+menu-


  • Category Archives The Issue is top down Gov.
  • Elwha Supplemental Impact Statement?

    Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

    The installation of Scott Pruitt, to run the Environmental Protection Agency, sued the agency he intends to lead more than a dozen times as Oklahoma attorney general, reinforces expectations.

    “I have no doubt that Scott will return the EPA to its core objectives,” said Republican Senator James Inhofe, also of Oklahoma, adding the agency had been guilty of “federal overreach, unlawful rule making, and duplicative red tape,”

    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    National Park Service

    DATED: JULY 9, 2002. Elwha Ecosystem Restoration Implementation; Olympic National Park; Clallam and Jefferson Counties, WA; Notice of Intent To Prepare a SUPPLEMENTAL Environmental Impact Statement FILED 9-11-02 

    Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

    (FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS, SEE ELWHA RIVER WATER QUALITY MITIGATION PROJECT

    PLANNING REPORT AT www.nps.gov/olym/elwha/home.htm).

     Mar 30 2017, Olympic National Park WE CAN’T FIND THAT PAGE….

    ——————————————————————————-

    DATED: JULY 9, 2002. MITIGATION PROJECT ISSUES?   IT’S IMPACT ON VISITORS? AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS ON VISITORS? FILED 9-11-02 

    Water quality or water supply mitigation issues that will be analyzed in the SEIS include impacts of rebuilding the existing rock diversion structure on riparian vegetation, wildlife, water quality and fish; land use related impacts of building permanent water treatment facilities, such as removal of vegetation and soil, use of heavy equipment to build the facilities and its impact on wildlife or VISITORS,

    VISITORS? WOW, IS THAT LIKE AN ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT ON CLALLAM COUNTY TOURISM?

    and hazards of using chlorine and other chemicals required for treatment.    Other environmental issues not related to water quality or supply include providing access to Morse Creek and other tributaries for fisheries protection during dam removal, access to seed stock and protection of young plants in revegetating reservoir lands, changes in driving routes for trucks disposing of rubble, or noise of an onsite rubble crushing operation and its potential effects on wildlife and VISITORS.

    VISITORS? WOW, IS THAT LIKE AN ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT ON CLALLAM COUNTY TOURISM?

    VISITORS? LIKE AN IMPACT STATEMENT ONP INHOLDERS?

    ——————————————————

    Jun 28, 2011

    Olympic National Park mea culpa: ‘Inholder’ blocked from family property

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/…/olympic-national-park-mea-culpa-8216-inholder-82…

    Jun 28, 2011 – Pearl Rains Hewett stands at a blockade on Olympic Hot Springs Road in Olympic National Park on Monday. — Photo by Chris …

    ————————————————————-

    FISH BEFORE PEOPLE

    Elwha River Fish Restoration Plan – National Park Service

    https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/upload/Elwha-River-Fish-Management-Plan.pdf

    2008 – ‎Related articles

    THE SITE WILL HELP PRESERVE AND RESTORE ELWHA RIVER CHINNOOK POPULATIONS BY PROVIDING SAFE HAVEN FOR 200,000 YEARLING SMOLTS.

    —————————————————————-

    DATED: JULY 9, 2002.

    Dam removal was determined to be the preferred option for restoration, and the 1996 EIS also identified a desired suite of actions to remove the dams. As a step towards accomplishing these objectives, Congress directed purchase of the dams (which occurred in February 2000 for $29.5 million, as stipulated by Pub. L. 102-495).

    ————————————————————————-

    AS A DELEGATED EIS, THE OFFICIAL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL DECISION IS THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PACIFIC WEST REGION;

     SUBSEQUENTLY THE OFFICIAL RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION WOULD BE THE SUPERINTENDENT, OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK.

     DATED: JULY 9, 2002.JOHN J. REYNOLDS,REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PACIFIC WEST REGION.[FR DOC. 02-23124 FILED 9-11-02; 8:45 AM]BILLING CODE 4310-70-P

    (FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS, SEE ELWHA RIVER WATER QUALITY MITIGATION PROJECT

    PLANNING REPORT AT www.nps.gov/olym/elwha/home.htm).

     Mar 30 2017 WE CAN’T FIND THAT PAGE….

    Written comments may be delivered by fax to: 360/565-1325; via e-mail to: Brian_Winter@nps.gov; or via postal mail or hand delivery during normal business hours to: Elwha Restoration Project Office, SEIS Comments, 826 East Front Street, Suite A, Port Angeles, WA 98362.

    ———————————————————————-

    Timeline of the Elwha 1992 to Present – Olympic National Park (U.S. …

    https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/…/timeline-of-the-elwha-1992-to-present.htm

    THE SITE WILL HELP PRESERVE AND RESTORE ELWHA RIVER CHINNOOK POPULATIONS BY PROVIDING SAFE HAVEN FOR 200,000 YEARLING SMOLTS. … Before his death in 2007, Albright pioneered propagation methods for many plants native to the Northwest.

    ———————————————————————

    Elwha River Fish Restoration Plan – National Park Service

    https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/upload/Elwha-River-Fish-Management-Plan.pdf

    2008 – ‎Related articles

    PURSUANT TO THE ELWHA RIVER ECOSYSTEM AND FISHERIES RES- TORATION ACT …… 200,000. MORSE CREEK. YEARLING SMOLTS. ON-SITE. 180,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 …… Spawning ground surveys of live or dead fish and redds can then be.

    —————————————————————————

    Apr 15, 2013

    ELWHA RIVER WATER QUALITY  200,000  DEAD SMOLT

    SEABURY BLAIR JR. | Elwha too clogged for fish to live – Kitsap Sun

    www.kitsapsun.com/sports/columnists/seabury-blair/356167261.html

    Apr 15, 2013 – … AS MANY AS 200000 CHINOOK SALMON WERE KILLED IN WHAT HAS TO BE ONE OF THE … HATCHERY OFFICIALS REPORTED SEEING HUNDREDS OF DEAD SMOLTS LINING THE … For almost 15 miles, the Elwha River carves through a century’s worth of … ELWHA RIVER WATER QUALITY  

    JUL 12, 2013 LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM TRIBE’S HATCHERY

    200, 000  MORE DEAD SMOLT

    400,000 TOTAL DEAD HATCHERY SMOLT…

    —————————————————————–

    The Danger of Putting All Your Eggs in the Hatchery Basket — Wild …

    wildfishconservancy.org › About › Press › Press Clips

    JUL 12, 2013 – ROUGHLY 200,000 HATCHERY COHO SALMON AND 2000 STEELHEAD, RESULTING FROM A PUMP FAILURE AT THE LOWER ELWHA KLALLAM TRIBE’S HATCHERY ON THE ELWHA RIVER. …

     SPRING  Apr 15, 2013 THANKS TO MISTAKEN TIMING OF LARGE RELEASE OF SMOLTS AT ONE TIME … PRODUCTION LOST (200,000 DEAD) DUE TO MALFUNCTION OF HATCHERY WATER PUMP …

    The tragedy is: this production could have occurred with much less risk with natural spawning left to the river where fish make their own decisions regarding spawning destination and time, and juveniles determine their own window for outmigration.  Instead these fish have been hi-jacked by the continued belief in hatcheries rather than the proven success story of wild fish recolonization for thousands of years and resulting diversity that hedges its bets against the whims of nature’s unpredictable events.  And we paid $16 million to create this Elwha hatchery fiasco plus further annual investments in taking fish from the river and subjecting them to the persistent belief in hatcheries that is counter to the science — further evidence of the tragic disconnect of science from policy, the latter continually driven by the politics of popular beliefs.

    http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20130711/news/307119990

     ————————————————————————————

     (FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS, SEE ELWHA RIVER WATER QUALITY MITIGATION PROJECT

    PLANNING REPORT AT www.nps.gov/olym/elwha/home.htm).

    WE CAN’T FIND THAT PAGE….

    THE SEIS WILL ALSO ANALYZE CHANGES UNRELATED TO WATER QUALITY

    MITIGATION WHERE APPLICABLE.

    One of these changes is a re-evaluation of

    options to mitigate impacts to septic systems on the Lower Elwha

    Klallam Reservation. Many of the septic systems in the lower lying

    parts of the Reservation may become ineffective when the river level

    and associated groundwater table rises as a result of river channel

    aggradation following dam removal.

    In addition to the points summarized above, further detail has been added to the revegetation plan for the areas currently inundated by the reservoirs; thus, potential impacts of

    actions associated with such revegetation will be addressed.

    ———————————————————–

    Full unedited text

    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    National Park Service Elwha Ecosystem Restoration Implementation;

    Olympic National Park; Clallam and Jefferson Counties, WA;

    Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement [Federal Register: September 12, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 177)][Notices][Page 57834-57836]From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov][DOCID:fr12se02-94] SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, and its cooperating agencies are undertaking a conservation planning and environmental impact analysis process intended to supplement the 1996 Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation final environmental impact statement (1996 EIS).

    Two dams, built in the early 1900s, block the river and limit anadromous fish to the lowest 4.9 river miles. The 1996 EIS is the second of two environmental impact statements that examined how best to restore the Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fishery in Olympic National Park. Dam removal was determined to be the preferred option for restoration, and the 1996 EIS also identified a desired suite of actions to remove the dams. As a step towards accomplishing these objectives, Congress directed purchase of the dams (which occurred in February 2000 for $29.5 million, as stipulated by Pub. L. 102-495). However, release of sediment from behind the dams would result in sometimes severe impacts to water quality or to the reliability of supply to downstream users during the dam removal impact period of about 3-5 years, which the 1996 EIS proposed mitigating through a series of specific measures (see below).

    Subsequently, new research and changes unrelated to the implementation project have emerged. Therefore, the primary purpose of this Supplemental EIS (SEIS) will be to identify and analyze potential impacts of a new set of water quality and supply related mitigation measures.

    Background     Elwha Dam was built in 1911, and Glines Canyon Dam in 1925, limiting anadromous fish to the lowest 4.9 miles of river (blocking access to more than 70 miles of Elwha River mainstream and tributary habitat). The two dams and their associated reservoirs have also inundated and degraded important riverine and terrestrial habitat and severely affected fisheries habitat through increased temperatures, reduced nutrients, reduced spawning gravels downstream, and other changes. Consequently, salmon and steelhead populations in the river have been considerably reduced or eliminated, and the river ecosystem within Olympic National Park significantly and adversely altered.

    In 1992, Congress enacted the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act (PL 102-495) directing the Secretary of the Interior to fully restore the Elwha river ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries, while at the same time protecting users of the river’s water from adverse impacts associated with dam removal. The records of decision associated with this process indicated removal of both dams was needed to fully restore the ecosystem. However, impacts to water quality and supply will result from release of sediments, which have accumulated behind the dams.

    The 1996 EIS proposed and analyzed mitigation measures to protect water quality and ensure supply for each of the major downstream users. These users included the city of Port Angeles’ municipal and industrial consumers, the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe’s fish hatchery, the state chinook salmon rearing channel, and the Dry Creek Water Association. Many private wells along the river could also be affected, but mitigation proposed for these users would remain substantially the same.    Currently, surface water from a rock fill diversion and intake pipe at river mile 3.3 supplies the city’s industrial clients and the state rearing channel. Mitigation to protect the city’s industrial customers described in the 1996 EIS included the installation of an infiltration gallery to collect water filtered from the riverbed and open-channel treatment with flocculants, chemicals and polymers during dam removal. The city’s municipal customers are supplied with a subsurface Ranney collector on the east-side of the river at river mile 2.8. To maintain water yield, the 1996 EIS [[Page 57835]] proposed a second Ranney collector be built on the river’s west-side, opposite the current collector. A temporary “package” treatment plant to filter water from the Ranney wells would have been operational during dam removal.

    The rearing channel would have been closed during dam removal and chinook production transferred to another state facility.    The tribal hatchery at river mile 1 will be central in protecting and producing Elwha anadromous fish for restoration following dam removal. Water for the hatchery is currently provided through wells and a shallow infiltration gallery. Measures described to protect hatchery water during dam removal included the expansion of the gallery to ensure supply and drilling of two new wells to provide clean groundwater for dilution.

    Dry Creek Water Association (DCWA) currently meets the needs of its members through groundwater wells. These wells would be subject to an increased frequency of flooding following dam removal, as well as increased sediment and mobilization of iron and manganese. The 1996 EIS analyzed two options for DCWA–connection to the city’s water distribution system, or providing additional protection from flooding for the existing DCWA system and treating on site with filtration and chlorination.

    Since December 1996 (when the most recent record of decision was signed), the U.S. Department of the Interior (including Bureau of Reclamation) and its cooperating agencies (including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe) have continued studying and refining elements of the selected alternative. As a result, they have found better solutions for protecting water quality and water supply during and following dam removal. In addition, changes in user needs have come about as a result of factors unrelated to the project.

    For example, chinook salmon and bull trout have both been listed as threatened since 1997, resulting in the requirement to keep the state rearing facility open during dam removal.

    Also, the city of Port Angeles must now meet new standards for the treatment of its municipal supplies. In addition, an industrial customer (Rayonier) which required very high quality water for its operation has since closed.    As a result of these and other changes, the agencies are pursuing an option of building permanent water treatment facilities with varying levels of treatment depending on the ultimate use of the water

    (for additional details, see Elwha River Water Quality Mitigation Project Planning Report at www.nps.gov/olym/elwha/home.htm).  The locations and types of diversions may also change because water collected from the city’s Ranney well is no longer considered to be purely groundwater, but is highly connected to the river and so must be treated as a surface supply.

    In addition, problems associated with subsurface intakes during the 3-5 year dam removal impact period may now outweigh the benefits. These problems include possible clogging and reduced yields, increased costs of providing flood protection, and increased environmental impacts associated with installing and maintaining subsurface structures in or very near the river. Sources of “true” groundwater, which are not so closely connected to the river have been investigated, but do not exist in the quantities required. This leaves surface water as a more attractive option. An alternative of replacing the existing intake structure will therefore be analyzed in the SEIS.

    Feasibility studies indicate surface water could be treated and used for the city’s industrial customer, in combination with well water for the state’s rearing facility and the Lower Elwha Klallam tribal hatchery, and as a backup for the city’s municipal customers. It may also be evaluated as an option to supply DCWA customers.

    The SEIS will also analyze changes unrelated to water quality mitigation where applicable. One of these changes is a re-evaluation of options to mitigate impacts to septic systems on the Lower Elwha Klallam Reservation. Many of the septic systems in the lower lying parts of the Reservation may become ineffective when the river level and associated groundwater table rises as a result of river channel aggradation following dam removal. Although the 1996 EIS examined a community mounding system, the number of residents living in the valley part of the Reservation has now increased. The SEIS will evaluate other options which are technically, economically, or environmentally preferable in light of these changes. At this time, the Tribe is considering a variety of options, including individual onsite systems with pressurized pumps, small group treatment options, offsite treatment by others, or combining with other valley residents (who would not be affected by dam removal) to create a community treatment system.

    Since the release of the 1996 EIS, two species of fish cited for restoration have been listed as threatened, and the NPS has worked with USFWS and NMFS staff to further address these species during and following dam removal. Keeping the rearing channel open for chinook salmon production and modifying road culverts within the park to provide access for bull trout to additional tributary habitat are examples of some of the additional actions that the SEIS will examine.

    Environmental Issues     Updated and additional information relevant to decision-making will be presented in the SEIS. In addition to the points summarized above, further detail has been added to the revegetation plan for the areas currently inundated by the reservoirs; thus, potential impacts of actions associated with such revegetation will be addressed. The 1996 EIS envisioned using one or more of nine solid waste disposal areas for rubble and other materials. Some of these may no longer be available, new sites might be added, or recycling of concrete may be economically preferable now.    Water quality or water supply mitigation issues that will be analyzed in the SEIS include impacts of rebuilding the existing rock diversion structure on riparian vegetation, wildlife, water quality and fish; land use related impacts of building permanent water treatment facilities, such as removal of vegetation and soil, use of heavy equipment to build the facilities and its impact on wildlife or visitors, and hazards of using chlorine and other chemicals required for treatment.    Other environmental issues not related to water quality or supply include providing access to Morse Creek and other tributaries for fisheries protection during dam removal, access to seed stock and protection of young plants in revegetating reservoir lands, changes in driving routes for trucks disposing of rubble, or noise of an onsite rubble crushing operation and its potential effects on wildlife and visitors.

    Scoping/Comments     Public scoping for the SEIS will conclude 30-days from the date of publication of this notice. All interested individuals, groups, and agencies are encouraged to provide information relevant to the design, construction, location, or potential environmental effects of desired measures noted above. Please limit comments to the proposal as described in this notice, since prior decisions to restore the ecosystem and anadromous fisheries through dam removal, and selection of the River Erosion alternative as the dam removal scenario, are beyond the scope of environmental impact analysis targeted in the SEIS. [[Page 57836]]

    Additional information and periodic updates will be available at the Web site noted above or by contacting the Elwha Restoration Project Office at (360) 565-1320. All comments must be postmarked or transmitted no later than 30 days from the publication date of this notice; as soon as this date is determined it will be announced on the Web site noted.

    Written comments may be delivered by fax to: 360/565-1325; via e-mail to: Brian_Winter@nps.gov; or via postal mail or hand delivery during normal business hours to: Elwha Restoration Project Office, SEIS Comments, 826 East Front Street, Suite A, Port Angeles, WA 98362.    If individuals submitting comments request that their name or/and address be withheld from public disclosure, it will be honored to the extent allowable by law. Such requests must be stated prominently in the beginning of the comments. There also may be circumstances wherein the NPS will withhold a respondent’s identity as allowable by law. As always: NPS will make available to public inspection all submissions from organizations or businesses and from persons identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations and businesses; and, anonymous comments may not be considered. Decision

    The SEIS will be prepared in accord with all applicable laws and regulations, including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the NPS Management Policies (2001) and NEPA guidelines (Director’s Order 12). A 60-day public review of the Draft will be initiated upon its release, which at this time is expected in early 2003; then subsequently a Final will be prepared. Issuance of both documents will be announced via local and regional press, direct mailings, on the Web site noted above, and through the Federal Register.

    AS A DELEGATED EIS, THE OFFICIAL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL DECISION IS THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, PACIFIC WEST REGION;

    SUBSEQUENTLY THE OFFICIAL RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION WOULD BE THE SUPERINTENDENT, OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK.

    DATED: JULY 9, 2002.

    JOHN J. REYNOLDS,REGIONAL DIRECTOR,

    PACIFIC WEST REGION.[FR DOC. 02-23124

    FILED 9-11-02; 8:45 AM]BILLING CODE 4310-70-P


  • WSDOT is Planning the New Elwha Bridge

    WSDOT is Planning The New Elwha Bridge

    Replacing the  Elwha River Bridge is a “Federal” top down government issue.

    I emailed my Mar 9, 2017 comment to the elected that should be concerned?   And others that are genuinely concerned.

    WSDOT is working now on (option #7)  bridge design, environmental issues, land acquisition, permitting and programming. MAR 3, 2017.

    WSDOT is ONLY planning the “Transportation” future of Clallam County’s  lifeline of highway 101.

    I saw the new proposed option #7 bridge design on Mar 7, 2017, and I immediately saw the possibilities for CLALLAM COUNTY’S ECONOMIC  FUTURE LIFELINE OF TOURISM.

    The bad news  on Mar 7, 2017?  I was informed that  there has been NO planning, cooperation or coordination between WSDOT and Clallam County elected officials on the New Elwha Bridge. period

    Someone suggested that I go to a Commissioners meeting, and give them my two (2) minutes worth.

    This is not a bottom up government issue, this is a top down government issue.

    “Planning is bringing the future into the present so that you can do something about it now.”

    So as a concerned Clallam County citizen I posted this on my website.

    The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop?

    Posted on March 9, 2017 10:29 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop? The possibilities are endless

    ———————————————————————————-

    Indeed, Replacing the  Elwha River Bridge is a “Federal” top down government issue. I emailed my comment to the elected that should be concerned?   And others that are genuinely concerned

    WA State’s elected Federal Rep. Derek Kilmer and his new local rep.

    WA State elected Reps Steve Tharinger, Kevin Van DeWege, and Mike Chapman.

    Clallam County elected Commissioners, Mark Mosias, Bill Peach and Randy Johnson, and, elected DCD director Mary Ellen Winborn.

    I sent it to WSDOT as a public comment

    I sent it  ONP Brian Winters project manager for the Dam Removals. As an informed Clallam County citizen there is also the issue of Federal accountability, responsibility, restoration for the irreparable destruction of the bridge caused by the removal of the Elwha River Dams and the tribes manmade log jams upriver from the bridge.

    Behind My Back | Battered by Dam Removal – Elwha Bridge

    www.behindmyback.org/2017/01/…/battered-by-dam-removal-elwha-bridge-destroye…

    Jan 11, 2017 – Battered by Dam Removal Elwha Bridge Destroyed A DAM TRAGEDY THE ELWHA RIVER BRIDGE MARCH 11, 2016 Andy Ritchie, project …

    ————————————————————————————-

    And the cost of replacing the Battered Elwha River Bridge is only $29.5 million dollars of tax payers money.

    —————————————————————

    A DAM TRAGEDY THE ELWHA RIVER BRIDGE

    The feds removed the Elwha River Dams. The Tribes got what they wanted for the fish, the Feds financed the removal of the Elwha River Dams with citizens taxpayer money. When the feds removed the dams, the citizens of Clallam County were the biggest losers. Citizens  lost their clean inexpensive hydro electric power producing dams, flood protection, and water storage for drought.

    The tribes were allowed by the feds to install huge manmade log jams for the fish on the Elwha River inside the Olympic National Park.

    During subsequent  flooding events, Nov 17, 2015, a devastating flood event occurred, the 300,000 public tourists and  private land Inholders  access road to Olympic National Park was lost, Gated by the ONP.

    During subsequent  flooding events the huge logs from the tribes manmade log jams became battering rams that destroyed public and Inholder campground recreational facilities. And, eventually battered and destroyed the Elwha River Bridge.

      —————————————————————————————-

    Restitution from  the federal government to the citizens of Clallam County for the financial loss incurred by the removal of the Elwha River Dams, is long overdue.

    —————————————————————————————–

     March 7, 2017  After looking at the WSDOT plans for the New Elwha Bridge and the  importance of Norm’s Resort property plus the WDFW boat launch property combined is nearly 50 acres of previously developed recreational land.

    The importance to the citizens of Clallam County, the economic necessity for tourism, Indeed, the possibilities and opportunity for a Clallam County rest stop, picnic area, a river walk on both sides of the Elwha River, that could provide another new Clallam County Recreational Park.

    ——————————————————————————-

    WSDOT is planning Clallam County’s transportation future. period

     The limited opportunities to get the rest area/river walk/picnic area/camping area idea in front of WSDOT in support of coordinated planning with the Clallam County Board of commissioners, prompted the posting on my website.

    The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop?

    Clallam County elected representatives should be in position “NOW”  to plan the Economic future of its citizens with WSDOT so they can do something about it “NOW”

     “Planning is bringing the future into the present so that you can do something about it now.”

    How important is Clallam County’s economy

    Mar 12,2017 I called our local newspaper  PDN and  and radio station KONP

    They have access to my comment “The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop?”

    —————————————————————————————–

    I was reminded, that there is public tourist recreational access on the Elwha River

    The Highway 112  The Elwha River Trail bridge.   This segment of ODT starts with a crossing of the Elwha River on a new 586 ft trail bridge suspended 70 ft above the river underneath the auto deck. with views of the river and flood plain below.

    INDEED, THE ODT A CYCLING DREAM COME TRUE

    ATTRACTION: MOUNTAIN BIKE ENTHUSIASTS

    MAY YOU BE YOUNG ENOUGH AND FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO RIDE THE DREAM!

    —————————————————————–

    PUBLIC RECREATIONAL ACCESS TO ELWHA RIVER PUBLIC FACILITIES

    TO THE EXCLUSION OF OTHERS THAT ARE TOO OLD, DISABLED AND HAVE  LESS INCOME?

    ————————————————————————————–

    The New Elwha Bridge and Norm’s Resort

    Who’s Norm?  What’s he got to do with it?

    IN 1979  Norm’s Resort on the Elwha River gave free public recreational access on ten or more acres of private land.

    Norm’s Resort  was at the intersection of the Highway 101 Elwha River Bridge and the defunct Olympic Hot Springs Road.

    As a  witness with living memory of what Norm’s Resort provided to our community

    Norm’s Resort provided “we the people”  and tourists with free public access,  a peaceful walk on the banks of the Elwha River under towering trees, fishing holes to fish in, a store, cabins, picnic area and rental boats.

    What a store it was… a very public establishment with very friendly people, food, snacks and then there was the fishing tackle.

    How do I know all this stuff about NORM’S RESORT?  because it was personal.

    In 1979, my two teenage sons and i spent an entire summer at our family Elwha River. “Inholders” recreational property inside the Olympic National Park,  accessed using the Olympic Hot Springs Road.

    The boys spent half of their time fly fishing, and the other half of their time walking 3 miles on the Olympic Hot Springs Road (one way) down to NORM’S RESORT to replenish their mosquito flies.

    The old guys met, drank coffee, socialized and even spent their time to teach my boys how to play “Ship Captain and Crew”

    NORM’S RESORT  was the go to Place. And it was very busy.

    Got tourists? Need fishing gear? Got milk? Need groceries?

    Indeed, in 1979 Clallam County had millions of tourist and our city and county flourished.

    ————————————————————

    i could stop at this point because it’s personal, But I won’t because IT IS PERSONAL

    ———————————————————————————–

    Later in the early 1980’s, Norm’s Resort provided their  boats to the Clallam County  Law Enforcement Explorer Post.( LEEP’S)  for search and rescue.

    As a  witness with living memory of  what NORM’S RESORT PROVIDED TO OUR COMMUNITY

    ——————————————————————————–

    A drunk driver missed the curve at the Elwha River bridge on highway 101.

    Directly in front of NORM’S RESORT, the truck flipped upside down as it plunged into the river

    A  young woman was thrown from the truck and missing in the Elwha River.

    The response was Clallam County search and rescue, the Sheriff’s Dept. dive team, Reserve’s and The Law Enforcement Explorer Post.( LEEP’S) and an advisor (Pearl Hewett).

    NORM volunteered his small rental row boats to The Law Enforcement Explorer Post.

    ( LEEP’S) SEARCH AND RESCUE TEENAGERS and an advisor (Pearl Hewett) so they could search for young woman.

    The Sheriff’s Dept. dive team gave up their search and left.

    With due diligence and perseverance the  ( LEEP’S) SEARCH AND RESCUE TEENAGERS and an advisor (Pearl Hewett) continued the search up and down the river in the NORM’S RESORT small rental row boats.

    That afternoon a 14 year old member of the LEEP and an advisor (Pearl Hewett) found  the body of the young woman, pinned underwater in a log jam, on an island in the middle of the Elwha River.

    (I could stop at this point)

    But, I won’t…. It was a traumatic incident for both the 14 year old and myself.

    Our boat came to rest in the log jam directly over her body, her lost wooden clog was above her,  an unbearable  view of her.  The 14 year old boy jumped up to get out of the boat, I made him sit down, he said he was going to be sick.

    The Elwha River was roaring so loudly it took us over a half an hour of yelling to attract the attention of someone one the east bank. (no cell phones back then)

    Using hand gestures we indicated that we had found her body.

    We sat in the boat and waited. while another teenage  LEEP ran up to Norm’s store and called the Sheriffs Dept.

    We sat in the boat and waited  until the Sheriff Dept Dive team arrived.

    We sat in the boat and watched as the Dive team tied off her body so it would not  be washed downstream.

    We sat in the boat and watched as she was pulled across the river and laid face down in a sheriff’s Dept. boat.

    Traumatic? face down? because rigor had her knees bent and set at a 90 degree angle ….and the purple socks she was wearing….

    THE PDN REPORTED on the incident

    WITH NO MENTION OF THE PART THE TEENAGE  LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPLORER POST.( LEEP’S) PLAYED in finding and recovering.

    Indeed, the destruction of NORM’S RESORT is personal.

    AND NOW 2017 ?  use the same worst case scenario?

    A drowning recovery on the Elwha River without Norm’s Resort and his small rental boats?

    ——————————————————————————-

    Yep… It’s Personal…

    IN 1979 WE HAD FREE ACCESS TO ELWHA RIVER  RECREATION ON PRIVATE LAND

    IN 2013 REQUESTS WERE MADE IN PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT UPDATE (SMP)

    REQUESTING, THAT THE NEARLY 50 ACRES IN U.S.A. LIMBO LAND, SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CLALLAM COUNTY FOR PUBLIC ACCESS.

    ——————————————————————————————-

    MAR 3, 2017 ENGINEERS ARE LOOKING AT BUILDING A 36-FOOT-WIDE BRIDGE WITH 12-FOOT LANES FOR VEHICLES AND 6-FOOT PEDESTRIAN LANES, WYNANDS SAID.

    MAR 9, 2017 I posted, The New Elwha Bridge and Rest Stop? The possibilities are endless

    —————————————————————————-

    March 13, 2017 Rep Derek Kilmer’s News Letter….

    Subject: Helping Those in Need

    Kilmer’s bottom line,  PLEASE DON’T HESITATE TO HOLLER IF I CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE.

    ———————————————————–

    MARCH 14, 2017,  I  post another comment first

    “WSDOT is Planning The New Elwha Bridge”

    Then, I email my comment to the elected that should be concerned?  

    And others that are genuinely concerned.

    —————————————————————————

    HELLO REPRESENTATIVE DEREK KILMER…..

     I AM REQUESTING THAT THE NEARLY  50 ACRES OF HISTORIC PUBLIC RECREATIONAL IN CLALLAM COUNTY, OWNED BY THE U.S.A. IN LIMBO LAND,   BE GIVEN BACK TO THE CLALLAM COUNTY etal.,  ELECTED COMMISSIONERS FOR THE ECONOMIC RECOVER OF TOURISM.

    Other opportunities,  I encourage anyone interested, from the public side of this equation, to send a comment to your elected federal state representative, a comment for WSDOT

    And, a note of support, for the idea to the Clallam County Board of commissioners.

    ——————————————————————————————-

    Department of Transportation designing new Elwha River bridge for …

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/news/department-of-transportation-designing-new-elw…

    Mar 3, 2017 – Department of Transportation designing new Elwha River bridge for … after funding and permitting the new bridge, plans would likely move …

    The public overwhelmingly told DOT it should replace the bridge and put it on a new alignment. The cities of Forks and Port Angeles, Clallam County and the Port of Port Angeles also urged DOT to build on a new alignment.

    DOT is working now on bridge design, environmental issues, land acquisition, permitting and programming, Wynands said.

    ENGINEERS ARE LOOKING AT BUILDING A 36-FOOT-WIDE BRIDGE WITH 12-FOOT LANES FOR VEHICLES AND 6-FOOT PEDESTRIAN LANES, HE SAID.

    He said the hope is DOT will acquire funding during this legislative session. DOT has submitted its budget and requested about $29.5 million, he said.