DOCSLIB.ORG

Carbon River Access Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 510 Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102 Lacey, Washington 98 503 APR 2 6 20ll In Reply Refer To: 13410-2010-F-0488 Memorandum To: Superintendent, Mount Rainier National Park Ashford, Washington From: Manager, Washington Fish and Wildlife Lacey, Washington Subject: Biological Opinion for the Carbon River Access Management Plan This document transmits the Fish and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion based on our review of the proposed Carbon River Access Managernent Plan to be implemented in Mount Rainier National Park, Pierce County, Washington. We evaluated effects on the threatened northern spotted owl (Sfrlx occidentalis caurina),marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus),bttll trout (Salvelinus confluentus), and designated bull trout critical habitat in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Your July 29,2010 request for formal consultation was received on August 2,2010. This Biological Opinion is based on information provided in the June 28, 2010 Biological Assessment and on other information and correspondence shared between our respective staff. Copies of all correspondence regarding this consultation are on file at the Washington Fish and Wildlife Office in Lacey, Washington. If you have any questions about this mernorandum, the attached Biological Opinion, or your responsibilities under the Act, please contact Vince Harke at (360) 753-9529 or Carolyn Scafidi at (360) 753-4068. Endangered Species Act - Section 7 Consultation BIOLOGICAL OPINION U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Reference: 13410-2010-F-0488 Carbon River Access Management Plan Mount Rainier National Park Pierce County, Washington Agency: National Park Service Consultation Conducted By: U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Lacey, Washington +-lL- lutl Date TABLE OF CONTENTS CONSULTATION HISTORY ....................................................................................................... 2 BIOLOGICAL OPINION ............................................................................................................... 4 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................................... 4 Action Area – Upper Carbon River Watershed .......................................................................... 6 Overview of the Proposed Action ............................................................................................... 8 Project Elements ......................................................................................................................... 9 Work Activities and Project Equipment ................................................................................... 21 Project Schedule and Duration .................................................................................................. 24 Avoidance and Minimization Measures ................................................................................... 29 STATUS OF THE SPECIES: Spotted owl .................................................................................. 38 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE: Spotted Owl ........................................................................ 40 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION: Spotted Owl .......................................................... 42 Direct Effects to Spotted Owls ................................................................................................. 42 Indirect Effects to Spotted Owls ............................................................................................... 48 Effects of Interrelated or Interdependent Actions ..................................................................... 49 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS: Spotted Owl ................................................................................... 49 INTEGRATION AND SYNTHESIS OF EFFECTS: Spotted Owl ............................................ 51 CONCLUSION: Spotted Owl...................................................................................................... 53 STATUS OF THE SPECIES: Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)....................... 55 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE: Murrelet .............................................................................. 56 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION: Murrelet ................................................................. 58 Direct Effects to Murrelets........................................................................................................ 58 Indirect Effects to Murrelets ..................................................................................................... 71 Effects of Interrelated or Interdependent Actions ..................................................................... 73 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS: Murrelet ......................................................................................... 74 INTEGRATION AND SYNTHESIS OF EFFECTS: Murrelet .................................................. 77 CONCLUSION: Marbled Murrelet ......................................................................................... 80 STATUS OF THE SPECIES: Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)............................................. 81 Status of Bull Trout in the Puyallup Core Area ........................................................................ 81 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE: Bull Trout ............................................................................. 86 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION: Bull Trout ............................................................. 96 Direct Effects to Bull Trout ...................................................................................................... 97 Indirect Effects to Bull Trout .................................................................................................. 101 Effects of Interrelated and Interdependent Actions ................................................................ 114 Summary of Direct and Indirect Effects to Bull Trout ........................................................... 115 Effects to the Carbon River Bull Trout Local Population ...................................................... 119 Effects to the Puyallup Core Area .......................................................................................... 120 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS: Bull Trout..................................................................................... 120 INTEGRATION AND SYNTHESIS OF EFFECTS: Bull Trout.............................................. 122 CONCLUSION: Bull Trout ....................................................................................................... 123 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE: Designated Bull Trout Critical Habitat ............................. 125 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION: Designated Bull Trout Critical Habitat ............... 126 Summary of Effects to Designated Bull Trout Critical Habitat .............................................. 129 ii Effects to the Puyallup CHSU and Puget Sound CHU ........................................................... 130 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS: Designated Bull Trout Critical Habitat ........................................ 131 CONCLUSION: Designated Bull Trout Critical Habitat .......................................................... 132 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................ 138 REINITIATION NOTICE .......................................................................................................... 139 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................... 140 APPENDIX A – CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS OF PROPOSED BANK PROTECTION STRUCTURES .............................................................................................. 152 APPENDIX B – STATUS OF THE SPECIES – NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL .................... 208 APPENDIX C: – STATUS OF THE SPECIES – MARBLED MURRELET ........................... 250 APPENDIX D – STATUS OF THE SPECIES – BULL TROUT AND DESIGNATED BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT ..................................................................... 271 iii LIST OF ACRONYMS Act Endangered Species Act of 1973 ATVs All-Terrain Vehicles BA Biological Assessment CFR Code of Federal Regulations CHU Critical Habitat Units dB Decibels DSA Demographic Study Area ELJs Engineered Logjams FR Federal Register FWS U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service GIS Geographic Information System GMP General Management Plan HCP Habitat Conservation Plan MP Milepost NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NPS National Park Service NTUs Nephelometric Turbidity Units Opinion Biological Opinion Park Mount Rainier National Park PCEs Primary Constituent Elements RCW Revised Code of Washington RM River Mile RPMs Reasonable and Prudent Measures SOSEAs Spotted Owl Special Emphasis Areas Spotted Owl Northern Spotted Owl U.S.C. United States Code USFS U.S. Forest Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington Fish and Wildlife WDNR Washington Department of Natural Resources WDOE Washington Department of Ecology iv LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. Summary of townships and sections. Carbon River Access Management area, Pierce County, Washington, Willamette Meridian. .................................................................... 6 Table 2. Summary of live tree removal needed for trail realignments.
Recommended publications
  • An Inventory of Fish in Streams in Mount Rainier National Park 2001-2003

    An Inventory of Fish in Streams in Mount Rainier National Park 2001-2003

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science An Inventory of Fish in Streams at Mount Rainier National Park 2001-2003 Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCCN/NRTR—2013/717.N ON THE COVER National Park staff conducting a snorkel fish survey in Kotsuck Creek, Mount Rainier National Park, 2002. Photograph courtesy of Mount Rainier National Park. An Inventory of Fish in Streams at Mount Rainier National Park 2001-2003 Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCCN/NRTR—2013/717.N Barbara A. Samora, Heather Moran, Rebecca Lofgren National Park Service North Coast and Cascades Network Inventory and Monitoring Program Mount Rainier National Park Tahoma Woods Star Rt. Ashford, WA. 98304 April 2013 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
  • Independent Populations of Chinook Salmon in Puget Sound

    Independent Populations of Chinook Salmon in Puget Sound

    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-78 Independent Populations of Chinook Salmon in Puget Sound July 2006 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Techni- cal Memorandum NMFS series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible due to time constraints. Documents published in this series may be referenced in the scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS- F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest & Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Techni- cal Memorandum series is now being used by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Reference throughout this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. This document should be cited as follows: Ruckelshaus, M.H., K.P. Currens, W.H. Graeber, R.R. Fuerstenberg, K. Rawson, N.J. Sands, and J.B. Scott. 2006. Independent populations of Chinook salmon in Puget Sound. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-78, 125 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-78 Independent Populations of Chinook Salmon in Puget Sound Mary H. Ruckelshaus,
  • Greenwater Access and Travel Management Project Environmental Assessment

    Greenwater Access and Travel Management Project Environmental Assessment

    United States Department of Agriculture Greenwater Access and Travel Management Project Environmental Assessment Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Snoqualmie November Forest Service National Forest Ranger District 2016 For More Information Contact: Snoqualmie Ranger District 902 SE North Bend Way North Bend, WA 98045 (425) 888-1421 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD- 3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
  • Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment August 2004

    Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment August 2004

    Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment August 2004 Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment – August 2004 Acknowledgements Pierce County Planning and Land Services Department-Advance Planning Division Katherine Brooks, Senior Planner Karen Trueman, GIS Specialist Chip Vincent, Principal Planner Pierce County Executive’s Office Debby Hyde, Special Projects Coordinator Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife John Jacobson, Senior GIS Analyst, Habitat Program Marc McCalmon, Landscape Conservation Analyst, Habitat Program Erik Neatherlin, Landscape Conservation Planner, Habitat Program Michelle Tirhi, Urban Biologist-South Puget Sound Region University of Washington, Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Unit Karen Dvornich, Public Education and Outreach Coordinator, NatureMapping Program and Washington GAP Analysis Project Assistant Chris Grue, Principal Investigator and Leader, WACFWRU Metro Parks Tacoma John Garner, Education Coordinator Tahoma Audubon Society Bryan Flint, Conservation Coordinator Puyallup River Watershed Council Dave Seabrook TerraLogic GIS Chris Hansen, Principal Levon Yengoyan, Principal Authors Katherine Brooks, Pierce County Planning and Land Services Karen Dvornich, University of Washington Michelle Tirhi, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Erik Neatherlin, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Marc McCalmon, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife John Jacobson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Reference Citation Brooks, K., K.M. Dvornich, M. Tirhi, E. Neatherlin, M. McCalmon, and
  • Mount Rainier National Park, Washington

    Mount Rainier National Park, Washington

    NATIONAL PARK . WASHINGTON MOUNT RAINIER WASHINGTON CONTENTS "The Mountain" 1 Wealth of Gorgeous Flowers 3 The Forests 5 How To Reach the Park 8 By Automobile 8 By Railroad and Bus 11 By Airplane 11 Administration 11 Free Public Campgrounds 11 Post Offices 12 Communication and Express Service 12 Medical Service 12 Gasoline Service 12 What To Wear 12 Trails 13 Fishing 13 Mount Rainier Summit Climb 13 Accommodations and Expenses 15 Summer Season 18 Winter Season 18 Ohanapecosh Hot Springs 20 Horseback Trips and Guide Service 20 Transportation 21 Tables of Distances 23 Principal Points of Interest 28 References 32 Rules and Regulations 33 Events of Historical Importance 34 Government Publications 35 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR • Harold L. Ickes, Secretary NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Arno B. Cammerer, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • 1938 AN ALL-YEAR PARK Museums.—The park museum, headquarters for educational activities, MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK may be fully enjoyed throughout the and office of the park naturalist are located in the museum building at year. The summer season extends from early June to early November; the Longmire. Natural history displays and wild flower exhibits are main­ winter ski season, from late November well into May. All-year roads make tained at Paradise Community House, Yakima Park Blockhouse, and the park always accessible. Longmire Museum. Nisquaiiy Road is open to Paradise Valley throughout the year. During Hikes from Longmire.—Free hikes, requiring 1 day for the round trip the winter months this road is open to general traffic to Narada Falls, 1.5 are conducted by ranger naturalists from the museum to Van Trump Park, miles by trail from Paradise Valley.
  • Naches Pass Trail

    Naches Pass Trail

    NACHES PASS TRAIL. BARTLETT Student History Laura B. Downey Bartlett, "First immigrant train over the Cascade Mountains," Students history of the Northwest and the State of Washington. Tacoma: Smith-Digby, 1922. p. 161-166. http://books.google.com/books?id=K1pKAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Bartlett+Students +history+of+the+Northwest+and+the+State+of+Washington&source=bl&ots=GadQWoE2GL&sig =OiZgw6tbRohF5BDA1s9oOpvPj58&hl=en&ei=odqCTM-cFIb4swOQ- Kj3Bw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Epo ch%20XVI%201853&f=false In the early part of 1853, while the Territory of Washington was being brought into life, another most important move was being made, through and by which the newly made territory would be greatly benefitted. On the 15th day of April, 1853, at Independence, Missouri an immigrant train was leaving for great Oregon Territory, as they supposed, but which had, in the interim of their coining, become the Ter- ritory of Washington. The founders of this train, with their families, household goods, supplies and other necessary equip- ments, loaded into a dead-" wagon, drawn by oxen, though a few had horses, started on their long, laborious journey- to an unknown country-in number less than one hundred-people, all told. They were six months on the way, but increased their numbers enroute to one hundred and seventy- five people, by smaller companies joining them. On leaving Independence, the party realized the necessity of having a Captain, and to that end Mr. James Biles was chosen, with William R. Downey, Bartolomew Baker, Charles Biles, and Nelson Sargent as Assistants.
  • Pierce County Shoreline Master Program Update

    Pierce County Shoreline Master Program Update

    Key Peninsula-FrontalKey Peninsula-Frontal Case Inlet Case Inlet Key Peninsula-Frontal Carr Inlet PIERCE COUNTY Key Peninsula-Frontal Carr Inlet PIERCE COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Curley Creek-Frontal Colvos Passage SHOR LINE MA PR AM U DATE Curley Creek-Frontal Colvos Passage Burley Creek-Frontal Carr Inlet CUMULATIVERESTORATION IMPACTS PLAN ANALYSIS Burley Creek-Frontal Carr Inlet WRIAWRIA MillerMiller Creek-Frontal Creek-Frontal East PassageEast Passage WRIASWRIASWRIAS A ANDND B BASINS BASINSASINS 1515 - -Kitsap Kitsap City ofCity Tacoma-Frontal of Tacoma-Frontal Commencement Commencement Bay Bay White R FOX Whit FOX HylebosHylebos Creek-Frontal Creek-Frontal Commencement Commencement Bay Bay ISLANDISLAND eR iv i ver e Lake MC NEILMC NEIL r Lake TappsTapps ISLANDISLAND Chambers Creek - Leach Creek Chambers Creek - Leach Creek WhiteWhite River River D D N N SwanSwan Clear Clear Creeks Creeks U U O O S S PuyallupPuyallup Shaw Shaw Road Road Upper Upper AndersonAnderson Island Island ClarksClarks Creek Creek ANDERSONANDERSON e RRi hhi it t e ivveerr ISLANDISLAND WW CloverClover Creek Creek - Lower - LowerClover Creek - North Fork ?¨ Clover Creek - North Fork?Ã FennelFennel Creek-Puyallup Creek-Puyallup River River ?¨ T T ?Ã E E G rGer e e e G G WRIA ri rei eCCr n n WRIA r i eeeek U American a i k w w U American r a CC a a Spa S r l P P Lake Lake na pana P P l ee t t w w Twin Creek-White River e e a a o v e v e t h h aa Twin Creek-White River y C l l or r t r r r C y C Boise Creek-White River River r C C u u ww r C r e e o South
  • 1 New Chronologic and Geomorphic Analyses of Debris Flows on Mount

    1 New Chronologic and Geomorphic Analyses of Debris Flows on Mount

    New Chronologic and Geomorphic Analyses of Debris Flows on Mount Rainier, Washington By Ian Delaney Abstract Debris flows on Mount Rainier are thought to be increasing in frequency and magnitude in recent years, possibly due to retreating glaciers. These debris flows are caused by precipitation events or glacial outburst floods. Furthermore, as glaciers recede they leave steep unstable slopes of till providing the material needed for mass-wasting events. Little is known about the more distant history and downstream effects of these events. Field observations and/or aerial photograph of the Carbon River, Tahoma Creek, and White River drainages provide evidence of historic debris flow activity. The width and gradient of the channel on reaches of streams affected by debris flows is compared with reaches not affected by debris flows. In all reaches with field evidence of debris flows the average channel width is greater than in places not directly affected by debris flows. Furthermore, trends in width relate to the condition of the glacier. The stable Carbon Glacier with lots of drift at the terminus feeds the Carbon River, which has a gentle gradient and whose width remains relatively consistent over the period from 1952 to 2006. Conversely, the rapidly retreating Tahoma and South Tahoma Glaciers have lots of stagnant ice and feed the steep Tahoma Creek. Tahoma Creek’s width greatly increased, especially in the zone affect by debris flow activity. The rock-covered, yet relatively stable Emmons Glacier feeds White River, which shows relatively
  • W Hite R Iver B Asin P

    W Hite R Iver B Asin P

    White River Basin Plan Draft Volume 2 – Appendices September 2012 Plan White River Basin TABLE OF CONTENTS DRAFT —WHITE RIVER BASIN PLAN White River Basin Plan Draft TABLE OF CONTENTS – VOLUME II APPENDIX A: White River and Lake Tapps Basin Plan Questionnaire APPENDIX B: Subbasin Delineation Method APPENDIX C: Method Used to Estimate Impervious Surfaces and Analyze Land Use and Zoning APPENDIX D: Lake Tapps Water Quality Monitoring Data APPENDIX E: Stream Survey Methods Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment Method APPENDIX F: Stream Survey Results APPENDIX G: Tributary Stream Gauge Station Date and Tributary Water Quality Monitoring Data APPENDIX H: Pierce County Flood Risk Assessment – White River Basin APPENDIX I: Lake Water Quality Management Plan (White River Basin Plan) APPENDIX J: Lake Tapps Water Quality Monitoring Plan APPENDIX K: Capital Improvement Project Cost Estimate and Site Map APPENDIX L: Capital Improvement Project and Programmatic Measures Ranking Score Sheets APPENDIX M: Pollutant Source Identification and Monitoring Program Pierce County Public Works & Utilities TOC-1 www.piercecountywa.org/water Surface Water Management THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. Appendix A White River and Lake Tapps Basin Plan Questionnaire THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. DRAFT Appendix A White River and Lake Tapps Basin Plan Questionnaire Pierce County Water Programs is preparing a surface water management plan for the White River Basin, including Lake Tapps. The plan will identify the actions necessary to provide safe storm drainage, reduce flooding, maintain water quality and protect natural streams and the fish and wildlife they support. Your completion of this questionnaire will help us make sure that the plan takes account of your views and any information you may have.
  • Page 85 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 110C Main Fork of Ohanapecosh

    Page 85 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 110C Main Fork of Ohanapecosh

    Page 85 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 110c main fork of Ohanapecosh River to the quarter and one-half acres, as generally depicted on the section line of section 9, township 14 north, map entitled ‘‘Mount Rainier National Park range 10 east, Willamette meridian; thence west- Proposed 1987 Boundary Adjustments’’, num- erly along the quarter section line of sections 9, bered 105–80,010B and dated January 1987, which 8, and 7 to the west boundary of said township; shall be on file and available for public inspec- thence due west to the right or west bank of tion in the Washington office of the National Muddy Fork of the Cowlitz River; thence north- Park Service, United States Department of the erly along the right bank of said Muddy Fork to Interior and at Mount Rainier National Park. a point exactly due east of post numbered 34 on (b) Forest boundary adjustment the south boundary of Mount Rainier National The boundaries of the Snoqualmie National Park as surveyed in 1908; thence due west to said Forest and of the Gifford Pinchot National For- post numbered 34; thence along the boundary of est, are hereby revised to include in the Sno- said park as surveyed in 1908 to post numbered qualmie National Forest approximately thirty- 35; thence easterly along the south boundary of one and one-half acres, to exclude from the Sno- said national park as surveyed in 1908 to the qualmie National Forest approximately thirty southeast corner thereof; thence northerly along acres, and to exclude from the Gifford Pinchot the east boundary of said national park as sur- National Forest approximately two hundred and veyed in 1908 to post numbered 59; thence along ten acres, as generally depicted on a map enti- the east boundary of said park as revised by sec- tled ‘‘Mount Rainier National Park Proposed tion 107 of this title, northerly to the point of 1987 Boundary Adjustments’’, numbered beginning.
  • MOUNT • RAINIER NATIONAL • PARK Wbtm

    MOUNT • RAINIER NATIONAL • PARK Wbtm

    wBtmmm wcy«yS&jfli .V&2Smmmmmmm\ fmWk\ mmmWmZfWmVWm W&* M §?'/*£¥&LWrnA Ur+Jmmmm m$af •5-t'' s '•* f •' •' '• Jvfl MOUNT • RAINIER NATIONAL • PARK r~Wask inatopis Trail Guide MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK Washington This Trail Guide is printed in such a way that the Wonderland Trail Section 1 is the Carbon River area. By starting a trip in this section of the park (such as the one around Mount Rainier on the Wonderland Trail) the hiker may come out periodically at devel­ oped areas, such as Longmire or Yakima Park, to renew supplies or to dry off if the weather has been wet. However, the hiker may begin long trips anywhere, or short trips as he pleases, by noting the maps in this trail guide and the descriptions of the vari­ ous trails in each sec­ tion. 1 SECTION 1 about 50 feet in a setting of trees, "coasting" and the Mowich Lake Carbon River WONDERLAND TRAIL ferns, and moss-covered rocks. Trail intersection is reached. It is Up again out of the trees and into four-tenths of a mile from here to the sunshine of the alpine meadows beautiful Mowich Lake, which oc­ is a land of flowers and cool, pure cupies an old glacial cirque and is Summary of Trail head wall of a glacial cirque of water. Here are miles of open the largest body of water in Mount Mileages such enormous proportions as to trail through Seattle and Spray Rainier National Park. Mowich is stagger the imagination. At its Parks. In a few spots the trail a Chinook Indian word meaning There are 26.3 miles of the Wonder­ feet begin the ice masses of the Car­ reaches rocky country, snowfields, "deer." land Trail in this section of the park.
  • 1912 the Mountaineers

    1912 the Mountaineers

    The Mountaineer. Volume Five Nineteen Hundred Twelve h611, •• , ,, The Mountaineen Sea11le. Wa1hla1100 :J1'.)1'1zec1 bv G oog I e 2,-�a""" ...._� _..,..i..c.. tyJ Vi) Copyright 1912 The Mountaineers Din,tiZ<'d by Google CONTENTS Page Greeting ................... ................................John Muir .......................................... Greeting ..................................................... Enos Mills ........................................ The Higher Functions of a Mountain Club................................................... \ Wm. Frederic Bade.......................... 9 Little Tahoma ............ ............................. .Edmond S. Meany............................ 13 Mountaineer Outing of 1912 on north side of Mt. Rainier....................... Mary Paschall ................................... 14 Itinerary of Outing of 1912................... .Charles S. Gleason........................... 26 The Ascent of Mt. Rainier.................... £. M.Hack ........................................ 28 Grand Park .............................................. 1=dmond S. Meany............................ 36 A New Route up Mt. Rainier.............. 'Jara Keen ........................................ 37 Naches Pass .............................................. Edmond S. Meany....... ,.................... 40 Undescribed Glaciers of Mt. Rainier .. Fran,ois Matthes ............................. 42 Thermal Caves ....................................... J. B. Flett .......................................... 58 Change in Willis