Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2261 Shannen Cartmel From:Michelle Farfan Sent:Thursday, November 09, 2017 2:08 PM To:Tim Cullinan; Charin Godbolt; Bryan.Murphie@dfw.wa.gov; mathew.blankenship@dfw.wa.gov; Don Coleman Cc:Patty Charnas Subject:Draft Meeting Notes from October 19, 2017 Wildlife Management Site Visit for Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort, Brinnon Attachments:10-19-17 Draft mtg notes.docx Good afternoon everyone: Please find attached draft meeting summary notes from the 10/19 wildlife management site visit for the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned resort in Brinnon. Please provide any edits to me on or before 11/27 at which time I will finalize the notes and provide you with a finalized document. Kind regards, Michelle Farfan Associate Planner, Pleasant Harbor MPR Lead Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Port Townsend WA 98368 V: 360-379-4463 F: 360-379-4451 Work hours – M, T, W mfarfan@co.jefferson.wa.us All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act, a state law found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy (or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from production to the requester according to state law, including RCW 42.56 and other state laws. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street | Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-4450 | email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment DRAFT 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 Murphey, 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 Meeting Summary:  The meeting began inside the deli building located at the Pleasant Harbor Marina. Introductions were made.  Discussion occurred regarding the 11.90-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. It was decided to include a walk-through 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 look preventing wildlife (specifically elk) onto the resort property the developer has agreed to look at where could be recommended. Discussion occurred about the western boundary of the MPR.  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 (not grasses) at tees and greens and scrub- shrub in between. 2  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 may be due to when the elk herds were smaller. Current Duckabush herd(s) are dynamic and explore more.  Tim reviewed the history of elk usage in the 90’s and 2,000’s when DNR timber cutting occurred; stating “we never radioed the elk but the Skokomish have.” Recently DFW modeling looked at vegetation, age, land cover, topography, roadway proximity, and models on dietary digestible energy (DDE) in the summer. Tim continued model depiction just south of the Dosewallips to the Hamma Hamma, focusing on the underlying land area under the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) line where elk graze. Also the triangular parcel owned by the developer may provide viable mitigation along with the fencing. Discussion about the model continued.  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 1 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. It 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. It 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.  DFW explained the different fencing options but likely an 8 foot fence with metal slats would work. Tim described an example of an all elk fence located on I-90 near Cle Elum that will not preclude other terrestrial wildlife usage, however, also noted the WSDOT was dealing with different project impacts. 3  If the Brinnon elk herds increase, there may expected be increased exploration and hazing needed if the elk find their way onto Black Point because of attractive vegetation. Tim noted that he was under the impression that the project was still a grass-based 18-hole golf course. Tim said it makes a big difference 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 gate” in the western fence and hazing the elk to exit.  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.