DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Environmental Impact Statement B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Walla Walla Basin Spring Chinook Hatchery Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement October 2014 DOE/EIS-0495 Walla Walla Hatchery Spring Chinook Hatchery Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement DOE/EIS-0495 Bonneville Power Administration The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife October 2014 Walla Walla Basin Spring Chinook Hatchery Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement Abstract Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy - Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Title of Proposed Project: Walla Walla Basin Spring Chinook Hatchery Program Cooperating Agencies: The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife States Involved: Oregon and Washington Abstract: BPA proposes to fund the construction and operation of a hatchery for spring Chinook salmon in the Walla Walla River basin in northeast Oregon. The proposed hatchery would be constructed at an existing Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) fish facility on the South Fork Walla Walla River near Milton-Freewater in Umatilla County, Oregon. The CTUIR would own and operate the hatchery to augment spring Chinook fish populations available for harvest and aid in establishing a naturally spawning spring Chinook population in the Walla Walla River basin. BPA is considering two action alternatives and a no action alternative. Alternative 1 includes construction of a hatchery for production of up to 500,000 Walla Walla spring Chinook smolts, modification of an existing adult fish trapping facility to capture broodstock, and release of juvenile and adult spring Chinook into Walla Walla River tributaries in both Oregon and Washington. Alternative 2 would be similar to Alternative 1, but would also include relocation of the production of Umatilla spring Chinook from the existing Umatilla Hatchery near Irrigon, Oregon, to the proposed Walla Walla Hatchery. The proposed Walla Walla hatchery was identified in the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program—a regional program designed to protect and rebuild fish and wildlife populations affected by hydropower development in the Columbia River Basin. The EIS analyzes impacts to surface and groundwater, fish, vegetation, socioeconomics, environmental justice, cultural resources, wetlands, floodplains, wildlife, air quality, climate change, noise, visual quality, and recreation. BPA requested comments to help determine the scope of the EIS in May 2013 and June 2014. Public review of and comment on this draft EIS will continue through November 24, 2014. For additional information, contact: Donald Rose, Supervisory Environmental Protection Specialist Bonneville Power Administration P. O. Box 3621, KEC-4 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Telephone: (503) 230-3796 Email: [email protected] For additional copies of this document, please call 1-800-622-4520 and ask for the document by name. You may also request additional copies by writing to: Bonneville Power Administration P.O. Box 3621 Portland, Oregon 97208 ATT: Public Information Center – CHDL-1 The EIS is also on the Internet at: www.bpa.gov/goto/WallaWallaHatchery For additional information on USDOE NEPA activities, please contact Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-54, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue S.W., Washington D.C. 20585-0103, phone: 1-800-472-2756; or visit the USDOE NEPA web site at www.eh.doe.gov/nepa. Walla Walla Basin Spring Chinook Hatchery Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... S-1 Underlying Need for Action .................................................................................................... S-1 Purposes ................................................................................................................................... S-1 Public Involvement .................................................................................................................. S-1 Proposed Action and Alternatives ........................................................................................... S-2 Alternative 1 ............................................................................................................................ S-2 Alternative 2 ............................................................................................................................ S-3 No Action Alternative .............................................................................................................. S-3 Environmental Consequences .................................................................................................. S-4 Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for Action ........................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Underlying Need for Action ............................................................................................. 1-3 1.2 Purposes ............................................................................................................................ 1-3 1.3 Process and Planning Background .................................................................................... 1-3 1.3.1 Northwest Power Act/Council’s Fish and Wildlife Program .................................... 1-3 1.3.2 Columbia Basin Fish Accords ................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.3 Tribal Treaty Fishing and Management Rights under U.S. v. Oregon ...................... 1-4 1.3.4 CTUIR Natural Resources Management Approach................................................... 1-5 1.4 Recent Spring Chinook Activities in the Walla Walla Basin ........................................... 1-5 1.5 Umatilla Spring Chinook Program ................................................................................... 1-7 1.6 Cooperating Agencies ....................................................................................................... 1-8 1.7 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................... 1-8 Chapter 2. Alternatives Including the Proposed Action ....................................................... 2-1 2.1 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Alternative 1 ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Facilities ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2.2 Operations .................................................................................................................. 2-9 2.2.3 Phased Approach and Management Criteria ............................................................ 2-10 2.2.4 Monitoring and Evaluation ...................................................................................... 2-13 2.2.5 Construction Schedule, Personnel, and Equipment Requirements .......................... 2-14 2.2.6 Estimated Program Costs: Alternative 1 .................................................................. 2-14 2.3 Alternative 2 ................................................................................................................... 2-15 2.3.1 Facilities ................................................................................................................... 2-15 2.3.2 Operations ................................................................................................................ 2-18 2.3.3 Construction Schedule, Personnel, and Equipment Requirements. ......................... 2-19 2.3.4 Estimated Costs ........................................................................................................ 2-19 2.4 No Action Alternative ..................................................................................................... 2-19 2.5 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Evaluation in this EIS ............. 2-20 Contents i Walla Walla Basin Spring Chinook Hatchery Program 2.5.1 Alternatives Considered in the Walla Walla Spring Chinook Hatchery Master Plan . 2- 20 2.5.2 Alternatives Proposed During Scoping .................................................................... 2-21 2.5.3 Alternative Facility Designs for Walla Walla Hatchery .......................................... 2-22 2.6 Comparison of Alternatives ............................................................................................ 2-22 2.7 Summary of Environmental Effects ............................................................................... 2-24 Chapter 3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .............. 3-1 3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Overview of Walla Walla Basin ....................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.1 Geography .................................................................................................................. 3-2 3.2.2 History and Status of Spring Chinook in the Walla Walla Basin .............................. 3-2 3.3 Surface and Groundwater Quantity
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flood Basalts and Glacier Floods—Roadside Geology
    u 0 by Robert J. Carson and Kevin R. Pogue WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Information Circular 90 January 1996 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher - Commissioner of Public Lands Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor FLOOD BASALTS AND GLACIER FLOODS: Roadside Geology of Parts of Walla Walla, Franklin, and Columbia Counties, Washington by Robert J. Carson and Kevin R. Pogue WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Information Circular 90 January 1996 Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor Division of Geology and Earth Resources WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Jennifer M. Belcher-Commissio11er of Public Lands Kaleeo Cottingham-Supervisor DMSION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Raymond Lasmanis-State Geologist J. Eric Schuster-Assistant State Geologist William S. Lingley, Jr.-Assistant State Geologist This report is available from: Publications Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources P.O. Box 47007 Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Price $ 3.24 Tax (WA residents only) ~ Total $ 3.50 Mail orders must be prepaid: please add $1.00 to each order for postage and handling. Make checks payable to the Department of Natural Resources. Front Cover: Palouse Falls (56 m high) in the canyon of the Palouse River. Printed oo recycled paper Printed io the United States of America Contents 1 General geology of southeastern Washington 1 Magnetic polarity 2 Geologic time 2 Columbia River Basalt Group 2 Tectonic features 5 Quaternary sedimentation 6 Road log 7 Further reading 7 Acknowledgments 8 Part 1 - Walla Walla to Palouse Falls (69.0 miles) 21 Part 2 - Palouse Falls to Lower Monumental Dam (27.0 miles) 26 Part 3 - Lower Monumental Dam to Ice Harbor Dam (38.7 miles) 33 Part 4 - Ice Harbor Dam to Wallula Gap (26.7 mi les) 38 Part 5 - Wallula Gap to Walla Walla (42.0 miles) 44 References cited ILLUSTRATIONS I Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin Above the Dalles, Oregon
    Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin above The Dalles, Oregon Bv W. D. SIMONS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1220 An evaluation of the consumptive use of water based on the amount of irrigation UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1953 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 50 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and scope....................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments......................................................................................................... 3 Irrigation in the basin......................................................................................................... 3 Historical summary...................................................................................................... 3 Legislation................................................................................................................... 6 Records and sources for data..................................................................................... 8 Stream
    [Show full text]
  • Walla Walla River Decree
    IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR U1dATILLA COUNTY IN THE MATTER OF THE DETERMINATION ) OF THE RELATIVE RIGHTS TO THE USE ) OF THE WATERS OF THE WALLA WALLA ) MODIFIED FINDINGS RIVER AND ITS TRIBUT_4RIES, A TRIBU- ) and TARY OF COLUMBIA RIVER . ) DECREE The State Engineer having heretofore made his findings of fact and order of determination herein, determining and establishing the several rights to the use of the waters of the above named stream and its tributaries, and there having been filed with the Clerk of this Court on the 24th day of December, 1930, - the original evidence filed with the State Engineer in connection with such determina- tics, together with a copy of the findings of fact and order of determination of said State Engineer as the same appears of record in his office, and said State Engineer having thereupon procured from this Court an order fixing the 9th day of March, 1931 as the . time at which the determination herein would be heard by this Court, and notice of said hearing and of the time fixed therefor having been duly and regularly given to all parties interested in the matter and within the time required by lax, and exceptions in writing to the findings and order of determina- tion of said State Engineer having been duly and regularly served in the manner required by law and filed herein prior to the time-for said hearing, the Court made an order fixing May ll, 1931, at 10 o'clock A .M . for the hearing upon the exceptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Touchet Endemic Summer Steelhead HGMP to NOAA Fisheries in 2010 for a Section 10(A)(1)(A) Permit
    WDFW Touchet River Endemic Stock Summer Steelhead - Touchet River Release HATCHERY AND GENETIC MANAGEMENT PLAN (HGMP) Hatchery Program: Mid-Columbia Summer Steelhead –Touchet River Stock: Lyons Ferry Hatchery Complex Species or Touchet River Endemic Summer Steelhead Hatchery Stock: Agency/Operator: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Watershed and Region: Touchet River / Walla Walla River / Mid- Columbia Basin, Washington State Date Submitted: April 20, 2002; November 29, 2010 Date Last Updated: November 6, 2015 WDFW - Touchet River Endemic Stock HGMP 1 Executive Summary ESA Permit Status: In 2010 the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) submitted a Hatchery Genetic Management Plan (HGMP) for the Lyons Ferry Hatchery (LFH) Touchet River Endemic Summer Steelhead 50,000 release of yearling smolts into the Touchet River program. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) are now re-submitting an HGMP for this yearling program to update the description of the current program. Both the Touchet River Endemic Summer Steelhead (O. Mykiss), Mid-Columbia ESU summer steelhead population, listed as threatened under the ESA as part of the Mid-Columbia River ESU (March 25, 1999; FR 64 No. 57: 14517-14528) and Wallowa Stock summer steelhead (O. Mykiss), (not ESA-listed) are currently produced at WDFW’s LFH and released into the Touchet River. This document covers only the Tucannon Endemic Steelhead program. The proposed hatchery program may slowly phase out the Wallowa stock from the Touchet River in the future. This will depend on the performance of the Touchet River endemic steelhead stock, and decisions reached with the co-managers for full implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • Walla Walla Subbasin Assessment
    Walla Walla Subbasin Assessment General Overview Components Prepared by: Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council Version 2: April 2004 Note: This document was not reviewed or approved by the Subbasin Planning Team, subbasin plan leads, co-managers, or subbasin technical staff. 1 Introduction History and Description of Planning Entity The organization for developing the Walla Walla River Subbasin Plan was comprised of the lead agencies, subcontractors, the Planning Team, the Technical Team, and other governmental and non-governmental organizations that will provide local input. The role of each member group is described below. Lead Agencies and Co-Lead Agency The lead agency for the Oregon portion of the Walla Walla subbasin was the Walla Walla Basin Watershed Council, with the Walla Walla Watershed Foundation serving as its fiscal agent. The co-lead entity for the Washington portion of the subbasin was Walla Walla County. The responsibility of co-leads was to oversee and initiate the planning process and ensure that it was an open and inclusive and there was proper outreach to and input from subbasin stakeholders. Subcontractors The Co-lead entities subcontracted with consultant(s) to perform the following functions: (1) facilitation assistance, (2) public involvement assistance, and (3) report preparation including technical assistance. The consultants’ roles were to facilitate and assist with the coordination of Technical and Planning Team and Working Group meetings. The consultants worked closely with the Technical and Planning Teams and the Working Group, and compiled, edited, and wrote (as appropriate) various sections of all draft and final versions of the assessment, inventory, and management plan components of the subbasin plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Yelleppit and the Walla Wallas
    Yelleppit and the Walla Wallas By Meriwether Lewis This excerpt from Meriwether Lewis’s journal describes the Corps of Discovery’s encounter with Walla Wallas and their headman Yelleppit (Tamtappam). After crossing the Umatilla River—which Lewis calls the “Youmalolam”—on their return to St. Louis, the “much fatigued” explorers stopped to eat. While encamped, they were met by Yelleppit and six others. Lewis and Clark recognized the headman from the previous fall, when the Expedition had stopped at his village near the mouth of the Walla Walla River. The captains had given Yelleppit a small peace medal and had promised to spend a few days with him the following spring. Little is known about Yelleppit aside from what is in the journals. When the explorers met him in October 1805, Clark described him as “a bold handsom Indian, with a dignified countenance about 35 years of age, about 5 feet 8 inches high and well perpotiond.” It is unlikely that Yelleppit was his name. Yalípt is a Sahaptin word that means “trading friend,” a formal social relationship among Plateau peoples whose economy was based in large part on trading, gifting, and other forms of exchange. Several months later, on April 27, 1806, Lewis wrote that Yelleppit was “a man of much influence not only in his own nation but also among the neighbouring tribes and nations.” The headman was interested in the American explorers, who he viewed as potential trading partners, and he persuaded them to stay at his village for a couple of days. The Walla Wallas entertained Expedition members with dancing and music, and a nearby village of Yakamas joined in the celebration.
    [Show full text]
  • North Fork Walla Walla River Bull Trout Patch Occupancy and Habitat
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia River Fisheries Program Office North Fork Walla Walla River Bull Trout Occupancy and Habitat Use Assessment FY 2012-2013 Annual Report Marshall G. Barrows, Ryan C. Koch and Brook Pattison Silver U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia River Fisheries Program Office Vancouver, WA 98683 On the cover: In the North Fork Walla Walla River, threatened bull trout use critical habitat to overwinter and forage prior to returning to natal headwater reaches of the South Fork Walla Walla River to subsequently spawn. Photograph by Ryan Koch (FWS). The correct citation for this report is: Barrows, M.G., R.C. Koch, and B.P. Silver. 2014. North Fork Walla Walla River Bull Trout Occupancy and Habitat Use Assessment. 2012-2013 Annual Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Office, Vancouver, WA. www.fws.gov/columbiariver/publications.html North Fork Walla Walla River Bull Trout Occupancy and Habitat Use Assessment 2012-2013 Annual Report Study Funded by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia River Fisheries Program Office And authored by Marshall G. Barrows Ryan C. Koch Brook Pattison Silver U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia River Fisheries Program Office 1211 SE Cardinal Court, Suite 100 Vancouver, WA 98683 Final December 5, 2014 Disclaimers The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The mention of trade names or commercial products in this report does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the federal government.
    [Show full text]
  • A Lasting Legacy: the Lewis And
    WashingtonHistory.org A LASTING LEGACY The Lewis and Clark Place Names of the Pacific Northwest—Part II By Allen "Doc" Wesselius COLUMBIA The Magazine of Northwest History, Summer 2001: Vol. 15, No. 2 This is the second in a four-part series discussing the history of the Lewis and Clark expedition and the explorers' efforts to identify, for posterity, elements of the Northwest landscape that they encountered on their journey. Columbia River "The Great River of the West" was on the maps that Lewis and Clark brought with them but the cartographic lore of its upper reach influenced William Clark when he identified the supposed upper fork as "Tarcouche Tesse." British explorer Alexander Mackenzie had called the northern reach of the river "Tacoutche Tesse" in his 1793 journals and map. When the explorers realized they had reached the Columbia River on October 16, 1805, they also discerned that they would not discover the source of the drainage, important as that was for establishing the future sovereignty of the region. After Lewis & Clark determined that there was no short portage route between the Missouri and Columbia rivers, the myth of a Northwest Passage evaporated. The priority for the expedition now was to achieve the primary goal of its mission by reaching the mouth of the Columbia River. American rights of discovery to the Columbia were based on Robert Gray's crossing of the bar in 1792 at the river's discharge into the Pacific. He explored the waterway's western bay and named it "Columbia's River" after his ship, Columbia Rediviva.
    [Show full text]
  • Empty Harvest at Waiilatpu: the Mission Life of Narcissa Whitman Columbia Magazine, Fall 1992: Vol
    Empty Harvest at Waiilatpu: The Mission Life of Narcissa Whitman Columbia Magazine, Fall 1992: Vol. 6, No. 3 By Julie Roy Jeffrey THE AMERICAN MISSIONARY movement has often been considered irrelevant or embarrassing. Recently, though, historians and others have been reexamining the significance of mission work both within and outside the United States. New studies point out that missionary impulses to do good and to refashion other peoples and cultures have been central themes in American history since the 17th century. As their efforts expanded outside the continental United States in the early 19th century, missionaries became important agents of modernization. While missionaries can be considered successful proponents of modernization, it is striking to modern observers how many of these efforts at transformation failed. Perhaps contemporary uncertainties about the ability of the United States to deal with problems at home and abroad encourage an emphasis on the limits of American influence and a reconsideration of the appeal of American values and ideals. This reassessment of the American missionary movement suggests the need to reexamine the Protestant missions established in Oregon Territory during the 1830s and '40s. Their history reveals some of the general themes and issues that are central to understanding the American missionary enterprise and provides useful insights into 19th-century cultural attitudes and practices. New studies have been done on Protestant evangelicalism, middle-class culture and the position of women in pre-Civil War or antebellum America. These studies and the work done in Indian history over the last two decades contribute to an understanding of the complexity of cultural and religious encounters between white missionaries and the Indians they hoped to convert.
    [Show full text]
  • WALLA WALLA RIVER RM 35.5 RESTORATION Sponsor: Walla Walla Co Cons Dist Program: Salmon State Projects Status: Preapplication Parties to the Agreement
    Project Application Report PROJECT: 21-1004 REST, WALLA WALLA RIVER RM 35.5 RESTORATION Sponsor: Walla Walla Co Cons Dist Program: Salmon State Projects Status: Preapplication Parties to the Agreement PRIMARY SPONSOR Walla Walla County Conservation District Address 325 North 13th Ave Ste 101 City Walla Walla State WA Zip 99362 Org Type District-Conservation Vendor # SWV0041502-00 UBI Date Org created Org Notes link to Organization profile Org data updated SECONDARY SPONSORS No records to display LEAD ENTITY Snake River Salmon Rec Bd LE QUESTIONS #1: List project partners and their role and contribution to the project. External Systems SPONSOR ASSIGNED INFO Sponsor-Assigned Project Number Sponsor-Assigned Regions EXTERNAL SYSTEM REFERENCE Source Project Number Submitter HWS 21-1004 AFitzgerald Project Contacts Contact Name Primary Org Project Role Work Phone Work Email Alice Rubin Project Manager (360) 867-8584 [email protected] Rec. and Conserv. Office Renee M. Hadley Project Contact (509) 956-3756 [email protected] Walla Walla Co Cons Dist Ali Fitzgerald Lead Entity Contact (509) 382-4115 [email protected] Snake River Salmon Rec Bd LE Audrey Ahmann Billing (509) 956-3753 [email protected] Walla Walla Co Cons Dist Page 1 of 15 03/08/2021 Project Application Report - 21-1004 Worksites & Properties # Worksite Name #1 WALLA WALLA RIVER RM 35 Restoration Property Name WALLA WALLA RIVER RM 35 Page 2 of 15 03/08/2021 Project Application Report - 21-1004 Worksite Map & Description Worksite #1: WALLA WALLA RIVER RM 35 Worksite map WORKSITE ADDRESS Street Address Last Chance Rd City, State, Zip Walla Walla WA 99362 Worksite Details Worksite #1: WALLA WALLA RIVER RM 35 SITE ACCESS DIRECTIONS From the City of Walla Walla head west on Hwy 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Milton-Freewater, Oregon
    Milton-Freewater, Oregon In the 1800’s, the towns of Milton and Freewater incorporated; Milton in 1889 and Freewater in 1892. Lying in the southern part of the Walla Walla River Valley, hearty pioneer families found an ideal climate and plenty of ‘elbow room.' Milton and Freewater merged in 1950 as the town that today bears the name Milton-Freewater, Oregon. Located on Oregon Highway 11 in the northeastern part of Umatilla County, it is 27 miles northeast of Pendleton, Oregon and 10 miles south of Walla Walla, Washington. Discover Historic Umatilla County, Oregon Looking back at Milton (now Milton-Freewater) in 1882 The town of Milton is situated on Walla Walla River, in the extreme northeast corner of Umatilla County, and but a few miles south from the line of Washington Territory. It lies just within the southern edge of the great Walla Walla Valley, and on the line of road now being constructed from Walla Walla by the O.R. & N. Co.. The narrow gauge branch from Whitman Junction, built two years ago, passes within a mile of the town. By it all freight is now received, and large quantities of grain are forwarded. In its life of ten years Milton has become a town of considerable prominence, and the next decade will probably witness a still more substantial growth than the last. Two good general stores indicate the amount of trade that now seeks this place from surrounding farms and the mountains. When a new county is created in this region, Milton expects to press its claims to the county seat with prospect of success.
    [Show full text]
  • The Towns and Lake Wallula
    Railroads WALLULA In 1871, construction of the first Pacific Northwest railroad of any length began at Wallula. The Walla Walla and Columbia River Railroad was completed in 1875 connecting the town of HISTORY SITE Walla Walla with the steamship dock at Wallula. The only prior tracks in the region were the short portage lines at the Cascades and between the Dalles and Celilo Falls. In 1880, the Oregon Railroad and Navigation Company began a line from Wallula to Portland, which by 1883 was linked at Wallula to the Northern Pacific’s transcontinental railroad. In 1888, five railroads brought as many as 15 to 30 trains a day to Wallula. Despite a town having been established around the ruins of Old Fort Walla Walla where the steamship dock and the WW&CR railroad depots were located, the OR&N built its track and depot a mile inland because its freight business no longer relied on river traffic. A new town of Wallula was then built around these tracks to capitalize on the railroad and its workers and customers, after which the first town was abandoned. The Wallula History Site There has long been recognition by individuals, Fort Walla Walla, John Mix Stanley, 1853 agencies and organizations of the need to create an interpretive site to honor Wallula’s significant Including early geology, tribal history. history, Lewis & Clark, fur traders, The citizens group Walla Walla 2020 has recently steamships, railroads, towns, and obtained permission from the Washington State Department of Transportation to construct an the McNary flood interpretive shelter at the eastern entrance to the Though Wallula aspired to be “The Railroad Center of the Wallula Gap at a turnout on US 730 just west of Northwest,” in 1884 the NP built the new town of Pasco, and Milepost 4.
    [Show full text]