Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 337 Part Four Summary of Plan Elements 4.1 Introduction This part of the Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative provides a summary description of the plan elements, considering how they apply across the Hood Canal/ Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum region and to individual summer chum salmon stocks and watersheds. The intent is to show what and where specific objectives, strategies and actions are to be applied, and by whom, to meet the plan's goal of protecting and restoring the summer chum runs. In the course of summarizing information below, references are given to specific sections of this plan where more complete and detailed information exists. Part Four also provides discussions of how the goals of the recovery plan and ESA will be achieved, when population based recovery goals will be available, and how the plan will be implemented by the co managers and others.

4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions The objectives, strategies and actions of the plan are summarized in Tables 4.1 through 4.7. These applications are applicable to all of the summer chum watersheds and estuaries. Specific objectives are described within section dealing with Artificial Production, Ecological Interactions, Harvest Management, Habitat, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Program Integration and Adaptive Management. For each objective, one or more actions/ strategies are described, including the participants with jurisdiction/ authority, additional partners, status of available resources/ funding, and time frame.

Actions are differentiated from strategies in that an action is a specific measure or set of measures that directly addresses a problem, and is agreed to by the parties with jurisdiction. A strategy is meant to be an approach to developing specific actions. In this plan, a strategy is generally indicated where not all participants with jurisdiction/ authority are yet involved; the idea being that specific actions can be developed from the strategy once all the appropriate parties are participating ( e. g., with regard to habitat issues).

Parties with jurisdiction/ authority pertaining to a given action or strategy and other partners are listed in describing the action/ strategy even if they are not yet participating in this plan. The intent is to Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 338 recognize the potential role of those parties and recommend their participation. But, of course, they are not necessarily bound by provisions set forth in this initiative.

The status of resources/ funding to address a strategy or action is described in two categories, Phases 1 and 2. Phase 1 means the resources and funding required for the strategy or action are currently available. Phase 2 means the resources/ funding are not currently available and, in some cases, may not yet be clearly identified.

The description of the time frame for an action/ strategy is in general terms. Words such as continuing, immediate and undetermined are most often used to indicate the approximate timing for implementation. More specific information is provided when available.

4.2.1 Artificial Production The artificial production program supplements production of severely depressed, at risk populations and reintroduces summer chum to watersheds where the historical populations have been lost. In the future, the program may also incorporate provisions for enhancing fishing opportunity. The program is coordinated with other management actions and is designed to minimize ecological and genetic risks. The program includes risk assessment leading to selection of projects, guidelines for effective and low risk operations, monitoring of implementation and success, and adaptive management ( see Part Three, section 3.2). The following table summarizes the major actions of the co managers under Artificial Production. Note that monitoring and evaluation measures are summarized separately below ( see section 4.2.5). Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 339 Table 4.1 Artificial Production objectives and action items.

Objective: Conduct an annual evaluation of the risk of extinction for each extant summer chum stock.

Action Items Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 1. Update the plan's extinction risk evaluation with each year's escapement numbers. See Part One, 1.7.4  Stock Extinction Risk for discussion of assessment of extinction risk used in this recovery plan. The methodology ( following Allendorf et al. ( 1997) uses recent population size and population trends to determine the risk of extinction for individual stocks. WDFW, Tribes NMFS, USFWS Phase 1 Annual 2. Continually review literature for improved methods for extinction risk assessment The science of risk assessment is rapidly evolving,

and the co manager's intent is to use the most current assessment techniques as they become available. WDFW, Tribes NMFS, USFWS Phase 1 Annual Objective: Avoid the future extinction of any extant summer chum stock through the use of supplementation techniques.

1. Continue the current supplementation projects for summer chum salmon. Continuing projects include Big Quilcene, Salmon Creek, Lilliwaup and Hamma Hamma. WDFW,

Tribes, USFWS HCSEG,

NOSC,

WOS, LLTK Generally, existing projects fall within the category of Phase 1 projects. New projects and some identified monitoring and assessment needs for existing projects ( section 4.2.5) fall within the category of Phase 2 projects. Several projects are currently in operation and are expected to continue under a defined schedule ( section <IP_ADDRESS>).

One new project is recommended for Jimmycomelately stock ( section <IP_ADDRESS>) where project implementation is expected to begin the summer of 1999. Additional projects may be considered in the future ( section <IP_ADDRESS>). Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 340 Table 4.1 Artificial Production objectives and action items ( continued).

Action Items Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 2. Initiate a new supplementation project for the Jimmy comelately stock. The Jimmycomelately stock has been identified in this plan as having a high risk of extinction,

because of current low population size and a recent precipitous decline ( see Part One, 1.7.4  Stock Extinction Risk). Efforts are underway to improve habitat conditions in the stream, however, these remedies are long term. Immediate supplementation is recommended, and is expected to commence in the summer of 1999. WDFW,

Tribes NOSC and/ or WOS Phase 1 Immediate 3. Operate all supplementa tion projects to minimize potential deleterious effect. All supplementation projects will follow the recovery plan criteria for minimizing potential deleterious effects in the following areas: partial/

total hatchery failure, predation, competition,

disease, and loss of genetic variability within and between populations. WDFW,

Tribes, USFWS HCSEG,

NOSC,

WOS, LLTK Phase 1 Immediate.

4. Initiate future supplementa tion projects for any stock found to have a high risk of extinction. Supplementation techniques to be used if assessment shows that the stock is in jeopardy of extinction and there are no other timely remedies. WDFW,

Tribes Partners depend on stock location and interest of agencies and citizen groups Phase 2 As needed.

Objective: Reintroduce summer chum salmon to region streams as donor stocks become available.

1. Continue the current reintroduction projects for summer chum salmon. Big Beef Chimacum WDFW,

Tribes, USFWS HCSEG,

NOSC,

WOS, LLTK Phase 1 Immediate.

2. Operate all reintroduction projects to minimize potential deleterious effect. All supplementation projects will follow the recovery plan criteria for minimizing potential deleterious effects in the following areas: partial/

total hatchery failure, predation, competition,

disease, and loss of genetic variability within and between populations. WDFW,

Tribes, USFWS HCSEG,

NOSC,

WOS, LLTK Phase 1 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 341 Table 4.1 Artificial Production objectives and action items ( continued).

Action Items Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 3. Initiate future reintroduction projects as donor stocks become available. Stocks that are candidates for future reintroduction include: Tahuya Dewatto, Skokomish, and Anderson. Decisions to pursue reintroductions will be based on current status of donor stock ( ability to contribute brood stock). Donor stocks will be limited to adjacent stocks not previously introduced to another streams. WDFW,

Tribes. Partners depend on stock location and interest of agencies and citizen groups. Phase 2 When appropriate.

4. Allow opportunity for natural reintroductions to occur on some streams through straying. See Part One  <IP_ADDRESS> for list of streams identified as possibly being part of the historic distribution of summer chum salmon. These streams will be allowed to repopulate naturally. WDFW,

Tribes. Phase 1 Immediate Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 342 4.2.2 Ecological Interactions Ecological interactions between summer chum and other species have been assessed as part of this initiative ( see Part Three, section 3.3). There is little likelihood that summer chum ( specifically, artificially produced summer chum) will substantially impact other species. The artificial production levels are relatively small, limiting competitive interactions with other juvenile salmonids, and since the production programs are intended to restore summer chum spawners to historical levels, competition on the spawning grounds should not be an issue. Because summer chum are released at a relatively small size, predation effects on other fishes is not a concern. More important to consider are the impacts of other species on summer chum. Primary sources of potential impact are other salmonids and marine mammals ( see Part Two  Region wide Factors for Decline). Potential impacts of other salmonids ( with emphasis on hatchery produced fish) include effects from hatchery operations, predation, competition and fish disease transfer. The potential impact of marine mammals is predation on summer chum. Following are descriptions of actions to address these potential impacts. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 343 Table 4.2 Ecological Interactions objectives and action items.

Objective: Eliminate and reduce negative hatchery interactions with summer chum.

Action Items Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 1. Assess risks to summer chum from producing hatchery salmonids. See Part Three, 3.3 for description of risk assessment that includes hazards from hatchery operations ( associated with broodstock collection,

water withdrawal, hatchery intakes and outlets, and pollution), predation ( direct and indirect effects),

competition and behavioral modification ( from juvenile and adult hatchery fish), and fish disease transfer. WDFW,

Tribes USFWS Phase 1 Completed as part of this initiative and updated periodically.

2. Identify risk aversion measures to reduce risks of hatchery programs. See Part Three, 3.3 for detailed description of risk aversion measures including protocol for broodstock collection, species specific limitations on hatchery releases to reduce or eliminate potential for predation and competition, and protocol for fish disease management. WDFW, Tribes,

USFWS Phase 1 Completed as part of this initiative.

3. Implement identified risk aversion measures. Apply risk aversion measures to hatchery programs as identified in 3.3.2 of Part Three. WDFW, Tribes,

USFWS HCSEG, WOS,

NOSC, LLTK Phase 1 Immediate.

Objective: Assess and respond to other potential negative species interactions with summer chum ( see 3.3).

1. Evaluate impacts of fall chum spawning activity on summer chum. Design and implement assessment of impacts from fall chum spawning within same stream reaches in which summer chum spawn. WDFW,

Tribes Agencies and others with funding resources. Phase 2 Undetermined.

2. Assess impacts of pinniped predation on summer chum. Continue study to assess pinniped populations and impacts on salmon within Hood Canal.. NMFS, WDFW Tribes and other agencies or entities Phase 1 Continuing.

3. Implement appropriate management actions based on assessments of negative interactions. Management actions may include control of individual seals or populations, and short term limiting of fall chum escapement levels in designated streams. NMFS WDFW,

Tribes Phase 1 or 2 When appropriate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 344 4.2.3 Harvest Management Harvest management provisions have been developed within this initiative to manage fisheries in a manner that will allow the rebuilding and maintenance of self sustaining summer chum populations throughout Hood Canal and eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca, while maximizing harvest opportunities on co mingled salmon species. The harvest management strategy utilizes a conservative four way control mechanism: 1) a base set of conservative fishing regulations, 2) abundance and escapement thresholds that trigger adjustments to the fishing regime, 3) exploitation rate objectives that will result in changes to the harvest regime if not met, and 4) overall stock assessment criteria that will affect all plan provisions, including harvest, if not satisfactorily met at periodic plan reviews. Following is a summary of harvest management actions. Detailed descriptions may be found in Part Three, section 3.5. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 345 Table 4.3 Harvest Management objectives and action items.

Objective: Define and implement a base conservation harvest regime that will halt the decline of summer chum and allow rebuilding.

Action Items Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 1. Review and analyze existing data to determine basis for effective harvest management. Escapement, catch and fisheries data have been compiled and analyzed ( see Part One and Part Three, 3.5) and the structure of a base conservation harvest regime has been established ( see Part Three, 3.5). WDFW, Tribes Phase 1 Completed as part of this initiative.

2. Identify specific harvest management actions within the conservation based harvest regime. Harvest management actions include no directed harvest on summer chum and specific time, area and gear restrictions on other species to reduce summer chum bycatch to very low levels ( details in Part Three, 3.5). WDFW,

Tribes Phase 1 Completed as part of this initiative.

3. Implement harvest management actions. Protective harvest management actions have been in effect since 1992. The base conservation harvest regime developed for this initiative more clearly defines and expands upon ongoing management actions.

Implementation is effective immediately. WDFW,

Tribes Phase 1 Continuing.

4. Maintain summer chum exploitation rates substantially below levels observed during years of decline, and at levels that will not impede recovery. Exploitation rates are evaluated each year and additional harvest management measures taken if rates fall outside defined range. Additionally, every 5 years, exploitation rates will be evaluated for longer term effects and actions taken as determined appropriate ( see Part Three, 3.5 and 3.6). WDFW, Tribes Phase 1 Completed as part of this initiative.

Objective: Ensure that base conservation harvest regime is working effectively.

5. Evaluate the base conservation regime assumptions. Exploitation rates are evaluated each year and additional harvest management measures taken if rates fall outside defined range. Additionally, every 5 years, exploitation rates will be evaluated for longer term effects and actions taken as determined appropriate ( see Part Three, 3.5 and 3.6). WDFW, Tribes Phase 1 Continuing. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 346 Table 4.3 Harvest Management objectives and action items ( continued).

Action Items Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 2. Evaluate stocks and harvest management units performance against minimum abundance and spawning distribution criteria. Criteria ( thresholds) are described in Part One, 1.7.3 and Appendix Report 1.5. Reviews occur annually ( Part Three,

section 3.6). If criteria are not met, causes for failure are evaluated and appropriate actions are taken applicable to harvest, habitat and supplementation programs. WDFW, Tribes Other agencies and entities Phase 1 Annual reviews begin with 1999.

First five year review in 2004.

Objective: Determine what constitutes a recovery harvest regime.

1. Define recovery criteria and recovered harvest regime. Within one year, criteria for recovered stocks and harvest management units should be developed upon which a recovery based harvest regime will be defined. The conservation based harvest regime will remain in effect until recovery criteria are met. WDFW,

Tribes. Phase 1 Within one year. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 347 4.2.4 Habitat Strategies for addressing habitat factors for decline have been identified by the co managers ( Part Three, section 3.4). The local governments and agencies with jurisdiction are expected to take the lead in selecting and implementing specific actions based on the strategies. The co managers anticipate providing technical assistance in the process of determining specific habitat protection and recovery actions, to the extent available resources will allow. An overview of habitat objectives and strategies is presented in Table 4.4, followed immediately by Table 4.5 that describes specific objectives, strategies and potential actions for individual stocks and watersheds. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 348 Table 4.4 Region wide habitat objectives and strategies.

Objective: Develop a high level of certainty that the habitat component of plan will be completed and implemented.

Strategy Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 1. Engage local governmental bodies and other entities in continuing the development and implementation of the program for habitat protection and recovery. Development of a habitat program has begun with this plan in the description of strategies for the protection and recovery of summer chum in response to specific habitat related factors for decline ( Part Three, section 3.4). To have an effective program, local governments and citizens must participate in its development because the local governments have the jurisdiction to implement the needed measures and because without local support, implementation will not succeed. This action requires presentation of this plan to the local governments and entities, who will then lead in developing additional planning and specific actions to address the habitat related factors for decline ( see also the immediately following strategy). Working through local groups, efforts should be made to educate the public about importance of functional habitats and associated management actions for the protection and recovery of summer chum and other species. Mason, Kitsap,

Jefferson and Clallam Counties, HCCC,

DNR, DOE,

DOT, USFS,

WDFW, Tribes. Local groups and citizens,

other agencies. Use existing funding and resources, Phase 1. Immediate.

2. Complete development and begin implementation of the habitat component of the plan. The next stages of habitat program development involve the selection and implementation of specific measures or actions. These measures include broad based regulatory actions affecting land use practices in the watersheds and estuaries ( for example, establishing riparian protection zones, limiting development of impervious surfaces, more effective regulation of shoreline structures), and specific habitat recovery actions ( for example, acquiring land or easements to protect habitat from development, removing or setting back dikes). An evaluation procedure for prioritizing specific local recovery actions is suggested in Part Three, section 3.4). Applications to specific watersheds are summarized in Table 4.5 and presented in detail within Appendix Report 3.6. Mason, Kitsap,

Jefferson and Clallam Counties, HCCC,

DNR, DOE,

DOT, USFS. WDFW,

Tribes,

local groups and citizens,

other agencies. Phases 1 and 2. Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 349 Table 4.4 Region wide habitat objectives and strategies ( continued).

Objective: Develop a high level of certainty that the habitat component of plan will be completed and implemented.

Strategy Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame Objective: Maintain and restore critical subestuarine and nearshore/ shoreline processes and conditions.

1. Prohibit further ditching, diking and road construction in subestuaries,

and prohibit or severely restrict bulkheading as well as construction of new piers, docks and floats along shorelines. Further degradation of estuarine habitats is to be avoided wherever possible. Exemptions for single family residences should be removed from the Shoreline Management Master Plan. Critical habitat areas especially require protection.

Consideration should be given to requiring use of joint facilities ( e. g., docks, floats) away from critical areas and use of alternatives to bulkheading. Sources of marine sediment ( feeder bluffs, etc.) Must be allowed to provide sediment to the marine environment for the maintenance of spits, beaches, and other nearshore habitat features.

Mitigation should be required for any unavoidable developments ( see Part Three, 3.4). Counties Agencies,

tribes and other interested parties Phase 1, possibly Phase 2. Immediate 2. Identify and purchase from willing landowners property or easements of undeveloped, subestuarine and shoreline areas. Summer chum rely on diverse, productive and structurally complex habitats in the estuarine areas.

Undeveloped critical areas should be protected from future development by purchase of property or easements ( see Part Three, 3.4). Counties,

agencies,

nonprofit organizations Agencies,

tribes and other interested parties. Phase 2 As funding resources become available.

3. Remove or set back dikes and refit or remove roads/ causeways in subestuaries. Re establish dendritic channels and patterns of inundation in deltas, and restore sinuous mainstream channels in subestuarine areas. Restoration of habitat in the subestuaries is a critical component of summer chum recovery ( see Part Three, 3.4). Restoration will provide unrestricted tidal and freshwater circulation,

natural sediment transport and storage, and development of marshes, swamps and eel grass beds, all of which contribute to high quality summer chum rearing and migrating habitat. Counties Agencies,

tribes and other interested parties. Phase 2 As funding becomes available.

4. Establish vegetation buffer requirements for marine shorelines.

Place critical nearshore migratory pathways in marine reserves. Vegetation buffers protect natural shoreline processes and limit effects of development.

Critical nearshore migratory pathways will need to be identified and given adequate protection ( Part Three, 3.4). Counties Agencies,

tribes and other interested parties. Phase 1 As soon as possible. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 350 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions.

A. Dungeness Stock ( see also action to evaluate summer chum population in Table 4.6)

Objective: Restore salmonid habitat in the Dungeness River ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 1. Re establish functional flood plain in the lower 2.6 miles of river ( dike removal and constriction abatement).

2. Abate man made constrictions above RM 2.6.

3. Create stable long term log jams.

4. Manage sediment to stabilize channel and reduce flooding risk.

5. Construct and/ or protect side channels.

6. Restore riparian vegetation.

7. Conserve instream flows.

8. Decrease water quality impacts in Dungeness Bay to control harmful ulvoid blooms.

9. Restore estuarine habitat and functions in Dungeness Bay and along juvenile summer chum migration corridors ( e. g., Gierin Creek estuary). The Dungeness River has been subject to numerous planning processes. A Watershed Council and technical workgroup have been working for several years on a comprehensive plan to guide salmonid restoration. The plan, which incorporates the seven actions/ strategies listed here, was approved by the Watershed Council in 1998. These continuing efforts, assuming adequate funding, are expected to result in the restoration of habitat functions to the benefit of summer chum as well as other salmonid species. Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Clallam County, state and federal agencies. Property owners and others. Phases 1 and 2. Ongoing B. Jimmycomelately Stock Objective: Re establish estuary to freshwater linkages and functions ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Reconnect and expand existing connections between freshwater reaches of flood plain and tidal delta. The poor connections and habitat conditions at the freshwater/ estuary interface is viewed as the primary issue to be addressed in restoring summer chum habitat of Jimmycomelately Creek. An estuary technical workgroup has been established to determine the scope of restoration actions, and to identify funding sources and time lines. Clallam County,

DOT. Clallam Conservat.

District, WDFW,

Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe,

WSU Coop. Ext.,

land owners and others. Phases 1 and 2. Early stages. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 351 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 2. Remove secondary roads and railroad grade that limit tidal circulation and fish movement.

3. Fill remnant ditches.

4. Mitigate and eliminate log storage and handling impacts.

5. Create stable logjams to increase channel complexity.

6. Restore estuarine habitat and functions in Sequim Bay and along juvenile summer chum migration corridors ( e. g., Bell Creek estuary).

C. Salmon/ Snow Stock  Salmon and Snow Watersheds Objective: Restore stream habitat functions ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Return stream channel to sinuous morphology.

2. Control sediment inputs to natural levels.

3. Create stable logjams to increase channel complexity.

4. Restore riparian vegetation. These measures address the major impacts assessed to be limiting habitat functions in Salmon and Snow creeks and affecting freshwater life stages of summer chum. Restoration activities were begun in 1995 in Snow Creek north of Highway 101 and west of State Road 20 to abate channel constriction, re establish pools, lower streambed and place LWD in stream. A more comprehensive restoration effort can be built on these initial activities. Additional assessment may be needed to prepare for actions. Clallam County,

DOT Clallam Conserv.

District, WDFW,

James town S'Klallam Tribe, WSU Coop.

Ext., landowners and others. Phase 2 As funding becomes available.

Objective: Re establish estuary to freshwater linkages and functions ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Remove railroad grade.

2. Remove or set back dikes. The railroad grade limits tidal circulation for both creek deltas and is located at the center of emergent marsh rearing habitat on Snow Creek. Dike removal on both creeks must be carefully planned because of the integration of diked areas with Highway 101 transportation corridor. Additional assessment may be required to prepare for actions Clallam County,

DOT Clallam Conserv.

District, WDFW,

James town S'Klallam Tribe, WSU Coop.

Ext., land owners and others. Phase 2 As funding becomes available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 352 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame D. Chimacum Watershed Objective: Recover summer chum habitat in lower stream reaches ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Replace road fill and culvert at Irondale Rd.

crossing.

2. Re establish riparian forest on east and west forks.

3. Restore wetlands.

4. Protect wetlands and riparian areas downstream of Irondale Rd.

5. Protect lower river floodplain and estuary.

6. Restore estuarine and nearshore habitat by removing fill from approximately 18 to 20 acres of former intertidal habitat located immediately south of the Chimacum Creek mouth.

7. Decrease water quality impacts to the estuary and associated nearshore areas. These measures address the major limiting factors affecting summer chum in Chimacum Creek. The work at the Irondale Rd. crossing is to remove possibility of future culvert failure.

Riparian restoration will help reduce high summer temperatures and input of fine sediment. Wetland restoration will help control summer and winter flow conditions. Assessment of winter and summer flow effects is also needed. The Jefferson Land Trust and WDFW are currently working to acquire conservation easements including riparian areas. The tidal floodplain and estuary are undeveloped and should be protected by acquisition and regulation. Jefferson County WDFW, Tribes and local groups. Phase 2 As soon as funding is available.

E. Quilcene Stock  Big and Little Quilcene Watersheds Objective: Determine instream flows needed to support summer chum during immigration and spawning life stages in the Big and Little Quilcene rivers ( see Appendix Report 3.6). Perform instream low flow assessment and recommend summer instream low flow levels and associated habitat improvements. Because of water withdrawals, summer low flows are believed to be limiting immigration and spawning life stages in the Big and Little Quilcene. An assessment of low flow needs should be performed using appropriate methodology and considering other factors ( e. g. channel aggradation) that may affect summer chum habitat in conjunction with low flows. A recommendation of instream low flow levels and any associated habitat improvements should be developed based on the results of the assessment. DOE, Jefferson County, WDFW. Tribes, City of Port Town send,

other agencies and interested parties. Undetermined

Phase 2 As soon as funding / resources are available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 353 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame Objective: Meet and maintain recommended instream low flow levels and associated habitat improvements in the Big and Little Quilcene rivers.

Develop and implement process to gain acceptance of instream low flow levels and associated habitat improvements, to seek needed funding and to follow up with specific actions to meet objective. The governing bodies with jurisdiction, directly affected parties and others should convene to review results of the instream flow assessment and develop a cooperative response to meeting instream flow needs and addressing associated habitat improvements. Funding requirements should be determined and a strategy developed to secure the funds. The funding strategy should be implemented and specific actions should be taken to ensure instream low flow levels are met and to secure associated habitat improvements critical to successful instream low flow conditions. Jefferson County, City of Port Town send,

Dept. of Ecology,

WDFW, any affected landowners. Tribes, other agencies and interest ed parties. Undetermined

Phase 2 Immediately following completion of instream flow assessment Objective: Protect or improve channel complexity, reduce channel aggradation effects, and protect and improve riparian conditions in the lower rivers ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Purchase from willing landowners property and easements adjacent to stream reaches and in the flood plains of the lower rivers and subestuaries. In the lower Big Quilcene River ( downstream of RM 1.0), the exact location of the river is controlled in large part by the placement of dikes; natural lateral river movement is constrained and sediment aggradation occurs in a restricted area. The effect has been to reduce channel complexity and exacerbate negative effects of sediment aggradation. The purchase of property or easements in this reach of the river, complemented by removal and setting back of dikes ( see below) and obtaining appropriate instream low flow conditions ( see above) will return natural river and flood plains interactions and functions, will increase channel complexity, and will significantly improve summer chum habitat conditions in the lower river. The purchase of this land will eliminate the need to protect the existing land uses of the current landowners from effects of flooding and thus will allow for more natural river functions. The reach of the Big Quilcene River from RM 1.0 to 2.5 is constrained by farmers and residents who have armored the banks to restrict river movement. Purchase of property or flood plain easements will allow the river to move more naturally across the flood plain, will lead to improved riparian conditions and will increase channel complexity.

The lower Little Quilcene River contains a few remaining spawning areas with intact riparian forest and good instream habitat. Purchase of property or easements will protect these areas from degradation. Jefferson County, willing land owners. Tribes, WDFW, other agencies and interest ed parties. Undetermined

Phase 2. Immediately as funds become available Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 354 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 2. Remove or set back dikes in the flood plain and estuary. Removal and setting back of dikes could provide access to substantial amounts of the flood plains and estuaries of the Big and Little Quilcene rivers. Natural lateral river movement, accompanied by improved distribution of sediments, greater channel complexity and improved riparian conditions would result in much improved habitat to the benefit of summer chum. Jefferson County, willing land owners. Tribes, WDFW,

other agencies and interest ed parties. Undetermined

Phase 2. As funds become available 3. Reduce future development in the flood plain by restricting construction permits. Permits should be restricted to not allow new construction of residences or other developments in flood plain areas that currently accommodate natural stream/ flood plain interactions and functions. The purpose would be to avoid further diminution of natural processes that support desirable summer chum habitat conditions. The flood plain on the north side of the Little Quilcene River below RM 0.7 is a natural flood plain area that should be protected from development. Jefferson County. Other counties,

agencies tribes and interest ed parties. Undetermined

Phase 2 if needed. Immediate.

4. Determine sources and extent of sediment aggradation and scouring problems. The sources of sediment aggradation on the Little Quilcene should be determined using existing watershed analysis methods. The extent and dynamics of sediment aggradation and scouring effects should be assessed in the lower Big and Little Quilcene rivers. These assessments will provide a better understanding of the scope of the aggradation and scouring problems that exist in the lower rivers, and indicate what actions may be taken to rectify the problems, leading to improved habitat conditions for summer chum. U. S. Forest Service ( upper watershed sediment source areas),

Jefferson County . Other agencies tribes and interest ed parties. Undetermined

Phase 2 if needed. As funds become available 5. Restore natural levels of LWD to the anadromous use zones of both rivers. The Big and Little Quilcene rivers are extremely deficient in stable LWD. Restoring LWD will contribute to channel stability and complexity. U. S. Forest Service, Jefferson County Other agencies,

tribes and interested parties. Phase 2 As funds become available.

6. Restore natural meandering configuration to the channelized reach of the Big Quilcene River between approximately river mile 2.5 and 2.8. Channelization of this portion of river in 1950s has led to extremely simplified and impaired habitat ever since. Also,

with the river being confined against the valley wall in this area, high rates of bluff erosion and sediment recruitment into the river have occurred. Restoring the channel to a meandering configuration will restore channel complexity,

reduce stream energy and allow the river to move away from the highly erodible slopes. Jefferson County Other agencies,

tribes and interested parties. Phase 2 As funds become available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 355 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 7. Remove artificially aggraded sediments from the Big Quilcene and Little Quilcene river delta cones. Channelization of these streams has caused the development of abnormal delta cones that have buried intertidal estuarine habitat at these stream mouths. These delta cones should be removed to restore estuarine habitat and contribute to the stability of the lower reaches of these streams. Similar consideration should be given to removing delta cones of other streams in Quilcene Bay estuary ( i. e., Indian and Jakeway creeks). Jefferson County Other agencies,

tribes and interested parties. Phase 2 As funds become available.

F. Dosewallips Stock Objective: Protect and improve summer chum habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Purchase property or conservation easements in lower 3.0 miles of watershed. Development pressures are highly concentrated in the lower 3.0 miles of river, where most summer chum use occurs. Acquisition of property or easements from willing landowners will ensure future protection and recovery of summer chum habitat. The potential also exists for planting conifers in the riparian zone and placing engineered logjams to improve channel complexity and stabilize spawning gravels. Jefferson County and state/ federal agencies Tribes and other interested parties Phase 2 When funding is available 2. Restore tidal circulation across the subestuary. Existing and failed dikes have disconnected the wetlands across the delta. Removing or setting back the dikes would allow more natural tidal circulation and access to habitat. Tidal channels north of the river mouth could be reconnected to the mainstem river. Jefferson County and state/ federal agencies Tribes and other interested parties Phase 2 When funding is available 3. Restore natural levels of LWD to the anadromous use zones of the Dosewallips River. The Dosewallips River if deficient in stable LWD. Restoring LWD will contribute to channel complexity and stability. Jefferson County and state/ federal agencies. Tribes and other interested parties. Phase 2 When funding is available.

G. Duckabush Stock Objective: Protect and improve summer chum habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

4. Purchase property or conservation easements in lower 2.5 miles of watershed. Development pressures are highly concentrated in the lower 2.5 miles of river, where most summer chum use occurs. Acquisition of property or easements from willing landowners will ensure future protection and recovery of summer chum habitat. The potential also exists for planting conifers in the riparian zone and placing engineered logjams to improve channel complexity and stabilize spawning gravels. Jefferson County and state/ federal agencies Tribes and other interested parties. Phase 2 When funding is available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 356 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 2. Restore tidal circulation across the subestuary. Rerouting or refitting the Highway 101 road causeway across the delta would help restore tidal circulation and juvenile salmon migration and rearing in the subestuary. Removal or setting back of one of the dikes in the northern delta would reconnect additional delta area. Jefferson County, DOT,

state/ federal agencies Tribes and other interested parties Phase 2 When funding is available H. Hamma Hamma Stock Objective: Protect and improve summer chum habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

3. Protect and restore riparian forests. Logging and timber salvage in riparian zone has reduced LWD recruitment into the stream and has increased soil erosion and landslide hazards.

Providing an adequate riparian forest buffer and avoiding harvest on steep slopes is recommended.

Engineered logjams may be placed to improve channel habitat complexity. Mason County, DOT,

state / federal agencies. Land owner,

tribes and other interested parties Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 4. Restore tidal circulation across the subestuary. Reconnecting the lower river with the north bank marsh would restore fish access to subestuarine habitat used for rearing and refuge. An assessment of this action and others in the delta area is needed to determine nature and feasibility of actions. Mason County, DOT,

state / federal agencies. Land owner,

tribes and other interested parties Phase 2 Immediate I. Lilliwaup Stock Objective: Protect and improve summer chum habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Restore riparian forest in lower river. Restriction of human activities associated with agricultural and residential developments would allow riparian forests to become reestablished, providing a source of LWD to increase channel complexity. Mason County Landowners

tribes and other interested parties. Phase 1 Immediate Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 357 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 2. Protect wetlands in upper Lilliwaup valley. The DNR owned wetlands are believed to play a major role in sustaining summer flows. The land should be managed to ensure the wetlands are maintained. DNR Tribes and other interested parties. Phase 1 Continuing.

3. Restore natural tidal channel system. The natural tidal channel system of the subestuary is impacted by the Highway 101 road causeway.

The causeway should be relocated or refitted to reduce impact. DOT Tribes and other interested parties. Phase 2 When funded.

J. Skokomish Stock Objective: Protect and improve freshwater natural habitat conditions ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Restore natural flows in the North Fork. Substantial restoration of North Fork flows ( currently diverted by the Cushman Hydroelectric Project) would restore historic habitat conditions,

reduce or eliminate sediment aggradation in the main channel, and improve conditions for upstream adult salmon migration during the summer low flow months. U. S. Dept. of Interior City of Tacoma,

state and federal agencies, Skok.

Tribe Phase 1 and possibly Phase 2. In process.

2. Improve hydrological conditions throughout watershed. Reducing road densities through obliteration and decommissioning and improving drainage of remaining roads by installing larger and more frequent cross drains and water bars will help restore ecosystem processes and lessen peak flow impacts. By allowing the forest to mature,

general hydrologic conditions will improve and rain on snow impacts will be reduced. Federal and state agencies, Mason County Skok. Tribe Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 3. Restore riparian condition through revegetation Revegetation of the riparian corridor together with decommisioning dikes and fencing livestock will improve the river connection with the floodplain and improve riparian benefits ( e. g.,

provide source of LWD). Mason County Conserv. Dist. ,

state and federal agencies, Skok.

Tribe, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 358 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 4. Provide for natural movement of the river across the floodplain. Removal of dikes and purchase of property or easements from willing landowners would allow the river to move across and integrate more naturally with the flood plain, creating improved habitat conditions. Habitat diversity may be improved by reconnecting isolated sloughs and side channels. Mason County State and federal agencies, Skok.

Tribe, landowners Phase 2 Depends on funding.

Objective: Restore delta functions.

Convert lands back to estuarine wetlands with natural distributary channels. Remove dikes and tide gates, and remove or relocate roads to provide unimpeded tidal circulation in river delta. A key part of the subestuary's recovery is the restoration of North Fork flows that strongly affect the delta's ecological processes and would reduce the long term sediment aggradation in the main channel.

The actions will restore summer chum migration and rearing habitat. Mason County State and federal agencies, Skok.

Tribe, landowners Phase 2 Depends in part on funding.

K. Union Stock Objective: Protect and improve subestuarine habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

5. Purchase property or conservation easements in undeveloped subestuarine or shoreline areas. Acquisition of properties or easements from willing landowners will secure permanent protection of undeveloped, natural areas that provide summer chum rearing and migratory habitat. Mason County Agencies, tribes,

landowners Phase 2 Contingent on funding.

6. Recover habitat through removal or setting back dikes and removal of unnecessary fills and bulkheads. There is a need to assess the effectiveness of the dikes, fills and bulkheads and their impact on the subestuarine environment.

Based on results of assessment, restoration opportunities may be explored and negotiated with the landowners. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 2 Contingent on funding. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 359 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Restore riparian forest. Encourage riparian revegetation throughout the stream corridor. Upgrade riparian protection through ordinances. Existing riparian forests may be improved by underplanting shade tolerant conifers. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

2. Increase channel complexity. Channel complexity may be improved by allowing natural input processes for woody debris to occur and by leaving LWD in the stream channel. Consider placing engineered logjams in channel. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

3. Improve water quality. Raise standards for best management practices utilized by industrial landowners, small farms and residential homeowners to reduce impacts on habitat and water quality. Enact effective stormwater protection measures. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 1 Immediate.

L. Big Mission Watershed Objective: Protect and improve subestuarine habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

4. Purchase property or conservation easements in undeveloped subestuarine or shoreline areas. Acquisition of properties or easements from willing landowners will secure permanent protection of undeveloped, natural areas that provide summer chum rearing and migratory habitat. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 2 Contingent on funding. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 360 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 2. Recover habitat through removal or setting back dikes and removal of unnecessary fills and bulkheads. The condition and effectiveness of dikes, fills and bulkheads, and their impact on the subestuarine environment should be assessed. Based on results of assessment, restoration opportunities should be explored and negotiated with the landowners. Explore with Washington Parks Dept. the potential of reconfiguring the lower stream channel. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 2 Contingent on funding.

Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

3. Restore riparian forest. Encourage riparian revegetation throughout the stream corridor. Upgrade riparian protection through ordinances. Consider purchasing from willing landowners critical undeveloped properties or conservation easements on developed properties that can be enhanced.

Existing riparian forests may be improved by underplanting shade tolerant conifers. Link the DNR riparian forests in the middle reaches of stream with riparian forests in the lower reaches. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

4. Increase channel complexity. Channel complexity may be improved by allowing natural input processes for woody debris to occur and by leaving LWD in the stream channel. Consider placing engineered logjams in channel. Assess capacity of bridges/ culverts to pass wood, water and sediment to lower reaches;

replace or improve these structures where appropriate. Where possible, remove rip rap or replace with bio engineered shoreline protection. Mason County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 361 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame M. Tahuya Watershed Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Protect and improve riparian condition. Allowing existing forests to mature and providing adequate riparian buffers will over time protect and improve riparian processes. As riparian condition improves, potential effects of high water temperatures ( i. e., limiting distribution of returning adults) will be mitigated. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

2. Increase channel complexity. Channel complexity will increase by allowing the river to migrate naturally across the 100 year floodplain. Opportunities for elimination of bank hardening and stream channelization that limit natural river movement should be pursued. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

3. Protect instream flows. Negative impacts on instream flows are likely with development in the watershed unless effective management is applied. Impervious surfaces should be limited, storm water control measures planned and implemented, and drainage structures sized to allow for 100 year storm events. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

4. Protect and improve subestuarine habitat. Efforts should be made to protect estuary from further development, especially bank hardening. Existing road causeways constrict water circulation and should be refitted to reduce impact. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

N. Dewatto Watershed Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Protect and improve riparian condition. Riparian functions will improve as the existing riparian forest matures over the next 25 50 years.

Adequate protection through regulation and enforcement will ensure functions such as LWD recruitment, and moderation of water temperatures will naturally improve over time. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 362 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 2. Upgrade road conditions. Fine sediments in spawning gravels may be reduced by routing road drainage away from stream channels,

stabilizing sidecasts, hardening road surfaces,

upgrading stream crossings to pass 100 year flood events and, where possible, decommisioning roads. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

3. Improve channel complexity. Restore natural function within the 100 year flood plain by removing or redesigning constraints to natural channel development. Such constraints include bank hardening and channelization. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

4. Protect subestuary. The subestuary is one of few relatively undisturbed deltas. Specific measures should be sought to ensure its protection; e. g., purchase of conservation easements and regulation of land use. Mason County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

O. Big Anderson Watershed Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

5. Protect and improve riparian condition. Increase riparian buffer and provide adequate protection. Plant conifers throughout flood plain in lower one mile of stream. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

6. Reduce unnatural instream sediment accumulation and reduce adverse peak flow effects. Avoid logging on potentially unstable slopes and decommission or repair roads that have high surface erosion or landslide hazard. Limit new road construction. Increase water bars and cross drains on forest roads. Redirect roadside ditches to avoid direct routing of storm flows into stream channels. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

7. Improve habitat in lower river flood plain and subestuary. Relocate roads out of flood plain or replace road fill with structures that allow channel movement and passage of flood waters. Alternatively, roads may be set back or rerouted within flood plain to improve habitat. Remove abandoned railroad fill in subestuary. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 1 and 2 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 363 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame P. Stavis Watershed Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Protect existing high quality habitat Continue and expand acquisitions under the Hood Canal Salmon Sanctuary. Highest priority is estuary and adjacent uplands, but also important are adjoining shoreline areas, lower mainstem and flood plain, and wetland hydrologic source areas. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

2. Protect and restore riparian forest. For properties acquired in lower watershed, replant streamside areas lacking sufficient riparian forest or appropriate species and abandon any associated roads.

Consider treatments to encourage conifer regeneration on WDFW properties. Reforest narrow riparian zones on upstream DNR lands. Establish appropriate riparian zone widths to provide long term LWD recruitment. Assess West Kitsap Watershed Analysis prescriptions and modify as needed. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

3. Establish hydrologic maturity targets. Set forest harvest rates to ensure hydrologic maturity.

Address growth management issues to limit effects ( e. g., from impervious services) on hydrologic maturity. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

4. Use Stavis Creek estuary as critical habitat template. Establish long term monitoring programs to track estuarine quality. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

Q. Seabeck Watershed Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Control sediment sources. Improve road maintenance and surfacing on private roads, and ensure storm water runoff is not routed directly into stream channel. Evaluate effectiveness of slope stability standards. Control timing of clearing and grading activities adjacent to creek to avoid storm events. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 1 and 2 Immediate Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 364 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 2. Improve channel complexity. Place LWD jams in lower river if determined to be feasible. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

3. Protect flow conditions. Prohibit new water withdrawals until instream flow requirements are established. Establish impervious surface limits and condition land use permits accordingly. Retrofit existing developments for storm water control. Maintain minimum 60% of watershed in forest cover. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

4. Protect and restore riparian habitat. Acquire high quality riparian forest to protect habitat.

Replant riparian buffers with native species to improve habitat. Review and revise critical area ordinance to meet recommended functional riparian buffer standards. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

5. Protect subestuary. Prevent further development within subestuary by land acquisition or land use regulation. Kitsap County Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

R. Big Beef Watershed Objective: Protect and improve stream habitat ( see Appendix Report 3.6).

1. Reduces sources of sediment aggradation. Reduce mass wasting into lower five miles of stream by prohibiting logging and development on steep,

unstable slopes. Address sediment contributions from existing abandoned and active roads ( esp. Kidhaven Rd. at RM 3.2). Prohibit new roads on steep ravine slopes below Lake Symington. Monitor effectiveness of prescriptions for logging ( West Kitsap Watershed analysis) and rural development ( Critical Areas Ordinance). Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

2. Increase channel complexity. Remove service road located within flood plain &

evaluate feasibility of restoring side channels and wetlands next to U. W. research facility. Assess role of WDFW weir in affecting sediment routing and investigate options for reducing its impact. Evaluate option of placing LWD jams in lower river. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phase 1 and 2 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 365 Table 4.5 Stock and watershed specific habitat objectives, strategies and potential actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/ Authority Partners Resources/ Funding Time Frame 3. Reduce causeway impact on delta. Retrofit causeway by removing fill and expanding bridge span to reduce its footprint in the historic delta,

promote full tidal water exchange and allow natural habitat development in subestuary. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

4. Improve flow conditions. Condition water applications to ensure minimum instream flow recommendations are met. Establish impervious surface limits and condition land use permits accordingly. Maintain minimum 60% of watershed in forest cover. Institute water conservation programs and seek opportunities to reduce number of shallow wells in watershed. Require on site infiltration of runoff from impervious surfaces where soils are appropriate. Ensure road drainage is not routed directly into stream channels. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

5. Protect and restore riparian forests. Continue riparian area acquisition efforts under the Hood Canal Salmon Sanctuary program. Replant degraded riparian zones with appropriate native species. Review and revise critical area ordinance consistent with recommendations for riparian buffers. Kitsap County, DOT Agencies,

tribes, landowners Phases 1 and 2 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 366 4.2.5 Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and evaluation are intended to document compliance with the management actions described in this initiative and to help verify whether or not the expected results of those actions actually occur. They also are used to validate critical assumptions upon which management actions are based and address identified information gaps. Monitoring and evaluation are necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of the initiative in addressing the factors for decline, in stopping population declines, and ultimately in recovering summer chum. Table 4.6 summarizes monitoring and evaluation objectives, strategies and actions. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 367 Table 4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation  objectives, strategies and actions.

Objective: Document compliance of specific projects and actions with applicable guidelines, criteria or rules.

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 1. Monitor summer chum supplementation and reintroduction projects for consistency with provisions and guidelines under the initiative and in support of adaptive management ( section 3.2). Monitoring is accomplished by required recording of all project operations including brood stocking, incubation,

rearing, health, transfer and release of fish. Records,

including building of new facilities, are summarized and made available in annual reports. Projects may be modified or even terminated based on monitoring results. WDFW, USFWS,

Tribes. HCSEG,

NOSC, WOS,

LLTK. Phase 1. Immediate.

2. Monitor hatchery mitigation measures to reduce negative ecological interactions of other species with summer chum, consistent with provisions of section 3.3. Hatchery records demonstrate level of compliance with identified mitigation actions. Results are summarized in annual report. WDFW, USFWS,

Tribes Citizens and other participant organizations Phase 1. Immediate.

3. Monitor harvest regulations and fisheries for consistency with plan provisions ( section 3.5). Records of harvest regulations are kept. Tribal and state fisheries enforcement programs promote compliance with regulations and record violations. Results are reviewed annually. WDFW, Tribes Phase 1. Immediate.

4. Include compliance monitoring as part of habitat protection and restoration measures ( section 3.4). Documenting compliance with land use permits and regulations, and with specifications of habitat restoration projects, should be required in the development of these actions. Local governments and agencies with jurisdiction WDFW, Tribes Phases 1 and 2 Immediate.

Objective: Measure effectiveness of actions and projects.

1. Monitor adult returns from supplementation and reintroduction projects. All artificially produced summer chum are marked or tagged so that returning hatchery origin fish may be sampled.

Because all currently planned projects are integrated recovery programs, the focus is on number and proportion of natural origin returns ( NORs) as the primary measure of project success. ( Adequate sampling resources are critical for effective monitoring.) Artificial production program may be reduced or even terminated based on monitoring results ( Part Three, 3.2). WDFW, USFWS,

Tribes HCSEG,

NOSC, WOS,

LLTK Phases 1 and 2 Immediate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 368 Table 4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation  objectives, strategies and actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 2. Monitor catches, escapements,

genetics, ages and fisheries exploitation rates. Summer chum are not targeted in fisheries. However,

catches of summer chum in fisheries for other species, with run timing that overlaps that of summer chum, are monitored, as are summer chum escapements to spawning grounds, genetic stock information, ages of summer chum and other biological data ( see Part One). With this information, runs are reconstructed and exploitation rates estimated to measure the success of harvest controls and assess the condition of the summer chum management units and stocks. Population performance standards will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of all management actions in conserving and recovering summer chum ( see also below, section 4.2.6). WDFW, USFWS,

Tribes Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 3. Verify that assumed effects of habitat restoration projects on habitat are what was assumed. Projects should include post construction monitoring for specific effects on habitat or fish ( e. g., changes in habitat configuration or function ( such as expansion of salt marsh)

and/ or improved fish access to restored habitat) ( Part Three, 3.4). Local governments and agencies with jurisdiction WDFW, Tribes and other interested parties. Phases 1 and 2 As projects are implemented Objective: Validate critical assumptions behind planning and actions.

1. Verify that under present guidelines artificial production projects do not affect genetic diversity of natural populations. Continue to collect genetic information on natural summer chum. Collect genetic information over time from selected artificial production programs to monitor any changes and compare with natural populations ( Part Three, 3.2). WDFW, USFWS,

Tribes Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 2. Verify that straying of hatchery summer chum out of watersheds of origin is at acceptably low levels. Sample summer chum for marks during brood stocking operations. Also, sample summer chum carcasses for marks in watersheds of origin and in adjacent watersheds ( Part Three, 3.2). WDFW, USFWS,

Tribes Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 3. Verify that regulatory measures for Hood Canal terminal fisheries based on run timing will control summer chum exploitation levels to expected low levels. Catches in terminal fisheries will be monitored and genetic samples will be taken ( to separate summer from fall chum)

so that run timing assumptions are verified or modified,

and associated regulatory measures are also adapted as needed ( Part Three, 3.5). Tribes, WDFW Phases 1 and 2 Immediate Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 369 Table 4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation  objectives, strategies and actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 4. Investigate whether controlled Hood Canal terminal fisheries impacts on summer chum do not disproportionately affect one or more stocks. Results of monitoring summer chum catch distribution and associated genetics sampling information would address this issue ( Part Three,

3.5). Tribes, WDFW Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 5. Verify that pre terminal fisheries exploitation rates fall within bounds stipulated for conservation based fishing regime. Monitoring of within state pre terminal fisheries to estimate exploitation rates is planned. Agreements will be sought with Canada to monitor fisheries with likely impact ( Part Three, 3.5). WDFW, Tribes Phases 1 and 2 Immediate 6. Verify and increase understanding of habitat factors for decline identified in this initiative. Evaluations should be made in selected locations of factors ( and associated parameters) currently identified as negatively affecting summer chum.

Included are assessments of storm flow runoffs and upland drainage patterns that affect peak flows, low flow and temperatures, LWD loading and channel stability affecting channel complexity and floodplain function, sediment delivery and routing, riparian forest condition, and subestuarine habitat condition ( Part Three, 3.4). WDFW, Tribes Other agencies and interested parties. Phases 1 and 2 As funding and resources become available.

Objective: Perform assessments that address additional identified information gaps.

1. Plan and implement evaluation of Dungeness summer chum population The Dungeness stock is known to exist in the Dungeness River but the abundance and condition of the stock is not known ( Part One, section <IP_ADDRESS>).

An assessment of the population, including measurements of the distribution and levels of escapement, should be designed and implemented by the management agencies and tribes. The assessment should provide an understanding of the status of the stock and provide a basis for determining appropriate management actions. WDFW, and Tribes USFWS and other interested agencies and parties Phase 2 As soon as funding is available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 370 Table 4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation  objectives, strategies and actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 2. Assess summer chum productivity and production capacity. Obtain age and sex data from existing populations and develop estimates of productivity. Also perform more in depth investigations; for example, the research project has been initiated at Big Beef Creek ( where summer chum are being reintroduced) to assess productivity from egg deposition to adult return and to follow production of consecutive generations spawning in the stream ( Part Three,

3.2). WDFW Tribes, HCSEG and other interested parties. Phases 1 and 2 Continuing.

3. Assess summer chum nonharvest mortality. Research non harvest summer chum mortality as a mortality rate per fish encountered such that the rate for each gear type is estimated with sufficient precision to match goals for accuracy of exploitation rate estimates and management effectiveness ( Part Three, 3.5). WDFW, Tribes Phase 2 When funding becomes available.

4. Develop stream habitat classification system and database. The Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Project ( SSHIAP) is being developed by the comanagers and is expected to provide recovery planners a valuable tool for planning and prioritizing protection and recovery work ( Part Three, 3.4). Tribes, WDFW Other agencies and interested parties. Phases 1 and 2 Continuing.

5. Survey habitat in streams and estuaries where little or no data has been collected. Systematically collected habitat data is lacking or limited in scope for several streams and the nearshore estuarine areas.

Surveys will provide improved understanding of habitat conditions affecting summer chum ( Part Three, 3.4). WDFW, Tribes Other agencies and interested parties. Phase 2 When funding or resources become available.

6. Assess stream bed scouring effects on summer chum redds in selected watersheds. Increases in peak winter flows, stream bed mobility and consequent scouring of salmon redds is perceived as a major factor of decline in several watersheds. Scour chain monitoring linked with spawning surveys and/ or emergent fry trapping will help better define severity of effect on summer chum ( Part Three, 3.4). WDFW, Tribes Other agencies and interested parties. Phase 2 When funding or resources become available.

7. Perform multi scenario analysis of full build out in selected watersheds using standard and alternative designs and materials. Analysis will help reconcile development pressures with habitat protection needs ( Part Three, 3.4). Counties, local governments WDFW,

Tribes Unknown As soon as practical. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 371 Table 4.6 Monitoring and Evaluation  objectives, strategies and actions ( continued).

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 8. Perform analysis of hydrologic changes in selected watersheds. Hydrologic changes such as artificial stream channel constrictions and increased peak flows dynamically interact to affect sediment regimes, bed stability and channel complexity impacting summer chum habitat.

Analysis of these changes will help focus on appropriate summer chum protection and recovery measures ( Part Three, 3.4). Counties, local governments WDFW, Tribes Unknown As soon as practical.

9. Inventory and assess estuarine nearshore habitat and shoreline structures. Little information currently exists on estuarine nearshore habitat or shoreline structures. A study is needed to survey the shoreline and evaluate effects of man made structures on habitat and summer chum ( Part Three, 3.4). WDFW, Tribes Other agencies and interested parties. Phase 2 When funding or resources become available.

10. Perform estuarine life history study of selected summer chum populations. Study would be to determine the distribution and timing, as well as the feeding and sheltering characteristics of juvenile summer chum in the subestuarine and nearshore environments ( Part Three, sections 3.3, 3.4). WDFW, Tribes Other agencies and interested parties. Phase 2 When funding or resources become available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 372 4.2.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management The summer chum salmon conservation initiative is an integrated plan, with each element contributing in concert with other elements to address the broad range of factors for decline and promote recovery. The plan elements of artificial production, ecological interactions, habitat and harvest management have been presented separately, each with specific objectives, strategies and actions intended to conserve and recover summer chum salmon. However, it is understood that the combination of effects from the individual strategies and actions, across all elements, is the key to success. To fully integrate the initiative's elements, the results must be assessed over time with existing management measures either adjusted or terminated, and possibly new measures added as is appropriate. While the previous descriptions of each of the elements address specifically applicable performance evaluations, the ultimate measure of overall success must include assessment of summer chum population performance. Table 4.7 describes the co managers' approach to assessing and responding to summer chum population performance. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.1 Introduction and 4.2 Summary of Plan Objectives, Strategies, and Actions Page 373 Table 4.7 Program Integration and Adaptive Management  objectives and action items.

Objective: Define population performance criteria for periodic evaluation of summer chum populations.

Strategy/ Action Description Jurisdiction/

Authority Partners Resources/

Funding Time Frame 1. Identify thresholds below which summer chum management units and stocks are at critical status. Numerical critical thresholds or flags have been set for escapements and run sizes of management units and stocks ( see Part One, 1.7.3 and Appendix Report 1.5). WDFW, Tribes NMFS Phase 1 Completed as part of this initiative.

2. Identify recovery thresholds. Numerical recovery thresholds are to be determined in 2000. WDFW, Tribes NMFS Phase 1 Scheduled for completion in spring 2000.

Objective: Periodically evaluate summer chum population performance and provide effective management response to evaluation.

1. Annually review population performance and provide specified response. Review entails comparing past year's estimates of run sizes or escapements ( for the defined management units and stocks)

with identified critical threshold values. If any estimates fall below critical thresholds or flags, the following responses are implemented: 1) identify and if appropriate implement appropriate emergency actions; 2) within 6 months, prepare assessment of causes of population decline and recommend modifications to plan to effect prompt restoration of management unit or stock to non critical status. All potential factors for decline will be considered in assessment. WDFW,

Tribes NMFS and other interested parties. Phase 1 Annual 2. Review population performance every 5 years. Five year review will include: 1) performance review of each element of plan relative to its specific existing and any subsequent newly defined standards, 2) cumulative and comprehensive review of annual population performances relative to critical thresholds, 3) refinement of recovery standards if sufficient information is available, and 4)

preparation of recommendations pertaining to management objectives, strategies and actions including possible modification or termination of existing measures and addition of new ones. Management actions will be pursued based on recommendations. WDFW,

Tribes NMFS and other interested parties. Phase 1 Every five years beginning 2004. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and ESA Page 374 The goal of the Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative is:

To protect, restore and enhance the productivity, production and diversity of Hood Canal summer chum salmon and their ecosystems to provide surplus production sufficient to allow future directed and incidental harvests of summer chum salmon.

" The co managers are committed to seeing that no additional extinctions occur." 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and Meeting ESA Objectives The Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative comprehensively addresses all factors affecting the decline of summer chum salmon in Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca. Specific actions and strategies are identified to protect and restore the populations and, because there is much to learn about summer chum and the effectiveness of management actions taken, adaptation based on knowledge gained is a part of the plan. Over time, learning as we go, the co managers believe that recovery of the summer chum will be realized.

4.3.1 Achieving the Recovery Plan Goal Recovery activities for Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum salmon were begun by the co managers in 1992. The recovery goal was, and still is, to return summer chum salmon to full health and to allow future harvests. This goal is in some respects more rigorous than the requirements of ESA, since it goes beyond the singular need to secure summer chum populations from the risk of extinction. The plan goal statement is presented below and is discussed in the Foreword ( page 2).

The co managers believe that there is a very high likelihood that this plan will accomplish the recovery of Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum stocks. The recovery objectives and actions identified for artificial production, ecological interactions, and harvest management will be immediately implemented by the co managers ( most are already underway). The implementation of strategies for habitat recovery is necessarily an activity that is longer term and will involve participants other than just the co managers. The following elements of the plan will contribute to its ultimate success.

<IP_ADDRESS> Artificial Production The plan identified 16 individual summer chum stocks, seven of which have recently become extinct ( Part One). The co managers are committed to seeing that no additional extinctions occur. Annual assessments of individual stocks will determine levels of extinction risk, and if any stock is found to be at great risk, hatchery Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and ESA Page 375 " The co managers will institute rigorous criteria for the release of hatchery salmonids into the waters of the Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca regions."

"... the identification of specific actions, prioritization, and implementation are a part of an on going process to be completed by the jurisdictions actually controlling the habitat". supplementation using local brood stock will be used to sustain and recover the stock. The hatchery supplementation techniques to be applied under this plan have been proven to be extremely successful for the Big/ Little Quilcene and Snow/ Salmon summer chum salmon stocks, and if needed can confidently be used in the future. In addition to the supplementation of at risk extant stocks, the plan provides for the staged reintroduction of summer chum salmon to streams where recent extinctions have occurred. Two such projects are currently underway, at Big Beef and Chimacum creeks, and the first three year old spawners are expected back in 1999. These and future reintroductions will further reduce the overall extinction risk to summer chum salmon by increasing the number of independent populations.

<IP_ADDRESS> Ecological Interactions Two significant sources of negative competition and/ or predation were identified in Part Two  Region wide Factors For Decline, interactions with hatchery salmonids and predation on adult summer chum by marine mammals. The co managers will institute rigorous criteria for the release of hatchery salmonids into the waters of the Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca regions. These criteria include time, size and species restrictions that are designed to greatly reduce potential negative impacts on summer chum salmon. The co managers will monitor and evaluate risk aversion measures being implemented to meet these criteria. The plan recommends that the on going studies of harbor seal predation on summer chum salmon continue, and recognizes that future remedial measures may be required if seal predation is shown to be affecting recovery.

<IP_ADDRESS> Habitat Habitat degradation was identified as a major factor for decline ( Part Two). Recovery of proper habitat quality and function is a long term effort. The habitat portion of the plan cannot be implemented by the co managers, but rather is the responsibility of land and water management agencies, major land holders, and private citizens. The summer chum plan has identified watershed and estuarine limiting factors and measures for recovery, however, the identification of specific actions, prioritization, and implementation are a part of an on going process to be completed by the jurisdictions actually controlling the habitat. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and ESA Page 376 " The co managers will limit the incidental summer chum harvests in Washington terminal and pre terminal fisheries to levels that will minimize impacts on summer chum stocks." <IP_ADDRESS> Harvest Management The harvest of summer chum salmon in various terminal and pre terminal fisheries was identified as one of the factors contributing to the decline of summer chum stocks. The comanagers will limit the incidental summer chum harvests in Washington terminal and preterminal fisheries to levels that will minimize impacts on summer chum stocks. Annual evaluation and adaptive management of the fisheries will assure that the numbers of summer chum salmon that are harvested incidentally to fisheries for other species remain at very low levels.

<IP_ADDRESS> Cumulative Effects of Recovery Actions Taken together, the above described conservation and restoration activities will have a synergistic effect on the recovery of Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum stocks. In summary, the following results are expected. No further extinctions will occur. Re introductions of summer chum to currently unpopulated streams will occur through time. The past negative consequences potentially resulting from hatchery fish interactions will be largely eliminated as a precautionary measure. The impacts of incidental fishery harvests on summer chum stocks will be minimized. Habitat, both freshwater and estuarine, will be gradually returned to a more productive state. Annual monitoring and evaluation and adaptive management will assure that recovery objectives are achieved. Ultimately, the combined effects of these actions will recover summer chum salmon.

4.3.2 Meeting ESA Objectives In 1996, NMFS published a document titled " Coastal Salmon Conservation: Working Guidance for Comprehensive Salmon Restoration Initiatives on the Pacific Coast". The purpose of this guidance was to identify the elements that would constitute a successful salmon recovery plan. NMFS described three major criteria to be met by a conservation plan ( NMFS 1996a). One criterion is that the plan must have substance; that is, it includes measures that will effect recovery. Another criterion is that there must be certainty that the measures will be undertaken by the parties with the authority and means to implement recovery actions. The third criterion is for monitoring and assessment that will lead to effective adaptive management and help determine what recovery is and when it occurs. This initiative provides the basis for addressing all three criteria.. However, in order to meet the three criteria and succeed in recovering summer chum, the measures summarized in the following sections must be addressed by the indicated parties. As implementation of the below described strategies actions occur, the participants in recovery can learn from the experience, making adjustments as appropriate. Furthermore as information is gained, the conditions of recovery may be determined and ultimately recovery of the summer chum can be achieved.

The 1996 NMFS guidance document also presented nine critical and desirable elements that should constitute a salmon restoration strategy for an ESA listed Evolutionarily Significant Unit ( ESU). Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and ESA Page 377 <IP_ADDRESS> NMFS  Critical and Desirable Elements Substance of the Plan 1. Identify at appropriate scales the major factors that have contributed to decline of the ESU. 2. Establish priorities for action. 3. Establish explicit objectives and timelines for correcting factors for decline and achieving desired population characteristics. 4. Establish quantifiable criteria and standards by which progress toward each objective will be measured. 5. Adopt measures ( actions) needed to achieve the explicit objectives.

Implementation Certainty 6. Provide high levels of certainty that the identified measures and actions will be implemented, including necessary authorities, commitments, funding, staffing, and enforcement measures.

Monitoring 7. Establish a comprehensive monitoring and reporting program, including methods to measure whether objectives are being met, and to detect subpopulation declines and increases in each ESU.

Other 8. As much as possible, integrate Federal state, tribal, local, corporate, and non governmental activities and projects that are designed to recover salmon populations and the habitats upon which they depend. 9. Utilize an adaptive management approach that actively shapes management actions to generate needed information.

<IP_ADDRESS> NMFS Elements and the Summer Chum Plan Those recovery actions that will be implemented by the co managers are in the areas of artificial production, ecological interactions, and harvest management. Each of the NMFS recovery plan elements is discussed below in the context of the co managers' responsibility and their implementation of recovery actions. Habitat recovery actions should also eventually be incorporated under the NMFS recovery plan elements but are not included in the following discussion because they fall primarily outside the co managers' jurisdiction. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and ESA Page 378 Substance of the Plan Element 1) Identify at appropriate scales the major factors that have contributed to decline of the ESU.

Region wide factors contributing to the observed summer chum salmon declines in Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca were identified in Part Two  Region wide Factors For Decline of this recovery plan. Major factors for decline for Hood Canal stocks were habitat deterioration and terminal area fishery harvest, and moderate impacts resulted from climate effects on stream flow, interactions with hatchery salmonids, and pre terminal harvests. Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum stocks experienced major cumulative habitat impacts and climate effects on stream flow, along with moderate impacts from pre terminal harvest. The recent expansion of harbor seal populations and their predation on summer chum was identified as a recent major factor that may affect recovery.

Limiting factors for summer chum salmon at the stock, watershed, and management unit levels are assessed in Part Three  Evaluation and Mitigation of Factors for Decline, which identifies specific limiting factors and also provides specific strategies and actions for recovery.

Element 2) Establish priorities for action.

For those management actions that are the responsibility of the co managers ( including artificial production, ecological interactions, and harvest management) , the recovery plan has adopted a single priority: immediate action. In fact, substantial co manager actions in these areas have been underway since 1992, and have resulted in increased summer chum salmon runsizes and escapements in recent years ( see discussions in Parts One and Three).

Element 3) Establish explicit objectives and timelines for correcting factors for decline and achieving desired population characteristics.

Specific objectives are identified in detail in the artificial production, ecological interactions, and harvest management discussions in Part Three, and are summarized above in section 4.2. Each objective has one or more specific actions that address recovery needs. Specific timelines are not identified for the various objectives and actions because immediate implementation is the comanager intent ( see Element 2 above). In some situations, future actions may be instituted based on currently unforeseeable circumstances, e. g. supplementation of a stock that declines to a point of extinction risk, or an opportunity for reintroduction to a former summer chum stream. Adaptive management is also a major feature of the plan ( see Element 9 below), however, since, changes in management will be in response to future events and results, no timelines can be established.

Element 4) Establish quantifiable criteria and standards by which progress toward each objective will be measured.

Very specific and quantifiable criteria and standards for management and implementation of recovery objectives are presented in the individual sections of Part Three, and are summarized below. Some examples of specific criteria include; brood stock collection criteria to avoid loss of Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.3 Accomplishing Goals of Recovery Plan and ESA Page 379 genetic variability, time and size at release criteria for hatchery salmon to avoid competition and predation effects on summer chum, and exploitation rate criteria to minimize fishery impacts. In addition, the plan contains three approaches for evaluating the abundance, distribution, and extinction risk for summer chum stocks.

Element 5) Adopt measures ( actions) needed to achieve the explicit objectives.

Individual action items ( relating to specific objectives) are presented in the artificial production, ecological interactions, and harvest management sections of Part Three, and are summarized above ( section 4.2). Many of the actions have been previously implemented and will be continued, while others represent new recovery activities.

Implementation Certainty Element 6) Provide high levels of certainty that the identified measures and actions will be implemented, including necessary authorities, commitments, funding, staffing, and enforcement measures.

The co managers are the lawfully designated agencies ( under US v. Washington and State statutes) with the responsibility for managing summer chum salmon. Co manager recovery activities have been underway since 1992, and as a result, many of the objectives of this plan have been included in the normal operation of WDFW and the Tribes. Management biologists, hatchery personnel and facilities, and enforcement officers are routinely assigned to the activities affecting summer chum salmon. The co mangers feel that current dedicated levels of funding and staffing are minimally acceptable to effect summer chum salmon recovery. However, additional activities are identified in the plan, the funding and implementation of which, will improve summer chum salmon management and likely speed recovery. Important new measures include support of supplementation and reintroduction projects, collection of information on productive capacity and recovery levels, and the monitoring and evaluation of recovery actions.

Monitoring Element 7) Establish a comprehensive monitoring and reporting program, including methods to measure whether objectives are being met, and to detect subpopulation declines and increases in each ESU.

The co managers have a number of long term monitoring programs in place that are adequate to measure general population responses to recovery efforts. These include spawner escapement monitoring, harvest accounting, run size estimation procedures, and hatchery release accounting. The plan identifies specific ways that these existing programs can be improved. In addition, needed new monitoring and evaluation action items are identified in Part Three ( and see above summary in section 4.2.5). Some examples are; collection of comprehensive age data for use in determining production rates for summer chum stocks, genetic stock identification in fisheries to help minimize selective impacts, evaluation of the success of supplementation programs, and monitoring of straying of supplemented stocks. While the existing co manager monitoring and evaluation programs are Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.4 Population based Recovery Goals Page 380 sufficient to achieve the long range recovery goals of this plan, the recommended new monitoring efforts will allow more protective and directed recovery approaches and will ultimately speed recovery.

Other Element 8) As much as possible, integrate Federal state, tribal, local, corporate, and nongovernmental activities and projects that are designed to recover salmon populations and the habitats upon which they depend.

This recovery plan is the combined effort of technical staff members representing the co managers ( WDFW and The Point No Point Treaty Tribes), and representatives of NMFS and USFWS. Additionally, private citizen salmon enhancement groups were provided opportunities to meet with the co managers and to offer comments on plan elements affecting their projects. As the plan proceeds, there will be opportunities for general public comment on all parts of the recovery effort.

Element 9) Utilize an adaptive management approach that actively shapes management actions to generate needed information.

Adaptive management is a critical element of the recovery plan for summer chum salmon. Annual and longer term evaluations of the abundance, distribution, and extinction risk of summer chum stocks will guide the future application of the recovery activities under this plan. At the same time, monitoring and evaluation programs will evaluate the effectiveness of individual recovery efforts like supplementation and reintroduction, fishery impacts, and seal predation. These evaluation and adaptive management approaches are described in Part One, 1.7 Stock Evaluations, and in Part Three, 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management ( see also summary in section 4.2.6 below).

4.4 Population based Recovery Goals The following sections describe how the overall goal to protect and restore summer chum is to be achieved and summarize measures to be taken to meet that goal. However, specific quantitative, population based recovery goals are also needed that determine when recovery has been achieved. These goals must account for the condition and dynamics of the summer chum populations and should define recovery in terms of population abundance, productivity and diversity. For a given population, management unit or all of the summer chum to be recovered, goals specified as levels or ranges of summer chum abundance ( run size) and escapement must be specified, consistent with the productive capacity of the habitat. Lacking adequate information on the relationship of habitat to productive capacity, historical experience with populations may initially serve to set the abundance and escapement recovery goals.

But in addition to defining abundance and escapement recovery goals, it is critical to determine productivity goals; that is, target production rates or ranges of rates. Productivity can be thought of as a rate of survival; that is, the number of salmon produced for each parent spawner that survive Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.5 Plan Implementation Page 381 over a given life stage or range of life stages. Productivity may be measured, for example, over the entire life cycle as the number of recruits per spawner. Productivity determines the amount of harvest a given population can support and it determines the resiliency of that population; that is, it's ability to recover and to sustain itself under a range of environmental conditions. For a population to be considered recovered, it should demonstrate adequate productivity for sustainability and harvest, as defined by the productivity recovery goals.

Finally, population based recovery goals must include diversity. This set of goals should include maintaining the geographic range and variable life histories expressed by the populations of summer chum. To a large extent this consideration is already addressed in this recovery plan with the focus first on protecting and restoring existing populations, but also on restoring summer chum to watersheds where they are now extinct.

The co managers have defined performance standards upon which to measure the progress of the summer chum salmon populations towards achieving recovery ( see section 3.6.4). In addition, the co managers are developing a comprehensive set of population based recovery goals, addressing abundance, productivity and diversity as described above. These recovery goals are scheduled for completion in spring 2000 and will be made available in a supplement to this recovery plan ( see section 4.6, Plan Supplements).

4.5 Plan Implementation The above summary descriptions of objectives, strategies and actions for summer chum protection and recovery include listings of the participants with the authority or jurisdiction to pursue specific actions or strategies and also listings of other participants who can provide support as partners. The fisheries co managers, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Point No Point Treaty Tribes, are committed to carrying out the provisions of the plan for which they have the authority ( measures addressing harvest management, artificial production and ecological interactions) and to supporting other parties who pursue recommendations of the plan for which they have jurisdiction or authority ( e. g., counties in their efforts to address habitat protection and recovery measures). The co managers have, in fact, since 1992 been implementing many of the actions specified in this initiative. The process of developing the initiative has confirmed and refined many of the comanagers existing management measures and led to the development and immediate implementation of others. The co managers intend to file this initiative with the federal court to be adopted as a court order under U. S. v Washington.

The preparers of this plan have attempted to develop a comprehensive document that addresses all the components for protection and recovery of summer chum and provides a scientific basis for recommending actions/ strategies. However, particularly with respect to summer chum habitat, this plan is only the first step to a larger planning and implementation effort that must continue if recovery of the summer chum is to succeed. Counties and other agencies, who have not participated in the development of this plan but have provided review comments during its development, are encouraged to address the recommended strategies and actions that fall under their jurisdiction or authority. This will lead to additional planning, that will result in definition and execution of Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.6 Plan Supplements Page 382 specific protection and recovery actions. The support of landowners, private non profit organizations, volunteer groups and local citizens is also important if these efforts are to succeed.. The co managers will offer technical support in how to interpret and apply the recommendations of this plan.

The basic requirements for the harvest management, artificial production and ecological interaction components of the plan are currently being met by resources and funding available to WDFW, the Tribes and USFWS. These include: 1) the annual planning, regulation, monitoring and enforcement of fisheries and also, monitoring of harvests and escapements; 2) the operation, basic assessments and monitoring of supplementation and reintroduction projects; and 3) all of the mitigative measures to prevent or reduce ecological impacts on summer chum from potential hatchery caused ecological interactions. All of these currently supported actions/ strategies are categorized in the tables above as Phase 1, meaning that funding and resources to execute the measures are presently in place. There are, however, several actions under jurisdiction of the fisheries co managers that are categorized as Phase 2 or a combination of Phases 1 and 2, meaning the actions are not funded or could be improved with additional funding. Development of the needed support of these actions is strongly recommended to speed recovery. Still, given the existing available resources and funding, the co managers' believe the summer chum conservation requirements under their jurisdiction are being met.

Many of the recommended habitat related strategies and actions are not currently funded ( Phase 2 in Tables 4.4 and 4.5). As previously noted, additional participation in planning is expected to result in the specification of habitat protection and restoration measures for which funding will need to be found. On going and new funding sources through the county, state and federal governments as well as voluntary participation by citizens, landowners and others can help to meet the requirements for funding and implementation of these measures.

It is expected that the measures identified in this plan and that are subsequently developed based on recommendations of the plan will be incorporated into the ESA permitting process. That process has been in development in the same time frame as this plan. There may be a need to adapt or modify measures within the plan in response to the permitting requirements ( i. e., under ESA sections 4 ( d), 7 or 10).

4.6 Plan Supplements Two additional reports have been published to provide supporting information for this initiative: Supplemental Report No. 1  Revised Estimates of Escapement of Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca Natural Spawning Summer Chum Populations ( Haymes 2000), and Supplemental Report No. 2 Public Review Comments on Draft Habitat Sections of the Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative ( PNPTT and WDFW 2000). The first supplement provides a detailed description of results from an intensive review of the escapement data, including revised estimates of annual summer chum salmon escapements and ratings of the quality of the estimates. Supplemental Report No. 2 is a compilation of all written comments received from distribution of a draft of the habitat element of the initiative ( section 3.4) in March, 1999. Additional supplemental reports to the initiative will Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 4.6 Plan Supplements Page 383 prepared in the course of its implementation. A third supplement describing population based summer chum salmon recovery goals is scheduled for completion in spring 2000. Later this year, another supplement comprising the results of the first annual plan review will also be made available. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 385 References Allen, B. 1974. Early marine life history of Big Qualicum River chum salmon, p 137 148. In Harding, D. R. ( ed.) Proceedings of the 1974 northeast Pacific pink and chum salmon workshop. Dept. of Environment and Fisheries, Vancouver, B. C.

Allendorf, F. W. and N. Ryman. 1987. Genetic management of hatchery stocks, p. 141 159. In Population genetics & fishery management. Edited by N. Ryman and F. Utter. Univ. of Wash. Press, Seattle, WA.

Allendorf, F. W., D. Bayles, D. L. Bottom, K. P. Currens, C. A. Frissell, D. Hankin, J. A. Lichatowich, W. Nehlsen, P. C. Trotter, and T. H. Williams. 1997. Prioritizing Pacific salmon stocks for conservation. Conservation Biology 11.1: 140 152.

Ames, J. 1983. Salmon stock interactions in Puget Sound: a preliminary look. In M. A. Miller ( ed.), Southeast Alaska coho salmon research and management review and planning workshop, 18 19 May 1982. Alaska Dept. Fish and Game, Juneau, AK. 109 p.

Ames, J. 1984. Puget Sound chum salmon escapement estimates using spawner curve methodology, p. 135 148. In Symons, P. E. K. and M. Waldichuk ( eds.), Proc. of the Workshop on Stream Indexing for Salmon Escapement Estimation, West Vancouver, B. C., 2 3 February 1984. Can. Fish. Aquat. Sci. Tech. Rpt. no. 1326.

Ames, J., and H. Beecher. 1995. Recommended spawning flows for Cedar River sockeye salmon: with a review of spawning distribution and flood risk studies  Rpt. to Cedar River In stream Flow Committee. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 108 p.

Ames, J. 1997. Status summary  Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum  Report to the Joint Natural Resources Cabinet. October, 1997. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 7 p.

Ashcraft, W. 1982. WDFW memorandum October 21, 1982 ( subject: Loading rate guidelines for hauling fish). Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 2 p.

Bakkala, R. G. 1970. Synopsis of biological data on the chum salmon, Oncorhynchus keta Walbaum 1792. FAO species synop. No. 41, U. S. Fish. Wild. Serv. circ. 315. 89 p. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 386 Bams, R. A., and C. N. H. Lam. 1983. Influences of deteriorating water quality on growth and development of chum salmon ( Oncorhynchus keta) larvae in a Japanese style keeper channel. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40: 2098 2104.

Bax, N. J., E. O. Salo, B. P. Snyder, C. A. Simenstad, and W. J. Kinney. 1978. Salmonid out migration studies in Hood Canal ( final rpt., phase III, Jan. July 1977). UW Fish. Res. Inst. rpt. FRIUW 7819, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA. 128 p.

Bax, N. J., E. O. Salo and B. P. Snyder. 1979. Salmonid out migration studies in Hood Canal ( final rpt., phase IV, Jan. July 1978). UW Fish. Res. Inst. rpt. FRI UW 7921. 89 p.

Bax, N. J., E. O. Salo, and B. P. Snyder. 1980. Salmonid out migration studies in Hood Canal ( final rpt., phase V, Jan. July 1979). UW Fish. Res. Inst. rpt. FRI UW 8010, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA. 55 p.

Bax, N. J. and C. J. Whitmus. 1981. Early marine survival and migratory behavior of juvenile chum salmon released from the Enetai Hatchery, Washington in 1980. UW Fish. Res. Inst. rpt. FRI UW 8109, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA. 48 p.

Bax, N. J. 1982. Seasonal and annual variations in the movement of juvenile chum salmon through Hood Canal, Washington, p. 208 218. In Brannon, E. L. and E. O. Salo ( eds.) Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior Symposium. School of Fisheries, Univ. of Wash, Seattle WA.

Bax, N. J. 1983. The early migration of juvenile chum salmon ( Oncorhynchus keta) through Hood Canal  its variability and consequences. Ph. D. Dissertation, Univ. of Wash, Seattle, WA. 196 p.

Beamer, E. M., and R. G. LaRock. 1998. Fish use and water quality associated with a levee crossing the tidally influenced portion of Browns Slough, Skagit River Estuary, Washington. A report prepared for Skagit County Diking District No. 22. Skagit System Cooperative, La Conner, WA.

Beamish, R. J., and D. R. Bouillon. 1993. Pacific salmon production trends in relation to climate. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50: 1002 1016.

Beamish, R. J., C. M. Neville, and A. J. Cass. 1997. Production of Fraser River sockeye salmon ( Oncorhynchus nerka) in relation to decadal scale changes in the climate and the ocean. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54: 543 554.

Berejikian, B. A. 1995. The effects of hatchery and wild ancestry and experience on the relative ability of steelhead trout fry ( Oncorhynchus mykiss) to avoid a benthic predator. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 52: 2476 2482. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 387 Beschta, R. L., R. E. Bilby, G. W. Brown, L. B. Holtby, and T. D. Hofstra. 1987. Stream temperature and aquatic habitat: fisheries and forestry interactions, p. 191 232. In Salo, E. O., and T. W. Cundy ( eds.) Streamside management: forestry and fishery interactions. College Of Forest Research, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA.

Beschta, R. L., J. R. Boyle, C. C. Chambers, W. P. Gibson, S. V. Gregory, J. Grizzel, J. C. Hagar, J. L. Li, W. C. McComb, M. L. Reiter, G. H. Taylor, and J. E. Warila. 1995. Cumulative effects of forest practices in Oregon. Prepared for Oregon Dept of Forestry by Ore. State Univ., Corvallis, OR.

Bilby, R. E. 1984. Removal of woody debris may affect stream channel stability. J. of Forestry 82: 609 613.

Bilby, R. E., and J. W. Ward, 1989. Changes in characteristics and function of large woody debris with increasing size of streams in western Washington. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 118: 368 378.

Bisson, P. A., R. E. Bilby, M. D. Bryant, C. A. Dolloff, G. B. Grette, R. A. House, M. L. Murphy, K. V. Koski, and J. R. Sedell. 1987. Large woody debris in forested streams in the Pacific Northwest: past, present, and future, p. 143 190. In Salo, E. O., and T. W. Cundy ( eds.). Stream management : forestry and fishery interactions. Contribution no. 57, Institute of Forest Resources, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA.

Bjornn, T. C., and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams, p. 83 138. In Meehan, W. R. ( ed.) Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. Special Publication 19, Amer. Fish. Soc.

Booth, D. B., and C. J. Jackson. 1997. Urbanization of aquatic systems   degradation thresholds, stormwater detention, and the limits of mitigation. Water Resources Bulletin 33: 1077 1090.

Bouchard, R., and D. Kennedy. 1997. A review and evaluation of Twana ethnographic sites on the North Fork Skokomish River. Tacoma Public Utilities, Tacoma, WA.

Brodeur, R. D. 1991. Ontogenetic variations in the type and size of prey consumed by juvenile coho, Oncorhynchus kisutch, and chinook, O. tshawytscha, salmon. Environ. Biol. Fishes 30: 303 315.

Brock, V. E., and R. H. Riffenburgh. 1960. Fish schooling: a possible factor in reducing predation. J. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 25: 307 217.

Brosofske, K. D., J. Chen, R. J. Naiman, and J. F. Franklin. 1997. Effects of harvest on microclimate from small streams to uplands in western Washington. Ecological Applications 7: 1188 1200. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 388 Busack, C. A. and K. P. Currens. 1995. Genetic risks in hatchery operations: fundamental concepts and issues, p 71 80. In Schramm, H. L. Jr., and R. G. Piper ( eds.) Uses and effects of cultured fishes in aquatic ecosystems, Amer. Fish. Soc. Symp. 15.

Busack, C., B. Watson, T. Pearsons, C. Knudsen, S. Phelps, and M. Johnston. 1997. Yakima fisheries project spring chinook supplementation plan. 185 p.

Cardwell, R. D., and K. L. Fresh. 1979. Predation upon juvenile salmon ( draft technical paper, September 13, 1979). Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 19 p.

Cavalli Sforza, L. L., and A. W. F. Edwards. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. Evolution 21: 550 570.

Cederholm, C. J. 1972. The short term physical and biological effects of stream channelization at Big Beef Creek, Kitsap County, Washington. M. S. Thesis, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA.

Chamberlin, T. W., R. D. Harr, and F. H. Everest, 1991. Timber harvesting, silviculture, and watershed processes, p. 181 205. In Meehan, W. R. ( ed.) Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. Special Publication 19, Amer. Fish. Soc.

Chapman, D. W. 1988. Critical review of variables used to define effects of fines in redds of large salmonids. Trans. A. Fish Soc. 117: 1 21.

Cook Tabor, C. K. 1994. Summer chum salmon in Hood Canal. U. S. Dept. of the Inter., Fish and Wild. Serv., Lacey, WA. 52 p.

Crawford, B. A. 1997. Letter to M. Schiewe, dated April 25, 1997 ( subject: Response to partial draft of NMFS review of the status of chum salmon). Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 62 p. + attachments Cuenco, M. L., T. W. H. Backman, and P. R. Mundy. 1993. The use of supplementation to aid in natural stock restoration, p. 269 293. In J. G. Cloud and G. H. Thorgaard ( eds.) Genetic Conservation of Salmonid Fishes. Proceedings of a NATO Advanced Study Institute, Plenum Press, New York, NY.

Cuenco, M. L. 1994. A model of an internally supplemented population. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 123: 277 288.

Dawe, G. ( No year cited). The classification and description of predator attack marks in juvenile pink salmon ( Oncorhynchus gorbuscha). Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Unpublished.

Day, D., W. Palsson, K. Hoeman, and G. Bargmann. 1995. Puget Sound bottomfish status of stocks report ( Draft # 1). Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild. Olympia, WA. 171 p. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 389 Desbonnet, A. L., P. Pogue, D. Reis, J. Boyd, J. Wills, M. Imperial. 1995. Development of coastal vegetated buffer programs. Coastal Management 23: 91 109.

Dolloff, C. D. 1986. Effects of stream cleaning on juvenile coho salmon and dolly varden in southeast Alaska. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 115: 743 755.

Eames, J. M., T. J. Quinn II, and M. Hino. 1983. 1977 Northern Puget Sound adult coho and chum tagging studies. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 239 p.

Ebbesmeyer C. C., C. A. Coomes, G. A. Cannon, and D. E. Bretschneider. 1989. Linkage of ocean and fjord dynamics at decadal period. American Geophys. Union Geophys. Monogr. 55: 399 417.

Egan, R. 1978. Salmon spawning ground data report. WDF prog. report No. 51. Wash. State Dept. Fish. and Wild., Olympia, WA. 484 p.

Emlen, J. M. 1995. Population viability of the Snake River chinook salmon. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 52: 1442 1448.

Emmett, R. L., S. L. Stone, S. A. Hinton, and M. E. Monaco. 1991. Distribution and abundance of fishes and invertebrates in west coast estuaries, Volume II: species life history summaries. ELMR Rep. No. 8, NOAA/ NOS Strategic Environ. Assessments Div., Rockville, MD. 329 p.

Emmett, R. L., and M. H. Schiewe. 1997. Estuarine and ocean survival of northeastern Pacific salmon: Proceedings of the workshop. NOAA tech. memo. no. NMFS NWFSC 29, NMFS NW Sci. Center, U. S. Dept. Commer. Nat. Marine Fish. Serv., Seattle, WA. 313 p.

Evans, W. A., and B. Johnson. 1980. Fish migration and fish passage: a practical guide to solving fish passage problems. USFS rpt. no. EM 7100 2. U. S. Dept. of Ag., Forest Service, Wash. D. C.

FAO UN ( Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1981. Conservation of the genetic resources of fish: problems and recommendations. Report of the Expert Consultation on the Genetic Resources of Fish, Rome, Italy, 9 13 June 1980. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 217. 43 p.

FEMAT ( Forest Ecosystem Management Team). 1993. Forest Ecosystem Management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Team, U. S. Government Printing Office 1993 783 071. U. S. Government Printing Office for the U. S. Dept. of Agri., Forest Serv.; U. S. Dept. of the Inter., Fish and Wild. Serv., Bureau of Land Mgt., and Nat. Park Serv.; U. S. Dept. of Comm., Nat. Ocean. and Atmospheric Admin. and Nat. Mar. Fish. Serv.; and U. S. Envir. Prot. Ag. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 390 Feller, R. J. 1974. Trophic analysis of juvenile chum and pink salmon from Puget Sound, 1970 72. Pp. 149 160 in Harding, D. R. ( ed.) Proceedings of the 1974 northeast Pacific pink and chum salmon workshop. Dep. Of Env. Fish, Vancouver, B. C.

FERC ( Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). 1996. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Cushman Hydroelectric Project ( FERC Project No. 460), Washington. FERC/ EIS 0095F, Washington DC.

Fiscus, G. 1969. 1968 Admiralty Inlet chum salmon tagging. Pp. 12 19 in 1968 WDF Annual Report, Wash. State Dept. Fish., Olympia, WA.

Francis, R. C. and S. R. Hare. 1997. Regime scale climate forcing of salmon populations in the northeast Pacific  some new thoughts and findings, p. 113 128. In Emmett, R. L., and M. H. Schiewe ( eds.) Estuarine and ocean survival of northeastern Pacific salmon: Proceedings of the workshop. NOAA tech. memo. no. NMFS NWFSC 29, NMFS NW Sci. Center, U. S. Dept. Commer. Nat. Marine Fish. Serv., Seattle, WA.

Fresh, K. L., D. Rabin, C. A. Simenstad, E. O. Salo, K. Garrison and L. Matheson. 1979. Fish Ecology studies in the Nisqually Reach area of southern Puget Sound, Washington ( final rpt., March 1977 Aug. 1978). Univ. Washington, Fish. Res. Inst. Final Rep. FRI UW 7904. 229 p.

Fresh, K. L., R. D. Cardwell, B. P. Snyder, and E. O. Salo. 1980. Some hatchery strategies for reducing predation upon juvenile chum salmon ( Oncorhynchus keta) in freshwater, p. 79 89. In Proceedings of the North Pacific Aquiculture Symposium. Alaska Dept. Fish and Game. Anchorage, Alaska.

Fresh, K. L. ( ed.). 1984. Evaluation of potential species interaction effects in the planning and selection of salmonid enhancement projects ( unpublished). Species Interaction Workgroup ( SWIG) of the Enhancement Planning Team. Wash. Dept. of Fish and Wild., and Northwest Indian Fish. Comm., Olympia, WA.

Fresh, K. L., and S. L. Schroder. 1987. Influence of the abundance, size, and yolk reserves of juvenile chum salmon ( Oncorhynchus keta) on predation by freshwater fishes in a coastal stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44( 2): 236 243.

Fresh, K. L. 1997. The role of competition and predation in the decline of Pacific salmon and steelhead, p. 245 275. In Stouder, D. J., P. A. Bisson, and R. J. Naiman ( eds.) Pacific Salmon and Their Ecosystems: Status and Future Options, Chapman and Hall, New York City, NY.

Furniss, M. J., T. D. Roelofs, and C. S. Yee. 1991. Road construction and maintenance, p. 297 324. In Meehan, W. R. ( ed.) Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. Special Publication 19, Amer. Fish. Soc. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 391 Fuss, H. J. and C. W. Hopley. 1991. Survival, marine distribution, and age at maturity of Hood Canal hatchery chum, p. 9 16. In B. White and I. Guthrie ( eds.) Proceedings of the 15th Northeast Pacific Pink and Chum Salmon Workshop. Pacific Salmon Comm., and Can. Dept. Fish and Oceans, Vancouver, B. C.

Fuss, H. J. 1997a. Can hatchery origin salmonids establish naturally reproducing populations?  WDFW technical report. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 25 p.

Fuss, H. J. 1997b. Length weight relationship for juvenile chum salmon ( table). Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 1 p.

Gallagher, A. F. 1979. An analysis of factors affecting brood year returns in the wild stocks of Puget Sound chum ( Oncorhynchus keta) and pink salmon ( Oncorhynchus gorbuscha). M. S. thesis, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA. 152 p.

Gerke, R. J., and V. W. Kaczynski. 1972. Food of juvenile pink and chum salmon in Puget Sound, Washington  WDF tech. rpt. 10. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA. 27 p.

Hager, B. 1980. History of chum salmon rearing in Washington state, p. 108 118. In Kingsbury, A. P. ( ed.) Proceedings of the 1980 Northeast Pacific Pink and Chum Salmon Workshop. Sitka, Alaska. Alaska Dept. Fish and Game, Juneau, AK.

Hamma Hamma Supplementation Subcommittee. 1997. Hamma Hamma River summer chum salmon supplementation program  HCSEG, LLTK, PNPTC, Skokomish Tribe Dept. Nat. Res., USFWS, and WDFW. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild. Olympia, WA. 12 p.

Hard, J. J., R. P. Jones, Jr., M. R. Delarm, and R. S. Waples. 1992. Pacific salmon and artificial propagation under the Endangered Species Act. NOAA tech. memo NMFS NWFSC 2, U. S. Dept. Comm., NOAA, NMFS NW Sci. Center, Seattle, WA. 56 p.

Hargreaves, N. B. and R. J. LaBrasseur. 1985. Species selective predation on juvenile pink ( Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum salmon ( O. keta) by coho salmon ( O. kisutch). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42: 659 668.

Hargreaves, N. B. and R. J. LaBrasseur. 1986. Size selectivity of coho ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) preying on juvenile chum salmon ( O. keta). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 43: 581 586.

Hastein, T. and T. Lindstad. 1991. Diseases in wild and cultured salmon: possible interaction. Aquaculture, 98: 277 288.

Hawkins, S. W. and J. M. Tipping. In press. Predation by juvenile hatchery salmonids on wild fall chinook salmon fry in the Lewis River, Washington. California Fish and Game Dept., Sacramento, CA. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative February 2000 References Page 392 Haymes, J. H. 2000. Revised estimates of escapement of Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca natural spawning summer chum populations. Supplemental Report No. 1 to the Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wild., Olympia, WA.

HCSMP ( Hood Canal Salmon Management Plan). 1986. United States v. Washington, No. 9213. Sub proceeding No. 83 8. 26 p.

Henegar, O. L., and K. W. Harmon. 1971. A review of references to channelization and its environmental impact. Pages 79 83 in Stream channelization. Amer. Fish. Soc., Bethesda, MD.

Hillman, T. W. and J. W. Mullan. 1989. Effect of hatchery releases on the abundance of wild juvenile salmonids, p. 265 285. In Summer and Winter Ecology of Juvenile Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Trout in the Wenatchee River, Washington  Report to Chelan County PUD. D. W. Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID.

Hirschi, R., and M. Reed. 1998. Salmon and trout life history study in the Dungeness River. Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Blyn, WA.

Hoar, W. S. 1951. The behavior of chum, pink, and coho salmon in relation to their seaward migration. J. Fish Res. Bd. 8: 241 263.

Hodges, J. I., J. G. King, B. Conant and H. A. Hanson. 1996. Aerial surveys of waterbirds in Alaska 1957 94: population trends and observer variability. Information and Technology Report 4, U. S. Dept. of Inter., National Biological Service.

Holtby, L. B., T. E. McMahon, and J. C. Scrivener. 1989. Stream temperatures and inter annual variability in the emigration timing of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) smolts and fry and chum salmon ( O. keta) fry from Carnation Creek, British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 46: 1396 1405.