Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources April 12 20051 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee April 12, 2005 Committee Chair Sharon Roy called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Seth Fleetwood None Dan McShane Also Present: COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. SPECIAL PRESENTATION BY THE NOOKSACK SALMON ENHANCEMENT ASSOCIATION (AB2005 -173) Rachel Vasak, South Fork Working Group, gave a Power Point presentation (on file). People are concerned about recreational impacts on the south fork of the Nooksack River. She indicated the location on a map. The Edfro Creek area is an upstream area where people would put kayaks, inner tubes, and canoes into the river. She read about the problems and salmonids in the south fork of the Nooksack River. From the confluence, there is 30.4 miles of viable salmonid habitat in this reach. She read about habitat requirements. Cool water is under 60 degrees Fahrenheit. This section of the river is not glacially fed. Many of the fish come into the river in the spring as adults, then spawn in the fall. Many large fish are in the stream system during the summer months. Tribes are working on placing large woody debris in areas for the fish to rest and hide. At least six to eight parts per million of dissolved oxygen is necessary for healthy standing. Generally, the food source is a variety of macro - invertebrates, or aquatic insects. Those are also dependent on cool, clean water and gravel. One parameter they are concerned with is the south fork Nooksack temperature profile. The water gets cooler upstream. Fish passage barriers are about 30 miles up the stream system. In the lower part of the river, the temperature extreme already stresses the fish. Roy asked the location of the higher temperatures. Vasak responded (inaudible). The fish are stressed in the parts of the river that are desirable for recreational activity. Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Vasak read the fish use calendar and the spring chinook habitat use calendar. Fish are in the stream system all year long. Recreational users in close proximity during the summer months is an issue. Disturbances to the fish and people is documented by the newspaper. Concerned residents and homeowners in the South Fork area are concerned about trespassing, litter, and parking. Many of the neighbors are concerned about the type of people using the area. She read about past activities in the area. Many of the problems they're seeing are currently enforceable. The question is who is enforcing the regulations. Because they're dealing with listed fish species, disturbing the fish is a federal, enforceable violation. She read possible solutions. Landowners feel the reach should be closed to all recreational activities. Those businesses that depend on the recreational activity are concerned about shutting down the reach. She read about examples of other river closures. Fleetwood asked if this group is a part of the Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association (NSEA). Vasak stated she is a member of NSEA and this working group. Her group is the ad hoc committee for a fish friendly South Fork. She read the list of members on the ad hoc committee. John Thompson, Senior Planner, stated the inner tube impact has been an issue for a number of years. This ad hoc committee is made up of folks familiar with the impacts and who have dealt with the impacts in a variety of ways. The community and fish folks want to lessen impact to fisheries. Fleetwood stated he rode an inner tube down the south fork as a kid. He asked how serious a threat is inner tubers, and if there should be a ban on riding inner tubes on the river. Roy asked how many people float or paddle down the river. Steve Seymour, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), stated as many as 500 per day ride the river. The concern is that those people who ride the river don't have any information about the impacts of the inner tubes. In the south fork, there is very little wood, cover, and there are few deep pools. These fish are in the river during the summer getting ready to spawn. The fish are susceptible to stress. Eventually, there will be a lot of cover in the South Fork. If that cover existed, the inner tubes wouldn't have as much of an impact. The ad hoc committee has struggled because of the question of who has the power to put someone on the river daily for enforcement. A question is how to Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. reduce this traffic. The NSEA watershed steward program will talk with people there this summer. Roy asked if there is an underwater video of the effect on fish. She heard someone was planning to put a camera under water to see the behavior the fish exhibit. Seymour stated there was a proposal to do that years ago. That information would be useful. Roy asked if there is more impact from inner tubes than a kayak. Vasak stated the problem is mostly inner tubes. The fish are skittish from them or anytime there is a shadow over the water. The fish are much less skittish from a canoe than an inner tube. Seymour stated inner tubes are more likely ridden by kids that create more activity and fall into the river. However, they can't designate closure for only inner tubes. Fleetwood asked which entity would have authority to close the river. Seymour stated the State indicated it doesn't have any authority to close the river. The County regulates Lake Whatcom and other things. It should have the ability to control trespass and access. Thompson stated this issue has been pushed for a number of years. Neither WDFW nor National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Division are willing to contribute extra enforcement. Whether the County has authority to enforce or draft an ordinance is questionable. The Sheriff's Department or State Patrol can do emphasis patrols on things such as underage drinking. The litter and trespass problems falls on the Sheriff's Office. Get the neighbors together to contact the law enforcement, but the problem is it stresses the Sheriff's Office. A number of folks in the group are looking for a way to step up and show some leadership. It's the County's authority to write an ordinance, which is a legal issue for the attorneys. There is also a question of available resources. The County's desire is to encourage ratcheting down on existing ordinances, and get NSEA to do the education to the public. Other folks in the group think that's not enough, and want a ban on watercraft. This is something that is discussed every year. There is no real science on the issue. Roy asked if a County ordinance has ever been written to put restrictions on the river. Fleetwood stated the overlap in every area on the spring chook calendar is July and August. He asked if anyone has tried to navigate the course that people should take to avoid areas and to minimize impacts to the fish. Seymour stated they have not. Part of the solution is education. Most people don't have a clue they are having a lot of impact to the fish. Identifying a route would alert the people that something is going on. If there were an improved presence, people would be more aware. Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Fleetwood asked about a permit system to pay for inspectors. There are only a few places to put in. Seymour stated they are trying to get ideas of reasonable options short of a closure. They have talked about limiting access from Acme to Van Zandt, and closing other areas. Thompson stated that if the river is open, it's difficult to flag a route through it. Fleetwood stated there is not enough information to determine the solution. They can figure out what information is needed to make informed decisions. He asked the minimum amount of information needed to make an informed decision and the accompanying resources. Seymour stated the minimum would be documenting real disturbance. Document traffic and what is going on. Ideally, underwater video could document the response of the fish. If the Council made an ordinance, it would be challenged to justify it. There is a lot of anecdotal information. They can make a fairly good argument on what they do know. Thompson stated the number of fish is low, the fish lack good cover, and temperatures are high. The Forest Service requires commercial permits with rafters on the North Fork. There is a clear legal connection. The question is how much more information they need. There are precedents in other areas. Roy stated there is much information. This group doesn't seem sure that they should take the hard line. She is interested in looking at all the options. Other than scientific proof and a rationale, the Council will need support from this group. She's not feeling the group has unanimous support. Thompson stated the group is fairly informal. It will tie back to each agency represented. It's more of a resource issues. If NOAA Fisheries and WDFW have authority, than the County Council might need to contact those agencies about the fish being in a precarious state and the need for enforcement and education. Randy Kinley, Lummi Nation Natural Resources Manager, stated he agrees with the situation. There is not information that supports a solution, even though it is a no- brainer. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) lists endangered species, and they must take all precautionary steps to make sure the fish aren't harmed or harassed. There are so many potential aspects of recovery, if they don't take extraordinary precautions, Whatcom County won't see recovery. All the time, energy, and resources put to this effort won't benefit the seventh generation. Roy asked if the Tribe has tried to put pressure on NOAA and WDFW. Kinley stated they have. The Tribe is looking for leadership. The Tribe enforces the constituents of the tribe. The County should enforce the constituents of the County. Fleetwood asked what kind of response the Tribe has received from WDFW and NOAA. Kinley stated those agencies will respond if someone finds a dead fish Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. that is listed as endangered and connected to a sports fisherman. The implications are very severe. If the County and tribes can be co- managers, then it would be better than relying on the federal government to enforce the issue. WDFW has budgetary problems. The Tribe has worked with WDFW and NOAA for 15 years in trying to find a mechanism. Roy asked why the County is vulnerable since these are listed species. That is an interesting question. Kinley stated people will only step up if there is a crisis situation. In his opinion, they are past the crisis situation. Fleetwood asked if there is sufficient information to support a case if the County takes a stance. Kinley stated there is. As the trustor of Whatcom County, the County is responsible for protecting the resource. Roy asked for a list of the names or agencies on the ad hoc committee so she can follow up. Vasak stated the original purpose of the presentation is to ask the Council to consider a full or partial closure for a part of or all of the critical season. However, the working group pulled back it's recommendation and chose to encourage outreach to help mitigate the problem as it currently exists. Start there, then look at more extreme measures later on. The majority of people in the working group are in favor of some type of closure if the Council can justify it. A lot of the problem can be mitigated by enforcing the issues that can already be enforced. They talked about enforcing the fishery issues with WDFW and NOAA, but the problems are difficult to enforce. Certain issues such as parking, littering, speeding, drunken driving, and trespassing are more enforceable. They are enough of a problem during high traffic times that a crack down would deter the people who might head out that direction. If they simply deal with parking issues on private property, it would significantly reduce the number of people on the river. Fleetwood stated enforcement requires manpower. If there is a ban, there must be enforcement personnel ready this summer. Instead of a ban, put in place a permitting system that includes a hefty fine. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Fleetwood stated the permit fees could pay for an enforcement personnel. The permit would have conditions on where to go and where to stay away from. Roy stated that is interesting, but may not be timely to do this summer. The potential is with the Sheriff's Office to do emphasis patrol. It's hard for the deputies to respond to trespassing and parking problems. However, Sheriff Elfo has been willing to consider emphasis patrols. A lot of these people are probably the same people. Another resource is the people who are getting the master watershed training to do education. Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Craig MacConnell, Cooperative Extension, stated it could be appropriate to have those in the master watershed training do education. He gets nervous having them involved in something that has regulatory authority. Jim Hansen, Lummi Natural Resources, stated the ad hoc committee members favor some sort of limited closure. In response to the difficulties of enforcement, establish a certain period of time and certain critical areas of the river. There could be signage in those areas. The regulation could be self - enforcing. People of good will, once they know what is at stake, would take it upon themselves to comply with the regulations. Roy asked if the Parks Department would be impacted and if there are parking lots that encourage this activity. Mike McFarlane, Parks and Recreation Department Director, stated there are no parking lots in the County park system. There is one small parking area that the Flood Division uses when it does litter pickup. It has good river access for people who use the river. The County has a significant amount of holdings along the waterfront. Until the County gets the area open, it will remain accessible. There is not a lot of activity on the park property. The activity is on the public roads and private properties. The other question is whether the same type of activity exists in better areas. Roy asked if there are comparable activities that wouldn't cause harm to endangered species. McFarlane stated moving the activity downriver would be better, but it is not as desirable for the users. Try to find a compromise that is more acceptable. Then, look at facilities to accommodate that type of recreation. Fleetwood stated the Middle Fork and North Fork are all either too difficult or too dangerous to inner tube. The main stem is too big and deep. For this activity, this is the only place to do it. Roy asked if a ban would affect the Parks Department. McFarlane stated it would not, as long as the Parks Department doesn't have to enforce the ban. Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Department Director, stated he was involved in river management many years ago in the Kettle River. The State legislature put together a Kettle River Management Act that dealt with these types of issues. The outcome was a multi - jurisdictional coordination effort, which is where they are now. That act has been in place for 16 years. It's an annual forum as to what has been done to put the management plan into action. In some places, people make a living off other people going down the river. It's a tough issue for the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). Continue on a number of fronts. Education is key. They also must consider the ongoing recreational management of the whole river. The population growth of the county will increase dramatically. There will be greater and greater needs for this in the Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. future. Annually, review how they can improve the problems, with all the agencies at the table. Think about long -term solutions. Think about alternatives. The permit system is something that may work, but it could break down quickly. If the weather is really hot, people will go to the river en masse from all areas. Roy asked how successful the Kettle River Management Plan has been. Hart stated it's a very small community that lives along those river basins. The success comes from points of recreation along the river with controlled trespass. There are places where the community is involved to maintain the points of access, outside of the governmental structure. It's a very different culture. Limiting and managing the points of access is what they do. Fleetwood asked if it's not likely to be an example Whatcom County can employ. Hansen stated the ad hoc committee operated by consensus. All the representatives are constrained from taking a policy position. In light of the critical nature of the limited stocks and not wanting to impose something on an entire activity and entire river, then just close a certain area that is the most critical habitat, then work on the educational efforts and begin a comprehensive recreational plan. Proceed with a partial closure while working towards a comprehensive plan, education, and a study of the area. This summer, they expect to put in some logjam constructions. There will be heavy machinery in the area, and there could be liability to users who will be floating down the river. That is another reason to close the stretch for this summer. Fleetwood stated all of this effort to impose restrictions should proceed only if they believe they can still save salmon. That gives him purpose to try. That belief will justify taking measures. If permitting won't work to save salmon, then education definitely won't work. If they aren't willing to go in a less restrictive direction, then the only solution is to be more restrictive, which is some kind of closure. The Council will benefit from having a presentation of data that demonstrates the science that these fish are stressed and the particular cause of the stress as it relates to these activities. He would like to see the documentation that Randy Kinley referenced. They have to have that information to justify what they are doing. Look at three options, from the least to the most restrictive. Look at realistic education. Look at the permitting approach. People come from far away to enjoy this experience. Consider some kind of closure. Roy stated this committee's next step is to look at what information exists to justify a partial or full closure. Bring forward that data. Start with the most restrictive option, then talk about why they can accomplish what they need to accomplish through a less restrictive option. The information should be strong enough to support a full or partial closure, and then back off from that with Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. adequate information. The committee is very interested in this topic. She believes the full Council will be interested in this topic. Fleetwood stated the group should come forward with any evidence supporting the clear hope that they can actually restore the fish. They can only justify actions if they really believe the actions will work to restore the fish. Hansen stated he will provide that information. Roy stated she would schedule this item on the agenda for the first meeting in May. Thompson stated he will continue to work with the group. Vasak stated NSEA will increase its education and outreach this summer. She will work with NSEA members to pull together additional information and a more concrete recommendation. The group will try to reallocate resources to collect more information and observations. Roy stated she would like the data collected with the most restrictive option in mind. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Sharon Roy, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 4/12/2005, Page 8