EPA 910/9-88-242
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Water Division
Wetlands Section
October 1988
Restoration Potential of Diked
Estuarine Wetlands in
Washington and Oregon
Phase I: Inventory of Candidate Sites
-------
Final Report
DIKED WETLANDS RESTORATION POTENTIAL
Work Assignment No. 10
EPA Contract No. 68-02-4381
Submitted by:
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc.
1808 - 136th Place N.E.
Bellevue, Washington
(206)-641-3982
October 11, 1988
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1
Background 1
Objective 1
General Approach 2
Information Sources 2
Analytical Method 2
Restoration Site Criteria 3
Report Structure 5
Study Limitations 5
Extent of Tidal Influence 6
Land Use Implication 6
Site Verification 7
Mapping 7
CHAPTER 2 - OREGON SITES 9
Necanicum River 12
Nehalem Bay 14
Tillamook River 16
Netarts Bay 18
Sand Lake 20
Nestucca Bay 22
Salmon River 24
Siletz Bay 26
Yaquina Bay 28
Alsea Bay 30
Siuslaw River 32
Umpqua River 34
Coos Bay 36
Coquille River 46
CHAPTER 3 - WASHINGTON SITES 49
Clallam County 52
Meadowbrook Creek 52
Crescent Bay 54
Batelles Lagoon 55
Grays Marsh 56
Island County 57
Clinton 57
Dugalla Bay 58
Picnic Point 59
Useless Bay 60
Cultus Bay 61
Maxwelton 62
Jefferson County 63
Dabob Bay 63
Squamish Harbor 64
-------
Quilcene Bay 65
King County 66
Quartermaster Harbor 66
Mason County 67
Lynch Cove 67
Annas Bay 68
Little Skookum Inlet 69
Pierce County 70
Nisqually 70
Skacjit County 72
Padilla Bay 72
Samish River 74
Skagit River 76
Swinomish Channel 80
Snohomish County 82
Stillaguamish River 82
Snohomish Delta 84
Grays Harbor County 86
Chehalis River 86
Copalis River 88
Grass Creek 90
South Bay 92
Bowerman Basin 94
Johns River 95
North River 96
Westport 98
Pacific County 100
Kindred Slough 100
Bear River 102
Palix River 104
Willapa River 106
BIBLIOGRAPHY 109
APPENDIX A - POTENTIAL RESTORATION SITES BY USGS QUAD 111
11
-------
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Background
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Executive Order
11990 have established policies and measures to protect
wetland habitats. Implementation and enforcement of these
legal requirements and policies has been given to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Wetlands
Protection Section in the Water Division is responsible for
implementing the wetland protection policies in EPA Region 10.
EPA Region 10 has developed interest in the possibility
of enhancing wetland habitat in the Pacific Northwest by
identifying sites where it may be possible to restore tidal
influence to diked agricultural lands within the estuaries of
Oregon and Washington.
There are thousands of acres of agricultural lands
within the region which have been created by diking of
estuaries; some of the diking activity is nearly a century
old. Many of these areas are currently prime agricultural
lands and the economic values associated with them are
substantial. Some of the diked lands, although historically
used for pasture or agricultural uses, are now fallow and not
actively used. Tide gates may be nonfunctional or dikes
breached, and the land is reverting to wetland in response to
more saturated conditions. It is these lands which this study
has attempted to focus on as potential restoration sites as
they may contribute more biological and economic resource
values if restored to the estuary than they currently provide
as diked agricultural land.
The return of these lands to the estuary would contribute
to achieving a national goal of reclaiming lost wetlands as
well as providing a potential source of mitigation sites to
offset wetland loss resulting from the development of
justifiable water-dependent facilities.
Objective
This study was undertaken at the request of EPA Region
10 as the first step in identifying candidate wetland
restoration sites in Washington and Oregon. The objective of
this first step is to identify areas in Washington and Oregon
which 1) once were estuarine wetlands but are not now
functioning as such due to dike construction; 2) are greater
than 5 acres in size; and 3) may be suitable for restoration.
-------
General Approach
Information Sources
The primary approach of this phase of the work was to
create a preliminary inventory using existing information.
Actions taken to identify sources of information and compile
the preliminary inventory include the following:
o meet with state and local government and resources
agency staff to obtain sources of data, personal
knowledge, and references;
o review U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps for the
presence of wetlands mapped as farmed, drained, or
diked which are adjacent to or associated with an
estuary;
o analyze available U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
aerial photographs of the estuary sites for
potential sites which are not mapped as wetland on
the NWI maps (for Oregon, 1986 aerial photomosaics
were utilized, for Washington, 1987 aerial flight
lines were used, except where noted within the
text); and
o review available literature for historical records,
potential sites, and previously identified
mitigation sites.
Analytical Method
Using the most up-to-date National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI) maps, existing diked wetlands were identified within
each estuary. The NWI mapped both fresh and saltwater
wetlands and classified them according to the USFWS wetland
habitat classification system developed by Cowardin et al.
(1979). Within the USFWS wetland classification system,
special modifiers can be added onto the vegetative descriptors
to more accurately describe the wetland. The specific
modifiers of interest to this inventory were:
d: partially drained/ditched
f: farmed
h: diked/impounded
These modifiers appear after a general habitat classification
code, e.g., PEMlWh, which translates into a palustrine,
emergent, intermittently flooded (temporary), diked wetland.
This further translates into a freshwater wetland which is
diked and is characterized by herbaceous vegetation (not trees
-------
or shrubs) which contains, at least periodically, standing
water.
The special modifiers help to identify those systems
which have been directly impacted by human activity. The
modifiers are included on the NWI maps only when the
modification, such as diking, is visible in the aerial
photograph used for the data source or if it is mapped on the
USGS quad used for the NWI base map. Wetland areas behind
dikes which have been in place for decades often lose their
visual distinction, and it is difficult to detect their
presence on aerial photos. In the cases of very old diking,
it is often necessary to rely on historic data or personal
knowledge to detect the presence of dikes as even the USGS
quads may not map them.
The NWI maps were the source primarily used to identify
wetlands which had been diked. Aerial photographs were used
to attempt to determine current land use within these diked
areas and to find areas which were diked but no longer
classified as wetland. Aerial photographs often reveal former
wetland conditions by the presence of old slough channels and
meander lines. Many of the former wetlands are currently used
for agricultural purposes and therefore would not be
identified as wetlands on the NWI maps. The aerial
photographs are a valuable source to reveal traces of former
conditions which persist in spite of current land use
patterns.
Where they were available, historical records were also
used to identify the extent of estuarine wetlands. These
records were an aid to identifying areas of diking, but they
were not useful in distinguishing the type of wetland habitat
present at the time of mapping. Much of the historic mapping
did not differentiate between fresh and salt water wetlands,
therefore, professional judgment was utilized to assess the
former extent of tidal influence within the estuary.
Restoration Site Criteria
A preliminary effort was made in this study phase to
identify potential sites for the restoration of tidal
influence on lands which have been diked. The preliminary
effort reported here focuses solely on existing information
and does not yet include either field work or necessary
feasibility studies. The primary source of information in
this aspect of the study was a visual assessment of the aerial
photographs available for each of the potential restoration
sites.
Sites were identified as potential sites for this
inventory if they met the following criteria:
-------
1) They were located within potential tidal range of the
estuary and a human intervention such as tide gates or
dikes had removed them from tidal influence. This was
determined by the presence of adjacent wetland, or
channels mapped as estuarine by the NWI, or the clear
presence of levees, dikes, or tide gates which impacted
tidal influence.
And
2a) Current land use as determined from aerial photograph
review was agricultural. Agricultural use was defined
as active cultivation, pasture for grazing, or hay-field
use. Such areas may have been mapped by the NWI as
palustrine, estuarine, or upland systems.
Or
2b) Current land use as determined from aerial photographs
was passive and the area appeared to have the potential
to be restored to estuarine influence, i.e., the area was
not discernable as being cultivated or actively
developed. Such areas may have been mapped by the NWI
as palustrine, estuarine, or upland systems.
Once a potential site had been identified from either the
NWI mapping or the historical data, then the aerial was
reviewed to assess current land use and the physical
relationship of the site to the rest of the estuary or tidal
channels.
In some of the major river deltas, a substantial portion
of the estuary has been diked and converted to agricultural
use. It is not practical to map these estuaries in their
entirety as potential candidates for restoration to estuarine
influence because the potential for designation as mitigation
sites is low for much of the diked acreage. In these
estuaries, focus was placed on identifying sites which were
not currently in active cultivation or agricultural use, i.e.,
fallow fields or areas where the dikes may have been breached
through natural causes or neglect, or where the existing
fields indicated the continuing presence of saturated
conditions. Thus, in some of the major river deltas, the
inventory focuses on potential restoration sites, and is not
necessarily an inventory of all diked lands.
Non-agricultural sites were identified as potential
restoration sites when the area was in passive use such as old
holding ponds or where there may have been old fill or dredge
disposal sites. Very few of the identified sites are old fill
or disposal sites.
Some of the proposed sites are freshwater wetlands which
have formed behind dikes or have been purposefully diked off
-------
from the tidal system. Further analysis is necessary to
determine whether these could be converted to estuarine
wetlands with restoration of tidal influence.
Existing estuarine wetland sites were not included within
the inventory unless the site was noted as impounded or
farmed, or if the site was under a modified tidal influence
such as a non-functioning tide gate or broken levees. In
general, estuarine sites bayward of any impoundments were not
included within this inventory.
The potential or historical extent of tidal influence is
unknown in many estuaries. For this inventory, "tidal
influence" is defined as the limit of saltwater intrusion of
sufficient concentration to allow the development of
halophytic (salt-tolerant) vegetation or to establish non-
vegetated estuarine conditions such as mud flats. "Tidal
effect" is defined as the limit of hydrologic effects
associated with tides. The limit of tidal influence was
estimated based on the presence of mapped estuarine systems,
a review of the aerial photographs to discern visual
indicators of past conditions such as old slough channels and
dikes, a review of historical wetland mapping, or literature
references to historical conditions.
Report Structure
The report is divided, into separate inventories for
Oregon and Washington. The Oregon sites are listed north to
south as the sites occur down the coast. The Washington sites
are listed alphabetically by county, first by the sites on the
inland waters and Straits of Juan de Fuca and then Grays
Harbor and Willapa Bay. Within Appendix A, the Washington
sites are also listed alphabetically by quad, inland waters
first and then Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay. The Columbia
River estuary is undergoing a work effort similar to this
inventory by the Columbia River Estuary Study Team. Their
report is currently in draft form, so rather than duplicate
efforts within this inventory, the Columbia River estuary is
not included herein.
Each estuary which contains potential restoration sites
is mapped and a brief discussion is provided based on review
of the aerial photographs or other documentation where noted.
Where they were available, the maps are based on the 7.5' USGS
quads used in the NWI. The text associated with each map
discusses specified areas identified by a letter code on the
maps.
Study Limitations
The scope of this study is very broad, but limitations
on resources and time has placed constraints on the level of
detail in this preliminary inventory. Interpretation of the
-------
information contained in this preliminary work must take into
account these constraints. Below are outlined some of the
constraints, concerns, and limitations associated with this
inventory.
Extent of Tidal Influence
Within the scope of this current inventory it is not
possible to predict with accuracy the anticipated extent of
tidal influence within the estuaries if dikes or tide gates
are removed. It cannot be assumed that the historic range of
tidal influence will be reestablished just by the simple
removal or breaching of dikes. Many factors such as
subsidence, ditching and channeling, remaining dikes and
obstructions, and changes in river flows and channels all
factor into potential tidal action. Detailed analysis,
including field work, will be required to identify the
feasibility of restoring tidal influence within the identified
potential restoration sites.
In addition, when an estuary is diked, the land subsides
and soil undergoes physical compaction. Agricultural
activities such as haying, cultivation, ditching, or draining
also impact the soil structure. These physical changes in
elevation and soil structure will affect the hydraulic regime
(water depths, flushing, and mixing actions) when tidal
influence is restored. What may have historically been high
marsh may return as low marsh because of the response of
vegetation to changes in water depths and salinity. These
factors further complicate the accuracy of trying to identify
potential restoration sites.
Land Use Implication
For this preliminary inventory, no attempt was made to
discern whether sites were in public, private, or tribal
domain. It is known that sites within this inventory are
located within each of these categories.
The inclusion of sites within this inventory does not
imply any future land use decision. The function of this
report is to record the first phase of data collection for the
future identification of potential restoration and mitigation
sites.
The inclusion of any site does not imply that it would
provide a feasible or functional restoration or mitigation
site. Many factors, such as existing site conditions,
ownership, economics, availability, and existing habitat value
and function, will have to be considered in detail prior to
any specific restoration or mitigation sites becoming
established.
-------
Any proposal to use a specific site as a restoration
project or mitigation site would be accompanied by detailed
technical analysis as well as a voluntary cooperative effort
of the landowner.
Site Verification
None of the sites included within this inventory have
been field checked during the process of this study. Some of
the sites have been field checked in the course of other
studies and therefore their viability is stronger; however,
all of these sites will require field verification to
establish the feasibility of their restoration potential.
Mapping
Following is the legend for the individual estuary maps.
Note that there is a graphic distinction between sites which
visually appear to have greater potential for mitigation
success vs. diked agricultural lands. In addition, both the
Oregon Estuary Plan (OREP) and the Grays Harbor Estuary
Management Plan (GHEMP) contain previously identified
mitigation sites which are included within this report.
LEGEND!
SS3
= Potential Restoration and Mitigation Sites
= Diked Agricultural Land
« = Dike
H = Preidentified Mitigation Sites per OREP or
GHEMP as appropriate
M-l = MIT-1 per OREP or Reference Number per GHEMP
a = Text Reference Letter
-------
-------
Chapter 2
OREGON SITES
An extensive review of Oregon's estuaries has been
undertaken by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD); it is contained within the publication,
"The Oregon Estuary Plan Book", (OREP), completed in 1987.
This publication was a significant source of data for the
restoration sites contained within this inventory as it
contained a detailed mapping of the diked lands within each
estuary.
The Oregon Estuary Plan was developed as a comprehensive
long range planning tool for Oregon's estuaries. It contains
the 17 largest estuaries in the state and provides detailed
habitat and zoning maps for each.
The habitat maps are based on the 1979 Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) classification of the habitats
of the major estuaries of the state. These maps provide not
only detailed habitat classification, but they also note which
areas have been diked.
The ODFW habitat maps also include potential mitigation
sites within many of the estuaries. These mitigation sites
were identified by a process that involved the ODFW working
with Federal agencies such as USFWS, EPA, and other relevant
State agencies to develop a list of potential mitigation sites
for each estuary-
Through the community planning process, potential
mitigation sites were designated from the agency-generated
lists. The potential sites identified within the OREP are
biologically sound, as well as politically feasible, and
should be considered as the prime potential mitigation sites
for each estuary. The amount of detailed analysis which went
into identifying those areas in the comprehensive long range
planning process far exceeds the scope of this study.
This report includes sites beyond those identified by the
OREP process based on an evaluation of the NWI maps, the OREP
maps, and aerial photographs. No future use of these
additional sites is implied by their inclusion in this
inventory.
Within the Oregon Estuary Plan (OREP), the identified
mitigation sites are labeled, e.g., MIT1 (4); within the
mapping for this report the site is labeled M-4. The number
in parenthesis is the reference number for the mitigation
site. The text associated with the list of OREP mitigation
sites for each estuary is directly quoted from the OREP,
therefore the notation "not mapped" means that the area was
-------
not mapped in the source document, the OREP. The photomosaic
reference refers to the color photomosaics on file at the
Portland office of the Corps of Engineers.
Following are the sites as mapped with their accompanying
descriptions. The letter notations on the maps refer to the
areas specified in the text.
Site Quad;
1) Necanicum River Gearhart, Cannon Beach
2) Nehalem Bay Newhalem
3) Tillamook River Newhalem, Tillamook
4) Netarts River Tillamook
5) Sand Lake Tillamook
6) Nestucca Bay Hebo
7) Salmon River Hebo
8) Siletz Bay Cape Foulweather, Euchre Mt.
9) Yaguina Bay Yaguina, Toledo
10) Alsea Bay Waldport
11) Suislaw River Siltcoos Lake, Heceta Head
12) Umpgua River Reedsport, Winchester Bay
13) Coos Bay Charleston, Empire, Coos Bay,
North Bend
14) Coguille River Bandon, Bullard, Riverton
10
-------
olumbio River
Tillamoo
Netarts Bay
Sand Lake
Nestucca Bay
aim on River
Siletz Ba y
Yaquina Bay
Alsea Bay
Siuslaw River
Umpqua River
;CooS Bay
OREGON LOCATION MAP
11
-------
1) NECANICUM RIVER USGS Quads: CANNON BEACH, 15'
GEARHART, 7.5'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=1,000'
No potential restoration sites were identified in the
OREP- Only two small diked areas are mapped, neither of them
are utilized for agricultural purposes. Predominant impacts
within the estuary are from residential development.
Potential mitigation sites occur along the eastern shoreline
of the distributary channel, or potentially at the north end,
west side and east side of main channel. It is difficult to
discern from the aerials if any of these areas are either
pasture or diked. Restoration could be limited to increasing
vegetation species diversity or reducing or eliminating human
and domestic animal intrusion impacts.
Tidal reach is approximately 3.0 miles from the mouth of
the river (Percy, 1974).
12
-------
1) NECANICUM RIVER, OREGON
13
-------
2) NEHALEM BAY USGS Quad: NEHALEM, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2,000'
The USGS quad does not indicate any diking; neither does
the NWI mapping; and the COE photo is not clear enough to show
the presence of dikes. The OREP indicates 5 different
mitigation sites, most of which refer to breaching dikes which
are not mapped on the available data.
The area interior to the major south bend of the river
is currently under cultivation. The only potential
restoration sites occur at the southern end of this
agricultural lobe where the former tidal channels still enter.
Pastures along the former sloughs appear saturated and show
a diversity of vegetation not present in the more well drained
portions of these fields.
Tidal effects extend approximately to mile 8.6 of the
Nehalem River and to mile 4.7 of the North Fork Nehalem River
(Percy, 1974).
To the west of the OREP MIT1(4) site, another small
slough exists; the potential exists to return it to tidal
influence.
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Dean Point: breach dike, create high marsh";
10.0 acres.
MIT 2 Wheeler: breach dike, create high marsh; 4.2
and 8.0 acres.
MIT 3 MCCoy's Marsh: breach dike, create high marsh;
5.8 acres.
MIT 4 Alder Creek: remove tidegate, regrade pasture;
create intertidal marsh; 38.3 acres.
MIT 7 Nehalem Spit: grade and remove logs at mouth
of inlet to increase tidal flows; 22 acres.
14
-------
i / SCALE 1" » 3500'
/ " - - . i / i c -
2) NEHALEM BAY, OREGON
15
-------
3) TILLAMOOK RIVER USGS Quads: NEHALEM, 15'
TILLAMOOK, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2,000'
a) Biggs Cove: The southeast end of the cove, west of
the spit is mapped as a freshwater lacustrine system by the
NWI. It is completely diked from tidal influence. The dikes
could be removed or breached to allow tidal influence to be
restored. The OREP identifies MIT (7) adjacent to the north
on Bayocean Spit with the notation to grade a portion of the
spit to create an intertidal flat. Site is over 30 acres in
size.
b) Larson Cove: The aerial indicates only one narrow
channel. The channel opening could be broadened to increase
tidal influence. There is no agricultural use present. Site
is less than 15 acres in size.
c) Miami Cove: area is mapped as OREP MIT(l) with a note
to breach the dike to restore tidal influence. The aerial
photo indicates the area is agricultural, it appears to be
pasture. Site is less than 30 acres in size.
d) Area in southeast section of the Bay: It is mapped
by OREP as a freshwater forested wetland, however the aerial
does not indicate this clearly. The area behind the dike
appears to be a mosaic of emergent and scrub/shrub wetland
containing old channel remnants. It appears to provide
restoration potential, but it is unknown if it is within
saltwater influence. Area is greater than 30 acres in size.
e) Area in southeast section of the Bay, south of (d),
above: The northern half of this lobe contains several old
slough channels. The vegetation diversity indicates potential
saturated conditions within what appears to be a freshwater
pasture. It is unknown to what extent the site would come
under tidal influence if tide gates or dikes were removed.
Area is greater than 50 acres in size.
f) Area in southeast section of the Bay, north of (d),
above. This area is not mapped as diked, nor do the aerials
indicate levees. It is currently pastured or hayed. It is
unknown to what extent it would come under tidal influence if
the dikes were removed.
Within the southeast sections of the bay, in the vicinity
of areas (d) and (e), above, wetlands are mapped (Hamilton,
1973). All of these areas are now diked and in agricultural
use. The 1973 map lacks enough detail to provide even
approximate acreage figures.
Tidal effects extend approximately to mile 1.3 of the
Kilchis River, mile 0.4 of the Miami River, mile 7.0 of the
Tillamook River, mile 4.2 of the Trask River, and mile 2.4 of
the Wilson River (Percy, 1974}.
Oregon Estuarv Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Miami Cove: breach dike, create high
intertidal marsh; 17 acres.
MIT 7 Bayocean Spit: grade to create intertidal
flat; 25 acres.
16
-------
3) TIUJiMOOK RIVER, OREGON
-------
4) NETARTS BAY USGS Quad: TILLAMOOK, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=1,000'
(note: photo is 1978)
The OREP indicates several diked areas in the northern
half of the bay, along the east shore. The most northern of
them is mapped by the NWI as estuarine, and the aerial
indicates a vegetation community which does not appear to be
diked. Perhaps the dikes are in disrepair or tide gates are
not functioning. Field work would be required to verify
whether this is a potential restoration site. Site may be
less than 5 acres in size.
The area immediately surrounding Yager Creek may provide
potential restoration sites. NWI maps the area as both
estuarine and palust'fine, while the OREP maps it as estuarine
only. Tidal influence could be restored or expanded in this
area. The aerial indicates a diversity of emergent vegetation
within the area. The area is also dissected by several
roadways which may influence hydrology. This area is
approximately 10 acres in size.
The most southern mapped area is identified as palustrine
in the NWI and estuarine in the OREP- The aerial indicates
old channels are present, which would aid in restoring or
expanding tidal influence. Site may be less than 5 acres in
size.
The OREP does not indicate any mitigation sites within
this estuary. No upstream limit of tidal effects was listed.
18
-------
M2BB2P.
E2FLN
E2AB2M
E2BB2P
E2FL
E10WL
E2FLN
E2FLM
£2FbN
E2EM5PU
E2EM5N
F7FLN
Ml OWL
PEM5CH
E2EM5P
E2FL6N
E2FLN
EIOV^L
E2EM5P
E2&52P
SCALE 1" = 3500'
4) NETARTS BAY, OREGON
19
-------
5) SAND LAKE USGS Quad: TILLAMOOK, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=1,000'
(note: 1978 photo)
a) Sand Lake South: The entire area at the south end of
Sand Lake is diked and is now a freshwater wetland. Removing
the dikes would restore the area to tidal influence. It is
noted in the OREP as a special habitat feature as Beltz Farm
freshwater wetland.
b) North end of Sand Lake: These areas are mapped as
diked per the OREP; however, review of the 1978 aerial
photomosaic does not indicate the presence of dikes. The
areas may currently be used for pasture in the northern
reaches; however, the vegetation within the southern end has
the same patterns as that within the area mapped as low salt
marsh to the south. Field review would be required to verify
the existing vegetation on this site and its potential as a
restoration site.
c) East shore, directly east of the mouth of the bay.
The 1978 aerial indicates active pasture use out into the
estuary; however, no dikes are discernable. If the
agricultural use was curtailed, the estuary would likely
restore itself.
No OREP mitigation sites were listed for this estuary-
20
-------
MIOWL
:SCALE 1" * 3500
M2BB2P
El
£2
m^
F2FLN
E2FLN
E2FL2P
E2B&2P
E2A&2M
E2EM5Jhe
E2FLM- c
?EM5Jh
PEM5CH
5) SAND LAKE, OREGON
21
-------
6) NESTUCCA BAY USGS Quad: HEBO, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2,000I
a) Nestucca River I: The area is mapped as an
unspecified type of tidal marsh in the OREP; however, it may
be beyond tidal influence for the re-establishment of
estuarine vegetation. The area south of the river is not
appropriate for restoration as there are residences present.
From review of the aerial photographs it is clear that
the north shore of the river is currently used for
agricultural purposes. No dikes or tide gates are mapped, but
the presence of the agricultural use implies the dikes are
present. Area is greater than 50 acres in size.
b) Nestucca River II: This is a large area which has
been diked. The 1986 aerial photomosaics indicate that the
area is currently used for hay production or actively
pastured. Old sloughs and channels are present. A diversity
of emergent vegetation occurs along the channel margins.
Removal of the levees would return the area to tidal
influence. Area is greater than 150 acres in size.
c) South end of the bay, west of the Little Nestucca
River: The 1986 photomosaics indicate vegetation which
appears to reflect saturated conditions. The area appears to
be utilized as pasture. Removal of the levees would return
at least a portion of the area to tidal influence. Area is
greater than 100 acres in size.
Tidal effects extend approximately to mile 7.0 of the
Nestucca River and to mile 3.1 of the Little Nestucca River
(Percy, 1974). No OREP mitigation sites were listed for this
estuary.
22
-------
6) NESTUCCA BAY, OREGOK
-------
7) SALMON RIVER USGS Quad: HEBO, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=1,000'
a) The far east end of the bay, northwest of Highway 101:
It is currently diked and utilized for either pasture or hay.
There are old channels present. The 1973 mapping (Hamilton,
1973) indicates that the area was wetland. Removal of the
dikes would restore tidal influence. Site is greater than 50
acres in size.
b) The southwest side of the river: This area is
adjacent to a slough which is diked and possibly has tide
gates as well. Removal of the levees and the tide gates would
restore tidal influence and allow the expansion of the
estuarine vegetation. This area may currently be used for
agricultural purposes. Site is potentially greater than 100
acres in size.
c) East of the river, along the north shoreline: Review
of the 1986 photomosaic indicates that the levees are in
disrepair which has allowed a diversity of vegetation to
establish. Removal of the levees would restore tidal
influence. Site is approximately 50 acres in size.
d) Northwest of (c) above: The OREP indicates that the
area is diked. The aerial photomosaic is unclear as to
existing use. Field review would be required to establish
whether this would provide a potential restoration site. Site
would be less than 20 acres in size.
Oregon Estuarine Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Boat Ramp: remove dike; 9.5 acres.
MIT 4 U. S. 101: remove dike; 30 acres.
24
-------
KJ
Ol
7) SALMON RIVER, OREGON
-------
8) SILETZ BAY USGS Quad: CAPE FOULWEATHER 15'
EUCHRE MOUNTAIN, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2/000I
a) East of Culter City: An extensive slough remains on
the east of the highway which crosses the mouth of the slough.
The aerials of the pastures indicate continuing saturation and
no active cultivation. Current use may be for hay production
or grazing pastures. The southern end appears to be
scrub/shrub. Removal of the dikes would further restore tidal
influence. Site is greater than 100 acres in size.
b) Diked area southwest of Millport Slough: The western
quarter of it is currently not in use for pasture, the eastern
three-quarters of it is active pasture or hay fields. The OREP
maps this area as a marsh habitat and as MIT(l) . The
mitigation notes call to remove the tide gate at the west end
and the dikes at the east end. It is unknown how far upstream
on Millport Slough the tidal influence would extend. Area is
115 acres in size.
c) Between Millport Slough and the main river channel:
It is diked and is currently in active use for pasture. There
remains old slough channels within the area; tidal influence
would be restored if the dikes and tide gates were removed.
Area is more than 150 acres in size.
d) Area northeast of the main river channel, east of a
secondary roadway: A substantial area is mapped as diked in
the OREP; however, only the northern half of it is noted as
marsh habitat. The aerial photomosaics are unclear, but the
area appears to be currently used for pasture. If tidal
influence was restored under the roadway, the area would be
within tidal influence of the bay. Area is potentially almost
100 acres in size.
Oregon Estuarv Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Millport Slough/ Habitat 22: remove tide gate
at west end and remove or breach dikes at the
east end; 115 acres.
26
-------
-------
9) YAQUINA BAY USGS Quads: YAQUINA, 15'
TOLEDO, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2,000'
a) Boone and Nute Sloughs. Both of these sloughs have
tide gates and the lands within are diked. Land use within
the diked area is predominantly agricultural, much of it
active cultivation. Removal of the tide gates and the dikes
would restore the area to tidal influence. Per the OREP the
potential area for restoration is 600 acres.
b-e) Small diked sloughs along the south side of the
river: Flesher Slough, (b) , appears to be in pasture use. The
other areas are vegetated with variable vegetation
communities; some appear to be scrub/shrub systems. The two
areas furthest east, (d) and (e) , have adjacent residences,
so field verification would be required to assess their
restoration potential. Removal of tide gates or dikes on each
of these small sloughs would likely restore them to tidal
influence.
The Oregon Estuarine Plan book does not map any of the
mitigation sites for Yaquina Bay; however, they do provide the
following notes in the appendix:
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 13 Publishers Slough: create additional breaches
or remove dike.
MIT 15 Flesher Slough: bridge or increase culvert
size; 15 acres.
MIT 2 Huss Property: remove tidegate; 3 acres.
MIT 3 Blackberry Hill: enlarge culvert; 3 acres.
MIT 4 Reinoehl Trout Hatchery: enlarge culvert or
install bridge; 2.5 acres.
MIT 5 Sherman Property: enlarge culvert; 2 acres.
MIT 6/7 Lower Boone's and Nute's Sloughs: remove
dikes; 600 acres.
Tidal effect extends to approximately mile 26 of the
Yaguina River (Percy, 1974).
28
-------
9) YAQUINA BAY, OREGON
-------
10) ALSEA BAY USGS Quad: WALPORT
(note: no NWI map in file)
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2,000'
a) Lint Slough: This is an impounded freshwater lake
created from diking of the former slough. The OREP notes the
northern 11 acre section as a mitigation site with the note
to remove the dam and tidegate. To the south of the 11 acres
there is another much larger impounded lake (25+ acres)
created out of the former slough. Removal of the dikes could
restore the entire area to tidal influence.
b) Eckman Slough: This is another impounded coastal
lake. The area impounded behind the road is approximately 70
acres. If dams were removed or culverts under the road
installed, this area could be restored to tidal influence.
c) Two diked pastures: These two areas are located in
the eastern reach of the bay and are noted as diked high salt
marsh in the OREP. The aerial indicates that the areas may
currently be utilized for pasture. Removal of the dikes and
termination of the agricultural use would allow the re-
establishment of estuarine vegetation.
d) North end of bay: Review of the aerial photomosaic
indicates an old meander channel in this area which appears
to be partially emergent wetland and partially within active
agricultural use. It is not possible to determine without
field verification whether this area actually is wetland and
whether it could be restored to tidal influence. It may be
that the former channel mouths are now at an elevation which
puts them above tidal influence. Site is potentially over 50
acres in size.
Tidal effects extend approximately to mile 16 of the
Alsea River and mile 5.5 of Drift Creek (Percy, 1974).
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Lint Slough - remove dam and tidegate; 11.4
acres.
MIT 5 Barclay Meadows - remove or breach dikes; 70
acres (not mapped by OREP).
30
-------
2P-
1--.-P55C * ~~
PE1Vl5EelVi:
LtSWHh
L2AB6Hh
R20WH
. UJ
- f«l f I 1 f~ f*l
SCALE 1" = 3500'
10) ALSEA BAY, OREGON
31
-------
11) SIUSLAW RIVER USGS Quads: SILTCOOS LAKE, 15'
HECETA HEAD, 15'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=2,000'
a) North Fork Sl<5ugh: The North Fork is noted as tidal
to river mile 6.9 (Percy, 1974). It is diked on both banks
for several miles from Siuslaw Bay. These mapped areas are
under active agricultural use as pasture; however, they are
not cultivated. Removal of the dikes would restore the area
to tidal influence. Potential area of nearly 100 acres.
b) South Inlet: The inlet contains several small sloughs
which have been diked. It is not possible to determine from
the aerial photomosaic if the areas are pasture; however, they
would be under tidal influence if the dikes were removed.
Each is less than 10 acres.
c) Upriver area: This area contains several areas mapped
in the OREP as diked and which appear in the aerials to be
pasture lands. The area with the most significant potential
is located on the south side of the river in Section 22. It
contains a complex system of old channels and sloughs which
if the tidal influence was restored, potentially could
support a diverse estuarine system. It is unknown to what
extent tidal influence would be restored if the dikes were
removed from these agricultural lands along the river.
Potential area of over 100 acres.
Tidal effects extend approximately to mile 25 of the
Siuslaw River and to mile 6.9 of the North Fork Siuslaw River
(Percy, 1974).
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 North Fork Islands - remove sand to create
intertidal or subtidal environments; 58.0
acres.
32
-------
-------
12) UMPQUA RIVER USGS Quads: REEDSPORT, 7.5'
WINCHESTER BAY ,7.5'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=3,000'
(infra-red)
The lower reaches of the river appear to have primarily
industrial, log storage and some residential impacts, not
those associated with agriculture or other passive uses.
On the south shore of Smith River, west of Otter Slough,
there is a wetland system mapped in the OREP as the Franz
Creek wetland, Habitat B. The site is also noted as diked,
therefore an assumption has been made that this is currently
a palustrine system. A review of the aerial indicates an area
of equal size and immediately adjacent to Habitat 13 which
looks exactly like the vegetation composition within Habitat
13. This entire area would potentially be restored to tidal
influence if the dikes were removed.
Tidal effects extend to approximately mile 28 of the
Umpqua River (Percy, 1974).
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Providence Creek - remove tidegates; 55 acres.
MIT 2 West Mouth Scholfield - lower elevation and
create tidal channels; 6.3 acres.
MIT 3 Purdy Island - lower elevation and create tidal
channels; 3.1 acres.
MIT 4 Scott's Swamp - Install larger culverts or
replace dike with causeway; 14.2 acres.
MIT 5 Steamboat Island - move dredge spoils to upland
site; 14.5 acres.
34
-------
' -, ""-V-V *" I o ""- '
^Jv-^a
£^[.;.-..
:>' ^ --^,
'1*" -'--: ^i^r-'.^-i.
SCAI^E 1" = 2 , 000 '
12) UHPQUA RIVER, OREGON
-------
13) COOS BAY USGS Quads: CHARLESTON, 7.5'
COOS BAY, 7.5'
EMPIRE, 7.5'
NORTH BEND, 7.5'
COE Photomosaic: l"=2,000'
Mitigation sites within the Coos Bay system were
identified utilizing the OREP and The Salt Marshes of Coos Bay
(Hoffnagle, 1974) . A review of the aerial photoitiosaic and the
NWI maps did not reveal any additional potential restoration
.areas. The OREP and the USGS quads for the Coos Bay region
do not indicate the presence of extensive diking within the
system, but Hoffnagle (1974) identifies'many areas of diked
agricultural lands. These areas are indicated in this report
as potential restoration sites although much further detailed
study would be required to correctly identify feasible
restoration sites.
Within the OREP there are 13 mitigation sites referenced
in the text. These sites are listed below. However, the maps
for Coos Bay identify many more mitigation sites than are
listed in the text. The status, composition, and size of
these other mitigation sites are unknown. They have been
included within this mapping to reflect the detailed analysis
that produced the OREP. Further information regarding these
sites will have to be generated on a site specific basis by
field reconnaisance and/or contact with the appropriate agency
staff within the Coos Bay planning district.
Note that due to the size of the Coos Bay system, it has
been divided into seven maps as identified on the Coos Bay
Location map.
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT LI Oxford Way Road: Breach or remove dike; 6.0
acres.
MIT L4 Across from Charleston Basin: Remove sand to
create marsh beside channel; 5.5 acres.
MIT L5 Lower South Slough: Remove dike; 5.4 acres.
MIT M5 Spoils Islands: Lower elevation to promote
tidal flushing; 22.3 acres.
MIT U12 Lilienthal Boom Site: Breach dike and remove
tidegates; 36.0 acres.
MIT U16A North of Christiansen's Ranch: Remove tidegate
and breach berm; 3.7 acres.
MIT U30B Sumner Road: Breach dike; 4.8 acres.
36
-------
13) COOS BAY (cont'd)
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT U31 Catching Slough: Enlarge breaches; 2.7 acres.
MIT U44 Isthmus Slough: Remove tidegate and breach
berm; 20.0 acres.
MIT U51A Davis Slough: Breach or remove dikes and/or
tidegates; 24.0 acres.
MIT U51B Davis Slough: Remove tidegates; 16.0 acres.
MIT U59A Coalbank Slough: Replace or add culvert; 25.0
acres.
MIT U59B Coalbank Slough: Breach berm; 35.0 acres.
37
-------
: v:
-ytij
«. %£3
$£4
&***?*
^
fl (
COOS BAY LOCATION MAP
38
-------
I M-SSRM-
\
-PSSC ^t,' K«l
)m
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
13) COOS BAY, OREGON (A)
-------
13) COOS BAY, OREGON (B)
40
-------
/f>jc\ _ ^ ^ -\ a- .- vr. -"?
SCALE _1" = 2,000'
13J COOS BAY, OREGON (C)
41
-------
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
13) COOS BAY, OREGON (D)
42
-------
13) COOS BAY, OREGON (E)
-------
11) COOS BAY, OREGON (F)
-------
/ X ' {
. f ...,
MSBC
..--> M-U30AM ,
"/ rcvich/
-s SCALE 1" = 2,000'
13) COOS BAY, OREGON (G)
-------
14) COQUILLE RIVER
USGS Quads: BANDON, 7.5'
BOLLARD, 7.5'
RIVERTON, 7.5'
COE Photomosaic: 1"=1,000'
a) Impounded lake: This area appears to be an impounded
freshwater lake from the aerial photograph. It is located
southeast of the major eastward bend of the river, west of
Prosper. The site is located east of the roadway, therefore
restoration may require the installation of culverts under the
roadway if none exist. Area is just over 5 acres in size.
b) Old Slough: This area is located north of the river,
just east of the major eastward bend of the river. The OREP
maps the area as diked, and the aerial indicates that it is
used for agricultural purposes. Removal of the dike would
restore the area to tidal influence. Site is approximately
10 acres in size.
c) Agricultural lands: Upstream from river mile 22 there
is extensive agricultural use along both banks of the river.
The OREP identifies the area just north of Prosper on the east
bank as diked, the remaining agricultural lands are not
identified within the OREP or the NWI. It is noted that tidal
effects extend to approximately between river mile 36 and 40
of the river (Percy, 1974) . It is unknown to what extent
estuarine restoration could take place if the dikes were
removed. Potential area is greater than 25 acres.
Oregon Estuary Plan Mitigation Sites
MIT 1 Dredge Spoil Island - grade to create high salt
marsh; 3 acres.
MIT 10 Unnamed site - remove dike and grade to create
salt marsh; 12 acres.
MIT 11 Prosper - create channel and salt marsh; 4
acres.
MIT 2 North Spit; 13.5 acres.
MIT 3 Dredge Spoil Islands - scalp to create salt
marsh; 12 acres.
MIT 4 U. S. 101 West; 1.2 acres.
MIT 5 U. S. 101 East; 2.0 acres.
MIT 8 Unnamed site - remove bank to create high
marsh; not mapped; 1.5 acres.
MIT 9 Randolph Slough - construct tidal channel; not
mapped; 6.0 acres.
46
-------
14) COQUILLE RIVER, OREGON
-------
48
-------
Chapter 3
WASHINGTON SITES
Of 13 major estuaries within Washington state, seven of
them have lost over 50 percent of their original subaerial
wetlands (those wetlands above the intertidal mudflats and
submerged algal beds) within approximately the last century-
The Lummi, Samish, Duwamish, and Puyallup river systems have
lost over 90 percent of their original estuary lands
(Simenstad, 1982) . Many of these estuaries were historically
diked for agricultural uses, and most are still used for that
purpose.
The Duwamish and Puyallup systems have been converted
from agricultural uses to industrial and commercial uses which
have a more significant impact on the potential for
restoration. These systems are not contained within this
study because of the lack of agricultural or passive uses
within the estuaries.
Unlike the detailed work for long range comprehensive
planning which has been done in the state of Oregon,
Washington does not at this time have detailed comprehensive
plans for most of its estuaries. This preliminary study may
be the first step to identify potential restoration and
mitigation sites throughout the state.
The source for data within Washington state came from the
NWI mapping, the COE aerial photos, historical mapping,
personal communication from various agency staff, and various
specific reports and documents as noted within the text and
bibliography.
Historical Changes of Shoreline and Wetland at Eleven
Mai or Deltas in the Puaet Sound Region. Washington.
(Bortleson, 1980), was utilized to determine the former extent
of wetland presence in some of the estuaries. The historical
data on which the Bortleson (1980) report is based did not
differentiate between freshwater and saltwater wetlands
within the estuary, therefore the former exact extent of
saltwater wetland systems must be estimated.
The sites are listed alphabetically by county; the inland
waters and the Straits of Juan de Fuca first, then by county
within Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay. "Inland waters" includes
the identified potential sites on the Straits of Juan de Fuca,
Hood Canal, and within Puget Sound and the San Juan Islands.
All of the sites are listed alphabetically by USGS quad in
Appendix A.
49
-------
The COE Photo Number refers to the number of the 1987
color aerial photographs on file at the Seattle office of the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. A few of the photographs are
from the 1986 series, as 1987's were not available for some
sites at the time of this inventory.
"Inland Waters" includes the identified potential sites
on the Straits of Juan de Fuca, Hood Canal, and within Puget
Sound and the San Juan Islands. Following is a list of all
sites, including those on inland waters (1-24) and on the
Pacific Coast (25-36) .
Site
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
Meadowbrook Creek
Crescent Bay
Batelles Lagoon
Grays Marsh
Clinton
Dugalla Bay
Picnic Point
Useless Bay
Cultus Bay
Maxwelton
Dabob Bay
Squamish Harbor
Quilcene Bay
Quartermaster Harbor
Lynch Cove
Annas Bay
Little Skookum Inlet
Nisqually
Padilla Bay
20) Samish River
21) Skagit River
22) Swinomish Channel
23) Stillaguamish River
24) Snohomish Delta
25) Chehalis River
26) Copalis River
27) Grass Creek
28) South Bay
29) Bowerman Basin
30) Johns River
31) North River
32) Westport
33) Kindred Slough
34) Bear River
35) Palix River
36) Willapa River
Quad
Dungeness
Joyce
Sequim
Sequim
Mukilteo
Cresent Harbor
Mukilteo
Hansville &
Maxwelton
Maxwelton
Maxwelton
Brinnon
Lofall
Quilcene
Vashon
Belfair
Potlatch
Shelton
Nisqually
Anacortes, South,
Bow, LaConner
Bow
Conway and Ustalady
LaConner
Juniper Beach,
Utalady, Stanwood
Marysville
Aberdeen
Copalis Beach
Copalis Crossing
Grayland
Hoquiam
Hoquiam
Western
Westport
Bay Center
Chinook, Long Island
Neman
South Bend
50
-------
WASHINGTON LOCATION MAP
51
-------
CLALLAM COUNTY
1) MEADOWBROOK CREEK USGS Quad: DUNGENESS, 7.51
COE Photo #: S87-009-07-9
The area is located southeast of Dungeness Spit, on the
mainland, at the mouth of Meadowbrook Creek. The two areas
are mapped as estuarine in the NWI: one is emergent, the
other is open water. Review of the aerial photograph does not
indicate where the tidal input occurs in these two systems;
it may be a culvert under the roadway. The systems appear
simple in the aerials; restoration could increase the tidal
range and flow into the areas. Field verification of the
existing situation is necessary- Both sites are less than 10
acres in size.
52
-------
#. .-I---- //--' sS.^* ,--,'-'>'.
- . - .. ,
:. SCHOOL ,";. JKMOV
, ^-i.-^^-^^.
^ '"
1) MEADOWBROOK CREEK, WASHINGTON
53
-------
2) CRESCENT BAY
USGS Quad: JOYCE, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-4-11
In the southeast corner of Crescent Bay, the roadway
around the bay has created a dike across Salt Creek. The NWI
maps the upstream area as estuarine, however DNR agency staff
(L.Kunze, pers. comm.) have noted that the road acts as a
dike.
Culverting under the road would restore tidal influence
to the area. It is unknown, however, what size of an area
would be affected. Field verification is necessary to
determine restoration potential. Potential area could be
greater than 20 acres.
CRESCENT BAY
v;- -. , .~- ^ - z . »j-> X-- *". . -s ^
C^. ,'--'. '^ :~r^~ '- ~^- ' '~- ' ^2-^.< ' :^ it M. I P.
^--o-' -' lO^r _,--'-^--:-^-^-^i,\N-.-, -
SCALE 1" = 2,000' ':-
'
2) CRESCENT BAY, WASHINGTON
54
-------
3) BATELLES LAGOON
USGS Quad: SEQUIM, 7.51
COE Photo #: S87-009-7-5
The site is diked wet pasture to the west of the lagoon.
Breaching of the dike would restore this area to tidal
influence and expand the area of the existing estuary. The
site is between 5 and 10 acres in size.
£
.. V
E 2 EM IP.
AS4it- p£W,^-_._-,:^iv ^^EM (R^«
^* ' -»-_T ^^ i - jfc
PcPAlW
r c i»vi w I
^ .."I
*
=^"^_.__ ^rs-^^TC:'^"^.
21-^--C»'- - =%.-
- '.y^-
i
\
£2FLP
\ rr^c :
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
3) BATELLES LAGOON, WASHINGTON
55
-------
4) GRAYS MARSH
USGS Quad: SEQUIM, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-7-7
This large extensive wetland is in private ownership and
is currently actively managed for waterfowl habitat. The
system is currently freshwater wetland as the sloughs and
channels have tidegates. Removal of the tidegates would
restore the area to tidal influence. The site is over 140
acres.
PErvuw ,.
TRAIT OF
JUAN DE FUG A
POWZ*
iwzx---,, -
sO**:,"
M2BBN "
COWl*
SCALE 1" = 2,000
4) GRAYS MARSH, WASHINGTON
56
-------
ISLAND COUNTY
5) CLINTON
USGS Quad: MUKILTEO, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-70A-31
The site is located south of the town of Clinton,
approximately halfway to Glendale. The site is mapped as a
small impounded freshwater scrub/shrub wetland. Field review
would establish if it was feasible to restore tidal influence
with a culvert. The site is just under 5 acres.
US" \
N
v; SCALE 1" = 2,000'
-."-..ft//
5) CLINTON, WASHINGTON
57
-------
6) DUGALLA BAY
USGS Quad: CRESENT HARBOR 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-71-19
This area is at the head of Dugalla Bay. It is currently
impacted by the presence of tide gates and dikes. The roadway
across the head of the bay contains a tide gate. NWI maps the
openwater area and old slough to the west as estuarine. The
area immediately surrounding the old slough is currently
active agricultural use. Removal of the tide gate would
possibly expose the area to greater tidal influence; removal
of the dikes also would expose a greater area to tidal
influence.
The area currently mapped as estuarine is approximately
50+ acres in size; the area of agricultural use is over 100
acres.
6) DUGALLA BAY, WASHINGTON
-------
7) PICNIC POINT
USGS Quad: MUKILTEO, 7.51
COE Photo #: S87-009-54-7
From the aerial photograph this area appears strictly as
an open water pond with no margin of emergent vegetation. It
is impounded behind the railroad tracks, and it is assumed
that there is no culvert connection.
The potential for restoration would be more accurately
assessed with a field verification. It may be possible to
introduce tidal influence into this system by placing a
culvert under the tracks if none exists.
The site is just less than 5 acres.
/
o
«9
z
o
w
CO
UJ
CO
CO
o
a
Picnic Poir'
SCALE
E i" = 2,000' ' :;
i!»' x,-x<....-j Vi-^".^::"
7) PICNIC POINT, WASHINGTON
59
-------
8) USELESS BAY
USGS Quad: HANSVILLE, 7.5'
MAXWELTON, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-72-17
Useless Bay is a former estuarine system which is now
diked. A diverse freshwater system has developed within the
Bay according to the NWI. The area as a whole does not
provide feasible restoration because of the presence of houses
all along the natural berm. Restoring tidal influence to the
Bay would run the risk of not only flooding the existing
structures, but also impacting the septic systems and thereby
further impacting the already poor water quality within the
Bay. Field review may identify areas within the Bay which
could be restored to tidal influence without adversely
impacting the hydrologic regime of the remainder of the Bay,
and therefore not adversely impacting the existing structures.
8) USELESS BAY, WASHINGTON
60
-------
9) CULTUS BAY
USGS Quads: MAXWELTON, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-72-17
The natural berm at the head of Cultus Bay has been
extended with a dike and two tide gates, which effectively
closes off the former estuary from tidal influence. The areas
currently exist as pasture. Removal of the tidegates and
breaching of the dikes would restore the area to tidal
influence. The area is approximately 100 acres.
mm
/7A |i'///;/;/-A ,-.vi
$m!$m
9) CULTUS BAY, WASHINGTON
61
-------
10) MAXWELTON
USGS Quads: MAXWELTON, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-72-17
This area is located just north of the town of Maxwelton,
on Whidbey Island. According to the NWI, the area is
currently a freshwater system located across the road and
behind a tide gate from Puget Sound. The freshwater system
contains good diversity of vegetation. Removing the tide
gates or dikes would restore the
area to tidal influence. Old channels are still present
within the system. The area is over 100 acres.
10) MAXWELTON, WASHINGTON
62
-------
JEFFERSON COUNTY
11) DABOB BAY
USGS Quad: BRINNON 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009
The NWI indicates a small estuarine system at the north
end of Dabob Bay as diked. No agricultural use is indicated.
A field check would be required to confirm whether the site
provides any potential for restoration. The area is just over
10 acres in size.
11) DABOB BAY, WASHINGTON
63
-------
12) SQUAMISH HARBOR
USGS Quad: LOFALL, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-16-1
This site is identified in the NWI as a freshwater
system. It appears to be cut off from tidal influence only
by the presence of the road. Field review would confirm
whether the site has potential to be restored to tidal
influence by placing a culvert under the road or removing a
tide gate which may be present. Potential area is over 30
acres in size.
HARBOR
SCALE 1" = 2.000
12) SQUAMISH HARBOR, WASHINGTON
64
-------
13) QUILCENE BAY
USGS Quad: QUILCENE, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-20-3
The areas noted in Quilcene Bay are mapped in the NWI as
diked freshwater wetlands. Tide gates are present on the two
systems south of the road. No tide gate is mapped on the area
just north of the road; it may be impounded behind the road
fill with no culvert connection. Removal of the tide gates
would restore tidal influence to the two sites with gates.
The third site requires field inspection to determine the
potential of restoring it to tidal influence. The two sites
south of the road are approximately 20 acres each; the one
north of the road is approximately 15 acres.
To the northwest of the two sites south of the road,
there is potential area which would possibly come into tidal
influence as well if the levees were removed. Elevations and
existing site conditions would have to be verified as to the
feasibility of restoration (area is not mapped).
13) QUILCENE BAY, WASHINGTON
65
-------
KING COUNTY
14) QUARTERMASTER HARBOR
USGS Quad: VASHON, 7.51
COE Photo #: S87-009
The site is located in the northeast section of
Quartermaster Harbor. It is an estuary which currently has
a tide gate at the mouth. Removal of the tide gate would open
the estuary to a different tidal regime. This would restore
an element of mud flats which is now lacking because of the
permanent impoundment created by the tide gate. The site is
approximately 15 acres.
SCALE 1" = 2.000'
A
14) QUARTERMASTER HARBOR, WASHINGTON
6fi
-------
MASON COUNTY
15) LYNCH COVE
USGS Quad: BELFAIR, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-24-9
Lynch Cove is at the head of Hood Canal. This area has
been diked and is currently either freshwater wetland or in
pasture use. Removal of the dikes or tide gates would restore
the area to tidal influence. The area is apparently within
a private land trust established by the adjacent property
owners (L. Kunze, pers. comm.). It may provide a politically
feasible restoration site based on the participation of the
land trust. The site is approximately 40+ acres.
'^S^y /
J=n^//E2fMN/
/"^ I ' ^ ,, r,
/W -' ~ -f. /'
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
; /f/t / " _ / \
^^^^^i^^^^^^^~"
15) LYNCH COVE, WASHINGTON
67
-------
16) ANNAS BAY
USGS Quad: POTLATCH, 15'
COE Photo #: S87-009-22-15
587-009-23-1,3
a) Skokomish River Mouth: On both sides of the river at
its mouth there are diked lands which are currently under
active cultivation. The extent of tidal influence if the
dikes were removed is unknown, however the northern-most
limits of the diked areas indicate continued saturation.
Given the proximity of these sites to the existing estuary,
it is assumed that tidal influence would be readily restored
if the dikes were removed.
The site north of the river mouth is approximately 20
acres in size, the one to the south is approximately 30 acres.
16) ANNAS BAY, WASHINGTON
68
-------
17) LITTLE SKOOKUM INLET
USGS Quad: SHELTON, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S86-020-41-5
(note: photo is 1986)
The area is not identified as wetland or as diked in the
NWI or on the USGS quad map; however, the aerial photo shows
clearly that the area is diked and currently used for pasture.
Removal of the dike would restore the area to tidal influence.
A field check would verify the assumption of the presence of
the dike. The area is just under 20 acres.
17) LITTLE SKOOKUM INLET, WASHINGTON
69
-------
PIERCE COUNTY
18) NISQUALLY USGS Quad: NISQUALLY, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-33-1
587-009-34-19,21
a) Nisqually Refuge: The first area to be impounded
within the estuary was diked in 1904. The estuary continued
to be further diked and converted to agricultural uses until
the 1960s (Bortleson, 1980). According to Burg (1984), there
has been a 55 percent reduction in estuarine system habitats
within the delta since 1878. She states that estuarine
emergent habitat has been reduced by 56 percent as a result
primarily of diking. When active agricultural use ceased, the
area within the dikes converted to freshwater marsh and old
pasture complex. From December 1975 to June 1977 the dike was
breached, and salt marsh vegetation began to reestablish.
Repair of the dike in 1977 curtailed any further saltmarsh re-
establishment in the area (Bortleson, 1980; Burg, 1984).
Currently within the diked sections of the Refuge the
area is actively managed to attempt to maintain the freshwater
wetland. From the historical record and more detailed recent
studies (Burg, 1984), it is clear that the estuary would
simply restore itself if the dikes surrounding this area were
removed.
The entire area occupied by the Refuge would likely not
revert to an estuarine system, as portions of the area were
historically surge-plain wetlands and upland. Therefore size
approximations and mapping are on a gross scale. There is a
potential for several hundred acres of restoration within the
refuge.
The issue of restoring the refuge to its former estuarine
status is a controversial one; therefore, use of the Refuge
as a restoration site is more a question of the political
feasibility rather than its biological viability.
b) East of the main river channel: This area is mapped
in the Bortleson (1980) report as wetland historically, but
the aerial photograph indicates the area has been diked and
is currently in agricultural use. From the historical mapping
it would appear that primarily the northeast corner of this
area was formerly saltwater wetland (Burg, 1984). It is an
area of approximately 35 acres.
70
-------
|tt\ !& 4-«'ffi>
lire 15 'J-J^fc
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
18) NISQUALLY, WASHINGTON
71
-------
SKAGIT COUNTY
19) PADILLA BAY USGS Quad: ANACORTES, SOUTH, 7.5
BOW, 7.5'
LaCONNER, 7.5'
COE Photo #: 887-009-69-21,23
387-009-92-3,5,7
The entire shoreline of the east shore of Padilla Bay is
diked, and behind the dikes are extensive areas of
agricultural use. This area is not covered within the
Bortleson report (1980), so it is difficult to assess the
former extent of tidal influence except where the topography
clearly dictates tidal limits.
Tidal influence along the shoreline may be limited. It
is assumed, however, that some tidal range could be restored
to some of the former sloughs and channels.
Only two potential restoration sites were identified
within the Bay as the vast majority of the area is within
active agricultural use or has been filled and is outside the
scope of this inventory.
The southern limits of the Bay at the mouth of the
Swinomish Channel is mapped and discussed below (Swinomish
Channel, #22). It will be noted here that this area as well,
is extensively diked and used for agricultural purposes.
Tidal influence along the shoreline would possibly be limited;
however, the range would be more extensive up the channels and
sloughs.
a) South of Joe Leary Slough: This area is approximately
20+ acres of formerly diked lands where the dikes have not
been maintained and estuarine vegetation is already re-
establishing itself. Removal of the remaining dikes would
allow further tidal influence within the area.
b) North of Joe Leary Slough: Although this area is
mapped as diked upland, the aerial photo indicates that the
area is saturated and severely channelized. Removal of the
dikes would restore approximately 35+ acres to tidal
influence.
72
-------
19) PADILIA BAY, WASHINGTON
-------
20) SAMISH RIVER USGS Quad: BOW, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-92-5
S87-009-92-7
The Samish River and Samish Bay have all been diked, and
the lands behind the dikes are primarily used for agricultural
purposes. The only specific potential restoration site
identified is a small palustrine emergent marsh on a small
island which has been completely diked. No active use was
identifiable from a review of the aerial photograph. It is
unknown whether the palustrine site or that portion of the
diked island which used to be within tidal influence would be
able to be restored to tidal influence. The small pond area
labeled as "a" on the map is less than 5 acres.
The former or anticipated range of tidal influence is
unknown, therefore the mapping of agricultural lands extends
eastward to known obstructions such as roads. This mapping
is clearly an approximation and is not based on available
historical mapping. Size approximations are not provided
because of the degree of uncertainty of restoration potential.
74
-------
in
20) SAMISH RIVER, WASHINGTON
-------
21) SKAGIT RIVER USGS Quad: CONWAY, 7.5'
USTALADY, 7.5
COE Photo: 387-009-63-9,11,13
S87-009-65-3
Like the majority of the major river deltas on Puget
Sound, the Skagit estuary has been extensively diked and
converted to agricultural uses since 1889, (Bortleson, 1980).
Most of the delta continues to be used for active cultivation.
These extensive, actively cultivated fields have not been
included within this inventory as potential restoration sites.
The southern half of the delta, south of Freshwater
Slough and the southern half of Milltown Island, have been
diked since the 1889 mapping. Both of these areas are
indicated as non-impounded wetland in the historical mapping.
It is assumed that the wetlands within the braided
channel systems of the delta were primarily estuarine prior
to any diking. As noted previously, the action of diking and
years of agricultural uses alters the soil complexity to a
degree that may be irreversible in a mitigation time frame.
The previous extent of estuarine systems was not assessed
within the scope of this preliminary study; thus, no acreage
estimates have been given for potential restoration area.
There may be small areas of potential restoration adjacent to
some of the slough channels and bayward of the dikes. These
areas could only be identified with field work, as they were
not discernable from the scale of mapping and aerial
photography available.
a) Dodge Valley: This site is located north of the mouth
of the North Fork, at the west end of Dodge Valley. It is
mapped as estuarine in the NWI; however, review of the aerial
photograph reveals that the area has recently been converted
to agricultural use. Removal of the dikes would restore the
area to tidal influence. The site is over 40 acres.
b) Lower North Freshwater Slough: This area is located
north of Freshwater Slough, and it is mapped by the NWI as
estuarine. The aerial photo indicates that tidal action is
still restricted by the presence of the old dikes.
Restoration could be accomplished by further breaching or
removal of the dikes to increase tidal influence. Field
review is required to determine restoration potential. Area
is over 40 acres in size.
c) Upper North Freshwater Slough: This area is north of
(b), above. It is mapped by the NWI as a mosaic of palustrine
wetlands, old channels, and agricultural lands. Review of the
aerials indicates a complex mosaic of vegetation and water
patterns. Removal of the dikes would restore the area to
tidal influence. The site is greater than 60 acres.
76
-------
-------
21) SKAGIT RIVER (cont'd)
d) South of Freshwater Slough, north of Deepwater Slough:
This is an area which was not diked in the 1889 mapping; it
is indicated as being diked presently. From the aerial
photos, it appears that the dikes are in disrepair and/or the
tide gates are malfunctioning. The vegetation is diverse and
the area appears to be saturated. Field checking would verify
the current condition and assess the restoration potential.
The area is approximately 60+ acres.
e) The middle third of Milltown Island: This area has
been diked and apparently used as a settling pond for the
adjacent pulpmill. The pond is no longer in use by the mill,
and it has been mapped as a freshwater system by the NWI.
Removal of the dikes around the impoundment would restore
tidal influence; however, the water and substrate quality
within the old settling pond could pose a potentially
significant problem. Detailed study and field work would be
required to assess the restoration potential of the area. It
is approximately 30+ acres in size.
f) South of Moore Slough: This area is in the southern-
most slough of the delta. It is mapped as wetland in the 1889
mapping (Bortleson 1980), but it is currently in agricultural
use. Removal of the dikes would restore tidal influence.
Area is greater than 30 acres in size.
78
-------
21) SKAGIT RIVER, WASHINGTON (CONTINUED)
-------
22) SWINOMISH CHANNEL USGS Quad: LaCONNER, 7.5'
COE Photo #: 387-009-69-21,23
387-009-92-3,5,7
The area surrounding the Swinomish Channel, including
Telegraph Slough, Indian Slough, and the southern reach of
Padilla Bay, has been thoroughly diked and converted to
agricultural use. Review of the aerial photos does not
indicate any clear potential restoration sites. The entire
area is actively cultivated or in agricultural use such as
pasture or hayfield. None of the fields or pastures indicate
unmaintained dikes or non-functioning tide-gates, therefore
no likely potential restoration sites were discernable. It
is unknown to what extent tidal influence would be restored
if the dikes were removed. No estimate of potential acreage
was calculated.
80
-------
-------
SNOHOMISH COUNTY
23) STILLAGUAMISH RIVER USGS Quad: JUNIPER BEACH, 7.5'
UTASLADY, 7.5'
STANWOOD, 7.5'
COE Photo #: 587-009-63-5,7
S87-009-69-33
Much of the delta has been diked and converted to
agricultural uses since the early 1870's (Bortleson 1980).
Agricultural use is still the primary land use within the
delta; much of the former estuary is within active cultivation
and pasture lands. Restoration potential for much of the
area is unknown because of the extent of the diking and
subsidence which has occurred.
a) Lona Beach: This area is completely diked according
to the quad map. The NWI indicates the northern portion of
the area as estuarine. The Bortleson report (1980) indicates
that the entire area in the historic mapping was wetland. The
potential of restoring the area is diminished because of the
presence of residences and their associated septic systems on
what used to be the old natural berm. Field review would
provide specific information on the potential of restoring
greater tidal influence into the area which still maintains
the estuarine characteristics. The area is over 75 acres.
b)-d) These areas were mapped as wetland in 1886, but
they are now in agricultural use. It is unknown to what
extent tidal influence would be restored if the dikes were
removed. Sites range from over 30 to over 50 acres in size.
e) North of the mouth of South Slough: This area is
diked; however, the aerial photos indicate that the dikes may
be in disrepair. The vegetation indicates some diversity.
Field review would confirm existing conditions and the
potential of restoring tidal influence by removal of the
dikes. The site is approximately 60 acres in size.
f)-h) these lands were diked prior to the 1886 mapping.
It is assumed that they were previously wetland and the
potential exists to remove the dikes and restore tidal
influence. Each area is over 100 acres in size.
i) East of the confluence of West and South Sloughs:
From the aerial photographs, this area appears to be old
fallow pasture. Field review is necessary to determine the
potential of restoration and the feasible extent of tidal
influence. The area is approximately 60 acres.
j) Douglas Slough. This site is northeast of the mouth
of the West Pass of the Stilliguamish, east of Douglas Slough.
The area is mapped as estuarine in the NWI; however, the
aerials indicate that the area is currently being used for
agricultural use. Removal of the dikes would restore tidal
influence in the area. The site is approximately 25 acres in
size.
The vast majority of the delta is in active agricultural
use and as such has not been mapped as potential restoration
for the purposes of this inventory.
82
-------
23) STILL&GUAMISH RIVER, WASHINGTON
-------
24) SNOHOMISH DELTA USGS Quad; ^g^^, 7.5,
COE Photo #: S87-009-56-3
S87-009-57-5,7
*? "84~85 virtually the entire Snohomish River delta,
south to the confluence of the main channel and Ebey Slough,
was mapped as wetland (Dortleson, 1980). Because there is no
distinction in the historic mapping between freshwater and
estuarine wetlands, it is difficult to determine the former
extent of saltwater influence. The entire delta is mapped as
hydric soils within the SCS Soil Survey (1983).
Currently the entire delta, with the exception of the
mouth of the junction of Steamboat and Ebey Sloughs, has been
diked and converted to non-wetland status, primarily
agricultural uses. The mouths of Steamboat and Ebey Sloughs
remain as natural estuarine systems, the last undiked segments
of what used to be an extensive wetland delta system of
approximately 15 square miles (Bortleson, 1980).
For the purposes of this inventory, the extensive area
which has been converted to agricultural uses has not been
mapped in its entirety, because much of it is in active
cultivation. The southern reaches of the estuary are unlikely
to provide potential restoration sites; however, detailed
field work and further research beyond the scope of this study
would be required to confirm this assumption.
Portions of the delta adjacent to the harbor and the
river mouth are currently used for industrial purposes. Log
storage areas, settling ponds, active dredge disposal sites,
and similar sites were not reviewed or identified for their
restoration potential.
Based on a review of the aerial photographs, the
following potential sites have been identified near the mouth
of the delta in the vicinity of Interstate 5 (1-5).
a) West end of Spencer Island, just east of the remaining
natural estuary: From the aerials the site appears to be
cleared. It may be a dredge disposal site, although it is not
identified as one in the FEIS for the Everett Harbor and
Snohomish River Navigation Project (USCOE, 1975). Field
review is required to determine existing conditions and
whether the site provides any restoration potential. The site
is over 120 acres.
b) North of Steamboat Slough, east of 1-5, south of Ebey
Slough: This area is mapped as palustrine scrub/shrub and
emergent in the NWI. The aerials indicate that the sites have
good vegetation diversity. Removal of the dikes would restore
tidal influence, which would significantly alter the
vegetation community structure.
c) South end of Spencer Island: This area was recorded
as diked land in the 1884 historical mapping (Bortleson^l980).
It does not appear to be currently in use for agriculture from
review of the aerial photographs. Removal of the dikes would
restore the area to tidal influence. The area is less than
50 acres.
d) Smith Island: The area of Smith Island, to the west
of 1-5, contains a variety of land uses. ^Freshwater ponds
diked off from the estuary are present, as is what may be an
old disposal site. Without further data as to the historic
or current function of the ponds and the use of the cleared
areas this site can only be labelled as a potential
restoration site pending further data. The area is over loo
acres.
84
-------
24) ENOHOMISH DELTA, WASHINGTON
-------
GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY
25) CHEHALIS RIVER USGS Quad: ABERDEEN, 7.5'
COE Photo #: 87-009-96-3
a) Rennie Island: There is an old holding pond on the
island which has been diked. The edges of the island, outside
of the dikes, are mapped as estuarine in the NWI. It is
therefore assumed that at least a portion of the diked area
would also fall within tidal influence. There is potential
concern regarding residual toxic sediments within the settling
pond, so more detailed analysis of the site's restoration
potential would be required. This site is identified as
mitigation site N10 in the Grays Harbor Estuarine Management
Plan (GHEMP) (1982) . Area is approximately 40 acres in size.
b) Books Ranch: This area is not shown on the USGS quad
map as diked, nor does the NWI indicate it as wetland. The
aerial photographs, however, indicate the presence of what
appears to be dikes. Field verification is required to
determine the actual restoration potential.
c) South of the railroad: The railroad appears to be
functioning as a levee, as the land to the north is mapped as
estuarine and to the south as palustrine or upland. To the
south of the railroad and east of Books Ranch is an area of
approximately 40 acres which is mapped by the NWI as
palustrine. There is the potential of placing culverts under
the railroad grade or removing tide gates, if they exist, to
restore this area to tidal influence. Field verification
would be required.
North and east of (c) above, there are several freshwater
open water ponds mapped by the NWI. These are located both
north and south of the railroad line. Their current and
historical use is unknown; the potential may exist to restore
these areas to tidal influence.
86
-------
SCALE 1M = 2,000'
^ - ^---^ f -''' '/, ]'
25) CHEHALIS RIVER, WASHINGTON
87
-------
26) COPALIS RIVER USGS Quad: COPALIS BEACH, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-100-11
There are two areas north of the river which appear to
be within tidal range if the dikes around them were breached.
The larger of the two is approximately 40 acres and is mapped
in the NWI as palustrine emergent. The smaller system to the
northeast of the river is not mapped in the NWI as wetland,
and field verification is necessary to determine if
restoration is possible. The larger area to the west of the
river is approximately 40 acres in size, the smaller area to
the east is less than 25 acres in size.
88
-------
R3OWZ
o
1
SCALE 1"=^ 2,000'
26) COPALIS RIVER, WASHINGTON
89
-------
27) GRASS CREEK USGS Quads: COPALIS CROSSING,
7.5'
HUMPTULIPS, 15'
COE Photo #: S87-009-101-7
(a) There are four pasture areas located along Grass Creek
which are mapped as impounded freshwater wetlands. The USGS
quad, which is the base map for the NWI maps, does not indicate
these areas as being diked. The aerial, however, indicates the
presence of dikes.
All four sites are currently in use for agricultural
purposes. All would appear to provide some restoration
potential if the dikes were removed or breached. The GHEMP
(1982) also identifies these areas adjacent to Grass Creek as
mitigation sites.
The areas vary in size: two are approximately 15 acres
each piece, one is over 40 acres, and the other is over 20
acres. It is unknown to what extent tidal influence would
extend.
The GHEMP (1982) also identifies potential restoration
sites within the delta of the Humptulips River. It identifies
(but does not specifically map) diked lands within the delta
and just to the southeast of the main channel of the river as
GHEMP Mitigation Sites N3 and N4. It notes that N4 may provide
the best potential mitigation site in the entire estuary. It
is assumed that the more detailed analysis done for the GHEMP
provides accurate field assessment of these sites.
90
-------
27) GRASS CREEK, WASHINGTON
-------
28) SOUTH BAY USGS Quad: GRAYLAND, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-99-3
These sites are located along the southwest shore of
South Bay of Grays Harbor. The areas are not agricultural
lands but are mapped by the NWI as freshwater wetlands which
have been formed behind the dikes and roadways along the bay
shore. Removal of the tidegates and breaching of the dikes
would restore these areas to tidal influence. It may be
necessary to place culverts under the existing roadway, if
none exist, in order to restore tidal influence.
The conversion of functioning freshwater systems to
estuarine systems requires a detailed analysis of the
potential values and functions anticipated in comparison to
those being provided by the existing system.
The GHEMP (1982) identifies these areas as mitigation
sites S10 and Sll. The sites total more than 120 acres. The
GHEMP (1982) also identifies mitigation site S9 to the south
as a diked pasture area with potential for restoration to
tidal influence. This site is estimated to be 47 acres (GHEMP
1982) .
92
-------
D SCALE 1" = 2,000'
I / /, j -^ x
28) SOUTH BAY, WASHINGTON
93
-------
29) BOWERMAN BASIN
USGS Quad: HOQUIAM, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-103-5
To the east end of the basin there is a dike present
which impacts the tidal range. Removal or breaching of the
dike would restore at least a portion of this area to tidal
influence.
The NWI maps two palustrine sites behind the dike, and
the aerial indicates areas of fill as well. Restoration of
estuarine flushing in this area would entail detailed field
analysis including the feasibility of removal of the fill.
The area is approximately 40 acres in size.
It is unknown what impact the newly created National
Wildlife Refuge status will have on this area and its
potential restoration. **
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
29) BOWERMAN BASIN, WASHINGTON
94
-------
30) JOHNS RIVER
USGS Quad: HOQUIAM, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-96-9
There are two large sites on each side of the Johns River
east of the main highway bridge. The sites are not mapped as
diked on the USGS quad used as a base map for the NWI, however
the aerials clearly show the presence of both dikes and
extensive ditching on both sites. It is unclear from the
aerial if the areas are currently used for hay fields. The
vegetation appears quite regular and uniform. The NWI maps
both areas as palustrine emergent freshwater wetlands.
Removal of the tidegates or breaching of the dikes would
restore at least a portion of these areas to tidal influence.
The river in this vicinity is mapped as estuarine. Total area
of each site is over 60 acres. It is unknown how much of this
area would actually be under saline tidal influence.
SCALE 1"
/ DrO+3 V
30) JOHNS RIVER, WASHINGTON
95
-------
31) NORTH RIVER USGS Quad: WESTERN, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-319-3
Two sites are mapped by the NWI as freshwater emergent
wetlands; however, the aerials indicate that the areas may be
used for pasture. Removal of the dikes along the river would
restore tidal influence to these areas. The larger system
north of the river is over 120 acres.
The smaller area to the south of the river shows a higher
degree of saturation from review of the aerial. It is
approximately 30 acres.
96
-------
N \ vjjv
L i \\ i;
SCALE i" - 2,000
31) NORTH RIVER, WASHINGTON
97
-------
32) WESTPORT USGS Quad: WESTPORT, 7.5'
COE Photo #: 887-009-9,11
On the east side of the City of Westport the NWI has
mapped a freshwater wetland as diked. The aerial indicates
that the area may be at least partially former estuary.
Removal of the dikes would restore a portion of the area to
tidal influence. The total area is just over 10 acres.
The GHEMP (1982) identifies Mitigation Sites S6 and S7
on the east side of the bay, across from the town of Westport.
It is noted that both areas are diked pastures. Site 6 is
approximately 25 acres, site 7 is approximately 75. It is
also noted that complex ownership patterns exist on these
parcels.
98
-------
y p=k»ji "r; ;'.:'
LpEMir-.".^/ j ?jCS'': ' \4'^
~ , , ^ ,^'D -''" 'T/1 fl':'T.'- jr.'-V J
K - f -TTT .rH- ,L=J^i*f|
IY ^--v^Hv^M
lE&ERJJATlON [|- I -I!' '=f7;"^?7r^v:-ST'tKjC5
~ Y«iftii0Bs^ir'H4^-v ; .-^^^^
fe^^^ Vj"i2 .'V-v- '»'. '^'-y^N-^ti^*
^SS4fcSfc-/
^^^E^ri^iik ittrf^
I u'^^"PEMIY i'" 'V /~-
N^"V^I'T.M ^
T. >-i-^
, , -J^ . . ,fv... I \
\ reW ^ 'fomrn i. .. '!
?i \v SrT? . .(-',,, !
32) WESTPORT, WASHINGTON
-------
PACIFIC COUNTY
33) KINDRED SLOUGH USGS Quad: BAY CENTER, 7.5'
COE Photo #: S87-009-118-5
The mouth of the Cedar River is diked in the area of Duck
and Kindred Sloughs. The two areas mapped as potential
mitigation on the north and south sides of Kindred Island may
still be within agricultural use; however, the aerials
indicate that the area is still very saturated and the
channels are poorly maintained.
The areas to the north and south of the two mapped
restoration sites are in agricultural use as well. The sites
do not appear as saturated as are the labeled potential
restoration sites, and therefore these areas are mapped as
agricultural only. Tidal influence may be restored to all of
these areas with removal of the dikes.
Total area is over 120 acres. Tidal influence would
probably extend at least as far west as the roadway which
crosses the estuary just to the west of the edge of the
available map (not shown on this quad).
The potential restoration sites are approximately 40
acres each; the agricultural sites are both less than 35 acres
each.
100
-------
:TA!-V\N\r£=^J v3v>
^S.- M. "' /" ^ \ ' ! y. ! fc X*\ ^
^
-------
34) BEAR RIVER USGS Quad: CHINOOK, 7.5'
LONG ISLAND, 7.5'
COE Photo #: 587-009-123-7,9,11
a) The west side of the mouth of the Bear River has been
diked resulting in an extensive impounded freshwater marsh
system. This freshwater system is mapped by the NWI as
impounded or diked, however, it is unknown how far to the
southwest the tidal influence would extend. The areas
immediately adjacent to the tidal channel would certainly
respond to restored tidal influence.
The aerial photographs indicate that the area behind the
dikes is saturated and that the former tidal channels are
still intact. To the north of the small road which crosses
the area east to west an area of open water has been
impounded, to the south of the road, the area is emergent
wetlands. The total area of over 120 acres is not used for
agricultural purposes currently.
b) A small area of approximately 30+ acres is mapped by
the NWI as diked palustrine emergent systems at the south end
of Willapa Bay. The area appears to be potentially within
tidal influence if the dikes were breached or tide gates were
removed.
c) The USGS base quad map does not indicate the presence
of any dikes on the southeastern portion of the peninsula,
however the aerial photographs clearly indicate the presence
of diking and channels. The old slough channels are still
present behind the dikes, although the area appears to be
currently used for pasture. Removal of the tide gates or
breaching of the dikes would restore this area to tidal
influence. The area is between 80 and 100 acres in size.
102
-------
SCALE 1" = 2,000'
' .-:=- X- C\ r r\ru,., , » ' " "
34) BEAR RIVER, WASHINGTON
103
-------
35) PALIX RIVER USGS Quad: NEMAH, 7.5'
COE Photo #:S87-009-120-3,5,7
a) South of the main stem of the Palix River: This area
is large (over 300 acres) and is currently actively used for
hay and pasture. It is mapped by the NWI as a palustrine
system; however, the aerial indicates pasture usage.
Old slough channels are still present throughout the
site. Removal of the tidegates and breaching of the dikes
would restore a substantial area to tidal influence. In the
northwest end of this site is a freshwater pond which possibly
could also be restored to tidal influence.
b) East of (a): This area is east of the major road
and west of the river. It is mapped as a palustrine
scrub/shrub wetland. Removal of the dike would clearly
restore it to tidal influence. The site is approximately 20
acres in size.
c) South Fork Palix River: These two sites are located
north and south of the South Fork. Both are mapped as
freshwater wetlands in the NWI; however, the aerials indicate
there may be some pasture usage. Removal of the dikes would
restore the areas to tidal influence. Both sites are
approximately 20 acres in size.
104
-------
o
Ul
35) PALIX RIVER, WASHINGTON
-------
36) WILLAPA RIVER USGS Quad: SOUTH BEND, 7.5'
COE Photo: 887-009-116,1,3,5
On both sides of the Willapa River there are several
hundred acres of land which are currently in active
agricultural usage. The areas are all diked, and the dikes
and tide gates are all well maintained. The NWI maps these
areas as uplands with an intricate mosaic of remnant
freshwater wetlands along the old channels and ditches.
Removal of the dikes and tide gates would restore a
significant portion of these areas to tidal influence. No
acreage estimate is given because of the unknown extent of
tidal influence if tidal flushing were restored.
106
-------
36) WILLAPA BAY, WASHINGTON
-------
108
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bortleson, G.C., M.J. Shrzastowski, and A.K. Helgerson. 1980.
Historical Changes of Shoreline and Wetland at Eleven
Major Deltas in the Puget Sound Region. Hydrologic
Investigations Atlas, U.S. Geological Survey- Atlas HA-
617.
Boule1, M. , N. Olmsted, T. Miller. 1983. Inventory of
Wetland Resources and Evaluation of Wetland Management
in Western Washington for Washington Department of
Ecology- Olympia, Washington. 102 pg.
Burg, M. 1984. Habitat Change in the Nisqually River Delta
and Estuary Since the Mid-1800's. Masters of Science
thesis. University of Washington. 113 pg.
Burg, M.E., D.R. Tripp, and E.S. Rosenberg. Plant
associations and primary productivity of the Nisqually
Salt Marsh on Southern Puget Sound, Washington.
Northwest Science, Vol.54, No. 3, 1980.
Cortright, R., J. Weber, R. Bailey, 1987. The Oregon Estuary
Plan Book. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development. Salem, Oregon. 126 pg.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979.
Classification of Wetlands and Deep-Water Habitats of the
United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior, D.C.
Debose, A. and M. Klungland. 1983. Soil Survey of Snohomish
County Area Washington. U.S. Dept. of Ag., Soil
Conservation Service.
Driscoll, A.L. 1978. Snohomish estuary wetlands study.
Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Seattle,
Washington.
Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commission. 1982. Inventory of
Potential Migigation Sites. Grays Harbor Estuary
Management Program. Grays Harbor, Washington.
Hamilton, S.F. 1973. Oregon Estuaries, Division of State
Lands. Salem, Oregon.
Hoffnagle, J. and R. Olson. 1974. The Salt Marshes of Coos
Bay, Port Commission of Coos Bay and Oregon Institute of
Marine Biology, Coos Bay, Oregon. 87 pg.
109
-------
Kunze, L. 1984. Puget Trough Coastal Wetlands. Washington
Natural Heritage Program, Washington Department of
Natural Resources. Olympia, Washington. 154 pg.
Percy, K., D. Bella, C. Sutterlin, p. Klingeman. 1974. Oregon
Estuaries. Sea Grant College Program, Oregon State
University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331. 294 pg.
Simenstad, C.A., K.L. Fresh, and E.O. Salo. 1982. The role
of Puget Sound and Washington coastal estuaries in the
life history of the Pacific Salmon: an unappreciated
function. Pages 343-364 in V.S. Kennedy (ed.), Estuarine
comparisons. Academic Press, Inc. New York. 709 pp.
Thomas, D. 1983. Changes in Columbia River Estuary Habitat
Types Over the Past Century. Columbia River Estuary Data
Development Program. Astoria, Oregon. 70 pg.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1975. Everett Harbor and
Snohomish River Navigation Project, Final Environmental
Impact Statement. U.S. Army Engineer District, Seattle,
Washington.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1981 - 1987. National
Wetlands Inventory- St. Petersburg, Florida.
110
-------
APPENDIX A
POTENTIAL RESTORATION SITES BY USGS QUAD
OREGON
Quad
Bandon
Bullard
Cape Foulweather
Charleston
Coos Bay
Empire
Gearheart and Tillamook Head
Hebo
Hebo
Newhalem
Newhalem and Tillamook
North Bend
Reedsport
Siltcoos Lake
Tillamook
Tillamook
Waldport
Yaquina and Toledo
Site
Coquille River
Coquille River
Siletz Bay
Coos Bay
Coos Bay
Coos Bay
Necanicum River
Nestucca Bay
Salmon River
Newhalem Bay
Tillamook River
Coos Bay
Umpqua River
Siuslaw River
Netarts Bay
San Lake
Alsea Bay
Yaquina Bay
WASHINGTON
Quad
Anacortes, South
Belfair
Bow
Brinnon
Cresent Harbor
Conway
Dungeness
Hansville
Joyce
Juniper Beach
Lofall
LaConner
Marysville
Padilla Bay
Lynch Cove
Padilla Bay
Samish River
Dabob Bay
Clinton
Dugalla Bay
Skagit
Meadowbrook Creek
Useless Bay
Crescent Bay
Stillaguamish
Squamish Harbor
Padilla Bay
Swinomish Ch.
Snohomish R.
County
Skagit
Mason
Skagit
Skagit
Jefferson
Island
Skagit
Clallam
Island
Clallam
Snohomish
Jefferson
Skagit
Skagit
Snohomish
WASHINGTON - continued
111
-------
WASHINGTON - continued
Quad
Maxwelton
Mukilteo
Nisquallly
Potlatch
Quilcene
Sequim
Shelton
Stanwood
Ustalady
Vashon
Site
Cultus Bay
Maxwelton
Useless Bay
Picnic Point
Nisqually R.
Anna's Bay
Quilcene Bay
Batelles Lagoon
Grays Marsh
Little Skookum
Stillaguamish
Skagit
Stillaguamish
Quartermaster H.
County
Island
Island
Pierce
Mason
Jefferson
Clallam
Clallam
Mason
Snohomish
Skagit
Snohomish
King
Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor
Aberdeen
Bay Center
Chinook
Copalis Beach
Copalis Crossing
Grayland
Hoquim
Long Island
Nemah
South Bend
Western
Westport
Chehalis R.
Kindred Slough
Chinook R.
Copalis R.
Grass Creek
South Bay
Bowerman Basin
Bear River
Palix River
Willapa River
North River
Westport
Grays Harbor
Pacific
Pacific
Grays Harbor
Grays Harbor
Grays Harbor
Grays Harbor
Pacific
Pacific
Pacific
Grays Harbor
Grays Harbor
112
------- |