REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

1 2 3 4

Review Draft – Summary Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan November 21, 2016

5 6 7 8 9 10

REVIEW DRAFT WHATCOM LOCAL INTEGRATING ORGANIZATION ECOSYSTEM RECOVERY PLAN SUMMARY

11

NOVEMBER 21, 2016

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Disclaimer: The Draft Whatcom Local Integrating Organization Ecosystem Recovery Plan, December 30, 2016, was prepared in accordance with planning grants to local integrating organizations (LIOs) around Puget Sound to develop local ecosystem recovery plans that will support Puget Sound recovery. It conforms to the framework developed to meet the interests of the Puget Sound Partnership. The vision for the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan is a locally developed strategic plan that meets the needs of the community and integrates traditional resource-based culture, local ecosystem priorities, and supports a healthy economy. The materials presented are the start that process. These materials have had limited public and agency review and are subject to revisions, additions, and/or deletions as the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan continues to be developed through summer 2017 with additional opportunities for public and agency input.

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Page 2 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

33

DRAFT WHATCOM LOCAL INTEGRATING ORGANIZATION ECOSYSTEM RECOVERY PLAN SUMMARY

34 35 36 37 38

The Draft Whatcom Local Integrating Organization Ecosystem Recovery Plan was prepared in accordance with a planning grant to the WRIA 1 Boards1 as the Local Integrating Organization (LIO), using the framework and format established by the Puget Sound Partnership. This summary is intended as a reader-friendly version of the longer December 30, 2016, Draft Whatcom Local Integrating Organization Ecosystem Recovery Plan that was submitted as a grant deliverable to the Puget Sound Partnership.

39

Background

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

The Puget Sound Partnership (PSP) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have established a Puget Soundwide approach for communities, through local integrating organizations (LIO), to support local actions and programs that together will achieve Puget Sound ecosystem recovery. The approach entails each Puget Sound area LIO developing its own local 5 to 6 year ecosystem recovery plan that includes strategies from which high-priority actions that support Puget Sound recovery can be developed. The PSP established requirements for the structure and approach of the LIO plans in order to standardize the local ecosystem recovery plans so they can be folded into future updates to the comprehensive Action Agenda for Puget Sound. The EPA provided funding to the nine LIOs to develop their LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan.

55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

The format required by the PSP for the LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plans uses open source software called Miradi that implements the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation planning framework, which brings together common concepts, approaches, and terminology in conservation programs. The PSP planning process that is supported through Miradi involves identifying priority natural and social components, defining threats to those components, describing the current social context through the use of “conceptual models”, and describing how strategies and actions are expected to address threats and achieve goals through “results chains”. While this may be a logical ecosystem recovery planning approach and provides consistency among LIOs making it easier to roll up the plans into the Puget Sound Action Agenda, it is a complex and jargon-heavy process. The LIO ecosystem recovery plans submitted to the PSP are primarily generated from the Miradi software, with limited flexibility to customize the language and plan organization to local needs.

68 69 70

This Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary was prepared in an effort to summarize the information from the Miradi-generated report that constitutes the December 30, 2016 DRAFT Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan into a more reader-friendly document. The full Whatcom LIO Ecosystem

1

There are nine local integrating organizations around Puget Sound that self-organized and were subsequently endorsed by the Puget Sound Partnership’s Leadership Council. For more information about local integrating organizations and their purpose in Puget Sound recovery, visit psp.wa.gov/LIO-overview.php

The Whatcom Local Integrating Organization (LIO) was established in 2010 as a function of the WRIA 1 Watershed Joint Board and WRIA 1 Salmon Recovery Board under the WRIA 1 program structure that includes a WRIA1 Management Team, Staff Teams, and Work Groups. For more information about the Whatcom LIO structure, visit wria1project.whatcomcounty.org

The WRIA 1 Boards are the WRIA 1 Joint Board and the WRIA 1 Salmon Recovery Board. Refer to side bar for information on the Whatcom Local Integrating Organization structure. Page 1 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

71 72

Recovery Plan is available for review on the Whatcom LIO page of the WRIA 1 Project website (wria1project.whatcomcounty.org).

73

The Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan

74

Purpose

75 76 77

The purpose for local ecosystem recovery plans, as defined by the PSP and EPA, is to provide focused, strategic planning that does the following:

78 79

 Provides a roadmap for focusing local efforts on the highest priority ecosystem recovery needs.

80 81 82

 Builds on and works in coordination with existing related recovery efforts, and that coordinates recovery actions across local areas and the Puget Sound region.

83 84 85 86

 Ensures consistency of local ecosystem recovery plans with the Puget Sound Action Agenda so that local priorities inform decision-making and sequencing of recovery actions at the Puget Sound level.

87 88 89

 Serves as a longer-term plan from which Near Term Actions (NTAs) can be developed that may then be included in the Puget Sound Action Agenda.

The Puget Sound recovery planning approach is centered on an open source, cloud-based conservation software called Miradi Share, which is based on Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. For more information on Miradi Share, visit miradishare.org. For more information on Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, visit cmp-openstandards.org

The Puget Sound Action Agenda is the regional roadmap for Puget Sound recovery. The Action Agenda outlines regional strategies and actions needed to protect and restore Puget Sound. The Action Agenda is intended to help achieve Puget Sound recovery goals and targets. More information about the Action Agenda, Puget Sound recovery goals and targets, and the role of local watersheds in the recovery efforts is available at psp.wa.gov/action_agenda_center.php

90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

In addition to achieving the PSP- and EPA- intended purpose, a Whatcom LIO ecosystem recovery plan provides an opportunity to integrate existing, locally approved Water Resource Inventory Area 1 (WRIA 1) plans and other local plans that have common elements and that also support Puget Sound recovery (Figure 1). For example, the locally approved WRIA 1 Watershed Management Plan and WRIA 1 Salmonid Recovery Plan have objectives related to water quality and fish habitat that likely overlap with objectives in other local government or organizations’ planning documents that also relate to water quality and fish habitat. In many cases, the overlapping local objectives and elements overlap with recovery goals for Puget Sound.

98

Figure 1. Relationship of Local Plans to the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan

99 100 101

WRIA 1 Watershed Management Plan

102

104

106 107

Common components Components Achieving Puget Sound Recovery Targets

103

105

WRIA 1 Salmonid Recovery Plan

Local Governments’ Planning Documents

Other Local Organizations’ among local programs Strategic Plans, Work Plans, and Planning Documents

Components

 Chinook  Floodplains  Freshwater Quality  Land Cover  Marine Water Quality  Shellfish  Summer Stream Flows

Preliminary Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan

Page 2 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

108

Iterative Process of the Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan

109 110 111 112 113 114

Developing the iterations of the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan has been done using the framework provided by the PSP as described in the “Background”. The plan development began with an “first installment” submitted October 8, 2015. The LIO plan “early installment” was used as the basis for proposing local near-term actions to be considered for inclusion in the 2016 Puget Sound Action Agenda. The next step in the process was to build out and refine the “early installment” of the LIO plans and develop longer term (5-6 year) plans using the Puget Sound framework provided in February 2016.

115

Figure 2 shows the stages of development for the Whatcom LIO Plan.

116

Figure 2. Plan Development Steps in Timeline

117 118 119 120 121

“First Installment” October 8, 2015  Build on existing

plans  Use Work Groups  Six Focus Areas  Identify Strategic Needs

Preliminary Draft September 30, 2016

Draft Plan December 30, 2016

 Build on existing plans  Participation by Work

Groups, Committees, Staff  Direction/Agreements from WRIA 1 entities

 Additional feedback,

input from staff, committees, public  Draft review and approval by WRIA 1 Boards

Final Plan September 2017  Refine key elements to

develop local road map  5-6 year plan t is basis

for 2-year action plans  Review/revise through

Adaptive Management

122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130

The Preliminary Draft Plan continues to be reviewed and revised locally before being presented to the WRIA 1 Boards for their review and approval of a Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan to submit as the grant work product by December 30, 2016. Information presented in the December 30, 2016, Draft Plan will continue to be reviewed and revised into summer 2017, building on components of the earlier drafts and leading to a local road map for implementing solutions that address local priorities and that support Puget Sound recovery. The local LIO plan will also serve as the basis for developing 2-year actions, referred to as Near Term Actions or NTAs, which will be submitted for inclusion into future updates of the Puget Sound Action Agenda.

131

Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Development

132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140

All of the draft versions of the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan have been prepared within the overall LIO structure (See Sidebar on page 1). Generally, the WRIA 1 structure includes: (1) decisions, direction, and Near Term Actions (NTAs) are activities approval occurring at the WRIA 1 Board or WRIA 1 that are trackable, measurable, and necessary for Puget Sound recovery and Management Team level that involves elected officials, are a component of the Action Agenda for policy-level representatives, and senior management of the Puget Sound. NTAs can be proposed by WRIA 1 governments; and (2) work groups, staff teams, and government agencies and tribes, academic a steering committee preparing draft work products and institutions, non-profit organizations, making recommendations. businesses, and individuals.

141 142 143 144

The process for building on the October 8, 2015 “first installment” of the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan was initiated in February 2016 when the new guidance for the full LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plans was provided by the Puget Sound Partnership to the LIOs.

(psp.wa.gov/2016_AA_NTA.php)

Page 3 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

145 146 147 148

The WRIA 1 Management Team monthly meetings in 2016 were used to provide updates on status of plan development, receive direction and/or agreements on plan elements, and to present recommendations as necessary. The first steps were to develop a vision statement for the plan and agree on general principles for developing the LIO plan.

149 150

The general principles that guided development of the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan included:

Whatcom Local Integrating Organization Ecosystem Recovery Plan Vision Statement

151



Use existing groups to develop plan elements;

152 153 154



Make it easy to provide input including using surveys with committees and preparing straw dogs for meetings;

155



Build on existing work; and

156 157 158 159



Continue to work within the LIO structure, with work groups reviewing and refining work products, LIO Staff Team reviewing deliverables, LIO Steering Committee providing general oversight, and WRIA 1 Management Team and WRIA 1 Boards providing approvals.

“The Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan provides a strategic framework for integrating traditional resource-based culture, local ecosystem priorities, valued ecosystem goods and services, community economic vitality, and supports regional Puget Sound recovery goals”.

160

Components and Goals for the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan

161 162 163 164 165

Components are the focus of the Puget Sound ecosystem recovery effort. Each LIO around Puget Sound identified priority natural and human components for their LIO area and developed strategies and actions to improve or protect the health of the components selected. While the components, strategies, actions, and goals included in the LIO plans are specific to the LIO, the intent is that they are making contributions to Puget Sound recovery targets.

166 167 168 169 170

A screening survey2 was distributed in April 2016 to members of existing Whatcom County committees and Boards involved in work related to ecosystem recovery. The purpose of the screening survey was to confirm the components of the plan that were included in the October 8, 2015 “first installment” and identify any additional components that individuals felt were important to consider- either natural elements or human elements.

171 172 173

There are seven natural – or ecosystem- components and six human components included in the Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan (see Table 1). The human components were added in April 2016; the “first installment” was focused on ecosystem components.

174 175 176 177 178 179

Short-term and long-term local goals have been identified for three of the seven ecosystem components: Chinook, Marine Water Quality, and Shellfish. The reason for selecting those components to start with is that there are existing programs in place that have established goals that could be used or modified for the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan. Developing goals for the remaining four ecosystem components and definitions for all of the human components has been identified as a gap to work on for future updates to the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan.

2

The intended use of the screening survey was to obtain input from existing committees and to inform the process for building out the October 8, 2015 “first installment” of the LIO plan; it was not designed or intended to be a scientific survey. The survey was sent to lead staff of the existing committees and boards for distribution. Page 4 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

180

Table 1. Summary Table of Whatcom LIO Plan Components LIO Plan Component

Description of Component

Whatcom LIO Goals

3

Natural (or Ecosystem) Components Chinook

Floodplains

Freshwater Quality

Land Cover

Whatcom LIO Long term Goal The North Fork/Middle Fork Nooksack early Chinook and South Fork Nooksack  Meet recovery goals outlined in WRIA 1 Salmonid early Chinook populations are listed as Recovery Plan (SRP) threatened under the Endangered Species Whatcom LIO Near Term Goal (2030) Act. The two populations are critical to  Estimated benefits of implementing 10-year action plan the recovery of the Puget Sound Chinook. (WRIA 1 SRP) o SF Nooksack chinook: 600 spawners o NF/MF Nooksack chinook: 1200 spawners There are several efforts underway or planned that will address floodplain function and reduce/manage flood risk. Integrating salmon recovery needs into floodplain management is a key action in the WRIA 1 Salmonid Recovery Plan.

Shellfish

3

To be developed for future updates.

Multiple water courses in WRIA 1 are not  To be developed for future updates. meeting water quality standards, are listed on the 2012 Water Quality Assessment 303(d) list, and/or have water quality clean up plans associated with Total Maximum Daily Loads. Changes in land cover affect habitat, water  To be developed for future updates. quality, and hydrology.

Marine water quality is important to Marine Water Bellingham Bay, Birch Bay, Chuckanut Bay, Quality Drayton Harbor, Lummi Bay, and Portage Bay where shellfish and other marine resources are supported.

Summer Stream Flows



Whatcom LIO Long-Term Goal  Marine waters meet water quality standards  Stormwater and wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) discharges do not negatively affect marine water quality. Whatcom LIO Near Term Goal  Human-related contributions to DO reductions minimal  Stormwater quality characterized  WWTP discharges meet or exceed permit requirements  Contaminated sites in Bellingham Bay cleaned up to MTCA standards.

Reductions in summer stream flow limits  To be developed for future updates. salmonid distribution and productivity. Minimum instream flows adopted in 1986 resulted in water use restrictions on many WRIA 1 streams and lakes. Shellfish growing areas in Whatcom County including Birch Bay, Chuckanut Bay, Drayton Harbor, Lummi Bay, and

Whatcom LIO Long term Goal  Approved status of shellfish growing areas in Whatcom County is maintained (i.e., prevent further downgrades)

The Whatcom LIO long term and near term goals are summarized in Table 1. The complete goal statement is included in the December 30, 2016 Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan (Miradi generated report). Page 5 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

LIO Plan Component

Description of Component

Whatcom LIO Goals

3

Portage Bay. With the exception of Lummi Whatcom LIO Near Term Goal Bay, each of these shellfish growing areas  Shellfish areas upgraded has acreage that is either classified as o Portage Bay 820 acres prohibited or conditionally approved for o Birch Bay 127 acres harvesting shellfish. o Drayton Harbor 960 acres Human Components (Puget Sound Indicators are provided as a reference point for intent at a Puget Sound level) Cultural WellBeing

Viable Agriculture Economy

Viable Fisheries Economy

Viable Forestry Economy

Public Safety

Recreation

To be defined for future updates.

 

To be defined for future updates.

 

To be defined for future updates.

 

To be defined for future updates.

 

To be defined for future updates.



To be defined for future updates.



To be developed for future updates. Puget Sound Indicators includes locally harvestable foods, recreational shellfish beds, nature-based recreation, acres harvestable shellfish beds, participation in cultural practices, sense of place, and/or overall life satisfaction. To be developed for future updates. Puget Sound Indicators for including locally harvestable foods, natural resource industry output, percent of GDP in natural resource-based industries, employment in natural resource industries. To be developed for future updates. Puget Sound Indicators for including locally harvestable foods, natural resource industry output, percent of GDP in natural resource-based industries, employment in natural resource industries. To be developed for future updates. Puget Sound Indicators for Economic Viability including natural resource industry output, percent of GDP in natural resource-based industries, employment in natural resource industries.

To be developed for future updates.  Puget Sound Indicators include swimming beaches and acres harvestable shellfish beds. 

To be developed for future updates Puget Sound Indicators include recreational shellfish beds, nature-based recreation in Puget Sound region, nature-based work in Puget Sound region, and condition of swimming beaches.

181

Page 6 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

182

Ecosystem Recovery Context for Whatcom LIO

183

Key Pressures

184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191

In addition to identifying ecosystem and human components (Table 1) for the Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan, pressures that may affect those components were identified. Pressures are the human actions or natural processes that can cause stress to the ecosystem. Pressures, however, may also provide important benefits to humans. The basis for pressures that were considered for the LIO plans is the Puget Sound Pressure Assessment, and is part of the Puget Sound framework for all LIO plans.

192 193 194 195

For the Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan, the pressures were initially identified for the October 8, 2015, “first installment” where work groups undertook a process for identifying key pressures affecting shellfish, stormwater, and habitat in the Whatcom LIO. For the December 2016 draft, the key pressures were reviewed and related to the LIO ecosystem components (Table 2).

196

Table 2. Summary of Pressures

The Puget Sound Pressures Assessment is a tool that was used by local integrating organizations in identifying key pressures in their area. Additional information about the Puget Sound Pressures Assessment and the 2014 report can be found at (http://www.psp.wa.gov/science-pugetsound-pressures-assessment.php)

4

Related Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Components Pressure Housing & Urban Areas Commercial & Industrial Areas Annual &Perennial Non-Timber Crops Livestock Farming & Ranching Roads & Railroads (including culverts) Freshwater Shoreline Infrastructure Marine Shoreline Infrastructure Agricultural Effluents Abstraction of Surface Water Abstraction of Ground Water Dams Freshwater Levees, Floodgates, Tidegates Marine Levees, Floodgates, Tidegates Domestic & Municipal Wastewater to Sewer Domestic & Commercial Wastewater to Onsite Sewage Systems (OSS) Runoff from Residential and Commercial Lands Oil Spills Industrial Wastewater Industrial Runoff 4

Chinook Floodplains

Freshwater Land Marine Water Summer Shellfish Quality Cover Quality Stream Flow Beds x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x x x

x x x

x x x

x

The Puget Sound Pressure Assessment is the basis for LIOs selecting pressures applicable to their LIO. Refer to the sidebar for a link to the Puget Sound Pressure Assessment for the report. Definitions for the pressures listed in Table 2 are found in Appendix 2 of the December 30, 2016 Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan. Page 7 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

197

Conceptual Models

198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205

Conceptual models are part of the Puget Sound framework for LIO plans and are a way to visualize and analyze the social, political, and natural context for ecosystem recovery. They show relationships among factors that contribute to a pressure (contributing factors), pressures, and ecosystem and human components, and provide a foundation for developing targeted strategies. Conceptual models are intended to help build a common understanding of the context within which the LIO is operating. Figure 3 shows the general components of a conceptual model. For the Whatcom LIO Plan, conceptual models were constructed for habitat, floodplains, water quality, summer stream flows, and shellfish and are included as Appendix 3 in the December 30, Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan.

206

Figure 3. Components of a Conceptual Model

207 208

Strategies

209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216

Under the LIO planning framework, once the conceptual models describing different situations within the LIO area were developed, the next step was to consider the types of actions or strategies that could help achieve desired outcomes. Thirty-four strategies were developed and incorporated into the conceptual models. For most of these strategies, a type of logic model was used to document the assumptions about how taking specific actions will result in change. This logic model approach under the Puget Sound recovery planning framework uses “results chains” (also referred to as “theories of change”) as the tool to visualize or map out a series of statements that link short-, medium, and long-term results in an “if… then” fashion. Figure 4 shows the components of a results chain.

217

Figure 4. Components of a Results Chain

218 Page 8 of 16

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

219 220 221 222

The December 30, 2016 Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan includes 20 Results Chains reflecting most of the 34 strategies. For the most part, each results chain focused on one to three primary strategies, although related strategies were also included. The strategies can be generally grouped into seven strategic approaches for addressing the Whatcom LIO Plan elements (Figure 5). Figure 5. Whatcom LIO Strategic Approaches

223

224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240

Figure 6 lists the range of strategies that fit under each of the strategic approaches in Figure 5. Descriptions for each of the strategies are also included in Table 3. Appendix 5 in the December 30, 2016 Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan includes all of the strategic needs that have been identified throughout the process from September 2015 through December 2016. The work to date has been completed within the regional Puget Sound framework for LIO recovery plans and has had limited public and agency feedback into local priorities, strategies, and approaches. The process for receiving feedback and refining, focusing, and/or adding to the Whatcom LIO plan will be ongoing through the summer of 2017.

241

Adaptive Management

242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249

The December 30, 2016 Draft Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan and programs, strategies, and actions it encompasses and describes are based on the best information available at the time and within the time constraints and framework for developing the plan. Adaptive management of the draft plan and future updates will be necessary over time. It is anticipated that adaptive management will continue to occur through the unified decision-making structure of the WRIA 1 Boards under which the LIO functions. This will include further developing priority component goals, strategy objectives and indicators, and action objectives and effectiveness measures that will inform development of a more formalized Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan monitoring and adaptive management framework.

Page 9 of 16

251 252

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary Figure 6. Strategies within Strategic Approaches

250

253

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary Table 3. Summary Table of Strategy Descriptions

LIO Plan Strategy

Description

Research/Monitoring Strategies Salmon Assessments and Monitoring

This strategy includes technical habitat and salmonid population assessments, restoration planning, and adaptive management of the WRIA 1 Salmonid Recovery Plan and associated restoration priorities. It also involves implementation, compliance, and effectiveness monitoring of management practices, land use regulations and salmon recovery actions to inform adaptive management.

Shellfish Source ID and Monitoring

This strategy includes development and implementation of a comprehensive monitoring program that includes ambient, storm/source identification, and effectiveness monitoring of management measures to reduce bacterial pollution, and establishes and/or supports a coordinated and collaborative mechanism for accessing and managing data.

Climate Change Assessment and Adaptation

This strategy involves assessing the vulnerability of ecosystem or human components to climate change, developing strategies and actions to build resilience and adapt to anticipated change, and generally incorporating future climate scenarios into ecosystem recovery, water supply needs, and land use planning.

Water Availability and Management Studies

Strategies in this category include quantifying water availability, water use, and water supply needs under current and future climate and land use/growth scenarios, water management research to develop and demonstrate feasibility and/or effectiveness of water management tools.

Stormwater Monitoring

This strategy involves characterizing and monitoring water quality of stormwater to evaluate effectiveness of stormwater management.

Planning/Adaptive Management Watershed Plans

This strategy is to develop and implement watershed-scale plans that address habitat, water quality, water quantity, and drainage, consider economic viability, and engage landowners and the community in the watershed.

Integrated Floodplain Management Plan

This strategy involves development of an Integrated Floodplain Management Plan for the Nooksack River that updates the Lower Nooksack Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan and integrates land use, flood risk reduction, and ecosystem recovery needs.

Oil Spill Planning

This strategy includes preventing and otherwise reducing the risk of petroleum oil spills that could affect Whatcom Action Area. It involves training, participating in drills, and other activities to improve local capacity to respond to an oil spill.

Funding Strategy

This strategy involves developing a plan or plans to leverage existing and potential sources of funding for priority strategies and actions.

TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily Load)

This strategy involves completing Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies and implementing TMDL plans.

Land Use Planning

This strategy is to identify areas in the watershed (including parts of the floodplain) that are unsuitable for development and to develop, implement, amend, or update relevant plans to discourage growth in those areas. Page 11 of 14

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary LIO Plan Strategy

Description

Programs Incentive/Cost Share Programs

Implement, expand, and adaptively manage incentive/cost-share programs to increase voluntary use of best management practices and other management measures, as well as address other desired outcomes.

Shellfish Protection and Recovery

This strategy involves coordinating efforts to shellfish protection and recovery efforts in the Whatcom Action Area, including continuation of the Whatcom Clean Water Program, the Whatcom County PIC program ( short-term enhanced programs) and development of a long-term, sustainable, locally-led comprehensive structure to implement, monitor, and adaptively manage plans to reopen, expand and prevent downgrade of important shellfish harvest areas. Required elements to ensure substrategy success (should be incorporated into results chain): (1) consistent, long-term, ambient water quality monitoring to prioritize projects and evaluate action effectiveness; (2) coordinated outreach about proposed PIC projects and results to increase community awareness, participation, and support; (3) source identification sampling; (4) provision of information, site inspection, technical assistance, and financial support to correct identified sources of pollution; (5) effective enforcement capability as backstop when compliance efforts fail; (6) sustainable funding to maintain long-term stability of the program; and (7) better align authorities/resources of the respective agencies and build to a scale appropriate to the challenge.

Watershed-Scale Stormwater Management

This strategy involves cross-jurisdictional coordination to plan, implement and monitor stormwater management actions at the watershed scale.

Implement and Expand OSS Program

This strategy involves sustaining and expanding implementation of the recently expanded program regulating on-site sewage systems in Whatcom County.

Control Sources of Pollutants

This strategy involves controlling non-point and point pollution at its source.

Salmon Recovery Coordination

This strategy involves coordinating the planning, implementation, monitoring and adaptive management of salmon recovery actions through the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Board framework.

Local Incentives Binding Agreements to Resolve Habitat, Water Quality, Water Quantity Issues

This strategy is to develop binding agreements to resolve habitat, water quality, water quantity and drainage issues and provide certainty for water users through a negotiated settlement framework that engages key parties.

Identify and Support Solutions for Meeting Water Supply Needs

This strategy includes identifying, evaluating, and supporting solutions for meeting short- and long-term water supply needs, such as surface-ground transfers, water banking, stream augmentation, deep aquifer exploration, storage, mitigation, pipelines.

Promote US/Canada Coordination

This strategy involves promoting US/Canada coordination on transboundary impacts to water resources in the Whatcom Action Area either by invoking the existing formal processes for US/Canada coordination (i.e., State of Washington coordination with British Columbia, EPA coordination with Environment Canada), and/or promoting more informal crossborder coordination (e.g., Whatcom Conservation District working with BC agencies and agricultural and industrial sectors). Page 12 of 14

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary LIO Plan Strategy Select and Adopt New Instream Flows

Description This strategy is to select and adopt new instream flows that incorporate best available science.

Regulations Improve Compliance with Regs/Laws

This strategy involves improving and increasing compliance with existing regulations, laws, and permits.

Update and Improve Regulations, Policies

This strategy is to update and improve regulations (e.g. RCW, County ordinances) and policies to facilitate implementation of solutions agreed to by key parties (including state, federal, tribal, and local parties), fill regulatory gaps, and/or incorporate current best available science.

Adjudicate/Define Water Rights

This strategy involves adjudicating or otherwise defining federally-reserved and state-based water rights.

Prevent Problems from New Development

This strategy involves applying best available low impact development science and technology to prevent problems from new development occurring at the site or subdivision scale

Restoration Implement Habitat Restoration Projects

This strategy involves implementing projects to restore habitat and habitat-forming processes to address legacy and ongoing impacts of land use.

Land Acquisition, Conservation Easements, Farm Transition, and/or Landowner Agreements

This strategy involves land acquisition, conservation easements, purchase of development rights, farm transition, and/or landowner agreements to increase opportunity for restoration and/or to protect quality habitat.

Fix Problems Caused by Existing Development

This strategy involves retrofitting stormwater infrastructure to manage problems caused by existing development.

Education/Outreach Education and Outreach

This strategy includes developing and implementing a communication strategy for education and outreach to the broader public and/or targeted communities in Whatcom County to encourage environmental stewardship, increase understanding and awareness of ecosystem recovery issues and solutions, and build support for recovery and resolving water supply issues.

Provide Technical Assistance (to reduce bacterial pollution)

This strategy involves providing technical assistance to agricultural operators, landowners, and others to implement measures to reduce bacterial pollution.

Stormwater Training and Technical Assistance

This strategy involves providing training and technical assistance for landowners to install and maintain stormwater management measures and for developers to employ low impact development practices.

254

Page 13 of 14

REVIEW DRAFT – November 21, 2016 Whatcom LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plan Summary

255

Glossary

256 257 258 259 260

Conceptual Model – Conceptual models capture concepts and relationships between them. Sometimes

261 262

Ecosystem Components – Ecosystem components are the natural elements of the ecosystem. They can

263

Goal – A goal is a desired future condition.

264 265 266

Human Components (or Human Wellbeing) – Humans are part of the ecosystem. The human

267 268 269 270

Miradi – Miradi Share (Miradi) is an open source, cloud-based conservation software that is based on

271 272 273 274 275

Pressures – Pressures are human actions or natural processes that give rise to stress on the ecosystem

276 277 278 279

Results Chains – A results chain is a tool that shows how a particular action will lead to some desired

280 281 282 283 284

Vital Signs – Vital signs, in the context of Puget Sound recovery and planning, represent a range of

285

the term “situation analysis” is used to refer to a conceptual model. In the context of the LIO ecosystem recovery planning process, conceptual models are used to help build a common understanding of the context within which the LIO is operating including the ecological, social, economic, cultural, political, and institutional systems that affect the things that the LIO cares about.

include such things as individual species, habitat types, and/or ecological processes.

components of an ecosystem recovery plan are elements that may be affected by or benefit from recovery efforts.

Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. The Puget Sound recovery planning approach and the framework for the LIO planning processes uses Miradi as a way to standardize all of the Puget Sound recovery planning efforts.

but that may also provide benefits to humans. Pressures are associated with sources and stressors. Sources are the actions that contribute to the creation of stressors. Sources, although often damaging to the environment are often beneficial to humans in other ways. Stressors are the most proximate causes of ecosystem degradation, such as shoreline hardening, land conversion or altered flows.

result. In the context of ecosystem recovery planning, a results chain documents the assumptions about how actions or strategies will contribute to reducing key threats or stresses that will lead to the conservation or achieving of priority recovery targets.

overarching measures for determining the health of Puget Sound. There are indicators for each of the vital signs that are measures. For example, Chinook salmon abundance is an indicator under the Chinook Vital Sign. For more information on Puget Sound indicators and vital signs go to www.psp.wa.gov/vitalsigns