DRAFT

S HORELINE A NALYSIS R EPORT

FOR SHORELINES IN KLICKITAT COUNTY

Prepared for:

Klickitat County 228 W Main Street Goldendale, WA 98620

Prepared by:

December 2016

The Watershed Company Reference Number: 121201

Cite this document as: The Watershed Company. December 2016. DRAFT Shoreline Analysis Report for Shorelines in Klickitat County. Prepared for Klickitat County, Klickitat, WA.

The Watershed Company Contact Person: Dan Nickel

Printed on 30% recycled paper.

T ABLE OF C ONTENTS

Page # Shoreline Analysis Report ...... 1 Table of Contents ...... i List of Exhibits ...... iv Executive Summary ...... vii Shoreline Analysis Report ...... 1 1 Introduction ...... 1

1.1 Background and Purpose ...... 1 1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction ...... 1

1.2.1 Shorelines of the State ...... 1 1.2.2 Shorelines of Statewide Significance ...... 3

1.3 Study Area ...... 3

2 Summary of Current Regulatory Framework ...... 4

2.1 Shoreline Management Act ...... 4 2.2 Local Regulations ...... 5

2.2.1 Klickitat County Shoreline Master Program and Critical Areas Ordinance5 2.2.2 Other County Regulations ...... 6 2.2.3 Columbia River Gorge Commission ...... 7

2.3 State Regulations ...... 7 2.4 Tribal Regulations ...... 10 2.5 Federal Regulations ...... 10

3 Summary of Ecosystem Conditions ...... 13

3.1 Geography, Topography, and Drainage Patterns ...... 14

3.1.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) ...... 14 3.1.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) ...... 14 3.1.3 Columbia River ...... 16

3.2 Key Species and Habitats ...... 16

3.2.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) ...... 20 3.2.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) ...... 21

i

3.2.3 Columbia River ...... 24

3.3 Land Use and Land Use Changes ...... 25

3.3.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) ...... 25 3.3.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) ...... 27 3.3.3 Columbia River ...... 28

4 Shoreline Inventory ...... 30

4.1 Inventory Sources ...... 30 4.2 Data Assumptions and Data Gaps ...... 36

4.2.1 Ecological Characterization ...... 36 4.2.2 Land Use Characterization ...... 40

4.3 Shoreline Inventory Results ...... 41

5 Analysis of Ecological Functions ...... 42

5.1 Approach, Rationale and Limitations of Functional Analysis ...... 42

5.1.1 Reach Delineation...... 42 5.1.2 Functions and Impairments ...... 45 5.1.3 Limitations ...... 53

5.2 Results of Functional Analysis ...... 53

5.2.1 White Salmon Watershed ...... 53 5.2.2 Klickitat Watershed ...... 69 5.2.3 Columbia River ...... 89

5.3 Restoration Opportunities ...... 95

5.3.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) ...... 95 5.3.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) ...... 98 5.3.3 Columbia ...... 100

6 Land Use Analysis ...... 102

6.1 Overview ...... 102 6.2 Land Use Context: Population ...... 103 6.3 County-wide Zoning and Ownership ...... 104 6.4 Shoreline Permit History ...... 105 6.5 Shoreline Land Use Analysis by Area ...... 105

6.5.1 Approach and Methodology ...... 106 6.5.2 White Salmon Watershed ...... 108 ii

6.5.3 Klickitat Watershed ...... 110 6.5.4 Columbia River ...... 113

7 Shoreline Management Recommendations ...... 117

7.1 Environment Designations ...... 117 7.2 General Policies and Regulations ...... 121

7.2.1 Archaeological and Historic Resources ...... 121 7.2.2 Critical Areas ...... 121 7.2.3 Flood Hazard Reduction ...... 121 7.2.4 Public Access ...... 122 7.2.5 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation ...... 122 7.2.6 Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint Pollution ...... 122

7.3 Shoreline Modification Provisions ...... 123

7.3.1 Shoreline Stabilization ...... 123 7.3.2 Piers and Docks ...... 123 7.3.3 Fill ...... 123 7.3.4 Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins and Weirs ...... 124 7.3.5 Dredging and Dredge Material Disposal ...... 124 7.3.6 Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects ...... 124

7.4 Shoreline Uses ...... 124

7.4.1 Agriculture ...... 124 7.4.2 Aquaculture ...... 125 7.4.3 Boating Facilities ...... 125 7.4.4 Commercial Development ...... 125 7.4.5 Forest Practices ...... 125 7.4.6 Industry ...... 126 7.4.7 In-stream Structural Uses ...... 126 7.4.8 Mining ...... 126 7.4.9 Recreational Development ...... 126 7.4.10 Residential Development ...... 126 7.4.11 Transportation and Parking ...... 127 7.4.12 Utilities ...... 127

7.5 Restoration Plan...... 127

8 References ...... 129 9 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... 133

APPENDIX A Klickitat County Assessment of Shoreline Jurisdiction APPENDIX B Shoreline Inventory Map Folio

iii

L IST OF E XHIBITS

Page #

Exhibit 3-1. Map of Water Resource Inventory Areas in Klickitat County ...... 13 Exhibit 5-1. Shorelines in the White Salmon Watershed...... 54 Exhibit 5-2. Buck Creek Aerial Images (Google Earth 2016). Image on left shows agricultural uses in Reach 1. Image on right is Reach 2 which is largely unmodified except for Buck Creek Road ...... 56 Exhibit 5-3. Cave Creek (Google Earth 2016). Image shows Reach 2 and the riparian vegetation modifications that have resulted from agricultural uses within the mapped floodplain ...... 57 Exhibit 5-4. Dry Creek (Google Earth 2016). Image depicts residential uses and associated shoreline modifications in Reach 1 ...... 58 Exhibit 5-5. Gilmer Creek Shoreline Jurisdiction (Google Earth 2016) ...... 59 Exhibit 5-6. Little White Salmon River Shoreline Jurisdiction (Google Earth 2016) ...... 60 Exhibit 5-7. Major Creek (Google Earth 2016) ...... 62 Exhibit 5-8. Major Creek (Google Earth 2016) ...... 63 Exhibit 5-9. Rattlesnake Creek near Husum (Google Earth 2016)...... 64 Exhibit 5-10. Trout Lake Creek, Reach 1, residential and agricultural uses (Google Earth 2016) ...... 65 Exhibit 5-11. Trout Lake Creek north of Highway 141 bridge (Reach 1) ...... 65 Exhibit 5-12. Trout Lake Creek Wetland Complex (Reach 2) (Google Earth 2016) ...... 66 Exhibit 5-13. White Salmon River Select Reach Photos (Google Earth 2016) ...... 68 Exhibit 5-14. Shorelines in the Klickitat Watershed ...... 70 Exhibit 5-15. Bowman Creek typical shoreline conditions, just north of where it crosses the Glenwood Highway (Google Earth 2016) ...... 71 Exhibit 5-16. Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek, Reach 1 (Google Earth 2016) ...... 72 Exhibit 5-17. Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek wetland complex in Reach 2 (Google Earth 2016) ...... 72 Exhibit 5-18. Mill Creek (Google Earth 2016) ...... 73 Exhibit 5-19. Dead Canyon Creek typical shoreline condition (Google Earth 2016) ...... 75 Exhibit 5-20. Frasier Creek, Reach 2 typical condition depicting loss of riparian vegetation and ditching through agricultural areas (Google Earth 2016) 76 Exhibit 5-21. Holmes Creek (Google Earth 2016) ...... 77 Exhibit 5-22. Klickitat River Select Reach Photos (Google Earth 2016) ...... 79 Exhibit 5-23. Upper Little Klickitat River (Reach 4) (Google Earth 2016) ...... 81 Exhibit 5-24. Little Klickitat River Reach 3, depicting typical shoreline conditions in the agricultural and rural residential areas outside of Goldendale (Google Earth 2016) ...... 82 Exhibit 5-25. Mill Creek Reach 1 typical shoreline condition. Conditions are similar in Reach 2 with vegetation becoming denser and fewer adjacent agricultural uses upstream (Google Earth 2016) ...... 83 iv

Exhibit 5-26. Summit Creek (Google Earth 2016) ...... 84 Exhibit 5-27. Swale Creek Reaches (Google Earth 2016) ...... 85 Exhibit 5-28. Old mill site along lower Snyder Canyon Creek (Reach 1) (Google Earth 2016) ...... 87 Exhibit 5-29. Steep canyon and forested vegetation in upper Snyder Canyon Creek (Reach 2) (Google Earth 2016) ...... 87 Exhibit 5-30. Trout Creek shoreline jurisdiction (Google Earth 2016) ...... 88 Exhibit 5-31. White Creek typical shoreline condition (Google Earth 2016) ...... 89 Exhibit 5-32. Columbia River Select Reach Photos (Google Earth 2016) ...... 91 Exhibit 5-33. Chamberlain Lake (Google Earth 2016) ...... 93 Exhibit 5-34. Horsethief Lake (Google Earth 2016) ...... 94 Exhibit 5-35. Patterson Slough (Google Earth 2016) ...... 94 Exhibit 5-36. Rowland Lake (Google Earth 2016) ...... 95

L IST OF T ABLES

Page #

Table 3-1. Priority Habitats and Species in Klickitat County (Source: WDFW 2008) 17 Table 3-2. Wildlife habitat types within the Big White Salmon subbasin, Washington (IBIS 2003). (Source: NPCC 2004a) ...... 20 Table 3-3. Wildlife habitat types within the Klickitat subbasin, Washington (IBIS 2003). (Source: NPCC 2004b) ...... 22 Table 4-1. Shoreline Inventory Elements and Information Sources ...... 31 Table 5-1. Shoreline Reaches Used in Functional Analysis...... 43 Table 5-2. Ecological processes and functions used to evaluate reaches ...... 45 Table 5-3. Description of shoreline functions and common sources of human disturbance ...... 47 Table 5-4. Functional score ranking for SMA waterbodies1 by indicator metric ...... 51 Table 5-5. Functional rating by reach on Buck Creek ...... 55 Table 5-6. Functional rating by reach on Cave Creek...... 57 Table 5-7. Functional rating by reach on Dry Creek ...... 58 Table 5-8. Functional rating by reach on Gilmer Creek ...... 59 Table 5-9. Functional rating by reach on the Little White Salmon River ...... 60 Table 5-10. Functional rating by reach on Major Creek ...... 61 Table 5-11. Functional rating by reach on Major Creek, West Fork ...... 62 Table 5-12. Functional rating by reach on Rattlesnake Creek ...... 64 Table 5-13. Functional rating by reach on Trout Lake Creek ...... 66 Table 5-14. Functional rating by reach on the White Salmon River ...... 69 Table 5-15. Functional rating by reach on Bowman Creek ...... 71 Table 5-16. Functional rating by reach on Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek ...... 73 Table 5-17. Functional rating for Mill Pond ...... 74 Table 5-18. Functional rating by on Dead Canyon Creek ...... 74

v

Table 5-19. Functional rating by reach on Frasier Creek ...... 76 Table 5-20. Functional rating on Holmes Creek ...... 77 Table 5-21. Functional rating by reach on the Klickitat River ...... 80 Table 5-22. Functional rating by reach on the Little Klickitat River ...... 81 Table 5-23. Functional rating by reach on Mill Creek ...... 83 Table 5-24. Functional rating by reach on Summit Creek ...... 84 Table 5-25. Functional rating by reach on Swale Creek ...... 85 Table 5-26. Functional rating for Snyder Canyon Creek ...... 86 Table 5-27. Functional rating for Trout Creek ...... 88 Table 5-28. Functional rating for White Creek ...... 89 Table 5-29. Functional rating by reach on the Columbia River ...... 92 Table 5-30. Functional rating for Columbia River Lakes ...... 92 Table 5-31. White Salmon River watershed restoration strategies and opportunities 96 Table 5-32. Klickitat River watershed restoration strategies and opportunities ...... 98 Table 5-33. Columbia River restoration strategies and opportunities ...... 100 Table 6-1. Klickitat County population projections (Office of Financial Management 2012) ...... 104 Table 6-2. Klickitat County Shoreline Jurisdiction Zoning ...... 104 Table 6-3. Klickitat County Shoreline Jurisdiction Ownership ...... 105 Table 6-4. Water-oriented uses: definitions and examples ...... 106 Table 6-5. White Salmon Watershed: Transportation Infrastructure ...... 109 Table 6-6. Klickitat Watershed: Transportation Infrastructure ...... 112 Table 6-7. Columbia River: Transportation Infrastructure ...... 115

vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Shoreline Analysis Report (SAR) was prepared for the unincorporated areas of Klickitat County to help update the County’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Washington’s Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and its implementing State Guidelines adopted in 2003 require this update. The present SMP was originally adopted in 1975 and amended in 1979, 1990, and 1996.

Under State Guidelines, the County must base the master program provisions on an analysis of the most relevant and accurate scientific and technical information (WAC 173-26-201(3)(c)and(d)). This includes meeting the mandate of “no net loss” of shoreline ecological functions as well as providing mechanisms for restoration of impaired shoreline functions. The SAR is not a binding regulatory document but rather provides guidance for potential future updates to the SMP.

The County’s SMP update is a multi-year process, which begins with an inventory and characterization of existing environmental and land use conditions, otherwise known as a “baseline condition.” As part of developing a “baseline condition,” this SAR contains an inventory of a variety of elements, including land use, landscape processes, and ecological functions. These elements are spatially catalogued using a Geographic Information System (GIS), where possible, and are presented as a Countywide Map Folio. Together, these elements define what is understood to be the existing present day condition and helps inform the review of current shoreline regulations and highlight areas where changes may be necessary to meet shoreline management goals to provide for water dependent uses, public access and the protection of natural resources.

Key information provided in this report includes: characterization of existing ecological functions through an analysis of both physical and biological processes; an analysis of existing land uses, shoreline modifications, public access, and areas under public ownership; preliminary identification of restoration opportunities; and recommendations for the SMP to help meet the Guidelines.

vii

The Watershed Company December 2016

S HORELINE A NALYSIS R EPORT

FOR SHORELINES IN KLICKITAT COUNTY

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and Purpose

Klickitat County (County) is completing a comprehensive update of its existing Shoreline Master Program (SMP) in accordance with the State’s Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) Guidelines. One of the first steps of the update process is to inventory and characterize the County’s shorelines as defined by the SMA (RCW 90.58).This Shoreline Analysis Report (SAR) was conducted in accordance with the SMP Guidelines (Guidelines, Chapter 173-26 WAC). Under these Guidelines, the County must identify and assemble the “most current, accurate, and complete scientific and technical information available that is applicable to the issues of concern” regarding natural and built environment characteristics within shoreline jurisdiction.

This SAR inventories and describes existing conditions and characterizes ecological functions in the shoreline jurisdiction of all unincorporated areas within County jurisdiction. Tribal lands in the Yakama Reservation, and land under the jurisdiction of Klickitat County cities are not included in the analysis. This assessment of current conditions will serve as the baseline against which the impacts of future development actions in shoreline jurisdiction will be measured. The Guidelines require that the County demonstrate that the implementation of their updated SMP yields “no net loss” in shoreline ecological functions relative to the baseline (current condition). By describing and inventorying existing conditions, this SAR will be used to help inform the development of appropriate SMP policies, regulations, and environment designations to help meet the “no net loss” goal.

1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction

1.2.1 Shorelines of the State As defined by the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, shorelines include certain waters of the state plus their associated “shorelands.” At a minimum, the waterbodies designated as shorelines of the state are streams whose mean annual flow is 20 cubic feet

1 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

per second (cfs) or greater, lakes whose area is greater than 20 acres, and all marine waters. Shorelands are defined as:

“those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward 200 feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes, and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of this chapter…Any county or city may determine that portion of a one- hundred-year-floodplain to be included in its master program as long as such portion includes, as a minimum, the floodway and the adjacent land extending landward two hundred feet therefrom… Any city or county may also include in its master program land necessary for buffers for critical areas (RCW 90.58.030)”

The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) is:

“that mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or the department: PROVIDED, That in any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water” (RCW 90.58.030(2)(b)).

Ecology has identified the upstream limits of shoreline streams and rivers based on projected mean annual flow of 20 cfs (Higgins 2003), and those lakes that are 20 acres or greater in size. In Klickitat County, shoreline jurisdiction includes the 29 waterbodies indicated in Table 1, below. A Shoreline Jurisdiction Summary which includes a detailed discussion of the jurisdiction assessment and determination process is included as Appendix A of this report.

Table 1. Klickitat County Shorelines of the State

Bowman Creek Major Creek, West Fork Buck Creek Mill Creek Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek Mill Pond Cave Creek Paterson Slough Chamberlain Lake Rattlesnake Creek

2 The Watershed Company December 2016

Columbia River* Rowland Lake Dead Canyon Creek Snyder Canyon Creek Dry Creek Summit Creek Frasier Creek Swale Creek Gilmer Creek Trout Creek Holmes Creek Trout Lake Creek* Horsethief Lake White Creek Klickitat River* White Salmon River* Little Klickitat River Little White Salmon River Major Creek * All or portions of these waterbodies also meet criteria for Shorelines of Statewide Significance (see Section 1.2.2).

1.2.2 Shorelines of Statewide Significance A subset of state shorelines, called Shorelines of Statewide Significance, receive special attention in the SMA and Guidelines, with specific preferences as to their use and a higher level of effort in implementing the SMA’s objectives. In eastern Washington, all streams and rivers which have mean annual flow of 200 cfs or greater or portions of waterbodies downstream from the first 300 square miles of drainage area are considered Shorelines of Statewide Significance. West of the Cascade Crest, rivers with a mean annual flow of 1,000 cfs or greater are considered Shorelines of Statewide Significance. Additionally, any lakes larger than 1,000 acres are also Shorelines of Statewide Significance. This special status applies to all shorelines within the County along the Columbia River, Klickitat River, Trout Lake Creek and the White Salmon River. No lakes in the County meet this criteria.

1.3 Study Area

Klickitat County encompasses approximately 1,871 square miles and is located along the Oregon-Washington border in south central Washington, bounded by Yakima County to the north, Skamania County to the west and Benton County to the east. The Yakama Indian Reservation occupies a portion of its central and northern areas. Additionally, the County includes portions of Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA) 29- White Salmon, 30-Klickitat, 31-Rock/Glade, and 37- Lower Yakima.

The County is predominantly rural in nature. Unincorporated areas make up most of its territory and include communities such as Trout Lake, Husum, BZ Corner, Lyle, Klickitat, Dallasport, Maryhill, and Roosevelt, which include housing, commercial and industrial activities. Incorporated cities include White Salmon, Bingen and Goldendale. Each city has recently undergone their own, separate SMP update process. Agricultural activity occurs primarily in the eastern half of the County while the central and western

3 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

portions contain agricultural and forest resource activities with significant recreational opportunities, particularly on the White Salmon and Klickitat Rivers. The Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area (National Scenic Area) is present along the Columbia River in the County’s western half. Industrial activity is also present in places along the Columbia River.

The study area for this report includes all land currently within the County’s proposed shoreline jurisdiction. Shorelines within city boundaries and within the Yakama Nation are excluded. The study area includes relevant discussion of the contributing watersheds.

In total, this shoreline inventory has mapped approximately 427 miles of river shoreline that meet shoreline jurisdiction criteria. Jurisdictional shoreland area totals approximately 32 square miles and includes floodways, associated floodplains, and wetlands.

2 SUMMARY OF CURRENT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

2.1 Shoreline Management Act

The Shoreline Management Act of 1971 promoted planning along shorelines and coordination among governments, stating:

“There is, therefore, a clear and urgent demand for a planned, rational, and concerted effort, jointly performed by federal, state, and local governments, to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines (RCW 90.58.020).”

The SMA is intended to balance the impact of shoreline use, be it development or water- dependent or water-oriented activities, with measures that conserve or enhance shoreline ecological functions and values. SMPs are the local land use policies and regulations designed to enact this balance. SMPs must be based on state guidelines, but should be tailored to the specific conditions and needs of the local community.

4 The Watershed Company December 2016

2.2 Local Regulations

2.2.1 Klickitat County Shoreline Master Program and Critical Areas Ordinance Klickitat County adopted its current SMP in 1998 and amended it in 2007. It has not been updated since that time. In addition to being subject to the SMP, the County’s shoreline uses, developments, and activities are also subject to County Code and various other provisions of County, state and federal laws.

The SMP divides shoreline areas into zones called “environment designations.” The environment designations defined in the current SMP, are briefly described below:

Natural. The Natural environment is characterized by the presence of some unique natural or cultural features considered valuable in their natural or original condition which are relatively free of human influence and considered valuable in its natural or original condition.

Conservancy. The Conservancy environment is intended for areas for very low intensity land uses, low land values and relatively severe biophysical limitations.

Rural. The Rural environment is intended to protect agricultural land from Urban expansion by setting aside areas that have a high capability to support agriculture. Low-density residential and moderate intensity recreational uses are appropriate for this area.

Community. The Community environment is characterized as an area of moderate intensity land use including residential, recreational and commercial development. The Community designation includes all unincorporated areas in the County.

Urban/Industrial. The Urban/Industrial area is characterized by high intensity and diverse land uses such as commercial and industrial development, as well as community facilities.

Within all shoreline environments, the SMP designates an area called the Natural Buffer Zone (NBZ) that establishes a 50 feet setback from the OHWM for all development that does not include flood control, erosion control, water dependent uses, or access to banks. The purpose of the NBZ is to maintain a natural, vegetated buffer of undisturbed land.

The County is not fully planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA); however, the County is subject to the minimum requirements of the GMA, which include

5 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

identification of natural resource lands and development regulations to protect critical areas. Additionally, several communities have developed long-range master plans and subarea plans which contain many of the same elements required by the GMA.

County regulations applicable to critical areas are detailed in the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), Ordinance No. O080613 which was adopted in 2013 as an update to the 2004 CAO. In those regulations the County specifies minimum buffer widths of 75 to 300 feet for wetlands and 25 to 200 feet for critical fish/wildlife habitat conservation areas (Klickitat CAO Chapter 3 and 4). The County’s Critical Areas regulations also apply to geologically hazardous areas, aquifer recharge areas, and frequently flooded areas.

Many shoreline and wetland areas within the County contain functioning buffers of the required widths. Smaller functioning buffers are found where developments existed prior to the critical areas regulations or where buffers of different widths were previously established in approved site plans or protected critical area easements.

Shoreline uses, developments, and activities regulated under the critical areas regulations are also subject to the County’s various other provisions, as well as state and federal laws. Any applicant must comply with all applicable laws prior to commencing any use, development, or activity. The County will ensure consistency between the SMP and other County codes, plans and programs by reviewing each for consistency during periodic updates.

2.2.2 Other County Regulations Activities and uses in shorelines are also regulated by the County’s zoning ordinance (No. 62678), enacted in 1979 and amended most recently in June of 2015. The ordinance specifies permitted, conditional, and prohibited uses by zoning designation, as well as dimensional standards such as minimum lot size, lot coverage, and maximum building height.

The County floodplain management ordinance (No. 62981) includes regulations to minimize losses due to flood conditions. The ordinance prohibits structures in the floodway, and contains minimum building standards such as anchoring and elevation for structures in areas of special flood hazard.

Ordinance No. 122997, codified in Title 8, Health and Safety, of the Klickitat County Code, contains minimum requirements for on-site sewage disposal in order to protect surface and ground waters. The County’s Environmental Ordinance (No. 121084)

6 The Watershed Company December 2016

contains local procedures for SEPA environmental review of various types of development and uses.

Applications for most proposed activities and uses that are subject to review by the Planning Department are provided to local, state, and federal agencies; affected tribes; and other interests for their review and opportunity to comment. Comments of a substantive nature are typically addressed per conditions of approval.

2.2.3 Columbia River Gorge Commission Approximately 292,500 acres of public and private lands surrounding the Columbia River Gorge are designated as a National Scenic Area. The U.S. Forest Service administers the Management Plan for the Scenic Area, and manages all National Forest System lands within its boundaries. The Management Plan is a non-regulatory document that provides recommendations for land use management. New land uses within the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area are reviewed for consistency with local land use ordinances that apply to non-Forest Service lands within the Scenic Area. In some jurisdictions, this review is done by the applicable county planning department. However, in Klickitat County, the Gorge Commission reviews the land use applications for National Scenic Area lands and makes a decision prior to the County acting on any land use decisions.

2.3 State Regulations

Aside from the SMA, Washington State regulations most pertinent to development in the County and Cities’ shorelines include the State Hydraulic Code, Growth Management Act, State Environmental Policy Act, Watershed Planning Act, Water Resources Act, Salmon Recovery Act, and case law. A variety of agencies are involved in implementing these regulations or otherwise manage public shoreline areas. For example, Ecology reviews all shoreline projects that require a shoreline permit and has specific regulatory authority over shoreline conditional use permits and shoreline variances. Other agency reviews of shoreline developments are typically triggered by in- or over-water work, discharges of fill or pollutants into the water, or substantial land clearing.

Depending on the nature of the proposed development, state regulations can play an important role in the design and implementation of a shoreline project, ensuring that impacts to shoreline functions and values are avoided, minimized, and/or mitigated. During the comprehensive SMP update, the County will consider other state regulations to ensure appropriate consistency and feasibility, with the goal of streamlining the

7 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

shoreline permitting process. A summary of some of the key state regulations and/or state agency responsibilities follows.

Hydraulic Code. Chapter 77.55 RCW (the Hydraulic Code) gives the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) the authority to review, condition, and approve or deny “any construction activity that will use, divert, obstruct, or change the bed or flow of State waters.” These activities may include stream alteration, culvert installation or replacement, pier and bulkhead repair or construction, among others. In a permit called a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), WDFW can condition projects to avoid, minimize, restore, and compensate adverse impacts.

Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act allows states to review, condition, and approve or deny certain federal permitted actions that result in discharges from fills or excavations to State waters, including wetlands and streams. In Washington, Ecology has been delegated responsibility for conducting that review and ensuring that State water quality standards are, or have been, met. Actions within streams or wetlands within the shoreline zone that require a Section 404 permit (see below), Coast Guard Permit, or a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license, which requires a Section 401 water quality certification.

Washington Department of Natural Resources. Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) is charged with protecting and managing use of state-owned aquatic lands. WDNR manages more than 5.6 million acres of state- owned forest, range, commercial, agricultural, conservation, and aquatic lands. WDNR manages these lands for revenue, outdoor recreation, and habitat for native fish and wildlife. Water-dependent uses waterward of the OHWM require review by WDNR to establish whether the project is on state-owned aquatic lands. WDNR recommends that all proponents of a project waterward of the OHWM make contact with WDNR to determine jurisdiction and requirements. WDNR also regulates forest practices, including timber harvest within shorelines. Typically, the County, WDNR, and WDFW jointly review timber harvest proposals within shoreline jurisdiction.

Watershed Planning Act. The Watershed Planning Act of 1998 (Chapter 90.82 RCW) was passed to encourage local planning of local water resources, recognizing that there are citizens and entities in each watershed that “have the greatest knowledge of both the resources and the aspirations of those who live

8 The Watershed Company December 2016 and work in the watershed; and who have the greatest stake in the proper, long- term management of the resources.” Klickitat County shoreline jurisdiction is within two watershed basins: WRIAs 29 and 30.

The 2007 Legislature split the Wind-White Salmon watershed (WRIA 29) into two subbasins for continued planning and implementation purposes. The Wind subbasin in the western part of the basin became WRIA 29a and the White Salmon subbasin in the east, within Klickitat County, became WRIA 29b. No watershed management plan has been adopted under the Watershed Planning Act for the White Salmon subbasin. The Klickitat Basin (WRIA 30) Watershed Management Plan was written in 2005 and adopted in 2006. Phase 4 funding was received in 2006 and the WRIA 30 planning group, led by Klickitat County, continued to produce several subsequent documents through 2011. The WRIA 30 group is not currently operating under the Watershed Planning Act.

Water Pollution Control Act. Chapter 90.48 RCW establishes the State’s policy “to maintain the highest possible standards to insure the purity of all waters of the State consistent with public health and public enjoyment thereof, the propagation and protection of wild life, birds, game, fish and other aquatic life, and the industrial development of the State, and to that end require the use of all known available and reasonable methods by industries and others to prevent and control the pollution of the waters of the State of Washington.” Ecology is responsible for crafting and implementing rules and regulations in accordance with this legislation.

On-site Sewage Systems. Klickitat County is subject to state health regulations for disposal of on-site wastewater (sewage). The County has authority over small on-site wastewater (sewage) disposal systems, defined as those systems with design flows up to 3,499 gallons per day. For larger domestic systems, the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) has approval authority. Ecology regulates systems with design flows above 100,000 gallons per day, as well as systems that treat industrial waste.

Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). In Washington State, archaeological sites and Native American graves are protected from known disturbance by a variety of state and federal laws. Federal law applies to all federal and Native American lands and Washington State law applies to all other lands. Project review processes under these laws typically require consideration be given to protecting significant historic, archaeological,

9 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

and traditional cultural sites from damage or loss during development. DAHP works with agencies, tribes, private citizens, and developers to identify and develop protection strategies for such resources.

2.4 Tribal Regulations

A portion of the Yakama Indian Nation (YIN) reservation extends across the county’s northern border. As a sovereign nation, the YIN has its own zoning and environmental provisions that apply within the reservation. The County has no authority on reservation lands. The County Planning Department typically notifies the YIN of all SEPA decisions, shoreline applications, applications that require public notice and/or public hearing, and any other applications that have potential impacts on the YIN.

Outside of the reservation, approximately 21,000 acres are in Tribal Trust ownership by the YIN. As with reservation lands, the County has no jurisdiction over Tribal Trust lands.

2.5 Federal Regulations

Federal regulations most pertinent to development in the County’s shorelines include the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act. Other relevant federal laws include the National Environmental Policy Act, Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, Clean Air Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. A variety of agencies are involved in implementing these regulations, but review by these agencies of shoreline development in most cases would be triggered by in- or over-water work, or discharges of fill or pollutants into the water. It should be noted that County authority under its SMP does not extend to federal projects on federal lands.

Depending on the nature of the proposed development, federal regulations can play an important role in the design and implementation of a shoreline project, ensuring that impacts to shoreline functions and values are avoided, minimized, and/or mitigated. During the SMP update, the County and Cities will consider other federal regulations to ensure consistency as appropriate and feasible with the goal of streamlining the shoreline permitting process. A summary of some of the key federal regulations and/or federal agency responsibilities follows.

Clean Water Act. Major components of the Clean Water Act include Section 404, Section 401, and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).

10 The Watershed Company December 2016

Section 404 provides the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), under the oversight of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with authority to regulate “discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands” (http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/pdf/ reg_authority_pr.pdf). The extent of the Corps’ authority and the definition of fill have been the subject of considerable legal activity. As applicable to the County’s shoreline jurisdiction, however, it generally means that the Corps must review and approve most activities in streams and wetlands. These activities may include wetland fills, stream and wetland restoration, and culvert installation or replacement, among others. The Corps requires projects to avoid, minimize, and compensate for impacts.

Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required for any applicant for a federal permit for any activity that may result in any discharge to waters of the United States. States and tribes may deny, certify, or condition permits or licenses based on the proposed project’s compliance with water quality standards. In Washington State, Ecology has been delegated the responsibility by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for managing implementation of this program.

The NPDES is similar to Section 401, and it applies to ongoing point-source discharge. Permits include limits on what can be discharged, monitoring and reporting requirements, and other provisions designed to protect water quality. Examples of discharges requiring NPDES permits include municipal stormwater discharge, wastewater treatment effluent, or discharge related to industrial activities.

Endangered Species Act (ESA). Section 9 of the ESA prohibits “take” of listed species. Take has been defined in Section 3 as: “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The take prohibitions of the ESA apply to everyone, so any action that results in a take of listed fish or wildlife would be a violation of the ESA and is strictly prohibited. Per Section 7 of the ESA, activities with potential to affect federally listed or proposed species and that either require federal approval, receive federal funding, or occur on federal land must be reviewed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) and/or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) via a process called “consultation.” Activities requiring a Section 10 or Section 404 permit also require such consultation if these activities occur in waterbodies with listed species. Section 4(f) of the ESA directs the

11 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Services to develop or appoint teams to develop and implement recovery plans for threatened and endangered species.

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1996 is administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service to foster and protect commercial and recreational fisheries of designated species that “contribute to the food supply, economy, and health of the Nation and provide recreational opportunities” (18 U.S.C. §1801-a). In Klickitat County, Chinook and coho salmon, and steelhead are designated species. The primary avenue for on-the- ground management of those species is designation and protection of “essential fish habitat” (EFH), which is “those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.” The National Marine Fisheries Service incorporates consideration of EFH into the same process under which projects are reviewed per the Endangered Species Act.

Rivers and Harbors Act. Section 10 of the federal Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 provides the Corps with authority to regulate activities that may affect navigation of “navigable” waters. Designated “navigable” waters in Klickitat County include the Columbia, and lower portions of the Klickitat, and White Salmon Rivers. Proposals to construct new or modify existing over-water structures (including bridges), to excavate or fill, or to “alter or modify the course, location, condition, or capacity of navigable waters must be reviewed and approved by the Corps.

Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act: Congress established the Northwest Power Act in 1980, which established the Northwest Power and Conservation Council with the goals of preparing and adopting (1) a regional conservation and electric power plan and (2) a program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife. Klickitat County participated as a lead entity for the Klickitat Subbasin Plan (2004), prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. The Subbasin Plan describes ways in which the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) can prioritize spending for projects that protect, mitigate and enhance fish and wildlife that have been adversely impacted by the development and operation of the Columbia River hydropower system.

12 The Watershed Company December 2016 3 SUMMARY OF ECOSYSTEM CONDITIONS

The majority of Klickitat County shorelines are located within Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 30, the Klickitat watershed. The County also includes portions of WRIA 29 (Wind-White Salmon), WRIA 37 (Lower Yakima) and WRIA 31 (Rock Glade). The 2007 Legislature split the Wind-White Salmon watershed (WRIA 29) into two subbasins for continued planning and implementation purposes. The Wind subbasin in the western part of the basin became WRIA 29a and the White Salmon subbasin in the east, within Klickitat County, became WRIA 29b. It should be noted that the WRIA 29b watershed planning process was not completed and is currently on hold; the County has not formally adopted any watershed planning documents for WRIA 29b.

The Columbia River system forms the southern boundary of the County. The only shoreline waterbody in WRIA 37 is Satus Creek. The reach of Satus Creek which meets shoreline criteria lies entirely within the Yakama Nation and therefore is excluded from analysis in this report. No shoreline waterbodies are within WRIA 31, other than the Columbia River system.

The watersheds containing jurisdictional County shorelines, White Salmon and Klickitat, (WRIAs 29b and 30) and the Columbia River system are described in the following sections.

Exhibit 3-1. Map of Water Resource Inventory Areas in Klickitat County

13 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

(Source: WDFW, Salmonscape)

3.1 Geography, Topography, and Drainage Patterns

3.1.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) The White Salmon River originates in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest along the southern side of Mt. Adams. It drains approximately 386 square miles and flows south through a basalt gorge for most if its 45 mile length before entering the Columbia River (NPCC 2004a, Allen et al. 2016). Major shoreline tributaries to the White Salmon River within Klickitat County include Cave Creek, Dry Creek, Buck Creek, Gilmer Creek, Rattlesnake Creek and Trout Lake Creek.

Subbasin elevations range from 12,307 feet at Mount Adams to 72 feet at the mouth. Topography in the basin varies from rugged mountains to rolling hills to river valleys. Consolidated sediments are overlain with basaltic lava flows. Subsequent erosion, mud flows, and glaciation have resulted in precipitous cliffs, deeply incised canyons, and relatively flat valley floors. Trout Lake Valley in the northwest corner of Klickitat County is the major valley in the White Salmon subbasin and is bordered by hills to the west and rolling plateaus to the east (NPCC 2004a).

The geology of the subbasin is dominated by past volcanic activity. Subbasin soils are the result of volcanism and glaciation. Soils in the valley are deep and coarse with moderate fertility. In the hilly areas the deep and well drained soils are derived from weathered volcanic ash and lava underlain with olivine basalt. In the lower portion of the basin, the soils are generally shallow and less porous (Haring 2003 cited in NPCC 2004a).

Climatic patterns of the White Salmon subbasin are controlled by marine-influenced air masses from the Pacific Ocean and continental air masses from eastern Washington. Precipitation is concentrated between October and March. Winters are usually wet and mild, while summers are warm and dry.

3.1.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) The Klickitat River originates at Mt. Adams and the eastern side of the Cascade Mountains. The primary tributary to the lower Klickitat River is the Little Klickitat River, which runs through central Klickitat county and which drains the Simcoe Mountains located to the east of the mainstem Klickitat River. Other shoreline tributaries to the Klickitat River within Klickitat County include White Creek, Trout Creek, Dead

14 The Watershed Company December 2016

Canyon Creek, Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek, Summit Creek, Synder Canyon Creek, Swale Creek, Bowman Creek, and Mill Creek.

Elevation in the WRIA ranges from 75 feet at the Columbia River to 12,296 feet at the crest of Mount Adams. The upper Klickitat subbasin in Yakima County contains areas of high topographic relief as do some of the headwater areas of the Little Klickitat River. However, most of WRIA 30 within Klickitat County consists primarily of low rolling hills. In some areas water features have dissected the underlying bedrock creating steep canyon areas such as those in the lower reaches of the Little Klickitat River, the lower Klickitat River Subbasin, the lower portion of Swale Creek, near the mouths of most of the tributaries to the Klickitat and Little Klickitat Rivers, and in the smaller tributaries along the Columbia River (WPN and Aspect 2005a).

Precipitation is highly variable in the WRIA. Mean annual precipitation generally increases with elevation and from east to west. For example, mean annual precipitation is as little as nine inches per year in the eastern end of the Columbia Tributaries Subbasin in south central Klickitat County, and as high as 105 inches per year on Mount Adams in the Upper Klickitat Subbasin (WPN and Aspect 2005).

Variations in the elevation ranges of the subbasins found within WRIA 30 result in variable expected runoff patterns among the subbasins. Streams within the Upper Klickitat subbasin, and the Klickitat River mainstem itself, are likely to have a snowmelt dominated hydrograph, with the highest flows occurring in the late spring months. In the mid-elevation ranges, streams are likely to have rain-on-snow dominated hydrographs, with the highest flows occurring in the winter months. In the lowest elevation areas streams are unlikely to be significantly influenced by rain-on-snow events, and are likely to have a rainfall driven hydrograph, with the highest flows occurring in response to high- intensity rainfall events (WPN and Aspect 2005b).

Most of the Klickitat mainstem is a canyon with steep walls and a narrow valley floor. Such steep-walled canyons formed as a result of erosion-resistant basalts which dominate the basin. Local variations in erosion resistance of the underlying geology have resulted in the formation of cascades and waterfalls along the mainstem and in many tributaries. The stream reaches in the plateau areas are lower gradient and are able to develop meander patterns. These areas tend to have more agricultural, urban, and recreational land use (WPN and Aspect 2005a).

Geology in the watershed is primarily from volcanic sources. From the surface down the geologic units of primary significance with respect to ground water in WRIA 30 are:

15 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Quaternary Volcanics (including Simcoe Volcanics), Wanapum Basalt and Grande Ronde Basalt. Alluvium is present in depositional areas along lower gradient sections of streams. Additionally, a deposit of alluvium that is up to 250 feet deep is present in the Swale Valley. A fault on the western edge of the Swale Valley acts as a barrier to ground water flow out of this alluvial plain.

3.1.3 Columbia River The Columbia River was formed by the forces of glaciation, volcanism, hydrology, and erosion and accretion of sediments. The Cascade mountain range was formed 50 to 35 million years ago, at which time uplift of the Rocky Mountains combined with subduction of the oceanic plates of the Pacific Ocean, creating the flow path for the River. Subsequent glaciation restructured and expanded the extent of the Columbia River basin. Near the end of the last glacial period, the Missoula Floods shaped the physical landscape, transporting and depositing silt, sand, and gravel that now form much of the landscape in the Columbia River basin (Simenstad et al. 2011).

The Columbia River is the largest river in the Pacific Northwest, and the fourth largest river in the United States by volume. The Columbia River watershed originates in Canada, and the drainage area of over 258,000 square miles includes areas of Washington, Oregon, Montana, and Idaho, Wyoming, and Nevada. The portion of the Columbia River through Klickitat County is commonly referred to as the lower-middle Columbia River.

The hydrology of the Columbia River Basin reflects the interaction of topography geology, and climate. Most of the drainage of the Columbia River falls as snow in the Rocky Mountains and in the Cascade Range. Annual peak discharges occur in the spring (April to June) and generally results from snowmelt in the interior subbasin. Historically, flood flows peaked at 1.2 million cfs (Simenstad et al. 2011). Today, as a result of dam regulation, the highest flows occur from April to June, with discharge at the mouth of the river ranging from 100,000 to 500,000 cfs (Neal 1972, Marriott 2002).

3.2 Key Species and Habitats

Habitat within shoreline jurisdiction ranges from extensive riparian and wetland habitat in the Trout Lake region, to narrow bands of upland shrub-steppe vegetation through agricultural fields in the eastern portion of the County, to wide intact forested buffer zones on designated forest lands on many of the upper portions of White Salmon and Klickitat River tributaries.

16 The Watershed Company December 2016

The County’s shorelands support significant populations of small mammals, which are highly responsive to changes in vegetation cover, and play important roles in ecosystem functions, including water infiltration, habitat formation, and prey source for predators. Small mammal species which may inhabit the shoreline riparian area include species such as shrews, jackrabbits, and ground squirrels. Large and medium-size mammals potentially using areas within shoreline jurisdiction include black bear, black-tailed deer, elk and mule deer (WDFW 2008)

Klickitat County supports a portion of the remaining white oak habitat in Washington State. Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) is Washington’s only native oak. East of the Cascades, stands greater than five acres are considered a priority habitat. Priority species associated within this oak woodland region include mule and black-tailed deer, wild turkey, and the western gray squirrel, listed as a State threatened species. Oregon white oak woodlands are used by an abundance of mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians. Many invertebrates, including various moths, butterflies, gall wasps, and spiders, are found exclusively in association with this oak species. Oak/conifer associations provide contiguous aerial pathways and important roosting, nesting, and feeding habitat for birds and mammals. Dead oaks and dead portions of live oaks harbor insect populations and provide nesting cavities. Acorns, oak leaves, fungi, and insects provide food. Some birds, such as the Nashville warbler, exhibit unusually high breeding densities in oak. Oaks in Washington may play a critical role in the conservation of neotropical migrant birds that migrate through, or nest in, Oregon white oak woodlands (Larsen and Morgan 1998).

Table 3-1 below, lists the priority habitats and species (PHS) WDFW has identified in Klickitat County. A brief discussion specific to each watershed follows. Fish and Wildlife PHS maps are included as Maps 21-23 in the map folio (Appendix B).

Table 3-1. Priority Habitats and Species in Klickitat County (Source: WDFW 2008)

Priority Habitat/Species State Status Federal Status Habitats Aspen Stands -- -- Biodiversity Areas & Corridors -- -- Inland Dunes -- -- Old-Growth/Mature Forest -- -- Oregon White Oak Woodlands -- -- Eastside Steppe -- -- Shrub-Steppe -- -- Riparian -- -- Freshwater Wetlands & Freshwater Deepwater -- --

17 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Priority Habitat/Species State Status Federal Status Instream -- -- Caves -- -- Cliffs -- -- Snags and Logs -- -- Talus -- -- Fish Pacific Lamprey -- Species of Concern River Lamprey Candidate Species of Concern White Sturgeon -- -- Leopard Dace Candidate -- Mountain Sucker Candidate -- Bull Trout/Dolly Varden Candidate* Threatened* Chinook Salmon Candidate Threatened Chum Salmon Candidate Threatened Coastal Residential/Searun Cutthroat Coho -- Threatened Pink Salmon -- -- Rainbow Trout/Steelhead/Inland Redband Trout Candidate** Threatened** Sockeye Salmon Candidate Endangered Wildlife Larch Mountain Salamander Sensitive Species of Concern Oregon Spotted Frog Endangered Candidate Western Toad Candidate Species of Concern Pacific (Western) Pond Turtle Endangered Species of Concern California Mountain Kingsnake Candidate Sharptail Snake Candidate Species of Concern Striped Whipsnake Candidate -- Sagebrush Lizard Candidate Species of Concern Western Grebe Candidate -- E WA breeding concentrations of: Grebes, -- -- Cormorants E WA breeding: Terns -- --

Black-crowned Night-heron -- --

Great Blue Heron -- -- Cavity -nesting ducks: Wood Duck, Barrow’s Goldeneye, Common Goldeneye, Bufflehead, -- -- Hooded Merganser

Harlequin Duck -- --

Waterfowl Concentrations -- --

Bald Eagle Sensitive Species of Concern

Ferruginous Hawk Threatened Species of Concern

Golden Eagle Candidate --

Northern Goshawk Candidate Species of Concern

Peregrine Falcon Sensitive Species of Concern

18 The Watershed Company December 2016

Priority Habitat/Species State Status Federal Status Prairie Falcon -- --

Chukar -- --

Mountain Quail -- --

Ring-necked Pheasant -- --

Greater Sage-grouse Threatened Candidate Sooty Grouse Wild Turkey -- --

Sandhill Crane Endangered -- E WA breeding occurrences of: Phalaropes, Stilts and Avocets -- --

Band-tailed Pigeon

Burrowing Owl Candidate Species of Concern

Flammulated Owl Candidate --

Spotted Owl Endangered Threatened Vaux’s Swift Candidate --

Black-backed Woodpecker Candidate --

Lewis’ Woodpecker Candidate --

Pileated Woodpecker Candidate --

White-headed Woodpecker Candidate Loggerhead Shrike Candidate Species of Concern

Sage Sparrow Candidate Sage Thrasher Candidate --

Preble's Shrew Candidate Species of Concern Roosting Concentrations of: Big-brown Bat, Myotis bats, Pallid Bat -- --

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Candidate Species of Concern

Black-tailed Jackrabbit Candidate --

White-tailed Jackrabbit Candidate --

Western Gray Squirrel Threatened Species of Concern

Townsend’s Ground Squirrel Candidate Species of Concern Cascade Red Fox Candidate

Fisher Endangered Candidate Marten -- --

Wolverine Candidate Candidate Columbia Black-tailed Deer Elk -- -- Rocky Mountain Mule Deer -- -- Columbia Oregonian Candidate Dalles Sideband Candidate Juniper Hairstreak Candidate Mardon Skipper Endangered *Bulltrout only **Steelhead only -- Not listed

19 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

3.2.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) Vegetation in the White Salmon watershed is a mixture of eastern and western Cascade forests. The majority of the watershed is forested. Non forested areas are generally composed of grassland and shrub-steppe that has been converted to agricultural use such as in the Trout Lake valley. The White Salmon River and tributary Trout Lake Creek have stands of mature timber that have been designated spotted owl habitat areas. The White Salmon subbasin plan identified 349 wildlife species within the subbasin found within 11 habitat types. Table 3-2 identifies the habitat types found within the White Salmon watershed as identified by the Interactive Biodiversity Information System (IBIS) (NPCC 2004a).

Table 3-2. Wildlife habitat types within the Big White Salmon subbasin, Washington (IBIS 2003). (Source: NPCC 2004a)

Habitat Type Brief Description

Agriculture, Pastures, and Cropland, orchards, vineyards, nurseries, pastures, and grasslands Mixed Environs modified by heavy grazing; associated structures. Alpine Grasslands and Grassland, dwarf-shrubland, or forb dominated, occasionally with Shrublands patches of dwarfed trees. Coniferous forests and woodlands; Douglas-fir commonly present, up to Eastside (Interior) Mixed eight other conifer species present; understory shrub and grass/forb Conifer Forest layers typical; mid- montane. Lodgepole Pine Forest and Lodgepole pine dominated woodlands and forests; understory various; Woodlands mid- to high elevations. Dry site coniferous forests and woodlands; Western hemlock and Mesic Lowlands Conifer- Douglas-fir commonly present, up to 3 other conifer and 2 hardwood Hardwood Forest species present; understory typically shrub-dominated Forest or woodland dominated by evergreen conifers; deciduous trees Montane Coniferous may be co-dominant; understory dominated by shrubs, forbs, or Wetlands graminoids; mid- to upper montane. Coniferous forest of mid-to upper montane sites with persistent Montane Mixed Conifer snowpack; several species of conifer; understory typically shrub- Forest dominated Lakes, are typically adjacent to Herbaceous Wetlands, while rivers and Open Water - Lakes, streams typically adjoin Eastside Riparian Wetlands and Herbaceous Rivers, and Streams Wetlands Ponderosa Pine & Interior Ponderosa pine dominated woodland or savannah, often with Douglas- White Oak Forest and fir; shrub, forb, or grass understory; lower elevation forest above Woodlands steppe, shrubsteppe. Whitebark pine (P. albicaulis) is found primarily in the eastern Cascade Subalpine Parkland Mountains, Okanogan Highlands, and Blue Mountains. Dominated by Red alder, 3-4 other deciduous broadleaf and 3 conifer Westside Riparian- trees may also be dominate or co-dominate; understory typically large Wetlands shrubs and herbs

20 The Watershed Company December 2016

Fish For 100 years the Condit dam, built on the White Salmon River near Powerhouse Road in 1912-1913, acted as a fish barrier, restricting access for migratory fish to the upstream reaches of the river. Before the construction of Condit Dam, the White Salmon River was likely productive for anadromous species including Chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead as well as rainbow trout, cutthroat trout, and bull trout (NPCC 2004a). Condit dam was breached in 2011 and fully removed in 2012. Since then, migratory fish species have been re-established in the upstream reaches of the White Salmon River (Allen et al. 2016).

There are several waterfalls that naturally limit the potential fish distribution in the mainstem White Salmon River and accessible tributaries. The likely end of anadromous fish distribution in the mainstem is at Big Brother Falls, north of the community of BZ Corner. Several other waterfalls downstream may be complete or partial barriers to some species including BZ Falls and Husum Falls. Tributary habitat is also limited because of high waterfalls. There are four main tributaries likely accessible to anadromous fish: Rattlesnake Creek, Spring Creek (non-shoreline), Buck Creek and Mill Creek (a non- shoreline different Mill Creek than the Klickitat River tributary) (Allen et al. 2016).

As of 2014, surveys indicate that spring and fall Chinook have generally recolonized the White Salmon River as anticipated. Steelhead have also recolonized in the mainstem and expected tributaries, but more monitoring is needed to understand the full extent. Other anadromous species observed in 2013 include coho, pink, and sockeye salmon (Allen et al. 2016).

3.2.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) A large variety of wildlife species are associated with the Klickitat subbasin because of its diverse vegetative and geologic features. The Klickitat subbasin plan identified 365 wildlife species within the subbasin found within 15 habitat types. Table 3-3 identifies the habitat types found within the Klickitat watershed as identified by the Interactive Biodiversity Information System (IBIS) (NPCC 2004a).

21 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 3-3. Wildlife habitat types within the Klickitat subbasin, Washington (IBIS 2003). (Source: NPCC 2004b)

Habitat Type Brief Description

One or more of the following are dominant: Douglas-fir, western hemlock, Mesic Lowlands Conifer- western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), red alder Hardwood Forest (Alnus rubra). Coniferous forest of mid-to upper montane sites with persistent Montane Mixed Conifer snowpack; several species of conifer; understory typically shrub- Forest dominated. Coniferous forests and woodlands; Douglas-fir commonly present, up Interior Mixed Conifer Forest to 8 other conifer species present; understory shrub and grass/forb layers typical; mid-montane. Lodgepole Pine Forest and Lodgepole pine dominated woodlands and forests; understory Woodlands various; mid- to high elevations. Ponderosa Pine and Interior Ponderosa pine dominated woodland or savannah, often with White Oak Forest and Douglas-fir; shrub, forb, or grass understory; lower elevation forest Woodland above steppe, shrub steppe. Whitebark pine is found primarily in the eastern Cascade mountains Subalpine Parkland Okanogan Highlands, and Blue Mountains. Alpine Grasslands and Grassland, dwarf-shrubland, or forb dominated, occasionally with Shrubland patches of dwarfed trees. Dominated by short to medium height native bunchgrass with forbs, Interior Grasslands cryptogam crust. Sagebrush and/or bitterbrush dominated; bunchgrass understory with Shrub Steppe forbs, cryptogam crust. Cropland, orchards, vineyards, nurseries, pastures, and grasslands Agriculture, Pasture modified by heavy grazing; associated structures. High, medium, and low (10-29 percent impervious ground) density Urban development. Lakes, Rivers, Ponds, and Natural and human-made open water habitats. Reservoirs Emergent herbaceous wetlands with grasses, sedges, bulrushes, or Herbaceous Wetlands forbs; aquatic beds with pondweeds, pond lily, other aquatic plant species; sea level to upper montane. Forest or woodland dominated by evergreen conifers; deciduous Montane Coniferous trees may be co- dominant; understory dominated by shrubs, forbs, Wetlands or graminoids; mid- to upper montane. Shrublands, woodlands and forest, less commonly grasslands; often Interior Riparian Wetlands multilayered canopy with shrubs, graminoids, forbs below.

22 The Watershed Company December 2016

Fish

WDFW Salmonscape mapping shows fall and spring Chinook salmon distribution in the Klickitat River, including rearing habitat for spring Chinook and spawning habitat for both fall and spring Chinook. Fall and spring Chinook are also documented in the Little Klickitat River, Bowman Creek, Summit Creek, White Creek and Swale Creek. Spring Chinook only are documented in Trout Creek (WDFW 2016a). Bull trout are also documented in portions of the Klickitat River (WDFW 2016a). Coho salmon are documented in the Klickitat River, Synder Creek, Little Klickitat River, Swale Creek, Summit Creek and White Creek, as well as multiple non-shoreline tributaries (WDFW 2016a).

Winter and summer steelhead are also present in WRIA 30. The Klickitat River is mapped as a spawning stream for winter steelhead from the mouth up to Summit Creek with documented presence continuing upstream and in Summit Creek. Presence is presumed in White Creek and is documented in Swale Creek, Snyder Creek, the Little Klickitat River and the lower portion of several non-shoreline tributaries. Spawning is shown in portions of Swale Creek, the Little Klickitat River and lower Bowman Creek (WDFW 2016a).

There is documented summer steelhead rearing in the Klickitat River near its mouth, and spawning throughout the rest of the river in the County. There is also documented presence in the lower portion of several Klickitat River tributaries including Snyder Canyon Creek, Mill Creek, Bowman Creek, Trout Creek, White Creek, Summit Creek and Outlet Creek.

The WRIA 30 Watershed Management Plan notes the following about fish passage in the Klickitat basin (WPN and Aspect 2005a):

“One of the major limitations on anadromous fish production is the presence of a number of natural migration barriers in the watershed. The Klickitat River flows through a deep, steep walled canyon with historically impassable or marginally passable falls and cascades where the river flows over resistant bedrock. In addition, access to many of the tributaries is restricted because there are impassably high gradients close to the tributary mouths. The most significant natural fish passage barriers and impediments include:

Lyle Falls (River Mile (RM) 2.2) is currently not a barrier to any indigenous salmon or steelhead stocks, but passage at the falls is

23 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

considered difficult. Historically the Lyle Falls was a barrier to coho salmon and possibly fall Chinook.

Castile Falls (RM 64.0) is a series of 11 falls with an elevation change of 80 feet over one-half mile. These falls are considered the historical upper limit of anadromous fish usage on the mainstem Klickitat River (Washington State Conservation Commission (WSCC), 1999). Fish passage facilities have been installed at Castile Falls.

Little Klickitat River Falls (RM 6.1) is considered passable by steelhead under some flow conditions. The frequency that the falls is passable is unknown. Larger flow events are probably required to enable passage. Long-term residents have not observed steelhead above the falls, but limited observations of redds suggest that spawning of large fish may have occurred in a high flow year. No documentation is available to determine whether the spawning fish were steelhead that passed the falls or large trout that were stocked by the trout hatchery or escaped from trout ponds (both of which have been documented through communications with residents).

West Fork Klickitat River Falls (RM 0.3 and RM 4.6) is a 15 to 20 foot falls located 0.3 miles upstream of the confluence with the mainstem of the Klickitat River. The falls is likely a passage barrier.

Tributary Falls: Numerous tributaries in the WRIA, such as Outlet Creek, Bowman Creek, Canyon Creek, and Blockhouse Creek, have falls that block passage into upstream habitats.

3.2.3 Columbia River Hundreds of fish and wildlife species reside in or migrate through the Columbia River. At least 51 species of fish, including thirty native species, have been reported from the mainstem Columbia River between Wanapum and The Dalles Dams (Ward et al. 2001). Fall Chinook salmon are the dominant salmonids during spring in nearshore areas. Other numerically significant species during the spring period are redside shiners, carp, largescale suckers, northern pikeminnow, and peamouth (Ward et al. 2001). While areas of the lower mid-Columbia River historically served as spawning grounds for fall Chinook and steelhead, today the lower mid-Columbia is mostly a migration corridor to and from the Pacific Ocean for adult and juvenile salmonids (NPCC 2004c). Salmon spawning has been observed in limited areas of the Columbia River but most fish species spawn and rear in tributary streams (NPCC 2004c).

In 2005, wild populations of salmon in the Columbia River basin represented only 12% of their historic numbers (Bottom et al. 2005). All 13 ESA-listed evolutionary significant

24 The Watershed Company December 2016

units (ESUs) of salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) and steelhead (O. mykiss) in the Columbia basin use the mainstem Columbia River for migration to and from freshwater natal areas to the Pacific Ocean (National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 2009). Most of the ESA- listed species spawn and incubate in tributaries, but some populations of fall Chinook and chum salmon spawn in the mainstem itself.

At least 258 species of birds, 44 species of mammals, and 21 species of reptiles and amphibians have been reported from habitats along or near the mainstem Columbia River between Wanapum and The Dalles Dams (Ward et al. 2001). The middle Columbia River mainstem supports one of the largest Northwest concentrations of wintering waterfowl, particularly Canada geese and mallards (Ward et al. 2001). The reservoirs support colonies of colonial nesting birds, most of which forage primarily on fish. The river is an important migratory stopover and staging area for many species of shorebird as well, including long-billed curlew, marbled godwit, long-billed dowitcher, black- crowned night heron, and several gull and sandpiper species, some of which also nest on the river.

Riparian vegetation and cliffs in this subbasin provide nesting opportunities for several species of raptors. The State-threatened ferruginous hawk occurs in the area, as well as bald and golden eagle, northern goshawk, Swainson’s hawk, osprey, peregrine and prairie falcons, and several more common buteos and accipiters. Burrowing owl occurs in adjacent open terrain, which also serves as foraging habitat for many other birds of prey.

Many species of passerine birds also occur along the Columbia River, typically foraging on insects associated with riverine and wetland habitats. Species occurring along the Columbia that are particularly dependent on riparian areas and wetlands include common yellowthroat, yellow warbler, Wilson’s warbler, yellow-breasted chat, Nashville warbler, warbling vireo, cedar waxwing, marsh wren, American pipit, red- winged blackbird, and several of the swallows.

3.3 Land Use and Land Use Changes

3.3.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) Historically, the White Salmon watershed was managed for timber and agricultural production. Today forestland management is the predominant land use. Secondary land uses include agriculture, recreation and some residential and commercial development (NPCC 2004a).

25 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Outside of the cities of White Salmon and Bingen, the area is predominantly rural. Much of the shoreline along the White Salmon and its tributaries in WRIA 29b is undeveloped. The primary unincorporated communities include Trout Lake, Husum, and BZ Corner. Commercial development and infrastructure improvements occur primarily in these communities. Highway 141 is the primary highway in the region and generally parallels the White Salmon River.

The White Salmon River, between approximately RM 5 and RM 13, is part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers system (U.S. Forest Service 1991), and between its confluence with the Columbia River and RM 3, it is included in the National Scenic Area (Columbia River Gorge Commission 2011). Land use applications for projects within the National Scenic Area are first reviewed by the Columbia Gorge Commission who makes a decision prior to the County acting on any land use decisions.

Water Quality

Ecology regularly performs water quality assessments and places waterbodies into one of five categories to describe the status of their water quality. Several shoreline waterbodies currently have Category 4 or 5 listings, which indicates impaired water quality. Water quality concerns are primarily from non-point sources throughout most of the watershed, including livestock, fertilizers, stormwater pollutants, and septic systems (Ecology 2011, Aspect Consulting 2009). Temperature is also a concern in several of the waterbodies in the watershed.

Category 4 are polluted waters that either have or do not require a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), and Category 5 are polluted waters requiring a TMDL, traditionally referred to as waters on the 303(d) list. Category 4 and 5 shoreline waterbodies within WRIA 29b are identified in Tables 3-1 and 3-2 below (Ecology 2016).

Table 3-2. Category 4 Waterbodies in WRIA 29b* River Category** Instream Flow White Salmon 4c** X River *As identified in the WA Department of Ecology Water Quality Atlas, 2016 ** Category 4c indicates waterbody is impaired by a non-pollutant such as low water flow. Cause of impairment cannot be addressed through a TMDL.

Table 3-3. Category 5* Waterbodies (Impaired) in WRIA 29b Dissolved PCB pH Temperature Bacteria River Oxygen Trout Lake Creek X X

26 The Watershed Company December 2016

Dissolved PCB pH Temperature Bacteria River Oxygen Hole in the Ground Creek X Gotchen Creek X White Salmon River X X X Little White Salmon River X Gilmer Creek X Buck Creek X Rattlesnake Creek X X Major Creek X *As identified in the WA Department of Ecology Water Quality Atlas, 2016

3.3.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) The majority of WRIA 30 is forested. Historically, fire was a common disturbance in the subbasin. However, fire suppression practices have altered the fire disturbance regime, resulting in changes in vegetative species composition. The Klickitat subbasin plan notes that, “many areas that were historically dominated by fire-dependent communities have been altered through succession to more dense vegetation that is prone to catastrophic fire” (NPCC 2004b). Much of the forestland is managed for commercial timber production. Agricultural land, primarily for pasture, dry-land farming and livestock grazing is present primarily in the Outlet Creek drainage area, along the Little Klickitat River near Goldendale, and in the upper Swale Creek drainage (NPCC 2004b).

Two significant wildlife areas are present in the region: the Klickitat Wildlife Area and Conboy Lake National Wildlife Refuge. The Klickitat Wildlife Area, owned and managed by WDFW, covers approximately 14,000 acres in the western portion of the County. Most of the area borders the Klickitat River and which supports federally listed steelhead, spring Chinook and bull trout (see Section 3.2). The area also provides habitat for diverse wildlife, from elk to western pond turtles. It includes black-tailed deer wintering range and important habitat for the Western gray squirrel and Vaux’s swift. The area includes diverse vegetation in forested riparian zones, south-facing hillsides of open grasslands, north-facing hillsides forested with conifers, and a flat plateau covered by mixed forests of oak and pine interspersed with small grassland openings (WDFW 2016a).

The Conboy Lake National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) is managed by the USFWS. It contains approximately 5,000 acres of marsh, meadows, grasslands, and forest in the Glenwood Valley/Camas Prairie area. The area provides a spring migration area for Canada geese and ducks and wintering use for tundra swans, Canada geese, ducks, and bald eagles. One of three known nesting areas for sandhill cranes in Washington is

27 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

located in the refuge, as is one of two known populations of Oregon spotted frogs (NPCC 2004b).

The lower 10 miles of the Klickitat River is also designated as part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System under Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

Water Quality

Land use-related water quality impacts generally occur as a result of forest practices, agricultural practices or residential or commercial construction. Several waterbodies are identified by Ecology as having impaired water quality parameters (Tables 3-4 and 3-5).

Table 3-4. Category 4 Waterbodies in WRIA 30* River Category** Instream Flow Temperature Bowman 4a X Creek Mill Creek 4a X Mill Creek 4c X Little Klickitat 4a X River Swale Creek 4c X *As identified in the WA Department of Ecology Water Quality Atlas, 2016 **Category 4a - water bodies that have an approved TMDL in place and are actively being implemented. Category 4b - water bodies that have a program in place that is expected to solve the pollution problems. Category 4c - water bodies impaired by a non-pollutant cause that cannot be addressed through a TMDL.

Table 3-5. Category 5* Waterbodies (Impaired) in WRIA 30 Dissolved PCB Toxaphene pH Temperature Bacteria River Oxygen Little Klickitat River X X X

Swale Creek X X X Klickitat River X X X X *As identified in the WA Department of Ecology Water Quality Atlas, 2016

3.3.3 Columbia River Human influences have resulted in substantial changes to the shoreline of the Columbia River. The most significant changes to the River’s shoreline have resulted from European settlement following the Lewis and Clark expedition in the early 1800s.

The 21 dams built on the Columbia and Snake Rivers since 1933 have substantially altered the Columbia River hydrograph. Dam operations have reduced the frequency of spring freshets, which historically helped maintain floodplain habitat connectivity and aided the migration of juvenile salmon. As a result, over-bank flows and associated large

28 The Watershed Company December 2016 woody debris (LWD) recruitment and sediment transport processes have been substantially reduced.

Today, the Columbia basin supports significant water-dependent commercial and industrial uses, ports, transportation, and urban population centers. The Port of Klickitat County owns and leases commercial and industrial property at two business/industrial parks on the Columbia River. The Dallesport Industrial Park is located in Dallesport across the river from The Dalles, Oregon. The park includes one terminal facility and rail access (served by the BNSF Railway) and borders US Hwy. 197 and the Columbia Gorge Regional Airport. The Bingen Point Business Park is located just outside of Bingen, WA.

Another significant developed area along the Columbia, with potential for additional future development, is the Roosevelt region. See Chapter 6 for a complete discussion of current and potential future land use.

In these developed areas, riprap and docks have replaced large areas of riparian vegetation. Historic and ongoing dredging operations are responsible for maintaining a viable navigation channel through the Columbia.

Water Quality Environmental contaminants enter the lower mid-Columbia mainstem region through a variety of point and non-point sources. Point sources include outfalls at a variety of agricultural, military, and industrial facilities along the river and major non-point sources including agricultural applications of pesticides, insecticides, and herbicides. Salmonids may uptake contaminants through direct contact or biomagnification through the food chain. In the lower mid-Columbia mainstem water quality is impacted by excessive sedimentation. Contaminants are suspended in sediments and accumulate in the reservoirs behind the dams (NPCC 2004c). The John Day and Dalles Reservoir areas are listed as impaired waterways for several parameters. Category 4 water quality listings for reaches of the Columbia River in Klickitat County include dioxin, total dissolved gas and invasive exotic species. Category 5 listings include 4,4’-DDE, Chlordane, dissolved oxygen, pH, PCBs and temperature.

29 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

4 SHORELINE INVENTORY

4.1 Inventory Sources

Development of a shoreline inventory is intended to record the existing or baseline conditions upon which the development of SMP provisions will be examined to ensure the adopted regulations provide no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. At a minimum, local jurisdictions shall gather the inventory elements listed in the WAC Guidelines, to the extent information is relevant and readily available. Collected information principally included Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) and other basin documents, Klickitat County studies, scientific literature, aerial photographs, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data from a variety of data providers.

Table 4-1 lists those relevant inventory elements for which data is available for the County’s shorelines. The table also describes the information collected for each of the required inventory elements. Map figures are provided in the Map Folio (Appendix B), and they depict the various inventory pieces listed in the table, as well as additional analysis. Data gaps and limitations are discussed further in Section 4.2. The WAC Guidelines do not require generation of new information or mapping to fill identified data gaps.

30 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 4-1. Shoreline Inventory Elements and Information Sources Inventory Element (corresponding map numbers in the Information Gathered Data Source(s) Use/Assumptions/Limitations Inventory Map folio, Appendix B) • Wellhead Protection Aquifer Recharge • Washington State Areas Areas (Map 24) Department of Health • Aquifer Type • Channel migration zone (CMZ) data are not available; • Federal Emergency therefore, the 100 year floodplain was used as a proxy for the • Floodways and Management Agency CMZ except where areas are separated from the channel by Floodplains (FEMA) Q3 a major, legally existing artificial structure Channel migration • • Aerial Photos • National Agriculture This approach typically may over-estimate the extent of zone (CMZ) (Map 25) the CMZ in flatter lowland areas and under-estimate the • Infrastructure Imagery Program (NAIP) extent of the CMZ in high gradient mountainous areas. • County • CMZ location maps may be modified by site-specific studies • Regulated facilities for water quality, water resources, air quality, hazardous waste, • The database shows locations of facilities regulated by Environmental • WA Department of industrial contaminants, Ecology under various environmental management and Cleanup Sites (Map Ecology 18) spills, toxic clean-up, regulatory programs. and shorelands and environmental assistance • Floodplain and floodways based on federally established models • • Federal Emergency May be used at site scale, although further refinement at • Floodplains Frequently flooded Management Agency site scale may also be desired areas (Map 10) • • Floodways (FEMA) Q3 2014 FEMA data may indicate certain areas as being within the floodplain and/or floodway, when under current conditions such areas are in reality outside of the floodplain or floodway and vice versa.

31 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Inventory Element (corresponding map numbers in the Information Gathered Data Source(s) Use/Assumptions/Limitations Inventory Map folio, Appendix B) • Geohazards: mine • WWA Department of • Useful for broad scale assessment of geologically hazardous hazards, seismic Geological hazards Natural Resources, areas hazards including (Maps 15A and 15B) Geology and Earth • Requires site-specific review to verify presence/absence liquefaction risk, Sciences Division of geohazards erosion hazards • Historical sites • Historic districts • WA Department of Historical Sites (Map • Mapped data represent only known historical properties • Archaeology and Historic 19) Historic structures or places Preservation

• Land surface in a range of 0 to 100% percent of • US Department of the imperviousness as • Useful for broad-scale assessment of impervious surfaces Impervious Surfaces Interior, US Geological (Map 8) defined by the National only Survey Land Cover Database (NLCD) • Land use/land cover, • • US Department of the Useful for broad-scale assessment of vegetation coverage including vegetation only Land Cover (Map 9) Interior, US Geological type, as defined by the Survey • Not useful for accurate characterization of fine-scale data NLCD (e.g., parcel level, species composition) • County (tax lots) • Land ownership for • WA Department of Land Ownership Natural Resources (Map 5) parcels countywide (WDNR managed parcels) • County (tax lots, land use • Gross-scale characterization (e.g., residential, agriculture) Land Use Patterns • Current land use codes) • Useful in assessing existing intensity and type of (Maps 3, 4, 6) • NAIP 2015 aerial photos development at broad-scale planning level • Data may not be up-to-date

32 The Watershed Company December 2016

Inventory Element (corresponding map numbers in the Information Gathered Data Source(s) Use/Assumptions/Limitations Inventory Map folio, Appendix B) • Useful to anticipate future land use changes at broad-scale • Future land use • County zoning planning level • Per County assessor, “undeveloped” defined by • County assessor data improvement value of zero • Undeveloped Land and direct County input • Useful to anticipate potential for future land use changes at • NAIP 2015 aerial photos broad-scale planning level • Data may not be up-to-date • This dataset is a synthesis of existing information on levees • Levees • WA Department of in the State of WA. Primary data sources include the U.S. Ecology Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. • Overwater structures include structures such as piers and Shoreline bridges. Dams are also depicted in DNR’s overwater Modifications (Map structures dataset. • Overwater structures • WA Department of 16) • Data were last updated in 2007 and have a 10-foot Natural Resources horizontal accuracy range • May not be useful for accurate characterization of fine scale data (e.g., parcel level) • • WA Department of Dams Ecology • Parks • County maps and plans • Trails and direct County input • Hatcheries • WWA State Parks Shoreline Public • Boat Launches • WWA Recreation and Access and • State Recreation Lands Conservation Office Recreation (Map 7) • National Forest Service • US Fish and Wildlife Managed Lands Service • Other public lands • WA Department of Natural Resources

33 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Inventory Element (corresponding map numbers in the Information Gathered Data Source(s) Use/Assumptions/Limitations Inventory Map folio, Appendix B) • National Forest Service • Soil types (Soil Survey • Based on broad-scale soil mapping Soils (Maps 14, 14A) Geographic Database) • USDA NRCS (SSURGO) • Useful for broad-scale assessment of soil conditions • Not to be used in place of site-specific studies • WA Department of Natural Resources, • Based on broad-scale geologic classifications Surficial Geology • Geologic classifications Division of Geology and • Useful for broad-scale assessment of geologic conditions (Map 13) Earth Resources, Surface • Not to be used in place of site-specific studies Geology • Highways • Railroads Transportation and • Airports Energy Infrastructure • County • Other Roads (Map 20, some Klickitat Public Utility District features on all maps) • BPA Transmission lines • Electrical Substations Pipelines • Wells • Water Mains • Klickitat Public Utility • Treatment Plants District Water and Sewer (Water and Sewage) Infrastructure (Map • WWA Department of • Large On-site Sewage 12) Health Systems

• Sewer Mains

• Water quality impairments are based on monitoring at specific Water quality • 303(d)/305(b) waters • WA Department of locations impairment (Map 17) and regulated sites Ecology Impairments may extend beyond the mapped area Wetlands and • Waterbodies and • US Geological Survey- • The “major streams,” “waterbody,” and “area” layers from the Surface Water (Map watercourses (e.g. National Hydrography NHD, together with the “SMA suggested points” layer from

34 The Watershed Company December 2016

Inventory Element (corresponding map numbers in the Information Gathered Data Source(s) Use/Assumptions/Limitations Inventory Map folio, Appendix B) 11) rivers, streams, Dataset Ecology’s shoreline waterbodies dataset and the US Fish and drainages) • County Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory dataset, were • WA Department of used to create the Shoreline Jurisdiction boundary. For most Ecology (shoreline areas within Klickitat County, these data layers are fairly waterbodies) accurate based on 2015 aerial photographs. However, slight adjustments were made by GIS staff from The Watershed Company to the ordinary high water mark along the White Salmon River south of its confluence with Cave Creek, and along the southwestern border of the county; along the Klickitat River near Dead Canyon Creek; and in several locations along the Columbia River.

• US Fish and Wildlife • Useful for broad scale assessment of potential wetlands Service National Wetland • NWI mapping based on interpretation of multi-spectral Inventory (NWI) imagery and ground-truthing • Many wetlands are not identified by NWI; mapped • Potential wetlands wetlands may not meet wetland criteria • NWI mapping is based on imagery and should not to be used in place of site-specific studies required at the time of permit application review • WDFW maps do not capture every priority species location or habitat, particularly for rare species or species that use shoreline habitats seasonally or intermittently WDFW Priority • Priority fish distribution Habitats & Species • Absence of mapping information does not indicate • Priority species • WA Department of Fish (Maps 21, 22, 22A, absence of a particular species occurrences and Wildlife and 23) • The number of documented species may reflect the • Priority habitats relative amount of past survey efforts • New data will need to be obtained at the time of project application

35 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

4.2 Data Assumptions and Data Gaps

4.2.1 Ecological Characterization The following discussion identifies assumptions and limitations for present inventory elements, and may provide a brief County-wide or watershed-wide narrative where qualitative descriptions provide more information than quantitative measures. Despite data gaps and limitations, a substantial quantity of information is available for the shorelines of Klickitat County to aid in the development of the inventory and analysis report, as well as the shoreline master program.

Vegetation Coverage Vegetative coverage data was generated using multi-spectral satellite imagery with 30x30-meter cell resolution. Spectral data was classified using Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium, National Land Cover (NLC) Database. Because each cell represents 900 square meters, the classification may over or under represent coverage when the type of coverage within cells is mixed. The spatial resolution of the NLC data provides a good foundation for broad scale assessment of vegetation coverage. Its utility is higher in rural areas where vegetative cover is more uniform over broad areas compared to more developed areas.

Because the data is based on interpretation of multi-spectral imagery, classification of some data may be inaccurate. Most notably, shrub steppe vegetation on steeper slopes is frequently miscategorized as “cultivated crops” using the NLC model. So long as the inherent inaccuracies of the data or recognized, the NLC data provides a good broad- scale assessment of vegetation coverage.

Finally, because the OWHM changes over time, water is occasionally included within the total shoreline area used for the calculation of vegetation coverage. For this reason, any area identified as “Water” was excluded from the calculation of percent coverage.

Impervious Surfaces Similar to the vegetation coverage data, impervious surface data was generated using MRLC Consortium NLC data (2006) of multispectral satellite imagery with 30x30-meter cell resolution. National Land Cover categories that apply to areas of higher impervious surface coverage include Developed- Low, Medium, and High Intensity categories. The same limitation as the vegetation coverage data apply to impervious surfaces.

36 The Watershed Company December 2016

Wetlands Wetland mapping was assembled from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). The NWI dataset is based on many factors, including soil inventories and aerial interpretations. Although it is very comprehensive and is fairly accurate in approximating wetland locations, it is acknowledged that many wetlands, especially small wetlands, are not identified by NWI. Likewise, some areas identified as NWI wetlands may not meet wetland criteria. The NWI map was reviewed for obvious inaccuracies, but site-scale investigation is needed to conclusively include or exclude potential wetland areas. Whether or not they are captured by this mapping effort and included in the preliminary shoreline jurisdiction maps, actual wetland conditions that may or may not be found on a site will determine shoreline jurisdiction (as a potential shoreline-associated wetland) on a site-specific basis.

Soils Soil data are derived from the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) national soil survey. These data represent soils over broad areas; therefore, site-specific soil characteristics may differ from what is mapped. Information on alluvial soil presence and distribution was used to assess hyporheic functions.

Surficial Geology Data on surficial geology are based on information from WDNR. The data is based on broad-scale geologic classifications; therefore, site-specific characteristics may differ. The map should not be used in place of site-specific studies.

Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas WDFW Priority Habitat and Species maps are presented as three separate units: Habitat and Species Regions (species or habitat ranges by area), Habitat and Species Points (specific PHS species site observations); and Fish (fish species presence).

These maps do not capture every priority species location or habitat in shoreline jurisdiction. For example, rare species or species that use the water for foraging and drinking but that nest or den farther from the shoreline are not recorded. The maps do not capture the density, quality, or relative importance of priority habitat areas either. Absence of mapping information does not indicate that a particular species does not or could not utilize the shoreline or adjacent lands. Furthermore, the number of documented species may reflect the relative amount of past survey efforts rather than the presence or absence of suitable habitat. Identification of fish and wildlife habitat

37 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

conservation areas is accomplished at a site scale through the permitting process, using criteria established in the County’s Critical Areas Ordinance.

Frequently Flooded Areas For all practical purposes, “frequently flooded areas” are those areas within the 100-year floodplain. Floodplain and floodway maps were developed using FEMA’s Q3 map for Klickitat County.

Channel Migration Zone Channel Migration Zone (CMZ) data was not previously available for shorelines within Klickitat County. For the purpose of this analysis report, the 100 year floodplain is being used as a proxy for the CMZ extent with the following conditions per WAC 173-26- 221(3)(b):

• Where available data indicates areas separated from the active river channel by legally existing, publically owned and maintained, artificial channel constraints that limit channel movement, those areas are excluded from the channel migration zone. • All areas separated from the active channel by a legally existing artificial structure(s) that are likely to restrain channel migration, including major transportation facilities, built above or constructed to remain intact through the one hundred-year flood, will not be considered to be in the channel migration zone.

In general, we expect that this approach may slightly over-estimate the CMZ in flatter lowland areas.

The CMZ map represents a graphical overlay of the different elements and does not include field surveys or onsite data collection. Approvals for projects and permits relying on these boundaries should include detailed assessments with stream surveys, particularly in active channel areas.

Geologically Hazardous Areas Maps of geologically hazardous areas were developed by WDNR. The data primarily focuses on seismic hazards and is limited in regard to landslides. For example, data on the distribution and location of steep slopes within the proposed shoreline jurisdiction was not available. Steep slopes should be evaluated for landslide hazard potential on a site- and project-specific basis.

38 The Watershed Company December 2016

Water Quality As a requirement of Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act all waterbodies should be “fishable and swimmable,” Ecology classifies waterbodies into five categories:

• Category 1: Meets tested standards, • Category 2: Waters of concern, • Category 3: No data, • Category 4: polluted waters that either have or do not require a TMDL, and • Category 5: polluted waters requiring a TMDL.

Individual waterbodies are assigned to particular “beneficial uses” (public water supply; protection for fish, shellfish, and wildlife; recreational, agricultural, industrial, navigational and aesthetic purposes). Waterbodies must meet certain numeric and narrative water quality criteria established to protect each of those established beneficial uses. Waterbodies may provide more than one beneficial use, and may have different levels of compliance with different criteria for those beneficial uses in different segments of the stream or lake. As a result, many waterbodies may be on the 303(d) list for more than one parameter in multiple locations.

For more information on specific waterbodies and their water quality classifications, Ecology provides an interactive on-line viewer at the following website: http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/wqawa2008/viewer.htm.

Shoreline Modifications Shoreline modifications are human-caused alterations to the natural water’s edge. The most common types of shoreline modifications include overwater structures and shoreline armoring.

The WDNR has digitized piers and other in-water structures such as boatlifts, boathouses, and moorage covers. However, this dataset does not differentiate between each of these various types of overwater structures. Thus, reporting of overwater cover is usually an overstatement when assessing just piers, docks, and floats. Although not technically overwater structures, boat ramps are also reported in the inventory.

Levees were mapped based on data from Ecology. County-wide data were not available for shoreline stabilization, including rip rap armoring and dikes. A visual assessment of shoreline stabilization using aerial photography was incorporated into the analysis of ecological functions. This visual assessment is likely to underestimate the extent of armoring and diked areas.

39 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas GIS data on critical aquifer recharge areas were not available, and this represents a mapping data gap.

4.2.2 Land Use Characterization The following discussion identifies assumptions, data gaps and limitations for land use inventory elements. Despite data gaps and limitations, a substantial quantity of information is available for the shorelines of Klickitat County to aid in the development of the inventory and analysis report, as well as the SMP. The data discussed below, as well as other information on shoreline land use, is presented in Chapter 6, Land Use Analysis.

Existing and Potential Shoreline Land Use Existing and potential shoreline land use is focused on three primary components: current land use, ownership, and zoning. Existing land use provides a baseline for types of land use and land cover found within shoreline jurisdiction. Existing land use data were obtained from the Klickitat County Assessor. Mapped assessor use types were sorted into land use categories established in WAC 458-53-030. Land use data from the County Assessor’s office may not be updated as frequently as other property information; however, it represents the best readily available information on current land use at a countywide level.

Transportation and Utility Infrastructure There are several County, state and federal highway road sections and railroad corridors in Klickitat County that either parallel, cross or are otherwise located in shoreline jurisdiction. Road densities are generally low throughout most of the County. Main highways are present running north to south near the White Salmon River and Klickitat River, and north to south and east to west near Goldendale. Utility infrastructure such as water, wastewater, electrical, communication, and other facilities are found throughout the County with a higher prevalence in populated areas. Utilities data that was available in digital form is included in the inventory maps, but should not be considered complete.

Existing and Potential Public Access Shoreline waterbodies in Klickitat County are accessed at federal, state, City and County parks and trails. Information about shoreline public access facilities and potential opportunities was obtained from Washington State Parks, Washington Recreation and Conservation Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, WA Department of Natural

40 The Watershed Company December 2016

Resources, the National Forest Service, County maps and plans and direct County input. Information was refined by reviewing relevant plans and webpages of agencies with oversight of varies facilities and sites identified, for example the Wild and Scenic River Management Plans for the Klickitat and White Salmon River. This inventory focused on physical public access to shoreline waterbodies, but it is important to note that the SMA includes visual access, or the ability to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations, as a form of public access. Significant public ownership along Klickitat County shorelines provides assurance of visual public access, and physical access to the water on public lands is often not restricted unless specifically posted. Additionally, shoreline roads such as Highways 14, 141, and 142 provide visual access.

Historical or Archaeological Sites Historic resources were inventoried based on publically available data obtained from the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Because of the potential for vandalism and looting, archaeological site locations are not publicly available; therefore data represents only known historical properties or places. Other significant sites may exist. Due to the wealth of cultural resources potentially present in areas long inhabited by human populations, the State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation often requires cultural resources assessments when development or activities are proposed that may affect archaeological or historic resources.

4.3 Shoreline Inventory Results

Results of the shoreline inventory on a County-wide scale are depicted in the Mapfolio provided in Appendix B. In order to assess shoreline conditions and ecological functions at a local scale, each shoreline waterbody’s jurisdictional area was broken into discrete units for analysis referred to as reaches. The reach analysis presented in the next chapter uses the relevant required inventory elements discussed above to provide specific detail and applicable data for each reach (see Section 5.1.1 below for description of reach delineation). Only information available within the boundaries of shoreline jurisdiction of each reach is discussed.

41 Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

5 ANALYSIS OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS

5.1 Approach, Rationale and Limitations of Functional Analysis

A GIS-based semi-quantitative method was developed to characterize the relative performance of relevant ecological processes and functions by shoreline reach, within the County, as outlined in WAC 173-26-201(3)(d)(i). The assessment used the available information gathered as part of the shoreline inventory and applied standardized ranking criteria to provide a consistent methodological treatment among reaches (Table 5-4). These semi-quantitative results will ensure consistent and well-documented treatment of all reaches when assessing existing ecological conditions, yet allow for a qualitative evaluation of functions for data that are not easily summarized by GIS data alone. The results are intended to complement the inventory mapfolio information in Appendix B and provide a comparison of watershed functions relative to other reaches in the County.

5.1.1 Reach Delineation In order to assess shoreline functions at a local scale, each shoreline waterbody’s jurisdictional area was broken into discrete reaches based on a review of maps and aerial photography. Land use (e.g., land use patterns, zoning, existing shoreline environment designations, vegetation coverage, and shoreline modifications) was weighted heavily in determining reach break locations because the intensity and type of land use has affected and will continue to affect shoreline ecological conditions. Furthermore, functional analysis outcomes will be more relevant for future review of appropriate shoreline environment designations if the reach breaks occur at potential transition points in environment designations (note: every attempt has been made to create reach breaks along parcel boundaries).

Regardless, reaches have been created for informational purposes only and are not intended to represent regulatory boundaries. While reach scale analysis of ecological functions is one aspect of evaluating appropriate environment designations, several other inventory elements also play a significant role.

In addition to land use, physical drivers of shoreline processes were used to establish an overall framework for determining reach break locations. As noted throughout this report, ecological function ratings at the reach level are intended to be indicators of function and not an absolute metric.

42 The Watershed Company December 2016

The following criteria in the following general order were used for determining reach break locations:

• City and urban growth area boundaries; • Changes in land use; • Changes in vegetation (coverage and type); • Shoreline modifications (levees and dams); • FEMA mapped floodway/floodplain areas; and • Significant wetland areas as mapped by NWI

In all of the above criteria (except the city/UGA boundaries), reach breaks were made where fairly significant changes were evident. For example, the presence of a couple of single-family residences along a stretch of undeveloped shoreline would not necessitate creation of a reach break to separate those two different uses. Also, many reach breaks correspond closely to the boundaries between the existing shoreline environment designations. For many waterbodies in Klickitat County, particularly in areas with little diversity of land use, conditions are fairly consistent throughout the waterbody and only one reach was delineated.

The following is a complete list of the 60 reaches created for this effort. Each reach has been given a unique identifier to signify the waterbody name, reach number along that waterbody, and a general locator name for reference. The map of shoreline reaches includes color-coded waterbodies and the reach number (Map 26, Appendix B).

Table 5-1. Shoreline Reaches Used in Functional Analysis

Shoreline Reaches Bowman Creek-1 Buck Creek-1, Agriculture Buck Creek-2, DNR Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek-1, Wetland Complex Cams Ditch and Outlet Creek-2, Forest Land Cave Creek-1, Forest Land Cave Creek-2, Floodplain Chamberlain Lake-1 Columbia River- 1, Railroad Columbia River- 2, Bingen Harbor Columbia River- 3, Lyle Columbia River- 4, The Dalles Dam Columbia River- 5, John Day Dam Columbia River- 6, Roosevelt Columbia River-7, Alderdale

43 Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Shoreline Reaches Dead Canyon Creek-1 Dry Creek-1, Residential Dry Creek-2, Forest Lands Frasier Creek-1, Wetland Complex Frasier Creek-2, Agriculture Gilmer Creek-1 Holmes Creek-1 Horsethief Lake-1 Klickitat River-1, Lyle Klickitat River-2, Open Space/Ag Klickitat River-3, Klickitat Residential Klickitat River-4, Open Space Klickitat River-5, Fish Hatchery Road Little Klickitat River-1, Klickitat Confluence Little Klickitat River-2, Agriculture Little Klickitat River-3, Floodway/Rural Residential Little Klickitat River-4, Upper Little White Salmon River-1 Major Creek-1 Major Creek, West Fork-1 Mill Creek-1, Lower Mill Creek-2, Upper Mill Pond-1 Paterson Slough-1 Rattlesnake Creek-1, Husum Rattlesnake Creek-2, Forest Rowland Lake-1 Snyder Canyon Creek-1, lower Snyder Canyon Creek-2, upper Summit Creek-1 Swale Creek-1, Forest/Residential Swale Creek-2, Agriculture Trout Creek-1 Trout Lake Creek-1, Residential Trout Lake Creek-2, Wetland Complex White Creek-1 White Salmon River-1, Columbia Confluence White Salmon River-2, Resource Lands White Salmon River-3, Husum White Salmon River-4, Agriculture/Residential White Salmon River-5, Gilmer Creek White Salmon River-6, Forest White Salmon River-7, Agriculture White Salmon River-8, Cave Creek White Salmon River-9, Upper Forest Lands

44 The Watershed Company December 2016

5.1.2 Functions and Impairments The analysis of reach functions was based on the four major function categories identified in Ecology’s guidelines: hydrologic, hyporheic, shoreline vegetation, and habitat. The four primary functional categories were further broken down into relevant functions which were used to evaluate reach performance:

Table 5-2. Ecological processes and functions used to evaluate reaches Ecological Process and Functions 1. Hydrologic Functions • Moderating erosion processes and the transport of water and sediment • Development and maintenance of instream habitat features (e.g., riffles, pools, and off- channel habitat) • Attenuating flow energy 2. Vegetative Functions • Provision of large woody debris (LWD) and organic matter • Filtering of upland inputs, including excess nutrients, fine sediment, and toxic substances • Slowing riverbank erosion; bank stabilization 3. Habitat Functions • Wetland and riparian habitat • Physical space (upland and aquatic, including migration corridors) and conditions for life history 4. Hyporheic Functions • Water and sediment storage, cool water refugia, and maintenance of base flows • Support of vegetation

The available information gathered County-wide in the Shoreline Inventory Map Folio (Appendix B) was used to determine the performance of these functions (High, Moderate, or Low). Metrics were developed based on best professional judgment related to known impacts of different parameters and the data available (Table 5-4). Rankings were developed for each function based on the distribution of conditions within the County, so that each ranking provides a relative measure of functions compared to other waterbodies and reaches.

Table 5-3 provides a description of the significance of each function, and how each function may be affected by human alterations. It should be noted that alterations to watershed-wide processes (e.g., flow regulation) affect functions throughout all reaches of each river. Since the purpose of this analysis is to differentiate between levels of function and anthropogenic alterations, the effects of these watershed-wide impairments are addressed in Table 5-3, and not incorporated into the rating of each reach.

45 Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-4 describes the metrics and rating methodology for each function. Rating of some functions is different between rivers, so that the range of ratings for each river represents the range of relative functions of each reach compared to other reaches in the same river. For example, floodway area is present along portions of the Klickitat and Little Klickitat Rivers, but is not present on the other waterbodies; therefore, the rating criteria for flow attenuation incorporates floodway data for the Klickitat and Little Klickitat Rivers and uses floodplain data for the others.

46 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-3. Description of shoreline functions and common sources of human disturbance Hydrology Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic Functions Sediment Production Sediment Shade Riparian vegetation helps Wetland/Riparian Habitats Water storage, cool water transport is an integral process to maintain cool water temperatures Continuous riparian vegetation refugia, and filtration Storage of building and maintaining instream through provision of shade and along the length of a waterbody peak flows is provided by habitat features. Gravel beds and creation of a cool and humid provides a dispersal corridor for floodplains, off channel areas sand bars help form diverse microclimate over the stream. animals using riparian habitats. and large wetland complexes; geomorphic conditions. Metered Given the width of the Columbia Larger and wider riparian and these features serve to reduce sediment delivery typically occurs River and the type of riparian wetland areas tend to have more peak flows and contribute to through bank erosion, landslides, vegetation that grows along the complex vegetation communities summer low flows. and bedload transport. Excessive banks, shading from vegetation and more habitat types. Wetlands fine sediment delivered to channels has a limited potential to provide adjacent to streams provide an Groundwater from shallow can suffocate salmonid eggs, inhibit temperature refuge in any important habitat niche for a variety aquifers is often a substantial emergence of fry from gravels, shoreline reaches of that of species, particularly amphibians. component of base flows, and decrease feeding success, increase waterbody. Instead, thermal groundwater seeps provide an physiological stress, and through refugia in the Columbia is Physical Space for Life History important source of cool water adsorption, may facilitate the primarily derived by hyporheic Some areas support important or refugia. Storage of peak flows is transport and persistence of activity, groundwater inputs, and rare species assemblages or provided by local topography. chemical contaminants. small tributaries (which can habitat features that require an Within shallow alluvial soils Alternatively, if banks are too stable significantly benefit from riparian elevated level of protection to adjacent to steams, nutrients in reaches without bedrock control, shading). ensure that these natural features and toxic compounds may be the erosive power of high flows may are conserved. filtered or removed by uptake, scour the bed of the river, causing Large Woody Debris/Organic Many aquatic species, including especially in floodplain areas. channel incision and disconnecting Inputs Riparian vegetation some species of salmon, rely provides a source of large woody heavily on off–channel areas, for the river from its floodplain. Support of Vegetation debris recruitment, and provides rearing. Riparian vegetated habitats Hyporheic flow helps support Development of Instream Habitat organic matter which is important are particularly important for vegetated riparian floodways Features Channel form, including to the ecosystem in the form of breeding, foraging, and rearing of and floodplains. meander formation and floodplain leaves, branches, and terrestrial many terrestrial species. development affects the distribution insects. and dimensions of aquatic habitats, such as pools and riffles. Large Removing Excess Nutrients woody debris (LWD) recruitment Dense riparian vegetation from mature tree cover influences encourages infiltration of surface

47 Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Hydrology Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic stream channel morphology and water. Nutrients and habitat complexity. Accumulations contaminants in subsurface water of LWD affect bank stability, scour, are filtered out of the soil and bar formation, and may also induce taken up by the roots of plants. rapid channel adjustments and assists in pool formation. Mid- Shoreline Stabilization The root channel islands and off-channel structure of woody vegetation habitats provide important high-flow stabilizes shoreline soils and refugia for fish and wildlife. prevents excessive erosion.

Wave and Flow Attenuation Floodway areas and riverine wetlands provide a transition between upland and riverine habitats. Vegetated floodways help impede and disperse flood flows. The extent to which local conditions affect flow is related to the position of a reach within a watershed and the size of the floodplain or wetland area relative to watershed size.

Watershed-wide Alterations Dam regulation on the Columbia On the Columbia dam regulation, Hydrologic alteration from dams Dam regulation limits the River affects the timing, duration, channelization, and armoring limit interrupts natural habitat forming frequency and intensity of and frequency of flood events, as floodplain connectivity, which processes, which create diversity in flooding events, which limits the well as sediment transport. Dams helps support the establishment channel form and suitable instream recharge capacity of the aquifer. impound water, creating shallow of riparian vegetation. Over time, habitat function. reservoirs that typically fill the width as flood events are reduced in Irrigation-induced groundwater of the steep-sided canyons. magnitude and frequency, the Periodic dredging of depositional flows and agricultural return area of riparian vegetation is areas in the Columbia River limits flows now discharge to the river Dredging of the Columbia River has reduced. the development of instream habitat to provide cool water refugia. also greatly simplified the channel features. form and limited geomorphic LWD recruitment was likely

48 The Watershed Company December 2016

Hydrology Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic diversity. always limited in portions of the County given the climate and type Irrigated agriculture occurs in some of riparian and upland vegetation areas of the County, primarily in the naturally occurring. Instead, LWD Trout Lake Valley region. Such was transported from upstream activity can effect natural hydrologic reaches. Clearing and forest processes. Irrigation water is drawn practices in the upper watersheds from groundwater and late spring has limited recruitment of LWD to and summer surface flow. Irrigation shoreline reaches. returns have substantially replaced natural groundwater recharge.

Localized Alterations Armored shorelines prevent natural Clearing and grading for Historic draining, ditching, and fill of Impervious surfaces reduce erosion and sediment delivery development often results in the wetlands for agriculture and infiltration, increasing surface processes. Shoreline armoring can removal of significant vegetation. development have reduced the flows. The net result is a limit floodway interactions, Impervious surfaces related to availability of suitable habitat for reduction in shallow accelerate streamflow along the roadways, driveways and parking aquatic and terrestrial species. groundwater and hyporheic bank, and contributing to erosion of areas tend to produce flows capable of maintaining adjacent properties. hydrocarbon pollutants and heavy In water structures interrupt the summer low flows in streams longitudinal flow of sediment and metals. Depending on and rivers. alter habitat associations. Loss of mature, native vegetation management activities, even and wetlands affects the timing, pervious surfaces such as lawns Levees that limit channel migration and floodplain area rate, magnitude, and duration of can substantially increase also restrict hyporheic activity. stream flows. An increase in nutrients from fertilizers and impervious surfaces results in pollutants and toxins through increased frequency and intensity of herbicides and pesticides. flooding. Changes in flow volume or frequency can alter channel Armored shorelines can isolate morphology and the sediment the river from potential sources of balance of the stream. organic matter and eliminate filtration potential. In addition to watershed scale effects, irrigation withdrawals can have localized effects on stream

49 Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Hydrology Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic flow. The effect of withdrawals on stream flow may depend on the withdrawal rate, as well as the local groundwater interchange (i.e. if the reach is a gaining or losing reach).

50 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-4. Functional score ranking for SMA waterbodies1 by indicator metric Process/Function High Moderate Low • No armoring or dams present within • Steep slopes present, but well- • Steep slopes present with the reach vegetated or not developed development Moderation of AND OR OR sediment • If present, creek mouths have • Limited armoring present • Majority of the reach is armored transport natural deltas

• Backwater areas, islands, and/or • Backwater areas, islands, and/or • No backwater areas, islands, and/or Development/ wetlands occupy >30% of the reach wetlands occasionally present wetlands maintenance OR OR of in-stream • Off-channel habitats are isolated • Off-channel habitats are significantly habitat from the mainstem channel by altered (i.e. dredged or armored) features armoring or causeways • Majority of the reach is not armored • Wetlands or backwater areas are • Levees present or majority of the Hydrologic or protected by levees occasionally present reach is armored AND AND OR • Large wetlands or backwaters are • Majority of the reach is not armored • No wetlands or backwater areas Attenuation of present or protected by levees present flow energy AND AND OR • Floodplain >50% or • Floodplain 20-50% of area or • Floodplain area <20% of total area Floodway1 >5% of area floodway is present, but less than 5%

• Forest, shrub, or wetland vegetation • Forest, shrub, or wetland vegetation • Forest, shrub, or wetland vegetation >75% of area within immediate 50-75% of area within immediate <50% of area within immediate LWD and proximity of shoreline proximity of shoreline proximity of shoreline organic AND OR OR matter

• No armoring or structures separate • A portion of the vegetation isolated • Vegetation is separated from the recruitment vegetation from the water’s edge. from the water’s edge by armoring shoreline by armoring and other or other structures structures • A broad band of dense vegetation • A narrow band of dense vegetation • No vegetation along the shoreline Filtration of separates uplands from the river or a broad band of sparse OR Vegetative upland inputs vegetation separates uplands from • A narrow band of sparse vegetation the river separates uplands from the river • Riparian trees and shrubs stabilize • Riparian trees and shrubs are • The majority of the reach is armored Bank the banks in the majority of the sparsely present along the shoreline stabilization reach OR

51 Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Process/Function High Moderate Low • A portion of the shoreline is armored • Wetland area >30% of total area • Wetland area 10-30% of total area • Wetland area <10% of total area Wetland/ OR OR AND riparian • A broad band of dense riparian • Limited areas of dense riparian • Dense riparian vegetation is absent habitat vegetation is present vegetation are present • Two PHS regions each >50% of • Significant wetland, riparian, or • Wetland, riparian, or unique habitat

area are present unique habitat features are present features are absent or significantly Space and • OR within the reach, but the corridors degraded conditions • Four of more different PHS regions between habitats are impaired by

Habitat supporting present development fish and OR wildlife, • Significant wetland, riparian, or including unique habitat features are present PHS species and corridors between habitats are free from roads and other development • Riverine wetlands are present • Banks of the river are moderately • Banks slope steeply up from the Water AND sloped River storage and • Armoring does not isolate the AND OR filtration wetland from the mainstem channel • The majority of the banks are not • The majority of the banks are armored armored • Large, riverine wetlands occur within • River banks support moderate • Banks of the river support little, if the reach density of scrub or forested any, vegetation Hyporheic Support of • OR vegetation OR vegetation • Alluvial soils comprise over 65% of AND • Alluvial soils comprise under 10% of the reach • Alluvial soils comprise 10-65% of the reach the reach 1. Floodway area is mapped along portions of the Klickitat and Little Klickitat Rivers, but is not mapped on the other waterbodies; therefore, the rating criteria for flow attenuation incorporates floodway data for the Klickitat and Little Klickitat River and uses floodplain data for the others.

52 The Watershed Company December 2016

5.1.3 Limitations This evaluation was limited by the quality and availability of inventory data. Therefore, limitations presented in Sections 4.2.1 also apply to this evaluation.

In evaluating shoreline functions, the area of shoreline impacts and conditions assessed was generally limited to the area of shoreline jurisdiction. In many cases, shoreline impacts may occur at a site due to ecological and geomorphological processes that are disturbed at a remote site upstream, further inland, or up-current. This evaluation approach may not identify all of the functional responses occurring as a result of impacts to nearby or remote areas.

The approach was limited to an evaluation of shoreline ecological potential, and it did not integrate this potential with the opportunity to perform a given function based on site-specific conditions. For example, the analysis assessed the ability of a shoreline to store water, but it did not consider the frequency of flooding downstream and the corresponding significance of such a function.

5.2 Results of Functional Analysis

The following sections summarize the results of the ecological functional analysis for each shoreline waterbody. For the discussion, the waterbodies are separated by geographic region: the White Salmon region, Klickitat River region, Little Klickitat River region and the Columbia River. A brief overview of the main functions and impacts of each waterbody is given, followed by a breakdown of the functional ratings by reach.

5.2.1 White Salmon Watershed The White Salmon watershed includes ten shoreline waterbodies (Exhibit 5-1). Existing shoreline conditions and functions are summarized below for each waterbody. Reach specific functions are rated, where appropriate. Several shorelines are discussed as a single reach as there were not significant land use or ecological changes observed which would warrant a reach break (see Section 5.1.1).

53 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Exhibit 5-1. Shorelines in the White Salmon Watershed.

Buck Creek Buck Creek enters the White Salmon River near the Skamania/Klickitat County border in the southwest corner of Klickitat County. The majority of the creek in shoreline jurisdiction is WDNR managed land. Little development is present but Buck Creek Road generally parallels the shoreline. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches. Reach 2 encompasses the WDNR land while Reach 1, closer to the confluence with the White Salmon River, has more

54 The Watershed Company December 2016

diversity of land use present, including some agricultural activities. Conditions are fairly similar between the reaches, however more modifications are generally found in Reach 1 due to the agricultural activities.

No known armoring or dams are present in either reach. However, only a small amount of floodplain is mapped in Reach 1 and no floodplains are mapped in Reach 2. Furthermore, no wetlands or significant backwater areas are present, which limit flow attenuation and instream habitat diversity. Significant forest and shrub/scrub vegetation is present through most of shoreline jurisdiction. Spotted owl habitat is mapped over more than half of Reach 1. More modifications to the riparian area are found in the agricultural parcels of Reach 1. Hyporheic functions are limited in both reaches by moderately sloped banks and the absence of alluvial soils.

Table 5-5 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

Table 5-5. Functional rating by reach on Buck Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 2 DNR 1 H M L H H H H M M L 1 Agriculture 2 H M L H M H M L M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach rating (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

55 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Reach 1 Reach

Exhibit 5-2. Buck Creek Aerial Images (Google Earth 2016). Image on left shows agricultural uses in Reach 1. Image on right is Reach 2 which is largely unmodified except for Buck Creek Road

Cave Creek Cave Creek enters the White Salmon River just south of the confluence with Trout Lake Creek in the northwest region of the County. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches. Reach 1 encompasses designated forest land in the upper portion of the creek. Reach 2 includes mixed land use, comprised of agriculture and residential areas, and contains an extensively mapped floodplain contributing to a high rating for attenuation of flow energy. While in a designated forest land, Reach 1’s vegetative and habitat ratings are lower due to generally sparse woody vegetation in the riparian area. In contrast, Reach 2 has dense riparian vegetation present and an intact forested riparian area. Both reaches have priority elk and spotted owl habitat mapped over the majority of the reach.

Table 5-6 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

56 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-6. Functional rating by reach on Cave Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stabilization

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Forest Land 1 H M M H H H H H H L 2 Floodplain 2 M M H L L M L H H L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-3. Cave Creek (Google Earth 2016). Image shows Reach 2 and the riparian vegetation modifications that have resulted from agricultural uses within the mapped floodplain

Dry Creek Dry Creek is a tributary to Cave Creek. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches. The downstream portion, Reach 1, has been impacted by residential uses which have modified shoreline vegetation (see Exhibit 5-4). The upstream portion, Reach 2, is primarily undeveloped forest land. Reach 2 has high vegetative function with a dense, intact forested riparian area while Reach 1 has low to moderate vegetative function ratings due to sparse or disturbed riparian vegetation. Little floodplain is mapped in both reaches and no wetland areas or alluvial

57 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

soils are mapped yielding low flow attenuation and hyporheic function ratings. Several road crossings limit habitat connectivity in both reaches. Priority habitats for elk and spotted owl are mapped in both reaches, with a greater population present in Reach 1.

Table 5-7 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

Table 5-7. Functional rating by reach on Dry Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 2 Forest Land 1 H H L H H H H M M L 1 Residential 2 M M L L L M L H M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-4. Dry Creek (Google Earth 2016). Image depicts residential uses and associated shoreline modifications in Reach 1

58 The Watershed Company December 2016

Gilmer Creek Gilmer Creek enters the White Salmon River just north of BZ Corner-Glenwood Road. Only a small length, approximately 2,700 linear feet, is included in shoreline jurisdiction. Most of this area is undeveloped with the exception of BZ Corner-Glenwood road, which lies within the eastern end of shoreline jurisdiction, and one parcel in residential use (Exhibit 5-5). Vegetative and habitat function is moderate to high. Small areas of PHS species mule and black-tailed deer and rocky mountain elk are mapped. No mapped floodplain or floodway is present which limits attenuation of flow energy function. Hyporheic function is also limited by a lack of alluvial soils and moderately sloped banks.

Table 5-8 provides the functional ratings for Gilmer Creek.

Table 5-8. Functional rating by reach on Gilmer Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Gilmer Creek NA H M L M H H H M M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-5. Gilmer Creek Shoreline Jurisdiction (Google Earth 2016)

59 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Little White Salmon River A very small length (1,287 linear feet) of the Little White Salmon River is included in shoreline jurisdiction along the western boundary of Klickitat County. This area is entirely undeveloped forest land (Exhibit 5-6). High vegetative and habitat functions are present due to the intact riparian area and lack of shoreline modifications. However, no floodplain or wetlands are mapped which limits flow attenuation function and moderately sloped banks with no mapped alluvial soils naturally limit hyporheic function.

Table 5-9 provides the functional ratings for the Little White Salmon River.

Table 5-9. Functional rating by reach on the Little White Salmon River

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Little White Salmon River NA H H L H H H H H M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-6. Little White Salmon River Shoreline Jurisdiction (Google Earth 2016)

60 The Watershed Company December 2016

Major Creek and Major Creek, West Fork Major Creek is a tributary to the Columbia River. It enters the Columbia just east of Rowland Lake. Shorelands are almost entirely undeveloped with the exception of some small buildings off of Major Creek Road which runs through the reach. Old Highway 8 and Highway 14 also intersect the reach, limiting habitat connectivity.

Exhibit 5-7 depicts the typical shoreline condition. The shoreline’s steep slopes and no mapped floodplain or floodway limit its hydrologic functional ratings; no shoreline armoring is known to be present. The creek flows through a canyon with no alluvial soils, limiting hyporheic function. Cliffs/bluffs, mule and black-tailed deer, and Western gray squirrel PHS regions are mapped in the reach.

Table 5-10 provides the functional ratings for Major Creek.

Table 5-10. Functional rating by reach on Major Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

habitat features habitat

stream - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Major Creek NA M M L H M H M M L L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

61 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Exhibit 5-7. Major Creek (Google Earth 2016) The West Fork of Major Creek through shoreline jurisdiction has similar conditions to the mainstem. No development or roads are present through the reach and a denser forested slope is present on the western bank, yielding slightly higher functional ratings than the mainstem for vegetation and habitat. Hyporheic functions are limited by steep slopes. Hydrologic functions are limited by the steep slopes, lack of prominent wetland or large backwater areas, and no mapped floodplain.

Table 5-11 provides the functional ratings for Major Creek, West Fork.

Table 5-11. Functional rating by reach on Major Creek, West Fork

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support Major Creek, West 1 NA M M L H H H H H L L Fork Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

62 The Watershed Company December 2016

Exhibit 5-8. Major Creek (Google Earth 2016)

Rattlesnake Creek Rattlesnake Creek is a tributary that converges with the White Salmon River in the community of Husum. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches: Reach 1, near the confluence, has lower ecological function due to modifications from development, though an intact vegetated buffer is still present in most areas separating the channel from uplands and stabilizing banks (Exhibit 5-9). Reach 2, which makes up the majority of shoreline jurisdiction, is mainly undeveloped with a dense forested riparian area. Alluvial soils are present in Reach 2 which help store water and support vegetation within the shoreline area. High vegetative and habitat function are also present in Reach 2 due to the intact vegetated buffers, wetland areas and presence of several PHS species.

Table 5-12 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

63 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-12. Functional rating by reach on Rattlesnake Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

habitat features habitat

stream - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 2 Forest 1 H H L H H H H H H M 1 Husum 2 M M L L M M M H M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Reach 1

Exhibit 5-9. Rattlesnake Creek near Husum (Google Earth 2016).

Trout Lake Creek Trout Lake Creek is a tributary to the White Salmon River in the northwest corner of the County. It enters the White Salmon just south of Sunnyside Road. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches. The lower reach, Reach 1, flows through an agricultural and residential area where the shoreline has been modified by development and lacks vegetation coverage in much of the shorelands (Exhibit 5-10). While less than 50% of Reach 1 is mapped as forest, shrub or wetland vegetation, a moderate band of dense vegetation generally separates uplands from the river in most places, which provides filtration of upland inputs (Exhibit 5-11). Reach 2 includes an extensive wetland complex and little development (Exhibit 5-12).

64 The Watershed Company December 2016

Both reaches have high function for attenuating flow energy due to a significant amount of floodplain with good connectivity to the channel and little armoring present.

Exhibit 5-10. Trout Lake Creek, Reach 1, residential and agricultural uses (Google Earth 2016)

Exhibit 5-11. Trout Lake Creek north of Highway 141 bridge (Reach 1)

65 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Exhibit 5-12. Trout Lake Creek Wetland Complex (Reach 2) (Google Earth 2016) Table 5-13 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

Table 5-13. Functional rating by reach on Trout Lake Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

of upland inputs upland of

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 2 Wetland Complex 1 H H H H H H H H H M 1 Residential 2 M M H L M M M M H M Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

White Salmon River The White Salmon River is a tributary to the Columbia River. It forms the western Klickitat County boundary with Skamania County near the confluence with the Columbia in the southwest corner of Klickitat County. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into nine reaches, numbered sequentially upstream. Shoreline conditions vary from steep cliffs and canyons to forested meanders to flatter agricultural areas and residential development near the community of Husum. Functions are highest across all categories in Reaches 6 and 9 where broad, dense forested shorelands are present, backwater areas and intact

66 The Watershed Company December 2016 floodplain provide flow attenuation function and there is little shoreline armoring. Functional ratings are lowest across all categories in Reaches 3 and 4 where little floodplain and sparser riparian vegetation are present. The shorelands in Reaches 3 and 4 have been modified by agricultural and residential uses. Several overwater structures are present in Reach 1, near the confluence with the Columbia. A high amount of wetland is mapped in Reach 8 and at least one PHS region or species is documented in every reach. Alluvial soils are mapped in Reaches 7 and 8 contributing to higher hyporheic functions in those reaches due to the soils ability to help store water and support vegetation within the shoreline area. Exhibit 5-13 depicts the range of conditions found throughout the White Salmon River reaches. Table 5-14 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

67 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Agricultural uses typical Highway and commercial of Reach 7 uses in Reach 3 at Husum

Cliffs and highway corridor in Reach 1 at the confluence with the Columbia River

Reach 6 forest lands

Exhibit 5-13. White Salmon River Select Reach Photos (Google Earth 2016)

68 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-14. Functional rating by reach on the White Salmon River

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

conditions conditions

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian Space and wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 9 Upper Forest Lands 1 H H H H H H H H M L 6 Forest 2 H M H M H H H H M L 2 Resource Lands 3 H H M M H H H H L L 8 Cave Creek 4 H H H L M H M M H M 7 Agriculture 5 H M H L M M M H M M 5 Gilmer Creek 6 H L H M M M M H M L 1 Columbia Confluence 7 M M H M M M M M L L 4 Ag/Residential 8 M M L M M M M H L L 3 Husum 9 M M L L L M L H M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

5.2.2 Klickitat Watershed The Klickitat watershed includes fourteen shoreline waterbodies (Exhibit 5-14). Existing shoreline conditions and functions are described below for each waterbody. Reach specific functions are rated, where appropriate. Several shorelines are discussed as a single reach as there were not significant land use or ecological changes observed which would warrant a reach break (see Section 5.1.1).

69 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Exhibit 5-14. Shorelines in the Klickitat Watershed

Bowman Creek Bowman Creek is a tributary to the Little Klickitat River. It joins the Little Klickitat just east of the confluence of the Little Klickitat with the Klickitat River. The lower portion flows through a canyon with naturally sparsely vegetation slopes, while the upper portion includes denser forest on designated forest land. The middle of the reach includes some agriculture and residential uses which have modified the shorelines. Little wetland and floodplain is mapped. Hyporheic functions are limited by the natural cliffs and absence of alluvial soils. At least a narrow band of dense riparian vegetation is generally present separating the channel from uplands and stabilizing banks, with wider areas of vegetation in the upper portions of the creek. Multiple PHS regions including bald eagle, mule and black-tailed deer, oak woodland, talus slopes, western gray squirrel and wild turkey, contribute to a moderate to high habitat function overall.

70 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-15. Functional rating by reach on Bowman Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name flow energy flow

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Bowman Creek NA H M L H M H M H L L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-15. Bowman Creek typical shoreline conditions, just north of where it crosses the Glenwood Highway (Google Earth 2016)

Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek is the name for a single waterbody in the northern portion of the County which flows through the Glenwood area before enters the Klickitat River. A large wetland area is associated with the system. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches. Reach 1 encompasses the large area of potentially associated wetland (Exhibit 5-16) and Reach 2 includes the lower portion of the creek which is designated forest land (Exhibit 5-17).

Overall, moderate to high functions are present. Function ratings are higher in Reach 1 due to the amount of wetland and off channel habitat present which contributes to the development of in-stream features and water storage. However, no floodplain is mapped in either reach, limiting the flow attenuation function. Alluvial soils help store water and support vegetation within the shoreline area, contributing to moderate to high hyporheic function. Multiple PHS regions are mapped including mule and black-

71 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

tailed deer and spotted owl in both reaches; Oregon spotted frog, rocky mountain elk and sandhill crane in Reach 1 and bald eagle, and talus slopes in Reach 2.

Exhibit 5-16. Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek, Reach 1 (Google Earth 2016)

Exhibit 5-17. Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek wetland complex in Reach 2 (Google Earth 2016)

Mill Pond Mill Pond is associated with Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek, the latter of which flows through the pond just south of where it crosses the Glenwood Highway. The Glenwood Highway runs along the northern side of the pond, but otherwise shorelands immediately adjacent to the pond are undeveloped (Exhibit 5-18). Significant associated wetland areas are mapped to the north and west of the pond. The wetland areas are predominantly in agricultural use.

72 The Watershed Company December 2016

Tables 5-16 and 5-17 below provide the functional ratings for each reach of Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek and for Mill Pond, respectively. Not all of the same functions are applicable to Mill Pond that are applicable to the stream reaches. For example, development of in-stream features like riffles and pools does not occur in a pond environment. Likewise, hyporheic functions are generally not significant in lake environments. Consequently, some criteria in Table 5-4 were not considered for Mill Pond and are marked as NA in Table 5-17.

Exhibit 5-18. Mill Creek (Google Earth 2016)

Table 5-16. Functional rating by reach on Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

conditions conditions

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian Space and wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Wetland Complex 1 H H L H M M H H H H 2 Forest Land 2 H M L H M H M H H M Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

73 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-17. Functional rating for Mill Pond

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

storage and

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water filtration vegetation of Support 1 Mill Pond 1 NA NA NA L M M H M NA NA Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Dead Canyon Creek A short length of Dead Canyon Creek (approximately 5,954 linear feet) is included in shoreline jurisdiction. All of the Dead Canyon Creek shoreline is on parcels owned by WDFW. No development is present other than Company Road which bisects the creek near the confluence with the Klickitat River. Vegetation appears naturally less dense than some other areas of the County. PHS mapping indicates oak woodland is mapped over the entire reach. Meanders and backwater areas contribute to high hydrologic function, through no floodplain is mapped. While banks are moderately sloped, no armoring is present and banks are well vegetated. Alluvial soils are also present which help store water and support vegetation within the shoreline area.

Table 5-18 provides the functional ratings for Dead Canyon Creek.

Table 5-18. Functional rating by on Dead Canyon Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Dead Canyon Creek NA H H L H M H M H M M Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

74 The Watershed Company December 2016

Exhibit 5-19. Dead Canyon Creek typical shoreline condition (Google Earth 2016)

Frasier Creek Frasier Creek flows through an agricultural area of the Glenwood community and is connected to the Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek system. Agricultural uses and loss of riparian vegetation are the primary modifications along the creek. Aerial imagery indicates that the creek is ditched through some properties and little riparian vegetation is present (Exhibit 5-20). For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into two reaches. Reach 1 includes a significant wetland area which connects to the Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek Reach 1 wetland complex, while Reach 2 includes the upper portion of Frasier Creek.

Low to moderate hydrologic and vegetative function is present in both reaches due to the altered nature of the channel in many areas, lack of floodplain, and loss of riparian vegetation. Higher habitat and hyporheic functions are present due mainly to the extensive mapped wetland. A PHS region for Rocky Mountain elk is also mapped throughout both reaches. A high percentage of alluvial soils is also mapped along the entire creek which helps store water and support vegetation within the shoreline area.

Table 5-19 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

75 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-19. Functional rating by reach on Frasier Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Wetland Complex 1 L M L M L M H M H H 2 Agriculture 2 L M L L L M M M H H Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-20. Frasier Creek, Reach 2 typical condition depicting loss of riparian vegetation and ditching through agricultural areas (Google Earth 2016)

Holmes Creek Holmes Creek lies at the upstream end of the Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek/Frasier Creek system near Glenwood. Extensive wetlands and alluvial soils are present contributing to high hydrologic and hyporheic functions. However, the absence of mapped floodplain limits the flow attenuation rating. The majority of the mapped land cover consists of emergent wetland vegetation which contributes to organic matter recruitment and filtration of upland pollutants. Aerial imagery indicates some riparian modifications have occurred due to agricultural practices.

Table 5-20 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

76 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-20. Functional rating on Holmes Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name wildlife

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Holmes Creek NA H H L H M M H H H H Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-21. Holmes Creek (Google Earth 2016)

Klickitat River For the purposes of this report the Klickitat River shoreline jurisdiction has been divided into 5 reaches, numbered sequentially downstream to upstream. Highest functional ratings are found in Reach 4, which is by far the longest reach and includes significant areas of floodplain and wetland, contributing to high hydrologic and habitat functions. Riparian vegetation is generally unmodified and multiple PHS regions are mapped including cliffs and bluffs, oak woodland and talus slopes. Lower reaches have slightly more modification from development including agricultural and residential uses. However, even in more developed areas, a vegetated buffer tends to separate the river from uplands. Reaches 1, 2 and 3 include the Lower Klickitat River Wild and Scenic

77 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Management Area. Overwater structures are present in all reaches and several roads intersect or parallel shoreline jurisdiction throughout the length of the river. Exhibit 5-22 depicts the range of conditions found throughout the Klickitat River reaches. Table 5-21 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

78 The Watershed Company December 2016

Residential development in Reach 3

Fish hatchery in Reach 5

Undisturbed condition of shoreline in Reach 4

Reach 1 at the confluence with the Columbia River near Lyle

Typical condition in Reach 2, where Highway 141 parallels much of the shoreline with some agricultural uses upland of the road

Exhibit 5-22. Klickitat River Select Reach Photos (Google Earth 2016)

79 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-21. Functional rating by reach on the Klickitat River

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name wildlife

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 4 Open Space 1 M H H H M H H H M M 2 Open Space/Ag 2 M H H H M H M H M M 3 Klickitat Residential 3 H M H M L M M H H H 1 Lyle 4 M M H M M M M M M M 5 Fish Hatchery Road 5 M M L H M M M M M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Little Klickitat River The Little Klickitat River enters the Klickitat River near where Highway 142 turns east toward Goldendale. For the purposes of this report the Little Klickitat River shoreline jurisdiction has been divided into four reaches, numbered sequentially downstream to upstream.

Extensive floodway is present in Reach 3 and extensive floodplain in Reach 2. The floodway/floodplain is well connected to the river though only sparsely vegetated in some areas, providing some opportunity for recruitment of organic material and moderation of flows that leave the channel. The main modifications to reaches are from agricultural activities and riparian vegetation removal, though at least a narrow vegetated buffer exists separating the river from uplands in most areas. Shoreline modifications from development are concentrated near Goldendale in Reaches 2 and 3. Wetlands are mapped in all reaches which can help filter excess nutrients and pollutants. Some backwater areas and off-channel habitat is present as well, particularly in Reach 4. A narrow band of woody riparian vegetation is present along the majority of the shoreline which provides moderate to high temperature regulation and LWD recruitment function. Broader bands of vegetation are present in Reaches 1 and 4. Banks appear stable. Forest and scrub/shrub vegetation help provide filtration of upland pollutants. PHS regions occurring within shoreline jurisdiction include bald eagle, mule

80 The Watershed Company December 2016

and black-tailed deer, talus slopes, oak woodland, wild turkey, and western gray squirrel.

Table 5-22 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

Table 5-22. Functional rating by reach on the Little Klickitat River

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 4 Upper 1 H M M H M H M H H M Floodway/Rural 3 2 H M H M M M L M H H Residential 1 Klickitat Confluence 3 M M M H H H M M M L 2 Agriculture 3 M M H H M M M M M M Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-23. Upper Little Klickitat River (Reach 4) (Google Earth 2016)

81 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Exhibit 5-24. Little Klickitat River Reach 3, depicting typical shoreline conditions in the agricultural and rural residential areas outside of Goldendale (Google Earth 2016)

Mill Creek Mill Creek is a tributary to the Little Klickitat River. For the purposes of this report it has been divided into two reaches: upper and lower Mill Creek. The majority of shoreline jurisdiction is undeveloped and well vegetated with exception of the area around Highway 142 in Reach 1, where some residential and agricultural uses are found that have modified the shoreline vegetation. Other than that modification, functions are generally similar in both reaches. No floodway or floodplain is present and virtually no wetlands are mapped, limiting the opportunity for recruitment of organic material and moderation of flows that leave the channel. Absence of alluvial soils indicates a lower hyporheic function.

Table 5-23 provides the functional ratings for each reach.

82 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-23. Functional rating by reach on Mill Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 2 Upper 1 H M L H H H H H M L 1 Lower 2 H M L H M H M H M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-25. Mill Creek Reach 1 typical shoreline condition. Conditions are similar in Reach 2 with vegetation becoming denser and fewer adjacent agricultural uses upstream (Google Earth 2016)

Summit Creek Summit Creek is a tributary to the Klickitat River. The majority of Summit Creek lies within the Yakama Nation and has not been included in this analysis. The portion of shoreline jurisdiction outside of the Yakama Nation is entirely undeveloped and forested other than a few roads, both improved and unimproved, which bisect shoreline jurisdiction. Summit Creek flows through a canyon with moderately steep slopes. No wetlands are mapped and backwater areas or islands appear minimal on aerial imagery. The sloped banks support vegetation and some alluvial soils are mapped, contributing to a moderate hyporheic function rating.

83 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-24 provides the functional ratings for Summit Creek.

Table 5-24. Functional rating by reach on Summit Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

energy Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Summit Creek NA H M L H H H H H M M Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-26. Summit Creek (Google Earth 2016)

Swale Creek Swale Creek is a tributary to the Klickitat River southwest of Goldendale. For the purposes of this report shoreline jurisdiction has been divided into two reaches. The upper reach, Reach 2, flows through a relatively flat agricultural area and shoreline vegetation has been modified by agricultural practices in many areas. However, this reach also has more well-connected floodplain present than Reach 1 channel which helps to attenuate flow energy. It also has more wetlands mapped and alluvial soils helping contribute to filtration function and support of vegetation in the riparian area. Reach 1 flows through more of a canyon region with steeply sloped banks. Slopes are well vegetated and a broad, dense area of riparian vegetation separates uplands from

84 The Watershed Company December 2016

the channel providing temperature regulation, filtration of upland pollutants, and LWD recruitment function.

Table 5-25 provides the functional ratings for Swale Creek.

Table 5-25. Functional rating by reach on Swale Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name wildlife

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Forest/Residential M M M H H H H H M L

2 Agriculture H M H L M M M M H M

Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Reach 2 Reach 1

Exhibit 5-27. Swale Creek Reaches (Google Earth 2016)

Snyder Canyon Creek Snyder Canyon Creek is a tributary to the Klickitat River near the unincorporated community of Klickitat. For the purposes of this report shoreline jurisdiction has been divided into two reaches. Shoreline conditions in the lower reach, Reach 1, are heavily altered and differ greatly from conditions in the upper reach, Reach 2, which are predominantly unaltered. Lower Snyder Canyon Creek near the crossing of Highway 142 and the confluence with the Klickitat River, is owned by the County and zoned for

85 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

industrial use. Shorelines have been heavily altered by vegetation removal and impervious surfaces dominate the shorelands. Much of the channel is armored and natural hydrologic, vegetative, habitat and hyporheic functions are all limited. The upper reach of Snyder Canyon Creek flows through a steep canyon, the south side of which is densely forested while the north side consists of more rocky cliffs and sparser scrub/shrub vegetation. Steep slopes and lack of floodplain or significant off channel habitat limit hydrologic function, however unaltered forest and shrub vegetation and unimpaired habitat corridors provide moderate to high vegetative and habitat functions. Several PHS regions are mapped in Reach 2, including cliffs/bluffs, mule and black- tailed deer, oak woodland, and talus slopes.

Table 5-26 provides the functional ratings for Snyder Canyon Creek reaches.

Table 5-26. Functional rating for Snyder Canyon Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name sediment

f vegetation

stream habitat features - Rank of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration o Support Snyder Canyon Creek, 2 1 M L L H M H M H L L upper Snyder Canyon Creek, 1 2 L L L L L L L L L L lower Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

86 The Watershed Company December 2016

Exhibit 5-28. Old mill site along lower Snyder Canyon Creek (Reach 1) (Google Earth 2016)

Exhibit 5-29. Steep canyon and forested vegetation in upper Snyder Canyon Creek (Reach 2) (Google Earth 2016)

Trout Creek Trout Creek is a tributary to the Klickitat River near the northern County border. It is entirely within designated forest land and is undeveloped (Exhibit 5-28). High vegetative and wildlife functions are present due to the unaltered and remote shoreline conditions. Flow attenuation function is low due to no floodplain and no mapped wetlands, though some backwater areas are likely present contributing to maintenance of in-stream habitat features. No alluvial soils are mapped and the banks of the river are moderately sloped, but well vegetated, leading to a low to moderate hyporheic function rating.

87 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-27 provides the functional ratings for Trout Creek.

Table 5-27. Functional rating for Trout Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 Trout Creek NA H M L H H H H H M L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-30. Trout Creek shoreline jurisdiction (Google Earth 2016)

White Creek White Creek is a tributary to the Klickitat River. The majority of White Creek lies within the Yakama Nation and has not been included in this analysis. The portion of shoreline jurisdiction outside of the Yakama Nation is entirely undeveloped and lies on designated forest land. It flows through a canyon with steeply sloped sides. Talus slopes are mapped over 37 percent of the reach, limiting vegetation. Other areas are well vegetated, providing filtration of upland inputs and recruitment of LWD and organic matter.

Table 5-28 provides the functional ratings for White Creek.

88 The Watershed Company December 2016

Table 5-28. Functional rating for White Creek

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

and organic matter matter organic and

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 1 White Creek NA H M L H H H H H L L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Exhibit 5-31. White Creek typical shoreline condition (Google Earth 2016)

5.2.3 Columbia River The Columbia River completes Klickitat County’s southern border. For the purposes of this report, the shoreline jurisdiction area has been divided into seven reaches, numbered sequentially upstream. Spatially divergent portions of the shoreline with similar characteristics have been aggregated together into the one, largest reach: Reach 1- Railroad.

This reach encompasses similar areas of the shoreline where road or railroad parallels the river, but no other significant modifications are present. A railroad runs along the entire length of the Columbia River through the County. Additionally, the John Day Dam and Dalles Dam are present on the river. There are several areas where

89 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

development occurs waterward of the railroad such as near the communities of Lyle and Roosevelt, Bingen Harbor, and the two dams. These areas are delineated as separate reaches, as is the Alderdale area, where undeveloped riparian conditions waterward of the railroad differ than much of the rest of the shoreline.

The conditions along the Columbia River within shoreline jurisdiction vary from armored roadbed and railroad to industrial development, agriculture, and some open space. Generally functions are limited by armoring along much of the river that limits flow attenuation and instream habitat diversity. Multiple overwater structures are also present. Dam regulation and dredging throughout the Columbia River impact natural hydrologic processes. Functions are higher in the Lyle, Roosevelt and Alderdale reaches where armoring is more limited and more vegetated shoreline is present waterward of the railroad. Some backwater areas, wetlands and islands allow for sediment deposition and off-channel habitat.

The railroad limits wildlife dispersal opportunities and riparian vegetation is limited along several of the reaches. However, shrub steppe vegetation and bluffs provide upland habitat value and multiple PHS regions are mapped throughout the shorelines, the majority in Reach 1 including sand dunes and waterfowl concentrations. Anadromous fish use is documented throughout the river.

Hyporheic functions are limited by armoring in many areas, however some riverine wetlands and alluvial soils are present in Reaches 3, 6, 7 and 2 that maintain water and support shoreline vegetation.

90

The Watershed Company December 2016

Typical condition of Reach 1, along Vegetated shoreline and boat launch in railroad Reach 3- Lyle

Heavily modified shoreline at The Dalles Dam in Reach 4

Roosevelt area of Reach 6 (red line depicts

shoreline jurisdiction boundary)

Exhibit 5-32. Columbia River Select Reach Photos (Google Earth 2016)

91 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Table 5-29 provides the functional ratings for each of the Columbia River reaches.

Table 5-29. Functional rating by reach on the Columbia River

Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic

Reach Number/ Name

stream habitat features - Rank sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtration vegetation of Support 3 Lyle 1 M M M L M M M M M M 6 Roosevelt 1 M M M M M M L M M M 7 Alderdale 1 M M M L M M M M M M 2 Bingen Harbor 2 L M L L L M M M M M 1 Railroad 3 L M L L L L L H L L 4 The Dalles Dam 4 L L L L L L M L L M 5 John Day Dam 5 L L L L L L L L L L Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Columbia River Lakes Several waterbodies are present behind the road and/or railroad paralleling the Columbia River. Much of the shoreline around these waterbodies is owned by public agencies. Existing conditions at each waterbody is described briefly below and functional ratings are summarized in Table 5-30. Not all of the same functions are applicable to these lakes that are applicable to the Columbia River mainstem reaches. For example, development of in-stream features like riffles and pools does not occur in a lake environment. Likewise, hyporheic functions are generally not significant in lake environments. Consequently, some criteria in Table 5-4 were not considered for the Columbia River lakes and are marked as NA in Table 5-30.

Reach Number/ Name Ra nk Hydrologic Vegetative Habitat Hyporheic Table 5-30. Functional rating for Columbia River Lakes

92 The Watershed Company December 2016

tion stream habitat features - Moderation of sediment sediment of Moderation transport In energy flow Attenuating matter organic and LWD recruitment inputs upland of Filtration Bank stabilization habitat Wetland/riparian conditions and Space wildlife supporting Water storage and filtra vegetation of Support NA Horsethief Lake 1 NA NA NA M L M L M NA NA NA Chamberlain Lake 2 NA NA NA L L L M M NA NA NA Patterson Slough 2 NA NA NA M L L L M NA NA NA Rowland Lake 2 NA NA NA L L L L H NA NA Relative ranking order from highest to lowest function based on mean reach ratings (L= Low function, M=Medium function, H= High function).

Chamberlain Lake Chamberlain Lake is located just west of the confluence of the Columbia and Klickitat Rivers. Shorelines are highly modified by Highway 14, which runs along the northern border of the lake, and the railroad which forms the southern border. Little riparian vegetation is present, although some habitat value is provided by a large wetland area that extends into the lake’s western end.

Exhibit 5-33. Chamberlain Lake (Google Earth 2016)

Horsethief Lake Horsethief Lake is owned by the Washington State Parks Commission. It is located just east of the Dalles Dam. The southern border is formed along the railroad line that runs along the Columbia; Highway 14 runs through the northern portion of shoreline jurisdiction. Park access, including a parking lot, is located on the southern side of the

93 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

lake. The northern side of the lake is bounded by steep cliffs. More riparian vegetation is present along the southern side.

Exhibit 5-34. Horsethief Lake (Google Earth 2016)

Patterson Slough Patterson Slough is located at the interchange between Rock Creek (a non-shoreline waterbody) and the Columbia River. The slough is connected to the Columbia River though a channel that flows underneath Highway 14 which forms the southern border of the slough. Rock Creek road parallels the eastern boundary of the slough and undeveloped scrub/shrub hills form the western border. A boat launch is present at the northern end.

Exhibit 5-35. Patterson Slough (Google Earth 2016)

94 The Watershed Company December 2016

Rowland Lake Rowland Lake, located just west of Major Creek, includes two waterbodies, divided by Highway 14. The southern waterbody is separated from the Columbia River by the railroad grade. Old Highway 8 runs along the northern boundary of the northern waterbody. The lake is owned by WDFW and stocked for fishing. Shores are rocky with limited vegetation. A public access area is present along the northern portion of the lake which includes a rough WDFW unimproved boat launch. Vegetative and some habitat functions are limited by the roads and rocky slopes surrounding the lake, however the slopes provide unique upland habitat and are mapped by WDFW as a priority habitat (cliffs/bluffs and talus slopes). Other PHS habitats mapped in this reach include mule and black-tailed deer and waterfowl concentrations.

Exhibit 5-36. Rowland Lake (Google Earth 2016)

5.3 Restoration Opportunities

Restoration priorities, strategies, and opportunities are identified throughout the County through watershed planning efforts that focus on water quality, habitat for priority species, water availability, and general watershed management. These efforts identify issues and limiting factors that may be addressed through restoration or protection activities. Some of the primary issues affecting the County’s watersheds, and the potential restoration opportunities to address those issues, are highlighted in the following sections.

5.3.1 White Salmon (WRIA 29b) The removal of the Condit Dam from the White Salmon River in 2011 made the river’s upper reaches accessible for migratory fish for the first time in 100 years. The removal created significant changes to the ecology of the river, including export of fine-grained sediment from the former Northwestern Lake above the dam. At the same time,

95 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

landowners along the upper White Salmon River may now qualify for salmon-related restoration funds as habitat is opened up for anadromous salmonids above the dam (Klickitat Lead Entity 2013). In addition to broader issues of habitat and water quality, restoration strategies in the watershed address the unique opportunity afforded by the dam removal project.

Table 5-31 highlights potential restoration strategies and opportunities for the White Salmon River watershed.

Table 5-31. White Salmon River watershed restoration strategies and opportunities

Strategy Issue(s) Source(s)* Geographic focus: Watershed-wide Low quality LES Place LWD as appropriate; add structure to form pools. Remove pools, sediment man-made confinement structures and stabilize streambanks. inputs, limited in- stream cover Lack of LES Add in-stream structure to trap gravels. spawning gravel Low summer LES Restore wetlands, floodplain connectivity, and other water-holding flows and high capacity on the plateau. peak flows High summer LES stream temperature, Establish conifers in riparian areas. long-term pool habitat availability Remove or replace barriers blocking or impairing passage Fish passage LES including dams, dikes, road culverts, and irrigation structures. barriers Increase shading along temperature-limited reaches. Restore LES Reduced natural riparian vegetative communities, including eradication of riparian function invasive species. Floodplain LES Relocate or improve floodplain infrastructure and roads. connectivity Geographic focus: White Salmon River Pool quality and LES Revegetate any riparian areas that are affected by actions related quantity for to Condit Dam Mitigation. rearing habitat, LWD Alteration of LES native Support efforts to control and/or eradicate invasive species that ecosystem and pose a threat to important habitat. community dynamics Low summer LES Improve base flow by returning unused diverted water and flows and higher improving irrigation efficiencies. stream temperatures

96 The Watershed Company December 2016

Strategy Issue(s) Source(s)* Diversion of fish ESA Provide screening at irrigation diversions and replace screens that into unsuitable do not meet criteria. habitat Sediment LES, ESA Improve grazing management and road drainage. loading Reduce sediment inputs and reduce increases in peak flows Sediment LES, ESA originating from roads loading Protect high quality habitat form land conversions using voluntary Loss of LES, ESA acquisitions and/or easements floodplain habitat Geographic focus: White Salmon River – upstream of Condit Dam Water quality ESA Reduce nutrient runoff from agricultural lands. (nutrients) Water quality ESA Reduce runoff from septic tanks and dairies. (fecal colifirm) Floodplain ESA Reconnect side channels and off-channel habitats to stream connectivity and channels, and reconnect floodplain to channel. function Floodplain ESA Restore wet meadows. connectivity and function Stream incision, WSSP Reintroduce beaver into areas with suitable habitat. hydrologic function Geographic focus: White Salmon River – downstream of Condit Dam High fine WSSP Restore habitat in reaches formerly occupied by Northwestern sediment loads Lake and downstream of former dam site. from former lake Loss of old WSSP Use landowner incentives to conserve remaining intact pine/oak growth or late forests. seral forests Geographic focus: Little White Salmon River Restore instream flows through implementation of water LCSP Low summer conservation measures, water rights closures, and acquisition of flows existing water rights Enhance access to mineral sources via dense vegetation removal, Loss of band- LCSP and maintain and enhance growth of berry/mast-producing shrubs tailed pigeon and trees habitat

* LES: Klickitat Lead Entity Region Salmon Recovery Strategy (Klickitat Lead Entity 2013) ESA: ESA Recovery Plan for the White Salmon River Watershed (NMFS 2013) WSSP: White Salmon Subbasin Plan (NPPC 2004a) LCSP: Lower Columbia Salmon Recovery and Fish and Wildlife Subbasin Plan (LCFRB 2004)

In addition to the issue-based strategies and opportunities identified above, the Lower White Salmon National Wild and Scenic River Management Plan defines several goals, summarized below, that would contribute to improvements in ecological functions along the White Salmon River (NFS 1991c). The Wild and Scenic River designation is described in more detail in Section 6.5.2 of this report.

97 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

• Maintain or enhance levels of biological diversity which presently exist, and habitats of sensitive plant and animal species which exist in the management area. • Prevent introduction of non-native plant or animal species that could adversely affect existing native plants and animals.

The management plan also has goals intended to minimize environmental impacts from construction of new infrastructure and operation of agriculture, forestry, recreation, and other uses.

5.3.2 Klickitat (WRIA 30) Within the Klickitat Watershed, primary issues identified include loss of riparian vegetation; reduced in-stream flow; reduced in-stream habitat complexity; increase in fine sediment loading; and reduced in-stream habitat availability due to fish passage barriers. Lack of riparian shading has led to elevated water temperatures in the Little Klickitat River basin, for which the Department of Ecology (Ecology) has developed a TMDL. The TMDL also identifies reduced in-stream flow and increased sediment loading as contributing causes.

Table 5-32 highlights potential restoration strategies and opportunities for the Klickitat River watershed.

Table 5-32. Klickitat River watershed restoration strategies and opportunities

Strategy Issue(s) Source(s)* Geographic focus: Watershed-wide Restore or protect riparian vegetation using landowner incentives Loss of riparian KSP, LES, such as purchase easements or leases, or federal or state vegetation WRIA 30 programs that promote riparian conservation. Stream incision, Reintroduce beavers and reintroduce or plant large woody debris loss of large KSP (LWD) where appropriate. woody debris Non-native Continue and enhance riparian weed control efforts. vegetation in KSP riparian areas Loss of riparian Implement grazing and livestock management BMPs to minimize vegetation, KSP, WRIA 30 riparian disturbance. sediment Reduction in floodplain Protect functioning floodplain areas, and restore floodplain acreage, connectivity by removing fill, pulling back road prism. Relocate, hydrological KSP, LES remove, or repair roads that impair hydrologic function. Relocate alteration, floodplain infrastructure. channel incisions

98 The Watershed Company December 2016

Strategy Issue(s) Source(s)* Reduced channel Increase floodplain, reconnect side channels, and improve complexity, off- LES, KSP floodplain connectivity. channel habitat, channel evulsion Low pool frequency, Restore channel roughness and increase pool frequency by channel LES placing LWD and other structures. complexity, channel incision Access to fish Remove, repair, or replace barrier culverts LES habitat Geographic focus: Klickitat River Loss of riparian Revegetate elevated gravel bars (from 1996 floods) and vegetation, LES, KSP reestablish and/or enhance native vegetation within the floodplain. channel evulsion Loss of old Protect intact pine/oak forests using landowner incentives such as growth or late KSP purchase easements or leases. seral forests Protect remaining important wetlands and, where appropriate, Loss of wetlands KSP restore habitat to suitable conditions. Geographic focus: Little Klickitat River Reduce sediment erosion from uplands, including roads, grazed Sediment, areas, logged areas, and other sources such as construction site, channel TMDL stormwater runoff, and cropland runoff morphology Restore watershed features that retain moisture in the upper Low summer portions of the watershed throughout the year, such as wetlands instream flows, TMDL and naturally occurring ponds, or treed hill slopes with vegetated bank stability soil Low summer Increase stream connections to hyporheic zone TMDL instream flows Replace antiquated bank stabilization structures with river- and Bank stability TMDL neighbor-friendly bank protection methods Geographic focus: Swale Creek Modify railroad bed or place structures to facilitate the capture of Temperature WRIA 30 stream-adjacent sediments that could support riparian vegetation Protect high quality shrub-steppe habitat from land use Loss/degradatio conversion, and continue and enhance shrub-steppe weed control n of shrub- KSP programs steppe habitat

*KSP: Klickitat Subbasin Plan (NPPC 2004b) LES: Klickitat Lead Entity Region Salmon Recovery Strategy (Klickitat Lead Entity 2013) WRIA 30: Klickitat Basin (WRIA 30) Watershed Management Plan (WPN & Aspect Consulting 2005a) TMDL: TMDL for Little Klickitat River (Ecology 2005)

Additionally, results of the reach analysis summarized earlier in this chapter (Section 5.2.2) note that the lower portion of Snyder Canyon Creek is one of the most heavily altered shoreline areas in the County. Shorelines have been modified by vegetation removal and impervious surfaces dominate the shorelands as a result of development

99 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

associated with a previous mill operation. Much of the channel is armored and natural hydrologic, vegetative, habitat and hyporheic functions are all limited. Opportunity exists to conduct shoreline restoration activities on the County owned parcel at the confluence with the Klickitat River.

In addition to the issue-based strategies and opportunities identified above, the Lower Klickitat River National Wild and Scenic River Management Plan defines several goals, summarized below, that would contribute to improvements in ecological functions along the Klickitat River (NFS 1991b). The Wild and Scenic River designation is described in more detail in Section 6.5.3 of this report.

• Maintain the river’s free-flowing character, with no new bridges, dams, diversion, or other instream structures for flood control or water supply. • Maintain a non-degradation policy for water quality, and maintain adequate flow levels in the river to protect and allow for resource enhancement. • Maintain and enhance resident and anadromous fish habitat and populations. • Maintain the existing character of shorelands and of canyon hillsides, and reduce the potential for impacts from hillside development. • Identify and conserve rare plants species and communities in the river corridor, and implement a program to identify and conserve significant stands of Oregon white oak.

5.3.3 Columbia As described earlier in this chapter, shoreline functions along the Columbia River are limited by armoring, dam regulation, and dredging. Shoreline and floodplain habitat is fragmented by transportation infrastructure and development. Riparian vegetation is limited, and water quality in the river mainstem is impacted by excessive sedimentation. However, shrub steppe vegetation and bluffs provide upland habitat value. Restoration strategies and opportunities, highlighted in Table 5-33, emphasize riparian vegetation and enhancement of habitats for species of concern.

Table 5-33. Columbia River restoration strategies and opportunities

Strategy Issue(s) Source(s)* Manage livestock in such a way as to provide for riparian Loss of riparian LCSP vegetation restoration. vegetation Increased human Restrict access to known western pond turtle sites disturbance of LCSP western pond turtle Remove bullfrog and non-native fish from occupied sites and Loss of western LCSP

100 The Watershed Company December 2016

Strategy Issue(s) Source(s)* control current bullfrog and non-native fish occupation in potential pond turtle habitat habitat Diversion of fish Screen all irrigation pumps into unsuitable LMCMSP habitat Sediment load, Increase floodplain and channel roughness and reconnect side floodplain LMCMSP channels hydrology Sediment load, Relocate floodplain infrastructure floodplain LMCMSP hydrology Sediment load, Reestablish and/or enhance native vegetation in the floodplain, floodplain LMCMSP and introduce LWD as appropriate hydrology

*LCSP: Lower Columbia Salmon Recovery and Fish and Wildlife Subbasin Plan (LCFRB 2004) LMCMSP: Lower Mid-Columbia Mainstem (including Rock Creek) Subbasin Plan (NPPC 2004c)

In addition to the issue-based strategies and opportunities identified above, the Management Plan for the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area defines several enhancement objectives, summarized below, that would contribute to improvements in ecological functions along the Columbia River (Columbia River Gorge Commission 2011). The National Scenic Area designation is described in more detail in Section 6.5.4 of this report.

• Enhance soil water retention and reduce runoff. Give preference to use of native species. • Protect existing oak woodlands using landowner incentives, acquisition of sensitive stands, and easements. • Enhance and protect wildflower habitats. • Restore anadromous fish runs. • Conserve winter range and conserve and enhance non-game wildlife habitat. • Enhance waterfowl and shallow-water fish habitat. • Restore and enhance wetlands and riparian areas, including revegetation and stream channel improvements for wildlife and fish habitats. • Encourage the use of fire to restore and perpetuate natural ecosystems.

101 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

6 LAND USE ANALYSIS

6.1 Overview

This land use analysis reviews current shoreline use patterns and projected trends to ensure appropriate shoreline use consistent with the SMA and its Guidelines. The analysis was designed to identity current or planned preferred uses in shoreline jurisdiction that should be protected or promoted to meet SMA goals for water-oriented uses, shoreline access, and ecological protection.

Under the Guidelines (WAC 173-26-201(2)(d)), local governments, when determining allowable uses and resolving use conflicts within their shoreline jurisdiction, must apply, in order, the following preferences and priorities:

1. Reserve appropriate areas for protecting and restoring ecological functions to control pollution and prevent damage to the natural environment and public health. In reserving areas, local governments should consider areas that are ecologically intact from the uplands through the aquatic zone of the area, aquatic areas that adjoin permanently protected uplands, and tidelands in public ownership. Local governments should ensure that these areas are reserved consistent with constitutional limits.

2. Reserve shoreline areas for water-dependent and associated water-related uses. Harbor areas, established pursuant to Article XV of the State Constitution, and other areas that have reasonable commercial navigational accessibility and necessary support facilities, such as transportation and utilities, should be reserved for water- dependent and water-related uses that are associated with commercial navigation unless the local governments can demonstrate that adequate shoreline is reserved for future water-dependent and water-related uses and unless protection of the existing natural resource values of such areas preclude such uses. Local governments may prepare master program provisions to allow mixed-use developments that include and support water-dependent uses and address specific conditions that affect water- dependent uses.

3. Reserve shoreline areas for other water-related and water-enjoyment uses that are compatible with ecological protection and restoration objectives.

102 The Watershed Company December 2016

4. Locate single-family residential uses where they are appropriate and can be developed without significant impact to ecological functions or displacement of water-dependent uses.

5. Limit non-water-oriented uses to those locations where the above described uses are inappropriate or where non-water-oriented uses demonstrably contribute to the objectives of the Shoreline Management Act.

Additionally, for Shorelines of Statewide Significance, the SMA (in RCW 90.58.020) advanced a special set of use preferences. As discussed in Section 1.2.2, Shorelines of Statewide Significance in Klickitat County include all shorelines within the County along the Columbia River, Klickitat River, Trout Lake Creek and the White Salmon River. As set forth in RCW 90.58.020, for its Shorelines of Statewide Significance, the County must give preference to uses in the following order that:

1. Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest; 2. Preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3. Result in long term over short term benefit; 4. Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines; 6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; 7. Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary.

6.2 Land Use Context: Population

Information about the County’s current and potential future population provides some basic context for understanding current and potential future land use and development. According to the most recent data (2016) from the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM), in 2015 Klickitat County had a total population estimate of 21,000 (14,420 in unincorporated areas; 6,580 in incorporated areas). This ranks the County 30th of Washington’s 39 counties in terms of total population. With a land area of approximately 1,871 square miles, its population density was 11.22 people per square mile.

Regarding the County’s potential future population, the OFM (2012) issued population projections for 2010 through 2040 for growth management planning purposes. These population projections include low, medium, and high series projections (Table 6-1), though “the medium series is considered the most likely because it is the best foreseeable future based on assumptions that have been validated with past and current

103 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

information.” Under the medium series projection, the County population would grow by about 5.5% to 21,439 by the year 2040. Put another way, under this projection the County would typically grow by about 0.18% or 30 people each year. However, with the 2016 annual Office of Financial Management population estimate of 21,000 for Klickitat County, it appears the County is ahead of the 2012 medium series projection. Under the high series projection, the County population would grow by 33.5% to 27,115 by 2040, or about 0.97% or 167 people a year.

Table 6-1. Klickitat County population projections (Office of Financial Management 2012)

Year Low Series Medium Series High Series 2017 18,402 20,743 23,263 2022 18,114 21,068 24,322 2027 17,819 21,324 25,254 2032 17,425 21,469 26,070 2037 16,915 21,479 26,752 2040* 16,574 21,439 27,115 *Projections are currently only available through 2040.

6.3 County-wide Zoning and Ownership

2016 County Assessor GIS zoning data and parcel data were overlaid with shoreline jurisdiction summarized on a County-wide level.

The largest category of zoning in shoreline jurisdiction is Agriculture, including the Extensive Agriculture and Extensive Agriculture – Cluster zones. 40% of land in shoreline jurisdiction is zoned Agriculture, followed by Open Space, which makes up 26%. Less than 2% of shoreline jurisdiction is zoned Industrial and Commercial. The County’s zoning ordinance prescribes minimum lot sizes of 20 acres in the Extensive Agriculture, Open Space, and Forest Resource zones, and limits outright permitted uses to resource-related uses and one residence per lot. Table 6-2 below summarizes zoning for shoreline jurisdiction throughout the County.

Table 6-2. Klickitat County Shoreline Jurisdiction Zoning Zone Percent Agriculture 40% Open Space 26% Forest Resource 13% Residential 9% Rural 6% Resource Lands 4% Industrial 1% Rural Center 1% Commercial < 1%

104 The Watershed Company December 2016

Just over half (52%) of shoreline jurisdiction in the County is owned by private landowners. Federal, state and county lands combined own about 30%. BNSF (Railroad) is a significant shoreline landowner, owning about 10% of the total shoreline lands in the County. Table 6-3 below summarizes shoreline jurisdiction ownership for the entire County.

Table 6-3. Klickitat County Shoreline Jurisdiction Ownership Owner Percent Private 52% Federal 17% State 11% Railroad 10% Land Trust 3% Tribal 2% County 2% Utilities 1% Other 1%

6.4 Shoreline Permit History

In comparison to other Washington counties, Klickitat County issues a relatively small number of shoreline development permits. Since 2006, only 19 shoreline permits have been issued, including 18 substantial development permits and one variance. Five permits were for bridges. Four permits were for utilities improvements such as water lines, pipelines, or electric substations. Three permits were issued for new commercial development. The remaining permits were for trail improvements, port infrastructure improvements, a driveway, a raft launch site, and temporary building. The one variance issued was for rebuilding a cabin. One permit application was withdrawn. Based on this information, shoreline development activities are fairly rare in the County. Most shoreline permits since 2006 have been for development on the Columbia River (5) or Klickitat River (5). Shoreline exemption data were not available. It is important to note that development permitted prior to 1972 predated the SMA and was not subject to shoreline permitting requirements.

6.5 Shoreline Land Use Analysis by Area

The below subsections summarize the results of a reach-based shoreline land use analysis. Similar to other chapters of this report, the results of the shoreline land use analysis are summarized according to three areas: the White Salmon watershed, the Klickitat watershed and the Columbia River.

105 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

6.5.1 Approach and Methodology For each of the three areas, the shoreline land use analysis is organized around four topics: existing and potential shoreline land use, shoreline transportation and utilities, existing and potential shoreline public access, and historic and archaeological resources. In general, the methodology for the land use analysis involved the extensive use of geographic information systems (GIS) to calculate quantitative data for the shoreline reaches (see Section 4.2.2 above). Information supplementary to three of these topics is further provided below.

Existing and Potential Shoreline Land Use Included under this topic heading is a discussion of water-oriented uses. According to the Guidelines (WAC 173-26-020), a “water-oriented use means a use that is water- dependent, water-related, or water-enjoyment, or a combination of such uses.” The SMA promotes uses that are “unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline,” as well as “ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks, marinas, piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state” (RCW 90.58.020). Definitions and examples of water-oriented uses are included in Table 6-2 below.

Table 6-4. Water-oriented uses: definitions and examples Water-Oriented Use Definitions Examples "Water-dependent use" means a use or portion of a use Examples of water-dependent uses may which cannot exist in a location that is not adjacent to the include ship cargo terminal loading areas, water and which is dependent on the water by reason of ferry and passenger terminals, barge the intrinsic nature of its operations. (WAC 173-26- loading facilities, ship building and dry 020(39)) docking, marinas, aquaculture, and sewer outfalls.

"Water-related use" means a use or portion of a use which Examples of water-related uses may is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location but include warehousing of goods transported whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront by water, seafood processing plants, location because: hydroelectric generating plants, gravel storage when transported by barge, oil (a) The use has a functional requirement for a waterfront refineries where transport is by tanker, log location such as the arrival or shipment of materials by storage, and potentially agriculture and water or the need for large quantities of water; or agriculturally related water transportation systems. (b) The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water-dependent uses and the proximity of the use to

106 The Watershed Company December 2016

Water-Oriented Use Definitions Examples its customers makes its services less expensive and/or more convenient. (WAC 173-26-020(43))

"Water-enjoyment use" means a recreational use or other Primary water-enjoyment uses may include, use that facilitates public access to the shoreline as a but are not limited to, parks, piers and other primary characteristic of the use; or a use that provides for improvements facilitating public access to recreational use or aesthetic enjoyment of the shoreline for the shorelines of the state; and general a substantial number of people as a general characteristic water-enjoyment uses may include, but are of the use and which through location, design, and not limited to restaurants, museums, operation ensures the public's ability to enjoy the physical aquariums, scientific/ecological reserves, and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. In order to qualify and resorts/hotels (as part of mixed-use as a water-enjoyment use, the use must be open to the development or with significant public general public and the shoreline-oriented space within the access or restoration components), and project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use commercial/office as part of a mixed-use that fosters shoreline enjoyment. (WAC 173-26-020(40)) development.

Water-enjoyment uses were identified by summarizing available public shoreline access and shoreline recreational opportunities including state parks, other state and federally owned land, county parks, and port-owned land. Potential water-dependent uses were identified through visual assessment of aerial imagery. Shoreline infrastructure including shipping infrastructure were identified as potential water-dependent uses. Water-related uses were not systematically identified. 2016 County Assessor data for existing shoreline environment designations, tax parcels, zoning and land use were used for assessing existing and potential land use and development.

Existing and Potential Shoreline Public Access Existing and potential shoreline public access opportunities were identified based on the input of County staff and review of available County mapping and reports, including the Klickitat County Paths and Trails Development Plan (1990). This information was refined by reviewing webpages of agencies that typically provide shoreline public access facilities, such as Washington State Parks, WDFW and the United States Forest Service (USFS). Potential public shoreline access was obtained through review of the Klickitat County Comprehensive Plan and input from County staff.

Shoreline Transportation and Utilities Roads, bridges and railroads are mapped in the inventory mapfolio included in Appendix B. However, the summary data for roads and bridges should not be considered complete. Based on a comparison of the roads and bridges GIS data with aerial imagery, the GIS data appear to exclude a variety of features, particularly private

107 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

access roads and minor bridges. Of additional note, railroad data reflect active railroads only.

Common utility infrastructure such as water, wastewater, electrical, communication, and other facilities are found throughout the County. However, no GIS data for common utilities were available.

Historic and Archaeological Resources Additional information about historic resources mapped in the shoreline inventory was obtained via the Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data. Because of the potential for vandalism and looting, archaeological site locations are not publicly available. However, given the traditional tribal presence in the County and the use of shorelines for sustenance and spiritual practices, archaeological features could be present along shorelines.

6.5.2 White Salmon Watershed

Existing and potential shoreline land use A portion of the White Salmon River is designated as a Wild and Scenic River and is managed by the USFS. The designation includes the 27.7 miles of the river, from the confluence with Gilmer Creek to the confluence with Buck Creek and from the headwaters to the boundary of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest. As a requirement of this designation the USFS developed a management plan in 1991. The Management Plan is a non-regulatory document that provides recommendations for land use management. The Plan itself does not increase protections for lands not currently owned by the USFS; however, it provides guidance to the County on its land use decisions.

Shoreline jurisdiction in the White Salmon watershed is primarily zoned Agriculture or Forest Resource. At the southern edge of the watershed, the removal of Condit Dam in 2011 exposed lands previously inundated by Northwestern Lake; this area is zoned Resource Lands and owned primarily by PacifiCorp. Upriver, the communities of Trout Lake, BZ Corner, and Husum feature residential development and some commercial development. On the periphery of those communities lies rural residential development mixed with agricultural use. In the upper White Salmon Basin, within Klickitat County and in the vicinity of Trout Lake exists an area of concentrated agricultural use. These areas are unlikely to experience significant development due to the distance from large commercial centers, and due to the fact that development for uses other than agriculture would require a zoning change and extensive public and environmental review. The majority of shoreline development in the White Salmon basin is likely to occur in the

108 The Watershed Company December 2016

communities of Trout Lake, BZ Corner, Husum and potentially along areas at the mouth of the White Salmon. Some scattered rural residential development could also occur on the periphery of the established communities. Shoreline jurisdiction along Rattlesnake Creek is almost entirely undeveloped, and is almost exclusively zoned Resource Lands, with the exception of a small area near the confluence with the White Salmon River in Husum. Shoreline jurisdiction along Major Creek is entirely undeveloped and mostly comprised of forest and open space. Water-oriented uses are primarily recreation-based described further below.

Existing shoreline environment designations in the White Salmon River basin are primarily Conservancy in the lower watershed, and a mix of Conservancy and Rural in the upper watershed. Trout Lake, Husum and BZ Corner are designated as Community. There are no areas in the White Salmon Basin that are currently designated as Urban/Industrial.

Shoreline transportation and utilities Shorelines within the White Salmon region contain 74,267 linear feet of road. No rail or dams are known to be present. At least two bridges are present over the White Salmon River, one at the confluence with the Columbia River and one near Husum. Significant highways include Highway 141 which crosses the White Salmon River near Husum and parallels the shoreline for portions of the river. Table 6-4 summarize the transportation infrastructure found within the Columbia River region’s shoreline areas.

Table 6-5. White Salmon Watershed: Transportation Infrastructure

Roads Rail Region Bridges Dams (linear feet) (linear feet) White Salmon Watershed 74,267 2 -- --

PacificCorp operated the Condit Dam on the White Salmon River until it was removed in 2011. Northwest Pipeline LLC owns and operates an interstate pipeline that crosses the White Salmon River in the vicinity of Northwestern Lake road (National Pipeline Mapping System). High voltage power transmission lines cross the White Salmon in at least one location; in the lower White Salmon in the vicinity of Powerhouse Road.

Existing and potential shoreline public access Prior to the Condit Dam removal in 2011, WDFW maintained a Water Access Site on the Northwestern Lake. Shoreline access to the White Salmon River is available in Husum at the Husum Boating Site, maintained by USFS. This site is frequently used as a portage opportunity to pass Husum Falls. The USFS also maintains a launch site for kayakers

109 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

and rafters at BZ Corner. The County has a Paths and Trails Development Plan which was created in 1990. While it is not updated on a regular schedule it is occasionally used to determine where to utilize available recreation funding, particularly along transportation corridors. As such, the plan may serve as a guide for future recreational trails proposed in shoreline jurisdiction. Some of the proposed trails that would likely provide shoreline viewing or access opportunities include the Husum Bridge Path, the Washington State Co-op trail (Oak Ridge Loop), the Major Creek Trail, and the C.M. Atwood Trail. Additional information about the location and extent of these proposed trails can be found in the Paths and Trails Development Plan.

Historic and archaeological resources Few historic sites are documented within the White Salmon region, which does not include any heavily urbanized areas within shoreline jurisdiction. The White Salmon River is regionally significant for recreation and some agriculture, but it does not have a history as a major transportation route that would attract large concentrations of modern human settlement. Within the White Salmon region one historic barn is located in shoreline jurisdiction along Dry Creek: Schnick's Barn at Bachelor's Corner. The B-Z Corner Bridge on the White Salmon River is also on the State historic register. Other structures greater than 50 years old potentially eligible to be on the historic register include a pole barn on Buck Creek and the White Salmon River Bridge near Husum. There is potential for undiscovered archaeological resources in the shoreline environment.

6.5.3 Klickitat Watershed

Existing and potential shoreline land use As with the White Salmon River, a portion of the Klickitat River is designated as a Wild and Scenic River. 10.8 miles are designated, from the confluence with Wheeler Creek to the confluence with the Columbia River. The USFS has developed and implemented a management plan intended to increase protection of the river. Future development within shoreline jurisdiction of the Lower Klickitat River may be deterred by the protections established in the management plan; however, as with other Wild and Scenic River Management Plans, the USFS plan for the Klickitat River is a non-regulatory document that provides guidance and recommendations only.

Shoreline jurisdiction in the Lower Klickitat River is predominately zoned Open Space and Forest Resource Land. The unincorporated town of Lyle lies at the confluence of the Klickitat River and the Columbia River. A small amount of residential development is present in this area. A small amount of agriculture is also present. The vast majority of

110 The Watershed Company December 2016 shoreline jurisdiction along the mainstem Klickitat River is undeveloped and zoned Open Space. As mentioned previously, this zone limits development to one dwelling per 20 acres; development in this area is further limited by topography and the presence of floodplain. The northern extent of the mainstem Klickitat River in Klickitat County (as the river approaches Yakima County) features an area zoned Forest Resource Land.

Approximately 7 miles upstream, at the confluence of the Klickitat River and Snyder Canyon Creek lies the unincorporated town of Klickitat. This area is zoned Rural Center and features residential development within shoreline jurisdiction. The town used to support a lumber mill along the river. The old mill site along lower Snyder Canyon Creek is zoned Industrial and is currently unused for industrial purposes, but some structures and a significant amount of impervious surface still remain from the previous use. The site is owned by the County and could be used for industrial purposes again in the future, or may be developed for recreational or other use. This is the only area in the Klickitat Basin that has a shoreline environment designation of Urban/Industrial. Upstream from the mill, Snyder Canyon Creek is undeveloped; the western bank is predominantly forested and the eastern bank is mainly sparse forest and open space, and is zoned General Rural.

Lower Swale Creek is predominantly undeveloped and zoned Open Space. Shoreline jurisdiction in the upper reaches of the creek is mostly agricultural use.

Extending upstream from the confluence with the Klickitat River, shoreline jurisdiction zoning along the Little Klickitat River progress from Open Space to Agriculture to General Rural. Mill Creek has notably less shoreline jurisdiction area than the Little Klickitat River, but features the same progression in zoning from Open Space downstream, to Agriculture and General Rural upstream. Near the northern extent of shoreline jurisdiction along Mill Creek lies a small area zoned Forest Resource. Just west of Mill Creek lies Bowman Creek which features predominantly rural development and notably less agricultural use. Similar to Mill Creek, the upstream extent of Bowman Creek is zoned of Forest Resource Land.

Shoreline jurisdiction along Dead Canyon Creek, Summit Creek and White Creek is undeveloped and composed of forested areas zoned Open Space.

The Camas Ditch and Outlet Creek network, including Holmes Creek and Frasier Creek is predominantly zoned as Agriculture, with some areas zoned Open Space and Forest Resource Land. Within this reach is Conboy Lake National Wildlife Refuge, an area that

111 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

was previously drained and used for agriculture but now is protected and supports a variety of wildlife.

Future development will likely be concentrated in the areas of existing development and commercial centers. Residential and commercial development may occur in the town of Klickitat, and in the periphery of the City of Goldendale along the Little Klickitat River. Although no plans currently exist, there is potential for industrial development along the old Snyder Creek mill site. Future development in the vicinity of Lyle is limited to the area designated as exempt from the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area regulations. Lyle Point, a 33-acre peninsula on the Columbia River, is under YIN ownership and also not likely to be developed due to its cultural significance.

Shoreline transportation and utilities The Klickitat Basin contains 176,534 linear feet of road within shoreline jurisdiction. Transportation features are documented in Table 6-3. Several bridges and creek crossings were not captured in the GIS-generated summary data. There are no dams in the Klickitat River basin. Rail is limited to the area along the confluence of the Klickitat River and the Columbia River.

Table 6-6. Klickitat Watershed: Transportation Infrastructure

Roads Rail Region Bridges Dams (linear feet) (linear feet) Klickitat Watershed 176,534 16 437 --

Existing and potential shoreline public access The Klickitat River Trail is an old rail grade that has been converted to a hiking trail. The trail follows the Klickitat River from the confluence with the Columbia until it reaches the town of Klickitat, where another section of trail follows Swale Creek up Swale Canyon. The 31-mile long trail provides numerous of opportunities to view and enjoy the river. WDFW maintains six water access sites in the Klickitat Basin (WDFW 2016b). Turkey Hole is the farthest downstream, about three miles north east of Lyle. Mineral Springs and Swale Creek are in the vicinity of the town of Klickitat. Stinson Flats, Leidl North and Leidl South are further upstream in the vicinity of Dead Canyon. Three of these sites, Leidl South, Stinson Flats and Mineral Springs offer concrete boat launches. Extensive public lands in shoreline jurisdiction provide potential access, which is not restricted unless posted. Significant visual access is also provided by shoreline roads, including Highway 142 (along the Klickitat River) and Highway 14 (along the Columbia River).

112 The Watershed Company December 2016

The Paths and Trails Development Plan discussed above may also serve as a guide for future recreational trails in the Klickitat watershed shoreline jurisdiction. The following proposed paths and trails may provide public shoreline viewing and access opportunities; Outlet Falls Trail, Simcoe Trail, Old Military Trail, Wahkiacus Park Trail, Klickitat Access Trail, Soda Springs Trail, Swale Canyon Railroad Trail, Forry Stables Trail.

Historic and archaeological resources Few historic sites are documented within the Klickitat River region, which does not include any heavily urbanized areas within shoreline jurisdiction. The Klickitat River is regionally significant for recreation and some agriculture, but it does not have a history as a major transportation route that would attract large concentrations of modern human settlement, other than in the area near the confluence with the Columbia. Two sites known to be on the State’s historic register are located within the shoreline jurisdiction of the Klickitat River: the Klickitat River Bridge on State Route 142 and the Klickitat River Bridge at the confluence with the Columbia River in Lyle. Additional historic properties in the Klickitat watershed shoreline jurisdiction based on age (greater than 50 years old) include two box culverts, one on Bowman Creek and one on the Klickitat River; the Klickitat Fish Hatchery Facility, and the Harms Road Bridge on Swale Creek. There is potential for undiscovered archaeological resources in the shoreline environment.

6.5.4 Columbia River

Existing and potential shoreline land use The Columbia River is designated as a National Scenic Area. Accordingly, the Columbia River Gorge Commission and the USFS developed a regional management plan in 1991 and later revised the plan in 2014. Development within the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area is subject to land use regulations set by the Columbia River Gorge Commission. The management plan and land use regulations increase protection of undeveloped areas along the Columbia River shoreline in Klickitat County. Urban areas are exempt from the regulations that are required by the regional management plan. The scenic area designation will likely concentrate future development in urban areas along the Columbia shoreline like Wishram, Dallesport, Lyle, Bingen and White Salmon.

The unincorporated communities of Alderdale, Roosevelt, Wishram, Dallesport, and Lyle all have an existing shoreline environment designation of Urban/Industrial. The John Day Dam, The Dalles Dam, and Bingen Harbor also have an Urban/Industrial shoreline environment designation. The remaining shorelands of the Columbia are all

113 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

designated Conservancy, with the exception of the Maryhill area which is designated Community, and the mouth of the White Salmon River and Major Creek which are both designated Natural.

Out of the three basins discussed in this chapter, the Columbia River has the most existing development and the greatest potential for future development. The Columbia also likely contains the most water-dependent development. Some of the potentially water-dependent uses along the Columbia include a grain transfer facility on the Columbia in the unincorporated town of Roosevelt that is operated by Horse Heaven Grain LLC. This facility transfers grain to and from rail and ships. Potential new development in Roosevelt includes waste transfer by barge to the Roosevelt landfill. A gravel pit mining and transfer operation exists just west of the unincorporated community of Wishram. This facility enables transfer of gravel to ships for transport. A potentially water-dependent logging operation exists near the Dalles Dam.

More than a third of the Columbia River shoreline is zoned Open Space. Roughly a quarter is zoned Extensive Agriculture and a little more than a fifth is zoned as Rural Residential. The majority of the Rural Residential area is in the eastern side of the county surrounding the community of Roosevelt. All of the Extensive Agriculture shorelines along the Columbia are also on the eastern side of the county. The western portion of the Columbia River shoreline in Klickitat County features a diversity of zoning including Commercial, Industrial, General Rural, Open Space, Rural Residential and Suburban Residential. The unincorporated community of Dallesport has some undeveloped areas that are zoned Industrial and present potential for future water-dependent development, especially considering the community’s relative proximity to The Dalles in Oregon, which was home to 13,620 people in 2010 (US Census).

In the vicinity of Maryhill Park exists agricultural use of a shoreline area that is zoned Rural Center. This area features orchards and vineyards, as well as fruit stands and an RV park that is zoned Tourist Commercial. This is the only area along the Columbia that has an existing shoreline environment designation of Community.

There is existing residential development along the Columbia shoreline in the community of Lyle. Shoreline in Lyle is zoned Suburban Residential and could likely support greater densities. Just east of the City of Bingen in unincorporated Klickitat County is an area that is zoned Industrial Park but is currently used for agriculture. As industrial use in Bingen and unincorporated Klickitat County grows, agricultural land may be converted to industrial use. Insitu operates a drone manufacturing facility in this area that it is anticipating expansion. The Port of Klickitat also has plans to develop a

114 The Watershed Company December 2016

full-service boat moorage in this area, and intends to pursue mixed-use commercial development at Bingen Point. Water dependent uses include the Dalles Dam, and the John Day Dam.

Shoreline transportation and utilities The Columbia River serves as a major transportation corridor. Transportation facilities along the Columbia River include U.S. highways, county roads, private access roads, and railroads. Goods and materials are also transported by barge on the Columbia River itself. Two dams, the John Day Dam and Dalles Dam, are located in the County. Typical utility systems such as gas, electric and communication exist along the Columbia River shoreline.

Highways on the Columbia River include State Route 14, the Lewis and Clark Highway, which parallels the shoreline from the Skamania border until just past Lyle where it veers inland for much of the eastern portion of the County before returning to the shoreline area near Patterson Slough. Highway 197 also crosses the Columbia at the Dalles Dam and Highway 97 crosses near Bingen Harbor. Several other bridges and 199,385 linear feet of roadways are present. Railroads also parallel the Columbia River shoreline along its entire length in Klickitat County. BNSF is a significant shoreline landowner owning more than a third of the County shorelands along the Columbia. Table 6-4 summarizes the transportation infrastructure found within the Columbia River region’s shoreline areas.

Table 6-7. Columbia River: Transportation Infrastructure

Roads Rail Waterbody Bridges Dams (linear feet) (linear feet) Columbia River 199,385 13 302,170 2

Existing and potential shoreline public access The Rowland Lake gravel boat launch provides access to Rowland Lake. Just east of Bingen, The Port of Klickitat owns and maintains two shoreline parks: Sailboard Park and Marina Park. These parks are a popular spot for kiteboarders and windsurfers to launch. Marina Park also offers a concrete boat launch. Other informal boat launch areas exist at County road-ends at Lyle and Old Ferry Landing.

Doug’s Beach State Park is a 400-acre undeveloped day use park on Highway 14 east of Lyle. The park is one of the premier windsurfing sites in the Columbia Gorge, and provides parking, a pedestrian walkway, and picnic tables.

115 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Maryhill State Park is a 99-acre park with 4,700 feet of shorefront just east of State Route 97 as it crosses over the Columbia into Oregon. Maryhill Park provides hiking trails, camping, swimming and fishing access as well as a concrete boat ramp and parking. Just west of Maryhill State Park lies Miller Island, which is managed by the USFS. This island is only accessible by boat. Miller Island is closed to camping. Northeast of Dallesport lies Columbia Hills Historical State Park. This park offers close to a mile and a half of shorefront along the Columbia River and additional shorefront on Horsethief Lake. This park offers swimming, fishing, windsurfing, camping and other recreational opportunities. The park also offers two boat ramps, one on Horsethief Lake and one that provides access to the Columbia River.

Railroad Island Park offers a boat launch and parking on the upstream side of the John Day Dam. Cliffs Park offers shoreline viewing opportunities on the other side of the dam. Both of these parks are managed by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps also manages recreation areas at Paterson Slough, Rock Creek, Sundale, and Roosevelt. Each of these areas offers a boat ramp with access to the Columbia River.

A number of treaty-fishing sites exist throughout the County. Use of these facilities is limited to Native Americans. These sites include Alderdale, Pine Creek, Roosevelt Park, Pasture Point, Maryhill, Dallesport, Lyle and White Salmon.

There are other areas of state and federally owned shoreland along the Columbia that do not currently provide developed recreational amenities but could provide potential for future shoreline public access. There are no trails planned along the Columbia River in the Paths and Trails Development Plan. The Port of Klickitat has plans to develop a full- service boat moorage in the Port of Bingen which may include additional public shoreline access opportunities. The County is also currently exploring potential improvements to an unofficial public shoreline access point at the confluence of the Klickitat and Columbia Rivers. Additionally, significant visual access is provided by Highway 14 along the Columbia River.

Historic and archaeological resources The Columbia River has been a major inland waterway for centuries, providing fishing, hunting, and transportation for native peoples. After European settlement of the region, resource-based agriculture and mining operations became more common, leading to increased use of the river as a transportation route for both imported and exported goods. Numerous sections of the Columbia River were dammed in the early and mid-

116 The Watershed Company December 2016

20th Century to ease navigation, provide irrigation water, and generate hydroelectric power. A byproduct of this process was alteration of the historic shoreline in many areas. Due to the long history of water and shoreline use by both native peoples and European settlers, the Columbia River valley contains numerous documented historic and archaeological sites and is likely to contain many undocumented archaeological resources, as well.

In Klickitat County, cultural resources sited on the Columbia River are concentrated near the Dalles. Historic register sites include the Columbia River Bridge at the Dalles and the Celilo Railroad Bridge. Historic properties (greater than 50 years old) include the Dalles Dam, Sam Hill Memorial Bridge near Bingen Harbor, and State Road No. 8.

7 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

The following are recommended actions for translating inventory and characterization findings into the draft SMP policies, regulations, environment designations, and restoration strategies for areas within shoreline jurisdiction. In addition to the following analysis-specific recommendations, the updated SMP will incorporate all other requirements of the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) and the Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26). A gap analysis is also being prepared which thoroughly compares the County’s current SMP to the requirements of RCW 90.58 and Ecology’s SMP Guidelines.

7.1 Environment Designations

As outlined in WAC 173-26-191(1)(d), “Shoreline management must address a wide range of physical conditions and development settings along shoreline areas. Effective shoreline management requires that the shoreline master program prescribe different sets of environmental protection measures, allowable use provisions, and development standards for each of these shoreline segments.” In WAC 173-26-211(2)(a), the Guidelines further direct development and assignment of environment designations based on “existing use pattern, the biological and physical character of the shoreline, and the goals and aspirations of the community as expressed through comprehensive plans…”

It is difficult to describe a methodology for environment designation recommendations as there are very few firm rules. In general, the environment designation purpose and

117 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

criteria will be utilized and further informed by the findings of this Shoreline Analysis Report, including the following GIS data:

• Current land use • Planned land use • Ownership • Wetlands • Floodplains • Vegetation • Impervious surface • Ecological functions (as described in this report)

While current and future land use designations provide the basic context for a given segment of land, recommended environment designations will not always correlate strongly with those parameters, particularly on currently undeveloped shoreline areas and shoreline areas with extensive critical areas (e.g., wetlands, floodways, channel migration zones, other geologically hazardous areas). This may also be the case where parcels are large, and extend well beyond shoreline jurisdiction. For example, while the current land use code may indicate a single-family residential land use designation, the actual existing use may not be in shoreline jurisdiction and a more conservative designation could be appropriate to correspond with existing conditions in shoreline jurisdiction.

In the above situations, vegetation (including identification of wetlands) and impervious surface data, as well as the ecological function results, may provide better indicators of the existing alteration level in shoreline jurisdiction. For this reason, all or portions of parcels that have a current or planned land use designation of residential (or other designation allowing alteration) may ultimately have a more protective shoreline environment designation if the ecological functions are considered high and examination of aerial photos and specific data layers provides additional support. In these cases, the parcels can still accommodate the existing or planned uses, perhaps even in shoreline jurisdiction, and satisfy the WAC requirements for consistency between the environment designations and the Comprehensive Plans (see WAC 173-26-211(3) for additional detail about consistency requirements).

In more developed areas, current land use designation will be more strongly correlated with level of alteration and the resulting environment designation. In these areas, often the entire parcel or a large portion of the parcel is in shoreline jurisdiction, and the allowed level of development may already have occurred

118 The Watershed Company December 2016

The County’s current Shoreline Management Master Plan utilizes a system of five environment designations: Natural, Conservancy, Rural, Community and Urban/Industrial.

• Natural: The purpose of the Natural Environment is to preserve and restore those natural resource systems existing relatively free of human influence and those shoreline areas possessing natural characteristics intolerant of human use or unique aesthetic, historical, cultural, and/or educational features. These systems require severe restrictions on the intensities and types of uses permitted so as to maintain the integrity of a shoreline environment.

• Conservancy: The purpose and intent of the Conservancy Environment is to protect, conserve and manage existing natural resources and/or unique, valuable, aesthetic, historic, and cultural areas in order to achieve sustained resource utilization and provide recreational opportunities. The conservancy environment is also intended to protect environmentally sensitive areas which are not suitable for intensive use, such as steep slopes, flood-prone areas, eroding bluffs, natural wetlands, and areas which cannot provide adequate sewage disposal. It is characterized by very low intensity land uses primarily related to natural resource use and diffused recreational development, relatively low land values, relatively minor public and private capital investment, and/or relatively severe biophysical limitations.

• Rural: The Rural Environment is characterized by intensive agriculture or recreational use, moderate land values, lower public and private capital investment, and/or some biophysical development limitations. It is intended to protect agricultural land from urban expansion. Those areas having high capability to support active agriculture or which have agriculture potential should be maintained for present and future needs. They include areas which have a potential for agriculture purposes or are already being used for agriculture purposes. Low density rural residential and moderate intensity recreational uses are types appropriate to the resources of the areas.

• Community: The Community Environment is characterized as an area of moderate intensity land use including residential, recreational and commercial development. It is particularly suitable to those areas presently planned to accommodate community expansion.

119 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

• Urban/Industrial: The Urban/Industrial Environment is a shoreline area characterized by high intensity and diverse land uses such as commercial and industrial development, as well as community facilities. The purpose of assigning an area to an urban/industrial environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines occurring in industrial areas by providing for manufacturing, commercial, high density residential and industrial uses, and providing for orderly future development. The resources characteristic of this environment are those necessary to the uses of such an environment: (1) electrical, domestic water, and sewage utilities, (2) shipping and transportation.

The County’s shoreline environment designation map has not been modified since the late 90s or early 2000s, thus the environment designation assignments may no longer provide the best fit with the existing biological and land use character.

The Guidelines recommend use of six unique environments: Aquatic, Natural, Urban Conservancy, Rural Conservancy, Shoreline Residential, and High Intensity. Urban Conservancy, Shoreline Residential, and High Intensity are each intended by the Guidelines to be applied only in Cities and Towns, UGAs, and intensely developed rural areas. However, each jurisdiction may use “alternative” environment designations, as appropriate, as long as they provide equal or better protection than the standard.

Generally, the County’s existing environment designations are supported by the findings of this Analysis Report and could likely be used as alternative designations to the Guideline’s recommended system. They are generally in line with the Guideline’s recommended system in so far as Conservancy seems to equate to Rural Conservancy, Rural equates to Rural Conservancy, Community equates to Shoreline Residential, and Urban/Industrial equates to High Intensity. However, the County is required to include an Aquatic environment designation for areas below the OHWM. Per the Guidelines, the purpose is to “protect, restore, and manage the unique characteristics and resources of the areas waterward of the ordinary high-water mark.”

The County should consider how to designate any potentially associated wetlands, especially any associated wetlands which extend beyond the minimum 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction. Some options include applying a universal shoreline environment designation (e.g. Conservancy or Natural) to all associated wetlands or applying the shoreline environment designation which is immediately adjoining the wetland.

120 The Watershed Company December 2016

7.2 General Policies and Regulations

7.2.1 Archaeological and Historic Resources • The findings of this Shoreline Analysis Report do not suggest a need for additional regulations beyond those mandated by the SMP Guidelines.

7.2.2 Critical Areas • The County and Cities should consider whether their critical areas regulations should be incorporated into the SMP by reference or through direct inclusion. Either method of incorporation will require modification of the County’s critical areas regulations as they apply in shoreline jurisdiction to meet SMA criteria. For example, any exceptions, such as reasonable use, will need to be removed as the appropriate SMA process for such action is through the Shoreline Variance.

• The County will need to evaluate whether the existing critical area buffer protections are sufficient to protect their functions and values and achieve no net loss. The County’s existing critical areas regulations establish a 200 foot buffer for Type S waterbodies (shorelines). The SMP also established a 50 foot natural buffer zone “NBZ” on all shorelines. It is unclear how these two buffers relate. The County may wish to revisit both buffer systems or at least make the connection between the two clearer. Alternately, the County could establish waterbody and/or environment designation specific buffers. • Overall, these regulations will need to be revisited to assess if changes are needed to recognize existing shoreline conditions and to accommodate water- oriented and other preferred uses consistent with no net loss of ecological functions (as required by WAC 173-26-221(2)(a)(ii)). In particular, the existing stream buffers are not environment designation- or waterbody-based, which indicates that they may need to be further customized to accomplish these objectives. Wetlands regulations will need to be reviewed carefully to ensure consistency with the latest Ecology guidance.

7.2.3 Flood Hazard Reduction • Consistent with the WAC provisions in the Guidelines, the SMP should provide flexibility for developing and maintaining flood hazard reduction measures as needed to continue protection of existing uses. Emphasis should be given to maintaining existing ecological functions, at a minimum, through Ecology’s no net loss criteria.

121 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

7.2.4 Public Access • The County should consider providing policies and regulations that: recognize and facilitate implementation of existing parks, recreation, and open space plans (e.g. the 1990 Paths and Trails Plan); provide public access, as feasible and where public safety would allow, in new commercial, industrial and multi-family development as well as any future publicly sponsored or financed utility and flood control facilities; recognize informal shoreline access points and attempt to create formal public access opportunities that address these needs and prevent improper use of the shoreline that may interfere with adjacent uses; and, promote visual access where physical access is not feasible.

7.2.5 Shoreline Vegetation Conservation • As noted above under Critical Areas, the County should review the existing protections provided in the critical areas regulations, paying special attention to measures that will promote retention of shoreline vegetation, replacement of invasive vegetation with native vegetation, and development of a well- functioning shoreline which provides both physical and habitat processes. • Within each environment designation the existing SMP designates an area called the Natural Buffer Zone. This zone is measured 50 feet from the OHWM and is intended to provide an undisturbed conservation buffer of natural vegetation. The County may want to consider developing environment designation specific buffer widths based on the existing conditions observed today, as identified in this report. To meet the no net loss standard, larger buffers may be necessary in some areas to preserve higher functioning shoreline, while smaller buffers may be adequate in developed areas. • Ensure that vegetation provisions allow for appropriate modifications to accommodate preferred uses, particularly important agriculture modifications, water-dependent or –related port developments, other water-oriented uses, and public access and recreation.

7.2.6 Water Quality, Stormwater, and Nonpoint Pollution • Several waterbodies throughout the County have water quality parameters such as bacteria levels, temperature, and dissolved oxygen, which are exceeding State standards. The County should consider incorporating regulations to facilitate maximum implementation of TMDL plans, and controlling introduction of 303(d)-listed pollutants for which TMDLs have not yet been prepared. • Consider adding clarifying statements noting that the policies of the SMP are also policies of the comprehensive plan and that the policies also apply to

122 The Watershed Company December 2016

activities outside shoreline jurisdiction that affect water quality within shoreline jurisdiction. However, the regulations apply only within shoreline jurisdiction.

7.3 Shoreline Modification Provisions

7.3.1 Shoreline Stabilization • The presence of existing stabilization related to transportation infrastructure (e.g. railroads and highways) or existing water-dependent uses will continue to be maintained in the years ahead. For the updated SMP, ensure that proper reference is given to appropriate exemptions found in the WAC related to “normal maintenance and repair.” These are not exemptions from the regulations, however; they are exemptions from a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. • Ensure “replacement” and “repair” definitions and standards are consistent with WAC 173-26-231(3)(a). Repair activities should be defined to include a replacement threshold so that applicants and staff will know when “replacement” requirements need to be met. • The County should include policies and regulations which promote "soft" over "hard" shoreline stabilization measures. Incentives should be included in the SMP that would encourage modification of existing armoring, where feasible, to improve habitat while still maintaining any necessary site use and protection. • Consider requiring a Conditional Use Permit for any new hard shoreline stabilization, at least in certain environment designations.

7.3.2 Piers and Docks • The County should consider providing specific dimensional requirements for overwater structures associated with residential uses. • For other types of uses, such as commercial, industrial, and public recreational, it may not be appropriate to have defined dimensional requirements but rather standards which emphasize that these uses should rely on mitigation sequencing to develop an appropriate design. • Similar to the recommendation under Shoreline Stabilization, the County should ensure repair activities are defined to include a replacement threshold so that applicants and staff will know when “replacement” requirements need to be met.

7.3.3 Fill • Restoration fills can benefit shoreline functions and should be encouraged, including improvements to shoreline habitats, material to anchor LWD placements, and as needed to implement shoreline restoration. For example, the

123 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

filling of rip-rapped shoreline areas with previously dredged material to fill interstitial spaces often used by non-native fish species which prey on juvenile salmon. • Fills waterward of the OHWM to create developable land should be prohibited.

7.3.4 Breakwaters, Jetties, Groins and Weirs • Breakwaters, jetties and groins are not prevalent in the County except along the Columbia River. The County should clearly prohibit new breakwaters, jetties, and groins, except for water-dependent uses, public access, shoreline stabilization, or other specific public purposes per WAC 173-26-231(3)(d).

7.3.5 Dredging and Dredge Material Disposal • Dredging to maintain active navigation channels, moorage facilities, and docking areas on the Columbia River is expected to continue. The County should consider providing standards as necessary so these activities can continue. • As noted above under “Fill,” the re-use of dredge material for the purposes of filling interstitial spaces in rip-rapped shorelines should be allowed. • Except for purposes of shoreline restoration, flood hazard reduction, and maintenance of existing legal moorage and navigation, the County should consider prohibiting these modifications.

7.3.6 Shoreline Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects • Consider incentives to encourage restoration projects, particularly in areas identified as having lower function. For example, allow modification of impervious surface coverage, density, height, or setback requirements when paired with significant restoration. Emphasize that certain fills, such as streambed gravels or material to anchor logs, can be an important component of some restoration projects.

7.4 Shoreline Uses

7.4.1 Agriculture • Maintenance of existing agriculture is commercially and culturally important to parts of the County. This should be recognized in shoreline policies. • The findings of this Shoreline Analysis Report do not suggest a need for additional regulations beyond those mandated by the SMP Guidelines.

124 The Watershed Company December 2016

7.4.2 Aquaculture • There are known hatcheries in the County and future aquaculture activities may occur. The County should ensure that any salmon recovery-related aquaculture activities are facilitated in the aquatic and appropriate upland environments.

7.4.3 Boating Facilities • The County includes a variety of boating facilities, including port uses and park boat moorage and launching facilities. Regulations for the over- and in-water components should be developed to provide applicants with as much predictability as possible, while still allowing for an appropriate amount of flexibility based on site-specific conditions and use-specific needs. • Public access should be included as components of new marinas or expansions, where feasible.

7.4.4 Commercial Development • There is minimal commercial use in the County’s shorelines, other than along the Columbia River. However, the County should allow existing commercial uses to continue and identify criteria for where future commercial uses may be appropriate by providing clear priority for water-oriented uses. • Consider incentives to attract water-oriented uses in appropriate locations along the shoreline. • Public access should be included as a component of new non-water oriented commercial uses, where feasible. • Ensure water-dependent uses are not restricted by other regulatory setbacks/buffers.

7.4.5 Forest Practices • The County should ensure they provide general policies and regulations for forest practices according to the SMP Guidelines. As provided for in WAC 173- 26-241(3)(e), the master program should rely on the Forest Practices Act for regulation of commercial forestry. There are, however, specific limits on clear cutting provided in RCW 90.58.150 which must be included. Exceptions to this standard should be by conditional use review. • The SMP standards should apply to Class IV General Forest Practices within the County where shorelines are being converted to non-forestry uses.

125 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

7.4.6 Industry • The County should support the Port’s efforts to retain existing and attract new water-oriented industrial uses in appropriate locations. • The County should recognize current industrial uses and consider incentives to attract water-oriented uses in appropriate locations along the shoreline.

7.4.7 In-stream Structural Uses • Large-scale in-stream structures intended to produce energy and/or moderate flooding are found in the County. There are also likely to be irrigation diversion and discharge structures in some waterbodies such as in the Trout Lake region. Regulations need to accommodate anticipated new diversion structures, and repair/maintenance and possible expansion of existing projects.

7.4.8 Mining • The County should consider policies which emphasize locating new mining away from shorelines, floodplains, and streams and when mining is allowed, ensure regulations are in compliance with WAC 173-26-241(3)(h).

7.4.9 Recreational Development • Recreation is a significant use of Klickitat County shorelines, particularly on the White Salmon and Klickitat Rivers. Recognizing this, the County should include appropriate provisions for existing and potential recreational uses, including rafting, boating, swimming, and fishing. • Work with local, state and federal parks departments; Army Corps of Engineers; and Port officials to ensure consistency between shoreline policies and regulations and long-term parks management plans. • Policies and regulations related to parks management should provide clear preferences for shoreline restoration consistent with public access needs and uses. • New shoreline access should be located and designed to maintain ecological functions.

7.4.10 Residential Development • Where proposed, residential development should proceed in a manner consistent with the control of pollution and prevention of damage to the shoreline environment.

126 The Watershed Company December 2016

• In the areas of more intense development, recognize current and planned shoreline residential uses with adequate provision of services and utilities as appropriate to allow for shoreline ecological protection. • Incorporate clear dimensional criteria for residential development, including setbacks/buffers, lot coverage, height limits, etc. • Include provisions which ensure that new development, including the creation of new lots, would not require new shoreline stabilization. New primary and accessory residential structures should be located far enough from the shoreline to prevent such a need. • For residential subdivisions that create five or more lots, consider how to create public or community access opportunities to the shoreline, as stipulated by the WAC Guidelines.

7.4.11 Transportation and Parking • Given the prevalence of transportation infrastructure within or near shorelines, the County should allow for maintenance and improvements to existing roads, railroads and parking areas, and for necessary new roads and parking areas where other locations outside of shoreline jurisdiction are not feasible.

7.4.12 Utilities • The County should allow for maintenance and improvements to existing utility facilities, and ensure that the location of new utilities considers alternatives to location within shoreline jurisdiction and provide performance standards for necessary new utilities where other locations outside of shoreline jurisdiction are not feasible.

7.5 Restoration Plan

A Restoration Plan document will be prepared at a later phase of the Shoreline Master Program update process, consistent with WAC 173-26-201(2)(f). The Shoreline Restoration Plan will address the following six subjects (WAC 173-26-201(2)(f)(i-vi)) and incorporate findings from this Shoreline Analysis Report:

(i) Identify degraded areas, impaired ecological functions, and sites with potential for ecological restoration;

(ii) Establish overall goals and priorities for restoration of degraded areas and impaired ecological functions;

127 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

(iii) Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs that are currently being implemented, or are reasonably assured of being implemented (based on an evaluation of funding likely in the foreseeable future), which are designed to contribute to local restoration goals;

(iv) Identify additional projects and programs needed to achieve local restoration goals, and implementation strategies including identifying prospective funding sources for those projects and programs;

(v) Identify timelines and benchmarks for implementing restoration projects and programs and achieving local restoration goals; and

(vi) Provide for mechanisms or strategies to ensure that restoration projects and programs will be implemented according to plans and to appropriately review the effectiveness of the projects and programs in meeting the overall restoration goals.

The Restoration Plan will “include goals, policies and actions for restoration of impaired shoreline ecological functions. These master program provisions should be designed to achieve overall improvements in shoreline ecological functions over time, when compared to the status upon adoption of the master program.” The Restoration Plan will mesh opportunities identified in this report with additional projects, regional or local efforts, and programs of each jurisdiction, watershed groups, and environmental organizations that contribute or could potentially contribute to improved ecological functions of the shoreline.

128 The Watershed Company December 2016 8 REFERENCES

Allen, Brady M., R. O. Engle, J. S. Zendt, F. C. Shrier, J. T. Wilson and P. J. Connolly. 2016. Salmon and Steelhead in the White Salmon River after the Removal of Condit Dam– Planning Efforts and Recolonization Results: Fisheries, Volume 41, No. 4. Pgs. 190-203.

Aspect Consulting. 2009. Hydrologic Report: Husum/BZ Corner Subarea. Prepared for Klickitat County Planning Department. Project No. 080184-001-04. November 4, 2009.

Beeson, M.H., Fecht, K.R., Reidel, S.P., and Tolan, T.L. 1985. Regional correlations within the Frenchman Springs Member of the Columbia River Basalt Group - new insights into middle Miocene tectonics of northwestern Oregon: Oregon Geology, v. 47, no. 8, p. 87-96.

Camp, V.E., Ross, M.E., and Hansen, W.L. 2003. Genesis of flood basalt flows and basin and range volcanic rocks from the Steens Mountains to Malheur River Gorge, Oregon: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 115, p. 105-128.

Columbia River Gorge Commission. 2011. Management Plan for the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. Available: www.gorgecommission.org/managementplan.cfm.

Fecht, K.R., Reidel, S.P., and Tallman, A.M., 1987, Paleodrainage of the Columbia River system on the Columbia Plateau of Washington State - a summary, in, Shuster, J.E., ed., Selected papers on the geology of Washington State: Washington Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources Bulletin 77, p. 219-248.

Google Inc. 2016. Google Earth. [Software].

Higgins, J. L. 2003. Determination of upstream boundary points on southeastern Washington streams and rivers under the requirement of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4042:18.

Larsen, E. M., and J. T. Morgan. 1998. Management recommendations for Washington’s priority habitats: Oregon white oak woodlands. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 37pp.

Lindsey, K.A. 1996. The Miocene to Pliocene Ringold Formation and associated deposits of the ancestral Columbia River system, south-central Washington and north-central Oregon. Washington Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open- File Report 96-8.

129 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Marriott, D. 2002. Lower Columbia River and Columbia River Estuary Subbasin Summary. Pp. Northwest Power Planning Council.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2013. ESA Recovery Plan for the White Salmon River Watershed.

Neal, V. 1972. Physical aspects of the Columbia River and its Estuary. Pp. pp. 19–70 in A. T. Pruter and D. L. Alverson, editors. The Columbia River Estuary and Adjacent Ocean Waters: Bioenvironmental Studies. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPCC). 2004a. White Salmon Subbasin Plan. Portland, OR. May 28, 2004. http://www.nwcouncil.org/media/116777/EntirePlan.pdf.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPCC). 2004b. Klickitat Subbasin Plan. Portland, OR. May 28, 2004. http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/subbasinplanning/klickitat/plan.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPCC). 2004c. Draft Lower Mid-Columbia Mainstem Subbasin Plan. December 8, 2004. http://www.nwcouncil.org/fw/subbasinplanning/lowermidcolumbia/plan.

Port of Klickitat Website. http://www.portofklickitat.com/. Accessed October 19th, 2016.

Reidel, S.P., Fecht, K.R., Hagood, M.C., and Tolan, T.L.. 1989a. The geologic evolution of the central Columbia Plateau, in, Reidel, S.P., and Hooper, P.R., eds., Volcanism and tectonism in the Columbia River flood-basalt province: Geological Society of America Special Paper 239, p.247-264.

Reidel, S.P., Tolan, T.L., Hooper, P.R., Beeson, M.H., Fecht, K.R., Bentley, R.D., and Anderson, J.L.. 1989b. The Grande Ronde Basalt, Columbia River Basalt Group - stratigraphic descriptions and correlations in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, in, Reidel, S.P., and Hooper, P.R., eds., Volcanism and tectonism in the Columbia River flood-basalt province: Geological Society of America Special Paper 239, p. 21-53.

Simenstad, C. A., J. L. Burke, J. E. O’Connor, C. Cannon, D. W. Heatwole, M. F. Ramirez, I. R. Waite, T. D. Counihan, K. L. Jones, and and K. L. J. Charles A. Simenstad, Jennifer L. Burke, Jim E. O’Connor, Charles Cannon, Danelle W. Heatwole, Mary F. Ramirez, Ian R. Waite, Timothy D. Counihan. 2011. Columbia River Estuary Ecosystem Classification — Concept and Application. Pp. 54 U.S. Geological Survery Open-File Report.

Swanson, D.A., Anderson, J.L., Bentley, R.D., Camp, V.E., Gardner, J.N., and Wright, T.L.. 1979. Reconnaissance geologic map of the Columbia River Basalt Group in Washington and adjacent Idaho: U.S., Geological Survey Open-File Report 79-1363, scale 1:250,000.

130 The Watershed Company December 2016

Swanson, D.A., Anderson, J. L., Camp, V.E., Hooper, P.R., Taubeneck, W.H., and Wright, T.L. 1981. Reconnaissance geologic map of the Columbia River Basalt Group, northern Oregon and western Idaho: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-797, scale 1:250,000.

Tolan, T.L., Reidel, S.P., Beeson, M.H., Anderson, J.L., Fecht, K.R., and Swanson, D.A.1989. Revisions to the estimates of the areal extent and volume of the Columbia River Basalt Group, in, Reidel, S.P. and Hooper, P.R., eds., Volcanism and Tectonism in the Columbia River Flood-Basalt Province: Geological Society of America Special Paper 239, p. 1-20.

U.S. Forest Service. 1991. Final environmental impact statement for the Lower White Salmon National Wild and Scenic River management plan. Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, Mt. Hood, Oregon.

U.S. Forest Service. 1991. Lower Klickitat River Wild and Scenic River Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement. 51 pp.

U.S. Forest Service. 1991. Lower White Salmon National Wild and Scenic River Management Plan. 51 pp.

Ward, D., S. Barnes, G. Rimbach, K. Bevis, J. Feen, P. Hoffarth, J. Jacobson, D. Larsen, J. Tabor, M. Vander Hagen, R. Woodin, M. Gildersleeve, H. Brunkal, G. Hughes, K. Tiffan, D. Geist, B. Tiller, J. Lukas, M. Powelson, and C. Macdonald. 2001. Draft Mainstem Columbia River Subbasin Plan. Prepared for Northwest Power and Conservation Council:169.

Washington State Department of Ecology. 2011. White Salmon River Watershed Fecal Coliform Bacteria Attainment Monitoring Study. Ecology Publication No. 11-03-046. August 2011, Olympia, WA.

Washington State Department of Ecology. 2016. Electronic Reference. Salmonscape. Water Quality Atlas: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterqualityatlas/map.aspx?CustomMap=y&RT=0&Layers=23, 29&Filters=n,n,n,n. Accessed September 19, 2016.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. State of Washington Priority Habitats and Species List.

Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2016a. Klickitat Wildlife Area Website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/lands/wildlife_areas/klickitat/. Accessed September 20, 2016.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2016b. Electronic Reference. Water Access Sites. http://wdfw.wa.gov/lands/water_access/. Accessed October 19, 2016.

131 DRAFT Klickitat County Shoreline Analysis Report

Watershed Professionals Network (WPN) and Aspect Consulting. 2005a. Klickitat Basin (WRIA 30) Watershed Management Plan.

Watershed Professionals Network and Aspect Consulting. 2005b. WRIA 30 Level I Watershed Assessment.

132 The Watershed Company December 2016 9 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

cfs ...... Cubic Feet per Second Corps ...... U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Ecology ...... Washington Department of Ecology ESA ...... Endangered Species Act FEMA ...... Federal Emergency Management Agency GIS ...... Geographic information systems GMA...... Growth Management Act HPA ...... Hydraulic Project Approval LWD ...... Large Woody Debris NLC ...... National Land Cover NOAA ...... National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration NPDES ...... National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS...... Natural Resources Conservation Service NWI ...... National Wetlands Inventory OHWM ...... Ordinary High Water Mark PCB ...... Polychlorinated biphenyl PHS ...... Priority Habitats and Species RCW ...... Revised Code of Washington RM…………………… River Mile SMA ...... Shoreline Management Act SMP ...... Shoreline Master Program SSURGO ...... Soil Survey Geographic Database TMDL ...... Total Maximum Daily Load UGA ...... Urban Growth Area USDA ...... U.S. Department of Agriculture USFWS ...... U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS ...... U.S. Geological Service WAC...... Washington Administrative Code WDFW ...... Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WDNR ...... Washington Department of Natural Resources WRIA ...... Water Resource Inventory Area

133

The Watershed Company December 2016

A PPENDIX A Klickitat County Assessment of Shoreline Jurisdiction

The Watershed Company December 2016

A PPENDIX B

Shoreline Inventory Map Folio