SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 21
2015-2016 UW-REN SITE
ASSESSMENT
North Creek Forest
Eric Carpenter,
Peter Clarke,
Kai Farmer,
Thomas Radon,
Batzorig
Tuvshinjargal,
Nick Vradenburg
BES 462 A-
RestorationEcology
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
i
Contents
Contents ............................................................................................................................... i
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
RFP Synopsis........................................................................................................................ 1
Site Description................................................................................................................... 1
History................................................................................................................................. 3
Topography ......................................................................................................................... 4
Soils ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Hydrology............................................................................................................................ 8
Vegetation........................................................................................................................... 8
Habitat............................................................................................................................... 12
Disturbance....................................................................................................................... 13
Matrix................................................................................................................................ 14
Human Context ................................................................................................................. 15
Impaired Ecological Functions .......................................................................................... 16
Likelihood of Autogenic Repair......................................................................................... 17
Appendix A........................................................................................................................ 17
Sources.............................................................................................................................. 19
1
Introduction
This site assessment is for the 2015-2016 UW-REN site in the North Creek Forest. The
subject is located in a residential area and is enjoyed by residents and students alike. Our
project is one of many at this location initiated by Friends of North Creek Forest. Their intention
is to buy up as much of the forest as they can for the purposes of restoring and protecting for
future generations to enjoy. The value of this forest as a teaching tool cannot be
underestimated, nor can its aesthetic value.
The problem with the site is that is has become overrun by introduced invasive species
and specific to our site there is significant risk of mudslides and general sediment and erosion
off of the steep hillside that makes up the western border of the subject site. These issues will
present a challenge, however, we are all excited at the prospect of initiating and seeing through
the completion of this restoration site to the satisfaction of our clients, Friends of North Creek
Forest (FNCF).
RFP Synopsis
Our site is located downhill of a residential neighborhood and bordered by steep slopes
on the western edge. This site is adjacent to the site that was restored by the 2014-2015 UW-
REN team (just north). According to our Community Partner, Friends of North Creek Forest, this
site offers many opportunities to conduct different restoration activities. One of the main
concerns and primary consideration of our efforts is the abundance and domination of invasive
species. Our project goals as stated in the RFP, submitted by FNCF, is invasive removal and
forest enhancement. In order to achieve forest enhancement we need to focus on restoring
native vegetation, controlling soil and sediment erosion as well as building trails and
implementing a maintenance plan.
Site Description
North Creek Forest is a 64 acre mixed conifer forest located within the City of Bothell,
about a mile North-East of City Hall. The forest is surrounded by the City of Bothell to the
North, West and South. The Eastern edge of the forest is bordered by Interstate 405 (Map 1).
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
2
There are schools in the area, with Canyon Park Junior High and Maywood Hills Elementary
within walking distance of the forest. The project site within North Creek Forest we intend to
restore is located on the Western Edge of the forest near where NE 204th Pl. and 108th Ave NE
meet, in close proximity to surrounding housing to the North and West, with the forest
stretching further south bordering more residential housing (Map 1). The project site is a part
of the North Creek watershed. Surface runoff and groundwater from seepage points within the
project site and surrounding forest recharges North Creek. Starting from the Western border
our site slopes down, gradually leveling off until you reach the Eastern edge, where it flattens
out slightly. We have further broken our site down into four polygons due to topographical and
vegetative differences. Accessibility played a major role in the formation of polygons as well.
Most of the site is an impenetrable thicket, so in some cases divisions of the site are based on
trails we created. Polygons 1 and 2 are divided from polygons 3 and 4 due to the topographical
differences we see, where 1 and 2 are considerably sloped, 3 and 4 are much less so, but
polygon 4 has the most variability in vegetation and topography. Polygons 1 and 3 were
separated from polygons 2 and 4 based upon changes in vegetation and accessibility. The line
that divides these two sets of polygons is a trail that we made (Map 1). Overall the hill slope
within the project site is steep and the soils saturated through much of the year, but high
degrees of variability in slope, elevation, moisture, canopy cover, and vegetation are present
throughout.
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
3
History
“North Creek Forest is 64 acres of Upland Coniferous forest. The forest can be
considered mixed with old growth elements that includes nine wetlands and seven
streams.”(FNCF 2011-2015)
This area was once home to many Native American Tribes. Ultimately, settlers made
their way out west and began buying land in the Bothell Area. In 1870, Columbus S. Greenleaf
and George R. Wilson filed land claims, and in 1876 George Brackett bought land for
commercial logging (FNCF 2011-2015). In 1885 Brackett sold about 80 acres of this land to
David Bothell and a town was named in his honor in 1888, officially being incorporated in 1909
as the city of Bothell. This area grew substantially due to logging and fishing in the
area. Suburban development proceeded after WWII making Bothell a bedroom community for
those who worked in Seattle. This continued until about 1990 when businesses started to move
out into suburban areas in greater numbers. During this time, after being logged extensively in
the early 1900’s, North Creek Forest was largely left alone and allowed to recover to the stage
Map 1:
satellite view
of NCF, with
project
location and
topographical
inset (FNCF)
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
4
we see today. Much of the forested areas in and around North Creek Forest were logged to
make room for more housing.
To stop development of more houses being built, advocates for the forest began an
organization known as “Friends of North Creek Forest”. A group whose mission statement
reads “To maintain and improve the biological function of North Creek Forest through
education, stewardship and conservation in perpetuity.” In 2011 FNCF began putting many
hundreds of hours into grant applications to raise funds, and in doing so managed to draw over
$500,000. They used this money to purchase their first 35 acres of the remaining forest; with 6
more acres being purchased at the end of 2013. There is still fundraising going on to this day to
try to purchase the remaining available acreage and with over 40 acres of land in hand, FNCF
have begun to utilize this area to educate the public, bringing awareness to the forefront, and
use the forest to teach local students why area like this are such a necessity among our ever
expanding borders of Urban sprawl (FNCF 2011-2015).
Topography
Our site at North Creek Forest Park is bordered by NE 204 Pl to the west and private
property (10654 NE 204th Pl. Bothell, WA 98011) to the north. The Northern Boundary, running
along the 240°-60° transect, is 145’ long with an average eastern facing slope of 0.21o. The
western border, running along the 165°-345° transect, is 53’ long with an average slope of zero.
The southern border, along the 82°-262° transect, is 90’ long and has an average slope of 0.26o.
The western border, along the 9°-189° transect, is 114’ long and has an average slope of 0.06o.
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
5
The hillside consists of fairly smooth transitions with no major features across all
polygons with the exception of Polygon 4 which contains a small section with the steep slope of
1.0o. This slope connects to a small stream which runs through the corner of the polygon. The
stream runs from 1.5’-2’ wide and though the average water level is only 2”-3”, the stream
channel ranges from 2’-3.5’ deep. It forms a semicircle, entering the northern boundary 15’
from the northeastern corner and exiting the eastern boundary 11’ from the northeastern
border.
Map 2: Shows topographic features of the project site
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
6
The site has a rough trail approximately 4’ wide that runs along the eastern edge of the
site. It is more like a mud pit than a trail because of all the water it receives due to its location
at the downhill edge of the site. This feature will be enhanced and possibly shifted through our
work so ultimately the location has yet to be laid out.
Soils
We collected 8 different soil samples throughout our project site.
Polygon 1 - Two soil samples were taken from Polygon 1. Even though the samples we
took were fairly separate from each other, both of them showed similar features. In both of the
samples, there was standing water on the surface. The O horizons were saturated, consisting of
dark brown soil with some small twigs intermixed. For the A horizons, they formed ribbons that
were up to 5cm long and they felt smooth with little bit of grain. Thus, we identified the soil
texture in both samples to be silty clay loam.
Polygon 2 – We took one soil sample on the northern border and one in the middle. An
important factor that we should note is that the sample we took on the border was located
beneath an isolated western red cedar patch that is on a slight mound separating it from the
slope. At this sampling location, there was approximately 1 inch of western redcedar leaf litter
and small twigs on the surface. The soil in the O horizon was slightly moist and contained some
old, dead roots. Moreover, the soil was dark brown and really compact. When we dug deeper
into the A horizon, there were several worms present and there was also some gray coloration.
In addition, the soil was half gritty and half smooth, so we identified it as clay loam. Trailing
blackberry (Rubus ursinus) was present here as well, which was absent in most other places of
the site most likely due to the difference in soil composition. The second soil sample located in
the middle of Polygon 2 was layered with a ½ inch of leaf litter with lots of big twigs. It was fully
saturated and was dark brown. The A horizon was moist to saturated with a sticky and gleyed
constituency. There were a number of plant species growing in it, including salmonberry (Rubus
spectabilis), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus bifrons), English ivy (Helix hedera), and horsetail
(Equisetum ssp.). We identified the soil as loam since it felt both gritty and smooth.
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
7
Polygon 3 - We only took one soil sample in this polygon because the majority of the
area was surrounded by dead logs and a heavy population of R. bifrons, which made it difficult
for us to go to the desired sampling location. Therefore, the one sample we took was right
along the trail. The soil was saturated and had some standing water on surface. We were able
to spot some invertebrates in the O horizon, but none were observed in the A horizon. The soil
in the A horizon was sticky and compact with little moisture. The soil felt mostly smooth with a
little bit of grain, so we identified it as silty clay loam. A note about this location is that we
pulled out some deserted wood and trash within the A horizon, meaning that it had been there
for an extended period of time.
Polygon 4 - We took two soil samples on the trail. There was not much leaf litter on the
trail in comparison to the rest of the site, but there were still some decaying leaves present. The
first place that we tried to sample was difficult to dig through, and it also had some standing
water on the surface. The O horizon contained some small twigs and dead roots, and the color
of the soil was dark brown. The A horizon was similar in color, but it also had a slightly orange
coloration. In addition, it did not form long ribbon, but the bottom horizon was fully saturated
so we could not perform a legitimate ribbon test. Finally, it was gleyed and sticky, so we
identified it as loam. For the second soil sample in this polygon, there was no standing water
and there was about a ½ inch of leaf litter. The color of the soil was same as most of our other
samples (dark brown) and it was slightly moist. The A horizon was almost dry (slightly moist),
and it was somewhat sticky. The A horizon had some gray in its coloration and it was not very
compact. However, when we moistened the soil and performed the ribbon test, we were able
to form a ribbon that was almost 5 cm long. Finally, the soil felt smooth with some grit, so we
identified it as silty clay loam.
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
8
Hydrology
The majority of the project site is on a slope, which runs parallel to city streets in a
residential neighborhood. Excessive rain can result in runoff from the street and from the top of
the slope. The water travels down a steep gradient from west to east, collecting in pockets
where the land periodically flattens out. No surface water was directly seen flowing down the
slope at the time of our first visit; however, waterlogged soils were observed throughout the
site shortly after a rain event and were also seen days after the rain. The flatter places where
surface waters tend to gather, were inundated with standing water. This tells us that the soil
drains poorly.
On the northwestern corner of the site, the slope curves slightly to the east. Instead of
surface water at this location flowing directly east like most of the other runoff, the surface
water on the curving slope flows southeast, creating larger pockets of water on the northern
portion of the site. The levels of standing water were observed to be higher here than in areas
located further south.
The northern most edge of the perimeter is an isolated patch of large western redcedars
(Thuja plicata). These trees are located on a slightly elevated portion of land. This added
elevation prevents excess runoff from collecting there, which has left the soil there much drier
than in other areas of the site. Also, just north of these cedars and beyond the boundary of the
site is a small drainage creek that flows east. The majority of surface water from the site will
not drain that far north, but the previously established foot trail that acts as the eastern
boundary of the site has a slight decline in elevation towards the north. This allows surface
runoff on the northeastern corner of the site to drain into this creek.
Vegetation
The vegetation cover across the site is highly variable but R. spectabilis and R. bifrons
are the most common species. Dense impenetrable thickets comprised of these two species
cover approximately 60% of the site (Map 1, Map 2). The areas in which these two species are
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
9
dominant are halted in the primary stage of succession with very little trees present. The
dominant tree species is T. plicata, some red alder (Alnus rubra) and big-leaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum) are present as well. The overall community type of the site is a mixture of
THPL/RUSP (western red cedar/salmonberry) and ALRU/LYAM (red alder/skunk cabbage)
(Kunze 1994). Existing trees are 20 -100 years in age, representative of second growth forest in
the secondary stage of succession. Diversity in structure is great across the site, with mature T.
plicata located in polygon 4 (Map 2) and nothing above 10 feet in height located in the R.
spectabilis/R. bifrons thickets (see Map 1, Map 2). The community types vary based on
hydrology and canopy conditions. There appears to be a seepage flowing eastward through the
site; this wet area is consistent with the R. spectabilis/R. bifrons thicket, and has no canopy
cover. Where canopy cover is present or soils are drier, the vegetation changes, most notably to
a PSME-THPL/GASH-MANE/POMU (Douglas-fir-western red cedar/Salal-Oregon grape/sword
fern) community type located in the Northeast corner of Polygon 4 (see Map 2) (WSDNR 2015).
A total of 19 plant species have been identified within the project site, 3 of which are invasive
(See Appendix A).
Invasive species are prevalent through most of the site, although none are present in
the Northeast corner of polygon 4. H. helix is covering the ground and wrapped around trees
and snags in polygon 1 and 2, it is only present where at least some canopy cover is present and
soil is not inundated. H. helix is also present in abundance outside of the project site adjacent to
the Western border (Map 3). R. bifrons is present in all polygons in varied abundance, it seems
to only occur where canopy gaps allow ample light infiltration. Where canopy cover is at 100%
invasive species are not present, such as the northeast corner of polygon 4 (Map 3). The
vegetation across the project site does not fit cleanly into one community type, because of
environmental heterogeneity, but it is likely that the presence of invasive species has halted
succession and altered the composition of vegetation communities.
Polygon 1 contains A. macrophyllum and vine maple (Acer circinatum) but the area is
dominated by a carpet of H. helix and a thicket comprised of mainly R. bifrons. H. helix accounts
for approximately 60% cover in polygon 1. The large A. macrophyllum is almost entirely covered
with H. helix with few branches exposed near the canopy. Some native understory species are
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
10
present in small amounts in sporadic locations. These understory species are lady fern
(Athyrium felix-femina), sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and Equisetum ssp.
Polygon 2 is dominated by dense, impenetrable thickets of R. spectabilis and R. bifrons.
These two species alone account for approximately 80% cover of polygon 2. Some skunk
cabbage (Lysichiton americanum) and Equisetum ssp. are present at sporadic locations
throughout this this thicket. 3 young (under 40 years old) T. plicata are located along the
Eastern border of polygon 2 (Map 4). H. helix is present in this polygon where it completely
covers a snag at the southwestern corner (Map 3).
Polygon 3 is dominated by A. rubra and T. plicata but it also contains thickets comprised
of R. spectabilis and R. bifrons. A ground cover of H. helix and piggy-back plant/youth-on-age
(Tolmiea menziesii) is present in the Southeast corner. P. munitum and Equisetum ssp. are
sporadically located throughout polygon 3 in small quantities.
Polygon 4 is by far the most diverse with regard to vegetation, although, R. spectabilis
and R. bifrons combined account for approximately 70% cover in the shrub layer. Much of the
polygon is dominated by a dense thicket of R. spectabilis and R. bifrons but A. rubra, T. plicata,
cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), L. americanum, English holly (Ilex aquifolium), Equisetum ssp, red
huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), and western-beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta var.
californica) become intermixed with the thicket in spots. In the Northeast corner of polygon 4
the vegetation begins to transition into a T. plicata and low Oregon-grape (Mahonia nervosa)
dominated landscape where the soil is drier and the canopy begins to close. The community
type of the Northeast corner can be described as PSME-THPL/GASH-MANE/POMU (Douglas-fir-
western red cedar/Salal-Oregon grape/sword fern) community type, but the vegetation is
highly variable towards the R. spectabilis and R. bifrons thicket (Map 4) (WSDNR 2015).
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
11
Map 3: shows invasive vegetation
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
12
Habitat
The site allows for a variety of wildlife to find suitable habitat, and there are several
different resources available for animals to utilize. No wildlife was spotted within the
boundaries of the site while we were there but, the potential exists. This prime habitat has
likely caught the attention of numerous species.
Woody debris is the most commonly found habitat resource on the site. Wind events
have downed a significant number of trees in the area, and this has created an ample source of
logs. Bacteria and fungi arrive when there is a presence of logs and begin the process of
decomposition. The decaying wood is attractive to insects and other small organisms, and these
in turn become food for larger animals such as birds. One example of a bird that has been
spotted nearby in other areas of North Creek Forest is the pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus
Map 4: Shows native vegetation
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
13
pileatus), which uses its long beak to remove and eat insects out of logs (DNR). Logs and woody
debris are also useful to add nutrients and organic material into the soil. Certain species such as
western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) are adapted to use decaying wood as a substrate for
their own establishment.
Snags are another important element in the site that will prove useful to wildlife. Many
different birds and mammals are able to use snags as shelter. An example of a species that has
been seen in North Creek Forest before is the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), which uses
the tops of snags for nesting (DNR). Snags also decompose in the same way that logs do, and
this decomposition attracts insects which can be used as food by birds and small mammals.
There are two large snags that have been located in our site, but one is currently engulfed the
invasive by H. helix.
There are several tall, western redcedars along the boundaries of the site, primarily in
the northern portion. These trees have evergreen foliage that provide small mammals and birds
with shelter over the winter months. The foliage is a good heat insulator, and some mammals
are able to use the foliage for browse. There are also several species present within the shrub
and groundcover layers that are berry-producing, such as R. spectabilis, M. nervosa, and
although invasive and subject to removal, R. bifrons. Birds and small mammals are able to
consume these berries, which act as an important source of food.
Disturbance
The project site is vulnerable to various disturbances due to the high degree of
environmental heterogeneity across polygons. All 4 polygons are at risk for vegetation
trampling and introduction of invasive plant seeds from visitor’s boots, due to the use of North
Creek Forest for education, research, art and recreation. All 4 polygons have poorly drained
soils, increasing the likelihood of downed trees in severe wind or rain events. The sparse
existence of mature conifers in all polygons causes concern for further invasion of R. bifrons and
other invasive species. Polygon 1 is at risk of erosion due to the steep slope and high moisture
content in soils. Polygons 1 and 2 contain the invasive species H. helix and R. bifrons, they also
show the highest risk for reinvasion because these species cover the private property at
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
14
western edge of the project site. Polygon 2 is also susceptible to erosion due to the wet soil,
steep slope and lack of trees or soil binding species. Considerable amounts of debris and trash
were observed in polygon 2 during the site assessment. Polygon 3 has some of the wettest
soils, this could cause existing trees to fall during wind events. Two newly fallen A. rubra were
observed on the eastern edge of polygon 3 adjacent to the trail. Polygon 4 is at risk for erosion
and windfall, the stream that cuts through the Northeast corner of this polygon has also shown
signs of erosion.
Matrix
NCF is located right in between a residential area and highway 405. This area is the only
forest that acts as a buffer in the City of Bothell. This project site is in close proximity to the
walking trail and residential area.
The area to the west is surrounded by houses but there is a massive amount of invasive
species right in the middle of the residential area and our site. In addition to the invasive
species, R. Spectabilis covers a large portion of our project site.
Aerial view of the features adjacent to the site ---- Source: Google Maps White box:
North Creek Forest ---- Red Star: REN Capstone Site 2015-2016
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
15
The CP has requested that we leave some of the Salmonberry in order to maintain the
privacy of the residents. So, most of the species we will be removing are Himalayan blackberry,
English ivy, and some salmonberry in places where is it not needed for concealment. The
walking trail is on the eastern border of our project site. Next to the trail, there are many dead
trees and two big stumps; there is also an old pipe that is right on the walking trail. These may
have to be removed.
UWREN 2014-15 project site is located on the south side. There is drainage that is
located at the northeastern side of our site, as well as a small creek that runs directly through
the northeastern border of the project site.
Human Context
Surrounding North Creek Forest are suburban development areas and highways. This
area used to be forest similar to North Creek, but, has since been logged and converted for
anthropogenic purposes. Besides logging done over the past century, pollution from humans
including trash and car exhaust have had some effect on the area, especially on its
perimeters. Additionally, many of the invasive species have made their way into the forest due
to the surrounding areas. When people buy a house and have a garden, they tend to plant
species that aren’t native to the area. This can contribute heavily to the invasive plant species
problem we currently see in the area.
At this time, the community does not use our site and there seems to be little to no
pedestrian traffic going through the area. We are however, adjacent to previous UW-REN sites
and trails through the forest where people frequently walk. Our site is located very close to a
few houses. This could complicate our restoration progress, depending on the people who live
here and their compliance in not further polluting the area with trash and not planting invasive
species near the site, which is essentially their back yard.
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
16
Impaired Ecological Functions
Widespread establishment of English ivy has proved to be troublesome throughout the
site where it has ample access to sunlight. It has been observed climbing up the trunks of trees,
one of which has been completely choked out and died. Also, there are areas where it is
interspersed with several native groundcover species such as youth-on-age, which runs the risk
of being completely outcompeted. Native tree and shrub saplings cannot grow nearby these
large patches of English ivy or they will be choked out.
There is a large, mixed thicket of salmonberry and Himalayan blackberry in the center of
the site. This thicket is quite dense and has prevented the growth of other shrubs and
groundcover that could compete. There are some species located within the thicket itself that
have either been damaged or stunted. Examples include skunk cabbage and lady fern. No tree
saplings are able to grow within the thicket, and this has prevented successional development
within the site. Shade is unable to be created due to the lack of canopy development, and this
has created an ideal habitat for invasive species that have already been established. Trees will
not be able to establish or develop if this thicket is not mitigated.
Areas along the slope where there is a lack of shrubs or trees has softer upper layers of
soil than soil that is hosting shrubs or trees. There is nothing holding this soil together, which
has left it vulnerable to erosion. The soil is already drainage-poor and does not dry or solidify
very well, so without the assistance of roots to help compress the soil, surface runoff heading
down the slope will transport the upper layers of the soil away from the site and will degrade
Salmonberry/Himalayan
Blackberry thicket ----
Source: Kai Farmer
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
17
the landscape over time. Also, the saturation and poor drainage of soil will create difficult
conditions for native lowland forest species to establish. The site appears to be far wetter than
the adjacent sections of North Creek Forest, so the installation of similar species that are
located in other areas of the forest may not achieve the same success at this location.
Likelihood of Autogenic Repair
The likelihood for autogenic repair of this project site is low due to the concentrations of
invasive species present. North Creek forest was logged a century ago and the native species
present within the project site do represent autogenic recovery but, little canopy has
established and invasive species cover is likely to increase over time. Multiple trees on and
directly adjacent to the Western border of the project site are covered with H. helix, one of
which has fallen and become a snag. It is likely that without intervention through restoration
other trees within the project site will become killed by H. helix.
Much of the project site is densely covered with a mixture of R. bifrons and R.
spectabilis, resulting in little biodiversity within these areas. Conifers have not regenerated in
most of the project site, if this area is not restored it is likely to become dominated even further
by R. bifrons, H. helix, I. aquifolium and R. spectabilis with little canopy cover. The existing
canopy also provides favorable light conditions for further invasion and establishment of
dominance by invasive species. The loss of existing trees may cause further erosion in the
stream (polygon 4) and erosion of the soil throughout the project site.
Appendix A.
Scientific Name Common Name
Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
18
Thuja plicata Western Redcedar
Lysichiton americanum Skunk Cabbage
Tolmeia menziessi Piggyback plant/ youth upon age
Oemlaria cerasiformis Indian Plum
Acer macrophyllum Big Leaf Maple
Acer circinatum Vine Maple
Equisetum ssp. Common Horsetail
Polystichum munitum Sword Fern
Athyrium felix-femina Lady fern
Alnus Rubra Red Alder
Vaccinium Parvifolium Red Huckleberry
Mahonia nervosa Low Oregon Grape/ Cascade Oregon
Grape
Corylus cornuta var. californica Beaked Hazelnut
Rhamnus purshiana Cascara
Pseudotsuga menziessi subsp.
menziessi
Douglas Fir
Rubus bifrons INVASIVE Himalayan Blackberry
Hedera helix INVASIVE English Ivy
Ilix aquifolium INVASIVE English Holly
North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site
Assessment 5 November 2015
19
Sources
FNCF: Friends of North Creek Forest [Internet]. C2011-2015 [cited 2015 Nov 2].
Available from; http://www.friendsofnorthcreekforest.org/
DNR: Department of Natural Resources. Creating a wild Backyard – Snags & Logs
[Internet]. Maryland.gov; [cited 2015 Oct. 30]
http://dnr2.maryland.gov/wildlife/Documents/Snags_Logs.pdf
Kunze L. 1994. Preliminary Classification of Native, Low Elevation, Freshwater Wetland
Vegetation in Western Washington. Olympia (WA): Washington Natural Heritage Program,
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Available from:
http://wadnr.s3.amazonaws.com/publications/amp_nh_wetland_class.pdf
WSDNR: Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Reference Desk of the
Washington Natural Heritage Program [Internet]. C2015 [cited 2015 Nov 5]. Available from:
http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/communities/pdf/psme-thpl-gash-mane-pomu.pdf
Kai Farmer - Photos

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (19)

kimberley_aboriginal_caring_for_country_plan
kimberley_aboriginal_caring_for_country_plankimberley_aboriginal_caring_for_country_plan
kimberley_aboriginal_caring_for_country_plan
 
El niño de hojos cuadrados
El niño de hojos cuadradosEl niño de hojos cuadrados
El niño de hojos cuadrados
 
Higiene industrial
Higiene industrialHigiene industrial
Higiene industrial
 
Wi-Fi & Starbucks: Is it the Right Fit?
Wi-Fi & Starbucks: Is it the Right Fit?Wi-Fi & Starbucks: Is it the Right Fit?
Wi-Fi & Starbucks: Is it the Right Fit?
 
2D portfolio
2D portfolio2D portfolio
2D portfolio
 
Ict
IctIct
Ict
 
130 morf analiz
130 morf analiz130 morf analiz
130 morf analiz
 
Parametros de analisis arquitectónico
Parametros de analisis arquitectónicoParametros de analisis arquitectónico
Parametros de analisis arquitectónico
 
Dia daqueles lucia
Dia daqueles luciaDia daqueles lucia
Dia daqueles lucia
 
Orientação a objetos
Orientação a objetosOrientação a objetos
Orientação a objetos
 
Administracion financiera
Administracion financieraAdministracion financiera
Administracion financiera
 
Rosa
RosaRosa
Rosa
 
La scena di genere - Genre works
La scena di genere - Genre worksLa scena di genere - Genre works
La scena di genere - Genre works
 
Конспект (трудове навчання, Бортків)
Конспект (трудове навчання, Бортків)Конспект (трудове навчання, Бортків)
Конспект (трудове навчання, Бортків)
 
Nelson mandela2
Nelson mandela2Nelson mandela2
Nelson mandela2
 
Software engineering principles (marcello thiry)
Software engineering principles (marcello thiry)Software engineering principles (marcello thiry)
Software engineering principles (marcello thiry)
 
Uso de flamintex
Uso de flamintexUso de flamintex
Uso de flamintex
 
El verbo to have
El verbo to haveEl verbo to have
El verbo to have
 
Richard neutra (1892-1970)
Richard neutra (1892-1970)Richard neutra (1892-1970)
Richard neutra (1892-1970)
 

Similar to NorthCreekForest_SA15.doc

Driving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan Briggs
Driving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan BriggsDriving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan Briggs
Driving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan BriggsLeisure Solutions®
 
Conservation education @ eecom june 2011
Conservation education @ eecom june 2011Conservation education @ eecom june 2011
Conservation education @ eecom june 2011bmitschke
 
booklet 2014 2ff OFFICIAL
booklet 2014 2ff OFFICIALbooklet 2014 2ff OFFICIAL
booklet 2014 2ff OFFICIALJanoy Sinclair
 
Neptune Case Study
Neptune Case StudyNeptune Case Study
Neptune Case StudyLuke Slater
 
Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...
Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...
Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...Marcellus Drilling News
 
Alex Frost - Conservation Biology
Alex Frost - Conservation BiologyAlex Frost - Conservation Biology
Alex Frost - Conservation BiologyAlex Frost
 
Heins mapping water analysis wk 2
Heins mapping water analysis wk 2Heins mapping water analysis wk 2
Heins mapping water analysis wk 2Derrick Heins
 
Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)
Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)
Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)Michael McPeak
 
IJSRED-V2I4P13
IJSRED-V2I4P13IJSRED-V2I4P13
IJSRED-V2I4P13IJSRED
 
AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...
AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...
AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...George Dumitrache
 
Nisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft Presentation
Nisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft PresentationNisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft Presentation
Nisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft PresentationNisqually River Council
 
ConceptualRestorationPlanFinal
ConceptualRestorationPlanFinalConceptualRestorationPlanFinal
ConceptualRestorationPlanFinalTyler Mulhall
 
Harewood Community Profile
Harewood Community ProfileHarewood Community Profile
Harewood Community ProfileHerkamal Brar
 

Similar to NorthCreekForest_SA15.doc (20)

Driving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan Briggs
Driving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan BriggsDriving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan Briggs
Driving Rural Recovery with Geotourism, Wheatbelt of WA: Alan Briggs
 
Conservation education @ eecom june 2011
Conservation education @ eecom june 2011Conservation education @ eecom june 2011
Conservation education @ eecom june 2011
 
Alexander Healy Resume
Alexander Healy ResumeAlexander Healy Resume
Alexander Healy Resume
 
Project NarrativeW
Project NarrativeWProject NarrativeW
Project NarrativeW
 
April_Newsletter
April_NewsletterApril_Newsletter
April_Newsletter
 
booklet 2014 2ff OFFICIAL
booklet 2014 2ff OFFICIALbooklet 2014 2ff OFFICIAL
booklet 2014 2ff OFFICIAL
 
Bear Rocks
Bear RocksBear Rocks
Bear Rocks
 
Neptune Case Study
Neptune Case StudyNeptune Case Study
Neptune Case Study
 
Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...
Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...
Potential Impacts of Pipeline Development on the Landscape of Hopewell Big Wo...
 
Alex Frost - Conservation Biology
Alex Frost - Conservation BiologyAlex Frost - Conservation Biology
Alex Frost - Conservation Biology
 
2015 PEC Annual Report
2015 PEC Annual Report2015 PEC Annual Report
2015 PEC Annual Report
 
Heins mapping water analysis wk 2
Heins mapping water analysis wk 2Heins mapping water analysis wk 2
Heins mapping water analysis wk 2
 
Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)
Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)
Invasive Species Adaptive Managment Plan (NFCLP)
 
IJSRED-V2I4P13
IJSRED-V2I4P13IJSRED-V2I4P13
IJSRED-V2I4P13
 
AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...
AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...
AS 91240 NCEA LEVEL 2 - LARGE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT - TONGARIRO VOLCANIC CENTRE...
 
Nisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft Presentation
Nisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft PresentationNisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft Presentation
Nisqually Watershed Stewardship Plan: Status Report 2018 Draft Presentation
 
ConceptualRestorationPlanFinal
ConceptualRestorationPlanFinalConceptualRestorationPlanFinal
ConceptualRestorationPlanFinal
 
Fall_08_WildEast
Fall_08_WildEastFall_08_WildEast
Fall_08_WildEast
 
Jim salinger presentation
Jim salinger presentationJim salinger presentation
Jim salinger presentation
 
Harewood Community Profile
Harewood Community ProfileHarewood Community Profile
Harewood Community Profile
 

More from Eric Carpenter

Timeline Revision Gantt Chart
Timeline Revision Gantt ChartTimeline Revision Gantt Chart
Timeline Revision Gantt ChartEric Carpenter
 
NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)
NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)
NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)Eric Carpenter
 
NorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlan
NorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlanNorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlan
NorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlanEric Carpenter
 
NorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposal
NorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposalNorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposal
NorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposalEric Carpenter
 

More from Eric Carpenter (6)

Comgen Final Poster
Comgen Final PosterComgen Final Poster
Comgen Final Poster
 
Timeline Revision Gantt Chart
Timeline Revision Gantt ChartTimeline Revision Gantt Chart
Timeline Revision Gantt Chart
 
NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)
NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)
NorthCreekForest_SP16(Final Version)
 
PlantingPlanFinale
PlantingPlanFinalePlantingPlanFinale
PlantingPlanFinale
 
NorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlan
NorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlanNorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlan
NorthCreekForestUWRENWorkPlan
 
NorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposal
NorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposalNorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposal
NorthCreekForestUWRENFinalProposal
 

NorthCreekForest_SA15.doc

  • 1. 2015-2016 UW-REN SITE ASSESSMENT North Creek Forest Eric Carpenter, Peter Clarke, Kai Farmer, Thomas Radon, Batzorig Tuvshinjargal, Nick Vradenburg BES 462 A- RestorationEcology
  • 2. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 i Contents Contents ............................................................................................................................... i Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 RFP Synopsis........................................................................................................................ 1 Site Description................................................................................................................... 1 History................................................................................................................................. 3 Topography ......................................................................................................................... 4 Soils ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Hydrology............................................................................................................................ 8 Vegetation........................................................................................................................... 8 Habitat............................................................................................................................... 12 Disturbance....................................................................................................................... 13 Matrix................................................................................................................................ 14 Human Context ................................................................................................................. 15 Impaired Ecological Functions .......................................................................................... 16 Likelihood of Autogenic Repair......................................................................................... 17 Appendix A........................................................................................................................ 17 Sources.............................................................................................................................. 19
  • 3. 1 Introduction This site assessment is for the 2015-2016 UW-REN site in the North Creek Forest. The subject is located in a residential area and is enjoyed by residents and students alike. Our project is one of many at this location initiated by Friends of North Creek Forest. Their intention is to buy up as much of the forest as they can for the purposes of restoring and protecting for future generations to enjoy. The value of this forest as a teaching tool cannot be underestimated, nor can its aesthetic value. The problem with the site is that is has become overrun by introduced invasive species and specific to our site there is significant risk of mudslides and general sediment and erosion off of the steep hillside that makes up the western border of the subject site. These issues will present a challenge, however, we are all excited at the prospect of initiating and seeing through the completion of this restoration site to the satisfaction of our clients, Friends of North Creek Forest (FNCF). RFP Synopsis Our site is located downhill of a residential neighborhood and bordered by steep slopes on the western edge. This site is adjacent to the site that was restored by the 2014-2015 UW- REN team (just north). According to our Community Partner, Friends of North Creek Forest, this site offers many opportunities to conduct different restoration activities. One of the main concerns and primary consideration of our efforts is the abundance and domination of invasive species. Our project goals as stated in the RFP, submitted by FNCF, is invasive removal and forest enhancement. In order to achieve forest enhancement we need to focus on restoring native vegetation, controlling soil and sediment erosion as well as building trails and implementing a maintenance plan. Site Description North Creek Forest is a 64 acre mixed conifer forest located within the City of Bothell, about a mile North-East of City Hall. The forest is surrounded by the City of Bothell to the North, West and South. The Eastern edge of the forest is bordered by Interstate 405 (Map 1).
  • 4. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 2 There are schools in the area, with Canyon Park Junior High and Maywood Hills Elementary within walking distance of the forest. The project site within North Creek Forest we intend to restore is located on the Western Edge of the forest near where NE 204th Pl. and 108th Ave NE meet, in close proximity to surrounding housing to the North and West, with the forest stretching further south bordering more residential housing (Map 1). The project site is a part of the North Creek watershed. Surface runoff and groundwater from seepage points within the project site and surrounding forest recharges North Creek. Starting from the Western border our site slopes down, gradually leveling off until you reach the Eastern edge, where it flattens out slightly. We have further broken our site down into four polygons due to topographical and vegetative differences. Accessibility played a major role in the formation of polygons as well. Most of the site is an impenetrable thicket, so in some cases divisions of the site are based on trails we created. Polygons 1 and 2 are divided from polygons 3 and 4 due to the topographical differences we see, where 1 and 2 are considerably sloped, 3 and 4 are much less so, but polygon 4 has the most variability in vegetation and topography. Polygons 1 and 3 were separated from polygons 2 and 4 based upon changes in vegetation and accessibility. The line that divides these two sets of polygons is a trail that we made (Map 1). Overall the hill slope within the project site is steep and the soils saturated through much of the year, but high degrees of variability in slope, elevation, moisture, canopy cover, and vegetation are present throughout.
  • 5. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 3 History “North Creek Forest is 64 acres of Upland Coniferous forest. The forest can be considered mixed with old growth elements that includes nine wetlands and seven streams.”(FNCF 2011-2015) This area was once home to many Native American Tribes. Ultimately, settlers made their way out west and began buying land in the Bothell Area. In 1870, Columbus S. Greenleaf and George R. Wilson filed land claims, and in 1876 George Brackett bought land for commercial logging (FNCF 2011-2015). In 1885 Brackett sold about 80 acres of this land to David Bothell and a town was named in his honor in 1888, officially being incorporated in 1909 as the city of Bothell. This area grew substantially due to logging and fishing in the area. Suburban development proceeded after WWII making Bothell a bedroom community for those who worked in Seattle. This continued until about 1990 when businesses started to move out into suburban areas in greater numbers. During this time, after being logged extensively in the early 1900’s, North Creek Forest was largely left alone and allowed to recover to the stage Map 1: satellite view of NCF, with project location and topographical inset (FNCF)
  • 6. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 4 we see today. Much of the forested areas in and around North Creek Forest were logged to make room for more housing. To stop development of more houses being built, advocates for the forest began an organization known as “Friends of North Creek Forest”. A group whose mission statement reads “To maintain and improve the biological function of North Creek Forest through education, stewardship and conservation in perpetuity.” In 2011 FNCF began putting many hundreds of hours into grant applications to raise funds, and in doing so managed to draw over $500,000. They used this money to purchase their first 35 acres of the remaining forest; with 6 more acres being purchased at the end of 2013. There is still fundraising going on to this day to try to purchase the remaining available acreage and with over 40 acres of land in hand, FNCF have begun to utilize this area to educate the public, bringing awareness to the forefront, and use the forest to teach local students why area like this are such a necessity among our ever expanding borders of Urban sprawl (FNCF 2011-2015). Topography Our site at North Creek Forest Park is bordered by NE 204 Pl to the west and private property (10654 NE 204th Pl. Bothell, WA 98011) to the north. The Northern Boundary, running along the 240°-60° transect, is 145’ long with an average eastern facing slope of 0.21o. The western border, running along the 165°-345° transect, is 53’ long with an average slope of zero. The southern border, along the 82°-262° transect, is 90’ long and has an average slope of 0.26o. The western border, along the 9°-189° transect, is 114’ long and has an average slope of 0.06o.
  • 7. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 5 The hillside consists of fairly smooth transitions with no major features across all polygons with the exception of Polygon 4 which contains a small section with the steep slope of 1.0o. This slope connects to a small stream which runs through the corner of the polygon. The stream runs from 1.5’-2’ wide and though the average water level is only 2”-3”, the stream channel ranges from 2’-3.5’ deep. It forms a semicircle, entering the northern boundary 15’ from the northeastern corner and exiting the eastern boundary 11’ from the northeastern border. Map 2: Shows topographic features of the project site
  • 8. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 6 The site has a rough trail approximately 4’ wide that runs along the eastern edge of the site. It is more like a mud pit than a trail because of all the water it receives due to its location at the downhill edge of the site. This feature will be enhanced and possibly shifted through our work so ultimately the location has yet to be laid out. Soils We collected 8 different soil samples throughout our project site. Polygon 1 - Two soil samples were taken from Polygon 1. Even though the samples we took were fairly separate from each other, both of them showed similar features. In both of the samples, there was standing water on the surface. The O horizons were saturated, consisting of dark brown soil with some small twigs intermixed. For the A horizons, they formed ribbons that were up to 5cm long and they felt smooth with little bit of grain. Thus, we identified the soil texture in both samples to be silty clay loam. Polygon 2 – We took one soil sample on the northern border and one in the middle. An important factor that we should note is that the sample we took on the border was located beneath an isolated western red cedar patch that is on a slight mound separating it from the slope. At this sampling location, there was approximately 1 inch of western redcedar leaf litter and small twigs on the surface. The soil in the O horizon was slightly moist and contained some old, dead roots. Moreover, the soil was dark brown and really compact. When we dug deeper into the A horizon, there were several worms present and there was also some gray coloration. In addition, the soil was half gritty and half smooth, so we identified it as clay loam. Trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus) was present here as well, which was absent in most other places of the site most likely due to the difference in soil composition. The second soil sample located in the middle of Polygon 2 was layered with a ½ inch of leaf litter with lots of big twigs. It was fully saturated and was dark brown. The A horizon was moist to saturated with a sticky and gleyed constituency. There were a number of plant species growing in it, including salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus bifrons), English ivy (Helix hedera), and horsetail (Equisetum ssp.). We identified the soil as loam since it felt both gritty and smooth.
  • 9. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 7 Polygon 3 - We only took one soil sample in this polygon because the majority of the area was surrounded by dead logs and a heavy population of R. bifrons, which made it difficult for us to go to the desired sampling location. Therefore, the one sample we took was right along the trail. The soil was saturated and had some standing water on surface. We were able to spot some invertebrates in the O horizon, but none were observed in the A horizon. The soil in the A horizon was sticky and compact with little moisture. The soil felt mostly smooth with a little bit of grain, so we identified it as silty clay loam. A note about this location is that we pulled out some deserted wood and trash within the A horizon, meaning that it had been there for an extended period of time. Polygon 4 - We took two soil samples on the trail. There was not much leaf litter on the trail in comparison to the rest of the site, but there were still some decaying leaves present. The first place that we tried to sample was difficult to dig through, and it also had some standing water on the surface. The O horizon contained some small twigs and dead roots, and the color of the soil was dark brown. The A horizon was similar in color, but it also had a slightly orange coloration. In addition, it did not form long ribbon, but the bottom horizon was fully saturated so we could not perform a legitimate ribbon test. Finally, it was gleyed and sticky, so we identified it as loam. For the second soil sample in this polygon, there was no standing water and there was about a ½ inch of leaf litter. The color of the soil was same as most of our other samples (dark brown) and it was slightly moist. The A horizon was almost dry (slightly moist), and it was somewhat sticky. The A horizon had some gray in its coloration and it was not very compact. However, when we moistened the soil and performed the ribbon test, we were able to form a ribbon that was almost 5 cm long. Finally, the soil felt smooth with some grit, so we identified it as silty clay loam.
  • 10. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 8 Hydrology The majority of the project site is on a slope, which runs parallel to city streets in a residential neighborhood. Excessive rain can result in runoff from the street and from the top of the slope. The water travels down a steep gradient from west to east, collecting in pockets where the land periodically flattens out. No surface water was directly seen flowing down the slope at the time of our first visit; however, waterlogged soils were observed throughout the site shortly after a rain event and were also seen days after the rain. The flatter places where surface waters tend to gather, were inundated with standing water. This tells us that the soil drains poorly. On the northwestern corner of the site, the slope curves slightly to the east. Instead of surface water at this location flowing directly east like most of the other runoff, the surface water on the curving slope flows southeast, creating larger pockets of water on the northern portion of the site. The levels of standing water were observed to be higher here than in areas located further south. The northern most edge of the perimeter is an isolated patch of large western redcedars (Thuja plicata). These trees are located on a slightly elevated portion of land. This added elevation prevents excess runoff from collecting there, which has left the soil there much drier than in other areas of the site. Also, just north of these cedars and beyond the boundary of the site is a small drainage creek that flows east. The majority of surface water from the site will not drain that far north, but the previously established foot trail that acts as the eastern boundary of the site has a slight decline in elevation towards the north. This allows surface runoff on the northeastern corner of the site to drain into this creek. Vegetation The vegetation cover across the site is highly variable but R. spectabilis and R. bifrons are the most common species. Dense impenetrable thickets comprised of these two species cover approximately 60% of the site (Map 1, Map 2). The areas in which these two species are
  • 11. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 9 dominant are halted in the primary stage of succession with very little trees present. The dominant tree species is T. plicata, some red alder (Alnus rubra) and big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) are present as well. The overall community type of the site is a mixture of THPL/RUSP (western red cedar/salmonberry) and ALRU/LYAM (red alder/skunk cabbage) (Kunze 1994). Existing trees are 20 -100 years in age, representative of second growth forest in the secondary stage of succession. Diversity in structure is great across the site, with mature T. plicata located in polygon 4 (Map 2) and nothing above 10 feet in height located in the R. spectabilis/R. bifrons thickets (see Map 1, Map 2). The community types vary based on hydrology and canopy conditions. There appears to be a seepage flowing eastward through the site; this wet area is consistent with the R. spectabilis/R. bifrons thicket, and has no canopy cover. Where canopy cover is present or soils are drier, the vegetation changes, most notably to a PSME-THPL/GASH-MANE/POMU (Douglas-fir-western red cedar/Salal-Oregon grape/sword fern) community type located in the Northeast corner of Polygon 4 (see Map 2) (WSDNR 2015). A total of 19 plant species have been identified within the project site, 3 of which are invasive (See Appendix A). Invasive species are prevalent through most of the site, although none are present in the Northeast corner of polygon 4. H. helix is covering the ground and wrapped around trees and snags in polygon 1 and 2, it is only present where at least some canopy cover is present and soil is not inundated. H. helix is also present in abundance outside of the project site adjacent to the Western border (Map 3). R. bifrons is present in all polygons in varied abundance, it seems to only occur where canopy gaps allow ample light infiltration. Where canopy cover is at 100% invasive species are not present, such as the northeast corner of polygon 4 (Map 3). The vegetation across the project site does not fit cleanly into one community type, because of environmental heterogeneity, but it is likely that the presence of invasive species has halted succession and altered the composition of vegetation communities. Polygon 1 contains A. macrophyllum and vine maple (Acer circinatum) but the area is dominated by a carpet of H. helix and a thicket comprised of mainly R. bifrons. H. helix accounts for approximately 60% cover in polygon 1. The large A. macrophyllum is almost entirely covered with H. helix with few branches exposed near the canopy. Some native understory species are
  • 12. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 10 present in small amounts in sporadic locations. These understory species are lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina), sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and Equisetum ssp. Polygon 2 is dominated by dense, impenetrable thickets of R. spectabilis and R. bifrons. These two species alone account for approximately 80% cover of polygon 2. Some skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum) and Equisetum ssp. are present at sporadic locations throughout this this thicket. 3 young (under 40 years old) T. plicata are located along the Eastern border of polygon 2 (Map 4). H. helix is present in this polygon where it completely covers a snag at the southwestern corner (Map 3). Polygon 3 is dominated by A. rubra and T. plicata but it also contains thickets comprised of R. spectabilis and R. bifrons. A ground cover of H. helix and piggy-back plant/youth-on-age (Tolmiea menziesii) is present in the Southeast corner. P. munitum and Equisetum ssp. are sporadically located throughout polygon 3 in small quantities. Polygon 4 is by far the most diverse with regard to vegetation, although, R. spectabilis and R. bifrons combined account for approximately 70% cover in the shrub layer. Much of the polygon is dominated by a dense thicket of R. spectabilis and R. bifrons but A. rubra, T. plicata, cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), L. americanum, English holly (Ilex aquifolium), Equisetum ssp, red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), and western-beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta var. californica) become intermixed with the thicket in spots. In the Northeast corner of polygon 4 the vegetation begins to transition into a T. plicata and low Oregon-grape (Mahonia nervosa) dominated landscape where the soil is drier and the canopy begins to close. The community type of the Northeast corner can be described as PSME-THPL/GASH-MANE/POMU (Douglas-fir- western red cedar/Salal-Oregon grape/sword fern) community type, but the vegetation is highly variable towards the R. spectabilis and R. bifrons thicket (Map 4) (WSDNR 2015).
  • 13. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 11 Map 3: shows invasive vegetation
  • 14. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 12 Habitat The site allows for a variety of wildlife to find suitable habitat, and there are several different resources available for animals to utilize. No wildlife was spotted within the boundaries of the site while we were there but, the potential exists. This prime habitat has likely caught the attention of numerous species. Woody debris is the most commonly found habitat resource on the site. Wind events have downed a significant number of trees in the area, and this has created an ample source of logs. Bacteria and fungi arrive when there is a presence of logs and begin the process of decomposition. The decaying wood is attractive to insects and other small organisms, and these in turn become food for larger animals such as birds. One example of a bird that has been spotted nearby in other areas of North Creek Forest is the pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus Map 4: Shows native vegetation
  • 15. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 13 pileatus), which uses its long beak to remove and eat insects out of logs (DNR). Logs and woody debris are also useful to add nutrients and organic material into the soil. Certain species such as western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) are adapted to use decaying wood as a substrate for their own establishment. Snags are another important element in the site that will prove useful to wildlife. Many different birds and mammals are able to use snags as shelter. An example of a species that has been seen in North Creek Forest before is the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), which uses the tops of snags for nesting (DNR). Snags also decompose in the same way that logs do, and this decomposition attracts insects which can be used as food by birds and small mammals. There are two large snags that have been located in our site, but one is currently engulfed the invasive by H. helix. There are several tall, western redcedars along the boundaries of the site, primarily in the northern portion. These trees have evergreen foliage that provide small mammals and birds with shelter over the winter months. The foliage is a good heat insulator, and some mammals are able to use the foliage for browse. There are also several species present within the shrub and groundcover layers that are berry-producing, such as R. spectabilis, M. nervosa, and although invasive and subject to removal, R. bifrons. Birds and small mammals are able to consume these berries, which act as an important source of food. Disturbance The project site is vulnerable to various disturbances due to the high degree of environmental heterogeneity across polygons. All 4 polygons are at risk for vegetation trampling and introduction of invasive plant seeds from visitor’s boots, due to the use of North Creek Forest for education, research, art and recreation. All 4 polygons have poorly drained soils, increasing the likelihood of downed trees in severe wind or rain events. The sparse existence of mature conifers in all polygons causes concern for further invasion of R. bifrons and other invasive species. Polygon 1 is at risk of erosion due to the steep slope and high moisture content in soils. Polygons 1 and 2 contain the invasive species H. helix and R. bifrons, they also show the highest risk for reinvasion because these species cover the private property at
  • 16. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 14 western edge of the project site. Polygon 2 is also susceptible to erosion due to the wet soil, steep slope and lack of trees or soil binding species. Considerable amounts of debris and trash were observed in polygon 2 during the site assessment. Polygon 3 has some of the wettest soils, this could cause existing trees to fall during wind events. Two newly fallen A. rubra were observed on the eastern edge of polygon 3 adjacent to the trail. Polygon 4 is at risk for erosion and windfall, the stream that cuts through the Northeast corner of this polygon has also shown signs of erosion. Matrix NCF is located right in between a residential area and highway 405. This area is the only forest that acts as a buffer in the City of Bothell. This project site is in close proximity to the walking trail and residential area. The area to the west is surrounded by houses but there is a massive amount of invasive species right in the middle of the residential area and our site. In addition to the invasive species, R. Spectabilis covers a large portion of our project site. Aerial view of the features adjacent to the site ---- Source: Google Maps White box: North Creek Forest ---- Red Star: REN Capstone Site 2015-2016
  • 17. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 15 The CP has requested that we leave some of the Salmonberry in order to maintain the privacy of the residents. So, most of the species we will be removing are Himalayan blackberry, English ivy, and some salmonberry in places where is it not needed for concealment. The walking trail is on the eastern border of our project site. Next to the trail, there are many dead trees and two big stumps; there is also an old pipe that is right on the walking trail. These may have to be removed. UWREN 2014-15 project site is located on the south side. There is drainage that is located at the northeastern side of our site, as well as a small creek that runs directly through the northeastern border of the project site. Human Context Surrounding North Creek Forest are suburban development areas and highways. This area used to be forest similar to North Creek, but, has since been logged and converted for anthropogenic purposes. Besides logging done over the past century, pollution from humans including trash and car exhaust have had some effect on the area, especially on its perimeters. Additionally, many of the invasive species have made their way into the forest due to the surrounding areas. When people buy a house and have a garden, they tend to plant species that aren’t native to the area. This can contribute heavily to the invasive plant species problem we currently see in the area. At this time, the community does not use our site and there seems to be little to no pedestrian traffic going through the area. We are however, adjacent to previous UW-REN sites and trails through the forest where people frequently walk. Our site is located very close to a few houses. This could complicate our restoration progress, depending on the people who live here and their compliance in not further polluting the area with trash and not planting invasive species near the site, which is essentially their back yard.
  • 18. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 16 Impaired Ecological Functions Widespread establishment of English ivy has proved to be troublesome throughout the site where it has ample access to sunlight. It has been observed climbing up the trunks of trees, one of which has been completely choked out and died. Also, there are areas where it is interspersed with several native groundcover species such as youth-on-age, which runs the risk of being completely outcompeted. Native tree and shrub saplings cannot grow nearby these large patches of English ivy or they will be choked out. There is a large, mixed thicket of salmonberry and Himalayan blackberry in the center of the site. This thicket is quite dense and has prevented the growth of other shrubs and groundcover that could compete. There are some species located within the thicket itself that have either been damaged or stunted. Examples include skunk cabbage and lady fern. No tree saplings are able to grow within the thicket, and this has prevented successional development within the site. Shade is unable to be created due to the lack of canopy development, and this has created an ideal habitat for invasive species that have already been established. Trees will not be able to establish or develop if this thicket is not mitigated. Areas along the slope where there is a lack of shrubs or trees has softer upper layers of soil than soil that is hosting shrubs or trees. There is nothing holding this soil together, which has left it vulnerable to erosion. The soil is already drainage-poor and does not dry or solidify very well, so without the assistance of roots to help compress the soil, surface runoff heading down the slope will transport the upper layers of the soil away from the site and will degrade Salmonberry/Himalayan Blackberry thicket ---- Source: Kai Farmer
  • 19. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 17 the landscape over time. Also, the saturation and poor drainage of soil will create difficult conditions for native lowland forest species to establish. The site appears to be far wetter than the adjacent sections of North Creek Forest, so the installation of similar species that are located in other areas of the forest may not achieve the same success at this location. Likelihood of Autogenic Repair The likelihood for autogenic repair of this project site is low due to the concentrations of invasive species present. North Creek forest was logged a century ago and the native species present within the project site do represent autogenic recovery but, little canopy has established and invasive species cover is likely to increase over time. Multiple trees on and directly adjacent to the Western border of the project site are covered with H. helix, one of which has fallen and become a snag. It is likely that without intervention through restoration other trees within the project site will become killed by H. helix. Much of the project site is densely covered with a mixture of R. bifrons and R. spectabilis, resulting in little biodiversity within these areas. Conifers have not regenerated in most of the project site, if this area is not restored it is likely to become dominated even further by R. bifrons, H. helix, I. aquifolium and R. spectabilis with little canopy cover. The existing canopy also provides favorable light conditions for further invasion and establishment of dominance by invasive species. The loss of existing trees may cause further erosion in the stream (polygon 4) and erosion of the soil throughout the project site. Appendix A. Scientific Name Common Name Rubus spectabilis Salmonberry
  • 20. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 18 Thuja plicata Western Redcedar Lysichiton americanum Skunk Cabbage Tolmeia menziessi Piggyback plant/ youth upon age Oemlaria cerasiformis Indian Plum Acer macrophyllum Big Leaf Maple Acer circinatum Vine Maple Equisetum ssp. Common Horsetail Polystichum munitum Sword Fern Athyrium felix-femina Lady fern Alnus Rubra Red Alder Vaccinium Parvifolium Red Huckleberry Mahonia nervosa Low Oregon Grape/ Cascade Oregon Grape Corylus cornuta var. californica Beaked Hazelnut Rhamnus purshiana Cascara Pseudotsuga menziessi subsp. menziessi Douglas Fir Rubus bifrons INVASIVE Himalayan Blackberry Hedera helix INVASIVE English Ivy Ilix aquifolium INVASIVE English Holly
  • 21. North Creek Forest 2015-2016 Restoration Site Assessment 5 November 2015 19 Sources FNCF: Friends of North Creek Forest [Internet]. C2011-2015 [cited 2015 Nov 2]. Available from; http://www.friendsofnorthcreekforest.org/ DNR: Department of Natural Resources. Creating a wild Backyard – Snags & Logs [Internet]. Maryland.gov; [cited 2015 Oct. 30] http://dnr2.maryland.gov/wildlife/Documents/Snags_Logs.pdf Kunze L. 1994. Preliminary Classification of Native, Low Elevation, Freshwater Wetland Vegetation in Western Washington. Olympia (WA): Washington Natural Heritage Program, Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Available from: http://wadnr.s3.amazonaws.com/publications/amp_nh_wetland_class.pdf WSDNR: Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Reference Desk of the Washington Natural Heritage Program [Internet]. C2015 [cited 2015 Nov 5]. Available from: http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/communities/pdf/psme-thpl-gash-mane-pomu.pdf Kai Farmer - Photos