DOCSLIB.ORG

Climate Change and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Climate Change and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series (ONMS-13-01) Climate Change and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service Office of National Marine Sanctuaries March 2013 About the Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Ocean Service (NOS) administers the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS). Its mission is to identify, designate, protect and manage the ecological, recreational, research, educational, historical, and aesthetic resources and qualities of nationally significant coastal and marine areas. The existing marine sanctuaries differ widely in their natural and historical resources and include nearshore and open ocean areas ranging in size from less than one to over 5,000 square miles. Protected habitats include rocky coasts, kelp forests, coral reefs, sea grass beds, estuarine habitats, hard and soft bottom habitats, segments of whale migration routes, and shipwrecks. Because of considerable differences in settings, resources, and threats, each marine sanctuary has a tailored management plan. Conservation, education, research, monitoring and enforcement programs vary accordingly. The integration of these programs is fundamental to marine protected area management. The Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series reflects and supports this integration by providing a forum for publication and discussion of the complex issues currently facing the sanctuary system. Topics of published reports vary substantially and may include descriptions of educational programs, discussions on resource management issues, and results of scientific research and monitoring projects. The series facilitates integration of natural sciences, socioeconomic and cultural sciences, education, and policy development to accomplish the diverse needs of NOAA’s resource protection mandate. All publications are available on the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries Web site (http://www.sanctuaries.noaa.gov). Climate Change and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures Edited by Ian M. Miller1, Caitlin Shishido2, Liam Antrim3, and C. Edward Bowlby3 1Washington Sea Grant, Olympic Peninsula Field Office, Port Angeles, WA 2Washington Sea Grant, Seattle, WA 3Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, Port Angeles, WA U.S. Department of Commerce Rebecca M. Blank, Acting Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Kathryn Sullivan, Ph.D., Acting Under Secretary National Ocean Service Holly Bamford, Ph.D., Assistant Administrator Office of National Marine Sanctuaries Daniel J. Basta, Director Disclaimer Report content does not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Report Availability Electronic copies of this report may be downloaded from the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries web site at http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov. Hard copies may be available from the following address: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of National Marine Sanctuaries SSMC4, N/ORM62 1305 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Cover A mosaic of perspectives on the ecosystems and organisms within the boundaries of Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. All images: OCNMS Suggested Citation for Report: Miller, I.M., Shishido, C., Antrim, L, and Bowlby, C.E. 2013. Climate Change and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series ONMS-13-01. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, Silver Spring, MD. 238 pp. Suggested Citation for Individual Sections: AUTHOR(S), YEAR. SECTION TITLE. In: Miller, I.M., Shishido, C., Antrim, L, and Bowlby, C.E. Climate Change and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Interpreting Potential Futures. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series ONMS-13-01. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, Silver Spring, MD. 238 pp. Contact Correspondence should be addressed to Ian M. Miller, [email protected] Executive Summary Due to global climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC; www.ipcc.ch) projects a high likelihood that marine ecosystems around the globe will be measurably altered in the coming century (Bernstein et al. 2007). In some cases, the collapse of entire ecosystems is viewed as possible, or even likely. These projections are valuable in terms of describing the global implications of climate change and clarifying the role that anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases plays in large-scale ecosystem change. However, they are less useful for assisting managers and policy-makers at the regional or local scale in their efforts to prepare for and, where possible, adapt to climate- related changes. The Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS) encompasses 572 square kilometers of marine and near-shore waters and intertidal habitat off of Washington State’s Pacific Ocean coast. As one of 14 national marine sanctuaries managed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), OCNMS is provided protected status because of extraordinary ecological and maritime heritage values. The Office of National Marine Sanctuaries developed its “Climate-Smart Sanctuary” program in order to facilitate the process of climate adaptation in these special marine waters. This assessment is designed to assist OCNMS in adapting to climate change by bridging the gap between the global projections provided by the IPCC, and the regional and local implications of climate change by 2100. The direct consequences of climate change on the physical environment in OCNMS were considered and, where possible, the direction and magnitude of change was estimated (Section 2). These physical effects were divided into seven categories: Increasing ocean temperature, ocean acidification, sea level rise, increasing storminess, changing ocean current patterns (with a focus on upwelling), increasing hypoxia or anoxia and altered hydrology in rivers draining into OCNMS. These are summarized here: • Based on the literature reviewed for this assessment it is considered likely that in the Pacific Northwest (including the habitats within OCNMS) average air and ocean temperatures will rise measurably by 2100, probably outside of the contemporary range of variability. Downscaling of multiple global climate models for the Pacific Northwest coastal zone suggests that ocean water could warm by approximately 1°C by 2050. (Section 2.2). • The magnitude and extent of corrosive ocean water (the term used in this report to describe ocean water with pH reduced relative to contemporary values and reduced availability of carbonate ions for calcifying organisms) is also expected to increase. Corrosive ocean water is currently associated with deeper water in OCNMS and is probably only drawn to the surface during periods of intense upwelling. By 2050, however, shallower areas within OCNMS will be exposed to corrosive water with greater frequency (Section 2.3). • Due primarily to the warming of the ocean and melting of land-based ice, mean sea level rise in OCNMS could exceed 1.0 m by 2100, but variable rates of i vertical land movement associated with tectonic forces will cause variations in the rate of relative sea level rise. Relative sea level is expected to be greater along the southern coast of shoreline within OCNMS as compared to the northern coast (Section 2.4). • Climate model projections suggest that the tracks of storms in the northeast Pacific Ocean will migrate, on average, further north due to climate change, but it is not clear if the magnitude or duration of storms will change. Observational evidence from locations in the northeast Pacific Ocean suggests the possibility that the ocean adjacent to OCNMS has become stormier in the last 50 years, though it isn’t clear if the trend is related to long-term climate trends (Section 2.5). • Projections regarding the possibility of increased upwelling favorable winds in OCNMS are mixed, and based on the contemporary variability in the timing, duration and intensity of upwelling favorable winds it is considered unlikely that climate change will cause measurable changes by 2100 (Section 2.6). Other factors besides upwelling favorable wind, notably warming of the surface layer of the ocean (Section 2.2), may also influence the timing and magnitude of upwelling and, by extension, productivity in OCNMS. • Concentrations of dissolved oxygen in the northeast Pacific Ocean are expected to decrease as the upper ocean warms and becomes more stratified. Based on the dynamics of water masses influencing ocean areas within OCNMS, dissolved oxygen concentrations in the ocean waters in OCNMS also may decline. Long- term declines in dissolved oxygen have been observed at numerous locations in the northeast Pacific, including coastal locations near OCNMS (Section 2.7). • Future warming in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States is projected to alter regional rainfall patterns and trigger more 100-year magnitude floods and lower summertime low flows among some basins that drain to OCNMS, including the Sol Duc, the Hoh, the Queets and the Quinault
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Outline of United States Federal Indian Law and Policy
    Outline of United States federal Indian law and policy The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to United States federal Indian law and policy: Federal Indian policy – establishes the relationship between the United States Government and the Indian Tribes within its borders. The Constitution gives the federal government primary responsibility for dealing with tribes. Law and U.S. public policy related to Native Americans have evolved continuously since the founding of the United States. David R. Wrone argues that the failure of the treaty system was because of the inability of an individualistic, democratic society to recognize group rights or the value of an organic, corporatist culture represented by the tribes.[1] U.S. Supreme Court cases List of United States Supreme Court cases involving Indian tribes Citizenship Adoption Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 530 U.S. _ (2013) Tribal Ex parte Joins, 191 U.S. 93 (1903) Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978) Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989) South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679 (1993) Civil rights Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe, 435 U.S. 191 (1978) United States v. Wheeler, 435 U.S. 313 (1978) Congressional authority Ex parte Joins, 191 U.S. 93 (1903) White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 (1980) California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987) South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679 (1993) United States v.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018-05-21 Makah Cert Petition and Appendix
    No. _______ In the Supreme Court of the United States MAKAH INDIAN TRIBE, Petitioner, v. QUILEUTE INDIAN TRIBE AND QUINAULT INDIAN NATION, ET AL., Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI GREGORY G. GARRE MARC D. SLONIM BENJAMIN W. SNYDER Counsel of Record LATHAM & WATKINS LLP ZIONTZ CHESTNUT 555 Eleventh Street, NW 2101 Fourth Avenue Suite 1000 Suite 1230 Washington, DC 20004 Seattle, WA 98121 202 637-2207 (206) 448-1230 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Petitioner QUESTION PRESENTED On the same day in 1859, the Senate ratified several treaties between the United States and Indian tribes in western Washington. The Treaty of Neah Bay secured to the Makah Indian Tribe the “right of taking fish and of whaling or sealing at usual and accustomed grounds and stations.” The Treaty of Olympia secured to the Quileute Indian Tribe and Quinault Indian Nation, the southern neighbors of Makah along the Washington coast, the “right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations.” Unlike the Treaty of Neah Bay, the Treaty of Olympia expressed only a “right of taking fish”; it did not reference “whaling or sealing.” In this case, the Ninth Circuit held the “right of taking fish” in the Treaty of Olympia includes a right of whaling and sealing. Then, the Ninth Circuit held Quileute and Quinault’s “usual and accustomed” fishing grounds under the treaty extend beyond the areas in which the Tribes customarily fished to areas in which they hunted “‘marine mammals—including whales and fur seals.’” App.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON; STATE OF NO. 10 OREGON; CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE CHEHALIS RESERVATION; COMPLAINT 11 CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COOS, LOWER UMPQUA AND 12 SIUSLAW INDIANS; COW CREEK BAND OF UMPQUA TRIBE OF 13 INDIANS; DOYON, LTD.; DUWAMISH TRIBE; 14 CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE GRAND RONDE COMMUNITY OF 15 OREGON; HOH INDIAN TRIBE; JAMESTOWN S’KLALLAM TRIBE; 16 KALISPEL TRIBE OF INDIANS; THE KLAMATH TRIBES; MUCKLESHOOT 17 INDIAN TRIBE; NEZ PERCE TRIBE; NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE; PORT 18 GAMBLE S’KLALLAM TRIBE; PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS; 19 QUILEUTE TRIBE OF THE QUILEUTE RESERVATION; 20 QUINAULT INDIAN NATION; SAMISH INDIAN NATION; 21 CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF SILETZ INDIANS; SKOKOMISH INDIAN 22 TRIBE; SNOQUALMIE INDIAN TRIBE; SPOKANE TRIBE OF 23 INDIANS; SQUAXIN ISLAND TRIBE; SUQUAMISH TRIBE; SWINOMISH 24 INDIAN TRIBAL COMMUNITY; TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE; 25 CENTRAL COUNCIL OF THE TLINGIT & HAIDA INDIAN TRIBES 26 OF ALASKA; UPPER SKAGIT COMPLAINT 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Complex Litigation Division 800 5th Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98104-3188 (206) 464-7744 1 INDIAN TRIBE; CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE 2 YAKAMA NATION; AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION; 3 ASSOCIATION OF KING COUNTY HISTORICAL ORGANIZATIONS; 4 CHINESE AMERICAN CITIZENS ALLIANCE; HISTORIC SEATTLE; 5 HISTORYLINK; MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND INDUSTRY; OCA 6 ASIAN PACIFIC ADVOCATES – GREATER SEATTLE; WASHINGTON 7 TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION; and WING LUKE 8 MEMORIAL FOUNDATION D/B/A WING LUKE MUSEUM, 9 Plaintiffs, 10 v. 11 RUSSELL VOUGHT, in his capacity as 12 Director of the OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET; 13 DAVID S.
    [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]
  • Environmental Assessment for 2020 Ocean Salmon Management
    Preface to the Final Environmental Assessment for 2020 Ocean Salmon Fisheries Management Measures (RIN 0648-BJ48) The development of annual management measures for West Coast salmon fisheries is a well-documented and public process. Alternatives for annual management measures are developed at the March meeting of the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council). At this meeting, the previous year’s fisheries are reviewed, and alternatives are developed for the current year’s fisheries after considering projected stock abundances, conservation objectives in the Fishery Management Plan (FMP), and compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), and other relevant laws, as well as international agreements under the Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST). Public meetings are held in Washington, Oregon, and California in late March to give the public the opportunity to provide comments on the alternatives. The Council meets again in April to consider public and agency input on the alternatives and to develop and adopt a preferred alternative. Environmental impacts of the preferred alternative are within the range of impacts analyzed for the preliminary alternatives, although new fisheries data developed between March and April, especially regarding fisheries north of Cape Falcon, may require modification of the range of impacts. During this process, the Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) develop a series of documents that describe the development and analysis of the alternatives. These documents collectively form the basis for the Environmental Assessment (EA) for NMFS’ analysis of the proposed action of adopting the 2020 ocean salmon fisheries management measures under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Preservation for Washington State
    Historic Preservation for Washington State 24 CFR Part 58 General requirements Legislation Regulation Protect sites, buildings, and objects with national, National Historic Preservation 36 CFR Part 800 state or local historic, cultural and/or archeological Act, 16 U.S.C. 470(f), section 24 CFR Part 58.5(a) significance. Identify effects of project on properties 106 1. Does the project include new construction; demolition; the acquisition of undeveloped land; or any activity that requires ground disturbance (defined as one cubic foot of disturbed soil)? No: PROCEED to #2. Yes: PROCEED to #3 2. Does the project include repair, rehabilitation or conversion of existing properties; involve a structure that is MORE than 45 years old, is not in a historic district and has no ground disturbing activities? No: STOP here. The Section 106 Historic Preservation review is complete. Record your determination that there is no potential to cause effect, including the age of the existing building and information from the National Register to show that the activity is not in a historic district, on the Statutory Worksheet or Environmental Assessment. Yes: PROCEED to #3 3. Consult with SHPO or THPO and any tribes or groups that may have an interest in the project to determine if the project is eligible for the National Historic Register. • You must define and consider the Area of Potential Effect (APE). The APE is the geographic area within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties. The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 2:70-Cv-09213-RSM Document 21063 Filed 07/09/15 Page 1 of 83
    Case 2:70-cv-09213-RSM Document 21063 Filed 07/09/15 Page 1 of 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al, No. C70-9213 10 Plaintiffs, Subproceeding No. 09-01 11 v. 12 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., AND MEMORANDUM ORDER 13 Defendants. 14 15 I. INTRODUCTION 16 This subproceeding is before the Court pursuant to the request of the Makah Indian Tribe (the 17 “Makah”) to determine the usual and accustomed fishing grounds (“U&A”) of the Quileute Indian 18 Tribe (the “Quileute”) and the Quinault Indian Nation (the “Quinault”), to the extent not specifically 19 determined by Judge Hugo Boldt in Final Decision # 1 of this case. The Court is specifically asked to 20 determine the western boundaries of the U&As of the Quileute and Quinault in the Pacific Ocean, as 21 22 well as the northern boundary of the Quileute’s U&A. A 23-day bench trial was held to adjudicate 23 these boundaries, after which the Court received extensive supplemental briefing by the Makah, 24 Quileute, Quinault, and numerous Interested Parties and took the matter under advisement. The Court 25 has considered the vast evidence presented at trial, the exhibits admitted into evidence, trial, post-trial, 26 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 1 Case 2:70-cv-09213-RSM Document 21063 Filed 07/09/15 Page 2 of 83 1 and supplemental briefs, proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and the arguments of 2 counsel at trial and attendant hearings.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 State of Our Watersheds Report Queets – Chehalis Basins
    2016 State of Our Watersheds Report Queets – Chehalis Basins he evidence is abundantly clear. We know how Tto manage our fish. We understand sustain- ability. The problems fish are facing are not of our making. But we are definitely a big part of the solution, with the work we do in habitat res- toration and protection, good management and education. – FAWN SHARp, PRESIDENT QUINAULT INDIAN NATION Quinault Indian Nation The Quinault Indian Nation (QIN) consists of the Quinault and Queets tribes and descendants of five other coastal tribes: Quileute, Hoh, Che- halis, Chinook and Cowlitz. Quinault ancestors lived on a major physical and cultural dividing line. Beaches to the south are wide and sandy, while to the north, they are rugged and cliff- lined. Quinault people shared in the cultures of the people to the south as well as those to the Seattle north. Living in family groups in longhouses up and down the river, they were sustained by the land and by trade with neighboring tribes. Salmon runs, abundant sea mammals, wildlife and forests provided substantial material and spiritual wealth. A great store of knowledge about plants and their uses helped provide for the people. The western red-cedar, the “tree of life,” provided logs for canoes, bark for clothing, split boards for houses and more. The Quinault are the Canoe People, the people of the cedar tree. Tribal headquarters are located in Taholah, Washington. 190 Quinault Indian Nation Queets – Quinault – Chehalis Basins The Quinault Indian Nation’s Area of Interest for this report covers three Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIAs) includ- ing the Queets-Quinault basin (WRIA 21) and Chehalis basin (WRIAs 22 and 23).
    [Show full text]
  • Historylink.Org Supplement for Washington: a State of Contrasts
    Photo of Gatewood School students on last day of school, Seattle, June 17, 1949. Courtesy Museum of History & Industry. HistoryLink.org Supplement for Washington: A State of Contrasts 1 Washington: A State of Contrasts has been identified as the most commonly used Washington state History textbook for 7th and 8th grades for the 2011-12 school year. Using this textbook as a base for identifying the specific themes and topics that are being covered in required Pacific Northwest History middle school classes, the Education Team at HistoryLink.org has created this supplement for teacher and students. This supplement was developed as a tool to assist in identifying HistoryLink.org essays that can be used to study and research the state history themes and topic in more depth. The name of each relevant essay is listed as well as the abstract, number, and link to the full essay. This supplement also aids HistoryLink.org in identifying general or specific topics for which more essays are needed or would be helpful in the Washington state History classroom. In addition, as a part of this exercise, HistoryLink.org staff assigned appropriate key words to selected essays to match those used in this textbook. A set of HistoryLink Elementary essays was added to the HistoryLink encyclopedia in 2014. (http://www.historylink.org/Index.cfm?DisplayPage=education/elementary- educators.cfm.) These essays were written for beginning readers who are studying Washington state history or anyone who wants to learn more about Washington. They may be helpful for some of your students. All HistoryLink Elementary essays are based on existing HistoryLink essays.
    [Show full text]
  • Quinault Salmon Cultural Values
    Measuring Socio-Cultural Values Associated with Salmon in the Quinault Indian Nation March 2014 Kelly Biedenweg, Ph.D., Puget Sound Institute, University of Washington, Tacoma Sophia Amberson, M.S., University of Washington Justine James, Quinault Indian Nation Acknowledgements Funding for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation and The Nature Conservancy. We thank Quinault and Queets residents for their participation throughout the project, especially Chelsea Capoeman for her assistance in data collection. Measuring Quinault Socio-Cultural Values related to Salmon 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 4 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 5 METHODS ........................................................................................................................ 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ....................................................................................... 8 INTEGRATING METRICS INTO PLANNING ......................................................... 17 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................. 18 APPENDIX I: PROJECT TIMELINE ......................................................................... 20 APPENDIX II: SURVEY ............................................................................................... 21 Measuring Quinault
    [Show full text]
  • Quinault INDIAN NATION
    Quinault Indian Nation Advantages of Working With Quinault: • Work with a mature business organization • Quality aggregate product • Largest undeveloped sand and gravel re- source on the West Coast • Tribal Tax Advantages Introduction business structure of the operating company select- ed by the aggregate producer and QIN. The Quinault Indian Nation (QIN) is honored to present this summary of Quinault aggregate re- the Quinault People sources. The sovereign Quinault Indian Nation is located on the Olympic Peninsula, west of the city The people of the Quinault Indian Nation are among of Seattle, Washington. The huge QIN aggregate the small number of Americans who can walk the resource is the only remaining uncommitted large same beaches, paddle the same waters, and hunt the near-shore sand and same lands their an- gravel source on the cestors did centuries West Coast of the low- ago. The QIN con- er United States. The sists of the Quinault aggregate resources and Queets tribes are composed primar- and descendants of ily of extensive glacial five other coastal outwash deposits of tribes: Quileute, sand and gravel, with Hoh, Chehalis, Chi- supplemental potential nook, and Cowlitz. identified in the form of various basalt de- The Quinault Indian posits. Nation is a sover- eign nation with The Quinault Indian the inherent right to Nation is seeking a company to lease or joint- govern itself and deal with other tribes and nations venture portions of their land with the primary on a government-to-government basis. Bylaws objective of mining were established in and producing high 1922: under these quality construction Bylaws, the QIN aggregate materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Need for the Marine Spatial Plan The marine waters along Washington’s Pacific Coast host abundant natural resources and a wide diversity of species and habitats. These ocean resources support multiple uses that are vital to the economy and social fabric of nearby communities and the entire state, such as fishing, recreation, and shipping. The citizens of Washington, as well as the Native American tribes that have rich histories and treaty-protected interests along the coast, strongly depend upon ocean resources and will continue to do so into the future. Existing ocean resources, uses, and communities along Washington’s Pacific Coast may be adversely affected by increasing pressures on the resources in this area, conflicts among existing uses, and proposed new ocean uses such as offshore wind or wave energy, offshore aquaculture, or sand and gravel mining. In addition, multiple, overlapping jurisdictions and authorities create challenges for coordinated decision-making and proactive planning. In March 2010, the Washington State Legislature enacted a marine planning law to foster integrated coastal decision making and ecosystem-based management (RCW 43.372). Marine Spatial Planning is a comprehensive, place-based and ecosystem-based planning tool. In July 2012, the State Legislature began targeting funding to the creation of a plan for Washington’s Pacific coast. The Marine Spatial Plan (MSP) for Washington’s Pacific Coast provides a baseline of scientific information, a consistent way of evaluating future proposals, and a framework to coordinate decisions around human uses of the sea. The plan also creates a process for coordinating across all levels of government and ensuring stakeholder input on new ocean uses.
    [Show full text]