DOCSLIB.ORG

Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project M A Y 2 0 0 3 NORTHEAST OREGON HATCHERY PROGRAM GRANDE RONDE - IMNAHA SPRING CHINOOK HATCHERY PROJECT Draft Environmental Impact Statement DOE/EIS-0340 Northeast Oregon Hatchery Program Grande Ronde – Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0340) Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Cooperating Federal Agencies: U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries); U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Cooperating Tribes: Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) Cooperating State Agencies: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Abstract: To assist in the conservation and recovery of Chinook salmon native to the Grande Ronde River and Imnaha River subbasins, the Proposed Action of updating and modifying two existing hatcheries and constructing three new hatchery facilities at other sites is being studied in this Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS). BPA proposes to fund the capital improvements and the operation and maintenance of all five facilities to aid BPA’s efforts to mitigate and recover anadromous fish affected by the Federal Columbia River Power System. The Lower Snake River run of spring/summer chinook was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1992. The existing hatchery facilities, Lookingglass Hatchery in the Grande Ronde subbasin and Imnaha Satellite Facility in the Imnaha subbasin, have become over-extended, outdated or otherwise unsuitable for producing the numbers of hatchery fish necessary to recover the threatened Chinook stocks. The Lostine River Hatchery, Lostine Adult Collection Facility (both on the Lostine River in the Grande Ronde subbasin), and Imnaha Final Rearing Facility (in the Imnaha subbasin) would help alleviate the risk of fish production failure or disease epidemic at the existing hatcheries; and allow hatchery fish production, evaluation and monitoring programs described in the Northeast Oregon Hatchery Program Spring Chinook Master Plan (Master Plan, Ashe et al. 2000) to meet objectives of the fishery co-managers (NPT, CTUIR, ODFW, USFWS, & NOAA Fisheries). This Draft EIS evaluates the Proposed Action and a No Action Alternative in detail. Considered, but eliminated from detailed study were nearly 40 alternative sites, which were found to be unsuitable due to insufficient water quality and/or volume at critical times of the fish production cycle, distance to native spawning grounds (important for young fish ‘imprinting’ to native waters), or lack of space (too little land available). All proposed sites are privately owned except the existing Imnaha Satellite Facility, which is on Forest Service land under Special Use Permit to the USFWS. The two Imnaha facilities are within the Imnaha Wild and Scenic River corridor and the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area boundary. Public review and comment of this Draft EIS will continue through July 7, 2003. Responses to comments will be made part of the Final EIS, which is scheduled for completion in August 2003. BPA expects to issue a Record of Decision whether to implement the project in September 2003. Public review and comment of this Draft EIS will continue through July 7, 2003. Responses to comments will be made part of the Final EIS, which is scheduled for completion in August 2003. BPA expects to issue a Record of Decision whether to implement the project in September 2003. For more information about the Draft EIS, please contact: Mickey Carter, Environmental Protection Specialist Bonneville Power Administration P. O. Box 3621, KEC-4 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Phone: (503) 230-5885 Email: [email protected] To receive additional copies of the Draft EIS: Call BPA’s document request line at 1-800-622-4520; record your name, address, and which document and format you would like to receive. Executive Summary - Grande Ronde-Imnaha Hatchery Project Draft EIS (9 pages) Draft EIS - Grande Ronde-Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project (about 200 pages) Formats available: Paper copy, or CD. The documents are also available on BPA’s website at: http://www.bpa.gov under links to environmental analysis, Active Projects. Or, write to: BPA Communications Office – DM-7 P.O. Box 12999 Portland, OR 97212 For information on Department of Energy’s National Environmental Policy Act activities, contact: Carol Borgstrom, Director Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, EH-42 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20585 Phone: 1-800-472-2756 Website: http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa Northeast Oregon Hatchery Program Grande Ronde – Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement Bonneville Power Administration May 2003 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary..................................................................................................ES-1 to ES-9 Chapter 1: Purpose and Need 1.1 Need for Action..............................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Purposes of Taking Action.............................................................................................1-1 1.3 Decisions to be Made and Responsible Officials ..........................................................1-2 1.4 Background....................................................................................................................1-2 1.4.1 Regional Perspective....................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4.2 Grande Ronde – Imnaha Spring Chinook Management Perspective .............................. 1-3 1.5 Public Scoping and Key Issues......................................................................................1-6 1.6 Issues Beyond the Scope of this EIS..............................................................................1-7 1.7 Relationship to Other Fish Projects and Programs in the Vicinity ................................1-7 Chapter 2: Proposed Action and Other Alternatives 2.1 Proposed Action.............................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Grande Ronde Facilities.................................................................................................. 2-3 2.1.2 Imnaha Facilities ........................................................................................................... 2-11 2.2 No Action Alternative..................................................................................................2-17 2.3 Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Study..............................................................2-17 2.3.1 Modify Lookingglass Hatchery and Use, Add or Modify No Other Facilities ............. 2-17 2.3.2 Use or Modify Existing Facilities Elsewhere in the Columbia Basin to Assist with Lookingglass Hatchery Production...................................................................... 2-18 2.3.3 Put New Facilities at Other Sites in Northeast Oregon to Assist Lookingglass Hatchery Production .................................................................................................... 2-18 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives ........................................................................................2-18 Chapter 3: Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Fish ........................................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.2 Impacts Evaluation Summary ....................................................................................... 3-12 3.2.3 Consequences of the Proposed Action.......................................................................... 3-13 3.2.4 Cumulative Impacts ...................................................................................................... 3-40 3.2.5 Consequences of Taking No Action.............................................................................. 3-41 3.3 Wildlife .................................................................................................................................. 3-43 3.3.1 Affected Environment................................................................................................... 3-43 3.3.2 Evaluation Criteria ........................................................................................................ 3-51 3.3.3 Consequences of the Proposed Action.......................................................................... 3-51 3.3.4 Cumulative Impacts ...................................................................................................... 3-54 3.3.5 Consequences of Taking No Action.............................................................................. 3-54 3.4 Plants and Wetlands ............................................................................................................. 3-54 3.4.1 Affected Environment................................................................................................... 3-54 3.4.2 Evaluation Criteria .......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wallowa County Community Sensitivity and Resilience
    Wallowa County Community Sensitivity and Resilience This section documents the community’s sensitivity factors, or those community assets and characteristics that may be impacted by natural hazards, (e.g., special populations, economic factors, and historic and cultural resources). It also identifies the community’s resilience factors, or the community’s ability to manage risk and adapt to hazard event impacts (e.g., governmental structure, agency missions and directives, and plans, policies, and programs). The information in this section represents a snapshot in time of the current sensitivity and resilience factors in the community when the plan was developed. The information documented below, along with the findings of the risk assessment, should be used as the local level rationale for the risk reduction actions identified in Section 4 – Mission, Goals, and Action Items. The identification of actions that reduce a community’s sensitivity and increase its resilience assist in reducing the community’s overall risk, or the area of overlap in Figure G.1 below. Figure G.1 Understanding Risk Source: Oregon Natural Hazards Workgroup, 2006. Deleted: _________ County Deleted: Month Year Deleted: 2 Northeast Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Page G-1 Community Sensitivity Factors The following table documents the key community sensitivity factors in Wallowa County. Population • Wallowa County has negative population growth (-1.3% change from 2000-2005) and an increasing number of persons aged 65 and above. In 2005, 20% of the population was 65 years or older; in 2025, 25% of the population is expected to be 65 years or older. Elderly individuals require special consideration due to their sensitivities to heat and cold, their reliance upon transportation for medications, and their comparative difficulty in making home modifications that reduce risk to hazards.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon – 2011
    Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon – 2011 Submitted by The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. Title: Monitoring Wolverine in Northeast Oregon – 2011 Authors: Audrey J. Magoun, Patrick Valkenburg, Clinton D. Long, and Judy K. Long Funding and Logistical Support: Dale Pedersen James Short Marsha O’Dell National Park Service Norcross Wildlife Foundation Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Seattle Foundation The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. U.S. Forest Service Wildlife Conservation Society Special thanks to all those individuals who provided observations of wolverines in the Wallowa- Whitman National Forest and other areas in Oregon. We also thank Tim Hiller, Mark Penninger, and Glenn McDonald for their assistance in the field work. This document should be cited as: Magoun, A. J., P. Valkenburg, C. D. Long, and J. K. Long. 2011. Monitoring wolverines in northeast Oregon – 2011. Final Report. The Wolverine Foundation, Inc., Kuna, Idaho, USA. 2 INTRODUCTION The Oregon Conservation Strategy lists “species data gaps” and “research and monitoring needs” for some species where basic information on occurrence and habitat associations are not known (ODFW 2006; pages 367-368). For the Blue Mountains, East Cascades, and West Cascades Ecoregions of Oregon, the Strategy lists wolverine as a species for which status is unknown but habitat may be suitable to support wolverines. ODFW lists the wolverine as Threatened in Oregon and the USFWS has recently placed the species on the candidate list under the federal Endangered Species Act. Wolverine range in the contiguous United States had contracted substantially by the mid-1900s, probably because of high levels of human-caused mortality and very low immigration rates (Aubry et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Heaven in Hell's Canyon
    Northwest Explorer ONDAL ONDAL M M EN EN K K Left: Hiker at the boundary of Hell’s Canyon Wilderness. Right: Approaching Horse Heaven, elevation 8,100 feet on the Seven Devils Loop Trail in Hell’s Canyon Wilderness. June and July are good times to explore Washington’s southeast corner in the Wenaha-Tucannon area and in the nearby Hells Canyon area of Oregon and Idaho. Heaven in Hell’s Canyon Hiking two wilderness areas near Washington’s southeast corner By Ken Mondal finding places to backpack when the high jaw-dropping views. This hike can be country is snowed in. The Imnaha River done comfortably in 3-4 days. Seven Devils Loop in Hell’s is hikable virtually year round. An excellent description of hiking the Canyon is Heavenly On the Idaho side of the recreation Seven Devils Loop can be found in Hik- There is no question that the Grand area is a 215,000-acre wilderness area, ing Idaho by Maughan and Maughan, Canyon is one of the natural wonders which includes the Seven Devils Moun- published by Falcon. For the other hikes of the world. However, if one measures tains. The premier hike within this I would recommend Rich Landers’ 100 from the Snake River to the summit of wilderness is the Seven Devils Loop, a Hikes in the Inland Northwest. 9,393 foot He Devil Peak in the Seven rugged 29-mile round trip offering mag- Devils Mountains, this makes Hells nificent views into Hells Canyon many Choose Forgotten Wenaha- Canyon the deepest canyon in North thousands of feet below and equally Tucannon for Solitude America.
    [Show full text]
  • DOE/EIS-0340-SA-01: Supplement Analysis for NEOH Grande Ronde
    DOE F 1325.8e Electronic Form Approved by CILR – 10/08/2002 (08-89) United States Government Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration memorandum DATE: March 23, 2006 REPLY TO ATTN OF: KEC-4 SUBJECT: Supplement Analysis for NEOH Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project (DOE/EIS-0340-SA-01) TO: Ken Kirkman - KEWU-4 Project Manager Proposed Action: Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project Modifications Resulting from Final Design Project No.: 1988-053-01 Location: Wallowa County, Oregon Proposed By: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Nez Perce Tribe Introduction: BPA, in its March 11, 2005 Record of Decision (ROD) on the Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project, decided to fund value engineering, land acquisition and final design of fish production facilities to support an ongoing program of Snake River spring chinook propagation for conservation and recovery of the species. BPA analyzed the environmental impacts of the program in the NEOH Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project (DOE/EIS-0340) completed in July 2004. Subsequently, modifications to some of the proposed facilities and sites have been made to reduce costs, improve efficiency, reduce hazards and risks, and ameliorate some physical limitations and lingering public issues associated with some aspects of certain facilities. These changes are detailed in the attached report entitled “Supplement Analysis for the NEOH Grande Ronde - Imnaha Spring Chinook Hatchery Project Final Environmental Impact Statement.” The purpose of the Supplement Analysis (SA) is to determine if a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of the proposed changes in project design since the Final EIS and ROD were issued.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Q2
    QUARTERLY impactREPORT Q2 2019 HELLO FRIEND, The Freshwater Trust (TFT) protects and restores rivers all year round, but the next few months are our busiest season. It’s all helicopters, plants and restoration professionals on deck. Due to permitting and weather, we have a narrow window when we can install large wood structures for fish habitat and river complexity in places like the Sandy River basin.In a matter of weeks, helicopters will carry massive logs to key You’ll also hear about our fifth water quality places along a river or creek – places that have trading program to benefit the McKenzie River, been carefully identified by our project staff this won this past quarter. past quarter. These large wood structures will improve the overall river function, create new These reports are intended to shine a spotlight side channels, and increase the complexity of the on what we’ve accomplished with your support habitat for native fish species. Much of this work and provide you with a sneak peak of where we’re is paid for through grants and contracts. But going. Our past successes and future wins are another big piece comes from the dollars you’ve both thanks to you. helped raise already this year. The next couple months is also the season when Thank you for your continued our water deals shine – when the contracts we’ve signed with farmers and ranchers kick into action support of this organization. and save thousands of gallons of water in rivers that need it – when the temperatures are high and the fish need all the cool water they can get.
    [Show full text]
  • The Geology of Part of the Snake River Canyon and Adjacent Areas in Northeastern Oregon and Western Idaho
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Tracy Lowell Vallier for the Ph.D. in Geology (Name) (Degree) (Major) Date thesis is presented May 1, 1967 Title THE GEOLOGY OF PART OF THE SNAKE RIVER CANYON AND ADJACENT AREAS IN NORTHEAXERN OREGON AND WESTERN IDAHO Abstract approved Redacted for Privacy (Major professor) The mapped area lies between the Wallowa Mountains of northeastern Oregon and the Seven Devils Mountains of western Idaho. Part of the Snake River canyon is in- cluded. A composite stratigraphic section includes at least 30,000 feet of strata. Pre- Tertiary and Tertiary strata are separated by a profound unconformity. Pre -Tertiary layered rocks are mostly Permian and Triassic volcani- clastic and volcanic flow rocks. At least four pre -Ter- tiary intrusive suites occur. Tertiary rocks are Miocene and Pliocene plateau basalts. Quaternary glacial materi- als and stream deposits locally mantle the older rocks. Permian ( ?) rocks of the Windy Ridge Formation are the oldest rocks and consist of 2,000 to 3,000 feet of keratophyre, quartz keratophyre, and keratophric pyro- clastic rocks. Unconformably ( ?) overlying the Windy Ridge Formation are 8,000 to 10,000 feet of volcaniclastic rocks and minor volcanic flow rocks of the Hunsaker Creek Formation of Middle Permian (Leonardian and Wordian) age. Spilitic flow rocks of the Kleinschmidt Volcanics are interlayered with and in part overlie the Hunsaker Creek Formation and comprise a sequence about 2,000 to 3,000 feet thick. The Paleozoic layered rocks were intruded by the Holbrook - Irondyke intrusives, composed of keratophyre porphyry, quartz keratophyre porphyry, diabase, and gab- bro.
    [Show full text]
  • Or Wilderness Protection in the Blue Mountain Ecoregion Have Been Identified by the Nature Conservancy As Vital to Protect Biodiversity in the Area
    172 OREGON WILD Neither Cascades nor Rockies, but With Attributes of Both Blue Mountains Ecoregion xtending from Oregon’s East Cascades Slopes and Foothills to the from 30 to 130 days depending on elevation. The forests are home to Rocky Mountain intersection of Oregon, Idaho and Washington, the 15.3 million acres elk, mule deer, black bear, cougar, bobcat, coyote, beaver, marten, raccoon, fisher, of the Blue Mountains Ecoregion in Oregon are a conglomeration of pileated woodpecker, golden eagle, chickadee and nuthatch, as well as various species Emountain ranges, broad plateaus, sparse valleys, spectacular river canyons of hawks, woodpeckers, owls and songbirds. Wolves, long absent from Oregon, are and deep gorges. The highest point is the Matterhorn that rises to 9,832 making their return to the state in this ecoregion. Individuals from packs reintroduced feet in the Wallowa Mountains. The ecoregion extends into southeastern Washington in nearby Idaho are dispersing into Oregon. Fish species include bull and rainbow and west central Idaho. trout, along with numerous stocks of Pacific salmon species. Most of the mountain ranges in the Blue Mountains Ecoregion are volcanic. The Depending on precipitation, aspect, soil type, elevation, fire history and other Crooked River separates the Maury Mountains from the Ochoco Mountains, which are factors, one generally finds various combinations of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, lodge- separated from the Aldrich Mountains by the South Fork John Day River. The Aldrich pole, western larch, juniper and Engelmann spruce throughout the Blue Mountains. Mountains are separated from the Strawberry Mountain Range by Canyon Creek. Beginning approximately at the Lower Deschutes River and rising eastward, the These ranges generally run east-west.
    [Show full text]
  • Imnaha River Spring Chinook HGMP
    HATCHERY AND GENETIC MANAGEMENT PLAN (HGMP) Hatchery Program: Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) Imnaha Spring/Summer Chinook Program Species or Spring/summer Chinook (Stock # 029) Hatchery Stock: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Agency/Operator: Imnaha / Snake River / ColumbiaBasin / Oregon Watershed and Region: Date Submitted: December 2002 Date Last Updated: May 2011 SECTION 1. GENERAL PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1.1) Name of hatchery or program. Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP), Imnaha Spring/Summer Chinook Hatchery Program. 1.2) Species and population (or stock) under propagation, and ESA status. Snake River ESU/Imnaha Spring‐Summer Chinook, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, (stock 029). ESA status: threatened. 1.3) Responsible organization and individuals ODFW Salem Headquarters Staff: Name (and Title): Scott Patterson, Fish Propagation Program Manager Organization: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 3406 Cherry Avenue NE, Salem, OR 97303‐4924 Telephone: 503‐947‐6218 Fax: 503‐947‐6202 Email: [email protected] ODFW NE Regional Staff: Name (and Title): Colleen Fagan, Northeast Region Hatchery Coordinator Organization: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Address: 107 20th Street, La Grande, OR 97850 Telephone: 541‐962‐1835 Fax: 541‐963‐6670 Email: [email protected] Name (and title): Jeff Yanke, Wallowa District Fish Biologist Agency or Tribe: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Address: 65495 Alder Slope Road, Enterprise OR 97828 Telephone: (541) 426‐3279 Fax: (541) 426‐3055
    [Show full text]
  • Recreation Overview
    APPENDIX 8-1 RECREATION OVERVIEW SUMMARY: Recreation and tourism are increasingly important parts of Wallowa County’s economy. Overall tourism and recreation spending has doubled over the last ten years, with an increased emphasis on conventional tourism (As opposed to more traditional recreation such as hunting, fishing and backcountry trips, conventional tourism is more centered on nice lodging, fine dining, shopping and sight seeing). People come to Wallowa County for scenery, solitude, camping, picnicking, boating, snow and water skiing, snowmobiling, auto touring, hiking and backpacking, horseback riding, fishing, hunting, and to visit the shops, galleries and restaurants in the Joseph and the Wallowa Lake area.. Recreation is centered around Wallowa Lake and the Eagle Cap Wilderness and to a lesser extent the streams and rivers of the County including the Snake River and the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area. Tourism is centered around Joseph and the Wallowa Lake area. PAST AND PRESENT: Recreation and tourism are considered a primary part of the County’s economy , and are the fastest growing segment of the economy. Wallowa Lake and Joseph are the center of tourism in the County and the State Park at Wallowa Lake is a major attraction. The Joseph Economic Improvement District and resultant improvements has turned Joseph into a center for tourism, and has led to a doubling of businesses on main street. This industry is highly seasonal and operates from late May to mid October, with peak activity from the first of July to mid October. The tourist facilities at the lake, including the State Park parking area, the moorage and docks, short term rentals, the motels, and the restaurants, now stand idle during the winter months.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Imnaha Rangeland Analysis
    Lower Imnaha Rangeland Analysis Lower Imnaha Rangeland Analysis Wildlife Biological Evaluation and Assessment Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Hells Canyon National Recreation Area Prepared by: Patricia L. Johnson Date: _11 March 2014___ Patricia L. Johnson Zone Wildlife Biologist Wallowa-Whitman National Forest – Hells Canyon National Recreation Area Wildlife Biological Evaluation and Assessment Page 1 Lower Imnaha Rangeland Analysis Table of Contents Wildlife Resource Section ......................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4 Alternative Comparison and Summary........................................................................................ 10 Alternative A: No Grazing............................................................................................................... 11 Alternative B: Current Management ............................................................................................... 11 Alternative C: Proposed Action ...................................................................................................... 11 Alternative D: .................................................................................................................................. 11 Alternative E: .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Bull Trout Redd Monitoring in the Wallowa Mountains
    2018 Bull Trout Redd Monitoring in the Wallowa Mountains Prepared by: Gretchen Sausen U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service La Grande Field Office April 8, 2019 2018 Bull Trout Redd Monitoring in the Wallowa Mountains Prepared by: Gretchen Sausen U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service La Grande Field Office April 8, 2019 ABSTRACT Bull trout were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1998 due to declining populations. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) recommends monitoring bull trout in subbasins where little is known about the populations, including the Grande Ronde and Imnaha subbasins. Spawning survey data is important for determining relative abundance and distribution trends in bull trout populations. This report summarizes the 2018 bull trout spawning data collected in the Wallowa Mountains of northeast Oregon and compares this with past years’ data. Bull trout spawning surveys have been conducted on similar index areas for selected Grande Ronde and Imnaha River streams from 1999 to 2018. These surveyed streams are located within the Wallowa River/Minam River, Lookingglass Creek/Wenaha River and Imnaha River bull trout core areas. In 2018, the Wenaha and Minam Rivers, and additional locations on Big Sheep Creek were added to the regular annual redd surveys. Surveys in 2018 were conducted by the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), the Service, U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Anderson Perry, Inc., and fisheries consultants. Objectives of the survey included: (1) locate bull trout spawning areas; (2) determine redd characteristics; (3) determine bull trout timing of spawning; (4) collect spawning density data; (5) determine and compare the spatial distribution of redds along the Lostine River in 2006 through 2018; (6) document redd locations on the Wenaha, Upper Minam, Imnaha, Big Sheep, and Bear Creek in 2018; and (7) over time, use all of the data to assess local bull trout population trends and the long-term recovery of bull trout.
    [Show full text]
  • Lostine Corridor Public Safety Project AQUATICS
    02/21/2017 Lostine Safety Project Lostine Corridor Public Safety Project AQUATICS Aquatic Resources There are 3 documents that go with the aquatics resources input for the Lostine Public Safety Corridor Project: - Aquatics Biological Evaluation (10/05/2016), - Salmonid Project Design Criteria Compliance Worksheet (11/29/2016), and - Letter of Concurrence level 1 Agreement – Lostine Corridor Vegetation (12/2/2016) The proposed action detailed in both the Aquatics Biological Evaluation (BE) and the Salmonid Project Design Criteria Compliance Worksheet (Worksheet) were more intensive than what has the current Project Activities (Appendix A, Decision Memo). The project activities are lessened in scope and scale and therefore, are within the range of activities consulted on with National Marie Fisheries and the US Fish and Wildlife Services. Effects Determination Summary Table 1. Effects determinations for aquatic resources for ESA listed species, Wallowa Whitman management indicator species, and Region 6 sensitive species. Aquatics – Federally listed Threatened, Endangered, Proposed or Candidate (TEPC) Species Common name of species Effects Determination Snake River Steelhead May Affect, not Likely to Adversely Affect Snake River Spring/Summer May Affect, not Likely to Adversely Affect Chinook Salmon Columbia River Bull Trout May Affect, not Likely to Adversely Affect Aquatics –Region 6 Sensitive Species Redband Trout* MIIH Pacific Lamprey MIIH Western Ridge Mussel MIIH Shortfaced Lanx MIIH Columbia Pebblesnail MIIH MIIH = May impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute to a trend toward federal listing causing a loss of viability to the population. * Redband Trout are also a Management Indicator Species for the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 1 02/21/2017 Lostine Safety Project Consistencies Based on the information documented in this report, the proposed actions under the Lostine Project are found to be consistent with Forest Plan as amended by the Lostine Wild and Scenic River Plan.
    [Show full text]