DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment 20070531-3047 Issued by FERC OSEC 05/31/2007 in Docket#: P-12751-000 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Finavera Renewables Ocean Energy, Ltd. Project No. 1 27 51 -000 Washington NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (May 31 , 2007 ) In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 F.R. 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for an original license for the Makah Bay Offshore Wave Energy Pilot Project to be located in part in Makah Bay of the Pacific Ocean in Clallam County, Washington and in part on the Makah Indian Reservation near Neah Bay , Washington, and has prepared a n Environmental Assessment ( EA) for the project. The EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the "eLibrary" link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at [email protected] or toll -free at 1 -866 -208 -3676, or for TTY, (202) 502 -8659. You may also regis ter online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs - filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. Any comments should be filed within 30 days fro m the date of this notice and should be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20426. Please affix Project No. 12751 -000 to all comments. Comments may be electronically fil ed via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR § 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s web site (http://www.ferc.gov ) under the “e -Filing ” link. For further information, contact Nicholas Jayjack at (202) 502 -6073. Kimberly D. Bose Secretary 20070531-3047 Issued by FERC OSEC 05/31/2007 in Docket#: P-12751-000 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE Makah Bay Offshore Wave Energy Pilot Project FERC Project No. 12751 -00 0 Washington Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, D.C. 20426 May 2007 20070531-3047 Issued by FERC OSEC 05/31/2007 in Docket#: P-12751-000 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................ ................................ ............................... v I. APPLICATION ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 1 II. PURPOSE OF ACTION AND NEED FOR POWER ................................ ............. 1 A. Purpose of Action ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 1 B. Need for Power ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 2 III. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ................................ .................... 3 A. Proposed Action ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 3 1. Project Facilities ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 2. Project Operation ................................ ................................ ............................... 8 3. Project Construction and Installation ................................ .............................. 8 4. Project Safety ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 10 5. Proposed Environmental Measures ................................ ................................ 11 B. Staff’s Recommended Alternative ................................ ................................ ........ 12 C. Staff’s Recommended Alterative with Mandatory Conditions ......................... 14 D. No -action Alternative ................................ ................................ ............................ 15 IV. CONSULTATION AND COMPLIANCE ................................ ............................. 15 A. Consultation ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 15 1. Scoping ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 15 2. Interventions ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 16 3. Comments on the Application ................................ ................................ ......... 16 B. Compliance ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 17 1. Water Quality Certification ................................ ................................ ............. 17 2. Section 4(e) Conditions ................................ ................................ ..................... 17 3. Endangered Species Act ................................ ................................ ................... 18 4. 10(j) Recommendations ................................ ................................ .................... 19 5. Coastal Zone Management Act ................................ ................................ ....... 20 6. Essential Fish Habitat ................................ ................................ ....................... 20 7. Marine Mammal Protection Act ................................ ................................ ..... 21 8. National Historic Preservation Act ................................ ................................ .22 V. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ................................ ................................ ............ 22 A. Genera l Description of the Project Area ................................ ............................. 22 B. Cumulative Effects ................................ ................................ ................................ .24 1. Geographic Scope ................................ ................................ ............................. 25 2. Temporal Scope ................................ ................................ ................................ .26 C. Proposed Action and Action Alternatives ................................ ........................... 26 1. Geology and Soils ................................ ................................ .............................. 26 2. Water Resources ................................ ................................ ............................... 32 3. Marine Fishery Resources ................................ ................................ ............... 46 4. Marine Mammals, Reptil es, and Seabirds ................................ ..................... 62 5. Terrestrial Resources ................................ ................................ ....................... 93 6. Threatened and Endangered Species and Essential Fish Habitat ............... 97 ii 20070531-3047 Issued by FERC OSEC 05/31/2007 in Docket#: P-12751-000 7. Recreation, Ocean Use, and Land Use ................................ .......................... 109 8. Aesthetic Resources ................................ ................................ ........................ 124 9. Soci oeconomic Resources ................................ ................................ ............... 127 10. Cultural Resources ................................ ................................ ...................... 130 11. Project Decommissioning ................................ ................................ ........... 136 VI. DEVELOPMENTAL RESOURCES ................................ ................................ ... 137 VII. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 146 VIII. FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ .......... 156 IX. CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ................................ ..... 158 X. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ................................ ....................... 159 XI. LITERATURE CITED ................................ ................................ .......................... 160 XII. LIST OF PREPARERS ................................ ................................ ....................... 175 iii 20070531-3047 Issued by FERC OSEC 05/31/2007 in Docket#: P-12751-000 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project location map ................................ ................................ ........................... 4 Figure 2. Schematic of Finavera’s proposed AquaBuOY array and associated mooring surface floats ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 6 Figure 3. Configuration of Finavera’s proposed AquaBuOY mooring and anchoring system ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 7 LIST
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Olympic Peninsula Nfhs Review (Final Report Summary)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - Pacific Region Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula Big Quilcene, Quinault, Hoh, Sooes, and Waatch River Watersheds Quilcene, Quinault, and Makah National Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Summary May 2009 Please cite as: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. Quilcene, Quinault, and Makah National Fish Hatcheries: Assessments and Recommendations. Final Report, Summary, May 2009. Hatchery Review Team, Pacific Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. <http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ fisheries/Hatcheryreview/ team.html>. USFWS Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula NFHs Assessments and Recommendations Report – May 2009 Summary Long-term conservation needs of natural salmonid populations and their inherent genetic resources require a reexamination of the role of hatcheries in basin-wide management and conservation strategies. Hatcheries must be viewed as part of the environmental and ecological landscape to help achieve both conservation and harvest goals. These goals need to be part of a holistic and integrated strategy that also combines habitat, hydropower, and harvest needs for conserving and managing fishery resources. These strategies must establish short- and long-term goals for both hatchery- propagated and naturally-spawning populations. To ensure that its hatchery programs are best meeting conservation and harvest goals, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) began, in October 2005, a multi-year review of 21 salmon and steelhead hatcheries that the Service owns or operates in the Columbia River Basin. This review was expanded in 2007 to include the three National Fish Hatcheries on Washington’s Olympic Peninsula. The goal of this review is to ensure that Service hatcheries are operated in accordance with best scientific principles, and contribute to sustainable fisheries and the conservation of naturally-spawning populations of salmon, steelhead and other aquatic species.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Quinault Tribe of Indians on Its Own Behalf and on Behalf of the Queets Band of Indians, Et Al., Intervenor-Plaintiffs, V
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Quinault Tribe of Indians on its own behalf and on behalf of the Queets Band of Indians, et al., Intervenor-Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Defendant, Thor C. Tollefson, Director, Washington State Department of Fisheries, et al., Intervenor-Defendants Civ. No. 9213 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, TACOMA DIVISION 384 F. Supp. 312; 1974 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12291 February 12, 1974 SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: [**1] On Question Per Reconsideration Motion March 22, 1974. COUNSEL: Stan Pitkin, U.S. Atty., Stuart F. Pierson, Sp. Asst. U.S. Atty., Seattle, Washington, for the U.S.; George D. Dysart, Asst. Regional Sol., U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Portland, Oregon, of counsel. David H. Getches, Native American Rights Fund, Boulder, Colorado, and John H. Sennhauser, Legal Services Center, Seattle, Washington, for Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Squaxin Island Tribe of Indians, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Skokomish Indian Tribe, Stillaguamish Indian Tribe. Alvin J. Ziontz, Ziontz, Pirtle, Morisset & Ernstoff, Seattle, Washington, for Makah Indian Tribe, Lummi Indian Tribe, Quileute Indian Tribe. Michael Taylor, Taholah, Washington, for Quinault Tribe of Indians. James B. Hovis, Hovis, Cockrill & Roy, Yakima, Washington, for Yakima Indian Tribe. Lester Stritmatter, Stritmatter & Stritmatter, Hoquiam, Washington, for Hoh Tribe of Indians. William A. Stiles, Jr., Sedro-Woolley, Washington, for Upper Skagit River Tribe. Slade Gorton, Atty. Gen., Edward B. Mackie, Deputy Atty. Gen., Olympia, Washington, for State of Washington. Joseph Larry Coniff, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Game, Olympia, Washington, [**2] for Game Defendants & Carl Crouse. Earl R. McGimpsey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Makah Tribe Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. MAKAH TRIBE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SURFACE WATERS September 30, 2006 Makah Tribe Water Quality Standards for Surface Water September 30, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I - INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 1. Authority, Purpose and Scope.............................................................................. 1 SECTION 2. Definitions............................................................................................................ 2 SECTION 3. General Considerations........................................................................................ 8 PART II - DESIGNATED USES AND CRITERIA .................................................................... 10 SECTION 4. Freshwater Designated Uses and Criteria.......................................................... 10 SECTION 5. Marine Water Designated Uses and Criteria ..................................................... 15 SECTION 6. Water Quality Standards for Wetlands .............................................................. 20 SECTION 7. Lake Designated Uses and Criteria...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MAKAH NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY Neah Bay, Washington
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Summer 2006 MAKAH NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY Neah Bay, Washington INTRODUCTION QUICK REFERENCE DATA The Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (WWFWO) and the Olympia Fish Health LEGEND: AVG = Average (mean) Center (OFHC) assist the three National Fish BY = Brood Year Hatcheries (NFH) on the Olympic Peninsula ­­ FL = Fork Length Makah, Quilcene, and Quinault (see locale map COS = Coho Salmon below). The WWFWO, OFHC, and NFHs work FCS = Fall Chinook Salmon together to restore salmon for domestic and WST = Winter Steelhead & = Female international fisheries in compliance with Trust % = Male responsibilities to tribes, court orders, agreements with states, and international < ADULT AGES AT RETURN treaties. WWFWO works with cooperators to program and evaluate hatchery production to AGE 2005 1985­2005 assure obligations are met with minimal impact RANGE AVG. AGE AVG.AGE on wild fish. OFHC provides fish health FCS 2­6 yrs. 3.6 3.7 diagnostic and treatment services to assure COS 2­3 yrs. 3.0 2.8 optimum post­release survival of hatchery fish. WST 2­6 yrs. 3.3 3.3 This annual report provides basic information on < ADULT FORK LENGTHS in millimeters (inches) Makah NFH to inform Service employees, visitors, and our cooperators of their hatchery FL RANGE FL MEAN programs FCS 203­1185mm (8­47") 813mm (32") COS 205­903mm (8­36") 650mm (26") WST 330­1008mm (13­40") 675mm (27") VANCOUVER ISLAND < ADULT ENTRY DATES TO HATCHERY NEAH BAY STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA MAKAH NFH MEAN 1988­2005 RANGE ENTRY DATE SEATTLE QUILCENE NFH FCS Sep ­ Nov October 8 COS Sep ­ Jan October 26 QUINAULT NFH WST Sep ­ Feb January 8 OLYMPIA < GRAY'S HARBOR NUMBER AND DATES OF ADULTS SPAWNED Western Washington locale map 2005 1986­2005 2005 # Spawned Avg # Makah NFH, located on the northwest tip of the % & Olympic Peninsula, began operating in 1981.
    [Show full text]
  • Coseismic Subsidence and Paleotsunami Run-Up Records
    Journal of Coastal Research 00 0 000–000 Coconut Creek, Florida Month 0000 Coseismic Subsidence and Paleotsunami Run-Up Records from Latest Holocene Deposits in the Waatch Valley, Neah Bay, Northwest Washington, U.S.A.: Links to Great Earthquakes in the Northern Cascadia Margin Curt D. Peterson†, Kenneth M. Cruikshank†, Mark E. Darienzo†, Gary C. Wessen‡, Virginia L. Butler§, and Sarah L. Sterling§ †Geology Department ‡Wessen and Associates §Anthoplology Department Portland State University 15028 24th Avenue SW Portland State University Portland, OR 97207-0751, U.S.A. Seattle, WA 98166, U.S.A. Portland, OR 97207-0751, U.S.A. [email protected] ABSTRACT Peterson, C.D.; Cruikshank, K.M.; Darienzo, M.E.; Wessen, G.C.; Butler, V.L., and Sterling, S.L., 0000. Coseismic subsidence and paleotsunami run-up records from latest Holocene deposits in the Waatch Valley, Neah Bay, northwest Washington, U.S.A.: links to great earthquakes in the northern Cascadia Margin. Journal of Coastal Research, 00(0), 000–000. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208. Representative shallow cores (1–2-m depth) from the Waatch Valley (n ¼ 10) and from Neah Bay back-barrier wetlands (n ¼ 7) record four coseismic subsidence events and associated paleotsunami inundations during the last 1300 years in the North Central Cascadia Margin. Three of the subsidence events (SUB1, SUB2b, and SUB3) correlate to reported great earthquakes dated at AD 1700, about 1.1 ka, and about 1.3 ka. An additional subsidence horizon (SUB2a), which is newly discovered in the study area, might correlate to a widely reported paleotsunami inundation, dated between 0.7 and 0.9 ka in the study region.
    [Show full text]
  • The Boldt Decision
    The Boldt Decision Hon. George H. Boldt Statement of the Case – 9 I. Established Basic Facts and Law – 12 II. Summary of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law – 15 III. State Regulation of Off Reservation Treaty Right Fishing – 17 IV. Rulings on Major Issues – 24 V. Findings of Fact – 36 Treaty Status of Plaintiff Tribes – 36 Pretreaty Fishing Among Northwest Indians – 37 Treaty Background – 41 Negotiation and Execution of the Treaties – 43 Post Treaty Indian Fishing – 46 Historic and Present Status of Each Plaintiff Tribe: 1. Hoh Tribe – 48 2. Lummi Tribe – 49 3. Makah Tribe – 53 4. Muckleshoot Tribe – 56 5. Nisqually Tribe – 58 6. Puyallup Tribe – 61 7. Quileute Tribe – 63 8. Quinault Tribe – 66 9. Sauk-Suiattle Tribe – 68 10. Skokomish Tribe – 68 11. Squaxin Island Tribe – 70 12. Stillaguamish Tribe – 71 13. Upper Skagit River Tribe – 72 14. Yakima Nation – 72 General Fisheries Conservation and Management – 76 Department of Fisheries Policies and Practices – 83 Department of Game Policies and Practices – 98 VI. Conclusions of Law – 97 VII. Declaratory Judgment and Decree – 105 IIX. Rulings on Fisheries’ Questions Reconsideration Motion – 110 IX. Proposed Amendments and Rulings Thereon – 115 X. Injunction – 117 XI. Interim Plan and Stay Order Pending Final Decision on Appeal – 126 6 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Quinault Tribe of Indians on its own behalf and on behalf of the Queets Band of Indians, et al., Intervenor-Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Defendant, Thor C. Tollefson, Director, Washington State Department of Fisheries, et al., Intervenor-Defendants Civ. No. 9213 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, TACOMA DIVISION 384 F.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER RESOURCES OF CLALLAM COUNTY, WASHINGTON: PHASE 1 REPORT By B. W. Drost U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4227 Prepared in cooperation with the CLALLAM COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Tacoma, Washington 1986 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Cover photograph by Clallam County Planning Department For additional information Copies of this report write to: can be purchased from: District Chief Open-File Services Section U.S. Geological Survey Western Distribution Branch 1201 Pacific Avenue - Suite 600 U.S. Geological Survey Tacoma, Washington 98402 Box 25425, Federal Center Lake wood, Colorado 80225 (Telephone: (303) 234-5888) ii CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction 3 Purpose and scope 3 Description of the area 4 Acknowledgments 4 Ground water 6 Surface water 8 Water quality 13 Water use 17 Water-resource problem areas and recommendations for future studies 19 References cited 21 ILLUSTRATIONS (Plates 1-5 in pocket) PLATES 1-5. Maps showing primary study areas: 1. Miller Peninsula and adjacent areas. 2. Sequim-Dungeness Peninsula. 3. Port Angeles and adjacent areas. 4. Soleduck-Calawah River basins from LaPush to Sappho and adjacent areas. 5. Clallam Bay-Sekiu and adjacent areas. Page FIGURE 1. Map showing Clallam County and primary study areas 5 iii TABLES Page TABLE 1. Summary of selected ground-water data in the primary s tudy areas 7 2. Summary of selected surface-water data 9 3. Summary of selected ground-water-quality data 15 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Renewable Energy Feasibility Study for the Makah Indian Tribe
    DOE Award Number: DE-FC36-02GO12110, M001 Makah Renewable Energy Feasibility Study in Neah Bay Washington Final Report Comprehensive Renewable Energy Feasibility Study For the Makah Indian Tribe Period covered: September 2002 through March 2005 Date of Report: March 31, 2005 Recipient Organization: Makah Indian Tribe Leonard A. Denney Planning and Economic Development Manager Makah Indian Tribe P.O. Box 115 Neah Bay, WA 98357 Phone: 360-645-3281; Fax: 360-645-2033 E-mail: [email protected] Alternate Tribal contact: Ryland Bowechop Planner E-mail: [email protected] Technical Contact: Robert Lynette, Springtyme Company LLC 212 Jamestown Beach Lane, Sequim, WA 98382 Phone: (360) 681-3289; Fax: (360) 681-7509 E-mail: [email protected] Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.0 Project Overview ...................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Project Purpose and Long-Term Objectives ......................................................................... 4 1.2 Background ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 Wind Energy Pre-development Activities and Results............................................................. 7 2.1 Wind Energy Tutorial ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MAKAH NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY Neah Bay, Washington
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2008 MAKAH NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY Neah Bay, Washington INTRODUCTION QUICK REFERENCE DATA The Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (WFWO) and the Olympia Fish Health Center LEGEND: AVG = Average (mean) (OFHC) assist the three National Fish BY = Brood Year FL = Fork Length Hatcheries (NFH) on the Olympic Peninsula -- COS = Coho Salmon Makah, Quilcene, and Quinault (see locale map FCS = Fall Chinook Salmon below). The WFWO, OFHC, and NFHs work WST = Winter Steelhead together to restore salmon for domestic and & = Female % = Male international fisheries in compliance with Trust responsibilities to tribes, court orders, < ADULT AGES AT RETURN agreements with states, and international treaties. WFWO works with cooperators to AGE 2007 1985-2007 RANGE AVG. AGE AVG.AGE program and evaluate hatchery production to assure obligations are met with minimal impact FCS 2-6 yrs. 3.1 3.7 on wild fish. OFHC provides fish health COS 2-3 yrs. 2.8 2.8 diagnostic and treatment services to assure WST 2-6 yrs. 3.4 3.3 optimum post-release survival of hatchery fish. < ADULT FORK LENGTHS in millimeters (inches) This annual report provides basic information on FL RANGE FL MEAN Makah NFH to inform Service employees, FCS 350-945mm (14-37") 584mm (23") visitors, and our cooperators of their hatchery COS 250-840mm (10-33") 644mm (25") programs. WST 330-1008mm (13-40") 675mm (27") < ADULT ENTRY DATES TO HATCHERY VANCOUVER ISLAND NEAH BAY MEAN STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA 1988-2007 RANGE ENTRY DATE MAKAH NFH SEATTLE FCS Sep - Nov October 13 QUILCENE NFH COS Sep - Jan November 3 WST Sep - Feb December 16 QUINAULT NFH OLYMPIA GRAY'S HARBOR < NUMBER AND DATES OF ADULTS SPAWNED Western Washington locale 2007 1986-2007 2007 # Spawned Avg # Makah NFH, located within the Makah Indian Date Range % & Total Spawned Reservation on the Olympic Peninsula, began operating in 1981.
    [Show full text]
  • Olympic Peninsula Quilcene, Quinault and Makah National Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Appendix A
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Pacific Region Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula Big Quilcene, Quinault, Hoh, Sooes, and Waatch River Watersheds Quilcene, Quinault and Makah National Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Appendix A: Briefing Document; Summary of Background Information May 2009 Please cite as: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. Quilcene, Quinault, and Makah National Fish Hatcheries: Assessments and Recommendations – Appendix A: Briefing Document; Summary of Background Information. Final Report, May 2009. Hatchery Review Team, Pacific Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. <http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ fisheries/Hatcheryreview/ team.html>. USFWS Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula NFHs Assessments and Recommendations Report –May 2009 Figure 1.Fish Hatcheries on Olympic Peninsula (National Fish Hatcheries are in caps and underlined) 1 1 Modified figure from Streamnet <http://www.streamnet.org/>. Appendix A i USFWS Olympic Peninsula Hatchery Review Team Olympic Peninsula NFHs Assessments and Recommendations Report – May 2009 Table of Contents I. OLYMPIC PENINSULA 1 II. QUILCENE NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY 53 IIA. QUILCENE NFH COHO ....................................................................................... 75 IIB. QUILCENE NFH, HOOD CANAL STEELHEAD.................................................... 101 III. QUINAULT NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY 103 IIIA. QUINAULT NFH STEELHEAD (COOK CREEK PROGRAM) ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Origin of Washington Geographic Names
    I LIBRARy f U.S.F,S. POWTLAND, or. LFJIE COPY ORIGIN OF WASHINGTON GEOGRAPHIC NAMES BY EDMOND S. MEANY PROFESSOE O1P rnSTOBY, UNIvrnSITT O1 WASHINGTON, PRESIDNNI' OP TR MOUNTAINFIEBS, AUTHOR ON VAN000VBR'I DISOOVFXRY OF FUGET SOUND, HISTORY OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, SIOIINT E1IcIDR, EAGOEJI OY EXTLOIFATION SEATPL i3NIV1tS1Ty OF WASHTGTON P1SS 1923 HERBERT THOMAS CONDON COLLEAGUE AND FRIEND IN APPRECIATION OF HIS LOYALTY, INDUSTRY, FAITHFULNESS AHD EPPICIERCY INTRODUCTION In the first half of the sixteenth century, the Spaniards placed the beautiful geographical name of California upon the Pacific shore of North America. At first that name was extended indefi- nitely to the northward along the undiscovered or unexplored coast line.In 1579, Captain Francis Drake, on the memorable voyage which earned him knighthood at the hands of Queen Elizabeth, landed on the coast of California, took possession for England and gave the region the name of Nova Albion.The bounds of that name, like the bounds of the original California, were indefinite, although each name may be thought to have reached the shore of Washington. In 1625, Samuel Purchas: His Pilgrims was published, con- taining a letter by Michael Lok.That famous letter gave the world the purported information that in 1592 Juan de Fuca, a Greek navigator, whose real name was Apostolos Valerianus, seek- ing the fabled Straits of Anian, had found a spiral rock "between 47 and 48 degrees of Latitude" and also a great strait into which he sailed.Most of the historians who have made search for sus- taining documents in the centuries that ensued have concluded that the Juan de Fuca story is a myth.However, E'uca's Pillar and the Strait of Juan de Fuca remain as names and may be accepted as frontispieces in a discussion of Washington's historical geography.
    [Show full text]