Watershed Analysis

1
Watershed Analysis

• Presented to the
• Washington State Forest Practices Board
• By Mary McDonald and Marc Engel
• Department of Natural Resources, Forest Practices
  Division
• Special Meeting of the Forest Practices Board,
• March 31, 2009

2
Watershed Analysis

• During 2008 the Board directed staff to perform
  forest practices program review of Watershed
  Analysis and Forest Practices Application Review
  and Approval Processes

3
Watershed Analysis PresentationTwo Parts

• Forest Practices Application (FPA) review
• Findings
• Actions initiated by Forest Practices Program
• Review of Watershed Analysis statutes and rules
• Findings
• Staff recommendations

4
FPA Review

• What is a Watershed Administrative Unit (WAU)?
• Assessments of DNR-identified WAUs
• WAUs usually between 10,000 and 50,000 acres
• WAUs defined by hydrology and geomorphology
• NOTE there are 846 WAUs of which 466 are under
  forest practices jurisdiction.

5
FPA Review

• What is Watershed Analysis?
• Biological and physical assessment of a watershed
• Looks at cumulative effects of forest practices
  on resources addressed by Forest Practices Act
  and rules
• Includes evaluation modules

6
FPA Review

• Watershed Analysis Modules
• Mass Wasting
• Surface erosion
• Hydrologic change
• Stream channel
• Fish habitat
• Public works
• Cultural resources

7
FPA Review

• Watershed Analysis
• All Watershed Analysis subject to SEPA review and
  DNR approval
• Forest practices activities incorporating
  prescriptions are not subject to SEPA review for
  the specific issue covered

8
FPA Review

• Mass Wasting Prescriptions
• Harvesting
• No ground system logging
• Cable logging permitted with partial suspension
• Road Building
• No new road construction on to scree slopes

9
Watershed Analysis Mass Wasting Prescriptions in
FPAs

• WAC 222-16-050(1)(d)(iii) directs that certain
  FPAs are not to be classified as Class IV-Special
  for potentially unstable slopes or landforms if 3
  criteria apply
• within a WAU with an approved watershed analysis
  and
• conducted according to an approved watershed
  analysis prescription and
• prescription is specific to the site or
  situation, as opposed to a prescription that
  calls for additional analysis

10
Review Findings

• The three criteria are not always correctly
  applied
• Some FPAs are being classified as Class III
  rather than Class IV-Special based on watershed
  analysis prescriptions that are not specific or
  call for additional analysis.

11
Review Findings

• Specific vs. Non-specific prescriptions
• Specific Prescriptions
• No road construction except where slopes are less
  than 40 and are stable
• Non specific prescriptions/additional analysis
• Proposed harvest unit shall be reviewed under
  direction of a qualified geologist

12
Review Findings

• 21 of mass wasting prescriptions were determined
  by FP to be specific
• If FPA has a WA and is proposing an activity on
  an unstable landform that is utilizing
  nonspecific mass wasting prescriptions, the FPA
  is a Class IV-Special

13
Actions Initiated

• Watershed Analysis Worksheet required
• Guidance Spreadsheet identifying specific
  prescriptions
• Review/training of region/division staff
• Geologist review sample to verify specific
  prescriptions

14
Actions Initiated

• Resources regarding mass wasting prescriptions
• Programmatic FPA review and documentation
  expectations implemented
• Master Forest Practices Application log sheets
  used by all regions
• Interactions with DOT concerning FPAs

15
Review of Watershed Analysis Statutes and Rules

• The Board asked staff to recommendation how to
  eliminate Watershed Analysis. Staff found
• Has been treated as legacy under forests and fish
  rules
• Training is not being offered and as a result,
  there are no certified experts
• 21 of mass wasting prescriptions are specific

16
Watershed analysis modules

• Mass Wasting
• Surface erosion
• Hydrologic change
• Stream channel
• Fish habitat
• Public works
• Cultural resources

17
Class IV-Special Trigger for Unstable Slopes

• WAC 222-16-050(1)(d) Timber harvest, or
  construction of roads, landings, gravel pits,
  rock quarries, or spoil disposal areas, on
  potentially unstable slopes or landforms (with)
  the potential to deliver sediment or debris to a
  public resource or that has the potential to
  threaten public safety

18
Exemption from Class IV-Special

• (iii) An application (is) not classified as Class
  IV-Special for potentially unstable slopes or
  landforms if     (A) The proposed forest
  practice is located within a WAU that is subject
  to an approved watershed analysis     (B) The
  forest practices are to be conducted in
  accordance with an approved prescription from the
  watershed analysis (or as modified through the
  five-year review process) and     (C) The
  applicable prescription is specific to the site
  or situation, as opposed to a prescription that
  calls for additional analysis. The need for an
  expert to determine whether the site contains
  specific landforms will not be considered
  "additional analysis," as long as specific
  prescriptions are established for such landforms.

19
Three ways change to the Watershed Analysis rules

• Legislation
• Courts
• Adaptive management

20
Staff Recommendation

• Board direct staff to prepare
• A mass wasting adaptive management proposal and
• Answers to the questions listed in Part 3.1,
  Proposal Initiation of Board Manual Section 22,
  Guidelines for the Adaptive Management Program.

21
Staff Recommendation

• Proposal is to change the rules through the
  Adaptive Management program to
• Remove the exemption for mass wasting
  prescriptions from the definition of Class
  IV-Special in WAC 222-16-050 and to
• Add language in WAC 222-22-070 establishing that
  the current rules supersede all mass wasting
  prescriptions.

22
Staff Recommendation

• Board directs staff to present for review the
  mass wasting adaptive management proposal at
  their May 20th meeting.
• With Board approval the proposal will be
  forwarded to the Administrator to initiate
  review under Part 3 of the Adaptive Management
  Program.

23
Questions