DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydrologic Analysis Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydrologic Analysis Report RESTORING OUR ENVIRONMENT DESIGNING OUR FUTURE Missoula-Granite PMR, MAS No. 2019-02 Missoula and Granite Counties, Montana Hydrologic Analysis Report Montana DNRC July 9, 2020 Pioneer Technical Services, Inc. 106 Pronghorn Trail, Bozeman Montana 59718 www.pioneer-technical.com Missoula-Granite PMR MAS No. 2019-02 Missoula and Granite Counties, Montana Hydrologic Analysis Report Prepared for: State of Montana, Department of Natural Resources and Conservation 1424 9th Avenue Helena, Montana 59620 Prepared by: Pioneer Technical Services, Inc. 106 Pronghorn Trail Bozeman, Montana 59718 Missoula-Granite PMR MAS No. 2019-02 Missoula and Granite Counties, Montana Hydrologic Analysis Report July 9, 2020 I hereby certify that all work products (maps, reports, etc.) prepared for this project were done so under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Montana. George Austiguy P.E. Date: ______07/09/20_______ Montana Registration No. 9528 Pioneer Technical Services, Inc. 106 Pronghorn Trail, Suite A Bozeman, MT 59718 Missoula-Granite PMR Missoula-Granite Hydrologic Analysis TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... i Figures ....................................................................................................................................... iii Tables......................................................................................................................................... iv Appendices ................................................................................................................................. v 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background Information ............................................................................................................... 1 2 Clark Fork River ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Clark Fork River Introduction ........................................................................................................ 4 2.1.1 Basin Description .............................................................................................................. 4 2.1.2 Flood History .................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Past Studies and Existing Flood Data .......................................................................................... 15 2.2.1 City of Missoula and Missoula County Flood Insurance Study ...................................... 16 2.2.2 Granite County and Incorporated Areas Flood Insurance Study ................................... 17 2.2.3 Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4308 .......................................................... 18 2.2.4 Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019.................................................................... 19 2.2.5 Scientific Investigations Report 2018-5046.................................................................... 20 2.2.6 Letter of Map Revision – Clark Fork River and Blackfoot River Near Milltown, Montana – Appendix A .................................................................................................................. 21 2.2.7 Restoration Plan for the Clark Fork River and Blackfoot River near Milltown Dam – October 2005: Appendix A – Hydrology and Flood Series Analysis ............................... 22 2.2.8 Additional Previous Studies ............................................................................................ 23 2.2.9 Flood Protection Measures ............................................................................................ 25 2.3 Hydrologic Analyses and Results ................................................................................................. 26 2.3.1 USGS Stream Gage Analysis ........................................................................................... 26 2.3.1.1 1% + Peak Flow Estimates ................................................................................. 28 2.3.2 Flow Change Node Locations ......................................................................................... 32 2.3.3 Flood Frequency Estimates at Ungaged Sites ................................................................ 37 2.3.3.1 Two-Site Logarithmic Interpolation Method .................................................... 38 2.4 Clark Fork Mainstem Discussion ................................................................................................. 42 3 Bitterroot River .................................................................................................................... 53 3.1 Bitterroot River Introduction ...................................................................................................... 53 3.1.1 Basin Description ............................................................................................................ 53 3.1.2 Flood History .................................................................................................................. 55 3.2 Past Studies and Existing Flood Data .......................................................................................... 57 3.2.1 City of Missoula and Missoula County Flood Insurance Study ...................................... 58 3.2.2 Water Resources Investigations Report 03-4308 ........................................................... 59 3.2.3 Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019.................................................................... 60 3.2.4 Scientific Investigations Report 2018-5046.................................................................... 60 3.2.5 Additional Previous Studies ............................................................................................ 61 Page i of viii Missoula-Granite PMR Missoula-Granite Hydrologic Analysis 3.2.6 Flood Protection Measures ............................................................................................ 61 3.3 Hydrologic Analyses and Results ................................................................................................. 62 3.3.1 USGS Stream Gage Analysis ........................................................................................... 62 3.3.1.1 1%+ Peak Flow Estimates .................................................................................. 64 3.3.2 Flow Change Node Locations ......................................................................................... 68 3.3.3 Flood Frequency Estimates at Ungaged Sites ................................................................ 71 3.3.3.1 Two-Site Logarithmic Interpolation Method .................................................... 72 3.3.3.2 Drainage Area Gage Transfer Method .............................................................. 75 3.3.4 Bitterroot River Discussion ............................................................................................. 77 4 Rock Creek and Tributaries .................................................................................................. 85 4.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................. 85 4.1.1 Basin Description ............................................................................................................ 85 4.1.1.1 Rock Creek Mainstem ....................................................................................... 85 4.1.1.2 Rock Creek Tributaries ...................................................................................... 85 4.1.2 Flood History .................................................................................................................. 87 4.2 Past Studies and Existing Flood Data .......................................................................................... 90 4.2.1 City of Missoula and Missoula County Flood Insurance Study ...................................... 91 4.2.2 Granite County and Incorporated Areas Flood Insurance Study ................................... 92 4.2.3 Water Resources Investigations Report 03-4308 ........................................................... 92 4.2.4 Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5019.................................................................... 93 4.2.5 Scientific Investigations Report 2018-5046.................................................................... 94 4.2.6 Additional Previous Studies ............................................................................................ 94 4.2.7 Flood Protection Measures ............................................................................................ 95 4.3 Hydrologic Analysis and Results .................................................................................................. 96 4.3.1 Rock Creek Mainstem .................................................................................................... 96 4.3.1.1 USGS Stream Gage Analysis .............................................................................. 96 4.3.1.2 1%+ Peak Flow Analysis ..................................................................................... 99 4.3.1.1 Flow Change Node Locations .........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • December 18, 2020 Fish Consumption Guidance Updated for Portions Of
    Media contact: Trevor Selch, FWP Fisheries Pollution Biologist, 406-444-5686 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 18, 2020 Fish consumption guidance updated for portions of Clark Fork, Bitterroot and Blackfoot Rivers in western Montana MISSOULA – The State of Montana Fish Guidance Board, which includes Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) and the Departments of Environmental Quality (DEQ), and Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS), has updated the fish consumption guidance for all species of fish on a 148-mile stretch of the Clark Fork River and tributaries in western Montana in response to new research results. Guidance now recommends avoiding consumption of all species of fish from the Clark Fork River’s confluence with the Bitterroot River, just west of Missoula, to the confluence with the Flathead River, near Paradise. Slightly revised guidance is also in place for rainbow trout and northern pike on an upstream section of the Clark Fork and for the Blackfoot and Bitterroot Rivers. New data was collected to assess chemical contaminants including dioxins, furans, and PCBs in fish tissue in a study area on the Clark Fork that extended from approximately 30 miles upstream of Missoula to 100 miles downstream. Testing in the area is underway as part of water quality monitoring around the former Smurfit-Stone Container mill site. Upon review of the study results, new guidance was issued based on high levels of contaminants in the fish tissue. The source of all the contaminants found in the fish has not been attributed. The study only looked at contaminant concentrations found in the muscle tissues of northern pike and rainbow trout, but the same “Avoid” guidance extends to all species present in the Clark Fork River near Missoula (such as brown trout, whitefish, small- and large-mouth bass, northern pikeminnow, and sucker species) because similar food habits, habitat use, and life- span suggest they could also contain chemical concentrations at potentially dangerous levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Derek Decker, Senior Offensive
    Derek Decker, senior offensive gua Other area attractions include “A Carousel for Missoula” (one of the first fully hand-carved carousels to be built in America since the Great Depression), Garnet Ghost Town, the National Bison Range, the Ninemile Remount Depot and Ranger Station, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Wildlife Visitor Center, and the Smokejumper Visitor Center. Missoula Parks and Recreation and the YMCA provide a variety of recreational opportunities in basketball, soccer, softball, tennis, volleyball, and ice skating. Missoula also serves as a center for education, health care, retail, and the arts. The University of Montana provides educa­ tional opportunities for more than 13,000 college students. Com­ munity Medical Center and St. Patrick Hospital, along with many clinics, make Missoula one of the state’s premier health care com­ munities. The Missoula community supports the arts in all its forms: the­ Summertime in Missoula, the Downtown Association’s Out to Lunch ater productions, dance, art, and music. The Missoula Children’s weekly series. Theater, founded in 1970, moved into a renovated building near Birthplace and hometown of author Norman McLean, who wrote campus and produces plays and musicals by national and local A River Runs Through It, Missoula is also known as the “Garden playwrights for both adults and children. The theater also has an City” for its dense trees and lush green landscape. Missoula is International Tour Project, taking theatrical productions to audi­ nestled in the heart of the Northern Rockies in western Montana. ences outside the Missoula area. The Garden City Ballet and A community of approximately 66,000 residents, Missoula lies in a Missoula Symphony, which is in its 50th season, bring performances mountain forest setting where five valleys converge.
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences in Montana
    Report of Investigation 23 Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences in Montana Richard B. Berg 2015 Cover photo by Richard Berg. Sapphires (very pale green and colorless) concentrated by panning. The small red grains are garnets, commonly found with sapphires in western Montana, and the black sand is mainly magnetite. Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences, RI 23 Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences in Montana Richard B. Berg Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology MBMG Report of Investigation 23 2015 i Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences, RI 23 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................1 Descriptions of Occurrences ..................................................................................................7 Selected Bibliography of Articles on Montana Sapphires ................................................... 75 General Montana ............................................................................................................75 Yogo ................................................................................................................................ 75 Southwestern Montana Alluvial Deposits........................................................................ 76 Specifi cally Rock Creek sapphire district ........................................................................ 76 Specifi cally Dry Cottonwood Creek deposit and the Butte area ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring Macroinvertebrate Community
    Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring: Macroinvertebrate Community Assessments for 2019 Prepared by: David Stagliano Montana Biological Survey/Stag Benthics Prepared for: Boise, Idaho Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 June 2020 Executive Summary The upper Clark Fork River (CFR) Basin in western at Kohrs Bend (Station 10) to 85 percent at SBC Montana contains four contiguous Superfund below Warm Springs (Station 4.5) and the operable units that have been undergoing various Blackfoot River site (Station 14) (Figure ES-1). remediation activities for decades. Since 1986, Both SBC sites (stations 2.5 and 4.5) were rated as annual benthic macroinvertebrate-based (BMI) slightly impaired. Slight biological impairment monitoring has been performed at 13 CFR stream from nutrients was evident at two CFR stations reaches with ongoing or future remedial actions near Deer Lodge (8.5 and 9.0) and near Missoula (McGuire Consulting 1986-2017; Montana (Station 15.5), but the former sites have improved Biological Survey/Stag Benthics 2017-Present). markedly since 2017. The lower Blackfoot River Monitoring extended from Silver Bow Creek (SBC) (Station 14) was ranked slightly impaired again in sites upstream of the Warm Springs Ponds, 2019, likely due to metal related stressors. downstream through the upper CFR, bracketing During 2019, environmental conditions in SBC at the former Milltown Dam site to below the Opportunity (Station 2.5) improved after CFR-Bitterroot River confluence. In addition to experiencing declines in integrity scores in 2018. providing current assessments of ecological Likewise, SBC below the Warm Springs Ponds conditions, these sampling events extend the (Station 4.5) remained slightly impaired but BMI long-term data set for evaluating water quality integrity improved over 2017 scores.
    [Show full text]
  • Birding in the Missoula and Bitterroot Valleys
    Birding in the Missoula and Bitterroot Valleys Five Valleys and Bitterroot Audubon Society Chapters are grassroots volunteer organizations of Montana Audubon and the National Audubon Society. We promote understanding, respect, and enjoyment of birds and the natural world through education, habitat protection, and environmental advocacy. Five Valleys Bitterroot Audubon Society Audubon Society P.O. Box 8425 P.O. Box 326 Missoula, MT 59807 Hamilton, MT 59840 www.fvaudubon.org/ www.bitterrootaudubonorg/ Montana Audubon P.O. Box 595 Helena, MT 59624 406-443-3949 www.mtaudubon.org Status W Sp Su F Bird Species of West-central Montana (most vagrants excluded) _ Harlequin Duck B r r r Relative abundance in suitable habitat by season are: _ Long-tailed Duck t r r c - common to abundant, usually found on every visit in _ Surf Scoter t r r r moderate to large numbers _ White-winged Scoter t r r r u - uncommon, usually present in low numbers but may be _ Common Goldeneye B c c c c _ missed Barrow’s Goldeneye B u c c c _ o - occasional, seen only a few times during the season, not Bufflehead B o c u c _ Hooded Merganser B o c c c present in all suitable habitat _ Common Merganser B c c c c r - rare, one to low numbers occur but not every year _ Red-breasted Merganser t o o _ Status: Ruddy Duck B c c c _ Osprey B c c c B - Direct evidence of breeding _ Bald Eagle B c c c c b - Indirect evidence of breeding _ Northern Harrier B u c c c t - No evidence of breeding _ Sharp-shinned Hawk B u u u u _ Cooper’s Hawk B u u u u Season of occurrence: _ Northern Goshawk B u u u u W - Winter, mid-November to mid-February _ Swainson’s Hawk B u u u Sp - Spring, mid-February to mid-May _ Red-tailed Hawk B c c c c Su - Summer, mid-May to mid-August _ Ferruginous Hawk t r r r F - Fall, mid-August to mid-November _ Rough-legged Hawk t c c c _ Golden Eagle B u u u u This list follows the seventh edition of the AOU check-list.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeologic Framework of the Upper Clark Fork River Area: Deer Lodge, Granite, Powell, and Silver Bow Counties R15W R14W R13W R12W By
    Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Montana Groundwater Assessment Atlas No. 5, Part B, Map 2 A Department of Montana Tech of The University of Montana July 2009 Open-File Version Hydrogeologic Framework of the Upper Clark Fork River Area: Deer Lodge, Granite, Powell, and Silver Bow Counties R15W R14W R13W R12W by S Qsf w Qsf Yb Larry N. Smith a n T21N Qsf Yb T21N R Authors Note: This map is part of the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology (MBMG) a n Pz Pz Groundwater Assessment Atlas for the Upper Clark Fork River Area groundwater Philipsburg ValleyUpper Flint Creek g e Pz Qsf characterization. It is intended to stand alone and describe a single hydrogeologic aspect of the study area, although many of the areas hydrogeologic features are The town of Philipsburg is the largest population center in the valley between the Qsc interrelated. For an integrated view of the hydrogeology of the Upper Clark Fork Area Flint Creek Range and the John Long Mountains. The Philipsburg Valley contains 47o30 the reader is referred to Part A (descriptive overview) and Part B (maps) of the Montana 040 ft of Quaternary alluvial sediment deposited along streams cut into Tertiary 47o30 Groundwater Assessment Atlas 5. sedimentary rocks of unknown thickness. The east-side valley margin was glaciated . T20N Yb t R during the last glaciation, producing ice-sculpted topography and rolling hills in side oo B kf l Ovando c INTRODUCTION drainages on the west slopes of the Flint Creek Range. Prominent benches between ac la kf k B Blac oo N F T20N tributaries to Flint Creek are mostly underlain by Tertiary sedimentary rocks.
    [Show full text]
  • West Fork Rock Creek Watershed Assessment
    WEST FORK ROCK CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Beaverhead- WEST FORK Deerlodge National Forest ROCK CREEK Pintlar Ranger District WATERSHED ASSESSMENT January 31 , 2007 1 WEST FORK ROCK CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income derived from any public assistance program. (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 TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal employment opportunity provider and employer. Cover Photo: Bowles Creek, Cameron Rasor, June 20, 2005 2 WEST FORK ROCK CREEK WATERSHED ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS West Fork Rock Creek Watershed FACT SHEET …………………………………………1 Executive Summary..................................................................................................... 3 Section 1 Goals and Methods .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Fishing Regulations
    MONTANA FISHING REGULATIONS 20March 1, 2018 — F1ebruary 828, 2019 Fly fishing the Missouri River. Photo by Jason Savage For details on how to use these regulations, see page 2 fwp.mt.gov/fishing With your help, we can reduce poaching. MAKE THE CALL: 1-800-TIP-MONT FISH IDENTIFICATION KEY If you don’t know, let it go! CUTTHROAT TROUT are frequently mistaken for Rainbow Trout (see pictures below): 1. Turn the fish over and look under the jaw. Does it have a red or orange stripe? If yes—the fish is a Cutthroat Trout. Carefully release all Cutthroat Trout that cannot be legally harvested (see page 10, releasing fish). BULL TROUT are frequently mistaken for Brook Trout, Lake Trout or Brown Trout (see below): 1. Look for white edges on the front of the lower fins. If yes—it may be a Bull Trout. 2. Check the shape of the tail. Bull Trout have only a slightly forked tail compared to the lake trout’s deeply forked tail. 3. Is the dorsal (top) fin a clear olive color with no black spots or dark wavy lines? If yes—the fish is a Bull Trout. Carefully release Bull Trout (see page 10, releasing fish). MONTANA LAW REQUIRES: n All Bull Trout must be released immediately in Montana unless authorized. See Western District regulations. n Cutthroat Trout must be released immediately in many Montana waters. Check the district standard regulations and exceptions to know where you can harvest Cutthroat Trout. NATIVE FISH Westslope Cutthroat Trout Species of Concern small irregularly shaped black spots, sparse on belly Average Size: 6”–12” cutthroat slash— spots
    [Show full text]
  • Milltown, Montana and the History of Superfund Implementation
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2012 Restoring the "Shining Waters": Milltown, Montana and the History of Superfund Implementation David James Brooks The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Brooks, David James, "Restoring the "Shining Waters": Milltown, Montana and the History of Superfund Implementation" (2012). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 836. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/836 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RESTORING THE “SHINING WATERS:” MILLTOWN, MONTANA AND THE HISTORY OF SUPERFUND IMPLEMENTATION By David James Brooks MA Anthropology, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, 2004 BS Biology, Adams State College, Alamosa, Colorado, 1995 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of PhD in History The University of Montana Missoula, MT May 2012 Approved by: Sandy Ross, Associate Dean of the Graduate School Graduate School Dan Flores, Chair Department of History Jeff Wiltse Department of History Jody Pavilack Department of History Tobin Shearer Department of History Nancy Cook Department of English Literature Sara Dant Department of History, Weber State University COPYRIGHT by David James Brooks 2012 All Rights Reserved ii Brooks, David, PhD, May 2012 History Abstract: Restoring the "Shining Waters:" Milltown, Montana and the History of Superfund Implementation Chairperson: Dan Flores This dissertation is a case study of a dam removal and river restoration within the nation’s largest Superfund site.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form
    !.PS Perm 10-900-b _____ QMB No. 1024-0018 (Jan. 1967) *-• United States Department of the Interior ».< National Park Service ^ MAR1 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is for use in documenting multiple property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering trie requested information. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900-a). Type all entries. A. Name of Multiple Property Listing_____________________________________________ _______Historic Resources in Missoula, Montana, 1864-1940___________ 3. Associated Historic Contexts________________________________________________ _______Commercial Development in Missoula, Montana, 1864-1940____ ______Commercial Architecture in Missoula, Montana, 1864Q194Q C. Geographical Data The incorporated city limits of the City of LJSee continuation sheet D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation, standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60 and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Planning and Evaluation. 3 - IH-^O Signature of certifying official //Y Date j\A "T Swpo ^ ° State or Federal agency and bureau I, here by, certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evi iluating related pro Derties for listing in the National Register. i. < / \ ——L- A ^Signature of the Keeper of the National Register Date ' ' ( N —— ——————— E.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Setback Handout 12-10-07.Pmd
    Streamside Setbacks Protecting People, Property, and Montana’s Streams and Rivers with Specific Information on Ravalli County, Montana Montana’s future depends on clean water. One of the significant threats to our water quality is the increasing number of developments—including homes, parking lots, lawns, roads, and other developments—located next to our streams and rivers. Stream setbacks offer an intelligent solution that protects clean water, a homeowner’s privacy, and the natural landscapes that harbor the fish and wildlife that everyone in the state of Montana enjoys. Setbacks also reduce the risk of losing investments to flooding and erosion— and they increase property values. Much of the information contained in this handout is based on A Planning Guide for Protecting Montana’s Wetlands and Riparian Areas (Ellis and Richard, 2003). SETBACKS AND PUBLIC HEALTH The main way that stream setbacks address public health, is by filtering out pollutants from our water. Polluted runoff—which occurs when rainfall or snowmelt washes pollutants such as sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, pesticides, and salt into streams, lakes, and ground water—is the number one source of pollution to the waters of our state (DEQ, 2007a). What Setbacks Do for Clean Water: All Montanans depend upon clean water that comes from ground water or surface "Development along rivers and water. Wetlands and riparian areas act like a filter to reduce streams that destroys protective the amount of pollutants that enter streams, ground water, riparian areas is possibly the and—ultimately—drinking water, in runoff originating from single most urgent ecosystem sources such as city streets, lawns, construction sites, and threat facing Montana around buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • Resolution Number 7660 a Resolution of the Missoula
    RESOLUTION NUMBER 7660 A RESOLUTION OF THE MISSOULA CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT A PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE WHICH WILL GUIDE THE CITY IN MAKING DECISIONS FOR PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PROJECTS AND ALLOW THE CITY TO BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE FEDERAL PRE- AND POST-DISASTER MITIGATION FUNDS. WHEREAS, all citizens and property within the City of Missoula are at risk from a wide range of hazards, such as, but not limited to, flooding, earthquakes, winter storms, wind and thunderstorms, wildfire, landslides, and volcanic hazards, and; WHEREAS, the Missoula City Council recognizes that mitigation is the most cost effective way to manage the potential consequences of disasters, and; WHEREAS, a Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan will guide the City in making decisions for pre-disaster mitigation projects, and; WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency requires local jurisdictions to have an approved Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan to be eligible for federal pre- or post-disaster mitigation monies, and; WHEREAS, the 2004 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan was prepared in accordance with guidance provided by FEMA under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, and; WHEREAS, the 2004 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan provides the background and essentials for evaluating risks and exposures to hazards, and; WHEREAS, this 2011 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update has been prepared according to "Local Multi- Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance" (FEMA, 2008) and adds to the 2004 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Missoula, Montana hereby adopts, the Pre- Disaster Mitigation Plan Update dated August, 2011. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of October, 2011 ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/ Martha L.
    [Show full text]