Strategy Table of Contents

• I. Introduction, Acronyms
• II. Executive Summary
• III. Project Priorities
• A. Mission and Philosophy
• B. Stocks and their Status
• C. Priority Stocks and Recovery Goals
• D. Prioritized Watersheds
• E. Watershed Processes and Habitat Features
• F. Priority Actions and Areas Strategy
• G. Community Issues and Support
• H. Community Outreach Plan

Return to NOPLEGroup.org Site Map

List of Figures, Tables and Appendices

• Figure 1 Strategy Development Process
• Figure 2 Historic and Current Productivity
• Figure 3 Watershed Basin Area
• Figure 4 Tier Designations
• Table 1 Strategy Development Criteria
• Table 2 Stock Status & Trends
• Table 3 NOP Stakeholders
• Table 4 Current Hatchery Information
• Appendix A Watershed Data Matrix
• Appendix B Strategy Development Data
• Appendix D Watershed Pages and Nearshore Strategy
• Appendix E Documented Limiting Factors & Watershed Processes
• Appendix F NOPLE Map & Area

The North Olympic Peninsula Lead Entity (NOPLE) geographic area is an exceptionally large and diverse region within which a multitude of salmonid stocks evolved. For more details about the NOPLE geographic region, click here. For more information about the NOPLE organization and stakeholders, click here. For more information about specific watersheds, click here.

What's new since 5th SRFB Round

• Watershed Pages are new for 2005, are still draft, and pages for all watersheds aren’t yet drafted. However, this material provides more detail than was previously presented about watershed-related information (e.g., priorities). See Watershed Pages (Appendix D).
• Priority stocks are identified more clearly, per WRIA, see Priority Stocks and Recovery Goals (Section C), and per watershed, see Watershed Pages (Appendix D). In addition to ESA species, NOPLE priority stocks are those stocks that are considered critical or uniquely vulnerable, or are of particular ecological and/or economic importance.
• Priority watershed processes and habitat features are now clearly identified per WRIA and nearshore area, see Watershed Processes and Habitat Features (Section E), as well as per watershed, see Watershed Pages (Appendix D).
• The illustrations in the below Strategy Summary highlight the priority stocks, priority watershed processes, priority habitat features, priority limiting factors, and priority actions & areas for the WRIA 19 watersheds and the WRIA 18 and 19 Strait nearshore.
• The goals of Community Outreach are now more specific and have been prioritized. See Community Outreach Plan (Section H). In addition, a specific process has been described for building community support, where needed. See Community Issues and Concerns (Section G).

I. Specificity and Focus of Strategy

1. Species and stocks

• Identify all of the stocks in the WRIA(s) comprising the lead entity area.
  • The Washington State Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory (SaSI) identifies 88 unique populations of salmon stocks in the NOPLE geographic area, which make up 15 ESUs/DPS). See Stocks and their Status (Section B) for more information about the salmon stocks in the NOPLE area.
  • The Shared Strategy Regional Nearshore Approach (2005, p. 6-22), indicates that the Eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca nearshore (WRIA 17 and 18 nearshore) is the migration corridor for all 22 populations of Puget Sound Chinook as well as all populations of Hood Canal/East Strait of Juan de Fuca Summer Chum.
    
• What is the status for each stock?
  • The strength of the NOPLE stocks ranges from strong to extremely weak. Four NOPLE-area ESUs/DPS are currently listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), with two additional ESUs under consideration for listing. See StockLinks for the ESA status of each ESU and the WDFW status for each SaSi stock in the NOPLE Area, and Stocks and their Status (Section B) for additional information about the status of salmon stocks in the NOPLE area.
    
• What stock(s) are the highest priorities for habitat restoration and/or protection actions?
  • In addition to ESA species, NOPLE priority stocks are those stocks that are considered critical or uniquely vulnerable, or are of particular ecological and/or economic importance. For a listing of priority stocks per WRIA, see Priority Stocks and Recovery Goals (Section C) and per watershed, see Watershed Pages (Appendix D).
  • Watersheds with ESA species and/or multiple priority stocks have been designated Priority Watersheds: (potentially) high productive watersheds are Tier 1 and (potentially) moderate productive watersheds are Tier 2; watersheds without ESA listed stocks or lower productivity and less diversity are either Tier 3 or 4. See Prioritized Watersheds (Section D).
  • The highest priority stocks for NOPLE are those stocks identified as priority stocks in the respective Watershed Pages of Tier 1 and 2 watersheds.
    
• What rationale is identified in the strategy for these priorities?
  • NOPLE encompasses two entirely different regions containing completely different stocks (Puget Sound (WRIAs 18 & 19), and Coastal (WRIA 20)). It is not feasible to prioritize stocks across the entire region. Stocks that do not occur in the Coastal region are of a lower priority for recovery there, than stocks that do occur in the Coastal region, especially when these stocks are crucial to the Coastal economy -- and vice versa. See Priority Stocks and Recovery Goals (Section C).
  • Recent history shows that strong stocks are declining, and if this trend continues, those stocks may become weak. NOPLE has concluded that an overall recovery strategy that combines projects that: a.) maintain and improve habitat integrity so as to protect and strengthen wild stocks, and b.) restore habitat for the formerly productive but currently weak wild stocks, holds the most promise for salmon recovery in the NOPLE area and probably elsewhere across the Pacific Northwest. For a detailed explanation of the NOPLE Strategy rationale, see Mission and Philosophy (Section A).
    
• What are the project ranking criteria that reflect the priorities?
  • See Question 4A of the NOPLE Application Addendum.
  • See Section A of the NOPLE Project Score Sheet.
    

2. Watershed and marine ecological processes

• What are the watershed and marine ecological processes (i.e., habitat forming processes) that are limiting factors for the stocks prioritized in the strategy?
  • Per Watershed Processes and Habitat Features (Section E) , the NOPLE-wide watershed processes that are limiting stocks are:
    • hydrologic regime,
    • sediment supply,
    • riparian processes,
    • organic matter flow,
    • heat and light inputs,
    • nutrient and chemical inputs.
  • Per NOPLE Nearshore Strategy (p. 1) the NOPLE-wide marine ecological processes are:
    • hydrologic processes (both marine and riverine)
    • wind and current driven sediment processes
    • light
    • water quality
• What are the highest priority limiting watershed and marine ecological processes in the strategy?
  • The highest priority limiting watershed and marine ecological processes are identified by WRIA and nearshore area in Watershed Processes and Habitat Features (Section E)
  • Because stock distributions and watershed processes differ so substantially across the vast NOPLE area, NOPLE has chosen to apply the prioritization process described in the SRFB Guide to Strategy Development to each individual watershed, based on the priority stock(s) that are present in that watershed, all as reflected in each respective Watershed Page (Appendix D) and in the NOPLE Nearshore Strategy.
    
• What rationale is identified in the strategy for these priorities?
  • Per WRIA, these priorities are based on the information compiled by the NWIFC in State of the Watersheds 2004, which depicts status and trends in salmonid habitat within WRIAs 1-23, using data from SHIAPP, WDOE, WDFW, WCC, USGS, DNR, IAC and others.
  • Per nearshore area, the rationale for these priorities is explained in the NOPLE Nearshore Strategy.
  • Per Watershed, these priorities are based on the latest and most relevant watershed-specific information available on stocks, their habitats, habitat-forming watershed processes and limiting features. For a bibliography of available information, see Documentation (Appendix E).
    
• What are the project ranking criteria that reflect the above priorities?
  • See Question 4C of the NOPLE Application Addendum.
  • See Section C2 of the NOPLE Project Score Sheet.
    

3. Habitat features

• What are the habitat features (i.e., habitat conditions) that are limiting factors for the stocks prioritized in the strategy?
  • Per Watershed Processes and Habitat Features (Section E), the NOPLE-wide habitat features that are limiting stocks are:
    • Insufficient in-steam flow or increased peak flows
    • Increased or decreased sedimentation
    • Lack of LWD
    • Lack of pools
    • Increased water temperatures
    • Detrimental water quality
  • Per NOPLE Nearshore Strategy (DRAFT 2005, p. 1) the NOPLE-wide habitat features that are limiting stocks are:
    • Lack of habitat in lower rivers and estuaries
    • Lack of habitat and forage fish along shoreline
    • Detrimental water quality
• What are the highest priority limiting habitat features in the strategy?
  • The highest priority limiting habitat features are identified
    • by WRIA and nearshore area in Watershed Processes and Habitat Features (Section E) and
    • by watershed in paragraph B (Salmon Habitat Recovery Priorities) of each respective Watershed Page (Appendix D)
• What rationale is identified in the strategy for these priorities?
  • The watershed-specific priorities set forth in each respective Watershed Page (Appendix D) and in the NOPLE Nearshore Strategy
    • have been identified by watershed-specific stakeholders and experts as limiting the priority stocks located in that watershed and
    • are based on the latest and most relevant watershed-specific information available on the priority stocks, their lifecycle, and habitat needs, such as a Shared Strategy Chapter, Watershed Habitat Assessment, Watershed Analysis, NOPLE Summary of Limiting Factors and Action Recommendation Priorities for WRIAs 17, 18, 19, or 20 (prepared by the NOPLE TRG specifically for this purpose), the information compiled by the NWIFC in State of the Watersheds 2004, the relevant Limiting Factor Analysis Report, Stakeholder expertise, and the like, as identified in the Bibliography (Paragraph A.6) of each Watershed Page (Appendix D)).
• What are the project ranking criteria that reflect the above priorities?
  • See Question 4B of the NOPLE Application Addendum.
  • See Section B1 of the NOPLE Project Score Sheet.

4. Actions and geographic areas

• Based on scientific information, what specific actions for restoration and/or protection of targeted habitat features and watershed and marine ecological processes are identified in the strategy?
  • The NOPLE Priority Actions and Areas Strategy (Section F) lists the following major prioritized actions:
    1. Analyze the site
    2. Protect the best
    3. Reconnect healthy habitat
    4. Fix bad roads
    5. Restore riparian processes
    6. Restore instream habitat
  • Per NOPLE Nearshore Strategy (p. 5), the "goal of NOPLE's nearshore strategy is to a) protect the most important physical forming processes and functioning nearshore habitats, and b) restore impaired habitat forming processes and function important for salmonid recovery."
    
• What are the highest priorities among those specific actions for restoration and/or protection of targeted habitat features and watershed and marine ecological processes identified in the strategy?
  • The highest priority actions within each watershed
    • are described in paragraph B.5 of each Watershed Page (Appendix D) and
  • are consistent with the logic and recommendations of the Priority Actions and Areas Strategy (Section F)
  • The highest priority actions within each nearshore area are described in the NOPLE Nearshore Strategy (p. 2 and 3).

• What are the specific geographic areas associated with prioritized actions identified in the strategy?
  • NOPLE-wide priority watersheds are identified in Prioritized Watersheds (Section D) and determined by the NOPLE LEG and TRG.
  • Watershed-specific priority areas are identified in paragraph B.5 of each relevant Watershed Page (Appendix D) by Watershed-specific Stakeholders.
  • Nearshore priority areas associated with priority actions are identified in the WRIA-specific tables that accompany the NOPLE Nearshore Strategy.

• What rationale is identified in the strategy for these priorities?
  • The NOPLE LEG and TRG have determined that the NOPLE-wide priority watersheds offer the highest potential in recovering the NOPLE-wide priority stocks, as described in detail in Prioritized Watersheds (Section D).
  • The Watershed Stakeholders use their unique watershed-specific expertise and
    • follow the prioritization process set forth in the Salmon Habitat Recovery Priorities (Paragraph B) of the Watershed Template (which is based on the SRFB Guide to Strategy Development), and
    • apply the logic and recommendations of the Priority Actions and Areas Strategy (Section F) to the recommendations and conclusions of the latest and most relevant watershed-specific documentation available.
  • The Priority Actions and Areas Strategy (Section F) is based on Roni et al. (2002), a review of the literature on the effectiveness of salmon restoration projects. It provides guidance for allocating monies spent on restoration of Pacific Northwest watersheds inhabited by anadromous salmonids, and it is based on the philosophy that watershed restoration should focus on restoring natural processes that create and maintain habitat rather than manipulating instream habitat.
  • The priorities identified in the NOPLE Nearshore Strategy are the result the NOPLE Nearshore Subcommittee applying the prioritization process set forth in the SRFB "Guidance for Protection and Restoration of the Nearshore Ecosystems of Puget Sound" to the relevant scientific information, some of which is reflected at the bottom of the Nearshore Page.
    
• What are the project ranking criteria that reflect the above priorities?
  • See Question 4D and 4E of the NOPLE Application Addendum.
  • See Sections A and B of the NOPLE Project Score Sheet.
    

5. Community issues

• What community issues and concerns regarding salmon habitat protection and restoration are identified in the strategy?
  • It is the goal of NOPLE to achieve genetically diverse, self-sustaining, salmon populations that will support healthy ecosystems as well as ceremonial, subsistence, recreational, and commercial fisheries. See Mission and Philosophy (Section A).
  • Cultural and economic issues are considered in identifying priority stocks. See Priority Stocks and Recovery Goals (Section C).
  • Socio-political issues are considered in identifying priority watersheds. See Prioritized Watersheds (Section D).
  • Watershed Stakeholder input and feedback are considered in developing watershed-specific priorities. See Watershed Pages (Appendix D).
  • Community group support is considered in prioritizing project lists. See Project Priorities (Section III).
    
• What priority actions are proposed in the strategy for building or maintaining community support for salmon protection and restoration efforts?
  • The Community Outreach Plan (Section H) lists the following prioritized actions, and also includes an implementation plan.
  1. Assist and/or refer potential habitat recovery applicants to relevant resources.
  2. Invite and involve stakeholders (including community) in setting habitat priorities and implementing recovery, and encourage and assist the formation of watershed-based stewardship groups to reach out to others within the watershed.
  3. Educate and direct the local general public (land-owners, residents) to local salmon and watershed information, recovery resources, and citizen involvement opportunities
  4. Inform local governments of efforts and priorities and seek their support
  5. Showcase local salmon recovery efforts.
     
• What specific actions are proposed in the strategy for building or maintaining community support for the highest biological priority actions and areas? What rationale is identified in the strategy for establishing these priorities?
  • Communities Issues and Concerns (Section I) provides the following:
    " To garner support for high priority actions where such is lacking, NOPLE believes that the best way to do so is through educating and involving watershed stakeholders and by providing those watershed stakeholders the means to educate those more reluctant stakeholders in their watersheds. Landowners are much more likely to listen to and follow the example of their neighbors. Through the process of constructing and updating Watershed Pages, interested stakeholders become educated of where the priorities are in their watershed and how to access the resources available for addressing them. Stakeholders can then use that information to communicate with their more reluctant neighbor landowners. This Strategy is carried out through the NOPLE Community Outreach Plan."
    
• What types of biologically based high priority projects, areas, and actions do not currently enjoy the community support necessary for successful implementation, and why?
• Communities Issues and Concerns (Section I) provides the following:
  • Not widely supported are actions to remove existing bluff bulkheading and riprap, because homeowners may believe that doing so might affect the stability of developed properties located above.
  • Also not widely supported are high-cost actions within urban areas that are likely to be of low certainty of success or benefit to salmon, with such an abundance of alternate opportunities available for priority projects with high certainty of success and benefit to salmon.
    
• What community values are identified in the strategy that will be taken into consideration in evaluating and ranking projects?
  • The NOPLE CFG Project Evaluation Criteria ask citizens to provide the following "socio-political" feedback on projects:
    • Will this project improve community support for salmon recovery?
    • Will this project employ displaced natural resource workers? ("Natural resource worker" is defined as follows: timber harvesters, fishermen, or individuals displaced from government positions in natural resources.)
    • Are the economic benefits to the local community that are associated with, or will result from, this project significant?
    • Does the project include an effective outreach/education component?
    • Will the project promote a diverse cultural interaction through partnerships with other governments, organizations or the local community?
    • Will the project support the goals of a local watershed, or nearshore stewardship group, provided one exists in the geographic unit targeted by this project?
• What are the project ranking criteria that reflect the priorities identified in the strategy?
  • See Question 4F of the NOPLE Application Addendum.
  • See "Citizen Facilitation Groups" Section in Score and Rank Merge Process
    
• What process is identified in the strategy that will provide for effective evaluation and weighing of community values and taking these values into consideration when developing and prioritizing project lists?
  • The LEG section of the NOPLE Score and Rank Merge Process states that
    • "In making adjustments to the [TRG] Baseline Prioritized List of Projects, The LEG will consider all the TRG and CFG deliverables, as well as the amount of SRFB funds requested (especially if large compared to expected SRFB funds available for distribution), the amount of match, any SRFB label as “project of concern,” as well as any additional socio-political, community value, and regional equity considerations brought forward by the respective LEG members.
    • The LEG will decide, by majority of LEG group membership (6 out of 10), the final prioritized list of projects to be submitted to the SRFB, and will provide explanations of adjustments made by the LEG to the Baseline Prioritized List of Projects.

6. Certainty

• How well supported are hypotheses/ assumptions for (1) attributes (e.g., abundance, productivity distribution, diversity), and (2) watershed processes and habitat conditions, that are most limiting fish response? What is the nature of the data to support these hypotheses? [Watershed Data Quality]
  • Recognizing that stock information from SASSI and the Limiting Factors Analyses may be either outdated or incomplete for our purposes, the NOPLE TRG has updated and added to that information as an aid in developing the NOPLE Strategy, as reflected in Stock Status and Trends (Table 2), Watershed Data Matrix (Appendix A), and Current Hatchery Information (Table 4).
  • Per WRIA, priorities are based on the information compiled by the NWIFC in State of the Watersheds 2004, which depicts status and trends in salmonid habitat within WRIAs 1-23, using data from SHIAPP, WDOE, WDFW, WCC, USGS, DNR, IAC and others.
  • Per watershed, priorities are established from a review of the latest and most relevant information available on stocks, watershed processes and habitat features, as reflected in paragraph A of each Watershed Pages (Appendix D). Such information may include Shared Strategy Chapter, Watershed Habitat Assessment, Watershed Analysis, Reports, Studies, Limiting Factor Analysis, Stakeholder expertise, and the like. See Documentation (Appendix E) for a limited listing of documentation available.
  • Priority actions and areas are determined by watershed-specific stakeholders following the Watershed Page Template (reflecting the prioritization process described in the SRFB Guide to Strategy Development),and applying the Priority Actions and Areas Strategy (Section F) (based on a review of the literature on the effectiveness of salmon restoration projects) to the recommendations and conclusions of the latest and most relevant documentation available.
    
• How well have the habitat actions been shown to work? [Empirical Support]
  • NOPLE keeps track of salmon habitat recovery projects implemented in the NOPLE-area, and regularly publishes reports on the status of all funded projects as well as implementation reports for individual projects, where available. These reports, and extensive additional monitoring information, are available in the Monitoring Section.
  • The NOPLE committees meet regularly to consider whether new information justifies re-addressing NOPLE-wide Priority Stock and Priority Watershed designations. Watershed Stakeholders also meet regularly to continue the process of identifying watershed-based priority actions and areas as reflected in the Watershed Pages (Appendix D).
    

II. Fit of the Project List to the Strategy or Recovery Plan

7. Actions and geographic areas

• Based on scientific information and assessment of community interests, to what extent does the project list address the highest priority actions and areas identified in the strategy?
  • See Project Fit to Strategy Explanation
• To what extent does the project list benefit the highest priority stocks, limiting watershed and marine ecological processes, and limiting habitat features identified in the strategy?
  • See Project Fit to Strategy Summary.
    

8. Fit of project ranking

• To what extent does the rank order of the project list address the highest priorities in the strategy for the
  following: Stocks, Limiting watershed processes, Limiting habitat features, Actions, Geographic areas, Community interests
  • See Project Fit to Strategy Summary.

III. Relationships between Strategies, Recovery Plans, and Project Lists (not rated)

• To what extent is the strategy included in a regional salmon recovery plan prepared by a regional salmon recovery organization in your area?
  • See Recovery Plans.
    
• Clarify how the project list reflects the priorities identified in the regional salmon recovery plan.
  • ESA-listed species are NOPLE-wide Priority Stocks in the NOPLE Strategy.
  • NOPLE watersheds with ESA species are tier 1 priority watersheds in the NOPLE Strategy.
  • Watershed-based priority actions and areas are based on determining what watershed processes and habitat features limit the ESA-listed, NOPLE-wide priority stocks that occur in the watershed, all as reflected in the relevant Watershed Page in the NOPLE Strategy.
    
• Clarify how the rank order of projects on the list reflects priorities identified in the regional salmon recovery plan.
  • Projects were fitted to the priorities established in the NOPLE Strategy, which incorporates and reflects any priorities identified in any relevant regional salmon recovery plans. See Recovery Plans.

Previous / Next