DOCSLIB.ORG

Specialist Report Outline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Specialist Report Environmental Assessment South Fork Stillaguamish Vegetation Project Cultural Resources Paul Alford, Forest Archaeologist 12/15/2016 Applicable Laws, Regulations, and Policies The following summarizes the major laws, regulations, and policies pertaining to culturalresources: The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended in 2014 (NHPA) Section 106 of the NHPA directs all federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on properties listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP.) The Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA) The ARPA prohibits disturbance or removal of archaeological resources from federal lands without a permit from the responsible land manager. ARPA applies to both NRHP-eligible and non-eligible sites that are at least 100 years old. National Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA) The NFMA directs the Forest Service to develop renewable resource plans through an interdisciplinary process with public involvement and consultation with other interested governmental departments and agencies. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) NEPA provides for consideration of environmental impacts of federal projects and for public involvement in decision-making. Section 101(b)(4) of the statute declares that one objective of the environmental policy is to “preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage.” Accordingly, NHPA Section 106 studies can be coordinated with the NEPA process. The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (AIRFA) The AIRFA protects the rights of American Indian people to believe, express, and exercise their traditional religions. AIRFA allows access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and freedom of worship through traditional ceremonies and practices. It also requires a review, in consultation with American Indian leaders, of federal agency policies and programs to determine changes necessary to protect and preserve religious and cultural practices of American Indians. 1 of 33 The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA) NAGPRA establishes the rights of lineal descendants and members of Indian tribes to certain human remains and precisely defined cultural items recovered from federal or Indian lands. NAGPRA also establishes procedures and consultation requirements for intentional excavation or accidental discovery of American Indian remains or cultural items on federal or Tribal lands. Relevant Standards and Guidelines Land & Resource Management Plan for the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Service FEIS: Chapter II-43: A cultural resource inventory (professionally supervised) will be performed on all projects, prior to any ground-disturbing activity, or modification or removal of older structures. Cultural properties that are identified will be protected until their significance has been evaluated, through consultation with the Washington State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and using the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. When sites are determined significant, mitigation measures will be developed in consultation with the SHPO, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and other interested parties, as specified in 36 CFR 800. Chapter III-140: Management decisions concerning cultural resources will be made in a context of increasing public interest and involvement, with growing public appreciation of these resources contribution to community economies and identity. In response to these concerns, the amount of inventory not tied to specific development projects will increase, to equal or surpass the amount of inventory for development projects. Management Plan: Chapter 4 pages 97 through 99 36 CFR 800 provides guidelines for the implementation of Section 106 of the NHPA. Section 304 of the NHPA provides for the confidentiality of cultural resource site locations. 36 CFR 60 provides criteria for evaluation for listing on the NRHP. 36 CFR 296 provides regulations for the implementation of ARPA. 43 CFR 10 Subpart B provides guidance for the implementation of NAGPRA regarding Human Remains, Funerary Objects, Sacred Objects, or Objects of Cultural Patrimony from Federal or Tribal Lands. FSH 2309.12 provides the direction for the Forest Service Heritage Program. 2 of 33 Other Programmatic Direction Section 106 compliance on the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (MBS) is accomplished through the terms of the 1997 Programmatic Agreement among the USDA Forest Service, Region 6, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Washington State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Cultural Resources Management on National Forests in the State of Washington (PA). Definitions of Technical Terms Terms used in regards to the NHPA can differ from those used in NEPA. The following definitions are from 36 CFR 800 regarding the implementation of Section 106 of the NHPA. Area of potential effects (APE) means the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. The area of potential effects is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking and may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking. Eligible or listed refers to the status of any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, or structure in regards to the NRHP maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. A site may be either not eligible, eligible, or listed in the NRHP. Sites that are unevaluated are treated as eligible until a determination is made. According to the 2004 revised regulations [36 CFR 800.4(d)(1)] for the NHPA, sites considered not eligible for the NRHP may be directly affected once adequately recorded and evaluated, and concurrence is received from the State Historic Preservation Office. Historic property means any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the NRHP. This term includes artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within such properties. The term includes properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization and that meet the National Register criteria. This term would equate to “significant” archaeological or historic sites in regards to NEPA but does not equate to a determination of a “significant” impact. Undertaking means a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a Federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a Federal agency; those carried out with Federal financial assistance; and those requiring a Federal permit, license or approval. Management Requirements and Mitigation Measures The following Standards from the Forest Plan, as amended (2005, 2005a), apply to all alternatives: 3 of 33 Mitigation Measure or Project Objective Effectiveness and Forest Plan Design Feature Basis Standard & Guideline Cultural Resources If a previously unidentified cultural Protect Moderate (MBS Chapter 4-98,99 resource is discovered during historic Forest project implementation, the activity properties experience.) shall be stopped in the area of the find and a reasonable effort to secure and protect the resource be made. The Heritage Specialist shall be notified and the Forest would fulfill its responsibilities in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement and other applicable regulations. If human remains are discovered, Comply with Unknown Chapter 4-98,99 all work must stop in the area of the NAGPRA discovery and NAGPRA protocols followed. Table 1: Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures Analysis Methodology, Assumptions Objectives The primary objective of the analysis was to comply with Section 106 of the NHPA, whereas in accordance with 36 CFR 800.4(b)(1), federal agency officials shall make a “reasonable and good faith effort” to identify historic properties that may be affected by their undertakings. This required the delineation of an Area of Potential Effect (APE), a review of existing information, and consultation with affected tribes, and interested communities. The identification of significant archaeological, historical, and cultural sites helps guide the design of project activities so as to avoid adverse effects, wherever possible. Methodology Per 36 CFR 800.4(b)(1), appropriate identification efforts may include background research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey.In 2012, the ACHP clarified that a “reasonable and good faith effort” does not equate to the ground verification of the entire APE, nor is there an expectation to locate all properties. Efforts should be devised to be neither excessive nor inadequate. For the purpose of this project, a careful consideration of the surface conditions and effectiveness of past survey efforts has guided the development of the methodology. The project area has been the focus of archaeological survey for at least 38 years, covering a total of 6,610 acres on Forest Service land alone. During that time, only 25 sites have been recorded; however, only 6 of those were found through survey. The rest were identified through historical documentation or continuous site use. Some sites simply have resided in current memory of employees and informants. This equates to
Recommended publications
  • Wednesday, March 25, 2009

    Wednesday, March 25, 2009

    8 TFW -16B-90-0 11 EVALUATION OF TIlE TFW STREAM CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM: STRATIFICATION OF PHYSICAL HABITAT AREA AND DISTRIBUTION By T. J. Beechie and T. H. Sibley TIMB~:R &WILDLIFE July 1990 EVALUATION OF THE TFW STREAM CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM: STRATIFICATION OF PHYSICAL HABITAT AREA AND DISTRIBUTION. FINAL REPORT 1988,1990 Prepared by T. J. Beechie and T. H. Sibley Center for Streamside Studies (AR-lO) and Fisheries Research Institute (WH-10) University of Washington Seattle, W A. 98195 Submitted to: TimberIFishlWildlife Ambient Monitoring Steering Committee and State of Washington. Department of Natural Resources (EL-03) Olympia, W A. 98504 July, 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables IV List of Figures v Executive Summary vm 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Stream Classification Review 1 1.2 Proposed Classification System 4 1.3 Objectives 5 2. Approach 7 2.1 Problems in Variable Definition 7 2.2 The Problem of Spatial Scale 11 2.3 The Problem of Time 11 2.4 Addressing Sources of Variability 12 2.5 Recent Evaluations and Their Implications 15 2.6 Variables Used in this Study 15 3. Methods 19 3.1 Data Collected 19 3.2 Code Definitions 20 3.3 Field Procedures 21 3.4 Visual Estimation Procedure 22 3.5 Statistical Analyses 23 3.6 Study Area 23 4. Results and Discussion 33 4.1 Reference Sites 33 Summary of site characteristics 33 Variation channel unit areas with changes in discharge 36 Relative importance of several physical factors in predicting the percentage of summer pools 40 Discharge-area relationships 42 Large organic debris as obstructions 42 ii Page 4.2 South Fork Stillaguamish River Basin Sites 44 Percentages of summer pool surface area in paired segments 46 Comparison of spawning gravel percentages 48 Distributions of channel unit types 50 Cluster Analysis 50 Discriminant analysis 53 4.3 Multiple Watershed Sites 55 Spawning gravel distribution 55 Discriminant analysis 58 Percentages of pools 58 Physical factors affecting pool area 61 5.
  • 2015 Removal Action Appendices

    2015 Removal Action Appendices

    APPENDICES Appendix A. Health and Safety Plan Appendix B. Updated HELP Model Simulations Appendix C. MCMA Repository Run-on Control Drain Appendix D. Technical Specifications and Construction Quality Assurance Plan Appendix E. Biological Monitoring Plan Appendix F. Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan Appendix G. MCMA 2015 Removal Action Proposed Schedule Appendix H Modified XRF Protocol for Field Screening Appendix A. Health and Safety Plan Health and Safety Plan 2015 Removal Action Monte Cristo Mining Area Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Snohomish County, Washington April 2015 Cascade Earth Sciences 3511 Pacific Blvd SW Albany, OR 97321 Ph. (541) 926-7737 Fax (541) 967-7619 www.cascade-earth.com Health and Safety Plan 2015 Removal Action Monte Cristo Mining Area Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Snohomish County, Washington EMERGENCY PHONE NUMBERS Medical Emergency/Ambulance .......................................................................................... 911 Police.......................................................................................................................................... 911 Fire .............................................................................................................................................. 911 National Poison Control Center ...................................................................... (800) 222-1222 CES Corporate Safety Officer (Ellen Crawford) ............................................ (541) 812-6620 US Forest Service, Snoqualmie National
  • Species Status Summary and Information Needs White-Winged Scoter (Melanitta Fusca)

    Species Status Summary and Information Needs White-Winged Scoter (Melanitta Fusca)

    Species Status Summary and Information Needs Sea Duck Joint Venture, March 2015 White-winged Scoter (Melanitta fusca) Population Size and Trends: The number of White-winged Scoters breeding in western Canada and Alaska appear to have declined in the past half-century, based on declines in total scoter numbers in regions where White-winged Scoters predominate. The recent trend is unknown, but the population is probably below historic levels (Bowman et al. 2015). Scoters (all three species combined) declined from the early 1980s to the early 2000s but seem to have increased beginning around 2004 (Bowman et al. 2015). The number of White-winged Scoters breeding in the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge was apparently stable from 2001 to 2011, with no apparent trend and no significant differences between years (Guldager and Bertram 2010; Bowman et al. 2015). However, species-specific data from the Waterfowl Breeding Population and Habitat survey indicates an increasing trend in Alaska between 1993 and 2012 (Bowman et al. 2015). Alisauskas et al. (2004) found that the number of breeding White-winged Scoters in northern Manitoba and Saskatchewan increased during the 1990s while continuing to decline in northern Alberta and the Northwest Territories; breeding populations disappeared from southern Alberta and southern Manitoba by 1998. Range-wide surveys during winter are only at the developmental stage. A 35% decline has been observed in Puget Sound, Washington, from 1999 to 2013 (Bowman et al. 2015) and a significant negative trend (-7.6%/year) in the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, has been recorded by the BC Coastal Waterbird Survey (Crewe et al.
  • Final Mountain Loop Road Repair Environmental Assessment

    Final Mountain Loop Road Repair Environmental Assessment

    Figure 1-Vicinity Map, Location of Damage Forest-wide, 2003 Flood i Table of Content Chapter 1 –Need for Action ....................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Mountain Loop History, Desired Road Condition ............................................................................................. 1 October 2003 Flood Event ................................................................................................................................. 3 Need for Action .................................................................................................................................... 6 Proposed Action................................................................................................................................... 7 Proposed Repair at Milepost 33.1 (T30N, R11E, Section 29) ........................................................................... 7 Proposed Repair at Milepost 33.6 (T30N, R11E, Section 29) ......................................................................... 11 Proposed Repair at Milepost 34.8 (T30N, R11E, Section 28) ......................................................................... 16 Proposed Repair at Milepost 35.6 (T30N, R11E, Section 21) ......................................................................... 18 Project Scope.....................................................................................................................................
  • Circumpolar Wild Reindeer and Caribou Herds DRAFT for REVIEW

    Circumpolar Wild Reindeer and Caribou Herds DRAFT for REVIEW

    CircumpolarCircumpolar WildWild ReindeerReindeer andand CaribouCaribou HerdsHerds DRAFTDRAFT FORFOR REVIEWREVIEW 140°W 160°W 180° 160°E Urup ALEUTIAN ISLANDS NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN KURIL ISANDS Paramushir ALEUTIAN ISLANDS Petropavlovsk Kamchatskiy Commander Islands Bering Sea Kronotskiy Gulf r ive Gulf of Kamchatka a R k 50°N at ch NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN m Ka 40°N Sea of Okhotsk Bristol Bay KAMCHATKA PENINSULA Karaginskiy Gulf Okha ALASKA PENINSULA Tatar Strait Kodiak Gulf of Sakhalin Bethel Iliamna Lake Shelikhova Gulf P’yagina Pen. Koni Pen. Riv Homer ina er iver zh Magadan Cook Inlet R n m Pe Taygonos Pen. wi Coos Bay ok sk u Kenai K Kotlit S . F Gulf of Anadyr' Okhotsk-Kolyma Upland Kenai Peninsula o Western Arctic Wi r Uda Bay llam Anchorage k iver Eugenee Ku r’ R tt Tillamook Gulf of Alaska sk dy e S o Nome A na R Prince William Sound kw Salem2iv Queen Charlotte Islands u im s e Astoria Palmeri R Norton Sound ive r t iv R r STANOVOY RANGE n e a r a Valdez m Portland2 R y r Aberdeen2 Port HardyQueen Charlotte Sound i l e Dixon Entrance v o v Vancouver1 e CHUKCHI PENINSULA K i r R y r Centralia Bering Strait O u e Sitka l t v Olympia Seward Peninsula o h i ALASKA RANGE y R k R Courtenay ive u ia KetchikanAlexander Archipelago r K b TacomaStrait of Juan de Fuca Nanaimo m r Bol’sho u e y l A Wrangell v n o Puget Sound Strait of Georgia i United States of America yu C SeattleEverett R y r er Kotzebue Sound Ri e Juneau p ve iv BellinghamVancouver2 S op r R Yakima t C Kotzebue n ik r o COAST MOUNTAINS in e l COLUMBIA PLAT.
  • Duncan Lake): a Draft Report

    Duncan Lake): a Draft Report

    Tse Keh Nay Traditional and Contemporary Use and Occupation at Amazay (Duncan Lake): A Draft Report Amazay Lake Photo by Patrice Halley Draft Submission to the Kemess North Joint Review Panel May, 2007 Report Prepared By: Loraine Littlefield Linda Dorricott Deidre Cullon With Contributions By: Jessica Place Pam Tobin On Behalf of the Tse Keh Nay ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was written under the direction of the Tse Keh Nay leaders. The authors would like to thank Grand Chief Gordon Pierre and Chief Johnny Pierre of the Tsay Keh Dene First Nation; Chief John Allen French of the Takla Lake First Nation and Chief Donny Van Somer of the Kwadacha First Nation for their support and guidance throughout this project. The authors are particularly indebted to the advisors for this report who took the time to meet with us on very short notice and who generously shared with us their knowledge of Tse Keh Nay history, land and culture. We hope that this report accurately reflects this knowledge. We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Grand Chief Gordon Pierre, Ray Izony, Bill Poole, Trevor Tomah, Jean Isaac, Robert Tomah, Chief John Allen French, Josephine West, Frank Williams, Cecilia Williams, Lillian Johnny, Hilda George and Fred Patrick. We would also like to thank the staff at the Prince George band and treaty offices for assembling and providing us with the documents, reports, maps and other materials that were used in this report. J.P. Laplante, Michelle Lochhead, Karl Sturmanis, Kathaleigh George, and Henry Joseph all provided valuable assistance and support to the project.
  • C-16 Aboriginal Groups

    C-16 Aboriginal Groups

    ake Nation River ntlo L 128°0'0"W 127°0'0"W 126°0'0"W 125°T0ch'0e"W 124°0'0"W 123°0'0"W B abi ake ne owite L La Nat T ke a ke k La 39 la itch Seven Sisters Park (PP) L W a k e Seven Sisters (PA) T o c Babine Mountains Park (PP) h 16/37 c h M a id Kitsumkalum Lake d L le a R k i B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a e ve Inza N na " r Lake F 0 u ' lto n 0 L ° Smithers ak e 5 5 KP 634.6 ke La ur ble Babine Lake em Kitsumkalum River Telkwa Tr Zymagotitz River P r B a ve u rs Ri lk Carp Lake n N a le ip " w y lk R T R 0 e e i ' T i z v ve ze e 0 r r Rubyrock Lake Park (PP) ro Carp Lake Park (PP) 3 N n ° L or a 4 t h ke r 5 A ive r R Zymoetz River m na ee Sk Perow P Topley inc hi L ake Stuart Lake 16 Clearwater 97 Pump Station KP 1130 Tazdli Wyiez Bin/burnie-shea Park (PP) Bear Lake KP 1140 Houston Sutherland River Park (PP) Mount Pope Park (PP) KP 690 Pump Station KP 720 KP 710 N r e Fort St. James " v 0 i ' R KP 1110 0 Bear Lake KP 1176.9 t S KP 700 3 a alm KP 740 Fort St.
  • Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Campground Prospectus

    Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Campground Prospectus

    United States Forest Mt. Baker- 2930 Wetmore Ave/ Suite 3A Department of Service Snoqualmie Everett, Washington, 09201 Agriculture National Forest File Code: 2730-1 Date: September 1, 2017 Route To: (2720) Subject: Forest-wide Campground Concession To: Dear Interested Parties REPLY DUE OCTOBER 2, 2017 Dear Interested Parties: Thank you for your interest in providing visitor services at various recreation sites within the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (MBS). The Prospectus (solicitation for offers) is now available for review and download on the Forest website (address below). Detailed information on this business opportunity, Forest Service concession program and policies, special use permit, application and post-selection requirements are available in the Prospectus. This website will also serve as the main source for all Prospectus related information and updates throughout this solicitation and selection process. If requested by applicants, a single site visit may be scheduled in Fall 2017. All applicants will be encouraged to attend this on-site visit to review the facilities when and if it is scheduled. Applications submitted in response to this Prospectus are subject to cost recovery pursuant to 36 CFR 251.58(c)(3)(iii). Applicants must submit an application fee of $400.00 to cover the cost of the Prospectus and review of the application. Additionally, the selected applicant will be responsible for the cost of preparing and issuing the permit and conducting a Financial Ability Determination (FAD), unless the Forest Service has conducted a FAD on the applicant within the past year. Payments due the United States for this application must be paid in the form of a bank draft, money order, or cashier’s check payable to the USDA- Forest Service.
  • TABLE of CONTENTS Page 1.0 SUMMARY

    TABLE of CONTENTS Page 1.0 SUMMARY

    Technical Review Surf Inlet Gold Project Mid-Coastal British Columbia, Canada Prepared for Rupert Resources Ltd May 03, 2004 Author “Carl Von Einsiedel” Carl Von Einsiedel. P. Geo. May 03, 2004 Technical Review, Surf Inlet Gold, May 2004 Rupert Resources Ltd. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 SUMMARY. ……………………………………………………………………………………..….… 5 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND TERMS OF REFERENCE 2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...……………8 2.2 Terms of Reference……………………………………………………………………...…8 2.3 Purpose of Report…………………………………………………………………………..8 2.4 Sources of Information………………………………………………………………….….9 2.5 Field Examination……………………………………………………………………….…9 2.6 Definitions…………………………………………………………………………………9 3.0 DISCLAIMER………………………………………...……………………………………… 9 4.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION 4.1 Area and Location…………………………………………………………………………10 4.2 Claims and Title…………………………………………………………..…………….…10 4.3 Mineralization Location…………………………………………………………..….……10 4.4 Environmental Liability…………………………………………………..…………….…14 4.5 Permits & Bonds………………………………….…………………………………….…14 5.0 ACCESS, CLIMATE, INFRASTRUCTURE AND PHYSIOGRAPHY ................................14 6.0 HISTORY………………………………………………………………………………..……15 7.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING 7.1 Regional Geology……………………………….…………………………………………18 7.2 Local Geology………………………………………………………..……………………18 8.0 DEPOSIT TYPE..……………………………….………………………...……………...……21 9.0 MINERALIZATION 9.1 General Mineralization…..……….……………………………….………………………21 9.2 Surf Mine Mineralization………………………………………….………………………22 9.3 Pugsley Mine Mineralization……..……………………………….………………………22
  • Population Structure of Lake Trout (Salvelinus Namaycush) in a Large Glacial-Fed Lake Inferred from Microsatellite DNA and Morphological Analysis

    Population Structure of Lake Trout (Salvelinus Namaycush) in a Large Glacial-Fed Lake Inferred from Microsatellite DNA and Morphological Analysis

    1171 Population structure of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) in a large glacial-fed lake inferred from microsatellite DNA and morphological analysis Sara Northrup, Mark Connor, and Eric B. Taylor Abstract: Understanding the structure of intraspecific genetic and morphological diversity within and across habitats is a fundamental aspect of biodiversity research with conservation value. Atlin Lake is the largest lake in British Columbia, Canada, and contains relatively pristine populations of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) that are key components of the lake’s fish community and local fisheries. Lake trout from Atlin Lake were examined for genetic and phenotypic variation using eight microsatellite DNA loci, body form, and colouration. Genetic assays were also conducted on lake trout from the adjoining Tagish Lake and from 17 other localities to provide spatial context for the variation within Atlin Lake. The genetic data suggested that there were three genetic subpopulations within the Atlin–Tagish lake system. Morphological analysis identified two morphological groups of lake trout within Atlin Lake. Genetic and morphological groupings in At- lin Lake were not associated with each other. A mixed-stock analysis of samples collected from Atlin Lake commercial and recreational fisheries suggested that all genetic subpopulations contributed to the fishery and that there was some con- tribution from fish originating from within Tagish Lake. Re´sume´ : La compre´hension de la structure de la diversite´ intraspe´cifique ge´ne´tique et morphologique au sein des habitats et entre les habitats est une composante essentielle de la recherche sur la biodiversite´ relie´ea` la conservation. Le lac Atlin est le plus grand lac de la Colombie-Britannique, Canada, et il contient des populations de touladis (Salvelinus namaycush) encore relativement dans leur e´tat originel qui forment une composante essentielle de la communaute´ de poissons du lac et de la peˆche locale.
  • Critical Habitat and the Conservation Ecology of the Freshwater Parasitic Lamprey, Lampetra Macrostoma

    Critical Habitat and the Conservation Ecology of the Freshwater Parasitic Lamprey, Lampetra Macrostoma

    Critical Habitat and the Conservation Ecology of the Freshwater Parasitic Lamprey, Lampetra macrostoma R. J. B EAMISH 1 and J. W ADE 2 1 Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Biological Station, 3190 Hammond Bay Road, Nanaimo, British Columbia V9T 6N7 Canada; e-mail: [email protected] 2 Fundy Aqua Services, 1619 Venlaw Road , Nanaimo, British Columbia V9S 1J3 Canada; email: [email protected] Beamish, R. J., and J. Wade. 2008. Critical habitat and the conservation ecology of the freshwater parasitic lamprey, Lampetra macrostoma . Canadian Field-Naturalist 122(4): 327-337. Lampetra macrostoma , the Cowichan Lamprey, is a freshwater parasitic lamprey that probably evolved from L. tridentata within the last 10 000 years. It is unique to the Cowichan Lake watershed on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Larval rearing in Mesachie and Cowichan lakes occurs in shallow, silt-covered gravel areas at the mouths of rivers and streams flowing into the lakes. Spawning occurs over a protracted period from early May until about late July. Shallow areas with small gravel along the shore of the lakes, near the mouths of rivers are essential for successful spawning. Adults prey on a variety of salmonid species within the lake. There has been considerable development around Mesachie Lake and reported increased fishing pressure on prey in Mesachie and Cowichan lakes. It is not known if the size of the population of L. macrostoma has changed since an initial study in the early 1980s, but a study in 2008 captured very few spawning lam - prey in Mesachie Lake, possibly indicating that the population is declining.
  • Snohomish County Hiking Guide

    Snohomish County Hiking Guide

    2015- 2016 TO OUTDOOR ADVENTURE! 30 GREAT HIKES • DRIVING DIRECTIONS MAPS • ACCOMMODATIONS • LOCAL RESOURCES photo by Scott Morris PB | www.snohomish.org www.snohomish.org | 1 SCTB Print - Hiking Guide Cover 5.5” x 8.5” - Full Color 5-2015 HIKE NAME 1 Hike subtitle ROUNDTRIP m ile ELEVATION GAIN m ile HIKING SEASON m ile MAP m ile NOTES m ile DRIVING DIRECTIONS m ile CONTACT INFO m ile Hard to imagine, but one of the finest beaches River Delta. A fairly large lagoon has developed on in all of Snohomish County is just minutes from the island where you can watch for sandpipers, downtown Everett! And this two mile long sandy osprey, kingfishers, herons, finches, ducks, and expanse was created by man, not nature. Beginning more. in the 1890s, the Army Corp of Engineers built a You won’t be able to walk around the island as the jetty just north of Port Gardiner—then commenced channel side contains no beach. But the beach to dredge a channel. The spoils along with silt and on Possession Sound is wide and smooth and you sedimentation from the Snohomish River eventually can easily walk 4 to 5 miles going from tip to tip. created an island. Sand accumulated from tidal Soak up views of the Olympic Mountains; Whidbey, influences, birds arrived and nested, and plants Camano, and Gedney Islands; and downtown Everett soon colonized the island. against a backdrop of Cascades Mountains. In the 1980s the Everett Parks and Recreation Department began providing passenger ferry service to the island. Over 50,000 folks visit this sandy gem each year.