HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 West Shore Hood Canal WatershedsY,iduk Id"
�iiiil�ik {I��.
�iilj llXl iplr i]9�I III Ifi l II ; 19 �� +�i��ill .fi �.
!I { III {I I�i ii (� I lil Ihv � tlll it l
I Ib jI' I IitIE i' �iwif
1 fi �l It �i Ii�t�l �tF Fii
i ���{ I;,�F: >il4ii�ill'I�IJt(li� I'. i,el��I;�11i1f (�Itlli'lly�il.
II
}alp J 5
I, i Ill , I �I I 'i I It{ l� �' lili i i,ll
II I i�t 3 H
6q iu � iilll I lIll I I j
�'I ��l� Ili iIP1r Itl III +'
11 �
„III ►II iiPil�l
I In 1+ I
j li
j(
�Y� �'1I�1�j1 �idil j"�+ I IIII lit iU1 1 1 :1-9il l tYI Ii I iI 1 i I { t �f ! u 'a hI l t�`I lilL If ti �i I i � l i1I
, till, I
% i I,
, n in n I
�
,
I {I i II IId���Fl��lt
! f IIIIilltt. Itl 131i I III �Ii I all! ,
j
i Illrtt t II11.
I�� Ij��p` lltll ilia (i ul {I a l!' 1 t �i i i ills
�llji
11�1�II1711� iiilll {ii 1i'{ tl llAx �i
!!!Jill j:.;
���tilfiVlil��i�91i` Ij I it °Milli i I !
4fSINI TEAML
I
IIII Ili1 P I I 2 i 1 I i s
ry qt} It l I III I' I
4 �411i� 1,
il III`
�II -:a UI�� �ilji ih�l Ii�II�iII� ` �� !all °jJu�l�l (II I i
I {.II� {{� f�li II II IIII I
ii I�t I i lili
1 6 1 1 1 1 Id n! I Il��li i
b i)!I Ikl f jIA f .li 17! 1 l {l il I
iKji yl�illl J ly!li II:,�aI l i e
IIj ( I i ili t
1
Mason County, Washington
Prepared for Mason County and
the Hood Canal Coordinating Council
At the' Request of the
Board of Mason County Commissioners
by
Puget Sound! Cooperative River Basin Teat
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504 -7600
(360) 407 -7542
Project Coordinator: Joseph "Heller
nsTTe�tn Lea &r Je Smith
Mori "cn Ho6yer "
=Ahn . Trombley
w..
e'er Granger
Elarbkti McIntosh
s Michael Hiepp
representing
y
USDA- Natural Resources Cotvation Service
U9Dk.Pdtest Seevide`
Washings Suite✓ b6p0 ment`o Fish and Wildlife
z := Wathihktoh State `i epartni t `of Ecol y
a : ;.VIS� Bnvironme'ritaI Protection.Agency
September 1905
.<y5
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements................. ............................... 1
Background..................................................... 3
Water Quality and Nonpoint Source Pollution ......................... 3
Watershed Planning and Nonpoint Source Pollution ..................... 4
Growth Management ........... ............................... 5
Introduction ....................................................... 7
Chapter 1 Watersheds Characterization .. ............................... 9
Setting...................................................
Y
History....................
...............................
12
Land CoverAL and Use .........
...............................
14
Population.................
...............................
21
Conditions
23
Socio - Economic .....
...............................
Geology...................
...............................
24
36
Soils.............................
.............. .....
Erosion and Sedimentation .............
.. ....................
42
Hydrology..... ..........
...............................
54
• Water Quality ...............
...............................
64
StreamCorridors .............
...............................
70
Wetlands..................
...............................
77
Highlights and Conclusions .....
...............................
93
Chapter 2 Beneficial Uses .......... ............................... 97
Fish and Shellfish Resources ..... ............................... 98
Wildlife Resources ............ ............................... 108
RecreationalResources ......... ............................... 115
Wetlands ..................... ............................118
Water Supply .................. ............................131
Highlights and Conclusions ................... 133
Chapter 3 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution .............................. 137
Forestry... ............................... ...............137
General Forest Characterization ............................. 137
Ownership and Management ............................... 139
Forestry Impacts on Water Quality,
Stream Corridors, and Wetlands ............................ 144
Forest Practice Regulations . ............................... 158
Education and Assistance .. ............................... 160
Highlights and Conclusions ............................... 163
i
Land Use Conversions ......... ............................... 165,
Conversion Activities ..... ............................... 166
Impacts on Water Quality, Stream Corridors, and Wetlands ......... 166
Regulations....... ... ............................... 170
Highlights and Conclusions ............................... 175
Residences ................. ............................... 177
On -Site Disposal Systems .. ............................... 178
State and County Regulations .............................. 186
Stormwater Quantity and Quality ........................... 187
Residential Use of Fertilizers, Pesticides, and Other Chemicals ....... 191
Impacts on Stream Corridors and Wetlands .................... 192
Highlights and Conclusions ............................... 195
Other Potential Nonpoint Sources . ...............................
198
Agriculture............................................
198
Powerline Corridors ...... ...............................
198
Cushman Powerplant ..... ...............................
199
Highway Maintenance .. ............................... . .200
Landfills ................ ............................201
Hazardous Materials ..... ...............................
202,
Christmas Tree Cultivation .......... ....................
203
Marinas and Boating ...................................
204`
NetPens .. ............. ............................205
Seals.................... ...................:.......206
Highlights and Conclusions ............................... .
207
Bibliography ....................... ............................210
Appendices....................... ............................223
A. Water Typing System
B. Water Quality Parameters by Classification
C. Characteristic Uses by Water Body Classification
D. Land Cover Types by Watershed
E. Land Use Categories by Watershed
F. Mason County Water Quality Survey Results
G. Age Class of Tree Cover by Watershed
H. Stewardship Incentive Program: Summary
I. Forest Landowner Interviews: Summary
J. Example Restoration Recommendations for Road - Related Erosion
K. Stormwater Management Manual Comparison
L. Summary of Agricultural Best Management Practices
M. Summary of Regulatory Protection Programs
N. Summary of Landowner Assistance Programs
•
ii
List of Tables
0
Table 1. West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds Land Cover Types .............. 16
Table 2. West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds Land Use Categories ............ 18
Table 3.
Geologic Units Youngest to Oldest and the Percent of the
Study Area They Occupy .... ...............................
31
Table 4.
Generalized Soil Groups ..... ...............................
39
Table 5.
Controls of Hillslope Stability . ...............................
44
Table 6.
Rain Thresholds Producing Storm Runoff on a Low Runoff Soil
During a 24 -Hour Storm ....................................
59
Table 7.
Summary of Gaging Station Records ............................
62
Table 8.
Fecal Coliform Water Quality Standards ........................
65
Table 9.
Commercial Shellfish Harvesting Areas in West Shore Hood Canal-
Watersheds.............. ...............................
66
Table 10.
Salmonid Species Found in Streams of the West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds.............. ...............................
71
Table 11.
Wetland and Deepwater Systems ..............................
79
Table 12.
Acres of Major Wetland Classes ..............................
80
Table 13.
Percent Total Wetland Acres in Each Watershed ...................
82
Table 14.
Noteworthy Wetlands in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds .......
89
• Table 15.
Study Area Tree - Covered Acres by Age Class .....................
139
Table 16.
Land Management /Ownership of Managed Forestlands ...............
140
Table 17.
Harvest Permits and Silvicultural Method by Year Approved ...........
159
Table 18.
Study Area Annual Building Permits ...........................
166
•
iii
List of Figures and Maps
•
Figures
Figure 1. West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds Location Map ................ 11
Figure 2.
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds Household Income Levels ........
22
Figure 3.
Cross Section of Western Washington Plate Convergence ............
25
Figure 4.
Olympic Peninsula Major Geologic Terrains and Faults .............
26
Figure 5.
Generalized Soils of West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds ............
36
Figure 6.
Slope Stability Maps ......................................
46
Figure 7.
Hydrologic Cycle .........................................
56
Figure 8.
Diagrammatic Cross - section of Aquifers and Confining Layers ........
57
Figure 9.
Selected Wetlands With Identification Numbers ...................
91
Figure 10.
Hillslope with Potential Mass Sediment Failure Sites ...............
145
Figure 11.
Lilliwaup Watershed Inventoried Road - Related Erosion Sites .........
149
Figure 12.
A Typical Conventional Gravity Flow On -Site Sewage System and Tank
Detail.......................... .............. .....179
Maps
Map 1.
Base Map Map 6. Land Cover
Map 2.
Generalized Geology Map 7. Land Use
Map 3.
Generalized Soils Map 8. Ownership/Management of
Map 4.
Watersheds, Beneficial Forestlands
Uses, and Stream Map 9. Soil Limitations for On -Site
Types Sewage Disposal Systems
Map. 5.
Wetlands and Hydric
Soils
iv
•
*Acknowledgments
The Puget Sound Cooperative River Basin Team ( PSCRBT) acknowledges the partnership
of state and federal agencies providing River Basin Team staff to assist local governments
in their pursuit of better water quality. These agencies include the United States
Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil
Conservation Service) and Forest Service, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
the Washington State Departments of Fish and Wildlife, and Ecology.
A host of individuals and agencies provided information for the characterization of the
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. The efforts of Donna Simmons, Hood Canal
Coordinating Council, were instrumental in coordinating local support and materials to
allow this Study Area to be characterized. The team is grateful to the following persons
for their assistance: Marty Ereth, Skokomish Tribe, for information on fish habitat; Mark
Cullington, USDA Forest Service, for training and assistance with evaluation of road -
related erosion; Jerry Gorsline, Washington Environmental Council, for wetland
information involving the Lilliwaup Swamp and Price Lake; Josh Logan, Connie Manson,
and Rebecca Christie, Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Division
of Geology and Earth Resources, for geology information; and Gordon Adams of Shelton,
a retired geologist.
The team also extends a thank you to the staff at the Mason County Health Department
and the Department of Community Development. A special thank you goes to Wayne
Clifford for sharing his knowledge, providing the PSCRBT with local contacts, his
assistance obtaining parcel data to allow automation of the land use data, and his work on
the survey of local businesses.
•
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
2
:
•
•
0 Background
Water Quality and the Effects of Nonpoint Source
Pollution
The biological health of the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds (Study Area) and the
beneficial uses of its water are dependent on good water quality (see Chapter 2 for a
discussion of beneficial uses). The Watersheds' streams and wetlands form a unique
interrelated environment for fish, shellfish, and other wildlife that depend on acceptable
water quality.
Nonpoint sources of pollution can threaten the Study Area's biological health and the
beneficial uses of its water. Little is known about the Study Area's fresh water quality.
The most intensive water sampling has occurred in marine waters near shellfish growing
areas. Non -point water quality problems are likely to increase with increases in the Study
Area's population. Additional water quality studies will help quantify and locate nonpoint
source pollution problems.
The Finch Creek drainage is included in areas which may be contaminated with
unacceptable levels of bacteria. High fecal coliform counts have been found in the
Hoodsport and Suncrest Community water system. Nonpoint pollution may be the source
of this contamination.
Nonpoint source pollution does not seem very important when viewed from a single forest
harvest operation, household, business, or farm. It is difficult to recognize and accept an
individual's responsibility to solve nonpoint source pollution problems because it is the
cumulative impact of many nonpoint sources that leads to water quality degradation.
Solutions, therefore, must be individually based and accepted community -wide.
Water quality is a social or public good from which all of us derive some benefit, no
matter where we live. Likewise, society must share the responsibility of providing a clean
environment in which to live. Long term solutions depend not only on rules, regulations,
and Best Management Practices but on society developing a sensitivity to natural
resources. Ethics that foster good stewardship of the land and water are essential.
3
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Watershed Planning Addresses Nonpoint Source
Pollution
Because of concern about the degradation of Puget Sound waters, Washington State's
Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan ( PSWQMP) was developed to ultimately
restore and protect the biological health and diversity of Puget Sound (Puget Sound Water
Quality Authority, 1991). The plan calls for the preparation and implementation of
watershed action plans to control and prevent nonpoint source pollution and to protect the
beneficial uses of water.
"Puget Sound is recognized worldwide as an extraordinary natural resource. The
region's 2.9 million residents enjoy boating, beachcombing, and other activities on
the Sound's waters and beaches. Its deep waterways support international
commerce, abundant commercial and recreational fisheries, and varied wildlife
habitats (Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1987)."
National recognition of the beneficial values of Puget Sound has led to its formal
designation as an "Estuary of National Significance (Russell, 1988)."
The nonpoint source pollution watershed planning process was developed as one
mechanism to achieve the goal of the management plan. The nonpoint rule, "Local
Planning and Management of Nonpoint Source Pollution" (Chapter 400 -12 WAC), guides
the nonpoint source watershed planning process. Its goal is:
"to establish a process to identify and rank watersheds in the Puget Sound Basin
and to develop action plans to prevent nonpoint source pollution, enhance water
quality, and protect beneficial uses."
The watershed action plans are developed and carried out locally, with financial and
technical assistance from federal, state, and local government agencies. Local authorities,
usually county governments, guide the planning and implementing process. A committee
of affected local parties is responsible for developing the action plans. The Puget Sound
Cooperative River Basin Team (PSCRBT) helps local governments carry out their
responsibilities under the PSWQMP by conducting watershed characterizations and
providing educational and other technical assistance. The River Basin Team is funded
primarily by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service with assistance from other
federal and state agencies.
4
low
•
9
Background
• The Mason County Watershed Ranking Committee listed the West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds as the fourth priority in the county. Mason County Commissioners, with
support from the Hood Canal Coordinating Council (HCCC), requested the PSCRBT to
characterize the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. The information collected will assist
the HCCC in protecting water quality within Hood Canal.
Planning efforts on other top ranked watersheds in Hood Canal have either been completed
or are in progress. Nonpoint watershed action plans have been approved for the Lower
Hood Canal Watershed. Vitsap County is currently working with a citizens' committee to
develop an action plan for the Upper Hood Canal Watershed. Jefferson County has
completed and received approval for watershed action plans in the Port Ludlow and
Quilcene areas. A major planning process is also going on in the adjacent Skokomish
River Basin.
The implementation actions that ultimately appear in a watershed action plan must not only
protect the waters along West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds but must also meet basic
tests of practicability and acceptability. Support for solutions which are needed but not yet
widely accepted will be important. If solutions are not economically, socially, and
politically feasible, besides being technically possible, it is doubtful any real progress can
be made in protecting the waters of Hood Canal. Creating a plan which will make real
progress is the challenge for a future local planning committee.
•
•
Growth Management Also Helps Protect Water Quality
The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) protects water quality and
beneficial uses by requiring certain cities and counties to protect resource lands and critical
areas. Resource lands include mineral, agricultural, and forestlands. Critical areas are:
♦ wetlands.
♦ areas with critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water.
♦ fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas (including streams).
♦ frequently flooded areas.
♦ geologically hazardous area.
All counties and cities are required to designate and protect critical areas. Those with a
substantial population growth are required to complete comprehensive plans. Substantial
population growth is defined as 10% growth in 10 years with a population of 50,000 or
5
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
more or 20% growth in 10 years regardless of population. Mason County is voluntarily*
planning under the act and is preparing a draft Comprehensive Plan with a tentative
adoption date of June 1996. The county is required to;
♦ classify and designate resource lands and critical areas.
♦ develop interim regulations.
♦ adopt comprehensive plans.
♦ pass final regulations consistent with the comprehensive plans.
Regulations are designed to preclude incompatible land use and development around or
near designated critical areas. Interim regulations are required so that resource lands and
critical areas are not lost to incompatible uses while comprehensive plans are being
developed. Although counties and cities are given guidelines to consider, GMA does not
require that minimum standards be met.
0
•
6
Introduction
Information Sources for the Report
The objective of this report is to provide Mason County and other interested persons with
a characterization of the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds using information gathered
and interpreted by the Puget Sound Cooperative River Basin Team ( PSCRBT). The Hood
Canal Coordinating Council (HCCC) has expressed interest in using the data to combine
with other PSCRBT studies in Mason and Kitsap Counties to prepare a common data base
for the Hood Canal drainage area.
Information for the characterization report is from a variety of sources: published and
unpublished reports, aerial photographs and maps, field data, and individuals living and
working in the Study Area. To assist in generating the map layers, existing computer data
bases from Washington State DNR, Jefferson County, and Olympic National Forest were
used. Land use parcel data from the Mason County Assessor's office was digitized to
produce the residential parcel layer.
The River Basin Team made field observations of land cover and land use, tree harvesting
activities, land use conversions, landslides, and shoreline conditions, agricultural activities,
• and selected stream reaches and wetlands within the Study Area. A Geographic
Information System (GIS) was used to store and evaluate data and generate maps. Data
contained within the GIS are available to Mason and Jefferson Counties' and other
interested entities or groups for further interpretation and use.
•
The information in this report is for use and consideration by a future (presently not
planned) West Shore Hood Canal Watershed Management Committee, the Hood Canal
Coordinating Council, and the citizens of Mason County. The information is provided to
inform and stimulate thought and discussion. The report presents actual and potential
problems, but it is neither all- inclusive of the problems nor the solutions.
7
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
How to Use the Report
4
r
0 ;
The table of contents and section headings are designed to help the reader use this
document efficiently. The report is organized into three large chapters, each with multiple
subsections. A brief description of the contents of each chapter is provided in the box
below. Descriptive headings for chapter sections are provided to help the reader discern
the contents of each part. A Watershed Management Committee can use the Highlights
and Conclusions at the end of each chapter and some sections to help identify problems
and formulate actions. Additional information about report topics is provided in the
appendices. Most maps are located at the back of the report.
0
M
'yeHA^
*Chapter 1 Watersheds Characterization
This chapter of the report provides much of the background material necessary to
understand the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds (Study Area) from a physical and
sociological perspective. Information such as the setting, history, land cover, and land uses
is followed by discussions of the Watersheds' geology, soils, hydrology, and water quality.
The characterization chapter concludes with descriptions of the stream corridors and
wetlands.
Overview of the Watersheds' Setting
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are located in northeast Mason County and
southeast Jefferson County and cover approximately 103,558 acres (Figure 1). The Study
Area is approximately 24.5 miles long and varies in width from 1.5 to 15.0 miles. The
PSCRBT divided the Study Area into 17 watersheds, displayed on a map at the back of the
report. The largest is the Hamma Hamma River drainage with four watersheds totaling
53,653 acres, 52% of the Study Area.
The Study Area has about 30 miles of shoreline. The shoreline is irregular and forms bays
. and coves. The largest are Lilliwaup Bay, Triton Cove, McDonald Cove, and the estuary
at the confluence of the Hamma Hamma river. The shoreline topography varies from
relatively flat or gently sloping to steep with nearly vertical bluffs.
�J
The elevation of the Study Area ranges from sea level to over 6,800 feet above sea level.
The topography of the Study Area contains a steep slope area that climbs from sea level to
between 500 and 600 feet elevation within approximately one -half mile of Hood Canal.
Rolling topography then extends up to approximately 1,000 feet in elevation. The western
portion of the Study Area extends into the steep - sloped Olympic Mountains forming the
headwater areas of many streams. Review of topography maps indicate that the highest
point in the Study Area is The Brothers (6,842 feet) at the northern boundary. Mt.
Washington, at 6,255 feet, is the highest point in the southern portion. Watershed
landmarks can be located on the base map and other maps at the back of the report.
There are numerous perennial and intermittent streams, ponds, and lakes. Lakes range in
size from 5 to 100 acres and are scattered through the Study Area. Freshwater wetlands
occur throughout the Watersheds. The largest wetland complex is the area known locally
as the Lilliwaup Swamp. Saltwater wetlands occur along Hood Canal.
Z
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
The Watersheds' climate is moderated by maritime air masses from the Pacific Ocean. i
The Olympic Mountains capture the winds from Pacific ocean storms and produce very
high rainfall just south of the Study Area. The northern portion of the Watersheds is
partially shielded from the more intense Pacific winter storms. The prevailing southwest
wind in fall and winter shifts to the northwest in late spring and summer.
A well defined dry season occurs during July and August when the total rainfall is only
5% of the annual total. Seventy -five percent of the annual precipitation occurs during the
October to March rainy season. The average annual precipitation within the Study Area,
ranges from approximately 60 inches along the Hood Canal shoreline, to over 180 inches
of annual precipitation in the mountainous areas. Rainfall data was obtained from Soil
Conservation Service charts and correlated to data collected at four local sites.. Two sites,
Lake Cushman Dam and Staircase Ranger Station, are approximately one mile south of the
Study Area. The shoreline sites include the Forest Service station at Hoodsport and the
Robbins family residence at the Hamma Hamma River. These sites have 20 years of
records with monthly and annual totals.
Study Area temperatures vary considerably in all seasons between the shoreline area and
the Olympic mountains. The Hood Canal and lower elevations have an average winter
daytime temperature of 40 to 50 degrees F. In the summer, the average daytime
temperature is 70 to 80 degrees F, with some days exceeding 90 degrees. Minimum
temperatures are 40 to 50 degrees F in the summer and 25 to 35 degrees in the winter.
Temperatures near 0 degrees F occur infrequently when high pressure systems allow .,.
northeast winds to bring cold Arctic air down from Canada. The mountain areas, which
lack recorded data, have cooler maximum and minimum temperatures than the shoreline
areas.
•
10
1
/ �^ I V ��•• �} I h i � - ' ✓ /�a,7' d 3- Mme. aµ4 ll.• C�. _ .. 'f'•
I i ��``��� yf a• r i 3 �,3'aa � "� ,!>sr� r �' a x� a
I VVF
� I
to
V r ^
1
E 1 I I
I I I I
1 1 I I
1
+J
• jI For ____�s ______ ` {il f * r
i.fl y,� °` IIl�',r 1 �..aYk �'��`�_ ,tt ✓ '
1 � � � �, " " � � � a sa }mot y,'' ;a,�Nt '� r..•.: � ;: .,x O
�- -1 : °yam I "�./ n :�•� 1 -t':`� �"}3 'j�s. -_... �.+•w . 'r O
1 1 m u # /1'—�� �"`3� �"'�t'° �y .�yz`•° iF.��' 1,, .��r F+�
�" .�. S -; . d r ^F. � � a t �'� 4�n �zy � � � t'a 't'+w �'n � *;�„�`.,� ,;� � •spa � � W
,*fin.
1 } §, aRrv�'Y ° 'FJ,1�.s'.•z�gaF„ r y: -.��- ��3s �'h �
y`z" Y- t � �� # � xi ..;?•f 3,,.�^ 1*taf � a+',. � F7s* �syn` :F �. ,. yr n•�,E,�; P. �.+. � s�
- s f� " h fix+. •vrN'_t ..a .as'. .,e { z Y +
3
#p»t
f fiJ %. •�
1 1 l
b {A b W o
in = y
i
t
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
i
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds History
The historical information that follows is based, for the most part, on a summary included
in Hood Canal. Splendor at Risk. The book was compiled by staff writers with the
Bremerton newspaper, The Sun.
The Early Years
The Skokomish Tribe lived in the Study Area, using the west shore of Hood Canal prior to
European settlement. Management of the abundant natural resources along Hood Canal
supported a flourishing and sophisticated native culture for several thousand years.
Settlements included villages and numerous seasonal campsites.
One of the first European explorers of Puget Sound, Captain
George Vancouver, anchored off The Great Bend, in Hood Canal.
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds, when viewed originally
by European explorers, were heavily forested to the saltwater edge,
except for small open meadows and wetlands and bogs, and where
streams entered Hood Canal. Captain Vancouver and his crew
collected botanical specimens, drew maps, and wrote descriptions
of the region.
The next exploratory group to observe Hood Canal was the U.S.
Exploration Expedition under Lt. Charles Wilkes. The expedition
mapped the area in 1841 and named it after Lord Samuel Hood, an
admiral in the British Navy who became famous for his victories
against the United States during the Revolutionary War.
Development in the 1800s
The large stands of timber and the protected bays for shipping ports lured California
capitalists to Puget Sound and Hood Canal. Subsequent settlement of the Study Area
centered around Hoodsport, Potlatch, Lilliwaup, and Eldon. These communities were
supported by an economy based on regional timber cutting and lumber processing. Hand
saws and axes were used to cut trees and oxen teams transported logs over log -cord roads
to the shoreline. Logs were rafted on the water for easy delivery to local and Puget Sound
sawmills. Later, railroads with steam yarders replaced oxen teams.
12
•
Characterization - History
The U.S. government and Indian tribes negotiated treaties in 1855 in which reservations
were established, while hunting and fishing rights were retained. Reservation land was
located along the Skokomish River. However, the Skokomish Tribe's "usual and
accustomed areas" for fish and shellfish gathering include many areas in Hood Canal and
Puget Sound.
The community of Hoodsport was first settled in 1888 and became the site of a large
sawmill. The Hoodsport sawmill was built and operated utilizing the abundant tree
resources. Hood Canal featured a sheltered inland waterway for rafting logs and its depth
was an asset for loading processed lumber on sailing vessels. The lumber produced was
delivered along the west coast, with a majority shipped to the San Francisco Bay area.
People were attracted to and employed by the numerous sawmills. The early settlers were
concentrated in small communities, usually where rivers or streams flowed into Hood
Canal. Prior to construction of Highway 101, transportation to and from Hood Canal was
provided by a "mosquito fleet" of small boats, steamers, and sailing ships that carried
passengers, supplies, and mail.
Modern Times on Hood Canal
The construction of the Lake Cushman Dams on the north fork of the Skokomish River, its
associated pipelines and powerplants, and the logging railroad saltwater dump attracted
people to the Potlatch area. A pipeline from the lower lake was completed between 1925
and 1931 to supply the Cushman No. 2 power generation plant located along Hood Canal
at Potlatch.
Later trees were harvested by steam donkeys and delivered to saltwater by log flumes or
railroads. The old growth timber was quickly removed, with the majority of the Study
Area harvested or burned by wildfire between 1880 and 1935. The removal of the easily
available trees caused railroads and the mills along Hood Canal to close. Eventually,
railroads were replaced by logging trucks and gas driven yarding equipment. The railroad
grades were then converted to roads to accommodate logging truck traffic. Cut -over
timber lands were abandoned and management given back to county governments when
taxes became delinquent. Timber harvest today is occurring in the tree stands that grew
following the initial harvest.
Seafood cultivation of oysters and clams was developed in the Hood Canal tide lands. The
introduction of Pacific oysters and the reproductive ability of spat to attach to old shells
greatly expanded commercial operations.
13
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds •
The Watersheds Are Mostly Tree - Covered, the Major
Land Use Category is Managed Forestland
This section presents general information about land cover types and land use categories.
Land cover is the aerial (bird's eye) view of the types of surfaces covering the Study Area.
Two examples are tree - covered land and developed areas with impervious surfaces. Land
use describes how the parcel is predominantly used or is zoned/platted for potential future
use. An area mapped with the land cover type "tree - covered" may be identified on the
Land Use Map as residential. The Land Use Map and the Land Cover Map are located at
the back of the report.
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds contain numerous land cover types and land use
categories. Readers of this characterization report will better understand current conditions
of the Study Area after reviewing the existing land cover types and designated land use
categories. This information can also be valuable to Mason County staff when planning
for the Study Area, making decisions about land use permits, and addressing water quality
and beneficial use concerns.
Land Cover Types in the Watersheds
The land cover information was obtained from a variety of data sources. The primary data
source was PSCRBT photo interpretation of the 1989 Department of Natural Resources'
orthophoto maps and aerial photographs. The Olympic National Forest, Hood Canal
Ranger District provided digital data for vegetation mapping on federal lands. Field
verification included driving area roads, conversations with landowners, and limited field
observations.
Aerial photos from 1939 were available from the Lilliwaup
area to the northern Study Area boundary. These photos
show the steep - sloped areas above the shoreline were
covered with young trees that had naturally seeded the area
following the earliest oxen logging. The private lands that
were railroad logged had some natural regeneration of
trees, but extensive areas of bare ground were evident.
These areas are currently managed by the state Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) and private owners and the
stands are being harvested.
14
•
C]
iY
•
Characterization - Land Cover /Land Use
Tree- Covered Land Dominates the Study Area
The land cover types and their approximate acreage are displayed in Table 1. The
dominant land cover type is tree covered (89% or 92,055 acres). The tree - covered type
also includes home sites when the cleared area is less than one acre. Additional cover
types include rock, grass /shrub, developed areas, and waterbodies.
The type and age of tree cover varies across the Study Area depending on elevation,
aspect, and amount of rainfall. Generally areas below 1,900 feet elevation were harvested
between 1880 and 1940 and are currently covered by 50 to 75 year old tree stands.
Stands of coniferous trees occupy 93% of the tree - covered acres, with stands of hardwood
trees located along stream corridors. The Land Cover Map displays tree - covered areas in
four age classes: 0 to 10 years, greater than 10 to 50 years, greater than 50 to 160 years,
and greater than 160 years. The majority of the private and DNR tree - covered. areas
contain trees between 50 and 160 years old that resulted from natural seeding following
railroad logging and forest fires. The most common tree species found in the lower
• elevation areas are Douglas -fir, red alder, big leaf maple, western hemlock, and western
redcedar. Scattered old growth Douglas -fir can be found in steep areas along Hood Canal.
•
Federal lands contain the largest variety of vegetation, due to the change in elevation from
near sea -level to high mountain areas. The most common tree species found on Federal
lands are Douglas -fir, western hemlock, Pacific silver fir, and subalpine fir. The age class
occupying the most area is greater than 160 years (old growth timber). The highest
elevation zones are transition zones from tree - covered lands to scattered subalpine trees
and huckleberry shrubs located among rock outcrops and some permanent snowfields.
Higher elevation plant communities can be viewed in the upper Hamma Hamma River
basin.
Stands of hardwood trees make up 7% of the Watersheds' tree - covered areas. These
stands are located along stream corridors, surrounding wetlands, and on steep hillsides
where water seeps to the surface. The principal species of hardwood trees are red alder,
black cottonwood and big leaf maple.
15
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Table 1. West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds Land Cover Types
Tree Covered
92,055
89
Rock
8,170
8
Grass/Shrub
2,404
2
Developed Areas (25 -100%
Impervious Surfaces)
548
1
Waterbodies 1
381
1 <1
Total 1 103,558 100
Other Cover Types
The rock outcrop category is mainly located in the high elevation areas that form the
western Study Area boundary.. These areas are snow covered in the cooler and wet winter
months. Rock outcrops are also located on lower elevation ridges, especially north of the
Hamma Hamma River. Rock formations are also associated with the Hood Canal
shoreline and stream corridors. •
The grass /shrub cover type is located on 2% of the Study Area. This cover type is
concentrated around lakes and in wetlands but also occurs on small valley bottom areas.
Past and present agricultural operations are located in this cover type.
Developed areas with impervious surfaces include both residential and commercial parcels
and cover 548 acres of the Study Area. These lands are located predominately along the
Hood Canal shoreline or adjacent to roads that connect to State Highway 101.
Water bodies are year -round lakes found in the Study Area. The larger lakes are Price,
Melbourne, Lena, and the Mildred Lake complex.
Land Cover by Watershed
Appendix D contains a table displaying the land cover in the Study Area by watershed.
Review of this data indicates which watersheds with private timberlands can expect timber
harvest activity in the next decade. The residential acreage is displayed for both developed
and undeveloped parcels, which may indicate possible future conversion or development.
17�
16
Characterization - Land Cover /Land Use
•
West Shore Hood Canal Land Use Categories
The principle sources used to produce the land use data layer are the Mason County and
Jefferson County Assessor's parcel layers. Selected parcels on the data layers were field
checked and updated to reflect recent changes.
Managed forestland is the largest land use category in the Study Area. Other use
categories include designated wilderness, park lands, residential lands, utilities, open lands,
transportation corridors, retail, and a variety of other Miscellaneous uses. Refer to Table 2
for watershed land use data and Appendix E for land use categories by watershed.
Managed Forestiand Includes Public Lands, Private Lands, and Tribal Lands
Public managed forestlands include the Olympic National Forest (non - wilderness) lands
and Washington State Department of Natural Resources lands. Private managed
forestlands include industrial and non - industrial forestlands dedicated to long -term timber
management. Lands enrolled as "open space- timber" or "designated forestland" in Mason
and Jefferson Counties' current-Use Property Tax Exemptions Program are defined as
• managed forestlands for this report.
Landowners with more than five contiguous acres devoted primarily to the growth and
production of forest products can apply at the assessor's office for enrollment as "open
space- timber." "Designated forestlands" require 20 contiguous acres or more. The
application and a current forest management plan are reviewed under state guidelines
(Open Space Taxation Act RCW 84.34). Application approval allows the parcel to be
assessed at a reduced amount instead of taxation for the highest and best use.
Tribal forestlands are managed under a natural resource plan. Tribal trust lands are
managed in common for all members. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) assists with
trust land resource management. Some forestland is owned by individual tribal members.
Non -Tribal lands within the reservation boundary (fee lands) require a permit from the
tribe to remove trees.
Designated Wilderness Areas
Portions of two Olympic National Forest wilderness areas, Mt. Skokomish and The
Brothers, lie on the western boundary of the Study Area. A portion of the Olympic
National Park lies between these two areas. These high elevation areas contain lakes and
subalpine meadows. Summer and early autumn are prime visiting periods.
17
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds w
Table 2. West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds Land Use Categories
Category
Auer► ; ;
Percxat£ Stud Area Acaes
Managed Forestland
Public
58,466
56
Private'
18,779
18
Tribal
898
1
Subtotal
78,143
75
Designated Wilderness
13,867
13
Park Lands
Olympic National Park
4,4%
4
Wa. State and County Parks
155
<1
Subtotal
4,651
5
Residential
Developed 2
1,560
1
Undeveloped '
1,809
2
Subtotal
3,369
3
Utilities
1,129
1
Open Lands4
703
1
Transportation Corridors
598
1
Retail
67
<1
Other
1,031
1
Total Acres
103,558
100
•_
' Includes "open space- timber" and designated forestlands.
2 Includes parcels less than 5 acres in Mason County and 10 acres in Jefferson County.with residential
units.
3 Includes parcels less than 5 acres in Mason County and 10 acres in Jefferson County platted for
residential development.
Includes parcels greater than 5 acres in Mason County and parcels greater than 10 acres in Jefferson
County not included in another category. It also includes parcels of any size designated open space or
dedicated green belts. Parcels are not intensively managed but some larger parcels may include a
residence. is
18
Characterization - Land. Cover /Land Use
•
Park Lands Provide Ample Recreation Opportunities
The Olympic National Park encompasses 4,496 acres of undeveloped, low- intensity
recreation lands inside the Study Area. Access to these lands is by hiking trails in the
Hamma Hamma River drainage.
The State of Washington operates public recreation areas on 74 acres in the Study Area.
Two Washington State Parks are located along Hood Canal in the Study Area. Potlatch
State Park offers overnight camping and a daytime picnic area with beach access. Triton
Cove State Park was opened in the summer of 1995 as a public boat launch and picnic
area.
Mason County manages the 81 acre Foothills Community Park adjacent to State Highway
119. The site contains softball fields and a picnic area with public parking. A solid waste
transfer station is located in the southeast corner of the parcel.
Residential Land Use Includes Developed and Undeveloped Parcels
• The residential land use category includes 3,369 acres located in communities along Hood
Canal, planned developments, and individual residences adjacent to State Highways and
county roads. This category includes both developed parcels and undeveloped parcels.
•
The sizes of residential parcels vary from less than an acre up to 5 acres. Currently, 47%
of the platted residential area is developed. The highest concentration of residences is in
the vicinity of Hoodsport. Other concentrations also occur at Colony Surf, Triton Cove,
Seamont Estates, and near the shoreline in Eldon, Lilliwaup, and Potlatch. Residential
construction is occurring throughout much of the Study Area, especially on areas with
waterfront access or views.
A platted area (Hama Ridge) has been proposed for development near Jorsted Creek.
Previous owners of the eighty acre site constructed improvements including a steep single
lane road, operating well and storage tank, and underground power. The subdivision has
not been approved by Mason County due to the lack of adequate access for emergency
vehicles.
19
�r
[a
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
"Utilities" Include Powerline Corridors and Generation Facilities
The Bonneville Power Administration maintains a major transmission line running through
the Study Area, roughly parallel with the shoreline of Hood Canal. Tacoma City Light
operates the Potlatch hydroelectric power generation facility along State Highway 101.. In
addition, Tacoma City Light has a transmission line that runs from the powerhouse near
Potlatch to the Skokomish tide flats. Mason County Public Utility District #1 provides
electrical power above and below ground to the Watersheds' residents.
The Open Land Category Is Undeveloped Parcels Not Intensively Managed
The open land category is identified on 703 acres. This land use category includes parcels
greater than 5 acres in Mason County and greater than 10 acres in Jefferson County not
included in another category and parcels of any size designated as open space or dedicated
green belt. These parcels are not intensively managed and generally are tree - covered.
According to the Assessor's data base, a minor number of these parcels have residences.
Undeveloped parcels are typically owned and managed for a variety of personal objectives
including investment, recreation, wildlife habitat, or scenic value. The amount of open
land held by real estate investors is unknown.
There Are Three Major Transportation Corridors
Transportation corridors for State Highways 101 and 119 and the Forest Service paved
road #25 cover approximately 400 acres. State Highway 101 provides the region's primary
transportation link and connects the Olympic Peninsula to Interstate -5. Mason/Jefferson
Public Transit vans and buses transport residents and tourists to shop in Shelton or travel
around the peninsula. Mason County Public Works maintains approximately 17 miles of
paved roads that access homes and businesses. Private landowners in the Study Area
maintain approximately 180 miles of unpaved roads accessing their property.
Retail Business Reflects Tourism
The retail category for the Study Area includes wholesale and retail operations. Also
identified were RV parks and resorts, seafood processors, and the winery in Hoodsport.
The "Other" Category Encompasses a Variety of Land Uses
•
The "Other" land use category includes Camp Robbinswold, the Girl Scout camp near
Eldon, community greenbelt areas, saltwater marshlands on the Skokomish Tribal
Reservation, and water bodies. Public buildings such as fire stations, government offices, is
and the post office facility are also listed in this category.
20
•
•
Characterization - Population
The Watersheds Population Growth Is Limited
In comparison to the rest of the Puget Sound Basin, the Study Area appeared to experience
minimal growth from 1980 to 1990. The estimated population in 1990 was 1,500 people
(Rhine and Doane 1995).
There are no incorporated cities within the Study Area. The largest population center is
Hoodsport, which also has the largest commercial area. This community is located along
State Highway 101 and at the junction with State Highway 119 that provides access to the
Lake Cushman residential development and other recreational areas.
Residential development is concentrated near the shore zone. Small communities include
Potlatch, Lilliwaup, and Eldon. Developments with numerous homes are also located
around lakes at Colony Surf in Mason County and Seamont Estates in Jefferson County.
The Lake Cushman residential area is a series of 16 developments with portions of
Subdivisions 12 and 16 in the Study Area. The residents have leased lots and built homes
or sites for recreational vehicles. This development attracts many vacationers and retirees,
especially in the summer months.
The Study Area consists of an older population compared to other areas in the state. The
age classes break down as follows: 25% are over age 60, 50% are ages 19 to 59, and 25%
are age 18 or younger. The Study Area contains a large number of retirees, many of
whom moved to the area to enjoy its rural characteristics. According to Rhine and Doane
(1995), the lack of economic development will maintain these characteristics, as children
finish school and move from the Study Area to pursue higher education and employment
in other parts of the state.
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are a desirable place to live, work, and play.
Roads from Olympia and Bremerton to Hood Canal provide access to scenic vistas, rural
beauty, and shoreline amenities. These attributes attract retirees and increasing numbers of
resident commuters. The mild climate, water access and relative proximity to Olympia,
Tacoma, and Bremerton provide many people with opportunities for recreation and other
activities. The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds' physical and biological health, water
quality, and habitat will determine its continued desirability.
21
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Socio- Economic Conditions in the Study Area
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds contain a variety of diverse cultures and
lifestyles. Forestry, fisheries, construction, retail trade, and public administration employ
the largest number of residents. The population also includes retirees, homemakers, and
workers who commute to jobs outside the Study Area. Census and business data described
below is based on The Hood Canal Watershed. A Demographic and Economic Profile
(Rhine and Doane, 1995) and 1990 U.S. Bureau of the Census data.
The Study Area population is 92% Caucasian. People of American Indian, Eskimo, or
Aleut ancestry total 6% and persons of Hispanic origin, Asian or Pacific Islander, and
other race groups represent 2% of the population (Rhine and Doane, 1995).
The center of activity in the Study Area is Hoodsport, located along Hood Canal at the
junction of State Highways 101 and 119. It has a business district where residents and
tourists shop and meet for social activities. The Olympic National Forest and Olympic
National Park operate a cooperative Ranger Station that provides public information and
maps from a combined public information office in Hoodsport.
The Watersheds closest full service
community is located in Shelton, the county
seat of Mason County. Residents must drive
outside the Watersheds to obtain many types
of goods and services, such as health care,
clothing, and household furnishings.
Characteristics of Income and
Watershed Businesses
Once supported almost solely by abundant
timber resources and shellfish cultivation and
harvest, Study Area residents are now
involved in a variety of services related to
recreational pursuits. Good water quality
and access to local beaches for recreation is
important in attracting tourists. A water
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Household Income Levels
$0.34,900
59%
quality survey was conducted by contacting
19 businesses in the Study Area. The
survey, done in July 1995, requested
comments on Hood. Canal water quality, Figure 2
(U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990)
22%
0- 100,000
2%
X00- 74,900
17%
closure of State Highway 101 and its
impacts on tourism, and adequate potable water supply. A listing of survey questions and
22
r'
•
is
Characterization - Socio- Economics
0 results is located in Appendix F. Shellfishing and water contact sports are major
recreational activities that could be severely impacted by water quality problems. These
business owners rely on tourism for greater than 50% of their annual receipts (Clifford,
1995).
•
The types of businesses operating in the Study Area include extractive industries such as
forestry, Christmas trees, and shellfish cultivation. Forestry is the largest extractive
industry. Fish and shellfish harvesting and processing provide diversification of income.
Recreation and tourism also contribute to the economic base if they attract people from
outside the region. The goods and services purchased by tourists add to the local
economy. While not explicitly measured, most income generated by tourism would fall
into retail trade or service sectors. Examples of retail trades include boat dealers /repairs,
fish and seafood vendors, general grocery, a liquor store, restaurant /tavern, gift and novelty
stores, and general merchandise. General services include motels, RV parks, real estate
agents, general contracting and construction services, beauty shops, automobile repair, a
winery, and landscaping services (Rhine and Doane 1995).
These important sectors of the economy are directly or indirectly affected by
environmental quality. Resident commuters, retirees, and tourists are attracted to the Study
Area by its natural amenities. The extractive industries depend on good land management
and water quality for their continued viability. Shellfish cultivation and fisheries depend
directly on water quality and habitat conditions.
►:Tc?
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Geology Is Important in Land Use Decisions
Geology is the study of the dynamic Earth in its past, present, and future forms.
Knowledge of current geologic conditions, the natural forces that act on them, and the
limitations that result can help reduce undesired consequences of human activity.
Geologic conditions are important factors to consider in making land use decisions. For
example, areas underlain by impervious geologic layers (bedrock, compacted hardpan, etc.)
are vulnerable to surface pollution or erosion from stormwater runoff flows. Areas
underlain by extremely permeable geologic units are more vulnerable to ground water
contamination. Permeable units overlying impermeable ones on steep slopes are susceptible
to landslides. Areas underlain by either impermeable or highly permeable soil or rock are
poor locations to construct on -site sewage treatment and disposal systems that adequately
treat effluent.
Tectonic Plate Movement Formed the Olympic Peninsula
Although the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are geologically similar to other parts of
the Olympic Peninsula, they are unique in the Puget Sound Basin. Bedrock exposures
(outcrops) are more common and of different origin than found outside the Olympic
Peninsula. The rock is of deep marine rather than continental origin and includes both
sedimentary and volcanic rocks. Glacial deposits are thinner especially in the southern part
of the Study Area and are more commonly eroded than in other locations in coastal areas
around Puget Sound.
The land underlying the Study Area and the rest of the Olympic Peninsula was the floor of
the Pacific Ocean during the Eocene Epoch (approximately 37 to 58 million years ago).
Because of the movement of the oceanic plate against and under the North America plate,
ocean and continental shelf rocks and sediment were scraped off and pushed up against
North America. As the oceanic crust, composed of basalt flows, sand, and fine sediments
was pushed up, it broke into a series of blocks. These blocks slid under each other and
were pushed up higher as the oceanic plate continued to "bump into" the continent as if on
a slow moving conveyor belt. These blocks formed the Olympic Mountain Range and
their foothills (Figure 3).
24
•
Characterization -
Cascade R"e
Y1(M�
N MME
0 =pk
�AOUffWfls
0 Figure 3. Cross Section of Western Washington Plate Convergence
•
The Olympic Peninsula bedrock units show the outcome of this plate movement. There is
a horseshoe shaped outer ring of basalt and sediments on the south, east, and north sides of
the peninsula (Figure 4). These are called peripheral rocks. Central core rocks consist of
deformed sediments.
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are located on the southeastern portion of the
"horseshoe." The rock units run (strike) north -south and generally drop (dip) to the east.
Fault zones mostly run roughly north - south. Major faults are located along the transition
from core to peripheral rocks. Minor faults have been identified within the peripheral
rocks, such as the faults at Dow Mountain and the eastern end of Saddle Mountain.
25
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
1p
Figure 4. Olympic Peninsula Major Geologic Terrains and Faults
Several Glacial Advances Occurred During the Ice Age
Glaciers from the Pleistocene Epoch (or Ice Age), which began about 2 million years ago,
eroded and covered the older rocks, forming most of today's low elevation landscape.
During the Pleistocene, at least five major and several minor continental glacial advances
have been identified in the Puget Sound Basin. However, only two, Fraser and an older
glacial advance called Pre - Fraser in this report, can be recognized by geologic evidence in
the Study Area.
Glacial sediments in the Study Area were deposited near the ends and margins of the
continental glaciers. As a result, the deposits are thinner and more erratic than glacial
deposits near the center of the Puget Sound Basin. In addition to the advance and retreat
26
W
•
Characterization - Geology
of the continental ice sheets, local alpine glaciers from the Olympic Mountains also were
present in the Study Area.
The types of rocks found in glacial deposits tell a lot about their origin. The large
continental ice sheets originated in the coast and insular mountain ranges of British
Columbia and moved south into the Puget Sound Basin. The ice sheets carried granitic
and other crystalline rocks from British Columbia and the North Cascades. In contrast,. the
local alpine glaciers and interglacial streams transported and deposited darker basalt and
sedimentary rocks native to the Olympic range. The percentage of northern stones
decreases as the Puget Lobe added Olympic bedrock, older glacial deposits, and local
alluvium into its load.
Each glacial advance was characterized by a similar set of geologic events during which
the land was sculpted and materials deposited and reworked. Advancing ice blocked rivers
flowed north to the Puget lowland and formed lakes covering huge areas. Wide- spread,
fine - grained, lacustrine (lake) sediments were deposited in these lakes on top of terrain
much like the present. The sediments formed a relatively impermeable layer. These
deposits were overlain by coarser material laid down by meltwater as the ice sheet
advanced. This material is called advance outwash. Glacial till was then deposited on the
outwash directly under the ice as the glacier overrode the advance sediments. Glacial till
is a compact, nonsorted mix of clay, sand, and gravel, with the appearance of concrete. As
the glacier receded or melted away to the north and east, sand and gravel (recessional
outwash) were deposited by meltwater at the sides, front, and bottom of the ice sheet.
Nonglacial intervals between the glacial advances are characterized by the deposition of
finer - grained fluvial (stream) and beach sediments, and local peat deposits formed in an
environment similar to today's.
Pre- Fraser Glacial Deposits
The oldest glacial deposits mapped in the Study Area are from Pre - Fraser glaciers. Carson
(1976a) considered these older deposits to possibly be from the Salmon Springs Glaciation.
The exact age is uncertain. The Pre - Fraser Glacier extended farther south and higher into
the Olympic Mountains than the late Fraser advances. Long (1975) concluded the last Pre -
Fraser Glacier on the southern Olympic Peninsula probably extended as much as eight
miles farther than the Fraser Glaciation. Pre- Fraser deposits in the Brothers Quadrangle
appear up to an elevation of 2,800 feet.
Because the Pre - Fraser glaciation and interglacial deposits were later over -ridden by the
Fraser ice, deposits are patchy, widely scattered and are usually under the more recent
glacial deposits, soil, and vegetation. Surface boulders from the Pre - Fraser glaciations are
rare. Where exposed, the deposits occur on steep slopes on the mountain front or along
27
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
x
the shoreline bluff where vertical cuts expose deeper deposits. Because these areas are
steep to nearly vertical, they are difficult to display on maps.
During the Pre - Fraser glaciation, alpine glaciers were very large and the local ice in the
Olympics coalesced with the Continental ice sheet. It is believed the alpine ice was thick
enough to prevent continental ice from penetrating very far up the river valleys. There is
almost a total lack of Pre - Fraser drift in Olympic valleys.
It is inferred that Dow Mountain may have been covered by till from local alpine glaciers
during Pre - Fraser glacial episodes. According to Long (1975), Dow Mountain is covered
with basaltic till, containing abundant striated stones between an elevation of 1,900 feet
and the summit, without granite or other northern stones. Below 1,900 feet, stones of
various kinds of granite are common in abundant drift, inferring the upper limit of Fraser
drift. Therefore, the till above 1,900 feet in elevation is most likely of Olympic glacial
origin.
Minor Amounts of Sediment Were Deposited During Olympia Interglaciation
Before the Fraser Glacier advanced, the land surface was probably similar to today's
landscape. Sediment deposited during this time (the Olympia Interglacial interval) is
commonly composed of clayey and sandy silt, with peat and fossil wood. Interglacial
deposits are characterized b Olympic or Cascade Mountain rocks, not those carried by
Po Y
glaciers from British Columbia. In the Study Area, these deposits are difficult to map as a
unit distinct from overlying lacustrine deposits and are not separated. The Vitsap
Formation, an older interglacial deposit, may occur in the Study Area but it is not mapped
by Carson (1976a and b) because it contains material similar to other interglacial deposits
and is difficult to identify with certainty (Noble, 1990).
The Fraser Glaciation Formed Today's Landscape
The Fraser Glaciation, which occurred from 13,500 to 15,000 years ago, was the last
glacial advance in the Puget Sound Basin (Deeter, 1979). It was separated from the last
Pre - Fraser Glacier by the Olympia Interglaciation.
The Fraser Glaciation is broken up into four glacial intervals (stades or interstades):
Sumas Stade, Everson Interstade, Vashon Stade, and the Evans Creek Stade. The Sumas
Stade, the last advance during the Fraser Glaciation, didn't reach the lower Puget Sound
Basin. During the first glacial episode, the Evans Creek Stade, the Puget lobe of the
continental ice -sheet did not exist, and alpine glaciers reached their maximum extents.
However, during the Vashon Stade, the lobe advanced southward into the lowland,
damming north - flowing drainages and creating the large glacial lakes. Gravel - laden,
meltwater streams built large deltas into these lakes as the ice receded (Thorson, 1980).
PIK
Characterization - Geology
0 The Vashon Stade ice sheet extended up to an elevation of 1,900 feet at the mouth of the
Hamma Hamma River and to a point half a mile into the valley. This elevation is
determined by the extent of Vashon drift deposits. About three miles up the Hamma
Hamma valley, Vashon drift is covered by outwash terrace sediments traceable to an alpine
terminal moraine.
n
Olympic Alpine Glaciers
The climatic conditions that made the continental glaciers possible also caused the
formation of alpine glaciers. They extended farther down slope and in greater .numbers
than today's mountain glaciers. Olympic Mountain glaciers descended to the adjacent
lowland areas during the Evans Creek Stade and had retreated somewhat before the arrival
of the Vashon continental ice. For example, Washington Creek and its tributaries
contained glaciers that joined a larger alpine glacier in Jefferson Creek valley.
The advancing continental ice sheet either overtook and made contact with the retreating
local glaciers or joined other descending glaciers. At some places, Olympic drift overlies
Vashon continental drift. For example, late Vashon, alpine glacial end moraines and
associated outwash sand and gravel overlie Vashon Puget Drift in the Hamma Hamma
River valley.
Recent Geologic Processes
Following the final retreat of the Fraser Glacier, erosional and depositional processes
sculptured and continue to shape the landscape. Most of the Study Area streams have
eroded down to the older till deposits of Pre - Fraser glaciers or bedrock, forming waterfalls
in their lower reaches. Since the recession of the last glacier, the Hamma Hamma River
has cut a gorge as much as 300 feet deep into bedrock. Postglacial stream incisions have
deepened Washington Creek and tributary valleys to the point that little or no semblance of
a former broad glaciated floor remains, the valleys are narrow and V- shaped (Long, 1975).
Identifying nonglacial erosion and deposition patterns is complicated by past sea level
fluctuations of up to 600 feet, changes in drainage patterns as ice melted away non -
uniformly, and accelerated erosion along more easily eroded units. Landslides occurred in
areas of bedrock faulting, geologic unit changes, and along sea cliffs. As discussed in the
Erosion and Sedimentation section, the slopes along Hood Canal were left unsupported as
the continental ice sheet melted away. The combination of steep, unsupported slopes with
the presence of lacustrine clay and glacial till layers interbedded by more permeable
material makes areas along the Hood Canal shoreline prone to landslides.
29
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Where they are not protected, the shoreline and bluffs continue to erode and the material
redeposited as beaches and spits. Streams erode their banks and sediment is deposited in
flood plains, wetlands, deltas, and mudflats.
All of these natural processes are being modified by human activities such as road
building, removing trees and other vegetation by clear -cut harvesting or clearing for
construction, draining and filling wetlands, and dike and levee building.
There Are 15 Geologic Units Identified in the Study Area
The geology of the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds is portrayed on the Generalized
Geology Map at the end of this report. Geology maps are idealized and simplified
versions of the earth's surface as if vegetation and artificial features were removed, with
subjective interpretations made to match a map's particular uses.
The map in this report was designed to give a general understanding of the geology of the
Study Area. On -site evaluations and reference to the original work are needed for site -
specific geologic and ground water evaluations. It is important to remember that a
geologic map is a two dimensional representation of three dimensional features made for
specific purposes. Deep features such as water - bearing aquifers are not shown.
The Generalized Geology Map and following geologic unit descriptions are a compilation
of three maps. Tabor and Cady (1978) was used to cover federal lands, Carson (1976a)
for nonfederal lands in Mason County, and Carson (1976b) for parts of the Study Area in
Jefferson County. The two maps don't merge well because different map scales and
geologic units were used. Therefore, the Geology Map contains an abrupt line between the
two areas where the team was unable to resolve the differences between the maps.
Descriptions of the Study Area's Geologic Units
The following geologic units in the Study Area are described in order of decreasing age
from the youngest to oldest. For simplicity, additional deeper units identified only in drill
holes in the Study Area are not included.
•
30
r
•
•
Characterization - Geology
Table 3. Geologic Units Youngest to Oldest And
The Percent of the Study Area They Occupy t
Continental Glacier Alpine Glaciers
Recessional Outwash Alpine Glacial Deposits
(3 %) (3%)
Ablation Till
(6 %)
Lodgement Till
(13 %)
Advance Outwash and Lacustrine
Deposits
(2 %)
Undifferentiated Continental Glacial Deposits
(1 %)
Interglacial Deposits
(Not Displayed as a Map Unit)
Pre - Fraser Drift
(1 %)
Core Bedrock I Peripheral Bedrock
Core Basaltic Rock Twin River Sedimentary Rock
(1%) ( >1 %)
Core Sandstone Crescent Basalt
(7 %) (56 %)
Blue Mountain Sandstone and Argillite
(2%)
1 Geologic units are described later in this section.
31
S. .
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Recent Deposits
■ Alluvium and Artificial Fill (Ho are sediments deposited by recent stream, lake, and
beach processes. Artificial fill is lumped into this unit for mapping purposes.
These deposits vary from cobblely stream gravels laid down in channels to finer
grained sands, silts, and clays deposited in a tloodplain environment. This unit is
often subject to high water tables.
■ Landslide Deposits (Ls) are areas where old or active landslide activity can be
identified. These deposits typically consist of mixed masses to large blocks of
mud, clay, sand, and gravel. Natural and human- influenced processes resulting in
landslides are discussed later in the report.
■ Swamp, Marsh, and Bog Sediments (Hs) are those derived from water- saturated,
semi- decayed plant remains and organic rich sediments commonly in depressions
and valleys. They are typically underlain by an impermeable material such as till
or clay.
Fraser Glacial Deposits •
■ Recessional Outwash (Vro) is poorly to moderately sorted and stratified sand,
gravel, ice contact, and deltaic deposits formed in meltwater channels and outwash
plains. It includes ice - contact stratified drift, recessional deltas and alluvial fans,
and a unit containing Puget and Olympic outwash and young alluvium. The
deposit contains minor amounts of silt and clay. Recessional deposits overlie till
and can be, in turn, overlain by swamp, marsh, and bog deposits and recent
alluvium. Recessional outwash is mapped in the Lilliwaup valley, and along the
top of the bluffs along the Hood Canal coastline.
■ Ablation Till (Vat) was formed under glacial ice as it melted. It is composed of
similar material to the underlying lodgement till but is looser, nonstratified, pebbly,
silty sand with noticeable air spaces. Ablation till can grade into recessional
outwash that, in some parts of the Study Area, forms the upper most layer. Large
areas of ablation till are mapped in the upper reaches of the Lilliwaup valley.
■ Lodgement Till (Vlt) is grey, compact, and poorly sorted, nonstratified pebbly,
sandy silt with occasional boulders which looks much like concrete. Its thickness
varies considerably. Lodgement till is generally quite hard as a result of glacial
compaction. It is commonly known as hard pan. It is very resistant to erosion and
only yields small quantities of water from the local lenses of sand and gravel. The
low permeability of till results in rapid surface runoff, local perched water tables, •
and poor suitability for on -site sewage drainfields.
32
0 Characterization - Geology
Compared to many other areas of the Puget Sound Basin, lodgement till in the
Study Area appears to be rather well drained. The till may be thin and
discontinuous, or overlain by coarse permeable soils, especially in the southern part
of the Study Area. This condition may be the result of the Study Area being
located near the edge of the Vashon Glaciers. Because the upper layer is well
drained, plant species are typical of areas with low precipitation, even though
precipitation levels reach about 80 inches per year.
■ Advance Ouwwash (Vao) contains moderate to well- sorted, well- stratified particles
ranging in size from gravel to sand to silt and clay. Generally, it is exposed in
ravines eroded by streams. Advance outwash has good permeability and can yield
moderate to large quantities of water if there is adequate recharge. It is easily
eroded and susceptible to slides if ground water recharge or surface flow is too
great.
■ Lacustrine Sediments (VI) are silt and clay laid down in lake environments. These
deposits form an aquitard or impervious layer on which ground water in overlying
units moves laterally. Springs form where the geologic layers are cut or exposed
by a slope. Clay layers and springs can be seen along State Highway 101 in the
. Jorsted Creek area. --
•
Pre-Fraser Deposits
■ Undifferentiated Continental Glacial Deposits (Qc) include areas on the bedrock
geology map where all continental ice sheet deposits are lumped into one unit.
This unit includes moraine and stratified deposits including sand, gravel, silt, and
clay characterized by rocks foreign to the Olympic Peninsula. Areas mapped as
unknown are also lumped into this category.
■ Pre - Fraser Drift (Ps) is composed mostly of till and outwash deposited by the
Puget Lobe and Olympic alpine glaciers prior to the Fraser Glaciation. It contains
some oxidized, nonglacial material.
Alpine Glacial Deposits
■ Alpine Glacial Deposits (Fo) were deposited by local alpine glaciers and are
composed of lodgement till and recessional outwash with small amounts of advance
outwash and ablation till.
33
}
t
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
tE
Prejelacial Rock
Core Bedrock
■ Core Basaltic Rock (Tb) contains basalt, pillow basalt, basalt breccia, diabase, and
gabbro.. Red limestone and associated manganese minerals are common. Contacts
between units are commonly highly sheared.
■ Core Sandstone (Tsc) includes fair to poorly- sorted angular, micaceous sandstone
with thin to very thick bedding, small crossbeds, and rare graded beds, .ripple
marks, and load casts. Quartz veining is locally abundant. This unit includes
sandstone, foliated sandstone, and semischist; thick -bedded sandstone and
semischist; and tectonic breccia, slate, and phyllite.
Peripheral Bedrock
• Twin River Sedimentary Rock (Ts) includes mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone,
dominantly volcaniclastic overlain by thin drift in places.
• Crescent Basalt map unit includes basalt flow and mudflow breccia, massive •
( Tcb )
flows, pillows, and breccia, as well as areas where thin (less than five feet), glacial
drift covers the Crescent basalt. It is highly resistant to erosion and is a
ridgeformer. This unit includes many unmapped units of interbeds of sedimentary
rocks.
■ Blue Mountain Sandstone and Argillite (Thin) are fine to medium - grained, volcanic
rich but rarely micaceous, lithic sandstone, which are fair to poorly sorted with
angular clasts.
There Are a Number of Bedrock Faults in the Study Area
A number of bedrock faults (zones of fracture with displacement) and fold axis are also
shown on the geology map. These features result from the plate tectonic movements
previously discussed. As with geologic units, the purpose and scale of original mapping
should be considered when using structural data.
Knowledge of the location of faults is useful to land use planning for reasons beyond
immediate earthquake considerations. The chance of movement on a mapped fault during
•
34
•
U
•
Characterization - Geology
an earthquake is low. However, fault zones (and clayey units) have high potential for
landslides and are susceptible to erosion. Fault zones also impede soil water and ground
water flow over and through bedrock and are often the site of springs and wetlands. Some
faults form scarps where land along one side of the fault uplifts, creating a blockage to
water flow.
Three major faults have been mapped in the Dow and Saddle Mountain area. The Dow
Mountain fault can be seen as a northwest- trending lineament on aerial photographs and a
southwest - facing scarp about 1/4 mile long and up to 35 feet high. The scarp is at 1,500
to 1,800 feet in elevation near the upper limit of Vashon Till. The scarp below 1,500 was
probably obliterated by the Puget Lobe ice sheet. The last major movement of the fault
occurred during the Olympia Interglaciation.
A north/northeast trending reverse fault at the east end of Saddle Mountain offsets the
Dow Mountain fault. Movement along the Saddle Mountain fault helped form Price Lake.
Radio carbon dating of wood from the bottom of Price Lake indicated movement on the
fault occurred about 1,100 year ago (Othberg and Hall, 1976). A similar fault, landslide,
and drowned tree pattern is recognized in the Seattle area from about 1,100 years ago
(Dietrich, 1992).
35
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Soils Influence Pollutant Transport and Erosion '
An understanding of the soils in a watershed helps explain how activities throughout the
watershed affect water quality. The following factors which influence water quality vary
as soil type or slope changes:
♦ The ability of soil to absorb water at the surface, which influences the
transport of pollutants to nearby surface water.
♦ The ability of soil to filter pollutants from water percolating through the
soil.
♦ The potential for erosion of topsoil or for mass movement such as
landslides.
The environmental and physical conditions in a specific area determine what soil forms
over time. These conditions, known as the five soil forming factors, are the parent
material (surface geology), climate, topography, biota (plants and animals), and time. The
interaction of these conditions create a variety of soils throughout the Study Area.
Detailed and Generalized Soil Maps
The soils of the West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds are described by three sources.
The soils on non - federal lands in the Study
Area are described in the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources' (DNR)
soils data layer and in the Soil Survey of
Mason County, Washington (USDA Soil
Conservation Service, 1960). Soils
information for the Olympic National Forest
is from the draft "Olympic National Forest
General Soils Map" (1995). Soils in the
National Park portion of the Study Area have
not been mapped.
Gereralized Soils of
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
AluvW, Etc.
_..
1% outwasWDOft
t S Wroch
The DNR soils data layer is derived from the
Private Forest Lands Grading Program, a
five -year mapping program completed in Figure 5
1980 for the purpose of forestland taxation.
Because this information is more detailed and current than the Mason County SCS soil
survey, it was the primary soils information source for non - federal lands.
36
0
0
rCharacterization - Soils
The soils information sources listed above are known as detailed soil surveys. Based on
these surveys, there are 71 different soil map units on non - federal lands. For the purposes
of this report, these 71 map units were combined into four generalized soil groups based
on the way they interact with water (see Figure 5). The groups were named for their
location on the topography and parent material. The soils within each group differ in
slope, depth, drainage, and other characteristics that affect land use management.
The Forest Service is currently mapping the soils of the Olympic National Forest to bring
older soil maps up to the standards of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. The Forest
Service survey will be completed in the late 1990's. Because the detailed soil maps are
not yet available, the draft Olympic National Forest General Soils Map was used to
provide information on this portion of the Study Area. This map primarily shows soils as
"associations" which are groups of map units. As can be seen on the West Shore Hood
Canal Watersheds' Generalized Soils Map (see back of report), the soil groups on the
National Forest lands are broader than on the non - federal lands; they may also contain
individual map units from the other soil groups.
The soil groups are described later in this section. They are summarized in Table 4 and
their locations are identified on the Generalized Soils Map.
• The Generalized Soils Map is a useful guide for gaining a broad understanding of the soils
of the Study Area. However, the map is at a small scale (less detail) and many soils with
varying characteristics were combined into each of the four groups. Mapped soils have
"inclusions," areas of other soils too small to map separately. Some of the soils in the
Study Area are mapped as complexes, two soils so intermixed that they are mapped as a
single unit. For these reasons, the Generalized Soils Map is not useful for site specific
purposes, such as the construction of on -site sewage systems.
The soil information contained in the soil surveys of the non - federal lands was used to
develop other sections of this report. The information was used to interpret on -site sewage
system drainfield limitations and to identify saturated or inundated areas which may be
wetlands.
Soil Characteristics Used to Evaluate the Generalized Soil Groups
Table 4 lists three soil characteristics which were evaluated for each soil group. These
characteristics (permeability, wetness, and erosion potential) affect the transport and
filtration of contaminants before they reach surface or ground water.
Permeability refers to the rate water moves vertically through the soil profile. Soils with
high silt and clay content often have slow or very slow permeability. Pollutants introduced
onto a soil with a slow rate of infiltration and permeability have a greater likelihood of
mixing with surface water due to the slow rate of water uptake. Soils with rapid
37
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
infiltration and permeability may not provide sufficient treatment as water containing
pollutants moves through the soil profile to potentially impact the ground water.
The degree of wetness of a soil is most dependent on soil permeability and position on the
landscape. If water moves through the soil slowly, the soil is likely to be wet. If rain falls
at a faster rate than the water moves through the soil, the water will flow over the surface
(runoff) or may become ponded in flat areas or depressions. Some soils are seasonally or
permanently saturated without being ponded.
Erosion potential refers to the soil's susceptibility to surface erosion. Soils on steep slopes
and soils with high silt or very fine sand content rate high in erosion susceptibility.
Improper land management can result in loss of soil and sediment transport into road
ditches, streams, and wetlands.
Study Area Soils Described in Four General Groups
Bedrock - Derived Soils on Mountain Slopes and Foothills
The bedrock- derived soils on mountain slopes and foothills are the dominant soils (45 %) in
the Study Area. They cover 15% of the non - federal land and 77% of the National Forest
lands. They are in the foothills in the northern half of the Study Area and around Dow
and Saddle Mountains in the southern half of the Study Area.
These soils formed primarily in volcanic material weathered in place or moved and
deposited by slides or surface creep. The primary soils of this group on the National
Forest land are in the Fricaba- Sawtooth - Brokenfinger Association. The primary soils on
the non - federal lands are the Ellinor soil and the Rock Outcrop/Kilchis Complex. Slopes
are primarily greater than 60% and few wetlands are mapped on these soils.
Soils in this group are characterized by moderately rapid permeability because of their
coarse texture and moderate to severe erosion potential due to the surface soil texture and
the steep slopes. These soils are not rated for on -site sewage system limitations and are
generally unsuitable for this use. Due to the steep slopes these soils are rated as having a
medium to high potential to influence surface water and a low potential to influence
ground water quality.
cm
•
C7
•
Characterization - Soils
' Generalizations for each soil group. Within each group, exceptions exist.
Z This is a subjective rating of the group based on the soil's influence on transport of
pollutants to either surface or ground water. "Low" indicates little influence whereas a soil
with a "high" rating may have a significant influence. Other factors such as geology affect
an area's potential to impact water quality.
3 Permeability is moderate to rapid above the compacted till layer and slow to very slow through
that layer, leading to lateral water movement along the compacted till layer.
° The National Park land and a small area of the National Forest land is unmapped.
Glacial Till Soils on Moraines, Glacial Valleys, and Uplands
The glacial till soils on moraines, glacial valleys, and uplands cover a total of 36% of the
Study Area. They are the predominant soils on the non - federal lands, covering 58% of this
area. They cover a much smaller proportion (18 %) of the National Forest lands. Alpine
glacial till is mapped between 1,350 feet and 3,900 feet of elevation, and continental till is
mapped up to 2,900 feet. In some areas, there is a mix of alpine and continental glacial
till. These soils occur on slopes ranging from flat to moderately steep, 0% to 60% slopes.
39
Table 4. Generalized Soil Groups
Soil Chge�cteristics'
W(�' Tmpact
.Potential'.;: .
General Sail G:roap ;
% of
Soils;!
Pertee:billty
YVetaess
l ros"
SucEacse
Ground
Pote tin#
Water
W. Ai
Bedrock- Derived
45%
Slow to
None to
Moderate
Medium
Low
Soils on Mountain
Moderately
Slight
to Severe
to High
Slopes and
Rapid
Foothills
Glacial Till Soils on
36%
Moderate to
Seasonal
Slight to
Medium
Low to
Moraines, Glacial
Rapid Over
in Some
Moderate
to High
High
Valleys, and
Slow to Very
Locations
Uplands
Slow3
Outwash and Drift
13%
Moderately
None to
Slight to
Low to
High
Soils on Glacial
Rapid to
Slight
Moderate
Medium
Terraces, Plains,
Very Rapid
and Outwash
Channels
Alluvial, Organic,
1%
Slow to
None to
Slight or
Low to
Low to
or Glacial Soils on
Moderately
Year-
Variable
High
High
Bottomiands or
Rapid
around
Upland Depressions
Unmapped"
5% 1
--
—
—
—
—
' Generalizations for each soil group. Within each group, exceptions exist.
Z This is a subjective rating of the group based on the soil's influence on transport of
pollutants to either surface or ground water. "Low" indicates little influence whereas a soil
with a "high" rating may have a significant influence. Other factors such as geology affect
an area's potential to impact water quality.
3 Permeability is moderate to rapid above the compacted till layer and slow to very slow through
that layer, leading to lateral water movement along the compacted till layer.
° The National Park land and a small area of the National Forest land is unmapped.
Glacial Till Soils on Moraines, Glacial Valleys, and Uplands
The glacial till soils on moraines, glacial valleys, and uplands cover a total of 36% of the
Study Area. They are the predominant soils on the non - federal lands, covering 58% of this
area. They cover a much smaller proportion (18 %) of the National Forest lands. Alpine
glacial till is mapped between 1,350 feet and 3,900 feet of elevation, and continental till is
mapped up to 2,900 feet. In some areas, there is a mix of alpine and continental glacial
till. These soils occur on slopes ranging from flat to moderately steep, 0% to 60% slopes.
39
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
The primary soil associations in this group on the National Forest lands are the Aristine-
Hammahamma-Hoodcanal Association and the Rockybrook - Nicklund Association. The
primary soils on the non - federal lands are the Hoodsport, Shelton, and Triton soils.
This group is characterized by an uncompacted till layer, 20 to 40 inches deep, overlying
very compacted till material (often called hardpan). These soils are well drained above the
pan with low permeability throughout the pan. As a result, precipitation drains quickly to
the pan and then may flow laterally to an outlet in a depression, hillside seep, stream, or
road cut. Water often collects above the pan, creating a seasonal high water table during
the winter months.
This group is divided into two subgroups: till soils with slow to moderate permeability
over the compacted layer and till soils with moderately rapid to rapid permeability over the
compacted layer. These separations were made because of the significant affect of
permeability upon hydrology, vegetation, and on -site sewer system limitations.
On the non - federal lands, the Shelton soils are mapped as having rapid permeability.
Vegetation which would normally occur in a dryer climate is regularly seen in areas
mapped as the Shelton soil. The on -site sewage limitations include a cemented pan,
subsoil wetness, and poor filtration. The limitation of poor filtration is unusual for glacial
till soils in the Puget Sound Basin. The Shelton soil is mapped on the plateau south of
Dow Mountain and in the Melbourne and Stetson Lakes area. Till soils on the National
Forest lands have moderately rapid permeability and are shown on the Generalized Soil
Map in the same subgroup as the Shelton soils.
The hazard of erosion is slight to moderate. The main limitations for on -site sewage
system absorption fields are seasonal wetness, the depth to compact glacial till, and
steepness of slope. These soils are rated as having a medium to high potential to influence
surface water quality and a low to high potential to influence ground water (depending on
hydrologic connectivity between a water table perched on the till layer and an aquifer).
Outwash and Drib Soils on. Glacial Terraces, Plains, and Outwash Channels
Outwash soils on glacial terraces, plains, and outwash channels occur throughout the Study
Area, primarily on gentle slopes less than 15 %. These soils cover 13% of the overall
Study Area. They cover 25% of the non - federal lands and concentrations occur in the
lowlands west of Melbourne Lake, associated with the Hamma Hamma River valley, and
north of Triton Head. On the non - federal lands, the primary soil is the Grove soil. Glacial
drift soils with rapid permeability on 60% to 90% slopes are also included in this group.
They are found in most stream channels and an area of landslide activity between
Lilliwaup Bay and Jorsted Creek. •
40
0 Characterization - Soils
•
On the National Forest lands, these soils occur in the relatively flat areas (2% to 15%
slopes) of the Hamma Hamma River valley. Here they are mapped as the Matlock soil
formed in alpine glacial outwash. They cover 4% of the National Forest lands.
Soils in this group are very deep and, because of the loose and coarse nature of the
outwash material, are somewhat excessively to excessively drained. The gravelly and
sandy soil textures result in rapid permeability, a low to medium potential to impact
surface water and a high potential to impact ground water. Because water moves through
these soils rapidly, they may not have time to adequately filter contaminated water, such as
on -site sewage system effluent. The on -site sewage system drainfield limitation rating for
these soils is severe, or, in the case of the glacial drift soils on steep slopes and the soils
on the Olympic National Forest, unrated. The water erosion hazard is slight to moderate
on most of these soils on the non - federal lands.
Alluvial, Organic, or Glacial Soils on Bottomlands or Upland Depressions
Alluvial, organic, or glacial soils on bottomlands or upland depressions cover about 1% of
the overall Study Area and 2% of the non - federal lands. These soils are not mapped on
the National Forest lands in the Study Area. A variety of soils are included in this group.
The predominant soils are silty alluvium Belfast soils, the mixed alluvium Juno soils, and
McMurray peat. The remaining members of this group are the alluvial Bellingham,
Norma, and Puget soils, the coastal beaches, the Deckerville mucky loam formed in glacial
drift, the glacial till McKenna soils, the organic Mukilteo, Semiahmoo, and Tanwax soils,
and the areas mapped as riverwash or tidal marsh. These soils generally cover less than 50
acres each. Three- fourths of the acres included in this group are saturated or inundated for
a specific time period and are listed as hydric or potentially hydric soils. However, a site
specific wetland determination cannot be made based solely on this information. The non -
hydric soils are portions of the Juno and Belfast soils.
Surface water ponds or saturates most of these soils during the winter months or longer.
The hazard of water erosion is slight. However, stream bank erosion on the alluvial soils
is likely if vegetation is removed. The potential to impact both surface and ground water
is low if the area is isolated from other surface water. However, these saturated soils are
often in or near streams and wetlands, and transport of contaminants off -site is likely.
41
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Erosion and Sedimentation Occur in Many Parts of the
Study Area
There are several types of erosion processes. Surface erosion is the movement of soil
particles. It primarily occurs where the vegetative cover is not adequate to hold the soil in
place against the forces of gravity, water movement, and other factors. Types of surface
erosion include sheet and rill, ditch, and gully erosion. Often, sheet erosion will be nearly
invisible, occurring on bare soil near the top of a slope. As the volume of water and the
steepness of slope increase, rills begin to form; where these come together, flowing water
can cut ditches and gullies.
Erosion also occurs in streams and ditches. This is often the result of an increase in
stream flow volume or velocity. Disturbance of stream or ditch bank vegetation also
increases erosion. Stream bank erosion is discussed in the section titled "Stream Corridors
Protect Water Quality and Habitat."
Mass movement is an erosion process in which the movement of soil and /or rock occurs as
a unit rather than as separate particles. It can occur in a variety of forms such as
landslides, slumps, debris or earth flows, and rock falls. The varied forms of mass .
movement will be referred to here collectively as landslides.
Sedimentation is the deposition of eroded material. Sedimentation can occur in creek
channels, at the mouths of creeks as they meet Hood Canal, or at the base of slopes.
Sediment can be deposited and eroded several times as it moves through the watershed.
An example of this is material that is moved by a landslide and deposited at the base of
the slope can then be moved by flowing water in the road ditch and deposited in a stream,
and moved again by the stream and deposited in the Canal.
Erosion and sedimentation processes are affected by natural conditions such as slope,
geology, vegetation, rainfall patterns, and water movement. They also are affected by
human activities such as clearing and excavating for buildings, road construction or
maintenance, drainage management, and tree removal.
Erosion and sedimentation affect the Study Area in a variety of ways. Large volumes of
sediment degrade fish habitat in streams and smother shellfish beds in Hood Canal.
Pollutants attach to sediment and often settle out in marine waters near shellfish beds.
Structures, such as roads or buildings, are damaged. Soil productivity is lost. On the
other hand, coastal landslides are the necessary source of the sediment which creates and
maintains Hood Canal's beaches.
42
• Characterization - Erosion and Sedimentation
Surface Erosion Contributes Sediment to Streams and Hood Canal
Factors affecting the severity of surface erosion are the soil surface texture, length and
steepness of slope, vegetative or debris cover, and climatic conditions.
In the 1920s and early 1930s fires and logging removed most of the forest cover in the
lower elevations of the Study Area. The first few years after the loss of the vegetative
cover are the most critical for soil loss. Surface erosion was probably severe following
these events.
Surface erosion occurs in the Study Area in association with roads, other clearings, and
where landslides create bare soil. The most critical area of surface erosion seen during the
study is associated with mid -slope forest roads on slopes greater than 60 %. This is
described further in the forestry section in Chapter 3. Although landslides are most visible
in the State Highway 101 corridor, surface erosion also occurs in this road way corridor.
Hillslope Stability Is Controlled by a Variety of Factors
• In general, landslides occur when the downslope force of gravity along the potential failure
surface is greater than the resistance of the geologic material to failure. Some processes
affect the downward force by changing the weight or distribution of material on the
hillside or by changing the steepness of slope. Other processes affect the resistance of the
geologic material by changing the cohesion, the frictional properties of the rock, or the
soil -pore water pressure at the failure surface. These controls of hillslope stability and
some of the ways in which activities alter them are described in Table 5 (modified from
Dunne and Leopold, 1978).
Signs of Landslide Areas Are Visible in the Study Area
Many clues of slope instability can be seen on the landscape in the West Shore Hood
Canal Watersheds. Slumps leave a rounded "scarp" at the top of the area of movement
and a mass of hummocky terrain at the base of the slump. These features can be seen in
the slump at State Highway 101 milepost 326.8 (see Figure 6). Other examples of
hummocky terrain can be seen near mile 326.4. Leaning trees can indicate past instability
and can be a clue to future instability. Areas experiencing the slow downward movement
of soil known as soil creep have trees with bent trunks. When found on slopes, seeps or
vegetation that thrives in wet soil conditions can indicate instability. Vegetation age can
be used to date the occurrence of landslides. Red alders, which are frequently the first tree
species colonizing disturbed areas in the Study Area, can be used for this purpose. Patches
on the highway asphalt or bumpy, uneven, or broken areas in the roadway can be
indications of past or present instability.
43
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Table 5. Controls of Hillslope Stability
oaigl iirtape i>t
Bx ;kxa=iaPka of Aci. .
Hillslope gradient
Steepened by cutslopes or flattened by placement of
fill material for road or building construction
Undercutting of slope
Stream bank erosion or excavation
Loading of upper end of slope
Placement of fill for construction site
£ �#Ras�e#ssee to ;llfsrenaesf
::..... ..
.. ..
ita 1€slau�ias of
Nature of geologic material: rock type and structure
The contact between different geologic materials can
be the site of slope instability; e.g. rapidly permeable
outwash over slowly permeable lakebed sediments
Nature of weathering products
The materials resulting from weathering may have
different stability than the original geologic material
Soil -pore water pressure changes
Fluctuations of rainfall and snowmelt
Diversion of stormwater
Groundwater additions from septic tank
drainfields and lawn watering
Reduction of evapotranspiration following
changes in vegetation
Concentration of groundwater flow by geologic
structures, such as joints, or the sequence of geologic
materials, such as porous layers over impermeable
layers
Earthquake vibrations which reduce the strength of
Rock falls, thought to be caused by earthquake
weakly cemented sands or silts or cause rock falls
vibrations, contributed to the formation of Jefferson,
Elk, and Lena Lakes
Tree roots which can increase the cohesion of soils
Logging or burning and the subsequent decay of the
root systems
Landslides Are Identified on the Geology Map
Many, but not all, of the landslides in the Study Area are identified on the geology map.
These include older landslides occurring between the last glaciation and fifty years ago,
and young landslides which are active or have been active in the last 50 years. The largest
area of mapped activity occurs in the State Highway 101 corridor. This area is described
separately below.
Large areas of old landslide activity are near Tenas Lake and in the lower reaches of the
Hamma Hamma River valley. Tenas Lake formed in the hummocky terrain of the large
landslide deposit just north of the Lilliwaup Swamp. This deposit covers 623 acres.
44
• Characterization - Erosion and Sedimentation
•
Mapped old landslide deposits in the lower reaches of the Hamma Hamma include the flat
bench of pasture land, south of the river near the mouth, and about 304 acres in the John
Creek area.
Other notable old landslides are found in the Hamma Hamma watersheds. Jefferson and
Lena Lakes were created when large rock slides dammed their streams between 1,100 and
1,300 years ago. A rock slide, roughly 2,900 years ago, dammed the Hamma Hamma
River near the confluence with Cabin Creek (Schuster et al., 1992). This dam formed a
lake about one half mile long and deposited as much as 12 feet of sediment before the
natural dam failed a few hundred years after it formed. Elk Lake was formed in
depressions on an avalanche deposit instead of direct damming of the stream (Kuper. et al.,
1994). Evidence suggests that strong shaking by large prehistoric earthquakes triggered
most or all of these rock slides as well as others in the southeastern Olympic Mountains
(Schuster et al., 1992).
Several of the mapped recent landslides occur in association with streams. Recent
landslides are mapped along the following creeks: the unnamed stream furthest south in
the Study Area, Clark Creek, the Hamma Hamma River, Waketickeh Creek, and the
unnamed creek immediately north of Waketickeh Creek.
The State Highway 101 Corridor is a Prominent Landslide and Erosion
Area
Types of landslides and surface erosion seen in the State Highway corridor include deep -
seated rotational slumps, earth flows, debris slides, gully erosion, and sheet and rill erosion
of steep road cut or fill slopes.
The Coastal Zone Atlas (WSDOE 1980) displays maps of the slope stability, as well as
other features of the land within about 2,000 feet of the shoreline. The slope stability
maps are reproduced in Figure 6 and, according to the Atlas, address "rock or soil
movement in the form of falling, sliding, and /or flowing. Not included are slow mass
movement processes such as soil creep or surficial erosion in the form of sheet erosion or
gullying." For this area the Coastal Zone Atlas maps give more detailed slope stability
information than the geology map.
The Coastal Zone Atlas maps must be used with their limitations in mind. They result
from aerial photographic interpretation supported by as many field observations as time
permitted and may be limited by the small map scale, generalization of mapping units, or
lack of information. These maps are not a substitute for professional site - specific analysis
in the field.
45
•
Ar
Tr •�
r yam.
i
,an
>•v> 0
f` it j.Y
`i
Y�
Tt(
;vvv
^xw^
,S q•r
yvvvvyv�
Bottom of slope Sam
MAP s joins top of slope
SablMty Map 2
of Slope StaDtw map a ioma Domm of
SLOPE STABILITY MAP :3 Foffe 6
of
�Y
AA
Jy�7
SLOPE STABILITY MAP 2
FWe 6
• West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
In addition to the Coastal Zone Atlas maps, a second source of information on slope
stability in a portion of the Study Area is available. The Relative Slope Stability of the
Southern Hood Canal Area, Washington (Smith and Carson, 1977) is a map covering the
Study Area from the southern boundary north to the Lilliwaup Swamp area.
Several areas in the highway corridor are mapped as stable. When the map in Figure 6 is
combined with the geology map, it can be seen that the stable areas include Triton Head
mapped as basalt, Vashon till or basalt on gently sloping uplands, alluvial (river) deposits
laid down by streams like Eagle Creek or the Hamma Hamma River, and areas of stable
recessional outwash such as at Potlatch.
The most dramatic area of slope movement along the highway corridor begins just north of
Lilliwaup Bay and continues north to slightly past Jorsted Creek. Within this area fine
grained sediments deposited in glacial lakes can easily be seen in many of the road
cutslopes. The cutslope is the uphill side of the road where some material has been
removed to build the roadbed. The fillslope is the downhill side of the road where fill
material has been added to construct the road.
The Washington Geologic Newsletter contained an article on the "Jorsted Creek Slide"
• (Carson and Gryta) in 1974. The following is excerpted from that article:
"The causes of the landsliding along the west shore of Hood Canal, including the
Jorsted Creek Slide, are numerous. The stratigraphy in the area of most of the slides
consists of outwash overlying lakebeds. The outwash is permeable sand and gravel,
whereas the lakebeds are composed of impermeable silty sediment. The melting of the
glacier that excavated Hood Canal removed lateral support from the steep sides of the
glacial trough. Wave action on the shore of Hood Canal further steepened the sides of
the trough, and the construction of U.S. 101 resulted in many near - vertical roadcuts.
During the rainy winter months, pore pressure builds up in the potential landslides
because ground water percolates into the outwash but cannot escape through the
lakebeds. Excessive pore pressure results in outward flowing of the toe of the landslide
and downward slumping of the upper portion of the landslide."
Active Landslide /Erosion Areas
Several landslide areas along the highway corridor were active in the winter of 1994 to
1995. The landslide sites are identified by highway mile on Figure 6. The more notable
sites are described below starting from the southern Study Area boundary and moving
north. References to miles refer to mileposts on State Highway 101.
40 No currently active landslide sites were noted from the southern Study Area boundary
through the community of Potlatch to mile 333 just south of Hill Creek. However, within
this area there are slopes mapped as unstable and unstable /old slide.
50
•
Characterization - Erosion and Sedimentation
Between mile 333 and Lilliwaup Bay there are five areas of relatively shallow, small
landslides (mile 333.1, 333.2, 333.3, 331, and 330.4). In addition, at mile 330.5 there are
two incised "V- shaped" erosion sites. These are gullies. The "V- shape" indicates erosion
by water at the surface rather than the process of sub - surface saturation and slumping as
described in the article on the Jorsted Creek Slide. Surface erosion also occurs in the road
cutslope just below North Hill Road in Hoodsport (mile 331.4) and at the entrance to
Holiday Beach where Susan Ave. intersects State Highway 101 (mile 330).
The lakebed deposits described in the article on the Jorsted Creek slide were seen by the
Team in the road cutslopes beginning about one mile south of Lilliwaup Bay. According
to Carson and Gryta (1974), "approximately 15% of U.S. 101 between Jorsted Creek and
Lilliwaup has been destroyed or buried by landslides at least once in the past 25 to 50
years." Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has completed geologic
investigations at the landslide sites currently threatening the stability of the highway.
These investigations included drilling that showed saturated lakebed deposits _associated
with all of the investigated sites (Moses, 1995).
One of the largest currently active slides in the Study Area is at mile 326.8. Material from
previous slides appears to have formed a point of land extending into Hood Canal just
north of Lilliwaup Bay. This area is used for a road -side parking area and unofficial rest
stop.
A group of slides near mile 324 includes a cutslope failure and two fillslope failures. The
fillslope failures resulted in a loss of a portion of the road shoulder.
The slide at mile 322 is part of what is known as the Jorsted Creek Slide. Carson and
Gryta (1974) describe it as a combination of a slump on top and an earthtlow at the toe,
stretching at least 1,000 feet along the highway. The authors mention activity at this slide
in 1968 and 1974 and movement of roughly one -half million cubic yards of material.
The fillslope failure at mile 317 damaged approximately 270 feet of the north bound lane
of State Highway 101. The following information is from the WSDOT Geotechnical
Report (1995). This slide is a smaller localized failure within a larger, pre- existing
landslide. Test borings show the following sequence of soil and bedrock units from the
top of the test hole to the bottom, the maximum thickness found for each unit follows in
parenthesis: outwash gravels (14 feet), glacial lakebed sediments (28 feet), basal till (47
feet), and basalt bedrock (depth unknown). The slide was facilitated by increasing
porewater pressure in the glacial lakebed sediments that resulted from heavy rainfall in
December 1994 and January 1995.
51
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Significant Property Damage in Other Areas Prompted Strict
Development Controls
The need for strict controls over development on unstable slopes is often overlooked or
popularly unacceptable until significant property damage results from a period of intensive
landsliding. This pattern is described in the introduction to Shoreline Bluff and Slope
Stability: Technical Management Options (Canning, 1985). Rainstorms in the Puget
Sound Region in early 1972 caused a remarkable number of landslides throughout the
Puget Sound lowlands, particularly the Seattle area. The area was declared a natural
disaster area. The 1972 incident prompted the first widespread concern in the Puget Sound
area about slope stability in developing areas. In response, some local governments,
particularly Seattle, enacted strict controls over development on unstable slopes. "Heavy
winter rains in Los Angeles County (California) during 1951 -52 produced a large number
of landslides and resulted in Los Angeles County's first grading controls. Another winter
of heavy rains in the Los Angeles area in 1961 -62 produced more landsliding and stricter
grading controls. Wet winters in the San Francisco Bay Area in 1968 -69 and 1972 -73
resulted in an intensive regional slope stability research program and the implementation of
local controls." The significant property damage during a period of intensive landsliding
was critical to passage of strict development controls.
Concern about slope stability in the Puget Sound basin preceded the heavy rainfalls in the
1970's. In Seattle the problem was recognized early in the city's history. In an 1897
letter to Seattle's Corporation Council, the first city engineer outlined the problem as the
result of the interaction of groundwater and proglacially deposited layers of clay and sand.
Landslides continued to be a problem later in the city's history. "Periodically, especially
stormy winters result in an epidemic of slope problems. The winter of 1933 to 1934 was
such a season. In December of 1933, 15.33 inches of rain fell, leading to 180 separate
slides. More heavy rains fell in January of 1934, with further sliding (Evans, 1994)."
Mason County Has Regulations for Landslide and Surface Erosion
Areas
The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance (77 -93) classifies and regulates uses of
Landslide Hazard Areas and Erosion Hazard Areas. Activities exempt from regulation
related to landslide hazards include forest practices, surface mining, and existing and
ongoing agriculture when conducted according to pertinent regulations or guidelines. The
development standards for Landslide Hazard Areas and Erosion Hazard Areas address
grading, vegetation management, drainage, sewage collection/treatment, lot size, and
buffers. Geotechnical reports for Landslide Hazard Areas may be required under certain
listed conditions. Effective implementation of development controls in the Landslide
Hazard Areas will become critical as building increases on highly desirable view lots on
the bench above Hood Canal. •
52
•
Characterization - Erosion and Sedimentation
Policy and Use Regulations for shoreline stabilization are described in the Mason County
Shoreline Master Program. It is stated that shoreline stabilization should be undertaken in
a coordinated manner, should consider entire systems or sizeable stretches of rivers, marine
shoreline, etc. and should consider off -site erosion or accretion resulting from the
stabilization activities. In addition, the county shall require professional design of
shoreline stabilization projects which may cause interference with normal geohydraulic
processes, leading to erosion of other upstream and downstream shoreline properties, or
adverse effects to shoreline resources and uses.
Information on Landslides and Erosion Control for Property Owners Is
Available
Three recent publications are valuable for property owners with slope stability or erosion
concerns: Vegetation Management: A Guide for Puget Sound Bluff Property Owners
(#93 -31), Slope Stabilization and Erosion Control Using Vegetation (#93 -30), and Surface
Water and Groundwater on Coastal Bluffs: A Guide For Puget Sound Property Owners
(#95 -107). These publication are available through the Washington State Department of
Ecology.
53
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
•
Hydrology Is the Science of Water Movement
Hydrology is a science concerned with the distribution, movement, and effects of the
earth's water. The transfer and movement of water on the earth are conceptually
represented by the hydrologic, or water cycle, shown in Figure 7. The cycle shows water
moving from the atmosphere as precipitation, flowing over the land surface and in
channels, eventually reaching the ocean, and evaporating into the atmosphere to continue
the cycle. Some precipitation sinks into the ground, becoming part of the ground water
system, taking longer to find its way back to the atmosphere. Some water returns to the
atmosphere before reaching the ocean, evaporating from the ground and from lakes and
wetlands, or being transpired by plants.
A watershed is an area of land on which precipitation drains to a common outlet. The
outlet could be where a stream flows into a river or where a river flows into a bay or
ocean. A watershed can contain many smaller watersheds or subwatersheds. Several
watersheds within the Study Area are delineated on the Watershed, Beneficial Use, and
Stream Type Map. All the watersheds outlet into Hood Canal. Earlier in the report,
information about soils, slopes, land use, land cover, and other conditions that have a
bearing upon the hydrology of watersheds was presented.
One effect of water flowing overland (runoff) in a watershed is the entrainment and
transport of nonpoint pollutants. During runoff, nonpoint source pollution moves to
surface water bodies where it can adversely impact beneficial uses of water. Nonpoint
sources may also affect ground water recharge areas and, in some cases, aquifers.
Interflow (lateral subsurface water movement) also occurs within a watershed.
Precipitation infiltrates through the soil pore spaces containing air and water (the vadose
zone) to a zone of saturation, where it may move laterally. In the zone of saturation all
pore spaces are filled with water. The zone of saturation can form on "hardpan" in till
areas, on layers of clay soil, or within other geologic units where it forms an unconfined
aquifer.
Wetlands play critical roles in the watershed hydrologic cycle. Wetlands are sites for
evapotranspiration and they store precipitation, runoff, and floodwater. They can be
ground water discharge and recharge areas. Wetlands release stored water slowly through
surface water connections and lateral flow along impermeable soil layers. The slow
release of water helps support stream flow during the summer months.
r
54
•
•
Surface runoff, as well as interflow and water storage, is
affected by many factors, such as rainfall amount and
intensity, evapotranspiration, soils, land use, and
topography. The relationship between precipitation and
evapotranspiration is very important to the watershed's
hydrology. Evapotranspiration is the process by which
water is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation from
the earth's surface and by transpiration from plants. The
relationship of precipitation and evapotranspiration
creates a yearly change in surface water runoff,
interflow, and in the amount, depth, and duration of
water stored in surface waterbodies.
Characterization - Hydrology
Precipitation and evapotranspiration vary considerably between the western boundary and
the northeastern parts of the Study Area. Precipitation in the western part of the Study
Area is approximately 180 inches per year decreasing to 60 inches per year in the
northeast corner. The amount of precipitation also varies considerably from year to year.
Potential evapotranspiration also varies seasonally, as well as from year to year. The
average annual potential evapotranspiration at Lake Cushman Dam is 25.7 inches per year
(Brody, 1991).
The condition of the land surface - pervious or impervious, vegetated or bare, saturated or
dry - is also very important in watershed hydrology. For example, wetland areas provide
a natural buffer to detain flows, reduce flooding, and help maintain stream flows. As
additional development occurs, the creation of more impervious surfaces, loss of wetlands,
and concentration of runoff into ditches and pipes will increase peak flows and total
surface runoff. Forestry activities also can affect runoff through the construction of roads
which concentrate flows into ditches and culverts, and through the clearcutting of large
forest units. This reduces the vegetation available to intercept and use the precipitation
that occurs. In turn, changes in runoff can change pollutant transport. Land development
and increases in impervious surfaces prevents infiltration of rainfall into the soil and
increases runoff.
55
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Hydrologic Cycle
Condensation
• Y�1
Transpiration
Precipilation , , •,
Evaporation
•
�' fir • •
. Surfaoe. o
runoff '• - '
Per —' Lake •
'• Wate Streamflow
• table Ocean
C=J 0,
• �o S • . ' GroiindiMater flow '
Figure 7
Ground Water Occurs Below the Earth's Surface
Groundwater has many important functions including feeding of lakes, streams, and
wetlands and use as drinking water. It is the primary water source for domestic
consumption in the Study Area.
Water that does not evaporate, is not used by plants, or does not run off as surface water
moves slowly downward through the soil under the force of gravity. It first moves through
the vadose zone, then through the top of the water table to become ground water. Ground
water occurs when all voids and fractures in the subsurface are saturated with water.
56
•
•
Characterization - Hydrology
Aquifers and wells
Figure 8. Diagrammatic Cross - section of Aquifers and Confining Layers
(Environment Canada, 1990)
Piezometric
surface
(in confined
aquifer)
Water
table well
unconfined
aquifer)
Confining
layer
npermeable)
Geologic units in the subsurface, saturated zones are classified as either aquifers or
confining layers (see Figure 8). An aquifer is a geologic unit that will yield water in a
usable quantity to a well or spring. A confining layer or aquitard is a geologic unit that
restricts movement of ground water either into or out of an adjacent layer. Aquifers, such
as those that occur in the glacial sediments of the Puget Sound Basin, are more like
saturated sponges than the underground rivers of legend. Flow rates of less than one foot
per day should be expected in all but coarse gravel geologic units.
An unconfined or water -table aquifer does not have an upper confining layer. The upper
surface of the aquifer is free to move up and down with the variations in discharge and
recharge. An unconfined aquifer is more susceptible to surface contaminants. An aquifer
is said to be confined, or artesian, if water completely fills the subsurface material, and it
is bounded above and below by confining layers (aquitards). Confined aquifers are better
protected from surface contaminants, but they are dependent for recharge on water moving
laterally for large distances or slowly through confining layers.
57
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Ground Water Aquifers Have not Been Identified in the Study Area
Description of Potential Aquifer Systems
Mason County's ground water resources have not been inventoried and mapped for the
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. An area along the East Fork of Lilliwaup Creek in
the vicinity of Melbourne and Osborn Lakes is shown on the Mason County Shoreline
Inventory maps as a potential aquifer recharge area. The boundaries for an aquifer are
difficult to determine as the depths of glacial deposits vary drastically in the Study Area.
Ground Water Availability
Wells Access Ground Water
Ground water availability is dependent upon the amounts of ground water currently
present, extraction rates, ground water flow rates, plus additional water obtainable by
infiltration from above. Ground water rights filed with the Washington Department of
Ecology total 58 permits, approximately 560 million gallons /year. The largest water use
category is "domestic multiple," wells that supply communities or small parcels in
subdivisions (75 %). The second highest recorded use is for fish propagation at state and
private hatcheries (24 %). A minor amount can be used for commercial /industrial and
irrigation. The totals do not include ground water use by small consumers such as single -
family residences that use less than 5,000 gallons per day.
Land Use Impacts Infiltration Rates
Land use activities can have major impacts on infiltration rates. Changes in the amount
and timing of water available for infiltration can have both negative and positive impacts
on ground water availability. Infiltration rates are decreased and stormwater runoff
increased by activities such as paving. Taking water from deep aquifers or from outside
an area and using it for lawn watering or disposing of it through on -site septic systems will
increase the amount of water infiltrated.
Reduction in the amount of rain intercepted by vegetation and decreases in the infiltration
capacity of the soil are the usual effects of development. Impervious surfaces, such as
roofs and parking lots, are impediments to infiltration of surface water to the ground.
Septic system drainfields and the use of dry wells to infiltrate roof runoff can help
maintain the limited ground water recharge that could be lost during residential
construction. Improper siting of infiltration can have negative effects such as hydraulic
loading on or above unstable slopes.
58
0 Characterization - Hydrology
I*
The reduction of rain interception and the infiltration capacity of soil can also occur
without the construction of impervious surfaces. For example, it takes about 2.8 inches of
rain falling on a mature forest before water begins to runoff of a low runoff soil.
However, on areas with small trees and brush cover, it takes 1.6 inches of rain to cause
runoff on the same soil. On lawns, golf courses, and other landscaped areas, where grass
covers about 75% of an area of low runoff soil, you get stormwater runoff with only 0.9
inches of rain. These estimates were calculated assuming a minimum 24 -hour storm using
a formula in the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (Washington
State Department of Ecology, 1992).
The frequency of storms producing at least two inches of rainfall in 24 hours has been
calculated for three stations in or near the Study Area. Calculations based on data from
Shelton with a mean annual precipitation of 64 inches, can predict a 24 -hour storm with
over two inches of precipitation every 4.24 months. At the Cushman Power House, the
mean annual precipitation is 85 inches, and the 24 -hour storm with over two inches of
precipitation can be expected every 1.6 months. The Cushman Dam, located closer to the
mountains, receives a mean annual precipitation of 100 inches and the 24 -hour storm with
more than two inches can be expected every 1.12 months.
Table 6. Rain Thresholds Producing Storm Runoff on a
Low Runoff Soil During a 24 -Hour Storm'
Lawns, golf courses, etc.
Fair condition (grass covers 50-75% 75 of the area)
Cultivated land in winter
Impervious surface such as parking lots
0.6 inches
032 inches
0.04 inches
Calculated using SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers for selected agricultural,
suburban, and urban land use for Type IA (Winter storm conditions) rainfall distribution, 24-
hour storm duration. Taken from Stormwater Manual for Puget Sound (Washington State
Department of Ecology, 1992).
59
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Decreases in the infiltration capacity of soil can also affect surface waterbodies. Most of
the water that falls on forested, till- derived soil is not transmitted to ground water but is
carried in the soil as interflow and is slowly released to streams and wetlands.
Construction activities that cut the soil horizon bring this water to the surface sooner and
result in greater highs and lows in wetland water levels and stream flow rates.
Construction activities can also redirect interflow. Road cuts and ditches are prime
examples of interception that reduces the natural detention time of subsurface water.
Direct discharges of interflow and deep ground water to the surface are critical in
providing year -round baseflow in small streams. The interflow and deep ground water
provide the additional benefit of temperature moderation in addition to base flows.
Infiltration of surface water can have negative impacts. Contaminated water infiltrates to
ground water through dry wells, septic systems, or leaking pipes. The potential for ground
water contamination is greater in soil types with higher infiltration rates and land use
activities using hazardous chemicals. A detailed survey of local businesses is useful to
determine which chemicals are used and to promote change to less hazardous substitutes.
This is most critical in areas with high infiltration rates.
Increased infiltration can also increase the likelihood of landslides and slumps to occur or
be reactivated. This problem is especially critical in areas where sand and gravel overlay
clay beds and increased hydraulic loading causes slumping.
Surface Water Bodies Are Primarily Supported By Ground Water and
Interflow
Surface water consists of waterbodies such as streams, lakes, wetlands, and estuaries.
There are 466 miles of mapped streams within the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds.
Approximately half these streams are perennial. Base flow (summer flow) is maintained
by recharge from ground water through springs and seeps. The ground water recharge to
area streams occurs from horizontal movement of soil moisture above the compacted till
layer and above the bedrock in the soil.
Snowmelt contributes flow year -round to the Hamma Hamma River. Snowmelt contributes
some flow to streams such as the Lilliwaup Creek during the winter and spring. Many of
the smaller streams, without headwaters in higher elevation areas, receive very little if any
snowmelt.
•
M
Characterization - Hydrology
As new properties in the Study Area are developed near lakes and streams, more water
will be needed and the threat of water pollution will increase. Recreation and home
development could be seriously affected by surface water depletion or by deterioration of
surface water quality. Land use planning requires special consideration of the low flows of
streams. Despite general abundance of water the area has a distinctly dry summer season,
and this is also the time of greatest water needs. Adequate low flows are essential for
sustaining migratory fish that use many streams in the area (Richardson, 1974).
The spring runoff flow in the smaller streams of the Study Area is dependent on short-term
precipitation. The only stored water available to maintain summer stream flow in the area
is from ground water and natural lakes. Because there is little change in the amount of
water stored in natural lakes during the summer, the low stream flows are sustained by
ground water discharge into the stream channels. Some wetlands that provided summer
stream flows were observed in the Study Area. The area contributing ground water to a
stream is generally unknown, but is not necessarily the same as the surface- drainage basin.
Ground water contributions differ considerably in response to local geologic and
hydrologic conditions but tend to be greatest in the lower reaches of streams (Richardson,
1974).
9 Surface Water Rights
Within the Study Area, most surface water rights issued are for domestic use of springs or
unidentified streams. Finch Creek has the highest number of water rights issued for any
specific stream in the Study Area. Finch Creek surface water rights issued for
consumptive use, or water used for domestic uses, is equal to 0.815 cfs (cubic feet per
second). Nonconsumptive use, such as for irrigation, is 17.4 cfs. There are 7.75 cfs of
surface water rights issued on Lilliwaup Creek. Hamma Hamma River has the two largest
(quantity) surface water rights, 100 cfs on the main stem and 50 cfs on Jefferson Creek,
both held by the City of Bremerton
Peak Flow Measurements
Scientists measure stream flows and take water samples to quantify the effect of land uses
and precipitation on water quality and quantity. Stream flow that results from storm events
is often called storm runoff. Storm runoff in a stream includes all flow above the base
flow. The increased volumes, velocities, and depths of water during storm events create
most of the flooding, erosion, and sedimentation that occur within a stream system. Peak
flow is a term used to describe the maximum flow volume that occurs during a storm
event before stream flow begins to recede. Peak flows are often used to describe storm
runoff events since they can easily be determined using various statistical methods and
computer models. Higher peak flows indicate there is more energy available to accelerate
erosion and to transport pollutants.
roil
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Only a few of the streams in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds have been au ed
g g
for stream flow. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maintained gauging stations on a
few of the streams in the Study Area in the 1940's and 1950's. Except for the Hamma
Hamma River, the records are for individual days and events; continual daily
measurements were not recorded.
8 Table 7. Summary of Gaging Station Records (Richardson, 1974). 1
' cubic feet per second (cfs).
2 (CH2M Hill, 1983)
62
•
0
Eagle Creek
June - Sept., 1951
—
6.9
Finch Creek
June - Sept., 1951
—
11
John Creek (tributary of
Hamma Hamma River)
1942 -43, 1948 -50
35.2
3.9
Jefferson Creek (tributary of
Hamma Hamma River)'
1957 -1971
152
8.8
Hamma Hamma River
(R.M. 2.0)Z
estimated
524
48
' cubic feet per second (cfs).
2 (CH2M Hill, 1983)
62
•
0
Characterization - Hydrology
Good Water Qualit y Is Important to Beneficial Uses
Water quality is the result of chemical, physical, and biological
factors that influence the suitability of water for different beneficial
uses. The "Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State
of Washington" Chapter 173 -201A Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) classifies all streams draining into West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds and Hood Canal as Class AA (extraordinary) water.
Class AA waters receive the highest level of protection in the state
and must meet the requirements to support all beneficial uses.
Beneficial uses include water supply (domestic, agricultural, and
industrial), fish and shellfish, wildlife, and recreation (contact
recreation, boating, fishing, and aesthetic enjoyment). See
Appendices B and C for a complete listing of characteristic uses and
water quality parameters by classification.
Hood Canal Has Water Quality Problems
A shallow sill located near the northern entrance to Hood Canal reduces the exchange rate
of water within the Canal. The water in the Canal also becomes stratified for longer _
periods of time than other embayments in Puget Sound. These conditions combine to
prevent vertical mixing of water and slow the removal of pollutants.
Because of its hydrographic characteristics, Hood Canal is nutrient - limited and sensitive to
changes in nutrient input. Oxygen depletion, an indicator of excessive algal blooms, is a
problem throughout most of Hood Canal. In addition to lower dissolved oxygen, nutrient
depletion in the southern part of the Canal has been found to persist longer than in any
other Puget Sound water body tested under the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program.
According to the most recent information, depleted oxygen appears to be increasing in
magnitude and duration according to the most recent information.
Poor water quality in Hood Canal is primarily due to the impacts from nonpoint source
pollution. Lower Hood Canal marine water quality is deteriorating. Dissolved oxygen,
pH, and fecal coliform parameters have been exceeded. In northern Hood Canal,
violations of pH, metals and organics parameters have exceeded water quality standards
(Hood Canal Technical Group, 1995).
Several fish kills have been reported in Hood Canal in past years. An extensive fish kill
occurred in 1989 and another in 1990 (Hood Canal Technical Group, 1995).
63
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Reduction in Pollution From the Study Area Will Improve Hood Canal
Water Quality
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds have few documented marine water quality
problems, with the exception of Finch Creek and the Hoodsport tidelands. However, other
areas in Hood Canal have water quality problems such as in Lynch Cove at the tip of the
canal. Any reduction or prevention of nonpoint pollution from the West Shore Hood
Canal Watersheds will help prevent further deterioration of Hood Canal water quality.
Water quality sampling by Washington Department of Health (WDOH), Mason County,
and a local citizen's group, Friends of Finch Creek, has revealed high fecal coliform
bacteria counts in lower Finch Creek. The high counts were found in the main stem of
Finch Creek and in ditches containing storm drain water. The storm
drains originate near residents' homes and businesses in Hoodsport.
Drinking water quality problems have plagued the Hoodsport area
for about the past ten years. The Hoodsport and Suncrest water
systems were found to have elevated levels of fecal coliform
bacteria. Both systems are operated with an interconnected system
that uses the same water source, two shallow wells less than 40 feet
deep, located next to Finch Creek in Hoodsport.
The first evidence of contamination of the water system was found
in routine water tests conducted in August, September, and October of 1994. The tests
indicated the presence of fecal coliform in the water. Both systems lack a proper method
of disinfecting the water which is pumped to approximately 185 commercial and
residential customers. The owner had also been dumping chlorine in an improper manner
into the water systems. A health advisory was issued by WDOH to boil the water before
drinking. The advisory was lifted in December 1994 when good quality samples were
taken. Restrictions were again placed on the water in April 1995.
In June 1995, a Thurston County Superior Count judge placed the Mason County Public
Utility District No. 1 in control of the water utility after its owner failed to make repairs
and improvements ordered by WDOH. An emergency state loan was awarded to begin
rebuilding the water system.
Possible reasons for the fecal coliform contamination according to WDOH included:
♦ The shallow wells next to Finch Creek are easily polluted.
♦ The systems have experienced a number of line breaks and piping is exposed.
♦ The main storage tank which serves the two systems is old and dilapidated.
♦ No approved chlorination system is in place.
IM
� West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
E
C7
The bacteriological water quality of the marine water samples must satisfy both parts of
the standard in Table 8. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has established fecal
coliform standards for shellfish sold commercially. Concentrations in the shellfish are not
to exceed 230 organisms per 100 grams of shellfish tissue.
WDOH classifies all actual and potential commercial shellfish growing areas in
Washington state as either Approved, Conditionally Approved, Restricted, or Prohibited
based on the results of the comprehensive sanitary investigations. Presently, 920 acres of
shellfish beds in the Study Area are Approved. There are no areas classified as Prohibited,
Restricted, or Conditionally Approved.
Table 9.
Commercial Shellfish Harvesting Areas
in West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds (WDOH, 1994).
WDOH ClawiFicatioii
of Shell€ish Beds {Acres)
Area
Growers
A
CA;
R
' SourcesZ
Camp Robinswold
1
30
0
0
0
-
Eagle Creek
2
70
0
0
0
-
Hamma Hamma River Delta
4
380
0
0
0
-
Jorsted Creek -Hood Canal
3
110
0
0
0
-
Lilliwaup Bay/Sund Creek
8
110
0
0
0
-
Waketickeh Creek -Hood Canal
1
30
0
0
0
-
Fulton Creek -Hood Canal
3
40
0
0
0
-
McDaniel Cove -Hood Canal
1
10
0
0
0
-
Triton Cove -Hood Canal
2
140
0
0
0
-
Total
25
920
0-70
0
t A= Approved, CA= Conditionally Approved, R= Restricted, and P= Prohibited.
2 "Sources" refers to contamination sources that have been identified in the area
by WDOH. Some sources represent potential rather than active discharges of
pollution, including sewage treatment plants.
Recreational shellfish harvesting sites can be closed under recommendation by WDOH.
Presently only one recreational site near the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Hoodsport Hatchery is closed due to possible contamination from the nearby marinas and
septic effluent from on -site septic systems.
,.
Characterization - Water Quality
Shellfish and Water Quality
Clams and oysters feed by filtering microorganisms from large quantities of water.
Although seeking phytoplankton as a food source, the bivalves coincidentally remove
bacteria and viruses if they are present in the water column. Due to the large quantities of
water filtered, shellfish can concentrate harmful microorganisms to levels many times
greater than levels in the water. Laboratory experiments have shown that oysters can
concentrate virus and bacteria 60 times greater than ambient water.
Fecal Coliform Standards
Fecal coliform (FC) bacteria are often used as indicator organisms whose presence in water
is associated with viral, bacterial, or parasitic pathogens. These pathogens can cause
infectious hepatitis, gastroenteritis, shigellosis, cholera, typhoid fever, or other illnesses.
Fecal coliform is one of many different bacteria that occur in the feces of warm - blooded
animals. The primary source of bacterial pollution is human sewage or animal fecal
matter. The fecal coliform standards for Class AA waters, marine and fresh water, are
listed in Table 8. If the parameters in either Part 1 or 2 are exceeded, the water sample
does not meet state water quality standards.
Table 8. Fecal Coliform (FC) Water Quality Standards
•
Marine water - Class AA FC are not to exceed a geometric Not more than 10% of the samples
and Class A mean of 14 colonies per 100 ml of are to exceed 43 colonies per 100
water. I ml of water.
Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) must certify any area used for
commercial shellfishing safe for human consumption. This precaution is taken because of
the biological ability of shellfish to concentrate harmful microorganisms and because
shellfish are often eaten raw and the whole animal is eaten, including its digestive system.
WDOH prohibits or restricts commercial harvest of shellfish when its sanitary survey and
water quality data indicate that fecal material, pathogenic microorganisms, marine
biotoxins, or poisonous or deleterious substances are present in dangerous concentrations.
The comprehensive sanitary survey includes water quality and shoreline investigations to
identify sources of contamination and evaluate fecal coliform (FC) levels in the area.
Potential sources of both point and nonpoint contamination are identified in these surveys,
and their influence on the shellfish is evaluated. Meteorological and hydrological factors
that may affect the distribution of pollutants in the area are also evaluated (WDOH, 1994).
65
M West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
r
P_.�
Water quality sampling has shown high fecal coliform bacteria levels in the main stem of
lower Finch Creek and in nearby ditches that transport storm drain water from nearby
residents' homes and businesses. Many samples failed to meet state water quality fecal
coliform bacteria requirements for Class AA waters. Some of the higher bacteria levels
recorded range from 110 FC /100 ml to over 1,000 FC /100 ml. The data is not summarized
but there appears to be a definite trend of increasing bacteria from stations higher in the
watershed to those closer to the mouth within the town of Hoodsport.
Sampling of oyster meats from the Finch Creek tidelands and north of the Hoodsport
Public Docks also revealed high bacteria levels. Counts ranged from less than 18 to 460
FC /100 gm. The state owned tidelands near the hatchery are closed to harvest of shellfish
due to the contamination.
A survey of actual and potential sources of pollution affecting the sanitation of marine
waters and shellfish resources was conducted in September 1993. One commercial
shellfish operation that harvests clams and oysters from 25 acres of tidelands and one
public recreational shellfish beach were within the study area.
Two drainages discharge into Triton Cove. A sample collected on September 13, 1993
from the southwest corner drainage culvert had a bacteria count of 350 FC /100 ml.
The Department of Health recommended if a proposed boater sewage pump -out facility at
the new Triton Cove State Park is installed, then WDOH should determine the boundary
for a closure zone around the pump -out.
An eight -day intensive water quality study was conducted in the Hamma Hamma River
Delta Area in May, June, August, and September of 1988 by Washington State Department
of Health. There were no elevated fecal coliform levels recorded at any of the sample
sites. The studies were done during dry weather months.
e.
Characterization - Water Quality 0
Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning
Paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) is a serious illness caused by eating shellfish that have
consumed large amounts of a poison- producing microscopic dinoflagellate (Alexandrium
catenella . When clams, oysters, and other bivalves feed on the dinoflagellates, they
concentrate the poison. Outbreaks of PSP are sporadic, usually occurring in late spring,
summer, and fall when warmer water temperatures, more hours of daylight, and other
factors create conditions favorable to the growth of dinoflagellates. The actual causes of
the outbreaks are not clearly understood. These organisms occur naturally but may be
affected by urban runoff. One theory suggests nutrient loading from development as a
possible cause.
WDOH, in conjunction with local health agencies, monitors shellfish along Puget Sound
and coastal beaches for the presence of PSP. WDOH utilizes caged blue and California
mussels for monitoring purposes. A site at Triton Head and another at Hoodsport are two
monitoring stations maintained within the Study Area. The only large areas remaining
unaffected in recent years by PSP closures are southern Hood Canal, south of Seabeck and
the southernmost areas of south Puget Sound.
Water Quality Studies Completed and Ongoing
The following is a brief overview of studies relevant to water quality completed or
ongoing within West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. The findings and conclusions
discussed are those of the author(s) of the studies and not necessarily those of the
River Basin Team. For more detailed information please see the individual reports
referenced.
Washington State Department of Ecology's Marine Water Column Monitoring Program is
primarily designed to measure ambient water quality conditions in Puget Sound and the
coastal estuaries. The water quality parameters sampled include temperature, conductivity,
pH, dissolved oxygen, light tramsmissivity, dissolved nutrients, and fecal coliform bacteria.
One sampling site lies within the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds near Eldon in Hood
Canal. Low dissolved oxygen and surface nutrient depletion based on nitrite- nitrate
concentrations have been the only observed water quality violations.
67
•
•
•
Characterization - Water Quality
Three -day water quality studies were conducted in May 1988, September 1989, and
September 1990 in the Lilliwaup area. The overall water quality results were satisfactory,
although some of the stations showed periodic increases in fecal coliform counts. In
addition, stream water samples were taken from Eagle and Lilliwaup Creeks May 16 and
18, 1988. The readings on Lilliwaup Creek were 17 and 130 FC /100m1 and on Eagle Creek
were 3.7 and 49 FC /100 ml. A small stream north of Lilliwaup had a reading of 33
FC /100 ml. on May 16, 1988. The study recommended further intensive water quality
studies be done in both Lilliwaup Bay and Eagle Creek. The final recommendation was
for Lilliwaup and Eagle Creeks to remain as approved shellfish growing areas.
RM
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Stream Corridors Protect Water Quality and Habitat
A stream corridor is defined, for the purposes of this report, as the streambed and upper
and lower stream banks. Stream corridors provide many different functions.
♦ Streams provide spawning and rearing habitat for salmon, trout, and other fish.
♦ Streams and streamside vegetation provide food and habitat for insects, fish, and
other wildlife. Root systems of vegetation stabilize stream banks, which protect
against erosion. Vegetation is a source of large woody debris (logs) to the stream
and provides habitat for fish.
♦ Stream corridor vegetation shades the channel, helping keep water temperatures
low, and assists with the control of undesirable vegetation. The vegetation provides
a buffer between the adjacent land use and the stream channel.
♦ Small streams and wetlands help detain runoff and absorb rain water. This function
helps maintain stream base flows during summer and fall.
♦ Stream corridors serve as travel passageways for wildlife.
♦ Streams transport surface runoff water and any pollutants in the water.
♦ Summer base flows in the upper part of the Watersheds are maintained primarily by
wetlands. In the lower valley areas streams gain additional base flow from springs
and seeps discharging ground water.
Stream corridors within the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds display a variety of
conditions from densely wooded and undisturbed to heavily impacted. There are 466 miles
of streams mapped in the Study Area. The following table lists known fish use by species
within the larger streams. Other streams may contain salmon, steelhead, or trout. The
smaller, shorter streams not included in the list provide limited spawning habitat that is
cumulatively very important.
70
•
0
•
Characterization - Stream Corridors
Table 10. Salmonid Species Found in Streams of the
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Coto
Qrum
Ct:itioale;
SteeIhead
Seaton
Pink
Rasident
StreamA+)
Salmon
Salmon
Salmon
Ck€tihraat
<
Salon:
Trout :
;.
Unnamed (16 -0217) (Enatai
■
■
Hatchery)
Unnamed (16 -0218) (Potlatch
■
■
State Park)
Unnamed (16 -0220)
■
(Potlatch)
Hill Creek (16-0221)
■
■
■
■
■
Finch Creek (16 -0222)
■
■
■
■
■
Clark Creek (16 -0223)
■
■
■
Miller Creek (16 -0225)
■
■
❑
p
■
Sund Creek (16 -0226)
■
■
❑
❑
■
Little Lilliwaup Creek (16-
■
■
■
■
0228)
Lilliwaup Creek (16 -0230)
■
■
■
■
■
■
Eagle Creek (16 -0243)
■
■
❑
■
■
■
Jorsted Creek (16 -0248)
■
■
■
■
■
Hamma Hamma River (16-
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
0251)
John Creek (16 -0253)
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
(tributary to Hamma
Hamma)
Waketickeh Creek (16 -0318)
■
■
■
■
Schaerer Creek (16 -0326)
■
■
Fulton Creek (16 -0332)
■
■
■
■
■
■
McDonald Creek (16 -0349)
■
■
❑
❑
■
' Strays of pink salmon
can be found in most streams
■ Fish Use Known
11 Fish Use Unknown but Potential Exists
71
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Many of the streams in West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds originate in the rugged,
forested areas of the National Park and Forest Service lands in the Olympic Mountains.
Numerous smaller independent streams drain the lower foothills of the Olympic Mountains
between the major river systems. The Hamma Hamma River is the major river system in
the Study Area. Stream gradient in both the large and small streams is relatively steep.
Anadromous fish migration in all the streams is limited by falls, cascades, or by the overall
steep terrain. In spite of the limited amount of accessible areas, the lower sections of these
streams provide some of the highest quality salmon spawning grounds in Puget Sound,
particularly for chum salmon.
The present day vegetative pattern of the stream corridors in the Study Area, as in the
remainder of the Olympic Peninsula, is primarily the result of past wildfires and logging.
Most human habitation within the Study Area is located along the immediate shoreline of
Hood Canal, but, is expanding into upland areas as more forested areas are being converted
to residential land use (Williams et al., 1975).
A brief description of some of the larger streams follows. Streams and watersheds of the
Study Area are displayed on the Watersheds, Stream Types, and Beneficial Uses Map
located in the back of the report. Information was obtained from interviews, a literature
review, land use data, and field checks of the stream corridor.
CJ
72
0 Characterization - Stream Corridors
Hamma Hamma River
Midway along the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds, lies the Hamma Hamma River.
This system has 18 mikes of main stem, but it has extensive tributaries totalling
approximately 209 miles. Its headwaters are high in the Olympic Mountains, and the
Hamma Hamma is similar to other streams of this area with steep gradients in its upper
reaches. The upper river flows for six to seven miles through steep mountain terrain in a
narrow, steep - walled valley; then assumes a more moderate gradient and flows for 7 miles
more before dropping into a narrow canyon. One major falls at river mile (R.M.) 2.7 and
a long series of cascades (R.M. 2.0) lie in the canyon. Major tributaries include Jefferson,
Washington, Cabin, and John Creeks, of which only John Creek is accessible to salmon
migration.
With the exception of several rural homes and one rural farm located near the river mouth,
the entire watershed is sparsely populated. Most of the upper watershed is located in the
Olympic National Forest. Public managed forestland accounts for 48% of the watershed.
Private managed forestland comprises 28% and designated forestland is 17% of the
watershed. Coniferous forests predominate, although extensive logging has been done in
portions of the tributary drainages.
From R.M. 3.0 to 1.3 the river drops into a canyon with a steep gradient. The steep
gradient blocks salmon passage at approximately R.M. 2.0. Steelhead are sometimes able
to ascend these cascades but are stopped by the falls at R.M. 2.7. Below mile 1.5 the
stream and the valley characteristics abruptly change. Gradient become moderate, with
occasional deep pools separating broad expanses of excellent quality gravel. Stream
gradient below this point is shallow to moderate and includes some extremely productive
salmon spawning area. The valley contains stands of conifer and deciduous trees. The
lower 0.6 miles of stream is tidally influenced, with limited spawning area (Williams et al.,
1975).
Livestock are allowed unlimited access to the lower reach of the main stem. However, the
limited number of animals do not appear to have a large impact on the habitat. An elk
herd is also frequently observed in the lower reaches of the river during the winter.
John Creek, a major tributary, has a moderate gradient in the lower mile and is accessible
to approximately mile 1.8 with the gradient becoming steeper upstream. The south fork of
John Creek has approximately 0.1 mile of anadromous fish use. Low summer flows in
John Creek limit fish production. Both John Creek and the main stem Hamma Hamma
support strong runs of chum and pink salmon and a moderate run of chinook (only in the
main stem). John Creek also produces a small, but very important, coho population. An
. important run of chum salmon spawn intertidally on the north side of the main stem valley.
73
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Rainbow trout are the most abundant resident fish in the Hamma Hamma basin. Prickly
and coast range sculpins are also present (CH2M Hill, 1983).
The limited amount of accessible stream miles in the Hamma Hamma system (4.0 miles)
also limits the summer and winter habitat for anadromous fish. Forest practices have
reduced the tree canopy throughout the basin which probably increases fine sediment
production and water temperature. Logging in riparian areas has led to a reduction in large
woody debris in the stream channel (WDFW et al., 1994).
The estuary provides important transitional habitat for juvenile coho migrating to sea,
however dikes along the river mouth may have reduced estuarine productivity (WDFW et
al., 1994).
The Hamma Hamma River watershed was extensively logged in the past. Numerous
logging roads run through the basin. Recent logging has also been done in several areas
near John Creek. A landowner recently completed a clearcut near the power lines and fell
large trees into the riparian area. This action resulted in failed slopes and erosion into the
creek. A 50 -foot buffer was left adjacent to the stream's edge, however, the steepness of
the surrounding slopes dictates a wider buffer in order to protect the stream. Additional
logging will be taking place on the main stem in the near future.
•
Finch Creek
The Finch Creek watershed is the most developed basin within the West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds. The largest center of population in the Study Area is the community of
Hoodsport which lies on both sides of the creek in the lower reaches. Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife's Hoodsport Hatchery is located at the mouth of Finch
Creek. This hatchery is situated on the shores of Hood Canal and is uniquely adapted for
either fresh water or salt water rearing of salmon. Four of the five species of salmon
native to Washington are produced at this hatchery.
Finch Creek has a fairly steep gradient except in the lower reaches. Finch Creek is
perennial with low summer and early fall flows. A fish trap at the hatchery, near the
stream outlet, prevents most fish from passing. A dam and water diversion at R.M. 0.2
also prevent fish passage. During high flow conditions some fish, mainly coho salmon, are
able to bypass the fish trap, ascend the dam, and reach spawning grounds.
Private managed forestland covers 58% of the Finch Creek watershed. Public managed
forestland comprises 11% and residential land (both developed and undeveloped) covers
16% of the watershed.
The stream flows close to residential homes in the lower reaches and through back and .
front yards. The habitat has been compromised by the removal of most native understory
74
0 Characterization - Stream Corridors
vegetation. The stream banks are armored in many areas to prevent the stream from
overflowing and /or eroding stream banks.
A poorly built logging road, near the poweriines, was observed in January 1995. Deep ruts
developed in the road surface from logging trucks hauling on the saturated, unrocked road.
The road crossed over Finch Creek, causing a lot of erosion and siltation into the stream
bed. Temporary sediment control devices were seen (straw bales); however, they were
doing little to control the runoff.
Clark, Miller, and Sund Creeks
Clark, Miller and Sund Creeks lie north of Finch Creek and south of Lilliwaup Creek and
share several characteristics in common. All the creeks are small, intermittent with steep
gradients in the upper reaches. Salmon access in the creeks is limited, ranging from
several hundred feet to less than one -half mile. This reduces their fish productivity.
Although anadromous fish access is limited in these streams, the habitat they do provide is
important and should be protected.
Land use within this area (Dow Mountain watershed) is predominately public managed
forestland (68 %) and private managed forestland (21 %).
Lilliwaup Creek
Lilliwaup Creek is the largest creek in the southern portion of the Study Area. Its drainage
contains a system of wetlands and lakes, including Lilliwaup Swamp. Dozens of unique
plant and animal communities are spread out over 6,000 acres around Saddle Mountain.
The area is home to migratory and resident elk herds, numerous waterfowl, and several
sensitive plant and animal species (Brody, 1991).
Ideal fish habitat is found within the stream corridors, however, most of the watershed is
inaccessible to salmon. A large falls (Lilliwaup Falls) at R.M. 0.7 prevents anadromous
fish passage. An important chum stock spawns in the northern tributary of the estuary at
the mouth.
A private owner operates a small hydroelectric power plant below Lilliwaup falls. The
electricity generated is sold to the local PUD. From the 1940s to 1985 the electricity
generated was used for personal consumption.
The majority of the stream corridors are forested within the Lilliwaup drainage.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) owns much of the forested
75
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
wetland area near Saddle Mountain. The Forest Service manages the area surrounding the
headwaters, north of Lilliwaup Creek Campground. Public managed forestland accounts
for 82% of the Lilliwaup watershed. Private managed forestland comprises 14 %.
A small tributary that drains an area south of Washington Pass and then joins the East
Fork of Lilliwaup Creek was surveyed. A blocked, undersized culvert along a logging
road ( #2469) created erosion and siltation into the tributary. The corridor of the tributary
contained a lot of woody debris and appeared to be holding back most of the larger
sediment. The stream channel and ravine walls appeared to be fairly stable; only a few
small slides were observed. The entire section of creek surveyed contained a heavy
sediment bedload, probably the result of past logging and /or wildfires. The sediment will
continue to work its way down the stream bed for many years.
A few residential homes /farms are located next to the creek near the mouth. _Long Live
the Kings, a private enhancement group, maintains a small hatchery on Lilliwaup Creek.
They collect summer chum entering Lilliwaup Creek, spawn them at the hatchery, and
release the offspring.
Summary 10
There are other streams (some mapped and others not) in the Study Area that are potential
fish bearing streams in the lower reaches. Gradient generally restricts fish use in the upper
areas. In combination, the habitat all these smaller streams provide is important. The
smallest streams, especially in the upper reaches, often suffer large impacts such as being
culverted or ditched. These impacts affect hydrology and water quality. These small
streams are often poorly regulated because there is a lack of information about them and
agency personnel (county, state, federal, etc.) are busy overseeing larger projects.
Many streams in the Study Area flow through very unstable ravines. The walls of the
ravines are composed of advance outwash which is easily eroded and susceptible to slides
if saturated with water from ground water recharge or surface flow. Extreme caution
should be taken before any activity, including road building, timber harvest, or construction
of residential homes, is permitted near these ravines.
Construction, ground disturbance, gravel removal, etc. in or near marine or fresh waters of
the state must be done under the terms of a permit called a Hydraulic Project Approval
(HPA). An HPA is also required for any work activity associated with wetlands next to
streams. Restrictions can be placed on projects outside the ordinary high water mark if
there is a direct impact to the stream receiving runoff from the project. There is a general
misconception held by many individuals that most requests for HPAs are denied. In
Western Washington during the five -year span of 1984 to 1989, over 99% of all requests
were approved. Verbal approval for certain emergency projects can be given over the
phone.
76
•
r�
Characterization - Wetlands
West Shore Hood Canal Wetlands Are Diverse
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds have a wealth of wetlands which contribute to the
overall health and diversity of the Study Area. Wetlands are a critical part of the Study
Area's water cycle and provide important
functions such as protecting water quality and
providing critical habitat. They vary from small,Yllat Makes a Wetland?
simple shrub systems that are seasonally wet to
hugs; complexes forming a mosaic of different 1!3 soils, plant communities, and hydrologic types
with open water areas and streams. Uncommon
SQils
in the Puget Sound Basin, the Study Area
contains some high quality salt marshes.
Wetlands are places where land and water
combine to create saturated soils or ponded or
flooded areas for a specified length of time during the growing season. These areas often
support plants, called hydrophytes, that have special adaptations for wet soils. The
presence of all or a combination of three parameters is used to identify wetlands for
inventory and regulatory purposes: sufficient water, wetland (hydrophytic) vegetation., and
saturated (hydric) soils.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) definition of wetlands was used
for this report. "Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems
where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow
water. For purposes of this classification, wetlands must have one or more of the
following attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes;
(2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is
saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season
of each year (Cowardin et al., 1979)." Although another definition is used in the
regulatory arena in the State of Washington, the USFWS definition is routinely used for
inventory and other nonregulatory efforts.
Deepwater areas (the deep portions of the Study Area's coves, bays, and lakes) differ from
wetlands by the depth and permanency of water. In general, deepwater habitats, such as
the subtidal areas in Hood Canal and the deep parts of lakes, are permanently inundated
areas deeper than.6.6 feet. Examples of deepwater lacustrine areas include Price Lake,
Tenas Lake, Lake Armstrong, Lena Lake, Jefferson Lake, Mildred Lakes, and Melbourne
Lake. They total 223 acres. Wetlands typically are less than 6.6 feet deep, and they can
be permanently or seasonally inundated or saturated. Wetlands may be associated with or
independent of deepwater.
77
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
The PSCRBT combined the following
sources of information to create a
composite Wetland and Hydric Soils Map
for the Study Area. It is located at the
back of the report.
♦ National -Wetlands Inventory (USFWS, 1987).
♦ PSCRBT photographic interpretation and field observations of lower elevation
wetlands in the Study Area.
♦ Skokomish Tribal Lands Wetland Inventory (Sheldon and Associates, 1994).
♦ Washington State Department of Natural Resources' GIS Soil Data Layer.
Hydric soils not already identified as wetlands are included on the portion of the map
covering non - federal lands. Hydric soils are mapped because they may be or historically
have been wetlands. The PSCRBT describes them as "additional hydric soils" in the
report. Available mapping did not designate hydric soils on federal lands.
Each wetland on the map was assigned an
identification number. It consists of a
watershed abbreviation and a wetland
number separated by a dash. For example,
wetland #TR -3 is the third wetland in
Triton Watershed. Because of limited map
space, the identification numbers of only selected wetlands are displayed on report maps.
All identification numbers are in the GIS data base.
Wetlands Cover About Two Percent of the Study Area's Land Base
Approximately 333 wetlands, some with deepwater components, cover an estimated 2%
(about 2,465 acres) of West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. Hereafter, the term wetlands
will include the deepwater areas wetlands are associated with. Approximately 1,066 acres
of intertidal wetlands occur beyond the Study Area's land boundary. Additional hydric
soils cover less than one percent (261 acres). Together, wetlands and deepwater areas
(excluding intertidal wetlands beyond the land boundary) and additional hydric soils make
up a little under 3% of the Study Area. The ratio of wetlands to land area in the Study
Area is considerably lower than many watersheds in the Puget Sound Basin because of the
extent of mountainous terrain.
Using the USFWS's classification system, wetlands in the Study Area are classified as
palustrine, estuarine, or lacustrine (Cowardin et al., 1979) and are described below.
Riverine wetlands are described in the hydrology and stream corridor sections of the
report.
U-11
0
•
Palustrine wetlands are the most common
wetland system in the Study Area (Table
11). Eighty percent of the wetland acreage
is palustrine. Nine percent of the total
wetland acreage, excluding the continuous
strip of intertidal flats along the shoreline,
are estuarine areas. The larger, estuarine
areas within the-land boundary are parts of
larger systems that transition into
freshwater wetland areas. Examples
include the wetlands at the mouth of
Lilliwaup ( #LC -54) and Fulton ( #FC -1)
Creeks and the Hamma Hamma ( #HR/CU-
65) and Skokomish ( #PO -28) Rivers. A
few shoreline wetlands (Eagle Creek ( #EC-
47) and Triton Head (#TR -13) lagoons)
appear to be mostly fresh water. The fresh
water comes from streams and ground
water discharge. The fresh water is
impounded by beach berms.
Characterization - Wetlands
1 Does not include off -shore intertidal wetland
2 Most riverine wetlands are represented as linear
features, not in acres, therefore are not represented
here. About 26 acres of the lower Hamma
Hamma River constitutes a measurable riverine
map unit.
Tenas, Price, and Melbourne Lakes and Lake Armstrong all have lacustrine wetland areas
along the perimeter of their open water. Nine percent of the Study Area wetlands are
deepwater and one percent are lacustrine wetlands.
Wetland systems are further divided into classes. See Table 12 for the percentage of the
major classes in the Study Area. Overall, the palustrine forested and scrub -shrub class is
most common in the Study Area covering 42% and 21% of the total Study Area's acreage,
respectively.
79
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
' Other wetland and deepwater classes are each less than 3 %.
1,
•.I
•
•
Table 12. Acres of Major Wetland Classes'
CLss
Acreage
Peroest Total Wetlands and
ileepwater
Estuarine
Emergent
93
4%
Lcustrine
Deep Open Water
223
9%
Palustrine
Forested
1,044
42%
Scrub -shrub
514
21%
Open Water
169
7%
Emergent
152
6%
' Other wetland and deepwater classes are each less than 3 %.
1,
•.I
•
•
0 Characterization - Wetlands
•
Wetland Location and Character Relate to the Study Area's Landscape
Wetland Distribution, Size, and Formation Factors
A Large Percent of Wetland Acreage is in the Study Area's Valleys
Although wetlands occur from high mountain cirques to the shore zone, they are a
dominant landscape feature in the Study Area's valleys. They contain about 62% of the
total wetland acreage. Lilliwaup Creek valley and the valley containing Price Lake have
the largest concentration. The Lilliwaup Creek valley is located between Forest Service
Road No. 24 and Saddle Mountain.
The shore zone contains significant intertidal wetland acres, 1,066 acres offshore from the
land boundary. The plateau areas of the Study area, notably the area in the southern -most
part of the Study Area and the plateau east of Ulliwaup Creek valley, contain 8 %. The
Area's benches also contain 8% of the total wetlands. Plateaus are flat to very gently
sloping areas that don't abut an upward sloping incline, hill, or mountain. Benches are
relatively flat areas with slopes above and below. Plateaus and bench areas are scattered
along the eastern portion of the Study Area between about 500 and 700 feet in elevation.
Like different landforms, some watersheds, geologic units, and soil types contain a higher
percentage of wetland acres. The Lilliwaup Creek watershed contains the largest acreage
of wetlands in the study area (46% of all the wetland acres) and the Hamma Hamma River
watershed supports 18% (see Table 13). The geologic units containing the most wetland
acres are ablation till (19% of the area's total wetland acres), alluvium (17 %), and
lodgement till (12 %). The soil types (excluding those in the National Forest lands)
containing the most wetland acreage are Hoodsport (14% of the total wetland acreage),
McMurray (14 01o), and Nordby (11 %).
m
The Studv Area's Wetlands Vary Greatly in Size
There is a full range of wetland sizes in the Study Area from less than a quarter acre up to
507 acres (Lilliwaup Swamp #LC -6). Other exceptionally large wetlands include the Price
Lake wetlands complex ( #LC -28 with 225 acres), wetland #LC -32 (185 acres), and wetland
#HR -50 (153 acres). Thirty -one of the Study Area's wetlands are ten acres or larger in
size. The size of a wetland doesn't always correspond to its importance. Large wetlands
are extremely important. Many small wetlands, however, cumulatively can provide
benefits equal to or greater than a single large wetland.
Wetland Formation Factors
Wetland formation factors determine
wetland character. Wetland character
such as water depth and fluctuation,
vegetation communities and structure,
presence of an inlet or outlet and many
other factors determine wetland function.
Wetland formation factors include time,
climate, topography, water movement and
supply, soil, geologic processes, plant
82
•
•
n
U
Characterization - Wetlands
growth, and animal activity. Alterations to these factors can cause detrimental results.
Because of their influence on character and function, understanding these factors is
important to managing Study Area wetlands and the Watersheds themselves. Topography,
geologic processes, and hydrology are discussed below.
Topography and Geologic Processes
Topographically, the majority of the wetlands identified in the Study Area occur in a
depression or a valley bottom. Less common are wetlands that occur on slopes or are wet
meadows on flat terrain. Examples of wet meadows include those along Lilliwaup Creek
in the broad valley bottom and in flood plain environments.
Many of the depressional wetlands occur on plateaus and benches while some are
depressions in large valleys like the Lilliwaup Creek valley. The depressions range from
small and shallow to large and rather deep, some are lakes fringed with wetlands.
Topographical depressions were typically created by glacial processes and, in selected
areas, landslides. Glacial scouring left topographic irregularities on the landscape. These
can be seen as small, linear wetlands in the plateau area south of Dow Mountain. A
• glacial outwash stream eroded into the underlying lodgement till to create the elongate
depressional wetland just west of Melbourne Lake. Ice blocks were left behind and buried
in deposits by the receding glacier. The ice blocks slowly melted and formed many of the
depressions in the Study Area. These depressions are called kettles or kettle - holes.
Examples of kettles include depressions in the southern part of the study area, Lilliwaup
Creek valley and the plateau to the east of the valley, and on the Study Area's benches.
Other geologic processes forming or altering wetlands include landslides and faults that
blocked drainages. Tenas Lake ( #LC -12) and surrounding wetlands developed in
depressions formed during the settling of a landmass that slid down the adjacent north
slope. The Elk Lake wetlands ( #WAC -5) are in depressions within a landslide. Price
( #LC -28), Lena ( #HR -55), and Jefferson ( #WAC -4) Lakes were formed by the damming of
stream drainages. All but Price were impounded by landslides tumbling from steep,
adjacent slopes. Price Lake was dammed by the scarp of a fault. The Lilliwaup Swamp
( #LC -b) may also have been affected by a fault running parallel to the Price Lake fault.
Wetlands also can occur on slopes where there is a steady water supply that keeps the soil
saturated for extended periods or all year long. Seeps occur periodically along the slopes
adjacent to State Highway 101, at other road cuts, as well as in other parts of the Study
Area. For example, a wetland was noted on the slope south of the lower Hamma Hamma
River ( #JC -4). Wetlands on slopes are seldom identified and therefore don't appear on
inventory maps. Sloping wetlands, because of their topography and tree cover, are difficult
to identify on aerial photographs. More field work and easier access are needed to
determine the prevalence of this wetland type.
83
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Estuarine wetlands primarily formed in beach deposits and in deltas or alluvial fans.
Examples include those created by Fulton Creek ( #FC -1), Lilliwaup Creek ( #L.0 -4), and
the Hamma Hamma ( #HRCU -65) and Skokomish ( #PO -28) Rivers. These wetlands vary
from very small to large. They continue to change with regular deposition of sediment and
movement of channels and sloughs.
Hydrology
A wetland's hydrology encompasses many components, including water transport into and
out of a wetland. Water transport into wetlands is described below. Transport out
includes evapotranspiration, subsurface flow (interflow), recharge into ground water, and
surface outlets. Evapotranspiration is the combination of evaporation and the transpiration
of plants. Subsurface flow occurs when water spills out of a depression in lodgement till
and moves laterally. Ground water recharge occurs through windows in the lodgement till
or, as may be the case for some wetlands in the Lilliwaup Creek valley, the unconfined
aquifer the wetland is located in. Recharge as a wetland water source is discussed in the
next chapter.
V
The majority of wetlands in the study area have outlets. Ninety -three wetlands containing
76% of the total wetland acres are hydrologically connected perennial or intermittent •
streams. Many of the wetlands lacking outlets are in kettle depressions.
Wetland hydrology is greatly influenced by local geology and soils. The majority of
wetlands in the lower elevations of the Study Area occur in areas mapped as lodgement till
or in deposits over till. Wetlands in the higher elevations of the Study Area are underlain
by bedrock or alpine glacial till. Even areas mapped as lodgement till have a layer of
ablation till or weathered till over the compact layer. The upper part of the soil profile is
very well drained, and precipitation percolates quickly to the lodgment till layer. It is so
well drained that in some parts of the Study Area, plants typical of lower precipitation
areas thrive. Examples include manzanita, quaking aspen, Idaho fescue grass, and others.
Lodgement till, as well as bedrock, creates a layer of slow permeability. The lodgement
and bedrock perch water between the less permeable layers and the ground's surface. This
water remains in place or moves laterally along the lodgement till layer and becomes
interflow. In the southern part of the Study Area, it appears that interflow moves rather
quickly to the edge of plateaus, where streams form and erode downward creating ravines.
Interflow and direct precipitation provide much of the water for depressional wetlands on
plateaus and, depending on adjacent topography, benches. Some benches are adjacent to
slopes and receive surface runoff and snow melt as well.
•
84
•
Characterization - Wetlands
Depressional Wetlands
When precipitation falls into a depression in the lodgement till, the water is retained on
site, unless it fills the depression to the point of spilling. Otherwise, precipitation soaks
into the soil and forms a local water table. Where the till layer slopes, water moves
laterally. It moves along the downward gradient until it intersects a depression and is
detained in a wetland, percolates through a window into an underlying aquifer, or
discharges on a slope as a spring, seep, or stream.
Drought periods and alterations to interflow, which can result from activities such as road
building, are especially threatening to depressional wetlands fed by interflow. Interference
with interflow can also affect slope wetlands and streams supported by seeps and springs.
Also, because the lodgement till may be thin in places, removal of stumps and drilling
holes, such as for well drilling, may penetrate through the till layer providing a window
into the underlying outwash, potentially draining wetlands.
Valley Wetlands
• Lodgement till also influences the hydrology of the extensive wetlands in the Study Area
valleys such as Price Lake ( #LC -28) and in the Lilliwaup Swamp ( #LC -6). They are
located in peat and alluvium, respectively, and are underlain by lodgement till. Unlike
other lowland valley complexes, the upper Hamma Hamma River valley wetlands (for
example, #HR -50) occur in alpine glacial and alluvial deposits.
In addition to precipitation and interflow /ground water, valley wetlands and those in deep
depressions on benches at the base of mountain slopes are also supported by snowmelt and
rain carried by overland runoff and streams. Some of this water is stored in the valleys of
Price Lake and the Lilliwaup Swamp, in the deep accumulation of sediments in valley
bottoms, providing a year round saturation and base flow support to Lilliwaup Creek.
Because these wetlands are so wet, large areas of deep peat have formed.
Wetlands with these additional surface and ground water supports are not as hydrologically
vulnerable as other wetlands. They can, however, be threatened by excessive ground water
withdrawal and the diversion of runoff and streams.
Shore Zone Wetlands
Most of the major estuarine wetland areas formed at the mouth of stream valleys. Their
hydrology is influenced primarily by periodic inundation by tides and overwashing by
waves. Freshwater influxes from streams and overland runoff moderates salinity. Salinity
varies with wetland elevation, the salinity of tidal water, and the amount of freshwater
dilution. Estuarine hydrology is artificially altered primarily by levee building, diking, and
damming.
85
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Unusual Variability in Wetland Hydroyeriod
Although wetland hydroperiod is commonly variable between wetlands throughout the
Puget Sound Basin, it is notable that, in the Study Area, quite a few wetlands are
unsaturated relatively early in the spring. In many cases, wetlands within the same vicinity
have very different hydrologic regimes within the same geologic unit. For example, during
May field reconnaissance in the southern part of the Study Area, the team noted some
wetlands that were significantly drier than others. One wetland ( #PO -10) had moist soils
while a short distance away a wetland ( #PO-8) had a greater than two foot water depth.
Wetland #L.0 -1 (Mint Marsh) and #L,C -13 are also examples of wetlands with similar
hydroperiods.
In addition to the differences in water level, there is a striking difference in the growth
habit of shrubs dominating these drier systems. The wetlands with a longer duration of
inundation contain hardhack (spirea) of normal stature, while in the drier wetlands,
hardhack is stunted and has an almost delicate appearance.
The team theorizes that erratic glacial depositional patterns and subsurface morphology of
the lowlands of the Study Area greatly affect the hydroperiod of these wetlands. The
Study Area is near the southwestern extent of the Vashon Glaciation and the ice was
thinner in this location. As a result, the depth of ablation till and recessional outwash
deposited over lodgement till, and the lodgement layer itself, varies greatly. The depth of
the depressions varies as well. Some depressions extend into the lodgement till layer,
while others are solely in the overlying, well- drained ablation till layer.
Depth of a depression does not dictate wetland hydroperiod. Some of the wetlands in
shallow depressions may be wet longer because the water table is close to the surface.
Some of the deeper depressions contain drier wetlands because they occur in areas where
the ablation till overlying lodgement till is thicker. The bottom of these depressions
doesn't extend into the underlying lodgement till and only intersects the water table during
the wettest times of year. These wetlands are especially vulnerable to anything affecting
the water table including climate changes and diversion of interflow. However, the deep
depressions that extend well into the lodgement till layer, as is the case with some of the
Study Area's lakes, will provide long -term storage of large amounts of water. Some of
these wetlands have accumulated deep peat, and sphagnum bogs have developed on the
peat.
•
9
r-.-
0 Characterization - Wetlands
•
There Are Numerous Noteworthy Wetlands In the Study Area
The Puget Sound Cooperative River Basin Team compiled a list of individual wetlands and
wetland systems that are noteworthy in the Study Area (refer to Table 14). The PSCRBT
subjectively identified wetlands using the six considerations listed below. However, this
noteworthy wetland list is not Inclusive of all wetlands of importance or concern in
the Study Area.
87
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Organic Soils
•
The presence of organic soils, especially sphagnum peat and associated plant communities,
fulfills three of the noteworthy considerations: uncommon, irreplaceable, and vulnerable.
Organic soils consist largely of undecomposed (peat) to well decomposed (muck) plant
remains that have accumulated under excess moisture. Organic soils are uncommon,
making up less than one percent of the Study Area. However, they are the dominant
hydric soil. Sixty -two percent of hydric soils in the Study Area are organic.
Peat wetlands are irreplaceable in a human lifetime and are vulnerable to land use
activities. They are irreplaceable because they take such a long time to accumulate. One
inch of peat takes 40 or more years to form in Western Washington (Rigg, 1958). The
depth of peat at Price Lake is deeper than 21 feet (Rigg, 1958). Using Rigg's estimates
for peat formation, Price Lake peat started forming more than 10,000 years ago.
Peat systems are vulnerable because artificial drainage by open ditches and tiling create
aerobic conditions. This causes peat wetlands to subside and decompose rapidly. Peat and
muck soils are easily compacted by equipment and livestock. Because of their wetness
and compactability, they are also the least suitable for development.
Wetlands with sphagnum moss are one of the most sensitive types of peat wetlands. They
require specific environmental conditions to thrive (low pH, low nutrient inputs, and a
stable water regime). Plant species growing in sphagnum moss are specially adapted to
this environment. Examples of sphagnum community species include Labrador -tea, bog
laurel, sundew, and cranberry. Cedar and hemlock trees growing on sphagnum are often
significantly stunted.
It appears the conditions for the growth of sphagnum moss and the formation of sphagnum
communities are favorable in the Study Area. Although low in number relative to other
wetland types within the Study Area, sphagnum wetlands are more common here than in
many other areas in the Puget Sound Basin. Of the 48 wetlands that were visited in the
field or for which there is information, eight contain a sphagnum component. Only a
small number of wetlands (about 159o) could be visited. It is likely that other sphagnum
wetlands have not been identified.
Sphagnum wetlands are especially vulnerable to land use changes. Small changes in
environmental parameters, especially water quality and water regime, can cause permanent
degradation of this unique wetland type.
•
•
Characterization - Wetlands
ITable 14. Noteworthy Wetlands In the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Mixed Estuarine and Palustrine
Hamma Hamma River delta
(#HR /CU -65)
Skokomish River delta (#PO -27)
Lilliwaup delta (#LC -54)
Fulton Creek delta (#FC -1)
Palustrine
#PO-8
#PO -20
#PO -24
#PO -25
Western lobe of the Price Lake
complex (#LC -28)
Main body of the Price Lake
complex (#LC -28)
#L.0 -26
Mint March (#LC -1)
Lilliwaup Swamp complex (#LC-
6)
Tenas Lake complex (#LC -12)
#L.0 -32
Cluster of #EC 5, 6, 25
Melbourne Lake complex (#EC4)
#EC -34
D, FO, MM, AB, MF, SM I S, UNC, F, V, D
D, SM, MF, MM, FO, AB S, UNC, F, V, D
D, SM, MF, AB S, UNC, V, F
D, SM, MF, AB UNC, V
SS, FO, MM, AB, PE
FO, SS
SPH, PE, SS
SPH, PE, SS
SS, OW, AB, BV, SPH, PE, SN
FO, SS, OW, EM, SPH, PE, SN
SS, OW, AB, SPH, PE, BV
SS, MM
FO, SS, MM, OW, BV, SPH, PE,
SN
SS, MM, OW, AB
SS, FO, OW, AB, SN
SS, FO, OW, AB, SN
SS, FO, OW, SPH, MM, PE, SN
SS, FO, OW, AB, MM SPH, PE,
SN
:•
UNC, V, D, F
UNC, V
UNC, D, C, IR, V
UNC, D, V, IR
UNC, D, IR, V, F
UNC, D, IR, V, F
UNC, IR, D, V
F
S, UNC, IR V, D, F
S, F, V, LI
S, UNC, F, D
D, F
S, UNC, IR, V, F, D
S, UNC, IR,V,F,D
•1
J
01
Table 14 (coot.).
Noteworthy Wetlands In the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Wetland
Lake Armstrong (#TR-10)
SS, MM, Ow
S, LI
#HR-50
FO, SS
S'lP
Elk Lake (#WAC-5)
SS, MM, OW
DY, V, LI
Jefferson Lake (#WAC-4)
SS, MM, OW
V, U
Mildred Lakes (#HR-7,8,9)
Ow, MM
"Ll, F
Upper Lena Lake (#HR-46)
Ow, MM
U, F
Una Lake (#HR-55)
zc�
I
owl MM
U, F
'Cbaracteristics: D-delta, SP-sand spit, SM--salt-marsh, MF--mudflat, LG=IagDon, FO--forested, SS-shrub,
MM=wet meadow/marsh, OW=fresh open water, AB=aquatic bed, BV-beaver activity, SPH=sphagnum,
PE--organic soil , SN=snags
2 PSCRBT Considerations: S=size, UNC--uncommon type or plant community, IR=irreplaceable,
V=vulnerable, D=diverse, F-critical functions, U=Iocally significant
•1
J
01
I L3W. L4W.p
T.25K
T.24 K.
T.24 N.
T 23 N.
T. 22 N.
T. 23 X
T.23 N
T.22N.�
L4W. L3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meow
Aw Dew&"
4!
I't
yr -
004"
Mop"
�47-7' 71z, Mz
z
00d COW
F"s Am=
Bay.
LSW.L2W.
cow
...... ......
DIM
Cam
�kp
ti `T On,
Ew
N,
4
t"I
...........
Carr.
..................
-7�
i
LEGEND
Study Area
Land Outside Study Area
Hood Canal & Lake Cushman
Wedand Aram
/V Watershed Boundaries
State nerway,
Major Roads
Section Lines
Townsh4WRange Lin"
A I county Line
-po.7e- Wetland Jdardffication Numbers
WATERSHEDS
AY -A ock
CC - Creek
CU v- Cummiw
DM - Dow Moundain
EC : Engle Creek
PC Fulton Creek
FNC - Finch Creek
HR - tiamma liarruna. River
C FJohn Creek
jc,�- jorsted Creek
Lahwoup Creek
MC McDonald Creek
MWS - Mid -West Shore
PO = Podafth
7R - Triton
MC - Washington Creek
WC - Vhkedciceh Creek
ReMAP I.-l6VQw
Am-
SELECTED WETLANDS WITH IDENTIFICATION NUNBERS
pumuSOUM COOPS UMTRIM MSW7F" -59MMM IM
Figure 9
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
92
•
s
r
Characterization - Highlights and Conclusions
Watersheds Characterization Highlights and Conclusions
Highlights
• The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds (the Study Area) cover about 103,558
acres. -
• The Study Area has approximately 30 miles of marine shoreline containing
numerous coves, lagoons, and bays.
• Precipitation ranges from approximately 60 inches annually in the northeast area to
about 180 inches at the western edge. Annual precipitation influences the amount
of surface runoff and ground water recharge.
• Tree - covered land covers 89% of the Study Area.
• Public and private parks cover 5% of the Study Area.
• Land use classified as residential occupies 3% of the Study Area.
•
• Approximately 47% of the platted residential land is developed.
•
• The 1990 U.S. census estimates the population of the Study Area to be 1,500,
residents, excluding the census block within the Skokomish Reservation boundary.
• Crescent basalt (56 %) and lodgement till (13 %) are the most common surface
geologic formations in the area. Lodgement till is the dominant feature in the
lower elevations. In this Study Area, The hardpan in lodgement till is overlain by
coarse, well- drained material and supports plants typical of drier climates. The
hardpan causes lateral, subsurface water movement and limits ground water
recharge.
• The most common soil groups are bedrock - derived soils on mountain slopes and
foothills and glacial till soils on moraines, glacial valleys, and uplands.
• Landslides and surface erosion occur in many parts of the Study Area, especially on
steep slopes; they are most prominent in the State Highway 101 corridor. They can
be caused or aggravated by human activity.
93
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
• In the Study Area, Hood Canal marine water is of good quality in areas where
shellfish are harvested.
• Water quality conditions of fresh water are unknown in many Study Area streams.
Finch Creek in the Hoodsport area has identified bacterial pollution problems.
• All of the streams have steep gradients and anadromous fish are unable to ascend
many of the falls and cascades.
• There are 466 miles of mapped streams, both perennial and intermittent.
• Historically, the streams of the Watersheds and Hood Canal produced more fish
than today.
• Wetlands and hydric soils cover 3% of the Study Area. This percentage is lower
than other Puget Sound watersheds because of the extent of mountainous terrain.
This estimate does not include the 1,066 acres of intertidal wetlands that are
waterward of the shoreline.
• Freshwater forested and shrub wetlands are the most common wetland types, 42%
and 21% of the total wetland acreage respectively. Salt marshes and sphagnum
bogs are the least common. 0
• Sixty -two percent of the Study Area's wetland acreage occurs in valleys.
• The Study Area contains an unusually high number of "noteworthy" wetlands.
They have local and, especially, regional significance.
Conclusions
■ The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are a desirable place to live, work, and
play. The Study Area's physical and biological health, water quality, and habitat
will determine its continued desirability.
■ The character of the Study Area is rural with extensive tree cover.
■ Aquifers should be identified and mapped in the Study Area.
■ Base flow of streams are dependent on wetlands, springs, and seeps from shallow
aquifers and interflow. Approximately 50% of the streams are perennial.
•
94
EM
•
Characterization - Highlights and Conclusions
■ The most common habitat limitation to fish production in streams is impassible
barriers to fish migration from steep gradients.
■ A field inventory to enhance current maps would improve wetland protection and
management. It would be useful to forest managers, local government, developers
and realtors, and residents.
■ Noteworthy wetlands need special protection in local regulations and forest
management plans, as well as through private voluntary measures such as wetland
stewardship practices and conservation easements.
■ Effective implementation of development controls in the Landslide Hazard Areas
will become critical as building increases on highly desirable view lots on the
bench above Hood Canal.
95
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
96
•
•
0
1
� Chapter 2 Beneficial Uses
One of the goals of the nonpoint source pollution watershed planning process is to protect
beneficial uses of water. A full listing of beneficial uses is provided in the Water Quality
Standards for Surface Water of the State of Washington (Chapter 173.201 WAC) and is
listed in the box below.
This chapter describes the following selected beneficial uses of water in West Shore Hood
Canal Watersheds: fish and shellfish, other wildlife habitat and resources, recreational
uses, and water supply. A description of the benefits provided by wetlands is also
included in this chapter. The beneficial uses of commerce and navigation are not covered
in the report.
97
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
West Shore Hood Canal Supports a Wide Variety of Fish
and Shellfish Resources
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds provides habitat for a
variety of marine and freshwater fishes. Residents benefit from
the fish and shellfish resources in waters of the canal. Sport or
recreational fishing, commercial fishing, and the "opportunity to
view fish," such as salmon spawning in a stream, are all
important uses and depend on good water quality.
-� �w��'
The Skokomish Tribe resides in the Study Area and is one of
four tribes involved in the Point No Point Treaty. The Point
No Point Treaty tribes' usual and accustomed fishing places
stretch from the southern end of Hood Canal, north through
Admiralty Inlet to include the San Juan Islands and then west to include most of the Strait
of Juan de Fuca. The people of the Skokomish Tribe have resided in the Hood Canal area
for millennia and the fish and shellfish resources are very important to them. The natural
resources of Hood Canal provide important cultural and social values in addition to
economic benefits.
A court decision regarding tribal rights to harvest shellfish was announced in early 1995,
by federal Judge Rafeedie. The ruling affirms the claims of 15 Puget Sound Indian Tribes,
including the Skokomish Tribe, that treaties signed in 1855 guaranteed their right to harvest
fish and shellfish in historic harvest areas, including privately owned tidelands. Artificially
cultivated commercial tidelands or beaches on which natural shellfish species have been
replaced were clearly excluded in the judge's decision, although the definition of "staked
and cultivated beaches" remains to be clarified.
Clams, geoducks, oysters, mussels, abalone, crab, shrimp, sea cucumbers, anenomes, and
other species are all affected by the ruling. These resources will now be co- managed by
the tribes and Washington State.
A report titled Shellfish and Finfish Resources at Risk in the Hood Canal Watershed was
completed in June 1995 for the Hood Canal Coordinating Council. The report gives
detailed information on habitats and fish resources in Hood Canal and was prepared by the
Hood Canal Technical Work Group, the technical group of the Hood Canal Coordinating
Council. The technical work group is made up of experts in various fields of natural
resource management. Some of the following information was taken from this report.
98
•
•
Beneficial Uses - Fish and Shellfish Resources
• Fish and Shellfish Occur in Many Habitats
The shore zone of Hood Canal provides important habitat for many fish and shellfish.
Nearshore, shallow estuarine habitats, such as the intertidal mudflats and eelgrass beds in
many of the coves, inlets, and bays along the shoreline provide food and refuge for fish
and invertebrates. Dungeness crab, outmigrating juvenile salmonids, and many other
juvenile fish use these "nursery" habitats in spring and early summer. This habitat
includes all beaches and beds of marine and estuarine waters of the state from ordinary
high water to ten feet below mean lower low water (minus 10 feet).
Little is known about the actual extent of eelgrass coverage in
the Study Area, however, it is thought to cover a relatively
r�ljsmall area. Eelgrass is limited by bottom type and depth.
Since it covers such a small area and is so important to some
of the fish/shellfish resources its loss is very critical to the
or
survival of some species.
•; Eelgrass shaded by docks or disturbed by other means often
dies. Shoreline armoring also limits eelgrass habitat.
Shoreline residences are often constructed without adequate
buffers between human uses and the shore zone. To stop or
• reduce the natural erosion, concrete, rock, or wood bulkheads
are installed for protection. Bulkheads are also built to prevent landslides caused by wave
cutting into the toe of the slope. If properly constructed, these shoreline armoring
structures can slow most forms of wave - induced shoreline erosion for a period of time but
will probably do little to prevent continuing landsliding. Shoreline armoring and the
associated vegetation clearing typically results in the following adverse effects
(Washington State Department of Ecology, 1994).
•
♦ Sediment supply to nearby beaches is cut off, thus leading to "starvation" of
the beaches for sand and other fine grained materials that typically make up
a beach.
♦ The hard face of shoreline armoring, particularly concrete bulkheads, reflects
energy back onto the beach, thus increasing beach erosion.
♦ In time, a sandy beach is transformed into gravel or cobbles and may even
be scoured down to bedrock, or more commonly in the Puget Sound basin, a
hard clay. The footings of bulkheads are exposed, leading to undermining
and failure.
VM
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
♦ Vegetation which shades the upper beach is eliminated, thus degrading the
value of the beach for spawning habitat.
♦ Transformation of the character of the beach affects the kinds of life the
beach can support.
Bulkheads create additional predation by larger fish on young or small fish by eliminating
shallow hiding areas. Juvenile chum salmon and pink salmon depend on nearshore
habitats for their survival after leaving fresh water. Both surf smelt and sandlance also use
these beach gravels for their spawning habitat. Bulkheads in the past were often built on
top of spawning areas.
A research project evaluated the amount of shoreline that has been bulkheaded along the
west shore of Hood Canal. The evaluation of bulkheads included seawalls, rip rap,
breakwaters, and groins but did not include the extensive bank armoring associated with
State Highway 101. At least 37% of the Hood Canal shoreline within the Study Area is
enclosed in a bulkhead (Toal, 1992). The author of the report /study said it is more likely
at least 50% if the highway bank armoring is included (Toal, 1995).
Bulkheads are traditionally built to prevent bank erosion. However, in the past, some
bulkheads were built for seaward extension of residential yards, rather than protection from
wave action. Many homeowners living near the edge of steep bluffs frequently clear
vegetation from the top and upper slopes for a better view of Hood Canal. Landslides •
often begin to claim the outer edges of their yards because the stabilizing vegetation has
been removed. They then mistakenly attribute the loss of property to undercutting of the
foot of the bluff by wave erosion. Saturation of soils from lawn watering, on -site sewage
system drainfields, and winter rainfall may trigger the landslides.
Alternative methods of bank protection are available. This can be accomplished by using a
bio- technical approach. This approach utilizes technology incorporating coastal zone
processes, integrated with the principals of erosion, soil bioengineering, and bio - technical
engineering to achieve slope stability. In 1993, the Washington State Department of
Ecology published two manuals providing
instruction on this subject: Slope Stabilization
and Erosion Control Using Vegetation and
Vegetation Management. A Guide for Puget
Sound Bluff Property Owners. A third guide
was published in 1995 - Surface Water and
Groundwater on Coastal Bluff's: A Guide for
Puget Sound Property Owners. _
•
11
• Beneficial Uses - Fish and Shellfish Resources
Freshwater Areas Provide Salmonid Habitat
All of the streams of the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are so steep that anadromous
fish are unable to ascend very far upstream. Most of the streams do provide habitat for
these fish in the lower reaches and resident trout inhabit the upper reaches of many
streams of the Study Area. The many smaller streams also support at least small
populations of fish, and cumulatively these small streams support a substantial portion of
the salmonid populations in the Canal. Habitat and water quality become even more
important in order to sustain and build up these populations of fish and maintain the
genetic pool.
For salmonids (salmon, trout, or steelhead) to reproduce and have young that survive,
various environmental conditions are needed. Their basic metabolism requires narrow
oxygen, pH, and temperature ranges. Aquatic vegetation and turbulence, such as in
shallow, riffle areas and where water spills over logs, provide oxygen. Streamside
vegetation provides the overhead shade and cover that maintains low water temperatures
and offers shelter. The vegetation provides food and cover for insects that are eaten by
fish. Clean, loose spawning gravel of the proper size is necessary to protect the eggs from
predators and to allow water to flow through the eggs to provide oxygen. Good water
quality is vital; salmon eggs and fry are especially vulnerable to pollutants. Excessive
sediment within the spawning gravel suffocates the eggs.
Habitat variety is important because newly
hatched fish (fry) require a good mix of pools
and riffles to provide both resting and feeding
areas. Fry also require various kinds of cover,
such as logs in the streambed and overhanging
vegetation, to protect them from predators and
high flow conditions. Juvenile rearing
requirements of anadromous salmonids in fresh
water differ between species. Chum salmon fry
migrate from the streams into the salt water soon
after hatching, spending only a few days to a few
weeks in freshwater. Other species rear for a
year (coho salmon) to several years ( steelhead
and cutthroat trout) in streams before going to
sea. Low summer stream flows limit the
population of those species more than they limit
chum salmon.
a
Improperly installed culverts and the removal of stream bank vegetation significantly affect
fish and wildlife habitat. Even minor alterations can result in significant changes, such as
• erosion, streambed scouring, and increased water temperatures. At road crossings, bridges
are preferable to culverts to maintain fish passage and habitat. If culverts are necessary,
101
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
then use of bottomless pipe arches, oversized culverts, or semi - elliptical pipes enhances
fish passage and water flow. Selection of the type of culvert needed is site specific.
Impacted streams benefit from carefully planned enhancement /restoration projects once the
source or cause of the impact has been identified and controlled. Enhancement projects
involving rechannelization can include placement of meanders in streams at an acceptable
gradient to fish. The placement of large woody debris (logs and rootwads) in streams
creates pools for juvenile fish. Revegetation of the stream banks with native trees and
shrubs provides an overhead canopy, stabilizes the soil, discourages the growth of reed
canary grass, and maintains cool water temperatures. Vegetation is the base for insect
production, the primary food of juvenile fish. Finally, to preserve the stream bank zone
and water quality, it is best to eliminate livestock access entirely and convey water to
pastures by pipelines. When this is not feasible, access at defined points for watering
purposes is preferable to unlimited access.
Stream fencing, stream corridor revegetation, spawning habitat improvement, and creation
of over - wintering habitat (off - channel ponds) are worthwhile habitat enhancement projects.
Fish production facilities will put more fish in the stream but will not provide suitable
habitat for spawning and rearing of native fish. A number of sources of guidance,
financial assistance, and labor are available to the landowner or organization willing to
conduct a stream enhancement project and are listed in Appendix N. •
Maintenance of stream flows is extremely important, especially during times of low
precipitation. The streams in the Study Area depend on ground water to maintain their
summer base flows, with the exception of the Hamma Hamma River. Further ground
water and surface withdrawals should only be permitted after determination of the effect
on the neighboring streams and wetlands. Wetlands help maintain summer flows by
storing water during the wet season and releasing it slowly through outlets into streams or
through interflow.
Construction, ground disturbance, and gravel removal in or near marine or fresh waters of
the state must be done under the terms of a permit called a Hydraulic Project Approval
(HPA). The permit is available from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and is
free. An HPA is also required for any work activity associated with wetlands next to
streams. Restrictions can be placed on projects outside the ordinary high water mark if
there is a direct impact to the stream receiving runoff from the project. Verbal approval
for certain emergency projects can be given over the phone.
Mason County provides some protection to streams through the Mason County Interim
Resource Ordinance. Buffers, or areas of undisturbed vegetation next to streams, are
protected from certain land uses and practices. Other land uses, such as the keeping of
animals within buffers, are given as guidelines only. The size or width of the buffers are
based on the type of stream. Streams are typed according to their size and fish use
(Appendix A). Stream Types 2, 3, and 4 are given vegetative buffer widths and minimue
102
Beneficial Uses - Fish and Shellfish Resources
• setback requirements. Type 5 streams are not given any protection. Type 1 waters are
protected through the Shoreline Management Program.
The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance is also serving as the interim standards for
impacts of development of properties which contain sensitive areas, such as wetland and
geologically hazardous areas, as required by the Growth Management Act. The watershed
community is encouraged to become familiar with this document because it can be a
powerful planning tool for protecting important natural resources and water quality.
Department of Natural Resources' stream typing, originally using aerial photographs and
topographic maps, was a first attempt to classify streams. A recent report outlining stream
typing errors was prepared by the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, the Skokomish Tribe, and
the Point No Point Treaty Council. This report states the Washington State Water Type
maps greatly underestimate the occurrence of fish -bearing streams and other stream types
in the Olympic Peninsula area. As a result, fish populations are susceptible to loss from
forest practices and other land uses that destroy habitat. In six Hood Canal watersheds
surveyed by the tribes, the maps underestimated the miles of fish - bearing streams by 46 %.
Fifty -three percent of the Type 4 stream miles surveyed in seven Hood Canal watersheds
were found to be fish -bearing streams. Intensive surveys of five watersheds in the upper
Hood Canal region indicated that the maps under - estimated the miles of verified Type 2
streams by 77% and Type 4 streams by 46 %. A total of 75% of total stream miles (Type
2, 3, and 4) in these upper Hood Canal watersheds were mis -typed (Bahls and Ereth, 1994).
Within the Study Area, Eagle Creek and McDonald Creek basins were examined during
the study. In McDonald Creek, 77% of the fish -bearing miles were incorrect and in the
Eagle Creek drainage, 29% of the streams were labeled incorrectly.
Incorrect water types can be changed based on site - specific information by submitting a
Water Type Change Form for approval by Timber- Fish - Wildlife (TFW) representatives in
the region. Water Type Change Forms were submitted to DNR for the streams examined
in the study. The authors of the study recommended, as an interim measure to prevent fish
habitat loss, to consider all unverified Type 4 streams as upgraded to Type 3, unless field
inspection demonstrates no fish are present and the physical criteria for Type 3 stream
classification are not met.
103
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Fish Resources Include Recreational and
Commercial Species
Many West Shore Hood Canal Streams Support
Salmonids
The marine and fresh waters of the West Shore Hood
Canal Watersheds support species of salmonids,
including chum, coho, chinook, and pink salmon,
occasional sockeye salmon "strays," and steelhead.
Others include cutthroat trout, rainbow trout, and dolly
varden. Hood Canal contributes many of the total
salmon stocks which return to the Puget Sound region,
including wild runs, runs that are a mixture of hatchery
and wild production, and runs that have been introduced
from other areas.
The salmon resources in Puget Sound and Hood Canal are presently in much lower
numbers than in the past. Many native stocks of fish are in serious decline. Commercial
and recreational fishing seasons for salmon in 1994 were drastically reduced. The various
groups involved attribute the decline to a variety of factors: sport and/or commercial
fisheries, fish resource management decisions, introduction of hatchery fish, offshore
fisheries,ocean conditions, and loss of stream habitat. There is general agreement that
habitat degradation is partially responsible. Even though some of the Study Area streams
are small, they need to provide the best possible habitat, water quality, and quantity to
maintain and rebuild these stocks of fish.
A recent study, the 1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory ( SASSI)
conducted by the former Washington State Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife and
twenty -three Western Washington Treaty Indian Tribes, classified 17 Hood Canal Stocks as
"Healthy," 11 as "Depressed," one as "Critical," and seven as "Unknown" (WDFW et al.,
1992).
Hood Canal wild coho salmon stocks are in such critical low numbers that in 1992, strong
constraints were placed on sport, commercial, and tribal harvest, including sharp reductions
on ocean fisheries. The SASSI report lists four Hood Canal coho stocks as "Depressed."
During the 1994 season high returns of wild coho salmon to Quilcene Bay and some Hood
Canal streams were encouraging (Hood Canal Technical Group, 1995).
Hood Canal summer chum have reached critically low levels in recent years. Of the
Canal's 12 summer run chum - producing streams, drastic population declines have occurred
on all but the Union River. Hood Canal summer chum salmon runs are listed in the
SASSI report as one of two critical stocks in Washington State. The critical status of this 10
104
•
Beneficial Uses - Fish and Shellfish Resources
stock prompted emergency actions in 1992 aimed at
reducing harvest rates and developing a brood stock
collection program at the Quilcene National Fish
Hatchery and the Lilliwaup Hatchery. By
comparison, fall runs of chum salmon are in
relatively good shape (Hood Canal Technical Group,
1995).
The Hood Canal cutthroat trout is listed in the 1991 report as a stock of special concern,
although information about this population is lacking. Studies are now being carried out to
determine its status. Hood Canal stocks listed as unknown in the SASSI report include the
Hamma Hamma River winter steelhead.
Hood Canal stocks listed as healthy include the Hamma Hamma River late chum, pink,
and coho salmon. Hood Canal summer /fall chinook are also listed as healthy.
Other Fish Species
The Pacific herring is an important fish resource in the waters of Hood Canal. Herring are
40 forage fish for some species of salmon and other predatory fish. They are also used for
human food and bait. No documented spawning grounds occur within the West Shore
Hood Canal Watersheds, however, spawning sites and holding areas occur in other sections
of Hood Canal. Spawn is deposited primarily on eelgrass or sea lettuce. Spawning occurs
from late February to the middle of April, with an incubation time of approximately two
weeks.
The young herring tend to stay near the spawning grounds until June. By September they
disperse between nearshore and offshore areas of Puget Sound. By winter, the juvenile
herring are normally most abundant in the mid - channel waters, although since 1980, they
have also aggregated in protected embayments. Many herring overwinter in central and
southern Puget Sound and migrate to the Pacific Ocean feeding grounds from March to
July (Washington State Department of Fisheries, 1983). A herring roe -on -kelp fishery is
conducted by the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe each year. A commercial bait fishery for
herring is centered in north Hood Canal- Admiralty Inlet and in southern Puget Sound.
Surf smelt are also an important forage fish and provide a popular recreational fishery
where the fish are abundant. Surf smelt spawn at the upper intertidal level of beaches on a
substrate of coarse sand and fine gravel. Shaded beaches are preferred for spawning.
There are no historical records of surf smelt spawning in the Study Area, however, gravel
beaches, their preferred spawning areas, occur along many shore zones of the Study Area.
Undocumented spawning beaches may be present in the Study Area.
105
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Groundfish in Hood Canal include lingcod, quillback
rockfish, canary rockfish, copper rockfish, Pacific cod,
Pacific whiting, spiny dogfish, longnose skate, big skate,
English sole, rock sole, sand sole, starry flounder, Pacific
sanddab, shiner surfperch, striped seaperch, and pile perch.
A variety of other common, but commercially and
recreationally unimportant species include eelpouts, sculpins,
ratfish, poachers, and midshipman.
The legislature banned trawling for bottomfish in 1989
because of the damage caused by the drag net3. The only
species harvested with a bottom trawl is spiny dogfish.
There is a small commercial fishery for surf perch in the late
winter and early spring (Brody, 1991).
Four fish hatcheries are located in the Study Area. A private hatchery on Hill Creek,
called Troutlodge, Inc., raises trout for commercial harvest. The Hood Canal Salmon
Hatchery, operated by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, produces
chinook, coho, and chum salmon. Long Live the Kings, a private fish enhancement group,
maintains a small hatchery on Lilliwaup Creek. They collect coho salmon and small
numbers of summer chum entering Lilliwaup Creek, spawn them at the hatchery and
release the offspring. The Skokomish Tribe Enatai Fish Hatchery, near the mouth of a
small stream close to the southern boundary of the Study Area, raises chinook and chum
salmon.
Oysters, Hardshell Clams, and Other Shellfish
Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) has classified 920 acres as Approved
commercial shellfish beds within the intertidal area of West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
(WDOH, 1994). These beds are used primarily for the culture of oysters and the harvest
of native hardshell clams. Some softshell intertidal clams are harvested in the southern
portion of the Study Area.
The primary clam species harvested in both commercial and recreational fisheries are
native littleneck and Manila clams. Other species harvested include cockles, horse, butter,
softshell, and mud clams. Other shellfish harvested from Hood Canal include Dungeness
crab, coonstripe and spot shrimp, pink shrimp, scallops, and sea cucumbers. The
recreational fishery for spot shrimp in the Canal has become extremely popular in recent
years. Many miscellaneous invertebrates, such as bentnose clams, polycheates, barnacles,
mud shrimp, and shore crabs, also occur in the waters of Hood Canal.
v
106
•
•
Beneficial Uses - Fish and Shellfish Resources
Many residents harvest shellfish recreationally from their private beach property. Eagle
Creek Recreational Tidelands, Lilliwaup Recreational Tidelands, DNR beach #43 (south of
Miller Creek), Hood Canal Recreational Park, and Potlatch State Park provide shellfishing
opportunities to the public. The tidelands at the Washington State Department of Fish and
Wildlife's Hoodsport Hatchery are closed to harvesting because of concerns with bacterial
contamination from the nearby marina and residential septic systems.
Presently, the tribes do not harvest shellfish on privately owned beaches.
harvested from South Lilliwaup and Potlatch State Park tidelands. Tribal
oysters occurs primarily on Eagle Creek and
Lilliwaup tidelands. The tribal shrimp harvest
includes both commercial and subsistence
harvest. Management of the crab fisheries
consists of issuing and enforcing commercial
and subsistence regulations.
107
Clams are
harvest of
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
The Study Area Has Diverse Wildlife Habitats and
Species
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds contains a variety of wildlife habitats which
support animal and plant communities. These include areas used by rare, endangered, or
otherwise highly regarded species, and unique plant communities and habitats. All of the
different types of habitat, whether forested, estuarine, riverine, or grassland, depend on
water quality and availability. The protection of these habitats and associated animal and
plant communities will always be beneficial to both wildlife and water quality.
The Study Area Has Outstanding Floral
Diversity
The Study Area has a wide array of plants and plant
communities from the shoreline to the high elevations of the
mountains. Because of local geology, portions of the Study
Area contain plants more common in low rainfall areas. Six
sensitive plants and eight native plant communities/wetlands
occur in the Study Area, a relatively large number for the
Puget Sound Basin. It appears that the occurrence of invasive
exotic plants is low in the Study Area. One exception is
scotch broom, which is common in the powerline corridor.
Vegetation Zones and Forest Species
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds contain a number of major vegetation zones
which are dependent on elevation and aspect. The species composition of these zones is
also influenced by other site specific characteristics such as slope, exposure, and water
availability. The major zones include the Western Hemlock Zone in the lower elevations
and, with increasing elevation, the Silver Fir, Mountain Hemlock, and Subalpine and
Alpine Zones (USDA Forest Service, 1989).
The Western Hemlock Zone is dominated by Douglas -fir, with western redcedar and
western hemlock more prevalent in wetter areas. In very old stands, western hemlock and
western redcedar become dominant. Forest fires are common in this zone, with large fires
occurring at 50 to 250 year intervals (USDA Forest Service, 1989).
108
0 - �
n
Beneficial Uses - Wildlife Resources
Understory shrubs in this zone include salal, vine maple,
Oregongrape, red huckleberry, Alaska huckleberry,
salmonberry, and rhododendron. Herbaceous understory
plants include swordfern, deerfern, oxalis, beargrass,
twinflower, prince's pine, evergreen violet, vanillaleaf,
trillium, and foamflower.
The Silver Fir Zone occurs in the middle to upper slope
forests above the Western Hemlock Zone in all but the
driest areas. The dominant trees are silver fir and
western hemlock, with Douglas -fir in young -growth
stands in the lower elevations or as relicts from earlier
periods. Other tree species that grow in this zone include
Alaska yellowcedar, mountain hemlock, and Pacific yew. Common understory shrubs
include Alaska huckleberry, red huckleberry, salmonberry, fool's huckleberry, salal, and
Oregongrape. Non -woody plants include queen's cup, bunchberrry, rosy twisted- stalk,
vanillaleaf, false lily -of -the- valley, deerfern, swordfern, five - leaved bramble, foamflower,
and trillium.
The Mountain Hemlock Zone occurs at upper elevations except in the driest areas where it
is replaced by the Subalpine Fir Zone. It transitions into subalpine parkland at upper
elevations. Snowpacks usually exceed 10 feet in this zone (USDA Forest Service, 1989).
It is dominated by silver fir and mountain hemlock and sometimes Alaska yellowcedar.
Shrubs growing in this zone include the huckleberries, white rhododendron, mountain -ash,
and red heather. Herbaceous plants include five - leaved and trailing bramble, avalanche
lily, deerfern, queen's cup, beargrass, and sidebells pyrola.
Subalpine and Alpine Zones occur at higher elevations above tree line and in a mosaic with
the Mountain Hemlock Zone. Trees occur as sporadic individuals or in clumps or at the
transition from subalpine to alpine as kummholz. Krummholz is a growth form resulting
in mature trees that are twisted and stunted, and nearly prostrate and shrubby in
appearance. Examples of plants growing in these zones also include red heather, white
heather, phlox, lupine, buckwheat, bistort, valerian, sedges, and grasses.
Old Growth Trees
Old growth forests, clumps, or individual trees occur throughout the Study Area. Old
growth, greater than 160 years in age, is primarily located within the National Park and
National Forest boundaries. Scattered trees or clumps of old growth trees are located in
inaccessible areas such as ravines and cliffsides on state and private land. Individual old
growth trees can also be seen occasionally along the shoreline. However, much of the
low elevation areas have been harvested one to two times in the past. In these areas,
second, sometimes third growth forests are dominant. Second - growth coniferous forests
IMIZ
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
contain Douglas -fir and western hemlock with interspersed red alder, Sitka spruce, western
redcedar, bigleaf maple, cascara, and Pacific madrone.
Riparian and Wetland Forest Species
Riparian and wetland forests are dominated by red alder, western redcedar, and willow,
with Sitka spruce, western hemlock, and black cottonwood trees occurring less frequently.
Bigleaf maple is common in riparian areas and in wetland buffers. Shrub species in these
areas include salmonberry, devil's club, thimblebenry, black twinberry, crabapple, rose, red -
osier dogwood, red elderberry, Pacific ninebark, Indian plum, hardhack, willow species,
and vine maple. Herbaceous understory plants in wetland forests include stinking nettle,
lady fern, water parsley, angelica, skunk cabbage, pig -a -back plant, ladyfern, false
hellebore, horsetail, slough sedge, marsh speedwell, and false lily -of- the - valley. The
riparian areas also contain false Solomon's seal, deer fern, sword fern, bleeding heart,
twinflower, northern starflower, and western trillium.
Shrubland Species
Shrublands in the Study Area are typically wetlands or cleared areas. Wetland shrubs
include hardhack (spirea), salmonberry, willow, rose, crabapple, dogwood, and cascara.
Alder, redcedar, and less commonly hemlock, cottonwood, quaking aspen, and lodgepole
pine saplings grow in transitional shrub wetlands.
Areas in the shrub transition from harvest or fire to forest typically contain scotchbroom,
grasses, ferns, snowberry, oceanspray, salal, huckleberry, thistle, fireweed, clover,
blackberries, and rhododendron. Tree saplings include red alder, bigleaf maple, and if a
significant seed source is available, conifers such as Douglas -fir, redcedar, and hemlock.
Grassland, Aquatic, and Marsh Species
Most of the grasslands are pastures, parks, or lawns. Plant cover is generally grass such as
blue grass, bentgrass, orchard grass, velvet grass, and rye. Other species include buttercup,
ox-eye daisy, clovers, thistle, bracken fern, sword fern, thistle, blackberry, and plantains.
Aquatic freshwater species include spatter dock, floating - leaved pond weed, buckbean,
water shield, and purple cinquefoil. Emergent freshwater wetlands (marshes, wet
meadows, and wet pastures) contain water parsley, angelica, waterhemlock, buttercup,
stinging nettle, curly dock, fireweed, horsetail, reed canary grass, mint, marsh speedwell,
rushes, grasses, cattail, cowparsnip, mare's tail, many species of sedge, bur -reed,
dulichium, potentilla, sticky tofieldia, and bulrushes. 0
110
•
Beneficial Uses - Wildlife Resources
Intertidal mudflats include eel grass and algae beds. Emergent saltwater wetlands (salt
marshes) support hairgrass, bentgrass, baltic rush, silverweed, pickleweed, seaside plantain,
alkaligrass, arrowgrass, fat hen, saltgrass, sandspurry, tufted hairgrass, redtop, Baltic rush,
Douglas' aster, and Pacific silverweed.
Uncommon Plants and High Quality Native Wetlands and Plant Communities
The Washington Natural Heritage Program has identified the sensitive plants and native
wetlands and plant communities in the Study Area listed in the next graphic box
(Norwood, 1995). Because their inventory is not exhaustive, there may be other species or
native plant communities present that are not listed.
The River Basin Team noted that quaking aspen trees and Columbia manzanita shrubs,
uncommon in much of the Puget Sound Basin, grow in the study area. They are common
in the southern part of the study area but reported elsewhere, including the Lilliwaup area.
Quaking aspen grows in wetlands perched in well drained areas. From a distance, the
aspen bark appears to be dark in color, however, a moss growing on the tree trunks creates
the dark appearance. Manzanita grows in well drained upland forests, burned areas, and
clear cuts.
Sphagnum moss wetland areas are also relatively uncommon in the Puget Sound Basin in
comparison to other wetland plant communities. They require special environmental
conditions to develop and persist including low pH, low nutrients, and stable hydrology.
However, they are more common in the study area than many other areas in the Puget
Sound Basin. Plants typically associated with sphagnum moss wetlands include Labrador
tea, bog laurel, bog St. John's -wort, cranberry, and sundew. Examples of wetlands with
sphagnum communities are listed in the table of noteworthy wetlands at the end of this
section.
Nonnative Invasive Species
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds appear to have a lower occurrence of nonnative
invasive plants than many other watersheds in the Puget Sound Basin. Common,
nonnative, Study Area plants include the Himalayan and evergreen blackberry, English ivy,
and scotch broom. Invasive, nonnative species crowd out native plants, often forming
dense stands or a monotypic understory. The result is loss of species diversity and wildlife
habitat. These nonnatives are not as desirable for food and habitat for fauna as native
plants.
111
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
112
•I
r�
•
0 Beneficial Uses - Wildlife Resources
•
Many Species of Fauna Inhabit the Study Area
Many different mammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and insects
utilize one or more habitats within the Study Area. Some of the
mammals (both game and non -game) include Columbia black - tailed
deer, cottontail and snowshoe rabbits, black bear, cougar, beaver,
muskrat, mink, river otter, marten, weasel, skunk, bobcat, coyote,
voles, bats, mice, and raccoon. Populations of northern alligator
lizard, rubber boa, garter snake (three species), salamanders (six
species), leatherback turtle, roughskin newt, western toads, Pacific tree frogs, bullfrogs and
other frogs (three species), occur in the Study Area (Leonard et al., 1993).
The harbor seal population in Hood Canal is between 1,500 and 2,000 animals. There has
been an overall decline in seal numbers in northern Hood Canal since 1990. The seals tend
to congregate in large numbers on the Hamma Hamma River delta and in several areas
outside the Study Area (Hood Canal Technical Group, 1995).
Cavity nesting ducks occurring in the Study Area are Barrow's goldeneye, common
goldeneye, bufflehead, wood duck, and hooded merganser. All five species nest in tree
cavities and feed in wetlands on animal matter except wood ducks who feed mainly on
aquatic and emergent vegetation and seeds. These ducks require snags and
emergent/woody vegetation in swamps with buffers of large trees and woody vegetation for
breeding and rearing of their young. Other waterfowl include Harlequin duck, mallard,
pintail, canvasback, ruddy, ringnecked, redhead, oldsquaw, widgeon, green- winged teal,
shoveler ducks, black brant, Canada goose, lesser Canada goose, snow goose, cackling
goose, and white - fronted goose. Other water -based
bird life include scoter, American coot, whistling
swan, great blue heron, and trumpeter swans. Several
heron rookeries occur near the shorelines. Many
shore birds concentrate in the bays to feed during
spring and fall migrations.
Raptors include the bald eagle, osprey, and the
northern goshawk. All three species have nest sites
near fresh water and /or the coastline within the Study
Area. The northern spotted owl is closely associated
with old- growth forests in several locations in the
Study Area.
Many other species of birds either live entirely in the
Study Area or use it as a resting/feeding area during
annual migrations. Some of these species are
swallows, hummingbirds, woodpeckers, crows, ravens,
113
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
chickadees, Stellar's jay, nuthatches, wrens, kinglets, robins and other thrushes, waxwings,
warblers, sparrows, blackbirds, crossbills, siskins, flycatchers, and snipes. Other species
found in the Study Area include: starlings, juncos, rufous -sided towhees, flycatchers and
finches.
Upland bird species that live in the Study Area include ring- necked pheasant, ruffed
grouse, blue grouse, California quail, and band tailed pigeon.
Marbled murrelet, a robin -sized bird, spends most of its life at sea. It flies as far as 50
miles inland to nest in the hollows or depressions of large tree branches. While rearing
their young, the adults fly from nest site to marine waters, returning with one fish at a time
to feed the young murrelets. The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds contain nesting and
feeding sites of the murrelets. Their population is declining at the rate of 3 to 7 percent
per year due to the loss of old - growth forest habitat. Oil spills, fish -net entanglement, and
predation are considered lesser threats.
Federal Species of Concern
The bald eagle, a federally designated threatened species, occurs throughout the year and
nests in several locations within the Study Area. Bald eagles are most common along the
lower reaches of the rivers and streams during winter, when they feed on anadromous fish
carcasses. For the past 12 to 13 years, the bald eagle population in Hood Canal has
declined. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has studied the problem since 1991. The
eggs were found to be highly contaminated with PCB's (polychlorinated byphenols). In
1995 there were 27 nest sites, only six nests were successful in producing young, resulting
in nine juveniles. The normal survival rate of eagle eggs is about 92 %. This problem
seems to be confined to the west coast of the Canal from midway in the Canal southward.
No funding has been provided for continuation of the Hood Canal Eagle study beyond
1995, and the Fish and Wildlife Service is prevented from further studies outside of
wildlife refuges (Stewart, 1995).
The marbled murrelet and the northern spotted owl, also federally
threatened species, use nesting sites throughout the West Shore Hood
Canal Watersheds.
The following candidate species occur in the Study Area: mountain
quail, northern goshawk, northern red - legged frog, harlequin duck,
northwestern pond turtle, pacific fisher, and spotted frog.
114
0
"
Beneficial Uses - Wildlife Resources
State of Washington Priority Species
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) defines "priority species" as
those wildlife species that are of concern due to their population status and their sensitivity
to habitat alteration. They include state and federal threatened, endangered, sensitive, and
candidate species. Priority species also include species that WDFW believes are
vulnerable to future listing and species with recreational importance that are vulnerable to
impacts because of lost or degraded habitat. The recent merger of the state departments
(Fisheries and Wildlife) will encompass adding fish and .shellfish species to the priority
status lists. The updated list is expected to be completed sometime in 1995.
State priority species in the Study Area include marbled murrelet, northern spotted owl,
western pond turtle (state endangered species), the bald eagle (a state threatened species),
the great blue heron, osprey, harbor seal (state protected species), and the purple martin,
golden eagle, pileated woodpecker, northern goshawk, fisher, and spotted frog (state
candidate species).
Important recreational and commercial species in the Study Area include cavity nesting
ducks, harlequin ducks, trumpeter swans, and mountain quail.
Species of state concern reported to occur near the Hamma Hamma River estuary include
harbor seals, river otters, and breeding great blue herons. The fisher, a secretive forest -
dwelling mammal, was observed near Eldon in 1972. This medium -sized carnivore travels
large distances in search of food and cover, and prefers mature coniferous forest habitats.
The original range of the fisher in Washington has decreased, and population numbers are
estimated to be low in spite of complete protection (CH2M Hill, 1983).
Use of Recreational Resources Has Increased in the
Study Area
The West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds provide residents and non - residents the
opportunity to participate in water - related recreation activities along Hood Canal. These
activities include fishing, shellfish gathering, swimming, nature studying/walking, bird
watching, beach using, beach walking, boating, scuba diving, and canoeing/kayaking.
The Olympic Mountains provide outdoor opportunities for camping, hiking, mountain
climbing, hunting, fishing, berry picking, and cross - country traversing. The Hamma
Hamma River drainage is a popular destination containing the majority of the Study Area's
camping sites and trail departure points. Trails lead from the river corridor to access
numerous lakes and mountain peaks in Olympic National Forest Wilderness areas and the
Olympic National Park.
115
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Recreation use has increased significantly since 1980 in the Watersheds (Clifford 1995).
Data show increases in State Highway 101 traffic and visitors using the public information
center at the Hoodsport Ranger Station. Figures for Potlatch State Park, however, show
declines in day -use and overnite visitors. Some decline in 1993 and 1994 can be attributed
to winter season park closures. The park was closed for two months in 1993 and four
months in 1994 due to failure of the sewage disposal system. The system has been
repaired. Declining visitation may also be to due to a reduction in the days allowed for
shrimp harvest and new state fees for shellfish harvesting permits.
Recreation users travel through the Study Area to reach adjacent high use areas. Lake
Cushman and the Olympic National Park's Staircase Ranger Station offer boating
opportunities and hiking trailheads. Property leases in the Lake Cushman subdivisions are
used for camping, summer homes, and increasingly as retirement homes.
The Watersheds Have Numerous Recreation Sites
The Study Area contains a variety of public and private recreation sites. Public sites
include Washington State parks, a Mason County recreation site, DNR campgrounds and
Forest Service campgrounds and trails.
There are two state parks in the Study Area that have public shoreline access. Potlatch
State Park with its saltwater beach on Hood Canal is a popular destination for dayuse and
overnight camping. Potlatch Park is also the first public area on Hood Canal available
when driving north, along State Highway 101 into the Study Area. A newly constructed
Park at Triton Cove was opened in 1995. This park, in the northern portion of the Study
Area, features a boat launch and picnic area. Mason County's Foothills Community Park,
located one mile west of Hoodsport, has two softball fields and a picnic area.
The Olympic National Forest operates two full service campgrounds in the Hamma
Hamma River drainage. The Lena Creek and Hamma Hamma campgrounds charge for
overnight use. The Forest Service allows dispersed camping along forest roads. The DNR
maintains two non -fee campgrounds in the Study Area at Lilliwaup Creek and Melbourne
Lake.
Private recreation facilities along Hood Canal are a popular destination for recreational
vehicle (RV) drivers to spend extended vacations. Six RV resorts operate along the Study
Area shoreline. These resorts provide a variety of accommodations with overnight,
weekly, and monthly site rentals. The increased use begins in spring with daytime low
tide levels and warmer weather. The Hood Canal area can reach over - crowded conditions
during the three major summer holidays, and when extremely low tides occur. The
greatest boat activity occurs during the spring shrimp - harvest season.
116
•
•
•
Beneficial Uses - Recreational Resources
Private facilities also include marinas and a large number of residences with boat launch
facilities. The Port of Hoodsport provides a public fishing pier and day -use boat slips that
allow boat operators to dock and visit the community.
Private shorelines constitute. a large recreational resource used by landowners. Hood Canal
is a haven for recreational boating, fishing, and shellfish gathering. The Canal also
provides passive recreation through its majestic views of the Olympic Mountains and the
ICtsap Peninsula.
The Girl Scouts of America manage approximately 560 acres in the Study Area. Camp
Robbinswold is located North of Eldon, along Hood Canal. The property has facilities to
accommodate 130 individuals weekly. In addition to water activities, the forested areas
provide hiking, natural resource education, and outdoor camping opportunities.
117
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
i'�
Wetlands Provide Critical Functions
1 �
Wetlands provide or protect beneficial uses through
their functions. Wetlands also indirectly provide
economic benefits to all residents of the Study
Area.
Wetland functions include:
♦ Water quality protection and improvement
including erosion control and bank
protection.
♦ Runoff and flood water management.
♦ Ground water exchange.
♦ Stream base flow support.
♦ Habitat for plants, fish, and wildlife.
These functions are valued to varying degrees by
qf
different communities. However, wetlands are
often also valued for:
♦ Aesthetics.
♦ Recreational pursuits.
♦ Educational and research opportunities.
All wetlands don't provide all functions, nor do they perform them to the same degree.
Wetland functions are dependent on watershed and site specific characteristics. A
wetland's functions must be placed in the context of its watershed, not just on the property
where the wetland occurs.
Two critical factors common to many wetland functions are
surface water connection and the presence of buffers.
Surface water connections influence water quality
improvement, runoff and flood reduction, wildlife habitat,
and stream flow support. Also, surface water connections
provide aquatic travel corridors between wetlands and other
waterbodies. In the Study Area, wetlands connected to
mapped streams make up 76% of the Study Area's wetland
acreage. The continued integrity of wetlands with surface
water connections is important to the hydrology of the
Study Area, specifically to the maintenance of stream flow.
•
118
Beneficial Uses - Wetlands
0 Y
When wetlands are "isolated," the aren't connected to other wetlands and waterbodies by
surface flow, continuous hydric soils, or are not in a flood plain. Although some wetlands
are "isolated," some may be connected to other waterbodies by interflow and play an
important hydrologic role.
Buffers protect wetlands from adjacent and nearby land uses by reducing erosion, filtering
pollutants, and moderating water level fluctuations. Buffers are vegetated upland areas
adjacent to wetlands. For many wildlife species, buffers are an integral part of the wetland
ecosystem. For example, 121 species of animals use both aquatic systems and associated
uplands for primary breeding and feeding habitat (Castelle, et al., 1992).
The condition of buffers adjacent to the Study Area's wetlands is generally good, with
some exceptions. Good buffers exist around wetlands in tree - covered areas that have not
been recently harvested or otherwise disturbed. Commercial age and old growth trees
cover 72% of the Study Area. Even relatively short term changes to the buffer, such as
clear cutting can affect a wetland's provision of habitat. In the small amount- of residential
and commercial areas in the Study Area, buffers vary from good to significantly degraded.
In harvested and developed areas, buffers are rarely continuous around wetlands.
Study Area Wetlands Are Especially Important for Water Quality
Protection and Wildlife Habitat and Store Large Volumes of Water
The Study Area's Wetlands Provide Important Water Quality Protection
Wetlands remove and store waterborne pollutants through plant filtration and assimilation,
biological and chemical alteration, and storage in soils. Wetlands also reduce
sedimentation downstream by slowing water flow and allowing sediments and attached
pollutants to settle out. Streamside wetlands stabilize stream banks, thereby reducing
erosion.
The Thurston County Environmental Health Department documented that stream reaches
with extensive wetlands contain significantly fewer pollutants, particularly fecal coliform,
in the water column than stream reaches with few wetlands (Thurston County Health
Department, 1984). A correlation exists between greatly deteriorating water quality,
increasing urbanization, and the loss of wetlands (Thurston County Health Department,
1990).
Many of the Study Area's wetlands have characteristics indicating effective water quality
improvement. Wetlands with emergent and aquatic plants that experience some inundation
are especially efficient biofilters. According to the PSCRBT data base, 90 wetlands (27%
of the total) contain one or both of these classes. This estimate, however, is low. The
complex interspersion of aquatic bed, emergent, and shrub areas in many of the Study
119
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Area's wetlands combined with the scale used for mapping make it difficult to accurately
map these classes. Examples of wetlands with emergent and aquatic plants include #L.0 -5,
#CU -2, #HR -61, #EC -5 and 6, the southern lobe of the Melbourne Lake complex ( #EC -4),
#EC -34, and #PO -8.
Although generally less efficient in the short term, the many forested and shrub wetlands
provide long term storage of pollutants. Also, nonwoody understory plants provide
pollution abatement in seasonally inundated forest and shrub wetlands. A common
wetland shrub, hardhack (spirea), is especially effective at removing heavy metals. Woody
plants also facilitate sediment deposition.
The longer water stays in a wetland, the more effective the removal and storage of water-
borne pollutants. Unless artificially drained, water is retained in wetlands that formed in
depressions with no outlets. When wetlands overlay continuous, thick glacial till, retention
of polluted water poses little threat to ground water quality. However, wetland plant and
animal communities may be harmed by the stored pollutants.
Detention time is increased in wetlands with constricted outlets, which is common in the
Study Area. Examples of wetlands with constricted outlets include #PO -8, the west lobe
and main body of the Price Lake complex ( #LC -28), the Lilliwaup Swamp ( #LC -6), #LC-
32, #EC -34, #WAC -5, and #TR -10. Detention time is also extended in wetlands that have
beaver dams, a common feature of the Study Area. However, once the impoundment
behind a beaver dam is full and maximum storage capacity has been reached, water moves
through quickly. Forested and shrub wetlands connected to streams increase detention time
by resisting water flow.
Some wetlands are especially important as sediment traps and pollution filters because they
are catch basins for large drainage areas. Examples include wetlands such as Lilliwaup
Swamp ( #LC -6), Price Lake ( #LC -28), #LC -32, #HR -50, and #HR /CU -65.
Wetlands adjacent to the Study Area's streams and rivers help reduce erosion by protecting
shorelines. Stream banks are stabilized by wetland vegetation and velocity is reduced by
woody wetland plants, thereby reducing erosion and sediment transport.
Water quality function is often reduced when wetlands are cleared, drained, filled, and
stream channels straightened. Also, there is a natural limit to a wetland's ability to remove
and store contaminants. Wetlands are not bottomless sinks for pollutants. Wetlands can
be harmed by sediment deposition, excess nutrients, and toxic substances. Also, wetlands
do not permanently store pollutants. Pollutants are released when wetland sediments are
disturbed, wetland chemistry is changed, and wetland plants die and decay.
120
r
9
0 Beneficial Uses - Wetlands
The Study Area's Wetlands Hold Considerable Amounts of Water
Wetlands are important for runoff and floodwater control. By intercepting, slowing, and
storing surface runoff and floodwater, wetlands can reduce stormwater and flood damage
to downstream habitat and property. The numerous areas of dense, woody wetland
vegetation throughout the Study Area help slow runoff and flood water.
A considerable amount of water from
precipitation, interflow, seeps, streams, and 'J'ite cumulattve storage "pactty of
surface runoff finds its way into the Study wetlands is especially important to
Area's wetlands. Some large wetlands, such watersheds with downstream
as the Lilliwaup Swamp ( #LC -6), #LC -32, development
wetlands associated with Price ( #LC -28),
Melbourne ( #EC -4), Tenas ( #LC -12), and
Armstrong (#TR -10) Lakes receive large quantities of water and hold large volumes.
Many kettle wetlands on benches and plateaus have a relatively moderate storage capacity,
collectively storing large water volumes. The early - spring, seasonally inundated wetlands
provide little long -term storage. They are a reflection of the regional water table.
Reduction in water storage capacity and the ability to slow flows potentially create
significant runoff and flooding problems. Without wetlands to detain some of the water on
the plateaus and benches and slowly release it, flooding, as experienced in the December
1994 and January 1995 storms, would be more damaging. Wetland alterations of special
concern are filling, draining, stream channeling, and removing woody vegetation.
The Study Area's Wetlands Are Critical To Stream now
The slow release of water stored in valleys and depressions with outlets makes wetlands
critical to stream flow. Direct stream flow support is provided by wetlands from which
streams originate; wetlands intersected by streams; and wetlands connected to streams by
small tributaries, swales, or ditches. Although some streams and the Hamma Hamma
River receive primary support from snow melt and runoff from the hills and mountains of
the Study Area, many are aided with maintenance of base flow by wetlands connected to
them. Some wetlands without surface connections indirectly support stream flow through
subsurface interflow from wetlands that eventually discharge into streams.
Without wetlands, streams originating in the lower elevations of the Study Area would be
drier in the summer and fall months. Lilliwaup Swamp and the Price Lake wetlands, #PO-
8, #EC -34. #EC -5 and 6, #LC -32, and #TR -10 are examples of wetlands important to
maintaining summer base flow in streams.
121
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
r
The Study Area's Wetlands Are Primarily Ground Water Discharge Sites
Wetlands most often are sites of subsurface (interflow) discharge and ground water
discharge. Much of the lowlands of the Study Area are underlain by compact lodgement
till and the higher elevations are underlain by bedrock. These conditions impede
percolation into deep aquifers. The less permeable layers cause perched water tables.
Interflow along these layers discharges into wetlands on benches, in depressions and low
areas in valleys, and hillsides as seeps and springs. Some of these seeps occur in ravines
and provide base flow to streams and may, depending on location, be expressions of either
interflow or deeper ground water. Ground water discharge from deeper aquifers occurs
where water -laden sand and other permeable material sandwiched between Vashon till and
Pre -fraser deposits are exposed by erosion, by road cuts, and along the steep slopes
adjacent to State Highway 101.
Wetlands recharge ground water where permeable soil underlies a wetland or its outflow,
allowing vertical percolation. When an aquifer is unconfined and intersects the ground's
surface, a wetland may function as both a recharge and discharge site. During the wetter
winter months the wetland recharges the aquifer. In the dry summer months, the aquifer
discharges into the wetland. Wetland #LC -32 is mapped by Mason County in a potential
recharge area in recessional outwash. Also, the Lilliwaup Swamp, other wetlands in the
valley, and those in the Price Lake valley may provide this function. These valleys may
contain a local unconfined or water table aquifer located in the ablation till. However, the
deep peat that has formed in these systems may create very slow vertical percolation of
water that is stored in the wetlands.
It is difficult to locate other wetland areas that may recharge ground water because the
geology of the Study Area is so complicated. There may be as yet unidentified areas
where there are gaps in the till, through which interflow from wetlands percolates into
deeper aquifers.
Because interflow and ground water discharge provide a significant contribution to many
wetlands' water supplies, intercepting and diverting interflow away from wetlands can
adversely affect wetland hydrology. Road and ditch construction can affect interflow.
Excessive ground water withdrawal and diminished ground water recharge on the plateaus
and benches could affect the viability of low elevation wetlands and streams.
The Study Area's Wetlands Provide an Incredible Diversity of Wildlife Habitats
The Study Area's wetlands provide a diverse assortment of wildlife habitat. Overall, they
contain ideal wildlife habitat: high quality estuarine mudflats and marshes; freshwater
mosaics of open water, emergents, and woody plant communities; lakes with simple to
complex fringing wetland systems; and high elevation, mountain wetlands. Of great
122
0 Beneficial Uses - Wetlands
importance is the role wetlands play in the migration cycle of local elk herds. The Study
Area wetlands, especially in the upper Lilliwaup Creek and Price Lake valleys, are heavily
used by elk during the winter and early spring. Wetlands in the Hamma Hamma
delta/floodplain and the plateau south of Dow Mountain are used less heavily. The DNR
agreed to designate the Lilliwaup and Price Lake area a wildlife management area. It is
closed to vehicular traffic from October 1 to April 15 each year.
Wetlands provide habitat for a wide variety of plants, mammals, birds, amphibians and
reptiles, insects, and other life. They are essential habitat for feeding, breeding, nesting,
and rearing young. Many species are totally dependent on wetlands and upland buffers.
Other species use wetlands for a portion of their life cycles.
The intertidal zone along the Study Area's shoreline contain mud flats, eelgrass, and algae
beds critical to fish. Shellfish, both a commercial and recreational resource, depend on
these areas for their existence.
Deltas with salt marsh plant communities and mudflats have formed at the mouths of
larger streams as well as the Hamma Hamma and Skokomish Rivers, which contain the
largest salt marshes in the Study Area. Of high quality, the Hamma Hamma marsh is one
of the gems along Hood Canal. Salt marshes are in low supply in all of the Puget Sound
Basin.
Salt marshes are especially productive, supporting a diverse food chain and producing
detritus. Detritus is small food particles used by aquatic life. Mudflats and salt marshes
also provide important habitat to migrating and resident shorebirds, waterfowl, raptors, and
mammals. The combination of freshwater wetlands near estuarine mud flats and salt
marshes is especially important for wildlife habitat.
Estuarine wetlands, especially salt marshes, play an important role in the salmonid life
cycle. These wetlands provide the environment needed for the physiological transition
from marine to fresh water. Some species remain in these areas several months for the
food and protection provided. Many areas along the shore zone contain mudflats and
small areas of salt marsh. Examples of estuarine wetlands with large salt marshes include
wetlands #LC -54, #HR /#CU -65, and #FC -1. Freshwater coastal wetlands provide
spawning, rearing, and feeding habitat for fish. Some of the estuarine areas at the mouths
of streams change gradually to freshwater wetland areas, such as those at the Skokomish
River and Hamma Hamma deltas.
Diversity is one of the keys to good wildlife habitat. Diversity is, in part, represented by
the number and interspersion of vegetation and wetland types, as well as the presence of
special habitat features. Thirty -nine wetlands in the Study Area (12 %) contain three or
more wetland classifications, often intermixed in a patchwork pattern. Some of the
40 wetlands fringing lakes and some smaller wetlands have vegetation zones arranged in
concentric rings, providing less habitat edges or ecotones. Although size doesn't
123
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
necessarily correlate with habitat diversity in the Study Area, many small wetlands are
rather simple containing a predominance of one or two habitat types with little
interspersion.
Forested wetlands on slopes and those in ravines often are less diverse than other wetlands.
However, forested wetlands with good vertical diversity and structure have important
habitat value for mammals and small birds.
Many wetlands contain special habitat features such as snags, pools, stream channels, over-
hanging vegetation, and islands. Standing and downed dead trees in wetlands are another
special habitat feature and are common in many Study Area wetlands. They provide
habitat for animals including mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, and insects. The trees
most likely died because of water impoundment, often a result of beaver dams. The
downed trees may be fallen snags, trees from the buffer, or debris from past logging
activities.
Examples of freshwater wetlands with good diversity, interspersion of vegetation and
classes, and special habitat features include #HR -56, #WAC -5, the south lobe of the
Melbourne Lake complex ( #EC -4), Lilliwaup Swamp ( #LC -6), #LC -26, the Price Lake
complex ( #LC -28), #EC -34, and #LC -32.
Because so much of the Study Area is managed for forest practices, wetland habitat has
not been greatly altered in comparison to other Puget Sound Basin watersheds. As
described in the forest practices section of Chapter 3, impacts are relatively short term in
comparison to agricultural, residential, and commercial land uses. Exceptions include
changes in tree species, soil compaction, introduction of nonnative species, improper
culvert installation, and filling for landings or roads.
The Study Area's Wetlands Are Used For Recreation
Wetlands attract people who enjoy outdoor recreation. The actual amount of recreational
use of wetlands in the Study Area is unknown. Seventy -six percent of the wetland acres in
the Study Area are located on Department of Natural Resources, Forest Service, or
National Park Service land and, if accessible, can be used recreationally. Examples of
freshwater wetlands with known use or evidence of use include Lena ( #HR -55), Upper
Lena ( #HR -46), Elk ( #WAC -5), Jefferson ( #WAC -4), Melbourne ( #EC -4), Osboume ( #LC-
36) Tenas ( #LC -12) and Price ( #LC -28) Lakes, and #CU -1, #HR -61, and Lilliwaup Swamp
( #LC -6). Lake Armstrong (#TR -10) is located on property owned and managed by the
Girl Scouts of America. They use areas adjacent to the lake for overnight camping and
outdoor education.
F_.�
124
Beneficial Uses - Wetlands
0 The Study Area's residents use the shore zone, intertidal wetlands for shellfish harvesting
and fishing. Also, the wide array of wetland habitats, supporting diverse animal and plant
populations, enhances fishing, hunting, and nature observation opportunities.
The Study Area's Wetlands Are Valuable For Their Aesthetics
Aesthetics can go beyond visual images and include emotional pleasures such as peace and
tranquility. Wetlands are aesthetically pleasing to many people because they provide
diversity and contrast on the landscape. Salt marshes, sand spits, and mud flats abutting
bluffs and forested valley slopes provide a serene feeling, and a rhythmically changing
visual experience. They contribute to the sense of openness in forested areas. In
residential and commercial areas, they present a natural experience, and provide contrast to
the built environment.
Typically, open water in any environment is aesthetically appealing. From the open water
of Hood Canal to the various freshwater ponds and lakes, the Study Area offers many
opportunities to view and experience the calm of open water, with a tree - covered
foreground and, often, a mountain backdrop.
The Study Area's Wetlands Are Rarely Used For Education and Research
Wetlands are ideal outdoor classrooms and research sites because they provide
opportunities to observe ecological relationships. Study Area wetlands provide the
diversity and accessibility preferable for educational use. However, there are few schools
in or near the Study Area. Hood Canal School, about one mile from the Study Area, uses
the tidal wetlands at Potlatch State Park for outdoor education. It is unknown if university
students have or are using the Study Area's wetlands for their studies. To the Team's
knowledge, there are no locally active groups using the wetlands as classrooms. However,
the Skokomish delta estuary has been used for research purposes. Even though they are
far from large urban centers or schools, the number of wetlands that are easily accessible
on public land and their high quality may warrant out -of -the -way trips:
The Study Area's Wetlands Are in Better Shape than Most in Puget
Sound Watersheds
Wetland loss and degradation often eliminate or reduce their functions. Because of the
lack of reliable historic wetland maps, it is difficult to accurately estimate wetland
destruction in the Study Area. Subjectively, the Study Area wetlands have suffered less
destruction and degradation than other watersheds characterized by the PSCRBT. That is
not to say wetlands have not been impacted. Most of the degradation has resulted from
125
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
logging operations, predominantly road building. As the Study Area develops, this
correlation may change. The severity and number of wetland impacts occurring in the
Study Area seems to relate to location on private land and proximity to residential and
commercial property. Impacts from land uses, including those from residential areas, are
described in Chapter 3 covering nonpoint pollution sources. The following is a general
description of observed impacts.
Twenty -seven of the 48 wetlands observed in the field have been altered in some way.
The most common negative impact to the Study Area's wetlands noted during field work is
filling for road building. Overlaying the wetland and road coverages, 18% of the Study
Area wetlands have roads constructed through them. This estimate is conservative. Many
unimproved roads are not mapped. In some cases, culverts were absent or inadequate,
interrupting wetland hydrology.
Wetlands have also been filled for forest harvest landings, to build shoreline residences,
and create bulkheads. The actual number of residences and bulkheads that have been built
in intertidal areas over time is unknown.
Other alterations less commonly observed include excavations, artificial drainage,
vegetation control in the powerline, and logging debris. At 48% of the wetlands visited in
the field, the buffer was altered by activities such as tree harvest, powerline corridor
maintenance, and recreation access.
Even though wetlands have suffered less in this Study Area, strong protection is important
to keep them in good shape and functioning at their highest levels. For example, the north
central and western portion of Lilliwaup Swamp, one of the Study Area's well known and
most important wetlands, has been impacted. A logging road was built through the
wetland; some portions impound upgradient areas and alter the normal water flow through
the wetland.
The road was built in the early logging days. However, along one portion, a linear area
has been excavated more recently. The road acts as a dam impounding water in the
excavation. Flow has consequently been redirected from a southerly flow to the east and
west. A control structure has been built at the west outlet. The road and nearby wetland
areas have been eroded and sediment transported as high water flowed over the road and
the outlet structure this winter. A small collection of old buried cans along the road was
uncovered by the erosion. It also appears that the area just north of the excavation was
cleared at some time; young shrubs and emergents have become the dominant cover. Also,
as apparent on aerial photography, two small areas have been cleared and ponds
constructed.
Another example is a construction site in Hoodsport. Woody vegetation from some small
wetlands, seeps, and springs, has been removed and the area around them graded. The
drainage from the wetlands has been directed into roadside ditches.
126
P__�
Beneficial Uses - Wetlands
There is no water quality data documenting levels of pollution in wetlands in the Study
Area. Potential sources of pollutants entering wetlands include logging operations and
road runoff resulting in sediment deposition, pollutant laden runoff, and inadequately
treated on -site sewage effluent in residential and commercial areas.
Some wetlands, such as Lilliwaup Swamp, and wetland buffers in the Study Area would
benefit from carefully designed and executed restoration projects. See (Appendix N) for
sources of funding, technical guidance, and information on assistance.
Wetlands Are Inadequately Protected on the Local Level
Regulatory Protection
A number of federal and state laws afford some protection to wetlands. None of these
laws are comprehensive nor are they designed specifically to protect wetlands. Certain
wetland types and activities that impact wetlands are not regulated consistently under these
laws. Appendix M lists various regulatory programs and describes them briefly.
Mason County's wetland regulatory authority includes the Shoreline Master Program
10 (SMP) and an Interim Resource Ordinance. The Shoreline Master Program locally
implements the State Shoreline Management Act. The act regulates the coastline,
shorelines of certain streams and lakes, and land in the adjacent 200 feet. It also regulates
wetlands associated with these waterbodies. Mapped SMP shorelines in the study area
include Price Lake, Lilliwaup Swamp, Melbourne Lake, Lilliwaup Creek, and the Hamma
Hamma River. The shoreline of Hood Canal is a Shoreline of Statewide Significance.
The majority of shorelines in the Study Area are designated as urban commercial
environments. The county designates shorelines under SMP jurisdiction as urban, rural,
conservancy, or natural. The protection objectives and project requirements for each
designation is different. For example, the most stringent is the natural environment
designation which is intended to preserve and restore natural systems relatively free of
human influence. The urban environment includes high intensity land use, areas presently
subjected to extremely intensive use pressure, as well as areas planned to accommodate
urban expansion. The urban designation includes residential, commercial, and industrial
subcategories. The urban residential category requires a small setback from the shoreline
(15 feet) and allows covering up to 60% of the site with impervious surfaces, including the
residence.
Specifications for wetland protection are needed in a revised local master program. The
language in the County's Shoreline Master Program does not cover wetland protection.
• Originally adopted in 1979 and amended in 1988, the county has been preparing to revise
their SMP. Under Washington State Department of Ecology grants, the County conducted
127
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
an SMP policy project and a shoreline inventory. During a third phase in 1996, revisions
to the program and its protection provisions will be considered.
The Interim Resource Ordinance was adopted in 1993. It was developed as a part of the
state's growth management effort. The ordinance prohibits fill in wetlands and requires a
50 -foot buffer around wetlands. It does not allow conversion of a regulated wetland in
agricultural lands to a non - agricultural use. However, there are some deficiencies in the
ordinance. The following are examples.
♦ Wetlands under the jurisdiction of the county's SMP are exempted from the
ordinance, yet there is no protection language in the SMP to cover these
wetlands.
♦ The ordinance exempts activities in wetlands within agricultural lands.
♦ The ordinance allows for "activity exemptions." They are issued when the
applicant can demonstrate that the impacts of the wetland degradation are
isolated in the subject wetland, don't constitute a threat to public health and
safety, and there are no adverse impacts on adjoining property. This could
allow activities in wetlands, regardless of size, character, function, or
resource value, as long as the above are demonstrated. There is no guidance
as to what kind of information is required to "demonstrate" the absence of
off site impacts.
♦ The same level of protection is afforded to wetlands regardless of their
quality or functions. There is no rating system.
♦ Activities in isolated wetlands under one acre are exempt and don't require a
permit, buffer, or mitigation. There is a one -time 50 cubic yard limit for
excavation, grading, or dredging from these wetlands and dumping,
discharging, or filling in them. For more fill, the applicant must obtain a
formal "activity exemption."
♦ Compensatory mitigation is not required for regulated activities for which a
permit has been obtained that occur only in the buffer and have no adverse
impacts to regulated wetlands. "Revegetation with native vegetation may be
required (PSCRBT emphasis)."
♦ Compensatory mitigation requirements mandate recreating as nearly as
possible (PSCRBT emphasis) the original wetlands in terms of acreage,
function and geographic location and setting. It doesn't require specific
standards or ratios of replacement to be met. Although monitoring is
required, there are no contingencies for mitigation failure.
128
r
Beneficial Uses - Wetlands
Revisions to the final ordinance should include:
♦ requiring permits for isolated wetlands under one acre.
♦ adopting a rating system and providing more protection for high category
wetlands than is provided in the current ordinance.
♦ being more selective about what activities can occur in wetlands in
agricultural lands.
♦ requiring a sequence where avoiding impacts to the wetland is the first
alternative considered.
♦ requiring more stringent compensatory mitigation stipulations including
replacement requirements, such as ratios, and failure contingencies.
It would be advantageous if the two local laws were revised to be more closely aligned.
New and revised policies for the county's SMP were recommended during the "Shoreline
Protection Policies Project." The new recommended policies, if expressed in law, would
provide some improvement to wetland protection. However, they are, for the most part,
intended only for inclusion in the Shoreline Master Program, not the resource ordinance.
These revisions would, if limited to the SMP, continue the discrepancies between the two
laws.
It would also be advantageous to adopt other laws such as a stormwater management,
clearing and grading, and zoning ordinances. A stormwater management ordinance would
regulate how wetlands were used in regard to stormwater discharge. The county has a
draft stormwater management ordinance (see Chapter 3 Residential Nonpoint Pollution
Sources and Appendix I).
The county lacks a clearing and grading ordinance that controls runoff and erosion from
the construction site and a zoning ordinance. The clearing and grading ordinance could
require on -site approval before vegetation is removed from wetlands and the area graded.
Removing wetland vegetation and changing topography is very detrimental to wetland
function. A stormwater management ordinance may partially address clearing and grading.
The draft ordinance regulates clearing in sensitive areas on large parcels as a part of
erosion control. A zoning ordinance could guide development to the most suitable areas.
This would not only help protect wetland functions and watershed water quality and
beneficial uses but provide predictability to landowners.
Nonregulatory Protection
The residents of Mason County would benefit from additional incentives implemented by
the county government to encourage and reward land stewardship. Nonregulatory
protection is as important to protecting wetlands as regulations are. Nonregulatory
approaches include project pre - planning to avoid wetland impact, voluntary protection
129
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
(using land stewardship and BMPs) and restoration, working with land trusts and land
owners to preserve noteworthy wetlands, education to inform residents about the benefits
wetlands provide and how to manage them, and tax incentives to reward landowners for
protecting wetlands.
Land trusts play an important role in nonregulatory protection by acquiring lands and
assisting landowners with conservation easements and other land- saving options.
Landowners who set up conservation easements with a land trust often get significant
property tax reductions. The Hood Canal Land Trust is available to assist the residents of
the Study Area with conserving land (see Appendix N for the land trust's contact).
•
C,
130
0 Beneficial Uses - Water Supply
•
•
Water Supply Is an Important Beneficial Use
In the Study Area, ground water is primarily obtained from wells and used for domestic
water supply and for fish propagation at state and private hatcheries. Surface water is
primarily used for nonconsumptive uses such as fish propagation and irrigation -
presumably of home landscaping. Further information about surface and ground water is
presented in Chapter 1.
131
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
132
is
•
0 Beneficial Uses - Highlights and Conclusions
•
Beneficial Uses Highlights and Conclusions
Highlights
• There are important fish and shellfish resources in the West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds.
• A large portion (at least 50 %) of the shoreline has been armored, decreasing the
usable nearshore habitat.
• The salmon resources of Puget Sound have declined in recent years.
• The Study Area supports a high diversity of habitats for plants and animals.
• Residents participate in water -based activities including fishing, beachcombing,
boating, shellfishing, nature watching/walking, and swimming.
• There are numerous recreation sites in the Study Area, many enjoyed for water -
related activities.
• Wetlands in the Study Area are especially important for wildlife habitat, stream
flow maintenance, and stormwater and flood management. Most noteworthy is the
outstanding wildlife habitat they provide, especially when compared to wetlands on
the Kitsap Peninsula and southern and eastern Puget Sound watersheds.
• Although many wetlands have been impacted by historical or recent human
activities such as logging and road construction, wetland loss appears to be
significantly lower in the Study Area when compared to most watersheds in the
Puget Sound Basin.
• The most common activity degrading the Study Area's wetlands is filling, primarily
for road or bulkhead construction. When wetlands are in tree harvest or developed
areas, buffer degradation is common.
• Although road building and buffer degradation was noted throughout the
Watersheds, PSCRBT noted wetlands in the more developed areas have incurred
the most damage.
• Most of the Study Area's population obtains its domestic water supply from ground
water sources.
133
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
• The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance provides some protection of
streams, wetlands, and their buffers. The small type 5 streams are not protected.
Provisions are inadequate for wetlands, wetland buffers, and compensatory
mitigation.
• The Mason County Shoreline Master Program does not address wetland protection.
Conclusions
■ As the population of the West Shore Hood Canal expands, it will increase the
demand for all beneficial uses of water.
■ Opportunities exist through land use planning to preserve the existing biodiversity
while providing room for growth.
■ The adoption and enforcement of a clear, definitive, and strong final critical areas
ordinance (called the Resource Ordinance in Mason County) is essential to protect
water quality and beneficial uses in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds.
•
■ Protection and improvement of riparian habitat is critical to improving fish •
resources and water quality. The smaller type 5 streams and their buffers need
protection under the county's Interim Resource Ordinance.
■ Unless adequately protected, more wetlands will be damaged as the population of
the Watersheds expands.
■ The final county Resource Ordinance should also provide improved protection for
wetlands. Improvement should include a wetland rating system to provide a range
of protection measures including buffers ranging from 50 to 150 feet and better
provisions for compensation such as mitigation ratios and replacement procedures.
■ The Mason County Shoreline Master Program should be revised 'to adequately
protect wetlands.
■ The county should enforce the policies and provisions of their Shoreline Master
Program in regard to single family residences and bulkheads. Shoreline armoring
should be discouraged and alternative means of bank protection used.
■ Shoreline designations should be revised to reduce the amount of shoreline
categorized "urban," which only requires a 15 -foot building setback and allows
covering 60% of the site with impervious surfaces.
I"-]
134
• Beneficial Uses - Highlights and Conclusions
•
•
■ Stormwater management, clearing and grading, and zoning ordinances would help
protect the benefits provided by wetlands.
■ Landowners can contribute to the area's health by voluntarily protecting and
restoring streams, wetlands, and their buffers.
■ More local government incentives for voluntary protection and restoration of
streams and wetlands are needed.
135
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
136
•
•
Chapter 3 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution
Nonpoint sources of pollution are defined by "Local Planning and
Management of Nonpoint Source Pollution" (Chapter 400 -12 WAC) as:
"...pollution that enters any waters of the state within Puget
Sound from any dispersed land -based or water -based activities,
including, but not limited to atmospheric deposition, surface
water runoff from agricultural lands, urban areas, or forestlands,
subsurface or underground sources, or discharges from boats or
marine vessels."
The following sections describe the major land uses and their
contributions to nonpoint pollution in the West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds (Study Area).
Forest Management Activities Occur Throughout the
Stud y Area
The following forestry sections describe historical and present conditions, ownership and
use patterns, forestry impacts to water quality, harvest regulations, and education and
assistance programs. Throughout the Study Area, logging occurs in areas that will
continue in forest management and on parcels that will be converted to other land uses.
Impacts associated with clearing and grading activities are described in the conversion
chapter.
The Majority of the Study Area Is Forested
Tree - covered land (92,055 acres) occupies 89% of the Study Area. Individual watersheds
contain tree - covered lands ranging from 78% to 99 %. The majority (75 %) of the tree -
covered lands are located on managed forestlands. Forestland management activities are
described later in the chapter.
137
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Historical Conditions
Prior to European exploration, the Study Area was heavily forested to the saltwater edge,
except for occasional meadows, open water, and shrubby wetland areas. Western redcedar
and Douglas -fir were the dominant coniferous tree species. Minor amounts of western
hemlock were scattered through all stands. Hardwoods such as red alder, black
cottonwood, and big leaf maple were located along stream corridors and in wetlands.
The settlement and early economy of this region grew around timber product extraction.
Loggers used oxen teams to drag the trees to water over corduroy log roads. Later, trees
were skidded by steam yarders, and the logs were hauled on trains to sawmills, allowing
areas farther from salt water to be harvested. In areas unsuited for heavy equipment, water
flumes were constructed to move the logs from upland areas to shoreline bays and coves
for rafting. Gas powered harvesting equipment and log trucks eventually replaced steam
yarders, flumes, and railroads for logging and log transport. The removal of easily
available trees and national economic recessions caused sawmill operations to shutdown
along Hood Canal in the 1930s.
Present Conditions
Current tree species should not be used as the indicator of
site potential or natural trends. Partial -cut harvest of
selected higher valued conifers, leaving the hardwood
species, has influenced current stand structure. This
selective harvest has occurred mainly on smaller private
parcels in the Study Area, especially those close to Hood
Canal. The extent of this harvest practice and its impact on forest composition is difficult
to access on photos without extensive field survey. In these lower elevation areas, the
dense understory brush species will completely cover past ground disturbance within two
years after harvest. Individual tree removal for firewood and salvage of dead or blowdown
trees is also visible on many parcels, especially since the 1995 snowstorm.
0
•
The Study Area currently contains a variety of timber age classes for conifer and hardwood
stands. Forest Service lands have the highest percentage of old growth trees. The
majority of State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and private lands
have been harvested previously and timber stands average 45 to 70 years old. The current
age classes reflect past land management practices. Large openings were created by the
rapid removal of original old growth timber with minimal conifer reforestation, and
widespread wild fires in 1924, 1929, and 1932. The timber stands in the low elevation
foothills are dominated by conifer species but contain hardwood trees especially along
stream corridors and perched water tables on steeper slopes. Low elevation old growth •
138
• Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
is
trees in clumps, and scattered individual trees, remain along the steep ravines adjacent to
Hood Canal. Timber stands on public and private lands provide habitat variety for wildlife
and high valued timber products.
Study Area Age Class Patterns
The Study Area contains a variety of age classes, shown in Table 15. The largest age
class (49,258 acres) is the commercial category, greater than 50 to 160 years old. Harvest
activity during the past five years and in the next decade will occur on lands containing
these commercial aged trees. A further comparison of the age classes and species, conifer
and hardwood, by watershed is included (Appendix G). The largest acreage of commercial
trees are located in the Hamma Hamma and Lilliwaup Watersheds.
Table 15. Study Area Tree - Covered Acres by Age Class
irx- Covered Lands
Percent of
Age Class
Total Study
Aches::::..
! Percent
:..Area t
Plantations (0-10 yrs.)
5,481
6
5
Young Growth ( >10 -50 yrs.)
12,669
14
12
Commercial ( >50 -160 yrs.)
49,258
53
48
Old Growth (160+ yrs.)
24,647
27
24
Total
92,055
100
89
' Percentage of total Study Area, 103,558 acres.
Forestland Management Objectives Depend on Ownership
Forest management activities (growing, stand tending, harvest, and regeneration) are
evident in portions of all the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. Current timber harvest
on forestland is concentrated on the private lands generally located within two miles of
Hood Canal. These young growth stands resulted from regeneration following previous
logging, especially railroad logging in the 1900 to 1930 period. Table 16 shows the
acreage of each management /ownership category for managed forestland.
139
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds •
Table 16. Land Management/Ownership of Managed
Forestlands
PUBLIC
Forest Service
37,085
32,970
DNR
26,509
25,4%
SUBTOTAL
63,594
581466
TRIBAL LANDS
1,029
898
INDUSTRIAL'
MRGC
2,457
2,366
Simpson Timber Company
1,633
1,618
Weyerhaeuser
881
803
John Hancock
828
823
SUBTOTAL
5,799
5,660
PRIVATE NON - INDUSTRIAL=
Hama Hama Co.
3,888
3,628
Mt. Washington Tree Farm
594
579
Sheldon Properties
504
457
Other Designated Parcels
9,062
8,455
SUBTOTAL
14,048
13,119
GRAND TOTAL
84,470
78,143
' Industrial ownerships are large commercial ownerships by corporations or individuals.
2 Private Non - Industrial includes ownerships > 160 acres in the designated forestland program.
3 Private parcels include ownerships < 160 acres included in the designated forestland program.
Managed forestland covers 75% of the Study Area, encompassing 84,470 acres. Ownership
of this managed forestland includes public agencies, industrial companies, members of the
Skokomish Indian Tribe, private non - industrial landowners with holdings over 160 acres
and individual owners of small parcels which vary in size from 5 to 160 acres.
C
The large variety of forest cover, including conifer and hardwood species and the diversity
of public, industrial, and small private parcels ensure a continuing variety of forest 0
140
• Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
products. The short hauling distances to nearby manufacturing facilities and high quality
trees for lumber and fiber make the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds a continuing
prime western Washington commercial forest area (Adams, 1992).
Public Managed Forestlands
Public managed forestlands totaling 63,594 acres, 61% of the Study Area, are under the
jurisdiction of two agencies. The managed federal forestlands are administered by the
Olympic National Forest. The State of Washington, Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) administers trust lands for education and county governments.
The Forest Service manages the largest forestland area, 37,085 acres, located in the higher
elevations of the Study Area. The Forest Service practices multiple use resource
management on these lands. Resource practices are guided by the Olympic National
Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) and the U.S Department of
Agriculture and Department of Interior Final Environmental Impact Statement on
Management of Habitat for Late - Successional and Old Growth Forest Related Species
within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl (President's Plan) 1994.
Management Objectives on Public Forestiands
The 1990 Olympic National Forest plan significantly reduced the amount of timber offered
for sale compared to 1980 sale volumes. To meet planning objectives and endangered
species habitat requirements, the harvest has shifted from old growth removal to
commercial thinning in the lower elevation young growth timber stands. The President's
Plan will continue managing most of the Study Area as Late - Successional Reserves for
endangered species.
Public lands also includes those managed by the State of Washington Department of
Natural Resources (DNR). The DNR manages tree - covered lands under School Board and
Trust designations to generate income for state school construction and county government
funding. The DNR has completed two significant land trades in the past ten years and
expanded its ownership in the Study Area. The largest exchange involved Simpson
Timber Company lands in the Dow Mountain and Lilliwaup Creek area. The DNR is now
able to improve management of this consolidated portion of the watersheds. A special
management area is designated for the Lilliwaup Swamp wetland complex and other
significant wetlands, including a limited harvest zone to protect these unique features. In
the Hamma Hamma watershed an exchange with the Hama Hama Company also resulted
in consolidation of both parties land ownership. Prior to the exchange each ownership
•
managed a series of non - connecting small parcels that compounded management strategies
such as road use and surveying of property boundaries.
141
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Tribal Forestlands are Located in the Southern Part of the Study Area
The Skokomish Tribe manages 1,029 acres in the vicinity of the Great Bend, adjacent to
Hood Canal. The majority of forestlands on the tribal property are in the commercial age
class. Tribal timberlands are managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The BIA
assists with designating areas to harvest, marking trees, advertising sales, and contract
inspection activities. All harvested areas are replanted. There are no- planned sales on
Tribal lands.
Industrial Forestlands Are Located in the Study Area's Lower Elevations
The term "industrial operations" will be used to describe corporate owners who manage
more than 160 acres of land with the objective of long -term harvesting of forest products.
These ownerships are located between the BPA powerline corridor and State Highway 101.
Industrial forestlands cover 5,799 acres. The largest industrial owner is MRGC with 2,457
acres. Industrial ownership changed significantly with land exchanges and selling of
properties. In 1988, a land exchange between Simpson Timber Company and the DNR
was completed in the Dow Mountain/Lilliwaup Creek area. This land trade significantly
•
reduced the amount of industrial ownership in the Study Area. .
Two large timberland purchases have occurred since 1992. Travelers Insurance Company
sold their Fulton Creek and McDonald Creek timberlands to Weyerhaeuser. In 1994,
MRGC purchased the J. Hofert Christmas tree lands in the Hoodsport area. The recent
timber stumpage price increases have resulted in harvest on many of the commercial -aged
stands in both ownerships. Timber removal to recover capital investments is a factor in
both firms' management plans.
All industrial operations reforest after harvest and practice silvicultural techniques such as
precommercial thinning, herbicide use, hand slashing of hardwood competitor species, and
commercial thinning of young growth stands in areas with access.
Private Forestland Holdings Greater than 160 Acres
Private non - industrial individuals have tree - covered properties totaling 4,986 acres. The
land owners have filed for and been approved by either Mason or Jefferson County under
the open space/ forestland taxation designation. Under provisions in the designated
forestland program, landowners receive a reduction in their property valuation but must
keep their lands in forest cover for a ten year period. Many owners reside in the Study
Area and manage properties that in several cases have been in family ownership for many
years. The owners share many of the same goals as the industrial operators but tend to •
harvest only when fluctuating timber market prices are in the high cycle.
142
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Other Designated Parcels
Owners with holdings of 5 to 160 acres have approximately 9,062 tree - covered acres.
These parcels are designated for long term forest management under the open
space /forestland taxation designation approved by the county. Ownership includes long-
term residents, recent land purchasers, and some absentee owners.
Interviews with some of the forestland owners/managers discussing objectives, harvest
methods, and regeneration techniques are located in Appendix I
Timber Harvest Values Are at Historical High Levels
Trees are prized for their monetary, wildlife, and aesthetic values. The demand for wood
products remains high at both the regional and national levels. Concurrently, the Pacific
Northwest public forestland base available for timber harvest is shrinking. These factors
will keep timber stumpage values at a high level during this decade. Fifty -eight percent of
the timber stands in West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are of commercially harvestable
age.
An alternative way for owners of tree - covered lands to produce income is to harvest and
market miscellaneous and specialty forest products (Camp, 1984). Some items that can be
harvested from these lands include floral greens, moss, firewood, Christmas trees,
evergreen boughs, and wood post /poles. Processing facilities for many of these products
exist in the Shelton area. The product demand has also increased trespassing and theft of
valuable products, especially in the southern part of the Study Area.
Facilities for timber product manufacture including lumber, pulp chip production, and log
exports are located in Shelton or Olympia. Hardwood species are shipped to Shelton for
lumber manufacture and pulp logs to where market prices are competitive.
Study Area harvest levels will decrease during the next decade from cutting rates of the
past two years. This reduction will be most notable on public lands to meet critical habitat
needs associated with the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet, endangered species.
Industrial harvest will continue as commercial aged timber approaches rotation age. There
has been a heavy concentration of clearcut harvesting in the northern and southern portions
of the Study Area due to recent ownership changes on private holdings. Commercial
thinning in young growth stands is occurring as high timber prices make this normally
expensive silvicultural operation profitable.
143
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Forestry Activities Can Impact Water Quality
Forestry practices can impact water quality and the beneficial uses associated with water.
The most visible forest practice in the Study Area is timber harvest and associated road
construction. These activities can concentrate runoff, increase sediment loads, elevate
water temperatures, cause chemical contamination, generate organic debris, and result in
loss of riparian and wetland habitat. The principle pollutant from forest activities is
sediment. Some forest practices, especially when performed on unstable soil types,
combined with steep slopes or during periods of heavy rainfall, may adversely affect water
quality. Forest practice activities on managed forestlands occur at different intensities,
depending on ownership objectives.
This section presents general information about forestry activities on the Study Area's
managed forestlands. A summary of the impacts from road construction and _maintenance
and tree removal on surface erosion processes, stream corridors, and wetlands is presented.
Some impacts are described for educational purposes, because all activities are not
presently happening in all portions of the watershed.
•
The greatest sediment source is roads. Road location, construction methods, and the
timing of maintenance during both log hauling and non -use periods affect the amount of i
sediment resulting from roads. Lesser amounts of pollution are generated by timber
product removal, post- harvest activities such as machine slash piling, fertilization, or
herbicide applications.
Recently harvested units will have increased surface runoff until new plantations establish
rooting systems and overhead canopy for absorption and transpiration of precipitation.
When large areas are harvested in one continuous unit, such as in upper Finch Creek
watershed, peak flows will increase dramatically, especially during storm events. High
peak flows can result in streambank erosion, streambed scour, downstream flooding,
sediment transport, and deposition.
Road Location and Construction Methods Can Affect Water Quality
Road construction methods vary by ownership and type of terrain. The early railroad
corridors began at the saltwater and were extended into the more gentle terrain up to
approximately 2,000 feet of elevation. When the tracks were removed, these railroad
grades became routes for motorized vehicles. These narrow roads are still used on much
of the DNR and private lands.
•
144
Figure 10.
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Hillslope with
Potential Mass
Sediment Failure Sites
Pre -road slope
/ Forest Road
Ditch, .
Culvert
Fill
Clearcut
Natural
Earthflow
,
Stream bed
Road building and log landing construction have the largest potential to affect water
quality, especially when built on steep slopes or erosive soils. At stream or drainage
crossings, road culverts need to be properly sized and placed to avoid road failure and the
• resulting erosion. Maintenance of road surfaces and drainage ditches is critical during
timber hauling and in the fall after summer recreational use.
145
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Forest Service Roads Are Designed for Mixed Traffic
Roads on the steeper - sloped Forest Service lands were built for timber removal. Generally
Forest Service roads are built as part of a timber contract, but are designed to
accommodate recreation traffic. The majority of Forest Service roads in the Study Area
were constructed between 1960 and 1990. Cable logging methods required many miles of
midslope roads to reach effective landing sites. Construction methods in these steep slope
areas required cutting and filling to assure safe passage of logging equipment. Rock
outcrop areas required blasting, which frequently created material in excess of the road
width requirements. On midslope roads built prior to 1979, the excess material was
pushed (sidecast) to the downhill side of the new road. This sidecast rock and dirt
material created large unvegetated areas along many road systems.
•
Since passage of the National Forest Management Act in 1976 and completion of the
Canal Front Management Plan in 1979, sidecast road construction is prohibited on slopes
greater than 50 %. Construction on these steep slopes now requires hauling the excess
material to a disposal site. Since 1979, 26 miles of road have been built under the new
direction, but their locations tend to be on ridge tops with reduced water drainage.
Older forest roads totaling 99 miles were built close to valley streams. Later construction •
was done in midslope areas with roads that required ditches to convey water to culverts in
natural drainages. Some stream crossings required large fills to continue smooth alignment
and grades. Material used to build these road fills often contained woody debris such as
tree limbs, stumps, and defective portions of trees. Over time, this woody material decays,
leading to road slumping and loss of driving surfaces.
Road construction must address water drainage in ditchlines and culverts to carry water
under the road bed. The size of culverts installed is determined by the area of the natural
drainageway. In some midslope areas, road construction required burying the culvert in a
large fill to maintain road alignment. These culverts in older roads were frequently
undersized for the water flow from road ditches, natural flow, and runoff from harvested
areas. In heavy rain storms or in areas subject to wintertime rain -on -snow, more water
runs off than these culverts could disperse. When culverts are blocked or restricted by tree
limbs or floating debris, the overflow can damage fills by washing away portions or all of
the road material into stream courses.
The Hood Canal Ranger District maintains a road reconstruction inventory list that
identifies areas where undersized culverts need replacement and failure sites where
additional drainage culverts are needed. Culvert replacement is expensive, and heavy
winter runoff the past two years has caused many roads in the Watersheds to require
upgrading and repair. •
146
• Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Road Construction on Industrial and Private Lands
Road construction standards for industrial and private lands are located in the Forest
Practices Rules and Regulations (Chapter 222 -24, WAC). Generally roads in these areas
are constructed on gentle slopes (5 to 20 %) and are designed for timber extraction, not
mixed traffic patters associated with roads on public lands. The current roads in this
portion of the Study Area are former railroad grades used in the first harvest. These roads
are narrow, lack turnouts, and utilize native soil surfacing. These road surfaces do not
allow year -round hauling and require more frequent maintenance to protect public
resources.
These owners also have steeper sloped areas, usually near stream crossings. Roads in
these sensitive areas should be designed as outsloped or ditched on the uphill side, with
surface drainage provided that directs water flows into natural channels. Special care is
needed to avoid discharging surface drainage upon erodible soils or unvegetated fill slopes.
To reduce off -site sediment transport, road and landing construction are best done during
the drier months (June to October). During this time period, disturbed soils have lower
water content and there is reduced chance of rainfall on soil exposed during construction
activity. Vegetation in disturbed areas helps to stabilize exposed soils and reduce surface
erosion. Ground cover seeding and water diversion cross drains should be in place before
periods of heavy rain.
Field observations indicated that most industrial and some private owners are building new
roads and landing areas up to one year prior to timber hauling. This practice allows the
road to stabilize and compact, reducing surface erosion and road maintenance.
Road Maintenance Protects Beneficial Uses
Annual road maintenance is done in the spring and autumn for access roads to timber
hauling and recreation facilities. The spring maintenance includes cleaning ditches and
culvert inlet basins where bank slumping has occurred following the winter snow melt.
Road surface maintenance and repairs are completed on public roads prior to the major
holidays and recreation season. Fall maintenance includes ditch and culvert cleanout along
with installing road surface cross drains to channel surface water to ditches in steeper road
sections. Ground cover and vegetation growth is critical for 2 to 3 years following
disturbance. The length of growing season varies in the Study Area. Ground cover
becomes established more rapidly on low elevation sites than on higher elevation public
lands.
• Road maintenance in steep slope and sidecast construction areas requires removal of cut
slope raveling and slides that block roadside ditches. Large slide areas require a front -end
147
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
loader and dump truck to move material to a storage site. Later, when a roadgrader cleans
the ditches and blades the road, the rock material is deposited on the road surface. When
blading the road, a road grader will create a berm of excess material along the downslope
road edge. Along narrow roads the excess berm material is pushed off the road and over
the steep slope. Along roads with steep slopes this annual blading of sidecast material can
destroy native vegetation and leave bare slopes exposed to precipitation.
The Olympic National Forest has developed a Watershed Condition Inventory form to
record road related impacts to water quality. Condition surveys have been done in
watersheds adjacent to the Study Area. The inventory results were used to prioritize road
segments for restoration and closure to vehicle travel. Funds from federal and state
agencies for stream restoration have been used the past two years for a variety of road
related projects. Future funding appears limited, subject to congressional approval. No
inventories have been done in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. The PSCRBT
completed an inventory of the roads within the Lilliwaup watershed. Completed forms and
photos were delivered to the Forest Service. Additional inventory and restoration funds are
needed in Lilliwaup, Cabin Creek, and Washington/Jefferson Creek drainages, to protect
the roads and prevent further resource damage.
•
The Team Inventoried Road - Related Erosion Sites in the Lilliwaup Watershed 0
To help evaluate road- related erosion in the Study Area, the team conducted an inventory
of road - related erosion sites in the Lilliwaup watershed. This watershed covers 11,443
acres and was selected because it contains the full spectrum of federal, state, and private
ownership and a variety of topographic conditions from sea level to higher elevations.
The watershed and the numbered erosion site locations are shown in Figure 11. The
numbering system consists of the road number or other identifier followed by a dash and
the site number, numbered consecutively as found on each road system. A watershed
condition inventory form that describes site conditions, impacts and possible treatments
was completed at each site. Photographs were taken to record conditions at each site.
For this discussion the watershed is divided into three areas: upper Lilliwaup, upslope
from Forest Road 24; middle Lilliwaup, between Forest Road 24 and the power line right -
of -way; and lower Lilliwaup, between the powerline right -of -way and the Hood Canal
shoreline. Each of these areas are described below.
U
148
P
4
7 \ T / A16
Lake
1
0
a
0
o,
c
o,
M
Lcmm
Land Outside L Mwlaup Wabastwd Streams
LAM & Hood Catud N Rods
Q LMwmp Wabnsi Ail State Highway 101
*U Sibs Lomtion do Number
INVENTORIED ROAD - RELATED EROSION STIES
IN THE LILLIWAUP WATERSHED
Figure 11
PUGET SOUND COOPERtATlVE RIM M= ZEAM -SZF7Z = 1956
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
The inventoried erosion sites in the Lilliwaup watershed cover about 4.5 acres of actively
eroding land surface area. Without active restoration efforts, the size of the affected area
is likely to increase.
The Maiority of the Erosion Sites Are in the Upper Lilliwaup
The majority of the erosion sites inventoried in the Lilliwaup watershed are associated with
mid -slope roads in the upper Lilliwaup. Most land in this area is managed by the Forest
Service. Slopes are primarily greater than 60 %, with flatter slopes closer to the valley
bottom.
Twenty -one erosion sites were identified in the upper Lilliwaup. One site (2464 -14) is the
result of mass wasting which is movement of a fairly large and sometimes relatively intact
mass of soil and rock material. Two locations (2464 -2 and -5) are stream bank erosion
associated with a road culvert. Initial erosion at these sites resulted from high water flows
during the winter of 1994 to 1995. The other sites are surface erosion, movement of
individual soil particles at the surface by water and gravity or other forces. Some of these
sites have the potential to become mass wasting sites or for increased severity of the
surface erosion.
Surface erosion is evident on both road cut and fill slopes throughout the upper Lilliwaup.
However, when compared to road cutslope erosion, fill slope erosion generally appears to
contribute larger amounts of sediment. Sediment yield studies have not been conducted to
quantify this conclusion.
Natural re- establishment of vegetation on disturbed sites appears to be much slower in the
upper Lilliwaup area as compared to the middle and lower Lilliwaup areas. This is the
result of steeper slopes, a shorter grower season, and for some sites, the southern aspect.
Road Cutslope Erosion
Five of the 21 erosion sites identified in the upper Lilliwaup are in road cutslopes (2441 -2;
2469 -1; and 2464 -1, -11, and -13). Frequently, these are areas where a concave - shaped
erosional site appears to be eroding in an up -slope direction. These areas often remain
unstable due to the removal of eroded material at the base of the slope during routine road
ditch cleaning. In addition to these five sites, continual, small -scale surface erosion from
the top of road cut - slopes occurs over roughly half the road length in the upper Lilliwaup.
Soil eroded from these areas is caught by vegetation, the road ditch, or the road bed.
Material in the road ditch is either removed during ditch cleaning or is carried in runoff
and deposited off the site in drainage ways or streams. The volume of sediment moved
from these sites was not quantified.
150
C:
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Three of the five sites (2441 -2, 2469 -1, and 2464 -1) were rated as low for on -site and off -
site impacts. The other two sites were rated as having medium impacts to resident fish,
roads, soil productivity, and timber productivity. These are associated with two areas of
fillslope erosion (2464 -12 and 2464 -14). Together these sites were identified as a "pulse"
of soil and rock material moving toward Lilliwaup Creek.
Road Fillslope Erosion
Fourteen of the 21 identified erosion sites in the upper Lilliwaup are associated with road
fill - slopes. Thirteen of these sites result from surface erosion; only one (2464 -14) results
from mass wasting.
Most of these sites have been created or aggravated by side - casting road blading material.
This side -cast material buries existing vegetation and "scours" the slope on its way down
slope exposing soil to further erosion. Because side - casting appears to occur annually with
road blading, this erosion process can continue over many years, preventing the site from
revegetating naturally. In many cases, erosion caused by side - casting is eroding the road
bed and narrowing the road width, resulting in the need for major road repairs.
Other frequent causes of road fillslope erosion involve road culverts and the decay of road
fill material. Proper culvert size, location and placement are critical to road fill slope
stability. The use of culvert downspouts reduced erosion at several sites, and several more
sites could benefit from their addition. Logs, stumps, and other woody debris were
included as part of the fill material during road construction. As this material decays, the
roadbed integrity is lost and mass wasting or surface erosion begins or accelerates.
Organic material in road fills is primarily a problem in forest roads built on National
Forest lands before the mid- 1970s. Passage and implementation of the National Forest
Management Act prohibited this practice.
Erosion at Landings
Two of the 21 identified sites are at former landings (2464 -6 and -8). Landings are a
central location to which logs are yarded for loading onto log trucks. After logging, the
landing area often includes buried stumps and other woody debris. This debris decays
over time making any rock, soil, or woody material above it unstable and likely to move
down slope, creating an erosion site. Site 2464 -6 included a small area of existing erosion
with a high potential for slope failure and site 2464 -8 had two narrow erosion chutes
extending over 300 feet down slope.
151
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Other Erosion Sites
High volume and high velocity stream flows from rainstorms in January 1995 blocked the
culvert and washed out a portion of Forest Road 24 at the crossing of Lilliwaup Creek.
The Middle Lilliwaup Has Flatter Slopes and Fewer Erosion Sites
This area is predominantly managed as timberland by the Washington State Department of
Natural Resources. The terrain is dominated by the Lilliwaup Swamp, Price and Tenas
Lakes, and Saddle and Dow Mountains. Roads in this area are primarily located on less
than 20% slopes. Where slopes are steeper, the area is well- vegetated.
Two sites were identified in the middle Lilliwaup. Site 1300 -1 is erosion of the roadbed
and road shoulder where a creek flowing into Price Lake crosses the road. Due to high
stream flow associated with heavy rains in January 1995 (Cargil, 1995) and a blocked
culvert, water left the stream channel; deposited sediment, gravels, and cobbles; and eroded
new channels, primarily in the road shoulder. Site 1290 -1 is an erosion site associated
with a landing. Water flowing along a skid trail eroded soil primarily at the landing edge
where the slope steepened to the road ditch. Off -site impacts include further erosion in the
road ditch and sedimentation.
The Lower Lilliwaup Has Primarily Revegetated Since Past Logging Activity
The lower Lilliwaup area includes the power line right -of -way managed by the Bonneville
Power Administration (BPA), a former Christmas tree plantation now being managed for
timber production, private forestland parcels, and residential sites along the shoreline of
Lilliwaup Bay. One erosion site was identified in this area: site LL-1 is a washout of the
powerline access road where it crosses a tributary to Lilliwaup Creek.
Roads on private forest lands in this area are used infrequently or are closed to travel.
Some slight erosion was observed at a few locations. If these roads are reopened for
future timber harvest, maintenance and installation of water management practices such as
water bars, to direct water flow off the road surface, and culverts will be needed.
There Are Many Solutions to Erosion Problems
A variety of methods have been successfully used to restore mass movement and surface
erosion sites in other watersheds. Examples of solutions recommended for the types of
erosion seen in the Lilliwaup watershed are listed and defined in (Appendix J).
152
C7
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Road Inventories Assist Managers In Identifying Erosion Maintenance and
Restoration Projects
A road maintenance and repair schedule should be updated annually for all road systems,
whether the status is active, inactive or incidental use, or abandoned. Active roads will
require more surface blading and ditch and culvert cleanout to minimize sediment
transport. Heavy rainstorms in December 1994 and January and February 1995 clearly
showed the need to stop haul traffic and revise plans to protect road subgrade and provide
adequate drainage. Examples of poorly built /maintained roads within the Study Area are
listed below:
Finch Creek The road to private lands above Hoodsport broke through the
subgrade, causing rutting and ponding of water. Because most of the
road is located upslope of Finch Creek, sediment was delivered to
the stream at the upper crossing.
Cabin Creek Inadequate ditch capacity and lack of drainage culverts allowed water
to flow down and across the road surface. Deep ditch cutting
allowed sediment to be transported to nearby streams and wetlands.
Heavy water flow caused overtopping of many culverts, resulting in
loss of road surface along the entire system. Sidecasting road blade
material is causing fillslope erosion and narrowing road width. A
major slump occurred in the harvest unit near the end of road #2502.
An updated erosion inventory is needed for the entire road system.
Fulton Creek The private road is located south of Fulton Creek and about one mile
west of the powerline. Inadequate ditch maintenance allowed water
to flow a long distance on the road surface. Where water leaves the
road, the fill is slumping and a considerable amount of sediment has
been transported to the stream.
John Creek Inactivated midslope road needs culverts and upper water bars to
reduce road surface erosion in the drainage ways. Sidecast slopes
would benefit from vegetative cover.
153
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Jefferson Ck. An erosion inventory is needed on all roads above Jefferson lake.
Numerous washouts at culvert crossings and slumps in harvest units
were noted.
Powerline Rd. Road access to transmission towers is blocked near Lilliwaup Creek
from slumps and culvert washouts. All powerline access roads in the
Study Area would benefit from ditch cleanout to prevent water flow
down the driving surface. A complete road condition inventory is
needed.
Boulder Ck. The road system has been closed and culverts have been removed
from stream crossings. Sediment continues to move overland and
annually blocks the Forest Service 25 road.
The amount of road damage in these areas exhibits the failure to anticipate impacts from
large storm events or in some cases, to stop logging truck traffic when native road surfaces
are saturated. While the immediate impacts were of short duration, annual repair costs are
expensive. An inventory system that records existing and potential sites is needed. The
inventory would allow road maintenance and drainage plans to be adjusted to meet current
conditions. Is
Forest Practices Can Negatively Affect Streams and Wetlands
Forestry and Stream Corridors
A majority of the stream corridors (81 %) in the Study Area are adjacent to managed
forestland. Salmonid habitat within these stream corridors is affected by road construction
and timber harvest. These activities tend to increase erosion and sedimentation and to
increase stream temperature when the vegetative canopy is removed next to the stream.
Tree removal from the riparian zone reduces stream bank stability and reduces its ability to
filter out sediment. In addition, the source of large organic debris (logs and rootwads), the
primary structural component of habitat in small streams, is reduced. Sedimentation
within streambeds is not usually observed in sites where large organic debris (LOD) from
logging and natural blowdown is plentiful.
The LOD creates a staiistep channel profile and forms plunge pools downstream of debris
accumulations (Keller and Swanson, 1979). Large organic debris tends to direct fine
sediment from the channel to the flood plain and to store gravel in the channel. It also
provides a source of nutrients, creates a substrate for biological activity, and forms the
large, high quality pools necessary for the rearing of juvenile salmonids. In general, the •
more habitat diversity (pool, riffle, and off- channel habitat) created by LOD, the greater
the rearing potential for salmonids.
154
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Intensive forest management with shortened harvest rotations will remove much of the
source material for recruitment of wood debris to stream channels. Shortened timber
rotation and harvest of smaller trees will result in stream channels nearly devoid of LOD.
Policies addressing these needs and recommendations on riparian management zones of
streams and wetlands are outlined in the Timber/Fish/Wildlife Agreement (TFW, 1987).
TFW covers stream types 1, 2, and 3 and makes recommendations on Type 4 and 5 waters
when such practices are necessary to protect public resources (WAC 222- 30 -020).
Additional buffers on type 4 and 5 streams will always help protect fish and wildlife
habitat, and water quality.
Not all of the impacts of tree removal in the riparian zone are detrimental. Increased light
reaching the stream can result in short term increase in production of algae and greater
density of invertebrates, which form the basic diet of fish. Although canopy removal in
small blocks can have positive impacts on stream productivity, the cumulative effects of
extensive clearcutting outweigh most potential benefits.
In the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds many of the streams have been impacted by
past logging. Almost all stream corridors were logged 30 to 70 years ago. The past
harvesting practice was to log these riparian areas up to a stream's edge. Many of the
streams are beginning to stabilize to some extent. A heavy bedload within the streams
is will continue to work itself down the corridors for many years. Present Forest Practice
Rules and Regulations, in conjunction with Timber, Fish, and Wildlife processes and local
county input, should provide protection on state and private lands if all involved groups
follow the prescribed methods.
Forest activities can have a major effect on water quality through increased sediment
levels. Logging practices in western Washington can be expected to increase sediment
yield over background levels by a factor of 4. Of this increase, 80% will be attributable to
existing and newly constructed roads. Road activity associated with hauling logs or
increases in administrative or recreational traffic, creates more sediment than inactive or
abandoned roads. Inactive roads do require field inspection to identify drainage structure
failures. One study found that roads used by more than 16 trucks per day contribute 130
times as much sediment as roads not subject to log hauling and 1,000 times as much as
roads that had been abandoned (Reid, 1981).
Most of the roads in the Study Area's steep mountainous uplands were constructed in the
1960s to 1980s. Numerous studies have shown that three -fold increases in sedimentation
over natural rates are common during and immediately following road construction. The
fine sediment has already entered Hood Canal but the larger bedload sediment is slowly
routing through the lower gradient reaches. This bedload tends to deposit in pools and
realign stream channels reducing access to important side channel habitat (Hood Canal
Technical Work Group, 1995).
155
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Mass wasting from steep mountain slopes is a natural physical process in the region.
Several slides were observed in the Study Area, primarily on steep slopes associated with
roads. These natural events often were associated with wildfires and storm events on a
cycle of hundreds of years. With forest entry activities, mass wasting has increased in
frequency and distribution of events to once every five to 20 years. Both more frequent
mass wasting and erosion from vegetation removal and roads have caused changes in
channel conditions and impacts to fish stock reproduction. These chronic pulses do not
allow the fisheries or the habitat to recover. It is probable that chronic, frequent events
have a greater impact over the long -term than one large catastrophic event over the same
period (Hood Canal Technical Work Group, 1995).
Current forest practices regulations require buffers along Type 1, 2, and 3 streams
(Appendix A). Buffers are usually not required on Type 4 and 5 streams. Type 4 and 5
streams warrant buffer protection and are very important in protecting downstream
resources, water quality, and regulating runoff and water temperature. Some .studies
suggest leaving an even wider buffer along these important headwater streams than is
required for larger streams.
Erosion and sedimentation in marine waters impact shellfish resources in several ways.
Shellfish can be directly affected by outright burial and smothering from excessive
sedimentation. More often they are indirectly affected by sediment -bearing runoff
containing nutrients and bacteria which can lead to harvest closures or restrictions. Several
landslides originating from the Boulder Creek road in the upper Hamma Hamma drainage
in the early 1970s resulted in serious damage to shellfish and finfish habitat. These
landslides were most likely due to the inability of the road drainage to handle runoff, either
from culverts being blocked with debris, or from runoff eroding or causing instability of
road fill material at stream crossings on steep slopes.
Forest Practices Can Negatively Affect Wetlands
Timber harvest activities can adversely affect wetlands and their buffers. These activities
include clearing trees and understory plants, constructing roads, depositing slash, and
compacting and disturbing soil. Harvesting trees from wetlands changes plant communities
for the short term and, unless the same species are planted or there are sufficient seed
sources, there may be long term changes. Tree removal alters habitat, and increases
temperature. Although it accelerates evaporation, there is less transpiration because of the
lack of tree cover. Removing woody plants diminishes a wetland's ability to slow runoff
and flood flows in systems containing streams.
Roads in wetlands can reduce or eliminate water movement into and out of wetlands,
threatening their character and their ability to support stream flow. Fill used for roads can
be a source of sediment. Placement of thick slash in wetlands inhibits regrowth of
vegetation. Storage of water in the soil profile is reduced by compaction from heavy
156
.7
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
equipment. Nonnative plants can easily grow in disturbed soil, often excluding native
plants that were originally on the site.
When an area is managed as forestland after harvest, many of the impacts of tree removal
are short term. Wetlands recover as the replacement forest matures. Although in most
cases wetland habitat recovers, some animals dependant on wetlands and their buffers may
be displaced for long periods. Some can't physically move to a wetland outside the
harvest area. Some of the effects of forest practices can be relatively permanent. For
example, once nonnative species are established they are extremely difficult to eradicate.
Also, acreage and hydrologic changes resulting from road construction requires removal of
fill and restoration to correct.
The Washington State Forest Practices Rules and Regulations allow tree harvesting in
forested wetlands areas and their buffers, unless they are bogs or fens. Revisions to the
rules and regulations in 1993 reduce impacts by discouraging road building in wetlands
and specifying harvest techniques that reduce soil compaction. Also, wetland management
zones (WMZs) for nonforested wetlands, and bogs and fens are required. Partial- cutting or
harvesting groups of trees is allowed in the zone; however, a specific number of trees must
be retained. There are disagreements between different interest groups about what is
needed to protect the function of wetlands. No formal, long term research has been
conducted.
About 74% of the wetland and buffer acreage in the Study Area is in managed forestland.
Examples of wetlands in or adjacent to harvest areas include #PO -8, #MC -4, #LC -6,
#FNC -5 and 6, and #JC -4. For location of wetlands, refer to the map on the end of
Chapter 1.
The primary impact to nonforested wetlands is the construction of logging roads through
them. Because interflow is an important hydrologic support to some of the Study Area
wetlands, roads blocking or intercepting interflow can alter a wetland's hydroperiod.
The presence of Wetland Management Zones (WMZ) varied. Many of the harvests were
either completed or permitted prior to the 1993 revisions to the rules and regulations.
Therefore, many of the wetlands without WMZs were not required to have them at the
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
•
time the permits were obtained. In some cases, the majority of the area adjacent to a
wetland had been cleared, and it was difficult to determine what was considered a WMZ.
In a few cases, it appeared that foresters clustered wildlife leave trees adjacent to wetlands
for which designation of WMZs aren't required.
Forest Practice Regulations Help Protect Public Resources
Water quality impacts related to forest practices are addressed primarily through the
Washington Forest Practices Act (Chapter 76.09 RCW). The Act created the Forest
Practices Board which has the authority to promulgate Forest Practices Rules and
Regulations under WAC 222 -10 -010. The Washington State Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) administers the rules and regulations. Water - related rules require the use
of Best Management Practices (BMPs) referred to in the "Water Quality Standards for
Surface Waters of the State of Washington" (Chapter 173 -201 WAC). They-have been
co- promulgated by the Washington State Department of Ecology by reference in Chapter
173 -202 WAC.
Most timber harvest operations require the preparation of a Forest actices Application
(FPA). The FPA was revised in June 1993 and reflects the Forest Practices Board's .
emphasis on reducing impacts on non - timber resources. The landowner, in completing the
FPA, provides information specific to the harvest site as required in the following permit
resource sections:
♦ Water classification and protection.
♦ Wetland identification and protection.
♦ Tree removal methods.
♦ Road access needs.
The information provided on the application establishes the class of forest practice permit
and determines the requirements needed to protect site - specific beneficial uses. WAC
222 -16 -050 defines the classes for the four permit types available.
The FPA, when completed and signed by the landowner, is then submitted to the DNR for
review and approval. All Mason County applications are sent with a $50 filing fee to the
DNR Enumclaw regional office for processing, review, and approval or denial. Jefferson
County applications are submitted to the DNR regional office in Forks, Washington. The
DNR modifies harvest permits to meet standards set by state Forest Practice Rules and
Regulations. When a permit is approved, harvest operations can be started anytime within
a two year period.
FPA harvest permits and acres treated increased in 1993 and 1994 (See Table 15). The
1993 totals reflect a rush to get permits prior to the start of a DNR required $50
158
0 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
application fee. In 1994, the Study Area had the highest number of permits and a large
increase in commercial thinning acres. Permit totals, through May 1995, reflect salvage
permits to clean up after the wet, heavy, snowfall damage in the lower elevations of the
Study Area.
Permit requests and harvest acreage
increases can be attributed to current high
timber market prices, the convenience of
existing road networks, changes in land
ownership with trees being harvested to
recover land acquisition costs, and in
some cases fear of further restrictions
under Forest Practice regulations. Tree
removal associated with land use
conversions to residential or recreation
uses is covered in the conversion chapter.
The Forest Practices Rules and
Table 17. Harvest Permits and Silvicultural
Method by Year Approved
Yeaz
Person
Totals `
Clearcut ;
Acres
Thlrmg
Acres
1992
4
80
48
1993
12
835
59
1994
22
184
592
1995 ('Through
May)
10
237
233
Regulations (Chapter 222 -24, WAC)
contain standards for the construction and maintenance of the roads used to remove forest
products. Effective road planning and design begins with road locations that fit the
topography and minimize routes along riparian management zones, wetlands, unstable
slopes, or known slump areas. All attempts must be made to minimize the number of
stream, drainage, and wetland crossings, and bridges or culverts must be installed with the
minimum disturbance. To prevent road surface erosion and road failures, culverts should
be sized to accommodate a 50 -year flood. The Forest Practices board in 1992 adopted
minimum culvert requirements of 18 inches in diameter for permanent culverts at all water
crossings, relief culverts, and ditch diversions.
Although not required in the Forest Practices Rules and Regulations, road and landing
construction, with their heavy ground disturbance, are best done during the drier months
from June to October. During this period, soils have a lower water content and the chance
of rain falling on exposed soils is reduced. Protective ground cover should be seeded on
exposed areas and cross drains installed on sites prior to extended rainy periods. This
reduces surface erosion and stabilizes exposed soil embankments, fill slopes, and ditches.
Road maintenance should be performed annually for all road systems, whether roads are
active, inactive, incidentally used, or abandoned. Actively used roads require frequent
maintenance of the surface, road -side ditches, and culverts.
Some Forestry Activities Do Not Require a Permit
In June 1993, the Washington Forest Practices Board revised the permit requirements for
owners of small parcels of timberland. Operations on parcels that have been determined to
159
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
have no direct potential for damaging public resources are called Class I forest practices
and can proceed without an FPA. While some unpermitted harvesting has taken place
after the winter storms, the impact to resources in residential areas has been minor.
Implementing the new regulations has created confusion among local residents and
enforcement administrators in other Puget Sound areas.
Commercial timber harvesting without a permit must meet the following conditions. A
complete listing of these Class I forest practices and the environmental considerations
required on each harvest site is contained in the definitions section of WAC 222- 16 -050.
♦ Harvest of less than 2 acres.
♦ Applicant does not own adjoining forestland.
♦ No tree cutting within 200 feet of a shoreline.
♦ No tree cutting within 100 feet of a Type 1 or 2 water or within 50 feet of
Type 3 streams.
♦ No equipment operations in any stream or on slopes steeper that 40 %.
♦ No harvesting within the breeding grounds of any threatened or endangered
species.
♦ Construction of less than 600 feet of road.
Other forestry activities that do not require permits include:
♦ Christmas tree culture.
♦ Personal -use harvest of less than 5,000 board feet every 12 months.
♦ Tree planting.
♦ Tree pruning.
♦ Precommercial thinning.
Education and Assistance for Private Landowners
Several programs are available to provide forestry education and technical and financial
assistance to private, non - industrial landowners. Some sources are free and sponsored by
governmental agencies. Private consulting foresters charge fees for evaluation of current
conditions and suggesting management practices to meet owner objectives.
ELF
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
To manage small private parcels and meet both the economic and environmental objectives
of landowners, while complying with laws and regulations, new methods should address:
♦ Moving from clearcutting and planting toward selective harvesting.
♦ Focusing on overall forest management to make the best growth sites more
productive, offsetting economic pressures to convert to other land use.
♦ Preserving sensitive sites with unique environmental characteristics and providing
protection to fish and wildlife habitat.
♦ Using tree culture techniques such as pruning and space control to maximize
growth for high value specialty markets.
To implement approved forestland plans, publicly supported financial assistance is
available on a cost sharing basis, that provides incentive payments to maintain forestland
resources. The Consolidated Farm Services Agency, formerly the Agricultural Stabilization
and Conservation Service (ASCS), has two programs that support long term forestry
practices. These programs provide financial assistance for tree planting (including site
preparation), fencing, and silvicultural tree stand improvements such as pre - commercial
thinning and ground cover release. Landowners can qualify by application through the
local Consolidated Farm Services Agency.
Additional programs provide assistance to landowners through Washington State University
Cooperative Extension, the Washington Department of Natural Resources, Forest
Stewardship program, and Washington Conservation Districts. These agencies provide
technical assistance in developing resource management plans. During the process, short
and long term objectives of landowners, economic desires, and proper use of their natural
resources are coordinated into specific recommendations for a property.
The Stewardship Incentives Program (SIP) administered by the DNR, assists in tree
planting and stand improvement and was expanded to promote enhancement of all
beneficial uses. SIP promotes enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat, riparian and
wetland areas, soil and water protection and recreation (Appendix l). Several forestry
associations provide technical assistance, monthly newsletters, and recognition to private
forest owners. The Tree Farm System is promoted by the Washington Forest Protection
Association. The program assists in land use planning that promotes forest management
on private lands.
161
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
162
•
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Forestry
Forestry Highlights and Conclusions
Highlights
• Managed forestland occupies 75% of the Study
Area.
• The majority of timber harvesting is being done on
industrial forestlands, where ownership changes
have occurred in the last two years.
• Tree removal is not planned for the majority of
Forest Service lands, which have been designated as
Late Successional Reserves. Two previously sold
sales are currently being harvested.
• Most private non - industrial forestry operations occur on relatively flat terrain.
• Mid -slope roads in steep terrain and roads located in ravines or areas adjacent to
streams have high potential for erosion.
• Side - casting material bladed during road maintenance is causing or aggravating
surface erosion on mid -slope forest roads on steep slopes.
• Forest Practice Rules and Regulations, revised June 30, 1993, recognize and
improve wetland habitat and stream corridor protection over previous regulations.
• Current Forest Practice Rules and Regulations allow harvest of trees adjacent to
Type 4 and 5 streams. These stream types make up 61% of the DNR typed
streams.
• A recent study has shown a large percentage of the streams in the Study Area are
mis- typed.
• Forest Practice Rules and Regulations permit harvest in forested wetlands, except
bogs and fens, with the use of limited impact techniques. Partial -cut harvest is
permitted in wetland management zones.
• Education and technical assistance for forestland owners has been expanded to
address beneficial uses. Some of these programs also provide financial assistance.
163
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Conclusions
■ Harvest will continue on industrial and private designated forestlands due to the
amount of commercial age timber available and its accessibility in the low elevation
portions of the Study Area.
■ Road inventories are needed to identify existing and potential erosion sites in the
steep sloped high elevation areas.
■ Road drainage requires proper culvert sizing and placement to reduce erosion from
failures that cause road fills to erode into streams.
■ The culumative effects of extensive harvest from non - industrial tree - covered lands
will affect hydrology and wildlife habitat.
■ To promote long -term shade and large organic debris recruitment to streams, shade -
tolerant native trees such as western redcedar, grand fir, or western hemlock should
be planted adjacent to streams. In addition, native low canopy shrubs should be
planted in current streamside riparian stands.
•
■ Incentives are needed to promote voluntary use of BMPs to retain forested wetlands 10
and stream buffers and to reduce impacts to nonforested wetlands.
■ Landowners need education and training to identify and avoid impacts to wetlands
in forest harvest areas.
■ Intensive review and field checking of the stream type designations for Type 4 and
5 streams is needed.
■ Buffers left adjacent to Type 4 and 5 streams will benefit fish and wildlife habitat
and help maintain water quality.
•
164
•
•
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Conversions
Land Use Conversions Can Be a Significant Source of
Sediment
This section presents general information
about conversion from forest cover to
residential and commercial uses. The
discussion centers on the negative impacts of
increased runoff and the resulting erosion
when land is cleared and graded. For
example, road access to construction sites, the
time of construction, and lack of properly
installed erosion prevention measures can
produce increased surface water runoff and
erosion. Sediment is carried in the runoff to
wetlands, stream channels, and eventually to
saltwater areas.
Mason County is experiencing the fifth
highest growth rate of counties in the State of Washington. The West Shore Hood Canal
Watersheds are experiencing slower growth than areas near Shelton and Belfair. However,
the Study Area can expect an increase in parcel sales and building permits when real estate
prices rise in other areas of Mason County. Undeveloped platted parcels are available to
meet increased demand for land suitable for development to residential, recreational, and
commercial uses. Tree - covered properties, especially those with saltwater or mountain
views, are prime locations for residential conversion. Two parcels with road access have
been cleared for development: a five acre site on Old Mill Hill road in Hoodsport, and a
twenty acre parcel across State Highway 101 at Ayock Point.
The county population increase has raised land values as the supply of parcels suitable for
residential construction decreases. Some landowners with undeveloped parcels may be
responding to the higher land values and larger, annual tax assessments by selling property.
In addition, timber prices are at record high levels. Owners of tree - covered property are
now removing trees before selling parcels for conversion to homes.
The ground disturbance associated with tree removal and clearing and grading exposes
unvegetated soil to rainfall for long time periods. When considering the time required for
closing real estate transactions, obtaining construction permits, constructing buildings, and
landscaping, the time of ground exposure can exceed a year.
165
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Land Use Conversion Activities in the Study Area Occur Primarily
Along Hood Canal
The yearly totals for new residential construction permits have declined slightly from the
high of 1993 (see Table 18). This reflects higher interest rates for construction loans and
increasing prices for single family residences. Review of permits for the type of residence
shows an increase in manufactured homes compared to conventional construction. In
1992, only three permits were obtained for manufactured homes, 14% of total permits
issued. In 1994, manufactured home permits were 12, an increase to 75% of permits
issued. Manufactured homes generally require less grading since a foundation base is not
required. The cleared area tends to be the same as conventional construction to allow
installation of septic tanks and drainfields (Heacock 1995). The following table displays
Study Area building permit activity during the last four years.
Mason County Building Permit Data Base
Conversions Can Impact Water Quality, Stream Corridors, and
Wetlands
Clearing and Grading Affect Surface Water Runoff and Can Cause Erosion
The runoff and erosion process is not only influenced by natural conditions such as
precipitation, evapotranspiration, slope, vegetation, and soil texture but also by human
activities such as removing vegetation, grading, and road building. When vegetation is
removed and land uses change, a watershed's hydrologic cycle is disturbed. Ground
disturbance and interruption of hydrologic flow patterns can increase surface water runoff,
166
n
ICJ
i
! Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Conversions
•
resulting in soil erosion and sedimentation. Construction practices which expose soil to
rainfall and runoff can result in erosion.
When land is converted, logging roads are built to remove trees prior to building permit
application and construction. Both logging and construction access roads often lack
adequate drainage and erosion control practices. Where new gravel roads intersect paved
roads, the surface water drainage from the new road can be a significant sediment source
and safety hazard during rainy periods. Also, the amount of parcel ground disturbance is
increased when new roads are built instead of upgrading logging roads for residential
driveways.
Clearing of Land Affects Water Runoff and Drainage
Clearing the land of trees and other plants can affect runoff and erosion significantly.
Vegetation intercepts rainfall, absorbs energy, and reduces the erosive effects of raindrops.
Plants return moisture to the atmosphere through transpiration and evaporation, and they
intercept and use water through branches and roots. When vegetation is removed, surface
moisture increases, allowing saturation of the soil profile and increased surface water
runoff. Peak stream flows may increase when vegetation removal reduces the amount of
precipitation being retained.
Generally, construction sites with large cleared and graded areas increase erosion and
sediment transport, both on and off the sites. Also, clearing of steep slopes, especially
with unstable soils, greatly increases the erosion hazard. A construction site where phased
clearing techniques are applied and more ground cover retained reduces erosion and
sediment transport off site. Often, more trees and ground cover are removed than is
necessary.
The addition of roads with less permeable surfaces, and water directed to ditches, changes
natural overland flow conditions, especially on slopes above State Highway 101. These
alterations reduce the time it takes for runoff to flow into drainageways and streams. This
concentration can lead to increased peak flows and higher stream velocities, resulting in
channel bank erosion and potential flooding.
Hillside surface erosion takes place on steep slopes when soils are exposed to overland
runoff and /or the direct impact of rainfall. Gully erosion, debris torrents, slumps, and
landslides cause significant losses of soil. Where sediment and debris accumulate in
draws, debris torrents that scour the downstream channel may be triggered. The stream
channel below the clearing on Old Mill Hill road experienced a debris torrent that blocked
the culvert under State Highway 101.
167
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
While the effects of erosion and sediment may appear minor on an individual site, the
total, cumulative impact of several projects in a watershed can heavily effect water quality
in drainage systems, streams, and wetlands. The changes to surface water runoff, if
unmitigated, will result in increased erosion, sedimentation, and flood potential.
Land Conversion Affects Stream Corridors
Development and urbanization within a watershed have a detrimental cumulative effect on
stream corridors. Precautions to minimize the impacts are necessary and vital.
Construction, clearing and grading, and filling activities increase the likelihood of erosion
and sedimentation into streams and ultimately Hood Canal. The increased impervious
areas created during conversion to a more intensive use, such as road surfaces, rooftops,
and parking lots, cause more rainwater to run off. As the population grows many more
homes will be built and adequate precautionary measures are needed to protect streams of
all sizes. Adequate buffer widths, control of stormwater during and after construction,
leaving native vegetation next to streams, and limiting construction of roads or driveways
over streams are some of the measures required to protect stream corridors.
r._.I
In West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds, most conversion sites appear to be developed as
individual homes. This pattern will be the single most important impact to stream is
corridors in the future.
Large sites cleared for future development also impact stream corridors. One such site is
located south of Hoodsport on Old Mill Hill Road. The runoff from the site, after the
1995 winter storms, most likely contributed to a slide within the small stream that receives
the runoff.
Large, proposed residential developments in the Study Area can increase stormwater
runoff. The pollution the runoff carries will be delivered to the streams and eventually the
Canal. Approved shellfish harvest areas are found all along the shore zone of the Study
Area. All runoff from proposed developments needs to be cleaned before it is allowed to
enter the stream system and Hood Canal. Generally, well - planned developments are felt to
be less detrimental to stream corridors and the habitat they supply, than the piece -meal
chiseling away of forested areas into single - family housing, each on 2.5 acres. Well -
planned developments use the concept of clustering and provide protection to critical areas,
streams, and wetlands.
•
168
0 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Conversions
•
Conversion to More Intense Land Uses Can Degrade Wetlands
Major alterations to wetlands can occur during conversion of land to residential and
commercial development. Unless adequately protected, wetlands can be filled for roads,
driveways, and building sites. They are often drained to reduce soil saturation. Vegetation
is commonly cleared and buffers degraded during construction site preparation. Soils can
be compacted by the use of heavy equipment.
Common effects of these activities are as follows. Filling can greatly impair wetlands and
the functions they provide; extensive filling can destroy wetlands. Runoff can carry
sediment from conversion sites into wetlands, slowly filling wetlands. Even when parts of
wetlands are filled, all functions are affected. Draining a wetland negatively affects its
water storage capacity, its ability to improve water quality, and its ability to slow runoff
and flood flows. Altered water regimes change the composition of the plant community.
Compaction reduces a wetland soil's ability to hold water, causing water to run off more
readily. Habitat functions are degraded by all of these activities.
Wetlands are especially vulnerable in the early stages of land use conversion. Because
Mason County doesn't have a clearing ordinance, vegetation removal can begin before any
permit process is underway. By the time environmental review occurs, project alterations
and a resulting loss of wetland functions may have already occurred. This problem could
be alleviated by the county's adoption and enforcement of a strong stormwater control and
critical areas ordinance.
Unless adequately protected, more wetlands could be negatively affected by land
conversion to residences. Although the study area is experiencing much less development
pressure in comparison to most of the Puget Sound Basin, the area is growing and
residential impacts are likely to increase. Development may occur around privately owned
lakes and ponds, and the flats on the plateaus and benches.
Three percent of wetland acreage is on vacant, undeveloped residential land or
undeveloped open land greater than 5 acres in size. Open land, which does not include
private commercial forestland or public land, can be developed. Wetland degradation
appeared to be more severe in developed areas within the Study Area.
169
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Regulations Address Conversion Activities
A DNR Permit is Required for Tree Removal When a Parcel Will Not be Reforested
Tree felling or road construction associated with timber harvesting and conversion requires
a permit before activities start. The removal of timber associated with conversion is
regulated by the Washington Forest Practice Rules and Regulations. The Washington State
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will issue Class IV- General permits when
landowners indicate, on a permit application, the intent to convert land to activities
incompatible with timber growing. Since July 1993, all conversion Forest Practice
Applications (FPAs) require a $500 filing fee when submitted to the DNR. The DNR's
regulations allow monetary penalties when harvesting occurs without an approved permit.
The fines can total up to $10,000 for a civil infraction. Repeat offenders are subject to
criminal citation.
In addition, landowners should consider local government ordinances before submitting a
conversion FPA to the DNR (Johnstone, 1995). Local governments can participate in the
regulation of the forest conversion process by commenting on FPAs, using their local
policies and ordinances or by signing an agreement with DNR to take the lead on forest
practices conversion permitting. 0
When the DNR receives a conversion permit application, copies are sent to Mason County
Department of Community Development. Review and comments on FPAs must be
returned within thirty days, unless an extension is requested to complete a State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Developers must also include $105 for the
Mason County Department of Community Development to complete a SEPA review and
determine site needs for road access and drainage connections (Neff, 1995). When the
FPA is issued, permit administration and project inspection are the responsibility of the
DNR.
Under rules adopted in December 1991 by the Forest Practices Board, Mason County can
identify forestlands that are likely to convert. Forest Practice Approvals in these areas
would be upgraded to Class IV General status, unless the parcel is designated as Open
Space - Forestland. Signing an agreement with the DNR would allow the county the "lead
agency status in conversion application review and permit conditioning.
The Mason County Department of Community Development relies on existing ordinances
and policies (Interim Resource Ordinance, Shoreline Master Program) to attach conditions
to forest practice applications. However, these laws don't cover some aspects of land
F,
1
170
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Conversions
conversion, such as clearing, grading, and erosion control. If a local government is lacking
the necessary ordinances to back up BMPs requested by the county, DNR cannot require
them as a permit condition. They will only apply the Forest Practices Rules and
Regulations.
When tree removal occurs without the required DNR permit or if the unpermitted activity
violates local government permit conditions, county governments can restrict construction
activity by placing a six -year building and development moratorium on a parcel
(Johnstone, 1995). Review of DNR permit records show that five conversion permits have
been issued in the Study Area during the last four years. Four of these permits were
issued just prior to the July 1993 effective date of a $500 application fee.
The County Lacks a Zoning Ordinance
Zoning ordinances, in conjunction with resource lands, critical areas, and other laws, can
be used to protect water quality and beneficial uses. One important way to protect water
quality and beneficial uses is to plan where and how land uses, such as conversions to
residential and commercial development, occurs. The "how" is addressed by laws such as
the Shoreline Master Program and the Interim Resource Ordinance. In most counties, the
"where" is determined through zoning ordinances. Designating land uses according to
appropriate environmental, social, or economic conditions is crucial to determining the
future character of an area and assuring good watershed health. Many people move to the
county because of its natural amenities and environmental health. Mason County residents,
therefore, would receive long -term benefit from a zoning ordinance. The county's
continued desirability as a place to work, live, or visit may depend on good land use
planning.
A Clearing and Grading Ordinance Is Needed
Mason County does not have a clearing and grading ordinance. County planning staff rely
on the "Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, Excavation and Grading" to review building
applications. Uniform Building Code 70 does not meet the requirements for regulating
stormwater and erosion on construction sites as defined in the Stormwater Management
Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992).
Refer to the chapter on residential nonpoint pollution sources for a discussion of the
stormwater manual.
A proposed Mason County Stormwater Management Ordinance has been drafted for public
review and comment. Approval standards are defined in Section 7 that describe the
minimum requirements for new development and redevelopment. The definitions of small,
medium, and large parcel sizes are included in Appendix K.
171
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
The Mason County draft ordinance is somewhat similar to the minimum requirements in •
the Stormwater Management Manual for Puget Sound (the manual). A comparison of the
proposed county draft and minimum manual requirements is displayed in Appendix K.
Best Management Practices Are a Crucial Part of Water Quality Protection
Requiring and enforcing the use of appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) for
land conversions is essential to the protection of water quality and beneficial uses. Permit
requirements must spell out resource protection and be clearly understood by the proponent
and their contractors before construction begins. An on -site meeting between developers,
contractors, subcontractors, and county permit staff to discuss BMPs and other
requirements is helpful prior to issuing the permit. Subcontractors should be involved
because they complete only a portion of the project. They may not be aware of the overall
project specifications and, unknowingly, may not abide by permit conditions.
Monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of BMPs and county permit requirements
before and after construction would help reduce future conversion impacts. Reviewers can
determine what worked well and suggest improvements for future construction projects.
Timing of inspections and monitoring visits is critical. Inspections would be desirable at
all phases of construction, especially before, during, and after storms. Presently, unless
complaints are received, most site inspections are done following final construction.
Actions therefore tend to involve site rehabilitation rather than impact prevention. The
number of personnel required to inspect and document observations is insufficient to meet
the workload throughout the county.
An incentive program for contractors is essential to protect water quality and resources and
to promote construction techniques that meet county goals and policies. An incentive
program should include awards for protection and enhancement of resources with bond
reduction to reward previous performance. Prevention is less costly than rehabilitation of
damaged sensitive areas and resources.
•
172
iNonpoint Sources of Pollution - Conversions
173
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
•
•
174
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Conversions
Land Use Conversions Highlights and Conclusions
Highlights
• Five conversion harvest applications in the Study Area have been approved by the
DNR during the past four years.
• The number of permits between 1992 and 1994 for manufactured homes compared
to on -site construction methods has increased.
• Mason County has no clearing and grading ordinance and has not identified areas
likely to convert. This restricts their ability to include State Environmental Policy
ActBMP requirements in Forest Practice Application (FPA) conversion permits.
Conclusions
0 ■ Conversion of undeveloped Study Area lands will likely increase in the next decade
to meet Mason County's demand for increased residential and commercial sites.
■ Unless adequately controlled, erosion and transport of sediment will increase as
undeveloped parcels are converted to residential uses.
■ The greatest threat to stream corridors and wetlands in the Study Area is conversion
of land to more intensive uses such as residential and commercial development.
■ As the Watersheds' population grows and undeveloped lands are converted to
residences, water quality and wildlife and fish habitat will degrade further unless
adequate effective regulations are adopted and enforced.
■ Pre - project planning sessions to identify erosion control (BMPs) and impact
avoidance measures early in project design will reduce negative impacts and costly
after- the -fact rehabilitation. Ideally, these issues would be discussed on -site with
all parties involved.
■ Staff levels for DNR and Mason County are inadequate to review the increasing
amount of tree cutting throughout the county associated with land use conversion.
■ A memorandum of agreement between Mason County and the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources would allow the county to be the lead agency
placing restrictions on conversion permits.
175
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
■ A zoning ordinance would help protect the Study Area's water quality and
beneficial uses.
■ An effective clearing and grading ordinance is needed to reduce impacts from land
use conversions.
■ Monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of conversion BMPs before and
after construction and making appropriate changes to BMPs will help reduce future
conversion impacts.
■ Best Management Practices are often not installed nor maintained in a timely
manner to reduce runoff and erosion at conversion or road access sites.
■ An education program on the installation and maintenance of conversion BMPs is
needed for land owners, developers, contractors, subcontractors, and all county staff
who make site visits.
176
•
•
1]
9 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
•
C
A Variety of Pollutants Originate From Residential Uses
This section presents general information about residential sources of pollution,
highlighting on -site sewage disposal and stormwater issues. It also summarizes the
negative affects of residential land use on stream corridors and wetlands.
Nonpoint pollutants associated with homes come from a
wide variety of sources. Ground - disturbing activities such
as road maintenance and improvement can increase
sediment in runoff. Effluent from failing on -site sewage
treatment systems can contaminate surface and ground
water. Other pollutants are generally transported to
surface water by runoff from impervious surfaces.
Population growth and development cause increases in
impervious surfaces and runoff.
ret wastes The increased runoff associated with roads, parking lots,
♦ Household streets, highways, residences, and commercial businesses
chemicals carries pollutants such as gasoline, oil, sediment, nutrients,
heavy metals, and bacteria into the Study Area's fresh and
salt waters. Runoff also transports fertilizers, pesticides,
and herbicides applied to lawns and gardens. Responses to surveys conducted in other
areas around Puget Sound show most residents use chemicals on their lawns and gardens.
Residents may add to the pollution problem by improperly storing household chemicals
and disposing of material such as paint, antifreeze, and petroleum products on the ground
and into roadside drains. Pet wastes are identified in an urban watershed as a major source
of E. coli, a pathogen originating in the intestinal tract of warm blooded animals (PSWQA,
1993).
Residential activities not only contribute pollutants
to surface water but can negatively affect wildlife
habitat. The removal of natural vegetation along
and in streams and wetlands reduces the quality of
fish and wildlife habitat.
The negative effects caused by a single homeowner
may not seem significant. When considered from a
cumulative perspective, however, activities at many
homes within a watershed do represent a significant
threat.
177
MIND Nltlf
iim !.'!A
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
On -Site Disposal Systems Are Used to Treat Sewage in the Study Area
Following World War II, on -site sewage (septic) treatment and disposal systems were
viewed as short-term, temporary wastewater disposal systems that could be used until
sewers became available. During the 1970s, regulatory and research emphasis shifted from
wastewater disposal to wastewater treatment and environmental protection. In the 1980s,
soil application began to be viewed as a treatment system for wastewater. Properly
functioning on -site sewage systems can provide cost- effective, long -term treatment and
disposal of household sewage, while providing protection to ground waters and surface
waters.
In 1994 there were about 500,000 on -site sewage systems in the Puget Sound Basin, with
an estimated 25,000 new systems being installed every year (Slagle, 1994). These
treatment systems cumulatively form the largest wastewater treatment system in the region
and are the leading contributors of treated wastewater to ground water. Because they are
integrally connected, impacts to ground water are transposed to adjacent surface waters.
Information from the County Assessor's data base indicates that over 1900 on -site sewage
disposal systems have been installed in the Study Area. Vacant lands zoned for residential
use show a potential to increase the number of on -site sewage systems by nearly 1600
installations. 0
How On -Site Sewage Systems Work
Conventional Gravity Flow Systems
Conventional gravity flow systems are the most common on -site sewage treatment systems.
These systems consist of three components: a septic tank, a dispersal drainfield, and a soil
treatment area surrounding the drainfield.
The tank, composed of two chambers, receives the raw sewage. In the receiving
compartment of the tank, the sewage settles into layers. Lighter solids, such as fats and
grease, form a scum layer that floats to the top. Beneath the scum layer is the active
liquid layer consisting of water, dissolved materials, such as detergent, and fine suspended
solids. Sludge, composed of undigestible material and heavy solids, settles to the bottom.
Solids and scum in the tank are broken down into liquid and gas by bacteria. When the
first chamber fills, wastewater (effluent) moves into the second chamber of the tank and
then out to the drainfield for dispersal over the soil treatment area.
The soil below the drainfield provides final treatment. As the effluent descends through
the soil, suspended solids further decompose, nutrients attach to soil particles, bacteria and
viruses die, and the liquid disperses, with some of it being absorbed by plants.
178
• Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
•
Evapotranspiration from these plants releases this water back into the water cycle. Water
not used by plants continues to infiltrate and become a part of the ground water.
Soil treatment of the effluent is most effective when the soil is somewhat dry, has medium
permeability, and contains plenty of oxygen for several feet below the drainfield.
Treatment essentially stops once the effluent intercepts either an extremely coarse
excessively drained soil layer, soil saturated with water, or an impermeable soil or rock
layer.
The amount of vertical separation between the bottom of the drainfield and water - saturated
soil is a major consideration in deciding whether a conventional gravity or an alternative
system is required for any specific site. The chances for system failure and surfacing of
inadequately treated sewage are increased if there are minimal distances between the
drainfield and impervious layers or water table. The state regulations require minimum
vertical separation of three feet for conventional systems and two feet for pressure
distribution systems.
avp�.
A
__ �L
mom um La er anM
F « M��t7y Y
1st Compartment
BW color
UM From LJquid
Pump Out Tank When:
' "A" is 3" or Less or
"B" is 12" or less
Figure 12. A Typical Conventional Gravity Flow On -Site Sewage System and Tank
Detail (Washington State Department of Health, 1991)
179
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
i
"Alternative" On -Site Sewage Disposal Systems
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 400 -12 -525 stipulates the use of
"alternative" on -site sewage systems in high risk areas. These areas are defined as areas
where conventional systems are failing, soils have severe limitations for sewage treatment,
development is at a high density, or where other site conditions create a potential for
surface or ground water contamination from use of on -site systems. The specific limiting
factors of soils within the Study Area are discussed later in the report.
These alternative systems use a septic tank, like conventional gravity -flow systems, but
may depend on pressurized distribution to disperse the effluent. The three most common
"alternative" types are pressurized drainfields, mound systems, and sand filters.
Pressurized dispersal helps ensure an even distribution of the effluent through the soil
profile. Mound and sand filters use a constructed layer of sand and soil to filter the
effluent before it enters the natural soil layer. This additional constructed layer increases
the vertical depth of soil available for effluent treatment.
Operation and maintenance of alternative systems are more complicated than conventional
systems. Alternative systems may rely on pumps to pressurize the distribution system and
are designed for a maximum sewage load. The systems are designed with a resting period •
between each dosing of effluent. If the volume pumped or frequency of dosing increases
beyond design capacity, the system will not function properly and effluent treatment will
not occur. System controls with timers and dose counters with an override alarm can help
the property owner detect and avoid some of these problems.
Failing On -Site Sewage Systems Can Be Major Pollution Sources
The failure of an on -site sewage treatment system is defined as "a condition where an on-
site sewage system threatens public health by inadequately treating sewage or by creating a
potential for direct or indirect contact between sewage and the public" (WAC 246 -272-
01001 Definitions). Symptoms of on -site sewage system failures include obvious evidence
such as odors, surfacing sewage, and effluent seeping from vertical banks or bulkheads.
Thirty -eight percent of the parcels with on -site sewage disposal systems in the Study Area
are within 200 feet of surface waters, either the shoreline of Hood Canal or freshwater
lakes and streams. Using the county Assessor's data for undeveloped residential land,
another 1,594 on -site sewage systems could be installed in the Study Area.
r:
MR
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
Surveys For Failing On -Site Sewage Systems
On -site sewage system surveys have been conducted in parts of Puget Sound. Studies in
Mason County in the Totten/Little Skookum Watershed reported a 19% failure rate along
the shoreline; and studies in Skagit County in the Blanchard and Edison communities
reported failure rates as high as 60% (Glasoe, 1995). Intensive surveys of predominantly
waterfront properties in Thurston County have revealed an overall on -site sewage system
failure rate between 13 and 14% (Hofstad, 1995).
Surveys for fecal coliform in receiving waters such as road ditches, storm drains, or
streams can be used to discern areas where on -site system failures may be causing raw or
inadequately treated sewage to contact either ground or surface waters. Dye -trace
techniques can be used to identify failing systems that do not display obvious symptoms of
failure.
On -site sewage systems may fail to treat effluent without obvious signs such as surfacing
effluent or strong odors. Failing systems without obvious signs of failure may also
contribute contamination to receiving waters. An intensive survey by Bremerton - Kitsap
County Health District along the Kitsap portion of Hood Canal reported that water quality
samples taken from hillside seeps below homes had high fecal coliform bacteria readings
( BKCHD, 1987). In a 1993 BKCHD survey, health workers detected significant fecal
coliform bacteria pollution in shoreline seepage at sites where potential sources were not
obvious.
Department of Health Shoreline Surveys
Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) "Shoreline Sanitary Survey" information
for Fulton Creek, Triton Cove, Hamma Hamma River delta, and Lilliwaup Bay were
recently compiled by staff of the Shellfish Section of WDOH. Information gathered in the
surveys included the location and operating condition of individual on -site sewage disposal
systems, waste water disposal method, soil condition relative to drainage, and the number
of inhabitants at each site. A surveyed site was judged to have a failing system if sewage
effluent was surfacing on the ground, seeping from a bank or bulkhead or if the drain field
opened to the Canal, a water course, or roadside culvert. The surveys are usually
conducted at properties adjacent to marine shorelines or along streams draining into marine
waters. Dye -trace techniques for fecal coliform were not used in these surveys.
The Fulton Creek Shoreline Survey was conducted in September of 1993. Six complete
surveys and 24 visual observations were made at 30 sites. Twenty -two of the sites were
• classified as vacation sites, the remaining eight sites were permanent residences. Four
privy sites with greywater discharge were found in the survey area. Four additional sites
were identified as possibly having untreated greywater discharge.
181
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
A shoreline survey of Triton Cove was conducted by WDOH Shellfish Section personnel
on September 13, 1993. Forty -five sites on the shoreline had septic tanks and drainfields
for on -site sewage disposal. Seventeen sites were inspected or surveyed, limited
inspections were done on 28 sites. No problems with on -site disposal systems were found
in the survey area.
The shoreline of Hood Canal in the Hamma Hamma River delta area (from the north side
of Waketickeh Creek to the south side of Jorsted Creek) was surveyed by staff of the
WDOH Shellfish Section on January 22nd, and February 2nd and 5th 1990. Of the 29
sites surveyed, 2 were found to be in a condition of possible failure, with sewage effluent
surfacing on the ground. Three additional sites were discharging untreated greywater to
the top of the cliff above Hood Canal.
The shoreline of Hood Canal from north of Eagle Creek to four miles north of Hoodsport
(Lilliwaup Bay) was surveyed by WDOH Shellfish Section personnel in August 1990. Of
the 65 sites surveyed, one site had sewage effluent surfacing on the ground, 15 sites were
located too close to a bulkhead, or bank, or were inaccessible to the surveyors. The report
recommends intensive water studies in the areas of these drainfields, under wet weather
conditions. Ten additional sites were noted as being located on parcels with adverse soil
conditions such as high water table or overly steep slopes.
A shoreline survey for the remainder of West Shore of Hood Canal was in process during
the summer of 1995. This survey is also being performed by the Shellfish Section of the
Department of Health. Results of the survey were not available for this report.
Mason County Office of Water Ouality Testing
In 1993, using a Public Information and Education grant, Mason County Office of Water
Quality completed a survey of 100 systems along Finch Creek and Mill Hill Road in
Hoodsport. The area has severe restrictions for adequate soil treatment of effluent, many
hillside springs and seeps, and small sized parcels. The study revealed .21 of the surveyed
systems were failing. Three on -site sewage systems without drainfields provided
inadequate treatment to discharged sewage. Drainfields located in saturated soils were
cited in six failures. Greywater discharge to Finch Creek and onto the ground were noted
at two locations. Septage dumped into Finch Creek during non- permitted repairs occurred
in one instance. An inundated tank was found at one location and two wooden cesspools
were also discovered during the survey. Dye testing located two failing systems that were
covered by a house and a driveway. Dye testing also found a failed system discharging
into a ditch, and two failed systems discharging into curtain drains.
•
182
• Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
The Impacts of Failing On -Site Systems Can Be Significant
While individually failing on -site sewage systems might not pose a health hazard, the
cumulative impact from several systems may be significant. Other factors such as the
density of homes, the distance to surface water or ground water, and inadequate operation
and maintenance also influence the potential for pollution. A Hood Canal tidal intrusion
study concluded that drainfields within 100 horizontal feet of the mean high tide contribute
sewage effluent to surface waters. Studies from other parts of the United States have
reported microorganisms being transported horizontally from drainfields through a few feet
to over 1,000 feet (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986). The distances that
microorganisms can be transported is greatest in coarse- textured, sandy soils.
Many Elements Can Contribute to On -Site System Failures
Natural Causes of On -Site Sewage System Failures
Natural factors that can contribute to failure include site characteristics such as vertical
• depth to a water table or impermeable layers, and climatic and soil conditions.
The assimilative capacity of soil in the treatment area is critical to proper functioning of an
on -site system. Natural properties of soils and sites govern the appropriateness of a
location for on -site sewage system drainfields. These properties include:
♦ depth of soil suitable for sewage treatment
♦ steepness of slope
♦ surface and subsurface wetness
♦ soil texture.
A map displaying soils limitations for on -site sewage systems in the non - federal portion of
the Study Area is located in the back of this report. The majority of the soils have more
than one factor that causes them to be rated "severe" in their suitability for on -site sewage
treatment.
Fifty -nine percent of the soils in the non - federal portion of the Study Area have severe
limitations due to the presence of a cemented pan and wetness. These soils occur on
glacial till with a cemented pan at a depth of 20 to 40 inches. These soil conditions
restrict downward movement of water and result in perched water tables, especially during
periods of high rainfall. Wastewater from drainfields can surface or move laterally along
this hardpan to seep into wetlands, streams, and ditches. Less than one percent of the soils
• in the non - federal portion of the Study Area are wet without the presence of a cemented
pan.
183
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds .
Some soils, 51% of the non - federal portion of the Study Area, lie on slopes too steep for
on -site sewage disposal systems to function properly. Slopes steeper than 15% do not
allow proper treatment of effluent before it flows off the site.
Another 2% of the soils in the non - federal portion of the Study Area are frequently wet.
These are peaty, sandy, or gravelly soils which are, in places, underlain by hardpan. Their
locations in low areas, wetlands, or adjacent to streams ensure their saturated condition.
Generally, a perched water table exists at least from November through March. Ponding
may occur frequently during this season. Soils that are always wet or have seasonally high
water tables are unsuitable for on -site sewage treatment. A high water table restricts the
soil's assimilative capacity by filling pore spaces with water. A high water table in the
soil can also be caused by yard watering, overloading of the on -site sewage system's
designed capacity, heavy rainfall, or tidal intrusion through a bulkhead on shoreline
property.
Less than 1% of the soils in the Study Area are wet due to slow percolation. Effluent
percolates very slowly through extremely fine textured soils, rendering these soils
impractical for drainfield installation.
Soils with rapid permeability, 35% of the non - federal Study Area soils, present a different
challenge. Because of the speed that fluids move through the soil profile, these sandy and -
very gravelly soils have poor treatment ability. They are the most likely to transport
pathogens and pollute ground water before treatment can occur. Few studies have actually
traced the movement of bacteria and viruses from on -site sewage drainfields to ground
water; therefore, the extent of this problem is unknown.
Shallow soils overlaying bedrock also present a severe limitation on the functioning of on-
site sewage treatment systems. Seventeen percent of the soils in the non - federal portion of
the Study Area have this limitation.
Other Causes of On -Site Sewage System Failure
Other factors that may effect on -site system failures include:
♦
Improper system design
♦
Improper drainfield location
♦
Faulty installation
♦
Inappropriate use
♦
Lack of maintenance
♦
Concentration of on -site systems
184
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
The natural assimilative soil capacity of medium and fine textured soils can be seriously
impaired during the installation of a drainfield when these soils are nearly saturated with
water. Destruction of pore space in a soil by compaction from heavy equipment during
wet conditions reduces the assimilative capacity of the soil treatment area.
The use of garbage disposals and heavy loads of grease and non - digestible paper products
cause sludge build -ups in septic tanks, requiring more frequent pumping. Failure to pump
the tank frequently may cause the system to discharge solids and scum into the drainfield,
where the soil pores may become plugged with these materials.
Commercial compounds designed to eliminate the need for tank pumping can also cause
solids and scum to be flushed into the drainfield. Useful bacteria that are essential to the
on -site sewage system functioning may be killed by chemicals, household cleaning
compounds, and medicines.
Overloading the on -site system with concentrated water use, such as doing many loads of
laundry in a single day, can also cause system failure. Uncontrolled surface runoff onto
the drainfield can reduce the absorptive capacity of the soil.
. Residential on -site systems are designed to deal with household waste products. Failure
can occur when waste products associated with commercial enterprises are disposed of in
residential systems.
•
Routine monitoring and maintenance are essential components of effective on -site sewage
treatment. When these vital steps are neglected, the performance of on -site systems can be
dramatically diminished. Public awareness and education programs covering system
operations and maintenance can be used to assist homeowners in properly caring for their
systems. One commercial on -site sewage system pumper indicated that less that 3% of the
systems in the Study Area which they had pumped in 1995 were failing systems. Over
95% of the systems this company had pumped this year were for routine maintenance.
The capacity of the soil to adequately treat septic effluent may become overloaded when
the density of septic systems becomes too high. The most important factor influencing
ground water contamination from on -site sewage systems is the concentration of the
systems in an area (EPA, 1977). Most states regulate septic system density by imposing
setbacks, minimum percolation rates, and absorption field sizing restrictions. These steps
may be adequate to protect ground water when densities are low. At some point,
increasing septic system density may exceed the soil's capacity to treat effluent, increasing
the potential for ground water contamination.
185
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
State and County Regulations Govern On -Site Sewage Systems
Regulation of on -site sewage treatment is a contentious issue, linked to land use and
property rights, and has major economic implications. Revised state regulations governing
on -site sewage systems (WAC 246 -272) became effective January 1, 1995. Mason County
on -site sewage regulations, which became effective in early 1995, adopt the state
regulations and add local guidelines. As directed by state regulations, on -site sewage
systems which process fewer than 3,500 gallons per day shall be overseen by the local
health officer.
The 1995 State regulations contain a provision allowing previously approved septic
installation permits to remain valid up to five years from the date of approval. In the last
three months of 1994, Mason County Health Department issued over 1,000 septic permit
applications, a number exceeding the yearly totals for each of the preceding two years.
These installation permits will be valid until the last quarter of the year 1999.
0
Minimum horizontal separation distances from on -site sewage systems to surface waters
and drinking water sources are specified in the 1995 regulations. Drainfields must be at
least 100 feet from either marine or fresh surface waters and the same distance from public •
drinking water wells. Acceptable effluent distribution systems and hydraulic loading rates
are listed and defined by soil textural classifications in the 1995 regulations.
A minimum land area of 12,500 square feet is required for on -site sewage systems for
single family residences. Other minimum sizes are dependent upon the type of water
supply and soil textural classification. However, small lot size alone can't be used to
restrict the installation of on -site sewage systems. According to state law, the local health
office may grant waivers for minimum land areas in lots platted prior to January 1995 (the
effective date of the regulation), provided the lots are outside areas of special concern and
all other requirements of the regulation are complied with.
Owners of on -site sewage systems are required by the 1995 regulations to inspect their
septic tank once every three years, pump the tank as required, and protect and properly
operate their systems. Local health officers will provide information and education to
assist the owners in these duties.
The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance (77 -93) adopted in August 1993, addresses
on -site sewage treatment systems. An inspection of on -site disposal systems is required
prior to transfer of ownership for any property located within a Class 1 Aquatic
Management Area. The Ordinance allows the County Health Director to establish an on-
site inspection program in areas where it is necessary to protect water quality.
•
186
• Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
The Ordinance is compatible and consistent with the Mason County Shoreline Master
Program (MCSMP), adopted in 1975 and amended in 1988. Shoreline setbacks from
Ordinary High Water Mark or the front of a bulkhead are specified in the MCSMP.
Single- family residential setback distances from a shoreline are designated as 15 feet in
urban environments and 25 feet in rural environments. The majority of the shoreline in the
Study Area is designated as an urban environment.
Legal authority to establish and operate local on -site sewage maintenance districts is
contained within various sections of the Revised Code of Washington. Variable financing
options also exist for these maintenance districts.
Stormwater Quantity and Quality Affects Watersheds
This section covers stormwater issues associated with present or future residences. Issues
associated with stormwater and erosion control on construction sites are addressed in the
preceding section titled "Land Use Conversions Can be a Significant Source of Sediment."
Stormwater is precipitation that does not naturally percolate into the ground or evaporate.
• It flows via overland flow, interflow, and pipes or other features of a stormwater drainage
system into a defined surface water body or a constructed infiltration facility. Stormwater
has the potential to cause erosion and flood damage. Stormwater also impacts water
quality through the transport of pollutants including sediment, oil, pesticides and fertilizers,
metals, and harmful bacteria. Historically, stormwater managers have dealt only with
water quantity issues by managing larger storms. Now it is recognized that water quality
can be improved by managing stormwater from smaller storms as well.
Increased Runoff Can Degrade Water Quality
As natural conditions are replaced by less permeable or impermeable surfaces, runoff
increases. The impacts of increased runoff were discussed in the hydrology section and
include:
♦ Increased volume and velocity of runoff in streams and ditches increasing erosion.
♦ Increased movement of pollutants from their sources.
♦ Reduced infiltration affecting stream baseflow, wetlands, and some aquifers.
Conveyance, detention, and retention are important concepts in stormwater planning and
management. Conveyance is the movement of collected stormwater off the site. little or
no treatment of pollutants or infiltration is achieved in a system which relies solely on
conveyance. Detention facilities control the rate of runoff to reduce off -site damages.
187
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Detention facilities do little or nothing to control the total volume of runoff. Retention
facilities control the rate and volume of runoff from a design storm by retaining some or
all of the runoff for infiltration.
The use of retention ponds to increase infiltration can be an important element of a
stormwater management system, however, it is not feasible or desirable in some situations
due to soil or site conditions. For example, if retention ponds are used on top of the steep
slopes on the west side of State Highway 101, saturation may increase slope instability.
Decreased natural infiltration resulting from development often cannot be completely
addressed and results in decreased stream baseflow, wetland water supply, and recharge to
some aquifers. It is one of the negative impacts of increased impermeable surfaces.
Stormwater Transports a Variety of Pollutants
Stormwater itself is not a pollutant but it moves pollutants from their source to surface or
groundwater. The sources /activities include but are not limited to the following list.
♦ Vehicle - related pollutants on roads
♦ Leaking home fuel tanks
♦ Failing on -site sewage systems
♦ Spills or improperly stored household or industrial chemicals
♦ Wash water from vehicle cleaning
♦ Fluids from home auto repair
♦ Materials in illegal dumps
♦ Improper use of fertilizers or pesticides
♦ Farm runoff containing bacteria or nutrients from animal waste
Source Controls Are Most Cost Effective Where Applicable
Source controls are more effective both in terms of reducing the pollutant and minimizing
the cost than trying to clean up polluted water. Controlling pollutants at their source
prevents the materials from being pollutants or prevents spilled materials from leaving the
site. The following list cites some examples.
•
♦ Repair fluid leaks in automobiles and keep vehicles well maintained.
♦ Inspect home fuel tanks regularly and repair or replace when needed
♦ Properly maintain on -site sewage systems.
♦ Use appropriate methods to clean up spilled materials.
♦ In areas where spills are likely to happen, use curbs and roofs to contain
materials and keep spills dry; use an impervious surfacing material and drain •
to the sanitary sewer, dead -end sump, or other facility as regulations allow.
::
•
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
♦ Wash vehicles where wash water is recycled and /or directed to a sanitary
sewer.
♦ Properly dispose of all waste materials, for example used appliances.
♦ Seek ways to minimize use of fertilizer, pesticides, and household or
business chemicals; follow the labeled instructions.
♦ Implement agricultural best management practices (BMPs).
Existing Stormwater Systems and Conditions
Stormwater management facilities in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are primarily
conveyance systems. A roadside ditch collects surface runoff and moves it to the natural
drainage ways.
Current stormwater requirements are found in Title 16 of Mason County Codes, Plats, and
Subdivisions and require the review of drainage when lots are created. Over time this has
evolved from a check to assure that water will move off the site to consideration of off -site
impacts of stormwater volume (Tahja, 1995). In general, these requirements are not
adequate to mitigate the downstream impacts of stormwater quality and quantity
The general Hoodsport area, including Old Mill Hill Road, Hoodsport School Hill. Road,
Finch Creek Road, and North Hill Road, has 102 acres mapped as 25% to 100%
impervious area. This includes 173 residences, 24 businesses, and the Hoodsport Ranger
Station. Businesses include gas stations, grocery stores, restaurants, etc. Surface runoff
from these areas drains to drainage ditches, Finch Creek, and /or Hood Canal. As with the
rest of the Study Area, there is no stormwater treatment; nearly all materials spilled,
leaked, or poured onto impermeable surfaces are carried by surface runoff away from their
source.
Roadside ditches containing grass or other vegetation can provide some biofrltration of
surface water and control of erosion in the ditch. If these ditches are primarily grass and
are maintained by mowing, the ideal mowing height is three to six inches. Mowing quite
short or leaving grass long greatly reduces its filtering ability.
The access to several developments is by way of roads traversing the steep bluffs along
Hood Canal. Due to the gradient of these roadways, road ditches and cut slopes may
erode during heavy flows.
On Terrace Road, just north of Holiday Beach, and on Robinson Road, just south of
Lilliwaup Bay, road ditch erosion from the heavy winter rains of 1994/1995 undercut the
steep roadcut bank. In each case, a small slump filled the road ditch with soil. On
:E
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds (9
Robinson Road this material was washed to Little Lilliwau Creek. On Terrace Road,
, P
road -ditch water washed the soil to Hood Canal by way of the road ditches. These are
small events, but cumulatively they can result in movement of a significant volume of
sediment.
In many other Puget Sound areas, stormwater is directed over steep, unstable bluffs
through a pipe and outletted below the bluff. Pipes, directing runoff over the bluff, were
rarely seen in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds but may increase as development
above the shoreline increases. Although not an ideal situation, when done properly, this
can help prevent bluff erosion from saturated soil conditions or over -land flow near the
bluff edge.
Erosion problems associated with the pipe can occur through lack of maintenance or
improper installation. If the pipes are exposed, they can become brittle with aging and
time, break off near the bluff face, and result in bluff erosion. Also, if the soil under the
pipeline outlet is not properly protected, erosion can occur and contribute to bluff
undercutting. Because this is a conveyance system, no water quality treatment occurs.
The Puget Sound Plan and Stormwater Management
The Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan requires all cities and counties in the
Puget Sound basin to develop stormwater management programs and adopt ordinances
requiring stormwater controls for new development and redevelopment. The stormwater
program and ordinances must include minimum requirements "substantially equivalent" to
the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (Washington State
Department of Ecology, 1992) and meet operation and maintenance requirements by
January 1, 1995 (PSWQA, 1994). Ecology reviews alternative manuals to assure they are
technically equivalent.
The Mason County Stormwater Management Ordinance
In response to the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan and the need to address
water quality and quantity problems associated with stormwater, Mason County has
prepared a draft stormwater management ordinance. The draft ordinance adopts the
Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin with the exception of the
Minimum Requirements Chapter. Section 7 of the ordinance defines the minimum
requirements. They are somewhat similar to the manual. Appendix K summarizes the
primary differences.
The Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan requires Ecology to review the status of
all stormwater programs every two years, on an ongoing basis. The reviews will focus on •
providing assistance with implementation of the program.
190
•
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
Homeowner Use of Fertilizers, Pesticides, and Other Chemicals May
Impact Water Quality
Homeowners may use a variety of products around the home. These include fertilizers for
lawns and gardens, insecticides to control home and garden pests, and other chemicals such
as household cleaners and "moss killer" for the roof. These materials have the potential to
impact both surface and ground water quality and fish and wildlife habitat through use, or
through disposal of chemicals or containers as discussed in Other Nonpoint Sources -
Hazardous Materials.
No information is readily available on the amount of fertilizer, pesticides, and other
household chemicals used in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. However, use of
these products is likely to increase as population increases.
Pesticide usage can be minimized through the use of Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
strategies. Puget Sound Pest Management Guidelines, A Guide for Protecting Our Water
Quality (Menzies and Peterson, 1993) is a good source of information on IPM. According
to this publication, the goals of IPM are to:
♦ Understand the dynamic nature of interactions between environment, pest, and host
rather than to focus exclusively on the pest.
♦ Prevent problems by choosing appropriate plants and giving them good growing
conditions.
• Reduce pest populations below an economically or aesthetically damaging level
rather than seek pest eradication.
• Understand the biology of the pest or complex of pests to allow for optimizing
timing and selection of appropriate control tactics when control is necessary.
Fertilizer usage can be minimized through: 1) the use of soil tests to assure the added
minerals and nutrients are needed, 2) management of soil. pH to assure optimum
availability of nutrients present in the soil, and 3) accurate assessment of the need for
improved soil fertility. Fertilizers from both organic and chemical sources have the
potential to impact water quality and should be properly stored and applied.
Educational programs through organizations such as Washington State University
Cooperative Extension and Mason County Conservation District can inform the general
public about potential water quality problems associated with chemical use, storage, and
disposal.
191
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
•
Residential Land Use Affects Stream Corridors and Wetlands
Most of the Stream Corridors Close to Hood Canal Are Impacted
Most of the streams close to Hood Canal in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds are
impacted to some extent by closely placed residential homes and /or the runoff from these
areas. The majority of the Study Area is rural and forested in character; however,
nonpoint pollution associated with urban and high density residential areas will increase as
the area continues to grow and stream corridors are impacted.
Residents owning property with a stream flowing through it often landscape to the water's
edge, removing the beneficial natural vegetation on the stream bank. Many homes are
built very close to the streams near their mouths, such as in lower Finch Creek, Miller, and
Sund Creeks, with most beneficial native vegetation removed. During storms and /or high
tides the banks will most likely erode due to lack of vegetation, as happened during the
1994/1995 winter storms. Landowners often request a Hydraulic Project Approval to
armor the bank in some way to prevent the erosion, further depleting the stream -side
habitat.
A recent study by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife found that a threshold
level of 10 to 12% impervious surface in a watershed typically demonstrates loss of
aquatic system function. The loss is reflected by changes in stream channel morphology
and water chemistry. The habitat alteration affects fish and aquatic insect communities.
To avoid stream degradation and loss of fish resources, total effective impervious surface
area in a watershed should be considered in land use planning (Washington State
Department of Fish & Wildlife, 1994).
Residential Activities Can Harm Wetlands
A King County study of wetlands and stormwater found water borne pollutants in wetlands
increased when wetlands are located in developed areas (Reinelt, 1991). Wetlands
frequently receive runoff carrying pollutants because of their topographic position and their
role in the hydrologic cycle. Runoff from areas with increased impervious surfaces also
can change a wetland's hydroperiod (water depth, duration, and fluctuation). The King
County wetlands and stormwater study found water depth increased up to six feet in
wetlands where impervious surfaces increased in their watersheds (Cooke, 1990).
Alterations to wetland hydroperiod can cause extensive changes to wetland plant
communities and wildlife habitat.
Residential on -site sewage disposal systems may also affect wetlands. When not
functioning properly, inadequately treated effluent from a drainfield can flow laterally
192
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
along the hardpan into wetlands. Sewage disposal systems built in wetlands typically don't
function properly and discharge untreated sewage.
A Washington State Department of Ecology study in some of the Puget Sound counties
revealed designated buffer areas are reduced or degraded incrementally over time by
residential activities (Cooke, 1992). Wetlands, as well as their buffers, are degraded
through landscaping, gardening, and use as pasture. It is common for residents to place
small amounts of fill in wetlands to increase their yards or gardens. Road noise,
residential activity, and pet use also disturb some wildlife species using wetland and buffer
habitat. The wider the natural buffer between houses, lawns, and wetlands, the smaller the
negative impact. Lawns, gardens, and pastures do not adequately buffer wetlands.
Although a small amount of the Study Area's wetlands are in residential land use (four
percent), the wetlands in these areas typically are more degraded than in other land use
categories in the study area. The areas most affected include wetlands in and along the
intertidal zone and wetlands in valleys at the mouths of streams. There are a few on
plateaus and benches where development has taken place. It appears that residential
construction at the mouth of Jorsted Creek has eliminated much of the wetland acreage
inland from the shoreline. The Mason County soil survey shows coastal beach, tidal
r marsh, and the hydric soil Puget silt loam in the area where houses are now present. The
commercial development at the mouth of Eagle Creek may be constructed on fill in a
lagoon. Other examples of wetlands containing or adjacent to residences include #MC -5,
#HR \CU -65, #LC -54, #AY -5, and #FNC -7.
•
193
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
•
•
194
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
Residential Highlights and Conclusions
Highlights
• Fifty -three percent of the Study Area residential
parcels are undeveloped.
• All residences and business use on -site sewage
treatment systems; approximately 1900 systems
currently exist in the Study Area. There are no
sewer systems in the Study Area.
• Soils have severe limitations for on -site sewage
disposal systems. Fifty -nine percent of the
Watersheds' soils on non - federal lands have limitations due to wetness caused by a
cemented pan. This condition contributes to on -site sewage disposal system failure
and pollution of surface waters.
• Thirty -eight percent of the existing on -site sewage systems in the Study Area are
within 200 feet of Hood Canal or streams flowing directly into the Canal.
• The presence and extent of failing on -site sewage systems in the Study Area is
poorly documented. However, numerous failing systems were identified in the
Hoodsport area.
• Mason County has adopted regulations for maintenance of new and existing on -site
sewage systems.
• State on -site sewage disposal regulations have been revised and were effective
January 1, 1995. Local regulations have been revised.
• Stormwater in the Study Area is moved by roadside ditches to streams and Hood
Canal.
• Because there is no treatment of stormwater, nearly all materials spilled, leaked, or
poured on impermeable surfaces are carried with surface runoff away from their
source. These materials may flow to streams, wetlands, and Hood Canal.
• Mason County has developed a draft stormwater management ordinance, which
differs from the State's stormwater manual. The Department of Ecology will
determine if it is technically equivalent to the Stormwater Management Manual for
the Puget Sound Basin.
195
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
• No information is available on the amount of household chemicals used in the
Study Area.
• The most common residential land use impacts to stream corridors and wetlands in
the Study Area are removal of streambank or wetland and buffer vegetation,
increased runoff and pollution, and building too close to the stream or wetland.
Conclusions
■ A strong public information, education, and involvement program should be
developed for Study Area residents (both adults and students). Increased
knowledge of the importance of on -site sewage system maintenance, protection of
wetland and riparian habitats, and use of household chemicals may change
behaviors and attitudes about land and water stewardship.
■ Collectively, failing on -site sewage disposal systems could be contributing nutrients
and pathogenic contaminants to the waters of Hood Canal.
■ Information about existing on -site sewage systems in the Study Area is needed,
minimally in high priority areas such as marine shore zones, streams, or on soils
with high water tables. Data collected should be evaluated and compared with
water quality data to identify problems and to target corrective actions.
■ Corrective measures should be identified and implemented to improve the condition
of sewage treatment in Hoodsport.
■ The change from small part -time residences to larger, permanent residences is
putting a major strain on existing on -site sewage systems.
■ The increased operation and maintenance requirements of "alternative" systems will
put additional demands on their users. Education about maintenance is critical.
• On -site sewage maintenance districts could assure on -site system performance by
conducting inspections and coordinating tank pumping.
• Annual continuing education credits for recertification of on -site sewage disposal
system designers and installers should be added to recertification requirements.
■ A comprehensive stormwater management ordinance should be adopted and
enforced as soon as possible. It should be as comprehensive as the Stormwater
Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. 0
196
0 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Residences
•
•
197
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Other Potential Nonpoint Sources Exist
in the Study Area
There are Few Farms in the Watersheds
In some situations, agricultural operations degrade water quality and fish and wildlife
habitat. Bacteria, organic matter, and nutrients from animal waste and sediment from
eroding pastures, cropland, or stream banks create water quality problems or contribute to
existing problems. Improper use, storage, or disposal of pesticides or fertilizers can also
affect water quality. Loss of stream bank vegetation, due to removal, trampling, or
grazing, contributes to stream bank erosion and a loss of fish and wildlife habitat.
Few farms were identified in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. Much of the Study
Area land is unsuitable for pasture or cropland. One site along Finch Creek has two
horses and one site on the south side of the Hamma Hamma River has 15 cow /calf pairs
and two horses. The Shoreline Sanitary Survey of the Hamma Ham= River Delta
(WDOH, 1990) identified six residences with cows, horses, or chickens. Two of these
residences no longer have livestock and two residences are included in the site on the
Hamma Hamma River described above. The team was unable to locate the two other
residences - one site with one horse (with stream access) and one with seven chickens.
Several best management practices have been used on Puget Sound farms to improve
surface water quality and fish and wildlife habitat. These practices include pasture
management, nutrient management, roof runoff management, and several practices used to
manage stream corridors and wetlands. These practices are described in Appendix L.
Powerline Corridors Parallel Hood Canal
The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) operates and maintains one substation and
approximately 27 miles of high voltage powerline corridors that traverse the Study Area
(Barsnes, 1995). The powerline corridor runs north/south along Hood Canal, a distance of
(one -half to two miles) inland. The BPA manages the land through easements with
adjacent property owners. The cleared corridor area averages 200 feet in width and totals
approximately 818 acres.
In the Potlatch area, Tacoma City Light has a single transmission line extending from the
Lake Cushman generating facilities through the lower Study Area. The local Public Utility
District (PUD #1) obtains power from a substation in the Potlatch area and maintains
transmission lines to local residences and businesses. 0
198
0 Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Other Sources
Vegetation management within the powerline corridors involves manual cutting with
powersaws of all plants over fifteen feet in height. Machine brushing is done along access
roads to allow safe entry of repair vehicles. Cutting is done on a four to five year
schedule. Chemical application by aerial spraying for vegetation control on BPA or Puget
Power corridors has not been done in any Puget Sound or western Washington powerline
corridor since 1985. The herbicide, Garlon -4, is hand applied to fresh -cut big leaf maple
stumps to prevent sprouting and the fast growth that follows cutting this species (Atkinson,
1995). This practice is done in areas where the powerline crosses streams or ravines.
Access roads to the transmission towers are used for annual maintenance and emergency
repair work. These gravel roads are also popular areas for bike and off -road vehicle travel.
Motor bike use on the steep grade of these roads causes water channelization on road
surfaces and breakdown of cross - drainage water control structures. Several roads are gated
to restrict unauthorized vehicle travel, however, uncontrolled access continues to the
majority of tower sites. The BPA visually inspects and maintains roads, especially those
that have steep grades.
f An inventory of culverts in the powerline road systems has not been done in the Study
Area. Several sites experienced road washouts and slumps during the 1994 -95 winter
season where culverts were blocked or undersized. These water crossings have the highest
erosion potential during periods of high precipitation. Sediment from these access roads
has reached stream courses and, due to the road system's relative proximity to Hood
Canal, have high potential to affect water quality in the Canal.
•
Illegal garbage dumping along these remote powerline access roads was observed in the
Watersheds, especially in the areas south of State Highway 119.
Tacoma City Light Operates a Power Plant in the Study Area
Tacoma City Light manages 307 acres adjacent to Hood Canal in the Potlatch area for
hydroelectric generation. Tacoma City Light property includes a corridor of land that
extends from the lower Lake Cushman dam to the power plant located along State
Highway 101. The cleared corridor contains a 15 -foot buried water line and power
transmission lines. Above the Potlatch powerhouse, water from the buried pipeline enters
a surge storage tank. Water from the surge tank is carried by three 10 -foot diameter,
above - ground pipelines to the power house turbines, before discharging to Hood Canal.
Buildings surrounding the power plant include vehicle and equipment storage, two
residences, and a building for meetings or conferences. Across State Highway 101 from
the power plant, Tacoma City Light maintains a saltwater boat launch and picnic area for
public use.
199
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds is
The powerhouse and switchyard control building have equipment that uses oil in large
quantities. An oil storage area is located in the lower levels of the powerhouse facility. In
response to federal regulation (40CFR, Section 112.7), an oil spill prevention and
countermeasure plan has been completed. The plan is posted in operating areas and
employee training has been completed (Koehm, 1995).
Roads providing access to pipeline facilities and transmission poles receive annual surface
blading. The access road from State Highway 101 to the surge tank area is closed to
public entry to reduce vandalism and illegal dumping.
Vegetation management levels differ between the powerline corridors and the pipelines that
enter the powerplant. Total vegetation control is required by federal regulation in areas
near the surge tank and under the penstock pipes to facilitate inspection for water leaks.
The powerline vegetation maintenance to control woody species is done every three to five
years. Trees and shrubs over ten feet tall must be manually removed.
Powerline corridors in two areas have been leased for Christmas tree cultivation
(Swanberg, 1995). The lease specifies hand cutting (no herbicide) of .brush and grass.
Fertilizing to promote tree growth and needle color is permitted and ammonia nitrate
fertilizer was applied in 1991 and 1994. Christmas tree removal has not occurred the past
two years, the public demand for unsheared trees has fallen.
Management of State Highway Right -of -Ways Includes Ditch and
Vegetation Maintenance
The Washington State Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) is responsible for road
maintenance and visual safety along the approximately 35 miles of state highways in the
Study Area. State Highway 101 traverses along Hood Canal and State Highway 119
provides access to the Lake Cushman area. The heavy rainfall between November 1994
and February 1995 caused numerous slides, slumps, and stream blowouts that deposited
material on road surfaces, ditches, and culverts along State Highway 101. The highway
surface slumped in several areas. The most severe was near Eldon, reducing traffic to a
single travel lane. Ditch cleaning and debris removal required moving large amounts of
material by dump truck to a disposal site at the former Jorsted log yard.
Runoff from State Highways 101 and 119 is a potential source of pollutants to Study Area
streams, wetlands, and Hood Canal. Surface water is conveyed by drainage ditches and
culverts to natural water courses and water bodies. The Washington State Department of
Transportation, in cooperation with Washington State Department of Ecology, is
developing a program to control runoff from highways in the Puget Sound area. WSDOT
agreed to use BMPs listed in the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound
Basin on page I -1-8 (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992). WSDOT must
M
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Other Sources
consider BMPs that address both water quantity and quality control and the use of
chemicals on highway right -of -ways. In addition, WSDOT will be required to obtain a
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under the states's new
stormwater program. This permit requires the development of a monitoring and
management plan that reduces or eliminates pollution from stormwater discharges. _ Along
State Highway 101, the long term management plan is to maintain grass lined ditches
(Bell, 1995).
Vegetation management is done annually to clear intersections, signs, and guardrails for
visual safety. Clearing is done with mechanical mowing and limbing as well as selective
herbicide application. In fall of 1994, the entire upslope right -of -way area along State
Highway 101 was cleared for traffic safety objectives. Washington State DOT removed all
standing trees along an area from Potlatch State Park to Eagle Creek. The cleared area is
currently covered with grasses and shrubs. The increased surface runoff from the cleared
area during last winter's storms contributed to sediment in ditches. Although_ sediment was
seen in ditches, the amount transported to other surface water is unknown.
To eliminate vegetation within a one to two foot strip along paved road edges, a
springtime application of Oust and Camex is used by state certified applicators. Additional
herbicide spraying of Crenite is done to control alder and other leafy vegetation in ditches
or bankslopes. Areas of standing or running water do not receive treatment (Bell, 1995).
There Are No Operating Landfills in the Watersheds
There are no operating landfill facilities in Mason County or the Study Area. Mason
County Garbage Service, a private contractor, provides voluntary curbside solid waste
collection service for residents and businesses in their permitted area. All Mason County
garbage is transported to a disposal site in eastern Washington.
A Hoodsport dump site, located on Mason County property, was used for uncontrolled
waste disposal until 1971. The dump site, located in the vicinity of the current transfer
site, was closed following a recommendation in the 1971 Comphrensive Plan for Solid
Waste Management (Moore, 1995). Information about types of material dumped and
potential impacts to water quality are discussed in the solid waste management plan.
Mason County operates a solid waste transfer station that serves the general public. The
transfer station located along State Highway 119 is open Saturday, Sunday, and Monday.
The site also contains bins to recycle materials such as newspaper, cardboard, cans, bottles,
and plastic. The transfer station accepts clean automotive materials such as used oil, oil
filters, and antifreeze.
201
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Illegal dump sites were seen while driving graveled or lightly traveled roads in the Study
Area. Besides being unsightly, illegal dump sites can contain household hazardous waste
such as used motor oil, tires, and household chemicals, in addition to discarded household
appliances and furniture. They are a potentially significant risk to human health and to
water quality. Liability and expensive clean -up costs from illegal dumping have caused
many landowners to gate or block vehicle access to their property. Mason County Health
Department has an active enforcement program to require dump -site cleanup and identify
the persons responsible for the dumping. Meetings with private landowners to discuss
illegal dumping and cleanup requirements led to removal of some unsightly and potentially
hazardous material.
Hazardous Materials Are Used and Waste Products are Produced by
Businesses and Residences
The release of hazardous raw material and waste by- products should be a concern to Study
Area residents in areas where there is development. Government, business, and residents
all use hazardous materials and produce hazardous waste. The amount of hazardous
materials stored and generated and the methods of disposal by Study Area businesses and
residents has not been determined. In general, waste by- products are more strictly
regulated than the raw material used or available for sale.
Hazardous Material Storage is Regulated
When large volumes are used, hazardous raw materials and products are regulated by
federal and state requirements primarily under the "Emergency Planning and Community
Right -to -Know Act of 1986," also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act. Title III has four major sections: 1) emergency response planning, 2)
emergency response reporting, 3) hazardous chemical inventory reporting, and 4) toxic
chemical release reporting. Reporting requirements depend on the type and amount of
chemicals used or released but are generally greater than 500 pounds.
Safe storage and use of hazardous materials are important for environmental protection,
independent of any regulations. Protection of the environment from hazardous materials
requires local education beyond the requirements of Title III.
Hazardous Waste Disposal is Regulated
Hazardous waste regulations are generally classified by whether the waste is from
households or from businesses. The state requirements for business waste are much more
strict than waste from households, because households do not generate the quantities or
202
0 Non point Sources s of Pollution -Other Sources
types of wastes businesses do. Determining if activities are residential or home -based
(hobby) businesses can be confusing. The potential for environmental damage exists from
improper disposal of hazardous waste from either source.
•
Households generate hazardous wastes such as unwanted oil -based paints, household
cleaners and pesticides, used motor oil, antifreeze, and other automotive products. These
wastes are generally exempt from state of Washington hazardous waste regulations because
of the small amounts generated. However, they may contaminate ground and surface water
if disposed of improperly.
Education and Workshops Assist Waste Identification and Disposal
Mason County Environmental Health, Solid Waste Section has educational brochures for
households and businesses to encourage proper hazardous waste management and disposal
(Watts, 1995). Interested persons can call to obtain specific information about product
disposal. An educational program with workshops or meetings would reach additional
persons to provide technical information and storage requirements.
Christmas Tree Cultivation in the Area is Declining
Since 1945, Mason County has developed as a Pacific Northwest center for growing and
shipping Christmas trees. Several of the larger producers, J. Hofert Company, Kirk
Christmas trees, and Douglas Fir Company, owned lands or leased parcels in the Study
Area to grow natural "wildland" trees. Small private landowners cultivate trees on their
parcels or obtain permits to raise trees on leased powerline corridors. They sell them to
the larger producers. Acreage in Christmas tree production peaked in 1975, with
approximately 5,000 acres in the Study Area. The current Christmas tree production area
has been reduced to 1,400 acres following recent land ownership changes. Several
Christmas tree plantations are still located in the cleared portion of powerline corridors.
The soils in the Study Area produce the slow leader growth necessary to develop a
uniformly shaped tree. Trees are harvested after a 7 to 10 year growth cycle. The
planting of trees requires site preparation and herbicide application to control grasses and
shrubs. Later in the growth cycle, hand culture treatments for branch -tip shearing and
application of fertilizer helps to produce a lush dark green color. Aerial fertilization was
done at some early plantation sites, but discontinued when field monitoring showed
excessive growth in grasses and shrubs. The Study Area growers now typically hand
apply fertilizer within the tree canopy dripline.
203
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Tree cultivation is limited to the more gentle slopes of the Study Area to allow easier tree
removal. Large Douglas -fir trees are retained in the plantation areas to provide a seed
source and some overstory shade during summer heat periods. Streams and steep - sloped
drainages are also left in a natural condition. Buffers are not retained around wetlands.
The market demands of Christmas tree purchasers has changed dramatically from natural
growing to sheared trees with a compact shape. Consumers are also buying alpine species
such as Noble fir and grand fir, instead of the traditional Douglas -fir Christmas tree.
These preference changes and the increase of growers on more fertile farmlands have
caused Study Area growers to stop harvesting in many plantations. Several owners have
sold their property to timberland owners who are allowing the former Christmas trees to
mature for timber harvest.
Marinas and Boating
Hood Canal is popular with boaters for both recreation and economic reasons.
Recreational boating is associated with fish and shellfish harvesting, sailboats enjoy the
winds patterns connected with Hood Canal, and the shoreline bays and coves are used for
kayak and canoe touring.
There is one commercial marina in the Study Area, at Hoodsport. The Hood Canal Marina
and Cafe provides 27 boat slips. These slips are rented monthly for boat storage (no live -
aboards). Additional boat moorage is available at RV parks in the Study Area and the
Sunrise Motel in Hoodsport. The Port of Hoodsport provides day use moorage and dock
facilities of 5 to 8 boats.
Sewage Discharge
The federal Clean Water Act of 1972 prohibits boats from discharging untreated sewage
into the waters of the United States (within three miles of the U.S. coast). Enforcement of
the regulations is under jurisdiction of the U.S. Coast Guard.
The regulations for sewage discharge rely heavily on enforcing the use of approved Marine
Sanitation Devices (MSDs) aboard boats that have toilet facilities. The Coast Guard
admits that catching someone in the act of discharging raw sewage overboard is very
difficult given that the discharge is usually below the boats waterline. Water quality
education displays associated with boat activities, have been installed by the Hood Canal
Coordinating Council at the Potlatch public boat launch.
204
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Other Sources
Other Pollutants
Other types of pollution associated with boating are fuel spills, boat maintenance, and
littering. Small, but numerous spills of gasoline and diesel fuel are common sources of
pollution throughout all areas used by boats.
Litter from boats can be particularly hazardous to fish and wildlife, especially when fishing
line, nets, and other plastic materials are tossed into surrounding waters. Marine birds,
mammals, and fish are often found entangled in such debris.
Net Pens Are Considered a Point Source
Net pens are often used to culture both native and non - native fish. The environmental
effects of net pen culture are highly dependent upon the location of the net pen facility and
operational practices. Possible adverse environmental effects resulting from the operation
of net pens are the accumulation of organic -rich sediments beneath the structure from food
and feces and the subsequent impact to the benthic microfauna community. Secondly, the
0 potential exists for adverse environmental effects on water circulation, water quality,
phytoplankton productivity, and the introduction of exotic fish species (Weston, 1986).
•
There are four net pen operations in the Study Area. The largest is operated by
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) near Sund Rock where
chinook salmon are raised for part of the year. Three smaller cooperative projects utilize
netpens at Glen Ayr dock, Hood Canal Marina, and Hoodsport Marina. Chinook salmon
are also raised at these three sites.
The wastewater discharged from large net pens has been classified by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency as a point source. A National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System ( NPDES) permit is required for a net pen facility if the fish rearing
operation lasts longer than 30 days per year and more than 20,000 pounds of fish are
raised per year or more than 5,000 pounds of fish food is fed in one month. The
Washington State Department of Ecology is presently developing standards for the NPDES
permits and expects them to be completed by October 1995 (Ward, 1995). The WDFW
netpen is the only operation in the Study Area large enough to be required to have a
permit.
205
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Seals Can Be a Source of Bacterial Pollution
Seal wastes can be a source of bacterial pollution at haulout areas if they are in a cove or
inlet where little tidal flushing occurs. Harbor seals have several haulout areas in Hood
Canal including Dosewallips, Duckabush, Hamma Hamma, and Skokomish River deltas,
and Quilcene Bay. Shellfish beds can become contaminated by fecal material from the
seals and Dosewallips tideflats is the only beach in Puget Sound to have been closed as a
result of the contamination. This area was reopened after an aggressive research project
carried out in 1992 provided alternative haulout sites for these mammals (Hood Canal
Technical Group, 1995).
Hood Canal supports a harbor seal population between 1,500 and 2,000 animals. Due to
undetermined causes, there has been an overall decline in seal numbers in northern Hood
Canal since 1990. Within the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds, the Hamma Hamma
delta is used as a haulout site from February to October for congregations of up to 200
seals.
Hood Canal also supports a fairly significant population of sea lions. California sea lions
are frequently sighted in Hood Canal in the winter months. Spring congregations of 20 to
30 sea lions have been observed in the northern part of the Canal in recent years.
v
206
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Other Sources
Other Potential Nonpoint Sources
Highlights and Conclusions
Highlights
• Agriculture is a minor land use in the Study Area.
• Powerline corridors cover 818 acres in the Study Area. Vegetation is cut every
four to five years to keep vegetation under fifteen feet in height.
• Tacoma City Light operates a power generation plant at Potlatch. Water is diverted
from lower Lake Cushman by pipeline and discharges to Hood Canal. _
• Washington State DOT is responsible for road maintenance and visual safety along
State Highways 101 and 119. Storms with heavy rainfall in December 1994 caused
numerous slides and slumps along State Highway 101.
• No landfills are located in the Watersheds. Illegal dumping along roads and
powerlines is a significant problem in the southern Study Area.
• The amount of hazardous materials stored and generated, and methods of disposal
are unknown for Study Area businesses and residences.
• Christmas tree cultivation occurs on 1,400 acres in the Study Area.
• Four netpen operations are present near West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds.
Three are small cooperative projects. The Environmental Protection Agency
classifies netpens as a point source.
• Washington State Department of Ecology expects to have standards developed for
the NPDES permit requirements for netpen operations in September 1995.
207
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds 0
Conclusions
■ Although a minor land use, agricultural practices may have localized impact on
habitat and water quality.
■ Maintenance of powerline access roads ditches and culverts is needed to reduce
sediment in streams.
■ Washington State DOT will need to routinely clean sediment from roadside ditches
along State Highway 101 because of erosion and landslides occurring on steep
roadcuts.
■ Christmas tree cultivation is declining in the Watersheds. Recent land sales have
changed management of two large parcels from Christmas trees production to long
term forestry.
■ A survey of Study Area businesses is needed and BMPs implemented to address the
storage, generation, and disposal of hazardous materials.
•
M
•
•
•
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution - Other Sources
209
Bibliography
•
Adams, Darius. Future Prospects For Western Washington's Timber Supply. Seattle,
Washington: College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, 1992.
Atkinson, Donald. Vegetation Manager, Bonneville Power Administration. Kent,
Washington: June 1995. Personal Communication.
Bahls, Peter and Marty Ereth. Stream Typing Error in Washington Water Type Maps for
Watersheds of Hood Canal and the Southwest Olympic Peninsula. Kingston,
Washington: Port Gamble SICallam Fisheries Office, Point No Point Treaty
Council, August 1994.
Barsnes, Mel. Operations and Maintenance, Bonneville Power Administration. Olympia,
Washington: June 1995. Personnal Communication.
Bell, Robert. Maintenance Supervisor, Washington State Department of Transportation.
Shelton, Washington: June 1995. Personal Communication.
Bremerton - Kitsap County Health District. An Evaluation of Nonpoint Bacterial
Contamination in Hood Canal. Bremerton, Washington: Bremerton- Kitsap County
Health District, 1987.
Brody, Jeff. Editor, Hood Canal Splendor at Risk. Bremerton, Washington: The Sun
Newspaper, 1991.
Brown, George. Forestry and Water Quality. Corvallis, Oregon: College of Forestry,
Oregon State University, 1991.
Camp, Orville. The Forest Farmers Handbook. Ashland, Oregon: Sky River Press, 1984.
Canning, Douglas J. Shoreline Bluff and Slope Stability: Technical Management Options.
Olympia, Washington: Department of Ecology, 1985 (out of print).
Canning, Douglas J. and Michelle Stevens. Wetlands of Washington: A Resource
Characterization. Olympia, Washington: Department of Ecology, 1989.
Carlson, Richard. Hood Canal Ranger District, Olympic National Forest. Hoodsport,
Washington: April 1995. Personal Communication.
n
210
Bibliography
• Cargil, Herb. Washington Department of Natural Resources. Shelton, Washington.
February 1995. Personal Communication.
Carson, R.J. Geologic Map of the Brinnon Area, Jefferson County, Washington. Olympia,
Washington: Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Earth
Resources, 1976a.
Carson, R.J. Geologic Map of North Central Mason County, Washington. Olympia,
Washington: Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Earth
Resources, 1976b.
Carson, R.J., and J.J. Gryta. "Jorsted Creek Slide." Washington Geologic Newsletter,
1974, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp 1 -2.
Castelle, A.J., C. Connolly, M. Emers, E.D. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Mauermann, T.
Erickson, and S.S. Cooke. Wetland Buffers: Use and Effectiveness. Olympia,
Washington: Adolfson Associates, Inc., Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management
Program, Washington Department of Ecology, 1992.
CH2M Hill. Final Environment Impact Statement - Hamma Hamma Hydroelectric Project,
FERC Project No. 3178. Potlatch, Washington: Public Utility District No. 1 of
Mason County, July 1983.
Citizens Program for the Chesapeake Bay. Baybook. Baltimore, Maryland: Citizens
Program for the Chesapeake Bay, 1987.
Clifford, Wayne. Office of Environmental Health, Mason County Department of Health
Services. Shelton, Washington: June 1995. Personal Communication.
Cooke, Sarah. "The Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management Research
Program: A Report on the Research Effort, Significant Findings and Implications -
Soils and Vegetation." Seattle, Washington: Presentation at Wetlands and
Stormwater Management Workshop, 1990.
Cooke, Sarah. Wetland Buffers - A Field Evaluation of Buffer Effectiveness in Puget
Sound. Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Ecology, 1992.
Cowardin, Lewis M., Virginia Carter, Francis C. Golet, and Edward T. LaRoe.
Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979.
Deeter, Jerry. Geology of Kitsap County. Master's Thesis. Bellingham, Washington:
Western Washington University, 1979.
211
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Dietrich, Bill. Seattle Times Newspaper, Science Reporter. "How the Sleuths of Science •
Uncovered the Seattle Fault ". Seattle, Washington: December 8, 1992.
Dunne, Thomas, and Luna B. Leopold. Water in Environmental Planning. New York,
New York: W.H. Freeman and Co., 1978.
Environment Canada. Groundwater - Nature's Hidden Treasure. Ottawa, Ontario:
Environment Canada, 1990.
Epp, Donald J. and K.S. Al -Ani. "The Effect of Water Quality on Rural Nonfarm
Residential Property Values." Journal of Agricultural Economics 61:3, August
1979.
Ereth, Marty. Biologist, Skokomish Tribe. May 1995. Personal Communication.
Evans, Stephen. "Draining Seattle - WPA Landslide Stabilization Projects, 1935- 1941."
Washington Geologic Newsletter, December 1994, Vol.22, No. 4, pp 3 -10.
Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. Federal Manual for Identifying
and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A.
Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.; Cooperative Technical Publication,
2989, 1989. 0
48° North The Sailing Magazine. Sound Watch, An Environmental Guide for Boaters.
Seattle, Washington: 48° North The Sailing Magazine, 1992.
Freeman II1, A. Myrick. "The Benefits of Environmental Improvement." Resources for
the Future. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979.
French, Craig. Forester, MRGC Inc. Shelton, Washington: April 1995. Personal
Communication.
Glasoe, Stuart. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Olympia, Washington: February
- 1995. Personal Communication.
Goodpasture, Jim. Forestland Manager, Mt. Washington Tree Farm. Hoodsport,
Washington: May 1995. Personal Communication.
Grant, Gordon and Fred Swanson. "Cumulative Effects of Forest Practices." Forest
Perspectives. Volume 1, Issue 4, 1991.
Gryta, J.J. Landslides Along the Western Shore of Hood Canal, Northern Mason County,
Washington. Master's Thesis. Raleigh, North Carolina: North Carolina State
University, 1975. 0
212
•
Bibliography
Heacock, Steven. Resource Specialist. King Conservation District. Renton, Washington:
August 1995. Personal Communication.
Hofstad, Linda. Environmental Health Specialist. Thurston County Environmental Health
Division. Olympia, Washington: February 1995. Personal Communication.
Hood Canal Technical Work Group. Shellfish and Finfcsh - Resources at Risk in the Hood
Canal Watershed. Hood Canal Coordinating Council, June 1995.
Johnstone, Jerry. Washington Department of Natural Resources. Belfair, Washington:
March 1995. Personal Communication.
Keller, E.A. and F.A. Swanson. "Effects of Large Organic Material on Channel Form and
Fluvial Processes." Earth Surface Processes 4, (1979): 361 -380.
King County Resource Planning Section, Environmental Division. Development of
Guidance for Managing Urban Wetlands and Stormwater. Seattle, Washington;
King County, 1991.
Koehm, Dennis. Powerplant Manager, Tacoma City Light. Potlatch, Washington: May
1995. Personal Communication.
Kosis, Francis. Hoodsport Sub -Area Manager. Olympic National Park. Hoodsport,
Washington: June 1995. Personal Communication.
Kuper, H.T., A. McDonald, S.F. Burns, D.E. Kuper, R.L. Schuster, R.L.Logan, and P.T.
Pringle. "Character of Landslides in Western Washington and Oregon." In D.A.
Swanson and R.A. Haugerud (ed.), Geologic Field Trips in the Pacific Northwest:
1994 Geological Society of America Annual Meeting. Seattle, Washington:
Geologic Society of America, 1994.
Leonard, W.P., H.A. Brown, L.L.C. Jones, K.R. McAllister, R.M. Storm. Amphibians of
Washington and Oregon. Seattle, Washington: Seattle Audubon Society, 1993.
Long, William A. Salmon Springs and Vashon Continental Ice in the Olympic Mountains
and Relation of Vashon Continental to Fraser Olympic Ice. Olympia, Washington:
USDA Forest Service, 1975.
Makers. Mason County Shoreline Protection Policies Project. Shelton, Washington:
Mason County, June 1994.
Mason County. Mason County Shoreline Master Program. Shelton, Washington: Mason
County, March 1988.
213
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Mattson, Joan E. Geologist, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Spokane,
Washington: April 1995. Personal Communication.
Menzies, G. and B. Peterson. Puget Sound Pest Management Guidelines, A Guide for
Protecting Our Water Quality. Bellingham, Washington: WSU Cooperative
Extension, 1993.
Moore, Tom. Mason County Department of Community Development. Shelton,
Washington: July 1995. Personnal Communication.
Moses, Lynn. Washington State Department of Transportation. Tumwater, Washington:
June 1995. Personal Communication.
Messmer, James. Resident Manager, Girl Scouts of America. Camp Robbinswold. Eldon,
Washington. June 1995. Personal Communication.
Neff, Randy. Mason County Department of Community Development. Shelton,
Washington. July 1995. Personal Communication.
Noble, J.H. Proposed Revision of Nomenclature for the Pleistocene Stratigraphy of
Coastal Pierce County, Washington. Open File Report 90 -4, p.54, Olympia,
Washington: Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Division of
Geology and Earth Resources, 1990.
Norwood, Sandy. Environmental Review Coordinator. Department of Natural Resources,
Washington Natural Heritage Program. Olympia, Washington: 1995. Personal
Correspondence.
Othberg, Kurt L. and John B. Hall. Monitoring of an Active Fault Near Lilliwaup, Mason
County, Washington. Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of Natural
Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources, 1976.
Parametrix, Inc. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement - Fish Culture in
Floating Net Pens. Bellevue, Washington: Parametrix, Inc., 1990.
Parks, Jim. Resource Manager. Skokomish Tribe. Shelton, Washington: September
1995. Personnal Communication.
Peter, Dave. Ecologist. Olympic National Forest, U.S. Forest Service. Olympia,
Washington: February 1995. Personal Communication.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. "Bacterial Source Tracking - Studies in an Urban
Seattle Watershed." in Puget Sound Notes. Olympia, Washington: Puget Sound
Water Quality Authority, 1993.
214
0 Bibliography
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan.
Olympia, Washington: Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1987.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan.
Olympia, Washington: Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1991.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan.
Olympia, Washington: Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1994.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. State of the Sound 1988 Report. Olympia,
Washington: Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, 1988.
Quinnell and Schmitt. "Abundance of Puget Sound Demersal Fishes: 1987 Research
Trawl Survey Results" in Washington Department of Fisheries Progress Report, No.
286. Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of Fisheries, 1991.
Reed, Jr. Porter B. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988
Washington. St. Petersburg, Florida: National Wetlands Inventory U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1988.
• Reid, Leslie. Sediment Production from Gravel- surfaced Forest Roads, Clearwater Basin.
Master's Thesis. Seattle, Washington: University of Washington, 1981.
Reinelt, Lorin E. "Urban Stormwater Impacts on the Hydrology and Water Quality of
Palustrine Wetlands in the Puget Sound Region." Seattle, Washington:
Presentation at Puget Sound Research '91, 1991.
Rhine, Richard and Richard Doane. The Hood Canal Watershed: A Demographic and
Economic Profile. Hood Canal Coordinating. Council, June 1995.
Richardson, D. Folio of the Southern Hood Canal Area, Washington. USGS map 1-853 -
C. Streamflow in the Southern Hood Canal Area, Washington; as Related to Land
Use Planning. 1974.
Rigg, George. Peat Resources of Washington: Bulletin No. 44. Olympia, Washington:
Department of Conservation, 1958.
Robbins, Dave. Manager, Hama Hama Company. Eldon, Washington: June 1995.
Personal Communication.
0 Russel, Robie. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Seattle, Washington: 1988.
Personal Correspondence.
215
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Schott, Tom. Nonpoint Source Watershed Workshop - Nonpoint Source Solutions.
Washington D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, 1991.
Schoyton, Gary. Forester, Simpson Timber Company. Shelton, Washington: May 1995.
Personal Communication.
Schuster, R.L., R.L. Logan, and P.T. Pringle. "Prehistoric Rock Avalanches in the
Olympic Mountains, Washington" in Science, Vol. 258, December 1992, p 1620.
Sheldon, Tim. Manager, Sheldon Properties. Potlatch, Washington: July 1995. Personal
Communication.
Sheldon and Associates. Skokomish Tribal Lands Wetlands Inventory. Shelton,
Washington: Skokomish Indian Tribe, 1994
Slagle, Eric. "Regional Perspectives on the Use and Management of On -Site Sewage
Systems." in Clearing the Waters. Seattle, Washington: Puget Sound Water
Quality Authority, 1994.
Smith, Mackey and R.J. Carson. Relative Slope Stability of the Southern Hood Canal
Area, Washington. Washington D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, 1977. •
Springwood Associates. Port Gamble S'Klallam Indian Reservation Wetlands Inventory.
Kingston, Washington: Port Gamble S'Kallam Tribe, 1992.
Stewart, Joe. U.S. fish and Wildlife Service. Olympia, Washington: July 1995. Excerpts
from remarks before the Hood Canal Environmental Council Board of Directors.
Swanberg, Syndi. Resource Manager, Tacoma City Light. Tacoma, Washington: June
1995. Personal Communication.
Tabor, R.W. and W.M. Cady. Geologic Map of the Olympic Peninsula, Washington.
Denver, Colorado: Branch of Distribution, U.S. Geological Survey, 1978.
Tahja, Alan. Hydraulics Engineer, Mason County Department of Public Works. Shelton,
Washington: May and July 1995. Personal Communication.
Thorson, Robert. Ice -Sheet Glaciation of the Puget Lowland, Washington, During the
Vashon Stade (Late Pleistocene). Seattle, Washington: Puget Sound Earth Science
Applications Project, U.S. Geological Survey, 1979.
Thurston County Health Department. Eld Inlet and Watershed 1987 -89: A Water Quality
and Remedial Action Report. Olympia, Washington: Thurston County, 1990.
216
Bibliography
• Thurston County Health Department. Henderson and Eld Inlet Water Quality Study.
Olympia, Washington: Thurston County, 1984.
Thurston County Health Department. Henderson Inlet and Watershed 1987 -89: A Water
Quality and Remedial Action Report. Olympia, Washington: Thurston County,
1990.
Thurston County Health Department. Totten and Little Skookum Inlet and Watershed
1987 -89: A Water Quality and Remedial Action Report. Olympia, Washington:
Thurston County, 1990.
Toal, C.M. The Effects of Bulkheads on Juvenile Salmonids in Hood Canal. A report
prepared for Jeff Cedarholm. Olympia, Washington: The Evergreen State College,
Salmonid Ecology, 1992.
Toal, C.M. Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington: June 1995.
Personal communication.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, Olympic National Forest. Canal Front
Planning Unit, Final Environmental Impact Statement Olympic National Forest.
Olympia, Washington, 1979.
• U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, Olympic National Forest. Draft "Olympic
National Forest General Soils Map ". Olympia, Washington: USDA Forest Service,
1995.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Forested
Plant Associations of the Olympic National Forest. R6- Ecol -TP 001 -88. Portland
Oregon. June 1989.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Olympic National Forest. Final
Environmental Impact Statement For The Land and Resource Management Plan.
Portland, Oregon, 1990.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Mason County.
Spokane, Washington: USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1960.
U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Interior. Forest Service and
Bureau of Land Management. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
on Management of Habitat for Late - Successional and Old- Growth Forest Related
Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. Portland, Oregon.
February 1994.
0 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Local Area Personal
Income. Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989.
217
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory: Is
Brinnon, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
The Brothers, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Eldon, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Hoodsport, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Holly, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Lilliwaup, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Mt. Jupiter, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory: •
Mt. Skokomish, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Mt. Washington, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory:
Skokomish Valley, Washington Quadrangle, 1987.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Brinnon, Washington Quadrangle,
Revised 1985.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Eldon, Washington Quadrangle,
Revised 1985.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Hoodsport, Washington Quadrangle,
Revised 1985.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Holly, Washington Quadrangle,
Revised 1985.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Lilliwaup, Washington Quadrangle,
Revised 1985. 0
218
Bibliography
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Mt. Jupiter, Washington Quadrangle,
Revised 1985.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Mt. Skokomish, Washington
Quadrangle, Revised 1990.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Mt. Washington, Washington
Quadrangle, Revised 1985.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Skokomish Valley, Washington
Quadrangle, Revised 1986.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. The Brothers, Washington
Quadrangle, Revised 1985.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Report to Congress -Waste Disposal Practices
and Their Effects on Groundwater. Washington D.C.: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1977.
U.S. Environmental Protect, r— Community Right -to -Know and Small Business.
Washington D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1986.
• U.S. Environmental Protection . A enc Septic Tank Siting to Minimize the Contamination
Agency. P g
of Groundwater by Microorganisms. Washington D.C.: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Publication No. 440/6 -8 -007, 1986.
U.S. Water Resources Council. Essentials of Ground Water Hydrology Pertinent to Water
Resources Planning. Washington D.C.: Bulletin 16, p. 38.
Ward, Bill. Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington: February
1995. Personal Communication.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Coastal Zone Atlas, Volume 11, Jefferson
County. Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of Ecology, 1980.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Coastal Zone Atlas, Volume 9, Mason County.
Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of Ecology, 1980.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Marine Water Column Ambient Monitoring
Program: Annual Report for Wateryear 1991. Olympia, Washington: Washington
State Department of Ecology, 1993.
• Washington State Department of Ecology. Shoreline Management Guidebook 2nd ed. Vol
2, Shoreline Master Program Handbook. Olympia, Washington: Washington State
Department of Ecology, Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program, 1994.
219
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
Washington State Department of Ecology. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Control Using
Vegetation. Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Ecology,
1993.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget
Sound Basin. Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Ecology,
1992.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Surface Water and Ground Water on Coastal
Bluffs: A Guide For Puget Sound Property Owners. Olympia, Washington:
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1995.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Vegetation Management: A Guide for Puget
Sound Bluff Property Owners. Olympia, Washington: Washington State
Department of Ecology, 1993.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Washington Coastal Currents. Vol. XV1, No.
12. Olympia, Washington: Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program,
Department of Ecology, 1992.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Wetlands Regulatory Guidebook. Olympia,
Washington: Wetlands Section, Department of Ecology, 1988.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Stream Health and Growth •
Management. Olympia, Washington: Habitat Program, Department of Fish and .
Wildlife, 1994.
Washington State Department of Fisheries. Management Plan for Baitfish Species in
Washington State. Progress Report No. 195. Olympia, Washington: Washington
Department of Fisheries, 1983.
Washington State Department of Fisheries, Washington Department of Wildlife, and
Western Washington Treaty Tribes. 1992 Washington State Salmon and Steelhead
Stock Inventory (SASSI). Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of
Fisheries, 1992.
Washington State Department of Health. Annual Inventory of Commercial and
Recreational Shellfish Areas in Puget Sound Olympia, Washington: Washington
State Department of Health, 1994.
Washington State Department of Health. Shoreline Survey of Fulton Creek. Olympia,
Washington: Washington Department of Health, 1993.
Washington State Department of Health. Shoreline Sanitary Survey of Hamma Hamma .
River Delta. Olympia Washington: Washington Department of Health, 1990.
0101
•
Bibliography
Washington State Department of Health. Shoreline Sanitary Survey of Lilliwaup Bay.
Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of Health, 1990.
Washington State Department of Health. Shoreline Survey of Triton Cove. Olympia,
Washington: Washington Department of Health, 1993.
Washington State Department of Health and the Washington State University Cooperative
Extension Service. Understanding and Caring for Your Septic Tank System.
Olympia, Washington: Washington State Department of Health, Publication 334-
016, 1991.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Timber /Fish/Wildlife Agreement: A
Better Future in Our Woods and Streams. Final Report. Olympia, Washington:
Washington Department of Natural Resources, 1987.
Washington State Department of Transportation. Geotechnical Report, Milepost 317
Landslide, S.R. 101. Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of
Transportation Materials Office, 1995.
Washington State Department of Wildlife. Lakes of Washington: Region 6. Olympia,
Washington: Washington State Department of Wildlife, 1991.
Watts, Dan. Mason County Department of Community Development. Shelton,
Washington: July 1995. Personal Communication.
Weston, Donald. The Environmental Effects of Floating Mariculture in Puget Sound.
Seattle, Washington: University of Washington, 1986.
Williams, R.W., R.M. Laramie, J.J. Ames. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon
Utilization. Volume L Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife:
Olympia, Washington, 1975.
Woodcock, Robert. Forester. Weyerhaeuser. Cosmopolis, Washington: July 1995.
Personal Communication.
221
West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds
222
•
•
•
•
Appendices
•
•
223
Appendix A Water Typing System
The following water typing system was developed for forest practices and agreed to by the
Washington State Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife and Ecology in conjunction with
affected Indian Tribes to classify streams, lakes, and ponds. These definitions are found in
Chapter 222 -16 -030 of the Washington Administrative Code which is part of the Forest
Practices Rules and Regulations.
Type 1 Water All waters, within their ordinary high water mark, as inventoried as
"shorelines of the state" under Chapter 90.58 RCW.
Type 2 Water Segments of natural waters which are not classified as Type 1 water and
have a high use and are important from a water quality stand point for:
a. Domestic water supply,
b. Public recreation,
40 c. Fish spawning, rearing or migration or wildlife uses, or
d. are highly significant to protect water quality.
Type 3 Water Segments of natural waters which are waters not classified as Type 1 or
2 and have a moderate to slight use and are moderately important from
a water quality standpoint for:
a. Domestic use,
b. Public recreation,
c. Fish spawning, rearing or migration or wildlife uses, or
d. have moderate value to protect water quality.
Type 4 Water Segments of natural waters which are not classified as Type 1, 2 or 3.
Their significance lies in their influence on water quality downstream in
Type 1, 2 or 3 waters. These segments may be perennial or
intermittent.
Type 5 Water All other waters, in natural watercourses, including streams with or
without a well defined channel, areas of perennial or intermittent
seepage, ponds and natural sinks. Drainage ways having short periods
of spring runoff are considered to be Type 5 waters.
•
� Appendix B Water Quality Parameters by
Classification
r1
U
•
Water Quality Parameters By Classification
Bacteria
Freshwater
50
100
200
n/a
50-
Marine
14
1 14
100
200
n/a
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/L)
Freshwater
9.5
8.0
6.5
n/a
Marine
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
n/a
Temperature (C *)
Freshwater
16
18
21
n/a
Marine
13
16
19
22
n/a
pH
Freshwater
6.5 -8.5
6.5 -8.5
6.5 -8.5
n/a
Marine
7.0 -8.5
7.0 -8.5
7.0 -8.5
6.5 -9.0
n/a
Turbidity (NTU)
5
5
10
10
5
Toxicity
**
**
**
**
**
* No change from background levels
** See Chapter 173 -201 WAC for specific
numeric and narrative criteria.
Appendix C Characteristic Uses by Water Body
0 Classification
Characteristic Uses By Water Body Classification
Characteristic '
Water Body Classi€ication
Use
AA
A
l3 !
C:- :
Lake
Water Supply
Domestic
X
X
X
Industrial
X
X
X
X
X
Agricultural
X
X
X
X
Stock Watering
X
X
X
X
Fish & Shellfish
Salmonids
Spawning
X
X
X
Rearing
X
X
X
X
Migration
X
X
X
X
X
Harvesting
X
X
X
X
Other Fish Species
Spawning
X
X
X
X
Rearing
X
X
X
X
Migration
X
X
X
X
X
Harvesting
X
X
X
X
Clams, Oysters &
Spawning
X
X
X
X
Rearing
X
X
X
X
Harvesting
X
X
X
Crab, Shrimp, etc.
Spawning
X
X
X
X
Rearing
X
X
X
X
Harvesting
X
X
X
X
Wildlife Habitat
X
X
X
X
X
Recreation
Primary Contact
X
X
X
Secondary Contact
X
X
X
X
X
Navigation
X
X
X
X
X
• Appendix D Land Cover Types b Watershed
pp yp y
•
40
OAppendix E Land Use Categories by Watersheds
v
0 y
of
p�
kn
O
e�1
N
1b
�
8
L1
N
C
•''
f/�
ai
N
h
0
6
C 0
d � a
�
� y
N
�
•° o
in
C
00
d
Y
= 31
O
M
V C
C C C
3
3 U
O
a
O
a� a�i e0
6�
m
$
N
N
O+
.•r
7
O
..w
O
co
.•y
�
N
p
O+
p
7
6 9 2 �+
R
e0U O
W
�r
.fi
h
.•w
p
G
p C �+
y
O
A
U U e
LLLJJJ
eV
0D
tf
Op
O G t
..
�p
h1
00
0 0
O�
00
01
le
NI
'C .0 !�•' O
.�
„y
�O
1p y
N
W � � •y
en
�p
�"'
00
ti
fr1
app
co
.�—
e0 tC •m
L y 2 C L
to
fi.
O •�
O •�
rl
Ll
0
22
i w
EE! d
5
5
GS a.1
O oG .�
O
rI
1 Includes parcels less than 5 acres in Mason County and 10 acres in Jefferson County, with
residential units.
2 Includes parcels less than 5 acres in Mason County and 10 acres in Jefferson County, platted for
residential development.
3 Includes parcels greater than 5 acres in Mason County and parcels greater than 10 acres in Jefferson
County, not intensively managed but may include some residences. It also includes parcels of any
size designated as open space.
4 Includes public service facilities such as fire stations, Post Offices, and greenbelts. Also includes
the Girl Scout Camp near Eldon.
� Appendix F Mason County Water Quality
Survey Results
A telephone survey of businesses in the watershed was conducted in July of 1995 by the Mason
County Department of Health Services. The business owners were asked to respond to five questions:
1) What percent of your business comes from tourism?
In the following three questions, business owners were asked to rate impacts to their business as none,
slight, moderate, and severe
2) What impact occurs to your business from the closures on Highway 101?
3) What impact do you perceive would occur to your business if there were water quality
problems in Hood Canal?
• 4) What impact would occur to your business if there were problems with your water supply?
5) Are there any other impacts or issues you wish to make known?
The survey attempted to contact 29 businesses. Nineteen were successfully contacted. Survey results
are listed below.
•
Local Business Survey Results
Baeimees Type
Peraesi Bps
Fron�.Toor>ism
Im Fr�►m H
Pte, �T
l01 Cbsares2
Impact From WQ
Problems it the
Goal'
Impact Fes. Watts
Simply Rmbkmet
Gifts Beauty Salon
25%
M
SV
SV
Marine Retail
50%
S
SV
S
Market
65%
SV
M
S
Market
20%
M
SV
SV
Market
70%
N
M
M
Market
75%
SV
SV
SV
Market Motel
25%
S
SV
SV
Motel
10%
S
SV
SV
Motel
97%
SV
SV
SV
Restaurant
60%
SV
SV
N
Restaurant
75%
SV
N
M
Restaurant
50%
SV
M
SV
Restaurant
75%
SV
SV
SV
Restaurant
75%
SV
SV
SV
RV Park
70%
S
M
SV
RV Park
80%
SV
SV
M
RV Park
99%
N
SV
SV
Service Station
50%
SV
N
N
Tavern
35%
M
U
M
' N =none, S=slight, M= moderate, SV=severe, U= unknown
LI
C:
•
n
LJ
•
•
LOCAL BUSINESS SURVEY RESULTS: SUMMARIES
Percent; Business
Number
Percent
From ut m Touris
Number
Percent
0-10%
1
53%
11 -25%
3
15.8%
26 -50%
4
21.1%
51 -75%
8
42.1%
76 -100%
3
15.8%
Total
T19
19
100.0%
Isnpad From WQ
Number
Percent
Problems in the Canal
None
2
10S%
None
2
10.5%
Slight
0
0.0%
Moderate
4
21.1%
Severe
12
63.2%
Unknown
T19
1
5.3%
Total
19
100.0%
impact From
Number `
Percent
Hwy. ;181 Cio6urea
None
2
10S%
Slight
4
21.1%
Moderate
3
15.8%
Severe
10
52.6%
Unknown
0
0.0%
Total
T19
0
100.0%
Impact From Water
Number
Percent
Supply Problems
None
2
10.5%
Slight
2
10.5%
Moderate
4
21.1%
Severe
11
57.9 %.
Unknown
0
0.0%
Total
19
100.0%
Business Type
Additional Concerns
Gifts Beauty Salon
Bleach in the water system affects chemicals for hair treatment
Marine Retail
Washington State Fish & Wildlife policies. Management of the fish resource is bad. The
general economy always affects business.
Market
Bad press is the biggest problem. Road closures and floods are news. Road openings and
normal road conditions are not. We regularly get calls asking if the Skokomish bridge has
been replaced and when we can expect Hwy 101 to re -open.
Market
Highway closure signs are not clear. Media is not clear. Tourists have a hard time knowing
when the highway is clear and when it's not.
Market
Would loose business if they closed the forests for hikers & recreation.
Market
New water system regulations are hard to meet. On -site sewage systems are a concern.
Market Motel
Competition from reservation. The tribe is not required to carry insurance. Gas is not
profitable because of insurance policy. Tribe can offer cheaper prices because of fewer
regulations and requirements on them.
Restaurant
Anything to do with tourists.
Restaurant
On -site septics. Throwing grass in Canal. Gets black & ugly & stinks. Need a sewer system.
Restaurant
Parking problems when there is heavy participation in local events such as Hoodsport Days.
Restaurant
This is the worst year for business I have ever seen. The media has not been kind to us.
SBA loans are not being approved for us.
Restaurant
Tourism. Permanent fix for Highway 101.
RV Park
None
RV Park
Growth management regulations (not negative or positive, but an impact). People drive up to
the road closure, get stuck and come back to stay the night.
RV Park
Weather. Irresponsibility of media reporting road closures.
Service Station
Dept of Ecology, State of Washington, Dept of Revenue, Regulations. No help from the
state. No longer selling gas due to liability insurance.
Tavern
Road Closure Coverage. Media.
•
•
�J
� Appendix G Age Class of Tree Cover by
Watershed
•
•
a
m
00
a
a
ON
a
p +�.
v
N
O
rq
c+1
00
M
o�0
tn
C
a
r+
h
c
�pS
00
��pp
pp
Q
.r
V1
zn
d
N
w
t
'n
O
j
O
O
O
00
N
N
U
Lo
F
h
O
o
r.
0
M
o
M
00O
00
N
Q
Vi
�O
N
0Q7�
r
'D
M
a
N
to
O
0�p0
to
LL
3
:
/E
y
M
con
y
M
V1
O
0p
M
h
N
~
a
O
t+
O
M
r
tN�1
O
M
-
�
8
•
•
•
•
Appendix H
Stewardship
Summary
Incentive Program:
Stewardship Incentive Program
A part of the Forest Stewardship Act of 1990
Background
Nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) lands make important contributions to environmental
quality and raw material requirements of the Nation. Growing pressures for public land policy
have focused on the need for more intensive management of natural resources on private
lands. The benefits of enhanced management may include habitats for fish and wildlife,
aesthetics, recreational opportunities, increased timber supplies, and other products.
Authority
The Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 authorizes the cooperative
Stewardship Incentive Program (SIP) to stimulate enhanced management of nonindustrial
private forest lands through cost sharing of approved practices. Funding of this program —up
to $ 100 million annually through 1995 —is authorized by title XII, section 6 of the Forest Stewardship
Act of 1990. For fiscal year 1991, the appropriation is $19.9 million.
Relationship to the Forest Stewardship Program
Title XII, section 5, authorizes information, education, and technical assistance programs to
encourage, assist, and recognize NIPF landowners who keep their lands and natural resources
productive and healthy. The companion Forest Stewardship Program was established to
develop a written plan that provides and documents resource management direction and
practices, while the Stewardship Incentive Program provides subsequent tools and incentives
to implement practices recommended in this plan.
Leadership and Coordination
USDA Forest Service and state foresters have leadership responsibilities for SIP at the national
and state level, respectively. Each state forester, in consultation with the state Forest
Stewardship Committee, will determine cost - share levels, practice priorities, and minimum
acreage requirements. Technical responsibilities for SIP practices may be assigned to other
agencies and resource professionals through memoranda and cooperative agreements. USDA
agencies, among others, will be key partners in developing and implementing SIP.
Eligibility
Qualifying NIPF land includes rural lands with existing tree cover pnd other woody
vegetation or land sultable for growing such vegetatlon and owned by a private Individual,
group, association, corporation, Indian tribe, or other legal private entity. Eligible landowners
must have an approved Forest Stewardship Plan and own 1,000 acres or less of qualifying land.
Authorizations must be obtained for exceptions of up to 5,000 acres. Existing management plans
can be modified to meet stewardship guidelines.
@ A
Agricultural StabiAzatlon and Extension Service
Conservation service
FOREST
U�S
Q Forest SeMes Soll Conservation service
�TFwARDS�t
Eligibility Limitations
Payments may not exceed $ 10,000 per owner per fiscal year. SIP cost - shared activities must
101 be completed within 18 months of approval, unless specifically allowed otherwise. Landowners
will maintain and protect SIP - funded practices for a minimum of 10 years.
National SIP Practices
Ten SIP practices have been approved for cost -share assistance under state programs.
Each practice allows for specific technical practices to be considered for state programs.
Practices approved in Individual states may vary. The purpose of each SIP practice Is as follows:
1— Management Plan Development
Document NIPF landowner objectives and management decisions. Recommend
resource management practices to provide an action -oriented land management
plan.
2— Reforestation and Afforestation
Establish or reestablish diverse stands of forest trees through natural regeneration,
planting, or direct seeding for conservation purposes and sustainable timber
production.
3— Forest and Agroforest Improvement
Improve forest stand productivity, stand vigor, forest health, and the value and quality
of wood products.
4— Windbreak and Hedgerow Establishment, Maintenance, and Renovation
Establish, maintain, and renovate windbreaks and hedgerows to conserve energy;
protect farmsteads, livestock, and crops; and reduce soil erosion.
5—Soil and Water Protection and Improvement
Maintain or improve water quality and soil productivity on forest land and along
waterways.
b-- Riparian and Wetland Protection and Improvement
Protect, restore, and improve wetlands and riparian areas to maintain water quality
and enhance habitat.
7- 41sheries Habitat Enhancement
Protect and enhance habitat for native fisheries including resident and anadromous
species.
8— Wildlife Habitat Enhancement
Establish and enhance permanent habitat for game and nongame wildlife species.
9 —Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Protection
Restore, protect, and enhance unique habitat to sustain or expand populations of rare,
threatened, or endangered native plant or animal species as defined by federal and
state policies.
10— Forest Recreation Enhancement
Establish and enhance outdoor recreation activities.
For Additional Information:
Contact your state forester.
Implementation
June 21, 1991, is the expected date for publication of an Interim Rule regarding the
Stewardship Incentive Program in the Federal Register. Program funding will be allocated at
that time in preparation for a midsummer signup period.
U.S. Department ofAgricultule programs are open to all c flzens without regard to race, color,
June 1991 sex, handicap, religion, age, or national origin.
• Appendix I Forest Landowner Interviews:
Summary
The following text summarizes responses to interviews with public, industrial, and private
landowners who have holdings in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds. The responses
describe the landowners' or managers' current activities associated with timber harvest and
reforestation practices.
Public Owners
Forest Service, Olympic National Forest, Hood Canal Ranger District:
Richard Carlson, Resource Manager
The Forest Service manages 50,924 acres in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds,
concentrated in the headwater areas of the Hamma Hamma River. Past activity has
included road construction, along abandoned railroad grades in low elevations and
midslope to ridgetop routes in the higher elevations. Roads provide access to timber
harvest operations, campgrounds, and hiking trails.
Currently two timber harvest operations are under contract in the Study Area. In July
1995, harvest of a timber sale was in progress near Nettleton Pass. This harvest included
three clearcut units totaling 70 acres. Commercial thinning in the Fulton Creek watershed
was started in the spring of 1995. Operations are suspended until fall due to potential bark
damage to leave trees during the spring growing season. Future harvest planning will only
consider commercial thinning sales in the Fulton Creek area due to land allocation. All
previously harvested areas have been replanted and are checked annually for stocking
levels.
The presence of northern spotted owls (a Federally listed endangered species) and current
guidelines designating nonwildemess areas as Late- Successional Reserves will preclude
timber harvest in all Study Area, old growth stands. The recovery plan will allow pre -
commercial thinning with the intent of providing future large trees in previously harvested
areas.
Forest Service roads receive annual surface blading and ditch maintenance. Culvert
cleanout and inlet maintenance is done as needed to facilitate water passage. All roads
have a crushed rock surface and slope embankments have been revegetated.
Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR):
Herb Cargil, Planning Forester 0
The DNR manages approximately 26,509 acres in the West Shore Hood Canal Watersheds.
The average slope is 20% with some steeper ground in the Dow Mountain and Lilliwaup
Creek Watersheds. Rotation age is 70 years for Forest Board lands and 60 years on
School Trust lands, which make up the majority of the DNR holdings in the Study Area.
The most common harvest method is clearcutting with average unit size of approximately
60 acres. Harvest areas are generally prelogged to remove high - value, pole timber. This
practice avoids breakage and provides a significant increase in trust fund receipts. It is
likely DNR's harvest activity will increase in the future. They have acquired more land in
the Study Area and the trees are reaching harvest age.
Northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet presence and habitat areas are based on annual
field surveys. When use or occupancy of either species is confirmed, additional protection
of habitat may be required in planned harvest areas.
Major road construction on DNR land is completed. However, some new construction of
short segments is needed to access log harvest landings. Annual road blading and ditch
maintenance is done on the roads that provide public access to the Melbourne and Price
Lakes recreation areas. Other short segment roads require little surface maintenance except
prior to, during, and after timber haul periods.
Precommercial thinning is used in plantation areas for spacing and red alder control. The
thinning is completed with contracted labor using hand slashing. To reduce red alder
seeding potential, the practice of broadcast burning of harvested areas has been eliminated.
Reforestation by hand planting is done with Douglas -fir seedlings, however, western red
cedar seedlings are planted in wetter soil areas. Fuel reduction is limited to pile burning at
landing sites to reduce wild fire hazards.
National Park Service, Olympic National Park, Hoodsport Sub -Area:
Francis Kosis, Manager
The National Park Service manages 4,496 acres in the headwaters of the Hamma Hamma
River drainage. The Olympic National Park was designated by Congress in 1938 to
maintain natural ecosystems on the Olympic Peninsula, therefore the Park does not harvest
timber. National Park watershed lands contain forest cover, subalpine meadows, and high
elevation peaks. Access to their lands is by Forest Service hiking trail #810 to Lena Lake.
The trail system continues to upper Lena Lake and the Brothers, the highest point in the
Study Area.
0
0 Industrial Owners
MRGC:
Craig French, Forester
MRGC is the largest industrial timberland owner with 2,457 acres located mainly in the
southern watersheds. The company manages its timber resources on a 60 -year rotation.
Logging has increased the past two years after the purchase of J. Hofert Company
holdings. The J. Hofert Company managed commercial aged timber and Christmas tree
plantations. MRGC is currently harvesting the commercial aged timber stands in the Finch
Creek watershed. Harvest operations will then decline until the former Christmas tree
plantations reach sawlog size. There are no plans to continue the Christmas tree operations
because demand for wild (unsheared) trees has plummeted making the labor intensive
operation unprofitable.
Current MRGC harvest methods have been equally split between tractor skidding on slopes
under 30% and cable yarding in the steeper areas. The majority of the remaining stands
will require cable yarding. Planting is done following harvest with Douglas -fir and
western redcedar seedlings. Precommercial thinning by powersaw or hand slashing is done
for spacing control. Commercial thinning is done on stands 40 to 45 years old when chip
market prices are high.
Forest roads are constructed to a single -lane, twelve foot wide standard using pit run
(local) rock. It is a company policy to build roads 6 months to one year before haul
operations. This allows for natural compaction and less surface erosion during timber
removal. Roads are maintained annually with emphasis on surface grading, ditch slump
removal, and culvert maintenance. New road construction will be needed to access cable
landings. Company roads have gates installed to restrict public access for safety reasons
and to reduce illegal garbage dumping.
MRGC allows private individuals to lease rights for collection of firewood and forest
greens when the desired species are present.
Simpson Timber Company:
Gary Schoyten, Forester
Simpson Timber Company manages 1,633 acres in the southern portion of the Study Area.
The majority of their lands have been clearcut harvested in the past 5 to 10 years. Future
harvest will be minimal with some commercial thinning and removal of some small
isolated patches of mature timber. Simpson Timber Company constructs all log landing
and haul routes 1 to 2 years before harvest. This technique allows natural settling and
compaction, reducing dust and sediment, and extending operations when rainy weather
occurs. All road construction in the Study Area is complete and the majority of roadways
will be inactivated in 1996 following replanting in the cleared areas. Planting is done with
Douglas -fir seedlings, and western redcedar in sites with a higher soil moisture content.
Inactive roads have gates installed to reduce surface erosion and fire risk during the
summer months. Roads are gated to reduce illegal dumping and vehicle harassment to
wildlife at all times of the year.
Stand tending (precommercial thinning) is practiced on company lands. This includes
stocking level control (spacing management) and hardwood eradication. Hand slashing of
hardwoods is the preferred method but aerial application of 2, 4 -D herbicide has proven
effective and economical on steeper ground and in densely stocked stands.
Weyerhaeuser:
Bob Woodcock, Forester
In 1992, Weyerhaeuser purchased the timberlands from Travelers Insurance Inc. This
transaction involved 881 acres in the Fulton Creek/McDonald Cove drainages. The
majority of Weyerhaeuser holdings are on gently (15 -20 %) sloped areas. Harvesting is
done with tractor skidders, on lands under 35% slope; highlead cable is used in steeper
areas near draws and ravines. Cable yarding is also used to reduce road construction in
areas of intermingled ownership.
Clearcut harvest of approximately 160 Study Area acres was completed in 1994. A
riparian zone along McDonald Creek has been retained to provide shade and LOD
recruitment. Operations observed during field observations were in the adjacent
Duckabush River Watershed. The harvest method is expected to switch from clearcut
harvest to commercial thinning during the next decade. Planting in previously harvested
areas has been done with Douglas -fir and western red cedar in wetter soil areas.
The primary timber haul road system on Weyerhaeuser lands is built. Limited new road
construction will be necessary for short segments of temporary road to access log landing
areas. Road maintenance consisting of surface and ditch repairs is performed after annual
inspection. This maintenance includes surface blading, culvert basin cleanout, and
removing small ditch slumps.
Private Owners
Hama Hama Company:
Dave Robbins, Manager
The Robbins family manages approximately 3,888 acres located in the northern portion of
the Study Area. This operation is in its third generation of management dating back to the
railroad logging done from 1922 to 1934. All company lands are enrolled in the forestland
open space taxation program. The ownership ranges from the saltwater upslope into the
foothills, on both sides of the Hamma Hamma River. 9
A forest management plan has been developed for the entire property holdings. The
holdings contain an uneven distribution between the young growth and commercial age
classes. The plan includes clearcut harvest with unit sizes varying between 30 and 50
acres annually. Commercial thinning is done in the 50 to 60 year old stands to promote
higher valued products from the remaining trees. In addition, thinning generates income
by removing pulp chip material and small sawlogs during high timber stumpage prices.
The large age class acreage resulted when railroad harvest was completed in a 10 to 12
year period. The family intends to continue resource management on all lands.
The company's silvicultural treatments include replanting and spacing control.
Reforestation is done with Douglas -fir seedlings. Pre - commercial thinning entries in
Douglas -fir stands is done at stand ages three, eight, and twelve years, to promote growth.
Roads are constructed to single lane width using native materials. Rock is applied in areas
with steeper grades and damp soil. Culverts are installed at stream crossings, and ditches
are used to divert surface water to natural channels. The company noted during the
February 1995 storm that additional and larger culverts were needed. These have been
installed at several intermittent stream crossings to keep water in natural courses and off
the road surface where erosion occurred. The majority of the access roads are built,
however, short segments to reach landing sites will be built in the future. Roads are gated
to provide family solitude and eliminate poaching of wildlife. Road access gates provide
protection from illegal dumping of garbage and reduced fire risk in the dry summer
months.
Desired tree spacing is achieved by precommercial thinning with hand slashing or
powersaw. Herbicides and fertilizer are used on the property in areas under powerlines
used for Christmas tree production. Alder and hemlock seedlings invade plantations by
natural seeding processes.
ML Washington Tree Farm:
Jim Goodpasture, Manager
The tree farm includes approximately 594 acres concentrated in the Hoodsport area. The
family has owned this forestland designated property since 1948. A sawmill that produces
rough sawn lumber is located behind the residence; use is now limited to personal needs.
Present timber removal operations include partial removal of trees to salvage storm related
blowdown. The current high pulp chip stumpage rates have prompted clearcut harvest and
commercial thinning on overstocked low site productivity stands. Clearcut areas are
replanted with Douglas -fir seedlings. Red alder invades disturbed areas associated with
timber harvest, and is removed during precommercial thinning operations. The family
intends to continue management of their tree farm for long -term wildlife, aesthetic, and
timber benefits.
Road access is native surface with single lane alignment conforming to the ground contour.
Pit run rock is applied in steeper areas or soft areas that form during wet weather haul
periods. Culverts are installed where flowing streams are crossed. The family restricts
access by closure to reduce fire hazard and illegal dumping.
Sheldon Properties:
Tim Sheldon, Owner
The Sheldons own and manage a 504 acre tree farm in the southern portion of the Study
Area near Potlatch. The property has been in family ownership since 1922. An early
railroad logging company constructed a railroad grade from the Potlatch'saltwater terminus
through the property. The original railroad grades now provide the primary transportation
network to their home and harvest activities.
The entire property is operated under a forest management plan completed in 1984. The
plan emphasizes commercial thinning entries to the twelve separate stands. Commercial
thinning entries were completed in 1989, 1991, and 1994. Tractor yarding entire tree
lengths reduces soil compaction. Tree length removal also allows the limbs and tops to be
piled and burned at Iandings, reducing fire hazard. The thinning areas received an aerial
application of urea nitrogen following harvest. Each year the property is inventoried, and
dead and down trees are removed. A heavy snowstorm in February 1995 produced 20
loads of salvage from trees that were broken or tipped over.
Future commercial thinning entries are scheduled to maintain long -term timber and wildlife
benefits. These entries will generate higher revenues by marketing the larger diameter
trees. Intermittent property revenue is obtained by selling pit run gravel located in an
existing pit adjacent to State Highway 101. Brush picking rights for salal and huckleberry
greens are leased to private individuals.
All outside access from adjoining properties has been closed by gates due to trespass,
illegal dumping, and concern for fire protection. The owners observe harvest activities on
adjoining properties and have noticed increased wildlife use on the property.
Girl Scouts of America, Camp Robbinswold:
Jim Messmer, Resident Manager
The Girl Scout Council manages approximately 569 acres located along State Highway
101, north of Eldon. The property has over one mile of Hood Canal beach, a freshwater
lake (Lake Armstrong), and overnight facilities that accommodate up to 130 weekly
summer users. Girl Scouts have been using the facilities for 65 years. The entire property
has been under a tree -cover management plan since 1978, with a recent update completed
in 1993. The shoreline area, east of State Highway 101 contains the education and
housing facilities. The rest of this area is managed in a natural state and contains scattered
old growth Douglas -fir. Tree removal in this portion is limited to salvage of dead and
down trees to provide safety in the heavily used building and recreation sites.
Appendix J Example Restoration
Recommendations for Road - Related
Erosion
Restoration Activity. .
Definition
Pull back Fillslope or Landing
Removal of unstable soil and woody debris from the edge of a landing or
road fillslope and reshaping the edge into a less erodible form.
Dewater Slope
Generally achieved by installing perforated pipes into a slope to reduce
saturation by moving water out of the soil.
Install Erosion Matting
A woven mat often made of photodegradable nylon and straw used to
stabilize the surface of a disturbed or eroding area.
Distribute Straw
Spreading straw over a disturbed or eroding area to reduce surface
erosion.
Install Trash Racks
A "grill- like" set a bars placed adjacent to, in front of, or on top of a
culvert to help prevent the culvert from plugging with woody debris
Install Water Bars
A cut with a berm made a few inches deep in the road surface to help
direct water off the road surface
Endhaul Material
Moving material, such as from road blading or culvert cleaning, to a
stable area.
Install Retaining Structure
Used here to describe a crib wall: a retaining structure consisting of live
plant material placed at the toe of slopes to stabilize cutbank slopes.
Repair, Realign, or Replace Culvert
Make changes as needed to a culvert so that it will effectively move
water with a minimum of erosion
Seed
Aerial or hand seed grass or grass /forb mixtures.
Plant Trees and /or Shrubs
Plant trees and /or shrubs; may be seedlings grown for this purpose or
transplanted from a nearby site.
Install Live Stakes
Insertion and tamping of live, rootable vegetative cuttings into the
ground; willow is frequently used.
Install Brush Layers
Placement of bundles of rootable branch cuttings in small benches
excavated into the slope; bundles are oriented perpendicular to the slope.
Install Willow Wattles
Placement of long bundles of branch cuttings bound together into
"sausage -like" structures, parallel to the slope in shallow trenches.
Place Woody Material
Placement of anchored logs across slope to help decrease and /or prevent
surface erosion associated with an eroding hillside.
' The listed restoration activities are those recommended for road - related erosion sites in the Lilliwaup watershed. These and
other activities are applicable to other watersheds as well.
0 Appendix K Stormwater Management Manual
•
Comparison
The 1994 Puget Sound Water
Quality Management Plan
requires all cities and counties
in the Puget Sound basin to
develop stormwater
management programs and
adopt ordinances. The
stormwater program and
ordinances must include
minimum requirements
"substantially equivalent to the
Stormwater Management
Manual for the Puget Sound
Basin." The table at right
defines types of development
Al to A5
and B2 to B11
by size. In addition to this,
the Mason County draft
ordinance contains a flow chart describing when a small parcel erosion and sediment
control plan is needed. The table below compares the Stormwater Management Manual
for the Puget Sound Basin and the draft Mason County Stormwater Management
Ordinance.
A Comparison of Minimum Requirements Between the Stormwater Management Manual for
the Puget Sound Basin and the Draft Mason County Stormwater Management Ordinance
A. Small Parcel Minimum Requirements
11 A 1. Construction Access Route 11
Construction vehicle access shall be, whenever possible,
limited to one route. Access points shall be stabilized with
quarry spall or crushed rock to minimize the tracking of
sediment onto public roads.
Supplemental guideline: If sediment is inadvertently
transported onto public roads, roads shall be cleaned
thoroughly at the end of the day by shoveling or sweeping.
Street washing should only be done after the bulk of the
sediment has been removed by sweeping.
Essentially the same except the following words in bold are
added to the supplemental guideline, "... If sediment is
transported onto a road surface creating a hazard, ..."
A 2. Stabilization of Denuded Areas
For all exposed and unworked soils:
From 10 /1 to 4/30, unstabilized not more than 2 days.
From 511 to 9/30, unstabilized not more than 7 days.
For all exposed and unworked soils with erosion potential:
From 1111 to 4/30, unstabilized not more than 7 days.
From 511 to 10/30, unstabilized not more than 30 days.
Exposed soils within 200 ft. of waters of the State are
required to be stabilized with 48 hours.
A 3. Protection of Adjacent Properties
Adjacent properties shall be protected from sediment The same
deposition.
A 4. Maintenance
All erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be regularly Essentially the same
inspected and maintained.
A S. Other BMPs
As needed, other BMPs shall be required by the local The same
government.
B. Large Parcel Minimum Requirements
B 1. Erosion and Sediment Control
B 1.01 Stabilization and Sediment Trapping
From 10 /1 to 4/30, unstabilized not more than 2 days.
From 10/16 to 4/15, unstabilized not more than 2 days.
From 511 to 9/30, unstabilized not more than 7 days. From 5116 to 9115, unstabilized not more than 30 days.
B 1.02 Delineate Clearing and Easement Limits
Mark clearing limits, easements, buffers, sensitive areas, The same
trees and drainage courses.
B 1.03 Protection of Adjacent Properties
Adjacent properties shall be protected from sediment The same
deposition.
B 1.04 Timing & Stabilization of Sediment Trapping Measures
Construct sediment trapping BMPs first; must be functional The same except for the differences in the definition of the
before land disturbing activities take place. I wet and dry seasons as noted above.
Stabilize in accordance with B 1.01
B 1.05 Cut and Fill Slopes
Design and construct to minimize erosion. The same except for the differences in the definition of the
wet and dry seasons as noted above.
Stabilize in accordance with B 1.01
•
•
•
•
B 1.06 Controlling Off -site Erosion 11
Protect downstream properties from erosion due to increases Essentially the same except the following words in bold are
in volume, velocity and peak flow rate of stormwater runoff added "... downstream from development sites shall be
from the site. protected from damage by erosion ..."
11 B 1.07 Stabilization of Temporary Conveyance Systems 11
Prevent erosion from the expected velocity of flow from the
developed condition 2 -year, 24 -hour storm.
Outlets, etc. must be stabilized to prevent erosion.
B 1.08 Storm Drain Inlet Protection
Storm drain inlets made operable during construction shall
be protected so that stormwater runoff shall not enter the
conveyance system without first being filtered or otherwise
treated to remove sediment.
B 1.09 Underground Utility Construction
Do not open up >500 ft. of trench at one time, unless
provisions are made to protect against adverse stormwater
impacts.
Where possible, excavated material shall be placed on the
uphill side of a trench.
Trench dewatering must discharge into a sediment trap or
pond.
B 1.10 Construction Access Routes
Minimize the transport of sediment onto paved roads.
When it occurs, clean the road daily.
Do not use street sweeping until sediment has been cleaned
up first.
The same
The words where practicable are added to this requirement
The same
Only required if it is "creating a hazard"
11 B 1.11 Removal of Temporary BMPs 11
Remove within 30 days_ of final site stabilization or after
they are no longer needed.
Remove or stabilize trapped sediment.
Disturbed soil areas resulting from removal shall be
permanently stabilized.
The same
11 B 1.12 Dewatering Construction Sites 11
Dewatering devices shall discharge into a sediment trap or
pond.
Trench dewatering devices shall be discharged in a manner
that will not adversely affect flowing streams, drainage
systems or off -site property. Sediment -laden water
discharged from trench dewatering pumps shall be routed
through a sediment pond or trap. Water from building
foundations shall, at a minimum, be routed through silt
fence.
it B 1.13 Control of Pollutants Other Than Sediment on Construction Sites 11
IIHandle and dispose of these pollutants in a manner which I The same II
will not cause contamination of stormwater.
B 1.14 Maintenance
Maintain and repair all erosion and sediment control BMPs Does not include the second part (Conduct maintenance and
as needed to assure continued performance of their intended repair in accordance with an approved manual).
function.
Conduct maintenance and repair in accordance with an
approved manual.
B 1.15 Financial Liability
IIBonding or other appropriate financial instruments shall be I Performance bonding may be required. II
required for all projects.
11 B 2. Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems 11
Maintain natural drainage patterns and discharge at the
natural location to the maximum extent practicable.
"... and at the pre - developed rate" is added (note: this
conflicts with B5. the Stream Bank Erosion Control
minimum requirement)
11 B 3. Source Control of Pollution 11
Apply source control BMPs to all projects to the maximum
extent practicable.
Select, design, and maintain according to an approved
manual.
An adopted and implemented basin plan may be used to
tailor BMPs to a specific basin; source control BMPs are
always required for every site.
The same
•
�J
•
•
•
:3tocria rrat Baal ;[e
I3rnk mitt oei�iE $torarrw►ts
for Elie) S+rursd Bass
altar m a# 4 e ma e
B 4. Runoff Treatment BMPs
All projects shall provide stormwater treatment.
All projects shall provide stormwater treatment of
contaminated stormwater.
Treatment BMPs should be sized to capture and treat the 6-
The same.
month, 24 -hour return period storm.
Infiltration shall be emphasized ( "wherever it is appropriate"
Infiltration shall be emphasized wherever it is appropriate.
is not included).
Direct discharge of untreated stormwater to ground water is
Pretreatment prior to infiltration into the ground may be
prohibited.
required in cases where:
1) The stormwater contains high concentrations of
undesirable dissolved chemicals that can move
through soil.
2) The stormwater contains large amounts of
sediment that might clog the infiltrative surfaces in
the basin.
3) The soils are extremely pervious and will not
properly filter the stormwater as in the case for
some gravelly soils.
Select, design, and maintain BMPs according to an approved
This part not included
manual.
Treatment BMPs shall not be built within a natural vegetated
The same
buffer except for necessary approved conveyance systems.
An adopted and implemented basin plan may be used to
The same
tailor BMPs to a specific basin.
B S. Stream Bank Erosion Control
Applies in addition to B 4 if there is direct or indirect
In defining where this applies, "non -tidal reach of a
discharge to a stream (large water bodies, regional detention,
stream" was added; otherwise, it is the same.
and streams with >1000 cfs.)
Control stream bank erosion by limiting the peak rate of
runoff to 50% of the existing condition 2 -year 24 -hour
design storm, and maintaining the existing condition peak
runoff rate for the 10 -year and 100 -year, 24 -hour design
storms.
Infiltration shall be emphasized wherever it is appropriate.
Select, design, and maintain BMPs according to an approved
manual.
Treatment BMPs shall not be built within a natural vegetated
buffer except for necessary approved conveyance systems.
An adopted and implemented basin plan may be used to
tailor BMPs to a specific basin.
StocRwater M A
1tKneo� Co�w3g StonntE?�r
for. Sc►ttrd $asap ..
,< ;;Maaent (�rtidiatce
B 6. Wetlands
Applies in addition to B 4 if there is director indirect
Does not include the first two parts at left.
discharge to a wetland.
Discharges to wetlands must be controlled and treated to the
extent necessary to meet the state surface water and ground
water quality standards.
Discharges to wetlands shall maintain the hydroperiod and
Replaces "... hydroperiod and flows of the existing site
flows of existing site conditions to the extent necessary to
conditions ..." with "... natural hydroperiod and flows ... ".
protect the characteristic uses of the wetland.
Replaces "... extent necessary to protect the characteristic
uses..." with "... extent needed to preserve or enhance its
existing functions and values ..."
Wetlands created for mitigation cannot be used for
"These requirements apply to existing natural wetlands and
stormwater treatment.
wetlands created as mitigation for loss of wetland acreage."
This appears to allow stormwater discharge to wetlands
created as mitigation for loss of wetland acreage,
Constructed wetlands must be built on a non - wetland site
Wetlands constructed for stormwater treatment /storage areas
and managed for stormwater treatment.
are exempt from these restrictions that apply to natural
wetlands. This exemption may be lost if the constructed
wetland is not operated and maintained for >3 years.
This appears to allow construction of stormwater control
structures (such as excavated ponds) in existing wetlands.
Treatment BMPs shall not be built within a natural vegetated
Not included but potentially covered by B4.
buffer except for necessary approved conveyance systems.
An adopted and implemented basin plan may be used to
Not included but potentially covered by B4.
tailor BMPs to a specific basin.
B 7. Water Quality Sensitive Areas
If a local government determines that the Minimum
The same
Requirements do not provide adequate protection of sensitive
areas, more stringent controls shall be required to protect
water quality.
Treatment BMPs shall not be built within a natural vegetated
Not included
buffer except for necessary approved conveyance systems.
An adopted and implemented basin plan may be used to
The same
tailor BMPs to a specific basin.
0
•
•
�J
e Stornatrafatr M :�oueatAai
'be Drab AoAaty $ttiaAtec
Q!C Basle
XX. laBagemeAt Nance
................ :.:.
B 8. Off -Site Analysis and Mitigation
All development projects shall conduct an analysis of off -site
The project engineer shall provide a detailed qualitative
water quality impacts resulting from the project and shall
analysis of the flow path of the discharge from the project
mitigate those impacts. The analysis shall extend a
site to the receiving water; applies when a Drainage and
minimum of V. mile downstream and shall evaluate and
Erosion Control Plan is prepared; includes flow routing,
mitigate for existing or potential impacts including but not
eta; includes discussion of any known or expected
limited to excessive sedimentation, stream bank erosion,
downstream erosion, flooding, or water quality problems...
discharges to ground water contributing or recharge zones,
The Director or designee shall have the discretion to specify
violations of water quality standards and spills or discharges
the level of detail of the analysis. Based on this qualitative
of priority pollutants.
analysis, a quantitative analysis of the conveyance system,
both upstream and downstream, may be needed.
The Director or designee may impose strider standards if
the discharge from the project is reasonably expected to
result in flooding, loss of aquatic habitat due either to high
or low flows, property damage, water quality problems,
erosion, or an unacceptable interruption of vital services.
B 9. Basin Planning. Note: This minimum requirement may vary because of its intent to give local governments the
flexibility to use basin plans to modify the other minimum requirements.
Adopted and implemented basin plans can be used to modify
If a proposed project is located in a basin or subbasin for
the minimum requirements provided that the level of
which the jurisdiction has an adopted basin plan,
protection for surface or ground water achieved by the
stormwater requirements specifically identified in the
basin plan will equal or exceed that which would
basin plan shall take precedence over those provided in
otherwise be achieved by the minimum requirements.
the manual. However, all other elements detailed in this
manual shall continue to apply to such projects.
Basin plans shall evaluate and include as necessary
retrofitting of BMPs for existing development and/or
redevelopment.
B 10. Operation and Maintenance
An O&M schedule shall be provided for all proposed
In addition to the information at left, an operation and
facilities and BMPs and the party(ies) responsible for O &M
maintenance covenant will be required to cover all privately
shall be identified.
owned and maintained stormwater facilities approved by the
Director.
B 11. Financial Liability
Performance bonding or other appropriate financial
Performance bonding or other appropriate instruments may
instruments shall be required for all projects to ensure
be required ...
compliance with these standards.
Note: Bold lettering in the descriptions is used to emphasize differences.
� Appendix L Summary of Agricultural Best
Management Practices
Several best management practices (BMPs) have been used on Puget Sound area farms to improve
farm management, surface water quality, and fish and wildlife habitat. Those most appropriate to
the Study Area are briefly described below.
Pasture Management
Practicing good pasture management will result in a healthy stand of grass providing high quality
forage for livestock, weed and erosion control, and protection for water quality.
Healthy vegetation on pastures is necessary to help filter contaminants from runoff flowing over
them. Livestock can damage vegetation through overgrazing and by grazing on saturated soils.
Many grass species need at least three inches of plant growth remaining after grazing to maintain
the leaf and root system. When plants are consistently overgrazed or grazed during saturated soil
conditions, the plants become less vigorous and productive and less effective filters.
Overgrazing can be avoided through proper stocking rates and the use of a pasture rotation
system. By dividing a pasture into several, separate areas, each unit can be grazed for one period,
such as a week, and rested for forage regrowth for a while. If four units are used, a unit can be
grazed for one week and rested for three weeks. The size and number of pasture units depend on
the herd size and the amount of land available. Livestock confinement areas, such as paddocks or
barns, are often used on operations of all sizes to protect pastures from the damage of grazing on
wet soils. Such areas are useful throughout the year for operations where no pasture is available.
During the summer grazing season, the use of confinement areas may also allow grasses to grow
between grazing periods if there is not enough pasture to rotate the animals. Care must be taken
to prevent runoff from transporting pollutants concentrated in confinement areas.
Nutrient Management
Proper livestock waste management on pasture land is an important element in forage production
and water pollution control. When properly used, animal waste can supply needed nutrients to
plants and improve the overall soil condition. Over- fertilization results when animal waste is
applied at a rate that exceeds the nutrient needs of the grasses. Excess nutrients, carried by runoff
into local streams or leached into the ground, can negatively impact water quality.
Excess manure can result in bacteria and organic matter being washed into surface water. By
following some general guidelines and understanding a few simple concepts, animal waste
becomes a valuable resource instead of a potential pollutant. One concept is the animal unit. An
animal unit is a measure of equivalency based on wight. One animal unit is equivalent to a 1,000
pound cow; a 1,250 pound horse would equal 1.25 animal units.
On well- managed pasture, grass production of two tons per acre per year can be expected to
support one animal unit per two acres. This assumes the livestock are fed hay for four months of Is
the year. At this stocking level, manure applied to the grass can be recycled by the plants. More
animal units can be supported by pasture with higher production levels. Exceeding proper
stocking levels leads to overgrazing and compaction. The result will be lowered pasture
production, less nutrient use, and more loss of nutrients to streams and wetlands. As pasture
condition declines, other manure related pollutants are more likely to be transported to surface
water.
To reduce the problems associated with high livestock density, the landowner can reduce the
number of livestock or acquire more land. In some cases, increasing pasture production through
improved management may be a solution. If these steps are not possible, landowners should
confine animals during the winter and during portions of the grazing season and collect excess
manure from the barn or confinement area. This manure should be properly stored and applied
elsewhere, such as in garden beds or given to neighbors.
The distance between surface water and areas where manure accumulates is an important factor in
assessing the level of potential pollution. Runoff washes manure from confinement areas and
uncovered manure piles. Where surface water is nearby, organic matter, nutrients, and bacteria
are likely to be carried to it.
Confinement areas should be located well away from surface water, including ditches and swales.
The distance needed depends on soils, slope, plant cover, and livestock density. This location
minimizes the amount of contaminated runoff reaching the water body from these very compacted Is
areas. If creating an adequate grassed area between paddocks and surface water is not possible,
then the manure in the paddocks should be regularly collected. With livestock such as cattle, it
maybe best to use a heavy layer of bedding, such as wood shavings or straw, to help absorb and
contain the waste. This material should be removed, composted, and applied to gardens or
pastures.
Roof Runoff Management
Management of roof water from barns or sheds is an important step in reducing nonpoint pollution
from animal waste on farms. The privately owned non - forestland averages approximately 80
inches of precipitation per year. At this precipitation level, every 100 square feet of roof area
collects over 4,900 gallons of water annually. This can be a nonpoint pollution problem if roof
water flows through an area where manure collects, such as a barnyard, paddock, or manure
storage area.
A complete gutter and downspout system includes a buried pipe to carry water from downspouts
away from areas where roof water can pick up pollutants. Fully functioning gutter and downspout
systems can divert large amounts of roof runoff away from animal wastes and can improve
barnyard conditions for livestock.
• Management of Stream Corridors
Livestock management practices on both commercial and non - commercial farms can impact the
stream banks and the quality of the water in the streams. Livestock in streams defecate into the
water, dramatically increasing the loading of bacterial contamination. Livestock graze bank
vegetation and compact soil with their hooves, destabilizing the stream bank. The loss of
vegetation and change in the stream bank shape decrease usable fish and wildlife habitat. Stream
temperatures are increased by the loss of shading caused by removal of the protective bank
vegetation. Without exclusion or controlled access to streams, livestock may damage streamside
vegetation to the point where water quality and habitat values of the creek are severely degraded.
Where these impacts occur, they can be dramatically reduced by installing fencing to restrict
animal access to the streams. Fencing can be used to create designated watering access points,
allowing the use of streams for livestock watering, while protecting most of the riparian corridor
from damage. Impacts in seasonally wet areas can be reduced through the use of temporary
fencing and reduced grazing periods. Many waterways, which act as conduits for pollutants, carry
flowing water only during the rainy season. These seasonally flowing swales, ditches, or creeks
need to be surrounded by healthy pastures, and ideally, livestock access should be restricted.
These practices will help decrease soil compaction, erosion, and contamination of surface water.
The water quality benefits of these practices vary greatly with the degree of livestock
management.
0
Management of Wetlands
Wetland plant composition changes through grazing and seeding with pasture grasses; nonnative
species typically dominate wetland pastures. Livestock waste increases bacterial loading and
nutrients in wetlands. This can lead to vegetation changes and contamination of other surface
water such as streams. Uncontrolled grazing can lead to soil erosion through exposure of bare
soil to rainfall and runoff, and to compaction which also increases runoff.
Wetlands are frequently drained to create pastures and improve pasture conditions. Drainage
reduces the length of time, the amount, and the extent of inundation or saturation.
These changes diminish wetland functions including water storage and detention, slowing runoff
and flood flows, stream flow support, wildlife habitat, and pollution abatement. During the
growing season, wetland soils and plants help mitigate the effect of livestock wastes on
down - gradient waters by improving water quality on site. However, overgrazing of wetland
pastures reduces the ability of wetlands to filter pollutants.
Grazing in wetland pastures when they are saturated or inundated should be avoided. Wetlands
with good habitat diversity or native plant communities should not be grazed.
n
L_�
is
Appendix M Summary of Regulatory Protection
Programs
The regulatory efforts to protect water quality and the beneficial uses of water are listed
below. This list is not meant to be all inclusive. Following the table is a brief description
of each regulation.
Federal, State, and Local Laws Discussed in the Text and Their Applicability to
Different Land Uses, Streams, and Wetlands.
;Applies to .
LawJRegulatiou
Forestry
Ag�ic�lture
Camrersions
Residences
Streams
Wetlands
Federal Laws
Clean Water Act Sec. 401
'/
'/
(33 U.S.C. et seq)
Clean Water Act Sec. 404
(33 U.S.C. et seq)
Endangered Species Act
./
•�
'�
'�
'�
(PL 93 -205)
Olympic National Forest
Land and Resource
Management Plan, 1990
National Environmental
d
./
Policy Act (PL 91 -190)
State LAws
Forest Practices Act
(RCW 76.09)
Current Use Property Tax
Exemptions (RCW 84.34)
Growth Management Act
.�
•�
'�
'�
'�
(ESHB 2929 and ReESHB
1025)
Hydraulics Code
(RCW 75.20.100)
On -Site Sewage System
Regulations (WAC 246-
272)
Appltes to
Regulations
Forestry
Aicttltttre
Cbnvetsions.
Residenoes
Streams
Wetlands
State Environmental
Policy Act
(RCW 43.21C)
Shoreline Management
,/
,/
V/
Act (RCW 9058)
Water Quality Standards
(WAC 173 -201)
Local I.Lws
Mason County
Comprehensive Plan
(Adoption Target
Date June 1996)
Uniform Building Code,
Chapter 70, Excavation
and Grading
Mason County Interim
,/
Resource Ordinance
Mason County
Environmental Policy
Ordinance (No. 99-84)
Mason County Shoreline
✓
,/
./
,/
./
,/
Master Program
Mason County Subdivision
Ordinance
Mason County Board of
/
Health On -Site Sewage
Regulations
Mobile Home and
Recreational Vehicle Parks
(118 -91)
Mason County Draft
,/
./
Stormwater Management
Ordinance
0 Federal Laws
The Clean Water Act Section 401 requires certification from the state that any
materials discharged into waters of the state (including wetlands) under a federal
permit meet the state water quality standards. If the state denies certification, the
federal permitting agency must deny the permit application. Conditions imposed by
the state become part of the federal permit. Administered by Washington State
Department of Ecology.
The Clean Water Act Section 404 regulates the placement of dredge spoils and
fill material in waters of the United States, including wetlands. Administered by U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers with guidelines developed by the Environmental Protection
Agency.
The Endangered Species Act establishes federal policy to conserve endangered
species of fish, wildlife, and plants and their critical habitats. Administered by U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
The Olympic National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan,
1990 regulates management of the natural resources on Forest Service Lands. The
1994 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on Management of Habitat for
Late - Successional and Old- Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the
Spotted Owl provides additional direction regarding habitat management.
Administered by the Forest Service.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) institutes a process
requiring federal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of agency - sponsored
development projects and federal permit decisions for privately- sponsored development
projects. An environmental impact statement is required for any major federal action
that would have significant environmental impacts. Administered by the federal
agency sponsoring the project or administering the permit.
State Laws
The Forest Practices Act established a Forest Practices Board that promulgates
rules and regulations establishing minimum standards for forest activities on DNR-
managed and private lands. The act requires a Forest Practice Application (FPA) be
completed by the private landowner and approved by DNR prior to operations. Items
such as individual tree removal may not require an FPA. Administered by
Washington State Department of Natural Resources.
Current Use Property Tax Exemptions provide property tax relief for
special use properties. If property meets certain use requirements, its taxable value
will be based on its use rather than market value. There are four current use
categories: Open Space General, Open Space Agriculture, Open Space Timber and
Designated Forest Land. Landowners apply for current use classification through
Mason County. Administered by Mason County.
The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires jurisdictions experiencing a
rapid population growth rate to:
♦ Designate "critical areas"
♦ Prevent adverse impacts associated with uncontrolled growth through
comprehensive planning
♦ Adopt development regulations to protect critical areas, including wetlands.
Each local government is developing their own critical areas protection
program.
Critical areas and resource lands regulations were required to provide protection until
comprehensive plans were adopted. An interim resource ordinance was adopted in
August 1993. Final regulations were due by December 1994; however, most
jurisdictions, including Mason County, have not yet adopted final regulations. A draft
comprehensive plan is scheduled for public review in November 1995 with possible
adoption by the County Commissioners in June 1996. Administered by Washington
State Department of Trade, Economics, and Community Development.
The Hydraulics Code requires a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) when anyone
conducts any activity (construction, ground disturbing, gravel removal, etc.) in or near
marine or fresh waters of the state. It applies to wetlands associated with fish habitat
i.e. wetlands below the high water mark of streams. The HPA is obtained from the
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife at no charge. In recognition of fish
habitat needs and the potential for projects to cause adverse impacts, conditions may
be placed upon work performed under an HPA to prevent or minimize damage.
Administered by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
On -Site Sewage System Regulations provide design, installation and
management requirements to accommodate long -term treatment and disposal of
sewage. These are minimum function requirements for local boards of health. Local
jurisdictions may adopt more stringent standards. Administered by Washington State
Board of Health.
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) provides a process to analyze
the environmental impacts of state and local permit decisions. Information is provided
by an applicant through an environmental checklist. The checklist helps local
governments, other agencies, and the public understand how a project would affect the
environment. Then the local government makes a determination of the significance of
resulting impacts. If it is determined that significant environmental impacts could
result, an environmental impact study (EIS) will be required. Possible mitigation
measures should be discussed in the EIS. Based on the information in the EIS, the
local government may then condition the local permit to prevent significant
environmental impacts. The local government may deny permits if environmental
impacts are large or mitigative measures are insufficient. Administered by local
governments.
The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) guides the future development of
shorelines in Washington State. It requires a permit to ensure that a proposed activity
complies with the act, the state guidelines, and the local shoreline master program. It
covers land 200 feet from the ordinary high water mark of state shorelines (including
all marine waters, lakes 20 acres and greater, and stream segments greater than 20 cfs
mean annual flow) and associated wetlands. Administered by Washington State
Department of Ecology.
The State Water Quality Standards established standards consistent with
public health and public enjoyment of the water, and the propagation and protection of
fish, shellfish, and wildlife (see appendix B and Q. Administered by Washington
State Department of Ecology
0 Local Laws
A Mason County Comprehensive Plan has not been adopted to date. A draft
plan was due by August 30, 1995 for review and comment by the county and an ad
hoc committee. The target adoption date by the County Commissioners is June 1996.
The plan should establish standards to address issues of land use, transportation,
housing, capital facilities, utilities, and water resources. It will be administered by
Mason County.
The Mason County Interim Resource Ordinance defines and regulates
natural resource lands and critical areas. For critical areas, the land uses which require
permits and the development standards are described. Administered by Mason
County.
The Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70 Excavation and Grading was
adopted by Mason County in September, 1990. This chapter defines rules and
regulations to control excavation, grading, and earthwork construction, including fills
and embankments; establishes the administrative procedure for issuance of permits;
and provides approval of plans and inspection of grading. Mason County requires a
Land Modification Permit when grading, excavation, or fills exceed 50 cubic yards.
is The permit requires the applicant to also complete a resource lands and critical areas
checklist. Administered by Mason County Building Department.
The Mason County Environmental Policy Ordinance defines regulations
and administrative procedures to consider environmental impacts of a proposal before
making decisions. An environmental checklist provides the information to identify
impacts (to reduce or avoid proposal impacts) and to assist agency determination of
significant adverse impacts. Projects identified to have significant impacts, require
preparation of an environmental impact statement. Administered by Mason County.
The Mason County Shoreline Master Program (SMP) administers the
"Shoreline Management Act" on the local level. In the Master Program, shoreline
areas are given an environmental designation: natural, conservancy, rural, or urban.
Each of these categories receives a different level of protection under the Master
Program. In June 1994, Mason County published the Mason County Shoreline
Protection Policies Workbook. It contains a set of basic county -wide shoreline
protection policies which is intended to serve as the basis for a SMP amendment.
Administered by Mason County.
Mason County Subdivision Ordinance, establishes the requirements and
responsibilities for preliminary plat application, reviews and final plat approvals. This
ordinance includes requirements for large lots (parcels of five or more acres).
Driveway access to county roads or state highways requires approval. Administered
by Mason County.
Mason County Board of Health On -Site Sewage Regulations provide
for the regulation of on -site sewage disposal systems to protect public health, safety,
and welfare. They apply to all new construction and to existing systems determined to
be a health hazard. Administered by Mason County Department of Health Services.
The Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks Ordinance No.
118 -91, regulates mobile home and recreational vehicle (RV) parks in the
unincorporated areas of Mason County. To insure development and maintenance of
well - planned parks. This ordinance applies to any tract of land with the purpose of
locating two or more mobile homes or RV's. This includes establishing new parks or
expanding existing parks. Administered by Mason County.
The Draft Mason County Stormwater Management Ordinance adopts
the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin with the exception of
the Minimum Requirements Chapter. Section 7 of the ordinance defines the minimum
requirements for Mason County. The minimum requirements set sediment and erosion
control and stormwater management standards for small, medium, and large parcel
development (see Appendix I). Administered by Mason County.
0
•
Appendix N Summary of Landowner Assistance
Programs
Assistance available to landowners from government and private sources is listed in the
table below. This list includes those mentioned in the report and additional sources but is
not meant to be all inclusive. Other local community programs may exist. Examples
include the local chapter of Trout Unlimited, Boy and Girl Scout groups, local service
organizations, etc. Following the table is a brief description of each assistance program or
agency.
Assistance Programs or Agencies and their Applicability
to Land Uses, Streams, and Wetlands
Federal
Applies to...
tore Residences Streams Wetisuds
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Washington
State Ecosystems Conservation Project
✓
✓
USFWS Challenge Cost Share Program
✓
USFWS Partners for Wildlife Program
✓
USDA Consolidated Farm Services Agency
./
.�
✓
USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service
.�
✓
✓
✓
State
Wa. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Regional ✓
Enhancement Group
WDFW Cooperative Projects ✓
Program/Volunteer Fisheries Resource
Program
Wa. State DNR Stewardship Incentive ✓ ✓ ✓
Program
WSU Cooperative Extension/ UW Seagrant ✓ ./ �/ ✓ ✓
Program
Local
Mason County Open Space and Timberland
Taxation Program
Mason County Conservation District ✓
Hood Canal Land Trust ✓
Federal Programs
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) Washington State Ecosystems
Conservation Project provides 30% of the cost of restoration projects including
diversifying habitat and fencing projects. Contact Alisa Ralph (360) 753 -9440
USFWS Challenge Cost Share Program provides grant funds for fish and
wildlife conservation activities addressing wetland protection or restoration. A 50% match
of non - federal funds or services is required. Contact any office of the OSFWS.
USFWS Partners for Wildlife Program provides matching funds for habitat
conservation and restoration projects on private lands. Contact Alisa Ralph (360) 753-
9440.
USDA Consolidated Farm Services Agency provides financial assist_ ance for
conservation projects for eligible landowners. Contact (360) 753 -9453.
•
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service assists in the development of
farm conservation plans designed to conserve natural resources while meeting the
landowners objectives. They can help the landowner identify resource concerns, design
solutions, and obtain financial resources to implement the plans. Contact Ken Drecksel in .
Mason County, (360) 427 -9436.
State Programs
Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Regional
Enhancement Group receives funds through sport and commercial fishing licenses
from WDFW to bring enhancement activities to the local level. Funded projects could
include fish rearing enhancements, demonstration hatcheries, or stream restoration work.
Contact Steve Seymour (360) 902 -2260
Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Cooperative Projects
Program/Volunteer Fisheries Resource Program actively participates with
volunteers in fish and wildlife resource projects throughout the State. Individuals and
volunteers from educational institutions, civic clubs, community groups, businesses, sport
or commercial fishing groups, are encouraged to participate in projects to restore habitat,
increase fish production, provide education , and contribute to further understanding of
resource management. Contact Dave Gadwa (360) 586 -5511 or Rich Kolb (360) 902-
2260.
•
• Washington State Dept. Natural Resources Stewardship Incentive
Program provides financial incentives to non - industrial private landowners with forested
parcels ten acres or larger to manage their properties using an integrated multi - resource
approach. An approved Forest Stewardship Plan is required before cost - shared practices
can be implemented. The Stewardship Incentive Program practices include fisheries and
wildlife habitat enhancement, riparian area and wetland restoration, and recreation projects.
Contact Steve Gibbs (360) 902 -1650.
WSU Cooperative Extension/U.W. Seagrant Program provides technical
assistance and water quality education to communities in Jefferson, Kitsap, Mason, and
Thurston Counties. Contact Jim Bolger (360) 876 -7157
Local Programs
Mason County Open Space and Timberland Taxation Program provides
property tax relief, following tax assessment, through the classification of land in the
current use valuation public benefit rating. Current use value is expressed as a percentage
of the highest and best market value as determined by the Mason County Assessor. Once
the parcel has been classified as open space, the land use cannot be changed for ten years
without paying the higher tax assessment plus interest. Contact (360) 427 -9670.
Mason County Conservation District assists in the development of farm
conservation plans designed to conserve natural resources while meeting the landowners
objectives. They can help the landowner identify resource concerns, design solutions, and
obtain financial resources to implement the plans. Availability of assistance is dependent
on funding. Contact (360) 427 -9670.
1�ood Canal Land Trust provides an opportunity to set aside lands for protection
and /or preservation. Land trusts use acquisition and a variety of other land- saving options
such as conservation easements. Landowners who set up a conservation easement with a
land trust get significant tax breaks at the federal and local level. Contact Joe Testu, (360)
275 -3505.
•
USDA is an Equal Opportunity Employer •
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in its programs
on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs and
marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with
disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (braille,
large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA Office of Communications at (202) 720-
5881 (voice) or (202) 720 -1127 (TDD).
To file a complaint, write the Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C., 20250, or call (202) 720 -7327 (voice) or (202) 720 -1127 (TDD). USDA is
an equal employment opportunity employer.
A Civil Rights Impact Analysis Was Completed
This River Basin Study has been analyzed for its potential impacts upon civil rights of
socially and economically disadvantaged groups, minorities, women and persons with
disabilities. This analysis was performed in accordance with Department of Agriculture . •
Regulation Number 4300 -4.
The following conclusions were reached by this analysis:
(1) None of the actions taken by members of the Puget Sound Cooperative River
Basin Team during the preparation of this Study had an adverse impact upon the civil
rights of individuals who are members of the groups listed above.
(2) Not any of the recommendations for reducing nonpoint source pollution on West
Shore Hood Canal Watersheds included in the River Basin Study should have an
adverse impact upon the civil rights of individuals who are members of groups
identified in the first paragraph of this analysis.
Dated September 29, 1995
Je L. Smith
Team Leader •
Puget Sound Cooperative River Basin Study Team
• The property west of State Highway 101, has a variety of stand types and age classes.
Past timber harvest has included commercial thinning, partial removal, and small (1 to 5
acre) clearings. Revenue from tree removal has been used to upgrade and expand on -site
facilities. A trail system provides access to Lake Armstrong, using parts of the logging
roads. The trail contains a self - guided plant identification tour and other ecosystem
educational study areas.
In February 1995, the Seattle Girl Scout Council developed a study document describing
future use of the Robbinswold site. Alternatives included no change, increased tree
removal, and possible sale of the property. News coverage prompted many comments
from previous users and the general public. The decision for future use has been delayed
until further review with no recommendation expected before the spring of 1996.
•
Scale 1:125,0000
Mks
Q 2 4
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
WETLANDS & HYDRIC SOILS MAP
MASON &JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERA 77VE RIVER BASIN 7EAM 1995
Scale 1:125,000
Miles
0 2 4
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
BASE MAP
MASON & JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERATIVE RIVER BASIN TEAM 1995
12
1
3LT� a1
fF.
H -dap -t
State Highways
Other Roads
Section Lines
22
Township/Range Lines
1
t
LEGEND
i1b
/'•�'
County Line
.
.
Ph' °d
-
D
Land Outside Stud y Area
' - State Cjw
j (
Reservation Bound ary
}}
_ .
Study Area
Mountain Peaks
T. 22 N
_
� �
B4Y
' Ck,f
Hood Canal & Water Bodies
Scale 1:125,000
Miles
0 2 4
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
BASE MAP
MASON & JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERATIVE RIVER BASIN TEAM 1995
12
Streams
3LT� a1
fF.
H -dap -t
State Highways
Other Roads
Section Lines
22
Township/Range Lines
/'•�'
County Line
Potlatch
Ph' °d
Skokomish Indian
' - State Cjw
j (
Reservation Bound ary
•
T. 22 N.
nnar
aT,
Mountain Peaks
T. 21 N.
_
� �
B4Y
t { �
f
1
Scale 1:125,000
Miles
0 2 4
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
BASE MAP
MASON & JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERATIVE RIVER BASIN TEAM 1995
r
`J
iv-
<x' YY 15�r ,r K`rY�Y T\,�K ( <{ �x<T) �n yr)
YS'
T 24N r XT .:
x
may,. v �
%„
N<
A
A JA A
K
( v
�K) Txx�xl�
{S,r ?n < <Yxvr x <��.�,y�,
'� >KxC YYl� r�,!��iCr1 �V71111
Illlgl'li
it
Y
41 at
Cove
R.aw R 3w
lw�
i� IIlia
I
I
,r,'i
I I�
X,
/� vv
0,
11
,r
vY1,1v� /YY k R�
<0S
Ia�IIIG�
Y�
LiMafh
i. Kr yJT >`)
X {xUx N/K A/V ,i /) K,(�(1`) /Y'�,
\� <, YX },(
v� iY�11A�K
% <�/YK
> ^
x\ �
�K` A \ {� YYK��
^Yvs— T (nrY ^0 , Vv �Yr
U!7,
...
Y�I0' {
Y U,'V ♦'� ^Jx(Y1^, > <Kc -
-' �: .•..
�%. "��
Y♦
iX 4, ,SV<KVt,lr.% >r' rC^ 1V� /Y Y,Ar)
Y x YK�r%
Y
.y�G X'�.(Y K<Y �,ti�•J,T
iv-
<x' YY 15�r ,r K`rY�Y T\,�K ( <{ �x<T) �n yr)
YS'
T 24N r XT .:
x
may,. v �
%„
N<
A
A JA A
K
( v
�K) Txx�xl�
{S,r ?n < <Yxvr x <��.�,y�,
'� >KxC YYl� r�,!��iCr1 �V71111
<.)lr �uY }i4x x� Yid xY
Illlgl'li
it
Y
41 at
Cove
i� IIlia
I
I
,r,'i
I I�
' w
i I
.0
-.
p ti
I1IA �.1�
11
,r
vY1,1v� /YY k R�
(
Ia�IIIG�
Y�
ror,
> ^
x\ �
<.)lr �uY }i4x x� Yid xY
Cove
vY1,1v� /YY k R�
(
Y�
ror,
> ^
x\ �
i
<
TYltan
Read
• `r .
( X� jKl <i
'4r,.t <i ti�
rv��.T7
S�
rti� <� 1S < i
l�
v)At %"x b <>Y K>T
X 11� <�'>�,�,4v r6%Y < '
x rC) Yf Y
I ,
�yV >) vvvv
LAwamp
Bay
V.
Scale 1.125,000
Mki
0 2 4
GENERAUZSD SOEL GROUPS
I'� Bedrock Derived Soil m
Mountain SMpea d< Poothilla
Glacial Till Soils on Momines, Glacial Valleys,
dr Uplands
Slow To Moderate Permeability
TO Upper Layers
Moderatat Rapid To Rapid
Pormoability In Upper Layers
Outwaah Soils an Glacial
Terraces, Plains, alt Outwa& ChaooeL
Alluvial, Organic, or GLeial Soda
on Bonomlaoda or Upland Depressions
Unmapped
Sources:
For Non-Fodaral Lander:
Washinpum Stato Department of Natural Resources
1990 80116 Data IAyer
SCS Soil Survey of Mason County 1960
For Foderal Lao&:
O NatiooalPowst
1995 General Soils Map
This map is meant for general p puapoaoa,
retbee &= desiciooa an specific parcels.
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
GENERALIZED SOIL5 MAP
MASONd JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERA 71rVE RIVER BASIN 7EAM 1995
AM Adik
Scale 1:125,000
Miles
0 2 d
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
WATERSHED, BENEFICIAL USE, AND STREAM TYPE MAP
MASON &,JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERA77VE ROVER BASIN 7F" 1993
\1
R.3 W. R.2 W.
w,I� i��; u a'u
,IdleIN
�. �� S��Z"r�' ;�i; E'' .;i ,.�' -•:
h It� � � •I�'' rr r G ,
y0. di
I � II II' ``III''I +II�II ` °`� ?� rr'•. \� I��'�.�r� .� ``'� ,•�. <�.:•:�.L•. i ,
1 f {`,ill I' /4�•.,\ �\ ,� , _``,y.r• ��
YKyA Y�
?Y
Camp
Robblruwold
> t S <} t )
Anderma
Cove_
`iY yl r'v v Y..
I
Yv
TA< ^v .!>yL. A•/ r ,.Ewfor �):'.r .r .: t(/ .. .
A
W . �y <<• J
qr�< yA <N
r r0 V
`^ Y
A 'la
LEGEND
Land Outride study Area
Hood card de water Bodies
,A /. Major Roads
Section Lines
Township/Range Linea
A* County Lino
AL Mountain Peaks
LAND COVER TYPES
Tree Cover, 0 - 10 Yoga
Tree Cover, >10 - 50 Yeas
Tree Cover, >50 -160 Yeas
Tree Cover, 160+ Years
® Rock Outcrop
Gzasaftrub
(—� Devoloped Are" With 25 - 100%
Impervious Cover
Sources:
Information compiled from aerial phowpaphy and
Pored Service data base.
Fuld veri ication was linked
Scale L-125,0W
Afiks
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
LAND COVER MAP
MASON & JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERATIVE RIVER BASIN 7E AM 1995
Scale 1.125,000
1Niles
0 2 4
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
LAND USE MAP
MASON & JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERATIVE RIVER BASIN TEAM 1995
MCDW"
Cove
1 U
0m
A
"441 e RW* rawold
A
-7—
jj
t
- am+
>
<
A;
s"
11 4Q
77"
<
>
dYn
Yt
< <
>
MY Dmauv
�&A
—Ile
LSW.R.2W.
7
T 23N
X A X:i'>
T. 22 N:
N
X
717=
Zb
.2
FT N '5�x
4
-3=
too
<;
cow
T*m
JEW
ps.
4"
iv
MCDW"
Cove
1 U
0m
A
"441 e RW* rawold
A
-7—
jj
t
- am+
>
<
A;
s"
11 4Q
77"
<
>
dYn
Yt
< <
>
MY Dmauv
�&A
4 4'f
T 23N
X A X:i'>
T. 22 N:
N
ps.
Match Qle
State Park 4pe1j'4
00d
hQ
Amm
Day
IS
Scale 1.125,000
Afikj
0 2 4
m —7
NO&
laud 0OW& study Ares
wdw nodies
state RjAmwo
Orb wU4.,Rmb
Sautium Liu"
Townddp2mv Lim,
A* ommy Lim
3k0kQm3M Indian Re—stionBomndW
mcuww rcab
LAND OWNERS/Ii &MGERS
pubho
FmwtSwkc
State of%Ainston (DNR)
Nxbmd Park Service
City of Tacoma
WadicOm State Parka
Mawn County
Tnbd
SkoLmnik Tribal Laud
Private
ladve'rid
MRGC
Simpson Twim Conpoy
John Ekawk
N*a4u*mddd Pave Land Ow um
HE= Raft Compw
Mt. Wmbkgwn True Fw=
Odw DmWAfod Forealmd
0thw Lmd Ownen
soormc
Derived kmMvftWs Attu and M-w4@jjkm
Ammme► d►b"*.
WEST SHORE HOOD CANAL WATERSHEDS
LAND OWNERSHIPIMANAGEMENT MAP
MASON & JEFFERSON COUNTIES
PUGET SOUND COOPERATIVE RIVER BASIN 7FAM 1995