DOCSLIB.ORG

Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State D ETERMINING THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK ON STREAMS IN WASHINGTON STATE Dr. Patricia Olson and Erik Stockdale, Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program, Washington State Department of Ecology Ecology Publication #: 08-06-001 March 2010 Second Review Draft DETERMINING THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK ON STREAMS IN W ASHINGTON STATE March 2010 Second Review Draft Dr. Patricia Olson and Erik Stockdale Washington State Department of Ecology Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program Ecology Publication #: 08-06-001 This report should be cited as: Olson, P. and E. Stockdale. 2010. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark on Streams in Washington State. Second Review Draft. Washington State Department of Ecology, Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program, Lacey, WA. Ecology Publication # 08-06-001. Cover photographs courtesy of Brian Walsh: Top left: Loretta Creek, Skagit River basin. Top right: White River. Bottom: Stillaguamish River. This document is available (or will be shortly) on the Department of Ecology web site at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0806001.html Special accommodations: If you need this publication in an alternate format, call the Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program at 360-407-6096. Persons with hearing loss, call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability, call 877-833-6341. DETERMINING THE OR DINAR Y HIGH WATER MAR K ON STRE AMS IN WASHIN GTON STATE Table of Contents Chapter One - Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Importance of accurate Ordinary High Water Mark determinations ................................................................................. 1 Purpose of the document ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Organization of this document ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Chapter Two – defining the ordinary high water mark ................................................................................................................. 5 The ordinary high water mark defined ............................................................................................................................................ 5 The three criteria of ordinary high water mark ........................................................................................................................... 6 What is ordinary high water mark on a stream? .......................................................................................................................... 8 Reasons for systematically determining the OHWM ................................................................................................................ 10 Common misunderstandings of stream OHWM ......................................................................................................................... 11 OHWM on tidally influenced streams.............................................................................................................................................. 16 Chapter THREE – Office Assessment .................................................................................................................................................... 19 Step 1: Assess landscape and geomorphic features .................................................................................................................. 19 Step 2: Choose potential locations for field survey ................................................................................................................... 21 Importance of hydrologic assessment ............................................................................................................................................ 24 Chapter FOUR - Field Assessment ......................................................................................................................................................... 25 General observations .............................................................................................................................................................................. 25 Identify lower and upper boundaries of OHWM using transects: ...................................................................................... 26 - Set up transects from the water’s edge to the upland. ................................................................................................. 26 - Identify vegetation and soil indicators along transect starting at water’s edge. .............................................. 26 Narrow the bookends ............................................................................................................................................................................. 28 Field indicators .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 Chapter FIVE – Hydrologic Assessment .............................................................................................................................................. 43 Step 5-1: Use gage data to approximate upper and lower Values of OHW flow .......................................................... 44 Step 5-2: Evaluate peak flow “bookends” using daily discharge and stage data ......................................................... 46 MARCH 2010 SECOND REVI EW D RAFT i DETERMINING THE OR DINAR Y HIGH WATER MAR K ON STRE AMS IN WASHIN GTON STATE Step 5-2.1: Convert discharge to stage ........................................................................................................................................... 48 Step 5-3: Compare recent events to OHWM bookends ........................................................................................................... 50 MARCH 2010 SECOND REVI EW D RAFT ii DETERMINING THE OR DINAR Y HIGH WATER MAR K ON STRE AMS IN WASHIN GTON STATE List of Figures Figure 2-1: Deschutes River daily mean discharge for 1996-2008 . ....................................................................... 10 Figure 2-2: Comparisions of recurrence interval for small, frequent peak flows ................................................ 10 Figure 2-3: Cross-section of a typical stream showing OHWM .............................................................................. 12 Figure 2-4: Channel characteristics that influence the location OHWM ................................................................ 13 Figure 2-5: Cross-section from a multi-channel stream reach .................................................................................... 15 Figure 2-6: Example cross-sections from the intertidal zone to upstream of tidal influence .............................. 17 Figure 3-1: Determinations where indicators are not available on site ................................................................ 22 Figure 4-1: An example of cross-sectional profile illustrating some channel and floodplain feature ................. 27 Figure 5-1: Deschutes River peak streamflow for 1950-2006 ................................................................................. 46 Figure 5-2: Deschutes River daily mean discharge for 1996-2009 ......................................................................... 47 Figure 5-3: Deschutes River discharge to stage conversion .................................................................................... 49 List of Tables Table 3-1. Location of OHWM in relation to channel pattern 23 Table 4-1. Selected OHWM indicators and locations 41 Appendices Appendix A: Field Data Form Appendix B: Plant Species Distribution Across OHWM Gradient Appendix C: Internet Links Appendix D: Geomorphic Examples and Indicators Appendix E: Example Report Outline Appendix F: Glossary Appendix G: Comparison of different OHWM definitions in various statutes and rules Appendix H: References and Suggested Reading MARCH 2010 SECOND REVI EW D RAFT iii DETERMINING THE OR DINAR Y HIGH WATER MAR K ON STRE AMS IN WASHIN GTON STATE This page left intentionally blank. MARCH 2010 SECON D R E VIEW DRAFT iv DETERMINING THE OR DINAR Y HIGH WATER MAR K ON STRE AMS IN WASHIN GTON STATE Acknowledgements The production of this document would not have been possible without the assistance and input from others. We would like to acknowledge the long-standing effort by Perry Lund of the Department of Ecology to develop a science-based methodology for determining the location of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) on shorelines of the state. We are equally indebted to Al Wald of the Department of Fish & Wildlife who similarly recognized the need for a consistent, inter-agency guidance document. We hope this document will eventually lead in that direction. Both Al and Perry have contributed hundreds of hours in providing training for local, state, federal and tribal staff, and consultants. They also provided technical oversight during the initial scoping of the methodology. We are grateful to Marlies Wierenga and Joy Michaud of Envirovision, Inc. (Olympia, WA) who managed the production of the first draft of the document. Thank you for your patience while
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Determination of the High Water Mark and Its Location Along a Coastline
    Faculty of Science and Engineering Department of Spatial Sciences Determination of the High Water Mark and its Location Along a Coastline Xin Liu This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Curtin University April 2013 Declaration To the best of my knowledge and belief this thesis contains no material previously published by any other person except where due acknowledgement has been made. This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university. Signature…………………………………………………………….. Date………………………………………………………………….. i ABSTRACT The High Water Mark (HWM) is an important cadastral boundary that separates land and water. It is also used as a baseline to facilitate coastal hazard management, from which land and infrastructure development is offset to ensure the protection of property from storm surge and sea level rise. However, the location of the HWM is difficult to define accurately due to the ambulatory nature of water and coastal morphology variations. Contemporary research has failed to develop an accurate method for HWM determination because continual changes in tidal levels, together with unimpeded wave runup and the erosion and accretion of shorelines, make it difficult to determine a unique position of the HWM. While traditional surveying techniques are accurate, they selectively record data at a given point in time, and surveying is expensive, not readily repeatable and may not take into account all relevant variables such as erosion and accretion. In this research, a consistent and robust methodology is developed for the determination of the HWM over space and time. The methodology includes two main parts: determination of the HWM by integrating both water and land information, and assessment of HWM indicators in one evaluation system.
    [Show full text]
  • Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State
    Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State October 2016 Final Review Publication no. 16-06-029 Template Publication and Contact Information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1606029.html For more information contact: Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: 360-407-6000 Washington State Department of Ecology - www.ecy.wa.gov o Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 o Central Regional Office, Yakima 509-575-2490 o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 Accommodation Requests: To request ADA accommodation including materials in a format for the visually impaired, call Ecology at 360-407-6000. Persons with impaired hearing may call Washington Relay Service at 711. Persons with speech disability may call TTY at 877-833-6341. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State by; Paul S. Anderson, Susan Meyer, Dr. Patricia Olson, Erik Stockdale Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington Table of Contents Page Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................3 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Final Coastal and Riverine High Water Mark Collection for Hurricane Katrina in Mississippi FEMA-1604-DR-MS, Task Orders 413 and 420 March 14, 2006 (Final)
    Final Coastal and Riverine High Water Mark Collection for Hurricane Katrina in Mississippi FEMA-1604-DR-MS, Task Orders 413 and 420 March 14, 2006 (Final) FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Hazard Mitigation Technical Assistance Program Contract No. EMW-2000-CO-0247 Task Orders 413 & 420 Hurricane Katrina Rapid Response Mississippi Coastal & Riverine High Water Mark Collection FEMA-1604-DR-MS Final Report March 14, 2006 Submitted to: Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV Atlanta, GA Prepared by: URS Group, Inc. 200 Orchard Ridge Drive Suite 101 Gaithersburg, MD 20878 FOR PUBLIC RELEASE HMTAP Task Orders 413 and 420 Final Report March 14, 2006 Table of Contents Abbreviations and Acronyms ................................................................................................................... iii Glossary of Terms...................................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................. vii Introduction and Purpose of the Study...........................................................................................vii Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... vii Coastal and Riverine HWM Observations......................................................................................viii Hancock County ...................................................................................................................viii
    [Show full text]
  • A Navigable Waterway?
    A LEGAL GUIDE TO THE PUBLIC’S RIGHTS TO ACCESS AND USE CALIFORNIA’S NAVIGABLE WATERS 09/13/2017 Table of Contents I. PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDE .......................................................................................................... 4 A. Overview of Public Rights to Access and Use California’s Navigable Waters ............... 5 B. The California State Lands Commission’s Role in Protecting Public Access Rights ..... 6 II. PUBLIC ACCESS LAWS ............................................................................................................. 7 A. Ancient Origins ................................................................................................................ 8 B. Common Law Public Access and Use Rights .................................................................. 9 C. Act of Admission ........................................................................................................... 11 D. Equal Footing Doctrine .................................................................................................. 12 E. California Constitution ................................................................................................... 12 F. Statutory Enactments ......................................................................................................... 13 1. Prohibitions on the Sale or Elimination of Access ..................................................... 13 2. McAteer-Petris Act – San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Re: Definition of “Waters of the United States” Under the Clean Water !Ct
    Department of Environmental Quality To protect, conserve and enhance. the quality of Wyoming’s environment for the benefit of current and future generations. Matt hew H. Mead, Governor Todd Parfitt, Director June 16, 2017 Honorable Scott Pruitt Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460 Honorable Douglas W. Lamont, P.E. Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Assistant Secretary of the Army 108 Army Pentagon Washington, DC 20310 Via email to: [email protected] and [email protected] Re: Definition of “Waters of the United States” Under the Clean Water !ct Dear Administrator Pruitt and Senior Official Lamont, Please accept these comments in response to USEP!’s May 8, 2017 request that states provide input on a new definition of “waters of the United States” that is consistent with Justice !ntonin Scalia’s Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006) plurality opinion. As a co-regulator in implementing the Clean Water Act, the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) is responsible for the implementation of the NPDES program under Section 402, adoption of state water quality standards and TMDLs under Section 303, water quality certifications under Section 401, and addressing nonpoint source pollution under Section 319, in addition to implementing state water quality requirements under the Wyoming Environmental Quality Act. WDEQ appreciates that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has reached out directly to Governor’s to solicit input on implementing the February 28, 2017 Presidential Executive Order on Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the “Waters of the United States” Rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Rights and Boundaries PDH325 3 Hours
    Water Rights and Boundaries PDH325 3 Hours PDH Academy PO Box 449 Pewaukee, WI 53072 (888) 564-9098 www.pdhacademy.com Robert T. Loane III, PS PLS Licensed in New Mexico & Colorado Water Rights and Boundaries Water Rights - Definitions Historically, in the United States, determining water rights and boundaries has proven to be very difficult. Both represent some of the most complex and challenging problems regarding land ownership. This topic covers a great deal of issues including meander lines, dependent resurveys, navigability issues, division of lands, partition lines, accretion, reliction, omitted lands whether truthful or erroneous, islands, rivers and lakes. Let us first take the time to look at a few important terms for purpose of understanding. Abandonment: Voluntarily Relinquish or Abandon a Water Right Certificate or Claim. A holder of a water right may voluntarily relinquish the water right if the water use has diminished or completely stopped. Relinquishment can also occur when the state agency responsible for water managing water rights notifies a water right holder (through an administrative order) that evidence shows the water right has not been put to full use. (1) Accretion: The process of deposition consisting of the grain-by-grain deposition of soil along the bank of a river. (2) (See Image 1.1 below) (Image 1.1) Adjudication: In the water rights context, a judicial or administrative process whereby water rights are determined or decreed by a court of law. (1) Alluvial River: A river that flows through its own sediments that by nature, move around over time by the process of erosion of one bank and deposition on the other bank.
    [Show full text]
  • Navigable Waterways in the State of Oregon
    HARDY MYERS PETER D. SHEPHERD Attorney General Deputy Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE April 21, 2005 No. 8281 QUESTIONS PRESENTED The State Land Board (Board) has asked three questions about the ownership and use of waterways in this state. Upon becoming a state, the State of Oregon acquired ownership (or “title”) of all waterways within its boundaries that satisfy certain criteria. The Board first asks us to describe the criteria that determine state ownership and advise whether there are limitations on the state’s authority to dispose of, or constrain the public rights to use, waterways acquired at statehood. Second, the Board asks us to advise whether the public has any right to use a waterway if its bed is privately owned and, if so, to describe the extent of that right and the types of waterways for which the right exists. Finally, under current state law, the means to determine whether a particular waterway is state-owned are limited. The Board asks us what activities by members of the public are lawful in the absence of a determination concerning ownership. ANSWERS GIVEN 1. The United States Supreme Court’s articulation of the criteria for determining state ownership of waterways has been clarified over time. At statehood, the state acquired (with few exceptions) all waterways that were tidally-influenced or that satisfied the federal test of title- navigability. Federal and state law limit the discretion of the state to alienate its ownership, to the extent that doing so would interfere with the public use of the waterway for navigation, commerce, recreation or fisheries.
    [Show full text]