Emergency Water Conservation


August 28, 2015

OWSI Well Pump Problem

We are asking all residents to limit water use today, particularly landscape irrigation and other non-essential water use.

The power fluctuations Thursday night caused a problem with the pump control in one of our wells (Well 16). This is one of our main sources of water.

We have an electrician on the way to help determine the problem and will let you know the status later today.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Larry Smith
Olympic Water and Sewer

(360) 437-8246 (direct
(360) 437-2101 (main office 10 am- 3 pm)
(877) 826-5787 emergency

Potential Impacts of Aerial Spraying near Teal Lake to OWSI Water Facilities


From: Larry Smith <LSmith@portludlowassociates.com>
Date: August 21, 2015 at 10:09:00 AM PDT
Subject: Pope Aerial Spraying near Teal Lake

Pope Resources/Olympic Resource Management (Pope) recently announced their intention to perform aerial herbicide spraying on the recently logged unit on Teal Lake Road known as “Bidder Sweet”.

In response, we did an analysis of any potential impacts to our water facilities in the area including discussions with the foresters who are coordinating the spraying and input from our consulting hydrogeologist and water system engineers.
• Teal Lake Reservoir is a 270,000 gallon, above-ground, fully enclosed, steel reservoir which is located in an easement area toward the north end of the parcel. Pope had already planned a 200 foot buffer around the tank. We understand that 200’ is the maximum buffer required from any physical or environmental feature. In addition, we inspected the reservoir to ensure that any potential entry points, such as drains or vents were protected.
• Well #14 is approximately 300’ west of the site. As part of our Wellhead Protection Plan (WPP), we have a recorded 100’ radius Sanitary Control Area (SCA) around the wellhead. We note that the proposed spraying is outside of the SCA.
• The wellhead is within the mapped 5-year and 10-year zones of groundwater travel in the WPP. Our hydrogeologist at the firm of Robinson Noble advised that that the water-bearing zone is adequately protected by the existence of a thick clay layer, or “confining layer”.
• Our water system engineer at HDR Consulting Engineers reviewed our findings and didn’t have any additional comment except to note that the Wellhead Protection plan was working as designed; it initiated discussion of activities and potential impacts
Based on the above, we don’t anticipate that the proposed spraying activities will impact our groundwater resource or storage in the area.

Olympic Resources Management to Apply Herbicide


Olympic Resource Management (ORM), is also known as Pope Resources

The area being described is along Teal Lake Road and Andy Cooper Road, where a large expanse of clear-cutting occurred earlier this year.

From: Adrian Miller [amiller@orminc.com]
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 2:29 PM
To: Umbreit, William Terry
Cc: Patrick Raymond; Mike Glass
Subject: Olympic Resource Management Herbicide Application

Mr. Umbreit,                                                                                                                        I wanted to make you aware that Olympic Resource Management will be applying herbicides by helicopter to approximately 123 acres on our property in an area recently harvested off of Teal Lake Road, south of Port Ludlow (see attached map).  Some residents in the Port Ludlow development closest to the operations may be receiving additional notice from our foresters, however, I wanted the community to be aware of the upcoming operation and that you should feel free to direct any questions residents may have to myself.

The herbicide application will likely be taking place towards the end of August or early September.  We cannot provide more precise timing of the applications as we are dependent on our contractor’s availability and weather constraints.  The operation should not take more than one day, however, depending on weather windows it could be spread out over multiple days.

We use herbicides to help reduce the amount of competing vegetation so that our seedlings can quickly establish and begin to grow the next crop of trees.  The herbicides we use are all labeled for forestry use and we follow both the federal law prescribed on the label as well as Washington State Forest Practice regulations.  While there are no streams in the unit, we will be buffering the small wetlands inside the unit.  We will also be buffering around the water storage tank that is in the interior to the unit.

We utilize licensed contract applicators for herbicide application and we will have a company representative on site during the application.  While our property is currently closed to the public for fire danger, we still will be posting signs at access points to the area notifying the public of the proposed activity.

Again, please feel free to pass along my contact information if anyone has any questions.  I would also be happy to make myself available to meet with any members of the community if that is more convenient.

Best,    Adrian

Adrian Miller, Manager of Policy and Environment                                                 Olympic Resource Management                                                                           19950 7th Avenue NE, Suite 200, Poulsbo, WA  98370

(O) 360-394-0595 (C) 360-620-0346 amiller@orminc.com

Attachments area                                                                                                 Welcome to Pope Resources  www.orm.com

Preview attachment Bidder Sweet Spray Map.pdf


From: Adrian Miller <amiller@orminc.com>
Subject: RE: aerial herbicide applications
Date: August 14, 2015 at 10:36:46 AM PDT

Attached and embedded in this email is a list of the products we will be using. If you have any specific questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. The labels for these products contain specific information about how these products must be used and the label itself is more than an “instruction manual” but is actually a reflection of federal law. We apply the minimum amount of product necessary to ensure that our planted tree seedlings can quickly re-establish on the site. Please note that the rates per acre presented in this email are below the maximum rate allowed under the label. In addition to the herbicides, we will also use seed oil which allows us to use less herbicide by helping to break down the waxy coating of some plant leaves. The drift control agent is exactly that, a product that helps create larger droplets that will get to the target vegetation faster. We also use larger nozzles to create larger droplets and obviously only apply in very low wind conditions measured on the site, before and during the application.

In addition to following the label requirements (federal law), we also conduct our applications under a permit with the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and follow the Washington State Forest Practice Rules.

I will have to get back to you on your specific questions related to the two harvest units you referenced in your note. I’m out on vacation next week, but will provide that information upon my return. However, I can tell you that we evaluate every individual harvest unit on a site specific basis to determine if we believe we need to apply herbicides to help ensure that the trees we plant will both survive and grow. In some instances we don’t need to apply herbicides. In some cases we apply herbicides one time and that is enough to ensure the trees’ survival. In some cases we have to apply herbicides a second time. The two applications generally happen within the first 5 years after a harvest. After that, the trees are above the competing vegetation and are able to grow on their own without any additional treatment for the rest of the rotation, approximately 40 years.

I hope you find this information helpful and responsive to your questions and if you have any additional questions please don’t hesitate to ask.



  1. Type: Herbicide
    EPA Registration . No.: 81927-5
    Product Name:SFM Extra
    Per Acre: 4 oz
  2. Type: Herbicide
    EPA Registration . No.: 42750-60
    Product Name: Gly Star Original
    Per Acre: 2 Qts
  3. Type: Herbicide
    EPA Registration No.: 81927-6
    Product Name: Rotary 2 SL
    Per Acre: 16 oz
  4. Type: Metholated Seed Oil
    EPA Registration No.: WA Reg # 2935-03001
    Product Name: Super Spread MSO
    Per Acre: 16 oz
  5. Type: Drift Control
    EPA Registration No.: WA Reg # 2935-11001
    Product Name: Crosshair
    Per Acre: 4 oz (as needed)

Adrian Miller (O) 360-394-0595 (C) 360-620-0346 amiller@orminc.com

Timber Harvesting Documents Available



Port Ludlow Village Council has placed a number of valuable documents on their website presenting extensive research into both the history and legalities of the Timber Harvesting Issue.

After you read through this material, prepared by the Ad Hoc Timber Harvesting Committees, you’ll have a much better understanding of various aspects of this issue.

We encourage you to take the time to examine these documents.

Go to www.plvc.org to check out the selection of items to choose on the main menu.

images-29                 Port Ludlow Village Council has placed a number of valuable documents                                     on their website presenting extensive research into both                              the history and legalities of the Timber Harvesting Issue.

After you read through this material, prepared by the Ad Hoc Timber Harvesting Committees, you’ll have a much better understanding of various aspects of this issue.

We encourage you to take the time to examine these documents.

                                     Go to www.plvc.org to check out the selection                                        of items to choose from the main menu.

Timber Harvest Update at PLVC Meeting, August 6th – 3pm Bay Club



                                            PLVC MEETING TOMORROW                                                                                             August 6 – 3PM, Bay Club                                                  Tree Harvest Update

  • Representatives of County, PLA and Ad Hoc Tree Harvesting Committees will be there to update you on this critical subject
  • Your attendance will indicate your interest in the topic, and you are encouraged to make your feelings known to those involved

 Ad Hoc Committees Activities

It has been three months since Jefferson County issued letters to PLA, Keith Guise and their logging contractor Cedarland Forest Resources notifying them that their commercial timber harvesting in Single Family Tract (SFT) and Open Space Reserve (OSR) zones within the Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort was in violation of applicable zoning laws. Since that time, SBCA, LMC and PLVC have all formed special committees to review the issues relating to the timber harvesting. The committees’ goal has been to seek negotiations with PLA and/or Jefferson County or other persons deemed appropriate regarding remedies for these violations or other adverse consequences of the harvesting. Each organization has sent formal letters to Jefferson County outlining its expectations for an acceptable resolution.

In a letter response to Jefferson County dated May 19, the attorney for PLA stated that timber harvesting was a long-standing practice in this area and offered several other arguments why the harvesting supposedly was not in violation of the zoning code, including that permits had been issued by the Washington Department of Natural Resources. There are over 500 additional acres, almost 23% of the entire Port Ludlow MPR, that potentially could be clear-cut.

PLA initiated a “dispute resolution” process under the terms of the Port Ludlow Development Agreement, calling for the parties to attempt to resolve the dispute by negotiation or mediation before resorting to litigation. Although the County had seemed poised to issue a letter to PLA about the timber harvesting along Cameron Drive and Argyle Lane in the “Recreation Area” zone (the golf course), upon receipt of the May 19 letter from PLA’s counsel the County apparently decided to put that letter on hold while the issues relating to the other timber harvesting were being worked out.

The three special committees , chaired by Dave Jurca of SBCA, Dave McDearmid of LMC and Bill Dean of PLVC, have been working in concert to analyze the applicable laws and contractual provisions of the Port Ludlow Development Agreement entered into between Jefferson County and PLA’s predecessor-in-interest (Pope) in May 2000. The committees’ positions and arguments have been presented to Jefferson County in several written submissions and at Board of County Commissioners meetings. The committee chairs have had multiple meetings with County officials and PLA. County Commissioner Kathleen Kler has visited the affected areas and attended the PLVC meetings on June 4 and July 2, where she answered questions from residents. She expressed her understanding of the residents’ concerns and pledged to work within the County processes to try to resolve the dispute.

The County and PLA have treated their negotiations as “confidential” and have not shared with the committee chairs the substance of those negotiations. Representatives of the Port Ludlow community are not being allowed to attend or participate in the discussions between the County and PLA, but the three committee chairs have met separately with PLA’s owner Randy Verrue on three occasions, the most recent being yesterday, August 4. At this time PLA is reserving further comment until it has received additional information from its attorney. Another meeting with Mr. Verrue is scheduled for next week. As far as we know, there have not been any substantive negotiations between the County and either Guise or Cedarland.

It is the committees’ position that under the Development Agreement and applicable law timber harvesting was not, and never should be, permitted within the MPR, except for the purpose of clearing land for residential development or other permissible uses under the MPR zoning code. This is the committees’ overarching concern, but two additional issues are being emphasized in the discussions with both PLA and the County. Those are remediation of the environmental impacts of the logging, including addressing both the visual blight and other adverse environmental impacts, and forfeiture of profits from the logging that was done in violation of applicable zoning restrictions.

The committees are encouraged that on July 13 the County authorized the retaining of a Seattle attorney to prepare an “opinion letter” on various issues relating to the logging. The committees have shared with the County’s attorney their analysis of the pertinent issues. The current expectation is that it will take at least a couple more weeks for the County’s Seattle attorney to render his opinion. The committees will keep you apprised as things develop.

August 5, 2015

Excessive coliform levels detected in the North Bay drinking water



The following is an update to the July 22nd notice that LMC sent out for Olympic Water and Sewer regarding excessive coliform levels detected in the North Bay drinking water. 

August 3, 2015 Update  



August 3 Report

Good Morning – the samples taken Friday are also “NO coliform“. We have discontinued chlorination and the chlorine should soon dissipate and the water returning to normal.   We will be doing additional sampling later this week but are confident that this episode is behind us.

July 31 Report

All – the sample results from yesterday are “clean“. NO total coliform detected. Additional samples went to the lab today. We are going to continue the chlorination through the weekend and take more samples Monday.

If LMC members have questions about water quality in the North Bay please contact Larry Smith or Greg Rae of Olympic Water and Sewer.


 From: Larry Smith [mailto:LSmith@portludlowassociates.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 5:50 PM
Subject: Coliform update 7/28

Sampling did not happen today as hoped. Chlorine still not at target levels. Will try again tomorrow.



From: Larry Smith [mailto:LSmith@portludlowassociates.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 3:45 PM
Subject: Update on Coliform

We had hoped to take follow up water quality samples today (Monday) but unfortunately the chlorine hadn’t fully circulated in the system. The operations crew is working to run water from fire hydrants to pull the chlorinated water throughout the affected area. If this is successful we will be doing follow up sampling on Tuesday or Wednesday and will have the sample results back from the lab the following day.




July 21, 2015


OLYMPIC WATER & SEWER, INC. Water System, I.D. 68700L, located in Jefferson County submitted routine drinking water samples to a certified laboratory for the month of July 2015 for total coliform analysis.

The test results indicated that there was Total Coliform bacteria present in the sample but no fecal or E. Coli. The sample was taken from a routine sample station at 563 Pioneer Drive. Because of the configuration of the water pipes, we are confident that the only properties potentially affected are above (north and west) Oak Bay Road.

Since only Total Coliform has been detected, there is no immediate health risk to our customers.  If an immediate health risk had existed, you would have been notified right away. However, as a precaution the Washington State Department of Health has recommend that if you are currently taking chemotherapy, undergoing kidney dialysis, or have an immune deficiency you may want boil water. Total Coliforms are common in the environment and are generally not harmful themselves, however any indication of contamination is thoroughly investigated.

The following investigation and follow up actions are being taken in consultation with Washington State Department of Health:

All of the wells and storage reservoirs that serve the area were tested for total coliforms. The samples from the wells were negative, however the reservoir near Swansonville Rd. and Rainier Lane (in the LMC trailer storage yard) tested positive as well as the followup sample from the original sampling area on Pioneer Drive.

While we continue our investigation we have decided that the most efficient way to cure the problem is through a light chlorination. Beginning Wednesday, July 22 we will be feeding a small amount of chlorine which will possibly become apparent at the customer taps. We will continue this for up to two weeks, or until all of our follow up samples show that the problem has been corrected.

While we strive to deliver the highest quality water possible to our customers, unfortunately situations such as this do occur periodically in a non-chlorinated system. Thank you for your understanding and patience. Please do not hesitate to call us with questions.

Sincerely,                                                                                                                             Larry Smith, Vice President                                     Greg Rae, Operations Supervisor   (360) 437-2101                                                        (360) 437-7898                           Email: owsi@portludlowassociates.com

The following is mandatory language required by the Environmental Protection Agency in these situations. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets water standards and has determined that the presence of total coliforms is a possible health concern. Total coliforms are common in the environment and are generally not harmful themselves. The presence of these bacteria in drinking water, however, generally is a result of a problem with water treatment or the pipes which distribute the water, and indicates that the water may be contaminated with organisms that can cause disease. Disease symptoms may include diarrhea, cramps, nausea, and possibly jaundice, and any associated headaches and fatigue. These symptoms, however, are not just associated with the disease causing organisms in drinking water, but may also be caused by a number of other factors other than your drinking water. EPA has set an enforceable drinking water standard for total coliforms to reduce the risk of these adverse health effects. Drinking water which meets this standard is usually not associated with a health risk from disease-causing bacteria and should be considered safe.



eBlast #2: June 22, 2015

 This is the second in a series of eBlasts from the ad hoc committees addressing the logging within the MPR.

The presentation below was made to the Board of County Commissioners on June 22. It points out that the land use restrictions in question were agreed to by the developer.

My name is David Jurca. I live in Port Ludlow.  On many occasions when you as county commissioners are called upon to deal with land use or development issues you have to balance the interests of a community against the rights of an individual property owner. I want to remind you that the present situation involving commercial timber harvesting in the Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort is not one of those occasions. That is because the developer voluntarily entered into a Development Agreement with the county in May 2000 to set forth the development standards that would apply for the term of the agreement, which was originally for 20 years and was recently extended for another 5 years. That means the developer, now PLA, voluntarily agreed to the land use restrictions contained in the MPR zoning ordinance.

The developer did not agree to those restrictions out of the kindness of its heart. As with any clustered development, the developer got something very valuable in exchange for agreeing to those land use restrictions. In return for agreeing to preserve open spaces in perpetuity to enhance the natural amenities and aesthetic qualities of the resort, the developer got the right to build housing with much greater density than would otherwise have been allowed. In addition, the developer got the certainty of knowing what development standards would be in effect for the next 20 years, which was expected to be more than enough time to finish the development.

So the county is not being asked to balance the interests of the community against the rights of a property owner. That balance was struck by agreement 15 years ago, when the county and the developer entered into the Development Agreement. The residents of Port Ludlow are merely asking the county to enforce the land use restrictions that the developer voluntarily agreed to when it entered into the MPR Development Agreement in May 2000.

One of the documents included in the Agreement was the county commissioners’ formal finding in 1998, when the MPR was established, that “because of its development history and patterns of development, the land on which Port Ludlow is located is determined to be better suited and has more long-term importance as a Master Planned Resort than for the commercial harvesting of timber or agricultural production.” That finding is incorporated in and is part of the Development Agreement, and by entering into that Agreement the developer acknowledged and agreed to that finding. By enforcing the prohibition of commercial timber harvesting in the MPR, the county is not depriving PLA of any of its rights as a property owner. The county is merely enforcing a prohibition that the developer agreed to in May 2000.

eBlast #2:

eBlast #3: July 20, 2015

This is the third eBlast detailing information relative to the harvesting of trees in the MPR. This presentation was made by Bill Dean to the Jefferson County Commissioners on July 20. It is hoped this will provide additional background and perspective on this important subject.

At the August 6th PLVC meeting representatives from the County and PLA will be available to listen to your questions and provide updated information on the issue.

Summary: Washington State’s intent for an MPR allows for urban zoning in a rural environment to utilize the natural beauty of the area and provide economic benefits for everyone.

Since 1989, Pope and PLA have demonstrated strong intent to have trees within the MPR remain as an aesthetic enhancement for the community. Now, after 25 years of recorded documents reaffirming that position, PLA has decided to perform tree harvesting.

My name is Bill Dean and I live in Port Ludlow.

Two weeks ago Washington State’s intent for the MPR legislation was outlined for you by Dave McDearmid. Briefly, an MPR allows for urban zoning in a rural environment to utilize the natural beauty of the area and provide economic benefits for everyone.

What has been the intent of the Port Ludlow developers?  Let’s take a three minute walk over the last 25 years:

In 1989 – Pope recorded covenants on all of the South Bay area of Port Ludlow that said, in part, “No removal of trees shall take place without approval of the Architectural Control Committee [of SBCA] and that all maintenance of landscaping shall be done to enhance the existing character of South Bay.”

In 1996 – seven years later, Pope recorded covenants on Woodridge Village which required that all vegetation remain in its natural condition.

In 2000 – Four years later, and after exacting legislation of the MPR, the county and Pope signed the development agreement in which “Open Space shall be nmaintained in perpetuity and serve to enhance the aesthetic quality of the MPR.”

In 2003, three years later – the new developer, PLA, recorded covenants on Olympic Terrace Village which specifies “common areas shall remain in natural condition.”

In 2007, four years after that – PLA recorded covenants for Olympic Terrace II Village which maintained the same theme that common areas shall remain in natural condition.

The developer of Port Ludlow, either Pope or PLA, have continuously demonstrated a strong intent to have the trees within the MPR remain an aesthetic enhancement for the community.

Now, in 2015,  after 25 years of saying otherwise, that same developer is now saying that all along that was not their intent and that they planned to harvest trees since it was a long standing right. This is just inconsistent with what they recorded time and time again. And it is just wrong. We ask that you Commissioners look at this history to support stopping this activity.

Thank you

eBlast #3 – June 20, 2015