Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Draft Environmental Impact Statement Port Angeles-Juan de Fuca Transmission Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement DOE/EIS-0378 March 2007 Port Angeles-Juan de Fuca Transmission Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Department of Energy Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability and Bonneville Power Administration March 2007 Port Angeles-Juan de Fuca Transmission Project Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (OE), and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Title of Proposed Project: Port Angeles-Juan de Fuca Transmission Project State Involved: Washington Abstract: Sea Breeze Olympic Converter LP (Sea Breeze) has applied to DOE for authorizations and approvals necessary to construct the U.S. portion of an international electric power transmission cable. Sea Breeze’s proposed cable would extend from the greater Victoria area, British Columbia, Canada, across the Strait of Juan de Fuca to Port Angeles, Clallam County, Washington, U.S. The U.S. portion is referred to as the Port Angeles–Juan de Fuca Transmission Project. Sea Breeze has applied to DOE/OE for a Presidential permit for the international crossing of the cable and to BPA for interconnection into the federal transmission system. The Proposed Action involves the installation of a ±150-kilovolt direct-current (DC) transmission line cable, which could carry up to 550 megawatts of power. About 10.5 miles (16.9 km) of the marine cable would be trenched in the sea floor from the international boundary to the Port Angeles Harbor. The cable would transition from the marine environment in the Harbor to land through a horizontal-directionally-drilled hole. The DC cable would then proceed underground through city streets for about 0.8 mile (1.3 km) to a new converter station. The converter station would convert power from DC to alternating current (AC). A 1,000-foot (305-m) long underground AC cable would then connect into BPA’s Port Angeles Substation. The Port Angeles Substation would be expanded to accommodate the interconnection of power into the federal transmission system. Sea Breeze would construct and own the proposed cable project. Sea Breeze intends to sell capacity on the cable to interested utilities or generators (through open access), with power flow possible both north and south between the U.S. and Canada. Because the proposed project does not include improvements that would increase the capacity of BPA’s transmission system, power flow to and from the proposed interconnection with BPA’s system would be subject to existing power transfer limits and transmission constraints. DOE/OE and BPA are also considering a No Action Alternative in which Sea Breeze’s requests would be denied, and the project would not receive a Presidential permit and could not interconnect with the federal transmission system. The proposed project could create impacts to water resources, vegetation, marine habitat and wildlife, terrestrial wildlife and freshwater fish, soils, land use, visual resources, socioeconomics, cultural resources, noise, health and safety, and air quality. Chapter 3 of the EIS describes impacts in detail. Public comments are being accepted through April 24, 2007. For additional information, contact: Ms. Stacy Mason – KEC-4 Dr. Jerry Pell Project Environmental Lead Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Bonneville Power Administration Reliability P. O. Box 3621 U.S. Department of Energy Portland, Oregon 97208 Washington, DC 20585 Telephone: (503) 230-5455 Telephone: (202) 586-3362 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]. For additional copies of this document, please call 1-800-622-4520 and ask for the document by name. The EIS is also on the Internet at: http://www.efw.bpa.gov/environmental_services/Document_Library/PortAngeles/. You may also request copies by writing to: Bonneville Power Administration P. O. Box 3621 Portland, Oregon 97208 ATT : Public Information Center - CHDL-1 For additional information on DOE NEPA activities, please contact Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue S.W., Washington D.C. 20585-0103, phone: 1-800-472-2756 or visit the DOE NEPA Web site at www.eh.doe.gov/nepa. Table of Contents Summary.................................................................................................................................. S-1 S.1 Purpose and Need for Action............................................................................... S-1 S.1.1 Public Involvement..........................................................................................S-2 S.1.2 Issues Outside the Scope of the Proposed Action or This EIS........................S-2 S.2 Proposed Action.................................................................................................... S-2 S.2.1 Marine DC Transmission Cable ......................................................................S-3 S.2.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Hole....................................................................S-4 S.2.3 Terrestrial Direct Current Cable......................................................................S-5 S.2.4 Converter Station.............................................................................................S-5 S.2.5 Terrestrial Alternating Current Cable..............................................................S-6 S.2.6 Port Angeles Substation Interconnection ........................................................S-6 S.2.7 Construction and Schedule..............................................................................S-7 S.2.8 Operation and Maintenance.............................................................................S-7 S.2.9 Transmission Service ......................................................................................S-7 S.3 No Action Alternative............................................................................................ S-8 S.4 Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts ........................................... S-8 S.4.1 Water Resources..............................................................................................S-8 S.4.2 Vegetation and Wetlands.................................................................................S-9 S.4.3 Marine Habitat and Wildlife..........................................................................S-11 S.4.4 Terrestrial Wildlife and Freshwater Fish.......................................................S-12 S.4.5 Geology and Soils .........................................................................................S-14 S.4.6 Land Use........................................................................................................S-15 S.4.7 Visual Resources ...........................................................................................S-15 S.4.8 Socioeconomics.............................................................................................S-16 S.4.9 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................S-17 S.4.10 Noise..............................................................................................................S-18 S.4.11 Health and Safety ..........................................................................................S-19 S.4.12 Air Quality.....................................................................................................S-21 S.4.13 Cumulative Impacts.......................................................................................S-21 Chapter 1 Purpose and Need for Agency Action..................................................................1-1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action................................................................................1-2 1.2.1 Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability.....................................1-2 1.2.2 Bonneville Power Administration ...................................................................1-3 1.3 Sea Breeze’s Project Objectives...........................................................................1-4 1.4 Public Involvement.................................................................................................1-4 1.5 Issues Outside the Scope of the Proposed Action or This EIS .........................1-5 1.6 Organization of the Environmental Impact Statement........................................1-7 i Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives........................................................................2-1 2.1 Proposed Action.....................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Marine DC Transmission Cable ......................................................................2-2 2.1.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Hole....................................................................2-7 2.1.3 Terrestrial Direct Current Cable......................................................................2-9 2.1.4 Converter Station...........................................................................................2-11 2.1.5 Terrestrial Alternating Current Cable............................................................2-13 2.1.6 Port Angeles Substation Interconnection ......................................................2-14 2.1.7 Staging Areas ................................................................................................2-16
Recommended publications
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement
    Final Environmental Impact Statement Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation Purpose and Need: The Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries are severely degraded as a result of two hydroelectric dams (projects) and their reservoirs built in the early 1900s. Congress has mandated the full restoration of this ecosystem and its native anadromous fisheries through the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act (Public Law 102-495). The Department of the Interior has found there is a need to return this river and the ecosystem to its natural, self-regulating state, and proposes to implement the Congressional mandate by removing both dams in a safe, environmentally sound and cost effective manner and implementing fisheries and ecosystem restoration planning. Only dam removal would fully restore the ecosystem or its native anadromous fisheries. Proposed Action: The U.S. Department of the Interior proposes to fully restore the Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries through the removal of Elwha Dam and Glines Canyon Dam and implementing fish restoration and revegetation. Dam removal would occur over a 2-year period. Elwha Dam would be removed by blasting, and Glines Canyon Dam by a combination of blasting and diamond wire saw cutting. Lake Aldwell would be drained by a diversion channel, and Lake Mills by notching down Glines Canyon Dam. Stored sediment would be eroded naturally by the Elwha River. The proposed action is located in Clallam County, on the Olympic Peninsula, in Washington State. Lead/Cooperating agencies: The National Park Service is the lead agency. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Dam – Hydro News
    SSoommee DDaamm –– HHyyddrroo NNeewwss and Other Stuff i 5/01/2009 Quote of Note: Thoughts on the economy: “If you’re in a traffic jam quit whining, it means you have a job” - - Paula Smith “If you have a job it’s a recession, if you’re laid off it’s a depression” - - Common “No nation was ever drunk when wine was cheap.” - - Thomas Jefferson Ron’s wine pick of the week: Maipe Bonarda Mendoza, Argentina 2008 OOtthheerr SSttuuffffff::: (Oops, a funny thing happened on the way to the office, they forgot about or don’t know about pumped storage hydro, the ideal backup solution. They got it right on the other points though.) Getting real on wind and solar By James Schlesinger and Robert L. Hirsch, Washington Post, 04/24/2009 Why are we ignoring things we know? We know that the sun doesn't always shine and that the wind doesn't always blow. That means that solar cells and wind energy systems don't always provide electric power. Nevertheless, solar and wind energy seem to have captured the public's support as potentially being the primary or total answer to our electric power needs. Solar cells and wind turbines are appealing because they are "renewables" with promising implications and because they emit no carbon dioxide during operation, which is certainly a plus. But because both are intermittent electric power generators, they cannot produce electricity "on demand," something that the public requires. We expect the lights to go on when we flip a switch, and we do not expect our computers to shut down as nature dictates.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 State of Our Watersheds Report West WRIA 18 – Morse Creek to Elwha River
    2016 State of Our Watersheds Report West WRIA 18 – Morse Creek to Elwha River am removal seemed like an elusive Dtarget over the years and many citizens were skeptical of the benefits. However in just four years the river has transported over 60% of the stored sediment, resulting in a rebirth of the estuary and the floodplain. Salmon are ascending to historic habitats and the recovery of the ecosystem is about to blossom. -MIkE MCHENrY FIsHErIEs HABItAt MANAGEr Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe is part of the Klal- lam Band of Indians that have resided throughout the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Hood Canal and Port Gamble Bay for generations. They are party to the Point No Point Treaty of 1855, when tribes ceded most their traditional lands to the U.S. government. The Dunge- ness-Elwha Basin (WRIA 18) has remained largely Seattle rural and forested with a natural resources-based economy focused on shellfish harvesting, commercial forestry, commercial fisheries, tourism, and agricul- ture. Major land-use impacts on salmon habitat have occurred from floodplain and shoreline development, road construction and past logging practices. This report will focus on the northwest portion of WRIA 18 basin and surrounding marine waters, which is only a portion of the area that the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe co-manages. 58 Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Elwha Basin The Area of Concern for the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (Elwha shoreline habitat conditions. Both internal and outside reviews Tribe) is the western portion of WRIA 18, from the Elwha River have concluded that recovery efforts are behind the expected pace watershed to Morse Creek, east of Port Angeles.
    [Show full text]
  • Steelhead Response to the Removal of the Elwha River Dams
    Steelhead response to the removal of the Elwha River Dams Photo by John McMillan Pacific Coast Steelhead Management Conference March 22 2018 Walla Walla, WA Acknowledgements Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Mike McHenry, Ray Moses, Larry Ward, Mel Elofson, Sonny Sampson, Wilson Wells, John Mahan, Doug Morill, Robert Dohrn, Randall McCoy, Matt Beirne National Park Service Brian Winter, Anna Geffre, Josh Geffre, Heidi Hugunin, Phil Kennedy, Sam Brenkman, Pat Crain, Kathryn Sutton NOAA Fisheries George Pess, Martin Liermann, Todd Bennett, Steve Corbett, Oleksandr Stefankiv, Amilee Wilson, Zach Hughes, Tim Tynan, Eric Ward USGS Jeff Duda, Andy Ritchie, Chris Curran, Amy East, Jon Warrick Trout Unlimited WDFW US Fish and Wildlife Service John McMillan Joe Anderson, Chris O’Connell, Randy Roger Peters US Bureau of Reclamation Cooper, Mike Gross, Andrew Claiborne & K Denton & Associates Jennifer Bountry, Tim Randle WDFW Fish Ageing Laboratory Keith Denton Elwha River 833 km2 watershed Elwha Dam • built 1913 • 32 m tall • River km 8 Glines Canyon Dam • Built 1927 • 64 m tall • River km 21 Pess et al. 2008 NW Science 115 km of habitat upstream of Elwha Dam site Photo montage compiled by George Pess Photos from NPS time lapse camera Photo montage compiled by George Pess Photos from NPS time lapse camera Sediment release • 21 million m3 of sediment stored in former reservoirs • 16 million m3 in Lake Mills (upstream of Glines) • 5 million m3 in Lake Aldwell (upstream of Elwha) • Approximately two-thirds evacuated from former reservoirs • 90% delivered to
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus Confluentus)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Top left: Clackamas bull trout reintroduction, Clackamas River, Oregon. David Herasimtschuk, Freshwaters Illustrated; Top, right: Glines Canyon Dam removal, Elwha River, Washington. John Gussman, Doubleclick Productions; Center: South Fork Skagit River and Skagit Bay, Washington. City of Seattle; Bottom: Riverscape surveys, East Fork Quinault River, Washington. National Park Service, Olympic National Park Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) September 2015 Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Lacey, Washington and Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office Portland, Oregon Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. A-1 Current Status of Bull Trout in the Coastal Recovery Unit ........................................................ A-6 Factors Affecting Bull Trout in the Coastal Recovery Unit ....................................................... A-8 Ongoing Coastal Recovery Unit Conservation Measures (Summary) ..................................... A-33 Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation ..................................................................................... A-38 Recovery Measures Narrative ................................................................................................... A-39 Implementation Schedule for
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Monitoring Options for Assessing the Response of Salmonids and Their Aquatic Ecosystems in the Elwha River Following Dam Removal
    Michael L. McHenry1, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Fisheries Department, 51 Hatchery Road, Port Angeles, Washington 98363 and George R. Pess, NOAA Fisheries, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112 An Overview of Monitoring Options for Assessing the Response of Salmonids and Their Aquatic Ecosystems in the Elwha River Following Dam Removal Abstract Removal of two hydroelectric dams on the Elwha River, Washington, one of the largest river restoration projects in the United States, represents a unique opportunity to assess the recovery of fish populations and aquatic ecosystems at the watershed scale. The current project implementation does not contain sufficient funding to support comprehensive monitoring of restoration ef- fectiveness. As a result, current monitoring efforts are piecemeal and uncoordinated, creating the possibility that project managers will not be able to answer fundamental questions concerning salmonid and ecosystem response. We present the initial elements of a monitoring framework designed to assess the effectiveness of dam removal on the recovery of Elwha River salmonids, their aquatic habitats, and the food webs of which they are an integral component. The monitoring framework is linked to the Elwha Fisheries Restoration Plan, which outlines the restoration of native stocks of salmon and relies upon a process of adaptive manage- ment. The monitoring framework includes two areas of emphasis—salmonid population recovery and ecosystem response. We provide study design considerations and make recommendations for additional monitoring efforts prior to dam removal. Based on a power analysis, we determined that a minimum of 3–11 years and up to 50 years of monitoring will be required to capture potential ecosystem responses following dam removal.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Olympics
    VOICE of the WILD OLYMPICS The Natural History of a Coastal Prairie In Olympic National Park by Ed Tisch Olympic Although typically they are forested, the tween Cape Alava and the north end of Lake Park Olympic lowlands support a sizeable number Ozette, belongs in the wet prairie category. It, Associates of coastal prairies. Harlan Bretz, an early too, has had a long fire history. In a recent in- Founded in 1948 Washington geologist, reported in 1913 that terview with Myra Vanderhoof, one of the last many of these occupy glacial outwash plains children born to homesteaders at the now-ex- and moraines (e.g., near Shelton and Sequim) tinct Lake Ozette settlement, she informed me Volume 10, No 2 where excessively-drained, gravelly soils pro- that in the early 1900s the white settlers found Spring 2002 duce summer-arid conditions. Fire has also an abundance of fire-scarred trees in the for- contributed to the sparsely-forested character ests adjoining Ahlstrom’s Prairie to the west. Contents of these “prairies,” which sometimes resemble At that time most of the trees between Ozette oak savannas. G.N. Jones, a 1937 University of and Cape Alava also seemed smaller than they Washington graduate student, felt that these are today. The homesteaders assumed that the OPA Meeting Schedule 2 “constituted the nearest approach to a grass- local Ozette Indians had burned their prairies land formation” in the Puget Trough region. to eliminate trees and to keep down the salal Congressional In stark contrast, however, the coastal prai- understories. When Myra first visited Contacts 2 ries of the rainy western Olympics are bog-like Ahlstrom’s Prairie, around 1927, she found it Roadless Bill ? 3 and tend to occur on clayey glacial tills where very sparsely forested.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Vs. Dams: the Dam Removal Debate on the Elwha River
    Salmon vs. Dams: The Dam Removal Debate on the Elwha River Teachers: This lesson contains a classroom project with background related to the AFG video clips about salmon vs. dams. These parts may be used individually or together, depending on the needs of your class. Note: You can access and view the video clips used in this lesson in the Teacher Resources section of the AFG Web site www.pbs.org/americanfieldguide/teachers. Grade Level: 10-12 Background Hydroelectric Power has long been touted as a clean alternative source of energy. It produces roughly 70% of the power in the Pacific Northwest. However, hydroelectric is not without its costs. Salmon runs on the major river systems, such as the Columbia River, and on minor rivers, such as the Elwha River in Olympic National Park, have suffered greatly in recent decades, and some of these salmon species are becoming listed as endangered or threatened species. Today, large dams on the Columbia River, owned by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) provide the majority of power for the Pacific Northwest. Yet hundreds of small, privately owned dams are scattered around the region. These are in various states of disrepair, and often only provide enough power to fuel a small community or one or two factories. However, these dams do as much or more damage to the salmon runs in their area than the large dams (BPA dams have extensive programs to help the fish successfully navigate the dams). This lesson is derived from real testimony given to Congress regarding two of these small dams in the pristine Olympic National Park in Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping and Monitoring Bluff Erosion with Boat-Based LIDAR and the Development of A
    Mapping and Monitoring Bluff Erosion with Boat-based LIDAR and the Development of a Sediment Budget and Erosion Model for the Elwha and Dungeness Littoral Cells, Clallam County, Washington GEORGE M. KAMINSKY HEATHER M. BARON AMANDA HACKING DIANA McCANDLESS Washington State Department of Ecology Coastal Monitoring & Analysis Program DAVID S. PARKS Washington State Department of Natural Resources 1 This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement PC00J29801 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife contract number 12-1119 and sponsored by Coastal Watershed Institute. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 2 ABSTRACT The spatial distribution and temporal variability of retreat rates of coastal bluffs composed of unconsolidated glacial deposits are of intense interest to landowners who occupy bluff-top properties as well as coastal resource managers who are responsible for protecting marine habitats such as forage fish spawning beaches dependent on bluff-derived sediments. Assessment of the bluff retreat and associated sediment volumes contributed to the nearshore over time is the first step toward development of a coastal sediment budget for bluff-backed beaches. This project develops and applies a boat-based LiDAR system for mapping and monitoring bluff erosion patterns from June 2012 to August 2013 to augment traditional data sources including aerial photography (1939 and 2001), GPS-based beach profile data (2010-2013), and airborne LiDAR (2001 and 2012). These data are analyzed in context to determine alongshore rates of bluff retreat and associated volume change for the Elwha and Dungeness littoral cells in Clallam County, Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • B-236481 Comments on Legal Issues Regarding Glines Canyon And
    .1- - Comptroler Geu-al * UtER of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 2dr'¢ _ \ B-236481 .February 16, 1990 The Honorable John D. Dingell Chairman Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairmang This is in response to your letter dated June 12, 1989, in which you asked for our views on three legal issues concerning the Glines Canyon and Elwha River Dams: (1) Whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has jurisdiction to issue a new license for the Glines Canyon Dam; (2) Whether FERC may add conditions to its annual licenses on the Glines Canyon Dam for the restoration of fisheries; and (3) Whether any federal agency may order either dam removed. First, we believe that FERC does not have jurisdiction to issue a new license for the Glines Canyon Dam. Second, because FERC does not have jurisdiction to issue a new license for the Glines Canyon Dam, it does not have authority to issue annual licenses, much less condition their issuance. Third, we have concluded that FERC has the authority to order either or both dams removed. We hope our comments are helpful to you. We have enclosed our more detailed analysis of these issues. Under our usual FILE C@YD ':u A agreement, this opinion will be available to the public 30 days from its date, unless you release it sooner. As agreed, we will provide you with our analysis of the nonlegal issues at a later date. Sincerely yours, Actingcomptroller General of the United States Enclosure B-236481 .
    [Show full text]
  • Dam Removal & the Elwha River
    Ecosystem response during the removal of the Elwha River Dams Photo by John McMillan June 2016 Chris Curran Dwight Barry Pat Connolly Tina Herschelman Chris Clark Mary Hunchberger Joe Anderson Jeff Chan Amy Draut Trisha O’Hara Mike Ackley Jeff Duda Randy Cooper Denise Hawkins Jason Dunham Mike Gross Roger Peters Nancy Elder Dan Spenser Guy Gelfenbaum Marshal Hoy Ian Miller Ian Jezorek Chris Konrad Chris Magirl Matt Beirne Josh Logan Phillip Blackcrow Sam Brenkman Joe Peterson Sonny Earnest Pat Crain Steve Rubin Tim Beechie Mel Elofson Josh Chamberlin Jerry Freilich James Starr Mike McHenry Heidi Hugunin Andrew Stevens Holly Coe Doug Morrill Josh Geffre Christian Torgersen Keith Denton Raymond Moses Jon Warrick Phil Kennedy Kurt Fresh Rebecca Paradis Kinsey Frick Lauren Kerr Kim Sager-Fradkin Andy Ritchie Polly Hicks Sonny Sampson Anna Kagley Anna Torrance Brian Winter Martin Liermann K Denton & associates Tim Randle John McMillan Jennifer Bountry Keith Denton Sarah Morley George Pess Christine Steele Gary Winans Tom Quinn Neal & Linda Chism Today’s talk • A national context for dam removal • Watershed description • Impacts of the Elwha river dams • The Elwha River Ecosystem & Fisheries Restoration Act • How much sediment is there & what is going to happen? • The removal of the Elwha River dams Photo by John McMillan • What has occurred during & since dam removal? • Summary Photo by Brian Cluer Dam Removal in the United States Number of dams removed (American Rivers 1912 to 2014) 600 (O’Connor et al. 2015) 500 400 300 200 100 http://www.mpcer.nau.edu/riverreborn/map.html 0 Increased removal over last 30 years 1915 - 251915 - 351926 1936 - 45 1946 - 55 1956 - 65 1966 - 75 1976 - 85 1986 - 95 1996 - 05 2006 - 15 Percent of total removed 60% (American Rivers 1999, 50% Doyle et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Bugler 2010 Designer and Editor Glines Canyon Dam (Left)
    8 Summer 2010 Olympic National Park BUGLER Summer Newspaper 2010 OlComeOlOlympic’ympic’ympic’ Explores WWs ilderilderildernessnessness Wilderness is... a place for people seeking solitude, escape, wildness, beauty and much more. A place for clean water, clean air, abundant wildlife, and diverse and unique plants. A place for the solo adventurer, families, mountaineers and for friends. A place for the young and the old. Wilderness Take A is a place for all people. For the past 25 years I have camped and hiked all over the west and Olympic National Park is still one of my favorite places. In this spectacular park my family and I can enjoy the comfort of a campground, take a short day hike or Last Look embark on a backpacking trip. I am always amazed that at Olympic I can stand on a sandy beach with waves By BARB MAYNES, Public Information Officer lapping at my feet and gaze out past mammoth sea stacks at the Pacific fter years of planning and preparation, Olympic Ocean, and the next day I can become immersed in the refreshing embrace National Park is gearing up for the largest dam of the temperate rain forest. Or I can walk through groves of giant trees removal in U.S. history and celebrating the ‘last while following the path of a crystal clear river up to its source in the lofty, A snow covered mountain passes and peaks that overlook the valley below. dam summer’ in the Elwha River Valley. Next summer, removal of Elwha and Glines Canyon dams on the My spine has tingled as a giant bull elk and I have watched a mountain lion Elwha River will begin, the culminating step in a run along a huge log in the rain forest.
    [Show full text]