DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Geospatial Methodology Used in the Psnerp Comprehensive Change Analysis of Puget Sound Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Geospatial Methodology Used in the Psnerp Comprehensive Change Analysis of Puget Sound Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem FINAL GEOSPATIAL METHODOLOGY USED IN THE PSNERP COMPREHENSIVE CHANGE ANALYSIS OF PUGET SOUND PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Prepared In Support of Prepared by Anchor QEA, LLC 1423 Third Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 In Association With Additional Anchor Team consultants and Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Program Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Point‐No‐Point Treaty Council Skagit River System Cooperative University of Washington Wetland Ecosystem Team May 2009 Table of Contents PREFACE BY THE PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT NEARSHORE SCIENCE TEAM .............................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION AND PROCESS OVERVIEW............................................................................ 1 2 DATA DISCOVERY ............................................................................................................................ 3 3 DATABASE STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................... 10 3.1 Spatial Hierarchy, Scale, and Metrics.................................................................................... 11 3.2 Nested Spatial Components (Geographic Scale Units [GSUs])......................................... 13 3.2.1 Shoreline GSUs................................................................................................................... 14 3.2.2 Delta GSUs.......................................................................................................................... 15 3.2.3 Shoreline and Delta Overlap ............................................................................................ 17 3.2.4 GSU Table Structure.......................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Geodatabase Architecture....................................................................................................... 18 3.4 Long‐Term Database Support ................................................................................................ 19 4 DATA DEVELOPMENT AND SYNTHESIS ................................................................................. 21 4.1 Geographic Scale Units (GSUs).............................................................................................. 37 4.1.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 37 4.1.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 45 4.1.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 50 4.2 Historic Shoreform................................................................................................................... 50 4.2.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 50 4.2.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 65 4.2.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 76 4.3 Current Shoreline..................................................................................................................... 76 4.3.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 76 4.3.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 76 4.3.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 76 4.4 Shoreform Change ................................................................................................................... 77 4.4.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 77 4.4.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 77 4.4.3 Data Synthesis .................................................................................................................... 83 4.4.4 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 85 4.5 Armoring................................................................................................................................... 85 4.5.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 85 4.5.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 86 4.5.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 87 4.6 Breakwaters/Jetties................................................................................................................... 87 4.6.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 87 4.6.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 87 4.6.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 87 Geospatial Methodology used in the PSNERP Comprehensive Change Analysis of Puget Sound May 2009 Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project i 070202‐01 Table of Contents 4.7 Marinas...................................................................................................................................... 88 4.7.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 88 4.7.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 88 4.7.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 88 4.8 Nearshore Fill ........................................................................................................................... 89 4.8.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 89 4.8.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 89 4.8.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 89 4.9 Overwater Structures............................................................................................................... 90 4.9.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 90 4.9.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 90 4.9.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 90 4.10 Railroads, Abandoned (Nearshore Only)............................................................................. 91 4.10.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 91 4.10.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 91 4.10.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 91 4.11 Railroads, Active (Nearshore Only) ...................................................................................... 91 4.11.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 91 4.11.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 92 4.11.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 92 4.12 Roads (Nearshore Only).......................................................................................................... 92 4.12.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 92 4.12.2 Data Processing.................................................................................................................. 92 4.12.3 Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 92 4.13 Tidal Barriers ...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Records and Thoughts by Evelyn Hopley Clift, 1964
    Samish and Vendovia Islands : Records and Thoughts by Evelyn Hopley Clift, 1964 Samish Island Early Settlers It is much too late to learn the story of Samish Islands early history from the lips of the first pioneers. They are gone as are the Indians who once made the Island home, or an important rendezvous. But I have pieced together from the family Bible, old letters, several newspaper clippings of long ago and personal interviews with grandsons what tells a little part of those early days. I pass it on humbly, filled with awe at the courage, fortitude, strength and kindliness of the particular pioneer woman I found. Time and the humid climate have all but erased the signs which tell us that here was a white man's first crude cabin or there an Indian's smoky long-house. The clearings, so laboriously made, remain . greatly extended by tractor and bulldozer. Roads that are wide and smooth today were once native trails, then narrow pathways and wagon roads. Occasionally one comes upon a bit of orchard long forgotten, a portion of rotting rail fence, a wagon wheel, pestles, weights the natives used to anchor their nets, arrow heads, a lonely grave. One of the earliest settlements by white men in what is today Skagit County was on Samish Island. Projecting westward from the Samish River flats into the deep waters of Padilla and Samish Bays, the island is just over 3 miles long and 3/4 mile wide. It was originally separated from the mainland by Siwash Slough, so called for the 2000 or so Siwash who had their long-house there and hunted and fished these waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Coupeville and Part of the Port Townsend North 7.5
    WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGIC MAP GM-58 Geologic Map of the Coupeville and Part of the Port Townsend North R1W R1E 42¢30² 122°45¢ 40¢ 122°37¢30² 48°15¢ 48°15¢ Qgtv Qco Qb Qgoge Qco Qgdp 7.5-minute Quadrangles, Island County, Washington Qml 1 Qco schematic section Qgog Qgd 5 e Qcw from top to Qgav; Qgav Qgdme elev. 197 ft schematic section elev. 160 ft measured section Qgdp Qml Qgav Qgoge elev. 150 ft Qs <10 ft sand by Michael Polenz, Stephen L. Slaughter, and Gerald W. Thorsen ~10 ft below Qgav Qd active dune sand Qp Qs 110,124,182 6 to 12 ft 5 ft Qs sand Qgdm 18 ft sand and gravel Qgdm Qco silt and clay e Qgav 7 ft Qgdm diamict e Qb liquefaction features e Qgdme Qml Qc 15 ft silt 9 ft Qgd diamict Qcw o and small shears in Qd Qgoge Qgd 9 ft Qgt till 188 p 10 ft silt and clay silt and sand at ~100 ft June 2005 v Qgtv <75 ft Qgoge 11 ft Qgav sandy gravel Qcw Qp Qmw 177,178 gravel with ~30 ft mixed deposits—sand, Qmw silt boulders silt, and minor gravel Qgd Qp Qgomee? Qm Qgdmels? ~20 ft lahar runout (Table 2, samples 188 and 182*) GEOLOGIC SETTING AND DEVELOPMENT We suggest that this sediment source is partly documented by a high-energy outwash Deposits of the Fraser Glaciation (Pleistocene) alluvial facies reflect ancestral Skagit River provenance. Sparse, local Glacier REFERENCES CITED channel deposits— Qgomee Qcw Qgd 79 ft p clean sand with Qls Qb Qcw ~15 ft channel deposits—sand and minor gravel gravel unit (unit Qgoge), which locally grades up into Partridge Gravel, and which we Peak dacite and pumice pebbles, such as those found to the east of Long Point very sparse gravel Like most of the Puget Lowland, the map area is dominated by glacial sediment and lacks Armstrong, J.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Hydrodynamic Model of Puget Sound and Northwest Straits
    PNNL-17161 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Development of a Hydrodynamic Model of Puget Sound and Northwest Straits Z Yang TP Khangaonkar December 2007 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062; ph: (865) 576-8401 fax: (865) 576-5728 email: [email protected] Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161 ph: (800) 553-6847 fax: (703) 605-6900 email: [email protected] online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm This document was printed on recycled paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 13 -- Puget Sound, Washington
    514 Puget Sound, Washington Volume 7 WK50/2011 123° 122°30' 18428 SKAGIT BAY STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA S A R A T O 18423 G A D A M DUNGENESS BAY I P 18464 R A A L S T S Y A G Port Townsend I E N L E T 18443 SEQUIM BAY 18473 DISCOVERY BAY 48° 48° 18471 D Everett N U O S 18444 N O I S S E S S O P 18458 18446 Y 18477 A 18447 B B L O A B K A Seattle W E D W A S H I N ELLIOTT BAY G 18445 T O L Bremerton Port Orchard N A N 18450 A 18452 C 47° 47° 30' 18449 30' D O O E A H S 18476 T P 18474 A S S A G E T E L N 18453 I E S C COMMENCEMENT BAY A A C R R I N L E Shelton T Tacoma 18457 Puyallup BUDD INLET Olympia 47° 18456 47° General Index of Chart Coverage in Chapter 13 (see catalog for complete coverage) 123° 122°30' WK50/2011 Chapter 13 Puget Sound, Washington 515 Puget Sound, Washington (1) This chapter describes Puget Sound and its nu- (6) Other services offered by the Marine Exchange in- merous inlets, bays, and passages, and the waters of clude a daily newsletter about future marine traffic in Hood Canal, Lake Union, and Lake Washington. Also the Puget Sound area, communication services, and a discussed are the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, and variety of coordinative and statistical information.
    [Show full text]
  • SAMISH RIVER Geographic Response Plan (SAMR-GRP)
    Northwest Area Committee JUNE 2017 SAMISH RIVER Geographic Response Plan (SAMR-GRP) SAMISH RIVER GRP JUNE 2017 SAMISH RIVER Geographic Response Plan (SAMR-GRP) June 2017 2 SAMISH RIVER GRP JUNE 2017 Spill Response Contact Sheet Required Notifications for Oil Spills & Hazardous Substance Releases Federal Notification ‐ National Response Center (800) 424‐8802* State Notification ‐ Washington Emergency Management Division (800) 258‐5990* ‐ Other Contact Numbers ‐ U.S. Coast Guard Washington State Sector Puget Sound (206) 217‐6200 Dept Archaeology & Historic Preservation (360) 586‐3065 ‐ Emergency / Watchstander (206) 217‐6001* Dept of Ecology ‐ Command Center (206) 217‐6002* ‐ Headquarters (Lacey) (360) 407‐6000 ‐ Incident Management (206) 217‐6214 ‐ NW Regional Office (Bellevue) (425) 649‐7000 13th Coast Guard District (800) 982‐8813 ‐ Bellingham Field Office (360) 715‐5200 National Strike Force (252) 331‐6000 Dept of Fish and Wildlife (360) 902‐2200 ‐ Pacific Strike Team (415) 883‐3311 ‐ Emergency HPA Assistance (360) 902‐2537* ‐ Oil Spill Team (360) 534‐8233* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Dept of Health (800) 525‐0127 Region 10 – Spill Response (206) 553‐1263* ‐ Drinking Water (800) 521‐0323 ‐ Washington Ops Office (360) 753‐9437 Dept of Natural Resources (360) 902‐1064 ‐ RCRA / CERCLA Hotline (800) 424‐9346 ‐ After normal business hours (360) 556‐3921 ‐ Public Affairs (206) 553‐1203 Dept of Transportation (360) 705‐7000 State Parks & Recreation Commission (360) 902‐8613 National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration State Patrol ‐ District 7 (360) 654‐1204* Scientific Support Coordinator (206) 526‐6829 Weather (NWS Seattle) (206) 526‐6087 Tribal Contacts Samish Indian Nation (360) 293‐6404 Other Federal Agencies Upper Skagit Indian Tribe (360) 854‐7090 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Freeland and Northern Part of the Hansville 7.5
    WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGIC MAP GM-64 Geologic Map of the Freeland and Northern Part of the Freeland and Northern Part of the Hansville 7.5-minute Quadrangles Hansville 7.5-minute Quadrangles, Island County, Washington 122°37¢30² R 1 E R 2 E 35¢00² 32¢30² 122°30¢00² 48°07¢30² 48°07¢30² Qls Qgof Qf T 31 N Qgdme by Michael Polenz, Henry W. Schasse, and Bradley B. Petersen T 30 N S O U T H E R N W H I D B E Y I S L A N D F A U L T Z O N E Qgasv Qgtv Qgome Qgtv June 2006 Qgof Qgomee Qmw Qgtv Qb A Qgdme GEOLOGIC SETTING AND DEVELOPMENT of sliding or hazard. All shoreline bluffs in the map area are subject to UNDIVIDED PRE-FRASER NONGLACIAL DEPOSITS (PLEISTOCENE) Berger, G. W.; Easterbrook, D. J., 1993, Thermoluminescence dating tests for lacustrine, Johnson, R.; Introne, D. S.; Mattes, J.; Stipp, J. J., 1980, University of Miami radiocarbon Qm Qb Qgo T episodic landsliding and bluff retreat, but many slides are too small to glaciomarine, and floodplain sediments from western Washington and British Columbia: dates XVII: Radiocarbon, v. 22, no. 1, p. 103-104. f Qlse The map area is covered by 800 to 2500 ft (Jones, 1999; Mosher and others, 2000; show, and most slide deposits are quickly removed by beach wave action. Qc Pre-Fraser nonglacial deposits, undivided—Sand, silt, clay, peat, and Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 30, no.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 2. Hazard Summaries
    Whatcom County SECTION 2: HAZARD SUMMARIES Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan SECTION 2. HAZARD SUMMARIES The following seven natural hazards were identified to be significant risks to the county, and specifically hazardous to the populated western areas of Whatcom County: 1. Earthquakes 2. Flooding 3. Geologic Hazards 4. Severe Storms 5. Tsunamis 6. Volcanoes 7. Wildland Fires The updated HIVA was received late in the plan update process and will be the basis for the next version of the all hazards plan. The following sections describe the seven significant natural hazards and their potential threats to Whatcom County. Much of the information collected in these hazard summaries came from local experts working in hazard assessment or hazard mitigation for a specific hazard. The summaries describe the hazards, convey the areas at potential risk from each hazard, and describe mitigation measures as implemented in the past or to be implemented in the future to manage the effects of natural disasters in Whatcom County. Each hazard description is organized into the following parts: Hazard Related Definitions Background Information General description of the hazard relevant to Whatcom County and Washington State History Historical background on the presence of the hazard in Whatcom County; much of this information was obtained from agencies such as FEMA, the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), and the U.S. Geological Society (USGS) Vulnerability Assessment Descriptions of specific areas within the county at risk for each hazard, when this information was available Mitigation Strategies Recommended mitigation strategies to lessen the dangers posed by each hazard Whatcom County Sheriff’s Office Division of Emergency Management Original Submission: June 1, 2015 2 - 1 FEMA Approval: Dec 15, 2016 Whatcom County SECTION 2: HAZARD SUMMARIES Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Whatcom County’s Planning and Development Services provided the entire hazard GIS datasets, except for the Wildland Fire data, which came from WDNR’s North Region.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Skagit Basin Overview
    1. Skagit Basin Overview Abstract Since the 1850s, the Skagit River basin has been altered by human activities such as logging, diking, and the construction of dams, roads, levees, and tide gates. Logging and construction of levees and dikes converted coniferous forest and wetlands to farmland, industrial, and urban/suburban residential development. Dams constructed in the Skagit River not only generate hydropower but also provide flood control, recreation opportunities, and diverse ecosystem services. Major highways constructed through Skagit County promoted both economic and population growth in Skagit County. These human developments have dramatically impacted the hydrology and geomorphology of the basin and have impacted or reduced habitat for a wide range of species, including multiple species of native anadromous fish historically reliant on Skagit River Basin tributaries. Low-lying farms, urban development, and other lands in the floodplain are currently vulnerable to river flooding and sea level rise. The economy of the Skagit River basin in the 19th and early 20th centuries was focused primarily on logging, mining, and agriculture, but has diversified through the second half of the 20th century. Rapid increases in population in the 21st century are projected for Skagit Co., which, under the Growth Management Act and the Skagit County Comprehensive Plan, will direct future growth primarily in urban areas. 1.1 Overview of the Skagit River Basin The Skagit River basin is located in southwestern British Columbia in Canada and northwestern Washington in the United States (Figure 1.1) and drains an area of 3,115 square miles (Pacific International Engineering, 2008). Major tributaries in the basin are the Baker River, Cascade River, and Sauk River.
    [Show full text]
  • Catch Record Cards & Codes
    Catch Record Cards Catch Record Card Codes The Catch Record Card is an important management tool for estimating the recreational catch of PUGET SOUND REGION sturgeon, steelhead, salmon, halibut, and Puget Sound Dungeness crab. A catch record card must be REMINDER! 824 Baker River 724 Dakota Creek (Whatcom Co.) 770 McAllister Creek (Thurston Co.) 814 Salt Creek (Clallam Co.) 874 Stillaguamish River, South Fork in your possession to fish for these species. Washington Administrative Code (WAC 220-56-175, WAC 825 Baker Lake 726 Deep Creek (Clallam Co.) 778 Minter Creek (Pierce/Kitsap Co.) 816 Samish River 832 Suiattle River 220-69-236) requires all kept sturgeon, steelhead, salmon, halibut, and Puget Sound Dungeness Return your Catch Record Cards 784 Berry Creek 728 Deschutes River 782 Morse Creek (Clallam Co.) 828 Sauk River 854 Sultan River crab to be recorded on your Catch Record Card, and requires all anglers to return their fish Catch by the date printed on the card 812 Big Quilcene River 732 Dewatto River 786 Nisqually River 818 Sekiu River 878 Tahuya River Record Card by April 30, or for Dungeness crab by the date indicated on the card, even if nothing “With or Without Catch” 748 Big Soos Creek 734 Dosewallips River 794 Nooksack River (below North Fork) 830 Skagit River 856 Tokul Creek is caught or you did not fish. Please use the instruction sheet issued with your card. Please return 708 Burley Creek (Kitsap Co.) 736 Duckabush River 790 Nooksack River, North Fork 834 Skokomish River (Mason Co.) 858 Tolt River Catch Record Cards to: WDFW CRC Unit, PO Box 43142, Olympia WA 98504-3142.
    [Show full text]
  • Have Native Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus Kisutch) Persisted in the Nooksack and Samish Rivers Despite Continuous Hatchery Production Throughout the Past Century?
    Conservation Genetics 5: 367–379, 2004. 367 Ó 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Have native coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) persisted in the Nooksack and Samish rivers despite continuous hatchery production throughout the past century? Maureen P. Small*, A.E. Pichahchy, J.F. Von Bargen & S.F. Young Genetics Laboratory, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capital Way N, Olympia, WA 98501- 1091, USA (*Author for correspondence: fax:+1-360-902-2943; e-mail: [email protected]) Received 6 May 2003; accepted 5 July 2003 Key words: coho salmon, hatchery impact, microsatellites, native salmonids, Oncorhynchus kisutch Abstract For over a century, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife has implemented hatchery pro- grams as a means to boost salmon abundance. Concerns have developed that native populations may be replaced by hatchery strains, decreasing the genetic diversity required to respond to environmental changes. We report a comparison of microsatellite DNA variation in wild-spawning and hatchery-strain coho salmon from the Nooksack and Samish rivers in northern Puget Sound. Significant heterogeneity in genotype frequencies was detected between wild-spawning coho salmon from the upper North Fork (NF) Nooksack River and hatchery-strain coho salmon from the Nooksack River (descendants of primarily Nooksack River broodstock). Little difference in genotype frequencies was detected between wild-spawning coho salmon from the Samish River and hatchery-strain coho salmon from the Nooksack River. The 13- locus suite provided high resolution: in assignment tests over 85% of wild-spawning coho salmon from the upper NF Nooksack River were assigned to source. Wild-spawning coho salmon collected below hatcheries in the Nooksack River and 50% of wild-spawning Samish River coho salmon were assigned to hatchery collections.
    [Show full text]
  • Joseph Whidbey State Park
    JOSEPH WHIDBEY STATE PARK A Cascadia Marine Trail Site History Honoring over 5,000 Years of Marine Travel The Cascadia Marine Trail site at Joseph Whidbey State Park is located about half way between Deception Pass and Point Partridge on the west side of Whidbey Island, just south of Rocky Point and Naval Air Station Whidbey Island. It is open to west wind and waves sweeping in through the Strait of Juan de Fuca but, with a public sandy beach, it is one of the few available landing sites on northwest Whidbey. Coast Salish Indians that lived throughout Puget Sound before white settlement hunted and gathered berries and other plants in the area. They managed the vegetation with intentional fires and some cultivation to encourage the growth of camas, nettles, bracken, and other edible plants. Game, fish, and edible plants were so abundant that the Indians in the area never experienced famine. The first Europeans to explore the west side of Whidbey were Spaniards of the Quimper Expedition of 1790. Manual Quimper sent his second pilot, Juan Carrasco, to explore the area, but the Spaniards did not linger long or venture far. They saw Admiralty Inlet and Deception Pass but thought they were closed inlets. Captain VanCouver arrived in 1792 and explored more extensively, discovering that Admiralty Inlet led to Puget Sound. The settlers of northwest Whidbey were primarily Dutch that arrived in the 1890’s to establish dairies and farms. The land was extraordinarily fertile and the area set national records for bushels of wheat per acre. But the west shore of Whidbey became known for a different economic activity: smuggling.
    [Show full text]
  • Updating the River Mile System in Washington State: Considerations, Ramifications, and Recommended Solutions
    GEOG 569 – SUMMER QUARTER, 2013 - CAPSTONE PROJECT UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON Updating the River Mile System in Washington State: Considerations, Ramifications, and Recommended Solutions Grant Novak Jon Walker 8/23/2013 GEOG 569 – CAPSTONE PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................. 2 II. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 2 III. The River Mile System ......................................................................................................................... 8 History ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Need for Updates ........................................................................................................................................ 9 IV. Proposed Alternatives .......................................................................................................................11 Alternative 1 – Keep current USGS river miles, and add major tributaries ..............................................11 Alternative 2 – Replace River Mile Dataset with NHD ..............................................................................12 Alternative 3 – Replace River Mile Dataset with NHD and develop online river miles application .........12 Financial Analysis
    [Show full text]