NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN

Tribal code

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

HOH RIVER WATERSHED

JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON WRIA 20

Submitted to:

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 10 TRIBAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155

Seattle, Washington 98101

Submitted by:

July 2026

Hoh Indian Tribe Natural Resources Department

2269 Lower Hoh Rd, Forks, Washington 98331

In cooperation with: WESTECH CONSULTING, LLC

937 Boathaven Drive, Port Angeles, Washington 98363

Trevor Shea, CEO

CONTENTS

OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................... 3

Summary of Waters .............................................................................................................. 34

Waters Facing Imminent Threats .............................................................................................. 4

High-Quality Waters Requiring Protection .............................................................................. 6

Olympic National Park Headwaters.......................................................................................... 6

Culturally Signiﬁcant Waters .................................................................................................... 6

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 7

Objective 1: Manage Temperature Impairments ................................................................ 87

Objective 2: Reduce Chronic Dissolved Oxygen Violations .......................................... 8

Objective 3: Develop Framework for Addressing Severe Acidiﬁcation .................... 8

Objective 4: Address Streambank and Riparian Buffer Zone Vulnerabilities ....................... 8

Objective 5: Protect High-Quality Waters ............................................................................. 9

MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY ................................................................................. 9

MANAGEMENT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 10

BMP Selection Considerations ............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.10

Nonpoint Source Pollution Categories................................................................................ 1114

Implementation .................................................................................................................. 2529

Governance Structure ....................................................................................................... 4649

CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 4952

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 5255

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1. Summary of NPS management plan for each pollutant category. ............................. 2224

Table 2. NPS categories and their potential pollutant impacts. ............................................... 2426

Table 3. NPS categories and impairments based on monitoring sites. .................................... 2527

Table 4. NPS objective and outcome measures by category.................................................... 3638

Table 5. Summary of Major Funding Sources for NPS Implementation. ................................ 4648

Figure 1. Hoh Tribe’s water quality monitoring program’s assessed waterways and wetlands in

the Hoh River Watershed. ............................................................................................................... 7

OVERVIEW

The Hoh Indian Tribe has developed this Nonpoint Source Management Program Plan (MP)

to establish the framework for addressing signiﬁcant water quality impairments throughout the

299-square mile Hoh River Watershed. This plan, with the companion Nonpoint Source

Assessment Report (AR), fulﬁlls requirements under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act,

qualifying the Tribe for federal nonpoint source implementation funding. The MP translates

assessment ﬁndings, documenting river miles of impaired waters into actionable strategies for

restoration while protecting remaining high-quality resources essential to treaty-protected

ﬁshing rights and cultural practices.

The assessment report and the management plan comprehensively address four conditions

through synthesis of water quality monitoring data (FY2021-2025), ﬁeld reconnaissance, and

geospatial analysis. The AR documented that 43.8 river miles (57.7%) of assessed waters fail

to meet applicable standards, with temperature impairments affecting 35.8 river miles

(47.15%) throughout the watershed in 2025 (Assessment Report 2025). The AR provides the

technical foundation upon which the MP builds its implementation framework.

The AR establishes eleven tributaries maintaining continuous 303(d) listings for temperature

since 1996: Alder, Anderson, Elk, Line, Maple, McQuarry-Fisher, Nolan, Owl, Split,

Willoughby, and Winﬁeld Creeks. This demonstrates that nearly three decades of current

forest practices have proven insufficient for achieving recovery (Ecology 2025; Assessment

Report 2025).

Dissolved oxygen violations in Lower Chalaat Creek, with a 64.6% failure rate over 19 years

of monitoring, indicate ecosystem dysfunction requiring immediate intervention to protect the

Tribe's steelhead hatchery operations (Hoh Tribe FY25 CWA 106 Report). Severe acidiﬁcation

in Hell Roaring and Lower Braden Creeks, with pH consistently below 5.5, has effectively

eliminated these waters from the functional habitat network (Assessment Report 2025).

SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

Key ﬁndings from the comprehensive AR provided the technical foundation for this MP.

Documented widespread water quality degradation throughout the Hoh River Watershed,

identiﬁed the primary pollution sources contributing to impairments and established the

scientiﬁc basis for selecting appropriate management interventions.

The following summary highlights the most critical impairments requiring immediate

attention, the dominant nonpoint sources driving degradation, and the high-quality waters

requiring protection from future impacts. This synthesis ensures that management strategies

directly address documented problems while building on existing watershed strengths.

Summary of Waters

The Hoh River Watershed exhibits widespread and persistent water quality degradation

throughout its 298.5-square mile drainage area, with the AR documenting that 43.8 river miles

(57.7%) of the 76 river miles assessed fail to meet water quality standards for at least one

parameter (Assessment Report 2025). This comprehensive impairment affects ﬁsh-bearing

waters from headwater tributaries to the mainstem river, threatening the ecological integrity

necessary to support treaty-reserved ﬁshing rights and cultural practices. Certification of tribal

authority can be found in the appendix of this report. The severity and extent of these

impairments, documented through five years of intensive monitoring and ﬁeld

reconnaissance, demonstrate that nonpoint source pollution control is essential for achieving

water quality standards throughout the watershed.

Waters Facing Imminent Threats

Temperature represents the most pervasive water quality impairment, affecting 35.8 river

miles (47.15%) of monitored stream length with violations documented at 26 monitoring sites

during FY2025 (Hoh Tribe FY25 CWA 106 Report).

The AR identiﬁed eleven tributaries maintaining continuous 303(d) listings for temperature

since 1996: Alder, Anderson, Elk, Line, Maple, McQuarry-Fisher, Nolan, Owl, Split,

Willoughby, and Winﬁeld Creeks. This demonstrates that nearly three decades of current

forest practices have proven insufficient for achieving recovery (Ecology 2025; Assessment

Report 2025). The Hoh River mainstem joined this list of persistently impaired waters in 2012,

indicating that cumulative thermal loads from degraded tributaries now overwhelm the dilution

capacity of the main river. Maximum temperatures reached 19.7°C in Lower Nolan Creek in 2023,

approaching lethal limits for salmonids and exceeding the 16°C core summer salmonid habitat

criterion by 3.7°C (Assessment Report 2025).

Dissolved oxygen violations compound temperature stress in critical spawning and rearing

habitats, with monitoring documenting chronic failures at multiple sites throughout the watershed.

Lower Chalaat Creek exhibits the most severe impairment with a 64.6% failure rate over 19 years

of monitoring, where DO concentrations routinely drop below the 9.0 mg/L standard necessary to

support the Tribe's steelhead hatchery operations (Hoh Tribe FY25 CWA 106 Report). DO

violations frequently coincide with temperature impairments at sites including the Hoh River

mainstem and Lower Nolan Creek. This creates synergistic stress where elevated temperatures

reduce oxygen solubility while simultaneously increasing metabolic oxygen demand (Assessment

Report 2025). Field reconnaissance confirmed visual indicators of oxygen depletion through

extensive algal growth and stagnant conditions during summer low-ﬂow periods.

Severe acidiﬁcation has effectively eliminated Hell Roaring and Lower Braden Creeks from the

functional habitat network, with pH values consistently below 5.5 since monitoring began in 2005

(Assessment Report 2025). Lower Braden Creek exhibits both pH and dissolved oxygen

violations, creating particularly hostile conditions where acidiﬁcation increases metabolic costs

while oxygen depletion limits available energy for aquatic organisms (Hoh Tribe FY23 CWA 106

Report).

The spatial distribution of impairments reveals clear patterns linking water quality degradation to

land management activities. Temperature impairments concentrate at actively managed state and

private forestlands, with streams showing marked deterioration (Assessment Report 2025). This

pattern indicates that current forest practices, particularly inadequate riparian buffers and extensive

clear-cutting documented during ﬁeld reconnaissance, continue to drive thermal loading despite

regulatory requirements.

Conversely, dissolved oxygen and pH impairments concentrate in lower gradient reaches where

channel morphology and longer residence times create conditions for biochemical oxygen

depletion and acid accumulation.

Turbidity violations, while less pervasive than other parameters, create episodic impacts during

storm events that mobilize sediment from roads, harvest units, and unstable banks. Canyon Creek

experiences severe turbidity problems requiring further investigation, while monitoring at other

sites indicates general compliance except during high-ﬂow events (Assessment Report 2025). The

limited turbidity monitoring conducted to date likely underestimates the extent of sediment-related

impairments, particularly given the 246 documented stream crossings and extensive unpaved road

network identiﬁed in the watershed assessment.

Multiple parameter violations create cumulative stress at six critically impaired locations where

temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, or turbidity problems overlap. Lower Nolan Creek experiences

both severe temperature violations (maximum 19.7°C) and chronic dissolved oxygen depletion,

while Lower Chalaat Creek combines the watershed's worst dissolved oxygen conditions with

periodic pH depression (Assessment Report 2025). These multiply-impaired waters represent

priority restoration sites where addressing single parameters in isolation will prove insufficient for

achieving designated uses.

The persistence of these impairments despite decades of restoration efforts and regulatory

compliance demonstrates that current management approaches have failed to protect or restore

water quality. The eleven tributaries maintaining continuous 303(d) listings since 1996 show no

improving trends after 27 years, with several streams showing continued degradation (Ecology

2025).

Regionally documented impacts, including earlier snowmelt, extended summer drought, and

extreme heat events, will intensify existing impairments and make current degraded conditions

tomorrow's best-case scenarios without comprehensive intervention (Assessment Report 2025).

Several currently unimpaired or marginally impaired waters face immediate threats requiring

proactive protection measures before degradation occurs. Highway 101 corridor streams face

ongoing threats from transportation-related pollutants, with direct discharge of untreated road

runoff documented at multiple bridge crossings including sites where traffic and stormwater ﬂow

directly into rivers without any treatment (Assessment Report 2025). Winter road maintenance

introduces sand, salt, and deicing compounds, while year-round vehicle traffic contributes

petroleum hydrocarbons, brake dust, and tire particles like 6PPDQ. These streams currently

maintaining marginal water quality could rapidly deteriorate without installation of stormwater

mitigation systems and regular maintenance of existing infrastructure.

Upper watershed areas currently protected by mature second-growth forests face potential

degradation as these stands reach commercial maturity and enter harvest rotations. Private

industrial forestlands typically operate on 35-45-year rotations, meaning forests regenerating from

1980s-1990s harvests will soon face cutting (Assessment Report 2025)

Proactive engagement with landowners to establish extended rotations, expanded buffers, or

conservation easements in key watersheds could prevent future temperature impairments before

they occur.

High-Quality Waters Requiring Protection

While the Tribe has documented extensive water quality degradation throughout the Hoh River

Watershed, it also identiﬁes critical high-quality waters that maintain ecological integrity and

require protection from future impairment. These waters provide essential ecological functions

including cold-water refugia, source populations for downstream recovery, reference conditions

demonstrating achievable restoration endpoints, and sustained support for treaty-reserved ﬁshing

rights (Assessment Report 2025). Protection of these remaining high-quality waters proves more

cost-effective than restoration and ensures preservation of the ecological foundation necessary for

watershed-wide recovery.

Olympic National Park Headwaters

The most extensive high-quality waters originate within Olympic National Park boundaries, where

109,888 acres (57.4% of the watershed) receive comprehensive protection under National Park

Service management that prohibits commercial resource extraction (Assessment Report 2025).

The glacially fed nature of the upper Hoh River and several headwater tributaries contributes yearround ﬂow and naturally elevated turbidity from glacial ﬂour, maintaining base ﬂows even during

extended summer drought periods (Assessment Report 2025). Although most of the rivers and

creeks monitored by the Tribe in the ONP do not achieve water quality standards, waterways in

the park are cooler and better oxygenated compared to those outside of its boundaries on state and

private forestlands. These protected headwaters serve as the ecological backbone of the watershed,

providing water that moderates downstream impacts. The transition zones where streams exit park

protection warrant special management attention, representing the last opportunity to maintain

higher quality conditions before entering areas of active forest management.

Culturally Signiﬁcant Waters

Waters holding special cultural importance to the Hoh Tribe require protection beyond their

ecological value, representing irreplaceable connections to traditional practices and spiritual

beliefs. These include traditional ﬁshing sites at speciﬁc river bends and tributary conﬂuences

where families have harvested salmon for generations, ceremonial bathing pools used for spiritual

cleansing and cultural practices, and medicinal plant gathering areas along riparian zones where

speciﬁc species grow. While speciﬁc locations remain conﬁdential to protect cultural resources,

these waters often coincide with high ecological quality due to traditional management practices

and limited development.

The Tribe's steelhead hatchery on Chalaat Creek represents a modern expression of traditional

ﬁsheries management, requiring high-quality water for successful operations that support both

subsistence and ceremonial needs. Continued degradation threatens long-term viability in Chalaat

Creek (Hoh Tribe FY23 CWA 106 Report). Protection of hatchery water supplies through

upstream buffer enhancement and sediment reduction becomes essential for maintaining tribal

ﬁsheries programs.

Figure 1.Hoh Tribe’s water quality monitoring program’s assessed waterways and wetlands in the Hoh

River Watershed.

INTRODUCTION

This plan translates documented water quality impairments into actionable restoration

strategies The plan presents the programmatic structure through which the Tribe will

coordinate voluntary implementation of best management practices, leverage partnerships

across mixed ownership landscapes, and adaptively manage restoration efforts based on

monitoring feedback. Through this framework, the Tribe seeks to restore decades of

cumulative impacts that have impaired waters while protecting remaining high-quality waters

essential for treaty-reserved ﬁshing rights and cultural practices.

The overarching goal of the Hoh Indian Tribe's NPS management plan is to restore and protect

water quality effected by NPS throughout the Hoh River Watershed to support treaty-reserved

ﬁshing rights, cultural practices, and the ecological integrity necessary for sustaining salmon

and steelhead populations. This goal recognizes that water quality degradation directly

threatens the Tribe's ability to exercise treaty rights guaranteed under the Treaty of Olympia

(1855-1856) and affirmed through subsequent federal court decisions (United States v.

Washington 1974).

The management plan seeks to reverse decades of cumulative impacts from NPS pollution

while protecting remaining high-quality waters from future degradation. It establishes five

primary objectives that address known critical water quality impairments that are caused by

nonpoint source pollutants:

Objective 1: Manage Temperature Impairments in Persistently Degraded Tributaries

Prioritize restoration of the eleven tributaries maintaining continuous 303(d) listings for

temperature since 1996. These streams include Alder, Anderson, Elk, Line, Maple,

McQuarry-Fisher, Nolan, Owl, Split, Willoughby, and Winﬁeld Creeks. These streams

collectively represent 25 river miles of impaired habitat, requiring comprehensive riparian

restoration, enhanced shade retention requirements, and modiﬁed forest practices to achieve

compliance with salmonid habitat criterion (WAC 173-201A-200; Assessment Report 2025).

Objective 2: Reduce Chronic Dissolved Oxygen Violations in Critical Spawning and

Rearing Habitat

Implement targeted interventions to address dissolved oxygen violations, particularly in

Lower Chalaat Creek where the 64.6% failure rate over 19 years threatens the Tribe's steelhead

hatchery operations (Hoh Tribe FY25 CWA 106 Report). Management actions will focus on

improving riparian function to moderate stream temperatures that inﬂuence oxygen solubility

and restoring natural channel complexity to enhance reaeration.

Objective 3: Develop Framework for Addressing Severe Acidiﬁcation in

Headwater Streams

Establish specialized approaches for Hell Roaring and Lower Braden Creeks, where pH values

consistently below 5.5 have eliminated these waters from the functional habitat network

(Assessment Report 2025). Given the complex interaction between natural geology,

atmospheric deposition, and forest management practices contributing to acidiﬁcation, the

program will implement restoration techniques. These include cedar spault removal, enhanced

wetland delineation, invasive removal, and modiﬁed harvest prescriptions in contributing

watersheds.

Objective 4: Address Streambank and Riparian Buffer Zone Vulnerabilities throughout

the Watershed

Streambank vulnerabilities like bank erosion, sediment delivery pathways, roadway runoff,

and riparian buffer degradation can benefit from sediment control practices or bank

stabilization. Sediment delivery from the extensive road network and associated stream

crossings creates chronic turbidity impairments throughout the Hoh River Watershed, with

Canyon Creek exemplifying the severity of erosion impacts through maximum turbidity

readings of 190.80 NTU upstream of Upper Hoh Road in FY2022, far exceeding the 5 NTU

over background standard for salmonid streams (Assessment Report 2025). The watershed's

forest road system, developed primarily during the timber harvest expansion of the 1960s1980s, continues generating sediment decades after construction through surface erosion,

crossing failures, and chronic maintenance deﬁcits. The following sediment control practices

address both active erosion sources and legacy infrastructure contributing to water quality

degradation. Protection streambanks through buffer enhancement and conservation easements

could create stepping stones for watershed recovery.

Objective 5: Protect High-Quality Waters Within and Adjacent to Olympic National

Park

Implement protection strategies for parts of the watershed maintaining water quality standards,

particularly pristine headwater streams within Olympic National Park boundaries that serve as

critical refugia for cold-water species (Assessment Report 2025). Protection measures will

include enhanced riparian buffers on adjacent lands, strategic conservation easements in key

connectivity corridors, and proactive monitoring to detect emerging threats before

degradation occurs. The program recognizes that protecting functional habitat is more costeffective than restoration and essential for maintaining source populations for watershed

recovery.

MANAGEMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY

The Hoh Tribe's Natural Resources Department has demonstrated substantial governmental duties

and powers through decades of environmental management under the authority of the Hoh Tribal

Business Committee. This includes operation of EPA-approved water quality monitoring programs

under Section 106 using EPA General Assistance Program (GAP) since the early 2000s,

development of comprehensive forest management plans (Hoh Tribe 2015), and co-management

of ﬁsheries resources throughout treaty areas. While the Tribe is currently pursuing Treatment as

State (TAS) status under Section 518(e) of the Clean Water Act for the Section 319 program, the

completion of these NPS Assessment Report and NPS Management Program Plan establishes the

foundation for TAS approval and subsequent eligibility for Section 319(h) base and competitive

grant funding.

The Hoh Tribe’s Water Quality Specialist manages a Partnership Performance Grant (PPG) which

bundles the General Assistance Program (GAP), Clean Water Act 106, and a Wetland Program.

The nonpoint source pollution management program will join the list of grants included in the

PPG. The Water Quality Specialist, along with other specialists in the Natural Resources

Department, will aid in establishing a framework for the program. Specialists include the Timber,

Forest, & Wildlife Biologist, Restoration Biologist, Wetland Specialist, Natural Resources

Director, Fisheries Manager and technicians. The Hoh Tribal Business Committee is presented

with details of the non-point source pollution program through bi-monthly council meetings with

the Natural Resources Director. Hoh Tribal Business Committee members have final oversight

into any nonpoint source program decisions. The program requires input from all staff to ensure

success of a comprehensive watershed-based approach of the Hoh River Watershed. The Tribe's

existing PPG and diverse portfolio of natural resource grants from NOAA, BIA, and other state

agencies, provides the institutional foundation necessary for successful implementation of

comprehensive NPS management throughout the Hoh River watershed.

The Tribe's authority to develop and implement this management program derives from its

inherent sovereignty as a federally recognized tribe, treaty-reserved rights under the Treaty of

Olympia (1855-1856), and status under the Clean Water Act. The Hoh Tribe is regarded on the

Department of Interior's list of Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services from

the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, conﬁrming federal recognition and government-togovernment relationship with the United States (Federal Register 2025). The

federal trust responsibility and treaty obligations provide additional authority for tribal water

quality protection that transcends speciﬁc Clean Water Act provisions. As affirmed through the

Boldt Decision (United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312, 1974) and subsequent federal

court rulings, the Tribe's treaty-reserved ﬁshing rights implicitly include the right to protect habitat

and water quality necessary to sustain cultural resources. This plan aims to advance the Tribe's

sovereign responsibility to protect waters that have sustained the Hoh people since time

immemorial.

Identification of pollution sources and BMP’s decisions will coincide with Tribal goals outlined

in the EPA-Tribal Environmental Plan. The Tribe’s goals focus on restoration and protection of

the watershed based on historical data, cultural knowledge, and landowner participation.

Since the Hoh River Watershed (HRW) has various land ownerships and land usages it will be

important to establish strong relationships with local partners and stakeholders. With the guidance

of the Hoh Tribal Business Committee, expert consolation, and extensive research, the Tribe will

implement best management practices (BMP) while leveraging funding, waterway priorities,

infrastructure, landscape, cultural assessments, outcome success, and aquatic life health. Public

participation will be available to gain landowner input and cooperation. The Tribe will establish

communications with stakeholders to ensure cooperative management decisions.

MANAGEMENT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

BMPs were addressed by categories to form an outline of how to respond to site specific NPS

pollution. Each monitoring site has a unique set of pollutants and conditions that may be

contributing to impairment(s). The Hoh Tribe’s water quality monitoring program first determined

impairments through historical monitoring. Next, pollutant sources were attributed to NPS

categories that could potentially be influencing waterways (Table 2). This determination aided in

addressing severity and source category impacts of our monitoring locations (Table 3). To assign

severity and category applications at each monitoring location was assessed for:

Impairments (historical water quality data)

Frequency of impairment

Land use

Road/highway proximity

Fish passage barriers presence

Invasive species mapping

Gravel mining activity

Since the water quality monitoring data can only provide input on impairment status (pollutants),

other knowledge regarding land use is a major factor in determining sources categories.

Based on our assessment of category impacts on specific monitoring sites, management activities

were selected to alleviate pollutant issues in each category. The following management activities

are considerations the Tribe could implement to resolve NPS pollutants.

Nonpoint Source Pollution Categories

There are six major categories of nonpoint source pollution contributing to water quality

degradation throughout the Hoh River Watershed, with forestry and logging roads representing

the dominant source. These pollution categories, characterized through synthesis of

monitoring data, ﬁeld reconnaissance, and geospatial analysis, create multiple pathways for

pollutant delivery that vary in magnitude, timing, and spatial distribution. Understanding the

speciﬁc mechanisms by which each category degrades water quality provides the foundation

for selecting appropriate best management practices targeted to address identiﬁed sources.

1. Forestry and Logging Roads

Forest management activities and associated road networks constitute the most widespread

and impactful nonpoint source pollution category in the watershed, with commercial timber

harvest occurring throughout state and private lands that comprise approximately 45% of the

total watershed area (Assessment Report 2025). The combination of timber harvest, road

construction and maintenance, and log transport creates multiple pathways for sediment

delivery, thermal pollution, and hydrologic alteration that directly contribute to the

temperature impairments and increased turbidity affecting fish habitats.

Approximately 70% of the watershed area represents designated forest land available for timber

harvesting. These extensive timber harvest operations can be observed with clearcuts of varying

ages along the Hoh Mainline Road and Oil City Road that create a moving mosaic of thermal

source areas as harvest units progress through rotation cycles. The watershed's extensive forest

road network, with documented stream crossings requiring assessment for ﬁsh passage and

sediment delivery, generates an estimated 50-300 tons/mile/year of sediment from unpaved

surfaces (Assessment Report 2025).

Industrial private forestlands typically operate on 35-45 year rotations compared to 60-80 year

rotations on state lands, creating temporal and spatial variability in disturbance patterns. Current

Washington Forest Practices Rules require riparian buffers ranging from 90 to 200 feet, yet field

reconnaissance documenting numerous locations where harvest units approach or violate standard

buffer requirements, particularly from pre-1999 harvests when only 25-foot buffers were required.

These historical buffer violations continue affecting stream temperature decades after harvest, as

regenerating vegetation has not yet achieved the height and density necessary to provide adequate

shade (Assessment Report 2025). Even in areas that abide by more stringent buffer practices,

clearcuts and landscape alterations can disturb streams through cascading impairment effects,

influencing dissolved oxygen or pH in the process.

The comprehensive assessment of water quality conditions and pollution sources throughout

the Hoh River Watershed reveals a system under severe stress, with 52.4 river miles (65.4%)

failing to meet standards while forestry and logging roads affect approximately 70% of the

watershed area (Assessment Report 2025). The convergence of persistent temperature

impairments on eleven tributaries since 1996, chronic dissolved oxygen violations, and severe

acidiﬁcation eliminating entire stream reaches from the habitat network demonstrates that

current management approaches have proven insufficient for achieving recovery.

The following chapter establishes the framework for selecting and prioritizing best management

practices that address identiﬁed pollution sources while building on existing high-quality waters,

recognizing that strategic investment in protection and restoration must be scaled to available

resources and focused where the Tribe maintains greatest management authority.

a. Riparian Forest Buffer Restoration (NRCS Practice Standard 391)

Riparian forest buffers represent the primary mechanism for reducing stream temperatures through

direct shade provision, with effectiveness dependent on buffer width, vegetation height, channel

orientation, and topographic shading. Riparian Forest Buffer Restoration provides technical

speciﬁcations for establishing woody vegetation adjacent to waterbodies, though site-speciﬁc

design must account for the unique characteristics of Olympic Peninsula streams. Recent peerreviewed research demonstrates that riparian buffers can achieve temperature reductions of 1-3°C

under current conditions, with effectiveness varying by stream size, aspect, and existing canopy

gaps (Fuller et al. 2022, Journal of Water and Change).

The Washington Forest Practices Board Manual establishes baseline requirements through WAC

222-30-021, mandating 90-foot no-harvest buffers on Type F (ﬁsh-bearing) waters for sites within

the timber harvest land base. However, research by Yonce et al. (2021) indicates that while 54meter (177-foot) buffers effectively mitigate timber harvest impacts through the 2050s, projections

suggest wider buffers will be necessary to maintain temperature standards into the 2080s. This

temporal dimension requires adaptive management approaches that anticipate future conditions

rather than simply addressing current impairments.

Field reconnaissance documented variable riparian conditions throughout the watershed, from

completely denuded reaches to areas with intact but inadequate buffers. At Winﬁeld Creek, despite

existing riparian vegetation, extensive orange and green algae growth indicated severe temperature

stress correlating with the stream's 303(d) listing (Field Reconnaissance, August 2025). Anderson

Creek presented a more complex scenario, with thorough shading from large trees and shrubs

providing minimal direct sunlight penetration to the 3-5 foot wide ﬂow, yet temperature

impairment persists due to a large clearcut immediately uphill to the west, suggesting subsurface

thermal loading and reduced humidity affecting stream temperature (Field Reconnaissance,

August 2025).

Buffer restoration effectiveness depends critically on vegetation composition and structure. Native

coniferous species including Thuja plicata (Western Red Cedar), Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas

Fir), and Tsuga heterophylla (Western Hemlock) provide superior shade density compared to

deciduous species, though Alnus rubra (Red Alder) offers rapid early growth and nitrogen ﬁxation

beneﬁts. Mixed species plantings that mimic natural succession patterns demonstrate greater

resilience to disturbance and disease while providing diverse ecological functions beyond

temperature regulation.

Temperature reduction through riparian shade restoration provides the primary mechanism for

DO improvement, as cooler water holds more dissolved oxygen while reducing metabolic oxygen

demand. Research by Ghimire & Johnston (2021) documented that urban riparian buffer zones

raised DO concentrations by 4-10% across three watersheds, with effectiveness

correlating directly with temperature reduction achieved. The temperature management

practices described earlier therefore serve dual purposes, addressing both thermal stress and

oxygen depletion simultaneously.

Watershed management addressing acid sources provides longer-term solutions though with

extended response times. Forest harvest prescriptions that retain canopy cover reduce acid

leaching from exposed soils, particularly in areas with naturally acidic parent material.

Selective harvest maintaining 50-70% canopy retention demonstrates reduced acidiﬁcation

compared to clearcuts. Extended rotations allowing soil recovery between entries reduce

cumulative acidiﬁcation. Protection of headwater areas with high acid-neutralizing capacity

preserves watershed buffering.

b. Tree and Shrub Establishment (NRCS Practice Standard 612)

Complementing riparian buffer restoration, Practice Standard 612 addresses temperature

impacts from upland harvest units and degraded areas beyond the immediate riparian zone.

This practice proves particularly relevant given ﬁeld observations of extensive clearcuts at

various successional stages throughout the watershed, ranging from fresh cuts less than one

year old to maturing second growth exceeding ﬁfteen years (Field Reconnaissance, August

2025). Strategic reforestation of critical areas can reduce landscape-level heating that

contributes to stream temperature through advective heat transfer and reduced humidity.

The effectiveness of tree and shrub establishment varies signiﬁcantly with site conditions and

implementation methods. Survival rates in the challenging Olympic Peninsula environment

with extreme winter precipitation, summer drought stress, and intensive herbivory from

Roosevelt elk require careful species selection and establishment techniques. Protection

measures including browse barriers, competition control, and strategic placement within

protective microsites improve establishment success.

Native plant distribution programs expand the Jefferson County Conservation District's

successful annual sales to include comprehensive restoration support services. Species

selection emphasizes locally-sourced materials adapted to Olympic Peninsula conditions

including high rainfall, acidic soils, and browsing pressure from Roosevelt elk.

c. Wetland Development or Restoration (NRCS Practice Standard 657)

Wetland restoration offers natural treatment capacity for organic matter processing that

reduces biochemical oxygen demand. Properly functioning wetlands provide extended

residence time for organic matter decomposition, nutrient uptake by wetland vegetation, and

natural reaeration through plant oxygen transport. Logging and timber harvesting practices disrupt

soil, water, and vegetation development. Wetland development or preservation is key to the protection

of waterways from nutrient pollution and restoring natural mechanisms. Wetland restoration requires

careful design to avoid creating additional oxygen demand through excessive organic

accumulation. Site selection favoring degraded wetlands with restoration potential rather than

new construction minimizes disturbance while maximizing treatment beneﬁts.

Wetlands mapping within the Hoh River watershed is underway but approaches to support

this vital proponent of waterway pollution filtration system are important to include in this

management plan. It is important to create an official wetland inventory to prevent

development on sensitive habitats and to avoid construction in areas that will likely flood

again. Long-term efforts will aim to use wetlands to address acidification and dissolved

oxygen impairments.

d. Large Woody Debris Removal

Cedar spaults, or waste cedar pieces left over from timber harvesting, may be leaching watersoluble tannins, which are natural acids, into the creeks. When cedar spaults are in the wetted

channel, the water can become acidified from the tannins. In some stretches of the creek, spaults

were so tightly packed that flow was reduced to a trickle. Hell Roaring and Braden were identified

as creeks most affected by cedar spaults in the early 2000’s. Despite the work to remove spaults

completed in 1999 and 2000, cedar spaults likely remain within the riparian zone and channel of

many creeks in the watershed. Large woody debris like cedar spault removal projects would

improve acidification of streams, overall appearance, and open fish habitat in streams.

e. Nutrient Management in Non-Agricultural Settings

While the Hoh watershed lacks intensive agriculture, the extensive algae growth observed at

multiple monitoring sites indicates nutrient enrichment requiring management intervention.

Residential fertilizers, septic systems, and natural sources including nitrogen-ﬁxing Red Alder

and wetland drainage contribute nutrients that stimulate algae growth and subsequent oxygen

depletion.

NRCS Practice Standard 590, though traditionally agricultural, provides applicable principles

for residential and forest settings. Soil testing to determine existing nutrient levels prevents

over-application, timing restrictions avoid application before storm events, and buffer zones

prevent direct nutrient delivery to streams. Riparian buffer enhancement speciﬁcally targeting

nutrient interception requires wider buffers and speciﬁc vegetation selection compared to

temperature-focused restoration. EPA meta-analysis indicates buffers exceeding 50 meters

achieve 89.6% nitrogen removal efficiency, substantially higher than the 30-50% achieved by

narrow buffers (EPA 2022). Vegetation selection emphasizing high nutrient uptake species in

addition to shading effectiveness maximizes water quality beneﬁts.

2. Hydromodiﬁcation and Bank Erosion

Channel alterations, infrastructure encroachment, and ﬂow regime changes from create chronic

sources of sediment while destroying critical habitat complexity necessary for salmonid

production. Natural baseline erosion rates are projected to increase through intensiﬁed storm

events and altered hydrology. However, accelerated erosion from riparian clearing and channel

modiﬁcations cause increases above these natural rates, delivering excessive sediment that ﬁlls

pools, embeds spawning gravels, increases stream temperatures, and reduces channel capacity.

Further effects of erosion from bank alteration include dissolved oxygen, pH, and nutrient

detriments from riparian buffer loss.

Speciﬁc hydromodiﬁcation impacts identiﬁed include road embankments constraining channel

migration and concentrating erosive forces, timber harvests encroaching on riparian zones and

removing stabilizing vegetation, historical channel straightening that increase stream power and

bank stress, bridge abutments and riprap creating scour pools and deﬂecting ﬂows into opposite

banks, and undersized culverts or dams channeling sediment and changing stream hydrology.

Projects that support engineered log jams (ELJ) or traditional log jams, large woody debris or rock

structures serve as fish habitat, improve streamflow complexity, and provide areas for sediment

transport or disposition (Martens and Devine 2025). The cumulative effect of these modiﬁcation

simpliﬁes channel morphology, reduces ﬂoodplain connectivity, and eliminates off-channel

refugia critical for juvenile salmonid rearing (Assessment Report 2025).

a. Stream Habitat Improvement and Management (NRCS Practice Standard 395)

Temperature reduction through channel modiﬁcation represents an underutilized but highly

effective approach, particularly when combined with riparian restoration. Research by Poff et

al. (2022) demonstrated that channel narrowing combined with riparian restoration could

achieve temperature reductions up to 6.5°C in Oregon streams, potentially offsetting projected

impacts through the 2080s. This practice addresses the widened, shallow channels observed

at multiple monitoring locations where ﬁeld crews documented dramatic width-to-ﬂow ratios,

such as Winﬁeld Creek with only 5-8 feet of ﬂow in a 30-40 foot channel (Field

Reconnaissance, August 2025).

Channel modiﬁcations that reduce surface area exposure while increasing depth and velocity

provide immediate temperature beneﬁts while restored riparian vegetation develops.

Techniques include large wood placement to create scour pools and channel complexity,

construction of channel-spanning structures to concentrate ﬂow, removal of legacy sediment

deposits that create channel widening, and restoration of natural meander patterns in

straightened reaches. These modiﬁcations must account for ﬁsh passage requirements and

avoid creating velocity barriers while achieving temperature objectives.

Channel and ﬂow restoration addressing the underlying morphological changes that reduce

reaeration capacity provides long-term DO improvement. Field observations documented

multiple sites where channel widening, pool formation, and ﬂow stagnation create conditions

promoting oxygen depletion. Strategic channel modiﬁcations that increase turbulence and

atmospheric exchange while maintaining ﬁsh passage can improve oxygen dynamics.

However, these modiﬁcations must avoid creating velocity barriers or excessive energy

dissipation that could increase temperature.

b. Stream Crossing Improvements (NRCS Practice Standard 578)

The numerous stream crossings throughout the Hoh River Watershed create localized but

cumulatively signiﬁcant temperature impacts. Undersized culverts create shallow, exposed

impoundments upstream while producing turbulent, aerated ﬂow downstream that increases

surface heat exchange. Replacing culverts with bridges or bottomless arch structures eliminates

these thermal impacts while providing multiple co-beneﬁts including restored ﬁsh passage and

reduced sediment delivery.

Research by Morris et al. (2015) documented that bridges produce 86% less sediment than culverts

while eliminating thermal barriers, making crossing improvements a high-priority practice

addressing multiple impairments simultaneously. Field observations at Oil City Road documented

an old corrugated metal culvert creating ponded water upstream, while observations at Anderson

and Maple Creeks noted single-lane bridges that, despite their age, maintained natural channel

dimensions and thermal regimes (Field Reconnaissance, 2025).

c. Stream Crossing Rehabilitation (NRCS Practice Standard 578)

Stream crossings represent critical sediment delivery points where road runoff directly enters

aquatic habitats. The HRW contains numerous crossings while precise numbers remain

unquantiﬁed, the regional context from Jefferson County's 2000 inventory documenting 246

ﬁsh-bearing crossings county-wide indicates the potential scale of crossing-related impacts.

Field reconnaissance conﬁrmed problematic conditions at multiple crossings, from failing

culverts with active erosion to aging bridges lacking adequate runoff treatment.

NRCS Standard 578 addresses crossing-related sediment through proper sizing, inlet

protection, and outlet stabilization. Recent research by Morris et al. (2015) quantiﬁed

sediment production by crossing type, ﬁnding bridges produce the lowest sediment (0.2 g/L

TSS), fords intermediate levels (1.4 g/L), and culverts highest (2.9 g/L). This order-ofmagnitude difference in sediment generation makes crossing upgrades particularly costeffective for water quality improvement.

Infrastructure sizing must accommodate increased peak ﬂows to prevent catastrophic failure

during extreme events. Current design standards based on historical precipitation records

systematically underestimate future ﬂows, as demonstrated by recent failures requiring

emergency repairs throughout the watershed. This reality requires oversizing infrastructure

above current standards and designing for easier modiﬁcation as projections evolve.

The mechanisms driving crossing-related erosion extend beyond the structure itself to include

approach ﬁlls, drainage, and channel impacts. Undersized culverts cause upstream

aggradation and downstream scour, mobilizing stored sediment during high ﬂows. Perched

outlets create plunge pools and headcutting that can extend hundreds of feet downstream.

Inadequate inlet protection allows road ﬁll erosion during overtopping events. Approach roads

without adequate drainage concentrate ﬂow at crossing locations. These cumulative impacts

create sediment plumes extending far downstream of the actual crossing.

Field observations documented these impacts directly, particularly at the Oil City Road

unnamed stream crossing where an old corrugated metal culvert with failing riprap had created

both sediment accumulation and partial ﬁsh barriers (Field Reconnaissance, 2025). The riprap,

intended for erosion protection, had fallen into the stream channel, creating additional

hydraulic disruption and sediment mobilization. This exempliﬁes how aging infrastructure not

only fails to provide intended functions but creates new erosion sources through altered

channel dynamics.

Crossing improvements must address both immediate sediment reduction and long-term

resilience. Design standards incorporating 15-25% increases in peak ﬂows prevent future

failures while maintaining sediment control functions. Stream simulation designs that

maintain natural channel dimensions through the crossing reduce both sediment generation

and maintenance requirements. Removal of unnecessary crossings through road

decommissioning eliminates sediment sources permanently while reducing long-term

maintenance obligations.

d. Streambank and Shoreline Protection (NRCS Practice Standard 580)

Bank erosion contributes episodic but signiﬁcant sediment pulses during high-ﬂow events, with

ﬁeld reconnaissance documenting active erosion at multiple locations including Canyon

Creek's clay deposits requiring riprap and netting installations (Field Reconnaissance,

August 2025). NRCS Standard 580 provides bioengineering techniques that combine

structural stability with ecological function, achieving reduction in bank erosion when

properly designed and maintained.

However, recent research using unmanned aerial system (UAS) monitoring reveals important

caveats about long-term effectiveness. A 2022 study published in Geomorphology found that

while bank stabilization projects reduce local erosion initially, continued erosion above toe

protection can cause beneﬁts to diminish over time. This ﬁnding emphasizes the need for

comprehensive approaches addressing entire erosion zones rather than just active failure

points.

Bank erosion in the HRW results from both natural processes and human modiﬁcations that

require different management approaches. Natural meander migration in alluvial reaches

represents important channel evolution that creates habitat diversity. However, accelerated

erosion from land use impacts generates excessive sediment exceeding the stream's transport

capacity. Distinguishing between these erosion types ensures that stabilization efforts focus

on anthropogenic impacts while allowing natural channel dynamics where appropriate.

Bioengineering techniques appropriate for Olympic Peninsula conditions include vegetated

reinforced soil slopes using native species adapted to high precipitation, large wood or boulder

structures that deﬂect ﬂow while creating habitat complexity, engineered log jams (ELJ) or

rip rap, that reduce near-bank velocity while maintaining channel capacity, and brush layering

that provides immediate protection while vegetation establishes. These living systems

demonstrate superior long-term performance compared to hard armoring while providing

ecosystem beneﬁts beyond erosion control.

e. Road Decommissioning

Complete removal of unnecessary roads provides the most permanent and effective sediment

reduction, eliminating sources rather than treating symptoms. Research by Clingenpeel et al.

(2017) documented remarkable effectiveness, with median sediment production dropping to

zero kg/m² in the ﬁrst two years post-decommissioning and road-stream connectivity

declining from 12% to 2%. This near-complete elimination of sediment delivery makes

decommissioning highly cost-effective despite higher initial costs compared to maintenance.

The Hoh watershed's evolved transportation needs create opportunities for strategic

decommissioning. Many roads constructed for timber harvest access no longer serve active

management given changed harvest patterns and improved equipment capabilities.

Redundant roads providing multiple routes to the same areas can be consolidated. Spur

roads accessing previously harvested units with no planned re-entry can be removed. Highrisk roads in unstable terrain where maintenance costs exceed access beneﬁts become

decommissioning priorities.

Effective decommissioning requires more than simply abandoning roads. Full recontouring to

restore natural drainage patterns prevents gully formation, while decompaction of road surfaces

enables revegetation. Removal of stream crossing structures and associated ﬁlls eliminates

chronic sediment sources. Placement of physical barriers prevents unauthorized vehicle access

that could re-establish disturbance. These comprehensive treatments ensure permanent

restoration rather than temporary abandonment that continues generating sediment.

3. Invasive Species

Clearcutting and harvesting presents opportunities for invasive species to grow in place of native

species affecting soil composition, wildlife habitat availability, erosion, and hydrography (10,000

Years Institute, n.d.). Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), Spotted jewelweed (Impatiens capensis),

Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), knotweeds, Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and

Everlasting peavine (Lathyrus latifolia) are invasives currently reported in the Hoh River

Watershed. Invasive growth and reproduction in areas where clearcutting occurs contributes to

monocultures where native species that provide food, habitat, timber, and other forest products are

outperformed. Scotch broom, found in gravel bars, forest harvest sites, along roads, reduce the

amount of shade availability for streams and soils, deplete water resources for native species, and

replace native riparian species that are crucial to regulating rain contributions that influence soil

development. Invasive species alter organic matter contributions in soils, which may have

detrimental effects on nutrient impacts in water quality.

Invasive removal programs clear room in riparian buffer zones for native plant species to thrive

while removing plants that are detrimental to the landscape. Services will not only target certain

invasives like Scotch broom or Knotweed but will focus on long-term effectiveness using chemical

applications to avoid future invasives from reappearing. Technical staff with extensive invasive

removal experience can provide landowners with expertise to develop an understanding of their

contributions to landowner property and watershed quality. Additionally, maintenance of this

project will be necessary given the nature of many invasive long term seed viability. Short term

goals include increasing invasive mapping tools and establishing prominent areas of interest and

removing invasive species from riparian buffer zones. Long-term goals include expansive mapping

tools, permeant removal techniques, maintenance of previously treated areas, and collaboration

with experts to ensure success.

4. Roads, Highways, and Bridges

Despite comprising only 3.90% of the watershed area, developed lands create concentrated

pollution loads that signiﬁcantly impact receiving waters, particularly along the Upper Hoh

Road corridor (Assessment Report 2025). There is an abundant absence of stormwater

management infrastructure at major discharge points, like Nolan Creek Bridge or Hoh Hill

Bridge along Highway 101 where traffic and road stormwater ﬂow directly into the river or

stream without any detention. These concentrated sources are particularly problematic during

ﬁrst-ﬂush storm events when accumulated pollutants, like sediment or toxic chemicals, wash

directly into streams without dilution or treatment.

a. Access Road Improvements (NRCS Practice Standard 560)

Forest roads represent the dominant chronic sediment source throughout approximately 70% of

the watershed affected by commercial timber management (Assessment Report 2025). NRCS

Standard 560 provides technical speciﬁcations for road surfacing, drainage, and location to

minimize erosion while maintaining access for management activities. Published

effectiveness studies from the Eastern United States demonstrate that comprehensive road

BMPs achieve 53-94% sediment reduction when properly implemented, with effectiveness

varying by rainfall intensity, soil type, and maintenance frequency (Hawks et al. 2022).

The persistent sediment generation from forest roads results from multiple interacting

mechanisms that compound across the extensive network. Surface erosion from native soil

and poorly maintained gravel surfaces generates ﬁne sediment. Inadequate drainage

concentrates ﬂow, creating gullies and cutslope failures during intense precipitation events.

Ditch lines efficiently route sediment-laden runoff directly to streams at crossing locations,

bypassing natural ﬁltration. Inside ditches intercept subsurface ﬂow, converting it to erosive

surface runoff that exceeds the transport capacity of drainage structures.

Road improvement effectiveness depends critically on addressing all erosion pathways rather

than single components. Surface treatments including chemical stabilization or pavement

installation provide immediate reductions in surface erosion but require proper drainage to

prevent failure. Cross-drain installation at intervals based on road grade and contributing area

prevents ﬂow concentration while maintaining road stability. Ditch armoring with rock or

vegetation reduces erosion while maintaining conveyance capacity. Sediment traps at strategic

locations capture mobilized material before stream delivery. These integrated approaches

demonstrate superior performance compared to single-practice implementation.

Strategic targeting maximizes cost-effectiveness given limited restoration funding. Research

from the U.S. Forest Service using the Geomorphic Roads Analysis and Inventory Package

(GRAIP) methodology reveals that less than 10% of road networks typically deliver 90% of

ﬁne sediment, enabling prioritized treatment of high-risk segments (USFS 2023). Factors

identifying priority segments include proximity to streams, particularly direct connections

through ditches or gullies; steep grades exceeding 10% that generate erosive velocities;

erodible soils, especially marine sediments and glacial deposits; and high traffic during wet

seasons that prevents surface armoring development.

b. Toxic Chemical Monitoring

Tire anti-degradant, 6PPD, is a compound capable of reacting with ozone to create a toxic chemical

called 6PPD-quinone. Roads and highways are hot spots during rain events for the chemical to

leach into rivers/streams through road crossings, bridges, or culverts. The contaminant has lethal

effects on aquatic species at low concentrations, particularly for culturally significant species like

salmonids (Tian et al. 2021). Intervention through restoration or green infrastructure modifications

are necessary to prevent road runoff from polluting streams.

Monitoring for 6-PPD in the watershed has been minimal. Programs with the Department of

Ecology and Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission have been established to help identify and

monitor areas that may be at risk. This management plan will aim to establish further monitoring

for this pollutant to determine if further BMPs are needed.

5. Natural Resource Extraction

Sand and gravel mining within the watershed delivers sediment to streams, destabilizes

streambanks, and expedites erosion. Active permits include the St. Regis Gravel Pit located near

Winfield Creek and an unnamed tributary, the Winfield Surface Mine near Winfield and Elk Creek,

and the Seton Construction Canyon Creek Quarry near Canyon Creek. Legacy effects from

previous aggregate mining activities may still be contributing to water quality issues.

Transportation of these resources spreads pollutants beyond the original site, dispersing sediment

along roadways and crossings. Small gravel pits have been observed throughout the watershed

near major and minor tributaries like Tower Creek and along Oil City Road.

Management practices to address erosion and sediment delivery loads due to natural resource

extraction include establishing stormwater mitigation systems to direct sediment away from

streams. Sediment catch basins or terraces and tree/shrub establishment are reliable preventative

and restoration efforts to prevent road run off and debris from entering streams. Additionally,

establishment of riprap, engineered log jams reduce the effects of this category on streambank

erosion. The management plan will also prioritize prevention and protection of sensitive areas

susceptible gravel mining.

6. Atmospheric Deposition

Atmospheric deposition from vehicle exhausts, coal burning, or hazardous material combustion

enter waterbodies through rainfall or runoff. These emissions are responsible for mercury or

nitrogen concentration elevations either through airborne or fallout particulate dispersal. Because

the watershed receives large volumes of vehicle traffic, particularly along Highway 101 to access

ONP and through extensive logging road networks, vehicle emissions can reach waterbodies

through proximity, not just aerial dispersal. High mercury concentrations have already been

detected in snow and fish in the Olympics (Eagles-Smith et al. 2014). Waterbodies are directly

affected through direct runoff; however, particulates also get distributed to soil through lichen

absorption or forest debris (Maynes 2008). This insinuates long-term adsorption from soil, even if

roads are no longer in use. Elevated mercury is a hazard to fish and human health.

Table 1. Summary of NPS management plan for each pollutant category.

NPS

Forestry and

Logging Roads

Impacts

• Generates pathways for sediment delivery

• Creates thermal source pollution

• Hydrologic alterations

• Influences soil development

• Disturbs riparian buffers

• Opens opportunities for invasive species

• Causes infrastructure encroachment

• Increases streamflow

• Alters channel migration

• Impacts habitat complexity

• Delivers excessive sediment

• Increases soil and stream temperature

• Increase bank stress

• Removes stabilizing vegetation

Hydromodification

and Bank Erosion • Provides opportunity for invasive species

• Alter soil nutrient profiles

• Creates scour pools

• Deflects flow

Management Activities

• Riparian buffer restoration

• Tree and shrub establishment

• Wetland protection, development, or restoration

• Cedar spault/Large woody debris removal

• Nutrient management

• Large woody debris placement

• Advocate for watershed-based protections

• Support research that aids in reducing impairments through pollution

sources

• Channel and flow modifications

• Large wood placement

• Sediment removal

• Restoration of natural hydrology

• Protection from sediment sources

• Restore habitats and riparian buffer zones

• Stream crossing improvements

• Culvert restoration/replacement

• Bridge modifications

• Stream crossing rehabilitation

• Streambank and shoreline protection

• Road decommissioning

• Stabilize eroding streambanks

• Preserve natural streambank and water quality conditions

• Monitor effects of restoration over time in relation to water quality

impairments

• Commit to research opportunities that support pollution reductions

Table 1. Summary of NPS management plan for each pollutant category.

NPS

Invasive Species

Impacts

Management Activities

• Replaces stabilizing vegetation in riparian buffer

zone

• Contribute to erosion and sediment delivery

• Reduces shade

• Increases soil, water, and air temperature

• Replaces organic matter contribution

• Decreases water availability

• Alters sediment transport

• Introduces allelopathic chemicals

• Changes nutrient profiles

• Eliminates biodiversity

• Delivers toxic chemicals to streams

• Introduces sediment pathways

• Uncontrolled stormwater flows

• Contributes to increased erosion

• Alters hydrology

•

Develop mapping of invasive species throughout the watershed

Restore native species

Remove invasive species near riparian buffer zones

Engage in research opportunities that focus on effects of invasives

Collaborate with experts to impose strategies for prevention and removal

Support maintenance of invasive removal

•

Improve access roads

Chemical stabilization

Pavement installations

Cross drain installation

Ditch armoring

Sedimentation traps

Gather information regarding emerging toxic chemicals like 6-PPDq or

PFAS

Tree and shrub establishment to reduce erosion and sediment delivery

Communicate with entities responsible for roads to promote management

measures

Streambank and shoreline protection

Establish stormwater mitigation systems

Tree and shrub establishment

Support sediment catch basins or terraces

Protect at-risk waterways

Preservation of hydrologic conditions and streambanks

Rip-rap, dolos, and log jam establishment to mitigate erosion cause by

mining

Stabilize stream channels

Roads, Highways,

and Bridges

•

• Creates sediment delivery pathways

• Erodes streambanks

• Destabilizes banks

Natural Resource

Extraction

•

Table 1. Summary of NPS management plan for each pollutant category.

NPS

Atmospheric

Deposition

• Impacts

• Contaminates stream with hazardous material

through rainfall or runoff

• Adsorption through soil or water

•

Management Activities

Construct catch basins

Establish vegetation on streambanks to buffer rainfall

Mitigation systems to prevent runoff onto stream

Conduct research to establish presence and identification of pollutants

Table 2. NPS categories and their potential pollutant impacts.

Forestry and Logging Roads

Roads, Highways, & Bridges

Hydromodification and Bank Erosion

Atmospheric Deposition

Natural Resource Extraction

Invasive Species

Temperature

Dissolved Oxygen

Turbidity

Toxic Chemicals

Table 3. NPS categories and impairments based on monitoring sites.

Implementation

Implementation establishes the programmatic framework through which best management

practices will be deployed across the watershed's complex ownership landscape to achieve

water quality objectives. The implementation approach recognizes that with the Tribe

controlling less than 1% of the watershed, success depends on voluntary participation from

state and private landowners who manage the lands where most impairments originate.

The framework therefore emphasizes collaborative partnerships, technical assistance delivery,

and incentive programs that align landowner interests with water quality protection. Through

coordinated implementation leveraging multiple funding sources and partner organizations,

the Tribe will transform limited resources into comprehensive watershed restoration capacity.

Technical Assistance Delivery

Technical assistance represents the critical bridge between landowner willingness and

successful BMP implementation, transforming conservation interest into properly designed

and installed practices that achieve water quality objectives. The framework establishes

delivery mechanisms that provide expert guidance throughout the project lifecycle from initial

assessment through long-term maintenance. This comprehensive support ensures that BMPs

are appropriately matched to site conditions, correctly installed, and maintained for sustained

effectiveness.

Site Assessment Process

Initial landowner contact establishes the foundation for successful technical assistance

delivery through relationship building and trust development. Tribal staff or partner

organization representatives conduct preliminary conversations to understand landowner

objectives, concerns, and constraints. These early interactions determine whether properties

merit detailed assessment and identify potential barriers to implementation. Building rapport

during initial contact proves essential for long-term cooperation.

Property evaluation for BMP suitability requires systematic assessment of physical,

ecological, and management factors. Technical staff conduct ﬁeld visits documenting soil

types, slope conditions, existing vegetation, and hydrologic features that inﬂuence practice

selection. Stream proximity, wetland presence, and critical habitat areas receive particular

attention given their regulatory implications. Management objectives include timber harvest

plans, livestock operations, or residential uses shape recommendations to ensure

compatibility.

The assessment process incorporates both contemporary scientiﬁc methods and traditional

ecological knowledge. GPS mapping and GIS analysis provide quantitative data on drainage

areas, buffer widths, and sediment delivery pathways. Conversations with tribal elders

familiar with historical conditions offer insights into seasonal ﬂow patterns, ﬁsh usage, and

vegetation changes over decades. This dual approach strengthens assessment accuracy while

honoring indigenous knowledge systems.

Custom conservation planning develops site-speciﬁc recommendations tailored to each

property's unique conditions and landowner objectives. Plans prioritize practices addressing

the most severe resource concerns while considering implementation feasibility. Cost

estimates, funding sources, and implementation timelines help landowners make informed

decisions. Alternative approaches accommodate varying levels of landowner commitment and

ﬁnancial capacity.

Design and Implementation Support

Access to qualiﬁed technical service providers ensures that BMPs meet engineering standards

and regulatory requirements. Engineers licensed in Washington State design stream crossings

and bank stabilization structures. Forestry consultants develop harvest plans incorporating

enhanced riparian buffers. Restoration ecologists specify native plant communities adapted to

site conditions.

Coordination with Conservation District expertise leverages decades of local experience and

established relationships. District staff provide soil testing, erosion assessments, and

agricultural conservation planning at no cost to landowners. Their familiarity with NRCS

practice standards ensures designs qualify for federal cost-share programs. Long-standing

presence in the community builds trust that facilitates project implementation.

Cultural considerations in BMP selection respect tribal values and traditional practices while

achieving water quality goals. Restoration designs incorporate culturally signiﬁcant plants

like western red cedar and traditional food sources including camas and huckleberry. Access

provisions maintain tribal member gathering rights while protecting restored areas. Project

timing avoids disruption of ceremonial activities and seasonal resource collection.

Design review by tribal natural resources staff ensures projects align with watershed

restoration priorities and treaty resource protection. Technical experts evaluate hydraulic

calculations, planting speciﬁcations, and erosion control measures. This review process

maintains quality control while building tribal capacity through exposure to diverse project

designs.

Implementation oversight during construction prevents common installation errors that

compromise BMP effectiveness. Technical staff conduct pre-construction meetings reviewing

critical design elements with contractors. Field visits during installation verify proper

techniques and materials. Immediate correction of problems prevents costly repairs and

ensures practices function as designed. Post-construction inspections document successful

completion for cost-share reimbursement.

Monitoring and Adaptive Management

Effectiveness tracking framework establishes protocols for evaluating BMP performance

against water quality objectives. Baseline monitoring before implementation documents

existing conditions including temperature, turbidity, and channel morphology. Postimplementation monitoring at regular intervals tracks changes attributable to restoration

actions. Standardized protocols ensure data compatibility across projects and enable

watershed-scale assessment.

Photo documentation provides visual evidence of project evolution and effectiveness over

time. Established photo points capture seasonal variations and long-term vegetation

establishment. Before-and-after comparisons demonstrate tangible improvements that

motivate continued landowner participation. Time-lapse sequences reveal restoration

trajectories useful for reﬁning future projects.

Technical assistance delivery must evolve with changing environmental conditions and

emerging restoration techniques. Increased storm intensity requires updated sizing criteria for

hydraulic structures. New research on riparian buffer effectiveness informs width

recommendations. Innovative bioengineering techniques offer cost-effective alternatives to

traditional approaches. The framework maintains ﬂexibility to incorporate advances while

retaining proven methods.

Partnership development with regional technical providers expands available expertise

beyond tribal capacity. University extension services provide research-based guidance on

emerging issues. Engineering ﬁrms offer specialized design services for complex projects.

Non-proﬁt restoration organizations contribute implementation experience from similar

watersheds. These partnerships ensure landowners access appropriate expertise regardless of

project complexity.

Maintaining healthy populations of fish and wildlife within our Usual & Accustomed Area is of

paramount importance to the Hoh Indian Tribe. The viability of fish and wildlife populations is

dependent on effective management of human activity within the Hoh River watershed to maintain

and improve water quality and habitat for fish and wildlife. Several agencies, organizations, and

timber companies participate in watershed management policy and planning in the Hoh River

watershed and other watersheds within the Hoh Tribe traditional areas, including Olympic

National Park, Olympic National Forest, Washington Department of Natural Resources,

Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, North Pacific

Coast Lead Entity, the Hoh Tribe, and timber companies such as Rayonier and Merrill & Ring.

The Hoh Tribe will participate in watershed management policy and planning to ensure that our

priorities of maintaining excellent water quality and fish and wildlife habitat are represented in

decision-making. We will participate in meetings with other stakeholders, submit written

comments, and participate in development of salmon habitat restoration strategy as a member of

the North Pacific Coast Lead Entity.

Education and Outreach Strategy

Education and outreach programs create the foundation for long-term watershed stewardship

by building awareness of water quality issues and motivating voluntary conservation action.

The framework develops targeted messaging for diverse audiences, employing

communication methods appropriate to each group's information preferences and decisionmaking processes. This strategic approach ensures efficient use of limited outreach resources

while maximizing behavior change potential.

Target Audience Identiﬁcation

Tribal members and reservation residents serve dual roles as both land managers and cultural

stakeholders in water quality protection. Treaty rights education reinforces connections

between watershed health and cultural survival. Youth engagement through school programs

and summer camps builds future conservation leaders. Elder involvement ensures traditional

knowledge informs contemporary restoration approaches while maintaining intergenerational

knowledge transfer.

Outreach Methods

Workshops and ﬁeld demonstrations provide hands-on learning opportunities that prove

particularly effective for technical topics. Riparian planting workshops teach proper

techniques while participants help install restoration projects. Road maintenance ﬁeld days

demonstrate drainage improvements and sediment control methods at actual problem sites.

These events build community among conservation-minded landowners while providing peer

learning opportunities. Social aspects including shared meals and informal discussions

strengthen relationships essential for sustained engagement.

Youth education through the Natural Resources Department builds environmental

stewardship ethics in future landowners. School presentations connect classroom science

curricula to local watershed issues. Summer culture camps integrate water quality lessons with

traditional ﬁshing and gathering practices. Student monitoring programs provide hands-on

experience while generating useful data. Career exposure introduces natural resources

professions to tribal youth considering post-secondary education.

Key Messages Framework

Treaty rights protection provides the fundamental driver and ultimate measure of success for

this implementation framework. The Tribe's ability to exercise ﬁshing rights guaranteed under

the Treaty of Olympia depends entirely on maintaining water quality sufficient to support

harvestable salmon populations. The persistence of temperature impairments since 1996,

chronic dissolved oxygen violations threatening the Tribe's steelhead hatchery operations, and

severe acidiﬁcation eliminating entire stream reaches from the functional habitat network

demonstrates that current management approaches have failed to protect treaty resources

(Assessment Report 2025). This framework therefore represents not merely an environmental

program but a critical component of tribal sovereignty, cultural preservation, and economic

sustainability that cannot be deferred while impairments continue degrading treaty resources.

Treaty rights and cultural values create unique messaging opportunities that distinguish tribal

programs from other conservation efforts. The connection between water quality and salmon

survival directly links to treaty-protected ﬁshing rights. Traditional ecological knowledge

demonstrates millennia of successful watershed stewardship. Cultural responsibility for

protecting resources for seven generations ahead resonates with both tribal and non-tribal

audiences.

Resilience through restoration addresses growing concerns about extreme weather impacts.

Enhanced riparian buffers moderate stream temperatures during heat waves while reducing

ﬂood velocities. Improved road drainage prevents washouts during intense storms. Healthy

watersheds maintain base ﬂows during droughts. Forward-thinking landowners appreciate

preparing for future conditions rather than reacting to crisis.

Building on Existing Communication Channels

Annual General Council meetings provide forums for discussing water quality concerns.

Cultural events including First Salmon ceremonies offer opportunities for conservation

messaging. These existing channels reduce costs while reaching engaged audiences.

Partnership communications multiply message reach through partner organizations'

networks. Conservation District newsletters reach rural landowners throughout Jefferson County.

NRCS ﬁeld offices display educational materials reaching agricultural producers. North

Paciﬁc Coast Lead Entity meetings connect with salmon recovery stakeholders.

Coordinated messaging ensures consistency while expanding audience reach.

Annual meetings with Washington department of Natural Resources and Department of

transportation inform the Tribe of projects within the watershed. It allows the Tribe to

provide feedback and inquire about projects that may affect the watershed of nearby areas.

Continuous improvement incorporates feedback and changing communication preferences.

Communication with participating restoration entities helps identify successful strategies

worth expanding and ineffective approaches requiring modiﬁcation. Emerging technologies

offer new engagement opportunities requiring framework adaptation. Demographic shifts in

land ownership necessitate evolving outreach strategies. The framework maintains ﬂexibility

while retaining proven methods that effectively motivate conservation action.

Implementation Schedule Overview

This chapter establishes the phased implementation schedule for nonpoint source management

activities over the initial ﬁve-year program period. The schedule provides a framework for

systematic deployment of best management. The timeline balances ambitious restoration

goals with realistic assessment of tribal capacity, landowner readiness, and funding

availability while maintaining ﬂexibility for adaptive management based on monitoring

results and emerging opportunities.

The implementation schedule employs an approach that builds systematically from

foundation-setting activities through demonstration projects to watershed-scale restoration. It

recognizes that lasting water quality improvement requires more than technical solutions; it

demands trust-building with landowners, capacity development within partner organizations,

and documented success that encourages broader participation.

The Tribe's experience with the successful centralized wastewater treatment installation

demonstrates that complex environmental improvements require years of planning,

relationship development, and incremental progress before achieving transformational

outcomes. The schedule therefore emphasizes early investment in partnerships and

demonstration projects that create the foundation for accelerated implementation in later

years.

The schedule cannot mandate speciﬁc project locations or guarantee participation rates but

instead establishes general activity categories and capacity targets. This approach provides

EPA with reasonable assurance of progress while preserving the Tribe's ﬂexibility to pursue

opportunities as they emerge rather than adhering to rigid timelines that ignore local realities.

Adaptive management principles embedded throughout the schedule ensure that

implementation strategies evolve based on effectiveness monitoring and practical experience.

Annual evaluation of BMP performance, particularly for temperature reduction of impaired

streams, will inform adjustments to technical approaches and priority areas. The schedule

incorporates speciﬁc review points where monitoring data and resource availability trigger

reassessment of implementation strategies. This iterative approach prevents continued

investment in ineffective practices while allowing successful approaches to expand more

rapidly than initially projected.

The implementation timeline directly connects to the Tribe's established monitoring programs

that will track both project outputs and environmental outcomes. Implementation milestones

include both activity metrics such as miles of riparian buffers installed and outcome indicators

including temperature reduction and dissolved oxygen improvement. This dual tracking

system enables the Tribe to demonstrate progress toward EPA grant requirements while

assessing actual environmental beneﬁts that determine long-term program success.

Funding availability fundamentally shapes the pace and scale of implementation activities

throughout the ﬁve-year period. The conﬁrmed FY2026 EPA funding provides initial

implementation resources. The framework recognizes that major implementation phases may

need adjustment based on competitive grant success, federal appropriation levels, and state

funding availability. However, the voluntary implementation approach's emphasis on

technical assistance and education ensures continued progress even during periods of

constrained implementation funding.

General Program Timeline

Short-term Goals: Foundation Building

The initial two years of implementation focus on establishing the organizational

infrastructure, partnership frameworks, and demonstration projects essential for long-term

program success. Year 1 priorities emphasize planning and relationship development that

create the foundation for on-ground implementation, while Year 2 transitions toward active

restoration with early adopter landowners. A watershed-based approach requires collaboration

among multiple landowners, the county road department, DNR for forest roads, and

potentially Federal Highways for Highway 101 crossings.

Year 1 activities center on establishing the technical advisory committee that will guide BMP

selection, project prioritization, and adaptive management decisions throughout the program

period. Initial meetings will develop operating protocols, review ﬁndings, and establish

criteria for project selection that balance ecological priorities with implementation feasibility.

The committee structure ensures that diverse perspectives inform implementation decisions

while building buy-in from organizations essential for program success. Initial projects will

focus on riparian buffer enhancement, culvert restoration (undersized/failing), large woody

debris projects, and invasive removal. The technical assistance framework will adapt based

on early participant feedback to reduce barriers and improve service delivery. Technical

assistance delivery in Year 2 will support project development cycles from initial site

assessment through BMP installation and maintenance planning.

Summary of Short-term Goals: Years 1-2 years

• Propose NPS 319 grant to Tribal Business Committee for approval

• Submit application for NPS Assessment Report, Management Plan, and TAS to EPA

• Assemble NPS technical advisory committee

• Implement NPS BMPs in accordance with priority areas to address the goals and objectives of

the Hoh River Watershed

• Discuss with Tribal members to ascertain priority pollutants and solutions

• Employ community dinners to establish connections and consultation

• Establish initial priorities for NPS projects based on assessments that account for reasonable

timelines, budgets, staff, and resources.

• Delineate lands where NPS pollution is projected

Intermediate Goals: Implementation

Years 3 through 4 represent the program's transition from demonstration-scale

implementation to systematic watershed restoration based on proven approaches and

established partnerships. This period emphasizes expanding successful BMPs to priority

watersheds, increasing landowner participation through documented successes, and reﬁning

technical approaches based on effectiveness monitoring. The scaling process will remain

adaptive, accelerating in areas with strong landowner interest while adjusting strategies where

participation lags. Initiate systematic approaches to address road-related sediment sources

identiﬁed through GIS analysis and ﬁeld reconnaissance. Rather than scattered individual

projects, the program will coordinate road improvements within priority sub-watersheds to

maximize sediment reduction beneﬁts. By Year 5, the program will have established the

institutional frameworks and technical capacity for sustained long-term restoration beyond

the initial implementation period.

Activities focus on expanding temperature, sediment delivery, DO, and pH reduction efforts

from the eleven 303(d) listed tributaries and creeks on reservation. Successful restoration

approaches proven effective on tribal lands will be replicated at willing landowner properties,

with particular emphasis on Winﬁeld Creek's severe impairments and Anderson Creek's

targeted restoration opportunities.

The expansion will utilize established cost-share mechanisms and technical assistance

partnerships to build on relationships developed during Years 1-2. Implementation will

proceed tributary by tributary rather than attempting simultaneous restoration across all

priority streams, ensuring adequate technical support and monitoring capacity for each project

area.

Enhanced outreach will target speciﬁc landowner segments, including small forest owners

unfamiliar with assistance programs and residential property owners with streamside parcels.

The Conservation District's established relationships and the Tribe's growing credibility as a

technical assistance provider will facilitate this expansion.

Summary of Intermediate Goals:

• Staff will track developments in watershed management planning and policy in the watershed

and other nearby watersheds and communicate with stakeholders to ensure participation in

decision making.

• Gather information regarding emerging contaminants in waterways, such as 6-PPD quinone

and PFAS/PFOS. If it is determined that an emerging contaminant is a threat to the water

quality in the rivers/creeks, tribal staff will investigate methods for managing the pollutant

• Adapt management strategies to decrease the impacts from land management activities on

water quality of streams and rivers

• Attend training opportunities to ensure proper expertise of staff to achieve program goals.

• Provide presentations and solicit input from council members and other members of the

community regarding the NPS; present to the Hoh Summer Camp participants, when

requested.

• Tribal staff will meet with personnel from federal, state, and regional governments and

organizations regarding watershed management issues to advocate for protection and

restoration of water quality and habitat.

• Submit annual reports that highlight progress of proposed work.

• Conduct inventory and GIS analysis of streams affected by specific pollutant sources

Long-term Goals: Expansion and Reﬁnement

Year 5 will receive an emphasis on adaptation strategies as monitoring data reveals

temperature trends and the effectiveness of current restoration approaches under changing

conditions. The program will identify and protect cold-water refugia including deep pools,

groundwater springs, and north-facing tributaries that provide critical habitat during

temperature extremes.

Riparian restoration speciﬁcations will be modiﬁed to account for projected inclement

weather patterns, potentially increasing buffer widths or adjusting species composition for

future conditions. These adaptations will be developed through consultation with regional

scientists and incorporation of traditional ecological knowledge about historical refugia

locations.

Year 5 activities establish frameworks for long-term program sustainability while evaluating

progress toward water quality goals. The Tribe will pursue formal partnerships with

organizations including The Nature Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, and 10,000 Years

Institute, Wild Salmon Center to coordinate landscape-scale restoration beyond the initial

ﬁve-year period.

Funding diversiﬁcation strategies will reduce dependence on EPA base funding by developing

competitive grant applications for state and federal programs. The permanent monitoring

network framework will be designed to track long-term trends while reducing monitoring

costs through strategic station selection and parameter prioritization.

Integration of traditional ecological knowledge will be formalized in Year 5 through structured

consultation processes building on the Tribe's established methods using community dinners

and elder interviews. This knowledge will inform restoration priorities, identify historical

reference conditions, and guide adaptive management decisions.

The synthesis of western science and indigenous observations accumulated over generations

will strengthen both technical approaches and community support for continued restoration

efforts. Documentation of traditional knowledge will ensure its preservation and application

in future restoration planning while respecting cultural protocols for information sharing.

Summary of Long-term Goals:

• Update assessment and management plan as needed with the NPS technical advisory

• Staff will track restoration efforts in the watershed and communicate with stakeholders to

ensure participation in decision making. When possible, staff will monitor the short- and longterm effects of restoration on channel geomorphology, hydrology, and water quality.

• Collaborate and support research that will aid in a greater understanding of watershed

pollutants.

• Expand NPS program priorities if needed with other entities to expand program operations and

funding

• Education and outreach to tribal members once success, research, and

implementation have been established

• Monitor conditions of the watershed pre- and post- BMP implementation

• Increase monitoring for NPS pollution sources

• Assess the success of monitoring, implementation, progress, and conclusions of NPS BMPs on

a project-by-project basis. As well as refine procedures to adapt NPS projects if needed.

Category dependent objectives and measurable outcomes:

Each category of NPS pollutant sources requires unique objective and outcomes based on need

and priority according to Tribal standards. The table below documents short- & long-term

objectives, and success standard by each category.

Table 4. NPS objective and outcome measures by category.

NPS Category

Short-term objectives

Long-term objectives

Success measurements

• Identify high-priority riparian restoration sites

• Restore water quality in streams on

• Demonstrable temperature, DO,

with property managers on logged properties

logged properties

pH reductions at established monitoring

• Discuss with property managers where

• Assess effectiveness of various

sites.

restoration activities like large woody

treatments to inform adaptive

• Quantify high-priority sites identified

Forestry and

debris establish, wetland protections, and riparian management and potential watershed• Establish GIS inventory of

Logging Roads

buffer protections would be most beneficial.

wide application

cedar spaults causing NPS pollution

• Inventory and GPS cedar spault presence

• Alter management strategies to tailor

throughout the watershed

• Assist partners with BMPs intended to

goals and objectives

• Number of connections with property

reduce forestry-related pollution sources

managers

• Identify high-priority riparian restoration sites

• Track restoration results and influence

• Establish relationship with property

with property managers on logged properties

on NPS pollution reduction

managers

• Focus restoration to address large woody debris, • Monitor or assist in research to assess

• Measurable reductions to pollutants

riparian replanting, and culvert restoration in

effectiveness

from restoration efforts

Hydromodification

areas that would be most beneficial.

• Expand programs to increase

• Quantify restoration efforts (# of

and Bank Erosion

• Assist expert personnel with implementation of

monitoring

culverts replaced, miles of riparian

related BMPs

• Observe water quality changes over

buffers restored, etc.)

• Coordinate with land managers to build closer

time

ties

• Inventory and map invasives in the watershed

• Track riparian changes over time

• Calculate riparian buffer zone/river

• Collaborate with expert

• Continue to advocate for invasive

miles restored

personal to establish priority areas

removal and safe practices to ensure

• Determine measurable reductions to

• Work jointly with interested parties to address

prevention

pollutants

shared invasive removal projects

• Review miles of removed invasives

Invasive Species • Enforce invasive removal projects and provide

along riparian areas

participation needed to establish success

• Monitoring will assess effectiveness of

various treatments to inform adaptive

management

• and potential watershed-wide

applications.

• Work with agencies to establish 6ppd

• Conduct long term monitoring on toxic • Identify at-risk streams

monitoring plans

chemicals

• Expand program goals if needed based

• Map at risk areas and establish sampling plans

• Monitor project areas and

on urgency of pollution source

Roads, Highways,

• Gather information regarding emerging

assess strategies to mitigate pollution

• Number of at-risk streams assessed for

and Bridges

contaminants in waterways, such as 6-PPD

source

6PPD

• Conduct research and testing on a 6PPDQ,

• Increase monitoring if 6PPD is a

including effects on wildlife and habitats

known persistent pollutant

Table 3 (cont.): NPS objective and outcome measures by category

NPS Category

Short-term objectives

Long-term objectives

Success measurements

• Determine and prioritize sites with high-risk

• Create baselines for data at high• At-risk high-priority sites identified

pathways to streams

risk streams

• Confirm or deny pollutant presence

Natural Resource • Gather research to confirm or deny if pollutants • Coordinate with agencies to assist in

Extraction

are affecting water quality

streambank restoration sue to aggregate

• Collaborate with agencies to address pollutant

resource pollution

pathways and issues

• Determine if contaminants are present

• Develop further plans that address

• Needs are established based on research

Atmospheric

• Establish areas where pollution sources affect

contaminants of interest

and data gathered

Deposition

waterways and establish priority areas

• Adapt management strategies based on

data gathered

Milestones and Evaluation

The implementation schedule includes speciﬁc milestones and evaluation criteria that enable

tracking progress toward water quality goals while maintaining ﬂexibility for adaptive

management. These milestones provide accountability to EPA and the tribal council while

avoiding unrealistic numerical commitments that could constrain the voluntary program's

ability to respond to opportunities.

The evaluation framework emphasizes both implementation metrics and environmental

outcomes, recognizing that water quality improvements may lag behind BMP installation by

several years. Regular assessment ensures that the program remains on track while identifying

necessary adjustments to strategies or priorities.

Annual reporting to EPA and the tribal council will document progress across multiple

performance categories without binding the Tribe to speciﬁc quantitative targets. Reports will

track acres of riparian buffers established, number of BMPs installed by type, landowners

engagement, and partnerships developed or strengthened.

Environmental outcomes including temperature trends at priority sites, dissolved oxygen

improvements in Lower Chalaat Creek, and pH changes in acidiﬁed tributaries will be

assessed against baseline conditions, sedimentation baselines created. These reports will

provide transparency while acknowledging the inherent variability in voluntary participation

and environmental response times.

Persistent water quality standard violations despite BMP implementation would initiate

comprehensive review of technical approaches and potentially identify need for regulatory

backstops. These triggers ensure that ineffective approaches are modiﬁed rather than

perpetuated through program inertia.

Success metrics will be organized into categories that reﬂect the program's multiple objectives

without establishing rigid numerical targets. Implementation success will be evaluated

through BMP installation rates compared to regional programs and leveraging ratios showing

non-EPA funding attracted.

Environmental success will be assessed through trend analysis showing movement toward

water quality standards, increased stream miles supporting beneﬁcial uses, and maintenance

of high-quality reference waters. Partnership success will be measured through active

participation in the technical advisory committee and coordination with restoration partners.

The evaluation framework explicitly acknowledges factors beyond tribal control that

inﬂuence program outcomes. Variability including extreme heat events or atmospheric rivers

may overwhelm BMP effectiveness temporarily. Changes in timber markets affecting harvest

timing and intensity could alter landowner participation patterns.

Federal funding ﬂuctuations might accelerate or constrain implementation pace despite

consistent tribal commitment. The evaluation process will distinguish between controllable

program elements requiring adjustment and external factors requiring patience and

persistence.

Flexibility to adjust implementation based on monitoring results and emerging opportunities

remains paramount throughout the evaluation process. The schedule represents a framework

for action rather than rigid commitments, allowing the Tribe to accelerate successful

approaches while modifying or abandoning ineffective strategies.

This adaptive approach ensures that resources generate maximum water quality beneﬁt while

building the experience base for long-term watershed restoration. The evaluation framework

provides sufficient structure for accountability while preserving the nimbleness essential for

successful voluntary conservation programs.

Funding Source Overview

The Hoh Tribe identiﬁed potential funding sources available to support implementation of the best

management practices and programs described throughout this Management Program Plan. The

diversity of funding opportunities presented here demonstrates the Tribe's understanding of the

complex funding landscape for nonpoint source management while providing multiple pathways

for securing implementation resources. These sources range from federal programs speciﬁcally

designed for tribal water quality protection to innovative market-based mechanisms that align

economic incentives with environmental outcomes.

The funding sources identiﬁed directly support the voluntary implementation framework

established and the phased schedule outlined earlier. Each source has been evaluated for alignment

with the speciﬁc BMPs identiﬁed, ensuring that funding pursuits match both water quality

improvement needs and program eligibility requirements. The Tribe's existing funding portfolio,

including annual EPA GAP support plus diverse federal and state resources, provides the

foundation for leveraging these additional opportunities.

The Hoh Tribe's approach to securing implementation resources builds systematically from

an established foundation of federal and state funding that demonstrates institutional capacity

and program sustainability. Current annual support from EPA GAP funding plus Section 106

monitoring grants, combined with diverse funding from NOAA, BIA, and Washington State

programs, provides the administrative infrastructure essential for pursuing competitive

implementation grants. This existing portfolio, spanning ﬁsheries management and habitat

restoration, positions the Tribe as a capable recipient for expanded nonpoint source

management investments. The funding strategy emphasizes strategic alignment between

identiﬁed water quality impairments and programs designed to address speciﬁc pollution

sources.

Diversiﬁcation across federal, state, regional, and private sources reduces dependence on any

single funding stream while creating opportunities for leveraging match requirements. Federal

programs often accept state funds as match, while private foundations may provide the

unrestricted resources needed for federal match requirements. The Tribe's established

partnerships with organizations including The Nature Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, and the

10,000 Years Institute facilitate joint applications that access larger competitive grants

requiring collaborative approaches.

Implementation timing will necessarily respond to funding cycles and award notiﬁcations

rather than following rigid schedules. The implementation framework described earlier

provides ﬂexibility to accelerate activities when resources become available or adjust

approaches based on funder priorities. This adaptive approach ensures that water quality

improvements proceed regardless of speciﬁc funding outcomes while maintaining readiness

to scale up when major resources materialize.

The phased implementation schedule deliberately aligns with typical funding trajectories for

watershed restoration programs. Years 1-2 focus on planning and demonstration projects

typically supported by base funding and smaller grants. Years 3-5 expand successful

approaches using competitive implementation grants that require proven effectiveness and

established partnerships. Long-term sustainability beyond Year 5 depends on demonstrating

measurable water quality improvements that justify continued investment.

Cost-effectiveness remains central to funding competitiveness given limited resources for

watershed restoration nationwide. The emphasis on voluntary implementation through

existing technical assistance programs reduces administrative costs while leveraging

landowner contributions that extend public investments.

Federal Funding Sources

EPA Programs

Section 319(h) Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants represent the primary federal

mechanism for implementing the BMPs identiﬁed in Chapter 3, with competitive awards

typically ranging from $100,000 to $750,000 for projects demonstrating measurable pollutant

load reductions. These grants require approved assessment and management plans, which this

document fulﬁlls, and support riparian restoration, forestry BMPs, and road improvements

that directly address the temperature, sediment, and nutrient impairments documented

throughout the watershed. The 40% non-federal match requirement can be met through other

federal programs with speciﬁc authority, tribal in-kind contributions, or state and private

resources.

Section 106 Water Pollution Control Grants currently support the Tribe's monitoring program

and can expand to include implementation effectiveness monitoring as restoration projects

proceed. Wetland Program Development Grants provide $75,000 to $300,000 for developing

wetland restoration programs that address the dissolved oxygen impairments in Lower Chalaat

Creek through enhanced natural treatment systems. Environmental Justice Grants recognize

that tribal communities face disproportionate impacts from water quality degradation and

provide resources for community-based solutions.

USDA Conservation Programs

The Natural Resources Conservation Service Environmental Quality Incentives Program

(EQIP) provides exceptional support for tribal producers through 90% cost-share rates

compared to 75% for other landowners, making conservation practices economically feasible

on agricultural lands. Eligible practices directly addressing watershed impairments include

riparian forest buffers (Practice 391), livestock exclusion fencing (Practice 382), nutrient

management planning (Practice 590), and sediment basins (Practice 350). Annual payment

limits of $450,000 per entity over ﬁve years enable substantial landscape-scale restoration

when combined with other funding sources.

The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) supports landowners already implementing

conservation practices who commit to additional enhancements, providing annual payments

of $1,500 to $40,000 based on acreage and practices implemented. The Regional Conservation

Partnership Program (RCPP) leverages partner contributions for landscape-scale projects,

with awards typically ranging from $250,000 to $10 million for multi-year collaborative

efforts.

The Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) provides 10-15 year rental

payments for removing environmentally sensitive land from agricultural production while

establishing permanent vegetation, particularly valuable for riparian buffer creation. Forest

Service Tribal Forest Programs support management activities on the 41.9% of the watershed

in forest ownership, including road decommissioning, riparian thinning, and erosion control.

The Emergency Watershed Protection Program responds to natural disasters with 75% federal

funding for restoration, relevant given the increasing frequency of extreme weather events

affecting the watershed.

Bureau of Indian Affairs Programs

The Water Management, Planning, and Pre-Development Program offers $50,000 to

$400,000 for comprehensive water resource management including watershed assessments,

restoration planning, and project development. These programs recognize tribal sovereignty

in natural resource management while providing ﬂexible funding for activities that may not

qualify under other federal programs.

Rights Protection programs currently supporting ﬁsheries management through Paciﬁc

Salmon Treaty and Western Washington Boldt allocations can expand to include water quality

protection as essential for maintaining treaty resources. The BIA Forestry Programs

complement USDA efforts with speciﬁc focus on tribal trust lands and culturally signiﬁcant

forest resources. Water Resources Programs support infrastructure improvements including

irrigation efficiency and water conservation that reduce stream withdrawals during critical

low-ﬂow periods.

Other Federal Programs

NOAA's Community-based Restoration Program provides $75,000 to $3 million for habitat

restoration projects beneﬁting threatened salmon populations, directly supporting temperature

reduction efforts through riparian restoration. The program's emphasis on collaborative

partnerships aligns with the Tribe's established relationships with The Nature Conservancy

and Wild Salmon Center. NOAA's Transformational Habitat Restoration and Coastal

Resilience Grants under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provide $1 million to $15

million for large-scale ecosystem restoration.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Tribal Wildlife Grants range from $25,000 to $200,000 annually

for species conservation projects, with potential application to cold-water refugia protection

and riparian habitat enhancement. The National Fish Passage Program supports removal of

barriers to ﬁsh migration, addressing the culvert and crossing improvements identiﬁed through

ﬁeld reconnaissance. Partners for Fish and Wildlife provides technical and ﬁnancial assistance

for habitat restoration on private lands, facilitating engagement with non-tribal landowners.

Federal infrastructure programs authorized through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

and Inﬂation Reduction Act provide unprecedented funding for water quality improvements.

The Federal Highway Administration's Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative,

Efficient, and Cost-saving Transportation (PROTECT) program funds infrastructure

improvements addressing landscape vulnerabilities. Rural Surface Transportation Grant

Program supports road improvements in rural areas, applicable to the extensive forest road

network contributing sediment. These programs typically provide 80% federal funding with

reduced match requirements for tribal governments.

State and Regional Sources

Washington Department of Ecology Programs

The Water Quality Combined Funding Program represents Washington's primary mechanism

for implementing water quality improvements, integrating multiple funding sources into

streamlined application processes with awards typically ranging from $100,000 to $5 million.

This program supports nonpoint source pollution control, on-site sewage system

improvements, and stormwater management projects that directly address the impairments

documented throughout the watershed. The Centennial Clean Water Program component

provides grants and low-interest loans for water quality infrastructure, particularly relevant

for addressing septic system failures contributing to dissolved oxygen impairments.

The Coastal Protection Fund provides resources for projects protecting coastal waters from

nonpoint source pollution, with the Hoh River's direct discharge to the Paciﬁc Ocean

establishing eligibility for downstream water quality protection. Terry Husseman Grants

support watershed planning and implementation with typical awards of $50,000 to $300,000

for collaborative projects involving multiple partners. The Stormwater Financial Assistance

Program addresses runoff from developed areas and roads, applicable to sediment delivery

from the extensive road network identiﬁed.

Washington Recreation and Conservation Office

The Salmon Recovery Funding Board, through which the Tribe already receives support, can

expand to include water quality components of habitat restoration with typical project grants

ranging from $75,000 to $500,000. The Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program's

Riparian Protection Category speciﬁcally funds conservation of riparian corridors critical for

temperature reduction, with awards often exceeding $1 million for landscape-scale protection.

The Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account supports restoration of aquatic habitat on stateowned aquatic lands, relevant where state ownership extends into the watershed.

The Brian Abbott Fish Barrier Removal Board coordinates statewide ﬁsh passage restoration

with dedicated funding for high-priority barriers, directly applicable to the high-risk crossings

identiﬁed through GIS analysis. These programs leverage state capital budget appropriations

that have increased substantially in recent biennia due to court-mandated culvert replacement

requirements. The Land and Water Conservation Fund state allocation provides additional

resources for habitat protection and public access improvements.

Washington Department of Natural Resources Programs

The Family Forest Fish Passage Program provides 75-100% cost-share for small forest

landowners to replace ﬁsh passage barriers, critical given that DNR and private forest lands

comprise 41.9% of the watershed where temperature impairments concentrate. The Forestry

Riparian Easement Program compensates small forest landowners for timber value foregone

when implementing riparian buffers beyond regulatory requirements. Rivers and Habitat

Open Space Program supports acquisition and restoration of ecologically valuable lands along

rivers and streams.

Community Forestry Assistance provides technical support and funding for urban and

community forest management, applicable to developed areas within the watershed. The

Forest Health and Resilience programs address landscape adaptation needs through strategic

thinning and species selection that maintains forest cover while reducing ﬁre risk. These

programs recognize the interconnection between forest management and water quality,

providing pathways for addressing temperature impairments on forested lands.

Other State Agency Programs

The Washington Department of Commerce Infrastructure Assistance programs provide

funding for rural infrastructure improvements including road upgrades and stormwater

management systems. The Public Works Board's Construction Loan Program offers lowinterest ﬁnancing for infrastructure projects that protect water quality. The Transportation

Improvement Board's Small City and Rural Area programs fund road improvements that can

incorporate water quality protection measures during reconstruction.

The Department of Fish and Wildlife's Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention program supports

early detection and rapid response efforts that protect native ecosystems from additional

stressors. The State Conservation Commission provides funding through conservation

districts for voluntary conservation practices on agricultural lands. These diverse state

programs enable comprehensive approaches addressing multiple impairment sources

simultaneously.

Regional Partnership Programs

The North Paciﬁc Coast Lead Entity, in which the Tribe maintains voting representation,

coordinates salmon recovery funding across multiple watersheds and jurisdictions with annual

allocations typically exceeding $2 million regionally. This established partnership provides

technical assistance for project development, regional prioritization that strengthens

individual applications, and coordination among restoration practitioners. The Lead Entity

process ensures that projects align with regional recovery plans while maintaining local

priorities.

The Paciﬁc Coast Salmon Coalition facilitates collaboration among tribes, agencies, and

conservation organizations implementing restoration across the Olympic Peninsula. Hood

Canal Coordinating Council, while focused primarily on Hood Canal, provides models and

partnerships applicable to Olympic Peninsula watersheds. The Washington Coast Sustainable

Salmon Partnership develops regional strategies that individual projects support,

strengthening funding applications through demonstrated contribution to landscape-scale

recovery.

Olympic Natural Resources Center facilitates research partnerships between tribes, agencies,

and academic institutions that can provide technical support and monitoring for restoration

projects. The Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission coordinates tribal natural resource

management programs, providing technical assistance and advocacy for funding programs

supporting treaty rights protection. These regional entities provide both direct funding and

critical support services that enhance the Tribe's capacity for successful implementation.

Private and Foundation Sources Environmental Foundations

The Bullitt Foundation prioritizes ecosystem protection and restoration throughout the Paciﬁc

Northwest, with particular emphasis on projects demonstrating resilience and community

engagement in environmental stewardship. Grant awards typically range from $25,000 to

$100,000 annually for multi-year commitments supporting both implementation and capacity

building. The foundation's focus on environmental justice and tribal sovereignty aligns with

the Tribe's leadership in watershed restoration while addressing disproportionate impacts on

tribal communities from water quality degradation.

The Wilburforce Foundation supports landscape-scale conservation in western North America

with grants ranging from $20,000 to $250,000 for projects protecting intact ecosystems and

restoring degraded habitats. Their emphasis on collaborative approaches matches the

partnership framework, particularly for engaging private forest landowners in voluntary

conservation. The M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust provides capacity building support for

Paciﬁc Northwest nonproﬁts and tribes, with awards up to $500,000 for strengthening

organizational infrastructure essential for long-term program sustainability.

The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation has invested substantially in Puget Sound and coastal

restoration, with potential application to the Hoh watershed given its direct connection to

Paciﬁc coastal waters. The Russell Family Foundation supports environmental sustainability

in Puget Sound and Washington State, emphasizing innovative approaches to environmental

challenges. The Kongsgaard-Goldman Foundation provides smaller grants of $5,000 to

$25,000 for grassroots environmental efforts, suitable for demonstration projects and

community engagement activities.

Corporate Partnership Opportunities

Timber companies operating within the watershed, including Rayonier which manages

substantial acreage in the basin, increasingly support collaborative restoration that maintains

working forests while protecting water quality. These partnerships can provide match funding,

equipment, technical expertise, and access to lands for restoration implementation.

Technology companies with Paciﬁc Northwest presence, including Microsoft and Amazon,

have established environmental grant programs supporting ecosystem restoration in their

operating regions.

Outdoor recreation companies including Patagonia, REI, and Columbia Sportswear maintain

grant programs supporting watershed protection given the connection between healthy rivers

and recreational opportunities. Fishing industry partnerships through commercial and

recreational ﬁshing organizations recognize the direct connection between water quality and

salmon productivity. Beverage companies dependent on clean water resources increasingly

fund source water protection initiatives that align with temperature and sediment reduction

goals.

Conservation Organization Partnerships

The Nature Conservancy, already partnering with the Tribe, leverages private philanthropy for

landscape-scale conservation with capacity to bring matching funds and technical expertise to

joint grant applications. Trout Unlimited's Western Washington program combines member

donations with foundation grants to support cold-water habitat restoration directly addressing

temperature impairments. Wild Salmon Center's partnerships bring international attention and

funding to Paciﬁc salmon watersheds, with particular emphasis on refugia protection.

Bonneville Environmental Foundation's Model Watershed Program provides multi-year

funding for comprehensive restoration initiatives demonstrating innovative approaches to

watershed management. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation administers multiple

corporate-funded programs supporting habitat restoration, with typical awards ranging from

$50,000 to $500,000. American Rivers, Trust for Public Land, and Conservation Northwest

offer both direct funding and technical assistance for projects protecting riverine ecosystems.

Table 5. Summary of Major Funding Sources for NPS Implementation.

Program

Agency

Typical Award

Range

Match

Required

Section 319(h) Base

Section 319(h)

Competitive

EPA

$30,000- 50,000/year

EPA

$100,000-750,000

None

40% nonFederal

USDA

NRCS

Up to $450,000/5 years

10% (tribal)

Agricultural conservation

practices

BIA

$50,000-400,000

None

Watershed planning, assessment

NOAA

Project-based varies

Varies

WA Ecology

$100,000-5 million

Varies

Salmon habitat restoration

Comprehensive water quality

projects

WA RCO

$75,000-500,000

15%

Habitat restoration

WA DNR

75-100% cost-share

0-25%

Culvert replacement

Various

$25,000-250,000

Nontypical

Capacity building, restoration

EQIP

Water Management

Program

PCSRF

Water Quality

Combined Funding

Salmon Recovery

Funding Board

Family Forest Fish

Passage

Environmental

Foundations

Primary Use

Program capacity, planning

BMP implementation

Governance Structure

The Hoh Tribe’s responsibility to uphold protections of their waterways due to their

sovereignty and treaty rights, emphasizes their jurisdiction and tribal authority. NPS BMP

implementation will consider land manager values and tribal engagement; however, the Hoh

Tribal Business Committee will hold sole discretion on NPS program decisions. The Hoh

Tribal Business Committee acts on behalf of the Tribes best interest to maintain Tribal treaty

reserved rights and uphold Tribal values. The Natural Resources Department’s development

of NPS plan will be consulted with the Tribal Business Committee with Tribal goals in mind.

The Hoh Tribal Business Committee acts in the best interest of preserving and maintaining

protections of waterways. Additionally, the Hoh Tribe, with the approval of the Tribal

Business Committee, will provide technical or fiscal support to develop or establish NPS

BMPs when necessary. Given the Tribes limited land ownership cooperation with various

land managers will be necessary for successful NPS pollution control.

The framework for stakeholder engagement, tribal participation, and education is essential for

successful voluntary implementation of nonpoint source management practices throughout

the Hoh River Watershed. The Tribe's approach builds upon established community

engagement methods including community dinners and elder interviews, while expanding

outreach to non-tribal landowners whose participation aids in watershed-scale restoration

success. Through systematic property manager identiﬁcation, targeted education strategies,

and transparent decision-making processes, the program creates pathways for meaningful

participation from all who inﬂuence or are affected by water quality conditions.

Landowner participation serves multiple essential functions within the nonpoint source

management program, from incorporating traditional ecological knowledge into technical

decisions to building the social license necessary for implementing practices on private lands.

The framework recognizes that lasting water quality improvement requires more than technical

solutions; it demands community understanding, stakeholder buy-in, and sustained

commitment from diverse participants. The Tribe's established practice of gathering input

through community dinners and one-on-one interviews with elders and youth provides the

foundation for expanded engagement reaching throughout the watershed.

The education and outreach components translate complex water quality data into accessible

information that motivates conservation action. Different audiences require distinct

messaging and communication methods, from technical workshops for forest landowners to

cultural events connecting water quality with treaty rights. This strategic approach ensures

efficient use of limited outreach resources while building the awareness and capacity

necessary for long-term watershed stewardship.

Landowner Identiﬁcation and Roles

The nonpoint source management program's success depends on active participation from

diverse landowners who collectively inﬂuence watershed conditions through their land

management decisions, technical expertise, and implementation capacity. Each stakeholder

brings unique perspectives, resources, and authorities essential for comprehensive watershed

restoration. The framework identiﬁes primary landowners based on their direct inﬂuence over

water quality, their role in implementation, and their capacity to support or impede program

success.

Tribal members represent the primary group whose cultural connections to water resources,

traditional ecological knowledge, and treaty rights drive the program's fundamental purpose.

The Natural Resources Department engages tribal members through quarterly General Council

meetings where water quality updates are standard agenda items. Community dinners provide

informal settings for gathering observations about changing watershed conditions and

concerns about impacts on cultural practices. Elder interviews conducted seasonally capture

traditional knowledge about historical conditions and management practices, while youth

engagement through the Tribal School builds future capacity for watershed stewardship.

Private forest landowners controlling 17.6% of the watershed hold critical inﬂuence over

riparian conditions along temperature-impaired tributaries. Large industrial operators,

including Rayonier manage thousands of acres under Habitat Conservation Plans that provide

regulatory ﬂexibility for innovative practices. Small forest landowners with 20–200-acre

parcels may not be aware of technical assistance programs but demonstrate strong stewardship

ethics when engaged appropriately. The Conservation District serves as the primary liaison

with these landowners, providing trusted relationships essential for voluntary participation.

Government agencies provide regulatory oversight, technical assistance, and funding essential

for program implementation. EPA Region 10's Tribal Assistance Program ensures Section

319 compliance while providing grant administration support. Washington Department of

Natural Resources manages 24.3% of the watershed where many temperature impairments

originate, making their participation essential for landscape-scale restoration. Jefferson

County's road department controls infrastructure affecting sediment delivery at numerous

stream crossings. Federal Highway Administration oversees Highway 101 improvements that

could incorporate water quality protection measures.

Technical service providers expand implementation capacity beyond tribal staff limitations.

The Jefferson County Conservation District delivers technical assistance for agricultural

BMPs and administers cost-share programs. Engineering consultants design complex

restoration projects requiring specialized expertise. University researchers provide

monitoring support and effectiveness assessment. Non-proﬁt organizations including The

Nature Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, and the 10,000 Years Institute contribute both

technical knowledge and implementation funding.

The technical advisory committee implementation schedule coordinates these diverse

stakeholders through meetings as needed during active implementation phases. Committee

membership includes representatives from key agencies, major landowners, technical

providers, and tribal natural resources staff. This structure ensures that implementation

decisions incorporate diverse perspectives while maintaining focus on water quality

objectives. The committee's transparency in decision-making builds stakeholder conﬁdence

while providing accountability for resource allocation.

Stakeholder roles evolve throughout the implementation process, from initial planning

through long-term maintenance. During planning phases, stakeholders provide input on BMP

selection and priority areas based on local knowledge and implementation feasibility.

Implementation phases require active participation from landowners hosting projects,

agencies providing permits, and contractors conducting work. Monitoring and evaluation

phases engage stakeholders in assessing effectiveness and identifying necessary adjustments.

This dynamic engagement maintains stakeholder investment while building collective

capacity for watershed stewardship.

Public Participation Process

Public feedback opportunities will be available at least 30 days prior to final certification of

major implementation projects. If plans are likely to affect nontribal entities, public notice

will be extended outside of reservation boundaries. Information and documentation will be

provided via the Hoh Tribe’s webpage and Facebook for viewing. Flyers with notice of public

input requests will also be posted throughout the effected community to spread information

physically. Additionally, all information will be available at the Hoh Tribe’s administration

building for those who don’t have access to the internet to view and comment.

Community dinners represent the Tribe's preferred method for gathering input in culturally

appropriate settings that encourage broad participation. These gatherings coincide with seasonal

activities, providing natural opportunities to discuss water quality observations and concerns.

The informal atmosphere enables elders who may be uncomfortable in formal meetings to

share traditional knowledge about historical conditions and effective management practices.

One-on-one interviews with elders and cultural practitioners capture detailed traditional

ecological knowledge that might not emerge in group settings. These conversations occur at

times and locations comfortable for participants, often during resource gathering activities

when connections between water quality and cultural practices are most apparent. Interview

protocols respect cultural sensitivities about sharing certain knowledge while documenting

observations essential for establishing restoration targets. Youth participation through school

programs ensures that younger generations contribute fresh perspectives while learning about

watershed stewardship responsibilities.

The federal consistency review process ensures that Section 319 implementation coordinates

with other federal programs affecting watershed resources. The Tribe reviews federal

assistance applications and development projects to identify potential conﬂicts or duplication

with nonpoint source management activities. Coordination with BIA forestry programs

ensures that timber management on trust lands incorporates water quality protection measures.

Highway improvement projects are assessed for opportunities to incorporate culvert upgrades

and stormwater management during construction.

Conﬂict resolution mechanisms address disagreements that inevitably arise when balancing

multiple objectives and stakeholder interests. When conﬂicts emerge between water quality

goals and economic concerns, the framework prioritizes treaty rights while seeking solutions

that minimize economic impacts. Disagreements between stakeholders are addressed through

facilitated discussions at technical advisory committee meetings where diverse perspectives

can be heard. The Hoh Tribal Business Committee serves as the ﬁnal arbiter for disputes that

cannot be resolved through committee deliberation. This structured approach ensures that

conﬂicts are addressed constructively rather than undermining program implementation.

CONCLUSION

This Nonpoint Source Management Program Plan establishes a comprehensive framework

through which the Hoh Tribe will address the signiﬁcant water quality impairments

documented throughout the Hoh River Watershed. Building upon the technical foundation

provided by the companion assessment report, this plan translates scientiﬁc ﬁndings into

implementable strategies scaled to available resources and designed for adaptive

management. Through systematic identiﬁcation of best management practices,

implementation mechanisms, and robust timelines, the Tribe has developed a practical

approach to restoring impaired waters while protecting remaining high-quality resources.

The plan identiﬁes speciﬁc BMPs matched to documented impairments, establishes programs

for technical assistance delivery, ensures federal consistency review, conﬁrms adequate

implementation authority, identiﬁes diverse funding sources, coordinates with federal

development projects, engages local and private expertise, and employs a watershed-based

approach transcending jurisdictional boundaries. These elements collectively demonstrate the

Tribe's technical capability and institutional commitment necessary for managing complex

nonpoint source challenges across mixed-ownership landscapes.

Implementation success will require sustained collaboration with the diverse stakeholders

who collectively inﬂuence watershed conditions. The Tribe's direct control over less than 1%

of the watershed emphasizes the critical importance of voluntary participation from state and

private forest landowners managing lands where temperature impairments concentrate. The

established partnerships with organizations including The Nature Conservancy, Trout

Unlimited, Jefferson County Conservation District, and the 10,000 Years Institute provide the

technical expertise and trusted relationships essential for engaging non-tribal landowners.

Through the technical advisory committee structure and comprehensive public participation

framework, the program creates meaningful pathways for all stakeholders to contribute their

knowledge and resources toward watershed restoration.

The phased implementation schedule recognizes that lasting water quality improvement

requires patient, systematic effort building from demonstration projects to landscape-scale

restoration. Years 1-2 establish organizational infrastructure and early adopter projects that

demonstrate BMP effectiveness under local conditions. Years 3-5 expand successful

approaches to priority tributaries while reﬁning techniques based on effectiveness

monitoring. Long-term success depends on adaptive management that responds to monitoring

results, adapting landscapes, and evolving stakeholder needs. The robust monitoring and

evaluation framework ensures that limited resources generate maximum water quality beneﬁt

while building the evidence base for continued investment.

The Tribe acknowledges the signiﬁcant challenges ahead, like the persistence of temperature

impairments despite nearly three decades of regulatory implementation. However, the

strength of existing partnerships and the availability of diverse funding sources provide

conﬁdence that meaningful restoration is achievable. The integration of traditional ecological

knowledge with contemporary science ensures that restoration approaches respect cultural

values while achieving measurable water quality improvements. This dual knowledge system

strengthens both technical approaches and community support essential for long-term success.

Moving forward, the Hoh Tribe commits to implementing this Management Plan through

transparent, adaptive processes that maintain accountability to EPA while responding to local

conditions and community needs. Annual progress reports will document implementation

achievements, monitoring results, and adaptive management decisions. The Tribe will

continue engaging stakeholders through established mechanisms including community

dinners and technical committees that ensure broad participation. As implementation

proceeds, the program will evolve based on effectiveness monitoring, stakeholder feedback,

and emerging scientiﬁc understanding while maintaining focus on the fundamental goal of

restoring water quality to support treaty-protected resources and ecological integrity.

This management plan represents more than regulatory compliance; it embodies the Tribe's

commitment to its responsibility as steward of ancestral lands and waters. The restoration of

water quality throughout the Hoh River Watershed directly supports the perpetuation of

cultural practices, the recovery of salmon populations essential to tribal identity, and the

protection of ecosystem functions for future generations. Through patient, persistent effort

guided by both traditional knowledge and contemporary science, the Hoh Tribe will lead

collaborative watershed restoration that beneﬁts all who depend on these waters while

honoring the sacred trust of protecting this remarkable temperate rainforest ecosystem.

REFERENCES

Assessment Report. 2025. Nonpoint Source Assessment Report for the Hoh River Watershed.

Hoh Indian Tribe Natural Resources Department. Prepared by Westech Consulting, LLC.

January 2025.

Maynes, Barb. 2008. “Airborne Contaminants Study Released - Olympic National Park (U.S.

National Park Service).” February 26. https://www.nps.gov/olym/learn/news/airbornecontaminants-study-released.htm.

Berkes, F. 2012. Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource

Management. Routledge, New York.

BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs). 2023. Water Management, Planning, and Pre-Development

Program Guidelines. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Northwest Regional Office, Portland, OR.

BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs). 2024. Tribal Resilience Program: Funding Announcement

and Application Guidelines. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Trust Services,

Washington, DC.

Boyd, M. 1996. Heat Source: Stream Temperature Simulation Software. Oregon Department

of Environmental Quality, Portland, OR.

Boyd, M. and B. Kasper. 2003. Analytical Methods for Dynamic Open Channel Heat and Mass

Transfer: Methodology for Heat Source Model Version 7.0. Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, Portland, OR.

Bryson, J.M., K.S. Quick, C.S. Slotterback, and B.C. Crosby. 2013. Designing public

participation processes. Public Administration Review 73(1): 23-34.

Cafferata, P. and J. Munn. 2002. Hillslope Monitoring Program: Monitoring Results from 1996

Through 2001. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Sacramento, CA.

Charnley, S., A.P. Fischer, and E.T. Jones. 2007. Integrating traditional and local ecological

knowledge into forest biodiversity conservation in the Paciﬁc Northwest. Forest Ecology

and Management 246: 14-28.

Chess, C. and K. Purcell. 1999. Public participation and the environment: Do we know what

works? Environmental Science & Technology 33(16): 2685-2692.

Clean Water Act Section 319. 33 USC 1329. Nonpoint Source Management Programs.

Clean Water Act Section 401. 33 USC 1341. Certiﬁcation.

Clean Water Act Section 404. 33 USC 1344. Permits for Dredged or Fill Material. Clean

Water Act Section 518. 33 USC 1377. Indian Tribes.

Code of Federal Regulations. 7 CFR 1466. Environmental Quality Incentives Program.

Code of Federal Regulations. 16 USC 3839aa. Environmental Quality Incentives Program.

Code of Federal Regulations. 25 USC 318a. Indian Reservation Roads.

Code of Federal Regulations. 25 USC 3101-3120. National Indian Forest Resources

Management Act.

Code of Federal Regulations. 25 USC 3501. Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. Code of

Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 25.4. Public Participation Requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 31.40-31.43. Monitoring and Reporting Program

Performance.

Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 35.500-35.735. Environmental Program Grants

for Tribes.

Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 35.507. Work Plan Requirements. Code of Federal

Regulations. 40 CFR 35.515. Evaluation of Performance.

Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 35.630-35.638. Water Pollution Control (Section 319)

Grants.

Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 35.635. Nonpoint Source Management Program

Requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 124.17. Response to Comments. Code of Federal

Regulations. 40 CFR 130.7. Total Maximum Daily Loads.

Colombi, B.J. 2012. Salmon and the adaptive capacity of Nimiipuu (Nez Perce) culture to

cope with change. American Indian Quarterly 36(1): 75-97.

Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP). 2023. National Assessment of

Conservation Practice Effects on Water Quality. USDA Natural Resources Conservation

Service, Washington, DC.

Creighton, J.L. 2005. The Public Participation Handbook: Making Better Decisions Through

Citizen Involvement. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Daniels, S.E. and G.B. Walker. 2001. Working Through Environmental Conﬂict: The

Collaborative Learning Approach. Praeger, Westport, CT.

Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2014. Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode

Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 4th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.

Eagles-Smith, Collin, James Willacker, and Colleen Flanagan Pritz. 2014. Mercury in Fishes from

21 National Parks in the Western United States—Inter- and Intra-Park Variation in

Concentrations and Ecological Risk. Open-File Report Nos. 2014–1051.

Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 2024. Water Quality Combined Funding

Program Guidelines. Publication 24-10-001. Olympia, WA.

Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 2025. Washington State Water Quality

Assessment 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report. Olympia, WA.

Emerson, K., T. Nabatchi, and S. Balogh. 2012. An integrative framework for collaborative

governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22(1): 1-29.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2003. National Management Measures for the

Control of Nonpoint Pollution from Agriculture. EPA-841-B-03-004. Office of Water,

Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. National Management Measures to

Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from Forestry. EPA-841-B-05-001. Office of Water,

Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008, revised 2013. Handbook for Developing

Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters. EPA 841-B-08-002. Office of Water,

Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2013. Handbook for Developing and Managing

Tribal Nonpoint Source Pollution Programs Under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act.

EPA 841-B-13-001. Office of Water, Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. A Quick Guide to Developing

Watershed Plans to Meet the Nine Minimum Elements. EPA 841-B-16-002. Office of

Water, Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2018. EPA Public Participation Guide. Office

of International and Tribal Affairs, Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2022. General Assistance Program Guidance.

Office of International and Tribal Affairs, Washington, DC.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2023. EPA Region 10 Tribal Environmental

Program Overview. Seattle, WA.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2024. Section 319 Grant Program Guidance.

Office of Water, Washington, DC.

Eubanks, C.E. and D. Meadows. 2002. A Soil Bioengineering Guide for Streambank and

Shoreline Stabilization. USDA Forest Service Technology and Development Program.

FS-683. San Dimas, CA.

Field Reconnaissance. August 2025. Hoh River Watershed Field Observations. Westech

Consulting, LLC.

Field Reconnaissance. September 2025. Hoh River Watershed Field Observations - Upper

Hoh Road. Westech Consulting, LLC.

Fiﬁeld, J.S. 2001. Designing for Effective Sediment and Erosion Control on Construction

Sites. Forester Press, Santa Barbara, CA.

Furniss, M.J., T.D. Roelofs, and C.S. Yee. 1991. Road construction and maintenance. In:

Inﬂuences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats.

American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19: 297-323.

Hamlet, A.F., M.M. Elsner, G.S. Mauger, S.Y. Lee, I. Tohver, and R.A. Norheim. 2013. An

overview of the Columbia Basin Change Scenarios Project: Approach, methods, and

summary of key results. Atmosphere-Ocean 51(4): 392-415.

Haro-de-Rosario, A., A. Sáez-Martín, and M.C. Caba-Pérez. 2018. Using social media to

enhance citizen engagement with local government: Twitter or Facebook? New Media &

Society 20(1): 29-49.

Hoh Tribe. 2015. Forest Management Plan Update. Hoh Indian Tribe Natural Resources

Department.

Hoh Tribe. 2024. Personal Communication - Tribal Natural Resources Department responses

to project questions. Email correspondence, December 2024 through September 2025.

Hoh Tribe Constitution. Article V. General Council.

Hoh Tribe FY22 CWA 106 Report. 2022. Clean Water Act Section 106 Annual Report, Fiscal

Year 2022. Hoh Indian Tribe Natural Resources Department.

Hoh Tribe FY23 CWA 106 Report. 2023. Clean Water Act Section 106 Annual Report, Fiscal

Year 2023. Hoh Indian Tribe Natural Resources Department.

Huntington, H.P. 2000. Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: Methods and

applications. Ecological Applications 10(5): 1270-1274.

Imperial, M.T. 2005. Using collaboration as a governance strategy: Lessons from six

watershed management programs. Administration & Society 37(3): 281-320.

Johnson, J.T., R. Howitt, G. Cajete, F. Berkes, R.P. Louis, and A. Kliskey. 2016. Weaving

indigenous and sustainability sciences to diversify our methods. Sustainability Science

11(1): 1-11.

Kovach, M. 2010. Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations, and Contexts.

University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

Lake, F.K., V. Wright, P. Morgan, M. McFadzen, D. McWethy, and C. Stevens-Rumann.

2017. Returning ﬁre to the land: Celebrating traditional knowledge and ﬁre. Journal of

Forestry 115(5): 343-353.

Lukensmeyer, C.J. and L.H. Torres. 2008. Citizensourcing: Citizen participation in a

networked nation. In: Civic Engagement in a Network Society, K. Yang and E. Bergrud (eds.).

Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC.

Lynn, K., J. Daigle, J. Hoffman, F. Lake, N. Michelle, D. Ranco, C. Viles, G. Voggesser,

and P. Williams. 2013. The impacts of change on tribal traditional foods. Climatic Change

120(3): 545-556.

Madej, M.A. 2001. Erosion and sediment delivery following removal of forest roads. Earth

Surface Processes and Landforms 26: 175-190.

Mantua, N., I. Tohver, and A. Hamlet. 2010. change impacts on streamﬂow extremes and

summertime stream temperature and their possible consequences for freshwater salmon

habitat in Washington State. Climatic Change 102(1): 187-223.

Martinez, D. 2010. The value of indigenous ways of knowing to western science and

environmental sustainability. Journal of Environmental Studies 1(1): 1-9.

Mauger, G.S., J.H. Casola, H.A. Morgan, R.L. Strauch, B. Jones, B. Curry, T.M. Busch Isaksen,

L. Whitely Binder, M.B. Krosby, and A.K. Snover. 2015. State of Knowledge: Change in

Puget Sound. Impacts Group, University of Washington, Seattle.

Meals, D.W., S.A. Dressing, and T.E. Davenport. 2010. Lag time in water quality response

to best management practices: A review. Journal of Environmental Quality 39(1): 8596.

Mitsch, W.J., J.W. Day, L. Zhang, and R.R. Lane. 2005. Nitrate-nitrogen retention in

wetlands

in the Mississippi River Basin. Ecological Engineering 24(4): 267-278.

Musselman, K.N., F. Lehner, K. Ikeda, M.P. Clark, A.F. Prein, C. Liu, M. Barlage, and

R. Rasmussen. 2018. Projected increases and shifts in rain-on-snow ﬂood risk over

western North America. Nature Change 8(9): 808-812.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2016. Paciﬁc Coastal Salmon

Recovery Fund Report to Congress. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring,

MD.

Norton-Smith, K., K. Lynn, K. Chief, K. Cozzetto, J. Donatuto, M.H. Redsteer, L.E.

Kruger, J. Maldonado, C. Viles, and K.P. Whyte. 2016. Change and Indigenous

Peoples: A Synthesis of Current Impacts and Experiences. General Technical Report

PNW-GTR-944. USDA Forest Service, Paciﬁc Northwest Research Station, Portland,

OR.

Martens, Kyle D., and Warren D. Devine. 2025. “Stream Temperature, Density Dependence,

Catchment Size, and Physical Habitat: Understanding Salmonid Size Variation Across Small

Streams.” Fishes 10 (8): 368. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes10080368.

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2016. National Conservation Practice

Standards. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC.

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2023. Environmental Quality Incentives

Program National Payment Schedule. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service,

Washington, DC.

NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2024. Conservation Programs Manual.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC.

O'Neill, M.P. and E. Siegert. 2013. Economic Analysis of Best Management Practice

Implementation. Water Environment Research Foundation, Alexandria, VA.

Opperman, J.J. and A.M. Merenlender. 2000. Riparian restoration success in California.

Restoration Ecology 8(3): 260-269.

Parkyn, S. 2004. Review of Riparian Buffer Zone Effectiveness. Ministry of Agriculture and

Forestry Technical Paper No: 2004/05. Wellington, New Zealand.

Poole, G.C. and C.H. Berman. 2001. An ecological perspective on in-stream temperature:

Natural heat dynamics and mechanisms of human-caused thermal degradation.

Environmental Management 27(6): 787-802.

Quinault Indian Nation. 2019. Quinault Watershed Restoration Program Annual Report.

Quinault Department of Fisheries, Taholah, WA.

RCW 77.85. Salmon Recovery. Revised Code of Washington. RCW 90.82. Watershed

Planning. Revised Code of Washington.

Reckhow, K.H., M.N. Beaulac, and J.T. Simpson. 1980. Modeling Phosphorus Loading and

Lake Response Under Uncertainty: A Manual and Compilation of Export Coefficients.

EPA-440/5-80-011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

Reed, M.S. 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature

review. Biological Conservation 141(10): 2417-2431.

Reid, L.M. and T. Dunne. 1996. Rapid Evaluation of Sediment Budgets. Catena Verlag,

Reiskirchen, Germany.

Roni, P., T.J. Beechie, R.E. Bilby, F.E. Leonetti, M.M. Pollock, and G.R. Pess. 2008. A review

of stream restoration techniques and a hierarchical strategy for prioritizing restoration in

Paciﬁc Northwest watersheds. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22(1):

1-20.

Saltelli, A., K. Chan, and E.M. Scott. 2008. Sensitivity Analysis. John Wiley & Sons, West

Sussex, England.

Sample, D.J., J.P. Heaney, L.T. Wright, C.Y. Fan, F.H. Lai, and R. Field. 2003. Costs of best

management practices and associated land for urban stormwater control. Journal of Water

Resources Planning and Management 129(1): 59-68.

Sharpley, A.N., T. Daniel, T. Sims, J. Lemunyon, R. Stevens, and R. Parry. 2006. Agricultural

Phosphorus and Eutrophication, Second Edition. ARS-149. USDA Agricultural Research

Service, Washington, DC.

Skaggs, R.W., M.A. Youssef, and G.M. Chescheir. 2012. DrainMod: Model use, calibration,

and validation. Transactions of the ASABE 55(4): 1509-1522.

Skokomish Tribe. 2010. Skokomish Tribe Nonpoint Source Assessment and Management

Program. Skokomish Natural Resources Department, Skokomish, WA.

Stoddard, J.L., D.P. Larsen, C.P. Hawkins, R.K. Johnson, and R.H. Norris. 2006. Setting

expectations for the ecological condition of streams: The concept of reference condition.

Ecological Applications 16(4): 1267-1276.

Store, R. and J. Kangas. 2001. Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert

knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modelling. Landscape and Urban Planning

55(2): 79-93.

Sugden, B.D., S.W. Woods, and M.J. Goss. 2012. Sediment production from forest roads in

western Montana. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 42(3): 793-807.

Thurston, H.W., M.A. Taylor, A. Shuster, J. Roy, and M. Morrison. 2003. Using a reverse auction

to promote household level stormwater control. Environmental Science & Policy 6(4):

383-393.

Tian, Zhenyu, Haoqi Zhao, Katherine T. Peter, et al. 2021. “A Ubiquitous Tire Rubber–Derived

Chemical Induces Acute Mortality in Coho Salmon.” Science 371 (6525): 185–89.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abd6951.

Tohver, I.B., A.F. Hamlet, and S.Y. Lee. 2014. Impacts of 21st-century change on hydrologic

extremes in the Paciﬁc Northwest region of North America. Journal of the American

Water Resources Association 50(6): 1461-1476.

Treaty of Olympia. 1856. Treaty with the Quinaielt, etc. 12 Stat. 971.

Turner, N.J., M.B. Ignace, and R. Ignace. 2000. Traditional ecological knowledge and wisdom of

aboriginal peoples in British Columbia. Ecological Applications 10(5): 1275-1287.

United States v. Washington. 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash. 1974). The Boldt Decision.

University of Washington Impacts Group. 2023. Change Impacts and Adaptation in Washington

State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers. Seattle, WA.

Vymazal, J. 2007. Removal of nutrients in various types of constructed wetlands. Science of the

Total Environment 380(1): 48-65.

WAC 173-201A. Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington.

Washington Administrative Code.

WAC 222. Forest Practices Rules. Washington Administrative Code.

WAC 222-24-050. Road Maintenance and Abandonment Plans. Washington Administrative Code.

WAC 222-30-021. Western

Administrative Code.

Washington

Riparian

Management

Zones.

Washington

Washington Cooperative Monitoring, Evaluation, and Research Committee (CMER). 2023-2024.

Annual Reports. Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA.

Washington Forest Practices Board (WFPB). 2016. Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan.

Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA.

Whyte, K.P. 2013. On the role of traditional ecological knowledge as a collaborative concept: A

philosophical study. Ecological Processes 2(1): 7.

Wossink, A. and B. Hunt. 2003. The Economics of Structural Stormwater BMPs in North Carolina.

Water Resources Research Institute Report 344. North Carolina State University, Raleigh,

NC.

WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). 2025. Upper Hoh Road Emergency

Repair Documentation. Olympic Region, Port Angeles, WA.

Yonce, M.L., B.L. Rhoades, and K.D. Johnson. 2021. Riparian buffer width requirements for

temperature protection in Paciﬁc Northwest forests. Forest Ecology and Management 491:

119

APPENDICES

Acronyms & Abbreviations

10K

10,000 Years Institute

7-DADMax 7-Day Average Daily Maximum

Assessment Report

BIA

Bureau of Indian Affairs

BMP

Best Management Practice

Dissolved oxygen

United States Environmental Protection

EPA

Agency

Funding Year

GAP

General Assistance Program

GIS

Geographic Information System

HRW

Hoh River Watershed

HUC

Hydrologic Unit Code

HWQP

Hoh Tribal Water Quality Program

Management Plan

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

NOAA

Administration

NPCLE

North Pacific Coast Lead Entity

NPS

Nonpoint Source

NTU

Nephelometric Turbidity Units

NWI

National Wetland Inventory

NWIFC

Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission

ONP

Olympic National Park

Quality Assurance

QAPP

Quality Assurance Program Plan

Quality Control

TWQD

Tribal Water Quality Database

U&A

Usual & Accustomed Lands

USFS

United States Forest Service

USFWS

United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS

United States Geologic Surveys

WDNR

Washington Department of Natural Resources

WDOE

Washington Department of Ecology

WIP

Wetland Intrinsic Potent

WQTS

Water Quality Time Series

WQX

Water Quality Exchange

WRIA

Water Resources Inventory Area

WSDA

Washington State Department of Agriculture

Employee Agenda Request Form

ALL SECTIONS OF THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED OR HTBC WILL DENY REQUEST.

Due: 5pm on Friday before HTBC meeting

The purpose of the Employee Agenda Request Form is to ensure the Hoh Tribal Business Committee has

adequate time to review documentation in preparation for the meeting. All Gaming Support must have

supported documentation or will be tabled!

Name: Kim Bray

Date Requesting with HTBC:

Department: natural resources

Phone: 360-780-0610

Director:

8/19/2026

Kim Bray

In person

✔ Virtual

* Please attach supporting documents to be reviewed with compliance and completion of required

signatures.

Budget

Discussion

Contract

FYI

✔ Resolution

Travel Advance

Addition- backup details required by Tuesday at 2pm or will be denied.

Purpose:

CWA 319 TAS legal package + resolution

Action desired of HTBC:

Signing of resolution and approval of package

Gaming Support (if applicable): $_______________________*Supporting

Documents

Required Staff Attendance:

Yes ✔ No - Comments:

FOR HTBC USE ONLY

Meeting Date: ___/___/20___

Received by (initials): ____________

□ Approved

□ Rejected

Date: __________________________

Justifications: ________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

Director Signature ___________________________________

Application of the Hoh Indian Tribe for Treatment as a State

Exhibit 1

Resolution of the Hoh Tribal Business Committee approving of the

application of the Hoh Indian Tribe to the US Environmental

Protection Agency for Treatment as a State

Hoh Indian Tribe

Tribal Business Committee Resolution No. ________________

WHEREAS, the Hoh Indian Tribe is a federally recognized Indian Tribe organized under its

governing Constitution; and

WHEREAS, the Hoh Tribal Business Committee is the duly elected governing body of the Hoh

Tribe by the authority of the Tribe's Constitution; and

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the Hoh Tribe, Article IV, Section 1(a), empowers the Hoh

Tribal Business Committee to consult, negotiate, contract, or conclude agreements with

Federal, State, and local governments, and others, on behalf of the tribe and to advise and

consult with their representatives on all activities that may affect the tribe; and

WHEREAS, the Clean Water act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., as amended by the Water

Quality Act of 1987, authorizes the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

to treat eligible tribes in a similar manner to states for a variety of purposes, including

administering each of the principal Clean Water Act regulatory programs and receiving

grants under several Clean Water Act authorities; and

WHEREAS, the Hoh Tribe has in past years applied for and obtained treat as a state (TAS)

status pursuant to section 518 of the Clean Water Act and desires to apply again in order to

maintain its TAS status; and

WHEREAS, the Tribal attorney has worked with Tribal Natural Resources Department staff

to prepare the attached Application of the Hoh Indian Tribe for Treatment as a State

Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. and the Water Quality Act of 1987, which the Hoh

Tribal Business Council has reviewed and finds is in the best interest of the Tribe to submit

to the EPA.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Hoh Tribal Business Committee hereby

approves the attached Application of the Hoh Indian Tribe for Treatment as a State Pursuant

to 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. and the Water Quality Act of 1987; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Hoh Tribal Chairwoman, Vice Chairwoman or

Executive Director are hereby authorized to sign the Application on behalf of the Hoh Tribe; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Hoh Tribal attorney is hereby authorized to finalize the

Application for submission to the EPA; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Hoh Tribal staff are hereby authorized to take all other

necessary actions to effectuate this Resolution and carry out the Hoh Tribe’s obligations under

the Application.

Certification

The above Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Hoh Tribal Business

Committee on ___________ on the Hoh Indian Reservation, at which time a quorum was

present and voting

For,

Against, and

Darlene Hollum, Chairwoman

Abstention.

Tahnee Hudson, Secretary

Application of the Hoh Indian Tribe for Treatment as a State

Exhibit 2

91 Federal Register 4102, 4103 (January 30, 2026) INDIAN TRIBAL ENTITIES WITHIN

THE CONTIGUOUS 48 STATES RECOGNIZED AND ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE

SERVICES FROM THE UNITED STATES BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

documenting Federal recognition of the Hoh Indian Tribe

Application of the Hoh Indian Tribe for Treatment as a State

Exhibit 3

Hoh Indian Tribe Constitution

CONSTITUTION

OF THE

HOH INDIAN TRIBE

PREAMBLE

We, the members of the Hoh Tribe, in order to establish a tribal organization and secure certain

privileges and powers offered to us by the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat.

984), do ordain and establish this constitutio

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.