DOCSLIB.ORG

Finding and Dating Cathlapotle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Finding and Dating Cathlapotle Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology 2009 Finding and Dating Cathlapotle Kenneth M. Ames Portland State University, [email protected] Elizabeth A. Sobel Missouri State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details 2009 Kenneth Ames with Elizabeth Sobel, Finding and Dating Cathlapotle. Archaeology in Washington 15: 9 - 32. This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. FINDING AND DATING CATHLAPOTLE Kenneth M. Ames1 and Elizabeth A. Sobel2 ABSTRACT Sobel 2004, Ames et al. 1999, Ames et al. 2008 ) but we have not to date published a The people of the Cathlapotle town played a summary of those reasons. One purpose of significant role in the fur trade era history of this paper is to do so. The relevant lines of the Lower Columbia River, including Lewis evidence include ethnohistoric sources, site and Clark’s visit on March 29th, 1806. chronology, topography and site contents. Archaeologists and others have sought the town’s location for years. Long-term research A second purpose of the paper is to present a has established that archaeological site summary of the extensive chronological 45CL1 on the US Fish and Wildlife Refuge evidence developed for 45CL1 since the near Ridgefield, Washington is Cathlapotle. project there began in 1991. Several issues This determination is based on the close drive the radiocarbon dating program at match between site details with various 45CL1. Among them are these: ethnohistoric accounts of Cathlapotle. The site was occupied by ca. AD 1450 and probably 1) Did the site have a long occupation span? moved there from another nearby location. It Early assessment suggested the site was deep, was abandoned sometime in the 1830s or raising the possibility of a long occupation 1840s. This chronology is based on 54 span ending in the fur-trade era. Very few radiocarbon dates, historic trade goods such sites have been professionally tested or including glass beads and ceramics, and excavated in the Wapato Valley (aka Portland documentary accounts. Basin). To assess this, there was a focus in collecting datable samples from the site’s INTRODUCTION deepest deposits. Scholars have sought to locate and identify the 2) Had the settlement expanded through time? physical remains of Cathlapotle, a major fur- The size of the site (see below) and trade era Middle Chinookan town, for some ethnohistoric documentation (see below) time (e.g., Hudziak and Smith 1948; Minor indicated that Cathlapotle was among the and Toepel 1984, 1993; Starkey et al.1974; largest communities along the Lower Strong 1959). Portland State University has Columbia River during the fur-trade era. We conducted archaeological and ethnohistorical wished to establish the time depth of its size. research at 45CL1 (Figure 1) since 1991. That There seemed to be three possible alternatives: research identified 45CL1 as Cathlapotle early • The settlement has always been large; in the course of the project and the project has • The settlement started small but grew published on the site using the name to its documented size prior to the fur- “Cathlapotle.” Our reasons for doing so are trade; scattered across a number of documents (e.g., 1 Department of Anthropology, Portland State University, Portland, OR; [email protected] 2 Department of Anthropology, Missouri State University, Springfield, MO; [email protected] 5 Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. Figure 1. Map showing the location of 45CL1. • The settlement started small but 3) Were all house compartments expanded to its documented size contemporary? A number of 45CL1’s houses during the fur-trade. This latter pattern were divided into compartments. The issue might suggest the site’s recorded size was whether these compartments were built at was a product of regional population the same time or whether they had been added redistribution and aggregation caused to expand an original structure. This is issue by epidemics, the fur trade, or other #2 at the household level: if there was contact era dynamics. evidence for settlement expansion, was there also evidence for household expansion? To assess this, samples for dating were collected from widely dispersed basal deposits FINDING CATHLAPOTLE to determine whether deposition in all sampled portions of the site began at the same Minor and Toepel (1993) review the time. Samples were also collected to provide alternative locations for Cathlapotle proposed initial construction dates for houses in the by different archaeologists and others. These site’s two house rows, to determine whether alternatives focused on two sites located on both rows were always present. what is now the Carty Unit of the Ridgefield 6 Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. Wildlife Refuge, 45CL1, and 45CL4. 45CL1 in two small boats up the Columbia River was originally placed in a meadow on what from its mouth – the first known Europeans on was then private land near the confluences of the river. During this venture, Broughton and Gee Creek, Lake River, the Lewis River, and his men arguably met Cathlapotle residents. the Columbia River (Hudziak and Smith As told to him by Broughton, Vancouver 1948). A second survey of the area concluded relates the following: that this location was not an archaeological site and proposed that 45CL4, which is About three miles and a half from Oak located on Lake River about 3 km above Point Mr. Broughton arrived at 45CL1, also on the Carty Unit (Ross and another, which he called Point Starkey 1975), represents Cathlapotle. Warrior, in Consequence of being Subsequent work (Abramowitz 1980) there surrounded by twenty-three reinforced that opinion. In 1984, Minor and canoes, carrying from three to twelve Toepel tested 45CL4 and concluded that it persons each, all attired in their war was the location of several small camps and garments, and in every other respect was probably the campsite for the Lewis and prepared for combat. On these Clark expedition on the night of March 29- strangers discoursing with the friendly March 30, 1806, after their visit to Cathlapotle Indians who had attended our party, (Minor and Toepel 1984, 1993). This they soon took off their war dress, and assignment was not based on archaeological with great civility disposed of their data but on the fit between the description of arms and other articles for such the camp locale in the Lewis and Clark valuables as we presented to them, but journals (Moulton 1991) and the physical would neither part with their copper setting of 45CL4. They found no swords, nor a kind of battle axe made archaeological support for 45CL4 being the of iron [Vancouver 1798:61]. large village described in various fur-trade documents. From this they concluded that At Point Warrior the river is divided Cathlapotle had to be in the vicinity of 45CL1. into three branches; the middle one was the largest, about a quarter of a ETHNOHISTORICAL AND mile wide, and was considered as the ETHNOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION main branch; the next most capacious OF CATHLAPOTLE took an easterly direction, and seemed extensive, to this the name of While Cathlapotle is mentioned in many Rushleigh’s River was given; and the documents dating between ca. 1792 and the other that stretched to the s.s.w. was 1840s (see Sobel 2004), two lengthy, early distinguished by the name of Call’s accounts provide virtually all of the available River [Vancouver 1798:61]. detailed fur-trade era descriptions. On the banks of Rushleigh’s River was Broughton, 1792 seen a very large Indian Village, and such of the strangers as seemed to The earliest possible references date to 1792 belong to it strongly solicited the party and come from journals of George to proceed thither; and, to enforce their Vancouver’s British exploring party. On the request, very unequivocally evening of October 28th, Lieutenant William represented, that if the party persisted R. Broughton led a group of Vancouver’s men in going to the southward they would 7 Archaeology in Washington, Vol. 15, 2009. have their heads cut off. The same his side, together with a Cutlass, entreaties, urged by similar warnings, Pistols &c. Mr. Broughton by way of had before been experienced by Mr. shewing them that our Arms were Broughton during his excursion, but loaded and in good order, fired a having found them to be unnecessary Musket with a Ball in it into the Water, cautions, he proceeded up that which which at first seem’d to terrify the he considered to be the main branch of Chief, and all the Indians, for they the river, until eight in the evening; immediately hid their heads beneath when, under the shelter of some the Gunwhales of the Canoes, and it willows, they took up their lodging for was some time before they could be the night on a low sandy point, persuaded to hold them up again. accompanied by twelve of the natives Soon after this perceiving that our in a canoe, who fixed their abode very intentions were peaceable, as their near to them [Vancouver 1798:61]. own, they took off all their War Garments, and every man seem’d In this account, “Call’s River” undoubtedly eager to dispose of Bows and Arrows refers to Multnomah channel, “Rushleigh’s for old Buttons, Beads, &c. nor was River” likely refers to the Lewis River, and the Chief the least eager among the the “Indian Village” to Cathlapotle (Barry number.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geologic Map of the Simcoe Mountains Volcanic Field, Main Central Segment, Yakama Nation, Washington by Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein
    Prepared in Cooperation with the Water Resources Program of the Yakama Nation Geologic Map of the Simcoe Mountains Volcanic Field, Main Central Segment, Yakama Nation, Washington By Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3315 Photograph showing Mount Adams andesitic stratovolcano and Signal Peak mafic shield volcano viewed westward from near Mill Creek Guard Station. Low-relief rocky meadows and modest forested ridges marked by scattered cinder cones and shields are common landforms in Simcoe Mountains volcanic field. Mount Adams (elevation: 12,276 ft; 3,742 m) is centered 50 km west and 2.8 km higher than foreground meadow (elevation: 2,950 ft.; 900 m); its eruptions began ~520 ka, its upper cone was built in late Pleistocene, and several eruptions have taken place in the Holocene. Signal Peak (elevation: 5,100 ft; 1,555 m), 20 km west of camera, is one of largest and highest eruptive centers in Simcoe Mountains volcanic field; short-lived shield, built around 3.7 Ma, is seven times older than Mount Adams. 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Introductory Overview for Non-Geologists ...............................................................................................1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................2 Physiography, Environment, Boundary Surveys, and Access ......................................................6 Previous Geologic
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe
    1 Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe: Traditional Resource Harvest Sites West of the Crest of the Cascades Mountains in Washington State and below the Cascades of the Columbia River Eugene Hunn Department of Anthropology Box 353100 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-3100 [email protected] for State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW contract # 38030449 preliminary draft October 11, 2003 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 Map 1 5f 1. Goals and scope of this report 6 2. Defining the relevant Indian groups 7 2.1. How Sahaptin names for Indian groups are formed 7 2.2. The Yakama Nation 8 Table 1: Yakama signatory tribes and bands 8 Table 2: Yakama headmen and chiefs 8-9 2.3. Who are the ―Klickitat‖? 10 2.4. Who are the ―Cascade Indians‖? 11 2.5. Who are the ―Cowlitz‖/Taitnapam? 11 2.6. The Plateau/Northwest Coast cultural divide: Treaty lines versus cultural 12 divides 2.6.1. The Handbook of North American Indians: Northwest Coast versus 13 Plateau 2.7. Conclusions 14 3. Historical questions 15 3.1. A brief summary of early Euroamerican influences in the region 15 3.2. How did Sahaptin-speakers end up west of the Cascade crest? 17 Map 2 18f 3.3. James Teit‘s hypothesis 18 3.4. Melville Jacobs‘s counter argument 19 4. The Taitnapam 21 4.1. Taitnapam sources 21 4.2. Taitnapam affiliations 22 4.3. Taitnapam territory 23 4.3.1. Jim Yoke and Lewy Costima on Taitnapam territory 24 4.4.
    [Show full text]
  • White Salmon Planning Commission Meeting AGENDA February 24, 2021
    White Salmon Planning Commission Meeting AGENDA February 24, 2021 – 5:30 PM Via Zoom Teleconference Meeting ID: 840 1289 8223 Passcode: 623377 Call in Numbers: 669-900-6833 929-205-6099 301-715-8592 346-248-7799 253-215-8782 312-626-6799 We ask that the audience call in instead of videoing in or turn off your camera, so video does not show during the meeting to prevent disruption. Thank you. Call to Order/Roll Call Public Comment – Draft Elements 1. Public comment will not be taken during the teleconference. Public comment submitted by email to Jan Brending at [email protected] by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 24, 2021 will be read during the planning commission meeting and forwarded to all planning commissioners. Please include in the subject line "Public Comment - February 24, 2021 - Planning Commission Meeting." Please indicate whether you live in or outside of the city limits of White Salmon. Discussion Items 2. Presentation and Discussion of Draft Elements a. History and Historic Places b. Transportation c. Public Facilities and Services d. Capital Improvement Program 3. Comprehensive Plan Update Workshop a. Environmental Quality and Critical Areas Element b. Economics Element c. Parks and Recreation Element d. HIstory and Historic Places Element (if time allows) Adjournment 1 File Attachments for Item: 2. Presentation and Discussion of Draft Elements a. HIstory and HIstoric Places b. Transportation c. Public Facilities and Services d. Capital Improvement Program 2 II. HISTORY AND HISTORIC PLACES Background Context and History Environmental context The City of White Salmon lies in a transition zone between the maritime climate west of the Cascade Mountain Range and the dry continental climate of the inter-mountain region to the east.
    [Show full text]
  • Hood River – White Salmon Interstate Bridge Replacement Project SDEIS
    (OR SHPO Case No. 19-0587; WA DAHP Project Tracking Code: 2019-05-03456) Draft Historic Resources Technical Report October 1, 2020 Prepared for: Prepared by: In coordination with: 111 SW Columbia 851 SW Sixth Avenue Suite 1500 Suite 1600 Portland, Oregon 97201 Portland, Oregon 97204 This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Project Alternatives ....................................................................................................................... 3 2.1. No Action Alternative .......................................................................................................... 7 2.2. Preferred Alternative EC-2 ................................................................................................... 8 2.3. Alternative EC-1 ................................................................................................................ 14 2.4. Alternative EC-3 ................................................................................................................ 19 2.5. Construction of the Build Alternatives ............................................................................... 23 3. Methodology ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis River Hydroelectric Project Relicensing
    United StatesDepartment of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 510 DesmondDr. SE, Suite 102 Lacey,Washington 98503 In ReplyRefer To: SCANNED 1-3-06-F-0177 sEPI 5 2006 MagalieR. Salas,Secretary F6deralEnergy Regulatory Commission 888First Sffeet,NE WashingtonD.C. 24426 Attention:Ann Ariel Vecchio DearSecretary Salas: This documenttransmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's(Service) Biological Opinion on the effectsto bull trout(Salvelinus confluentus),northern spotted owls (Srrlxoccidentalis caurina)and bald eagles(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) fromthe relicensingof the Lewis River HydroeiectricProjects: Merwin (FERC No. 935),Yale (FERC No. 2071),Swift No. 1 (FERC No. Zr 11),and swift No. 2 (FERCNo. 2213). Theaction that comprises this consultationunder theEndangered Species Act of 1973,as amended (16 U.S.C. l53I et seq.)is therelicensing of the Lewis-RiverHydroelectric Projects by the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission and the interdependentactions contained in the SettlementAgreement (PacifiCorp et aL.2004e),dated November30,2004,and Washington Department of Ecology's401 Certifications. Consultationfor the relicensingof the Lewis River Plojectswas initiated by the Commission's letterto the Servicewhich was received in our officeon October11,2005. Based on our letter datedMarch15,2006,the deadline for completingthis consultationwas extended by mutual agreementuntil May 5, 2006. On June12,2006,with concurrenceby thelicensees,we submittedanother request for an extensionto SeptemberI,2006, to
    [Show full text]
  • Soc 1-1 10.1 Socioeconomics Resource Study (Soc 1)
    PacifiCorp/Cowlitz PUD Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 TABLE OF CONTENTS 10.0 SOCIOECONOMICS.................................................................................... SOC 1-1 10.1 SOCIOECONOMICS RESOURCE STUDY (SOC 1).......................... SOC 1-1 10.1.1 Study Objectives......................................................................... SOC 1-1 10.1.2 Study Area .................................................................................. SOC 1-2 10.1.3 Methods ...................................................................................... SOC 1-5 10.1.4 Key Questions............................................................................. SOC 1-7 10.1.5 Results......................................................................................... SOC 1-8 10.1.6 Discussion................................................................................. SOC 1-49 10.1.7 Schedule.................................................................................... SOC 1-51 10.1.8 References................................................................................. SOC 1-52 10.1.9 Comments and Responses on Draft Report .............................. SOC 1-57 SOC 1 Appendix 1 Text of RCW 54.28.050 SOC 1 Appendix 2 Descriptive Text of Money Generation Model LIST OF TABLES Table 10.1-1. Local sources of socioeconomic information...................................SOC 1-5 Table 10.1-2. 1990 population distribution by age in the secondary study area. ................................................................................................SOC
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Scientific Assessment Report Vancouver Watershed Health
    INTEGRATED SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT VANCOUVER WATERSHED HEALTH ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Vancouver, Washington Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. and Pacific Groundwater Group Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so this document will copy correctly when duplexed. INTEGRATED SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT VANCOUVER WATERSHED HEALTH ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Vancouver Surface Water Management 4500 Southeast Columbia Way Vancouver, Washington 98661 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1001 Southeast Water Avenue, Suite 290 Portland, Oregon 97214 Telephone: 503-228-4301 and Pacific Groundwater Group 2377 Eastlake Avenue East Suite #200 Seattle, Washington 98102 Telephone: 206-329-0141 February 20, 2019 CONTENTS Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... vii 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Study Area and Vicinity ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects FERC Project Nos
    Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects FERC Project Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 Photo courtesy of Kim McCune, PacifiCorp – June 2018 2018 Annual Report Annual Summary of License Implementation and Compliance: Aquatic and Terrestrial Resources April 12, 2019 Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects FERC Nos. 935, 2071, 2111, 2213 Annual Summary of License Implementation and Compliance: Aquatic and Terrestrial Resources 2018 Annual Report ©2005 PACIFICORP | PAGE 1 Lewis River Hydroelectric Project (FERC Nos. 935, 2071, 2111 & 2213) Annual Report 2018 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 7 1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 8 1.1.1 Lewis River Settlement Agreement ............................................................................................. 8 1.1.2 Environmental Impact Statement ............................................................................................... 8 1.1.3 Agency Terms and Conditions ................................................................................................... 8 1.1.4 Endangered Species Act Consultations ...................................................................................... 9 1.1.5 Water Quality Certifications .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington: a Preliminary Report
    Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology 1999 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996) , Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington: a Preliminary Report Kenneth M. Ames Portland State University, [email protected] Cameron M. Smith Portland State University William L. Cornett Portland State University Elizabeth A. Sobel Portland State University Stephen C. Hamilton Portland State University SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Ames, K. M., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service., & Portland State University. (1999). Archaeological investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996), Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, Clark County, Washington: A preliminary report. Portland, Or: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Kenneth M. Ames; Cameron M. Smith; William L. Cornett; Elizabeth A. Sobel; Stephen C. Hamilton; John Wolf; Doria Raetz; United States. Department of the Interior; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1; and Portland State University. Department of Anthropology This technical report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac/61 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996) , Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington A Preliminary Report by Kenneth M. Ames, Cameron M. Smith, William L.
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC MAP of the MOUNT ADAMS VOLCANIC FIELD, CASCADE RANGE of SOUTHERN WASHINGTON by Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP 1-2460 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE MOUNT ADAMS VOLCANIC FIELD, CASCADE RANGE OF SOUTHERN WASHINGTON By Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein When I climbed Mount Adams {17-18 August 1945] about 1950 m (6400') most of the landscape is mantled I think I found the answer to the question of why men by dense forests and huckleberry thickets. Ten radial stake everything to reach these peaks, yet obtain no glaciers and the summit icecap today cover only about visible reward for their exhaustion... Man's greatest 2.5 percent (16 km2) of the cone, but in latest Pleis­ experience-the one that brings supreme exultation­ tocene time (25-11 ka) as much as 80 percent of Mount is spiritual, not physical. It is the catching of some Adams was under ice. The volcano is drained radially vision of the universe and translating it into a poem by numerous tributaries of the Klickitat, White Salmon, or work of art ... Lewis, and Cis pus Rivers (figs. 1, 2), all of which ulti­ William 0. Douglas mately flow into the Columbia. Most of Mount Adams and a vast area west of it are Of Men and Mountains administered by the U.S. Forest Service, which has long had the dual charge of protecting the Wilderness Area and of providing a network of logging roads almost INTRODUCTION everywhere else. The northeast quadrant of the moun­ One of the dominating peaks of the Pacific North­ tain, however, lies within a part of the Yakima Indian west, Mount Adams, stands astride the Cascade crest, Reservation that is open solely to enrolled members of towering 3 km above the surrounding valleys.
    [Show full text]
  • Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed
    Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed • The Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed is the area of land in Clark County where all of the water drains into Burnt Bridge Creek. • It is a mostly flat area and it covers about 28 square miles. About two-thirds of this area is in the City of Vancouver. • It starts in large wetland area, then forms ditches and channels. Eventually it flows as a creek on its way into Vancouver Lake. • This watershed is a highly developed area with a lot of paved surfaces. • Only 4% of the watershed is left as a forest. • Coho salmon are only found in the very lowest segments of the creek, west of Interstate 5. • Clark County hopes to improve the health of this creek by making greenspaces along the creek. • All of the trees and vegetation will help absorb stormwater and any non-point source pollution that it has picked up while flowing over the watershed. Cedar Creek Watershed • The Cedar Creek watershed is the area of land in Clark County where all of the water drains into Cedar Creek. • This creek is a major tributary of the North Fork Lewis River which starts on Mount Adams. • Cedar Creek drains about 56 square miles of land and is mostly privately owned. • The watershed contains about 8% developed land and 55% forested land. • The upper watershed is in good to excellent health. • The lower part of the watershedis impacted by forestry and agricultural practices. • Cedar Creek supports populations of coho salmon, Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, Pacific lamprey, and freshwater mussels.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Creek and Lakeshore
    VancouverVancouver LakeLake andand LakeLake RiverRiver WatershedsWatersheds SalmonSalmon CreekCreek andand LakeshoreLakeshore RonRon WierengaWierenga ClarkClark CountyCounty PublicPublic WorksWorks WaterWater ResourcesResources ProgramProgram PresentationPresentation OutlineOutline ¾¾ VancouverVancouver LakeLake andand LakeLake RiverRiver WatershedsWatersheds ¾¾ SalmonSalmon CreekCreek WatershedWatershed andand WaterWater QualityQuality ¾¾ LakeshoreLakeshore WatershedWatershed andand WaterWater QualityQuality ¾¾ DiscussionDiscussion ofof SignificanceSignificance ofof InputsInputs toto VancouverVancouver LakeLake GeneralGeneral DepictionDepiction ofof WaterWater QualityQuality ProblemsProblems Washington Department of Ecology 303d Listed Waterways in Lake River System ¾ Vancouver Lake z Phosphorus, fecal coliform, PCB’s ¾ Lake River z Temperature, fecal coliform ¾ Salmon Creek z Oxygen, pH, temperature, fecal coliform, turbidity ¾ Whipple Creek z Fecal coliform ¾ Burnt Bridge Creek z Oxygen, fecal coliform, temperature Area of 90 square miles Mixed land use Five major tributaries and many smaller streams Extensive storm water infrastructure in lower watershed Impervious surfaces greater than 50% in lower watershed Annual Volume 105,000 acre-ft per year Average flow = 145 cfs Range = 15 to 1,510 cfs SalmonSalmon CreekCreek InputsInputs toto LakeLake RiverRiver Parameter Median Value Range Comment Typically higher 80 bac-t per Fecal Coliform 2 to 500 concentration at low 100mL flow Total 0.034 to Higher concentration 0.055 mg/L Phosphorus
    [Show full text]