Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM091802 " Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee Minutes Wednesday, September 18,2002 Present: Judy Damore, District 1 Spike Hall, District 3 (Vice Chair) Anne Murphy, District 2 Jeff Gallant, District I Bill Kalina, ex-officio, U.S. Navy, Indian Island Andrew Palmer, District 3 (Chair) Richard Wojt, Jefferson County Commissioners Guests: Pat Pearson, WSU Cooperative Extension Barbara Nightingale, MRC Consultant Joanna Sanders, Secretary Absent: Larry Crockett, ex~officio, Port of Port Townsend David Jenkins, District 2 Larry Lawson, Commercial Fishing Rex Rice, Environment Dave Christensen, Jefferson County Natural Resources Judy Surber, City of Port Townsend Varn Brooks, Marine Science Practitioner OPENING BUSINESS Chair Andy Palmer called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM in the Madrona Room, at the WSU Cooperative Extension, Port Hadlock, Washington. There was a quorum of members present. Minutes of the July and August meetings were approved. The agenda was approved as written. NEW BUSINESS Project Update on Olympia Oyster Restoration Project: Barbara Nightingale distributed her final project report. She reviewed the planting sites at which 13 volunteers and 3 staff had planted 25,000 oyster seeds. Noting that this was a low· growth period, she explained that oysters respond better to more nutrient rich waters, which could account for the low numbers of seeds per shell that incubated. Knowing this, the MRC may want to change some of its tactics. In response to announcements in three newspapers, many property owners expressed interest in participating. A Bay Watch potluck last evening also generated interest among Discovery Bay shoreline owners. Remaining tasks are in the areas of public education and outreach and producing signage for posting at public beaches. Betsy Peabody of the Puget Sound Restoration Fund will soon be submitting her final report for their portion of the project. Project Update on Habitat Stewardship Project: Barbara Nightingale distributed a written report plus a matrix that folds in the various benchmarks as well as criteria specific to the MRC. For background, she pointed out that she used the areas of concern identified in the focus groups conducted as part of the Year Two Action Grant (shoreline landowners, shellfish growers, sport fishers and boaters, and non-governmental organizations), to map out Fish and Wildlife priority habitats in the same areas. Although, there was representation at the focus groups from inner Port Ludlow, there were no focus groups with citizens of outer Port Ludlow or Squamish. She noted there might need to be a focus group in that area. The first technical meeting was held this week in QuiJcene, the purpose of which is to identity limiting factors and restoration and protection opportunities in each identified bay. She then distributed a draft handout produced by the Department ofFish and Wildlife of Priority Habitats and Species in Quilcene. OLD BUSINESS Finalizing the Letter of Intent - Year Four Action Grant: It was noted that the letter of intent is due September 30. Members then moved into a discussion of some of the assumptions and ideas regarding continuing the Olympia Oyster and Habitat Stewardship Projects. Discussion of other projects was also noted. Marine Resources Committee - September 18, 2002 Page: 2 1. Olympia Oyster Project: Based on the good response and interest by shoreline landowners in Year 3, there would be more opportunities to seed additional beaches in Year 4. Members used as a basis for their discussion some of the ideas that surfaced during the Year 3 Project. · The Marine Science Center (MSC) could take over incubation, which previously occurred at the Lummi Hatchery. Project expenses would include MSC stafftime and the purchase of an incubator for the MSC. Other ideas for supporting this project were Puget Sound Restoration Fund and/or NOAA community restoration grants. · Jefferson and Clallam MRCs might partner to hire a contractor to complete habitat surveys and conduct outreach to interested landowners. There might also be financial support for this project through the Federal Fish and Wildlife Foundation. 2. Habitat Stewardship Project: Barbara led a discussion of potential Habitat Stewardship areas identified as part of the Year 3 project. The idea was to focus on one or two likely sites, which will result in some measurable action, restoration or protection. Sites identified by the tribes and Fish and Wildlife and other non-governmental organizations in the near-shore limiting factors analysis for protection are also sites that the MRC might consider for a Year 4 Project. She then reviewed some of the projects being considered for SRF Board funding. Without ruling out the need for partnerships, it was noted that the MRC should have had a significant role in laying the groundwork for the project. A summary of the discussion about these sites and ideas for MRC involvement were as follows. · Quilcene - Restoring Estuary. At the Quilcene technical meeting, there was a lot of discussion about the need to remove culverts. Estuaries are the source of a large amount of biodiversity and their destruction by diking is a big concern. At the point when projects are proposed as a part of the limiting factors analysis, the MRC could also become involved. Questions: Could the MRC be a catalyst for the removal of culverts? Should the MRC be involved in this type of project? Suggestion: Consult with NWSC on this question. Get Randy Johnson to present to the MRC. Concern: This would be a multi-year project. · Pulalee Point - Protection of rockfish or ling cod. This site was identified by Wayne Paulson as an area of diversity and abundance for lingcod and rockfish. · Oak Bay Lagoon - MRC outreach with property owners and partners. This is a proposed Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRF Board) project involving redirecting the stream. Existing partners include Jamestown S'Klallam and Port Gamble S'KlalIam tribes, the Hood Canal Coordinating Council, WDFW, Jefferson County and ACOE. Questions: Would there be an opportunity to go beyond outreach to landowners and have more direct involvement? How much upstream work can the MRC do? Could there be research on the impact of the changes that are being proposed. Suggestion: Set aside money in Category B to participate in education, monitoring and data gathering. Investigate to what degree the project would improve estuarine function and improve near shore habitat. This could be a pilot MP A similar to Salt Creek County Park established in ClalIam County. Concern: It is one of the few areas for public shelIfishing. · Discovery Bay - Projects might relate to removing pilings and addressing siltration. Because the area is rich in diversity, a strategy could be to protect that area from changes. There is some concern about low-flying aircraft and commercial fishing and crabbing. Question: Is it likely that the Discovery Bay technical discussion will occur in enough time to propose a Year 4 project. It was noted that Kevin Ryan of US Fish and Wildlife at Protection Island should attend the technical meeting. Concern: There has not yet been enough conversation with the tribes. · Port Townsend Bay - Eelgrass beds/mooring buoys/piling removal. Suggestion: Investigate partnering with the Northwest Maritime Center on a mooring buoy and eelgrass project. Work with City to establish a no~anchor zone. Andy Palmer agreed to contact Dave Robison of the Northwest Maritime Center. Marine Resources Committee - September 18,2002 Page: 3 · Dosewallips - Partner with tribes on restoration of the estuary. · Tarboo Creek - Protection and restoration. There is broad interest in protecting the estuary. Peter Bahls with the Northwest Watershed Institute is focused primarily on protecting salmonids. He is trying to identify fish use in the estuary as well as in the lower two miles of the stream. · Research and Education MP A - Designate areas of interest for further study - similar to Skagit County. There might be tribal support and there are many potential areas. Would need to identify objectives for each site. Concern: An MP A implies that there is some force protecting it. The MRC is still identifying what areas need protecting and why. 3. Forage Fish - Work forage fish information into the Shoreline Management Program. The MRC needs to make recommendations to BOCC. It was noted that the NOSC data and maps were passed on to the County. The City had an atlas created that includes the forage fish and bird habitats, which is a reference tool for planners and permit writers. Suggestion: Need to get an update from NOSC on their plans. Concern: It is unlikely this could happen before finalizing the letter of intent. 4. Siltration - County-wide monitoring and mapping. Monitor and track the effects of sittration on nearshore habitat. Barbara noted that Randy Johnson has been working with the tribes on mapping out what the Discovery Bay area looked like in the late 1800s, compared to today. Modification of river mouths has prevented the tides from coming in and naturally pulling the silt out. Suggestion: The MRC could have some influence on the shoreline. Education can identify all sources of siltration. Question: How far up in the riparian zone should the MRC go? 5. Fred Hill/Shine Project - This is a project of interest because of its proximity to an area identified for protection - Thorndyke. The only application submitted to date for BOCC action is a mineral overlay zone. The MRC might have a role in this project at the shoreline development phase. Species richness would justify the State looking at it as a potential MPA. Suggestion: A research and education MPA at Thorndyke. Letter of Intent - Criteria B MRC Support Funds: One suggestion was to use the entire $30K for MRC infrastructure. MRC projects are getting increasingly more complex and need the attention of full-time staff that can boil down and bring the issues to the MRC so it can make good decisions. Need to consider how best to utilize funds for monitoring, education, website developing or staffing. The remainder of support funds could be used for projects. Letter of Intent - Next Steps I Follow-up: There was some concern that a delay in getting started on the Year 3 projects has made it difficult to specify sites for a continuation of the Habitat Stewardship project. A comment was that the limiting factors analysis process seems to be beneficial to the MRC in supplying specific potential projects. The MRC's plan was to focus on one or two sites and track them all the way through the process to see how it works before taking it to other areas. It was noted that this is part of the process in the current project. One of the things they are trying to do with the matrix is develop a prioritization of the long- term strategy from which we pick projects. Barbara Nightingale agreed to investigate getting answers to some of the questions that have been asked about the projects. Pat Pearson agreed to draft the letter of intent, the focus being to carry forward the Habitat Stewardship and Olympia Oyster projects, as well as possibly a Port Townsend Bay project. The MRC intends to use information gained in the next month to help determine where Habitat Stewardship sites would be. She will e-mail it to the MRC for input. The MRC will use e.-mail to schedule another strategy session for the Year 4 Action Grant. There was also interest in meeting with Jamestown S'Klallam to review where we are going with this project before the technical meeting in Discovery Bay. Marine Resources Committee ~ September 18, 2002 Page: 4 OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team: It was noted that the Action Team will meet at WSU on Thursday, September 26. There was interest in having an MRC presence at this meeting. Barbara Nightingale, Judy Damore and Pat Pearson indicated they would be attending. PREPARE AGENDA I ADJOURN The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 16, 2002 at 7:00 PM in the Madrona Room, Port Hadlock, Washington. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 PM.