Exploring the Waters of Okanogan Country April 17, 2019
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Mussel Currents ~
4th Annual Freshwater Mussels Of the Pacific Northwest Symposium ~ Mussel Currents ~ April 17th, 2007 Water Resources Education Center, Vancouver, WA Hosted by: the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup “Dedicated to conservation of Pacific Northwest drainage mussel populations and promoting restoration, protection, education, and identification of further research needs.” Special Thanks To Our Sponsors Bureau of Land Management Interagency Status/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sensitive Species Program City of Vancouver Clark County Washington Water Resources Education Center Solid Waste Program Environmental Information Cooperative American Fisheries Society Clark County, Washington Oregon Chapter Washington Department Society for Ecological Restoration of Fish and Wildlife Northwest Chapter Table of Contents About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup…………………..... 2 Symposium Agenda ………………………..……………………………………………... 3 About the Keynote Speakers ……………………………………………………………… 5 Speaker Abstracts …..…………………………………………………………………….. 6 List of Technical Posters & Poster Abstracts….………………………………….…….... 13 Presenter Contact Information ……………………….………………………………… 16 Attendee Contact Information .…………………………………………………...……… 18 Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup Members.................................. 20 About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup History The status of the seven species of freshwater mussels native to the Pacific Northwest has received very little attention, despite the fact that freshwater mussels in general are considered the most endangered group of animals in North America. On February 19, 2003, a workshop on freshwater mussels was held in Vancouver, Washington that consisted of presented papers and a panel discussion. The purpose of the workshop was to initiate discussion on the regional population status of freshwater mussels. The workshop was attended by 91 participants of very diverse backgrounds. From this meeting, the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup was founded. -
Colville and Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forests Revised Forest Plans Frequently Asked Questions
Colville and Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forests Revised Forest Plans Frequently Asked Questions Plans and Planning Rule and Process Q. What is a Forest Plan? A. A forest plan, or land and resource management plan (LRMP), is a tool that provides a framework and broad guidance for making management decisions for a Forest unit, while providing technical boundaries for protecting the environment. They are strategic and programmatic, and identify desired conditions for national forest lands. Similar to county land- use zoning plans, they identify areas where various types of activities may occur, such as harvesting trees or certain types of recreational uses. Q. When were the existing Forest Plans approved? A. The Colville forest plan was completed in 1988, the Okanogan in 1989, and the Wenatchee in 1990. Q. Why revise current land management plans (LMPs)? A. Revision is required by law (NFMA, National Forest Management Act of 1976). The existing Forest Plans have reached their intended 15-year life. Both public comment and new science show some need for change to the existing Plans. Much has changed since the existing set of forest plans were approved in the late 80’s, including changes in public values and expectations from public lands, recreation demands and types of recreation uses, demographics and development patterns, and natural resource policy. Other changes have occurred on the landscape itself; and there have been advances in our knowledge about landscape processes, science and technology. Even though amendments have been made over time to the existing plans to adapt to some of those changes, they still do not fully reflect the current needs of the forest and neighboring communities. -
Owl Mountain Wilderness Evaluation
May-June 2009 Owl Mountain Wilderness Evaluation WILDERNESS EVALUATION Owl Mountain – 621016 11,083 acres OVERVIEW History The 2006 inventory identified this area as meeting the criteria for a potential wilderness area (PWA) as described in Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.12, Chapter 70. The area had not been identified in any previous inventory. The following chart depicts the current 1988 Colville National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan direction for the 2006 inventoried area. Table 1--Management area percentages (rounded) Colville National Forest MA1 MA10 MA5 MA6 MA7 MA8 Old Growth Semi- Scenic Scenic/ Wood/ Winter Dependant primitive, Timber Winter Forage Range Species Motorized range Habitat Recreation 32% 37% 9% 12% 6% 3% Location and Access The Owl Mountain Proposed Wilderness Area (PWA) is contained wholly within Ferry County in T. 40 N., R. 35 E., Sec. 1, 12 13, 23, 24, and 25; and T. 40 N, R. 36 E., Sec. 3 – 10, 15 – 22, 27 – 31, and 34. The area is accessed on the east side through the Little Boulder/Independent Creek road systems, ultimately Forest Road 9576-370, which ends at a road closure on Huckleberry Ridge. There is no access from the north because of the Canadian border. The northeast side of the area is extremely rugged and steep and provides no access. Access from the southeast side is along U.S. Highway 395. However, very few people actually access the area from this side. The terrain on the lower slope is such that few hike up from the highway. Most of the access to this area is derived from driving into the heart of the Kerry Creek watershed on Forest Road 9576-150, which leads to the east end of Forest Trail 102 (Owl Mountain Motorized Trail). -
An Independent Newspaper for the Pacific Northwest AUGUST 1997 VOL
An Independent Newspaper for the Pacific Northwest AUGUST 1997 VOL. 3 No. 3 Dear Reader early all the problems we face in Cascadia boil down to population. NAs Alan Durning and Christopher Crowther point out in their new book, Misplaced Blame: The Real Roots of Population Growth, the Pacific Northwest is growing nearly twice the North American rate and almost 50 percent faster than the global population. The Northwest population reached 15 million EDITORIAL in mid-1997 and is swelling by another 1 million every 40 months. Starting this month, with our cover story on growth pressures in the scenic Columbia River Gorge, Cascadia Times Boom Times The UnbearableRightness ot Breen will publish an occasional series on, Can the Columbia River Gorge survive the Life on the fault line of environmentally growth, growth management strategies demand for development? and what it all means. As senior editor correct energy Kathie Durbin reports from the Columbia by Kathie Durbin Page 9 Gorge, local politics threaten this national by Kevin Bell Page 7 treasure. This is true everywhere, because growth and land-use decisions are in varyingdegrees made at the local THE USUAL STUFF level. We aren't saying that local commu• FIELD NOTES: Green groups clash over Sierra REALITY CHECK: 16 nities cannot do a good job protecting places such as the Gorge, Snoqualmie logging. EPA fines big Alaska mine. toxic waste POINT OF VIEW: The ASARCO juggernaut and Pass, Whidbey Island, Lake Tahoe or the on crops. Oregon slams nuclear weapons plan 3 Muir Woods, to name just a few places of its proposed Rock Creek Mine. -
Snowmobiles in the Wilderness
Snowmobiles in the Wilderness: You can help W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e P a r k s A necessary prohibition Join us in safeguarding winter recreation: Each year, more and more people are riding snowmobiles • When riding in a new area, obtain a map. into designated Wilderness areas, which is a concern for • Familiarize yourself with Wilderness land managers, the public and many snowmobile groups. boundaries, and don’t cross them. This may be happening for a variety of reasons: many • Carry the message to clubs, groups and friends. snowmobilers may not know where the Wilderness boundaries are or may not realize the area is closed. For more information about snowmobiling opportunities or Wilderness areas, please contact: Wilderness…a special place Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (360) 902-8500 Established by Congress through the Wilderness Washington State Snowmobile Association (800) 784-9772 Act of 1964, “Wilderness” is a special land designation North Cascades National Park (360) 854-7245 within national forests and certain other federal lands. Colville National Forest (509) 684-7000 These areas were designated so that an untouched Gifford Pinchot National Forest (360) 891-5000 area of our wild lands could be maintained in a natural Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (425) 783-6000 state. Also, they were set aside as places where people Mt. Rainier National Park (877) 270-7155 could get away from the sights and sounds of modern Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest (509) 664-9200 civilization and where elements of our cultural history Olympic National Forest (360) 956-2402 could be preserved. -
The Effects of Spring Cattle Grazing on the Nutritional Ecology of Mule Deer
THE EFFECTS OF SPRING CATTLE GRAZING ON THE NUTRITIONAL ECOLOGY OF MULE DEER (ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS) IN EASTERN WASHINGTON By SARA JANE WAGONER A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCES IN NATURAL RESOURCE SCIENCES WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Natural Resource Sciences MAY 2011 To the Faculty of Washington State University The members of the Committee appointed to examine the thesis of SARA JANE WAGONER find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted ________________________________ Lisa A. Shipley, Ph.D., Chair ________________________________ Linda H. Hardesty, Ph.D. ________________________________ Kristen A. Johnson, Ph.D. ________________________________ Karen L. Launchbaugh, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was fully funded and supported by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and partnered by the Washington Cattlemen’s Association. My advisor, Dr. Lisa A. Shipley, whom was the brain-child and brawn-child behind this enormous endeavor, tirelessly offered perspective and assistance when I needed it, and I am forever indebted. A sincere thank you to my committee members: Linda Hardesty, Kristen Johnson, and Karen Launchbaugh for contributing their range science expertise and logistical input to our experimental design. I extend my appreciation to Rachel and John Cook, for giving me the opportunity to work along side them at Starkey; it gave me a real grasp on what I was getting into; especially to Rachel, for her professional guidance, friendship, and assistance towards this project. Thank you Laura Applegate, Taryn Clark, Becky Greenwood, Ben Maletzke, Tamara Johnstone-Yellin. and Sarah McCusker for selflessly pitching in, you are truly great friends. -
Lake Roosevelt Fisheries Monitoring Program. 1993 Annual Report
Annual Report 1993 BONNEVILLE DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED f This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. For additional copies of this report, write to: Bonneville Power Administration Public Information Center - CKPS-1 P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 Please include title, author, and DOE/BP number from the back cover in the request. LAKE ROOSEVELT FISHERIES MONITORING PROGRAM 1993 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by: Keith Underwood and John Shields Department of Natural Resources Spokane Tribe of Indians Wellpinit,WA Prepared for: U. S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project Number 88-63 Contract Number DE-8179-88DP91819 June; 996 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi- bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom- mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. -
The Wild Cascades
THE WILD CASCADES October-November 1969 2 THE WILD CASCADES FARTHEST EAST: CHOPAKA MOUNTAIN Field Notes of an N3C Reconnaissance State of Washington, school lands managed by May 1969 the Department of Natural Resources. The absolute easternmost peak of the North Cascades is Chopaka Mountain, 7882 feet. An This probably is the most spectacular chunk abrupt and impressive 6700-foot scarp drops of alpine terrain owned by the state. Certain from the flowery summit to blue waters of ly its fame will soon spread far beyond the Palmer Lake and meanders of the Similka- Okanogan. Certainly the state should take a mean River, surrounded by green pastures new, close look at Chopaka and develop a re and orchards. Beyond, across this wide vised management plan that takes into account trough of a Pleistocene glacier, roll brown the scenic and recreational resources. hills of the Okanogan Highlands. Northward are distant, snowy beginnings of Canadian ranges. Far south, Tiffany Mountain stands above forested branches of Toats Coulee Our gang became aware of Chopaka on the Creek. Close to the west is the Pasayten Fourth of July weekend of 1968 while explor Wilderness Area, dominated here by Windy ing Horseshoe Basin -- now protected (except Peak, Horseshoe Mountain, Arnold Peak — from Emmet Smith's cattle) within the Pasay the Horseshoe Basin country. Farther west, ten Wilderness Area. We looked east to the hazy-dreamy on the horizon, rise summits of wide-open ridges of Chopaka Mountain and the Chelan Crest and Washington Pass. were intrigued. To get there, drive the Okanogan Valley to On our way to Horseshoe Basin we met Wil Tonasket and turn west to Loomis in the Sin- lis Erwin, one of the Okanoganites chiefly lahekin Valley. -
Chief Joseph Hatchery Program
Chief Joseph Hatchery Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement DOE/EIS-0384 May 2007 Chief Joseph Hatchery Program Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Title of Proposed Project: Chief Joseph Hatchery Program Cooperating Tribe: Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation State Involved: Washington Abstract: The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) describes a Chinook salmon hatchery production program sponsored by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Colville Tribes). BPA proposes to fund the construction, operation and maintenance of the program to help mitigate for anadromous fish affected by the Federal Columbia River Power System dams on the Columbia River. The Colville Tribes want to produce adequate salmon to sustain tribal ceremonial and subsistence fisheries and enhance the potential for a recreational fishery for the general public. The DEIS discloses the environmental effects expected from facility construction and program operations and a No Action alternative. The Proposed Action is to build a hatchery near the base of Chief Joseph Dam on the Columbia River for incubation, rearing and release of summer/fall and spring Chinook. Along the Okanogan River, three existing irrigation ponds, one existing salmon acclimation pond, and two new acclimation ponds (to be built) would be used for final rearing, imprinting and volitional release of chinook smolts. The Chief Joseph Dam Hatchery Program Master Plan (Master Plan, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, May 2004) provides voluminous information on program features. The US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District, and others have cooperated on project design and siting. -
2013-15 Capital Budget Omnibus Capital Only
2013-15 Capital Budget Omnibus Capital Only TABLE OF CONTENTS Subject Page Capital Budget pages begin with C - Budget Highlights .............................................................................. 1 Bar Chart: Total Appropriations in the Capital Budget (10 Year History) ................................ 6 Pie Chart: Capital Budget by Functional Area Comparison of 2011-13 and 2013-15 Enacted ................ 7 New Appropriations Project List .................................................................. 8 Alternatively Financed Projects .................................................................. 20 Project Lists Housing Trust Fund Project List – LEAP Capital Document 2013-1A ............................... 21 Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account – LEAP Capital Document 2013-2B .......................... 24 Trust Land Transfer Program – LEAP Capital Document 2013-3A ................................. 25 Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program – LEAP Capital Document 2013-6A .................... 26 Projects for Jobs and Economic Development ................................................... 32 Projects that Strengthen Communities and Quality of Life ......................................... 33 Projects that Strengthen Youth and Families .................................................... 35 Building for the Arts ....................................................................... 36 Youth Recreational Facilities ................................................................ 37 Building Communities Fund ................................................................ -
Wilderness Study Areas
I ___- .-ll..l .“..l..““l.--..- I. _.^.___” _^.__.._._ - ._____.-.-.. ------ FEDERAL LAND M.ANAGEMENT Status and Uses of Wilderness Study Areas I 150156 RESTRICTED--Not to be released outside the General Accounting Wice unless specifically approved by the Office of Congressional Relations. ssBO4’8 RELEASED ---- ---. - (;Ao/li:( ‘I:I)-!L~-l~~lL - United States General Accounting OfTice GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-262989 September 23,1993 The Honorable Bruce F. Vento Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Committee on Natural Resources House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: Concerned about alleged degradation of areas being considered for possible inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (wilderness study areas), you requested that we provide you with information on the types and effects of activities in these study areas. As agreed with your office, we gathered information on areas managed by two agencies: the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLN) and the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. Specifically, this report provides information on (1) legislative guidance and the agency policies governing wilderness study area management, (2) the various activities and uses occurring in the agencies’ study areas, (3) the ways these activities and uses affect the areas, and (4) agency actions to monitor and restrict these uses and to repair damage resulting from them. Appendixes I and II provide data on the number, acreage, and locations of wilderness study areas managed by BLM and the Forest Service, as well as data on the types of uses occurring in the areas. -
May 12, 2021 – 5:30 PM Douglas County Public Services Building Hearing Room 140 19Th Street NW, East Wenatchee, WA
AGENDA Wednesday – May 12, 2021 – 5:30 PM Douglas County Public Services Building Hearing Room 140 19th Street NW, East Wenatchee, WA NOTICE, in consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic the meeting is closed to in person attendance. The meeting will be held via Zoom teleconference, attend by phone at 1-253-215-8782, Meeting ID: 937 9170 7816, Password: 520623 or online at: https://zoom.us/j/93791707816?pwd=c25FOGo4QlpUZ3BzME0xek1TMy9hQT09 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER – Roll Call of Planning Commissioners II. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES a) Review minutes of the April 14, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. III. CITIZEN COMMENT The planning commission will allocate 15 minutes for citizen comments regarding items not related to the current agenda. IV. OLD BUSINESS - NONE V. NEW BUSINESS a) A joint Douglas County, WA Department of Ecology public hearing on limited amendments to Douglas County Shoreline Master Program. The proposed amendments are the result of the periodic review process required by RCW Chapter 90.58.080(4). b) A public hearing to consider adopting City of East Wenatchee Ordinances 2021-05, 2021-06 and 2021-08 regarding amendments to the Greater East Wenatchee Area Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code as they apply to the unincorporated portions of the City’s urban growth area. VI. Adjourn Planning Commission meeting materials available at: http://www.douglascountywa.net/311/Planning-Commission DOUGLAS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION & LAND SERVICES 140 19TH STREET NW, SUITE A • EAST WENATCHEE, WA 98802 PHONE: 509/884-7173 • FAX: 509/886-3954 www.douglascountywa.net Douglas County Planning Commission ACTION MINUTES Wednesday, April 14, 2021 Meeting held via Zoom online meeting platform I.