Shoreline Analysis Report Describes Existing Conditions and Characterizes Ecological Functions in the Shoreline Jurisdiction
The Watershed Company May 2015
S HORELINE A NALYSIS R EPORT
PACIFIC COUNTY
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Purpose Pacific County (County) obtained a grant from the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) in 2014 to complete a comprehensive update of its Shoreline Master Program (SMP). One of the first steps of the update process is to inventory and characterize the County’s shorelines as defined by the state’s Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971 (RCW 90.58). This analysis was conducted in accordance with the SMP Guidelines (Guidelines, Chapter 173- 26 Washington Administrative Code (WAC)) and project Scope of Work promulgated by Ecology, and includes all unincorporated areas within the County. Under these Guidelines, the County must identify and assemble the most current, applicable, accurate and complete scientific and technical information available.
This Shoreline Analysis Report describes existing conditions and characterizes ecological functions in the shoreline jurisdiction. 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 demonstrates that its updated SMP yields “no net loss” in shoreline ecological functions relative to the baseline (current condition). The no net loss requirement is a new standard in the Guidelines that is intended to be used by local jurisdictions to test whether the updated SMP will in fact accomplish the SMA objective of protecting ecological functions.
1.2 Shoreline Jurisdiction As defined by the SMA, 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 per second (cfs) or greater, lakes whose area is greater than 20 acres, and all marine waters extending three miles offshore. 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
1 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
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).”
Figure 1-1 provides a diagram conveying the extent of shoreline jurisdiction.
3
1 5
2 4
1. Shoreline-associated wetland located entirely within 200 feet from the OHWM 2. Shoreline-associated wetland located partially within 200 feet from the OHWM 3. Shoreline-associated wetland located beyond 200 feet from the OHWM, but within the 100-year floodplain 4. Shoreline-associated wetland that is beyond 200 feet from the OHWM and outside of the 100- year floodplain, but that is hydrologically connected a shoreline waterbody 5. Wetland that is not considered part of shoreline jurisdiction because it is beyond 200 feet from the OHWM, outside of the 100-year floodplain, and not hydrologically connected to a shoreline waterbody
Figure 1-1. Diagram showing areas within shoreline jurisdiction Source: Ecology 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
2 The Watershed Company May 2015
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)(c)).
A detailed description of the methods used to depict shoreline jurisdiction is included in Appendix A.
The SMA sets specific preferences for uses and calls for a higher level of effort in implementing its objectives along designated Shorelines of Statewide Significance, these preferences are detailed in Section 4.3.2. All streams and rivers that have mean annual flow of 1,000 cfs or greater are considered Shorelines of Statewide Significance, along with their associated uplands. Within Pacific County’s jurisdiction, the following waterbodies qualify as Shorelines of Statewide Significance (Figure 1-2).
• North River
• Willapa River downstream from the confluence with the South Fork Willapa River
• All areas seaward of the OHWM along the Pacific Ocean coastline, including harbors, bays, estuaries, and inlets, and all shorelands associated with these waters are also considered Shorelines of Statewide Significance
Pacific County does not have any lakes greater than 1,000 acres which would thereby qualify as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance.
3 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Figure 1-2. Map of Pacific County showing all Shorelines of the State (regulated shorelines) and Shorelines of Statewide Significance
1.3 Study Area The study area for this report includes all unincorporated land within the County’s proposed shoreline jurisdiction. Further, the study area includes relevant discussion of the contributing watersheds.
4 The Watershed Company May 2015
Pacific County encompasses 1,223 square miles. The County is bordered to the south by the Columbia River, to the southeast by Wahkiakum County, to the east by Lewis County, and to the north by Grays Harbor County. The County is bordered to the west by the Pacific Ocean. The County is predominantly rural in nature, with unincorporated areas making up most of the land area. Incorporated areas of the County include the cities of South Bend, Raymond, Long Beach, and Ilwaco. Pacific County is home to the Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe. The Long Beach Peninsula was also once home to the Chinook Indian Tribe, the federal recognition of which is still pending (History Link, electronic reference).
Federal and State lands make up nearly 4 percent and 12 percent of the total shoreland area, respectively. Federal lands occur in the Willapa National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). Federal lands on which shoreline waterbodies lie are included in this report, but discussion is more limited because the future SMP will only pertain to actions undertaken by non-federal parties on those lands. This generally occurs when a federal agency leases lands to a private party, such as forest tract leases on lands in a National Forest.
2 SUMMARY OF CURRENT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
2.1 Shoreline Management Act The SMA promotes planning along shorelines and coordination among governments. The legislative findings and policy intent of the SMA states:
“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).”
While protecting shoreline resources by regulating development, the SMA is also intended to provide balance by encouraging water-dependent or water-oriented uses while also conserving or enhancing shoreline ecological functions and values. SMPs must be based on state guidelines, but should be tailored to the specific conditions and needs of the local community.
2.2 Pacific County
Shoreline Master Program Pacific County adopted its existing SMP in 2000.
5 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Shoreline uses, developments, and activities are also subject to the County’s Comprehensive Plan, County Code, and various other provisions of County, State and federal laws.
Each incorporated City in the County is in the process of its own individual SMP update.
Existing Pacific County Shoreline Master Program Designations The current SMP designations for Pacific County include the four designations included in Ecology’s 1971 Final Guidelines. These designations include:
Natural: “relatively free of human influence… Any activity which would change… the existing situation would be desirable only if such a change would contribute to the preservation of the existing character. The primary determinant for designating an area as a natural environment is the… presence of some unique natural or cultural features considered valuable in their natural or original condition which (is) relatively intolerant of intensive human use.”
Conservancy: resources and valuable historic and cultural areas in order to ensure a continuous flow of recreational benefits to the public and to achieve sustained resources utilization… examples of use that might be predominant in a conservancy environment include diffuse outdoor recreation activities, timber harvesting on a sustained-yield basis, passive agricultural uses such as pasture and range… conservancy would also be the most suitable designation for those areas which present too severe biophysical limitations to be designated rural or urban…”
Rural: “to protect agricultural land from urban expansion, restrict intensive development along undeveloped shorelines,… and maintain open spaces and opportunities for recreational uses is intended for those areas characterized by… or having a high capability to support… agricultural practices and intensive recreational development. New developments in a rural environment are to reflect the character of the surrounding area by limiting residential density, providing permanent open space and by maintaining adequate building setbacks from the water…”
Urban: “to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by providing for intensive public use and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of urban uses. The urban environment is an area of high intensity land use including residential, commercial and industrial development. (It) does not necessarily include all shorelines within an incorporated city. Because shorelines suitable for urban uses are limited, emphasis should be given to development within already developed areas priority is also to be given to planning for
6 The Watershed Company May 2015
visual and physical access (by the public) to water in the urban environment industrial and commercial facilities should be designed to permit pedestrian waterfront activities.”
In addition to these four overarching shoreline environment designations, Pacific County also refined these designations for specific circumstances by dividing the conservancy and rural designations into several subcategories. In addition, the County’s existing SMP includes a separate set of designations with distinct regulations for the Columbia River and one for ocean uses. Chapter 7 includes a more detailed comparison of current designations.
For the purposes of this analysis, the County only maintains Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data including the four overarching designations. Therefore, the subcategories for conservancy and rural designations and the separate Columbia River designations are not mapped in Appendix B or reported in this document. Some areas of the proposed shoreline are not currently designated. Chapter 6 identifies the designations that are currently applied for each waterbody.
County Comprehensive Plan The County Comprehensive Plan, last updated in 2010, is a statement of goals and policies that guides growth and development throughout the County. In addition to the basic elements required by the Growth Management Act (GMA), such as environment, land use and rural lands, critical areas and resource lands, housing, transportation, capital facilities, and utilities, the County’s Comprehensive Plan establishes an overall land use pattern. It provides the general distribution, location, and extent of the commercial, industrial, residential, and natural resource land uses.
The Comprehensive Plan’s Land use and Rural Element establishes a future land map along with development intensities and population densities aimed at preserving the County’s rural character and allowing for growth that is sensitive to the environment. The County’s land use preferences and policies also include provisions for protecting groundwater and surface waters, while providing the services and employment base desired for Pacific County.
Consistent with GMA, the Pacific County Comprehensive Plan establishes locations that are appropriate sites for higher intensity and density residential, commercial, and industrial development. Most of these uses will occur within incorporated areas and the County’s designated UGA. These include land in and around the County’s incorporated municipalities of Ilwaco, Long Beach, Raymond, and South Bend. UGAs are also established for areas outside of incorporated towns, in areas that are already characterized by urban growth. The Seaview UGA is the only example of that in the County. The Seaview UGA is generally located outside of shoreline jurisdiction, except that portions of associated wetlands occur within the UGA.
7 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
The Comprehensive Plan also establishes rural areas that are appropriate for growth and rural areas that are appropriate for long term resource uses. The GMA allows for “limited areas of more intensive rural development” within rural areas (RCW 36.70A.070). These areas are typically characterized by existing development or tourist attractions that should be supported by other uses. Pacific County has identified several existing, rural land use patterns that are considered more intense than the surrounding countryside. These areas have been designated as rural villages, rural activity centers, or community crossroads as follows in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1. Pacific County Limited Areas of More Intensive Rural Development Location Area (Acres) Purpose Community Crossroad Purpose: recognize the existing commercial centers located Klipsan Crossing 72 along state highways or county arterials that provide nearby residents, local vehicular traffic, and the traveling public with Lindgren Road 22 everyday convenience shopping goods and services. Community crossroads are generally small, compact, isolated East Raymond 7 commercial centers characterized by small-scale industries and businesses. Surfside Estates 9
Tokeland Road 85
Rural Activity Centers Purpose: Recognize the historic, unincorporated communities Bay Center 251 that are characterized by urban type densities and which may offer some urban services such as community water, limited Chinook 545 commercial uses, and fire protection. Rural activity centers are generally not self-sufficient. This designation provides for the Frances 64 infill, development, or redevelopment of lands within the rural activity center boundary. The rural activities centers are Lebam 165 generally small, compact, isolated rural centers that primarily exist to provide housing, convenience goods, and services to Menlo 305 residents in and around the area
Nahcotta 42
Naselle 1,554
Tokeland 145
Rural Village Purpose: Recognize the historic, unincorporated communities Ocean Park 581 that are characterized by urban type densities, are self-sufficient villages offering a full range of consumer goods and services, and which may offer some urban services. Rural Villages provide for the infill, development, or redevelopment of lands within the rural village boundary. The rural village is generally a compact, self-sufficient town that functions as a small urban center and provides housing, convenience goods, and services to residents in and around the area Source: Pacific County, 2010 The Comprehensive Plan defines the types of development and the uses desired through land use designations. The land use designations differentiate urban, rural and resource lands and
8 The Watershed Company May 2015 determine the types of uses and density. There are three types of rural areas. In an effort to understand planned and future shoreline land use, the Comprehensive Plan land use designations are reported for the shoreline jurisdiction of each shoreline waterbody. Table 2-2 summarizes the Comprehensive Plan land use designations.
Table 2-2. Pacific County Comprehensive Plan land use designations % Acres in Density Land Use Total Total Shoreline Primary Land Uses or Purpose (dwelling units / Designation Acres Area Jurisdiction acre Rural Land Remote Rural 13,212 2.2 476 Farming, forestry, mineral 1 unit / 10 acres extraction, open space, and residential General Rural 100,02 16.9 15,606 Small-scale farms and forestry 1 unit / 5 acres 3 activities, dispersed single-family homes, and open space Rural 7,177 1.3 1,373 Recognize the historic areas 1 unit / 5 acres Agriculture dedicated to cranberry production or areas of potential cranberry expansion Rural Shoreline 1,572 0.3 15.6 Residential development on 1 unit / acre Development parcels that are surrounded by smaller lots and which can physically support development without requiring urban service levels. existing one-acre lots Rural Village 581 0.1 4.2 Single family residences, small- 1 unit / acre scale industries and businesses in a compact core, public facilities such as post offices, schools, and fire departments, and open space with single family residences (seasonal and year round use), and open space Rural Activity 3,073 0.4 766 Single family residences, small- 1 unit / acre Center scale industries and businesses, public facilities such as post offices, schools, and fire departments, and open space. Community 195 <0.1 80 Restaurants, feed stores, garden Intended for Crossroad supplies, greenhouse and plant commercial nurseries, lumber sales, groceries uses and drug stores, gas stations, hotels and other small-scale businesses, including residences in conjunction with such businesses. Industrial 358 <0.1 221 Industrial activities include, but Intended for are not limited to, research, industrial uses manufacturing, processing, fabrication, wholesaling and storage of products, and associated offices. Typical uses
9 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
% Acres in Density Land Use Total Total Shoreline Primary Land Uses or Purpose (dwelling units / Designation Acres Area Jurisdiction acre include building materials storage, boat building and repair, contract construction service shops and storage yards, laboratories, wholesale business and storage, automobile business and storage, feed and fuel storage, warehouses, locally distributed utilities, log storage, saw and lumber mills, rock crushing, welding and sheet metal shops, parking lots, laundries, machinery and transportation sales, service and repair, saw and filing shops, emergency fire and police facilities, recycling accessory drop boxes, community recycling centers and processing plants. Public Preserve 16,309 4.0 4,831 Publicly owned areas pertaining Residential to recreation, fish and wildlife Prohibited habitat conservation, or unique geologic features. Coast Guard 164 <0.1 61 Includes the Cape N/A Disappointment Coast Guard Station located on the Long Beach Peninsula. These lands are owned by the federal government. Resource Land Agriculture 8,063 1.4 1,373 Meant to preserve agricultural and Residential aquacultural lands and to protect development shellfish and fishing industries. discouraged Includes lands meeting the definition for agricultural and aquaculture lands of long-term commercial significance. Forest LTCS 411,67 69.2 12,500 Includes lands meeting the 1 unit / 40 acres 5 definition for forest lands of long- Residential term commercial significance. development discouraged Transitional 32,792 5.5 5,770 The purpose of this designation is 1 unit / 5acre Forest to protect transitional forest areas, primarily located adjacent to rural shoreline areas along Willapa Bay, the Naselle River and the Columbia River. This designation provides for rural types of residential development along with commercial forestry production on parcels in accordance with the protection standards of this subsection and
10 The Watershed Company May 2015
% Acres in Density Land Use Total Total Shoreline Primary Land Uses or Purpose (dwelling units / Designation Acres Area Jurisdiction acre the Critical Areas and Resource Lands Ordinance No. 147. Urban Areas (City/UGA) City of Ilwaco 1,350 0.2 NA- not in The shoreline within the County’s county’s incorporated areas are regulated shoreline through their own SMPs jurisdiction City of Long 1,060 0.2 Beach
City of 3,027 0.4 Raymond
City of South 1,255 0.2 Bend
Unincorporated 263 <0.1 16 The Seaview UGA generally falls Seaview outside of shoreline jurisdiction, except that portions of associated wetlands occur within the UGA. Land within the Seaview UGA has been designated as predominantly residential, with limited commercial use areas. Total Land 594,860 42,007 Area
Source: Pacific County, 2010; BERK, 2014
A 2008 study conducted by the Pacific County Economic Development Council concluded there was insufficient industrial land to support Pacific County’s economy. As a remedy, the Comprehensive Plan identifies and designates additional lands suitable for industrial development. The purpose of the Industrial designation is to recognize areas where industrial activities are located and to provide controls for such activities that protect nearby land uses. The Industrial designation provides for existing industrial users, as well as for the intensification of development, or new development of small-scale industries. The Industrial designation is particularly relevant for shoreline planning because in Pacific County, industrial uses are often associated with natural resources, such as agriculture, aquaculture, aquifer supply, timber or minerals. Industrial lands are often located near natural resources such as shorelines. The major industrial areas in Pacific County include those operated by the Ports of Willapa (e.g., Bay Center and Tokeland), Chinook, and Peninsula. These are primarily located near water bodies.
11 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Zoning Code The Comprehensive Plan is implemented through the development regulations, including the Zoning Code. Title 18 of the Pacific County Code provides zoning standards that more specifically direct uses, building bulk, scale, and location, and other design considerations. The zones match the Comprehensive Plan designations and minimum lot sizes are dictated through the Comprehensive Plan land use designations. Pacific County zoning code includes the zones and abbreviations in the following list.
• Commercial Forestry (FC ) • Transitional Forest Land (FT) • Conservation (CD) • Agricultural (AG) • Aquacultural (AQ) • Remote Rural (RR-1) • Rural Lands (RL) • Rural Residential (RR) • Restricted Residential (R-1) • Resort District (R-3) • Mixed Use (MU) • Community Commercial District (CC) • Industrial (I) • Mixed Use – Tokeland (MU-T)
Critical Areas County regulations applicable to critical areas and natural resources were last updated in 1999. In those regulations, the County specified general stream/river buffers and wetland buffers as summarized in Table 2-3. Per Ordinance 147, wetlands are delineated based on Ecology’s 1997 manual and rated under Ecology’s 1993 wetland rating manual. These standards do not reflect the most current, accurate, and complete scientific and technical information available. State law (WAC 173-22-035) now directs wetland delineation to be conducted in accordance with the 1987 U.S. Corps of Engineers (Corps) Wetlands Delineation Manual and the 2010 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Interim Regional Supplement, rather than the State’s 1997 manual. Ecology’s wetland rating manual was last revised in 2006, and an updated rating system became effective as of January 1, 2015.
The wetland buffers in the County’s critical areas regulations are not consistent with current guidance from Ecology, which proposes wetland buffers ranging from 25-300 feet (Granger et al. 2005). Stream buffers under Pacific County Code are expected to help maintain several
12 The Watershed Company May 2015 functions of riparian areas, yet the existing regulatory buffer widths are on the lower side of literature cited in guidance from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) (Knutson and Naef 1997). In addition to stream buffers, the PCC 16.52 establishes standards for new and repaired on-site sewer systems adjacent to shellfish, kelp, eelgrass, herring, and smelt spawning areas, including a 100-foot-wide setback from surface waters. Wetland and stream buffer standards are described in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3. Pacific County Critical Area Buffer Regulations Summary Category Standard Buffer Cat. I 100 Cat. II 75 Wetlands Cat. III 50 Cat. IV 25 Category I, II, and III wetlands may be averaged. Resulting buffer may Averaging be no less than 50% of standard buffer width in any location Stream Type Standard Buffer 1 100 Streams / 2 100 Lakes 3 100 4 50 5 25
PCC 16.58 (Aquifer Recharge Areas) regulates areas with permeable soils, including beaches and dunes. The provisions for aquifer recharge areas establish maximum densities for residential development in aquifer recharge areas depending on the type of sewage treatment proposed. New non-residential development with the potential to contaminate the underlying aquifer requires preparation of an aquifer recharge report.
County regulations for frequently flooded areas (PCC 16.56) reference the County’s flood damage prevention standards (PCC 15.08). PCC 15.08.070 prohibits fill, new construction, or substantial improvements in the floodway that would increase flood levels during the base flood discharge. These provisions help ensure that floodways will maintain their functions in storing and transporting water, as well as their habitat functions. Standards applicable to the floodplain and coastal high hazard areas are primarily focused on minimizing risks to structures and safety. In the future, the County could consider extreme high tide events (e.g. King Tides), NOAA’s highest astronomical tides (HAT), and sea level rise predictions, as well as their added effects in development planning to prevent potential damage to structures.
The County’s geological hazard area regulations (PCC 16.60) apply to areas susceptible to erosion hazards, landslide hazards, mine hazards, seismic hazards, and areas susceptible to
13 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
other geologic events. Many development standards apply to geologic hazard areas, including a 50-foot buffer from the top, toe and sides of landslide and erosion hazard areas. Tsunami hazard areas are not identified as a geological hazard area in the County’s critical areas regulations.
Provisions to fulfill requirements for critical areas on shorelines are addressed in RCW 90.58.100(2) and WAC 173-26-186. Shoreline critical areas that occur in marine and estuarine waters include critical saltwater habitats (WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(iii)). “Critical saltwater habitats include all kelp beds, eelgrass beds, spawning and holding areas for forage fish, such as herring, smelt and sandlance; subsistence, commercial and recreational shellfish beds; mudflats, intertidal habitats with vascular plants, and areas with which priority species have a primary association” (WAC 173-26-221(2)(c)(iii)(A)). Critical saltwater habitats that occur within Pacific County include: spawning and holding areas for herring, and although not documented in the county, potentially for smelt and sandlance; mudflats and eelgrass beds; recreational and commercial shellfish beds; and areas with which priority species have primary associations. The identification of ecologically important areas, as well as surveys to identify priority forage fish and marine mammal habitats will continue to be conducted by the Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) along Pacific County’s coast to inform critical areas designations and the marine spatial planning process (http://msp.wa.gov/msp-projects/). WAC 173-26- 221(2)(c)(iii)(B) also suggests that local management planning should “include an evaluation of current data and trends,” as well as “an analysis of what data gaps exist and a strategy for gaining this information.” The state encourages local governments to be involved in “determining which habitats and species are of local importance.”
2.3 State Agencies and Regulations Aside from the SMA, State regulations most pertinent to development in the County’s shorelines include the State Hydraulic Code, the GMA, the State Environmental Policy Act, tribal agreements and case law, the Watershed Planning Act, the Water Resources Act, and the Salmon Recovery Act. A variety of agencies (e.g., Ecology, WDFW, Washington Department of Natural Resources [WDNR]) are involved in implementing these regulations or otherwise own shoreline areas. Ecology reviews all shoreline projects that require a shoreline permit, but 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
14 The Watershed Company May 2015
SMP update, the County will consider other State regulations to ensure consistency as appropriate and feasible with the goal of streamlining the shoreline permitting process. A summary of some of the key State regulations and/or State agency responsibilities follows.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Chapter 77.55 RCW (the Hydraulic Code) gives the 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 any of the salt or fresh waters of the State.” 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 for adverse impacts. In most cases, if a government agency or any person plans to conduct a hydraulic project they must “secure approval of the department in the form of a permit as to the adequacy of the means proposed for the protection of fish life” (RCW 77.55.021).
WDFW and Washington tribes co-manage fisheries in waters of Washington State.
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 to State waters, including wetlands. In Washington, the Department of Ecology is the State agency responsible for conducting that review, with their primary review criteria of ensuring that State water quality standards are met. Actions within streams or wetlands within the shoreline zone that require a Section 404 permit (see below) will also need to be reviewed by Ecology.
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 ordinary high water mark require review by WDNR to establish whether the project is on State-owned aquatic lands. Certain project activities, such as single-family or two-party joint-use residential piers, on State-owned aquatic lands are exempt from these requirements. WDNR recommends that all proponents of a project waterward of the ordinary high water mark contact WDNR to determine jurisdiction and requirements.
The WDNR also implements and enforces the Forest Practices Act and Forest Practices Rules. The Forest Practices Act applies to primarily all non-Federal and non-tribal forestland. The
15 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
forest practices rules include standards to maintain and restore aquatic and riparian habitat. The rules were incorporated into a State-wide Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan for federally threatened and endangered species in 2005.
Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission - Seashore Conservation Area: The Seashore Conservation Area (SCA), established in 1967, includes lands between the line of mean high tide and the line of mean low tide from Cape Disappointment to Leadbetter Point, from Toke Point to the south jetty in Grays Harbor County, and from Damon Point in Grays Harbor County to the Makah Indian Reservation, excluding areas within any Indian reservation (RCW 79A.05.605). The SCA also includes lands that have been formed by accretion, which are above the present line of mean high tide, where private landowners have granted State Parks with a deed of dedication. The purpose of the SCA is, “To contribute toward providing people an opportunity to enhance their lives through recreational leisure time experiences and cause our environment to be protected, our heritage preserved, and our natural resources conserved” (Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission 2001).
The SCA establishes standards for ocean beach management, including provisions that regulate vehicular traffic within the SCA and prohibit mining for sand, except for small quantities and on the Long Beach Peninsula for cranberry growing.
The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission developed a Long Beach Area Management Plan (Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission 2009), which identifies the following objectives for the area’s State Parks:
• Recreational resources: Provide and develop an array of compatible and quality overnight, day-use facilities and recreational opportunities that are inspired by and in harmony with the parks’ natural and cultural resources.
• Natural resources: Maintain and enhance habitat for coastal flora and fauna. Interpret these natural resources to the public to create and reinforce stewardship of them.
• Partnership: Provide park visitor services through public and private partnerships and other entrepreneurial programs that are compatible with other park management objectives.
• Cultural resources: Preserve and interpret historical and archaeological resources.
Marine Waters Planning and Management Act: The Marine Waters Planning and Management Act (RCW 43.372) authorizes agencies with marine waters planning and management responsibilities to include marine spatial data and marine spatial planning elements in existing and ongoing planning. The Act also directs Ecology to work with other
16 The Watershed Company May 2015
State agencies with marine management responsibilities, tribal governments, marine resources committees, local and federal agencies, and marine waters stakeholders to compile marine spatial information and to incorporate this information into ongoing plans. The marine interagency team shall coordinate the development of a comprehensive marine management plan for the State's marine waters, which includes marine spatial planning. The goal of the marine spatial planning process is to analyze existing and future uses of Washington’s coastal waters, identify potential conflicts between activities, and recommend policies. The SMP is a regulatory document that will potentially implement these policy recommendations. Because these acts and programs intersect, consistency between the two processes is necessary. The Washington marine spatial planning website provides interactive data layers here: http://www.msp.wa.gov/.
Ocean Resources Management Act: The Ocean Resources Management Act (RCW 43.143) establishes policies that are intended to protect the functions and values of the State’s ocean resources. These policies are summarized as follows:
• No leasing of Washington's tidal or submerged lands for purposes of oil or gas exploration, development, or production;
• Priority to resource uses and activities that will not adversely impact renewable resources; and
• Encourage the conservation of liquid fossil fuels, and explore available methods of encouraging such conservation.
The Act establishes criteria for federally, State, or locally permitted uses or activities that will adversely impact renewable resources, marine life, fishing, aquaculture, recreation, navigation, air or water quality, or other existing ocean or coastal uses. Those criteria are listed as follows:
• There is a demonstrated significant local, State, or national need for the proposed use or activity;
• There is no reasonable alternative to meet the public need for the proposed use or activity;
• There will be no likely long-term significant adverse impacts to coastal or marine resources or uses;
• All reasonable steps are taken to avoid and minimize adverse environmental impacts, with special protection provided for the marine life and resources of the Columbia River, Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor estuaries, and Olympic National Park;
17 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
• All reasonable steps are taken to avoid and minimize adverse social and economic impacts, including impacts on aquaculture, recreation, tourism, navigation, air quality, and recreational, commercial, and tribal fishing;
• Compensation is provided to mitigate adverse impacts to coastal resources or uses;
• Plans and sufficient performance bonding are provided to ensure that the site will be rehabilitated after the use or activity is completed; and
• The use or activity complies with all applicable local, State, and federal laws and regulations.
The Act also establishes the Washington Coastal Marine Advisory Council to communicate and collaborate with federal, State, and local agencies and entities on coastal issues, including coastal resource policy, planning, and management issues, and to advise the governor, legislature, and State and local agencies on specific coastal waters resource management issues. The Advisory Council’s role also includes identifying and pursuing funding opportunities for relevant programs and activities of member entities.
Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.020): The purpose of the Growth Management Act is to guide the development of comprehensive plans and development regulations, including the Shoreline Master Program. These plans are encouraged to: plan urban growth in areas that are already developed to reduce sprawl, create efficient transportation systems, allow for affordable housing and economic development, respect property rights, make decisions on permits in a timely manner, maintain and enhance natural resource industries, allow for open space and recreation, protect the environment, encourage public participation in planning processes, create public facilities and services that support planned development, and preserve sites that have historic value. In 1990, Pacific County, at the option of their Board of County Commissioners, elected to prepare a comprehensive plan under the Act, and thus began a coordinated approach and process to address growth. The incorporated cities of Ilwaco, Long Beach, Raymond and South Bend were also embodied into the growth management planning process.
2.4 Federal Regulations Federal regulations most pertinent to development in the County’s shorelines include the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 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, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Magnuson-Stevens Act of 2006, Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the Submerged Lands Act,
18 The Watershed Company May 2015
and Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A variety of agencies are involved in implementing these regulations. Review by these agencies of shoreline development by these agencies in most cases would be triggered by in- or over-water work, or discharges of fill or pollutants into the water. 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 comprehensive SMP update, the County 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).
Section 404 provides the 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.” 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.
A 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, the Department of 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.
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 Pacific County include the Pacific
19 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Ocean, Willapa Bay (including Skidmore Slough), the lower 4 miles of the Bear River, the lower 15.3 miles of the Naselle River, the lower 5 miles of the North River, and tidal waters of the Bear, Willapa, Nemah, and Palix 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.
Federal 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 require federal approval, receive federal funding, or occur on federal land must be reviewed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 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.
Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA): The MSA is the primary law governing marine fisheries management in United States federal waters. The Magnuson-Stevens Act of 2005 requires the conservation and management of commercial and recreational fisheries within the United States’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and beyond to international waters by preparation, implementation, and enforcement of fishery management plans. The Act created eight regional fishery management councils. The Pacific Fishery Management Council is made up of representatives from state and tribal fish and wildlife agencies, as well as fisheries and conservation stakeholders.
The MSA also establishes Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), broadly defined to include "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity" for designated species. For the State of Washington, EFH has been designated for 3 species of Pacific salmon, 83 species of groundfish, and 5 coastal pelagic species. The MSA requires all Federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on all federal actions that may adversely affect designated EFH.
It also promotes the prevention of impediments or interference with “recognized legitimate uses of the high seas, except as necessary for the conservation and management of fishery resources.”
20 The Watershed Company May 2015
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA): Section 303 of the CZMA of 1972 declares that “it is the national policy (1) to preserve, protect, develop and where possible, to restore or enhance, the resources of the Nation’s coastal zone for this and succeeding generations; (2) to encourage and assist the states [in]… development and implementation of management programs to achieve wise use of the land and water resources of the coastal zone, giving full consideration to ecological, cultural, historic, and esthetic values as well as well as the needs for compatible economic development…” (3) “to encourage the preparation of special area management plans which provide for increased specificity in protecting significant natural resources…” (4) “to encourage participation and collaboration of the public, state, local governments, and other regional agencies” including Federal agencies. (5) “to encourage coordination and cooperation with and among the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, and international organizations where appropriate in collection, analysis, synthesis, and dissemination of coastal management information, research results, and technical assistance…” (6) “to respond to changing circumstances affecting the coastal environment and coastal resource management…” There are currently no requirements for interstate consistency.
The CZMA consists of three programs, the National Coastal Zone Management Program, the National Estuarine Research Reserve System, and the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program. Section 307 of the CZMA, called the "federal consistency" provision, requires that federal actions that have reasonably foreseeable effects on any coastal use or resource be consistent with the enforceable policies of a state's federally approved coastal management program. In the State of Washington, the coastal management program is encompassed by six state laws, including:
• the Shoreline Management Act (including local government shoreline master programs) • the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) • the Clean Water Act • the Clean Air Act • the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) • the Ocean Resource Management Act (ORMA)
Federal agency activities must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of a state coastal management program. In Pacific County, where marine fisheries are an integral part of the regional economy, marine fishery resources and activities regularly extend beyond the three-mile limit of state jurisdiction. To the extent that the County’s SMP establishes enforceable policies for uses and modifications in the marine environment, the SMP can be a tool to help ensure that federal actions are consistent with the County’s marine management objectives.
21 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (16 U.S. Code Chapter 40): The Oil Pollution Act expands the federal government’s ability to prevent and respond to oil spills; it also calls for the expansion of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, and the ability of the federal government to penalize responsible parties for oil spill damage.
Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S. Code Chapter 29): The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 gives authority to the Department of the Interior to grant leases for mineral exploration and development on the Outer Continental Shelf. The Department of the Interior is also responsible for formulating regulations associated with exploration and development on the Outer Continental Shelf.
2.5 Tribal Regulations The Shoalwater Reservation is approximately one square mile in size. As a sovereign nation, the Shoalwater Tribe has its own zoning and environmental provisions that apply within the reservation.
2.6 Regulatory Framework - Special Topics
Dredging Dredging projects typically involve multiple agencies. The following discussion assumes that new permits are required for a dredging project (as opposed to performing the dredging under an existing permit). Permits are required to be obtained from: the Corps, Ecology, WDFW, and the local government with jurisdiction. Before applying for a permit, an applicant must obtain a Suitability Determination or other decision document from the Corps’ Dredged Material Management Program that evaluates the proposed project. As part of the Corps’ process, ESA consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service will be conducted. If in-water disposal is proposed, a Site Use Authorization from the Washington Department of Natural Resources is also required. Any dumping of dredge material is managed by the Dredged Material Management Program under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) enacted by Congress in 1972. Dumping permits and recommended dumping sites within the territorial seas (3-12 miles out) are issued by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers using the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) environmental criteria. Existing ocean disposal sites in and adjacent to Pacific County are included in this report (Section 6.11).
22 The Watershed Company May 2015
Ocean Energy Projects As is discussed in Section 3.4.5 of this document, there has been some interest in the potential for wave, tidal, and offshore wind energy to be produced in Pacific County. Although some technologies have not been adequately vetted as far as their potential for energy production or environmental impacts, a regulatory framework exists for permitting of potential ocean-based energy production projects. In general, the location of a proposed project would determine the applicable regulatory processes. The permitting process varies according to whether such a project is proposed in State waters (less than three nautical miles offshore) or in federal waters (beyond three nautical miles offshore).
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issues authorizations for such projects in State waters. “Preliminary permits” allow project-related studies to be performed. Licenses allow the actual construction of a project. The licensing process incorporates most State authorizations and typically takes years to complete. Shoreline permits would also be required for projects in State waters.
In federal waters (beyond three nautical miles offshore and outside of shoreline jurisdiction), both the FERC and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management have regulatory authority. For wave, tidal, offshore wind, and current projects, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has jurisdiction to issue leases, while FERC has jurisdiction to issue licenses. It should be noted that even projects in federal waters will likely require transmission lines that will pass through State waters. These transmission lines would require a FERC license and a shoreline permit.
The 2005 Energy Policy Act gives the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management the authority to lease submerged lands for ocean energy projects. The Renewable Energy Program Regulations (30 CFR 585), however, first require the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to coordinate with the relevant federal, state, and local agencies to avoid conflicts among users and prevent interference with reasonable uses of territorial seas. As discussed above in Section 2.4, the Coastal Zone Management Act also requires any federal agency activity (including permitting of ocean energy projects) within the coastal zone be carried out in a manner that is consistent to the maximum extent possible with the enforcement policies approved by State management programs.
On the west coast of the United States, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is engaged in the West Coast Governors Alliance on Ocean Health, which is a partnership between the governors of California, Oregon, and Washington to manage the impact of human activities on ocean resources and ecosystems. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management will also be involved in the West Coast Regional Planning Body, which will require the Bureau of Ocean
23 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Energy Management to work with other Department of the Interior Agencies to consider all responsibilities and interests in ocean use issues.
3 SUMMARY OF COUNTY ECOSYSTEM CONDITIONS
3.1 Climate and Ocean Physical Conditions Pacific County is located in a temperate maritime climate. Annual rainfall in the Willapa basin averages about 85 inches with a range of 44-145 inches (Smith 1999). Precipitation is concentrated in the winter months, with most precipitation falling as rain below 1,500 feet.
3.1.2 Currents
The most predominant current influencing water transport along the Washington coast is the California Current System. This current system is driven by strong alongshore winds along the narrow continental shelf (Skewgar and Pearson 2011). While the California current flows southward, west of the continental shelf break, the California Undercurrent flows northward over the continental slope (Skewgar and Pearson 2011). The California Undercurrent is responsible for transporting the nutrient-rich waters, which are then brought to the surface during upwelling. Another current that influences the Washington coast during the fall and winter is the Davidson Current, which is a northward current that flows over the continental shelf and slope (Hickey 1979).
3.1.3 Tides
Washington’s outer coast experiences two high and two low tides per day of different heights, called a mixed semidiurnal tidal pattern. The mixed semidiurnal tide range (the vertical range between Mean Higher High Water to Mean Lower Low Water) varies from 7 to 8 vertical feet along the outer coast of Washington (Skewgar and Pearson 2011). Up to half the volume of brackish water in Willapa Bay is flushed into the coastal ocean twice each day due to tidal fluctuations (Hickey and Banas 2003; Skewgar and Pearson 2011).
3.2 Geology and Sediments
Willapa Hills
Pacific County is located in the Willapa Hills physiographic region, which includes the Black Hills, Doty Hills, and the broad valleys that lead to the Pacific Ocean. The following description
24 The Watershed Company May 2015 of the geologic setting is derived from Lasmanis’ “Geology of Washington” (1991) and Wiedemann's description of coastal geology in "The Ecology of Pacific Coastal Sand Dunes" (1984).
Sequences of exposed tertiary igneous and sedimentary rocks of Eocene through Miocene age are present in the Willapa Hills. Geological features and fossils indicate the historical presence of a marine shoreline along the eastern side of the Willapa Hills during the Tertiary period.
During the middle and late Miocene, Columbia River basalt flowed down the Columbia River to the Pacific Ocean, Willapa Bay, and Grays Harbor. These flows formed many of the basaltic intrusions and headlands that remain today. The Willapa Hills were not subject to subduction or metamorphism. Erosional weathering of the sedimentary beds in the Willapa Hills began in the Pliocene and continued rapidly, resulting in the rounded topography and deep weathering profiles apparent today. The combination of steep slopes, erodible geology, and abundant rainfall contribute to high landslide susceptibility. Most landslides have been shallow slides or debris flows, but deep-seated landslides have also occurred. The hydrologic and vegetative changes that accompany forestry activities have increased landslide activity in the region (Weyerhaeuser 1996, Smith 1999).
Submerged cedar forests and radiocarbon dating techniques provide evidence that estuaries along the coast experienced repeated episodes of sudden submergence during the Holocene associated with subduction earthquakes, followed by uplift. These subsidence and emergence events occurred at an approximately 500-year interval, with last event occurring in 1700 (Ruggiero et al. 2007).
Barrier beaches along the outer coast create the major estuaries of Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay. These beaches have formed as a result of currents from the Columbia River, winds, and waves. The easily erodible material also allowed for the creation of wave-cut terraces on which present-day sand dunes have developed. Today, the coastline of Pacific County consists of broad sand beaches, backed by a foredune, parallel dune ridges, and a deflation plain.
Columbia River Estuary The Columbia River estuary 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 (Simenstad et al. 2011). Subsequent glaciation restructured and expanded the extent of the Columbia River basin (Simenstad et al. 2011). Near the end of the last glacial period, the Missoula Floods, first described by J Harlen Bretz in 1923, resulted in the deposition of silt, sand, and gravel that now
25 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report form much of the landscape in the Columbia River basin. Volcanism, lava flows, and lahars occurring in the Holocene period, have contributed much of the bedload of the lower Columbia River (Simenstad et al. 2011). Sea level rise since the late Pleistocene period has submerged river channels and caused deposition of coarse and fine sands (Marriott 2002), which shape today’s shallow estuarine habitats.
Coastal Ocean The surficial geology off the coast from Pacific County in the coastal ocean is primarily composed of soft bottom habitat with sand of varying grain sizes (Reid et al. 2006). The sandy benthic composition of the coastal ocean is partly due to sediment discharge from the Columbia River which travels up the coast of Washington in the Columbia River Littoral Cell (CRLC) (Ruggiero et al. 2005). As sediments travel away from the Columbia River in the CRLC, they become finer (Goldfinger et al. 2014; Ruggiero et al. 2005). In the nearshore, north of the Columbia River to a depth of 50 m, the sea bed is covered in a layer of fine grain sandy sediment ranging in size from 0.21 mm near the mouth of the Columbia River to about 0.16 mm at the tip of the peninsula (Byrnes and Feng 2005; Ruggiero et al. 2010; Di Leonardo and Ruggiero 2015). The sediment composition in this region is variable as discharge from the Columbia River changes throughout the year, with peak flows occurring in May and June and minimum flows occurring in August and September (Byrnes and Feng 2005). Sediment transport is also influenced by large-scale weather systems, which control water circulation including littoral currents, upwelling, and downwelling events (Barnes et al. 1972).
Sediments transported in the CRLC also create migrating sandbars that form offshore from the Long Beach peninsula (Ruggiero et al. 2005). In 2011, sandbars near Long Beach formed between 200 and 1,010 m from the shoreline, at an average depth of 3.9 m (Di Leonardo and Ruggiero 2015). The maximum height of a sandbar off Long Beach was 2.9 m, with an average height of 0.8 m. (Di Leonardo and Ruggiero 2015). The Southwest Washington Coastal Erosion Study reported that the highest reported sandbars off of Long Beach occurred in 1999, reaching heights up to 6 m (Southwest Washington Coastal Erosion Study Report). These offshore bars influence regional hydrodynamics, create waves, and absorb a substantial amount of wave energy as storm surge approaches the shoreline and coastal dune system.
Anthropogenic influences such as the damming of the Columbia River and the construction of Columbia River jetties have historically had a significant effect on sediment transport and dynamics along Washington’s coast, especially in Pacific County along the Long Beach Peninsula (reviewed by Ruggiero et al. 2005; Kaminsky et al. 2010; Kaminsky et al. 1999; Gelfenbaum et al. 1999). Shoreline sediment changes over decadal timescales are hypothesized
26 The Watershed Company May 2015 to be driven by “strong gradients in alongshore sediment transport rates and onshore feeding from the lower shoreface” (Ruggiero et al. 2010).
Hard substrate in the near-shore waters of Pacific County is rare and rocky outcrops are predicted occur in deeper waters (i.e. ~200 m) and boulders at approximately 100 fathoms depth (Goldfinger et al. 2014).
3.3 Key Species and Habitats
Key Pacific County habitats considered within the SMP include freshwater, estuarine, and marine shorelines and their associated shorelands. Most species within the County are predominantly associated with one of these habitats, although several (including salmonids) bridge multiple habitats.
Freshwater Habitats Key habitats associated with freshwater shorelines include riparian habitats, floodplains, wetlands, and upland forests and grasslands.
Riparian areas provide a broad range of critical functions for water quality and habitat. Water quality functions include filtration of nutrients, fecal coliform bacteria, sediment, and other contaminants (Naiman and Decamps 1997, Mayer et al. 2007). Functions important to fish and wildlife habitats include microclimate regulation, invertebrate and detrital food sources for juvenile fish, shaded cover, and woody debris recruitment (Naiman and Decamps 1997). Floodplain habitats act as an extension of riparian areas. Floodplains often include off-channel rearing habitats and wetlands, and they provide pulses of organic detritus and insect prey following flood events.
Wetlands provide habitat for fish, and wildlife, moderation of flood impacts, and filtration and assimilation of nutrients and contaminants (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000). The relative value of wetland functions varies based on landscape position; location relative to streams, rivers, and lakes; and surrounding development. In recognition of these differences, the hydrogeomorphic (HGM) approach to wetland classification was developed, which accounts for geomorphic setting, water source, and water transport (Brinson 1993, Smith et al. 1995). The primary freshwater HGM classifications in Pacific County and brief descriptions follow.
• Depressional wetlands occur in topographic depressions. Dominant water sources are precipitation, ground water discharge, and runoff. When present, flow is typically directed toward the center of the depression. Interdunal wetlands, discussed below, are typically depressional.
27 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
• Riverine wetlands occur in floodplains and riparian corridors. Dominant water sources are overbank flow from the channel or hyporheic flow. Flow is predominantly unidirectional, flowing downstream. Surge plain wetlands, discussed below, are a type of riverine wetland.
• Slope wetlands occur on sloping lands. Dominant water sources are ground water and precipitation. Flow is predominantly unidirectional.
• Flats occur on broad, flat lands, including large, historic floodplains and deflation plains. Water sources are predominantly precipitation; ground water is not a major water source. Water loss primarily occurs through infiltration and seepage. Deflation plain interdunal wetlands, described below, may be classified as flats.
• Lake fringe wetlands occur adjacent to lakes. Dominant water source is the water elevation of the lake. Flow is bidirectional, rising and falling with lake levels.
Interdunal wetlands are common features near coastal areas in Pacific County. They frequently occur behind stabilized foredunes, either in small depressions or as larger deflation plains. Wiedemann (1984) listed 168 species of birds, 31 species of mammals, 10 amphibian species, and 3 reptile species occurring in association with the Pacific Northwest coastal dune ecosystem. In addition to supporting a wide diversity of wildlife, interdunal wetlands are frequently associated with many rare and endangered plant species and their associated fauna (Crawford 2011). Rapid rainwater infiltration in coastal dunes helps recharge freshwater aquifers and limit potential saltwater intrusion. Because there is typically little elevation difference in groundwater between adjacent interdunal wetlands, slight differences in water level may initiate flow from one wetland to another (Crawford 2011). Under natural conditions, individual wetland locations may shift seasonally or inter-annually through natural sand movement and vegetation succession (Crawford 2011). A research study of the Long Beach Peninsula in Pacific County documented high infiltration rates within the sand dunes (Blakemore 1995). Blakemore (1995) identified the direction of drainage on the Long Beach Peninsula, finding that, “most of the natural drainage of the Long Beach Peninsula moves south to north following swales between the dune ridges. Some of this natural drainage has been altered by canals, drainage ditches, and culverts… An example of an altered drainage is the Whiskey Slough watershed where a dune ridge was penetrated, thereby expanding the size of the watershed by more than 50 percent.” Blakemore concluded that approximately two-thirds of the peninsula drainage drains to Willapa Bay, and approximately one-third drains to the Pacific Coast, as shown in Figure 3-1.
During winter months, up to 40 percent of the groundwater recharge occurring in the Long Beach dunes discharges to surface waters (Blakemore 1995). Because interdunal wetlands rapidly drain to the underlying aquifer and the Pacific Ocean, the Shoreline Hearings Board
28 The Watershed Company May 2015 determined in 1993 that interdunal wetlands in the City of Westport, Washington, “are in hydraulic continuity with the Pacific, and so they are associated wetlands of the Pacific, and thus subject to SMA jurisdiction”(Shorelines Hearings Board 1993). Drawing from that conclusion, interdunal wetlands throughout the Pacific County shoreline are likely considered associated wetlands.
Figure 3-1a. Direction of groundwater flow in the northern portion of the Long Beach Peninsula (from Blakemore 1995)
29 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Figure 3-1b. Direction of groundwater flow in the central portion of the Long Beach Peninsula (from Blakemore 1995)
30 The Watershed Company May 2015
Figure 3-1c. Direction of groundwater flow in the southern portion of the Long Beach Peninsula (from Blakemore 1995)
Coastal forests have also been extensively managed for timber production. Managed forests are typically 20 to 60 years old and are made up of native tree species, primarily Douglas fir and western hemlock. Harvest of old-growth and mature forests for commercial timber and paper production has resulted in loss of species diversity and forest complexity on most of this landscape due to planting of even aged, monotypic stands, and short harvest rotations. Conversion of habitat to residential and nonforest uses has accelerated forest fragmentation.
31 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Land cover has a significant effect on water flow through a watershed. A loss of forested vegetation cover is correlated with increased high flows, increased variability in daily streamflow, reduced groundwater recharge, and reduced summer low flow conditions (Burges et al. 1998, Jones 2000, Cuo et al. 2009). Changes in hydrology related to development are generally associated with soil compaction, draining, and ditching across the landscape, increased impervious surface cover, and decreased forest cover (Moore and Wondzell 2005).
Estuarine and Marine Habitats Key habitats associated with estuarine and nearshore marine areas in Pacific County are described below.
Dunes Coastal sand dunes are a prominent feature along the County’s Pacific Coast shoreline. Historically, coastal marine and wind processes maintained native plant communities in early successional stages on the outer edges of the dunes. Mature native plant communities, such as spruce-dominated forests, developed in the more stable interior systems. Coastal sand dunes provide a number of important functions, including protected habitat for shorebirds and wildlife, groundwater recharge, water quality protection, physical backshore protection, and recreation (City of Long Beach 2000). Interdunal wetlands commonly occur behind stabilized foredunes, either in small depressions or as larger deflation plains. See discussion of interdunal wetlands in Section 3.3.1, above.
Marine Riparian Intact marine riparian habitats provide a variety of essential ecological functions, including water quality protection, sediment control, wildlife habitat, nutrient control, insect food sources for juvenile fish, shaded cover, and woody debris to help build complex habitat and stabilize beach substrate (Brennan and Culverwell 2005). Marine riparian vegetation helps stabilize slopes and protect against landslides and other erosion hazards.
Beaches Sandy flat beaches predominate along the Pacific Coast, North of Cape Disappointment. These fine grained beaches tend to have high levels of primary productivity and support benthic infauna (e.g., amphipods, isopods, polychaete worms, and patches of razor clams) (Dethier 1991 in Skewgar and Pearson 2011).
Intertidal beaches may also provide spawning substrate for forage fish including surf smelt and sand lance. However, a recent survey of potential spawning habitats on the outer coast of Washington did not identify any intertidal forage fish spawning areas along the Pacific County coast (Langness et al. 2013).
32 The Watershed Company May 2015
Cobble to fine sand beaches and tidal sand and mudflats are important habitats for many shellfish species. Shellfish beds perform a number of important ecological functions including cycling nutrients, stabilizing substrates, creating habitat structure, and providing food for a wide variety of marine invertebrates, birds, fish, and mammals. Fish such as sole, surfperch, and staghorn sculpins use high energy nearshore beaches (Skewgar and Pearson 2011). Intertidal beaches throughout the County also provide roosting and foraging opportunities for shorebirds.
Estuarine Habitats Shallow water estuarine ecosystems, like tidal marshes in Willapa Bay, provide exceptionally productive habitats. Many estuarine habitats function as nurseries for a wide variety of marine and anadromous species, including several that are of significant ecological and economic interest (Hughes et al. 2014).
Tidal marshes are particularly important for the rearing of small, subyearling ocean-type Chinook salmon during estuarine residency (Levings et al. 1991, 1995, Bottom et al. 2005). Shallow water estuarine habitats may provide spatial separation from aquatic predators that reside in deeper waters, improved protection from predators through higher turbidity levels (Gregory and Levings 1998), as well improved foraging capacity (Levings et al. 1991).
Federally threatened green sturgeon are also found in estuarine habitats of the Columbia River and Willapa Bay in summer months. The habitat value that these estuaries provide to green sturgeon is not fully understood (Adams et al. 2002), but it is hypothesized that green sturgeon take advantage of the warmer temperatures and high productivity in estuarine systems to maximize growth (Moser and Lindley 2006). Their species decline has been attributed to multiple factors including habitat degradation, dams, possibly commercial fishing, or a combination of these factors (Huff et al. 2012). Trawl records suggest that green sturgeon ocean populations are concentrated in the coastal waters of Oregon, Washington, and Vancouver Island (Huff et al. 2012). It is possible that the productive northwest waters provide both optimal foraging and refuge for this species (Huff et al. 2012).
Larger estuaries, such as Willapa Bay and the Columbia River Estuary, support recruitment and juvenile rearing habitat for Dungeness crab (Armstrong et al. 2003).
In addition to their ecological significance, coastal saltmarsh wetlands provide substantial value to the local economy. A recent study by Feagin et al. (2010) found that just in birding and hunting value alone the high saltmarsh community provides more than $4,000/ha in economic service. A study of all Puget Sound watershed habitats using peer-reviewed literature
33 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
established a range of ecosystem values for saltmarshes from $381 to $122,098/ac (Batker et al. 2010). This was the highest appraised value of any natural capital in the study.
Eelgrass beds provide habitat for invertebrates and diverse fish assemblages, including juvenile and subadult salmonids and spawning herring (Hosack and Dumbauld 2006). Eelgrass beds also entrain sediment and detritus, they are a major organic carbon source in nearshore areas, and they attenuate wave and current energy (Miller et al. 1980, Steneck et al. 2003). Eelgrass beds require soft substrate for establishment, and the depth of eelgrass beds is controlled by the level of ambient light (Mumford 2007). Eelgrass provides a significant food source for waterfowl.
Shellfish beds perform a number of important ecological functions including cycling nutrients, stabilizing substrates, enhancing water quality (filtering and retention), and providing food for a wide variety of marine invertebrates, birds, fish, and mammals, as well as humans. Epibenthic shell deposits associated with commercial and wild shellfish beds, supports higher densities of amphipods, harpacticoid copepods, cumaceans, crabs, and gunnels compared to bare mudflats (Reviewed in Feldman et al. 2000). Shellfish growth can be affected by fine sediment loads, changes in salinity, and the establishment of invasive species (e.g., Zostera japonica and Spartina alterniflora). Pathogens and toxic algal blooms related to water quality from upland uses can present health hazards from shellfish consumption (Anderson et al. 2002).
Salt marshes and mudflats are used as roosting and foraging grounds by shorebirds. Tidal wetlands that are fed by freshwater seeps or streams provide localized freshwater input and support species that include native shellfish and shorebirds (Schlenger et al. 2011).
Coastal oceans soft bottom benthic habitat The main benthic habitat type in the coastal ocean off of Pacific County is soft bottom habitat. Soft bottom habitats support a high diversity of macrobenthic organisms including polychaete worms, bivalves (e.g. butter clam and razor clams), echinoderms, and crustaceans. These communities exhibit a variety of feeding mechanisms including: suspension feeding, deposit feeding (surface and subsurface), herbivory, carnivory, and omnivory (Macdonald et al. 2011). Macrobenthic organisms are incredibly important in sediment biogeochemistry and nutrient cycling (Solan et al. 2003). They perform ecological functions by providing stability to sediments, serving as a food source for both people and other organisms, decomposing sediment organic matter and remineralizing nutrients, and improving water quality by filtering water of sediments, nutrients, carbon, and pollutants (Thursh and Dayton 2002; Solan et al. 2003). Soft bottom communities, however, are sensitive to anthropogenic impacts such as habitat disturbance (i.e. dredging, and dredge spoil placement, and mining) (reviewed by
34 The Watershed Company May 2015
Probert 1984), ocean acidification (Dupont et al. 2010), increases in sea surface temperature (Harley et al. 2006), and toxic pollution (Pearson and Rosenberg 1978, Gorostiaga et al. 2004, Borja et al. 2006).
In addition to macrobenthic organisms, the coastal ocean in this region contains a number of commercially important fish and invertebrate species that inhabit the sandy bottom. These fish include: English Sole, rock sole, pacific sandlance, and Dungeness crab. Many of these organisms (e.g., English sole and Dungeness crab) begin their lives in sheltered estuaries habitats (such as Willapa Bay) and may make an ontogenetic habitat shift as an adult to offshore sandy bottom habitats for spawning and/or foraging (Gunderson et al. 1990).
Rocky Shores While soft bottom habitat dominates a majority of the southwest Washington Coast, small areas of rocky and mixed substrate shorelines occur in the southern portion of the County’s shorelines, at Cape Disappointment and North Head. Wave energy is reduced in the lee of rocks and kelp beds, creating diverse habitat structure, including intertidal and subtidal tidepools that support a range of species. The mixed substrate shorelines in the northern portion of the County create habitats occupied by “a unique subset of sand‐loving rocky‐shore organisms” (Skewgar and Pearson 2011). In addition to marine fish and invertebrates that use the rocky shoreline, small mammals and shorebirds forage in and around the rocky shore. Seabirds and birds of prey nest on the rocky cliffs. Harbor seals and fur seals may use rocky platforms as pupping sites and haul-outs (Skewgar and Pearson 2011).
Kelp requires high ambient light, hard substrate, minimum turbidity during settlement, fairly low marine water temperatures, and moderate to high salinities (Mumford 2007). Rocky shores at Cape Disappointment and North Head may support small areas of kelp, and floating kelp mats, which can provide habitat structure in nearshore pelagic habitats (see below). However, there are no known kelp beds in Pacific County waters and there are no kelp beds mapped for Pacific County (Washington Department of Natural Resources 2005).
Nearshore Pelagic Habitat
Pelagic Plankton Plankton forms the base of the nearshore pelagic food web. The distribution and abundance of plankton varies daily, seasonally, and interannually, depending on upwelling, currents, and wind. Phytoplankton production is particularly high on the Washington coast. During spring and summer months, northerly winds transport surface water offshore to the south. This leaves space for cold, nutrient- rich water to flow up to the photic zone and support blooms of phytoplankton. In addition to the nutrients derived from upwelling, coastal waters along the
35 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Washington coast are continually sourced with additional nutrients from the Columbia River plume. During an upwelling event, the Columbia River plume interacts with oceanographic features and prevents the southward transport of waters, causing retention of nutrient- rich waters locally (Banas et al. 2009). When the southern winds along the Washington-Oregon coast taper, the Columbia River plume travels northward along the Washington coast where it becomes temporarily trapped in coastal estuaries such as Willapa Bay (Banas et al. 2009). While these hydrologic features make the southwest Washington coast highly productive, they also create conditions which make the region particularly complex and difficult to model (Skewgar and Pearson 2011). This factor could prove detrimental in the case of an oil spill, where it would be difficult to predict where contaminated waters would travel and to identify regions to protect (Skewgar and Pearson 2011).
Many marine organisms begin their lives as planktonic organisms, called meroplankton. Oceanographic conditions such as wind, currents, temperature, and salinity may affect meroplankton population dispersal, development, survival, and genetics (Botsford et al. 1994). For example, when Dungeness crab reproduce annually in January, their fertilized eggs enter the water column where they metamorphose into zoea. Zoea develop and disperse for about four months as they are transported in offshore and cross-shelf currents. In their later stages of development, larval crabs (called megalopae) will settle onto estuary or nearshore benthos when the temperature and salinity conditions are favorable (Hobbs et al. 1992). The success of Dungeness crab recruitment to the benthos has been attributed largely to the timing and strength of onshore winds, which transport megalopae back to settlement areas nearshore (Hobbs et al. 1992). Thus, oceanographic variables affect meroplankton distribution along the Washington coast, which in turn affects the distribution of many fishes (e.g. rockfish) and invertebrates (e.g. razor clams), as well as the food supply for planktivores and higher trophic level marine life (e.g., fish, seabirds, marine mammals) (Miller 2004).
Pelagic Fish Species Fish species found in the pelagic zone of the coastal ocean include both local and transient species whose populations vary temporally and spatially often depending on water temperature, productivity, and prey. The following is a description of how selected species utilize offshore waters in the coastal ocean of Pacific County.
• Many forage fish species such as Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) forage close to shore and migrate into Willapa Bay to spawn in February (Brodeur and Percy 1986; Bargmann 1998).
36 The Watershed Company May 2015
• Anchovy populations are known to spend most of their lives offshore, but travel nearshore to the mouth of the Columbia River and Willapa Bay in the summer months (Bargmann 1998; Richardson 1980). • From the month of June to early Fall, north Pacific Hake (Merluccius productus) are found in the waters off Pacific County as they migrate between north and south of the Columbia River (Brodeur and Pearcy 1986). • Adult and juvenile coho and Chinook salmon have been found to inhabit the nearshore pelagic waters off the Washington coast (Krutzikowsky and Emmett 2005). The diet of young adult coho salmon offshore from the Columbia River have been found to be composed of fish (e.g., anchovy, herring, juvenile Chinook salmon, and rockfish), crustaceans, and cephalopods (e.g., squid) (Laufle et al. 1986; Brodeur 1990). • The Pelagic cephalopod, opalescent inshore squid, (Loligo opalescens), have been found to be most abundant off the coast of Oregon, but adults are commonly found in waters off of Long Beach (Brodeur and Pearcy 1986).
Pelagic Marine Mammals In the 1900s, Stellar sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) declined largely due to population control by humans. However, in the 1970s, protections for the stellar sea lion were put in place and their populations have been increasing at an “average rate of 9.13% from 1989 to 2013” (Wiles 2014). Stellar sea lions feed up to 60 km offshore or in the Columbia River and forage for Pacific hake, rockfish, skates, flounders, herring, salmon, smelt, white cod, and white sturgeon (Wiles 2014). These sea lions are not known to haul out on Pacific County shorelines, but can be found resting nearby on the Oregon side of the Columbia River at the tip of the South Jetty and in Astoria.
A number of whale species migrate offshore of the west coast of the United States. These whales include: grey (Eschrichtius robustus), humpback (Megaptera novaengliae), sei (Balaenoptera borealis), sperm (Physeter microcephalus), fin (Balaenoptera physalus), orca (Orcinus orca), and blue (Balaenoptera musculus) whales (Douglas et al. 2008). These species are susceptible to ship strikes by vessels and increased vessel traffic could pose a threat to these species (Douglas et al. 2008).
Since 2012, NOAA has attached satellite tags to endangered southern resident killer whales and tracked their movements. In March and April of 2015, tagged killer whales from the L and K pod were found to be active in nearshore waters off of Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay, and the entrance to the Columbia River. Whales were observed in these locations in 2013 as well. Prey and fecal samples were collected by NOAA researchers and future analysis will decipher how killer whales are utilizing the nearshore waters off of Pacific and Grays Harbor Counties (NOAA satellite tagging blog).
37 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Figure 3-2. Example movements of L pod on April 10, 2015 near the mouth of the Columbia River, the Long Beach peninsula, and Grays Harbor (NOAA).
Priority Habitats and Species Table 3-1 includes a list of Priority habitats and features identified by WDFW as occurring in Pacific County. Table 3-2 includes a list of priority animal species, and Table 3-3 addresses priority plant species in the County. Although most of these species and habitats occur in shoreline jurisdiction, it is possible that some of them may occur exclusively outside of shoreline jurisdiction. Where specific occurrences have been identified within shoreline jurisdiction, these are mapped in Maps 15-17 of the Inventory Mapfolio (Appendix B). These maps do not show all occurrences; therefore, it is not possible to definitively identify those species and habitats that do not occur in shoreline jurisdiction at this time.
Table 3-1. Priority habitats and features in Pacific County Species/ Habitats Description Biodiversity Areas and Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species Corridors of native fish and wildlife.
Caves A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages (including associated dendritic tubes, cracks, and fissures) which occurs under the earth in soils, rock,
38 The Watershed Company May 2015
Species/ Habitats Description ice, or other geological formations, and is large enough to contain a human.
Cliffs Greater than 7.6 meters (25 feet) high and occurring below 1524 meters (5000 feet).
Coastal Nearshore Relatively undisturbed nearshore estuaries of Washington’s outer coast, including Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay and the mouth of the Columbia River, encompassing shore, intertidal, and subtidal areas.
Freshwater Wetlands and Freshwater wetlands: Lands transitional between terrestrial and Fresh Deepwater aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water.
Fresh deepwater: Permanently flooded lands lying below the deepwater boundary of wetlands (6 feet).
Herbaceous Balds Variable-sized patches of grass and forb vegetation located on shallow soils over bedrock that commonly is fringed by forest or woodland.
Instream The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
Old-Growth/Mature Forest Old Growth: Forest stands >3 ha (7.5 acres) having at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings and meeting specific size standards for trees, snags, and downed wood (over 200 years old)
Mature: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) diameter at breast height; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old- growth (80 - 200 years old).
Open Coast Nearshore Relatively undisturbed non-estuarine nearshore of Washington’s outer coast, from the Canadian border south to the Oregon border, encompassing shore, intertidal, and subtidal areas.
Oregon White Oak Woodlands Stands of oak or oak/conifer associations >1 acre, where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%; or where total canopy coverage of the stand is <25%, but oak accounts for at least 50% of the canopy coverage.
Riparian The area adjacent to flowing or standing freshwater aquatic systems. Riparian habitat encompasses the area beginning at the ordinary high water mark and extends to that portion of the terrestrial landscape that is influenced by, or that directly influences, the aquatic ecosystem.
39 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Species/ Habitats Description Snags and Logs Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 51 cm (20 in) and are > 2 m (6.5 feet) in height. Priority logs are > 30 cm (12 in) in diameter at the largest end, and > 6 m (20 feet) long.
Talus Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 - 2.0 m (0.5 - 6.5 feet), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
Source: WDFW 2008 Table 3-2. Priority species in Pacific County and offshore waters Category Species/ Habitats State Status Federal Status Bull Trout Candidate Threatened Chinook Salmon Candidate Threatened Chum Salmon Candidate Threatened Coastal Res./ Searun Cutthroat -- Species of Concern Threatened – Coho Salmon -- Lower Columbia Eulachon Candidate Threatened Green Sturgeon -- Threatened Diadromous Fish Kokanee -- -- Pacific Lamprey -- Species of Concern Pink Salmon -- -- River Lamprey Candidate Species of Concern Endangered- Sockeye Salmon Candidate Snake River Steelhead Trout Candidate Threatened Western Brook Lamprey -- Species of Concern White Sturgeon -- -- Black Rockfish Candidate -- Bocaccio Rockfish Candidate -- Brown Rockfish Candidate -- Canary Rockfish Candidate -- China Rockfish Candidate -- Copper Rockfish Candidate -- English Sole -- -- Marine/Estuarine Greenstriped Rockfish Candidate -- Fish Longfin Smelt -- -- Pacific Cod Candidate -- Pacific Hake Candidate -- Pacific Herring Candidate -- Pacific Sand Lance -- -- Quillback Rockfish Candidate -- Redstripe Rockfish Candidate -- Rock Sole -- --
40 The Watershed Company May 2015
Category Species/ Habitats State Status Federal Status Surfsmelt -- -- Tiger Rockfish Candidate -- Walleye Pollock Candidate -- Widow Rockfish Candidate -- Yelloweye Rockfish Candidate -- Yellowtail Rockfish Candidate -- Lingcod -- -- Dunn's Salamander Candidate -- Amphibians Oregon Spotted Frog Endangered Threatened Van Dyke's Salamander Candidate Species of Concern Western Toad Candidate Species of Concern Bald Eagle Sensitive Species of Concern Band-tailed Pigeon -- -- Brandt's Cormorant Candidate -- Brant -- -- Brown Pelican Endangered Species of Concern Cavity-nesting ducks: Wood Duck, Barrow’s Goldeneye, Common -- -- Goldeneye, Bufflehead, Hooded Merganser Common Loon Sensitive -- Common Murre Candidate -- Golden Eagle Candidate -- Great Blue Heron -- -- Marbled Murrelet Threatened Threatened Birds Mountain Quail -- -- Northern Goshawk Candidate Species of Concern Peregrine Falcon Sensitive Species of Concern Pileated Woodpecker Candidate -- Purple Martin Candidate -- Short-tailed Albatross Candidate Endangered Western Snowy Plover Endangered Threatened Sooty Grouse -- -- Northern Spotted Owl Endangered Threatened Streaked Horned Lark Endangered Threatened Trumpeter Swan -- -- Tundra Swan -- -- Vaux’s Swift Candidate -- W WA breeding concentrations of -- -- Cormorants, Storm-petrels, Terns, Alcids
41 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Category Species/ Habitats State Status Federal Status W WA nonbreeding concentrations of Charadriidae, Scolopacidae, -- -- Phalaropodidae W WA nonbreeding concentrations of Loons, Grebes, Cormorants, Fulmar, -- -- Shearwaters, Storm-petrels, Alcids Waterfowl Concentrations -- -- Western grebe Candidate -- Western Washington nonbreeding concentrations of Barrow's Goldeneye, -- -- Common Goldeneye, Bufflehead Wild Turkey -- -- Yellow-billed cuckoo Candidate Threatened Blue Whale Endangered Endangered California Sea Lion -- -- Dall's Porpoise -- -- Gray Whale Sensitive -- Marine Mammals Harbor Seal -- -- Humpback Whale Endangered Endangered Orca (Killer Whale) Endangered Endangered Pacific Harbor Porpoise Candidate -- Sperm Whale Endangered Endangered Steller Sea Lion Threatened -- Green Sea Turtle Threatened Threatened Reptiles Leatherback Sea Turtle Endangered Endangered Loggerhead Sea Turtle Threatened Endangered Columbian Black-tailed Deer -- -- Elk -- -- Terrestrial Fisher Endangered Candidate Mammals Marten -- -- Roosting Concentrations of Big-brown -- -- Bat, Myotis bats, Pallid Bat Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Candidate Species of Concern Butter Clam -- -- Dungeness Crab -- -- Manila Clam -- -- Native Littleneck Clam -- -- Marine Newcomb’s Littorine Snail Candidate Species of Concern Invertebrates Olympia Oyster Candidate -- Pacific Oyster -- -- Pandalid shrimp (Pandalidae) -- -- Razor Clam -- --
42 The Watershed Company May 2015
Category Species/ Habitats State Status Federal Status Oregon Silverspot Threatened Endangered Moths/Butterflies Queen Charlotte's Copper (formerly Candidate Species of Concern Makah Copper) Source: WDFW 2008 In addition to priority species designated by WDFW, the federal government has identified commercially significant fish species warranting additional habitat protection through the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the designation of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). In Washington State, EFH has been designated for 3 species of Pacific salmon, 83 species of groundfish, and 5 coastal pelagic species.
43 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Table 3-3. Rare plant species in Pacific County Scientific Name Common Name State Status Federal Status Abronia umbellata var. acutalata pink sand-verbena Endangered Species of Concern Baccharis pilularis ssp. coyotebush Threatened -- consanguinea Boschniakia hookeri Vancouver ground-cone -- Brotherella roellii1 Roll’s golden log moss Threatened -- Carex macrochaeta large-awned sedge Threatened -- Dodecatheon austrofrigidum frigid shooting-star Endangered Species of Concern Erigeron aliceae Alice's fleabane Sensitive -- Erythronium revolutum pink fawn-lily Sensitive -- Euonymus occidentalis var. western wahoo Sensitive -- occidentalis Filipendula occidentalis queen of the forest Threatened Species of Concern Lycopodiella inundata bog clubmoss Sensitive -- Packera bolanderi var. harfordii Harford's ragwort Sensitive -- Parnassia palustris var. northern grass-of- Sensitive -- neogaea parnassus Phacelia bolanderi Bolander's phacelia -- -- Poa laxiflora loose-flowered bluegrass Sensitive -- Poa unilateralis ssp. ocean-bluff bluegrass Threatened -- pachypholis Polemonium carneum1 great polemonium Threatened -- Sanicula arctopoides bear's-foot sanicle Endangered Species of Concern Triglochin striata three-rib arrowgrass -- -- 1. Most recent record in Pacific County was before 1977. Source: WDNR. Accessible at: http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/lists/plantsxco/pacific.html Salmonid populations in Table 3-2 that are listed as threatened or endangered generally spawn and rear in freshwater tributaries to and the mainstem of the Columbia River. Even those coastal salmonid populations that are not federally listed are afforded significant conservation status because of their ecological and commercial role in the County. Additionally, because of their relative health and the lower risks from growth and development, coastal salmon populations are important to long-term success of salmon populations in the Pacific Northwest (Miller 2003). Salmon populations that occur in Pacific County are listed in terms of ESUs and DPSs in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4. Salmonid populations in freshwater habitats in Pacific County. WRIA Salmon Population Washington Bull Trout (Threatened) Southwest Washington steelhead (winter run) Southwest Washington coho Willapa- 24 Pacific coast chum Washington coast Chinook Resident/Sea run cutthroat trout Washington Bull Trout (Threatened) Southwest Washington steelhead (summer and winter runs) Chehalis- 22/23 Southwest Washington coho Pacific coast chum Washington coast Chinook
44 The Watershed Company May 2015
WRIA Salmon Population Resident/Sea run cutthroat trout Washington Bull Trout (Threatened) Lower Columbia River Chinook (Threatened) Grays/Elochoman- 25 Columbia River Chum (Threatened) Lower Columbia River coho (Threatened) Source: WDFW 2008 In addition to the birds listed in Table 3-2, the USFWS (http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/) lists the following birds of conservation concern in Western Washington:
• Horned Grebe • Hudsonian Godwit • Peregrine Falcon • Red Knot • Solitary Sandpiper • Rock Sandpiper • Lesser Yellowlegs • Short-billed Dowitcher • Upland Sandpiper • Olive-sided Flycatcher • Whimbrel • Smith's Longspur • Bristle-thighed Curlew • Rusty Blackbird
Still other species that occur in Pacific County are considered vulnerable, even if they are not have specific state or federal listings. Additional information on vulnerable and imperiled in Pacific County can be found at http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe.
Non-Native, Invasive Species A list of many of the non-native and invasive species present in the County are identified in Table 3-5.
Non-native, invasive vegetation often forms dense monocultures that preclude native vegetation and alter the ecosystem. Potential effects of invasive plant species in riparian and instream habitats include increased instream water temperatures, lowered dissolved oxygen, changes in pH, reduced bank stability, altered flow conditions and increased localized flooding. By altering environmental conditions to which native species are adapted, anthropogenic changes may facilitate more frequent and successful biological invasions (Byers 2001). Impacts of non-native species range from trophic and competitive effects to large scale habitat changes. Some species introductions may serve to facilitate future introductions of other non-native species (Williams and Grosholz 2008). Estuaries and coastal marine habitats are particularly susceptible to introductions of nonnative species because they support activities that may serve as vectors for invasive species, such as shipping and boating (Williams and Grosholz 2008).
In Willapa Bay, Japanese eelgrass (Zostera japonica) is expanding into what had likely been unvegetated tidal flat, typically in the tidal range above Z. marina (Dumbauld and Wyllie- Echeverria 2003, Ruesink et al. 2010). Z. japonica converts these tidal flats by adding a complex
45 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
structure of rhizomes and leaf blades. The ecological role of Zostera japonica is not entirely understood, but studies indicate that it has an inverse relationship with the density of some benthic macrofauna (e.g., burrowing shrimp and copepods) and nearshore fish species (e.g., surf smelt, herring, sand lance, and juvenile chum salmon) (Reviewed in Mach et al. 2010). Z. japonica may compete with the native Z. marina at the lower range of its tidal distribution, but conversely, Z. japonica may also facilitate the expansion of native eelgrass into shallower habitats (Ruesink et al. 2010). Japanese eelgrass also provides a foraging source for migratory waterfowl (Reviewed in Mach et al. 2010), and although not the primary spawning substrate, it can provide spawning substrate for Pacific herring in Willapa Bay (Penttila, D, personal communication to Hamel, K, March 5, 2012). A recent study of the effects of Z. japonica on commercial shellfish production found that the growth, productivity, harvest efficiency, and quality of Manila clams (Ruditapes philippinarum) was higher in plots without Z. japonica (Patten 2014). The tidal range of oyster production is normally deeper than the Z. japonica range, and the same study did not find a consistent effect of Z. japonica removal on Pacific oyster production (Patten 2014).
Spartina was introduced into Willapa Bay in the late 1800’s. By 2002, Spartina had colonized 15,000 acres of former mudflat in Willapa Bay (Ecology, electronic reference). By establishing marsh vegetation, Spartina encourages deposition and transforms mud flats into marshes. This change displaces functions associated with mud flat habitats, including shellfish beds and shorebird foraging habitat. Following a coordinated effort among government, non-profit, and private entities to eliminate Spartina, today, only isolated patches of the plant remain in Willapa Bay.
New Zealand mudsnails were first discovered in the lower Columbia River in 1996, and today they can be found throughout the Columbia River Estuary (including peripheral bays, lakes and tributaries) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, electronic reference). Experimental results indicate that large populations of New Zealand mudsnails could potentially limit the availability of other, more nutritious food sources for native rainbow trout (Vinson and Baker 2008).
Non-native dune grasses (Ammophila spp.) predominate in much of the dune area in Pacific County. Ammophila spp. tend to accumulate sand more quickly than native dunegrass, creating a higher, steeper foredune, and decreasing the supply of sand to interior dunes (Wiedemann and Pickart 1996 cited in Pickart 1997). Increased dune stabilization results in fewer areas of bare sand, which can be an important habitat attribute for several dune adapted species (e.g., federally threatened western snowy plover and streaked horned lark).
Marine invasive species can alter ecosystems and impact important fishery species by inducing new sources of competition, predation, habitat alteration, and affecting food sources (Bax et al.
46 The Watershed Company May 2015
2003). In the coastal ocean, non-native or invasive species may be introduced either naturally or inadvertently by humans. Non-native species can be transported by marine debris including human derived flotsam (e.g. floating wreckage of a ship or cargo) and jetsam (e.g. purposely disposed of cargo from a ship) or on natural structures such as logs or algal mats (Gregory 2009). These debris make their way across oceans through normal current flows, storm activity, or tsunamis. Plankton and other marine species may also be transported and accidentally introduced into their non-native environment by cargo ship bilge and recreational boats (Williams 2009).
Non-native or invasive marine organisms of particular concern to the coastal ocean off of Pacific County includes invasive zooplankton species transported in cargo ships through the Columbia River, Grays Harbor, and Puget Sound. Studies have shown that even with current bilge dumping, invasive plankton introduction still remains a threat (Cordell et al. 2008).
Marine debris associated with the 2011 Japanese tsunami has recently washed ashore in Pacific County. This debris brings with it the potential to transport new non-native, invasive marine species to the shores of Pacific County. The WDFW is the lead State agency for responding to reports of marine debris with respect to potential invasive species. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has reported that two Japanese skiffs have washed ashore in Pacific County at Cape Disappointment (June 15, 2012) and Long Beach (March 22, 2013) in Pacific County. One skiff carried at least 30 non-native Japanese coastal species. These non-native species may have the potential to settle in Washington waters, posing a threat to local ecosystems.
Climate change induced increases in sea surface temperature may also change the geographic distributions of some fish and plankton species, with some fish species moving north and others moving out of their current habitats resulting in alterations to community patterns and ecosystems (Morgan and Seimann 2011; Osgood 2008; Occhipinti-Ambrogi et al. 2007). For example, WDFW has reported that Humboldt squid (whose habitat ranged from central and South America in the past) has extended its range into North America (off the coast of Washington into the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Hood Canal) (http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/shellfish/squid/).
Table 3-5. Non-native, invasive species present within shoreline jurisdiction in Pacific County Riparian/Wetlands Freshwater Estuarine/Marine Vegetation • Knotweed • Eurasian water milfoil • Japanese eelgrass • English ivy • Brazilian elodea • Spartina • Yellow flag iris • Parrotfeather • European and American • Hydrilla • Purple loosestrife beach grass • Common reed • Common gorse
47 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Riparian/Wetlands Freshwater Estuarine/Marine • Scotch broom • Tansy ragwort • Thistles • Knapweeds • Reed canarygrass Aquatic Nutria Nutria mammals Mollusks • Asian clam • Eastern drill • New Zealand mudsnails • Japanese oyster • Japanese oyster drill Crustaceans Non-native freshwater • Green crab crayfish • Chinese mitten crab • Non-native copepods Fish • Goldfish Atlantic salmon • Brown bullhead • Yellow perch Amphibians American bullfrog
Sources: See lists below Invasions by non-native species may occur rapidly and impacts may be unpredictable. The following websites maintain updated information on invasive species in Washington State.
• Washington Noxious Weed List - http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/
• WA Invasive Species Council - http://www.invasivespecies.wa.gov/
• Washington Invasive Species Education - http://www.wise.wa.gov/
• WDFW (Aquatic Invasive Species Species) - http://wdfw.wa.gov/ais/
• WDFW (clam identification) - http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/shellfish/clams/
• Marine Invasive Species Monitoring Program - http://vmp.bioe.orst.edu/ Note: This list is no longer actively maintained, but website is still a good resource In addition to the non-native species identified above, anthropogenic alterations have altered community assemblages of native species, resulting in significant changes to food web dynamics, and creating nuisance populations of native species. This is particularly evident at the mouth of the Columbia River where sand islands have resulted from historic dredge disposal practices. In turn, large colonies of Caspian terns and cormorants, which historically did not occur in the area, have colonized these islands. As a result of these large populations, these avian communities account for up to 2-15 percent mortality of federally threatened salmonid smolts (Chinook and steelhead, respectively), outmigrating from the Columbia River (Collis et al. 2001).
48 The Watershed Company May 2015
3.4 Watershed Setting and Conditions The majority of the County is located in the Willapa Watershed, but the County also includes portions of the Chehalis Watershed and the Grays-Elochoman Watershed. Generally, these watersheds are identified by the State as Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA). Because of its large size, the upper and lower portions of the Chehalis River Watershed were divided into two WRIAs. Small portions of both the Upper and Lower Chehalis Watersheds occur in Pacific County, although no Shorelines of the State from the Lower Chehalis Watershed occur in Pacific County. A map of the WRIAs within Pacific County is provided in Figure 3-3. Although technically within the Willapa Bay watershed, given their unique functions and characteristics, estuarine and marine waters are discussed separately below.
Figure 3-3. Map of Water Resource Inventory Area boundaries in Pacific County
Willapa (WRIA 24) The Willapa watershed consists of several medium-sized rivers originating in the Willapa Hills and flowing into Willapa Bay. Watercourses include: the Cedar, North, Willapa, Palix, Nemah, Naselle, Niawiakum, and Bear Rivers and Smith Creek. WRIA 24 extends south to Cape Disappointment, at the mouth of the Columbia River.
49 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
The Willapa Hills receive frequent and heavy precipitation, concentrated in the winter months. The Willapa watershed does not include any large mountains with glaciers or regular accumulations of significant snowpack; therefore, drainages in the Willapa Basin tend to have peak streamflows in winter months. Windward slopes in the Willapa Hills frequently experience strong winds during winter months.
Tidal influence extends between 2 miles (Cedar River) and 13 miles (Willapa River) upstream from Willapa Bay.
Historic Changes and Current Conditions Logging, beginning in the mid-1800’s, has had a significant effect on the freshwater shorelines in the watershed. Nearly three-quarters of the land in the County is still used for timber production (Smith 1999).
As a result of forestry uses, the watershed has reduced large woody debris (LWD) densities, reduced riparian tree cover, and excess sediment inputs (Applied Environmental Services 2001). Some areas have naturally low levels of gravel recruitment, and without the large wood in the basin, spawning gravels are not retained (Applied Environmental Services 2001). Fish passage barriers, incised channels, and high summer water temperatures are also conditions associated with past timber harvest that limit natural processes in the basin (Applied Environmental Services 2001).
Several watercourses in WRIA 24 have been identified as impaired for temperature, fecal coliform bacteria, and dissolved oxygen, as indicated in Table 3-6.
Table 3-6. Impaired water quality parameters in freshwater shorelines in WRIA 24 in Pacific County https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wats/approvedsearch.aspx Waterbody Parameter Year of qualifying data Status Elkhorn Creek Temperature 1997 303(d)- impaired Fern Creek Dissolved oxygen 1998 303(d)- impaired Martin Creek Temperature 2001-2002 303(d)- impaired Mill Creek Temperature 2001 303(d)- impaired Naselle River Temperature 2001 303(d)- impaired North River Bacteria 1988-1990 303(d)- impaired Bacteria 1991 303(d)- impaired Pacific County Drainage 1994-1996, 2001- Ditch #1 Pesticides 303(d)- impaired 2002 Temperature 1996-2002 303(d)- impaired Raimie Creek pH 2001-2002 303(d)- impaired Redfield Creek Temperature 2001-2002 303(d)- impaired Smith Creek Temperature 1988 303(d)- impaired Trap Creek Temperature 2001 303(d)- impaired Willapa River Subbasin Temperature 2001 TMDL (2005)
50 The Watershed Company May 2015
Waterbody Parameter Year of qualifying data Status Bacteria and Dissolved 1998-2008 TMDL (2007) Oxygen Source: Ecology 2012
Chehalis (WRIA 22/23) The Chehalis basin consists of approximately 2,766 square miles and spans eight counties. The Chehalis Watershed drains the western side of the Willapa Hills, the Black Hills, an area of low mountains on the west side of the Cascade Range, and the lower south slopes of the Olympic Range.
A portion of the Elk and Andrews Rivers of WRIA 22 extends south into Pacific County. These rivers flow north from the Willapa Hills into the South Bay of Grays Harbor, but within Pacific County, they do not meet the minimum flow criteria for Shorelines of the State.
A portion of WRIA 23 extends into the eastern portion of Pacific County. Shorelines of the State that occur in Pacific County include the following tributaries to the Chehalis River: Elk Creek, Little Elk Creek, Swem Creek, Eight Creek, Rock Creek, and Crim Creek. These tributaries drain east from the eastern edge of the Willapa Hills. Similar to the Willapa Basin, precipitation is concentrated in winter months, and typically falls as rain, except in the highest elevations.
Historic Changes and Current Conditions Timber harvest occurred throughout the WRIA for most of the 20th Century. Riparian conditions are degraded throughout most of the WRIA as a result of past forest and agricultural practices. Riparian buffer protection increased in the mid-1980s, and more recently with the latest Forest Practices Rules. Although these protections do little to improve LWD recruitment potential in the short-term, they improve the long-term LWD recruitment potential for the WRIA (Smith and Wenger 2001).
Excess fine sediment loads throughout the watershed are likely related to a high density of forest roads, the reduction in instream LWD that resulted from logging, logging practices that affect headwater streams, and erosion associated with agriculture (Smith and Wenger 2001, Grays Harbor County Lead Entity 2011). Fish passage barriers, resulting from the high density of roads, are also a concern throughout the WRIA, including those areas within Pacific County (Smith and Wenger 2001).
Several water quality impairments have been identified in the Chehalis River watershed; however, these impairments are located outside of Pacific County.
51 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Grays/Elochoman (WRIA 25) A small portion of the Grays/Elochoman Watershed occurs in the southeastern corner of the County. Subbasins within the Grays/Elochoman watershed consist of relatively short coastal streams and rivers draining from the southern Willapa Hills to the Columbia River. Within Pacific County, with the exception of the Chinook River and Wallacut River, which meander through a low-lying valley, the other small (Class II) tributaries in the County are characterized as fairly steep channels passing through the Willapa Hills.
Historic Changes and Current Conditions Similar to other watersheds in the County, past timber and agricultural practices have affected watershed functions. Riparian functions are degraded, and fish passage barriers are associated with culverts at road crossings (Wade 2002). Tidegates and diking have limited estuarine wetland, floodplain, and side channel connectivity (Wade 2002). In recent years, restoration activities to restore connectivity have been conducted in the lower Chinook and Grays Rivers.
The Grays River and its tributaries have been identified as impaired for temperature, as indicated in Table 3-7.
Table 3-7. Impaired water quality parameters in freshwater shorelines in WRIA 25 in Pacific County https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wats/approvedsearch.aspx Year of qualifying Waterbody Parameter Status data Grays River, East Fork, Temperature 2003-2005 303(d)- impaired South Fork, West Fork, and mainstem Source: Ecology 2012
Marine and Estuarine Shorelines Pacific Coast The Columbia River littoral cell (CRLC) extends for ~135 miles from Tillamook Head, OR in the south to Point Grenville, WA in the north. The CRLC includes three estuaries, the Columbia River estuary, Willapa Bay, and Grays Harbor, and it contains two headlands. The estuaries and headlands divide the CRLC into four sub-cells, Clatsop Plains, Long Beach Peninsula, Grayland Plains, and North Beach.
The primary source of sediment to the CRLC and the shores of Pacific County is the Columbia River. Although Willapa Bay provides some sediment input to the CRLC, the source is small enough that it can be considered negligible (Gelfenbaum et al. 1999). The direction of sand transport through the CRLC is seasonally driven by wave direction relative to the coast; summer conditions result in a weak southerly long-shore current with little transport capacity and winter conditions result in a strong northerly long-shore current with much greater
52 The Watershed Company May 2015 transport capacity. The large source of sediment from the Columbia River combined with the strong northerly long-shore sediment transport regime during the winter results in the transport of Columbia River-sourced sand to Willapa Bay during the winter months via the ebb-tidal deltas and the near-shore zones. Due to the weak southerly summer transport capabilities of the littoral cell, sediment from Willapa Bay primarily remains in the estuary and in the surrounding sub-cells (Gelfenbaum et al. 1999).
From south to north, the following coastal features are prominent along the Pacific County Coast: the Columbia River mouth, Long Beach Peninsula, the entrance to Willapa Bay, and the Grayland Plains (Gelfenbaum et al. 1999). With the exception of the rocky headlands of Cape Disappointment, the coastal shoreline in Pacific County is predominantly characterized by long stretches of sand beaches, backed by low-lying dunes. The beaches and dunes are created and maintained by the sediment transport associated with the CLRC, as well as by erosion of existing landforms. Sand dunes form a complex mosaic of dune forms. In Pacific County, sand dunes are described as a parallel ridge system (Wiedemann 1984). This system is associated with dune progradation, where longshore transport deposits sediment, which becomes stabilized by vegetation, and in turn, a new foredune is formed waterward of the stabilized vegetation (Wiedemann 1984). Depending on the spacing between the parallel ridges, swales, lakes, or ponds have formed. Dune forms change seasonally and interannually related to changes in wind and wave patterns.
Tides for Pacific County are of the mixed semi-diurnal type typical of the North American Pacific Coast, typified by two unequal high and low tides per day.
Historic Changes and Current Conditions Existing and potential anthropogenic stressors relevant to coastal and estuarine ecosystems include the following: habitat loss, water quality degradation, changes to sediment transport processes, harvest, climate change, and potential development of ocean energy facilities. These issues are described below.
Sediment Transport Before the early 1900s, the County’s beaches experienced natural shoreline progradation as a result of longshore sediment transport from the Columbia River. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, jetties were installed at the mouth of the Columbia River and the entrance to Grays Harbor to improve navigation. Initially, the jetties caused rapid progradation of barrier beaches, but since the construction of dams in the Columbia River and the start of dredging and disposal maintenance programs, the coastline has locally experienced high levels of erosion (Venturato et al. 2007).
53 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Historic NOAA bathymetric charts show the changes in sediment movement over time from 1877 to 1998 (Figure 3-4). As a result of the changes to sediment processes, described above, a shift from sediment deposition to erosion is generally noted.
Figure 3-4: Historic NOAA Bathymetric changes at the mouth of the Columbia River from 1877- 1998. Source: Southwest Washington Coastal Erosion Study (specific reference not available) The Pacific coastline is a dynamic system that not only changes seasonally, but reacts to inter- decadal and inter-centennial cycles and episodic forcing. Inter-decadal cycles include the Pacific Decadal Oscillation; inter-centennial cycles include natural climate variations such as ice-ages; and episodic influences include the construction of the jetties on the Columbia River and dredging and deposition events in the estuaries and along the coasts. The Pacific County shoreline is very dynamic, featuring spatially variable rates of both accretion and erosion.
The Columbia River’s north and south jetties channelized flow through the mouth of the river and have pushed the ebb-tidal delta seaward from the mouth into the CRLC. The influx of sediment to the CRLC resulted in shoreline accretion of Long Beach to the north in the decades following the construction of the jetties. Over approximately 100 years from 1889 to 1999, the shoreline at the City of Long Beach accreted approximately 2,000 feet to the west (City of Long Beach 2000). In recent decades, however, some areas of Long Beach peninsula, specifically in
54 The Watershed Company May 2015 the area adjacent to the north jetty, have experienced substantial rates of shoreline erosion. The erosion has been occurring due to the lack sediment supply from the exhausted ebb-tidal deltas in the Mouth of the Columbia River. With the former ebb-tidal deltas exhausted, the sediment supply system has been working toward a new equilibrium between the delta and the CRLC (Kaminsky et al. 1999).
Further exacerbating the sediment deficit in the CRLC are the practices of Columbia River flow regulation and sediment trapping by upstream dams. As sediment transport is strongly tied to flow speed, spring freshets have historically provided substantial supplies of sediment to the Lower Columbia River. Flow regulation for irrigation and power production has resulted in a flattening of the hydrologic curve for the Lower Columbia River, and a subsequent decrease in the sediment supply to the CRLC from the Columbia River (Sherwood et al. 1990; Templeton and Jay 2012).
Habitat and Water Quality Changes Early records of the Long Beach Peninsula document extensive meadows, which were used for grazing (Wiedemann 1984). Overgrazing resulted in the loss of vegetation and reintroduction of sand from the former dune areas (Wiedemann 1984). Following agricultural uses, commercial and residential development began on the Long Beach Peninsula to accommodate beach-goers (History Link, electronic reference). Tourism increased with the development of commercial rail and the production of the automobile at the beginning of the 20th century.
As coastal areas were developed, aggressive, non-native plant species were introduced to stabilize sand dunes and protect built infrastructure (Wiedemann 1984). Among these, the European and American beach-grasses now predominate foredune vegetation on the entire west coast. Both pedestrian and off-road vehicle use of dunes trample vegetation.
Each year, the recreational razor clam fishery draws beachgoers to the Pacific Coastal beaches. Potential expenditures on the recreational razor clam fishery in Pacific and Grays Harbor County are estimated at $24.4 million per year (Dyson and Huppert 2010). Offshore waters are frequently used for recreational bottomfish and lingcod fishing, a recreational salmon fishery, and commercial fisheries (Washington Marine Spatial Planning, electronic reference). As an example, on average, since 2008, approximately 60 percent (over 6 million pounds per year) of the total non-treaty commercial Dungeness crab catch on the Washington Coast has occurred north of Cape Disappointment and South of Point Chehalis (WDFW, electronic reference). Additionally, the Pacific County coast has accounted for an average of approximately 722,000 pounds of commercial pink shrimp landings per year since 1998 (WDFW, electronic reference). Marine fisheries in the County often extend beyond the state’s three-mile boundary into federally managed waters.
55 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Fisheries The ten major commercial fisheries occurring along Washington’s outer coast include: Dungeness crab pots, ocean salmon troll, ocean delivery pink shrimp, baitfish lampara, non- shrimp shellfish pots, herring lampara, sardine purse seine, herring purse sein, herring dip bag net, and coastal hagfish pot (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing). Two of the most important commercial fishing ports in Washington, Ilwaco and Chinook, are located in Pacific County. These two ports produce a combined landed weight of 29 million pounds of commercial fish worth $22 million (NMFS 2013a). However, the revenue gained by the harvesters is just a piece of the economic value of these fisheries. Processing and packaging facilities, fish distribution, and sales at local markets and restaurants located in Pacific County create additional local jobs and revenue.
The most valuable fishery along Washington’s outer coast is the Dungeness crab fishery (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing). The fishery has a limited entry of 223 licensed non-tribal commercial fishermen and there are currently 200 active fishermen who are primarily based out of Westport (Grays Harbor county), as well as Ilwaco and Chinook (Pacific County). Between 2004 and 2013, the average Dungeness crab harvested by this fishery in Washington was 21.1 million pounds worth $27 million dollars. While 56.2 % of the fisher landings were from Grays Harbor, Pacific County had the second highest contribution to the catch (Figure 3-5) (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing).
Through the Rafeedie Decision in 1994, federal courts granted Treaty Tribes rights to half of the share of the sustainable Dungeness crab harvest. Today, the Dungeness crab fishery is managed by both the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Treaty Tribes. At the start of each Dungeness crab season, the northern coast of Washington is closed to non-treaty commercial fishing to allow tribal fishermen to harvest their share of the total allowable catch. During that time period, all non-tribal commercial crabbing is pushed to south of Westport. The decision has also led to an increase in Dungeness crab catch, and a decrease in the number of days fishers can be out to sea (D. Beasley, personal communication with Jodie Toft, May 8, 2014 and July 11, 2014, Fisher and Velasquez 2008).
56 The Watershed Company May 2015
Figure 3-5. Dungeness crab landings along Washington’s outer coast (From WDFW 2014)
Although other commercial marine fisheries occur beyond the 3-mile boundary of state waters, the species may occur across boundaries and marine uses beyond the 3-mile boundary may have significant impacts on fisheries originating from Pacific County ports. Trends in these Washington’s outer coast fisheries from 2004- 2013 are described below (figures and information summarized from the 2014 Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-tribal Fishing):
• Salmon: While there has been inconsistent catch over the years, Pacific County has received and average of 49.4% of the ex-vessel revenue for this fishery.
Figure 3-6. Commercial Ocean Salmon Landings and ex-vessel value by Port (2004-2013) Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
57 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Figure 3-7. Commercial Gillnet Salmon Harvest (2003-2013) for Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
58 The Watershed Company May 2015
• Groundfish: Fishing methods for this fishery include bottom trawlers, mid-water trawlers (not targeting whiting species), and mid-water trawlers (targeting whiting species).Total landings (lbs) of non-whiting ground fish in Pacific County increased in 2011.
Figure 3-8. Groundfish (non-whiting) total landings and value 2004- 2013 for counties along the outer coast. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
59 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
• Pink Shrimp: Due to a bottom trawling ban in Washington State waters, this fishery occurs between 75 and 125 fathoms. Pacific County receives a small portion of revenue from this fishery (~7-17%).
Figure 3-9. Pink shrimp landings and values 2004-2013 for Pacific and Grays Harbor counties. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
• Albacore: This fishery occurs both inside and outside of state waters. Westport and Pacific County receive a majority of the revenue from this fishery.
Figure 3-10. Commercial albacore landings and value 2004-2013 for counties along the outer coast of Washington. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
60 The Watershed Company May 2015
• Spot shrimp: Participation in this fishery is low for Pacific County. There were no active spot shrimp fishers in Pacific County in 2012 or 2013.
Figure 3-11. Spot shrimp landings and value 2004-2013 for counties along the outer coast of Washington. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
• Sardines: Purse seining for sardines along Washington’s coast increased greatly in 2012 and 2013. A majority of landings and revenue for this fishery are based out of Grays Harbor. Pacific County saw an increase in landings for sardines in 2012 and 2013.
Figure 3-12. Commercial sardine landings and value 2004-2013 for counties along the outer coast of Washington. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
61 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
• Anchovy: Anchovy fishing occurs on the outer coast and in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. The average anchovy landing for Pacific and Grays Harbor combined has been about 650,000 lbs. In 2009, there was a spike in anchovy landings for Grays Harbor.
Figure 3-13. Commercial albacore landings and value 2004-2013 for Pacific and Grays Harbor counties. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014
62 The Watershed Company May 2015
• Hagfish: The hagfish fishery occurs between the depths of 50 and 80 fathoms on soft bottom habitats. Between 2 and 15 active fishers supply an increasing number of hagfish to Asian markets since 2005.
Figure 3-14. Commercial Hagfish landings and value 2004-2013 for counties along the outer coast of Washington. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014.
• Razor Clams: A majority of the commercial razor clam fishery in Washington occurs in Pacific County along the sand pits located on the mouth of Willapa Bay. Pacific County accounts for about 82% of the revenue for this fishery.
Figure 3-15. Commercial razor clam and value 2004-2013 for counties along the outer coast of Washington. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014.
63 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
• Recreational Fisheries: A total of 720,000 anglers were licensed to fish by DFW between 2012 and 2013 on Washington’s outer coast (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014). These fishers primarily target: razor clam, Dungeness crab, Albacore tuna, bottomfish, halibut, and salmon (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014). A majority (60%) of recreational fishing activity occurs between Point Grenville to the Columbia River with 75% of recreation angler trips leaving from the southwest ports of Westport, Ilwaco, and Chinook (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014). Recreational fishers leaving from Ilwaco and Chinook target mostly salmon and Columbia River sturgeon. In 2008, Long Beach supported the greatest number of recreational razor clam diggers (112,442) in Washington, with each participant spending an average of $114.01/day of digging locally during the razor clam season (October to May) (Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014). Recreational ocean salmon fishing is also prevalent in Pacific County with anglers primarily fishing from the port of Ilwaco (Figure ***).
Figure 3-16. Recreational ocean salmon landings and value 2004-2013 for counties along the outer coast of Washington. Graph extracted from Marine Sector Analysis Report: Non-Tribal Fishing 2014.
64 The Watershed Company May 2015
Overfished species
Groundfish are targeted off the coast from Pacific County on both the nearshore soft bottom (e.g. English sole) and offshore rocky reef (outside of SMP jurisdiction) (e.g. rockfish and sablefish). Groundfish along the entire Pacific Coast have been heavily targeted and as a result, their populations are assessed and managed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council’s (PFMC) Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) order to rebuild stocks. Under this plan, many species populations have been rebuilding (e.g., canary rockfish and widow Rockfish), while others remain overfished (e.g. Bocaccio and yelloweye rockfish) (Miller et al. 2009) (Figure 3-17). While many of these species (including overfished rockfish) are targeted outside of SMP jurisdiction as adults, some species utilize structurally complex inshore habitats such as oyster reefs and eelgrass beds for protection as juveniles (Dumbauld et al. 2011).
65 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Figure 3-17. Excerpt from Miller et al. (2009) listing of Pacific groundfish populations that are either “overfished”, “not overfished”, “rebuilding”, or “unknown”.
Willapa Bay Willapa Bay offers a unique estuarine ecosystem in Washington State. It provides substantial natural capital, supporting one of the nation’s largest commercial shellfish industries, as well as a diversity of high-functioning ecosystems, including salt marshes, eelgrass beds, and mud flats (see Section 3.3.2 for a summary of the significance of these habitats). Its geographic location,
66 The Watershed Company May 2015 separated from significant industrial, commercial, and development, supports high water quality conditions necessary for continued support of successful aquaculture.
Willapa Bay’s surface area is 136 square miles at MHHW (Coastal Resources Alliance 2007). The Bay consists of three main channels 30 to 77 feet deep (Hedgpeth and Obrebski 1981), surrounded by broad tidal flats. One channel extends eastward from the mouth to the Willapa River; the main channel, Stanley Channel, runs from the mouth in a southerly direction to the Naselle River; and a third channel branches off from the Stanley Channel in a southwesterly direction at about Oysterville to terminate in a broad intertidal region with almost no fluvial input. Over sixty percent of the area of Willapa Bay, 84 square miles, is composed of intertidal habitat (Coastal Resources Alliance 2007), and most of the remaining subtidal areas range from approximately one to six feet deep at low tide (Hedgpeth and Obrebski 1981). The northern portion and central portions of Willapa Bay experience strong tidal currents and the substrate is characterized by sandy sediments. The southern part of Willapa Bay has lower currents and wave activity, and substrate is predominantly mud or mixed sand and mud (Coastal Resources Alliance 2007).
In Willapa Bay, tides vary along the lengths of the estuaries. The tidal range at Toke Point on the north side of the entrance to the Bay is about 8.9 feet, whereas the tidal range for South Bend, which is several miles up the Willapa River, is about 9.8 feet. The astronomical tidal range at Nahcotta is about 10 feet, and the extreme range (including barometric tides, setup, surge, etc.) is about 14 feet (NOAA 2014c). The tidal range varies by about 20% over the length of the estuary and by 50% on a neap-spring cycle (Banas et al. 2004). The tidal prism exceeds 2.5 x 107 ft3 and comprises about 45% of the bay’s total volume with the maximum tidal exchange occurring during spring tides (Gingras et al. 1999).
Due to its large tidal prism and relatively small fluvial inputs, currents through the entrance to Willapa Bay are substantial and largely driven by tidal forcing. The current at the entrance, in the tidal channels are significant and during peak flows may reach or exceed about 2.5 knots. The ebb current in the tidal channel with a south wind is greatest and during peak flow conditions may be as high as 5.9 knots. The tidal currents at South Bend are influenced by tides as well as Willapa River flow and are about 1.2 knots on the flood and 1.4 knots on the ebb (NOAA 2014c).
Salinities are lowest in Willapa Bay in the late spring, when wind-driven downwelling directs the Columbia River plume northward along the coast and into Willapa Bay (Banas et al. 2004). Strong tides result in vertical mixing and lower salinities throughout the water column (Banas et al. 2004).
67 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
The detached spits of Willapa Bay support the State’s only non-tribal commercial razor clam fishery.
Historic Changes and Current Conditions Sediment Transport Cape Shoalwater on the north side of the entrance to Willapa Bay experiences the highest rate of shoreline erosion on the Pacific Coast of the United States. The rate of erosion has been approximately 100 to 145 feet per year since the late 1800s (Terich and Levenseller 1986). The northward migration of the channel is closely tied to the unique phenomenon of significant tidal flow in and out of Willapa Bay cyclically (approximately every 5 years) migrating to the north by breaching the nearshore shoals and bars during extreme waves and tidal flow conditions. Previous studies determined that northward migration of the tidal channel may not be naturally confined and would continue until Willapa Bay merged with Grays Harbor if no efforts were made to stem the northward migration of Cape Shoalwater. To constrain migration of the North Channel to the north and to protect the State highway (SR 105), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) completed the SR 105 project to stabilize the shoreline by constructing in 1998 a flow deflecting rock groin and placement of beach nourishment (Johannessen and MacLennan 2005, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2009). The project was constructed with anticipated 5 to 10 years frequency of maintenance repair of the submerged part of the groin. However, no maintenance work was conducted after construction. The lack of maintenance may partly explain the continued erosion along the Cape Shoalwater shoreline during the last decade (Shepsis 2006, Shepsis et al. 1997). In 2005 and 2006, additional rock armoring was added to the base of SR 105 to address continued erosion (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2009).
Long Beach Peninsula to the south of the entrance of Willapa Bay owes its existence from Columbia River derived sands. As the peninsula grows northward from the Columbia River, the entrance to Willapa Bay is constrained, which results in higher current velocities through the entrance. The higher current velocities result in increased erosion at the mouth, which can be observed at Cape Shoalwater (Terich and Levenseller 1986). Although Cape Shoalwater exhibits much higher rates of shoreline change than anywhere else in Pacific County, other locations are in flux, too. Between the 1950s and the 1990s, Cape Disappointment experienced erosion rates of about 40 feet per year and Leadbetter Point saw erosion rates of about 30 feet per year. The only locations that experienced shoreline accretion between the 1950s and the 1990s in Pacific County were at Grayland (4 feet per year) and at Ocean Park (8 feet per year) (Kaminsky et al. 2009). The accretion at Grayland was likely due to increased sediment supply from the northward migrating Willapa Bay entrance (Buijsman et al. 2003).
68 The Watershed Company May 2015
Dredging of the deep-draft river channel in Willapa Harbor was discontinued by the Corps in 1976 because of marginal benefits. Several sites within the Bay were historically dredged by the Corps, including Tokeland Marina Entrance Channel, the Bay Center Channel and Boat Basin, and the Nahcotta Channel. The Corps discontinued dredging in the Nahcotta Channel in 1987, in the Tokeland Marina entrance channel, and the Bay Center Channel and Boat Basin in 2002. In response to sedimentation and the need for adequate navigation depth at Port facilities, the Port of Willapa Harbor proposed a dredging plan that included hydraulic suction dredging with flow lane disposal using their own small hydraulic dredge. Flow lane disposal of dredged material was proposed by the Port to retain clean sediments within the littoral system and allow sediments to be distributed and dispersed by natural hydrodynamic processes. By 2009, dredging was permitted and the Tokeland Marina was dredged. Numerous other sites in Willapa Bay are dredged and maintained on a regular basis including Bay Center Marina, Raymond City dock, and others. Dredge disposal locations around Willapa Bay include Cape Shoalwater and Goose Point, both dispersive disposal sites (Dredged Material Management Program 2006). Several flow lane disposal sites have been identified and permitted for placement of suitable dredged sediment from various dredging projects in Willapa Bay and the Willapa River. Two of these sites, Tokeland Marina and Bay Center flow lane sites have been successfully used and monitored. Results of monitoring at these placement sites confirmed the effectiveness of flow lane disposal sites for dispersion of the hydraulically placed dredged material and meeting the required water quality conditions. The DMMP Panel, composed of Federal and State agencies has reviewed the results of Willapa Bay flow lane placement site and has encouraged local dredging entities to extend use of this practice at other locations in Willapa Bay and Willapa River areas, subsequent to appropriate analysis of hydrodynamic and sediment transport.
Habitat and Water Quality Changes The most recent estimate indicates that 64 percent of historic estuarine wetlands have been lost in Willapa Bay as a result of diking and filling activities (Coastal Resources Alliance 2007). Tide gates have also restricted natural estuarine connectivity and limited fish passage opportunities (Smith 1999).
Oyster aquaculture began in Willapa Bay in the mid-1800s. By 1880, the native Olympia oyster population was decimated (Applied Environmental Services 2001). Today, non-native oysters and clams are cultivated over approximately 17,000 acres of tidelands, more acreage than all other aquaculture areas in Washington State combined (Northern Economics 2013). The shellfish industry directly provides between 800 and 1,500 jobs in Pacific County, and when indirect economics are considered, it is responsible for 15-24 percent of the labor-earned income
69 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
in Pacific County (Flores and Batker 2014). Successful aquaculture production is dependent on good water quality conditions, low fine sediment loads, and a consistent range of salinities.
Shellfish aquaculture can modify estuarine functions through changes resulting from bivalve digestion (filtration and waste), effects on physical structure, and disturbance associated with harvest and chemical treatments (Dumbauld et al. 2009). Detailed reviews of the potential effects of shellfish aquaculture in Washington’s estuaries have been conducted by Simenstad and Fresh (1995) and, more recently, by Dumbauld et al. (2009). These effects will be only briefly summarized in the following discussion.
Bivalve filtration affects water properties by reducing the concentration of phytoplankton (Dumbauld et al. 2009). Bivalve waste then results in deposition of fine organic material and the release of dissolved nutrients into porewater or into the water column (Dumbauld et al. 2009).
Approximately 80 percent of the bivalve aquaculture tracts within Pacific County overlap with areas of mapped eelgrass beds. To the extent that bivalves improve light availability through filtration of phytoplankton, and increase nutrient concentrations in sediment, they have the potential to improve eelgrass growth (Dumbauld et al. 2009). However, the physical disturbance associated with aquaculture and space occupied by cultured bivalves could limit eelgrass beds (Dumbauld et al. 2009). A study of the potential impact of oyster aquaculture on eelgrass beds in Willapa Bay found that eelgrass density declined with oyster density in all aquaculture areas; however, eelgrass growth rate, plant size, and production did not change with oyster density (Tallis et al. 2009). Another study in Willapa Bay noted a distinct threshold of 20 percent oyster cover, above which shoot density of Z. marina declined markedly (Wagner et al. 2012). The same study found that eelgrass growth was not affected by increased nutrients in sediment an porewater, but that shoot size was reduced (Wagner et al. 2012). A change is eelgrass density was not detectable in long line harvest areas, but eelgrass was smaller and had lower production in these areas (Tallis et al. 2009). Eelgrass growth rates increased in dredged or hand-picked beds, but density, plant size, and production were reduced (Tallis et al. 2009).
Bivalve aquaculture can also interact with invertebrate communities through physical disturbances to the substrate and chemical treatment applications. Mechanical dredges cause more eelgrass disturbance than longline culture or hand picking (Tallis et al. 2009). Despite this disturbance, seedling germination and survival is also greater in dredge-harvested areas compared to longline and control sites, potentially contributing to more rapid recovery (Wisehart et al. 2007).
70 The Watershed Company May 2015
Another study in Willapa Bay found that the densities of small epibenthic invertebrates were higher in eelgrass beds and oyster beds compared to unstructured mudflat (Hosack and Dumbauld 2006), indicating that the physical structure created by oyster beds may provide habitat functions similar to eelgrass beds. Other studies of shellfish aquaculture in West Coast estuaries have similarly found little to no difference between epibenthic, benthic, and fish assemblages between oyster aquaculture and eelgrass beds (Dumbauld et al. 2009).
Populations of native burrowing shrimp (Neotrypaea californiensis and Upogebia pugettensis) impact shellfish growing areas by softening the bottom and making areas unsuitable for shellfish beds (Feldman et al. 2000). Beginning in the 1960’s oyster beds in Willapa Bay have been treated with carbaryl pesticide to control burrowing shrimp populations (Dumbauld et al. 2009). In 2008, Ecology issued a NPDES permit allowing the application of carbaryl pesticide to control burrowing shrimp in shellfish-growing areas within Willapa Bay. That permit expired in 2012, and was not reissued. Estimates of the loss of aquaculture production in Willapa Bay that would result from not applying pesticides range from 60 to 90 percent without pesticide treatments for the control of burrowing shrimp (Washington State Department of Ecology 2014). In 2015, Ecology issued a permit to apply the pesticide imidacloprid to up to 1,500 acres of commercial tidelands in Willapa Bay and 500 acres in Grays Harbor to control burrowing shrimp. Under the permit, Ecology staff would monitor applications, and the growers would be required to conduct intensive water and sediment monitoring throughout the five-year term of the permit through a partnership with the Washington State University Long Beach extension research facility. However, due to public outcry about pesticide use in early May, 2015, the Department of Ecology and the Willapa-Grays Harbor Oyster Growers Association agreed to cancel the recently issued permit.
As noted in Section 3.3.4, Z. japonica is an invasive species that occupies previously open mud flat habitats. Control of burrowing shrimp is correlated with the expansion of the non-native eelgrass, Z. japonica, into previously unsuitable mudflat (Dumbauld and Wyllie-Echeverria 2003), and conversely, eelgrass beds (both native and non-native) reduce the mobility of burrowing shrimp (Reviewed in Feldman et al. 2000). A recent study of the effects of Z. japonica on commercial shellfish production found Z. japonica limited the growth, productivity, harvest efficiency, and quality of Manila clams (Ruditapes philippinarum) (Patten 2014). The same study did not find a consistent effect of Z. japonica removal on Pacific oyster production (Patten 2014). Z. japonica impacts revenue from aquaculture practices where it displaces existing cultivated beds, increases costs for management, or reduces yields (Fisher et al. 2011). In 2014, Ecology issued a permit to apply the pesticide imazamox to control Z. japonica in shellfish beds in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor.
71 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Willapa Bay has historically been known for its excellent water quality conditions. Nevertheless, several areas within Willapa Bay are listed as impaired for water quality parameters including temperature, fecal coliform bacteria, dissolved oxygen, and pesticides. Table 3-8 lists water quality impairments that have been identified within the Bay.
Recruitment and abundance of many commercially and recreationally important marine species are affected by changes in estuarine conditions. For example, Dungeness crab recruitment is affected by oceanographic currents, but Dungeness crab are also particularly sensitive to the effects of dredging and estuarine habitat conditions during development. WDFW’s recommendations for the conservation of Dungeness crabs include suggestions to minimize the volume of dredged materials, minimize trench widening, prevent material suspension, and dredge during low tides in intertidal areas and during high tides in subtidal areas (Fisher and Velasquez 2008). Similarly, development that affects eelgrass beds and water quality in the estuary can have a detrimental effect on juvenile Dungeness crab, salmon, and rockfish that use these habitats for development.
Columbia River Estuary The Columbia River is the largest river on the West Coast of the US, draining about 260,000 mi2 and extending from British Columbia to the Pacific Ocean between Oregon and Washington. The hydrology of the Columbia River Basin reflects the interaction of topography, geology, and climate. Precipitation in most of the drainage falls as snow in the Rocky Mountains and in the Cascade Range (Simenstad et al. 2011). Annual peak discharges occur in the spring (April to June), and generally result from snowmelt in the interior sub-basin. 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 (Marriott et al. 2002). The lower basin, where precipitation generally occurs as rain, contributes to peak winter discharges (Simenstad et al. 2011). The average annual discharge is about 52 mi3 per year, more than twice the average annual discharge of all other rivers in Washington, Oregon, and California combined. The spring tide tidal prism is about 3.85 x 1010 cubic feet (Jarrett 1976).
The Columbia River Estuary in Pacific County experiences extensive mixing, depending on river flows, winds, waves, and tides. Currents through the Columbia River Estuary can be heavily influenced by fluvial forcing. Velocities at the entrance to mouth of the Columbia River in the tidal channels can reach over 5 knots on the ebb, but seldom exceed 4 knots on the flood, and on average reach about 3.5 knots (NOAA 2014b). Tide range decreases moving upstream from the mouth; however, there is spatial variability in tidal ranges in and around Pacific County. The tidal range for the astronomical tide (not including extreme tides) at the Columbia
72 The Watershed Company May 2015
River entrance is 7.5 feet, 7.6 feet at Ilwaco, 8.6 feet at Astoria, and 8.1 feet at Chinook (NOAA 2014b). Extreme fluvial forcing, however, can dampen the flood tide so much that little tidal influence can be felt upstream of the mouth. During low flow periods, tidal forcing can be strong enough to reverse flow through the river up to River Mile (RM) 87 (Beaver Army Terminal) (Kukulka and Jay 2003).
Historic Changes and Current Conditions Sediment Transport The mouth of the Columbia River has three jetties; the north and south jetties and Jetty “A” (Figure 3-18). The north and south jetties flank the mouth to the northwest and southwest while Jetty “A” lies to the east of the north jetty and the west of Sand Island. The primary function of jetties is to constrict flow, increase flow rate, increase bottom shear stress, and promote channel scour. Prior to the construction of the jetties, the mouth of the Columbia River was a spatially and temporally dynamic and unstable system with variations in shoaling and channel location and geometry over time making navigation through the channel challenging. Congress approved a feasibility study for the stabilization of the mouth of the Columbia River in 1882 and construction of the south jetty began in 1885 and did not reach completion until 1913. The south jetty resulted in the northern migration of the main channel, which led to the construction of the north jetty to train the channel between Peacock and Clatsop spits. North jetty construction was started in 1913 and completed in 1917. In order to shield the north jetty from tidal currents, which ultimately would have undermined the south side of the north jetty, Jetty “A” was constructed in 1939 (Hickson and Rodolf 1951).
Figure 3-18. Overview of jetty locations at the mouth of the Columbia River. Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
73 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Baker Bay, part of the Columbia River estuary, borders Pacific County to the south. Prior to the construction of the Columbia River jetty system, the entrance was more dynamic; the main channel changed positions and shoaling and bed erosion occurred in varying locations around the mouth of the Columbia River including Baker Bay. Following jetty construction, however, the channel was trained in one direction, the river channel adopted a more static position, and the bay was cut off from flow. As a consequence, sedimentation has occurred in Baker Bay, home to the ports of Ilwaco and Chinook. The construction of the jetties, land use practices, in- filling, and sedimentation have resulted in changes to the tidal prism and sedimentation patterns over time. In addition to a reduction in the tidal prism, channelization of the river with the jetties and the placement of in-stream pile dikes around Sand Island have also resulted in decreased circulation in and increased siltation of Baker Bay in Pacific County from 1870 to 1983.
In addition to changes at the mouth of the Columbia River, the Columbia River dam system has significantly altered flows and sediment transport processes within the Columbia River system. As a result of dam operations, flows in the Lower Columbia River are greatly reduced from historic levels in late spring through summer months (Figure 3-19).
Figure 3-19. Changes in annual flow cycle near Vancouver, Washington Figure from Bottom et al. 2005 A comparison of historic (1859-1899) and recent (1970-1999) sediment transport loads at Vancouver, Washington showed an average annual reduction in total sediment transport of between 10.8 and 12.5 million metric tons, equivalent to 52-61.5% of the total sediment historic sediment load (Bottom et al. 2005).
74 The Watershed Company May 2015
Regular maintenance dredging is required to maintain a navigation channel to the Port of Chinook Marina, the Coast Guard training facility, the Port of Ilwaco, and the public boat yard at Cape Disappointment. The Corps maintains a federal navigation channel from the main channel in the Columbia River through Baker Bay and to the ports of Ilwaco and Chinook. The Ilwaco channel is maintained at 17 feet depth and the Chinook Channel is maintained to a depth of 10 feet per Corps authorization (FBO 2013; Corps 2009). Total amount of dredging is approximately 3 to 5 million cubic yards per year. The Corps maintains numerous dispersive flow-lane and open-ocean dredge disposal sites in and around the Lower Columbia River. Much of the dredge material from the mouth of the Columbia River is used for shallow water open ocean disposal, whose transport pathway takes it to nearby beaches and the backside of the jetties to mitigate recent nearby shoreline erosion and subsequent jetty instability. Some amount of dredged material has been placed historically on designated upland disposal sites; however, this upland placement is now relatively limited. Other disposal uses have included the beneficial use of dredged material and creation of habitat projects. Several attempts were made by the USACE to place dredged material directly on Benson Beach directly north of the North Jetty to enhance the northward littoral drift along the Washington Coast. The concept of the Benson Beach placement project was based on understanding that net sediment transport in the region is toward the North and that a significant part of sediment from Columbia River historically transported to the north forming sandy beaches of Long Beach peninsula and beyond towards Grays Harbor County shorelines. It was also a commonly agreed that construction of North Jetty partially obstructed this transport that resulted in shoreline erosion along Long Beach Peninsula, Willapa Harbor, Westport, and other places to the north. Therefore it was assumed that placement sand at Benson Beach would mitigate a detrimental impact from the jetty and partially restore northward sediment transport.
However studies of the Benson Beach demonstration project did not provide conclusive data on the processes of sediment transport and the benefit from Benson Beach project on rehabilitation of northward sediment transport. For example the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study (Stevens et. al. 2012) concluded that the dominant direction of transport at the Benson Beach to be toward the south that is a contrary to the accepted net northerly sediment transport. Most likely the Benson Beach shoreline in combination with North Jetty forms a local littoral cell with specific sediment transport parameters different from that of the remainder of the Long Beach peninsula. However the validity of this concept requires confirmation by future studies. In the meantime placement of sediment (dredged material) to enhance northward littoral transport is recommended at the bottom depressions (deep holes), created by the North, South, and A jetties at the entrance to the estuary. The practical experience from other locations along Columbia River and similar projects along the North Pacific coastline demonstrated benefits of this action to the coastline. The sediment, placed at such depressions (holes) naturally re-nourish the
75 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
littoral transport, restoring and enhancing the historical coastal processes. Placement of dredged sediment at bottom depressions along Columbia River to enhance the littoral transport has been supported by State and Federal Agencies. The placement of dredged material at bottom depressions along Mouth of Columbia River has been discussed previously and supported by various public and state entities, including DOE, WFDW, Columbia River Crab Association, Pilton Bar Association, and others.
The Port of Ilwaco conducts regular maintenance dredging work at the Port of Ilwaco marina and marina approaches. The dredged material from the marina recently has been placed at an upland disposal site due to a number of reasons, including the lack of nearby flow lane disposal sites and contamination of the river bed sediment from up-river sources (Greenwood et. al. 2011). The capacity of this upland disposal site has been exhausted. Therefore, alternatives under consideration include extension of the existing site and/or developing a new flow lane placement site, dependent on sediment quality, to accommodate maintenance dredging needs and to return accumulated sediment into the natural littoral drift system in Pacific County. One approach may include the extension the historic West Sand Island dredge disposal site. This site has been permitted in the past and is the leading candidate site for future port disposal, but would require collaboration of all constituents including the Lower Columbia River Solutions Group.
As noted above in the discussion of Willapa Bay, dredging operations have the potential to adversely affect recruitment of marine species that support commercially and recreationally significant fisheries, notably Dungeness crab. Because of potential conflicts between dredging and fisheries, in 2002, the governors of Oregon and Washington convened the Lower Columbia Solutions Group. The group is comprised of key government, fishing industry, and environmental stakeholders to cooperatively plan dredging projects to achieve economic and environmental objectives. In 2011, the group signed a Regional Sediment Management Plan for the Mouth of the Columbia River. The plan includes planned implementation of dredging projects along with funding for research and monitoring from the Corps, the EPA, WDFW, the Columbia River Crab Fisherman’s Association, the Oregon Dungeness Crab Commodities Commission, and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Habitat and Water Quality Changes Flow regulation and diking in the Columbia River have eliminated or limited tidal inundation and disconnected the river from its floodplain, limiting natural disruptions that form new wetlands and create shifting mosaics of wetland habitats (Bottom et al. 2005). Furthermore, channel dredging and flow regulation in the Columbia River have combined to consolidate the river current into a single channel and reduce flow through peripheral wetland and marsh habitats (Bottom et al. 2005). The combination of dikes and water flow regulation has
76 The Watershed Company May 2015 contributed to a 62% loss in the shallow water habitat available to juvenile Chinook salmon in the lower estuary (Kukulka and Jay 2003).
Current wild populations of salmon in the Columbia River basin represent only 12% of their historic numbers (Bottom et al. 2005). Hatchery fish represent approximately 50% of all fall Chinook salmon in the entire basin, and over 85% of the fall Chinook salmon from the lower and middle subbasins of the watershed (Genovese and Emmett 1997). The diversity of salmon life histories, including different ocean-type Chinook salmon strategies, in the Columbia River has decreased substantially since the early 1900s (Burke 2004, Bottom et al. 2005).
Within Pacific County, the hydrologic connectivity of several shallow areas has been cut off by highway causeways. A substantial amount of the Columbia River shoreline within the County has been armored with riprap. Over-water and in-water structures occur along the Columbia, including the marina at Port of Chinook, the Astoria Bridge, the Chinook jetty, and several thousand in-water derelict piles from historic fish traps.
Water quality monitoring from 2004-2007 found elevated levels of PCBs and PAHs in tissues sampled from the Columbia River Estuary (Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 2010). The legacy pesticide, DDT, was also identified in salmonid tissues in 2007 sampling. Water quality impairments in the Columbia River Estuary that are listed by Ecology are identified in Table 3-8.
Table 3-8. Impaired water quality parameters in Willapa Bay and the Columbia River Estuary in Pacific County https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wats/approvedsearch.aspx Year of qualifying Waterbody Parameter Status data Bacteria 1998-2009 303(d)- impaired Dissolved Oxygen 1998-2006 303(d)- impaired Willapa Bay Temperature 2002, 2005 303(d)- impaired Pesticides- Mussel tissue 2006, 2008 303(d)- impaired PCBs- Mussel tissue 1996 303(d)- impaired Columbia River Estuary Bacteria- Ilwaco marina 1992 303(d)- impaired Dioxin 1989 TMDL (1993) Source: Ecology 2012
Coastal Risks and Emerging Issues Tsunamis Shorelines of Pacific County, along the Pacific Ocean and within Willapa Bay and the Columbia River estuaries are vulnerable to tsunami inundation. Tsunamis can occur from either local sources like the Cascadia Subduction Zone or from far-field sources such as Alaska or Chile. The recurrence interval of tsunami is estimated at 500 to 1,000 years for a megathrust event (Jacoby et al. 1997; Satake et al. 1996). Apparently the last known Cascadia Subduction Zone
77 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report event to produce significant inundation and run-up in SW Washington was in 1700, for which numerous proxies exist, such as inland marine deposits in Willapa Bay and records of sudden land subsidence indicative of convergent subduction zone inter-plate stress release (Satake et al. 1996). Far-field tsunamis have produced substantial observed run-ups in Pacific County, as well. The 1964 Alaska-Aleutian earthquake and tsunami produced recorded tsunami wave heights at Seaview of 12.5 feet above tide, 4.5 feet above tide at Ilwaco, and 3.5-4 feet above tide at the Raymond docks (Washington 2013).
The Washington State Department of Natural Resources worked with the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program and local officials to develop tsunami evacuation maps for the State of Washington. In addition to the delineation of tsunami evacuation limits for the State, the US Geological Survey and the Washington Military Department Emergency Management Division recently assessed variation in exposure of 24 communities along Washington’s outer coast to tsunami hazard. The report finds that Long Beach peninsula is relatively sensitive to tsunami inundation compared to other areas on the Washington coast (Figures 3-20 and 3-21).
78 The Watershed Company May 2015
Figure 3-20. Modeled tsunami inundation for the Long Beach peninsula from a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake in 25 min intervals (from Venturato et al. 2007).
79 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
Figure 3-21. Maximum inundation levels (left) and current speeds (right) for the Long Beach Peninsula in the case of a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake (from Venturato et al. 2007).
Energy Production Potential ocean energy projects include projects generating power from waves, tidal currents, and wind.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) reports that, in general, wave energy resources in Pacific County are abundant (EPRI 2004). Studies identify the region offshore of Pacific County,
80 The Watershed Company May 2015
Ocean Park in particular, as having a relatively high wave power potential. However, there are currently no permitted or pending wave energy projects for Pacific County (FERC 2013).
Similarly, The Georgia Tech Research Company indicates that Willapa Bay has a total tidal energy production potential of 91 MW. However, given the dynamic and unstable condition of the entrance to Willapa Bay, the size of turbines needed to harness tidal power (15-20 feet in diameter), and the location of the highest currents, tidal power production would have to come from the upper 20 feet of the water column, which could interfere with navigation and other uses. There are currently no permitted or pending tidal energy projects for Pacific County.
Schwartz et al. (2010) and Musial et al. (2010) have identified viable wind energy resources in the offshore coastal areas of Pacific County. Wind power tends to be highest offshore and decrease as it approaches land (Natural Renewable Energy Laboratory, electronic reference). The potential for offshore wind energy exists and may develop further as technologies improve, economic factors are improved, and regulatory roles are clarified (Musial et al. 2010, Baker et al. 2014).
An assessment of the environmental effects of ocean energy noted a number of potential ecological effects of offshore renewable energy developments. These include:
• Temporary disturbance during installation; • Alteration of currents and waves; • Alteration of substrates, sediment transport and deposition; • Alteration of habitats for benthic organisms; • Acoustic effects of noise during construction and operation, • Emission of electromagnetic fields; • Toxicity of paints, lubricants, and antifouling coatings; • Interference with animal movements and migrations; and • Alteration of fish and wildlife behavior; • Direct injury and mortality to fish and wildlife; and • Potential unforeseen population and community impacts (Polagye et al. 2010).
Other potential impacts include:
• Loss of fishing areas; and • Restrictions to navigation areas. The same assessment notes that, “effects on the magnitude and scale of hydrodynamic and sediment dynamic changes on fish interaction with structure and on changes to community structure are not well understood, especially for marine mammals and seabirds, in such dynamic and difficult-to-study tidal environments.” Structures may attract species assemblages
81 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
by providing structure, either mid-water or at the water surface, but the extent of the assemblage and the effect of these assemblages on marine populations and communities are not well understood.
A majority of Washington’s coastal ocean is protected under the National Marine Sanctuary jurisdiction which prohibits offshore renewable energy development. That leaves waters off of Grays Harbor and Pacific County as the only allowable areas for offshore development along Washington’s outer coast. Pacific County is also the most marine dependent county in Washington State. These fishing fleets harvest Dungeness crab, herring, salmon, pink shrimp, albacore tuna, salmon, and bottomfish and provide them local and global markets. The estimated value of the Dungeness crab fishery alone in Pacific County in 2013 was over $16 million dollars (PacFIN). Offshore fishing in Pacific County is considered an existing sustainable use of the ocean and offshore development may pose a threat to these important fisheries through, habitat degradation, displacement, and fishery gear entanglement.
Local shellfish growers also note that Willapa Bay does not have appropriate hardened channels to support current generators, and that by changing of flow patterns in the Bay, such devices would alter sediment stability that is important for maintaining shellfish aquaculture production.
Thus, a critical look at the environmental impacts of offshore energy development on important fish, invertebrate, and mammal habitats using best available science will be important to evaluating potential impacts from marine energy. Additionally, a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and safety impacts on culturally and economically significant sustainable uses of the coastal ocean will be critical (Lester et al. 2013).
In a 2014 workshop, the Mid- Atlantic Fishery Management Council created a list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) based on “lessons learned” from offshore development. These recommendations included (Offshore Wind Best Management Practices Workshop 2014):
• Slow down the planning process to allow the fishing industry to become more fully engaged • Begin collecting the data necessary to establish environmental economic baselines. • Begin developing tools and resources to facilitate better communication between developers and the fishing industry (e.g. a database of interested individuals and organizations). • Develop clear guidelines for the selection and responsibilities of the fisheries representative (FR). • Require transparency during all phases of the development process.
82 The Watershed Company May 2015
• Establish guidelines that specify when, where, and how exclusion zones can be established. • Develop models to estimate the impacts of scour and sedimentation. • Establish a role for fishermen in improving safety practices. • Include fishermen in the environmental monitoring • Focus on building trust
Climate Change Although the specific impacts of climate change have yet to be fully understood, some of the potential effects of climate change to coastal shorelines include sea level change, increased frequency and intensity of storm events, ocean acidification, and changes to ocean currents. Huppert et al. (2009) summarized the following physical and biological stressors that may be anticipated to accompany climate change in coastal areas of Washington State:
• inundation of low-lying areas by high tides as sea level rises • flooding of coasts during major storm events, especially near river mouths • accelerated erosion of coastal bluffs • shifting of beach profiles, moving the position of the Mean High Water line landward • saltwater intrusion into coastal freshwater aquifers • increased ocean temperature and acidity
Local sea level change can occur due a combination of factors including eustatic change, which is sea level change due to changes in the total volume of ocean water or changes in the volumetric capacity of the ocean basins, and local effects such as tectonic uplift. Changes in the world’s ocean volume have numerous sources including the melting of ice caps and glaciers and thermal expansion of the oceans due to global warming (Committee on Sea Level Rise in California, Oregon, and Washington et al. 2012). The information on sea level rise along the Pacific County shorelines is relatively limited. Although long term sea level rise records are relatively sparse for the region, there is indication that the rate of eustatic sea level rise exceeds the rate of tectonic uplift for the Central Washington Coast and Pacific County. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), based on data from long-term tidal station at Toke Point in Willapa Bay, has estimated a mean sea level rise trend of 0.73 mm/year ± 1.05 mm/year between 1973 and 2012 (NOAA 2014a). It is expected that there will continue be a net rise in the sea level in Willapa Bay in the future. Mote et al. (2008) developed three alternatives for sea level rise for the Central Washington Coast that indicate sea level rise of 1 to 18 inches by 2050 and 2 to 43 inches by 2100 (Toke et al. 2008). Not all locations in the region, however, are experiencing sea level rise. Astoria, Oregon, for example, currently has a sea level fall (decreasing) trend of 0.27 mm/year ± 0.35 mm/year. The trend in Astoria is due to tectonic uplift in the area; the uplift is greater than the eustatic sea level rise. It may be possible that
83 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report most southern Pacific County shorelines are also influenced by the same tectonic uplift measured at Astoria and that the rate of sea level rise (0.73 mm per year), estimated at Toke Pt. is smaller in the southern portion of the County or does not exist.
Two different analyses of sea level rise are displayed graphically in Figure 3-22 and 3-23.
Figure 3-22. Map showing existing conditions on left and 2-foot sea level rise scenario on the right. Low-lying areas highlighted in green and inundated areas shown in blue. Source: http://coast.noaa.gov/slr/
84 The Watershed Company May 2015
Figure 3-23. Map showing extent of mean high water (pink) and highest observed water level (blue) under a 3-foot (1m) sea level rise scenario. Source: Data from Global Ocean Health In addition to sea level rise, climate change is also expected to change local climate patterns. Shifting storm tracks and increased wave heights have already been recognized south of Point Grenville (Huppert et al. 2009). The frequency of extreme precipitation events is expected to increase in Washington State as a result of global climate change (Salathé et al. 2010). These changes are expected to accelerate shoreline erosion and contribute to flashier hydrographs in the rivers and streams of Pacific County. Under these scenarios, coastal flooding would become more frequent.
Increasing sea surface temperature has the potential to create El Nino and La Nina like conditions, which could lead to increased winter precipitation (in La Nina years) and southeasterly winter storms in the winter and spring (in El Nino years). Increased precipitation and storm activity leads to coastal erosion, increased sedimentation, and disturbance to benthic communities (Goldfinger et al. 2014; Komar et al. 1972). Soft bottom habitats, such as those characteristic of the coastal ocean off Pacific County are particularly susceptible to disturbance by surface waves, internal waves, and/or bottom currents up to about 150 m as sediments are highly mobile, especially on the inner coastal shelf (<40 m) (Komar et al. 1972, Goldfinger et al. 2014, Bob Eder, Ronald Briggs pers. Comm.). Evidence for local sediment movement patterns and events can be derived from the reports of crab fishermen whose crab pots can be
85 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
transported or buried by ocean physical conditions (Goldfinger et al. 2014). Crab fishermen off the coast from Pacific County have reported that sediment mobilization in the region can range from 6-8 ft. near Willapa Bay to over 20 ft. and depends on the sediment grain size, shape, and specific gravity, as well as storm strengths and the speed or duration of a storm event (Dale Beasley pers. comm.). Crab fishermen in Pacific County report an approximate sediment redistribution rate of 1 ft. in a 4-5 days with seas greater than or equal to 20 ft within crab fishing zones (7-30 m depths) (Dale Beasley pers. comm; Goldfinger et al. 2014). If storm activity increases along Washington’s coast, crab pot burial may become more frequent. In order to retrieve crab pots, fishermen will have to use a “pot pump” to hydraulically pump crab pots out of the sediments (Goldfinger et al. 2014). In addition to decreased safety for fishermen with increasing storm activity, sediment burial of crab pots will likely lead to a loss of catch and more derelict gear.
Increased coastal flooding could compromise previously compliant septic fields, resulting in water quality concerns in coastal waters. Additionally, sea level rise could compromise existing wells. As described by Blakemore (1995), “In an island ground-water flow system, [such as occurs on the Long Beach Peninsula,] the higher the water table is above sea level, the thicker is the freshwater lens…For every 1 ft of altitude the water table is above sea level, fresh ground water will extend 40 ft below sea level.” Put another way, for every one foot of rise in sea level relative to ground water, the aquifer depth will decrease by 40 feet. For this reason, overuse of the aquifer; development that results in reduced infiltration and aquifer recharge; and sea level rise each present potential threats to the long term sustainability of the Long Beach aquifer.
Another potential effect of climate change relates to ocean acidification. Ocean acidification,
resulting from adsorption of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), reduces pH in marine waters and the availability of carbonate ions that are used for shell formation on marine plankton and shellfish. Since the industrial revolution, the pH of seawater has decreased by approximately 0.1, and reductions of up to 0.4 are predicted by the end of the century from future increases in atmospheric CO2 (Feely et al. 2008). Ocean acidification results in reduced production and growth of oysters (Barton et al. 2012), and therefore is a significant concern for native and commercial bivalve species in Pacific County and along the Pacific Coast. This is particularly of concern along the west coast of the U.S. where seasonal upwelling already results in more corrosive waters being transported into coastal estuaries (Feely et al. 2008). The global increase
in CO2 is expected to result in more frequent, more intense, and longer duration high CO2 events along the Pacific Coast over the upcoming decades (Gruber et al. 2012, Hauri et al. 2013). West Coast shellfish hatcheries have begun to adapt to the problem primarily by buffering the water coming into the hatchery and using selective timing to draw water under ideal conditions (Barton et al. 2012). Scientific research into understanding critical stages of shellfish
86 The Watershed Company May 2015 susceptibility, potential acclimation or adaptations to higher acidity, and potential buffering effects of different estuarine habitats is being actively pursued. Recent studies have found that effects may carry over from one life stage to the next, and that effects may be cross-generational (Parker et al. 2012, Hettinger et al. 2012). Adult oysters conditioned to higher acidity produce larvae that are more resilient to acidification, suggesting that oysters may either adapt to
elevated CO2 over multiple generations (Parker et al. 2012). Seagrass and oyster shells are two communities that could offer potential refugia from the effects of ocean acidification (Waldbusser et al. 2013, Hendriks et al. 2014), although further research is necessary to understand how these estuarine habitats alter carbonate chemistry at the habitat or landscape scale.
Additionally, temperature effects of climate change can stress aquatic and coastal organisms, particularly those at the outer range of their species distributions. This can result in local species extinctions or the shifting of species distributions. Changes in species ranges and depths may alter trophic relationships, as well as fisheries (reviewed in Skewgar and Pearson 2011).
Oil Spills Given the frequent cargo traffic and the challenging navigational conditions in the Pacific Coast and at the mouth of the Columbia River, oil spills are a potential environmental hazard in the region. The risk of oil spills is increased by the transport of crude oil from Canada and the interior United States. Crude oil is heavier, and therefore, presents greater challenges for containment and greater risk to wildlife compared to lighter oils, such as gasoline (Washington Department of Ecology 2015). Crude oil is transported by rail along the Columbia River Gorge and out of the Columbia River mouth on articulated tug barges (ATBs). In describing potential effects of an oil spill on the Columbia River, a recent report by Ecology stated, “Impacts would include toxicity-related mortality to existing fish and shellfish stocks (adults, juveniles, and eggs), decreased fish and shellfish fecundity (reproductive capacity) in future years, and reduced important food sources. Even if marine species mortality rates were relatively low, there is a risk of contamination of marine species food sources, which may lead to a fishery closure” (Washington Department of Ecology 2015). The same report states that the risk of spills to sensitive areas will increase with the full build-out of proposed crude-by-rail facilities in Washington. Should a major oil spill occur in the Lower Columbia River, in addition to impacts at the Columbia River Mouth, depending on wind, waves, and currents, oil could be transported northward in the Columbia River Plume, potentially impacting the Pacific County coastline and Willapa Bay. The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for restricting vessel traffic at the mouth of the Columbia River when conditions are determined to be too severe for safe passage (i.e. swells over 20 feet and winds over 50 knots). The U.S. Coast Guard is also
87 Pacific County Shoreline Analysis Report
responsible for oil spill response and containment to ensure that water quality impacts are minimized if and when oil spills occur.
Submerged Cables Ocean cables are laid across the ocean floor for power transmission and communication. The placement of these cables requires coordination between multiple agencies and stakeholders. The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) requires that federal agencies may not grant cable placement licenses without review by state agencies. Under the United States Submarine Cable Act (47 USC 21-23), it is a criminal offence to purposely interfere with submarine cables, thus the placement of cables may have an effect on the distribution of fishing effort in areas where cables have been placed. The direct environmental impact of submerged cables is thought to be low (Burnett et al. 2013). However, buried cables can be either further buried or become exposed due to changes in currents, storm activity, and sediment transport. If cables become exposed and suspended, marine organisms can become disturbed or entangled (Burnett et al. 2013). Additionally, the burying and re-burying of cables involves temporary disturbance of benthic communities. In order to re-bury cables in soft sediments, water injection or jetting is often used, which can create plumes of sediments and displace organisms (Burnett et al. 2013).
Ocean Navigation Pacific County is located at the mouth of the Columbia River which leads to the major shipping ports of Vancouver, WA and Portland, OR and the fishing ports of Ilwaco, WA and Astoria, OR. Vessels may also pass by Pacific County heading to and from Grays Harbor, the north coast of Washington, and across the Pacific.
The number of container vessels shipping goods along the west coast of North America has increased and is projected to increase over time (Douglas et al. 2008). While rail and pipeline oil transport is on the rise in Washington, almost 70% of crude oil is currently transported by vessels (Etkin et al. 2015). Grays Harbor, adjacent to Pacific County, has been proposed as a new oil terminal. If developed, Grays Harbor will receive crude oil by rail and transport the oil from the Harbor by tankers and barges (Etkin et al. 2015). Increased bunkering in Lower Columbia River ports by tank vessels is also projected to increase (Etkin et al. 2015).
An increase in vessel traffic could lead to increased instances of vessel collisions as well as ship strikes to marine mammals (Etkin et al. 2015; Douglas et al. 2008).
88