Olympic National Park
Located in the north-west of Washington State, Olympic National Park is renowned for the diversity of its ecosystems. Glacier-clad peaks interspersed with extensive alpine meadows are surrounded by an extensive old growth forest, among which is the best example of intact and protected temperate rainforest in the Pacific Northwest. Eleven major river systems drain the Olympic mountains, offering some of the best habitat for anadromous fish species in the country. The park also includes 100 km of wilderness coastline, the longest undeveloped coast in the contiguous United States, and is rich in native and endemic animal and plant species, including critical populations of the endangered northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet and bull trout. © UNESCO
Summary
2025 Conservation Outlook
Current state and trend of VALUES
Overall THREATS
Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT
Full assessment
Description of values
The Western Hemisphere’s largest stands of temperate rainforest
Remarkable combination of habitats
Glaciers
Diversity of flora and fauna which continues to evolve in a relative natural state
Habitats of unmatched diversity on the Pacific coast
Endemic species associated with park’s isolation
Wilderness coastline
Assessment information
The introduced population of mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus, LC) in Olympic National Park and Olympic National Forest increased through the years and caused ecological concern for their impact on the sensitive vegetation communities in the area (National Park Service 1995). In 2010, safety concerns increased when a visitor hiker was fatally gored in Olympic National Park (Tsong, 2010). The protection and preservation of the integrity of the International Biosphere Reserve and World Heritage Site designations was included in the objectives for the management of mountain goats on the Olympic Peninsula (National Park Service, 2018a). In 2018, 725 mountain goats were estimated to occupy the Olympic Mountains. In 2018 the Final Mountain Goat Management Plan/Environmental Impact Assessment was released, expressing the goal of reducing or eliminating the impact of exotic mountain goats on park resource while reducing potential public safety issues associated with the presence of the mountain goats in the park (National Park Service, 2018a). The goal was to reach a zero-population level or at least to remove 90% of the population with a combination of capture and translocation and lethal removal (National Park Service, 2018a). During the execution of the project, a total of 325 mountain goats were translocated to the nearby Cascade Mountains where the goats are native (Happe and Harris, 2018; National Park Service, 2018a, 2020a). Nearly all translocated mountain goats died within five years, while native populations in the North Cascades also declined at an alarming rate. Experts remain uncertain about the exact cause but propose several possible factors, including recreation, habitat loss, climate change, disease, and predation (Van Sistine, 2024). By 2022, Olympic National Park concluded its five-year project. A total of 548 mountain goats were removed from both the park and the adjacent Olympic National Forest. The park is now in a 15-year maintenance phase designed to prevent the reestablishment of a goat population. During this phase, park staff will monitor the area and, when necessary, lethally remove any remaining goats (OPA, 2022). Since the goal of removing at least 90% of the population was not achieved, the current impact of the remaining 24.4% (aprox. 177 mountain goats) is still unknown.
Many fir trees (Abies spp) have died in Olympic National Park due to the infestation of balsam woolly adelgid (Adelges piceae), an invasive European insect that is widespread in the park and was detected around 1970 (McCaffey et al. 2018). Invasive plant species in waterways and lakes in Olympic National Park are impacting the ability of endangered fish species to reproduce successfully (Northwest Treaty Tribe, 2018). Invasive plant species in Lake Ozette are clogging up the gravels used by Lake Ozette sockeye to spawn. The following are considered the worst invasive plant species in the Olympics: Scot’s broom (Cytisus scoparius), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), English ivy (Hedera helix), English Holly (Ilex aquifolium), Herb Robert (Geranium robertianum), Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), information about each one can be found online (National Park Service, 2020d). The park has increased staffing for treatment of invasive plants and enhanced coordination between working groups within the park, and collaboration with partners including tribes, counties, other federal agencies, and visitors (Olson et. al, 1991; Frey and App, 2013; National Park Service, 2012; Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board 2017; National Park Service, 2020d). However, at present the park’s resources are not adequate to treat all known occurrences of invasive, exotic plants (National Park Service, 2010).
Olympic National Park has implemented several closures to maximize the protection of wild spring/summer Chinook salmon and Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (National Park Service, 2015, Sequim Gazelle, 2019; Olympic National Park, 2022; National Park Service, 2022; 2024d). Endemic fishing species are currently compromised (State Party of United States of America, 2024).
Natural visual range reduction in the park due to pollution caused mainly from power plants and urban emissions, affects visitor experience (National Park Service, 2024h, McCaffery et al. 2018). The concentration of mercury in fish from contaminated lakes in Olympic National Park exceed safe consumption threshold for humans and wildlife and is affecting fish population health (Landers et al. 2008, Eagles-Smith et al. 2014, McCaffery et al. 2018, National Park Service, 2024h; 2022; 2024e). An advisory for recreational and subsistence fish consumption remains in effect for Olympic NP’s mountain lakes (brook trout) and Lake Ozette (largemouth bass, yellow perch and northern pikeminnow) (National Park Service, 2024h; 2022; 2024f). Dragonfly larvae sampled in the park revealed mercury concentrations at moderate to high impairment levels. Additionally, studies identified mercury and other contaminants across various park environments, including snow, sediment, vegetation, and fish, highlighting the widespread presence of pollutants (National Park Service, 2024h).
Noise pollution concern has increased due to the sounds produced by military aircraft over the Olympic Peninsula. Kuehne et al. (2020) found that 88% of audible air traffic is military and discussed how it can impact people and wildlife in the park and the region.
Glacier retreat, disappearance and thinning has already been documented in Olympic National Park. Through a glacier inventory in the park it was reported that from 266 glaciers existing in 1982, only 184 were still observed in 2009 (National Park Service, 2019a). Anderson Glacier was essentially gone by 2015. Its receding progression was reported to less than 10% between 1927 and 2009 (National Park Service, 2019a). Climate modelling projections suggest that most glaciers of the Olympic mountains could disappear by 2070 (Fountain et al., 2022). Glaciers are currently seriously compromised (State Party of United States of America, 2024). Increasingly extreme flooding due to climate change is causing acute threats to park infrastructure, especially roads and culverts, and increases erosion well beyond traditional weather events. KCPQ, a television station in Seattle reported a flood damage event that resulted in partial closing of Olympic National Park (Q13 Fox, 2018).
Rising temperatures from climate change impacts are causing an increase in wild land fire scale and intensity, as well as an increase in insect infestations for native trees, with increased mortality from both causes (McCaffery et al. 2018).
The Olympic marmot (Marmota Olympus, LC) was listed as the only state endemic mammal in 2009 (Washington State Legislature, 2009). Most of its habitat is within Olympic National Park. A historical decline in its distribution and an ongoing decline in the southwestern area of the park was confirmed, generating high conservation concern for this endemic marmot population (McCaffery et al., 2018). Direct and indirect impacts of climate change are listed as the main causes of concern for this species long-term survival (McCaffery et al., 2018; State Party of United States of America, 2024).
Potential effects of climate change on vegetation on federal lands on the Olympic Peninsula have been described by Aubry et al. (2011) and Halofsky et al. (2011). Climate change is expected to result in altered geographic ranges of dominant plant species, increases in the probability of establishment of regeneration failures, and increased drought stress leading to decreased growth of forests. Habitats most at risk include wetlands, alpine and subalpine areas, temperate rainforests with Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), and high-elevation forests dominated by Pacific silver fir (Abies amabilis), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), and Alaska yellow-cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis). Wershow and DeChaine (2018) projected that only a few isolated thermal refugia for the survival of endemic alpine plant species will remain in the Olympic Peninsula due to the negative impact of climate change. Based on their projections, the authors proposed management measures such as limiting impacts from hikers on the thermal refugial areas. Wershow and DeChaine (2018) also highlight the importance of The Olympic Mountains and their alpine species, since they serve as a global model for endemics, illustrating biogeographic traits that contribute to their susceptibility to climate change. Endemic alpine species are currently seriously compromised (State Party of United States of America, 2024). Loss of alpine and subalpine habitat could lead to extinction of Olympic marmots (Marmota olympus, LC) listed as the only state endemic mammal in 2009 and Olympic Masama pocket gopher (Thomomys mazama melanops, LC) listed as federally threatened in 2014 (Washington State Legislature, 2009; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2019; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2020; Murphy-Williams, M., 2020). Loss of subalpine habitat will also lead to diminished forage available for Roosevelt elk (Cervus elaphus roosevelti), North American black bear (Ursus americanus), Columbian black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus), subalpine birds, small animals and numerous other species (Halofsky et al. 2011). Olympic National Park resource managers monitor the potential impact of ocean acidification, water temperatures, and other environmental variables on coastal organisms (National Park Service, 2020c). There is an increasing interest in the negative impact of ocean acidification on marine species sensitive to changes in carbonate chemistry. Jones et al. (2018) found that most of the intertidal taxa at Olympic National Park are at risk from ocean acidification and they proposed new methodological approaches for research and management related to ocean acidification. Olympic National Park has been monitoring intertidal ocean acidification since 2010 (National Park Service, 2020b). The park has developed some capacity to identify which potential consequences of climate change are occurring most rapidly through the development of long-term monitoring with other NPS units in western Washington (National Park Service, 2020g). Effective responses will require reevaluation of agency policy, increased collaboration with other agencies and an increase in staff and funding. Other climate change impacts include tsunami risk, unusual tidal events including erosion of beach/coastal line, heat domes (State Party of United States of America, 2024).
There is concern about the potential negative effects of excess nitrogen and sulfur compounds deposited from the air on plant communities and acidification of surface waters and soils (National Park Service 2020f, McCaffery et al. 2018).
A case study on climate change adaptation at Olympic National Forest (ONF), in collaboration with Olympic National Park (ONP), explored strategies for managing federal lands on Washington’s Olympic Peninsula in response to climate change (Halofsky et al., 2011). The process developed adaptation options for both ONF and ONP, with many of the ideas applicable to other locations and agencies. Some example strategies included: relocating road segments, controlling invasive fish species, conserving tree genetic diversity, and considering allowing fires to burn more frequently.
As temperatures rise, precipitation patterns shift, and glaciers retreat, Olympic National Park is taking proactive steps to address these challenges. The park is focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, implementing climate adaptation strategies, expanding education and outreach, and continuously assessing progress. These efforts aim to safeguard the park’s vital natural resources for future generations (Zero Hour Climate, 2024).
Given the speed and variability of climate change affecting a park as multifaceted and vulnerable as Olympic National Park, authorities are working to establish appropriate criteria to address severe weather events. So far, the World Heritage Policy for Climate Change has not been used (State Party of the United States of America, 2024).
Education and interpretation programs are frequently among the first to be reduced during tight fiscal times. To some extent the reduction in government programs is being offset by education provided by non-profit organizations within and around the park.
The relatively conservative fisheries management regulations implemented by the park are not enough to minimize impacts to park resources (National Parks and Conservation Association 2004, National Park Service, 2010; McCaffery and Jenkins, 2018).
Seasonal recreational fisheries closures have been designed and implemented to maximize the protection of wild spring/summer Chinook salmon and Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (National Park Service, 2015; Olympic National Park, 2022; Sequim Gazelle, 2019; National Park Service, 2022; 2024d).
Partnerships through alternate transportation and local businesses is an example of locally driven sustainable tourism initiatives in the park (State Party of United States of America, 2024).
There is ongoing monitoring with other agencies to look at erosion along shorelines, including bluff retreat and ongoing monitoring of snowpack relating to riverine environments. For sensitive cultural sites, the Tribal Nations and the park have monitoring plans (State Party of United States of America, 2024).
There is a citizen science monitoring program for specific species. Active inventory and monitoring relating to multiple species of plants and animals relating to potential climate change impacts (State Party of United States of America, 2024).
The Western Hemisphere’s largest stands of temperate rainforest
Remarkable combination of habitats
Glaciers
Diversity of flora and fauna which continues to evolve in a relative natural state
Habitats of unmatched diversity on the Pacific coast
Endemic species associated with park’s isolation
Wilderness coastline
Additional information
| № | Organization | Brief description of Active Projects | Website |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Park staff | Restoration of Elwha River watershed following removal of two dams (now in progress) |
https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/elwha-ecosystem-restoration.htm
https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/restoration-and-current-research.htm
|
| 2 | Park staff | Monitor and assess endangered Native American sites, especially along the park coastline | |
| 3 | Park staff | Inventory and Monitoring program that is assessing 9 vital indicators | |
| 4 | Park staff | Skokomish river anadromous fish restoration following modification of hydro dam structures to allow more effective fish passage |
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/skokomish-river-estuary-restoration-helps-salmon-and-steelhead-return-home
|
| 5 | park staff | Park staff will continue to remove invasive Barred Owls that have moved into endangered Spotted Owl habitat in the park. While the few remaining pairs of Spotted Owls in the park may well not survive, no recovery plan can be undertaken while the more aggressive Barred Owls are present in the park. The current management of invasive barred owls (Strix varia) in Olympic National Park is part of the national "Final Barred Owl Management Strategy" (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2024). The strategy aims to protect the threatened northern spotted owl by reducing competition with barred owls, including controlled removal and ongoing monitoring. |
https://nps.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=89ed9a4189d241f987273f156746b509
https://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/Documents/BarredOwl-EIS-ExecSum.pdf
|
| 6 | The NPS (lead agency) - USDA Forest Service and WDFW (cooperating agencies) | Mountain Goat Management Plan (2018-in progress). Purpose: to allow the NPS to reduce or eliminate impacts on park resources from exotic mountain goats, while reducing potential public safety issues associated with the presence of mountain goats in the park. The goal of removing 50% of the mountain goat population by translocation was reached by 2020, lethal removal of the reminding individuals is planned to start during the Fall of 2020. Since the final goal of removing at least 90% of the population was not achieved by 2022, the current impact of the remaining 24.4% is still unknow. The park is now in a 15-year maintenance phase designed to prevent the reestablishment of a goat population. During this phase, park staff will monitor the area and, when necessary, lethally remove any remaining goats (OPA, 2022). |
https://www.nps.gov/olym/planyourvisit/mountain-goat-capture-and-translocation.htm
|
References
| № | References |
|---|---|
| 1 |
Aubry, C., Devine, W., Shoal, R., Bower, A., Miller, J. and Maggiulli, N. (2011). Climate Change and Forest Biodiversity: A Vulnerability Assessment and Action Plan for National Forests in Western Washington, USDA Forest Service, PNW Region.
|
| 2 |
Beschta, R. L. and Ripple, W.J. (2018). Wolf‐triggered trophic cascades and stream channel dynamics in Olympic National Park: a comment on East et al.(2017). Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 43(4), pp.930-935.
|
| 3 |
Bleakney (2012) Pirates of the Rainforest. [Online] Sierra Club. Sierra. Available at: <http://vault.sierraclub.org/sierra/201207/olympic-national-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 4 |
Burgess, K. (2010). Olympic National Park elk poacher fined $2,500 for killing trophy bull. [Online] Los Angeles Times. Available at: <https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/outposts/2010/01/national-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 5 |
Cox, S.E., Moran, P.W., Huffman, R.L. and Fradkin, S.C. (2016). Monitoring plant tissue nitrogen isotopes to assess nearshore inputs of nitrogen to Lake Crescent, Olympic National Park, Washington. [Online] U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5054, 20 p., Available at: <https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2016/5054/sir20165054.pdf> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 6 |
Cullinane Thomas, C. and Koontz, L. (2020). 2019 National park visitor spending effects: Economic contributions to local communities, states, and the nation. Natural Resource Report
|
| 7 |
Eagles-Smith, C.A., Willacker, J.J. and Flanagan Pritz, C.M. (2014). Mercury in fishes from 21 national parks in the Western United States: Inter and intra-park variation in concentrations and ecological risk. [Online] U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014-1051, 54 p. Available at: <http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141051.> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 8 |
Fountain, A. G., Gray, C., Glenn, B., Menounos, B., Pflug, J., & Riedel, J. L. (2022). Glaciers of the Olympic Mountains, Washington—The past and future 100 years. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 127(4), e2022JF006670.
|
| 9 |
Fountain, A. G., Gray, C., Glenn, B., Menounos, B., Pflug, J., & Riedel, J. L. (2022). Glaciers of the Olympic Mountains, Washington—The past and future 100 years. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 127(4), e2022JF006670.
|
| 10 |
Frey, M., and R. App. (2013). Exotic Plant Management Team Program: 2013 annual report. [Online] Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRMD/NRR—2014/781. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. Available at: <http://npshistory.com/publications/vegetation/epmt-annual-r…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 11 |
Gardner, J. and Gonzales, A. (2025). How the New Administration’s Actions Will Affect National Parks. National Parks Conservation Association [Online]. Available at: https://www.npca.org/articles/6680-how-the-new-administrati…. [Accessed 8 March 2025].
|
| 12 |
Halofsky, J.E., Peterson, D.L.; O’Halloran, K.A., Hawkins Hoffman, C. (2011). Adapting to climate change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-844. Portland, OR. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 130 p.
|
| 13 |
Happe, P. and Harris, R. (2018). Olympic National Park Mountain Goat Removal and Translocation to the North Cascades Progress Report I. Olympia, USA: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. [online] Available at: https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/02036/…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 14 |
Howard, S. (2018). Remembering our oil spills legacy: Why Washington has an emergency response tug at Neah Bay. [Online] Department of Ecology State of Washington. Available at: <https://ecology.wa.gov/Blog/Posts/May-2018/Remembering-our-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 15 |
Hutten, M., Woodward, A. and Hutten, K. (2005). Inventory of the Mosses, Liverworts, Hornworts, and Lichens of Olympic National Park. [Online] Washington: Species List. U.S. Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5240, 78 p. Available at: < https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/sir20055240> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 16 |
IRMA (2024). Annual Park Ranking Report. [Online] Available at:https://irma.nps.gov/Stats/SSRSReports/National%20Reports/A…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 17 |
Jones, J.M., Passow, U. and Fradkin, S.C. (2018). Characterizing the vulnerability of intertidal organisms in Olympic National Park to ocean acidification. Elem Sci Anth, 6.
|
| 18 |
Kuehne, L. M., & Olden, J. D. (2020). Military flights threaten the wilderness soundscapes of the Olympic Peninsula, Washington. Northwest Science, 94(2), 188-202.
|
| 19 |
Landers, D.H., Simonich, S.L., Jaffe, D.A., Geiser, L.H., Campbell, D.H., Schwindt, A.R., Schreck, C.B., Kent, M.L., Hafner, W.D., Taylor, H.E., Hageman, K.J., Usenko, S., Ackerman, L.K., Schrlau, J.E., Rose, N.L., Blett, T.F. and Erway, M.M. (2008). The Fate, Transport, and Ecological Impacts of Airborne Contaminants in Western National Parks (USA). [Online] EPA/600/R-07/138. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, NHEERL, Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, Oregon. Available at: <https://irma.nps.gov/DataStore/DownloadFile/514681> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 20 |
Lohan., T. (2018). The Elwha’s Living Laboratory: Lessons From the World’s Largest Dam-removal Project. [online] 1 October, The Revelator. Available at: https://therevelator.org/elwha-dam-removal/ [Accessed 14 October 2020].
|
| 21 |
Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board (2017). Olympic Peninsula Cooperative Noxious Weed Control 2016 Project Report [Online] Available at: <https://s3.wp.wsu.edu/uploads/sites/2064/2014/02/2016-Mason…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 22 |
Matza, M. (2025). Cuts to national parks and forests met with backlash. BBC News. Published online 1 March 2025. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czx7kez4vx2o
|
| 23 |
McCaffery, R.M., Jenkins, K.J., (2018). Natural Resource Condition Assessment. Olympic National Park. [Online] National Park Service NPS/OLYM/NRR—2018/1826, p. 510. Available at: < http://npshistory.com/publications/olym/nrr-2018-1826.pdf> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 24 |
Moran, P.W., Cox, S.E., Embrey, S.S., Hufffman, R.L., Olsen, T.D. and Fradkin, S.C. (2013). Sources and sinks of nitrogen and phosphorus to a deep, oligotrophic lake, Lake Crescent, Olympic National Park, Washington. [Online] U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5107, 56 p., Available at: <https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5107/pdf/sir2012-5107.pdf> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 25 |
Murphy-Williams, M. (2020). Climate Change Impacts in Alpine Meadows: Environmental Factors Correlated with the Decline of the Olympic Marmot (Marmota olympus) Population in Olympic National Park, Washington State. Master dissertation. Seattle: University of Washington.
|
| 26 |
NPS (2025). Olympic Fun Facts. [online] Olympic National Park (U.S. National Park Service). Available at: http://www.nps.gov/olym/parkmgmt/olympic-fun-facts.htm [Accessed on 15 May 2025]
|
| 27 |
National Park Service (1995). Goats in Olympic National Park: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Mountain Goat Management within Olympic National Park, Washington. Department of the Interior. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. State of Washington, Department of Fish and Wildlife.
|
| 28 |
National Park Service (2008a). Olympic National Plan General Management Plan [Online] Available at: <https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?parkID=329&…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 29 |
National Park Service (2008b). Olympic National Park Final General Management Plan Released Today. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/olympic-national-park-f…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 30 |
National Park Service (2009). Climate Friendly Parks. Olympic National Park Action Plan. [Online] Available at: https://npshistory.com/publications/climate-friendly-parks-…. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 31 |
National Park Service (2010). General Management Plan Summary Presentation. Olympic National Plan. [Online] Washington. Department of the Interior. 165 pp. Available at: < https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=329&pr…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 32 |
National Park Service (2012). Help Stop the Spread of Invasive Species. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/planyourvisit/stopinvasives.htm> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 33 |
National Park Service (2015). Emergency Closure of Recreational Fishing in the Hoh and South Fork Hoh Rivers within Olympic National Park. [online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/closure-of-recreational…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 34 |
National Park Service (2016). Donate. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/getinvolved/donate.htm> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 35 |
National Park Service (2018a). Final Mountain Goat Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement. Washington. Department of the Interior. 283 pp. Available at: <https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=329&pr…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 36 |
National Park Service (2018b). Fisher Reintroduction. [Online] Available at: < https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/fisher-reintroduction…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 37 |
National Park Service (2019a) Glaciers and Climate Change. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/glaciers.htm> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 38 |
National Park Service (2019b). Olympic National Park Rangers Seek Information in Illegal Elk Poaching Incident. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/olympic-national-park-r…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 39 |
National Park Service (2020a). Mountain Goat Capture and Translocation. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/planyourvisit/mountain-goat-captur…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 40 |
National Park Service (2020c). Ocean Acidification. Oceans, Coasts & Seashores. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/subjects/oceans/acidification.htm> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 41 |
National Park Service (2020d). Invasive Exotic Plants. Olympic National Park. [Online] Available at: < https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/invasiveplants.htm> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 42 |
National Park Service (2020e). Speciation via Isolation. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/education/upload/Speciation-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 43 |
National Park Service (2020g). Climate Change and Western National Parks. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/idp/interp/ClimateChange%20in%20Western…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 44 |
National Park Service (2020h). Elwha River Restoration. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/nature/elwha-ecosystem-resto…. > [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 45 |
National Park Service (2022). Sport fishing regulation changes in Olympic National Park will protect wild steelhead. [online]. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/fishingclosure2022.htm?…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 46 |
National Park Service (2024e). Olympic. Law & Policies. Park Regulations. [online]. Available at: https://home.nps.gov/olym/learn/management/lawsandpolicies…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 47 |
National Park Service (2024f). Fishing. Fishing in Olympic National Park. [online]. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/planyourvisit/fishing.htm#:~:text=…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 48 |
National Park Service (2024g). Hurricane Ridge Day Lodge fire investigation finds no definite cause. [online]. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/hurricane-ridge-day-lod…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 49 |
National Park Service (2024h). Park Air Profiles - Olympic National Park [online]. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/airprofiles-olym.htm [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 50 |
National Park Service, (2024a). 325.5 million visits to national parks in 2023, 2.9 million visits to Olympic National Park. [Online] Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/325-5-million-visits-to…. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 51 |
National Park Service, (2024b). Tourism to Olympic National Park contributes $393 million to local economy. [Online] Available at: https://home.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/tourism-to-olympic-nat…. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 52 |
National Park Service. (2017). Olympic National Park Foundation Document. [online] Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/upload/OLYM_FD_2017_508.pdf (Accessed 14 October 2020).
|
| 53 |
National Park Sevice, (2024c). Olympic. Science & Research. [Online] Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/scienceresearch.htm. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 54 |
National Park Sevice, (2024d). Low returns of wild steelhead prompt sport fishing pause in Queets River, Olympic National Park. [Online] Available at: https://home.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/low-returns-of-wild-st…. [Accessed 16 January 2025].
|
| 55 |
National Parks Conservation Association (2015). Park on the Edge: Funding Shortfalls at Olympic National Park. [Online] Available at: <https://www.npca.org/resources/3152-park-on-the-edge-fundin…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 56 |
National Parks Service (2020b). Oceans, Coasts & Seashores. Ocean Acidification. [Online] Available at: <https://www.nps.gov/subjects/oceans/acidification.htm> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 57 |
National Parks Traveler (2019). Washington's National Park Fund Funnels $1.5 Million to Mount Rainier, North Cascades, and Olympic National Parks [Online] Available at: <https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2019/02/washingtons-n…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 58 |
Northwest Treaty Tribe (2018). Noxious Weed Removal Results in Improved Salmon Habitat. [Online] Available at: <https://nwtreatytribes.org/noxious-weed-removal-results-in-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 59 |
OPA (2022). Mountain Goat Removal Wrap-up. [online]. Available at: https://olympicparkadvocates.org/non-native-mountain-goats/. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 60 |
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (2011). Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Final Management Plan and Environmental Assessment. [online] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Available at: <https://olympiccoast.noaa.gov/management/managementplan/man…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 61 |
Ollikainen (2019). Cow elk killed in Olympic National Park. [Online] Peninsula Daily News. Available at: <https://www.peninsuladailynews.com/crime/cow-elk-killed-in-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 62 |
Olson, R.W., Schreiner, E.G and Parker, L. (1991). Management of exotic plants in Olympic National Park (Draft). [Online] Port Angeles, Washington. 47 pp. Available at: <http://npshistory.com/publications/olym/exotic-plants-mgt-1…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 63 |
Olympic National Park, 2022. Fish & Shellfish Regulations. National Park Service Brochure (Updated April 2024). [online]. Available at: https://www.nps.gov/olym/upload/OLYM_Fish_Brochure_2022-050…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 64 |
Olympic Park Advocates (2022). Mountain Goat Removal Wrap-up. [online]. Available at: https://olympicparkadvocates.org/non-native-mountain-goats/. [Accessed 15 January 2024].
|
| 65 |
Q13 Fox (2018). Flood damage closes portion of Olympic National Park. [Online] Available at: <https://www.q13fox.com/news/flood-damage-closes-portion-of-…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 66 |
Rosenblat, C. (2025). National parks brace for ‘a hold-your-breath year’ as the season heats up. CNN. Published online 16 April 2025. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/16/travel/national-parks-vi…
|
| 67 |
Sequim Gazelle (2019). Park closes Hoh River watershed to recreational fishing. [online]. Available at: https://www.sequimgazette.com/news/park-closes-hoh-river-wa…. [Accessed 15 January 2025].
|
| 68 |
Shaffer, J. A., Juanes, F., Quinn, T. P., Parks, D., McBride, T., Michel, J., ... & Byrnes, C. (2017). Nearshore fish community responses to large scale dam removal: implications for watershed restoration and fish management. Aquatic Sciences, 79(3), 643-660.
|
| 69 |
State Party of United States of America (2014). Periodic Report Second Cycle Section II: Olympic National Park. [Online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, pp. 1-10. [Online] Available at: < https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/151/documents/> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 70 |
State Party of United States of America (2024). Periodic Report Third Cycle Section II: Olympic National Park. Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, pp. 1-59. [Online] Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/151/documents/. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 71 |
Tsong, N. (2010). A 63-year-old hiker was fatally injured in Olympic National Park and rangers suspect an encounter with a mountain goat is to blame. [Online] The Seattle Times. Available at: <https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/mountain-goat-kil…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 72 |
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2019). Mazama Pocket Gophers in Western Washington – Frequently Asked Questions [Online] Available at: <https://www.fws.gov/wafwo/documents/Mazama%20pocket%20gophe…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 73 |
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2020). Federally Protected Subspecies of Mazama Pocket Gopher in Washington [Online] Available at: <https://www.fws.gov/wafwo/articles.cfm?id=149489588> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 74 |
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2024). Final Barred Owl Management Strategy. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/media/final-barred-owl-management-strat…. [Accessed 10 January 2025]
|
| 75 |
U.S. Geological Survey (2018). Moving Mountains: Elwha River Still Changing Five Years After World’s Largest Dam-Removal Project: More than 20 million tons of sediment flushed to the sea. [Online] Available at: <https://www.usgs.gov/news/moving-mountains-elwha-river-stil…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 76 |
Van Sistine, T. (2024). Almost all mountain goats died after airlift from Olympics to Cascades. Herald Net. [online] Available at: https://www.heraldnet.com/news/almost-all-mountain-goats-di…. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 77 |
Washington State Legislature (2009). State endemic mammal. [Online] Available at: <https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=1.20.038> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 78 |
Wershow, S.T. and DeChaine, E.G., (2018). Retreat to refugia: Severe habitat contraction projected for endemic alpine plants of the Olympic Peninsula. American Journal of Botany, 105(4), pp.760-778.
|
| 79 |
World Heritage Committee (1990). Decision 14 COM VII.E. Boundary Modifications: Olympic National Park (United States of America). [Online] In: Report of decisions of the 14th session of the World Heritage Committee (Banff, 1990). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, p.13. Available at: <https://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/14COM/decisions/> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 80 |
World Heritage Committee (1991). Decision 15 COM VIII. SOC: Olympic National Park (United States of America). [Online] In: Report of decisions of the 15th session of the World Heritage Committee (Carthage, 1991). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, p.15. Available at: < https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/3501> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 81 |
World Heritage Committee (1992). Decision 16 COM VIII. SOC: Olympic National Park (United States of America). [Online] In: Report of decisions of the 16th session of the World Heritage Committee (Santa Fe, 1992). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, p. 31. Available at: < https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/3426> [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|
| 82 |
World Heritage Committee (2018). Decision : 42 COM 8E Olympic National Park Adoption of retrospective Statements of Outstanding Universal Value. In: Report of decisions of the 42nd session of the World Heritage Committee (Manama, Bahrain, 2018). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/7164 [Accessed 1 December 2020].
|
| 83 |
Zero Hour Climate (2024) Olympic National Park & Climate Change Impact. [Online] Available at: https://www.zerohourclimate.org/olympic-national-park-fores…. [Accessed 20 January 2025].
|
| 84 |
de Place and Stroming, A. (2015). Fifty Years of Oil Spills in Washington’s Waters. What can the past tell us about the future? [Online] Sightline Institute. Available at: <https://www.sightline.org/2015/01/12/fifty-years-of-oil-spi…; [Accessed 11 September 2020].
|