DOCSLIB.ORG

Table of Contents: Chapter 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Table of Contents: Chapter 2 Table of Contents: Chapter 2 1 Scientific Conceptual Foundation ...................................................................... 10 1.1 Definition and Purpose of a Scientific Conceptual Foundation ...................................10 1.2 Guiding Principles .......................................................................................................11 2 Wildlife Habitat ..................................................................................................... 20 2.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................20 2.1.1 Overview Related to Wildlife .................................................................................................20 2.1.2 Assessment Tools .................................................................................................................21 2.1.3 Interactive Biodiversity Information System ..........................................................................21 2.1.4 Washington GAP Analysis Program......................................................................................21 2.2 Wildlife Habitats...........................................................................................................21 2.3 Focal Wildlife Habitats.................................................................................................26 2.3.1 Habitat Selection and Rationale............................................................................................26 2.3.2 Montane Coniferous Wetlands..............................................................................................29 2.3.3 Ponderosa Pine/Oregon White Oak......................................................................................29 2.3.4 Shrub Steppe/Interior Grasslands.........................................................................................29 2.3.5 Interior Riparian Wetlands.....................................................................................................30 2.4 Changes in Focal Wildlife Habitat Quantity and Distribution .......................................30 3 Focal Wildlife Species ......................................................................................... 31 3.1 Selection and Rationale ..............................................................................................31 3.2 Focal Wildlife Species Selected ..................................................................................32 4 Focal Habitat and Focal Species Discussion .................................................... 36 4.1 Montane Coniferous Wetlands....................................................................................36 4.1.1 Historic...................................................................................................................................36 4.1.2 Current...................................................................................................................................36 4.1.3 Trends ...................................................................................................................................39 4.1.4 Key Attributes ........................................................................................................................40 4.2 Focal Species for the Montane Coniferous Wetlands .................................................40 4.2.1 Western Toad (Bufo boreas).................................................................................................40 4.2.2 Sandhill Crane (Grus canadensis) ........................................................................................45 4.2.3 Key Findings for Montane Coniferous Wetlands and Focal Species....................................53 4.3 Ponderosa Pine/Oregon White Oak............................................................................53 4.3.1 Historic...................................................................................................................................53 4.3.2 Current...................................................................................................................................53 4.3.3 Climax Vegetation .................................................................................................................56 4.3.4 Disturbance ...........................................................................................................................57 4.3.5 Status and Trends .................................................................................................................57 4.3.6 Recommended Future Conditions.........................................................................................58 4.4 Focal Species for Oregon White Oak/Ponderosa Pine Forest....................................59 4.4.1 White-Headed Woodpecker (Picoides albolarvatus).............................................................59 4.4.2 Lewis’ Woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis)................................................................................65 4.4.3 Western Gray Squirrel (Sciurus griseus)...............................................................................71 4.4.4 Key Findings for Ponderosa Pine/Oregon White Oak Habitat and Focal Species ...............77 4.5 Shrub Steppe/Interior Grasslands...............................................................................77 4.5.1 Historic...................................................................................................................................77 Chapter 2-1 4.5.2 Current...................................................................................................................................78 4.5.3 Key Findings for Shrub Steppe Habitat.................................................................................85 4.5.4 Ranking of Limiting Factors...................................................................................................86 4.6 Focal Species for Shrub Steppe..................................................................................88 4.6.1 Rocky Mountain Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus hemionus) ............................................88 4.6.2 Brewer’s Sparrow (Spizella breweri) .....................................................................................93 4.6.3 Greater Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) ..........................................................102 4.6.4 Key Findings of Shrub Steppe/Interior Grasslands Habitat and Focal Species..................109 4.7 Interior Riparian Wetlands.........................................................................................109 4.7.1 Historic.................................................................................................................................109 4.7.2 Current.................................................................................................................................113 4.8 Focal Species of Riparian Wetland Habitat...............................................................119 4.8.1 Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechia)..................................................................................119 4.8.2 Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos)..............................................................................................125 4.8.3 American Beaver (Castor canadensis) ...............................................................................132 4.8.4 Key Findings for Interior Riparian and Focal species..........................................................139 5 Aquatic-Terrestrial Ecosytem Linkages........................................................... 140 5.1 Salmonid Associations ..............................................................................................140 5.2 Ecological Processes and Functions.........................................................................142 6 Aquatic Focal Species and Habitat Assessment............................................. 144 6.1 Overview ...................................................................................................................144 6.2 General Approach to Plan Preparation: ....................................................................145 6.2.1 General Approach to Fisheries and Habitat Management..................................................146 6.2.2 Fish and Wildlife Management at the Columbia Basin Scale .............................................147 6.2.3 ESA listing documents ........................................................................................................148 6.2.4 Yakima Subbasin Specific Documents ...............................................................................148 6.3 Focal Fish Species....................................................................................................153 6.3.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................153 6.3.2 Spring Chinook....................................................................................................................154 6.3.3 Fall Chinook.........................................................................................................................170 6.3.4 Steelhead ............................................................................................................................180 6.3.5 Bull Trout .............................................................................................................................194
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Inventory Chapter Summarizes the Fish and Wildlife Protection, Restoration, and Artificial Production Projects and Programs in the Yakima Subbasin
    Table of Contents: Chapter 3 1 Organization of the Inventory Chapter 3 2 Current Management Activities 4 2.1 International 4 2.1.1 United States-Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty 4 2.2 Federal Government 5 2.2.1 Bureau of Reclamation 5 2.2.2 Environmental Protection Agency 5 2.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Service 6 2.2.4 National Forest Service 6 2.2.5 Natural Resources Conservation Service 6 2.2.6 NOAA Fisheries 7 2.2.7 Yakima Training Center 7 2.3 Tribes 7 2.3.1 Yakama Nation 7 2.4 State Government 8 2.4.1 State of Washington 8 2.4.2 Washington Conservation Commission 9 2.4.3 Washington Department of Natural Resources 9 2.4.4 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 10 2.4.5 Washington Department of Ecology 11 2.4.6 Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation 11 2.4.7 Conservation Districts 11 2.5 Local Government 11 2.5.1 Growth Management Act 12 2.5.2 Shoreline Management Act 12 2.5.3 State Environmental Policy Act 12 2.5.4 Benton County 13 2.5.5 Kittitas County 13 2.5.6 Yakima County 14 2.5.7 City of Yakima 14 2.5.8 Tri-County Water Resources Agency 15 2.5.9 Roza-Sunnyside Board of Joint Control (RSBOJC) 15 2.6 Other 16 2.6.1 Timber Fish and Wildlife Agreement 16 2.6.2 Agriculture, Fish, and Water (AFW) Process 16 Chapter 3-1 2.6.3 The Nature Conservancy 16 2.6.4 Tapteal Greenway 16 2.6.5 Washington Trout 17 2.6.6 Pheasants Forever 17 2.6.7 Ducks Unlimited 17 2.6.8 Cowiche Canyon Conservancy 17 2.6.9 Yakima Greenway Foundation 18 2.7 Major Umbrella Programs, Projects, or Organizations 18 2.7.1 Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program (YTAHP)
    [Show full text]
  • Teanaway Natural History
    Teanaway Natural History Silat Mushtaque Original material by Cindy Luksus Photo by I by Photo Teanaway Natural History 1. Who were the first inhabitants? 2. What is the history of the land? 3. Geology of the area 4. Forest dynamics 5. Trees, shrubs, flowers, wildlife, butterflies, lichen Photo by Karen Wallace Karen by Photo Teanaway History • The first inhabitants of the Teanaway River Valley were members of the Yakama, Cayous and Nez Perce Indian Tribes. The Teanaway Valley was part of the summering grounds for these tribes. The name Teanaway possibly had its origins in a Sahaptin word, tyawnawí-ins, meaning “Drying Place”. • The watershed is within the ceded area of the Yakama Nation under the Treaty of 1855. Photo by Adam Johnson Teanaway History Farming, grazing, and timber harvest became important within the watershed as European immigrants and other settlers began moving into the area in the late 1800s. Sheep and livestock grazing occurred, and at various times, several thousand head of livestock grazed in the area. Timber harvest within the forest began early in the 1900s. Alpine Lakes Wilderness Alpine Lakes Wilderness Esmeralda Iron De Roux All areas in green are Okanagan/Wenatchee National Forest Bean Crk Teanaway Links: Where to read more about it! 1. Teanaway Magic from the WTA magazine: https://www.wta.org/news/magazine/magazine/1071.p df 2. Teanaway Community Forest Management Plan: http://www.friendsoftheteanaway.org/wp- content/uploads/amp_rec_TeanawayRecPlan_120718.p df Photo by I Padraic Ryan I Padraic by Photo Mt Stuart dominates the upper elevation views Bean Creek Basin Esmerelda Basin Swauk and Tronsen Ridge Iron Peak Geology • The geology of the area is dominated by the Late Jurassic/Early Cretaceous Ingalls Tectonic Complex.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Streamflow Estimates for Watersheds in the Lower Yakima River
    Natural Streamflow Estimates for Watersheds in the Lower Yakima River 1 David L. Smith 2 Gardner Johnson 3 Ted Williams 1 Senior Scientist-Ecohydraulics, S.P. Cramer and Associates, 121 W. Sweet Ave., Moscow, ID 83843, [email protected], 208-310-9518 (mobile), 208-892-9669 (office) 2 Hydrologist, S.P. Cramer and Associates, 600 NW Fariss Road, Gresham, OR 97030 3 GIS Technician, S.P. Cramer and Associates, 600 NW Fariss Road, Gresham, OR 97030 S.P. Cramer and Associates Executive Summary Irrigation in the Yakima Valley has altered the regional hydrology through changes in streamflow and the spatial extent of groundwater. Natural topographic features such as draws, coulees and ravines are used as drains to discharge irrigation water (surface and groundwater) back to the Yakima River. Salmonids are documented in some of the drains raising the question of irrigation impacts on habitat as there is speculation that the drains were historic habitat. We assessed the volume and temporal variability of streamflow that would occur in six drains without the influence of irrigation. We used gage data from other streams that are not influenced by irrigation to estimate streamflow volume and timing, and we compared the results to two reference streams in the Yakima River Valley that have a small amount of perennial streamflow. We estimate that natural streamflow in the six study drains ranged from 33 to 390 acre·ft/year depending on the contributing area. Runoff occurred infrequently often spanning years between flow events, and was unpredictable. The geology of the study drains was highly permeable indicating that infiltration of what runoff occurs would be rapid.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Washington Pheasant Release Program
    Eastern Washington Pheasant Release Program Whatcom Pend Oreille Okanogan Skagit Ferry Stevens 2 Snohomish Clallam Mill Creek 1 Chelan Jeerson 4 Douglas Lincoln Spokane Kitsap King Grays Spokane Harbor Ephrata Mason 6 Kittitas Pierce Montesano Olympia Grant Adams Whitman Thurston Yakima Pacic Lewis 5 Franklin Yakima Gareld Columbia Cowlitz Skamania 3 Benton Asotin Wahkiakum Walla Walla Clark Klickitat 5 Vancouver EASTERN WASHINGTON PHEASANT ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM Over the past two decades Eastern Each year thousands of pheasants Eastern Washington Washington has been experiencing are released on lands accessible to Regional Offices: a decline in pheasant harvest. the public. The Eastern Washington Habitat loss has been identified as release sites are shown on the maps REGION 1 the leading factor for the decline. To in this pamphlet. Rooster pheasants (509) 892-1001 address the loss of habitat WDFW are released to supplement harvest. 2315 North Discovery Place initiated an aggressive habitat Birds are released for youth and Spokane Valley, WA 99216-1566 enhancement program. To fund general season openers. We do not this program the Legislature in 1997 provide other release dates because REGION 2 created the Eastern Washington we want to minimize crowding at (509) 754-4624 Pheasant Enhancement Fund. the release sites and promote hunter 1550 Alder St. NW ethics. Ephrata, WA 98823-9699 The Eastern Washington Pheasant Enhancement Fund is a dedicated To protect other wildlife species REGION 3 (509) 575-2740 funding source. The fund is including waterfowl and raptors, 1701 S 24th Ave. used solely for pheasant habitat non-toxic shot is required for all Yakima, WA 98902-5720 enhancement on public and private upland bird, dove and band-tailed lands and for the purchase of pigeon on all pheasant release sites REGION 5 rooster pheasants that are released statewide.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington State's Scenic Byways & Road Trips
    waShington State’S Scenic BywayS & Road tRipS inSide: Road Maps & Scenic drives planning tips points of interest 2 taBLe of contentS waShington State’S Scenic BywayS & Road tRipS introduction 3 Washington State’s Scenic Byways & Road Trips guide has been made possible State Map overview of Scenic Byways 4 through funding from the Federal Highway Administration’s National Scenic Byways Program, Washington State Department of Transportation and aLL aMeRican RoadS Washington State Tourism. waShington State depaRtMent of coMMeRce Chinook Pass Scenic Byway 9 director, Rogers Weed International Selkirk Loop 15 waShington State touRiSM executive director, Marsha Massey nationaL Scenic BywayS Marketing Manager, Betsy Gabel product development Manager, Michelle Campbell Coulee Corridor 21 waShington State depaRtMent of tRanSpoRtation Mountains to Sound Greenway 25 Secretary of transportation, Paula Hammond director, highways and Local programs, Kathleen Davis Stevens Pass Greenway 29 Scenic Byways coordinator, Ed Spilker Strait of Juan de Fuca - Highway 112 33 Byway leaders and an interagency advisory group with representatives from the White Pass Scenic Byway 37 Washington State Department of Transportation, Washington State Department of Agriculture, Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife, Washington State Tourism, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission and State Scenic BywayS Audubon Washington were also instrumental in the creation of this guide. Cape Flattery Tribal Scenic Byway 40 puBLiShing SeRviceS pRovided By deStination
    [Show full text]
  • Title 232 WAC FISH and WILDLIFE, DEPARTMENT OF
    Wildlife Chapter 232-12 Title 232 232-12-107 Falconry permit license required. [Statutory Authority: Title 232 WAC RCW 77.12.040 and 77.12.010. 96-18-062 (Order 96- 138), § 232-12-107, filed 8/30/96, effective 9/30/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 77.12.040. 90-22-064 FISH AND WILDLIFE, (Order 472), § 232-12-107, filed 11/5/90, effective 12/6/90; 82-04-034 (Order 177), § 232-12-107, filed DEPARTMENT OF 1/28/82; 81-12-029 (Order 165), § 232-12-107, filed 6/1/81. Formerly WAC 232-12-232.] Repealed by 10- 18-012 (Order 10-214), filed 8/20/10, effective 9/20/10. (WILDLIFE) Statutory Authority: RCW 77.04.012, 77.04.020, 77.04.055, 77.12.047, 77.12.210, and C.F.R. Title 50, Part 21, Subpart C, Section 21.29; Migratory Bird Chapters Treaty Act. 232-12 Permanent regulations. 232-12-114 Permit required for capture of raptors. [Statutory Authority: RCW 77.12.047. 03-02-005 (Order 02-301), 232-16 Game reserves. § 232-12-114, filed 12/20/02, effective 1/20/03. Statu- 232-28 Seasons and limits. tory Authority: RCW 77.12.040 and 77.12.010. 96-18- 232-30 Falconry regulations. 064 (Order 96-140), § 232-12-114, filed 8/30/96, effec- tive 9/30/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 77.12.040. 90- 232-36 Wildlife interaction regulations. 22-062 (Order 470), § 232-12-114, filed 11/5/90, effec- tive 12/6/90; 82-04-034 (Order 177), § 232-12-114, filed 1/28/82; 81-12-029 (Order 165), § 232-12-114, Chapter 232-12 Chapter 232-12 WAC filed 6/1/81.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of Washington - Northwest Quadrant
    GEOLOGIC MAP OF WASHINGTON - NORTHWEST QUADRANT by JOE D. DRAGOVICH, ROBERT L. LOGAN, HENRY W. SCHASSE, TIMOTHY J. WALSH, WILLIAM S. LINGLEY, JR., DAVID K . NORMAN, WENDY J. GERSTEL, THOMAS J. LAPEN, J. ERIC SCHUSTER, AND KAREN D. MEYERS WASHINGTON DIVISION Of GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGIC MAP GM-50 2002 •• WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF 4 r Natural Resources Doug Sutherland· Commissioner of Pubhc Lands Division ol Geology and Earth Resources Ron Telssera, Slate Geologist WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Ron Teissere, State Geologist David K. Norman, Assistant State Geologist GEOLOGIC MAP OF WASHINGTON­ NORTHWEST QUADRANT by Joe D. Dragovich, Robert L. Logan, Henry W. Schasse, Timothy J. Walsh, William S. Lingley, Jr., David K. Norman, Wendy J. Gerstel, Thomas J. Lapen, J. Eric Schuster, and Karen D. Meyers This publication is dedicated to Rowland W. Tabor, U.S. Geological Survey, retired, in recognition and appreciation of his fundamental contributions to geologic mapping and geologic understanding in the Cascade Range and Olympic Mountains. WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGIC MAP GM-50 2002 Envelope photo: View to the northeast from Hurricane Ridge in the Olympic Mountains across the eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca to the northern Cascade Range. The Dungeness River lowland, capped by late Pleistocene glacial sedi­ ments, is in the center foreground. Holocene Dungeness Spit is in the lower left foreground. Fidalgo Island and Mount Erie, composed of Jurassic intrusive and Jurassic to Cretaceous sedimentary rocks of the Fidalgo Complex, are visible as the first high point of land directly across the strait from Dungeness Spit.
    [Show full text]
  • Kennewick School District
    1 Amistad Elementary................................................930 W. 4th Ave. 13 Southgate Elementary......................................3121 W. 19th Ave.˜ 25 Kennewick High.......................................... 500 S. Dayton St. 2 Amon Creek Elementary................18 Center Parkway, Richland WA 14 Sunset View Elementary................................711 N. Center Pkwy. 26 Legacy High...............................................4624 W. 10th Ave. 3 Canyon View Elementary.......................................1229 W. 22nd Pl. 15 Vista Elementary...............................................1701 N. Young St. 27 Phoenix High...............................................1315 W. 4th Ave. 4 Cascade Elementary...........................................505 S. Highland Dr. 16 Washington Elementary.....................................105 W. 21st Ave. 28 Southridge High..................................3520 Southridge˜Blvd. 5 Cottonwood Elementary..................16734 Cottonwood Creek Blvd. 17 Westgate Elementary ........................................2514 W. 4th Ave. 29 Tri- Tech Skills Center...........................5929 W. Metaline Ave. 6 Eastgate Elementary...............................................910 E. 10th Ave. 18 Mid-Coulmbia Partnership .................................5980 W. 12 Ave. 30 Administration Center..................................1000 W. 4th Ave. 7 Edison Elementary................................................. 201 S. Dawes St. 19 Chinook Middle................................................4891
    [Show full text]
  • Washington Wildlife Mitigation Projects
    BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION AUGUST 1996 WASHINGTON WILDLIFE MITIGATION PROJECTS FINAL PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (DOE/EA-1096) AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT jn> i^ 4*7, FEB 1 2 1397 T Scotch Creek Chesaw OKANOGAN * * Scotch -ft,,* Creek valley Columbia Basin : Wetland Projects ' Columbia Plateau Acquisition/Improvement Project activities could occur in Okanogan. Douglas. Grant, Adams and/or Franklin Counties. In cooperation with: BONNEVILLE Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bonneville Power Administration Finding of No Significant Impact for Washington Wildlife Mitigation Projects SUMMARY: BPA proposes to fund the portion of the Washington Wildlife Mitigation Agreement (Agreement) pertaining to wildlife habitat mitigation projects to be undertaken in a cooperative effort with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). This Agreement serves to establish a monetary budget funded by BPA for projects proposed by Washington Wildlife Coalition members and approved by BPA to protect, mitigate, and improve wildlife and/or wildlife habitat within the State of Washington that has been affected by the construction of Federal dams along the Columbia River. The proposed action would allow the sponsors to secure property and conduct habitat improvement activities for multiple projects located in central Washington. BPA has prepared an Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • SR 240 I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange (Columbia Causeway) Mitigation Site
    SR 240 I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange (Columbia Causeway) Mitigation Site USACE IP 2004-00043 South Central Region 2018 MONITORING REPORT Wetlands Program Issued March 2019 Environmental Services Office Author: Jennie Husby Editor: Kristen Andrews Contributors: Kristen Andrews Jennie Husby Tom Mohagen Sean Patrick For additional information about this report or the WSDOT Wetlands Program, please contact: Kristen Andrews, Wetlands Program WSDOT, Environmental Services Office P. O. Box 47332, Olympia, WA 98504 Phone: 360-570-2588 E-mail: [email protected] Monitoring reports are published on the web at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/environment/technical/disciplines/wetlands/monitoring- reports SR 240 I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange (Columbia Causeway) Mitigation Site USACE IP 2004-00043 General Site Information USACE IP Number 2004-00043 Ecology WQC 1760 On both sides of SR 240 at milepost 37 in Mitigation Location Benton County LLID Number 1192477462437 Construction Date 2005–2007 Monitoring Period 2009-2018 Year of Monitoring 10 of 10 Type of Impact Permanent Wetland Area of Project Impact1 9.65 acres Upland Wetland Wetland Type of Mitigation Vegetation Establishment Enhancement Preservation Planned Area of 10.19 acres 5.62 acres 0.7 acre Mitigation2 1 Impact and mitigation numbers sourced from SR 240, I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange Construct Additional Lanes Final Mitigation Plan Addendum (WSDOT 2008). 2 Additional off-site mitigation credit of 3.2 acres obtained from Amon Creek for fish passage enhancement and
    [Show full text]
  • Wagon Roads Map Download
    SEATTLE WALLA WALLA Union Gap Pioneer Cemetery: An early settler in the Red Mountain Wine Region: Though its 4,040 acres Pasco: Located at the confluence of the Snake and L’Ecole No. 41: Founded by Baker and Jean Seattle 13 Yakima Valley, Dr. Lewis H. Goodwin, lost his wife 16 of scrubby desert-dry sandy loam slopes may not 20 Columbia rivers and at the junction of the Northern 23 Ferguson in 1983, L’Ecole No. 41 is the third- Lake Sammamish State Park Priscilla in 1865. He donated the land, at the end of East constitute what some consider an actual “mountain,” the Red Pacific and Oregon Railway & Navigation Company rail oldest winery in the Walla Walla Valley and is known Ahtanum Road, around her burial site near the Yakima River Mountain appellation looms large in the world of North- lines, Pasco has long been a transportation hub. It replaced for sustainably produced wines with an international to the city for use as a cemetery. Many early Yakima Valley west wine. Even before the Yakima River-bordered area was Ainsworth, established two miles down the Columbia in 1879, reputation. Originally built in 1915 as part of the Fall City settlers are buried here. granted official AVA status in 2001, the exceptional grapes as a construction camp for the Northern Pacific Railway. The Frenchtown settlement along the Walla Walla River, Issaquah 1 grown in its windy vineyards had earned a towering reputa- town grew as freight and passengers connected there with the historic schoolhouse that houses the tasting room Battle of Two Buttes: On November 9, 1855, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Gray Squirrel Recovery Plan
    STATE OF WASHINGTON November 2007 Western Gray Squirrel Recovery Plan by Mary J. Linders and Derek W. Stinson by Mary J. Linders and Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Wildlife Program In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as en- dangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix E). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an en- dangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the final Washington State Recovery Plan for the Western Gray Squirrel. It summarizes the historic and current distribution and abundance of western gray squirrels in Washington and describes factors af- fecting the population and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting the population and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, potential reintroduction of western gray squirrels into vacant habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Interim target population objectives and other criteria for reclassification are identified. The draft state recovery plan for the western gray squirrel was reviewed by researchers and representatives from state, county, local, tribal, and federal agencies, and regional experts. This review was followed by a 90-day public comment period.
    [Show full text]