DOCSLIB.ORG

WASHINGTON STATE PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION Item E-4: Riverside State Park – Classification and Management Planning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
WASHINGTON STATE PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION Item E-4: Riverside State Park – Classification and Management Planning Don Hoch Director STATE OF WASHINGTON WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1111 Israel Road S.W. • P.O. Box 42650 • Olympia, WA 98504-2650 • (360) 902-8500 TDD Telecommunications Device for the Deaf: 800-833-6388 www.parks.state.wa.us May 17, 2018 Item E-4: Riverside State Park – Classification and Management Planning Project - Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item reports to the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission on updated land classifications, long-term boundary, and management plan for Riverside State Park. This item advances the Commission’s strategic goal: “Develop amenities and acquire lands that advance transformation” and “Provide recreation, cultural, and interpretive opportunities people will want.” SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: For the past year, staff has conducted a public planning process for Riverside State Park as part of the Agency’s Classification and Management Planning (CAMP) project. The purpose of this report is to acquaint the Commission with information gathered, issues raised, and preliminary staff recommendations. Appendices 1- 8 provide detailed information regarding the current CAMP planning effort for Riverside State Park. Original CAMP Planning Process When the current land classification system was first established by the Commission in 1995, a long-term effort was undertaken to classify lands and prepare management plans for each park in the system. By 1998, this effort resulted in a public process at Riverside that: 1) Oriented citizens to the park and the planning process; 2) Identified natural, cultural, and recreation management issues, and; 3) Developed management approaches designed to address these issues. Riverside continues to evolve and its land classifications, long-term boundary, and park management plan require updating to address changing circumstances. Today, State Parks manages 9,432 acres within the existing Riverside State Park long-term boundary. These holdings include: • 7, 617 acres owned by State Parks • 1,686 acres owned by Spokane County • 129 acres owned by the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 1 Current CAMP Planning Process Following Commission adoption of land classifications and long-term park boundary in 1998, staff entered into management agreements with Avista Corporation and the Department of Natural Resources for a series of properties on Lake Spokane. These lands, along with the Commission-owned Fisk Property, were not evaluated within the scope of the original CAMP process nor have they been formally included in the long-term boundary for Riverside State Park. As part of the current planning effort, staff is evaluating approximately 2,251 acres to potentially recommend for inclusion in the Riverside long-term boundary. These include: On Lake Spokane: • 621 acres Knights Lake (DNR owned) • 680 acres Fisk property (State Parks owned) • 92 acres Lake Spokane Campground (DNR owned) • 400 acres McLellan Conservation Area (Spokane County owned) • 2 acre disposal to Nine Mile Falls School District (State Parks owned) On the Little Spokane River: • 108 acres Waikiki Springs (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife owned) • 199 acres private lands between Waikiki Springs and Riverside State Park West of the Spokane River: • 98 acres (lands that connect Riverside with Palisades Park) • 51 acres (Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway right of way to link Riverside with the Airway Heights area) The original Riverside CAMP remains mostly relevant. As a result, the current CAMP will augment rather than replace the original plan—building on the operational direction already established for Riverside. Next Steps Next steps will include presenting preliminary staff recommendations included in this item to the Commission at its May 17, 2018 meeting in Spokane. This information will also be presented at public meetings scheduled during the week of May 14, 2018. Staff then anticipates incorporating input into final recommended updates to the long-term boundary and land classifications for Riverside State Park for consideration by the Commission at its July 2018 meeting in Vancouver, Washington. 2 SUPPORTING INFORMATION: Appendix 1: Riverside Classification and Management Plan 2018 Appendix 2: Riverside State Park Area Description Appendix 3: State Parks Land Classification System Appendix 4: Overall Map of Riverside Appendix 5: Southern area of Riverside Appendix 6: Lake Spokane area Appendix 7: Little Spokane area Appendix 8: Sontag Park Land Transfer and Property Disposal Author(s)/Contact: Michael Hankinson, Parks Planner [email protected] (360) 902-8671 Reviewer(s): Jessica Logan, SEPA REVIEW: Pursuant to WAC197-11-704 and WAC 352-11-055(2)(c), staff has determined that this Commission agenda item is a report and therefore is not subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Chris Leeper, Fiscal Impact Statement: Report only, no fiscal impact at this time. Michael Young, Assistant Attorney General: April 23, 2018 Peter Herzog, Assistant Director Approved for Transmittal to Commission _______________________________ Donald Hoch, Director 3 1 APPENDIX 1 Riverside State Park Classification and Management Plan – 2018 Update The following report is based on the original CAMP, which served as a starting point for this update. The original document from the late 1990s acknowledged how the relationship between its own plan, other existing plans, and recommended future plans should be seen as “iterative” explaining: As new information is derived from more detailed resource-specific planning, existing plans should be reviewed and modified to reflect changed circumstances. No single plan should be vested with ultimate authority, but rather, the on-going process of creating new plans and revising exiting plans should be seen as forming an increasingly comprehensive base of park operational direction. The purpose of this report is to discuss all the opportunities, what the public thinks about those opportunities, and summarize preliminary staff recommendations. The first portion of this report, however, explains more about the planning process and the contextual issues that must be considered that are specific to Riverside State Park. Figure 1: Map showing acreages of Riverside as established in the 1998 CAMP. 111 4 Figure 2: Existing management area of Riverside State Park, which is today over 12,000 acres, and far greater in size than envisioned in the late 1990s. Natural, Historical, and Cultural Context: Riverside State Park encompasses three primary land areas associated with watercourses including the Spokane River, Lake Spokane, and the Little Spokane River. The park is composed of natural areas that provide important wildlife habitat: illustrate geologic formations related to lave flows and ice age flooding events, and show the natural influences of the Spokane and Little Spokane Rivers, its tributaries, and springs. In terms of governance, Riverside includes property concentrated in Spokane County. In addition, Riverside also includes the management of DNR lands and Avista Corporation recreational lands in both Stevens and Lincoln counties on Lake Spokane. The Spokane River flows westward into eastern Washington out of the northern end of Lake Coeur d’Alene in northern Idaho. The banks of this river and its tributaries have played a significant role in Pacific Northwest history. Native American presence dates thousands of years and the settlement at the confluence of the Spokane and Little Spokane ranged around 10,000 people. The Spokane House trading post built in 1810 by the Northwest Fur Trading Company-a precursor to the Hudson’s Bay Company—was one of the earliest English trading houses in the Northwest. The historic social and economic evolution of the larger region plays out in all its aspects along the banks of the Spokane River, as fur trading yielded to agriculture, which in turn transformed toward combinations of industrial, commercial, residential, military, and recreational uses. 5 Riverside includes a heritage area at the confluence of the Spokane and Little Spokane rivers, which is a land classification that recognizes how this area has been home to the Spokane Tribe of Indians for thousands of years. According to the Spokane Tribe of Indians: A Socioeconomic Profile 2013, their traditional homelands extended along the Spokane River from the present day City of Spokane, east to the Idaho border and west at the confluence of the Spokane and Columbia rivers. The Spokane shared both economic and cultural ties to neighboring groups including the Kalispel to the east, and the Chewelah, to the north. According to Grant et al., 1994, the Spokane lived in autonomous bands that joined together for fishing and trading; however, the majority of their actions were decided at the band level. The Chewelah occupied the Colville Valley, north, and were an offshoot band of the Kalispel that migrated to the Colville Valley and were later absorbed into the Spokane Tribe. In 1934, the first parcel of land of what would eventually become Riverside State Park was transferred from Spokane County to the State Parks. This was followed closely in the next few years by a variety of donations and small park purchases from private and public parties. Much of the land was acquired as delinquent tax parcels, but Washington Water Power (now Avista Corporation) and other public parties provided key parcels. The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) developed a master plan and constructed many facilities in the park including
Load more

Recommended publications
  • One Thread That Weaves Throughout Our 125-Year History Is That of Innovation
    ON THE COVER Summer storms hitting 10 days apart caused extensive damage throughout Avista’s Washington/Idaho service area in 2014, knocking out power to nearly 100,000 customers. Crews and office staff worked around the clock, restoring power quickly and safely, keeping customers informed through traditional and social media channels. 1411 EAST MISSION AVENUE | SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99202 | 509.489.0500 | AVISTACORP.COM One thread that weaves throughout our 125-year history is that of innovation. A LANDMARK Dear Fellow Shareholder: It’s been a landmark year at Avista for many reasons — we celebrated our milestone 125th anniversary; we sold Ecova, our home-grown energy and sustainability management business; we acquired Alaska Energy and Resources Company (AERC) and its primary subsidiary Alaska Electric Light and Power Company (AEL&P) in Juneau, Alaska; and we continued to make significant progress in achieving our goals of investing in our infrastructure, upgrading our technology and preparing our utility to effectively and efficiently implement 21st century energy delivery. For the first time in a generation, we can consider ourselves close to being a “pure play” utility. None of this would have been possible without our cadre operations were $1.93 per diluted share, with net income of dedicated and knowledgeable employees. There’s a from continuing operations attributable to Avista Corp. confidence that comes with competence, a steadiness that shareholders of $119.8 million for 2014. builds on itself and makes things happen. It’s not flashy, but Our balance sheet and credit ratings remain healthy. the effects speak for themselves. Avista’s employees embody At year-end, Avista Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • SECTION 21 – Table of Contents
    SECTION 21 – Table of Contents 21 Spokane Subbasin Overview........................................................................2 21.1 Regional Context ........................................................................................................ 2 21.2 Spokane Subbasin Description ................................................................................... 3 21.3 Logic Path ................................................................................................................. 24 21-1 21 Spokane Subbasin Overview 21.1 Regional Context The Spokane Subbasin shares a border with the Upper Columbia Subbasin to the north, the Pend Oreille Subbasin to the northeast, and the Coeur d’ Alene Subbasin to the east (Figure 21.1). The outlet of Coeur d’ Alene Lake forms the headwaters of the Spokane River, which flows westerly to its confluence with the Columbia River (Lake Roosevelt). The major river in the Subbasin is the Spokane River, which runs 111 miles from the outlet of Coeur d’ Alene Lake to its confluence with the Columbia River. The major tributaries of the Spokane River listed from upstream to downstream include Hangman Creek (also known as Latah Creek), Little Spokane River, and Chamokane Creek (also known as Tshimikain Creek). In eastern Washington and northern Idaho there are seven dams on the Spokane River. The city of Spokane Water Department owns, operates, and maintains Upriver Dam and is licensed for fifty years (FERC license 3074-WA, 1981-2031). Avista Corporation owns and operates the other six hydroelectric facilities. The six dams (from upstream to downstream) include Post Falls in Idaho, Upper Falls, Monroe Street, Nine Mile, Long Lake, and Little Falls located in Washington. Five of the six dams owned by Avista were constructed and were operating between 1906 and 1922. Monroe Street Dam was initially built in 1890 (Avista 2002; Scholz et al. 1985) and then reconstructed in 1973.
    [Show full text]
  • A Storypath Exploring the Lasting Legacy of Celilo Falls by Shana Brown
    Living in Celilo A Storypath Exploring the Lasting Legacy of Celilo Falls by Shana Brown Office of Native Education Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction Washington State Trillium Publishing, Inc. Acknowledgements Contents Shana Brown would like to thank: Carol Craig, Yakama Elder, writer, and historian, for her photos of Celilo as well as her Introduction to Storypath ..................... 2 expertise and her children’s story “I Wish I Had Seen the Falls.” Chucky is really her first grandson (and my cousin!). Episode 1: Creating the Setting ...............22 The Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission for providing information about their organization and granting permission to use articles, including a piece from their Episode 2: Creating the Characters............42 magazine Wana Chinook Tymoo. Episode 3: Building Context ..................54 HistoryLink.org for granting permission to use the article “Dorothea Nordstrand Recalls Old Celilo Falls.” Episode 4: Authorizing the Dam ..............68 The Northwest Power and Conservation Council for granting permission to use an excerpt from the article “Celilo Falls.” Episode 5: Negotiations .....................86 Ritchie Graves, Chief of the NW Region Hydropower Division’s FCRPS Branch, NOAA Fisheries, for providing information on survival rates of salmon through the Episode 6: Broken Promises ................118 dams on the Columbia River system. Episode 7: Inundation .....................142 Sally Thompson, PhD., for granting permission to use her articles. Se-Ah-Dom Edmo, Shoshone-Bannock/Nez Perce/ Yakama, Coordinator of the Classroom-Based Assessment ...............154 Indigenous Ways of Knowing Program at Lewis & Clark College, Columbia River Board Member, and Vice President of the Oregon Indian Education Association, for providing invaluable feedback and guidance as well as copies of the actual notes and letters from the Celilo Falls Community Club.
    [Show full text]
  • Spokane River Basin
    334 Figure 40. Location of surface-water and water-quality stations in the Spokane River Basin. Figure 41. Schematic diagram showing surface-water and water-quality stations in the Spokane River Basin. 335 336 SPOKANE RIVER BASIN 12419000 SPOKANE RIVER NEAR POST FALLS, ID ° ° 1⁄ 1⁄ 1⁄ LOCATION.--Lat 47 42'11", long 116 58'37", in SW 4SW 4SW 4 sec.4, T.50 N., R.5 W., Kootenai County, Post Falls quad., Hydrologic Unit 17010305, on right bank, 1 mi downstream from powerplant of Avista Utilities, 1.5 mi southwest of Post Falls, and at mile 100.7. DRAINAGE AREA.--3,840 mi2, approximately, of which about 122 mi2 in the vicinity of Hayden Lake is noncontributing to this station. WATER-DISCHARGE RECORDS PERIOD OF RECORD.--October 1912 to current year (prior to January 1913, monthly discharge only, published in WSP 870 and 1736). Prior to October 1949, published as “at Post Falls.” GAGE.--Water-stage recorder. Datum of gage is 2,050 ft, referred to originally accepted elevation of 2,157.40 ft for the U.S. Geological Survey bench mark in southeast corner of Idaho First National Bank Building (see WSP 882). Gage datum is 2,047.00 ft above NGVD of 1929. Jan. 1, 1913, to Nov. 21, 1920, nonrecording gage, and Nov. 22, 1920, to Sept. 15, 1934, recording gage 0.6 mi upstream. From Sept. 16, 1934, to Nov. 15, 1949, recording gage 0.8 mi upstream. From Nov. 16, 1949, at present site. Datum of all gages prior to Sept. 30, 1964, 50 ft lower.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 I N V E S T I N G I N O U R S H a R E D F U T U R E 2010
    INVESTING IN OUR SHARED FUTURE 2010 ANNUAL REPORT A STATEMENT OF OUR PURPOSE: DELIVERING RELIABLE ENERGY SERVICE AND THE CHOICES THAT MATTER MOST TO YOU. THIS IS THE IDEA THAT GUIDES OUR WORK EVERY DAY • IT IS THE YARDSTICK AGAINST WHICH WE GAUGE OUR PRIORITIES AND MEASURE OUR RESULTS. IT EXPRESSES WHAT WE WORK TOWARD • OUR SHARED FUTURE. ON THE COVER: Avista looks back on 2010 as a year of investment in our shared future. Operational challenges were met head-on and programs successfully implemented which resulted in strong financial health and a clear, empowered vision for moving forward. ON THIS PAGE: Natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel. Its most efficient use is to directly heat homes and businesses. Construction of new natural gas lines continues as Avista meets increasing residential and business demand for this clean heating source. Scott Morris Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer D EAR FelloW SHAREHOLDERS: Let’s talk about two thoughts: FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS We’ve come through 2010 with solid [ shared value and shared future. As a financial results and modest growth. We believe these are good outcomes given the shareholder of Avista Corp., you have weak economy both regionally and nationally. invested in the work of this company – The year started with weather that once again set records. This time, though, it wasn’t record for today and for tomorrow. As the snow levels as in 2009; instead 2010 was one of the warmest January to March time chairman of Avista Corp., my job is periods in this region. This resulted in lower than normal energy use from customers to to see that your trust in our work is heat their homes and businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Consultation
    Health Consultation EVALUATION OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBs) IN FISH FROM LONG LAKE (A.K.A. LONG SPOKANE) SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON APRIL 25, 2005 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Health Assessment and Consultation Atlanta, Georgia 30333 Health Consultation: A Note of Explanation An ATSDR health consultation is a verbal or written response from ATSDR to a specific request for information about health risks related to a specific site, a chemical release, or the presence of hazardous material. In order to prevent or mitigate exposures, a consultation may lead to specific actions, such as restricting use of or replacing water supplies; intensifying environmental sampling; restricting site access; or removing the contaminated material. In addition, consultations may recommend additional public health actions, such as conducting health surveillance activities to evaluate exposure or trends in adverse health outcomes; conducting biological indicators of exposure studies to assess exposure; and providing health education for health care providers and community members. This concludes the health consultation process for this site, unless additional information is obtained by ATSDR which, in the Agency’s opinion, indicates a need to revise or append the conclusions previously issued. You May Contact ATSDR TOLL FREE at 1-888-42ATSDR or Visit our Home Page at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov HEALTH CONSULTATION EVALUATION OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBs) IN FISH FROM LONG LAKE (A.K.A. LONG SPOKANE) CITY OF SPOKANE, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared by: Washington State Department of Health Under Cooperative Agreement with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Lake Dam Tdg Abatement Feasibility Phase Iii Physical Model Study 2011 Interim Report
    LONG LAKE DAM TDG ABATEMENT FEASIBILITY PHASE III PHYSICAL MODEL STUDY 2011 INTERIM REPORT Prepared for: February 2012 Prepared by: Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Long Lake Dam TDG Abatement Feasibility Phase III Physical Model Study 2011 Interim Report Prepared for: Avista Utilities 1411 East Mission Ave. Spokane, WA 99220 Prepared by: northwest hydraulic consultants 835 South 192nd St. Building C, Suite 1300 Seatac, WA 98148 February 9, 2012 21885 DISCLAIMER This document has been prepared by Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc. in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices and is intended for the exclusive use and benefit of the client for whom it was prepared and for the particular purpose for which it was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc. and its officers, directors, employees, and agents assume no responsibility for the reliance upon this document or any of its contents by any party other than the client for whom the document was prepared. The contents of this document are not to be relied upon or used, in whole or in part, by or for the benefit of others without specific written authorization from Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc. and our client. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 System Description ........................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 Long Lake Hydroelectric Development ..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F Generation Cost and Performance Appendix Fbi Biomass
    APPENDIX F GENERATION COST AND PERFORMANCE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................................................................2 ANALYTICAL APPROACH............................................................................................................................................3 REPRESENTATIVE RESOURCE CHARACTERIZATIONS .............................................................................................................3 APPENDIX FBI BIOMASS APPENDIX FNU NUCLEAR POWER APPENDIX FCO COAL APPENDIX FOE OCEAN ENERGY APPENDIX FGT GEOTHERMAL APPENDIX FSO SOLAR APPENDIX FHY HYDROPOWER APPENDIX FWN WIND APPENDIX FNG NATURAL GAS F-1 Draft Fourth Northwest Conservation and Electric Power Plan, Appendix F GENERATION COST AND PERFORMANCE SUMMARY Appendix F provides the analysis used to characterize the generating resource alternatives described in this draft plan. Table F-1 lists the types of resources analyzed and summarizes the resulting cost and resource potential. Following this overview are detailed descriptions of each resource. A brief description of the process used to analyze each resource follows. Table F-1 Generating Resource Costs and Potential Block Code Resource Base-Year Technology Ref. Lev. Energy CostsBlock Firm Energy (m/kWh, real): (MWa) GEO 1 Geothermal 1995 Flash or Binary 49.7 576 GEO 103 Geothermal 1995 Flash or Binary 49.7 576 GEO 2 Geothermal 1995 Flash or Binary 59.6 414 GEO 3 Geothermal 1995 Flash or Binary 72.8
    [Show full text]
  • October 2017) (Implements RCW 34.05.320) Do NOT Use for Expedited Rule Making
    CODE REVISER USE ONLY PROPOSED RULE MAKING CR-102 (October 2017) (Implements RCW 34.05.320) Do NOT use for expedited rule making Agency: Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) ☒ Original Notice ☐ Supplemental Notice to WSR ☐ Continuance of WSR ☒ Preproposal Statement of Inquiry was filed as WSR 19-13-052 June 13, 2019 ; or ☐ Expedited Rule Making--Proposed notice was filed as WSR ; or ☐ Proposal is exempt under RCW 34.05.310(4) or 34.05.330(1); or ☐ Proposal is exempt under RCW . Title of rule and other identifying information: (describe subject) The department is considering amendments to freshwater recreational gamefish rules. 220-310-070 – Statewide bait rules 220-310-090 – Game fish possession limits and size limits 220-312-010 – Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules – General rules 220-312-020 – Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules – Coast 220-312-030 – Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules – Southwest 220-312-040 – Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules – Puget Sound 220-312-050 – Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules – Eastside Hearing location(s): Date: Time: Location: (be specific) Comment: October 18-19, 2019 8:00 am Natural Resource Building, 1111 Washington St. SE, Olympia, WA 98501 Date of intended adoption: October 20, 2019 (Note: This is NOT the effective date) Submit written comments to: Name: WDFW Rules Coordinator Address: PO Box 43152 Olympia, WA 98501 Email: [email protected] Fax: 360-902-2155 Other: By (date) October 17, 2019 Assistance for persons with disabilities: Contact WDFW ADA Manager Phone: 360-902-2349 Fax: TTY: 360-902-2207 Email: [email protected] Other: By (date) October 17, 2019 Page 1 of 4 AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending WSR 18-06-045, filed 3/1/18, effective 4/1/18) WAC 220-312-010 Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules—Gener- al rules.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of (Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 'iO-900 ~«QM.B No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of [the In National Park Service APR I 8 f995 National Register of (Historic Places Registration Form UtMC'r RESOURCES DIVISION NATIONAL PARK SERVICE This form is for use in nominating oiireauesWc| ^tttrtfeinHfctefe^»tt<dBH^UfiMperties aha-1dT^frhife.rH<^S^K^eS£IM<9!ON c1omPtefe the National Register of Historic Places fie£/is1r%fio7)Fo7rirfni^^ 3i9l|4dtfaGtiM4lj1Bftft|( 9£$pfh'c?(" >n the pppropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the |—[—K[**...;...| j^...^^^ g^^ "NW for fyflt applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from {he Infill UUIIUiu. I 'tale additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NFS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Spokane River Bridge at Long Lake Dam other names/site number WSDOT 231/101 2. Location street & number State Route 231. spanning the Spokane River D not for publication city or town Rearden____________________________ _ S vicinity state Washington code WA county Lincoln & Stevens code 043 T zip code 99Q29 _____________________________065 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this IE1 nomination D request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property Kj meets D does not meet the National Register criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • A Storypath Exploring the Lasting Legacy of Celilo Falls
    Living in Celilo – A Storypath Exploring the Lasting Legacy of Celilo Falls By Shana Brown Office of Native Education/Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Washington State In cooperation with Trillium Publishing, Inc. Acknowledgements Shana Brown would like to thank: Carol Craig, Yakama Elder, writer, and historian, for her photos of Celilo as well as her expertise and her children’s story, “I Wish I Had Seen the Falls.” Chucky is really her first grandson (and my cousin). The Columbia River Inter-tribal Fish Commission for providing information about their organization and granting permission to use articles, including a piece from their magazine, Wana Chinook Tymoo. HistoryLink.org for granting permission to use the article, “Dorothea Nordstrand Recalls Old Celilo Falls.” The Northwest Power and Conservation Council for granting permission to use an excerpt from the article, “Celilo Falls.” Ritchie Graves, Chief of the NW Region Hydropower Division’s FCRPS Branch, NOAA Fisheries, for providing information on survival rates of salmon through the dams on the Columbia River system. Sally Thompson, PhD., for granting permission to use her articles. Se-Ah-Dom Edmo, Shoshone-Bannock/Nez Perce/Yakama, Coordinator of the Indigenous Ways of Knowing Program at Lewis and Clark College, Columbia River Board Member, and Vice- President of the Oregon Indian Education Association, for providing invaluable feedback and guidance as well as copies of the actual notes and letters from the Celilo Falls Community Club. The Oregon Historical Society for granting permission to use articles from the Oregon Historical Quarterly. The Oregon Historical Society Research Library Moving Image Collections for granting permission to use video material.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Lake Spokane Fishery Enhancement
    AVISTA CORPORATION REVISED LAKE SPOKANE FISHERY ENHANCEMENT AND CREEL SURVEY PLAN LICENSE ARTICLE 406 Spokane River Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2545 Revised By: Avista Corporation in Coordination with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Prepared By: NORMANDEAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 40 Cascade Ave. Suite 40 PO Box 1159 Stevenson, WA 98648 Revised March 15, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Background ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Plan Overview ..................................................................................................................... 4 4.0 Trout Stocking .................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Procurement and Criteria ................................................................................................ 5 4.2 Stocking Schedule and Location .................................................................................... 5 5.0 Creel Survey ....................................................................................................................... 6 5.1 Survey Design Overview ................................................................................................ 6 5.2 Angler Counts ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]