DOCSLIB.ORG

Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan Objectives and Principles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Puget Sound Chinook Harvest Management Plan Objectives and Principles Comprehensive Management Plan for Puget Sound Chinook: Harvest Management Component PUGET SOUND INDIAN T RIBES AND THE WASHINGTON DEPAR TMENT OF FISH AND WI LDLIFE DECEMBER 1, 2017 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. I LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ IV LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ VI 1. OBJECTIVES, PRINCIPLES, AND INTEGRATION WITH HABITAT REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Scope of the Plan .................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Integration of Harvest and Hatchery Management with Habitat Requirements ..... 5 2. FISHERIES AND JURISDICTIONS ...................................................................... 7 2.1 Southeast Alaska ..................................................................................................... 7 2.2 British Columbia ..................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Washington Ocean ................................................................................................ 10 2.4 Puget Sound .......................................................................................................... 12 2.5 Fishery Impact Assessment................................................................................... 19 2.6 Non-Landed Fishery Mortality ............................................................................. 20 2.7 Regulatory Jurisdictions affecting Washington fisheries ..................................... 23 3. POPULATION STRUCTURE – AGGREGATION FOR MANAGEMENT ... 29 3.1 Population Structure.............................................................................................. 29 3.2 Management Units ................................................................................................ 31 3.3 Population Categories ........................................................................................... 33 4. MANAGEMENT THRESHOLDS AND EXPLOITATION RATE CEILINGS35 4.1 Upper Management Thresholds ............................................................................ 35 4.2 Low Abundance Thresholds (LAT) ...................................................................... 39 4.3 Point of Instability................................................................................................. 39 4.4 Exploitation Rate Ceilings .................................................................................... 40 5. IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................. 44 5.1 Rules for Allowing Fisheries ................................................................................ 44 5.2 Rules That Control Harvest Levels ....................................................................... 46 5.3 Response to Critical Status ................................................................................... 47 5.4 Pre-season Planning .............................................................................................. 50 5.5 Compliance with Pacific Salmon Treaty Chinook Agreements ........................... 52 5.6 Regulation Implementation ................................................................................... 53 i 5.7 In-season Management ......................................................................................... 53 5.8 Enforcement .......................................................................................................... 54 6. CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT .................................................................... 56 6.1 Harvest Objectives Based on Natural Productivity .............................................. 57 6.2 Protection of Individual Populations .................................................................... 58 Exploitation Rates and Escapement Trends ................................................................... 61 6.3 Equilibrium Exploitation Rates............................................................................. 63 6.4 Recovery Goals ..................................................................................................... 66 6.5 Harvest Constraint Cannot Effect Recovery ......................................................... 68 6.6 Integration of harvest and hatchery management with habitat status ................... 69 6.7 Protecting the Diversity of the ESU ...................................................................... 79 6.8 Summary of Fishery Conservation Measures ....................................................... 80 7. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT ................................................................... 82 7.1 Catch and Fishing Effort ....................................................................................... 82 7.2 Spawning Escapement .......................................................................................... 84 7.3 Abundance and Exploitation Rates ....................................................................... 84 7.4 Annual Management Review ................................................................................ 86 7.5 Retrospective Performance Assessment ............................................................... 87 7.6 Marine-Derived Nutrients from Salmon ............................................................... 88 7.7 Selective Effects of Fishing .................................................................................. 90 8. AMENDMENT OF THE HARVEST MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................... 91 9. GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................. 92 10. LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................... 94 11. APPENDIX A: MANAGEMENT UNIT PROFILES (MUPS) ...................... 122 Nooksack River Management Unit Status Profile ........................................................ 123 Skagit River Management Unit Status Profile ............................................................. 135 Stillaguamish River Management Unit Status Profile .................................................. 159 Snohomish River Management Unit Status Profile ...................................................... 170 Lake Washington Management Unit Status Profile ..................................................... 200 Green River Management Unit Status Profile .............................................................. 211 White River Management Unit Status Profile .............................................................. 220 Puyallup River Fall Chinook Management Unit Profile .............................................. 227 Nisqually River Management Unit Status Profile ........................................................ 235 Skokomish River Management Unit Status Profile ...................................................... 250 Mid-Hood Canal Management Unit Status Profile ...................................................... 266 Dungeness Management Unit Status Profile ................................................................ 276 ii Elwha River Management Unit Status Profile ............................................................. 292 Western Strait of Juan de Fuca Management Unit Status Profile ................................ 312 12. APPENDIX B: TRIBAL MINIMUM FISHING REGIME (MFR) .............. 323 iii List of Figures Figure 2-1. Commercial net and troll catch of Chinook in Puget Sound fisheries, 1980 – 2016 (WDFW WaFT database). ............................................................................................................ 14 Figure 2-2. Recreational salmon catch in Puget Sound marine areas, 1985 - 2015 (WDFW CRC estimates, 2007 data are preliminary) ........................................................................................... 18 Figure 2-3. Recreational Chinook harvest in Puget Sound freshwater areas, 1988 - 2015(WDFW Catch Record Card estimates). ...................................................................................................... 19 Figure 2-4. Total exploitation rate for Skagit, Stillaguamish, and Snohomish summer/fall Chinook salmon management units, 1992-2014 (based on 2017 FRAM validation run). ........... 27 Figure 2-5. Total exploitation rate for Nooksack, Skagit, and White spring Chinook salmon management units, 1992-2014 (based on 2017 FRAM validation run)........................................ 28 Figure 6-1. The equilibrium exploitation rate, at each escapement level, for Skagit spring Chinook. ........................................................................................................................................ 64 Figure 6-2. Natural and hatchery origin spawner abundance on the Skokomish River for 2008 – 2016..............................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Suspended-Sediment Concentration in the Sauk River, Washington, Water Years 2012-13
    Prepared in cooperation with the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Suspended-Sediment Concentration in the Sauk River, Washington, Water Years 2012-13 By Christopher A. Curran1, Scott Morris2, and James R. Foreman1 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center, Tacoma, Washington 2 Department of Natural Resources, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Darrington, Washington Photograph of glacier-derived suspended sediment entering the Sauk River immediately downstream of the Suiattle River mouth (August 5, 2014, Chris Curran). iii Introduction The Sauk River is one of the few remaining large, glacier-fed rivers in western Washington that is unconstrained by dams and drains a relatively undisturbed landscape along the western slope of the Cascade Range. The river and its tributaries are important spawning ground and habitat for endangered Chinook salmon (Beamer and others, 2005) and also the primary conveyors of meltwater and sediment from Glacier Peak, an active volcano (fig. 1). As such, the Sauk River is a significant tributary source of both fish and fluvial sediment to the Skagit River, the largest river in western Washington that enters Puget Sound. Because of its location and function, the Sauk River basin presents a unique opportunity in the Puget Sound region for studying the sediment load derived from receding glaciers and the potential impacts to fish spawning and rearing habitat, and downstream river-restoration and flood- control projects. The lower reach of the Sauk River has some of the highest rates of incubation mortality for Chinook salmon in the Skagit River basin, a fact attributed to unusually high deposition of fine-grained sediments (Beamer, 2000b).
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing a Surface Collection to an Excavated Collection in the Lower Skagit River Delta at 45SK51
    Central Washington University ScholarWorks@CWU All Master's Theses Master's Theses Summer 2017 Comparing a Surface Collection to an Excavated Collection in the Lower Skagit River Delta at 45SK51 Sherri M. Middleton Central Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, and the Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Recommended Citation Middleton, Sherri M., "Comparing a Surface Collection to an Excavated Collection in the Lower Skagit River Delta at 45SK51" (2017). All Master's Theses. 711. https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/711 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses at ScholarWorks@CWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMPARING A SURFACE COLLECTION TO AN EXCAVATED COLLECTION IN THE LOWER SKAGIT RIVER DELTA AT 45SK51 ________________________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty Central Washington University ________________________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Cultural and Environmental Resource Management _______________________________________________________________________ by Sherri Michelle Middleton June 2017 CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Graduate Studies We hereby approve the
    [Show full text]
  • Skagit River Emergency Bank Stabilization And
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 510 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102 Lacey, Washington 98503 In Reply Refer To: AUG 1 6 2011 13410-2011-F-0141 13410-2010-F-0175 Daniel M. Mathis, Division Adnlinistrator Federal Highway Administration ATIN: Jeff Horton Evergreen Plaza Building 711 Capitol Way South, Suite 501 Olympia, Washington 98501-1284 Michelle Walker, Chief, Regulatory Branch Seattle District, Corps of Engineers ATIN: Rebecca McAndrew P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, Washington 98124-3755 Dear Mr. Mathis and Ms. Walker: This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion (Opinion) based on our review of the proposed State Route 20, Skagit River Emergency Bank Stabilization and Chronic Environmental Deficiency Project in Skagit County, Washington, and its effects on the bull trout (Salve linus conjluentus), marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), and designated bull trout critical habitat, in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act). Your requests for initiation of formal consultation were received on February 3, 2011, and January 19,2010. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Seattle District (Corps) provided information in support of "may affect, likely to adversely affect" determinations for the bull trout and designated bull trout critical habitat. On April 13 and 14, 2011, the FHWA and Corps gave their consent for addressing potential adverse effects to the bull trout and bull trout critical habitat with a single Opinion.
    [Show full text]
  • Skagit River Steelhead Fishery Resource Management Plan Under Limit 6 of the 4(D) Rule of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
    Final Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment to Analyze Impacts of NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Consideration of the Skagit River Steelhead Fishery Resource Management Plan under Limit 6 of the 4(d) Rule of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region April 2018 Cover Sheet Final Environmental Assessment Title of Environmental Review: Skagit River Steelhead Fishery Resource Management Plan (Skagit RMP) Distinct Population Segments: Puget Sound Steelhead DPS Responsible Agency and Official: Barry A. Thom Regional Administrator National Marine Fisheries Service West Coast Region 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Building 1 Seattle, Washington 98115 Contacts: James Dixon Sustainable Fisheries Division National Marine Fisheries Service West Coast Region 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 103 Lacey, Washington 98503 Legal Mandate: Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended and implemented – 50 CFR Part 223 Location of Proposed Activities: Skagit River Basin including Skagit Bay and Mainstem Skagit River in Puget Sound, Washington Activity Considered: The proposed resource management plan includes steelhead fisheries and associated activities in the Skagit Basin 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose Of And Need For The Proposed Action 12 1.1 Background 12 1.2 Description of the Proposed Action 13 1.3 Purpose and Need for the Action 16 1.4 Project Area and Analysis Area 16 1.5 Relationship to Other Plans, Regulations, Agreements, Laws, Secretarial Orders and Executive Orders 18 1.5.1 North of Falcon Process 18 1.5.2 Executive Order 12898 18 1.5.3 Treaty of Point Elliot 19 1.5.4 United States v.
    [Show full text]
  • Where the Water Meets the Land: Between Culture and History in Upper Skagit Aboriginal Territory
    Where the Water Meets the Land: Between Culture and History in Upper Skagit Aboriginal Territory by Molly Sue Malone B.A., Dartmouth College, 2005 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in The Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (Anthropology) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) December 2013 © Molly Sue Malone, 2013 Abstract Upper Skagit Indian Tribe are a Coast Salish fishing community in western Washington, USA, who face the challenge of remaining culturally distinct while fitting into the socioeconomic expectations of American society, all while asserting their rights to access their aboriginal territory. This dissertation asks a twofold research question: How do Upper Skagit people interact with and experience the aquatic environment of their aboriginal territory, and how do their experiences with colonization and their cultural practices weave together to form a historical consciousness that orients them to their lands and waters and the wider world? Based on data from three methods of inquiry—interviews, participant observation, and archival research—collected over sixteen months of fieldwork on the Upper Skagit reservation in Sedro-Woolley, WA, I answer this question with an ethnography of the interplay between culture, history, and the land and waterscape that comprise Upper Skagit aboriginal territory. This interplay is the process of historical consciousness, which is neither singular nor sedentary, but rather an understanding of a world in flux made up of both conscious and unconscious thoughts that shape behavior. I conclude that the ways in which Upper Skagit people interact with what I call the waterscape of their aboriginal territory is one of their major distinctive features as a group.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Record of Fish Related Issues on the Skagit River
    HISTORICAL RECORD OF FISH RELATED ISSUES ON THE SKAGIT RIVER SKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON 1897 THROUGH 1969 By Larry Kunzler June 4, 2005 Updated and republished June 2008 www.skagitriverhistory.com Historical Record of Fish Related Issues On The Skagit River Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ 2 PREFACE....................................................................................................................................... 4 Levees and Fish Discussed Early in Skagit History ....................................................................... 5 Flood Control Projects Impacted Fish Runs ................................................................................... 5 Fish Hatchery At Baker Lake Stops Work For Winter................................................................... 6 Seattle To Build State Hatchery On Upper River........................................................................... 6 Forest Service To Survey Road From Here To Baker Lake........................................................... 7 O’malley Is Appointed As Fish Commissioner.............................................................................. 7 Fish Hatchery Man Has Exciting Trip To Lake.............................................................................. 7 Preliminary Work On Baker Lake Road Started This Week.......................................................... 8 Power Company To Continue
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Analysis of Ecological Characteristics
    Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report 5 ANALYSIS OF ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 Methods A GIS-based semi-quantitative method was developed to characterize the relative performance of relevant ecological processes and functions by shoreline reach, within the County, as outlined in WAC 173-26-201(3)(d)(i). The assessment used the available information gathered as part of the shoreline inventory and applied ranking criteria to provide a consistent methodological treatment among reaches. These semi-quantitative results will help provide a consistent treatment of all reaches in approximating existing ecological conditions, yet allow for a qualitative evaluation of functions for data that are not easily summarized by GIS data alone. The results are intended to complement the mapped inventory information (Appendix B) and numerical data (Table 4-3) and provide a comparison of watershed functions relative to other reaches in the County. The analysis of the ecological characteristics of the Coastal Ocean AU is different than the analysis for the other AUs. The main distinguishers for the Coastal Ocean AU are that 1) the Coastal Ocean AU does not contain distinct shoreline segments, and 2) there is a paucity of data on the dynamic, biophysical characteristics in the AU, so they are supplemented with human use data as proxies for nodes of ecological function. Reach Delineation In order to assess shoreline functions at a local scale, the ten AUs with upland areas within the County were broken into discrete reaches based on a review of maps and aerial photography. The Coastal Ocean AU is considered as a singular section (i.e., no distinct reaches) for this assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • B.18: Skagit County Public Utilities District (PUD)
    B.18: Skagit County Public Utilities District (PUD) www.skagitpud.org Skagit Public Utility District Number 1 (Skagit PUD) Resource conservation and stewardship are increasing concerns of the operates the largest water system in the county, PUD. Recognizing the value of water resources in Skagit County, the providing 9,000,000 gallons of piped water to PUD is a member of the Skagit Watershed Council and is actively approximately 70,000 people every day. The PUD participating in efforts to protect ins-stream flows. maintains nearly 600 miles of pipelines and has over 31,000,000 gallons of storage volume. The vision of the PUD - is to be recognized as an outstanding regional leader and innovative utility provider that embodies environmental Mount Vernon, Burlington, and Sedro-Woolley receive the majority of stewardship and sound economic practices. the PUD’s water. Due to public demand for quality water, the PUD also provides service to unincorporated and remote areas of the county. The mission of the PUD - is to provide quality, safe, reliable, and The District’s service area includes part of Fidalgo Island at the west affordable utility services to its customers in an environmentally- end of the county and extends as far east as Marblemount. From north responsible, collaborative manner. to south, the District’s service area starts in Conway and extends north to Alger/Lake Samish. The values of the PUD are: PUD water originates in the protected Cultus Mountain watershed area Quality east of Clear Lake from 4 streams. Melting snow and season rainfall Reliability are diverted from an uninhabited, 9 square mile, forested area, located Environmental responsibility high about the mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA)
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 01/01/2015 to 03/31/2015 Mt Baker-Snoqualmie 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 R6 - Pacific Northwest Region, Regionwide (excluding Projects occurring in more than one Region) Aquatic Invasive Species order - Wildlife, Fish, Rare plants In Progress: Expected:04/2015 05/2015 James Capurso to prevent the spread or Scoping Start 05/05/2014 208-557-5780 introduction of aquatic invasive [email protected] species Description: The purpose of this order is to prevent the spread or introduction of aquatic invasive plant or animal species. CE Public involvement is targeted for the Umatilla, Willamette, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie, Gifford Pinchot, and Colville NFs. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=44360 Location: UNIT - R6 - Pacific Northwest Region All Units. STATE - Oregon, Washington. COUNTY - Asotin, Clark, Columbia, Cowlitz, Ferry, Garfield, King, Klickitat, Lewis, Pend Oreille, Pierce, Skagit, Skamania, Snohomish, Stevens, Walla Walla, Whatcom, Baker, Clackamas, Douglas, Grant, Jefferson, Lane, Linn, Marion, Morrow, Umatilla, Union, Wallowa, Wheeler. LEGAL - Not Applicable. Order will apply to all Forests in Region 6, however targeted scoping is with the Umatilla, Gifford Pinchot, Mt. Baker/Snoqualmie, Willamette and Colville NFs tribal and public scoping lists. Mt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Forestwide (excluding Projects occurring in more than one Forest) R6 - Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Management - Vegetation management In Progress: Expected:04/2015 05/2015 Phyllis Reed EIS (other than forest products) NOI in Federal Register 360-436-2332 02/28/2012 [email protected] Est.
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Transport Into the Swinomish Navigation Channel, Puget Sound—Habitat Restoration Versus Navigation Maintenance Needs
    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article Sediment Transport into the Swinomish Navigation Channel, Puget Sound—Habitat Restoration versus Navigation Maintenance Needs Tarang Khangaonkar 1,*, Adi Nugraha 1, Steve Hinton 2, David Michalsen 3 and Scott Brown 3 1 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Seattle, WA 98109, USA; [email protected] 2 Skagit River System Cooperative, La Conner, WA 98257, USA; [email protected] 3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124, USA; [email protected] (D.M.); [email protected] (S.B.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-206-528-3053 Academic Editor: Zeki Demirbilek Received: 26 February 2017; Accepted: 12 April 2017; Published: 21 April 2017 Abstract: The 11 mile (1.6 km) Swinomish Federal Navigation Channel provides a safe and short passage to fishing and recreational craft in and out of Northern Puget Sound by connecting Skagit and Padilla Bays, US State abbrev., USA. A network of dikes and jetties were constructed through the Swinomish corridor between 1893 and 1936 to improve navigation functionality. Over the years, these river training dikes and jetties designed to minimize sedimentation in the channel have deteriorated, resulting in reduced protection of the channel. The need to repair or modify dikes/jetties for channel maintenance, however, may conflict with salmon habitat restoration goals aimed at improving access, connectivity and brackish water habitat. Several restoration projects have been proposed in the Skagit delta involving breaching, lowering, or removal of dikes. To assess relative merits of the available alternatives, a hydrodynamic model of the Skagit River estuary was developed using the Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM).
    [Show full text]
  • Muckleshoot Library 2006 Community Study
    Engage. Muckleshoot Library 2006 Community Study Turn to us. The choices will surprise you. CONTENTS COMMUNITY OVERVIEW Executive Summary ......................................................................................... 1 Muckleshoot Tribe ............................................................................................ 1 Muckleshoot Library Service Area: Past and Present.............................................. 3 Geography ............................................................................................ 4 Transportation ....................................................................................... 5 Education and Schools ............................................................................ 5 Demographics ....................................................................................... 4 Business ............................................................................................... 4 History of the Muckleshoot Library: Past, Present & Future..................................... 6 COMMUNITY STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... 8 BOARD PRESENTATION SLIDES MAPS • Muckleshoot Aerial Overview • Muckleshoot Library Circulation APPENDICES • Demographic Summary • School Statistics • School Test Scores • Race in Service Area • Age in Service Area • Languages Spoken at Home • Occupational Profile • Home Sales in Service Area • Tribes COMMUNITY OVERVIEW EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study encompasses the southeast sector of Auburn, Tribal Reservation lands and parts
    [Show full text]
  • Mt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest EA CE
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2007 to 09/30/2007 Mt Baker-Snoqualmie 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 Projects Occurring Nationwide Aerial Application of Fire - Fuels management In Progress: Expected:08/2007 08/2007 Christopher Wehrli Retardant 215 Comment Period Legal 202-205-1332 EA Notice 07/28/2006 [email protected] Description: The Forest Service proposes to continue the aerial application of fire retardant to fight fires on National Forest System lands. An environmental analysis will be conducted to prepare an Environmental Assessment on the proposed action. Web Link: http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/retardant/index.html Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. Nation Wide. R6 - Pacific Northwest Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) Aquatic Outfitter and Guide - Special use management Developing Proposal Expected:08/2008 01/2009 Don Gay Special Use Permits Est. Scoping Start 11/2007 360-856-5700 CE [email protected] Description: Issuance of special use permits for outfitter and guides using the N.F. Nooksack, Skagit, Sauk, Skykomish, and Cispus Rivers. Location: UNIT - Mt Baker Ranger District, Darrington Ranger District, Skykomish Ranger District, Cowlitz Ranger District. STATE - Washington. COUNTY - Lewis, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom. LEGAL - T40NR6E, T39NR6 and 7E, T39NR7E, T35NR8,9,10E, T36NR11E, T31-35NR10E, T32NR9E, T27NR9 and 10E, T11NR5,6,7, and 8E. N. F. Nooksack, Skagit, Sauk, Skykomish, and Cispus Rivers.
    [Show full text]