DOCSLIB.ORG

Ferry County, Washington

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ferry County, Washington Ferry County, Washington Community Wildfire Protection Plan Approved by the Ferry County Commissioners 2014 This plan was developed by the Ferry County Community Wildfire Protection Plan steering committee. Acknowledgements This Community Wildfire Protection Plan represents the efforts and cooperation of a number of organizations and agencies working together to improve preparedness for wildfire events while reducing factors of risk. Ferry/Okanogan County Fire Washington State Ferry County Extension, Protection District #13 Malo Grange, Ferry County Planning Ferry/Okanogan County Fire Department Protection District #14 & Ferry County Joint Fire Protection Local Businesses and Citizens of Ferry District #3 County Ferry County Homeland Security Coordinator Office Location Mailing Address 175 N Jefferson PO Box 1099 Republic, WA Republic, WA 99166 99166 Phone Numbers (509) 775-3132 (509) 775 3133 (509) 775-3136 Toll Free (800) 342-4344 Fax (509) 775-1076 Copies of this plan can be found at: www.ferry-county.com www.dnr.wa.gov Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................................ II FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 OVERVIEW OF THIS PLAN AND ITS DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................................................... 3 GOALS AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES ................................................................................................................................................... 3 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER LOCAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS ............................................................................................................ 6 CHAPTER 2 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 DOCUMENTING THE PLANNING PROCESS .......................................................................................................................... 9 DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS ...................................................................................................................................... 9 THE PLANNING TEAM ..................................................................................................................................................................... 9 STEERING COMMITTEE MEETINGS ................................................................................................................................................ 11 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT.................................................................................................................................................................. 11 CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 FERRY COUNTY CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................................................................. 17 DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................................................................ 17 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS ............................................................................................................................................... 18 NATURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................................................. 20 CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 RISK AND PREPAREDNESS ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 25 WILDLAND FIRE CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................................................................................. 25 WILDFIRE HAZARDS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 26 WILDFIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................................. 32 RELATIVE THREAT LEVEL MAPPING ............................................................................................................................................. 43 OVERVIEW OF FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM ..................................................................................................................................... 47 FIRE PROTECTION ISSUES.............................................................................................................................................................. 57 CURRENT WILDFIRE MITIGATION ACTIVITIES .............................................................................................................................. 60 CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................................................................................................... 63 LANDSCAPE RISK ASSESSMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 63 STEPPE LANDSCAPE RISK ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 67 FOREST LANDSCAPE RISK ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 69 CHAPTER 6 ................................................................................................................................................................................... 71 MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 71 MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING ................................................................................................................................................ 71 PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................................ 71 CHAPTER 7 ................................................................................................................................................................................... 89 SUPPORTING INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................................. 89 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................................................ 89 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................................................... 89 SIGNATURE PAGES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 91 [This page intentionally left blank.] Foreword The process of developing a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) can help a community clarify and refine its priorities for the protection of life, property, and critical infrastructure in the wildland–urban interface on both public and private land. It also can lead community members through valuable discussions regarding management options and implications for the surrounding land base. Local fire service organizations help define issues that may place the county, communities, and/or individual homes at risk. Through the collaboration process, the CWPP steering committee discusses potential solutions, funding opportunities, and regulatory concerns and documents their resulting recommendations in the CWPP. The CWPP planning process also incorporates an element for public outreach. Public involvement in the development of the document not only facilitates public input and recommendations, but also provides an educational opportunity through interaction of local wildfire specialists and an interested public. The idea for community-based forest planning and prioritization is neither novel nor new. However, the incentive for communities to engage in comprehensive forest planning and prioritization was given new and unprecedented impetus with the enactment of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) in 2003. This landmark legislation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mussel Currents ~
    4th Annual Freshwater Mussels Of the Pacific Northwest Symposium ~ Mussel Currents ~ April 17th, 2007 Water Resources Education Center, Vancouver, WA Hosted by: the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup “Dedicated to conservation of Pacific Northwest drainage mussel populations and promoting restoration, protection, education, and identification of further research needs.” Special Thanks To Our Sponsors Bureau of Land Management Interagency Status/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sensitive Species Program City of Vancouver Clark County Washington Water Resources Education Center Solid Waste Program Environmental Information Cooperative American Fisheries Society Clark County, Washington Oregon Chapter Washington Department Society for Ecological Restoration of Fish and Wildlife Northwest Chapter Table of Contents About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup…………………..... 2 Symposium Agenda ………………………..……………………………………………... 3 About the Keynote Speakers ……………………………………………………………… 5 Speaker Abstracts …..…………………………………………………………………….. 6 List of Technical Posters & Poster Abstracts….………………………………….…….... 13 Presenter Contact Information ……………………….………………………………… 16 Attendee Contact Information .…………………………………………………...……… 18 Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup Members.................................. 20 About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup History The status of the seven species of freshwater mussels native to the Pacific Northwest has received very little attention, despite the fact that freshwater mussels in general are considered the most endangered group of animals in North America. On February 19, 2003, a workshop on freshwater mussels was held in Vancouver, Washington that consisted of presented papers and a panel discussion. The purpose of the workshop was to initiate discussion on the regional population status of freshwater mussels. The workshop was attended by 91 participants of very diverse backgrounds. From this meeting, the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup was founded.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program. 1993 Annual Report
    Annual Report 1993 BONNEVILLE DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED f This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. For additional copies of this report, write to: Bonneville Power Administration Public Information Center - CKPS-1 P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 Please include title, author, and DOE/BP number from the back cover in the request. LAKE ROOSEVELT FISHERIES MONITORING PROGRAM 1993 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Keith Underwood and John Shields Department of Natural Resources Spokane Tribe of Indians Wellpinit,WA Prepared for: U. S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project Number 88-63 Contract Number DE-8179-88DP91819 June; 996 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi- bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom- mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NFS Form 10-900 (Oct. 1990) r United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See in Inn linn 1iT«i H 1 in hmnjjjuli the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place 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 Fairweather/Trevitt House________________________________ other names/site numberBowlby House. Ferry County Cultural Resource Survey //4/OT/2 2. Location street & number _ 645 Kauffman LJ not for publication city or town Republic _ D vicinity state Washington code WA county Ferr y County code 019 zip code 99166 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this Ej 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 £§ meets D does not meet'the National Register criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant CD nationally O statewide $Q locally.
    [Show full text]
  • FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE for More Information Timothy Coleman, Kettle Range Conservation Group 509-775-2667 | Tcoleman@Kettlerange
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For More Information Timothy Coleman, Kettle Range Conservation Group 509-775-2667 | [email protected] For Immediate Release: May 13, 2021 Lawsuit Filed to Protect Ancient Forest & Wildlife Sanpoil Timber Sale Challenged Spokane, WA. The Kettle Range Conservation Group filed a complaint yesterday in federal district court challenging the Sanpoil timber project in the Kettle River Range, located in the Colville National Forest in northeast Washington. The U.S. Forest Service predicts the timber sale will produce 50-60 million board feet of timber, enough to fill an estimated 10- 12,000 logging trucks. The Project threatens to cut down ancient forests, destroy wildlife habitat, and ruin pristine wilderness areas. The complaint contends the decision approving the Sanpoil Project was arbitrary and capricious, and that the Forest Service failed to evaluate the Project’s effects on the upper Sanpoil River watershed. “This project is going to change the forest landscape for decades to come,” said Timothy Coleman, executive director of the Kettle Range Conservation Group. “The project provides for the logging more than 10,000 acres, much of which will be clearcut, or have just a couple of trees left standing per acre.” The Forest Service recently completed two other projects adjacent to the Sanpoil area of the Kettle River Range, and has two more projects already in the planning phase. Conservationists allege the Forest Service failed to consider the cumulative effects of these projects on Colville’s recreation, wildlife, ancient forests and pristine wilderness areas. “Unlogged wild forests are our primary source of clean water, and contribute significantly to the health of fish and wildlife,” Coleman said.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 2:21-Cv-00161-RMP ECF No. 1 Filed 05/12/21 Pageid.1 Page 1 of 73
    Case 2:21-cv-00161-RMP ECF No. 1 filed 05/12/21 PageID.1 Page 1 of 73 Claire Loebs Davis, WSBA #39812 Dakota Rash, WSBA #57299 (admission to ED WA pending) ANIMAL & EARTH ADVOCATES, PLLC 2226 Eastlake Ave E #101 Seattle, WA 98102 Tel: (206) 601-8476 [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON KETTLE RANGE CONSERVATION GROUP, Case No. 2:21-cv-161 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND v. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF U.S. FOREST SERVICE, GLENN National Forest Management Act, CASAMASSA, Pacific NorthWest National Environmental Policy Act, Regional Forester, U.S. Forest Service, and Administrative Procedure Act RODNEY SMOLDON, Forest Supervisor, Colville National Forest, TRAVIS FLETCHER, District Ranger, Republic Ranger District, U.S. Forest Service. Defendants. COMPLAINT – 1 Case 2:21-cv-00161-RMP ECF No. 1 filed 05/12/21 PageID.2 Page 2 of 73 1 I. INTRODUCTION 2 1. Plaintiff Kettle Range Conservation Group (“KRCG” or “Plaintiff”) 3 challenges the final decision by the United States Forest Service (“Forest Service”) 4 to proceed With the Sanpoil Project (“the Project”), because of its failure to perform 5 a meaningful analysis of the environmental impacts of alloWing timber harvests, 6 controlled burns, and road work within 47,956 acres (the “Project Area”) of the 7 Colville National Forest (“Colville Forest” or “Forest”). KRCG also challenges the 8 Forest Service’s final decision approving the 2019 Colville National Forest Land 9 Management Plan (“2019 Forest Plan” or “Plan”), because it fails to protect old- 10 growth trees from logging through projects such as the Sanpoil Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Roosevelt Northern Pike Research and Suppression
    Henry Lorenzen W. Bill Booth Chair Vice Chair Oregon Idaho Bill Bradbury James Yost Oregon Idaho Guy Norman Jennifer Anders Washington Montana Tom Karier Tim Baker Washington Montana July 3, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO: Council members FROM: Kendall Farley SUBJECT: Lake Roosevelt Northern Pike Research and Suppression BACKGROUND: Presenter: Chris Donley, Region 1 Fish Program Manager, WDFW Holly McLellan, Principal Biologist, Colville Confederated Tribes Elliott Kittel, Biologist II, Spokane Tribe of Indians Summary: The non-native invasive Northern Pike Esox luscious arrived in the upper reaches of the Columbia River, in Lake Roosevelt, in 2011. Since that time, Northern Pike abundance has increased and their distribution is expanding downstream. The co-managers of Lake Roosevelt (Colville Confederated Tribes, Spokane Tribe of Indians, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) worked together to develop a Lake Roosevelt Northern Pike Research and Suppression Plan (hereafter Plan), which includes multiple tasks and is supported by multiple funding sources, that aims to meet the Council’s Non-native and Invasive Species principles and stragegy. Limited aspects of the Plan were implemented in 2015 and 2016. The full plan is being implemented in 2017 as a result of additional funding acquired. The three co-managers of Lake Roosevelt will present the comprehensive Plan, as well as preliminary results, data gaps, and future needs. 851 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Steve Crow 503-222-5161 Portland, Oregon 97204-1348 Executive Director 800-452-5161 www.nwcouncil.org Fax: 503-820-2370 Relevance: Part Three, Section IV A (Strategies, Ecosystem Function) Non-native and Invasive Species section of the 2014 Fish and Wildlife Program (page 46) supports the development of the Lake Roosevelt Northern Pike Research and Suppression Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Sheet
    Lake Roosevelt and Tributaries Rule Change – (Decision) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Summary Sheet ............................................................................................................. 1 of 12 CR-102 .......................................................................................................................... 3 of 12 Excerpts from WAC 220-310-195 Freshwater exceptions to statewide rules—Eastside Countywide freshwater exceptions to statewide rules ......................................... 5 of 12 Roosevelt Lake ................................................................................................... 6 of 12 Sanpoil River ....................................................................................................... 8 of 12 Spokane River .................................................................................................. 11 of 12 Summary Meeting dates: October 7 Fish and Wildlife Commission conference call Agenda item: Lake Roosevelt and tributaries Regulation Update – (Final Rule recommendation) Presenter(s): Chris Donley, Region One, Fish Program Manager Background summary: The Fish and Wildlife Commission received a petition from the Colville Tribe to reduce harvest impacts on wild Redband Rainbow Trout in Lake Roosevelt. The Commission accepted the petition, and asked WDFW staff to develop rule options and take public comment on the rule options. At the August 5-6 Fish and Wildlife Commission meeting staff briefed the Commission on the rule options and public comment that
    [Show full text]
  • Colville Tribes Fish & Wildlife News
    June, 2014 | Volume 14 COLVILLE TRIBES FISH & WILDLIFE NEWS As of mid-June, the CTFW Dept. received 40 bear complaints; here are some helpful tips to keep bears from visiting your neighborhood. Fish passage was another topic on the agenda which Friedlander, Terbasket and SPECIAL THANKS TO THE Upper Columbia United Tribes Executive PROJECT PARTNERS Director, D.R. Michel discussed. “I believe fish passage past Grand Coulee Dam and Chief Joseph Dam is possible but there is still a lot of work to do,” said Terbasket. “There’s a lot to be discouraged about, and there’s always a challenge.” Chief Joseph Hatchery (CJH) Manager, Pat Phillips and CJH Fish Culturist, Jim Andrews gave a presentation on the hatchery in its first year of operation. “Everyone at the hatchery is dedicated in their work to bring salmon back,” said Andrews. “There was a lot to do in our first year, from collecting brood on the purse seine fishing boat in July to spawning activities in October and November. We sure handled a lot of fish eggs.” BEAR AWARE At the noon luncheon, tribal elders sung a table song and the Colville Tribes’ History HERE ARE SOME HELPFUL TIPS IF YOU ENCOUNTER A BEAR: 2014 salmon ceremony and Archeology Dept. showed a video that TO AVOID BEAR AND HUMAN • If a bear approaches, move your family FIRST SALMON CEREMONY included interviews of tribal elders titled: INTERACTION: indoors immediately Salmon and the People, the Chief Joseph The 9th Annual First Salmon Ceremony to the region. “We’ve really had to rely on • Bears are drawn to smells such as • Try to remain calm, don’t panic Dam Fishery Story.
    [Show full text]
  • Bungalow Forest Management Project
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERTOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Final EnvironmerLtal Assessment fbr the proposed Bungalow Mines Forestry Project on the Colville Indian Rerservation, Okanogan County, Washington AGENCY: Bureau of krdian Affairs ACTION: Notice of Availability SUMMARY: This notice is to advirie interested parties that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) as lead federal agency, with the Conflederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, has prepared a final Environmenta.l Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) foi ttre proposed Bungalow Mirres Forestry Project on the Colville Indian Reservation, Okanogan County, Washington. This notice also announces the EA and FONSI are now available in hard copy at the address below. ADDRESSES; You may request ahard copy of the EA and FONSI by writing the BIA Colville Agency, PO Box 1.50, Nespelem, Washington, 99155, ancl the Colville Tribe, PO Box 111, Nespelem, Washington, 99 I 55. FOR FURTHER IINFORMATION CONTACT: Debra Wulff, BIA Colville Agency Superintendent, at (509) 634-2316, and Chasity Swan, Colville Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRMP) Coorclinator, at (509) 634-2323. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The Colville Tribe, through contractual obligations to the BIA, has proposed the Bungalow Mines Forestry Project. The activities under the agency proposed action are for the Omak-Nespelem Forestry District of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation to harvest approximately 5 million board feet of timber from T,340 acres in the Bungalow Mines 2021 Forestry Project Area on the Colville Indian Reservation, Okanogan County, Washington. The activities will occur under guidelines in the IRMF and associated Environmental Impact Statement. AUTHORITY: This notice is published pursuant to 43 CFR 46.305 of the Department of Interior Regulations (43 CFR 46 et seq.), the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Survey of North Ferry Area, Washington Parts of Ferry and Stevens Counties
    This is a scanned version of the text of the original Soil Survey report of North Ferry Area, Washington, Parts of Ferry and Stevens Counties issued September 1979. Original tables and maps were deleted. There may be references in the text that refer to a table that is not in this document. Updated tables were generated from the NRCS National Soil Information System (NASIS). The soil map data has been digitized and may include some updated information. These are available from http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov. Please contact the State Soil Scientist, Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) for additional information. SOIL SURVEY OF NORTH FERRY AREA, WASHINGTON PARTS OF FERRY AND STEVENS COUNTIES BY ALLEN S. ZULAUF, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, AND PROFESSOR WARREN A. STARR, WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FIELDWORK BY ALLEN S. ZULAUF AND GERALD J. LATSHAW, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, PROFESSOR WARREN A. STARR, WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY, AND OSCAR MUELLER, FOREST SERVICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE AND FOREST SERVICE, IN COOPERATION WITH THE WASHINGTON AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION THE NORTH FERRY AREA is in the northeastern road in the State. Copper Butte, the high point of this range, part of Washington (fig. 1). It has a total area of 778,790 rises to an elevation of 7,135 feet. acres, or 1,217 square miles. Colville National Forest covers The only railroad in the area follows the Kettle 523,000 of these acres. The survey area covers the northern River north from Kettle Falls to Laurier and then half of Ferry County, 100 square miles in northwestern extends west to Grand Forks in Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Colville National Forest Land Management Plan
    Colville National Forest Land Management Plan Ferry, Pend Oreille, and Stevens Counties, Washington Forest Service Colville National Forest September 2019 Cover photo: View of Gypsy Peak and the Salmo-Priest Wilderness, Sullivan Lake Ranger District (photo courtesy of Jon Day) In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Interpretation Plan for the Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail
    Western Washington University Western CEDAR WWU Graduate School Collection WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship Winter 2018 Environmental Interpretation Plan for the Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail Rosalie Matsumoto Western Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet Part of the Environmental Education Commons, and the Environmental Studies Commons Recommended Citation Matsumoto, Rosalie, "Environmental Interpretation Plan for the Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail" (2018). WWU Graduate School Collection. 651. https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/651 This Masters Field Project is brought to you for free and open access by the WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in WWU Graduate School Collection by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENVIRONMENTAL INTERPRETATION PLAN FOR THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL By Rosalie Matsumoto Accepted in Partial Completion Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Education Huxley College of the Environment Western Washington University Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A. March 14, 2018 ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chair, Dr. Gene Myers Dr. Nick Stanger Professor Wendy Walker Master’s Field Project In presenting this field project in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master’s degree at Western Washington University, I grant to Western Washington University the non-exclusive royalty-free right to archive, reproduce, distribute, and display the field project in any and all forms, including electronic format, via any digital library mechanisms maintained by WWU. I represent and warrant this is my original work, and does not infringe or violate any rights of others.
    [Show full text]