HomeMy WebLinkAbout66F_PNPTC Letter 2024-0815
19472 Powder Hill Place NE, Suite 210 Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Phone (360) 297-3422 Fax (360) 297-3413
August 15, 2024
Commissioners Kate Dean, Heidi Eisenhour, and Greg Brotherton
Jefferson County Commission
1820 Jefferson Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Re: Pleasant Harbor MPR - Preliminary Plat Application, Case No. SUB2023-00025
Dear Commissioners,
Our Tribes, the Jamestown S’Klallam (JST) and Port Gamble S’Klallam (PGST) Tribes,
and our consortium, the Point No Point Treaty Council (PNPTC) want to express our
many concerns regarding the Application for the Pleasant Harbor Plat, Case No.
SUB2023-00025. Beginning in 1997, the PNPTC and our Tribes have provided
comments to Jefferson County and participated in discussions and hearings to review
this project. Yet, for over 20 years now, our comments have not been addressed,
especially now in the current project proposal, plat application, and associated
documents.
Our Tribes have commented on the proposed MPR at each step in the review process.
We have repeatedly commented on the potentially harmful effects and the impacts to
important Treaty reserved resources that could be lost if the project were to move
forward as proposed. Again, to date, we feel that these concerns have not been
adequately addressed.
Over the years we have provided comments from our organization and our Tribes
(2001, 2006, 2007, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2024) regarding this project, and we are deeply
concerned about the potential adverse effects on our cultural resources and Treaty
Rights. These concerns stem from the loss of wetlands and rare kettle ponds,
increased traffic affecting fisheries access, intensity of land use for commercial and
residential development, significant alteration of hydrology, clearing and grading,
increased impermeable surface, wildlife impacts, use of persistent pollutants, impacts to
shellfish, storm water impacts, wastewater issues, and other project effects.
A summary of some of the major concerns and deficiencies in the current application
follows, which still contains many issues we have commented on over the years:
Shellfish Resources Protection and Management
The Pleasant Harbor MPR (PH MPR) will be located between two public beaches on
the Duckabush and Dosewallips, which provide both significant commercial and
ceremonial/ subsistence harvest opportunities to Tribes with Usual and Accustomed
fishing rights in the area. The two delta flats are among the most important intertidal
areas to the tribal harvesters based on acreage available, healthy habitats available,
and existing natural manila clam and pacific oyster production.
Exhibit 66F
PNPTC Letter to Jefferson County re Pleasant Harbor MPR, Case SUB2023-00025
Page 2 of 5 8/14/2024
19472 Powder Hill Place NE, Suite 210 Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Phone (360) 297-3422 Fax (360) 297-3413
Any increase in visitors and recreational use is expected to increase the harvest
pressure on the Duckabush and Dosewallips tidelands. Additionally, any system
overflows into the Duckabush or contaminated storm water runoff from the increase in
impervious areas could result in poor water quality in the rivers leading to problems with
shellfish on the tidelands. Obviously, a closure of these tidelands by DOH due to water
quality issues would have severe cultural and economic impact on the S’Klallam Tribes.
Water Quality Protection and Management
Our Tribes would like Jefferson County to require a water quality and shellfish
protection plan with adaptive management measures so that we are reassured the
treaty resource is retained over time. We would expect and be pleased to review the
required plans and suggest that they incorporate, at a minimum, the following:
• Water quality monitoring in waters connected to tribal fisheries and shellfish
harvesting areas, including monitoring for pollutants,
• An evaluation of alternatives for constructing additional swales and contours near
roadways to redirect storm water runoff away from Hood Canal, particularly in the
areas of Phase 1 construction.
Revisions to the project management plan are also needed to eliminate the use of
persistent pollutants and replace them with substances allowed for use under the
agricultural national organic program. We request that the draft revised management
plan be provided to tribal natural resources staff for review and comment.
The urbanization of the area by the development of the proposed PH MPR will
increase the prevalence of toxic heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants and
other contaminants of emerging concern in this rural area. The increase in the
prevalence of these pollutants will likely have a negative effect on fish and shellfish
resources inhabiting PH MPR and the surrounding areas, including the Dosewallips
and Duckabush River Estuaries.
Wildlife Protection and Habitat Management Plan
While the recent Wildlife Management Plan’s (published 3/12/2024) goals describe an
attempt to address some of the Tribes’ most significant wildlife-related concerns, the
methods proposed to reduce harm to elk herds are flawed and will not accomplish the
Plan’s goals. This plan only identifies one west-oriented fence, and that it is not enough
to exclude elk from the premises.
Elk should be completely excluded from the PH MPR via fencing all around the project
area because elk are highly mobile. By excluding elk entirely, it could remove other
issues that are not currently addressed in the Wildlife Management Plan. Some of
those issues are:
• vehicle-wildlife collisions.
• damage to ornamental plantings and landscaping.
• changes in habitat use by the elk herd, as a response to newly created food
sources.
Exhibit 66F
PNPTC Letter to Jefferson County re Pleasant Harbor MPR, Case SUB2023-00025
Page 3 of 5 8/14/2024
19472 Powder Hill Place NE, Suite 210 Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Phone (360) 297-3422 Fax (360) 297-3413
• the presence of divots and elk feces on the golf course.
• potentially dangerous interactions between elk and visitors, residences, and their
pets.
The Wildlife Management Plan greatly underestimates how significant elk use (and
damage) could be to the PH MPR site. Through the tribally led elk monitoring program,
our biologists know that the Duckabush elk herd consists of up to 40 adult elk (which eat
roughly the same amount of browse as 25 full grown bovine cows). The Duckabush
herd crosses to the east side of Highway 101 (immediately south of the PH MPR) on a
limited basis only, likely because there are few novel resources and few high value
feeding areas. However, elk use will change after habitat conditions are significantly
altered and novel food sources (e.g. fertilized and watered fields) are installed.
The Dosewallips elk herd (which lives roughly 5 miles north of the project) regularly
crosses to the east side of Highway 101 to graze on the fields maintained by
Dosewallips State Park. The elk are there for hundreds (possibly thousands) of hours
each year, despite the presence of dozens to hundreds of campers/visitors and all the
noise and disturbance associated with people. Once elk are accustomed to a new and
high-value food source, deterring future use will be incredibly challenging.
The Wildlife Management Plan proposes temporary deterrence techniques to be
implemented if elk begin to use PH MPR site. However, the proposed flashing lights
and loud noises are unlikely to deter elk use but may disturb residents and visitors.
Cultural Resources Protection and Stewardship
Tribes continue to request that Kettle Ponds B and C and adjacent wetlands be
preserved for traditional property evaluation and protection of cultural resources. Storm
water and wastewater management plans should avoid the destruction of wetlands and
use of these Kettles for storm water and treated wastewater storage.
Contact should be made with the PGST and JST Tribal Historic Preservation Officers
(THPO) (and other regional tribes) directly regarding these matters. The Kettle ponds
are sacred, cultural relics, and are rare biological features and should be preserved.
Development Agreement does not Incorporate Tribal Comments/Revisions
In the letter from the Port Gamble S’Klallam tribe (dated April 9, 2018), there was a
19-page detailed list of concerns and issues that have not been remedied in the
current Development Plan and its Amendments. Below are some concerns related
to (but not limited to) the following areas:
• Concerns related to the density, intensity of use, unlimited terms/build-out
period, lack of enforceability and specificity, sequencing issue with the
Development regulations, and failure to meet required provisions and
conditions of the Ordinance 01-0128-08.
• Need for reduction in overall density of the PH MPR
• Need for conditional approval structure for the PH MPR
Exhibit 66F
PNPTC Letter to Jefferson County re Pleasant Harbor MPR, Case SUB2023-00025
Page 4 of 5 8/14/2024
19472 Powder Hill Place NE, Suite 210 Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Phone (360) 297-3422 Fax (360) 297-3413
• Need for enforceability and specificity in the Development Agreement (and
associated appendices) and development regulations
• Need for meaningful consultation between Jefferson County and the area
Tribes.
• Need to correct for noncompliance with Ordinance 01-0128-08 of nearby
natural resources including the protection of shellfish harvesting areas
• Need for compliance with protection of critical areas with current standards that
should include standards related to 6PPD, water quality, climate change
impacts, etc.
• Need for a closer examination of the PH MPR’s water plan and impacts to the
kettle ponds for use as water storage, etc. There needs to be a thorough
independent study of hydrologic function and relationship between
groundwater, surface water, and runoff, aquifer recharge, contamination by
pollutants related to pesticides and golf course management, or other treated
surfaces.
• Need for a better water quality monitoring plan. The proposed plan lacks scope
and sample frequency.
• Need for wastewater treatment plan. According to the “Fully Executed
Development Agreement with appendices” this is still pending.
• Need for the implementation of the revisions and actions proposed by the late
PGST Tribal Chair Jeromy Sullivan (from letter dated April 9, 2018) for the
development agreement and amendments.
We appreciate the County’s willingness to regularly meet with Tribal staff regarding this
project. However, our concerns have not yet been adequately addressed in these
meetings. The meetings themselves have been too short in duration and seem to only
cover updates as to what the County’s staff and consultant have been working on,
leaving little time to discuss next steps and responses to our comments and
suggestions. Our tribes are deeply concerned about these issues and look forward to
addressing them together before the application and project moves forward.
We are encouraged by the County’s offer to schedule recurring, quarterly meetings with
our Tribes to discuss future projects as they arise. It is our hope that developing a
consistent, collaborative line of communication will enable us to work effectively to
address Tribal concerns related not only to the Pleasant Harbor project, but future
development proposals as well.
Sincerely,
Chris Tom, Vice Chairman W. Ron Allen, Chairman
Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
Exhibit 66F
PNPTC Letter to Jefferson County re Pleasant Harbor MPR, Case SUB2023-00025
Page 5 of 5 8/14/2024
19472 Powder Hill Place NE, Suite 210 Poulsbo, Washington 98370 Phone (360) 297-3422 Fax (360) 297-3413
Cc: Amber Caldera, Chairwoman, Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe
Guy Miller, Chairman, Skokomish Tribe
Joseph Pavel, NR Director, Skokomish Tribe
Frances Charles, Chairwoman, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
Russ Hepfer, Vice Chair, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
Hansi Hals, NR Director, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
Roma Call, NR Director Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe
Randy Harder, PNPTC Director
Cristina Haworth, SJC Alliance
George Terry, Jefferson County
Josh Peters, Jefferson County
Exhibit 66F