HomeMy WebLinkAbout057 121'
STATE OF WASHINGTON
County of Jefferson
In the Matter of Adoption of the } RESOLUTION NO. 57 -12
South Port Townsend Bay }
Management Plan }
WHEREAS, The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan has goals and policies to preserve the
long -term benefits of shoreline resources; and
WHEREAS, Jefferson County has a Shoreline Master Program as codified in Jefferson County
Code Chapter 18.25; and
WHEREAS, Jefferson County in collaboration with Washington State Department of Natural
Resources, Department of Health, Office of Regulatory Assistance and numerous tribal, agency
and citizen group stakeholders has prepared a South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan to
manage boater usage in a manner that ensures continued, year -round harvest of commercial
shellfish while balancing that interest with the legitimate use of the bay for public recreation and
other commercial use; and
WHEREAS, approval of the South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan by this Board falls
within the general police power granted to local governments such as Jefferson County by the
Washington State Constitution; and
WHEREAS, approval of the South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan promotes and
benefits the general health, welfare and safety of the populace of Jefferson County,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Jefferson County approves this South Port
Townsend Bay Management Plan dated August 16, 2012.
SEAL:
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1" day of October, 2012
t • � R
y e
1 .
ATTEST:
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Jo Austin, hair
Phil UZIember
Davi411 /40�
l
€in�mxigrcn- APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Deputy Clerk of the Board too",(
David Alvarez (((
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
SOUTH PORT TOWNSEND BAY
MANAGEMENT PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
South Port Townsend Bay (SPTB) is located near Port Hadlock in Jefferson County,
between the west side of Indian Island and the mainland, just inside Admiralty Inlet.
SPTB, like other areas of the Puget Sound, has multiple and sometimes competing uses.
SPTB is an important shellfish area with both commercial shellfish operations and natural
shellfish beds that have the potential for harvest by the tribes and the general public.
SPTB is also a popular harbor for traveling boaters and serves as a homeport for upland
landowners, area residents, and others. SPTB is also home to the NW School of Wooden
Boatbuilding; the Port Hadlock Yacht Club; Port of Port Townsend dock and boat
launch; the Port Hadlock Marina; and other commercial, residential, and tribal interests.
The number of boats using SPTB has increased over the past several years, to the point
where they are impacting commercial shellfish operations.
Shellfish
In 2011, the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) expressed concern about
shellfish beds in SPTB due to the number of boats moored and anchored in the bay. The
number of boats exceeded National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) standards that
must be adopted by states that export shellfish commercially. Among other
requirements, the NSSP requires the closure of commercial shellfish areas when the
number and density of boats exceeds specified numerical limits called the "marina
threshold levels ".
Along with privately owned companies, western Washington's tribes are also active in
commercial shellfish operations and have treaty rights providing access to shellfish
beds. Shellfish have been harvested by northwest tribes for thousands of years and
shellfish have been farmed commercially for more than 150 years. The shellfish industry
represents a significant portion of Washington State's economy and provides thousands
of family -wage jobs in coastal communities. Not only do shellfish bed closures affect
commercial companies, but are also a direct impact to the Treaty Tribes' ability to
access shellfish beds and infringes upon their treaty rights. To learn more about the
specific issues and concerns, a Question and Answer Factsheet was developed (see
Appendix A).
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 1
The Plan
To address the problem of too many boats anchored or moored near shellfish beds in
SPTB and the threat of shellfish harvest closures, a group of stakeholders began to meet
in early 2012, to find a workable and sustainable solution. The group's goal is to manage
boater usage in a manner that ensures continued, year -round harvest of commercial
shellfish while balancing that interest with the legitimate use of the bay for public
recreation and other commercial use. The stakeholder group includes local, state, and
federal agencies; four treaty tribes; commercial shellfish interests; local businesses,
waterfront landowners and boaters. (see Appendix B).
This plan is the result of the collaborative efforts of the stakeholder group and provides a
unique model to help resolve multiple use conflicts in manner that may have broad
application throughout Puget Sound. The group was guided by and operates under the
legal framework and regulatory authority currently in place (see Appendix C). The SPTB
Management Plan contains the following major elements:
1. Permit and manage boat moorage to ensure that shellfish beds are not
negatively impacted.
2. Proceed with enforcement process for mooring buoys and boats that have not
applied or otherwise cannot be authorized.
3. Manage transient boaters through a voluntary "No Anchor Zone" in part of SPTB
and manage mooring buoy authorizations that complement transient use.
4. Establish interpretive displays and material and conduct outreach.
5. Establish a long -term boat monitoring plan to assure that the numbers and
densities of boats do not exceed the marina threshold levels.
6. Develop adaptive management to address ongoing changes.
In order to determine the success level of the plan, the stakeholder group will convene,
at a minimum, once in the fall of 2012, after the boating season ends and once in the
spring of 2013, before the boating season begins. The success of the plan will be ranked
as follows:
A successful outcome if there are no closures because of too many boats;
An acceptable outcome if closures (due to boats) are no more than two and
limited in duration to no more than 14 days total and the bay is quickly re-
opened to harvest.
Note - If closures (due to boats) number greater than two, if closures last longer than 14
days cumulatively, or for any other relevant issue, the stakeholder group will reconvene
as soon as practical, but no later than 45 days after notification, to evaluate the
problem and take action, if necessary.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 2
SOUTH PORT TOWNSEND BAY
MANAGEMENT PLAN
South Port Townsend Bay Shellfish Protection
Objective 1 - Maintain an "Approved" classification of the shellfish growing areas
to allow continued harvest.
Because shellfish are filter feeders and can concentrate disease - causing organisms and
because they are commonly eaten raw or minimally cooked, the Washington
Department of Health (DOH), in accordance with the National Shellfish Sanitation
Program (NSSP), maintains strict standards for the areas where shellfish are grown. These
standards include limits on the presence of pollution sources such as boats. The NSSP is
managed nationally by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The NSSP definition
of a marina is any water area with a structure (docks, basin, floating docks, etc.) which
is used for docking or otherwise mooring vessels; and is constructed to provide
temporary or permanent docking space for more than ten boats. The FDA has stated
that, under their marina definition, "Any area which has buoy moorage for at least 10
boats is also considered a marina ".
When an area surpasses the marina threshold level, the surrounding waters cannot be
considered safe for shellfish harvesting. In interpreting the NSSP Guide marina definition,
the DOH uses a density threshold of one boat per acre as a screening tool to count
boats towards the marina threshold. The density threshold may need to be decreased
in water bodies that have poor dilution characteristics (like a shallow enclosed
embayment).
In SPTB, there are currently two areas that surpass the marina threshold level: Port
Hadlock Marina and the area in and around the Port Hadlock Yacht Club leasehold
(See Appendix Dl; yellow outline is shellfish beds; black outline is area negatively
impacted by boats). In order to maintain an "Approved" classification for the
commercial shellfish bed in SPTB, it is necessary to ensure that these two existing areas
do not change in such a way that would affect shellfish beds. Therefore, it is essential to
address mooring buoy management and transient boater use. Currently, there are
unauthorized transient vessels moored in close proximity to the commercial harvest
area that must be moved in order to achieve this objective. For the long term success
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 3
of this plan, future authorized or transient uses must not be allowed in this area (See
Appendix D2 for the target outcome once the plan is enacted).
Mooring Buoy Management - Permitting and Enforcement:
Objective 2 - Continue necessary permitting and enforcement measures to
ensure the marina closure zone for the Port Hadlock Yacht Club mooring field
does not result in a downgrade of adjacent shellfish beds by December 31,
2012.
Since fall 2011, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Jefferson County, and the
Office of Regulatory Assistance (ORA) have worked together to inventory boats and
mooring buoys in South Port Townsend Bay. The list and map showing the status of
mooring buoys in the bay can be found in Appendices El -3 (Note - this information can
frequently change). Appendix E4 is a map of SPTB prior to development and
implementation of this plan.
Objective 2a - Proceed with authorization process for mooring buoys that can
be authorized by the DNR.
On November 7, 2011, Jefferson County approved and adopted a moratorium on new
mooring buoy applications in South Port Townsend Bay (see Appendix F). The DNR has
continued to accept applications during this moratorium period. Once the moratorium
is over, DNR will move forward with processing any applications or registrations that
have been on hold, assuming:
1. The applicant possesses or obtains valid permits or approvals under the Shoreline
Master Program (SMP) or is otherwise in good standing with Jefferson County,
2. The applicant possesses or obtains a valid permit from the US Army Corp of
Engineers (Corps) or is otherwise in good standing with Corps requirements,
3. The mooring buoy is already in place, or if not, the applicant possesses or obtains
an Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife (WDFW) for installation,
4. The mooring buoy and vessel is located or relocated such that its presence
would not:
a. result in DOH closing an existing commercial shellfish bed,
b. cause DOH to downgrade a growing area's classification, or
c. surpass the marina threshold level in proximity to tidelands that have the
potential for commercial, recreational, or tribal harvest in the future.
5. The mooring buoy and vessel is located such that its presence would achieve
Objective 3b of this plan, and
6. The use meets all other conditions and criteria as required by the DNR and other
regulatory agencies.
Future permitting process - Jefferson County will not accept new buoy permit
applications until the county lifts the moratorium on mooring buoys in South Port
Townsend Bay. At that time, the permitting process would proceed in accordance with
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 4
the standards and criteria set by the individual permitting authorities. Permitting and
authorizing agencies will consider granting use authorization for new buoys if the
proponent meets the conditions stated in Objective 2a.
Objective 2b - Proceed with enforcement process for mooring buoys and boats
that have not applied to DNR for an authorization or otherwise cannot be
authorized based on conditions outlined in Objective 2a.
The primary permitting and authorizing agencies for mooring buoys in South Port
Townsend Bay are the DNR, Jefferson County, the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife (WDFW), and the US Army Corp of Engineers (Corps). A description of the
authority and responsibility of these agencies can be found as the South Port Townsend
Bay Legal Framework document in Appendix C.
For mooring buoys and vessels currently in SPTB that are not authorized, have not
applied to DNR for an authorization, or cannot be authorized based on conditions
outlined in Objective 2a, the DNR, Jefferson County, and other stakeholders will
collaborate to take the following action:
Vessels, anchored or attached to a mooring buoy, and mooring buoys with
known ownership:
i. Final Notice: A final 30 -day notice will be made, either by certified mail or
by posting on the vessel and mooring buoy, informing the owner that they
must vacate their use of State -owned aquatic lands within 30 days.
ii. Enforcement Action: Enforcement may occur in several different ways,
including, but not necessarily limited to the following:
• An authorized public entity, like the DNR or the County, may
proceed under the Derelict Vessel regulations, RCW 79.100. If a
vessel has been left moored or anchored in the same area without
the consent of the aquatic land owner then the vessel is
considered to be an abandoned vessel. An authorized public
entity can obtain custody of an abandoned vessel, then dispose of
the vessel and seek reimbursement from the vessel owner.
• DNR may charge a Use and Occupancy Fee, per RCW 79.105.200
and WAC 332 -30 -127, which allows us to charge a fee sixty percent
higher than the full fair market rental.
• DNR or another landowner could file a trespass action.
2. Mooring Buoys that do not have a vessel attached and where ownership is
unknown:
I. Final Notice: A final 30 -day notice will be made, by posting a tag on the
mooring buoy, informing the owner that they must vacate their use of
State -owned aquatic lands within 30 days.
ii. Enforcement Action: Buoys will be removed from State owned aquatic
lands.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 5
Future enforcement actions- Jefferson County and other regulatory agencies, along
with the DNR, will work collaboratively using their individual authorities to address
unpermitted and unauthorized uses in South Port Townsend Bay. Jefferson County and
the DNR may, from time to time, conduct surveys of boat use in the bay, but will
predominately rely upon the monitoring protocol, as described in objective 4 of this
plan, for determining when enforcement action is needed in South Port Townsend Bay.
Transient Vessel Management
Objective 3 - Minimize transient anchoring in South Port Townsend Bay.
Aquatic lands in South Port Townsend Bay (outside of private tidelands) are managed
by the DNR and are subject to the Public Trust Doctrine, which gives the public the right
to engage in navigation. Navigation is construed by the DNR to include temporary
anchoring of a vessel. Transient boaters can legally anchor in the some area for periods
up to 30 consecutive days and for a total of up to 90 days in any 365 -day period,
without needing to obtain authorization from the DNR. Note - "in the same area' means
within a radius of five miles of any location where the vessel previously anchored.
In determining whether the marina threshold level is exceeded, the DOH counts all
boats — both those moored as well as those temporarily anchored in the bay. This
creates a management challenge. In an effort to avoid promulgating and enforcing
new regulations that would formally designate a portion of South Port Townsend Bay as
a no anchorage zone, the Transient Vessel Management section has been developed.
Note - Vessels remaining in South Port Townsend Bay longer than 30 days without an
authorization are in trespass and subject to enforcement action.
Objective 3a - Establish a voluntary "No Anchor Zone" in portions of South Port
Townsend Bay.
swEaaria«ntoreesro� .
A voluntary "No Anchor Zone" in a portion of South Port ZOMF
Townsend Bay, similar to what has been successfully
implemented along the Port Townsend waterfront and in Mystery
Bay, could be established to protect shellfish by keeping boat ^"
numbers within permitted levels. Marker buoys designating the t`
area as a "No Anchor Zone" would have a picture of an anchor
in a circle with a line through it to designate the area as a no
anchor zone and would also read, "Shellfish Protection Zone' No Anchor Zone
(see figure at right for an illustration of the marker buoy). These
marker buoys would be strategically placed to help persuade
transient vessels to anchor their vessels elsewhere. The Jefferson County Marine
Resources Committee (MRC) will be contracted to oversee permitting and installation
of the marker buoys (Appendix E2 - proposed marker buoy locations are the black flags
on the yellow line connecting the dock and Skunk Island).
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 6
Objective 3b - Manage SPTB Mooring Buoys and Other Uses to Complement
Transient Use.
South Port Townsend Bay should be managed in such a way that provides reasonable
access for transient vessel use by minimizing the number of mooring buoys and other
uses in some areas (Reasonable access means within a reasonable rowing distance to
the Port dock facility or another public access area).
In other areas, especially closer to commercial shellfish beds, long term mooring buoys
could be authorized in a way that effectively precludes transient vessel use and would
act as a buffer for commercial shellfish beds. This could be achieved through strategic
authorization and permitting of mooring buoys. When new long term moorage uses are
proposed, agencies under their individual authority would consider whether the use
would preclude or limit transient use.
In those areas where transient use is desired, authorizations for long term moorage
could be avoided and for those areas where transient use is not desired, authorizations
for long term moorage could be encouraged. Additionally, local stakeholders are
encouraged to limit or avoid moorage of dinghies from unauthorized boats.
Objective 3c- Establish Interpretive Displays and Material and Conduct
Outreach for the Public to Learn and Understand how South Port Townsend Bay is
being Managed.
The Jefferson County MRC, with input from the stakeholder group, will work to establish
interpretive displays on or near the South Port Townsend Bay dock, Port Hadlock Marina,
and the Northwest School of Wooden Boafbuilding. Brochures will also be available at
these locations as well as the Jefferson County DCD permit center and local DNR office
for distribution to the public. The display and brochures will educate the public about
South Port Townsend Bay and explain how the bay is being managed and include a
map showing the commercial shellfish beds, mooring buoy authorizations, marina, port
management area, and the voluntary "No Anchor Zone ". Additional outreach will be
conducted through various means including bulletin boards, local publications,
applicable web sites, and direct outreach to relevant interest groups such as boating
clubs.
Monitor Mooring Buoy Usage and Transient Anchorage in South Port
Townsend Bay to Determine if Marina Threshold Levels Are
Exceeded.
Objective 4 — Monitor Voluntary No Anchor Zone Area and Remainder of SPTB
DOH will note locations of boat moorage in the proximity of Broders Clam Farm during
routine marine sampling runs and may also count boats during periods of concern. The
Port of Port Townsend will also monitor boat moorage in the proximity of Broders Clam
Farm during their routine visits to the Port dock. Increased activity will be noted and
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 7
reported as described in Objective 6. The remainder of SPTB will be monitored by a
combination of area stakeholders, the county, DNR, and DOH.
The monitoring should focus on anticipated high use periods during the boating season
(May 1 - September 30), especially on weekends and known high use events (e.g.,
regattas and the Wooden Boat Festival).
Boat Moorage Safety/Security
Objective 5a - Damage and Economic Loss
During the development of the SPTB Management Plan's section on Boat Moorage
Safety /Security, an issue arose regarding the lack of insurance coverage by many boat
owners. No matter how careful and diligent some boat owners are accidents and
storms have caused boats to break free from their anchorage or mooring and cause
subsequent damage and economic loss to other boat and property owners in the
area. There have also been occasions where human health and safety have been
jeopardized by loose boats crashing into the marina and other properties. There have
also been several close calls. While the threat to safety and security of authorized
vessels and property will be significantly reduced through permitting and enforcement
(see objectives 2 and 3), it will not be altogether eliminated. Insurance coverage may
not compensate for damages in every instance, i.e., storms and Acts of God, but at
least some events causing damage and economic loss may be covered.
Currently, insurance is only required in some instances; for example, DNR requires
insurance for users that lease state owned aquatic lands (e.g. marinas, and
commercial mooring buoys) and marina owners typically require insurance for boats
moored at their facilities. There are several instances where insurance is not specifically
required, including:
• DNR license holders: recreational vessel owners authorized by DNR to install and
maintain a mooring buoy on state -owned aquatic lands under a mooring buoy
license are not required to have insurance.
Abutting Residential owners: RCW 79.105.430, the law which allows abutting
residential owners to place a mooring buoy on State -owned aquatic lands does
so without requiring insurance as a precondition.
Transient Users: In addition transient vessel users operating or anchoring their
vessels pursuant to the public trust doctrine are not required to have insurance.
The stakeholder group explored whether insurance requirements could be expanded
beyond those now in place, but concluded that this issue is outside the scope of the
group and that the ultimate solution would require a broader effort and perhaps even
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 8
new legislation. However, the issue was important enough too many in the group to
warrant mention here in the SPTB Management Plan.
Objective 5b — Improve Emergency Communication Procedure
• In order to improve emergency response contact information for people
holding mooring buoys authorization in South Port Townsend Bay can be
obtained from the DNR. This list can be updated upon request and provided
to:
➢ Port Hadlock Marina
➢ Vessel Assist
➢ Port Hadlock Yacht Club
➢ Port of Port Townsend
➢ Jefferson County Sheriff
➢ Others upon request
DNR will request all authorized mooring buoy owners post their emergency
contact information on their vessel.
Jefferson County will request mooring buoy owners post emergency response
contact information on their vessel and provide emergency contact
information to DNR for inclusion on an emergency response contact list.
Objective Sc — Emergency Response Procedure
1. Vessel Assist Port Hadlock receives notification of a problem situation (four to five
incidents annually), typically from several sources: Port Hadlock Marina,
Northwest School of Wooden Boat Building, or various shore watchers. Typically,
the issue is a "vessel adrift ", originating from the area in and around the South
Port Townsend Bay mooring field.
2. Vessel Assist Port Hadlock attempts to verify vessel description, ownership, and
implications of emerging situation, i.e., collision potential, beaching probability,
and pollution risks. Typically, however, verification and assessment of implication
is most effective by getting a vessel underway and on scene.
3. Once visual inspection is possible, and if registration numbers are recorded, three
resources are notified; U.S. Coast Guard Sector Puget Sound, Port of Port
Townsend, and DNR's Derelict Vessel Removal Program in an attempt to discover
ownership and subsequently establish contact with owner. None of these
resources will, however, release direct contact information as per regulations.
Each resource attempts ownership trace and, if successful, will relay situation to
the owner. Onus is then on the owner to resolve the incident.
4. If implications assessed in #2 are deemed critical and imminent, Vessel Assist will
take the vessel in tow and move it to safe mooring at either Port Hadlock Marina
or Port of Port Townsend Boat Haven. At this point, by law, if ownership has not
been established and contact made, all risks and costs are the liability of the
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 9
tower or salvor and the probability of recovering costs are unlikely. (Note - an
MOU exists between the Port of Port Townsend and Vessel Assist Port Hadlock to
share equally in those risks provided reasonable efforts are made to secure
commitment from DNR to assist in cost recovery.)
What Can the General Public Do?
Objective 6a — Monitor Transient Vessels
The general public can help in the monitoring and enforcement process by voluntarily
keeping records documenting transient vessel use in SPTB. As described above, if any
vessel has anchored in the same area longer than 30 days, or for more than 90 days in
any 365 -day period, without DNR authorization, they are in trespass ( "in the same area"
means within a radius of five miles of any location where the vessel previously
anchored). The public can assist enforcement agencies by keeping written records
documenting:
1) Identifying characteristics of the vessel,
2) Location it is anchored or moored, and
3) Dates the vessel is present.
Once the vessel has remained longer than the time allowed, the public may notify DNR
or Jefferson County of the unauthorized use. In the case of legal proceedings, it may be
necessary for volunteers to sign an affidavit attesting to the fact that the information is
true and correct. To facilitate monitoring efforts, the following materials will be
developed:
• A map of South Port Townsend Bay with existing boat /buoy locations, annotated
with number of boats in each area which will necessitate a closure.
• Calendar with anticipated high boat use periods.
• Boat count documents.
Objective 6b — Responsible Boat Ownership and Moorage
Boat owners can minimize risk and more efficiently use time and resources with
coordination amongst other boat owners in the area.
• Carry liability insurance on your boat.
• Post Emergency Contact Information on your boat in a visible location.
• Honor the voluntary "No Anchor Zone" and help educate others about this.
• Maintain your ground tackle. Coordinate inspection with neighboring buoy /boat
owners to reduce costs.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 10
• Be properly authorized and permitted in accordance with federal, state and
local laws and regulations.
Adaptive Management and Effectiveness
In order to determine the success level of the SPTB Management Plan, the stakeholder
group will convene, at a minimum, once in the fall of 2012, after the boating season
ends and once in the spring of 2013, before the boating season begins. Additional
meetings will be scheduled if necessary. The success of the plan will be ranked as
follows:
A successful outcome if there are no closures because of too many boats;
An acceptable outcome if closures (due to boats) are no more than two and
limited in duration to no more than 14 days total and the bay is quickly re-
opened to harvest.
If closures (due to boats) number greater than two, if closures last longer than 14 days
cumulatively, or for any other relevant issue, the stakeholder group will reconvene as
soon as practical, but no later than 45 days after notification, to evaluate the problem
and take action, if necessary. The request to reconvene must come from one (or more)
of the stakeholders. The DOH will be the point of contact for this request. Possible
actions are, but not limited to, the following:
• Increase public outreach and education
• Evaluate monitoring data
• Try different voluntary strategies
• Implement a mandatory "No Anchor Zone" (see #1 below)
• Impose a moratorium
• Increase formal federal agency action (see #2 below)
• Change county enforcement codes
• Seek legislative relief and /or state agency action
(1) If necessary, promulgate regulation that would designate South Port
Townsend Bay as a no anchorage zone.
Transient uses can be regulated by Jefferson County under local ordinance. DNR
also has the ability to promulgate no anchorage regulations. If the "Voluntary No
Anchorage Zone" is not successful, then DNR and Jefferson County will
coordinate to determine the most appropriate regulatory options and consider
instituting a formal no anchorage zone.
(2) As described in Appendix C, the Corps' Regulatory Program requires
permits for the construction of any structure or the placement of any fill in the
Nation's waters.
In South Port Townsend Bay, the typical projects authorized in the past include
the construction or installation of moorage facilities, docks, mooring buoys, bank
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 11
protection, and aquaculture related activities. The most common method for
authorizing the installation of mooring buoys is Nationwide Permit (NWP) 10. All
permits issued by the Corps must not impact tribal treaty rights. The Corps issued
a special public notice on March 19, 2012, regarding the use of Nationwide
Permit 10 in Puget Sound. Regional conditions became effective on March 19,
2012; and Washington State Department of Ecology's 401 Water Quality
Certification conditions are expected in June 2012.
State Environmental Policy Act
If a lead agency sought to adopt this plan as an action under the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA), first the proposal or adoption of rules, regulations and resolutions of
any plan or program relating solely to governmental procedures containing no
substantive standards would be exempt under SEPA, see WAC 197 -11- 800(19). Along
with this exemption and in consideration of the programmatic overview provided by
this management plan, the following existing environmental documents could be
incorporated by reference per WAC 197-11-600 and 635 being available at the
Jefferson County Department of Community Development for public inspection: Draft
and Final Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS /FESIS) and addenda prepared in
anticipation of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1998. The DEIS and FEIS, dated
February 24, 1997 and May 27, 1998, respectively, examined the potential cumulative
environmental impacts of land use alternatives at the non project level in preparation
of a comprehensive plan for Jefferson County. Finally, any proposals involving natural
resource management such as issuance of leases for, and /or placement of mooring
buoys designed to serve pleasure craft, are exempt from SEPA review under WAC 197-
11- 800(24).
Appendices
• Appendix A - Question and Answer Factsheet
• Appendix B - List of Stakeholder Group
• Appendix C - South Port Townsend Bay Legal Framework document
• Appendix D1 - Current Shellfish Beds and Closure Zone; yellow outline is shellfish
beds; black outline is area negatively impacted by boats
• Appendix D2 - Target Outcome for Closure Zone
• Appendix El - A map of current location of buoys and boats in South Port
Townsend Bay /North (see E3 for details)
• Appendix E2 - A map of current location of buoys and boats in South Port
Townsend Bay /South with location of proposed "No Anchor Zone" buoys (see E3
for details)
• Appendix E3 - South Port Townsend Bay boat /buoy inventory list (Note - this
information is subject to change).
• Appendix E4 - A map of South Port Townsend Bay prior to development and
implementation of the management plan.
• Appendix F1 - Jefferson County approved and adopted a moratorium on new
mooring buoy applications in South Port Townsend Bay.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan August 16, 2012 Page 12
Q&A Factsheet:
South Port Townsend Bay (SPTB)
Q. What is the issue and goal in South Port Townsend Bay?
A. The issue is the threat of closure of shellfish harvesting in SPTB because
of too many boats anchored or moored near shellfish beds. The goal is to
develop a management plan that will avoid closure of SPTB to shellfish
harvesting. The management plan must consider all uses in the bay and
include a long -term approach for the whole bay that allows sustainable
coexistence of commercial shellfish operations, boat moorage, and other
appropriate uses.
Q. Why the concern about shellfish safety?
A. Shellfish (oysters, clams and mussels) feed by filtering the water in which
they live. One oyster can filter 50 gallons in a day. These animals ingest
and concentrate whatever is in the water, which can include bacteria and
viruses when they are present. Because people often eat shellfish raw or
lightly cooked, shellfish harvested from polluted areas can be hazardous
to eat. Because of these factors, shellfish are a highly regulated food.
Q. Why are we protecting commercial shellfish operations in SPTB?
A. SPTB shellfish operations are important to Jefferson County's economy
and the bay's ecology. Environmentally, shellfish are a key species that
graze down phytoplankton as they eat, keeping marine waters clean.
Q. What is the concern about boat discharges?
A. There are two concerns. (1) Septic or other discharges from boats
(intentional or unintentional) can concentrate in shellfish and, if ingested,
make people ill. The more boats present, the higher the likelihood of
discharges occurring. (2) Like all shellfish - producing states, Washington
must comply with the shellfish growing water standards of the National
Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP), as established by the US Food and
Drug Administration, and administered here by the Department of Health
(DOH).
Under the NSSP a "marina" is defined as any water area that is used for
temporary or permanent docking or mooring for more than 10 boats.
When an area meets this threshold, the DOH is required to develop a
management plan to assure that shellfish in the area or adjacent to it are
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix A Page 1 of 3
Q&A Factsheet:
South Port Townsend Bay (SPTB)
safe for consumption. The plan can include permanent or temporary
closures and other protective measures.
Q. Why are the Tribes concerned about SPTB?
A. Historically, Tribes have harvested shellfish for ceremonial, subsistence,
and trade purposes. Commercial shellfish harvesting continues to be an
important source of income for many Tribal citizens. Closures due to
pollution or other environmental degradation are a direct impact to the
Tribes' ability to access shellfish beds and violate their treaty rights.
Treaty Tribes are also co- managers of fish and shellfish resources, along
with the State of Washington. One of these co- management
responsibilities is to ensure that shellfish harvested is safe for human
consumption by following the NSSP guidelines.
Q. Water quality results have been fine. Why close the shellfish
beds?
A. NSSP determines health risks by the number and location of boats, not
water sample results. This is because marine toilets, as opposed to septic
systems, provide only limited or no treatment and the discharge can
reach shellfish quickly and with little dilution. Because the discharges are
sporadic, water samples rarely capture boating waste, especially
considering that marine water is sampled in some areas only once every
60 days.
Q. Does SPTB meet the NSSP definition of a marina?
A. DOH has determined the Hadlock Marina and the mooring field in front of
it (partly occupied by the Port Hadlock Yacht Club) meet the NSSP
definition of a marina. NOTE - DOH counts only boats that can
accommodate a marine toilet. A Prohibited marina closure zone to cover
the Port Hadlock Yacht Club and nearby boats will be one outcome of the
management plan process. However, a desired outcome of this process
is that this Prohibited zone not encroach on existing commercial shellfish
beds.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix A Page 2 of 3
Q&A Factsheet:
South Port Townsend Bay (SPTB)
Q. How many buoys /vessels are in SPTB? How many of these uses
are authorized?
A. When the stakeholder process first started, there were 68 moorage
structures in SPTB. 26 of these (38% of the original total) have left the
area as of June 2012. Of the remainder, 15 are authorized and 27 are
unauthorized. Only a handful of vessels (all currently unauthorized) need
to be relocated in order for the existing commercial shellfish beds to
remain open.
Q. What authorizations are necessary in order to have a fully legal
mooring buoy in SPTB?
A. The DNR requires either a registration, a license or a lease depending on
individual factors. Jefferson County requires a shoreline development
permit or exemption. WDFW requires a Hydraulic Project Approval. The
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers automatically covers permitting of mooring
buoys under Nation Wide Permit 10 if the use meets the terms and
conditions covered by that general authorization.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix A Page 3 of 3
Appendix B - South Port Townsend Bay Team
Linda
Barnfather
Staff for Representative Kevin Van De Wege
Margaret
Barrette
Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association
Viviane
Barry
Suquamish Tribe Shellfish Program Manager
Alan
Bogner
Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance
Bill
Brock
NW School of Wooden Boat Building
Richard
Broders
Broder's Seafoods
CJ
Burleson
SPTB Shoreline Owner
Rich
Childers
WA Department of Fish and Wildlife
John
Collins
Port Hadlock Yacht Club
Jessica
Coyle
Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe EPA Response Program Manager
Larry
Crockett
Port of Port Townsend Executive Director
David
Fyfe
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Shellfish Biologist
Tamara
Gage
Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Shellfish Manager
Don
Givens
Port Hadlock Yacht Club
Marcus
Harvey
Port Hadlock Yacht Club /Hydro Tech Diving
Randy
Hatch
Point No Point Treaty Council Senior Shellfish Biologist
Tod
Hornick
Port Hadlock Marina Harbormaster
Stacie
Hoskins
Jefferson County Dept of Community Development Planning Manager
Jess
Jordan
US Army Corps of Engineers
Bill
Kalina
US Navy
Bridget
Kaminski - Richardson
WA Department of Natural Resources
Jared
Keefer
Jefferson County Env Health & Water Quality Director
Terry
Khile
Port of Port Townsend Environmental Compliance Officer
Gabrielle
LaRoche
Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee
Susie
Learned
Friends of Chimacum Creek
Bill
Mahler
NW School of Wooden Boat Building
Paul
McCollum
Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Natural Resources Director
Megan
McCreary
SPTB Dock Owner
Sheila
Murray
US Navy
Tom
Ostrom
Suquamish Tribe Salmon Recovery Coordinator
Alison
O'Sullivan
Suquamish Tribe Biologist
Jim
Peacock
SPTB Boat Owner
Maj -Britt
Peacock
SPTB Boat Owner
Molly
Pearson
Friends of Chimacum Creek
Erin
Prewitt
SPTB Boat Owner
Rick
Rezinas
SPTB Shoreline Owner
Tami
Ruby
Port of Port Townsend Harbormaster
Margie
Schirato
WA Department of Fish and Wildlife
Brady
Scott
WA Department of Natural Resources
Roger
Slade
Vessel Assist Port Hadlock
David
Sullivan
Jefferson County Commissioner
Mark
Toy
WA Department of Health Shellfish Program
Kelly IToy
1.1amestown
S'Klallam Tribe Shellfish Manager
Steve ITucker
I
Port of Port Townsend Commissioner
Bob lWise
jPort
Hadlock Marina
Appendix C
South Port Townsend Bay Legal Framework
Treaties and Subsequent Court Decisions
Treaty of Point No Point, 1855
ARTICLE 4 - The right of taking fish at usual and accustomed grounds and stations is further
secured to said Indians, in common with all citizens of the United States; and of erecting
temporary houses for the purpose of curing; together with the privilege of hunting
and gathering roots and berries on open and unclaimed lands. Provided, however, that they
shall not take shellfish from any beds staked or cultivated by citizens.
Boldt Decision
On February 12, 1974, in U.S. v. Washington, Federal Judge George Boldt issued a ruling that
affirmed the right of most of the tribes in the state of Washington to continue to harvest
salmon up to 50% of the harvestable number of fish. Many opponents of this case couch it as a
"grant" of rights to the tribes. More accurately, the decision was simply affirming that when the
Tribes released their interest in the millions of acres of land in Washington State through a
series of treaties signed in 1854 and 1855, they reserved the right to continue fishing. For
example, the Treaty of Point No Point (1855) includes the following language: "The right of
taking fish at usual and accustomed grounds and stations is further secured to said Indians, in
common with* all citizens of the United States " Most of the treaties negotiated by Territorial
Governor Isaac Stevens included this, or very similar, language.
In 1979, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Boldt's ruling, and on July 2, 1979, the U.S.
Supreme Court largely affirmed it. Principles established by the Boldt Decision have since been
applied to other resources, including shellfish.
*To interpret this article of these treaties, United States District Court Judge Boldt
looked at the minutes of the treaty negotiations to determine the meaning of "in
common with" as the United States described it to the Tribes, and determined that the
United States intended for there to be an equal sharing of the fish resource between the
Tribes and the settlers. Of this, Judge Boldt wrote, "By dictionary definition and as
intended and used in the Indian treaties and in this decision, 'in common with' means
sharing equally the opportunity to take fish.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Pagel of 9
Rafeedie Decision
After hearing testimony from tribal elders, biologists, historians, treaty experts, as well as
testimony from private property owners and non - Indian commercial shellfish growers, Federal
District Court Judge Edward Rafeedie followed in the footsteps of the Boldt Decision. He ruled
the treaties' "in common' language meant that the tribes had reserved harvest rights to half of
all shellfish from all of the usual and accustomed places, except those places "staked or
cultivated" by citizens — or those that were specifically set aside for non- Indian shellfish
cultivation purposes.
"A treaty is not a grant of rights to the Indians, but a grant of rights from them," Rafeedie wrote
in his December 1994 decision, adding that the United States government made a solemn
promise to the tribes in the treaties that they would have a permanent right to fish as they had
always done. Rafeedie ruled all public and private tidelands within the case area are subject to
treaty harvest, except for shellfish contained in artificially created beds.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court's final refusal in 1999 to hear the case, several parties, including
the tribes and shellfish growers, have been working on an implementation plan under the
guidance of Seattle Federal Court Judge Robert Lasnik.
The Public Trust Doctrine
The Public Trust Doctrine is a legal principle derived from English Common Law that has been
adopted by Washington courts. The essence of the doctrine is that the navigable "waters of the
state" are a public resource owned by and available to all citizens equally for the purposes of
navigation, conducting commerce, fishing, recreation, and similar uses. This trust is not
invalidated by private ownership of the underlying land.
The doctrine limits private use of tidelands and other shorelands to protect the public's right to
use the waters of the state. The Public Trust Doctrine does not allow the public to trespass over
privately owned uplands to access the tidelands. It does, however, generally protect public use
of navigable water bodies below the ordinary high water mark.
Protection of the trust is a duty of the State, and the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) is one of
the means by which that duty is carried out. The doctrine requires a careful evaluation of the
public interest served by any action proposed. This requirement is fulfilled in large part by the
planning and permitting requirements of the SMA.
Local governments should consider public trust doctrine concepts when developing
comprehensive plans, development regulations, and shoreline master programs. There are few
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 2 of 9
"bright lines ", however, as the Public Trust Doctrine is common law, not statutory law, the
extent of its applicability can only be determined by state court decisions.
Public Trust Doctrine — Navigational Uses
• The government has power to regulate the public's right to navigation and anchorage.
• The aquatic lands managed by the DNR are subject to the Public Trust Doctrine, which
gives the public the right to engage in navigation, together with incidental rights
regarded as corollary to navigation, without authorization from the DNR.
• The right to navigate includes the right to incidental anchorage. However, if a vessel
remains anchored in one place too long, it is no longer engaged in navigation.
Transient uses (e.g., anchorage zones) can be regulated under county ordinance. The DNR also
has the ability to promulgate regulation in this regard under the new Recreation WAC, although
the DNR's process is more cumbersome than the County process.
Jefferson County and the Shoreline Management Act
Shoreline Management Act (SMA)
Washington's SMA was passed by the Legislature in 1971 and adopted by the public in a 1972
referendum. The goal of the SMA is "to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and
piecemeal development of the state's shorelines ".
The Act establishes a broad policy giving preference to uses that: protect the quality of water
and the natural environment, depend on proximity to the shoreline ( "water- dependent uses "),
and preserve and enhance public access or increase recreational opportunities for the public
along shorelines.
The SMA establishes a balance of authority between local and state government. Cities and
counties are the primary regulators but the state (through the Department of Ecology) has
authority to review local programs and permit decisions.
Shoreline Master Program (SMP)
Under the SMA, each city and county adopts an SMP that is based on state guidelines but
tailored to the specific needs of the community. More than 200 cities and all 39 counties have
SMPs. Local SMPs combine both plans and regulations. The plans are a comprehensive vision of
how shoreline areas will be used and developed over time. Regulations are the standards that
shoreline projects and uses must meet. Note - On December 7, 2009, after 30 hours of
deliberations and weighing hundreds of public comments, Jefferson County commissioners
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 3 of 9
unanimously approved a an update to the SMP. The next step is submittal to Department of
Ecology for final review and approval.
Shoreline permits
Each local government has established a system of permitting for shoreline development.
Substantial Development Permits are needed for projects costing over $2,500, or those that
materially interfere with the public's use of the waters. Some projects and activities are simply
prohibited by local SMPs or under the policy of the Act. However, it is far more common that
the issue is how a development should be done - not whether or not it should be done.
Local governments may also issue Conditional Use or Variance permits to allow flexibility and
give consideration to special circumstances. Ecology must approve all conditional use and
variance permits. Local governments issue approximately 1,000 permits every year.
State Agency Responsibilities
Washington Department of Health (DOH)
Sanitary Control of Shellfish (WAC 246 -282)
DOH is responsible for evaluating commercial shellfish growing areas to determine if shellfish
are safe to eat. Commercial shellfish growing areas in Washington State are classified as
Approved, Conditionally Approved, Restricted, or Prohibited. These classifications have specific
standards that are derived from the National Shellfish Sanitation Program Guide for the Control
of Molluscan Shellfish (NSSP Guide), which is adopted by reference in WAC 246 -282.
The NSSP Guide defines a marina as: "any water area with a structure (docks, basin,
floating docks, etc...) which is:
(a) Used for docking or otherwise mooring vessels; and
(b) Constructed to provide temporary or permanent docking space for more than ten
boats."
The NSSP Guide definition of a marina includes mooring buoys for the purpose of shellfish
growing area classification. In counting boats towards the definition of a marina, DOH counts
any boat large enough to accommodate a marine toilet.
A permanent marina closure zone is established for areas that always have more than 10 boats
docked or moored there. However, many marine areas in Washington reach this number only
during the boating or fishing season. For these areas a "conditional closure' is established for
those seasons. Also, if there is a confirmed threat of discharge from a boat that endangers
water quality, we may establish a temporary closure zone. Criteria for sizing the closure zone
are detailed in the NSSP Guide.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 4 of 9
Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Aquatic Land Ownership and Management Authority
Washington State took absolute title to the beds and shores of navigable waters under the
Equal Footing Doctrine when it was admitted to the Union in 1889 and the State Legislature has
delegated the proprietary authority over state -owned aquatic lands to DNR [RCW 79.105.010 —
030]. Anyone wishing to use state -owned aquatic lands in a way that will interfere with the use
by the general public will require authorization from the DNR by way of agreement, lease,
permit, or other instrument [WAC 332 -30 -122]. All uses must comply with statutory
requirements [RCW Chapters 79.105 through 79.140].
Point at which DNR Asserts its Proprietary Interest
The DNR asserts its proprietary interest against vessels at the point the vessel ceases navigating
and engages in long term moorage or anchoring over state -owned aquatic lands [WAC 332-30 -
122(1)(a)]. The DNR regards 30 days as the outer limit of transient moorage and anchoring —
stays longer than that requires authorization from the DNR by way of agreement, lease, permit,
or other instrument [See, e.g., WAC 332 -52 -1551.
Residential use of State owned Aquatic lands
Residential use, including living aboard a vessel, is considered a non -water dependent use of
state -owned aquatic lands. Non water dependent uses are defined as a use that can operate in
a location other than on the waterfront [RCW 79.105.060(11)]. Non -water dependent use of
state -owned aquatic lands is a low- priority use providing minimal public benefits and shall not
be permitted to expand or be established in new areas except in exceptional circumstances
where it is compatible with water- dependent uses occurring in or planned for the area [RCW
79.105.210(2)].
In 2002 the Board of Natural Resources adopted additional rules regarding residential use of
State owned Aquatic lands. Such that the amount of residential use on State owned aquatic
lands were limited to marinas and designated /established open water moorage and anchorage
areas and were limited to ten percent of the total vessels; furthermore, vessels used for
residential use and floating houses shall be moored, anchored or otherwise secured only at a
marina, pier or similar fixed moorage facility that is connected to shoreline or in open water
moorage and anchorage area [WAC 332 -30 -1711. Additionally, local governments had a one-
time opportunity (a five year period from 2002 to 2007) to establish Open Water moorage and
Anchorage areas [WAC 332 -30- 139(5)]. An Open Water Moorage and Anchorage Area was not
established in South Port Townsend Bay; as a result no residential uses are allowed outside of
the established marinas in this vicinity.
Residential use is defined as a floating house, or a vessel when any person or succession of
different persons residing on the vessel in a specific location, and /or in the same area on more
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 5 of 9
than a total of thirty days in any forty -day period or on more than a total of ninety days in any
three hundred sixty- five -day period. "in the same area" means within a radius of one mile of
any location where the same vessel previously moored or anchored on state -owned aquatic
lands. A vessel that is occupied and is moored or anchored in the same area, but not for the
number of days described in this subsection, is considered used as a recreational or transient
vessel [WAC 332 -30- 106(62)].
Leases and Licenses:
For leases and licenses, the DNR follows its general authority regarding authorizing uses of
state -owned aquatic lands. The general process after receiving an application is as follows:
1. The DNR considers:
• if the use is appropriate at the requested location,
• whether applicant has secured all regulatory permits, and
• if applicant addresses any other concerns
2. The DNR then decides whether to processor deny application.
3. If the application is NOT denied, then the DNR will issue an authorization contract.
NOTE - Licenses are revocable authorizations; Leases are not.
Registrations:
People may register their mooring buoy for a free use (RCW 79.105.430 below), if they meet
the following standards:
1. They are abutting (waterfront) residential landowners.
2. It is not in a harbor area and there are no prior rights to the land.
3. The boat moored is for private recreational use of the occupant of the abutting
waterfront property.
4. The boat is not used commercially or for a residence (i.e. a live- aboard).
5. The boat is not over 60 feet in length.
6. The use meets all other local, state, and federal rules and regulations.
The general process after receiving a registration form (similar to Leases and Licenses above) is
as follows:
1. The DNR considers:
• if the use is appropriate at the requested location,
• whether applicant has secured all regulatory permits, and
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 6 of 9
• if applicant addresses any other concerns
2. If the above conditions are met, the DNR will assign an authorization number and
notify the user that the registration has been processed. The DNR does not issue
written lease or license documents for mooring buoys registered under authority of
RCW 79.105.430.
NOTE - Registrations can be revoked by the DNR through a "Finding of Public Necessity"
[RCW 79.105.430(3).
Excerpts from RCW 79.105.430 - Mooring buoys
The abutting residential owner to state -owned shorelands, tidelands, or related beds of
navigable waters, other than harbor areas, may install and maintain a mooring buoy without
charge if the boat that is moored to the buoy is used for private recreational purposes, the area
is not subject to prior rights, including any rights of upland, tideland, or shoreland owners and
the buoy will not obstruct the use of mooring buoys previously authorized by the department.
The buoy cannot be sold or leased separately from the abutting residential property. The buoy
cannot be used to moor boats for commercial or residential use, or to moor boats over sixty
feet in length.
The permission granted for installing a mooring buoy is subject to applicable local, state, and
federal rules and regulations governing location, design, installation, maintenance, and
operation of the mooring buoy, anchoring system, and moored boat.
The permission to install and maintain a recreational dock or mooring buoy may be revoked by
the DNR, or the DNR may direct the owner of a recreational dock or mooring buoy to relocate
their dock or buoy, if the DNR makes a finding of public necessity to protect waterward access,
ingress rights of other landowners, public health or safety, or public resources. Circumstances
prompting a finding of public necessity may include, but are not limited to, the dock, buoy,
anchoring system, or boat posing a hazard or obstruction to navigation or fishing, contributing
to degradation of aquatic habitat, or contributing to decertification of shellfish beds otherwise
suitable for commercial or recreational harvest. The revocation may be appealed. Nothing in
this section authorizes a boat owner to abandon a vessel at a recreational dock, mooring buoy,
or elsewhere.
Unauthorized uses:
The following process has been used to address unauthorized mooring buoys:
1. The DNR places tag on buoy, notifying owner that buoy is not authorized and that
the owner needs to contact the DNR to seek authorization or remove the buoy;
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 7 of 9
2. If the DNR receives contact, they proceed with the appropriate process as described
above; if the DNR does not receive contact, a second tag is placed that provides 30-
day notice of removal unless the owner makes contact with the DNR;
3. Proceed with enforcement, which may involve removal or trespass action in court.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) - Hydraulic Project
Approval (HPA)
WDFW review and approval is needed for all structures proposed and activities conducted in
the water, including mooring buoys. The WDFW reviews applications to ensure the protection
of fish and shellfish and their habitats and has specific requirements for structures in or near
water through their HPA. The WDFW may require mitigation for damage to fish life or habitat
resulting from project installation and construction. Construction on your project can only occur
during designated timeframes or work windows. Contact the Area Habitat Biologist to
determine specific requirements for your location and to determine work windows. Note - If
your buoy has been installed longer than 2 years, you do not need an HPA from the WDFW.
Federal Agency Responsibilities
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) — Section 10
The mission of the regulatory program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is to protect
the nation's aquatic resources, while allowing reasonable development through objective
permit decisions. The Corps permit evaluation process balances the need for proposed project
with protection of the nation's aquatic environment. The Corps evaluates permit applications
for essentially all construction activities occurring in the nation's waters under Section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Acts of 1899. Section 10 covers the construction, excavation, or deposition
of materials in, over, or under navigable waters of the U.S., or any work that would affect the
course, location, condition, or capacity of those waters. Under Section 10, the Corps also
maintains and protects navigation of the nation's waters and finally, Section 10 is the Corps
regulatory authority related to mooring buoys.
The level of the Corps permit evaluation is commensurate with the level of the environmental
impacts and the aquatic functions and values involved in the particular area being impacted. All
permit decisions made by the Corps follow an evaluation process involving avoidance,
minimization, and compensation for unavoidable losses of aquatic functions and values. All
permit decisions are subject to various other Federal laws and the Corps consults with other
agencies for compliance. Important among these other laws are the Endangered Species Act,
the National Historic Preservation Act, the Magnuson- Stevens Fisheries Conservation and
Management Act (involving protection of essential fish habitat), Water Quality Certifications,
Coastal Zone Management Consistency Determinations, and Tribal trust issues. Compliance
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 8 of 9
with each of these authorities often requires consultation with other agencies and results in
additional restrictions on the proposed work and compensatory mitigation for impacts to the
resources protected by these Federal laws.
The type of permit review process used by the Corps to issue a permit depends on the design
and location of the project. The different processes include standard individual, letter of
permission (LOP), nationwide (NWP), and regional general (RGP) permits, in order of most to
least complex and /or impacting project. The standard individual permit is for larger, more
complex or controversial projects and includes a 30 -day public notice comment period. The LOP
is for Section 10 -only projects that do not meet the terms and conditions of a NWP /RGP, but
are not controversial. Typically, this is for individual pier, ramp, or float moorage facilities.
NWPs and RGPs must be minimally impacting, both individually and cumulatively, and are
issued on either a national or regional basis. Projects must meet all the terms and conditions of
the NWP /RGP. Verification letters are issued for those requiring a pre- construction notification
to the Corps or for those projects submitted to the Corps for review. Most NWPs require
notification to the Corps because of the presence of ESA listed species or critical habitat.
Relative to mooring buoys, two common NWPs are the NWP 10 for construction and
installation of mooring buoys (non - commercial, single boat) and the NWP 3 for the repair,
rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable structure.
Note —The Corps' authorities also include Section 404 of the Clean Water Act that covers the
discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. As this does
not pertain to mooring buoys, please visit the Corps' web site for details regarding this authority.
South Port Townsend Bay Management Plan- Appendix C Page 9 of 9
(555 n) A
:e
PHYC Buoys A to 33
9 with the Exception of
17, 18, 20, 21, 31 and 32
0 Buoys Mean Center
Marina Closure Zone
555 Feet Radius Around
OBuoy Mean Center
Combined with 200 Feel
Radius Around Buoys
Hpn120, 2AOf
�o
Broders Harvesting Activity
O w.t aFxr�N
OCurrently Harvashng
in
""' di
Historically Harvesting
n
rodinmU lnum4 ee � a u.., m...
y Not Haresting(Wood Pilings)
�UTH
P�IIMN�D MY �T/� Nw�"
DNR
(NN.W
R,dSt
WN'N
OKYN
I'lld.
NOON,
N.
AuthOf 2ed ise
1,
1�
1
SMQF�2
11
Alh ... Nd I�S
... V
NA
N.
AlMd.d 11
NNS,
'A
1�1
wos 0,
1.
AWNMNN� Um
&N,
'A
"I'll
w
MNMI, V.
M,
11
I I
WOR06
I,
MOMIA INS
&W
'A
Slll�
IS
MdNd 1.
M.,
'A
,�ll
I,
"UNSISd U.
M.Y
NA
'm 11
MdIS, �
....
NA
13 f ,
1 1 0,310
Wan
MUNNINI M
... y
IS
"1
11 "1
11 1 I'll,
� 11
IS
MO,N % U,
0 ...
NA
u 1,m
914M
�14n72
NNIN-12
MMI.ImUN,
M.,
N1
d,VN,,Nj
MJS,
IS
m
M,,SNN,uN,
SIN,
lddl�lk,w
is
dMOM.Sdum,
Md.
I,FM..AlSN
I.....Wul
(SAW
ldlwl��11.
a
MSM
I,
MNN
22
U,.�.Id
MM
IN
23
ON
UMSN, Nd, ld.t IS,.N,
m
I.MhNr.�.
Oftr
EMIdnNaAc�
Is
U�,M",.
ONer
EMNd.NdIc.
2�
1��lkrudde
28
WSV.INd
Md.
IS
I.lm.d�
a,my
lt...AmN.
1,
1,,
—
mftlud��
MdNr
'N..IACMI
ISIINSM,�
ld.rM.AcMI
u—
za�
S"'Id
�INSNMN
2,NKIRP
5,1,49M,
I,
",w.wu.
M.�
NA
m
In,h.r
IN
IN
234OP78
I'M`331
I �1435
1�91
Mll.rl,l 1.
1.,
a
LMVaC��
In,h.r
,,41,
In.m.lMll.
I...
MlrMdSnlMd,
�NI�..es 1.
N,.,
UrNf��MCAMmn
11
1 N,I� 1. 11.
drl.r
dNdN.IAdNn
l,r� I�S
AnChOr
ulevatawd
1.
11
IS
16
IN
11
uIll.,ld
&NN
I,
11
13 MISS
"sm'so,
unp,l
NS
AMM�edl,.
'A
I
I I
SIN'
MOS,
—Nc—
d..,. I� ��
�S, I
d`dNerdNt,,M
51
I.V.CIN,
INS,
'A
11
I.V.Mt.
111h.r
NA
im
IS
MI,
--t�l
dkdlldtll�
UNNN,NSSWUN,
a4_
-::j E�
I
]UdW�
MpInd x DI
STATE OF WASHINGTON
County of Jefferson
In the matter of a }
Moratorium on new Mooring }
Buoy's in the southern portion of }
Port Townsend Bay }
Ordinance # 04-1107 -11
The Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners enters the following
findings of fact:
1. Jefferson County has committed to planning under the provisions of the
Growth Management Act, codified as RCW 36.70A.
2. Jefferson County implements the Growth Management Act through a
comprehensive plan adopted in 1998 and updated in 2004.
3. The Comprehensive Plan of Jefferson County provides goals and polices on
page 8 -36 of the Comprehensive Plan to implement the provisions of the
Shoreline Management Act found at RCW 90.58.
4. The Shoreline Management Act development regulations are implemented in
Jefferson County through the Jefferson County Code (JCC) in section 18.25.
5. Mooring Buoys are regulated by provisions of Jefferson County Code found at
JCC18.25. 380.
6. The Shoreline Management Act found at RCW 90.58.590 grants counties
moratoria authority as an important aspect of complying with environmental
stewardship and protection requirements when implementing that legislation.
7. This state law provides that local governments may adopt moratoria provided
that all lawfully existing uses, structures and other development shall continue to
be deemed lawful.
9. A moratorium may be effective for up to six months if a detailed work plan is
prepared for remedying the issues and circumstances necessitating the
moratorium, and may be renewed for two six month periods.
WHEREAS, Port Townsend Bay is near the entrance to Admiralty Inlet being part
of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, all being marine waters of the State of Washington;
WHEREAS, this southern portion of Port Townsend Bay includes areas locally
known as the Chimacum Creek Beach Park, Lower Hadlock, Skunk Island, and
the Old Alcohol Plant;
WHEREAS, these areas are in proximity to the Irondale[Port Hadlock Urban
Growth Area;
WHEREAS, until a sewer system is installed and available to serve the Urban
Growth Area, transitional zoning Is in place, which allows rural commercial and
rural residential uses to take place;
WHEREAS, under the existing Shoreline Master Program the area has a mixture
of shoreline environmental designations including conservancy, urban, and
suburban;
WHEREAS, these shoreline areas include feeder bluffs and drifts cells such as
the Hadlock Bluffs that created depositional beaches and accretionary beaches
such as the Hadlock Lagoon and Chimacum Creek Beach;
WHEREAS, this marine water body includes eel grass beds which accommodate
sand lance and surf smelt, provide overwintering habitat for waterfowl and are
hosting coho salmon, cutthroat trout, and the endangered species of steelhead
trout and summer chum salmon;
WHEREAS, this southern area of Port Townsend Bay has a wooden boat school,
one commercial shellfish bed, a mix of residential development with docks,
bulkheads and mooring buoys, a public boat launch, a marina and has active use
by the boating public;
WHEREAS, there are competing interests in this southern portion of Port
Townsend Bay between boaters, near shore residential uses, commercial uses
and shellfish harvesting both recreationally and commercially:
WHEREAS, Washington State Department of Health issued a news release on
June 1, 2011 indicating that the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay was
threatened with closure this year,
WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) Office of
Shellfish and Water Protection issued their annual growing area review report
stating that Port Townsend Bay meets water quality standards but is threatened
with a downgrade in classification due to the amount of boating activity and
potential pollution associated with transient boat anchoring;
WHEREAS, an increase in the number of boats within the southern and westerly
portions of Port Townsend Bay, and particularly the area near Lower Hadlock
may adversely impact commercial and recreational shellfish harvesting
operations;
WHEREAS, a commercial shellfish closure has adverse economic impacts on
local business;
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Public Health Department will be monitoring
water quality in Port Townsend Bay through the Northeast Jefferson County
Clean Water Project beginning in 2012;
WHEREAS, Jefferson County is near final adoption of their Shoreline Master
Program through the State Department of Ecology including provisions for
permitting and placement of mooring buoys;
WHEREAS, the new shoreline master program has provisions that are consistent
with the standards outlined in the National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP);
WHEREAS, Jefferson County is in a partnership with state agencies and local
tribes seeking to create a management plan for the aforementioned portions of
Port Townsend Bay in order to prevent any adverse impacts to commercial
shellfish harvesting and /or downgrading of the area by DOH;
WHEREAS, a bay management plan is one element of the work plan for the
stakeholders group;
WHEREAS, a bay management plan would examine the competing interests for
using the southern and western portions of Port Townsend Bay and would
include evaluation of mooring buoy placements;
WHEREAS, permitting additional mooring buoys in the southern and western
portions of Port Townsend Bay may exacerbate problems associated with over
use of the bay and lead to potential shellfish closures;
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to protect commercial shellfish harvesting in
Port Townsend Bay;
WOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners
of Jefferson County as follows.
SECTION 1. A moratorium is placed on submittals of shoreline permit
applications to the Jefferson County Department of Community Development for
placement of mooring buoys in the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay (as
defined in the attached management plan area map), except when: 1) the state
Department of Health notifies the Jefferson County Shoreline Administrator that
movement or placement of a mooring buoy would contribute to preventing or
lifting a shellfish harvesting closure; or 2) the Jefferson County Shoreline
Administrator determines that an application for the movement or placement of a
mooring buoy must be accepted and reviewed by Jefferson County in
furtherance of the planning being conducted during the development of the Port
Townsend Bay Management Plan.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to the provisions of Ch. 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline
Management Act, this moratorium does not affect any lawful mooring buoys in
place in the southern area of Port Townsend Bay (as defined above) on or before
the date this Ordinance becomes effective.
SECTION 3. Severability.
If any provision of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance
is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance, or the application of the provision
to other persons or circumstances is not affected.
SECTION 4. The work plan and management plan area map are hereby
incorporated by reference, see Attachments A and B.
SECTION 5. Effective date.
This ordinance shall take effect immediately after passage and shall remain
effective for six months or until repealed by the BOCC.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this !' day oftbWft 2011
Vxsvdaii
Clerk of the Board
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Z APPROVED A§ TO FORM:
David Alvarez, Deputy
Prosearting Attorney
Port Townsend Bay
work Plan
Issue: The Issue is the threat of closure of shellfish harvesting in the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay due
to the presence of too many vessels anchored or moored near commercial shellfish beds. Issue also involves
concerns over presence of derelict vessels and the use of vessels by people living aboard.
Solution: Considering all uses, develop a plan or strategy to manage vessels in a manner that will avoid future
closures of commercial shellfish harvesting in the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay.
Strategy: Through facilitation by the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance, undertake a collaborative
process with stakeholders, government agencies, tribal governments and interest groups (see list below); engage
the public throughout the derision- making process; and prepare a plan for Port Hadlock in partnership with
stakeholders that achieves the following:
a. Reduces the number and proximity of vessels in relationship to the commercial shellfish beds through
enforcement action to avoid shellfish harvest closures by Department of Health. This may involve
removing mooring buoys and vessels not properly permitted or authorized.
b. Establishes a voluntary "No Anchor Zone" in the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay, similar to that in
place in Mystery Bay, to direct transient boaters away from commercial shellfish beds in order to prevent
emergency closures due to number of transient moorages.
c identifies a mooring area In a portion of the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay in the area
appropriate to authorize mooring buoys for use by recreational and/or commercial vessels
d. identifies an appropriate area in the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay for transient moorage and
navigation.
e. Establishes a Community Monitoring/Education effort — Establish monitoring and reporting process to
maintain levels of use consistent with shellfish harvest regulations.
f. Consider other factors and strategies necessary to address the issue and achieve the desired solution.
Stakeholder List The following list identifies potential stakeholder, government agencies, tribal governments and
interest groups, to invite to the collaborative process, other stakeholders may also be included as necessary:
• Government Agencies
o Jefferson County
• Washington Department of Health
• Washington Department of Natural
Resources
• Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife
• Tribes
•
Jamestown S'kallam
•
Port Gamble S'Kallam Tribe
•
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
•
Suquamisih Tribe
• Interest Groups
•
Part Hadlock Yacht Club
•
Port Hadlock Marina
•
Northwest School of Wooden
Boatbuilding
o Broder's Clam Farm
• Jefferson County Marine Resources
Committee
• United States Army Corp of
Engineers
• United States Navy
• Port of Port Townsend
• Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission
• Point No Point Treaty Council
• Megan McCrary
• Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers
Association
• Friends' of Chimacum Creek
• North Olympic Salmon Coalition
o Residential Owners
o Other
Geographic exterm The area of particular concern for commercial shellfish closure is limited to the tidelands
located west of Skunk Island and south of the Port of Port Townsend boat launch and dodo. However, because the
strategy considers vessel uses in the general Port Hadlock vldnity, the geographic extent proposed for the
management area Includes other areas in view of boating activities and land uses that may effect the
management plan (See Appendix B— map of management area).
Calendar of events:
November 7, 2011
Moratorium on mooring buoys placed by BOCC
Nov /Dec- 2011
Agencies begin enforcement efforts by tagging and /or notifying unauthorized
vessels
Nov /Dec - 2011
Agencies conduct Inventory and gather information from the field on vessel use
Nov /Dec 2011
Office of Regulatory Assistance establishes the Stakeholder group
January 2011
a Stakeholders group meeting: review issue, solution and begin process
February 2012
2"d Stakeholder group meeting: discuss details of strategy, form subcommittee to
draft plan
March 2012
1a Sub- committee meeting to develop draft management plan
April 2012
3'd Stakeholder meeting: Stakeholders group meeting to review draft
management plan finalize and release draft plan for public review (two weeks
before public meeting)
April 2012
Final draft management plan prepared
May 2012
Extend Moratorium for six additional month with updated Work Plan
May 2012
Hold Public Meeting to solicit comments on the draft management plan
June 2012
4a' Stakeholder's group meeting: discuss public comments identify changes
June 2012
2"d Subcommittee meeting to incorporate changes to management plan
July 2012
Final draft of the management plan is released for public comment period.
August 2012
Adopt Management Plan
August 2012
End Moratorium
September 2012
Agency action begins to implement plan and achieve solution
September 2012
Final Stakeholder's group meeting: review and identify needs for follow up if any.
September 2012
DOH public notice on the Port Townsend Bay growing area classification
The remedy of the Issues and circumstances:
The moratorium(s) on mooring buoys would allow adequate time for Interested parties and the general public to
be engaged in the development and final adoption of a management plan. The moratorium period will allow for
field identification of existing ad3vities and uses, allow a time period for voluntary compliance and enforcement
as needed in parallel with a program to gain public participation and involvement in solving management issues
Identified in the management plan process.
,� Appendix B
Management Plan Area Map
Within the southern portion Port Townsend Bay, those waters lying westerly of a line drawn between the
SE corner of parcel number 980 - 100 -019 and the SE corner of parcel number 001- 353 -003.
Mort Townsend Bath
plli
BDYld ,
s
JofFerson County Board of Chanty Chmmimoners
LbnserdAgenda
11-7 -11
a_
DATE NovewJw T, 2011
SJB,JELf: P0WTOVd4SEWJ8AYI
SCATBN&FTOR
The Department of Cbmmw*Development requests the Board of Oaunty(bmmissionersto
establish a moratorium on the placement of new mooring buoys in the southern portion of Port Townsend
Bay. Amoratoriumonnow mooringbuoysisthestartingpointas interestedparties,localtribes,state
agenaesand Jefferson ( bunty prepare a management plan for thisaree. The Lower Fiadlockareaissubject to
competingirderestsof the boatingpublicaswellas upland lard uses Thesewater and land useshave the
potential to adversely affect commercial shellfish harvesting within the southern portion of Port Townsend
Bay. A mooring buoy moratorium will provide a period of time where eAsting buoys;whether authorized or
unauthorlmd can be inventoried and evaluated for compliance with applicable county and state legal
requirements. Thandent boat locaflons can be monitored to verify if boaters are adversely Impaclingthe
commercial shellfish beds. Finally, various land, will be examined to promote a coordinated effort for
protection, use, development and restoration opportunitiesthrough a management plan process. The
management plan prooesswill include a public outreach program facilitated by the state Office of Fbgulatory
Assistance.
A public hearingwill be schedule before the BOMwftNn the net two monthsofferirgthe
publica opportunityto addressthe Board on this matter.
P#SOCIMPACT:
The Jefferson (bunty costsassodated with developing the moratorium, participation in the
formation of the management plan and the on going monitoring of the ac tIvitieswithin Port Townsend Bay are
included in the 2011 annual budget approved for DCD
Staff reeommendsthe BOOCapprove the moratorium and attached work plan for a period of six months.
Philip Morley, (buntyAdministretor Date
Y ,
0Ifiz 1
r. 1 f
In the matter of a
ardinanos# _
Moratoriumon new Mooring
Buoysin thesouthern portion of
Fbrt Townsend Bay
TheJsfifersonCourdy Board ofO uity(bnunissionersentersthefollowingfindingsoffait:
1. Jafferson (bunty has committed to planning under the providonsof the Growth Management
Act, codified as FQV 36.70A.
2 Jefferson County Implementsthe Growth Management Act through a comprehensive plan
adopted in 1998 and updated in 2004.
3. The Comprehensive Flan of Jefferson County providesgoals arxi polices on page &W of the
Comprehensive Ran to implement the provisions of the Shoreline Management Act found at FUN
90.58.
4. The Shoreline Management Act development regulations are implemented in Jafferson County
through the Jefferson Q unty Code {JCq in section 1825.
5. Mooring Buoys are regulated byprovisionsofJefferson County Code found atM825.380.
6. The Shoreline Menagmient Act found d FUN 90.58.590 grairds counties moratoria authority as
an Important aspect of complying with environmental stewardship and protection requirements
when implementingthat legislatiom
7. This state law providesthat local governments may adopt moratoria provided that all ladully
erasting uses, structuresand other development shall continueto be deemed lawful.
9. A moratorium may be effectivefor up to sox months if a detailed work plan is prepared for
remedying the Issues and circumstances necessitating the moratorium, and may be renewed for
two six month periods.
WhEWAS, Fort Townsend Bay is near the entrance to Admiralty Inlet being part of the 3ralt of
„Lan de Fuca, all beam marine waters of the Rate of Washington;
WFEFE4Q thissouthem portion of Fbrt Townsend Bay indudesareaslocally known asthe
Chimaam Oreek Beach Park, tower Hadlock Sxunk Island, and the ad Alcohol Rant;
. ,i..
WFEI;B& these weasare in proximity to the lmndale/Fbrt Hadlock Urban Growth Area;
Wi B;E4S until a sewer eystem is installed and arailableto serve the Urban Growth Area,
transitional zoning is in place, which allows rural commercial and rural residential usesto take
place;
Why under the existing Ehoreliine Master Program the area has a mbdure of shoreline
environmental designation >sirxtudingconservang/, urban, and suburban;
WFEFEAF; these shoreline areas Include feeder bluffs and drifts cells such as the H3cllock Buffs
that o-uted depositional beaches and accretionary beadmsu h asthe Hadlodc Lagoon and
C1himacum Creek Beach;
WF00A thismarinewater body inciudeseel grassbedswhich accommodate send lance and surf
snelt, provide overwintering habitat for waterfowl and are hosting coho salmon, cutthroat trout,
and the endangered spedesof steelhead trout and summer chum salmon;
WhEEA& thissouthem area of Fbrt Townsend Bay has a wooden boat school, one commercial
shellfish bed, a mix of residential development with dodos, bulkheads and mooring buoys, a public
boat launch, a marina and has active use bythe boating public,
WFEAS, there are competing interests in thissouthem portion of Fbrt Townsend Bay between
boaters, new shore residential uses, commercial uses and shellfish harvesting both recxealionally
and commercially.
W FEWAIA Washington State Department of Health issued a news release on Jane 1, 2011
indicatingthrat the southern portion of Fbrt Townsend Bay wasthreatened with closure thisyear;
WF the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) Office of Shellfish and Water
Protection issued their annual growing area review report stating that Fbrt Townsend Bay meets
water quality standards but isthreatened with adowngrade in classification due to the amount of
boating activity" potential pollution assodatedwithtransient boat anchoring
WhTEAri an increase in the number of boatswithin the southern and westerly portionsof Fort
Townsend Bay, and particularly the area near Lower Hadlocic may adversely impact commerdal and
recreational shellfish harvesting operations,
WI-l3WAEj acommercid shellfish down hasadverse eoonomic impactson local business;
WFEFEtL$ the I fferson Owrrty Public Health Department will be monitoring water quality in Port
Townsend Bay through the Northeast .Wferson (burity Oean Water Project beginning in 2012;
Wt .1 offersonaurrtyis near final adoption of their Shoreline Mader iiDgram through the
Sate Department of Ecology including provisionsfor permitting and placement of mooring buoys
VVF8€4$ the new shoreline master program has provisionsthat are consistent with the
standardsoutlined in the National Shellfish siltation Program (NSEFy
WHEFE4S Jefferson Oa my is in a partnership with state agendesand local tribes saddng to
create a nanagarnent plan for the aforementioned portionsof Fbrt Townsend Bay in order to
prevent any adverse Impartsto commercial shellfish harvest €ng and/or downgrading of the area
byDOF#
W EWASjabaymanagementplanisonedementoftheworkplanforthestakeho ldersgroup;
Why a bay management plan would examine the competing interestsfor using the southern
and wedem portions of Fbrt Townsend Bay and would include evaluation of mooring buoy
placements
WFFEA& permitting additional mooring buoys in the southern and western portiorsof Fbrt
Townsend Bay may e)raoerbate problemsassociated with over use of the bay and lead to potential
shellfish closures;
WFEFO4S it is in the public Interest to protect commercial shellfish harvesting in Fbrt Townsend
WY
SWnON1. A moratorium is placed onsubmittdsof shoreline permit applicdiorstothe
,b ferson (bunty Department of Community Development for placement of mooring buoys in the
southern portion of Fbrt Townsend Bay (as defined In the attached management plan area map),
except when: 1) the state Department of Health notifiestheJefferson (.buntySiordine
Administrator that movement or plaoernent of a mooring buoy would oontributeto preventing or
lifting shellfish harvesting closure; or 2) theJ&erson (bunty Shoreline Administrador
determ€nesthat an application for the movement or placernent of a mooring buoy must be
accepted and reviewed byJdferson (bunty in furtherance of the planning being conducted during
the development of the Fbrt Townsend Bay Management Flan.
S=CN 2 Rusuard to the provision sof Ot 10.58 FUA the Shoreline Maagement Act, this
moratorlum does not affect arry kwfui mooring buoys in place in the souihern area of Fbrt
Townsend ft (asdefined above)on or beforethe detethisQdlnence beaomeseffective.
SSeverability.
9 any provision of thisordina ceor its application to any person or circurratence is held invalid, the
remainderof the ordinance, or the application of the provislon to other pasonsordreurnstences
Is not effected.
34 MON 4 Thevrork plan arxf management plan arm map am hereby Inoorporated by reference,
seeA;tachmentsAard B.
f a\ . • _i o
This ordinance shall take effect immediately after passage and shall rennin effective for six months
or until repeated by the BOM
TAL. .ETON OOUNTY
BOWCFOOUNTY
OOMMIS3omEm
Phil .bhrnson, Member
David Sullivan, Member
ATTER .bhnAustin, Chair
Beth Hit
Qerkof the Board
PortToamsendBay
Work Plan
Issue: The issue isthe threat of closure of dW Ifish harvesting inthe sourthem portion of Port Townsend Bay
dusto the pry of too manyvesselsendrored or noored new oDmmarcial shellfish beds issue also
involvesconcerns over presence of derdict vesselsand the urss of vestsbypeople living aboard
9ofutic= Considering all uses, develop a plan orstrateWto manage vessels Ina manner that will avoid future
closuresof commercial shellfish harvesting In the southern portion of Fort Tower may.
Strateghr. Throughfacilitation bytheGovemo>'sOfficeof ftriatoryAssistarree, undertakes collaborative
proceswith stakeholders, government agende% tribal governmentsand interest groups (see Fst below);
engage the publicthroughout the derislon- making process and prepare a plan for Fbrt Hadlock in partnership
with stakehoidersthata devesthefoilcwing
ieducesthe number and proximity of vesselsinrelatiorshipto the cornmercial "[fish bedsthrough
enforcement action to avoid shell%h harvest dosuresby De,rtmant of Health.3hismay involve removing
mooingbuoyswWvemWsnotpro perlypemMedora .
Rtablkihssa volurdary'No Anchor Zone° In the southern portion of Fort Townsend Bay, similar to that in place
in Mystery My, to direct transient boaters awayfrom commercial shellfish beds in order to prevent emergency
dostresdue to number of transient moorages.
Identifiesa mooring area in a portion of the southern portion of Fort Tower Bay in the area approprieteto
authorias mooring i uoysfor use byreaeational ardor commercial vessels
Identifies an appropriate areainthe southern portion of Port Townsend Bay for transient moorage and
navigation.
Bt abIishesaC brnmunityMonttoirrglEdurcation effort — Esiab6shmordtotngand reporting processto maintain
levalsof use consistent with shellfish harvest regulatiorm
Cbrdder other fectorsand strategiesnecassaryto addressthe Issue and adnierethe destredsoluticn.
Stakeholder List: Thefollowing list identifiespotential stakeholder, governmerrt terries, tribal governments
and interest grouups, to irwiteto the c ollaborar a prooew� other stakehoidersmay also be irAxled as
Tribes
- jefferson Cburdy
-Washington Department of Health
- Washington Department of Natural Fasources
-Washington Department of Rsh and VVildllfe
- Jefferson County Marine Rasowcestbmmittee
-Lh ted 3atesArmy mrp of E*n s
-Uded Sates Nary
°Fbrt of Fbrt Townsend
%knestownSkallam
°Fbrt Gamble SKa lam Trite
-Lower BAB i4ailam Tribe
°S:rquuamis'h Tribe
-Northwest Indian HsherfesCbmn -dmon
•Fbint No Fbint Treaty ibundl
Interest Groups
Fbrt HadlockYWt Cub
-Fbrt Hadlock Marina
-Northwest SJ=l of Wooden Boatbuiidirg
- Brodeesaan Farm
-Megan MoC ary
- PacificCbast aelifish G owemAssocialion
- Frienddl of C mac un Creek
-North Olympic admon Ccaliiion
-Ilbsdertial Owners
•Other
Geogaphlcextot: The area of particular concern for commercial shellfish closure is limited to the tidelands
located west of Su* Island and south of the Port of Fbrt Townsend Twat launch and dodo However, because
the strategy considersvessall uses In the general Port liadlodc vicinity. the geographic aderd proposed for the
management area includes other areasin view of boatingactivtiesaxi tend uses that may affect the
management plan (&eAppendxB—nwof management area).
November 7, 2D11
Moratorium on mooring buoys placed by BLOC
Nov /Deo -2011
Agencies begin enforcement efforts by tagging arWor
notifying unauthorized
vessels
Nov /Deo•2011
Agendesoonduct Imrentoryand gather infonnation from the
field on vessel use
Nov/Dec2011
Cf los of IagulatoryAsddance edabIL4mthe aWmh*ler
group
,Ia w 2011 12 3akelmldefsgroup meting review Issue, solution and
begin process
February2012 2nd Stakeholder group meiirxy dls=detdisof strategy,, form suboommittee to draft plan
March 2012 1$ StAroommittes meeting to develop draft management plan
April 2012 3rd Stakeholder meeting 8akeholdees group medingto review draft management plan finaUm
end release draft plan for public review (two weeIabefore public meeting)
April 2012 Rnal draft management plan prepared
May2012 Bdend Moratorium for dxaddtional month with updated Work Plan
May2012 h- bldRMc Meeting tosofidtcommertson the draft nariagernentplan
.ime2012 Paiskeholdeesgroupmeating dtscusspubliceommentsidertifychenges
Jm 2012 2nd StbaxrmiMee mdingto inoorporate c angesto mragwmnt plen
ay2012 Find draft offhe management plan Isreleased for publicwmmentperiod.
August 2012 Adopt Manger ent Ran
August 2012 End Moratorium
Sapternber 2012Agen y action beginsto implement plan and achieve solution
84Aernber 2012Rral asketoldeesgoup medirg: review and identify needsfor follow up if any.
,W amber2012DCH public notice on the Port Townsend Bay gowf ova classification
Theremedyofthelm anddtcuil ance%
The moratorium(s) on mooring buoyswouid allow adequatetim for Interested patiesand the general pubftto
be engaged in the development "final adoption of a rranagernent pla>. The moratorium period will allow for
field identificatlon of existingactivitiesaxh uses, allowatime period for voluntary compliance and enforcement:
as needed in parallel with a pmgramto gain public participation and involvement in solving malagetnett issue
Identified in the management plan process
Min an boadma pa
of pw
AnumftB
mm MMAMMW
Part Towm=dB"
Not
U
I
Iffie
ti i
ti
i Y
�.. 6
t� .
x .I:. t . e
sr..T .::� -.
F I a,ln
a
{p x A "'�i 4 ♦ � u:
.w ar ".�� � tee— �_, �u...a'�`, +�• fi +ALL
�F
M
Lla,fl Re
yy �NJ J
4
e
-� F. A..
,;
Regular Agenda
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Philip Morley, County Administrator
FROM: Ab Scalf, DCD Directoj�r
DATE: November 7, 2011
SUBJECT: PORT TOWNSEND BAY MOORING BUOY MORATORIUM
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The Department of Community Development requests the Board of Comity Commissioners to establish a
moratorium on the placement of new mooring buoys in the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay. A moratorium on
new mooring buoys is the starting point as interested parties, local tribes, state agencies and Jefferson County prepare a
management plan for this area The lower Hadlock area is subject to competing interests of the boating public as well
as upland land uses. These water and land uses have the potential to adversely affect commercial shellfish harvesting
within the southern portion of Port Townsend Bay. A mooring buoy moratorium will provide a period oftime where
existing buoys whether authorized or unauthorized can be inventoried and evaluated for compliance with applicable
county and state legal requirements. Transient boat lotions can be monitored to verify if boaters are adversely
impacting the commercial shellfish beds. Finally, various land uses will be examined to promote a coordinated effort
for protection, use, development and restoration opportunities through a management plan process. The management
plan process will include a public outreach program facilitated by the state Office of Regulatory Assistance.
ANALYSI5ISTRATEGIC GOALS:
A public hearing will be schedule before the BOCC within the next two months offering the public a
opportunity to address the Board on this matter.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Jefferson County costs associated with developing the moratorium, participation in the formation of the
management plan and the on going monitoring of the activities within Port Townsend Bay are included in the 2011
annual budget approved for DCD.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the BOCC approve the moratorium and attached work plan for a period of six months.
REVIEWED BY:
WOOD t
4112,4
Date
Consent Agenda
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Philip Morley, County Administrator
FROM: Carl Smith, Director of DCD � a
Stacie Hoskins, Planning Manager Ql
DATE: October 1, 2012 0
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION to adopt the South Port Townsend Bay Management
Plan; and ORDINANCE to release moratorium
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Final adoption by resolution of the South Port Townsend Bay (SPTB) Management Plan and release of the
moratorium on new mooring buoys implemented through ordinance #05- 0507 -12.
BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS /STRATEGIC GOALS:
The SPTB Management Plan was prepared to manage boater usage in a manner that ensures continued, year -
round harvest of commercial shellfish while balancing that interest with the legitimate use of the bay for
public recreation and other commercial use. Washington State departments of Natural Resources (DNR) and
Health, the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance (ORA) and Jefferson County representatives worked
together to inventory boats and mooring buoys in South Port Townsend Bay and led a group of numerous
stakeholders in developing the plan.
The plan in full was presented to the Board and citizens in attendance at the presentation provided on August
27, 2012. The Board held a duty noticed public hearing on September 10, 2012 seeking comment on the plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Jefferson county costs associated with developing, adopting and implementing the plans are included in
the 2012 annual budget approved for DCD.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the Board:
1. Approve the attached resolution adopting the South Port Townsend Bay (SPTB) Management Plan;
and
2. Approve the attached Ordinance releasing the moratorium implemented through ordinance #05 -0507-
12.
REVIEWED BY:
1 ip Morl unty Admminis�
Date