Puget Sound’s shoreline habitat is slowly being restored to a
more natural state, thanks to the ongoing removal of old bulkheads
from private property, one after another.
The latest “State
of the Sound” report from the Puget Sound Partnership reports
that the amount of bulkhead removed from important “feeder bluffs”
has nearly reached the 2020 goal established by the
partnership.
For shorelines in general, it appears that the tide has turned
in a positive way, with removal of old bulkheads outpacing new
bulkhead construction. At the same time, efforts to protect
shorelines from erosion have become more focused on natural “soft
shore” techniques, as opposed to concrete, wood or rock walls.
The overall effort at removing shoreline armoring from Puget
Sound has fallen somewhat short of the Puget Sound Partnership’s
nine-year goal to remove more miles of bulkheads than what gets
constructed between 2011 and 2020. A major reason for the shortfall
is the amount of bulkhead constructed during the early years of the
effort — 2011 to 2013 — as shown on a graph in the State of the Sound report.
Things might be a bit better than the graph indicates, because
the data do not adequately reflect improvements in shoreline
habitat from replacing old-fashioned bulkheads with natural
structures — such as carefully placed logs. Man-made installations,
even when natural, are still counted as armoring.
The trouble with hard bulkheads below the high-tide line is that
they reduce spawning habitat for forage fish, such as surf smelt.
Bulkheads also increase the risk that juvenile salmon will be eaten
by predators as they migrate through deeper water. And shoreline
armor also can block the movement of sand needed to maintain
healthy beaches, as described by coastal geologist Hugh Shipman in
the video on this page.
In Kitsap and Clallam counties, nearly two miles of shoreline
armor have been removed starting in 2011, according to the report.
That accounts for 43 percent of the total armor removed in Puget
Sound during that time.
Thanks to grants from the Environmental Protection Agency, most
Puget Sound counties have joined the state’s Shore Friendly program, which
provides incentives for private property owners to remove their
bulkheads. Each of Puget Sound’s 12 counties have developed
individual programs to suit the needs of their residents. One can
locate specific county programs on the Shore
Friendly page managed by the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife.
One of the latest ideas for encouraging shoreline restoration is
to create a program that can offer low-interest loans to shoreline
property owners who wish to remove bulkheads, install soft-shore
stabilization or move their houses back from shore as the sea level
rises. The feasibility of the program is being studied by research
scientist Aimee Kinney of Puget Sound Institute.
As proposed, the program would establish a revolving loan fund,
which would be replenished as shoreline property owners pay back
the loans, as Jeff Rice of PSI describes in a
blog post. The program might operate like Washington’s
low-interest
loan program for septic system repairs and replacements.
Meanwhile, many of the 12 Puget Sound counties still provide
assistance through the Shore Friendly program as funding becomes
available. Shore Friendly
Kitsap, for example, offers free site assessments to determine
the risk of erosion, along with $5,000 to help with design,
permitting and construction of a shoreline project.
Over the past three years, Shore Friendly Kitsap has helped with
15 shoreline projects. Bulkhead removals range from 15 feet of
armoring in Liberty Bay to 222 feet in Dyes Inlet. In all, 1,177
feet of armor have been removed, according to statistics provided
by Christina Kereki, environmental planner for the Kitsap County
Department of Community Development.
A recent
shoreline success story (1.6 mb) — including trials and
tribulations along the way — is told in writing by property owners
Sheri and Michael Flynn, who live on 200 feet of waterfront on
Miller Bay in North Kitsap. As they say, their project was “a
lesson in patience, persistence and perseverance,” but the outcome
will be favorable both to them and the environment.
Mason County shoreline owners also have restoration stories, and
I was pleased to help them tell their stories in a project for the
Mason Conservation District. See Living Along
the Waterfront.
Laura Blackmore, executive director of the Puget Sound
Partnership, was among six leaders from so-called “national
estuaries” who spoke to Congress last week about the need for
increased funding.
Laura Blackmore, Puget Sound
Partnership
The natural beauty of Puget Sound and its recreational
opportunities have attracted people and businesses, including 11 of
the nation’s Fortune 500 companies, Laura told the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
“Unfortunately,” she added, “Puget Sound is also slowly dying.
Southern Resident orcas, chinook salmon and steelhead are all
listed under the Endangered Species Act. We continue to pollute our
waterways and our shellfish beds, and habitat degradation outpaces
restoration.”
Laura Blackmore, deputy director of Puget Sound Partnership,
will slide into the agency’s executive director position when she
comes into work next week.
Laura Blackmore
Laura has built a reputation as a facilitator, helping to meld
diverse ideas into cohesive policies. That experience should serve
her well in the director’s post, where she will take on the primary
role of shaping the direction of the Partnership for the coming
years.
“Puget Sound is in trouble, and we know what we need to do to
fix it,” Laura told me. “It took us 150 years to get into this
mess, and it will take us awhile to get out. What we need is the
political will to keep going.”
Concerns about the endangered southern resident killer whales
seems to be spurring legislative support for new enforcement tools
that could be used to protect shoreline habitat.
Bills in both the state House and Senate would allow stop-work
orders to be issued by the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife when shoreline construction is done without permits or
exceeds permit conditions. If passed, the law would require that
Fish and Wildlife officials first work with contractors and
property owners to achieve “voluntary compliance.”
Working with property owners is the key, stressed Jeff Davis,
deputy director of Fish and Wildlife in charge of habitat
protection. Under current law, property owners who commit serious
permit violations are charged with criminal misdemeanors. That’s
neither good for the agency nor for the property owner, who may end
up battling each other in court, said Davis, who once worked as a
Fish and Wildlife habitat biologist in Kitsap County.
The criminal approach may work well with “egregious violations
of the law,” Davis told the House Committee on Rural Development,
Agriculture and Natural Resources, “but it’s not an appropriate
tool for the vast majority of noncompliance we see out there. We
would rather work with people so they are in compliance and there
aren’t impacts to fish.”
Puget Sound Partnership has honed its high-level game plan for
restoring the Puget Sound ecosystem, including a sharp focus on 10
“vital signs” of ecological health.
The newly released draft of the Puget
Sound Action Agenda has endorsed more than 600 specific
“near-term actions” designed to benefit the ecosystem in various
ways. Comments on the plan will be accepted until Oct. 15. Visit
the Partnership’s webpage to view the Draft Action Agenda and
access the
comments page.
The latest Action Agenda for 2018-2022 includes a revised format
with a “comprehensive
plan” separate from an “implementation
plan.” The comprehensive plan outlines the ecological problems,
overall goals and administrative framework. The implementation plan
describes how priorities are established and spells out what could
be accomplished through each proposed action.
Nearly 300 near-term
actions are listed at Tier 4, the highest level of priority,
giving them a leg up when it comes to state and federal support,
according to Heather Saunders Benson, Action Agenda manager.
Funding organizations use the Action Agenda to help them determine
where to spend their money.
The greatest change in the latest Action Agenda may be its focus
on projects that specifically carry out “Implementation
Strategies,” which I’ve been writing about on and off for nearly
two years. Check out
“Implementation Strategies will target Puget Sound ‘Vital
Signs’” in the Encyclopedia of Puget Sound.
State health officials have reduced shellfish-closure areas
around 20 marinas in Puget Sound, allowing more commercial
shellfish harvesting while inching toward a goal of upgrading
10,800 acres of shellfish beds by 2020.
In all, 661 acres of shellfish beds were removed from a
long-standing “prohibited” classification that has been applied
around marinas, based on assumptions about the dumping of sewage
from boats confined to small areas.
Poulsbo Marina // Photo:
Nick Hoke via Wikimedia
“We have seen pretty significant changes in boat-waste
management,” said Scott Berbells, shellfish growing area manager
for the Washington Department of Health, explaining how the
upgrades came about.
New calculations of discharges from boats in marinas and the
resulting risks of eating nearby shellfish have allowed health
authorities to reduce, but not eliminate, the closure zones around
the marinas.
Passion for saving Puget Sound’s killer whales is driving an
exhaustive search for ways to restore the whales to health and
rebuild their population, but hard science must contribute to the
search for workable answers.
I recently updated readers on the efforts of the Southern
Resident Killer Whale Task Force, appointed by the governor to
change the course of a population headed toward extinction. Read
the story I wrote for the
Encyclopedia of Puget Sound or the version reprinted in the
Kitsap Sun.
I began the story by mentioning the term “no silver bullet,” a
term I have heard numerous times from folks involved in the task
force. They are emphasizing how difficult it is to restore a
damaged ecosystem, while orcas wait for food at the top of a
complex food web. All sorts of people are looking for a quick fix,
something that will increase the number of Chinook salmon — the
orcas’ primary prey — within their range, which includes the Salish
Sea and Pacific Ocean from Vancouver Island to Northern
California.
More than 100 people tuned in today to an online presentation
regarding the Puget Sound Partnership’s Vital Signs indicators and
the quest for ecological health.
While there was not much breaking news, the session turned out
to be a very nice summary of progress toward restoring ecological
functions in Puget Sound — or rather, in too many cases, the
ongoing declines in species and habitats.
One can review the entire two-hour webinar, in which a variety
of our leading Puget Sound experts chime in on their areas of
expertise. Go to Puget Sound
Partnership’s webpage and click on “Vital Signs Webinar.”
Because of the linkage between Vital Signs and Implementation
Strategies, many of the issues under discussion relate to stories
that I have been writing for the Encyclopedia of Puget Sound
over the past two years. Check out 16 stories by various
writers on topics of ecosystem health found on the Puget Sound
Institute’s website.
One emerging issue brought up during the question-and-answer
portion of today’s webinar was what will happen to the Vital Signs
indicators and targets as the year 2020 approaches. The targets
were all established with a notion that if we could meet certain
goals by 2020, Puget Sound would be in pretty good shape. As it
turns out, almost none of the targets will be met by 2020, so the
struggle must go on.
Sometime this year, work will begin on a possible overhaul — or
at least a major update — of the Vital Signs indicators and
targets, according to officials with Puget Sound Partnership. Some
indicators, for example, reflect the success of restoration
projects by reporting the number of acres restored with no
accounting for acres lost somewhere else.
The targets were originally established with a sense of optimism
but without a clear understanding of what it would take, nor was
there any commitment of funds for improving a specific type of
habitat. As I see it, the uncertainty of financing will remain a
problem until the Legislature comes up with a dedicated funding
source.
Even if the targets remain the same, the target date of 2020
will need to be changed when we get to that year, if not sooner. I
discuss some of the benefits and pitfalls of changing the
indicators in a
Water Ways post I wrote in November while going over the 2017
State of the Sound report.
The Puget Sound
Science Panel, a team of expert advisers within the Puget Sound
Partnership, is expected to play a primary role in revising the
indicators and targets. I’m sure the discussion will address
implementation strategies, adaptive management and a process to get
Puget Sound on a more certain path to recovery.
I was pleased to see the
tribute story about Dan O’Neill written by Arla Shephard Bull,
a regular contributing reporter for the Kitsap Sun.
Dan O’Neill
Photo: Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement
Group
Dan, who played a key role in Puget Sound restoration, died in
October at age 81. A celebration
of his life is scheduled for Saturday from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. at
the Salmon Center in Belfair.
Dan was a longtime board member for the Hood Canal Salmon
Enhancement Group based at the Salmon Center. He also served on the
Washington State Transportation Commission and was a member of the
Leadership Council, the governing body of the Puget Sound
Partnership.
I thought Mendy Harlow, executive director of the enhancement
group, described the Dan I knew in Arla’s story: “He was really
focused on the facts, the science and the truth, which was
something I appreciated in him as an individual, but also as a
board member,” Mendy said. “He was someone who looked at the
reality and not at dreams.”
I don’t remember Dan ever saying anything flashy, but I could
always count on him for an honest assessment of various situations.
He looked at all sides of an issue. His comments were thoughtful
and down to earth.
His unique role on both the Transportation Commission and
Leadership Council put him in a good position to address some
serious environmental issues. We talked about stormwater runoff
from highways and salmon-blocking culverts. He was downright
practical about these matters, even when funding measures
inexplicably fell into legislative cracks.
“The Legislature right now is dealing with all kinds of issues,”
Dan told me in the midst of the culvert lawsuit pitting tribes
against the state. “From a transportation standpoint, revenues are
down. Gas taxes aren’t producing as much revenues, because people
are driving less or using more efficient cars or whatever.”
On the Leadership Council, Dan was always looking for ways to
help the public understand the issues better. He once told me that
he learned from my stories about the environment, which was nice to
hear.
During this time, Dan served on the board of The Greenbrier
Companies, a publicly traded railroad car leasing and manufacturing
company. He was also a founder of and investor in PowerTech Group,
Inc., a business security software company. Sheida Sahandy,
executive director of the Partnership, said she appreciated his
business sense.
“Dan’s unique perspective from the business community enabled
the Leadership Council and the Partnership to make more balanced
and broadly informed choices about Puget Sound recovery,” Sheida
said in a
written statement. “He spoke eloquently on behalf of business
interests, but he also kept protection and recovery of Puget Sound
at the top of his priority list.”
Southern Resident killer whales, cherished by many Puget Sound
residents, are on a course headed for extinction, and they could
enter a death spiral in the not-so-distant future.
It is time that people face this harsh reality, Ken Balcomb told
me, as we discussed the latest death among the three pods of orcas.
A 2-year-old male orca designated J-52 and known as Sonic died
tragically about two weeks ago.
Two-year-old J-52, known as
Sonic, swims with his mother J-36, or Alki, on Sept. 15. This may
have been the last day Sonic was seen alive.
Photo: Ken Balcomb, Center for Whale
Research
The young orca was last seen in emaciated condition, barely
surfacing and hanging onto life near the entrance to the Strait of
Juan de Fuca on Sept. 15. Ken, director of the Center for Whale
Research, said the young whale was attended to by his mother Alki,
or J-36, along with a male orca, L-85, known as Mystery — who may
have been Sonic’s father, but more about that later.
Extinction, Ken told me, is “very real” — not some ploy to
obtain research dollars. The population of endangered Southern
Residents has now dropped to 76 — the lowest level since 1984. Most
experts agree that a shortage of chinook salmon — the primary prey
of the orcas — is the greatest problem facing the whales.
Last week, the Leadership Council — the governing body of the
Puget Sound Partnership — discussed what role the partnership
should play to “accelerate and amplify efforts” to restore chinook
salmon runs and save the orcas. Chinook themselves are listed as a
threatened species.
Graph: Center for
Biological Diversity
Puget Sound Partnership is charged by the Legislature with
coordinating the restoration of Puget Sound, including the recovery
of fish and wildlife populations.
The Leadership Council delayed action on a
formal resolution (PDF 149 kb) in order to allow its staff time
to identify specific actions that could be taken. Although the
resolution contains the right language, it is not enough for the
council to merely show support for an idea, said Council Chairman
Jay Manning.
Sonic was one of the whales born during the much-acclaimed “baby
boom” from late 2014 through 2015. With his death, three of the six
whales born in J pod during that period have now died. No new
calves have been born in any of the Southern Resident pods in
nearly a year.
Meanwhile, two orca moms — 23-year-old Polaris (J-28) and
42-year-old Samish (J-14) — died near the end of 2016. Those deaths
were followed by the loss of Granny (J-2), the J-pod matriarch said
to have lived more than a century. Another death was that of
Doublestuf, an 18-year-old male who died last December.
Three orcas were born in L pod during the baby boom, and none of
those whales has been reported missing so far.
Ken believes he witnessed the final hours of life for young
Sonic, who was lethargic and barely surfacing as the sun set on the
evening of Sept. 15. Two adults — Sonic’s mother and Mystery — were
the only orcas present, while the rest of J pod foraged about five
miles away.
Sonic seen with his mother in
June.
Photo: Ken Balcomb, Center for Whale
Research
That was the last time anyone saw Sonic, although his mother
Alki as well as Mystery were back with J pod during the next
observation four days later. Ken reported that Alki seemed
distressed, as often happens when a mother loses an offspring.
Ken admits that he is speculating when he says that Mystery may
have been Sonic’s father. It makes for a good story, but there
could be other reasons why the older male stayed with the mother
and calf. Still, researchers are engaged in studies that point to
the idea that mature killer whales may actually choose a mate
rather than engaging in random encounters. I’m looking forward to
the upcoming report.
I must admit that this issue of extinction has been creeping up
on me, and it’s not something that anyone wants to face. Food is
the big issue, and chinook salmon have been in short supply of
late. It will be worth watching as the whales forage on chum
salmon, as they are known to do in the fall months.
“This population cannot survive without food year-round,” Ken
wrote in a news
release. “Individuals metabolize their toxic blubber and body
fats when they do not get enough to eat to sustain their bodies and
their babies. Your diet doctor can advise you about that.
“All indications (population number, foraging spread, days of
occurrence in the Salish Sea, body condition, and live birth
rate/neonate survival) are pointing toward a predator population
that is prey-limited and nonviable,” he added.
The Center for Biological Diversity, which was involved in the
initial lawsuit that led to the endangered listing for the whales,
is calling upon the NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service to
move quickly to protect orca habitat along the coasts of
Washington, Oregon and California. Currently designated critical
habitat is limited to Puget Sound, even though the whales are known
to roam widely along the coast.
“The death of another killer whale puts this iconic population
on a dangerous path toward extinction,” Catherine Kilduff of CBD
said in a
news release. “If these whales are going to survive, we need to
move quickly. Five years from now, it may be too late.”
How fast the whales will go extinct is hard to determine,
experts say, but the current population is headed downward at an
alarming rate, no matter how one analyzes the problem.
“I would say we are already in a very dangerous situation,” said
Lance Barrett-Lennard, senior marine mammal researcher at the
Vancouver Aquarium. “If this trajectory continues and we lose two
or three more from deaths or unsuccessful birth, we will be in a
real spiral,” he told reporter Richard Watts of the
Times Colonist in Victoria, B.C.
A
five-year status review (PDF 4.3 mb), completed last December
by NMFS, takes into account the number of reproductive males and
females among the Southern Residents, the reproductive rates, and
the ratio of female to male births (more males are being born). As
the population declines, the risk of inbreeding — and even more
reproductive problems — can result.
Eric Ward of NOAA, who helped write the status report, said the
agency often estimates an extinction risk for endangered
populations, but the actual number of Southern Residents is too
small to produce a reliable number. Too many things can happen to
speed up the race toward extinction, but it is clear that the
population will continue to decline unless something changes.
As Ken describes it in simple terms, Southern Resident females
should be capable of producing an offspring every three years. With
27 reproductive females, we should be seeing nine new babies each
year. In reality, the average female produces one offspring every
nine years, which is just three per year for all three pods. That
is not enough to keep up with the death rate in recent years. To
make things worse, reproductive females have been dying long before
their time — and before they can help boost the population.
Experts talk about “quasi-extinction,” a future time when the
number of Southern Residents reaches perhaps 30 animals, at which
point the population is too small to recover no matter what
happens. Some say the population is now on the edge of a death
spiral, which may require heroic actions to push the population
back onto a recovery course.
As described in the five-year status review, prey shortage is
not the only problem confronting the Southern Residents. The
animals are known to contain high levels of toxic chemicals, which
can affect their immune systems and overall health as well as their
reproductive rates. Vessel noise can make it harder for them to
find fish to eat. On top of those problems is the constant threat
of a major oil spill, which could kill enough orcas to take the
population down to a nonviable number.
The graph shows the probability
that the Southern Resident population will fall below a given
number (N) after 100 years. Falling below 30 animals is considered
quasi-extinction. The blue line shows recent conditions. Lines to
the left show low chinook abundance, and lines to the right show
higher abundance.
Graphic: Lacy report, Raincoast Conservation
Foundation
Despite the uncertainties, Robert Lacey of Chicago Zoological
Society and his associates calculated in 2015 that under recent
conditions the Southern Resident population faces a 9 percent
chance of falling to the quasi-extinction level within 100 years.
Worsening conditions could send that rate into a tailspin. See
report for Raincoast
Conservation Foundation.
What I found most informative was how the probability of
extinction changes dramatically with food supply. (See the second
graph on this page.) A 10 percent decline in chinook salmon raises
the quasi-extinction risk from 9 percent to 73 percent, and a 20
percent decline raises the risk to more than 99 percent.
On the other hand, if chinook numbers can be increased by 20
percent, the whales would increase their population at a rate that
would ensure the population’s survival, all other things being
equal. Two additional lines on the graph represent a gradual
decline of chinook as a result of climate change over the next 100
years — a condition that also poses dangerous risks to the orca
population.
The close links between food supply and reproductive success are
explored in a story I wrote last year for the Encyclopedia
of Puget Sound.
At last Wednesday’s Puget Sound Leadership Council meeting,
members discussed a
letter from the Strait (of Juan de Fuca) Ecosystem Recovery Network
(PDF 146 kb) that called on the Puget Sound Partnership to
become engaged in salmon recovery efforts outside of Puget Sound —
namely the Klamath, Fraser and Columbia/Snake river basins.
“Such collaborative efforts must be done for the benefit of both
the SRKW and chinook fish populations, without losing sight of the
continuing need to maintain and improve the genetic diversity of
these fish populations …” states the letter.
A separate
letter from the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council (PDF 395
kb) also asks the Puget Sound Partnership to become more
engaged in orca recovery. The group is calling on the partnership
to support salmon recovery statewide, “relying on each region to
identify strategies to restore robust salmon runs.”
Rein Attemann of Washington Environmental Council said salmon on
the Columbia and Snake rivers, as well as he Fraser River in
British Columbia, are “vitally important” to the recovery of the
Southern Resident killer whales, and Puget Sound efforts should be
coordinated with other programs.
Jim Waddell, a retired civil engineer with the Army Corps of
Engineers, spoke forcefully about the need to save chinook salmon
and the Southern Residents, starting by tearing down dams on the
Snake River.
“We are out of time,” Waddell said. “The Corps of Engineers have
it within their power to begin breaching the dams within months….
The orcas cannot survive without those chinook.”
An environmental impact statement on chinook recovery includes
the option of breaching the dams, something that could be pushed
forward quickly, he said.
“Breaching the Snake River dams is the only possibility of
recovery,” Waddell said. “There is nothing left.”
Stephanie Solien, a member of the Leadership Council, said
speaking up for orcas in the fashion proposed is not something the
council has done before, but “we do have a responsibility to these
amazing animals and to the chinook and to the tribes.”
The council should work out a strategy of action before moving
forward, she added, but “we better get to moving on it.”