DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh IV Wind Project Habitat Conservation Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh IV Wind Project Habitat Conservation Plan DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE SHILOH IV WIND PROJECT HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN P REPARED BY: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2800 Cottage Way, W-2650 Sacramento, CA 95825 Contact: Mike Thomas, Chief Habitat Conservation Planning Branch W ITH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM: ICF International 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Brad Schafer 916.737.3000 December 2011 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Draft Environmental Assessment for the Shiloh IV Wind Project Habitat Conservation Plan. December. (ICF 00810.10.). Sacramento, CA. With technical assistance from ICF International, Sacramento, CA. Contents Chapter 1 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 Species Covered by the HCP ...................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Proposed Action Addressed in this EA ....................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action .......................................................................... 1-3 Chapter 2 Proposed Action and Alternatives .................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Alternative 1: Proposed Action.................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Alternative 2: No Action .......................................................................................................... 2-13 2.3 Alternatives Eliminated from Further Consideration .............................................................. 2-13 Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ................................................. 3-1 3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................... 3.1-1 3.2 Agricultural Resources ............................................................................................................ 3.2-1 3.3 Air Quality and Climate Change .............................................................................................. 3.3-1 3.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................................................... 3.4-1 3.5 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 3.5-1 3.6 Geology, Seismicity, Soils, Mineral Resources, and Paleontological Resources..................... 3.6-1 3.7 Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................................... 3.7-1 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................. 3.8-1 3.9 Land Use and Planning............................................................................................................ 3.9-1 3.10 Noise ..................................................................................................................................... 3.10-1 3.11 Public Health Hazards ........................................................................................................... 3.11-1 3.12 Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 3.12-1 3.13 Traffic and Transportation .................................................................................................... 3.13-1 3.14 Utilities and Public Service Systems ..................................................................................... 3.14-1 Chapter 4 Other Required Analysis .................................................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Unavoidable Adverse Effects ..................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ....................................................... 4-1 4.3 Short-Term Uses versus Long-Term Productivity ...................................................................... 4-1 4.4 Cumulative Effects ..................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.5 Environmentally Preferable Alternative .................................................................................... 4-7 4.6 References ................................................................................................................................. 4-8 Chapter 5 List of Preparers .............................................................................................................. 5-1 Draft Environmental Assessment i December 2011 ICF 00810.10 Tables 3.2-1 Impacts on Agriculture ........................................................................................................ 3.2-4 3.2-2 Williamson Act Parcels in the Shiloh IV Plan Area ............................................................... 3.2-5 3.3-1 Applicable Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................................. 3.3-1 3.3-2 Federal de Minimis Threshold Levels for Criteria Pollutants in Nonattainment Areas .................................................................................................................................... 3.3-3 3.3-3 Federal de Minimis Threshold Levels for Criteria Pollutants in Maintenance Areas .................................................................................................................................... 3.3-4 3.3-4 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Measured at the Fairfield-Chadbourne Monitoring Station .............................................................................................................. 3.3-7 3.3-5 Federal and State Attainment Status of Solano County ...................................................... 3.3-8 3.3-6 Summary of Construction Equipment ................................................................................. 3.3-9 3.3-7 Summary of Annual Emissions for Nonattainment and Maintenance Pollutants (tons per year) ................................................................................................................... 3.3-11 3.3-8 Summary of GHG Emissions from Construction Activities (metric tons) .......................... 3.3-13 3.3-9 Assumptions for Annual Project-Related Emissions of HFCs from Refrigeration and Air Conditioning .......................................................................................................... 3.3-13 3.3-10 Summary of Operational-Related GHG Emissions (metric tons ........................................ 3.3-14 3.3-11 Summary of Lifetime GHG Emissions and Reductions (metric tons ................................. 3.3-15 3.3-12 HRA Screening Analysis Results ......................................................................................... 3.3-16 3.4-1 Special-Status Plants Potentially Occurring in the Montezuma Hills Region, Solano County ................................................................................... follows page 3.4-6 3.4-2 Special-Status Wildlife Species Potentially Occurring in the Montezuma Hills Region, Solano County ............................................................................ follows page 3.4-6 3.5-1 Cultural Resources in the Shiloh IV Plan Area ..................................................................... 3.5-8 3.6-1 Fossil Locality Search Results .............................................................................................. 3.6-4 3.10-1 Definition of Acoustical Terms .......................................................................................... 3.10-1 3.10-2 Typical Noise Levels ........................................................................................................... 3.10-2 3.10 3 Existing Noise Levels in the Project AreaPlan Area (dBA .................................................. 3.10-4 Draft Environmental Assessment ii December 2011 ICF 00810.10 3.10-4 Estimated Construction Noise Levels by Phase and Distance ........................................... 3.10-5 3.10-5 Noise Reduction Required to Achieve 50 dBa CNEL Limit at Each Residence Predicted to Exceed the Limit ........................................................................................... 3.10-6 3.11-1 Worst-Case and Expected Shadow Flicker Impacts .......................................................... 3.11-9 3.13-1 Existing Traffic Volumes on Regional Access Routes......................................................... 3.13-4 3.13-2 Existing Traffic Volumes on Local Access Routes .............................................................. 3.13-5 Draft Environmental Assessment iii December 2011 ICF 00810.10 Figures Follows Page 1-1 Shiloh IV Project Region ......................................................................................................... 1-2 1-2 Montezuma Hills Wind Resource Area ................................................................................... 1-2 2-1 Turbine Options ...................................................................................................................... 2-2 2-2 Impact
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MARSH LANDING GENERATING STATION Contra Costa County, California Application for Certi
    Responses to Data Request Set 2: (#60–63) ApplicationApplication for for Certification Certification (08-AFC-03)(08-AFC-03) forfor MARSHMARSH LANDING LANDING GENERATINGGENERATING STATION STATION ContraContra Costa Costa County, County, California California June 2009 Prepared for: Prepared by: Marsh Landing Generating Station (08-AFC-3) Responses to CEC Data Requests 60 through 63 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS RESPONSES TO DATA REQUESTS 60 THROUGH 63 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 60 THROUGH 63 TABLES Table 63-1 Cumulative Sources for Marsh Landing Generating Station and Willow Pass Generating Station Table 63-2 AERMOD Cumulative Impact Modeling Results FIGURES Figure 60-1 Inorganic Nitrogen Wet Deposition from Nitrate and Ammonium, 2007 Figure 62-1a Nitrogen Deposition Isopleth Map - Vegetation Figure 62-1b Nitrogen Deposition Isopleth Map - Wildlife Figure 63-1a Cumulative Sources Nitrogen Deposition Isopleths - Vegetation Figure 63-1b Cumulative Sources Nitrogen Deposition Isopleths - Wildlife i Marsh Landing Generating Station (08-AFC-3) Responses to CEC Data Requests 60 through 63 Table of Contents LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED IN RESPONSES AAQS ambient air quality standard AERMOD American Meteorological Society and Environmental Protection Agency preferred atmospheric dispersion model BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District CCPP Contra Costa Power Plant CEC California Energy Commission CEMS continuous emissions monitoring system cm/sec centimeters per second CO carbon monoxide K Kelvin kg/ha/yr kilograms per hectare
    [Show full text]
  • Methyl and Total Mercury Spatial and Temporal Trends in Surficial Sediments of the San Francisco Bay-Delta
    Methyl and Total Mercury Spatial and Temporal Trends in Surficial Sediments of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Assessment of Ecological and Human Health Impacts of Mercury in the Bay-Delta Watershed CALFED Bay-Delta Mercury Project Final Report Submitted to: Mark Stephenson California Department of Fish and Game Moss Landing Marine Labs 7544 Sandholdt Road Moss Landing, CA 95039 Submitted by: Wesley A. Heim Moss Landing Marine Laboratories 8272 Moss Landing Rd Moss Landing, CA 95039 [email protected] (email) 831-771-4459 (voice) Dr. Kenneth Coale Moss Landing Marine Laboratories 8272 Moss Landing Rd Moss Landing, CA 95039 Mark Stephenson California Department of Fish and Game Moss Landing Marine Labs 7544 Sandholdt Road Moss Landing, CA 95039 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recent studies indicate significant amounts of mercury are transported into the Bay-Delta from the Coastal and Sierra mountain ranges. In response to mercury contamination of the Bay-Delta and potential risks to humans, health advisories have been posted in the estuary, recommending no consumption of large striped bass and limited consumption of other sport fish. The major objective of the CALFED Bay-Delta Mercury Project “Assessment of Ecological and Human Health Impacts of Mercury in the Bay-Delta Watershed” is to reduce mercury levels in fish tissue to levels that do not pose a health threat to humans or wildlife. This report summarizes the accomplishments of the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDF&G) at Moss Landing as participants in the CALFED Bay-Delta Mercury Project. Specific objectives of MLML and CDF&G include: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Solano 4 Wind Project EIR 8 References Executive
    Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 8 References Executive Summary No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 1, “Introduction” No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 2, “Project Description” California Energy Commission. 2018 (August). Operational Wind Projects, Solano Wind Resource Area, 2018. Map scale 1:24,000. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/wind/WindResourceArea_Solano.pdf. Accessed March 27, 2019. CEC. See California Energy Commission. Solano County. 1987 (May). Solano County Wind Turbine Siting Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Department of Environmental Management, Fairfield, CA. U.S. Geological Survey. 2019 (January). U.S. Wind Turbine Database. Available: https://eerscmap.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/#14.02/38.16164/-121.79729. Accessed February 9, 2019. USGS. See U.S. Geological Survey. Chapter 3, “Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures” Section 3.1, “Aesthetics” Black & Veatch. 2019 (January 3). Solano Wind Energy Project, Wind Project Shadow Flicker Assessment. California Department of Transportation 2019. Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/. Accessed March 18, 2019. Federal Aviation Administration. 2018 (August 17). Obstruction Marking and Lighting, including Changes 1 and 2. Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L. Chapter 13, “Marking and Lighting Wind Turbines.” Federal Highway Administration. 2015 (January). Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects. FHWA-HEP-15-029. Washington, DC. Page 8-1 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 National Research Council. 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NRC. See National Research Council. Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 2007 (September). Draft Environmental Impact Report for the SMUD Solano Wind Project Phase 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    comparing futures for the sacramento–san joaquin delta jay lund | ellen hanak | william fleenor william bennett | richard howitt jeffrey mount | peter moyle 2008 Public Policy Institute of California Supported with funding from Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation ISBN: 978-1-58213-130-6 Copyright © 2008 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Summary “Once a landscape has been established, its origins are repressed from memory. It takes on the appearance of an ‘object’ which has been there, outside us, from the start.” Karatani Kojin (1993), Origins of Japanese Literature The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is the hub of California’s water supply system and the home of numerous native fish species, five of which already are listed as threatened or endangered. The recent rapid decline of populations of many of these fish species has been followed by court rulings restricting water exports from the Delta, focusing public and political attention on one of California’s most important and iconic water controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento and Stockton Deep Water Ship Channels Maintenance
    1. INTRODUCTION This Introduction section provides information relevant to the other sections of this document and is incorporated by reference into Sections 2 and 3 below. 1.1 Background The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) prepared the biological opinion (opinion) and incidental take statement portions of this document in accordance with section 7(b) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq.), and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 402. We also completed an essential fish habitat (EFH) consultation on the proposed action, in accordance with section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600. We completed pre-dissemination review of this document using standards for utility, integrity, and objectivity in compliance with applicable guidelines issued under the Data Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Public Law 106-554). The document will be available through NMFS’ Public Consultation Tracking System (https://pcts.nmfs.noaa.gov/pcts-web/homepage.pcts). A complete record of this consultation is on file at California Central Valley Area Office in Sacramento, California. 1.2 Consultation History On February 5, 2013, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) met with NMFS to discuss the development of a biological assessment (BA) to support a pending request for consultation under the ESA. On July 16, 2013, the Corps met with NMFS to further discuss the development of a BA to address the effects of the proposed project.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Existing Conditions
    Buchanan Field Airport Master Planning Program Field A. INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Buchanan A > Inventory of Existing Conditions INTRODUCTION. Buchanan Field Airport (CCR) is the major general aviation reliever airport serving Contra Costa County and multiple communities located in the northeastern portion of the greater San Francisco Bay Area (see Figure A1). The Airport has been a catalyst for business growth in the region and has served as an anchor for the local employment base, as well as meeting the aviation transportation needs. Situated in an unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County, directly adjacent to the thriving urban heartbeat of the City of Concord, Buchanan Field Airport is a vital component of the transportation infrastructure serving the region for tourism and business. Buchanan Field Airport is well equipped to serve regional demand related to general aviation and business aviation needs. The Airport has a reputation as being an excellent aviation facility that offers a safe and efficient operational environment. The Bay Area continues to experience significant increases in business activity, commercial and residential growth, and economic development. Because of this, Buchanan Field Airport is also being presented with increasing operational and facility demands. Many of the areas surrounding the Airport, with many high quality homes and environmental amenities, have experienced significant residential development, resulting in homeowner concerns about the effect that the Airport may have on their lifestyle. Some of these homes and facilities are located within a two to three mile radius of the Airport. Thus, the Airport may influence the social, economic, and physical environments of the area in which it operates.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan
    Statement of Qualifications for Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan Prepared for City of Rio Vista Prepared by Statement of Qualifications for RioRio VVistaista AAirportp Pavement Management Plan, DrainageiA AsseAssessment,ssment,ment,nt, and Electrical Plan July 22, 2010 765 The City Drive Suite 400 Mr. John Andoh Orange, California Transit & Airport Coordinator 92868 City of Rio Vista TEL 714 939 1030 FAX 714 938 9488 One Main Street Rio Vista, CA 94571 Re: Statement of Interest and Qualifications for Professional Airport Engineering Design and Planning Services for the City of Rio Vista and the Rio Vista Municipal Airport Dear Mr. Andoh: The City of Rio Vista is looking for the most qualified airport consultant to work with the City to improve the Rio Vista Municipal Airport. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) is that firm. We believe that Kimley-Horn is the right choice for the City based on the following: History of Stability and Strong California Presence. Kimley-Horn is an employee owned, national firm. Since its inception in 1967, our firm has never been sold or acquired, or merged with other entities. Furthermore, we are ranked in the top 20 national aviation firms by ENR, have been ranked No.1 firm to work for by CE News several times, and are in the top 100 companies to work for by Fortune. Kimley-Horn is stable. We are consistent and we’re not going anywhere. We are confident that the people and the company you see in California today will be the people and company you see for the life of your projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Inland-Breeding Pelicans, Cormorants, Gulls, and Terns in California a Catalogue, Digital Atlas, and Conservation Tool
    Inland-breeding Pelicans, Cormorants, Gulls, and Terns in California A Catalogue, Digital Atlas, and Conservation Tool W. DAVI D SHUFOR D Wildlife Branch Nongame Wildlife Program Report 2010-01 California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento Author contact information: W. David Shuford PRBO Conservation Science 3820 Cypress Drive #11 Petaluma, CA 94954 [email protected] www.prbo.org Typography and design: Timothy W. Brittain Cover photo: Forster’s Tern (Sterna forsteri) at its nest on an algae mat by tule (Scirpus acutus) clumps at Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge Sump 1-A, Siskiyou County, California, 20 June 1997. This and all other photos by the author. Recommended Citations: Shuford, W. D. 2010. Inland-breeding pelicans, cormorants, gulls, and terns in California: A catalogue, digital atlas, and conservation tool. Wildlife Branch, Nongame Wildlife Program Report 2010-01. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Available at www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/waterbirdcatalogue/. When referencing colony locations and maps, please cite the digital atlas CD-ROM of the catalogue as: Shuford, W. D., C. Rintoul, D. Stralberg, and V. Toniolo. 2010. Digital atlas of colonies of seven species of inland-breeding waterbirds in California, CD-ROM (Chapter 3) in Inland-breeding pelicans, cormorants, gulls, and terns in California: A catalogue, digital atlas, and conservation tool (W. D. Shuford, author/editor). Wildlife Branch, Nongame Wildlife Program Report 2010-01. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Available at www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/waterbirdcatalogue/. ii CONTENT S Frequently Used Acronyms .....................................................................iv Management and Research Recommendations .............................. 51 Acknowledgments ...................................................................................v Monitoring Needs ......................................................................... 51 Literature Cited ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2. the Legacies of Delta History
    2. TheLegaciesofDeltaHistory “You could not step twice into the same river; for other waters are ever flowing on to you.” Heraclitus (540 BC–480 BC) The modern history of the Delta reveals profound geologic and social changes that began with European settlement in the mid-19th century. After 1800, the Delta evolved from a fishing, hunting, and foraging site for Native Americans (primarily Miwok and Wintun tribes), to a transportation network for explorers and settlers, to a major agrarian resource for California, and finally to the hub of the water supply system for San Joaquin Valley agriculture and Southern California cities. Central to these transformations was the conversion of vast areas of tidal wetlands into islands of farmland surrounded by levees. Much like the history of the Florida Everglades (Grunwald, 2006), each transformation was made without the benefit of knowing future needs and uses; collectively these changes have brought the Delta to its current state. Pre-European Delta: Fluctuating Salinity and Lands As originally found by European explorers, nearly 60 percent of the Delta was submerged by daily tides, and spring tides could submerge it entirely.1 Large areas were also subject to seasonal river flooding. Although most of the Delta was a tidal wetland, the water within the interior remained primarily fresh. However, early explorers reported evidence of saltwater intrusion during the summer months in some years (Jackson and Paterson, 1977). Dominant vegetation included tules—marsh plants that live in fresh and brackish water. On higher ground, including the numerous natural levees formed by silt deposits, plant life consisted of coarse grasses; willows; blackberry and wild rose thickets; and galleries of oak, sycamore, alder, walnut, and cottonwood.
    [Show full text]
  • Membership Directory (1999-2000)
    19 Directory Errata Sheet Section 4. Notice of all regular meetings, including an agenda which lists all items of business on which action will be taken, will be posted to the Chapter’s Web Page not less than two weeks prior to the date on which the meeting is Some corrections/revisions were not included in the scheduled to be held. Upon written request to the Executive Director, members recently mailed directories. may also have a copy of the agenda mailed to them at the time of posting. For convenience, meeting agendas will be published in the Chapter’s newsletter Please cut the pages and punch the holes as shown for preceding the meeting. Included with the notice and agenda shall be a brief inclusion in your directory binder. The revisions are as description and/or explanation of those items of business on which action is proposed, in order to alert the general membership. Such advance notice and follows, agenda shall not be required for the second and any succeeding meeting(s) which may occur or be called during an annual meeting. Such advance notice, Remove and replace pages 19-20, if any, which is reasonably possible shall be given for special meetings called by the President to deal with urgent business of an emergency nature. Remove and replace pages 21-22, Emergency matters that impact directly on the operation of the Chapter that arise after publication of the agenda for a scheduled meeting of the Board may be acted upon by the Board during the meeting without prior notification to the Remove and replace pages 25-26, general membership.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Sherman Island Wildlife Area Land Management Plan EDAW California Department of Fish and Game I Table of Contents TABLE of CONTENTS
    LOWER SHERMAN ISLAND WILDLIFE AREA LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN FINAL APRIL 2007 iÿPWA EDAW ranr HILLIJVIbJMKWII LOWER SHERMAN ISLAND WILDLIFE AREA LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN FINAL PREPARED FOR: CAUFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME SACRAMENTO VALLEY CENTRAL SIERRA REGION 1701 NIMBUS ROAD, SUITE A RANCHO CORDOVA, CA 95670 CONTACT; SARAHDLM AREA MANAGER 916/353-2881 PREPARED BY: EDAW 2022 J STREET SACRAMENTO, CAUFORNIA 95814 CONTACT; JOHN HUNTER 916/414-5800 APRIL 2007 EDAW ig/PWA FINAL LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE LOWER SHERMAN ISLAND WILDLIFE AREA PREPARED FOR: California Department of Fish and Game Sacramento Valley Central Sierra Region 1701 Nimbus Road, Suite A Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 PREPARED BY: EDAW, Inc. 2022 J Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916)414-5800 APPROVED BY: Acting Regional Manager, Bay-Delta Region Date Date TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................... ES-1 Purpose and History of Acquisition ........................................................................................................ES-2 Property Description and Management Setting.......................................................................................ES-2 Environmental Setting.............................................................................................................................ES-2 Management Goals................................................................................................................................ES-13
    [Show full text]