Summary

Final Environmental 

Impact Statement

Dosewallips Road Washout Project

Hood Canal Ranger District, Olympic National Forest

Olympic National Park

Jefferson County, Washington

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Forest Service

Pacific 

Northwest

Region

September 2010
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS ii

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political 

beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all 

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program 

information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 

720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of 

Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 

DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider 

and employer.
Summary

1 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Final Environmental Impact Statement

Dosewallips Road Washout Project

SUMMARY

Introduction

The Dosewallips Road Washout Project (DRWP) addresses conditions created by a storm in 

January 2002 which washed away a portion of Forest Service Road (FSR) 2610. Subsequent 

storms also damaged a portion of Olympic National Park’s (ONP’s or park’s) Dosewallips Road 

about 4 miles west of the damage on FSR 2610. Reestablishing road access is needed to restore 

motorized access to developed recreation facilities on both the Olympic National Forest (ONF) 

and ONP thereby meeting Forest objectives and desired conditions as identified in the Olympic 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) and park goals and mission as 

identified in the park’s General Management Plan (2008). This final environmental impact 

statement (FEIS) assesses three alternatives for reestablishing road access on FSR 2610, with the 

proposed repair on the Dosewallips Road in the park being consistent with each alternative. The 

Olympic National Forest of the U.S. Forest Service is the lead agency in the preparation of this 

FEIS, and the Olympic National Park is a cooperating agency. Collectively both agencies are 

referred to as the Agencies.

Changes between Draft and Final EIS

The DEIS was circulated for a 60 day public review and comment from June to August 2008. 

Over 500 pieces of correspondence were received during the comment period. The Forest 

Service responded to public and internal comments in a variety of ways including: modifying the 

action alternatives (added a proposed Forest Plan amendment to drop a Survey and Manage 

standard requiring fungi equivalent-effort surveys and updated the park road repair description), 

supplementing the analysis, and making corrections to the analysis. A summary of public 

comments and Forest Service responses is provided in Appendix C.

Project Location

Project areas are located on the Hood Canal Ranger District of the ONF, and on the ONP; both in 

Jefferson County, Washington. Proposed Forest Service (FS) activities are located along FSR 

2610 about 10 miles west of Brinnon, Washington and Highway 101. The project area is 

bounded on the north by the Buckhorn Wilderness, on the south by The Brothers Wilderness, 

and is within the Dosewallips Key Watershed (77,800 acres) as identified in the Northwest 

Forest Plan Record of Decision (USDA/USDI 1994). The legal description is Township 26 

North, Range 3 West, Sections 16 and 17. Proposed park activities are located along its 

Dosewallips Road about 4 miles west of the FS project area, legal description is Township 26 

North, Range 4 West, Sections 23 and 24.
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 2

Background

During a storm in January 2002 approximately 310 feet of FSR 2610 washed out. The washout 

size had increased to about 520 feet as measured in September 2010. The washout cut off road 

access to approximately 5 miles of FS and ONP roads which had provided access to the ONF 

Elkhorn Campground and the ONP Dosewallips Ranger Station, campground, and several 

trailheads. FSR 2610 and the Dosewallips Road provide one of two motorized access portals 

into ONP on the east side of the Olympic peninsula.

FSR 2610 is a single lane road with turnouts, surfaced with aggregate (crushed rock). This road 

up to Elkhorn Campground, which includes the washout section, is maintained for passenger cars 

(FS maintenance level 3).1 Prior to the washout it had provided access to Elkhorn Campground 

for vehicles pulling trailers and recreational vehicles (RVs). In 2001 approximately 1900 people 

used campsites at Elkhorn. 

In May 2002 the FS prepared an environmental assessment (EA) to analyze management 

alternatives for responding to the conditions created by the washout. Based on a need for 

additional information that EA was revised in February 2003. After a public comment period on 

the February 2003 EA a decision was made in March 2004 to reestablish road access via a 

reroute located upslope and north of the washout. This decision was subsequently withdrawn to 

complete a more detailed analysis, which was documented in a draft environmental impact 

statement (DEIS) prepared in May 2008 and in this FEIS.

In late 2003 about 120 feet of the Dosewallips Road in the ONP at Milepost (MP) 0.85 (0.85 

mile from the park boundary and about 4 miles from the washout on FSR 2610) near the 

Dosewallips Falls sustained damage when retaining walls failed. Cedar log retaining structures 

were constructed in the 1940’s along a very steep area of the exposed bedrock side channel and 

along with more recently placed gabion baskets supported the outbound lane of the road. Failure 

of the retaining structures resulted in slumping of the road fill material. A site visit in 2010 

determined that appropriate road stabilization work would involve removing the remaining log 

structural members and completing drainage work, which would involve a total of 225 feet of 

road.

The Dosewallips Road is an extension of FSR 2610 that dead-ends in the park. It is a single lane 

road with turnouts, surfaced with aggregate, and is maintained at park primitive road standards. 

A steep section of the road in the vicinity of the road failure is not recommended for large RVs 

and vehicles pulling trailers. Prior to the washout and road failure it had provided access to the 

Dosewallips Campgound, Ranger Station and several trailheads. The road also provided 

motorized access for park trail maintenance operations on the east side of ONP and a helicopter 

search and rescue base located near the campground.

Development of Purpose and Need

Purpose and need is an important part of the NEPA process and answers the question “Why 

 1 Maintenance Level 3 – Road is open to public travel and is maintained for passenger car use.
Summary

3 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

would we consider taking any action?” Development and definition of purpose and need is 

determined by the Responsible Official. It is important that the purpose and need be focused to 

properly identify relevant issues, develop reasonable alternatives, and focus the Responsible 

Official’s decision on the issues at hand. The evolution of this project’s focused purpose and 

need can be described by looking at the project’s NEPA process. 

The Dosewallips Road Washout Project NEPA process has been longer than is typical for most 

Forest projects and also has a higher degree of complexity. As the NEPA process has developed 

since the washout in 2002 there have been changes in the project’s analysis framework. A 

description of the NEPA process and how it has changed over the life of this project is as follows 

and is important to an understanding of the current analysis framework. This is especially 

important due to the high degree of public interest in this project and the strong opinions 

expressed on both sides of the motorized access issue.

The NEPA process for this project began soon after the washout occurred in January 2002. Initial 

consideration was given to categorically excluding this project but a preliminary analysis of the 

degree of potential effects to some resource conditions indicated that further analysis 

documented in an EA was appropriate. After that decision by the Hood Canal District Ranger, 

who was the Responsible Official at the time, scoping or public involvement began in March of 

2002. The preliminary purpose and need was identified as restoring access and the preliminary 

range of alternatives included an alternative to decommission and convert to trail the section of 

road beyond the washout. 

As a result of the March 2002 scoping the Hood Canal District Ranger decided to establish 

“restoring access” as the purpose and need, and included a decommission and convert to trail 

alternative in the EA. It was also decided to include “Type of Access” as a major issue, which 

looked at what type (motorized vs. non-motorized) of recreational and administrative access 

should be provided. An EA was prepared in May 2002 and based on a need for additional 

information the EA was revised in February 2003. The revised EA did not change the purpose 

and need, issues, or range of alternatives.

Before a decision was made on this project there was a change in who was the Responsible 

Official. To avoid confusion on the resolution of any administrative appeals to a decision made 

on this project the Olympic National Forest Supervisor became the Responsible Official. So it 

was the Forest Supervisor who made a decision in March 2004 to reestablish road access via a 

reroute located upslope and north of the washout. This decision was subsequently withdrawn to 

complete a more detailed analysis.

The Forest Supervisor continued as the Responsible Official for the more detailed analysis 

(contained in this EIS) and established a purpose and need statement focused on motorized 

access based on his review of the analysis in the February 2003 EA, comments received on the 

project, input from the park, and his identification of the desired condition as being road access 

to Forest and park recreation facilities to restore the opportunity for people to realize the benefits 

these facilities were developed for and were intended to provide. Consequently the April 2005 

Project Initiation Letter; the August 12, 2005 Notice of Intent in the Federal Register; and 

August 16, 2005 EIS scoping letter all identified the purpose and need as reestablishing road 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 4

access. 

The more focused purpose and need serves a valuable purpose in focusing and developing a 

reasonable range of alternatives. While there are those who have in the past and continue to 

support an alternative to decommission the road beyond the washout and convert it to a walking 

trail, the Responsible Official has determined that this alternative does not meet the project’s 

need of motorized access. Comments supporting non-motorized access were not ignored by the 

Responsible Official in making his decision on focusing the purpose and need on motorized 

access but it would be misleading and inappropriate to analyze and consider any alternatives that 

do not meet the identified purpose and need and would not result in achieving the desired 

condition for the resource. 

Purpose and Need for Action

Purpose and need is defined by the Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations as the 

underlying need to which an agency is responding. The existence of a need is established by 

disparities between the existing and desired condition in a given area, for a focused situation and 

element. 

It is not uncommon for the Forest Service to pursue an action to meet another agency’s or 

organization’s need. The Forest surrounds the park for about 75% of the park’s interior or nonOlympic Coast boundary. Consequently a majority of the motorized access routes into the 

interior portion of the park, which are integral to the park meeting its recreational objectives, first 

cross the Forest. This is the case for the Dosewallips Road and as such the Forest is taking action 

to meet the park’s need. 

Existing Condition

As previously described the Dosewallips Road has sustained damage on both the Forest and park 

sections of the road, resulting in a lack of motorized access to the Forest’s Elkhorn Campground, 

but most importantly to all the park facilities in the Dosewallips River drainage. These facilities 

include the Dosewallips Campground, ranger station and trailheads. 

Development of Desired Condition

The desired future condition (DFC) for recreation, both overall and specifically for the 

Dosewallips area, on both the Forest and the park is described in their respective planning 

documents (the park’s General Management Plan and the Forest’s Land and Resource 

Management Plan [with additional guidance in the August 2007 Recreation Facility Analysis]). 

While each agency has its own specific recreation management objectives as described below, in 

general they complement each other and were developed in response to the same demographic 

conditions (characteristics of a human population). 

A more complete social/economic demographic analysis is contained in Chapter 3 of this 

document but is summarized here in order to provide an understanding of each agency’s 

recreation objectives in the Dosewallips area. The context of the demographic analysis is the 
Summary

5 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Dosewallips market zone, which generally identifies where visitors come from that use the 

recreation facilities in the park and Forest in the Dosewallips area. The Dosewallips market zone 

includes users from the local Olympic Peninsula (about 50% of total users) and non-local users 

from the Puget Sound area (about 25% of total users).

Trends in demographic factors are important considerations in identifying desired recreation 

conditions. The following are some key trends for the Dosewallips market zone.

• The market zone population has increased overall and a higher rate than the US population. 

An estimated 7 million people are within 150 miles of the Dosewallips area.

• In addition to the overall population growth, there is a steady growth in the population 

between the ages of 45-70. The Forest has the highest percentage of users over the age of 

50 (35%) of any forest in the Pacific Northwest Region.

• Walking is the most popular outdoor activity in Washington State. Walking with 

appropriate infra-structure is very important to seniors.

• Patterns and type of visitor use have changed. There is a shift from distant activities such as 

camping to local community based activities or “close to home” activities, such as walking.

• Use among youth and multicultural communities is low despite high representation in the 

region. Studies indicate that from 1997-2003 the proportion of 9-12 year old children who 

spent time on outdoor activities such as hiking fell by 50 percent and Pacific Northwest 

studies have shown Asian and Hispanic cultures prefer a higher development level of 

recreation infra-structure.

Olympic National Park DFC and Need

The park contains about 922,650 acres and has averaged 3.2 million recreation visits a year for 

the period 1990 to 2006. A majority of the yearly recreation visits, particularly to the interior 

portion of the park, are concentrated in the frontcountry (non-wilderness areas of the park where 

park and concession facilities may be located) areas with road access. Since 95% of the park is 

designated wilderness, only the remaining 5% of the park consists of road accessible 

frontcountry. The park identified a need to retain road access to existing developed areas, and in 

the park’s recently approved General Management Plan (GMP) the decision was made to retain 

road access to existing frontcountry areas (USDI NPS 2008). Keeping access to the existing 

developed areas is critical to the park’s goal of providing a range of recreational opportunities for 

both frontcountry and wilderness users. Specifically the decision was made to provide seasonal 

road access (adjusted depending on weather conditions) to Dosewallips, and retain the existing 

facilities and open the ranger station and campground seasonally.

The park’s GMP developed three broad management zones (frontcountry, special, and 

wilderness) and subsets of these zones, and applied them to different areas of the park. The mix 

of these zones as designated in the GMP allows the park to meet a diverse range of visitor 

recreation activities within the park’s overarching management guidance. Frontcountry areas 

with road access provide opportunities for less strenuous kinds of visitor recreation experiences, 

such as short nature hikes, sightseeing, and facilities such as developed campgrounds. The 

frontcountry zone is divided into three sub-zones; development, day use, and low-use; with the 

low-use zone applicable to the Dosewallips Road Washout Project. Areas within the low-use 

zone include those frontcountry areas that have fewer facilities and services and provide a more 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 6

remote or isolated visitor experience. As compared to the other frontcountry zones there would 

be more opportunities for solitude, remoteness, and presence of natural sounds.

The east side of the park, where there are only two motorized access routes into the park 

(Staircase and Dosewallips), is only 40 miles due west of the Seattle-Tacoma corridor. Public use 

numbers for the eastern portion of the park (Hoodsport District which includes Staircase and 

Dosewallips) show a drop in yearly average use since the washout, indicating that this 

component of the park’s recreation goal is not being met. For the post-washout period (2002-

2005) as compared to the pre-washout period (1996-2001), the numbers of recreation visitors and 

campground users were down 25%, and numbers of trail users were down 58% and backcountry 

users down 21%. As compared to the park-wide use figures for the same periods, as a whole 

Hoodsport District use is significantly down for campground and recreation visitors use, with a 

marked decrease in trail users as compared to park-wide use for this data set. Backcountry use 

for the Hoodsport District is also down but more closely follows the overall park downward 

trend in backcountry use.

The park has strongly supported restoring motorized access to their facilities at Dosewallips, as 

documented in letters to the Forest. In an April 3, 2003 comment letter on the 2003 EA the 

Acting Superintendent supported restoring motorized access to continue to provide access for 

park visitors to the Dosewallips Campground and trailheads. And in an April 15, 2009 letter the 

park superintendent stated the importance of the Dosewallips Road to the park. The Dosewallips 

area fills an important niche in providing for a wide range of visitor recreation experiences. It 

provides a camping experience in tune with the wilderness experience/concept for those people 

who do not have the ability to backpack and “rough it”. It has been an important family camping 

area and prior to the washout was a very popular drive in area that provided a unique experience 

among the park’s developed area campgrounds. 

Administrative access is an additional need for restoring motorized access to the facilities at 

Dosewallips. There is over $1,800,000 worth of infrastructure that cannot be adequately 

maintained without drive in access and much if not all of the infrastructure would likely be 

removed if drive in access is not restored.

Olympic National Forest DFC and Need

The 1990 Land and Resource Management Plan or Forest Plan designated the Elkhorn 

Campground to management prescription A3 – Developed Recreation Sites and Administrative 

Sites. At the time the Forest Plan was developed Elkhorn Campground filled an important 

recreational need. It was one of five campgrounds that consistently exceeded theoretical capacity 

and was planned for expansion. The Forest Plan envisioned that Elkhorn Campground would 

help meet the goal of providing a wide variety of recreation opportunities. The Forest Plan used 

the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) to describe the range of recreational opportunities 

provided by the Forest. Elkhorn Campground is one of only two campgrounds on the Forest in 

the Semi-Primitive Motorized class. 

Additionally the Olympic National Forest Outdoor Recreation Strategy (USDA 2007a), a tenyear recreation strategy, established desired conditions for recreation program areas that closely 
Summary

7 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

reflect direction in the Forest Plan, updated to incorporate recent analyses and new demographic 

information. It addresses the changing demographics, budgets, visitor trends, opportunities, and 

capacity on the Forest. Creation of the strategy was spurred by unprecedented growth in the 

communities surrounding the Forest over the last decade, particularly along the eastern and 

northern corridors, and changing recreational use patterns. The recreation niche identified in the 

strategy positions the Forest as a haven of day use opportunities. A key component of the 

strategy is the four “Cornerstones” which are developed campgrounds intended to serve as 

staging areas from which to access geographically unique day use activities. Seal Rock is one of 

the Cornerstones and is located just north of Brinnon, Washington along Highway 101.

Another component of the recreation strategy is developed recreation sites; which are 

campgrounds, picnic areas, and trailheads outside of the Cornerstones. According to the strategy 

the desired future condition for developed recreation sites near Cornerstones, which would 

include Elkhorn Campground as it is located about 12 miles from Seal Rock, is that these sites 

experience more intensive use and provide safe facilities accessible to a diverse public, including 

the physically challenged. 

Management direction for Elkhorn Campground is also included in the Forest’s Recreation 

Facility Analysis (USDA 2007b) which is a document that describes the vision for the overall 

Forest recreation program and outlines proposals specific to individual developed recreation 

sites. According to the analysis Elkhorn Campground is included in the management category of 

sites that meet the Forest’s recreation niche, are environmentally sustainable within the 

capability and capacity of the natural resources, are supported by and provide support to local 

communities, and have a sustainable management cost-benefit ratio.

Similar to the park, the Forest needs motorized access to adequately maintain the infrastructure 

at Elkhorn Campground. Resources would not be available to maintain Elkhorn as a walk-in 

campground and without motorized access this site would be treated as a dispersed site without 

facilities. A dispersed site would not meet the Forest’s recreation program direction for Elkhorn 

Campground. 

Project Purpose

Based on the park’s need as demonstrated in the management direction in the 2008 GMP and the 

Forest’s need as demonstrated in the Forest’s management direction, the purpose of this project 

is to reestablish road access to pre-washout standards (road access is recommended in the park’s 

GMP and the Forest’s Access and Travel Management [ATM] Plan) on FSR 2610 and the park’s 

Dosewallips Road to ONP and ONF recreation facilities. Access for passenger cars, vehicles 

pulling trailers, and RVs would be provided to Elkhorn Campground; with passenger car access 

to the park’s Dosewallips Campground, ranger station, and trailheads.
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 8

Proposed Action2

The FS and ONP propose to meet the purpose and need by restoring road access on FSR 2610 

and Dosewallips Road to the access condition which existed prior to the storm events. Initially 

the proposed action was to rebuild FSR 2610 through the washout area with a low-water 

crossing, which was formerally Alternative E. However Alternative E was dropped from futher 

consideration (see Alternatives Evaluated in Detail but Eliminated from Consideration discussion 

later in this summary) and now the proposed action is Alternative B. With Alternative B FSR 

2610 would be rerouted along the hillslope above and to the north of the washout to restore 

access for passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and vehicles pulling trailers. Approximately 0.84

mile of single lane road with turnouts would be constructed using standard construction methods. 

At the damaged site on the park’s Dosewallips Road approximately 225 feet of road would be 

repaired and reconstructed to current road standards. A retaining wall would be constructed and 

no in-stream work would be required. 

Should Alternative B be selected, then the ONF would need to include a proposal for nonsignificant Forest Plan amendments, which would modify or drop certain standards and 

guidelines for Late-Successional Reserves, Riparian Reserves, and Survey and Manage program

as identifed in the Record of Decision for the Northwest Forest Plan and the 2001 Record of 

Decision for Amendments to Survey and Manage mitgating measures.

Management Direction

ONF management direction is primarily provided by the Forest Plan. The Northwest Forest Plan 

is a major amendment to the Forest Plan and provides the following management direction.

• Late-Successional Reserves (LSR): The objective of this land allocation is to protect and 

enhance conditions of late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems. The project 

area is within the Hood Canal North LSR.

• Riparian Reserves (RR): This allocation consists of portions of watersheds where ripariandependent resources receive primary emphasis, which are required for maintaining 

hydrologic, geomorphic, and ecological processes that directly affect waterbodies. The 

entire ONF project area was considered to be within this allocation.

• Key Watershed: This is a component of the Northwest Forest Plan’s Aquatic Conservation 

Strategy (ACS) and is a system of large refugia comprising watersheds that are crucial to 

at-risk fish species and provide high quality water. The Dosewallips watershed is a Tier 1 

Key Watershed.

• Survey and Manage: Mitigation measures for management of known sites, site-specific 

pre-habitat disturbing surveys, and /or landscape scale surveys for rare or isolated species. 

It was not sure if these species, either because of rarity or lack of information, would be 

adequately protected by other elements of the Northwest Forest Plan.

 2 A proposed action is a proposal to authorize, recommend, or implement an action to meet a specific purpose and 

need. It is formed at that stage in the development of an action when agencies, in this case the FS and NPS, have a 

goal and are actively preparing to make a decision on one or more alternative means to accomplish that goal (40 

CFR 1508.23).
Summary

9 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

ONP activities are directed by their 2008 General Management Plan (GMP). The proposed 

repairs are consistent with this planning document.

Issues

In addition to issues identified by the Agencies, comments from the public, other agencies, and 

tribes were used to identify issues concerning the proposed action that are truly significant to the 

action and thus deserving of study. The identified issues will also be used to aid in distinquishing 

and comparing the alternatives. The final decision will be based on a comparison of an 

alternative’s ability to address the identified issues as well as the overall purpose and need for the 

proposed action.

Road Management

The proposed action would have short-term construction and long-term maintenance costs, and 

user safety is an important consideration.

Geotechnical Considerations and Geomorphic Processes

Concerns were expressed regarding the uncertainty of geotechnical conditions along the 

proposed reroute alternatives for FSR 2610, especially in the area of slope stability. Also an 

understanding of the geomorphic processes (those processes which create or shape land forms) is 

important in evaluating the alternatives, especially in the dismissal of those alternatives which 

would repair FSR 2610 approximately on the original road location along the river. Geomorphic 

processes have the potential to affect future structure failures and sediment supply. 

Soil Productivity

Some concerns were expressed that newly constructed or reconstructed roads have the potential 

to locally reduce soil productivity and negatively impact site productivity, water quality and 

aquatic habitat conditions. These and other associated management activities could result in soil 

compaction, surface erosion, mass wasting (such as landslides), modifications of surface and 

subsurface hydrology, alteration of wetland functions, and sedimentation into nearby 

streamcourses. Others think that these concerns can be addressed through appropriate project 

design and implementation of mitigation measures. 

Aquatic Species and Habitat Conditions

Fish bearing streams within the project area include the Dosewallips River and an unnamed 

tributary located just downstream of the washout. Some are concerned that road reconstruction 

may alter channel dynamics, sediment delivery, and riparian conditions in these waterbodies. 

They think the proposed action could affect the amount and quality of spawning and rearing 

habitat for a number of anadromous fish species, including Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed 

Chinook salmon. Others think that road access can be restored in an environmentally acceptable 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 10

manner and that effects to aquatic habitat can be kept to acceptable levels through project design 

and mitigation measures.

Terrestrial Species and Habitat

Some are concerned that proposed activities may affect Threatened and Endangered (T&E) 

species; FS Sensitive species; Management Indicator Species (MIS); Species of Concern; the 

habitat functions of Late-Successional Reserves; or the functions of marbled murrelet and 

northern spotted owl critical habitat units. Others think that road access can be restored in an 

environmentally acceptable manner and the effects to terrestrial wildlife and habitat can be kept 

to acceptable levels through project design and mitigation measures.

Botanical Species and Habitat

Concerns were expressed that project activities have the potential to affect botanical species and 

habitat.

Invasive Plants

There are existing populations of invasive plants in the project area. Road construction activities, 

resulting in the exposure of mineral soil, create conditions favorable to the spread of invasive 

plants.

Recreation Use and Social Analysis

There are concerns with reestablishing the road and thereby allowing motorized use past the 

washout area. Some think that non-motorized access past the washout area provides 

opportunities to enjoy the features of the area (river corridor and adjacent wilderness areas) in a 

quieter and more slow-paced manner. They think the relatively easy walk on the road past the 

washout provides a valuable, low-elevation hiking opportunity. Others believe it is important to 

provide road access past the washout in order to provide access to all users and not restrict 

visitation to those physically able or having the time to make the walk past the washout. They 

want everyone to be able to experience the more remote Forest and park areas that exists past the 

washout. There are also concerns associated with the increasing and changing recreation needs 

associated with the growing population in the Forest’s market zone.
Summary

11 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Wilderness

Project activity is proposed within a narrow corridor between the Buckhorn and The Brothers

Wilderness areas. While no activities are proposed within the Wilderness areas themselves, 

there could be impacts to wilderness values.

Potential Wilderness Areas (specific to ONF)

There are concerns about project impacts to an area on the Forest between the Buckhorn 

Wilderness and the Dosewallips River in the project area that could affect its future inclusion 

into the wilderness system.

Economic

Some have expressed concerns with respect to the economic effects of on-going restricted 

access past the washout to the communities along Highway 101 in the vicinity of the 

Dosewallips River. They think that road access to Forest and park recreational facilities past the 

washout are an important aspect of the local and southern Jefferson County economies. Others 

think that the economic impacts of the restricted access are overstated and that reopening the 

road would cost too much. 

Visual Quality (specific to ONF)

Proposed activities could affect the visual quality of the project area.

Climate Change

Concerns were expressed regarding the potential for the project to affect or be affected by 

climate change, including issues related to stream flows, invasive species, carbon sequestration, 

and greenhouse gas emissions.

Private Land Access

The New Elkhorn Group of Mining Claims, eighty one acres of private land, is located upriver 

from the washout near the park boundary, about 1⁄4 mile north of FSR 2610. The legal 

description is T.26N., R.04W., Sections 13 and 24. There are no roads directly accessing these 

claims, and FSR 2610 had provided the closest road access to the claims. One of the claimants 

responded during the comment period on the 2003 EA with a request for road access along FSR 

2610. A comment was also received during the DEIS comment period from the private property 

landowner of the New Elk Horn parcel requesting that vehicle access be restored as is 

guaranteed under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA).

(specific to ONF)
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 12

Soundscapes (specific to ONP)

A National Park Service (NPS) policy states that the NPS will strive to preserve the natural 

quiet and natural sounds associated with the physical and biological resources of parks. The 

noise associated with the proposed repair on ONP land could temporarily adversely affect park 

resources by modifying or intruding upon the natural soundscape.

Park Operations (specific to ONP)

Park operations refer to the quality and effectiveness of their facilities. For the proposed 

project, an issue was developed regarding the park’s ability to maintain the Dosewallips Road in 

order to adequately protect and preserve vital resources, maintain existing facilities and trails in 

the Dosewallips area, and provide for a successful visitor experience. 

Forest Plan Amendments

All action alternatives include non-significant amendments as defined under the National Forest 

Management Act (NFMA) to the 1990 Olympic National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan. The need for these amendments is due to changed physical conditions, i.e. 

the road washout. These proposed amendments are site-specific and only apply to the 

Dosewallips Road Washout project area. 

The amendments involve plan components established in the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan 

Record of Decision (1994 NWFP ROD). The implementation section of the 1994 NWFP ROD 

(E-18) states “Changes or adjustments to these standards and guidelines may be made through 

amendments to those plans [Forest Plans] required by regulations as described above. The 

authority to change or amend those plans remains as specified in applicable regulations. The 

amendments will be reviewed by the Regional Interagency Executive Committee to assure 

consistency with the objectives of these standards and guidelines”. A review by the Regional 

Interagency Executive Committee will be conducted prior to the Olympic National Forest

Supervisor signing a ROD for this proposed project.

Alternatives Evaluated in Detail but Eliminated from 

Consideration

Although Alternatives D and E were evaluated in detail by the interdisciplinary team (IDT)3

 3 An interdisciplinary team is an interagency team of experts such as biologists, geologists, engineers, etc. who help 

to develop the project and study its effects.

prior to the release of the DEIS they were eventually eliminated from futher consideration. In a 

December 20, 2006, interagency meeting the Agency executives considered the results of the 

IDT alternative evaluations and scoping input from National Oceanic Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). NMFS stated serious 

concerns about replacing the washed-out road into the Dosewallips River channel, as this 

potential placement could result in a serious long-term affect so great as to jeopardize the 
Summary

13 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

continued existence of the Puget Sound Chinook salmon Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU). 

Based on their review the Agency executives determined that the two alternatives (Alternatives 

D and E) which propose establishing the road bed into the river channel have unacceptable 

environmental impacts and will be dismissed from further consideration.

A more complete description of these alternatives can be found in Appendix A, and a detailed 

analysis can be found in Appendix B and project specialist reports. The analysis for these two 

alternatives has not been updated since prior to the release of the DEIS as they were eliminated 

from consideration.

Replace-in-Kind – Formerally Alternative D

This alternative was designed to meet the project’s purpose and need, minimize impacts to 

terrestrial habitats by avoiding the clearing associated with road construction in LSR, and 

minimize construction costs. This alternative would reestablish road access in the washout area 

as close to the preexisting conditions as possible.

A single lane road about 500 feet in length would be reconstructed similar to what existed prior 

to the washout. It would provide access for passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and vehicles 

pulling trailers. The horizontal alignment would swing into the hillside as much as possible 

without undercutting the slope while also providing sufficient catchment area at the base of the 

slope to accommodate bank sloughing and ravel. Near the upstream portion of the washout the 

road fill would occupy about one-half of the existing bankfull channel width. The bluff slope 

would be laid back to a slope angle of 1 horizontal:1 vertical to create a more stable slope. This 

would require moving the top of the slope back about 60 feet and removing about 0.7 acre of 

ground. There would be clearing of danger trees for approximately 100 feet from the top of the 

laid back slope, involving about 1 acre of forest within LSR. Road bank protection (most likely 

in the form of rip rap) would extend along the new construction area and approaches for a 

distance of about 680 feet. 

This alternative would also include mitigation activities of the construction of approximately 

five constructed log complexes near the project area. These complexes would be designed to 

dissipate the increased flow energy being translated downstream from the project site, redirect 

flow toward the south stream bank at the mid-level terrace to encourage channel migration in 

that direction and possible recruitment of spawning gravels and large wood from a high terrace, 

and create cover, rearing, and spawning habitat.

The cost of road construction, including construction related road maintenance and log jam 

mitigation, was estimated at $1.72 million (estimate was made in the spring of 2006 and has not 

been updated). 

This alternative would include two site-specific, non-significant amendments to the Forest Plan. 

These amendments are associated with Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) objectives and 

management direction for Key Watersheds.

Additionally the Dosewallips Road at milepost 0.85 would be repaired. This section of road is 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 14

in the vicinity of the Dosewallips Falls. Approximately 120 feet of road that was constructed in 

the 1940’s on log retaining wall/structures failed in late 2003. The road would be repaired by 

removing the old road fill material and reconstructing the road prism by using riprap and 

crushed rock to form a foundation on which structural backfill would be constructed. 

Stabilization techniques would be used to protect the stabilized fill from erosion. All of the 

construction would be above the ordinary high water line of the river.

Low-water Revetment – Formerally Alternative E

This alternative was designed to meet the project’s purpose and need, minimize impacts to 

terrestrial habitats by avoiding the clearing associated with road construction in LSR, and 

minimize construction costs. It would also lessen aquatic habitat and riparian function impacts 

by reducing the reconstructed road’s encroachment into the river, thereby allowing some gravel 

recruitment from the high bank. 

About 500 feet of single land road would be reconstucted. It would provide seasonal access for 

passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and vehicles pulling trailers. The horizontal alignment 

would be similar to former Alternative D and would swing into the hillside as much as possible 

without undercutting the slope, while also providing sufficient catchment at the base of the 

slope to accommodate bank sloughing and ravel. In the area close to the upstream portion of 

the washout the road fill would occupy about one-third of the existing bankfull channel width. 

There would be no scaling back of the bluff slope but there would be clearing of danger trees 

for approximately 100 feet from the top of the slope, involving about 1 acre of forest within 

LSR. 

The height of the roadway surface would be at a grade to minimize the road’s footprint while 

meeting design criteria for a 10-year flood (Q10). The design would be such that the road would 

be overtopped by the river during moderately large flood events, such as a 10-year flood.

The cost of road construction, including log jam mitigation, was estimated at $1.40 million 

(estimate was made in the spring of 2006 and has not been updated). This alternative also 

would have long-term road maintenance needs due to slope ravel and repairs to the road’s 

surface after flood events. 

This alternative would include two site-specific, non-significant amendments to the Forest Plan. 

These amendments are associated with Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) objectives and 

management direction for Key Watersheds.

Additionally the Dosewallips Road at milepost 0.85 would be repaired. This section of road is 

in the vicinity of the Dosewallips Falls. Approximately 120 feet of road that was constructed in 

the 1940’s on log retaining wall/structures failed in late 2003. The road would be repaired by 

removing the old road fill material and reconstructing the road prism by using riprap and 

crushed rock to form a foundation on which structural backfill would be constructed. 

Stabilization techniques would be used to protect the stabilized fill from erosion. All of the 

construction would be above the ordinary high water line of the river.
Summary

15 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study

Alternatives to ONF Proposed Action

Southern Road 

This alternative would establish road access beyond the washout site on the south side of the 

river by utilizing FSR 2610-010 (Six Mile bridge) and FSR 2610-012, and constructing a 2-mile 

connector road to FSR 2610-040 (Ten Mile bridge). This alternative was eliminated from 

detailed consideration for the following reasons: the route crosses The Brothers Wilderness (a 

Wilderness area boundary adjustment would require congressional approval), it is longer than 

the reroutes on the north side of the river (2 miles new construction and 2.5 miles 

reconstruction), the route crosses areas of very steep ground and cliff line, and the route crosses 

stands of late-successional character which are higher quality (than the re-reoute alternatives) 

because they are farther from existing roads than the late-successional stands crossed by two of 

the alternatives considered in detail. 

Eight Percent Grade Reroute

This alternative would relocate FSR 2610 above and north of the current washout site utilizing 

an 8 percent grade to facilitate easier access for large recreational vehicles. This alternative was 

eliminated from detailed consideration because: an 8 percent slope road would construct 

approximately 50 percent more road than the reroute alternatives; would encroach on the 

Buckhorn Wilderness; vehicles would still have to negotiate the existing 18 percent grade to 

reach the facilities in the park (the park does not recommend large recreational vehicles or 

vehicles pulling trailers use this section of road); and an improvement to the previous road 

condition would not qualify for ERFO funding. 

Wetland Avoidance

This alternative would relocate FSR 2610 above and north of the current washout site with an 

alignment that would avoid impacts to the wetlands located adjacent to FSR 2610 east of the 

washout. This alternative was eliminated from detailed consideration because: the reroute would 

have been longer with a greater impact on late successional reserve habitat and more of the 

reroute would have been on steep and potentially unstable slopes.

Decommission FSR 2610 and Convert to Trail

This alternative would decommission FSR 2610 and the park’s Dosewallips Road above the 

washout and convert the road to a non-motorized trail. With this as the main theme several 

variations were suggested which included building new campground and ranger station facilities 

below the washout and constructing a new trail network to tie into the existing trail system 

above the washout. While the decommission/convert to trail alternative was considered in the 

2003 EA, it was eliminated from detailed consideration in this analysis because it would not 

meet the project’s purpose and need of restoring road access for motorized vehicles on FSR 

2610 to the ONF and ONP recreational facilities and the park’s Dosewallips Road. Many of 

those commenting on the DEIS supported this alternative and some felt that their opinions were 

ignored by not fully considering this alternative. The agency Responsible Officials did consider 

public input on this issue but determined that the management action needed to meet agency 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 16

goals and objectives for the project areas was to establish motorized access.

Footbridge

An alternative was proposed that would construct a footbridge over the washout area and utilize 

a shuttle system to transport visitors to Elkhorn Campground and the park’s facilities. This 

alternative was eliminated from detailed consideration because without standard motorized 

access past the washout it would not be possible to adequately maintain the road for use by a 

shuttle system. It would also not meet the project’s purpose and need of restoring road access 

for motorized vehicles on FSR 2610 and the park’s Dosewallips Road.

Light Traffic Bridge

A proposal was suggested to construct a bridge over the washout area that would be suitable for 

use by vehicles such as wheelchairs, all terrain vehicles (ATVs), and light pick-ups (to be used 

for administrative purposes). This alternative was eliminated from detailed consideration 

because without standard motorized access past the washout it would not be possible to 

adequately maintain the road for use by light vehicle traffic. It would also not meet the project’s 

purpose and need of restoring road access for motorized vehicles on FSR 2610 and the park’s 

Dosewallips Road. 

Private Land Purchase

A suggestion was made to include the purchase of private land in the lower Dosewallips River 

valley and the decommissioning of roads within these areas as part of the alternatives. This 

proposal is outside the scope of the decision to be made for this project and for this reason was 

eliminated from detailed consideration.

Reroute Alternatives with LSR/AMA Exchange Forest Plan Amendment

A variation of the two reroute alternatives (Alternatives B and C) was considered which 

proposed a Forest Plan amendment to redesignate a block of Adaptive Management Area 

(AMA) Forest Plan allocation to LSR to mitigate the removal of LSR acres under the reroute 

alternatives. A potentially suitable stand of AMA was identified near Mt. Turner but after a 

field visit to the stand the proposal was eliminated from detailed consideration because the stand 

has lower quality biological and physical features when compared to the area of LSR affected 

by the reroute alternatives. 

Alternatives to ONP Proposed Action

Bypass

A suggestion was made to construct a bypass uphill of the failed section of the park’s road away 

from the Dosewallips River. This proposal was eliminated from detailed consideration because 

the side slope is extremely steep and rocky and the road would need to be constructed on a very 

steep grade, well over 18 percent. The financial cost of this option would be too high, and the 

environmental impacts would be unnecessarily severe as compared to the proposed action to 

restore this section of road.
Summary

17 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Alternatives Considered in Detail

Alternative A - No Action

Objective

This alternative would allow current geological processes, including the continued 

deterioriation of FSR 2610 and Dosewallips Road to continue with the associated risks and 

benefits. This alternative provides a baseline for comparison with other alternatives.

Description

Motorized access on FSR 2610 would end at or near the washout. Only measures to provide for 

public safety at the washout site would be implemented, such as blocking FSR 2610 near the 

washout to prevent a vehicle from plunging into the river. The road would be blocked with a 

traffic barrier (such as a jersey barrier) and would be signed to warn motorists of the road 

closure. Similarily, the Park’s failed section of the Dosewallips Road near the Dosewallips 

Falls would not be repaired. 

Current FS management plans would continue to guide management of the project area on ONF 

lands. Existing uses, such as parking along the edge of the road near the washout and in the 

adjacent dispersed camping area, would continue. The Elkhorn Campground would remain 

closed and would not be maintained.

On ONP lands, the Dosewallips Campground and pit toilet would remain open on a limited 

basis as a walk-in campground. The park’s ranger station and quarters would continue to be 

closed or possibly converted to a backcountry site.

A future decision likely would be needed to determine appropriate management of the Forest 

and park roads and recreational facilities located beyond the washout.

Forest Plan Amendment

Selection of the No Action alternative would not require a site-specific non-significant 

amendment (as defined under the NFMA) to the Forest Plan.

Alternative B – Reroute 1 Bench Emphasis

Objective

This alternative is designed to meet the project’s purpose and need by rerouting FSR 2610 past 

the washout site out of the river floodplain utilizing standard road construction techniques. This 

alternative was developed to minimize impacts to aquatic habitat and riparian function that 

would otherwise occur with eliminated Alternatives D and E by allowing gravel recruitment 

from the high bank by the river.

Description

FSR 2610 would be rerouted along the hillslope above and to the north of the washout to restore 

access for passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and vehicles pulling trailers. Approximately 

0.84 mile of single lane road with turnouts would be constructed using standard construction 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 18

methods. Construction would occur over a 2-year period. Standard (for the conditions)

construction methods involve trying to balance cuts and fills with no particular emphasis on 

minimizing the foot print of cleared area. Construction would involve the clearing of about 7.1

acres of LSR lands. Most of the route (95 percent) would be new road construction, with the 

remaining 5 percent following the alignment of an old timber harvest spur road. The road would 

have sustained grades up to a maximum of about 10 percent. Danger trees would be removed 

from along the reroute following Forest Service regional direction. 

The estimated cost to reconstruct FSR 2610 along this reroute is $2.68 million. Estimated 

annual maintanance costs for the reroute would be $35,900 for the first 5 years and annually 

$4,720 long-term (with an additional $14,920 every other year). Estimated deferred 

maintenance on FSR 2610 from the washout up to the park boundary would be $18,980 

initially, with long-term annual maintance estimated at $11,320.

During construction, FSR 2610 would be closed to the public from the Forest boundary up to 

the washout site to provide for public safety. Portions of FSR 2610 and previously disturbed 

dispersed camping areas (approximately 2 acres) near the washout would be used for 

construction equipment staging areas. The dispersed camping areas would be rehabilitated at the 

conclusion of construction activities. Rehabilitation would include soil improvement work, 

scattering of large wood, seeding/planting, and treatment for invasive species. 

About 0.7 mile of FSR 2610, located on either side of the washout to the take off points for the 

reroute, would be decommissioned. The section of road to be decommissioned is in the riparian 

area, but not within the active (100 year) floodplain (see Figure 33). Decommissioning the 

section of road upstream of the washout would involve removal of drainage structures and the 

road fill in draws and drainage pathways, but it is possible that not all of the fill that is present 

would be removed. The surfacing would be removed, the roadbed would be ripped or otherwise 

de-compacted and it would be replanted with appropriate native, woody vegetation. 

Decommissioning the section of road downstream of the washout would involve removal of 

drainage structures and the road fill to an extent to facilitate wetland restoration.

Additionally ONP would repair the Dosewallips Road at MP 0.85 in the vicinity of the 

Dosewallips Falls, at an estimated cost of $475,000. The construction would take about 90 days 

to complete and would begin after access was restored on FSR 2610. A section of road that was 

constructed in the 1940’s on log retaining wall/structures and more recently placed gabion filled 

baskets needs to be stabilized and roadway drainage improved, involving about 225 feet of road.

The road would be repaired by removing the old road fill material and remaining log structural 

members and reconstructing the road prism by connecting to and extending the remaining 

gabion baskets and adding riprap and crushed rock to form a foundation on which structural 

backfill would be constructed. Stabilization techniques and the development of roadway 

drainage paths would be used to protect the stabilized fill from erosion. All of the construction 

would be above the ordinary high water line of the river. The park would need to conduct road 

maintenance that has been deferred on the Dosewallips Road prior to the repair work at an 

estimated cost of $65,000.
Summary

19 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Forest Plan Amendments

Selection of this alternative would include six site-specific, non-significant amendments (as 

defined under the NFMA) to the Forest Plan. These amendments are to certain standards and 

guidelines for LSR (pre-project survey requirements, protection of murrelet habitat, neutral or 

beneficial requirement, and minimize adverse road impact requirements), Riparian Reserves 

(wetland avoidance), and Survey and Manage (fungi equivalent-effort surveys) as identified in 

the Record of Decision for the Northwest Forest Plan and the 2001 Record of Decision for 

Amendments to Survey and Manage mitgating measures.

Alternative C – Reroute 2 Retaining Structure Emphasis

Objective

This alternative is designed to meet the project’s purpose and need by rerouting FSR 2610 past 

the washout site out of the river floodplain. Instead of using standard construction practices as 

described for Alternative B, this alternative would narrow the road’s footprint to limit the 

amount of clearing and excavation needed for the proposed construction. This alternative was 

also developed to minimize impacts to aquatic habitat and riparian function that would 

otherwise occur with eliminated Alternatives D and E by allowing gravel recruitment from the 

high bank by the river.

Description

This alternative would generally follow the same alignment as proposed under Alternative B. 

However, some slight shifts in grade and horizontal alignment may be used to help minimize 

disturbance in the LSR as compared to Alternative B. 

FSR 2610 would be rerouted along the hillslope above and to the north of the washout to restore 

access for passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and vehicles pulling trailers. Approximately 

0.84 mile of single lane road with turnouts would be constructed. Construction would occur 

over a 2 year period. Construction of structures, such as retaining walls and potential 

reinforcement built into fills, would minimize the disturbed area. About 6.5 acres of LSR as 

designated in the Forest Plan would be cleared, about 9 percent less disturbance than 

Alternative B. Most of the route (95 percent) would be new road construction, with the 

remaining 5 percent following the alignment of an old timber harvest spur road. The road would 

have sustained grades up to a maximum of about 10.7 percent. Danger trees would be removed 

from along the reroute, following Forest Service regional direction. 

The estimated cost to reconstruct FSR 2610 along this reroute is $3.96 million. Estimated 

annual maintanance costs for the reroute would be $35,940 for the first 5 years and annually 

$4,720 long-term (with an additional $14,920 every other year). Estimated deferred 

maintenance on FSR 2610 from the washout up to the park boundary would be $18,980 

initially, with long-term annual maintance estimated at $11,320.

During construction FSR 2610 would be closed to the public from the Forest boundary up to the 

washout site to provide for public safety. Portions of FSR 2610 and previously disturbed 

dispersed camping areas (approximately 2 acres) near the washout would be used for 

construction equipment staging areas. The dispersed camping areas would be rehabilitated at the 
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 20

conclusion of construction activities. Rehabilitation would include soil improvement work, 

scattering of large wood, seeding/planting, and treatment for invasive species. 

About 0.7 mile of FSR 2610, located on either side of the washout to the take off points for the 

reroute, would be decommissioned. The section of road to be decommissioned is in the riparian 

area, but not within the active (100 year) floodplain (Figure 33). Decommissioning the section 

of road upstream of the washout would involve removal of drainage structures and the road fill 

in draws and drainage pathways, but it is possible that not all of the fill that is present would be 

removed. The surfacing would be removed, the roadbed would be ripped or otherwise decompacted and it would be replanted with appropriate native, woody vegetation. 

Decommissioning the section of road downstream of the washout would involve removal of

drainage structures and the road fill to an extent to facilitate wetland restoration.

Additionally ONP would repair the Dosewallips Road at MP 0.85 in the vicinity of the 

Dosewallips Falls, at an estimated cost of $475,000. The construction would take about 90 days 

to complete and would begin after access was restored on FSR 2610. A section of road that was 

constructed in the 1940’s on log retaining wall/structures and more recently placed gabion filled 

baskets needs to be stabilized and roadway drainage improved, involving about 225 feet of road.

The road would be repaired by removing the old road fill material and remaining log structural 

members and reconstructing the road prism by connecting to and extending the remaining 

gabion baskets and adding riprap and crushed rock to form a foundation on which structural 

backfill would be constructed. Stabilization techniques and the development of roadway 

drainage paths would be used to protect the stabilized fill from erosion. All of the construction 

would be above the ordinary high water line of the river. The park would need to conduct road 

maintenance that has been deferred on the Dosewallips Road prior to the repair work at an 

estimated cost of $65,000.

Forest Plan Amendments

Selection of this alternative would include five site-specific, non-significant amendments (as 

defined under the NFMA) to the Forest Plan. These amendments are to certain standards and 

guidelines for LSR (pre-project survey requirements, protection of murrelet habitat, and neutral 

or beneficial requirement), Riparian Reserves (wetland avoidance), and Survey and Manage 

(fungi equivalent-effort surveys) as identified in the Record of Decision for the Northwest 

Forest Plan and the 2001 Record of Decision for Amendments to Survey and Manage mitgating 

measures.
Summary

21 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Alternative F – Bridge

Objective

This alternative is designed to meet the project’s purpose and need, reduce impacts to the 

adjacent LSR as compared to Alternatives B and C, and lessen aquatic habitat and riparian 

function impacts (relative to the previously considered build in place Alternatives D and E) by 

allowing a relatively normal degree of gravel recruitment by the river from the high bank. 

Description

A single lane bridge, about 700 feet long spanning the washed out area, would be constructed to 

restore access to passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and vehicles pulling trailers. The bridge 

would be constructed of pre-cast spans, which would be supported by intermediate piers. There 

would be no scaling back of the bluff slope, there would be an adequate distance between the 

bluff and bridge to prevent debris from landing on the bridge deck. There would be clearing of 

danger trees for approximately 100 feet from the top of the slope, involving about 1 acre of 

forest within LSR.

The cost of bridge construction is estimated at $9.21 million. Estimated annual bridge 

maintenance and inspections costs would be $5,370. Estimated deferred maintenance on FSR 

2610 from the washout up to the park boundary would be $18,980 initially, with long-term 

annual maintance estimated at $11,320.

During construction periods FSR 2610 would be closed to public access from the Forest 

boundary up to the washout site to provide for public safety. Portions of FSR 2610 and 

previously disturbed dispersed camping areas (approximately 2 acres) near the washout would 

be used for construction equipment staging areas. The dispersed camping areas would be 

rehabilitated at the conclusion of construction activities. Rehabilitation would include soil 

improvement work, scattering of large wood, seeding/planting, and treatment for invasive 

species.

Additionally ONP would repair the Dosewallips Road at MP 0.85 in the vicinity of the 

Dosewallips Falls, at an estimated cost of $475,000. The construction would take about 90 days 

to complete and would begin after access was restored on FSR 2610. A section of road that was 

constructed in the 1940’s on log retaining wall/structures and more recently placed gabion filled 

baskets needs to be stabilized and roadway drainage improved, involving about 225 feet of road.

The road would be repaired by removing the old road fill material and remaining log structural 

members and reconstructing the road prism by connecting to and extending the remaining 

gabion baskets and adding riprap and crushed rock to form a foundation on which structural 

backfill would be constructed. Stabilization techniques and the development of roadway 

drainage paths would be used to protect the stabilized fill from erosion. All of the construction 

would be above the ordinary high water line of the river. The park would need to conduct road 

maintenance that has been deferred on the Dosewallips Road prior to the repair work at an 

estimated cost of $65,000.
Summary

Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS 22

Forest Plan Amendments

Selection of this alternative would include two site-specific, non-significant amendments (as 

defined under the NFMA) to the Forest Plan. These amendments are to a standard and guideline 

for Riparian Reserves (wetland avoidance) as identified in the Record of Decision for the 

Northwest Forest Plan and for Survey and Manage (fungi equivalent-effort surveys) as 

identified in the 2001 Record of Decision for Amendments to Survey and Manage mitgating 

measures.
Summary

23 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

Environmental Consequences (Comparison of Alternatives) 

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE 

A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE 

B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

C

Reroute 2 

Retaining 

Structure 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

F

Bridge

ROAD MANAGEMENT

 Estimated Costs

• Construction 

• Annual maintenance

o Short-term

 Deferred

 1st 5 years

o Long-term

 Annual

 Every 2 years

o Bridge

 inspection

 

 User Safety

ONF = $5,300

ONP = $0

$0

$0

$0

$0

Block FSR 2610 with 

traffic barrier

ONF = $2,682,000

ONP = $475,000

$18,980

$35,920

$4,720

$14,920

Treat danger trees

ONF = $3,960,000

ONP = $475,000

$18,980

$35,940

$4,720

$14,920

Treat danger trees

ONF = $9,210,000

ONP = $475,000

$18,980

$4,140

$4,140

$0

$1,230

Treat danger trees
y

lips Road Washout Final EIS 24

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE C

Reroute 2 

Retaining 

Structure 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE F

Bridge

GEOTECHNICAL 

CONSIDERATIONS

AND 

GEOMORPHIC 

PROCESSES

• Slope stability

 

• Fluvial 

processes

 

 

• Sediment

 supply

 (spawning

 gravels)

Natural conditions

Natural conditions

Natural conditions

Segment 2 has areas of 

pre-existing slope 

movement and ground 

water seepage.

Construction of new 

cuts up to 60 to 80 feet 

high could result in 

potentially unstable 

slopes and minor 

landslides.

Natural conditions at 

the high bank would 

continue

Same as Alt. A.

Same as Alt A.

Same as Alt B.

Same as Alt. A.

Same as Alt A.

Similar to Alt A in the 

short-term. Continued 

shallow slope 

movement on high bank 

until stable angle 

naturally achieved.

Similar to Alt A in the 

short-term.

Reduced river effect on 

high bank in the longterm.

Similar to Alt A in the 

short-term.

Reduction in supply in 

the long-term.

SOIL 

PRODUCTIVITY No additional road.

3.9 miles of abandoned 

road.

42 acres in detrimental 

soil condition with slow 

natural recovery.

Erosion continuing on 

abandoned road.

No effect to slope 

stability or hillslope 

hydrology.

0.84 mile of new road.

0.7 mile of road 

decommissioning.

44.7 acres in long-term 

detrimental conditions.

Increased short-term 

erosion from 

construction and longterm from storm events.

Second highest risk of 

slope instability.

Effects to hillslope 

hydrology.

0.84 mile of new road.

0.7 mile of road 

decommissioning.

44.1 acres in long-term 

detrimental conditions.

Increased short-term 

erosion from 

construction and longterm from storm events, 

higher than Alt. B.

Highest risk of slope 

instability.

Effects to hillslope 

hydrology, same as Alt. 

B.

700 foot long bridge.

42.0 acres in long-term 

detrimental conditions.

Minimal surface 

erosion.

Lowest risk of slope 

instability among action 

alternatives.

No effect to hillslope 

hydrology. 
Summary

25 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE 

A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE 

B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE C

Reroute 2 Retaining 

Structure Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

F

Bridge

AQUATIC 

HABITAT (Matrix 

Indicators: Project 

Scale/Watershed 

Scale)

 

Temperature M/M M/M M/M M/M

Sediment D/M D (tribs) M (Dose)/M D (tribs) M (Dose)/M D/M

Substrate 

Embeddedness

D/M D (tribs) M (Dose)/M D (tribs) M (Dose)/M D/M

Chemical 

Contaminants

M/M M/M M/M M/M

Physical barriers M/M M/M M/M M/M

Large Woody 

Debris

M/M D/M D/M M/M

Pool Freq and 

Quality

M/M M/M M/M M/M

Large pools M/M M/M M/M M/M

Off-channel 

Habitat

M/M D/M D/M M/M

Refugia M/M M/M M/M M/M

Width/Depth 

Ratio

M/M M/M M/M M/M

Streambank 

Condition

M/M M/M M/M D/M

Floodplain 

connectivity

M/M M/M M/M M/M

Peak/Base flows M/M D/M D/M M/M

Drainage 

Network

M/M D/M D/M M/M

Road 

Density/Location

M/M M/M M/M M/M

Disturbance 

history

M/M M/M M/M M/M

Function of Rip 

Reserves

M/M D/M D/M M/M

Puget Sound 

Chinook

No Effect NLAA NLAA LAA

Chinook Critical 

Habitat

No Effect NLAA NLAA LAA

Puget Sound 

Steelhead

No Effect LAA LAA LAA

Hood Canal 

summer chum

No Effect No Effect No Effect NLAA

Summer chum 

Critical Habitat

No Effect No Effect No Effect NLAA

Coastal Puget 

Sound bull trout

No Effect NLAA NLAA NLAA

(M)aintain = project may affect indicator, but impact is neutral.

(D)egrade = project is likely to have a negative impact on the habitat indicator.

Tribs = tributaries

NLAA = Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination as made under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)

LAA = Likely to Adversely Affect determination as made under the ESA
mary

wallips Road Washout Final EIS 26

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE 

B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

C

Reroute 2 

Retaining 

Structure 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

F

Bridge

TERRESTRIAL 

HABITAT

Northern Spotted 

Owl (NSO)

No habitat impact 

No Effect

Remove 7.1 acres 

suitable habitat (one 

activity center below 

habitat threshold); 

38 acres noise 

disturbance;

LAA

Remove 6.5 acres 

suitable habitat (one 

activity center below 

habitat threshold); 

38 acres noise 

disturbance;

LAA

Degrade 1 acre suitable 

habitat (one activity 

center below habitat 

threshold); 

3.5 acres noise 

disturbance 

LAA

NSO Critical 

Habitat

No habitat impact

No Effect

Remove 7.1 acres 

constituent element 

(nesting, roosting, 

foraging, or dispersal 

habitat);

LAA

Remove 6.5 acres 

constituent element;

LAA

Degrade 1 acre 

constituent element;

LAA

Marbled MurreletNo habitat impact

No Effect

Remove 7.1 acres 

suitable habitat; 38

acres noise disturbance;

LAA

Remove 6.5 acres 

suitable habitat; 38

acres noise disturbance;

LAA

Degrade 1 acre suitable 

habitat; 3.5 acres noise 

disturbance;

LAA

MM Critical 

Habitat

No habitat impact

No Effect

Remove 7.1 acres, 

constituent element;

LAA

Remove 6.5 acres, 

constituent element;

LAA

Degrade 1 acre of 

constituent element;

LAA
Summary

27 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE 

B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

C

Reroute 2 

Retaining 

Structure 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

F

Bridge

BOTANICAL 

SPECIES AND 

HABITAT

 Vascular plants

 Bryophytes

 Fungi

 

 Lichens

No risk to species 

viability or a trend 

toward Federal listing

No risk to species 

viability or a trend 

toward Federal listing

No risk to species 

viability or a trend 

toward Federal listing

No risk to species 

viability or a trend 

toward Federal listing

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

May impact species or 

habitat, very low 

likelihood of risk to 

species viability or 

trend toward Federal 

listing

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt B

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

Same as Alt A

RECREATION

and SOCIAL

Deferred 

maintenance and 

start-up costs

Non-motorized access 

only beyond washout on 

FSR 2610.

Maintains nonmotorized trail 

experience in nonwilderness area.

Campgrounds remain 

closed or limited 

services

park = $0

Forest = $0

Access restored to prewashout conditions.

Easier access to ONP 

for elderly & small 

children, persons with 

disabilities, and day 

visitors.

Campgrounds open.

park = $125,000

Forest = $190,000

Same as Alt. B.

park = $125,000

Forest = $190,000

Same as Alt. B.

park = $125,000

Forest = $190,000
mary

wallips Road Washout Final EIS 28

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE 

A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE 

B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

C

Reroute 2 

Retaining 

Structure 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

F

Bridge

WILDERNESS

No effect. Minor short-term 

effects to solitude 

(noise) and 

unconfined recreation 

during construction.

No long-term effects.

Same as Alt. B. Same as Alt. B.

POTENTIAL 

WILDERNESS 

AREAS

No effect. No effect. No effect. No effect.

ECONOMIC

Some continued 

reduction in income for 

local service 

businesses.

Present Value of 

Discounted Costs 

(PVDC): 

Forest = $5,300.

park = NA.

Increased income for 

local service 

businesses.

Dosewallips area 

again a visitor 

destination attraction.

PVDC: 

Forest = $3,287,000. 

park = $610,000.

Social same as Alt. B.

PVDC:

Forest = $4,565,000. 

park = $610,000.

Social same as Alt. B.

PVDC: 

Forest = $9,614,000. 

park = $610,000.

INVASIVE SPECIES

Minimal manual 

control of existing 

populations. No 

control of new 

infestations. 

Newly exposed 

ground and imported 

rocks and soil 

susceptible to invasive 

plant colonization.

Positive results in 

prevention of invasive 

plant spread and 

treatment of current

and new infestations

Same as Alt B Same as Alt B

VISUAL QUALITY

No change, long-term 

vegetative recovery of 

high bank

FS Visual Quality 

Objective (VQO) of 

retention met

Same as Alt B FS VQO of partial 

retention met
Summary

29 Dosewallips Road Washout Final EIS

ISSUE ALTERNATIVE 

A

No Action

ALTERNATIVE 

B

Reroute 1 Bench 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

C

Reroute 2 

Retaining 

Structure 

Emphasis

ALTERNATIVE 

F

Bridge

CLIMATE CHANGE

No effect Some benefit from 

moving road away 

from river. Otherwise 

effects so minor as to 

be a negligible 

consideration.

Same as Alt B Bridge would be 

designed for expected 

streamflow. Otherwise 

effects so minor as to 

be a negligible 

consideration.

SOUNDSCAPES

No adverse impact Short-term, 

moderately adverse 

impacts to 

soundscapes. Would 

be consistent with park 

management planning 

efforts.

Same as Alt B Same as Alt B

PARK 

OPERATIONS Continued 

deterioration of trails 

and facilities.

Increase flight time for 

air support to trail 

maintenance and 

search and rescue 

operations.

Improved maintenance 

of trails, reduced time 

and funding 

requirements.

Improved search and 

rescue operations.

Same as Alt B Same as Alt B

WETLANDS AND 

WATERS OF THE 

U.S.

No effect 0.019 acre impacted, 

no net loss

0.020 acre impacted, 

no net loss

0.016 acre impacted, 

no net loss

Placement of piers in 

the river and riprap for 

abutment stabilization 

could alter river 

channel in the future.

ESTIMATED 

IMPLEMENTATION 

COMPLETE (assumes 

ROD signed in Summer 

2010)

2010 2012 2012 2012

FOREST PLAN 

AMENDMENTS

None 4 Terrestrial,

1 Aquatic, 1 Survey 

and Manage

3 Terrestrial, 

1 Aquatic, 1 Survey 

and Manage

1 Aquatic, 1 Survey 

and Manage
mary

wallips Road Washout Final EIS 30

Mitigation Measures and Management Requirements

The proposed action includes mitigation measures and management requirements that have been 

established in order to minimize adverse effects. These are listed in the FEIS in Chapter 2, with 

one set common to the reroute alternatives and another set common to the river floodplain 

alternative. 

Measures and requirements include: 

• vegetation - emphasizing prevention of the spread of invasive plants; 

• watershed - designed to protect water quality; 

• fish and wildlife – designed to minimize effects to aquatic and terrestrial species and 

habitat; 

• cultural resources – providing protection for previously unidentified cultural properties.

Monitoring

Implementation monitoring would be conducted as part of all construction activities. 

Effectiveness monitoring would include observations of construction sites, aquatic sites, wetland 

sites, and mitigation areas. This monitoring would be done during the first winter after 

implementation, during periodic road inspections, and while inspecting for invasive species.

Preferred Alternative

The preferred alternative is the alternative which the agency believes would fulfill its statutory 

mission and responsibilities, giving consideration to economic, technical and other factors. 

Alternative C, Reroute 2 Retaining Structure Emphasis, has been identified by the agency 

Responsible Officials as the preferred alternative.

Environmentally Preferred Alternative

The environmentally preferred alternative is that alternative which will promote the national 

environmental policy as expressed in NEPA’s Section 101. It is the alternative which best 

responds to the six goals established in Section 101. Alternative F, Bridge, has been identified by 

the agency Responsible Officials as the environmentally preferred alternative.