HomeMy WebLinkAboutBiological Assessment - PLN General - 10/30/2003 Biological
Asses sment
ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Prepared by:
ENGINEERING SERVICES ASSOCIATES
210 Cherokee Beach Road
Belfair, WA 98528
(360)275-7384
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL MARICULTURE SERVICES
121 Resolute Lane
Port Ludlow, WA 98365
(360)437-0811
October 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.1 Location and Project Description------------------------------------------------------•___-_------1
2.1.1 Proposed Alderbrook Resort Remodel ______________________ 5
2.1.2 Proposed SR 106 Realignment---------------------------------------------------------6
2.1.3 Proposed Sire Drainage...................................................................8
2.1.4 Proposed Riparian Habitat Restoration-----------------------------------------------13
2.2 Action Area 18
2.2.1 Alderbrook Resort Remodel 18
2.2.2 SR 106 Realignment--------------------------------------------------------•--------------18
2.2.3 Project Affects to Alderbrook Creek_________________________________________________20
2.2.4 Project Affects to Dalby Creek________ _________
2.2.4 Project Affects to Terrestrial Habitat________________________________________________23
2.2.5 Project Affects to Marine Intertidal Habitat__ _________ _________ _____________ 24
3. SPECIES AND HABITAT.---••-•---------------- - 27
-------------------------- -----------
3.1 Fish Species Information
3.1.1 Chinook Salmon 27
3.1.1.1 Description of Species--------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
3.1.1.2 Habitat 27
3.1.1.3 Determination 28
3.1.2 Coho Salmon------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------30
3.1.2.1 Description of Species-----------------------------------------------------------------------30
3.1.2.2 Habitat-------------------- ----------------------------31
3.1.2.3 Determination - 32
3.1.3 Summer Chum Salmon 33
3.1.3.1 Description of Species-----------------------------------------------------------------------33
3.1.3.2 Habitat-------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------34
3.1.3.3 Determination 34
3.1.4 Bull Trout(Native Char)_
3.1.4.1 Description of Species.......................................................................36
3.1.4.2 Habitat 37
3.1.4.3 Determination 38
3.2 Wildlife Species,.------------ --------------------------- 40
3.2.1 Bald Eagle.....................................•-----------------....---------•-----•----••-•--.....----- 40
3.2.1.1 Description of Species--------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
3.2.1.2 Nesting Habitat_________
3.2.1.3 Wintering Habitat.............................................................................41
3.2.1.4 Use of Project Area---------------------------------------------------------------------------42
3.2.1.5 Determination 42
3.2.2 Marbled Murrelet 43
3.2.2.1 Description of species.----------------------------•------------••----------•--------------- 43
3.2.2.2 Use of the Project Area---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
3.2.2.3 Determination 44
j 4.CONSERVATION MEASURES 45
5.REFRENCES-------------------------------------------------- 48
I
I
I I
i
I
11
I
I
I
I
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND FIGURES
FIGURE I Alderbrook Location Map....................................................................................2
FIGURE I Topographic Map of Area............. ------------------------------•-----•--------------.......------------.3
EXHIBIT G-1 Alderbrook Existing Site Topography.............................................................4
EXHIBIT P-1 Proposed Roadway Over Existing Terrestrial._ _____ _ ___ ________ _______________7, 19
EXHIBIT T-3 Site Plan 9
EXHIBIT D-1 Alderbrook Existing Site Drainage...................................................................10
EXHIBIT D-2 Proposed Drainage Plan and Alderbrook Creek Restoration________ _______________I I
EXHIBIT D-3 Stormwater Treatment Plan for Western Portion of SR 106 12
-------------------------
FIGURE 2 Alderbrook Creek Restoration Plan Drawing........................................................15
FIGURE 3 Bottomless Arch Culvert . 16
EXHIBIT W-1 Alderbrook Existing Streams and Wetlands....................................................21
EXHIBIT S-1 Alderbrook Beach 26
TABLE OF APPENICIES
APPENDIX A. WETLANDS INVENTORY FOR THE ALDERBROOK SR 106RELOCATION51
APPENDIX B. BEACH SURVEY FOR THE ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL 61
APPENDIX C. 1. Summary of the Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans U.S.District Court Decision..................65
2.Endangered Species Act Status of West Coast Salmon&Steelhead..............................67
APPENDIX D. Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of
Proposed Action(s)on Relevant Indicators_________________________________________________________________68
APPENDIX E. Draft Bald Eagle Status Report_ __________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _______________70
111
1. INTRODUCTION
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) formally listed Puget Sound Chinook
(Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) and Hood Canal summer chum salmon as threatened under
the Endangered Species Act(ESA) on May 24, 1999 and March 25, 1999 respectively.
NMFS has designated the coho salmon (O. kisutch) as a candidate for listing. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in Puget
Sound as threatened December 1, 1999. Section 7 of the ESA requires Federal agencies
to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of an endangered or
threatened species, or their critical habitats. The Alderbrook Resort Remodel qualifies
for such action. Under ESA section 7, the lead federal agency, in this case the U.S. Army
Corp of Engineers must prepare a biological assessment(BA)of the potential influence
of its action(permitting the remodel of the Alderbrook Resort) on listed species and their
habitat.
i
This BA is for Corps review and possible submittal to NMFS and USFWS as an aid to
ESA decision making regarding the potential effects of the Alderbrook Resort Remodel.
Analyses of potential impacts were based on review of proposed site plans, an on-site
inspection of existing habitat conditions, a review of current and historical distributional
data available for each species, and personal communication with local biologists. The
BA addresses potential effects of the proposed project on chinook salmon, coho salmon,
Hood Canal summer chum salmon, bull trout, and the habitat of each species. The bald
eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus)
are also included in this BA as they are federally listed as threatened and may occur in
the project area.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Location and Project Description
Alderbrook is a 96-room resort located on SR 106, 1.5 miles east of Union, in Mason
County, Washington (Fig. lA and 1B). The resort has been in existence since 1913. The
fundamental goal of this project is to enhance and reposition Alderbrook as a leading
Pacific Northwest year round resort and conference center. Adjacent properties to the
west and east are residential. To the south, across SR 106, approximately 80 acres of
hillside are undeveloped and owned by the same ownership that holds Alderbrook,North
Forty Lodging, LLC.
I
The main campus is located on the north side of SR 106 and fronts Hood Canal with a
marina(Exhibit G-1). West of and adjacent to the main campus is a grouping of 21
cottages, of which 13 are owned by North Forty Lodging, LLC and the remaining eight
are individually owned by other parties. Insert Fig. lA—Map of Hood canal showing
Alderbrook
1
I�
FIGURE 1-B
ALDERBROOK RESORT RENOVATION PROJECT
SURROUNDING AREA TOPOGRAPHY
Foot 8rid lei
453
1\~ •.�.--= -.�'✓ +fir--��+
1 +
DALBY CREEK I /
O / r
l / • p `�wT •/ l
.:,,� � 1 /i � �'� \ •(l � � -ter: C �.-}�
��- ,y-- -__- J-- •f J — ALDER13ROOK CREEK
fr''q� \ + 'otcr T,
jr
- �^.,fir..k.��-�-_��-�j ..' L-\'i `✓i 2�V� �/'-' _ _� � "l. ` ,1 �`J�-
r
mmoo.00,0
Ph
ism
��K 1���.�7���� //•����` � - ���`� -y� �f �� ■. ^�w�i.•'fir•° ���i► �%� r � ���.
gp
io
ONE j.- nON
a
LA
r' �, • NO-ORM.
{
�' ! , .slr - •.;?�e �r�� - tee+
r- -
•s x
Opposite the main campus and the cottages, on the south side of SR 106, are
approximately 6.3 acres containing surface parking lots, a commercial building,
Alderbrook's sewage treatment plant and undeveloped lands. Located about 307 feet
west of the aforementioned property, also on the south side of the highway, is a 0.77-acre
lot, which contains an old barn structure.
2.1.1 Proposed Alderbrook Resort Remodel
Main Campus
The Main Hotel Building, sometimes referred to as The Plaza Building, is a three-story
wood-frame structure built in 1979. It is located alongthe west side of the main campus
P
parcel. The building houses 44 guest rooms, conference/ballroom p g gu facilities, restaurant
and kitchen facilities, lounge, main lobby, administrative offices, and some back-of-
house support functions. There is a small additional area, below the first floor on the
canal side of the building, housing the hotel laundry and some support space. The square
footage of this building is approximately 43,831 SF. The Main Hotel Building will be
renovated extensively, inside and outside.
The "Lanai" Buildings are two, three-story, wood-framed, connected structures,both
built in 1965. Each building houses 18 guest rooms, six rooms on each of three floors,
comprising 36 total rooms. The Lanai buildings are east of the lobby of the Plaza
Building and separated from SR 106 by a 40 feet of parking lot.. The combined areas of
these buildings are approximately 15,966 SF. The two lanai buildings will be
demolished.
The Pool House is located at the northeast corner of the property, and is a one-story,
aluminum, glass and plastic building housing the swimming pool,Jacuzzi and restrooms/
changing areas. The structure was built in 1979, at the same time as the main hotel
building. The square footage of this building is approximately 4,500 SF. The Pool
House will maintain its functions and receive some architectural modifications and
improvements.
The Eastwood Building is a one-story, wood-frame structure built in 1965. It houses a
large, column-free meeting room and support facilities. It is located to the south of the
Pool House. The square footage of this building is approximately 3,350 SF. The
Eastwood Building will be renovated extensively, inside and outside, and will house a
new spa. Between the Pool House and the Spa(Eastwood Building), a new fitness room
will be added.
The Conference Center is located to the south of the Eastwood Room and east of the
lanai buildings. The building is a two-story, wood-framed structure, believed to have
been built in 1965. A series of meeting and support spaces, restroom facilities and the
Alderbrook maintenance shop are located in this structure. The square footage of this
building is approximately 4,318 SF. The Conference Center will be demolished.
i
4
The covered walkways are a network of wood-framed canopies, which connect many of
the buildings,providing shelter in inclement weather. Separately, there is an assortment
of stairs and elevated walkways were added in front(on the west side) of the Conference
Center. The covered walkways in the courtyard and the Conference Center stairs and
walkways combined are approximately 6,503 SF. The covered walkways and
Conference Center stairs will be demolished.
The marina consists of a"T"configuration dock, wood-frame, floating and anchored
with wood pilings. A walkway extends approximately 500 feet from the shoreline to a
600-foot long moorage pier running perpendicular to the walkway. There is a small
marina shack at the juncture of the walkway and the pier. The square footage of the
marina is approximately 9,584 SF. The marina will remain as is with no modifications
outside of routine maintenance.
Cottages
West of the Plaza Building,there are 21 cottages, which are organized in a horseshoe
plan configuration around a central green space. Eight are privately owned and 13 are
property of Alderbrook. The total square footage of Alderbrook s 13 cottages is
approximately 10,088 SF. The total square footage of all 21 cottages is approximately
17,431 SF. The exteriors and interiors of these units will be partially renovated
(including those owned privately by others). One cottage, number 103,which is owned
by North Forty Lodgingwill be partially demolished to make room for emergency vehicle
access/turning radii.
South of SR 106
The Brookside Building is a one-story,wood-framed building,built in 1965. The square
footage of this building is approximately 3,600 SF. The Brookside Building will be
renovated inside to accommodate the primary hotel administration components and staff
facilities.
Alderbrook will be trading its off-site maintenance and storage barn and the lot it is on
for maintenance and storage building lot located south of the new SR realignment and
g g 1�
ih f west o the realigned Beach Drive. The maintenance building I � d g Alderbrook will construct
is a one-story,wood-frame structure of approximately 2,400 SF.
Alderbrook s Sewage Treatment Plant serves the hotel campus and cottages exclusively.
It is located south of the Brookside Building. The Sewage Treatment Plant will be
maintained and no modifications are anticipated.
2.1.2 Proposed SR 106 Realignment
A major component of the Alderbrook Resort Remodel is the proposed realignment of
SR 106 (Exhibit P-1). Under existing conditions,the majority of resort parking lies to the
south of SR 106. To access the main campus guests must cross SR106 creating
vehicle/pedestrian conflicts. The proposed realignment will eliminate this conflict. The
5
Realignment of SR 106 will incorporate current design standards to improve intersection
skew angles, horizontal and vertical sight distances, and overall safety in the project area.
A traffic study(The Shea Group, 2002) shows realignment of SR 106 will accommodate
traffic volumes projected to the year 2022.
6
.a w
r. INVY >A►RR
#. � ad Ph��� +ate-- .}� .iti_ .i ;-.c Y� •. 'v y��,,•. '•�,:` S`1,�
AWI
1 y yy� tl: -, _ C.� 7 <�r �.. - , y�a 't'JF.'.. �" •� y�7�3 i a
• a1
>r
' + Olt
y
1�4
s
v ,
x
T 1
J
aJb
OL
,y 16 $ i �- •a 'ta
' t 7 - i.' _•. { ' ,� '1. 1
1
091
kw.:
b
� c
.:,.. -
4 �_ _ � `'� � '��� � ,�• Mkt, �.
-44 ja
Aft . j
W
& if
The new road will require clearing of approximately 7.0 acres of second growth forest
(Exhibit P-1). Approximately 4.3 acres of the proposed site will be terraced and re-
vegetated with native vegetation (Exhibit T-3)to merge naturally with upslope second
growth forest. The owner of Alderbrook resort,North Forty Lodging, LLC.,plans to
maintain about 80 acres of second growth forest above the SR 106 Realignment as open
space for wildlife.
There will be two new stream crossings in the new road construction. The first over
Dalby Creek and the second over Alderbrook Creek. Each crossing will be designed over
a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum culvert. The present crossing of SR 106 over Dalby
Creek is over an existing 24" aluminum culvert. The perch of this culvert makes it a
barrier to fish passage. It will be replaced with a 14 foot wide 24 foot long prefabricated
bridge. The present crossing of SR 106 over Alderbrook Creek is over an existing 36"
concrete culvert,which represents a velocity barrier to fish. This culvert will be replaced
with a 12-foot bottomless arch aluminum culvert. An existing section of Alderbrook
Creek will be modified into a community watershed habitat viewing area with a juvenile
salmon rearing pond. A new channel will be created within this area to maintain a
spawning zone for returning salmon (Exhibit T-3).
According to the Wetlands Inventory for the Alderbrook/SR-106 Relocation, there are
two low value wetland systems in the corridor of the proposed SR 106 realignment.
These wetlands have a weak technical connection to Hood Canal (Shanewise, 2002). The
drainage from the two wetlands will be directed towards the Alderbrook Creek channel.
2.1.3 Proposed Site Drainage
The existing resort is spread over 7-acres (Exhibit D-1). Impervious space in the
existing resort development is 1.5 acres in roofs and 2.3 acres of pavement for a total area
of 3.8 acres. In the proposed resort development, total impervious space will increase to
5.9 acres with 1.4 acres in roofs and 4.5 acres in pavement. An extensive drainage
system has been designed to control and treat stormwater run-off from impervious
surfaces within the resort complex and the proposed SR 106 realignment (Exhibit D-2).
These modern storm water drainage and collection systems will greatly improve the
quality of run off water entering Hood Canal. Surface pollutants and road oils will be
largely removed as water filters through settling ponds, infiltration galleries and
bioswales. Prior to these improvements stormwater run-off flowed un-treated into Hood
Canal.
Surface runoff from the western half of the proposed development will be directed first
into a 100' x 6' diameter storm water settling and detention facility(Exhibit D-2,#7) and
second into a 65' x 10' storm water infiltration gallery (Exhibit D-2,# 1)before
discharging into the Hood Canal. A gravel parking lot, isolated from the new drainage
system in the SW corner of the development,will be designed with a gravel surface and
oil water separator(Exhibit D-2, # 2). Storm water from the eastern half of the
development will be directed into a 192' long bioswale and infiltration trench (Exhibit D-
2, # 9), a 140' x 6' wide infiltration trench (Exhibit D-2,#12) and into 120' of 4'-0"
8
_ �. �,:-..�•��► ,..� �•� ►�1�� , � . , _� a .. ,r ,ice
�:�����'�, ,��• lI ♦ I�,�"
�� ��� � � � `�:!!1` �`� l � �% ice;• _ - �i!�'���i � / �- ��, . , . ��
EXHIBIT T3
OWES00
ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL
OVERVIEW OF THE
PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION
l
• •
SITE IMRPOVMENTS
I I
14
EAST BEACH OUTFA LL
1-,� AM
,��,� _
Mi
km
WA
Al
IN
ir women
mztdmm=6 IPA
iwv
NO Poo
s
• `�� ( '� � �� :�'7:'rib' � � � f� ^�x� `
♦ �f
.-M fit,. �� ,. ., ., •, , ,` _ I
I /
Top View Side View NOTES.
Swale divider f K width,l0 R I. 65'X 10'STORM WATER INFILTRATION GALLERY SUMMARY ON/OFF SITE IMPACT
°np1np°'T"•E•M'o`•.T—^r j/ r water quaky dr.�yyn dW(h(Y)-4' 2. GRAVEL PARKING LOT WITH 12"OF ASTM 33 SAND UNDER GRAVEL AREA FOR PROPOSED ACTION
"« .`"` / (2-for k aquerttly mowed areas) 3. 12'WIDE BY 95'LONG ALSP BOTTOMLESS CULVERT 1. ROOFS = 1.4 ACRES
�^^j6•"°°' �. Y-1"- / 4.RECONSTRUCTED STREAM CHANNEL WITH POOLS&LWD 2. PARKING/ACCESS = 2.06 AC.
S1oie°°i"°"�' 1 ---_ ---/-- 6. /2'WIDE BY 45'�ONGEBOTTOMLESS CULVERT�E
3 LANDSCAPED 4.7 ACRES
S.—' Q _•• �•�«•�' 4. OFF SITE RD'S PAVM'T= 2.43 AC.
7. 100'X 4'DIA.STORM WATER SETTLING AND DETENTION S.SR 106 SLOPES = 4.61 ACRES
—2'compos(Mod into 8.SALMON GROTTO-SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR DETAILS
T'°"o^ bosom width=(b) U native sal 9. 192'BIOSWALE AND INFILTRATION TRENCH-SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN 6. STREAMS/RIP= 0.9 ACRES
10. 120'OF 4'DIA.DETENTION PIPE TO LIMIT FLOW TO OUTFALL
va.e."m op, area FAtw
d 4 4 u«n Max.-1Gf[ drvide�Wldt�
11.BUILDING ROOF DRAINS-SEPARATE DISCHARGE TO OUTFALL TOTAL IMPACT AREA = 16.1 AC.
.
jai owl.-2f( 12. 140'X 6'WIDE INFILTRATION TRENCH-DISCHARGE TO DETENTION
Sw"W Ce.n S,— Sl°""°ry" /Sand Fil1er 13. WEST PARKING LOT STORM WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM
14.EAST SR 106 DRAINAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM
15. COLLECT HILLSIDE DRAINAGE IN SOUTH ROADSIDE DITCH
TYPICAL BIO S WALE SECTION HILLSIDE DRAINAGE TO BE SEPARATE FROM ROADWAY RUNOFF
i WATER IN DITCH WILL DRAIN TO NATURAL STREAMS TO THE EAST.
16.DRAANAGE INTERCEPTOR DITCH AND 4'DEEP BY 12"DIA.
CURTA NG THE TOP
INFILTRATOR/FILTRATION TRENCH SECTION DR TO MEADDRAIOW BROOK CREEK.F PROPOSED ROADWAY CUT.
1
0 �z
I
30
— ----- L._%
fo
40 J j 4
�- -- EXHIBIT D-2
x
ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL
SEPA DOCUMENTATION
0
'°-- 104+00 '° + ' 6+ o PROPOSED STORM WATER COLLECTION,
TREATEMENT, AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
17. REMOVE THE EXISTING 24"CONCRETE CULVERT(FISH PASSAGE
N BARRIER) WITH A PREFABRICATED 20'LONG BY 14' WIDE BRIDGE, n :�
RESTORE STREAM CHANNEL FOR APPROXIMATELY 60 FEET.
18. INSTALL A 110'OF 12' WIDE BY 4.1'DEEP BOTTOMLESS ARCH
CULVERT(ALUMINUM STRUCTURAL PLATE)AND REBUILD THE STREAM
5.5 1 2' 4' 11' 11' 4 FOR 50'EACH SIDE OF PROPOSED CULVERT.
19. SR 106 STORM WATER TREATMENT TRENCH. SLOPE SR 106 TO THE
NORTH AT 2% FROM DALBY RD. INTERSECTION TO THE START OF
SUPERELEVATION CURVE. CONSTRUCT A 3' WIDE BY 2'DEEP
6' SAND TRENCH WITH PERFORATED PIPE IN THE BOTTOM.INSTALL
1'HIGH ROCK WEIRS EVERY 30 FEET IN THE 2'DEEP DITCH. USE 10'
WIDE GRASS SWAIL TO FILTER RUNOFF. _
20. 1' WIDE DITCH WITH WITH ROCK WEIRS.
\--
� �sG
■. o - --- -- --- ,a
?o -
�c � 1
CR -
1
Q '9r ♦ mot— —� O (1 p t
r_•- �.
17
40
x _ — 15 i
EXHIBIT D-3
m /
— J _. 102+00 , ,+ o - o 105+00 ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL
m SEPA DOCUMENTATION
PROPOSED STORM WATER COLLECTION,
TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM
_ —— WESTERN PORTION OF ROADWAY
�
X I BILL, N TES
1 / I
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to the beach outfall (Exhibit D-2, # 10). Building
roof discharges (Exhibit D-2, 11)run through a separate discharge to the beach.
Road drainage systems will be incorporated into the east and west sections of SR 106
realignment (Exhibit D-2, # 13, #14). Hillside drainage above the SR 106 realignment
will collect in a 4' deep x 12"diameter curtain drain that runs along the top of the
proposed roadway cut (Exhibit D-2, #15 and# 16). Storm drainage from the new SR 106
extension west of Dalby Creek will flow into a 3' wide by 2' deep sand infiltration trench
with perforated pipe prior to flowing into Big Bend Creek(Exhibit D-3, #19).
2.1.4 Proposed Riparian Habitat Restoration
The proposed Alderbrook Resort remodel and SR 106 realignment will affect the lower
riparian area of Alderbrook Creek and adjacent terrestrial habitat (Exhibit D-1). An
extensive riparian habitat restoration project will be an integral part of the resort remodel.
The Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group (HCSEG)will oversee this part of the
project, and a habitat management plan has been prepared for this activity. The goals of
the riparian habitat restoration project are to restore the natural characteristics of the
lower sections of Alderbrook Creek and to provide a an area for guests to view salmon in
a natural setting. This will be done by improving riparian diversity, increasing channel
sinuosity, adding in-stream structure, and increasing the salmon population (Fig 2 and
exhibit D-2, #4). Salmon viewing stations will be conveniently located along the new
channel.
The change in in-stream and riparian habitat within the development boundary will
increase by 0.5 acres from the existing area of 0.27 acres to 0.77 acres after the stream
restoration project is completed (Fig. 2). The stream flood plain will increase from an
existing area of 4,500 sq. ft. to 10,119 sq. ft. An existing section of Alderbrook Creek
will be modified into a community watershed habitat viewing area with five pools for
juvenile salmon rearing.
Within Alderbrook, there will be two stream crossings incorporated in the new road
construction. Each stream crossing will be designed over 12-foot bottomless aluminum
arch culverts (Fig. 3). The upstream culvert will open over 3000 feet of optimal upstream
habitat to salmon migration and juvenile rearing. It will also restore natural fluvial
processes to the downstream habitat such as large woody debris (LWD) movement and
nutrient cycling. The overall impact of the lost riparian habitat to the stream ecosystem is
expected to be minimal considering the goals of the restoration project.
New Stream Channel
A new channel will be created to maintain a spawning zone for returning salmon.
Moving the existing stream channel to the new location will affect roughly 200-feet of in-
stream habitat (Exhibit D-2, #4). The new channel,with seven pools and six log weirs
will be constructed to mimic natural conditions including sinuosity and structural in-
stream habitat. This will be conducive to more beneficial habitat relating to salmon
productivity and overall abundance of aquatic organisms.
13
The new channel will consist of a meandering stream flowing roughly 70 GPM through a
matrix of native landscape (Exhibit D-2; #4,5). To accomplish this, Beach Drive the
existing road along the east bank of Alderbrook Creek will be removed and relocated to
the west side of the reconstructed Alderbrook Creek. The parking area between the
existing Beach Drive road and the Brookside Building will be removed. The new
riparian area will be planted with native shrubs and trees in accordance with an approved
landscape plan. The planted trees will provide an immediate source of shade, nutrients,
and bank stability to the new channel.
The in-stream structure of the new channel will be enhanced through the addition of
LWD. This will provide a natural pool forming mechanism as well as cover for aquatic
organisms. Research has found that pools formed from constructed log structures result
in a 3- fold increase in summer juvenile coho numbers. At Big Beef Creek, Quinn and
Peterson(1996) indicated a positive correlation between LWD volume and coho over-
winter survival. Figure 84A and 8-1B from Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures show
the documentation of the positive correlations between LWD addition and coho smolt
abundance within streams (Slaney and Zaldokas 1997).
r
10.000 3.Oo0 `ORefemce•Engineered®Logge/s Choice
(A) Treated—. (B) 7rea�
0.000 2.500 N 4400
O
tl, „2.000
6000 ro 0300
Control �1.M 0
f3 <000 o
1.000 200
m
zaoo Control E
soo ,sue
Z 100
°9eb 1990 tti92 199t i m 1990 1992 1994
PM- Past- Pra Pmt- 0
taaa@aex two*No eeaurwo 1989 1990 1991 199Z 1993 1994
Pre-Enhancement Pcst•Ehhancemen!
Left Figure 8-1A. Increases in number of outmigrant coho salmon smolts after experimental addition
of LWD to debris poor streams in the Alsea River basin (A) and Nestucca River basin (B) in western
Oregon. Treatment occurred in summer 1990. (Murphy 1995).
Right Figure 8-1B. Coho smolt yield increases three years before and three years after large woody
debris enhancement in Porter Creek,a tributary of the Chehalis River,coastal Washington
(Cederholm et al.in prep).
Spawning success of returning adult salmon is directly related to the quality, size, and
abundance of spawning gravel (Groot and Margolis, 1994). To maximize the potential
spawning success of returning coho and chum salmon, the benthic environment created
for the new stream will consist of mostly one to three-inch substrate. Because the
average depth of chum and coho spawning redds range between 15 and 30cm into the
gravel, the new stream bed will contain at least a 30 cm depth of the optimal spawning
substrate previously described (Groot and Margolis, 1994).
14
c % '
► :
/ 1�' • , , ��!' /
•3'!� , �. A�,�,fir.�'-"+�`;
•
-4% ►�atp a�� � �
V
pit
Sellers
PROPOSE,6 SR 106 ALIGNMENT
►� 1 I * ,I
STA: 0+72.02 ELEV: 49.23
100'X12'-0"X4'-1" DEEP
BOTTOMLESS ALUMINUM w
PLATE ARCH CULVERT STA: 1+71.83 ELEV: 42.99 o w
�SIX LOG WEIRS WITH 1' DROP EACH o
-t O
r-) m
8 a 8
1.74%
0+00 0+40 0+80 1+20 1+60 2+00 2+40 2+80 3+20 3+60 3 93
18" SPAWNING GRAVEL - 12" MINUS COBBLES IN CULVERT
6" MINUS COBBLES BEHIND LOG WEIRS
ALDERBROOK CREEK CROSSING OF SR 106 AND NEW STREAM SECTION
SCALE: 1"=50'
STA: 0+37.05 ELEV: 46.82
100'X 12'-0"X 4'=1" HIGH
BOTTOLESS ALUMINUM PLATE
ARCH CULVERT STA: 1+47 ELEV: 41.18
-5.21%
DATUM ELEV
25. 00 0+00 0+40 0+80 1+20 1+60
18 SPAWNING GRAVEL - 16" MINUS COBBLES
DALBY CREEK CROSSING OF SR 106
SCALE: 1"=50'
SR 106 ROADWAY SURFACE
1'-6" FEET OF COVER (MIN.)
FIGURE 3
- 1 SPAWNING GRAVEL PROFILE OF PROPOSED
12" OR 16" MINUS COBBLE MIX STREAM IMPROVEMENTS
AND TYPICAL CULVERT
SECTION
12 ' - 0 "
ALSP ARCH
12'-0" X 4'-1"
TYPICAL BOTTOMLESS ARCH CULVERT SECTION
It must be considered that the benthic environment existing in the previous channel
upheld complex nutrient cycles and other functions associated with the concept of river
continuum that will not immediately occur in the new channel. It can be assumed that
these functions will eventually transpire; however, this process can be supplemented and
expedited by mimicking natural nutrient input processes. Adding salmon carcasses to
stream systems has been documented to increase juvenile salmon abundance and elevate
levels of benthic macroinvertebrates throughout the northwest and British Columbia
(Cederholm et al. 2000), (Bilby et al., 1998). Since there are currently no adult salmon
returning to this system, salmon carcasses will be added to the new stream section during
the natural time of returning salmon. The amount of carcasses added to the stream will
be determined using protocols established by Nickelson et al. (1996) in which water
surface area is measured and used to determine the biomass of salmon nutrients necessary
to support the identified section of aquatic ecosystem.
Conversion from Entrenched Channel to Off-Channel Rearing Pond
Riffles and pools provide different functions to stream habitat. Riffles tend to oxygenate
water, lower the temperature, and cause the water to lose carbon dioxide. Pools provide
nutrient storage, areas of energy conservation for fish, and relief to aquatic organisms
from terrestrial predation. Converting the entrenched channel to an off channel-rearing
pond will change roughly 200-feet of riffle habitat to 200-feet of pool habitat. Most of
the water(70 GPM)will be diverted elsewhere to create the new pool/riffle habitat
described previously, while roughly 30 GPM will flow into the new off channel rearing
pond.
Off channel ponds are documented to provide productive fish habitat for certain species
and life stages of salmonids especially chum and coho, and to a lesser degree steelhead.
They provide cover and protection from peak flows making them extremely stable over-
wintering habitat. Narver(1978, Carnation Creek) reported that over-winter survival of
juvenile coho in a side channel pond averaged 74% over four winters while comparable
survival in the main channel was only 23%. Figure 3-2 as published in Fish Habitat
Rehabilitation Procedures (Slaney and Zaldokas, 1997) shows the relationship between
surface area of off channel ponds and salmon abundance as documented by various
scientists.
17
H 10000 (b)
o •• •
E 3000
Cn • •
0 Iwo •
E00
• •
z 3
S •
E
A 100
W
•
30
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Pond Area(ha)
Figure 3-2. The relationship between surface area of off-channel ponds
and estimated number of salmonid fish present. Equation of the line is
log,,,fish number= 0.51 log„pond area (ha)+3.47, n=19, r 2= 0.64, P<
0.001. (Data are from Bustard and Narver 1975; Lister et al. 1980;
Peterson 1982a; Swales et al. 1986; Beniston et al. 1987; Beniston et al
1988; Swales et al. 1988; Cederholm et al. 1988; Swales and Levings 1989;
Cederholm and Scarlett 1991; M. Foy,Department of Fisheries and
Oceans,Vancouver, B.C., unpublished data. Figure after Keeley and
Slaney 1996 published in Slaney and Zoldokas 1997)
2.2 Action Area
2.2.1 Alderbrook Resort Remodel
Land area affected by this project is 16.1 acres (Exhibit D-2). Roof surfaces amount to
1.4 acres,pavement amounts to 4.5 acres, landscaped area amounts to 4.7 acres, roadway
slopes equal approximately 4.6 acres, and stream area equals about 0.9 acres. Impervious
roof surface decreases slightly in the proposed project to 1.4 acres compared to 1.5 acres
in the existing resort complex. Paved area in the proposed development, however,
increases from an existing surface area of 2.3 acres to 4.5 acres.
2.2.2 SR 106 Realignment
The realignment of SR106 will pass roughly parallel and 200-feet south of the old section
and require clearing of 7.0 acres of second growth forest (Exhibit P-1). Approximately
4.3 acres of this forestland will be terraced and landscaped with native vegetation to
merge naturally with upslope second growth forest(Exhibit T-3). The remaining 2.7
acres will be in impervious road surface and roadside slope.
18
The eastern third of the road alignment represents an established early successional
ecosystem characterized by past low-level development (Exhibit P-1). The primary plant
species occurring are Willow (Salix spp.) and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). There were no
wildlife species of concern identified in this area.
The middle third of the zone consists of mature conifer forest impacted by low levels of
business development. The plant species identified in this area were Douglas Fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii), Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla),Big Leaf Maple (Acer
macrophyllum), and Western Red Cedar(Thuja plicata)with an under-story of Willow
(Salix spp.), Vine Maple (Acer circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). This area
maintains potential habitat for Pileated Woodpecker(Drycopus pileatus), Bald Eagle
(Haliaetus leucocephalus), and Great Blue Heron(Ardea herodias)which are all wildlife
species of concern. Evidence of Pileated Woodpecker was observed during the site
inspection. There was no direct evidence of Bald Eagle or Great Blue Heron regularly
using this tract of land, although these species are known to frequent this habitat type in
the Hood Canal area.
The western third of the upland habitat zone maintains plant and wildlife characteristics
comparable to the middle third with lesser impacts from development. There are no
documented eagle nests within a one mile radius of the Alderbrook property according to
the WDFW database of nesting sites (Boad and Hannafious 2002).
The clearing of the road will result in the lose of approximately 80 large diameter trees in
the western third of the realignment zone. North Forty Lodging will be submitting for a
conversion of timber to road,which does not require reforestation.
Geological Assessment
The recent geologic history of the Puget Sound region has been dominated by several
glacial episodes. The most recent, the Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation is
responsible for most of the exposed geologic and topographic conditions in the area. The
Puget lobe of the Cordilleran ice sheet deposited a heterogeneous deposit of preglacial
lacustrine soil, advance outwash, lodgment till, and recessional outwash. These deposits
were placed upon either bedrock or older pre-Vashon sediments and bedrock. Once the
melting ice retreated northward, it uncovered a sculpted landscape of elongate uplands
and intervening valleys. The project site is located within this type of terrain.
The geologic units encountered during drilling were found to match those described in
geology references for the site (HartCrowser, 2002). These references and our
explorations at the site indicate it is underlain by a coarse-grained sequence of glacial,
fluvial, and deltaic deposits. In general, glacially overridden till, advance outwash, and
pre-Vashon sand and gravels predominate on the slopes south of SR 106. The till exists
on the steeper slopes to the east, while the advance outwash and pre-Vashon sands and
gravels exist on flatter slopes to the west. North of SR 106,near the Hood Canal,post-
glacial alluvial soils overlying glacially overridden outwash deposits were encountered.
19
Localized surficial areas of man-made fill and/or native soil altered by man (i.e., fill)
were encountered near the sewage treatment plant and the Alderbrook Inn.
20
2.2.3 Project Affects to Alderbrook Creek
Alderbrook Creek is a spring fed stream system. The low flow is approximately 100
gallons per minute below the culvert at Beach Drive, through the resort property, and into
Hood Canal. Between Beach Drive and SR 106 downstream, there is approximately 200
feet of stream habitat (Exhibit G-1). Beach Drive parallels the stream channel to the east
and a gravel parking lot lies to the west. These features limit riparian habitat within this
section to a narrow band of 20 to 50 feet on each side of the streambed. The entire
channel below Beach Drive culvert is confined to about a twenty-foot wide by ten-foot
deep trench that lacks sinuosity. This is likely the result of the improperly designed
culvert at Beach Drive,which is now perched three feet above the stream channel and
acts as a scouring, high water velocity barrier preventing fish migration (Exhibit W-1).
The riparian habitat is dominated by an over-story of mature Douglas fir(Pseudotsuga
menziesii), Hemlock(Tsuga heterophylla), and Western Red Cedar(Thuja plicata)with
an under-story of Willow (Salix spp.), Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), Vine Maple
(Acer circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra) as well as younger Cedars. The stream
is well shaded with over 85%canopy cover. This canopy cover helps to maintain the low
water temperature of this spring fed system making for ideal salmon habitat. The in-
stream large woody debris(LWD) abundance in this section,however, is minimal
resulting in lesser structural habitat and a lower pool to riffle ratio than what would
naturally occur.
Benthic macroinvertebrates identified in the stream are stoneflies (Plecoptera),
caddisflies(Tricoptera), and mayflies (Ephemeroptera). These orders of aquatic insects
are pollution intolerant and indicate high water quality. The aquatic insects identified in
this system indicate the water quality of this system to be well within the tolerance range
of priority species such as coho salmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch), chum salmon
(Oncorhynchus keta), and steelhead(Oncorhynchus mykiss). However, the pool to riffle
ratio, channel confinement and fish passage barriers are interacting in complex ways that
significantly limit salmon productivity.
The lack of LWD within the active stream channel of the lower reach is preventing pool
habitat that is essential for juvenile coho and other salmonid survival. The increased
velocity below the Beach Drive culvert has limited spawning habitat throughout the
accessible reach by entrenching the stream channel and flushing out most of the
spawning gravel, leaving mostly cobble sized substrate. The SR 106 crossing represents
a partial barrier while the Beach Drive barrier is preventing access to over 3000 feet of
optimal upstream habitat (Exhibit W-1). There were no anadromous fish species of
concern identified in this area. One juvenile cutthroat trout(Oncorhynchus clarki) was
identified in a pool directly downstream from the Beach Drive crossing. North of SR
106, in the resort complex, there is very little riparian complexity compared to the upper
watershed(Exhibit W-1).
21
ES h
HOOD CANAL ' " `°i r 4
ALDERBROOKK� f
SR r � RESORT N T#� j'ul v ,@
77
0.38 ACRES OF LOW r t= y
VALUE HILLSIDE SEEP
WETLANDS
xi M r.
b
O � � �� r� - {: 'tit. _ r t w1 ,��-;d-' - `ti� _ ��• ='k— •f"
!�3
-. _ _ y, f- • . j �i' - •tom'-
r _ �
V _
! ALDEJOR,11OKs _y f� trJ�
THIS CUL VERT A T
4� BEACH DRIVE BLOCKS
_ � t ` r - �• ONE HALF MILE OF
EXCELLENT COHO AND
STEELHEAD SPAWNING
le
HABITAT IN THE
z LDERBROOK CREEK
WA TERSHED,
�,, • %�` ;' EXHIBIT W-1
ALDERBROOK SEPA DOCUMENTA TION
EXISTING STREAMS AND WE t _ NDS
In its present state, Alderbrook Creek is a poor fish-bearing stream. The habitat is
already severely degraded and no significant negative impact is expected to Alderbrook
Creek as a result of Alderbrook Resort remodel and SR 106 realignment project.
Ambient temperature and naturally occurring aquatic insects indicate that conditions are
optimal for Pacific salmon. Restoration of Alderbrook Creek will significantly enhance
natural conditions for Pacific salmon species, and more than adequately compensate for
changes to the existing riparian habitat.
During rehabilitation of Alderbrook Creek, cutthroat in the existing channel could be
affected because of an intermittent period of no water in the channel. This water will be
pumped around the channel during construction. To avoid fish mortality, the cutthroat
will be removed from the project section using seine nets, and placed in other parts of the
stream that will not be affected by construction. The stream section under construction
will be isolated upstream and downstream using block nets so that fish will not be able to
swim near the construction area from other sections of the stream. Within the
construction zone, there will be mortality to benthic organisms, such as aquatic insects,
from lack of water during the construction phase. The impact of this on the stream
ecosystem will be minimal considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the
upstream habitat once stream flow is restored.
2.2.4 Project Affects to Dalby Creek
Dalby Creek is a spring fed stream system located approximately 15 miles west of Belfair
and crossing underneath SR 106 approximately 400 feet west of Alderbrook Resort
before emptying into Hood Canal (Exhibits T-3 and D-3). The riparian zone above SR
106 is dominated by an over-story of mature Douglas Fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii),
Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), and Western Red
Cedar(Thuja plicata) with an under-story of Willow(Salix spp.), Vine Maple (Acer
circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). Like Alderbrook Creek, this section is well
shaded with over 85%canopy cover. Despite a moderate level of channel confinement,
the habitat in this section still seems representative of natural conditions. There is a
lower pool to riffle ratio than what would occur naturally, however, due to a lack of
LWD. North of existing SR 106, the riparian zone is primarily residential with very little
native successional vegetation.
There were no fish identified in Dalby Creek above the culvert at the existing SR106.
The habitat,however, is similar to Alderbrook Creek where cutthroat trout
(Oncorhynchus clarki)were found, so it is likely that this species also occurs in Dalby
Creek. Aquatic insects identified in the stream are stoneflies (Plecoptera), caddisflies
(Tricoptera), and mayflies (Ephemeroptera). These orders of aquatic insects are known
to be pollution intolerant and indicate high water quality well within the tolerance range
of priority species such as coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), chum salmon
(Oncorhynchus keta), and steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss).
The proposed crossing for the SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet south of
the current SR 106 crossing. There will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both
23
stream banks removed and converted to roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts
to aquatic habitat will be minimized by the installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch
aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will allow for the natural fluvial
process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to continue downstream. The
current crossing of SR 106 is over an under sized culvert that represents a partial barrier
to fish passage. This culvert will be removed and replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot
long prefabricated bridge. The removal of this culvert will open up over 3000 feet of
productive upstream fish habitat. LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve
the in stream structural habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. The overall impact from
construction to this stream system will be minimal given the scope of the stream bed
restoration.
2.2.5 Project Affects to Terrestrial Habitat
The eastern third of the road alignment represents an established early successional
ecosystem characterized by past low-level development. The primary plant species
occurring are Willow (Salix spp.) and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). There were no wildlife
species of concern identified in this area.
The middle third of the zone consists of mature conifer forest impacted by low levels of
business development. The plant species identified in this area were Douglas Fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii), Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Big Leaf Maple (Acer
macrophyllum), and Western Red Cedar(Thuja plicata)with an under-story of Willow
(Salix spp.), Vine Maple (Acer circinatum), and Red Alder(Alnus rubra). This area
maintains potential habitat for Pileated Woodpecker(Drycopus pileatus), Bald Eagle
(Haliaetus leucocephalus), and Great Blue Heron(Ardea herodias), which are all wildlife
species of concern. Evidence of Pileated Woodpecker was observed during the site
inspection. There was no direct evidence of Bald Eagle or Great Blue Heron regularly
using this tract of land, although these species are known to frequent this habitat type in
the Hood Canal area. The western third of the upland habitat zone maintains plant and
wildlife characteristics comparable to the middle third with lesser impacts from
development. There are no documented eagle nests within a one-mile radius of the
Alderbrook property according to the WDFW database of nesting sites (Boad and
Hannafious 2002)
The realignment of SR106 will pass roughly parallel and 200-feet south of the old section
and require clearing of 7.0 acres of second growth forest (Exhibit P-1). Approximately
4.3 acres of this forestland will be terraced and landscaped with native vegetation
(Exhibit T-3) to merge naturally with upslope second growth forest. The remaining 2.7
acres will be in impervious road surface and roadside slope. The clearing of the road will
result in the loose of approximately 80 large diameter trees in the western third of the
realignment zone. North Forty Lodging will be submitting for a conversion of timber to
road, which does not require reforestation.
Wetlands
24
A wetland inventory was conducted along the proposed construction path for the SR 106
realignment (Shanewise, 2002; Appendix A). The proposed road realignment has
dramatically different topography between the east and west ends (Exhibit G-1). The east
end cuts across a steep slope typical of shoreline bluffs common to Hood Canal. At the
point where Alderbrook Creek is crossed, the topography flattens to a gentle slope to the
project's western terminus. The wetlands and stream described within this report all
occur within the eastern, steep-sloped part of the proposed new roadway.
Two, small wetland systems (Exhibits G-1, P-1 and W-1),approximately 0.37 acre, occur
along the realignment route. These are minor, hillside seeps. Surface water is restricted
to flows artificially consolidated by human caused alterations to the ground surface. Soil
saturation is caused by daylighting groundwater, and appears to occur at many locations
along the uphill wetland boundary. Both wetlands have downslope terminuses where
hydrology seeps subsurface again and soil saturation ceases. Minor outlet channels that
drain from the downslope points on both wetlands also fade from defined channels to
vegetated swales that technically lack either stream or wetland conditions.
An old dirt roadway was cut across the slope where the two wetlands occur, and this
roadway now intercepts most wetland hydrology. Where this roadway occurs,
downslope conditions are entirely upland. It seems likely that the past road builders cut
their path just below where the wetland seep naturally disappeared,but the hydrology
then drained into the flat roadway and created new wetland conditions below where the
natural wetlands had previously occurred.
The two slope wetlands technically terminate both wetland and stream conditions prior to
their connection with the ditch along SR106. Water from this ditch drains through
culverts and beneath adjacent developed ground before finally reaching Puget Sound
roadside ditch where water flows through culverts to the shoreline of Puget Sound over
200 feet away. Although storm event generated surface flows drain from the wetlands to
the roadside ditch during winter, this weak connection to Puget Sound should qualify
these sloped wetlands as not associated with tidal waters. A small, Type 5 stream also
occurs along the steep slope near the two minor wetland systems. This system drains to
an intake grate at the slope toe where solid pavement begins. From here,the surface flow
is culverted west into the Alderbrook Creek channel.
Both the wetlands and stream described here are low value systems with minimal
function performance. Water quality benefits from the densely vegetated sloped wetlands
are the primary function of these systems. The seasonal stream flows should contribute
organic matter to Alderbrook Creek, but the low volumes involved limit the total value of
this action. Habitat structures of all three systems are simple, and past disturbances have
occurred. Mitigation should is required for impacts to these wetlands. The proposed
restoration of Alderbrook Creek and improvements to Dalby Creek will qualify, as
adequate mitigation for the lose of these low value wetlands.however, in the event that
mitigation is required the stream restoration project on Alderbrook Creek will provide
adequate compensation. Restoring Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek to anadromous
fish runs will immensely improve the overall environment here well beyond the impacts
that will occur to these minor wetlands (Shanewise, 2002).
25
2.2.5 Project Affects to Marine Intertidal Habitat
A beach survey conducted for the Alderbrook Resort Remodel identified no critical
eelgrass (Zostera marina or Z.japonica)habitat in the intertidal area fronting Alderbrook
Resort(Thompson, 2002; Appendix B).
The beach at Alderbrook Resort lies against the southern shore of Hood Canal in a semi-
protected embayment sheltered from southwesterly storms and winds. The beach is fairly
exposed, however, to northeasterly winds along the canal.
The substrate throughout the intertidal zone is a mixture of coarse sand and pebbles
extending from the higher tidal elevations of about+10' mean lower low water(MLLW)
down to approximately+4' MLLW. Below a+4' MLLW tidal elevation the substrate
was predominantly sand. Minor patches of saltmarsh vegetation occur at the outfall of
Alderbrook Creek. There is very little other vegetation on the beach aside from sparse
patches of common macroalgae Ulva sp. and Entermopha sp. The dominant shellfish
species occupying the beach is the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas (Exhibit S-1). Minor
pockets of manila clams, Tapes philippinarum,were identified in the mid intertidal area.
In the event of a large-scale sediment release, the small area of salt marsh vegetation at
the outfall of Alderbrook Creek could be effected, however this would not be long-term,
and this vegetation would re-colonize the area once elevations returned to normal. The
geological report prepared for this BA, indicates that the soil within the project site is
composed predominantly of sand and gravel and this material would settle out before
reaching the oyster beds. Clam species would be able to move up through any
accumulation of sediments to the substrate surface. Proper construction and sediment
control measures should prevent any large-scale release of sediments to Alderbrook
Beach
The upper reaches of the beach are documented spawning sites for marine forage fish
including sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus)and surf smelt(Hypomesus pretiosus).
These species comprise an important part of the diet for juvenile salmon including listed
summer chum and Puget Sound chinook salmon. For this reason, the spawning habitat of
forage fish is considered critical for the eventual rehabilitation and continued
maintenance of threatened salmon species. Finer grained sand that may reach the upper
shoreline of the beach during proposed construction activities would add to and
complement existing spawning habitat of these forage fish species. Pacific Herring
(Clupea harengus pallasi) are also documented to spawn in this section of Hood Canal.
Pacific herring, however, spawn on eelgrass and the absence of eelgrass on this beach
precludes its use as a potential spawning site for Pacific herring.
Strict sedimentation control guidelines will be adhered to during construction and this
will minimize the potential for negative impacts to critical habitat, salt marsh vegetation,
and shellfish species. Restoration of the Alderbrook Creek will likely improve the flow
of fine sediments, nutrients and detritus to Alderbrook Beach that will compliment fish
26
forage habitat. A new drainage system for the resort will greatly eliminate the potential
for road oils and other pollutants to for reach the beach.
27
fq
M12.
v
..2
r
I ll
WIN 2
_ r: �`� �• !� '�� ice• � � _� - — -,�: �kfa:-� +'
-: ► . / -� '
\ ,' - 3•- � . _sir
AW
_ I <
ME MA' PEPSI,
� ,
3. SPECIES AND HABITAT
3.1 Fish Species
The NMFS completed an ESA status review of chinook salmon populations along the
Pacific coast and interior rivers in 1998 and identified 15 Evolutionary significant Units
(ESU); each considered a species under the ESA. Subsequent to this review,NMFS
proposed a threatened status for Puget Sound Chinook salmon. The ESU includes all
naturally spawned spring, summer, and fall run chinook salmon populations in the Puget
sound basin including Hood Canal. In 1999, the NMFS formally listed Puget Sound
chinook as threatened under the ESA. The ESU's and ESA listings are now being re-
assessed by NMFS due to legal actions and the U.S. District Court ruling in Eugene, OR
in Alsea Valley alliance vs.Evans that NMFS was negligent in not ruling hatchery fish as
an ESU(Appendix Q. For the purpose of this BA, Puget Sound chinook salmon and
Hood Canal summer chum salmon are still treated as listed under the ESA.
3.1.1 Chinook Salmon
3.1.1.1 Description of Species
Chinook are largest of the salmon species. A mature spawner can range from two to
seven years old (Moyle 1976). Redds are often 3.6 meters long and 30 cm deep with a
female laying between 2,000 and 14,000 eggs. Eggs laid in the fall hatch in the early
spring. In fresh water the juveniles are opportunistic drift feeders; adults feed primarily
on fish in the marine environment. As the juveniles grow,they gradually move out into
swifter water, smolting to enter the marine environment. They are primarily subyearling
emigrants and are known to utilize estuarine habitat for a significant part of their juvenile
life stage, Groot and Margolis (1994).
In Hood Canal, chinook salmon are found in the mainstem of major Hood Canal
tributaries including the Dosewallips, Duckabush, Hamma Hamma, and Skokomish
Rivers. Historically these runs were composed of spring, summer, and fall chinook.
Presently,the runs on these on these rivers are now composed of mixed Hood Canal
hatchery stocks of summer/fall chinook (USFS, 1995). Natural spawning is influenced
by straying of these hatchery—released fish to adjacent river systems. Chinook produced
in hatcheries nearest to the project area are not considered essential to the recovery of
chinook in the Puget Sound ESU nor are they listed under the ESA listing by NMFS in
1999.
3.1.1.2 Habitat
The designation of critical habitat for listed species is required under Section 4(a) (3) (A)
of the ESA. The ESA defines critical habitat in Section 3(5) (A) as"the specific areas
within the geographic area occupied by the species, on which are found those physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species and that may
require special management considerations or protection. NMFS has designated critical
habitat for Puget Sound chinook salmon to include "all waterways, substrate, and
29
adjacent riparian zones below longstanding naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural
waterfalls in existence for several hundred years)."
No marine habitats occur within the project area. Habitat within the project area is
limited to the freshwater environment, which includes potential spawning and
subyearling foraging habitat. The existing freshwater riparian habitat within the project
area,however, is presently degraded and not suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for
salmon(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle portion of the project area. The
streamswatershed, is spring fed, and flows year round. The upper watershed includes
approximately 40 acres of the Alderbrook residential community and Golf Course.
Storm runoff from the developed portion of the watershed is not controlled by detention
and heavy rains create a substantial increase in flow in the stream. Studies are currently
underway to retrofit the upper watershed with Stormwater flow control and treatment
facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at
SR 106 (Exhibit D-1) and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100' long with a slope
of 2.6% and no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The
P Y P g
second culvert (Exhibit D-1) is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from
SR106. It is a 36"diameter, 40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The
outlet of the upper culvert is perched 3 feet above the stream bed. This culvert has down
cut the stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of
the stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet in elevated so that
the only time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has the opportunity to become an excellent salmon stream. It has cool,
year round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with riparian habitat above
Beach Drive. There has been a small run of Fall Chum Salmon and cutthroat in the
stream. It is proposed to reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild
salmon incubator(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SR106 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24"culvert create a fish passage barrier
on the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SR106. This culvert will be
removed and replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The
removal of this culvert will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.
The proposed crossing for the SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the
current SR 106 crossing. There will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream
g 1� Y
banks removed and converted to roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to
aquatic habitat will be minimized by the installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch
aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will allow for the natural fluvial
process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to continue downstream. In
30
addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the in stream structural
habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. Dalby Creek has the opportunity to become an
excellent salmon stream.
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging, LLC desires to make
Alderbrook Creek, and the restored salmon runs in Alderbrook Creek, an environmental
"experience" for its guests at the lodge. The HCSEG has been requested to collaborate
with them in this endeavor. HCSEG will also complete similar restoration efforts as
outlined above for Dalby Creek.
3.1.1.3 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed
Action(s) on Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the
determination of the proposed action on chinook salmon. An extensive field survey of
the habitat parameters identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in
the field survey(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Overall, no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to chinook salmon or their
habitat in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook
Resort remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available
information, the potential for"take' to occur is negligible. Therefore,these activities
are not likely to adversely affect Chinook salmon and will not result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat for chinook salmon in the
action area. Information to support this determination is provided in the following
sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Chinook salmon do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious, 2002) and no direct
effects are likely to occur to chinook salmon resulting from The Alderbrook Resort
Remodel project or from the SR 106 Realignment Project. Construction on Alderbrook
Creek to improve riparian habitat and Dalby Creek to improve LWD is expected to have
minimal impacts. No construction will take place in near shore marine environment and
as such, disturbance from construction noise will be negligible. It is anticipated that there
will be short term turbidity plumes resulting from construction that will cause minor
decreases in water quality, due to the size and composition of the substrate (see Geology
Section 2.1.3). Much of the riparian substrate is composed of cobble and gravel, and
sedimentation from construction activities is expected to cause only minor, short-term
increases in sediment levels in the project area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed
erosion and sediment control measures, which may include the use of silt fencing, filters
on storm drains, hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County
Surface Water Manual (King County DNR 1988). A pollution prevention plan will be in
effect during construction.
31
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek
construction activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in
the immediate project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water
diversion during construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel, there will be
mortality of benthic organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the
construction phase. The impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal
considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow
is restored. Minor sediment plumes in the near-shore marine environment are expected to
have no impact on the epibenthic crustaceans utilized by juvenile chinook salmon as a
food resource.
Impacts to chinook forage fish prey are expected to be short-lived and minimized by
project BMP's and HPA restrictions. Potential impacts to chinook salmon food
resources, including surf smelt, that may occur as a result of this project will have an
"insignificant effect"on chinook salmon and should never reach the scale where"take"
will occur.
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction, if they occur, will be minor and short-term. Overall, the
action will contribute to the long tern improvement, over existing conditions, of the
riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SR106
alignment,parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex
(Exhibit D-2 & D-3). Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be
channeled into stormwater infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will
entrap suspended solids and filter hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road
surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil water separators. Water leaving bioswales
and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0" diameter detention pipe to limit flow
to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall will have minimal impact on
salinity of seawater in Hood Canal, and is not expected to alter salinities except in the
immediate area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage system project
will be to reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering hood canal compared to
existing conditions.
3.1.2 Coho Salmon
3.1.2.1 Description of Species
Coho are not currently listed under the ESA but are part of a vulnerable Evolutionally
Significant Unit and are presently a candidate for listing. Wild coho spawn in the
32
Dosewallips, Duckabush, Hamma Hamma, and Skokomish River systems on Hood Canal
(USFS, 1995, 1997-98). The redd site is chosen by the female. The preferred location is
at the head of a riffle in small to medium sized gravel (Moyle and Cech. 1982). Each
female lays 1,000 to 5,000 eggs, depending on her size. The eggs hatch in eight to twelve
weeks and the fry emerge from the gravel four to ten weeks later, depending on the water
temperatures (Moyle 1982).
The fry school in the shallow stream margins, feeding on a wide variety of small
invertebrates. As the fish grow, individuals establish territories. This territory is
characteristically quiet backwater or off channel areas in winter and main stem pools
during summer. LWD is known to be directly related to juvenile success because of its
pool forming function(Cederholm and Bilbe 1997). Coho salmon spend a year in fresh
water before migrating to sea.
Young coho are voracious feeders, ingesting any organism that moves or drifts through
its territory. A major part of their diet is aquatic insect larvae and terrestrial insects;
small fishes are taken when available (Moyle 1982). Coho salmon migrate to the sea
after their first year in freshwater. At sea, coho are pelagic and prey mostly on other
fishes (Moyle 1982), returning in two to five years to their native stream to spawn, die
and start the cycle again.
Although stock-specific information is not available, it is assumed that Hood Canal coho
are primarily harvested in Canadian troll, net and sport fisheries and in Washington net
and sport fisheries. In preterminal areas, the harvest rates on coho are determined by the
needs for the other stocks of coho or other species. There is a terminal area fishery on
Hood Canal coho. Overall, harvest rates are also a limiting factor for this coho stock
(WDFW and WWTIT 1994).
3.1.2.2 Habitat
No marine habitats occur within the project area. Habitat within the project area is
limited to the freshwater environment,which includes potential spawning and
subyearling foraging habitat. The existing freshwater riparian habitat within the project
area, however, is presently degraded and not suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for
salmon (Boad and Hannafious 2002). Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle
portion of the project area. The streams watershed is spring fed, and flows year round.
The upper watershed includes approximately 40 acres of the Alderbrook residential
community and Golf Course. Storm runoff from the developed portion of the watershed
is not controlled by detention and heavy rains create a substantial increase in flow in the
stream. Studies are currently underway to retrofit the upper watershed with Stormwater
flow control and treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at
SR 106 (Exhibit D-1) and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100' long with a slope
of 2.6% and no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The
second culvert (Exhibit D-1) is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from
33
SR106. It is a 36"diameter, 40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The
outlet of the upper culvert is perched 3 feet above the stream bed. This culvert has down
cut the stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of
the stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet in elevated so that
the only time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has the opportunity to become an excellent salmon stream. It has cool,
year round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with riparian habitat above
Beach Drive. There has been a small run of Fall Chum Salmon and cutthroat in the
stream. It is proposed to reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild
salmon incubator(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SR106 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24"culvert create a fish passage barrier
on the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SR106. This culvert will be
removed and replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The
removal of this culvert will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.
The proposed crossing for the SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the
current SR 106 crossing. There will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream
banks removed and converted to roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to
aquatic habitat will be minimized by the installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch
aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will allow for the natural fluvial
process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to continue downstream. In
addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the in stream structural
habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. Dalby Creek has the opportunity to become an
excellent salmon stream.
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging, LLC desires to make
Alderbrook Creek, and the restored salmon runs in Alderbrook Creek, an environmental
"experience" for its guests at the lodge. The HCSEG has been requested to collaborate
with them in this endeavor. HCSEG will also complete similar restoration efforts as
outlined above for Dalby Creek.
3.1.2.3 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed
Action(s) on Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the
determination of the proposed action on coho salmon. An extensive field survey of the
habitat parameters identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in the
field survey.
34
Overall, no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to coho salmon or their
habitat in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook
Resort remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available
information, the potential for"take' to occur is negligible. Therefore, these activities
are not likely to adversely affect coho salmon and will not result in the destruction
or adverse modification of critical habitat for coho salmon in the action area.
Information to support this determination is provided in the following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Coho salmon do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious, 2002) and no direct
effects are likely to occur to coho salmon as a result of remodeling activities to the
Alderbrook Resort or as a result of realignment of SR 106. Construction on Alderbrook
Creek to improve riparian habitat and Dalby Creek to improve LWD is expected to have
minimal impacts. No construction will take place in near shore marine environment and
as such, disturbance from construction noise will be negligible. It is anticipated that there
will be short term turbidity plumes resulting from construction that will cause minor
decreases in water quality, due to the size and composition of the substrate (see Geology
Section 2.1.3). Much of the riparian substrate is composed of cobble and gravel, and
sedimentation from construction activities is expected to cause only minor, short-term
increases in sediment levels in the project area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed
erosion and sediment control measures,which may include the use of silt fencing, filters
on storm drains, hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County
Surface Water Manual (King County DNR 1988). A pollution prevention plan will be in
effect during construction.
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek
construction activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in
the immediate project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water
diversion during construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel, there will be
mortality of benthic organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the
construction phase. The impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal
considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow
is restored. Minor sediment plumes in the near-shore marine environment are expected to
have no impact on the epibenthic crustaceans utilized by juvenile chinook salmon as a
food resource.
Impacts to coho forage fish prey are expected to be short-lived and minimized by project
BMP's and HPA restrictions. Potential impacts to coho salmon food resources, including
surf smelt, that may occur as a result of this project will have an"insignificant effect"on
chinook salmon and should never reach the scale where "take"will occur.
35
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction will be minor and short-term. Overall, the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement, over existing conditions, of the riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SR106
alignment,parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex
(Exhibit D-2). Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled
into stormwater infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap
suspended solids and filter hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces.
Parking lots are designed with oil water separators. Water leaving bioswales and
infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"diameter detention pipe to limit flow to
outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall will have minimal impact on salinity
of seawater in Hood Canal, and is not expected to alter salinities except in the immediate
area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage system project will be to
reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering hood canal compared to existing
conditions.
3.1.3 Summer Chum Salmon
3.1.3.1 Description of Species
Summer chum are currently listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
Genetic studies show that the Hood Canal and Juan de Fuca summer chum salmon are
distinguishable from other Northwest chum salmon stocks(WDFW 1995). Summer
chum are in the Hood Canal Evolutionally Significant Unit(ESU)while the late fall
chum are considered part of the Puget Sound ESU.
Hood Canal summer chum spawn from early September to late October and late fall
chum spawn from mid-November to mid-January(WDFW and WWTIT 1994). Chum
salmon spend little time in fresh water. They usually occupy the lowermost sections of
anadromous habitat, not extending beyond barriers that are easily passed by other salmon.
Some populations of parr spend several months in the estuaries making estuarine habitat
vital to their overall success (Moyle 1982). The female digs a series of depressions to
form the redd in gravel riffles, laying 2,400 to 4,000 eggs (Moyle 1982). Fry leave the
gravel when they reach 30-35 mm. Some populations of parr spend several months in the
estuaries (Moyle 1982). The chum spend three to five years at sea before returning to
their native stream to spawn, die, and regenerate the cycle.
36
3.1.3.2 Habitat
No marine habitats occur within the project area. Habitat within the project area is
limited to the freshwater environment, which includes potential spawning and
subyearling foraging habitat. The existing freshwater riparian habitat within the project
area, however, is presently degraded and not suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for
salmon(Boad and Hannafious 2002). Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle
portion of the project area. The streams watershed is spring fed, and flows year round.
The upper watershed includes approximately 40 acres of the Alderbrook residential
community and Golf Course. Storm runoff from the developed portion of the watershed
is not controlled by detention and heavy rains create a substantial increase in flow in the
stream. Studies are currently underway to retrofit the upper watershed with Stormwater
flow control and treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at
SR 106 (Exhibit D-1) and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100' long with a slope
of 2.6% and no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The
second culvert (Exhibit D-1) is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from
SR106. It is a 36"diameter, 40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The
outlet of the upper culvert is perched 3 feet above the stream bed. This culvert has down
cut the stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of
the stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet is elevated so that
the only time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has the opportunity to become an excellent salmon stream. It has cool,
year round spring water flow and excellent spawning area with riparian habitat above
Beach Drive. There has been a small run of Fall Chum Salmon and cutthroat in the
stream. It is proposed to reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild
salmon incubator(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SR106 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24" culvert create a fish passage barrier
on the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SR106. This culvert will be
removed and replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The
removal of this culvert will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.
The proposed crossing for the SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the
current SR 106 crossing. There will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream
banks removed and converted to roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to
aquatic habitat will be minimized by the installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch
aluminum culvert (Fig 3). The size of this culvert will allow for the natural fluvial
process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to continue downstream. In
addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the in stream structural
habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. Dalby Creek has the opportunity to become an
excellent salmon stream.
37
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging, LLC desires to make
Alderbrook Creek, and the restored salmon runs in the stream, an environmental
"experience" for its guests at the lodge. The HDSEG has been requested to collaborate
with them in this endeavor. HCSEG will also complete similar restoration efforts as
outlined above for Dalby Creek
3.1.3.2 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed
Action(s) on Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the
determination of the proposed action on summer chum salmon. An extensive field
survey of the habitat parameters identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG
biologists in the field survey(Boad and Hannafious 2002).
Overall, no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to summer chum salmon or
their habitat in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the
Alderbrook Resort remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the
available information, the potential for"take' to occur is negligible. Therefore, these
activities are not likely to adversely affect summer chum salmon and will not result
in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat for summer chum
salmon in the action area. Information to support this determination is provided in the
following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Summer chum salmon do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious, 2002) and no
direct effects are likely to occur to summer chum salmon as a result of remodeling
activities to the Alderbrook Inn or as a result of realignment of SR 106. Construction on
Alderbrook Creek to improve riparian habitat and Dalby Creek to improve LWD is
expected to have minimal impacts. No construction will take place in near shore marine
environment and as such, disturbance from construction noise will be negligible. It is
anticipated that there will be short term turbidity plumes resulting from construction that
will cause minor decreases in water quality, due to the size and composition of the
substrate (see Geology Section 2.1.3). Much of the riparian substrate is composed of
cobble and gravel, and sedimentation from construction activities is expected to cause
only minor, short-term increases in sediment levels in the project area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed
erosion and sediment control measures, which may include the use of silt fencing, filters
on storm drains, hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County
Surface Water Manual (King County DNR 1988). A pollution prevention plan will be in
effect during construction.
38
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek
construction activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in
the immediate project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water
diversion during construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel, there will be
mortality of benthic organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the
construction phase. The impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal
considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow
is restored. Minor sediment plumes in the near-shore marine environment are expected to
have no impact on the epibenthic crustaceans utilized by juvenile summer chum salmon
as a food resource.
Impacts to summer chum prey species are expected to be short-lived and minimized by
project BMP's and HPA restrictions. Potential impacts to summer chum salmon food
resources, including surf smelt that may occur as a result of this project will have an
"insignificant effect"on summer chum salmon and should never reach the scale where
"take"will occur.
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction will be minor and short-term. Overall, the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement, over existing conditions, of the riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SR106
alignment parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex (Exhibit
D-2 &D-3). Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled
into stormwater infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap
suspended solids and filter hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces.
Parking lots are designed with oil water separators. Water leaving bioswales and
infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"diameter detention pipe to limit flow to
outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall will have minimal impact on salinity
of seawater in Hood Canal, and is not expected to alter salinities except in the immediate
area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage system project will be to
reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering hood canal compared to existing
conditions.
3.1.4 Bull Trout (Native Char)
3.1.4.1 Description of Species
FWS listed bull trout in the Coastal-Puget Sound DPS as threatened under ESA on 1
November 1999. FWS (1998a)recently completed a determination of the status of bull
trout, identifying five distinct population segments (DPS) in the conterminous U.S. The
39
Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout DPS is composed of 34 sub-populations (FWS 1999).
Bull trout have been sighted in the Dosewallips River watershed (USFS, 1999) and are
considered by WDFW to be present in the Skokomish river watershed(USFS, 1995).
Therefore,bull trout do have the potential for occurring in the nearshore and freshwater
environment of the project area. In the Final Bull Trout and Dolly Varden Management
Plan September 2000 (WDFW 1998b), one stock is listed as healthy in Hood Canal and
two other stocks are listed as unknown. The river drainages where these stocks occur,
however, are not listed. HCSEG biologists found no bull trout in a recent survey of the
fish population in Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek drainages (Boad 2002).
Four life history forms are generally recognized for bull trout, which include resident
(nonmigratory), adfluvial (lake migrants), fluvial (stream and river migrants), and
anadromous fish (saltwater migrants). The Coastal-Puget Sound population segment of
bull trout is unique because it contains the only anadromous bull trout within the
conterminous U.S. (FWS 1998a). The status of the migratory forms are of greatest
concern throughout most of their range. The majority of the remaining populations in
some areas maybe largely composed of resident bull trout(Leary et al. 1991; Williams
and Mullan 1992).
Bull trout are widely distributed across their range but the distribution tends to be very
patchy even in pristine environments (Rieman and McIntyre 1993). Bull trout have been
extirpated from many of the large rivers within their historic range and exist primarily in
isolated headwater populations. The decline of bull trout has been attributed to habitat
degradation,blockage of migratory corridors by dams,poor water quality, the
introduction of non-native species, and the effects of past fishery management practices
(FWS 1998a).
Newly hatched anadromous bull trout emerge from the gravel in the spring(WDFW
1998b). They typically spend 2 years in fresh water before they migrate to salt water, the
mainstem of rivers, or reservoirs. Some populations remain their entire lives in the same
stretch of headwater stream. These fish may not mature until they are 7 to 8 years old,
and rarely reach a size greater than 14 inches in length (WDFW 1998b).
Bull trout typically use pristine headwaters to spawn(WDFW 1998b). Spawning begins
in late August,peaks in September and October, and ends in November. Fish in a given
stream may spawn over a period of two weeks or less. Almost immediately after
spawning, adults begin to work their way back to the mainstem rivers, lakes, or reservoirs
to overwinter. Some of these fish stay in these areas while others move into saltwater in
the spring. Bull trout will spawn a second or even third time. Bull trout are opportunistic
feeders, eating aquatic insects, shrimp, snails, leeches, fish eggs, and fish, Early beliefs
that these fish are serious predators of salmon and steelhead are generally not supported
today(WDFW 1998b).
40
Anadromy In Bull Trout And Stock Status
The status and occurrence of anadromous populations of bull trout in Puget Sound are
subject to some scientific debate. Separation of anadromous bull trout from the closely
related anadromous Dolly Varden char(S. malma) is very difficult and can only be
determined through electrophoretic techniques (Leary and Allendorf, 1997). For many
years, biologists believed the anadromous char in Washington were Dolly Varden and
freshwater char were bull trout. The confusion may be because within any given river
system there may be fluvial, adfluvial, and anadromous components within the bull trout
population. The majority of information on anadromous bull trout populations was
obtained from surveys in northern Puget Sound (Kramer 1991). For a complete
discussion on anadromy in bull trout see WDFW (1998b)
3.1.4.2 Habitat
Bull trout are believed to be glacial relicts whose distribution has expanded and
contracted with natural climate changes (Reiman et al. 1997). They are strongly
influenced by temperature and are seldom found in streams exceeding summer
temperatures of 18°C. Cool water temperatures during early life history results in higher
egg survival rates, and faster growth rates in fry and possibly juveniles as well (Pratt
1992) (WDFW 1998b).
All life history stages of native char are associated with complex forms of cover,
including large woody debris, under cut banks,boulders, and pools. Preferred spawning
habitat consists of low gradient streams with loose, clean gravel and water temperatures
of 5 to 9°C in late summer and early fall. Depending on the life history form, rearing and
overwintering habitat vary but still require cool clean water with insects, macro-
zooplankton, and small fish for larger adults (WDFW 1998b).
Habitat within the project area is limited to the freshwater environment. The existing
freshwater riparian habitat within the project area, however, is presently degraded and not
suitable as a spawning or rearing stream for bull trout according to critical habitat
elements outlined above. Alderbrook Creek flows through the middle of the project area.
The streams watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. The temperature in
Alderbrook Creek is cool enough to support the requirements of bull trout.
The upper watershed includes approximately 40 acres of the Alderbrook residential
community and Golf Course. Storm runoff from the developed portion of the watershed
is not controlled by detention and heavy rains create a substantial increase is flow in the
stream. Studies are currently underway to retrofit the upper watershed with Stormwater
flow control and treatment facilities.
Two culverts create fish passage barriers on the stream. The lower culvert is located at
SR 106 (Exhibit D-1) and is a 36"diameter concrete culvert that is 100' long with a slope
of 2.6% and no perch at the outlet. This culvert is a velocity barrier to fish passage. The
second culvert (Exhibit D-1) is located approximately 400 feet up Beach Drive from
41
SR106. It is a 36"diameter, 40' long concrete culvert with a slope of 4.7 percent. The
outlet of the upper culvert is perched 3 feet above the streambed. This culvert has down
cut the stream up to 3 feet for 200 feet downstream. It is a total blockage to fish passage.
The portion of the stream below SR 106 is highly structured and disturbed. The course of
the stream has been altered to protect adjoining structures. The outlet in elevated so that
the only time salmon can access the stream is during a very high tide.
Alderbrook Creek has cool, year round spring water flow and excellent spawning area
with riparian habitat above Beach Drive. The temperature and complex riparian habitat
may be suitable to support a small population of resident or anadromous bull trout once
fish passage barriers are removed from the lower stream drainage. It is proposed to
reestablish all the wild salmon runs in the stream using a wild salmon incubator(Boad
and Hannafious 2002).
Dalby Creek flows through the western portion of the SR106 Realignment. The streams
watershed is spring fed, and flows year round. A 24"culvert create a fish passage barrier
on the stream were it crosses underneath the existing SR106. This culvert will be
removed and replaced with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long prefabricated bridge. The
removal of this culvert will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish habitat.
The proposed crossing for the SR 106 realignment will occur roughly 200 feet above the
current SR 106 crossing. There will be roughly 60-feet of riparian habitat on both stream
banks removed and converted to roadway and semi-impervious surface. Impacts to
aquatic habitat will be minimized by the installation of a 12-foot bottomless arch
aluminum culvert(Fig 3). The size of this culvert will allow for the natural fluvial
process including nutrient transfer and cycling of LWD to continue downstream. In
addition LWD will be placed throughout the stream to improve the in stream structural
habitat and increase pool to riffle ratio. The temperature and complex riparian habitat
may be suitable to support a small population of resident or anadromous bull trout once
fish passage barriers are removed from the lower stream drainage.
The property owner of Alderbrook Resort,North 40 Lodging, LLC desires to make the
stream, and the fish runs in the stream, an environmental "experience" for its guests at the
lodge. The HCSEG has been requested to collaborate with them in this endeavor.
3.1.4.3 Determination
The Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and Effects of Proposed
Action(s) on Relevant Indicators is included in Appendix D and was used to guide in the
determination of the proposed action on bull trout salmon. An extensive field survey of
the habitat parameters identified in the checklist was performed by HCSEG biologists in
the field survey.
Overall,no long-term local or wide spread deleterious effects to bull trout or their habitat
in Alderbrook Creek or Dalby Creek are expected as a result of the Alderbrook Resort
remodel and associated stream habitat restoration projects. Given the available
information, the potential for"take' to occur is negligible. Therefore, these activities
42
will have no affect on bull trout and will not result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat for bull trout in the action area. Information to
support this determination is provided in the following sections.
Potential Direct Effects
Bull trout do not occupy the work area(Boad and Hannafious, 2002) and no direct effects
are likely to occur to bull trout because of remodeling activities to the Alderbrook Resort
or because of realignment of SR 106. Construction on Alderbrook Creek to improve
riparian habitat and Dalby creek to improve LWD is expected to have minimal impacts.
No construction will take place in near shore marine environment and as such,
disturbance from construction noise will be negligible. It is anticipated that there will be
short term turbidity plumes resulting from construction that will cause minor decreases in
water quality, due to the size and composition of the substrate(see Geology Section
2.1.3). Much of the riparian substrate is composed of cobble and gravel, and
sedimentation from construction activities is expected to cause only minor, short-term
increases in sediment levels in the project area.
In addition, impacts from erosion and run-off will be minimized using well designed
erosion and sediment control measures,which may include the use of silt fencing, filters
on storm drains,hay bales and other measures as recommended in the King County
Surface Water Manual (King County DNR 1988). A pollution prevention plan will be in
effect during construction.
Potential Indirect effects
Potential indirect effects from the proposed Alderbrook Creek and Dalby Creek
construction activities may include temporary changes to invertebrate food resources in
the immediate project area due to short-term disturbance of the substrate and water
diversion during construction. Within the existing 200-foot channel, there will be
mortality of benthic organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water during the
construction phase. The impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be minimal
considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the upstream habitat once stream flow
is restored. Minor sediment plumes in the near-shore marine environment are expected to
have no impact on the epibenthic crustaceans utilized by juvenile bull trout salmon as a
food resource.
Impacts to bull trout prey resources such as aquatic insects are expected to be short-lived
and minimized-by project BMP's and HPA restrictions. Once construction is completed
and water flow restored to the stream channels it is expected that aquatic insects and
other organisms will quickly re-inhabit the stream channel from the upper sections.
Potential impacts to aquatic insects and other food resources from construction will have
an"insignificant effect"on bull trout and should never reach the scale where"take"will
occur.
43
Cumulative Effects
Anticipated cumulative effect will be a temporary disturbance from construction of new
riparian habitat within Alderbrook Creek and LWD in Dalby Creek. Sediment plumes
resulting from this construction will be minor and short-term. Overall, the action will
contribute to the long tern improvement, over existing conditions, of the riparian habitat.
A new drainage system is designed to handle surface flow from the new SR106
alignment parking areas and other impervious surfaces within the resort complex (Exhibit
D-2 &D-3). Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled
into stormwater infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap
suspended solids and filter hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces.
Parking lots are designed with oil water separators. Water leaving bioswales and
infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"diameter detention pipe to limit flow to
outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater outfall will have minimal impact on salinity
of seawater in Hood Canal, and is not expected to alter salinities except in the immediate
area of discharge pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage system project will be to
reduce sediment and pollution contaminants entering Hood Canal compared to existing
conditions.
3.2 Wildlife Species
3.2.1 Bald Eagle
3.2.1.1 Description of Species
In 1978, the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)was federally listed as threatened in
Washington State under the Endangered Species Act. Bald eagles are also protected
under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918), The Eagle Protection Act(1940), and the
Lacey Act (1901). Bald eagles occupy most of their historical range in the Pacific
Northwest,but until recently, the population had been declining. A recovery plan for the
pacific bald eagle was developed in 1986. Recovery has been especially dramatic in
Washington State where there are now over 600 nesting pairs with approximately 300
pairs in Puget Sound alone (Appendix E). Bald eagle nesting territories are now found
along much of the shorelines of Puget Sound and lake Washington. Washington State
also the largest wintering population of bald eagles in the continental U.S.
With reference to forested habitat, the recovery plan calls for maintenance and
improvement of forested habitat in both the breeding and wintering range that is presently
used by eagles. This includes the development of nesting and roosting habitat for future
use by eagles; the management of young tree stands to meet desired physical
characteristics; the planting of new trees in potential bald eagle use areas devoid of tree
reproduction; the provision of artificial perches and nest structures where natural sites are
not available; and to create snags where suitable perch trees are not available. Human
activities will be restricted in established buffer zones around nest sites. Logging,
construction, habitat improvement, and other activities will be restricted during critical
44
periods of eagle use. Building construction will be prohibited near key bald eagle nesting
and wintering habitats and vehicle traffic will be prohibited at sensitive key areas during
periods of eagle use.
The recovery plan identified several aquatic tasks needed for eagle recovery that
emphasize recovery of food species and that each watershed be managed to improve
breeding and non-breeding habitat. Specifically, the plan calls for the management of
inland and anadromous fish populations and habitats to maintain and enhance adequate
food for eagles. The plan calls for increased management of water levels to maintain and
enhance eagle food sources. The plan further calls for the protection and enhancement of
natural spawning populations and spawning grounds of salmon and other important fish
spawners to increase availability to eagles. Lastly, the recovery plan calls for the
maintenance and improvement of habitat for fish.
The proposed Alderbrook Creek restoration projects will enhance the natural spawning
populations and spawning grounds for anadromous fish populations within the project
area, which may be a direct benefit to eagles occupying the lower section of Hood Canal
and frequenting the project area.
3.2.1.2 Nesting Habitat
Nesting, foraging, and perching habitat for bald eagles is typically associated with water
features such as rivers, lakes, and coast shorelines where eagles prey upon fish,
waterfowl, and seabirds (Stalmaster 1980, 1983, 1987 in Garrett and Green 2000).
During breeding season eagles establish and maintain territorial boundaries and breeding
birds are rarely found in high numbers. Breeding pairs show strong fidelity to nesting
territory, which may be considerable in size, and will prevent other eagles from entering
(Grubb 1980 in Garrett and Green 2000). Territories frequently contain two or more
nests,but will be used exclusively by one breeding pair, which allows a monopoly on the
resources there and affords protection to the young(Garrett and Green 2000).
Suitable nesting habitat for bald eagles is typically in mature forests that contain large,
dominant trees for nesting, and is in close proximity to aquatic foraging habitat.
Douglas-fir appears to be the most common tree species used for nesting in forests of
western Oregon and Washington. Lack of suitable nesting habitat has been shown to be a
limiting factor for population growth in some raptors (Newton 1979). Unoccupied nests
may indicate suitable physical habitat are available but human activity or other unknown
factors may prevent their successful use (Anthony and Isaacs 1980 in Garrett and Green
2000).
3.2.1.3 Wintering Habitat
Foraging and perching habitat is typically the same as the nesting season. Eagles are
opportunistic scavengers and predators who will consume a wide variety of prey. They
prefer high structures for perching such as high trees along the shoreline. However, will
also use cliffs,pilings, and open ground. They are usually seen foraging in open areas
having wide views (Stalmaster and Newman 1979). Perch sites may be used for a
45
number of activities including hunting, consumption of prey and nesting. Perch sites are
most often associated with food sources neat water and will have visual access to
adjacent habitats (Stalmaster and Newman 1979). Eagles often choose the highest tree on
the edge of a stand, selecting the strongest lateral branches(Garrett and Green 2000).
Bald eagles may spend nights together in communal roosts,more commonly in winter
and extreme weather. Many roosts are traditional sites that are used repeatedly and are
typically located in areas where the eagles have protection from the weather, and away
from human activity(Hansen et al. 1980 in Garrett and Green 2000).
3.2.1.4 Use of Project Area
There is no direct evidence of Bald Eagle regularly using the tract of land within the
proposed project area although these species are known to frequent this habitat type in the
Hood Canal area. There are no documented eagle nests within a one mile radius of the
Alderbrook property according to the WDFW database of nesting sites (Boad and
Hannafious 2002). The bald Eagle Recovery Plan(FWS 1986) regulates activities within
%z mile of nests.
3.2.1.4 Determination
Construction activities can disturb bald eagles by degrading habitat or by frightening
nesting eagles from their nests. Anthony and Isaacs (1989) found that secluded nests
away from human activities are more productive compared to nests close to human
activities. Other studies suggest that eagles become habituated to human presence
depending upon the level, proximity, and duration of the disturbance (Fraser et al.1985;
Matheson 1968; Stalmaster and Newman 1979). Foraging eagles can be affected by
disturbance, which may cause birds to move to less favorable areas (Stalmaster and
Newman 1979).
The SR106 realignment for the Alderbrook Inn remodel will require the removal of
approximately 7.0 acres of second growth forest and the lose of approximately 80 large
diameter trees in the western third of the realignment. No nesting or perching sites will
be removed. The greatest potential impact to eagles is disturbance from construction
activity. Since no documented nesting sites are within this radius,no timing restriction
on construction activities are necessary to avoid disturbance of nesting bald eagles. In
addition, bald eagles are expected to be delisted (WDFW 2002). Furthermore, the
importance of the project area to wintering eagles is probably low due to the high human
activity and the lack of concentrated prey on Alderbrook Creeks. A considerable number
of alternate foraging sites occur outside the project area. Therefore, the proposed
action is not likely to directly or indirectly adversely affect bald eagles, which may
occur in the project vicinity.
46
Potential Direct Effects
No negative direct effects from the SR 106 realignment and associated resort remodel
and stream rehabilitation projects are expected. To the contrary, it is expected that once
Alderbrook Creek is restored to support salmon runs there will additional prey for eagles
within the project area.
Potential Indirect Effects
No, negative indirect effects from the SR 106 realignment and associated resort remodel
and stream rehabilitation projects are expected. The new drainage system for the resort is
designed to handle surface flow from parking areas and other impervious surfaces within
the resort complex (Exhibit D-2)which will effectively reduce the potential for pollutants
entering the stream channel and Hood Canal.
Much of the surface water and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater
infiltration galleries and bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and
filter hydrocarbons and oil products draining from road surfaces. Parking lots are
designed with oil water separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will
drain through a 4'-0"diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of
property. Stormwater outfall will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood
Canal, and is not expected to alter salinities except in the immediate area of discharge
pipe. The cumulative effect of the drainage system project will be to reduce sediment
and pollution contaminants entering Hood Canal compared to existing conditions.
3.2.2 Marbled Murrelet
3.2.2.1 Description of Species
The marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus)was federally listed as threatened in
September 1992 under the Endangered Species Act. Marbled murrelets are sea birds that
nest in forest habitats and feed at sea. The nesting season in Washington is from April to
mid-September. Marbled murrelets spend the remainder of the year at sea in coastal
areas. Murrelets generally nest in low-elevation old-growth forest habitats on trees with
large limbs that provide a nesting platform greater than five inches. The principal
limiting factor for marbled murrelets in Hood Canal watersheds is suitable nesting
habitat. In the lower watersheds of Hood Canal, there is almost no suitable habitat
because of logging, agriculture, and urbanization (USFS, 1999).
The marbled murrelet population is estimated at 5,000 in the state of Washington, and
historical numbers are thought to have been higher. Removal of nesting habitat by timber
harvest is considered a primary factor in population decline(USFS 1999). Other factors
that may contribute to population decline, now and in the future include predation,
reduced prey populations, oil pollution, and entanglement in gill nets.
47
Suitable habitat is abundant in the upper watersheds of the Olympic Peninsula, and is
available in large, contiguous tracts. Therefore, nesting habitat for the Marbled Murrelet
is well removed and distant from the project area. The greatest opportunities for
management are in protecting and developing suitable nesting habitat. Priority should be
given to those areas that are contiguous to existing habitat so they will eventually provide
large blocks of habitat. Those areas identified as Late-Successional Reserve are
particularly important.
The other opportunity available to positively influence murrelet populations is the
conservation of fish populations in Hood Canal. Throughout the year,murrelets are
known to spend time foraging in the canal, and declines in prey populations would affect
murrelet population levels. Murrelets generally forage in shallow, nearshore waters.
They are opportunistic feeders, and will consume the most available prey species,which
may include Pacific sandlance, Pacific herring, and surf smelt(Burkett 1995; in Garrett
and Green 2000).
3.2.2.2 Use of the Project Area
As stated above abundance of murrelets in marine foraging areas may be related to the
availability of nesting habitat in the surrounding area. In the case of Hood Canal there is
little nesting habitat within close proximity to the project site. Nesting is in the upper
watersheds and late successional forests on the Olympic Peninsula. There is potential for
murrelets to enter the project area while foraging for food,however, nesting sites will be
greater than 50 miles west in the late successional forests of the Olympic Peninsula.
3.2.2.3 Determination
The Alderbrook Resort Remodel Project is not likely to affect foraging activities of
marbled murrelets as all construction activities are upland from the marine environment.
Potentially there may be some sediment discharge from construction activities to
rehabilitate Alderbrook Creek, however the geology report prepared for this BA indicates
that there would be minimal fines. Larger grain sediments will settle out quickly from
the water column. There is little potential to impact breeding habitat of marbled murrelet
prey species—Pacific sand lance, Pacific herring, and surf smelt.
Sufficient BMP's will also be in place to ensure no new contaminants (Stormwater
runoff, fuels, chemicals, etc.) are introduced during construction. The new drainage
system for the resort is designed to handle surface flow from parking areas and other
impervious surfaces within the resort complex (Exhibit D-2). Much of the surface water
and accompanying pollution will be channeled into stormwater infiltration galleries and
bioswale catchment basins that will entrap suspended solids and filter hydrocarbons and
oil products draining from road surfaces. Parking lots are designed with oil water
separators. Water leaving bioswales and infiltration galleries will drain through a 4'-0"
diameter detention pipe to limit flow to outfall at NE corner of property. Stormwater
outfall will have minimal impact on salinity of seawater in Hood Canal, and is not
expected to alter salinities except in the immediate area of discharge pipe. The
48
cumulative effect of the drainage system project will be to reduce sediment and pollution
contaminants entering Hood Canal compared to existing conditions.
Because proposed project activities will be confined to upland activities and pollution
control measures will be in place, the proposed Alderbrook Resort Remodel and
associated projects will have No Effect on marbled murrelets that may occur in the
project vicinity.
Potential Direct Effects
No negative direct effects from the Alderbrook Resort Remodel is expected for marbled
murrelets. A pollution plan will be in effect during construction and the project has built
in long-term pollution control measures. Overall, the project should result in a slight
improvement in local water quality, translating to an improvement of the potential
murrelet foraging habitat in Hood Canal.
Potential Indirect Effects
No negative indirect effects to murrelets from the Alderbrook Resort project are
expected.
4. CONSERVATION MEASURES
• HPA guidelines will be strictly adhered as to timing of the construction and
construction guidelines. WDFW biologists will be notified at the out set of
construction.
• Sediment control measures will be put in place to minimize disturbance to
riparian and nearshore marine environments. Impacts from erosion and run-off
will be minimized using well designed erosion and sediment control measures,
which may include the use of silt fencing, filters on storm drains,hay bales and
other measures as recommended in the King County Surface Water Manual (King
County DNR 1988). A pollution prevention plan will be in effect during
construction.
• Surface water will not be directed onto sloping areas or randomly daylight on the
site during or after construction. All facilities used to collect permanent surface
will be directed into tightlined systems that would discharge into the stormwater
control system.
• Prior to the onset of winter, any exposed subgrade will be hydroseeded and
covered with plastic netting or other similar material. In addition, exposed
construction slopes will be trackwalked (up and down) in order to roughen the
ground surface and reduce potential runoff velocities.
49
• Check dams will be established along roadways during construction, and silt
fences will be used along the lower elevations of roadways and future residential
lots.
• Temporary sedimentation ponds will be established during construction to
provide erosion and sediment transport control. Infiltration ponds are not
designed to function as sedimentation ponds and, therefore,will not be utilized as
part of the erosion control measurers during construction.
• All outlets from temporary and permanent settling/infiltration ponds will be
designed to prevent direct flow over unprotected slope. This will be
accomplished by either tightening the outlets or by armoring the outlets down to
less steep areas. An erosion control inspector will periodically be on-site during
construction to observe that the mitigation measures function as intended.
• Groundwater seepages may be encountered during grading for the proposed
roadway. The contractor will be prepared to provide temporary and/or permanent
drainage control measures as necessary. These could include interceptor drains,
curtain pipes, or rip-rap on slopes.
• The drainage from the two wetlands and hillside seepage impacted by the
proposed roadway will drain into an interceptor ditch that will direct the flow to
Alderbrook Creek to the west and Brookhaven Creek to the east. Restoring
Alderbrook Creek to anadromous fish runs will immensely improve the overall
environment here well beyond the minor impacts that will occur to hillside
seepage and associated wetlands.
• The newly designed drainage system for the resort include bioswale collectors
and stormwater infiltration galleries, that will greatly control and improve the
quality of surface runoff entering Hood canal from the resort complex.
• The treatment of the storm water discharge off the new SR106 realignment will
enhance overall water quality into Hood Canal
• With the relocation of SR 106, the new hotel design provides a large, new front
yard. Presently, SR 106 is in extremely close proximity to Alderbrook with
parking lots abutting the highway—within the right of way as well as outside the
right of way. In addition to tremendous opportunities to improve the aesthetic
condition of this zone,public safety concerns will be greatly improved, as the
guest parking areas will be proximal to the hotel,not requiring pedestrian crossing
of the highway.
50
• Landscaping will predominantly feature the use of native plants. Landscape areas
associated with the project will include landscaping around the buildings to better
integrate their placement and soften their presence, and at parking lots to screen
and buffer them as appropriate. Feature landscape elements will occur at the main
entry and within the public courtyard of the hotel, providing areas of additional
interest.
• Alderbrook stream will undergo extensive enhancements, covered in more detail
elsewhere in this submittal. The current stream conditions are poor from the
standpoint of aesthetic as well as drainage/runoff issues. A culvert will be
eliminated with the elimination of the drive south of the cottages. New culverts,
at the highway and at the parking area drive will be improved from the present,
undersized conditions. Rocks,boulders, log weirs and natural and native
vegetation will be utilized to control flow, erosion and to create an aesthetically
pleasing environment. Plants that provide cover for the stream and line the banks
for erosion control will compliment the reconstruction of the stream for Salmon.
Trees proposed along the stream include Western Red Cedar, Cascara, and Vine
Maple. The shrubs include Dogwoods, Indian Plum, Pacific Willow, Elderberry
and Huckleberry. The groundcovers and perennials include Salal, Wild Ginger,
Trillium, and ferns such as Maidenhair Fern, Sword Fern and Lady Fern.
• Extensive stream rehabilitation will be completed under the direction of the Hood
Canal Salmon Enhancement Group (HCSEG). The goals of the riparian habitat
restoration project are to restore the natural characteristics of the lower sections of
the stream systems, provide a people/wildlife interface associated with salmon,
and improve the intrinsic appeal of the Alderbrook Resort by increasing the
distance between the resort and highway 106. This will be done by improving the
riparian diversity, channel sinuosity, in-stream structure, accessibility to viewing
salmon migration, and increasing the salmon population.
• Moving the existing stream channel to the new location will affect roughly 200-
feet of in-stream habitat. The new channel will be constructed to mimic more
natural conditions such as sinuosity and structural in-stream habitat. This will be
conducive to more beneficial habitat relating to salmon productivity and overall
abundance of aquatic organisms.
• The cutthroat in the existing channel could be affected during construction
because of an intermittent period of no water in the channel. This water will be
pumped around the channel during construction. To avoid fish mortality, the
cutthroat will be removed from the project section using seine nets, and placed in
other parts of the stream that will not be affected by construction. The stream
section under construction will be isolated upstream and downstream using block
nets so that fish will not be able to swim near the construction area from other
sections of the stream. Within the existing 200-foot channel, there will be
mortality of benthic organisms such as aquatic insects because of lack of water
during the construction phase. The impact of this on the stream ecosystem will be
51
minimal considering the contribution of benthic fauna from the upstream habitat
once stream flow is restored
• The removal of the dalby Creek 24" culvert were the stream crosses underneath
the existing SR106 and replacement with a 12-foot wide 24-foot long
prefabricated bridge will open up over 3000 feet of productive upstream fish
habitat.
5. SUMMARY
Based on this BA, a determination of impacts was made for the proposed Alderbrook
Remodel Project. The determination concluded that project construction and future use
would result in the following determinations; "not likely to adversely effect" for salmon
species, bull trout, and bald eagles, and "no effect" for marbled murrelets.
6.REFRENCES
Anthony, R.G. and F.B. Isaacs. 1989. Characteristics of bald eagle nesting sites in
Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:148-159.
Boad, L. and D. Hannafious. 2002. A plan for restoration of Alderbrook Creek and
Dalby Creek as part of the Alderbrook Inn remodel project. Hood Canal Salmon
Enhancement Group, Belfair, WA.
Bilby, R.E, B.R. Fransen, P.A. Bisson, and J.W. Walker. 1998. Response of juvenile
coho salmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch) and steelhead (Onchorynchus mykiss)to the
addition of salmon carcasses to two streams in Southwestern Washington. , U.S.A.
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55:1909-1918.
Cauble,N. and K. Oswell. 2002. Alderbrook Lodge Traffic Impact Analysis, Tech.
Memorandum to Engineering Services Associates. Entranco Engineering.
Cederholm, C.J., D.H. Johnson, R.E. Bilby, L.G. Dominguez, A.M. Garrett, W.H.
Greaber, E.L. Greda, M.D. Kunze, B.G. Marcot, J.F. Palmisano, R,W, Plotnikoff,
W.J. Pearcy, C.A. Simenstad, and P.C. Trotter. 2000. Pacific Salmon and Wildlife
Ecological Context and Implications for Management. Special edition technical
report, Prepared for D.H. Johnson and T.A. O'neal (Managing Directors), Wildlife-
Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
Groot, C., and L. Margolis. 1994. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. Government of Canada
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 312-396.
Garrett, A.M. and G.A. Green.2000. Allyn dock Improvement biological assessment.
Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE, Kirkland, WA98033.
52
HartCrowser, Inc. 2002. Draft Geotechnical design study proposed SR 106 realignment
Union, Washington 1910 Fairview Avenue East, Seattle, Washington 98102.
Tel:206.324.9530
Fraser, J.D., L.D. Frenzel, and J.E. Mathisen. 1985. The impact of human activities on
breeding bald eagles in north-central Minnesota. Journal of Wildlife management
49:585-592.
FWS (Fish and wildlife Service). 1986. Recovery plan for the pacific bald eagle. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 160 pp.
FWS. 1998a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; proposal to list the coastal
Puget Sound, Jarbridge River and St. Mary-Belly River population segment of bull
trout as threatened species. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Proposed Rule June 10,
1998. federal register 63(111):31693-31710.
FWS. 1999. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of threatened
status for bull trout in the coterminous United States; Final Rule. Novemberl, 1999.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register.64 (210):58910-58931.
Kraemer, C. 1991. Unpublished char investigations data from files. Washington
Department of Wildlife, Fisheries Management Division, Mill Creek, WA.
Leary, R.F. and F.W. Allendorf. 1997. Genetic confirmation of sympatric bull trout and
Dolly Varden in western Washington. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society
126:715-720.
Matheson, J.E. 1968. Effects of human disturbance on nesting bald eagles. Journal of
wildlife Management 32:1-6.
Moyle, P.B. 1976. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press.
Moyle, P.B. and J.J. Cech. 1982.An Introduction to Ichthyology. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Englewood cliffs, N.J. 593 pp.
Newton, I. 1979. Population ecology of raptors. Buteo Books, Vermillion, S.D. 399 pp.
Nickelson, T.E. 1998. A Habitat based assessment of coho salmon production potential
and spawner escapement needs for Oregon coastal streams. Portland, Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Information Report 98-4.
Pratt, L.K. 1992. A review of bull trout life history. In: Howell, P.j. and D.V. Buchanan,
eds. Proceedings of the Gearhart Mountain bull trout workshop. Oregon Chapter of
AFS Corvallis OR. 67 pp.
Quinn, T.P. and N.P. Petersen. 1994. The effects of forest practices on fish populations.
Timber Fish and Wildlife Report F4-94-001 to Washington Department of Natural
Resources. 157p.
53
Rieman, B.E., D.C. Lee, and R.F. Thurow. 1997. Distribution, status, and likely future
trends of bull trout within the Columbia River and Klamath River Basins. North
American Journal of Fisheries Management. 17:1111-1125
Saltmaster, M.V. and J.R. Newman. 1979. Perch-site preferences of wintering bald
eagles in northwest Washington. Journal of Wildlife Management 43:221-224.
Shanewise, S. 2002. Wetlands Inventory for the Alderbrook SR-106 Relocation. Prepared
for Engineering Services Associates 210 NE Cherokee Beach Belfair Wa 98528. The
Coot Company Wetland and Wildlife Consulting Services 416 s. Washington,
Olympia WA 98501 360-352-9897
Thompson, D. 2002. Beach survey for the Alderbrook Resort remodel. Prepared for
Engineering Services Associates 210 NE Cherokee Beach Belfair Wa 98528.
Environmental Mariculture Services. Port Ludlow, WA 98365. 360-437-0811.
Slaney,P.A., and D. Zaldokas. 1997. Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures Watershed
Restoration Technical Circular No.9. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Watershed Restoration Program. 3-6, 3-10
USDA Forest Service. 1905. South Fork Skokomish watershed analysis.
USDA Forest Service. 1997. Hamma Hamma River and hood canal tributaries watershed
analysis.
USDA Forest Service. 1998. Duckabush watershed analysis.
USDA Forest Service. 1999. Dosewallips watershed analysis.
Washington Department of Fisheries, Washington Department of Wildlife, and Western
Washington Treaty Tribes. 1993. 1992 Washington State salmon and steelhead stock
inventory, appendix one Puget Sound Stocks, Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca
volume. Olympia, WA. 424 pp.
WDFW and WWTIT (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Western
Washington Treaty Indian Tribes), 1994. 1992 Washington State Salmon and
Steelhead Stock Inventory. Appendix One: Puget sound Stocks. WDFW and
WWTIT, Olympia.
WDFW 1995.genetic Diversity Units and Major Ancestral Lineages of Salmonid Fishes
in Washington. C. Busark and J.B. Shaklee, editors. Fish Management program
Resource Assessment Division. Technical Report No. RAD 95-02.
WDFW 1998b. Washington's native chars [on line report]. WDFW, Olympia
http//wa.gov./wdfw/outreach/fishing/char.htm.
54
APPENDIX A
WETLANDSINVENTORY
FOR THE
ALDERBROOK/SR-106 RELOCATION
S33T22NR3W
Mason County
MAY 2002
prepared for:
Pat McCullough
Engineering Services Associates
210 NE Cherokee Beach
Belfair WA 98528
prepared by:
S. Shanewise, PWS
Senior Ecologist
55
CONTENTS
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Introduction.............................................................................................
Methods...................................................................................................
Results.....................................................................................................
Discussion................................................................................................
Figure 2: Surveyed Wetlands Map
Figure 3: USGS Topography Map
Figure 4:National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 5: Soils Map
Appendix 1: Wetland Descriptions
Text
Data Sheets
Category Ratings
References
56
i
INTRODUCTION
This report documents the wetland and stream conditions along a.5-mile road realignment project for
SR106 on Hood Canal. The realignment action is primarily driven by safety concerns,but it will also
facilitate a major stream restoration project along Alder brook and Darby Creeks. Current road crossings of
these two systems prevent anadromous fish access to 95%of the available watershed within both streams.
Stream channel enhancement will also occur to provide high quality spawning and rearing habitat. In
addition to these two primary streams,one small Type 5 drainage and two minor slope seepage wetlands
occur within the proposed realignment path. Mitigation for all stream and wetland impacts is not required
in accordance with Section 1701070 B2 in WAC
METHODS
Site Inspection
Field review of the project was performed on 25 May 2002. The centerline of the proposed realignment
was staked,and field review centered on undeveloped areas within 150-200 feet of the centerline.
A/derbrook and Darby Creeks Excluded
Detailed stream/wetland information for these two systems is not included within this report. Information
on these streams has been provided within the restoration documents prepared for the enhancement project.
The stream enhancement project will be authorized under a NWP#27. The road realignment project will
be authorized under a NWP#14. Only the area of stream impact for Darby and Alderbrook Creeks is
included within this document.
Wetland Classification
Wetland characteristics are described within this report according to the Fish and Wildlife Service
Cowardin Classification System(1989).
Wetland Delineation
Wetland delineation followed a Routine Methodology based upon the Washington State Wetland
Identification and Delineation Manual(1997)requiring positive indicators for wetland soil,hydrology,and
plants:
Wetland hydrology was determined by water conditions in pits;
57
Presence of hydric soil was determined by soil conditions in pits dug around suspected wetlands.
Soil inspection included comparison with the Munsell Color Charts(1992). General soil
characteristics were derived from information contained within the Soil Survey of Mason County,
Washington. U.S.D.A.Soil Conservation Service(1951).
Occurrence of wetland vegetation was determined through species identification,estimation of
dominance and then assignment of wetland indicator status; indicator status was assigned based
upon the National List of Plant Species That Occur In Wetlands(1989).
Wetland Category Rating
The Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington(1993)was used to establish
Category Ratings for the wetlands.
Confirmation
Wetland status depicted in this report has not been confirmed by a government official,and therefore has
no legal status. Agencies with jurisdictional authority over wetlands at the local,state and federal level
need to be consulted for their signed agreement to our findings before there is any guarantee of no change.
Our estimation for the accuracy of the unconfirmed wetland boundaries portrayed within this report is
>95%.
RESULTS
Variable Topography
The proposed road realignment has dramatically different topography between the east and west ends. The
east end cuts across a steep slope descending hundreds of feet along the shoreline bluffs common to Hood
Canal. However,at the point where Alderbrook Creek is crossed,topography then flattens to gently sloped
ground from here to the project's western terminus. The wetlands and stream described within this report
all occur within the eastern,steep-sloped part of the proposed new roadway.
Minor Hillside Seeps
The two,small wetland systems that occur along the realignment are minor,hillside seeps. Surface water is
restricted to flows artificially consolidated by human caused alterations to the ground surface. Soil
saturation is caused by daylighting groundwater,and appears to occur at many locations along the uphill
wetland boundary. Both wetlands have downslope terminuses where hydrology seeps subsurface again and
soil saturation ceases. Minor outlet channels that drain from the downslope points on both wetlands also
fade from defined channels to vegetated swales that technically lack either stream or wetland conditions.
Old Dirt Roadway
An old dirt roadway was cut across the slope where the two wetlands occur,and this roadway now
intercepts most wetland hydrology. Where this roadway occurs,downslope conditions are entirely upland.
It seems likely that the past road builders cut their path just below where the wetland seep naturally
disappeared,but the hydrology then drained into the flat roadway and created new wetland conditions
below where the natural wetlands had previously occurred.
58
Weak Technical Connection To Puget Sound
The two slope wetlands technically terminate both wetland and stream conditions prior to their connection
with the ditch along SR106. Water from this ditch drains through culverts and beneath adjacent developed
ground before finally reaching Puget Sound roadside ditch where water flows through culverts to the
shoreline of Puget Sound over 200 feet away. Although storm event generated surface flows drain from the
wetlands to the roadside ditch during winter,this weak connection to Puget Sound should qualify these
sloped wetlands as not associated with tidal waters.
Small,Headwater Stream
A small,Type 5 stream also occurs along the steep slope near the two minor wetland systems. This system
drains to an intake grate at the slope toe where solid pavement begins. From here,the surface flow is
culverted west into the Alderbrook Creek channel.
Low Value Systems
Both the wetlands and stream described here are low value systems with minimal function performance.
Water quality benefits from the densely vegetated sloped wetlands are the primary function of these
systems. The seasonal stream flows should contribute organic matter to Alderbrook Creek,but the low
volumes involved limit the total value of this action. Habitat structures of all three systems are simple,and
past disturbances have occurred. Avoidance of these systems by the proposed project is unwarranted,and
mitigation compensation requirements should be minimal.
Total Impact Area
The total areas of impact are provided below for each of the five systems involved with the roadway
realignment.
SYSTEM
IMPACT AREA(ACRES)
WETLAND 1 .27
WETLAND 2 .11
STREAM A .02
ALDERBROOK CREEK .05
DARBY CREEK .05
TOTAL IMPACT AREA .50 ACRES
DISCUSSION
Divert Wetland Drainage To Alderbrook Creek
Hydrology from the two wetlands impacted by the proposed roadway should be directed towards the
Alderbrook Creek channel. Maintaining the existing outfall continuity on these two systems is unnecessary
due to their minor contributions and distant connection to Puget Sound through several hundred feet of
culvert.
Detailed Wetland/Stream Descriptions
An individual description of each wetland system is provided in Appendix I of this report. The wetland
description contains documentation of the wetland delineation conditions,functions and values assessment,
classifications,and description of hydrology, soils,and plants.
59
APPENDIX I
WETLANDS INVENTORY
FOR THE
ALDERBROOK/SR-106 RELOCATION WETLANDS
60
WETLANDS 1 and 2
LANDSCAPE POSITION: Hood Canal Watershed
These wetlands are Slope systems set near the toe of the large bluffs descending to Hood Canal. Although
these wetlands attain at least a temporary surface water connection through culverts to Puget Sound,this
connection is weak,and most likely the result of the construction of SR 106.These wetlands should not be
deemed adjacent to tidal waters.
CLASSIFICATION
These wetlands are small,forested seeps covered with young regrowth red alder(Alnus rubra)and a dense
herbaceous layer of skunk cabbage(Lysichiton americanum)and bracken fem(Pteridium aquilinum).
Hydrology results from groundwater daylighting against a shallow till layer. These seeps disappear
downslope where the till stops and is replaced by pervious sand and gravels that drain the water subsurface.
Past construction of a dirt road has altered native ground conditions by intercepting hydrology and probably
expanding the footprint of technical wetland conditions. Small,short"stream"channels occur at the
downslope terminuses of each wetland that quickly fade to ill-defined,vegetated,nonwetland swales.
Cowardin Dominant Vegetation
PALUSTRINE Alnus rubra
Forested,broad leaved deciduous Rubus spectabilis
Saturated,fresh Lysichiton americanum
Mineral Pteridium aquilinum
BOUNDARY DELINEATION
These wetland boundaries are generally indistinct edges that meander through the landscape moving across
a wide range of topographic elevation. Some mosaic conditions occur on slight rises,or where subsurface
sand lenses likely occur(HartCrowser 16 May 2002 Draft Memorandum.) Lack of hydric soils was the
most common factor limiting wetland occurrence,even though plants,and sometimes hydrology,were still
61
positive. Following careful review and analysis of site conditions,boundary flagging basically involved
flagging in all ground that had skunk cabbage(Lysichiton americanum)growing from it.
The following table depicts general field indicators used to delineate this wetland boundary:
WETLAND UPLAND
Lysichiton americanum Polystichum munitum
1 chroma 2 chroma
Saturated to surface Dry at surface
BOTH
Alnus rubra
Rubus spectabilis
Alderwood Soil Series
FUNCTION ASSESSMENT
The following is a list of commonly recognized wetland functions,with an estimated relative value rating
for this wetland and a brief conceptual statement regarding the primary factor affecting this rating. A
summary table is also provided for quick reference.
UGH MODESATE »flW � NNUT�
- x
0 2 6 0
Biofiltration MOD Slow percolation of water through dense
vegetation and saturated surface soils
Groundwater Recharge MOD Subsurface seepage at base of shoreline
bluffs along Hood Canal
Plant/Animal Habitat Value LOW Low diversity;small size; lack of surface
water;past disturbances
Sediment Capture Surface Water Supply LOW Sloped systems lacking significant
depressions or restricted outlets
Groundwater Exchange/Recharge LOW Sloped systems lacking significant
depressions or restricted outlets
62
Surface Water Runoff Route LOW Small,short,poorly defined surface flow
paths
Stormwater Detention LOW Sloped systems lacking significant
depressions or restricted outlets
Flood Attenuation NA Not associated with Riverine system
CATEGORY RATING: III(16 points)
These wetlands qualify for Category III ratings because they contain a single habitat class and lack high
structural diversity. A Category I Mature Forest rating was not possible due to the young age of the trees.
STREAM A
LANDSCAPE POSITION:Alderbrook Creek and Hood Canal Watersheds
This small stream is situated along the base of the steep slopes descending towards Hood Canal from the
surrounding bluffs. The stream connects through a culvert to Alderbrook Creek within 300 feet of Hood
Canal.
CLASSIFICATION
This stream is a small,headwater system with a total length of probably a few hundred feet. The channel
averages a foot in width and has a well-defined,slightly incised scour indicative of the fast,flashy flows
that should occur during storm events. Fish do not occur,and access to the channel is blocked by the
outfall culvert that drains from a catch basin that intercepts the stream flow.
Cowardin
RIVERINE
Upper Perennial,Intermittent
Streambed,Cobble-gravel
Seasonally Flooded,Fresh
BOUNDARY DELINEATION
The boundaries of this stream are the edges of a well-defined scour channel. Associated Palustrine
wetlands do not occur along this stream within the proposed project footprint.
LITERATURE
' Schaefer,Melvin G.,Regional Analyses of Annual Precipitation Maxima in Washington State,Water
Resources Research,Vol 26,No. 1,pp. 119-132,January 1990.
' Schaefer,M.G.,Dam Safety Guidelines,Technical Note 3:Design Storm Construction,Washington
State Dept.of Ecology,Publication 92-55G,April 1993.
' Schaefer,M.G.,Characteristics of Extreme Precipitation Events in Washington State,Department of
Ecology,Water Resources Program,Publication No. 89-51,Olympia,WA, 1989.
63
' U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,HEC-1 Flood Hydrogr`ph Package,Hydrologic Engineering Center,
Davis California, 1990.
' Dinicola,R.S., Characterization and Simulation of Rainfall-Runoff Relations for Headwater Basins in
Western King,and Snohomish Counties,Washington,U.S.Geological Survey,Water Resources
Investigations Report 89-4052.,Tacoma,WA, 1990.
Freeze, R. Allen and Cherry, John A., Ground Water, Prentice Hall,pp. 217-221,
1979.
' Schaefer,M.G.and Stevens,G.T.Flood Hydrograph Construction using the Incomplete Gamma
Distribution,Hydrologic Series Bulletin,University of Missouri-Rolla,May 1977.
1 Barker, Bruce, Modifications to the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph Method to
Improve Detention Pond Performance, King County Surface Water Management
Division, April 1992.
' Johnson,Douglas L.,Hydrologic Analysis of Wooten-Haven Lakes Watershed,a report for ESA
Engineering,Lakewood,Washington, 1999.
' Natural Resources Conservation Service,TR-55—Urban Runoff for Small Watersheds,USDA, 1986.
' Washington State Department of Transportation,Highway Hydraulics Manual,Olympia,WA, 1998
64
APPENDIX B
BEACH SURVEY
FOR THE
ALDERBROOK RESORT REMODEL
S33T22NR3W
Mason County
OCTOBER 2002
Prepared for:
Pat McCullough
Engineering Services Associates
210 NE Cherokee Beach Road
Belfair,WA 98528
Prepared by:
Doug Thompson
Senior Fish Biologist
Environmental Mariculture Services
121 Resolute Lane
Port Ludlow,WA 98365
i
66
INTRODUCTION
Alderbrook Resort is proposing to remodel sections of the existing resort buildings and
realign SR 106 to improve access for guests. The property owners are proposing a major
stream revitalization project for Alderbrook and Dalby Creeks. During construction and
stream restoration work, there is potential for increased sedimentation and associated
impacts to critical habitat supporting salmon, forage fish and shellfish. This report
documents the intertidal habitat fronting Alderbrook Resort and discusses the potential
for impacts.
METHODS
Site Inspection
Intertidal inspection of the beachfront property was conducted on October 1, 2002 and
October 3, 2002 at tidal elevations of 0.6' MLLW and 0.2' MLLW respectively. These
elevations were adequate for a complete survey of intertidal habitat within 300 feet of the
point where Alderbrook Creek flows onto the beach. The initial site inspection consisted
of walking over the length and width of the beach to identify shellfish and vegetation
types occurring within the ownership boundaries. Vegetation in the high intertidal was
documented, and prominent shellfish species were noted in the lower tidal elevations.
Eelgrass is considered critical habitat for juvenile chum salmon and juvenile chinook
salmon. As I walked the beach, I specifically looked for the presence of native eelgrass,
Zostera japonica.
Population Estimates
A bed of Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) occurred in the middle through the low tidal
elevations to about a 0.0' MLLW tidal elevation. The approximate area of the oyster bed
was estimated by pacing the length and width of the oyster bed. An estimate of the oyster
population was determined by standard methods utilized by Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife (Campbell, 1998) for estimating shellfish population
size.
RESULTS
Alderbrook beach is approximately 600' wide from the east to west ownership boundary.
A dock divides the beach roughly in half and extends about 500' out into Hood Canal. A
concrete sea wall at about the+10' MLLW tidal elevation extends the length of the beach
from the dock to the eastern boundary. Alderbrook Creek enters the beach just west of
the dock. A small area of salt marsh vegetation is present just below the point where
Alderbrook creek flows onto the beach (Fig 1).
61
Vegetation
Shell piles and sparse vegetation patches of Atriplex patula, Salicornia virginica, Ulva
sp.,Enteromorpha sp.,Jaumea carnosa, and Spergularia marina occupied the high
intertidal elevation area. The substrate throughout the intertidal was coarse sand and
pebbles at the higher elevations of+10' MLLW to +4' MLLW and predominantly sand
below+4' MLLW.
No eelgrass was observed on Alderbrook Beach at tidal elevations above 0.0' MLLW.
The tide was not low enough to walk out on the beach below 0.0' MLLW; however, this
lower portion of the beach could be inspected by looking closely from the dock.
Visibility was clear and accurate to a depth of about five feet. No eelgrass patches were
observed by this method on the subtidal portion of beach at Alderbrook. A low density
of eelgrass(Z. marina)was observed attached to the sides of the dock in association
native mussels (Mytilus trossulus).
Shellfish
Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas)were the dominant bivalve in the mid-tidal zone on
Alderbrook Beach. The population was a mixture of single oysters attached to small
pebbles or as clusters attached to one another. No native oysters (Ostrea lurida)were
identified on this beach. Manila clams (Tapes philippinarum)where found only
sporadically in minor areas of the beach with a mixed substrate of sand and pea gravel.
Pacific oysters extended well into the zone normally occupied by manila clams. No other
species of hardshell or softshell clams were found on this beach.
The length and width of the oyster band was estimated to be about 175' W x 400' L for
an approximate area of 70,000 square feet (1.6 acres). Pacific oysters were counted and
measured(Shell Length) within ten random samples (one square foot) along two
randomly established transect lines running from the top to bottom of the oyster band
(Fig 1). Pacific oysters ranged in size from 24 mm to >150 min shell length representing
several year classes. The mean density of oysters is estimated to be 16.3 oysters per
square foot with a 95% confidence interval of+8.1 oysters per square foot. Based on the
estimates the mean number of oysters on the beach at Alderbrook Resort is about
1,140,000 oysters within a possible range of 574, 000 to 1,708,000 (Appendix 1).
DISCUSSION
Minor occurrence of typical salt marsh vegetation was observed on Alderbrook Beach at
the point where Alderbrook creek flows onto the beach. The dominant shellfish species
was the pacific oyster with a population of about one million oysters representing various
size classes. No critical habitat such as eelgrass was found in any abundance on the
beach. Low densities of eelgrass were found attached to the dock.
The upper reaches of the beach are documented spawning sites for marine forage fish
including sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus)and surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus)
62
(Bargman, 1998). These species comprise an important part of the diet for juvenile
salmon including listed summer chum and Puget Sound chinook salmon. For this reason,
the spawning habitat of forage fish is considered critical for the eventual rehabilitation
and continued maintenance of threatened salmon species. Finer grained sand that may
reach the upper shoreline of the beach due to proposed construction activities would
function to complement and nourish existing spawning habitat of these forage fish
species. Pacific Herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) are also documented to spawn in this
part of Hood Canal. Pacific herring, however, spawn on eelgrass and the absence of
eelgrass on this beach would preclude its use as a potential spawning site for Pacific
herring.
After carefully reviewing plans of the proposed remodel and road realignment at
Alderbrook Resort, there is minimal potential for damage to critical habitat, salt marsh
vegetation, and shellfish species from construction activities. Restoration of the
Alderbrook Creek will likely improve the flow of fine sediments,nutrients and detritus to
Alderbrook Beach that will compliment and nourish fish forage habitat. A new drainage
system for the resort will greatly eliminate the potential for road oils and other pollutants
for reaching the beach.
LITERATURE
Bargmann, G. 1998. Forage fish management plan. Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, 600 capitol Way N., Olympia, WA 98501. 65p.
Campbell, W.W. 1996. Procedures to determine intertidal populations of Protothaca
staminea, Tapes philippinarum, and Crassostrea gigas in Hood Canal and Puget Sound,
Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Point Whitney Shellfish
Laboratory, Marine Resources Division, 1000 Point Whitney Road, Brinnon, Washington
98320. 27 pp.
63
APPENDIX 1
PACIFIC OYSTER SAMPLE DATA AT ALDERBROOK RESORT
OCTOBER 2002
Number of
Oysters per Pacific Oyster Population at Alderbrook
sample Resort
18
22 Mean 16.3
34 Standard Error 3.58716849
27 Median 16.5
10 Mode 0
0 Standard Deviation 11.34362278
15 Sample Variance 128.6777778
26 Kurtosis -0.849891559
11 Skewness -0.113187516
0 Range 34
Minimum 0
Maximum 34
Sum 163
Count 10
Confidence Level(95.0%) 8.114745079
64
APPENDIX C
1. Summary of the Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans
U.S. District Court Decision
2. Endangered Species Act Status of West Coast Salmon & Steelhead
65
Summary of the Alsea Valley Alliance v Evans
U.S. District Court Decision
In Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans (99-6265-HO, D. OR, September 12, 2001), the U.S.
District Court in Eugene, Oregon, set aside NMFS' 1998 ESA listing of Oregon Coast
coho salmon, and ruled that NMFS' treatment of hatchery populations within an ESU
was arbitrary and capricious (Alsea decision). Specifically,the Court found that NMFS'
1998 listing of Oregon Coast coho made improper distinctions beyond the level of an
ESU by excluding hatchery populations from listing protection even though they were
determined to be part of the same ESU as listed naturally-spawned populations. While
this ruling affected only one ESU, the interpretive issue raised by the ruling has the
potential to affect nearly all of the agency's West Coast salmon and steelhead listing
determinations made to date. On December 14, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit(01-36071) granted intervenors-appellants an emergency motion to stay the
district court judgment in the Alsea decision. Accordingly,the Oregon Coast coho ESU
remains listed as a threatened species pending final disposition of the appeal.
66
Endangered Species Act Status of West Coast Salmon & Steelhead
Updated:AuqLrt 8,2002
SpeciesfIES1.1'Status (E=Endwgered, T=Threatened,rno./yr.) Next Steps
LlsW: Non ................
Pink Salmon Not Warranted: 1)Even-year ESU(10.55)
2)Odd-year ESU(105)
Listed: 1)Central CA ESU(T-10,1913) Re-assess ESLYs fisting status
2)Southern OR/Northern CA Coasts ESU(-r-W) Re-assess ESLYs fisting slams
Coho Salmon A).DRp" ..................................... Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical habitat
Candidates: 1)Puget SoildStailtolGeorgia ESU(7,SS)
2)Lowe .. ......RlverSouthwest WA ESU J7 .............. Re-assess ESLIs fistingfistingstatus... ..... ......................................
Not Warranted: 1)Olympic Peninsula ESU&'95)
Listed: 1)Sacramento River Wirdet-run ESU(E-IM) Re-assess ESU's fistirig status
2)Snake River Fall.rn ESU(T-4192) Re-assess ESU's fisting status
3)Snake River Spring-'Surnnner-r-n ESU(T-4192) Re-assess ESU's listing status
4)Puget Sound ESU(T-3.190) Re-assess ESU's rising status&crrdcal habta-.
Chinook 5)Lower Cdurnbla River ESU(T-3M) Re-assess ESU's risIrig viatus&critical habitat
Salmon 6)Upper Willamette F;Uver ESU F-2-99) Re-assess ESU's lining Status&critical habita:
7)Upper Colu.mbla,River S-x..-Ig-urt ESU(E-3199) Re-assess ESU's lis'Jing status&critical habita-
8)Central Valley Spring-run ESU rr-SM) Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical haNta-.
9),CA Coastal ESU.t7.7 9!991........ ................................ Re-assess ESU's Using status&critical hab4ta!
Candidates: 1.)..Central..Valley.Fell and Ia"fj!�''-Ejn.ESU(
Not Warranted: 1)Upper K'arnathi-Trinity Rivers ESU(31M)
2)OR Coast ESU(-SM)
3)WA Coast ESU(3/98)
4)Kd-Columbia River Spfing-rin ESU(3M)
5)Upper Columbia River Surnrner+al-run ESU(3198)
6)Southem CR and Northern CA Coastal ESU(9M)
7)Deschutes River Summer/Fall-run ESU-(9199)
usbad: 1)Hwd0a.ial Summer-tun ESU(r-a%) Re-assess ESU's listing status&cAjcW habitat
Chum Salmon 2)Co7.-&YWa River ESU(T Re-assess ESU's Using status&critical habfta7.
........................................... . ........................I................
Not warranted: 1)Puget SoundiStrait of Georgia ESU(3198)
2)Pacific Coast ESU(3198)
Usad: 1l)Snake River ESU(E-1Il.V)
Re assess ESU's listing status&C.6ical habitat
AjRq).......................................
Sockge NotWairrarillisid: 1)Baker River ESU(V99'
2)Okanogan River ESU(3198)
3)Lake Wenatchee ESU(3W)
4)Quinauit Lake ESU(3198)
6)Lake Pleasant ESU(3M)
Listed: 1)Southem CA ESU(E-8/97) Re-assess ESU's aiticad habitat
2)Socith-Central CA Coast ESU(T-8,197) Re-assess ESU's listing status&aftical habitat
3)Central CA Coast ESU(T-8r97) Re-assess F-SILI's listing status&critical habitat
4)Upper Caurrt-,ia River ESU(E-FA7) Re-assess ESU*s listing status&critical habi:at
Steelhead 5)Snake Rver Basin ESU(T-11`057) Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical habitat
CN Loym"Go:urntLa River ESU T--198) Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical habitat
7)CA Central Vaiiey ESU(T-3.-W) Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical habitat
8)Upper Willamette ESU(T-2M) Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical habitat
9)Midde Columbia Rfw.ESU(T-3M9) Re-assess ESU's listing status&critical habitat,
..Ip).Northam CAE .(T-.§,
SU Re-assess ESU's lisdno s-atuss&critical habitat
Candidaltsili:
NolWarranted: 1)SoultwiesIlWAESU(8M)
2)OV.0pic Peninsula ESU(M)
3)Puget Sound ESU(M6)
4)10arnart Mountains Province ESU'4!01)
An Evolutionarly Significant,Unit or"ESU"Is a distinctive,group of Pacific salmon or steelhead.
APPENDIX D
Checklist for Documenting Environmental Baseline and
Effects of Proposed Action(s) on Relevant Indicators
68
APPENDIX C.CHECKLIST FOR DOCUMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND EFFECTS OF
PROPOSED ACTION(S)ON RELEVANT INDICATORS
Effects Of Action
Pathway Indicator Improve' Maintain Degrade3
Construction Noise X
Disturbances Entrainment X
Stranding X
Water quality Turbidity X
Chemical X
containment/nutrients
Temperature X
Stormwater Quality/Quantity X
Sediment Sources X
Quality X
Habitat Elements Fish access Refuge X
Substrate X
LWD X
Pool frequency X
Pool Quality X
Off-channel Habitat X
Saltwater/freshwater X
mixing
Channel Conditions Shoreline X
Streambank Conditions X
Flow/Hydrology Peak/Base Flow X
Drainage Network X
Biota Epibenthic Zooplankton X
Freshwater Insects X
Aquatic vegetation X
Prey-forage fish X
Nonindigenous species X
Ecological diversity X
1 =Action will contribute to long term improvement over existing conditions
2=Action will maintain existing conditions
3=action will contribute to long-term degradation over existing conditions
69
APPENDIX E
Draft Bald Eagle Status Report
Final Bald Eagle Status Report:
Executive Summary
The early summer population of bald eagles when white settlers first arrived in
Washington may have been around 6,500. Persecution, the cutting of forests,
commercial exploitation of salmon runs, and finally the use of DDT reduced the
state's population to only 105 known breeding pairs by 1980. Loss of wetlands,
contamination of estuaries, and declines in water quality also probably have
reduced the carrying capacity for eagles. The erection of>1,000 dams and the
introduction of warm water fishes, however, has likely added nesting and
wintering sites and produced changes in local distribution and abundance of
eagles. The population has recovered dramatically with the ban on DDT use after
1972 and increased protection for eagles and eagle habitat. In the past 20 years,
the population of nesting bald eagles grew about 10% per year as eagles
reoccupied habitat. Based on a model, the population is predicted to reach
carrying capacity at about 733 nesting pairs. In 1998, there were 664 occupied
nests, and there are some indications that the population has reached carrying
capacity in parts of western Washington. The population may still be increasing
in northeastern Washington and along some western Washington rivers. Though
the nesting habitat may be saturated around Puget Sound and other marine
coasts, the total late spring/early summer population may continue to grow with
an increase in the pool of non-breeding adults until all available food resources
are exploited. If there is no decline in the number of nest sites, productivity, or
survival, the population may stabilize around 4,400.
Comprehensive, statewide surveys of wintering eagles in Washington from 1982-
89 counted 1,000-3,000 eagles in the state. The increasing trends in those
surveys and in resident breeding birds predict a population of 3,200 winter
visitors and a total winter population of about 4,500 bald eagles in Washington in
the year 2000; this assumes that winter carrying capacity limits have not been
reached. Statewide winter counts have not been conducted in recent years, and
the carrying capacity is unknown. The number of resident breeders, and trends in
localized winter counts suggest that Washington hosts perhaps 3,500 —4,000
bald eagles each winter. Up to 80% of the eagles seen in mid-winter in
Washington consists of migrants, largely from the Canadian provinces and
Alaska. Wintering eagles will most benefit from protection of salmon runs and
communal roosts, and managing human disturbance at eagle concentration
areas.
Almost no late seral forest remains in the lowlands around Puget Sound, and
eagles nest in small patches of residual large trees and second growth. The large
trees along shorelines used by eagles are a diminishing resource, as more and
more shoreline is dedicated to residential development. Only 1% of the Puget
70
Sound Douglas-fir Zone is found on lands dedicated to the conservation of
biodiversity. Conservation of bald eagle nesting habitat is difficult because 80%
of the land within '/2 mile of shores is privately owned, and contains desirable
view property. Two thirds of the aggregate land within eagle territories and two
thirds of eagle nests are on private lands. The state bald eagle protection rule
(WAC 232-12-292) requires a management plan for development, forest
practices, or potentially disturbing activities on state and private lands near eagle
nests and roosts. Over 1,200 management plans have been signed by
Washington landowners since 1986. There are indications that some eagles in
Washington, and other states, have become fairly tolerant of human activity near
nests. Most eagles, particularly those in rural areas, remain rather sensitive to
disturbance during nesting.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is expected to remove the bald eagle from the
federal list of threatened and endangered species in 2001. Bald eagles will still
be protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act also prohibits disturbance
or molesting of eagles. Despite state and federal protection, a large percentage
of fatalities of adult bald eagles have human related causes, including shooting,
poisoning, vehicle collisions, and electrocution, and a black market trade in eagle
feathers and parts still exists.
Although the breeding population of bald eagles in Washington has increased
dramatically in the past 20 years, two thirds of nests are on private lands. Only
about 10% of eagle nests are on lands where their habitat values could be
considered secure in the absence of habitat protection rules. Land near shores is
highly desirable for residential development and the human population of
Washington is expected to increase by 2 million to 7.7 million in the next 20
years, and double to 11 million by 2050. Forest near shores is rapidly being
cleared, and the needs of eagles and desires of humans are increasingly in
conflict. Without protections of nesting and roosting habitat, the bald eagle could
again decline dramatically and require re-listing as threatened or endangered in
the state. For these reasons we recommend that the bald eagle be down-listed to
sensitive, but not de-listed, in the State of Washington, and that the bald eagle
protection rule be amended to apply to a Sensitive species.
71