US 101 Shore Rd to Kitchen-Dick Rd (Dungeness River) Mitigation Site

USACE NWS-2009-556-DOT

Olympic Region

2018 MONITORING REPORT

Wetlands Program

Issued March 2019

Environmental Services Office

Author: Tom Mohagen

Editor:

Kristen Andrews

For additional information about this report or the WSDOT Wetlands Program, please contact:

Kristen Andrews, Wetlands Program WSDOT, Environmental Services Office P. O. Box 47332, Olympia, WA 98504 Phone: 360-570-2588 E-mail: Kristen.Andrews@wsdot.wa.gov

Monitoring reports are published on the web at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/environment/technical/disciplines/wetlands/monitoring-reports

US 101 Shore Rd to Kitchen-Dick Rd (Dungeness River) Mitigation Site

USACE NWS-2009-556-DOT

1Impact area numbers sourced from USACE # NWS-2009-556-DOT and ECY WQC #9481. 2 Mitigation area numbers sourced from Ecology WQC #9481.

General Site Information

USACE Number NWS-2009-556-DOT

Mitigation

Location

Within the lower Dungeness watershed in Sequim, WA.

LLID Number 1231291481406

Construction Date 2013-2016

Monitoring Period 2016-2026

Year of

Monitoring 3 of 10

Type of Impact Wetland Long-term Temp. Wetland Perm.

Area of Project

Impact1 0.69 acre 3.43

Type of Mitigation Wetland Re-establishment

Wetland Enhancement

Wetland Preservation

Planned Area of

Mitigation2 6.96 acres 12.23 acre 2.51 acres

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

101 Dungeness River 1 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Summary of Monitoring Results and Management Activities (2018)

Performance Standards 2018 Results3 Management Activities

Wetland hydrology Present

Native woody density of 7 plants/100ft² in the required wetland re-establishment areas (including the hummocks) east of the central ditch and the buffer planting areas. See results below for cover.

Density of 39 emergent species/m2 in emergent planting pockets See results below for cover.

90% Survival of underplanted western red cedar (Thuja plicata) 15.8% survival

Presence/absence of native tree and shrubs on the hummocks Present

Vegetation map of additional potential wetland re-establishment area Present

WA State or Clallam County-listed Class A and Class B weeds will be eradicated Present Weed control visits on 3/22, 4/09, 5/08 &, 6/05

Immediate removal and control of: purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), paleyellow iris (Iris pseudacorus), and non-native knotweeds (Polygonum cuspidatum, P.

polystachyum, P. sachalinense, and P. bohemicum) None present

Class C Noxious weeds, including reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), will not exceed 20% aerial cover over the entire mitigation site 15% cover

Wildlife habitat structures including 15 logs with root wads and three woody material piles, will be present at the mitigation site. Present

80% survival of native woody species at East and West Owl Creek 60% cover

80% survival of native woody species at Wetland A and S 80% cover

Performance Standards(Year-10)

Native woody vegetation in the wetland tree and shrub planting areas (including the hummocks) will achieve a minimum of 70% cover on the east side of the central ditch. 81% cover (CI80% = 74-88%)

3 Estimated values are presented with their corresponding statistical confidence interval. For example, 81% cover (CI80% = 74-88% cover) means we are 80% confident that the true cover value is between 74% and 88%.

101 Dungeness River 2 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Native emergent vegetation (including volunteers) in the emergent enhancement planting areas will achieve a minimum of 75% cover. 98% cover

Native woody vegetation in the buffer will achieve a minimum of 50% cover. 48% cover (CI80% = 37-58%)

Report Introduction This report summarizes third-year (Year-3) monitoring activities at the 101 Dungeness River Mitigation Site. Included are a site description, the performance standards, an explanation of monitoring methods, and an evaluation of site development. Monitoring activities included vegetation surveys, photo-documentation, and assessments of wetland hydrology. Vegetation monitoring occurred on August 13 – 15, 2018.

101 Dungeness River 3 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

What is the 101 Dungeness River Mitigation Site? This 46-acre mitigation site (Figure 1) is a re-established and enhanced wetland within the lower Dungeness watershed in Sequim, Washington. This site was created to compensate for the loss of 3.43 acre of wetlands due to road improvements along US 101 and to improve fish passage and flows in East and West Owl Creeks.

The 101 Dungeness Mitigation Site contains 10-foot-wide hummocks planted with shrubs and trees to provide micro-topography and areas of less inundation during flooding. Emergent vegetation pockets are present between the hummocks on the west side of the central ditch adding diversity to the existing emergent community. A central ditch has been plugged to increase the amount of wetland acreage and the duration of inundation and saturation. Appendix 2 includes site directions.

101 Dungeness River 4 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Figure 1 Site Sketch

101 Dungeness River 5 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

What are the performance standards for this site? Year 3 Performance Standard 1 The soils in the wetland re-establishment and enhancement areas will be inundated, saturated to the surface, or groundwater will be present within 12 inches of the surface for at least four consecutive weeks (10 percent) of the growing season in years when rainfall meets or exceeds the 30-year average. Performance Standard 2 Achieve a density of seven native woody plants, including native natural recruitment, per 100 square feet in the required wetland re-establishment areas (including the hummocks) east of the central ditch and the buffer planting areas. Performance Standard 3 Achieve a density of 39 planted emergent species per square meter in the emergent enhancement planting pockets. Performance Standard 4 The underplanted western red cedar in the wetland preservation planting area will achieve 90 percent survival. If all dead western red cedar plantings are replaced, the performance measure will be met. Performance Standard 5 Each hummock on the west side of the central ditch will contain at least one tree and three shrubs. Performance Standard 6 A vegetation map will be created for the additional potential wetland reestablishment area. The vegetation map will be included in the monitoring report in Years 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10. Performance Standard 7 Washington State-listed or Clallam County-listed Class A weeds and Class B weeds designated for control by the county weed board must be eradicated. All occurrences at the mitigation site shall be immediately reported to the site manager and an eradication program will be initiated within 30 days of the report. Performance Standard 8 If any of the following species are found on the site during the monitoring period, the site manager will initiate immediate removal and control: purple loosestrife, yellow-flag iris, non-native knotweeds, and similar related species and hybrids.

101 Dungeness River 6 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Performance Standard 9 Class C noxious weeds, including reed canarygrass, will not exceed 20 percent aerial cover over the entire mitigation site. Performance Standard 10 Wildlife habitat structures including 15 logs with root wads and three woody material piles, will be present at the mitigation site. Performance Standard 11 Achieve 80 percent survival of native woody species within the long-term temporary impact replanting areas at Wetlands A and S. (Survival can include native natural recruitment.) Performance Standard 12 Achieve 80 percent survival of native woody species within the riparian areas at East and West Owl Creek 10. (Survival can include native natural recruitment.) Year 10 Performance Standard 1 Native woody vegetation in the wetland tree and shrub planting areas (including the hummocks) will achieve a minimum of 70 percent cover on the east side of the central ditch. Performance Standard 2 Native emergent vegetation (including volunteers) in the emergent enhancement planting areas will achieve a minimum of 75 percent cover. Performance Standard 3 Native woody vegetation in the buffer will achieve a minimum of 50 percent cover. Appendix 1 shows the As Built (WSDOT 2016).

101 Dungeness River 7 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

How were the performance standards evaluated? WSDOT staff collected hydrology data using methods described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western

Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE 2010) (Performance Standard 1). Shallow groundwater monitoring wells were installed following the Corps of Engineers guidance (USACE 2005) to evaluate groundwater during the growing season. The tables and figure below document the sampling methodology used for the remaining vegetative performance standards (PS) as required by the mitigation plan or permits. For additional details on the methods see the WSDOT Wetland Mitigation Site Monitoring Methods Paper (WSDOT 2008). Table 1 Site Sampling Design (2016)

PS 2 PS 2 PS 3 PS 4 PS 5 PS 7 PS 8 PS 9 PS 10 PS 11 PS 12

AttributeDensity Density Cover Survival

Presence/

Absence

Presence/

Absence

Presence/

Absence Cover

Presence/

Absence Survival Survival

Target population Native

Woody

Native

Woody Herbaceous

Native

Woody

Native

Woody

Noxious

Weeds/

Invasive sp.

Noxious

Weeds

Noxious

Weeds

Habitat

Structures

Native

Woody

Native

Woody

Zone Buffer Wetland Emergent Preserve Hummock Entire site Entire site Entire site Entire site Riparian Riparian

Sample method N/A N/A Qualitative

Total

Count

Total

Count Qualitative Qualitative Qualitative Qualitative Qualitative Qualitative

SU length N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

SU width N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Points per SU N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Total # of SU N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Other Owl Creek Wet A & S

101 Dungeness River 8 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Figure 2 Site Sampling Design (2018)

Table 2 Site Sampling Design (2018)

Placement of Wetland Baseline: The wetland baseline was placed roughly parallel to the central ditch Length 226m Transects 1-15 Placement of Buffer Baseline: The buffer baseline was placed parallel to the western fence line. Length 371m Transects 1-16 A vegetative map of the additional potential wetland reestablishment area is included in Appendix 4 to as required by Performance Standard 7. A total count of all habitat structures was conducted to meet Performance Standard

10.

PS 1 PS 2 PS 3Attribute Cover Cover Cover

Target population

Native

Woody Herbaceous

Native

Woody

Zone Wetland Emergent Buffer

Sample method

Line

Intercept Qualitative Line Intercept

SU length 30m N/A 20

SU width N/A N/A N/A

Points per SU N/A N/A N/A

Total # of SU 29 N/A 15

Other

Year 10

101 Dungeness River 9 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

How is the site developing? The site has developed quite rapidly and is meeting all of the final-year Year-10 performance standards except for native woody cover in the buffer and the under-planted red cedars in the preserve. The red cedars will not be replanted because they are located within the zone that will be impacted by the county levee. If that project does not go forward, this area will be replanted at that time. The buffer is only two percent away from meeting the final-year performance standard and will most likely meet it next year. The hummocks are doing quite well and visually stand out across the enhancement planting zone. Red alder (Alnus rubra) are attaining heights up to ten meters and willows (Salix spp.) are reaching approximately eight meters. The emergent depressions have been colonized by native herbaceous vegetation and nearly all of them are at 100 percent cover. Invasive cover is relatively low across the site. The site is providing a wide variety of wildlife habitats for various species. Passerines use the site and multiple nests have been observed, northern harriers use the site as hunting grounds, and there is an active red-tail hawk nest. Evidence of deer and elk are present across the site. A mink was seen this year hunting small mammals. Amphibians, such as red-legged and chorus frogs, are using the various water regimes for breeding and dispersal.

101 Dungeness River 10 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Year-3 Results for Performance Standard 1 (Wetland hydrology): The wetland re-establishment and enhancement areas were saturated or inundated much of the year. Both wells indicated water level fluctuations in March and April 2018. Water was consistently observed in the upper 12 inches of the soil surface during this time (See Appendix 3, tables 1 and 2). Inundation was observed in August 2018 as well. Results for Performance Standard 2 (Density of 7 native woody species per 100 square feet): Native woody cover in both the wetland and buffer have developed on a faster timeline and both zones were sampled for final-year performance standards. See results for Year-10 below. Results for Performance Standard 3 (Density of 39 planted native emergent species per square meter): Native herbaceous cover in the emergent enhancement areas has developed on a faster timeline and was sampled for final-year performance standards. See results for Year-10 below.

Results for Performance Standard 4 (90% survival of under-planted western red cedar): Six western red cedars were counted in the wetland preservation planting area. Thirty-eight cedars were planted within this zone, according to the as-built. Estimated survival is 15.8%.

Photo 1 Standing water in the wetland (March 2018)

101 Dungeness River 11 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Results for Performance Standard 5 (Presence/absence of one shrub and one tree per hummock): Observation occurred on fifty out of fifty-two hummocks. Out of the fifty observed hummocks, only one lacked the required tree to meet the performance standard. The vast majority of the hummocks had two trees and at least six shrubs (Photo 2). Results for Performance Standard 6 (Vegetative map of potential wetland enhancement area): Very little has changed in the potential wetland enhancement area since 2016. This area consists primarily of non-native pasture grasses. The dominant species identified include redtop (Agrostis gigantea), quackgrass (Elymus repens), and tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus) ((Photo 3). Near the levee set-back the grasses become more infested with Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and along the center ditch it becomes infested with poison hemlock (Conium maculatum). There is less poison hemlock than in 2016 and more horsetail (Equisetum sp) in the southeast corner. Results for Performance Standard 7 (Removal of Class A and B Noxious weeds): No Class A noxious weeds were observed on site. Poison hemlock was the only Class B weed observed. There are patches of poison hemlock located in the southcentral portion of the site along the central ditch that show signs of herbicide treatment.

Photo 2 Hummock in wetland enhancement (August 2018

Photo 3 Potential wetland enhancement (August 2018)

101 Dungeness River 12 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Results for Performance Standard 8 (Control of targeted noxious weeds): None of the targeted species were observed on site this sampling season. Paleyellow iris (Iris pseudacorus) which, was observed in 2016 is longer present around the pre-existing pound in the southwest corner of the site. Results for Performance Standard 9 (Class C noxious weeds and reed canarygrass will not exceed 20% cover): Cover of invasive species on the site is qualitatively estimated to be 15 percent. The vast majority of the cover is composed of Cananda thistle, which is encroaching from the levy setback. In addition, there are scattered patches of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), reed canarygrass, and bull thistle (Cirsium

vulgare). Results for Performance Standard 10 (Presence of wildlife habitat structures): All of the wildlife habitat structures were accounted for, 15 logs with root wads and three woody material piles. Results for Performance Standard 11 (80 percent survival of native woody species (Wetland A &S)):

The cover of native woody species at wetland A was estimated at 55 percent. Native woody cover at wetland S was estimated at 100 percent. The combined cover estimate is 60 percent. An abundance of volunteer red alder (Alnus rubra) at both planting areas helped to increase the cover estimate.

Photo 4 Woody cover in tree and shrub planting area (August 2018)

Photo 5 Woody cover in the buffer (August 2018)

101 Dungeness River 13 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Results for Performance Standard 13 (80 percent survival of native woody species (Owl Creek)): The estimate of native woody cover at East and West Owl Creek is 80 percent. The cover at the West Owl Creek (re-routed channel) is 95 percent, north East Owl Creek 25 percent, and south East Owl Creek is 45 percent. Year-10

Results for Performance Standard 1 (70 percent cover of native woody species in the wetland): Cover of native woody species in the wetland is estimated at 81% cover (CI80% = 74-88%) (Photo 4). This exceeds the final year performance standard. The dominant species include Hooker's willow (Salix hookeriana), red alder, Nootka rose, and salmonberry. Results for Performance Standard 2 (75 percent cover of native herbaceous species): Cover of native herbaceous species is estimated at 98 percent. Of the 20 emergent planting pockets, only eighteen were found. Cover in the emergent planting depressions ranged from 85 percent to 100 percent cover. These consists of primarily one to three species of native emergents in each depression: soft-stem bulrush (Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani), swordleaf rush (Juncus

ensifolius), small-fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), and soft rush (Juncus effusus). This exceeds the final year performance standard. Results for Performance Standard 3 (50 percent cover of native woody species in the buffer): The cover of native woody species in the buffer is 48% cover (CI80% = 37-58%). This is just short of meeting the final year performance standard of 50% cover. The dominant species include Hooker's willow, red alder, and Nootka rose. What is planned for this site? The region has plans to continue weed control.

101 Dungeness River 14 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Appendix 1 – As-Built (from WSDOT 2001)

101 Dungeness River 15 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

101 Dungeness River 16 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

101 Dungeness River 17 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Appendix 2 – Photo Points The photographs below were taken from permanent photo-points on August 15, 2018 and document current site development.

Photo Point 1a

Photo Point 2a

Photo Point 1b

Photo Point 2b

101 Dungeness River 18 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

The photographs below were taken from permanent photo-points on August 15, 2018 and document current site development.

Photo Point 2c

Photo Point 4

Photo Point 3

Photo Point 5

101 Dungeness River 19 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

The photographs below were taken from permanent photo-points on August 15, 2018 and document current site development.

Photo Point 6a

Photo Point 6c

Photo Point 6b

Photo Point 7

101 Dungeness River 20 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

The photographs below were taken from permanent photo-points on August 15, 2018 and document current site development.

Photo Point 8 Driving Directions:

From I-5, take Exit 104 to US 101 North and travel ~ 97 miles to the Sequim Avenue/City Center exit. Turn right on Sequim Avenue. Take the second exit from the roundabout onto Sequim Avenue. Continue on Sequim-Dungeness Way. Turn left onto Woodcock Road. Turn right onto Towne Road. The site is near the northern extent of Towne Road on the east side. A key should be obtained from region personnel.

101 Dungeness River 21 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Appendix 3 – Data Tables Table 1. Well 1 Hydrology Observations (GMW1)

101 Dungeness River 22 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Table 2. Well 2 Hydrology Observations (GMW2)

101 Dungeness River 23 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Well Locations

101 Dungeness River 24 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

Literature Cited

1. [ECY] Washington State Department of Ecology. 2012. Water Quality Certification Order #9481.

2. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Vicksburg (MS): US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Technical Report Y-87-1. Available at: http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/wlman87.pdf

3. [NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US) [Internet]. 2016. NOAA Online Weather Data. National Weather Service Forecast Office. Available at: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=sew

4. [USACE] US Army Corps of Engineers. 2005. Technical Standard for Water-Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites. ERDC TN-WRAP-05-2. Available at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2017/07/24/Env-Wet-WaterTableTechStds.pdf

5. [NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service [Internet]. 2016. Field Office Technical Guide - Climate Data. US Department of Agriculture. Available at: http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/cgibin/getwetco.pl?state=wa

6. [USACE] US Army Corps of Engineers. 2009. Department of the Army Individual Permit Number NWS-2009-556-DOT.

7. [USACE] US Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), Wakeley JS, Lichvar RW, Noble CV, editors. Vicksburg (MS): US Army Engineer Research and Development Center. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Available at: https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Regulatory-Program-and-Permits/reg_supp/

8. [WSDOT] Washington State Department of Transportation. 2008. WSDOT Wetland Mitigation Site Monitoring Methods. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C211AB59-D5A2-4AA2-8A76-3D9A77E01203/0/MethodsWhitePaper052004.pdf

9. [WSDOT] Washington State Department of Transportation. 2012. US 101 Shore RD to Kitchen-Dick RD Widening Mitigation Plan. Tumwater (WA): Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympic Region.

101 Dungeness River 25 2018 Annual Monitoring Report

10. [WSDOT] Washington State Department of Transportation. 2016. US 101 Shore RD to Kitchen-Dick RD Widening Mitigation Site As-built Planting Plan.