Final Joint WDFW/Tribal Wild Salmonid Policy

Back to TOC	Next Section

The Wild Salmonid Policy addresses habitat protection and restoration because habitat is essential to wild salmonid protection. Habitat protection and restoration crosses agency and governmental lines and requires coordination at the fundamental level of determining habitat needs for salmonids. The Department and Tribes will pursue implementation of this policy to the greatest extent possible within governing statutes and regulations, and will encourage other governmental and private entities to provide new statutes, regulations, and funding necessary for full implementation. Habitat protection and restoration will occur primarily through a combination of locally-based watershed planning and general policy objectives that have the flexibility to implement performance measures and action strategies in light of local conditions. State, Tribal, local or federal regulatory authorities will not be relinquished during locally-based watershed planning, but these authorities shall be used in a manner that supports locally-based planning consistent with this document. Regulatory action should be taken when authority to implement standards and requirements exists and voluntary actions are either not being taken or are insufficient to achieve compliance consistent with this document. Statewide planning or rule-making will occur on a collaborative basis. The Department and the Tribes will participate in the Timber, Fish, and Wildlife process to develop a Forestry Module intended to address Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act standards on state and private forest lands.⁸ The Governor's Joint Cabinet for Natural Resources, the Washington State Natural Resources Council, and the Joint Legislative Task Force on Salmon Recovery are among the appropriate forums to address fish and wildlife habitat issues related to agriculture and development on a statewide basis.

Protection and restoration of salmonid habitat also: (1) benefits other fish and wildlife resources, (2) protects valuable ecosystem features, such as flood plains and wetlands, (3) reduces flood damages and other community infrastructure costs, (4) facilitates groundwater recharge and helps to prevent ground and surface water contamination, and (5) contributes to maintenance of a healthy economic climate across the state.

There are a myriad of laws and actions that affect habitat protection and restoration. Indeed, habitat protection and restoration has improved significantly over the last 20 years. Some forest practices, for example, now employ "watershed analysis." This tool assesses salmonid habitat condition on state and private forest lands, determines the likely impact of proposed forest practices, and develops prescriptions designed to protect instream resources while allowing certain levels of forest practice activities. Where the Growth Management Act (GMA) applies, it couples land use and zoning with protection of critical areas including salmonid habitat. The GMA has brought some improvement in habitat protection. These are important steps and should continue. However, without continued modification and significant improvement of the state's habitat management programs, salmonid habitat will continue to decline in productive capacity, causing the loss of additional wild salmonid populations.

Many government programs, regulations, and plans affect land use. These directly or indirectly protect salmonid habitat. There are also non-regulatory programs that provide technical assistance or financial assistance for stewardship practices. There is also a growing number of volunteer efforts to restore salmonid habitat.

These regulatory programs limit one or more aspect of the use of land or water. Any one project may be subject to a multitude of requirements from the listed programs. Some of the programs prescribe specific processes (e.g., SEPA, NEPA, GMA ), others require specific permits, and some both (e.g., Shoreline Management Act). The permits frequently have different time requirements, sometimes even contradictions, and getting required permits can last several years for major projects. There are no consistent, coordinated, statewide goals, performance measures, or action strategies.

Habitat protection requires a high degree of specificity and guidance about "what fish need". The policy defines narrative and numeric performance measures that reflect the best available science to evaluate biological and physical processes for salmonids. The performance measures will be used to direct adaptive management and policy decision making, ensure compliance and accountability, and measure adequacy of implementation. Achieving the performance measures will also ensure consistency in achieving the goals of this policy. The Policy intends that performance measures will have a level of force and accountability comparable to that provided for by other elements of the Policy over which the co-managers have direct control. This document encourages local planning for specific implementation consistent with these policies and performance measures. In the absence of adequate local implementation, the obligation will rest with state and tribal entities to implement these policies.

It will be the policy of the Tribal Parties and the Fish and Wildlife Commission that:

1. Protection and restoration of wild salmonid habitat is fundamental to meeting the overall Wild Salmonid Policy goal. This will require identification and provision for the habitat needs of wild salmonids, identification of natural and human effects on habitat, and implementation of actions that will maintain or increase the quality and quantity of habitat necessary to sustain and restore salmonid populations.

2. The Department and Tribal Parties will advocate for the habitat measures identified within this document. The Department shall within two years of the adoption of this policy review its Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) rules and work with Tribal Parties and affected parties to commence rulemaking to effectively implement the habitat measures in this document. In advance of such rule review, the Department shall review applications for HPAs in accordance with its statutory authority and in light of the information about protection of fish life reflected in this document. During the next year, through co-management, the Department and the Tribal Parties will improve the HPA process. The improved process will enhance data sharing and provide timely notice to the affected Tribal Parties and a meaningful opportunity for review and comment on applications prior to their approval.

3. Habitat protection and restoration will require a comprehensive watershed-based approach that will stress the continuum that extends throughout the watershed, its estuary, and near shore marine waters. The Department and Tribal Parties will provide the leadership and coordination for protection and restoration through cooperative planning and appropriate programs. The affected Tribes and the Department are conducting watershed assessments and will increase these efforts to identify limiting factors in the watersheds. The Department and Tribes should involve other appropriate parties and encourage development of local proposals, consistent with appropriate guidance, for habitat preservation, protection, and restoration that addresses such limiting factors.

4. A balance of local implementation processes and state level regulation is essential to habitat protection and restoration. A state and local government regulatory framework should remain in place. New, or revised, statutory or rule-making authority recommendations, if needed, should result from collaborative discussion by all interested parties, including Tribal Parties, and should include additional SEPA review. Local implementation processes for habitat protection and restoration shall recognize tribal sovereignty in government-to-government interactions, be sensitive to the rights of citizens, and be accountable for protecting habitat.

5. Habitat goals, performance measures, and action strategies should apply to all salmonid habitat, regardless of land use and regardless of ownership.

6. The Department and Tribal Parties will cooperatively review local land use decisions and ordinance revisions to determine consistency with the performance measures of the Wild Salmonid Policy.

7. Many local, state, and federal laws currently exist to address elements of this policy, including water quality and quantity, habitat mitigation, and land use planning laws. The Department and Tribal Parties will work to ensure rigorous enforcement of existing applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

This policy strongly encourages local problem solving with state, local, and federal agencies, and tribes at the table. The Department and Tribal Parties, as co-managers of salmon fisheries, should provide technical support and represent the habitat measures, but they should also be at the table as partners, working collaboratively with local citizens to achieve Wild Salmonid Policy goals. The Department and Tribal Parties will encourage other state agencies to assume a similar role. Individual habitat performance measures can be amended to reflect local habitat conditions, provided the amendments remain consistent with the habitat goals defined in this Policy. The Department and Tribal Parties will not endorse funding for projects or watershed plans that are not consistent with the habitat goals of this Policy. If projects, watershed plans, or local ordinances are inconsistent with this Policy, the Department and Tribal Parties will inform the Governor, National Marine Fisheries Service, and other appropriate parties of the inconsistencies.

Identification of the actual makeup and operating principles for watershed groups is beyond the scope of this policy. However, watershed groups should be diverse and be representative of all interests within the community. To the extent possible, existing watershed groups should be considered and included in any planning and implementation scenario.

The policy encourages, and builds on, numerous existing regulatory, proprietary, voluntary, and incentive or grant-based efforts such as the Growth Management Act, the Shoreline Management Act, the WDFW Hydraulic Code, the Department of Natural Resources Habitat Conservation Plan, the Puget Sound Action Plan, Ecosystem Standards for State-owned Agricultural Lands, the Timber, Fish, and Wildlife Agreement (TFW), and recent improvements to the Forest Practices Act Rules and Regulations, individual landowner farm and forest plans, habitat restoration efforts, and water conservation measures, many developed through the State Conservation Commission. Further, programs such as Jobs for the Environment, and Regional Fisheries Enhancement Groups, have made significant contributions to fish habitat improvement and protection.

This brief list clearly does not provide credit for all the positive efforts we have collectively taken, but serves to acknowledge the intent of our citizens to support salmonid habitat protection and restoration. For example, the TFW "Forestry Module" is a cooperative effort by agencies, tribes, and citizens to develop an ESA and Clean Water Act strategy that includes all the habitat components in this policy as they relate to forest practices on state and private forest lands. WDFW and the Tribal Parties are parties to the TFW agreement and will defer to this process with the expectation that biological objectives for wild salmonids will be met.⁹

Maintenance of less intensive land uses, such as agriculture and forestry, when managed consistent with this policy, are integral to achieving the goals of the Wild Salmonid Policy. Providing technical assistance and other incentives to encourage landowners to continue in forestry and agriculture, consistent with the principles of this Policy, should be an integral part of watershed plans and/or collaborative rule-making processes.

The exact methods and products that will be developed to implement the habitat components of the policy are beyond the scope of this Policy. It is anticipated that additional plans, actions, agreements, and/or regulations will be developed, in most cases in arenas outside the WDFW rule-making process. It is also expected that additional SEPA review will be done to address the specific environmental impacts of those implementation actions subject to SEPA. In any event, successful implementation of the policy will require close coordination and cooperation of agencies, tribes, and individual landowners.

It is important to recognize that habitat protection and restoration are critical to the survival, production, and utilization of both wild and hatchery salmonids. This is because hatchery fish require high quality water in sufficient supply for efficient on-station incubation and rearing, and because they rely on the same habitat conditions as wild fish once they are released to the wild. If we allow habitat quality to decline, most hatcheries and other fish rearing facilities will eventually fail. Therefore, we cannot rely on increases in hatchery fish production to maintain harvest levels without addressing the same habitat issues as for wild salmonids.

In addition to this policy, other governmental obligations to rebuilding wild salmonids include the Pacific Salmon Treaty, the Magnuson Act, and the Columbia River Compact. These agreements require recovery of salmon to utilization or harvestable levels. Reductions in harvest levels alone cannot maintain wild salmonid populations. Merely reducing harvest does nothing to improve habitat conditions. Sound and sustainable salmonid management requires long-term habitat protection and restoration, from the spawning gravel through the full range of rearing and adult residency habitats.

The habitat policy is arranged along salmonid life history needs, and the physical processes and habitat types affecting them. It consists of nine components.

The Habitat Policy components are:

1. Habitat Protection and Management
2. Basin Hydrology and Stream Flow
3. Water and Sediment Quality and Sediment Transport
4. Stream Channel Complexity
5. Riparian Areas and Wetlands
6. Lakes
7. Marine Areas
8. Fish Passage and Access
9. Habitat Restoration

It is important to recognize the inter-relationships between these components. Inadequate attention to one or more habitat components can reduce, or eliminate, the benefit of achieving the performance measures of another. For example, riparian buffers and stream channel complexity will be of reduced value to wild salmonids if flows are inadequate, or fish access is denied. For anadromous salmonids, production gained from fresh water may be lost if nearshore marine conditions for feeding and migration are inadequate. Habitat quality is also related to spawner abundance. Freshwater productivity may be heavily influenced by returning adult salmon whose carcasses provide a source of marine-derived nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon) to the aquatic and riparian zone.

Protection and restoration of useable wild salmonid habitat is fundamental to meeting the overall Wild Salmonid Policy goal. Useable salmonid fish habitats include those areas historically and currently utilized by salmonids, and those areas that can be made useable by restoration or enhancement activities. Failure to protect and restore habitat will severely constrain, or eliminate, our harvest management, hatchery, and genetic conservation options to utilize and protect wild salmonids. Fundamentally, protection of wild salmonid habitat is the most effective way to ensure preservation of the salmonid resource. However, given the current degraded state of much of our habitat base, restoration of that habitat is also integral to recovery of wild salmonid populations.

The WSP recognizes that society and individual landowners can manage their activities to avoid impacts on wild salmonid habitat (e.g., managing basin hydrology and instream flows to influence water quantity; protecting or restoring floodplains and wetlands to influence water quantity, water quality, and fish use). This section emphasizes the importance of partnerships, since no single organization or group has complete authority to protect and manage fish habitat - management responsibility is held by multiple agencies and local governments (towns, cities, counties). Furthermore, most regulations are minimum standards and the overall level of protection afforded wild salmonids varies widely, from comprehensive, rigorous protection, to virtually none at all.

The Department has regulatory authority to protect salmonid habitat under the State Hydraulic Code. The Hydraulic Code requires that a permit be obtained from the Department for any activities that use, divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow or bed of waters of the state. The Department also has authority over fish passage at in-stream structures and can require screening of water diversion intakes. However, these WDFW actions are usually reactive to land use patterns and/or do not fully address the cumulative effects of watershed activities that affect stream and marine habitat. The Department and the Tribal Parties have the ability and responsibility to provide input into a variety of state and local activities. These activities include, but are not limited to, SEPA, forest practice applications, growth management plans, and water rights applications. The policies of this Policy will be used to guide input into these processes. It is a high priority to ensure these activities are consistent with this Policy. The Department and the Tribal Parties will utilize this document to guide challenges to these activities that are inconsistent with the goals and objectives of this Policy.

Protecting and restoring useable salmonid habitat requires recognition of the dynamic nature of the physical processes that influence habitat, and requires better-coordinated planning and regulatory efforts. It also requires complete and accurate inventory and assessment of existing, or potential, salmonid habitat, and land uses affecting that habitat.

Successful protection and restoration of wild salmonids and salmonid fisheries will require the participation of all levels of government and the Tribes. Under co-management, the State shares responsibility with the Tribes for managing fishery resources. Local governments and private interest groups have unique authorities and responsibilities that can affect salmonid habitat. All these groups should be brought into watershed planning processes. Further, the Governor has established a Joint Cabinet for Natural Resources and the Washington State Natural Resources Council will help guide interactions with the Tribes at both the state and local levels. The Department will be an active participant in the Natural Resources Cabinet as a vehicle to achieve wild salmonid protection. The Joint Legislative Task Force on Salmon Recovery will also be reviewing action strategies for salmonid recovery.

Performance Measures

The ultimate performance measure for habitat is a level of productivity and production that will sustain robust fisheries, while maintaining healthy adult spawning populations. However, relationships between habitat conditions and salmonid productivity are evolving. Therefore, the approach used will be to define performance measures based on the physical conditions within salmonid habitats that are expected to create good productivity. This is an indirect approach, that must periodically be evaluated to ensure its applicability. The physical performance measures are described in the habitat components that follow. They are based on our current understanding of what is expected to provide good salmonid habitat and productivity, and will be periodically updated as new or additional information becomes available.

This component addresses stream flow from two dimensions: (1), maintenance or restoration of natural physical processes affecting hydrologic regimes (flow timing, volume, and duration); and, (2) maintenance or restoration of flows through administration of water rights, instream resources programs, water conservation strategies and similar programs.

Floods and droughts are natural events, and anadromous and resident salmonids evolved in basins subject to variable, but generally predictable, flow regimes. Salmonid evolutionary responses for survival and reproduction - where and when they rear, migrate, and spawn - are reflected in those flow regimes (the basin hydrology). The adaptive responses for salmonid species are complex, involving several kinds of habitats, in various parts of a river basin, over a relatively short time period. Many of the responses and habitat requirements are not well understood. Therefore, salmonid habitat requirements for basin hydrology should consist of flow patterns that reflect the natural hydrologic regime under unmanaged conditions.

Land use can have a significant affect on basin hydrology. For example, in urbanizing basins, increases in the amount of impervious surface within basins will increase peak run-off and storm flows, restrict groundwater recharge, and restrict summer base flows. Certain forest practices can alter peak run-off, especially where timber harvest occurs in transient rain-on-snow zones, and certain agricultural practices can alter basin hydrology through changes in vegetation and surface compaction. In addition, surface water flows are influenced by sediment transport rates, groundwater recharge, floodplain connectivity, riparian area condition, and the size, condition, location and extent of wetlands.

Stream flows are affected as well by water withdrawals for off-stream use, by certain groundwater withdrawals, and by in-stream impoundment and release operations to achieve flood control, hydropower, and other societal objectives. Water quantity requirements for wild salmonids can be met in part through management of activities that affect basin hydrology and stream flow (e.g., land use planning and land use regulation, timber harvest planning, etc.), and through efficient management of water use including maintenance and restoration of stream flows.

Performance Measures

1. In streams or basins that provide useable wild salmonid habitat, and where stream flows have been adopted or are being revised, the performance measure will be the stream flow as adopted by rule. Where review is requested the objective will be to establish or revise stream flows to optimize habitat conditions for migration, spawning, incubation, and rearing of wild salmonids and their prey.
   

2. Physical indicators within a watershed should also be used, where applicable, as performance measures to assess or achieve the goals for basin hydrology and stream flow. These performance measures are typically expressed as thresholds of change - if the thresholds are exceeded, habitat conditions including water quality and water quantity decline dramatically, and often irreversibly. Threshold management can help to maintain or restore natural basin hydrology and stream flow. Examples of thresholds include:
   
   1. Percent effective impervious surfaces - including road surfaces, rooftops, compacted soils, and parking lots. As percent effective impervious area exceeds a threshold range of 5-10 percent in a subbasin watershed, stream conditions (including the frequency and intensity of high flows and water quality) begin to deteriorate. Groundwater recharge and summer low flows also usually decline, although the relationship is not always as predictable. The threshold may be applied to stream reaches, subbasins, or wetlands. In subbasins where the threshold has been exceeded, there will be a joint assessment with the affected Tribal Parties and other interested persons to determine what useable wild salmonid habitat remains and evaluate the effectiveness of existing or proposed stormwater controls using the best available science.

   2. Forest harvest and road density - the seasonal timing of forest harvests, and the density of roads in harvesting areas, can have significant effects on stream flows. The percent of upland forests at hydrologic maturity, and percent clearcut in rain-on-snow zones, have been used as thresholds beyond which significant adverse impacts on basin hydrology and stream flow will be expected. The thresholds are basin specific. For western Washington subbasin watersheds, a threshold of approximately 60% of standing timber at age 25 or more will begin to reflect hydrologic maturity. The effect of road densities is even more basin specific and will require some form of analysis and discussion to arrive at a threshold number, or other management prescription, to protect against unnaturally high stream flows.

   3. Threshold grazing standards should be set at the basin specific level. On state lands, guidance is available in the HB1309 Ecosystem Standards for State-Owned Agricultural and Grazing Lands. This guidance may also have application on other ownerships as a reference document.

Water and sediments within specific ranges of physical and chemical characteristics are essential to healthy and productive wild salmonid populations. Both water and sediment are excellent media for the uptake, storage, transportation, and concentration of dissolved and particulate materials. Natural rates of sediment delivery and routing within streams and marine areas are essential to creating and maintaining salmonid habitat, but accelerated rates of sediment erosion/deposition are usually detrimental to salmonid habitat.

Human activities can affect sediment delivery and routing, and introduce potentially toxic substances to water and sediment that can have deleterious effects on salmonids and the food webs they rely upon.

Preventing and minimizing releases of oil and other toxic or deleterious substances to the aquatic environment has been demonstrated to be much more cost-effective than remediation and restoration. Persistent hazardous materials accumulate in sediment depositional areas, such as wetlands and estuaries, where remediation options are very expensive.

Performance Measures

1. Maintain productive aquatic habitats for salmonids and their prey bases that contain a balanced, integrated community of organisms, having species composition, abundance, diversity, structure, and organization comparable to that in unimpacted reference ecosystems of the region.
   

2. Physical and chemical parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity, and suspended solids levels will meet or exceed state surface water quality standards, including narrative standards and anti-degradation provisions, for waters of the state as set under applicable law.
   

3. Freshwater and marine areas that affect salmonids should meet or exceed water and sediment quality criteria, as established for toxic or deleterious pollutants that can affect the survival, growth, or reproductive success of salmonids or prey species. These areas will also meet or exceed human health standards for fish consumption.
   

4. Spawning areas are impaired if fine sediments (<.85mm) among spawning gravel exceeds 11%. However, if fine sediment levels naturally exceed 11% in spawning or rearing habitat, then sediment concentrations should not exceed natural levels.

Salmonids have evolved and adapted to streams that possess a variety of in-channel features important to spawning, rearing, and migration. These features include (1) frequency of pools and riffles, (2) substrate size and distribution, (3) sediment delivery and transport processes, (4) water depth and velocity, (5) undercut banks, (6) in-stream woody debris, and (7) a variety of side-channel and off-channel habitats. Stream channels exhibit various levels of complexity dependent upon their degree of confinement within their valley walls, their steepness and size, the geologic makeup of the basin, and the hydrologic regime. Stream complexity is subject to natural levels of disturbance, particularly as a result of catastrophic events, such as wildfire and disease affecting riparian areas, and by landslides and debris torrents.

However, in-stream complexity has been reduced or lost as well, due to human activities, such as removal of large woody debris, channel encroachments (including bank hardening), dredging, relocation and realignment, loss of side-channel, off-channel and floodway connectivity (diking, channel aggregation, tide gates) , conversion of free-flowing reaches to impoundments, burial of streams in culverts to facilitate development, and installation of road crossing structures.

Performance Measures

1. It is the objective that spawning gravel be relatively stable, with a low potential for scour, throughout the nest building and incubation period of the wild salmonid species in the basin. Salmonid production will be considered impaired if the frequency or depth of scour exceeds the natural disturbance rate and magnitude.

2. It is the objective that adult salmonid holding pools contain sufficient depth (depending on species and stream, but generally greater than one meter) and associated cover.

3. It is the objective that more than 90% of channel banks on streams be stable through natural processes (vegetation root strength), relative to natural rates of erosion in the basin. Stability, if needed, can be provided in a number of ways. The need for stability should not override natural processes. If bank protection is necessary, bioengineering methods are preferred. Bank protection measures that are detrimental to salmonid habitat should be prohibited unless adverse impacts are fully mitigated using proven methods.

4. At a minimum, the performance measures relative to pools and large woody debris in forested and previously forested areas, should conform to those in the Washington State Watershed Analysis Manual (listed below, from WAC 222-22), unless locally defined based on the best available science. The quality and quantity of large woody debris in streams and the potential for future recruitment should not be impaired by human activities regardless of which performance measure is used.
   1. In streams of any gradient, but less than 15 meters wide, the frequency of pools should not occur at intervals less than one pool for every two channel widths in length.

   2. The percent pools in a stream will not be impaired by the presence of sediments, or the effects of human disturbances. For streams less than 15 meters wide, the percent pools should be greater than 55%, greater than 40%, and greater than 30% for streams with gradients of less than 2%, 2-5% and more than 5%, respectively.

   3. The quantity and quality of LWD in streams should not be impaired by human activities. For streams less than 20 meters wide, the number of pieces of LWD larger than 10 centimeters for every channel width, should exceed two; the number of key LWD pieces per "bank full width" (BFW) should be greater than 0.3 pieces for streams less than 10 meters BFW, and greater than 0.5 pieces for streams 10-20 meters BFW. Key piece size criteria are defined in the Washington State Watershed Analysis Manual.

5. Side channels and other off-channel habitat, including wetlands, should remain connected and passable by salmonids to the channel proper. Where feasible, dikes or levees, bridge approaches, and other structures that are constricting floodplains, should be removed or modified to allow flood flow, storage, recharge, and release.
   

6. It is the objective to manage stormwater so that there will be no increase in the number, frequency, or duration of flows that form channels or create scour, nor exceed those flows conducive to salmonid rearing. Maintenance of other stream channel complexity features, identified under policy statement # 10, should also be maintained and restored to natural frequency and distribution in stream channels.

Riparian areas are those areas immediately adjacent to streams, wetlands, and marine shorelines. The trees, shrubs, herbs and grasses comprising riparian vegetation influence aquatic areas, and in turn are influenced by them. Riparian areas are vitally important for maintaining, in varying levels of contribution, the water quantity, water quality, food supply, shelter, migration, and reproductive needs for wild salmonids. Fully functional, naturally vegetated riparian areas have the following attributes:

1. Contribute sizes and species of large woody debris to the aquatic zone that (1) dissipate energy, (2) trap and route sediments, (3) retain detritus and salmonid carcasses, (4) maintain channel complexity, and (5) assist in flood plain formation.

2. Create and maintain spawning, rearing, and migratory habitat for salmonids and their prey.

3. Provide shade, and subsequently reduce summer stream temperature, and ameliorate winter low stream temperature.

4. Maintain vegetative community integrity and diversity that prevents debris flows, controls sediment delivery and transport, provides a source of nutrients to the channel, and stabilizes stream banks.

5. Provide and maintain areas of off-channel habitat.

6. Attenuate flows and moderate impacts from high flow events.

7. Facilitate groundwater recharge and maintain summer low flows.

8. Intercept and break down incoming pollutants.

Wetlands provide a variety of direct and indirect benefits to wild salmonids. Fully functional wetlands have the following characteristics:

1. Reduction of flood peak-flows (including stormwater runoff), and maintenance of low flows.

2. Shoreline stabilization (energy dissipation/velocity reduction).

3. Groundwater recharge.

4. Water quality improvement, including sediment accretion and nutrient/toxicant removal/retention.

5. Food chain support (structural and species diversity components of habitat for plants and animals).

6. Provide habitat for numerous fish and wildlife species, including wild salmon and trout.
   

Riparian areas and wetlands are sensitive to natural and human activities (vegetation removal, modification of basin hydrology, and sediment transport); wetland functions in particular are very difficult or impossible to restore or replicate after damages have occurred. Washington's riparian areas and wetlands have been reduced in both area and function, due to human impacts. Lack of a statewide program of riparian area and wetlands protection, with agreed upon numeric standards, contributes to loss of riparian and wetland area and function.

Performance Measures

There are no single, agreed-upon, statewide numeric standards for riparian areas or wetlands. Because the Department of Natural Resources maintains and updates a water typing system (defined and mapped per WAC 222-16-030), and since many local governments use this system, we will use that system as a point of reference. It should be noted that the performance measures recommended below provide general guidance for riparian buffers that protect aquatic functions and salmonid habitat. These buffers should be applied regardless of land use (e.g., forest lands, agricultural, rural, or urban lands).

Regional or watershed specific standards may need to be applied, based upon (a) watershed analysis; (b) the development of specific and detailed standards in individual watershed plans; or (c) other assessments of site conditions and intensity of land use. The factors limiting the maintenance of salmonids will be considered when developing the standards. Individual riparian and wetland performance measures can be amended, by local watershed groups in cooperation with the Department and affected Tribal Parties, to reflect local habitat conditions, provided the amendments remain consistent with the habitat goals in this Policy.

It is anticipated that statewide standards for state and private forest lands will be developed through TFW consensus recommendations on the Forestry Module, and provided to the Forest Practices Board for formal rule making. Once these are developed, they will provide the standards for forestry management under this policy. In the event the Forestry Module discussions do not result in consensus recommendations, the performance measures in this Policy are recommended as necessary to maintain or restore salmonid habitat. In developed non-forested areas under jurisdictional control of local governments, existing encroachments in riparian areas, or parcel size and configuration, may preclude attainment of adequate riparian buffers.

Nonetheless, in the absence of any other quantified alternative that provides the riparian area functions described above, the performance measures below are recommended to maintain riparian functions and conditions which protect salmonid habitat:

1. Riparian Areas
   • For Water Types 1-3, a buffer of 100 - 150 feet (measured horizontally), or the height of a site potential tree representative of the mature dominant native vegetation capable of growing on those soils, whichever is greater, on each side of the stream's full channel migration or disturbance zone.
   • For Type 4 streams, a buffer of at least 100 feet (each side).
   • For Type 5 streams, a buffer of at least 50 feet (each side).
   • For streams not identified directly or indirectly per WAC 222-26-030, apply a buffer of 100-150 feet each side on salmonid streams larger than 5 feet wide, a buffer of 100 feet (each side) on smaller perennial streams, and a buffer of 50 feet (each side) on all other streams.
   • Based on local habitat conditions, buffers may need to be expanded to accommodate the anticipated channel migration or disturbance zone, to increase recruitment of woody debris, as an additional buffer against windthrow, or to address upslope instability, or previous negative upslope impacts.
   • Type 4 and 5 streams, with low stream gradient and relatively flat slope topography, may not need the full buffer width specified, and the buffer width may be reduced to that necessary to protect the stream from upslope sedimentation and significant changes in stream temperature. The actual buffer width and composition should be based on site-specific conditions.
   • To the extent possible, buffers should be continuous along the stream channel. Selective tree removal may occur where site review and prescription clearly demonstrates removal can occur without significantly affecting the function of the riparian area, or that removal and/or removal and subsequent rehabilitation will improve the functional characteristics of the riparian area. Averaging buffers to meet buffer requirements will not be permitted except where it would result in greater protection. Complete tree removal should be limited to the minimum amount necessary for road alignments, stream crossings, or other corridors where no feasible alternative exists and adverse impacts will be fully mitigated.
   • Riparian area restoration is strongly recommended after careful consideration and when consistent with guidelines to be established by the Department and Tribal Parties. Plant community structural complexity (understory herbaceous and woody overstory canopy),density, tree height and diameter should be similar to what would occur at the site under natural conditions (also known as site potential).
   • Grazing, if allowed, should be managed to maintain or allow reestablishment of functional riparian vegetation. Other management activities may occur within the riparian area, provided the functional characteristics of the riparian area necessary to protect the stream are not significantly impaired.
   • The performance measures for Basin Hydrology and Stream Flow, and Water and Sediment Quality and Sediment Transport and Stream Channel Complexity, should also be met to ensure riparian functions will be meaningful and attainable.
   • Shade criteria shall be developed considering stream width.

2. Wetlands
   • Buffers for wetlands should be applied in accordance with the Department of Ecology Model Wetlands Ordinance - September 1990, and the updated 4-tier rating system (Pub. #93-74 for western Washington, and Pub. #91-58 for eastern Washington). The ordinance should be applied as guidance. It is not a legally required state standard, and it is not solely designed to meet the specific needs of salmonid habitat protection and recovery. The Wild Salmonid Policy is intended to encourage habitat protection through all means, not only through regulation. Generic application of the Model Wetlands Ordinance buffer widths and rating system, for salmonid habitat protection in all cases, may result in too much, or too little, protection of salmonid habitat in different site conditions.
   • Use of the Model Wetlands Ordinance standards for the protection of salmonid habitat is intended as interim guidance. There is a need to develop improved wetlands protection guidance that is specific to the salmonid habitat needs addressed in this policy and the role wetlands play in maintaining or restoring watershed functions essential to wild salmonids.
   • Wetlands replacement is highly discouraged because of the difficulty of providing adequate replacement of functions and values. Where replacement is unavoidable, the replacement ratio will result in at least as much replacement as provided in the Model Wetlands Ordinance. Wetlands mitigation banking is also an option which may be considered where on-site, in-kind mitigation will not be feasible or practicable. However, such banking should be within the same affected subbasin, unless otherwise recommended by the Department and affected Tribal Parties.
   • Performance measures for Basin Hydrology and Stream Flow, and Water and Sediment Quality and Sediment Transport should be met, where applicable, to ensure wetlands extent and functions are meaningful and attainable.
     

These buffers are not intended to fully protect, or consider, the needs of terrestrial or aquatic wildlife, or non-salmonid fishes.

Lakes and reservoirs provide rearing, adult residency, spawning habitat, and migratory pathways for many species of salmonids. Access between lakes, and inlet or outlet streams, is critical for reproduction of many lake dwelling species. Lakes accumulate contaminants derived from upland or upstream sources. Outlet stream water quantity and quality is affected by in-lake conditions. Lake and outlet stream habitat is affected by a variety of human activities - particularly in highly developed urban, suburban, and recreational developments - including lake level manipulations, water withdrawals, high or poorly timed flow releases, loss of nearshore shallow water habitat, installation of overwater and underwater structures (docks, floats, ramps), loss of riparian vegetation, sedimentation of spawning habitat, control of aquatic plants, reduced dissolved oxygen, elevated temperatures, increased levels of chemical contaminants, such as fertilizers and pesticides, and increased fecal coliform bacteria and nitrate levels due to septic tank effluents. This results in accelerated aging (eutrophication) and "lake restoration" efforts, which may exacerbate habitat impacts on wild salmonids.

Performance Measures

1. There are no statewide, agreed-upon, standards, particular to all issues specific to lakes and reservoirs. However, performance measures for basin hydrology and stream flows, water and sediment quality, riparian areas and wetlands, and fish access and screening should include factors relevant to lake and reservoir protection.
   

There are three key areas of marine habitat:

1. Tidally influenced lands and estuaries that provide transition habitat for salmonid smolts as they leave fresh water to begin their ocean life phase.
2. Nearshore marine habitats that serve as the primary migratory corridor for juvenile salmonids on their seaward migration, providing a variety of prey organisms and refuge from predators.
3. Open water habitats that are important areas for migration and growth of larger salmonids.

Nearshore marine, estuarine and tidally influenced habitats are of vital importance to the survival of wild salmonids because:

1. Early marine rearing conditions are an important factor in overall survival rates of salmonids.
2. The productivity of these habitats influences the abundance of salmonid prey, including marine invertebrates and the forage fish populations, some salmonid species depend upon.
3. These areas also contain the critical intertidal and shallow subtidal forage fish spawning habitats that are the foundation of the coastal marine food web.

Beaches of Puget Sound are highly important areas for shorebirds, waterfowl, shellfish, finfish and other species of ecological significance to salmonids. Nearshore marine, estuarine, and tidally influenced habitats have been lost or modified to accommodate development along rivers and bays. These losses include diking and filling of intertidal wetlands, filling or dredging of shallow water habitat, loss or degradation of riparian vegetation, loss of channel system complexity near river mouths, alterations in freshwater inflows, alterations in flow interchange patterns, and a variety of water quality alterations. Marine habitats depend on continuation of watershed and coastal processes, such as basin hydrology, riverine sediment and nutrient transport, and coastal erosion and transport.

Performance Measures

1. Natural shoreline erosion, accretion to beaches, and transport processes should be maintained or, where feasible, restored.
   

2. Ensure no net loss of eelgrass habitat, herring spawning habitat area or function, intertidal forage fish spawning habitat area or function, and intertidal wetland area or function.
   

3. Successful establishment of functioning compensatory mitigation projects should be demonstrated prior to final authorization for projects that adversely affect marine, estuarine, and intertidal habitats.
   

4. Maintain or restore continuous shallow-water migration corridors along nearshore marine, estuarine, and tidally influenced areas.
   

5. Maintain or restore adequate flows through estuaries to ensure optimal and timely passage of migrating smolts through the system and to prevent the saltwater mixing zone from moving upstream.

Free and unobstructed passage among habitat types is essential for most wild salmonids at all life stages. Fish passage is affected by natural features and events. For example, high water temperature may cause thermal blocks to migration, drought or excessive sedimentation may result in stream flow too low for passage, and excessive turbidity may deter passage. High flows may cause velocity barriers, or salmonid stranding, as flows recede. Natural barriers, such as waterfalls and cascades, are important features which contribute life history variation within species, and allow for species separation (i.e. anadromous/resident).

However, instream structures such as dams, culverts, screens, and tide-gates, and water quality and water quantity fluctuations because of human activity, also create significant fish passage and stranding problems, and loss of productivity and production. For example, the Columbia River basin system of dams has caused significant losses of salmonid production. These losses are attributable to direct loss of access to habitat, transformation of a free-flowing riverine system to a system of fluctuating reservoirs, near-complete alteration of flow regimes, inadequate upstream and downstream fish passage, and inadequate screening at water intakes.

Performance Measures

1. Provide and maintain free and unobstructed passage for all wild salmonids, according to state and federal screening and passage criteria, and guidelines at all human-built structures.
   

2. Meet or exceed a 95% survival standard for fish passage through hydroelectric and flood control dams, and water diversion projects, and fully mitigate for fish mortalities.
   

The Wild Salmonid Policy goal will not be attained without active restoration of lost and damaged habitat. Continual restoration of unmitigated impacts to wild salmonid habitat is undesirable, ineffective, and the most costly means to achieving the Wild Salmonid Policy goal.

Voluntary, cooperative, approaches to restoration are preferred, but those who willfully, or through neglect, damage habitat should be held accountable for restoration. Stream restoration will generally not be successful if upland processes and functions are not maintained, or restored to levels that support the restoration effort. Restoration activities are generally more successful when land use is stable over time. Projects initiated on lands with low-intensity, cyclical land uses/disturbances (forest, large lot rural residential, or agricultural lands) will usually be more successful than those initiated on high-intensity, high-density urban or suburban lands. Past degradation of salmonid habitat often occurred in response to societal values at the time. Therefore, restoration of salmonid habitat on privately owned lands is likely to be more readily accepted and implemented if the cost of restoration includes some level of public financing, if restoration provides flexibility to the landowner, and if restoration addresses, at least in part, relief from regulatory processes.

Successful restoration requires competent analysis of watershed processes and identification of limiting factors. Funding for restoration activities is limited; funding is enhanced where partnerships exist, where there is local support, where restoration is included in a larger project context (i.e., flood damage reduction plan, water storage, and release strategies), and where restoration is part of a completed overall land use and/or watershed plan. Restoration is more likely where dedicated fund sources are sufficient and stable. Restoration of wild salmonid habitat usually contributes to improved wildlife habitat and other societal benefits, such as aquifer recharge for drinking water, flood damage reduction, improvement of soil fertility, and maintenance of rural economies. Restoration projects are facilitated by regulatory processes (permits) which are coordinated, timely, consistent and affordable. Active participation in, or support of, watershed restoration fosters an environmental ethic, improved land stewardship, and support for habitat protection. Restoration is most successful when contemporary technical information and guidance is available to the public.

Performance Measures

Restoration of salmonid habitat will be long-term, costly, and contentious. It will involve a combination of active in-water work, extensive upslope work, and in large part, just providing the opportunity and time for watersheds and marine areas to mend themselves. Many of the performance measures and action strategies in the preceding components include reference to restoration of the physical processes and habitat types necessary for salmonids, and they will not be repeated here.

Full habitat restoration within watersheds and marine areas will be ultimately achieved when the performance measures for the preceding components (i.e., basin hydrology and stream flow, water and sediment quality, and sediment transport, etc.) are met.

1. Establish clear restoration guidelines identifying conditions and strategies likely to result in successful habitat restoration.

2. Establish a statewide restoration monitoring program to assess the effectiveness of restoration strategies, and to improve the design and implementation of future projects.

---

⁸ Tribes have proposed different approach and concern over the adequacy of the TFW process, and concern regarding oversight, participation, and control so that watershed groups can achieve the needs of salmonids.
⁹ The Tribes proposed deletion of the last 2 sentences.

---