Watershed Management Plan - Mason County

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 2 WRIA 16 – State of the Watershed draining into the Canal is an issue in areas of dense development which contain more impervious surfaces from which stormwater can enter the Canal. High stream temperatures have been recorded in Dosewallips River, Marple Creek, Rocky Brook, Duckabush River, Lebar Creek, the South Fork of the Skokomish River, and Fulton Creek. Cool water is important for the health and survival of fish and other aquatic communities. Temperature changes can affect the development, growth, migration, and risk of disease in fish, especially salmon (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2004). The loss of native vegetation such as shade-providing trees, low summer stream flows, and agricultural and timber activities may contribute to increased water temperatures in WRIA 16 water bodies. PH levels fall outside state standards in the Great Bend and Lynch Cove water bodies of Hood Canal (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2005). Exceedances of pH standards often result from the natural photosynthetic processes that occur in algal blooms, which have become more common with increase nitrogen inputs. Fish typically thrive in water bodies that have a neutral pH (a pH of 7 is considered neutral on a scale of 0-14). Fluctuation in pH, either above or below the normal level, can be a serious threat to aquatic health. Additional impacts on water quality throughout WRIA 16 include runoff from Highway 101, 106, and 119, and other contamination sources such as pesticides, fertilizers, and saltwater intrusion. What is a TMDL? • A TMDL, which stands for Total Maximum Daily Load, is a water clean up plan and process that is intended to return water bodies to their normal, healthy conditions. • Ecology prioritizes and schedules water bodies to receive cleanup plans. • Ecology, local governments, communities, and citizens work together to develop water quality solutions. THE 303(D) LIST The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under provisions of the federal Clean Water Act, requires Ecology to identify water bodies in the state that do not meet water quality standards. Impaired water bodies are put on a list of impaired or threatened water bodies called the 303(d) list. Table 3 identifies water bodies in WRIA 16 that are listed on the 1998 and 2004 303(d) lists. It is important to note that there are limited data on the water quality of streams and rivers in the watershed, and the absence of a water body on Ecology’s 303(d) list does not necessarily mean that the water body meets state water quality standards (EnviroVision, 2003). In addition to the chemical and physical parameters tracked by Ecology, analysis of other water-quality parameters, such as biological indicators, would help assemble an even more thorough assessment of water quality. Provisions of the Clean Water Act require Ecology to develop water cleanup plans for water bodies that are on the 303(d) list. One type of water clean-up plan is a Total Maximum Daily Load Study (TMDL). A TMDL is a clean-up plan that considers how much pollutant a specific water body can receive while meeting water quality standards. Ecology completed a TMDL for the Skokomish River in 2003 to address fecal coliform (Ecology, 2003b). The Skokomish River TMDL also addresses Purdy Creek, Weaver Creek, Hunter Creek, and Ten Acre Creek, four creeks that are tributaries page 22 Final Plan for County Adoption – May 11, 2006
Chapter WRIA 16 – State of the Watershed 2 to the Skokomish River. Another TMDL in WRIA 15, Union River, has also been completed and is relevant to WRIA 16 water quality (Washington State Department of Ecology, 2003c). Union River, which is in WRIA 15 but flows into southern Hood Canal at Belfair, has been shown to have fecal coliform contamination and may be a significant source of water quality degradation in Lower Hood Canal (Golder Associates, 2003). No TMDLs are currently scheduled for other rivers or creeks in WRIA 16. Final Plan for County Adoption – May 11, 2006 page 23
Page 1 and 2: Watershed Management Plan Skokomish
Page 3 and 4: WRIA 16 Summary of Watershed Manage
Page 5 and 6: WRIA 16 Summary of Watershed Manage
Page 7 and 8: WRIA 16 Watershed Management Plan T
Page 9 and 10: Chapter Introduction and Background
Page 15 and 16: Chapter WRIA 16 - State of the Wate
Page 27: Chapter WRIA 16 - State of the Wate
Page 41 and 42: Chapter Recommendations: Water Quan
Page 43 and 44: Chapter Recommendations: Water Qual
Page 45 and 46: 4.2. On-site Septic Systems 4.2.1.
Page 47 and 48: Chapter Recommendations: Water Qual
Page 49 and 50: Chapter Recommendations: Habitat 5
Page 51 and 52: Chapter Other Recommendations 6 ent
Page 53 and 54: Chapter Other Recommendations 6 6.1
Page 55 and 56: Chapter Other Recommendations 6 lan
Page 57 and 58: Chapter Other Recommendations 6 Pla
Page 59 and 60: Chapter Implementing the Plan 7 7.
Page 61 and 62: Chapter Works Cited 8 Hood Canal Co
Page 63 and 64: Chapter Works Cited 8 Puget Sound A
Page 65 and 66: Chapter Works Cited 8 Washington St
Page 67 and 68: Chapter Glossary 9 9. Glossary 303(
Page 69 and 70: Chapter Glossary 9 pH - A measure o
Page 71 and 72: Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Appe
Page 73 and 74: Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A The
Page 75 and 76: Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Duck
Page 77 and 78: Figure 7. Duckabush Sub-basin
Page 79 and 80:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Esti
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 8. Map of the Hamma Hamma Su
Page 83 and 84:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A perm
Page 85 and 86:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Figu
Page 87 and 88:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Spri
Page 89 and 90:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A beco
Page 91 and 92:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A ISSU
Page 93 and 94:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Sout
Page 95 and 96:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Cree
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 11. Map of the South Shore S
Page 99 and 100:
Sub-basin Summaries Appendix A Depa
Page 101 and 102:
Key Issues and Options - Water Quan
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Key Issues and Options - Water Qual
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Key Issues and Options - Habitat Ap
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Addressing Cumulative or Cross-Cutt
Page 151 and 152:
Addressing Cumulative or Cross-Cutt
Page 153 and 154:
Options for Funding New Efforts App
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Supporting Documents Appendix G App
show all

Watershed Management Plan - Mason County

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?