North Olympic Peninsula Watershed Page
Return to NOPLEGroup.org Table of Contents, Site Map |
Dungeness River: Habitat Restoration ActionsD. What on-the-ground actions can be accomplished in the next 5 to 10 years and what will be the result for populations and habitat functions (i.e. actions to turn the negative trend around)? What are the next steps to advance other changes that cannot be addressed in the shorter timeframe? 1. Habitat Restoration Actions a. Project List and Supplement: The Dungeness River Management Team formally adopted a prioritized project list of proposed actions for the Dungeness Watershed area which is contained in Appendix 6 of "Restoring the Dungeness." The list has been used as the basis for project applications to the Salmon Recovery Funding Board and other funding sources for the past few years, and is organized around the ten major restoration strategies for the watershed. In April through June, 2004, the project list was re-structured to facilitate completion of an Ecosystem Diagnostic Treatment method analysis. In this "Supplemental Project List" (located at the end of the response to Question D), the DRMT project list was rearranged by river reach, and each project was evaluated for biological importance (based on EDT diagnosis), biological importance to bull trout (based on the Recovery Actions listed in US Fish & Wildlife Draft Document ,2004), likelihood of implementation, steps or barriers needed to achieve implementation, and projected cost estimates. The enclosed EDT analysis grouped actions together and ran model scenarios based on biological importance and the likelihood of implementation. EDT outputs show the results for populations and habitat functions. In general, the original priorities of the DRMT project list correspond well with the modeled effects on the viable salmon population parameters. The technical work group involved in the EDT analysis has considered discrepancies between the EDT outputs and previous recommendations. Some of the discrepancies are due to modeling limitations (such as estuarine conditions), and some may represent a new perspective on project priorities. EDT results have been reviewed by the DRMT for consideration of possible changes to the project list items. The biological importance to bull trout was based on recovery actions identified in the US Fish & Wildlife Service Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal-Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus), Vol. II, 2004, pp. 155-207. The recovery actions are comprised of a hierarchical listing of tasks necessary for recovery of bull trout in the Olympic Peninsula Management Unit. The first tier action entries consist of general recovery actions under which more specific second and third tier actions reside. For example, a recovery action listed in Table D-1 as 1.3.10 indicates a first tier of 1. (1. Protect, restore, and maintain suitable habitat conditions for bull trout), a second tier of 3 (1.3 Identify impaired stream channel and riparian areas and implement actions to restore their appropriate functions), and third tier of 10 (1.3.10 Restore instream habitat such as projects focusing on enhancement of habitat through large woody debris, logjams, and complex channels). In general, projects identified as high likelihood of implementation by the Dungeness River Restoration Work Group are those likely to be implemented in the next 10 years, for which specific plans have already been developed and/or some funding has already been obtained. Medium likelihood actions are fairly well defined, but in order for them to be implemented, substantial barriers to implementation will need to be addressed and/or major preliminary steps in the project sequence must be completed. Finally, the DRMT list and supplement identifies additional projects which can be achieved subject to funding and community/agency support, but will require considerable study and planning prior to implementation and are not expected to be achieved in the short term.
• Limited funding exists for salmonid habitat protection and restoration
in general, and competition is keen. Funding is particularly difficult
for some of the large scale projects that have multiple phases, such
as lower Dungeness River restoration which involves property buyout,
removal of existing buildings or structures, engineering and design of
dike setback, construction of an alternative dike configuration, and
re-construction of functional habitat through excavation, gravel placement,
log jam placement and re-vegetation. The ability of a sponsor organization
to obtain funding for several years to complete the sequence is extremely
difficult. Additional information on barriers to implementation that are specific to Dungeness watershed projects are noted in the project list supplement. The opportunity to implement many projects is directly dependent on the willingness of the private landowner to sell their property or to allow restoration projects to proceed. Where landowners are not willing, implementation may need to wait until property ownership changes hands, but in all cases the landowners have been approached to encourage their participation and to explain the risk to property and resources to continue to reside near the river. In a few cases, the need for preliminary planning and engineering are limiting implementation. A few projects in the Dungeness list have been rejected or reworked since technical and policy representatives agree that implementation simply is not likely. These "reworked" projects include the removal or relocation of the majority of the Dungeness Meadows dike, where the number of houses at that location and potential expense is unrealistic; and removal of the Corps dike downstream of Schoolhouse Bridge for the same reason. Additionally, the Gold Creek slide in the upper watershed is known to contribute substantial amounts of fine sediment, but technical experts have not been able to identify a solution that does not contain the possibility of making things worse.
The ESU-level Regional Nearshore and Marine Chapter for the Puget Sound
Salmon Recovery Plan was developed by Puget Sound Action Team staff in
consultation with many others and on behalf of the Nearshore Policy Group. Projects specific to the Dungeness watershed and nearshore vicinity are described in "Restoring the Dungeness", and focus on Dungeness Bay, and small estuaries associated with independent tributaries to the Strait of Juan de Fuca in east Clallam County. Due to declining water quality conditions in Dungeness Bay, Clallam County declared a Clean Water District in the eastern portion of the County and a "Clean Water Strategy" has been developed to focus on fecal coliform pollution of the lower river and bay. Additionally, an extensive study of circulation patterns and substrate elevations in Dungeness Bay was conducted by the Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe in 2000-2002 (Rensel, 2002) which documented dissolved oxygen problems, and a declining range of habitat factors such as loss of deep pools and eelgrass beds.
|