HomeMy WebLinkAbout042PILOT SALMON.SAFE CHRTIFICIITION
$TANDITRDS FOR GOLF COURSES
DRAFT 1.3
tEB ? 6 ?t1t
Prepared for:
Salmon-Safe, lnc.
Prepared by:
Josh Cerra and Mary Larkin
Herrera Environmental Consultants, lnc.
Portland, Oregon
With specialthanks to:
Stewardship Partners
National Fish & Wildlife Foundation
Alex Walker Foundation
March 2014
Salmon-Safe lnc.
317 SW Alder, Suite 900
Portland, OR 97204
503.232.3750
info@salmonsafe.org
www.salmonsafe.org
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Organization and Methodological Basis for $tandards
Methodology
Cedification Standards $ummary
EVALUATION PROCESS FOR CERTIFICATION
Scope
Evaluation lbam
Evaluation Process
Decision Rule for Certi{icatirn
Maintaining Certifi cation
CERTI FICATION STANDARDS
Fart A: General Siandards for Certification
Part B : H abilat*Specif i c Requirernenis for Certifr cation
G.1 lnstream Habitat Protection and Restoration:
G,2 Riparian/Wetlandf/egetation Protection and Rest0rati0n...,.....................
G,3 Stormwater Management
G.4 Water Use Management............
G.5 Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control
G.6 Pest Management and Nutrient Containment
References
Glossary
Appendix A- Documentation for Certification of Existing Golf Courses
Site Assessment Summary lnformation
Gall Course Management Overview
lnlegrated Pest Management Summary lnformatian
lrrigation Management Surnrnary
Water Quality Monitoring Summary
Stormwater !!lanagement Summary
Appendix B - Standards for New Golf Courses and lmprovements
to Existing Certified Golf Course Facilities
l. Site Selection Criteria
ll. Site Planning and Design Criteria
Standard G.2
Standard G.3
Itl. $ile Conslruclion a*d lt4anagenneni Criteria
G.1 lnstream Habitat Protection and Restoration
G.2 RiparianMetlandl/egetation Protection and Restoration
G.3 Stormwater Management
G.4 Water Use Management..........,.
1
3
3
4
6
8
x
o
u
I
10
11
il
4aIL
12
15
18
21
23
24
29
31
34
34
34
35
J}
36
<l\
36
37
,38
,38
,39
,40
G.5 Erosion Prevention and Sediment Conkol....... ....................40
G.6 Pest Management and Nutrient Containment ......................41
Appendix C - lntegrated Pest, Nutrient, and Chemical Management
Plan Guidance 42
43
4J
Appendix D - Salmon-Safe's List of High Risk Pesticides
$almon-Safe i'{igh Risk F*sticide List
n a:rr-i , : : : I : i:-
i:r.:," ,, .i
The Salmon Safe Golf Course Certification
Standards are a guide for golf course owners
and superintendents interested in designing,
constructing, operating and managing
golf courses in a manner that protects
watersheds and enhances fish and wildlife
habitat.
Golf courses offer both unique opportunities
and challenges for watershed protection.
Because natural habitat features like streams and wetlands enhance
the aesthetic qualities and technical challenges of a golf course, habitat
conservation is often compatible with good golf course design and
management. lmprovements in turf maintenance practices such as irrigation,
fertilization, ad pesticide application can result in far-reaching watershed
benefits.
Salmon-Safe and Stewardship Partners, our Puget Sound-based
implementation partner, bring a unique, project-specific, collaborative
approach to sustainable golf course certification. For certiflcation candidates,
an interdisciplinary evaluation team of qualified experts works with
landowners and managers during each step of the certification process. This
team is "on-call" for the life of the project, to work with the client in navigating
certiflcation standards and performance requirements. To complete the
certification process, the interdisciplinary team conducts an onsite inspection
of the golf course prior to final certification. After certification, Salmon-Safe
ensures the long-term environmental performance of certified sites through
an annual verification process. This process reviews landscape management
practices, habitat restoration progress, facility performance, and other
program elements to make sure the project is functioning as designed.
The Go/f Course Certification Standards are organized into six key
stewardship management categories:
'i lnstream habitat protection and restoration
;;. Riparian, wetland, and locally significant vegetation protection and
restoration
:1 Stormwater management
ii Water use management (irrigation activities)
,i', Erosion prevention and sediment control
i:. Chemical and nutrient containment.
Salmon-Sa{e is an independe*t,
no*prafit organizatian devoted to
r*st*ri*g agri*ultural and arb*n
waterslted* s* that salr*s* c*n
spewn and thrive" Faund*d as
a pr*ject of the Pa*ifi* fr.iv*rs
Cauncil, Salrnon-Safe became an
i*depende*t crganiaati*n tn ?.8fr2
and is based in F*rtland, *r*g*n.
ffis
$almon-Safe
The standards are primarily for certification of existing golf courses that
incorporate habitat-based improvements into their golf course management
and maintenance practices. The standards can also guide development of
new golf courses and expansion of existing facilities (see Appendix B). They
represent the most recent effort by Salmon-Safe to promote land use practices
that emphasize landscape-level conservation and protection of biological
diversity.
Nonl:rovisional reguirement. S
Salmsn-Safe
Salmon-Safe's golf course certiflcation program is a collaborative effort
between Salmon-Safe, our Seattle-based i mplementation partner Stewardship
Partners, and the Northwest golfing community to improve environmental
stewardship of golf courses.
Since 1996, Salmon-Safe has successfully defined and promoted ecologically
sustainable land management that protects water quality and aquatic
biodiversity throughout the Pacific Northwest. Beginning with the 2004
certification of the 10,000-acre Portland Park system, including its four
municipal golf courses, Salmon-Safe has successfully certified a number of
high profile urban projects in Oregon and Washington including the Nike World
Headquarters Campus, Portland State University, Oregon Convention Center
Washington State Department of Ecology's headquarters campus, Port of
Seattle's park system, and other corporate, municipal, and institutional sites
across the region.
This document presents draft standards for certification of golf courses,
including an overview of the process used to evaluate certification candidates
Salmon-Safe's golf course standards constitute a set of best management
practices (BMPs)for operating, maintaining, and constructing golf course
facilities in a way that enhances fish and wildlife habitat and protects
watershed health.
The Salmon-Safe certification program focuses on salmonid species (i.e.,
salmon and trout) and their habitat requirements. Salmonid species are key
indicator species in the Pacific Northwest, because their health is connected to
the health of ecosystems that include a variety of aquatic and upland wildlife
species.
The Salmon-Safe Golf Course Certiflcation Standards are adapted from the
Salmon-Safe Park and NaturalAreas Certification Standards and Residential
Development Certification Standards, both of which have been peer
reviewed by scientists, technical experts, representatives of environmental
organizations, and other interested parties. The Golf Course Standards focus
on operation and management of existing golf courses, but also provide
guidance for new facility upgrades within existing golf courses (see Appendix
B).
Organization and Methodological Basr's for Standards
Certification standards and processes are discussed as follows:
Evaluation Process for Certification: The evaluation process used for
meeting Salmon-Safe certification standards. This section is primarily
for use by golf course owners or superintendents.
Nonlrovisional requirement. S
$almsn-Safe
Certification Standards: Specific standards and related performance
requirements that must be met for the project to be considered for
Salmon-Safe certification. This section is primarily for use by golf course
superintendents and site designers.
Appendix A: A summary ol documentation needed for certification.
Appendix B: Guidance on certification of new golf course facilities and
upgrades or improvements to existing courses.
Appendix C: Guidance on developing an lntegrated Pest Management
(lPM) plan.
Appendix D: Salmon-Safe's list of high-risk pesticides most harmful to
salmon and other aquatic species.
Methodology
The certification standards are used to evaluate the extent to which existing
golf course design and infrastructure protect and restore terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems, in the context of providing high-quality recreational
opportunities and an aesthetically pleasing experience for users.
The certification standards are specifically designed to provide benchmarks
that limit or avoid impacts to watershed and habitat quality. Each standard
includes performance requirements that provide more specific guidance
and express the desired outcome for habitat conditions. The performance
requirements are organized into six habitat-related management categories:
G.1 Instream habitat protection and restoration
Applies to certain stream types that occur within the boundary of the
golf course. This category focuses on assessing the condition of the
actual channel, including the streambed and bank, and correcting
deficiencies where feasible. Both physical and biological conditions
that contribute to habitat quality are considered for these standards.
G.2 Riparian/wetland/ vegetation protection and restoration
Measures taken to protect areas closest to surface water bodies-
riparian vegetation zones and wetlands. This category focuses on
assessing the condition of riparian and wetland vegetation, and
correcting deficiencies where feasible. Also applies to areas with
locally significant vegetation. The performance requirements may vary
according to stream type.
Non-provisional requirement. S
$almon-Safe
G.3 Stormwatermanagement
Management of stormwater runoff on a golf course. lmpervious
surface and drainage systems from roads, parking lots, buildings and
lawn areas compacted by heavy equipment can contribute to flooding
and increase the rate, volume, and frequency of peak flows in streams
which can degrade stream habitat. Stormwater from developed
landscapes can also contain contaminants such as oils, heavy metals,
pesticides, and fertilizers that degrade water quality. This management
category introduces standards that minimize the amount of stormwater
generated on site and improve the quality of stormwater runoff.
G.4 Water use management
The use of water for irrigating vegetation and/or other landscape
management activities. Water withdrawals can adversely affect
salmonid habitat, primarily by reducing instream flows. Excessive
irrigation water may also serve as a medium to transport contaminants.
lmpacts can be minimized by selecting alternative water sources
that do not reduce instream flows, by reducing the use of water
(for example, through efficient irrigation or use of drought-tolerant
landscaping), and harvesting water for irrigation from rainfall or building
gray water systems.
G.5 Erosion prevention and sediment control
Sediment delivery into fish-bearing streams is a major cause of habitat
degradation, particularly for salmonid spawning areas. Stream bank
erosion and upland surface soil erosion are the principal sources of
sediment. This category evaluates upland sources of erosion, as bank
erosion is addressed in the instream channel management category
above. Effective erosion control design and maintenance practices are
intended to protect soils from movement.
G.6 Chemical and nutrient containment
Salmon survival depends on clean water, free from harmful levels of
fertilizers (nutrients), pesticides (herbicides, insecticides, fungicides,
and other biocides), stormwater runoff pollutants, and organic waste.
These contaminants can travel long distances in stormwater runoff
from a development to receiving streams. The principal methods
to avoid contamination of salmon-bearing waters are to minimize
overall inputs of these contaminants, restrict the type of inputs, and
develop an acceptable method of application through a comprehensive
management program, such as an integrated pest management (lPM)
plan.
Nor-lrrot;i;i.;i."qrir"m""r ts
$almon-Safe
Certification Standards S ummary
To aid in understanding how certification requirements relate to golf course
management, standards and performance requirements are grouped below
by stewardship management category. See the Certification Standards
section for more information.
Turf management
o Fertilizer/pesticide use (G.6.1)
o Stormwater Management (G.3.1)
o Water conservation and irrigation (G.4.1)
o Turf selection (G.4.2.3).
Water features
o Constructed stormwater treatment wetlands (G.2.2.2.3.iv)
o Onsite stormwater management (G.3.1)
o Artificial ponds (G.1.1.3.i).
lmpervious Surfaces (Pro shop, clubhouse, parking, maintenance
buildings)
o Stormwater management (G.3.1)
o Water conservation and stormwater re-use (G.4.2.3).
Tees and greens
o F erlilizerlpesticide use (G.6.1 )
o Stormwater Management (G.3.1)
o Water conservation and irrigation (G.4.1).
Fairways
o Fertilizer/pesticide use (G.6.1)
o Stormwater Management (G.3.1)
o Water conservation and irrigation (G.4.1)
o Stream crossings (G.1.2).
Nonlrovisional requirement. fl
$almon*$af*..: ':, r.
Golf cart paths
o Surfacing of paths (G.3.1.4.i)
o Stream crossings (G.1.2)
o Paths in Riparian Buffers (G.2.1-2)
o Path-related erosion control (G.5.1.2).
Golf course layout and design
o Use of natural contours for drainage (G.3.1.2)
o Riparian buffers (G.2.1)
o Stream channels (G.1.1 ,G.1.2)
o Wetlands (G.2.2)
Non-pt'ot,iai;;;i.dquG-e"i. $
$almon-Safe
H\IALUATI()N PR()CHSS FOR
CERTIFICATI()N
Scope
The evaluation process for Salmon-Safe golf course certification is an in-
depth assessment of the golf course's overall management policies and
operations, to determine if they are consistent with best management
practices for protecting watershed health and enhancing fish and wildlife
habitat. Restoration and enhancement projects are also assessed in the field
to determine if identified impacts are being addressed.
Part A of the Certification Standards lists the general standards that must be
met by the golf course for certification (General Standards). Part B of the
Certification Standards lists additional standards and associated performance
requirements that are specific to six management categories that relate to the
habitat needs of salmonids (Habitat Specific Standards). Part B standards
include provisional and non-provisionalstandards. Non-provisional standards
(indicated with an (R)) are mandatory standards that must be met (where
applicable). Provisional standards should be met to the greatest extent
operationally feasible, but the evaluation team has discretion to conditionally
certify these standards.
Throughout the standards, the phrase "to the greatest extent operationally
feasible" is used. This phrase describes the actual potential for incorporating
standards and performance requirements into site development or
operational activities. A mixture of economic, technical, biological,
cultural, aesthetic, and other reasonable factors are used to determine the
"operational feasibility" of implementing a standard at a given site location.
Ultimately, the operational feasibility of implementing certain standards and
performance requirements rests on the judgment of the interdisciplinary
evaluation team, and is evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Evaluation Team
Golf course assessments are conducted by a team of two or three qualified,
independent experts hired by Salmon-Safe. The evaluation team will be
well-versed in aquatic ecological science, turf management, and lPM.1 To
conduct the evaluation, the team conducts a detailed assessment of the
golf course's overall design and management related to habitat and water
quality protection. The team also conducts a field review of the golf course
design and habitat conditions to evaluate whether management practices are
consistent with Salmon-Safe's site-specifi c certification standards.
The interdisciplinary evaluation team has specific expertise in salmonid and riparian habitat and restoration, inte-
grated pest management (lPM), and stormwater treatment. ln building an evaluation team, the goal is to maximize
the credibility of the evaluation process by employing individuals with recognized regional expertise in relevant
disciplines, capable of independent, objective judgment.
Noii+ror;ii""ii r"qri;;menr" B
S*lmon-Bafe
Evaluation Process
The evaluation process is designed to inform the evaluation team about
existing golf course design, construction, and management practices. The
golf course practices are reviewed by the evaluation team to determine
whether they are consistent with the Salmon-Safe certification standards.
Using the certification standards described in Parts A and B below, the team
evaluates a golf course by:
"r Reviewing golf course management policies and operations by
interviewing golf course superintendents and staff and reviewing the
summary reports and inventories provided by the golf course (see
documents listed in Appendix A)
,:. Conducting a field assessment of overall golf course operations and
management to assess and verify information regarding golf course
management. Because some management actions conducted at
a specific golf course may not be visually veriflable (e.9., chemical
application methods), golf course staff will accompany the evaluation
team to indicate and explain recent management activities at the golf
course.
:j. Conducting a field assessment of ongoing restoration projects and other
conditions for certification on the golf course.
Decision Rule for Certification
Certification is awarded when both the evaluation team and Salmon-Safe are
satisfied that the golf course meets all relevant certification standards and
performance requirements. Specifically, the candidate golf course must:
Meet all requirements described in Part A of the Certification Standards
and all non-provisional standards in Part B.
Meet all provisional standards and requirements described in Paft B of
the certification standards, or provide written agreement to comply with
conditions stipulated by the evaluation team to address any observed
non-conformance with standards or performance requirements.
lf candidate golf course does not fully meet the certiflcation standards and
performance requirements, the evaluation team will stipulate one or more
certification conditions that must be completed to the satisfaction of the
evaluation team during the S-year certification period. The team also may
stipulate one or more preconditions to be completed prior to formalizing
certification.
Non-provisional requirement. [l
$almon-Safe
M aintai ning Certification
Salmon-Safe certification is valid for 5 years, subject to annual verification
of satisfactory progress in meeting any certification conditions. Annual
verification requirements require preparation of an annual site summary
report. This report typically includes a characterization of site conditions and
observed performance, verification of incorporation of policies and procedures
identified during certification, photo documentation of site condition at select
photo points, and other elements agreed upon at the time of certification.
After the initial Syear certification period, courses may be recertified through a
process consisting of a project site audit and assessment.
Non-provisional requirement. fl
$almon-$afe
*WWTrY fiffi NY X ffi ru ffiW MWffi &&ffiffi
Part A: General Standards for Certification
', . The Golf course is not in violation of national, state, or local environmental
laws or associated administrative rules or requirements, as determined
by a regulatory agency in an enforcement action.2
',) Standard management practices used in day-to-day golf course
maintenance, such as turf management, do not jeopardize salmon or
their habitat.
:j. All pesticide use occurs within the context of an integrated pest
management (lPltil) program as documented in a comprehensive written
plan (AppendixA-see elements required of an IPM plan consistentwith
Salmon Safe certification). B
i. Satisfactory progress is being made to address landscape design and
infrastructure features that degrade salmon habitat such as pavement
areas, road crossings, or concrete-lined streams. These restoration
efforts may include those required by the evaluation team to address
deficiencies, and efforts already being undertaken by golf course
management. This progress may include prioritized project lists for
the golf course, master plans for specific projects, and other planning
documents as determined by the review team.3 There is demonstrated
progress in correctin g ma nagement defl ciencies.
r.., Summary reporting is adequate to document compliance with Salmon-
Safe standards. See Appendix A for a list of written summary reports,
documents, and data required for golf course assessment.
.: The golf course allows monitoring by a third party authorized and
instructed by Salmon-Safe, and fully cooperates with such monitoring as
much as possible, given staffing and funding constraints. The evaluation
team may request that golf course management conduct water quality
or other monitoring where critically needed to assess the efficacy of
existing management practices in meeting Salmon-Safe standards. The
evaluation team will carefully weigh the need for the monitoring against
the golf course management's guidance regarding the practicality and
economic feasibility of the proposed monitoring. B
'r A policy addressing golf course upgrade design is in place. This policy
requires that significant new golf course improvements be consistent
with Salmon-Safe standards, including restoration goals as feasible,
2 fil symbol indicates that conformance with the criteria is required as a pre-condition for certification. Those not desig-
nated with the @ symbol are mandatory, but may be implemented over time.
3 An evaluation of buildings located on golf course property is not included in Salmon-Safe certification.
Non-provisional requirement.
Salmon-Safe
considering public use mandates and cost considerations. Appendix
B summarizes standards that must be met for golf course upgrades
and improvements. For example, golf course plans demonstrate that
they implement low impact development (LlD) designs, such as use of
permeable paving surfaces and localized stormwater BMPs (e.9., rain
gardens) where appropriate and to the greatest extent operationally
feasible. To evaluate conformance, the evaluation team will review the
policy and a sample of planned golf course improvements. EI
Part B: Habitat-Specific Requirements for Certification
Part B organizes standards and performance requirements into six
management categories. These requirements are intended for use by golf
course owners or superintendents as part of the Salmon-Safe certification
process. The standards are designated with the preflx "G.1" through G.6"; the
"G" designation is used to denote standards and performance requirements
associated with golf course development and operation, in contrast to
the numbered standards used in previous Salmon-Safe documents (e.9.,
Salmon-Safe 2005; Salmon-Safe 2008).
G.l lnstream Habitat Protection and Restoration:
This management category applies to certain stream types that occur within
the boundary of the golf course. lt focuses on assessing the condition of the
actual channel, including the streambed and bank, and correcting deficiencies
where feasible. Both physical and biological conditions contributing to habitat
quality are considered for these standards.
Standard G.1.1: Overall, channel and instream conditions are acceptable.
Key deficiencies have been identified, inventoried, evaluated, and resolved.
Stream channels provide salmonid habitat via naturally stabilized stream
banks, meandering channel form, and large and smallwood structures where
hydrologically and geomorphically appropriate.
This standard applies to both known and potential fish-bearing streams
and nonfish bearing perennial or intermittent streams greater than 2 feet in
bankfull width that are connected to fish bearing streams.
To determine whether streams are fish-bearing, StreamNet has fish data
for the Pacific Northwest, including GIS mapping of fish data by stream,
watershed, county, and other criteria (http://www.streamnet.org/). State
agencies, such as Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (http://wdfw.
wa.gov/fish/managementl) and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
(http ://www.dfw. state. or. us/f ish/) have add itional resources. Depend i n g
on the golf course location, local agencies, such as counties, cities, and/or
drainage districts, may have additional information on fish usage.
Nonlrrovisional requirement. fl
Salmon-Safe
Performance Requirements:
G.1.1.1 lnventory
An accurate map of fish species distribution (existing and potential
distribution of native salmonid species) and stream channel types on
golf course property has been developed. At a minimum, these stream
channel types shall include: a) fish-bearing streams, b) potential fish-
bearing streams, and c) non-fish bearing streams greater than 2 feet in
bankfullwidth and connected to a fish-bearing or potential fish-bearing
stream. The map also identifies Endangered Species Sct (ESA) Critical
Habitat for salmon and steelhead as mapped by NOAA Fisheries where
a ppl icable http:i/www. nwr. noaa. gov/Sal mon-H abitaUCritical-H abitaU.
Onsite stream channel deficiencies have been identified and mapped,
based on the best professional judgment of a qualified professional
(typically a geomorphologist, water resource engineer or fish biologist).
Bank stability and channel incision have been characterized across
the site. Onsite floodplain and channel migration zones have been
mapped.
ir . Existing watershed-specific restoration or recovery plans and local
salmonid recovery programs have been investigated by expert interview
or planning document review. See sa/mon recovery plans, in glossary,
for examples of sources. Opportunities to incorporate objectives of
these plans and programs into golf course management policy have
been identified.
G.1.1.2 Channel Protection
Channel manipulation, except for habitat restoration, is avoided to the
greatest extent operationally feasible. Existing channels are protected from
new impacts such as filling and excavation, straightening, unnecessary
additional stream crossings, unnecessary removal of wood, or disconnection
of off-channel wetlands and ponds
G.1.1.3 Restoration Effort
A plan is being implemented that shows significant progress toward repairing
existing stream channeldeficiencies identified in G.1.1.1 and G.1.1.2 to the
greatest extent operationally feasible, as follows:
Where geomorphically appropriate, stream banks and the edges of
other related water bodies are stabilized by native vegetation.
ii
ii The stream has an intact natural channel and floodplain, existing
off-channel habitats remain connected, and no large wood has been
unnecessarily removed.
,i. lncised or eroded stream banks have been stabilized using
Nonlrrovisionrl requirement. Sl
$almon-Safs : :' : "., ':l.t " rl
bioengineering methods to the greatest extent operationally feasible
Large wood and/or beaver dams provide channel structure and habitat,
where suitable. When geomorphically appropriate and in accordance with
natural and historical conditions, habitat improvement projects specify the
use of large woody debris that has been salvaged from the site or has
been harvested sustainably from an offsite location.
Artificial ponds located in flsh-bearing or potentially fish-bearing stream
channels are removed to the extent operationally feasible. Ponds that
remain are reconstructed if necessary to provide adequate fish passage,
habitat, and maintain stream temperatures and oxygen levels within
applicable state water quality standards.
Standard G.1.2. Key issues with regard to instream barriers, stream crossings,
and man-made features have been identified, evaluated, and resolved. Road
and trail crossings of streams that are on golf course property are minimized
and have a minimal effect on instream habitat, fish passage, and constriction of
flood conveyance. Permits are obtained and mitigation conducted for impacts, if
any, to jurisdictional waters.
This standard applies to both known and potential fish-bearing streams (see
Standard G.1.1 forfish data sources).
Performance Requirements:
G.1.2.1 lnventory
: Onsite stream crossings have been inventoried and evaluated. For
reference, consider Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife guidance
(WDFW 2000; WDFW 2003) to determine priorities for fish passage and
flood conveyance.
lnstream barriers to fish passage have been inventoried, described,
and located on a map. Human-made structures, or conditions with the
potential to degrade instream habitat quality like levees, embankments,
bank reinforcement or other features, have been inventoried.
G.1.2.2 Restoration Effort
A plan is being implemented that shows significant progress toward repairing
existing deficiencies, to the greatest extent operationally feasible, in the
following areas:
Unnatural barriers to fish and wildlife have been removed or plans are in
place for removal.
No new levees are proposed. Existing levees have been removed (or
moved) and floodplains are restored to the greatest extent operationally
feasible. .
Nonlrrovisional requirement. S
i,
$almon-S*fe
Stream crossings avoid creating obstructions and encumbrances to
flsh, wildlife, woody debris, and sediment passage to the greatest extent
operationally feasible.a
Bridges are used rather than culverts or fords to the greatest extent
operationally feasible. Natural bottom culverts are selected for use over
other types.
Wood used in new stream crossing structures is not treated with chemicals,
such as creosote, copper chromated arsenic or other copper based
preservatives, potentially harmful to aquatic life to the greatest extent
operationally feasible.
Where fainruays cross streams, they minimize impacts to the stream
Damaged, exposed, or at-risk areas, including areas devoid of vegetation,
areas containing significant populations of noxious weeds, and/or areas of
turfgrass extending to channel banks have been identified and mapped to
identify riparian areas in need of restoration.
G.2 Riparian/WetlandNegetation Protection and Restoration
The focus of this management category is on measures taken to protect areas
closest to surface water bodies-riparian vegetation zones and wetlands. lt
also applies to areas with locally significant vegetation (see glossary). The
performance requirements may vary according to stream type.
Standard G.2.1: Riparian buffers are maintained, restored, and unimpeded by
structures or improvements. Riparian areas are in good condition, maintain and
restore stream health, and provide shade, wood recruitment, leaf litter supply,
stream bank stability and cover, and filtration of sediment.
Performance Requirements:
G.2.1.1 lnventory
i. Onsite riparian areas are identified, mapped, and described by width of
existing buffer and stream length of riparian vegetation free from intrusions
from roads, utilities, and other clearings (i.e., riparian continuity).
tl
Typical local and watershed riparian habitat extent, quality and conditions
have been characterized by species composition and estimated percent
cover in the tree canopy, shrub layer, and herbaceous layer, especially in
areas adjacent to, immediately upstream, or immediately downstream of
the site.
1,,' Typical local terrestrial riparian species (vegetation, birds, mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians) have been characterized via interviews with local
4 WDFW (2003),
Non-provisional requirement.
Salmon-Saf*
experts, review of relevant documents, or other methods.
A site inventory of common local terrestrial riparian wildlife species
(birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians) and their sign has been
conducted at least once during the breeding or growing season to
determine the presence or absence of species on site. Locations
identified in the survey that likely provide high habitat value and/or may
harbor sensitive species have been mapped.
G.2.1.2 Riparian Zone Width
,. lmpacts on riparian functions affecting water quality or quantity,
floodplain condition, stream shading and contiguous riparian canopy
connectivity shall be minimized to the greatest extent operationally
feasible in any undeveloped natural area within 200 feet of a stream
or river channel migration zone (CMZ), or within the riparian protection
areas cited in adopted local, regional, or state plans, whichever distance
is larger. Within 200 feet of a stream or river CMZ, any effect on riparian
function is minimized and mitigated to offset functional impacts resulting
from other uses. For developed areas, including fairways and other
landscaped areas managed for golf, impacts to riparian function are
minimized within 50 feet of the stream or river channel migration zone.
Acceptable mitigation may include native plantings, enhancement
of remaining buffers, or removal of barriers. Trails are generally an
accepted use within these riparian areas unless they are obvious
sources of sediment or bank instability.
ii
G.2.1.3 Vegetation
Riparian zones are dominated by vegetation that provides bank stability and
shade, at a minimum.
G.2.1.4 Restoration Effort
A comprehensive program is underway to identify and implement riparian
restoration priorities, to the greatest extent operationally feasible, in the
following areas:
An average riparian buffer of 50 feet is provided between landscaped
areas of the golf course (fairway, tee, putting green) and the CMZ. Area
within the buffer is flagged and marked as water hazard,lateral water
hazard, environmental zone, or out of bounds.
Where riparian buffers do not meet the widths specified in G.2.1.4 (i),
buffers are enhanced by removal of invasive plant species, revegetation
with native plants, or removal of existing structures or impervious
surfaces to restore riparian functions identified in G2.1.2.
, Where viable, provisions are made to restore off-channel habitat and/or
i;
Non-pr ovisional requirement.
Salrnon-Safe
provide additional fl ood storage.
t',t. Connectivity between riparian, wetland, upland habitats is maximized
to the greatest extent operationally feasible. Life histories of local
species are maintained by connecting riparian, wetland, and upland
habitats in a manner that supports habitat needs. lmpediments to
habitat connectivity, including fencing, buildings, or other barriers, are
avoided.s
Standard G.2.2: Wetlands are protected, avoided, restored, or created to
improve stream habitat by providing off-channel salmonid habitat, improved
water quality, and/or additional floodplain storage to the greatest extent
operationally feasible. Permits are obtained and mitigation conducted for
impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and waters. B
Performance Requirements:
G.2.2.1 lnventory
Wetlands are identified, classified, and mapped. Classification of
existing wetlands includes types of impacts and whether the wetland
historically or currently provides fish habitat.
Conditions within 100 feet of each wetland are characterized by
vegetation composition, land use characteristics, and topography.
Typical localwetland species (vegetation, birds, mammals, reptiles, and
amphibians) have been characterized via interviews with local experts,
review of relevant documents, or other methods.
A site inventory of common local wetland species (birds, mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians) and their sign has been conducted at least
once during the breeding or growing season to determine or estimate
presence/absence of species on site. Locations identified in the survey
that likely provide high habitat value and/or may harbor sensitive
species have been mapped.
G.2.2.2 Wetland Protection
Existing wetlands are avoided and protected from development or site
improvements, to the greatest extent operationally feasible and as required
by local, state, and federal regulatory agencies ( e.g. Oregon Department
of State Lands; US Army Corps of Engineers; Washington Department of
Ecology; and/or localjurisdictions). Management or public impacts that are
detrimental to wetland native vegetation, soils, or water quality are minimized
Development near wetlands is avoided to the greatest extent operationally
feasible. lf 100 percent avoidance is not possible, the effect on wetlands
Work with a qualified biologist or a local or state fish and wildlife agency to identify significant local species and habFtats'
ffiffi*--%,ffiffifii g
5
$almgn-Safe
and wetland buffers is minimized and mitigated to offset functional impacts
and as required by local, state, and federal regulatory agencies (e.9. Oregon
Department of State Lands; US Army Corps of Engineers; Washington
Department of Ecology; and/or localjurisdictions) .Acceptable mitigation may
include native plantings, enhancement of remaining buffers, improved wetland
hydrology, removal of barriers to movement and, where appropriate, fencing to
protect buffers.
G.2.2.3 Restoration Effort
Plans are being implemented that show significant progress toward improving
wetland condition and function, to the greatest extent operationally feasible, in
the following ways:
Degraded wetlands are restored, or new wetlands created to improve
floodplain habitat, off-channel salmonid habitat, and/or other wetland
functions (e.9., water quality, flood storage or infiltration), to the greatest
extent operationally feasible.
't
,il
Wetland buffers are established to protect wetland functions affecting
water quality and quantity, floodplain condition, and contiguous habitat
connectivity. Where wetland buffers are inadequate under existing
conditions, buffers are restored by revegetation or removal of existing
detrimental structures or impervious surfaces. Buffers are managed to
respond to needs of known local wetland fauna that require accessible
adjacent or nearby upland habitat during their life cycles.
Wetland habitats and their buffers are spatially connected by locally
appropriate, contiguous native vegetation, to the greatest extent
operationally feasible. These areas are also connected to other
natural areas as part of a landscape-scale, conservation framework for
enhanced habitat connectivity. .
,,.j Constructed stormwater treatment wetlands (see G.3) do not disrupt
the normal function of natural wetlands, but can be used to accept or
redirect water to wetlands in order to enhance wetland function.
G.3 StormwaterManagement
Effective stormwater management is critical for all forms of development,
including golf courses. This management category introduces standards
that minimize the amount of stormwater generated onsite, and improve the
quality of stormwater runoff. Uncontrolled or poorly managed stormwater
can degrade stream habitat (through flooding and/or increases in the volume,
velocity, and frequency of peak flows), decrease summer base flows, increase
erosion and sediment transport, and cause water quality problems by washing
pollutants such as oils, heavy metals, pesticides, and fertilizers into receiving
waters. Golf courses have a relatively low percentage of impervious surface
Nonlrcvisionat reQuirement. [l
$almon-Safe
area, typically consisting of parking areas, the clubhouse, and maintenance
areas. Golf courses can effectively manage their stormwater by meeting the
performance requirements below.
Standard G.3.1: The golf course is designed to minimize stormwater runoff
and minimize the footprint of onsite impervious surfaces.
Performance Requ irements :
G.3.1.1 lnventory
lmpervious and semi-pervious (e.9., gravel or pavers) surfaces, and other
areas contributing to stormwater runoff, are mapped. A summary report
provides an estimate of the percent of impervious surface (pavement,
roofs, hard-packed gravel) based on site plans, record drawings (as-
builts) aerial photographs or field measurements.
lnformation on existing stormwater infrastructure, if any, has been
collected from record drawings, site mapping, or field inspection. This
includes locations of stormwater conveyance channels, pipes, catch
basins, outlets, and low impact development stormwater facilities. Any
existing stormwater mitigation projects, such as reduction in pavement,
detention ponds, or biofiltration swales, are called out and identified.
,.: Site topography has been mapped and a drainage area assessment
conducted. This information shows major stormwater catchments and
locations of receiving stormwater drains or streams, if present.o Areas
suitable for low impact development stormwater facilities (based on soil
infiltration capacity) have been mapped.
Any known or potential offsite drainage or stormwater resources entering
the site from an adjacent property have been identified based on drainage
or topographic maps or field inspection. Offsite areas contributing to
onsite hydrology have been characterized in terms of impervious and
pervious area, water quality concerns, and any proposed changes in
offsite conditions that may affect stormwater flow or water quality on
site.
b
G.3.1.2 Drainage Routes
Primary stormwater drainage routes within golf courses and location of
receiving stormwater drains and streams have been documented and
considered in management activities, such as pesticide application, mowing,
and implementation of stormwater treatment projects.
An existing site stormwater management plan, if updated and available, is generally sufficient to meet performance
requirements R.1.3.1(i), R.1.3.1(ii), and R.1.3.1(iii), and can be provided to the Evaluation Team as a substitute for
these requirements.ffiffi;ilffifi6
t1.
$almon*Safe
G.3.1.3 Water Quality Monitoring
A regular monitoring plan has been established for water quality testing in
stormwater ponds and naturally occurring water bodies (where they occur on
the golf course grounds). Written records are maintained, and the monitoring
plan includes adaptive managernent measures that will be implemented if
monitoring indicates that golf course conditions or activities are reducing or
impairing water quality. The plan specifies additional monitoring if visual signs
of water quality degradation, known spills or other water quality hazards are
evident in streams, watercourses, or stormwater facilities. Parameters to
be monitored will be determined by the certification team and may include:
dissolved oxygen; pH; temperature; specific conductivity; nitrogen (nitrate)
soluble orthophosphate; and other constituents known to be of concern in the
local watershed (identified on the state 303(d) list under the Clean Water Act).
G.3.1 .4 Restoration Effort
A plan is being implemented that shows significant progress toward
decreasing effective impervious area (ElA) and improving stormwater
management within the golf course to the greatest extent operationally
feasible, in the following ways:
lmpervious surfaces (pavement) are reduced to the greatest extent
operationally feasible. Strategies include reducing the number of
parking spaces (subject to local requirements), reducing parking space
and/or roadway widths, and/or using permeable paving materials for
parking lots.
Stormwater management systems for roadway, parking lot, and building
runoff treat stormwater close to the source. Rather than concentrating
runoff and releasing it to the storm drainage system or large-scale
detention facilities, stormwater is managed using dispersion and
infiltration and localized stormwater facilities. Examples of system
components include rain gardens; infiltration trenches, roof rainwater
collection cisterns, and vegetated rooftops. To avoid the risk of
catastrophic failure during high flow events, stormwater facilities are
designed with adequate bypass/overflow measures where appropriate.T
Stormwater facilities are planted with native or adapted vegetation
adapted to the fluctuating water conditions characteristic of stormwater
facilities. Large retentionldetention areas that may surface drain into
stream systems are shaded from solar access and associated potential
for thermal gain.
i,ii Stormwater facilities pose no fish trap hazard during normal or high flow
conditions. Stormwater facilities are outfitted with screens to prevent
7 Note: general guidance for effective stormwater facility design may be found in the Stormwater Management Manual
for Western Washington, or other similar documentation (Ecology 2005).
Non-provisional requirement. fil
i;
1"
$alm*n-$afe
fish from entering stormwater management facilities
Where consistent with the needs of local species, stormwater facilities
incorporate habitat feature improvements, integrate with the existing
natural areas matrix, and support connectivity between habitats.
G.4 Water Use Management
Water withdrawals for irrigation can adversely affect salmonid habitat,
primarily by reducing instream flows. lmpacts can be minimized by selecting
alternative water sources that do not reduce instream flows, by reducing the
use of water (for example, through efficient irrigation or use of drought-tolerant
landscaping), and harvesting water for irrigation from rainfall, where approved
by local jurisdictions.
Standard G.4.1: The selected source of irrigation water results in the least
potential impact to instream flows of fish-bearing streams to the greatest
extent operationally feasible.
Performance Requirements:
G.4.1.1 Site Water lnventory
An existing site water infrastructure inventory as it relates to water use and
disposal has been completed.
Availability of public water sources has been investigated to aid
in avoiding the use of surface water rights, to the greatest extent
operationally feasible. lnformation on existing sanitary/wastewater
infrastructure, if any, has been collected from record drawings, site
mapping, or field inspection.
Localjurisdictional code as it relates to reuse of gray water and black
water has been reviewed and documented, for reference during future
development.
G.4.1.2 Drought Planning
Withdrawals of surface water sources are managed to avoid impact to
salmonids in the source stream, particularly during times of below-average
precipitation.
Standard G.4.2: Water conservation measures reduce irrigation water use to
the minimum necessary to support maintenance of golf course grounds.
Performance Requirements:
G.4.2.1 Water Conservation Plan
The golf course develops a conservation plan to conserve water by focusing
watering in limited areas of the golf course.
ffiffii?ffiffits
$almon-Saf*
The plan lists activities to perform, provides a schedule for activities, and
identifies responsible parties. Adaptive management triggers actions that
respond to changes in performance. The water conservation plan shall
include a drought management plan that details how significant reductions
will be achieved during times of below-average precipitation.
Golf Course policy formalizes responsibility to implement and enforce all
aspects of the water conservation plan.
G.4.2.2 Water Use Monitoring
Awater use monitoring plan is implemented and annualsummary reporting is
available to the public. Reporting documents a decline in water use per acre
for the system over a 5year period, or explains why no further efficiencies are
feasible.
G.4.2.3 Restoration Effort
A plan is being implemented that shows significant progress, to greatest extent
operationally feasible, toward increased water conservation, in the following
areas:
Landscape vegetation has been selected and located appropriate to site
conditions.
,:: Drought-tolerant plants that require minimal (if any) irrigation are
used in landscaping to the greatest extent operationally feasible.
Plants with high water demands have been avoided. Where suitable,
drought-tolerant native vegetation is selected over nonnative plants,
especially near habitat buffers. No invasive species, as deflned by
local and state agency weed lists, are used at all.
,., On parts of the property not including the golf course, open lawn
is minimized to the greatest extent operationally feasible, or is
composed of drought-tolerant alternative seed mixes.
:... Construction details specify the use of compost and mulch during
installation of new plant material to reduce irrigation requirements.
Water conservation practices are used during site maintenance to the
greatest extent operationally feasible.
t,;. Automated soil moisture sensors and other water-conserving
techniques are part of the irrigation plan. lrrigation delivers water
based on specific vegetation requirements, rate of infiltration,
evapotranspiration, and other factors.
,,.: Stormwater reuse and gray water reuse systems, if compatible with
code and regulatory requirements, are used. Water may be reused
Non-provisional requirement. fl
t.
Salmon-Saf*
within building water systems, irrigation, or any water use that
reduces consumption.
G.5 Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control
Sediment delivery into fish-bearing streams is a major cause of habitat
degradation, particularly for salmonid spawning areas. Stream bank erosion
and upland surface soil erosion are the principal sources of sediment.
This management category evaluates upland sources of erosion, as bank
erosion is addressed in the instream channel management category above.
Effective erosion control design and maintenance practices protect soils from
movement.
Standard G.5.1: Soil is protected from erosion and generation of sediment
that could enter surface water bodies. Soils protection is accomplished by
vegetative cover, mulch, or other methods to prevent off-site movement of
sediment.
Performance Requirements:
G.5.1.1 lnventory
i Soil maps have been reviewed, if available. Areas that appear to have
hydric soils, high erodibility, and/or steep slopes are field-investigated
Unstable or highly erodible areas, including existing erosion and
sedimentation problem areas have been identified and mapped. These
include existing slumps or failures, steep slopes, and unstable soils.
iri. Any existing onsite soil tests or geotechnical bores are available to the
project team.
G.5.1.2 Trail Systems
Earthen trails are protected by mulch, water bars, closures or other BMPs as
necessary to prevent erosion. Golf course management actively seeks out
and decommissions unauthorized trails.
G.5.1.3 Vegetative Cover
No area larger than 100 square feet is comprised of bare or disturbed soils,
particularly areas that show evidence of sediment transport to streams or off-
site in stormwater. EI
G.5.'1.4 Restoration Effort
Erosion protection and sediment control plans demonstrate progress toward
protecting soils from erosion and preventing the transport of sediment into
streams or off-site stormwater, in the following areas.
N";t;ii;i;;;i ;"q,iii.""i. @
t.'",: .i.::..':1, ,, ..::.a.
Salmon*Safe
Bare or exposed soils are temporary features only, to be vegetated
with plant types consistent with Standard G.4.2.3. Erosion control seed
mixes are composed of native species or other suitable species that
contribute to soil stability and soil quality.
are protected by BMPs as necessary to prevent erosion. Earthen trails
or cart paths, especially those in designated buffers, are protected
by mulch, water bars, closures, or other BMPs as needed to prevent
erosion and sediment transport.
Permanent erosion control features, in the form of site grading, flow
control, and landscaping, are strategically placed to prevent turbid
stormwater from leaving the site.
Unstable or highly erodible areas have been identified and mapped.
lf they are within the limits of typical course play, they are marked as
ground under repair or out of bounds. These include existing slumps or
failures, steep slopes, and unstable soils.
Golf course soils are regularly enhanced by amending soils with organic
content and/or aerating as needed to improve soil health.
G.6 Pest Management and Nutrient Containment
Salmon survival depends on clean water, free from harmful levels of
fertilizers (nutrients), pesticides (herbicides, insecticides, fungicides,
and other biocides), stormwater runoff pollutants, and organic waste.
These contaminants can travel long distances in stormwater runoff from
a development to receiving streams. The principal methods to avoid
contamination of salmon-bearing waters are to minimize overall inputs of
these contaminants, restrict the type of inputs, and develop an acceptable
method of application through a comprehensive management program, such
as an integrated pest management (lPM)plan.
Standard G.6.1: ln the interests of improving site water quality and
ecosystem health, an integrated pest management (lPM) and nutrient
containment plan is in place.
Pedormance Requ irements:
G.6.1.1 lntegrated Pest Management and Nutrient Containment Plan
An lntegrated Pest Management (lPM) plan or policies are developed to
promote management practices that reduce the impact of or eliminate
the need for pesticides. Pesticide use must not result in contamination of
stormwater or streams in amounts harmful to salmon or aquatic ecosystems.
These practices generally include careful monitoring and scouting of insects,
weeds, and disease; use of nonspray control methods (cultural practices
Nonlrrovisional requirement. @
$almon-Safe
and mechanical controls); use of reduced impact pesticide controls; and/
or managing specific sites without the use of pesticides. The plan has been
adopted into the golf course's management policy to formalize implementation
and enforcement over time. The IPM plan must comply with the following
guidelines:
Type of pesticides -AIl use of pesticides within the golf course property,
including on watenruays, watenvay buffers, and uplands, is limited by
an IPM program addressing the specific policies on the method of use,
application type, rate, frequency, location, and amount. Only those
pesticides included on a limited use list developed by the golf course as
part of a comprehensive IPM approach can be used. These pesticides
will only be used when there is no undue risk of harm to salmon and
aquatic ecosystems. This limited use list is reviewed and adjusted on
an annual basis by golf course management to ensure that potential
environmental harm is minimized. Pesticides may be added or removed
from the list at the time of review.
Minimize aquatic impacts from high-risk pesticides - The use of any
pesticide on the Salmon-Safe Cautionary List of High Risk Pesticides
requires written explanation for each pesticide used that details the
methods of use, including timing and location, that demonstrate that
the risk to aquatic systems is negligible (Appendix D - Salmon-Safe
High-Risk Pesticide List). E
Restricted use zones - Pesticide use is specially managed within
watenruays and adjacent wateruiray buffer areas. For the purposes of
pesticide application, the buffer zone is defined as a corridor of land
that is 60 feet in width on each side of a stream or other body of water.
Measurement of this buffer zone begins at the edge of the water line
at the time of application, and is measured horizontally as if on a map.
Anticipated seasonal or weather-related changes affecting water level
will be included in the decision-making process when dealing with buffer
zones. However, the width of the buffer zone is location-specific and
playability of the golf course is considered in defining individual buffer
zones. Separate action thresholds must be defined for the application
of pesticides where the buffer zones are less than 60 feet. B
i1,Pesticide treatment of trees - Within riparian buffer zones, pesticides
are used only on rare occasion for treating tree pests or diseases.
lnjection of pesticides within tree tissues, or paintbrush application, are
the only application methods for trees allowed in riparian buffer zones.
Application equipment - Within riparian buffers, pesticide application
for vegetation other than trees is done by hand and using low-volume,
low-pressure, single-wand sprayers, wiping, daubing and painting
equipment, or injection systems. The methods used minimize fine
Non-pr ovisional requirement.
$almon-Safe
mists and ensure that the applied materials reach targeted plants or
targeted soils surfaces. El
,.ii. Pesticide drift - Great care is taken to ensure that pesticide drift does
not reach nearby surface waters by using appropriate equipment and
methods. Spray applications are not allowed in the buffer area when
wind speed is above 5 mph or wind direction would carry pesticides
toward open water. No spraying is conducted during a temperature
inversion, unless a suitable application method is identified to eliminate
any potential negative effects.
'.'jl Reduction Program - An IPM plan or policies are being implemented
that promote management practices that reduce the impact of, the
unnecessary reliance upon, or eliminate the need for pesticides. These
practices generally include careful monitoring and scouting of insects,
weeds, and disease, use of non-spray control methods including cultural
practices and mechanical controls, as well as managing specific sites
without the use of chemical pesticides.
,'r. Pesticide applicator licensing - All persons applying pesticides must
be currently licensed as private pesticide applicators by the Oregon
or Washington Departments of Agriculture, as appropriate. Licensed
personnel must be specifically endorsed for any of the state-defined
categories of pest control they undertake, such as aquatic endorsement
for all aquatic pest control activities.
Pesticide storage, rinsates, disposal - The golf course operation has
rigorous policies in place to ensure that no contamination of stormwater
or streams occurs due to the storage, cleaning of equipment, or
disposal of pesticides and conforms to all applicable permit and
regulatory requirements related to hazardous material storage. Source
control BMPs include keeping chemicals under cover and using spill
containment devices.
Pesticide tracking system - Detailed records are maintained for all
pesticide applications on the part of the golf course staff, including
applications to aquatic areas and buffer zones, consistent with state
requirements.
i,r.r. Pesticide application timing - Pesticides are not applied when it is
raining (unless otherwise directed by label instructions), or when there
is a potential for transport by runoff to stormwater drains or streams.
Decisions regarding scheduling of pesticide applications should account
for the expected impacts of anticipated storm events. B
Non-provisional requirement. [l
Salmsn*$afe
G.6.1.2 Nutrient Management Requirements within the Plan
The potential for nutrient and lime use to contaminate stormwater and
streams can be minimized through a program that uses alternative cultural
and mechanical practices to maintain soil fertility, uses fertilizers with
discretion based on soilfertility and plant needs, uses slow-reacting fertilizers,
and ensures proper application of fertilizer and lime in terms of amounts
and timing. The nutrient containment plan should comply with the following
guidelines:
Types of fertilizers - Fertilizer types are tailored to the existing soil
conditions and plant requirements. Slow release organic fertilizers,
low application rates of soluble fertilizers, or compost are generally
used. Fertilizers must be selected through a state-approved screening
and approval process to ensure the fertilizer does not contain toxic
contaminants. The Washington Department of Agriculture maintains
a database of commercial fertilizer products that includes data on
total metals concentrations in fertilizers (http://agr.wa.gov/PestFerU
Fertilizers/FertDB/Productl.aspx). lf soluble fertilizers are used, the
timing and rate of application are carefully considered (see below). B
Fertilizer application amounts - ln general turf and shrub bed areas,
soluble fertilizer rates of application are limited to no more than 0.51b
N/1,000 square feet at any one time with restraints on timing to minimize
fertilizer in stormwater runoff. EI
r Low fertilizer landscaping - Plants with low-fertilizer requirements are
used for landscaping to the greatest extent operationally feasible.
Focused use - Fertilizer is used only on high- and moderate-intensity
use areas, such as flowerbeds, turf and planting beds, and some
plantings associated with construction and restoration projects, if at
all. Lime is used to adjust pH to optimize nutrient availability to plants
where suitable, in a manner that does not pose impacts to water quality.
Buffer zone width - Fertilizer and lime use is highly restricted within a
waterway (riparian or wetland) buffer zone. B
Use within watercourse buffers - Fertilizer use in buffer zones of
waterways is restricted depending on the intensity of application and
type of fertilizers. The allowable use of fertilizer also varies depending
on whether it is being used for routine maintenance orfor restoration and
construction projects. However, the width of the buffer zone is location-
specific and playability of the golf course is considered in defining buffer
zones. See 6.6.1.ii above. EI
:,:' Soil testing - Periodic soil testing is used to determine the need for
fertilizer (phosphorus and potassium) and lime relative to appropriate
Non-provisional requirement.E
VI
$almon-Safs
benchmarks established by golf course management. Testing is
conducted a minimum of twice peryear. Golf course operation maintains
historic records of soil test results.
,",,;:. Soil fertility - Practices, such as on-site mulching of leaf and grass
clippings, are used to reduce the need for fertilizer.
:.; Asummary reportof annualfertilizeruse is provided thatshows consistent
improvements in fertilizer use and application via implementation of
the IPM plan, taking into account the changes in acreage managed,
specific uses, and other relevant factors.
G.6.1.3 Material and Waste Storage and Handling
: The golf course stores all materials that could potentially contaminate
streams or stormwater in a secure dry location.
:: The golf course has rigorous policies in place to ensure that no
contamination of stormwater or streams occurs due to storage, cleaning
of equipment, or disposal of materials and these policies are adhered to
by golf course personnel and contractors.
G.6.1.4 Other Contaminant Management within the Plan
: Other contaminants, such as animal and chemical waste, should not
contaminate stormwater or streams leaving the golf course.
tl Materials handling is done in dry areas and where spills can be cleaned
up without risk of contamination of stormwater or streams.
Animal waste control - The golf course fosters management and
education policies regarding dog or other domestic animal waste
control that are effective in minimizing the contamination of stormwater
or streams. For example, dogs may be restricted to certain areas of the
golf course property.
i Wildlife waste control program (geese, ducks) - lf necessary and
the greatest extent operationally feasible, a management program is
implemented to ensure that duck and goose waste does not contaminate
stormwater or streams.
ilffifi;cil;ffi;g
$alm*n-Safe
Referer"rce$
Audubon lnternational. 2006. Golf and Environment Fact Sheef;
Environmental hlanagement Practices for Golf Courses.
Ecology. 2005. Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Available for download from
agency website: <http://www.ecy.wa.goviprograms/wq/stormwater/index.
html>.
Environment Canada. 1996. Greening Your BC Golf Course: A Guide to
Envi ron me ntal M anage me nt.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 1995. Best Management
Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Deparlments.
IWWR. 2003. An lntroduction and User's Guide to Wetland Restoration,
Creation, and Enhancement. lnteragency Workgroup on Wetland Restoration
(National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration, Environmental Protection
Agency, Army Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Natural
Resources Conservation Service). Available for download at: <http://www.
epa. g ov/owow/wetl ands/pdf/restdocfi n a l. pdf>
Love, William R. 1999. An EnvironmentalApproach to Golf Course
Developmenf. American Society of Golf Course Architects, Chicago, lL
Oregon Natural Heritage lnformation Center. 2004. Rare, Threatened and
Endangered Species of Oregon. Oregon Natural Heritage lnformation Center
Oregon State University, Portland, Oregon. 105 pp.
Pace. 2000. Chapter 1: Golf course desrgln and construction best
management practices.
PSAT and WSU. 2005. Low lmpact Development: Technical Guidance
Manualfor Puget Sound. Puget Sound Action Team and Washington State
University Pierce County Extension. Available for download at: <http:/lwww.
psat.wa. gov/Pu blications/Ll D_tech_man ua I05/l id_i ndex. htm>.
Salmon-Safe. 2O04. Sa/mon-Safe Certification Standard s for Parks and
Natural Areas, Draft 5.4. Prepared by Peter Bayles, Northwest Watershed
lnstitute, and Dan Kent, Salmon-Safe lnc.
Salmon-Safe. 2005. Sa/mon-Safe Certification Standards for Corporate
and University Campuses, Draft 3.7. Prepared by Peter Bayles, Northwest
Watershed lnstitute, and Dan Kent, Salmon-Safe lnc.
NrrJrr-4ri""rl r"q,*"r""L ts
$almon-Safe
Salmon-Safe. 2009. Sa/mon-Safe Certification Standard s for Reside ntial
Development, Draft 2.2 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants
WDFW. 2000. Reference Fr'sh Passage Barrier and Sufface Water Diversion
Screening Assessment and Prioritization Manual. Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife. Available for download from agency website: < http://wdfw
wa. gov/h a blta pps/fi sh barr. htm>.
WDFW. 2003. Design of Road Culverts for Fish Passage. Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife. Available for download from agency website:
< http ://wdfw.wa. gov/h ab/en g i nee r/cm/>.
WDNR. Undated. Reference Desk of the Washington Natural Heritage
Program. Available at <http://www1 .dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/index. html>.
Non-pr ovisional requirement.ts
Salmt:n*Safe
Gltrssary
303(d) List
Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), the 303(d) list is the list of waters (streams
and lakes) identifled as impaired for one or more pollutants and that do not
meet one or more water quality standards. The CWA is administered by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with authori ty often designated to a
state agency for local implementation. ln Oregon, the 303(d) list is maintained
by the Oregon Depadment of Environmental Quality (Oregon DEO).
Best management practices, or BMPs
Schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures,
and structural or management measures that prevent or reduce the release of
pollutants and other adverse impacts on the environment.
Buffer
Land (of a specified width) adjacent to a water body or other sensitive area, in
which special management restrictions to protect habitats are applied.
Certifi cation Standards
A set of specific guidelines or BMPs developed by Salmon-Safe for golf
course owners, superintendents, and designers with an interest in the design,
construction, maintenance, and operation of golf courses in a manner that
protects imperiled salmonid species, and other associated aquatic and
terrestrial habitat elements.
Channel Migration Zone (CMZ)
The CMZ is the area where the active channel of a stream is prone to
movement over time. CMZs are also known as "flood hazard" or "floodway
fringe" areas, and are generally considered to be spatially equivalent to
the 100-year flood plain, i.e. the floodplain area subject to a one percent or
greater chance of flooding in any given year.
Critical Habitat
"Critical habitat" is defined under the federal ESA as: (1) specific areas within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing, if they
contain physical or biological features essential to conservation, and those
features may require special management considerations or protection; and
(2) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species if
the agency determines that the area itself is essential for conservation. More
information and maps of critical habitat in Oregon and Washington may be
obtained from the NOAA Fisheries Northwest Regional Office: <http://www.
n wr. n oa a . g ov/ E SA-S a I m o n - L i st i n g s/ I n d ex. cf m >
Evaluation Team
Golf course assessments are conducted by a team of two or three qualified,
independent experts hired by Salmon-Safe. The evaluation team is well
N"r,-r**fi-rl requ;tedi- B
$almon-Safe
versed in aquatic ecological science, environmental engineering and
landscape and stormwater management.
Large woody debris (LWD)
Wood that is naturally occurring or artificially placed in streams. LWD is
essential to a healthy stream because it provides habitat diversity and
protects against flooding. Many streams negatively affected by human use
lack a necessary amount of LWD.
Locally Si gnificant Vegetation
Patches of vegetation determined to be of substantial value relative to the
surrounding nearby condition. Vegetation may be determined to be locally
significant by the Evaluation Team. Locally significant vegetation may provide
a particularly good example of a local vegetation type at a given state or
maturity, represent types of vegetation not typically encountered in the local
area or at the outer edge of its typical geographic distribution, have higher
than average biodiversity value, be relatively large and/or contiguous in
comparison to other local patches of vegetation size and/or scale, provide
valuable local wildlife corridor or passage value, support important parts of
the life history of local species, and/or harbor significant natural resource or
cultural heritage values.
Management Category
ln the context of these Certification Standards, six primary management
categories have been defined to express the desired outcome of habitat
conditions in a given project area: (1) lnstream habitat protection and
restoration; (2) Riparian, wetland, and locally significant vegetation protection
and restoration; (3) Stormwater management; (4) Water use management
(irrigation activities); (5) Erosion prevention and sediment control; and
(6) Chemical and nutrient containment.
National Wetlands lnventory (NWl)
A nationwide inventory and mapping database of wetland habitat, as
maintained by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. http://www.fws.gov/nwi/.
New Golf Course Development
ln the context of these Certification Standards, new development refers to
new, unbuilt golf course facilities that are anticipated but that have not been
constructed.
Performance Requ i rement
Specific, measurable criteria that represent the desired outcome for habitat
conditions associated with a project. Performance requirements are a subset
of their broader Certification Standards.
Riparian habitat
Characterized by vegetated areas along bodies of surface water, including
Nonlrrovisional requirement. @
$almon-Safs
streams, wetlands and lakes. Typically, riparian habitats are distinct from
upland areas, demonstrating an obvious difference in vegetation types,
densities, and structure.
Salmon Recovery Plans
Salmon recovery plans may include, but are not limited to ESA salmon
recovery plans (availa ble at http ://www. nwr. noaa. gov/Salmon-Recovery-
Plan ni ng/ESA- Recovery-Plans/) for the fou r recovery domains del i neated by
NOAA Fisheries (Puget Sound, Willamette/Lower Columbia, Oregon Coast,
and lnterior Columbia); the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds (http://
www.oregon-plan.org/); the State of Washington Salmon Recovery Plan
lmplementation:A Report on High-Priority State and FederalActions Needed
to I m plement Sal mon Recovery Plans (http ://www. governor.wa. gov/gsro/) a nd
local agency salmon recovery plans.
Salmon-Safe
Salmon-Safe is an independent, nonprofit organization devoted to restoring
agricultural and urban watersheds so that salmon can spawn and thrive.
Founded as a project of the Pacific Rivers Council, Salmon-Safe became an
independent organization in 2002 and is based in Portland, Oregon.
TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load)
A calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can
receive and still meet water quality standards, and an allocation of that amount
to the pollutant's sources.
Wetlands
Areas that are inundated or saturated by ground or surface water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support hydric soils and vegetation
typically adapted for life in hydric soil conditions. Wetlands are regulated at
the federal, state, and local levels. Where the term wetland(s) is used in the
standards, it is referring to naturally-occurring wetlands, or wetlands restored
or created specifically as mitigation for impacts to naturalwetlands. Wetland
standards do not apply to constructed stormwater treatment wetlands.
ffi,+-ffiffieffi9
Salmon-Safe
APPENN*X A -D(}CUMENTATION F(}R CERTIFICATI(}N
(}F EXISTING G(}LF C(}URSE$
Below is a list of typical documentation and plans required for evaluation
during the certification process. All of these submittals may not be required
for all projects seeking certification. The evaluation team will work with the
applicant to determine specifically which submittals are required for a given
development.
Sffe Asses s ment S u m m ary I nform ation
The golf course site information shall consist of maps and explanatory text
documenting habitat features on the golf course as described in the main text
of this document. This includes (at a minimum):
" Existing stream channels and riparian buffers
" Existing wetlands and bu{fers
. Existing channel deficiencies
, Stream crossings
". Channel migration zones
" Floodplains
. Soils - including infiltration capacity and highly erodible.
Golf Course Management Overview
Overview information should identify specific management zones on the golf
course, describe measures for protecting these zones and document the
following, as described in the main text of this document:
No spray zones
Riparian buffers
Tees, greens and other "high maintenance" areas subject to high fertilizer
use (discuss liners, underdrains)
Rough (describe mowing practices, chemical application limitations)
Fainarays (describe soil management techniques, mowing)
Non-provisional requirement. $
$alm*n*$afe r.i Jt 1 rr:tx1i\{S :ri"i}tl
^i.:tl::e::i::
._. :..
lntegrated Pest Management Summary lnformation
lntegrated Pest Management Plan and related documentation including
pesticide use records or summary for the previous three years.
lrrigation Management Summary
lrrigation management overview including total water use for the previous 3-5
years.
Water Quality Monitoring Summary
Describe the parameters, sampling methods, quality assurance practices and
reporting for water quality monitoring.
Sto rmwater M an ag em ent S u m m a ry
Describe the periodic inspections and maintenance activities for stormwater
management facilities. For vegetated facilities, visual inspections are
adequate. Visually inspect for erosion, especially at inlets. lnspect for other
areas of bare soil and evidence of poor plant health (brown or sparse leaves,
insufficient plant density). Maintenance practices shall include cleaning and
repairing eroded areas, replanting or reseeding bare areas, and adjusting
plant selection if plants are not thriving. A stormwater management plan,
showing the location of stormwater treatment and flow control facilities,
drainage paths for stormwater runoff from impervious areas, and other
pertinent information, may be requested from the Evaluation Team.
N;J;',tiffii'.qri6""1" ts
$almsn-Safe
APPENDIX B *
STANNARDS F(}Ft' NEvl, G(}LF
C()URSE$ AND IMT}rIOVHMHNTS T(}
EXI$TING CERTIFIED (i(}LF C()URSE
FACILITIES
New golf courses and improvements or retrofits at existing golf courses must
meet all of the certification requirements for existing golf courses described
within the main text of this document. The following criteria may also apply:
L Sife Selecfion Criteria
To be eligible for certification, golf course expansion areas (for existing golf
courses) or the site selected for new golf course development must comply
with the following:
Development on the site selected for the proposed golf course location
will not result in harm to high quality salmon habitat, riparian habitat or
other signifi cant natural features
Previously disturbed sites have been given preference for new golf
course development, rather than similar, undisturbed sites during site
selection
The proposed project must comply with all applicable loca!, state, and
federal environmental protection laws.
ll. Site Planning and Design Criteria
Standard G.2
Standard G.2.1
The following additional restrictions apply:
Standard G.2.1.2
Development of club house, pro shop, parking areas, and other facilities with
impervious surfaces near riparian areas is avoided to the greatest extent
operationally feasible. These facilities are constructed outside of riparian
protection areas cited in adopted local or state plans or a minimum of
200 feet from stream channel migration zones (CMZs), whichever distance
is larger. lf 100 percent avoidance is not possible, the effect on riparian
buffers is minimized and mitigated to offset functional impacts affecting water
quality, water quantity, food web, microclimate, floodplains, riparian canopy
connectivity, and habitat. Acceptable mitigation may include native plantings,
enhancement of remaining buffers, or removal of instream or wildlife barriers.
Nonyovisional requirement.
Salmon-$afe
Standard G.3
Standard G.3.1
Standard G.3.1.5 Grading and Layout
Site layout responds to site conditions in a way that conserves contiguous
existing vegetation, minimizes impervious or semipervious areas, eliminates
effective (or connected) impervious area, and minimizes stormwater runoff.
To the greatest extent operationally feasible, golf course design utilizes
natural contours to preserve drainage patterns and contain stormwater
onsite. Existing drainage patterns (e.9., depressions, natural swales)
are maintained to the greatest extent operationally feasible unless there
are existing problems, such as flooding, channelization, or improperly
fu nction i ng stormwater infrastructure.
Noninvasive vegetation and soils are left undisturbed to the greatest
extent operationally feasible. Disturbed locations are selected
over undisturbed locations during overall site planning for building,
infrastructure, and other improvement locations. Locally significant
patches of onsite native vegetation identified during the site inventory
are left undisturbed. To the greatest extent operationally feasible,
these patches of existing vegetation are spatially connected to other
habitat elements via appropriate, native vegetation as a functioning
conservation framework. Staging areas during construction are planned
to be as efficient as possible to minimize disturbance area.
Buildings are clustered to the greatest extent operationally feasible
to conserve identified habitat areas and other open space, as well as
facilitate greater overall infiltration of precipitation.
:'; Roadway alignment maximizes contiguous open space and limits
encroachment on natural resources. Parking areas are deliberately
aggregated and are limited in size.
lmpervious rooftop areas and building footprints are minimized to the
greatest extent operationally feasible.
vt Building materials are selected to minimize pollutants in runoff. Uncoated
galvanized metal, zinc-coatings, or copper roofs and/or downspouts
may release metals that pose risks to fish and are expressly avoided.
Standard G.3.1.6
Stormwater management planning results in clear benefits to water quality,
volume, and flow control.
. ::::.i]..:
Non-provisional reQuirement. S
li
Salmsn-Safe
Performance Requirements:
: The project strives to store, treat and infiltrate stormwater on site. This
is accomplished by low impact development design, using infiltration,
and reusing stormwater for nonpotable uses (e.9., irrigation) to the
greatest extent operationally feasible.
Any development or redevelopment projectwith a footprintthat exceeds
5,000 square feet shall use site planning, design, construction, and
maintenance strategies for the property to maintain or restore, to the
maximum extent operationally feasible, the predevelopment hydrology
of the property with regard to the temperature, rate, volume, and
duration of flow.
The project design minimizes contaminant loading of downstream
receiving waters, especially for dissolved metals, sediment, nutrients,
water temperature, and other contaminants of concern in the watershed.
Adequate provision during site planning has been made for low impact
development techniques that intercept stormwater near the point of
origin to minimize the need for centralized stormwater management
facilities to the greatest extent operationally feasible. Careful grading
design avoids concentrating stormwater flows.
lll. Site Construction and Management Criteria
The following additional standards apply to the existing golf courses standards
described within the main text of this document:
G.l lnstream Habitat Protection and Restoration
Standard G.1.3 Fish Protection During Construction
Standard G.l.3.1
Fish and wildlife exclusion/protection measures are in place during
construction near water bodies. For work below the ordinary high water
line where fish may be harmed or entrapped during construction, work area
isolation barriers such as cofferdams, silt curtains, or other devices are used
at all times, and Applicant has coordinated with agencies to perform in-water
work only when permitted and follows BMPs specified by those permits.
During in-water construction, a fisheries biologist or other qualified specialist
is available on site in the event of accidental fish entrapment and to inspect
fish protection BMPs.
G.2 RiparianAllletlandNegetation Protection and Restoration
Standard G.2.3
Sensitive natural resources are protected during construction.
ffiuffi;Ig
tl
$almon-$afo
lntensive construction activities with the potential to disturb sensitive
wildlife occur outside the height of the terrestrial breeding season
(typically May-July) to the greatest extent operationally feasible. This
applies in particular to construction in or near locally significant habitats,
known nesting locations, and designated surface water buffer zones
where sensitive species may be present.
A tree protection plan has been developed with the aid of a certified
arborist for use during construction. ln addition to site-specific
tree protection provisions, this plan should adhere to the following
requirements:
o Project work limits are clearly defined by a temporary construction
fence, to protect tree drip lines and vegetation not-to-be disturbed.
o Riparian areas, wetland areas, identified locally significantvegetation,
and their corresponding buffers are marked and protected from
construction encroachment through the use of construction fence
and signage.
o Pre-construction meetings are held on-site so that contractors
understand project work limits and other construction restrictions.
o Where necessary disturbed native plants, woody substrate, and soils
are salvaged and reused on site to the greatest extent operationally
feasible.
G.3 Stormwater Management
Standard G.3.2 Stormwater Construction and Maintenance
Standard G.3.2.1
Construction practices avoid or reduce short- and long-term negative
stormwater impacts resulting from construction.
ii
,1.
Construction practices eliminate stormwater runoff and sediment
transport into surface waters during construction. Salmon-Safe's
construction-phase stormwater management plan (available upon
request) is used on site.
Vegetation disturbance, soil excavation and compaction are avoided
or minimized to the greatest extent operationally feasible during
construction.
i, LID facilities are fully protected from soil compaction and receiving
sediment during construction. Runoff is routed around vegetated
stormwater facilities until vegetation is established.
N.r"r-,i...d *q",r"."il ts
$alman-Safe
lf concrete materials are used within or over-water, they should be
washed (or weathered) before their use to avoid impacting the pH of
receiving waters.
Standard G.3.2.2
Golf course management has adopted a long-term stormwater management
plan as a concise written document to formalize the existing low impact
development practices.
The plan provides a post-construction maintenance plan to ensure
that installed low impact development stormwater control features are
working as designed. The plan lists activities to perform, provides
a schedule for activities, identifies visual and other indicators of
performance problems, and identifies responsible parties. Adaptive
management triggers actions that respond to changes in performance.
The plan guides the design and construction of anyfuture improvements,
so that that they comply with the Salmon-Safe Certification Standards
defined in this document. The plan identifies areas with soils with
high infiltration rates appropriate for future low impact development
stormwater BMPs that should be protected to the greatest extent
operationally feasible during construction of future improvements.
G.4 Water Use Management
Standard G.4.2
Standard G.4.2.4
Equipment cleaning and fueling occurs in designated areas sufficiently away
from riparian and wetland resources or their buffers to avoid accidental runoff,
contamination, or other impacts on water and natural resources.
Standard G.4.2.5
No surface water withdrawals are made in association with site construction
activities.
G.5 Erosion Prevention and Sediment Cantrol
Standard G.5.1
Standard G.5.1.5
Construction practices limit soil erosion and minimizes sedimentation
during construction to the greatest extent operationally feasible. Visible or
measurable sediment or pollutants do not exit the site or enter the public right
of way. Measures to prevent erosion and control sedimentation are installed
according to plans, monitored and maintained regularly, and left in place until
the site is stabilized.
Non-provisional requirement.ts
$*lm*n-$af*qft
ffi irffi,#,iilr#,fi,,r,,,rda," ]anr&$wilx!14{
G.6 Pesf Management and Nutrient Containment
Standard G.5.2 Pest Management and Nutrient Containment during
Construction
Standard G.6.2.1
The staging area for the project is located outside of any designated riparian,
wetland, or other buffer for storage and maintenance of equipment, vehicles,
chemicals, or other materials that could reasonable pose a risk to sensitive
aquatic habitats.
Standard G.6.2.2
An equipment and vehicle cleaning, fueling, and maintenance plan is used
during construction to limit the import and export of invasive plant seeds,
petroleum, or other toxic substances to and from the site.
Standard G.6.2.3
Use of pesticides or other chemicals is expressly avoided to the greatest
extent operationally feasible, especially within riparian and wetland buffer
areas.
Mechanical removal of invasive plants is chosen over chemical
treatment to the greatest extent operationally feasible.
No pesticides listed in the Salmon-Safe High Risk Pesticide List
(Appendix D) are to the greatest extent feasible (except in accordance
with the standard exemption policy described in Appendix D).
Nonlrrovisionat requirement. fl
$almon-Safe
APPENDIX C *
INTHGFIATHN PHST, NUYFIIXNT, AND
CHEMICAL MANA(}EMHNT PLAN
SUIDANCM
A Salmon-Safe lntegrated Pest Management Plan contains the following key
content:
Pest control strategy to ensure that prevention and physical, mechan ical,
or biological control methods are evaluated for use before pesticides
are used. Pest control strategies will be re-evaluated a minimum of
once a year.
Criteria for choosing any method of pest control include any potential
negative impacts to aquatic systems.
.',' Limited Use List of pesticides approved for use in aquatic buffers with
annual review based on available information on impacts to aquatic
systems.
. , Training and education in pest management techniques and IPM plan.
Buffer zone width and restrictions for use of pesticides within buffer
zones.
List of pesticides used on trees and discussion of methods (including
equipment, frequency, timing, location, and formulation and amount
used).
'.1i. Precautions taken to prevent pesticide drift.
uir . Pesticide applicator licensing requirements.
rn. Pesticide storage, rinsate, and disposal policies.
r'i. Pesticide tracking system.
Nonlrrovisional requirement.
Salm*n-8afe
APPHNT}IX * *
$ALII{{}N*SAFH'S L*&-T ffiW H'ffi}1 RISK
3}ESTICIDES
* Adapted from Salmon-Safe 2008
Salmon-Safe High Risk Pesticide List
Certain pesticides are a serious threat to salmon and other aquatic life.
ln addition, pesticide formulations can contain other ingredients that are
potentially more toxic than the active ingredients, such as nonionic surfactant
nonylphenols, their parent compounds, or nonylphenol polyethoxylates found
in the spreader R11 . ln addition to killing fish, certain pesticides at sublethal
concentrations can stress juveniles, alter swimming ability, interrupt schooling
behavior, cause salmon to seek suboptimal water temperatures, inhibit
seaward migration, and delay spawning. All of these behavioral changes
ultimately affect survival rates.
The following table lists many of the pesticides known or suspected to cause
problems for salmon and other aquatic life. The list includes chemicals that
could be used for site management purposes that are listed with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in various risk categories. Use this
list to identify pesticides that require special consideration. Please note
that this table lists only some of the currently available and commonly used
pesticides.
A golf course using any of the pesticides indicated as "High Risk" may be
certified only if written documentation is provided that demonstrates a clear
need for use of the pesticide, that no safer alternatives exist, and that the
method of application (such as timing, location, and amount used) represents
a negligible risk to water quality and fish habitat. ln certain situations, water
quality monitoring may be used to demonstrate site-specific fate and transport
properties, and/or to show that use of certain pesticides does or does not
affect water quality.
Non-provisional requirernent. fil
t.
I:.
ffi+ro;Honil;equ;ement ts
PESTICIDES USTN IN URBAN APPLICATIONS THAT POSE
HIGH RISK To SALMON AND AQUATIC LIFE
1,3-dichloropropene Disulfoton Prometryn
2,4-D Diuron Propargite
Abmectin Esfenvalerate Propiconazole
Acephate Ethoprop Rimon
Altacor Extoxazole Technical Quintozene
Atrazine Fenamiphos Rimon
Bensulide Fenpyroxirnate Simazine
Bentazon Fenbutatin-Oxide Spinosyn
Bifenazate Folpet Tebuthiuron
Bifenthrin lmidacloprid Thiram
Bromoxynil lprodione Triclopyr
Carbaryl Linuron TrifluralinCarbofuran fi/alathion
Carfentrazone-ethyl Mancozeb
Chlorothalonil Maneb
Chlorpyrifos lVletolachlor
Copper Sulfatel Metribuzin
Cyhalothrin Naled
Cypermethrin Norflurazon
Diazinon Oryzalin
Dicamba Oxyfluorfen
Dichlobenil Paraquat Dichloride
Diclofop-methyl Pendimethalin
Diflubenzuron Permethrin
Dimethoate Phosmet
lsalmon-Safe restrictions apply to any copper-containing pesticide including copper hydroxlde,
copper arnmonium hydrrixide, copper carbonate, and copper oxide, and others.