Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan 2017
www.piercecountywa.org/swm Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan
April 2017
This document was prepared by the Surface Water Management Division of Pierce County Planning and Public Works Department (SWM). SWM manages and maintains the Naches Trail Preserve. For additional information, please call (253) 798-2725 or email SWM at [email protected]
Acknowledgements
Many have contributed to the protection and preservation of this community resource. Establishment of the Naches Trail Preserve (Preserve) would not have been possible without the efforts of the Clover Creek Council and Forterra. Many community members also donated their time for research, documentation of resources, and restoration activities.
Special Acknowledgement
Special thanks go to the citizen members of the Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Committee, who attended many meetings, participated in management activities on the Preserve, and were instrumental in the completion of the first Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan in 2006. They participated from the beginning to preserve this property.
Mary Sue Gee Ione Clagett Tammy Clark In Memorium
David Renstrom at Pierce County Public Works was instrumental in the creation of the Preserve and the development and implementation of the 2006 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan. Dave was an enthusiastic naturalist. He is missed by many.
Consultant
Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle, Washington, contributed to the preparation of this plan update. TABLE OF CONTENTS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... ES-1 Reason for 2017 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan ...... ES-1 Naches Trail Preserve Background ...... ES-1 Stewardship Plan ...... ES-2 Plan Content ...... ES-3 Public Access ...... ES-3 Habitat Management ...... ES-3 Infrastructure ...... ES-3 Long-Term Management ...... ES-3 Priority Strategies ...... ES-4 Chapter One - Introduction ...... 1-1 1.0 Plan Purpose ...... 1-1 1.1 Naches Trail Preserve Background ...... 1-3 1.1.1 Property Acquisition ...... 1-3 1.1.2 2006 Plan ...... 1-4 1.1.3 Conservation Values ...... 1-4 1.1.4 Conservation Easement ...... 1-5 1.2 Plan Development ...... 1-7 1.3 Management Goals ...... 1-7 1.4 Content & Organization of Stewardship Plan...... 1-7 Chapter Two – Cultural Resources, Land Use and Climate Change ...... 2-1 2.0 Introduction ...... 2-1 2.1 Cultural Resources ...... 2-2 2.2 Land Use ...... 2-3 2.1.1 Cross Park ...... 2-3 2.3 Growth and Development ...... 2-5 2.4 Climate Change ...... 2-7 2.5 Encumbrances ...... 2-9 Chapter Three – Existing Conditions – Natural Features, Fish & Wildlife & Infrastructure ...... 3-1 3.0 Introduction ...... 3-1 3.1 General Property Description ...... 3-1 3.2 Clover Creek ...... 3-2 3.2.1 Channel Morphology ...... 3-4 Pierce County 1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
TABLE OF CONTENTS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN 3.2.2 Riparian Habitat ...... 3-4 3.2.3 Instream Habitat...... 3-4 3.2.4 Groundwater Influence ...... 3-7 3.2.5 Water Quality ...... 3-7 3.3 Wetlands ...... 3-8 3.3.1 Wetland Characteristics ...... 3-8 3.3.2 Wetland Ratings ...... 3-9 3.4 Fish & Wildlife ...... 3-12 3.4.1 Priority Habitats and Species ...... 3-12 3.4.2 Aquatic Species ...... 3-14 3.4.3 Species Presence During Site Visits ...... 3-16 3.5 Geology & Soils ...... 3-16 3.6 Mima Mounds ...... 3-19 3.7 Prairie Grassland ...... 3-21 3.8 Oregon White Oak Woodlands ...... 3-23 3.9 Mixed Conifer/Deciduous Forest ...... 3-24 3.10 Power Line Easement ...... 3-26 3.11 Public Access and Related Infrastructure ...... 3-26 3.11.1 Public Access ...... 3-26 3.11.2 Fencing ...... 2-27 3.11.3 Trails ...... 3-27 3.11.4 Parking Area ...... 3-30 3.11.5 Signage…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3-30
Chapter Four – Habitat Management Areas & Management Strategies ...... 4-1 4.0 Introduction ...... 4-1 4.1 Priority Strategies ...... 4-2 4.2 General Management Strategies ...... 4-2 4.3 Habitat Management Areas ...... 4-4 4.3.1 Instream Habitat Management Strategies ...... 4-6 4.3.2 Riparian Habitat Management Strategies ...... 4-6 4.3.3 Wetland Habitat Management Strategies ...... 4-7 4.3.4 Prairie Grassland Management Strategies ...... 4-8 4.3.5 Oregon White Oak Woodlands Management Strategies ...... 4-9 4.3.6 Mixed Coniferous/Deciduous ...... 4-9 4.3.7 Powerline Easement Habitat Management Strategies ...... 4-10
Pierce County 2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
TABLE OF CONTENTS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN 4.4 Public Access and Infrastructure Management Strategies ...... 4-10 4.4.1 Fencing Management Strategies ...... 4-11 4.4.2 Trails Management Strategies ...... 4-11 4.4.3 Signage/Public Outreach & Education Management Strategies ...... 4-12 4.5 Long Term Maintenance ...... 4-13 4.5.1 Ecological Features Management Strategies ...... 4-13 4.5.2 Trails ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4-13 Figures * Figure ES-1 Proposed Naches Trail Preserve Trails ...... ES-5 Figure 1.1 Naches Preserve Forest ...... 1-1 Figure 1.2 2014 Orthophoto Naches Trail showing Clover Creek/remnant ditch ...... 1-2 Figure 1.3 Preserve Location ...... 1-3 Figure 2-1 Upland Forest Trail ...... 2-1 Figure 2.2 Naches Trail Preserve and Cross Park ...... 2-4 Figure 2.3 Cross Park Conceptual Plan ...... 2-5 Figure 2-4 Powerline Corridor looking toward Military Road from South End of Preserve ...... 2-9 Figure 3-1 Clover Creek ...... 3-1 Figure 3-2 Topography ...... 3-2 Figure 3-3 Creek Berm ...... 3-4 Figure 3-4 Riparian habitat along Clover Creek underneath the power line ...... 3-6 Figure 3-5 Wetland on North side of Clover Creek w/prairie in foreground ...... 3-8 Figure 3-6 Northern edge of Clover Creek wetland at Naches Trail Preserve ...... 3-9 Figure 3-7 Wetlands on Preserve ...... 3-11 Figure 3-8 Cutthroat trout captured onsite ...... 3-15 Figure 3-9 Geology (Pierce County 2006) ...... 3-18 Figure 3-10 Soils on the Naches Preserve ...... 3-19 Figure 3-11 Mima Mounds at Preserve ...... 3-21 Figure 3-12 Existing and Proposed Trails ...... 3-29 Figure 4.1 Trail through Naches Oak Woodlands ...... 4-1 Figure 4-2 Habitat Areas ...... 4-5 Figure 4-3 Common Camas (Camassia quamash) at Naches Preserve ...... 4-14 *Please note that information shown on orthophotos is a representation and is not intended to provide exact locations or dimensions. Tables
Table 3-1 Special Status Species & Habitats Documented ...... 3-13
Pierce County 3 www.piercecountywa.org/water
TABLE OF CONTENTS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN Table 3-2 Diagnostic Prairie Plant Documented on the Naches Trail Preserve (Herrera, 2015) ...... 3-22
References Appendices
Appendix A Conservation Easement ...... Appendix B Herrera Stewardship Plan Assessment ...... Appendix C Wetland & Aquatic Resource Assessments ...... Appendix D Mima Mounds ...... Appendix E Cultural Resource Assessments ...... Appendix F Naches Trail Preserve Application ...... Appendix G 2006 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan………………………………………………………………………………...
Appendices are available at piercecountywa.org/Naches
Pierce County 4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The overarching-management standard is protection and restoration of the conservation values of the property. In particular, floodplain, wetlands, forested uplands, and oak savanna and prairie environments are to be protected against degradation and where degraded, be restored. All other management recommendations are secondary to these standards (2006 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan, Pierce County).
Reason for 2017 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan This 2017 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan (Plan) updates the 2006 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan (2006 Plan). Conditions have changed since the 2006 Plan was completed. Development around the Preserve has increased substantially with more to come, impacts from climate change are recognized by most as a reality and must be anticipated, and Cross Park is near construction.
The Plan employs the management standard of the 2006 Plan (above). Relevant information from the 2006 plan is retained and supplemented through updated assessments prepared by an environmental consulting firm. Management recommendations of the 2006 Plan are augmented through management strategies to provide implementation guidance.
Naches Trail Preserve Background Naches Trail Preserve (Preserve) is a 50-acre tract of land in the Frederickson community, located approximately 10 miles southeast of Tacoma at 43rd Avenue East on the south side of Military Road East. It is surrounded on the north, west, and south by existing or planned residential development. Cross Park borders the property on the east. As one of few remaining undeveloped tracts in the area, the Preserve represents part of the natural and cultural history of the community.
The property contains a range of natural features including remnant prairie grassland, Oregon white oak woodlands, coniferous forest, Mima mounds, floodplains, and riparian and wetland habitat along Clover Creek. It is located along the route of the Naches Trail, a historic route originated by Native Americans across the Cascade Mountains. The Trail was used by the military and early settlers to travel between Walla Walla and western settlements such as Ft. Steilacoom. The Preserve may have been used as a forage site by Native Americans, and anecdotal evidence indicates it was also used as a rest point for early settlers (Pierce County 2006).
Community members recognized the values of the property. They applied for and obtained a Conservation Futures grant in 2002 with the assistance of Forterra (then Cascade Land Conservancy) and Clover Creek Council to preserve the land and associated values. The Surface Water Management
Pierce County ES1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Division of Pierce County Public Works (SWM) joined the effort. SWM purchased the land in April 2003 with a combination of the grant funds and surface water management funds. Acquisition of the property was consistent with the SWM mission to reduce flooding, protect water quality, and preserve natural drainage courses. As property custodian, SWM assumed responsibility for management of the property.
Pierce County granted a perpetual conservation easement to Forterra in December 2003. The easement ensures that the property and its conservation values (scenic, ecological, archeological, and open space values) are protected forever, and prohibits any use of the property that will significantly impair or interfere with those values. Forterra inspects the Preserve annually to evaluate compliance with the easement.
A steering committee was created to develop a Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan. The committee included SWM staff, Forterra staff, a Frederickson community member, and representatives from environmental groups. The original stewardship plan was completed in August 2006.
The steering committee met regularly for several years, then on an “as-needed” basis until 2015 to discuss, plan and implement management recommendations in the 2006 Plan. Among the committee’s accomplishments were the construction of a parking lot, installation of informational signage, resource inventories, monitoring, and several work parties to remove invasive vegetation. Committee members have also been involved in discussions about how Cross Park and the Preserve can complement each other. Although the stewardship committee was disbanded in 2015, it must be noted that the community owes much to the members who dedicated their energies to protect and preserve this resource.
Stewardship Plan The Stewardship plan plays an important role in helping the community understand the values of the property, and in providing strategies to meet multiple needs within the limits of priority management standards. The 2006 Plan identified the priority management standard, documented conservation values, and proposed management activities. The 2017 update relates the management standard to conservation values and resources by identifying management considerations. Management strategies are presented to address the management considerations. For example, wetland areas have been identified within the Preserve. The presence of wetlands is a consideration for future activities. Management strategies are proposed to mitigate impacts to the wetlands.
The strategies are influenced by conservation easement provisions, stewardship committee comments, intentions conveyed in the Conservation Futures grant application, public comments, and the priority management standard of the 2006 Plan. Specific plans and methods for strategy implementation are to be developed for each of the conservation values.
The Plan provides for conservation of the natural features and functions of the property by identifying and protecting existing high quality features, addressing potential enhancement opportunities, and providing appropriate access to the public.
Pierce County ES2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Plan Content The Plan contains the following:
A brief discussion of property cultural significance, including the proximity of the historic Naches Trail and likely use of the site for forage by Native Americans.
Descriptions and evaluations of Preserve features, such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat, coniferous forest, remnant oak prairie habitat, Mima Mounds, and Clover Creek.
Discussion of possible impacts to Preserve features, such as potential loss of diversity due to climate change and natural succession of species, and potential for overuse due to increased development in the surrounding area.
Strategies for property stewardship, including provision of passive recreational and educational activities conducive to protection of conservation values.
Public Access The preferred uses of the property are passive recreational and educational activities that do not conflict with conservation values and features on the property. The Stewardship Plan provides for non-motorized, limited access. Pedestrian access will be provided by trails located and constructed to protect conservation values. Trails will loop through the prairie, through oak woodlands, up hills through the forest, and possibly over Clover Creek and associated wetlands. Figure ES-1 shows proposed trail locations.
Existing fencing will be extended around the site perimeter to create specific access points and trailheads. Informational and educational signage will be used to inform users about the property and conservation values, as well as rules of use.
Habitat Management Strategies for habitat management are intended to preserve and enhance the multiple habitat types on the Preserve. They include guidance for signage content, use limitations, and vegetation management and enhancement.
Infrastructure Strategies include guidance for signage, fencing, and trail placement.
Long-Term Management The Plan recognizes the potential impacts of increased development in the surrounding area and climate change. Long term management and preservation of the Preserve values must include adaptation to changing conditions. Regular monitoring will be an important element of site management.
Pierce County ES3 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Priority Strategies The management standard prioritizes protection of the property and associated conservation values. Public enjoyment of the property is also important. Priority strategies are to prevent damage to resources, and to provide for public access.
1. Protect the property and associated resources from impending development and continued trespass, the first priority must be installation of perimeter fencing with gates that provide controlled access.
2. Define public access areas, by delineation and definition of trails with fencing or railing.
3. Conditions for co-management and shared public access must be agreed upon by SWM, Forterra, and Pierce County Parks and Recreation.
4. Establish a means for monitoring the impacts of public access with a plan for why, when, and how changes to the extent of public access may be necessary.
5. Post signage with rules for activities on the property at access points, on a web site, and at key locations on the property.
Pierce County ES4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
The map features are approximate and are intended only to provide an indication of said feature. Additional areas that have not been mapped may be present. This is not a survey. The County assumes no liability for variations ascertained by actual survey. ALL DATA IS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND ‘WITH ALL FAULTS’. The County makes no warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Figure ES-1 (Not to Scale) Proposed Naches Trail Preserve Trails
Pierce County ES5 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Figure 1.1 Naches Preserve Forest
“Plans to protect air and water, wilderness and wildlife, are in fact plans to protect man.” ― Stewart L. Udall 1.0 Plan Purpose This 2017 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan (Plan) amends the 2006 Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan (2006 Plan). The Plan will guide ongoing conservation and enhancement of Naches Trail Preserve conservation values in a manner consistent with the standards established in 2006.
The update has been undertaken for several reasons, including the following: Development around the property has increased; The first phases of Cross Park are moving toward implementation; Open public access resulted in damage to infrastructure and conservation features; Climate change impacts have become a consideration in resource management; Habitat and resources change over time; Elements of the 2006 Plan were not compatible with priorities; and Assessments of some conservation features needed to be revisited;
Pierce County 1-1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
The management standard of the 2006 Plan is retained for this update: The overarching- management standard is protection and restoration of the conservation values of the property. In particular, floodplain, wetlands, forested uplands, and oak savanna and prairie environments are to be protected against degradation and where degraded, be restored. All other management recommendations are secondary to these standards.
This update includes relevant information from the 2006 Plan. The intent of this update is to: 1. Assess and document conservation values. 2. Provide management strategies for protection and restoration of conservation features of the property consistent with conservation goals contained in the conservation futures application and the conservation easement. 3. Provide management strategies for public enjoyment of the property in a manner consistent with the conservation standard. 4. Facilitate coordinated management of Naches Trail Preserve and Cross Park.
Figure 1-2 2014 orthophoto of the Naches Trail Preserve, showing Clover Creek, and a remnant ditch
Pierce County 1-2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
1.1 Naches Trail Preserve Background
1.1.1. Property Acquisition Naches Trail Preserve (Preserve) is a 50-acre natural area located in the Frederickson area, near the headwaters of Clover Creek, approximately 10 miles southeast of Tacoma. (Figure 1-3).
Preserve Location Figure 1-3
Clover Creek runs east to west across the property. In addition to wetland and floodplain habitats associated with the creek, the Preserve contains upland forest, remnant prairie, Oregon white oak habitat, and Mima mounds. It is an island of protected natural features within an area that is rapidly urbanizing.
The Preserve was acquired in April 2003 with a combination of funds from a Conservation Futures grant and Pierce County Surface Water Management funds. Surface Water Management (SWM) is the custodian. Forterra, a land conservancy organization, holds a perpetual conservation easement.
Pierce County 1-3 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
1.1.2 2006 Plan A steering committee was created to develop a Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan. The committee included SWM staff, Forterra staff, a Frederickson community member and representatives from environmental groups. That original stewardship plan was completed in August 2006.
Some site management activities in the 2006 Plan have been undertaken. They include invasive plant management, parking area creation, trail development, informational signage installation, supplemental planting activities, establishment of fencing, and use of the property for educational opportunities. Many activities are ongoing but may be refined to be more consistent with management strategies.
During implementation of the 2006 Plan, some elements were found to be incompatible with the management standard. Open public access was attempted on the property for a period of time. Habitat was compromised by persons who strayed outside designated trails and dogs off leash. The site was littered, and the parking area was damaged. The integrity of natural features on the site was threatened so open public access is no longer allowed.
In 2009 an effort was made to obtain permits for construction of a footbridge across the creek. Compliance with environmental and zoning regulations made the project expense and impact to conservation features infeasible at that time. The proposal was withdrawn.
The Preserve was closed to the public due to damage from trespass, vandalism and dumping. Despite the closure, there is evidence people are still using the preserve. Several social trails (off-trail paths) have been established in the prairie portion of the Preserve, with evidence of recent use. Dog feces have been observed in this area, as well as dog footprints along the creek, indicating that people are walking their dogs in the Preserve. In several locations logs have been placed in the creek to provide a creek crossing, including the limb of a large alder tree adjacent to the creek. The limb appeared to have been recently cut, likely by a user of the Preserve. Social trails have resulted in trampling of prairie vegetation and soil compaction, and the presence of people and dogs likely disturb wildlife on the Preserve. People crossing or playing in Clover Creek and associated wetlands could damage salmon redds or amphibian egg masses.
These conflicts with the management standard have influenced the management strategies in the updated plan.
1.1.3 Conservation Values The Conservation Values of the property were identified during the Conservation Futures grant application process. Property features were categorized by priority. Features recognized by the rating committee included the following:
High Priority Features included the presence of critical salmon habitat, fish and wildlife habitat areas, streams, wetlands and wooded areas.
Pierce County 1-4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Clover Creek runs through the property. It is a salmonid bearing stream. Approximately 7.1 acres of wetlands are associated with the stream and a small ditch in the northern portion of the property, continuing offsite to the east. The site contains approximately 40 acres of woodlands, including coniferous and deciduous elements. Part of the forested area is Oregon white oak woodland. Oak woodlands are a Habitat of Local Importance in the Pierce County Code (Title 18E.40). Approximately 8.1 acres of remnant prairie grassland containing prairie mounds are located in the northern portion of the site. Prairies are also a Habitat of Local Importance. The creek corridor is mapped by the County as being part of both “Priority Habitat” and “Open Space” corridors.
Medium Priority Features included the presence of an aquifer recharge area, flood hazard areas, and private trails and corridors.
The property is within the Clover Chambers Creek Basin which is within a larger sole source aquifer. Protecting the recharge capability of the site is critical to the health of the aquifer, and to the health of the creek downstream of the site, which relies heavily upon groundwater. The site lies within a mapped 100-year flood plain. Historically, there have been trails in the area.
Low Priority Categories included the presence of a historic landmark site and landslide hazard areas. The Naches Trail, which was used by Native Americans to cross the local prairies and by early settlers of the area, is associated with the site, along Military Road. A portion of the original trail is believed to have crossed the Preserve. The site was likely used as a gathering place along the way by both the tribes and early settlers. There is a steep slope along the south side of Clover Creek. It is mapped as being in the 20-40% range.
Bonus Categories included the location of the site within a County Urban Growth Area, the fact that it is more than five acres in area and, as well as its proximity to a property owned by the Pierce County Parks Department.
The 50-acre site is located within the Frederickson Community Plan area, which is located within the Pierce County Urban Growth Area. The site is bordered on the east and north by a property owned by Pierce County Parks and Recreation Department. The site is known as the “Cross Property”, and will eventually become a county park.
1.1.4 Conservation Easement The purpose of the conservation easement is to assure that the Conservation Values (defined as scenic, ecological, archeological and open space values) of the Preserve will be retained
Pierce County 1-5 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN forever and to prevent any use of the Preserve that will significantly impair or interfere with those conservation values.
Provisions of the conservation easement are summarized below. The full text of the provisions is contained within Appendix A, NACHES TRAIL CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
1. Permitted Uses: The general public will have access during daylight hours but the access is not to interfere with the Conservation Values (Values) of the Preserve. The County and Forterra can jointly agree in writing to restrict access for safety reasons, for maintenance or to preserve the Values. 2. The floodplain portion of the site is to be used only for purposes compatible with open space, recreation and/or wetlands management practices. 3. Passive recreational activities such as hiking, bird watching, and fishing may be allowed on the Preserve provided that such activities are conducted in a manner and intensity that does not adversely impact the Conservation Values. The County has the right to put in trails, a parking area, and toilet to serve recreation uses. 4. The County can undertake road and trail maintenance activities. 5. The County can fence the site in a manner that does not interfere with the Values. The County can allow recreational activities that do not conflict with the Values. 6. The County can undertake the operation, maintenance, and any emergency activities related to surface water management or floodplain control activities. Such activities will be conducted so as to not interfere with Values of the Preserve if possible, and if avoidance is not possible, minimized to the extent possible. 7. Measures to protect public safety can be undertaken by government agencies. 8. Signs for education and scientific purposes can be posted, subject to agreement by the County and Forterra. 9. Scientific and archeological research can be permitted, subject to agreement by the County and Forterra. 10. Noxious weed removal is permitted.
Prohibited Uses. The following uses are specifically prohibited (by the Conservation Easement): 1. Subdivision of the Preserve. 2. Commercial purposes. 3. Commercial recreational activities. 4. Active recreation uses. 5. Alteration of land, except as necessary for protection of Values or for surface water management issues. 6. Alteration of watercourses, except for the benefit of Values or to address surface water management problems. 7. Uses that could cause soil degradation or pollution of water resources. 8. Feedlots. 9. Grazing or agricultural activities. 10. Waste disposal. 11. Hunting. 12. Mining. 13. Wildlife disruption.
Pierce County 1-6 www.piercecountywa.org/water
INTRODUCTION NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
14. Use of herbicides and pesticides. 15. Removal of vegetation, unauthorized harvesting of native plants. 16. Introduction of invasive plant and animal species. 17. Use of off-road vehicles.
1.2 Plan Development This stewardship document builds upon the 2006 Plan. Surface Water Management hired Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. (Herrera) in 2015 to undertake an independent assessment of the property and conservation features. Updated management strategies have been developed using the Herrera study in conjunction with the management standard of the 2006 Plan, the conservation easement, Conservation Futures documents, and citizen comments received since 2006.
Several of the habitats on the site (wetlands, riparian, oaks, and prairies) have been identified by the county and state as regionally significant habitat types that should be protected and restored. This plan identifies those habitat areas and adopts a strategy of protecting and enhancing basic ecosystem (natural) processes to the extent possible and makes suggestions for intervention where natural processes alone are not enough for habitat recovery. It also addresses strategies to balance public enjoyment with conservation priorities.
1.3 Management Goals Management goals of the Plan are based upon the provisions of the conservation easement, the 2006 Plan, and public comment at various meetings. Management strategies will be used to meet those goals. The priority goal, for the protection, restoration and maintenance of property conservation values takes precedence. It will influence the way the public enjoys the property.
1. Natural property conservation values are protected, restored and maintained.
2. Provisions are made for public enjoyment of the property.
1.4 Content & Organization of the Stewardship Plan The Plan summarizes the known history of the property and describes existing natural features and natural resources.
The Plan addresses external influences, such as development impacts and climate change.
The Plan identifies management considerations and recommends strategies and activities for conservation of the property and public access to the Preserve.
Pierce County 1-7 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
CHAPTER TWO CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Figure 2-1 Upland Forest Trail
“A walk amongst nature, whether by the sea, river, hill, valley, meadow or wood, works wonders for the human spirit.” — Unattributable
2.0 Introduction This chapter discusses factors that influence uses of the property and future conditions. They include cultural resources, climate change, land use changes and encumbrances on the property.
Pierce County 2-1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
2.1 Cultural Resources The Preserve is within the traditional territory of the Southern Lushootseed (Puget Salish) speaking peoples whose descendants are affiliated with the Puyallup, Nisqually, and Steilacoom Tribes. Puget Sound Indians practiced a seasonal subsistence economy. In the spring, summer, and fall they migrated to hunting, fishing, and gathering areas, followed by a more sedentary lifestyle as they returned to longhouse villages in the winter. Villages were typically located at the confluence of watercourses or at the mouths of streams where they entered Puget Sound. Several Puyallup villages have been documented along river reaches in the area. The village closest to the Preserve was near the confluence of the Puyallup and Carbon Rivers, almost 7 miles east of the Preserve. No villages have been recorded on or in the immediate vicinity of the Preserve; however, the area of the Preserve may have been used by nearby villagers for hunting and foraging.
The property is called the Naches Trail Preserve because of its proximity to the terminus of the Naches Trail, which was a northern extension of the Oregon Trail (2006 Plan). The Naches Trail connected people living in the Puget Lowland with groups east of the Cascades by providing a route between the Nisqually River delta on Puget Sound and the Yakima Valley in eastern Washington. The trail followed the Puyallup River and South Prairie Creek to the White and Greenwater Rivers before crossing Naches Pass in the Cascade Mountains to the Naches and Yakima Rivers.
The trail was used as a travel route by the Hudson Bay Company beginning in the 1830s and then by early Euro-American settlers that arrived in the Frederickson area in the early 1850s. The Preserve occupies 50 acres of a 320-acre land claim that was settled in 1853 by Frederick Meyer. Anecdotal evidence indicates the property may have been a resting place for travelers on the trail, including the Longmire party, the first wagon train to cross the Trail in 1853 (Pierce County 2006).
The trail was also used as a road between Fort Steilacoom on Puget Sound and Fort Walla Walla in southeastern Washington. The Naches Trail route became known as Military Road, which currently forms the northern border of the Preserve. As late as 1884, the trail was used for cattle drives between Yakima and Puget Sound.
Late 19th and early 20th century use of the Preserve was primarily agricultural. Early maps show roads and Clover Creek crossing the Preserve, as well as a City of Tacoma flume line that carried water from Clover Creek to the City. Topographic maps from 1959 show two small structures on the property north of Clover Creek and west of the power lines. These structures were removed in the early 1960s. Historical aerial photos show conditions within the preserve have remained largely unchanged since 1969.
A cultural resources survey conducted for the Naches Trail Preserve in 2007 identified one archaeological site in the northwest corner of the Preserve consisting of six historic-era features: two small collapsed structures identified as early to mid-20th century agricultural outbuildings, a rock pile, a metal culvert, and rock-lined depression, along with some 20th century debris items such as metal cans, glass, and ceramic insulators. This site has not been formally evaluated for National Register eligibility, but based on the results of background
Pierce County 2-2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN research, the description of types and condition of the material and features found, and their estimated age, this site is not likely to be considered significant. (CRC 2015)
Management Considerations: Although there is no evidence of cultural significance, the site provides educational opportunities regarding the historic use of properties in the region by Native and Euro-Americans.
2.2 Land Use
2.2.1 Cross Park Cross Park is a 64-acre parcel east of the Preserve (Figure 2-2). The park was originally a dairy and cattle farm, and was acquired by Pierce County Parks and Recreation (PCPR) in 2003 (Cross 2007). The park is currently undeveloped. It contains one modern house in the center of the property that is leased to a tenant, as well as a remnant dairy barn and outbuildings near the park entrance on Military Road East. Clover Creek and associated wetlands are on the park property, as well as grassland and forest habitat.
PCPR has developed a conceptual master plan for development of the park that includes expansion of the existing Naches Preserve parking lot for park users, and potential connection of trails between properties (Figure 2 3).
Management Considerations: The Cross Park property was acquired specifically to provide recreational opportunities for the community. The community has expressed a strong desire for many activities that would not be consistent with the management priority for the Preserve. However, there are opportunities for cooperative management of the properties to maximize resources.
Pierce County 2-3 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 2-2 Naches Trail Preserve and Cross Park
Pierce County 2-4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 2-3 2014 Cross Park Conceptual Plan
2.2.2 Growth and Development Population in Washington State is projected to increase over 26 percent by 2040 (OFM 2014), and much of this increase will occur in western Washington, particularly in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties (PSRC 2009; OFM 2014). Pierce County has experienced rapid growth in the last half century (Pierce County 2008a). The 2014 Pierce County population estimate was 831,928, a 4.6 percent increase since 2010, and by 2030, the population projection for the County is 982,230 (OFM 2014).
The Frederickson area has grown even faster than the rest of Pierce County, transforming from a rural to suburban community in the past 50 years. In the 1950s, there were fewer than 1,000 people living in the area (Pierce County 2008a); by 2014, there were an estimated 18,920 people (US Census Bureau 2015). Between 2010 and 2014, housing units in unincorporated Pierce County increased 3.6 percent, from 140,160 units to 145,248 units (OFM 2015). More than 95 percent of homes within the Frederickson area have been built since 1970, with nearly half of the homes constructed in the last 10 years (Pierce County 2008a).
Pierce County 2-5 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
This level of growth is evident in aerial photos of the region. Photos from 1990 show mostly low density residential development in the Frederickson area, with a few agricultural and undeveloped forested parcels. By 2002, high-density housing developments are apparent on the landscape. Development increases rapidly until, as of July 2014, most parcels have been developed (Google Earth 2015). Remaining undeveloped areas are primarily limited to the Naches Trail Preserve, Cross Park, a few parcels east of the Preserve owned by the City of Tacoma and Boeing Corporation, and a narrow riparian strip along Clover Creek (PALS 2015).
Two large housing developments are currently planned adjacent to the Preserve: The Ranch at Frederickson, which proposes to subdivide a 12.59-acre parcel on the southwest boundary of the Preserve into 25 single-family residences; and Rosemont PDD on the southern boundary of the Preserve, which plans on building 569 apartment and townhome units (PALS 2015). The Rosemont development proposal includes extending 43rd Avenue East from East 176th Street, to create a new connection between 176th Street and Military Road East.
The Preserve is one of the few remaining relatively undisturbed parcels in the Frederickson area. Increased regional development will further isolate the Preserve from nearby undeveloped areas and fragment habitat. Fragmentation reduces habitat size, limiting the number and diversity of species that an area can support, and reduces habitat connectivity by eliminating vegetated corridors that facilitate plant and animal movement. Habitat connectivity allows more species to utilize habitat patches and populations to persist longer (Collinge 1996). Development of Cross Park would also contribute to habitat fragmentation and isolation of the Preserve, reducing contiguity between the Preserve and other undeveloped parcels to the east.
Development of both Cross Park and adjacent housing developments will attract more people to the area and increase use of the Preserve. Greater human use of the Preserve has the potential to increase disturbance of wildlife populations and reduce the fitness of individual animals and entire populations by increasing stress levels and avoidance behaviors, decreasing breeding success, and disrupting foraging (e.g., Fernández-Juricic and Tellería 2000; Hansen et al. 2005; Ciuti et al. 2012). For example, off-leash dogs have been documented chasing deer and other wildlife (Sime, 1999), and some studies have demonstrated lower nesting success for birds that nest near trails (e.g., Miller and Hobbs 2000). Refer to the Public Access sections for additional discussion of the impacts of recreational activities on habitat and wildlife.
Given population trends in Pierce County and the Frederickson area, additional high-density housing and other developments are likely to be constructed in the near future. Regional population growth will increase use of and pressure on the Preserve.
Management Considerations: Protection of the conservation values of the Preserve may become increasingly challenging. Measures must be undertaken to educate the public about the Preserve values, to prevent overuse of the resource, and to provide on-site guidance about use of the property. Collaboration with adjoining property owners will assist in maintenance of wildlife corridors and habitat.
Pierce County 2-6 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
2.3 Climate Change Scientific measurements spanning several decades demonstrate that changes in climate are occurring, and that the rate of change has been faster since the 1950s. Examples of climate change include warming of the global climate system and changes in regional weather patterns (IPCC 2007; Solomon et al. 2007). Although various climate models differ in their projections of the magnitude and rate of climate change, all projections indicate that average global surface temperature will increase through the end of this century (IPCC 2007; Meehl et al. 2007; Ganguly et al. 2009; Prinn et al. 2011).
During the next 20 to 40 years, the climate of the Pacific Northwest is projected to change significantly. Spring and summer are predicted to become warmer and drier, and autumns and winters will become warmer and wetter, resulting in diminished snowpack, earlier snowmelt, and an increase in extreme heat waves and precipitation events (Salathé et al. 2009). The changing climate will likely alter ecosystems as a result of the frequency, intensity, duration, and timing of disturbance factors such as fire, drought, introduced species, insect and pathogen outbreaks, hurricanes, windstorms, ice storms, landslides, and flooding (Littell et al. 2009).
One of the largest projected effects on Pacific Northwest forests is likely to come from an increase in fire frequency, duration, and severity. In general, wet western forests have short dry summers and high fuel moisture levels that result in very low fire frequencies. However, high fuel accumulations and forest densities create the potential for fires of very high intensity and severity when fuels are dry (Mote et al. 2008). Since the mid-1980s, wildfire frequency in western forests has nearly quadrupled compared to the average of the period 1970 through 1986, with a corresponding increase in the area burned and the length of the fire season (Westerling et al. 2006). The area burned by fire in the Pacific Northwest is projected to double by the 2040s and triple by the 2080s (Littell et al. 2009).
Effects on prairie and oak savanna ecosystems from climate change are complex and uncertain. Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide enhances the growth of woody vegetation, but warmer, drier summers tend to favor grasses (Bachelet et al. 2011). Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) are fairly drought tolerant, and a study modeling predicted effects of climate change on oak communities in the Willamette Valley suggests that temperature and precipitation changes projected into the 2080s will still fall within the oak tolerance range. Oak may even benefit from climate change, though it is not clear if changes will be enough to confer a competitive advantage over Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) (Michalak 2013). Oregon white oak is adapted to higher water tables and occasional winter flooding (Hanna and Dunn 1997; McDonald et al. 1983), unlike Douglas fir, which is drought tolerant but rarely found in wet areas (Williamson and Twombly 1983).
The impacts of climate change on insect herbivores and pathogens is poorly studied and highly uncertain. Warmer temperatures and a longer growing season may increase insect populations
Pierce County 2-7 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
and distribution, and put oaks in contact with new pests, intensifying disease and pest pressure. Alternately, warmer, wetter fall and winter months could increase the spread of Discula quercina, a symbiotic oak fungus that is harmless to oak but infects and damages Douglas fir that compete with oaks. Although the potential impacts of new or more widespread parasites and pathogens could be large, additional studies are needed to determine the extent of potential effects (Michalak 2013).
Clover Creek is also expected to respond to climate change. Because the creek is already ephemeral at times, it is expected that the creek will have more frequent and longer periods of no flow. Longer periods with no flow will heighten stream temperatures throughout the creek, create temporary fish barriers, and increase geomorphic disturbance as the stream bed vegetates (Elsner et al. 2010). Peak flows will also increase with heightened precipitation intensities, which has been documented within a number of climate models (Dominguez et al. 2012) and in the instrument record (Muschinski and Katz 2013). In combination with increased impervious area in the basin (see Instream Habitat section, below), it is likely that large events will increase flooding beyond existing expectations. Larger floods also bring the possibility for greater geomorphic change in the future.
Effects of climate change on wildlife are difficult to predict and will vary from species to species. Changes in wildlife populations that have been observed to date include alterations in species abundance and distribution, modification in body size, and shifts in phenology, such as earlier migration and breeding (IPCC 2001; USDA 2011). Some species may respond positively and others may respond negatively. For example, higher summer temperatures may benefit ectothermic (cold-blooded) species, but cause endothermic (warm-blooded) species to expend more energy to maintain constant body temperatures. However, the consensus is that climate change will adversely affect most species in the region and reduce their ability to cope with other environmental stressors (USDA 2011).
As described above, warming temperatures will alter seasonal climate patterns, with a shorter winter and longer growing season. The timing of life history events for wildlife species on the Preserve will likely change in response to these patterns, with species emerging from hibernation earlier and breeding earlier in the season in response to earlier plant bloom times and insect availability. Timing shifts may differ at different trophic levels, resulting in mismatches between some animals and their food sources that could lead to reduced fitness or mortality (USDA 2011).
Longer and more intense summer droughts will likely stress some species, particularly those heavily dependent on microhabitats or microclimates (USDA 2011). Reduced spring and summer moisture, for example, could adversely affect amphibians by reducing available prey and suitable habitat, and cause breeding ponds to dry before eggs have hatched (Corn 2005).
Higher winter creek flows could increase the magnitude of flooding and scouring in riparian areas, disrupting species occurring in that habitat. More frequent disturbance along
Pierce County 2-8 www.piercecountywa.org/water
CULTURAL RESOURCES, LAND USE, AND CLIMATE CHANGE NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
streambanks could create favorable conditions for invasive species such as Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), thus reducing habitat quality for songbirds and other animals (USDA 2011).
Management Considerations: Adaptive management measures will be key in preserving and protecting site conservation values impacted by climate change. Regular monitoring of the creek, wetlands, vegetation, and habitat areas will be important for quantification of changes and for development of appropriate management measures.
2.4 Encumbrances
Powerlines A Bonneville Power transmission easement runs from north to south across the property. Tacoma Public Utilities (TPU) has a power easement across the property that parallels the Bonneville lines. Bonneville and TPU retain the right to maintain vegetation along the corridor and keep vegetation low.
Figure 2-4 Powerline Corridor Looking, Toward Military Road from South End of Preserve
Management Considerations: Bonneville Power and Tacoma Public Utilities must be consulted about activities that may affect their maintenance programs.
Pierce County 2-9 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
CHAPTER THREE EXISTING CONDITIONS—NATURAL FEATURES, FISH AND WILDLIFE, AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Figure 3-1 Clover Creek “If there is magic on this planet, it is contained in water.” Loren Eiseley
3.0 Introduction This chapter contains a discussion of existing conditions, including natural features, fish and wildlife, and infrastructure on the property. The information in this chapter is expanded into a discussion of habitat management areas in Chapter 4. The discussion relies heavily on information in the 2006 Plan and on recent site specific assessments.
3.1 General Property Description The Preserve is an “L-shaped” property made up of 2 main parcels. The wide end of the “L” is along Military Road (See Figure 1-2). SWM also holds a third parcel along Clover Creek that is managed as part of the Preserve. Development to the north and west is residential, more residential development is proposed to the south, and the Cross Park property wraps around the east property boundary. Access to the Preserve is from Military Road at 43rd Ave. East on a
Pierce County 3-1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN driveway shared with the park property. A small gravel parking area is located in the northeast corner of the property. The access is gated.
Clover Creek represents a habitat divide on the Preserve. The northern part of the Preserve is relatively flat, containing prairie and oak woodland habitats. Wetlands are associated with the creek and the remnant drainage ditch that roughly parallels the north creek bank.
The ground elevation at the creek is approximately 330. That elevation rises fairly rapidly south of the creek from 330 to approximately 430 over a distance of approximately 500 feet, resulting in a steep slope. (See Figure 3-2). Habitat on the south side of the creek transitions from riparian habitat to forest.
Figure 3-2 Topography 3.2 Clover Creek The headwaters of Clover Creek are approximately 2 miles east of the Preserve. Clover Creek flows a distance of approximately 9 miles from its headwaters in the Frederickson area to Lake Steilacoom, which drains into Chambers Creek before discharging to Puget Sound near the City of Steilacoom (Kerwin 1999, Savoca et al. 2010, Pierce County 2006).
Pierce County 3-2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
The creek flows east to west through the Preserve, a distance of approximately 1500 linear feet (LF). It is channelized and bermed through much of the Preserve, most noticeably at the eastern and western portions of the reach (Figure 3-3). As a result, it is likely deeper and narrower than it would be naturally. Armor consisting of medium to large gravel and cobbles line the banks on both sides of the stream. In some areas, the armoring is in linear berms or mounded up in discontinuous piles. The purpose of the berming is somewhat unclear, though it probably was for agricultural purposes (Pierce County 2006). A remnant ditch channel runs across the Preserve roughly parallel to the north side of the creek near the northern edge of the floodplain. The origin is not known, although it may also have been for agricultural purposes.
The Clover Creek Basin Plan (Pierce County 2002) indicated the presence of a 200-GPM (gallons per minute) spring known as Deuber’s Big Hole Spring approximately 600-feet upstream of the Preserve on the Cross Park Property (U.S. Dept. of Water Resources 1968). This spring may account for a large proportion of the stream flow through the Preserve (Pierce County 2006).
Two habitat management areas are associated with the creek. Chapter 4 discusses Instream Habitat and Riparian Habitat in more detail in sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2, respectively.
Management Considerations: Activities upstream could affect creek flow on the Preserve.
Pierce County 3-3 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-3 Creek Berm (Pierce County 2006)
3.2.1 Channel Morphology Clover Creek possesses a plane bed channel morphology throughout the Preserve. Plane bed channel types lack discreet bars and occur at low, moderate and high slopes in relatively straight, unconfined or confined channels (Buffington and Montgomery 1997). The beds are typically composed of sand to small boulder grain sizes, but are dominantly gravel to cobble bedded. Plane-bed channels typically exhibit armored bed surfaces, which indicates transport capacity greater than sediment supply. These channel types tend to have few pools and are comprised of glides, runs and riffles. However, plane bed channels can be influenced by inputs of wood and other channel roughening inputs such as beaver dams (Ereth 2015).
3.2.2 Riparian Habitat Riparian habitat occupies the area adjacent to flowing or standing freshwater aquatic systems, extending from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) to that portion of the terrestrial landscape that is influenced by, or that directly influences, the aquatic ecosystem (WDFW 2008). Pierce County extends the riparian HLI 165 feet landward of the OHWM of Waters of the
Pierce County 3-4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
State when there are salmonids present. The riparian area at the Preserve encompasses floodplain and wetland areas.
Riparian habitat performs many functions essential for maintaining stream health. Riparian vegetation shades streams, maintaining cool water temperatures that contain high levels of dissolved oxygen. Roots stabilize stream banks, which helps control erosion and sedimentation. Overhanging vegetation creates cover for fish and contributes organic material such as leaves, twigs, and insects that serve as a food source for aquatic species. Large trees that fall into streams create pools, riffles, and off-channel habitat necessary to fish for cover, spawning, rearing, and protection from predators.
Riparian vegetation, litter, and soils filter incoming sediments and pollutants thereby improving water quality. Riparian habitat moderates stream volumes by reducing peak flows during flooding periods and by storing and slowly releasing water into streams during low flows (Knutson and Naef 1997).
3.2.3 Instream Habitat Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) defines instream habitat as the combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources (WDFW 2008). Clover Creek meets this definition and is also classified as a Habitat of Local Importance (HLI) by Pierce County (PCC18E.40.D) as it is a Water of the State.
Within the Preserve, Clover Creek displays 3 primary instream habitat types:
The upper 830 feet of Clover Creek on the Preserve is vegetated with thick stands of deciduous vegetation such as willow (Salix spp.), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), etc. The reach is heavily influenced by beaver dams which have created flooded backwater habitat providing excellent summer and winter rearing habitat for salmonids, wildlife habitat and water quality benefits.
The next 150 feet downstream is located under the Bonneville Power-line corridor (Figure 3- 4). The dominant vegetation in this reach is reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and watercress (Rorippa natursium-aquaticum), which are invasive species. Power-line corridors typically lack mature woody vegetation because they receive continual maintenance to assure vegetation does not interfere with the lines.
The lower 480 feet of Clover Creek, from the bottom of the power-line reach to Military Road, is heavily forested but lacks beaver dams and the flooded habitat that exists upstream. Both the upper and lower forested reaches are almost entirely shaded and possess an abundance of vegetation hanging in and over the stream. Despite this, and despite having a mature second growth conifer forest on the south banks, the stream lacks large woody debris. Most of the debris in the stream is from deciduous trees from the adjacent stand and has been delivered to the stream channel through rot, breakage, windfall or beaver use (Ereth 2015).
Pierce County 3-5 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-4 Riparian habitat along Clover Creek underneath the power line
Stream substrate is dominated by small pea gravel to medium size gravels in the pool tail outs and gravel, cobble, and some small boulders in the pools and glides. In the reaches affected by beaver, the substrate is primarily sands and silts that have settled due to slack water environment. Beneath the fine textured substrate is a gravel and cobble bedded channel.
Spawning habitat is limited on the Preserve due to the lack of pool tail outs in the lower section and the abundance of beaver dams and ponded areas in the upper section. However, the spawning habitat that is available is high quality and appears to contain a low amount of fine sediment, despite the low gradient of the streams and upstream beaver ponds which promote sediment delivery and settlement.
The stream banks have been armored at some point in the past. The armoring consists of medium to large gravel and cobbles that line the banks on both sides of the stream. In some areas, the armoring is in linear berms or mounded up in discontinuous piles. The armoring likely was placed when the site was used for agriculture and to address potential threats of erosion and flooding.
Management Considerations: The quality of instream habitat is tied to the quality of riparian habitat. Climate change may increase winter flow rates. Retention of vegetated undeveloped buffers and flood hazard areas will reduce impacts to the creek.
Pierce County 3-6 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
3.2.4 Groundwater Influence The stream is primarily fed by groundwater discharges. Creek base flow is maintained by groundwater that enters the channel from upwelling springs and hillside seeps. The watershed area upstream of the Preserve is about 1900 acres (2.97 square miles) according to sub-basin mapping of surface water drainage in the Clover Creek Basin Plan (Pierce County 2002).
While some recharge of ground water probably occurs on the Preserve, this area appears to be generally a groundwater discharge area. In discharge areas, ground water occurs at or near the land surface (EPA, 1993). Depth to ground water in the area of the Naches Trail Preserve is known to be very shallow. Productive residential wells in the immediate vicinity include an old hand dug well on the adjacent Cross Park property that is only six-feet deep. Another nearby residential well is less than 25-feet deep. The presence of springs and seeps also indicates that this is an area of ground water discharge. (Pierce County 2006).
3.2.5 Water Quality The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) has placed Clover Creek on the State’s 303(d) list for fecal coliform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, and temperature (Ecology 2015). Water quality is categorized by the County as poor, primarily due to low dissolved oxygen, but also due to high fecal coliform, pH, temperature, and phosphorus (Pierce County 2012). Water quality in Clover Creek is being evaluated by Ecology and Pierce County as of the writing of this update.
At this time polluted reaches are downstream of the Preserve; water quality within the Preserve is generally good. Sampling by Ecology in 2013 upstream of the Preserve at Canyon Road East, near the headwaters of the creek, and immediately downstream of the Preserve at Military Road, did not indicate any exceedances of fecal coliform (results for other parameters have not yet been made public; Ecology 2015).
Water quality in Clover Creek on the Preserve reflects its groundwater source. The permeable soils in the upper Clover Creek Watershed promote infiltration of precipitation to ground water and attenuate the response of streams to rainfall. Ground and surface water interactions can result in impacts to surface water quality from sources such as on-site sewage disposal systems and use of fertilizers (Pierce County 2006).
Management Considerations: The off-site regional water quality issue could affect the Preserve. The results of the Pierce County and Ecology water quality work should be regularly reviewed for updated information about water quality up- and downstream of the Preserve.
Pierce County 3-7 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
3.3 Wetlands
Figure 3-5 Wetland on north side of Clover Creek with prairie in the foreground (Herrera 2015)
3.3.1 Wetland Characteristics There are wetlands along Clover Creek and in the southern area of the property. (See Figure 3-7). The Clover Creek wetland is the most significant wetland on the site in terms of size. It is a mostly scrub-shrub depressional wetland, approximately seven-acres in area, dominated by deciduous species.
The wetlands in the southern area are referred to as the “upland” wetlands for their placement on the site. There are several small scrub-shrub and forested depressional wetlands, none of which appears to be larger than one acre. They are close enough together that they can be considered to be a “mosaic” wetland, which means that the entire area is viewed as a single wetland for regulatory purposes. They were rated as a group with a total area of approximately two and one-half acres.
Hydrology on the site was readily apparent during 2015 site visits, with a gradual but noticeable decrease over the duration of field work. Areas of the smaller wetlands and around the edges of the Clover Creek wetland that were inundated in March were shallower in April, and in some places merely saturated by May. Interior areas of the Clover Creek wetland remained inundated. Review of aerial photographs in Google Earth show that the extent of inundation in this area is fairly constant from year-to-year and throughout the year. Monitoring has identified this reach of Clover Creek as the upper portion of a significant “gaining reach” (Savoca, et al.
Pierce County 3-8 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
2010). The stream flow does not respond significantly to storm events, indicating that groundwater discharge is the primary source of hydrology. Beaver are present in the vicinity and may have some effect on the wetland, but only one very small dam was observed in the drainage ditch near the north edge of the wetland.
Historical information and photos indicate the creek wetlands were impacted by agricultural activities such as mowing and by berms created along the creek channel. Since the cessation of agricultural activities, the wetland area has been revegetated by native and invasive species. Attempting to describe similarities or differences between the present vegetative community and the historic (pre-disturbance) community would be speculative (Pierce County 2006).
Figure 3-6 Northern edge of Clover Creek wetland at the Naches Trail Preserve
3.3.2 Wetland Ratings The Clover Creek wetland is a Category 2, scrub-shrub, emergent, and forested, depressional wetland, supported primarily by groundwater discharge. For the purpose of the wetland rating, the assessment unit was defined as the area of wetland bounded between Military Road to the west and the driveway and culvert at the east edge of the site. In the absence of beaver activity to create a level water surface elevation, the culvert and driveway crossing the wetland currently creates a division of this portion of the wetland distinct from the portion of the
Pierce County 3-9 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
wetland to the east. This wetland has moderate water quality and hydrology functions (respectively), and high habitat function.
The upland wetland group was collectively rated as a Category 3 scrub-shrub and forested depressional wetland with some areas of emergent (non-woody) vegetation maintained along the powerlines. The total area of the wetland mosaic, including the non-wetland area between the wetlands, is estimated at about two and one-half acres. The wetland areas alone total an estimated one and one-half acres. The individual wetlands are located in depressions and swales. The wetland boundaries vary from gradual and indistinct to very abrupt transitions. This wetland group has moderate water quality, hydrology, and habitat functions (Ryba 2015).
Management Considerations:
Management of invasive species in wetlands and riparian areas is an ongoing process involving weed seed source control and management of growth conditions to favor native species, including restoration with appropriate native species.
Wetlands are critical habitat. The Clover Creek wetland crosses property boundaries. Detailed wetland delineations are recommended prior to development activities.
Pierce County 3-10 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-7 Wetlands on the Preserve (Ryba 2015)
Pierce County 3-11 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
3.4 Fish and Wildlife
3.4.1 Priority Habitats and Species The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) data and observations in the field indicate the presence of several priority species and priority habitats, which are also designated as Species of Local Importance (SLI) or Habitats of Local Importance (HLI) by Pierce County (Pierce County Code [PCC] Chapter 18E.40.D). Although Wetlands are the only Priority Habitat documented on the Preserve by WDFW (PHS data indicate a narrow strip of wetlands running through the preserve on either side of Clover Creek), field observations indicated that South Puget Sound Prairie, Oregon White Oak Woodlands, Instream Habitat, and Riparian Habitat were also present.
PHS data indicate a communal roost of Townsend’s big-eared bat, a state candidate species, in the vicinity of the preserve. PHS data, as a matter of policy, do not pinpoint the exact locations of bat detections or roost sites. Townsend’s big-eared bat is found in a wide range of environments throughout the state, and roost in caves, abandoned mines, and abandoned buildings. They are highly sensitive to human disturbance at roost sites, and disturbance is listed as one of the primary threats to the species (Hayes and Wiles 2013). The Preserve is potential foraging habitat, but Townsend’s big-eared bats are not likely to roost there due to the lack of suitable structures. (Herrera)
PHS data document coastal cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii), coho (O. kisutch), and steelhead (O. mykiss) in Clover Creek (WDFW 2015) (Table 3-1). Resident cutthroat trout are listed as a priority species because of their recreational, commercial, or tribal importance (WDFW 2008), and have been observed in the creek (M. Ereth, Pierce County Fisheries Biologist, personal communication). Although anadromous fish are documented as occurring in Clover Creek and occurred there historically, it is unlikely that they are currently present in this portion of the creek due to downstream barriers and intermittent low flows. Pierce County fisheries biologists have never observed coho or steelhead in the creek (M. Ereth, Pierce County Fisheries Biologist, personal communication).
Pierce County 3-12 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Table 3-1. Special Status Species and Habitats Documented or Likely to Occur on the Naches Trail Preserve.
Common Name Scientific Name Statusa Source Mammals Townsend’s Corynorhinus SC PHS big-eared bat townsendii Birds Fox sparrow Passerella iliaca BCC eBird Great blue heron Ardea herodias SM Site visits
Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus cooperi BCC Site visits Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus SC Site visits
Purple finch Carpodacus purpureus BCC Likely to occur based on species distribution and presence of suitable habitat Purple martin Progne subis SC eBird Rufous hummingbird Selasphorus rufus BCC Site visits Vaux’s swift Chaetura vauxi SC Site visits, eBird Willow flycatcher Empidonax trailii BCC Site visits Fish Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch PHS Criteria 2 and PHS (historical); not likely to occur 3, SLI Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarkii PHS Criterion 3, M. Ereth, Pierce County fisheries biologist, SLI personal communication Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss FT, SLI PHS (historical); not likely to occur Habitats South Puget SoundPrairie N/A PTH; HLI Site visit
Oregon White Oak N/A PTH; HLI Site visit Woodland Instream Habitat N/A PAH; HLI Site visit Riparian Habitat N/A PAH; HLI Site visit Wetlands N/A PAH; HLI PHS, Site visit Mixed Coniferous/ N/A None N/A Deciduous Forest Power Line N/A None N/A SC = State Candidate, SM = State Monitor (WDFW 2015); PTH = PHS Priority Terrestrial Habitat, PAH = PHS Priority Aquatic Habitat (WDFW 2008); BCC = USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern (USFWS 2008); SLI = Pierce County Species of Local Importance, HLI = Pierce County Habitat of Local Importance; eBird = Cornell Lab of Ornithology and National Audubon Society eBird online checklist
Pierce County 3-13 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
3.4.2. Aquatic Species The perennial reach of Clover Creek in the Preserve likely provides a source population for fish, amphibians, and other aquatic species that populate other portions of the watershed and affords refugia for fish and amphibians that move throughout the Clover Creek system. Fish species currently using Clover Creek include coastal cutthroat trout (Figure 3-8), three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), cottids (family Cottidae), and brook lamprey (Lampetra richardsoni).
Coastal cutthroat trout are common, with several year classes represented from fry (approximately 1 inch or 2.5 centimeters) to larger fish (up to 12 inches or 30 centimeters) that are likely four to six years old. It is undetermined whether the coastal cutthroat in Clover Creek are the resident or sea-run (anadromous) life history form, but they are likely resident fish due to the presence of several fish passage barriers downstream of the Preserve. Sea-run coastal cutthroat are caught by sport anglers in lower Chambers Creek several miles downstream of the Preserve, above the Chambers Dam, and some recent cutthroat harvested from Lake Steilacoom downstream appear to be sea-run cutthroat.
Although anadromous coho salmon and steelhead trout have been documented historically in the Preserve, they have not been observed recently and it is highly unlikely anadromous species migrate that far upstream. Downstream near the mouth of Chambers Creek, the Chambers Creek steelhead hatchery produced steelhead which were out-planted throughout Puget Sound and the Washington Coast, but steelhead within Chambers Creek system are likely extirpated. Coho salmon are occasionally seen in the Chambers Creek system, but the last time coho were noted in large numbers was over ten years ago. Low flows, coupled with several downstream barriers, likely prevent migration of anadromous fish to Clover Creek in the Preserve.
During a site visit on May 1, 2015, several size classes of coastal cutthroat trout were observed throughout the Preserve. Two cutthroat trout redds were observed below the power lines. Two more redds were observed downstream of the culvert under Military Road, immediately downstream of the Naches Preserve. Stream temperatures were a consistent 56°F throughout the Preserve. (Herrera 2015)
Pierce County 3-14 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-8 Cutthroat trout captured onsite (Pierce County 2006)
Amphibians in Clover Creek include Pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris regilla), red legged frog (Rana aurora), northwestern salamander (Ambystoma gracile) and potentially others. Invertebrates found in the creek include those common to other Puget Sound lowland streams such as signal crayfish (Pacifasticus leniusculus), free swimming and cased caddis flies (order Trichoptera), stone flies (order Plecoptera) and mayflies (order Ephemoptera). Other common aquatic invertebrate species include dragonflies and damselflies (order Odonata, suborders Anisoptera and Zygoptera) and aquatic beetles such as the whirligig beetle (family Gyrinidae). During the May 1, 2015, site visit, numerous large stoned cased caddis were observed on the stream bottom, and several large adult dragonflies were seen in flight.
The ditch north of Clover Creek on the Preserve is seasonal but provides habitat for three- spined stickleback and amphibians. On May 1, 2015, the ditch had 4 to 8 inches of standing water. Stickleback and one unidentified large amphibian egg mass were observed in the ditch. Temperatures were cool at 56°F to 57°F throughout the ditch segment, likely due to groundwater sources. By May 14, the ditch segment was dry throughout.
Beaver have been active within the stream. A beaver deceiver was installed at the bridge crossing to Cross Park in 2007 at the upstream end of the Naches Preserve. The beaver abandoned that area and moved their dams upstream. In 2010, beaver constructed two dams in the forested section of the Preserve, immediately upstream of the power line corridor. The dams backed up streamflow, causing overbank flow to the north, which then made its way back
Pierce County 3-15 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
to the channel within the power-line reach. A beaver dam was noted on the ditch within the Preserve in spring, 2015, during the wetland assessment. Water levels observed at four places within Clover Creek did not indicate that the dam was impeding creek flow. (Herrera 2015).
3.4.3 Species Presence during Site Visits No mammals were observed during project surveys, though Herrera biologists saw deer tracks in the mud adjacent to Clover Creek, as well as a deer skull, small rodent skull (perhaps a Douglas squirrel), and a coyote den in the forested habitat south of the creek. A small beaver dam was noted by SWM staff in the drainage ditch adjacent to the wetlands on the north side of Clover Creek. Several unidentified juvenile salmonids (likely cutthroat trout) were seen swimming in Clover Creek during the May 29 site visit (Herrera 2015).
Forty-four species of birds were observed during field visits (see Appendix B), a number of which are federally or state listed (Table 1). The US Fish and Wildlife Service lists several of these species as Birds of Conservation Concern, which are species of migratory nongame birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (USFWS 2008). State Species of Concern (SC) and State Monitor (SM) species were also documented or are likely to occur on the Preserve based on the distribution of these species and the presence of suitable habitat. State Monitor Species are those that require management, survey, or data emphasis to prevent them from becoming endangered, threatened, or sensitive. State Candidate Species are those that may meet the listing criteria due to failing, declining, or vulnerable populations (Herrera 2015) The presence of state and federally listed species indicates the variety and quality of habitat on the Preserve and the importance of the Preserve in providing a refuge for these species. Great blue heron, for example, require wetland and riparian habitat; pileated woodpecker is dependent on mature forests with large snags for nesting and foraging; olive-sided flycatcher prefers forest edges and clearings; and salmonids and brook lamprey require cold, clean flowing streams.
Management considerations: The Preserve contains habitat for listed species. Preservation of habitat is a conservation value contained in the conservation easement.
3.5 Geology and Soils The surficial geology of the Preserve consists of recessional outwash materials. (Figure 3-9) Mapping shows Vashon till in the southern area and Steilacoom gravels in the north. Steilacoom gravels are a permeable coarse gravel deposit that is generally less than 20-feet thick, frequently underlain by a relatively impervious till layer (Pierce County 2006). Vashon till is composed of gravel, sand, silt, and clay.
County GIS data shows the Spanaway soil association over the outwash materials. The association is found in Pierce County between ground elevations of 200 and 500 feet. The
Pierce County 3-16 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Spanaway soil association contains an abundance of well drained soils, as well as soils containing alluvium and organic soils associated with creek sediments and wetlands, respectively.
The specific soils found on the property include Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, Kapowsin gravelly loam, Dupont muck, and Tisch silt. Spanaway gravelly sandy loam, a very permeable soil, is found in the creek, prairie and oak woodland habitats of the Preserve. (Figure 3-10).
The southern portion of the property contains Kapowsin gravelly sandy loam, a moderately well drained soil. Kapowsin soils tend to be upland soils but can contain pockets of hydric soil. Kapowsin soils are common in forested areas (Zulauf 1979).
The northern wetlands are located within areas of the property with Dupont muck and Tisch silt soils. Both are considered to be hydric soils, which means that they tend to be poorly drained soils. These soil types are common in drainage ways (Zulauf 1979).
Pierce County 3-17 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Surficial geology of upper Clover Creek (Brown and Caldwell 1985) Qs = Steilacoom gravel – pebble to cobble gravel Qvt = vashon till – unstratified clay, silt, sand, gravel Qvr = vashon recessional outwash – stratified sand and gravel (2006 Plan) Figure 3-9, Geology (Pierce County 2006)
Pierce County 3-18 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-10 Soils on the Naches Trail Preserve (Pierce County 2006)
Management Considerations: Understanding the soils and geology of the property will be important in creating restoration plans or development plans on the property.
3.6 Mima Mounds Mima mounds are a geomorphic phenomenon that creates patches of regularly spaced and sized mounds. In the southern Puget Sound Lowlands they are found in prairie areas. The mounds are in areas of proglacial recessional outwash channels that apparently formed as drainage from the east side of the Puget Lowland glacier surged around the glacier’s snout periodically during the ice fronts’ retreat (Logan and Walsh 2009). The source of the mounds is debated. Theories include sediment deposition around brush during flood or wind events, freeze-thaw cycles, seismic activity, and pocket gopher burrowing.
A field of mounds is present near the northeast corner of the Preserve, in remnant prairie habitat(Figure 3-11). They are visible from the ground, and are evident in orthophotos and lidar
Pierce County 3-19 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
images. Herrera evaluated the mounds in November 2015, using four defining characteristics for Mima mounds: mound diameter, mound height, internal structure and vegetation association. Herrera determined “All four attributes exhibited trends within the mound field, with known- Mima patterns being stronger in the central portion (near the signed prairie mound) of the mound field, as compared to the edges. This implies that some lack of attributes seen in the data (e.g., the consistency of vegetation on some of the mounds near the edge of the mound field) can be explained by invading surface processes and other ecological disturbances that act to degrade the physical and ecological characteristics that define Mima mound ecosystems on the edges of the mound field.”
The means of the mound formation is not determined. Regardless of the formation mechanism, it is clear from the Logan and Walsh (2009) study and the analysis herein, that the presence of mounds at Naches Trail Preserve indicates that the conditions required to produce Mima mounds were likely more robust than has been historically understood. That said, the mound field at the Preserve is quite small and truncated to the north by development. Urbanization has likely destroyed or at least altered most, if not all, of similar locations beyond Mima mound traditional extents (with the possible exception of within the confines of Joint Base Lewis- McChord), which argues strongly for preservation of these features at Naches Trail Preserve (Parsons 2015). Herrera recommends mechanical borings of the mounds to confirm their determination (Herrera 2015).
Management Considerations: The mounds provide valuable educational opportunities about processes that created landforms in Pierce County.
Pierce County 3-20 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-11 Mima Mound Study Area at Preserve (Herrera 2015) 3.7 Prairie Grassland Remnant prairie grassland is found along the northern edge of the Preserve, between the Clover Creek and Military Road. Figure 4-2 shows the prairie grassland management zone. The creek forms the southern boundary of the wet prairie area, and the oak woodlands forms the western boundary of the prairie zone. This area is reported to have been used as pasture between about 1900 and the mid-1950s (Stan Cross, personal communication, Pierce County 2006). Some time between 1961 and 1974 (when the Cross family built a home on the property immediately to the east), agricultural activities on the property ceased. Pierce County 3-21 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
South Puget Sound prairie grasslands are herbaceous plant communities with less than 60 percent forest cover, and can be classified as either dry or wet depending on how well drained the soils are at that location. South Puget Sound prairies occur on gravelly, well-drained soils or on other soils derived from materials with low water holding capacity. These prairie soils are shallow, sandy to gravelly loam soils collectively referred to as the Spanaway series (Crawford and Hall 1997). Over 50 percent of the soils on the Preserve, primarily in the northern portion of the property, are mapped as Spanaway gravelly sandy loam (NRCS 2015, Herrera 2015).
Certain grasses, sedges, or forbs are required to establish the presence of prairie habitat (WDFW 2008). Prairie habitat on the Preserve meets the definition of South Puget Sound prairie based on the presence of several diagnostic plants (Table 3.2), and covers roughly 9 acres on the northern portion of the Preserve between Clover Creek and Military Road. Prairie habitat is degraded due to the presence of several non-native invasive grasses and forbs such as Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), tall oatgrass (Arrhenatherum elatius), and velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), as well as other species (Herrera, 2015).
Table 3-2 Diagnostic Prairie Plants Documented on the Naches Trail Preserve (Herrera 2015).
Common Name Scientific Name Dry Prairie Species California oatgrass Danthonia californica Chocolate lily Fritillaria affinis var. affinis Common camas Camassia quamash Common woolly sunflower Eriophyllum lanatum Fanleaf cinquefoil Potentilla gracilis Foot-hill sedge Carex tumulicola Long-stolon sedge Carex inops Roemer’s fescue Festuca idahoensis spp. roemeri Wet Prairie Species Fanleaf cinquefoil Potentilla gracilis Foot-hill sedge Carex tumulicola
Both dry and wet prairie are present on the Preserve. Dry prairie vegetation is dominated by native field chickweed (Cerastium arvense), common camas (Camassia quamash), common woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum), and red fescue (Festuca rubra). Non-native timothy (Phleum pratense) is also common, but this species is considered naturalized and is not a target weed species. Isolated patches of small native trees and shrubs such as black hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii), bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata), and tall Oregon grape (Mahonia aquifolium) are scattered throughout the prairie, as well as non-native oneseed hawthorn (C. monogyna) and apple trees (Malus spp.). Although not listed as a noxious weed, oneseed hawthorn is invasive.
The grassland in the northern portion of this area is a historic mounded prairie. The mounds are discussed in Section 3.6. Running parallel to Military Road, these mounds are a recognized geological form. Among south Puget Sound prairies, the Clover Creek area is the most northern Pierce County 3-22 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN location of these mounds, and the Preserve contains the best and most visible mound examples on Clover Creek with interesting populations of native prairie plants (Pierce County 2006).
There are well developed cryptobiotic crust layers in this area mixed in with small rock outcroppings containing various lichens (Cladonia sp.), as well as roadside and hoary rock moss (Racomitrium canescens and R. lanuganosum). The soil dwelling lichens and bryophytes in the Preserve are characteristic of prairie habitat (Calabria et al., 2015); there would likely be additional characteristic prairie species identified at the preserve with continued and more intensive study of these communities (Herrera 2015).
Native prairie bryophytes and lichens are sensitive to intrusion by non-native and invasive species. Square goose neck moss (Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus), an invasive species, and pseudoscleropodium moss (Pseudoscleropodium purum), a non-native species, were found on the Preserve. The colonies are well established. The result of this intrusion is less suitable habitat available for native species.
There is a distinct gradient extending from the drier northwest corner of the Preserve to wetter habitat closer to Clover Creek. The prairie south of the parking lot was likely historically wetland before construction of 43rd Avenue Court East restricted water flow to that portion of the Preserve (Herrera 2015).
The section of the Preserve between the irrigation ditch and Clover Creek qualifies as wet prairie, which is dominated by fanleaf cinquefoil (Potentilla gracilis), grand collomia (Collomia grandiflora), and yampah (Perideridia gairdneri), with reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) around the edges. Shrubs in this area are Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus) and oneseed hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna). The vegetation south of the parking lot is herbaceous, consisting primarily of Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and northern bedstraw (Galium boreale). Approaching the wetland bordering the irrigation ditch to the south, vegetation transitions to shrubs such as Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana) and snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) (Herrera 2015).
3.8 Oregon White Oak Woodlands Oregon white oak woodlands are defined as stands of oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25 percent, or where total canopy coverage of the stand is greater than 25 percent but oak accounts for at least 50 percent of the canopy coverage. Single oaks or stands less than one acre (0.4 ha) may be considered a priority habitat in urban or urbanizing areas west of the Cascades if they are found to be particularly valuable to fish and wildlife (WDFW 2008).
An oak stand covering approximately four acres is on the northwestern portion of the Preserve. The stand contains roughly 40 trees ranging from 6 to 28 inches diameter at breast height. Understory shrubs are dominated by snowberry, serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), and tall Oregon grape. The herbaceous layer is primarily red fescue (Festuca rubra) and cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Douglas firs are encroaching on the western side of the stand. On the Preserve, the grassland plant community extends into the oak woodland. The largest oak community on the Preserve is the group of oaks on the northwest corner of the site. It is consistent with the description of the Oregon white oak/snowberry/long-stolon sedge Pierce County 3-23 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
community from Chappell and Crawford (1997). It has a semi-open to closed canopy, oak dominant in the canopy, varying amounts of Douglas fir, and an understory dominated by common snowberry. This community type displays a well-developed shrub layer and fewer grassland species than the more open community type (e.g., savanna).
The presence of camas and other grassland forbs such as Oregon sunshine (Eriophyllum lanatum), congested harvest lily ( Dichelostemma congestum ), white fawn lily (Erythronium oreganum) and chocolate lily (Fritillaria lanceolata) as well as the presence of Idaho fescue (Festuca roemeri), seem consistent with Chappell and Crawford’s (1997) description of a successive trajectory in the absence of fire from Oregon white oak/long-stolon sedge-camas to Oregon white oak/snowberry/long-stolon sedge that involves an increase in common snowberry and other shrubs, and a decrease in grassland-associated species. This hypothetical succession would predict that the grassland species would be in decline in this oak community on the Preserve (Pierce County 2006).
Oregon white oak habitats are critical components of South Puget Sound region biodiversity. Remaining oak habitats are a mere trace of those that existed historically over more than 40% of the region. Many of the unique ecosystems of plants and animals associated with oak habitats are either in decline, or near extirpation because of the reduction in oak habitats. Like prairie habitat, oak woodlands were primarily maintained by fire set by Native Americans, and fire suppression has led to a region wide decline of oak habitat (Hanna and Dunn 1997).
Management Considerations: Vegetation management, particularly removal of Douglas fir, thinning of oak stands, and replanting oak are key to enhancing and restoring oak woodland habitat.
Preservation of an oak savanna area may require the use of fire to remove successional species.
3.9 Mixed Conifer/Deciduous Forest Mixed coniferous/deciduous forest is the largest habitat type on the Preserve, covering approximately 28 acres on the southern half of the Preserve (Figure 4-2). Dominant species in this habitat are natives such as Douglas fir, western red cedar (Thuja plicata), and big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), with an understory of vine maple (Acer circinatum) and salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis).
The forest is predominantly an even aged second growth forest with some large older western red cedars, black cottonwoods (Populus trichcarpa), and several large snags. Patches of distinctive vegetative communities appear to be related to soil moisture and to historic patterns of disturbance. The 2006 Plan noted the presence of a remnant orchard interspersed with the native community.
These patches include an area where Oregon white oak have regenerated to form a significant portion of the canopy. Because Oregon white oak is relatively rare in the region, oak release Pierce County 3-24 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
(thinning and removing adjacent overtopping trees; Devine and Harrington 2004) could be used to allow them to grow larger and would enhance the oak community.
False lily of the valley (Mianthemum dilatatum) and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) are common in the herbaceous layer. There is a well-developed bryophyte layer in this area dominated by badge moss (Plagiomnium insigne). Non-native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) proliferates throughout this area, and there are scattered individuals of other invasive species such as English holly (Ilex aquifolium).
Thinning is an important forest practice that benefits the forest by removing weak or suppressed trees and opening space for the remaining healthy trees. Periodic thinning treatments help reduce the risk of insect infestations, disease, and catastrophic fires. Thinning can improve wildlife habitat by stimulating new growth in the understory, improving mast production by overstory trees, and by increasing flight space under the canopy for foraging bats and forest raptors. Forest structure affects habitat quality for many wildlife species. Tree density, canopy height, percent canopy closure, and the number of standing and fallen dead trees are some key structural features that affect habitat quality.
The single-tree selection thinning method removes designated trees from one or more age classes every 5 to 30 years, depending on stand density and growth rates. The harvest of individual trees at periodic intervals creates space for adjacent tree crowns to expand. Single- tree and group selection thinning strategy creates small canopy gaps, which are similar to gaps formed by natural forest disturbances. Group selection treatments remove groups of trees from one or more age classes. Moderately shade-intolerant species can benefit from this harvesting method because larger openings are created.
Small mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and other wildlife that use the forest floor use brush piles for escape, resting and nesting cover. Effective brush piles are built on a base of coarse materials so openings are available at ground level for wildlife movement. Thinned branches and trees from forest management can be used to create brush piles for habitat purposes (Herrera 2015).
Management Considerations: Habitat goals should be prioritized for the forest. These can include habitat enhancement, canopy management, Oregon white oak release, invasive management, and selective thinning.
Pierce County 3-25 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
3.10 Power Line Easement Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) maintains a power line corridor that runs north-south through the Preserve and crosses several habitat types (See Figure 2-4). For purposes of this plan, it is considered to be a separate habitat area with its own management needs. North of Clover Creek the power line crosses prairie habitat, and plant species there are similar to those in other parts of the prairie grassland habitat. South of Clover Creek the line cuts through forest habitat. Vegetation in that portion of the corridor is actively managed to prevent trees from growing underneath the line. Adjacent to and south of the creek, going up the hillside, reed canary grass dominates, with patches of Himalayan blackberry, ninebark, and oneseed hawthorn. Dominant species at the top of the slope on the flat southern portion of the BPA Right-of-way are Douglas’ spiraea (Spiraea douglasii), fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium), and reed canarygrass. Scot’s broom (Cytisus scoparius) has also invaded the southern portion of the corridor (Herrera 2015).
Power line corridors are susceptible to colonization by invasive plant species due to repeated soil and vegetation disturbance that occurs from vegetation management, maintenance practices, and corridor use by visitors. Traditional power line corridor management focuses on keeping vegetation in an early-succession stage to minimize the risk of damage to the structural towers and overhead lines. As a consequence, power line corridors through forested ecosystems fragment the landscape and facilitate the intrusion of undesirable species into natural areas. Evidence of this trend is apparent on the Preserve, where fields of reed canary grass dominate much of this area (Herrera 2015).
Management Considerations: Power line corridors have the potential to create a mixture of different succession stages, enhancing habitat availability for many species that prefer forest edges, and grassland and shrub habitat. Corridors with low vegetation also allow for good views of surrounding landscapes.
3.11 Public Access and Related Infrastructure
3.11.1 Public Access Although the property has been posted with signs indicating a temporary closure to public access, it is clear that the signs are not respected. There are trails through parts of the Preserve, trees have been cut and litter has been left. There is evidence that dogs have been allowed to run loose on the Preserve (Herrera 2015).
Off-leash dogs can be particularly disruptive and will often chase or kill wildlife, particularly vulnerable individuals such as ground or low-nesting birds, pregnant animals, and newborns (Sime 1999). Dog feces can transmit a number of wildlife pathogens such as muscle cysts that infect deer and Leptospirosis that affects the kidneys and urinary tracts of most mammal species (Sime 1999). Dogs can also carry weed seeds in their fur, spreading invasive plant species (BLM 2015).
Pierce County 3-26 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Studies have shown that the presence of dogs, even on trails, causes wildlife disruption. Research shows that prey animals avoided trail areas used by dogs (Lenth, 2008).
Recreational activities such as hiking and biking can reduce wildlife abundance and diversity, change spatial and temporal habitat use, increase physiological stress, reduce reproductive success, and cause behavioral effects such as increased vigilance and flight. The severity of the response depends on the proximity, frequency, timing, and predictability of the disturbance and varies considerably among different species (Reed, et al. 2014, Herrera 2015).
3.11.2 Fencing The Preserve is partially fenced. There is a fence along Military Road, on the northern boundary. A fence has been installed along the internal perimeter of the parking lot. It prevents vehicles from entering the Preserve, but does not prevent pedestrians from entering. The access area is gated, and a dilapidated wire fence extends along the eastern boundary. This fence has been frequently cut by vandals.
Management Considerations: Fences discourage trespass. Extending the fence to surround the entire Preserve is a priority.
3.11.3 Trails If managed properly, public access can provide recreational opportunities and a greater appreciation of the natural heritage of the region, while still maintaining the conservation principles on which the Preserve was founded. A well-designed trail system that incorporates signage, education, and enforcement can provide a balanced mix of recreation and conservation. The American Trails Association lists three core elements of sustainable trails: they protect the environment, they meet user needs and expectations, and they require little maintenance (ATA 2015). It is useful to establish control points (specific places or features that influence where the trail goes) and use them to guide trail layout. The best trails create loops and avoid dead ends. To avoid and minimize erosion, trails should be located in stable soils and use cross slopes where possible, avoiding switchbacks and flat ground where water can pond. They should use natural vegetation and other features to conceal the trail and absorb noise (ATA 2015).
The prairie and oak woodland habitats, Clover Creek, and the Clover Creek wetlands provide a unique opportunity to provide easy access through a variety of habitats. Access to and through Clover Creek, wetlands and associated buffers would need to be carefully controlled in order to protect these resources and prevent habitat degradation. The forested trail leading to a view from the top of the ridge provides an opportunity for a more moderate hiking difficulty level.
Pierce County 3-27 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Approximately 11,292 linear feet of trails were mapped on the preserve during field visits by Herrera in 2015. Most existing trails (roughly 7,050 linear feet) are in the prairie and oak habitat in the north portion of the Preserve. One main circular trail in the prairie habitat is well established. There are several other trails within this habitat that appear to have been created by people wandering off the main trail.
Another unauthorized trail extends from Military Road for approximately 3,145 linear feet through the forested habitat in the southwest corner of the Preserve. This trail exits the forest underneath the power line and merges with a trail running underneath the line that extends from the top of the ridge to the southern boundary of the Preserve.
The 2006 Plan proposed alternative trails or trail extensions within the west side prairie grassland area, the wetland south of Clover Creek, the mixed coniferous deciduous forested area, and underneath the power line on the south part of the Preserve. This update proposes relocation of those trails to reduce impact to resources (Figure 3-11). Trail expansion south of the creek would require a pedestrian bridge over the creek, and a boardwalk trail would likely be required through the wetland.
If the creek must be crossed, a full-span pedestrian bridge is recommended. The bridge should completely span the creek and should minimize impacts by excluding instream structures in the design to minimize impacts to the creek, bank, and floodplain. The bridge footprint should be kept as small as possible to minimize shading of the creek and removal of riparian vegetation.
Pierce County 3-28 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 3-12 Existing and Proposed Trails (Herrera 2015)
Pierce County 3-29 www.piercecountywa.org/water
EXISTING CONDITIONS NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
A bridge over Clover Creek would not only have construction costs, but would require permits related to overwater structures and removal of riparian vegetation. Vegetation removal would likely require compensatory mitigation through restoration or enhancement of riparian vegetation elsewhere on Clover Creek. Similarly, constructing a boardwalk through the Clover Creek wetlands would also have wetland impacts from fill due to boardwalk footings or pilings and shade that reduces wetland vegetation. Boardwalk construction would likely require developing a permit application that details the impacts of construction and operation of the trail as well as compensatory mitigation that will be implemented by the County to offset those impacts. Enhancing and improving wetland and stream conditions would help increase habitat functions within the Preserve and offset impacts from construction.
Management Considerations: Trail establishment and management objectives should address potential impacts on habitat and wildlife resulting from public access. Unrestricted access can cause erosion and soil compaction, trample plants and damage sensitive habitats, reduce vegetative cover and associated wildlife habitat, and disturb wildlife.
3.11.4 Parking Area A small parking lot with capacity for less than 20 vehicles was constructed in the northeast corner of the property at 43rd Ave. E. The parking area is gated at the road. There is a pedestrian access to the Preserve inside the parking lot. Current plans for Cross Park include improvements to this parking area, including enlargement of the footprint.
A small kiosk was installed in the parking area at the internal entry to the Preserve. It provides a small amount of information about the Preserve history. It will likely be removed when the parking lot is reconstructed during Cross Park development.
Trash cans installed in the parking lot have been maintained by SWM on an as-needed basis. When the parking lot is used for Cross Park, maintenance responsibilities will fall on the PCPR.
Management Considerations: Use of the parking area for Cross Park exposes the Preserve to the potential for unmanaged access. Installation of fencing and gates to control public access between the parking lot and the Preserve is a priority.
Public Works and PCPR must develop formal agreements about management of the park and Preserve properties before the Cross Park improvement plans are finalized.
3.11.5 Signage A large informational sign is located in the parking lot at the pedestrian entrance to the Preserve. The sign explains the relationship of the property to the Naches Trail. Several natural features within the Preserve are identified with small metal signs.
Pierce County 3-30 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
CHAPTER FOUR HABITAT MANAGEMENT AREAS AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
Figure 4.1 Trail through Naches Oak Woodlands
“Believe one who knows: You will find something greater in woods than in books. Trees and stones will teach you that which you can never learn from masters.” (St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Epistles).
4.0 Introduction This chapter presents management strategies for the Preserve. Habitat management areas have been roughly delineated based upon the natural features of the Preserve. Strategies are also discussed for other elements of Preserve management. The strategies address
Pierce County 4-1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
conservation easement provisions, habitat management area conditions, and management considerations presented in preceding chapters.
4.1 Priority Strategies The priority management standard calls for protection and restoration of the conservation values of the property. Protection is the first priority, however, public enjoyment of the property is also a consideration. The following 5 priorities have been identified from the preceding discussions. They are to be implemented in accordance with those discussions.
4.1.a. To protect the property and associated resources from impending development and continued trespass, the first priority must be installation of perimeter fencing with gates that provide controlled access.
4.1.b. Define public access areas, by delineation and definition of trails with signage and fencing or railing.
4.1.c. Conditions for public access must be agreed upon by SWM, Forterra, and Pierce County Parks and Recreation.
4.1.d. Establish a means for monitoring the impacts of public access with a plan for why, when, and how changes to the extent of public access may be necessary.
4.1.e. Post signage with rules for activities on the property at access points, on a web site, and at key locations on the property.
4.2 General Management Strategies and Actions Many management activities are applicable to the Preserve as a whole.
4.2 a. Prioritize activities that support a natural preserve that provides opportunities for education and limited passive recreation.
4.2.b. Use of the Preserve is limited to pedestrians. Bicycles, horses and motorized vehicles are prohibited.
4.2.c. Create a schedule with specific dates public access may be allowed to prevent overuse.
4.2.d. Partner with educational institutions and natural resource management groups to increase knowledge, monitor, and maintain the ecosystems.
4.2.e. Work with surrounding property owners to maintain wildlife corridors and habitat.
Pierce County 4-2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.2.f. Involve the local community in the restoration, preservation and stewardship of the property.
4.2.g. Install fencing around the entire site perimeter and improve fencing between the parking lot and the Preserve to prevent uncontrolled access into the Preserve.
4.2.h. Limit points of access through fencing and gate placement.
4.2.i. Establish formal trails with clear signage that specifies designated uses and rules throughout the trail system to eliminate informal trails and unauthorized uses.
4.2.j. Install informational signage regarding rules of property use at all entry points.
4.2.k. Install educational signage along trails, including, but not limited to, information about habitat, geology, area history, vegetation, and wildlife.
4.2.l. Restrict access to areas off maintained trails except for restoration activities or related activities.
4.2.m. Provide fencing or railing along trail edges to minimize ecosystem damage.
4.2.n. Monitor the Preserve and habitat areas regularly to evaluate impacts from climate change and land uses changes and from public access.
4.2.o. Coordinate restoration activities in the powerline corridor with Bonneville Power and Tacoma Public Utilities.
4.2.p. Restrict access to the Preserve during breeding seasons.
4.2.q. Use outreach and education to reduce impacts from activities on adjoining properties on the Clover Creek habitat corridor, especially during breeding seasons.
4.2.r. Prohibit the presence of dogs in the Preserve, and prohibit off-leash dogs in the parking lot.
4.2.s. Require that anything brought in is packed out.
4.2.t. Minimize installation of infrastructure on the property to reduce habitat loss.
4.2.u. Locate signage that explains the Preserve purpose and allowed activities at the Preserve at trails that intersect with Cross Park boundaries.
Pierce County 4-3 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.2.v. Take measures to prevent contamination of wetland, riparian, and instream habitat through public education about the hazards of pathogen and invasives transport on shoes, boots, and clothing. 4.2.x. Prepare habitat management and restoration plans in advance that can be implemented by volunteers and student to prevent conflicts with the management standards.
4.3 Habitat Management Areas Seven habitat management areas have been identified. Habitat management areas were created to recognize differing management needs of the ecological areas associated with the natural features described in Chapter 3. The lines between the areas are not distinct, and some management considerations may overlap, however, each habitat type has some distinct values that must be protected. Management areas are shown in Figure 4-2.
Pierce County 4-4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
Figure 4-2, Habitat Areas
Pierce County 4-5 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.3.1. Instream Habitat Management Strategies Many areas within Clover Creek downstream of this reach go dry for extended periods, but have fish populations when there is sufficient water. This perennial reach likely serves as a source population and refugia for fish and amphibians that move throughout the Clover Creek system as water presence permits. Maintenance of this habitat is very important for the watershed (Ereth, 2015).
4.3.1.a. Ensure activities occurring in or near riparian areas are consistent with local, state, and federal regulations to protect the instream habitat.
4.3.1.b. Preserve water quality by encouraging stormwater treatment and low-impact development on adjoining properties, including Cross Park and other parts of the watershed.
4.3.1.c. Enhance salmonid habitat.
4.3.1.d. Remove bank armoring and reduce channelization.
4.3.1.e. Enhance and restore wetlands and riparian habitat adjacent to the creek.
4.3.1.f. Prohibit recreational activities that involve access into the creek.
4.3.2 Riparian Habitat Management Strategies The riparian condition of Clover Creek is generally good. Most of the stream banks are heavily forested, except for the creek portion that flows underneath the power line corridor. Riparian vegetation consists of red alder (Alnus rubra) and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), with an understory of ninebark and vine maple (with the vine maple primarily on the south side of the creek). Slough sedge (Carex obnupta) and reed canary grass dominate the herbaceous layer. Reed canary grass dominates the segment where the power line corridor passes over the stream.
Invasive species such as reed canary grass affect the structure and development of native plant communities, reducing many of the riparian habitat functions. Invasive species control can help restore and enhance riparian functions (Herrera 2015).
4.3.2.a. Create a broad vegetated buffer around the creek.
4.3.2.b. Place all trail infrastructure outside of the mapped 100-year FEMA floodplain (except for a portion of the trail bridging the creek).
Pierce County 4-6 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.3.2.c. Within the floodplain, manage vegetation to maximize shade to decrease the propensity for evaporation losses and temperature elevations in the warmer, drier summers of the future.
4.3.2.d. Ensure activities occurring in or near riparian areas are consistent with local, state, and federal regulations.
4.3.2.e. Remove invasive species, particularly reed canary grass, and restore/enhance native riparian species.
4.3.2.f. Enhance riparian vegetation underneath the power line. Use low-growing species that do not interfere with management of the power line corridor.
4.3.3. Wetland Habitat Management Strategies There are several wetlands in the Preserve (Figure 3, discussion Section 3.3). Wetlands provide a variety of ecological functions such as water storage and filtration, nutrient removal and transformation, groundwater recharge, moderation of peak flows, sediment stabilization, and wildlife habitat (Sheldon, et al. 2005). Higher quality wetlands provide more and healthier functions.
Wetlands in the Preserve are degraded by the presence of introduced species, particularly reed canary grass, which is common in both the Clover Creek wetlands and wetlands on the southern portion of the Preserve. Invasive plants significantly alter the composition of wetland plant communities, which in turn, changes all the invertebrate and microscopic organisms associated with those plants (Adamus, et al. 2001). As with riparian areas, wetlands planted with high stem density of native vegetation can often shade out invasive species (Sheldon, et al. 2005).
4.3.3.a. Confirm wetland boundaries prior to undertaking new activities through a delineation.
4.3.3.b. Designate and protect vegetated buffer areas adjacent to wetlands.
4.3.3.c. Restore buffer areas disturbed by past activities.
4.3.3.d. Enhance existing wetlands by removing invasive species and replanting native species.
4.3.3.e. Route trails to avoid wetland impacts to the extent possible. Where trails cross wetlands, use trail designs (such as bridges and boardwalks) that minimize impacts.
Pierce County 4-7 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.3.3.f. Remove or improve hydrologic barriers that impede wetland hydrologic flows, such as roads and undersized culverts.
4.3.3.g. Ensure activities occurring in or near wetlands are consistent with local, state, and federal regulations.
4.3.4. Prairie Grassland Management Strategies This prairie patch of disturbed grassland is a remnant of an estimated 149,000 acres of grasslands that existed in southern Puget Sound before 1850, based on the presence of grassland soils (Crawford and Hall 1997). Ninety-two percent of those grasslands no longer exist; of those remaining, only three percent of the original grassland area is considered to be high quality (Crawford and Hall 1997).
The grassland in the northern portion of this area is a historic mounded prairie (Figure 3-10). Running parallel to Military Road, these Mima mounds are noticeable in orthophotos. Among south Puget Sound prairies, the Clover Creek area is the most northern location of these mounds, and the Preserve contains the most visible mound examples on Clover Creek with interesting populations of native prairie plants. Even though this prairie patch is highly degraded, some typical prairie vegetation is still present. (Table 3.2). Preservation of the remnant prairie and the Mima mounds preserves part of a diminishing local natural heritage.
4.3.4.a. Restore degraded prairie habitat through control of weed species and replanting of native species.
4.3.4.b. Pursue opportunities to partner with groups with experience in prairie restoration and preservation.
4.3.4.c. Use prairie restoration activities to provide educational activities.
4.3.4.d. Explore habitat improvements to facilitate introduction of local prairie species, such as Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha taylori) and mardon skipper butterfly (Polites mardon).
4.3.4.e. Restrict prairie access to established and maintained trails, except for guided educational activities and restoration activities.
4.3.4.f. Limit access during breeding seasons to minimize disturbance to ground-dwelling species.
Pierce County 4-8 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.3.4.g. If use of fire is permitted as a management tool, public outreach, brochures, and signs regarding fire education and land management strategies help educate neighbors, trail users, and the public as to why control burning is an effective maintenance strategy.
4.3.5 Oregon White Oak Woodlands Management Strategies Douglas fir and other tree species can grow faster and taller than oaks, and have greater shade tolerance. Without active management, oak woodlands will gradually be colonized by Douglas fir and other invasive species (Dunn 1998; Campbell 2004; Devine and Harrington 2004; Vesely and Tucker 2004). Young oaks do not grow well in dense stands, which must be thinned to allow crown development.
4.3.5.a. Restore degraded habitat through control of weed species and replanting of native species.
4.3.5.b. Reduce species that compete with oak, such as Douglas fir and Scot’s broom, and restore understory plant communities historically associated with oak woodlands.
4.3.5.c. Cut, girdle or remove encroaching Douglas fir to enhance Oregon white oak habitat.
4.3.5.d. Thin existing stands if oak saplings become too dense.
4.3.5.e. Replant oaks and understory species.
4.3.5.f. If use of fire is permitted as a management tool, public outreach, brochures, and signs regarding fire education and land management strategies help educate neighbors, trail users, and the public as to why control burning is an effective maintenance strategy.
4.3.6. Mixed Coniferous/Deciduous Forest Management Strategies The Mixed Conifer/Deciduous Forest is the largest habitat type on the Preserve, covering approximately 28 acres on the southern half of the Preserve. It contains multiple canopy layers and a diversity of plant species.
4.3.6.a. Develop a plan for the forest area that prioritizes management goals.
4.3.6.b. Remove non-native invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry and English holly.
4.3.6.c. Supplement the shrub and herbaceous layers with site appropriate species.
Pierce County 4-9 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.3.6.d. Selectively thin trees to create an uneven aged stand that will develop old growth characteristics over time.
43.6.e. Where Oregon white oaks are present, selectively remove adjacent Douglas firs to release the oaks and understory vegetation.
4.3.6.f. Create brush piles for small animal habitat at a density of about one per acre or more.
4.3.6.g. Actively manage fuels and vegetation, where appropriate, to minimize risk of loss due to wildfire.
4.3.7 Powerline Easement Habitat Area Management Strategies The powerline easement is an encumbrance that crosses several habitat types. It has been designated as a separate habitat area because it comes with different issues than the rest of the Preserve. Management of this area is subject to the terms of easements held by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the City of Tacoma that allows the construction and related maintenance of powerlines. Much of the area contains invasive vegetation. There are limits to the types of restoration activities that can be undertaken without cooperation by the easement holders.
4.3.7.a. Facilitate the removal of invasive species by coordinating with BPA and Tacoma on management of their easements within the Preserve.
4.3.7.b. Coordinate vegetation management with BPA to create succession variation through corridors that includes a mix of areas dominated by grasses, herbs, shrubs, and small tree species.
4.3.7.c. Design trails under the power line to avoid and minimize wetland impacts.
4.3.7.d. Manage vegetation in the power line corridors to retain views of the surrounding area.
4.4 Public Access and Infrastructure Management Strategies Infrastructure and Public Access are tied very closely together. Infrastructure in this plan refers to parking, fencing, trails, signage and other amenities placed on the property to accommodate access. The Preserve was obtained for the purpose of protecting its
Pierce County 4-10 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
conservation values and for enhancing public enjoyment of those values. Provision of public access at a level that does not compromise the conservation values requires appropriate infrastructure.
4.4.1 Fencing Management Strategies The site perimeter is only partially fenced. Increasing pressure from development in the area makes fencing a priority if the Preserve conservation features are to be protected. The existing access into the Preserve from the parking lot must be secured with additional fencing to prevent uncontrolled entry onto the Preserve. Gates can be used to provide designated access to the Preserve.
4.4.1.a. Fence the entire Preserve perimeter. 4.4.1.b. Design and install fencing to accommodate wildlife migration 4.4.1.c. Control access with gates.
4.4.1.d. Establish gates at designated locations, posted with advisory signage regarding use limitations and contact information.
4.4.1.e. Work with BPA and Tacoma to re-establish an access gate for powerline maintenance on the south property line.
4.4.2 Trails Management Strategies The 2006 Plan proposed alternative trails or trail extensions within the west side prairie grassland area, the wetland south of Clover Creek, the mixed coniferous deciduous forested area, and underneath the power line on the south part of the Preserve (Figure 3-12). Trail expansion south of the creek would require a pedestrian bridge over the creek, and a boardwalk trail would likely be required through the wetland. Permitting for these trail expansions may be very difficult.
4.4.2.a. To minimize maintenance costs and maximize ecological values, limit use of trails to pedestrians, wheelchairs, and possibly, leashed animals.
4.4.2.b. Guide visitors to or away from sensitive resources.
4.4.2.c. Use existing trails where possible.
Pierce County 4-11 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.4.2.d. Re-route steep portions of the existing forest trail to avoid erosion and drainage problems.
4.4.2.e. If trails are routed through the Clover Creek floodplain, use raised boardwalks to protect low-lying wet areas.
4.4.2.f. Retire social trails, particularly in the prairie and forest portions of the Preserve (Figure 3-12), and restore those areas.
4.4.2.g. Install signage that clearly shows trail access, level of difficulty, and rules of etiquette throughout the preserve such as “leave no trace.”
4.4.2.h. Add fencing to discourage use of social trails and to keep visitors on established trails.
4.4.2.i. Route the proposed forest trail around the power line terrace wetland to avoid or minimize wetland impacts in that location.
4.4.3 Signage/Public Outreach and Education Management Strategies Naches Trail Preserve contains a number of rare and interesting features that provide educational opportunities. Signage is an element of all the management strategies. Potential signage themes include the following:
History of Native American peoples in the area; History of Euro-American settlement; Natural history; Prairie grasslands and patterned prairie; Oak woodlands; Clover Creek and associated wetlands; Overview maps of the trail system and appropriate uses; and Weed awareness and weed prevention techniques, including information about the potential for transport of weeds on shoes and clothing from off-site into the Preserve.
The Preserve could be a good location for interactive or digital signage that allows the public to access information with smartphones or mobile devices.
4.4.3.a. Signage and brochures should be developed to describe Naches features.
Pierce County 4-12 www.piercecountywa.org/water
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.4.3.b. If use of fire is permitted as a management tool, public outreach, brochures, and signs regarding fire education and land management strategies help educate neighbors, trail users, and the public as to why control burning is an effective maintenance strategy.
4.5 Long Term Maintenance Adaptive management is the refinement of management actions based on feedback incorporated from quantification and evaluation of the previous round of management actions. Adaptive management actively incorporates feedback and learning into management actions to improve stewardship of the Preserve. Components required to implement adaptive management are recording the baseline measure of condition, identifying management objectives, developing performance standards, monitoring and evaluating trends towards or away from the objectives and performance standards, and selecting the next step.
Monitoring and evaluation will be an essential aspect of Preserve stewardship. Natural resources and infrastructure should be monitored on an annual basis to measure conditions against objectives and performance standards. Monitoring methods should be consistent in order to develop data that can be compared between pre-and post-treatment evaluation.
Monitoring will determine if management objectives are being met and the next course of action. If monitoring indicates conditions are stable or improving, the next step may be no action or continue the current course. If goals and objectives are not being met, remedial actions may be necessary. Some remedial actions may be anticipated; others will require additional research and evaluation that could lead to modification of goals, objectives, and monitoring and evaluation methods.
4.5.1 Ecological Features Management Strategies The following management strategies can be implemented to monitor high-priority ecological features in the Preserve.
4.5.1.a. Establish indicators of ecosystem health that will be monitored.
4.5.1.b. Establish photo monitoring locations.
4.5.1.c. Assess vegetation condition in areas of concern such as near trails and other high use areas, and areas with known presence of noxious weeds.
4.5.1.d. Monitor water quality and quantity in Clover Creek.
4.5.1.e. Monitor fish use in Clover Creek to ensure protection of redds and other habitat.
4.5.2 Trails
Public access on the property will be dictated by impacts on the resources. Monitoring public use will help measure impacts and determine appropriate use levels. No matter how well trails are maintained some damage is inevitable.
Pierce County 4-13 www.piercecountywa.org/water
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
4.5.2.a. Establish photo points to help monitor impacts. Indicators of trail degradation include trampled and dying vegetation, soil rutting, soil loss, other signs of erosion, and trail widening.
4.5.2.b. Repair trails as necessary; close trails periodically to allow for restoration.
4.5.2.c. If repeated trail damage is occurring at specific locations, determine the cause and consider alternative surfacing, signage, or even re-locating the trail.
Figure 4-3 Common Camas (Camassia quamash) at Naches Preserve
“Just living is not enough... one must have sunshine, freedom, and a little flower.” Hans Christian Anderson
Pierce County 4-14 www.piercecountywa.org/water
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN
REFERENCES
Adamus, P.R, T.J. Danielson, and A. Gonyaw. 2001. Indicators for Monitoring Biological Integrity of Inland, Freshwater Wetlands: A Survey of North American Technical Literature (1990-2000). EPA 843-R-01. Fall 2001. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. ATA. 2015. Trail design and construction. American Trails Association.
Berg, A.W. 1990. Formation of Mima mounds: a seismic explanation. Geology 18(3):281–284. BLM. 2015. Bureau of Land Management Weed Prevention and Management Guidelines.
Calabria, L.alita, Arnold, A., Charatz, E., Eide, G., Hynson, L., Jackmond, G., Nannes, J., Stone, D., and Villella, J., A Checklist of Soil-Dwelling Bryophytes and Lichens of the South Puget Sound Prairies of Western Washington. Evansia Mar 2015: Vol. 32, Issue 1, pg(s) 30-41
Cole, D. N., and P. B. Landres. 1995. Indirect effects of recreation on wildlife. Pages 183-202 in Knight, R. L. and K. J. Gutzwiller, eds. Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence through Management and Research. 1995. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Collinge, S.K., 1996. Ecological consequences of habitat fragmentation: Implications for landscape architecture and planning. Landscape Urban Plann. 36, 59±77.
Corn, P.S. 2005. Climate change and amphibians. Animal and Biodiversity Conservation, 28.1: 59- 67.
Crawford, R.C. and H. Hall. 1997. Changes in the South Puget Sound landscape. Pages 11–15 in P. Dunn and K. Ewing, ed. Ecology and Conservation of the South Puget Sound Prairie Landscape. The Nature Conservancy, Seattle, Washington. CRC. 2015. Naches Trail Preserve History, Pierce County, Washington. Technical Memo 1503M-1. Cultural Resource Consultants, Inc., June 2, 2015. 16 pp. Cross, J. 2007. Story of Stan and Joan Cross Park. Pierce County Parks and Recreation, Pierce County, Washington.
Pierce County R1 www.piercecountywa.org/water
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN Dominguez, F., E. Rivera, D.P. Lettenmaier, and C.L. Castro. 2012. Changes in winter precipitation extremes for the western United States under a warmer climate as simulated by regional climate models. Geophysical Research Letters 39 doi:10.1029/2011GL050762. Dunn, P. 1998. Prairie Habitat Restoration and Maintenance on Fort Lewis and within the South Puget Sound Prairie Landscape. The Nature Conservancy of Washington. 70 pp. Ecology. 2015. Washington State Department of Ecology Clover Creek Area Multi-Parameter Water Quality Improvement Project.
Fernández-Juricic, E. and J.L. Tellería. 2000. Effects of human disturbance on spatial and temporal feeding patterns of Blackbird Turdus merula in urban parks in Madrid, Spain, Bird Study, 47:1, 13-21, DOI: 10.1080/00063650009461156 Kerwin, J. 1999. Salmon Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Puyallup River Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 10). Washington Conservation Commission, Olympia, Washington.
Pierce County R2 www.piercecountywa.org/water
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN Knutson, K.L. and V.L. Naef. 1997. Management recommendations for Washington’s priority habitats: riparian. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, Washington. 181 pp.
Lenth, B.B., Knight, R.L. 2008. The effects of Dogs on Wildlife Communities. Natural Areas Journal, Volume 28 (3), 2008, 218-227. Littell, J.S., M. McGuire Elsner, L.C. Whitely Binder, and A.K. Snover (eds). 2009. The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment: Evaluating Washington's Future in a Changing Climate – Executive Summary. In The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment: Evaluating Washington's Future in a Changing Climate, Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Available at:
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN Peter, D.H. and T.B. Harrington. 2014. Historical Colonization of South Puget Sound Prairies by Douglas-fir at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington. Northwest Science 88(3):186–205. Pierce County. 2006. Naches Trail Preserve Stewardship Plan. Pierce County Public Works and Utilities Water Programs Division.
Pierce County R4 www.piercecountywa.org/water
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN Sime, C.A. 1999. Domestic Dogs in Wildlife Habitats, Pages 8.1-8.17 in G. Joslin and H. Youmans, coordinators. Effects of Recreation on Rocky Mountain Wildlife: A Review for Montana. Committee on Effects of Recreation on Wildlife, Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society. Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, R.B. Alley, T. Berntsen, N.L. Bindoff, Z. Chen, A. Chidthaisong, J.M. Gregory, G.C. Hegerl, M. Heimann, B. Hewitson, B.J. Hoskins, F. Joos, J. Jouzel, V. Kattsov, U. Lohmann, T. Matsuno, M. Molina, N. Nicholls, J. Overpeck, G. Raga, V. Ramaswamy, J. Ren, M. Rusticucci, R. Somerville, T.F. Stocker, P. Whetton, R.A. Wood, and D. Wratt. 2007. Technical Summary. Pp. 19–91. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H.L. Miller (Eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, New York. 996 pp. Stanley, A.G., P.W. Dunwiddie, and T. N. Kaye. 2011. Restoring invaded Pacific Northwest prairies: management recommendations from a region-wide experiment. Northwest Science 85(2):233– 246. US Census Bureau. 2015. American Fact Finder. Accessed June 16, 2015.
REFERENCES NACHES TRAIL PRESERVE STEWARDSHIP PLAN EPA, 1993. Support Document for Sole Source Aquifer Designation of the Central Pierce County Aquifer System. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA. Zulauf, A.S. 1979. Soil Survey of Pierce County Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
Pierce County R6 www.piercecountywa.org/water