AGENDA Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council Thursday, March 19, 2020, 2:00-3:00PM

To Join the Conference Call Click Here: Dial: 206-263-8114 Call ID: 1894583#

Next Meeting: May 21, 2020, 2:00-4:15PM

Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office 3190-160th Ave. SE, Bellevue

Meeting Packet Page

1. Welcome and Review Participants John Stokes, Chair Councilmember, City of Bellevue

2:00-2:05

2. Consent Agenda: • Approval of Meeting Notes for January 16, 2019• Lake Washington Ship Canal Predation study funding

request

John Stokes 2:05-2:15

3. Updates & Announcements Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager

2:15-2:35

4. Check-in for new Salmon Recovery Council members • Review Council operating guidelines• Review member roles and responsibilities• Answer questions

Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz 2:35-3:00

2

10

22

7

1 of 26

WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Notes Washington Department of Ecology, Bellevue || January 16, 2020 2:00 – 4:15 p.m.

Members Present

# Name Affiliation 1) Eric Adman Sno-King Watershed Council 2) Tor Bell Mountains to Sound Greenway 3) Councilmember (CM) Diane Buckshnis City of Edmonds 4) Bea Covington King Conservation District 5) CM Bruce Dodds City of Clyde Hill 6) Larry Franks Friends of Issaquah Fish Hatchery (FISH) 7) CM Ted Frantz Town of Hunts Point 8) CM Victoria Hunt City of Issaquah 9) CM Varisha Khan City of Redmond 10) CM Ryan McIrvin City of Renton 11) Joe Miles WA State Department of Natural Resources 12) CM Melanie O’Cain City of Kenmore 13) CM Mark Phillips, Vice-Chair City of Lake Forest Park 14) Stewart Reinbold WA State Department of Fish & Wildlife 15) Mayor Pro Tem Carl Scandella Town of Yarrow Point 16) Gary Smith Water Tenders/Trout Unlimited 17) CM John Stokes, Chair City of Bellevue 18) CM Pam Stuart City of Sammamish 19) Corinne Young Cedar River Council

Alternates Present

21) CM Jay Arnold City of Kirkland 22) David Bain Sno-King Watershed Council 23) Lorri Bodi City of Lake Forest Park 24) Jeanette Dorner Mid-Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group 25) Christa Heller City of Bellevue 26) Garrett Holbrook King County 27) Michelle Koehler City of Seattle 28) Cleo Neculae WA State Department of Ecology 29) Josh Thompson Snohomish County

Others Present

34) CM Neal Black City of Kirkland 35) Denise Di Santo King County 36) Alexandra Doty Puget Sound Partnership 37) Lucas Hall Long Live the Kings 38) Diana Hart City of Woodinville 39) Kirstin Haugen King Conservation District 40) Peter Holte City of Redmond 41) Kim Jones City of Newcastle 42) Rachel Konrady City of Kirkland 43) Jim Loring Friends of Issaquah Salmon Hatchery (FISH) 44) Kristina Lowthian City of Renton 45) Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz WRIA 8 46) Carla Nelson WRIA 8 47) Kit Paulsen City of Bellevue 48) Stephanie Potts WA State Department of Ecology 49) Larry Reymann Environmental Science Center 50) Richard Sawyer City of Kenmore 51) Lauren Urgenson WRIA 8

WRIA 8 SRC Meeting Notes January 16, 2020

2_WRIA8_SRC_Meeting_Summary DRAFT_1.16.20.docx

52) Jordanna Warneck Department of Natural Resources 53) Jason Wilkinson WRIA 8

I) Call to Order / Introductions Council Member (CM) John Stokes called the meeting to order at 2:08p.

II) Public Comment - None

III) Consent Agenda - Salmon Recovery Council (SRC) Meeting Minutes from 11/21/2019 were discussed.

IV) Updates & Announcements

Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz (Jason MK), WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager, highlighted the following items: • Puget Sound Regional Update – The Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council (PS SRC)

meets next on January 23. Diane Buckshnis, Edmonds City Councilmember (CM) and Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz represent WRIA 8.

• The South Central Action Area Caucus (Local Integrating Organization (LIO)) meets next in mid-February and will focus on developing a work plan for supporting efforts to address shoreline armoring. Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz represents WRIA 8 on the LIO.

• Snohomish County’s status as a WRIA 8 cost share partner – Snohomish County Council approved funding for the County to re-join the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council as an interlocal agreement (ILA) cost share partner in 2020. WRIA 8 staff are working with Snohomish County to draft an amendment to the ILA to formally document their rejoining the ILA. All ILA partners will need to sign the amendment, which WRIA 8 staff are hoping to have complete by March. CM Diane Buckshnis noted that she appreciates the County is returning as an ILA partner, and said that the Meadowdale Beach and Estuary Restoration project and nearshore estuary issues are important priorities for WRIA 8 to address. She is interested in Snohomish County’s participation.

• Salmon Recovery Funding Board 2019 grant round funding decisions – The State Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) recently awarded grants to WRIA 8 projects, including $424,065 for the Royal Arch Reach Floodplain Reconnection project design located on the Cedar River and a $816,866 SRFB grant for the Riverbend Floodplain Restoration project. The Riverbend project will reconnect over 50 acres of Cedar River floodplain, including side channel and backwater channel features and large wood placements to improve channel complexity. CM John Stokes noted that Jason W leads the WRIA 8 Project Subcommittee to annually review and recommend grant funding to the SRC.

• Federal legislative priorities update – In late December, Congress approved a federal spending bill, including funding for the following WRIA 8 federal priorities:

o $65 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF), which is the primary federal funding for salmon recovery and supports annual grants for priority salmon habitat protection and restoration projects. WRIA 8 supported a $70 million funding level.

o $35.5 million for the Pacific Salmon Treaty, including support for priority Puget Sound habitat protection and restoration projects, hatchery conservation programs, and a Southern Resident Orca prey program. WRIA 8 supported a $57.1 million funding level.

o $33 million for the Puget Sound Geographic Program in the Environmental

The SRC unanimously approved the November 21, 2019 meeting minutes. CM Diane Buckshnis moved, CM Jay Arnold seconded the motion.

WRIA 8 SRC Meeting Notes January 16, 2020

2_WRIA8_SRC_Meeting_Summary DRAFT_1.16.20.docx

Protection Agency (EPA), providing grant funding to implement near-term actions identified in the Puget Sound Action Agenda. WRIA 8 supports establishing a Puget Sound recovery program office in EPA to coordinate federal Puget Sound recovery efforts with state, local and tribal recovery efforts and enable greater levels of federal funding for Puget Sound recovery and authorize up to $50 million for the Puget Sound Geographic Program.

• New WRIA 8 Administrative Coordinator hired – The WRIA 8 team welcomes Carla Nelson as the new Administrative Coordinator, taking over for Laura West who left the position last October.

• E-news – Please send ideas for the February edition of E-news to Carla Nelson by February 7. E-news distribution now includes over 1,400 recipients. WRIA 8 Technical Committee – In December, WRIA 8 convened a Predation Steering Committee including key partners involved in research and/or management of juvenile salmon predation by invasive, non-native predatory fishes (focusing on smallmouth bass and yellow perch) in our watershed. WRIA 8 Implementation Committee – The Implementation Committee is working on a draft WRIA 8 communications and outreach strategy framework, intended to coordinate messaging, guide WRIA 8 investments, and inform community partner programs. A final draft strategic framework will be presented to the Salmon Recovery Council for approval later in 2020.

V) WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council – 2020 Meeting Topic Themes

Jason MK reviewed 2020 proposed SRC meeting topic themes. Themes focus on supporting existing priorities, and opportunities for the SRC to take action. The primary themes include: • Supporting existing priorities (Ballard Locks fish passage, large wood management on

the Cedar River, stewardship incentive programs for streamside and lakeshore property owners)

• Accelerating recovery plan implementation (project development, increasing resources, tracking and reporting progress, integrating salmon recovery into other priority work areas, supporting/informing development and implementation of protective local regulations)

• Addressing priority knowledge gaps (Elevated Ship Canal temperatures, predation on juvenile salmon, effects of artificial light)

• Influencing regional and statewide priorities and decisions (state and federal funding and legislative priorities, Orca Task Force recommendations, watershed streamflow restoration planning, fish passage, climate change effects, stormwater management)

• Telling the story (opportunities for strategic communications and outreach) CM Stokes said he is interested in success stories about what works. Stewart Reinbold said filling data gaps and hearing lessons learned will improve decision-making. CM Scandella stated that filling knowledge gaps is an important and productive goal of the SRC.

VI) State Supplemental Budget Priorities

Jason MK reviewed proposed additions to WRIA 8’s 2020 state legislative priorities, which were informed by state agency partner budget requests during the “supplemental” (i.e., short session that meets for 60 days during even-numbered years) legislative session. The Implementation Committee has reviewed and informed the proposed additions, which focus primarily on budget items that support important salmon and water quality programs. The SRC also reviewed a draft letter sharing these priorities with legislators who have districts in WRIA 8 and the leadership of key House and Senate

WRIA 8 SRC Meeting Notes January 16, 2020

2_WRIA8_SRC_Meeting_Summary DRAFT_1.16.20.docx

committees.

The SRC unanimously approved the proposed additions to the WRIA 8 2020 state legislative priorities and the letter to share the approve priorities with legislators.

VII) Technical Priorities Funding Request – Managing Predation of Juvenile Salmonids by Nonnative Invasive Predatory Fishes in the Lake Washington Ship Canal

Lauren Urgenson, WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator, presented an update on predation of juvenile salmon by invasive, non-native predatory fish. The 2017 WRIA 8 Chinook Salmon Recovery Plan identifies predation of juvenile Chinook and other salmonids by predatory fishes to be a priority limiting factor in salmon recovery. The Lake Washington Ship Canal (LWSC) is a narrow corridor where juveniles are concentrated during their migration to Puget Sound and thus, particularly vulnerable to predation. Recent predator diet analyses conducted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2018 – 2019 (WRIA 8 supported this work in 2018) illustrate alarmingly high predation rates of juvenile salmon by invasive non-native predatory fishes, primarily smallmouth bass and large (> 240 mm length) yellow perch. High predation rates by yellow perch are a new and emerging issue in WRIA 8 and little is known about perch population abundance, distribution, and how they use the Ship Canal. Additional information is needed to support development of a systematic management program to reduce impacts of these nonnative invasive predators on the survival of juvenile Chinook in our watershed. Lauren reviewed a memo describing the funding request of $54,749 and associated scope of work to support a predation study in 2020. The funding would come from the carryforward fund balance in the WRIA 8 budget. Approval of the funding request would leave approximately $108,328 in unobligated carryforward fund balance in WRIA 8’s budget. Councilmembers asked what would be the likely predator management actions? Lauren explained that predator management is complex and a long-term commitment. There may be hotspots that can be identified for targeted removal, but more information about predator populations is necessary to determine what management actions would have a meaningful impact. That’s why this study is important. CM Arnold asked whether other topics were considered for this funding? Jason MK responded that there was no open solicitation for these funds. This topic was an identified priority in the WRIA 8 Plan and this request represents the next step in addressing this critical issue. The SRC has approved using carryforward funds to support other priority activities, including inventorying wood in streams and rivers, synthesize data and research on Lake Washington Ship Canal temperature and dissolved oxygen, and a diet analysis as part of a 2018/2019 Ship Canal predation study. Councilmembers were supportive of the funding request and proposed adding it to the consent agenda for the March SRC meeting.

VIII) Success Story

Jason MK noted that the planned success story for this meeting was an update from the Army Corps of Engineers on completion of replacement of the first of six valves in the large lock at the Ballard Locks. Unfortunately, the Corps was unable to attend the meeting. This topic will be added to a future SRC agenda. Jason MK updated the SRC on the successful completion of the 2019 Salmon SEEson program. The program provides communication materials and coordinates promotion of sites for the public to see returning salmon in local streams and rivers in the late summer and early

WRIA 8 SRC Meeting Notes January 16, 2020

2_WRIA8_SRC_Meeting_Summary DRAFT_1.16.20.docx

fall. Despite the low salmon return in 2019, many partners noted strong attendance at events. The Cedar River Salmon Journey program noted that there was an unexpected uptick in people visiting viewing sites along the Cedar River, and a slight decrease in participation at the Ballard Locks. In general, participants were interested in learning more about salmon and what they can do to help. Larry Franks commented that the Issaquah Hatchery is the most visited hatchery. As part of their docent program, he provided tours to lots of visitors. Over the years the main question is why the decline in the salmon population. He notes the impacts of climate change. He noted that last year, for the first time, no one questioned climate change as an issue, and that the perspective is changing among the public.

Meeting Adjourned at 4:06pm.

VIII) Next Meeting The next SRC meeting is March 19, 2:00 – 4:15 pm, at the Department of Ecology Bellevue office.

WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council Consent Agenda Item

Technical Priorities Funding Request – Managing Predation of Juvenile Salmonids by

Nonnative Invasive Predatory Fishes in the Lake Washington Ship Canal

March 2020

Request Summary

Estimated Cost

WRIA 8 staff requests Salmon Recovery Council approval to direct a portion of available carry forward funds in WRIA 8’s budget to support predator evaluation and management in the Lake Washington Ship Canal. Much of this work is being conducted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. However, additional resources are needed to cover the cost of: 1) predator diet analysis including genetic analysis of well digested salmonid prey, and 2) purchase in-fish acoustic transmitters to track movement of yellow perch, a newly confirmed nonnative invasive predator of juvenile Chinook in the Ship Canal. This information will guide management actions to reduce predation impacts and improve survival of juvenile Chinook and other salmonids in our watershed.

$54,749

Background

The 2017 WRIA 8 Chinook Salmon Recovery Plan identifies predation of juvenile Chinook by predatory fishes to be a priority pressure and first-tier research and data need to advance salmon recovery and support plan implementation. Recently, predation has emerged a greater risk than previously thought. The Lake Washington Ship Canal (LWSC) is a narrow corridor where juveniles are concentrated during migration to Puget Sound and thus, particularly vulnerable to predation. Predator diet analyses conducted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2018 – 2019, illustrate alarmingly high predation rates of juvenile salmon by nonnative invasive predatory fishes including smallmouth bass and large (> 240 mm length) yellow perch. WRIA 8 supported this work in 2018, which found yellow perch are a new and emerging predator in WRIA 8. However, little is known about perch abundance and use of the Ship Canal. Additional information is needed to guide development of management actions to reduce impacts of these nonnative invasive predators on the survival of Endangered Species Act-listed Chinook in our watershed.

Predation on juvenile salmonids in the LWSC may not be uniform but occurs in “hot spots”. Gillnet surveys

conducted by the WDFW in 2016-2019 identified several predation hot spots. Better understanding

predation could provide management options at these hot spots to improve juvenile Chinook survival. For

example, there is a crucial need to identify any additional predation hotspots and determine the best, most

effective approaches for predator removal and evaluation.

7 of 26

In December 2019, WRIA 8 staff convened an ad-hoc “Predation Steering Committee” including

representatives from the USFWS, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, WDFW,

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and King County. Participants expressed strong

interest in this issue and identified options for increased coordination that will provide greater benefits

than individual actions. WRIA 8 can support a critical missing piece to this work, but the funding decision

must be made by March 2020 to support predation assessments beginning in May.

This is a unique opportunity for WRIA 8 to work cooperatively with key partners to expand predation

assessment and management in the LWSC. The information obtained will inform management actions

targeting a key limiting factor to salmon recovery in our watershed. Much of this work will be conducted by

WDFW, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and USFWS. Partner plans are in place to survey, measure and

process predatory fish. WRIA 8 funding will enable detection of hotspots for predation of Chinook and

other salmonids and tracking movements of yellow perch to better understand this newly confirmed

predator of juvenile Chinook in the LWSC.

WRIA 8 Budget Request

A) Predator diet analysis

Task Days Crew Total Estimated Cost

Collection of diet samples 7 2 14 $3,096

Data entry 3 1 3 $663

Tech support for perch tagging 3 2 6 $1,327

Task Samples Days #/Day Estimated Cost

Lab processing of diet samples 1260 14 90.0 $19,902

Task Samples $/Sample Estimated Cost

Genetic analysis of ingested salmonids

WDFW or USFWS genetics lab 100 $55 $5,500

Misc. lab and field supplies $500

Subtotal $30,988

Subtotal + overhead (31.5%) $40,749

B) Yellow perch seasonal tracking

Tags $/Tag Cost

Vemco acoustic transmitters 40 350 $14,000

Total funding request $54,749

8 of 26

Partner Contributions

Partner Contributions

WDFW Logistics (project planning and implementation).

Purchase gillnets and other equipment.

Provide fishing boat, gear, and field crew.

Fish weekly mid-May to end of June.

Measure and process gillnet catch.

Transfer piscivore samples to USFWS for stomach content processing andanalysis.

USFWS Logistics (project planning and implementation).

Diet sampling with WDFW.

Diet analysis (lab assistance – QA/QC).

Seasonal tracking (fish collections, tagging and receiver maintenance).

Data analysis and presentation development.

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe

Logistics (project planning and implementation).

Purchase gillnets to test effectiveness of different sized mesh.

Provide fishing boat, gear, and field crew to at least double WDFW’s fishing effortand expand the number of locations sampled.

Measure and process gillnet catch.

Transfer the piscivore stomach content samples to the USFWS for analysis.

Assist with perch tagging and tracking.

Provide VEMCO acoustic receivers.

Assist with VEMCO transmitter implantation surgeries and mobile tracking.

King County Provide VEMCO acoustic receivers.

Assist with project coordination and logistics.

USGS Provide research and technical consultation.

WRIA 8 Carry Forward Funding Status

If the Council approves this proposal, approximately $108,328 in carry forward fund balance would remain.

*NOTE: The beginning carry forward fund balance amount does not include amounts reserved forunanticipated operating/staffing costs and previously approved amounts allocated to priority work items.

Beginning balance (as of December 27)* $163,077

Current Funding Request: Managing predation of juvenile salmonids by nonnative invasive predatory fish in the Lake Washington Ship Canal

$54,749

Remaining balance $108,328

9 of 26

WRIA 8 Updates and Committee Reports March 19, 2020

Puget Sound Regional Update – The Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council (PS SRC) last

met on January 23. The meeting focused on discussing the PS SRC’s 2020 work plan

priorities, next steps in the process to revisit regional Chinook salmon recovery priorities, an

update on the 2020 legislative session, the status of an update to the Statewide Strategy to

Recover Salmon, and hearing a presentation on Electron Dam operations and the PS SRC’s

draft letter supporting removal of the Dam. The PS SRC is scheduled to meet next on March

26. Diane Buckshnis, Edmonds City Councilmember, and Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz represent

WRIA 8.

The South Central Action Area Caucus (Local Integrating Organization (LIO)) last met on

February 19. The meeting focused on developing a work plan to support shoreline armoring

efforts that align at the watershed, regional, and state levels. The goal of the discussion is to

understand how South Central LIO can leverage the work of partners in the watershed in

order to create a collective impact. Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz currently represents WRIA 8.

• Four-Year Work Plan update – The WRIA 8 Four-Year Work Plan outlines the habitat

projects and programs anticipated to begin or be implemented in the near-term. To be

listed on the Work Plan, an action must have a connection to one or more of the recovery

strategies outlined in the 2017 WRIA 8 Plan Update. Being on the Work Plan is also a

prerequisite for receiving a WRIA 8 grant award. A call for updates and additions to the

Four-Year Work Plan was issued in early November, and for projects proposed as additions,

staff confirmed the connection between those activities and WRIA 8 recovery strategies.

Additions to the Four-Year Work Plan, along with several other Work Plan updates, are

shown in an attachment. (please see a table of projects added to the Four-Year Work Planon page 14 of the packet)

• Artificial lighting impacts on salmon – interim guidance – Over the next year, WRIA 8 staff

and the Technical and Implementation Committees are completing a synthesis of

information on urban light pollution to inform commonsense lighting recommendations for

our watershed to support salmon recovery. In the interim, we drafted a memo for the WRIA

8 SRC and partners to consider during code updates and other relevant decisions. The

memo summarizes best available science on lighting impacts to salmon and provides an

overview of existing standards to reduce adverse consequences of artificial lighting at night.

(please see the WRIA 8 Interim Guidance Memo on page 16 of the packet)

•King County Flood Control District proposed amendment to 2020 budget – On March 10, the King County Flood Control District (District) passed a revision to its 2020 budget that

10 of 26

increases funding for the watershed-based Cooperative Watershed Management grant

program from $4.8 million to $9.6 million annually and to establish three new grant

programs at $3 million each to address urban stream flooding, coastal erosion and flooding,

and fish passage. The District’s decision represents exciting additional support for salmon

recovery activities and a greater commitment to a multi-benefit approach to floodplain

management. The increased Cooperative Watershed Management grant funding will have

an immediate impact on WRIA 8’s 2020 grant round that is currently in process. There was a

strong showing of support from WRIA 8 salmon recovery partners as well as from other King

County watersheds. (Please see the Salmon Recovery Council letter on page 20 of the packet to the Flood Control District supporting the District’s approval of the proposed budget amendment, which the WRIA 8 Management Committee approved sending on the Council’s behalf due to the short time frame.)

Snohomish County’s status as a WRIA 8 cost share partner – As part of Snohomish

County’s 2020 budget, Snohomish County Council approved funding for the County to re-

join the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council as an interlocal agreement (ILA) cost share

partner. The amendment to the WRIA 8 ILA to enable Snohomish County to formally rejoin

the ILA is moving through the County Council approval process. It is expected to be

approved and signed by mid-April. Once the amendment is finalized and signed by

Snohomish County, all ILA partners will need to also sign the amendment. WRIA 8 staff will

work with all partners to secure all necessary signatures on the amendment.

February flooding update – The consistently wet weather at the beginning of the year,

along with heavy rains during the first week of February caused significant flooding in many

places in the watershed, in particular the Cedar River and Issaquah Creek. Average flows in

the Cedar River for this time of year are between 1,000 – 1,100 cubic feet (of water) per

second (cfs). The severe flooding stage is described as flows greater than 5,000cfs. On

February 7, Cedar River flows rose above 9,000cfs causing significant flooding and some

road closures, including a four mile stretch of SR 169 near Maple Valley. The site of the

Riverbend Floodplain Restoration project at the Cavanaugh Pond Natural Area, the river

avulsed through the left bank levee, shifting the main channel through the lower portion of

Cavanaugh Pond. While this event significantly impacts design of the Riverbend project, the

result may be increased habitat benefit in this reach of the river. In places where the

floodplain has been reconnected to the river, such as at the Rainbow Bend project site, the

river spread out into those areas demonstrating how connected floodplains function to

reduce water velocities and offer places for fish and wildlife to find refuge during flood

events.

Issaquah Creek also experienced significant flooding, closing Issaquah – Hobart Road for a

period of time, requiring evacuations of some streamside residents, and widespread

flooding at the Issaquah Salmon Hatchery.

11 of 26

Here are links to aerial drone footage of the February flooding:

o Flooding on Cedar River at the Riverbend project site – click on the embedded videotitled “Flyover Video: Riverbend Levee Breach 2020”

o Flooding on Issaquah Creek

Update to the Statewide Strategy to Recover Salmon and opportunity to provide input –

The Statewide Strategy to Recover Salmon (Strategy) is being updated by the Governor’s

Office with support from the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), the Governor’s

Salmon Recovery Office (GSRO), and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

(WDFW). The Strategy, originally adopted in 1999 to address the growing crisis of dwindling

salmon populations, is a collaborative initiative to restore and protect salmon runs across

Washington State, anchored in local expertise, experience, partnerships, and community

support. In 2006, Governor Christine Gregoire added to the Strategy, highlighting the

proactive approach to salmon recovery known as the “Washington Way.” In 2019, Governor

Inslee secured funding for an update to the statewide Strategy. The update to the Strategy

intends to incorporate new science, policies, obligations or commitments captured in

recovery plans, federal five-year status reviews, court decisions, and other pertinent

materials.

To provide your input and recommendations on salmon recovery for the Strategy update,

an online survey is available: Statewide Salmon Strategy Update Survey

Responses are welcome from ALL who are interested in salmon recovery For more

information about the Governor’s Statewide Salmon Strategy Update, please visit the

Washington Recreation and Conservation Office website and see the background

information below.

Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee (WREC) call for streamflow

restoration projects – As part of the planning process for the WRIA 8 Watershed

Restoration and Enhancement Committee (WREC), the Department of Ecology is seeking

ideas for projects that offer quantifiable water offset benefits. Examples include water

rights transfers and water offset projects (such as managed aquifer recharge, infiltration

basins, streamflow augmentation, and off-channel storage projects that release water to

streams during low flow periods). The deadline to submit projects is March 31, 2020. To

submit project ideas or for questions, contact Stephanie Potts at 425-466-5358 or

stephanie.potts@ecy.wa.gov.

12 of 26

WRIA 8 Committee Reports

WRIA 8 Technical Committee – In January, the Technical Committee provided feedback on

a letter drafted by the WRIA 8 Technical Coordinator on artificial lighting concerns in our

watershed and recommendations to address impacts on salmon recovery. This letter was

provided at the request of Councilmember Hunt from Issaquah, later adapted for

Councilmember Phillips from Lake Forest Park, and subsequently reformatted as a memo to

the WRIA 8 SRC (see artificial lighting memo).

The Technical Committee (TC) met on February 12. The TC reviewed a project

implementation survey developed by WRIA 8 staff to gather data on implementation

indicators for priority Chinook recovery strategies in the watershed. Every 5 years, WRIA 8

summarizes information on implementation of Chinook recovery actions to incorporate in

progress reports for the SRC and to fulfill reporting requirements for the Governor’s Salmon

Recovery Office (who in turn reports to NOAA). In spring/summer 2020, WRIA 8 will

distribute a Smartsheet poll to sponsors on project implementation from 2005 – present.

The TC also provided feedback on advances in the Lake Washington Ship Canal temperature

and dissolved oxygen scope of work. Last August, the WRIA 8 TC reviewed project plans

focused on temperature and dissolved oxygen issues in the Lake Washington Ship Canal. As

the next phase, the TC reviewed a set of draft figures created to illustrate temperature and

dissolved oxygen conditions during periods of salmonid use and to illustrate long-term

changes in water surface temperatures over time. These figures will eventually be

incorporated into a “state of knowledge” report. In addition to the figure alternatives, the

TC discussed a structure for the report and next steps. Based on the information provided,

the TC concluded there is adequate existing information to complete the report and

assessment and then move towards goal setting, and eventually begin to identify feasible

solutions.

WRIA 8 Implementation Committee –The Implementation Committee met on March 3.

Meeting topics included general WRIA 8 updates; presentation on early February flooding in

the watershed focusing on the Cedar River and impacts to the Riverbend Floodplain

Restoration project design; presentation on the impacts of artificial light on salmon survival

and interim WRIA 8 guidance to reduce these impacts; review of a project implementation

indicators and a survey tool developed by WRIA 8 staff to gather data on implementation

indicators for priority Chinook recovery strategies in the watershed as part of the 2020

WRIA 8 Progress Report; update on the draft WRIA 8 Communications and Outreach

Framework; and, review of planned agenda items for the March 19 Salmon Recovery

Council meeting.

13 of 26

Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed (WRIA 8)

2020 Four-Year Work Plan Update

Added to Work Plan – Tier 1 Locations

Project Name (Location and Sponsor) Description

Bear Creek Tretheway Stream Restoration (Bear Creek – Mid Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group)

Improve instream conditions for Chinook rearing by creating a more natural channel, connecting floodplain, and adding large wood to increase stream complexity at Tretheway property in reach 6 of Bear Creek. Control invasive species and restore riparian habitat along the project site.

Seawest-Granston Restoration (Bear Creek – King County)

Restore 32 acres of wetland and floodplain habitat along Bear Creek in an area dominated by reed canary grass. Add large wood in 1200 feet of stream within the Middle Bear Creek Natural Area.

East-Side Wayne Sammamish/Waynita Restoration (Sammamish River – City of Bothell)

Restore the east-side of the former Wayne Golf Course property (former back nine, 31.6 acres). Property includes 1,000 linear feet of the south bank of the Sammamish River, along with the mouth and lower reach of Waynita Creek. Restoration approach is dependent on results from a feasibility study but could include: enhancing Waynita Creek habitat at the mouth, Sammamish floodplain restoration, improving riparian conditions, and creating cold water refuge.

Fish Passage Restoration on Carey Creek at 276th Avenue SE (Carey Creek – King County)

Replace an existing partial barrier culvert/fishway with a bridge.

Fish Passage Restoration on East Fork Issaquah Creek at SE Highpoint Way (East Fork Issaquah Creek – King County)

Replace partial barrier culvert/fishway at SE Highpoint Way with a stream simulation design and restore unimpeded fish passage.

Shoreline Restoration at Be’er Sheva Park (Lake Washington – Seattle Parks Foundation)

Remove rock armoring and plant native vegetation along the shoreline north of the boat ramp to improve juvenile Chinook salmon migratory and rearing habitat.

Settler’s Landing Dock Decking Replacement (Lake Washington – City of Kirkland)

Replace solid wooden decking on 2,020 square feet of dock surface with grated decking to allow natural light to reach the water surface and lessen impacts to salmon migration.

Added to Work Plan – Tier 2 Locations

Project Name (Location and Sponsor) Description

Little Bear Creek Restoration at 228th Street NE (Little Bear Creek – Snohomish County)

Add large wood to Little Bear Creek to increase hydraulic complexity and provide low velocity refugia habitat. Plant riparian vegetation.

14 of 26

Little Bear Creek Restoration near 224th Street SE (Little Bear Creek – Snohomish County)

Increase habitat quantity and quality to create additional spawning and rearing areas for Chinook near a beaver-dammed pond. Incorporate woody material and restore riparian vegetation.

Little Bear Creek Restoration at 196th Street NE (Little Bear Creek – Snohomish County)

Add large wood to provide hydraulic complexity and cover and to manage sediment load and improve Chinook spawning habitat.

Little Bear Creek at Lightfoot (Little Bear Creek – Snohomish County)

Add large wood to improve bed material gradation, cover, and hydraulic diversity and restore riparian vegetation to benefit Chinook.

Other Four-Year Work Plan Updates

Lower Issaquah Creek Stream and Riparian Enhancement Project (Tier 1 – Issaquah Creek – City

of Issaquah)

o Updated project description and cost information.

Paradise Valley Conservation Area Restoration (Tier 1 – Bear Creek – Snohomish County)

o Updated cost information.

Little Bit Restoration Project (Tier 1 – Bear Creek – King County)

o Updated project name, description, cost information.

Cutthroat Creek Restoration/Carousel Ranch (Tier 2 – Little Bear Creek – Snohomish County)

o Updated cost information.

Hole in the Sky Park Habitat Improvements (Tier 2 – Great Dane Creek – Snohomish County)

o Updated description and cost information.

15 of 26

Artificial Lighting Impacts to Salmon in WRIA 8 Briefing Memo March 10, 2020

Introduction

The Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan

(WRIA 8 Plan) identifies artificial light pollution as a priority limiting factor and critical

research and data need to advance salmon recovery. Reductions in artificial lighting at night is

a priority strategy to increase survival of juvenile Chinook and other salmon species during

their journey from natal streams to the Puget Sound. Over the next year, WRIA 8 staff and the

Technical and Implementation Committees are completing a synthesis of information on urban

light pollution to inform commonsense lighting recommendations for our watershed. In the

interim, this memo provides an overview of best available science and existing standards to

reduce adverse consequences of artificial lighting at night.

Key Takeaways

• Improved juvenile survival is critical to recover self-sustaining populations of Chinook

and other at-risk salmon species in our watershed.

• Both direct lighting on adjacent waterways and more indirect, chronic increases in

lighting (aka “skyglow”) have adverse consequences for survival of juvenile salmon,

especially as they migrate through Lakes Sammamish and Washington, and the Lake

Washington Ship Canal.

• Artificial nighttime lighting alters juvenile salmon behavior in ways that make them

more susceptible to predation and increases the length of time their predators actively

feed.

• Commonsense lighting standards can reduce non-target, unintentional, and often

unnecessary impacts of artificial light pollution on salmon recovery, human health, and

other biological resources.

Summary of the Problem

Migration through Lakes Sammamish and Washington and the Lake Washington Ship Canal

presents a survival bottleneck for juvenile salmon in WRIA 8. From 2014 to 2019 an average

of just 9% and 11% of tagged juvenile Chinook migrating from the Cedar River and Bear

Creek, respectively, reached the Puget Sound (Lisi 2019). Emerging research suggests

artificial nighttime lighting alters the behavior of these juvenile migrants in ways that make

them more susceptible to predation and increases the length of time their predators actively

feed. Reductions in predation rates and improved survival of juveniles is critical for boosting

our odds of recovering self-sustaining Chinook populations.

Studies conducted in WRIA 8 suggest both direct lighting on adjacent waterways and more

indirect, chronic increases in lighting (aka “skyglow”) have adverse consequences for salmon

recovery. Direct lighting attracts juvenile salmon, slowing or stopping migration and making

Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish (WRIA 8) Watershed 201 S. Jackson Street, Suite 600

Seattle, WA 98104-3855

16 of 26

them more vulnerable to predators. Tabor et al. (2004) found that direct lighting delays or

stops juvenile sockeye outmigrants in the Cedar River, and the number of sockeye delayed

increases with light intensity. Predation by sculpins increases substantially (45% as compared

to 5% consumed without lights) on juvenile sockeye congregated beneath lights. Celedonia et

al. (2008) found that juvenile Chinook salmon are attracted to roadway lighting along the SR

520 Bridge and the Lake Washington Ship Canal, slowing or stopping their migration and

potentially increasing loss to predation. Tabor et al. (2017) also found that juvenile Chinook,

coho, and sockeye salmon aggregate beneath artificial lights in nearshore areas of Lake

Washington and Lake Sammamish, and this effect increases with light intensity.

Indirect lighting, or skyglow, is diffuse light reflected on surfaces or scattered in the

atmosphere. Skyglow can increase night brightness by orders of magnitude (Kyba et al. 2015)

resulting in increased predation risk for juvenile salmon (Mazur & Beauchamp 2006). Long-

term studies in Lake Washington show a shift in the extent and timing of predation on juvenile

fish. Thirty years ago, most predation occurred during twilight. Now predators feed throughout

the night (Beauchamp 2019). Analyses of light pollution in the Lake Washington Ship Canal

suggest skyglow effects have resulted in a seven-fold increase in nighttime predation risk for

juvenile salmon compared to historical, pre-lightbulb conditions (Beauchamp 2019).

Fortunately, studies also suggest even marginal reductions in artificial lighting at night can

substantially reduce predation risk (Beauchamp et al. 1992; Hansen et al. 2013; Mazur &

Beauchamp 2003; Vogel & Beauchamp 1999).

In recent decades, popularity of cool-blue, high intensity light-emitting diode (“LED”)

technology has unintentionally exacerbated the level and extent of light pollution effects in our

watershed and urban areas worldwide. These lights are energy efficient but particularly

problematic due to their blue-rich light spectrum and increased brightness. Light pollution is

spectrally dependent –shorter blue wavelengths are more prone to scattering and radiating back

down, contributing to increased skyglow. In aquatic environments, blue wavelengths penetrate

deep into the water whereas warm-red light is absorbed at shallower depths of a few feet.

Additionally, use of higher efficiency of LED’s can lead to inadvertent over-lighting. A

growing body of evidence demonstrates adverse consequences of high color intensity (cool-

blue) LED lighting for a range of biological resources and human health (Zielinska-Dabkowska

2018). The American Medical Association (2016) recommends warm-red (3000K color

temperature or below) LEDs for outdoor street lighting, use of shielding to minimize glare, and

dimming lights during off-peak hours (Kraus 2016). It’s also important to note, since all

spectrums of light can penetrate shallow nearshore habitats used by juvenile salmon,

minimizing the amount and intensity of any overwater lighting is critical to reduce light

pollution impacts in these areas (Tabor et al. 2019).

Interim Lighting Recommendations

Fortunately, practices and design technologies to meaningfully reduce effects of artificial light

pollution at night are known, and there are examples of successful implementation at large

scales. Manufacturers produce LEDs with “warm” color qualities and high energy efficiency.

Appropriate use of LED lighting with shields, dimmers, and adaptive controls can reduce light

pollution and save energy costs.

WRIA 8 is working to synthesize technical information on light pollution and develop a set of

commonsense recommendations for our watershed. In the interim, the International Dark Skies

17 of 26

Association (IDA) and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) have

established guidelines to reduce adverse consequences of artificial lighting at night. IDA

lighting recommendations focus on five principles to reduce light pollution and its ecological

and human health impacts. These include:

1) Use light only if it is needed;

2) Use shielding and shaping to direct light only where it is needed;

3) Use active controls (e.g. timers, motion detectors) to use light only when it is needed;

4) Minimize brightness to the amount of light needed; and

5) Minimize blue-rich lighting and use “warm” color temperature or filtered LEDs (3000K

or less).

The IDA and IESNA developed a joint Model Lighting Ordinance (2011) to help

municipalities design science-based and consistent outdoor lighting standards. This template

uses five lighting zones and specific numerical requirements to curtail light pollution, reduce

skyglow, and conserve energy resources. However, these standards do not specifically address

lighting adjacent to aquatic areas. Washington State’s lighting guidance requires the use of

low-intensity lights located and shielded to prevent attracting fish or disrupting fish migration

behavior, in the absence of safety concerns (WAC 220-660-140; WAC 220-660-400). Until

WRIA 8 develops a watershed-specific set of recommendations, these resources provide

guidance to reduce impacts of nighttime artificial light.

Conclusion

WRIA 8 staff and committees recognize multiple factors inform artificial lighting decisions and

standards. This memo provides a preliminary summary of artificial lighting impacts to salmon

and an overview of existing recommendations to consider in updates to municipal codes and

other relevant ordinances. We encourage increased actions to reduce non-target, unintentional,

and often unnecessary impacts of light pollution on Endangered Species Act listed Chinook,

steelhead and other at-risk-salmon populations.

If you have questions about this memo or the WRIA 8 Plan, please contact Jason Mulvihill-

Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager, at 206-477-4780 or jason.mulvihill-

kuntz@kingcounty.gov.

References

American Medical Association. 2016. “AMA adopts guidance to reduce harm from high

intensity street lights”. Press Release, June 14, 2016.

Beauchamp, D.A., Vecht, S.A. and Thomas, G.L., 1992. Temporal, spatial, and size-related

foraging of wild cutthroat trout in Lake Washington. Northwest Science, 66(3).

Beauchamp, D. 2019. "Visual foraging capabilities of predators and impacts of artificial light at

night (ALAN)." Presentation the WRIA 8 Technical Committee, October 9, 2019,

Seattle Washington.

Celedonia, M.T., Tabor, R.A., Sanders, S., Damm, S., Lantz, D.W., Lee, T.M., Li, Z., Pratt,

J.M., Price, B.E., and Seyda, L. 2008. Movement and habitat use of Chinook salmon

smolts, northern pikeminnow, and smallmouth bass near the SR 520 bridge, 2007 acoustic

18 of 26

tracking study, annual report (No. WA-RD 694.1). Washington State Dept. of

Transportation.

Hansen, A.G., Beauchamp, D.A. and Schoen, E.R., 2013. Visual prey detection responses of

piscivorous trout and salmon: effects of light, turbidity, and prey size. Transactions of the

American Fisheries Society, 142(3), pp.854-867.

Kraus, L. 2016. Human and environmental effects of light emitting diode (LED) community

lighting (Report No. 2). https://www.darksky.org/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-

manager/AMA_Report_2016_60.pdf

Kyba, C.C., Tong, K.P., Bennie, J., Birriel, I., Birriel, J.J., Cool, A., Danielsen, A., Davies,

T.W., Peter, N., Edwards, W. and Ehlert, R., 2015. Worldwide variations in artificial

skyglow. Scientific reports, 5, p.8409.

Lisi, P. 2019. "Lake Washington basin juvenile salmon 20-year PIT tagging synthesis."

Presentation the WRIA 8 Technical Committee, November 13, 2019, Seattle Washington.

Mazur, M.M. and Beauchamp, D.A., 2003. A comparison of visual prey detection among

species of piscivorous salmonids: effects of light and low turbidities. Environmental

Biology of Fishes, 67(4), pp.397-405.

Mazur, M.M. and Beauchamp, D.A., 2006. Linking piscivory to spatial–temporal distributions

of pelagic prey fishes with a visual foraging model. Journal of Fish Biology, 69(1),

pp.151-175.

Tabor, R.A., Brown, G.S. and Luiting, V.T., 2004. The effect of light intensity on sockeye

salmon fry migratory behavior and predation by cottids in the Cedar River,

Washington. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 24(1), pp.128-145.

Tabor, R.A., Bell, A.T., Lantz, D.W., Gregersen, C.N., Berge, H.B. and Hawkins, D.K., 2017.

Phototaxic behavior of subyearling salmonids in the nearshore area of two urban lakes in

western Washington state. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 146(4),

pp.753-761.

Tabor, R.A., E. K. Perkin, D. A. Beauchamp, L. L. Britt, R. Haehn, J. Green, T. Robinson, S.

Stolnack, D. W. Lantz, Z. J. Moore. 2019. Effect of six types of artificial nighttime

lights on the attraction of subyearling salmonids in the nearshore area of south Lake

Washington. Final report to King County Flood Control District, Seattle.

Vogel, J.L. and Beauchamp, D.A., 1999. Effects of light, prey size, and turbidity on reaction

distances of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) to salmonid prey. Canadian Journal of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 56(7), pp.1293-1297.

Zielinska-Dabkowska, K. M. 2018. Make lighting healthier. Nature, 553, 274–276.

19 of 26

March 9, 2020

Dave Upthegrove Chair, King County Flood Control Board of Supervisors King County Council Chambers, King County Courthouse 516 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104

RE: Support for proposed amendment to 2020 King County Flood Control District Budget

Dear Chair Upthegrove:

The Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed (WRIA 8) Salmon Recovery Council (Council) urges your approval of the proposed amendment to the Flood Control District’s (District) 2020 budget under consideration at your March 10, 2020 meeting. Enacting this proposal will accelerate critical salmon habitat restoration work, will result in meaningful improvements to the health of King County’s watersheds, and will provide other benefits associated with reduced flood risk and an improved quality of life for the residents of King County.

In particular, the WRIA 8 Council strongly supports approval of increased funding for the District’s Cooperative Watershed Management (CWM) grant program. The CWM grant program provides a foundational funding source for salmon recovery efforts in King County. In WRIA 8, the CWM grant program has provided over $13 million since 2012 to implement high priority habitat restoration projects and acquisitions, monitoring activities, and outreach and education programs. Grants awarded through CWM also leverage substantial investments from other local sources, as well as from federal and state grants. While the overall investment is significant, our pace of implementation is slowed by the availability of funds. State-wide, it is estimated that salmon recovery has received only 16% of the documented need to-date. Many projects in our watershed are large or otherwise complex efforts, and multiple grant cycles are needed to assemble the funding needed. This piecemeal approach typically results in a longer timeline to implement projects, delaying critically-needed habitat improvements.

Salmon recovery is a long-term effort, requiring sustained commitment and funding. With salmon populations continuing to decline and the resident orca population that depends on them at grave risk, the time is now to recommit to and increase support for salmon recovery. The proposed increase in CWM funding will provide a much-needed boost to watershed-based salmon recovery. Significant overlap exists between priority flood risk reduction areas and priority habitat restoration areas, and increasing funding for CWM will offer opportunities to make efficient public investments, form partnerships, and achieve multiple benefits.

20 of 26

In addition to our support for amending the District’s 2020 budget, the Council also supports the motion that reaffirms the District’s commitment to multi-benefit flood risk reduction and creates three new grant programs. These new grant programs will provide important new funding streams that not only address specific flooding issues, but will also result in enhanced habitat for salmon and other fish species in areas of the watershed that do not traditionally benefit from the CWM program.

The WRIA 8 Council requests your approval of the proposed budget amendment, and we applaud the District for considering ways to strengthen the commitment to salmon recovery and multi-benefit flood risk reduction. Thank you for your consideration of our comments, and we look forward to working collaboratively with the District to achieve salmon recovery goals while simultaneously reducing risk to people and property.

If you have any questions, please contact Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager, at 206-477-4780 or jason.mulvihill-kuntz@kingcounty.gov

Sincerely,

John Stokes Mark Phillips Chair, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council Vice-Chair, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council Councilmember, City of Bellevue Councilmember, City of Lake Forest Park

Cc: Clerk of the Metro King County Council WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council members Jason Mulvihill-Kuntz, WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council Manager

21 of 26

Approved March 2007 by WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council Revised March 2014 by WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council

Revised January 2018 by WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council

A. Purpose of the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council

The WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council will work to implement the Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed WRIA 8 Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan with the intent to recover Chinook salmon and other anadromous fish. The Council’s efforts are part of the regional salmon recovery effort for Puget Sound Chinook.

Objectives:

Provide a mechanism and governance structure for implementation andadaptive management of the Lake Washington/Cedar/SammamishWatershed WRIA 8 Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan (WRIA 8Plan).

Support the collaborative efforts of local jurisdictions and other parties,including state and federal agencies, businesses, community groups, andother stakeholders, to implement the recommendations in the WRIA 8Plan.

Provide for the ongoing participation of citizens and other stakeholders insuch efforts and to garner public support for WRIA 8 salmon conservationefforts.

Track progress in implementing the WRIA 8 Plan and monitor theeffectiveness of WRIA 8 implementation actions in improving habitat forChinook salmon and adaptively managing WRIA 8 actions over time.

Develop and articulate positions on issues related to salmon habitat andconservation and seek additional funding for WRIA 8 Plan implementation.

B. Responsibilities

WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (All):

Oversee and guide implementation of the WRIA 8 Plan.

Adopt rules and procedures necessary for its operation.

Review annual scope of work for service provider team.

Review and recommend grant proposals to Salmon Recovery Funding Board.

Establish standing or special committees to accomplish specific tasks (caninclude Council members and non-members).

Parties to the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) Only:

Review and recommend King County Flood Control District CooperativeWatershed Management grant proposals to the King County Flood ControlDistrict Board of Supervisors.

22 of 26

Select from its members a Management Committee and assign duties to theManagement Committee, which are expected to include overseeing thebudget and service provider staff.

Approve a scope of work and a memorandum of understanding that sets outservices to be provided by the service provider.

Establish and approve an annual budget.

Perform other duties according to the ILA.

C. Membership

Each participating jurisdiction shall choose an elected official as its votingrepresentative to the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council (Council). Eachjurisdiction may also choose another elected official to serve as their alternatein the event that the regular representative cannot attend. Alternates areencouraged to attend and participate in meetings.

If elected officials are unable to attend a meeting, they can also send a staffperson to represent them. The staff person is allowed to vote and countstowards the quorum with the exception of voting on topics reserved for theparties to the ILA (budget, King County Flood Control District CooperativeWatershed Management Grant Funding, and work program and staffing).

Council members should notify the Salmon Recovery Manager if they will notbe able to attend a meeting and are sending an alternate in their place.

The parties to the ILA have decided that it is appropriate and beneficial to theimplementation and adaptive management of the plan to have “non-party”members to the ILA serve on the Council. Stakeholder members of the formerWRIA 8 Steering Committee were originally appointed to serve on theCouncil.

Nomination of new non-party members may be made by any member of theCouncil. Appointment requires either a consensus or dual majority of the partymembers to the ILA.

A membership subcommittee made up of members of the WRIA 8 SalmonRecovery Council including both parties to the ILA and non-party members tothe Council should conduct an annual review of the current membership ofthe Council and their participation levels, and make recommendationsregarding future membership to the whole Council.

23 of 26

D. Chairs / Positions

The Council will be led by a Chair and Vice Chair elected by the membership of the Council. The Chair must be an elected official representing a party to the ILA. The Vice Chair can be an elected official representing a party to the ILA or a Stakeholder member of the Council.

1. Chair and Vice Chair

Chair and Vice Chair Selection: Chair and Vice Chair positions are selected from willing members of

the Salmon Recovery Council. Selection of Chair and Vice Chair positions occurs every two years, on

even years. Selection of Chair and Vice Chair positions takes place at the first

Salmon Recovery Council meeting of the year (typically January). Chair and Vice Chair selections are made by a vote of the Salmon

Recovery Council members present at the meeting. Special elections may take place if the current Chair or Vice Chair is no

longer able to serve.

Duties of Chair and Vice Chair: Chair to lead the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council. Vice Chair to lead the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council when Chair is

unable to attend. Both confer with members of the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council

between regular meetings on significant issues that require a timelyresponse.

Both confer with the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Manager on agendadevelopment and issues of the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council.

Both provide advance notice to the WRIA 8 Salmon RecoveryManager and the other Chair if unable to attend an upcoming meeting.

Both sign letters and statements agreed to by the WRIA 8 SalmonRecovery Council.

The Chair serves on the WRIA 8 Management Committee. The ViceChair may also serve on the WRIA 8 Management Committee if theyare an elected official representing a party to the Interlocal Agreement.

2. Regional WRIA 8 representative to Puget Sound Partnership’s PugetSound Salmon Recovery Council

The Council will elect a representative.

Duties include: Attend Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council meetings and advocate

for funding and policies that support WRIA 8 Plan implementation. Confer with WRIA 8 staff and members of the WRIA 8 Salmon

Recovery Council between regular meetings on significant issues thatrequire a timely response.

24 of 26

3. WRIA 8 Management Committee

The party members of the ILA shall choose five elected officials or theirdesignees to serve on a Management Committee.

The Management Committee membership should represent the diversityof local governments that are parties to the ILA. Membership shouldinclude both large and small jurisdictions as well as jurisdictions from thedifferent geographic areas of the watershed.

Duties: oversee the funds contributed by the participating jurisdictions andservice provider team in accordance with the adopted annual budget andother duties as assigned by the party members of the ILA.

E. Voting

Chart below clarifies who will vote on which topics:

Voting Activity Parties of the ILA Entire Group

Budget

Committee Directions

Correspondence*

Elections

Funding—KCFCD

Funding—SRFB

Funding—Other

Technical Direction

Work Program and

Staffing

* Comments on legislation, correspondence to political entities, etc.

Decisions shall be made by consensus as much as possible.Consensus may be reached by unanimous agreement of the partymembers to the ILA at the meeting, or by a majority recommendationagreed upon by the active party members, with a minority report.

A quorum of active party members to the ILA to the Council must bepresent to make a binding vote. Quorum exists if a majority of the partymembers are present provided that party positions left vacant on theCouncil shall not be included in calculating the quorum. In addition,positions will be considered vacant on the third consecutive absence and

25 of 26

shall not be included in calculating a quorum until that time in which the party member is present.

For topics that all members of the Council vote on, voting will bedetermined by consensus or a majority of the party members (asdescribed above) and a majority of the non-party members.

In the event that consensus cannot be reached on a vote, any partywho does not accept a majority decision may request weightedvoting as described in the WRIA 8 ILA section 5.1.2 (below). This votingtechnique was not needed in the first sixteen years of WRIA 8collaboration and can hopefully be avoided in the future.

5.1.2 In the event consensus cannot be achieved, as determined by rules and procedures adopted by the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council, the WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council shall take action on a dual-majority basis, as follows:

5.1.2.1 Each party, through its appointed representative, may cast its weighted vote in connection with a proposed WRIA 8 Salmon Recovery Council action.

5.1.2.2 The weighted vote of each party in relation to the weighted votes of each of the other parties shall be determined by the percentage of the annual contribution by each party set in accordance with Subsection 4.2.1 in the year in which the vote is taken.

5.1.2.3 For any action subject to weighted voting to be deemed approved, an affirmative vote must be cast by both a majority of the active party members to this Agreement and by a majority of the weighted votes of the active party members to this Agreement. No action shall be valid and binding on the parties to this Agreement until it shall receive majority of votes of both the total number of active party members to the Agreement and of the active members representing a majority of the annual budget contribution for the year in which the vote is taken. A vote of abstention shall be recorded as a “no” vote.

26 of 26