The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About080111_cabs01 Peter Goldmark Washington State Commissioner of Public Lands R~M"'\l,E~VE . ~.;:J",,,, m D July 20, 2011 The Honorable John Austin Jefferson County Commissioner 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 983.68 JUL 2 7 2011 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Dear Cc>mmi..sioner Austin: Thank you for the recent copy of Jefferson County's proposed revisions to DNR's Asset Management Strategy for State Trust lands in eastern Jefferson County. I appreciate the efforts of the Jefferson County Board of Commillsioners and the citizens who developed the proposal. Unfortunately, the plan, as it stands, is incomplete. While it lays out the desires of the County, it fails to acknowledge DNR's responsibilities to protect Trust assets and generate revenue to the Trust beneficiaries. I identified benefits to the Trusts from an exchange with Pope ReSources in my letter to Jefferson County dated May 11, 2009. At that time, the County had identified four proposed exchange parcels of particular concem to them, and I offered to postpone the exchange . for two years to allow the County to work with DNR toward a mutually beneficial solution however DNR was not included in your work group discussions. From DNR's perspective, a complete "forests in the county" plan needs to have several elements.: (a) ~knowledgement ofDNR Trust obligations and strategies to protect trust assets currently in Jefferson County, (b) recognition of the role that working forests and large forestland owners play in miUntainblg forested landscapes in the County, (c) address how county authority will be used for limiting conversion under county or$nmces, and (d) il strategy for investing County and partnership funds in acquiring key, high priority lands (or conservation easements, etc.) and maintnining them as forest lands. I would ask that the Board of Jefferson County Commissioners begin with parcels 5, 6, 7, 8, as I originally requested, and immediately identify their proposed action for each parcel, along with the time horizon anticipated to accomplish each parcel action. Please work with Susan Trettevik, Olympic Region Manager to see how the objectives of the County and the DNRmight be mutually achieved. Sue would work closely with Steve Saunders, Division Manager, Asset and Property Management Division, and his staff as needed for additional transactions gnidance to help move the development of this proposal forward.' Information contained within the County's alternative strategy for public lands within eastern Jefferson County will help inform Sue about the County's over-arching interests in forest lands in Jefferson County, but the focus of the work group would be on achieving a specific, mutually beneficial proposal for land transactions Department 01 Natural Resources 1111 WashingtOn ST SE MS 47001 Olympia, WashIngtOn 98504-7001 (360) 902-1000 ..... The Honorable John Austin July 20, 2011 Page 2 of2 involving the four parcels. This proposal would be presented to Jefferson County and me for consideration. Considering the time already allowed, I would ask that the County be ready to meet with Sue by August 5, 2011. Now, I believe, it is time to roll up our sleeves and reach agreement around parcels 5, 6, 7, 8. I look fOrward to your immediate response to this proposal. Again, thank you for your work on Jefferson County's conceptual asset management plan. Sincerely, ~u... . Peter amark Commis ner of Public Lands cc: Cullen Stephenson, Deputy Supervisor for State Uplands Steve Saunders, Division Manager, Asset and Property Management Division Susan Trettevik, Region Manager,. Olympic Region David Nunez, Pope Resow:ces John Shay, POPe Resources 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 PhIl.r_n, Dfstrlat 1 David W. Sullivan, DIstrict 2 .rchn AustIn, Dlatrlct 3 The Honorable Peter Goldmark Washington State Commissioner of Public Lands PO Box 47000 Olympia, WA 98504-7000 Dear Commissioner Goldmark: It is our pleasure to present you the enclosed proposal: Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands In East Jefferson County. We thank you for giving us time to closely examine the DNR managed properties. A group of citizens has spent many hours over the past two years in drafting this plan. We have received input from residents, tribes, environmental groups, and other organizations with interest in our public forests. We received public testimony in a publicly noticed hearing which took place on April 18, 2011 at 10:30 at the County Courthouse. We have received letters of support and endorsements from a wide variety of organizations which are enclosed with thIs letter. We urge you to read this document. We believe that it Is in line with your values and serves the long term needs of DNR, Washington State, and our County citizens. The plan recognizes the need to protect public lands from conversion, maintain timber revenues.and meet a growing need for all the benefits found in working forests. We value and rely upon the DNR as a partner in maintaining the long term commercial viability of working forests throughout Jefferson County. Chairman Austin will be calling you soon to arrange a convenient time to meet. This could be at your office, or in Jefferson county where you could visit some of the lands. We do appreciate the willingness of you and your staff to include us In planning for our public lands. . Sincerely, ~~u~ f~~an bfl-~ Phil Johnson, Member David Sullivan, Member BOCC/ld Encl. Plan List of endorsers Letters of support Draft minutes of the public hearing Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 jeftbocc@cOJefferson.wa.us AMP Endorsements - 4/20/11 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Admiralty Audubon Hood Canal Coalition Jamestown S'Klallam Enterprise Cascadia Northwest Natural Resources Group Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Olympic Forest Coalition Olympic Environmental.Councll Sierra Club Jefferson Land Trust Jefferson County Democrats Port Ludlow Fire & Rescue Hood Canal Coordinating Council Forests for the Future An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands in East Jefferson County DRAFT March 25, 2011 Public Lands Group Forests for the Future An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands in East Jefferson County The legislature finds that since the 1980s, abaut seventeen percent af Washingtan's commercial farests have been converted to ather land uses... The legislature further finds that as these forests vanish, so do the multiple benefits they provide to our communities like locol timber jobs, clean air and water, corbon storoge, fish and wildlife habitat, recreation areas and open space... The legislature further finds that the legislature has provided palicy directian to the department of natural resources to protect working forest and natural resource lands at risk of conversion. -Introduction to Community Forest Trust legislative proposal, DNR working draft 12-20-10 INTRODUCTION East Jefferson County is fortunate to contain approximately 23,457 acres of state-owned forest land dispersed widely across the county in blocks ranging in size from 40 acres to over 2,000 acres. These properties, managed by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), provide important economic and environmental benefits for Jefferson County. As Jefferson County's population grows, these public lands become increasingly important for a variety of reasons as summarized below- 1) Forest land base - State timber lands playa very important role in preserving East Jefferson County's timberlands and the overall viability of the local timber industry. State timber lands are, in a sense, anchors that secure the overall forest land base of private and public lands. If transferred into private ownership through a iand exchange, these lands could be sold immediately for large lot development under the current zoning, or potentially rezoned to higher density development, along with adjoining lands. A large forest land base of mixed public and private lands ensures the wood supply needed to support the local timber industry and employment. 1 2) Timber revenue - state timber lands categorized as Forest Board Trust lands provide revenue to the Jefferson County's junior taxing districts in which the timber was cut. Because these Forest Board lands are located within most of the taxing districts, the . districts share in the benefits. Timber revenue from other Trust lands, such as the Common School Trust, benefit programs at the state level, such as the General School Construction Fund. 3) Recreation - the dispersed nature of state timberlands in East Jefferson County provide accessible outdoor recreational opportunities close to most people who live in the county and near population centers, Including Port Townsend, Chimacum, Port ludlow, and Quilcene. Many of these public lands are increasingly valued and used by the local citizens for hunting, fishing, walking, mountain biking and as open space. 4) Environment - the lowland forests of Puget Sound play an increasingly important role In protecting habitat and water quality in the most rapidly growing region of Washington. State timber lands in eastern Jefferson County have been managed under the State's Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for over 10 years. The HCP forestry rules provide a much greater level of habitat protection to fish and wildlife than under Forest Practice regulations that apply to private lands. For example, habitat features such as old growth legacy trees, wider stream buffers, and forested wetlands are routinely conserved under DNR management. If these state lands are transferred to private ownership, the habitats protected under 10 years of DNR stewardship could be lost, even without selling the lands for development. The long term strategy for these public lands, entitled the Asset Management Strategy far East Jefferson County (AMS), was developed by DNR staff in 2008 under Doug Sutherland, the previous Commissioner of Public Lands. The AMS consisted of a map developed by DNR staff that delineated only the western portion of East Jefferson County, roughly west of Center Road, as viable for longterm DNR forestry (Figure 1). This was the area DNR proposed to keep in "working forest" while leaving the remainder of its ownership open to potentially being traded away as opportunities presented themselves. Concurrent with development of the AMS, DNR was also working on a proposal for a land exchange to implement it. In 2009, DNR held a public hearing in Chimacum to discuss a proposed land trade with Pope Resources (Pope), a private timber and development company. The land swap involved trading Pope about 3,000 acres of DNR timberlands in the central part of East Jefferson County in exchange for DNR receiving about 4,000 acres of Pope lands to the west near the Olympic National Forest. (The unequal acreage is due to the higher timber and land values of the DNR lands.) In essence, DNR was proposing to implement its AMS and "retreat to the hills"; backing out of the more populated parts of the cou nty, and consolidating their timber holdings in more remote areas near the federal land boundary. 2 . ~..:. .~""" ,.'-'" Natural Area Landscap.s i.., " "_~'.d"J.......',.,3,,_,, .'~ . << ...... ":, r '-" . ", ". ~..~," ", . f;<";:"'<<:"~ " '.',{.011 '" .). ',:" "0' ....... P'" ........ .' ., '...._~._.._~" EAST.:::".......') ~\ I " ,< ~FFt;~so~ - "-J .. .-' i '. . \: . f .1 i. I .I" ;; f I .. j , J .; ,'\ , .:" :-lliJtl~~.f~P . ::;<+<~:t <~'!-'': \.;:E~". " V " :Ji' 'OIl c.;~"j",6 '_f~ ;"v it.. ' ,~. ! ,r-t ~ , Interim Hold & Manage ~).1r "'~.,I ':.} '. i(' ""~';1 i S] ! Working Forest Landscapes ~~ \; Conservation Interest Landscapes "'''''''--'~''':-''';;)r-;.;~", -~::'~;Y.~~.~. j -. L\ ~.: i(" -;." ," \'" , accuracy. Jd.'nfOrmation, for ,"ors or omissions. ".,Z008 Figure 1. DNR's 2008 Asset Management Strategy map. Only state timber lands west of about Center road are proposed for long term forestry, or "working forest". Red and blue parcels are state forestlands. 3 For many citizens of East Jefferson County who had assumed DNR was committed to long term ownership of their holdings as "working forest", the land exchange and AMS were alarming surprises. DNR's proposal would not only put public lands with a long history of careful forest stewardship and high environmental and recreational values in the hands of private industry, but would increase the risk of conversion across the more vulnerable portion of East Jefferson County's forest land base. In defense of the AMS, DNR argued that they were faced with the challenge of continuing to manage small parcels in areas under increasing development pressure. DNR stated that as East Jefferson County developed, it would become increasingly difficult and costly to do forestry. Illegal dumping, tree cutting, and other trespass and encroachment issues, as well as neighboring residents' opposition to timber sales would become larger problems. In addition, as land prices increased in the area to reflect Highest and Best Use values, it would become more difficult for DNR to justify holding parcels for forestry instead of trading them for larger parcels in more remote areas. However, this "strategy of retreat" is a net loss game. It would result in the loss of important wildlife habitats that have formed over hundreds of years, and which have been protected for over a decade under the state's progressive Habitat Conservation Plan; severely reduce accessible public recreational areas; accelerate conversion of forestlands; and seriously impact revenues of junior taxing districts. The strategy runs exactly counter to the State Legislature's direction to DNR to protect working forests in areas at risk of conversion. If followed to its logical conclusion, such a strategy would result in the retreat of DNR from most of Puget Sound, one of the regions in the state at greatest risk of forest conversion and where forests are most needed for the continued viability of the overall timber resource base, habitats, and to meet outdoor recreational needs. In response to strong opposition to the proposed trade by citizens and the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners, Peter Goldmark, Commissioner of Public Lands, announced that he would put the trade on hold to give time for Jefferson County to develop an alternative proposal that would address DNR's concern with trying to manage dispersed small parcels. In addition, DNR staff met with conservation groups, timber industry representatives, and local officials to discuss the AMS and invite public involvement in revising the strategy. The purpose of this Public Lands Group was to address Commissioner Goldmark's directive and develop a new Asset Management Strategy for East Jefferson County. The intent of the strategy is exactly the same as DNR's stated goals - to protect the forest land base for long term timber production, recreation, and wildlife. However, the methods and approach are different. 4 METHODS A group of local citizens formed the Public Lands Group (PLG) and met regularly over a one year period. The PLG members included concerned citizens and experts in forestry, habitat, and conservation that had extensive knowledge of the timber management history, habitat conditions and recreational values of DNR lands in East Jefferson County. Members included: Peter Bahls - Mr. Bahls is the Director of Northwest Watershed Institute, a non-profit organization that provides scientific and technical support for watershed restoration in the Pacific Northwest. He has worked as a fish and wildlife biologist in East Jefferson County for eighteen years, including six years as the Timber-Fish-and-Wildlife Biologist for the Point No Point Treaty Council and Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe where he reviewed state and private timber sales. Mike Cronin - Mr. Cronin is a consulting forester and the retired DNR District Manager for the Straits District (East Jefferson County). He worked as the lead DNR forester in East Jefferson County for over 20 years. Connie Gallant - Ms. Gallant is executive director of Greenfleet Monitoring Expeditions, a nonprofit organization that monitors, reports, and educates on the environmental human impact on estuaries; a volunteer board member/vice president of Olympic Forest Coalition, and chair of the Wild Olympics Campaign. She also represents Quilcene as a Precinct Committee Officer of the Jefferson County Democrats. She has successfully negotiated alternatives with the staff of the Olympic National Forest during timber harvest proposals that threatened some of the scenic areas surrounding South County. Jennifer Portz - a concerned citizen from Port Ludlow. The overall approach of the PLG was to assess each separate DNR block of land, identify its assets and liabilities, and to recommend the best strategy for long term management given DNR's concern with dispersed ownership. (Note - a "parcel" as used in this report refers to a block of DNR land that may include one or more county tax parcels.) The PLG members considered the forestry, recreational, and habitat/environmental values of each parcel based on their on-the-ground knowledge, inspection of aerial photos, and available GIS coverages of streams and other habitats. The results were summarized in spreadsheet format. Based on each parcel's unique characteristics, and its context within the larger landscape of East Jefferson County, the PLG identified one or more suitable long-term management strategies for each parcel. GIS maps were developed by Doug Noltemeier, Jefferson County GIS Specialist, at the request of John Austin, Jefferson County Commissioner, to summarize the results. The suite of management options is summarized in Table 1. 5 Table 1. A summary of parcel characteristics that were used to identify management options for each parcel. Management Option Parcel characteristics DNR Hold Productive timberland with low to moderate environmental and social constraints to timber harvest Larger parcel (SOO+ acres) or adjoining other zoned forest parcels with low-moderate risk of conversion. Community Forest Same as DNR Hold, except n Located near populated areas with greater development pressure and conversion risk Moderate to high recreational use Moderate to high environmental/habitat benefits Proposed Trust Land High fish and wildlife and/or recreational benefits Transfer Low potential for timber production due to habitat or social factors Existing Trust Land Already protected as a natural preserve through the Trust Land Transfer Transfer program, or in the process of being transferred. Available for Smaller, isolated parcels where potential development of the parcel will Exchange not significantly increase the risk of conversion of surrounding lands- because those areas are already developed Low recreational and environmental benefits DNR Hold This management option was identified for parcels that are suitable for continued long-term timber management by DNR. The parcels are productive timber lands with low to moderate surrounding development pressure and where timber harvest is not unduly constrained by environmental/habitat issues or recreational conflicts. "Larger" parcels are generally defined here as those over SOO acres. Smaller parcels could also be considered suitable for DNR Hold if they are adjacent to a larger block of commercially zoned forestland. 6 We purposefully did not delineate a "broad brush" zone in East Jefferson County that was considered suitable for "working forest". Instead, we assessed every DNR parcel individually and within the context of the surrounding landscape, zoning, and development pressure to determine if long term forestry was viable for that parcel. DNR Hold -example Skidder/Snow parcel, at approximately 2,674 acres, is located in the more remote western portion of East Jefferson County. Most of the parcel is productive timber iand that can continue to be managed without substantial environmental or recreational constraints on timber harvest. There are some areas of high ecological sensitivity within the parcel where potential for timber harvest is limited, including extensive wetlands and rare plant communities on grassland mountain balds. Future Tl T may be appropriate for these smaller areas at some point in the future, but the parcel as a whole is well suited for long term timber management by DNR. Community Forest This management option applies to those parcels closer to developed areas where DNR is most concerned about its ability to manage for commercial forestry with increasing encroachment issues, higher recreational uses, concerns about timber harvest by neighbors, and increasing land values. The Community Forest option, in a general sense, entails arrangements that allow the property to stay in forestry, but relieves DNR of its obligation to provide income for the Trust. At present, there appear to be two main avenues for Community Forests. 1) DNR Community Forest - DNR is planning to introduce legislation in 2011 that would enable them to help protect high-risk working forest landscapes from being converted to non-forest uses. The legislation would establish a new Community Forest Trust (in addition to Forest Board Trust, Common School Trust, and other existing trusts). like the Trust land Transfer (TLT) process, funding from the iegislature would be used to transfer parcels into this new Community Forest Trust by reimbursing the original Trust. Also as in the Tl T process, the county would not lose revenue from Forest Board lands with this approach. The transfer relieves DNR of its perceived Trust obligation to manage the parcel to its "highest and best use", which in developing areas is increasingly difficult for DNR to justify. The parcel would continue to be owned and managed by DNR, but with locally developed management plans that might involve lighter logging and more focus on recreation, habitat, and ecosystems services. This option would keep the parcel in forestry and prevent the parcel from being sold or traded for private development. 2) Reconveyance to Jefferson County- Under current state law, DNR Forest Board lands can be reconveyed to the county for park purposes at no cost, other than an 7 administrative fee to DNR (RCW 7.22.300). In this process, the county requests reconveyance from DNR, who decides if the need for the park-land is in accordance with county and state outdoor recreation plans. The reconveyance process includes a public hearing by DNR and County and approval by the Board of Natural Resources (http://I,,yvv\;\/.ckr,vvc:.go2L?u bl ic~~ t 10 nS/d rn p _!yco n \/E:~.12J:J;~"EiJ2~:..s.::i.j..:J2.91). Given the current county budget, reconveyance is only a viable option if the county can obtain additional revenue to manage the new park. In addition, this option would result in a loss of tax revenue from timber sales unless the county could continue to harvest timber on the property. Although the existing state law does not address the issue specifically, it appears that the county does have the potential to continue to harvest timber on the reconveyed land, as long as DNR has approved a timber management plan as part of the county's Park management plan. Funds from county-run timber sales on the property could provide revenue for park management and perhaps compensate for the loss of this DNR-managed Forest Board land. Another potential option that would raise funds for park management would be to establish a Park Management District in all or a part of east Jefferson County. Voter approval is required to establish a Park District, which would have taxing authority to raise funds through a property tax within the District. Community Forest - example Teal Lake East and West are two of several larger parcels in the eastern portion of East Jefferson County, near Port Ludlow and the Hood Canal bridge, in an area of higher population denSity and risk of conversion. These parcels have a combined acreage of approximately 1,187 acres and are productive for timber, with few environmental issues, but with increasing recreational use. Due to rising land values and population pressures, DNR is leery of keeping these parcels long-term. Although there is a 20-year moratorium on re-zoning of this area from a previous rezone negotiation between Jefferson County and Pope Resources, if traded to a private corporation, the parcels would likely be sold to private buyers for large lot development, or eventually used to expand high denSity development of nearby Port Ludlow. Proposed Trust Land Transfer This management option would transfer a parcel into permanent protection for fish and wildlife habitat, open space or recreation under DNR's Trust Land Transfer (TLT) program. This option was selected for parcels that generally have very high ecological value, and in some cases recreational or open space value, yet limited timber value. In many cases, important 8 environmental features, such as federally listed species, unstable slopes, or rare plant communities, are protected by law and severely constrain the timber harvest that could occur on the parcel. DNR's TL T program is a somewhat complicated, but an effective way to both protect important habitats as well as fully reimburse the Trust for the loss of the timber revenue and timberland. The Trust Land Transfer program uses TLT funds approved by the State Legislature to transfer Common School land into a protected status. The funds reimburse the statewide general school construction fund for the timber value of the parcel (as if it had been cut) and also pays for the purchase of replacement timber lands by DNR. However, the replacement Common School properties may not necessarily be in Jefferson County, but can be anywhere in the State that meet certain criteria for productive timber land. The parcel protected byTLT can be transferred to any government jurisdiction that agrees to own and manage it, such as a county, city, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), or Washington State Parks. The parcel can also be retained by DNR, but only if it is within the boundary of a DNR approved Natural Area. To implement TLT for Forest Board and most other Trust types, an "intergrant exchange" must occur, whereby a Common School parcel of equal value in the same county is identified and the Trust designations are exchanged. Thus, the county does not lose the Forest Board lands, or the timber revenue that those lands provide to junior taxing districts. In general, TLT is an excellent tool to reposition DNR Trust assets to protect lands that have high value for recreation or fish and wildlife with limited timber harvest potential, while improving the long term productivity of the DNR timber base. Trust Land Transfer Example An example of a parcel well suited to Trust Land Transfer option is Thorndike 160. This 160-acre parcel is located along Thorndyke Creek and has exceptional ecological value. Most of the parcel is comprised of more than one-half mile of the mainstem of Thorndyke Creek, several tributaries, wetlands, and extensive floodplain wetlands that provide essential habitat for salmon and other wildlife. The riparian areas and wetlands are in good condition, composed of naturally regenerated, older second growth forest. Due to the environmental sensitivity of the site, very little logging can be done by DNR under the Habitat Conservation Plan, which is more stringent than rules for private timber logging (that would allow logging of forested wetlands and a larger portion of riparian areas). The Trust Land Transfer option makes the most sense here to best protect key habitats as well as improve the financial health of the Trust through the acquisition of replacement lands with better timber production potential. However, because this is a Forest Board parcel, DNR would need to undertake the additional administrative step of an intergrant exchange to convert the 9 parcel to Common School land for the transfer. In addition, because the parcel is not within a DNR Natural Area boundary, a sponsoring agency, such as WDFW or State Parks would need to agree to accept ownership and permanently protect the property (unless DNR decided to establish a new Natural Area here). Existing Trust land Transfer This management option applies to parcels that have already been transferred, or are in the process of being transferred, through Trust land Transfer program to a protected status. Oabob Bay, Gibbs-Beausite Lake, TL T lease - examples This management option includes parcels that are already protected by DNR as part of the Dabob Bay Natural Area, and properties near Port Townsend and along the Shine shoreline that were leased to Jefferson County under a 50-year TLT lease, as well as the pending Gibbs- Beausite Lake Tl T that was proposed by DN R for the fiscal year 2011-13 Tl T list of projects. Available for Exchange This management option involves DNR trading away a parcel in an area of higher conversion risk, in exchange for receiving a parcel in a more remote area, as was proposed in 2009 Pope ResourcesjDNR exchange. This option was generally not preferred because such trades inherently increase the risk of conversion in the at-risk areas that DNR is moving from. DNR parcels obtained by private iandowners in more developed areas could be sold for large lot development under the current zoning, or potentially rezoned to higher density in the future, accelerating conversion in the surrounding area of currently zoned forestland. Even if they continue to be managed as timber iand, important fish and wildlife habitats could be lost from public forestlands traded into private ownership. Stream buffers, forested wetlands, and old growth legacy trees remaining on the prior DNR properties would no longer be conserved to the standards of DNR's Habitat Conservation Plan, but under the less protective Forest Practices rules that apply to private lands. Thus, this option is only appropriate for small parcels without moderate to high environmental and recreational benefits that could be lost through private industrial logging or sale for development. In addition, this option is only appropriate for DNR parcels that are already adjacent to developed lands and thus, do not serve as anchors for maintaining forest land uses and forestry of surrounding lands. Available for Exchange -example The Tala Point parcel is a good example of a parcel that is appropriate for a private exchange of this type. The approximately 73 acre isolated parcel is relatively small for DNR to maintain in 10 forestry and is nearly surrounded by a gated development. Its potential development under private ownership would not significantly influence conversion in the surrounding area since it is already largely developed. In addition, because this is a gated community, full public access to the parcel for recreation is problematic, making the Community Forest option less appealing. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Parcel bv Darcel summaries A total of 45 distinct DNR parcels, totaling 23,457 acres, were identified and mapped (Figure 1). It is important to note that acreage figures used in this report are based on GIS parcel data from DNR and provide only approximations of actual acreage. These parcels include predominately Forest Board and Common School Trust lands. Parcels are dispersed throughout East Jefferson County in all of the Fire Districts. Parcels that were part of the proposed 2009 Pope-DNR trade are outlined with a thin red line. Figure 1 also highlights Common Schoo/lands that were identified in a 2009 Public Hearing for use in the Dabob Bay Natural Area intergrant exchange process. The PLG assessed individual parcels for a range of public benefits, including timber, habitat, and recreation, and identified one or more management options for each parcel. One page summaries of each parcel's characteristics were prepared (Appendix A). A summary of the ratings and management option selected for each parcel is provided in Figure 2 and Table 2. Some parcels have more than one management option - for example "DNR Hold or Community Forest". A total of 10 combinations of the five primary management options were chosen for the parcels (Table 3). The first option in a combination listed is the preferred option. However, either option identified was considered suitable, given the characteristics of the parcel, its public benefits, and influence on the surrounding lands. Parcels that have the DNR Hold option as the preferred of two or three selected alternatives are parcels that the PlG felt could continue to be managed as working forest by DNR. If DNR maintains otherwise, one of the other identified options should be employed. A management option can also involve different options on different portions of the same parcel. For example "DNR Hold and TLT (to DNR)" on the Dabob West property involves a proposed TlT on 200 acres and keeping the remaining 617 acres in DNR Hold. 11 DNR Lands in Eastern Jefferson County DRAFT Mar252011 . .0;. ~-...~..._~. . ~-:==.:.: Ei.i;;m-_" " ' , , C~bOl 00\' !ojat Irel Area nONR ::::orrmc1 S~hool L~nds [Jct'm'''o'eSI3oird_iJn~s OJNO Natu'al A,'ea [JJE'~er;;01 C)un~"' E-:- Leae8 Potertl8 Inlorqar E .-ha1oeP opertl6S Otrer-ru3tT,'pe3 Fire CisllCI l~ I u 1I' Figure 1. Map of East Jefferson County showing DNR ownership. 12 I (Proposed Asset Management Stra'~:~. --t'\. for DNR Lands in -o~..... East Jefferson County Mar252011 < C<( j ::i:l -" ' :l ......., ~ ,-,'" - , . ~ ., ," ~" . ~ " , r- ~,,"~.;o~"'C;;:;"-O~ :;J .~ 'I-.J' -. mIl~~"1 ". .~~, "_.C.,,",, I~~' ."')~'" / / ,/' I ,/: / '\ ;.. 1 \. \ :';,\ //, , ; '''-.", i "", .~'~," i \ \ \ 1'''''= \;q- I:' ~i''''"'';''' J" -- I " I _, "~"' ....~~: "'.';'" -;p~ , . ! -' I'~' ",:';;'" "".,: C--, ,~.O" :.",,,.'---' '11'. I I I .._...J --"'" ,/ / / , / , .. . K"O'~' ~ o ly m p 10:: N""OO'. F"... _-::~I~:' .. / / /___"'"1 Proposed Management FlreDlot"~t-;=r .DNR Hdd or A"'ila-)lef'~." E:<<:hdn~" DDd~~t BdY N.tural Area iIIC:'JR J-:old ~r C~mmum,vForest C mn:ercl~Fo-""t Zonl::l~ CF B~ !!C~.TR Hok: or Comnunicy I'o:eet or TL T ?ura I'ores' ZOfiln3 F.F ~o '. ,/ rNFosedTLT IIllE"i'tjng~ri:::...processn-T .D~;P,:;o;d "" i ! , / / / I ~]:iNR Pro:>0sed E"",=~~~ed:o Pope '.".. Figure 2. Map of management options for each DNR parcel. 1'.'.'..-. 'I ~~.,: : ,....., ,~1"'."' ~" ! / -.' '1'..""..'1. ,,,. ....... . <..... ~.."' .~..'*'. ...~:. , . _._--._~' ~---/~ / .'".'.~' ----.-L.I.~,' ,/ , , ->p/ ~"'''-'~'~._'~'~~-'''' "'~~.","~_.."". ....-_..-.'- ~:~,g2::'- ~ 13 Table 2. DNR parcels, total acres, summary rankings and management recommendation DNR Parcel Name Acres Recreation Habitat Timber Recommendation Anderson Lake 582 H H H DNR Hold or Community Forest Beaver Valley 521 H H H DNR Hold or TLT or Community Forest Camp Harmony 182 H H M DNR Hold and TLT (to WDFW) Cape George 243 H M L DNR Hold or TLT or Community Forest Coyle Road 149 M M M DN R Hold Crocker Ridge 1,002 M M H DN R Hold Dabob Bay Natural Area 1,909 H H M Existing TL T Da bob East 158 M M H DNR Hold Dabob West 817 H H H DNR Hold and TLT (to DNR) Dev lis La ke 494 H H M Existing TLT, TLT (to DNR) and DNR Hold Disco 120 L M H DNR Hold Duckabush Lower 44 H H L TLT (to WDFW or State Parks) Duckabush Upper 40 M H L TLT (to WDFW or State Parks) Eaglemou nt 80 80 M H M DNR Hold or TL T or Community Forest East Blynn 1,321 M M H DNR Hold Eaton 657 M M H DNR Hold Egg and I 325 M M H DNR Hold or Community Forest Gibbs- Beausite Lakes 291 H H M Existing TL T La rson La ke 40 40 L M M DNR Hold or Exchange Larson Lake 80 79 M M M DNR Hold or Exchange Leland/Ripley 1,070 H M H DN R Hold Lemonds Road 79 L M M DN R Hold Lone 40 40 L M L DNR Hold McDonald Creek 587 L M M DNR Hold MtJupiter 695 M M L DNR Hold Penny Creek 2,322 H H H DNR Hold Quimper Corridor 112 H M L Existing TL T Silent Lake 1,104 H M H DNR Hold 5kidder/5now 2,674 M H H DNR Hold South Shine 49 H H L Existing TL T South Snow 346 M H H DNR Hold Spencer Creek 156 L M L DNR Hold Tala Point 80 73 H M M DNR Hold or Exchange Tarboo East 820 H M H DN R Hold Tarboo Upper 863 H M H DNR Hold or Community Forest Teal 40 (Paradise Bay) 38 L L M DNR Hold or Community Forest Teal Lake East 655 M L H DNR Hold or Community Forest Teal Lake West 532 M M H DNR Hold or Community Forest Termination Point 59 L L M DNR Hold or Exchange Thorndyke 160 157 M H L TLT (to WDFW) Thorndyke 80 78 L M M DNR Hold Triton Cove 294 L M H DNR Hold Walker Mtn 1,119 M M H DNR Hold WestJacob Miller 121 H M L DNR Hold or TLT or Community Forest Zelatched Point 360 M M M DNR Hold Total acreage 23,457 14 Table 3. Number of parcels and total acres within each proposed management option or combination of options. No. of Total Percent Name of single Management strategy parcels Acres of total parcel DNR Hold 21 15,151 64.6 DNR Hold or Community Forest 6 2,995 12.8 TLT (to WDFW or State Parks) 2 84 0.4 TLT (to WDFW) 1 157 0.7 Thorndyke Existing TL T 4 2,361 10.1 DNR Hold or Exchange 4 251 1.1 DNR Hold or TLT or Community Forest 4 965 4.1 DNR Hold and TLT (to DNR)* 1 817 3.5 Dabob West DNR Hold and TL T (to WDFW)* 1 182 0.8 Camp Harmony Existing TLT, TLT (to DNR) and DNR Hold* 1 494 2.1 Devils Lake Totals 45 23,457 100.0 'portions of the parcel are proposed for different management options. Choosing to implement the preferred DNR Hold option in the parcel strategies would keep most DNR lands in working forest. A total of approximately 826 acres is proposed for TLT, or 4% of the 21,096 acres not currently in TLT (or in process). Community Forest is proposed as the best long range solution for some of the parcels in areas at higher risk of conversion if DNR is intent on moving these lands out of a timber Trust. Four parcels in east Jefferson County are considered potentially suitable for trade to a private entity. The recent Dabob TLT and other potential TLTs or DNR Community Forest transfers will generate millions of dollars for DNR's Property Replacement Account that can be spent anywhere in the state to purchase property that meet DNR's criteria for productive timber lands. We encourage DNR to re-invest these funds in Jefferson County to further consolidate working forests. These acquisitions should not be limited to the "working forest" zone delineated in DNR's 2008 Asset Management Strategy, but implemented anywhere in East Jefferson County where there is an opportunity to help build on existing DNR parcels to strengthen long term forestry potential. Possible areas for DNR acquisitions include approximately 800 acres of Rainier lands north of the Beaver Valley parcel, 350 acres of Green Diamond lands adjacent to the Upper Tarboo parcel, and Pope Resources holdings along the Forest Service boundary near the Skidder/5now and Penny Creek parcels. CONCLUSION The dispersed pattern of DNR forestlands in East Jefferson County is an asset as well as a challenge. Many of these DNR lands are increasingly important to anchor the timber base of the larger region, for accessible recreation, and to conserve rare habitats. Yet, DNR is concerned 15 that these smaller parcels in developing areas are more expensive to manage and more difficult to justify keeping in forestry over the long term as their land values increase. However, trading these parcels for larger acreages in more remote areas is a strategy of retreat from the challenge of protecting at-risk forestlands and the timber base. New strategies and tools need to be employed to deal with dispersed parcels, so that these lands can continue to provide the highest levels of public benefits without compromising DNR's fiduciary responsibility to the trust recipients. To address DNR's concern with dispersed parcels in East Jefferson County, the Public lands Group evaluated each parcel for its environmental/habitat, recreational, and timber benefits to choose from a range of options for long term management that best protected the public benefits of the parcel. For parcels in those areas of east Jefferson County at greater risk of development, we believe that most can continue to be managed as working forest. We understand DNR's concern in trying to do forestry near areas of increasing residential use and public concerns with timber proposals. However, we believe that public support for sustainable forestry is growing in east Jefferson County and that this long term landscape plan for specific parcels will help solidify that commitment. We support the continued timber management by DNR for these lands and expect to work with DNR toward greater acceptance of timber harvest on dispersed working forestlands in general. If DNR is intent on taking some parcels out of a timber Trust, we recommended transfer to a Community Forest Trust or county ownership for management as a Community Forest. Four of the smaller parcels were considered suitable for private exchange because their public benefits are relatively low, including their importance in helping maintain the surrounding forest land base. In some cases, where parcels had very high ecological benefits and low timber potential, we recommended transfer of the parcel to natural area protection through the Trust land Transfer process. Finally, recent and pending Trust Land Transfers in East Jefferson County are generating millions of dollars for DNR's Property Replacement Account. We strongly recommend that DNR use these funds in East Jefferson County to purchase private timber lands at-risk of conversion that adjoin their existing holdings. Most of the DNR parcels, although dispersed, occur within a large area of commercially zoned forest land. This larger forest land base could be strengthened by DNR's commitment to expanding public forest blocks across the entirety of its existing holdings in East Jefferson County so as to assure the economic and environmental benefits of forestlands and a strong timber base in East Jefferson County for generations to come. 16 APPENDIX A. Parcel Summaries for DNR parcels in East Jefferson County Notes 1 Site number such as DNR-01 are parcels in the 2009 proposed DNR-Pope land exchange 2 Acreage and percent stand type and age are estimates from DNR GIS parcel data and 2009 aerial photography 3 Stands listed as 1940 stand origin may have originated earlier (1900-1940) and are generally naturally regenerated, mixed species olderforests 4 In summary ratings, N = none, L = low, M = moderate, H = High Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the pubiic Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecological Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praductian R H Recommended Optian(s) Summary Reason Anderson Lake Common School - 542, Forest Board - 39 582 Mostly 3 with some 4 1940s, 25% 1970s 13% 1990s 17% 2000s, 45% Multiple forested wetlands Unauthorized bicycle trails throughout Moderate - the management only easement road is gated, but the north end abuts Anderson Lake State Park with a bike trail entering from the park Chimacum Tri-Area High hunting, no fishing High - many user built trails Good wildlife habitat in mixed aged forest with large wetland buffers No Old growth Douglas fir and red cedar remnants in cedar/fir forest Anderson lake State Park, large lot rural residential on other None known DNR Hold or Community Forest Neighbors have demonstrated support for working forest status Site Name Site Number Trust Type Tatal Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Sacial harvest canstraints Recreation/public use Accessibility ta the public Near papulatian centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian ar share line habitat Unique ar rare farest types Other considerations Adjacent awnership Part af a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,i,M,H) Recreatianal Value Rating H Ecalagical Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praductian R H Recammended Optianls) Summary Reasan Beaver Valley DNR 09 Common School S21 3 1980s, 13% 1990s, 17% 2000s, 23% 1920s, 47% Single family domestic water system downstream, forested wetlands Concerned neighbor Moderate - locked gate at Pope easement road off Phillips Road. East side is adjacent Hwy 19 near Chimacum and Port Ludlow Yes - Port Ludlow & Chimacum Moderate hunting Yes - includes user-built ATV trail Very good wildlfe habitat with large trees in and near forested wetlands. Type N small stream Type N small stream Older, naturally regenerated forest with the largest second growth Douglas fir in the area Pope on south side, Port Ludlow on east, and private residential on other sides DNR timber sale being planned DNR Hold or TL T or Community Forest High ecological values to be lost if transferred to private Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest canstraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecological Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Production R M Recammended Option(s) Summary Reason Camp Harmony Common School 182 3 1920, 55% 1990s, 25% 2000s, 30% High bluff waterfront on Dabob Bay limits harvest on west side of parcel Beach front neighbors with harvest opposition history Walk in only on gated DNR road, from Camp Harmony county road No High - hunting, fishing and shellfish gathering on DNR beach accessed from Dabob Bay only None known High - known eagle nests along bluff and high quality marine shoreline forest 1/2 mile of shoreline with public tidelands Residual old growth Douglas fir trees in older secand growth along Bluff Rural residential, incliuding beachfront homes on north; large, undeveloped private parcel on east No DNR Hold and TLT (to WDFW) High value shoreline with adjacent public tidelands for TLTto WDFW or State Pa rks Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praductian R L Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Cape George Common School 243 4 and 5 1900, 13% 1970s, 1S% 1980s, 25% 1990s & 2000s, 47% Moderate - low volume on dry ,low productivity site High - rural residential adjacent on ali sides High - public roads High - Port Townsend and Cape George Moderate hunting, no fishing Yes - user-built informal walking trails High - important for wildlife due to undeveioped parcel surrounded by residential None Some older age second growth with residual old growth trees on low productivity site Rural residential No DNR Hold or TLT or Community Forest One of only a few undeveloped forest parcels on North Quimper Penninsula with high open space values Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviran. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecolagicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R M Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Coyle Road Forest Boa rd 149 revised for Dabob Exp 01-11 3 1940s =44% 1970s = 27% 1980s = 27% 1990s = 2% Low High - open DNR roads off Coyle Road No High hunting, no fishing None Known No, but upper end of steep slopes that drain to Camp Discovery Creek None Dabob Bay Natural Area, Pope, other rural residential West boundary is adjacent to Dabob Bay Natural Area DNR Hold In CF 80 zone and near other similar DNR parcels Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecological Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R H Recommended Option!s) Summary Reason Crocker Ridge Common School - 77, Forest Board - 925 1002 3 19405 , 35% 19805, 2S% 1990s, 25% 20005, 15% Low Low - except hwy 104 corridor Moderate - walk in from gate on hwy 104 No High for deer and bear No - walking on roads Eagle, osprey, murrelet habitat No Older forest in SW corner Mostly Pope, some smaller ownerships by Crocker Lake No DNR Hold Good location in area of larger parcels and CF 80 zone Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stond 2 Origin dote, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings IN,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R M Recommended Option Is) Summary Reason Dabob Bay Natural Area Natural Area (in process) 1,909 1940, 60% 1970s, 10% 1980s, 10% 1990-2000s, 10% High - slope stability, waterfront, eagle, numerous streams Mod-residential and shellfish concerns High - Q4000 mainline DNR road on west side, other county roads No High - hunting low - only a few trails High - older shoreline forests and small stream habitats High - extensive marine shorelines and small streams High - heritage forest types identified by DNR DNR, Pope Resources, and residential All parcels included within the expanded Dabob Bay Natural Area boundary, approved 2009, and Trust land Transfer completed or in process for all parcels Existing Tl T High ecological and recreational values and constraints on potential timber harvest due to steep slopes and critical habitats Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitot Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rore forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of 0 larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R H Recommended Option(s] Summary Reason Dabob East Forest Board 158 revised jan 10,2011 3 1940s ~ 35% 1980s ~ 65% large wetland Good with open DNR road off Coyle road No High hunting, no fishing None known Moderate - mixed age forest wildlfe habitat Moderate - wetlands and tributary riparian No, but some older, naturally regenerated forest Dabob Bay Natural Area, Pope, other rural residential Adjoins Dabob Bay Natural Area to the west DNR Hold Large tract in area of industrial forest land Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Enviranmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecolagicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Dabob West Common School - 384, Forest Board - 433 817 3 19405, 40% 19605, 10% 20005, 20% 19805, 30% Moderate - occupied marbled murrelet site on 40 acres High - open heavily used DNR roads No High hunting, no fishing None known Good large parcel mixed forest wildlife habitat 1/2 mile shoreline on Dabob Bay Lots of old growth residual trees, murrelet habitat, Pre-HCP example of dispersed retention clearcut, 19605 brush rehab with dispersed large overstory trees Dabob NAP, Pope, large lot rural residential Proposed TL T for area in the NW that includes murrelet site DNR Hold and TLT (to DNR) Good timber growing site, with access and multi age class forest, Trust Land Transfer for 80 to 200 acres including occupied murrelet site adjacent to Dabob Bay Natural Area Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Sociai harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Devils Lake Common School - 41S, Natural Area - 79 494 3 1920s, 60% 1960s, 10% 2000s, 30% Includes Devils lake NRCA and gene pool reserve. No harvest on steep slopes along Dabob Bay Unstable stream banks downslope on Indian George Creek with restoration projects near mouth, BPA power corridor low -management only easement on locked road High - Quilcene High - hunting and fishing High - around Devil's lake High - at Devils lake and eagle nesting above bay, older forested shorelines of Dabob Bay High - marine shorelines of Dabob Bay (1/2 mile long) considered "Gene Pool Reserve" High -Devils lake bog and older 2nd growth with residual old growth forest in NA and slopes USFS, DNR and timber industry Big Qui/cene Watershed Analysis, NRCA Site Plan 120 acres in SW corner feasible for continued forestry, not TL T Existing TlT, TLT (to DNR) and DNR Hold Steep slopes above Dabob Bay prevent timber harvest and high ecological value - add to existing Devils lake Natural Area, remainder could be managed with adjacent Walker Mt. tract Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecolagicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praductian R H Recommended Optianls) Summary Reason Disco Forest Board 120 3 1940,42% 2000s, S8% Fish-bearing (Type F) tributary to Salmon Creek West boundary is rural residential No public access, management access through Pope roads (easement pending) No Moderate deer and bear hunting No Type F tributary to Salmon Creek No - but older, naturally regenerated forest on parts of parcel Pope on all but east side Upstream of Snow-Salmon Creek restoration project DNR Hold Part of a larger industrial forest block Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Closs Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R L Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Duckabush Lower Common School 44 3 1940, 100% Fish-bearing tributary (Type F) to Duckabush River Adjacent to high density development on three sides High - adjacent county roads Moderate - near Brinnon and subdivisions Moderate for hunting Unknown Proximity to river and low elevation winter elk range, that may include this parcel. Some along Type F tributary None known, but mostly naturally regenerated, older mixed alder- conifer hillside. Adjacent to Canal View subdivision Potential elk winter range TLT (to WDFW or State Parks) High value for wildlife and recreation, high density development on three sides small and isolated from other DNR lands Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibiiity to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecological Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R L Recommended Optian(s} Summary Reason Duckabush Upper Common School 40 3 1940, 100% Bisected by Duckabush river and fish-bearing (type F) tributary Small parcel with recreational and rural residential parcels adjacent Low - no road or easement Brinnon only Mod hunting, probably fishing None known High - mainstem of river and potential for low elevation winter elk range Older, high quality forest along Duckabush River and tribs None known Pope or other timber industry on south, small private tracts on other sides No TL T (to WDFW or State Parks) Very high quality habitat along Duckabush River with significant timber harvest constraints Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron, harvest constraints Socia' harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecolagicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Eaglemount 80 DN R 13 Forest Board 80 3 1900,10% 1990, 90% Chima cum Creek stream corridor Rural residential adjacent ownership High - located at end of county road by Peterson Lake Yes - Chimacum and Port Townsend within 10-15 minutes Moderate hunting None known Upper reach of west fork Chimacum creek in this parcel, core spawning area for coho salmon Type F Riparian corridor Important stream habitat for coho spawning, but 1990 logging left minimal stream buffer, mostly young forest on parcel Peterson Lake PUD property on west, Rural residential on north and east,and industruial forest lands on south DNR Hold or Community Forest or TLT Core saimon habitat for Chimacum Creek Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin dote, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibiiity to the pubiic Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a iarger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason East Blynn Common School - 408, Forest Board - 13S, Other Trust Types - 777 1321 3&4 1940s, S7% 1970s, S% 1990s, 12% 2000s, 26% Low -but some forested wetlands Low - but communicationjmicrosite on mt top and powerline on road route Low - with multiple owners, private gates, walk in only No High hunting for deer and bear None known High - mixed age 2ndj3rd growth forests Several small Type F streams No Mixed timber industry and some non-industry large lots Part of 4000+ acre block in adjacent Clallam Co. DNR Hold Part of much larger forest block in CF80 zone Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rore forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of 0 larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,i,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Eaton Forest Board 657 3&4 1940, 28% 1960s, 15% 1970s & 19805, 27% 1990s & 2000s, 30% Moderate - some unstable slopes associated with incised stream channels Low - but some rural residential neighbors High -old Coyle road and ungated DNR roads No High hunting, no fishing None known High - upland and wetland wildlife habitat in mixed age forest Some small fish-bearing (Type F) streams No Pope and rural residential No DNR Hold Adequate size, accessible parcel in areas zoned for forestry Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviran. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R H Recommended Optian(s) Summary Reason Egg and I Common Schaal 32S 3 1920, 15% 1970s, 15% 1980s, 20% 1990s & 2000s, 50% Low - with some forested wetlands Low - with some adjacent rural residential development Moderate - walk in only on gated DNR owned road Chimacum High hunting, no fishing Low - minor use with user-built ATV trails Moderate - wildlife habitat in mixed age forest with gated roads None Residual old growth trees scattered in older second growth Mostly large lot rural residential No Adjacent to part of 800 acres of Rainier timber lands on Chimacum Ridge DNR Hold or Community Forest Larger parcel, near other large parcels, with few environmental constraints, that can be managed for timber Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R M Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Gibbs- Beausite Lakes Forest Board 291 3 1940, 33% 1990s, 40% 2000s, 27% Beausite Lake, eagle nest, forested wetlands Kiwanis Camp use and harvest opposition High - near Gibbs Lake, County roads and Kiwanis Camp. However, Kiwanis has land posted, so public access restricted on west side Chimacum Tri-Area Moderate hunting, fishing limited to existing Gibbs lake County Park High - many user-built bicycle and walking trails High - adds older forest connection between existing County park lands and two lakes Low - but extensive riparian on adjoining County lands No, but older, naturally regenerated forest on 76 acres between lakes Jefferson County Parks and rural residential Currently proposed TL T parcel Existing TL T High recreational and ecological values, encroaching residential pressure, and support for use as county park addition Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreatian/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Enviranmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other consideratians Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Option(s} Summary Reason Larson Lake 40 DN R 11 Forest Board 40 3 19S0, 100% Poor due to locked Pope road and no easement Port Lud low Moderate hu nting none known Moderate None None, except entire parcel is naturally regenerated forest Pope on all sides 2011 timber sale planned DNR Hold Small parcel surrounded by Pope CF 80 zoning Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecological Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Optlon(s) Summary Reason Larson Lake 80 ONR 10 Forest Board 79 3 1950, 100% Adjacent to home on north Poor - Pope road system no easement Near Port Ludlow Moderate hunting None known Moderate None None known, however, parcel is entirely older naturally regenerated forest Pope on south and west, rural residential on other sides 2011 timber sale planned ON R Hold Smaller parcel adjacent to other commerical forest zoned Pope land Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Sacial harvest canstraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique ar rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part af a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecalogical Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Leland/Ripley Common School - 366, Forest Board - 704 1070 3 1940, 27% 19605 = 30% 19805 = 12% 19905 & 20005 = 31% low Moderate - two old water systems High - open DNR roads No High - with heavy deer hunting and some shooting None known Moderate -multi-age class forest, large wetland adjacent (under powerline to north) Small type F streams One of the oldest DNR planted stands Pope and other non industry private large parcels DN R Hold Good location in and adjacent to CF-80 zone Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other consideratians Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating l Ecological Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason lemonds Road Forest Board 79 3 1930s, 100% some unstable slopes within the fish bearing (Type F) or non-fish bearing (Type N P) stream corridors Downstream neighbors use road through parcel with no easement, yet refuse to grant DNR access on the private road over lemonds at Coyle Road junction low - due to private road No Moderate hunting use, no fishing None known High - good quality older forest along small stream corridor Small, fish bearing (Type F) stream No, but older naturally regenerated forest along Hood Canal slopes Private, rural residential and recreational properties No DNR Hold Access is yet to be resolved and parcel is small Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R L Recommended Option(s} Summary Reason Lone 40 Forest Board 40 3&4 1930, 15% 2000s, 85% Low Moderate - No permanent access and rural residential neighbors Low -no public road and gated private drives No Low hunting, no fishing None known Moderate - upland wildlife habitat in early succession forest with retention of legacy trees No None known 5 acre and larger rural residential tracts No DNR Hold Small size, but can be managed with other DNR tracts in the immediate area Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecolagicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praductian R M Recommended Optian(s) Summary Reason McDonald Creek Common School 587 3&4 1940, 60% 2 OOOs, 40% Older forest in northwest corner, very difficult access Poor due to management- only easement on private roads Brinnon, Olympia Moderate hunting including by the Tribes for elk, no fishing None known Moderate with some high potential elk wintering area Steep non-fishbearing (Type NP) streams only None known USFS and private timber industry No DNR Hold Remote area with good potential for long-term forestry, potentially valuable elk wintering habitat. Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviran. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of 0 larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecological Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R L Recommended Optionls) Summary Reason Mt Jupiter Common School - 461, Forest Board - 234 695 1 to 5 1940, 89% 2000s, 11% Very steep, difficult to road and log Very visible in Duckabush Valley moderate - access on minor part along Duckabush road Brinnon, Olympia Moderate hunting, no fishing Jupiter Mt trail is briefly in parcel near ridge top Good in valley, moderate on dry south slopes above Little Riparian, no shoreline None known Rural residential on south, U5FS and Pope on N,W and E No DNR Hold Low soil productivity for timber, steep, difficult to access and highly visible from recreation corridor Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 5 Origin date, percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking troils Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecological Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Production R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Penny Creek Common School - 314, Forest Board - 2008 2,322 3 1940,49% 19S0s & 1960s 11% 1970s & 1980s, lS% 1990s & 2000s, 25% High - significant wetland and riparian corridors Low - but one 40 acre residential inholding and some perimeter rural residential High - via open DNR roads Yes - Quilcene High hunting & moderate fishing None known High Type 1 Little Quilcene River and Type F Penny Creek Large open shrub wetiands some large remnant old growth douglas fir USFS and Pope + some 40-80 acre nonindustrial lands. Big Quilcene Watershed Anaysis 1994 Penny Creek is alternate water source for Quilcene hatchery DNR Hold Larger parcel adjacent to USFS in larger block of industrial forest lands. Significant habitat in some areas may be suitable for TLT Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R L Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Quimper Corridor Common School 112 4 1940, 80% 2000s, 20% Moderate - eagle presence High - residential neighbors and trail corridor High - part of Quimper Wildlife Corridor and trails High - Port Townsend area Low High High - eagle roosting in the area, part of Quimper Wildlife Corridor no Moderate - older age class grand fir Residential 50-year TLT lease to Jefferson County Part of Quimper Wildlife Corridor Existing TLT Important part of Quimper Wildlife Corridor Site Name Site Number Trust Type Tatal Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviran. harvest canstraints Sacial harvest canstraints Recreatian/public use Accessibility ta the public Near papulatian centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Enviranmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian ar shoreline habitat Unique or rare farest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecalogical Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recammended Option(s) Summary Reason Silent Lake includes DNR is Common School - 40, Forest Board - 1064 1,104 3&4 1940s, 46% 1970s, 6% 1980s, 8% 1990s & 2000s, lS% Some steep slopes with incised channels, forested wetlands Silent Lake S acre tracts on an 80 acre inholding (prior Pope land) High - ungated roads off Coyle Road No High hunting, and high fishing use in Silent lake None known High habitat values around lake and wetlands North end of Silent Lake Older age, naturally regenerated second growth on west part Pope timberlands, rural residential around lake A short access road on DNR land, off Coyle road, allows public access to this fishing lake which will be lost if the parcel becomes private DNR Hold Large tract of DNR land with high timber and recreational values, without major constraints for timber harvest Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat SkidderjSnow Common School - 1332, Forest Board - 1342 2674 3, small amounts of 2 in valleys 1940, 50% 1980s, 43% 2000s, 7% Moderate -balds, forested wetlands, unstable slopes on Snow Ck (Type F) Low - small portion with Hwy 104 visibility Good access to west end by Snow Ck. Road, prior city property No High deer and bear hunting use, mushroom picking is an established use None known Upper mainstem Snow Creek ravine, forested wetlands, multiple type F streams Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Rare cacti on small balds protected under HCP, extensive forested wetlands near headwaters of Salmon and Snow Cks Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,i,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Optianls) Summary Reason US Forest Service to west, Pope to north and south, other private to east Major Salmon-Snow restoration projects downstream Includes recently obtained city property with large, older age second growth DNR Hold Large block adjacent to other large blocks with good habitat values for continued DNR management. Subareas of exceptional habitat may be suitable for TL T Site Name Site Number Trust Type Totai Acres Timber Timber Site C/oss Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin dote, Percent Stand 4 Origin dote, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreatian/public use Accessibility to the pubiic Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Port of 0 Jarger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecological Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Praduction R L Recommended Optian(s) Summary Reason South Shine Un ive rs ity 49 3 1940, 100% Hood Canal shoreline riparian Yes ~ Bridgehaven subdivision to south Yes Near Hood Canal Bridge, Port Ludlow Moderate hunting yes High ~ shoreline High Older age, mixed species, unmanaged pre~1940s forest Pope timberlands to west, residential to north and south Existing TLT 50~year lease to Jefferson County Existing TL T High fish and wildlife value and limited timber harvest potential due to shorelines and adjacent residential development Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildiife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger pian Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicoi Value Rating H Sustainabie Timber Praduction R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason South Snow Forest Boa rd 346 2&3 19405 or older, 21% 19705, 12% 19805,42% 19905, 2S% High ~ 70 acres of wetlands and buffers No High ~ ungated DNR road off of Snow Ck Road No High for deer and waterfowi No High ~ waterfowl High ~ large open water and forested wetlands Residual old growth trees, unique older forested wetland, also 7~acre patch of 1900 age class timber in NE corner Pope on north and west, unknown east and south DNR Hold About 70% harvestable, with remainder protected and located in CF 80 zone Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Closs Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking traUs Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praductian R L Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Spencer Creek Common School 1S6 4 1940, 30% 2000s, 70% Very steep and helicopter logging access only Visible from US 101 and Dabob Bay Low - steep slopes and no roads Quilcene, Brinnon only Low - steep slopes and no roads No Moderate for wildlife, no fish None None known Within mostly US Forest Service ownership corner Big Quilcene Watershed Analysis DNR Hold Within USFS block and moderate to low values Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin dote, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin dote, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking troils Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rore forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecological Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Option!s) Summary Reason Tala Point 80 DNR 08 Forest Board 73 3 1950, 15% 1974,85%) Current orfuture residential on all sides High due to neighbors' recreational use Moderate - access through gated community Port Ludlow and Paradise Bay Low-moderate hunting Roads used and informal trails Improving as stand matures None Stand 2 is a reclaimed homestead site with evidence of land clearing and older trees Small residential tracts + Pope lands DNR Hold or Exchange High value for park purposes Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin dote, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Optionls) Summary Reason Tarboo East Common School - 77, Forsest Board - 743 820 3 1940s =40% 2000s = 30% 1970s = 10% 1980s 20% Forested wetlands,small Type F streams and unnsrtable slopes Low High - Coyle road frontage and walkin access via gated roads No High hunting, no fishing None known Moderate - large block of mixed age forest with streams and ravines High - includes major tributaries and ravines of the East Fork Tarboo Creek None known Pope, conservation easement property, Oabob Bay NA Adjacent to Oabob Bay Natural Area to the south, part ofTarboo Watershed Project ON R Hold long management history located in area of commercial forest zoning Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating H Ecological Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praductian R H Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Tarboo Upper DN R 12 Common School - S81, Forest Board - 282 863 3 and 4 1940s, 2S% 1980s, 10% 1990s, 2S% 2000s, 40% Domestic water system on southwest corner Adjacent to and visible from SR 104. Adjacent to Olympic Music Festival. Dragon Track site north of SR104. High - ungated DNR roads and parcel is contiguous with Tarboo South Centrally located between Chimacum, Quilcene and Port Ludlow High hunting use and regular shooting None known, but heavily roaded Significant forested wetlands and Tarboo Creek Riparian Borders Tarboo Creek to west None known Pope and rural residential, some protected by conservation easement Part of Tarboo Watershed Project plan to conserve working forests Adjacent to Olympic Music Festival, near intersection of Hwy 104 and Center Road, upcoming DNR timber sale in planning DNR Hold or Community Forest Part of larger block in working forest landscape with CF 80 zoning, but with increasing development pressure near Hwy 104 Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Closs Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Port of 0 larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecologicol Value Rating L Sustainable Timber Praduction R M Recommended Optian{s} Summary Reason Teal 40 (Paradise Bay) DNR 07 University 38 3 1990, 100% Mostly steep, east facing slope East end is adjacent to Paradise Bay residential development Poor due to steep young forest, road is owned by Pope, with a locked gate and no easement Yes - Port Ludlow/Paradise Bay moderate for hunting No Moderate None None Pope on all but east side that abuts Paradise Bay residential area Adjacent to commercial forest zoning on south side DNR Hold or Community Forest Small parcel, but with potential to expand to connect to East Teal Lake parcel Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site C/ass Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Saciai harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating L Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Option!s) Summary Reason Teal Lake East DN R 05 Forest Board 655 3 1970s, 35% 1980s, 65% 1 acre PUD well and pipeline easement and another waterline easement Moderate - near rural residential, but large parcel Existing road off county road Near Paradise Bay and Port Ludlow Moderate hunting Roads are used by neighbors Moderate No No - all young third growth Pope timberlands and rural residential DNR Hold or Community Forest Suitable for sustainable forestry but close to popu lation centers Site Name Site Number Trust Type Tatal Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rore forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R H Recommended Option(s} Summary Reason Teal Lake West DNR 06 Forest Board S32 3 1940, 31% 1980s, 21% 1990s, 30% 2000s, 18% Marbled murrelet habitat, Type F stream that is tributary to Shine Creek, osprey nest circle, two large scrub-shrub wetlands North end adjacent to Port Ludlow Golf course Locked easement road through Pope Yes - Port Ludlow Moderate hunting locked roads used Moderate small type F streams at north end, two large scrub-shrub wetlands Some residual old growth trees Pope timberlands, Port Ludlow, and recently sold Pope Large lots Pope xchange 2011 timber sale planned. Pope has sold lands on S boundary DNR Hold or Community Forest Suitable for sustainable forestry but close to population centers Site Name Site Number Trust Type Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,i,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecalagical Value Rating L Sustainable Timber Production R M Recammended Option(s) Summary Reason Termination Point University 59 3 1990s, 90% 1940s, 10% Low moderate but highly visible from west bound He Bridge traffic Low - inactive road with no parking off SR104 Low - a few large lot residences on North Low hunting, no fishing None known Moderate - mostly early succession forest None Old growth remnants preserved as legacy trees in and out of harvest units SR 104 on south, large lot rural residential other sides DNR Hold or Exchange Small parcel without permanent road access Site Name Site Number Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreatian/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers Fishing and hunting Walking troils Enviranmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rore forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecolagicol Value Rating H Sustainable Timber Production R L Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Thorndyke 160 DNR 2 Forest Boa rd 157 2 1950s, 80% 1940, 20% High - streams and wetlands No No legal access No High - Thorndyke is important deer hunting area No High - parcel is mainly Thorndyke Creek mainstem, tributaries and mature forested floodplain with excellent habitat value High Older floodplain forest and wetlands Most of watershed is owned by Pope Resources TNC interested in possible larger purchases in Thorndyke TLT (to WDFW) High fish and wildlife value and limited timber harvest potential due to streams and forested wetlands Site Name Site Number Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin dote, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near populatian centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Production R M Recommended Option Is) Summory Reason Thorndyke 80 DNR 03 University 78 3 1991, 80% 1940, 20% (riparian corridor in ravine) Stream ravine and associated unstable slopes East 20 acres is adjacent to the Bridgehaven subdivision. Only east 20 acres is accessible. Remainder is through Pope roads with no easement Yes - Bridgehaven subdivision Moderate hunting use No Fish-bearing stream corridor and ravine for Spring Creek Yes - Spring Creek Ravine, Type F No Pope on all sides but east - where it abuts small residential tracts Part of large commercial forest zoning block, recently cut DNR Hold Parcel is part of a large forest block Site Name Site Number Grant Totai Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin dote, Percent Stand 2 Origin dote, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the pubiic Near population centers Fishing and hunting Waiking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Nates Summary Ratings IN,i,M,H) Recreational Value Rating L Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Option Is) Summary Reason Triton Cove Common School 294 3 1940,80% 2000s, 20% Low Adjacent rural residential tracts on east, BPA powerline corridor and no public access Low due to management only easements on private roads Brinnon only Moderate hunting, no fishing None known Moderate wildlife habitat No None Known Part of a very large South Puget Sound Region DNR block Unknown if DNR SPS Region has plans DNR Hold Adjacent to large DNR ownership in Mason County Site Name Site Number Grant Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Ev;ron. harvest constraints Social harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near papulation centers Fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Value Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R H Recommended Optian(s) Summary Reason Walker Mtn Common School - 103, Forest Board - 1016 1119 3 1920s, 18% 1970s, 13% 1980s, 39% 1990s & 2000s, 30% Low -some steep, but mostly stable slopes Moderate - high visibility from US Hwy 101 and Quilcene Low -management only easement on gated road Yes - Quilcene High hunting None known High value, multi-aged forest No shoreline but significant NP streams Some older age 2nd growth with scattered residual old growth Other DNR, NRCA, USFS, private rural residential parcels on north Big Quilcene Watershed Analysis DNR Hold Good site with little residential adjacent, well roaded and multi aged forestland Site Name Site Number Grant Tatal Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Sacial harvest canstraints Recreation/public use Accessibility ta the public Near papuiation centers Fishing and hunting Woiking trails Environmental/habitat Fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare farest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger pion Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Vaiue Rating H Ecalogicai Value Rating M Sustainabie Timber Production R L Recammended Option!s) Summary Reason West Jacob Miller Common School 121 S 1940, 15% 2000s, 85% Forested wetlands No permanent access, 3 sides small rural residential tracts Moderate - road access by temporary permit through County waste transfer station, high use by nearby landowners High - very near Port Townsend Moderate hunting, no fishing High - many unauthorized user-constructed horse and hiking trails High - significant for wildlife due to larger parcel in area of small rural residential parcels Seasonal forested wetlands only Low timber productivity site with older age class residual trees Jefferson County waste transfer station on south, small rural residential tracts on all other sides Recently approved adjacent equestrian park may have plans to use Adjacent to equestrian park DNR Hold or TLT or Community Forest One of a few larger, undeveloped parcels in residential interface with high value as open space Site Name Site Number Grant Total Acres Timber Timber Site Class Stand 1 Origin date, Percent Stand 2 Origin date, Percent Stand 3 Origin date, Percent Stand 4 Origin date, Percent Eviron. harvest constraints Sacial harvest constraints Recreation/public use Accessibility to the public Near population centers fishing and hunting Walking trails Environmental/habitat fish and wildlife habitat Riparian or shoreline habitat Unique or rare forest types Other considerations Adjacent ownership Part of a larger plan Notes Summary Ratings (N,L,M,H) Recreational Vaiue Rating M Ecologicol Value Rating M Sustainable Timber Praduction R M Recommended Option(s) Summary Reason Zelatched Point Common School - 40, Forest Board - 320 360 3 and 4 1940, 11% 1990s, 49% 2000s, 40% Low Moderate - rural residential neighbors High - DNR roads off Coyle and Zelatched road Low - Coyle community only High hunting, no fishing Moderate - some user built trails by neighbors Moderate - mixed age upland forest wildlife habitat Moderate - some small Type N (non-fish bearing) streams OG remnants preserved as legacy in and out of harvest units Large lot rural residential, except small residential tracts near Coyle /Zelatched road junction No DNR Hold Adequate size parcel with established management activity and good access jeffbocc From: Washington Trust for Historic Preservation [Washington_ Trust_for_Historic_Pr@mail.vresp.com] Sent: Tuesday. March 29, 2011 12:22 PM To: jeffbocc Subject: Register for RevitalizeWA today! 'fCK ru \i;::\.\' ~,~:s Crr1i'1i: ire i' !)~"''i''_~e Register for RevitalizeWA today! Join the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation and Washington State's Main Street Program for RevltallzeWA, a Main Street and Preservation Conference in Walla Walla on May 11-13! Registration is available through Blown Paper Tickets. Click here to register online, or call 1.800.838.3006. Detailed conference schedule available next week! Excellence on Main Awards It's not too late! Nominations are due Wednesday, April 6, 2011. Washington State's Main Street Program invites you to help us ceiebrate achievements in preservation and revitalization in Washington's Statewide Main Street Network! Nominate your downtown project for an Excellence on Main Award. The awards are open to Certified Main Street Communities and Affiliates. Awards will be given out at the Excellence on Main Awards Reception Thursday evening, May 12th, at RevitalizeWA. UOW,,:Uij(j tk nomination for":! 3/29/2011 Page 1 of 5 SAVE THE DATE vita . fer :::ur ul::co~in9 \'Vrls.hlngt{:)11 $!,)!e Malr~ Str&f;o~ and Pr€o:.,H'hHIOfl CO'lfl;;.~rf;'rH:l:' In It.;,)" "'^"',)i!r1~ May 11-13,2011 '." 'i''; Fe: C~ 1 :1'~~"-:::)r.\jC: Fie 'I-'. "';:',-: iUf\j Donate to the Silent Auction! We will be holding a silent auction at RevitalizeWA and all proceeds will go to support the Washington State Main Street Program! Have an item you'd like to donate? Let us know by downloading and submitting an dOllation form! Keynote speaker Becky McCray Becky McCray says that small businesses and small towns matter. She is a small town business owner, with a retail store and a cattle ranch in Woods County, Oklahoma. Through her consulting firm she helps small town governments, and promotes entrepreneurship and tourism in small towns. Her dedication to small business has been featured in The New York Times, BusinessWeek, and Entrepreneur Magazine. She publishes the popular website, Small Biz Survival, on small town small business, and she is the author of 20 Small Business Ideas for Small Towns and Shop Local Campaigns for Small Towns. All of this from her home base in Hopeton, Oklahoma, a community of fewer than 30 people. Click here to check out Ms. McCray's website and hene to link to her blog, Small Biz Survival. 3/29/2011 Page 2 of 5 Sponsorship Opportunities are Still Available! Sponsorship of this regional event is an excellent way to showcase your business or organization to a target audience. Conference attendees will include: Washington's Main Street communities, small business owners, chambers of commerce, "buy/shop local" advocates, preservationists, city and regional planners, elected officials, developers, contractors, craftsmen, community and economic development specialists, educators, students, architects, landscape architects and the community at large. Click Ilere to see to sponsorship opportunities. Special room rates ($77/single, $84/double) are available at the Marcus Whitman Hotel and Conference Center through April 27. Call 1.866.826.9422 for reservations. Questions? Feel free to contact Membership & Events Coordinator or Washington State's Main Street Program Coordinator. V'i.ASHIN(;TOf\~ 'T;-<\ FOR HI " PPESEF~V;\ rl()t"~j DEPA~l'i,ENT 0' ARCH!\I:OlOGj& HISTO,iC P~ESFR\lATI()tj 3/29/2011 Page 3 of5 Page 4 of5 i.~;.,((.,... """'l\'I"'" 1 ~~~\U I1q~~ I':::!p~ "Il!ll~ I:;s. .... .~~ . :::f ;. ~ . ......~---_. '-_..~_..- i : 2"1'" /' ;;::: i '..~... s;: ! ~~"II ~~~~ 1,.;:.1\\:.... ,I",' ,':lJj.~"., D O\VN TOWN \VALLA \VALLA I'Ol'!\:I):\TI()N :....:.w~.~~ SHKSARCH!TFCTS Walla Walla SUlprit;e, sUlprise. ~ 3/29/2011 Page 5 of5 If you no longer wish to receive these emails. please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: "PC:i.'i:'SUIL+ Washington Tmst for Historic Preservation 1204 Minor Ave Seattle, Washington 98101 US d [m~Ht!d ull''1g OOerticalResponse .;'!.,h! the Vertical Response marketing policy. 3/29/2011 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Boa 1220 Port TOWDsend,WA 98368 Da1rliI w. II1JIJ1ft11, ....-..- 1I JOIul AlIlItlD. DIatdct 3 . 1une 1,2009 Honorable Peter Goldmark WAllhmgton State Comroi.lllrioner of Public Lands 1111 WRllhington Street Olympia, WA 98504-7001 Dear Peter. Thank you for your 1etter dated May 11,2009 whkh ftttther explained the proposed East Jefferson Land Exclnmge between Pope Resourcesan4 the State DE.p=lwent of Natural Resources (DNR). As ufI'e.led in your J.ettet, 1efferson ~ SUpports a delay of the exchange or sale ofDNR ~ls 6 . imd 8. as well as portions ofONa parcels 5 and 7. To that effect. we have initiated outreach to powntialpartners who may wish to participate in the future preservation of that \8nd. . We .....P1~ your efforts in working withPope Resources regarding the protection of pUblic health and water quality and look fOlwwd to working together to secure land needed for a CumlIbltli~ septic system for the Pamdise Bay area. Thank you againfor your wt1li~ to hear our c('~il1S. We aftp.e(,iateyourconsiderationofthe County's interest in your decisions and look forward to working cooperatively with DNR and Pope ~U1ces in the coming months. .-, 1/L. · .. _-- Da~ Member (l! ~ (360)38&-9100 ha (3601386-9382 .t-lfGMI~IrllnoJI."'''' ....,.. -'.' .... b~-oLI , '" . - A4.)) .) Peter Goldmark Washington State Commissioner of Public lands May 11, 2009 ~- .-, "' '" .1 cL_:irf The Honorable David Sullivan The Honorable Phil Johnson The Honorable John Austin Jefferson County Board ofCommiRsloners 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220. Port Townsend, W A 98368 /'lI/t'{ ,fl.;2. ?n"~ ,JF-':li ,- ',\"1/ , ! ~ Dear Commissioners: Thank you for the recent letWr,. dated May 1,2009 from Mr. Philip Morley, Jeffe1'SQn County Administrator,regarding the proposed East Jefferson Land Exchange. I also appreciate Chairman Austin taking the time to meet with me recently in Olympia to discuss your concerns. AJ; I explained to Chairman Austin, DNR does consider the county's interest when making decisioD$ regarding any state trust land, especially State Forest Lands (previously known as Forest Board Lands). The State Forest Lands, however, are a state trust and managed according to specific statutory requirements. The counties are beneficiaries of the income but do not have a proprietary interest. It is the State's duty to protect and enhance the trust all a whole, not just within the borders of individual counties, We believe the proposed exchange accomplishes this objective by creating ("rest blocks that provide more sustainable habitat, recreation and revenue fqr the eounty and other beneficiaries. Regarding your specificreq\1ests, a 50-year restriction is not consistent with trust mm111gement principles as it adversely affects property vall.lCS. Pope Resources could not reasonably be e)tpeeted to take lands at full price with such a condition in place, and the State in turn could not trade the lands at such a deeply discounted value. However, leaving the existing State Forest Lands in place will likely result in reduced or no future income to the county, which again is not consistent with prudent trust manl\gcment. We believe that Pope Resources i1lls worked hard to address the concerns you have l'aised: . Pope Resources has agreed to enter into an agreement with the Port Ludlow Village Council (pL VC)and the South Bay Community Association (SBeA) committing to no mining in DNR exchange parcel #6 and no rezones of these lands prior to 2025. We believe this is a reasonable approach. especially given that controlling land use. including Depli1tmenl of Natural Resources 1111 Washltlgton ST SE MS 47001 Olympla. Washingtoll98504-7001 (360)902-1000 ..... i. - ~ .. . East Jeffmon Land Exchange May II, 2009 page20f3 conversions, is much more appropriately addressed by the county and other local govemments under the Growth Management Act, Shoreline Management Act and other authorities rather th!In by the I>epartQ:lent of Natural Resources. . Pope must comply with the Forest Practices Act requirements in the same manner as DNR or any other forester. The Forest Practices Act is designed to address the conceQlS you have identified and, other than ensuring compliance with the act, DNR does not have the legal authority to require Pope to engage lti. forest practices that exceed those required under the Forest Practices Act. As an additional meaSWe of protection, Pope has acquired certification for their forest practices from the Sustainable Forestry Initiative, This is the same certification program that DNR is operating under on the Olympic Peninsula and therefore a similar level of protection would be provided under Pope's ownership as under DNR's. . Pope has been very responsive t9YOur cOncern regarding the protection of public health and water quality in regards to the Paradise Bay CommunitY's need for a large, on"site septic system. Pope agreed in writing to allow Paradise Bay to acquire the land it needs for its septic system project, and they have agreed to work within the timeline necessary for the community to meet its grant application. This goal is far easier for Pope to 8CCllmpllSh th!In for the state, which most likely would not be able to sell trust land for this pmpose and certainly could not meet the same timellne. . Pope Resources allows non-motorized recreation on their lands year-round and hUtl.ting is allowed.where it does not pose a threat to residential areas. Given the proximity of some DNR parcels to CClTtlnllUlities such as Port Ludlow (DNR 6), Tala Point (DNR 8) and }JeaverValley (DNR 9), it is likely Pope will impose some shooting restrictions on those properties to protect citizens. However. by acquiring Pope lands and consolidating trust lands in less developed areas, DNR will actually make more state lands available for sustainable recreation. I believe DNR and Pope have acted in very good faith to address these issues wherever legally and reasonably possible. I also understand and share yotu:' c()ncerns about conttolling land conversions, which is in part why we are taking the Dabob Bay and Thorndyke trust land transfer proposals to the Board of Natural Resources for approval in June. These proposals will transfer llwnership llr lease 250 acre& of trust lands within this area to the county. I have also directed my staff to approach Pope regarding the possibilities of a smallet exchange, specifically without DNR 6, 8 and potP.nfiAny where feasible those pomllns llfDNR Sand 7 not required as part of the Paradise Bay transaction. I am agreeable to withholding these parcels frlJlll thj: exchange llf sale. but only for two years. During this time. I expect that you will also actively explore and exercise your options lIS the duly elected and authorized representatives llf i,. _ '. ~ . East 1efferson Llmd Exchange May 11,2009 Page 2 of3 1~ CO~ to add:ress proteCtion of these lands. . This could.OO through a purchase in fee, p~ orJease ofdevelopn1ent ri~ acquisitioil Of aeonservation easement, loeal land orilinance. or slruilF action. I eannot simply hold these lands indefinitely and still exllCUte my trust responsibilities as the C(If1')ri'1j'l$i()~ ofPublie LandS. However, by working rogether and using our joint authority, I believe we. can successfully elrl'hlll1gl" anli reposition these lands for long term. sustainable Il1II1lllgeJlle while also protecting them where appropriate 1ii>m conversion. I appreciate your QOi1tinu.ed WiJ1ingness to work with us on thiseomplex transaction. ~inQereIy. ~~~. Corumil1$iQIlCt of.'P1Jbnc Lands .... ce: Leonard Young, Department Superviso~ Clay Sprague, Deputy Supervisor, Uplands Steve Sa~, .Asset Management and Recreation Division Manager 1oh11 V~ Olympic Region Manager David Nunes. President & CEO, Po~ Resources File 09-0257 File 09.0332 . . /~~;.) \- .' Philip Morley 1820 Jefferson street PO Box 1220 Port TOWDsend, WA 98368 MllY 1, 2009 Honorable Peter Goldmark Washington State Commissioner of Public Lands 1111 Washington Street Olympia, WA 98504-7001 David Nunes, President & CEO Pope Resources 19245 Tenth Ave. NE Poulsbo, WA 98370-7456 BE: JefteMon County Position on Proposed DNRlPope Tbnbe.. Land Swap Dear C'.nmmi...noner Goldmark and Mr. Nunes, On April 24, 2009,The Jetremm Co~ CQmmi""ioners received a letter from Pope Resources proposing certain mitigatiClllS of the proposed East Jefferson Land Exchange No. 86-083323. Previously, the County ColtlJllissioners had written a letter to ConunissionerGo1dmark dated Marcb 23,. 2009, outlining the County's concerns about impacts from the proposed swap, and stating J.efferson County's opposition to the swap in IIbsence of certain protections for the public and enviroJUnellt At their meeting April 27, 2009, the Jefferson County Commi""ioners reviewed Pope Resourses' proposed mitigation, IlI1d finds that it is nOM'eSponsive to our concerns. The Board directed that I clarify their position for your attention. To wit: - Jefferson County values DNRas a good steward ofits lands and the stD1'ounding environment Wea1so value Pope Resources as an important land holder and corporate member of our COIIUilunity. DNR Parcels 2, 5, 6, 8, n, 13 & 14 (see enclosed map) are County Trost Lands held and lI1lII1lIged by DNR on Jefferson County's behalf. Assueh, we hope that DNR will give substantial weight to the County's input on any proposed swap involving these properties. The County remains deeply concerned that timberlands currently held by DNR and proposed to be swapped to Pope Resources will be converted to non-timber uses such as mining or residential development, negatively impacting the environment and established communities, and that even as timber lands, unless they are m8naged in a manner consistent with DNR's practices, sigI1ificant avoidable iInpaets to environment and water quality are poS$ible. Phoo.e (36Q)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 pmor1ey@co.jelfersoo..wa.us . Letter re: Jefferson County Position on Proposed DNR/Pope Timber Land Swap l\fay 1, 2OD9 Page: 2 . . To protect water quality and shellfish in Tarboo Bay, Puget Sound and Hood Canal, and to protect eJdstjng communities and the continued viability of Port Ludlow, Jefferson County is opposed to any swap ofDNR Parcels 5, 6. 7, 8, 9, 12, & 14 (see enclosed m.ip). unless an enforceable agreement is put in place that prohibits an application for conversion to a non.timber use (SUCh as mining or reSidential dewlopment) for a ~od of SO years. . To futtber protect public health and water quality, Jefferson County also opJ;lOSllS the swap of DNR Parcels S & 7, unless an adequate well-bead protection zone, and adequate land is provided for a Large On-site Septio SY$WnI (LOSS) for tbeParadise Bay Community as part oftbeswap. . Jefferson County Is open to less stringent conversion restrictions on DNR Parcels 2, 3, 10, 11 & 13 provided a enforceable agreement is put in place for all vwu,lIL DNR Paicels in.the swap (parcels 2, 3,. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, & 14) to guaratltee that Pope Kesources will: o Engage. in the same forest practices followed by DNR (e.g. preserving certain large trees from barvest, attending to habitat preservation, and exercising similar timber harvest rotation lengths); and o Guarantee citizen access and hunting at least equal to that currently enjoyed on DNR forest lands. If the Department of Natural k.esources and Pope Kesources can provide the assurances outlined above, Jefferson County would support the ploposed land swap. If these ~lllimces are not pr()vided by the state and Pope for any of the parcels IIlI1IIed above, Jefferson " Counf}' must oppose the proposed swap in order to protect our delicate environment as wen as the character and future of our community. We h<>pe you will giw weight to our concerns and requests for assurances of the continued stewardship of th!lSe important resource lands within our County, especially in view that seven of the parcels in question. are County Trust ParceJs. Administrator Encl: Vicinity Map Co: Jon Rose, Olympic Property Group; John Viada, DNR Olympic Region Manager; Julie Armbruster, DNa Transactions Project Manager c~'! -" ",.~ ... . ( ') (J ,l.etter reI Jeft'enl(lll County Posiliol'l on Proposed DNR/I"ope Timber Land Swap May 1,2009 l>age;3 . \, ,f' I l P...._ ~ $l Ll e.t.....~.......~ _-"-10___- --" ....- --..-..--"-- ,~~-~~.~ $~- C5Fl~...... t:1i~~;;::;: I.IS:~~ 8ft... III ,',t!L;'c'.~~ ,,-)CC,Oilieio._ ." , '~:~;-;:. ~~._----- ~"...---..~- Honorable Peter Goldmark Washington State Commissioner ofPublie Lands 1111 WashiJ1gton.Street Olympia, WA 98504-7001 Dear Peter, 1820 Jetterson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port TOwABend, WA 98368 DavW W. SaIUvaD, DItdI:lct 2 JaJm AI:IatiD, Dfatdct 3 March 23, 2009 We thank you for your oonti11ued interest in Jefferson County. Please be aware that a friendly welcome waits you whenever you make a visit to Port Townsend. Commi"'~oner Austin visited you last month to .....v.ess concerns about the proposed PopelDNR land swap. As you know, a number of our oonstituents have expressed opposition to the swap and have communicated that opposition to us and to you. We have considered the DNR to be a good neighbor to the County and have appreciated the availability of John Viada and AI Vaughn. We hope that the DNR asset ma""gement plan would allow a continued presence ofDNR lands in eastern Je.fferson County. We aie sensitive to the voice of our constituents who have expressed SUCh strong opposition to the swap, and we Ilfe aWllre that a private COIIlpan.y has a different mission than the DNR. This letter is to let you know of our cona:m. Would it be possible for the DNR to include alega1ly binding document from Pope that: 1. Would guarantee DO oonversion to teSidential or mining for 50 years; 2. Gwuaut...e that Pope will engage in the same forest practices followed by DNR, e.g. preserving large trees after a harvest, attending to habitat preservation, a protracted timber harvest; 3. Guarantee citizen aceess and hllllting equal to that cUrrently enjoyed on DNR forest lands; 4. Guarantee well-head protection and adequate land for a large on-site septic system for the Pamdi"" Bay Comnnmity. W'rthout such guaranteeS, we would be opposed to the transfer ofDNR.lands to a private company. We appnMate your wilHf1!!1"""l to hear ourconcems. Sincerely, ~".-~L~ ~~ "-01111 (360Ja$5-9100 .... (360)388-9382 Jeft1Ioac@eoJefI'_-- . . . CC, LA LfIL-/ 1/1 Hood Canal Coalition P.O. Box 65279 Port Ludlow, WA 98365 HEARING RECORD Honorable Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 AprilS, 2011 RECEIV~::;W I\fr\ 04 -~'I ,-,. Dear Commissioners Ji:FFERSOf\! COUl\lfl' COMM~SS;ONERS We strongly support the Jefferson County proposed plan for long term maintenance and operation of East Jefferson County forest lands. The report "Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County" describes a holistic approach to maintaining working forest lands that protect wildlife habitat, fish and water quality. We believe that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is a better, more thoughtful, manager of forest lands than private sector fox:est owners. The DNR approach is better balanced and more careful, while protecting the public interest and long term benefits of timber revenue and conservation. We believe that the push for residential expansion and zoning upgrades will increase substantially in the coming decades. DNR ownership of East Jefferson County forest lands, when combined with "Community Forests," would be highly effective in limiting spmwl within the Hood Canal watershed. This is most critical in the Port Ludlow - Shine region where development pressures are the strongest. We urge you to work diligently to maintain DNR as our best pmctice, local foresters while also seeking funds for Community Forest using the Trust Land Tmnsfer program. Thank you for your service to the citizens of Jefferson County. c/~~~ Hood C;%' Coalition cC'. LA 4 {Wi \ \ [""']ENTERPRISE CASCADIA -- HEARING RECORD . Astoria. OR .Portkmd, OR r~o.WA P.rt~~ WA R~CEIV'EO April 7, 2011 .. Honorable Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County .. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 APR 04 2011 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Dear Honorable Board of County Commissioners, EnjerpJise Ca"""di'l_suppo~Jhe IQng:~ pIllntQ.<;Q.I\StlIVe the ~ furest lands 9i~_ __ JclrersOn County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands in East Jefferson County. . State forestlands are dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and are important in providing timber revenue to various taxing districts, for protecting fish and wildlife habitats, and for accessible recreation and open space. State forest lands are also pillars that help hold up the forestr:y zoning and timber land base in areas at risk of conversion for development. Instead of trading away many of these public lands and consolidating in more remote areas, we urge the Department of Natural Resources (ONR) to engage in helping Jefferson County strengthen the forest land based and timber economy here. The plan calls for most lands to continue to be managed by DNR as "working forests". Some parcels in areas of the county with higher development pressure are proposed for Community Forests (uDNR decides not to manage them as working forests). Some smaller parcels with high ecological values and low potential for timber revenue are proposed for permanent conservation through the Trust Land Transfer program. Only four small parcels, with moderate to low habitat values and already largely surrounded by development, are proposed for suitable exchange. --'Entefprli;e Cascadia strongly SuppOlts-tlie PL'U'ifieOOnririerldation tliiitIJNR:invesfPiOpeiiy-- Replacement Account funds in east Jefferson County to consolidate DNR's existing holdings and further strengthen the forest land base. Sincerely, ~O.e~ . Mark D. Bowman Vice President and Senior Loan Officer Enterprise CaSCllcHa 203 Howerton Way, 5.E. Tel36~424265 . P.O. Box 826 Fox 360-4554879 5emdos en Ingles y Espollol I~, WA 98624 VlWW.sbpaC.com f ..-~ ~. c..~', t> oce C-Pr Page 1 ofl Jeffbocc From: Ann Sargent [asargent@jamestowntrlbe.org] :~ ;::,APriI05,201110:09AM HEARING RECORD Cc: Scott Chitwood; W Ron. Allen Subject: An Asset Management Stretegy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County Attachments: Jefferson County DNR forest land.pdf Honorable Board of County Commissioners Attached find the Jamestown S'Kla11am Tribe's letter in support for the long term plan to conserve existing state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County. If you have any questions please contact W. Ron Allen, Tribal ChairmanlCEO at 360-681-4621 or e-mail the Chairman at raIlen@iamestowntribe.org. Thank you, Ann AVIN1ISc;r..y~ executive Assistant to Tribal Chair/CEO W. Ron Allen Jamestown S'K1allam Tribe 1033 Old Blyn Hwy Sequim, Wa 98382 ph: 360-681-4661 fax: 360-681-4643 e-mail: asarqentlliliamestowntrlbe.orn 4/512011 -.,;.-..- JAMESTOWN S'KLALLAM TRIBE ll)B 011;1 Blyn HiglT\\'aY, Si;>quim, WA 9f1)82 , -~-_._----_._~--~-,---~---~-) l&O1603-1109 FAX 360J681-4643 April 6, 20 II Honorable Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 (e-mail toieffboccralco.iefferson.wa.us) HEARING RECORD RE: An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson Connty Dear Honorable Board of County Commissioners, The Jamestown S'KIallam Tribe supports the long term plan to conserve existing state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson Cotmty. The TnOO feels that should DNR trade its forest lands located near population centers to private interests the potential of these forest lands to be quickly harvested and developed for some other use is significant Because eastern Jefferson County contains the natoral resources reserved by the TnOO through its treaty with the United States, the State of Washington is our co-manager in the protection and conservation of these resources. The level of protection for habitat that supports our fish and wild1ife resources is much higher on state DNR land than it is on private forestland. The Tnbe wishes to continue protecting the cultural resource value that presently exists on DNR lands. We have a working relationship with DNR for the protection of cultura11y significant trees for example. State forestlands are currently dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and provide tax revenue to the County, schools, and local fire districts. Local tax revenue will be lost ifDNR land is consolidated to other portions of the county. Existing DNR land provides high quality, productive, fish and wildlife habitat that our tnoal citizens depend on for hunting opportunities. State forest lands anchor forestry in areas at risk of conversion for development. The Public Lands Group (pLG) created a high quality evaluation of the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to identifY the best strategies for long term management. Their group includes citizens from Jefferson County with expertise in furestry, habitat and conservation. The group volunteered hundreds of hours to develop this plan. Instead transferring DNR land, the Asset Management Strategy recommends to place the land into a Community Forest category, where forest thinning is the primary managemeut tooL We would also like to work with the DNR on these properties to ensure that deer and elk habitat, where appropriate, are enhanced. This strategy also supports the DNR mandste to preserve forest land in urbanizing areas. icJ~' 8?\.- ()I~ W. RonA~hair/CEO .- ~ tt'. rn 4.~. l \ Page 1 of! Jeffbocc From: Denise Pranger [denise@nnrg.org] Sent: Thursday, April 07, 20115:20 PM To: jeffbocc Subject: FW: Forasts for the Future An Asset management Strategy for state lands in E Jeffco Attachments: NNRG support letter E Jeff Forast Plan.doc HEARING RECORD See attached, Denise Pranger Executive Director Northwest Natural Resource Group Only phone number (360) 379-9421 x2 www.nnrg.org RECEIVED APR 08 2011 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4/8/2011 .. - - .~ ~_ i~:;'/'--c~ _________ ~~--. / -~ ,,~ ~... .~I Northwest Natural Resource Group promotlng a sustainable environmerrtally sound economy for multiple generatIons , April 7lh, 2011 Honorable Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 ieftbocc@,co.iefferson.wa.us HEARING RECORD Dear Honorable Board of County Commissioners, Northwest Natural Respurce Group (NNRG) wishes to express our support for the long term plan to conserve State forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State F()restlands of East Jefferson County developed by the Public Lands Group. State owned forestlands are widely dispersed throughout East Jefferson County and provide an important anchor for the timber economy in the region, as well as providing vital wildlife habitat, carbon sequestration, recreation, and tourism/aesthetic value. We are very concerned that trading these lands to consolidate more remote holdings will lead to significantly increased development in the area and significantly decrease economic opportunities relating to timber management in the region. NNRG has been working for several years in the area to encourage sustainable forest management and to develop new markets and incentives for small forest landowners. DNR lands provide a key timber supply anchor for smaller landowners and for mills and manufacturers. Without continued active management ofDNR lands the timber supplied by the many other distributed smaIl landowners may not be enough to support the mills and infrastructure we have worked so hard to preserve and stimulate. As former trust lands become developed it become increasingly difficult for neighbors of the developments to continue to harvest as well as noise concerns, issues with logging trucks, etc increase and remove any remaining "social" license for private landowners to harvest. NNRG applauds recent efforts by DNR and local co=unity groups to embrace Forest Stewardship Council certification as a means of ensuring sustainability of forest lands and we sincerely hope this sort of proposed land trade will not jeopardize those environmental and economic gains. The Forests for the Future plan, developed by the Public Lands Group (pLG), including citizens of Jefferson County with expertise in forestry, habitat and conservation, addresses DNR's concem with continuing to manaee smaller parcels in areas with increasing development Northwest Natural Resource Group . P.O. Box 1067 . Port Townsend, W A 98368 Tel.360.379.9421 . Email.info@m:rrg.org . Web. www.nnrg.org -1- '" ~ - ,. pressure. The plan evaluates the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to identify the best strategies for long term man'lgement. We support this plan as a viable alternative to preserve our timber infrastructure and economy in a long term sustainable manner. We also support the PLG's recommendation that DNR invest Property Replacement Account funds in east Jefferson County to consolidate DNR's existing holdings and further strengthen the forest land base. Please contact us if you would like to discuss this issue or any of our own work in the area further. Sincerely, ~ __n C)J. 9 ~ Denise Pranger Executive Director Northwest Natural Resource Group . P.O. Box 1067 . Port Townseud, W A 98368 Tel. 360.379.9421 . Email.infO@Ullrg.Org . Web. WWW.llllrg.org -2- ~c ':(A q/ It) ID i--."--'-':;~?,_. --<:. / jeffbocc From: John & Nancy Woolley [woolley@tfon.com] Sent: Saturday. April 09. 20111:14 PM To: Jeffbocc Cc: cg@conniegallanlcom Attachments: Forest-ProposaLPLG_040811.pdf 4/11/2011 HEARlNG-RECORD Page 1 of! . ....- - ~......."....A ,..- . ~ Iymplc Forest Coalition ~---=-:::;::--=-'--:::::-:-'::=::::=-:-:-=_;":':=:::-:-::=_-..c__=~~.'-_-~- -, _. _ ___ Protecting and restoring our Olympic forest and aquatic ecosystems April 8, 2011 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Port Townsend, Washington Dear Commissioners: Olympic Forest Coalillon, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the protection of the Olympic National Forest and aquatic ecosystems, strongly supports the long term plan to conserve the state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County . state fonest lands are dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and are Important in providing timber revenue to the various taxing districts, for protecting fish and wildlife habitats, and for accessible recreation and open space. State forest lands are also pillars that help hold up the forestry zoning and timber land base in areas at risk of conversion for development. Instead of trading away many of these public lands and consolidating in more remote areas, we urge DNR to engage In helping Jefferson County strengthen the forest land bese and timber economy here. The plan, developed by the Public Lands Group, including cillzens of Jefferson County with expertise in fonestry, habitat and conservation, addresses DNR's concern with continuing to manage smaller parcels in areas with increasing development pressure. The plan evaluates the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to Identify the best strategies for long term management. The plan calls for most lands to continue to be managed by DNR as "working forests". Some parcels in areas of the county with higher development pressure are proposed as Community Forests If DNR does not want to continue to manage them as working forests. Some smaller parcels with high ecological values and low potential for timber revenue are proposed for permanent conservation through the Trust land Transfer program. Only four small parcels, with moderate to low habitat values and already largely surrounded by development, are proposed as suitable for exchange. We also strongly support the PlG's recommendation that DNR invest Property Replacement Account funds in East Jefferson County to consolidate DNR's existing holdings and further strengthen the forest land base. Sincerely, ~~~ John W00IIey, PreskIenI Olympic Fomst CoaIltion PO Box 461 . Qui/cane, WA 98376 www.olymplcforest.org.info@olympicforest.org CC. CA 4/11 / I D ~ From: Sent: To: Subject: Paul McCollum [paulm@pgslnsn.us] Monday, April 11, 2011 7:14AM jeffbocc East Jefferson County Forest Plan PGST support Jeff cnty Forest Plan.pdt; paulm.vcf H~ )effbocc Attachments: Ia [Ii PGST support Jeff paulm.vcf (438 B) cnty Forest ... Please note our attached comments in support of the East Jefferson Forest for the Future plan. County, Thanks Paul Paul McCollum Natural Resources Director Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Phone: 360 297-6237 Cell: 360 731-7435 Fax: 360 297-4791 E-mail:paulm@pgst.nsn.us 1 ",.. . ~ o~ r~,.~v:~ !~ ~ ::.. PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE - Kingston, W A 98346 Honorable Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 (e-mailedtojefibocc@co.jefferson.wa.us) Aprilll, 2011 Dear Honorable Board of County Commissioners, The Port Gamble S'l{IAllAm Tribe strongly supports the long term plan to conserve the state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County . State forestlands are dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and are important in providing timber revenue to the various taxing districts, for protecting fish and wildlife habitats, and for accessible recreation and open space. State forest lands are also pillars that help hold up the forestry zoning and timber land base in areas at risk of conversion for development. Instead oftnlding away many of these public lands and consolidating in more remote areas, we urge the Department ofNaturaI Resources (DNR) to engage in helping Jefferson County strengthen the forest land base and timber economy here. The plan, developed by the Public Lands Group (PLO), including citizens of Jefferson County with expertise in forestry, habitat and conservation, addresses DNR's concern with continuing to manage smaller parcels in areas with increasing development pressore. The plan evaluates the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to identify the best strategies for long term mAnAg=ent. The plan calls for most lands to continue to be managed by DNR as "working forests". Some parcels in areas of the county with higher development pressure are proposed as Community Forests (ifDNR decides not to manage them as working forests). Some smaller parcels with high ecological values and low potential for timber revenue are proposed for permanent conservation through the Trust Land Transfer program. Only four small parcels, with modemte to low habitat values and already largely surrounded by development, are proposed as suitable for exchange. We also strongly support the PLO's recommendation that DNR invest Property Replacement Account funds in east Jefferson County to consolidate DNR's existing holdings and further strengthen the forest land base. Sin~ ~~Ji71 -_ Director, NatUral Resources Department Phone: (360) 297-4792 Fax: (360) 297-4791 -. #~--"'11' " Jeffbocc Fun Name: Last Name: First Name: Job TItle: Department: Company: Other Addreee: Business: Mobile: Business Fax: E-mail: E-mail Display As: Paul McCollum McCollum Paul Natural Resources Director Natural Resources Dapartment Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 31912 LIttle Boston Ftd KIngston, Washington 98346 360297-e237 360737-7435 360 2974791 paulm@pgslnsn.us paulm@pgslnsn.us 1 ,. ~,r . HEARING RECORD Page 1 of! , Jeffbocc From: John & Nancy Woolley [woolley@lfon.com] Sent: Monday, April 11 , 2011 2:58 PM To: jeffbocc Attachments: Forest-ProposaLPLG_040811 (4) (2).pdf Please attach to the previous email. 4/Il/20 11 1'! :!L,"- . . ~ Iymplc Forest Coalition ~ and ~lori;gouroTYinpi~~t~d;;q~;rtJ~ ecosystems April 8, 2011 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Port Townsend, Washington Dear Commissioners: Olympic Forest Coalition, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the protection of the Olympic National Forest and aquatic ecosystems, strongly supports the long term plan to conserve the state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management strategy for state Forestlands of East Jefferson County . State forest lands are dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and are important in providing timber revenue to the various taxing districts, for protecting fish and wildlife habitats, and for accasslble recreation and open spaca. State forest lands are also pillars that help hold up the forestry zoning and timber land base In areas at risk of conversion for development Instead of trading away many of these public lands and consolidating in more remote areas, we urge DNR to engage in helping Jefferson County strengthen the forest land base and timber economy here. The plan, developed by the Public Lands Group, Including citizens of Jefferson County with expertise In forestry, habitat and conservation, addresses DNR's concern with continuing to manage smaller parcels In areas with increasing development pressure. The plan evaluates the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to Identify the best strategies for long term management. The plan calls for most lands to continue to be managed by DNR as "working forests'. Some parcels in areas of the county with higher development pressure are proposed as Community Forests if DNR does not want to continue to manage them as working forests. Some smaller parcals with high ecological values and low potential for timber revenue are proposed for permanent conservation through the Trust Land Transfer program. Only four small parcels, with moderate to low habitat values and already largely surrounded by development, are proposed as suitable for exchange. We also strongly support the PLG's recommendation that DNR invest Property Replacement Account funds in East Jefferson County to consolidate DNR's existing holdings and further strengthen the forest land base. Sincerely, ~~ OlympIc Forest CoaIlI/on PO Box 461 . Quilcene, WA 98376 WWW.olympicforest.org.lnfo@olympicforest.org J . ~.'>-~ ".1.3'--' Page 1 ofl jeffbocc HEAmNG-RECORD From: John & Nancy Woolley [woolley@tfon.com] Sent: Monday, April 11, 20112:26 PM To: jeffbocc Cc: cg@conniegallant.com Attachments: Forest-ProposaLPLG_040811 (4).pdf OFCO letter on land exchange. 4/11/2011 j I >- ..:J....~~.,I-~ - . ~ Iymplc Forest Coalition Protecting and restoa;,g;J;Oi~';i~furoot~~d~q~'atic eccsystems April 8, 2011 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Port Townsend, Washington Dear Commissioners: Olympic Forest Coalition, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the protection of the Olympic National Forest and aquatic ecosystems, strongly supports the long term plan to conserve the state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for state Forestlands of East Jefferson County . State forest lands are dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and are important in providing timber revenue to the various taxing districts, for protecting fish and wildlife habitats, and for accessible recreation and open space. State forest lands are also pillars that help hold up the forestry zoning and timber land base in areas at risk of conversion for development. Instead of trading away many of these pUblic lands and consolidating in more remote areas, we urge DNR to engage in helping Jefferson County strengthen the forest land base and timber economy here. The plan, developed by the Public Lands Group, including citizens of Jefferson County with expertise In forestry, habitat and conservation, addresses DNR's concern with continuing to manage smaller parcels in areas with Increasing development pressure. The plan evaluates the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to identify the best strategies for long term management. The plan calls for most lands to continue to be managed by DNR as "working forests'. Some parcels in areas of the county with higher development pressure are proposed as Community Forests if DNR does not want to continue to manage them as working forests. Some smaller parcels with high ecological values and low potential for timber revenue are proposed for permanent conservation through the Trust Land Transfer program. Only four small parcels, with moderate to low habitat values and already largely surrounded by development, are proposed as suitable for exchange. We also strongly support the PLG's recommendation that DNR invest Property Replacement Account funds in East Jefferson County to consolidate DNR's existing holdings and further strengthen the forest land base. Sincerely, A~~ John WooIIay, Pres!denl OlympIc FonlsI CoaIlllon PO Box 461 . QuUcene, WA 98376 WWW.olymPlcforest.org.lnfo@olympicforestorg 1033 Old BIyn HIghway, Sequim, WA 98382 April 6, 2011 ~1ee E~Vl!D643 Honorable Board of County Commissioners . APR 1 3 2011 ~~tr;:;~~ HEARING RECORn PortTownsend,WA98368 . 'dEFFERSON COUNTY (e-mail tojeftbocc@co.iefferson.wa.us) CO M MISSIO N E A S RE: An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County .~_~e" "~H()~unibieljoliid OfCOunty -cOnumSSlonerS;-----""'='c-~..~"~'~- .-~---'.~':..,~_.- The Jamestown S'KIalIam Tribe supports the long term plan to conserve existing state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report Forests for the Future - AlI Asset Mtmagement Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County. The Tribe feels that should DNR trade its forest lands located near population centers to private interests the potential of these forest lands to be quickly harvested and . developed for some other use is significant. Becmjse eastern Jefferson County contains the naturaI resources reserved by the Tn"be through its treaty with the United States, the State of Washington is our co-manager in the protection and Conservation of these resoUrces. The level of protection for habitat that supports our fish anci wildUfecresources is much higher on state DNR land than it is on private forestland. The Tribe wishes to continue-jirOteciing the culturBI resource value that presently exists on DNR lands. We have a working relationship with DNR for the protection of culturally significant trees for example. State forestlands are currently dispersed widely throughout East Jefferson County and provide tax revenue to the County, schools, and local fire districts. Local tax revenue will be lost if DNR land is consolidated to mher portions of the county. Existing DNR land provides high quality, productive, fish and wildlife habitat that our Tribal citizens depend on for hunting opportunities. State forest lands anchor foreatry in areas at risk of conversion fur development. , ".Th~c~~.G<.,.m,a.. hj~h'lmif~'eWlullUOn-oftli" lliiiliuetftiifnit,habffiif; artcr" nicreatioriaI values of each parcel to identifY the best strategies for long termmimagement. Theit group includes citize1is from Jefferson County with expertise in foreatry, habitat and conservation. The group volunteered hundreds of hours to develop this plan. - . . ._---"""",-~ Instead of transferring DNR land, the Asset Management Strategy recommends to place the land into a Community Forest category, where forest thinning is the primary management tool. We would also like to work with the DNR on these properties to ensure that deer and elk habitat, where appropriate. are enhanced. This strategy also supports the ONR_ n;umdate to preserve forest land in urbanizing areas. Please feel free to contaCt me by phone at 360-681-4621or bye-mail me at ralJen@jamestowutrihe.ol1'- S. -I - . mcere y; .. _u . . .. .... . pU.~alti i " W. Ron Allen, Tn'bal Chair/CEO ..,. - ~ Page 1 of! jeffbocc From: Bob [w1ndenergy@olypen.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 20113:55 PM To: jeffbocc Subject: Transfer ot DNR lands Attachments: Jefferson County letter supporting ratention ot DNR lands. pdt HEAlrtNG NEeON/} Re: DNR land transfers. Please see attached. (FYI, the Sierra Club has more than 430 members in Jefferson County, and we have a sincere interest in this issue.) Bob Lynette, Co-Chair North Olympic Group of the Sierra Club email: windenergy@olypen.com Mobile: (360) 461-0761 4/14/2011 -- - ~J HEARING RECORD SIERRA CLUB North Olympic Group of the Sierra Club P. O. Box 714 Carlsborg, W A 98324 fOUNDED t89~ RECE~VEg Sent via email April 13, 2011 APR 14 2011 JI:FFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: Transfer ofDNR lands On behalf of the North Olympic Group of the Sierra Club, we support the long term plan to conserve the state forest lands of East Jefferson County as described in the report, "Forests for the Future - An Asset Management Strategy for State Forestlands of East Jefferson County". We recognize the efforts by the Public Lands Group, which includes citizens ofJefferson County. We note the involvement of people with expertise in forestry, habitat and conservation. The plan calls for most lands in East Jefferson County to continue to be mAnaged by DNR, and we support this concept. We appreciate the fact that the plan addresses DNR's concern with continuing to mAnAge smaller parcels in areas with increasing development pressure by evaluating the unique timber, habitat, and recreational values of each parcel to identifY the best strategies for long term management. Some parcels in areas of the county with higher development pressure are proposed as CommUnity Forests ifDNR does not want to continue to manage them as working forests. We support this approach. However, land conversion is a major concern of ours. As East Jefferson's population grows, there is increasing pressure for conversion, particularly in areas already surrounded by development. The management plan identifies approximately 251 acres that could be exchanged with private properties. We would support these exchanges. We urge the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioner to endorse the proposed asset management strategy plan submitted by the Public Lands Group. Respectfully, Bob Lynette and John Woolley Co-Chairs, North Olympic Group of the Sierra Club -