DOCSLIB.ORG

Reiter Forest Update

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reiter Forest Update The Newsletter of the Alpine Lakes Protection Society (ALPS) 2009 Issue No. 1 By Thom Peters In a previous edition of this newsletter (2008 issue #1), we reported on planning initiated by the state for an off-road vehicle “park” in the Reiter Foothills north of Index and Gold Bar. Even without State Park designation, these lands have been overrun for years, with hundreds of miles of routes carved into state forest land. Another unfortunate fact is that Reiter is located just above spawning grounds of the Skykomish River. Nonetheless, a process was put in motion that included an advisory committee comprised almost entirely of motorized recreation advocates. The last Reiter Foothills Recreation Planning committee meeting took place on May 20, 2009. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) proposed two draft planning maps for the area for discussion purposes. The maps show a number of ideas that have been suggested by committee members at planning meetings. The suggestions have not been approved by the agency or agreed to by the planning committee. Those of us who represent the environmental community favor concept map “D”. It proposes approximately 1,090 acres for Continued on page 2 Also in this issue: Legislation Revived for Westside REITER FOREST Wilderness Addition ............................3 National Environmental Policy Act Review of Off-Road Vehicle Management ........................................4 UPDATE ALPS Seeks Money for Highway 2 Parcels .................................................5 Forests at Risk of Conversion to Karl Forsgaard Non-Forest Use ...................................7 On your State lands (a future State Park?), these trees Trustees Election Ballot ......................9 are being killed by ORVs. Tye Valley Tunnel .............................10 ALPINE 1 • Design all trails to have bridges Reiter Forest, continued from page 1 or culverts at stream crossings. • Consider a vehicle width limitation for motorized vehicles on trails. • Utilize seasonal trail closures to minimize potential environmental impact. • Consider the provision of motorized use areas for children and novice riders adjacent to motorized facilities to facilitate safe supervision. DNR has already taken some actions to try to manage the Karl Forsgaard situation, including: A very bad apple. • Camping is allowed only in two temporarily designated areas in the gravel pit and the upper staging area. non-motorized areas, and by motorcycles. • Sani-cans have been installed approximately 1,040 acres for • Provide positive sign in the designated temporary motorized areas and appears messaging that communicates camping areas. more balanced in its approach. information related to trail The entire Reiter Foothills area closures including why specific • Off-road use is limited to is approximately 10,000 acres. enforcement or management daylight hours only. Concept map “E” proposes 830 activities are taking place. • Officers and DNR staff will acres for non-motorized areas be issuing citations instead of and 1,040 acres for motorized • Pursue additional opportunities warnings for illegal activities. areas. One of the main distinctions to partner with enforcement between the two map proposals is personnel from adjacent • DNR staff posted more signs to that map “D” provides separate municipalities, U.S. Forest clearly indicate areas that are trailheads for non-motorized and Service, Washington not trails and where off-road motorized trails, whereas map “E” Department of Fish and use cannot occur. Wildlife, Snohomish County, combines the two. • Last but not least, the gate to and Snohomish County Sheriff’s DNR’s May Creek Mainline It needs to be emphasized that Office. the motorized community is not Road has been permanently happy about either proposal. They • Assess feasibility of a closed to street vehicles. obviously prefer the status quo of campground designed for the “Wild West” atmosphere that motorized use in a location The public will have an has been going on for decades in adjoining the motorized trail opportunity to become involved the area. system. and provide comments this July • Develop a protection strategy when DNR intends to publish There are a number of things for aquifer recharge protection their proposed alternatives that could be done to improve areas (Index aquifer recharge in complying with the State conditions in and around the area). Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Reiter Foothills. The proposed • Encourage separation of SEPA is the state policy that strategies include: recreation uses through requires state and local agencies to • Initiate an education and campground and facility consider the likely environmental enforcement strategy prior to design (i.e. facilities designed consequences of a proposal development using methods specifically for equestrian, before approving or denying the such as gate management, a motorized and non-motorized proposal. To follow or participate strategy for keeping users on users, and day-use versus in this process, go to www.dnr. trails, and enforcement patrols overnight use). wa.gov/recreation. 2 ALPINE Legislation Revived for Westside Wilderness Additions By Don Parks To recap, the new bill would of the Middle Fork Snoqualmie On March 26 of this year, add about 22,000 acres to the as a component of the Wild Senator Patty Murray and Alpine Lakes Wilderness in the and Scenic River System. Wild Representative Dave Reichert three river drainages. ALPS and Scenic River status will jointly introduced legislation supported the addition of these prevent dam construction and (S.721 and H.R.1769) to provide lands to the Wilderness during the formally recognize the important additional statutory protection for Congressional campaign of 1975- recreational and natural values the west side of the Alpine Lakes 76, but they were left out of the of the Middle Fork Valley. The Area. 1976 Wilderness bill for a number portion of the Middle Fork to of reasons. One of these was the be protected will extend from Representative Reichert had added acquisition cost of private National Forest land at the introduced a bill last November to land, then mostly in Weyerhaeuser Cascade Crest to DNR holdings add parts of the Middle and South hands. Since the 1980s, all of below Mailbox Peak. Forks of the Snoqualmie River, and the intermingled private lands all of the Pratt River, to the Alpine At the time of this writing, within the national forest have the bills had been referred to Lakes Wilderness. His bill also been acquired, and the area being sought to protect the Pratt within committees in the House and considered for Wilderness is now Senate but no hearings had the Wild and Scenic River System. in solid Federal ownership. The That bill, although sponsored been scheduled. Stay tuned for Pratt and the Middle Fork contain developments! You can follow by many in the Washington large areas of low-elevation forests delegation, did not receive a progress by dialing in website (50% of it is below 3,000 feet, and http://www.thomas.gov/. Search hearing or other consideration, and 20% below 2000 feet) that are so it died in the last Congress. under bill number (S.721 or H.R. unusual in Washington Wilderness 1769) or word/phase ‘Alpine The outlook for the new bill areas. ALPS has played a lead Lakes.’ Double click on either bill is far more promising, due to a role in the development of the number to bring up the text of the number of recent developments. boundaries for this outstanding legislation, Congressional Actions The new legislation is identical to Wilderness addition. log, the Congressional Research the 2007 legislation except that the The proposal for Wild River Summary, Congressional Budget Middle Fork Snoqualmie River status for the Pratt is unchanged Office reports, Committee Reports, has also been added as a Wild and from the 2007 legislation. An etc. Scenic River. exciting change is the addition Colchuck Lake from Aasgard Pass. Rick Jerabek ALPINE 3 National Environmental Policy Act Review of Off-Road Vehicle Management By Charlie Raymond that the Forest Service would need demotorization is very limited, In March, the Okanogan- to monitor. Furthermore, the with about 15 miles of currently- Wenatchee National Forest mixed-use of roads poses serious motorized trails being closed and initiated environmental analysis safety issues. Environmental a net of 15 miles to be converted to required by the National groups including the Alpine non-motorized status. Most of that Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Protection Society (ALPS) is in a single district, the Entiat. for implementing the National expressed grave concerns about Around the Alpine Lakes Area, Forest Service Travel Management such large increases in ORV the proposed additional ORV Rule. This Rule was issued in 2005 presence. Even with the present opportunities are relatively small, in recognition that unmanaged extent of ORV access to trails and the most notable being about 2 off-road vehicle (ORV) recreation roads, Forest Service resources miles of road opened to non-street is one of the largest threats to are inadequate to monitor and legal motorcycles in Jungle Creek, the National Forest System. The prevent serious impacts such as a tributary of the North Fork of Rule mandates that unrestricted, ground disturbance, sediment the Teanaway River. The next cross-country, motorized travel be delivery to streams, wildlife step for the Forest Service is to prohibited nationally on National habitat fragmentation, loss of quiet refine
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Wild Cascades
    THE WILD CASCADES April-May 1969 2 THE WILD CASCADES MORE (BUT NOT THE LAST) ABOUT ALPINE LAKES We recently carried in these pages an article by Brock Evans, Northwest Conservation Representative, on Alpine Lakes: Stepchild of the North Cascades. Mr. L. O. Barrett, Supervisor of Snoqualmie National Forest, feels the article contained "some rather significant misinterpretations" and has asked the opportunity to respond. Following are Mr. Barrett's comments on portions of Mr. Evans' article, together with Mr. Evans' rejoinders. Barrett: The Alpine Lakes Area is still wilderness quality in part because of the nature of the land, and in part because the Forest Service has managed it as wilderness type area since 1946. We will continue to protect it from timber harvesting, mining and excessive recreation use until Congress makes a decision about its suitability for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Evans: The wilderness parts of the Alpine Lakes region that are being lost are those which the Forest Service has chosen not to manage as wilderness. The 1946 date referred to is the date of the establishment of the Alpine Lake Limited Area. This designation granted a measure of administrative protection to a substantial part of the region; but much was left out. The logging in the Miller River, Foss River, Deception Creek, Cooper Lake, and Eight Mile Creek valleys all took place in wilderness-type areas which we proposed for protection which were outside the limited area. The Forest Service cannot protect its lands from mineral prospecting or, ulti­ mately, from mining operations of some types — because of the mining laws.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS Geologic Investigations Series I-1963, Pamphlet
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP I-1963 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE SKYKOMISH RIVER 30- BY 60 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, WASHINGTON By R.W. Tabor, V.A. Frizzell, Jr., D.B. Booth, R.B. Waitt, J.T. Whetten, and R.E. Zartman INTRODUCTION From the eastern-most edges of suburban Seattle, the Skykomish River quadrangle stretches east across the low rolling hills and broad river valleys of the Puget Lowland, across the forested foothills of the North Cascades, and across high meadowlands to the bare rock peaks of the Cascade crest. The quadrangle straddles parts of two major river systems, the Skykomish and the Snoqualmie Rivers, which drain westward from the mountains to the lowlands (figs. 1 and 2). In the late 19th Century mineral deposits were discovered in the Monte Cristo, Silver Creek and the Index mining districts within the Skykomish River quadrangle. Soon after came the geologists: Spurr (1901) studied base- and precious- metal deposits in the Monte Cristo district and Weaver (1912a) and Smith (1915, 1916, 1917) in the Index district. General geologic mapping was begun by Oles (1956), Galster (1956), and Yeats (1958a) who mapped many of the essential features recognized today. Areas in which additional studies have been undertaken are shown on figure 3. Our work in the Skykomish River quadrangle, the northwest quadrant of the Wenatchee 1° by 2° quadrangle, began in 1975 and is part of a larger mapping project covering the Wenatchee quadrangle (fig. 1). Tabor, Frizzell, Whetten, and Booth have primary responsibility for bedrock mapping and compilation.
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish River Watershed
    ARLINGTON Camano Sauk River Island Canyon Cr South Fork Stillaguamish River 5 9 WRIA 7 MARYSVILLE GRANITE FALLS S Freeway/Highway t Lake e S a Pilchuck River l Stevens m o r u b County Boundary 529 e g o v h i a R t LAKE Possession k WRIA 7 Boundary Whidbey h STEVENS c 2 g u Sound u h Island c o l i l P Spada Lake Incorporated Area S ey EVERETT Eb EVERETT r e Fall City Community v SNOHOMISH i R on alm Silver Cr n S C a r lt MUKILTEO u ykomis N S k h S S Ri ver k n MONROE r 9 o MILL o SULTAN F h GOLD BAR rth CREEK o o Trout Cr m 2 N 99 is mis h yko h R Sk iv Canyon Cr LYNNWOOD 527 er INDEX 1 2 3 4 5 0 EDMONDS 522 524 R Rapid River iv So e Proctor Cr u Barclay Cr BRIER r t Miles WOODWAY h BOTHELL F o Eagle Cr JohnsonSNOHOMISH Cr COUNTY rk MOUNTLAKE WOODINVILLE S C k KING COUNTY TERRACE h y e r olt River k SHORELINE h Fork T Beckler River r ry C rt Index Cr om KENMORE No ish Martin Cr DUVALL R. 522 KIRKLAND r Tolt-Seattle Water C SKYKOMISH Tye River olt 2 5 s Supply Reservoir T R i ive r Sou r Miller River t Foss River r h Money Cr a Fo REDMOND 203 rk SEATTLE H r Ames Cr e iv R 99 t l Deep Cr o er Puget Sound S T iv un R d CARNATION a Lennox Cr r y 520 Pat C ie C te r Lake Washington r m s n l o ffi a Elliott n i u S r Tokul Cr Hancock Cr n q Bay 405 G C o o Lake SAMMAMISH r q n File: 90 u S a BELLEVUE Sammamish ver lm k Ri 1703_8091L_W7mapLetterSize.ai r r i lo e o ay KCIT eGov Duwamish River Fall F T MERCER R i City v h ISLAND Coal Cr e t r r Note: mie Riv SEATTLE Snoqualmie o al e r The information included on this map N u r C SNOQUALMIE oq Falls d has been compiled from a variety of NEWCASTLE Sn r ISSAQUAH gf o k in sources and is subject to change r D o 509 without notice.
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River, Wa
    Hydropower Project Summary SULTAN RIVER, WA HENRY M JACKSON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (P-2157) Photo Credit: Snohomish County Public Utility District This summary was produced by the Hydropower Reform Coalition and River Management Society Sultan River, Washington SULTAN RIVER, WA HENRY M JACKSON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (P-2157) DESCRIPTION: The Jackson Project is located on the Sultan River in northwestern Washington. The project’s authorized capacity is 111.8 megawatts (MW). The project is located on the Sultan River, 20 miles east of the City of Everett, Washington, in Snohomish County. The project occupies 10.9 acres of the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). Downstream of the project’s Culmback dam at Spada Lake, the Sultan River flows through a deep forested gorge for nearly 14 miles. The project powerhouse is located near the downstream end of the gorge. The District (Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County) currently operates the project to satisfy the City of Everett’s municipal water supply needs, protect aquatic resources, maintain Spada lake levels for summer recreation, and generate electricity. The new license requires additional measures to protect and enhance water quality, fish, wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources. The twelve signatories to the Settlement Agreement are the District, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Forest Service; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. National Park Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Washington DFW), Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), Tulalip Tribes of Washington (Tulalip Tribes), Snohomish County, Washington; City of Everett; City of Sultan; and American Whitewater.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservatton Futures (Cft) 2016 Annual Collections Application for Funds
    K.C. Date Received li{¡ King County CONSERVATTON FUTURES (CFT) 2016 ANNUAL COLLECTIONS APPLICATION FOR FUNDS PROJECT NAME: South Fork Skvkomis h-Tve-tr'oss River Confl uence Aco uisition Annlicánt hrrisdictionlsl: Kins Countv DNRP Open Space System: Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (Name of larger connected system, if any, such as Cedar River Creenway, Mountains to Sound, a Regional Trail, etc ) Acquisition Proiect Size:75.2 acres (3 parcels) CFT Application Amount: $ 540.500 (Size in acres and proposed number of parcel(s) if a multi-parcel proposal) (Dollar amount oJCFT grant requested) PrioriV P arcels: 3 12612-9026. 302612-903 l. 302612-9029 S e c o n d ary P ar c e I s : 3 126 12 -900 4 (24.09 ac), 3 026 12 -9 032 ( I 0 ac), 302612-9040 (5.04 ac), 302612-9041(6.58 ac), 122610-9010 (17.55 ac), 122610-9008 (8.27 ac) Tvne of Acouisitionls): E Fee Title tr fion Easemenf tr Ofher: CONTACT INFORMATION Contact Name: Perrv Falcone Phone: ).06-477-4689 Title: Proiect Prosram Manaser Fax:206-296-0192 Address: 201 South Jackson Street- Suite 600 Emai I : nern¡.falconeôkinpcountv. sov Seattle. V/A 98104 l)ate:3-18-15 PROJECT SUMMARY: The goal of this project is to acquire three parcels at the confluence of the South Fork Skykomish, Tye and Foss Rivers to protect salmon habitat and recreational river access. The priority parcels include 75.2 acres of undeveloped high quality salmon habitat at river mile 19.5 of the South Fork Skykomish River.
    [Show full text]
  • Test Herrera Report Template
    APPENDIX B South Fork Skykomish River Salmon Habitat Information Review and Future Studies Scoping Summary Report SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH RIVER SALMON HABITAT INFORMATION REVIEW AND FUTURE STUDIES SCOPING SUMMARY REPORT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division and USDA Forest Service Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH BASIN SALMON HABITAT INFORMATION REVIEW AND FUTURE STUDIES SCOPING SUMMARY REPORT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division 201 S. Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 and USDA Forest Service Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206/441-9080 April 30, 2013 CONTENTS Project Objectives and Scope ............................................................................ 1 Project Setting ........................................................................................ 1 Geographic Scope of the Project ................................................................... 3 Methods for Data Review............................................................................. 4 Data and Information Review Results ................................................................... 9 Information Request Contacts and Status ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Wild Coho Forecasts for Puget Sound, Washington Coast, and Lower Columbia Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Science Division, Fish Program by Marisa N
    2020 Wild Coho Forecasts for Puget Sound, Washington Coast, and Lower Columbia Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Science Division, Fish Program by Marisa N. C. Litz Contributors: This coho forecast was made possible through funding from numerous federal, state, and local sources and the participation of numerous WDFW, tribal, and PUD biologists. The following WDFW employees, listed in alphabetical order, provided field data used in the 2020 forecast: Kale Bentley and Brad Garner (Grays River), Clayton Kinsel (Skagit River and Big Beef Creek), Matt Klungle (Nisqually River), Jamie Lamperth (Mill, Abernathy, and Germany creeks), Peter Lisi (Lake Washington), John Serl (Cowlitz Falls), Pete Topping (Green River and Deschutes River), and Devin West (Bingham Creek, Chehalis River). Sources of smolt data from tribal and PUD biologists and sources of freshwater and marine environmental indicators are cited in the document. Thank you to Skip Albertson for compiling data from the WA Department of Ecology Marine Water Monitoring Program. Mara Zimmerman, Neala Kendall, Dan Rawding, and Josh Weinheimer most recently completed these forecasts and provided much guidance and assistance on this one. Dave Seiler, Greg Volkhardt, Dan Rawding, Mara Zimmerman, and Thomas Buehrens have contributed to the conceptual approaches used in this forecast. Introduction Run size forecasts for wild coho stocks are an important part of the pre-season planning process for Washington State salmon fisheries. Accurate forecasts are needed at the scale of management units to ensure adequate spawning escapements, realize harvest benefits, and achieve harvest allocation goals. Wild coho run sizes (adult ocean recruits) have been predicted using various approaches across Washington’s coho producing systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Snoqualmie, Sultan, and Skykomish Rivers, Washington
    DEPABTMEI7T OF THE INTEKIOB. UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS RMITH, DIBECTOR WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 366 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR * WATER- SUPPLY PAPER 366 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 CONTENTS. Page. General features of Snohomish River basin.................................. 5 Gaging stations............................................................ 6 Publications.............................................................. 7 ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATE I. A-D, Plan and profile of Snoqualmie River and certain tributaries above Fall City, Wash..............................At end of volume. II. A-B, Plan and profile of Sultan River above Sultan, Wash......... At end of volume. III. A-F, Plan and profile of Skykomish River and certain tributaries above Gold Bar, Wash..............................At end of volume. 49607° WSP 366 14 3 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON. Prepared under the direction of R. B. MAKSHALL, Chief Geographer. GENERAL. FEATURES OF SNOHOMISH RIVER BASIN. Snohomish River is formed by the union of Skykomish and Sno- qualmie rivers, in the southwestern part of Snohomish County, Wash., and flows northwestward into Puget Sound. Skykomish River drains the west slope of the Cascade Mountains for a distance of 30 miles as measured along the divide or 22 miles in a straight line, northward between the point common to King, Kittitas, and Chelan counties, along the eastern boundary of King and Snohomish counties to a point 1 mile south of Indian Pass, at the divide between the Skykomish and Sauk drainage basins.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpretive Signage Themes/Content Prepared for Snohomish County Parks, Recreation and Tourism Contents
    FINAL 01/17/2020 SKYKOMISH & SNOHOMISH RIVERS Interpretive Signage Themes/Content Prepared for Snohomish County Parks, Recreation and Tourism Contents 1 Overview Background Goals Process Key Concepts and Ideas 3 Interpretive Themes Primary Theme: Rivers as Lifeways Sub-Theme: Rivers and Treaty Rights Cultural Heritage Interpretive Concepts Interpretive Symbol Lushootseed Names Traditional Stories Personal Views of the River 7 River Access Sites: Interpretive Ideas 13 Growing Interpretive Support and Community Connections 13 Interpretive Partners and Future Planning 13 Appendix Overview Background The Skykomish-Snohomish Rivers system is at the heart of the history, culture, and natural lifeways of Snohomish County. In 2015, the Skykomish-Snohomish Rivers Coalition (the Coalition) formed to address the growing recreational pressure on these rivers. A working group composed of “over 25 entities representing federal, tribal, state, and local governments and agencies, businesses, civic groups, non-profit organizations and residents” met regularly to develop a “shared vision and plan for coordinated, well-managed, sustainable recreation on the river system.” One result of the discussions that have been ongoing since 2015 is the Skykomish-Snohomish Rivers Recreation Concept Plan, with a working draft released in August of 2018. The concept plan included a series of visions and goals as well as key considerations for coordinated recreation management. The plan also provided general recommendations and proposed public river access sites accompanied by a detailed inventory of current landowner management. Among the major concerns expressed in the plan were safety on the rivers and protection of fish and habitat as recreational use increased. As part of ongoing efforts to address these issues, Snohomish County Parks, Recreation, and Tourism funded a project in 2018-2019 to develop and recommend a Wayfinding and Interpretive Signage Program for up to 11 access sites designated along the Skykomish-Snohomish River system.
    [Show full text]
  • A 60-Day Notice of Intent To
    KAMPMEIER & KNUTSEN PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW BRIAN A. KNUTSEN Licensed in Oregon & Washington 503.841.6515 [email protected] December 2, 2020 Via Certified Mail – Return Receipt Requested Director Kelly Susewind Commission Chair Larry Carpenter Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission P.O. Box 43200 P.O. Box 43200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Commission Vice Chair Barbara Baker Commissioner James Anderson Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission P.O. Box 43200 P.O. Box 43200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Commissioner David Graybill Commissioner Robert Kehoe Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission P.O. Box 43200 P.O. Box 43200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Commissioner Molly Linville Commissioner Donald McIsaac Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission P.O. Box 43200 P.O. Box 43200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Commissioner Bradley Smith Commissioner Kim Thorburn Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission P.O. Box 43200 P.O. Box 43200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 Olympia, Washington 98504-3200 RE: Notice of Intent to Sue WDFW for Violations of Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act Resulting from Skykomish River Steelhead Hatchery Program Dear Director Susewind and Washington Fish & Wildlife Commissioners: This letter provides notice of Wild Fish Conservancy’s (“Conservancy”) intent to sue the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and, in their official capacities, Director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Kelly Susewind and Commissioners of the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission Larry Carpenter, Barbara Baker, James Anderson, David Graybill, Robert Kehoe, Molly Linville, Donald McIsaac, Bradley Smith, and Kim Thorburn (collectively, “WDFW”) for violations of section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Skykomish River Reach-Scale Plan
    July 2017 Sustainable Lands Strategy Lower Skykomish River Reach-scale Plan Snohomish County Department of Public Works, Surface Water Management and the Executive Committee of the Sustainable Lands Strategy July 2017 Sustainable Lands Strategy Lower Skykomish River Reach-scale Plan Prepared for Prepared by Snohomish County Anchor QEA, LLC Department of Public Works 720 Olive Way, Suite 1900 Surface Water Management Seattle, Washington 98101 3000 Rockefeller Ave., M/S 607 Everett, Washington 98201 and The Executive Committee of the Sustainable Lands Strategy Recommended Citation Snohomish County Surface Water Management and the SLS Executive Committee, 2017. Lower Skykomish River Reach-scale Plan. Snohomish County Department of Public Works and the Executive Committee of the Sustainable Lands Strategy. Everett, Washington. Project Number: 160723-03.01 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Project Team Snohomish County Staff Consultants Steve Britsch Aaron Kopp Anchor QEA, LLC, Lynn Turner Zach Brown Frank Leonetti Carlstad Consulting, Cynthia Carlstad Ann Bylin Beth Liddell Dan Evans Consulting, Dan Evans Chien Chang Dave Lucas Donald “Kit” Crump Mike Rustay Brett Gaddis Erik Stockdale Jessica Hamill Lauren Tracy Mary Hurner David Wilson Linda Neunzig Reviewers The Nature Conservancy Tulalip Tribes Jenn Baker Julie Morse Kurt Nelson Morgan Ruff Heather Cole NOAA Restoration Center Snohomish Conservation District Paul Cereghino Cindy Dittbrenner Kate Riley Ducks Unlimited C.K. Eidem SLS Executive Committee Klesick Family Farm Ducks Unlimited Tristan Klesick,
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Design Project Description
    PROJECT DESCRIPTION SULTAN RIVER PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE BRIDGE DESIGN PROJECT Prepared for WH Pacific 12100 NE 195th Street, Suite 300 Bothell, Washington 98011 Prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC 720 Olive Way, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington 98101 July 2014 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SULTAN RIVER PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE BRIDGE DESIGN PROJECT Prepared for WH Pacific 12100 NE 195th Street, Suite 300 Bothell, Washington 98011 Prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC 720 Olive Way, Suite 1900 Seattle, Washington 98101 July 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Project Location ...............................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Purpose and Need ................................................................................................1 1.3 Project Background ..........................................................................................................1 2 ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT ........................................................................................... 3 2.1 Pedestrian Bridge Alignment ..........................................................................................4 2.1.1 Western Terminus ......................................................................................................4 2.1.2 Bridge Span .................................................................................................................4 2.1.3 Eastern Termini
    [Show full text]