Hood Canal Coordinating Council has finally found some shoreline
property to compensate for environmental damage from the Navy’s
$448-million Explosives Handling Wharf at Bangor.
The shoreline of a 6.7-acre
property to be used for mitigation of the Navy’s Explosives
Handling Wharf at Bangor. // Photo: Hood Canal Coordinating
Council
The 6.7 acres of waterfront property — located near Kitsap
County’s Anderson Landing Preserve on Hood Canal — becomes the
first saltwater mitigation site in Washington state under an
in-lieu-fee mitigation program. The $275,000 purchase was approved
Wednesday by the coordinating council, which manages the
in-lieu-fee program.
The Navy itself is not a party to the transaction, having paid
the coordinating council $6.9 million to handle all the freshwater
and saltwater mitigation required for the wharf project — including
managing the mitigation properties in perpetuity.
The coordinating council’s in-lieu-fee program, which is
overseen by state and federal agencies, allows developers to pay a
flat fee for their environmental damage instead of undertaking
mitigation work themselves.
Hood Canal and its surrounding watershed have been nominated as
a Sentinel Landscape, an exclusive designation that recognizes both
the natural resource values and the national defense mission of
special areas across the country.
USS Henry M. Jackson, a Trident
submarine, moves through Hood Canal in February on a return trip to
Naval Base Kitsap – Bangor.
U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Cmdr. Michael
Smith
If the designation is approved, it will bolster applications for
federal funding to protect and restore important habitats and to
maintain working forests in and around Hood Canal. Given the
uncertain budget for environmental programs under the Trump
administration, it wouldn’t hurt to have the Department of Defense
supporting the protection of Hood Canal.
The Sentinel Landscapes Partnership involves the U.S.
departments of Agriculture, Defense and Interior. The idea is to
coordinate the efforts of all three agencies in locations where
their priorities overlap, according to the
2016 Report on Sentinel Landscapes (PDF 5.6 mb).
Mike Anderson, chairman of the Skokomish Watershed Action Team,
and Thom Johnson, a leading expert in the recovery of Hood Canal
summer chum salmon, have been named recipients of this year’s Hood
Canal Environmental Awards.
Other recipients of the awards, which are sponsored by Hood
Canal Coordinating Council, are Shore Friendly Mason and Shore
Friendly Kitsap, two programs that actively enlist waterfront
property owners in the protection and restoration of their
shorelines.
Hood Canal // Photo:
Dale Ireland
I learned this afternoon that the awards ceremony on Nov. 4 will
be dedicated to Rich Geiger, the longtime district engineer for
Mason Conservation District. Rich, who died unexpectedly on Sept.
22, held the “technical vision” for the restoration of the
Skokomish River watershed, according to Mike Anderson. (See
Water Ways, Oct. 8.)
Beards Cove Community Organization and Newberry Hill Heritage
Park Stewards are this year’s winners of the Hood Canal
Environmental Achievement Awards.
The awards, sponsored by the Hood Canal Coordinating Council,
recognize people and groups that have taken actions and fostered
relationships to improve the health of the Hood Canal
environment.
The 500 property owners in the Beards Cove community were
credited with developing relationships with Great Peninsula
Conservancy and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to
restore an estuary near the Union River on the North Shore of Hood
Canal.
The Beards Cove Restoration Project completes the final segment
of 1.7 miles of unbroken saltmarsh along the shoreline. The project
removed 45,000 cubic yards of fill, derelict structures and a
septic system. The work included reconfiguring the shoreline and
planting the area with native vegetation, all to enhance salmon
habitat.
The Beards Cove project was described in a
Kitsap Sun story by Arla Shepherd Bull and in a
Water Ways blog entry I wrote about the history of the Beards
Cove development leading to the need for restoration.
Stewards working to improve Newberry Hill Heritage Park are
protecting fish and wildlife in the area, which includes the
Anderson Creek watershed, which drains to Hood Canal. The group
built a fence to protect a beaver dam, which provides habitat for
coho and other fish, along with a foot bridge that maintains access
to a flooded trail. The group helped develop a forest-management
plan to restore ecological health to the park. Members are known
for expanding their knowledge about forests, streams and
wetlands.
The awards will be presented Friday at a conference that will
celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Hood Canal Coordinating
Council. Speakers will include Donna Simmons, one of the council’s
founders who will describe the history of the organization. U.S.
Rep. Derek Kilmer will discuss his Save Our Sound legislation and
how to move forward with ecosystem restoration. I will contribute
to the discussion by talking about my reporting career as it
relates to Hood Canal.
The event will be held at Lucky Dog Casino Event Center. Those
who would like to attend should contact Robin Lawlis at the
coordinating council, (360) 394-0046 or rlawlis@hccc.wa.gov. For
information, check the fact
sheet on the HCCC’s website.
The Hood Canal Coordinating
Council was established in 1985 to improve the water quality of
Hood Canal. It has expanded its mission to include improving the
ecological health of the canal. The group is made up of the county
commissioners in Kitsap, Mason and Jefferson counties along with
the Port Gamble S’Klallam and Skokomish tribes.
When it comes to restoring the Puget Sound ecosystem, human
beings really do matter — in some ways that are obvious and in some
ways that are fairly subtle.
The Puget Sound Leadership Council, which oversees the
restoration of Puget Sound, acknowledged this fact yesterday when
adopting a new set of ecosystem indicators to measure how Puget
Sound influences the health and well-being of humans.
It’s often said that people have damaged the Puget Sound
ecosystem through years of abuse. They say it will take years of
restoration — by people — to return things to a healthy condition.
But why do we care? Are we spending millions of dollars on
restoration just to benefit fish and wildlife, or are we doing it
for ourselves?
The answer, which comes from studies of economics and human
behavior, appears to be that helping fish and wildlife — by putting
the ecosystem back together — also benefits humans in a variety of
ways.
When the Washington Legislature told the Puget Sound Partnership
to go forth and lead the way toward restoring Puget Sound to
health, our lawmakers understood that people would be the primary
beneficiaries. The first two goals assigned to the partnership, as
articulated by RCW
90.71.300:
A healthy human population supported by a healthy Puget Sound
that is not threatened by changes in the ecosystem;
A quality of human life that is sustained by a functioning
Puget Sound ecosystem;
The other three goals are related to native species, habitats
and water supplies.
Sometimes goals related to human values conflict with goals to
restore ecological functions. For example, one cannot build a house
on undeveloped land without altering the ecosystem in some negative
ways. Sometimes human values are aligned with ecological values,
such when we reduce pollution to clean up streams and drinking
water. In any case, these new ecosystem indicators will help people
understand the tradeoffs and opportunities of various actions.
As I pointed out last month in
Water Ways, the Hood Canal Coordinating Council has completed a
plan and associated website
that highlights connections between human well-being and natural
resources in the Hood Canal region. Hood Canal became a pilot
project for the indicators approved yesterday for all of Puget
Sound. Some of the same folks — including social scientist Kelly
Biedenweg of the Puget Sound Institute — were involved in creating
nine new “vital signs” with indicators to track human-related
changes in the Puget Sound ecosystem.
Unlike the original human health and human well-being indicators
adopted in 2010, these new indicators have undergone an extensive
review by scientists and other experts to ensure their validity and
reliability. That is, these new indicators have real meaning in
connecting human beings to the ecological functions of Puget
Sound.
In yesterday’s meeting, Martha Kongsgaard, chairwoman of the
Leadership Council, said the human dimension is often ignored in
favor of empirical science.
“This is a hard thing to do,” she said about developing the new
indicators. “This is sort of a brave new world, and I think it is
true that we live in this world whether we call it out like this or
not.”
Council member Stephanie Solien said she would like to see more
discussions about human health and well-being issues — not because
they are more important than species and habitats, but because they
make connections to average people.
“People are self-interested,” she said. “They care about their
health, their family’s health, the health of their communities. The
more we can draw those connections to Puget Sound and healthy
watersheds, I think we will be more successful in our work around
ecosystems and saving species.”
Here are the four new vital signs and associated indicators
related to human health:
1. OUTDOOR ACTIVITY: Measured by 1) Percent of
swimming beaches meeting bacterial standards (one of the existing
indicators), 2) Average hours people spend having fun outdoors, 3)
Average hours people spend working outdoors.
2. AIR QUALITY: Indicators to be determined
from existing data.
3. LOCAL FOODS: Availability of wild foods,
such the ability to catch fish, collect shellfish, harvest plants
and hunt for game.
4. DRINKING WATER: Indicators to be determined
from information about water systems.
Here are the five new vital signs and associated indicators
related to human well-being:
5. ECONOMIC VITALITY: Measured by 1) Value of
natural resources produced by industry, including commercial
fishing, shellfish harvesting, timber production, agriculture,
mining and tourism; 2) Value produced by natural-resource
industries compared to gross domestic product of all other
industries in the region; 3) Number of jobs in natural-resource
industries.
6. CULTURAL WELL-BEING: Percent of residents
who feel they are able to maintain traditions associated with the
natural environment.
7. GOOD GOVERNANCE: Percentage of people who
feel they have 1) the opportunity to influence decisions about
Puget Sound, 2) the rights and freedom to make decisions about
managing natural resources, 3) trust in local and regional
governments to make the right decisions about Puget Sound, 4) been
well represented by government leaders, 5) access to information
about natural-resource issues.
8. SENSE OF PLACE: Percentage of people who
feel: 1) a positive connection to the region, 2) a sense of
stewardship for the watershed, 3) a sense of pride about being from
Puget Sound.
9. PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING INDEX: Percentage
of people who experience: 1) inspiration from being in nature, 2)
reduced stress, calm or relaxation from being in nature, 3) Overall
life satisfaction based on criteria in national studies.
A new vital sign wheel will add
nine indicators for human health and well-being. Two indicators
were moved to another area.
Graphic: Puget Sound Partnership
Leadership Council member Jay Manning, former director of the
Washington Department of Ecology, said he supports the indicators.
His only concern is that some are beyond the control of the Puget
Sound Partnership, and some may have nothing to do with people’s
connection to Puget Sound.
Jay makes a good point, but the social scientists who developed
the indicators stressed that there will be no targets or goals
associated with human values. What will be interesting to watch is
whether people feel better or worse about the restoration effort as
time goes on, and how the leaders choose to respond to any changes
in public opinion.
Much of the information that will fit into the new indicators
will be the result of phone surveys yet to be conducted. Other
information will be teased out of ongoing research studies. The
partnership has received funding from the Environmental Protection
Agency to hire a consultant to continue work on the human-related
indicators until the numbers are finalized.
None of the new information about human health and well-being
will be included in the State of Puget Sound report to be issued
later this year, according to Kari Stiles, staff scientist for the
partnership. But some information could go into the Vital Signs wheel within
the next year.
If you want to know how the Hood Canal Coordinating Council is
working to protect and restore Hood Canal, take a look at a new
website created by the council. It is called OurHoodCanal.org.
The website is an attractive and functional companion to the
“Hood
Canal Integrated Watershed Plan” (PDF 325 kb), a five-year
strategic plan focused on programs that can be accomplished by the
coordinating council and its members.
Hood Canal Coordinating Council is made up of county
commissioners from Kitsap, Mason and Jefferson counties, along with
leaders from the Skokomish and Port Gamble S’Klallam tribes.
When planning efforts began five years ago, the idea was to
create an “integrated” plan that would recognize all the ecological
functions taking place in the Hood Canal watershed and create a set
of strategies for addressing all the various problems.
The effort got off to a good start by identifying many of the
problems, ranging from declining fish populations to fragmented
upland habitats. But the complexity of those problems, the
variability of conditions and the numerous agencies responsible for
data and decisions eventually overwhelmed the planners. It was as
if they were trying to complete a jigsaw puzzle containing a
million pieces.
The coordinating council decided to refocus the effort on issues
that are under its purview while maintaining the long-term vision
of a sustainable Hood Canal ecosystem that benefits humans in a
variety of ways.
“Ideally, we will eventually get to all the issues,” said Scott
Brewer, the council’s executive director. “The board decided it
wanted to focus on something that would be the first strategic
priorities and then pick up the other things over time.”
In this context, the plan identifies five focal components:
Shellfish,
Commercial shellfish harvesting,
Forests,
Forestry, and
Salmon.
Also, four major “pressures” are called out for special
attention:
Commercial and residential development,
Transportation and service corridors,
Climate change and ocean acidification, and
Wastewater discharges and stormwater runoff.
These are issues that the county and tribal leaders were already
addressing in one way or another, either through local actions or
through the Hood Canal Coordinating Council, which is recognized
under state law.
The new website OurHoodCanal.org highlights the connections
between human well-being and natural resources. The first findings
focus on three natural resource indicators — one each for
shellfish, forests and salmon — plus five indicators for human well
being — positive emotions, communication, traditional resource
practices, communities, natural resource industries and access to
local food.
A survey
last year, for example, showed that Hood Canal generates
positive emotions (at least most of the time) for the vast majority
of respondents, yet most Hood Canal residents say they don’t often
work together to manage resources, prepare cultural events or solve
community challenges.
The website also includes a section about what people can do to help
Hood Canal.
“This is a work in progress,” Scott said about the planning
effort and related website. “We can start by telling a really good
story about what is happening in Hood Canal, then going on to make
connections and asking whether we are doing the right things.”
The first strategies identified in the plan involve:
Working together on local land-use planning,
Identifying failing septic systems and other sources of
bacterial pollution,
Continuing projects to restore healthy runs of salmon,
Furthering a mitigation program to fully compensate for the
effects of development,
Finding ways to adapt to climate change, and
Developing a regional plan to reduce stormwater problems.
Meanwhile, the coordinating council has developed a new ranking
system for setting priorities for salmon restoration. Refinements
will come later, Scott said, but the system is currently being used
to identify restoration projects to be proposed for funding later
this year.
Under the Salmon
Recovery Prioritization (see “guidance” document) projects will
be given more consideration if they help highly rated salmon
stocks, such as fall chinook in the Skokomish River, summer chum in
the Big Quilcene and so on. Projects are given points for
addressing specific habitat types and restoration actions deemed to
be the most important.
If successful, this approach will result in funding the most
important restoration projects, as determined through a more
precise ranking process than ever used before, although it does
leave room for judgment calls.
While the Hood Canal Coordinating Council works on projects in
Hood Canal, other groups continue with similar efforts in other
watersheds.
“Everyone is prioritizing one way or another,” Scott told me,
“but they haven’t looked at it like we have.”
Scott said agencies and organizations that grant money for
salmon recovery or ecosystem restoration could call for an improved
ranking process throughout Puget Sound.
“A lot of money gets spread everywhere,” he noted, “but there
are some key spots throughout Puget Sound that need it more than
others.”
Long Live the Kings is holding two events that will give people
some special insight into the restoration of Hood Canal, and
possibly Puget Sound as a whole.
The first, tomorrow evening, begins with a free film that will
lead into a discussion about Hood Canal restoration. The second, on
Saturday, is a rare open house at LLK’s salmon and steelhead
hatchery on Lilliwaup Creek.
Jacque White, executive director of the group, told me that he
likes to show the film “Ocean
Frontiers” because it provides a hopeful view about protecting
marine ecosystems. It shows how a variety of people with diverse
interests can work together. I’ve embedded the trailer for the film
on this page.
Jacques said people clearly want to protect the rich ecosystem
of Hood Canal. The Hood Canal Coordinating Council has developed an
integrated watershed plan that connects the uplands to the
shoreline to the deep marine waters of the canal.
Joining him in a panel discussion after the film will be Dave
Herrera of the Skokomish Tribe and Terry King of Washington Sea
Grant.
The film and discussion will be tomorrow (Friday) from 6 to 8
p.m. at Alderbrook Resort and Spa in Union.
The open house on Saturday will be from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the
Lilliwaup Hatchery on Lilliwaup Street, off Highway 101 north of
Hoodsport. (Look for balloons along the highway near
Lilliwaup.)
The hatchery is a supplementation operation designed to restore
stocks of threatened Hood Canal summer chum, Puget Sound steelhead
and Puget Sound chinook. The event will be an opportunity to view
the hatchery and understand the supplementation program, but it is
also a chance to talk to people involved in numerous Hood Canal
restoration programs.
“The issues in Hood Canal are about the land-sea connection,”
White said, adding that he feels hope for the canal when people are
willing to learn about the ecosystem and attempt to understand
different viewpoints.
Two other events planned by Long Live the Kings:
A presentation by Jacque White with an emphasis on early marine
survival. See
“Water Ways” Aug. 22, 2013. The presentation will be Sept. 12
from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at Orcas Center on Orcas Island.
A benefit dinner for Long Live the Kings, Oct 17 at Seattle
Aquarium.
Nobody doubts the passion that Gov. Chris Gregoire holds for
Puget Sound or that she was instrumental in setting up the Puget
Sound Partnership, which has charted a course for restoration.
But how will the work to protect Puget Sound proceed under a new
governor?
Gov. Chris Gregoire (right) praises a new environmental
mitigation program during a tour of Hood Canal aboard the Coast
Guard cutter Sea Devil. Looking on are Martha Kongsgaard (left),
chairwoman of the Puget Sound Leadership Council, and Gail Terzi,
mitigation program manager with Seattle District Army Corps of
Engineers.
Kitsap Sun photo by Christopher Dunagan
It’s an issue that has not been discussed much in the ongoing
governor’s race. (I need to question the candidates on this issue.)
But I had a chance yesterday to chat with the governor over coffee
(she had tea) in the galley of the Coast Guard cutter Sea Devil on
the way to Dabob Bay.
“I created it, so the next governor can uncreate it,” Gregoire
told me simply, a comment I reported in
today’s Kitsap Sun.
Still, she said, the partnership fills a need in coordinating
the work of many government agencies, businesses and private
groups. The effort has increased awareness and provided
accountability needed to bring restoration dollars to the region.
She seemed to be saying that whatever management structure is used,
coordination will remain essential to the effort.
Gregoire filled me in on a story I had never heard before, one
she later repeated for the 15 or so visitors on the boat ride
across Hood Canal. It was about how the Puget Sound Partnership
grew from a spark of an idea that erupted over a lunch with U.S.
Rep. Norm Dicks.
“We were excited and got quite loud, as you can imagine with
Norm Dicks,” she said. “It was quite a shouting match, and everyone
in the restaurant was watching us.”
After that lunch, Gregoire called on Bill Ruckelshaus, former
director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to head a
study commission leading up to formation of the Puget Sound
Partnership, as I reported in today’s story.
Both Gregoire and Dicks will leave office at the end of the
year, and the governor says she is ready to pass the baton to
others.
The reason for yesterday’s boat ride was to celebrate a new
in-lieu-fee mitigation program for Hood Canal, which could be a
model for other parts of Puget Sound and, as some suggested
yesterday, for the entire nation.
The idea is that developers would pay a flat fee rather than
construct a mitigation project on their own. Money could be pooled,
if necessary, to promote significant long-term ecological
protections.
The Navy is expected to jump-start the effort with several
million dollars for mitigation of damage from its proposed
$715-million explosives handling wharf to service submarines at
Bangor on Hood Canal.
Rather than rehash all the work that has gone into fashioning
this rare mitigation program, I’ll refer you to my stories and
other sources. One thing to note is that the mitigation plan —
outlined in a document called an “instrument” — includes a complex
accounting system to keep track of the money as well as ecological
debits and credits. It’s all geared to ensure that the
environmental damage from development is fully compensated in
ecological functions.
A story related to mitigation at the proposed Bangor wharf
involves compensation to area tribes for the loss of certain
treaty-protected fish and shellfish resources. The story,
“Navy to pay $9 million to tribes in mitigation for wharf
project,” has generated considerable reader comments (134),
mainly about tribal rights.
It won’t be long before local governments will be called on to
do their part to restore Puget Sound.
That’s one conclusion I drew yesterday from a conversation
between representatives of the Puget Sound Partnership and the
Kitsap County commissioners.
Martha Kongsgaard, chairwoman of the PSP’s Leadership Council,
and PSP Executive Director Gerry O’Keefe have been visiting local
governments throughout Puget Sound to learn what they are doing now
and to gauge their capacity and willingness to do more to improve
the natural environment.
It has long been recognized that the effort to protect and
restore Puget Sound requires the support of the people who live
here. And local officials tend to be much closer to those living in
their community. As a result, they can often bridge the gap between
decision-makers at the top levels and the people who need to make
changes in their daily lives.
An investigation into the causes of low-oxygen conditions in
Hood Canal is coming to a close with this week’s release of a final
report by the Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program.
The pattern of fall oxygen
levels show severely depleted waters from Twanoh State Park to
Hoodsport with much better conditions to the north. (Click to
enlarge.)
Map courtesy of Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen
Program
What the five-year study learned about Hood Canal seems quite
impressive. The full report contains extensive discussions about
what causes oxygen to decline, the triggering mechanism for fish
kills, the inputs of nitrogen that drive the system and much
more.
One of the conclusions, which I focused on in my latest story,
is that nitrogen from septic systems in Southern Hood Canal appears
to be a pivotal factor in fish kills. When the natural decline in
oxygen approaches a dangerous range, the added nitrogen from septic
systems can tip the balance, causing excessive stress and sometimes
death for marine creatures.
According to the report, one cannot easily separate the natural
factors from the human factors that create problems in Hood Canal.
The long, narrow fjord is flushed slowly compared to most marine
systems. Organic carbon and nitrogen, which are the major players
in oxygen decline, naturally come in from streams, groundwater and
the Pacific Ocean. Numerous human sources, such as septic systems
and fertilizers, must be taken into account.
