VII. B. Recommendations |
- A baseline inventory of Bainbridge Island nearshore habitat and processes should be produced from Island-specific data supplemented with other databases. This inventory should be used for determining habitat trends, locating critical areas for protection or restoration, and identifying nearshore ecosystems most at risk to cumulative impacts. Base maps should be continually updated for all marine and estuarine shorelines of Bainbridge Island to promote increased understanding and better management.
- Bainbridge Island should strive to fill data gaps by working independently and in close coordination with other jurisdictions and agencies. Investigators should follow established, accepted methods to collect data (WDNR, WDOE, WDFW, EPA). The city should coordinate data available from agencies and Tribes. If appropriate, Bainbridge Island residents and volunteer groups should be involved in collection and management of data.
- Bainbridge Island should develop a realistic nearshore management strategy for the Island. The goal of this plan would be to reduce or eliminate new human-induced stressors to the nearshore environment, coupled with restoration and protection of existing systems. The City should identify usable management units for this effort. Units may be drift cells based upon physical parameters, shoreline characteristics reflective of current zoning characteristics, or other methodologies. The City should work in concert with other regional nearshore management activities and strategies (e.g., Kitsap and King Counties, Puget Sound Nearshore Science Team sponsored by the US Army Corps of Engineers) to stay current with progress made by neighboring jurisdictions. This management plan should include the following items, some of which are not yet developed by the City:
- A section to educate and inform residents of Bainbridge Island about the importance of the nearshore environment
- Policies that promote nearshore protection and impact avoidance and provide incentives to support policy
- A nearshore monitoring/adaptive management strategy.
- Sensitive marine nearshore and estuarine habitat and ecological functions should be protected and restored by avoiding shoreline structural modifications altogether. Protection and conservation of ecologically important natural areas must be prioritized from a landscape perspective, especially those sites recognized for their importance to shoreline processes (e.g., sediment dynamics) and biological functions (e.g., fish migratory corridors or spawning and nursery habitats).
- Bainbridge Island should evaluate and update current policies to reflect Best Available Science. Best available science is not static. New information is published continuously. Policy and regulation development, to be truly adaptive, must be updated frequently with new information.
- Bainbridge Island should identify and pursue restoration and preservation projects. This should include the prioritization of areas targeted for restoration and protection. These areas should be identified as sensitive, and policies associated with these areas should reflect long-term protection goals.
- Phased restoration of natural processes and ecological functions should be achieved through the strategic removal of unnecessary shoreline structures, especially in areas with particularly high rates of shoreline armoring and habitat structural modification. Restoration project planning must be complete and include a site assessment to ensure that the site is as correct as possible for the type of restoration planned and that any modifications needed to correct problems with the site are fully understood and carried out. Restoration is intended to result in a net benefit to the ecosystem, but restoration actions should be considered relative to the potential for success in order to maximize the net benefits.
- A thorough physical and biological assessment on a site-specific basis must be carried out to fully understand and document the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts prior to permitting any shoreline modifications around Bainbridge Island. Evaluations of potential effects of proposed shoreline modifications for a section of Bainbridge Island must consider carefully how these functions will be affected prior to allowance of any modifications to take place. The assessment must be site-specific, landscape sensitive, and scientifically rigorous enough to fully document the need for the modification, balanced by potential (including cumulative) impacts. Measures for protecting critical habitats must incorporate principles of landscape connectivity and extend to activities outside of their conveniently defined boundaries.
- When definitive scientific information is lacking but potential impacts are likely to occur, the City of Bainbridge Island should err on the side of caution to reach conservative decisions that favor natural ecological functions. The nearshore, including the riparian areas, has been extensively altered, and any unaltered or mildly altered areas likely have enhanced value to preserving remaining habitat functions. Enhancing and restoring these areas to provide a net benefit to habitat functions should be strongly considered.
- Where new shoreline modifications must occur, impacts should be minimized by pursuing alternative techniques (e.g., setbacks, vegetation, beach nourishment) and natural structure placement strategies. The pressure to allow shoreline armoring along Bainbridge Island is expected to continue and possibly increase as more difficult properties are targeted for development. The City should develop solid professional relationships with scientists and local agencies to maintain up-to-date knowledge of new techniques, options for armoring, and proper avenues to review and process permit applications.
| << vii.a. conclusions |