THE EFFECTS OF THE MOUNT ST. HELENS ERUPTION ON

iDoc.

/Dept.

' Y 3.P 11/4:

2M928

S

\.

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

A

FORUM

HELD

JUNE

12,

1980

VANCOUVER,

WASHINGTON

Conducted

by

the

Pacific Northwest River Basins

Commission

DEPOSITORY

SEP

2 0

1983·

BOISE

STATE

UNIVERSITY

LIBRARY

1

Columbia

River

P.O.

Box

908

Vancouver,

Washington

98666

The

Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

Commission

is

the principal

agency

for the coordination of

federal,

state,

interstate,

local

and

nongovern-

mental plans for the

development

of water

and

related land resources in the Pacific Northwest.

As

an

independent regional

commission,

it

also

provides a

forum

in

which

states

meet

with

federal agencies to conduct

and

coordinate water

and

related land resources planning.

The

Commis-

sion Chairman

is

appointed

by

the President;

its

Vice-Chairman

is

elected

from

among

state

members.

Commission

members

include the States of

Idaho,

Montana,

Oregon,

Washington,

Wyoming;

the

Departments

of Agriculture, the

Army,

Commerce,

Energy,

Health

and

Human

Services,

Housing

and

Urban

Development,

the

Interior,

and

Transporta-

tion;

the

Environmental

Protection

Agency;

the

Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency;

and

the

U.S.

Entity.

Commission

observers include representa-

tives

from

Canada

and

the Indian Tribes.

Chairman:

Mel

Gordon

Vice-Chairman:

George

Proctor,

Oregon

TABLE

OF.CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Opening

Remarks

Mel

Gordon,

Chairman

Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

Commission

FEDERAL

PERSPECTIVE

AND

ACTIVITIES

Moderator:

Mel

Gordon,

Chairman,

PNRBC

Geological Occurrences

Jerry Stephens

Geological

Survey

Atmospheric

Events

Arthur

Hull

National

Weather

Service

I

Hydrologic Effects

Charles

R.

Collier

Geological

Survey

Emergency

Measures

Neale

Chaney

Bob

Stevens

Jim

Kerr

Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency

Water

Quality

and

Municipal

Water

Supply

·

Lyman

Nielson

Environmental

Protection

Agency

Navigation

and

Flooding

Donald

Lawyer

.

Corps

of Engineers

Marine

Activity

LCDR

Harry

Dudley

Coast

Guard

Electric

Power

Sterling

Munro

Bonneville

Power

Administration

Agriculture

Guy

W.

Nutt

Soil Conservation Service

Forestry

Duane

G.

Tucker

Forest Service

iii

l

5

9

13

17

19

23

25

27

31

35

39

41

Upstream

Fisheries

and

Wildlife

Gary

Shaw

Fish

and

Wildlife Service

Downstream

Fisheries

Dale

Evans

Terry

Durkin

Herb

Curl

National

Oceanic

and

Atmospheric

Administration

Columbia

River Estuary

Dave

Kent

Columbia

River Estuary

Data

Development

Program

STATE

PERSPECTIVE

AND

ACTIVITIES

Moderator:

George

Proctor, Vice-Chairman,

PNRBC

Introductory

Remarks

43

47

49

53

55

George-Proctor,

Vice-Chairman

59

Pacific

Northwest

River

Basins

Commission

Washington

Wilbur

G.

Hallauer

61

Washington

Department

of

Ecology

Idaho

Scott

W.

Reed

65

Idaho

Water

Resources

Board

Montana

John

E.

Acord

71

Montana

Department

of Natural

Resources

and

Conservation

Wyoming

Paul

Scherbel

73

Oregon

Chris

Wheeler

75

Oregon

Department

of

Water

Resources

SUMMARY

Concluding

Remarks

Mel

Gordon,

Chairman

77

Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

·Commission

iv

OPENING

REMARKS

by

Mel

Gordon,

Chairman

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Pacific

Northwest

River

Basins

Commission

Good

morning

a.nd

welcome

to the Pacific-Northwest River Basins

Commission's

forum

on

the

effects

of the

Mount

St.

Helens

eruption

on

the water

and

My

name

is

Mel

Gordon.

I

am

the

Chairman

of the

Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

Commission.

On

my

right

is

Mr.

George

Proctor,

our

member

from

Oregon

who

is

also the

Vice-Chairman

of the

Commission.

In.ci-

dentally,

George

was

originally the

one

who

suggested the idea of holding

this

·gathering for the purpose of discussion

amongst

all

of our regional

members.

The

purppse of our

forum

is

to provide

and

exchange

information concerning

the current

and

long-term

effects

of the eruption

on

our region's water

and

related land

1

resources,

and

to take a

look

at

what's being

done

or

may

need

to

be

done

in

that

regard. Fostering the

exchange

of information.

and

coordinati.on

of water resources

activities

is

a

fundamental

responsibility of the Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

Commission.

As

we

began

to

.examine

the topic,

we

found

that

it

was

multi-dimensional

and

that

to

do

it

any

justice

we

would

need

to allocate a full

morning

or

after-

noon

to the subject. This

forum

is

the product of our collective thinking

and

efforts.

We

thank

all

of

you

for

coming

this

morning

and

especially those of

you

who

have

agreed to

participate.

It

seems

most

fitting

to

be

holding

this

forum

in the

shadow

of

Mount

St.

Helens

herself.

Sometimes

it's

hard

to believe

that

the very

mountain

which

caused

so

much

destruction

and

devastation could

now

be

sitting

for the

moment·

rather peacefully a

mere

35

miles

from

this

very spot.

But

that

is

similar to

the feeling

most

of

us

had

on

the

eve

of the mountain's mightest volcanic erup-

tion of the past 32,000 years.

It's

rather

hard

to believe

that

it

actually

blew.

Looking

back

to

that

cataclysmic

day

in

May,

it

seems

odd

that

an

eruption

with the force of the

most

potent

hydrogen

bomb

ever detonated

would

cause

little

more

than a shudder here

and

in Portland

and

yet

be

felt

200

miles

away

in

Canada.

But

that's

precisely

what

happened.

The

sleeping giant in our back-

yard

finally

discarded her quiet demeanorandliterally

caved

in

upon

herself

with a force

so

great

that

tons of

mud

and

ash

shot

up

ten miles into the

air.

Scientists

have

said

that

within a

few

hours,

Mount

St.

Helens

had

thrown

up

almost

as

much

ash,

mud

and

steam

as

Mount

Vesuvius

did

when

it

buried

Pompeii

more

than

20,000

years

ago.

Those

are

somewhat

awesome

comparisons

and

yet they are quite accurate.

1

What

was

the scenario

that

led

up

to the

mindboggling

natural disaster?

Hundreds

of lines of

newspaper

copy

and

television

conmentary

have

out-

lined the

series

of events

which

preceded the eruption of

Mount

St.

Helens

on

May

18

of

this

year.

I'll

try

to

briefly

summarize

those

activities

now.

The

mountain's

first

stirrings

in

123

years

came

on

March

20

when

a

slight

earthquake measuring

4.1

on

the Richter scale

went

almost unnoticed.

During

the next

two

days,

quake

activity

grew

but

little

attention

was

paid to

the

series

of earthquakes, except

by

seismologists

at

a

station

near the

mountain's

peak.

By

March

24

the

quakes

started

overlapping

and

the

peak

was

closed to the

public. Seismological instruments

became

unreadable but

still

the shaking

was

restricted

to the

Spirit

Lake

area

and

the

peak.

Phase

two

of the pre-eruption

activity

came

on

March

27

when

an

explosion

blew

a hole about

200

feet

across

on

the north side of the mountain, emitting

some

ash

which

then

swept

eastward.

After

that,

outpourings of

ash

became

a regular

phenomenon.

A

second

crater

developed

which

eventually

merged

with the

first

one

to

form

a cavern,

seven

football

fields

long

and

two

fields

deep.

The

situation

remained

status

quo

until April 3

when

the

first

harmonic

tremors,

which

heralded the

movement

of lava

somewhere

inside the mountain,

occurred.

But

the tremors

were

a false alarm.

There

was

no

immediate

outward

flow

of lava.

What

did

happen,

however,

was

the

development

of a sizable

11

bulge

11

which

scientists

viewed

apprehensively.

Would

the

bulge

burst

and

if

so,

when?

.

Scientists

got a

partial

answer

to

their

questions

on

May

7.

Although

the bulge continued to

grow,

the

peak

erupted

once

more

spewing

ash.

The

quakes

this

time intensified to a 5.0 reading

on

the Richter scale. Hotspots

and

steam

vents

formed

on

the mountain's top

and

the

crater

kept expanding

reaching the top of the

mountain

and

continuing to

eat

down

its

sides.

On

May

12,

an

earthquake

shook

loose a

wall

of ice

on

the north side of

the mountain.

Nothing

out of the ordinary

(if

you

can

call the

activities

up

to

this

point ordinary).

It

happened

again until

May

18

when

the 9,677-foot

mountain

erupted in a

mass

of fury

and

destruction in

one

of the

most

spectacu-

lar

and

devasting natural

disasters

of our lifetime.

The

mountain's eruption

is

only the

first

act in

this

incredible play.

Besides the destruction to St.

Helens

itself,

a

series

of

mud

flows

began

racing

down

the

mountain

into

two

forks of the Toutle River,

killing

bystanders,

sweeping

away

homes

and

collapsing bridges

as

if

they

made

out of matchsticks.

The

force of the mountain's explosion carved out a patch of forest eight miles

long

and

15

miles

wide.

Several feet of

ash

blew

as

far

east

as

Montana,

turning the

morning

sky

into

a

pitch black cover of unnatural night.

More

than

2

200

forest

fires,

some

enveloping thousands of acres of

trees,

were

ignited

and

hot toxic

gas

began

flowing

from

the crater.

Although

it's

difficult

to estimate,

officials

have

set

the

immediate

dollar

damage

wrought

by

the eruption

itself

in the $1.6

billion

range,

and

I

understand

that

it's

even

higher than

that

now.

That

amount

is

based

on

esti-

mates

of

more

than

$500

million in land destroyed in the Gifford Pinchot Forest,

a loss to the region's

fisheries

of

$200

million

and

$970

million in losses

mostly related to

employment,

transportation, buildings,

and

roads.

But

that's

only a

jumping

off

point.

It's

one

thing to

talk

about the

momentary

consequence

of the erµption

on

the region but

an

entirely

different

manner

to

-begin

assessing the current

and

.long-term

effects

of the eruption

on

the water

and

related land resources of the Pacific Northwest.

Hopefully

we

will begin

that

task here today.

Each

speaker to address

you

today

knows

what

the eruption has.meant to his or her

particular

agency.

Each

one

will,

in the

brief

period of

time

allotted,

trace the

particular

effect

of the eruption

on

their

individual sphere of operations, giving a

com-

prehensive

and

complete picture of the overall

effect

of the eruption of water

and

its

related resources in the region.

\

With

regard to the presentations,

I'd

like

to request

that

members

of the

audience

hold

their

questions until the

end

of the

forum

in

an

effort

to allow

us

to

meet

our time constraints.

At

that

time we'll

try

to

answer

questions,

time permitting, of course.

We've

basically divided

the

forum

into

two

parts or perspectives.

The

first

part of the

agenda

will cover the federal perspective

and

activities

per-

taining to the eruption. I will -moderate-this part of the

program

and

will

be

introducing representatives

from

a

number

of federal agencies.

Then

we'll

begin

the

second

part

of

our

program;

the

states'

views

on

the

eruption

and

its

effects

on

their

particularugencies.

Vice-Chairman

George

Proctor

wi

11

moderate

that part of the

forum.

Following the

states'

presentations, there will

be

a discussion

and

con-

clusion period

when

we'll take questions

from

the floor

if

we

have

time.

Before I begin the

program,

I'd

like

to

announce

that

a complete

trans-

cript

of the

forum

proceedings will

be

available within the next

few

weeks

to

anyone

who

has

registered

at

the front table.

So

if

you

haven't registered,

please

do

so

before

you

leave here today.

At

this

time

I'd

like

to call our

first

speaker

who

is

Jerry Stephens

from

the

United

States Geological Survey.

Mr.

Stephens will discuss the

series

of geological occurrences

that

have

resulted

from

the eruption.

Mr.

Stephens.

3

/

Page

left blank

GEOLOGICAL

OCCURRENCES

by

Jerry Stephens

Geological

Survey

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

I

would

like

to

show

some

slides

that

were

prepared to

illustrate

the

events

that

took place

from

the standpoint of the volcano

itself

and

the

effects

that

it

had

on

the local geology in the

Mount

St.

Helens

area.

If

I could get

the

slide

projector turned

on

and

maybe

the

lights

turned

down,

I'll

talk

to

the

slides

.

This

first

one

is

an

index

map

locating

Mount

St.

Helens

and

the other

potentially

active

Cascade

volcanos

going

all

the

way

from

Northern California

up

into British

Columbia.

Mount

St .

He

1

ens

has

been

known

for

yea

rs to

be

potent i a

11

y the

most

dan-

gerous

and

most

recently active of the

Cascade

volcanos. This indicates the

location of the monitoring

equipment

that

the Geological

Survey

had

prior

to

the eruption

on

May

18.

Many

of these instruments

were

installed

during the

time period of the

initial

earthquake

activity

in

late

March.

Some

of

them

were

destroyed

at

the time of the eruption .

.I

won't

go

into

any

details

of

what

kind

of equipment, but basically

this

was

geophysical monitoring equip-

ment,

gravity

tilt

meters,

where

we

were

trying to get

an

idea of

just

what

was

going

to

happen

there.

The

hydrologic data

sites

were

maintained

by

the

Geological Survey,

many

of

them

in cooperation with

state

agencies.

This

map

was

taken

from

a bulletin

that

the Geoiogical

Survey

prepared

which

was

released in

1978,

and

indicates,

on

the basis of geological studies

made

over

many

years,

what

we

and.our geologists

had

anticipated

might

be

the

future hazards

from

volcanic eruptions of

Mount

St.

Helens. This

bulletin,

as

I

said,

was

published in

1978.

The

area in here

was

considered to

be

the

greatest hazard zone.

The

peak

of

Mount

St.

Helens

is

right

in the middle,

the

light

spot.

These

would

be

the areas

that

would

be

most

endangered

by

ash

flows,

mud

flows

and

so

on.

The

yellow

zone

around

it

is

slightly

of

less

danger because of topography

and

distance

from

the

peak

but

still

a

major

hazard

area.

It

would

be

within

this

general orange

and

red area

where

we

would

have

anticipated

that

the

major

danger

from

falling

debris

and

so

on, in the event

of

an

eruption,

would

take place.

The

yellow areas

down

the

North

and

South

Forks

of the Toutle

and

the drainages

on

the south side are areas

where

we

anticipated,

on

the basis of evidence in the geologic record,

would

be

endan-

gered

by

mudflows.

The

green areas then

would

be

mudflows

further

from

the

volcano, probably less extensive than the yellow areas. This

is

on

the basis

of

what

we

could see in the record

from

not only the eruptions in the early

1800

1

s,

but also eruptions

going

back

to the

last

10,000 years or so.

5

After the eruption

on

May

18,

we

were

able to

document

some

of these

things. This

is

a preliminary documentation.

There

is

better

information

available

now,

but, basically these areas are

where

the debris

flows

took

place

when

the north side of the

crater

was

blasted out, the material

was

blasted out,

dammed

Spirit

Lake

and

flowed

down

the Toutle

as

a massive

debris flow. This area

is

one

that

we

had

not necessarily anticipated,

that

we

had

not projected

on

our hazards

map

that

was

shown

on

the

last

slide,

simply because in the geologic record

it

1

s very

difficult

to find evidence

of

this

kind

of thing.

But

the area with the

little

lines in

it

around

here

is

essentially

the area

where

the

blast

knocked

down

the

trees.

The

eastern

margin

at

this

time

was

undefined simply because

it

was

cloud-covered

all

during

that

period

and

we

couldn't get in.

And,

then the

mud

starting

on

the

mountain

side

up

above, but extending

on

down

below

the debris flows, also

coming

down

the south fork of the Toutle,

ended

up

leaving

essentially

a

dam

some

400

feet thick

right

at

Spirit

Lake

tapering

down

to feather

Edge

some

11

or

12

miles

down

the

river.

Then

mudflows

and

floods carried

that

material

down

depositing a

channel

fill

several feet thick in the Cowlitz

and

dumping

a

lot

of

silt

and

mud

into the

Columbia

which

succeeded in blocking the

channel

there.

Going

back

and

comparing

this

map

with the preceding one,

we

didn

1

t

do

a

bad

job of anticjpating

what

might

happen.

On

a photographic

base

map

of

the area,

this

is

essentially

the

geology

immediately prior to the eruption

on

May

18.

These

lava

flows

of various kinds, the

dome

and

so

on,

are

all

old features

from

prior eruptions.

Then

during the period

from

late

March

until

mid

May

after

the

first

eruption large arcuate cracks

some

five kilo-

meters

long

extending

around

the south side of the old

crater

right

near the

top

were

formed.

One

crack

went

through the

crater

area, the vent area,

and

one

ran

up

on

the side of the

crater

rim.

And

then, the

famous

bulge

that

caused

so

much

consternation

which

we

were

attempting to monitor,

started

developing in

this

area

on

the north flank.

For

a couple of

weeks

that

bulge

was

expanding

at

the

rate

of something

like

four to five

feet

per

day

in a

straight

line

and

everyone

was

concerned.

Normally,

in a

situation

like

that,

you

get

some

point

at

which

failure

occurs,

and

there

1

s a

change

in the slope of the curve.

We

didn

1

t

know

at

the time

whether

we

were

already past

that

break in slope

and

on

the verge of

failure

or whether

we

would

indeed observe

some

change

in the

rate

of expansion

which

would

give

us

an

indication

that

failure

was

imminent.

It

failed

without

any

change

in the

rate.

It

simply exploded

on

May

18, with

no

change

in our

observations.

This

is

a

little

more

detailed

map

of the geologic features

that

were

created

by

the

May

18

explosion.

The

entire

north

rim

of the

crater

was

blown

out, the

whole

north side of the

mountain

was

blown

out,

failed

first

by

a

massive landslide

which

created the debris

flows

that

went

down

and

dammed

up

the

river,

then the

blast

which wiped

out

essentially

everything in

this

entire

area

where

the green lines are superimposed.

None

of the

trees

are

standing there.

It

went

over the ridges

and

on

the

back

side of the ridges

the

trees

were

knocked

down,

just

as

on

the front side.

The

ash

flows,

which

started

later

during the

day

on

May

18

came

out of the breached area

on

the

north side of the

crater,

flowed

down,

and

partially

filled

up

Spirit

Lake

and

raised a

dam.

This

would

be

the

400'

thick

dam

at

the

end

of

Spirit

Lake

which

follows

down

the

river,

then

down

somewhere

in

this

area

it

tapers

off

to

essentially

nothing but thin layers of

mud.

6

There

were

also

some

mudflows

off

the south side of the

peak

and

over here

in the

Smith

Creek.

Apparently they got

all

the

way

down

to the

upper

end

of

Swift Reservoir.

Here's a

comparison

of the

volume

of material

that

was

ejected

from

Mount

St.

Helens

during the eruptive episodes

up

through the 18th, with other vol-

canos.

Mount

Vesuvius

up

here

compared

to

Mount

St.

Helens

down

here;

it

appears the material erupted

from

Mount

St.

Helens

is

considerably less than

Mount

Vesuvius, but

one

of the

problems

is

the

difficulty

of calculating the

exact

volume

of material.

The

scientists

have

several

ways

of

doing

it

and

I'm not sure

that

these are

all

comparable; but

you

can

see

that

St.

Helens

in

relation

to

some

of the

more.famous

ones

of the

past,

including the

Mt.

Mazama,

Tamboa,

Indonesia, the

famous

Krakatoa

explosion

that

blew

up

an

entire

island,

was

considerably sma1ler.

There

1

s

been

a

lot

of concern expressed about the

effects

of the dust

from

Mount

St.

Helens

on

the climate

and

atmosphere. I think,

some

of these

large

ones

undoubtedly created

such

an

effect,

but I suspect

that

the

amount

of material erupted

by

Mount

St.

Helens

into the atmosphere

is

probably not

of great significance in

that

respect.

The

May

18

eruption spread a blanket

of

ash

downwind

and

this

indicates the thickness of

this

material in the State

of

Washington

going

from--this

would

be

50

millimeters in

this

red area here--

inmediately

downwind

from

the volcano,

and

you

can

see the prevailing

wind

pattern quite

well

at

this

time.

Then

a thinning in the center of

that

dust

cloud occured over the

Yakima

area,

and

then increased in thickness again to

a

maximum

of over

100

millimeters in the Ritzville area southwest of

Spokane.

That

ash

fallout

has

probably created

more

problems,

at

least

economically,

than the events

right

at

the peak,

at

least

in terms of the

long

run

effects.

Here

1

s the ashfall

nationwide.

The black

spots are specific

sites

where

measurements

were

made

of the thickness

of

the ash, again ranging

from

more

than

100

millimeters in Eastern

Washington,

and

anywhere

froin

a trace to

as

much

as

a millimeter over

this

entire area,

clear

over into Northwestern

Minnesota,

South

Dakota,

Nebraska,

down

into

Northern

New

Mexico.

Then

for

some

strange

and

unexplained reason, a

gap

occurred in here, possibly the

result

of

lack of data, but

we

do

have

a couple of

sites

in here.

There

was

a very

slight

accumulation

down

in Central

Oklahoma.

I

1

m not sure

what

the

explanation of

that

is

but I'm sure a meterologist

might

be

able to explain

it.

One

of the local effects

was

the deposition of a thick layer

of

silt,

mud,

and

debris in the

bottom

of the Cowlitz River. This

slide

was

prepared

from

data

that

I think

Chuck

Collier will probably

be

referring to in a

little

while

when

he

talks about the water resources impact. This

particular

slide

shows

a

profile

from

Ke1so

upstream for

20

miles, the

profile

of the old channel

bottom

and

the top of the

ash

area

is

the

profile

of the

new

channel

bottom;

all

of

the stripped areas in here

would

be

the deposits

that

were

carried

down

in the.

flood

that

fol1owed

the

May

18

eruption.

Normal

flow

prior

to the eruption

was

10,000

second

feet

and

had

a

profile

like

this.

10,000

feet

flowing

down

the

channel

now

would

have

a

profile

like

that,

which

is

in

most

places higher than

bank

overflow before the

new

material

was

deposited.

Bank

overflow

of

76,000

cu.

ft.

per second,

which

is

essentially

the

initial

flood stage

prior

to the

eruption,

was

clear

down

here,

and

normal

flow

of 10,000

second

feet

now

is

higher than

that.

The

new

76,000 cfs

would

put

you

clear

up

into the flood

stage

down

the

entire

reach of

that

stream.

7

There

are about three or four

diagrams

here

that

show

diagrammatically

what

we

think

was

happening

to the

volcano

during

this

entire

episode. This

is

a cross section

which

shows

the situation prior to the beginning

of

activity

in

1980.

These

are old deposits, the yellow

from

the

1857

flow, a

dome

formed

in

1843

which

is

on

the flank in the

Goat

Rocks

area,

and

some

ash

flows

which

were

deposited there.

The

light

gray

area here

is

simply

showing

that

this

is

the area

that

was

blasted out

on

the

May

18

explosion.

After

activity

started

in

March

with a

relatively

small

eruption,

this

was

the

situation

that

existed.

Cracks

formed

in the

crater

area.

The

vent

was

releasing

some

of the

magma.

The

molten

rock

in the

chamber

was

bulging

out through these

zones

in the

rock

and

was

reflected in

this

enormous

bulge

that

was

forming

on

the north slope.

Then,

on

May

18,

it

appears

that

an

earthquake created a

shock

wave

which

caused a landslide, the

entire

bulge

area failed

and

slipped

down.

The

slides are apparently in a sequence of

just

a

few

seconds.

The

bulge area collapsed

and

the pressure released causing the

blast

to take

out the

whole

north side of the

peak.

Now

this

one

I probably shouldn't

be

showing,

because

it's

based

on

what

was

later

determined to

be

an

incorrect

interpretation;

but a

week

or

so

ago,

observers reported seeing

glowing

rocks

at

night in the

bottom

of the

crater

and

the interpretation of

that

was

that

we

were

beginning to get

at

the top of

the vent the formation of a lava

dome,

which

would

indicate

that

the

gas

pres-

sures

had

decreased'

sufficiently

and

the

rock

was

beginning to

solidify.

Based

on

that,

and

this

is

a prediction, but I don't

really

believe they

meant

that,

the next logical step

if

indeed

we

are seeing the formation of a

dome,

would

be

that that

dome

would

continue to

grow

and

create a plug similar to

the

one

that

formed

back

in

1843.

However,

it

was

determined

after

a

few

days

that

the

glowing

rock

that

we

were

seeing

was

not the formation of a lava

dome,

but surface rocks

around

the vent

which

were

being heated

by

gases

coming

up

this

column;

and

that

the top of the

molten

rock

magma

chamber

did not reach

the surface but

was

somewhere

down

in here,

and

that

hot gases

coming

up

this

column

were

heating the rocks

around

the vent.

So,

there

is

no

dome

forming

at

this

time.

We

anticipate

that

the

dome

will

form,

but

we

don't

know

what

will

happen

next.

Here

are

some

slides of the

May

18

eruption,

which

most

of

you

have

seen

on

television. This

one

shows

the

back

side of the area

that

was

blasted out.

The

crater

rim

now

has

just

this

arcuate

shape

here

and

the other side

is

com-

pletely

scooped

out

and

gone.

Thank

you.

8

ATMOSPHERIC

EVENTS

by

Arthur

Hull

National

Weather

Service

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Actually, I don't

have

too

much

of

an

overview to give. I

came

prepared

to

show

the cause.and

effects

on

our agency, but

my

thunder

has

been

stolen.

I

have

a

map

in the

back

of the

room

and

a

handout

showing

the

ash

fallout

from

the

two

events

that

we

had.

I'd

like

to

start

out

by

saying

I'm

not

going

to cry

and

whine

about the

problems

of our

agency

concerning

manpower,

but

it

must

be

brought

up

and

this

is

the

time

to

do

it.

The

mission of the National

Weather

Service

is

to pro-

tect

lives

and

minimize

property

damage

from

weather-related causes.

We

are

entirely

oriented to service to the public.

The

purpose of

this

forum

is

to

relate

cause

and

effect

of the continua-

tion of eruptive

activity

of

Mount

St.

Helens

on

the region's water supply

and

associated action programs.

I'm

going

to

limit

myself in

this

overview to the

handout. I will bring out

some

of the

problems

and

illustrate

what

actions

are

being

taken or

may

be

taken

by

the National

Weather

Service during the

continuing eruptive stage of Mount St.

Helens,

rather than

talk

of

what

we

did

in the past. Therefore,

from

this

point forward, the

impact

of continuing

eruption

on

National

Weather

Service

programs

relating to water supply will

be

mostly

by

inference.

First,

the National

Weather

forecast service

at

Seattle issues twice a

day,

seven

days

a week, a plume trajectory forecast.

We

believe

that

this

mes-

sage

is

vital

for planning purposes.

In

other words,

we

tried

to turn

it

off

once

and

we

got stopped, nipped in the

bud,

and

we

had

to turn the

system

back

on

again. Preparation of

this

message

involves nine

steps,

including determi-

nation of the

activity

of

Mount

St.

Helens

at

the time of

message

preparation.

We

get

this

from

the

Department

of

Emergency

Services

at

Olympia

who

in turn

are getting

it

from

the

command

post or

command

center

at

Vancouver.

So

that's·

the

first

step to find out what's

going

on

at

this

moment,

and

that's

the lead

sentence of the

message.

At

that

point in time,

we

extrapolate or

cast

the

current

winds

at

6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 40,

and

50

thousand

feet

above

the mountain.

Then,we

also

do

a forecast

of

the

winds

at

each

one

of these levels for the

hours.

Next,

the

trajectory

of the

ash

particles

at

various levels

and,finally,the

envelope of the

most

probable

fallout

pattern or

significant

ash

deposit·if

eruption takes place during the forecast period

is

done.

Prepa-

ration of

this

message,

we're talking

one

message

twice

a

day,

and

dissemination

of the final product

consumes

approximately

16

manhours

a

week.

Second,

coordination

between

agencies

and

this

included

local,

state,

and

federal,

initially,

I believe,

was poor.

It

is

now

good,

but meetings

such

as

9

this

will lead to

an

excellent level

of

coordination. A

brief

example

of

lack of coordinated

effort

was

when

we

were

trying to find out the depth of

the water in

Spirit

Lake

to see

how

much

volume

of water

we

had

to

worry

about

when

we

were

conc.erned

about.

fl

ash flooding re-occurring.

We

found

out

by

reading the

newspaper

that

the

Navy

had

gone

in

and

done

a sounding

of

the

lake

and

found

the lake

bottom

to

be

75

to

100

feet

below

the top water

level.

We

believe

that

with a greater degree of coordination,

where

each

agency

is

aware

of the needs of the others

and

exchanges

data

and

information,

we

can

do

a

much

better

job than

we

are

at

the present.

Coordination

between

the Forecast Office

and

other agencies

is

a function

in our

office

of a

man

whose

title

is

the Disasters Preparedness

Program

Leader. Since

we

are inadequately staffed for

even

fair

weather

situations,

this

individual

is

also the

satellite

focal point

and

stands routine rotating

shifts.

Thus,

his available time for

disaster

preparedness

programs

is

less

than

10

percent of the full time

he

is

available.

The

program

is,

therefore,

run

by

committee,

meaning

whoever

is

available handles the

program

for the

moment.

This

does

not allow for continuity of a

program.

Considering the

other routine catastrophes

which

regularly occur--flood several times a year;

flash floods during the

summer

season; bridge-destroying

wind

storms; fishing

fleets

sunk

by

wave

action; a drought

thrown

in for

good

measure; and,for

God's

sake,

now

we've got a volcano.

It

seems

that

a full time

disaster

prepared-

ness focal point

is

at

least

indicated.

Third,

use

of

weather radar

at

the Forecast Office

at

Portland for de-

tecting

and

tracking

ash

plumes

is

new

to the

Weather

Service.

There

is

a

demand,

and

I

might

add, a very strong

demand,

for continuous radar monitoring

of the mountain. This requires, for continuous monitoring, five persons

trained in radar

that

are not currently

on

the

staff

at

WSSO,

Portland.

In

other words,

it

takes five people to stand rotating

shifts

24

hours a day,

seven

days

a

week.

The

National

Weather

Service will

offer

to

train

and

pro-

vide the space to conduct continuous monitoring, but cannot take

on

the task

without a five-man unit increase in

station

complement

to cover three

shifts

a day,

seven

days

a

week.

Fourth, Hydrology--several people are

going

to

talk

on

this

subject,

from

many

different

viewpoints.

Let

me

state, though, that the River

District

Office in

Seattle

is

responsible for monitoring, data

collection,

preparation

of

river

statements, issuance of flash floods, floods, watches, warnings,

and

bulletins

for the

entire

state

of

Washington,

excluding the

Columbia

River.

The

entire

Hydrology

Unit

at

Weather

Service Forecast Office,

Seattle,

is

composed

of

one

man,

the Station Hydrologist.

Thus,

in order to cover

24

hours

a

day

when

we

have

flooding

situations,

monitoring

requires, at

a mini-

mum,two

other personnel taken

from

some

other duty.

We

cannot continue

such

monitoring for

more

than

two

or three

days

at

a time, otherwise

we

have

what

we

did

have

around

May

25,

an

office full of zombies.

We

cannot continue

such

monitoring, as I

stated,

for

more

than

two

or three

days

at

a time. I

am

crying

and

whining; I

didn't

mean

to

have

it

come

out

that

way,

but

this

is

the

way

it

appears.

The

Hydrologist's job

is

impossible to carry out

now

with only a

staff

of one; namely, himself.

The

flood

strip

in the

vicinity

of

Mount

St.

Helens

due

to

heavy

silting

of

rivers

was

very

well

demonstrated a

few

moments

ago. Considering the

10

j

denuding

of

all

the vegetation

from

the slopes

and

the consequent

immense

run-

off

problem

and

the

annual

rainfall

pattern of the

state

of

Washington,

the

flood potential will

be

in order of

magnitude,

more

severe

this

winter than

it

has

been

in

normal

winters of

the

past. This

is

my

own

personal contention;

it

may

be

in

error.

We

have

the

summer

season to prepare contingency plans to

handle the flood

threat

problem

that

will

most

assuredly

be

with

us

by

October.

We

must

coordinate a contingency plan for the

installation

of

river

and

pre-

cipitation

gauges, the timely collection-of data, the

exchange

of

this

data

between

interested parties,and coordinated action plans for flooding or flash

flooding

situations.

Lastly, the National

Weather

Service believes in keeping the public in-

formed.

We

have

a teletype

communication

system

called

NOAA

Weather

Wire.

This

circuit

is

accessed

by

the Associated Press,

UPI,

and

several radio

and

television stations throughout the

state.

Short, informative bulletins

from

any

agency

may

be

sent through our office to the press,

if

a proper press .

release

is

obtained

from

FEMA

or

their

own

agency.

We

will

be

glad to

assist

you

in

this

area.

In

closing,

we

have

the expertise to carry out the mission

of

the

National

Weather

Service.

The

impact

of continued

activity

at

Mount

St.

Helens

on

the

two

offices

I

can

speak

for, the Forecast Offices

at

Portland

and

at

Seattle are

due

to inadequate

staffing

levels. (I'm

doing

the

one

for the

Forecast Office of Portland, not

because

I

have

anything to

do

with

it,

but

because I got together with

that

boss

and

we

decided

that

I could speak for

him

as

well.)

I'm

drumming

on

these requirements for

us

to continue

just

in

our present

activities.

Hydrologic support is

needed

in the

form

of a

Hydrologic Technician

at

WSSO

Seattle.

I'm

only asking for

one

more

man.

This position

is

considered

mandatory

ancl

urgent. A

full

time

o.r,

at

a mini-

mum,

three-quarter time Disaster.Preparedness

Program

Leader

is

needed

to func-

tion as the primary coordination

official

with

all

other

local,

state,

and

federal agencies in matters of

disaster

preparedness,

emergency

communications,

information,

and

data acquisition

and

exchange.

A radar unit

is

needed.

Five

positions are desirable, three positions

minimum

are

needed

at

Weather

Service Forecast Office

at

Portland to provide

continued radar monitoring

of

Mount

St.

Helens

and

to track

ash

plumes

in the

event

of

an

eruption.

They

would

also function

as

radar observers for the

more

normal

situation

of tracking thunderstorm clouds,providing. information

which

is

called a local

warning

radar.

These

positions are also considered

mandatory

and

urgent.

There

is

no

compromise

position.

We

can

either

do

what

is

required with adequate

staffing

or

we

cannot take

on

the additional

new

requirements brought about

by

Mount

St.

Helens

eruptive

activity

under our .

present

staffing.

Thank

you

for your time.

11

Page

left

blank

\

HYDROLOGIC

EFFECTS

by

Charles

R.

Collier

Geological

Survey

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

The

violent eruption

and

explosion of

Mount

St.

Helens

on

May

18,

and

the

major

eruption of

ash

on

May

25

had

a dramatic

effect

on

the hydrology of the

surrounding areas.

Some

effects

are obvious,

and

their

magnitudes

have

already

been

measured

and

evaluated; other effects are

less

visible

and

the

magnitude

of these

is

generally

unknown

at

this

time.

I will describe for

you

the

immediate

effects of the

May

18

eruption

on

the streams draining the mountain, discuss

some

of the expected or possible

long-term effects

on

the hydrology,

and

review

the

activities

of the

Water

Resources

Di

vi

s ion,

USGS

during the

emergency

and

for

the

mid-

and

long-term.

In

addition to the massive

amount

of

rock

and

mud

blown

from

the

peak

and

northern side of the mountain, the

May

18

eruption destroyed the glaciers

on

the north slope of the volcano.

It

has

been

estimated

by

our Glaciology

Project Office

that

approximately

140,000

acre-feet of

glacier

and

snowpack

water

was

removed

from

the mountain. Several ice blocks,

some

as

large

as

50

feet in diameter, are lying in the

mud

debris

dam

on

the

North

Fork

Toutle

River.

All

of the

snow

pack

and

much

of the glacier ice probably

mixed

with

rock

and

mud

debris

and

produced

unprecedented flooding in the

South

and

North

forks

and

the

main

stem

of the Toutle River,

which

empties into the Cowlitz

River

two

miles upstream

from

Castle

Rock.

Debris

from

the explosion

and

mudflow

on

the north face of

Mount

St.

Helens

filled

the valley of the

North

Fork

Toutle River to depths of

400-500

feet

and

extended

downstream

for about

15

miles. This

is

commonly

referred to

as

the

dam

at

Spirit

Lake.

It

is

not

really

a

dam

as

you

visualize a

dam.

Spirit

Lake,

at

the

head

of the

North

Fork,

is

now

about

200

feet

higher than

before the eruption.

The

eruption triggered a

mudflow

and

flash flood

which

arrived

at

the

gaging

station

on

the Toutle River near Silver

Lake

about

noon,

3-4

hours

after

the eruption.

The

peak

flow

of

this

flash flood

was

about 47,000 cfs (cubic

feet

per second).

For

a

few

hours,

this

was

the highest

flow

recorded

at

this

site

since records

began

in 1909.

A

second

mud

and

water

flow

which

we

believe

came

out of the

North

Fork

of the Toutle River, arrived

at

the Silver

Lake

gage

about midnight

Sunday,

and

completely destroyed the

station.

Based

on

highwater marks,

this

sediment-

laden

second

flood reached a stage of

more

than

53

feet,

about

30

feet

higher

than the

earlier

record flash flood.

Based

on

preliminary computations, the

13

peak

discharge

is

estimated to

be

about

two_

to three times greater than the

first

peak,

on

the order of 100,000 to 150,000

cfs.

The

flood

wave

passed into the Cowlitz River with probably

little

change

in discharge. Early in the

morning

of

May

19, the

peak

discharge

at

Castle

Rock

was.

probably in excess of 100,000 cfs

and

caused serious but not record

flooding. Several

indirect

measurements

of discharge

have

been

surveyed.

We

are

now

in the process of surveying high-water

marks

and

conducting a

peak

timing study throughout the Toutle River.

Because

of

the uncertainty of the

consistency of the

mudflow

and

irregularities

in observed high-water marks,

it

will

be

some

time before

we

are able to

finalize

our discharge figures.

Most

significant

were

the

tremendous

quantities of sediment deposited in

the Cowlitz

and

Columbia

Rivers.

In

the Cowlitz River, about 25,400 acre-

feet

of sediment

is

clogging the channel

between

the

mouth

of the Toutle

River

and

the

Columbia

River.- This

volume

of sediment

would

cover a square

mile to a depth of nearly

40

feet.

The

new

sediment

is

12

to

15

feet

deep

throughout the channel

and

has

reduced the-channel's capacity to carry water

by

about

85

percent,

from

about 76,000 cfs

at

the previous flood stage to

10,000

cfs.

Mudflows

also.,occurred

May

18

on

Muddy

River

and

Pine Creek,

which

drain

the

east

and

southeastern flanks

of

Mount

St.

Helens

and

empty

into Swift

Reservoir.

From

records of reservoir

levels,

these

flows

amounted

to about

13,000

acre-feet.

This

volume

was

determined

from

the

change

and

stage of the

reservoir operated

by

Pacific

Power

and

Light

Company.

We

are also in the pro-

cess

of

measuring the

peak·

flows

at

each

of these streams.

The

greatest

immediate

hazard resulting

from

the

May

18

eruption

is

the

flood potential

on

the Cowlitz River in the Castle

Rock-Kelso-Longview

area.

The

river

is

now

at

or near flood stage with only

normal

seasonal flows.

Even

moderate

s_torms

in the basin could cause serious flooding.

The

floodplain

delineation

maps

and

river

profiles

developed for the several

HUD

flood

Insurance Studies in the area are

now

completely obsolete.

Beginning

on

May

19, the

Survey

began

developing a

new

surface-water

model

of the Cowlitz River using data available

from

the previous

HUD

studies

and

field

measurements

and

observations of the sediment deposited in

the cross sections.

Tudor

Engineering

was

most

cooperative in providing

river-profile

and

cross-section data acquired for the flood-insurance studies

conducted

by

them.

Other data

were

furnished

by

the

Corps

of Engineers,

and

coordination of the

Corps

and

Survey

field

parties

speeded

up

the

work.

The

model

was

completed

on

May

24

and

the

first

profiles

and

flood

delineation

maps

were

furnished to

FEMA

for

distribution

on

May

25.

This

was

a

"first

cut"

model

based

on

the previously acquired

field

data with

most

of

the

new

underwater sections being estimated. Detailed

field

surveys

of

cross-

section with the sediment deposition in the stream

and

overbank

were

initiated

on

May

19

and

completed

on

June

6. Again, coordination

of

the

USGS

effort

with the

Corps

greatly

facilitated

and

speeded

this

effort.

The

field

data

have

been

applied to the surface-water

model

and

a

fully

rigorous

model

was

completed

on

June

10. This

model

can

be

used

to evaluate

any

projected

flows

on

the Cowlitz and/or

any

channel changes.

14

FEMA

has

provided a

priority

list

of the

most

critical

areas

and

flood

frequencies

and

has

requested continuous updates

if

river

conditions change,

or

as

dredging progresses. The·Survey will continue these

efforts

as

requested

by

them

and

could

make

other runs for·other agencies

as

needed.

The

hydrologic

characteristics

of the streams

and

lakes in the

150

square-mile

blast

area will

be

drastically

altered.

This

area

is

completely

stripped of veget'ation

and

has

an

ash

cover of

at

least

several inches.

We

expect

the

rainfall-runoff

characteristics

of these streams to

be

greatly

different

than before the eruption.

Erosion

of the

ash

and

unprotected soil

may

greatly increase the

amount

of

sediment transported

by

the streams.

This, in

turn,

.will

affect

the fish

and

benthic organisms in the streams.

Ash

fall

over extensive areas

of

the State

beyond

the

150

square mile

blast

.area

may

also

have

an

effect

on

the hydrology of those areas.

Changes

in the

water-quality

characteristics

of these streams could

be

significant

and

may

also

affect

the biota.

When

Mount

St.

Helens

became

active

in

late

March,

the

Water

Resources

Division

intensified.its

hydrologic-data collection

activities

in the area.

Our

first

efforts

were

to obtain-background water-quality

and

biological data

of

streams

which

could

be

affected

by

eruptions.

At

the

Tacoma

and

Portland

offices,

we

added

25

sites

established for periodic sampling; four continuous

recording water-quality monitors

were

installed

and

telemetered

by

GOES

satel-

lite,

so

we

have

a continuous readout of other

changes

which

may

be

taking

place in the streams.

The

eruption

and mud flows

destroyed

two

of the continuous

monitoring

sites

and

the

North·

Fork Toutle

gaging

station

at Silver

Lake.

ln addition,

the.

Cowlitz gaging station at.Gastle

Rock was

slugged with

mud early in

the

·

flow.

These

gaging

stations

were

replaced

as

·rapidly

as

possible.

The

Kid

Valley

gage

on.the

North

Fork

Toutle River

was

installed

May

24, with the

river

stage transmitted to the

GOES

satellite

every three hours.

It

takes

a reading every five minutes

and

transmits

on

three-hour

intervals.

If

the

stage

goes

up

two

feet,

it

will kick over to five-minute transmission.

These

transmissions are picked

up

automatically

at

the

Weather

Service

offices.

A minicomputer

was

loaned to the Cowlitz

County

Sheriff

so

that

they

can

receive the data

directly

also.

The

Castle

Rock

gage

was

put

back

into

operation

on

May

25.

Similar

gages

for flood

warning

are being

installed

on

seven

other rivers or

tributaries

draining the mountain.

These

stations

will

be

used

also to

measure

the runoff

and

to provide the water-discharge

data necessary to

measure

and

interpret

the sediment

transport,

water

quality,

and

biological

changes

that

are taking place.

We

are

working

closely with the

River Forecast Center

and

National

Weather

Service office in Seattle to

install

flood-warning telemetry

at

the stations

on

those rivers subject to flooding

where

they.

need

to provide flood forecasting.

In

addition,

we

have

had

coor-

dination with the

Corps

relative

to

their

gaging

needs.

To

measure

the

effects

of the

ash

on

sediment

and

river

quality,

eight

water-quality

stations

and

six

sediment stations

have

been

added

to the

exist-

ing network.

The

water-quality

stations

are being equipped with continuous

recorders to

measure

any

rapid

changes

in specific conductance,

pH,

or tempera-

ture of the

rivers,

and

the analyses of periodic water-quality

samples

will

include toxic metals. A

network

of about

30

observe.rs throughout the

15

Pacific Northwest

was

established to

collect

samples

of

precipitation

and

ash

deposits for chemical analysis.

The

sediment

stations

will

be

operated to

measure

the daily sediment

dis-

charges of the rivers

and

to determine the

particle-size

characteristics

of

the suspended

and

bed

materials.

Movement

of

bed

material

is

a

particular

concern because the material in the

North

Fork

Toutle debris

dam

and

deposits

in the Cowlitz River are angular

and

sharp rather than

rounded

particles

of

most

river

sediments.

The

erosive

characteristics

and

the deleterious

effects

of

this

sediment

on

the fish populations are

unknown.

The

Survey

has

worked

closely with the State

Departments

of

Ecology, Fisheries,

and

Game

and

with

the

U.S.

Forest Service

and

U.S.

Fisb

and

Wildlife Service in selecting the

sites

for the water quality

and

sediment

stations.

Geomorphic

studies are

also being

initiated

in the Toutle River basin to

document

the redevelopment

of

river

channels

and

movement

of

sediment

on

the debris

dam

and

of the

mud-

flow

deposits.

The

effects

of

ash

on

lakes across the State are largely

unknown

at

this

time.

What

effect

will the

ash

deposits

on

the lake

bed

have

on

the

bottom

organisms

and

aquatic plants?

What

changes

can

we

expect in the water quality

of

the lakes

and

what

will

be

the impact

on

the fish

and

benthic organisms?

Will

ash

deposits

alter

the lake-ground-water relationship? Fortunately,

considerable

background

data are available for

many

of the lakes in

Washington

to aid these investigations.

We

are

making

a reconnaissance of selected lakes

across the State to assess the

immediate

effects

of

the

ash

and

to determine

the scope of further

and

more

complete investigation of the impact

on

lakes.

The

effect

of ash

on

the recharge rates to the ground-water system,

and

on

the water quality of the aquifers

is

another area of

unknown.

We

suspect

that

the

infiltration

rates

and

soil

capacities

may

be

affected,

but

by

how

much

and

for

which

soil

types

is

another

one

of our

unknowns.

With

the Cowlitz River in the Castle

Rock-Kelso

area

at

a stage

13

feet

above

its

normal

level

and

remaining there for a

number

of weeks, recharge to

the

alluvial

surficial

aquifer should

be

accelerated.

We

are

installing

a

number

of shallow observation wells

this

week

to

measure

the

effect

on

the

aquifer.

We

will also attempt to determine the changes,

if

any, in the water

quality

of

that

ground

water.

This

briefly

summarizes

the major

efforts

of

the

Water

Resources Division,

USGS

in

documenting

the

effects

of the eruption

on

the hydrology

of

the area.

Funding

for

this

effort

will

be

from

cooperative

programs

with State agencies,

from

other Federal agencies,

and

by

direct

Federal funding.

We

have

a very

large affected area

and

a

wide

variety of

unknowns.

Hopefully,

many

of the

effects

will

be

minimal,

and

the impact of others

can

be

lessened.

16

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

EMERGENCY

MEASURES

by

Neale

Chaney

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency

To

give

you

a

fast

rundown

of

what

takes place

when

you

have

a disaster·

when

the

State,

and

that

means

the

Governor,

has

determined

that

there

is

a

disaster

of a

magnitude

that

is

outside the capability

of

the State

and

local

governments

to handle, the

Governor

then

makes

a request through the Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency

to the President for a

disaster

declaration,

at

which

time normally

we

would,

in conjunction with the State

and

local govern-

ment,

send

out

an

assessment

team

and.look over the

damage

and

make

our

recom-

mendations

and

surrmarize

the thing for the President.

In

this particular

case,

it

took hardly

any

time

at

all

for

both

Governor

Ray

of

Washington

and

Governor

Evans

of

Idaho

to

make

that

request.

We

didn't

send

out the assessment teams,

at

least

up

in the Toutle Valley, because

first

of a

11

we

coul

dn

I

t get

up

there,

and

second.

we

I

d al ready

watched

the

di

saster

floating

down

the

river

and

we

knew

it

was

there,

and

of course, the President

made

the declaration almost immediately.

The

President then appoints a Federal Coordinating Officer

who

brings

together not only the

FEMA

people but those other agencies

that

can

offer

some

degree of

relief

to the people

that

have

suffered loss

and

hardship

from

the

disaster.

That

person then of course decides

where

he's

going

to put

what

is

known

as

the

disaster

field

office.

In

this

case,

it

is

located

right

here in

the City of

Vancouver.

If

it

wasn't for

that

I don't think

I'd

be

able to

get these gentlemen, because

at

this

time

they're

just

too

busy.

The

President

appointed

Mr.

Bob

Stevens,

who

is

the

Regional

Director of

FEMA

in

Region

9,

lives in California,

and

had

previous experience with volcanos, although I

don't think

one

quite

this

big.

Another

gentleman,

Jim

Kerr,

heads

up

the Technical Information

Network.

Jim

is

from

FEMA

headquarters in

Washington,

part of the mitigation

and

re-

search group.

The

Technical Information

Network

was

put together through the

efforts

of the President

and

the

Governor

of

Washington.

It's

a

panel

of

experts.

You

don't normally find

this

activity

because usually the

disasters

have

to

do

with floods or hurricanes, the type of things

that

are

fairly

commonplace.

This

is

different,

and

of course, the great question in every-

body's

mind

is,

"What

is

the

effect

of the ash--what

does

that

do

to your

lungs

and

carburetor?" Jim's

group

has

released

14

or

15

bulletins addressing

these questions.

These

gentlemen

are here with

me

this

morning

and

I

am

going

to ask

first

Bob,

and

then Jim, to get

up

and

give

you

a

little

summary

of

what

they've

been

able to

do

in the three or four

weeks

we've

been

in business.

17

Page

left blank

EMERGENCY

MEASURES

by

Bob

Stevens

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency

My

task

this

morning

is

particularly

difficult.

Neale

told

me

I could

talk

for five minutes

and

I

really

can't

say

good

morning

in five minutes,

let

alone get into

motherhood

and

apple

pie,

and

all

of these other things.

What

I'm

going

to

do

is

just

very quickly

tell

you

what

has

happened

since the

President

was

here the

first

time.

We've

opened

an

office,

as

Neale

said,

here in

Vancouver,

and

we

have

about

50

people

up

there.

They

represent a

number

of

different

federal agencies

and

this

is

our principal

field

office.

In

addition to

that,

we

have

a

field

office for the

Idaho

disaster

over

in

Coeur

d'Alene

and

we

have

a sub-field office for the

Washington

activity

in

Spokane.

We

also,

very quickly, in fact

on

Friday, I think

it

was

about

the 23rd,

which

was

some

five

days

after

the

first

eruption,

opened

our

first

disaster

assistance center.

We

opened

that

in

Kelso.

Unfortunately

we

were

only

open

a

day

and

a half.

We

opened

at

noon

on

Friday,

and

were

open

Satur-

day.

We

had

to close

down

for the

second

event,

and

we

were

closed

down

for

two

days.

That

center

has

since

moved

into the Centralia area.

We've

had

a

total

of

11

disaster

assistance centers in operation. They're

scattered

all

the

way

from

St.

Marys,

Coeur

d'Alene,

and

Moscow

in Idaho, into

Spokane,

Richville, Colfax,

Moses

Lake,

Yakima,

and

the

ones

already mentioned.

The

big

immediate

needs,

it

seemed

to us,

were

the

needs

for housing

and

to get

relief

for those

who

had

lost

their

homes

up

in the area of the

North

Fork

of the Toutle.

That

is

why

we

concentrated in the

Kelso

area

initially.

Now,

we

think

that

our

housing

workload

is

going

to

be

in the area of about·

350

or

400

families,

which

is

not a large

housing

workload

as

disasters

go;

but, of course,

is

important to those

that

were

affected.

Each

of those fami-

lies

is

entitled

to

rent-free

housing provided by the Federal

Government

on

a

temporary basis

up

to

one

year.

One

of the interesting

problems

we

had

with

this

was

where

we

were

going

to permit the placement of these

Government

provided housing units.

We

try

to

use

rental units to the extent

we

can

and

we

were

very concerned about the

new·

flood plain. Obviously,

we

didn't

want

to

be

in a position of placing these

people in rental units

on

the flood plain

that

might

be

flooded

this

fall.

But

through the cooperation of the

USGS,

we

have

gotten

new

flood plain

maps

and

are

moving

forward

on

that.

I think the figure

is

now

some

65

families

that

have

already

been

placed

and

the

rest

of

them

should

move

fairly

well.

There

are a

lot

of interesting things about

this

operation

that

are very

different.

One

that

has

cropped

up

right

away,

is the

statistics

on

the

Small

19

Business Administration

Loan

Program.

Normally

we

get about five or

six

home

and

personal loans for every business

loan.

In

this

case, we're getting about

two

business or

farm

loans for every

home

or personal property application

and

_the

SBA

people are projecting

that

figure will

go

up

to

as

much

as

four or

five to one.

It's

a real reversal of

what

we

normally

deal

with.

One

of the big

problems

we

had

initially,

which

Neale

has

already alluded

to,

was

the

problem

of defining the

problem

We

had

a

very

difficult

time

and

the situation

is

still

evolving

and

will continue for

some

time.

A couple of other things

that

are

going

on

here in

Vancouver

that

you

might

be

interested in--we

have

set

up

a centralized federal press

activity.

We

have

about ten federal agencies,

plus

the

state,

active in there.

We

are

in business

24

hours

a

day.

We

run

a

hot

line

that

is

available

on

that

basis,

24

hours

a

day.

It's

interesting,

we

start

getting

calls

about 4:30 or 5:00

a.m.

from

the eastern

media.

The

media

is

tremendously interested in

this

activity.

We've

had

great support

from

the federal agencies in

this

and, I

think,

it

has

worked

exceedingly well.

You've

seen

a

lot

of

conrnent

in the

press_about

it,

but

if

you

look

.very

closely

and

read those

conrnents

carefully,

you'll find the

critical

conments

are not pointed

at

the Federal

government.

We

also

set

up

a

hot

line

so

that

anyone

in these affected areas

can

dial

toll

free

and

get information about the current conditions, about the centers, about

the schedules,

and

so

on.

At

the request

of

Governor

Ray,

with the concurrence

of the President

on

his

first

visit,

we've

also

set

up

a Technical Information

Bulletin

Network.

The

intent of

this

was

to

try

to bring together, in

one

source,

all

of the different technical information

that

is

important to

all

of

us.

Mr.

Kerr

will

touch

on

that

in

just

a

moment.

We've

had

about 4,700

people through

our

centers

and

think that

is

substantially complete.

I'll

just

quickly

hit

a couple of the

high

poi.nts I think

you

would

be

interested in.

We've

identified about

175

different

state

and

local agencies

that

would

be

eligible

for

reimbursement

by

the President's Di.saster Relief

Fund

through

Mr.

Chaney's

office.

Our

estimate

is

that

the

total

cost

of

that

to the President's

fund

for

both

Idaho

and

Washington

will

be

about

$114

million,

of

which

Mr.

Chaney's

office

wi

11

pay

75

percent

or

about

$86

mi

ll

ion, with the

other

25

percent

coming

from

a combination of

state

and

local

government

funds.

That·does not include, of course, the

work

being

done

by

the

Corps

of Engineers

and

the Federal

Highway

Administration,

and

so

on.

The

Corps

estimates

some-

thing in excess of

.$200

million, primarily in

this

drainage

we've

already talked

about.

The

Federal

Highway

estimates about

$100

million.

One

thing I should touch

on

very

briefly,

as

you

know,

Senator

Magnusen

held hearings

on

Tuesday

as

to the

initial

needs

of

this

from

a federal stand-

point.

Although

the Administration request

has

not yet

gone

to the Congress,

or

at

least

it

hadn't

as

of

last

time I

checked

yesterday, the Administration

spokesman

at

Senator

Magnusen's

hearing

testified

for the

need

for

$917.9

million, almost a

billion

dollars.

That

does

include

some

money

in

Idaho

and

some

money

in

Montana.

Broken

down

that

is

$430

million, a big

chunk

of

it

goes

to the

Small

Business Administration for these subsidized loans. I

think

$215

million

goes

to the

Corps.

If

my

memory

serves

me

it's

$100

million

for the Federal

Highway

Administration

and

about

$86

million for the President's

Disaster Relief

Fund

which

is

administered through

FEMA.

20

I

would

like

to express

my

apprec-iation for the

tremendous

support

and

cooperation we've

had

from

the various federal agencies. Particularly note-

worthy

are the

USGS,

the Forest Service,

and

the

Corps

of Engineers.

But

there

are

many

others,

and

without-this support

and

cooperation,

it

would

be

impos-

sible

to

do

our job. That's

one

of the pluses of

having

a

visit

by

the Presi-

dent out here.

It's

been

just

great

and

we

very

much

appreciate

it.

Thank

you.

21

Page

left

blank

EMERGENCY

MEASURES

by

Jim

Kerr

.Federal

Emergency

Management

Agency

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

.MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

The

Technical Information

Network

was

set

up

on

my

birthday, the

21st of

May,

and

I'm not sure whether I'm saying thank

you

or what,

exactly.

Anyway,

it

has

gotten

me

out here

from

Washington,

D.C.,

and

that

is

a

pl

us.

The

network,

as

Neale

told you,

was

established for the purpose of

disseminating the technical information

that

everyone in the affected area

needs.

Now,

it's

kind

of hard to

tell

what

people actually

do

need,

so

our

decisions

on

}xactly

what

sorts

of information to put out are

based

on

two

things.

First

of

all,

as

Mr.

Stevens told you,

we

have

a pretty far-flung

group

of

disaster

centers

and

we

have

hotlines working,

and

the questions

that

surface

most

frequently are the

ones

which

we

attempt to address, in

an

attempt to respond to the public.

On

the other

side,

as

soon

as

we

feel well-

enough

informed

to address other technical matters, whether or not we've

been

asked

specific questions about

them,

we

put together a technical

bulletin.

Number

18

went

out yesterday.

It

addressed health matters.

Most

of the bulletins

have

talked about the ash,

as

Neale

said--what

it

is,

what

it

does,

what

its

effects are

on

the water supply,

what

the health aspects

are,

what

the

effects

are

on

automotive equipment,

and

so

on

down

the

line.

Because

this

is

a

unique

event

and

a

unique

disaster

as

far

as

the

48

states

are concerned,

we

can

see

that

the

interest

in

this,

in the

scientific

community,

is

very

high

and

is

going

to continue to

grow,

I'm sure.

Managing

this

sort

of question

becomes

a

little

tricky.

Neale

mentioned

the

first

difference

from

most

disasters;

that

is,

everybody

knows

all

there

is

to

know

about floods already,

so

from

the technical standpoint,

you

don't

need

an

information center.

But

the other thing about

it

is,

the flood

is

over..

In

this

case,

we

don't

know

when

the eruption is over, or

at

least

the

series

of eruptions;

so

we

have

to

be

prepared to

look

at

the technical side

of

it

over

an

extended period of time.

And

the questions

keep

coming

in;

for example,

late

yesterday, a

specialist

in nuclear

weapons

who

specializes

in predicting

where

the

fallout

would

come

from

an

enemy

attack called

up

and

said,

11

What

time

did the

ash

arrive

downwind?"

I'm

hoping

that

our

colleague,

Dr.

Hall,

is

going

to

be

able to

answer

that

question.

We

all

know

how

much

ash

was

finally

deposited

at

any

given

location, but

we

don't

know

when

the

first

bit

of

ash

got there.

It

would

be

very

interesting

to

trace

that

across the projectory

of

ash,

and

you

can

see

why

people in

that

field

of endeavor

would

be

asking

that

sort

of

question.

23

To

go

to another

end

of the spectrum, we've

had

a

number

of people

who

have

wanted

to

know

what

to

do

about the records for

their

stereos. Is the

ash

going

to

gouge

the

new

grooves

on

all

their

records? Well,

it

might

not

be

quite

that

bad, but

we

are attempting to respond to

both

types of requests,

and

we

are also attempting to

have

researchers in the

scientific

community,

whether they

be

physicists or

sociologists,

keep

us

posted

as

to

what

they're

studying,

and

keep

us

posted

as

to

their

results.

That

way

we

can

serve

as

an

information center for

them

as

well.

I

would

invite

you

all

to take note of the fact

that

the

bulletins

are

available.

Neale

put several copies of the

most

recent

one

back

on

the

table.

Help

yourself to

that.

As

I

said,

there

have

been

18

of

them,

and

there are

a

dozen

or

so

more

in the

making.

It's

easy to get

on

the

distribution

list

for

them;

you

simply

have

to give

us

your

name

and

address,

and

once

you're

on

the

list,

you

will get

all

the

back

issues

as

well.

I

would

also

invite

you

to call in

on

any

of the well-publicized

numbers

if

you

do

have

some

information requirement.

If

you

have

a question

that

is

bugging

you;

if

it

hasn't

been

addressed in the previous

bulletins,

we

will

either

attempt to

answer

the question

on

the

phone,

or,

if

enough

people care

about a big-enough question,

we

might

even

make

it

a subject of a bulletin.-

So

feel free to call in.

The

local

number

is

696-7801,

and

the hot

line

numbers

are plastered

all

over the place.

Thank

you.

24

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION.

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

WATER

QUALITY

AND

MUNICIPAL

WATER

SUPPLY

by

Lyman

Nielson

Environmental

Protection

Agency

The

initial

effects

of the

major

eruption of

May

18, 1980, are two-fold.

First,

and

most

direct,

is

the

mud

flow/flood debris devastation•on the Cowlitz

and

Columbia

Rivers. Public water supply intake structures·and waste discharge

outfall structures along the Cowlitz River

were

swept

away

or buried in debris

and

mud.

The

other

main

problem,

high

turbidities,

was

handled

by

closing

intakes

and

operating

from

storage or

alternative

ground-water systems.

The

Toutle

coinmunity

water system

was

wiped

out; buried in

mud.

The

City of

Longview

water supply intake

was

buried in

mud

for several ·days, during

which

time,

use

rest

rictions

were

imposed,

alternate

supplies tapped,

and

a

tempo-

rary intake

utilized.

Castle

Rock

lost

its

intake structure

and

is

operating

with limited capacity

from

existing wells while

drilling

new

wells

as

rapidly

as

possible.

The

warning

is

clear:

systems located in drainage basins

head-

ing

on

dormant

volcanos--even those systems

at

considerable distance

from

the volcano

itself--need

alternative sources.

The

secondary effects related to the

ash

fall

are three-fold.

First,

we

are fortunate

that

the

chemical

properties of the

ash

are

relatively

inert

from

a toxic point of

view.

No

reports or analyses received to date indicate

soluble

chemical

contaminants

at

concentrations great

enough

to

exceed

the

MCL

(maximum

contaminant level)

at

any

public water systems. A

comparison

of

analytical

results

indicates approximately the·

same

distribution

of elements

in the volcanic

ash

as

would

normally

be

found

in the earth crust

itself.

Physical

problems

caused

by

the

ash

fall,

such

as

high

turbidities,

at

surface-

water systems located in the area covered

by

the

ash

fall

were

more

prevalent.

Some

community

and

non-community

systems

have

experienced periodic

high

turbi-

dities

although these

have

returned to

normal

in a

few

days.

During

periods

when

turbidities

in water distributed to customers

were

over ten units,

11

boil

water advisories"

were

issued.

The

third,

and

perhaps the

most

critical,

was

the

problem

of water quantity.

Many

systems experienced exceptionally

high

demand

as

property

owners

used

water to clean

up

the

ash

and

control dust.

In

fact,

several systems experienced the highest water

demand

in

their

history,

and

severely

compromised

their

reserves. ·

The

third

area of concern

is

the future

effects

of the

ash

already

deposited.

The

dark-colored

ash

which

fell

on

snow-covered

areas

may

well

increase the rate of

snow

melt

at

the higher elevations, reducing the

snow

pack

more

rapidly than normal,

and

possibly contributing

to

flood conditions.

At

the

same

time,

any

increased

flow

regime

in the affected streams will lead

to higher turbidities resulting

in normal

.high-flow erosion and/or resuspen-

sion of ash. ·

25

Samples

of

the

ash

from

different

locations

have

been

sent to

EPA's

research laboratory in Cincinnati. Early investigation indicates

that

there

is

no

standard treatment

which

will

work

for

all

cases. Techniques based

on

addition of soda

ash

to

raise

the

akalinity

to 30-40, followed

by

the addition

of

15-25

mg/1

of

alum

will usually produce a

good

floe. Standard

filtration

procedures

can

then

be

used

by

systems operating full treatment

facilities.

Additional

work

is

being done, with

emphasis

on

"low

technology" processes

for application to or in

open

reservoirs.

A

major

problem

is

the

change

in

physical

ash

characteristics,

with the average

particle

size decreasing

as

.distance

from

the

mountain

increases.

The

extremely small

particles

tend to

remain

in

suspension

and

are extremely

difficult

to

remove.

We

had

considerable

problems

in

Yakima,

for example,

which

has

a

com-

bined sewer system

where

much

of

this

material

was

washed

both

by

the public

and

by

the people trying to clean

up

the ash. This caused the plant to

be

taken out of service with

many

hundreds of thousands

of

dollars

of

damage

done

to the equipment. Trickling

filters,

for example,

have

to

be

stripped of

the

media

and

have

been

placed out of operation

entirely.

Materials

settling

into the

clarifiers

have

put the

clarifiers

out of operation,

and

materials

pumped

into the digesters will require cleaning

up.

All

of

this

will cost

considerably.

However,

in those systems,

where

they

had

a separate

sanitary

sewer system,

we

have

not

had

any

damage

or

difficulties

in operation.

Thank

you.

26

NAVIGATION

AND

FLOODING

by

Donald

Lawyer

Corps

of Engineers

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

I'll

just

try

to

briefly

summarize

some

of the Corps'

activities.

I

think the preceding speakers

have

pretty well delineated

some

of the

problems

we

are looking

at,

and

I'll

direct

my

talks

toward

three general areas: one,

the

Columbia

River;

two,

the Cowlitz River;

and

three,

the Toutle River.

Our

estimates

now

are

that

the

mud

flows

that

came

down

the Toutle

and

the Cowlitz

and

hit

the

Columbia

River

happened

to

hit

it

at

an

incoming

tide,

so

what

happened

was

that

the sediment-laden water

hit

the

Columbia

and

dropped

its

load.

This

built

an

underwater

dam,

and

with tide

coming

up,

we

carried more material upstream

from

the Cowlitz

on

the

Columbia

than

went

downstream.

We

estimate about

22

million yards

were

deposited in the

Columbia

River.

On

May

19,

we

had

a channel-depth of

14

feet

where

it's

normally

40

feet.

We

immediately activated our

hopper

dredges

which

were

working

in other

locations.

The

BIDDLE

was

down

at

the

mouth

of the

Columbia.

It

immediately

came

upstream

and

had

some

problems

with

all

this

floating debris

that

was

going

down

the

Columbia.

They

got

on

station

on

the 19th.

The

dredge

PACIFIC

had

been

working

on

Coos

Bay.

It

came

up

and

started

on

the 21st.

The

dredge

HARDING

was

in

Humble

Bay

in northern California,

and

it

got

up

on

the

22nd.

We

had

the dredge

OREGON,

which

is

a Port of Portland dredge, under contract.

It

was

working

down

below

Longview,

so

we

packaged

that

up,

brought

it

·up,

and

got

it

here

by

the

22nd.

By

the

end

of the

week,

we

had

four dredges

working.

We

now

have

under

contract

some

additional dredges

that

are

on

station

or will

be

coming

in.

The

MC

CURDY

started

work

on

the 6th of June, the

WASHINGTON

on

the 7th, the

MISSOURI

will

be

here the 19th,

and

the

OLLIE

RIEDEL

will

be

here

on

the 23rd.

As

of yesterday morning,

we

had

about 2,100,000 yards of material

that

had

been

dredged

out of the channel,

and

we

have

kept a

channel

opening through the

efforts

of the Coast

Guard.

They

have

been

able to establish

windows

at

high

tide,

twice a

day

so

we

can

get ships

up

and

down.

The

last

record I

have

was

about

60

ships

have

passed through here, including

some

of the

Rose

Festival Fleet. Hopefully,

by

the

30th

of September,

we

will

have

nine

mi

ll

ion

yards of

this

material

moved.

One

of the

problems

we're running into

is

the material

is

much

heavier.

The

void-space

ratio

in the material

is

a

lot

lower than normal,

and

it's

very abrasive.

It

looks

like

we're handling only about

half

of

what

we

27

normally handle.

We

estimate

that

on

the

Columbia,

by

the 30th

of

September,

we

will

have

a

40

by

300

foot channel

open

and,

by

the 30th of

November,

we'll

have

the

full

40

by

600

foot channel. This

is

for a

total

distance of five to five

and

one-half miles.

The

problem

is

that

when

the material

was

deposited,

it

was

mounded

up,

so

as

you

get deeper, the length of the cut

that

you

have

to

make

is

longer.

Now,

in the Cowlitz River,

as

was

stated

earlier,

the hydraulic capacity

of the

river

itself

was

very severely impacted. Figures I

have

are

that

at

River

Mile

7,

which

would

be

just

upstream

from

the

Longview-Kelso

area, the

capacity

was

70,000 second

feet.

It's

now

down

to 13,000 second

feet.

And

up

at

River

Mile

17,

at

point 3,

which

would

be

in the Castle

Rock

area,

it

was

66,000.

It's

now

down

to 13,000.

In

the

first

seven miles of the Cowlitz,

we

estimate

we

have

about ten

million yards of material

that

was

deposited into the channel.

The

ART

RIDDLE

dredge

started

on

the 10th, the

ANDERSEN

will

be

on

station

on

the 16th,

and

the

HUSKY

on

the 18th.

We're

looking for three

more

dredges

by

the

end

of

July.

What

we're trying to

do

is

to reduce the

amount

of

sediment in

this

first

seven miles

so

that

any

waters

that

we

have

come

down

will not overtop the

levees.

The

levees

prior

to the eruption

gave

us

about a 500-year flood

protection, but because of

all

the sediment in the channel,

now

we

don't

have

near

that

amount.

We

estimate

from

River

Mile

7

up

to River

Mile

25,

which

is

5 miles

above

the

mouth

of the Toutle,

that

there's

14

million yards

of

material in there.

Now

the

same

thing

happened

on

the Cowlitz

as

on

the

Columbia.

When

the debris

from

the Toutle

came

down

and

hit

the Cowlitz,

it

deposited,

and

we

had

a backflow

of

debris

and

sediment

up

the Cowlitz River.

So

there are

problems

above

the

mouth

of the Toutle River.

Our

actions

that

we

are taking

now,

or will

be

taking,

on

the Cowlitz

are a combination of dredges

and

of

using land equipment.

We're

trying

to,

hopefully

this

week,

have

equipment in to dredge out

some

settlement basins

so

any

further sediment

that

is

coming

down

will

be

deposited in these

and

not

get out into the

main

channel of the

Columbia

River.

So

we're looking

at

a

combination of dredging out the channel, of levee protection,

and

of flood

plain

management.

During

the flood

fight

that

we

were

in for the

first

two

weeks,

we

did

do

some

levee raising along the Castle

Rock

area.

We

have

raised a

BPA

access road in the Lexington area to provide

some

protection.

We

have

also

done

some

other levee protection

work.

On

the Toutle River,

we

had

a

different

problem.

We

don't

have

high-

density people and

things

that

will

be

flooded

if

the water

comes

down.

But

we

do

have

a

huge

amount

of material in the Toutle River,

both

the

North

Fork

and

South

Fork. I haven't heard

any

estimates

of

how

much

material there

is.

The

plug

from

Spirit

Lake

downstream

has

been

discussed.

The

figures

on

that

are,

it's

400

feet

deep

at

the

Spirit

Lake

end

and

then tapers

down-

stream

12

to

14

miles to near

Camp

Baker,

and

so

you

can

just

imagine

how

much

28

material

is

in there.

It's

a

whole

new

valley floor.

Our

plan of action

on

that

will

be

starting,

hopefully, in a couple

of

weeks;

we're doing the plans

and

specifications

now

to get contractors

in.

We

will

be

building five debris retention

structures.

These

will

be

about

20

feet

high

and

wi

11

have

a spillway section in

them.

The

object

is

to build

these

at

certain

spots.

There

will

be

three

at

the

North

Fork

of the Toutle,

one

on

the

·South

Fork,

and

one

on

the

main

Toutle

just

downstream

of

the con-

fluence of the

North

and

South

Fork.

These

will require maintenance because

we

anticipate

that

the material will

fill

in and,

when

it

fills

in·

to

a certain·

point, then we'll

go

in

and

take equipment to

move

this

out.

We're

doing

all

this

to

keep

this

material

from

going

on

downstream.

Some costs

that

we're talking about:

we

estimate

$44

million to

do

the

dredging

on

the

Columbia

River;

and

we're talking about

$171

million or

$172

million

on

the Cowlitz

and

the Toutle.

Funds

for

this

were

submitted to

OMB

and

are in the appropriations

bill

that

Mr.

Stevens

was

just

talkfng about.

Hopefully, the

money

will

be

coming

in

shortly.

This

is

one

of the

problems

we

have

within the

Corps'

Emergency

Revolving

Fund.

We

do

have

some

funds,

so

we're able to

initiate

this

work

without

additional funding

from

Congress.

But

very shortly

we

will

have

expended

all

those funds, so

it

's

very cri

ti

ca

1 to

us

that

we

do

get the

funds

from

Congress.

In

addition to these three things,

we

do

have

Corps

staff

working

with

FEMA.

They

'

re

making

damage

survey reports in the

Kelso-Longview

area to

find out

what

damage

was

done

from

the flood,

such

as

debris cleanup, housing,

subdivisions,

and

water-systems intake.

We

also

have

teams

working

in Eastern

Washington

and

Idaho

on

the ash problem,-and

last

Friday, I did

make

a count,

and

the

Corps

had

375

staff

working

full time

on

this

disaster.

Thank

you.

29

Page

left

blank

MARINE

ACTIVITY

by

LCDR

Harry

Dudley*

Coast

Guard

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

When

the volcano,

Mount

St. Helens, exploded

on

Sunday

morning,

May

18,

1980,

severe

mud

slides

caused almost instantaneous flooding of the Toutle

River

which

swept

large

amounts

of

debris

and

logs

down

the

river

before

it.

The

Coast

Guard

initiated

Notices to Mariners early

Sunday

afternoon to

warn

ships in the

Columbia

River of the expectation

that

there

would

be

hundreds,

perhaps thousands, of logs

emptying

into the

river

from

the Cowlitz River,

into

which

the Toutle River empties,

and

recommended

that

vessels not

transit

the

river

at

night.

This

immense

influx into the

Columbia

River

of

logs,

trees,

and

other

flotsam caused

numerous

outages

of

down

river

aids to navigation.

The

Coast

Guard

Buoy

Tender

BLUEBELL

and

an

aids to navigation

team

were

dispatched

on

Monday

morning

to

check

aids to navigation

on

the

Columbia

River

and

make

necessary repairs.

At

the

same

time a

Coast

Guard

HH/3F

helicopterwasdirected

to

assist

in evacuation operations

and

to survey the conditions of the

Columbia

River.

It's

interesting to note

that

the

first

day's evacuation

effort

re-

sulted in

removing

22

people, three dogs,

and

one

boa

constrictor.

We

had

to

change

our operational

mode

for the

guys

in the helicopter

kind

of quickly to

accommodate

that

passenger.

Sometime

in the early

morning

hours

on

Monday,

May

19, unexpectedly, tens

of millions of cubic yards

of

fine

moraine

type

sand

were

swept

into the

Columbia

River

from

the Cowlitz River. Interestingly

enough,

in

spite

of the

fact

that

there

was

an

ebb

tide

at

the time

that

it

came

into the

Columbia

River,

most

of the sediment

moved

upstream.

Channel

depths

over a nine-mile

stretch

were

reduced with the

minimum

depth being opposite the Cowlitz River

confluence,

where

it

was

14

feet

deep, normally a 40'

deep

channel .

The

re-

sulting channel blockage

had

trapped approximately 18 ships in the Portland/

Vancouver

and

Kalama

areas until

such

time

as

the

channel

depth increased to

accommodate

their

draft.

This influx of

mud

and

silt

also prevented

at

least

22

ships

from

coming

up

the

river,

resulting in

numerous

vessels anchoring in

the Astoria

area.·

Shortly

after

five o'clock

Monday

morning, the

Norwegian

Motor

Vessel

HOEGH

MASCOT,

upbound

in the

Columbia

River,

grounded

in mid-channel

at

river

mile 67,

just

downriver of the

mouth

of the Cowlitz River. This

was

the

first

knowledge

that

the navigation

channel

had

filled.

*Lt.

Commander

Dudley

was

introduced

by

Commander

Jack

Holmead of

the

Coast

Guard,

a

member

of the Pacifi.c

Northwest

River Basins

Commission.

31

Before continuing a discussion of the

Coast

Guard's action,

it

is

appro-

priate

to address the

Coast

Guard's concerns

and

mandates

under

the Ports

and

Waterways

Safety Act.

Under

this

act

we

are charged with the supervision of

vessel

and

port operations to reduce the

possibility

of vessel, cargo or pro-

perty

damage,

loss of

life,

or

damage

to the

marine

environment.

This

act

contains authority for the Coast

Guard

Captain of the Port to create a safety

zone

and

control shipping

when

necessary.

This

authority, codified in

33

USC

1224

and

1231,

was

used

in

this

emergency

to

set

up

a Safety

Zone

between

miles

67

and

70

in the

Columbia

River with vessel

traffic

controls in the

Zone,

and

in issuing several Captain of the Port Orders.

The

CG

was

notified of the grounding,

at

about 6 o'clock

Monday

morning,

and

it

immediately

became

apparent

that

major

silting

had

occurred in the

river

since the

M/V

HOEGH

MASCOT

was

only

drawing

18

feet

forward.

While

continuing

the precautionary

warning

regarding debris in the

river,

the

Columbia

was

closed to

all

vessels with

more

than a 10

foot

draft

in the

Longview

area.

At

0615 the

Corps

of Engineers

was

requested,

and

shortly

thereafter

dispatched

a survey boat, to evaluate the

situation.

From

that

point

on

until today,

the

Coast

Guard

instituted

the control of shipping in the

Columbia

River

just

upriver of

Longview.

This Safety

Zone

was

established with the aid of selected

personnel

from

the

Vessel

Traffic Control

System

in

Seattle,

Washington,

and

then

was

carried

on

by

local

Coast

Guard

individuals

on

specific,

dedicated

assignments. Regulations establishing the Safety

Zone

were

published in the

Federal Register

on

June

2.

These

controls will probably continue into

September

or

November,

at

whatever point the

channel

is

completely cleared.

While

this

.may

seem

a simple matter

it

involves the collection

and

assimi-

lation of data

from

a

number

of

sources.

The

Corps

of Engineers daily

fur-

. nishes the Captain of the Port with

dredged

depths of the

channel

as

they

remove

the material with dredges. This information

has

to

be

modified

by

the

river

height caused

by

not only the

tide

but

by

water releases

from

the

up-

river

dams

also.

Water

level predictions are furnished

by

the National

Oceanic

and

Atmosphere

Agency,

commonly

called

NOAA.

From

this

data, the

Coast

Guard

sets

a

window,

or time span, during

which

vessels

may

transit

the

safety zone,

and

calculates the predicted

maximum

nraft

of vessels

which

may

safely pass.

We

must

emphasis

the

word

11

predicted.

11

To

assure

that

the pre-

dicted depth

is

reached,

we

receive the actual

river

level reading

just

before

the

window

opens

to confirm the predictions.

In

one

case, the predicted level

was

not reached

at

the opening of the

window

and

vessels scheduled to

transit

had

to anchor,

and

they

were

actually

down

bound

which

is

the

most

hazardous

situation.

As

inconvenient

as

this

was,

it

demonstrated

that

the

checks

and

balances for safety actually

worked.

Also, vessels

must

give

us

24

hour

ad-

vance

notice of intent to

transit.

All

of these procedures are

done

while

maintaining constant liaison with the

Corps

of Engineers

and

the River

Pilots.

Our

efforts

have

been

twofo'ld--to coordinate vessel

movements

so

as

to

use

a

minimum

time for

transits

so

the

Corps

of Engineers could

have

maximum

dredging time--and to

facilitate

safe transportation.

Besides

setting

the

window,

the

later

effort

has

involved the repa1r1ng

damaged

Aids

to Navigation,

setting

and

resetting of five temporary buoys,

and

the

installation

of

two

ranges to

assist

the

pilots

in navigating the

200

foot

channel.

32

Today,

we

are allowing vessels

of

34' 9' foot

draft

to

transit

the safety

zone.

65

upbound

and

55

downbound

deep

draft

vessels

have

transited

the area

since the eruption. This

is

approximately

60%

less than the

same

period

last

year.

In

addition to the

deep

draft

vessels there

have

been

numerous

shallow

draft

vessels

that

have

transited the area south of

where

the dredging

is

taking place.

Our

predictions indicated

that

by

the

end

of

June

vessels of

approximately

38

foot

draft

will

be

able to return to Portland,

Vancouver,

and

Kalama.

33

Page

left blank

ELECTRIC

POWER

by

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980_

Sterling

Munro

Bonneville

Power

Administration

The

massive explosion of

Mount

St.

Helens

on

May

18

and

the

lesser

erup-

tions a

week

later

have

posed

a strenuous challenge to

BPA

and

utility

main-

tenance crews, but resulted in

no

unplanned

service tnterruptions

on

the

BPA

system.

I

This

is

not

meant

to

downplay

the crippling

effect

of the localized

utility

power

outages

which

did

result

from

the

fallout

of volcanic ash

on

electrical

facilities.

Our

society today

is

immensely

dependent

upon

the

un-

interrupted

f)ow

of

electricity.

We

do

not readily adapt to

its

absence.

So

if

you

are

a

farmer

who

lacks

power

to milk your

cows

or to

pump

water for your

stock,

even

a

relatively

short duration

power

outage

can

be

a serious matter.

In

that

context, the St.

Helens

eruptions did

result

in hardship

and

economic

losses for

some

electricity

consumers.

In

terms of the

power

grid

itself,

our experience to date

is

one

of

for-

midable

stress,

but not severe jeopardy.

We

could,

however,

be

faced with a

long-term maintenance

problem

even

should St.

Helens

remain

passive.

Like

many

housekeepers throughout the Northwest,

we

find

that

the recirculation of

the existing volcanic

ash

is

a continuing vexation.

Any

additional large

eruptions of

ash

would

compound

the

problems

of

keeping

electrical

equipment

clean

and

operational.

Now,

you

have

seen

as

very

well

described the extent of the blast-affected

area

and

ash-affected area in our region. Luckily, there

were

no

major

trans-.·

mission

lines

located in the

blast

area.

If

there

had

been,

for

example, major

east/west transmission

lines,

such

as

are located in the

Snohomish

Pass

area

or

the Stevens

Pass

area, our

system

design requirements call for

sufficient

alternate

paths for

electrical

power

transmission to prevent a collapse of

the

electrical

power

system in the Northwest. A major interruption of

that.

kind,

however,

would

require curtailment

on

a

relatively

sizable

scale,

in

the neighborhood of several

hundred

megawatts

of load. Luckily

that

did not

occur.

With

regard to Bonneville

Power

Administration, the

fallout

of

ash

encom-

passed about one-third of our

four-state

transmission system.

We

immediately ·

undertook

emergency

measures.

Maintenance

crews

were

dispatched to

54

BPA

substations,

where

they

set

to

work

dusting,

sweeping

and

blowing

the ash

from

electrical

equipment.

And

I

can

tell

you

that

in

many

cases a

lot

of people

who

work

for the Bonneville

Power

Administration

and

who

had

never

come

in

close proximity to the

high

voltage

electric

power

system gained

some

experience

in housekeeping

work

around

tbose substations.

Meanwhile,

dozens

of local

uti-

lities

were

tackling the

same

work

on

their

distribution systems.

35

Bonneville laboratories

had

sampled

and

tested the

ash

from

the

earlier

minor

emmissions

from

Mount

St.

Helens

and

continued to

sample

in

many

differ-

ent areas

and

to

test

the

ash

fallout

from

the

major

eruptions.

There

is

a

diversity in the

characteristics

of the ash, but

from

the standpoint of our

concerns

it

appears

that

the

dry

volcanic

ash

is

not a serious problem, but

when

exposed

to mist or

light

drizzle

it

can

become

highly conductive.

That

is,

the ash

can

react to the moisture

by

11

arcing

11

or bypassing insulators

and

shorting out

electrical

circuits.

We

have

also

found

that

low-voltage

distri-

bution

facilities

are

more

vulnerable to

this

sort

of trouble than

is

high-

voltage transmission equipment.

Although

intensive cleanup

and

maintenance

were

required, the

BPA

high-

voltage

system

did not

suffer

any

extensive

damage

as

a

result

of the St.

Helens

fallout.

Many

of our

utility

distribution system customers

were

not

so

fortunate. Several of those with lower-voltage distribution lines

mounted

on

wood

poles experienced pole-top

fires

as

a

result

of the

electric

arcing

caused

by

the ash.

In

some

cases, ash-laden

tree

limbs collapsed

on

power

lines

and

disrupted service.

While

most

of these incidents

were

fairly

local-

ized

and

of short duration, they did

pose

inconvenience

and

in

some

cases

serious secondary consequences.

Some

of the

power

outages

were

the

result

of deenergizing substation

equi.pment

in order to clean

away

the ash without endangering

workmen's

lives.

In

the case of

BPA,

we

were

able to

perform

this

work,

for the

most

part,

without service interruption because of our various

backup

facilities.

Many

of the smaller

utilities

do

not

have

secondary

circuits,

and

closing

down

a

substation leaves

their

customers

at

least

temporarily without

power,

and

that

occurred in

many

cases.

On

the brighter

side,

there

have

been

no

reported incidents of the vol-

canic

ash

having

any

adverse

effects

on

power

generating units.

There

is,

however,

a continuing concern with regard to possible mudslides

or

flooding

as

a

result

of the

earlier

eruptions

and any

future volcanic

activity.

Pacific

Power

& Light

Company

operates three hydroelectric.

dams

on

the

Lewis

River

downstream

from

St. Helens.

We

understand

that

it

has

been

necessary to

main-

tain

additional capacity for storage in these reservoirs .as a flood control

measure.

This could

result

in

some

loss of generating capability next winter.

The

Trojan nuclear plant near Rainier,

Oregon,

has

not

been

affected

by

the St.

Helens

eruptions.

As

a precautionary measure, Portland

General

Electric,

which

operates the plant,

installed

some

temporary

filters

over

its

air-intake

system

to prevent the

ash

from

getting inside the plant.

In

summary,

the regional

power

supply

system

has

survived the

Mount

St.

Helens

blow-out remarkably well.

That

it

has

done

so

is

a

tribute

to the

utility

and

BPA

maintenance personnel

who

worked

round-the-clock to protect

operating

equipment

and

restore interrupted service with

minimum

delay.

Power

consumers

throughout

much

of the region

owe

a debt of gratitude to these dedi-

cated individuals.

In

the darkness of the

ash

fallout,

for the

most

part,

the

lights

were

on

and

the

pumps

and

other

equipment

that

we

are

so

dependent

upon

were

working.

I think

we

should recognize

that

the challenge

was

even

greater to a great

many

of our colleagues

and

those in the federal,

state,

local,

and

private

36

agencies

who

had

to deal with

some

horrendous

problems

and

I think

we

all

ought to

be

grateful

that

we

have

folks

like

that

who

are serving

us

and

are

continuing to

do

so.

Thank

you,

Mr.

Chairman.

37

Page

left blank

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

AGRICULTURE

by

Guy

W.

Nutt

Soil Conservation Service

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

My

presentation

this

morning

will deal with the impacts

on

agriculture

as a

result

of the

mudflows

and

ash

deposits.

Mr.

Duane

tucker,

Deputy

Forest Supervisor for the Gifford Pinchot National Forest,

will

discuss

effects

and

impacts

on

the forest resource.

An

area of

major

concern

is

the Cowlitz River floodplain. Approximately

5,000 acres

have

been

inundated

by

mud

and

debris rendering the cropland use-

less

and

inflicting

damage

to wells, -irrigation systems,

farm

equipment,

and

structures. Hundreds of acres of

farm

woodlots in the

va

11

ey

bottoms

are

inundated with

mud

and

debris

and

many

trees

will die. ·

The

ash

problem, although a

major

impact,

is

apparently

less

significant

than

first

thought.

Hay

crops appear to

have

been

damaged

more

severely than

some

other crops. A considerable

amount

of the

hay

crop will

have

to

be

plowed

and

reestablished.

Of

major

concern

is

the

impact

of the ash

on

the

soil,

although the

effects

are not

totally

known.

When

wet,

it

has

a sealing

effect

severely reducing

water penetration,

forming

a

barrier

for

irrigation.

It

also will increase the

problems

of flooding

from

all

lands.

An

anticipated

impact

concerns the water

supply

from

snow

pack;

it

appears

that

.a

deep layer of

ash

on

the

snow

pack

tends to insulate

and

slow

the melt, while a shallow layer will

speed

up

the

melting process. This

is

an

area

that

will

be

monitored.

Tests to date indicate a

fertility

problem

when

ash

is

incorporated in

the

soil.

Recommendations

by

Oregon

and

Washington

State Universities indicate

that

300

lbs. per acre of 10-20-20

fertilizer

should

be

applied.

Other impacts of concern are

ash

deposits

on

fruit

crops

such

as

apricots

and

peaches

that

have

fuzzy skins.

Both

beneficial

and

adverse

effects

result

from

the loss of various insects; for example, grasshoppers

won

1

t

be

missed,

but

bees

are extremely important for pollination of various crops.

The

ash

has

an

adverse

effect

on

the

growth

in ponds,

reservoirs,

and

wet'

land areas affecting fish

and

wildlife

habitats.

Other anticipated concerns include livestock production setbacks

and

the

long-range

effects

on

equipment

during farming operations.

Emergency

funds

have

been

requested

to

provide floodwater

outlets

for the

lower

valley areas draining into the Cowlitz River. Also, debris

removal

on

39

the

mud

flats

and

reestablishing vegetation

is

being planned.

These

activities

are also being

examined

in the Toutle River drainage. Seeding of

damaged

areas

on

both

public

and

private lands

is

also included.

Soil

samples

are being collected

and

analyzed for evaluating the

effects

of the

ash

in

relation

to the soil

and

plants.

An

ash

deposition assessment

is

underway

to determine

how

much

can

be

incorporated into the

soil.

Range-

lands are being evaluated to determine the

need

to incorporate the

ash

into

the soil

and

reseed.

A long-range plan for

rehabilitation

of the

total

damaged

area

is

needed;

3,000 miles of channels

need

evaluating for shaping,

stabilization,

and

vegetative programs. Seeding

and

tree

planting

on

barren land to reduce the

erosion potential.

An

extensive monitoring

program

is

needed

to determine

effects

on

water quality

as

well

as

land quality.

The

replacement of

snow

survey

equipment

is

also needed.

At

this

time I will call

on

Mr.

Tucker

to discuss the impacts

on

the

forest resource.

40

FORESTRY

by

Duane

G.

Tucker

Forest Service

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Well, they say

that

a

picture's

worth

a thousand

words.

I'm

not

going

to

say very

many

words

today,

but.I

brought along

some

pictures

that

the Forest

Service

has

been

able to gather in the

last

few

days.

Not

very

many

people

have

seen

what

really

happened

up

there

as

a

result

of the explosion

and

erup-

tion

on

May

18. I'm

going

to

be

reporting

just

on

the

effects

to the National

Forest land

so

these

statistics

that

I'll

be

referring

to

are

just

within the

National Forest.

I

1

11

speak

first

about streams.

There

are

35

miles of perennial stream

that

have

been

destroyed

by

the

mudflows

down

the

North

and

South

Fork

of the

Toutle River,

P-ine

Creek,

and

Muddy

River.

350

miles of perennial stream

have

been

severely to heavily

damaged

within the

Spirit

Lake

basin

and

the

Mt.

Margaret backcountry area.

These

have

long-term watershed 1mpacts. 3,000

miles of perennial streams

have

been

moderately to

lightly

damaged

by

ashfall

north of the

Lewis

River,

and

these

we

anticipate to

be

short-term watershed

impacts. Three. large debris

jams

have

been

observed in the

lower

Muddy

River

above

Swift Reservoir

that

have

high

potential for

moving

into the reservoir

during

high

flows. Pacific

Power

& Light

has

reported 11,000 acre-feet of

sedimentation or storage loss

from

the

Muddy

River

and

Pine

Creek

mudflows

and

80

acres of debris floating

at

the

upper

end

of Swift Reservoir.

This

is

a picture of the

mudflow

in the

South

Fork

of the Toutle River.

You

can

begin to see the scope of the

mudflows

that

resulted

from

the eruption.

Streams

over

much

of the

forest

have

had

some

water quality degradation

as

a

result

of the ashfall

and

we

anticipate

that

there's

going

to

be

high

turbidity

and

suspended

sediment

duri_ng

the rain events

that

will follow.

Long-term

downstream

sedimentation will occur

on

the Toutle River

and

in Swift

Reservoir

as

the

rivers

go

through

channel

forming

processes in these

mudlfows.

Now,

I'd

like

to

talk

a

little

bit

about

damage

to lakes. This picture

really

doesn't

show

up

too well, but

you

can

see

that

it

is

a picture looking

from

the north

back

to the south

at

Mount

St.

Helens

and

you

can

see the

crater,

the

mudflow

that

went

out of the

crater,

and

the thing

that

used

to

be

Spirit'

Lake.

It's

still

there, but I think

you

can

begin

to see

some

of the

moonscape

type appearance

that

it

now

has.

Spirit

Lake

was

1,262 acres

and

it's

been

totally

devastated.

There

are also

two

small

lakes

that

were

completely de-

stroyed

by

the

mudflow

down

the

Muddy

River.

I don't

know

how

many

of

you

have

taken the

trip

up

into the

Mt.

Margaret

backcountry

which

was

north of

Spirit

Lake,

but there

were

some

rather

sig-

nificant

and

beautiful lakes in

that

area.

One

of the

most

highly

used

was

41

St.

Helens

Lake.

That

was

the lake

that

flowed

directly

into

Spirit

Lake

and

set

up

on

a ledge above.Spirit

Lake.

This

is

what

St.

Helens

Lake

now

looks

like.

It's

been

totally

racked

by

the explosion

and

all

the timber

and

so

forth

that

was

surrounding

this

beautiful spot

was

just

completely leveled

and

gone;

the lake

is

full of

ash

and

partially

covered with debris.

We

esti-

mate

that

there

were

26

lakes heavily

damaged

in the

Mt.

Margaret backcountry

that

will

have

long-term acquatic impacts.

In

addition,

140

lakes

were

moder-

ately to

lightly

damaged

by

ashfall

which

will

have

short-term acquatic impacts.

Just in

summary

about

activities

that

are currently

underway

and

about

what

we

expect to

do

in the future:

We

are awaiting

better

watershed

damage

assessment for completion of

high

elevation

U-2

and

low

elevation photographs,

and

some

on-the-ground reconnaissance.

Funding

will

be

requested for

removing

debris

jams

in the

Muddy

River

and

other streams

and

for other watershed re-

habilitation

work.

A water quality monitoring

program

was

implemented

in

April in coordination with the

U.S.G.S.

and

the

Washington

Department

of

Ecology.

Twelve

stations are active

and

several others

were

destroyed

by

mudflows

or are within the Forest Service

11

RED

11

closure area

that

I'm sure

you've

all

heard

about.

In

addition,

we

have

a

Mount

St.

Helens

Regional

Recovery

Team

headed

by

Arvid

Ellson

from

the

Regional

Office,

who

has

been

assigned the task of developing short-term

and

long-term

recommendations

for

this

devastated area.

Actual

watershed

rehabilitation

work

will not occur until

it

is

safe for

the

crews

to enter the closed area,

and

these things are

going

to

have

to wait

until the

11

RED

11

closures area

become

a

little

bit

more

safe for people to

enter.

I appreciate being here

and

sharing with

you

some

of the impacts to the

Gifford Pinchot National Forest.

Thank

you.

42

UPSTREAM

FISHERIES

AND

WILDLIFE

by

Gary

Shaw

Fish

and

Wildlife Service

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

On

Sunday

morning, the 18th, about 8:30, I

was

just

leaving

my

house

and

I looked

up

at

the

mountain

and

saw

it

at

the

instant

it

blew.

It

was

a

sight

I'll

never forget the

rest

of

my

life.

I feel very fortunate to

be

partici-

pating

on

a

team

of biologists investigating

this

event.

As

everyone

is

aware,

it

seems

that

the data are changing daily

on

the

effects

of

Mount

St. Helens.

Just

a

few

minutes ago, I got

some

more

information

on

the potential impact

on

streams going into the

Yakima

drainage.

The

handout

which

I provided

this

morning

has

some

changes

in

it,

even

though

it

was

made

yesterday,

so

I

'll

attempt to pojnt out those

changes

as

I

go

through

and

maybe

expand

on

a

few

other i

tems.

The

Fish

and

Wildlife Service's

Olympia

Area

Office oversees

all

Service

programs

in

Washington

State. This includes National Fish Hatcheries,

National Wildlife Refuges, fishery assistance programs,

and

animal

damage

control,

among

others. Primary coordination of our response

efforts

is

handled

through

the

Area

Manager,

Gil

Blum,

who

unfortunately,

due

to a

prior

commit-

ment,

was

unable to

be

here today.

In

addition, a task force coordinated

by

the

Lower

Columbia

River

Refuge

Complex

Project Leader, Jack

Kinslow,

who

many

of

you

know,

has

been

delegated authority to respond to concerns involving

dredging

and

disposal of sediment in the

Columbia,

Cowlitz,

and

Toutle Rivers.

The

Service operates nine National Fish Hatcheries in the State

of

Washington.

Currently

none

of these

facilities

are reporting

any

damage

that

would

affect

their

operations;

this

means

their

equipment or fish

slots.

This

is

primarily

due

to the location of these hatcheries.

They

did not receive

that

much

of

an

immediate

impact

as

yet.

Much

of

their

water system

is

coming

from

spring water,

so

they are not being contaminated.

The

Fish

and

Wildlife Service

is

not presently directing

any

efforts

on

evaluating impacts of the eruption

on

fishery res·ources within the

immediate

area

of

the mountain. Present evidence indicates

that

aquatic resources

in the Toutle

and

lower Cowlitz Rivers

have

been

devastated .

In

the

imm·edi

ate

and

near term, the Service

is

focusing

efforts

on

assisting

the

Corps

of

Engineers in locating sediment disposal areas.

Emphasis

is

placed

on

identifying spoil

sites

where

the

least

long-term

damage

to wetlands will occur. Habitat losses are being

documented

in the

spoil

sites

and

this

information will

be

used

in developing

rehabilitation

pro-

grams,

which

at

the present time look very promising.

I'd

like

to say

that,

in

working

with the

Corps

on

this,

they

have

demonstrated a high degree

of

43

professionalism

and

sensitivity

to the protection of

habitat

wherever possible,

while keeping'in

mind

their

number

one

priority

is,

of course, the protection

of

the

life

and

property

of

the people of the

Lower

Cowlitz area.

In

the

mid

and

long term, the Service will provide assistance to both

federal

and

state

agencies in evaluating impacts of the eruption

and

develop-

ing

rehabilitation

programs.

As

an

example, the Service

1

s Fishery Assistance

Program,

which

is

headquartered in

Vancouver,

has

been

investigating fishery

resources

of

the

Columbia

River

and

tributaries

since the early

1970's.

They

have

the expertise

and

equipment to gather basic biological

and

chemical

data

to determine fishery impacts.

Before I

go

onto

wildlife,

I

might

comment

about

some

of the data

that

I

just

received

this

morning

from

a

team

of biologists looking

at

some

of the

Washington

Department

of Fisheries' index of streams

which

feed into the

Yakima.

Preliminary

results

of

that

data indicate they

do

not see

any

imme-

diate

effects.

The

majority of

wildlife

species in the

immediate

blast

area

was

resi-

dent

and

therefore

managed

by

Washington

State

Department

of

Game.

The

Columbian

white-tailed

deer,

which

are·

on

the federal endangered species

list,

are

found

primariiy

on

Columbia

River islands.

There

was

no

apparent

direct

impact

on

these animals

by

the

blast,

but

ash

fallout

and

its

potential impact

on

critical

habitat

of

this

species

is

being monitored.

Bald

eagles,

which

are federally

listed

as

threatened in

Washington

State,

were

known

to nest

around

Spirit

Lake.

It

.is doubtful

that

any

survived.

Preliminary data indicates impacts

from

ash

have

had

a

wide

variety of

effects

on

waterfowl

and

other

wildlife

on

our National Wildlife

Refuges

in

eastern

Washington.

Although

some

refuges are reporting

little

apparent

problems, other refuges

have

had

considerable impact.

When

the

ash

was

falling

out, the birds

went

into a

state

of shock.

They

were

not disturbed

by

the pres-

ence

of

humans

or other predators and,

therefore,

were

more

susceptible for

predation.

We

look primarily

at

mallards

and

redheads.

There

was

a

high

mor-

tality

of

newly

hatched ducks, but geese

and

goslings

were

apparently not

as

severely affected. This

was

primarily because the goslings hatched

earlier

than

the

ducks

and

were

of a

larger

size.

The

Turnbull Refuge,

just

south of

Spokane,

if

you

remember

on

the

earlier

slide

where

it

was

showing

where

the

ash

fallout

was

the

greatest,

did report the

most

severe impacts.

There

the

nest desertion

was

estimated

at

100

percent.

The

mortality

of

the

newly

hatched

was

estimated

at

100

percent, too.

What

our refuges are reporting

about

duck

renesting

is

that

they

have

found

nests

on

top of ash which,

once

they

dug

under the ash, they

found

additional eggs.

The

ducks

are nesting

on

top of

their

old former nests. Aerial insect feeding birds

were

noticed to

exhibit

abnormal

behavior.

By

abnormal

behavior,

we

mean

they

were

running

into the buildings

and

coming

very close to

humans

which

they

would

normally

not

do.

This occurred about

one

week

after

ashfall,

and

a dieoff

of

some

swallows

was

noted. Aquatic insects in the pothole areas

were

in the process

of

emerging

when

the

ash

settled

into the

ponds

smothering larvae. Another

item

which

I noticed

was

that

the

ash

apparently acted

like

a

precipitant,

and

what

were

once

muddy

ponds

cleared

up;

but

when

they

went

down

through the

mud,

they

found

that

the

insect

populations of those potholes

were

completely

gone.

One

of

the

earlier

speakers

had

mentioned

that

one

of the benefits

44

could

be

that

the grasshoppers

were

gone.

I'd

just

like

to point out

that

grasshoppers

are,

of course, a

major

food

source for upland

game

birds.

Vege-

tation

appears to

be

germinating

and

growing through the ash.

In

the handout

it

states

that

observations

have

indicated small

mammals

do

not appear to

be

affected

at

the present time.

Data

coming

in yesterday indicates

that

this

is

starting

to

change.

We're

talking,

of course, of the small ·mice, rabbit-type

size

of

small

mammal.

We

don't

know

the extent of

this

change.

We

don't

know

if

it's

going to

be

severe.

We

don't

know

if

it's

going

to

be

long-term or

short-term.

Concern

is

now

focusing

on

availability

of

food

for migratory waterfowl

which

will

be

coming

down

from

Alaska

and

Canada

this

fall

and

winter.

These

birds

spend

a great deal

of

time

on

the

Columbia

Basin.

Our

refuges provide

essentially

a sanctuary for these birds to

come

in

and

rest,

but they

go

out

and

feed in the agricultural lands, primarily the

irrigated

agricultural lands.

If

agricultural

production

is

down,

the

food

supply

is

going to

be

down,

and

until

we

know

what

is

going

to

happen

to those agricultural crops,

we

cannot

make

predictions

on

what

will

happen

to the waterfowl.

Some

of the

more

specu-

lative

predictions

would

be

a possible

shifting

of the birds through the

fly

line.

If

the previous information

on

the small

mammals

proves to

be

true,

then

we're also

going

to

be

dealing with the

problem

that

the

rafters--these

are

birds of prey

coming

down

from

Alaska

and

Canada--will also

be

potentially

impacted.

These

birds

numbering

in the thousands

come

to the

Columbia

Basin

during the winter to

spend

the winter

resting

there. Eightly percent of these

birds feed

on

the small

mammals

associated with

irrigated

agricultural lands.

As

I

have

been

making

qualifications

all

through

this,

I'll

do

so

one

more

time.

We

cannot

make

any

predictions concerning

effects

on

waterfowl until

we

know

what

will

be

happening

in the future.

In

conclusion, the Fish

and

Widllife Service

would

support formation of a

biological task force of appropriate federal

and

state

agencies to coordinate

research

and

evaluation

efforts,

and

to

make

recommendations

on

rehabilitation

programs

as

they

become

feasible.

Yesterday, I

was

directed

by

the area

office

to

state

that

the Fish

and

Wildlife Service will take the

logistical

lead today

to put

this

task force together.

45

DOWNSTREAM

FISHERIES

by

Dale

Evans*

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

National Oceinic

and

Atmospheric

Administration

One

of the

major

impacts of the

May

18

eruption of

Mount

St.

Helens

on

fishery resources

was

the scouring of the Toutle River

by

the flood of

mud,

ash,

and

debris. Other

members

of

this

panel will describe

effects

in the

Columbia

River, the estuary,

and

the ocean. I will limit

my

remarks

to the

impact

on

the Toutle River

salmon

hatchery.

The

Toutle River hatchery, constructed

and

funded

by

the National

Marine

Fisheries Service,

under

provisions of the Mitchell Act,

is

operated

by

the

Washington

Department

of Fisheries.

The

hatchery

is

situated

on

the

Green

River, which(is the hatchery water supply,about one-half mile

above

its

con-

fluence with the

North

Fork

of the Toutle River.

I've

not seen

any

assessment of

effects

on

the

Green

River watershed.

It's

about

10

miles north of

Mount

St. Helens, but I

assume

that

there

is

some

large degree of

ash

fallout

and

perhaps

blowdown.

We

were

up

at

the Toutle

Hatchery

last

Friday,

where

we

took these pictures.

The

Green

River

is

running

quite turbid

and

one

of the

unknowns,

of course,

is

how

that

watershed

is

going

to sustain

itself

in terms of being a hatchery supply.

This

is

the

view

of

some

of the rearing.ponds.

These

were

all

overtopped

by

the flood

which

left

from

a couple of

feet

to a

few

inches of

silt

and

ash

on

the bottoms.

Looking

on

down

toward

the hatchery building

and

one

of the

shops, the deposit of debris

can

be

seen

that

came

into the hatchery area

after

flowing

up

the

Green

River

from

the Toutle.

Apparently

this

is

a

backwash,

the depths of

mud

and

water

on

the Toutle

when

it

went

by

the

mouth

of the

Green

River

was

considerable.

The

Green

River

was

diverted

and

flowed

right

through the hatchery

complex.

This

is

the

inside of the freezer

shed

where,

of course,

all

the

electrical

equipment

was

off,

and

which

contained a considerable

amount

of

Oregon

Moist

Pellet,

which

really

doesn't

smell

very

good

after

it

has

laid

out for awhile.

This

slide

is the area

between

the hatchery building

and

the

machine

shed,

one

of the channels of the

river

when

it

went

through.

You

can

see the

mud

line

on

the building. This

is

adjacent to the shed, again part of the

diver-

sion

where

you

can

see

it

flows

back

into the

Green

River

on

downstream.

Again,

showing

the

mud

line

on

the building

and

the

kind

of debris

that's

going

to

have

to

be

moved

out of there

if

the

station

were

again to

become

operable.

Inside the

shop

you

see the water

line

just

above

the green paint there

above

the

bench.

*Mr.

Evans'

comments

were

accompanied

by

a

slide

presentation.

47

Below

the rearing

ponds

where

the

channel

that

flowed

through the hatchery

is

now

returning to the old

river

channel, the

Washington

Department

of Fish-

eries

moved

in

just

as

soon

as

they could

and

made

a

partial

diversion to put

the

river

back

where

it's

supposed

to

be.

That's

one

of the hatchery

resi-

dences

in the

background.

We

consider

that

one completely

lost,

I believe.

Here

is

part of a logging truck

that

was

carried

up

the

Green

River

from

the

Toutle.

Although

I don't

show

it,

there's

also a bridge girder about

30

feet

long, about a

12

or

15

inch steel bridge girder,

that

was

carried

up

and

dropped

in front of the hatchery.

Here

we

were

standing

on

four to five feet

of

mud

at

one

of the adult holding ponds, looking

back

up

toward

the hatchery

complex.

When

the

ash

and

silt

begins to drain,

it

solidifies

and

becomes

quite

solid,

except

as

you

walk

across there

you

find spots

that

are

just

about

like

quicksand, a considerable.cleanup job.

The

last

rose of

surrnner

for

what

was

a very short

summer

for the Toutle

hatchery.

The

gutters

on

the building are completely

filled

with

ash

that

ran

off

the roof. This

is

from

above

the hatchery looking

downstream.

The

hatchery buildings are

behind

the trees

on

the

right

and

this

is

the point

at

which

the

river

diverted

and

flowed

through the hatchery

complex.

The

same

kind

of

problem

that

was

discussed

earlier

for the Cowlitz exists here, of

course,

on

a smaller scale.

That

material

has

to

be

moved

out of the

Green

River

channel

or

else

the

high

water

this

fall

and

winter

is

going

to

be

right

back

into the hatchery

complex,

and

we'll

be

suffering further

damage.

The

question

is,

11

What

do

you

do

with

this

stuff

when

you

move

it

out?

11

You

can't

just

go

pile

it

on

the

banks

or

it's

going

to

run

right

back.into the

river

and

create a recurring

problem.

There

is

no

way

of

getting

it

out

right

now.

This

is

the

highway

crossing of the

North

Fork

just

above

the confluence

of the Toutl e.

You

can

see

here

the

mud

and

ash

left

on

the approach to the

bridge

settled

out

at

a

fairly

sharp angle of repose.

It's

not

comparable

with your

normal

kind

of

mud.

Those

are the abutments of the railroad bridge.

Both

the

highway

bridge

and

railroad bridge

were

sheared cleanly

off

their

abutments.

The

heavy

layer of

silt

can

be

seen

on

the

river

and

again

on

up

to

at

least

40

feet

above

current stream level.

The

contribution of

mud

and

silt

to

the

river

is

going

to

be

a recurring event every time

you

get a

little.

bit

of

high

water or

heavy

rain.

You

can

see the gravel bar of the old

river

bed

here.

There

is

four to six

feet

of overburden

on

that

now.

There

is

not

much

left

of

what

used

to

be

a very productive

salmon

pro-

ducer.

The

production of the

salmon

and

steelhead

below

Bonneville

is

about

two-thirds

from

the hatcheries,

and

the production

from

Toutle River about ten

percent of

this

total

during these kinds

of

generally depressed runs. This

wi.11

have

a

significant

impact

on

the

fisheries.

Depending

on

your

economic

method,

how

you

calculate the values of the

fishery

and

the assumption

you

make

on

the

distribution

of the Toutle River

stocks

among

the

ocean

and

river,

sport

and

corrnnercial

harvests,

this

could

be

as

much

as

a

$6

million

annual

loss to the

fisheries.

That's

all

I

have

on

the Toutle River.

Now

I'll

turn

this

to Terry

Durkin_

who

can

speak

of

some

of the

effects

on

the estuary.

48

DOWNSTREAM

FISHERIES

by

Terry

Durkin

.

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

National

Oceanic

and

Atmospheric Administration

First

of

all,

I

would

like

to point out the location

of

our research

stations

that

are

downstream

or in the

vicinity

of the lower

Columbia

River

that

were

actually collecting data shortly

after

the volcanic

expl

o-

sion.

The

only

map

we

have

is

up

here

and

those of

you

without very

sharp eyes

may

not

be

able to pick

them

up.

Here

1

s the entrance of the

Cowlitz to the

Columbia

and

the Prescott

Facilities

at

River

Mile

78,

approximately 6 miles upstream

from

the

mouth

of

the Cowlitz.

The

Clatskanie

office

at

Jones

Beach

is

at

roughly River

Mile

46, the

last

constriction of

the

river

before

it

empties into the estuary.

Our

Hammond

station

is

at,

roughly, River

Mile

7 near Fort Stevens State Park.

We

had

ongoing

charter

purse seining

going

on

off

the

mouth

of the

Columbia

at

the time material

emptied out into the ocean. I

1

m

going

to save

my

remarks

for

essentially

the

activities

of the Prescott

Facility

and

the

Hammond

Facility,

and

if

there

are

some

additional questidns, I

1

ll

have

data

and

information

from

the sampling

going

on

at

Jones

Beach

and

at

the

mouth

of

the

Columbia.

On

Monday

May

19,

various

water-quality parameters

were

monitored in

the: (1)

Columbia

River upstream of the Cowlitz (2) Cowlitz River

and

(3)

Columbia

atits

confluence with the Cowlitz.

Water

temperature,

turbidity

(JTU),

dissolved

oxygen

(D.O.

in mg/1),

and

pH

were

among

the factors measured.

Initially

(May

19)

turbidity

in the Cowlitz River exceeded

5600

JTU;

the

Columbia

at

the confluence

was

3500

JTU

compared

to a

background

of a 3 to

10

JTU

range.

(The

Toutle River

was

reported to

be

half

water

half

silt

late

on

May

18).

Water

·temperature in the Cowlitz

was

greater than

30°C

while the

Columbia

at

the confluence

was

20°C

on

the

bottom

(which

translates

to

68°F

which

was

approximately

7°C

above

Columbia

River background)

and

14°C

at

the

surface.

D.O.

in the Cowlitz

on

May

19

was

approximately 5.6

mg/1

while

the

Columbia

at

the confluence

remained

at

10.6

mg/1,

the

same

as

river

background.

pH

in the Cowlitz reached a

low

of

6.5

while the

Columbia

ranged

from

7.7 to 7.2.

By

Tuesday

p.m.

(May

20)

turbidity

in the Cowlitz

had

decreased to

1800

and

the

Columbia

to

700

JTU.

Cowlitz temperature

had

dropped

to l4°C, the

Columbia

was

14°C

top to bottom. Turbidity

and

tempera-

ture in the Cowlitz slowly decreased to

480

JTU,

8.9°C, respectively.

D.O.

stabilized

at

9

mg/1.

pH

equilibrated

at

approximately.7.0.

With

the excep-

tion of

turbidity,

the

Columbia

at

the confluence

has

returned to near

normal

·water

quality.

Turbidity levels of

3000

JTU

or greater

can

be

directly

lethal

to

fish;

the

mode

of action

is

gill

damage.

Coho,

chinook

salmon

and

steelhead

trout

49

juveniles

have

been

held in

Columbia

River flow-through water

at

the Prescott

Facility

since before the eruption.

The

highest

turbidity

recorded

was

on

May

19

at

1800

JTU

and

has

since decreased to 6

JTU.

No

mortality

has

occurred;

however,

small sharp

particles

were

noted in the

gills

of

some

test

fish.

Although

the

gill

irritation

was

not

directly

lethal,

it

could

affect

the ani-

mal's

ability

to operate

efficiently

in the environment, ultimately leading to

a decrease in survival.

The

nature of the

newly

formed

material

from

the

eruption (ash

fallout

and

earth

washed

down

Toutle drainage) could cause

direct

mortality

at

much

lower levels than reported in the

literature;

e.g.,

it

is

not

aged

and

smoothed

but

has

sharp edges. Tests indicate a

certain

amount

of the material will not

settle

from

the water

column

and

could

be

a

source of chronic

gill

irritation

which

could lead to hypertrophy or hyper-

plasia

of

gill

lamelle

and

secondarily

by

affecting the organisms

on

which

fish feed.

Filter

feeding organisms could

be

affected

by

the

particles

that

will

not

settle

from

the water

column.

Some

invertebrate

filter

feeders are a

source of

food

for recreationally

and

commercially important freshwater

and

marine species

of

fish.

Tube

dwelling invertebrates

would

be

affected

by

fine

particulate

matter

settling

on

the

bottom

of

the estuary.

To

assess the) overa

11

effect

of

settl

eab

le

and

non-fi-lterab

le

residue,

we

feel

as

though

our

CREDDP

efforts

should continue well past the

1981

deadline

now

in

effect;

Dungeness

crab

distribution

and

abundance

studies

should

be

resumed;

inriver

and

offshore monitoring

of

migrating juvenile

salmonids should

be

continued

and

increased. Monitoring

of

riverine

and

estuarine

turbidities

should continue until

11

normal

11

levels are re-established.

Comments

of

Dr.

Blahm

are in a

handout

and

may

be

available.

By

the

way,

our coordinator for these

particular

research

facilities

mentioned

above

is

Charles

Koski.

Here

are our

comments

for the estuary. This

is

also in a handout

form

entitled

"Preliminary Evaluation

of

Mount

St.

Helens

.

Impact

on

the

Columbia

River Estuarine Finfish."

Distributional

and

diurnal investigations of

Columbia

River estuary

salmonid

and

non-salmonid

finfish

species

have

been

underway

since February

1980.

By

diurnal,

I

mean

24

hours steady.

We

start

at

mid-noon

and

continue

until the following

day

making

trawl

and

purse seine

tests

every

two

hours.

NMFS

Hammond

and

Prescott research personnel

have

been

conducting studies for

the Pacific Northwest River Basins

Commission

through the

Columbia

River

Estuary

Data

Development

Program

(CREDDP).

Systematic

monthly

samplings

were

made

at

63

estuarine

sites

using trawls, purse

seines,

beach

seines,.and

traps.

Prior to the

May

18th volcanic explosion, over

250

distributional

baseline

samples

were

collected. This data base provides a

means

for

comparing

fin-

fish

and

species

abundance

before

and

after

the influx

of

volcanic debris in

the estuary.

I'll

point out

some

characteristics

of

this

particular

92,000-acre

estuary. This

is

Grays

Bay.

This

particular

mark

here

essentially

indicates

the fresh water area. This

mixed

area,

essentially

could

be

marine

down

here,

but

it

has

salt

water intruding

on

the

bottom

through

this

point

up

to Astoria.

50

These

small

figures are

pretty

well

condensed

in

the.

handout, but indicate

our sampling

sites,

and

there's

roughly

63

of

them.

The

open

squares are

purse seine

sites.

The

small

straight

lines.indicate

trawl

sites.

These

dotted lines are trap net

sites.

We

also

have

beach

seine

sites

throughout.

Noticeable

changes

were

observed in the

number

of

bottom

fish

found

at

freshwater

sites

in the

upper

estuary

above

Tongue

Point following the explo-

sion.

There

was

a

90

percent decline in

finfish

abundance

from

the previous

month

of

May.

This

catch reduction

would

have

been

even

more

distinctive

if

33

fish taken in a

tow

near the

mouth

of

Deep

River in

upper

Grays

Bay

were

not included in the

June

total.

I

mentioned

that

up

in

Grays

Bay

we

had

one

trawl

station.

There

would

have

been

13

fish caught with 8 trawl

samples

in the

upper

area

above

Tongue

point. I should caution, these are

just

bottom

fish,

they are not pelagic fish.

We

did ·this

work

last

week

and

it's

as

up-to-date

as

we

have.

June

bottom

fish catches in the

lower

saline portion of estuary west of

Tongue

Point

showed

no

change

·in abundance·or species (Table 2).

However,

a close

examina_tion

of

each

tow

catch revealed a

high

proportion of fish

were

found

in

Grays

Bay,

Youngs

Bay,

and

Desdemona

shoa

1. Normally, about

50

percent of the fish

were

captured in these four shallow

sites.

Tow

catches

at

these four sites in

June

provided over

80

percent of the

total

finfish

catch

below

rongue

Point.

June

pelagic purse seine sampling

had

not

been

completed, but a prelimi-

nary review indicated a substantial numerical decline in salmonid

and

non-

salmonid

finfish

captured

above

Tongue

Point.

We

haven't completed our purse

seine

below

Tongue

Point

at

this

point.

The

June

trap catches

whch

were

made

up

in the sloughs

and

the

mouths

of the

tributaries

in the

upper

estuary are also incomplete, but indicate

no

obvious

change

in

species or

numbers

at

tributaries

or sloughs in the upper

estuary.

There

was

neither a reduction in

numbers

or

an

increase of fish

which

seems

to indicate

little

movement

of fish into these areas.

Diurnal or 24-hour purse seine

and

trawl sampling

was

conducted

at

a

single location in April prior to volcanic explosion,

and

again

on

May

21

and

22nd

severa.l

hours

after

turbidity

and

debris

had

reached the area.

We

were

able to successfully complete

both

surveys.

The

diurnal

sample

site

was

at

the

Washington

side

of

the

Interstate

101

highway

bridge in

40

to 70-foot

water

depths and varying

salinity

concentrations.

May

purse seine catches increased dramatically with the increase in

tur-

bidity. A

total

of

19,835

fish

were

captured in eleven

sets

compared

with

942

in April.

Surges

of

schooling pelagic fish

were

encountered during

different

sampling periods.

Nearly

1200

shad

were

captured

at

noon,

over

2200

longfin

smelt

at

2:00 p.m.,

1500

shad

at

4:00 p.m.,

and

1500

herring

at

6:00

p.m.

At

10:00

p.m., over

1000

anchovy

were

captured.

Reduced

catches of finfish

were

taken

at

2:00 a.m., but

thereafter,

shad, herring,

and

longfin smelt

were

common

to abundant in the remaining

sets.

Yearling salmonid catches (coho, sockeye, spring chinook,

and

steelhead)

were

comparatively

low

though over

800

subyearling

fall

chinook

were

captured.

51

Many

bottom-associated species usually· not

found

in pelagic gear

such

as

a purse seine

were

taken during the 24-hour survey.

Over

1000

starry

flounder

were

captured

and

some

appeared in

each

purse seine

set.

Sand

sole,

English

sole,

Dungeness

crab,

sand

shrimp, staghorn sculpin, shiner perch, Pacific

tomcod,

and

snake prickleback

all

appeared in purse seine catches. Their

presence in the pelagic catches

is

unusual.

May

diurnal trawl catches

were

21

percent less than observed in April.

Over

67

percent of the fish

were

captured

between

midnight

and

6:00

a.m.

Longfin smelt

and

snake prickleback comprised

72

percent of the

total

bottom

fish catch.

There

were

no

dead

fish

observed in the diurnal surveys

and

no

apparent

hyperactivity

was

seen with fish held in the highly turbid water.

The

most

obvious behavioral

changes

were

the surface

movement

of bottom

fishes,

the apparent confusion of schooling pelagic

fish,

and

the

drop

in catch

of

yearling juvenile salmonids.

Collection

of

juvenile salmon,

starry

flounder, Pacific herring

and

Dungeness

crab

were

made

on

May

29th,

and

these

were

held for five

days

in

ambient estuarine water

at

the

NMFS

Hammond

boat house.

Each

day

a

few

of

each

species

were

sacrificed

for examination

of

gill

tissue.

This

effort

is

being

funded

through a supplemental

fund

provided

by

CREDDP

No

apparent

gill

damage

was

noted,

though

lab analysis

is

not complete.

We

propose to continue our regular

monthly

distributional

and

diurnal

samples.

We

will

be

comparing

food

items

consumed

by

dominant

species before

and

after

the volcanic explosion to determine

if

dietary

changes

are occurring.

We

propose

that

prior

NMFS

baseline studies of benthic infauna, sediment

size,

and

epibenthic crustaceans

be

reactivated to provide further comparative

assessment of the

effects

of volcanic debris in the estuary. Present studies

do

not

have

the scope or

historic

background

data to adequately

make

compari-

sons.

52

DOWNSTREAM

FISHERIES

by

Herb

Curl

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES.

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

National

Oceanic

and

Atmospheric

Administration

Pacific

Marine

Environmental

Laboratories

is

one

of

the three oceano-

graphic laboratories

that

NOAA

maintains.

We're

located in Seattle

and

actu-

ally

have

operations

all

over the Pacific

Ocean.

We

were

on

an

oceanographic

cruise, as

it

turned out gratuitously,

just

after

the eruption of

Mount

St.

Helens

and

were

at

sea during the

second

eruption

on

the

25th

of

May.

Our

original purpose

was

tb look

at

water properties with respect to

trace

metals

and

trace organics

as

part of a long-range

effects

program

on

pollutants

in

the ocean.

However,

we

added

an

additional

18

days

working

off

the

mouth

of the

Columbia

because of the volcanic material

coming

down

the

river.

I'll

briefly

summarize

our findings to date.

We

made

measurements

of

salinity

and

turbidity

distributions,

of

chemical

composition,

and

of the

physi.cal

state

of the material

that

was

coming

down

the

river.

The

plume

it-

self,

which

is

the fresh water lens lying

on

top

of

the

salt

water,

is

about

half

the

normal

·size for

this

time of year.

Normally,

as

this

would

be

the

maximum

period of runoff, the

plume

would

be

much

larger than

what

we

found.

The

plume,

at

this

time

of

the year,

would

normally

occupy

an

area like

this,

and

it

would

move

down

along the coast of

Oregon.

It

was

only half

that

size.

The

suspended

load

was

much

higher than

had

ever

been

recorded.

It

was

four times larger than

any

previous records

would

show

and

equivalent to the

normal

suspended

load of the Mississippi during flood stage.

In

other words,

we're not

setting

any

records, but there

was

much

more

material in the

river

than

we

normally find.

The

chemical

composition of the material

is

very simi-

lar

to the

normal

suspended

load of the

Columbia

River.

In

other words,

it

is

feldspar-type minerals but, in

this

case,

small

particles

that

are glassy.

They're glassy shards with a

lot

of bubbles

so

that

there's

less

of

a tendancy

for

this

material to

fall

out. But, chemically, the material

is

almost iden-

tical

to

what

normally

comes

down

the

river.

We

saw

two

distinct

turbid

layers,

one

at

the surface abouttenmeters

deep

which

is

quite normal,

and

also two tongues of turbid material near the bottom. This

is,

as

far

as

we

can

tell,

an

unusual

situation.

We

plan to

have

two

more

cruises,one

at

the beginning of July

and

one

in

August.

We

were

able to obtain

some

additional ship time

for

this

purpose

and

will

go

back

and

take another look

at

the

suspended

load, the material

coming

down,

its

concentration

and

distribution,

and

the

effect

on

light

penetration.

We

will also determine whether or not there

is

any

material being deposi.ted

on

the

bottom

which

might

be

unusual.

Based

on

the figures given today about the

53

total

amount

of material

that

has

come

out of St. Helens,

we

wouldn't expect

to find a layer of

ash

similar

to

that

deposited during the

Katmai

eruption.

It's

my

guess

that

the principal

effect

of the material

coming

down

the

river

and

entering the

ocean

will

be

an

increase in

turbidity

and

a decrease

in the

amount

of

light

penetration

as

long

as

this

material

is

coming

in. I

would

guess

that

the

river

will

be

continuing to flush

this

volcanic material

for

some

time,

so

there will probably

be

an

effect

on

primary production

of,

for example, phytoplankton,

at

least

near the

mouth

of the

river,

and

a pos-

sible

effect

on

fish

on

the

bottom

if

they are influenced

by

increased

turbidity.

54

COLUMBIA

RIVER

ESTUARY

by

Dave

Kent

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Columbia

River Estuary

Data

Development

Program

The

Columbia

River Estuary

Data

Development

Program

is

a six-year,

$6

1/4

million investigation of the physical

and

biological processes of the

lower

42

miles of the

Columbia

River,

funded

through the River Basins

Commission.

Our

study area,

if

I

can

pause

a

moment

and

point

it

out

on

the

map,

is

located

roughly

40

to

46

miles along the

river.

If

you

notice,

this

is

the area

immedi-

ately

below

the

mouth

of the Cowlitz River,

which

is

right

at

this

point.

Our

program

began, the

field

portion of our

program,

in

September

of

1979.

We

have

approximately

22

separate

field

research contracts

and

a

number

of

others not directly involved in

field

research. This

resea_rch

program

began

in,

as

I said, September,

1979,

and

we

are conducting a

comprehensive

survey

of

this

estuary.

We're

studying the

food

chain

from

the primary productivity

through the

consumers

up

to the higher level of

mammals

and

birds.

We're

studying the physical effects in the estuary, of currents

and

salinity

intrusion,

sediment transports

and

depositions,

and

geology

of the sediments.

We

had

approximately eight

months

worth

of data

field

research prior to the eruption.

Again,

very fortuitously,

we

were

in the

field

and

operating

when

the

eruption occurred.

In

the

weeks

immediately preceding the eruption

we

had

collected data

on

the

organisms

that

lived

in

the

sediments

and

immediately

on

top of the sediments. Terry

Durkin

from

the National

Marine

Fisheries

Service

has

already talked about the extensive fisheries research being con-

ducted with

CREDDP

funding.

At

the time of the eruption,

and

in the

week

immediately following,

we

already

had

scheduled a

number

of researchers.

As

a matter of

fact,

this

is

the

most

intensive period of research during the

field

year.

We

had

primary productivity

work

going

on

the

week

immediately

before

and

immediately

after

the eruption.

We

had

groups

measuring the organ-

isms

that

lived

just

on

top of the bottom,

and

in

the bottom, immediately prior

to the eruption.

The

scenario following the eruption

went

something

like

this:

On

May

20,

two

days

following the eruption, the research

activities

of

the

CREDDP

program

were

reviewed

by

the

staff

and

on

the following day,

on

the

21st,

an

emergency

contractors

meeting

was

called to discuss whether

and

how

we

should

alter

our

program

to take into account

this

unique

event.

On

May

23rd,

which

was

five

days

following the eruption, the meeting

was

held. A

number

of the contracts

were

modified with approval of

Mel

Gordon,

the Chair-

man,

that

afternoon, to

slightly

alter

or

expand

our

program

to cover areas

which

were

uniquely associated with the input of

ash

into the

Columbia

River

system.

55

What

follows

is

an

outline of the additional

work

that

1

s being

performed

by

CREDDP

contractors to assess the

damage

caused

by

the

Mount

St.

Helens

eruption:

The

Envirosphere personnel,

who

are with a consulting

company,

began

an

intensive

field

program

on

the

23rd

of

May.

Water

quality parameters

were

assessed

from

Bonneville

Dam

to the estuary using

mobile

lab equipment.

Samples

were

collected, also for future analysis. This

program

is

being coor-

dinated with water quality

work

being

done

by

the Geological

Survey

above

Bonneville.

Three

work

units

have

coordinated

their

efforts

to conduct

an

aerial sur-

vey

of the estuary. This includes the Envirosphere

work

on

log storage, the

Washington

Department

of Wildlife

work

on

marine

mammals,

and

another contractor,

Jones

and

Stokes,

work

on

the avifauna.

They

have

flown

over the estuary

and

assessed the impacts of the flood

on

these three aspects.

Oregon

State University

has

a contract to study the benthic infauna, the

organisms

that

live

within the

bottom.

They

1

ve:received the additional funding

to

go

back

out into the estuary

and

conduct

an

intensive survey throughout the

study area to determine

what

the

impact

of

this

additional sediment

is

going

to

have

on

this

very important

community.

The

University of

Washington

is

currently conducting a

program

of research

on

the zooplankton

and

larval in the estuary.

They

also received additional

funding to

add

on

special

equipment

and

to increase the

number

of sampling

trips.

As

a matter of

fact

they are

on

the estuary today

and

will continue

to

be

so

on

a

weekly

basis, for about the next

month.

We

1

ve

already

mentioned

the National

Marine

Fisheries Service research

that

is

going

on

the

salmonid

and

non-salmonid fishes.

They

are also deploying

flow-through turbidometers to determine

how

much

suspended

sediments are

being

carried in the

river.

Terry also

mentioned

the additional

work

that

they are

doing

with

this

funding

on

potential

gill

damage

and

other

effects

on

the

fisheries.

Starting next

Wednesday,

the 18th,

we

1

re

going

to

have

a very intensive

three-week

field

effort

being conducted

by

a

number

of our contractors.

This

will

be

going

on

24

hours

a day.

They

will

be

studying the current, the

tur-

bidity,

the productivity of the estuary, the

number

of the organisms in the

estuary, the zooplankton,

and

the benthic organisms.

It

happened

that

this

had

been

scheduled

from

the beginning of the

program

and

fortuitously occurred

immediately

after

this

eruption. Other

work

units are also responding to

this

eruption within the

scope

of

their

contracts.

Because

of the design of

this

particular

resource

program,

many

of the aspects of the eruption are already

being covered

by

existing

work

units.

As

I

said,

this

is

a very unique oppor-

tunity.

We

have

an

existing, comprehensive,

scientific

research

program

in

play

just

a

few

miles

below

where

this

cataclysmic eruption

has

occurred.

We

anticipate gathering data

which

is

not only unique, but

that

will undoubtedly

be.referred to for years to

come.

The

Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

Commission

will continue to serve

as

an

interagency coordinating center for

all

assessment

work

done

on

the

Columbia

River estuary.

We

might

add

that,

undoubtedly,

we

will

become

more

involved

56

with the

20

or

so

miles

between

the

upper

end

of our study area

and

the con-

fluence of the Cowlitz.

There

are already

some

sampling

stations

up

there.and,

as

I mentioned,

we

are

expanding

our

effort

into

that

area.

As

far

as

recommendations

go;

certainly

we

should continue to assess both

the short-

and

the long-term

impact

of

this

volcanic eruption

on

the

Columbia

River

and

estuary.

We

should assess the

impact

of the sediment input to the

river

and

we

should certainly determine

any

changes

in the sedimentation pat-

tern or

raise

in the estuary or the ship channel.

We

should continue to

moni-

tor

and

assess the

impact

of

this

eruption

on

the biological

system

of the

Columbia

River.

At

this

point,

it's

too early to

make

any

firm assessment of

what

the

impact

has

been.

Terry

has

already

mentioned

that

we

are getting

some

evidence

of impact;

that

there

has

been

a dramatic decrease in the

number

of fishes

that

are captured out there.

Our

productivity research units

have

found

a deeply

dramatic decrease in the level of productivity in the

estuaries.

Over

the

long-term,

if

this

continues, there will undoubtedly

be

significant

impact

on

the systems in the

river.

The

funding for continued investigations of volcanic

ash

in

this

system

is

currently non-existent.

Like

all

of

you

who

run

programs,

we

manage

to

spend

everything

that

we've

got.

Right

now

our funding

is

stretched

so

thin

you

could read a

newspaper

through

it.

Money

for long-term

effects

as

well

as

the short-term investigations

is

sorely

needed

for

this

study. That con-

cludes

my

remarks.

57

Page

left

blank

INTRODUCTORY

REMARKS

by

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

.ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

George

Proctor,

Vice-Chairman

Pacific-Northwest River Basins

Commission

I

certainly

appreciate the presentations

that

have

been

made

by

the Federal

agencies today.

As

often

as

I leave

Klamath

Falls

and

drive to Portland or

Vancouver,

I drive

up

and

see

Mt.

Shasta to the South, drive

by

what's

left

of

Mt.

Mazama

and

see the scenic beauty

that

we

all

appreciate in the Pacific

Northwest

through the

Sisters,Jefferson,

and

on

down

through

Mt.

Hood.

Always

as

you

swing

down

by

Mt.

Hood

you

hope

to see in the distance

Mt.

St. Helens,

but

as

usual, for various reasons

it

was

not there.

What

I

think

we

need

to

realize,

of course,

is

the beauty of the Pacific

Northwest

has

its

origin in

what

we

have

seen,to a large

extent,in

the

acti-

vities

of

Mount

St. Helens.

And,

for example,

like

Mt.

Mazama

in

my

area,

we

continue to

have

a daily residue of the volcanic

effect

which

was

over 6,000

years,

even

activity

up

to a 1,000 years

ago

which

is

an

overriding

effect

in

the area.

The

Cascades, of course, in the

1800

1

s

were

active

and

Mt.

Lassen,

of course, in

1915.

So,

I think

we

need

to realize

that

well

over half of

the Basin's area

is

overlaid with volcanic material.

I

have

a

particular

interest

in

this

area because

I've

spent considerable

time in geothermal

development

and

have

had

opportunity, for example, to fly

the

circle

of

fire

from

Chili to

Japan

and

to

visit

many

of the active ·sites

along

that

route.

You

can

appreciate the event

that

took place here, but

really,

you

can't

appreciate

it

unless you're in the front lines

as

many

of

you

folks

have

been.

I'd

like

to suggest

and

offer

one

additional perspective to

this

forum

as

it

relates

to planning,

particularly

to the mid-term

and

long-term

effects

that

we

see here in

this

area

and

in the basin.

As

you

folks are aware, the

River Basins

Commission

has

just

completed the regional plan--

the

CCJP,

and

obviously, did not

direct

their

attention to

this

type of

an

event. There

isn't

any

question

what

the

status

of St.

Helens

is

today,

tomorrow,

or the

It's

unknown.

And

there

is

no

reason to believe

that

what

has

happened

in the past over

many

years

may

not continue in the future

at

some

point of time within the Basin.

It

just

seems

to

me

that

we

need

to take a

look

from

the planning standpoint

as

to

what

is

the

effect

of

this

type

of

natural.

phenomenon

on

the environment and,

more

particularly,

how

do

you

live

with

such

changes

that

may

occur to the environment

as

a

result.

Naturally,

as

you

folks

have

reported

earlier

here today,

by

emergency

efforts,

immediate

efforts,

and.money,

you

can

minimize

the

effects

to persons

and

to property. But, nevertheless, we're talking about

an

event

that

over

the long-term,

we

need

to put in perspective. Often

Jim

Hill,

as

many

of

you

59

remembered,

would

say,

11

At

times

we

need

to help

Mother

Nature

but also

we

need

to understand

Mother

Nature.

11

I think

as

we

talk

about

how

to

live

with

the environment

that

occurs

from

this

type of event, I think

we

need

to recog-

nize

how

we

may

need

to

minimize

the effects of

it

and

how

we

can

aid,

as

I

indicated

"Mother

Nature,

11

and,

thirdly,

how

we

can

take advantage

and

benefit

from

those events

that

occur to our

environment

as

a

result

of

it.

To

me

we

have

an

event here in St.

Helens

that

probably,

on

a

world

basis,

occurs

once

in a decade.

And

there

is

information available, not only in the

Basin, but world-wide

that

is

available to address the planning questions

that

seem

proper

and

that

we

need

to address

as

we

look

down

the

road

in

this

re-

gard,

after

we

get through the

immediate

impact

as

to

just

what

areas

that

we

can

address

and

what

areas

that

we

can

work

within the environment

that

we

find ourselves in.

I think

at

this

time I

would

like

to introduce the

gentleman

who

probably

considers

that

over the

last

few

weeks,

he

has

been

in the core of the volcano,

a

gentleman

from

the State of

Washington,

Web

Hallauer.

60

WASHINGTON

by

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Wilbur

G.

Hallauer

Washington

Department

of

Ecology

Considering our

mayday

of

May

18, I think

that

the

first

thing I

want

to

do

is

thank the

many

agencies

at

the federal level

who

were

so

responsive,

so

helpful,

and

in

coordination with our

efforts

at

the

state

and

local

level,

in

the State of

Washington

in responding to

that

great

emergency.

It

was

an

out-

standing

effort,

and

the people of the State

of

Washington

are sincerely

appreciative.

I'd

like

to look

back

to the

time

when,

in

March

of

this

year, the

moun-

tain

first

shpwed

evidence of

renewed

activity.

In

the course of

that

time,

people

were

wondering

whether

this

would

be

an

event of

any

consequence or

going

to

be

kind

of

murmur

and

then

di

ssfpate

and

go

away

again. I reca

11

that

Governor

Ray

put together a task force called the St.

Helens

Mountain

Watch

and

asked

the people

from

USGS

to

come

to

Olympia

and

give

their

version

of

how

they

viewed

the mountain's

activities.

Of

course,

we

got into questions

at

that

point

and

we

were

asking the

USGS

personnel

just

how

they rated the

odds

book

in the St.

Helens

horserace--

whether

we

could expect anything major

on

an

odds

scale of

10

to

1,

or

1,000

to

l,

or 1,000,000 to

1--just

what

were

we

looking at?

And,

I

have

to give

all

the

credit

to the

USGS

people.

They

were

responsive

directly

to the

question.

The

odds

they quoted

were

probably

200

to l against anything major,

2,000 to l against anything

like

Krakatoa

or

Mt.

Pelee,

where

the

entire

moun-

tain

blew

up

back

in not too recent times,

maybe

50

and

100

years

ago.

But, then the question

was,

when

you're looking

at

an

odds

book

of

200

to

l,just

how

seriously

do

you

treat

it?

And,

I'm glad, in

view

of the events

that

have

come

about since then,

that

all

the agencies

at

the federal level

and

at

the

state

level

were

serious.

They

didn't

look

at

200

to l as being, oh,

let's

forget about

it.

They

went

to

work

and

did build a structure of

how

we

should

coordinate

if

the

time

came

about

when

that

cataclysm arose.

And,

of course,

as

you

all

know,

here

we

are today.

There

are

some

events

that

I'd

like

to

talk

about in a bittersweet vein

because I think

that

at

the

agency

level

we

had

a magnificant response. There,

are

some

stories

that

came

out of the eventthat are

kind

of intriguing in

looking

back

at

it

in the

light

of about four

weeks'

experience since the

mountain

blew.

On

the

day

of the eruption,

on

May

18, over in

Yakima

the

fall-

out

was

starting

to

come

down

rather

terrifically

along about

mid-morning.

One

of the radio

stations

over

there,

the manager, of course,

had

come

down

to

handle the

program

himself,

and

after

giving the usual

line

of stay

inside,

keep

the curtains

drawn,

try

to avoid exposure to dust,

don't

do

any

unnecessary

61

driving,

if

you

do

have

to

go

outside

wet

a cloth

and

keep

it

over your face--

if

you

really

are ·confronted with

that

kind

of a necessity,

he

went

on

and

said,

11

There

1

s nothing to get excited about--we should

all

keep

our cool--but

folks,

it

does

look

like

the

entire

Cascade

Range

is

blowing

up.

11

Another

incident

that

came

to

me,

I think

Monday

afternoon,

when

I got a

call

from

a lady over in

Yakima

Indian Reservation

..

She

happens

to

be

the

wife

-of

a mi-nister to the

tribe

over there

and

in a mission

situation.

Her

problem

was

that

she

had

been

listening to the radio

and

there

was

a story

on

it

that

the

city

of

Yakima

was

about to

start

dropping

its

sewage,

raw,

in

the

Yakima

River. Well, she

was

very upset

by

this

from

the standpoint

that

the

salmon

resource of the

Yakima

River

was

something

that

the Indians

had

depended

on

in

all

history

and

that

the

state

should not

be

a party to

that.

It

shouldn

1

t

be

done.

It

should

be

stopped.

Of

course, I

tried

to

tell

here

what

the facts of the

situation

were.

That,

if

we

did not allow the

city

to

go

ahead

with the procedure of putting

the

sewage

in the

river,

the situation

would

come

about shortly

that

the

machinery

wouldn

1

t

work.

Then

we

would

really

be

fouled

up.

The

sewage

would

be

going

in untreated

anyway.

Even

if

the machinery

was

still

there

and

we

were

running the

sewage

through the plant,we

wouldn't

be

getting

any

treatment

on

the

sewage

as

it

went

through.

Well,

she

didn

1

t understand

that

really,

and

then I

tried

to

tell

her

the

river

was

running

at

6,000 cfs

and

the

effluent

from

the

Yakima

plant

was

of a range

of

10

to

20

cfs.

Very

evidently,

she

didn't

understand

what

a cfs

was,

or

how

much

volume

that

amounted

to. I

asked

her,

finally,

"Just

how

much

sewage

do

you

think

that

is?"

She

said,

"Oh,

you

ought to

be

able to

move

it

in about

two

truckloads in a

day."

Well, of course,

we

were

looking

at

something

more

like

one

5,000-gallon

truck per minute.

To

try

to find

that

kind

of trucking capacity

was

totally

unrealistic.

We

were

looking

at

the history of the

Yakima

drainage where,for

many

years,

Yakima

and

many

other

communities

in

that valley

had

previously,

before environmental clean-up times, put

sewage

directly

in the

river

for

decades. It·wasn

1

t

all

that

novel

.a

situation.

But

she

was

serious

enough

about

it.

In

fact,

she

said

that

this

was

a

plot

and

what

it

really

amounted

to

was

genocide

committed

against the Indians.

It

1

s a

little

hard

to

be

rational

in

responding to

that

kind

of

an

attack.

Oh,

we

had

another interesting

little

incident in connection with the

Lewis

River

power

dams.

On

Sunday

night,following the

May

18

cataclysm,

we

wanted

to get people in there to manually

open

the gates

and

start

lowering

the reservoirs.

What

happened

was

when

the people got

up

to the roadblocks,

the

sheriff

wasn

1

t

going

to allow

them

through.

There

was

about a three-hour

delay there

that

could

have

been

rather important, but

it

all

got

worked

out.

People

see matters of

this

kind

in

their

own

perspective

and

don

1

t see the

larger

picture often times.

From

the standpoint of the

Water

Quality

Agency

of

the State

of

Washington,

what

we

were

doing

at

the

time

in

May

when

the eruption occurred,

we

had

started

a water monitoring procedure in conjunction with other agencies.

We

had

that

going

on

and

the water level

at

the

Lewis

River

dams,

the three

power

dams,

62

had

already

been

reduced

by

50

percent

by

the

time

of the eruption,

so

only

50

percent of the

normal

pool

was

still

in the reservoir.

Almqst

immediately

we

went

to

work

with Pacific

Power

for a rational lowering of

that

remaining pool,

so

that

over a week's time the residue of the water in the reservoirs

was

largely lowered. I think

it's

just

about

up

to the point

now

where

it's

at

minimum

pool

level.

The

next thing

we

did

after

the

big

blowup

on

Sunday

was

to get

right

down

to analyzing

what

the

ash

consisted of

so

we'd

know

what

we

were

dealing

with.

We

would

then

be

able to forewarn the

sewage

plants in eastern

Washington,

where

the

ash

fallout

was

occurring,

what

their

problems

were

going to

be

and

be

able to

tell

the agricultural people

what·we

thought the

end

result

of the

fallout

would

be

on

agricultural crops.

Of

course, these

were

rough

measurements

to

begin

with,

as

to

acidity

and

alkalinity,

so

that

we

could get a

rough

handle

on

it.

Later on, of course,

we

got into

more

refined analysis.

Then,

of course,

we

got the

sewage

problems

that·we immediately

dealt

with

by

telling

the local

communities

they

had

to

make

up

their

own

mind

as

to

what

they should

do

with

their

raw

sewage.

If

they

felt

they

had

to

go

di-

rectly

to the rivers with

it,

we

weren't

going

to stand in

their

way

and

quote

them

any

regulations simply because

we

felt

that

it

was

the necessity

of

the

moment.

There

were

some

agricultural

problems

in connection with

this

because

there

were

crops in the

Yakima

Valley,

like

asparagus

and

other things of

that

kind,

where

there could

have

been

questions about bacterial contaminati,on ·of

the crops. Fortunately, with the analysis

we

made

along

the

river,

we

didn't

get into a

situation

that

was

all

that

difficult.

Now

we're

at

the point

where

we're

starting

to look

at

long-range

effects.

One

of the

stories

that

has

me

a

bit

concerned

right

now

is

the area over the

wind-blown

soils

of eastern

Washington

wher.e

dry-land

wheat

farming occurs.

These

are rather

fragile

soils

that

got there

by

wind

deposition.

Now

we

have

a rather

light,

very fine grained material--in

some

places

up

to 3

and

4 inches

deep--deposited over

wide

areas, particularly.

around

the

community

of

Ritzville.

Farmers

in

that

area are raising the question

that,

if

they continue

their

normal

soil practices of

working

that

material in through

their

stubble

mulch

farming,

which

penetrates probably a

maximum

of 3 inches or so, are they

going

to

change

the average of

that

soil

and

make

it

lighter

and

more

subject to

wind

erosion. This

is

a real concern.

Back

in the

1930's,

for example, with the

old time cultural practices

of

that

day, there

was

a

lot

of

wind-blown

move-

ment. Almost,

at

times,

like

the

dust

bowl

back

in

the

Midwest

that

occurred

at

about the

same

time.

With

the

shift

to

different

tillage

methods

and

dif-

ferent cultural practices in the

wheat

belt

of

eastern Washington, they

have

largely gotten

away

from

any

problem

of

that

kind.

Now,

here

all

at

once,

with the addition of

this

new

material,

wheat

growers

in

that

area are fearful

that

they are

going

to experience

blowouts

in

their

fields

because of the

change

in the soil condition.

In

just

how

many

ways

this

type of long-term

affect

from

the eruption

may

be

felt,

we

don't

know.

It's

going

to

be

decades,

probably, before

we

settle

all

the questions.

But

that's

the next stage of

it.

Just

one

more

little

story,

before I close.

Oh,

a

few

months

ago, shortly

after

the

first

activity

on

the mountain, I

happened

to

be

reading a

book

en-

titled

"Memoirs

of Nisqually."

It

was

by

a farmer

who

was

under

contract

by

63

the

Hudson

Bay

Company

at

Fort Nisqually,

which

is

just

north of

Olympia.

He

had

started

farming about the turn of the year

1845.

Along

in

this

diary,

reproduced

as

his

memoirs,

was

a story

that

on

a

Sunday

in April 1845,

he

heard rumblings

like

guns

during the night.

Then

the

Hudson

Bay

people brought

the

news

a

few

days

later

saying

it

was

Mount

St.

Helens

in active stage.

Now,

Ft. Nisqually

is

about

80

miles

away

from

Mount

St.

Helens

and, of course,

if

they got

enough

noise

so

that

in pioneer times during the

middle

of the night,

people

were

awakened

by

the racket, there

must

have

been

quite

an

explosion

at

that

time

too.

It

was

loud

enough

so

that

he

thought

it

might

have

been

the

rumble

of

naval

guns

off

the Fort.

Thank

you.

64

' '

·'

IDAHO

by

Scott

W.

Reed

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

,Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Idaho

Water

Resources

Board

We

noticed

last

night

that

there

was

a place

on

the

program

where

the

states

were

supposed

to give

some

comments.

That

was

a

minor

disaster,

com-

pared to the other

sort

of thing.

We

did turn out

some

newspaper

clippings

that

I noticed

managed

to get eaten

up

like

all

the

rest

of the papers

on

the

table in back,

which

constitutes our

official

report.

I think I

would

like to

make

some

personal

comments.

If

I

am

correct,

it

appears to

me

that

I'm

the only person

so

far

who's

been

on

the speaker's

plat-

form

who

acttplly

ended

up

underneath the

ash

as

it

fell.

Coeur

d'Alene

was

the beneficiary, to a

minor

degree, to

what

happened

out here. I

had

little

experience to prepare

us

for

that.

I

grew

up

along with

George

and

my

wife

down

in

Klamath

Falls.

One

of our notable events,

at

an

early

age

when

we

were

all

in

high

school together,

was

the production of

some

kind

of

commemo-

ration out

at

the fairgrounds in

which

they

gave

the Indian version of

what

happened

when

Mount

Mazama

blew

up.

I

remember

that

my

wife,

Lou,

played in

that

extravaganza.

All

I

can

tell

you

is

that

whoever

wrote the

script

had

no

idea

what

it

was

all

about.

As

the

ash

came

over

us

that

particular

Sunday

and

started

falling,

I,

given

as

I

am

somewhat

to profundities, observed very solemnly

that

this

was

a

very

unique

occasion;

and

I thought

we

were

certainly,

in a

way,

blessed in

that

we

would

have

gone

through

something

that

no

one

else

that

we

ever

knew

had

ever

gone

through before--the explosure to a volcano's

fallout.

My

wife,

who

is

given to puncturing profundities, noted

that

everyone

else

we

knew

would

also

be

going

through

that

same

experience.

In

a

way

it's

kind

of nice

to

come

over here

and

find

someone

who

hasn't,

even

though

we're

all

hearing

about

it.

We've

been

trying to figure

some

remedies for

this.

One

of

the reports

was

that

part of the

mountain

belonged to Burlington Northern. I don't

know

if

this

is

true or not,

but

there's

an

old principal of

law

that

says

that

if

you

use

your property in

such

a

manner

that

it

comes

upon

another person's

property, they

have

a

right

for

some

damages.

My

thought

was

not

so

much

as

claiming

damages,

but to simply to

ask

Burlington Northern,

and

perhaps the

Federal

Government

to the extent

that

they

own

it,

to please

come

and

pick

it

up

and

take

it

back

We

would

be

most

appreciative.

The

area of

fallout

in

Idaho

conformed,

naturally,

to

where

that

map

ceases. That

map

is

a

Washington

State

map.

In

general,

it

went

from

Moscow

north to Sandpoint.

There

was

a

slight

fallout

up

along

Bonners

Ferry

and

a

slight

fallout

down

in Lewiston, but the

major

impact

was

right

in the center

65

of

that

area.

In

the St.

Maries/Plummer

area there

were

up

to,

maybe,

two

inches. Other areas

didn't

have

anything like

that

quantity.

Initially,

after

the

fallout,

there

was

a great deal of

measurement

and

talk

about

what

was

there. I

can

only

tell

you

that

there

were

a great

number

of depth meas-.

urements

that

were

made

horizontally.

We

had

maybe

a quarter

of

an

inch in.

our

particular

area

and

that

isn't

very

much,

except a quarter of

an

inch

on

everything

does

kind

of

mount

up.

It

does

really

begin to

do

something.

I think

you

might

be

interested in

what

the local reaction

was

in terms

of response;

how

did the agencies respond?

Perhaps

that's

one

of the things

we

could

talk

about as a

state.

Civil

Defense

was

a

total

farce, a

non-

existent

entity.

A report

that

came

out immediately noted

their

existence.

From

then on,

we

never heard

anymore·

about

them.

I'm

sure

if

there

were

any

dire

need

for

anybody

to

eat

K rations in the

basement

of

the courthouse,

there

were

boxes

of

them

there for those

who

wanted

them.

Other than

that,

it

simply served as the

normal

political

place

where

you

put people

who

can't

do

anything else

and

need

a job.

The

other agencies responded very well,

locally.

The

local health

dis-

trict

and

the State Division of

Environment

people,

who

were

monitoring

air

quality,

proceeded to put in 18-to 24-hour

days

monitoring the

air

quality

and

giving reports.

The

Fish

and

Game

people put in long hours to

do

the

testing

to find out the quality of the water.

They

did

some

testing

on

the

fish

and

found

that

the fish

were

surviving

in

the tanks

that

they

had

already

set

up

without

much

adverse impact.

The

Fish

and

Game

people

tried

to

keep

track

of

what

was

happening

to the animals out in the

forest,

to the degree they could.

The

water quality

tests

were

made.

We

had

a rather quick

and

prompt

response

that

gave

the

same

sort

of

assurances you've

been

hearing;

that

the

stuff

isn't

going

to

kill

you

right

away

and

probably not in the long-run.

All

of

this

was

good.

Most

of the

good

work

that

was

done, in the terms

of

alerting

people,

was,

just

like

was

previously mentioned,

done

by

the radio

stations

who

man-

aged

to organize

and

correlate

and

put everything together. I .think, for the

first

time, a

lot

of

us

had

good

feelings about disc jockeys

who

managed

to

keep

track of

disasters

when

they occurred.

It

was

probably

just

as well

that

these

were

private individuals trying to

keep

listeners

on

the radio

rather than, perhaps,

some

formalized

government

response.

We

had

quite a difference of opinion

and

difference in the reaction

just

within the

states.

Coeur

d'Alene

is

just

30

miles

from

Spokane.

Spokane's

sheriff

became

a hero,

unjustifiably

I think.

He

declared a

state

of

emer-

gency, shut everything

down,

and

was

extremely active in terms of quieting

the

traffic,

putting speed

limits

in,

issuing

all

sorts

of

directives,

ob-

taining

masks,

and

all

that

sort

of thing.

On

our side of the

line

there

was

a

political

contest

going

on.

A

lot

of people

were

running for

sheriff

and

none

of

them

really

had

time

to

do

much

about

that,

so

it

kind

of

went

by

the board.

In

the

long

term

of

doing

things,

it

didn't

matter too

much.

We

presently

have

a dispute

still

existing over whether

it's

safe to

breathe the

stuff

or not.

Idaho

is

now

taking the

official

position

it's

perfectly safe to breathe

it

and

Washington

is

not quite sure

it

is.

We.hope

we're

right,

but

it

doesn't

seem

to matter because you're breathing

it

anyway.

It's

just

a matter of

how

to

cope

with

it

as best

you

can.

66

The

schools, of course, closed

down

immediately

and

stayed closed

for·the

rest

of the

week.

They

then re-opened, stayed

open

for

one

day,

and

then

closed again.

In

doing

such,

it

was

rather not a reaction to health hazards,

as a reaction to the

mechanical

problems

of running the busses

and

that

sort

of thing.

Again,

I think

this

is

what

my

wife

calls

a

janitorial

,theory of

world

operation in

which

if

the

janitors

and

mechanics say

that

you

can't

go,

you

don't

go,

and

they're

far

more

important than the doctors

and

other people.

In

any

event, the

janitors

and

the mechanics.closed the

school

system

and

that's

fine.

No

one

is

really

complaining too

much.

We'll

just

skip the

last

two

weeks

of school.

Most

kids

do

anyway.

It

was

giving

some

problems

to the

teachers over

how

to grade

them.

They

found

that

they could

just

do

it

the

usual

-way,

passed or

failed.

They

did whatever they could to get

them

by.

We

had

considerable problems,

we

had

three

days

of

good

weather

which

terminated with rain.

I'll

tell

you

that

there

has

never

been

so

many

joyous

faces looking

at

a cold rain in

May

as there

were

looking

at

the

one

that

finally

poured

down

upon

us

on

Thursday.

Rain

in

May

is

not

welcome

in north

Idaho,

though

it's

frequent, but

it

was

extremely

welcomed

then

and

it's

been

welcomed

ever since.

Every

time

it

rains,

things look a

little

bit

better

than they did before

it

rained.

We've

had

considerable problems, not problems,

just

interesting

confronta-

tions,

I guess, with

media

events.

That

I

s

what

you

I

d call

them

more

than any-

thing

else.

About

three

weeks

after

the event, a

week

ago

Sunday,

the

Idaho

Statesman

announced

on

the front

page

of the

newspaper

that

there

was

a

fish

kill

on

the level

of

200

thousand fish in

Coeur

d'Alene

Lake

and

6 million

fish

in the

Salmon

River drainage.

It

attributed"this

to the

Idaho

Fish

and

Game

Department. Since

up

there

where

we

are,

next to

Coeur

d'Alene

Lake,

the Fish

and

Game

people

had

told

us

that

there hadn't

been

any

fish

kill,

why

this

was

.kind of a

shoc.k.

The

next day, the

most

marvelous resurrection occurred.

It

turned out

that

there

were

no

fish

kills;

either

in

Coeur

d'Alene

Lake

or

any-

where

else,

and

it

came

again

from

the

same

source.

There

was

just

some

little

mix-up

in

there,

but the fish a

11

came

back

alive

and

are well,

as

far

as

we

know.

As

a matter

of

fact,

the fishing,

at

present,

is

pretty

good._

That

I

s a

little

pitch put in

because

right

now

our

politicians

are

going

through

total

schizophrenia.

They

have

to

talk

out of

both

sides of

their

mouths

and

it's

absolutely mandatory.

They

first

have

to

make

sure .that the place

is

declared

a

disaster

because only in

that

way

can

you

be

eligible

for

all

the

funds

that

we

heard about

this

morning

that

are

so

vitally

necessary to

keep

the businesses

going, provide

money

for the farmers,

and

so

forth. But,

on

the other hand,

calling your area a disaster

at

the

commencement

of the

tourist

season

that's

the major business of your area,

is

not

really

good

public

relations.

So,

having

secured the Federal Disaster Designation, the

Governor

and

a troop of

cohorts

went

around

northern

Idaho

for a

week

last

week

announcing

that

it

wasn't a

disaster

after

all,

that

the fishing

was

good,

that

the streams

were

running

clear,

and

that

we

had

the

streets

cleaned

up.

All

of

that

is

pretty

much

true.

We

perhaps

have

gone

through the

same

sort

of resurrection,

and

will continue

to,

unless

somebody

tries

to take the

disaster

designation

away

and

cut

off

the loans.

Then

I'll

assure

you

that

it

will

really

be

a

disaster

and

we

do

desperately

need

that.

67

We

had

a

little

problem

with the response

from

the southern

part

of the

state.

It

took Boise about a

week

to find out

that

something adverse

had

happened

in

northern Idaho.

That

I

s not unusual,

that

I

s about par.

It

just

happened

to

be

a

little

more

necessary

this

time

than

usual

because

we

kind

of

needed

some

help.

The

kind

of help

we

needed

was

a couple units of

National

Guard

that

had

come

out of

Moscow

and

Coeur

d'Alene

and

gone

to

southern

Idaho

for

training.

The

State National

Guard

Commander

said

that

it

was

very important for

them

to continue

their

training

down

there in

_case

some

disaster

occurred.

It

took

a while to

finally

get the

message

through

that

maybe

this

was

one. Eventually, they did

manage

to

lumber

forth,

come

north,

and

bring

their

trucks along,

and

they did provide

some

minimal

assist-

ance for our problems.

The

problems

will continue

in

certain areas.

The

agricultural

situation

there

is

not

as

serious as

it

is

in eastern

Washington;

and

I

think,

in gen-

eral,

you're not

going

to

have

much

of

an

adverse

affect

as

far

as

anyone

knows

at

the present time, subject to the

sort

of things

that

were

.talked

about in changing our soil consistency.

Real

impact, I think,

is

going

to

be

in the logging.

The

problem

there

is

mechanical.

Our

country

ends

up

looking a

lot

better

and

our scenic values

are

right

up

there.

When

it

rains,

it's

green,

and

when

it

quits raining,

it's

still

green because the

trees

have

absorbed

all

this.

But

then,

when

you

get out to

chop

the

trees

down

or

saw

them

down,

all

that

stuff

comes

down

upon

you.

It's

dangerous to the loggers.

They

can't

see the

trees

when

they're

in the process of

falling.

The

chainsaws

end

up

just

blunted,

if

they

continue to run.

The

dust, of course, picks

up

immediately

and

goes

into the

engines of the trucks,

tractors,

and

the

rest

of the

equipment

that

are going.

It's

all

operating in dry, dusty country

when

it

can

operate,and

it's

going

to

be

a

tremendous

maintenance problem. This

is

the

sort

of thing, of course,

that

the

lumber

industry did not

really

need

at

this

time.

They

seem

to

have

enough

afflictions

from

exploding

interest

rates not to

have

to handle explo-

sions of

this

sort.

But

it

is

going

to

be

a continuing problem,·certainly

through

this

year,

and

maybe

longer than

that,

to

-the

extent where, in certain

areas, the

trees

are simply not

going

to

be

logged. I

don't

think

that

there

is

any

question about

that.

Right

now,

we're

engaged

in the process of-second guessing, but

this

goes

on

all

the time.

There

is

sniping

at

the people

who

said

that

it

was

a prob-

lem

and

then sniping

at

the those people

who

said

it

wasn't a problem.

The

letters

to the

editor

abound,

ranging

from

whole

gamut,

all

the

way

down

to

the current controversy over whether or not the

mayor

of

Spokane

should

have

worn

a

tie

when

he

greeted

Jimmy

Carter

at

the

airport.

This

seems

to

be

one

of the major controversies in

Spokane.

He

came

out there in a hurry

and

he

was

doing

something

where

he

didn't

have

a

tie

on.

That's not something

you

do

even

if

you're not in

Jimmy

Carter country,

you

still

wear

a

tie.

Anyway,

we

have

survived,and I think

we

have

a

rather

profound

wish

from

our

state,

from

our

part

of the

state.

I

must

say,

parenthetically,

that

when

the

second

eruption occurred

and

it

went

this

direction,

there

were

many

dry

eyes over

on

our side of the

line.

I don't

want

to

wish

you

ill,

but

we'd

like to share;

and

I think

that

our

first

wish

is

that

there

be

no

more

eruptions.

Our

second

wish

is

that

there

be

no

winds

from

the Palouse for

some

long

extended period of time,

at

least

until they

manage

to

plow

it

under

and

see whether

it

grows

things or not.

68

I

can

summarize

it

by

saying

that,

as

far

as the State of

Idaho

is

concerned,

it

would

be

just

fine

if

we

had

no

more

input

from

the State

of

Washington.

69

Page

left blank

MONTANA

by

Jack

E.

Acord

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Montana

Department

of Natural Resources

and

Conservation

Much

of

what

Scott

has

you

can

be

happening

in

Montana,

perhaps

on

a

lesser

degree.

You

notice I say

lesser,

not smaller,

because

of

the size of the State of

Montana,

it

may

be

greater,

because

it

did

affect

basically the

whole

state.

We

did

have

an

emergency

air

quality

notice put out

by

the Governor's

office,

which,in

effect,closed

everything

down

in the

state

for a period

of

two

days.

For

the western

part

of the

state,

that

extended for a period of about four

days

in

some

areas,

particu-

larly

in the area of Missoula

and

up

around

Superior.

I

The

depths of the ash,

as

Scott pointed out, varied widely,

at

least

depending

upon

whether

you

were

measuring

vertically

or horizontally. I think

Missoula

may

have

gotten

an

inch or

better.

In

Helena

we

got,

I

would

guess,

at

the

maximum

an

eighth of

an

inch. I

have

heard

stories

that

Superior got

considerably

more

than Missoula did, but I

have

no

documentation of

that.

Our

concerns

in

regard to the

effects

of the

fallout

on

the water

and

were

immediately with the water supply. There

were

indications

that,

at

first,

there could

be

the

possibility

of acid

fallout--

that

the ash contained oxides

which

could cause acid conditions in water sup-

plies;and, in the case

of

Helena, our surface water storage

was

shut

down

for

about

48

hours anticipating

that

there might

.be

problems

with water

quality.

Thanks

to the State of Washington,

it

was

soon

pointed out

that

it

was

very

slightly

acidic

and

that

it

wasn't

at

all

harmful,

so

they restored

that

surface water supply. In.the meantime,

we

were

drawing

from

the Missouri

River

which

is

also a surface storage.

The

river

was,

of course, a

lot

bigger

volume,

so

dilution

did play a

part.

We've

had

reports

that,

at

most, there

were

increases of

maybe

five to ten Jackson Turbidity Units in

turbidity,

but

this

rapidly

settled

out.

We

have

had

no

reported

effects

on

the

fisheries,

but there

is

some

specu-

lation

among

our fish

and

wildlife

people

that

there

may

be

some

long-term

effects

on

fish populations--on the

fish

themselves, through

damage

caused

by

the

particles,

and

perhaps

on

spawning

areas.

To

date, our major

efforts

have

been

in cleanup and,

as

Scott also pointed

out, there

were

some

fortuitous rains

that

came

along in the succeeding four

or five days.

We

don't

welcome

those cold rains in

May

anymore

than the

people in northern

Idaho

do, but

we

were

very

tickled

to see

them

this

year.

71

We

anticipate

that

there

may

be

some

long-term

effects

in

agriculture;

on

fish

and

wildlife;

recreation; and,particularly, logging. These, again,

are spectulative,

and

we

won't

know

for

many

months.

In

closing, I

would

like

to thank the State of

Washington

and

Web

Hallauer for the

advance

information they provided in

terms

of

ash

consist-

ency,

chemical

makeup,

pH

effects,

etc.

They

really

helped

Montana

antici-

pate the

problems

because

we

were

not getting information

from

any

other

source.

However,

I'll

reserve giving

any

thanks to

Web

for the soil additives

until

we

find out whether they

really

do

help.

Thank

you.

72

WYOMING

by

Paul

Scherbel

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

I

didn't

really

plan to say anything, because

all

that

Wyoming

had

was

a

little

dusting.

We

had

to

wash

our cars.

They

probably

needed

it

anyway.

When

Scott

was

talking, I did

remember

about

this

Civil

Defense

business

when

I

was

involved in

it.

We

were

told very carefully

that

if

someone

dropped

an

atom

bomb

on

Portland or

Seattle,

that

none

of the

fallout

would

come

over

to

Teton

County,

Wyoming.

We

know,

now,

that

information

is

incorrect.

The

other thing

that

I

wanted

to say,

and

I notice

that

the

Department

of

the

interior is

not involved in

this

session today,

is

that

somebody

needs

to

put

all

the

land

lines back,

all

the property lines back,

after

this

little

explosion

that

you

had.

If

someone

would

care to

engage

our services, I

would

be

happy

to

look

into

that.

But

that

is

quite a problem, putting

all

the land

lines

and

property

lines

back

that

have

been

destroyed in

this.

Thank

you.

73

Page

left

blank

Oregon

OREGON

by

Chris

Wheeler

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

·vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Department

of

Water

Resources.

Oregon,

by

the

winds

of chance, also lucked out

like

Wyoming,

and,

by

comparison,

has

had

only a

minimum

amount

of

effect

from

the eruption.

If

it

continues, ultimately, those

winds

will

change

and

we

could, or

would,

experi-

ence

some

of

the

more

severe

problems

that

Washington,

Idaho,

and1Montana,

particularly,

have

that

we've heard about.

As

I think

most

of

you

know,

we

did get,

from

the

May

25th

venting,

some

significant

problems

in the Portland

area

and

particulate

levels

that

were

irritating,

although, probably not

sig-

nificant

health hazards.

The

most

significant

impact

that

Oregon

has

had

to date

has

been

the

dollar value involved in the shipping loss resulting

from

the

partial

closure,

and

the continued

partial

closure, of the

channel

that

you've already

heard

a

lot

about.

We

have

had,

for

some

time, a

major

eme_rgency

operati.ons

plan_

geared to

supposedly cover

disasters,

but

we

have

no

specific,

detailed lengthy plans

to cover each type

of

di.saster

you

can

thi.nk

of:

wind

storms,

fires,

floods,

etc.

We

have

had

those.

But

it's

more

of

a procedural

one

that,

hopefully,

will cover

all.

We

do

have

an

excellent statewide corrmunications

network

as

a

result

of

that,

and

it

has

been

tested in the past and, hopefully,

would

re-

spond, or will respond,

as

needed

in the future.

There

has

been

some

updating

specifically

for the consideration

that

.we

would

have

further venting

and

would

have

wind

patterns

that

would

cause

sig-

nificant

problems

to

Oregon,

and

to

its

residents.

The

plan

has

been

updated

for

that

purpose.

There

have

been

the.usual

comments

that

you've already heard here; don't

breathe

any

more

of it than

you

have

to;

all

those

usual

good

responses, but

the

same

end

result

in terms of the expected

effect.

Something

we

have

to continue to

live

with

and

which

we

are concerned with

is

what

the

effect

is

going

to

be

on

our water supplies for

industrial,

munici-

pa

1 ,

and

fishery concerns.

Aga

i

n, to date,

we

have

no

major

effects

on

our

side

of the

Columbi.a

River.

We

are

vitally

concerned, though, about the overall

effects

upon

our water supply.

I think,

Mr.

Chairman,

that

that's

all

we

need

to say about

Oregon's

concerns.

75

Page

left blank

CONCLUDING

REMARKS

by

Mel

Gordon,

Chairman

FORUM

ON

THE

EFFECTS

OF

THE

MOUNT

ST.

HELENS

ERUPTION

ON

WATER

RESOURCES

Vancouver,

Washington

June

12,

1980

Pacific

Northwest

River Basins

Commission

Let

me

begin

by

thanking

all

of the speakers

who've

made

presentations

today.

The

wealth of information

that

has

been

presented here

is

very impres-

sive,

indeed.

I think

that

in

summing

up

what's

happened

here today, I

would

start

off

by

saying

that

a

lot

of

work

has

been

done

in a

truly

efficient

and

cooperative

manner

to

deal

with the

immediate

effects

of the eruption.

It's

clear

that

federal

and

state

agencies

from

a variety of perspectives

have

joined forces

to react

as

quickly

as

possible to the

situation

as

it

existed immediately

following

the eruption.

But

the

effects

of the volcano's eruption

can't

be

limited to

immediate

impacts only.

The

other important thing to

look

at

is

how

the eruption

may

affect

the region's water resburces in the future. This

is

of

vital

concern

to

us

al 1.

For

summary

purposes,

let's

divide the

mid-

and

long-term

effects

of the

Mount

St.

Helens

eruption

on

water into three categories.

The

first

would

deal with the long-term impacts of the eruption

on

the

Cowlitz

Watershed

and

Stream

system. A

minor

portion of

that

section

would

involve the

Lewis

River system, too.

Secondly,

we

need

to take a

look

at

how

the mountain's

activities

will

affect

the

Columbia

River

and

its

estuary

below

the confluence of the Cowlitz

River.

The

third

major area of concern centers

around

the

effects

of the

huge

quantity of.

ash

fallout

on

the northern

and

eastern portions of the

Columbia

River system.

Several observations

can

be

made

-concerning the

first

area of concern--

the

Cowlitz

and

Lewis

River drainages. Briefly they are:

A vast portion of the Cowlitz's upper watershed

has

been

virtually

de-

stroyed.

At

this

point,

we

don't

know

what

it's

going

to take to build

up

the

watershed again, but

it's

important to coordinate those

rehabilitation

efforts.

We

know

anadromous

fish

will

be

impacted, but the question

is

to

what

extent

have

or will these

fisheries

suffer.

77

Flooding potential

has

been

greatly increased.

The

U.S.

Corps

of

Engineers will

have

to

spend

a

lot

of

money

this

surrnner

to help avert the

flooding potential

that

will

come

with winter rains.

We've

lost

thousands of acres of

prime

agricultural land in the area

and

can

expect a

high

degree

of.mud

to

remairi

in the water

system

for the foresee-

able future.

What

that

means

in the long-run

is

hard

to say

now.

Finally, erosion in the

Lewis

River

system

is

quite possible.

Our

second

summary

area concerns the lower

Columbia

and

its

estuary.

The

major impacts there

seem

to·be:

Aquatic

life

and

environments in the estuary

have

been

adversely affected·

by

the layer

of

sediment

which

landed in the

river

as

a

result

of

the eruption.

Again, the extent of

that

devastation

is

not fully

known

at

this

time.

Dredging

operations

must

continue in order to

keep

the 40-foot navigation

channel

open.

We're

going

to

have

to monitor the

entire

gamut

of estuary

and

river

con-

ditions for

some

time to

come,

in order to

try

and

anticipate future

problems

before they get the

better

of us.

In the area of ash

fallout,

we

have

learned

that:

There's

been

an

increase in

turbidity

from

the

ash

fallout.

We're

not

sure of the

total

ramifications

of

the

fallout,

however.

Ash

fallout

will

affect

irrigated

lands, but to

what

extent,

we

still

are

not sure.

Snowpack

areas

don

't

appear to

be

affected

by

the ash. A big question

remains

though,

on

how

the ash will

affect

snowpack

runoff.

In

conclusion, I

would

say

that

the

key

word

is

"monitor."

We

will

have

to

keep

studying the

effects

of the erupt'ion for quite awhile to

come.

That's

the only

way

that

we

can

develop successful

rehabilitative

efforts.

If

we

monitor

and

work

together, the long-term impacts of the

Mount

St.

Helens

erup-

tion

on

water should

be

reduced.

We

at

the

Commission

vow

to

assist

both.

federal

and

state

agencies in

their

efforts

to

deal

with the

effects

of the eruption

on

our precious resource,

water.

Thank

you

all

for attending today.

78