The Elwha River Restoration: Challenges and Opportunities for Community Engagement by Ryan Laurel Hilperts B.A., Western Washington University, 2001 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the School of Environmental Studies Ryan Laurel Hilperts, 2010 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. ii The Elwha River Restoration: Challenges and Opportunities for Community Engagement by Ryan Laurel Hilperts B.A., Western Washington University, 2001 Supervisory Committee Dr. Eric Higgs, Supervisor (School of Environmental Studies) Dr. Jenny Feick, Departmental Member (School of Environmental Studies) Dr. Peter Stephenson, Outside Member Department of Anthropology) iii Supervisory Committee Dr. Eric Higgs, Supervisor (School of Environmental Studies) Dr. Jenny Feick, Departmental Member (School of Environmental Studies) Dr. Peter Stephenson, Outside Member (Department of Anthropology) Abstract As ecological restoration expands as a practice, so does the complexity, cost, and scale of many projects. Higgs (2003) terms these projects technological and argues they limit meaningful community focal restoration practices, one component of good ecological restoration. The planned removals of two large dams on the Elwha River in Washington State provide a case study to investigate this theory. I conducted 18 in-depth interviews with community leaders and restoration practitioners in order to explore the question, “How do technological restoration projects enable or constrain community engagement, and in the case of the Elwha River, how might such engagement be enlarged?” This interpretive study suggests that technological restoration projects, particularly when managed by federal agencies, expand engagement through a broadened 1) public audience and 2) suite of engagement activities. I argue for a “focusing” of engagement activities, and propose a matrix for assessing opportunities for local community engagement. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Supervisory Committee………………………………………………………………….ii Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………..iii Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………..iv List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………..v List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………...vi Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………..…...vii Introduction………………………………………………………………………………1 Thesis Organization……………………………………………………………...3 Terms and Abbreviations………………………………………………………..5 Chapter One: Restoration, Devices and Dams………………………………………...6 Ecological Restoration…………………………………………………………..6 Focal Restoration……………………………………………………………….17 Large Dams and their Removals…………………..…………………………..27 Chapter Two: The Elwha River…………………………………..…………………...34 Biogeography…………………………………………………………………...35 Human History………………………………………………………………….39 The Elwha Dam………………………………………………………...40 Glines Canyon Dam…………………………………………………....42 Creation of Olympic National Park……………………………………44 Ecological Impacts of the Elwha Dams……………………………………….45 Decision to Remove the Dams………………………………………………...48 Theory and the Specific Case: The Elwha River Restoration Project……….48 Chapter Three: Methodology……………………………………………………..…...57 Data Collection…………………………………………………………………58 Analysis and Reduction of Data……………………………………………….61 Limitations……………………………………………………………………...63 Chapter Four: Findings………………………………………………………………...65 4.1 Controversy and Collaboration……………………………………………66 4.2 Olympic National Park…………………………………………………….78 4.3 The Case of the Port Angeles Water Treatment Plants………………….88 4.4 Engagement in the Spaces Between……………………………………….97 Summary…………..…………………………………………………………..110 Chapter Five: Synthesis……………………………………………………………….112 5.1 What is Engagement?.........................................................................112 5.2 Who Engages?...................................................................................118 5.3 Types of Engagement: How does the public participate?......................121 Summary………………………………………………………………………136 Chapter Six: Ways Forward………………………………………………………….137 Conclusions……………………………………………………………………………147 Works Cited…………………………………………………………….……………..152 Appendix A: List of Abbreviations……………………………………………….….159 Appendix B: List of Informants………………………………………..……………..160 Appendix C: Participant Recruitment Materials……………………………….…...162 Appendix D: Participant Consent Form…………………………….…………….…163 Appendix E: Interview Questions………………………………….…………….…..167 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Defining Qualities of a Technological Restoration Project……….…...26 Table 2.1 Mammals and Birds of the Elwha River Basin……………………..….38 Table 2.2 Technological Features of the Elwha River Restoration Project…..….49 Table 5.1 Activities Identified as “Community Engagement with the Elwha Restoration Project” ……………………………………….……….114 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Location of the Elwha River…………………………………………….35 Figure 2.2 The Elwha Watershed, Elwha and Glines Canyon Dams………….…36 Figure 2.3 The Elwha Dam, 2006…………………………………………………...41 Figure 2.4 Glines Canyon Dam, 2006…………………………………………....…43 Figure 5.1 Continuum from Focal to Technological Engagement…………….….116 Figure 5.2 Participation in Restoration Activities……………………………...…..123 Figure 5.3 Planning and Decision-Making Activities…………………………..….126 Figure 5.4 Economic Arrangements…………………………………………….…..130 Figure 5.5 Research Activities………………………………………………….……132 Figure 5.6 Education and Information Activities………………………….…….…134 Figure 6.1 Focusing Engagement in Technological Restoration Projects..…...….138 Figure 6.2 A Matrix for Assessing Engagement Opportunities…………..…….…141 vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Fittingly, this thesis is the product of countless focal practices on both sides of the Strait of Juan de Fuca: meaningful conversations over meals, long walks in wild places, writing retreats and coffee dates, classroom debates and shared lesson plans. Most crucially, it is the product of a web of people who have generously given of their thought and passions. My advisor Eric Higgs impelled me to carve a meaningful path into this rich field of study. His generosity, encouragement, and guidance brought me new perspective, new confidence, and helped me discover a new home in a world where practice and ideas meet. Jenny Feick provided detailed and probing comments on drafts of the thesis, and shared a rich library that provided crucial signposts along the way. Peter Stephenson provided poetic perspective. The community in the School of Environmental Studies provided a warm intellectual and social home with room for creativity, rigor, and valuable cross- pollination of ideas. Elaine Hopkins and Anne Bowen cheerfully helped me navigate through the administrative thicket of the university. I am immensely grateful to Trudi Smith. This thesis would not be half of what it is without her critical thought, her ever-ready wit, and her willingness to engage with my ideas at a moment’s notice. I felt like a novice jogger taken under the wing of a marathon runner; she taught me tricks of the trade, the most important being keeping a sense of balance--and a ukelele--always at hand. The figures throughout are largely a product of our conversations. Jenny Kingsley provided motivation, writing retreats, and survival kits at all the right times. Lisa Levesque helped keep things in perspective. Jeannie Achuff kept me honest. Glenys Verhulst, Ernest Morrow, James Rowe, and all the rotating denizens of the Balmoral House created a supportive and encouraging space. Deep thanks to all the people in Port Angeles who gave time and energy to interviews. They all did so with a selfless sense of hope for the Elwha River and the people who live near it. Thanks in particular to Darek Staab, Lindsey Shromen- Wawrin, and Sam Fox. Each, in their own way, has taught me volumes about how to think critically about our home communities, while maintaining an animating spirit of hope. The staff and students at Olympic Park Institute inspired. Finally, Mike deWit made everything better. viii for Papou & Nikki and Jerry who have always insisted I follow my heart Introduction The Elwha River winds north for nearly 70 kilometers from its headwaters in the rainy heart of the Olympic Mountains of Washington State to its mouth on the southern edge of the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Sixteen kilometers east lies Port Angeles, a city of just under 20,000—the largest on the North Olympic Peninsula. Between 1912 and 1923 two dams constructed on the Elwha River decimated eleven runs of anadromous salmon and trout that inhabited the river, including a run of Chinook known to often reach 45 kilograms. Both dams—the Lower Elwha and Glines Canyon--were built without fish ladders, and the construction of the lower dam effectively shrunk their spawning habitat from 112 kilometers of streambed to six. Sediment trapped behind the dams starved the river mouth of fine sediments, causing the erosion and ultimate destruction of important habitat for shellfish and estuarine species. The creation site of the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, who relied heavily on both fish and shellfish, was flooded by of one of the reservoirs (Crane, 1997; Egan, 2007). In 1968, when the Elwha Dam was scheduled for relicensing, the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, fisheries advocates, and environmental groups based on the North Olympic Peninsula and in Seattle collaborated in a campaign to remove the dams and restore the watershed, in the hopes of restoring the decimated fishery of the river. Over twenty