Washington Trout

Washington Trout
Port Ludlow Water Type Survey, Spring 2001 and 2002
SUMMARY

Recent changes in state forest practice rules and Jefferson County development codes have led to a pressing need to update and verify water type maps. If the extent and distribution of fish and fish habitat are not known, full legal protection cannot be provided to sensitive stream habitats to protect them from harmful land use practices. In response to this need, the Port Gamble S�Klallam Tribe, in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the Rain Shadow Chapter of Trout Unlimited, contracted Washington Trout to conduct water type surveys for the Ludlow Creek area to provide local documentation for Jefferson County staff and the general public regarding the extent and pattern of water typing errors in east Jefferson County.

In spring 2001, Washington Trout performed water-typing surveys in the vicinity of Port Ludlow in Jefferson County, Washington, to determine the distribution of fish and fish habitat to ensure that wild-fish habitats receive the maximum legal protections available. Over a 5 week period, Washington Trout surveyed 37 miles of stream habitat, comprised of dozens of individual streams and two large watersheds (Ludlow Creek, Shine Creek) in the Port Ludlow vicinity, along northern end of Hood Canal. The survey area extended from Oak Bay in the North to just east of Thorndyke Creek in the South (with some discontinuity). The survey area incorporated approximately 40 sq. miles, drained by small streams with a variety of gradient characteristics. The geographic focus of this pilot study targeted an area that is anticipated to have heavy development pressure in coming years, relatively easy access, and yet has no known freshwater habitat use by ESA listed salmonids such as Hood Canal summer chum, Puget Sound chinook, or bull trout. Within 100 m of tidal areas sampling was limited to visual observation; backpack electrofishing equipment was not employed in these areas since outmigrant juvenile salmonids such as chinook have been observed utilizing the extreme lower reaches of small, independent tidal creeks in Hood Canal. In the event that chinook or bull trout were encountered in the course of fieldwork, the field crews were prepared to immediately terminate the survey and contact USFWS, NMFS, and WDFW; however, no ESA-listed species were encountered during the surveys.

In spring 2002, Washington Trout extended the previous year�s survey effort to include an additional 24 miles of stream; both within the 2001 geographic scope, and on the east side of Hood Canal.�

Washington Trout conducted the surveys following Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) watertype protocols (WAC 222-16-030 and Section 13 of the Washington Forest Practices Board Manual), including the verification of fish presence by visual observation or by electrofishing. Field crews of 2-3 persons walked each stream identified on current WDNR water type maps, verifying habitat characteristics and fish presence/absence by visual observation or by electrofishing. Prior to the field phase, project biologists consulted with local WDFW Area Habitat Biologist Chris Byrnes to determine which streams have recently undergone field surveys but for which stream type upgrades have not been formally submitted. Permission from landowners to access private property was obtained prior to the fieldwork. To minimize potential negative impacts to fish from electrofishing, visual observation was the preferred method to document fish presence. Washington Trout field crews charted new stream courses not depicted on water type maps and evaluated these unmapped streams for fish use. Survey crews employed GPS (Global Positioning Systems), where feasible, to facilitate data transfer and integration with existing map layers. During the course of the surveys, crews made supplementary habitat observations and recorded provisional data on the following parameters: in-stream features, water supplies, and photograph points, culverts, and fish specimen.

Significantly, in 2001 Washington Trout was unable to obtain water-type results for approximately 9 miles of stream (25% of the stream length surveyed) due to the State-declared drought conditions that occurred that year. These stream channels exhibited characteristics suggesting that, during non-drought years, fish could use the habitats. Instead of identifying these habitats as non-fish bearing, they were assigned a �Go Back� status, to be re-surveyed during normal water conditions.� A subsample of the nine miles of channel surveyed and identified as �Go Back� in 2001 was revisited to determine the extent to which inter-annual variation in watertype is measurable.� Of the 3.25 miles of �Go Back� that were sub-sampled in 2002, 0.67 miles were found to be Type 3.

WDNR had classified many Port Ludlow streams as non fish-bearing, only a handful as types-three through five, and many were unclassified, identified in the wrong location, or not identified at all on the official watertype maps. Of the approximate 64 miles of surveyed streams, approximately 24 miles received water type upgrades, approximately 40 miles received no change in classification, and approximately 5 miles were identified as go backs. Approximately 9 miles of stream were upgraded from non fish-bearing to fish-bearing.

The water-typing data from this survey have been recorded, analyzed, and submitted to the WDNR to amend the official Washington State water-type maps.

Conclusion
Washington Trout�s watertyping survey documented that, in this subsample of Jefferson County streams (excluding those classified as �Go Back�), 37 percent of the streams had been assigned incorrect watertypes by WDNR and were subsequently not receiving the protection warranted. This statistic includes approximately 7 miles of streams that had not previously been identified on the official WDNR maps.

These findings reinforce a pattern identified in Washington Trout's larger Habitat Lost & Found program, underscoring the need for accurate, comprehensive, and consistent water typing across Washington's landscape.

The Port Ludlow Water Type Survey has helped develop a credible, science-based report to provide local documentation for Jefferson County staff and the general public regarding the pattern and extent of water typing errors in east Jefferson County. Jefferson County planning entities and relevant resource management agencies can use the results of the Water Type Survey to make efficient and responsible planning decisions that provide the appropriate amounts of protection to the area�s sensitive resources.

Acknowledgements
In response to the widely documented inconsistencies between on-the-ground surveys and official WDNR watertype maps, and the common practice of local agencies employing WDNR watertype to regulate streamside actions outside of forest practice lands, the Port Gamble S�Klallam Tribe recognized the need to better understand the extent of watertype errors within Jefferson County. Project partners, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Point No Point Treaty Council, and the Rain Shadow Chapter of Trout Unlimited, contributed to the design and implementation of this Port Ludlow Water Type Survey project. The Port Gamble S�Klallam Tribe provided funding for the project. Numerous private landowners provided access to their lands for the water type surveys. In particular, we thank Pope Resources/Olympic Resource Management for access permission and logistical assistance.