DOCSLIB.ORG

W Fk Humptulips EA Final

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
W Fk Humptulips EA Final Environmental United States Department of Assessment for Agriculture Forest West Fork Service Pacific Northwest Humptulips Region Thinning Project September 2009 Olympic National Forest The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. i Contents CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED ...............................................................................1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................1 Project Location................................................................................................................1 Background .......................................................................................................................3 Purpose and Need for Action ...........................................................................................5 Proposed Action ...............................................................................................................6 Decision Framework .........................................................................................................7 Management Direction......................................................................................................8 Public Involvement ...........................................................................................................13 Issues.................................................................................................................................14 CHAPTER 2 – ALTERNATIVES.........................................................................................18 Introduction.......................................................................................................................18 Process Used to Develop Alternatives ............................................................................18 Alternatives Considered But Eliminated From Further Analysis...................................19 Alternatives Considered in Detail ....................................................................................20 Project Design Criteria Applicable to All Action Alternatives........................................22 Mitigation Common to All Action Alternatives................................................................45 Comparison of Alternatives..............................................................................................60 CHAPTER 3 – AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES..............................................................................................................62 Introduction.......................................................................................................................62 Discussion of Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Impacts .................................................62 Silviculture and Forest Stand Development....................................................................66 Soils and Site Productivity ...............................................................................................77 Fisheries and Water Quality .............................................................................................107 Northwest Forest Plan Aquatic Conservation Strategy..................................................128 Wildlife ...............................................................................................................................136 Botany and Invasive Plants..............................................................................................186 Recreation, Lands and Minerals ......................................................................................196 Economics.........................................................................................................................212 Fire and Fuels....................................................................................................................213 Global Climate Change.....................................................................................................215 Heritage .............................................................................................................................218 Other Effects .....................................................................................................................221 ii CHAPTER 4 – LIST OF PREPARERS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED ............................226 CHAPTER 5 – LIST OF REFERENCES .............................................................................228 APPENDICES.....................................................................................................................243 APPENDIX A - Maps..........................................................................................................244 APPENDIX B - Acronyms..................................................................................................245 APPENDIX C – Road Definitions ......................................................................................247 APPENDIX D – Road Use Summary.................................................................................249 APPENDIX E – Response to Comments..........................................................................255 iii List of Tables Table 1-1. Project 5 th , 6 th and 7 th Field Watersheds………………………………………………....11 Table 1-2. Forest Strategic Plan ratings for Planning Area 6 th field watersheds……………............13 Table 2-1. Alternative A (Proposed Action) Summary……………………………………………..34 Table 2-2. Alternative B Summary………………………………………………………………….39 Table 2-3. Alternative C Summary………………………………………………………………….43 Table 2-4. Prioritization of Humptulips Stands for seasonal restrictions...........................................52 Table 2-5. Priority candidate unclassified roads to be decommissioned……………………………57 Table 2-6. Priority candidate ML1 roads to be treated.......................................................................58 Table 2-7. Priority candidate ML2 roads to be treated……………………………………………...58 Table 2-8. Priority candidate road culverts to be replaced………………………………………….58 Table 2-9. Comparative Summary of Alternatives - General Information ……………………….....60 Table 2-10. Comparative Summary of Alternatives - Key Issue……………………………………..60 Table 2-11. Comparative Summary of Alternatives - Other Issues…………………………………..61 Table 3-1. Planning Area by 6 th Field Watershed…………………………………………………. 107 Table 3-2. Miles of Stream - Fish Presence Within Planning Area……………………………….. 107 Table 3-3. Acres of Riparian Reserve in Planning Area………………………………………….. 109 Table 3-4. Near-term LWD recruitment by sub-watersheds in the West Fork Humptulips …….…110 Table 3-5. Current riparian canopy cover impact ratings summary by sub-watershed…………… 111 Table 3-6. Quality of rearing habitat of selected reaches in the West Fork Humptulips…………. 112 Table 3-7. Current road densities in 6 th field watershed/Planning Area…………………………... 113 Table 3-8. Erosion Calculations/Hazard Rating for West Fork Humptulips……………………… 114 Table 3-9. Channel Gradients……………………………………………………………………... 114 Table 3-10. Planning/Proposed Thinning Acres by 6 th Field Watershed………………………….. 116 Table 3-11. Alternative A Comparison of Road Density by Watershed…………………………. 120 Table 3-12. Alternative A Percent Thinning of 6 th Field Watershed ……………………………… 120 Table 3-13. Alternative B Comparison by Road Density………………………………………… 123 Table 3-14. Alternative C Comparison by Road Density………………………………………… 124 Table 3-15. R6 Regional Forester's Sensitive Fish Species List for Olympic National Forest…… 126 Table 3-16. Summary table of impacts of proposed activities on general wildlife habitat…………140 Table 3-17. Summary table of proposed logging systems and early season harassment………….. 140 Table 3-18. Federally listed wildlife species………………………………………………………. 140 Table 3-19. History of the Northern spotted owl activity centers………………………….……….144 Table 3-20. Summary of Acres treated in Relation to Spotted Owl Activity Centers…………….. 252 Table 3-21. Mapped Murrelet Sites and Associated Habitat……………………………………….149 Table 3-22. Summary of Acres Treated in Relation to Mapped Murrelet Detection Sites………... 252 Table 3-23. Prioritization of Humptulips Stands for seasonal restrictions………………………… 155 Table 3-24. Regional Forester's Sensitive Species and their potential presence…………………... 161 Table 3-25. Sensitive Mollusks with potential habitat in the project area………………………… 168 Table 3-26. Forest Management Indicator Species………………………………………………… 172 Table 3-27. Road Information for 7 th Field sub-watersheds………………………………………. 252 Table 3-28. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species of Concern………………………………….. 180 Table 3-29. Sensitive Vascular Plants with Habitat in Project Area………………………………. 188 Table 3-30. Sensitive Bryophytes with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seeks Input at Upcoming Public Meetings in Forks, Aberdeen and Port Angeles
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 19, 2019 Olympic Forest Collaborative Begins 2019 by Building on Successes - Seeks Input at Upcoming Public Meetings in Forks, Aberdeen and Port Angeles Partnership initiated by Representative Kilmer between Timber & Conservation interests has helped increase timber harvest and aquatic restoration projects on Olympic National Forest through consensus-based approach. PORT ANGELES, WA –Representative Derek Kilmer (D-WA) & The Olympic Forest Collaborative head in to 2019 with an impressive string of successful projects increasing timber harvest and aquatic restoration on Olympic National Forest. A series of public meetings in 2019 are planned to obtain community input on future projects. “Growing up in Port Angeles, I know that actively managing our federal forests is essential to supporting quality jobs in the timber industry, protecting our environment, and growing our outdoor economy,” said U.S. Representative Derek Kilmer (D-WA06) who represents the Olympic Peninsula. “That’s why we embarked on this project to bring together regional leaders to develop innovative approaches to restoring our forests and promoting increased harvest levels. The recent successes achieved by the Olympic Forest Collaborative show that we don’t have to choose between protecting our environment and creating a more vibrant economy.” Over the last three years, the Olympic Forest Collaborative has worked across the Olympic Peninsula assisting the U. S. Forest Service with preparing commercial thinning timber sales to help the Olympic National Forest meet and recently exceed their timber targets, fund habitat and aquatic restoration objectives, and host public meetings around the peninsula. In addition to assisting the Forest on projects, the Olympic Forest Collaborative has successfully developed and prepared two different pilot Habitat Restoration Thinning Stewardship projects which were sold by the Olympic National Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Washington State Birding Trail  OLYMPIC LOOP
    OLYMPIC LOOP INDEX Sites Page Sites Page INFO KEY 1 1 Nisqually National 2 32 Morse Creek 8 Wildlife Refuge 33 Dungeness National Wildlife 2 Tumwater Historical Park Refuge 3 Capitol Lake 34 Dungeness River Audubon 4 Grass Lake Refuge Center 5 McLane Creek Nature 3 35 Dungeness Bay Trail 36 John Wayne Marina 6 Kennedy Creek 37 Jimmycomelately Creek 9 7 Friends Landing 38 Protection Island National 8 Grays Harbor National Wildlife Refuge Wildlife Refuge 39 Kah Tai Lagoon Park 9 Humptulips Estuary 4 40 Fort Worden State Park 10 Damon Point 41 Chimacum Creek Estuary 11 Ocean Shores North Jetty 42 Fort Flagler State Park 12 Point Grenville 43 Big Quilcene River 10 13 Campbell Tree Grove Estuary 14 Lake Quinault 44 Mt. Walker 15 Kalaloch Creek 5 45 Dosewallips State Park 16 4th Beach 46 Hamma Hamma Beaver Pond 17 Hoh Rainforest 47 Potlatch State Park 11 18 Anderson Homestead 48 Skokomish Delta 19 La Push 49 Twanoh State Park 20 Quillayute River Estuary 50 GeorgeAdamsSalmon 21 Lake Ozette 6 Hatchery 22 Hobuck Beach 51 Panhandle Lake 4H Camp 23 Cape Flattery 52 Oakland Bay 24 Clallam Bay Park 53 Jarrell Cove State Park 25 Pillar Point County Park 54 Theler Wetlands 12 26 Salt Creek County Park 7 27 Elwha River Estuary CREDITS 12 28 Lake Crescent 29 Whiskey Bend Trail 30 Hurricane Ridge © Ed Newbold, Tufted Puffins 31 Ediz Hook The Great Washington State Birding Trail 1 OLYMPIC LOOP INFO KEY MAp Icons LocAl SERVices And Highlights Best seasons for birding( spring, summer, fall,winter) Overall Washington: www.experiencewashington.com Olympic BirdFest: First weekend in April, Developed camping available, including restrooms; fee required.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Escapement Goals for Grays Harbor Fall Chinook Using Spawner-Recruit Models
    Development of escapement goals for Grays Harbor fall Chinook using spawner-recruit models May 2014 Quinault Department of Natural Resources (QDNR) Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Abstract Grays Harbor fall Chinook are currently managed for a system-total escapement goal of 14,600 naturally spawning adults (Chehalis: 12,364, Humptulips: 2,236), a goal established in 1979 based on estimates of total accessible spawning habitat and spawning habitat capacity for individual streams in the Grays Harbor Basin. Grays Harbor escapement goals have received additional attention since this capacity-based goal was developed, most recently by QDNR and WDFW in 2007 (a joint effort) and between 1999 and 2003 by the Chinook Technical Committee (CTC) of the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC) and its Washington members. To develop an escapement goal for common use in the CTC’s review of indicator stock performance and by the Grays Harbor co-managers (QDNR and WDFW) in management, QDNR and WDFW recently conducted stock-recruitment analyses for Grays Harbor fall Chinook using updated escapement, terminal run reconstruction, and ocean abundance datasets. Goals were developed separately for each main tributary (Chehalis, Humptulips) and summed to generate an aggregate goal for the CTC Grays Harbor fall Chinook escapement indicator stock. Of three spawner-recruit functions considered (Shepherd, Beverton-Holt, Ricker), the Ricker model was identified as being the most appropriate form for both the Chehalis and Humptulips datasets. Parameter estimates indicate that the adult spawning escapement needed to produce maximum sustained yield (mean Smsy) for the Grays Harbor fall Chinook indicator stock aggregate is 13,326 (age 3+ individuals); Smsy is 9,753 for the Chehalis River and 3,573 for the Humptulips River.
    [Show full text]
  • Catch Record Cards & Codes
    Catch Record Cards Catch Record Card Codes The Catch Record Card is an important management tool for estimating the recreational catch of PUGET SOUND REGION sturgeon, steelhead, salmon, halibut, and Puget Sound Dungeness crab. A catch record card must be REMINDER! 824 Baker River 724 Dakota Creek (Whatcom Co.) 770 McAllister Creek (Thurston Co.) 814 Salt Creek (Clallam Co.) 874 Stillaguamish River, South Fork in your possession to fish for these species. Washington Administrative Code (WAC 220-56-175, WAC 825 Baker Lake 726 Deep Creek (Clallam Co.) 778 Minter Creek (Pierce/Kitsap Co.) 816 Samish River 832 Suiattle River 220-69-236) requires all kept sturgeon, steelhead, salmon, halibut, and Puget Sound Dungeness Return your Catch Record Cards 784 Berry Creek 728 Deschutes River 782 Morse Creek (Clallam Co.) 828 Sauk River 854 Sultan River crab to be recorded on your Catch Record Card, and requires all anglers to return their fish Catch by the date printed on the card 812 Big Quilcene River 732 Dewatto River 786 Nisqually River 818 Sekiu River 878 Tahuya River Record Card by April 30, or for Dungeness crab by the date indicated on the card, even if nothing “With or Without Catch” 748 Big Soos Creek 734 Dosewallips River 794 Nooksack River (below North Fork) 830 Skagit River 856 Tokul Creek is caught or you did not fish. Please use the instruction sheet issued with your card. Please return 708 Burley Creek (Kitsap Co.) 736 Duckabush River 790 Nooksack River, North Fork 834 Skokomish River (Mason Co.) 858 Tolt River Catch Record Cards to: WDFW CRC Unit, PO Box 43142, Olympia WA 98504-3142.
    [Show full text]
  • Chehalis and Humptulips River Basins
    61 124° 123°30' 123° 122°30' JEFFERSON 47° EXPLANATION 30' GRAYS HARBOR REAL-TIME SURFACE-WATER SITE LAKE OR RESERVOIR SITE KITSAP KING B ig C 12035380 051015 20 MILES rk k r o r F o F 12035400 051525 1020 30 KILOMETERS t s t e s 12036000 W a E MASON 12039005 k r r ork e o v r F F i e r v R k i e US r l k R ive o r 101 d R o s F t d F p s i i t e M l s tu a t W s p E a m k , E r r e u e r o e H v h F i C c r R o e v t o m i um s l ia n l e R u h y a a PIERCE W q k W u o 12035000 h 12037400 p q s H o i o s l t US 47° Hoquiam W C a 101 Montesano S River Grays Aberdeen Chehalis SR US 12035002 THURSTON Harbor 105 101 12031000 I 12035100 5 Grand Tenino US 12 hMound Bucoda uck Che alis mch 12026150 u R GRAYS HARBOR k iver o o 12025700 PACIFIC 12027500 Ri k 12026400 v S e r Centralia k North For 12025100 , ork Chehalis r F e h v t 12021800 Ne i 12024400 ou wa R S ukum SR r r, 12020000 e e 508 iv v r 12025000 N i R e ewau R v I kum i 5 SR R 6 s Pe Ell s 12024000 i i Willapa l l a WASHINGTON a 46° Bay h eh 30' he h C C 12020800 k r o F th ou LEWIS S WAHKIAKUM COWLITZ PACIFIC OCEAN Figure 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil and Gas in the Western Part of the Olympic Peninsula, Washington
    OIL AND GAS IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE OLYMPIC PENINSULA, WASHINGTON. By CHARLES T. LUPTON. INTRODUCTION. High-grade paraffin oil is reported to have been discovered in the western part of the Olympic Peninsula, Wash., as early as 1881. Since then attempts to obtain oil or gas in commercial quantities by drilling have been made from time to time in different localities in this region, but without success. Within the past few years interest has been aroused in oil seeps near the mouth of Hoh River and in gas vents in other parts of the field to such an extent that many persons have been attracted to this country to search for oil and gas. As a result of this interest and on account of the fact that efforts had been made to lease tracts of land for this purpose in the Queniult Indian Reservation, an examination of this region was made by the United States Geological Survey at the request of the'Office of Indian Affairs. The results of the investigation, which are enumerated below and which are discussed in detail throughout this report, suggest that certain parts of the field are worthy of careful consideration by' oil operators. The following summary includes the most important facts regarding the area examined: High-grade paraffin oil issues from two seeps near the mouth of Hoh River, and at other localities oil-saturated sandy clay (" smell mud" of the Indians), is exposed. Natural gas containing about 95 per cent methane escapes from a conical mound just north of the mouth of Queniult River and also from an inverted cone-shaped water-filled depression on Hoh River a short distance west of Spruce, post office.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Forty-Second Annual
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE FORTY-SECOND ANNUAL NORTHWEST FISH CULTURE CONFERENCE DECEMBER 3-5, 1991 REDDING, CALIFORNIA , *-' Ii THE NORTHWEST FISH CULTURE CONFERENCE The Northwest Fish Culture Conference is an annual informal meeting by and between fish cUlturists for the exchange of information and ideas about all aspects of fish culture. The PROCEEDINGS contain abstracts and or talks presented at the conference. They are unedited, contain progress reports of uncompleted programs, and, as such, SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A FORMAL, PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATION. ORGANIZING COMMITTEE General Coordinator Ken Hashagen Registration Roger Ellis Exhibits Don Estey Audiovisual Tony Nevison Local Arrangements Bob Corn Raffle Royce Gunter Program Ron Ducey Proceedings Ken Hashagen Treasurer Barbara Simpson ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The 42nd Northwest Fish Culture Conference was held at the Red Lion Inn in Redding, California from noon December 3 through noon December 5, 1991. This was the first time the California Department of Fish and Game was provided the opportunity to host the Conference. There were a total of 376 attendees from California (146), Washington (79), Oregon (87),Idaho (22), British Columbia (20), Alaska (10), Utah (8), Montana (4), Nevada (2), and Wyoming, Illinois, North Dakota, and Colorado (each with 1). As General Coordinator of the conference, I would like to thank the California Department of Fish and Game for their contributions of time for the organizing committee to plan the conference and for absorbing the cost of phone calls and preliminary mailings. The Committee Chairs are also due thanks for their efforts, as well as all those assisting them with committee activities. This year 27 exhibitors displayed their products at the trade show/product display.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Humptulips Quadrangle and Adjacent Areas
    (I) GEOLOGIC MAP OF (I) I ~ C!> THE HUMPTULIPS QUADRANGLE Q. < :E AND ADJACENT AREAS, (.) C!> GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY, WASHINGTON 0 ..J 0 w C, BY WELDON W. RAU 1986 GEOLOGIC MAP GM-33 •• WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT or ~~~=~ Natural Resources Brtan eoyi,. • C"'1lltUSSJoMt ot Publie Lands An Sleams • SupervLSOr Division ol Geology and E(rtfh Re10Utet!! Raymond LasmaN1. Sta"' Geologut Printed In the United States of America For sale by the Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington Price $ 2.78 .22 tax $ 3.00 Brtw, BO\"le • Coinmis&looor <JI f>u blk; t.wxi. Ar1 Slearn< • 5ull<l,-,.•t.o,- Geologic Map WASHINGTON STATE D~ARTMENT OF Dbtl*-1 o! GeolCVI' a.-.d Earth Resource> Natural Resources RayrnoM i.,,.....,n,.. Slcrta ~~ GM-33 probably most extensive during the Oeposition of the upper part of the formatio n. Hoh rocks of this area are likely no younger than the middle Eocene Ulatisian Stage. Northern outcrops of the Montesano Formation continue westw ard from the Hoh rocks of the 00/lSlal area are known to contain foraminifers ranging in age from Wynoochee Valley quadrangle, forming a belt of ou1crop extending to the East Fork miOdlc Eocene to middle Miocene. gf the Hoquiam Rive r. The formation is ma;t extensively c,;poscd in the southeastern part of the mapped area, mainly along the Ea.st Fo rk of the Hoquiam Ri~er and along the Wishkah River and itJ lower tributaries. In aOdilion, the format ion is particularly INTRUSIVE ROCKS (Ti) well exposed in the hill s within the cities of Aberdeen and Hoquiam.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Humptulips River Temperature TMDL Detailed Implementation Plan List of Tables
    Upper Humptulips River Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load Detailed Implementation Plan June 2003 Publication Number 03-10-042 Upper Humptulips River Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load Detailed Implementation Plan by Craig Graber Robin Stoddard Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Post Office Box 4777 Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 Publication No. 03-10-042 For additional copies of this document contact: Department of Ecology Publications Distribution Center P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Telephone: (360) 407-7472 If you require this document in an alternate format, please call the secretary at 360-407- 6270. The TTY number is 711 or 1-800-833-6388 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 1 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................... 4 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 7 THE APPROACH........................................................................................................................................ 7 POLLUTION SOURCES ............................................................................................................................ 8 ORGANIZATIONS RESPONSIBLE FOR POLLUTION REDUCTION ........................................... 10
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Yellow-Cedar Groves in the Olympic Mountains, Washington. In: a Tale of Two Cedars: International Symposium on Western Redcedar and Yellow- Cedar.C.A
    2010 - A Tale of Two Cedars PNW-GTR-828 ANCIENT YELLOW-CEDAR GROVES IN THE OLYMPIC MOUNTAINS, WASHINGTON Marshall D. Murray1 Yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis) grows throughout the Olympic Mountains, Washington at elevations of 500-2200 m. Recent surveys have found ancient yellow-cedar in this area range in size from a 365-cm diameter giant to shrubby krummholz at timberline. Eight groves of ancient yellow-cedar have been found on the windward side of the Olympic Mountains at elevations of 800 to 1000 m where precipitation is high and fire frequency is low (Fig. 1). These groves have not burned for more than 1000 years and contain the oldest trees in Washington. Large yellow-cedar in the groves range in diameter at breast height from 150 to 365 cm. The actual age of the largest trees cannot be determined because of rotten centers and their large size. The 365-cm diameter tree, the largest yellow-cedar in the United States, has been estimated to be more than 2000 years old. Growth of these yellow-cedars is slow. Snow accumulation in the groves is often greater than 3 m per year and growth is affected by the short snow- free growing season. Large decadent trees continue to live and grow for a long time and paper-thin growth rings are common. A tree 180 cm in diameter had 922 annual growth rings on the outer 30 cm of its radius. Photographs from these ancient groves show the physical characteristics of the trees including large burls, rotten, hollow living trees, standing dead hollow trees, and dead trees that fall to the ground and leave a 3 to 5 m high hollow stump.
    [Show full text]
  • REVIEW of 2020 OCEAN SALMON FISHERIES Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Document for the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan
    REVIEW OF 2020 OCEAN SALMON FISHERIES Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Document for the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan Pacific Fishery Management Council 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101 Portland, OR 97220-1384 (503) 820-2280 www.pcouncil.org FEBRUARY 16, 2021 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS SALMON TECHNICAL TEAM DR. MICHAEL O’FARRELL, CHAIR National Marine Fisheries Service, Santa Cruz, California MR. JON CAREY, VICE CHAIR National Marine Fisheries Service, Lacey, Washington MS. WENDY BEEGHLEY Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Montesano, Washington MR. CRAIG FOSTER Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Clackamas, Oregon DR. STEVE HAESEKER U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Vancouver, Washington MS. ASHTON HARP Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, Forks, Washington MR. ALEX LETVIN California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Santa Rosa, California MS. MINDY ROWSE National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, Washington PACIFIC FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL STAFF MS. ROBIN EHLKE DR. JAMES SEGER The Salmon Technical Team and the Council staff express their thanks for the expert assistance provided by Mr. Kyle Van de Graaf, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; Ms. Nadine Hurtado, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; Dr. Pete McHugh, Mr. Ian Pritchard, and Ms. Kandice Morgenstern, California Department of Fish and Wildlife; Dr. Ed Waters, economist on contract with Pacific Fishery Management Council; and to numerous other tribal and agency personnel in completing this report. This document may be cited in the following manner: Pacific Fishery Management Council. 2021. Review of 2020 Ocean Salmon Fisheries: Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Document for the Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery Management Plan. (Document prepared for the Council and its advisory entities.) Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, Oregon 97220-1384.
    [Show full text]
  • Steelhead Washington: Chehalis, Hoh, Humptulips, Queets, Quillayute
    Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss ©Monterey Bay Aquarium Washington: Chehalis, Hoh, Humptulips, Queets, Quillayute, Quinault Rivers Gillnet, Midwater February 6, 2017 (updated April 6, 2017) Seafood Watch Consulting Researcher Disclaimer Seafood Watch® strives to have all Seafood Reports reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science and aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch® program or its recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch® is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report. Seafood Watch Standard used in this assessment: Standard for Fisheries vF2 Table of Contents About. Seafood. .Watch . 3. Guiding. .Principles . 4. Summary. 5. Final. Seafood. .Recommendations . 6. Introduction. 8. Assessment. 10. Criterion. 1:. .Impacts . on. the. species. .under . .assessment . .10 . Criterion. 2:. .Impacts . on. other. .species . .26 . Criterion. 3:. .Management . Effectiveness. .38 . Criterion. 4:. .Impacts . on. the. habitat. and. .ecosystem . .48 . Acknowledgements. 52. References. 53. Appendix. A:. Review. Schedule. 60. 2 About Seafood Watch Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch® defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch® makes its science-based recommendations available to the public in the form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from www.seafoodwatch.org. The program’s goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservation issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans.
    [Show full text]