Betsy Peabody, Puget Sound Restoration Fund, on “Ocean acidification monitoring in Totten Inlet”

Partners: NOAA PMEL, UW, Pacific Shellfish Institute, PS Restoration Fund, Pacific Coast Sehllfish Growers Association; Taylor Shellfish, Baywater, Inc.; Department of Ecology; funded by Puget Sound Partnership

Warning signs were repeated larval mortalities in WA and OR shellfish hatcheries and shellfish failures in Willapa Bay/Grays Harbor.

These were part of larger problem of ocean acifidication.  25% of human-emitted CO2 is absorbed by oceans leading to a decrease in pH (an increase in acidity), which affects ocean life.

Coastal upwelling brings deep water in the North Pacific, which  contains more CO2 than the rest of the world, to the surface.

More CO2 in the water leads to a decrease in aragonite, which is required by shelled organisms.

Question studied: Is there an effect on natural shellfish populations in Puget Sound?

Study:  A two year sampling effort of Big Cover, Totten Inlet and Dabob Bay, Hood Canal, which are both important shellfish places.

Increasing acidity could affect shellfish production, and their role in natural filtration, ecological services, and ecosystem restoration.  The non-scientist would notice fewer local food sources, increasing eutrophic waters, and troubled economies.

Thus far, no sign yet that natural shellfish populations are affected.

“Knowing about potential local effects increases the urgency to reduced CO2 emissions.”

Stormwater in a pilot low impact development (LID) project in Pierce County near Hylebos Creek is successfully being infiltrated and filtered of contaminants despite some problems with construction of the LID elements and poor soils at the site.

Curtis Hinman from the Washington State University Puyallup Research and Extension Center explained how an 8 acre development with 35 homes was constructed in 2002 as a pilot project to evaluate the potential of low impact development techniques to mimic native hydrologic function and protect the nearby Hylebos stream.   The project was built using bioretention swales or raingardens along all the roadways, previous concrete along the road shoulders, compost amended soils around the homes, and a compost amended sloped dispersion area for any remaining stormwater runoff.

Curtis explained that there were problems with the project because the builder did not have much guidance on how to build the raingardens, the largest raingarden ended up being lined because of sewer concerns, and the site had poor soils for infiltration.   Despite these challenges when post development stormwater was evaluated the results showed that the site was exceeding the goals for stormwater reduction and infiltration.   The LID features in the development combined with the compost amended slope removed 96 percent of the stormwater on site.   In addition a water quality analysis showed that metal contaminants in the water were at non detectable levels and were much less than metal levels in stormwater runoff in typical residential developments.

Alan Hamlet, member of Climate Impacts Group at University of Washington, on “Flow regime change forecast for Nisqually/Deschutes Rivers & Chambers Creek”

Showed graphs with historic climate change and projected change.

Two different scenarios based on different reductions in greenhouse gas emissions show vastly different results, but only after a couple of decades. 

Columbia Basin Climate Change Scenarios Project goals and objectives: provide a wide range of products to address multiple stakeholder needs, increase spatial and temporal resolution, provide a large ensemble of climate scenarios to assess uncertains, and address hydrologic extremes

Studied changes to runoff and frequency extreme events for the Nisqually watershed.  Also the increase of sediment discharge at teh Nisqually headwaters in Mt. Rainier Nationa Park due to glacier melting.

Question for future research:  How will sea level rise  and sediment change affect Nisqually delta? 

The Budd Inlet Treatment Plant in Olympia operated by LOTT discharges the equivalent of 17 Olympic size swimming pools of water a day into Puget Sound, according to Laurie Pierce of the LOTT Clean Water Alliance.  It’s nitrogen contribution to the Sound is equal to that of the Deschutes river watershed.   In 1992 an upgrade to the plant significantly reduced nitrogen levels in the plant’s discharge.  Without that improvement the wastewater from the Thurston County area would be having a much greater impact on nitrogen levels in the South Sound.  

The new focus for reduction of nitrogen loading and impacts of wastewater on Budd Inlet and the South Sound is the movement towards decentralized treatment facilities that are focused on where the growth is happening in Thurston County – Lacey/Hawks Prairie, Tumwater, and Chambers Prairie.   At each of these decentralized locations the goal is to reclaim water for reuse and for recharge of the aquifer instead of discharging to Puget Sound.  LOTT is also working with the Squaxin Tribe and others to identify and implement projects to address non point sources of nitrogen to the Deschutes River to help reduce the overal nitrogen contribution to Budd Inlet and the South Sound.

Curtis Hinman, WSU Puyallup Research and Extension Center, on “Flow Control and Water Quality Treatment Performance of a Residential Low Impact Development Pilot Project in Western Washington”:

LID will become the first approach to dealing with water quality issues.

Pilot Project: Meadow on the Hylebos (35 home community): partnership between local government (Pierce County), designer, owners, and developer

Goals: mimic native hydrologic function (for Hylebos Creek) and provide “an affordable and livable neighborhood” 

Monitoring Objectives:  how well the project matches flood-control standards, effectiveness of LID techniques, stormwater runoff quality, and provide accurate scientific data

LID features (‘LID light’): bioretention swales along roads, pervious concrete, compost amended soils and sloped biodentention

For 0.3 ha sub-basin, project exceeded design objectives and met forested duration standard.  Also exceeded objectives at Hybelos Creek.  Water quality results from 2 storms:  metals were below detection threshold.

If largest planned bioretention area was functional, modeling shows this would have met forested duration standard at Point of Compliance.

“The LID applications appear to be robust.”

Laurie Pierce, Operations and Facilities Director at LOTT Alliance on “The evolution of wastewater treatment at the LOTT Clean Water Alliance”:

Main treatment facility is in the heart of Olympia, and discharges into the Budd Inlet.  A portion of the discharge (up to one million gallons) is reclaimed for reuse.

She explained the history of treatment facilities to accomodate new laws, population, and for better water quality.

Satellite treatment plants:  Lacey (Hawk’s Prairie), then Tumwater, and then the Chambers Prairie area in order to accomodate growth.

Showed current permit limits for total inorganic nitrogen and BOD according to season, and loading-based limits.  These are “some of the most stringent in country.”

Plan extends to 2053.

LOTT Alliance’s focus on education

A couple of questions and answers:

How are you dealing with emerging chemicals of concern?

We have a long retention time, which according to EPA is good for these contaminents of concern.

Rate structure and history of?

We began in incremental increase about five years ago, $1.50 a year.  We don’t foresee huge adjustments.

Maryanne Reiter, hydrologist at Weyerhaeuser on “Spatial and temporal turbidity patterns over 30 years in a managed forest of Western Washington”:

“In the early 1980s there was concern over sediment filling Capitol Lake.”  Weyerhaeuser wanted to determine if forest practices were contributed, so created a watershed plan.  

Study started in 1974.  Several 1 square mile sections studied, plus multiple grab sites. 

Used turbidity as a measure since more data was available than suspended sediment on.  A correlation between the two was demonstrated.

The measures of turbidity was adjusted for flow.  The watersheds, although near, behaved differently, and account.  

Harvest does not account for the decrease. Changes in way roads were constructed, sediment traps and ditching are likely influential.

Underlying geology was considered.  There was a marked difference between glacial and volcanic terrains.

New sampling equipment were installed in 2006. 

“This study has shown decreasing trends in winter turbidity for at the small and large watershed scale.” 

Conclusion:  Decline largely due to improvements in road construction and maintenance practice.

Questions and answers:

Was there a problem with clogging culverts with vegetation?

No, design includes settling basin to allow cleaning.

Questions regarding road construction.

Most of the road consruction had been completed prior to sampling.  Traffic more than density of roads.

A long term study of turbidity trends in the Upper Deschutes watershed in Thurston County by Weyerhauser have indicated that improvements in forestry road construction practices have made a significant difference in reducing sediment in the Deschutes river and its tributaries.   Maryanne Reiter explained that the analysis of data from 1974 to 2004 suggested that even when adjusting for flow levels there is a clear correlation with reduced turbidity in the river and better road construction practices that have reduced sediment runoff.

In a statewide analysis of the risk of conversion of forestland to other uses between now and 2050, the forest lands of the South Sound have been identified as being at the highest risk of conversion in the state.   Luke Rogers from the University of Washington explained that the analysis identifies that there currently is a signficant economic incentive in some areas to convert land from forestry to mixed use or urban/suburban use.   He suggested that the state policy of reduced property taxes for enrolled forestry lands was successful in providing financial incentives to landowners to keep their land in forestry through the 1990’s.  However, Rogers asserted, new restrictions on forestry practices with new protective regulations have now counteracted that economic incentive and it is no longer effective.  

The biggest transition over the last few decades in forest land ownership has been the sale of industrial forest lands to small private forest land owners.  Rogers showed a map that identified which forestry lands in the South Sound were at the greates risk of conversion to non-forestry uses due to their economic value.  Many of these lands were in the middle area of the watersheds in the transition zone between the public forest lands in the upper watersheds and the more urbanized areas closer to Puget Sound.

A survey of private forest landowners revealed that 93 percent of them would be willing to keep their land in forest production for 10 years if they were given a payment of $200 per acre and 53 percent of them would be willing to sign a 50 year forestry easement for $200 per acre.

Luke Rogers spoke on “South Sound forest land conversion”

Questions asked from Integrated Statewide Parcel Data:  How big is forest industry?  How much of these are family forests?

things are rapidly becoming urbanized in the South Sound

roughly a 1/4 of forest land has been impacted by development

Showed timberland ownership net flow.  The amount of land under public ownership and small owners hasn’t changed much.  Much of the conversion comes from large forestry selling to smaller owners, which then (after a time) sell land for development.

He explained the property tax incentives to keep land for forestry.

Researchedthe amount of incentive payments needed for someone to choose not to develop.  For $200 an acre per year, 93% of owners would join a 10 year contract to not develop.  53% of people would keep the land undeveloped for 50+ years.

Concerns: “Forestlands are more at risk now than ever.”  DFL reduced risk, but was expensive for local communities.  “Regulatory takings trump tax incentives.”

Could use mitigation funds/markets, and dvelopment right markets.

Questions and answers:

Is there any evidence that reduced land prices is an opportunity?

This is a question that will be researched next spring, but opportunities here could be cancelled out by smaller budgets for buying land.

Are there any places where the conversion of large forestlands to small parcels could be adding to forested land, since it is less apt to be harvested?

We don’t have a good idea of what smaller parcels contribute to the ecosystem, and smaller parcels are more likely to be poorly managed.