DOCSLIB.ORG

SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN for Lewis County and the Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN for Lewis County and the Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN For Lewis County and The Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock Prepared by: Lewis County Community Development Ecology Grant # G1200468 March 2016 SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN For Lewis County and The Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock Prepared by Lewis County Community Development 2025 Northeast Kresky Avenue Chehalis, Washington 98532 With Assistance from Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206-441-9080 AHBL 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1620 Seattle, Washington 98101 CORE GIS 355 Northwest 47th Street Seattle, Washington 98107 March 3, 2016 March 2016 Shoreline Restoration Plan for Lewis County and the Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock ii Page intentionally left blank March 2016 Shoreline Restoration Plan for Lewis County and the Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock iii CCCONTENTS Contents ..................................................................................................... iv Figures ....................................................................................................... vi Tables ........................................................................................................ vi Limitations ................................................................................................. vii Purpose and Intent ......................................................................................... 1 Restoration ............................................................................................. 1 Protection vs. Restoration .................................................................... 1 Restoration vs. Mitigation ..................................................................... 2 Partnership ............................................................................................. 2 Objectives .............................................................................................. 3 Identification of Restoration Projects ................................................................... 5 Information Sources .................................................................................. 5 Identification of Other Restoration Opportunities ............................................... 5 Overall Coalition Restoration Priorities ................................................................. 7 Nisqually – (WRIA 11) ................................................................................. 7 Overview ........................................................................................ 7 Key Issues ....................................................................................... 7 Restoration Priorities .......................................................................... 8 Deschutes – (WRIA 13) ................................................................................ 9 Overview ........................................................................................ 9 Restoration Priorities and Opportunities .................................................. 10 Upper Chehalis – (WRIA 23) ......................................................................... 11 Overview ....................................................................................... 11 Key Issues ...................................................................................... 12 Basin-Wide Priorities ......................................................................... 12 Restoration Priorities and Opportunities .................................................. 15 Cowlitz – (WRIA 26) .................................................................................. 18 Overview ....................................................................................... 18 Key Issues ...................................................................................... 19 Restoration Priorities – Basin-wide ......................................................... 23 Restoration Priorities – Lower Cowlitz ..................................................... 24 Restoration Priorities and Opportunities – Upper Cowlitz ............................... 28 Restoration Priorities and Opportunities – Toutle ........................................ 31 Additional Restoration Strategies ....................................................................... 32 Education and Incentives: .......................................................................... 32 Infrastructure Investment: .......................................................................... 32 Planning and Coordination: ......................................................................... 33 Potential Partners and Funding for Restoration ...................................................... 34 Chehalis River Basin Land Trust .................................................................... 34 March 2016 Shoreline Restoration Plan for Lewis County and the Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock iv Columbia Land Trust ................................................................................. 34 Gifford Pinchot Task Force ......................................................................... 34 Lewis County Conservation District ................................................................ 34 Lower Columbia Fish Enhancement Group ....................................................... 35 Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board ............................................................. 35 Natural Resources Conservation Service .......................................................... 35 Salmon Recovery Funding Board ................................................................... 36 Tacoma Power ........................................................................................ 36 US Environmental Protection Agency: Region 10 Pacific Northwest .......................... 37 US Fish and Wildlife Service ........................................................................ 38 US Forest Service ..................................................................................... 38 Washington State Department of Ecology ........................................................ 39 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife .................................................... 40 Washington State Parks ............................................................................. 40 Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office ......................................... 40 Western Native Trout Initiative .................................................................... 41 Land Conservation Programs ....................................................................... 41 Implementation and Monitoring ......................................................................... 42 Timelines and Benchmarks ......................................................................... 42 Benchmarks and Evaluation......................................................................... 43 Conclusion .................................................................................................. 44 Data Gaps ................................................................................................... 45 Monitoring Results ................................................................................... 45 Shoreline Armoring ................................................................................... 45 Climate Change ....................................................................................... 46 References ................................................................................................. 47 Appendix A – Potential Nisqually Projects ............................................................. 50 Appendix B – Potential Chehalis Projects .............................................................. 52 Appendix C – Chehalis Basin Culvert Priorities By Subbasin ......................................... 59 Appendix D – Potential Cowlitz Projects ............................................................... 67 March 2016 Shoreline Restoration Plan for Lewis County and the Cities of Centralia, Morton and Winlock v FFFIGURES Figure 1: The Concepts of Mitigation and Restoration in the Shoreline Management Act.......................... 2 Figure 2: Nisqually Basin Water Quality Issues ............................................................................................. 8 Figure 3: Deschutes Basin in Lewis County ................................................................................................. 10 Figure 4: Watershed Management Units in Chehalis River Basin in Lewis County .................................... 11 Figure 5: Water Quality Issues in the Chehalis Basin .................................................................................. 13 Figure 6: Priorities for Watershed Restoration ........................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: Priorities for Restoration for Fish ................................................................................................. 14 Figure 8: Priorities for Culvert Restoration ................................................................................................. 16 Figure 9: Priorities for Off-Channel Habitat Enhancement ........................................................................ 17 Figure 10: Subbasins within the Cowlitz River Watershed ........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Battlefields & Treaties
    welcome to Indian Country Take a moment, and look up from where you are right now. If you are gazing across the waters of Puget Sound, realize that Indian peoples thrived all along her shoreline in intimate balance with the natural world, long before Europeans arrived here. If Mount Rainier stands in your view, realize that Indian peoples named it “Tahoma,” long before it was “discovered” by white explorers. Every mountain that you see on the horizon, every stand of forest, every lake and river, every desert vista in eastern Washington, all of these beautiful places are part of our Indian heritage, and carry the songs of our ancestors in the wind. As we have always known, all of Washington State is Indian Country. To get a sense of our connection to these lands, you need only to look at a map of Washington. Over 75 rivers, 13 counties, and hundreds of cities and towns all bear traditional Indian names – Seattle, Tacoma, Yakima, and Spokane among them. Indian peoples guided Lewis and Clark to the Pacifi c, and pointed them safely back to the east. Indian trails became Washington’s earliest roads. Wild salmon, delicately grilled and smoked in Alderwood, has become the hallmark of Washington State cuisine. Come visit our lands, and come learn about our cultures and our peoples. Our families continue to be intimately woven into the world around us. As Tribes, we will always fi ght for preservation of our natural resources. As Tribes, we will always hold our elders and our ancestors in respect. As Tribes, we will always protect our treaty rights and sovereignty, because these are rights preserved, at great sacrifi ce, ABOUT ATNI/EDC by our ancestors.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe
    1 Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe: Traditional Resource Harvest Sites West of the Crest of the Cascades Mountains in Washington State and below the Cascades of the Columbia River Eugene Hunn Department of Anthropology Box 353100 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-3100 [email protected] for State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW contract # 38030449 preliminary draft October 11, 2003 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 Map 1 5f 1. Goals and scope of this report 6 2. Defining the relevant Indian groups 7 2.1. How Sahaptin names for Indian groups are formed 7 2.2. The Yakama Nation 8 Table 1: Yakama signatory tribes and bands 8 Table 2: Yakama headmen and chiefs 8-9 2.3. Who are the ―Klickitat‖? 10 2.4. Who are the ―Cascade Indians‖? 11 2.5. Who are the ―Cowlitz‖/Taitnapam? 11 2.6. The Plateau/Northwest Coast cultural divide: Treaty lines versus cultural 12 divides 2.6.1. The Handbook of North American Indians: Northwest Coast versus 13 Plateau 2.7. Conclusions 14 3. Historical questions 15 3.1. A brief summary of early Euroamerican influences in the region 15 3.2. How did Sahaptin-speakers end up west of the Cascade crest? 17 Map 2 18f 3.3. James Teit‘s hypothesis 18 3.4. Melville Jacobs‘s counter argument 19 4. The Taitnapam 21 4.1. Taitnapam sources 21 4.2. Taitnapam affiliations 22 4.3. Taitnapam territory 23 4.3.1. Jim Yoke and Lewy Costima on Taitnapam territory 24 4.4.
    [Show full text]
  • South Rainier Elk Herd
    Washington State Elk Herd Plan SOUTH RAINIER ELK HERD Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 Prepared by Min T. Huang Patrick J. Miller Frederick C. Dobler January 2002 Director, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Date January 2002 i Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife STATE OF WASHINGTON GARY LOCKE, GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE JEFF KOENINGS, PH. D., DIRECTOR WILDLIFE PROGRAM DAVE BRITTELL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GAME DIVISION DAVE WARE, MANAGER This Program Receives Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration funds. Project W-96-R-10, Category A, Project 1, Job 4 This report should be cited as: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2002. South Rainier Elk Herd Plan. Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 32 pp. This program receives Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The U.S. Department of the Interior and its bureaus prohibit discrimination on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability and sex. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility, please write to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of External Programs, 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 130, Arlington, VA 22203 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………….. iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY…………………………………………………………………. v INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………. 1 The Plan…………………………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Nisqually Land Trust Land Trust Acquires Rare Nisqually River
    Winter 2016 NISQUALLY LAND TRUST Newsletter Land Trust Acquires Rare Nisqually River Salmon Property Has Potential for Extending Yelm-Tenino Trail to River he Land Trust continued its renewed push to protect “It was well over ten years ago that we first identified this Thigh-priority salmon habitat on the main stem of the valuable shoreline property as important for protection,” Nisqually River by acquiring a prized shoreline property in said Lands Committee Chair George Walter. “Over the the river’s Whitewater Reach, just below Yelm. years we have kept in contact with the owner, and we’re very happy to announce that we have now acquired the The ten-acre property includes over 2,000 feet of salmon- property for permanent protection. Securing this much producing shoreline, an exceptional run of habitat to find high-quality habitat in such a relatively developed area is a in a single property. The Whitewater Reach is rated highest rare opportunity.” priority for protection in both the Nisqually Chinook Salmon Recovery Plan and the Nisqually Steelhead (continued on page 7) Recovery Plan. The Land Trust has acquired a key property with 2,000 feet of Nisqually River salmon shoreline (right bank, above) and potential for extending the Yelm-Tenino Trail. Land Trust Acquires Ohop Creek Spawning Property - Page 5 President’s Letter ummertime, and the livin’ is…wait, it’s OUR MISSION Sautumn already! How’d that happen? The Nisqually Land Trust acquires and We had another great summer here in the manages critical lands to permanently Northwest. Maybe just a little too warm for benefit the water, wildlife, and people of a couple of days there, but not so warm that the Nisqually River Watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • ELK ECOLOGY and MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES at MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK
    ELK ECOLOGY and MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES at MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK William P. Bradley Chas. H. Driver National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit College of Forest Resources University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 ELK ECOLOGY and MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES at MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK William P. Bradley1 Chas. H. Driver2 National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit College of Forest Resources University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 CPSU/UW 81-2 Winter 1981 'formerly Research Associate, College of Forest Resources 2Professor, College of Forest Resources The research in this publication was supported by National Park Service contract CX-9000-6-0093. INTRODUCTION Elk management in the western states has often been subject to heated and emotional controversies, both among different public agencies responsible for elk management and between these agencies and the public at large. The National Park Service (NPS) is extremely susceptible to adverse criticism and negative public opinion resulting from elk management decisions, because they do not have at their disposal the accepted managerial tool of sport hunting to control and regulate problem populations. The NPS's direct reduction-by-shooting program in Yellowstone Park has become a classic example of a managerial solution resulting in inflammatory inter-agency conflict and public relations problems. (See Pengelly 1963 and Woolf 1971 for excellent discussions of the Yellowstone situation.) The intent of this paper is to summarize the elk management problems at Mount Rainier National Park in the State of Washington and the actions taken to mitigate them. The seat of this controversy revolves around a large summering elk population's impact on the sub-alpine meadow system con­ tained within the park.
    [Show full text]
  • The Big Bottom (Lewis County) 1833-1933
    THE BIG BOTTOM (LEWIS COUNTY) 1833-1933 An important desideratum of Washington's first white settle­ ment at Tumwater, was a direct route across the Cascade Range to The Dalles. In the spring of 1854, two Tumwater pioneers set out on an exploring expedition to locate a low pass to connect Puget Sound with the Oregon Trail. Their names have since become emblazoned in Washington's hall of fame : James Longmire, discoverer of the springs in Rainier National Park now bearing his name; and William Packwood, for whom a postoffice, lake and mountain saddle in eastern Lewis Coun- . ty have been named. Led by a trio of Nisqually Indian guides, the pioneer pair skirted the stream known as Skate Creek southward from Mount Rainier, and came out upon a huge bottomland bisected by the up­ per Cowlitz River. At that time, according to the statement of Jim Yoak, aged patriarch of the Cowlitz tribe, I."ongmire and Packwood found a thriving Indian village on the banks of the river, with several hun­ dred members of the Cowlitz tribe living there. The two trail-blazers returned to Tumwater with the word that they had discovered the long-hoped-for low pass to The Dalles. A subsequent trip of course proved this belief was erroneous, for the summit was still many miles to the eastward. Even to this day, man has not pierced White Pass with a road; but this will soon become an actuality. Although failing in their original purpose, Longmire and Pack­ wood did not make that exploring trip in vain, for they were the first white men to glimpse the "Big Bottom" country.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA)
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2016 to 09/30/2016 Gifford Pinchot National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Gifford Pinchot National Forest Cowlitz Ranger District (excluding Projects occurring in more than one District) R6 - Pacific Northwest Region 2015 Goat Mountain Hardrock - Minerals and Geology In Progress: Expected:12/2016 01/2017 Erica Taecker Prospecting Permit Comment Period Public Notice 360-497-1136 Applications 02/18/2016 [email protected] EA Description: Please proceed directly to the BLM project page at http://stg.or.blm.gov/or/programs/minerals/prospecting/ for *UPDATED* comment and contact information. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=46996 Location: UNIT - Cowlitz Ranger District. STATE - Washington. COUNTY - Skamania. LEGAL - The permit area is within portions of sections 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18, and 19 of Township 10 N, Range 6 East, Willamette Meridian, Skamania County, WA. The project area is located on and adjacent to the south facing slope of Goat Mountain. These lands are next to and extend northeast from the boundary of Mt St Helens National Volcanic Monument. 2016 Priority 1 Flood Damage - Road management Completed Actual: 05/17/2016 07/2016 Ruth Tracy Site Repairs 360-891-5112 CE [email protected] *NEW LISTING* Description: Repair four road segments that were damaged during the December flood event and within the roadway area. The roadway is defined as the portion of the road within the limits of excavation and embankment, and includes the road shoulder.
    [Show full text]
  • A Learning Guide on the Geology of the Cispus Environmental Center Area, Lewis County, Washington
    A Learning Guide on the GEOLOGY OF THE CISPUS ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER AREA LEWIS COUNTY, WASHINGTON By J. ERIC SCHUSTER, GeoJo i t DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY Prepar d in coop ration with the Superintendent o Public Instruction 1973 CONTENTS Page Introd uctio n ................................................................... 1 Geo logic hi story ....................................•.......................... Genera I • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • • . • . • . • • • 1 Tower Rock . • . 4 Rock descriptions . • . • . • . • . • . • . • 5 0 hanapecosh Formation •... ... ................•...•...••.•.•....••••••• , 5 Fifes Peak Formation . • . 7 Tatoosh? pluton........................................................ 7 Quaternary rocks • . • . • . • . • . • . • • • • • • • 8 Suggested exercises • . • . • . • . • • • • 10 Explanation of terms •...............................•...•....•...•........•••••• 13 Appendix A-Occurrences of metallic minera ls •................••..........••••••. 19 Appendix B-Occurrences of nonmetallic minerals •.................•......•••••••• 39 I LLUST RA Tl O NS Page Figure 1.-The formation of an angular unconformity 2 2.-Tower Rock as seen from the oppo site side of the Cispus River valley. View is toward the southeast ••......•.........•..• ;............ 4 3.-Line drawing showing alignment of mineral grains due to flow in mo I ten rock • . • • • .. • • • 6 4.-Line drawing of quartz and heulandite filling vesicles in flow rock. • • • • • • • • 6 5.- Geologic map and cross
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC MAP of the MOUNT ADAMS VOLCANIC FIELD, CASCADE RANGE of SOUTHERN WASHINGTON by Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP 1-2460 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE MOUNT ADAMS VOLCANIC FIELD, CASCADE RANGE OF SOUTHERN WASHINGTON By Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein When I climbed Mount Adams {17-18 August 1945] about 1950 m (6400') most of the landscape is mantled I think I found the answer to the question of why men by dense forests and huckleberry thickets. Ten radial stake everything to reach these peaks, yet obtain no glaciers and the summit icecap today cover only about visible reward for their exhaustion... Man's greatest 2.5 percent (16 km2) of the cone, but in latest Pleis­ experience-the one that brings supreme exultation­ tocene time (25-11 ka) as much as 80 percent of Mount is spiritual, not physical. It is the catching of some Adams was under ice. The volcano is drained radially vision of the universe and translating it into a poem by numerous tributaries of the Klickitat, White Salmon, or work of art ... Lewis, and Cis pus Rivers (figs. 1, 2), all of which ulti­ William 0. Douglas mately flow into the Columbia. Most of Mount Adams and a vast area west of it are Of Men and Mountains administered by the U.S. Forest Service, which has long had the dual charge of protecting the Wilderness Area and of providing a network of logging roads almost INTRODUCTION everywhere else. The northeast quadrant of the moun­ One of the dominating peaks of the Pacific North­ tain, however, lies within a part of the Yakima Indian west, Mount Adams, stands astride the Cascade crest, Reservation that is open solely to enrolled members of towering 3 km above the surrounding valleys.
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis River ~ Including Clear, Quartz, Siouxon, Pine, Rush, Smith Creeks & the Muddy River
    Photo by Susan Saul Wild and Scenic Rivers Support Local Communities The legendary volcanoes in southwestern Washington and the spectacular rivers that originate on their slopes are valuable to the health, economy, and cultural identity of local communities. Rivers like the Green, Cispus, and Lewis provide drinking water to thousands of local residents, world-class recreation, and a high quality of life for local residents. Designating the rivers and key tributaries in Volcano Country under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act will increase long- term potential for recreation and tourism in the area, ensure cool clean water for fish and people, and protect these natural treasures for future generations. Just a few of the benefits of Wild and Scenic designation include: RECREATION, TOURISM, AND THE ECONOMY: According to the Outdoor Industry Association, outdoor recreation brings in more than $11.7 billion annually to our state, supports an estimated 115,000 jobs, and generates $650 million in annual sales tax revenue. Travel and tourism provide nearly 8000 jobs – or 14 percent of jobs across all economic sectors – in Lewis, Cowlitz, and Skamania counties. In addition to putting a river “on the map” for visitors and outdoor enthusiasts, a Wild and Scenic River designation can lead to access improvements and foster growth in river-based outdoor recreation and tourism. For example, a recent study of the Wild and Scenic section of the Rogue River found that commercial rafting, fishing, and other recreation contributed $30 million a year to the State of Oregon’s economy. The White Salmon and the Klickitat River are two positive examples of Wild and Scenic Rivers in Washington that benefit local recreation economies.
    [Show full text]
  • Nisqually State Park Interpretive Plan
    NISQUALLY STATE PARK INTERPRETIVE PLAN OCTOBER 2020 Prepared for the Nisqually Indian Tribe by Historical Research Associates, Inc. We acknowledge that Nisqually State Park is part of the homelands of the Squalli-absch (sqʷaliʔabš) people. We offer respect for their history and culture, and for the path they show in caring for this place. “All natural things are our brothers and sisters, they have things to teach us, if we are aware and listen.” —Willie Frank, Sr. Nisqually State Park forest. Credit: HRA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . 5 PART 1: FOUNDATION. .11 Purpose and Guiding Principles . .12 Interpretive Goals . 12 Desired Outcomes . .13 Themes. 14 Setting and Connections to Regional Interpretive Sites . 16 Issues and Influences Affecting Interpretation . .18 PART 2: RECOMMENDATIONS . .21 Introduction . 22 Recommended Approach . .22 Recommended Actions and Benchmarks . 26 Interpretive Media Recommendations . 31 Fixed Media Interpretation . .31 Digital Interpretation . 31 Personal Services . 32 Summary . 33 PLANNING RESOURCES . 34 HRA Project Team . 35 Interpretive Planning Advisory Group and Planning Meeting Participants . .35 Acknowledgements . 35 Definitions . 35 Select Interpretation Resources. 36 Select Management Documents . 36 Select Topical Resources. 36 APPENDICES Appendix A: Interpretive Theme Matrix Appendix B: Recommended Implementation Plan Appendix C: Visitor Experience Mapping INTRODUCTION Nisqually State Park welcome sign includes Nisqually design elements and Lushootseed language translation. Credit: HRA Nisqually State Park | Interpretive Plan | October 2020 5 The Nisqually River is a defining feature of Nisqually State Park. According to the late Nisqually historian Cecelia Svinth Carpenter, “The Nisqually River became the thread woven through the heart and fabric of the Nisqually Indian people.” —Carpenter, The Nisqually People, My People.
    [Show full text]
  • Gifford Pinchot
    THE FORGOTTEN FOREST: EXPLORING THE GIFFORD PINCHOT A Publication of the Washington Trails Association1 7A 9 4 8 3 1 10 7C 2 6 5 7B Cover Photo by Ira Spring 2 Table of Contents About Washington Trails Association Page 4 A Million Acres of outdoor Recreation Page 5 Before You Hit the Trail Page 6 Leave No Trace 101 Page 7 The Outings (see map on facing page) 1. Climbing Mount Adams Pages 8-9 2. Cross Country Skiing: Oldman Pass Pages 10-11 3. Horseback Riding: Quartz Creek Pages 12-13 4. Hiking: Juniper Ridge Pages 14-15 5. Backpacking the Pacific Crest Trail: Indian Heaven Wilderness Pages 16-17 6. Mountain Biking: Siouxon Trail Pages 18-19 7. Wildlife Observation: Pages 20-21 A. Goat Rocks Wilderness B. Trapper Creek Wilderness C. Lone Butte Wildlife Emphasis Area 8. Camping at Takhlakh Lake Pages 22-23 9. Fly Fishing the Cowlitz River Pages 24-25 10. Berry Picking in the Sawtooth Berry Fields Pages 26-27 Acknowledgements Page 28 How to Join WTA Page 29-30 Volunteer Trail Maintenance Page 31 Important Contacts Page 32 3 About Washington Trails Association Washington Trails Association (WTA) is the voice for hikers in Washington state. We advocate protection of hiking trails, take volunteers out to maintain them, and promote hiking as a healthy, fun way to explore Washington. Ira Spring and Louise Marshall co-founded WTA in 1966 as a response to the lack of a political voice for Washington’s hiking community. WTA is now the largest state-based hiker advocacy organization in the country, with over 5,500 members and more than 1,800 volunteers.
    [Show full text]