Nearshore Strategies for Protection and

RestorationLandform-based conservation

on Puget Sound Shorelines

Restoration Center Northwest

May 2, 2014

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 2

• Guide selection of PSNERP actions

• Basis for Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program (ESRP)

• Support Action Agenda in nearshore

Anniversary

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 3

• Integrate with watershed assessment

• Test at local jurisdictions• Learn through field

experience• Revisit based on new

data sources

Anniversary

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 4

Anniversary

Nearshore Strategy

Initial Assessment

(2012)?

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 5

• What are the assumptions behind the planning• Increasing cumulative impacts are inevitable.• The primary objective is to locate new injuries

where they will have the least impact

Is all planning the same?

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 6

Same but different

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 7

Same but different

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 8

The information it provides will allow local and regional governments, as well as NGOs, to base their decisions regarding land use on a systematic analytic framework that prioritizes specific geographic areas on the landscape as focus areas for protection, restoration, and conservation of our region’s natural resources, and that also identifies areas that are likely more suitable for development. Application of this method should result in future land-use patterns that protect the health of Puget Sound’s terrestrial and aquatic resources while also helping to direct limited financial resources to the highest priority areas for restoration and protection.

This massive change, suggests that in addition to protecting against future injuries, extensive restoration is necessary to recover historical ecosystem services, and to recover nearshore dependent biota. Restoration will be challenging and expensive.…We should test our strategy for weaknesses. Because of this our strategy should be accessible, transparent, and subject to discussion and critique. A strategy should push actions to meet sound-wide outcomes and targets, while being responsive to local knowledge. The purpose of this report is to provide the first iteration of that evolving strategy for the protection and restoration of physiographic dynamics in the nearshore.

Strategy for Protection and Restoration Characterization for Comparing Value

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 9

• “Develop” as a strategy for protecting resources?

• Does not assume risk from threshold events.• Assumes that value is provided at the AU level• Does not consider emergent properties at larger

scales.

Same but different

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 10

• Multi-scale integration of goals• Consider process units as a critical scale• Protection is necessary for restoration• Complete rapid restoration of target processes• Respond to site degradation context• Risk management—attend to large complex

sites

What the strategy actually says

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 11

• Not just colored maps

What the initial assessment was not

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 12

• Wilhere et al 2012 and ShoBaz• Forage fish• Redmond et al 2005 – the nearshore chapter• Mosaic of sub-estuaries• Photic zone services

The unfinished business of importance

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 13

• Shipman 2014• Forage Fish• WDFW findings – some peoples beaches

• Miniature beaches

Revisiting the Beach Strategy

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 14

• Sub-basin• Nearshore management area• Process units• Shorezone units

Scale of service provision

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 15

• Sub-basin• Nearshore management area• System

Scale of service provision

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 16

• We need to revise assessments• How do we adapt the strategy• Adaptive management

Pivot Point

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 17

• Beach Classification• Embayment Classification• Coastal Management Areas• Biogeography• Habitat Models• Sediment Budgets• Protection Assessment• Transportation Impacts

Section 4.4 – Eight recommendations

U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | NOAA Fisheries | Page 18

• Integrate water quality – trump card• Connect watersheds to sub-estuary matrix• Sub-estuary function is still gap.

• Revisit beach systems• Protection must be resolved• Integrate EPA work

Pivot Point