HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix B Middle Hoh Action Plan (1)
Photo: Raena Anderson, 10,000 Years Institute
Plan Information:
A product of Jefferson County through an agreement with Natural Systems Design, Cramer Fish Sciences and in collaboration with Hoh Tribe Natural Resources, Trout Unlimited, 10,000 Years
Institute and more than 50 resource agency representatives and valley landowners.
Authors include: Mike Ericsson, Tim Abbe, Shelby Burgess, Phil Roni, Tami Pokorny, Luke Kelly, Jill Silver, Kevin Fetherston and Paul Pittman
Project manager: Tami Pokorny, Jefferson County Public Health
Funded by the Washington Coast Restoration and Resiliency Initiative (WCRRI)
RCO #18-2005
JCPH WQ-20-195
JCPH WQ-19-177
Special thanks to the Hoh Tribe and participants in the Middle Hoh River Resiliency Steering and Leadership Committees.
December 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 1
Proposed Actions 4
Lessons Learned 4
Education, Outreach and Engagement 5
Access and Recreation 6
Valley Development 6
Full and Partial Acquisitions and Relocation Actions 8
Instream & Floodplain Restoration 9
Riparian Restoration 9
Invasive Plant Prevention and Control 10
Engineered Log Jams and Large Wood Placement 10
Opportunities to Support Middle Hoh River Resiliency 12
Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach 12
Spruce Canyon Reach 13
Morgan’s Crossing Reach 14
Willoughby Creek Reach 15
Oxbow Canyon Reach 16
Prioritization & Sequencing 16
Prioritization Framework 16
Action Sequencing 18
References 20
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Actions Identified and Scored to Improve Resiliency in the Middle Hoh. Scoring is based on current conditions and can change in the future depending on changing conditions and
stakeholder priorities. 18
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Old bridge crossing of the main stem Hoh River, 1942. Note size of logs being harvested. 3
Figure 2. Rock lined bank (riprap) protecting Upper Hoh Road taken at RM 24.6. Looking downstream at right bank. Guardrail along road is visible at top of right bank. Flow is from left
to right. October 2, 2020. 4
Figure 3. Example typical clearing for opening canopy and planting conifer 10
Figure 4. Residential cabin at imminent risk of damage on left bank of river looking upstream near RM 29, Nov – Dec 2020. 12
Figure 5. Wide active channel with young alder forest along the channel margin with active bank erosion near RM 29.9, Oct 2, 2020 13
Figure 6. Young conifers planted in young monotypic stand of red alder near RM 22.8, Mar 3, 2021 14
Figure 7. Second-growth conifer recruitment on left bank at RM 24.1, Oct. 1, 2020. 15
Figure 8. Mixed forest age stands adjacent to broad unvegetated active channel at RM 19.5, Oct. 2, 2020. 15
Figure 9. Confined Oxbow Canyon reach with bedrock walls and turbulent flow at RM 16.5, Oct. 2, 2020. 16
Figure 1. Old bridge crossing of the main stem Hoh River, 1942. Note size of logs being harvested. 3
Figure 2. Rock lined bank (riprap) protecting Upper Hoh Road taken at RM 24.6. Looking downstream at right bank. Guardrail along road is visible at top of right bank. Flow is from left
to right. October 2, 2020. 4
Figure 3. Example typical clearing for opening canopy and planting conifer 10
Figure 4. Residential cabin at imminent risk of damage on left bank of river looking upstream near RM 29, Nov – Dec 2020. 12
Figure 5. Wide active channel with young alder forest along the channel margin with active bank erosion near RM 29.9, Oct 2, 2020 13
Figure 6. Young conifers planted in young monotypic stand of red alder near RM 22.8, Mar 3, 2021 14
Figure 7. Second-growth conifer recruitment on left bank at RM 24.1, Oct. 1, 2020. 15
Figure 8. Mixed forest age stands adjacent to broad unvegetated active channel at RM 19.5, Oct. 2, 2020. 15
Figure 9. Confined Oxbow Canyon reach with bedrock walls and turbulent flow at RM 16.5, Oct. 2, 2020. 16
INTRODUCTION
The Hoh River is one of the better-preserved rivers in the United States. The 2020 State of Our Watersheds Report (state-of-our-watersheds-sow-2020-final-web.pdf at nwifc.org) recognized
that high road densities, fish passage barriers, timber harvest rates, invasive species, streamflow extremes, water quality and climate change “may pose a significant impact to salmon
runs in the Hoh River”. Roads, culverts and timber harvest are limited to lower 31-river miles (RM) of the watershed because the upper half lies within Olympic National Park (ONP) where
the Hoh’s unique temperate rainforest and alpine areas have been largely protected. The river has no dams, was never splash-dammed and has no water diversion facilities. The principal
human impacts have been road construction and maintenance (in and outside ONP), timber harvest (outside ONP), and introduction of invasive non-native plants. The watershed has been
home to the Hoh Tribe for millennia and to all five species of Pacific Salmon (King, Coho, Pink, Sockeye and Keta), steelhead, along with Bull Trout, Pacific Lamprey and many other
native species. The 15.6-mile (mi) Middle Hoh River reach (project area) extends from Highway 101 Bridge at River Mile (RM) 15.4 to the boundary with ONP near RM 31. The Middle Hoh
reach lies entirely outside ONP and includes private, state and land trust ownership.
The Middle Hoh River retains many attributes of a natural alluvial river, but it has undergone significant historic and modern era impacts. Most significantly has been the loss of the
large trees once common to the region. Almost all of the Middle Hoh valley was historically logged, so there are only small, isolated patches of old-growth forest that once existed
throughout the valley. Large trees play an important role in the morphology of rivers and the quality and quantity of salmon habitat. Mature floodplain forests are more resistant to
bank erosion than areas with small trees as they benefit from lower erosion rates due to the large trees that fall into the river when erosion begins, reducing the erosive forces acting
on banks as a result. Small trees simply wash away. The large wood also forms logjams that protect patches of floodplain where trees can mature and provide a future source of large
wood. The logjams also create and sustain stable side channels that are critical to Chinook, Coho and other key species. The loss of mature forest in the Middle Hoh valley, particularly
on the floodplains and adjacent slopes, has contributed to more rapid channel migration and loss of important side channel habitat. It also has increased risk to infrastructure and
home owners in the valley.
Road construction and protection is another major impact to the Middle Hoh River. Floodplain roads disconnect habitat, such as side channels and wetlands, and reduce the potential for
long-term large wood recruitment. To date most common method to protect and repair the Upper Hoh Road from erosion is to cover a bank with large rock (riprap). This technique simplifies
the river’s morphology and directly impacts rearing salmon habitat by eliminating hydraulic refugia (areas of slower water), cover and bank-sourced prey. It also prevents the natural
recruitment of large wood.
The Middle Hoh River community includes the Hoh Tribe, other local residents, timber corporations, privately held timberlands, Washington State Departments of Natural Resources (WDNR)
and Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), The Nature Conservancy – a major landowner, additional non-profits, fishing and rafting guides, tourists, Jefferson County, Olympic National Forest and
Olympic National Park. All have an interest in the natural function and productivity of the Hoh River, as well as the valley’s ecosystems, biodiversity and fish populations.
The Hoh River valley supports a way of life for the Hoh Tribe that is anchored in time immemorial. “The Hoh Tribe is a river-based fishing community that is dependent on the fish, wildlife
and other natural resources of the Hoh River watershed for their subsistence and commercial economy. Therefore, protection of the watershed’s functions is key to meeting the cultural
and economic needs of the tribe.” (NWIFC 2020)
The valley receives the most precipitation of any watershed in the continental United States, yet the extensive mature forests and deep soils that previously acted as a sponge to moderate
the flow of water over the landscape are now largely absent or greatly altered. Especially since World War II, road building and timber harvest has come to dominate the watershed outside
of ONP and the Hoh Tribe Reservation. The cumulative impacts of these practices over decades, in particular the extensive, intensive harvest of old growth forests, road building and
bank armoring along the Upper Hoh Road, have altered the natural processes that formerly supported very abundant runs of salmon and steelhead. These natural processes perfectly melded
climate, vegetation, geology and water and sediment into exceptional biodiversity and fish abundance. The transition of valley outside of the Park, from primordial rainforest into mixed-age
timber plantation, yielded remarkable products and benefits for broader society, but came with adverse consequences for the river system itself and local people. Today, the experiences
of all residents and visitors to the valley are impacted to one degree or another by flooding, erosion or the decline of fishing opportunities.
Beginning in the 1800s, families originally from Europe built farms, vacation homes, roads and businesses with a perceived understanding of the river’s dynamics. They often maintained
wide forested buffers between the riverbank and their farms or homes, built on the highest ground available, and took great pride to construct and maintain themselves and their homesteads
largely from local resources.
“It was not until a railroad line from the mills at Port Angeles began to snake toward the small town of Forks in the first decades of the twentieth century that lumber became a significant
economic activity on the western edge of the Olympic Peninsula. There the industry experienced a series of booms beginning with the First World War—when the area was logged for the
spruce used in aircraft construction; in the 1920s as the demand for pulp-woods rose; and then, sustained growth from the Second World War peaking in the 1970s when a convergence of
market demand and liberal federal policies opened large tracts of public lands on the peninsula to logging. Also, advances in technology, particularly high-lead yarding, the chainsaw,
and the growing use of trucks made it possible to profitably log areas that in earlier years would have been bypassed.”
/
Figure 1. Old bridge crossing of the main stem Hoh River, 1942. Note size of logs being harvested.
Prior to the 20th Century, extensive forests and deep soils helped moderate the rate stormwater flow from uplands down to the river. Meanwhile, the path of main stem river channel itself
was governed by large tracts of mature conifers growing on the floodplain and along the shoreline. These trees and forests presented a formidable force that effectively countered the
river’s erosive power. Where very large trees did fall, they functioned as the nucleus of enormous log jams that would, in places, split the flow of the main channel into multiple,
much less powerful threads. Into these threads, additional trees would eventually fall, causing scour pools. Beaver often colonized islands between the threads and, especially in locations
of ground water
upwelling, pools of cold water sustained salmon during extended periods of hot weather and otherwise low water.
Few rivers, including the Hoh, have comprehensive management plans that integrate the diverse members of the community in decision-making and developing a common vision for the river.
While there are state and federal programs that offer educational resources, few counties have budgets for outreach programs. The Middle Hoh Resiliency Plan (Plan) was developed with
the intent to establish better communication with local residents and setup a framework to continue outreach into the future working with other public, tribal and non-profit organizations.
A key goal of the Plan is to establish a “living document” and framework for community communication, education and decision-making regarding river management, habitat restoration,
flood protection, and conservation that can be sustained permanently. Continuing to advance the Resiliency Plan, and to identify trends, maintain momentum, and address cumulative changes
to the watershed, will depend on securing funding over the long-term specific to this intent. Project-level funds also provide the opportunity to advance prioritized action items in
this Plan through coordination with the North Pacific Coast Lead Entity (NPC LE) and Coast Salmon Partnership.
This Plan provides a series of prioritized actions developed to provide long-term resiliency for the ecosystem of the river and the community that calls it home. The findings of the
Middle Hoh Resiliency Plan were compiled to identify proposed actions focused on the casual mechanisms contributing to higher channel migration rates, loss of mature floodplain forests,
loss of key aquatic habitats, the sustainability of existing infrastructure, and risks to property owners within the valley. With stakeholder feedback, the proposed actions were further
developed, refined, and ranked to provide a prioritized sequence of actions to realize the goals of the Plan. This Plan’s recommendations will be integrated, as appropriate, with the
NPC LE and Coast Salmon Partnership guidance documents as they pertain to the Hoh River.
PROPOSED ACTIONS
Education is the critical first step to foster a shared understanding of the dynamic and ever-changing interaction between rivers and their floodplains, and the inherent risks posed
by living in their proximity. Thoughtful and honest conversations between floodplain residents and restoration practitioners will support advancing the long-term vision for the resiliency
corridor (Map 9).
Lessons Learned
The Hoh Valley is home to one of the few temperate rainforests remaining and largest trees in North America. Historic logging outside ONP has accelerated upland erosion, particularly
from landslides and debris flows (Parks
1990). Logging in the valley bottom removed big trees that were critical to defining the river’s morphology, habitat, and ecosystem complexity. The loss of those trees led to a more
simplified river more prone to rapidly migrating across its alluvial valley (e.g., Montgomery and Abbe 2006, Abbe and Brooks 2011, Collins et al 2012, Abbe et al. 2016). While residential
land development is rare in the Middle Hoh valley, the few areas that have been developed are subject to significant erosion risks and damage. Another major impact has been road construction
and maintenance that has disconnected the river from portions of its floodplain and altered the natural river banks. The other major impact has been the proliferation of invasive plant
species that degrade native riparian vegetation, influence channel morphology and impact habitat formation.
Over the last 30 years there have been major changes in our understanding of land management impacts to rivers and new regulations improve management and protect native species. Forest
practices have evolved to better protect riparian areas, floodplains, channel migration zones and unstable slopes. Portions of the Hoh floodplain have been conserved by land trusts
and non-profits. Floodplain forestry to promote conifer development and restore the native big trees has become an important part of land management within the valley. Another essential
element of current land management is invasive plant control, work that has been led by the 10,000 Years Institute in Forks, WA and has been funded entirely by grants. Perspectives
on riverbank alteration have also changed, particularly the negative impact of traditional rock revetments on fisheries and habitat formation (e.g., Schmetterling et al. 2001). Significant
portions of the Hoh’s banks have been converted to rock revetments to protect the Upper Hoh Road (both in and outside ONP) (Figure 2). Recent research has shown alternatives such as
engineered logjams have been successfully applied to protect infrastructure and are much better at emulating natural river banks, enhancing aquatic habitat and preserving forest buffers
along the river (e.g., Abbe et al. 1999, Abbe and Brooks 2011, Abbe et al. 2016, Abbe et al. 2018).
While hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent restoring aquatic habitat around Washington State, no restoration projects have been constructed on the mainstem Hoh, with the exception
of invasive plant prevention and control since 2001. Restoration actions in the Upper Quinault River over the last 10 years have been instrumental in restoring floodplain forests and
side channels crucial to salmon. The restoration has been instrumental in restoring the native Blueback Sockeye fisheries which was opened for harvest in 2021 after being closed for
years.
Habitat deficits in the Middle Hoh require many of the same actions proven to be successful in restoring habitat in the Upper Quinault. Recent changes to regulatory guidelines, more
environmentally sensitive land management and restoration actions are helping to better protect and restore aspects of the Hoh River, but more active restoration actions are needed,
along with efforts to assist local willing landowners to reduce their risks by relocating out of hazard areas, and acquisition or protection strategies that preserve native habitat.
All these actions are critical to sustaining the natural infrastructure of the Hoh River valley. Developing the Plan and engaging local stakeholders has already greatly improved education,
communication and transparency in management decisions influencing the Middle Hoh River. Sustaining the Plan and its leadership team will be crucial in securing future funding and benefiting
the local community and protecting one of the “Last Great Rivers” in the United States.
Education, Outreach and Engagement
The Middle Hoh community represents a diverse collection of individuals with a varied background and life experiences, with a range of concerns from the health and condition of the Hoh
River ecosystem to channel migration, traffic and frequent washouts of the Upper Hoh Road. Most are well-aware of the flood and erosion hazards, while river processes and aquatic habitats
needed to sustain salmon populations are less understood. While there are state and federal programs that offer educational resources, few counties have budgets for outreach programs.
The Plan was started with a grant intended to establish better communication with local
residents and setup a framework to continue outreach work into the future working with other public, tribal and non-profit organizations.
Education is the critical first step to foster a shared understanding of the dynamic and ever-changing interaction between rivers and their floodplains, and the inherent risks posed
by living in their proximity. Thoughtful and honest conversations between floodplain residents and the County will build trust and relationships to advance a long-term vision for the
resiliency corridor.
The Middle Hoh River Resiliency Plan has established the Middle Hoh Leadership Team of key community members to discuss management issues at regular meetings. This public forum that
should be used to disseminate information and notify the community of any studies, planning or actions that are being considered within the river valley. It is imperative that agencies
such as the Federal Highway Administration, Olympic National Park and Jefferson County Public Works use this forum to discuss any issues involving the Upper Hoh Road to notify the Middle
Hoh Leadership Team before any studies or actions are implemented. The failure to communicate in the past has led to serious impacts and a lack of trust by community members.
Access and Recreation
Tourism and fishing are crucial economically to the local Hoh watershed community and larger west-end coastal region, thus maintaining access to the river and ONP is essential. Transportation
is also critical to ensuring emergency services are available to residents and visitors. Traditional road repairs following washouts using riprap is not environmentally sustainable
and new approaches to bank protection (e.g., engineered logjams, complex timber revetments) should become standard practice where required. Wherever possible, road segments at risk
of erosion should be relocated outside the resiliency corridor. Unimproved (4x4) access for experienced guides to launch and retrieve their boats should be maintained and re-established
in appropriate locations when river changes eliminate access at existing sites. Any actions regarding access should be closely coordinated with the Hoh Tribe, local landowners and guide
community. Feedback from the local community indicates there is concern related to improving access to the river, potentially leading to more inexperienced people using the river and
increase the risk of personal injury.
Valley Development
Development in the Middle Hoh valley that is susceptible to flooding and erosion consists primarily of roads and residential homes. Road maintenance has had the single largest impact
to aquatic and riparian habitat other than historic logging. A major improvement begins with better communication between the government agencies responsible for roads (Federal Western
Lands, Federal Highway Administration; Olympic National Park and Jefferson County Public Works) and the Middle Hoh community (Hoh Tribe, landowners, US Forest Service, WA Department
of Natural Resources, WA Department of Fish and Wildlife, The Nature Conservancy, and others) represented in the Middle Hoh Leadership Team.
Wherever roads are located within the resiliency corridor the first option should be to relocate the road outside the corridor. If this isn’t possible, actions to protect the road should
incorporate erosion measures that create a complex shoreline with velocity refugia and cover, such as created by engineered logjams. Rock “riprap” embankments should be abolished entirely,
even in emergency situations. Riprap has destroyed miles of the Hoh River’s natural shoreline. All protection strategies should also include restoring a forest buffer between the road
and the river.
The costs of flood damage to lives and property, along with environment and economic benefits of restoring floodplains, has led local, state, and federal government agencies to implement
major land acquisition and
relocation programs across the country (e.g., Conrad et al. 1998, FEMA 2009, Polefka 2013, Mechler et al 2014, Schiff et al. 2015, Frendenberg et al. 2016, ELI 2017, Patterson 2018,
Salvesen et al. 2018, Siders 2019, Johnson et al. 2020). More locally, Pierce County has implemented very successful buy-out programs in floodplains of the Puyallup and Carbon Rivers.
Helping people get out of harm’s way not only protects their lives and properties but can save taxpayers millions of dollars in flood relief. Managed retreat from increasingly hazardous
areas, such as the purchase of flood prone property, will become an unavoidable situation as climate change effects intensify (see Jay et al, 2018 in https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/).
The federal government shares responsibility for flood recovery and there is increasing interest in assisting state and local governments with reducing community flood risk.
A comprehensive list of federal flood resilience and risk reduction assistance programs is provided in a recent 2019 Congressional Research Service report, https://crsreports.congress.gov,
report number R45017. There are also several other federal resources to assist the County in developing the programs and supports necessary to provide the Middle Hoh landowners with
viable options for relocation, including but not limited to:
Repetitive Loss Program: Using FEMA’s Cost-Benefit Calculator, “beneficial” actions for repetitive loss properties (more than 1 FEMA insurance claim) can be identified. This opens funding
opportunities and reduces community insurance premium costs (including for floodplain residents).
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program: This program funds buyouts for homes and businesses that meet the cost-benefit ratio. https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-grant-program
NRCS Conservation Programs: US Department of Agriculture programs help landowners reduce soil erosion, enhance and improve water quality, reduce flooding damages, and increase wildlife
habitat. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/
Washington Coast Restoration and Resiliency Initiative (WCRRI): WA state program to address the coast regions highest priority restoration and resiliency needs with opportunity for landowners
to protect property while restoring and enhancing habitat. https://rco.wa.gov/grant/washington-coast-restoration-and-resiliency-initiative/#
The federal government is increasingly pushing for communities to commit to buy-out programs in chronic flood-prone areas (Mach et. al 2019). In a recent federal policy change, funding
partially administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for flood protection and climate adaptation can be contingent on local governments agreeing to use eminent domain to purchase
properties whose owners are unwilling to voluntarily sell: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/climate/government-land-eviction- floods.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage.
Such policies and initiatives promote a process to identify the risks and impacts on community resilience to natural hazards, including those associated with climate change, and direct
Federal agencies to support climate resilient infrastructure, including a Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program by FEMA, which provides funding for flood mitigation strategies
rooted in restoring ecological process and function. See: https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1487161136815-ecad1c0312eda2111ffa28735a4d06ad/FSR_Fact_Sheet_Feb2017_COMPLIANT.pdf
Other actions the County could pursue in support of landowner relocation support could include:
Prohibit emergency actions that degrade habitat.
Encourage road re-location outside the resiliency corridor where and when possible. When bank protection is necessary utilize physically complex structures such as engineered logjams.
Establish funding for immediate acquisition of flood prone properties that come up for sale.
Develop preliminary criteria for prioritizing acquisitions
In many locations, the current cost of floodplain land acquisition is 3 to 5 times less than future flood damages (Johnson et al, 2020).
Develop long-term plans for moving interested residents to safe ground, including considerations such as:
Establish an outreach program to assist landowners who want to stay in community but move out of flood prone areas.
Ensure adequate services and access to local and county roads in plans for relocation.
Local government action guides exist which provide detailed guidance and resources for developing a floodplain acquisition program which maximizes ecological benefits and minimizes risk
as projects are planned and completed (ELI 2017).
Consider social and environmental equity and the location of the County’s low-income housing and business sectors within the 100-year floodplain and even delineated floodways.
Continue local education, particularly with river users like rafting and fishing guides regarding the natural history of the Hoh River and critical function logjams play in the river’s
morphology and ecology. Education can also include discussions of public safety and hazards in natural waterways.
Sustain the Resiliency Plan leadership team as a forum of communication and means of periodically updating the Plan. Ensure that all governmental entity considering a study or action
within the valley communicate with the leadership team.
Full and Partial Acquisitions and Relocation Actions
The most effective long-term flood protection is to remove structures from flood hazard areas, which also facilitates habitat restoration of these ecologically valuable areas. To do
this the property can be acquired or there are additional options such as fee simple acquisitions, conservation easements, life estates and relocation. Relocation grants allow the landowner
to move to a safer property in the area while ownership of the flood-prone property is transferred to a government, other public entity, land trust or NGO. Portions of the Upper Hoh
Road are prime candidates for relocation to eliminate conflicts with the river that result in frequent washouts and pose risks to the public and ecosystem. Likewise, landowners on the
south side of the river, losing land and structures to the river, would benefit from similar relocations options. Addressing these conflicts is critical to providing future resiliency
in the Middle Hoh.
Reaches of the Middle Hoh that are currently in conservation or owned by local, state or federal entities provide the greatest opportunities to improve ecologic resiliency is by protecting
existing mature forests and high-quality floodplain habitats. Significant progress has already been made to create a protected corridor along the Middle Hoh River, including most of
the Willoughby Creek, Morgan’s Crossing and Spruce Canyon Reaches. Private ownership along the river corridor is centered around the Lindner Creek area in the Morgan’s Crossing Reach
and the south of the river in the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach (plus the Lewis Homestead). Habitat protection and restoration in these areas should be pursued with interested landowners
through outreach and collaboration where high-quality habitat currently exists.
Restoration actions in the Middle Hoh to create a multi-thread main stem channel with vegetated islands, maintained by stable instream wood and connection with off-channel floodplain
habitat will have the greatest ecological benefit by directly addressing limiting factors contributing to the decline of salmon in the Hoh and providing channel and habitat resiliency
into the future. There is historical evidence and local analogs that
demonstrate the rivers planform has been altered, resulting in a single thread wandering channel that has significantly more energy than the individual channel threads of the historic
anastomosing or multi-thread river. This higher energy, coupled with logging of the riparian corridor removing the large trees that once lined the channel banks, has resulting high
channel migration rates, frequent channel avulsions and immature floodplain forests unable to withstand the river’s erosive forces. The greatest risk to salmon survival in the Middle
Hoh is loss of high-quality rearing habitat found in floodplain side channels, wetlands and beaver ponds. Protection and restoration of these habitats is key to the long-term resiliency
of the species and the broader ecosystem as a whole. Development of a mature riparian corridor, with large conifers capable of acting as key pieces in the channel will form stable instream
habitat complexity and limit further erosion into the bank. Invasive plant prevention and control, planting and other targeted silvicultural actions that can be taken to accelerate
the natural succession of the riparian forest will ultimately provide the long-term resiliency needed to enable Hoh River salmon to persist into the future.
Instream & Floodplain Restoration
Riparian Restoration
Restoration of a mature riparian corridor with large conifers capable of acting as key pieces (remaining stable) in the river is critical restoring long-term sustainable salmon habitat.
Given projected climate changes to snowpack, precipitation, flows and fire susceptibility, it is even more clear the focus of restoration actions should be restoring a mature conifer
and deciduous riparian forest throughout the Middle Hoh River. The riparian forest will play an even more critical role in both water temperature amelioration in floodplain side channel
networks and in the production of the large mature floodplain conifers–keystones in the generation of stable forested islands, side channels, floodplains and aquatic salmon habitat.
Although some large trees are recruited and transported downstream from intact Olympic National Park riparian forest, 20th century logging of the majority of the Middle Hoh River forest
has decreased the overall resiliency of the river’s aquatic and riparian ecosystems. Restoring the Middle Hoh River riparian forest is therefore a key and critical element for regenerating
the overall resiliency of the Middle Hoh River. The future Middle Hoh River aquatic and riparian ecosystem without riparian forest restoration of floodplain conifers will simply be
less resilient over the next few centuries than a restored riparian and floodplain forest. Restoring the mature coniferous component to the Hoh River floodplains is the mid- and long-term
solution to regenerating the resiliency of the entire riverine landscape, with constructed ELJs as the short-term surrogate for the large trees needed.
Conifer Release
Understory conifers will be released by cutting adjacent overstory deciduous trees to provide a minimum of 40% full sunlight, promoting faster growth (Emmingham et al 2000). Locations
are limited to where young conifers (less than 6-ft tall, are established and growing on the floodplain. Any trees downed should be left on the floodplain or otherwise utilize for restoration
actions, like yarding into an adjacent side channel if permitted. If the conifer seedling is small the understory vegetation may also require scheduled understory brushing to maintain
sunlight exposure until it is sufficiently tall.
Thinning and Planting
Where conifers are not currently established on the floodplains planting is needed to accelerate forest succession. In preparation of planting seedlings, overstory red alder will first
be cleared forming a 30-ft diameter circle gap that is planted Sitka spruce and red cedar, with cottonwood as well where likely to succeed (Figure 3). Cleared red alder is stacked,
forming a circle around the planted seedlings to deter elk browsing. And similar to conifer release of existing seedlings, any understory vegetation will require scheduled clearing
for up to four or five years until planted seedlings achieve a sufficient height to not be obstructed by the understory.
Invasive Plant Prevention and Control
When constructing instream jams or restoring fish passage through a barrier, planning to treat existing invasives or to prevent the introduction of new species is necessary to avoid
inadvertent spread via construction, materials, and equipment. If the gravel for a forest road comes from a mine covered with Scotch broom or knotweed, seeds and fragments of these
species become established in stands that were likely free of them, quickly growing and eliminating important habitats and ecosystem services ranging from carbon storage to air and
water temperature attenuation. It’s easy to prevent, but difficult to restore once established, when the cost of eliminating these species grows, and associated environmental impacts
continue to spread.
Engineered Log Jams and Large Wood Placement
Engineered log jams are intended to mimic natural logjams and restore the geomorphic functions of natural log jams by increasing flow resistance and slowing flow velocities, splitting
flow into multiple channels, forcing main stem channel pools, and connecting the channel to side channels and the adjacent floodplain (Abbe and Montgomery, 2003; Montgomery et al.,
2003). Log jams provide critical habitat functions such as triggering and sustaining the formation of deep pools, retaining spawning gravels, and providing in-stream cover. The goal
of implementing engineered log jams is to re-initiate these habitat-forming processes in the near-term until natural wood recruitment from the restored riparian forest sustains those
processes in the long-term.
Design and placement of ELJs and smaller instream wood placements need to both meet geomorphic and habitat objectives while not increasing flooding or erosion hazard risks to adjacent
landowners, public river users and fitting in with the floodplain management of the river system. Through the project reach, the Middle Hoh is categorized as a Special Flood Hazard
Area with a regulatory Zone A floodplain by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Jefferson County code, Section 15.15.080, describes the limitations to development (referred
to as encroachments) within regulatory floodplains with base flood elevations but no floodways and requires that the proposed encroachment would “not result increase the water surface
elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point within the community” (Section 15.15.080(3)).
Floodplain regulations require that a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis be conducted on the proposed project actions to assess if the water surface elevations during a 100-year flood
event (referred to as the Base Flood Elevation) would be increased a foot or more as a result of the proposed actions. If proposed restoration actions are shown to increase the Base
Flood Elevation (BFE) in the project reach one foot or more, a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) would need to be obtained from FEMA to document the proposed changes to the
BFE and the 100-year floodplain before the project actions could be implemented. In addition, no increase in BFEs can impact an insurable structure as defined by the NFIP. Once the
project is completed, a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) would need to be reviewed and approved by FEMA. The time frame for receiving a CLOMR and LOMR can be on the order of 6-12 months
and 3-6 months, respectively, and thereby can significantly increase the design timeline for restoration actions. The floodplain management regulations, as well as the feasibility of
pursuing the CLOMR/LOMR pathway, will need to be factored into the prioritization and design development of restoration actions in the project reaches.
Apex Engineered Log Jams
Apex ELJs are intended to mimic natural logjams that form on hardpoints in the active channel, providing the geomorphic functions of natural bar apex log jams, and will be placed in
the middle of the channel and on existing gravel bars within the project reach. Apex ELJs are intended to split flow around the structures creating a stabilize bar and/or floodplain
surface in the lee and partitioning stream power into two channels instead of one to reduce channel migration rates and increase channel length. The structures are designed to mimic
hardpoints in the channel that will stabilize sediment in the lee to reduce hydraulic forces, allowing vegetation to establish and flourish and leading to forested islands over time
that can provide a long-term source of large wood to the river. Because the structures are often placed in areas with high hydraulic forces, deep pools are often scoured at the front
face and around the corners of the jam. Apex ELJs are often constructed as a group of multiple structures so larger island areas can form in the lee and structures can cumulatively
‘protect each other’ by reducing the overall hydraulic forces over a larger region of the river corridor.
Deflector Engineered Log Jams
Deflector ELJs, which include log jams installed adjacent to the channel margin, are intended to mimic the geomorphic functions of natural flow deflection from meander bend log jams.
The structures are primarily constructed along a bank and, as their name states, are intended to deflect flow from one area of the river corridor to another. Deflector ELJs can be used
to slow channel migration rates to historical levels on a particular portion of bank by deflecting flow away from the bank, as well as increase the frequency of side channel inundation
by deflecting flow towards side channel inlets. Because they are often placed in areas with high hydraulic forces (such as the outside of an actively migrating meander bend), large
scour pools develop at the head of the structures which can provide important holding habitat for salmon. Deflector ELJs can also be used to protect developing riparian vegetation located
behind the structures by reducing the rates of future channel migration and erosion. The structures can be placed in groups to treat larger areas such as the entirety of a meander bend.
Key Piece Placement or Small Engineered Logjams
The placement of Key-sized logs and smaller “side channel’ ELJs is intended to improve existing habitat conditions within less hydraulically active sections of the floodplain to improve
local habitat conditions and increase stable wood loading within the reach. These structures are suitable for locations where hydraulic forces (velocity and shear stress) are lower
than the main channel and construction access is limited. Placement of these smaller structures is designed to add hydraulic roughness and complexity to side channels and the floodplain,
provide pools with cover and rack mobilized small woody debris during floods. Natural snags that are deposited in the river should be protected from cutting and could be used to construct
and/or augment smaller ELJs. Smaller beaver dam analog structures, sited in areas of low velocity, could also provide additional habitat complexity thought the floodplains to further
enhance salmon rearing opportunities.
Opportunities to Support Middle Hoh River Resiliency
The opportunities presented here are a high-level assessment and may not capture all potential locations or opportunities for protection and/or restoration. More detailed conceptual
design development is needed to tailor the overarching approach to restoration to a specific location that considers local constraints and priorities.
Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach
Private property in the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach south of the river at the Brandeberry and Rain Forest Road area (RM 29 – 30) and Fletcher Ranch are at the greatest short-term risk
of erosion and flooding and should be prioritized for facilitating conservation, acquisition and/or relocation actions to limit landowner risk and enable habitat restoration work (Figure
4). Continued outreach to other private landowners in the reach to similarly improve community and ecologic resiliency would be the next highest priority because these parcels are still
at risk of erosion and flooding. Numerous individual acquisitions from willing sellers, or full neighborhood relocation, would provide the greatest degree of certainty for landowners
planning for the future and while also allowing for significant aquatic habitat enhancement actions in a section of the river currently largely devoid of habitat complexity. Restoration
actions such as construction of ELJs, riparian planting and thinning, side channel wood loading and strategic excavations to improve side channel connectivity could be enacted aggressively
if flood and erosion risk to the landowners was eliminated through acquisition. Smaller-scale actions such as shoreline setbacks, installing wood along eroding banks and riparian planting
could be interim actions accomplished with cooperative agreements or conservation easements, and such actions can build community support for similar projects. However, property acquisition
from willing landowners is the long-term most beneficial action to restore the river’s resiliency corridor and aquatic habitats in the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach.
The Upper Hoh Road in the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach has a history of washouts, relocation and bank armoring from the Lewis Homestead upstream to ONP. The road encroaches into the delineated
resiliency
corridor here and is the highest priority for road relocation in the reach as it impairs aquatic habitat conditions and is at future risk for washouts. Relocation alternatives would
require close coordination with the Hoh Tribe, NPS, USFS, WFL and private landowners in the area.
The broad floodplain of the Middle Hoh through the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach historically was characterized by a multi-thread channel with large, vegetated islands complete with adjacent
floodplains and abundant side channels and low-lying areas holding water throughout the year. This framework was held together by mature large trees falling into the river as the channel
migrated, slowing erosion, and providing instream habitat. The loss of these large trees has resulted in a rapidly migrating channel that recycles through the floodplain faster than
the trees can grow to sufficient size to provide key functions and remain stable (Figure 5). Opportunities exist to install clusters of apex ELJs to split flows, coupled with deflector
ELJs to slow the channel migration rate along the channel margins to allow the forest to mature. Planting conifers and strategic thinning and invasive plant prevention and control in
the lee of constructed ELJs and the adjacent floodplains will accelerate natural succession of the riparian forest to create larger trees sooner, ultimately providing a local long-term
source of large wood to the reach. Additional small ELJs along floodplain side channel would further enhance off-channel habitat complexity. Implementation of such projects will require
working closely with local landowners, the Hoh Tribe and various agencies involved in permitting as any proposed actions will either be located on private lands or will impact private
property somewhere in the reach. Ideally acquisitions occur or conservation easements are established where restoration actions are proposed and where they will impact hydraulic conditions
prior to their design and construction. Opportunities to improve resiliency by protecting the Upper Hoh Road within the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach using ELJs was not included here as
relocation outside of the resiliency corridor is the preferred option.
Spruce Canyon Reach
Short of a few parcels under private ownership at the confluence with Maple Creek, the Spruce Canyon Reach is currently in conservation or government owned. Opportunities exist to engage
the private landowners at Maple Creek for acquisition or conservation within the resiliency corridor, and establishing MOU’s with WDFW to ensure policies are consistent with establishing
and improving ecologic and community resiliency in the Middle Hoh.
As the Middle Hoh is confined through much of the Spruce Canyon Reach, there are limited opportunities for instream and floodplain restoration actions as hydraulic forces limit appropriate
locations for instream ELJs and the floodplain is relatively narrow. Local improvements to the riparian corridor to by planting conifers, strategic thinning, and invasive plant prevention
and control on the adjacent floodplains where present would accelerate natural succession of the riparian forest to create larger trees sooner, ultimately providing a local long-term
source of large wood to the reach. Most of these areas are at the upstream end of the reach at Spruce Island
and the Maple Creek confluence area north of the river where floodplains exist. Recent erosion of Spruce Island has contributed more than 100 mature spruce to the channel since 2011.
As most of the property is under conservation or owned by the government, restoration actions can more readily be implemented as long as proposed actions fit within existing agreements.
Morgan’s Crossing Reach
Commercial and residential private property lies within the resiliency corridor, creating opportunities for conservation easements, acquisitions and relocation of infrastructure. These
areas are at risk from flooding and erosion and should be prioritized to facilitate restoration actions in the reach. Infrastructure at highest short-term risk includes the Jefferson
County Public Works facilities and east adjacent private property and structures south of the Upper Hoh Road, as recent channel migration increasing the potential for a partial to complete
channel avulsion through the existing side channel that flows just south of the facilities and buildings. Long-term plans for the Public Works facilities should be developed as they
are currently located within the resiliency corridor and are at high risk from flooding and erosion that will intensify over time. Continued outreach to other private landowners in
the reach to similarly improve community and ecologic resiliency would be the next highest priority because parcels remain within the resiliency corridor that will remain at risk of
erosion and flooding. Full acquisition from willing sellers of these parcels would allow for significant aquatic habitat enhancement actions by opening up a large area of the floodplain
to natural processes. Restoration actions such as construction of ELJs, riparian planting and thinning, side channel wood loading and strategic excavations to improve side channel connectivity
could be enacted aggressively if flood and erosion risk to the landowners were eliminated through acquisition. Invasive plant prevention and control has been conducted since 2001 and
continues each year to support native understory and tree growth. Smaller-scale actions such as riparian enhancements, installing wood along side channels and planting open areas could
be interim actions accomplished with landowner agreements or conservation easements, and such actions can build community support for similar and/or larger projects (Figure 6). However,
property acquisition from willing landowners is the long-term most beneficial action to restore the river’s resiliency corridor and aquatic habitats in the Morgan’s Crossing Reach.
The Upper Hoh Road encroaches into the resiliency corridor from RM 21 to 22.3, significantly limiting natural processes and salmon habitat quantity, quality, and availability north of
the road. Relocation of this section of the road from the floodplain would provide additional off-channel habitat for rearing salmon. Despite the consideration of various scenarios
over many years, no viable large-scale alternate route for the Upper Hoh Road has been identified to date due to land ownership, geologic, topographic, listed species constraints and
the costs for implementation. Potential setbacks of shorter segments are also met with many of these same challenges. An alternative visitor, economic and transportation paradigm may
eventually be needed to address
the continuing risk of road closures and extensive, cumulative habitat impacts despite past and current mitigation efforts.
As the Middle Hoh exits Spruce Canyon the valley widens and the channel again begins to freely migrate across the floodplain, similar to the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach. Opportunities
exist to install clusters of apex ELJs to split flows, coupled with deflector ELJs to slow the channel migration rate along the channel margins to allow the forest to mature (Figure
7). Planting conifers, strategic thinning, and invasive plant prevention and control in the lee of constructed ELJs and the adjacent floodplains will accelerate natural succession of
the riparian forest to create larger trees sooner, ultimately providing a local long-term source of large wood to the reach. Implementation of such projects downstream of RM 23 will
require working closely with local landowners, the Hoh Tribe, river users and various agencies involved in permitting as most proposed actions will either be located on private lands
or will impact private property somewhere in the reach. Ideally fee simple acquisitions or conservation easements occur where restoration actions are proposed and where they will impact
hydraulic conditions prior to their design and construction. Upstream of RM 23 most of the resiliency corridor is within conservation or government ownership, easing implementation
and design costs and complexity. Opportunities to improve resiliency by protecting the Upper Hoh Road within the Morgan’s Crossing Reach using ELJs was not included here as relocation
outside of the resiliency corridor is the preferred option.
Willoughby Creek Reach
There remain a few private parcels within the resiliency corridor in the Willoughby Creek Reach, in the Elk Creek Floodplain south of the river between RM 18 and 19. The rest of the
resiliency corridor is in conservation or government owned. Opportunities exist to engage the private landowners for acquisition or conservation within the resiliency corridor. The
Middle Hoh retains its broad valley and floodplain as it enters the Willoughby Creek Reach, maintaining opportunities for clusters of apex ELJs to split flows coupled with deflector
ELJs on the adjacent floodplains slowing further channel migration. Side channels traversing floodplains with young forests include smaller ELJs to improve off-channel cover and habitat
complexity. Hydraulic conditions are less intense in this reach due to backwatering effects from Oxbow Canyon during large floods and may require less engineered approaches relative
to other reaches in the
Middle Hoh. However, the same backwater effect promotes aggradation and Scotch broom establishment as velocities diminish approaching the canyon, creating a dynamic channel that is prone
to frequent avulsions. Planting conifers, strategic thinning, and invasive plant prevention and control in the lee of constructed ELJs and the adjacent floodplains will accelerate natural
succession of the riparian forest to create larger trees sooner, ultimately providing a local long-term source of large wood to the reach (Figure 8). Patches of remaining old-growth
should be prioritized for protection from channel migration to maintain this largely lost floodplain habitat in the Middle Hoh. Most restoration work in the reach would be on land under
conservation or government ownership, making design and implementation relatively cheaper and simpler. If proposed restoration actions will impact private land in the reach additional
outreach and coordination is needed to move design and implementation forward. Ideally acquisitions occur or conservation easements are established if needed prior to design and construction
of restoration actions. Opportunities to improve resiliency by protecting the Upper Hoh Road within the Morgan’s Crossing Reach using ELJs was not included here as relocation outside
of the resiliency corridor is the preferred option.
Oxbow Canyon Reach
Similar to the Spruce Canyon Reach, the Oxbow Canyon Reach is largely in conservation or government owned. However, the property essentially surrounded by the river and canyon is privately
owned and located within the resiliency corridor. These parcels are an opportunity to engage the private landowner for acquisition or other approach to conservation, and to help establish
a mature forest.
The Middle Hoh River is confined through the Oxbow Canyon Reach and thus there are limited opportunities for instream and floodplain restoration actions as hydraulic forces limit appropriate
locations for instream ELJs and the floodplain is relatively narrow (Figure 9). Local improvements to the riparian corridor to by planting conifers, strategic thinning, and invasive
plant prevention and control on the adjacent floodplains where present would accelerate natural succession of the riparian forest to create larger trees sooner, ultimately providing
a local long-term source of large wood to the reach. Most of the property is under conservation or owned by the government, therefore restoration actions can more readily be implemented
as long as proposed actions fit within existing agreements.
PRIORITIZATION & SEQUENCING
Prioritization Framework
A prioritization framework for habitat restoration was developed by applying a hierarchical implementation of restoration strategies (watershed scale process prioritization) adapted
from Roni et al. (2002) and Beechie et al. (2008), which results in the logical sequencing of restoration actions based on their probability of “success, response time, and longevity.”
Using this approach, we applied the following priority order to restoration opportunities in the five reaches of the study area:
Protect Hoh River floodplain and channel migration zone (CMZ).
Protect intact key habitats for Chinook, Coho, and steelhead, i.e., forested side channels
Restore mature forest riparian zones
Restore impaired processes
Enhance instream habitat
Using this framework, opportunities were scored by reach/location based on their ability to meet project goals and its related objectives for maximum improvement in aquatic habitat,
extent, and durability of anticipated biological benefits. Long-term and short-term actions were not considered separately as they can and should be evaluated and conducted in parallel
to make progress on longer-term goals like community engagement, conservation easements, and acquisition from willing sellers, while shorter-term actions are being planned, designed,
and implemented.
Higher scores and thus higher ranking were given to actions that provided protection of intact, naturally functioning habitat in a more expedient manner (e.g., through conservation easement
rather than through acquisition) and to actions which could provide improvement of a targeted impaired process and immediate improvements in aquatic habitat. A greater range of scores
was ascribed to the riparian restoration, ELJ and large wood placement criteria to account for the priority placed on actions which would address impaired processes identified in each
reach and the limiting factors for Hoh River salmon (i.e., lack of velocity refuges, spawning gravel sorting and storage, and floodplain connection/rearing habitat).
Table 1 presents the opportunity identified, and its score for the prioritization criteria considered based on improvements to community and ecologic resiliency. Overall community resiliency
is most improved upon through relocation measures but have the least benefit from habitat restoration actions. Conversely ecologic resiliency is most improved through habitat restoration,
preservation, and conservation actions while community resiliency is less improved. Some actions, if continued unchanged, will diminish overall resiliency over time and should be avoided.
Scores for preservation and conservation measures assume that additional actions would be taken if needed to restore or maintain desired habitats. Opportunities for implementing riparian
and aquatic habitat restoration actions are constrained in the Huelsdonk-South Fork and Morgan’s Crossing Reaches due to large private inholdings within the resiliency corridor and
will require further landowner outreach and engagement. Working in these reaches in areas under conservation would still require agreements with private landowners effected by the project(s).
The Willoughby Creek Reach is similarly broad with abundant habitat potential, but more completely under conservation and has the added benefit of reduced flow velocities during large
floods due to the backwater effect of Oxbow Canyon. Acres of established Scotch broom in this reach developed on new and abandoned alluvial surfaces will add an additional level of
complexity to any on-ground restoration actions as ground disturbing activities will expose and potentially spread propagules within the site and/or beyond. Any restoration designs
developed will require coordination with project partners to ensure all invasive species concerns are addressed.
For these reasons, and the lack of restoration opportunities in Spruce and Oxbow Canyon reaches, we recommend prioritizing short-term habitat restoration actions in the Willoughby Creek
Reach and were there are willing landowners in the Huelsdonk-South Fork and Morgan’s Crossing Reaches, pursued concurrent with landowner outreach over the long-term to acquire properties
or property rights (conservation easements) or to facilitate relocation to safer ground in support of neighborhoods as well as habitat protection and restoration.
Priorities for relocation of infrastructure and landowners from hazard areas include the Upper Hoh Road, communities south of the river in the Huelsdonk-South Fork Reach, and the Jefferson
County Public Works
facilities and east adjacent landowners. Pursuing relocation scores at the top overall for cumulative resiliency benefiting both the community and aquatic environment.
Table 1. Actions Identified and Scored to Improve Resiliency in the Middle Hoh. Scoring is based on current conditions and can change in the future depending on changing conditions and
stakeholder priorities.
Proposed Actions
Community Resiliency
Ecologic Resiliency
Cumulative Resiliency
Preservation and Conservation
Conservation easements with willing landowners
6
5
11
Fee simple property acquisitions from willing sellers for conservation
5
8
13
Average
5.5
6.5
12
Relocation and Infrastructure Protection
Road relocation out of resiliency corridor
8
6
14
Relocate at risk landowners to safer areas
10
8
18
Habitat “friendly” erosion protection for existing development
5
5
8
Develop and implement county plan for new development in geologically safe areas outside of resiliency corridor
10
10
20
Improve visitor access through Middle Hoh to ONP*
8
0
8
Continue past practices to protect road
-5
-9
-14
Average
6
3
9
Habitat Restoration
Reach restoration proposals focused on floodplain side channels
3
10
13
Floodplain forestry to advance conifer growth
4
7
11
Restore and sustain forested islands
4
10
14
Invasive plant prevention and control
8
10
18
Restore and sustain mainstem pools and cover
0
10
10
Average
3.8
9.4
13.2
Cumulative Resiliency Score
Total possible
260
Total
144
Average
11.1
*visitor access could include improved local river access but this could impact ecological resiliency, it could also include reducing vehicular traffic which would improve ecologic
resiliency
Action Sequencing
The Middle Hoh Resiliency Plan advances a holistic approach to protecting and improving conditions for salmon, people and the unique ecosystem of one of the great, iconic rivers of the
United States. Implementing specific actions described in the Plan will involve various levels of planning. The resiliency corridor delineated in the Resiliency Plan provides a geographic
template for conservation and restoration and is central to this plan’s approach. Land within the resiliency corridor (Map 9) has an elevated risk of flooding and erosion which contributes
to its high ecological value and vulnerabilities. Simply put, it is an area for natural processes to dominate and aquatic species to thrive, but is unadvisable for human development
due to high and increasing cost and difficulty of defending against the river’s encroachments, or to mitigate its impacts. Thus, open space
protections – in the form of conservation easements, life estates, or fee simple acquisition from willing landowners within the resiliency corridor - will advance the overall resiliency
plan’s objectives. Restoration actions require a more intensive process of analysis and planning to ensure they will achieve the desired goals and not have adverse impacts. Restoration
actions would also go through a thorough vetting with stakeholders before being implemented.
REFERENCES
Abbe, T. and D.R. Montgomery. 1996. Large woody debris jams, channel hydraulics, and habitat formation in large rivers. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management, 12, 201-221.
Abbe, T.B. and D.R. Montgomery. 2003. Patterns and processes of wood debris accumulation in the Queets River Basin, Washington. Geomorphology 51, 81-107.
Abbe, T., J. Bountry, L. Piety, G. Ward, M. McBride, and P. Kennard. 2003. Forest Influence on Floodplain Development and Channel Migration Zones. Geological Society of America Abstracts.
Abbe, T. and A. Brooks. 2011. Geomorphic, Engineering and ecological considerations when using wood in river restoration. In Simon, A., Bennett, S., and Castro (Eds.), Stream Restoration
in Dynamic Fluvial Systems: Scientific Approaches, Analyses, and Tools. Geophysical Monograph Series 194. AGU. pp.419-451.
Abbe, T., B. Belby, M. Fox and D. Shields. 2016. Geomorphology and Hydrology Considerations. Chapter 4, National Large Wood Manual: Assessment, Planning, Design, and Maintenance of
Large Wood in Fluvial Ecosystems: Restoring Process, Function, and Structure. pp.234-326.
Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016. National Large Wood Manual: Assessment, Planning, Design and Maintenance of Large Wood in Fluvial Ecosystems: Restoring
Process, Function, and Structure. 628 pages + Appendix
Beechie, T., G. Pess, P. Roni, and G. Giannico. “Setting River Restoration Priorities: A Review of Approaches and a General Protocol for Identifying and Prioritizing Actions.” North
American Journal of Fisheries Management 28, no. 3 (2008): 891–905.
Conrad, D.R., McNitt, B.H., and Stout, M. 1998. Higher Ground: A Report on Voluntary Property Buyouts in the Nation’s Floodplains. National Wildlife Federation, Washington D.C. 221 p.
Environmental Law Institute (ELI). 2017. Floodplain Buyouts: An Action Guide for Local Governments on How to Maximize Community Benefits, Habitat Connectivity, and Resilience. Chapel
Hill, NC. 77 p.
FEMA. 2019. Flood Insurance Study. Jefferson County, Washington. Study Number 53031CV000A. Effective June 7, 2019.
Frendenberg, R., Calvin, E., Tolkoff, L. and Brewley, D. 2016. Buy-In for Buyouts the Case for Managed Retreat from Flood Zones. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Cambridge, MA. 76 p.
Johnson, K.A., Wing, O.E.J., Bates, P.D., Farigone, J., Kroeger, T., Larson, W.D., Sampson, C.C., and Smith, A.M. 2020. A benefit-cost analysis of floodplain land acquisition for US
flood damage reduction. Nature Sustainability 3, 57-62. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0437-5/
Mach, K. J., C. M. Kraan, M. Hino, A. R. Siders, E. M. Johnston, and C. B. Field. “Managed Retreat through Voluntary Buyouts of Flood-Prone Properties.” Science Advances 5, no. 10 (2019):
eaax8995.
Montgomery, David R., and John M. Buffington. “Channel-Reach Morphology in Mountain Drainage Basins.” Geological Society of America Bulletin 109, no. 5 (May 1, 1997): 596–611. https://doi.org/10.1130
/0016- 7606(1997)109<0596:CRMIMD>2.3.CO;2.
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Member Tribes. 2020. 2020 State of Our Watersheds. A Report by the Treaty Tribes in Western Washington. http://files.nwifc.org/sow/2020/state-of-our-watersheds-s
ow-2020-final-web.pdf#page=1
Patterson, G. Case Studies in Floodplain Buyouts: Looking to best practices to drive the conversation in Harris County. (2018) Rice University Kinder Institute for Urban Research: https://doi.org/10.
25611/hvon-iusb.
Polefka, S. 2013. Moving out of Harm’s Way. Center for American Progress. Washington D.C. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2013/12/12/81046/moving-out-of- harms-way/.
Mechler, R., Czajkowski, J., Kunreuther, H., Michel-Kerjan, E., Botzen, W., Keating, A., McQuistan, C., Cooper, N., and O’Donnell, I. 2014. Making communities more flood resilient: the
role of cost benefit analysis and other decision-support tools in disaster risk reduction. Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance. 82 p.
Roni, P., T. J. Beechie, R. E. Bilby, F. E. Leonetti, M. M. Pollock, and G. R. Pess. “A Review of Stream Restoration Techniques and a Hierarchical Strategy for Prioritizing Restoration
in Pacific Northwest Watersheds.” North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22, no. 1 (2002): 1– 20.
Salvesen, D., BenDor, T.K., Kamrath, C., and Ganser, B. 2018. Are floodplain buyouts a smart investment for local governments? Final Report for the UNC Policy Collaboratory, Chapel Hill,
NC. 43 p.
Schiff, R., Bighinatti, S., Fitzgerald, E., Wahlund, N., Carlton, D., Church, A., Louiso, J. and Cote, B. 2015. Evaluating the costs and benefits of floodplain protection activities
in Waterbury, Vermont and Wilsboro, New York, Lake Champlain Basin, U.S.A. Report prepared for Lake Champlain Basin Program and New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission.
137 p. http://www.lcbp.org/media-center/publications-library/publication-database/
Schmetterling, D.A., C.G. Clancy and T.M. Brandt. 2001. Effects of riprap bank reinforcement on stream salmonids in the Western United States. Fisheries 26(7), 6-13.
Siders, A.R. 2019. Managed retreat in the United States. One Earth 1 (2):216–25. doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2019.09.008.