United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers Walt Olsen, PE Deputy Director 2404 Chandler CT SW, Ste240 Olympia, WA 98504-0913 360.753.5989.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

A Brief Introduction Professor Margaret Martin Barry.

Advertisements

Future of our Salmon A summary of the origins and legal fundamentals of the role of artificial production in the Columbia River Presented by: John Ogan.

PROPONENT INVOLVEMENT IN CONSULTATION Presentation to the Geology Matters Community Engagement Workshop October 30, 2012 Consultation with the Mi’kmaq.

Whatcom CWP Partnership Whatcom County Planning and Development Whatcom County Health Whatcom County Public Works Whatcom Conservation District Nooksack.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SHELLFISH RESTORATION November 19 – 22, 2008 Charleston, SC Shellfish Management in Washington State Dan Barth, Seattle Shellfish.

March SRSRB Meeting.  The purpose of this discussion is to provide early feedback to project sponsors  Five Application Submitted 1. South Touchet RM.

Alan C. Stay, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Bart J. Freedman, K&L Gates

Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 1 Columbia River Treaty 2014/2024 Review Paul Lumley, Yakama, CRITFC Executive Director Northwest Hydroelectric.

Earth Disturbance Programs  Chapter 102 –Erosion Control & NPDES Permits  Chapter 105-General Permits  Dirt & Gravel Roads Program.

© 2011 Marine View Ventures, Inc. All rights reserved. Washington Freight Advisory Committee: Tribal Freight Issues September 9, 2013.

TREATY FISHING, WATER RIGHTS & CULVERTS – A TRINITY 100 YEARS OF IMPLIED TREATY RIGHTS Presented by: Mason D. Morisset, Attorney at Law Washington Water.

Judge George Hugo Boldt For the tribes, enforcing the treaties meant establishing three fundamental points: tribal fishers could fish free of state regulation;

Supreme Court Only 1 Have original & Appellate jurisdiction 12 US Courts of Appeals: Courts who Review cases on appeal from the districts. Also called.

Inyo County VS. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community By Katie Davidson.

Missouri State Government. Purpose of State Gov’t Sharing power with Federal government = FEDERALISM.

THE SUQUAMISH TRIBE AND TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY. SUQUAMISH IDENTITY  Translates into “people of the D’Suq’Wub (clear salt water)”  D’Suq’Wub is the name.

CIVIL CASES. STEPS TO CIVIL CASES Negotiation Legal advice Starting a case: –Exchange of information –Basis of claim –Details of injury or damage –Investigation.

Washington State History

Railroads Powerpoint presentation By Nicholas Lumiere.

1 Legal Basis, Endangered Species Act and Hatchery Reform Heather Bartlett, Hatcheries Division Manager.

Jason King, P.E. State Engineer WSWC/NARF Symposium on the Settlement of Indian Reserved Water Right Claims August 25-27, 2015 Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe’s.

Chumstick Creek Salmon Habitat Conditions* Land development, road construction, and other human activities have affected channel migration and sediment.

Reminders… Make up the Executive/Legislative Branch test! Make up the Executive/Legislative Branch test!

Chapter What would likely happen to Anthony if he turns to the courts for help in ending the discrimination? 2. Does Anthony have a duty to anyone,

Battle of Seattle By Nicholas Inadomi. Point Elliott Treaty In order for Seattle to grow the settlers needed a treaty with local tribes to say they owned.

Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resource Management Nez Perce Tribe / Nez Perce National Forest Partnership Overview February 3, 2011 Watershed.

Conservation of Lake Sammamish Kokanee A Briefing for the City of Bellevue Planning Commission David St. John – Lake Sammamish Kokanee Work Group

Lower Taylor Creek Restoration Project Property Acquisition Seattle City Council - Seattle Public Utilities and Neighborhoods Committee June 9, 2015.

Recognition of Native Title Australia's Changing Community Source: Geography for Australian Citizens 2 nd edition.

Catoctin Creek TMDL Implementation Plan Development June 24, 2004.

Judicial Branch Federal District Courts (94 Courts in 12 Districts) Federal Appeals Court (12 Appeals Courts +1 Special Appeals Court) Supreme Court (Highest.

The Structure of the Federal Courts. Structure of the Federal Courts What does the Constitution say in Article III? Provides for Supreme Court Specifies.

WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE FISH PASSAGE AND FISH SCREENING STATUS

The Suquamish Tribe Treaty Fisheries in Puget Sound Brief Historical Background & Chronology of Events Treaty.

Critical Infrastructure Key Resources Protection in Washington’s Indian Country Glenn B. Coil Homeland Security Coordinator NW Tribal Emergency Mgmt. Council.

Point – No Point Treaty Signed by the following Tribes: Skokomish, Klallams, Chemakems and Twana Signed at Hahdskus, or Point-No-Point Signed on January.

Coal Creek Culvert Replacement Pacific Coast Salmon Coalition.

Chapter 11 Section 2 Conflicts Over Land. “Five Civilized Tribes” Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, Chickasaw, Choctaw Lived in Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi,

National Budget Meeting FY-2011 Budget Formulation May 11-13, 2009 Washington, DC.

Identifying the Role of Government in Forest Management.

JACKSONIAN DEMOCRACY Key events of Andrew Jackson’s Presidential Term.

What is “law”?  coercive nature of law (i.e., not voluntary)  rules of the “sovereign” (legitimate authority) backed by force  Problem:  who is the.

IX. Article III – The Federal Court System A. Understanding Jurisdiction 1. Jurisdiction means the power or authority over a person, a place, or an issue.

LESSON 1.3 Structure of American Government. government-belinda-stutzman

Chapter 10- The Judicial Branch. JUDICIAL BRANCH  The Judicial Branch was created to help balance the powers of the other two branches.  It played a.

THE COURT SYSTEMS Chapter 18. The Dual Court System ■In the United States there are two types of court systems under which every court in the nation can.

Law for Business and Personal Use © Thomson South-Western CHAPTER 3 Court Systems 3-1 Forms of Dispute Resolution 3-2 The Federal Court System 3-3 State.

The Judiciary How the national and state court systems work along with a brief look at due process…..

Basics - Federal Court System

Fish Passage Barriers & Salmon Recovery

Ocean/Envir 260 Lecture 14: Overview, Water Law.

Watershed Planning in the Pend Oreille River Basin in WA

8.1 The Federal Courts Civics and Economics.

Identifying Barriers to Fish Passage in Mason County

Conflicts Over Land Section Two.

Growth in Georgia.

Treaty Fisheries in Puget Sound

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SHELLFISH RESTORATION

Cooperative Aquaculture Agreements between Private Tideland Owners and the Native Tribes in Puget Sound.

Alaska Roadless Rulemaking

Business Law – Mr. Lamberti

SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS GROUP UPDATE

The Treaty Trail Unit 4.

Discovery Boulevard Extension (Thomasson Barn Road Extension)

Conflicts Over Land Section Two.

Article III – The Federal Court System

2017 SFEG Restoration Update

Judicial Branch #1 The Supreme Court.

Habitat Changes and Fish Migration

Habitat Changes and Fish Migration

Presentation transcript:

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers Walt Olsen, PE Deputy Director 2404 Chandler CT SW, Ste240 Olympia, WA Cell #

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers Gov. Stevens signs treaties w/ Puget Sound tribes. Treaty of Medicine Creek – December, 1854 Nisqually,Puyallup and other South Sound tribes Treaty of Point Elliot – January, 1855 Skagit,Snohomish,Swinomish and other North Sound tribes Treaty of Point No Point – January, 1855 S’Klallam,Elwha,Skokomish and other South Peninsula tribes Quinault Treaty – January, 1856 Quinault, Quillayute, Makah and other North Peninsula tribes

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers All treaties reserved …. “the right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations is secured to said Indians in common with all citizens of the Territory…”

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers February 12, 1974 United States v. State of Washington “The Boldt Decision” Injunction Article #8… “…the state has the responsibility for conserving the resources ….in order to safeguard the fish resources in the state from depletion …

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers U.S. Supreme Court affirms Boldt Decision U.S. District Court sides with tribes in habitat regulation th Circuit Court validates Boldt Decision, but found no evidence of State treaty violations Tribes sued to force Washington State to stop construction and maintenance of culverts under State roads that degrade fish habitat and reduced numbers of harvestable fish.

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers February 2002 – Judge directed U.S. and State work out an agreement along two tracks: 1.Technical Issues – Develop a Plan for: How many, Where, What to do, etc. 2.Policy/Legal – Priority, $’s, Legal Basis for Plan AG Office is negotiating now and seeking input from Counties and Cities for settlement by October 2002, with possible extensions

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barrier SO, WHERE THE HECK ARE WE? 1.WSDOT Statewide Inventory of Fish Barriers – completed by 12/ known barriers (1158 projected barriers) in case area (750 projected) 4.Ave. $ to current std- $250, Million $ in case area (187 M$ statewide)

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers SO, WHERE THE HECK ARE WE? (cont’d) 6.New Standard for culverts – Stream Simulation 7.Countersunk & 1.2 x Stream Width 8.New Standard = 3X Correction $! 9.Rate of Correction – 40 per year for 20 years! 10.Impact to Counties could be ENORMOUS!!!

United States vs. State of Washington – Fish Passage Barriers