CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
This watershed plan for the Hoko-Lyre Watershed provides a comprehensive review and evaluation of vital water resources in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 19 and lays the groundwork for future management and stewardship of these resources. Located on the Olympic Peninsula (see Figure 1-1), WRIA 19 is a beautiful and remote area with few human inhabitants, though it carries a legacy of large- scale logging throughout the region. Based on the review of water resources, this plan outlines steps for ensuring the optimum ongoing use of the watershed’s surface waters and groundwater in a way that balances water needs for human use and environmental protection. An overview of the important characteristics of WRIA 19 is provided below. Appendix A provides more detailed descriptions of WRIA 19 features that are important for consideration in a watershed plan.
Figure 1-1. WRIA 19 and Subbasins
1.1 WHY WAS THIS PLAN DEVELOPED?
In 1998, the Washington State Legislature created the Watershed Management Act (Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 90.82) to support local communities in addressing water resource management issues. The act established a voluntary watershed management planning process for the major river basins in the state. The goal of the planning process is to support economic growth while promoting water availability and quality. The Act encourages local governments and interested groups and citizens to assess basin water resources and develop strategies for managing them.
The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) defined boundaries that divide the state into WRIAs, which correspond to the watersheds of major rivers, and established funding for groups in each WRIA that choose to undertake the planning process (funding is broken down by phases of the planning
1-1 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
effort, as described in Appendix B). The Watershed Management Act requires that each watershed planning process address the issue of water quantity and defines three optional planning elements: water quality, habitat, and instream flow (the amount of flow that must be left in a stream to support habitat features). If a planning group chooses to undertake any of the optional planning elements, additional funding is available. The WRIA 19 Planning Unit chose to undertake all three of the additional elements, as described in Section 1.4.2.
Watershed planning conducted under the Watershed Management Act may be initiated only with the unanimous consent of the “Initiating Governments” in the WRIA, which include all counties in the watershed, the largest city or town, and the largest water utility. All tribes with reservation lands in the watershed must be invited to participate as an Initiating Government. The Initiating Governments appoint a lead agency for the planning process, decide upon the elements to be covered in the planning process, and designate a “Planning Unit,” consisting of stakeholders within the watershed.
When the legislation was enacted, areas of WRIA 19 were facing problems stemming from a long history of environmental damage from logging and overfishing. Although logging practices and their associated impacts have improved over the years, the long-term effects of past practices left present-day communities in WRIA 19 to deal with problems such as poor water quality, loss of habitat (especially old-growth forest), streambank erosion, and diminishing salmon runs. The delicate balance between maintaining an economy driven by natural resource extraction and protecting natural resources is a key theme in the watershed planning effort for WRIA 19.
The Planning Unit has the authority to approve or reject the watershed plan, but it cannot create obligations for entities that are not represented on the Planning Unit. Nor can the recommendations of the Watershed Plan supplant existing legislation pertaining to established forest practices. Specifically, RCW 90.82.120 states that watershed planning “shall not create any obligations or restrictions on forest practices additional to or inconsistent with” the state’s forest practices law (RCW 76.09). However, RCW 90.82 does not prevent a planning unit from proposing recommendations, such as monitoring, that can complement or assist the implementation of the forest practices law. Nor does the legislation preclude the forest industry from agreeing to undertake additional voluntary actions to protect watershed health.
1.2 HOKO-LYRE WATERSHED DESCRIPTION
1.2.1 Area Evaluated for the Watershed Plan
WRIA 19 covers 384 square miles in Clallam County, extending along the Strait of Juan de Fuca from Freshwater Bay west of Port Angeles to Cape Flattery. The northernmost peaks of the Olympic Mountains make up the southern boundary of the watershed; the northern boundary is the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
This plan does not address water resource issues pertaining to the Makah Reservation at the northwest tip of the Olympic Peninsula. This land is excluded as “federally reserved” based on the 1908 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in /Winters v. United States/, which states, “when the Federal Government withdraws land from the public domain for a particular purpose, by implication it also reserves whatever unappropriated water is necessary to accomplish this purpose. That reserved right carries a priority as of the date of the reservation, regardless of when the water is actually used” (Authorities and Definitions, USFWS Manual, 1993). These rights were given a priority date of “time immemorial” and are the most senior water rights in WRIA 19.
Although reservation land falls outside the scope of watershed planning, both the Makah and the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe have “Usual and Accustomed” hunting and fishing rights in many of the subbasins
1-2 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND throughout WRIA 19. The Usual and Accustomed (U&A) areas overlap with the land contained within the land defined in the WRIA 19. The Tribes have a federal right to manage natural resources on the landscape in their respective U & A’s. The Tribal rights are separate and distinct from any outcome of the WRIA 19 planning process. Management of Tribal resources, including water, in the U&A is the responsibility of the tribes as defined by their respective Treaties and the federal, state and county governments. The Tribe works cooperatively with federal, state, county and other government representatives to ensure tribal rights are protected.
1.2.2 Streams and Water Bodies
WRIA 19 includes all rivers and streams that drain into the Strait of Juan de Fuca along the western part of the north coast of the Olympic Peninsula. This watershed plan provides detailed evaluation of all streams in the watershed’s nine major subbasins outside of tribal lands that flow north from the Olympic Mountains through the foothills and lowland valleys to sea level (referred to as “the Big 9”): • Sekiu River • Deep Creek • Hoko River • East and West Twin Rivers • Clallam River • Lyre River • Pysht River • Salt Creek.
Several smaller streams originate in the foothills and lowlands. Lake Crescent is the only major lake in WRIA 19; it is entirely surrounded by National Park lands.
1.2.3 Land Use
The dominant land use in WRIA 19 is commercial forestry. Almost the entire watershed has been harvested at least once in the past 100 years, and much of it is in its third rotation of harvest (Johnson and O’Neill, 2001). Sixty-eight percent of the WRIA is zoned for commercial forestry, of which 53 percent is privately owned and the remainder is managed by state and federal agencies (24 and 19 percent, respectively). Figure 1-2 shows the distribution of timberlands by owner category, and Figure 1-3 shows the distribution of timberlands held by the largest private owners.
In addition to commercial forestry, WRIA 19 has a long agricultural tradition. Early settlers were encouraged to relocate to the Olympic Peninsula by the Donation Land Act of 1850, which granted 320 acres to a single settler or 640 acres to a family. After an early period of homesteading and farming, logging began to dominate the economy by the early 1900s, after which much of the land in the eastern, coastal areas of WRIA 19 was further converted to agriculture. The agricultural community developed important livestock, farming and especially dairy industries that Cowan Ranch (photo courtesy of Bill Drath) supplemented the forest economy (Crop and Livestock Reporting Services Bulletin, 1956). Today, 7 percent of WRIA 19 is zoned rural. Minor portions of the watershed are zoned tribal, public, industria l, tideland, or urban (see Figure 1-4).
1-3 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
50,000 Other 45,764 4% 45,000 40,000 35,000 State 24% 30,000 25,590 25,000 21,280 20,000 Private 53% 15,000 10,000 Timberland Area Owned (acres) 5,000 3,105 2,634 Federal 0 19%
Bloedel Rayonier Merrill& Ring Ring Familty Ltd. Cascade Timberlands Figure 1-2. Timberland Ownership by Owner Class Figure 1-3. Large Private Timberland Owners (ONRC Clearinghouse for the Olympic Peninsula) (ONRC Clearinghouse for the Olympic Peninsula)
Other 12%
Public 6%
Rural 7%
Commercial Forestry 75%
Figure 1-4. Zoning Distribution by Area (ONRC Clearinghouse for the Olympic Peninsula)
1.2.4 Population
Early native communities on the Olympic Peninsula thrived on the abundant fish and wildlife food sources in the peninsula’s hospitable climate. By the late 1700s, approximately 4,000 Native Americans of the S’Klallam, Makah, and Ozette tribes inhabited 17 villages along the northern peninsula. By the mid-1800s, European settlers were establishing communities in what is now Clallam County, with fur trading, canning, timber and wood products, and farming as the economic base. Commercial forestry
1-4 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND continues to employ many people throughout WRIA 19. Other major employment categories include retail, recreation, tourism, and staffing of the Clallam Bay Corrections Center.
There are no incorporated cities in WRIA 19, but there are several small communities, including Coville, Ramapo, Joyce, Disque, Ovington, Crescent, Fairholm, Port Crescent, Shadow, Twin, Pysht, Clallam Bay, Sekiu, Old Royal, and Neah Bay. Of these, Neah Bay and Clalla m Bay have the densest population centers; Coville, Ramapo and Joyce, lying on the sprawling lowlands in the eastern portion of WRIA 19, have the most widespread populations (Figure 1-5 Populations to be added). The 2000 census estimates that (XX number) people currently live in WRIA 19, most of them along the coastal fringe of the Strait of Juan de Fuca.
1.2.5 Flora and Fauna
WRIA 19 supports a diverse array of plants and animals. The most extensive habitat type is “Westside lowland conifer-hardwood forest,” which is dominated by evergreen conifers, in particular Douglas fir and western hemlock. Mature stands typically have a multi-layered canopy, large snags and many large logs on the ground. Common understory species include vine maple, Pacific rhododendron, salmonberry, salal, dwarf swordfern, twinflower and a wide variety of herbs, mosses, and lichens. Younger stands typically feature deciduous trees such as red alder, big leaf maple, and willows.
Western riparian wetlands are also found in WRIA 19. Conifers and deciduous mixed forests are typical for this habitat and include red alder, black cottonwood, big leaf maple, western red cedar, western hemlock and Sitka spruce. Species that make up the understory include salmonberry, salal, vine maple, dogwood, red-flowering currant, devil’s club, snowberry, and a variety of ferns and sedges.
Over 200 wildlife species are associated with the various habitats in WRIA 19. Wildlife communities vary with elevation and structural class, with the greatest diversity found at lower elevations in mid-late successional stands of timber (“successional” refers to the ongoing development of an ecosystem as the composition of plants an animals evolves; early succession is the youngest phase of this development and late succession is the oldest).
Large mammals such as Roosevelt elk, black-tailed dear, black bear and mountain lions are known to inhabit the watershed, along with smaller mammals such as the snowshoe hare, mink, river otter and Douglas’ squirrel. Typical birds include members of the songbird family, ruffed grouse, jays, ravens, and several species of raptors. Two species of note are the spotted owl and marbled murrelet, both currently listed as federally protected species. Waterfowl and shorebirds can be found in wetlands and nearshore habitat. Amphibians can also be found throughout the watershed.
1.2.6 Geology and Hydrology
WRIA 19’s underlying geology consists primarily of marine sediments (mostly shale, sandstone and conglomerate) and basalt. A relatively thin veneer of glacial deposits and alluvium, up to 200 feet thick, covers the bedrock in 21 percent of WRIA 19. Surface deposits include glacial drift, landslides, and alluvium. The Crescent Fault is an inactive thrust fault that separates the marine sediments and basalt above from “core rocks” below. The Crescent Fault passes through the Lake Crescent, Clallam River, and Hoko River subbasins.
WRIA 19 consists of all streams that drain from the Olympic Mountains into the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Lake Crescent. Of those that drain into the Strait, the most prominent are Salt Creek, East Twin River, West Twin River, Deep Creek, Pysht River, Clallam River, Hoko River and the Sekiu River. Several smaller streams drain independently into the Strait. These nine streams vary in size and stream
1-5 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
flow, though compared to neighboring streams such as the Sol Duc and the Elwha Rivers, they are smaller.
1.2.7 Climate
WRIA 19 experiences a typical maritime climate, characterized by cool dry summers and mild wet winters. Temperatures and rainfall vary throughout the watershed. Temperatures (in Fahrenheit) average in the high 60s to low 70s during summer and in the 30s and 40s during winter. Snow and freezing temperatures are rare in the lower elevations, but common from November until June in the high peaks.
Winds moving across the Pacific Ocean push moisture-laden air masses over the peaks of the Olympic Mountains. The resulting rainfall gives this region the wettest climate in the contiguous United States. As the weather systems progress eastward, less rain falls, creating a steep gradient of precipitation across the WRIA.
1.3 HISTORY OF WATERSHED PLANNING IN WRIA 19
The Initiating Governments in WRIA 19 are Clallam County, the Clallam County Public Utility District (PUD), the Makah Nation and the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe. Appendix C presents the November 1999 agreement on watershed planning signed by these entities. Clallam County became the lead agency for watershed planning in WRIAs 19 and 20 and hired a single project manager to oversee the planning efforts for both WRIAs. The Initiating Governments elected to invite the State of Washington to participate in the planning process, and Governor Gary Locke appointed the Department of Ecology to speak for the State. As such, the State has the same responsibilities and obligations as other governmental units on the Planning Unit, such as the ability to veto and the requirement to concur with Plan recommendations.
In 2000, the Citizens Facilitation Group (CFG) that had been formed to carry out local planning for salmon recovery under the state’s Salmon Recovery Act (Engrossed Substitute House Bill (ESHB) 2496) agreed to serve as the WRIA 19 Watershed Planning Unit as well. In late 2000, the salmon recovery planning budget was exhausted, and the monthly meetings focused strictly on the watershed planning process. The Initiating Governments did not participate in the Planning Unit meetings, but held their own separate WRIA 19 meetings. WRIA 20 had by then established its own Planning Unit, but the two groups remained linked through a shared project manager, monitoring plan and budget.
The original project manager left in late 2002 and a new project manager was named in 2003. Under the new project manager, the WRIA 19 and WRIA 20 planning efforts were officially separated (Appendix D), but the efforts of the WRIA 19 citizens’ group and the Initiating Governments group were combined. Hence, the current WRIA 19 Planning Unit consists of citizen, business, non-profit and government representatives and carries out its efforts independently of the WRIA 20 planning activities. In mid-2004, the Planning Unit hired the consultant team Tetra Tech, Inc., Triangle Associates, Inc., and EES Consulting to provide technical, facilitation and plan development/writing services.
The participants in the WRIA 19 watershed planning now include representatives from tribal and local governments, private landowners and interested citizens. The Watershed Management Act provides a framework for these diverse interests to resolve water-related issues by working collaboratively to develop a watershed plan that benefits the community, economy and ecology of WRIA 19. All representatives to the WRIA 19 Planning Unit have demonstrated strong dedication to their community through their commitment to participate in this lengthy planning process.
1-6 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.4 WATERSHED PLAN DEVELOPMENT
For a watershed plan to be effective, all of its recommendations must be based on sound science. In WRIA 19 though, the Planning Unit found little data available to assess the historical condition of the watershed. In order to have a solid, scientifically defensible base for developing recommendations and actions to manage watershed resources, whatever technical information was available relating to natural resources in the watershed had to be collected and evaluated, and needs for new information had to be identified.
1.4.1 Technical Assessment
The first step was to undertake a technical assessment of watershed conditions (Chapter 2 is an overview of the technical assessment). All existing studies and technical documents pertaining to the natural and human landscape were analyzed, including watershed assessments, limiting factors analysis, online databases and local monitoring studies. Individual subbasins also were characterized by environmental features such as geological structure, hydrology, topography, weather patterns, terrestrial and aquatic habitats and associated wildlife and vegetation. In addition, each subbasin was characterized by anthropogenic concepts such as land use, population density, road development, water use and allocation, and the economics of resource extraction.
1.4.2 Supplemental Grants for Optional Planning Elements
In 2001, the state Legislature passed a bill authorizing funding for local planning units to study instream flow levels, water quality, and/or water storage options at the WRIA level. Each WRIA would be eligible for $100,000 to assess these factors and make recommendations. The only stipulation set by the Legislature was that if a planning unit accepts the $100,000 grant to study instream flows, it must recommend to the Department of Ecology whether or not to change the regulatory minimum instream flows, and if so, to what level. The WRIA 19 Planning Unit chose to address the optional planning elements of water storage, instream flow and water quality as described below.
Water Storage
The goal of the multipurpose water storage analysis was to evaluate the water needs of the basin and the capacity of water providers to meet those needs in the future and to identify potential projects for storing excess winter runoff to use for increasing summer instream flows, either by providing additional water for consumption or by directly augmenting instream flows. This was a survey-level study to determine projects that warrant further consideration and was based on a review of existing information. No new analyses were conducted for this report, so the level of detail for specific projects in this report depended on the information available. In some instances, projects would require considerably more investigation before a final determination of their feasibility could be made. Because the goal of the water storage study is to identify projects that will help mitigate the human impact on hydrologic processes, this report does consider the current state of hydrologic processes and summarizes conditions discussed in the habitat, water allocation, and hydrology sections of the Watershed Plan. Projects were selected for further consideration based on the following criteria: ease of implementation, water storage ability, potential cost, potential benefits/detriments, potential fish benefit, and habitat potential. At least one project was identified for each basin. Priority was given to projects located in basins that have been identified with a high need for water either for instream flow or for consumptive uses.
1-7 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
Instream Flow
The instream flow supplemental grant study focused on the habitat, hydrologic and instream flow needs of anadromous salmonids evaluated through an Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) Study. Primary emphasis was given to the spawning life history stage of Chinook, coho and chum salmon and steelhead trout, as well as ancillary emphasis to the rearing life history stages of Chinook and coho salmon and steelhead trout. Field data was collected throughout the summer, fall and winter of 2004/2005 at eleven sites on nine rivers/streams within the WRIA. This data was modeled using the PHABSIM model, and flow recommendations developed that would provide optimal fish habitat under current channel conditions. These recommendations were developed in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Ecology.
Water Quality
For the supplemental grant for water quality, information about existing monitoring efforts was collected to create a “coordinated monitoring program” based on the Department of Ecology’s Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) framework. Two workshops were held to determine specific monitoring needs for WRIA 19, in January 2005, and March 2005. Participants included representatives from organizations active in monitoring throughout the watershed, including Clallam County, Streamkeepers, the National Park Service, and the Makah and Lower Elwha Klallam Tribes. The purpose of these workshops was to document activities, identify monitoring needs, and develop goals and objectives for a coordinated monitoring program. Examples of monitoring activities included water quality, water quantity (such as flow and water use), and habitat monitoring. Details about who does the monitoring, frequency, site location and protocols were also collected.
1.5 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Creation of a meaningful watershed plan that achieves the dual goals of maintaining the local economy and protecting natural resources requires active involvement in the planning process from a broad cross- section of the public. Only such involvement can lead to the development of a balanced, well-informed plan that reflects the needs and interests of local citizens.
The WRIA 19 Public Involvement Plan (Appendix E) was developed in December 2004 to increase public awareness and involvement in watershed planning and to inform citizens about meaningful developments in the planning process. The public involvement plan outlines the following goals and the objectives for achieving them: • Goals: – Create awareness of watershed planning and how it affects individuals and groups. – Encourage an open and responsive planning process. – Gain stakeholder input on issues facing the watershed and on ways to resolve them. – Gather local knowledge about the history and unique features of the Hoko-Lyre watershed to incorporate into the watershed plan. – Provide citizens and policymakers with accurate and timely information about the watershed planning process. – Effectively communicate issues and solutions to community members and elected officials.
1-8 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
– Encourage support for adopting the WRIA 19 Watershed Plan. • Objectives: – To the extent possible, schedule Planning Unit meetings and field trips for evenings or weekends to encourage participation from residents who work during weekdays. – Publicize Planning Unit meetings in the newspaper and by poster at locations throughout the WRIA including the Joyce General Store, Clallam Bay Library, and post offices in Sekiu, Clallam Bay and Neah Bay. – Maintain information kiosks at the Clallam Bay and Port Angeles Public Libraries, with current information and study results related to the watershed plan. – Make regular personal outreach to all parties identified as Planning Unit members or interested parties. – Circulate email notices regarding watershed plan activities to all Planning Unit members and other interested parties. – Have Planning Unit members help publicize activities related to the watershed plan through their regular interactions in the community. – Through development of the water storage study and coordinated monitoring plan, conduct outreach to entities and individuals who are not partic ipating in planning process but have a more focused interest in these related topics. – Conduct a watershed field trip in the spring of 2005 to view and discuss watershed information and recommendations. The field trip will be publicized and open to all. – Hold two community meetings (in Joyce and in Sekiu) to present draft recommendations and solicit input from the community.
1.6 COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES
Distinct local, historical and cultural perspectives have shaped the communities of WRIA 19. Long-time residents of the watershed, whether as witnesses to one-time events or observers of slow changes over time, possess a unique knowledge and expertise that can contribute to the planning process by complementing the technical analysis that provides the foundation for much of this watershed plan.
The sections that follow summarize community perspectives obtained through personal interviews and the collection of anecdotal and informal information; more detailed presentations of these residents’ comments are provided in Appendix F. All subjective viewpoints expressed in these sections are those of the residents who were interviewed. Also included are overviews of cultural information about the Makah and Lower Elwha Klallam tribes, summarized from information provided on the tribes’ web sites (www.Makah.com and www.Elwha.org).
1.6.1 Mike McGarvie
In 1949, Mike McGarvie’s father moved his family to Clallam County just outside the town of Joyce, drawn to the location for the opportunities in logging and fishing, Except for a short time in 1953, Mr. McGarvie has lived in the same area since he was 13. Interviewed for this watershed plan on December 2, 2004, he made the following observations:
1-9 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
• After the initial logging of coastal areas in the watershed, much of the land was converted to agricultural use, but with substantial stands of old-growth timber remaining in the hillsides. • There were two cooperative creameries in the area: one in Port Angeles and one in Sequim. Eventually Darigold moved into the area and the small creameries were driven out of business. One of the last dairy farms Mike remembers, belonging to Carl Craig, closed in 1963, selling for roughly $8,000, including the house, barn, outpost and cattle. • Mike can’t think of any big timber left in the watershed. The last area he knew of personally, along the Twin Rivers, was cut about five years ago. • Mike believes that true loggers, when given the opportunity, are good stewards of the land, but that the field has become too mechanized—done by logging machines instead of local residents. • Mike and his father spent some time as commercial fishermen in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. He says that the salmon were disappearing by 1974-75 and that catches the size of those he remembers from his youth no longer exist. • Mike says he once witnessed a massive fish die -off on the Lyre River, for which he could find no explanation.
1.6.2 Bob and June Bowlby
Husband and wife Bob and June Bowlby are life-time residents of the Olympic Peninsula who currently live on the Pysht River 7 miles from Clallam Bay. Bob’s family moved to the Pysht area in 1926, six months before he was born, and he spent the first 18 years of his life there. June was born in Sekiu in 1932 and graduated from Clallam Bay High School. They were married in the Clallam Bay School Auditorium in 1951 and raised four children in their home on the Pysht River. They were interviewed for this watershed plan on December 3, 2004 and made the following observations: • The Bowlbys say that the work people do in their area has changed over the years but not the population numbers. In the old days there were the loggers and fishermen, but today the Clallam Bay Corrections Center is the largest employer. The population probably reached its peak around 1949 when there were many fishermen and tourists in Sekiu. • The Bowlbys’ property on the Pysht River has good habitat spots for salmon. However, there’s a tributary on their property that dog chum and silver salmon come to, which turns into a fish trap because it dries up every year. The salmon spawn, and when the water level dries, the small fish concentrate in dwindling pools, and eventually die. For a long time Bob and his grandkids collected the small fish from the tributary creek and put them in the much larger Pysht. That worked until a freshet occurred. Then the fingerlings would run back upstream and die when the creek dried up. • People also used to do a lot of clamming at the mouth of the Pysht. These days there isn’t much clamming for subsistence, but there are fewer calms due to recreational digging. • Historically the Pysht River supported populations of steelhead and cutthroat trout, as well as dog, coho and king salmon. Once there were even a couple of sockeye under the bridge near their house. This year there were more dog salmon than Bob’s seen in years, but he remains worried about the recovery of king salmon in the Pysht. This year
1-10 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
there was some evidence of a few kings, but it’s unclear if the carcasses they found were indigenous or an aberration coming from a run somewhere else. Bob remembers seeing hundreds of kings at a time when he was young, some weighing as much as 60 pounds. • After World War II, the salmon population seemed to take a turn for the worse. Tribes were netting fish at the mouth of the rivers for a time in the 1970s, and there was an increase in sport and recreational fishing, as well as more at-sea harvesting. • Although neither was born at the time, both Bob and June remember family stories from the 1921 blow-down event—a freak wind storm that swept across the peninsula. Trees that were toppled and roads were blocked. • Ten to 15 years ago, the upper part of the Pysht River basin was almost entirely clear cut. After that, summer flows in the river became really low. • Two or three years ago, in the upper reaches of the river basin, the entire side of a hill slid and blocked the Pysht, creating a dam that began forming a lake 200 to 300 yards long. Bob isn’t certain, but he thinks somebody went up and blasted the riverbed to release the water before the flooding got out of hand. Before that, the salmon were making their way past the slide area by swimming through the woods when the river was high! • The Bowlbys remember that when they first moved to their residence on the Pysht there were what appeared to be hundreds, if not thousands, of toads. In the spring, you could find long strings of toad eggs, as well clusters of frog and salamander eggs. They used to hear lots of frogs in the spring, but Bob has only seen one toad this year. • Their flock of mallard ducks used to feed off crawfish all day long. Bob hasn’t seen a crawfish in the Pysht for 5 to 10 years, although others have seen some, occasionally. • Pesticides often were sprayed by helicopter, which dispersed it everywhere; residents could smell it and taste it. This is less common today—now it’s more roadside spraying—but it still happens. • The eel population seems to have dwindled. They think it’s been about 30 years since they’ve seen a bullhead; they used to fish for bullheads on the Sekiu and Pysht. • Bob remembers black bear being abundant when he was young. These days there is hardly any evidence of black bears. • Elk and deer are also here. June and Bob used to wander all around the Pysht valley hunting elk. Some deer they see today have tumors on them and many have large patches of bare skin where the hair has fallen off. • Cougars used to wander the woods and the Bowlbys never worried about it, but now there is evidence of them killing dogs and cats. Cougars have accosted scalers (timber person) and hunters. • Normally the Bowlbys have many birds: jays, crows, ravens, juncos, varied thrushes, wrens, towhees, and downy woodpeckers. Owls are scarce, but in spring they get a run of eagles up and down the river.
1.6.3 Dick Goin
Dick Goin has been interested in fisheries restoration for over 40 years. The Goin family moved from Iowa to the Elwha valley in 1937 and Dick has a great familiarity with the streams while they were still in
1-11 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
good shape. Dick has fished “the Big 9” rivers of WRIA 19 since he was a little boy. His main interest is specific fish stocks and how they have adapted to river conditions over time. He first realized that fish were disappearing by the mid-1940s. Dick, a president and vice-president of the Sportsmen’s Club, says that all the members seemed to have a sense of entitlement to their catch; none of the volunteer fish counters that he works with are fishermen from the Sportsmen’s Club. Most of the counters are outdoor types, climbers, bird-watchers and a lot of women. What follows is a summary of Dick’s observations of the historical conditions of main streams in WRIA 19: • Salt Creek – Salt Creek is a low-gradient stream, with many tributaries and connected wetlands. – For its size, Salt Creek had the most coho and steelhead of the rivers Dick is familiar with. Coho, winter steelhead and chums could be found up to the lower falls, as well as sea-run cutthroats and a very large lamprey run. The estuary is still one of the few in the watershed that hasn’t been trashed. – All the wood in the streams is gone from logging. There are a lot of water withdrawals, and excessive sediment recruitment is filling in the lower-end. • Lyre River – The Lyre River is a very high-gradient stream with an impassable falls at about River Mile (RM) 3.2. – It was the premier chum stream on the Olympic Peninsula —featuring the only true winter chum in the region. He started going there in 1945-46, and it was common for every hole to have 200 to 500 large chum. It’s a designated winter- run because the first major entry is after November 15, but chum still enter up to February 15. The chum runs in the Lyre are an anomaly because chums normally need a large estuary and the Lyre has no estuary. – The Lyre is gravel-poor, so most of the eggs of any coho that spawned were dug up when the chum came through. – It seems that there are as many coho now as then but the chum run has deteriorated badly. Lyre River – The Lyre has a relatively small winter- steelhead run of pretty large and mean fish, and a small run of summer steelhead. There’s also a moderate cutthroat run and an occasional run of sockeye strays. – Logging was finished in the area around 1948. Nearly all the wood has been lost and there’s very little recruitment.
1-12 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
– In the 1960s, the river started being planted with the Chambers Creek steelhead stock, whose smolts are larger and preyed on the young chum. – In March 1997 there was a blowout that destroyed all of Boundary Creek and dumped an enormous amount of sediment into the river. • East/West Twin Rivers – The Twin Rivers are both high-gradient canyon streams. Toward the mouth, they are slow and deep with lots of pools. Both have coho, winter steelhead, and cutthroat runs, and there used to be some chums. Lots of restoration work was done on the East Twin and there is still a reasonably good coho and winter steelhead run, but nothing like they were. – Logging in the Pysht and Twins subbasins was pretty well finished by 1945. Conifers are now being planted to provide the river with large woody debris, but it takes 50 to 100 years for large woody debris recruitment. • Deep Creek – Deep Creek is a moderate-gradient stream that has really good chum and good coho, steelhead and cutthroat. – When Dick was about 12 years, there were lots of jams and big timber, and Deep Creek had a series of big holes and was very calm and full of cutthroats. – Dick observed chinook in Deep Creek recently, but there may have been some in the past. – In 1990-91 there was a blowout that wiped the creek off the map. Dick thinks the first restoration effort was in 1991 and the work was finished last summer, but the chums aren’t coming back very well. Steelhead are doing OK, and the coho are alright. • Pysht River – The Pysht River has a low-moderate gradient, and had excellent chum, coho and winter steelhead and lots of lampreys. There were occasional summer steelhead and a small run of summer/fall chinook. To Dick, these are late-summer chinook, but it depends on the timing of the run: up to September 15, it’s considered a spring run; from then until October 15, a summer run, and after October 15, fall. There were also a lot of indigenous lampreys. At first blush it appears that the chinook are gone and what remain are strays, probably Hoko strays, some of them very large. – Before logging, the river was alive with wetlands. In the 1940s, when it rained the river would swell over its banks one to three times a year, and on the average it was only about 3 feet below the road. Now it’s a rare thing for it to flood because the river is about 12 feet below the road. – The whole lower end used to be rearing and spawning area, with lots of chums and late steelheads. Now it’s virtually unusable with sand and very fine gravel and, in the worst parts, very gluey silt. He says recruitment of sediment has to stop before the river will take it out. – Pillar Point flat used to be a huge mass of eelgrass and Clallam Bay was total eelgrass, but now it’s almost totally choked. There were a lot of geoducks 20 years ago, but not anymore. Horse clams are also smothered out.
1-13 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
• Clallam River – The Clallam River is a moderate- to high-gradient stream that had coho, winter steelhead and chums. It also had some summer/fall chinook long ago. Dick started going out there in 1946-47 and is pretty sure it wasn’t stocked then. There were lots of lamprey. According to Dick, there are so many hatchery programs that he doesn’t know what stocks are in there any more. – The river has always bar-bound some fish, but it happens more often now. – The river remains a good stream for steelhead and coho. Two years ago Mike McHenry counted 100 fish to the mile, which is good for these days. • Hoko River – The Hoko River is a low- to moderate-gradient stream with good chums and winter steelhead, a few more summer steelhead than the Pysht, and lots of cutthroat. It still has summer/fall chinook. – After the 1974 Boldt decision (a federal court decision related to Native American fishing rights), 17 hatcheries and four to six rearing facilities were built, one of them on the Hoko. There was not enough water, so satellite water stations were built. Dick fished out there quite a bit in his boyhood, mostly for cutthroats; he found hardly any salmon. – Today, all the little tributaries have blown out massive amounts of gravel; there is virtually no meaningful wood. There are many sand and mud areas in the lower end. The river is heavily incised and a lot of the wetlands aren’t connected anymore. – The Hoko still has pretty good steelhead, coho, and chinook. The steelhead is probably wild. The river still has a lot of lampreys. • Sekiu River – The Sekiu is a higher-gradient stream than the Hoko, but not extremely steep. Chums, coho, winter steelhead and cutthroat are present. Dick doesn’t know about chinook, but says there is a strong likelihood they did exist. He fished for steelheads until the surrounding forests were cut. The state reopened the river for steelhead fishing two years ago. – There was a blowout in 1997. • Summary – The most profound change Dick has witnessed is the loss of the fish and the loss of enormous trees. In terms of restoration, the biggest problem is that every stream is heavily sediment-laden. – Lamprey, crawfish and fish stocks have disappeared. Bull trout in the lower Elwha are pretty well gone as well. – Pesticide use used to be significant; these practices have been cleaned up some. – Dick hiked Deep Creek recently and observed riparian zones with 7 feet of salmonberries, although it is often claimed that 200 feet is maintained. Dick says he has only seen 200-foot zones in one or two places.
1-14 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.6.4 Don Hamerquist and Janeen Porter
The following is a summary of a paper on the Pysht River written by Don Hamerquist and Janeen Porter for discussion in the WRIA 19 Citizens Facilitation Group; the full text of their paper can be found in Appendix F: • The Pysht River is a small rain-fed stream of moderate gradient that enters the Strait of Juan de Fuca a few miles east of Clallam Bay. The Pysht, along with a few other similar streams in the area, has a huge contrast between summer and winter flows, probably a variation of two orders of magnitude. • The river has been a very productive salmon stream with large runs of chinook, coho, chum, steelhead and sea-run cutthroat. While it is currently depressed for all species and the chinook are virtually gone, it still has relatively healthy stocks of coho, chum, and steelhead. There was a substantial hatchery impact on the river in the past, but currently there is only a relatively limited (10,000) annual outplanting of steelhead. • The watershed is sparsely populated, with less than two dozen families. • The predominant land use is logging and most of the land that is not state or federally held is owned by three logging companies. The old growth timber is virtually all gone and much of the area has been logged a second time. • Logging has left the Pysht with too little large woody debris, too much sediment, and a generally degraded set of stream characteristics. An additional problem is presented by the state highway that follows the stream fairly closely for about 5 miles. • A few years after the old growth logging, the Pysht, including its tributaries, was full of small to medium-sized trout (6 to 10 inches) in the spring, summer and fall. These were mainly cutthroat, though there were some rainbow, possibly hatchery derived. By the middle of August, larger sea-run cutthroat (12 to 18 inches) began to appear in fair numbers. • The Pysht and its tributaries have seen a precipitous decline in medium-sized cutthroat. Only late in the summer when the sea-runs enter the river are there a few larger ones. • Don and Janeen assume that high temperatures, low dissolved oxygen levels, lack of cover, lack of large woody debris, increasing sediment levels, and increased frequency and severity of flood flows are habitat limiting factors facing cutthroat. • The cutthroat started doing better as the habitat gradually recovered from the initial impact of old growth logging. • Species and areas are currently being logged that were passed over when the priorities were on large fir and cedar, and when, maple, alder, and spruce were considered to be virtually worthless. • Logging currently relies on high impact tracked vehicles and a profusion of sediment generating logging roads, rather than the older techniques that concentrated damage on landings, skid roads, and railroad grades. • Current logging takes much smaller trees, including trees that are more concentrated in riparian corridors and wetlands.
1-15 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
1.6.5 Chuck Owens
Chuck Owens spent many years involved in the fishing industry around WRIA 19 and throughout the Pacific Northwest. He began his fishing career after leaving the Marine Corps in 1974, working on everything from longliners, to gillnetters to salmon trollers. In 1978, Chuck went to work as a buyer for High Tide Seafoods. He left the seafood industry in 1994. Chuck offered the following observations about the fishing industry in WRIA 19: • Few people in the community still make a living from fishing. Chuck’s friends still in the business are barely holding on. Most work other jobs or spend the summers fishing in Alaska. • Salmon recovery should be approached like marine mammal recovery under the Marine Mammal Protection Act—stocks shouldn’t be brought back to just a harvestable level, they should be brought to the overall maximum level. s Chuck feels that the responsibility for the decline of the commercial fishing industry falls on the government for mismanaging the resource base and allowing commercial fishing to become dominated by corporate interests, rather than small-scale, local fishermen. • Impacts on fish runs come from a variety of sources, including logging and development. As a comparison, in Southeast Alaska fish traps in the 1930s did the majority of damage to the commercial salmon runs, but had relatively little impact on stream habitat. Once the traps were outlawed, salmon runs came back because the habitat was still intact. The difference in WRIA 19 is the impact logging and development had on salmon habitat. • Diminished salmon runs affected sport fishermen as well as the commercial industry, particularly in the Clallam Bay/Sekiu area. In the past, Chuck bought more fish in Sekiu than anywhere else. • WRIA 19 could be a spotlight of what can be done for the rest of the state; but a lot needs to be done to change people’s mindset. Salmon recovery needs to be the primary objective and all interest groups need to be on board with protecting habitat and stopping overfishing.
Historical View of Clallam Bay Fishing Fleet at Neah Bay
1-16 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.6.6 Joe Murray
Joe Murray has worked for 25 years as a forester for Merrill & Ring (M&R). Joe attended the University of Notre Dame and forestry school at Peninsula College and earned a degree in silviculture. He started working for Merrill & Ring as a summer employee and eventually became a full-time employee. Joe was named Forester of the Year by the Society of American Foresters in 2003. Before commercial software was available for taking a forest inventory, Joe wrote his own program for his forest inventories. The following is a summary of Joe’s views on forestry in general and in WRIA 19: • Joe believes that there’s a tremendous social value in being able to provide materials for people’s use, and that it’s fundamentally more beneficial to provide a renewable natural resource that can be regenerated. Foresters have to be careful they don’t change the climate and manage the soil, but forestry isn’t like mining, where the resource is removed and doesn’t grow back. • Like forestry, agriculture for food has an environmental impact, but many people don’t equate the benefit of forestry with that of agriculture. There isn’t as direct a link between the trees people use and their understanding of the products that come from trees. • Old growth timber was harvested at a time when society put a higher priority on “taming the wilderness.” Old growth could be grown back given time, but it doesn’t have to be on M&R land. It can be on land set aside, such as National Parks. • Joe feels M&R has a good relationship with the community, but it depends on who you talk to. The company has generally good working relationships with contractors, state agencies and tribes. He feels M&R practices forestry in an environmentally friendly manner. People forget that logging is just one aspect of forestry. • Private landowners do a lot to help out the community. Recently M&R donated $50,000 worth of trees that will go into the South Fork of the Pysht for a project enhancing in-stream large woody debris. It’s M&R’s part of a Salmon Recovery Funding Board project in conjunction with Mike McHenry of the Lower Klallam Elwha Tribe. • Merrill & Ring started purchasing land in 1888. The company employs about 24 people; Joe is one of four foresters who manage the land. Logging, tree planting, road construction, burns, are all done by contractors; so the company provides jobs in the community. Most people who work in the forest industry are proud of what they do. • M&R’s community involvement includes: donating land for a 5-acre County Park (Pillar Point Park) next to the company’s headquarters; sponsoring college scholarships for local high school students; donating money and staff time to salmon recovery and watershed restoration projects, including meeting spaces for all the WRIA 19 meetings; and, paying for transportation and guided tours for schoolchildren on M&R property. • People in general feel a need for more old-growth forests. Riparian areas are where old- growth forests will probably exist on commercial forest land. • People’s social and environmental values change. At one point the government thought it was desirable to remove the wood from streams. If private landowners did what was at one time socially and legally correct, and that results in a problem, should private landowners be the ones to correct it? Stream cleaning was something the companies were directed to do that at their own expense. Where do you draw the line between individual and social responsibility?
1-17 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
• We should be aiming for functioning habitat, not perfection. • M&R encourages its foresters to manage company-owned lands as though they owned it themselves. The company wants its foresters to be stewards of the land, and has created the inspiration and the opportunity to be so. In forestry, mistakes remain obvious in the landscape for a while. It’s human nature to point to the mistakes and not to the successes. • Joe’s not optimistic that the watershed plan is going to be a valuable product in the long run. It’s not designed to reinforce good things. We have some ideas for improvements—put wood in the stream, reduce sediment—but whatever we do is never enough.
1.6.7 History and Culture of the Makah
The 29,410-acre Makah reservation falls within the boundaries of WRIA 19 and neighboring WRIA 20. In addition to the reservation, the Makah have “usual and accustomed” hunting grounds within WRIA 19. The reservation is designated as federally reserved land, outside the jurisdiction of watershed planning, but the usual and accustomed land within the Plan’s jurisdiction. The Sail River has the largest subbasin on Makah land in WRIA 19, but numerous other small streams and tributaries exist as well. The following is a summary of Makah history and culture, taken from the Tribe’s website (www.Makah.com): • Prior to European settlement, the Makah Tribe’s territory reached east to the Lyre River and south to lands shared with the Quileute. Five permanent villages were home to between 2,000 and 4,000 Makah in the early 1800s. During the summer people traveled to summer residences that were closer to fishing, whaling and gathering areas. • With the January 31, 1855 signing of the Treaty of Neah Bay between the United States and the Makah Indians, the Tribe ceded 300,000 acres of tribal land to the U.S. in order to retain whaling rights and to protect the health, education and welfare of their people. Congress ratified the treaty in 1859. • The Makah were skilled mariners, using sophisticated navigational and maritime skills to travel the Pacific Ocean and the Strait of Juan de Fuca in various types of canoes. The Makah traveled great distances to obtain food or to trade. • Fish and marine mammals have always served as staple foods in the Makah diet. Halibut were caught, dried or smoked and stored in large quantities to be used in the winter. A variety of bottom fish were caught year-round. Porpoise and fur and harbor seals were eaten fresh or smoked and their skins were cured and used for whaling floats. Seal blubber was rendered into oil that was consumed as a condiment at every meal. Sea otters were a valuable item for trade. • Humpback, right, sperm, gray, fin and blue whales were among the species traditionally hunted by the Makah. Whales were hunted for their meat and blubber. Oil was rendered from the whale’s blubber and bones of the whale were useful for making combs, spindle whorls, war clubs, bark pounders, shredders and personal adornments.
1.6.8 History and Culture of the Lower Elwha Klallam
The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe possesses no reservation land in WRIA 19, but the eastern end of the watershed is culturally significant to the Tribe. There is historical evidence that land in the Deep Creek and Twin Rivers Subbasins was traditional hunting and fishing grounds for the Tribe, and it remains so to the present day. While there is little doubt that the Klallam used land as far west as the Pysht River,
1-18 …1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND detailed information isn’t available (James, 2002). The following is a summary of Lower Elwha Klallam history and culture, taken from the Tribe’s website (www.Elwha.org): • Historically the Klallam people lived throughout the northern Olympic Peninsula. They had villages on both sides of the Strait of Juan de Fuca. There were about 33 village sites from the Hoko River on the west to Puget Sound on the east. • European settlers began arriving in the 1860s, establishing towns and displacing many Klallam from their traditional home sites. When the 1884 Indian Homestead Act passed, several Klallam families eventually became landowners. But to take up the homesteads, the Klallam had to sever tribal relations. • Historically, the Tribe’s main source of food had always been fishing, but in 1910 state law required a license to fish; tribal members could not obtain a license because they were not U.S. citizens. In 1924, Indians were made U.S. citizens, but their fishing rights continued to be restricted. • In 1934, the Indian Reorganization Act helped the Tribe obtain 327 acres of land in the Elwha Valley for 14 families. The Elwha Klallam Reservation was not proclaimed until 1968 when the Tribe became federally recognized. Running water became available on the reservation in 1969, and electricity became available in the early 1970s. Since then the Tribe has purchased more land, currently owning 965 acres. • In 1974, the Boldt decision helped the Tribe regain fishing rights. In 1975 and 1976, the Fish Hatchery and Tribal Center were built in the Elwha valley.
1.7 RELATED WATERSHED PLANNING PROCESSES
In order to be successful, watershed planning needs to be fully integrated with other planning processes at the federal, state and local level. Other planning processes offer opportunities for coordination, data sharing, program management and funding; they also have rules and regulations that this planning process must accommodate, such as the Washington State Forest Practices Act. Some of the related planning processes are described below.
1.7.1 Clallam County Comprehensive Plan
The Clallam County Comprehensive Plan has served as a guide for directing local land use policy and decision-making since it first adoption in 1967. The current Comprehensive Plan outlines a vision for land use and development for the early 21st century and defines the policies, programs and actions necessary to atta in this vision. Clallam County adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the state Growth Management Act (GMA) that enacted a new framework for land use planning. Within this framework, a wide range of local visions for the future can be accommodated, however the GMA identifies specific goals and requirements that local comprehensive plans must achieve.
1.7.2 Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project
The Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project is a cooperative effort among the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies including state and other federal government organizations, tribes, industries and environmental organizations. Its goal is to preserve and restore the health of Puget Sound’s nearshore, which extends approximately 2,500 miles from the Canadian border, through Puget Sound and out the Strait of Juan de Fuca to Neah Bay.
1-19 WRIA 19 Watershed Plan…
1.7.3 Washington Department of Natural Resources Habitat Conservation Plan
The Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Habitat Conservation Plan is a 70-year management plan for 1.6 million acres of forested state trust land mostly in Western Washington. It is an agreement between the DNR and federal agencies under the Endangered Species Act to guarantee that habitat commitments are met, while not penalizing the occasional incidental “take” of a federally listed animal or its habitat. This allows some leeway to accomplish both habitat goals and various income production activities such as timber harvest.
1.7.4 ESHB 2496, Salmon Recovery Act
The 1998 state Legislature passed ESHB 2496, the Salmon Recovery Planning Act, to address the decline of salmon in Washington State. ESHB 2496 established a statewide process to identify habitat factors limiting salmon production in the state. This process requires assembly of a technical advisory group of basin experts and uses a set of habitat criteria to be applied statewide to produce a “limiting factors analysis” (LFA) for each river.
The Act also established the Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) and the Lead Entity Program. WRIA 19 is represented by the North Olympic Peninsula Lead Entity (NOPLE). The Washington State legislature allocates a certain portion of federal funds from the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund to the SRFB, who in turn allocates these funds to salmon habitat recovery projects based on a competitive grant process, which is coordinated in WRIA 19 by NOPLE.
1.7.5 Washington State Forest Practices Act
In 1974, the state Legislature passed the Forest Practices Act (FPA), Chapter 76.09 RCW, which governs all forest practices on non-federal lands in Washington State. The Act defines a plan to protect public resources while ensuring that Washington continues to be a productive timber growing area. The Act regulates activities related to growing, harvesting or processing timber on all local government, state and private forest lands.
Recent changes to the FPA are a result of the Forests & Fish Law adopted by the Legislature in 1999 in response to federal listings of endangered salmon and impaired water quality on non-federal forestlands. An important aspect of the Forest & Fish Law is adaptive management, which will be evaluated through the Cooperative Monitoring, Evaluation and Research (CMER) program. CMER will emphasize validation and effectiveness monitoring and research, and will develop documented, standard procedures to evaluate forest practices.
1.7.6 Northwest Forest Plan
Adopted in 1994, the Northwest Forest Plan (NFP) is an integrated, comprehensive design for ecosystem management, intergovernmental and public collaboration, and rural community economic assistance for federal forests in western Oregon and Washington, and northern California. The mission of the NFP is to adopt coordinated management direction for lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management and to adopt complementary approaches by other federal agencies operating in the range of the northern spotted owl. The management of these public lands must meet dual needs: the need for forest habitat and the need for forest products.
1-20