Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan De Fuca

ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY INDEX: PUGET SOUND AND THE STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA

INTRODUCTION reviewed with the assistance of biologists and resource managers Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) maps have been from the following agencies: developed for the coastal areas of Puget Sound and the Strait of • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Juan de Fuca. The ESI maps are a compilation of information from • Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) three main categories: shoreline habitats, sensitive biological • Additional agencies as identified in the biology sections. resources, and human-use resources. The above agencies provided the majority of information included The individual map pages in this atlas are divided according in the atlas. Other participating agencies are cited throughout the to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle atlas and in the metadata accompanying the digital product. index. Greyscale scanned images of these maps are used as a backdrop for each map page in the atlas. The name on the bottom KEY FEATURES ON ESI MAPS right of each map page refers to the corresponding USGS quadrangle. 1) Animal and plant species that are at risk during oil spills and/or spill response are represented on the maps by SHORELINE HABITAT MAPPING polygons, lines, and points. Original ESI maps, published in 1984 and 1985, were re- 2) Species have been divided into groups and subgroups based examined and updated using the sources and methods described on their behavior, morphology, taxonomic classification, and below. The base shoreline used was from Washington State spill vulnerability and sensitivity. The icons below reflect this ShoreZone Inventory, which was created between 1994 and 2000. grouping scheme. The shoreline types of Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca were updated by a coastal geologist via interpretation of MARINE MAMMAL FISH contiguous oblique digital aerial photographs acquired between 2000 and 2002. The shoreline type classification was verified via Pinniped Fish ground surveys conducted in November 2005. Where appropriate, revisions to the existing shoreline were made using digital Sea Otter INVERTEBRATE orthophoto quarter quads dated between 1990 and 1994. Where necessary, multiple habitats were described for each shoreline Bivalve segment. BIRD To determine the sensitivity of a particular intertidal shoreline Alcid / Pelagic Cephalopod habitat, the following factors are integrated: 1) Shoreline type (substrate, grain size, tidal elevation, origin) Diving Bird Crab 2) Exposure to wave and tidal energy 3) Biological productivity and sensitivity Gull / Tern Echinodern 4) Ease of cleanup Raptor Shrimp Prediction of the behavior and persistence of oil in intertidal habitats is based on an understanding of the dynamics of the Shorebird coastal environments, not just the substrate type and grain size. HABITAT The intensity of energy expended upon a shoreline by wave action, tidal currents, and river currents directly affects the persistence of Wading Bird Eelgrass stranded oil. The need for shoreline cleanup activities is determined, in part, by the slowness of natural processes in Waterfowl Kelp removal of oil stranded on the shoreline. The potential for biological injury and ease of cleanup of spilled oil are also 3) Polygons, arcs, and points are color-coded based on the important factors in the ESI ranking. Generally speaking, areas species composition of each feature, as shown below: exposed to high levels of physical energy, such as wave action and tidal currents, and low biological activity rank low on the scale, ELEMENT COLOR AND HATCH PATTERN whereas sheltered areas with associated high biological activity have the highest ranking. The list below includes the shoreline Birds Green outline (no hatch) habitats delineated for Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca, presented in order of increasing sensitivity to spilled oil. Fish Blue diagonal hatch 1A) Exposed Rocky Shores Invertebrates Orange diagonal hatch 1B) Exposed, Solid Man-made Structures Marine mammals Brown horizontal hatch 2A) Exposed Wave-cut Platforms in Bedrock, Mud, or Benthic habitats “Simplified wetland” patterns Clay

3A) Fine- to Medium-grained Sand Beaches 4) There is a Resources at Risk number (RAR#) located under 3B) Scarps and Steep Slopes in Sand each icon or group of icons. The RAR# references a table 4) Coarse-grained Sand Beaches on the reverse side of the map with a complete list of species associated with the feature. 5) Mixed Sand and Gravel Beaches 5) Also associated with each species in the table is the state 6A) Gravel Beaches and federal protected status as threatened (T), endangered 6D) Boulder Rubble (E), or species of special concern (C), as well as concentration, seasonality, and life-history information. 6B) Riprap 6) For species that are found throughout general 7) Exposed Tidal Flats geographical areas or habitat types on certain maps, 8A) Sheltered Rocky Shores and Sheltered Scarps in displaying the polygons for these species would cover Bedrock, Mud, or Clay large areas or would obscure the shoreline and biological features, making the maps very difficult to read. In these 8B) Sheltered, Solid Man-made Structures cases, a small box will be shown on the maps which states 8C) Sheltered Riprap that they are “Present in ...” (e.g., “Present in Puget Sound” or “Present in marshes”). 9A) Sheltered Tidal Flats 9B) Vegetated Low Banks MARINE MAMMALS 10A) Salt- and Brackish-water Marshes Marine mammals depicted in the Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca atlas include sea otters, seals, and sea lions. Seal and 10C) Freshwater Swamps sea lion haulout locations were mapped using Washington

Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (WDFW) haulout database Each of the shoreline habitats is described on pages 8-14 in (WDFW, 2005a). Information about harbor seal pupping and terms of their physical description, predicted oil behavior, and molting seasons was derived from the source report (Jeffries et. al., response considerations. 2000) for the WDFW database. Life history information for Steller sea lion and California sea lion was provided by Barry Troutman SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES at WDFW. Biological information presented in this atlas was collected Sea otter locations were mapped using WDFW’s wildlife and compiled from existing digital data sources provided by and heritage database (WDFW, 2005b). These locations were primarily from sightings in 1999 and 2000. Sea otter populations have been

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 1 increasing and distributions have shifted a bit over time, but the line atlas summarizing 12 years of marine bird densities within sea otter locations from the heritage database are consistent with one-minute cells (WDFW, 2005b). For each species or species general maps showing current locations of otter concentration group presented in the on-line atlas, the densities are grouped into areas (Jameson and Jeffries, 2005 and Lance et. al. 2004). Sea otter six categories. The actual range of density values corresponding to life history information was derived from the “Washington State each category varies by species. For the ESI Atlas, only the areas Recovery Plan for the Sea Otter” (Lance et. al., 2004). containing the highest three density categories for each species or Expert review and guidance on marine mammal data sets and species group are included. life history information were provided by Barry Troutman and Life-history information for PHS and PSAMP species was Steve Jeffries from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. provided by various sources, including Lewis and Kraege (2004), Dave Nysewander (pers. comm. 2006), and Speich and Wahl Major Data Sources Used: Marine Mammals (1989). Dave Nysewander and Barry Troutman of WDFW Jameson, R.J. and S. Jeffries. 2005. Results of the 2005 Survey of provided expert review and guidance on bird data sets and life the Reintroduced Sea Otter Population in Washington State. history information. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 6 pp. Major Data Sources Used: Birds Lewis, J. C. and D. Kraege. 2004. Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus Lance, M.M., S.A. Richardson, and H.L. Allen. 2004. Washington histrionicus). In E. M. Larsen, J. M. Azerrad, and N. State Recovery Plan for the Sea Otter. Washington Nordstrom, editors. Management Recommendations for Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 91 pp. Washington's Priority Species, Volume IV: Birds [Online]. Jeffries, S.J., P.J. Gearin, H.R. Huber, D.L. Saul, and D.A. Pruett. Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phs/vol4/harlduck 2000. Atlas of Seal and Sea Lion Haulout Sites in Washington. .htm Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Science Nysewander, D.R., J.R. Evenson, B.L. Murphie, and T.A. Cyra. Division, Olympia, WA. 150 pp. 2005. Report of Marine Bird and Marine Mammal Component, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005a. Seal and Sea Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program, for July 1992 to Lion Haulout Database. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital vector December 1999 Period. WDFW, Olympia, WA, 181 pp. data. Quinn, T. and R. Milner. 2004. Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005b. Wildlife In E.M. Larsen, J.M. Azerrad, and N. Nordstrom, editors. Heritage Database. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital vector data. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Species, Volume IV: Birds [Online]. Available at BIRDS http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phs/vol4/gbheron.htm A wide range of bird nesting and concentration areas is Speich, S.M. and T.R. Wahl. 1989. Catalog of Washington Seabird depicted in this atlas, including bald eagles, great blue herons, Colonies. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report seabirds, shorebirds, and waterfowl. 88(6). 510 pp. (OCS Study, MMS 89-0054) Nesting sites for bald eagles and great blue herons were extracted from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005a. Priority (WDFW) wildlife heritage database (2005d). Although not all nest Habitats and Species Database. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital sites in this dataset are currently active, the locations shown are a vector data. good indicator of existing and potential nesting habitat. Both of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005b. Puget species are vulnerable to oil spills because they feed in the Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP) Marine Bird estuarine and marine waters of Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan Density Atlas: Marine Bird Densities from the Inland Marine de Fuca. Life history information for bald eagles was provided by Waters of Washington as Captured by PSAMP Efforts 1992- Watson and Rodrick (2004), and for herons was provided by 2004. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital vector data [Online]. Quinn and Milner (2004). Atlas users should be aware that the Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/psamp/ information in the seasonality tables for bald eagles applies solely to the nesting occurrence. Bald eagles do occur in Puget Sound Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005c. Seabird and Strait of Juan de Fuca year-round. Colony Database. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital vector data. Seabird colony locations were mapped from WDFW’s seabird Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005d. Wildlife colony database (2005c). These data were developed from the Heritage Database. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital vector data. “Catalog of Washington Seabird Colonies” (Speich and Wahl, Watson, J.W. and E.A. Rodrick. 2004. Bald Eagle (Heliaeetus 1989). This data set includes colony locations for the following 18 leucocephalus). In E.M. Larsen, J.M. Azerrad, and N. species: fork-tailed storm-petrel, Leach’s storm-petrel, double- Nordstrom, editors. Management Recommendations for crested cormorant, Brandt’s cormorant, pelagic cormorant, Washington's Priority Species, Volume IV: Birds [Online]. American black oystercatcher, ring-billed gull, western gull, Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phs/vol4/baldeagle.pdf glaucous-winged gull, caspian tern, arctic tern, common murre, pigeon guillemot, marbled murrelet, ancient murrelet, Cassin’s TERRESTRIAL MAMMALS auklet, rhinoceros auklet, and tufted puffin. Due to the age of the Terrestrial mammals were not depicted in this atlas because source data, the specific detail on species composition and counts their use of more upland and inland habitats makes impact to within the colonies may not accurately describe current conditions these species during coastal and marine oil spills unlikely. and, therefore, is not included in this ESI Atlas. However, the colony locations are important sites that are generally used by FISH seabirds of various species. Finfish depicted in this atlas include selected marine, For other occurrences of birds within Puget Sound and the estuarine, and anadromous species. Existing digital data sets from Strait of Juan de Fuca, two data sources were used: WDFW’s the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) were priority habitats and species (PHS) database (2005a) and WDFW’s used to develop these maps. Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP) Marine Bird The riverine distributions of anadromous species, including Density Atlas (2005b). chinook salmon, chum salmon, pink salmon, coho salmon, From the PHS data, polygons were extracted depicting sockeye salmon, steelhead and bull trout/Dolly Varden, were concentration areas for harlequin duck, shorebirds, and waterfowl. derived from the fish distribution data in WDFW’s Washington These data were developed from expert input, including input Lakes and Rivers Information System Database (2005b). from WDFW regional biologists. Atlas users should be aware that Specifically, river segments identified as having “known” or PHS data are not comprehensive – they show important areas for “presumed” occurrence of any of these species were included in these birds, but there may be other areas that have not been the data for the ESI Atlas. Seasonality information was provided mapped. by various sources and species status reviews, including Busby et. For harlequin duck, PHS captures some essential riverine al. (1996) for steelhead, Johnson et. al. (1997) for chum salmon, breeding areas. For the hardcopy map product only, some of the Myers et. al. (1998) for chinook salmon, WDFW (2000) for native PHS polygons were combined to produce a more readable char (bull trout and Dolly Varden), and Monaco et. al. (1990) for product. No species information was deleted, however some of coho, pink, and sockeye salmon. Although there is a lack of the polygon boundaries were shifted a few feet to increase the comprehensive digital information depicting anadromous species coincidence with other polygons with similar boundaries. This distribution in marine and estuarine areas, the riverine reduced the number of extremely small polygons that would not distribution can provide a proxy for highlighting areas of concern be distinguishable on the hardcopy maps. for the various species and runs of anadromous fish in Puget The PSAMP data are based on an extensive, multi-year aerial Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. transect survey for marine birds in Puget Sound and the Strait of The digital data for anadromous fish streams included Juan de Fuca. These surveys show consistent areas of marine bird numerous short (< 50 feet) line segments that would not be visible concentrations in the marine and estuarine waters of the study on the maps. These short arcs were deleted for the purpose of map area. Survey methods are detailed in Nysewander et. al. (2005). production and the data were updated to make sure the river From the raw survey transect data, WDFW has developed an on- segments downstream of the deleted arcs included all of the

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca – Page 2

species in the deleted arcs. In addition there were numerous HABITATS instances of parallel line segments, with different species, Floating kelp beds and eelgrass beds were mapped using representing the same stream. These lines and species were existing digital data from Washington Department of Natural combined into one line segment. Resources (WDNR) because they have the most comprehensive For marine and estuarine species, forage fish distributions, data sets depicting these important and sensitive marine and including herring, smelt, sand lance, and rock sole, were mapped estuarine habitats. These data were supplemented by a recent using field survey data provided by WDFW (2005a). WDFW has eelgrass survey in the San Juan Islands by the Friends of the San been mapping forage fish spawning beaches throughout Puget Juans and others. Sound for more than ten years because these beaches are critical In the Strait of Juan de Fuca, WDNR has a multi-year (1989- links in the food chain between zooplankton and predatory fish, 2004) aerial inventory of the floating kelp species, Macrocystis birds, and mammals. There are also areas where adult herring integrifolia and Nereocystis luetkeana (WDNR, 2005). Because kelp, congregate before spawning, known as pre-spawner holding areas particularly Nereocystis, is highly variable, this multi-year data set (Stick, 2005). Seasonality information for forage fish spawning avoids the problem of a single snapshot in time and indicates areas areas is from WDFW’s Technical Report 79 (1992). Seasonality where kelp tends to occur regularly. For this atlas, the composite information for pre-spawner holding areas is provided by Stick polygons that depict any occurrence of floating kelp within the (2005). For the purpose of visibility on the hardcopy maps, a 400 ft. entire time series were used. Because species can vary between buffer was created on the water side of the shoreline where these years, the species were grouped into a single category for kelp. species occurred. The buffered polygon is represented on the The extent of this particular data set is from the outer coast of maps. Washington to the eastern end of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, near Major Data Sources Used: Fish Port Townsend. Busby, P.J., T.C. Wainwright, G.J. Bryant, L.J. Lierheimer, R.S. For comprehensive coverage of the atlas area, WDNR Waples, F.W. Waknitz, and I.V. Lagomarsino. 1996. Status provided data from the ShoreZone Inventory (2001). These data Review of West Coast Steelhead from Washington, Idaho, divide the shoreline into homogenous physical segments and, Oregon, and California. U.S. Department of Commerce, within each segment, indicate the presence of certain biological NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-27, 261 pp. features. Shoreline segments that indicated patchy or continuous floating kelp or eelgrass were extracted. To avoid data redundancy Johnson, O.W., W.S. Grant, R.G. Kope, K. Neely, F.W. Waknitz, with the kelp polygons described above, the segments along the and R.S. Waples. 1997. Status Review of Chum Salmon from Strait of Juan de Fuca that showed kelp were removed. Washington, Oregon, and California. U.S. Department of A recent eelgrass survey by the Friends of the San Juans et. al. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC- (2004) was used to supplement the eelgrass data in San Juan 32, 280 pp. County. These data depict the deep-water edge of eelgrass beds Monaco, M.E., D.M. Nelson, R.L. Emmett, and S.A. Hinton. 1990. along the county’s shoreline. To maintain a consistent spatial Distribution and Abundance of Fishes and Invertebrates in context, these data were transferred to the corresponding segments West Coast Estuaries Volume 1: Data Summaries. ELMR of the ShoreZone shoreline. If there was an area of eelgrass Report No. 4, Strategic Assessment Branch, National Ocean delineated by the Friends of the San Juans survey, but not by the Service, NOAA. Rockville, MD. 240 pp. ShoreZone data, that segment of the ShoreZone shoreline was coded to indicate the presence of eelgrass. Myers, J.M., R.G. Kope, G.J. Bryant, D. Teel, L.J. Lierheimer, T.C. Wainwright, W.S. Grant, F.W. Waknitz, K. Neely, S.T. Lindley, For the purpose of visibility on the hardcopy maps, a 400 ft. and R.S. Waples. 1998. Status Review of Chinook Salmon buffer was created on the water side of the shoreline where the from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. ShoreZone and Friends of San Juan kelp and eelgrass were shown Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum to occur. The buffered polygon is represented on the maps. NMFS-NWFSC-35, 443 pp. WDNR also provided data from detailed remote-sensing inventories of vegetated and non-vegetated habitats in Whatcom Stick, K.C. 2005. 2004 Washington State Herring Stock Status (1995) and Skagit (1996) counties. To avoid duplication, kelp and Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish eelgrass polygons were only incorporated in areas not depicted by Program, Fish Management Division. Olympia, WA. [Online]. the ShoreZone data. Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/papers/herring_status _report/2004_herring_stock_status_report.pdf Major Data Sources Used: Habitats Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1992. Salmon, Friends of the San Juans, J. Slocumb, S. Buffum-Fields, S. Wyllie- Marine Fish, and Shellfish Resources and Associated Fisheries Echeverria, J. Norris, I. Fraser, and J. Cordell. 2004. San Juan in Washington's Coastal and Inland Marine Waters. Technical County Eelgrass (Z. marina) Survey Mapping Project. Friday Report 79. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Harbor, WA, digital vector data. Habitat Management Division, Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1995. Intertidal Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000. Final Bull Shoreline Characteristics Inventory 1995, Whatcom County Trout and Dolly Varden Management Plan. Olympia, Area, Washington. WDNR, Aquatic Resources Division, Washington. [Online]. Available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish Olympia, WA, digital vector data. /bulltrt/bulldoly.htm Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1996. Intertidal Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005a. Marine Shoreline Characteristics Inventory 1996, Skagit County and Finfish, Shellfish and Baseline GIS Coverages, Published Map Northern Whidbey Island, Washington. WDNR, Aquatic Files and the Web Version of Technical Report 79, WDFW, Resources Division, Olympia, WA, digital vector data. Olympia, WA, digital vector data. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2001. Washington Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005b. Washington ShoreZone Inventory. WDNR, Aquatic Resources Division, Lakes and Rivers Information System Database. WDFW, Olympia, WA, digital vector data. Olympia, WA, digital vector data. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Washington INVERTEBRATES State Floating Kelp Inventory of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Outer Coast. WDNR, Aquatic Resources Division, Olympia, Invertebrates depicted in this atlas include important marine WA, digital vector data. and estuarine species that have been mapped by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). Data for invertebrate HUMAN-USE RESOURCES species were extracted from WDFW’s marine species database Management areas such as wildlife refuges, state parks, and (2005). Most of these species are of commercial or recreational Indian reservations are mapped as polygons, with the boundaries importance and include clams, oyster, scallops, shrimp, sea indicated as a black dot-dash line with the corresponding icon urchins, crabs, and octopus. For the hardcopy map product only, placed near the center of the polygon. Where the feature is a some of these polygons were combined to produce a more known point location (e.g., boat ramp, marina), the exact location readable product. No species information was deleted, however is shown as a small black dot and a leader line is drawn from it to some of the polygon boundaries were shifted a few feet to increase the icon. For the hardcopy map product only, some of the the coincidence with other polygons with similar boundaries. This polygons were combined to produce a more readable product. No reduced the number of extremely small polygons that would not information was deleted, however some of the polygon boundaries be distinguishable on the hardcopy maps. were shifted to increase the coincidence with other polygons with Major Data Sources Used: Invertebrates similar boundaries. This reduced the number of small polygons that would not be distinguishable on the hardcopy maps. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005a. Marine Finfish, Shellfish and Baseline GIS Coverages, Published Map A human-use number (HU#) can be found below the icon for Files and the Web Version of Technical Report 79, WDFW, some resources (such as management areas and aquaculture sites). Olympia, WA, digital vector data. The HU# references a table on the reverse side of the map and may provide more information (i.e., name, contact) for that particular

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 3 resource. The types of human use resources mapped in this atlas Units (ESU) of Puget Sound Chinook and Hood Canal Summer- are depicted below. Run Chum Salmon. These data were provided by the Protected Resources Division of NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service Access Location Log Storage (NMFS). See Figure 1. Dive Site: Locations of recreational dive sites. Coordinates for Airport Management Area these sites, or diver entry sites, were gathered from several expert sources. Aquaculture Facility Marina Equipment: Locations where spill response equipment is stored Archaeological Site Marine Sanctuary or accessed. Digital point features were generated from /NERR coordinates provided by the Regional Response Team NW Area Artificial Reef Committee. One storage location was acquired from digital point National Park features provided by Lummi Indian Business Council. Beach Nature Conservancy Ferry: Locations of ferry docking areas or terminals. Digital point features were provided by Washington State Department of Boat Ramp Recreational Fishing Transportation and Washington State Department of Ecology. These points are not depicted on the hardcopy maps. Coast Guard State or Regional Park Ferry Route: Paths of ferry travel. Digital line features were Commercial Fishing provided by Washington State Department of Transportation. Subsistence Hatchery: Locations of hatcheries. Digital point features were Dive Site provided by the StreamNet online database at Wildlife Refuge www.streamnet.org. Additional hatchery locations were gathered Equipment from digital point features provided by Lummi Indian Business Ferry Route Council. Hatchery Hazardous Waste Site: Hazardous waste: Digital points International Boundary representing Federal (Superfund) Cleanup Sites (FCS) were Hazardous Waste Site Management Area provided by Washington State Department of Ecology. Indian Reservation Boundary Indian Reservation: Locations of Indian reservations and tribal lands. This information was gathered from digital polygon Other Management Lock and Dam features provided by the following groups: Jamestown S’klallam Area Boundary Tribe, Lummi Indian Business Council, Makah Tribe, Washington Access Location: Locations where the shoreline can be accessed Department of Natural Resources, and Washington State by foot or vehicle. Most of these point features were generated Department of Ecology. from coordinates provided by Washington State Department of International Boundary: The line that marks the boundary Ecology (BEACH database). Other data, acquired as digital point between the United States (Washington) and Canada (British features, were provided by the Lummi Indian Business Council Columbia). Digital line features were provided by Washington and Joe Schmitt of the Clallam County Marine Resources Department of Natural Resources. Committee. Several of these points were repositioned to fall on Lock and Dam: Digital points representing locks and/or dams land. Additional information about the processes used to position were provided by the StreamNet website (www.streamnet.org). these features can be found in the metadata document. Log Storage: Locations of log storage sites. The only log storage Airport: Locations of non-military airports. This information was sites for these maps were provided by John Miller (Engineering gathered from digital point features provided by Washington State Field Activity Northwest) and Arnold Schouten (Islands’ Oil Spill Department of Transportation. Association). Aquaculture Facility: Locations of aquaculture sites. The majority Management Area: Locations of conservation areas. Area names of this information was based on digital polygon features provided are provided in the data tables for each map. This information was by Washington State Department of Health. Only sites identified gathered from digital polygon features provided by NOAA’s as “approved” or “conditional” were included on these maps. Marine Protected Areas Center and Washington Department of Four cultured mussel areas were obtained from a digital polygon Fish and Wildlife’s Marine Resource Database. layer provided by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Point features representing net pens were gathered from the Marina: Locations of marinas. Most of this information was StreamNet website (http://www.streamnet.org). gathered from digital point features provided by Washington State Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. Additional data Archaeological Site: Locations of archaeological sites. This providers included Washington State Department of Ecology information was gathered from local resource managers. (BEACH database), Lummi Indian Business Council, and Joe Artificial Reef: Locations of reefs made out of man-made Schmitt of the Clallam County Marine Resources Committee. materials or natural materials purposely placed at the site for Several of these points were repositioned to fall within water. fishing or sport diving purposes. Coordinates for these points Additional information can be found in the metadata document. were acquired through personal communication with Washington Marine Sanctuary/NERR: Locations of federally managed Marine Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sanctuaries and National Estuarine Research Reserves (NERR). Beach: Locations of recreational beaches used for activities such as Digital polygon features were provided by NOAA and the swimming, sun-bathing, boating, and picnicking. Water activities Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. and use of recreational beaches may occur along all shoreline areas National Park: Locations of National Park lands. This where access is possible. The majority of these point feature information was gathered from digital polygon features provided locations were generated from coordinates provided by by Olympic National Forest and Washington State Department of Washington State Department of Ecology (BEACH database). Transportation. Several of these points were repositioned to fall on land. Additional information can be found in the metadata document. Nature Conservancy: Locations of protected land owned by The Other data providers include the Lummi Indian Business Council Nature Conservancy. Digital polygon features were provided by and local resource managers. The Nature Conservancy, Washington Chapter. Boat Ramp: Locations of boat ramps. Most of this information was Recreational Fishing: Locations of recreational fishing areas. This gathered from digital point features provided by Washington State information was gathered from digital polygon features provided Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. Additional digital by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. point feature data were provided by Washington State Department State or Regional Park: Locations of state parks and related public of Ecology, Lummi Indian Business Council, and local resource park properties. Property names are provided in the data tables for experts. Several of these points were repositioned to fall on land. each map. Digital polygon features were provided by Washington Additional information can be found in the metadata document. State Parks and Recreation Commission. Additional digital point Coast Guard: Location of U.S. Coast Guard stations. Digital point features were provided by Washington State Department of features were provided by the Portland Sector of the U.S. Coast Ecology (BEACH database). Guard. Subsistence: Locations of traditional fish and shellfish harvesting Commercial Fishing: Nearshore areas where commercial harvest areas. Digital polygon features were provided by Washington is known to occur. Fishing activities may take place throughout Department of Fish and Wildlife. the study area. This information was gathered from several digital Wildlife Refuge: Locations of wildlife refuge areas. Digital polygon features provided by Washington Department of Fish and polygon features were provided by NOAA’s Marine Protected Wildlife. Areas Center and the Makah Tribe. Critical Habitats: Nearshore Marine, Estuarine and Freshwater Designated Critical Habitat Areas for Evolutionarily Significant

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca – Page 4

SALMON CRITICAL HABITAT IN PUGET SOUND 123 30’0" 123 0’0" 122 30’0" 122 0’0"

49 0’0" 49 0’0"

BELLINGHAM

48 30’0" 48 30’0"

STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA da Cana tes d Sta Unite

48 0’0" 48 0’0"

EVERETT

SEATTLE 47 30’0" 47 30’0"

TACOMA

47 0’0" 47 0’0"

123 30’0" 123 0’0" 122 30’0" 122 0’0"

CRITICAL HABITAT STREAM REACH BY EVOLUTIONARILY SIGNIFICANT UNIT (ESU)

PUGET SOUND CHINOOK SALMON HOOD CANAL SUMMER-RUN (HCS) CHUM SALMON 0204010 KILOMETERS PUGET SOUND CHINOOK SALMON AND HOOD CANAL SUMMER-RUN (HCS) CHUM SALMON 0204010 MILES

NEARSHORE MARINE AREA CRITICAL HABITAT BY EVOLUTIONARILY SIGNIFICANT UNIT (ESU) SCALE: 1:700,000 Source: Protected Resources Division PUGET SOUND CHINOOK SALMON National Marine Fisheries Service Not For Navigation PUGET SOUND CHINOOK SALMON AND Northwest Region HOOD CANAL SUMMER-RUN (HCS) CHUM SALMON Published: May 2006 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

FIGURE 1. Critical Habitat Areas for Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESU) of Puget Sound Chinook and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon in Puget Sound. Data provided by NMFS.

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 5 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM Shoreline habitat mapping was conducted by Jeff Dahlin, Zach Nixon, and Dallon Weathers of RPI. The biological and human use The entire atlas product is stored in digital form in a data were compiled and processed into a cohesive GIS format by Geographic Information System (GIS) as spatial data layers and Allison Bailey (Sound GIS) and Joy Haydt (CTC). The final text associated databases. The format for the data varies depending on documents and metadata were prepared by Allison Bailey (Sound the type of information or features being stored. GIS), Joy Haydt (CTC), and the RPI Staff. Graphic art and Under separate cover is a metadata document that details the hardcopy map production was conducted by Joe Holmes, Mark data dictionary, processing techniques, data lineage, and other White, Chris Locke, Bill Holton, and Katy Riggins of RPI. descriptive information for the digital data sets and maps that were used to create this atlas. Below is a brief synopsis of the APPROPRIATE USE OF ATLAS AND DATA information contained in the digital version. Refer to the metadata file for a full explanation of the data and data structure. This atlas and the associated database were developed to provide summary information on sensitive natural and human-use SHORELINE CLASSIFICATIONS resources for the purposes of oil and chemical spill response planning and response. Although the atlas and database should be The ESI shoreline habitat classification is stored as lines and very useful for other environmental and natural resource planning polygons with associated attributes. In many cases, a shoreline purposes, it should not be used in place of data held by may have two or three different classifications or colored lines on Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington the shoreline. These multiple classifications are represented on the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of maps by double and triple line patterns and in the database by Ecology, Washington Department of Health, Washington ESI#1/ESI#2, where ESI#1 is the landward-most classification and Department of Transportation, or any other agencies providing ESI#2 is the seaward-most classification. In addition to the line data for this effort. Likewise, information contained in the atlas features, tidal flats (ESI=7, ESI=9A), marshes (ESI=10A, ESI=10B), and database cannot be used in place of consultations with natural and scrub-shrub wetlands (ESI=10D) are also stored as polygons. and cultural resource agencies, or in place of field surveys. Also, Therefore, the legend on each map may contain two patterns this atlas should not be used for navigation. depicted on a map: a linear feature as well as a polygonal feature.

SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Biological resources are stored as polygons, lines, or points. Associated with each feature is a unique identification number that is linked to a series of data tables that further identify the resources. The main biological resource table lists species identification numbers for each site, the concentration of each species at each site, and identification codes for seasonality and source information. This data table is linked to other tables that describe the seasonality and life-history time-periods for each species (at one-month resolution) for the specified map feature. Other data tables linked to the first table include: the species identification table, which includes common and scientific names; the species status table, which gives information for state and/or federal threatened or endangered listings; and the source database, which provides source metadata at the feature-species level (specific sources are listed for each species occurring at each mapped feature in the biology coverages).

HUMAN-USE FEATURES Human-use features are represented as points, lines, or polygons. The resource name, the owner/manager, a contact person, and phone number are included in the database when available. All metadata sources are documented at the feature level.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was funded by Navy Region Northwest and supported by the NOAA Office of Response and Restoration, Hazardous Materials Response Division. Aerial photography and oblique imagery were provided by Washington State Department of Ecology. Washington State Department of Natural Resources provided overflight videos from the ShoreZone Inventory A project of this magnitude would not have been possible without the cooperation and assistance of many agencies and individuals. We appreciate the assistance, expertise, and data sets provided by these agencies and individuals. In particular, Barry Troutman from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Oil Spill Team provided critical guidance on data set availability, quality, and appropriateness for spill response as well as timely input and review of species life history information. Other members of WDFW’s Oil Spill Team, Dan Doty and Brian MacDonald, and John Williams from Washington Department of Ecology’s Spill Response Program provided early guidance and practical information about important data sets. In addition, the following individuals and organizations supported this project by providing expertise on biological resources and/or data sets, or by suggesting additional sources or experts to contact. Those assisting from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife include: Dale Gombert, Dave Nysewander, Don Saul, Steve Jeffries, Jim West, Wayne Palsson, Martin Hudson, and the Priority Habitats and Species Program. Washington Department of Natural Resources, Nearshore Habitat Program provided many data sets. Friends of the San Juans also provided digital data. This project was led by a team at Concurrent Technologies Corporation (CTC) in Bremerton, Washington, under contract with the U.S. Navy. Significant subcontractor support was provided by Research Planning, Inc. (RPI) of Columbia, SC and Sound GIS of Seattle, WA. Numerous GIS, scientific, and graphics staff from these firms were involved in the various phases of the project. John Baker (CTC) and Mark White (RPI) were project managers.

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca – Page 6 SPECIES LIST

Common Name Scientific Name BIRDS * Threatened and endangered species and species of special concern are designated by underlining. ALCID Ancient murrelet Synthliboramphus antiquus Murre Uria sp. Pigeon guillemot Cepphus columba Rhinoceros auklet Cerorhinca monocerata DIVING Common loon Gavia immer Cormorant Phalacrocorax sp. Pacific loon Gavia pacifica Red-throated loon Gavia stellata Western grebe Aechmophorus occidentalis GULL_TERN Caspian tern Sterna caspia Gulls - PELAGIC Seabirds - RAPTOR Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus SHOREBIRD Shorebirds - WADING Great blue heron Ardea herodias WATERFOWL Bufflehead Bucephala albeola Goldeneye Bucephala spp. Harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus Long-tailed duck Clangula hyemalis Scaup Aythya spp. Scoters Melanitta spp. Waterfowl - FISH FISH Chinook salmon (fall) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (fall) Chinook salmon (spring) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (spring) Chinook salmon (summer) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (summer) Chum salmon (fall) Oncorhynchus keta (fall) Chum salmon (summer) Oncorhynchus keta (summer) Chum salmon (winter) Oncorhynchus keta (winter) Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Native char Salvelinus spp. Pacific herring Clupea pallasii pallasii Pacific sand lance Ammodytes hexapterus Pink salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Rock sole Lepidopsetta bilineata Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka Steelhead (winter) Oncorhynchus mykiss (winter) Steelhead (summer) Oncorhynchus mykiss (summer) Surf smelt Hypomesus pretiosus HABITATS KELP Kelp - SAV Eelgrass Zostera marina INVERTEBRATES BIVALVE Geoduck Panopea abrupta Hardshell clams - Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas Scallops - Softshell clam Mya arenaria CEPHALOPOD Giant octopus Enteroctopus dofleini CRAB Dungeness crab Cancer magister Red rock crab Cancer productus ECHINODERM Sea urchins - SHRIMP Pandalid shrimp Pandalus spp. MARINE MAMMALS PINNIPED California sea lion Zalophus californianus Harbor seal Phoca vitulina Steller sea lion Eumetopias jubatus SEA OTTER Sea otter Enhydra lutris

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 7 SHORELINE DESCRIPTIONS

EXPOSED ROCKY SHORES ESI = 1A DESCRIPTION • The intertidal zone is steep (greater than 30° slope), with very little width • Sediment accumulations are uncommon and usually ephemeral, because waves remove the debris that has slumped from the eroding cliffs • There is strong vertical zonation of intertidal biological communities • Species density and diversity vary greatly, but barnacles, snails, mussels, seastars, limpets, sea anemones, shore crabs, polychaetes, and macroalgae are often very abundant • Found along the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the San Juan Islands PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil is held offshore by waves reflecting off the steep cliffs • Any oil that is deposited is rapidly removed from exposed faces • The most resistant oil would remain as a patchy band at or above the high-tide line RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • Impacts to intertidal communities are expected to be short- • Cleanup is usually not required term; an exception would be where heavy concentrations of a • Access can be difficult and dangerous light refined product came ashore very quickly

EXPOSED, SOLID MAN-MADE STRUCTURES ESI = 1B DESCRIPTION • These structures are solid, man-made structures such as seawalls, groins, revetments, piers, and port facilities • Many structures are constructed of concrete, wood, or metal • Often there is another shoreline habitat present, and multiple shoreline types are indicated when present • They are built to protect the shore from erosion by waves, boat wakes, and currents, and thus are exposed to rapid natural removal processes • Organisms, such as barnacles, mussels, and algae, may be common on the lower levels, whereas biota along the upper intertidal zones is sparse • They are present in harbors and developed shoreline areas along open coasts PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil can percolate between the joints of the structures • Oil can coat the intertidal areas of solid structures • Biota may be impacted under heavy accumulations RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS - prepare substrate for recolonization of barnacle and mussel communities; • High-pressure spraying may be required to: - minimize aesthetic damage; - remove oil; - prevent the chronic leaching of oil from the structure

EXPOSED WAVE-CUT PLATFORMS IN BEDROCK ESI = 2A DESCRIPTION • The intertidal zone consists of a flat bench cut into bedrock or glacial till of highly variable width • The shoreline may be backed by a steep scarp or low bluff • There may be a perched beach of sand- to boulder-sized sediments at the base of the scarp • The platform surface is irregular and tidal pools are common • Small accumulations of gravel can be found in the tidal pools and crevices in the platform • In bedrock areas, habitats can support large populations of encrusting animals and plants, with rich tidal pool communities; in glacial till areas, intertidal fauna are sparser • Occur in areas exposed to moderate to high wave energy PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil will not adhere to the rock or till platform, but rather be transported across the platform and accumulate along the high-tide line • Oil can penetrate in beach sediments, if present RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • Persistence of oiled sediments is usually short-term, except in wave shadows or larger sediment accumulations • Cleanup is usually not required • Where the high-tide area is accessible, it may be feasible to remove heavy oil accumulations and oiled debris

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 8

FINE- TO MEDIUM-GRAINED SAND BEACHES ESI = 3A DESCRIPTION • These beaches are generally flat, wide, and hard-packed • They generally occur along depositional features such as spits • Upper beach fauna are scarce; lower beach fauna can be dense, but are highly variable • Not very common in the Puget Sound area PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Light oil accumulations will be deposited as oily swashes or bands along the upper intertidal zone • Heavy oil accumulations will cover the entire beach surface; the oil will be lifted off the lower beach with the rising tide • Maximum penetration of oil into fine- to medium-grained sand is about 10-15 cm • Burial of oiled layers by clean sand within the first few weeks will be less than 30 cm along the upper beach face • Organisms living in the beach may be killed by smothering or lethal oil concentrations in the interstitial water • Biological impacts include temporary declines in infaunal • Activity through both oiled and dune areas should be limited, populations, which can also affect important shorebird to prevent contamination of clean areas foraging areas • Manual cleanup, rather than road use of graders and front-end RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS loaders, is advised to minimize the volume of sand removed • These beaches are among the easiest beach types to clean from the shore and requiring disposal • Cleanup should concentrate on the removal of oil from the • All efforts should focus on preventing the mixture of oil upper swash zone after all oil has come ashore deeper into the sediments by vehicular and foot traffic

SCARPS AND STEEP SLOPES IN SAND ESI = 3B DESCRIPTION • This shoreline type occurs where sandy bluffs are undercut by waves or currents and slump • The scarps are generally fronted by narrow beaches, if the erosion rates are moderate and episodic • Trees growing at the top of these slopes are eventually undercut and the logs can accumulate at the base of the scarp • Biological utilization by birds and infauna is low • They are common along shorelines composed of glacial materials PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Any stranded oil will concentrate at the high-water line and may penetrate sandy sediments • Oil will also adhere to the dry surfaces of any logs that have accumulated at the base of the scarp • There is little potential for burial except when major slumping

of the bluff occurs • Active erosion of the scarp will remove the oil • Closely supervised manual labor should be used so that the RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS minimal amount of material is removed during cleanup • In most cases, cleanup is not necessary because of the short • The need for removal of oiled sediments and debris should be residence time of the oil carefully evaluated because of the potential for increased erosion

COARSE-GRAINED SAND BEACHES ESI = 4 DESCRIPTION • These beaches are moderate-to-steep, of variable width, and have soft sediments; these characteristics combine to lower their trafficability • They occur on depositional features such as spits or as pocket beaches • Generally species density and diversity is lower than on fine- grained sand beaches • Not common in Puget Sound PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • During small spills, oil will be deposited primarily as a band along the high-tide line • Under very heavy accumulations, oil may spread across the entire beach face, though the oil will be lifted off the lower part of the beach with the rising tide • Penetration of oil into coarse-grained sand can reach 25 cm • Burial of oiled layers by clean sand can be rapid, and to depths of 60 cm or more • Burial to depths over one meter is possible if the oil comes RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS ashore at the start of a depositional period • Remove oil primarily from the upper swash lines • Biological impacts include temporary declines in infaunal • Removal of sediment should be limited to avoid erosion populations, which can also affect important shorebird problems foraging areas

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 9

RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS (cont.) • Mechanical reworking of the sediment into the surf zone may • Use of heavy equipment for oil/sand removal may result in be used to release the oil without sediment removal the removal of excessive amounts of sand; manual cleanup • Activity in the oiled sand should be limited to prevent mixing may be more effective oil deeper into the beach

MIXED SAND AND GRAVEL BEACHES ESI = 5 DESCRIPTION • Moderately sloping beach composed of a mixture of sand and gravel (gravel component comprises between 20 to 80 percent of total sediments) • Because of the mixed sediment sizes, there may be zones of pure sand, pebbles, or cobbles • They can occur in combination with many other shoreline types, such as wave-cut platforms, scarps, and riprap • Because of sediment mobility and desiccation, on exposed beaches there are low densities of attached animals and plants • The presence of attached algae, mussels, and barnacles indicates beaches that are relatively sheltered, with the more stable substrate supporting a richer biota • Common in Puget Sound PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • During small spills, oil will be deposited along and above the high-tide swash • Large spills will spread across the entire intertidal area • Oil penetration into the beach sediments may be up to 50 cm; • All oiled debris should be removed however, the sand fraction can be quite mobile, and oil • Sediment removal should be limited as much as possible behavior is much like on a sand beach if the sand fraction • Low-pressure flushing can be used to float oil away from the exceeds about 40 percent sediments for recovery by skimmers or sorbents. High- • Burial of oil may be deep at and above the high-tide line, pressure spraying should be avoided because of potential for where oil tends to persist, particularly where beaches are only transporting contaminated finer sediments (sand) to the lower intermittently exposed to waves intertidal or subtidal zones • In sheltered pockets on the beach, pavements of asphalted • Mechanical reworking of oiled sediments from the high-tide sediments can form if there is no removal of heavy oil zone to the upper intertidal zone can be effective in areas accumulations regularly exposed to wave activity (as evidenced by storm • Once formed, these asphalt pavements can persist for many berms). However, oiled sediments should not be relocated years below the mid-tide zone • Oil can be stranded in the coarse sediments on the lower part • In-place tilling may be used to reach deeply buried oil layers of the beach, particularly if the oil is weathered or emulsified in the middle zone on exposed beaches RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • Remove heavy accumulations of pooled oil from the upper beachface

GRAVEL BEACHES ESI = 6A DESCRIPTION • Gravel beaches are composed of sediments ranging in size from pebbles to boulders • They can be very steep, with multiple wave-built berms forming the upper beach in highly exposed areas • Attached biota are usually restricted to the lowest parts of the beach, where the sediments are less mobile • The presence of attached biota indicates beaches that are relatively sheltered, with the more stable substrate supporting richer biological communities • Common throughout Puget Sound. PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Deep penetration and rapid burial of stranded oil is likely on gravel beaches • On exposed beaches, oil can be pushed over the high-tide and storm berms, pooling and persisting above the normal zone of wave action • Long-term persistence will be controlled by the depth of penetration versus the depth of routine reworking by storm • Low- to high-pressure flushing can be used to float oil away waves from the sediments for recovery by skimmers or sorbents • On the more sheltered portions of beaches, formation of • Mechanical reworking of oiled sediments from the high-tide asphalt pavements is likely where accumulations are heavy zone to the upper intertidal zone can be effective in areas RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS regularly exposed to wave activity (as evidenced by storm berms). However, oiled sediments should not be relocated • Heavy accumulations of pooled oil should be removed quickly below the mid-tide zone from the upper beach • In-place tilling may be used to reach deeply buried oil layers • All oiled debris should be removed in the middle intertidal zone on exposed beaches • Sediment removal should be limited as much as possible

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 10

RIPRAP ESI = 6B DESCRIPTION • Riprap structures are composed of cobble- to boulder-sized rock fragments • Riprap structures are placed for shoreline protection and inlet stabilization • They are steep and often fronted by beaches or tidal flats • Attached biota may be common at lower intertidal levels, whereas biota along the upper intertidal zones is sparse • Found in harbors and along developed areas along the open coast PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Deep penetration of oil between the clast is likely • Oil adheres readily to the rough rock surfaces • If oil is left uncleaned, it may cause chronic leaching until the oil hardens • Resident fauna and flora may be killed by the oil RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • When the oil is fresh and liquid, high-pressure spraying • Heavy and weathered oils are more difficult to remove, and/or water flooding may be effective, making sure to requiring scraping and/or hot-water spraying recover all released oil • It may be necessary to remove heavily oiled riprap and replace it in high-use areas

BOULDER RUBBLE ESI = 6D DESCRIPTION • Relatively steep rocky shores with accumulations of angular boulder rubble displaying limited evidence of re-working by waves or sediment transport • Attached biota may be common at lower intertidal levels, whereas biota along the upper intertidal zones is sparse • Can co-occur with gravel beaches or exposed rocky shorelines; associated gravel beaches can be either at the upper or the lower half of the intertidal zone, depending on the nature of the rock outcrop • Relatively common in Puget Sound. PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil tends to adhere to the upper intertidal zone where the rock surface dries out during low tide, and the algal cover is sparse • On solid bedrock surfaces, the oil will occur as a surface coating • Oil will pool and penetrate crevices in the surface rubble • Where the rubble is loosely packed, oil can penetrate deeply, causing long-term contamination of the subsurface • Flushing techniques will be most effective when oil is still RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS fresh and liquid; restrict operations to tidal levels that will prevent oily effluents from impacting lower tidal elevations • Safety concerns will limit shoreline access during high-energy with rich intertidal communities conditions • Expect to increase temperature and pressure over time as the • Thick accumulations of pooled oil should be of high priority oil weathers; Evaluate trade-offs between oil removal and for removal, to prevent re-mobilization and/or penetration pressure/temperature impacts on intertidal communities • Manual removal of heavy oil is likely to leave significant • Consider potential impacts to rich biological communities on residues, but may be useful for oil in crevices or sediment the rocky shores when conducting cleanup of associated pockets gravel beaches

EXPOSED TIDAL FLATS ESI = 7 DESCRIPTION • Exposed tidal flats are broad, flat intertidal areas composed primarily of sand and mud • The presence of sand indicates that tidal or wind-driven currents and waves are strong enough to mobilize the sediments • They are usually associated with another shoreline type on the landward side of the flat, though they can occur as separate shoals; they are commonly associated with tidal inlets • The sediments are water-saturated, with only the topo- graphically higher ridges drying out during low tide • Biological utilization can be very high, with large numbers of infauna, heavy use by birds for roosting and foraging, and use as haulouts for marine mammals • Relatively common in Puget Sound

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 11

PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • Oil does not usually adhere to the surface of exposed tidal • Currents and waves can be very effective in natural removal of flats, but rather moves across the flat and accumulates at the the oil high-tide line • Cleanup is very difficult (and possible only during low tides) • Deposition of oil on the flat may occur on a falling tide if • The use of heavy machinery should be restricted to prevent concentrations are heavy mixing of oil into the sediments • Oil does not penetrate water-saturated sediments • On sand flats, oil will often be removed naturally from the flat • Biological damage may be severe, primarily to infauna, and deposited on the adjacent beaches where cleanup is more thereby reducing food sources for birds and other predators feasible

SHELTERED ROCKY SHORES AND SHELTERED SCARPS IN BEDROCK, MUD, OR CLAY ESI = 8A DESCRIPTION • Bedrock shores of variable slope (from vertical cliffs to wide, rocky ledges) that are sheltered from exposure to most wave and tidal energy • The wider shores may have some surface sediments, but the bedrock is the dominant substrate type • Species density and diversity vary greatly, but attached biota may be present at high densities at lower tidal elevations • Relatively rare in Puget Sound PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil will adhere readily to the rough rocky surface, particularly along the high-tide line, forming a distinct oil band • Even on wide ledges, the lower intertidal zone usually stays wet (particularly when algae covered), preventing oil from adhering to the rock surface • Heavy and weathered oils can cover the upper zone with little impacts to the rich biological communities of the lower zone

• Where surface sediments are abundant, oil will penetrate into the crevices formed by the surface rubble and pool at the • Care must be taken not to spray in the biologically rich lower contact of the sediments and the rock surface intertidal zone or when the tidal level reaches that zone • Where the rubble is loosely packed, oil will penetrate deeply, • Cutting of oiled, attached algae is not recommended; tidal causing long-term contamination of the subsurface sediments action will eventually float this oil off, so sorbent booms RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS should be deployed • Low- to high-pressure spraying at ambient water temperatures is most effective when the oil is fresh

SHELTERED, SOLID MAN-MADE STRUCTURES ESI = 8B DESCRIPTION • These structures are solid man-made structures such as seawalls, groins, revetments, piers, and port facilities. Composition, design, and condition may be highly variable • Most structures are constructed of concrete, wood, or metal • Often there is exposed beach at low tide, and multiple habitats are indicated if present • High densities of attached biota may be present at lower tidal elevations • Occur along developed, sheltered coasts PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil will adhere readily to rough surfaces, particularly along the high-tide line, forming a distinct oil band; chronic leaching may occur • The lower intertidal zone usually stays wet (particularly if algae covered), preventing oil from adhering to the surface RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • Cleanup of seawalls is usually conducted for aesthetic reasons or to prevent leaching of oil • Low- to high-pressure spraying at ambient water temperatures is most effective when the oil is fresh

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 12

SHELTERED RIPRAP ESI = 8C DESCRIPTION • Riprap structures are composed of cobble- to boulder-sized blocks of bedrock or concrete • These structures are found inside harbors and heads of bays in developed areas, sheltered from direct exposure to waves • High densities of attached biota may be present at lower tidal elevations • Relatively uncommon PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Deep penetration of oil between the boulders is likely • Oil adheres readily to the rough surfaces • If oil is left uncleaned, it may cause chronic leaching until the oil hardens RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • High-pressure spraying may be required to remove oil for aesthetic reasons and to prevent leaching of oil from the structure • Cleanup crews should make sure to recover all released oil

SHELTERED TIDAL FLATS ESI = 9A DESCRIPTION • Sheltered tidal flats are broad, flat intertidal areas composed primarily of mud, silt and clay • They are present in calm-water habitats, sheltered from major wave activity, and are frequently backed by marshes • Wave energy is very low, although there may be strong tidal currents on parts of the flat and in channels across the flat • The sediments are very soft and cannot support even light foot traffic in many areas • Large concentrations of shellfish, worms, and snails can be found on and in the sediments • Bird life is seasonally abundant, and flats are heavily utilized by birds for feeding • Present in the heads of numerous bays in Puget Sound PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil does not usually adhere to the surface of sheltered tidal flats, but rather moves across the flat and accumulates at the high-tide line • Deposition of oil on the flat may occur on a falling tide if RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS concentrations are heavy • These are high-priority areas necessitating the use of spill • Oil will not penetrate the water-saturated sediments but can protection devices to limit oil-spill impact; deflection or penetrate into burrows sorbent booms and open water skimmers should be used • In areas of high suspended sediments, sorption of oil can • Cleanup of the flat surface is very difficult because of the soft result in deposition of contaminated sediments on the flats substrate and many methods may be restricted • Biological damage may be severe • Low-pressure flushing and deployment of sorbents from shallow-draft boats may be helpful

VEGETATED LOW BANKS ESI = 9B DESCRIPTION • Sheltered banks with extensive vegetation along sheltered coasts exposed to episodic erosion by slumping of the backshore slopes • Most of the vegetation is composed of shrubs and trees on the slumping slopes • Relatively uncommon in Puget Sound PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil adheres readily to vegetation • Natural removal rates are very slow because of low energy and dense vegetation • If the vegetation is thick, heavy oil coating will be restricted to the outer fringe, with penetration and lighter oiling decreasing with distance into the vegetation RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • These are high-priority areas for protection to limit oil-spill impact • Cleanup of the banks is very difficult because of the dense • Any cleanup activity must not mix the oil deeper into the vegetation sediments; trampling of the plant roots must be minimized • Manual operations and deployment of sorbents to recover oil • Cutting of oiled vegetation should only be considered when released by tidal action may be helpful other resources present (such as birds) are at great risk from • Under light oiling, best practice is to let the area recover leaving the oiled vegetation in place naturally • Heavy accumulations of pooled oil can be removed by vacuum, sorbents, or low-pressure flushing

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 13

SALT- AND BRACKISH-WATER MARSHES ESI = 10A DESCRIPTION • These are grassy wetlands composed of emergent herbaceous vegetation in salt water settings • Width of the marsh can vary widely, from a narrow fringe to extensive areas • They are relatively sheltered from waves and strong tidal currents and are commonly fronted by tidal flats • Resident flora and fauna are abundant with numerous species with high utilization by birds, fish, and shellfish • Present along the heads of bays, at creek mouths, and behind spits PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Oil adheres readily to marsh vegetation • The band of coating will vary widely, depending upon the tidal stage at the time oil slicks are in the vegetation; there may be multiple bands • Large slicks will persist through multiple tidal cycles and coat the entire stem from the high-tide line to the base • If the vegetation is thick, heavy oil coating will be restricted to • Heavy accumulations of pooled oil can be removed by the outer fringe, with penetration and lighter oiling to the limit vacuum, sorbents, or low-pressure flushing. During flushing, of tidal influence care must be taken to prevent transporting oil to sensitive areas down slope or along shore • Medium to heavy oils do not readily adhere or penetrate the fine sediments, but can pool on the surface or in burrows • Cleanup activities should be carefully supervised to avoid vegetation damage • Light oils can penetrate the top few centimeters of sediment and deeply into burrows and cracks (up to one meter) • Any cleanup activity must not mix the oil deeper into the sediments; trampling of the roots must be minimized RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS • Cutting of oiled vegetation should only be considered when • Under light oiling, the best practice is to let the area recover other resources present are at great risk from leaving the oiled naturally vegetation in place

SWAMPS ESI = 10C DESCRIPTION • Swamps consist of shrubs and forested wetlands, essentially flooded forests • The sediment tends to be silty clay with large amounts of organic debris • They are seasonally flooded, though there are many low, permanently flooded areas; most are located above normal spring high tides, thus they are seldom inundated by tidal action • Resident flora and fauna are abundant with numerous species • Present along upstream portions of creeks and rivers PREDICTED OIL BEHAVIOR • Though generally not a risk of oiling from marine spills because of their position above normal high tides, they could become oiled during very high water levels, from land-based spills, or during cleanup of adjacent areas • Oil behavior depends on whether the swamp is flooded or not • During floods, most of the oil passes through the forest, coating the vegetation at the waterline, which changes levels RESPONSE CONSIDERATIONS throughout the flood event • Under light oiling, the best practice is to let the area recover • Oiled woody vegetation is less sensitive than grasses to oil naturally coating • Heavy accumulations of pooled oil can be removed by • Some oil can be trapped and pooled on the swamp floodplain vacuum, sorbents, or low-pressure flushing. During flushing, as water levels drop care must be taken to prevent transporting oil to sensitive • Penetration into the floodplain soils is usually limited because areas down slope or along shore of high water levels, saturated soils, muddy composition, • Under stagnant water conditions, herding of oil with water surface organic debris, and vegetation cover spray may be needed to push oil to collection areas • Large amounts of oily debris can remain • Oily debris can be removed where there is access • During dry periods, terrestrial spills flow downhill and • Any cleanup activity must not mix the oil deeper into the accumulate in depressions or reach waterbodies sediments

Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca - Page 14