Hypoxia in Hood Canal: Using Modern Science and Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Enhance Our Understanding of a Degraded Ecosystem

Item

Title

Eng Hypoxia in Hood Canal: Using Modern Science and Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Enhance Our Understanding of a Degraded Ecosystem

Date

2002

Creator

Eng Cary, Brian

Subject

Eng Environmental Studies

extracted text

Hypoxia in Hood Canal:
Using Modern Science and Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Enhance Our
Understanding of a Degraded Ecosystem
MES THESIS
Brian S. Cary

A Thesis: Essay of Distinction
Submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
Master of Environmental Studies
The Evergreen State College
June 2002

i

Approval Page

This Thesis for the Master of Environmental Studies Degree
by
Brian S. Cary
has been approved for
The Evergreen State College
by
___________________________
Tyrus Smith
Member of the Faculty

__________________________
Date

ii

ABSTRACT
Hypoxia in Hood Canal:
Using Modern Science and Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Enhance Our
Understanding of a Degraded Ecosystem
Brian S. Cary

The health of the Puget Sound and Hood Canal has been severely degraded over the past
several decades. Washington State’s Governor has dedicated millions to initiate a
recovery plan and the state legislature passed House Bill 1883 recognizing that tribal
elders and other long term residents of the Hood Canal area may provide “critical insight”
beneficial to all attempting to restore this ecosystem. This study examines how the
Traditional Ecological Knowledge derived from the oral histories of the Skokomish Tribe
can inform western science and restoration efforts. The oral histories analyzed herein
provide useful information regarding: 1) Habitat Utilization and Loss, 2) Changes in
Species Abundance, 3) Management Approaches, and 4) History, Impacts, and Potential
Causes of Hypoxic events.

Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Chapter 1: Literature Review and Scientific understanding: Human dependence
on marine systems 2
Chapter 2: Puget Sound 4
Present state of sediment in Puget Sound 7
Importance of High quality sediments 8
Concern over the Health of Puget Sound 8
Chapter 3: Hood Canal 10
Derelict Fishing Gear 13
Hood Canal History 16
Chapter 4: Hypoxia in Hood Canal and some properties of water 17
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) 18
Salinity, Temperature and Density 20
Stratification 21
Nutrient concentrations 21
Biotic influences on dissolved oxygen: Algae Blooms 22
Chapter 5: Puget Sound Partnership: Governor Gregoire’s plan for restoration 23
Immediate Priorities 25
Chapter 6: Historical Perspective 28
Benefits of Participatory research and Traditional Ecological Knowledge 28
Chapter 7: Methodology 29
Research Design 31
The Skokomish People 31

iii

Chapter 8: Findings 32
8.1 Habitat Utilization and Loss 34
Rivers and Deltas 34
Changes in Shoreline Habitat and shoreline associated species 35
Changes in forest cover 37
8.2 Changes in Species abundance 38
Fishes 38
Shellfish 39
Crabs 39
Sea Cucumbers 39
Marine Mammals 40
Birds 40
Increases in abundance 41
8.3 Management approaches 41
Changes in resource management 41
8.4 History, Impacts, and Potential Causes of low dissolved oxygen
events 44
History 44
Impacts 45
Potential Causes 45
Chapter 9: Conclusions 46
How Oral Histories Might Benefit Restoration Efforts 47
Study Limitations 48
The potential for the future 49

iv

Literature cited 51
Appendix A House Bill 1883 55
Appendix B Federal and Washington state listed species found within the Puget
Sound region 57
Appendix C Event timeline 58
Appendix D Oral history questions 60
Appendix E Map of the Skokomish River Valley and water table 62
Appendix F Eel grass habitat 63

v

List of figures
Figure 1: Map of the Puget Sound Region identifying types of land cover 3
Figure 2: Figure shows forest cover conversion for the Puget Sound and Hood
Canal.
Red cells depict recent conversions and gray are those areas developed. Source:
Skokomish Natural Resource Department 4
Figure 3: Map of Hood Canal 10
Figure 4: Figure shows a mechanism by which deep waters in Hood Canal are
replenished with more oxygenated waters 19

List of Tables
Table 1: Location and mortality figures for some derelict gillnets removed from
Puget
Sound between 2003 and 2005 15

vi

Acknowledgements

Many people deserve a thank you for assisting me in this endeavor. I would
like to extend a thank you to the faculty members of the Heritage Program “Ties
to the Land” of The Evergreen State College including: David Rutledge, Yvonne
Peterson, and Raul Nakasone. Additionally, I would like to thank Gary Peterson
and Phil Smith. Thanks to the Skokomish Nation’s Natural Resource
Department. Classmates whom deserve thanks include Chuck Kennedy, Larry
Peterson, LaMetta LaClair, and especially Cassandra Sharron. I would also like
to thank my thesis readers Linda Moon-Stumpff and Tyrus Smith. To all the
Skokomish Tribal members who shared their stories I thank you. And finally, to
whom I am most grateful, to my wife Jamie Lyn and daughter to be Madisyn
Rose, my days would have been dim without you. Thank you all.

vii

Introduction
More organisms than could be counted died Tuesday September 19, 2006 in Hood
Canal. Among the dead lay shrimp, Dungeness crab, lingcod, flounder, and other fish
apparently caught in a kill zone created by poorly oxygenated waters. Between midnight
and 6 a.m., a surge of water dangerously low in dissolved oxygen (hypoxic) surged to the
surface killing most organisms in a six mile stretch of the canal. Over a thirty-five mile
stretch many others died or were severely stressed (Lalena Amiotte, personal
communication). Although similar events occurred in 2002, 2003, and 2004 this recent
event affected a greater portion of the waterway and the levels of dissolved oxygen
reached new lows. Anthropogenic and natural forces are believed to be responsible.
Washington State Governor Chris Gregoire has responded by committing millions
of dollars to the restoration of Puget Sounds degraded waters and ecosystem. The State
of Washington’s 59th Legislature passed House Bill 1883. The bill presents several
findings which will provide the outline for this paper.
(1) The legislature finds that Hood Canal is a marine water of the state in
significant peril. (2) The legislature also finds that low dissolved oxygen
concentrations have occurred in Hood Canal for many years and that
these conditions have created a serious environmental health concern.
The legislature further finds that substantial fish kills have occurred in
Hood Canal in recent years, and scientists and other report significant
changes in marine species behavior in Hood Canal. The legislature finds
that the factors contributing to Hood Canal’s low dissolved oxygen
problems are complex and that investigation is needed to understand both
the problem and its potential solutions. The legislature also finds that a
historical perspective is important in understanding Hood Canal’s
problems. The legislature recognizes the tribal elders and other long-term
residents of the Hood Canal area are a great source of knowledge
regarding the history of Hood Canal. The legislature finds these tribal
elders and others may provide critical insight into the history, impacts,
and potential causes of the low dissolved oxygen concentrations
occurring in Hood Canal. (3) The legislature intends to initiate a process
for university students to interview tribal elders and other who have
knowledge of the history of conditions along Hood Canal to collect
information regarding the history and impacts of Hood Canal’s low
dissolved oxygen concentrations (HB 1883 see appendix A).

1

This paper is an effort to illustrate the declining health of Hood Canal and explore
how local ecological knowledge may inform restoration efforts. In this study, a
scientific literature review will be used to describe the declining health of Puget Sound,
with an emphasis on Hood Canal and incidents of hypoxia. Moreover, data taken from
qualitative interviews with long term residents of the Hood Canal region will be used to
further assess and understand the health of this ecosystem.
The objective of this study is to examine how traditional ecological knowledge
(TEK), may inform western science. This will be accomplished by analyzing interview
data documenting the oral histories provided by members of the Skokomish Indian Tribe.
The research question guiding this study is…, how can the oral histories of the
Skokomish Tribe enhance our understanding of the declining health of Hood Canal and
inform restoration efforts?

Literature Review and Scientific understanding
Chapter 1: Human dependence on marine systems.
Human survival and well-being is linked to healthy marine ecosystems. Covering
more than 70 percent of the Earth’s surface, marine ecosystems make up a large part of
our planet. A variety of marine ecosystems exist: oceans, estuaries, lagoons, coral reefs,
rocky subtidal, and intertidal. Oceans are the largest producers of biomass as well as the
source of most of the earth’s biodiversity. Representing the base of the marine food web
are zooplankton and phytoplankton and at the top of this web are mammals such as
whales, seals and humans. This complex marine food web supplies mankind with 20
percent of their food supply and phytoplankton is responsible for generating 90 percent of

2

the Earth’s oxygen (Oceans by the numbers 2006). The oceans generate weather patterns
and play significant roles in controlling greenhouse gasses (PSU, “Ninth Report” 9).
They provide us with food and income as well as nourishment from species we depend
on for animal feed, fertilizers, cosmetics and food additives (Environmental Protection
Agency 2007). Yet, aquatic ecosystems are suffering worldwide. The demand on these
systems is escalating as the world’s population increases. In fact, in the last 150 years
human impact on the worlds oceans have multiplied twenty-fold (Woodward IX).

Figure 1. Map of the Puget Sound Region identifying types of land cover.
Source: http://www.psat.wa.gov/Publications/state_sound07/2007_stateofthesound.pdf

3

Chapter 2: Puget Sound
The health of the Puget Sound ecosystem has been impacted by land use changes
(Figure 1). In recent years, the region has experienced growth and development
attributed with stressing the Puget Sound ecosystem. Alberti et al. (69) provides startling
evidence indicating dramatic land cover changes in Puget Sound between 1991 and 1999.
These changes are most evident in the Puget Sound lowlands due to urbanization. Alberti
(69) reports new development for one percent of the total area during the nineties. Lands
designated as forested have diminished by 55 percent for the same time period. Forest
cover decreased by 8.5 percent and impervious land cover has increased by more than 6
percent in those areas considered highly developed (ie., land with greater than 75 percent
impervious cover). Nearly half of the land cover reduction has occurred within the
Seattle metro area. Seven percent of the Puget Sound region below 1000 feet elevation
is covered by impervious surfaces. In the Hood Canal region during the 1990’s much of
the forest was removed (Figure 2). According to the PSAT (State of the Sound, 9),
biological function is significantly impaired in watersheds where impervious surfaces
near ten percent.

Figure 2. Figure shows forest cover conversion for the Puget Sound and Hood Canal.
Red cells depict recent conversions and gray are those areas developed. Source: Skokomish Natural
Resource Department. Note: resizing this image resulted in the loss of accuracy for the scale-bar.

4

Puget Sound’s ecosystem is increasingly becoming compromised by a variety of
stresses common to marine ecosystems worldwide. Some of these include overharvesting of marine species for consumption, coastal development, eutrophication,
climate change (PSU, “Ninth Report” 13), and the introduction of exotic species
(Environmental Protection Agency 2007). Some regions are more stressed than others.
A steady loss of habitat, increased water pollution, sediments laden with increasingly
high levels of toxins, and alarming declines in the populations of some fish and wildlife
are some of the challenges facing the Puget Sound region today.
Marine ecosystems are a sink for many toxins released into the air, soil, and water
ways. Toxins are just one of the problems jeopardizing marine ecosystems. Marine
waters are the repositories for a wide ranging collection of toxic compounds of both
natural and synthetic origins which can seriously impact the health of the marine
ecosystem. These toxins include industrial chemicals such as Polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) and flame retardants, pesticides, metals, and pharmaceuticals (PSU, “Ninth
Report” 130). As humans are currently the top level consumer of marine fish and
seafood, the toxins released into these ecosystems are returned to humans through the
foods they eat. Consumption of these contaminants by humans and other mammals is
linked to various biological effects including immune suppression and reproductive
failure (PSU, “Ninth Report” 134).
Toxic contaminants harmful to the Puget Sound ecosystem are wide-ranging in
their design as well as the methods in which they enter this ecosystem. Some are
synthesized to meet industrial needs and to protect crops while others are byproducts of

5

fuel combustion or manufacturing. Many of these are known to become highly
concentrated in the environment as a result of human activities (PSU, “Ninth Report”
130). These chemicals are discharged into the environment through vehicle exhaust
pipes, industry smokestacks and outfall pipes, and by pesticide application. Additional
ways which chemicals are discharged into the environment include chemical and oil
spills, landfill leaching, and the deterioration of manmade materials such as tires and
pavement (PSU, “Ninth Report” 130). The Puget Sound Action Team (PSU, “Ninth
Report” 130) lists six metals to be among the highest concern and found in Puget Sound.
These metals are: arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, and tributyl tin.
Additionally, of concern are seven organic compounds: Polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, dioxins and furans,
phthalate esters, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and various hormonedisrupting chemicals (PSU, “Ninth Report” 130). The damage these toxins are capable of
doing is proportional to the length of time they remain in the Puget Sound.
The length of time toxins remain within Puget Sound is longer than in other
urbanized estuaries of North America. This long residence time is the result of the
geomorphology of Puget Sound as well as several physical properties of marine water.
This means that Puget Sound’s biota is exposed to toxins for long periods of time. The
negative impact of lengthy residence time is bioaccumulation. Bioaccumulation is a term
used to describe an increase in the concentration of a chemical in an organism over time,
compared to the concentration of that chemical in the environment (Extoxnet 1993). This
is an issue of concern for all organisms residing in the Puget Sound region.

6

In fact, Chinook salmon in Puget Sound are reported to have between two and six
times the PCB levels than Chinook from Alaska, Oregon and British Columbia (PSU,
“Ninth Report” 129). Chinook Salmon in Puget Sound have between five and seventeen
times the PBDE’s compared to other west coast populations (PSAT, “News Release”
2007). PBDE’s (flame retardants) are expected to surpass PCBs in Puget Sound
foodwebs within the next 13 years; scientists estimate that levels of PBDE’s are doubling
every four years in marine mammals (PSU, “Ninth Report” 130). In the past 20 years,
PBDE concentrations have risen form 50 parts per billion in fatty tissue to more that
1,000 ppb (PSAT, “News Release” 2007).
Endocrine-disrupting compounds are detected in 20 percent of surface water
samples from King County’s lakes, river, streams, and stormwater discharges (PSU,
“Ninth Report” 131). How do these endocrine disrupting compounds affect organisms?
English sole provides one example. Male English sole sampled from various Puget
Sound locations are producing vitellogenin (PSU, “Ninth Report” 131). Vitellogenin is
an egg-protein which is normally only found in female fish. Male fish producing female
proteins is frightening.

Present state of sediment in Puget Sound
The sediment in Puget Sound is assessed by the Washington State Department of
Ecology (ECY). Between 1997 and 1999 sediments were sampled from random
locations throughout Puget Sound in a collaborative effort by the Department of Ecology
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This effort revealed
information regarding the severity, spatial patterns, and the spatial extent of benthic

7

community contamination as determined from measurements of sediment chemistry,
toxicity, and benthic invertebrate analyses. The study discovered that around 1 percent of
the sediment was degraded, 31 percent of the sediments were of intermediate quality, and
68 percent was of high quality (Long et al 2003). Not surprisingly, the degraded samples
were collected within the unbanized bays, especially harbors, and industrial waterways
adjacent to urban centers along Puget Sound (Long et al 2003). The areas classified as
degraded are predominantly located in the most biologically sensitive areas, river deltas
utilized by many species.

Importance of High quality sediments
High quality sediments are fundamental in the maintenance of the ecosystem and
economy around Puget Sound. Following the bigger fish eats littler fish analogy; detritus
feeders living in contaminated sediments pass the contaminants up the food chain. When
these contaminants reach humans through the consumption of fish and shellfish illness
and even death may result. Cancer and aberrant neurological, reproductive, and immune
system issues are additional health concerns possible from exposure to these
contaminants (PSU, “Ninth Report” 134). The characteristics of Puget Sound, its
multiple watersheds, and the properties of marine water contribute to this ecosystems
vulnerability.

Concern over the Health of Puget Sound.
Concern for the health of the Puget Sound has recently reached new heights but
this concern is not a new phenomena. Historic concern over pollution and Puget Sound

8

date back to the 1920’s when shellfish growers expressed concern over pulp mill
pollution (History of Puget Sound Cleanup Efforts 2006). During the 1960’s industries
including pulp mills began to treat toxic waste prior to it being discharged into the Sound.
During the early 1970’s the Washington State Department of Ecology was created to
monitor statewide pollution control efforts and the federal Clean Water Act was passed
(History of Puget Sound Cleanup Efforts 2006).
During the late 1970’s and early 1980’s the closing of shellfish beds, bottomfish
tumors, weakening salmon runs, dead grey whales’ and the Superfund listing of Tacoma
City tideflats increased the publics awareness concerning Puget Sounds health. In 1985
the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority formed and was assigned the task of generating
a water quality plan. This plan was finalized in 1987. In 1992 a state law passed
mandating the enforcement of shellfish protection districts by local governments.
However this law does not require the enforcement of cleanup plans pertaining to
shellfish growing area closures (History of Puget Sound Cleanup Efforts 2006). In 1996
the Puget Sound Action Team replaced the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Puget
Sound Chinook salmon became federally listed as threatened under the Endangered
Species Act in 1999 and in 2005 the Puget Sound Orca whale population was listed as
endangered. Many additional species are federally and state listed (Appendix B). More
recent concerns are focused on the declining levels of dissolved oxygen.
In recent years low levels of dissolved oxygen (DO) in Puget Sound waters are
elevating the concern for the Puget Sound region. Scientists, through measurements
taken from stations placed throughout the Sound, have noted an apparent downward trend
of DO concentration. In fact between 1998 and 2000, 62 percent of the monitoring

9

stations noted low (> 3 mg/l and <= 5 mg/l) or very low (< =3 mg/l) DO (PSU, “Ninth
Report” 107). Between 2001 and 2005 this figure rose to 84 percent, an increase of 20
percent over seven years (PSU, “Ninth Report” 107). Areas of Puget Sound with very
low concentration of DO are Budd Inlet, Penn Cove, Saratoga Passage, Possesion Sound,
Belling Bay, Nisqually Reach, and southern Hood Canal (PSU, “Ninth Report” 107).

Figure 3. Map of Hood Canal. Source: Skokomish Natural Resource Center

Chapter 3: Hood Canal
Hood Canal is the westernmost waterway of Washington States Puget Sound. Its
shoreline is shared by three of Washington’s counties; Jefferson, Kitsap, and Mason.
This glacier carved fjord measures more than sixty miles (100 km) long (FIGURE 3).
The width varies between 0.5 and 4 miles across with an average width of 1.5 miles. The
depth of the Canal ranges from tidal flats to 600 feet deep (Hull and Bryan 1). Linking
Hood Canal with Puget Sound in the north is Admiralty Inlet. Compared to the greater

10

Puget Sound and the rest of Hood Canal, Admiralty Inlet is relatively shallow. Just 55
meters deep this shallow sill limits deep water exchange and guarantees slow circulation
times within Hood Canal (Sound Science 17). Fresh water flows into Hood Canal from
several rivers. The largest, with a flow of 60 m³s¯¹, is the Skokomish River (Warner et al
2). Smaller rivers include the Dosewallips, Hamma Hamma, Quilcene, Duckabush, and
the Kitsap. These rivers combined contribute an additional 90 m³s¯¹ of freshwater to the
upper layers of Hood Canal (Warner et al 2).
Hood Canal extends southwest from Admiralty Inlet approximately 45 miles
where it then hooks northeast at the “Great Bend” and extends 15 miles to its head at the
Union River estuary close to the town of Belfair. The canal is a highly productive
estuary and is strongly stratified. Its circulation is slow compared to the greater Puget
Sound (PSAT “Ninth Report” 107). These traits make Hood Canal susceptible to
eutrophication and hypoxia. Eutrophification is the accelerated production of organic
matter in a waterbody as a result of the addition of nutrients (Bricker et al 1). Hypoxia
refers to a reduced concentration of dissolved oxygen; waters with dissolved oxygen
concentrations of 2 mg/l or less (USGS 2006).
In fact, compared to other regions of Puget Sound, the Hood Canal is reported to
be exceptionally sensitive to eutrophification (Snover et al 25). Algae, or phytoplankton,
require sunlight and the nutrients nitrogen and carbon. When sufficient nutrients are
available free floating phytoplankton (plants) thrive, especially in the summer. The
problem arises as waste products, including dead phytoplankton, sink into deeper waters
where decomposition by bacteria consumes dissolved oxygen. The waste generated from
algal blooms is exaggerated as the algae die and sink, thereby creating conditions where

11

bacterial populations expand and utilize all the dissolved oxygen. This process creates a
hypoxic condition which limits the oxygen available for the fish and benthic organisms
occupying those deeper waters. In the worst case scenario anoxia (absence of oxygen)
may develop.
In 2003, for the first time in Washington State’s history, the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) closed a fishery as a result of water quality
issues (Sound Science 17). The issue was low dissolved oxygen (hypoxia) and WDFW
closed commercial and recreational fishing throughout the Hood Canal for all finfish
except salmon and trout and for octopus and squid. Hypoxic episodes in Hood Canal are
not new phenomena however, it appears these episodes of hypoxia are affecting larger
areas of the canal and lasting for longer periods of time (PSAT, “Preliminary
Assessment” 4).
Limiting the occurrence of algal blooms in Hood Canal historically was a limited
nutrient supply. Since Europeans settled in the region, anthropogenic influences have
intensified the amount of nutrients entering these waters. Humans contribute nutrients to
marine systems in several ways. Bricker et al (1) lists agricultural practices, wastewater
treatment plants, urban runoff, and the burning of fossil fuels as sources of increased
nutrient runoff in estuarine environments. Six primary anthropogenic sources of nitrogen
in Hood Canal waters have been identified. Combined, these sources contribute between
86 and 319 tones per year. The largest contribution came from onsite sewage systems
(35-219 tons). Following sewage in decreasing order of influx are stormwater runoff (1122 tons), Chum salmon carcasses1 (15-22 tons), agricultural animal waste (16-20 tons),

1

As of 2004 chum salmon carcass dumping ceased to occur in Hood Canal. Carcasses are now used for
composting (personal communication with Skokomish Tribal Fishermen).

12

forestry related inputs (0.5-5 tons), and point source pollution (0.3-3 tons) (Hood Canal
Low Dissolved Oxygen Background). Hatchery discharges and fertilizers are an
additional source of nutrient enrichment leading to phytoplankton growth in the Canal
(Sound Science 17). Nitrogen enters Hood Canal by natural means as well.
The influx of marine nitrogen loading is much larger than influxes related to
anthropogenic loading. The Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program (HCDOP) reports
nitrogen loading from seawater flushing in the northern portion of the canal to be
between 8,700 and 31,200 metric tons. Still, more accurate measurements remain elusive
due to the difficult nature of collecting accurate and consistent measurements as well as
questions pertaining to just how much nitrogen each source actually delivers to the canal.

Derelict Fishing Gear
One other source of nutrients deserves mentioning. This potential source of
nitrification is derelict fishing gear. At present, the amount of gear in Hood Canal eludes
quantification yet; some generalizations and specific examples are reported to enable the
reader to elucidate the potential contribution from derelict gear.
Derelict fishing gear consists of lost or abandoned gillnets, trawl nets, purse seine
nets, aquaculture nets, crab, shrimp, and octopus pots, lines, ropes, and various other
fishing gear components (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2002).
Reportedly, this gear is found throughout Puget Sound, Hood Canal, the Strait of Juan de
Fuca, and in many of the rivers where commercial and recreational fishing occurs
(Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2002).

13

While the ability to estimate exactly how much derelict gear is in Puget Sound
eludes us, some estimates have been generated. WDFW reports alarming figures
resulting from the annual 2002 bottom trawl survey for bottom fish (Olympic Coast
2007). Reportedly, this survey led to the recovery of nearly 1,200 metric tons of derelict
fishing gear from Hood Canal, Whidbey basin, and the South and Central Sound.
Additionally, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (Olympic
Coast 2007) asserts an annual 10-20 percent loss of gear for gillnet fishermen. From this
figure and a documented history of permits issued, the Northwest Straits Foundation
(NWSF) estimate several thousand derelict gillnets remain in the Puget Sound. Tom
Cowan of the Northwest Straits Commission’s Derelict Fishing Gear Project believes
hundreds of tons of derelict gear remain in Puget Sound (Kivisto 2002).
Once lost, gillnets can continue to entangle invertebrates, fish, birds, marine
mammals and people. NWC (2005) believes that derelict gillnets impact the environment
for more than 20 years and that gillnets have the greatest impact on salmonids and
seabirds (Table 1). Gillnets also harm habitat. These nets have meshes capable of
trapping fine sediment out of the water column which generate fine layers of silt. Silt,
once deposited over rocky substrate, suffocates sessile organisms (Olympic Coast 2007).
Additionally, nets over rocks and reefs prohibit access to caves and depressions important
to juvenile and adult rockfish. Finally, concerning diver safety, gillnets are one of the
most dangerous types of derelict fishing gear to be recovered in Washington waters
(NWSC 2002).

14

Location of
net
S. Lummi
Is (2003)
Bellingham
Bay (2003)
Lopez Is.
46
different
nets

Specific
Species
12
Chinook

salmon
sp.
147

1 steelhead;

68

3 Chinook
1 harbor
seal

2

seabirds
1 seabird

43

Dungeness Rockfish/lingcod
crabs
Unspecified
number

1

Some of each

Table 1. Location and mortality figures for some derelict gillnets removed from Puget Sound between
2003 and 2005. http://www.nwstraits.org

Estimating the mortality from derelict gillnets is complicated. Northwest Straits
(2006) reports that tallying the observed dead fish during recovery operations provides a
significant underestimate of that gears impact on the biological community. To support
this claim the NWC (16) provide two reasons. One is that recovery operations are
conducted during winter and early spring when visibility is high but adult salmon are
scarce. The second reason is that derelict nets provide good habitat for starfish as these
nets are a consistent source of food for the starfish. After nets are present for a period of
time, populations of large starfish become established and these starfish rapidly consume
any organisms entangled in the net. Starfish are only one of the many scavengers
consuming trapped organisms. Often, it is only the bones left behind providing
researches with mortality estimates. The NRC (18) documented one to three foot deep
piles of bird bones under one derelict net near the San Juan Islands. Presumably these
bones had drifted down over the years from decomposing carcasses. Hypoxic conditions
in Hood Canal can lead to increased mortality affecting scavengers’ ability to consume
bycatch. As dead organisms accumulate, bacteria populations expand and further
diminish deep water DO concentrations exasperating the problem.
15

Natural Resources Consultants, Inc (NRC) has been contracted by NWSC to
manage the derelict fishing gear survey’s and removal operations. As of 2005 NRC had
invested more than 87 days effort removing derelict gear from locations throughout the
sound including: Dungeness Bay, Birch Bay, south Lopez Island, Lummi Island, Everett
Bay and Port Susan Bay. Gear recovered included 686 derelict crab, shrimp and octopus
pots/traps, and 260 nets. These nets alone covered 72.6 acres (3.15 million square feet) of
habitat (Horst et al 1). Trapped in this gear were 498 fish, more than 1,100 living and
deceased crabs, four dead marine mammals, and 90 dead marine birds (Horst et al 1). It
is important to remember that this mortality count represents only a weeks worth of
capture. Considering anthropogenic sources of eutrophication, the impact of derelict
fishing gear remains uncertain.
Eutrophic conditions are influenced by anthropogenic influences other than
nutrient additions. For example, it is acknowledged that modifications to estuarine
flushing rates occur from the building of dams and modification of stream channels. In
Hood Canal the largest of the rivers, the Skokomish River has been dammed since 1926.
Additionally, development and dredging alters the ability of estuaries and wetlands to
assimilate nutrients and destroys habitat for filter feeders and sea grasses capable of
cleansing water (Bricker et al 2). The shoreline and wetlands of Hood Canal have been
heavily modified.

Hood Canal History
During the 1990’s work was underway to determine whether or not Hood Canal
was undergoing changes regarding the frequency and intensity of its naturally low DO

16

conditions, and importantly if changes were occurring, were anthropogenic influences to
blame (Newton et al. 2002). Several data sets exist which have allowed the creation of an
historical timeline. The University of Washington has monitored these marine waters
since the 1950’s. Since 1975, the Washington State Department of Ecology (ECY) has
monitored the Puget Sound, including Hood Canal, as a response to the Federal Clean
Water Act. Since 2003, a citizen volunteer effort organized through the Hood Canal
Salmon Enhancement Group (HCSEG) has tested Hood Canal water weekly. The data
shows that levels of DO seasonally reach low levels in southern Hood Canal but that in
recent years the episodes of hypoxia are covering larger areas (PSU “Ninth Report” 107),
persisting for longer periods of time (Newton et al. 2002) , and spreading further
northwards (PSAT, “Ninth Report” 107; Newton et al 2002). In 2004 deepwater oxygen
concentrations were determined to be at an all time low between Dabob Bay and the
Great Bend (PSAT, “Ninth Report” 107). In 2006, the low DO levels seen in 2004 were
surpassed. Since this time, concern regarding Hood Canal has steadily increased. So too
has the realization that the Canals natural sensitivity to eutrophification is intensified by
human activity (Puget Sound Action Team and Hood Canal Coordinating Council 2004).

Chapter 4: Hypoxia in Hood Canal and some properties of water
Hood Canal, due to its geomorphology, high nutrient inputs, and slow flushing
bottom waters is especially susceptible to eutrophification and associated hypoxic events.
Over the past several years levels of dissolved oxygen have declined so much that many
fish, shellfish, and invertebrates are at risk (Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program
2000). This problem is especially severe in the southern half of Hood Canal. The

17

problem is attributed to three factors. 1) Poor water circulation and flushing, 2) water
stratification which hinders deep waters from mixing with surface waters, and 3) the
increased anthropogenic input of nutrients, especially nitrogen (Hood Canal Dissolved
Oxygen Program 2000). Examining the causes of these three factors uncovers local
features which influence the severity of a hypoxic event in Hood Canal. Below I will
describe some of these.
The amount of dissolved oxygen within the waters of Hood Canal is determined
by both biotic and abiotic factors. Abiotic factors include the waters temperature, density,
salinity, nutrient concentration, and stratification and circulation. Biotic factors involve
photosynthesis and the rise and fall of algal communities. Each of these properties is
important in understanding Hood Canal’s susceptibility to eutrophication and hypoxic
events.
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
In general dissolved oxygen concentrations vary in fresh and saline water as a
result of several physical properties of water and the biological processes of
photosynthesis and respiration (PSAT, “Ninth Report” 105). Fresh water DO
concentrations are lower than DO concentrations in saline water. Additionally, seasonal
fluctuations are observed. Generally in the southern Hood Canal the average dissolved
oxygen increases throughout the winter and into spring (Warner 2007). DO levels are
increased in the upper layer of the water column when aquatic plants photosynthesize and
when the water column is mixed from wind action. Additionally, the deep waters of the
Canal can be replenished when colder deep waters from outside the canal spill over the
sill at Admiralty Inlet and mix with surface waters containing higher levels of DO

18

(Warner 2007) see figure 4. This occurs as a result of ocean upwelling; a seasonal event.
Upwelling along the Pacific Ocean coast occurs during the late spring and into summer
when northerly winds along the Pacific coast initiate the delivery of cold, highly-saline,
nutrient-rich waters to the surface. This water enters the Strait of Juan de Fuca and
replaces the deeper waters of Puget Sound and eventually Hood Canal.

Figure 4. Figure shows a mechanism by which deep waters in Hood Canal are replenished with more
oxygenated waters. Source: (Hood Canal expose 2006).

Phytoplankton blooms are another seasonal event that impacts the algae growth in
the photic zone. These blooms may eventually reduce oxygen concentrations in deeper
water. During the summer, the flushing mentioned previously slows considerably and
often stops altogether thereby retarding the inflow of oxygen rich waters. Therefore,
during the late summer Hood Canal experiences its lowest levels of oxygen (Warner
19

2007). As algae die off and settle to the bottom of the canal, bacteria use oxygen to
decompose the algal material. In waters which are not well mixed hypoxic conditions
may persist. When DO diminishes beyond a certain threshold some marine organisms,
especially those immobile, may become stressed and or die.

Salinity, Temperature and Density
Salinity, temperature and density are influential in the degree of stratification
observed in Hood Canal. Seasonally, these influences fluctuate. The temperature of
surface waters in Hood Canal are the result of changes in air temperature, cloud cover,
solar radiation, and wind speed. During the summer months of July and August the air
temperature, solar radiation, and water temperatures reach their maximum; likewise,
during February these influences are at a minimum (PSAT, “Ninth Report” 101). During
the spring and early summer when snowmelt in the mountains fills the streams and
empties into Puget Sound, salinity levels are low at the surface. During late summer and
through to December, salinity peaks as a result of depressed river flows and upwelling
(PSAT, “Ninth Report” 102). Remember, salinity and temperatures influence the waters
density. As a result of the seasonal cycles of both temperature and salinity described
above, the surface waters of Hood Canal and Puget Sound tend to be less dense during
spring and summer than in the fall and winter. Fresh water is less dense than saline water
so fresh water inputs tend to remain on top of the denser deeper saline water. These
variations in density affect the potential circulation in the water column. When density
gradients in the water column become large, the water column is said to be stratified.

20

Stratification
Stratification describes a layered water column. It occurs in Puget Sound and
Hood Canal when less dense fresh water floats atop heavier, cooler, and more dense
saline water. In Puget Sound the intensity of stratification is influenced most by the input
of riverine waters and the level of solar radiation (PSAT, “Ninth Report” 103). During
spring and summer, when fresh water input is greatest, the stratification in the Sound is at
its greatest. During fall and winter, in the greater Puget Sound, as the density gradient
diminishes the water column becomes well mixed or less stratified (PSAT, “Ninth
Report” 103). Stratified waters limit nutrient mixing and oxygen circulation. Hood
Canal due to its geomorphology is always more stratified than the greater Puget Sound.
In fact, Hood Canal is strongly stratified for most of the year and the bottom waters at the
southern end the Canal may only be replaced only once per year at the tail end of summer
if at all (Warner 2007). When the Puget Sound is strongly stratified, Hood Canals deep
waters do not get flushed and the deep water dissolved oxygen concentrations are not
replenished.

Nutrient concentrations
Nutrient concentrations tend to be limited in the upper layers of marine waters
as a result of phytoplankton utilizing these nutrients in the photic zone. Phytoplankton
have a high demand for nitrogen and phosphorous. These nutrients can be replaced in
several ways: coastal upwelling, vertical diffusion from deeper waters, and surface runoff
from streams, rivers, treatment plants, and stormwater (Sound Science 16). In late
summer, when recreational use and the residential population around the Canal are

21

greatest, the oceanographic conditions favor “the creation of low levels of dissolved
oxygen” (Puget Sound Action Team and Hood Canal Coordinating Council). As the
human presence and influence in the Hood Canal watershed has intensified over the years
so too has the canals supply of nitrogen and organic materials. However, these
replacement sources may result in over enrichment of the surface waters especially when
influenced by humans. When this happens, harmful algal blooms may occur.

Biotic influences on dissolved oxygen: Algae Blooms
In systems such as Hood Canal, stratification, nutrient enrichment, and limited
circulation often lead to algal blooms (Sound Science 16). Algal blooms deplete surface
nutrients and deep water oxygen through photosynthesis. Photosynthesis occurs as algae
utilize sunlight filtering into the water column. Therefore, photosynthesis is limited to
the upper portions of the water column penetrable by sunlight. In stratified waters an
algal bloom eventually settles into deeper waters where it decomposes with the aide of
microorganisms (Sound Science 16). The result of these biotic processes is an oxygen
gradient in water columns with the most oxygen rich waters near the surface.

In some

cases water mixing can replenish oxygen concentrations in deep water. However, in
waters which are stratified (eg. Hood Canal), deep water is not mixed and becomes
oxygen limited. In summary, oxygen in marine systems is influenced by the seawater
density and stratification, organic production/respiration, seawater flushing or circulation,
and anthropogenic nutrient or carbon loading. Hood Canal is well stratified, nutrient rich,
experiences limited flushing and circulation, and is heavily supplemented with nutrients
from anthropogenic sources.

22

Chapter 5:
Puget Sound Partnership: Governor Gregoire’s plan for restoration.
In December 2005, Washington State’s Governor Chris Gregoire appointed 21
leaders to the Puget Sound Partnership. These leaders represent local, state, federal, and
tribal governments as well as building and timber industries, shellfish growers,
agriculture and environmental interests and port authorities. Governor Gregoire
dedicated 52 million dollars to restore and protect Puget Sound, declaring that “cleaning
and protecting Puget Sound must be at the top of [Washington’s] state agenda” (Puget
Sound Partnership 2006). The Partnership was given 10 months to “develop
recommendations for preserving the health and ecosystem of Puget Sound, and to help
educate and enlist the public in achieving recovery of the Sound by 2020” (Puget Sound
Partnership 2006). Vital to the recovery of the sound are restoration efforts aimed at
improving water quality, habitat, species and ecosystem health over the long term.
In an effort to address the Governors objective of a healthy functioning Puget
Sound ecosystem by 2020, the Puget Sound Partnership submitted in December 2006
their final recommendations for action. Restoring an ecosystem as large and complex as
the Puget Sound will require a holistic, or system wide, approach (Puget Sound
Partnership 2006). Elements deemed critical by the Partnership include
setting priorities for action and measuring results; assigning responsibilities for action and holding
the parties to their commitments; having the ability to make binding decisions that are clear to
those affected by them; tracking and reporting of the effort, and accounting for results.

If a healthy ecosystem is the objective, a clear definition of a healthy ecosystem is
required. The Puget Sound Partnership (2006) identifies three important properties which
identify a healthy ecosystem:

23

•
•

•

The system is “resilient to changes in natural- and human-caused changes in
environmental conditions
has built-in redundancy in its parts so that not all members of a species or habitat
type are limited to a single location. Spreading the risk of catastrophic losses of
species or habitats improves the ability of the ecosystem to withstand localized
losses of key components
has a representative sample of the diversity of species and habitat types that
characterized its historical state.

Therefore, in the efforts to sustain a functioning Puget Sound ecosystem beyond the year
2020, these three properties must be enhanced, restored, and protected.

As pointed out by the Partnership, past restoration efforts have focused on
individual ecosystem elements such as an individual species or single sources of
ecosystem degradation. These new recommendations maintain that success will occur
only though a system wide approach which focuses on the connections between land,
water, and species. It is the interconnectedness of these elements which sustained the
Puget Sound ecosystem for millions of years. With these connections in mind, the
Partnership identified eight priorities. They are: protect Puget Sound habitat; restore
damaged forests, rivers, shorelines, and marine waters; accelerate control and clean-up
of toxic pollution; significantly reduce pollution from human and animal wastes and
other sources; significantly reduce polluted stormwater runoff; ensure adequate water for
people, fish and wildlife, and the environment; protect ecosystem biodiversity and
recover imperiled species; build and support our human capacity to protect and sustain
the environment (Puget Sound Partnership 2006).

24

Immediate Priorities
From the priorities mentioned above, Governor Gregoire requested that
Partnership identify five actions “where state leadership and significant funding will
demonstrate a serious commitment for a sustained, vibrant ecosystem that supports
communities and our rich natural resources” (Puget Sound Partnership 2006).
The first priority involves cleaning up the areas with inadequate or failing septic
systems, working first on those septic systems located in sensitive marine areas.
Protecting habitat is the second priority. The PSP contends that legal compliance
with existing habitat protection laws that protect habitat, water quality, and stream flows
be well funded by the state. These lands should be purchased from land owners willing
to sell parcels located along estuaries, marine shorelines, and within watersheds to
enhance habitat important to aquatic and terrestrial species of concern.
The third priority insists restoration projects focus on forests, rivers, shorelines,
and marine waters.
The fourth priority is focused on toxic pollution. This pollution is a serious threat
to the Puget Sound ecosystem and accordingly the Puget Sound Partnership has
suggested five areas affected by toxic pollution which the state should generously fund.
They are: the acceleration of clean up efforts for every polluted site within one half mile
of the Puget Sound shoreline; harboring a tug at Neah Bay to support the prevention of
catastrophic oil spills; a strategy to phase out, limit, and control the release of toxics into
the environment2; increasing the financial assistance for water recycling projects aimed
at the reduction of demand for potable water as well as limiting the discharge of toxins,

2

April 17, 2007 Gov. Chris Gregoire signed into law a measure which prohibits the manufacture, sale or
distribution of most items containing PBDEs (La Corte 2007).

25

nutrients, and pathogens into lotic systems. The last point will aid in reducing the
demand for potable water thereby leaving more water in the rivers and streams.
The fifth priority involves significant reductions in stormwater runoff. At present,
eighty percent of the Puget Sound population’s stormwater is actively managed. In order
to improve upon this eighty percent, PSP advocates; coordinating efforts between the
state, federal, and local governments to measure results; enhancing programs that
maximize stormwater infiltration and meet water quality objectives with incentives,
technical advice, education, funding, and changes in regulation; actively support projects
supported by the Department of Transportation and the Department of Ecology which
seek basin wide approaches to stormwater management. The PSP recognizes a need to
highlight low impact development projects and encourage local governments to develop
and promote low impact developments as well as to prioritize urban stormwater retrofits
where runoff is responsible for environmental degradation. Finally “immediately form a
task force charged with developing a more complete set of actions to address the adverse
impacts of water pollution” (Puget Sound Partnership 2006).
This plan appears comprehensive, it looks good on paper. But, how does this plan
for action differ from the previous attempts to conserve the Puget Sound? Since 1983
an impressive looking list of events has occurred (Appendix C). Yet, since the late
1970’s the Puget Sound ecosystem has become increasingly degraded. The most
obvious way that this new plan differs from previous attempts lies in this approaches
effort to restore the ecosystem from a system wide approach as mentioned above.
Humans have lived in the Puget Sound region for thousands of years and
according to the histories preserved in oral traditions, and supported by western science,

26

these recent problems with ecosystem health are a new phenomenon. In 1900 there
were only 250,000 people living in the twelve counties around the Puget Sound. In 1940
this population reached 1 million. Projected for the year 2025 it is estimated that
between 4.7 and 6.1 million people will be living around the Sound (Sound Science 69).
With this increase in human presence and the already heavily degraded environment, the
stresses on Puget Sound’s ecosystem are quickly intensifying and the room for failed
attempts is rapidly diminishing.
According to the PSP (2006), measuring progress during restoration from an
ecosystem wide approach requires defining large scale or ‘ecosystem-scale’ goals. The
stated objective is a healthy Puget Sound ecosystem. Concerning the best strategy it is
important to figure out ‘how much’ is needed to classify the system as healthy as pointed
out by the PSP (2006). “For many of these outcomes, more discussion between a
scientific team, the larger scientific community, and the policy leadership of the new
entity will be needed to set these quantitative standards” (PSP 2006). Absent from this
sentence is any mention of the regions long term residents. However, House Bill 1883
acknowledges the contributions possible from the Hood Canal regions long term
residents. For thousands of years prior to European settlement, the Native peoples and
the components of the Hood Canal ecosystem coexisted. During this time those three
properties identified by the PSP which identify a healthy ecosystem remained intact. It
seems reasonable that the local tribes could provide critical information concerning the
past conditions and the relationships among the regions organisms. This is supported by
Calheiros et al (684) who point out the deep understanding local people often possess of

27

their environment attained from generations of living, oftentimes sustainably, within
these environments.

Chapter 6: Historical Perspective
Benefits of Participatory research and TEK
Scientific research is more often than not utilized as the source of acquiring
biological data. The Puget Sound Partnership provides a very succinct definition of a
healthy ecosystem. A portion of this definition maintains that a healthy ecosystem “has a
representative sample of the diversity of species and habitat types that characterized its
historical state”. One way to do so is to maintain records of the various species
assemblages over time and to specify what is representative from these records. However,
historical records may be less than ideal due to at least three methodological
circumstances. First, the records may only cover a short time period. Second, the
information recorded may be incomplete or insufficient in providing the desired details.
Third, concerning how the record is to be used, the historical reference may be too broad
or narrow. Fortunately, acquiring biological data can be obtained in other ways.
Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) is one approach.
Some advocates of TEK claim it capable of improving the scientific research
through sometimes better information (Huntington 1270). TEK is derived from extensive
observation of a particular area and its associated species. This information often extends
years beyond an individuals own lifetime by means of oral histories or the sharing of a
resource among users. Therefore, I will attempt to utilize TEK to inform scientific
findings pertaining to the health of the Hood Canal ecosystem. This will be

28

accomplished by analyzing the oral histories of Skokomish Tribe members and utilizing
such data to explain how members of this community characterize the environmental
history and overall environmental quality of this particular area and its associated species.

Chapter 7:
Methodology
The PSP (2006) advises a record be kept to track the most valued species, habitats,
and water quality attributes in an effort to “learn as we proceed about the mechanistic
linkages among ecosystem elements and how human actions affect them” (A-7). I
believe some of this information is already known; available to those who listen to the
oral histories of the Skokomish people and other long term residents of the region. It is
my intention to analyze transcripts derived from the Skokomish Tribe during interviews
collected by participants of The Evergreen State College Native American Studies
“Heritage” Program. The purpose of HB1883 and the “Heritage” Program is to “provide
critical insight into the history, impacts, and potential causes of the low dissolved oxygen
concentrations occurring in Hood Canal”. By analyzing the transcripts from the Heritage
interviews, specifically responses to the questions in Appendix D, new information
pertinent to my research question may be uncovered. Of particular interest is how these
oral histories document: 1) Species Composition, i.e., what species were present in the
past, 2) Habitat Utilization, i.e., which habitats they utilized, 3) Species Assemblages and
Interactions, i.e. what sort of relationships exist among the organisms, 4) Management
Approaches. Together such information will speak directly to the objective of the PSP
(2006) who seek to “better understand the mechanistic linkages among ecosystem
elements and how human actions affect them”.

29

The ‘Heritage’ interviews took place between March and June 2007. During this
time fifty interviews were to be conducted. Individuals were sought out based upon age
and occupation, as well as an individual’s interest to participate. Tribal fishermen were
the focal population of the Heritage programs interviews and tribal elders were assumed
to have the greatest amount history to share. Fishermen represent a large portion of the
Skokomish community as a substantial portion of the tribe’s economy is and was
centered on various fisheries. Not all interviews occurred with tribal fishermen directly
as several of the interviews occurred with the families of these fisherman as well as tribal
elders. The most consistent method of locating an individual occurred in the form of
referrals and recommendations from tribal members some of which were involved in the
Heritage program. I participated in the majority of interviews analyzed below.
Additionally, of the six transcripts analyzed for this study I transcribed half of them.
Interviews were recorded with a video camera. The audio portions of the tapes were
transcribed with the computer program Express Scribe v4.11. As transcripts were
completed, I analyzed them for information pertaining to the historical species and
habitat compositions of the marine, riparian, and upland habitats as remembered by the
Skokomish people. Additionally to validate the objectives of HB 1883 I sought
information related to the history, impacts and potential causes of low dissolved oxygen
in Hood Canal. Finally, in consideration of the objectives of the PSP and pertinent to the
restoration of the Puget Sound Ecosystem, I extracted information pertinent to sustainable
resource use.

30

Research Design
This ethnographic research design was adopted to recover information held by the
Community of the Skokomish Indian Tribe with regard to the low dissolved oxygen
concerns centered on the Hood Canal. The research model is derived from a combination
of local and scientific knowledge. The recent scientific knowledge for the Hood Canal
region is extensive and provides the basis from which survey questions were constructed.
Additionally, this scientific knowledge provided a base from which to interpret survey
responses and to better understand the knowledge derived from the Skokomish
community. “The researcher learns through careful listening, interpreting and
conversing with individuals” (Calheiros et al 690).

The Skokomish People
Residing along the southern end of Hood Canal is a population of people who
have been present since time immemorial3. These people are the Skokomish. The
Skokomish people are the decedents of the Twana Indians, a Salishan people who
historically occupied the Hood Canal drainage basin (Culture and History of the
Skokomish Tribe). First European contact occurred in 1792. After signing the PointNo-Point Treaty in 1855, the Skokomish moved to their reservation on Hood Canal near
the mouth of the north fork Skokomish River. The reservation boundaries, defined
during the 1870’s, encompass more than five thousand acres of forested uplands and a
floodplain, wetland mosaic heavily influenced by river and tidal forces. Currently the
tribe has 750 enrolled members.

3

“Immemorial” is defined as “reaching beyond the limits of memory, tradition, or recorded history.”

31

The Skokomish people were selected for research due to the fact that they have
been in the region since time immemorial and because of their intimate relationship with
the environment. Twana society was based on, and still is to a large degree, wild food
resources including fishing, hunting, and gathering (Government to Government Training
Manual). Tribal fisherman and other long term residents of the region are assumed to
have an intimate knowledge of the Canal’s ecosystem health as well as historical
information derived from multigenerational fishing family lineages.

Chapter 8: Findings
Introduction
In the passages presented below the voices of those being interviewed are
presented as direct quotes allowing the reader the opportunity to hear each voice
responding to specific questions. In the first passage Delbert Miller, a Skokomish
Spiritual Leader and tribal elder, describes habitats certain species historically depended
on, what species were present, and factors he believes are responsible for Hood Canal’s
degradation. In the passages that follow, many of Delbert’s memories are echoed. Like
Delbert Miller, each of these voices reveals changes personally witnessed or shared
among family members through oral histories. These changes cover wide ranging topics
including the ways in which the resources are managed, harvested, and available; the
causes of declining water quality, species abundance, habitat availability and hypoxic
events. Some of these interviews touched on possible solutions and the importance of
recording the oral histories of tribal elders before that knowledge is lost forever. This
prophecy below illustrates how the Skokomish realize the TEK possessed is valuable.

32

Delbert Miller: We were told of a prophecy by a man named Tah-lu(g) – he said that there would be a day
coming where the land, and the sea, and the sky would become dirty. There would be a people
who are going to come and change everything, and that what we would call “spoh-lotch” – means
“the world turned upside down”. The coming of the people from Europe would come and change
everything – the world would turn upside down. And when that happens, the land, and the sea,
and the sky would become dirty, and our culture would almost fade out. And then there would
come a time when they begin to pay attention to the environment, there would be a day coming
when, my grandmother said in my lifetime, I would see that they people would turn and begin to
ask our Indian People about our teachings: about the land, and the sea, and the sky. And it’s true,
I have seen it.
Alright. My name is Delbert Miller. My family name is Smut-Koom and it means – as if you looked across
a field or down a beach and seen heat waves rising up… and they fixed it to mean “that coming
from within – right here”….the beloved…that kind of warmth. It’s a family name and I was
named after my father.
I had the good fortune to be around a number of elders growing up: great-uncle, Archie Adams, and my
grandmother, Georgia Miller, Lee Kosh, Ida Kosh, Bennet Cooper, Catherine Cooper, Louisa
Pulsifer, Emily…not as much as much Emily but I thought to spend time. So I treasure those
memories and what I was told…I was taught - and over time in our culture I was taught very
important things to remember.
I was told about the numerous villages on Hood Canal – the Tuwaduk villages – major villages…One of
the things they told me to remember was about a village just north of Potlatch State Park, a place
called Ts-hal-but and it means “A Place of Herring” – it was a herring spawning ground, there was
also a longhouse right there – pretty significant …
I was told the way they use to fish there for herring and how important it was that these herring would
spawn right at the place called Ts-hal-but, and that area has been destroyed by Tacoma City Light
powerhouse and the boat launch they built; they destroyed the herring spawning ground that was
so highly regarded and treasured by the Tuwaduk People. That beach is no longer there [it] has
been covered-up and changed by the way they work the boat launch – they filled in that entire area
now - covered the beach.
It's important to have these memories. I have seen these changes myself and heard the stories from our
elders. I have seen, in my time, the change at the mouth of the Skok River, where growing up as a
boy we would dig clams, geoducks. Now the silt has filled in so much that you can nearly walk
across on a very low tide, all the way across to Ball Point, across from the Union. There is very
little water there now; the silt is filling it all in. There is very little of any geoduck anymore, and it
has interfered with the flounder that we used to enjoy gathering; twice a year we would go: in the
middle of winter, and midsummer. There were different types of flounders. We had many
members gathering flounders-those are almost gone too. And the crab is different. The cockles
we used to gather, the way they were, have changed as well due to the bulkheads, the silt, the bark
and the sawdust from the earlier mills. The cockles, we used to use a rake and get a lot of them-a
couple of buckets and never over-harvesting. It was easy to get a lot of them. So, I have seen
those changes…
Now, those kinds of areas have been disturbed by … bulkheads that people built and the sawdust, and the
log dumps-the bark-and the people themselves poured gravel over or moved these large rocks,
because they had to build the bulkhead; build up their beach. And if that wasn't enough, they had
their open septic tanks that would pour from the drains septic system right onto the beaches. I
have seen those myself - I walk the beach, quite often. So I have seen a decline in some areas of
the beaches. The different types of clams-the types of horse clams, a lot of those beaches are gone,
and a lot of types of muscles are fading away. And the kinds of grass, basket grasses, I've seen
change on the shoreline.

33

This analysis is divided into four sections: 1) Habitat Utilization and Loss, 2)
Changes in Species Abundance, 3) Management Approaches, and 4) History, Impacts,
and Potential Causes of low dissolved oxygen events. In some passages the reader may
feel that a portion of the information belongs in another section. For example, in
Delbert’s passage below while discussing river habitat alteration and a decrease in delta
depth, Delbert describes a decrease in the presence of sturgeon. This passage is included
in its entirety to provide the reader an example of the connectedness of the ecosystem.
Placing the sturgeon portion in the ‘change in species abundance’ section of these results
would exclude the cause and effect relationship Delbert alludes to.

8.1 Habitat Utilization and Loss
Rivers and Deltas
Land owners in the Hood Canal watershed have diked many of the rivers over the
years in an effort to contain flood events and to reclaim flood lands for farming and other
desires. These dikes have altered habitat as well as ecological processes essential to
some organisms.
Delbet Miller: We’ve seen the farmers up in the Skok[omish] valley dike and bulldoze everything they
could and changing the course of the river in their efforts to stop the flooding as a result of the
Tacoma dam. So they would build these big, long dikes, and they are still there today even though
they were found and charged with this illegal building of dikes – changing the river’s course –
hydraulic violations. But [it] changed the course of the river and washed away some of our old
village sites that run along the Skokomish River. And they also washed away some of the places
that were seen as gathering areas. Certain plants, and even trees, were washed away because of
the way they put the dike systems up. Some of these were specialized areas where [Skokomish]
would gather for spears, bows, basket grasses, or medicines.

I have seen the difference in the Belfair area – the rivers over there…Union River, Mission Creek.... And
the bay – you can wade out a long way in there – can wade out far out in there. I believe it’s
filling in because of the way they have changed the course of the rivers. They’ve also seen the
same thing in the Quilcene Bay. I was talking to some of the folks, Hood Canal Management,
who say that if we don’t take quicker actions, in 30 years that Quilcene Bay will no longer be there

34

because of silt will fill it all in. That was a large village site there – the Quilseit People. The kinds
of clams I have seen change there, they were called Jack-knife clams. I haven’t seen any there [in
recent years]. Sturgeon – I don’t see very many sturgeon in the Quilcene Bay like there use to be.
Or in Twadoh Bay – when I was younger, I remember them. Those are fading away as well ruining their spawning grounds. And that’s a sad thing, these sturgeon seeing them disappear that
way: 12-footers. There are 2 kinds … and I don’t see very many of any of them. Once in a while
a fisherman will catch one and there will be a lot of talk about them.

The Skokomish River was dammed in 1926 to provide light to the city of Tacoma.
This event changed the rivers carrying capacity. Gary Peterson believes the rivers
altered state negatively affects its ability to care for the Hood Canal.
Gary Peterson: On the Skokomish River for example when I grew up in the early fifties, the places we went
to swim for example, at that time we could jump off of the bank down into the water maybe six or
seven feet, hit the water and go down another maybe eight or nine or ten feet down to the bottom
of the river. Today, the bank is gone, you can step off of the bank into the bed of the river and
your feet come to the bottom of right away. So the river is much shallower than it used to be
because it’s filled up with the things coming out of the mountains as a result of the clear-cuts. So
the river is less able to care for itself let alone contribute to a healthy canal so that would have
happened probably from the time I was ten years old, eight or nine or ten, up until recent history,
and I am sixty-two now.

Changes in Shoreline Habitat and shoreline associated species
Shoreline development has altered great stretches of shoreline along Hood Canal.
Gary Peterson: When I was a kid there used to be vast stretches of darkness along highway 106 and 101
where there just wasn’t anybody, nobody lived there and we would drive at night on our way back
home or going someplace it would just be dark. There wouldn’t be any houses, but now it’s just
constant, it’s almost the whole length of the either road of 101 or 106 there’s houses build up
along the hill which there never used to be when they started to appear it was along side of the
road and gradually more and more they moved up the hills are now occupying the hillsides and the
hilltops and right next to the [water].

With this development, many eel grass beds have receded or vanished altogether.
Eel grass abundance changes are concerning to many. Its role in the ecosystem is
imperative. Its diminishing abundance threatens many organisms as a variety of juvenile
marine species depend on eel grass habitat for refuge and food. A map showing the
change of eelgrass habitat in Puget Sound and the Hood Canal is in Appendix F.

35

Lalena Amiotte: Eelgrass is a huge, huge concern. The eelgrass is what I like to call the nursery for the
babies. And if the eelgrass is gone, where are all the babies going to be reared up? It’s a very,
very important part of the Hood Canal ecosystem. And it’s very disturbing to see…WDFW has
been doing … surveys … for many years on what the distribution of eelgrass is in the Puget Sound.
Hood Canal for the past three year has had the most consistent decline in eelgrass population as
well as abundance and that’s just the fact. Hood Canal, out of the entire Puget Sound is the
number one impacted area for decline area for eelgrass. It’s extremely disturbing when you’re
looking at the resources of the, you know, the salmon and the Dungeness crab. They need that to
foster their babies. Without the babies we have no resource. So that’s definitely an issue. I’ve
definitely noticed changes.

Lalena develops this idea with several reasons she believes responsible for eel
grass and beach reduction.
Lalena Amiotte: There’s a lot of changes in the shoreline. A lot of it has to do with development. People
are able to go to Mason County and get permitting to put in piers and bulkheads. Bulkheads are
another reason why eel grass is declining. Bulkheads are concrete right up against the shoreline. I
am sure you’ve seen them off of people’s houses. When the waves come it changes the water
movement, it changes the physical characteristic of the tidal influx; it smashes up instead of a
flowing motion. Bulkheads have been linked to declining eel grass cause that motion changes.
There’s a lot more bulkheads and there are a lot more piers all along Hood Canal because there are
more people moving here and buying property. Mason and Jefferson counties still allow through
the permitting process these pieces of development to go in. So I would say the entire Hood
Canal’s changed in regards to that. Loss of sandy beaches, typically the entire Hood Canal is
more of pebble area versus sandy. When I think of sandy beaches I think of Mexico or Southern
California. The beaches here never really were sandy, mixed with sand definitely but more of a
cobble pebble texture. The erosion, there’s erosion all over the Hood Canal. Is that a natural
occurrence or is that caused by man? That would be speculation. I can say that at the Potlatch
State Park area the past 100 years where Potlatch State Park sits now which is in this little area
right here off of the delta that used to be an area where logging, where they took the logs, put them
on the barges and then send them out up the Hood Canal and then typically over to Tacoma or
Seattle. So, that area that the park sits on right now, if you were to dig down 2 feet you’re going
to hit sawdust. It’s basically just been filled over and that was a logging central area of Hood
Canal. And there’s several spots, Nally’s which is at the very base of the river, that was another
area where logs were shipped out the state park and then all along here, cause there was massive
logging in the early part of the century, and they were just getting the logs out. Potlatch state park
I’ve noticed in the past 2 years that when we have high tides and extreme weather events the
shoreline is being eroded away and you can actually see that fill, the wood chips and you know all
of that fill. So that is a real area where I’ve noticed some difference. Also, where the Skokomish
fish hatchery is, which is at the very bottom of Hood Canal off of highway 101 just south of the
Potlatch state park, that area we’ve actually filled in to stop erosion from occurring. And again
that’s the high tide and extreme weather events that are causing that. Some would speculate that
the water is coming up. Is that global warming? Maybe. But, we’ve noticed that. Tom Gulley
told me that, it must have been about a year ago, that he’s noticed that, cause he’s the one that
literally built that hatchery… I don’t know-40 years ago. He said that when that hatchery was
built the water was much lower, and he was talking feet. So, he’d definitely seen some changes
and I take what he says as probably true. Cause he’s a lot older than me. So that’s what I can say
about erosion and what I’ve seen.

36

Attempts to restore eel grass beds in Hood Canal have met only limited success.
Lalena links these complications to algal blooms.
Lalena Amiotte: My gut says algae [is responsible for the decrease in eel grass abundance], because eel
grass, of course, is a plant and it needs the sunlight and if we’re having this huge algae bloom
that’s blocking the sunlight from getting to the eel grass [eel grass will be unable to grow]. More
nitrogen, like I said, going in causes these algae blooms to be bigger and bigger every year and
that’s more light that’s being blocked for the eel grass.

Kelp has disappeared from the southern Hood Canal too.
Lalena Amiotte: And then kelp I remember when I was a girl, a teenager, kelp used to wash up on the shore
on this delta area (showing map) we used to walk, my dad kind of lives up near Potlatch State
Park and we used to walk down this delta everyday with our dogs and we used to ride our bikes. I
remember kelp, cause we used to whip each other with them, across the face. So I definitely
remember that I can’t the last time I’ve seen it since I’ve been an adult. But I definitely remember
whipping my sister with kelp when I was a kid.

Changes in forest cover
Logging decimated the forests in the Hood Canal watershed after European
settlement. The impacts of logging the uplands were mentioned by several of the
interviews I conducted as well as those interviews conducted by others in the Heritage
program. Most often the impacts of forestry were related to an increase in sediment
washing downstream and into the canal. Below, Lalena describes how forest
regeneration has generated an altered tree species assemblage. Additionally, Lalena
describes the impact of the Skokomish River Dams on local forests.

The map she

refers to is attached in appendix E.
Lalena Amiotte: Ok as far as the trees go this area used to be an Evergreen forest. This whole area was
Evergreen and when the logging people came in a century and a half ago basically this area was
clear-cut, this entire area was clear-cut. So the trees that we see now are second to third, some are
even fourth growth, from the old growth forest. Right now we’ve got several companies that
manage the forests and the private home owners shave a small share of what’s going on with the
timber industry as well as the national park system and the state and DNR. The changes have
gone from evergreen trees to trees that shed their leaves and those were obviously were not
originally here. The reason that those trees, such as the alders, alders have been planted following
the old growth trees because they grow very quickly and they’re of higher value. Long time ago
cedars were worth a lot of value but the cedars aren’t really worth that much [now] but the alders
are. So when people go and replant they’re planting alders it’s kind of a mixed bag type thing.
The state makes you plant a mixed forest. If we were to really get back to the way that the

37

geographical area looked it would all be evergreen. What changes have I seen? I’ve seen a
dramatic disturbing change in the Skokomish valley, which is this area here. It runs along the
Skokomish River. It starts up in the mountains, the Olympic Mountains and runs down. What
I’ve seen in my lifetime is the trees that are in the Skokomish valley are dying. And, primarily it’s
the Evergreen trees that are dying; the cedar trees, the pine trees. The alders actually do very well
in the area and the reason that the cedar trees and the pine trees are dying is because of a high
ground water issue. The reservation is affected by the high ground water as well. What happened,
you’ll see on the map here Lake Cushman that Lake Cushman is not a natural lake. This is a
dammed lake and there are power generators on 2 parts on the river. The north fork was dammed
off completely and then this other outlet here that drains off into where the Potlatch area of Hood
Canal is. When …the Skokomish River was dammed off it had major hydrological impact on the
Skokomish valley and that caused the river to change its channel and direction and it also caused
sediment cause the river used to just rage, rage, rage sediment really did not build up. Now the
river is slower so we see sediment that over time has gotten higher and higher and higher. And
with the logging, that I mentioned before, with clear cutting all that sediment washes down and
when it washes down it goes into these channels here into the Skokomish valley. Now the river is
higher cause there’s more sediment, it’s moving slower and when it rains there’s flooding events.
So the whole hydrological system that was in place 150 years ago is completely different and the
end result is that we now have a high water table and the most frequently flooded river in the state.
That’s causing the trees to rot out from the bottom. The alder trees are able to maintain, a lot of
them may fall over from flooding events or whatever, but the cedar trees and the pine trees they
are just rotting from the bottom. So if you drive in the valley you’ll notice that a lot of the
evergreen trees are dying or are already dead and that’s something I’ve seen in my lifetime. So
that’s what I know about trees.

8.3 Changes in Species Abundance
Fishes
The Skokomish have fished the Canal for many generations. During a couple of
the interviews I participated in, a decrease in the number of fish present was mentioned as
well as an overall decrease in the size of fish caught. Sturgeon is mostly gone according
to Delbert and several people spoke of smelt disappearing. Smelt are culturally important
to the Skokomish so I assume they have a heightened awareness of this fishery.
Lalena Amiotte: A long time ago smelt was as common as candy. Everybody was eating smelt…even 20
years ago every feast or everything there was always smelt. We don’t see that now, and I don’t
know why. I tend to think that it’s just not as abundant as it used to be and that’s something that’s
I’ve witnessed in my lifetime. We used to eat smelt all the time and we don’t anymore. And I
don’t know why. I just don’t think the population is out there. The smelt schools used to be really
big you could see them like if you were walking at Potlatch State Park you could see schools of
smelt; we don’t see that anymore. So I think that you know over time those populations have
declined.

Two elders I interviewed remembered ling cod utilizing the intertidal zone. Fred
Miller was one of them.
38

Fred Miller: The Cod – just north of the dock there, there’s rocks there the Cod would go lay their eggs up
in there, and we’d go get some, we ate some, use some for bait, you know. When the tide goes out
– that’s why the Cods laying like that so their eggs are protected half the tide, so they don’t get ate
up – and I don’t know, I haven’t seen that for a while, you know.

Shellfish
Nearly every person interviewed spoke of changes in the abundance of shellfish.
The Skokomish people have always depended on these resources and the memories of
past abundance and recent population declines were universal.
Lalena Amiotte: Well, again in this area, which would be the Skokomish River Delta the river feeds into
the canal here, but this is all saltwater influenced and all shellfish beds. This area when I was a
kid you could walk the entire beach and it was huge, huge abundance of clams, oysters, and
muscles. And I would say probably in the past 7 years that area has been completely stripped
down to hardly anything. There was a reseeding effort down there last year but we won’t see the
benefits of that, if any, for another 2 years. My theory on what changed that is illegal harvesting,
it’s right by the road so people will pull in and go out and get shellfish and I think a lot of illegal
harvesting has been done down there.

Crabs
The availability of crabs has diminished too. Larry shared information gathered
from a friend about crabs in the intertidal zone. Deeper water populations have declined
too. Lalena’s husband finds little payoff crabbing in the deeper waters of southern Hood
Canal.
Larry ‘Wong’ Peterson: A friend of mine was telling me the other day that he's noticed that you used to be
able to roll rocks down on the beach, and there would be all these itty bitty little crabs. As a kid
we used to like to go down and catch these little crabs, but they're just not there anymore to speak
of.
Lalena Amiotte: The crab… We have noticed in our family that the populations are declining. South of
Ayock Point which is the exclusive area of the tribe, the crabbing is not very good, the numbers
aren’t good; commercially it’s not a good situation. We aren’t gonna make a whole lot of money
if your setting your pots down here. But because the tribe has treaty rights up here (gestures
towards the northern portion of Hood Canal) most of the guys are going in this area which would
be south of Dabob Bay and into Dabob Bay.

39

Sea Cucumbers
Sea Cucumbers were previously found in the intertidal zone. Today, these
organisms are found below eighty feet.
Fred Miller: There was places below the flats where there was probably thousands of sea cucumber, at that
time we could see them, but they’re not there any more, so everybody kinda harvested them out.
They’re there. I think they are more deep water now. I know my son, he does some scuba diving
and goeducking and stuff and he says that he sees some, but you know, when I was a kid, like I
say, on some of those flats, I’d drive over them and they were just all over. Even on the beach
doing some clam digging we’d roll them up on the beach. You never see that anymore.
Lalena Amiotte: One thing that we have noticed is there is a real big interest in the Asian buyers in the sea
cucumbers. Apparently that’s some sort of delicacy in the Asian markets and there are a whole lot
of Asian buyers that are trying to get our Geoduck divers to tap into that market. But the sea
cucumbers that grow in the Hood Canal grow very very deep; they grow a lot deeper than most
divers would want to go down. So I am not sure if that market will every open up. Maybe there
are some people who would be interested in it but typically a divers not gonna go down below 60
feet. Typically where the real sea cucumber beds are is about 80 feet. Which a diver could do but
it’s a little bit more strenuous and more dangerous.

Marine Mammals
During one of the interviews marine mammals were mentioned. These mammals
were porpoise and with this story came a story of the porpoise hunters. Porpoise hunters
traditionally held a highly respected place in Skokomish society. These hunters along
with the porpoise have ceased to exist in the southern portion of Hood Canal.
Delbert Miller: We also don’t see porpoises in Hood Canal. We don’t see porpoises anymore and I don’t
know if that was due to early gill netting or why it is that they don’t return anymore. Every once
in a while with an El Nino a couple will get blown into the mouth of the Hood Canal. But we
don’t get them anymore.

Birds
Noting an absence of pigeons due to sport hunting, Gary speculates that their loss
coincides with an apparent decline in elderberry trees.
Gary Peterson: There used to be elderberry trees for example with purple berries on them that the birds ate
and I don’t know whether the birds disappeared first or the elder berry tree disappeared first but
you don’t see the elderberry tress around anymore. And there used to be pigeons, there used to be
a large pigeon population and there was a point by the [inaudible] creek where there used to just
be cars lined along the highway where they would stop and park their cars there and go in there
and shoot pigeons and I think they managed to shoot them all which I think they were responsible

40

for the spread of the elderberry trees, the pigeon were, and once they were gone the trees couldn’t
survive anymore either.

Increases in abundance
Not all of the organisms in Hood Canal are diminishing. In response to the
question “Are there any animals (fish, birds, mammals) that you used to see in the canal
but no longer do?” Gary made reference to the abundance of several animals declining
and one animal which has become more abundant. Of the two bird species which he
believes were more common in years past, the “Red Headed Woodpecker” (Melanerpes
erythrocephalus) is probably a Red Breasted Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus rubber) as
Melanerpes is found in the Eastern United States and Sphyrapicus is similar in
appearance and is found along the west coast.

Gary Peterson: No I cant think of anything except I think of things like Red headed woodpeckers that we
used to see pretty often which you hardly see any more and its to the point now if you do happen
to see one you think ‘Hey, there’s a Red Headed Woodpecker’. There were birds that we called
wax wings, I don’t know what the real name for them was, but there used to be a lot of those
around and you don’t see many of those any more. There are things like that I guess if you were
to think about it …Skunk. Skunks, we used to see skunks around and get into trouble with them
when I was a kid. You don’t even see them smashed on the road anymore like it was at that time.
So I think something like skunks are no longer as populous as they used to be. There are not as
many of them. So I guess if you were to really probe your mind you’d probably think of quite a
few things that aren’t there anymore that used to be. Well one other, just along the lines of what
aren’t there any more, we may be interested in what is there that wasn’t there before, thinks like
opossums. We never had…I never saw them when I was a kid and now it seems like they are
everywhere. So there are some things that have gone away and there are other things that have
appeared like opossums.

8.3 Management Approaches
Changes in resource management
A primary difference in resource use was sifted out of the words of Delbert and
Gary. Both men refer to changes in the fishing practices utilized today by both Indian
and non-Indian fishermen. Gary describes how the year round fishery remembered

41

many years ago was a fishery that supported many fish species and he relates this to the
comparatively limited fishery in existence today.
Gary Peterson: Well historically there would have been a year round fishery there would have been fish
coming into the canal and streams in the canal year round so it would have been spring Chinook
and fall Chinook and Sockeye salmon, chum salmon, silver salmon; over the years it dwindled so
that by the time the commercial fishery had built up there was basically a silver run, a Coho
salmon, and I guess the chum run, the dog salmon, and that had a lot to do with the state hatchery
on the Skokomish River. They would release Chinook and silver salmon from that hatchery. So it
was largely a hatchery run.
Cassandra Sharon: Has this changed?
Gary Peterson: Well yeah, it changed again because the state changed their hatchery management
philosophy so basically they were just releasing chum salmon, dog salmon, and so this has become
a giant chum run and not much of anything else.

Delbert explains how the fishery today has a greater impact on the marine
ecosystem. Delbert explained how during red tide events many fish would swim up close
to the shoreline. In earlier years these stressed fish, although an easy catch, were left
unmolested. Below Delbert describes the resource impact from bycatch.
Delbert Miller: I have seen changes in the kinds of fishing. We mainly fished in the river when I was
growing up. Some of the guys fished in the Canal – very little though - not like you see today. I
have seen change in the types of fishing in the Canal, a lot of gill nets at first always drifted with
their boats and then they began to tie off the beaches. I have seen the great numbers of crab and
bottom fish and birds caught in … those nets. I have seen Indian and non-Indian fish like that.
And I have seen Indian and non-Indian drift fishing – let your line out and just drift with the
current. I have seen Indian and non-Indian having to cut their gear off because maybe there were
too many sharks or they were hung-up on something on the bottom. Maybe they had caught too
many fish, but they would have to cut them off. Out of sight, out of mind, but I know those nets
are still there. So I have seen that change.

In recent times the resources have not been respected. Harvesting smelt while
they attempt to spawn limits the sustainability of the population.
Delbert Miller: I have come across numbers of … people harvesting smelt in the spawning areas. I didn’t
understand why that was allowed but…; down near Twanoh State Park. I felt they should have
been allowed to spawn, but they had their smelting seasons. In some of these areas, things like
that were allowed.

The Skokomish way demanded a level of respect be given to the resources which
they depended upon. Skokomish belief included the idea that resources would be taken

42

away if these resources were not respected. This is apparent in the practice of honoring
the first salmon caught as well as where they built structures and in how they value
ecosystem knowledge and understanding.
Delbert Miller: There were many places along Hood Canal that were seen as sacred in the old day.
Nobody was allowed into the further reaches of the Hamma-Hamma area. They were holy
grounds. Nobody was to live in there. Only at the mouth of the river, but nobody was to go up
inside the hills and build. It was holy ground. The giant trees that were in there – the kinds of
spirit lived in there. Now they are all covered in houses or logged off…It’s important because
some of these things need their purity in the place they live – their sacredness. Like many things,
if they are not respected, then they will begin to be taken away.

Resources were managed more sustainably in years past. Earlier fishing practices
exhibited a concern for the river and the resource.
Delbert Miller: in the early days, they use to build, all the way across the river, fish-traps. They would
have names for every part of a fish-trap and river. And they had where they had to open these
traps at a certain time of the night time – let fish go by. They were good managers of the resource
in those days. We see remnants of those today in what we call “eddies”. Dennis Allen built one
of the last archer ones; it only went partially across the river and it was done to make deeper
pockets because the river had begun to fill in – fill in with gravel and silt; no longer the deep holes
or eddies in the river due to the Tacoma City Light dam. Everything began to fill-in where even
the level of the water was higher than the surrounding land causing great floods year after year.
So the People resorted to building these eddies to create these deeper pockets: some would fall
trees, and some tried stakes to build deep pockets into the river and it was a great advantage. And
it was done in a way of consideration for the fish who would have a place to rest, as well as for the
fisherman [who] would be able to catch them. Now they don’t allow building of eddies in the
river like that – a wall type eddy to create deep pockets.

During Lalena’s interview Cassandra, Lalena, and I discussed changes in fishing
practices over time and whether or not Lalena believed the current practice of beach
seining was sustainable.
Cassandra Sharron: What fish/shellfish were harvested and how? Have there been changes in fishing
practices over time? Have fishing locations changed? Have you noticed or are there stories of
changes in the harvest of herring, clams, and Dungeness crab?
Lalena Amiotte: Well (referring to the power point again to show specific species) there are several species
here or natural resources that we’re harvesting. Traditionally I think that’s probably where we
should start, with the fish. A long time ago, there was not, right now, the real main bread winner
here is beach seining where people will set up nets; and they kinda go in like a purse string type
thing. They stretch the net all the way out into the Hood Canal, they let the fish run into the net
and then they come around with the boat and kinda trap em in there. Then the people are on the
shore and they pull them out; that’s beach seining. So a long time ago people did not do that. The

43

way that they did it a long time ago was they were on the river. And they had poles and they had
nets and they were river people. River fishing now is it’s different. Everything is different,
everything has changed; the flow, the amount you can catch, and then there is money involved.
People are out fishing because they are trying to feed their families basically. You can catch a
whole lot beach seining vs. on the river. You can definitely make money on the river but certainly
not what you would beach seining. For example my husband could spend the day out on the river
and probably make 2 to 3 hundred dollars one day. Beach seining is 3 or 4 grand depending on
what the market is. It’s completely different. The amount of fish that are coming up the canal, you
can catch a lot more. A long time ago that didn’t make sense, cause they weren’t doing it for
commercial, they were doing it for sustenance. So you wouldn’t go over harvest a bunch of things
for sustenance, it wouldn’t make sense. So that’s the fishing thing.
Brian Cary: Do you think beach seining is sustainable?
Lalena Amiotte: It’s sustainable in that we have co-management with the state hatchery system. If there
were not state hatcheries and rearing of fish, that would certainly not be sustainable. Because the
wild population versus the hatchery population is, it’s not comparable. There are some issues with
the issues, notably sea lice. Sea lice are fish lice and they attach to the fish and they’re more
common on hatchery fish than on a wild fish but what we are seeing now is that the hatchery fish
and the native fish are you know, kinda swimming around together and just like kids at school,
they brush up next to one another and then they end up with the sea lice too. So that’s an issue.
Sea lice if it’s real bad infestation on the fish it will kill it. It’s an issue that not only the state of
Washington is dealing with but also in Canada and British Columbia and also Alaska. So that’s an
ongoing problem. But to answer your question as far as the sustainability of a wild fish problem
for commercial purposes I don’t see that as sustainable for very long if it were at all.

8.4 History, Impacts, and Potential Causes of low dissolved oxygen events
History
Most of the responses to questions about the history of hypoxic events spoke of
the same events mentioned in the literature. New information regarding the impacts of
these events on the organisms affected and the economic impact to the tribe were
uncovered. Concerning the September 2006 hypoxic event in Hood Canal Lalena
describes the enormous amount of mortality she witnessed.
Lalena Amiotte: O.k. So the only fish kills that I’m aware of would be in recent times going back into
before the fifties I wouldn’t know of any….The first fish kills that I think we had in Hood Canal in
recent times was 2002. And every year since then we’ve had small events, last year however was
a real large event. The event that occurred last year extended all the way from…when it occurred
we sent all of our staff pretty much to comb beaches and see what the extent of it was. So we saw
all the way from the Skokomish River Delta up to Hoodsport, past Hoodsport to Eagle Creek,
Jorsted Creek, and to the Hama Hama. There was also documentation in Dabob Bay which is up
by Quilicene, so we’re looking at a 35 mile stretch of Hood Canal; where we saw real extensive
mortality. What was really surprising to me in witnessing that was…the extent of species; it was
like everything that was in the water died. There were jellyfish, and even up north where you
would think that the oxygen would be much higher, um on the Hama Hama River we witnessed I

44

think three mud sharks which are, you know, four feet long and maybe a foot and a half wide, you
know huge creatures that washed up on the shore. So this really covered everything, not just the
bottom feeders, but just everything that was in that water column when that oxygen level hit um
just washed up on the shore. It was a huge, huge event.

Impacts: biological and economic
Not every organism died during the 2006 hypoxia event. Many organisms were
only severely stressed. Below Lalena describes the stress observed in schools of Rock
Fish.
Lalena Amiotte: We saw fish, um Rock Fish. Rock Fish are definitely bottom fish, um, right at the surface.
I mean within an inch of the surface and there was schools….all over at the surface. Then at some
point the media came in and they were taking pictures and you know showing the footage of it
all…um but that was really the only time. It’s very strange to see that; a Rock Fish lives in very,
very deep in the water and to be even at 30 feet, that’s not very typical. So and then to have them
just right at the top, and then you could see their little, you know, mouths kind of gasping at the
surface it’s very strange. It was kind of a surreal experience to see something like that.

Lalena describes the economic impact of red tide events in her community.
Lalena Amiotte: We see those all the time. The large algae blooms. Red tide…red tide hit the Hood Canal
last year in August and it completely shut down the Oyster harvest in the Hood Canal. I think that
what happened last year was the first year that anybody every knew of that red tide actually hit the
Hood Canal. But what ever reason when the red tides hit, its always up in the straits of Juan De
Fuca, last year was the first year that that ever happened here. So the Oyster harvesting, that
supports a lot of people on this community… my family included cause my husband does oyster
harvesting. Having a month of it being shut down…literally that’s hundreds of thousands of
dollars that impacted this community. And once one tide hits the public health comes, the
department of health with the state of Washington, there absolutely can be no harvesting at all and
no sales. So the whole fishery was completely shut down. There were a lot of people at that point
that ended up going to general assistance programs through the tribe. And most people in this
community there is a lot of resources so general assistance is a last; on a lot of reservations general
assistance you have to, because of the situation and the economics and there are no jobs, but in
this community there are a lot of resources that people are able to tap into and the unemployment
is not very high. Last year in August when the red tide hit that was a real issue. And it tapped into
that GA [general assistance] program and it certainly directly impacted native families here.

Causes
Algae blooms are not a new occurrence, however the intensity and frequency is
apparently increasing.
Lalena Amiotte: Um as far as the algae blooms, Jennifer and myself and we always have a boat driver, we
see those weekly; to say that that wasn’t going on twenty years ago…that may be a stretch. Algae
blooms, being little tiny plants in the water if it’s sunny they’re gonna grow. So that’s a pretty
common occurrence. But then some would argue that feeding all the nitrogen that’s going into the
Hood Canal from the fertilizers that people are using and the you know and water from failing

45

septic systems, that’s pure nitrogen going in. The Skokomish valley being agricultural and there’s
a lot of livestock. I would guess probably seven to eight hundred head of cattle in the Skokomish
valley. When it rains or it floods which the Skokomish River is the number one flooded river in
the state of Washington. When it floods it [cattle waste] all goes into the river channel and the
river empties into the Hood Canal. So that’s more nitrogen going in and feeding those little tiny
plants causing the algae blooms. So some would argue, which I tend to agree with, that there’s
more nutrients going in feeding these little plants causing bigger algae blooms and causing more
impact onto the Hood Canal. So um you know human activities definitely are linked to you know
what’s going on with algae. But we see it weekly.
BC: Is that year round?
Lalena Amiotte: Yeah. The only months that I would say we really don’t have algae issues would be
during the ah, real heavy rainy season starting in October probably going to February, but
February for some reason, it seems like we get like a week or two weeks of sun, that’s been kinda
what’s been going on the past few years. We’re seeing massive algae blooms in February, which
historically we didn’t have that. So why are we getting sun? Some would say its global warming,
who knows.

Chapter 9: Conclusions
The objective of this study was to establish a better understanding of the declining
health of Hood Canal and to inform restoration efforts. This objective and the
legislature’s assumptions concerning the possible insights attainable from long term
residents of the region have been justified herein. The information provided by these six
interviews provided detailed information related to various habitats, particular species,
resource management, and low dissolved oxygen events both historically and in the
present.
In Hood Canal the Skokomish are intimately familiar with the environment. This
intimacy can benefit science. Since anthropogenic influence has apparently tipped the
balance for Hood Canal’s ability to sustain itself, reflections on past practices may
illuminate the corrective actions required. While restoration efforts are currently
underway, the rapid increase in anthropogenic forces in the region, and new concerns
such as climate change, promise to test and possibly limit the PSP’s attempts to restore
this ecosystem. It is important that these histories are recorded before they are lost.
46

How Oral Histories Might Benefit Restoration Efforts
Analyzing these transcripts uncovered a couple of ways TEK may benefit
restoration efforts. By identifying species assemblages in various portions of the
ecosystem in years past a metric is provided to measure restoration success. This point is
apparent when comparing the comments by Lalena and Fred regarding sea cucumbers
(Parastichopus sp.) and their habitat. According to Doughton (2004) there are more than
30 species of sea cucumbers which inhabit Puget Sound’s waters. These organisms
inhabit waters ranging from the intertidal zone to 249 meters deep (Lambert 1997).
Recognizing habitat preferences enabled this author to recognize the disappearance of
one or more cucumber species. When Lalena mentioned a potential market for sea
cucumbers she stated that cucumbers are only found below 80 feet. In these deeper
waters divers are at greater danger and have more difficulty harvesting them. This
prohibits the opening of this fishery in southern Hood Canal. However, tribal elders
remember sea cucumbers living in the intertidal zone. The significance is that in recent
years one or more intertidal sea cucumbers species likely has gone extinct at least locally.
Information such as this could be useful to the PSP in establishing restoration reference
conditions.
Another way in which TEK may benefit restoration efforts concerns the
Skokomish River. This example illustrates how TEK derived from oral histories can
enhance the knowledge derived empirically.

This is apparent from Gary Peterson’s

interview. Gary’s knowledge from living in the Skokomish River valley broadens the
knowledge derived through scientific inquiry (Stover et al. 272) simply from a
conversation. His knowledge is derived from “a lifetime of driving along the roads along

47

the canal and seeing the changes” and from childhood experiences. Gary recalls a
decrease in Skokomish River channel depth of approximately 15 feet in places.
Conversely, Stover et al (272) conducted research showing that the bed of the Skokomish
River has risen by between 5 and 6 feet. Interestingly, a notable difference exists
between Stover et al and Gary’s recollection concerning how much the Skokomish River
has risen. Stover et al (273) analyzed information from two gauging stations. One was
located along the South Fork Skokomish and the other further downstream along the
mainstem Skokomish. Gary spoke from the perspective of places he swam as a child.
Both sources of information are credible yet they yield different results concerning the
magnitude of aggradation. Utilizing both forms of knowledge provides a more complete
picture of how the Skokomish River has changed over the past 60 years.

Study Limitations
This study explored the range of information attainable from the oral histories of
the Skokomish people. It merely scratches the surface concerning how much information
may exist. The Heritage program intended to identify 50 individuals. At the end of the
project only 24 individuals were interviewed. Thirteen individuals who originally agreed
to interviews later declined. Considering the 750 enrolled members of the Skokomish
Tribe, the six individual voices heard within this analysis likely under represents the
voice of the tribe as a whole. Additionally, of the six interviews analyzed herein included
are two sets of brothers; Larry and Gary Peterson and Delbert and Fred Miller.
Interviewing brothers likely limits the breadth of the perspectives depicted in this study.
The analysis could be broadened by analyzing the other 18 interviews conducted by the

48

Heritage program. Additionally, although the Skokomish Tribal members represent the
majority of long term residents in the Hood Canal region, other non tribal long term
residents reside in the area and this analysis has not included them. Expanding the
interview effort to other long terms residents is likely to provide additional information.
Likewise, interviewing some of the other 744 Skokomish tribal members as well as the
regions other tribes will increase the recorded TEK.

The potential for the future
The elders have knowledge attained over multiple generations that could likely
save us many years of learning if we listen. The Skokomish recognize this and several of
them expressed to me the lack of interest by the scientific community in the knowledge
they possess. Advocates of TEK state that increasingly the scientific community is
becoming more aware of the benefits of TEK and caution that valuable information is lost
each time an elder goes to the other side. Augusta Blacketer sums up these thoughts well
in her final statement and in response to the question, “is there anything you would like to
add?”
Augusta Blacketer: you know this is a good project, and so many people in our community, its so pushed
on us that we learn from books, you know you got to get an education, you got to learn from
books, you have to get books and read and read and read and I like to read I mean, of course I like
to read, but when it comes down to this, like in our Skokomish community its not reading a book,
its um oral history, we have to take time to, we have to listen to our elders, and I believe I listened
to my grandpa a lot but when it comes to questions like this, you really miss your grandpa, you
miss your grandma, so you know nothing can bring that oral history back once they’re gone. So
that’s that I mean, its important that you do this but…like right now we did lose a lot of our
elders...and I don’t want to say it’s too late, cause it’s never too late, but it does make it, the
struggle that much harder to find answers when they’re gone. So just to keep that in mind.

The importance of restoring Puget Sound and the Hood Canal can not be over stated.
Washington State’s economy depends heavily upon its resources as do the cultures of this

49

regions tribal people. The fact that long term residents can provide historical information
regarding ecosystem components and connections is obvious from the handful of
interviews I analyzed. The legislature was correct in their findings regarding Hood
Canal:
a historical perspective is important in understanding Hood Canal's problems; tribal elders and
other long-term residents of the Hood Canal area are a great source of knowledge regarding the
history of Hood Canal; tribal elders and others [can] provide critical insight into the history,
impacts, and potential causes of the low dissolved oxygen concentrations occurring in Hood Canal
(HB: 1883).

The work initiated by the Heritage Program has enhanced the understanding
regarding the history, ecology, and resource use within the Hood Canal watershed. The
PSP is attempting a new approach to restoration. This approach is a holistic, ecosystem
wide approach. The interviews analyzed herein support that this holistic vision should be
incorporated into the research methodology for restoring the Sound. The information
built upon since time immemorial is lost with the passing of every elder within the
Skokomish Tribe and others. Additional interviews, well structured questions, and
further analysis are likely to provide valuable insights into the ecosystem of the Hood
Canal.

50

Literature Cited
Alberti, M., Christie, P., Marzluff, J. and J.J. Tewksbury. 2007. Interactions between
Natural and Human Systems in Puget Sound. In: Sound Science: Synthesizing
ecological and socioeconomic information about the Puget Sound ecosystem.
2007. Mary H. Ruckelshaus and Michelle M. McClure, coordinators; prepared in
cooperation with the Sound Science collaborative team. U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NMFS), Northwest Fisheries
Science Center. Seattle, Washington. 93 pp.
Amiotte, Lalena. Personal Interview. 17 May 2007.
“Aquatic Biodiversity: Marine Ecosystems.” Environmental Protection Agency. 22 May
2007. 23 May 2007. <http://www.epa.gov/bioiweb1/aquatic/marine.html>.
Bricker, S.B., C.G. Clement, D.E. Pirhalla, S.P. Orlando, and D.R.G. Farrow. 1999.
“National Estuarine Eutrophication Assessment: Effects of Nutrient Enrichment
in the Nation’s Estuaries”. NOAA, National Ocean Service, Special Projects
Office and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science. SilverSpring, MD: 71
pp.
Calheiros, D.F., A.F. Seidl, and C.J.A. Ferreira. “Participatory research methods in
environmental science: local and scientific knowledge of a limnological
phenomenon in the Pantanal wetland of Brazil”. Journal of Applied Ecology. 37
(2000): 684-696.
“Culture and History of the Skokomish Tribe.” skokomish.org. 22 November 2004. 2
February 2007. <www.skokomish.org/historyculture.htm>.
Doughton, Sandi. In Puget Sound, Divers Harvest Sea Cucumbers. The Seattle Times.
17 August 2004.
Extoxnet. A pesticide information project of cooperative extension offices of Cornell
University, Oregon state university, the University of Idaho, and the University of
California at Davis and the institute for environmental toxicology Michigan State
University. September 1993. 13 May 2007.
<http://extoxnet.orst.eduu/tibs/bioaccum.htm>.
“Government-To-Government Training Manual”. Washington State Governor’s Office
of Indian Affairs. <www.goia.wa.gov>.
“History of Puget Sound Cleanup Efforts.” The Olympian Online. 13 October 2006.
4/15/2007. < http://www.theolympian.com/127/story/45317>.
Hood Canal Expose. 2006. March 22, 2007. <www.courses.washington.edu/>.

51

Hood Canal Low Dissolved Oxygen Background Information. April 2005. 15 March
2007.
<www.hoodcanal.washington.edu/documents/PSHCDOP/hcdop_backgroundfinal
.pdf>.
Horst, S., J. June, and T. Cowan. Impacts of human activities: Derelict fishing gear in
Puget Sound. Proceedings of the 2005 Puget Sound Georgia Basin Research
Conference.
Hull, T.E., and A. Bryan. Solving Hood Canal’s Low Oxygen Problem, The Onsite
System Factor. PSAT publications. 2005.
Huntington, H.P. “Using traditional ecological knowledge in science: methods and
applications”. Ecological Applications. 10:5(2000):1270-1274.
“Immemorial.” Def. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. 3rd
ed.1992.
Kivisto, Sharon. Derelict Net Removed From Water Near Stuart Island. San Juan
Islander. 22 June 2002. 28 May 2007.
<http://www.sanjuanislander.com/state/dnr/net.html>.
La Corte, R. Fireproofing chemical may face backlash after phase-out. The Seattle
Times. 22 April 2007.
Lambert, B. Sea Cucumbers of British Columbia, Southeast Alaska and Puget Sound.
Vancouver: UBC Press. 1997.
Long, E., M. Dutch, S. Aasen, K. Welch, and M. Hameedi. . Chemical Contamination,
Acute Toxicity in Laboratory Tests, and Benthic Impacts in Sediments of Puget
Sound: A summary of results of the joint 1997-1999 Ecology/NOAA survey.
Washington State Dept. of Ecology, Publication No. 03-03-049 and NOAA
Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS CCMA
No. 163. Washington State
Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington. 2003.
<http://www.ecy.wa.gov.biblio/0303049.html>.
Miller, Delbert. Personal Interview. 19 April 2007.
Miller, Fred. Personal Interview. 17 April 2007.
Newton, J.A., S.L. Albertson, K.V. Voorhis, C. Maloy, and E. Siegel. . Washington
State Marine Water Quality, 1998 through 2000. Washington State Department
of Ecology Publication No. 02-03-056. 2002.
<http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0203056.pdf>.

52

Natural Resources Consultants, Inc (NRC). Northwest Straits Commission/ Foundation
Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Program. Report prepared by Natural Resources
Consultants, Inc., Seattle, WA. 2004.
Northwest Straits Commission (NWSC). Derelict Fishing Gear Removal Protocol.
Protocol prepared by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and
Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) in response to SB 6313.
2002.
Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative. Derelict Fishing Gear Removal. 2006.
22 March 2007. < http://www.nwstraits.org/PageID/142/default.aspx>.
“Oceans by the Numbers.” Earthwatch Institute. 2006. 5 April 2007.
<http://www.earthwatch.org/site/pp.asp?c=dsJSK6PFJnH&b=1742185>.
Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. “Derelict Fishing Gear”. 7 February 2007.
22 May 2007.
<http://olympiccoast.noaa.gov/protection/derelict/derelict_data.html>.
Peterson, Larry (Wong). Personal Interview. 17 April 2007.
Peterson, Gary. Personal Interview. 10 April 2007.
Puget Sound Action Team (PSAT): Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program: Water
Quality Challenges. 10 August 2000. 25 February 2007.
<http://www.psat.wa.gov/Programs/hoodcanal/hc_challenges.htm>.
---(PSAT) News Release. New Report Shows Continuing Troubles in Puget Sound.
January 17, 2007.
--- (PSAT). State of the Sound 2007. Publication No. OPSAT 07-01. 2007.
<http://www.psat.wa.gov/News/releases/news08_19.htm>.
--- (PSAT). Preliminary Assessment and Corrective Action Plan. 2000.
<http://www.psat.wa.gov/Publications/PACA_html/paca_intro.htm>.
--- Ninth Report of the Puget Sound Assessment and Monitoring Program. Puget Sound
Action Team. Publication No. PSAT 07-02. 2007.
Puget Sound Action Team and Hood Canal Coordinating Council. Hood Canal Low
Dissolved Oxygen, Preliminary Assessment and Corrective Actions Plan. Version
1. 6 May 2004. 13 February 2007.
<http://www.psat.wa.gov/Publications/hood_canal/HC_PACA.pdf>.

53

Puget Sound Partnership (PSP). Sound Health, Sound Future: Protecting and Restoring
Puget Sound. Puget Sound Partnership Recommendations. December, 2006. 19
February 2007.
<http://www.pugetsoundpartnership.org/reports/final/final/Final_wAPPx_lr.pdf>.
Snover, A.K., P.W. Mote, L. Whitely Binder, A.F. Hamlet, and N.J. Mantua. Uncertain
Future: Climate Change and its Effects on Puget Sound. A report for the Puget
Sound Action Team by the Climate Impacts Group (Center for Science in the
Earth System, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Oceans,
University of Washington, Seattle). 2005
Sound Science: Synthesizing ecological and socioeconomic information about the Puget
Sound ecosystem. 2007. Mary H. Ruckelshaus and Michelle M. McClure,
coordinators; prepared in cooperation with the Sound Science collaborative team.
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
(NMFS), Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Seattle, Washington. 93 pp.
Stover, S. C., and D.R. Montgomery. Channel change and flooding, Skokomish River,
Washington, Journal of Hydrology. 243 (2001): 272-286.
USGS. Toxic Substances Hydrology Program: Hypoxia. 14 December 2006. 2 May
2007. <http://toxics.usgs.gov/definitions/hypoxia.html>.
Warner, M., Kawase, M., Newton, J.A. Recent Studies of the Overturning Circulation in
Hood Canal. 2001. 7 May 2007.
<www.hoodcanal.washington.edu/docuemnts/HCDOPPUB/lc_warner/pdf>.
Warner, Mark. Average Dissolved Oxygen. Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program. 13
February 2007. 7 March 2007.
<www.hoodcanal.washington.edu/observatons/histroical.com>.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Derelict Fishing Gear Removal
Guidelines. November 2002. <http://www.nwstraits.org/uploads/pdfs/DGGuidelines.pdf>.
Woodward, Colin. Ocean’s End. Basic Books. 2000.

54

Appendix A
H-1249.2
HOUSE BILL 1883
State of Washington 59th Legislature 2005 Regular Session
By Representatives McCoy, Pearson, Eickmeyer, Upthegrove and Haigh
Read first time 02/09/2005. Referred to Committee on Select
Committee on Hood Canal.
AN ACT Relating to collection and preservation of oral histories about Hood Canal;
amending RCW 43.07.365; adding a new section to chapter 43.07 RCW; creating a new
section; and providing an expiration date.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. (1) The legislature finds that Hood Canal is a marine water of
the state in significant peril. The legislature also finds that low dissolved oxygen
concentrations have occurred in Hood Canal for many years and that these conditions
have created a serious environmental health concern. The legislature further finds that
substantial fish kills have occurred in Hood Canal in recent years, and scientists and
others report significant changes in marine species behavior in Hood Canal. (2) The
legislature finds that the factors contributing to Hood Canal's low dissolved oxygen
problems are complex and that investigation is needed to understand both the problem
and its potential solutions. The legislature also finds that a historical perspective is
important in understanding Hood Canal's problems. The legislature recognizes the tribal
elders and other long-term residents of the Hood Canal area are a great source of
knowledge regarding the history of Hood Canal. The legislature finds these tribal elders
and others may provide critical insight into the history, impacts, and potential causes of
the low dissolved oxygen concentrations occurring in Hood Canal. (3) The legislature
intends to initiate a process for university students to interview tribal elders and others
who have knowledge of the history of conditions along Hood Canal to collect
information regarding the history and impacts of Hood Canal's low dissolved oxygen
concentrations. The legislature further intends that these interviews and the information
learned be preserved as part of the state's oral history program.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 43.07 RCW to read as
follows:
(1) The secretary of state, with the assistance of the oral history advisory committee, shall
administer and conduct a program to record and document oral histories of tribal elders of
the tribes in the area surrounding Hood Canal and other long-term residents of the Hood
Canal area who have similar knowledge of the history of the conditions along Hood
Canal. The purpose of these interviews is to collect information and perspectives
regarding the history of the conditions along Hood Canal, including but not limited to
reports of fish kills, changes in marine species behavior, fishing and harvesting histories,
and other conditions related to the environmental health of Hood Canal. (2) The secretary

55

of state shall contract with the state universities to have university students interview and
record the oral histories specified in subsection (1) of this section. The tapes and tape
transcripts shall be indexed and made available for research and reference through the
state archives. The transcripts, together with current and historical photographs, may be
published for distribution to libraries and for sale to the general public.
Sec. 3. RCW 43.07.365 and 2002 c 358 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the secretary of state may fund
oral history activities through donations as provided in RCW 43.07.037. The activities
may include, but not be limited to, conducting interviews, preparing and indexing
transcripts, publishing transcripts and photographs, and presenting displays and programs.
Donations that do not meet the criteria of the oral history program may not be accepted.
The secretary of state shall adopt rules necessary to implement this section.
(2) The secretary of state may fund the oral history activities specified in section 2 of this
act through appropriations to the oral history, state library, and archives account.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. This act expires July 1, 2008.
--- END ---

56

Appendix B. Federal and Washington state listed species found within the Puget Sound
region. Source: PSAT 2007.

57

Appendix C Event timeline
Source: http://www.psat.wa.gov/News/press_info/images/PSI_brief_history.pdf
DATE Event
1983 Tacoma tide. flats added to the federal Superfund site list.
1985 Formation of Puget Sound Water Quality Authority.
1985 Decision to provide secondary treatment for sewage treatment plants discharging to Puget Sound.
1987 First comprehensive Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan completed.
1988 Designation of Puget Sound as National Estuary Program.
1990 Growth Management Act approved.
1991 Adoption of sediment standards in Sound, as called for in 1987 Puget Sound Management Plan.
1991 Approval of 1991 Puget Sound Management plan as federal Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan under Clean Water Act
1991 Local governments adopt development regulations
1992 Environmental Cooperation Agreement signed between Washington and British Columbia
1992 Ecology releases the region’s first stormwater management manual. Ecology issues baseline permit
for industrial and construction site stormwater discharges.
1992 Law passed requiring formation of local shellfish protection districts when pollution closes shellfish
growing areas.
1993 Burley Lagoon shellfish upgrade, first significant shellfish restoration involving non-point sources.
1995Ecology reissues stormwater general permit for industrial activities; construction-site stormwater
discharges covered under separate general permit. Ecology issues NPDES municipal phase I permits to
cities of Seattle and Tacoma, King, Pierce and Snohomish counties, and WSDOT.
1995 Shoreline Management Act and GMA statutes were integrated and Best Available Science
requirement added to GMA.
1995 Major updating of On-Site Sewage System rules, incorporating Puget Sound Management Plan
elements.
1996 Creation of Puget Sound Action Team (from Puget Sound Water Quality Authority).
1998 Separate watershed planning systems established for water and for salmon recovery.
1998 Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative authorized by Congress.
1999 Rescue tug stationed at Neah Bay (26 responses from 1999 to summer 2005).
1999 Puget Sound Chinook Salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act.
2000 State ballast water management program created.
2000 PBT Strategy completed and delivered to Legislature.
2000 Puget Sound Management plan updated with major rewrites of Stormwater and combined sewer
overflow programs.
2001 Ecology published Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Action Team begins
active promotion of LID techniques.
2001 Formation of Shared Strategy to develop a watershed-based recovery plan for salmon.
2001 Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project launched.
2002 State creates the Ballast Water Work Group to study and recommend improvements to the state
management program.
2002 Ecology reissues industrial stormwater permit and it is appealed. Action Team holds 3 regional
training workshops on LID.
2003 New Shoreline Management Act guidelines adopted
2003 Marine Mammal Protection Act designation of Orca as “depleted.”
2004 Invasive colonial tunicates reported in Puget Sound.
2004 Ecology issues “Beyond Waste” plan.
2004 Last Puget Sound county completed the basic GMA assignments.
2004 Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program (HCDOP) launched.
2005 Delivery of Shared Strategy’s Puget Sound salmon recovery plan to NOAA.
2005 The state Aquatic Nuisance Species Coordinating Committee develops and officially submits the
state’s Early Detection and Rapid
Response Plan for responding to new invasions.
2005 Ecology issues revised industrial stormwater general permit and preliminary drafts of municipal
NPDES phase I and II permits.

58

Ecology issues draft general construction NPDES permit.
2005 HCDOP Integrated Assessment and Monitoring study launched with federal funding.
2005 Additional updating of On-Site Sewage System rules with special Puget Sound provisions.
2005 Environmental sampling indicates that PAH contamination has begun increasing while metals are
decreasing.
2005 PBDEs recognized as environmental contaminant in Puget Sound.

59

Appendix D
Questions derived from The Evergreen State College Native American Studies
“Heritage” Program and analyzed for information pertinent to my research question.
Questions for
The Evergreen State College Hood Canal Oral History Project

Were there any fish kills that happened in the past? How often? Where? When? (for all
of the “when” questions it would be good to know not only the year or approximation,
but the time of year e.g. Spring, Summer, etc.).
Do you recall or have you heard of any stories of seeing listless bottomfish in the Canal fish that were alive but barely moving? When? Where?
Do you recall or have you heard of any stories of seeing schools of bottomfish in the
shallow water- less than 10-20 feet deep? When? Where?
Do you remember or have you heard of any stories of red tides or large blooms of
phytoplankton occurring in the canal in the past? When? Where?
What fish/shellfish were harvested and how? Have there been changes in fishing
practices over time? Have fishing locations changed? Have you noticed or are there
stories of changes in the harvest of herring, clams, and Dungeness crab?
Do you, or have you, fished in the deep water (deeper than 200 feet) of the canal? If so
what did you used to catch and what do you catch now?
How has commercial fishing changed over time? What kinds of species were harvested?
Has this changed? Were there fisheries in the past that are totally gone? (e.g. pollack,
whaling, etc.)
Are there any animals (fish, birds, mammals) that you used to see in the canal but no
longer do? Or that your ancestors used to see in the canal but no longer do?
Have you noticed changes in the abundance and distribution of eelgrass? Was kelp
observed in Hood Canal previously?
What changes did you notice with the introduction of the Japanese oysters?
Do you know of any areas or have you heard of any stories of where smelt used to spawn
but no longer do so?
Do you recall or have you heard of any stories of any spawning by smelt during the
summer months? If so where?

60

Have you noticed changes (Declines? Distribution?) in the abundance of sea life on
beaches? What kinds of changes? When? Where?
Have you noticed changes in the types of trees or other vegetation on the shorelines? In
the upland forests? What kind of trees were the most common? What kinds of changes
have you observed or have heard of? When? Where?
Have you observed changes in the shoreline? Loss of sandy beaches? Erosion? When
and where did this occur?
How have the populations of people changed? (numbers, distribution) Where did people
used to live within the Hood Canal watershed vs. where they live now?
Did people talk about smelling sulfur?
How close were fire pits to the water?
Have you seen changes in farming practices over time? Locations?

61

Appendix E. Map showing the extent of the increased water table in the Skokomish
River Valley. Source: provided by the Skokomish Natural Resource Department.

62

Appendix F. Source: provided by the Skokomish Natural Resource Department and the
Puget Sound Action Team. Of interest is the Hood Canal regions where the large red
circles depict declines in eelgrass habitat during the 2004-5 year.

63

Media

Brian Cary MESThesis2002.pdf