Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment August 2004

Transcription

1 Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment August 2004

2 Acknowledgements Pierce County Planning and Land Services Department-Advance Planning Division Katherine Brooks, Senior Planner Karen Trueman, GIS Specialist Chip Vincent, Principal Planner Pierce County Executive s Office Debby Hyde, Special Projects Coordinator Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife John Jacobson, Senior GIS Analyst, Habitat Program Marc McCalmon, Landscape Conservation Analyst, Habitat Program Erik Neatherlin, Landscape Conservation Planner, Habitat Program Michelle Tirhi, Urban Biologist-South Puget Sound Region University of Washington, Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Unit Karen Dvornich, Public Education and Outreach Coordinator, NatureMapping Program and Washington GAP Analysis Project Assistant Chris Grue, Principal Investigator and Leader, WACFWRU Metro Parks Tacoma John Garner, Education Coordinator Tahoma Audubon Society Bryan Flint, Conservation Coordinator Puyallup River Watershed Council Dave Seabrook TerraLogic GIS Chris Hansen, Principal Levon Yengoyan, Principal Authors Katherine Brooks, Pierce County Planning and Land Services Karen Dvornich, University of Washington Michelle Tirhi, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Erik Neatherlin, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Marc McCalmon, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife John Jacobson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Reference Citation Brooks, K., K.M. Dvornich, M. Tirhi, E. Neatherlin, M. McCalmon, and J. Jacobson Pierce County Biodiversity Network Assessment: August, Report to Pierce County Council, Pierce County, 146 pp. 2

3 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 6 Project Description... 6 Findings... 6 Purpose... 6 Stakeholders... 6 Implementation... 7 Background... 8 Overview of the Biodiversity Network...8 Geographic Information System (GIS) Review... 9 Predicted Habitat Field Assessment Predicted Species Ecoregional Assessments Biodiversity Management Areas and the Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment Biodiversity Network Assessment Kitsap County BMA North Bay BMA Gig Harbor BMA Greenwater River BMA Lake Bay BMA McNeil Island BMA Ketron Island BMA Upland BMA Norse Peak BMA Nisqually Delta BMA Puyallup River BMA Shoreline BMA Upper Nisqually River BMA Lewis County BMA Rainier BMA White River BMA Lower White River BMA Conclusion Recommendations Policy and Programmatic Actions Long-Term Monitoring and Data Collection Public Education and Outreach Acquisition, Restoration and Other Conservation Efforts

4 Tables 1. Primary Land Cover Codes and Definitions a. Primary Driver Habitats for the Puget Trough Ecoregion b. Primary Driver Habitats for the Southwest Cascades Ecoregion Amphibians Predicted to Occur in Each BMA Birds Predicted to Occur in Each BMA Mammals Predicted to Occur in Each BMA Reptiles Predicted to Occur in Each BMA Summary of Tables 3 through 6 by BMA Predicted Species for the Kitsap BMA Predicted Species for the North Bay BMA Predicted Species for the Gig Harbor BMA Predicted Species for the Greenwater River BMA Predicted Species for the Lake Bay BMA Predicted Species for the McNeil Island BMA Predicted Species for the Ketron Island BMA Predicted Species for the Upland BMA Predicted Species for the Norse Peak BMA Predicted Species for the Nisqually Delta BMA Predicted Species for the Puyallup River BMA Predicted Species for the Shoreline BMA Predicted Species for the Upper Nisqually BMA Predicted Species for the Lewis County BMA Predicted Species for the Rainier BMA Predicted Species for the White River BMA Predicted Species for the Lower White River BMA Fish Confirmed by BMA Butterflies Confirmed by BMA Comparison of Current Biodiversity Network and Revised Biodiversity Network Figures 1. Adopted Biodiversity Network Core BMA Polygons and Connectors Core BMA Polygons and Connectors for Kitsap, North Bay, Gig Harbor, Lake Bay and McNeil Island BMAs Core BMA Polygons and Connectors for Ketron Island, Upland, Nisqually Delta and Shoreline BMAs Core BMA Polygons and Connectors for Greenwater River, Norse Peak, White River and Lower White River BMAs Core BMA Polygons and Connectors for Puyallup River, Upper Nisqually, Lewis County and Rainier BMAs Connecting Core Biodiversity Management Area Polygons Ecoregions and Vegetation Zones in Pierce County Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment Area Comparison of Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment and BMA Core Areas Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Kitsap, North Bay, Gig Harbor, Lake Bay and McNeil Island BMAs

5 Figures Cont. 12. Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Ketron Island, Upland, Nisqually Delta and Shoreline BMAs Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Greenwater River, Norse Peak, White River and Lower White River BMAs Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Puyallup River, Upper Nisqually, Lewis County and Rainier BMAs Revised Biodiversity Network

6 Executive Summary Project Description The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, University of Washington and Pierce County have conducted an assessment of the Pierce County Biodiversity Network (a product of the Pierce County Biodiversity Management Plan 1 ) to assess the accuracy of predicted habitats and species contained within the Biodiversity Network. The original modeling was conducted using watershed boundaries and thus also represents lands that are located within other adjacent counties. This assessment was conducted based on the core Biodiversity Management Area polygons and buffered connectors; using a combination of GIS review by the collaborators and field investigations made by WDFW biologists. Based upon the outcomes of this analysis, the Biodiversity Management Areas and connectors have been adjusted to more precisely delineate on-the-ground conditions. Findings This accuracy assessment revealed that the majority of predicted habitats were present within the Biodiversity Management Area polygons and, based on LandSat imagery and orthophotographic interpretation and field investigations, warrant inclusion in the Biodiversity Network. A few areas did not match predicted habitat types or were deemed to lack the quality to support predicted species and were removed from the Biodiversity Network. The remaining Biodiversity Management Area polygons represent a variety of underlying land uses, such as commercial forest lands, agricultural, or mixed residential, which still contain 50% or more intact natural land cover. This variation is to be expected as the landscape is always changing. For example, the commercial or managed forest land areas are a dynamic mosaic of young, second-growth, and mature Douglas fir and hemlock forest that should provide adequate habitat for the predicted species. Some of the adjustments in the system also resulted in modifications to the connector systems between Biodiversity Management Area polygons. The Biodiversity Network Assessment section of this report details which individual polygons and connectors were removed, modified and retained within the Biodiversity Network. Purpose This assessment fulfills an important step of the Pierce County Biodiversity Management Plan recommendations to conduct a targeted ground-verification and field inventory of the Biodiversity Network to define clear network boundaries and eliminate any areas that lack sufficient natural vegetation to provide adequate habitat for the predicted species. This level of review should be adequate to update the County s current Biodiversity Network data. 1 Pierce County GAP Application Pilot Project: A Biodiversity Plan for Pierce County, Washington, January

7 Stakeholders The principle stakeholders in this project were Pierce County Planning and Land Services Department, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the University of Washington-Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. Other interested parties include the Pierce County Executive s Office, Metro Parks Tacoma, Pt. Defiance Zoological Society, Tahoma Audubon Society, and the Puyallup River Watershed Council. This project has also been endorsed by the Tacoma Rotary #8 Preserve Planet Earth committee, Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge, and the Cascade Land Conservancy. Implementation The final section of this report contains a variety of actions and recommendations to more fully implement long-term habitat and species protection within the Biodiversity Network. Suggestions cover a range of strategies including: Integration into Pierce County planning processes and programs including Open Space/Greenbelt Element of the Comprehensive Plan and Community Plans, Watershed Basin Plans and Transportation Plans; Integration into incentive-based programs such as Conservation Futures Program and Current Use Assessment Program; Ongoing monitoring of species and habitat conditions; Public education and outreach efforts designed to promote public awareness of the importance of conservation measures within these areas and to recruit and train citizens to conduct monitoring; and Acquisition and habitat restoration efforts. Information from this assessment may also be useful to other local jurisdictions, governmental agencies, tribes, land trusts, and environmental organizations seeking more detailed wildlife data and working on long-term habitat protection actions. This assessment creates a benchmark by which future monitoring and public education and outreach efforts within the Biodiversity Network can be measured. It should also be noted that while protection of lands within the Biodiversity Network is important, efforts to protect other quality habitat areas lying outside the network (especially those located within open space areas designated on the Pierce County Open Space/Greenbelt map 2 ) should not be discounted as these lands provide additional benefits to fish and wildlife and serve to enhance habitat conservation within the County. 2 Pierce County Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element - Open Space/Greenbelt Map. 7

8 Background Overview of Biodiversity Network Creation of the Biodiversity Network The Pierce County Biodiversity Management Plan (hereafter referred to as the plan ) was an effort to evaluate and map the lands within Pierce County that provide for the greatest biological diversity of terrestrial species (mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles) and provided special consideration for salmonids. The methodology used to identify these biodiverse areas was based on the principles of conservation biology and landscape ecology protocols (GAP Analysis 3 ) for species richness and representation as predicted by primary land cover derived from review of satellite imagery. The University of Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit served as the Washington State liaison (referred to as WA-GAP) to National GAP and implemented the National GAP Analysis methodology at a finer resolution. The minimum mapping unit (MMU) was 100 hectares, however, coastal islands and Nature Conservancy lands were mapped well below the MMU 4. The WA-GAP team classified land cover over the landscape (see Table 1) using satellite (LandSat) imagery and obtained numerous historical and current species location records to build a habitat relationship model. Over 360,000 records were collected and mapped (e.g., museum specimens, Breeding Bird Atlas records, research projects, private databases, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife [WDFW] Heritage data, etc.). The locations were used to assess predicted habitats for individual species based on the LandSat imagery. As more species location data were obtained, these data were either employed to improve the models or utilized for an accuracy assessment. (Note: Twenty independent studies provided 2,838 records for reptiles/amphibians that indicated a modeling accuracy of 95% and 96%, respectively, for species locations falling within the predicted range. The models were updated with these data to improve the maps.) Satellite imagery is too coarse to identify streams and wetlands, especially in forested areas. WA-GAP used 1:100,000 hydrology maps to identify large rivers. To improve accuracy, National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and the County Wetland Inventory (CWI) data was used in the model to identify polygons that met the criteria for species associated with wetlands and streams. The final model generated areas across the landscape that were identified for species richness and representation. These areas became the primary driver habitat core polygons (see Tables 2a and 2b) for each of the taxonomic groups in the study (mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles). These core polygons were then enclosed by a standard ¼-mile buffer to create the final Biodiversity Management Areas (BMAs). The BMAs were connected, using a linear alignment across appropriate landscapes, such as riparian channels, to promote movement corridors that would be adequate to avert isolation effects considered detrimental to biodiversity protection. These linear alignments were buffered at a ½-mile on 3 Gap Analysis is the process of locating habitat for individual species or groups of species not adequately protected through land ownership or management. The first Gap Analysis was conducted by Michael Scott in Hawaii during the mid-1980s (Noss et al 1994). The Gap Analysis Project is the largest effort to date to map the distribution of biological resources in the United States and is being conducted at the state level through support from the United States Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.), National GAP Program. Davis et al, Land Cover of Washington State: Description and Management. Volume 1 in Washington State Gap Analysis Project, Final Report. 8

9 center (¼-mile on either side of the linear alignment). The final compilation of buffered biodiversity management areas and corridors became the adopted Pierce County Biodiversity Network (Biodiversity Network) (see Figure 1). Yet, even with this finer level of detail, the plan contained certain limitations in accuracy of the data resulting from the coarse scale of the satellite imagery used to conduct the analysis, limited on-the-ground verification of the predicted habitat types, and the use of standard buffers that may have included lands that were inappropriate as habitat. In recognition of these inadequacies, the plan contained a recommendation to conduct a targeted verification and field inventory of the Biodiversity Network to define more precise network boundaries and eliminate any areas that lack sufficient natural vegetation to provide adequate habitat for the predicted species. Accuracy Assessment of the BMA Network This report provides an assessment and review of the core BMA polygons 5 and corridors that were utilized to create the original Biodiversity Network (see Figure 2). Each set of polygons within a BMA and the BMA corridors were evaluated at a finer scale to determine whether the predicted primary driver habitat was adequately classified. The intent was to remove any lands that do not qualify as one of the primary driver habitats for the BMA or would not serve to foster wildlife movement between BMAs. In addition, the latest species occurrence data was reviewed and incorporated into this assessment. Geographic Information System (GIS) Review A rapid GIS evaluation was conducted in the more developed western portion of Pierce County, using orthophoto interpretation to estimate the percent of non-developed land within each of the BMA core areas. The purpose of this initial evaluation was simply to determine how much (or relative percent) of the BMA consisted of natural habitat versus developed or mixed residential area. Approximately 1,000 1ha random stratified sample plots were reviewed and two parameters were estimated: (1) Percent Non- Developed Lands percent of non-developed lands represents everything that is not developed, agricultural or pasture cover estimated for each 1ha sample plot, and (2) Probability of Non-Developed Lands the probability of the 1ha plot center falling on non-developed lands was estimated using a grid overlay in a GIS environment for the entire BMA. Percent and probability were significantly correlated (r 2 = 0.94, df = 19) so only the percent of non-developed lands was reported. For the seven BMAs located in the western portion of Pierce County that were sampled in this analysis, three consisted of relatively high percent of non-developed land (94%, 95%, and 100% non-developed land). One BMA represented 73% non-developed land and three of the seven BMAs had plots with approximately 80% non-developed land (82%, 84%, and 85%). This initial screening suggests that most of the BMAs represent areas of predominantly natural habitat and identifies those BMAs that need closer scrutiny to determine how much of the natural habitat represented the predicted driver habitat from the initial modeling. A second level of GIS review was conducted within the core polygons and corridor area for each BMA, using orthophotos (at approximately a 1:1,200 scale) where available and recent LandSat imagery ( ) when orthophoto coverage was not available. When necessary, other State and County information (such as wetlands, hydric soils, hydrologic, and topographic data) and expert knowledge was applied to augment the photo interpretation process. 5 Unbuffered primary driver habitat core polygons. 9

10 A determination was made for each BMA on whether the predicted primary habitat within each given BMA core polygon was actually the dominant habitat type on the landscape. Then, each BMA was evaluated in more detail and, when necessary, divided into unique clusters within a BMA (e.g. BMA 4 into 4a, 4b, 4c, etc.) based on unique geography or habitat (see Figures 3-6). All primary driver habitat 6 (i.e. the dominant habitat and the one that is driving the polygon selection) core polygons that were located within the BMA were considered in the process. In certain cases, primary driver habitat areas that extended beyond a core polygon or between core polygons but were still within the buffered area were retained and incorporated into new polygons. Areas that may have been a primary driver habitat but were not directly attached to an area with the same primary driver habitat were excluded. Where core polygons were located along a riparian corridor, a 300 foot buffer on each side of the watercourse was used (see Figure 7). As a result, the lines of the core polygons were corrected to more precisely match the habitat as it actually exists across the landscape. During the GIS review process some core polygons were found to have habitat other than that predicted during the initial modeling effort 7, either because the habitat had matured or been altered by land use or was inaccurately identified during the initial LandSat imagery review process. In these situations, the habitat polygon was reassigned the correct code for the actual habitat contained within. It was then determined, based on the WA-GAP models 8, whether this habitat type could support the predicted species. For example, a model for a species may have included all seral stages of a conifer forest, or certain stages of a conifer and hardwood forest. If the actual habitat fit within the model the new habitat code was retained and the species was considered accounted for. Core polygons that contained primary habitats that cannot provide habitat functions for the predicted species were removed from the Biodiversity Network. For example, some polygons generated by the NWI data that had been converted for agriculture were eliminated during this project. The original connectors were evaluated based on the core polygons and riparian systems connecting them. Connectors that did not follow riparian areas were eliminated and realigned to follow a natural watercourse. NWI or county delineated wetlands within the corridors were included without a buffer around their polygons. If a stream didn t run the length of the corridor, the corridor continued, maintaining a 600 foot width, using the primary habitats of the BMAs it was connecting. Predicted Habitat Field Assessment Once the GIS review was completed and core polygons were corrected, WDFW staff biologists conducted site visits for each BMA in the western portion of Pierce County to validate the photo interpretation process. A habitat area that matched the predicted primary driver habitat was retained. Habitat areas that were of poor quality or core polygons that had been altered significantly through development processes (i.e. greater than 50% in a non-habitat condition) were recommended for removal from the Biodiversity Network. A finer field investigation will be needed to ascertain if restoration efforts are possible and what land use is planned for the area. The BMAs within the eastern portion of Pierce County are in a managed forest landscape or are in a protected status within the boundaries of Mount Rainier National Park and therefore were not field verified. It was assumed that the predicted species can be adequately supported within these environments. 6 Primary driver habitats are defined by the first two digits in the habitat code listed in Table 1 (e.g. codes 533 and 534 are both riparian habitat primary driver habitat code 53, with the final digit representing a micro habitat type). 7 Pierce County Biodiversity Management Plan, page WAGAP Manual, Volumes 1-5,

11 Predicted Species Species Identification Species occurrence within the Biodiversity Network was predicted based on two concepts: species richness and species representation 9. Species richness refers to the number of native terrestrial vertebrate species predicted to occur in a given mapped land cover unit. Thus, a land cover unit is considered rich if it is predicted to support greater than the mean number of predicted species for all units across the study area. Species representation refers to the fewest number of land cover units necessary to represent all terrestrial vertebrate species in the study area at least once. The trigger species concept refers to the process used to ensure representation of all terrestrial vertebrate species in the proposed Biodiversity Network. AML s (GIS programming language) written to guide the development of a representative set of mapped land cover units (the smallest number of mapped land cover units needed to represent all terrestrial vertebrates predicted to occur in the Pierce County study area at least once) processed the species data through a series of rounds of analyses. If a species occurred in the most representative mapped land cover units for each taxonomic group in the County study area, it was considered to be in the first round and was then removed from the process. In each subsequent round, new trigger species established the need for including certain additional mapped land cover units in the proposed Biodiversity Network. This process continued until all species were accounted for within a core polygon or polygons. Therefore, some BMAs may only have been designated based on one trigger species, which should be considered in any future management plans for this area. It is also important to review all the species within each BMA because many species are represented, some of which may be at-risk, listed, or priority species under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program. Tables 3 through 6 provide an overview of all the predicted species for each BMA and Table 7 provides a summary of all the species predicted to occur within the network by BMA. A species may be listed in multiple BMAs because each round of analysis was conducted by ecoregion and vegetation zone (see Figure 8) using all species. In addition, the tables identify species that are: Triggers, as explained previously; At-risk, as identified by the Washington GAP Analysis; State or Federally-listed as endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate, monitor or species of concern; and A priority species under the PHS Program. Tables 8 through 24 list each predicted species by BMA. Salmonid distribution for each BMA (see Table 25) was incorporated and used to analyze overlap between habitat predicted to support terrestrial vertebrates and the waterways used by anadromous fish. When possible, BMA connectors were aligned along riparian corridors which support salmonids and other aquatic species, which in turn may support terrestrial vertebrates. Invertebrates were not considered during the BMA network development. However, some individual BMAs are being analyzed for their ability to support invertebrates, especially certain butterflies that may be State or Federal-listed species. Examples include invertebrate-rich grasslands found on Fort Lewis Military Reservation and at WDFW Scatter Creek Wildlife Area. The Washington State Butterfly Atlas identifies the locations of butterfly sightings throughout the County and 9 Pierce County Biodiversity Management Plan, Page 31 11

12 Table 26 provides a list of confirmed butterflies for each BMA. (Note: Tables 8 through 26 are located at the end of the Biodiversity Network Assessment Section) Finally, State or Federal-listed species that were predicted to occur or were identified as WDFW Heritage points/phs polygons that fell within or directly adjacent to a BMA were described in detail in the analysis for each BMA. The listing status code was provided after each species as follows (Federal code, State code). The status codes identifying the listing status are as follows: FE: Federal Endangered FT: Federal Threatened FC: Federal Candidate FCo: Federal Species of Concern SE: State Endangered ST: State Threatened SC: State Candidate SS: State Sensitive SM: State Monitor Species Validation Once the model identified BMAs, this information was checked against actual wildlife records. Confirmation of species predicted to inhabit the Biodiversity Network was based on data sets including WDFW known species locations and use areas (PHS and Wildlife Heritage Points databases), citizen scientist NatureMapping 10 locations, museum records, Breeding Bird Atlas records, Breeding Bird Survey records, Washington Butterfly Atlas, Monitoring for Avian Population and Status (MAPS) records, Audubon Christmas Bird Count records, research project datasets, and private databases. With only a few exceptions overlap between the wildlife records and BMAs (i.e. predicted habitat) was significant. Ecoregional Assessments Ecoregional Planning in Washington State The WDFW is working in partnership with The Nature Conservancy and the Washington Department of Natural Resources on Ecoregional Assessments. The purpose of ecoregional assessments is to identify where high priority biodiversity conservation areas are located across the entire ecoregion. This is necessary because conservation resources are limited. However, because conservation priorities for the ecoregional assessments are determined across the entire ecoregion (or subsection of an ecoregion), some areas that are locally significant are not included. Lack of inclusion of a local habitat does not mean that habitat is not contributing to regional biodiversity. By definition, maintenance of local biodiversity contributes to regional biodiversity. There are nine ecoregions in Washington. Pierce County encompasses portions of both the Willamette Valley-Puget Trough-Georgia Basin (Puget Trough) Ecoregion and the Southwest Cascades Ecoregion. 10 The NatureMapping Program trains teachers and individual citizens to conduct wildlife and habitat assessments, using standardized protocols and methodology, for integration into a statewide biological survey. All information is transmitted to a central database repository, located at the University of Washington, where it can be used by the public to make local policy and planning decisions regarding how resources may be managed. 12

13 The Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment was recently completed. The Southwest Cascades Ecoregional Assessment is still being conducted and will not be available until later in Puget Trough Ecoregional Polygons within Pierce County Fifteen Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment terrestrial and nearshore polygons fall completely or partially within Pierce County. The total land area for these 15 polygons, including shorelines, is 124,741 acres. (See Figure 9) Fort Lewis-McChord is the biggest polygon (60,224 acres) and includes some of the largest, relatively undeveloped remaining expanses of oak woodlands and upland prairies in South Puget Sound. Fort Lewis-McChord also encompasses a diversity of terrestrial and aquatic habitats including: lowland coniferous forests, dry evergreens and woodlands, wetlands, riparian forests and shrublands, and headwater areas. Solo Point (2,275 acres) and Sequalitchew Marshes (976 acres) also include relatively undeveloped oak woodland and prairie habitat. Nisqually, the second largest polygon (19,239 acres), includes large areas of tidal and non-tidal marshes, mud flats, and kelp and seagrass marine habitat. In addition, the Nisqually River corridor represents a diverse and relatively undeveloped habitat system, from shoreline to headwaters, which includes: lowland conifer forests, dry evergreens and woodlands, oak woodlands, wetlands, riparian forests and shrublands, and headwater areas. Buckley Hills (10,932 acres), Tanwax Creek (7,472 acres), Carbon River Plateau (7,378 acres), White River Riparian (4,592 acres), Horn Creek (2,480 acres), Puyallup River Riparian (1,163 acres), the Narrows (1,875 acres), and South Prairie Riparian (514 acres) represent some of the highest priority areas for conifer (Douglas-fir) forests but also include a variety of important terrestrial and aquatic habitats including: dry evergreens and woodlands, riparian forests and shrublands, freshwater wetlands, and headwaters. North Bay (1,282 acres) and Dratyon Passage-Filucy Bay (921 acres) are the highest priority marine or nearshore sites in Pierce County and include: mudflats, saltmarshes, kelp beds, and seagrass. McNeil Island (3,418 acres) includes important marine and terrestrial habitats. Pierce County s greatest potential contribution to regional conservation, locally and across the Puget Trough ecoregion, is in protecting prairie and oak woodlands, the maintenance of relatively undeveloped estuarine systems and riparian corridors, marine and nearshore habitats, and large (>150 acres) tracts of relatively contiguous evergreen forests. Biodiversity Management Areas and the Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment Designation of the BMAs and Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment areas represent two different methodologies intended to identify lands important for biodiversity or conservation at two different scales, locally and regionally. Ecoregional Assessment utilizes target habitat and species to represent the full array of biodiversity. Identification of the BMAs uses GAP Analysis and other data to reflect where species richness and representation (including all terrestrial species) is concentrated within Pierce County. A qualitative comparison can be insightful in revealing areas that are important locally and that have ecoregional significance. 13

14 Portions or all of the North Bay, McNeil Island, Upland, Nisqually Delta, Shoreline, Lower White River, and the western portion of the Greenwater River BMAs represent some of the most important and biologically rich habitats within Pierce County. Partial overlap within any of these areas simply represents differences in scale and analysis methodology, and should not detract from the overall message that these areas, regardless of their specific boundaries, are significant. The east portion of Greenwater River BMA spans the uncompleted Southwest Cascades Ecoregion, which is why this (or anything located east of this) is not highlighted. (See Figure 10) Kitsap, Lake Bay, and Ketron Island were included as BMAs to provide adequate representation across the County for common species, such as the painted turtle and western fence lizard. These BMAs, while of local importance, are not considered areas of ecoregional significant. The Carbon River Plateau, Puyallup River Riparian, and Drayton Passage-Filucy Bay represent ecoregional polygons that are not included within Pierce County BMAs. Drayton Passage-Filucy Bay is a marine-only site and the GAP Analysis modeling process only included terrestrial species and their associated habitats. Carbon River Plateau and Puyallup River Riparian represent terrestrial conifer forest habitats and some freshwater sites of ecoregional significance. Since these areas are ecoregionally significant they should be addressed during any land use planning efforts once habitat quality is confirmed. 14

15 Table 1: Primary Land Cover Codes and Definitions Developed: Significant human influence. Surface development includes buildings, pavement, mining operations, etc. 212 Industrial/business with heavy development (e.g., >60% surface development) Agriculture: Intensively managed fields. Does not include unmaintained range used as pasture. Hedgerows are important and should be included in the comments. 321 Non-irrigated maintained pasture that is seeded and regularly mown Open water: Completely covered in water. 411 Fresh water lakes 420 Salt water Wetlands: Vegetated areas where plants are rooted in water or water saturated soil or that regularly tolerate flooding for extensive time periods. 524 Freshwater marsh 530 Riparian along rivers and streams with all wetland vegetation types 532 Riparian along rivers and streams with emergent herbs/shrubs 533 Riparian along rivers and streams with deciduous/hardwood trees Non-forested: Grasslands, mountain meadows, unmaintained range, clear cuts, as well as young replanted forests with trees less than 15' tall and have less than 26% canopy cover. Recently disturbed can mean disturbed yesterday, or 10 years ago. Most of undisturbed/climax vegetation is on preserves or hard to access parcels of land. 610 Recently disturbed (grazed, fire)/successional with successional and climax vegetation 612 Grassland/forbs (e.g., 0-10% shrub or tree cover) that has been recently disturbed (grazed, fire, mowed) 614 Shrubland (e.g., >26% shrub cover) that has been recently disturbed (grazed, fire, mowed) 615 Tree savannah (e.g., 11-25% tree cover) that has been recently disturbed (grazed, fire, mowed) 620 Undisturbed/climax with successional and climax vegetation 621 Undisturbed/climax that is sparsely vegetated (e.g., 60-90% bare ground) 624 Undisturbed/climax shrubland 625 Undisturbed/climax tree savannah 15

16 Table 1: Primary Driver Habitat Codes and Definitions Forests: Stands of trees greater than 15' tall and with more than 26% canopy cover. 700 Deciduous/hardwood forest with all age/size classes with open and closed canopy 760 Young, mostly sapling or pole deciduous/hardwood forest with open and closed canopy 762 Young, mostly sapling or pole deciduous/hardwood forest with a closed canopy 772 Intermediate aged deciduous/hardwood forest with mostly pole or small saw with a closed canopy 800 Deciduous/hardwood and conifer mixed forest with all age/size classes with open and closed canopy 860 Young, mostly sapling or pole deciduous/hardwood and conifer mixed forest with open and closed canopy 862 Young, mostly sapling or pole deciduous/hardwood and conifer mixed forest with a closed canopy (e.g., % canopy closure) 870 Intermediate aged deciduous/hardwood and conifer mixed forest with mostly pole or small saw with open and closed canopy 901 Conifer forest with all age/size classes and an open canopy (e.g., 26-60% canopy closure) 960 Young conifer forest with mostly sapling or pole, possibly including seedlings with open and closed canopy 961 Young conifer forest with mostly sapling or pole, possibly including seedlings with an open canopy 962 Young conifer forest with mostly sapling or pole, possibly including seedlings with a closed canopy 970 Intermediate aged conifer forest with mostly pole or small saw with open and closed canopy 972 Intermediate aged conifer forest with mostly pole or small saw with a closed canopy 982 Mature conifer forests with mostly saw timber to old-growth with a closed canopy; may include mature forests of smaller stunted trees, such as some subalpine forests 16

17 Table 2a: Primary Driver Habitats for the Puget Trough Ecoregion 17

18 Table 2a: Primary Driver Habitats for the Puget Trough Ecoregion (page 2) 18

19 Table 2b: Primary Driver Habitats for the Southwest Cascades Ecoregion 19

20 Table 2b: Primary Driver Habitats for the Southwest Cascades Ecoregion (page 2) 20

21 Figure 1 Adopted Biodiversity Network 21

22 Figure 2 Core BMA Polygons and Connectors 22

23 Figure 3 Core Polygons and Connectors for Kitsap, North Bay, Gig Harbor, Lake Bay and McNeil Island BMAs 23

24 Figure 4 Core Polygons and Connectors for Ketron Island, Upland, Nisqually Delta and Shoreline BMAs 24

25 Figure 5 Core Polygons and Connectors for Greenwater River, Norse Peak, White River and Lower White River BMAs 25

26 Figure 6 Core Polygons and Connectors for Puyallup River, Upper Nisqually, Lewis County and Rainier BMAs 26

27 Figure 7 Connecting Core Biodiversity Management Area Polygons 27

28 Table 3 Amphibians Predicted to Occur in Each BMA 28

29 Table 4 Birds Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 1) 29

30 Table 4 Birds Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 2) 30

31 Table 4 Birds Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 3) 31

32 Table 4 Birds Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 4) 32

33 Table 4 Birds Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 5) 33

34 Table 5 Mammals Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 1) 34

35 Table 5 Mammals Predicted to Occur in Each BMA (page 2) 35

36 Table 6 Reptiles Predicted to Occur in Each BMA 36

37 Table 7 Summary of Tables 3 through 6 by BMA 37

38 Figure 8 Ecoregions and Vegetation Zones in Pierce County 38

39 Figure 9 Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment Area 39

40 Figure 10 Comparison of Puget Trough Ecoregional Assessment and BMA Core Areas 40

41 Biodiversity Network Assessment 1 - Kitsap County BMA Description The Kitsap County BMA is located outside the jurisdictional boundaries of Pierce County in Kitsap County (see Figure 3) and is approximately 342 acres in size. This BMA lies within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 411) is a lake environment including shoreline and possible marshy edge. GIS Review The GIS review for this BMA was based on LandSat imagery. The LandSat imagery indicates that this BMA contains lake/shoreline habitat however, it also appears that a large portion of the shoreline has been developed. Field Validation Field validation based on driving routes indicates this BMA is an open freshwater lake community (411- coded habitat) dominated by deciduous trees and shrubs at lake edge and merging into coniferous cover as elevation increases. Significant native vegetation remains in undeveloped areas surrounding Long Lake and around developed housing units. Estimated percent native vegetation remaining may be as high as 75% based on visual observations. A deciduous corridor continues northwards from Long Lake, possibly fed by Cranberry Creek. An extensive riparian corridor (the Olalla Valley) also exists southwards from the lake to approximately SE Burley-Olalla Road, likely fed by Olalla Creek or its tributaries. Historically, Olalla Valley likely merged southwards into Crescent Valley, also identified as biologically rich under the Gig Harbor BMA. Predicted and Confirmed Species The Painted Turtle is the only predicted trigger species identified for this BMA. There are 3 predicted atrisk species, 15 state or federal-listed species and 17 PHS species. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 6 amphibians, 77 birds, 42 mammals and 4 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 8). WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the Kitsap BMA for the following species: Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Mountain Quail, Osprey (SM), Purple Martin (SC), Western Pond Turtle (FCo, SE), Coast-Range Sculpin, Prickly Sculpin, Reticulated Sculpin (SM), Shorthead Sculpin, and Western Brook Lamprey (FCo). Conclusion and Implementing Actions Field verification confirms that this BMA is not as developed as the GIS review initially indicated. Long Lake and its associated Olalla Valley system remains fairly intact (approximately 75%) providing a biologically rich environment in the face of increased human development pressures along the lake and in the surrounding area. The habitat type that was predicted exists in the field and should support the species that have been predicted. In particular several listed bat species were predicted to occur within this BMA 41

42 and the habitat is suitable to support their presence. In addition, while Western Pond Turtles (FCo, SE) were not predicted within this BMA, the WDFW confirmed their presence here in This BMA should be retained within the Biodiversity Network. This BMAs geographical proximity to Crescent Valley, to the south, provides an important movement corridor for species. The extensive deciduous corridor from Long Lake continuing southwards to the Burley-Olalla Road and eastwards along Olalla Creek to Olalla Bay allows for the movement of species from a freshwater environment to a marine (estuarine) environment. The BMA connection between Long Lake and Southeast Burley-Olalla Road should be retained. The BMA connection southwards of Southeast Burley-Olalla Road should be removed, and a new connector along Olalla Creek out to Olalla Bay should be established using the 300 foot buffer criteria. (See Figure 11) One large clearing on the northern end of the Long Lake could be the focus of vegetation restoration efforts. Landowners along Long Lake, Cranberry and Olalla Creeks, and within defined buffers of the Olalla Valley, should be educated on maintaining the integrity of the riparian corridors. Education should focus on vegetation retention and restoration, retaining in-stream flows to Long Lake, and the biological importance of the Olalla Valley-Crescent Valley corridor. Development within this BMA and connecting corridors should be managed in a manner that maintains the continuity and functions of the lake and riparian systems and connecting corridor. The data regarding the status of this BMA should be provided to the Kitsap County Planning Department for use in evaluating planning and development proposals within their jurisdictional boundaries. 2 - North Bay BMA Description The North Bay BMA is located outside the jurisdictional boundaries of Pierce County in Mason County (see Figure 3) and is approximately 162 acres in size. This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 552) is Puget Sound marine shoreline; dominated by herbs, shrubs, and shrubby trees. GIS Review The GIS review for this BMA was based on LandSat imagery. The LandSat imagery indicates that this BMA contains Puget Sound marine shoreline habitat but it appears that a large portion of the shoreline has been developed with single-family residences. Field Validation Field validation based on driving routes confirmed the east shore of North Bay from its merger with Rocky Bay to the northern boundary of Victor has been developed. The majority of native shoreline habitat in this section of the BMA has been removed and replaced with lawn and ornamental vegetation and therefore, does not contain at least 50% of the predicted habitat type. The section beginning at the northern boundary of Victor and then continuing around the North Bay estuary and along the western shore of North Bay to the northern limits of Allyn contains intact native shoreline vegetation on either side of Highway 302/Highway 3. Nearby Rocky Bay lagoon, which connects to North Bay on its eastern shore, is a largely undeveloped, naturally functioning lagoon system and likely supports the biodiversity found in North Bay. Two major creeks that feed into North Bay, Coulter Creek and Sherwood Creek, and several other smaller creeks and streams contain native vegetation along their length. 42

43 Predicted and Confirmed Species The Western Fence Lizard and Pigeon Guillemot are identified as predicted trigger species for this BMA and both are listed as WDFW priority species. There are 2 predicted at-risk species, 12 state or federallisted species and 13 PHS species. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Longlegged Myotis (FCo, SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 3 amphibians, 49 birds, 39 mammals, and 4 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 9). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations for the following species: Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Mountain Quail, Osprey, (SM), Pacific Lamprey, Reticulated Sculpin, and Coast Range Sculpin. North Bay also supports five species of anadromous fish (Chum, Coho, Searun Cutthroat Trout, Chinook and Steelhead), three of which spawn in North Bay. The Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP) data indicates a very rich Pigeon Guillemot population and nesting area for this shoreline. The WDOE Nearshore Inventory indicates the shoreline substrate is composed of sand and some sand/gravel mix which, coupled with the downed logs and bluffs/cliffs features, provides good habitat for both Western Fence Lizards and Pigeon Guillemots. One butterfly species was confirmed in the North Bay BMA. Conclusion and Implementing Actions It is recommended that the North Bay BMA be retained as a connector due to the presence of less than 50% driver habitat necessary for designation as a BMA. The northern and western portion of the North Bay estuary from Victor to Allyn, including the adjacent Coulter Creek system and adjoining Rocky Bay area, contain high quality habitat and likely support a majority of the predicted and confirmed species. As such, these other areas should also be retained as connector. It is unlikely that large mammals consistently use these areas because of the presence of two major highways. However, smaller predicted mammals and bats rely on the presence of contiguous vegetation along the shoreline and riparian areas that provide movement corridors. The North Bay and Rocky Bay areas have also been identified as being ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 11) Future development of waterfront lots should incorporate shoreline and native vegetation protection measures. Shoreline and riparian homeowners should be educated on protecting the natural functions of the bay and creeks. Existing homeowners should also be encouraged to replant native vegetation along the shoreline. Bulkhead development should be prevented or strongly discouraged and residents educated in the use of soft armoring techniques that allow natural functions to continue. During future Shoreline Master Program updates, the Rocky Bay area should be designated as a Natural Environment because it is relatively undisturbed and largely intact and is a designated lagoon under the WDFW PHS program. The northern and western portions of North Bay (including the estuary) should be designated conservancy and future growth managed through the use of low impact techniques and best wildlife management practices. The data regarding the status of this connector should be provided to the Mason County Planning Department for use in evaluating planning and development proposals within their jurisdictional boundaries. 43

44 3 - Gig Harbor BMA Description The Gig Harbor BMA is located in the Crescent Valley of the Gig Harbor Peninsula; situated along Crescent Creek and Crescent Valley Road between the Gig Harbor Bay and Crescent Lake (see Figure 3) and is approximately 800 acres in size. This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 533) is riparian shoreline; dominated by hardwood trees and small shrubs with some conifer trees. GIS Review The County orthophoto data seems to visually represent a riparian environment along Crescent Creek. The County s hydrology, hydric soils, and wetland (NWI and CWI) data also indicates a patchwork system of small tributaries and wetlands underlain by hydric soils. It appears that approximately 15 20% of the BMA area is developed in a low density single family, large lot pattern, where some habitat has been converted to pasture land. Field Validation Field validation based on driving routes indicates the BMA predominately contains 533-coded habitat consisting of riparian shorelines dominated by hardwood trees and small shrubs with scattered conifer trees (primarily cedar and fir). The northern portion of this BMA, just south of Crescent Lake, is a midseral mixed forest dominated by conifers, especially cedar. Crescent Lake appears to be less than 50% developed along its shorelines, with significant portions on the southern end supporting native vegetation. As elevation increases, conifers representative of the 534 code dominate lands to the west of the riparian corridor. City Park at Crescent Creek contains both 510 and 513-coded habitat. The Crescent Creek riparian corridor meanders in and out of private property, with some areas cleared of native vegetation to the creek edge. Predicted and Confirmed Species The Common Garter Snake is the only predicted trigger species listed for this BMA. There are 3 predicted at-risk species, 14 state or federal-listed species and 17 PHS species. The predicted state and federallisted species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 6 amphibians, 74 birds, 43 mammals, and 5 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 10). The confluence of Crescent Creek and Gig Harbor Bay (Gig Harbor Estuary) is identified as a WDFW priority habitat and Chinook Salmon (FT, SC) are known and predicted to occur in Crescent Creek. Eleven butterfly species have been confirmed within the Gig Harbor BMA. Conclusions and Implementing Actions The availability of lowland deciduous, riparian, estuarine and upland coniferous habitats along the Crescent Valley contributes to this BMAs ecological richness. Most of the at-risk, listed, and/or priority species predicted to occur within this BMA have a primary association with water for either all or part of their life cycle. It is highly likely that these species would be confirmed as inhabiting this BMA if additional surveys were conducted. Water quality within Gig Harbor Bay, its estuaries, Crescent Creek, and Crescent Lake should not be compromised as it contributes foremost to the presence of the species predicted within. (See Figure 11) 44

45 Older, fallow farmlands and pasturelands along Crescent Valley continue to collect water and could be targeted for wetland restoration sites by willing sellers. In their present state, they may provide breeding locations for amphibians. Sections of Crescent Creek located on private property, where native vegetation has been removed to the creek edge, should be targeted for habitat restoration. Future land development should not allow removal of native vegetation along the creek within a defined buffer. Culverts along the creek should be assessed for blockage to fish movement. The City of Gig Harbor in cooperation with Pierce County and other interested parties should target areas for restoration and protection. Landowners along Crescent Creek and Crescent Lake, and within defined buffers of the Crescent Valley, should be educated on maintaining the integrity of the riparian corridors. Education should focus on vegetation retention and restoration, retaining in-stream flows to Crescent Lake, and the biological importance of the Crescent Valley corridor. The Gig Harbor BMA would benefit by the application of WDFW PHS Riparian Habitat Guidelines on privately owned riparian lands and by enforcing county regulations for development along riparian corridors. WDFW PHS recommendations for salmonids and county critical area ordinance standards should also be applied in consideration of salmonid presence. 4 - Greenwater River BMA Description The Greenwater River BMA is located in the north central portion of Pierce County, near the City of Buckley (see Figure 5) and is approximately 20,857 acres in size. This BMA is located within the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) and the Western Hemlock vegetation zone (Zone 35). The Greenwater BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: Riparian mixed communities (code 530) Non-forested; recently disturbed/successional; all structural classes (code 610) Non-forested; recently disturbed/successional; shrubland >26% shrub cover (code 614) Hardwood forest in an unknown seral stage with a patchy or mixed canopy closure; usually either riparian forests or oak woodlands (code 700) Hardwood forest in a mid-seral stage with a closed canopy; usually mature trees in a riparian floodplain (code 772) Conifer forests in an early seral stage with a patchy or mixed canopy closure; usually Douglas fir (code 960) Conifer forests in a mid-seral stage with a closed canopy; usually Western hemlock or Douglas fir (code 972) GIS Review The Greenwater BMA is comprised of several different segments of primary driver habitat. For purposes of this analysis, the BMA was further subdivided into smaller geographic areas: 4A White River corridor, 530 and 700 coded areas; 4B Buckley area 772, 960 and 972 coded areas; 4C White River upland, 972 coded areas; and 4D isolated clearcuts, 610 and 614 coded areas. 4A White River Corridor Review of the orthophoto data indicates that the riparian habitat appears to be accurate. However, the BMA boundaries could benefit from some alignment to more accurately reflect the exact riparian habitat boundaries. To accomplish this, a 300-foot riparian buffer was established, as described earlier. The 45

46 hardwood forest appears to be a mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees in mixed seral stages. The species predicted in the hardwood forests were also predicted by WA-GAP for deciduous/conifer forests. 4B Buckley Area Review of the orthophoto data indicates that this is a managed forest landscape with ages of coniferous trees younger than coded in the original plan. The current landscape appears to be a mixture of very young conifer trees (60% coded as 910) and early seral stage conifer forest (40% coded as 960). It did not appear that this area contained mid-seral stage conifer forests. Based on a review of the trigger species predicted in this area, it appears that the different seral stages of forest would support the predicted species within this BMA. 4C White River Upland This area was originally coded as a mid-seral stage conifer forest (code 972). Review of the orthophotos indicated that the existing habitat is a mixture of habitat types including 60% mid-seral stage coniferous forest, 20% hardwood forest of mixed seral stages; 10% hardwood/conifer mix with multiple seral stages (code 800); and 10% clearcut. 4D Isolated Clearcuts This area was originally coded as clearcut and review of orthophotos indicates that the area has since regrown back into a young stand of coniferous trees. The areas previously coded as 610 are now at a 920 stage and the areas coded as 614 are in a 910 stage. The boundaries of these polygons do not appear to match the existing vegetation and could benefit from additional line correction. Field Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because of the predominance of managed forestland, wilderness, and/or national parkland. Lack of access roads and orthophoto coverage also limited the ability to verify this BMA. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 40 predicted trigger mammal species, 10 at-risk species, 20 state or federal-listed species and 25 PHS species identified for the Greenwater BMA. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Black Swift (SM), Great Blue Heron (SM), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 8 amphibians, 95 birds, 50 mammals, and 4 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 11). WDFW PHS data designates this area as a White River Elk range priority habitat and WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations for the following species: Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Turkey Vulture (SM), and Vaux s Swift (SC). The Pierce County fish presence maps identify several anadromous fish species in the Greenwater/White River systems including Chinook (FT, SC), Coho, Chum, Pink, Sockeye and Steelhead. The Washington Butterfly Atlas lists 27 butterfly species within the Greenwater River BMA, three of which are listed species [Dun Skipper (SM), Thicket Hairstreak (SM) and Western Hairstreak (SM)]. 46

47 Conclusions and Implementing Actions The upper portion of the White River Corridor (section 4A) of the Greenwater River BMA is an extensive, intact riparian system having been subject to very little development pressure. This BMA should be adjusted to extend 300 feet from the rivers edge. Surrounding the White River (4B-Buckley Area, 4C-White River Upland, 4D-Isolated Clearcuts) are extensive forestlands in varying stages of re- growth (from recently harvested to mature). The mosaic of different age and type forested habitat communities (deciduous and coniferous timber in varying age classes) in close proximity to a major riparian corridor likely explains why this area was identified for its biodiversity. The shear number of at- risk, listed, and priority aquatic and terrestrial species predicted and confirmed within this BMA is an example of its importance to wildlife within Pierce County. This richness in biodiversity validates the 4A and 4B portions of the Greenwater BMA being identified as ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 13) Pierce County along with private and federal forestland managers should strive to retain this area as managed forestland preserving its mosaic features. This should be accomplished through Forest Practice Regulations. These partners should also establish land management objectives that target biodiversity protection. 5 - Lake Bay BMA Description The Lake Bay BMA is located on the Key Peninsula surrounding Bay Lake (see Figure 3) and is approximately 147 acres in size. This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 411) is a lake environment including shoreline and possible marshy edge. GIS Review The County orthophoto data indicates a lake shoreline environment and the surrounding upland areas appear to be managed forestland with selective cutting. The shoreline is relatively undeveloped with approximately 5-10% in a low-density single-family land use and the remaining habitat seems quite intact. Field Validation Field visits confirmed the Lake Bay BMA is a lake shoreline environment (Bay Lake, code 411) surrounded by lakeshore habitat. Bay Lake is less than 40% developed with large sections of undisturbed, native vegetation remaining. Surrounding upland habitats contain forestlands in a variety of age classes and low density, large lot single-family residential development. Forestland along the shoreline of Lake Bay contains both deciduous and coniferous timber with an understory of shrubs. Predicted and Confirmed Species The Western Fence Lizard is the only predicted trigger species identified for this BMA. There are 6 predicted at-risk species, 14 state or federal-listed species and 18 PHS species. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Purple Martin (SC), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC) and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 6 amphibians, 71 birds, 42 mammals, and 5 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 12). 47

48 Bay Lake is identified as a WDFW priority habitat for waterfowl concentrations. The Lake Bay BMA has three confirmed butterfly species according to the Washington Butterfly Atlas. Conclusion and Implementing Actions Bay Lake represents small-vegetated lakes/ponds once frequently found throughout Pierce County. Human development in the western portion of the county around many of these habitat communities has largely altered wildlife presence. Historical presence of Western Pond Turtles (a listed species) signifies this lakes past importance to wildlife. The presence of native vegetation combined with upland forestlands and little human disturbance likely contributes to the richness of birds and mammals within this BMA. Such richness would probably decline in face of land alteration or over-use and pollution of the lake environment. The presence of intact forestlands and freshwater contributes to mammal and raptor presence within this BMA and the surrounding area. (See Figure 11) Pierce County and the Key Peninsula Community Planning Board should be encouraged to manage Bay Lake as a naturally functioning system in terms of recreation and development. The remaining, undeveloped sections of Bay Lake shoreline should be retained as native vegetation. Intact upland habitat, primarily located on the eastern shore of Bay Lake, should also be retained as undisturbed native vegetation or low scale managed timberland. The use of motorized watercraft on this lake should be prohibited or limited, especially during spring and summer breeding seasons for most of the predicted species. Storm water runoff and other sources of non-point pollution should be prevented from filtering into Bay Lake. 6 - McNeil Island BMA Description The McNeil Island BMA is located on McNeil Island surrounding a small lake (see Figure 3) and is approximately 94 acres in size. This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 411) is a lake environment including shoreline and possible marshy edge. GIS Review The County orthophoto data indicates a lake shoreline environment and the surrounding upland areas appear to be intact habitat. The shoreline seems completely undeveloped. Field Validation Field visits confirmed that the McNeil Island BMA is a lake environment (Butterworth Reservoir; code 411) with shoreline edge. The lake shoreline is less than 10% developed. Predicted and Confirmed Species The Painted Turtle is the only trigger species identified for this BMA. There are 6 predicted species listed as at-risk, 12 state or federal listed species and 17 PHS species. The predicted listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Purple Martin (SC), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC) and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 5 amphibians, 74 birds, 21 mammals, and 4 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 13). 48

49 This BMA is identified as a WDFW priority habitat for urban natural open space and Bald Eagle territory and several Bald Eagle (FT, ST) nests and Great Blue Heron (SM) rookeries are located in the immediate vicinity. Many confirmed priority species also use Butterworth Reservoir and the surrounding areas for all or part of their lifecycle such as Harbor Seal haulout areas. One butterfly species has been confirmed on McNeil Island. Conclusion and Implementing Actions The majority of McNeil Island, on which this BMA is located, is in an undeveloped condition. The island is partially owned by the Washington Department of Corrections (with a State prison facility) and partially by the WDFW. For this reason, very little human land development and human disturbance are present on the island. Large, contiguous blocks of coniferous forests surrounded by marine shoreline likely contribute to the presence of mammals and raptors. The entire island is also designated as ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 11) Undeveloped lands on properties owned by the WDFW along Butterworth Reservoir or in close proximity to it should be managed for the preservation of wildlife and their habitat. Management of lands surrounding Butterworth Reservoir should strive to preserve the native vegetation, as it currently exists. 7 - Ketron Island BMA Description The Ketron Island BMA completely encompasses Ketron Island (see Figure 4) and is approximately 229 acres in size. This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 700) is hardwood forest in an unknown seral stage with a patchy or mixed canopy closure; usually either riparian forests or oak woodlands. GIS Review Review of the County orthophoto data indicates that this habitat appears to be a mixed conifer (80%) and deciduous forest (20%) in a variety of seral stages (800 code) rather than the originally coded deciduous forest (code 700). The coniferous/deciduous habitat appears to be fairly intact with a very small amount of development on the island. Based on a review of the trigger species predicted in this area, the hardwood/conifer forest mix would support the species predicted to occur. Field Validation Field visits confirmed that Ketron Island consists primarily of mixed conifer and deciduous forests. Development has occurred primarily in the north-central portion of the island. Housing developments along the shorelines are single family residential; their design and placement has allowed the retention of significant surrounding habitat providing ample opportunity for species use and movement. Predicted and Confirmed Species The trigger species identified for this BMA include the Common Garter Snake, Northern Alligator Lizard, Northwestern Garter Snake, Western Terrestrial Garter Snake, Rubber Boa, and the Sharptail Snake (SC). There are 6 predicted at-risk species, 12 state or federal-listed species and 15 PHS species. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Purple Martin (SC), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), 49

50 Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Yuma Myotis (FCo) and Sharptailed Snake (SC). A total of 4 amphibians, 53 birds, 17 mammals, and 6 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 14). Conclusion and Implementing Actions Several species of reptiles are predicted to inhabit Ketron Island, probably due to its isolation and habitat availability. Reptiles of importance have been confirmed on nearby McNeil Island and would likely be confirmed on Ketron with additional surveys. Ketron Island is also rich in birds and mammals. Biologically, Ketron Island has benefited from limited human access due to lack of ferry service and no bridge crossing. This low development scenario could change with increased access (see Ferry Serving Ketron, Anderson Islands a Done Deal, The News Tribune, March 4th, 2004). (See Figure 12) Being a reptilian-rich island, special consideration should be given to implementing WDFW PHS recommendations for the reptiles predicted. Preservation of natural habitat systems and native vegetation through development standards, zoning, education, and outreach should be encouraged on Ketron Island. Additionally, future land use plans and development regulations should preserve wildlife movement corridors, particularly when planning new road systems. 8 - Upland BMA Description The Upland BMA is located within and adjacent to Fort Lewis Military Base and is approximately 14,687 acres in size (see Figure 4). This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Woodland/Prairie Mosaic vegetation zone (Zone 29). The Upland BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: Lakes, including shoreline and possible marshy edge (code 411) Marsh; mixed community (code 520) Marsh; closely lined with conifers (code 524) Riparian dominated by hardwood trees (code 533) Non-forested, logged or cleared; regrowth to shrubs or young trees (code 614) Non-forested, logged or cleared; usually regrowth to dense shrubs and saplings; also may include some heavily grazed west-side savanna (code 615) Hardwood forest in an unknown seral stage with a patchy or mixed canopy closure; usually either riparian forests or oak woodlands (code 700) Conifer forests in a mid-seral stage with a closed canopy; usually Western hemlock or Douglas fir (code 972) GIS Review The Upland BMA is comprised of several different segments of primary driver habitat. For purposes of this analysis, the BMA was further subdivided into smaller geographic areas: 8A Graham, 520 coded areas; 8B southeastern portions of Fort Lewis Army Base east of Interstate 5 and portions of McChord Air Force Base with 411, 520, 524, 533, 610, 614, 615, 700, 800, and 970 coded areas; and 8C western portions of Fort Lewis west of Interstate-5 with 411, 520, 800, and 972 coded areas. Orthophoto coverage is not available for the areas of the BMA that lay within Fort Lewis so the most recent LandSat imagery ( ) was used in these areas. 50

51 8A Graham This polygon was originally generated using the County s National Wetland Inventory and County Wetland Inventory data. However, review of the orthophoto data indicates that the marsh areas have been converted to agricultural fields and the habitat quality appears to be poor. 8B Southeastern portions of Fort Lewis Army Base east of Interstate 5 and portions of McChord Air Force Base Review of the LandSat imagery indicates that the non-forested and riparian areas dominated by hardwoods are accurate but each may be underrepresented. One of the 614 coded areas is questionable in terms of habitat quality as it appears to be developed with an extensive non-paved road network. The other non-forested areas (coded 614) are either in a state of regrowth or recent clearcut. The regrowth areas are currently comprised of stands of young conifer saplings (probably more reflective of a 910 code). 8C Western portions of Fort Lewis (west of Interstate-5) Review of orthophotos and LandSat imagery indicates that the area adequately represents the coded primary driver habitat. However, it should be noted that the area around Northwest Landing in Dupont, which was previously used as the old Fort Lake Munitions Plant, is classified as a Consent Decree Area and will be cleared to remediate toxic waste and permanently converted to a golf course. Furthermore, the BMA connector located between the core polygons in 8C should be removed because it doesn t adequately provide any habitat connectivity due to truncation by the Interstate 5 roadway network. Instead, two small connecting corridors that run along riparian areas were added. Field Validatio n 8A Graham Field verification based on driving routes confirmed that the polygons coded 520 (based on County s National Wetland Inventory and County Wetland Inventory data) have been converted to agricultural fields. These areas are no longer ecologically functioning wetlands and should be removed from the Biodiversity Network. The connector that runs between the Nisqually 10F polygon and the Upland 8A polygon should also be removed from the Biodiversity Network 8B Southeastern portions of Fort Lewis Army Base east of Interstate 5 and portions of McChord Air Force Base Field visits confirmed that 800 coded habitat (deciduous/coniferous forests; McChord AFB) is accurate; containing both open and closed canopy Douglas fir stand fringed with deciduous tree and shrub species. Some polygons coded 800 transition into pure stands of conifer (representing a 900 code); particularly into Fort Lewis property. Large polygons within Fort Lewis coded 614 (shrub-grasslands) also contain patches and/or corridors of coniferous forest (primarily Douglas fir, 900 coded habitat), coniferous/deciduous forest (800 coded habitat), and wetland complexes (Talbot, Woods, Bensten) throughout rather than pure shrub grassland. One large polygon coded 700 (situated on the western edge of Perimeter Road at the southern end of McChord AFB) should be recoded to 800 (deciduous-coniferous forest) to more accurately represent the existing habitat (primarily Holiday Park area and southwards; overstory of closed canopy Douglas fir with deciduous mixture on the edges). Polygons coded 520 and 524 (Spanaway Marsh) are accurate and present a very rich marsh environment. One area of Spanaway Marsh north of 169 th St. Ct. S. and on its southern edge should be realigned to include the entire wetland and both sections should be coded 522. Other large polygons coded 970 are accurately providing an intermediate aged coniferous forest; some portions of which are regenerating clear cut stands. A large 51

52 polygon located on the corner of 176 th St S. and SR 7 should be recoded from 800 to 900 to accurately represent the coniferous forests located within. Likewise, an elongated polygon within Fort Lewis property bordering SR 7 on its western edge is a regenerating, open canopy Douglas fir stand and should be recoded from 614 to 920. The hydrology of the eastern edge of Fort Lewis is an intertwined system of creeks, streams, marshlands, and lakes. Natural springs, aquifers, and precipitation likely maintain this system. In particular, Muck Creek and Lacamas Creek feed into various sized lakes in southeastern Fort Lewis (Brandenburg, Muck, Chambers, Hamilton, Dailman, and Shaver), which themselves nourish marshlands to the north (Spanaway Marsh, Johnson s Marsh). Surrounding these wetland areas are extensive coniferous and deciduous forests (970 and 700 coded habitats) with open areas of grasslands and tree savannah. A portion of the eastern edge of Fort Lewis along the border of southern Fort Lewis and northern Roy city limits was coded 970 but is more representative of wetlands and wet depression areas (520 coded habitat) and should be recoded to reflect the existing habitat. The eastern half of the 970 polygon in Nisqually Delta 10D is actually a wetland habitat and should be regrouped in with the 8B cluster of polygons. One large polygon coded 614 (shrub-grasslands) was confirmed on the east side of Fort Lewis (east of SR 507 S between SR 507 and Mountain Highway). Similar habitats exist elsewhere on Fort Lewis; this one polygon is not unique and likely serves little wildlife value and should be removed from the Network. Likewise a 610-coded polygon situated south of Johnson s Marsh serves no direct wildlife value and should be removed. 8C Western portions of Fort Lewis (west of Interstate-5) Field visits confirm the lakes coded 411 within this BMA (American Lake and Lake Sequalitchew) are accurate. American Lake contains significant quality habitat on Fort Lewis properties along its northwestern and southern shores. Most of the northeastern (within City of Lakewood boundaries) and southeastern (portions of which are within Tillicum and City of Lakewood boundaries) shorelines have been developed. Lake Sequalitchew is a fully intact lake system surrounded by conifer with less than 2% surrounding development. The Sequalitchew Creek lies to the east of a recent extension of the Northwest Landing subdivision and feeds the marshlands further east (lands coded 520). Conifer forests (900 coded habitats) and deciduous/coniferous mixed forests (800 coded habitat) are extensive throughout Fort Lewis properties. 800 coded polygons within this 8C portion of the Upland BMA are accurate containing an over story of conifer (primarily Douglas fir) and an under story of mixed deciduous species. Lands coded 520 consist of intact wetlands (marsh) and their associated habitat. One area to the west of the main Northwest Landing subdivision (west of Center Drive and south of Palisades Boulevard) contains a wetland complex and should be recoded 520. A portion of land to the west of the largest 520 polygon has been developed in multi-family residential and should be recoded from 800 to 221 (e.g. this is an extension of the Northwest Landing subdivision) and doesn t meet the 50% habitat requirement. Lands containing freshwater marsh wetlands (all polygons coded 520) and Sequalitchew Creek (code 530) are also present but were not reflected as primary driver habitat for this BMA. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 8 predicted trigger species identified for the Upland BMA including the Western Gray Squirrel, Common Garter Snake, Northern Alligator Lizard, Northwestern Garter Snake, Painted Turtle, Rubber Boa, Sharptail Snake (SC) and Western Terrestrial Garter Snake. There are 10 predicted at-risk species, 20 state or federal-listed species and 24 PHS species. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Purple Martin (SC), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Western Bluebird (SM), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Brush Prairie Pocket Gopher (SC), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Western Gray Squirrel (FCo, ST), Yuma Myotis (FCo) and 52

53 Sharptailed Snake (SC). A total of 7 amphibians, 113 birds, 51 mammals, and 7 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 15). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations for the following species: Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Streaked Horn Lark (FC, SC), Oregon Vesper Sparrow (FCo, SC), Purple Martin (SC), Western Bluebird (SM), Western Gray Squirrel (FCo, ST) and Olympic Mudminnow (SS). The Pierce County fish presence maps identify several anadromous fish species in the stream systems located within the BMA including Chum, Coho, Pink, and Steelhead. WDFW Priority Habitats and Species data designates this area as a priority habitat for waterfowl concentrations and Oregon White Oaks. The Upland BMA has 38 species of butterflies that have been confirmed. Three of these butterflies, Juba Skipper (SM), Mardon Skipper (FC, SE), and Taylor s (Whulge) Checkerspot (FC, SC), are listed species. Conclusion and Implementing Actions 8A Graham The three polygons coded 520 on either side of Webster Road East in Graham should be removed from the Biodiversity Network as they are now agricultural fields with little wetland functions and represent less than 50% of the coded habitat type. The connector between this BMA and the Nisqually Delta 10F polygon should also be deleted. Other high quality wetlands that have not been converted exist to the northwest along Muck Creek riparian corridor, especially located between 8 th Ave E. and approximately 13 th Avenue, contains intact riparian habitat and should be considered in any planning efforts for replacement of those polygons removed. (See Figure 12) 8B Southeastern portions of Fort Lewis Army Base east of Interstate 5 and portions of McChord Air Force Base The southeastern portion of Fort Lewis Army Base and southern McChord Air Force Base are a myriad of high quality habitats provided in a mosaic arrangement. Availability of such diverse, expansive habitats makes Fort Lewis and McChord two of the most biologically and ecologically rich areas remaining in the lower elevations of Pierce County. Along with national parkland and wildlife refuge land within the County, Fort Lewis contains an abundant source of wildlife. The Spanaway Marsh complex is a very rich marshland environment serving as an important habitat for wildlife. The congregation of high quality, diverse habitats within this portion of the Upland BMA adds to both the local and regional biological diversity. This is appropriately reflected in its dual designation as a BMA and ecoregionally significant area. The long list of predicted at-risk, listed, and/or priority species noted above validates the biological importance of this area. In addition, historical confirmation (identified through WDFW Heritage point data) of Mountain Quail, Spotted Frogs, Western Pond Turtle, etc. reflects its long history of use by wildlife. Two polygons indicated previously, that no longer contain driver habitat, should be removed from the Biodiversity Network (the 614 polygon on the east side of Forth Lewis, east of SR 507 S, and the 610-coded polygon situated south of Johnson s Marsh). (See Figure 12) Road construction within this marshland (similar to 169 th St. Ct. S) should be avoided to retain the integrity of the marsh complex. Adequate wetland buffers should also be provided between the marshland and future development. Extensive wetland systems remaining within Fort Lewis and McChord should be maintained in a natural state, void of development, and should be managed for their biological significance. 53

54 8C Fort Lewis/Dupont (west of Interstate-5) American Lake contains significant quality habitat on Fort Lewis properties along its northwestern and southern shores, however most of the northeastern and southeastern shorelines have been developed. In contrast, Lake Sequalitchew and Sequalitchew Creek appear to be intact, functioning habitat systems. A portion of this area has been developed with multi-family residential and should be removed from the Biodiversity Network. The areas of intact habitat support the variety of species that are predicted to occur within this BMA. This portion of the Upland BMA is also designated as ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 12) Undeveloped shorelines of American and Sequalitchew Lakes should be retained as native vegetation and should not be subject to further degradation. Forested habitats (800 and 900 coded forests) on Fort Lewis property should be retained in a managed forest scenario and should not be subject to conversion. Development pressure should be confined to the cities of Lakewood, Dupont, and Steilacoom with forestlands surrounding these cities (including Fort Lewis property) preserved for their open space and biodiversity connectivity. Sections of Sequalitchew Creek have been overdeveloped and should be targeted for restoration; remaining native riparian habitat should be protected from development. All marsh areas should be managed as wetland complexes with no further development allowed within or in close proximity. All opportunities for restoration around and within marsh/wetland complexes should be explored. 9 - Norse Peak BMA Description The Norse Peak BMA is located at the far eastern portion of Pierce County and is approximately 10,163 acres in size (see Figure 5). This BMA is located within two ecoregions: the East Central Cascades ecoregion (Region 12) containing the Interior Western Redcedar/Western Hemlock vegetation zone (Zone 36) and the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) with the Mountain Hemlock vegetation zone (Zone 82) and the Alpine/Parkland vegetation zone (Zone 85). The Norse Peak BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: Non-forested; subalpine/parkland (code 625) Conifer forest; early seral stage open canopy; usually Silver Fir/Mountain Hemlock (code 961) Conifer forest; late seral stage closed canopy; usually dominated by Western Hemlock/Western Redcedar (code 982) GIS Review Review of orthophotos indicates that the coded habitat types appear to be representative of what is occurring in the landscape. The core polygons coded 961 may contain up to 50% of larger pole size trees, however this habitat type should still provide adequate habitat for the predicted species. The boundaries of the core polygons are slightly generalized but the surrounding area is comparable habitat so line correction is not recommended. Field Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because of the predominance of managed forestland, wilderness, and/or national parkland. Lack of access roads and orthophoto coverage also limited the ability to verify this BMA. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. 54

55 Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 62 predicted trigger species, 13 at-risk species, 23 state or federal-listed species and 26 PHS species predicted in this BMA. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Cascades Frog (FCo, SM), Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Black Swift (SM), Black-backed Woodpecker (SC), Golden Eagle (SC), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Merlin (SC), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Three-toed Woodpecker (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Grizzly Bear ( FT, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Wolverine (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 8 amphibians, 74 birds, 51 mammals, and 2 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 16). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations for the following species: Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Three-Toed Woodpecker (SM), Marten, and Grizzly Bear (FT, SE). WDFW PHS data designates this area as a priority habitat for alpine meadows and talus slopes. There are 36 confirmed butterfly species listed for the Norse Peak BMA. Conclusion and Implementing Actions The Norse Peak BMA, encompassing the Norse Peak Wilderness Area, is one of three BMAs (Rainier and Lewis County BMAs being the other two) providing high alpine habitat for the species that depend on this habitat type. Confirmed species of importance found in this BMA include Spotted Owls, Martens, and Grizzly Bear. Norse Peak is also home to the largest mountain goat population in Pierce County and provides expansive habitat to many of Washington s most valued species (such as elk, deer, bear, and cougar). (See Figure 13) As most of Norse Peak is contained within designated wilderness, this BMA and the habitat that it contains, is considered secure. Norse Peak should continue to be managed for its biodiversity and recreational aspects Nisqually Delta BMA Description The Nisqually Delta BMA is located along and adjacent to the Nisqually River (Alder Lake to the Nisqually Delta) and is approximately 32,874 acres in size (see Figure 4). This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Woodland/Prairie Mosaic vegetation zone (Zone 29). The Nisqually Delta BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats Lakes, including shoreline and possible marshy edge (code 411) Marsh; mixed community (code 520) 55 including: Riparian dominated by herbs, shrubs, shrubby hardwoods (code 532) Riparian dominated by hardwood trees (code 533) Non-forested; apparently natural; westside grasslands (code 622) Hardwood forest in an unknown seral stage with a patchy or mixed canopy closure; usually either riparian forests or oak woodlands (code 700) Mixed forest; seral stage unknown; canopy closure patchy or mixed; usually Red Alder/Bigleaf Maple/Douglas-fir/shrubs (code 800)

56 Mixed forest; early seral stage; canopy closure patchy or mixed; usually Red Alder/Bigleaf Maple/Douglas-fir/shrubs (code 860) Conifer forest; mid seral stage; canopy closure patchy or mixed; usually Douglas-fir (code 970) GIS Review The Nisqually Delta BMA is comprised of several different segments of primary driver habitat. For purposes of this analysis, the BMA was further subdivided into smaller geographic areas: 10A Delta Mouth to Interstate-5, coded 511, 512, 520, 532, 533, 700 and 970; 10B Thurston County polygons coded 411 and 700; 10C riparian corridor along Nisqually River, 533 and 520 coded areas; 10D Fort Lewis polygons coded 622 and 970; 10E Roy/McKenna coded 520, 700 and 800; and 10F Southcentral Pierce County coded 411, 520, 800, 970 and 972. Orthophoto coverage is not available for the areas of the BMA that lay within Fort Lewis so the most recent LandSat imagery ( ) was used in these areas. 10A Delta Mouth to Interstate-5 Review of orthophotos indicates that the coded habitat types appear to be representative of what is occurring in the landscape. Areas that were coded as 321 Agricultural were included because the National Wetland Inventory data indicates that these areas contain a large wetland complex and a shoreline buffer of 300 along the Nisqually River also encompasses these areas. In addition, a 300 buffer was added on the south side of 10A along McCallister Creek. The BMA connectors were eliminated and replaced with new connectors aligned along riparian areas, using the 300 stream buffer criteria. 10B Thurston County polygons Review of orthophotos indicates that portions of these polygons are currently more than 50% developed. Therefore, part of these polygons and the corridor that extends to the north, providing a connection to the riparian corridor along the Nisqually River, should be deleted from the Biodiversity Network. A new connector was established through a wetland complex located between the 10B and 10C polygons. 10C Riparian corridor along Nisqually River Review of orthophotos and LandSat imagery indicates that the 533 coded areas accurately represent riparian habitat however, in some instances the Nisqually River actually extends outside the boundaries of the polygon. Where this situation occurs, the boundaries of the core polygon have been increased to include the river and the adjacent land area within 300 feet from the edge of the river. The 970 coded areas adjacent to the Nisqually River appear to be conifer forests with mixed hardwoods. 10D Fort Lewis Review of LandSat imagery indicates that the 622 coded areas are non-forested grassland and the boundaries appear accurate. Approximately 70% of the smaller polygon represents the 970 code with the remaining clear cut areas in a state of regrowth containing saplings defined as 2-4 inches in diameter. 10E Roy/McKenna Review of orthophotos indicates that the large 800 coded polygon appears to be about 80% developed and if so should be removed from the network. The small 800-coded polygon appears to actually be an 810 code with very few trees (i.e. low stock). The field inventory needs to determine if the vegetation is trees or shrubs and if there is more than 25% tree canopy cover to classify under the 800 code. If there is not at least 25% tree canopy cover, then the polygon should be removed from the network. The 700 coded polygon containing the NWI generated 520 code appears to be agricultural fields with definite pockets of 56

57 natural wetland areas. The field inventory needs to determine if there is enough wetland habitat function to support the predicted trigger species (Painted Turtle). If there is not sufficient habitat function remaining, then the polygon should be removed from the network. 10F South-central Pierce County Review of orthophotos indicates that the 800-coded polygon appears to represent at least 50% of the habitat type. Areas of NWI generated polygons (located within the 970 and 972 coded areas) also appear accurate. These wetland systems appear to be in a more native condition that some other areas that have been converted to agricultural uses, however these areas should be checked during the field inventory process to verify the quality of the habitat is adequate to support wetland functions and the predicted species. Field Validation 10A Delta Mouth to Interstate-5 Field visits confirmed that BMA 10A consists primarily of estuarine marshlands (code 520) and riparian corridors dominated by deciduous trees (in particular black cottonwood, code 533). An estuarine inlet feeds the marshlands within this portion of the Nisqually Delta. Several agricultural fields (code 321) are located to the south of this marshland to the Interstate 5 boundary; a dike separates the agricultural fields from the marshland. Lands to the south of the Nisqually River within the Nisqually Delta consist primarily of heavily used agricultural fields (code 310 and 320). Wetlands (code 520) are located between the riparian corridor of the Nisqually River and Nisqually Road to the north/northwest. 10B Thurston County polygons This section of the BMA was not ground verified due to the lack of orthophotos. Thus, verification is based on the GIS review provided previously. As such portions of these polygons and the corridor that extends to the north, providing a connection to the riparian corridor along the Nisqually River, should be deleted from the Biodiversity Network and the new connection between 10B and 10C established. 10C Riparian corridor along Nisqually River Field visit based on driving routes confirmed that BMA 10C is a riparian corridor on either side of the Nisqually River. Visual observations were made from elevated views or from areas that provided access. This is perhaps the longest riparian corridor in Pierce County and one that continues to provide expansive, undeveloped riparian vegetation dominated by deciduous trees and shrubs. This is especially true of the south central and southeastern portions of the Nisqually River where little to no access exists. Some areas have development in close proximity to the Nisqually River or have lands for sale. Upland habitat (970 coded coniferous forests) is also threatened by large lot (20 acres) sales north of Harts Lake. 10D Fort Lewis Field validation based on driving routes confirmed that extensive areas of intermediate aged conifer forest (970 code) exist within 10D, Fort Lewis. Field validation of 622 grasslands was not possible due to access issues on Fort Lewis. However, on-going work by WDFW biologists on Fort Lewis has verified the presence of perhaps the best remaining prairie grasslands in an area titled Division 13 prairies. Shrub grassland (614 coded habitat) was also verified on lands bordering the Burlington Northern railroad. 10E Roy/McKenna Field validation based on driving routes indicates that although the BMA is punctuated with low-density single-family large lot development, areas surrounding these structures are primarily 800-coded habitat. The 800 coded habitat found in the general area is an over story of conifer (primarily fir and cedar) in a 57

58 mixture of open and closed canopy conditions with an under story of deciduous trees and shrubs. Due to the rolling geography of the area, land depressions are scattered throughout with most depression supporting a wetland or wet area. Within these depressions, water tolerable vegetation such as alder is thriving. Habitat along Murray Creek consists of conifers, herbs, and ash tree species (thus 530 code) as well as large sections of introduced grasses on private property. Secondary streams and creeks are abundant throughout the area, many passing through private property. A hardwood/conifer tree association is typically found alongside these waterways (again, 800 code habitat). One homogenous, closed-canopy stand of evergreens is located in the central portion of this BMA. One large housing development called Pacific Rim has been cleared of timber and is presently in a regrowth stage of small shrubs and forbs with pastureland within. Lands surrounding human dwellings consist of horse pastureland, some of which is fallow and some in use. One area within the polygon located in T17N R02 E SW1/4 contains residential developments (Whitewater Estates and County Club), which has been developed to the level that it no longer serves a wildlife value and should be removed from the Biodiversity Network. The Lacamas Creek riparian corridor south of Fort Lewis at 288 th St S. contains expansive areas of introduced Reed Canary Grass and sections of pastureland to the creek edge. Very th little native vegetation remains and in-stream flow has been severely compromised south of 294 St S. Smaller tributaries north and south of 328th St S. feed Lacamas Creek. Although the hydrology for a naturally functioning system remains in the Lacamas Creek corridor, without extensive restoration, this corridor likely serves little wildlife value and should be removed from the system. 10F South-central Pierce County Field validation based on driving routes confirmed that these large polygons are dominated by coniferous forest (primarily 900, 910, and 932-coded habitats) and deciduous-coniferous forests (800, 802, 832, and 872-coded habitats) with sections of deciduous stands (700 and 710 coded habitat) bordering the Nisqually River to the south. 411-coded polygons (Harts, Silver, and Kreger Lakes) were also confirmed within the larger 10F area as were 520 and 530-coded creeks and marshlands (Brighton, Horn, and Tanwax creeks and their associated marshlands). Within this extensively forested landscape, previously used as managed forestland, some large 20 acre lots are being sold for development. The Brighton Creek corridor located within the larger 10F supports intact swamplands, marshlands, and wet depression areas (530 coded habitats) that serve a wildlife purpose. Field validation confirmed the Tanwax Creek corridor and Horn Creek corridor contains 530 coded habitat rather than 520. Approximately 40% of the Harts Lake shoreline and attached upland areas appear developed, however lands surrounding the shoreline development are intact. Both Swan and Kreger Lake are surrounded by intact freshwater habitat but the land between the two has been developed. Silver Lake is also surrounded by approximately 70% intact, native vegetation. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 67 trigger species, 13 at-risk species, 23 state or federal-listed species and 26 PHS species predicted in this BMA. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Purple Martin (SC), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Western Bluebird (SM), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis ( FCo, SM), Mazama (Western/Roy) Pocket Gopher (FC, SC), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), (Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Western Gray Squirrel (FCo, ST) and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 7 amphibians, 121 birds, 54 mammals, and 6 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 17). 58

59 The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations for the following species: Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Great Egret (SM), Green Heron (SM), Mountain Quail, Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Purple Martin (SC), Oregon Vesper Sparrow (FCo, SC), Osprey (SM), Snowy Owl (SM), Streaked Horned Lark (FC, SC), Western Bluebirds (SM), Gray Wolf (FT, SE), Tenino Pocket Gopher (FC, SC), Townsend s Big Eared Bat (FCo, SC), Western Gray Squirrel (FCo, ST), Western Pond Turtle (FCo, SE), Long Nose Dace, Olympic Mudminnow (SS), Reticulated Sculpin (SM), Riffle Sculpin (SM), Torrent Sculpin and Mardon Skipper (FC, SE). WDFW PHS data designates this area as a priority habitat for wetland and riparian areas, waterfowl concentrations, urban natural open space and Bald Eagle foraging areas. The Pierce County fish presence maps identify several anadromous fish species in the Nisqually River systems including Chinook (FT, SC), Chum, Coho, Pink, Sockeye and Steelhead. The Nisqually Delta BMA has 42 confirmed butterfly species. There are four listed species including Dun Skipper (SM), Juba Skipper (SM), Mardon Skipper (FC, SE), and Taylor s (Whulge) Checkerspot (FC, SC). Conclusion and Implementing Actions The Nisqually Delta BMA is located within the bounds of the Nisqually River Glacier to Sound Stewardship Corridor Plan ( ). The aim of the plan is to conserve important habitat and scenic areas, preserve working forests and farms, and maintain water quality and is based on community-driven, landowner-based, voluntary programs. Key elements include a habitat management plan, stream catalogue, and a comprehensive geographic information system. The plan also includes a landowner toolbox that provides best practices and incentives for stewarding property; utilizing low impact development techniques and architectural design standards. The anticipated release date of the plan is the fourth quarter of A Delta Mouth to Interstate-5 This section of the BMA is predominated by the Nisqually River and neighboring estuary and marshlands. Prior to agricultural conversion, this was a fairly large estuary. Estuarine habitat and the riparian corridor that remains continue to provide high wildlife function for this area. The variety of habitats in juxtaposition to one another (riparian corridors, small cottonwood galleries, meandering creeks, hardwood upland forest, marine shoreline) encourage a diversity of wildlife, in particular birds, small mammals, fish, and amphibians. Although livestock fields exist within, they continue to function as wildlife habitat due to their close proximity to neighboring marshlands and high quality habitat on the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge. In addition, sections of the agricultural fields are flooded, which provide habitat and food to both waterfowl and amphibians. These flooded fields may have previously been wetlands/marshlands and continue to have the hydrology and soils that support water retention (as predicted by National Wetlands Inventory). On the field visit day, greater than 400 mixed waterfowl were observed foraging on one flooded agricultural field. This area of the Nisqually Delta BMA is also identified as being ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 12) Agricultural fields within this BMA would be ideal candidates for restoration (dependent on willing sellers) based on their marshland character. The dike separating the existing marshland from the agricultural field should be removed in any restoration attempt. Existing high quality cottonwood galleries boarding the Nisqually River should be retained, as should wetland complexes bordering this riparian corridor. Riparian areas in which heavy human use is tolerated (e.g. bordering Nisqually Road) should be kept to a minimum, vehicular entry should be discontinued, and the understory re-grown. 10B Thurston County polygons Portions of these polygons and the corridor that extends to the north, providing a connection to the riparian corridor along the Nisqually River, should be deleted from the Biodiversity Network based on 59

60 lack of driver habitats and a new connection established between 10B and 10C. This connection falls within an ecoregionally significant polygon. (See Figure 12) 10C Riparian corridor along Nisqually River This portion of the Nisqually Delta BMA includes a high quality riparian corridor on either side of the Nisqually River and contains some of the most expansive, undeveloped riparian vegetation (dominated by deciduous trees and shrubs) left in Pierce County. The lack of road access contributes to this scenario and likely explains its designation as being ecoregionally significant. Unfortunately, land development activities in close proximity to the Nisqually River threaten the integrity of this area. (See Figure 9 & 12) Efforts should be made to coordinate restoration of stream habitat and acquisition of available riparian properties. Riparian buffers should be applied during the development process and applicants should be educated on habitat preservation techniques. New development and road access should be discouraged in south central and southeastern portions of the Nisqually River to retain the ecological integrity of this expansive riparian corridor. 10D Fort Lewis Fort Lewis contains some of the highest quality habitat remaining in Pierce County. Along with national parkland and wildlife refuge land within the county, Fort Lewis is a source of wildlife for surrounding developed and undeveloped areas. This part of the Nisqually Delta BMA is also designated as an area of ecoregional significance. (See Figure 12) Forested habitats surrounding wetlands and riparian corridors should be retained. Selective harvesting of timber should be encouraged over large patch size harvesting. As public land, Fort Lewis should serve the dual purpose of providing military training and supporting biodiversity within Pierce County. Division 13 prairie lands, and other high quality prairies within Fort Lewis, should be managed for their preservation and perpetuation. This may include natural burning regimes, weed control, and vegetation enhancement. 10E Roy/McKenna The presence of high quality, diversified habitat, wetlands/wet areas, and riparian corridors in this area make it valuable to wildlife. Although pasturelands and single-family residences punctuate the area, the residences are of the size (single houses or trailers) that would not impede the movement of wildlife throughout (i.e. abundant movement corridors are available). Pasturelands, especially fallow ones, likely provide food and space needed by predicted raptors, small mammals, and furbearers. Streams, creeks, wetlands/wet areas, and riparian habitat associated with these waterways in the area likely contribute to the presence of amphibians, reptiles, small mammals and songbirds. Abundant conifers in a variety of ages support woodpeckers and other cavity nesters (e.g. swallows). Whether enough deciduous trees remain to support Western Grey Squirrels would need to be verified by species monitoring. However, the possibility certainly exists based on presence of similar habitats and Western Grey Squirrels inhabiting neighboring Fort Lewis properties. The area around Whitewater Estates and County Club (T17N R02 E SW1/4) should be removed from the Biodiversity Network. A small portion of the 10E polygon that is located adjacent to the Nisqually River should also be removed because it lacks at least 50% habitat. The connectors to these polygons should be deleted as well. (See Figure 12) The major portion of the 10E BMA located in Roy and McKenna should continue to be zoned Rural 10. Clustering houses and retaining large tracts of open space would help maintain the abundance of wetlands 60

61 and green spaces within and around development, rather than conversion and replacement. Fencing on both public and private lands could be constructed in a manner that facilitates movement of wildlife. 10F South-central Pierce County The Brighton Creek corridor contains areas of exceptionally good wetlands. One location worthy of restoration is located west of 8 th Ave S in T17N R03E SW ¼, where riparian habitat has been degraded. Only a small section of the Tanwax Creek corridor has been designated within the 10F BMA. A portion of the 10F polygon cluster is located within an ecoregionally significant area. (See Figure 12) The section of the Tanwax Creek corridor positioned between identified BMA and then southwards to its ending at the Nisqually River is intact, quality habitat and could be managed for its wildlife value. Developed land located between Swan and Kreger Lake should also be targeted for habitat restoration efforts. Some large 20-acre forested lots (previously managed as commercial forestland by Weyerhaeuser Company) have been cleared of forest and are being sold for development. Twenty-acre lots are exempt from Pierce County Subdivision and Platting Regulations however the County s Critical Area Regulations still apply. These lots should also be managed for long-term biodiversity stewardship. Future subdivision and conversion of these lands should be avoided. Riparian habitat located along Brighton, Tanwax, and Horn Creek should be retained and managed for its biodiversity potential. Remaining good quality native vegetation surrounding Harts, Silver, Swan and Kreger lakes should be retained; while degraded land located between Swan and Kreger lakes should be targeted for habitat restoration efforts Puyallup River BMA Description The Puyallup River BMA is located in south central Pierce County between the Nisqually River and the headwaters of the Puyallup River and is approximately 46,702 acres in size (see Figure 6). The headwaters of the Mashel River, Little Mashel River, Lynch Creek, Busy Wild Creek, Midway Creek, and Beaver Creek are also contained within this BMA. The Puyallup River BMA is located within the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) and the Western Hemlock vegetation zone (Zone 35) and is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: Non-forested, logged or cleared; regrowth to shrubs or young trees (code 614) Hardwood forest in a mid-seral stage with closed canopy cover; usually mature trees in riparian floodplains (code 772) Conifer forest; mid-seral stage; usually Western Hemlock/Douglas-fir (code 972) Conifer forest; late-seral stage with closed canopy cover; usually Western Hemlock/Western Red Cedar/Douglas-fir (code 982) G IS Review Review of LandSat imagery indicates that the coded habitat types appear to be representative of what is occurring in the landscape. This is an area of managed forest that contains a mixture of tree ages. Some areas still have a significant amount of older growth tree stands. The current connectors between the Lewis County BMA and Puyallup River BMA were modified to align along riparian corridors. F ield Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because of the predominance of managed forestland, wilderness, and/or national parkland. Lack of access roads and orthophoto coverage also 61

62 limited the ability to verify this BMA. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 91 trigger species, 13 at-risk species, 23 state or federal-listed species and 26 PHS species predicted in this BMA. The predicted state and federal-listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Van Dyke s Salamander (FCo, SC), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Black Swift (SM), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Gray Wolf (FT, SE), Grizzly Bear (FT, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 9 amphibians, 77 birds, 51 mammals, and 2 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 18). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the BMA for the following species: Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Great Blue Heron (SM), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), and Spotted Owl (FT, SE). Point locations for the Gray Wolf (FT, SE), Grizzly Bear (FT, SE) and Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST) were identified just outside the BMA. The WDFW PHS data designates this area as a priority habitat for White River Elk. The Pierce County fish presence maps identify several anadromous fish species within the rivers and stream systems located inside the BMA including Chinook (FT, SC), Coho, Pink, and Steelhead. There are nine butterfly species confirmed in the Puyallup River BMA. Conclusion and Implementing Actions The Puyallup River BMA located in south central Pierce County is an extensive, intact riparian system surrounded by managed forestland that has been subject to very little development pressure. Surrounding this portion of the Puyallup River are extensive forestlands in varying stages of re-growth (from recently harvested to mature). The mosaic of different age and type forested habitat communities (deciduous and coniferous timber in varying age classes) in close proximity to a major riparian corridor likely explains why this area was identified for its biodiversity (similar to the other large riparian complexes found along the Nisqually, White, and Greenwater rivers). The shear number of at-risk, listed, and priority species predicted and confirmed within this BMA is an example of its importance to wildlife within Pierce County. The connector system between the Lewis County BMA and Puyallup River BMA should be realigned along riparian corridors. (See Figure 14) Pierce County along with private and federal forestland managers should strive to retain this area as managed forestland preserving its mosaic features. This should be accomplished through Forest Practice Regulations. These partners should also establish land management objectives that target biodiversity protection Shoreline BMA Description The Shoreline BMA is located between Puget Sound and the cities of Dupont and Lakewood and is approximately 3,163 acres in size (see Figure 4). This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Woodland/Prairie Mosaic vegetation zone (Zone 29). The Shoreline BMA contains two primary driver habitats including: 62

63 Mixed forest; seral stage unknown; canopy closure patchy or mixed; usually Red Alder/Bigleaf Maple/Douglas-fir/shrubs (code 800) Conifer forest; mid seral stage; canopy closure patchy or mixed; usually Douglas-fir (code 970) GIS Review Review of orthophotos indicates that the coded habitat types appear to be representative of what is occurring in the landscape. F ield Validation Field validation based on driving routes indicates lands in the northern section of this BMA contain both 800 and 970-coded habitat, as predicted. Weyerhaeuser timberlands (Dupont site) previously coded as 972 contain a mixture of coniferous and deciduous stands in a variety of canopy conditions and should be recoded to 800. A section in the northeastern portion of the BMA coded 610 is a disturbed area dominated by scotch broom and non-native cropped grassland, as predicted. Predicted and Confirmed Species The White-Breasted Nuthatch is the only trigger species identified for this BMA. There are 10 predicted species listed as at-risk, 17 state or federal listed species and 20 PHS species. The predicted listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Peregrine Falcon (FCo, SS), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Purple Martin (SC), Vaux s Swift (SC), Western Bluebird (SM), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Western Gray Squirrel (FCo, ST) and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 5 amphibians, 74 birds, 41 mammals, and 5 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 19). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations for Purple Martin (SC) and Western Gray Squirrel (FCo, ST). WDFW PHS data designates portions of this BMA as a priority habitat for urban natural open space and wetland/riparian areas associated with Sequalitchew Creek. The Shoreline BMA has 23 confirmed butterfly species. C onclusion and Implementing Actions In general, areas predicted to contain either 800 or 972 habitat do support such habitat although lands surrounding are developed or are in the process of being developed. The presence of extensive areas of pure and mixed forestlands (codes 800 and 970) within this BMA likely contributes to the high number of mammals predicted to occur within. Field validation confirmed that such habitat continues to exist. This BMA falls within an area designated as ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 12) Commercial forestlands should be managed in a manner that supports mammal concentrations Upper Nisqually River BMA Description The Upper Nisqually River BMA is located along and adjacent to the Nisqually River (Alder Lake east into Mount Rainier National Park) and is approximately 3,669 acres in size (see Figure 6). This BMA is located within the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) and the Western Hemlock vegetation zone (Zone 35). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 530) is riparian comprised of mixed communities. 63

64 G IS Review Review of orthophotos and LandSat imagery indicates that the 530 coded areas accurately represent riparian habitat however, in some instances the Nisqually River actually extends outside the boundaries of the polygon. Where this situation occurs, the boundaries of the core polygon have been increased to include the river and the adjacent land area within 300 feet from the edge of the river. F ield Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because of the predominance of managed forestland, wilderness, and/or national parkland. Lack of access roads and orthophoto coverage also limited the ability to field verify this BMA. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 39 trigger species, 8 at-risk species, 18 state or federal listed species and 21 PHS species in this BMA. The predicted listed species include the Cascade Torrent Salamander (SC), Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Black Swift (SM), Great Blue Heron (SM), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 8 amphibians, 75 birds, 49 mammals, and 3 reptiles were predicted to occur (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 20). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the BMA for the following species: Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Common Loon (SS), Golden Eagle (SC), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Osprey (SM), Peregrine Falcon (FCo, SS), and Fisher (FCo, SE). The WDFW PHS data designates this area as a priority habitat for White River, Rocky Mountain, and Roosevelt Elk herds. LaGrande and Alder Dams create a barrier to passage of anadromous fish. However, the Pierce County Upper Nisqually Valley Community Plan indicates a small, self-sustaining population of Kokanee salmon inhabits the Nisqually River upstream of Alder Dam. The Washington Butterfly Atlas lists 28 butterfly species within the Upper Nisqually River BMA. Conclusion and Implementing Actions The Upper Nisqually River BMA located in southern Pierce County is an extensive, intact riparian system surrounded by managed forestland that has been subject to very little development pressure. Surrounding this portion of the Upper Nisqually River are extensive forestlands in varying stages of re-growth (from recently harvested to mature). The mosaic of different age and type forested habitat communities (deciduous and coniferous timber in varying age classes) in close proximity to a major riparian corridor likely explains why this area was identified for its biodiversity (similar to the other large riparian complexes found along the Puyallup, White, and Greenwater rivers). The shear number of at-risk, listed, and priority species predicted and confirmed within this BMA is an example of its importance to wildlife within Pierce County. (See Figure 14) The Upper Nisqually BMA is located within the bounds of the Nisqually River Glacier to Sound Stewardship Corridor Plan ( ). The aim of the plan is to conserve important habitat and scenic areas, preserve working forests and farms, and maintain water quality and is based on community-driven, landowner-based, voluntary programs. Key elements include a habitat management plan, stream catalogue, and a comprehensive geographic information system. The plan also includes a landowner toolbox that provides best practices and incentives for stewarding property; utilizing low impact 64

65 development techniques and architectural design standards. The anticipated release date of this plan is Fall Pierce County along with private and federal forestland managers should strive to retain this area as a pristine riparian corridor. Development of riparian habitat should be prevented, as should road access and conversion of riparian lands. Creeks and streams feeding into the Nisqually River should also receive management consideration as they contribute directly to the value of the Nisqually River. The Upper Nisqually Riparian Corridor, along with other major corridors of the Puyallup, White, and Greenwater rivers, should be targeted for passive recreation only 14 - Lewis County BMA Description The Lewis County BMA is located to the south of Mount Rainier National Park and is approximately 37,340 acres in size (see Figure 6). This BMA is located within the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) and the Western Hemlock (Zone 35), Mountain Hemlock (Zone 82) and Alpine/Parkland (Zone 85) vegetation zones. The Lewis County BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: Riparian dominated by hardwood trees and tall shrubs (code 533) Non-forested; logged or cleared (614) Non-forested; apparently natural; subalpine or alpine meadows; steep slopes and avalanche chutes (code 620) Non-forested; apparently natural; shrubby slopes or avalanche chutes (code 624) Non-forested; apparently natural; montane meadows; scattered or patchy trees (code 625) Conifer forest; seral stage unknown; open canopy; often on slopes; usually Mountain Hemlock/Silver Fir (code 901) Conifer forest, early-seral stage; canopy closure patchy or mixed; usually Douglas-fir (code 960) Conifer forest; early-seral stage; open canopy cover; usually Silver Fir/Mountain Hemlock (code 961) Conifer forest; mid-seral stage; closed canopy cover; usually Western Hemlock/Douglas-fir (code 972) Conifer forest; late-seral stage; closed canopy cover; usually Western Hemlock/Western Red Cedar/Douglas-fir (code 982) GIS Review Review of LandSat imagery indicates that the polygons within this BMA represent at least 50% of the coded primary driver habitat type. The current connectors between the Lewis County BMA and Puyallup River BMA were modified to align along riparian corridors. Field Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because of the predominance of managed forestland, wilderness, and/or national parkland. Lack of access roads and orthophoto coverage also limited the ability to verify this BMA. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. 65

66 Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 118 trigger species, 19 at-risk species, 31 state or federal listed species and 29 PHS species in this BMA. The predicted listed species include the Cascade Torrent Salamander (SC), Cascades Frog (FCo, SM), Cope s Giant Salamander (SM), Larch Mountain Salamander (FCo, SS), Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Van Dyke s Salamander (FCo, SC), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Black Swift (SM), Golden Eagle (SC), Great Blue Heron (SM), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST), Merlin (SC), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Three-toed Woodpecker (SM), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Wolverine (FCo, SC) and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 15 amphibians, 106 birds, 58 mammals, and 4 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 21). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the BMA for the following species: Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Van Dyke s Salamander (FCo, SC), Common Loon (SS), Golden Eagle (SC), Great Gray Owl (SM), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Osprey (SM), Gray Wolf (FT, ST), Fisher (FCo, SE), Marten, Pacific Water Shrew (SM), and Wolverine (FCo, SC). The Lewis County BMA contains 27 butterfly confirmed species including one state-listed species, Juba Skipper (SM). Conclusion and Implementing Actions The Lewis County BMA, although outside the jurisdictions of Pierce County, is a vital link in the biodiversity potential of Pierce County. Comprised of forested lands south of Mount Rainier National Park and east of Tatoosh Wilderness, this is an area of managed forests. The myriad arrangement of forests in varying age classes due to continued forest management (from young re-growth to mature old growth) supports the biodiversity found within. Because of the size and heterogeneity of the forested landscape, both small and large mammals are abundant within this BMA. Birds are also numerous due to the abundance of creeks and streams. Portions of high alpine habitat (primarily along Backbone Ridge, Cowlitz Divide, and the Tatoosh Range) contribute to the number of amphibians and reptiles predicted within. The shear number of at-risk, listed, and priority species predicted and confirmed within this BMA is an example of its importance to wildlife within Pierce County. The connector system between the Lewis County BMA and Puyallup River BMA should be realigned along riparian corridors. (See Figure 14) Lewis County along with private and federal forestland managers should strive to retain this area as managed forestland preserving its mosaic features. Creek and streams riparian habitat should be protected from forest managed through a no-harvest buffer system. This should be accomplished through Forest Practice Regulations. These partners should also establish land management objectives that target biodiversity protection Rainier BMA Description The Rainier BMA is located within Mount Rainier National Park and is approximately 54,052 acres in size (see Figure 6). This BMA is located within the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) and the Alpine/Parkland (Zone 85) and Subalpine Fir (Zone 81) vegetation zones. The Rainier BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: 66

67 Non-forested; apparently natural; subalpine or alpine meadows; steep slopes and avalanche chutes (code 620) Non-forested; apparently natural; herbaceous subalpine or alpine meadows (code 622) Non-forested; apparently natural; montane meadows; scattered or patchy trees (code 625) GIS Review Review of high resolution (8 ) black and white orthophotos (late 1990 s) indicates that the polygons within this BMA represent over 50% of the coded primary driver habitat type. One polygon, an alpine lake, was miscoded as mature closed canopy forest (982) but this miscoding should not affect the species that were predicted to occur, especially for the amphibians. Field Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because it lies solely within the boundaries of Mount Rainier National Park; an area managed for the sake of biodiversity, habitat, and wildlife preservation. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 21 trigger species, 4 at-risk species, 13 state or federal listed species and 17 PHS species in this BMA. The predicted listed species include the Cascades Frog (FCo, SM), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Black Swift (SM), Golden Eagle (SC), Merlin (SC), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Three-toed Woodpecker (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Gray Wolf (FT, SE), Grizzly Bear (FT, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), and Wolverine (FCo, SC). A total of 4 amphibians, 41 birds, 40 mammals, and no reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 22). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the BMA for the following species: Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), White-Tailed Ptarmigan, Fisher (FCo, SE), Gray Wolf (FT, SE), Grizzly Bear (FT, SE), Marten, Wolverines (FCo, SC), Tailed Frog (FCo, SM) and Mardon Skipper (FC, SE). WDFW Priority Habitats and Species data designates a portion of this BMA as a Harlequin Duck breeding area. There are 59 butterfly species confirmed within the Rainier BMA. The following six butterfly species are listed species: Chryxus Arctic (SM), Juba Skipper (SM), Mardon Skipper (FC, SE), Moss Elfin (SM), Sylvan Hairstreak (SM) and Western Sulphur (SM). Conclusion and Implementing Actions The Rainier BMA is located within the boundaries of Mount Rainier National Park and is primarily managed for long-term protection of fish and wildlife species. This BMA provides an excellent level of protection for the variety of species that inhabit this area. Many rare species, such as Grizzly Bear and Gray Wolf, have had sightings in this location within the last decade. (See Figure 14) Mount Rainier National Park containing the Rainer BMA should continue to be managed for fish, wildlife, native habitat, and recreation. Natural functions should be encouraged through the application of national park management objectives. High quality habitat surrounding Mount Rainer should be targeted for park extension where funds and public support are available for such extension. 67

68 16 - White River BMA Description The White River BMA is located in the Cascade Mountains between the Puyallup River BMA and Greenwater River BMA and is approximately 8,586 acres in size (see Figure 5). This BMA is located within the Southwest Cascades ecoregion (Region 17) and the Western Hemlock (Zone 35) and Mountain Hem lock (Zone 82) vegetation zones. The White River BMA is comprised of several primary driver habitats including: Lakes; including the shoreline and possible marshy edges (code 411) Riparian; usually lined with conifers and willow (code 530) Riparian dominated by hardwood trees and tall shrubs (code 533) Hardwood forests; mid-seral stage; closed canopy cover; usually mature trees in riparian floodplains (code 772) Conifer forest; early-seral stage; open canopy cover; usually Silver Fir/Mountain Hemlock (code 961) Conifer forest; mid-seral stage; closed canopy cover; usually Western Hemlock/Douglas-fir (code 972) GIS Review Review of LandSat imagery indicates that the polygons within this BMA represent at least 50% of the coded primary driver habitat type. This BMA should be renamed to the Carbon River BMA since it is primarily comprised of Carbon River and its tributaries (portions of Evans, Pooh, and Gale Creeks). Field Validation This BMA was not ground verified through driving routes because of the predominance of managed forestland, wilderness, and/or national parkland. Lack of access roads and orthophoto coverage also limited the ability to verify this BMA. Validation is therefore based on the GIS review provided previously. Predicted and Confirmed Species There are 41 trigger species, 13 at-risk species, 22 state or federal listed species and 25 PHS species in this BMA. The predicted listed species include the Cascades Frog (FCo, SM), Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Van Dyke s Salamander (FCo, SC), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Black Swift (SM), Great Blue Heron (SM), Harlequin Duck (FCo), Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Pileated Woodpecker (SC), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), P acific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), Wolverine (FCo, SC) and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total of 11 amphibians, 93 birds, 55 mammals, and 3 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 23). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the BMA for the following species: Tailed Frog (FCo, SM), Van Dyke s Salamander (FCo, SC), Northern Goshawk (FCo, SC), Spotted Owl (FT, SE), Gray Wolf (FT, SE), Grizzly Bear (FT, SE), and Marbled Murrelet (FT, ST). The WDFW PHS data designates this area as priority habitat for White River Elk and Harlequin Duck (FCo) breeding areas. The Pierce County fish presence maps identify several anadromous fish species within the rivers and stream systems in this BMA including Chinook (FT, SC), Coho, and Steelhead. The White River BMA has 19 confirmed butterfly species. 68

69 Conclusion and Implementing Actions The White River BMA encompasses portions of the Carbon River and its tributaries (portions of Evans, Pooh, and Gale Creeks) and a majority of the Fairfax Forest Reserve. It is an area of high quality forestland surrounding an intact riparian corridor (Carbon River) and has a significant area in old growth forest. The only access intersecting the BMA other than forest roads is the Fairfax Forest Reserve Road. (See Figure 13) This BMA should continue to be the focus of biodiversity protection measures. Any increase in recreation activities, due to the availability of Fairfax Forest Reserve Road, should be evaluated in terms of compatibility with long-term biodiversity protection objectives. Further degradation of riparian habitat along Carbon River, like that which has occurred northwards in Orting, should be prevented Lower White River BMA Description The Lower White River BMA is located along the White River west of the Greenwater River BMA and is approximately 1,593 acres in size (see Figure 5). This BMA is located within the Puget Trough ecoregion (Region 7) and the Puget Sound Douglas-fir vegetation zone (Zone 31). The primary driver habitat for this BMA (code 533) is riparian dominated by hardwood trees and small shrubs. GIS Review Although there is no code for conifer/hardwood riparian, review of high resolution (8 ) black and white orthophotos (late 1990 s) indicates that the polygons within this BMA represent at least 50% of the coded primary driver habitat type. The surrounding landscape is primarily conifer/hardwood mix, intermediate stage (872). The river was re-buffered with 300 on each side to engulf the entire river within the BMA. Field Validation Field validation confirmed that the Lower White River riparian corridor is dominated by riparian habitat (533 coded habitat), with an over-story of cottonwoods and other deciduous species (700 coded habitat). This section of the BMA begins north of Sumner, passes through an area recently restored by Pierce County, and continues northwards through the cities of Pacific and Auburn. Riverfront property just north of Pacific City Park in Auburn (east end of 3 rd Ave SE) has resulted in some removal of native riparian vegetation. White River corridor then continues through Auburn Game Farm Wilderness Park; an area dominated by native vegetation. One small section of the White River Trail System, near the riverfront has also had native vegetation removed. Stuck River Drive may also impede movement of some species; however, this is a minor road with little traffic. As the White River corridor continues eastward through Muckleshoot Indian Reservation and into eastern Pierce County, it continues to be dominated by riparian, deciduous vegetation in a non-fragmented arrangement (e.g. mostly undeveloped). P redicted and Confirmed Species The Painted Turtle is the only trigger species identified for this BMA. There are 6 predicted species listed as at-risk, 16 state or federal listed species and 18 PHS species. The predicted listed species include the Red-Legged Frog (FCo), Western Toad (FCo, SC), Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Green Heron (SM), Olive-sided Flycatcher (FCo), Osprey (SM), Turkey Vulture (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), Willow Flycatcher (FCo), Fisher (FCo, SE), Long-eared Myotis (FCo, SM), Long-legged Myotis (FCo, SM), Pacific Water Shrew (SM), Townsend s Big-eared Bat (FCo, SC), and Yuma Myotis (FCo). A total 69

70 of 6 amphibians, 85 birds, 46 mammals, and 5 reptiles were predicted (see Tables 3 through 7 and Table 24). The WDFW Heritage data indicates point locations within the BMA for the following species: Bald Eagle (FT, ST), Great Blue Heron (SM), Vaux s Swift (SC), and Western Brook Lamprey (FCo). The WDFW PHS data designates this area as priority habitat for fish resources and small waterfowl. The Pierce County fish presence maps identify several anadromous fish species within the rivers and stream systems in this BMA including Chinook (FT, SC), Chum, Coho, Pink and Steelhead. There are 27 confirmed butterfly species within the Lower White River BMA. The Juba Skipper (SM) and Sonora Skipper (SM) are state-listed species. Conclusion and Implementing Actions Significant native riparian vegetation exists with the Lower White River riparian corridor despite continued development encroaching from western Pierce and King Counties. Development has been restricted or prohibited along White River, which has contributed to the continued biodiversity of this important riparian corridor and its designation as ecoregionally significant. (See Figures 9 & 13) The few sections in which vegetation has been removed or altered [Riverfront property just north of Pacific City Park in Auburn (east end of 3 rd Ave SE) and one section of the White River Trail System contained in Auburn Game Farm Wilderness Park] could be targeted for restoration. Future development along the White River should be avoided to protect the biological integrity of the corridor. Passive recreation, such as that available at the Auburn Game Farm Wilderness Park and White River Trail, should be encouraged over riverfront residential/commercial development. 70

71 Table 8: Predicted Species for the Kitsap (#1) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Killdeer Long-toed salamander Macgillivray's warbler Northwestern salamander Mallard Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Marsh wren Red-legged frog (3) Mountain quail (4) Roughskin newt Northern flicker Western toad (3) Northern harrier Northern oriole Birds Northern rough-winged swallow American bittern (2) Olive-sided flycatcher (3) American coot Orange-crowned warbler American crow Osprey (3) American goldfinch Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) American robin Pied-billed grebe Bald eagle (3,4) Purple finch Band-tailed pigeon (4) Red-breasted sapsucker Barn swallow Red-tailed hawk Belted kingfisher Red-winged blackbird Bewick's wren Rock dove Black-capped chickadee Ruffed grouse Black-headed grosbeak Rufous hummingbird Black-throated gray warbler Song sparrow Brewer's blackbird Sora Brown-headed cowbird Spotted sandpiper (4) Bushtit Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) California quail Steller's jay Canada goose Swainson's thrush Cedar waxwing Tree swallow Chestnut-backed chickadee Turkey vulture (3) Cinnamon teal Vaux's swift (3,4) Cliff swallow Violet-green swallow Common barn-owl Virginia rail Common merganser Warbling vireo Common nighthawk Western screech-owl Common snipe Western wood-pewee Common yellowthroat White-crowned sparrow Cooper's hawk Willow flycatcher (3) Downy woodpecker Wilson's warbler European starling Wood duck (4) Glaucous-winged gull Yellow warbler Great blue heron (3,4) Great horned owl Mammals Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) Beaver Hooded merganser (4) Big brown bat (4) House finch Black bear Hutton's vireo Black rat 71

72 Table 8 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Kitsap (#1) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Black-tailed deer (4) Bobcat California myotis (4) Coast mole Coyote Creeping vole Deer mouse Dusky (Montane) shrew Ermine Hoary bat Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole Long-tailed weasel Mink (4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion Muskrat Northern flying squirrel Norway rat Pacific jumping mouse Pacific water shrew (3) Porcupine Raccoon Red fox River otter Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Spotted skunk Striped skunk Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's mole Townsend's vole Vagrant shrew Virginia opossum Yuma myotis (3,4) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Painted turtle (1) Western terrestrial garter snake 72

73 Table 9: Predicted Species for the North Bay (#2) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Tree swallow Long-toed salamander Vaux's swift (3,4) Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Violet-green swallow Western toad (3) Warbling vireo Western screech-owl Birds Western tanager American crow Western wood-pewee American goldfinch White-crowned sparrow American robin Willow flycatcher (3) Bald eagle (3,4) Wilson's warbler Band-tailed pigeon (4) Barn swallow Mammals Belted kingfisher Beaver Bewick's wren Big brown bat (4) Black-throated gray warbler Black bear Brown-headed cowbird Black rat Bushtit Black-tailed deer (4) Cedar waxwing Bobcat Cliff swallow California myotis (4) Common barn-owl Coast mole Common nighthawk Coyote Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Creeping vole European starling Deer mouse Glaucous-winged gull Dusky (Montane) shrew Great horned owl Ermine Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) Hoary bat Hooded merganser (4) Little brown myotis (4) House finch Long-eared myotis (3,4) Northern flicker Long-legged myotis (3,4) Northern harrier Long-tailed vole Northern rough-winged swallow Long-tailed weasel Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Mink (4) Osprey (3) Mountain beaver Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Mountain lion Pigeon guillemot (1) Muskrat Purple finch Norway rat Red-tailed hawk Pacific jumping mouse Red-winged blackbird Porcupine Rock dove Raccoon Rufous hummingbird Red fox Savannah sparrow River otter Song sparrow Silver-haired bat (2) Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Spotted skunk Steller's jay Striped skunk Swainson's thrush Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) 73

74 Table 9 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the North Bay (#2) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Townsend's mole Townsend's vole Trowbridge's shrew Vagrant shrew Virginia opossum Yuma myotis (3,4) Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Western fence lizard (1) Western terrestrial garter snake Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 74

75 Table 10: Predicted Species for the Gig Harbor (#3) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Killdeer Long-toed salamander Macgillivray's warbler Northwestern salamander Mallard Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Marsh wren Red-legged frog (3) Northern flicker Roughskin newt Northern harrier Western toad (3) Northern oriole Northern rough-winged swallow Birds Olive-sided flycatcher (3) American bittern Orange-crowned warbler American coot Osprey (3) American crow Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) American goldfinch Pied-billed grebe (4) American robin Purple finch Bald eagle (3,4) Red-breasted sapsucker Band-tailed pigeon (4) Red-tailed hawk Barn swallow Red-winged blackbird Belted kingfisher Rock dove Bewick's wren Rufous hummingbird Black-capped chickadee Savannah sparrow Black-headed grosbeak Song sparrow Black-throated gray warbler Sora Brewer's blackbird Spotted sandpiper (4) Brown-headed cowbird Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Bushtit Steller's jay California quail Swainson's thrush Canada goose Tree swallow Cedar waxwing Vaux's swift (3,4) Cinnamon teal Violet-green swallow Cliff swallow Warbling vireo Common barn-owl Western screech-owl Common merganser Western wood-pewee Common nighthawk White-crowned sparrow Common snipe Willow flycatcher (3) Common yellowthroat Wilson's warbler Cooper's hawk (2) Wood duck (4) Downy woodpecker Yellow warbler European starling Glaucous-winged gull Mammals Great blue heron (3,4) Beaver Great horned owl Big brown bat (4) Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) Black bear Green-winged teal Black rat Hooded merganser (4) Black-tailed deer (4) House finch Bobcat Hutton's vireo California myotis (4) 75

76 Table 10 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Gig Harbor (#3) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Coast mole Coyote Creeping vole Deer mouse Dusky (Montane) shrew Ermine Hoary bat Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole Long-tailed weasel Mink (4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion Muskrat Northern flying squirrel Norway rat Pacific jumping mouse Pacific water shrew (3) Porcupine Raccoon Red fox River otter Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Southern red-backed vole Spotted skunk Striped skunk Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's mole Townsend's vole Vagrant shrew Virginia opossum Yuma myotis (3,4) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur Reptiles Common garter snake (1) Northern alligator lizard Painted turtle Rubber boa Western terrestrial garter snake 76

77 Table 11: Predicted Species for the Greenwater River (#4) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Golden-crowned kinglet Ensatina Gray jay Northwestern salamander Great blue heron (3,4) Pacific giant salamander Great horned owl Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Hairy woodpecker Red-legged frog (3) Hammond's flycatcher Roughskin newt Harlequin duck (2,3,4) Tailed frog (3,4,) House finch Western toad (3) Hutton's vireo Killdeer Birds Macgillivray's warbler American crow Mallard American dipper Marbled murrelet (2,3,4) American goldfinch Northern flicker American robin Northern pygmy-owl Band-tailed pigeon (4) Northern rough-winged swallow Barn swallow Northern saw-whet owl Barred owl Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Belted kingfisher Orange-crowned warbler Bewick's wren Osprey (3) Black swift (3,4) Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Black-capped chickadee Pied-billed grebe (4) Black-headed grosbeak Pileated woodpecker (2,3,4) Black-throated gray warbler Pine siskin Blue grouse (4) Purple finch Blue-winged teal Red crossbill Brown creeper Red-breasted nuthatch Brown-headed cowbird Red-breasted sapsucker Bushtit Red-eyed vireo California quail Red-tailed hawk Canada goose Red-winged blackbird Cedar waxwing Ruffed grouse Chestnut-backed chickadee Rufous hummingbird Cinnamon teal Savannah sparrow Cliff swallow Sharp-shinned hawk Common merganser Solitary vireo Common nighthawk Song sparrow Common raven Sora Common snipe Spotted owl (2,3,4) Common yellowthroat Spotted sandpiper (4) Cooper's hawk (2) Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Steller's jay Downy woodpecker Swainson's thrush European starling Townsend's warbler Evening grosbeak Tree swallow Fox sparrow Turkey vulture (3) 77

78 Table 11 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Greenwater River (#4) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Varied thrush Muskrat (1) Vaux's swift (3,4) Northern flying squirrel (1) Violet-green swallow Pacific jumping mouse (1) Warbling vireo Pacific water shrew (1,3) Western screech-owl Porcupine (1) Western tanager Raccoon Western wood-pewee Red fox White-crowned sparrow River otter (1) Willow flycatcher (3) Shrew-mole (1) Wilson's warbler Silver-haired bat (1,2) Winter wren Snowshoe hare (1) Wood duck (4) Southern red-backed vole (1) Yellow warbler (2) Spotted skunk (1) Yellow-rumped warbler Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's chipmunk (1) Mammals Townsend's mole Beaver (1) Townsend's vole (1) Big brown bat (4) Trowbridge's shrew (1) Black bear (1) Vagrant shrew Black-tailed deer (4) Virginia opossum Bobcat (1) Water shrew (1) Bushy-tailed woodrat (1) Yuma myotis (3,4) California ground squirrel (1) California myotis (1,4) Reptiles Coast mole (1) Common garter snake Coyote Northern alligator lizard Creeping vole Northwestern garter snake Douglas' squirrel (1) Rubber boa Dusky (Montane) shrew (1) Elk (1,4) Footnote: Ermine (1) Fisher (1,2,3,4) Hoary bat (1) Little brown myotis (1,4) Long-eared myotis (1,3,4) Long-legged myotis (1,3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole (1) Long-tailed weasel (1) Marten (1,2,4) Masked shrew (1) Mink (1,4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion (1) 78 (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

79 Table 11 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Greenwater River (#4) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Footnote (Cont'd): (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 79

80 Table 12: Predicted Species for the Lake Bay (#5) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Macgillivray's warbler Long-toed salamander Mallard Northwestern salamander Marsh wren Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Northern flicker Red-legged frog (3) Northern harrier Roughskin newt Northern oriole Western toad (3) Northern rough-winged swallow Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Birds Orange-crowned warbler American bittern (2) Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) American coot Pied-billed grebe (4) American crow Purple finch American goldfinch Purple martin (2,3,4) American robin Red-breasted sapsucker Bald eagle (3,4) Red-tailed hawk Band-tailed pigeon (4) Red-winged blackbird Barn swallow Rock dove Belted kingfisher Rufous hummingbird Bewick's wren Song sparrow Black-capped chickadee Sora Black-headed grosbeak Spotted sandpiper (4) Black-throated gray warbler Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Brown-headed cowbird Steller's jay Bushtit Swainson's thrush Canada goose Tree swallow Cedar waxwing Vaux's swift (3,4) Chestnut-backed chickadee Violet-green swallow Cinnamon teal Warbling vireo Cliff swallow Western screech-owl Common barn-owl Western wood-pewee Common merganser White-crowned sparrow Common nighthawk Willow flycatcher (3) Common snipe Wilson's warbler Common yellowthroat Wood duck (4) Cooper's hawk (2) Yellow warbler (2) Downy woodpecker European starling Mammals Glaucous-winged gull Beaver Great blue heron (3,4) Big brown bat (4) Great horned owl Black bear Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) Black rat Hooded merganser (4) Black-tailed deer (4) House finch Bobcat Hutton's vireo California myotis (4) Killdeer Coast mole 80

81 Table 12 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Lake Bay (#5) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Coyote Creeping vole Deer mouse Dusky (Montane) shrew Ermine Hoary bat Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole Long-tailed weasel Mink (4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion Muskrat Northern flying squirrel Norway rat Pacific jumping mouse Pacific water shrew (3) Porcupine Raccoon Red fox River otter Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Spotted skunk Striped skunk Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's mole Townsend's vole Vagrant shrew Virginia opossum Yuma myotis (3,4) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Painted turtle Western fence lizard (1) Western terrestrial garter snake 81

82 Table 13: Predicted Species for the McNeil Island (#6) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Killdeer Long-toed salamander Macgillivray's warbler Northwestern salamander Mallard Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Marsh wren Red-legged frog (3) Northern flicker Roughskin newt Northern harrier Northern oriole Birds Northern rough-winged swallow American bittern (2) Olive-sided flycatcher (3) American coot Orange-crowned warbler American crow Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) American goldfinch Pied-billed grebe (4) American robin Purple finch Bald eagle (3,4) Purple martin (2,3,4) Band-tailed pigeon (4) Red-breasted sapsucker Barn swallow Red-tailed hawk Belted kingfisher Red-winged blackbird Bewick's wren Ring-necked duck Black-capped chickadee Rock dove Black-headed grosbeak Rufous hummingbird Black-throated gray warbler Song sparrow Brown-headed cowbird Sora Bushtit Spotted sandpiper (4) California quail Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Canada goose Steller's jay Cedar waxwing Swainson's thrush Chestnut-backed chickadee Tree swallow Cinnamon teal Vaux's swift (3,4) Cliff swallow Violet-green swallow Common barn-owl Warbling vireo Common merganser Western screech-owl Common nighthawk Western wood-pewee Common snipe White-crowned sparrow Common yellowthroat Willow flycatcher (3) Cooper's hawk (2) Wilson's warbler Downy woodpecker Wood duck (4) European starling Yellow warbler (2) Glaucous-winged gull Great blue heron (3,4) Mammals Great horned owl Beaver Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) Big brown bat (4) Green-winged teal Black-tailed deer (4) Hooded merganser (4) California myotis House finch Deer mouse Hutton's vireo Hoary bat 82

83 Table 13 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the McNeil Island (#6) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Mink (4) Muskrat Northern flying squirrel Norway rat Raccoon River otter Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's vole Vagrant shrew Yuma myotis (3,4) Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Painted turtle (1) Western terrestrial garter snake Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 83

84 Table 14: Predicted Species for the Ketron Island (#7) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Long-toed salamander Northwestern salamander Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Red-legged frog (3) 84 Song sparrow Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Steller's jay Swainson's thrush Tree swallow Vaux's swift (3,4) Violet-green swallow Warbling vireo Western screech-owl Western wood-pewee Birds American crow American goldfinch American robin Bald eagle (3,4) White-crowned sparrow Band-tailed pigeon (4) Willow flycatcher (3) Barn swallow Wilson's warbler Barred owl Wood duck (4) Bewick's wren Yellow warbler (2) Black-capped chickadee Black-headed grosbeak Mammals Black-throated gray warbler Beaver Brown-headed cowbird Big brown bat (4) Bushtit California myotis (4) Cedar waxwing Deer mouse Chipping sparrow (2) Hoary bat Cliff swallow Little brown myotis (4) Common yellowthroat Long-eared myotis (3,4) Cooper's hawk (2) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Downy woodpecker Mink (4) European starling Muskrat Great horned owl Northern flying squirrel Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) Raccoon Hooded merganser (4) Silver-haired bat (2) House finch Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Hutton's vireo Townsend's vole Northern flicker Vagrant shrew Northern oriole Yuma myotis (3,4) Northern saw-whet owl Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Reptiles Orange-crowned warbler Common garter snake (1) Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Northern alligator lizard (1) Purple finch Northwestern garter snake (1) Purple martin (2,3,4) Rubber boa (1) Red-breasted sapsucker Sharptail snake (1,3,4) Red-tailed hawk Western terrestrial garter snake (1) Red-winged blackbird Rufous hummingbird Solitary vireo

85 Table 14 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Ketron Island (#7) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 85

86 Table 15: Predicted Species for the Upland (#8) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Downy woodpecker Long-toed salamander European starling Northwestern salamander Evening grosbeak Pacific giant salamander Gadwall Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Glaucous-winged gull Red-legged frog (3) Golden-crowned kinglet Roughskin newt Great blue heron (3,4) Great horned owl Birds Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) American bittern (2) Green-winged teal American coot Hairy woodpecker American crow Hammond's flycatcher American goldfinch Hooded merganser (4) American kestrel House finch American robin House wren Anna's hummingbird Hutton's vireo Bald eagle (3,4) Killdeer Band-tailed pigeon (4) Lazuli bunting Barn swallow Macgillivray's warbler Barred owl Mallard Belted kingfisher Marsh wren Bewick's wren Mourning dove Black-capped chickadee Northern bobwhite Black-headed grosbeak Northern flicker Black-throated gray warbler Northern harrier Blue grouse (4) Northern oriole Blue-winged teal Northern pygmy-owl Brewer's blackbird Northern rough-winged swallow Brown creeper Northern saw-whet owl Brown-headed cowbird Northern shoveler Bushtit Olive-sided flycatcher (3) California quail Orange-crowned warbler Canada goose Osprey (3) Cedar waxwing Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Chestnut-backed chickadee Pied-billed grebe (4) Chipping sparrow (2) Pine siskin Cinnamon teal Purple finch Cliff swallow Purple martin (2,3,4) Common barn-owl Red crossbill Common merganser Red-breasted nuthatch Common nighthawk Red-breasted sapsucker Common raven Red-tailed hawk Common snipe Red-winged blackbird Common yellowthroat Ring-necked duck Cooper's hawk (2) Ring-necked pheasant (4) Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Rock dove 86

87 Table 15 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Upland (#8) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Ruddy duck Dusky (Montane) shrew Ruffed grouse Eastern cottontail Rufous hummingbird Ermine Savannah sparrow Fisher (2,3,4) Scrub jay Hoary bat Solitary vireo Little brown myotis (4) Song sparrow Long-eared myotis (3,4) Sora Long-legged myotis (3,4) Spotted sandpiper (4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Long-tailed vole Steller's jay Long-tailed weasel Swainson's thrush Mink (4) Tree swallow Mountain beaver Turkey vulture (3) Mountain lion Varied thrush Muskrat Vaux's swift (3,4) Northern flying squirrel Vesper sparrow (4) Norway rat Violet-green swallow Pacific jumping mouse Virginia rail Pacific water shrew (3) Warbling vireo Porcupine Western bluebird (2,3) Raccoon Western screech-owl Red fox Western tanager River otter Western wood-pewee Shrew-mole White-crowned sparrow Silver-haired bat (2) Willow flycatcher (3) Snowshoe hare Wilson's warbler Southern red-backed vole Wood duck (4) Spotted skunk Yellow warbler (2) Striped skunk Yellow-rumped warbler Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's chipmunk Mammals Townsend's mole Beaver Townsend's vole Big brown bat (4) Trowbridge's shrew Black bear Vagrant shrew Black rat Virginia opossum Black-tailed deer (4) Western gray squirrel (1,2,3,4) Bobcat Yuma myotis (3,4) Brush prairie pocket gopher (3,5) Bushy-tailed woodrat Reptiles California myotis (4) Common garter snake (1) Coast mole Northern alligator lizard (1) Coyote Northwestern garter snake (1) Creeping vole Painted turtle (1) Deer mouse Rubber boa (1) 87

88 Table 15 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Upland (#8) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Sharptail snake (1,3,4) Western terrestrial garter snake (1) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 88

89 Table 16: Predicted Species for the Norse Peak (#9) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Merlin (3,4) Cascades frog (1,2,3,4) Mountain bluebird (1) Long-toed salamander (1) Northern flicker Northwestern salamander Northern goshawk (1,2,3,4) Pacific giant salamander Northern pygmy-owl (1) Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Northern saw-whet owl (1) Roughskin newt Olive-sided flycatcher (1,3) Tailed frog (2,3) Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Western toad (3) Pileated woodpecker (1,2,3,4) Pine grosbeak (1) Birds Pine siskin (1) American dipper (1) Red crossbill (1) American kestrel Red-breasted nuthatch (1) American pipit Red-breasted sapsucker (1) American robin Red-naped sapsucker (1) Barred owl Red-tailed hawk Barrow's goldeneye (1,4) Red-winged blackbird Black swift (1,3) Ruby-crowned kinglet (1) Black-backed woodpecker (1,3,4) Rufous hummingbird (1) Blue grouse (1,4) Sharp-shinned hawk (1) Brown creeper (1) Solitary vireo (1) Cedar waxwing Song sparrow Chestnut-backed chickadee (1) Spotted owl (1,2,3,4) Chipping sparrow (1,2) Steller's jay Clark's nutcracker (1) Swainson's thrush Common nighthawk Three-toed woodpecker (1,3) Common raven (1) Townsend's solitaire (1) Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco (1) Townsend's warbler (1) Dusky flycatcher Tree swallow Evening grosbeak Varied thrush (1) Fox sparrow (1) Vaux's swift (1,3,4) Golden eagle (1,3,4) Violet-green swallow Golden-crowned kinglet (1) Warbling vireo (1) Gray jay (1) Western tanager (1) Gray-crowned rosy finch (Rosy finch) (1) Western wood-pewee Great horned owl (1) White-crowned sparrow Hairy woodpecker (1) White-tailed ptarmigan (1) Hammond's flycatcher (1) Willow flycatcher (3) Harlequin duck (1,2,3,4) Wilson's warbler (1) Hermit thrush (1) Winter wren (1) Horned lark (1) Yellow warbler (2) Lincoln's sparrow (1) Yellow-rumped warbler (1) Macgillivray's warbler 89

90 Table 16 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Norse Peak (#9) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Mammals Vagrant shrew Beaver Water shrew Big brown bat (4) Water vole (Richardsons) (1) Black bear Wolverine (1,2,3,4) Black-tailed deer (4) Yellow-pine chipmunk (1) Bobcat Yuma myotis (3,4) Bushy-tailed woodrat California myotis (4) Reptiles Cascade golden-mantled ground squirrel (1) Common garter snake Coast mole Rubber boa Coyote Creeping vole Footnote: Douglas' squirrel Dusky (Montane) shrew Elk (4) Ermine Fisher (2,3,4) Grizzly bear (3,4,5) Heather vole (1) Hoary bat Hoary marmot (1) Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole Long-tailed weasel Marten (2,4) Masked shrew Mink (4) Mountain goat (1,4) Mountain lion Northern flying squirrel Northern pocket gopher (1) Pacific jumping mouse Pacific water shrew (3) Pika (1) Porcupine Red fox Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Snowshoe hare Southern red-backed vole Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's chipmunk Trowbridge's shrew (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis 90 Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur

91 Table 17: Predicted Species for the Nisqually Delta (#10) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Common yellowthroat (1) Long-toed salamander Cooper's hawk (1,2) Northwestern salamander Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Pacific giant salamander Downy woodpecker Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) European starling Red-legged frog (3) Evening grosbeak Roughskin newt Gadwall Western toad (3) Glaucous-winged gull Golden-crowned kinglet Birds Gray jay American bittern (1,2) Great blue heron (1,3,4) American coot (1) Great horned owl (1) American crow Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) American dipper (1) Green-winged teal (1) American goldfinch Hairy woodpecker American kestrel Hermit warbler (1) American robin Hooded merganser (4) Bald eagle (1,3,4) Horned lark Band-tailed pigeon (1,4) House finch Barn swallow House wren Barred owl Hutton's vireo (1) Belted kingfisher (1) Killdeer (1) Bewick's wren Lazuli bunting (1) Black-capped chickadee Macgillivray's warbler (1) Black-headed grosbeak (1) Mallard Black-throated gray warbler (1) Marbled murrelet (1,2,3,4) Blue grouse (4) Marsh wren (1) Blue-winged teal (1) Mourning dove Brewer's blackbird Northern bobwhite Brown creeper Northern flicker Brown-headed cowbird Northern harrier (1) Bushtit Northern oriole (1) California quail Northern pygmy-owl Canada goose Northern rough-winged swallow (1) Cedar waxwing (1) Northern saw-whet owl Chestnut-backed chickadee Northern shoveler (1) Chipping sparrow (2) Olive-sided flycatcher (1,3) Cinnamon teal (1) Orange-crowned warbler (1) Cliff swallow (1) Osprey (1,3) Common barn-owl (1) Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) (1) Common merganser (1) Pied-billed grebe (1,4) Common nighthawk (1) Pileated woodpecker (2,3,4) Common raven (1) Pine siskin Common snipe (1) Purple finch (1) 91

92 Table 17 (Cont d): Predicted Species for the Nisqually Delta (#10) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Purple martin (1,2,3,4) Yellow warbler (1,2) Red crossbill Yellow-rumped warbler Red-breasted nuthatch Mammals Red-breasted sapsucker (1) Beaver Red-eyed vireo (1) Big brown bat (4) Red-naped sapsucker (1) Black bear Red-tailed hawk Black rat Red-winged blackbird Black-tailed deer (4) Ring-necked duck Bobcat Ring-necked pheasant (4) Bushy-tailed woodrat Rock dove California yotis (4) Ruddy duck (1) Coast mole Ruffed grouse Coyote Rufous hummingbird (1) Creeping vole Savannah sparrow Deer mouse Sharp-shinned hawk Douglas squirrel Solitary vireo Dusky (Montane) shrew Song sparrow Eastern cottontail Sora (1) Ermine Spotted sandpiper (1,4) Fisher (2,3,4) Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) (1) Hoary bat Steller s jay (1) Little brown yotis (4) Swainson s thrush (1) Long-eared yotis (3,4) Tree swallow (1) Long-legged yotis (3,4) Turkey vulture (1,3) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Varied thrush Long-tailed vole Vaux s swift (1,3,4) Long-tailed weasel Vesper sparrow (1,4) Mink (4) Violet-green swallow (1) Mountain beaver Virginia rail (1) Mountain lion Warbling vireo (1) Muskrat Western bluebird (1,2,3) Northern flying squirrel Western meadowlark (1) Norway rat Western screech-owl (1) Nutria Western tanager Pacific jumping mouse Western wood-pewee (1) Pacific water shrew (3) White-crowned sparrow Porcupine Willow flycatcher (1,3) Raccoon Wilson s warbler (1) Red fox Winter wren River otter Wood duck (1,4) Roy prairie pocket gopher (3,5) 92

93 Table 17 (Cont d): Predicted Species for the Nisqually Delta (#10) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Snowshoe hare Southern red-backed vole Spotted skunk Striped skunk Townsend s big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend s chipmunk Townsend s mole Townsend s vole Trowbridge s shrew Vagrant shrew Virginia opossum Western gray squirrel (1,2,3,4) Western pocket gopher (2,4) Yuma yotis (3,4) (5) Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Northwestern garter snake Painted turtle (1) Rubber boa Western terrestrial garter snake Footnote: (1) Trigger Species Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) At-Risk Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) Listed (State or Federal) Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) PHS a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program 93

94 Table 18: Predicted Species for the Puyallup River (#11) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Harlequin duck (1,2,3,4) Ensatina Hermit warbler (1) Northwestern salamander Hooded merganser (1,4) Pacific giant salamander Marbled murrelet (1,2,3,4) Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Mountain chickadee Red-legged frog (3) Northern flicker Roughskin newt Northern goshawk (1,2,3,4) Tailed frog (2,3,4) Northern pygmy-owl (1) Van Dyke's salamander (2,3) Northern saw-whet owl (1) Western toad (3) Olive-sided flycatcher (1,3) Orange-crowned warbler Birds Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) (1) American crow Pileated woodpecker (1,2,3,4) American dipper (1) Pine siskin (1) American goldfinch Purple finch (1) American robin Red crossbill (1) Bald eagle (1,3,4) Red-breasted nuthatch (1) Band-tailed pigeon (1,4) Red-breasted sapsucker (1) Barn swallow Red-tailed hawk Barred owl Red-winged blackbird Bewick's wren Ruffed grouse Black swift (1,3) Rufous hummingbird (1) Black-capped chickadee Sharp-shinned hawk (1) Black-headed grosbeak Solitary vireo (1) Black-throated gray warbler Song sparrow Blue grouse (1,4) Spotted owl (1,2,3,4) Brown creeper (1) Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Brown-headed cowbird Steller's jay (1) Cedar waxwing (1) Swainson's thrush Chestnut-backed chickadee (1) Townsend's warbler (1) Cliff swallow Tree swallow (1) Common nighthawk (1) Turkey vulture (1,3) Common raven (1) Varied thrush (1) Common yellowthroat (1) Vaux's swift (1,3,4) Cooper's hawk (2) Violet-green swallow (1) Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco (1) Warbling vireo (1) Downy woodpecker Western screech-owl (1) Evening grosbeak (1) Western tanager (1) Golden-crowned kinglet (1) Western wood-pewee (1) Gray jay (1) White-crowned sparrow Great horned owl (1) Willow flycatcher (3) Hairy woodpecker (1) Wilson's warbler (1) Hammond's flycatcher (1) Winter wren (1) 94

95 Table 18 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Puyallup River (#11) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Wood duck (1,4) Shrew-mole (1) Yellow warbler (1,2) Silver-haired bat (1,2) Yellow-rumped warbler (1) Snowshoe hare (1) Southern red-backed vole (1) Mammals Spotted skunk (1) Beaver (1) Townsend's big-eared bat (1,2,3,4) Big brown bat (4) Townsend's chipmunk (1) Black bear (1) Townsend's mole Black rat Townsend's vole (1) Black-tailed deer (1,4) Trowbridge's shrew (1) Bobcat (1) Vagrant shrew Bushy-tailed woodrat (1) Water shrew (1) California ground squirrel (1) Yuma myotis (3,4) California myotis (1,4) Coast mole (1) Reptiles Coyote Common garter snake Creeping vole Rubber boa Douglas' squirrel (1) Dusky (Montane) shrew (1) Elk (1,4) Ermine (1) Fisher (1,2,3,4) Gray wolf (3,4,5) Grizzly bear (3,4,5) Hoary bat (1) Little brown myotis (1,4) Long-eared myotis (1,3,4) Long-legged myotis (1,3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole (1) Long-tailed weasel (1) Marten (1,2,4) Masked shrew (1) Mink (1,4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion (1) Muskrat (1) Northern flying squirrel (1) Pacific jumping mouse (1) Pacific water shrew (3) Porcupine (1) Raccoon Red fox River otter (1) 95 Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur

96 Table 19: Predicted Species for the Shoreline (#12) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Long-toed salamander Orange-crowned warbler Northwestern salamander Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Peregrine falcon (3,4) Red-legged frog (3) Pileated woodpecker (2,3,4) Western toad (3) Pine siskin Purple finch Birds Purple martin (2,3,4) American crow Red crossbill American goldfinch Red-breasted nuthatch American robin Red-breasted sapsucker Bald eagle (3,4) Red-tailed hawk Band-tailed pigeon (4) Red-winged blackbird Barn swallow Rock dove Barred owl Rufous hummingbird Bewick's wren Sharp-shinned hawk Black-capped chickadee Solitary vireo Black-headed grosbeak Song sparrow Black-throated gray warbler Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Brown creeper Steller's jay Brown-headed cowbird Swainson's thrush Bushtit Tree swallow Cedar waxwing Varied thrush Chestnut-backed chickadee Vaux's swift (3,4) Chipping sparrow (2) Violet-green swallow Cliff swallow Warbling vireo Common yellowthroat Western bluebird (2,3) Cooper's hawk (2) Western screech-owl Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Western tanager Downy woodpecker Western wood-pewee European starling White-breasted nuthatch (1,4) Evening grosbeak White-crowned sparrow Glaucous-winged gull Willow flycatcher (3) Golden-crowned kinglet Wilson's warbler Great horned owl Winter wren Hairy woodpecker Wood duck (4) Hooded merganser (4) Yellow warbler (2) House finch Yellow-rumped warbler House sparrow Hutton's vireo Mammals Killdeer Beaver Marbled murrelet (2,3,4) Big brown bat (4) Northern flicker Black rat Northern saw-whet owl Black-tailed deer (4) 96

97 Table 19 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Shoreline (#12) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Bobcat Bushy-tailed woodrat California myotis (4) Coast mole Coyote Creeping vole Deer mouse Douglas' squirrel Dusky (Montane) shrew Ermine Hoary bat House mouse Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Long-tailed vole Long-tailed weasel Mink (4) Mountain beaver Muskrat Northern flying squirrel Norway rat Pacific jumping mouse Pacific water shrew (3) Porcupine Red fox Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Snowshoe hare Southern red-backed vole Spotted skunk Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Townsend's chipmunk Trowbridge's shrew Vagrant shrew Western gray squirrel (2,3,4) Yuma myotis (3,4) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Northwestern garter snake Rubber boa Western terrestrial garter snake 97

98 Table 20: Predicted Species for the Upper Nisqually (#13) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Hooded merganser (4) Cascade torrent salamander (2,3) House finch Ensatina Hutton's vireo Northwestern salamander Killdeer Pacific giant salamander Macgillivray's warbler Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Mallard Red-legged frog (3) Marsh wren Roughskin newt Northern flicker Western toad (3) Northern rough-winged swallow Northern saw-whet owl Birds Olive-sided flycatcher (3) American crow Orange-crowned warbler American dipper Osprey (3) American goldfinch Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) American robin Pied-billed grebe (4) Bald eagle (3,4) Purple finch Band-tailed pigeon (4) Red-breasted sapsucker Barn swallow Red-tailed hawk Barred owl Red-winged blackbird Belted kingfisher Ruffed grouse Bewick's wren Rufous hummingbird Black swift (3) Savannah sparrow Black-capped chickadee Solitary vireo Black-headed grosbeak Song sparrow Black-throated gray warbler Sora Brown creeper Spotted sandpiper (4) Brown-headed cowbird Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Bushtit Steller's jay Canada goose Swainson's thrush Cedar waxwing Tree swallow Chestnut-backed chickadee Turkey vulture (3) Cinnamon teal Vaux's swift (3,4) Cliff swallow Violet-green swallow Common merganser Virginia rail Common nighthawk Warbling vireo Common raven Western screech-owl Common snipe Western wood-pewee Common yellowthroat White-crowned sparrow Cooper's hawk (2) Willow flycatcher (3) Downy woodpecker Wilson's warbler European starling Wood duck (4) Great blue heron (3,4) Yellow warbler (2) Great horned owl Harlequin duck (2,3,4) 98

99 Table 20 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Upper Nisqually (#13) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Mammals Townsend's mole Beaver (1) Townsend's vole (1) Big brown bat (4) Trowbridge's shrew (1) Black bear (1) Vagrant shrew Black-tailed deer (1,4) Water shrew (1) Bobcat (1) Yuma myotis (3,4) Bushy-tailed woodrat (1) California ground squirrel (1) Reptiles California myotis (1,4) Common garter snake Coast mole (1) Northern alligator lizard Coyote Rubber boa Creeping vole Douglas' squirrel (1) Footnote: Dusky (Montane) shrew (1) Elk (1,4) Ermine (1) Fisher (1,2,3,4) Hoary bat (1) Little brown myotis (1,4) Long-eared myotis (1,3,4) Long-legged myotis (1,3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole (1) Long-tailed weasel (1) Marten (1,2,4) Masked shrew (1) Mink (1,4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion (1) Muskrat (1) Northern flying squirrel (1) Pacific jumping mouse (1) Pacific water shrew (1,3) Porcupine (1) Raccoon Red fox River otter (1) Shrew-mole (1) Silver-haired bat (1,2) Snowshoe hare (1) Southern red-backed vole (1) Spotted skunk (1) Townsend's big-eared bat (1,2,3,4) Townsend's chipmunk (1) 99 (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur

100 Table 21: Predicted Species for the Lewis County (#14) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Common merganser Cascade torrent salamander (1,2,3) Common nighthawk (1) Cascades frog (1,2,3) Common raven (1) Cope's giant salamander (1,2,3) Common yellowthroat (1) Ensatina (1) Cooper's hawk (2) Larch mountain salamander (1,2,3) Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco (1) Long-toed salamander (1) Downy woodpecker Northwestern salamander (1) European starling Pacific giant salamander (1) Evening grosbeak (1) Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) (1) Fox sparrow (1) Red-legged frog (1,3) Golden eagle (1,3,4) Roughskin newt (1) Golden-crowned kinglet (1) Tailed frog (1,2,3,4) Gray jay (1) Van Dyke's salamander (1,2,3) Gray-crowned rosy finch (Rosy finch) (1) Western redback salamander (1) Great blue heron (3,4) Western toad (1,3) Great horned owl (1) Hairy woodpecker (1) Birds Hammond's flycatcher (1) American crow Harlequin duck (1,2,3) American dipper (1) Hermit thrush American goldfinch Hermit warbler (1) American kestrel Hooded merganser (1,4) American pipit Horned lark (1) American robin House finch Bald eagle (1,3,4) Hutton's vireo Band-tailed pigeon (1,4) Killdeer Barn swallow Lincoln's sparrow Barred owl Macgillivray's warbler Barrow's goldeneye (1,4) Mallard Belted kingfisher Marbled murrelet (2,3,4) Black swift (1,3) Merlin (3,4) Black-capped chickadee Mountain bluebird (1) Black-headed grosbeak Northern flicker Black-throated gray warbler Northern goshawk (1,2,3,4) Blue grouse (1,4) Northern pygmy-owl (1) Brown creeper (1) Northern rough-winged swallow Brown-headed cowbird Northern saw-whet owl (1) Bushtit Olive-sided flycatcher (1,3) Cedar waxwing (1) Orange-crowned warbler (1) Chestnut-backed chickadee (1) Osprey (3) Chipping sparrow (1,2) Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) (1) Clark's nutcracker (1) Pileated woodpecker (1,2,3,4) Cliff swallow Pine grosbeak (1) 100

101 Table 21 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Lewis County (#14) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Pine siskin (1) Black-tailed deer (1,4) Purple finch (1) Bobcat (1) Red crossbill (1) Bushy-tailed woodrat (1) Red-breasted nuthatch (1) California ground squirrel (1) Red-breasted sapsucker (1) California myotis (1,4) Red-eyed vireo Cascade golden-mantled ground squirrel Red-tailed hawk Coast mole (1) Red-winged blackbird Coyote Ruffed grouse Creeping vole Rufous hummingbird (1) Douglas' squirrel (1) Sharp-shinned hawk (1) Dusky (Montane) shrew (1) Solitary vireo (1) Elk (1,4) Song sparrow Ermine (1) Spotted owl (1,2,3,4) Fisher (1,2,3,4) Spotted sandpiper (4) Heather vole Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Hoary bat (1) Steller's jay (1) Hoary marmot Swainson's thrush Little brown myotis (1,4) Three-toed woodpecker (3) Long-eared myotis (1,3,4) Townsend's solitaire (1) Long-legged myotis (1,3,4) Townsend's warbler (1) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Tree swallow (1) Long-tailed vole (1) Turkey vulture (1,3) Long-tailed weasel (1) Varied thrush (1) Marten (1,2,4) Vaux's swift (1,3,4) Masked shrew (1) Violet-green swallow (1) Mink (1,4) Warbling vireo (1) Mountain beaver Western screech-owl (1) Mountain goat (4) Western tanager (1) Mountain lion (1) Western wood-pewee (1) Muskrat (1) White-crowned sparrow Northern flying squirrel (1) White-winged crossbill Northern pocket gopher White-tailed ptarmigan (1) Pacific jumping mouse (1) Willow flycatcher (3) Pacific water shrew (1,3) Wilson's warbler (1) Pika Winter wren (1) Porcupine (1) Yellow warbler (1,2) Raccoon Yellow-rumped warbler (1) Red fox River otter (1) Mammals Shrew-mole (1) Beaver (1) Silver-haired bat (1,2) Big brown bat (4) Snowshoe hare (1) Black bear (1) Southern red-backed vole (1) 101

102 Table 21 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Lewis County (#14) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Spotted skunk (1) Townsend's big-eared bat (1,2,3,4) Townsend's chipmunk (1) Townsend's mole Townsend's vole (1) Trowbridge's shrew (1) Vagrant shrew (1) Water shrew (1) Water vole (Richardsons) Wolverine (2,3,4) Yellow-pine chipmunk Yuma myotis (3,4) Reptiles Common garter snake Northern alligator lizard Rubber boa Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 102

103 Table 22: Predicted Species for the Rainier (#15) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Warbling vireo Cascades frog (1,2,3,4) Western tanager Long-toed salamander (1) White-crowned sparrow Northwestern salamander White-winged crossbill Western toad (3) White-tailed ptarmigan (1) Wilson's warbler Birds American kestrel Mammals American pipit Big brown bat (4) American robin Black bear Black swift (3) Black-tailed deer (4) Blue grouse (4) Bobcat Cassin's finch Bushy-tailed woodrat Chestnut-backed chickadee California myotis (4) Chipping sparrow (1,2) Cascade golden-mantled ground squirrel (1) Clark's nutcracker (1) Coyote Common raven Creeping vole Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Deer mouse Fox sparrow (1) Dusky (Montane) shrew Golden eagle (1,3,4) Elk (4) Gray jay Ermine Gray-crowned rosy finch (Rosy finch) (1) Gray wolf (3,4,5) Great horned owl Grizzly bear (3,4,5) Hairy woodpecker Heather vole (1) Horned lark (1) Hoary marmot (1) Lincoln's sparrow Little brown myotis (4) Macgillivray's warbler Long-eared myotis (3,4) Merlin (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Mountain bluebird (1) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Mountain chickadee Long-tailed vole Northern flicker Long-tailed weasel Northern pygmy-owl Masked shrew Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Mountain goat (1,4) Pine grosbeak (1) Mountain lion Red-breasted sapsucker Northern flying squirrel Red-tailed hawk Northern pocket gopher (1) Rock wren Pacific jumping mouse Rufous hummingbird Pika (1) Spotted sandpiper (4) Porcupine Swainson's thrush Red fox Three-toed woodpecker (3) Shrew-mole Townsend's solitaire (1) Silver-haired bat (2) Vaux's swift (3,4) Southern red-backed vole 103

104 Table 22 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Rainier (#15) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Vagrant shrew Water shrew Water vole (Richardsons) (1) Wolverine (1,2,3,4) Yellow-pine chipmunk (1) Footnote: (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure representation within the network (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 104

105 Table 23: Predicted Species for the White River (#16) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians European starling Cascades frog (1,2,3,4) Evening grosbeak Ensatina Fox sparrow Long-toed salamander (1) Golden-crowned kinglet Northwestern salamander Gray jay Pacific giant salamander Great blue heron (3,4) Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) Great horned owl Red-legged frog (3) Hairy woodpecker Roughskin newt Hammond's flycatcher Tailed frog (2,3,4) Harlequin duck (2,3,4) Van Dyke's salamander (2,3) Hermit thrush Western toad (3) Hermit warbler Hutton's vireo Birds Killdeer American crow Lincoln's sparrow American dipper Macgillivray's warbler American goldfinch Mallard American robin Marbled murrelet (2,3,4) Band-tailed pigeon (4) Northern flicker Barn swallow Northern pygmy-owl Barred owl Northern rough-winged swallow Belted kingfisher Northern saw-whet owl Bewick's wren Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Black swift (3) Orange-crowned warbler Black-capped chickadee Osprey (3) Black-headed grosbeak Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Black-throated gray warbler Pied-billed grebe (4) Blue grouse (4) Pileated woodpecker (2,3,4) Blue-winged teal Pine grosbeak Brown creeper Pine siskin Brown-headed cowbird Purple finch Bushtit Red crossbill Canada goose Red-breasted nuthatch Cedar waxwing Red-breasted sapsucker Chestnut-backed chickadee Red-tailed hawk Cinnamon teal Red-winged blackbird Cliff swallow Ruffed grouse Common merganser Rufous hummingbird Common nighthawk Sharp-shinned hawk Common raven Solitary vireo Common yellowthroat Song sparrow Cooper's hawk (2) Spotted sandpiper (4) Dark-eyed (Oregon) junco Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Downy woodpecker Steller's jay 105

106 Table 23 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the White River (#16) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Swainson's thrush Long-tailed vole (1) Townsend's solitaire Long-tailed weasel (1) Townsend's warbler Marten (1,2,4) Tree swallow Masked shrew (1) Turkey vulture (3) Mink (1,4) Varied thrush Mountain beaver Vaux's swift (3,4) Mountain lion (1) Violet-green swallow Muskrat (1) Warbling vireo Northern flying squirrel (1) Western screech-owl Pacific jumping mouse (1) Western tanager Pacific water shrew (1,3) Western wood-pewee Pika White-crowned sparrow Porcupine (1) Willow flycatcher (3) Raccoon Wilson's warbler Red fox Winter wren River otter (1) Wood duck (4) Shrew-mole (1) Yellow warbler (2) Silver-haired bat (1,2) Yellow-rumped warbler Snowshoe hare (1) Southern red-backed vole (1) Mammals Spotted skunk (1) Beaver (1) Townsend's big-eared bat (1,2,3,4) Big brown bat (4) Townsend's chipmunk (1) Black bear (1) Townsend's mole Black-tailed deer (1,4) Townsend's vole (1) Bobcat (1) Trowbridge's shrew (1) Bushy-tailed woodrat (1) Vagrant shrew California ground squirrel (1) Water shrew (1) California myotis (1,4) Water vole (Richardsons) Cascade golden-mantled ground squirrel Wolverine (2,3,4) Coast mole (1) Yellow-pine chipmunk Coyote Yuma myotis (3,4) Creeping vole Douglas' squirrel (1) Reptiles Dusky (Montane) shrew (1) Common garter snake Elk (1,4) Northern alligator lizard Ermine (1) Rubber boa Fisher (1,2,3,4) Heather vole Footnote: Hoary bat (1) (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed Little brown myotis (1,4) additional mapped land cover units to ensure Long-eared myotis (1,3,4) representation within the network Long-legged myotis (1,3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse 106

107 Table 23 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the White River (#16) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Footnote (Cont'd): (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 107

108 Table 24: Predicted Species for the Lower White River (#17) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Amphibians Green-winged teal Long-toed salamander Hooded merganser (4) Northwestern salamander House finch Pacific treefrog (Chorus frog) House wren Red-legged frog (3) Hutton's vireo Roughskin newt Killdeer Western toad (3) Lazuli bunting Macgillivray's warbler Birds Mallard American bittern (2) Marsh wren American coot Northern flicker American crow Northern harrier American dipper Northern oriole American goldfinch Northern rough-winged swallow American robin Northern shoveler Bald eagle (3,4) Olive-sided flycatcher (3) Band-tailed pigeon (4) Orange-crowned warbler Barn swallow Osprey (3) Belted kingfisher Pacific slope flycatcher (Western) Bewick's wren Pied-billed grebe (4) Black-capped chickadee Purple finch Black-headed grosbeak Red-breasted sapsucker Black-throated gray warbler Red-eyed vireo Blue-winged teal Red-tailed hawk Brewer's blackbird Red-winged blackbird Brown-headed cowbird Rock dove Bushtit Ruddy duck California quail Ruffed grouse Canada goose Rufous hummingbird Cedar waxwing Savannah sparrow Cinnamon teal Song sparrow Cliff swallow Sora Common barn-owl Spotted sandpiper (4) Common merganser Spotted towhee (Rufous-sided) Common nighthawk Steller's jay Common raven Swainson's thrush Common snipe Tree swallow Common yellowthroat Turkey vulture (3) Cooper's hawk (2) Vaux's swift (3,4) Downy woodpecker Violet-green swallow European starling Virginia rail Gadwall Warbling vireo Great blue heron (3,4) Western screech-owl Great horned owl Western wood-pewee Green heron (Green-backed heron) (3) White-crowned sparrow 108

109 Table 24 (Cont'd): Predicted Species for the Lower White River (#17) Biodiversity Management Area (BMA) Willow flycatcher (3) Striped skunk Wilson's warbler Townsend's big-eared bat (2,3,4) Wood duck (4) Townsend's mole Yellow warbler (2) Townsend's vole Vagrant shrew Mammals Virginia opossum Beaver Yuma myotis (3,4) Big brown bat (4) Black bear Reptiles Black rat Common garter snake Black-tailed deer (4) Northern alligator lizard Bobcat Painted turtle (1) California myotis (4) Rubber boa Coast mole Western terrestrial garter snake Coyote Creeping vole Footnote: Deer mouse Dusky (Montane) shrew Eastern cottontail representation within the network Ermine Fisher (2,3,4) Hoary bat Little brown myotis (4) Long-eared myotis (3,4) Long-legged myotis (3,4) Long-tailed (Forest) deer mouse Long-tailed vole Long-tailed weasel Mink (4) Mountain beaver Mountain lion Muskrat Northern flying squirrel Norway rat Nutria Pacific jumping mouse Pacific water shrew (3) Porcupine Raccoon Red fox River otter Shrew-mole Silver-haired bat (2) Southern red-backed vole Spotted skunk (1) - Trigger Species - Species that needed additional mapped land cover units to ensure (2) - At-Risk - Washington Gap Analysis Project (WAGAP) selected species considered to be most as risk of continued or future population declines due to human activities (3) - Listed (State or Federal) - Species listed as State endangered, threatened, sensitive, candidate or monitor, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (4) - PHS - a species defined as priority under the WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Program (5) - Included based on species significance under the WDFW PHS/Heritage database, although not predicted to occur 109

110 Table 25 Fish Confirmed by BMA 110

111 Table 26 Butterflies Confirmed by BMA (page 1) 111

112 Table 26 Butterflies Confirmed by BMA (page 2) 112

113 Figure 11 Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Kitsap, North Bay, Gig Harbor, Lake Bay and McNeil Island BMAs 113

114 Figure 12 Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Ketron Island, Upland, Nisqually Delta and Shoreline BMAs 114

115 Figure 13 Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Greenwater River, Norse Peak, White River and Lower White River BMAs 115

116 Figure 14 Revised Core Polygons and Connectors for Puyallup River, Upper Nisqually, Lewis County and Rainier BMAs 116

117 Conclusion The Biodiversity Plan for Pierce County was an initial attempt to identify habitats that support the greatest level of biological diversity remaining within Pierce County. The original modeling was conducted using watershed boundaries and thus also represents lands that lay within other adjacent counties. The adopted Biodiversity Network included a large buffered area that in many instances did not contain the habitat(s) that were predicted to occur and therefore does not support the wildlife species modeled for. Recognizing this issue, the Biodiversity Plan contained a directive to more thoroughly evaluate the BMA Network through a targeted groundtruthing effort. This assessment was conducted based on the core BMA polygons/connectors and, utilizing a combination of GIS review and field investigations, was an attempt to refine the original network to more accurately reflect actual conditions across the landscape. Findings of this accuracy assessment revealed that the majority of predicted habitats were present within the BMA core polygons and warrant inclusion in the BMA Network. Core BMA polygons that were retained represent a variety of underlying land uses, such as commercial forest lands, agricultural, or mixed residential, which still contain 50% or more intact natural land cover. This variation is to be expected as the landscape is always changing. For example, the commercial or managed forest land areas are a dynamic mosaic of young, second-growth, and mature Douglas fir and Hemlock forest that should provide adequate habitat for the predicted species. Areas that did not provide at least 50% of the predicted habitat type were removed from the BMA Network. Connectors that were aligned with riparian corridors were retained. Connectors that were not aligned along riparian corridors or that connected core polygons that were removed from the Biodiversity Network were deleted and several new connectors were established along a riparian corridor. The Biodiversity Network Assessment section of this report indicates which individual core polygons were removed, modified and retained within the Biodiversity Network and how the connector system was revised. This revised Biodiversity Network more accurately identifies the habitat as it exists across the landscape. Figure15 illustrates the revised BMA Network and Table 27 provides a summary of the original BMA Network as compared to the revised BMA Network. The original adopted Biodiversity Network (buffered core polygons and connectors) comprised 522,364 acres of land area throughout Pierce County (412,969 acres of BMA polygons and 109,395 acres of connectors). As previously stated review of the Biodiversity Network was based only on core BMA polygons and buffered connectors, which constitutes 344,855 acres of land area. The revised BMA polygon acreage has decreased 43% from the original buffered BMA polygons to 233,523 acres of land. The revised connector system consists of 34,261 acres of land for a total decrease of 69% from the original adopted buffered connector system. The final revised Biodiversity Network includes a total of 267,784 acres of land, which is a 49% reduction in acreage from the original adopted buffered Biodiversity Network. A thorough analysis of WDFW Heritage field data indicates that many of the predicted species for each BMA core have in fact been confirmed. Other data sets such as the WDFW PHS, Washington Butterfly Atlas, PSAMP information, and Pierce County Fish Presence Maps also reveals that these BMA core polygons actually support a variety of species. Many of these species are classified under some type of Federal or State listing status, indicating that they may be in a state of decline and warrant a greater level of scrutiny and care in land use and wildlife management practices. Tables 8 26 provide a good summary of the species predicted to occur within each BMA and the Biodiversity Network Assessment section of this report contains a complete listing of species that have been recorded as WDFW Heritage 117

118 and Washington Butterfly Atlas points. Of special note are confirmed sightings of the Gray Wolf and Grizzly Bear within the revised BMA network. These species are listed as Federally-threatened and State-endangered and are very rare in Pierce County. The revised BMA Network should be incorporated into the County s GIS data and replace the current BMA Network data. Information from this assessment may also be useful to other local jurisdictions, governmental agencies, tribes, land trusts, and environmental organizations seeking more detailed wildlife data and working on long-term habitat protection actions. A variety of implementation measures are described in greater detail in the Recommendations section of this report. Many of these recommendations involve long-term monitoring and public education and outreach efforts by various stakeholders. 118

119 Figure 15 Revised Biodiversity Network 119

120 Table 27 Comparison of Current Biodiversity Network and Revised Biodiversity Network 120