DOCSLIB.ORG

Sacramento, Delevan, Colusa, and Sutter National W Ildlife Refuges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sacramento, Delevan, Colusa, and Sutter National W Ildlife Refuges U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Sacramento, Delevan, Colusa, and Sutter National Wildlife Refuges Sacramento, Delevan, Colusa, and Sutter National Wildlife Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex 752 County Road 99W Willows, CA 95988 Sacramento, Delevan, Telephone:530/934-2801 Fax: 530/934-7814 http://sacramentovalleyrefuges.fws.gov Colusa, and Sutter California Relay Service TTY: 1 800/735-2929 Voice: 1 800/735-2922 National Wildlife Refuges U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1 800/344-WILD http://www.fws.gov Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan March 2009 and Environmental Assessment Volume 1 March 2009 Volume 1 March 2009 Photo © Steve Emmons Vision Statement “Located in the Sacramento Valley of California, Sacramento, Delevan, Colusa, and Sutter National Wildlife Refuges are some of the most important wintering areas for waterfowl along the Pacific Flyway and in North America. The Refuges’ wetland, vernal pool, alkali meadow, grassland, and riparian communities will provide high-quality habitat for a diverse array of wildlife species including migratory waterfowl, shorebirds, birds of prey, and songbirds. These habitats will also provide food, water, and cover for threatened and endangered species including vernal pool plants and invertebrates, and giant garter snakes. Working with partners, the Refuges will provide a wide range of environmental education programs and promote high quality wildlife-dependent recreation in order to maintain a refuge support base and attract new visitors. Compatible wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities for hunting, wildlife observation, and photography, environmental education, and interpretation will be provided on the Refuges.” Disclaimer CCPs provide long term guidance for management decisions and set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes and identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition. Sacramento, Delevan, Colusa, and Sutter National Wildlife Refuges Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan Prepared by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Southwest Region Refuge Planning Office 2800 Cottage Way, W-1832 Sacramento, CA 95825 and Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex 752 County Road 99W Willows, CA 95988 March 2009 Approved: _______________________________________ Date: __________________ Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region Implementation of this Comprehensive Conservation Plan and alternative management actions/programs have been assessed consistent with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC 4321 et seq.) Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations................................................................vii Chapter 1. Introduction and Background ............................................1 1. Introduction ..........................................................................................1 2. Purpose of and Need for Plan ............................................................3 3. Legal and Policy Guidance .................................................................3 3.1. National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act ..............3 3.2. Appropriate Use Policy ...............................................................4 3.3. Compatibility Policy.....................................................................5 3.4. Biological Integrity, Diversity and Environmental Health Policy .....................................................................................................6 4. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ...................................................6 5. The National Wildlife Refuge System ..............................................7 6. The Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex......................8 7. Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge ............................................10 8. Delevan National Wildlife Refuge...................................................12 9. Colusa National Wildlife Refuge .....................................................13 10. Sutter National Wildlife Refuge ....................................................15 11. Refuge Purposes ..............................................................................16 11.1. Sacramento Refuge Purposes.................................................16 11.2. Delevan Refuge Purpose.........................................................17 11.3. Colusa Refuge Purposes..........................................................17 11.4. Sutter Refuge Purposes ..........................................................17 12. The Refuges’ Vision.........................................................................18 13. Existing and New Partnerships.....................................................18 14. Ecosystem Context..........................................................................19 15. Conservation Priorities and Initiatives.........................................22 16. Wilderness Review ..........................................................................23 Chapter 2. The Planning Process .........................................................25 1. Introduction ........................................................................................25 2. The Planning Process........................................................................25 3. Planning Hierarchy ...........................................................................26 4. The Planning Team............................................................................28 4.1. Core Team ...................................................................................28 4.2. Expanded Team..........................................................................29 5. Pre-Planning.......................................................................................29 6. Public Involvement in Planning.......................................................29 7. Public Outreach..................................................................................31 8. Issues, Concerns, and Opportunities ..............................................31 9. Development of the Refuge Vision ..................................................32 10. Determining the Refuge Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ......33 10.1. Goals ...........................................................................................33 10.2. Interim Refuge Goals...............................................................33 10.3. Objectives, Rationale, and Strategies....................................33 11. Development of the Refuge Management Alternatives.............35 11.1. Alternative A: No Action .........................................................35 11.2. Alternative B: Emphasize Biological Resources..................35 11.3. Alternative C: Proposed Action..............................................35 11.4. Alternative D: Emphasize Visitor Services ..........................36 12. Selection of the Proposed Action ...................................................36 13. Plan Implementation.......................................................................36 i Chapter 3. The Refuge Environment...................................................37 1. Refuge Descriptions..........................................................................37 1.1. Sacramento Refuge....................................................................37 1.2. Delevan Refuge ..........................................................................38 1.3. Colusa Refuge.............................................................................39 1.4. Sutter Refuge .............................................................................40 2. Geographic/Ecosystem Setting .......................................................41 2.1. The Sacramento Valley Ecosystem.........................................42 3. Physical Environment.......................................................................43 3.1. Climate and Air Quality ............................................................43 3.2. Water Supply..............................................................................45 3.3. Contaminants and Water Quality ............................................48 3.4. Geology, Hydrology, and Soils .................................................49 4. Habitat ................................................................................................51 4.1. Vegetation ...................................................................................51 4.2. Wetlands......................................................................................56 4.3. Grasslands...................................................................................61 4.4. Riparian Habitats.......................................................................61 4.5. Agricultural Croplands..............................................................62 5. Habitat Management ........................................................................63 5.1. Water Management ...................................................................65 5.2. Vegetation Management...........................................................68
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Executive Summary
    Sacramento Valley Water Management Agreement Short-term Workplan Executive Summary October 2001 Sacramento Valley Water Management Agreement Short-term Workplan Executive Summary Background implemented and provide benefits by the 2002 and 2003 water years. As an alternative to participating in the This document summarizes the results of the adversarial State Water Resources Control Short-term Workplan effort. As required by Board (SWRCB) Phase 8 Bay–Delta Water the Agreement, this workplan was com- Rights Hearings, California Department of pleted on October 29, 2001. Water Resources (DWR), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Sacramento Valley Process water interests, and export water users entered into the Sacramento Valley Water The Short-term Workplan was prepared by Management Agreement (Agreement) in the Workplan Development Team (WDT), April 2001. This unprecedented Agreement which was formed to provide the technical establishes a process by which the parties are expertise needed to evaluate the projects to collaborating in the development and be included in the workplans. A implementation of a variety of water Management Team (MT) was formed to management projects that will increase the oversee the efforts of the WDT and provide availability of Sacramento Valley water policy-related input. resources. The Agreement provides that increased supplies resulting from the The WDT included water district, agency, projects would be used first to fully meet and consultant staff representing both inbasin needs, but would also be made northern California and south-of-Delta available to help meet the requirements of export interests with expertise in the areas of the 1995 Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP), as well as additional export needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0
    Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Strategic Plan April 2018 1.0 Introduction The Sutter-Butte Basin (Basin) covers 300 square miles bordered by the Cherokee Canal to the north, the Sutter Buttes to the west, the Sutter Bypass to the southwest and the 44-mile long Feather River to the east—see Figure 1. The Basin is home to 95,000 residents and encompasses $7 billion of damageable assets (as estimated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or USACE). The region has sustained numerous floods, including the 1955 levee failure on the Feather River, which resulted in the deaths of at least 38 people. The personal safety and economic stability of large segments of the population are reliant on flood management systems that, until recent efforts, did not begin to meet modern engineering standards. Numerous projects and programs have been implemented in the Basin over the years to reduce flood risk, including the Feather River West Levee Project, which is nearing completion. The Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) leads the planning and implementation efforts in the Basin to reduce the risk of catastrophic, riverine flooding. In this role, SBFCA collaborates with local, regional, state, tribal and federal agencies and organizations. On January 13, 2016 the SBFCA Board of Directors adopted the Strategic Plan to guide these efforts. This version is the first update to the Strategic Plan. 2.0 Purpose of the Strategic Plan The purpose of the Strategic Plan is to help formulate and articulate a vision for flood management within the Basin and to describe an approach to achieve this vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochemistry of Ground Water in the 1 Sacramento Valley, California
    IQJUN GEOCHEMISTRY OF GROUND WATER IN THE 1 SACRAMENTO VALLEY, CALIFORNIA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1401-B Geochemistry of Ground Water in the Sacramento Valley, California By LAURENCE C. HULL CENTRAL VALLEY OF CALIFORNIA RASA PROJECT GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1401-B UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Hull, Laurence C. Geochemistry of ground water in the Sacramento Valley, California (Geological Survey Professional Paper 1401-B) (Central Valley of California RASA Project) Bibliography: 36 p. 1. Water, Underground California Sacramento Valley. 2. Water chemistry. I. Title. II. Series. III. Series: Central Valley of California RASA Project. GB1025.C2H781984 551.4'9'097945 84-600016 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract .................. Bl Temporal changes ............... B13 Introduction ................ 1 Methods of data analysis ........ 15 Geography ............... 1 Dissolved solids .............. 15 Purpose and scope .......... 3 Hydrochemical facies ......... 16 Data compilation ............ 3 1 Nitrate ................... 19 Well-numbering system ........ 3 Hydrochemical facies ......... 20 Acknowledgments ........... 3 Hypothesis testing ............ 21 Description of the study area ...... 3 Processes controlling ground-water chemistry 22 Geology and geomorphology ..... 3 Methods of data analysis ........ 22 Geologic synopsis ......... 4 Principal components analysis .... 22 Geomorphic units ......... 4 Trend surface analysis ........ 22 Hydrogeology ............. 6 Processes and their spatial variation . 22 Hydrochemical facies ........... 7 Mineral stability relations ........... 25 Criteria and procedure for division . 7 Mineralogy of sediments ......... 25 Descriptions of hydrochemical facies Well 12N/01E-34Q .......... 25 Tuscan volcanic rocks .....
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda – Regular Meeting, February 14, 2018, 1 P.M
    Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency Board of Directors Agenda – Regular Meeting, February 14, 2018, 1 p.m. City of Yuba City Council Chambers - 1201 Civic Center Blvd., Yuba City, CA The agenda is posted in the building of the Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency at 1130 Civic Center Blvd. Suite B, Yuba City, and at the Sutter County Library, 750 Forbes Avenue, Yuba City. The agenda summary, backup materials, and approved minutes are also posted on the Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency website at sutterbutteflood.org. Materials related to an item on this agenda and submitted to the Board of Directors after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the office of the Board Clerk at 1130 Civic Center Blvd, Suite B, Yuba City, during normal business hours. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, the meeting room is wheelchair accessible and disabled parking is available. If you have a disability and need, disability related modifications or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the SBFCA office at 530-755-9859 or [email protected]. Requests must be made one full business day before the start of the meeting. County of Sutter County of Butte City of Yuba City City of Live Oak Mat Conant Bill Connelly John Buckland Jason Banks Larry Munger Steve Lambert Stan Cleveland Alt. Lakhvir Ghag Alt. Ron Sullenger Alt. Manny Cardoza Alt. Jim Whiteaker Alt. Shon Harris City of Gridley City of Biggs Levee District 1 Levee District 9 Frank Hall Bo Sheppard Francis Silva Mike Morris Alt. Gary Davidson Alt.
    [Show full text]
  • 1744 RFQ Consulting Services Agreement- Far Western.Pdf
    Tuolumne County Department of Public Works Engineering Division STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ____ day of __________, 2020 by and between the County of Tuolumne (“County”) and Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc., a California Corporation(“Consultant”) pursuant to the following terms and conditions. ARTICLE I STATEMENT OF WORK A. The work to be performed under this Agreement is described in this Article and the Consultant’s approved Category 5, Cultural Resources Scope of Work and Cost Proposal dated May 29, 2020 (“Project”). The Consultant’s approved Scope of Work is attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by reference. The Consultant’s approved Cost Proposal is attached hereto as Attachment B and incorporated herein by reference. If there is any conflict between the approved Scope of Work and Cost Proposal and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall control. B. Consultant shall submit progress reports at least once a month. The report should be sufficiently detailed for County’s Project Manager to determine if Consultant is performing to expectations, or is on schedule, to provide communication of interim findings, and to sufficiently address any difficulties or special problems encountered, so remedies can be developed. C. Subsurface Investigations County recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the location where borings, surveys or explorations are made by Consultant and that the data, interpretations and recommendations by Consultant are based solely on the information available to Consultant. Consultant will be responsible for the data, interpretations and recommendations, but will not be responsible for the interpretation by others of the information developed.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. VI No. 1 YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 1967 THE
    Vol. VI No. 1 YUBA CITY, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 1967 THE DOVER, towing a barge by a line from her hog-post on the Sacramento River. THE SUTTER COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY BULLETIN Mrs. Bernice Gibson Editor VOL. VI NO. 1 January 1967 SUTTER COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY ANNOUNCES! The Sutter County Historical Society meet four times a year, usually in the recreation room of the Mid-Valle Savings and Loan building on Plumes Street, Yuba City. If changes of meeting places must occur the change is announced in the local newspapers with the program for the meeting. The remaining meeting dates for 1967 are: April 18th, July 18th, and October 17th. Interesting programs are arranged for every meeting. Any person, young or old, interested in local history is invited to become a member upon payment of dues of 4;2.00 for the calendar year. We also have "Life Memberships" which we encourage. Upon payment of $25.00 per person one may become a life member. At the present time we have about twelve life members. Let's increase that number! MARK YOUR CALENDARS FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED DATES! JOIN THE HISTORIANS GROUP AND HELP MAKE AND RECORD HISTORY! TWO DOLLARS PER PERSON FOR CALENDAR YEAR DUES ARE DUE FOR 1967 NOW! SUTTER COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY MEETING DATES APRIL 18, 1967; Dinner at the First Methodist Church, 627 B. Street, Yuba City, 6:30 p.m. Reservation must be made no later than April the 10th. PLEASE MAKE YOUR RESERVATION WITH: Mrs. Ruth Grant 743-4095 Mrs. Maude Roberts 673-7450 Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • James Gerber Received His Ph. D. in Economics from the University of California, Davis
    JAMes gerBer James Gerber received his Ph. D. in Economics from the University of California, Davis. He is professor of Economics and director of the International Business Program at San Diego State University. From 2002 to 2009 he served as the director of the Center for Latin American Studies, also at sdsU. He has been a visiting lecturer at the University of Calgary, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, and the University of Debrecen, in Debrecen, Hungary. His recent publications include Fifty Years of Change on the U.S.-Mexico Border: Growth, Development, and the Quality of Life (2008), with Joan Anderson, and winner of the 2008 Association for Borderlands Studies Book Award; the edited volume Agriculture and Rural Connections in the Pacific, 1500-1900 (2006), with co-editor Lei Guang, and International Economics, 4e (2007). AMérica lAtinA en lA historiA eConóMica, núM. 34 Revista ALHE 34 (CS4).indd 35 09/07/2010 02:36:04 p.m. Resumen Este ensayo explora el casi simultáneo desarrollo de la fiebre de oro y la producción de cereales en la década de 1850 en California. Modelos económicos predicen que la producción de bienes de consumo, como el trigo, no se puede expandir durante un auge del sector minero si existe una fácil disponibilidad de importación, debido a que los costos del trabajo y otros insumos son altos. Diversos historiadores han enfatizado los impactos de la inmigración y el crecimiento del mercado local. Una mirada más cercana del tiempo y la secuencia de los cambios en la producción muestran que un declive de la producción de los bienes comerciales concuerdan relativamente bien con el caso californiano.
    [Show full text]
  • 6.12 Public Services
    6.12 PUBLIC SERVICES 6.12 PUBLIC SERVICES INTRODUCTION This section of the EIR describes the existing public services associated with implementation of the Draft Sutter County General Plan (proposed General Plan) and evaluates the effects of implementation of the proposed General Plan on those services. Potential environmental impacts related to the provision of services associated with build-out of the General Plan are primarily determined based on the need for new facilities and whether construction of these facilities could result in physical environmental impacts. The services evaluated in this section include: Law Enforcement, Fire Protection and Emergency Services, Schools, Parks and Recreation, and Solid Waste. Comments were received from the City of Yuba City Community Development Department in response to the NOP (see Appendix B) regarding fire protection and parks and recreation and are addressed in this section. Information for this section was taken from the 2008 Sutter County General Plan Update Technical Background Report (TBR), Yuba City Police Department 2009 Annual Report, California Department of Justice, the Sutter Pointe Specific Plan Draft EIR (SCH #2007032157), California Department of Education, Sutter County Superintendent of Schools, Yuba City Parks and Recreation Department, the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB), and personal and written communication with service providers, and websites from the service agencies. The TBR is available electronically on the County’s website (http://www.co.sutter.ca.us/pdf/ cs/ps/gp/tbr/tbr.pdf) and on CD at the back of this document. Sutter County General Plan 6.12-1 P:\Projects - WP Only\51363.00 Sutter Co GPU\Phase 7 EIR\!DEIR\06.12 Public Services.docx 6.12 PUBLIC SERVICES LAW ENFORCEMENT INTRODUCTION This section identifies the police protection providers for the policy area and describes staffing levels and equipment, staffing standards, and crime statistics.
    [Show full text]
  • James Gerber Received His Ph. D. in Economics from the University of California, Davis
    JAMes gerBer James Gerber received his Ph. D. in Economics from the University of California, Davis. He is professor of Economics and director of the International Business Program at San Diego State University. From 2002 to 2009 he served as the director of the Center for Latin American Studies, also at sdsU. He has been a visiting lecturer at the University of Calgary, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, and the University of Debrecen, in Debrecen, Hungary. His recent publications include Fifty Years of Change on the U.S.-Mexico Border: Growth, Development, and the Quality of Life (2008), with Joan Anderson, and winner of the 2008 Association for Borderlands Studies Book Award; the edited volume Agriculture and Rural Connections in the Pacific, 1500-1900 (2006), with co-editor Lei Guang, and International Economics, 4e (2007). AMérica lAtinA en lA historiA eConóMica, núM. 34 Revista ALHE 34 (CS4).indd 35 09/07/2010 02:36:04 p.m. Resumen Este ensayo explora el casi simultáneo desarrollo de la fiebre de oro y la producción de cereales en la década de 1850 en California. Modelos económicos predicen que la producción de bienes de consumo, como el trigo, no se puede expandir durante un auge del sector minero si existe una fácil disponibilidad de importación, debido a que los costos del trabajo y otros insumos son altos. Diversos historiadores han enfatizado los impactos de la inmigración y el crecimiento del mercado local. Una mirada más cercana del tiempo y la secuencia de los cambios en la producción muestran que un declive de la producción de los bienes comerciales concuerdan relativamente bien con el caso californiano.
    [Show full text]
  • Sutter County General Plan
    Sutter County General Plan Adopted by Sutter County Board of Supervisors on March 29, 2011 Resolution No. 11-029 Sutter County General Plan Adopted by Sutter County Board of Supervisors on March 29, 2011 Resolution No. 11-029 Prepared by Sutter County In consultation with Atkins (formerly PBS&J) DKS Associates West Yost Associates Willdan Financial Services ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Acknowledgments BOARD OF SUPERVISORS District 1: Larry Montna District 4: Jim Whiteaker District 2: Stan Cleveland District 5: James Gallagher District 3: Larry Munger PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS J.R. Griffin, District 1 Tom Engler, District 5 John Shaffer, District 2 Jana Shannon, District 5* Jose Flores, District 2* Felicity Clark, City of Live Oak Paul Basi, District 3 Annette Bertolini, City of Live Oak* Tejinder Dosanjh, District 4 John Sanbrook, City of Yuba City GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (GPAC) MEMBERS Melinda M. Russell Kulwant S. Johl Richard Libby Virgil Atkinson Gurvinder Pamma Leslie G. Mc Bride* Wade Arnold Judy Morris Greg Quilty Bob Harlan Maynard Dunn John Ochipinti Mike Darnell Jon Munger Byron Shinkle Stephen M. Brammer* Walter Ziegenmeyer Brynda Stranix Daniel Cucchi Tej Maan Russ Clark Judy K. Richards* Mandeep Singh Mundi* Gary Baland Chris Hrones Sarb Basrai** Tara Atkinson Brocker Satwant Takhar** Edmund C. Smith Brian J. Fedora** Sarbjit S. Thiara Joginder S. Paradesi Cheema* Cory D. Wilkins James L. Finstad** AGRICULTURAL FOCUS COMMITTEE MEMBERS Sam Nevis Jack Poukish Ann Chesini Casey Hoppin Matt Conant Ram Dhanota James Akin Amarjit Sohal
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. CULTURAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION This section of the DEIR evaluates potential impacts to cultural resources that may result from implementation of the Stonegate Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and General Plan Amendment / Rezone (“proposed project”). The information and analysis in this section is based on the following cultural resources reports prepared for the proposed project, which are included in Appendix E of this Draft EIR: Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. (Far Western), Archaeological Survey and Extended Phase I Report for the Stonegate Subdivision Project, Butte County, California, June 2017. ECORP Consulting, Inc., Cultural Resources Evaluation and Finding of Effect for the Stonegate Subdivision Project, City of Chico, Butte County, California, August 2017 Sub Terra Consulting, Archaeology and Paleontology, Peer review of Cultural Resources Evaluation and Finding of Effect for the Stonegate Subdivision Project, City of Chico, Butte County, California, November 2017 Methodology Far Western conducted cultural resources studies for a subdivision, general plan amendment and rezoning of the proposed project in southeast Chico, Butte County, California. These studies included an archival records search at the Northeast Information Center at Chico State University, online research of historical maps and land records, a buried site sensitivity analysis, Native American and Historical Society consultation, and an intensive pedestrian survey and partial metal detector survey. The
    [Show full text]
  • House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Complete Statement by Mike Inamine Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency March 9, 2017
    House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Complete Statement by Mike Inamine Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency March 9, 2017 Good morning Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Napolitano and members of the Committee. My name is Mike Inamine, Executive Director of the Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee on this most important and timely issue. Before beginning my testimony, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge Congressmen LaMalfa and Garamendi, two members of this committee who have been true partners on these local efforts from the start. But for their efforts I would be presenting a very different story today. Background The Sutter Butte Flood Control Agency (SBFCA) was formed in 2007 for the purpose of consolidating efforts of several agencies and communities with flood management responsibilities, and implementing locally led flood protection projects. SBFCA is a California Joint Powers Authority composed of the cities of Biggs, Gridley, Live Oak, and Yuba City, the counties of Sutter and Butte, and Levee Districts 1 and 9. SBFCA leads the planning and implementation of flood control projects in this historic agricultural basin. The Sutter-Butte Basin covers 300 square miles along the west bank of the Feather River immediately south of Lake Oroville. The basin is bordered by the Cherokee Canal to the north, the Sutter Buttes to the west, the Sutter Bypass to the southwest and the 44-mile long Feather River to the east. The basin is home to 95,000 residents and encompasses $7 billion of damageable assets. The region has sustained numerous floods, including the 1955 levee failure on the Feather River, which resulted in the deaths of at least 38 people.
    [Show full text]