DOCSLIB.ORG

Snohomish Basin Protection Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Snohomish Basin Protection Plan SNOHOMISH BASIN PROTECTION PLAN December 2015 Prepared by Snohomish County Surface Water Management King County Snoqualmie Watershed Forum Staff Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources Department ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Steering Committee Tulalip Tribes – Terry Williams Snohomish County – Debbie Terwilleger, Gregg Farris King County – Joan Lee Wild Fish Conservancy – Jamie Glasgow Trout Unlimited – Kate Miller Puget Sound Partnership – Susan O’Neil, Heather Cole Washington State University Extension – Kevin Zobrist U.S. Forest Service – Joe Neal Forterra – Skip Swenson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife – Kirk Lakey Washington Department of Natural Resources – Doug McClelland City of Snohomish – Ann Stanton Project Team Snohomish County Surface Water Management staff (Ann Bylin, Mike Rustay, Denise DiSanto, Karen Stewart, Beth Liddell, and Paul Marczin), Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources staff (Daryl Williams, Morgan Ruff, and Josh Kubo), and Snoqualmie Watershed Forum staff (Beth leDoux, Janne Kaje, and Perry Falcone) with consultant assistance from Hook Environmental, Parametrix, and Anchor QEA. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement PO 00J09701 to Snohomish County Public Works. 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. Additional match funding was provided by Snohomish County, King County, and Tulalip Tribes. Recommended Citation Snohomish County Surface Water Management, King County Snoqualmie Watershed Forum Staff, and Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources Department, 2015. Snohomish Basin Protection Plan. Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum. Everett, WA. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary goal of this 2015 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan (SBPP) is to identify protection strategies that prevent the degradation of hydrologic processes that support salmon or salmon habitat. In 2005, the Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum members approved the Snohomish Basin Salmon Conservation Plan and laid out a 50-year road map for multi- species recovery. The 2005 Plan was based on historical records, the best available science, and social and economic conditions. The Plan recognized that it was critical to use adaptive management to increase the chance of success by incorporating new data, information about successes and failures, and new opportunities provided by changing context in the Snohomish River Basin. Since 2005, there have been many site-scale successes on restoration projects in the mainstems, estuaries and tributaries. However, many environmental indicators continue to decline, according to local data and the 2009 State of the Sound report (Puget Sound Partnership 2010). The continued decline is likely due to little-understood cumulative effects that need to be addressed through protection at the landscape-scale. Snohomish Basin Hydrology—Supporting People, Wildlife, and Fish The Snohomish River Basin contains diverse aquatic resources, a variety of fish and wildlife populations of local and regional significance, and a diverse portfolio of land uses. The Basin and its many natural resources and human communities are inextricably linked to how water moves through space and time, from the smallest headwater streams to mainstem rivers and the groundwater beneath the surface. December 2015 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan ES-1 Hydrology in the Snohomish, Snoqualmie, and Skykomish rivers and associated tributaries is changing. Historical flow patterns and volumes are shifting as a result of changing land uses and climate change. Human activities—such as impervious surface installation, tree cover removal, traditional stormwater conveyance systems, and water withdrawals—are contributing to altered watershed processes, degraded water quality, loss of wetlands and riparian forests, and degraded shoreline conditions. Investigating Protection of Snohomish Basin Hydrology The continued degradation of hydrology in the Basin, rapid urbanization, and threats from climate change motivated a new effort focused on the protection of the water resources in the Basin and the watershed processes that support them. This SBPP identifies areas that are important to the goal of protecting hydrology, and examines new and existing tools to help support that goal. Through the protection of hydrology, the SBPP aims to ultimately protect habitat quality, quantity, and heterogeneity for fish and wildlife. The protection of hydrology will also support a continued high quality of life for those who live and work in the Basin, help ameliorate flood risks, and ensure the availability of water for multiple uses into the future. To best characterize the different challenges, hydrological importance, and opportunities in each area, an approach was developed that incorporates information on land use, expected climate change impacts, services provided by hydrology, salmon use, existing protection measures, and possible improvements to policies, programs, and projects. The Puget Sound Watershed Characterization model was used to understand the importance of different components of hydrology at various scales and to Photo credit: Greg Dunlap describe the level of hydrological degradation. Assessment of the components of hydrology resulted in the development of ES-2 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan December 2015 basic protection strategies and aided in the assessment of tools to The consequences of not achieve protective actions. implementing protective measures for hydrology in the Snohomish Basin The Snohomish Basin Protection Plan include the following: • Loss of habitat for salmon The intent of the SBPP is to set a framework for a more and other aquatic species complete implementation and accounting of protection efforts • Continued degradation of water quality by all Basin partners. Section 1 of the SBPP provides the Basin • Decreased ability to protection context and more details on the intended purposes of mitigate drought this document. Section 2 describes the technical assessment conditions • Negative impacts on in- approach and Section 3 summarizes the results of the technical stream flows assessment (with additional details provided in Appendix A). • Risk of loss of life and infrastructure during flood events Section 4 of the SBPP provides an overview of protection tools • Lost opportunity to protect ecosystem that can be a starting point for planners and others to consider function in combination with local hydrology concerns, land use types, • High future costs of fish use, and implementation opportunities. The tools include a restoration range of existing programs in their current form, existing Although a lot of good work programs with suggestions for improvements, and entirely new is being done through existing policy and tools. Section 5 presents an assessment of current and potential programs, water quality has future funding strategies to support SBPP objectives. continued to degrade and with the challenges of drought and extreme flow Section 6 presents a summary example of how the SBPP can events, the Basin’s natural hydrologic regime has been guide the development of protection strategies towards a significantly altered. It is specific program goal—in this case, salmon recovery—and more cost effective to provides updates on information developed since the 2005 protect hydrology now than to pay later for restoration Snohomish Basin Salmon Conservation Plan. Appendix B actions and projects. provides more detailed recommendations for updated salmon recovery protection strategies relative to specific land uses in the Basin. In December 2015, the Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum adopted Appendix B as the first formal adaptive management action for the 2005 Plan. This protection update does not change existing restoration recommendations and habitat goals from the 2005 Plan. December 2015 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan ES-3 It has been 10 years since the 2005 Plan was adopted by the Forum, with broad support of jurisdictions operating in the Basin. Much has been accomplished in the realm of habitat restoration, yet landscape-scale indicators—such as total forest cover and water temperature—continue to show degradation. The intent of this SBPP is to provide an update to the 2005 Plan, and to serve as planning guidance to achieve greater protection of hydrology and, in turn, salmon habitat. This SBPP was developed at a time when there is recognition for the need to create watershed and ecosystem resilience in the face of growing populations and changing climatic conditions. Just as restoration relies on partnerships and collaboration, protection of hydrology and habitat cannot be undertaken in isolation, or by one entity, group, or agency. As stated by the original chairs Photo credit: flickr user brewbooks of the Forum, “we know that to recover salmon in Puget Sound, we must succeed in the Snohomish Basin.” ES-4 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan December 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... ES-1 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................... vii SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND BASIN PROTECTION CONTEXT ........................ 1-1 1.1 The Importance of Hydrology in the Basin ...............................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geology and Structural Evolution of the Foss River-Deception Creek Area, Cascade Mountains, Washington
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF James William McDougall for the degree of Master of Science in Geology presented on Lune, icnct Title: GEOLOGY AND STRUCTURALEVOLUTION OF THE FOSS RIVER-DECEPTION CREEK AREA,CASCADE MOUNTAINS, WASHINGTOV, Redacted for Privacy Abstract approved: Robert S. Yekis Southwest of Stevens Pass, Washington,immediately west of the crest of the Cascade Range, pre-Tertiaryrocks include the Chiwaukum Schist, dominantly biotite-quartzschist characterized by a polyphase metamorphic history,that correlates with schistose basement east of the area of study.Pre-Tertiary Easton Schist, dominated by graphitic phyllite, is principallyexposed in a horst on Tonga Ridge, however, it also occurs eastof the horst.Altered peridotite correlated to Late Jurassic IngallsComplex crops out on the western margin of the Mount Stuart uplift nearDeception Pass. The Mount Stuart batholith of Late Cretaceous age,dominantly granodiorite to tonalite, and its satellite, the Beck lerPeak stock, intrude Chiwaukum Schist, Easton Schist, andIngalls Complex. Tertiary rocks include early Eocene Swauk Formation, a thick sequence of fluviatile polymictic conglomerateand arkosic sandstone that contains clasts resembling metamorphic and plutonic basement rocks in the northwestern part of the thesis area.The Swauk Formation lacks clasts of Chiwaukum Schist that would be ex- pected from source areas to the east and northeast.The Oligocene (?) Mount Daniel volcanics, dominated by altered pyroclastic rocks, in- trude and unconformably overlie the Swauk Formation.The
    [Show full text]
  • Community Relations Plan
    Community Relations Plan Rainy, Sunset, and Kromona Mine and Mill Sites Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Clean-Up Project Prepared by: Curtis Spalding Environmental Coordinator Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest and Rod Lentz On-Scene Coordinator Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests Approved By: _____________________________ Date: _____________ Y. ROBERT IWAMOTO Forest Supervisor Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW ...............................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................4 Rainy Mine and Mill ...............................................................................................................4 Sunset Mine and Mill .............................................................................................................5 Kromona Mine and Mill ........................................................................................................6 SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES ............................................................................................8 COMMUNICATION STRATEGY ..............................................................................................8 History of Community Involvement and Project Awareness .................................................8 Key Community Concerns .....................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • USGS Geologic Investigations Series I-1963, Pamphlet
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO ACCOMPANY MAP I-1963 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE SKYKOMISH RIVER 30- BY 60 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, WASHINGTON By R.W. Tabor, V.A. Frizzell, Jr., D.B. Booth, R.B. Waitt, J.T. Whetten, and R.E. Zartman INTRODUCTION From the eastern-most edges of suburban Seattle, the Skykomish River quadrangle stretches east across the low rolling hills and broad river valleys of the Puget Lowland, across the forested foothills of the North Cascades, and across high meadowlands to the bare rock peaks of the Cascade crest. The quadrangle straddles parts of two major river systems, the Skykomish and the Snoqualmie Rivers, which drain westward from the mountains to the lowlands (figs. 1 and 2). In the late 19th Century mineral deposits were discovered in the Monte Cristo, Silver Creek and the Index mining districts within the Skykomish River quadrangle. Soon after came the geologists: Spurr (1901) studied base- and precious- metal deposits in the Monte Cristo district and Weaver (1912a) and Smith (1915, 1916, 1917) in the Index district. General geologic mapping was begun by Oles (1956), Galster (1956), and Yeats (1958a) who mapped many of the essential features recognized today. Areas in which additional studies have been undertaken are shown on figure 3. Our work in the Skykomish River quadrangle, the northwest quadrant of the Wenatchee 1° by 2° quadrangle, began in 1975 and is part of a larger mapping project covering the Wenatchee quadrangle (fig. 1). Tabor, Frizzell, Whetten, and Booth have primary responsibility for bedrock mapping and compilation.
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River Project Ferc No. 2157 Anadromws Fish
    SULTAN RIVER PROJECT FERC NO. 2157 ANADROMWS FISH MITIGATION STUDY PLANS (PROPOSED) JUNE, 1983 (Revised September. 1983) (Revised October, 1983) PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY EVERETT, WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 11. Steelhead Fishability (Creel Census) 111. Sediment Analysis (Textural composition) Study IV. Gravel Quantity Study v. Ramping Rate Study VI . Fish Passage (Powerhouse Berm) Study VII. River Temperature Study VIII. Schedule IX. References Appendix A Agreement on Additional Sediment Sampling I. INTRODUCTION Thls document presents fish mi tigation study plans for agency and tribal review and comment so as to jointly develop studies of the effect of project operation on anadromous fishery resources of the Sultan River. When Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1 (District) applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for Stage I1 of the Sultan River Project (FERC No. 2157). several state and federal agencies and the Tulalip Tribes intervened over mitigation and enhancement issues concerning Sultan River aquatic resources. Subsequently, several 1icense articles addressed those issues in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Order Amending License dated October 16, 1981. In accordance with Article 60 a document entitled "Uncontested Offer of Settlement - Joint Agencies" was executed in April, 1982. The Commission approved this settlement on February 9, 1983. It included the series of studies mentioned in the Settlement Agreement and are described more fully in the next sections. During subsequent implementing steps in the studies the Joint Agencies have requested participation. Specific activities anticipated include technical review of consultant/contractor study plans, periodic monitoring of work through a study committee, and appropriate participation in field studies as described later.
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish River Watershed
    ARLINGTON Camano Sauk River Island Canyon Cr South Fork Stillaguamish River 5 9 WRIA 7 MARYSVILLE GRANITE FALLS S Freeway/Highway t Lake e S a Pilchuck River l Stevens m o r u b County Boundary 529 e g o v h i a R t LAKE Possession k WRIA 7 Boundary Whidbey h STEVENS c 2 g u Sound u h Island c o l i l P Spada Lake Incorporated Area S ey EVERETT Eb EVERETT r e Fall City Community v SNOHOMISH i R on alm Silver Cr n S C a r lt MUKILTEO u ykomis N S k h S S Ri ver k n MONROE r 9 o MILL o SULTAN F h GOLD BAR rth CREEK o o Trout Cr m 2 N 99 is mis h yko h R Sk iv Canyon Cr LYNNWOOD 527 er INDEX 1 2 3 4 5 0 EDMONDS 522 524 R Rapid River iv So e Proctor Cr u Barclay Cr BRIER r t Miles WOODWAY h BOTHELL F o Eagle Cr JohnsonSNOHOMISH Cr COUNTY rk MOUNTLAKE WOODINVILLE S C k KING COUNTY TERRACE h y e r olt River k SHORELINE h Fork T Beckler River r ry C rt Index Cr om KENMORE No ish Martin Cr DUVALL R. 522 KIRKLAND r Tolt-Seattle Water C SKYKOMISH Tye River olt 2 5 s Supply Reservoir T R i ive r Sou r Miller River t Foss River r h Money Cr a Fo REDMOND 203 rk SEATTLE H r Ames Cr e iv R 99 t l Deep Cr o er Puget Sound S T iv un R d CARNATION a Lennox Cr r y 520 Pat C ie C te r Lake Washington r m s n l o ffi a Elliott n i u S r Tokul Cr Hancock Cr n q Bay 405 G C o o Lake SAMMAMISH r q n File: 90 u S a BELLEVUE Sammamish ver lm k Ri 1703_8091L_W7mapLetterSize.ai r r i lo e o ay KCIT eGov Duwamish River Fall F T MERCER R i City v h ISLAND Coal Cr e t r r Note: mie Riv SEATTLE Snoqualmie o al e r The information included on this map N u r C SNOQUALMIE oq Falls d has been compiled from a variety of NEWCASTLE Sn r ISSAQUAH gf o k in sources and is subject to change r D o 509 without notice.
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River, Wa
    Hydropower Project Summary SULTAN RIVER, WA HENRY M JACKSON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (P-2157) Photo Credit: Snohomish County Public Utility District This summary was produced by the Hydropower Reform Coalition and River Management Society Sultan River, Washington SULTAN RIVER, WA HENRY M JACKSON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (P-2157) DESCRIPTION: The Jackson Project is located on the Sultan River in northwestern Washington. The project’s authorized capacity is 111.8 megawatts (MW). The project is located on the Sultan River, 20 miles east of the City of Everett, Washington, in Snohomish County. The project occupies 10.9 acres of the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). Downstream of the project’s Culmback dam at Spada Lake, the Sultan River flows through a deep forested gorge for nearly 14 miles. The project powerhouse is located near the downstream end of the gorge. The District (Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County) currently operates the project to satisfy the City of Everett’s municipal water supply needs, protect aquatic resources, maintain Spada lake levels for summer recreation, and generate electricity. The new license requires additional measures to protect and enhance water quality, fish, wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources. The twelve signatories to the Settlement Agreement are the District, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Forest Service; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. National Park Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Washington DFW), Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), Tulalip Tribes of Washington (Tulalip Tribes), Snohomish County, Washington; City of Everett; City of Sultan; and American Whitewater.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservatton Futures (Cft) 2016 Annual Collections Application for Funds
    K.C. Date Received li{¡ King County CONSERVATTON FUTURES (CFT) 2016 ANNUAL COLLECTIONS APPLICATION FOR FUNDS PROJECT NAME: South Fork Skvkomis h-Tve-tr'oss River Confl uence Aco uisition Annlicánt hrrisdictionlsl: Kins Countv DNRP Open Space System: Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (Name of larger connected system, if any, such as Cedar River Creenway, Mountains to Sound, a Regional Trail, etc ) Acquisition Proiect Size:75.2 acres (3 parcels) CFT Application Amount: $ 540.500 (Size in acres and proposed number of parcel(s) if a multi-parcel proposal) (Dollar amount oJCFT grant requested) PrioriV P arcels: 3 12612-9026. 302612-903 l. 302612-9029 S e c o n d ary P ar c e I s : 3 126 12 -900 4 (24.09 ac), 3 026 12 -9 032 ( I 0 ac), 302612-9040 (5.04 ac), 302612-9041(6.58 ac), 122610-9010 (17.55 ac), 122610-9008 (8.27 ac) Tvne of Acouisitionls): E Fee Title tr fion Easemenf tr Ofher: CONTACT INFORMATION Contact Name: Perrv Falcone Phone: ).06-477-4689 Title: Proiect Prosram Manaser Fax:206-296-0192 Address: 201 South Jackson Street- Suite 600 Emai I : nern¡.falconeôkinpcountv. sov Seattle. V/A 98104 l)ate:3-18-15 PROJECT SUMMARY: The goal of this project is to acquire three parcels at the confluence of the South Fork Skykomish, Tye and Foss Rivers to protect salmon habitat and recreational river access. The priority parcels include 75.2 acres of undeveloped high quality salmon habitat at river mile 19.5 of the South Fork Skykomish River.
    [Show full text]
  • 20110209-5130 Ferc
    20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Consultation Biological Opinion And Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation And Management Act Consultation Federal Energy Regulatory Commission License to operate the Jackson Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2157 Located on the Sultan River HUC 17100090402 Snohomish County, Washington Action Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Consultation Conducted by: National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Region Hydropower Division NOAA Fisheries Log Number: F/NWR/2010/01972 Date: February 9, 2011 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM Jackson Hydroelectric Project Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 7 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 9 1.1 Background and Consultation History
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Natural Environment
    CHAPTER 5: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 5.1 Introduction Sultan’s natural environment has shaped the city since its very inception with Sultan and Skykomish Rivers providing key transportation routes, accommodating the floating logs from the surrounding forest, to the bluff and plateau shaping the traditional Sultan core. The Natural Environment element combines several environmentally related topics, including critical areas (wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, and geologically hazardous areas), water and air quality, and shorelines. Sultan has many of these features throughout its 2,304 acre Urban Growth Area. The purpose of this chapter is to identify those natural features, especially those classified as critical areas. Perhaps one of Sultan’s most prominent features is its rivers and creeks. Three major rivers, a creek, and numerous minor streams drain the Sultan urban growth area. The Skykomish River flows west across the southern city draining into Puget Sound at Everett. The Sultan River flows south across the western city limits to its confluence with the Skykomish River. The Wallace River south and east of Sultan joins the Skykomish River in Sultan near Skywall Drive. Winters Creek originates north of Sultan and flows southwest before joining the Sultan River north of Osprey Park. Wagley Creek originates east of the City and flows west and southwest before joining the Skykomish River near Sultan Basin Road. Unnamed streams and water courses flow into the Sultan River and Wagley Creek. The river and tributaries drain the Sultan UGA within 3 principal basins: The Lower Sultan River Basin drains the Sultan River valley into Winters Creek and the Sultan River.
    [Show full text]
  • Gold and Fish Pamphlet: Rules for Mineral Prospecting and Placer Mining
    WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Gold and Fish Rules for Mineral Prospecting and Placer Mining May 2021 WDFW | 2020 GOLD and FISH - 2nd Edition Table of Contents Mineral Prospecting and Placer Mining Rules 1 Agencies with an Interest in Mineral Prospecting 1 Definitions of Terms 8 Mineral Prospecting in Freshwater Without Timing Restrictions 12 Mineral Prospecting in Freshwaters With Timing Restrictions 14 Mineral Prospecting on Ocean Beaches 16 Authorized Work Times 17 Penalties 42 List of Figures Figure 1. High-banker 9 Figure 2. Mini high-banker 9 Figure 3. Mini rocker box (top view and bottom view) 9 Figure 4. Pan 10 Figure 5. Power sluice/suction dredge combination 10 Figure 6. Cross section of a typical redd 10 Fig u re 7. Rocker box (top view and bottom view) 10 Figure 8. Sluice 11 Figure 9. Spiral wheel 11 Figure 10. Suction dredge . 11 Figure 11. Cross section of a typical body of water, showing areas where excavation is not permitted under rules for mineral prospecting without timing restrictions Dashed lines indicate areas where excavation is not permitted 12 Figure 12. Permitted and prohibited excavation sites in a typical body of water under rules for mineral prospecting without timing restrictions Dashed lines indicate areas where excavation is not permitted 12 Figure 13. Limits on excavating, collecting, and removing aggregate on stream banks 14 Figure 14. Excavating, collecting, and removing aggregate within the wetted perimeter is not permitted 1 4 Figure 15. Cross section of a typical body of water showing unstable slopes, stable areas, and permissible or prohibited excavation sites under rules for mineral prospecting with timing restrictions Dashed lines indicates areas where excavation is not permitted 15 Figure 16.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin July 2021
    Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin July 2021 Prepared for: Snohomish River Basin Salmon Recovery Technical Committee Prepared by: Josh Kubo, Andrew Miller, and Emily Davis. King County Water Land and Resources Division. Acknowledgements: Project Team: Emily Davis, Elissa Ostergaard, Kollin Higgins, Andrew Miller, and Josh Kubo Reviewers: Matt Baerwalde, Dave Beedle, Keith Binkley, Steve Britsch, Curtis DeGasperi, Aimee Fullerton, Kollin Higgins, Heather Kahn, Janne Kaje, Frank Leonetti, Kurt Nelson, Elissa Ostergaard, Colin Wahl. Recommended Citation: Kubo, J., A. Miller, and E. Davis. 2021. Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Water Land and Resources Division, Seattle, WA. July, 2021 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 Why is water temperature important for salmon recovery? ................................................................... 6 Drivers of Water Temperature ............................................................................................................... 10 Human Alterations to Aquatic Thermal Regimes ................................................................................... 16 Water Temperature Standards in the Snohomish River Basin ............................................................... 21 Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Test Herrera Report Template
    APPENDIX B South Fork Skykomish River Salmon Habitat Information Review and Future Studies Scoping Summary Report SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH RIVER SALMON HABITAT INFORMATION REVIEW AND FUTURE STUDIES SCOPING SUMMARY REPORT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division and USDA Forest Service Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. SOUTH FORK SKYKOMISH BASIN SALMON HABITAT INFORMATION REVIEW AND FUTURE STUDIES SCOPING SUMMARY REPORT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division 201 S. Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104 and USDA Forest Service Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Telephone: 206/441-9080 April 30, 2013 CONTENTS Project Objectives and Scope ............................................................................ 1 Project Setting ........................................................................................ 1 Geographic Scope of the Project ................................................................... 3 Methods for Data Review............................................................................. 4 Data and Information Review Results ................................................................... 9 Information Request Contacts and Status ........................................................
    [Show full text]