DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Friday, September 2, 2005 Part III Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 226 Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho; Final Rule VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:43 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\02SER3.SGM 02SER3 52630 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE v. NMFS (Civ. No. 03–1883)). In the Exclusions Based on ‘‘Other Relevant proposed rule, we identified a number Impacts’’ National Oceanic and Atmospheric of potential exclusions we were Impacts to Tribes Administration considering including exclusions for Impacts to Landowners With Contractual federal lands subject to the Pacific Commitments to Conservation 50 CFR Part 226 Exclusions Based on National Security Northwest Forest Plan, PACFISH and Impacts [Docket No. 030716175–5203–04; I.D. No. INFISH. We are continuing to analyze Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts 070303A] whether exclusion of those federal lands VI. Critical Habitat Designation is appropriate. VII. Effects of Critical Habitat Designation RIN 0648–AQ77 DATES: This rule becomes effective Section 7 Consultation January 2, 2006. Activities Affected by Critical Habitat Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation ADDRESSES: Comments and materials Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 VIII. Required Determinations Evolutionarily Significant Units of West received, as well as supporting IX. References Cited Coast Salmon and Steelhead in documentation used in the preparation I. Background and Previous Federal Washington, Oregon, and Idaho of this final rule, are available for public inspection by appointment, during Action AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries normal business hours, at the National Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, We are responsible for determining Atmospheric Administration, Protected Resources Division, 1201 NE whether species, subspecies, or distinct Commerce. Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR population segments of West Coast salmon and steelhead (Oncorhynchus ACTION: Final rule. 97232–1274. The final rule, maps, and other materials relating to these spp.) are threatened or endangered, and SUMMARY: We, the National Marine designations can be found on our for designating critical habitat for them Fisheries Service (NMFS), are issuing a website at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq). final rule designating critical habitat for 1salmon/salmesa/crithab/CHsite.htm. To qualify as a distinct population segment, a West Coast salmon or 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: steelhead population must be (ESUs) of West Coast salmon (chum, Steve Stone at the above address, at substantially reproductively isolated Oncorhynchus keta; sockeye, O. nerka; (503) 231–2317, or Marta Nammack at from other conspecific populations and chinook, O. tshawytscha) and steelhead (301) 713–1401 ext. 180. represent an important component in (O. mykiss) listed as of the date of this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: designation under the Endangered the evolutionary legacy of the biological Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). Organization of the Final Rule species. According to agency policy, a The specific areas designated in the rule This Federal Register notice describes population meeting these criteria is text set out below include the final critical habitat designations for considered to be an Evolutionarily approximately 20,630 mi (33,201 km) of 12 ESUs of West Coast salmon and Significant Unit (ESU) (56 FR 58612; lake, riverine, and estuarine habitat in steelhead under the ESA. The pages that November 20, 1991). Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, as well follow summarize the comments and We are also responsible for as approximately 2,312 mi (3,721 km) of information received in response to designating critical habitat for species marine nearshore habitat in Puget proposed designations published on listed under our jurisdiction. Section 3 Sound, Washington. Some of the areas December 14, 2004 (69 FR 74572), of the ESA defines critical habitat as (1) designated are occupied by two or more describe any changes from the proposed specific areas within the geographical ESUs. The annual net economic impacts designations, and detail the final area occupied by the species at the time of changes to Federal activities as a designations for 12 ESUs. To assist the of listing, on which are found those result of critical habitat designation reader, the content of this document is physical or biological features that are (regardless of whether those activities organized as follows: essential to the conservation of the would also change as a result of the I. Background and Previous Federal Action listed species and that may require ESA’s jeopardy requirement) are II. Summary of Comments and special management considerations or estimated to be approximately $201.2 Recommendations protection, and (2) specific areas outside million. Fish and wildlife conservation Notification and General Comments the geographical area occupied by the actions for the Federal Columbia River Identification of Critical Habitat Areas species at the time of listing that are Power System and other major Economics Methodology essential for the conservation of a listed hydropower projects in the Pacific Weighing the Benefits of Designation vs. species. Our regulations direct us to Northwest are expected to generate Exclusion focus on ‘‘primary constituent another $500–700 million in annual Effects of Designating Critical Habitat elements,’’ or PCEs, in identifying these ESU-Specific Issues costs, including forgone power III. Summary of Revisions physical or biological features. Section revenues. While these hydropower IV. Methods and Criteria Used To Identify 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each projects are covered by ESA section 7, Critical Habitat Federal agency shall, in consultation the conservation actions that generate Salmon Life History with and with the assistance of NMFS, these costs are imposed by a wide Identifying the Geographical Area ensure that any action authorized, variety of laws. We solicited Occupied by the Species and Specific funded or carried out by such agency is information and comments from the Areas Within the Geographical Area not likely to jeopardize the continued public in an Advance Notice of Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) existence of an endangered or Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) and on Special Management Considerations or threatened salmon or steelhead ESU or Protections all aspects of the proposed rule. This Unoccupied Areas result in the destruction or adverse rule is being issued to meet the timeline Lateral Extent of Critical Habitat modification of critical habitat. Section established in litigation between NMFS Military Lands 4 of the ESA requires us to consider the and Pacific Coast Federation of Critical Habitat Analytical Review Teams economic impacts, impacts on national Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA et. al V. Application of ESA Section 4(b)(2) security, and other relevant impacts of VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:43 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER3.SGM 02SER3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52631 specifying any particular area as critical announced that we would reassess the species at the time of listing? What habitat. listing status of these and other ESUs physical and biological features are The timeline for completing the (67 FR 6215; February 11, 2002). We essential to the species’ conservation? critical habitat designations described in recently published final listing Are those essential features ones that this Federal Register document was decisions for seven of the 13 ESUs and may require special management established pursuant to litigation extended the deadline for the Oregon considerations or protection? Are areas between NMFS and the Pacific Coast Coast coho salmon ESU and the five outside those currently occupied Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, ESUs of O. mykiss (70 FR 37160; June ‘essential for conservation’? What are Institute for Fisheries Resources, the 28, 2005). Final listing determinations the benefits to the species of critical Center for Biological Diversity, the for these six ESUs are expected by habitat designation? What economic and Oregon Natural Resources Council, the December 2005 (70 FR 37217 and other relevant impacts would result Pacific Rivers Council, and the 37219, June 28, 2005). However, the from a critical habitat designation, even Environmental Protection Information Consent Decree governing the schedule if coextensive with other causes such as Center (PCFFA et al.) and is subject to for our final critical habitat designations listing? What is the appropriate a Consent Decree and Stipulated Order requires that we complete final geographic scale for weighing the of Dismissal (Consent Decree) approved designations for those of the 13 ESUs benefits of exclusion and benefits of by the D.C. District Court. A complete identified above that are listed as of designation? What is the best way to summary of previous court action August 15, 2005. We are not issuing a determine if the failure to designate an regarding these designations can be final critical habitat designation for the area as critical habitat will
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mohawk River Watershed – HUC-12
    ID Number Name of Mohawk Watershed 1 Switz Kill 2 Flat Creek 3 Headwaters West Creek 4 Kayaderosseras Creek 5 Little Schoharie Creek 6 Headwaters Mohawk River 7 Headwaters Cayadutta Creek 8 Lansing Kill 9 North Creek 10 Little West Kill 11 Irish Creek 12 Auries Creek 13 Panther Creek 14 Hinckley Reservoir 15 Nowadaga Creek 16 Wheelers Creek 17 Middle Canajoharie Creek 18 Honnedaga 19 Roberts Creek 20 Headwaters Otsquago Creek 21 Mill Creek 22 Lewis Creek 23 Upper East Canada Creek 24 Shakers Creek 25 King Creek 26 Crane Creek 27 South Chuctanunda Creek 28 Middle Sprite Creek 29 Crum Creek 30 Upper Canajoharie Creek 31 Manor Kill 32 Vly Brook 33 West Kill 34 Headwaters Batavia Kill 35 Headwaters Flat Creek 36 Sterling Creek 37 Lower Ninemile Creek 38 Moyer Creek 39 Sixmile Creek 40 Cincinnati Creek 41 Reall Creek 42 Fourmile Brook 43 Poentic Kill 44 Wilsey Creek 45 Lower East Canada Creek 46 Middle Ninemile Creek 47 Gooseberry Creek 48 Mother Creek 49 Mud Creek 50 North Chuctanunda Creek 51 Wharton Hollow Creek 52 Wells Creek 53 Sandsea Kill 54 Middle East Canada Creek 55 Beaver Brook 56 Ferguson Creek 57 West Creek 58 Fort Plain 59 Ox Kill 60 Huntersfield Creek 61 Platter Kill 62 Headwaters Oriskany Creek 63 West Kill 64 Headwaters South Branch West Canada Creek 65 Fly Creek 66 Headwaters Alplaus Kill 67 Punch Kill 68 Schenevus Creek 69 Deans Creek 70 Evas Kill 71 Cripplebush Creek 72 Zimmerman Creek 73 Big Brook 74 North Creek 75 Upper Ninemile Creek 76 Yatesville Creek 77 Concklin Brook 78 Peck Lake-Caroga Creek 79 Metcalf Brook 80 Indian
    [Show full text]
  • 8.6 Bull Trout 8.6.1 Status of the Species
    8.6 BULL TROUT 8.6.1 STATUS OF THE SPECIES (Note that terminology related to bull trout population groupings are further defined in Appendix E) 8.6.1.1 Listing Status The coterminous United States population of the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) was listed as threatened on November 1, 1999 (64 FR 58910). The threatened bull trout occurs in the Klamath River Basin of south-central Oregon and in the Jarbidge River in Nevada, in the Willamette River Basin in Oregon, in the Pacific Coast drainages of Washington, including the Puget Sound; throughout major rivers in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Montana within the Columbia River Basin, and in the St. Mary- Belly River, east of the Continental Divide in northwestern Montana (Cavender 1978; Bond 1992; Brewin and Brewin 1997; Leary and Allendorf 1997). Throughout its range, the bull trout is threatened by the combined effects of habitat degradation, fragmentation and alterations associated with: dewatering, road construction and maintenance, mining, and grazing; the blockage of migratory corridors by dams or other diversion structures; poor water quality; entrainment (a process by which aquatic organisms are pulled through a diversion or other device) into diversion channels; and introduced non-native species (64 FR 58910). Poaching and incidental mortality of bull trout during other targeted fisheries are additional threats. The bull trout was initially listed as three separate Distinct Population Units (DPSs) (63 FR 31647, 64 FR 17110). The preamble to the final listing rule for the United
    [Show full text]
  • Itinerary: Mt. Rainier Loop
    Itinerary: Mt. Rainier Loop Length: 78 miles Time to Allow: 4-5 hours Open Season: The route is usually snow-free by mid-June and remains open through late October. The road closes each year due to winter snowfall from November to early June. Driving Directions: From Packwood, travel northwest on Forest Road (FR) 52, also called Skate Creek Road, 23 miles to State Route (SR) 706. Turn right on SR 706 and travel east 41.9 miles into Mount Rainier National Park to SR 123. Turn right on SR 123 and travel south 5.4 miles to US Highway 12. Turn right on US Highway 12 and travel 7.3 miles west back to Packwood. Experience the grandeur of Mount Rainier, old-growth temperate rainforest, waterfalls, and impressive vistas! An excellent introduction to Mount Rainier National Park. Start: Begin this mountain adventure in the rural mountain community of Packwood located on Highway 12. Restaurants, car services, lodging, and campgrounds are available. Stop 1: Skate Creek Nestled deep in the forest, watch bubbling Skate Creek as you drive its namesake road. Along this winding, paved, but primitive road, see countless waterfalls cascade along the roadside. See blankets of drooping mosses and experience the beauty and serenity of this little gem. Memorable fall color displays have earned this road the honor of “Best Sunday Drive in Lewis County for Fall Color”. In the wintertime, this road is closed to vehicle traffic and the Skate Creek Sno-Park becomes a popular destination for the snowmobiling crowds. Stop 2: Nisqually Entrance Welcoming visitors to Mount Rainier National Park at the Nisqually Entrance stands a wooden entrance arch built in 1922 and reconstructed in 1973.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Stand Density Conditions for Umatilla National Forest: a Range of Variation Analysis
    WHITE PAPER F14-SO-WP-SILV-50 Stand Density Conditions for Umatilla National Forest: A Range of Variation Analysis David C. Powell; Forest Silviculturist Supervisor’s Office; Pendleton, OR Initial Version: FEBRUARY 20131 Most Recent Revision: JUNE 2013 INTRODUCTION Umatilla National Forest adopted a program-of-work (POW) process in February 2013 involving three criteria: 1. Values at risk, including human infrastructure (Johnson 2013). 2. Subwatersheds where existing stand density exceeds a range of variation for stand density. 3. Unique habitats such as old-growth forests, aspen clones, riparian habitat conserva- tion areas, and meadows (Archuleta 2013). This white paper describes a process used to assess stand density conditions for Umatilla National Forest. A Forest-wide, stand-density assessment was completed to meet project planning needs associated with criterion #2 of a POW process. This assessment uses an analytical technique called the range of variation (RV), de- fined as a range of conditions likely to have occurred in the Blue Mountains prior to Euro-American settlement in mid-1800s. A white paper (WP Silv-3) provides concepts, principles, and methods relating to range of variation (Powell 2019) – that white paper provides more information about RV. Briefly, a stand-density assessment involved 4 steps: (1) compiling a dataset charac- terizing stand density conditions for Umatilla NF, (2) stratifying density data by biophysi- cal environment, (3) completing an RV analysis by using subwatersheds as landscape units, and (4) summarizing results while also accounting for land-use restrictions. 1 White papers are internal reports; they receive only limited review. Viewpoints expressed in this paper are those of the author – they may not represent positions of USDA Forest Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe
    1 Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe: Traditional Resource Harvest Sites West of the Crest of the Cascades Mountains in Washington State and below the Cascades of the Columbia River Eugene Hunn Department of Anthropology Box 353100 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-3100 [email protected] for State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW contract # 38030449 preliminary draft October 11, 2003 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 Map 1 5f 1. Goals and scope of this report 6 2. Defining the relevant Indian groups 7 2.1. How Sahaptin names for Indian groups are formed 7 2.2. The Yakama Nation 8 Table 1: Yakama signatory tribes and bands 8 Table 2: Yakama headmen and chiefs 8-9 2.3. Who are the ―Klickitat‖? 10 2.4. Who are the ―Cascade Indians‖? 11 2.5. Who are the ―Cowlitz‖/Taitnapam? 11 2.6. The Plateau/Northwest Coast cultural divide: Treaty lines versus cultural 12 divides 2.6.1. The Handbook of North American Indians: Northwest Coast versus 13 Plateau 2.7. Conclusions 14 3. Historical questions 15 3.1. A brief summary of early Euroamerican influences in the region 15 3.2. How did Sahaptin-speakers end up west of the Cascade crest? 17 Map 2 18f 3.3. James Teit‘s hypothesis 18 3.4. Melville Jacobs‘s counter argument 19 4. The Taitnapam 21 4.1. Taitnapam sources 21 4.2. Taitnapam affiliations 22 4.3. Taitnapam territory 23 4.3.1. Jim Yoke and Lewy Costima on Taitnapam territory 24 4.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Tahoma News Summer 2007
    November 2006 Flood Makes History The flood of November 6 and 7, 2006 was an previous records. Record amounts fell throughout up here, washing it away there changing course, historical, natural event unlike any other that has other regions of the park. seeking the easiest path through the debris. This been recorded in Mount Rainier National Park’s is why glacial riverbeds are wide and rocky, with 108 year history. The snow levels during the storm stayed above the river itself braided into constantly changing 10,000 feet in elevation, with the majority of the channels. Long before National Park status, debris flows precipitation falling as rain. Some existing snow traveled from Mount Rainier to the Puget Sound. above 7,000 feet melted, adding to the runoff in the Recent research at Mount Rainier National Park Areas near Tacoma and Seattle are formed of rivers. has measured aggradation in most park rivers prehistoric debris from the mountain. to occur at a rate of 6 to 14 inches per decade. As the rain flowed down mountain-sides and In comparison, during the November flood, the In more recent park history (1946-47), a series roads to the main watersheds, it caused extreme riverbed where Tahoma Creek flows under the of heavy snowstorms caused extreme damage to soil erosion and slides. It uprooted large areas of Nisqually Road rose more than four feet. facilities. For two weeks, the main entrance to the trees that eventually caused log jams that redirected park was closed to the public due to the danger of water.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Defense Office of the Secretary
    Monday, May 16, 2005 Part LXII Department of Defense Office of the Secretary Base Closures and Realignments (BRAC); Notice VerDate jul<14>2003 10:07 May 13, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\16MYN2.SGM 16MYN2 28030 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 93 / Monday, May 16, 2005 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Headquarters U.S. Army Forces Budget/Funding, Contracting, Command (FORSCOM), and the Cataloging, Requisition Processing, Office of the Secretary Headquarters U.S. Army Reserve Customer Services, Item Management, Command (USARC) to Pope Air Force Stock Control, Weapon System Base Closures and Realignments Base, NC. Relocate the Headquarters 3rd Secondary Item Support, Requirements (BRAC) U.S. Army to Shaw Air Force Base, SC. Determination, Integrated Materiel AGENCY: Department of Defense. Relocate the Installation Management Management Technical Support ACTION: Notice of Recommended Base Agency Southeastern Region Inventory Control Point functions for Closures and Realignments. Headquarters and the U.S. Army Consumable Items to Defense Supply Network Enterprise Technology Center Columbus, OH, and reestablish SUMMARY: The Secretary of Defense is Command (NETCOM) Southeastern them as Defense Logistics Agency authorized to recommend military Region Headquarters to Fort Eustis, VA. Inventory Control Point functions; installations inside the United States for Relocate the Army Contracting Agency relocate the procurement management closure and realignment in accordance Southern Region Headquarters to Fort and related support functions for Depot with Section 2914(a) of the Defense Base Sam Houston. Level Reparables to Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, and designate them as Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as Operational Army (IGPBS) amended (Pub.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications
    Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Waterbody Type Segment ID Waterbody Index Number (WIN) Streams 0202-0047 Pa-63-30 Streams 0202-0048 Pa-63-33 Streams 0801-0419 Ont 19- 94- 1-P922- Streams 0201-0034 Pa-53-21 Streams 0801-0422 Ont 19- 98 Streams 0801-0423 Ont 19- 99 Streams 0801-0424 Ont 19-103 Streams 0801-0429 Ont 19-104- 3 Streams 0801-0442 Ont 19-105 thru 112 Streams 0801-0445 Ont 19-114 Streams 0801-0447 Ont 19-119 Streams 0801-0452 Ont 19-P1007- Streams 1001-0017 C- 86 Streams 1001-0018 C- 5 thru 13 Streams 1001-0019 C- 14 Streams 1001-0022 C- 57 thru 95 (selected) Streams 1001-0023 C- 73 Streams 1001-0024 C- 80 Streams 1001-0025 C- 86-3 Streams 1001-0026 C- 86-5 Page 1 of 464 09/28/2021 Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Name Description Clear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Mud Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to Long Lake total length of all tribs to lake Little Valley Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Elkdale Kents Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Crystal Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Forestport Alder Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Bear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Minor Tribs to Kayuta Lake total length of select tribs to the lake Little Black Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Wheelertown Twin Lakes Stream and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to North Lake total length of all tribs to lake Mill Brook and minor tribs entire stream and selected tribs Riley Brook
    [Show full text]
  • Nisqually State Park Interpretive Plan
    NISQUALLY STATE PARK INTERPRETIVE PLAN OCTOBER 2020 Prepared for the Nisqually Indian Tribe by Historical Research Associates, Inc. We acknowledge that Nisqually State Park is part of the homelands of the Squalli-absch (sqʷaliʔabš) people. We offer respect for their history and culture, and for the path they show in caring for this place. “All natural things are our brothers and sisters, they have things to teach us, if we are aware and listen.” —Willie Frank, Sr. Nisqually State Park forest. Credit: HRA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . 5 PART 1: FOUNDATION. .11 Purpose and Guiding Principles . .12 Interpretive Goals . 12 Desired Outcomes . .13 Themes. 14 Setting and Connections to Regional Interpretive Sites . 16 Issues and Influences Affecting Interpretation . .18 PART 2: RECOMMENDATIONS . .21 Introduction . 22 Recommended Approach . .22 Recommended Actions and Benchmarks . 26 Interpretive Media Recommendations . 31 Fixed Media Interpretation . .31 Digital Interpretation . 31 Personal Services . 32 Summary . 33 PLANNING RESOURCES . 34 HRA Project Team . 35 Interpretive Planning Advisory Group and Planning Meeting Participants . .35 Acknowledgements . 35 Definitions . 35 Select Interpretation Resources. 36 Select Management Documents . 36 Select Topical Resources. 36 APPENDICES Appendix A: Interpretive Theme Matrix Appendix B: Recommended Implementation Plan Appendix C: Visitor Experience Mapping INTRODUCTION Nisqually State Park welcome sign includes Nisqually design elements and Lushootseed language translation. Credit: HRA Nisqually State Park | Interpretive Plan | October 2020 5 The Nisqually River is a defining feature of Nisqually State Park. According to the late Nisqually historian Cecelia Svinth Carpenter, “The Nisqually River became the thread woven through the heart and fabric of the Nisqually Indian people.” —Carpenter, The Nisqually People, My People.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer Microhabitat Use of Fluvial Bull Trout in Eastern Oregon Streams
    North American Journal of Fisheries Management 27:1068–1081, 2007 [Article] American Fisheries Society 2007 DOI: 10.1577/M06-154.1 Summer Microhabitat Use of Fluvial Bull Trout in Eastern Oregon Streams ROBERT AL-CHOKHACHY* AND PHAEDRA BUDY U.S. Geological Survey, Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, Utah 84322-5290, USA Abstract.—The management and recovery of populations of bull trout Salvelinus confluentus requires a comprehensive understanding of habitat use across different systems, life stages, and life history forms. To address these needs, we collected microhabitat use and availability data in three fluvial populations of bull trout in eastern Oregon. We evaluated diel differences in microhabitat use, the consistency of microhabitat use across systems and size-classes based on preference, and our ability to predict bull trout microhabitat use. Diel comparisons suggested bull trout continue to use deeper microhabitats with cover but shift into significantly slower habitats during nighttime periods; however, we observed no discrete differences in substrate use patterns across diel periods. Across life stages, we found that both juvenile and adult bull trout used slow- velocity microhabitats with cover, but the use of specific types varied. Both logistic regression and habitat preference analyses suggested that adult bull trout used deeper habitats than juveniles. Habitat preference analyses suggested that bull trout habitat use was consistent across all three systems, as chi-square tests rejected the null hypotheses that microhabitats were used in proportion to those available (P , 0.0001). Validation analyses indicated that the logistic regression models (juvenile and adult) were effective at predicting bull trout absence across all tests (specificity values ¼ 100%); however, our ability to accurately predict bull trout absence was limited (sensitivity values ¼ 0% across all tests).
    [Show full text]
  • Status Review of Puget Sound Steelhead (Oncorhynchus Mykiss)
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-81 Status Review of Puget Sound Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) June 2007 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Techni- cal Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC series to issue scientific and technical publications. Manuscripts have been peer reviewed and edited. Documents published in this series may be cited 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 referenced as follows: Hard, J.J., J.M. Myers, M.J. Ford, R.G. Cope, G.R. Pess, R.S. Waples, G.A. Winans, B.A. Berejikian, F.W. Waknitz, P.B. Adams. P.A. Bisson, D.E. Campton, and R.R. Reisenbichler. 2007. Status review of Puget Sound steel- head (Oncorhynchus mykiss). U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-81, 117 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-81 Status Review of Puget Sound Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Jeffrey J. Hard, James M. Myers, Michael J. Ford, Robert G. Kope, George R.
    [Show full text]