1. Fish 513. Seminar 1. April 3. The PRISM Context Jeff Richey

4. PRISM ISSUES * What will the coupled Puget Sound system look like over time for different spatial units? * How can the advanced information required to address the “futures” questions be mobilized and distributed? * How can advanced information be incorporated into and developed from education? How can advanced information be incorporated into the general public and ultimately policy?

7. WRIA-SPECIFIC TO WHOLE BASIN/ESU

10. Flow Verification Using all available flow data Hourly, daily, monthly, and annual flows Flood of record

11. Urban I (10-30% developed) Urban II (30-60%) Urban III (> 60%) Short Grass Tall grass Crop/mixed Irrigated Crop Mixed Woodland Bog or Marsh Evergreen Shrub Coniferous I Coniferous II Coniferous III Coniferous IV Deciduous Broadleaf Non-forested (Altered-unknown) Non-forested (Altered-shrub) Ice cap / Glacier Water Prism ‘98 Classified Landcover Snoqualmie Drainage Basin (M. Logsdon) Evaluating the Impact of Landscape Pattern on Watershed Hydrology

12. Classified “real” Random PatchySmooth Evaluating the Impact of Landscape Pattern on Watershed Hydrology

13. Accumulated Sum Difference (1990 – 1991) The Difference in the total amount of water flowing past the mouth of the basin between the “real” landscape (1998 classified) and the “simulated”pattern – Random, Patchy, and Smooth Random - 1998 Patchy – 1998 more water Smooth – 1998 Less water A 12% change in the forest composition, impacts the total accumulated flow to a greater degree then does a change in the pattern of the landscape with the same composition.

14. Spawning Timing Wissmar et al

15. SRF What are the recovery actions on a WRIA-by-WRIA basis, which in the aggregate over the ESU would provide numerically definable targets for sustainable and harvestable populations of salmon at definable financial costs?