HomeMy WebLinkAbout208JEFFERSON COUNW
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNIW DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street I Port Townsend, WA 98368
360-37 9-4450 | email: dcd @co.jefferson.wa.us
www.co.jeffe rso n.wa. us/co m mdeve lo pme nt
Final
Meeting Notes Summary
Wildlife Management Site Visit
for Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort
October 19,2017
ATTENDEES:
Tim Cullinan, Wildlife Program Manager, Point No Point Treaty Council)
Charin Godbolt, Wildlife Biologist, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe
Bryan Murphie, Wildlife Biologist, WDFW
Mathew Blankenship, Wildlife Biologist, WDFW
Patty Charnas, Director, Jefferson County DCD
Michelle Farfan, Project Planner, Jefferson County DCD
Don Coleman, Pleasant Harbor Developer Representative
Meetinq Summarv:
. The meeting began inside the deli building located at the Pleasant Harbor Marina.
lntroductions were made.
. Discussion occurred regarding the 1 1.90-acre triangular parcel (APN 502-152-013) located
on the west side of Highway 101 that is owned by Statesman and if it might be a good
candidate for planting vegetation that would be attractive to elk. lt was decided to include a
walkthrough of this parcel during this site visit.
. Developer's representative described that a wildlife management plan was originally
conceived as ensuring wildlife utilize the resort property, however, with respect to preventing
wildlife (specifically elk) onto the resort property the developer has agreed to reconsider the
option of fencing and look at where it could be recommended. Discussion occurred about
the western boundary of the MPR.
o Developer's representative described that the original project has been significantly reduced
and that the 9-hole golf course (not 18-hole) is using peat and organic humic compound at
tees and greens and fairways for fertilization. Wash areas will incorporate low level shrubs
and junipers in lieu of grasses between the t-boxes and the fairways.
. WDFW pointed out there are a lot of fencing options available.
. A combination of different fencing may be desirable to address visibility from the resort or
neighboring properties. Developer will take under advisement what alternatives are
discussed today.
. When the campground was active there was no recorded elk usage. Bryan (DFW) said that
elk herds tend to show strong site fidelity, as long as forage resources or other conditions
remain favorable to them. Past conditions in the main Duckabush River valley have been
sufficient to sustain the elk herd and allow for population growth; thus Black Point was
probably not utilized. However, as the Duckabush elk hard has grown and habitat
conditions within the Duckabush River valley have changed, the Duckabush herd has
expanded the range of area utilized. Tim point out the most notably, they are utilizing more
areas to the south of the Duckabush River. As a general comment, Bryan (DFW) noted that
as elk hard size increase, elk herds become more dynamic or less cohesive, which means
individuals or small groups, termed sub-herds, may explore new areas. The above-
described behavior more typical of cow-dominated elk herds. We briefly discussed the
differences between bulls, in that they tend to travel independently or in small groups, may
travel longer distances, and may occupy areas outside the home range of the elk herd.
Tim reviewed the history of elk usage in the 90's and 2,000's when DNR timber cutting
occurred. He used an elk habitat model developed by the U.S. Forest Service that considers
vegetation, forest age, land cover, topography, roadway proximity, and dietary digestible
energy (DDE) in the summer to estimate the suitability of habitat for elk. The model results
showed that areas with gently slopes and an abundance of grasses and low shrubs provide
the best habitat for elk. His analysis covered the area from just south of the Dosewallips to
the Hamma Hamma. Recent forest clear-cuts and the land area under the Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA) line where elk graze scored high as suitable elk habitat. Also the
triangular parcel (located on the west side of Highway 101) owned by the developer may
provide viable mitigation along with the fencing. Discussion about the model continued. (The
Treaty Council monitored radio-equipped elk in the Brinnon area 1994 through 2000 and again
2008 to the present. We have put radios on more than 40 elk during those years. The
Skokomish Tribe monitors elk farther south, in the Hamma Hamma and Skokomish valleys).
a
2
a Matt asked what the contingency plan is. Herding them off is difficult. Hazing them off the
property could potentially involve the state patrol as Black Point is within a county no shoot
zone.
Don stated if elk do get on the property, the developer is on record as not being concerned
and would not want to shoot any wildlife anyway.
Matt stated that maybe I to 2 elk may be spotted on the property. He explained non-lethal
rounds are explosive devises are prohibited because of the no shoot zone. Shot launchers
work but it's considered a firearm. Law enforcement is exempt. The site visit then started
out-of-doors.
All parties walked up to the developer owned triangular parcel to see if it is feasible to make
it attractive for elk foraging. This parcel has an existing drainfield that is scheduled to be
decommissioned. lt was determined by the wildlife biologists that this parcel likely is not a
good candidate because it would take a lot of land manipulation and does not easily support
elk vegetation. And, the close proximity to Hwy 101 was also a concern. lt was decided
that it did not have a lot of potential for any off-site elk mitigation.
The site visit continued with a walk adjacent to the western boundary to the south to look at
fencing options.
We discussed the most likely routes of travel for elk from the Duckabush Rive valley to Black
Point. We generally agreed that the most likely rout lies to the west - southwest of the
subject property. Adequate elk-proof fencing along the boundary of the subject property in
this area may reduce the likelihood of elk accessing the property. lt was also generally
agreed that fencing the entire boundary of the proposed resort was not necessary.
DFW explained the different fencing options but likely an I foot fence with metal slats would
work. Tim described an example of an all elk fence located on l-90 near Cle Elum that will
not preclude other terrestrial wildlife usage, however, also noted the WSDOT was dealing
with different project impacts. Fences can be built to exclude elk but still allow passage for
other wildlife.
lf the Brinnon or Duckabush elk herds increase or current forage resources become
insufficient to sustain current elk numbers, there may be increased exploration to new areas,
as elk search out habitats ore favorable for elk forage. Hazing of the elk would be needed if
the elk find their way onto Black Point because of attractive vegetation. Tim noted that
initially he was under the impression that the project was still a grass-based golf course.
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
3
a
a
Tim said it makes a big ditference that the project has been reduced and that the 9-hole golf
course is using elk-unfriendly vegetation (scrub-shrub in fairways).
Contingency plan if elk do manage to get on site would be to have "a one-way gate" in the
western fence and hazing the elk to exit.
The site visit continued with a stop at an abandoned meadow four miles upstream in the
Duckabush Valley, as an example of a site where habitat enhancements could be done to
improve forage for elk. Time explained the kinds of habitat manipulations that could be
done to improve the site for elk, if the developer chooses to implement offsite habitat
enhancements.
Following the outdoor part of the site visit, the parties returned to the deli and summarized
the additional information that will be needed to evaluate the options of fencing, or offsite
habitat enhancements, or some combination thereof. This included questions about fence
length, design, and exact location, and questions about amount and location of elk foraging
areas, and the feasibility using mechanized equipment to improve the habitat.
DFW would want something from the developer that states:
(a) harm or damage from elk is acceptable,
(b) that developer and successors indemnify DFW from having to use lethal strategies, and
(c) DFW would then limit themselves to only non-lethal strategies.
a
a
Next Steps:
The meeting concluded by agreeing that the developer would come back to the county with a
proposed wildlife management plan for addressing the concerns about elk, based on today's
discussions.
4