EXHIBIT E: ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXHIBIT E: ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ...... E-1

E1.0 General Description of the Locale...... E1-1 E1.1 Geology and Soils ...... E1-1 E1.2 Climate ...... E1-2 E1.3 Vegetative Cover and Wetlands ...... E1-2 E1.4 Developed Areas ...... E1-2 E1.5 Population ...... E1-2 E1.6 Floods...... E1-3 E1.7 Consultation Conducted with Interested Parties...... E1-3

E2.0 Water Use and Quality...... E2-1 E2.1 General Overview...... E2-1 E2.2 Water Quantity...... E2-2 E2.3 Water Rights...... E2-2 E2.4 Water Use: Existing and Proposed Uses of Project Waters ...... E2-3 E2.5 Historical and Existing Water Quality Resources ...... E2-4 E2.6 Applicable Water Quality Standards and Stream Segment Classifications ...... E2-22 E2.7 Existing Maximum Flow Releases and Water Levels ...... E2-24 E2.8 Existing Resource Management Framework ...... E2-25 E2.9 Consultation Conducted with Interested Parties...... E2-27

E3.0 Report on Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources ...... E3-1 E3.1 General Overview...... E3-1 E3.2 Fishery Resources...... E3-1 E3.3 Botanical and Wildlife Resources ...... E3-57 E3.4 Consultation Conducted with Interested Parties...... E3-92

E4.0 Historic and Archaeologic Resources ...... E4-1 E4.1 Historical and Archeological Overview ...... E4-1 E4.2 Existing Resources ...... E4-6 E4.3 Existing Archaeological and Historical Studies ...... E4-7 E4.4 Existing Resource Management ...... E4-8 E4.5 Consultation Conducted with Interested Parties...... E4-9

E5.0 Report on Recreational Resources ...... E5-1 E5.1 Introduction...... E5-1 E5.2 Description of Recreational Resources of the Project and its Vicinity...... E5-5 E5.3 Recreational Resources Management Framework...... E5-7 E5.4 Description of any studies previously conducted or currently underway ...... E5-11 E5.5 Wild and Scenic Rivers...... E5-12 E5.6 Consultation Conducted with Interested Parties...... E5-12

E6.0 Report on Land Management and Aesthetics ...... E6-1 E6.1 General Overview...... E6-1 E6.2 Description of Existing Development and Use of Project Land...... E6-1 E6.3 Land Management Framework...... E6-2 E6.4 Description of any studies previously conducted or currently underway ...... E6-4 E6.5 Consultation Conducted with Interested Parties...... E6-5

E7.0 List of Literature ...... E7-1 E7.1 List of Literature...... E7-1

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E-i SS/1181rr List of Tables

LIST OF TABLES

Table E2-1: Summary of Surface Rights Allocated to Lake Entiat by WDE...... E2-3 Table E2-2: Average Values for Water Quality Monthly Grab Samples at WDE Monitoring Station Below Rock Island Dam (1977 - 1990) ...... E2-6 Table E2-3: Top Priority Water Quality Concerns for Columbia River Reach Grand Coulee to Snake River ...... E2-17 Table E2-4: Average, Minimum and Maximum Values of TDG in the Forebays and Tailraces and Changes in Percent TDG from Forebay to Tailrace at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams, 1997 ...... E2-21 Table E2-5: Summary of Washington Department of Ecology Water Quality Standards...... E2-23 Table E2-6: Exceedences of Water Quality Standards...... E2-24 Table E3-1: Scientific Names of Fishes Known or Thought to Occur in Rocky Reach Pool...... E3-2 Table E3-2: Type and Number of Non-Target Fish Species Caught at Rocky Reach Dam During the Northern Pikeminnow Removal Program...... E3-13 Table E3-3: Estimated Survival of Steelhead With Interim Protection Plan Measures...... E3-45 Table E3-4: Estimated Survival of Spring Chinook with Interim Protection Plan Measures...... E3-47 Table E3-5: Rare Plant Taxa Potentially Present In The Rocky Reach Project Area (Based On WNHP 1997). Taxa Listed Include Those Currently Considered Endangered, Threatened, Or Sensitive In Washington, And Those For Whom Not Enough Is Known To Assign A Status (Review Group 1)...... E3-62 Table E3-6: Mammal Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 ...... E3-65 Table E3-7: Waterfowl And Waterbird Species Known Or Potentially Occurring At The Rocky Reach Reservoir1 ...... E3-70 Table E3-8: Raptors Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 ...... E3-72 Table E3-9: Game Birds Species Known or Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 ...... E3-74 Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 ...... E3-75 Table E3-11: Amphibian Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 ...... E3-81 Table E3-12: Reptile Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1...... E3-82 Table E3-13: Species With Federal and/or State Status Known or Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir...... E3-83 Table E5-1: Four-Year Visitor Counts for the Rocky Reach Project Area ...... E5-7

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure E2-1: Seasonal Trends in Nutrients for Lake Entiat...... E2-9 Figure E2-2: Daily water temperatures at Rocky Reach Forebay (1993 – 1998)...... E2-11 Figure E2-3: Daily Water Temperature at Rocky Reach Forebay Relative to Discharge ...... E2-13 Figure E2-4: Dissolved Oxygen Levels...... E2-14 Figure E2-5: Seasonal Trends in Conductivity for Rocky Reach and Rock Island Reservoirs (BPA 1994)...... E2-15 Figure E2-6: Aquatic Plant Distribution Along Douglas County Shoreline...... E2-18 Figure E2-7: Aquatic Plant Distribution Along Chelan County Shoreline...... E2-18 Figure E4-1: Approximate Tribal Boundaries of Chelan, Entiat, Wenatchi, and Columbia in the Rocky Reach Sector of the Columbia Valley as of about 1855 or Slightly Earlier (Schalk and Mierendorf 1983) ...... E4-3

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E-ii July 7, 1999 Exhibit E1: General Description of the Locale

E1.0 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALE

Rocky Reach Dam is located on the Columbia River in the north central portion of the State of Washington, 473.7 miles upstream from the Pacific Ocean. The City of Wenatchee, the largest city in the area and headquarters for Chelan PUD, is located approximately seven miles downstream. The Rocky Reach Reservoir, also known as Lake Entiat, extends 43 miles upstream to Wells Dam at river mile 515.5.

The Rocky Reach reservoir trends north/south and is divided by the two counties with Chelan on the west side and Douglas on the east side.

Rocky Reach Dam is 140 highway miles east of Seattle, an approximate 2.5-hour drive, and 165 miles west of Spokane, an approximate 3-hour drive.

E1.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The Rocky Reach of the Columbia River lies between two significantly different physiographic areas. The Project is located in a valley that is north-south trending, with the North Cascades Mountains to the west and the Columbia Plateau to the east. The rugged peaks in the Cascades average around 5,000 feet and reach elevations of over 10,000 feet. The mountains are comprised of highly metamorphosed schists and gneisses, slightly metamorphosed marine sedimentary rocks, volcanic rocks, and granitic batholiths.

The Columbia River Plateau ranges from 750 feet to 2,500 feet in elevation and was created by repeated, extensive lava flows during the Miocene period resulting in numerous vast layers of basalt covering the existing bedrock of the region. On the east side of the Rocky Reach, from about Chelan north, the Columba River Basalts are covered with till from the last advance of the Cordilleran ice approximately 12,000 years ago.

Subsequent to the last glaciation in the region, the Columbia River down-cut through the glacial outwash to its present base level forming a series of terraces along the valley sides while alluvial fans and debris flows shifted masses of unconsolidated drift to downslope positions. The river trench through the Rocky Reach is essentially a gorge interrupted by confluences with a number of tributary valleys. Two major drainages, the Chelan and Entiat Rivers, and a number of intermittent streams with deep "V" shaped valleys flow into the Columbia River from the west. There are no perennial streams entering the Columbia River from the east. One major intermittent drainage, Corbally Canyon, does join the Columbia from the east.

Soils in this part of the Columbia River valley are generally from two main sources. Where the river channel is close to the toe of a rock slope, the soil present is mainly colluvial in origin and is composed of angular rock fragments, well graded, from clay sized to boulder sized. Where there is a wider space between the shoreline and the valley wall, the predominant soils are fluvial or lacustrine in origin. These soils form extensive terraces and numerous small bars composed of

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E1-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E1: General Description of the Locale soils ranging from clay to gravel and cobbles. The particles are generally well rounded and the different deposits are fairly well sorted.

E1.2 CLIMATE Precipitation in the region surrounding Rocky Reach varies from an annual average of more than 35 inches in the lower Cascades to the west, to 11 inches on the Columbia Plateau to the east, to 8.5 inches in Rocky Reach area of the Columbia River valley. Average annual snowfall in the Rocky Reach area is 30 inches.

Annual temperatures at Rocky Reach vary markedly. Summer temperatures can exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit (F) with average daily maximums of about 83 degrees F. Winter temperatures can drop below 0 degrees F with average daily minimums of 25 degrees F.

E1.3 VEGETATIVE COVER AND WETLANDS Vegetative cover adjacent to Rocky Reach reflects the low level of precipitation in the area and the definitive shoreline edge of the reservoir. Riparian vegetation occurs intermittently along the margins of the reservoir. Riparian grass/forb, riparian shrub, and riparian deciduous trees are representative of vegetation within this typically narrow zone. Riparian vegetative types represent about 40 percent of the shoreline. Grassland, shrub steppe, and open conifer/shrub vegetation are found along the upland margins of the shoreline. Exposed rock of both fluvial and glacial origin is often mixed into the landscape.

Narrow wetlands occur intermittently within the shoreline margins of the reservoir. They are also found where depressions opposite the highways that parallel much of both sides of the river. Similarly, the railroad on the west side of the river traps water in small depressions that support wetland vegetation. These small wetland areas are supported by water that is directly related to the height of the river or from upland runoff that is temporarily impeded by the highway and railroad fills.

E1.4 DEVELOPED AREAS Much of the developed upland area adjacent to the reservoir supports fruit orchards, which have been critical to the economy of the Wenatchee area since the early 1900’s. To a lesser degree irrigated pastureland is present. Located near the river in several locations are large fruit packing facilities that support local orchards.

E1.5 POPULATION The major population center for the area is to the south of Rocky Reach in the area surrounding Wenatchee. This area supports a population of approximately 62,600 people while a relatively sparse population surrounds the 85 miles of shoreline on the Rocky Reach reservoir.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E1-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E1: General Description of the Locale

Approximately 100 parcels of land out of the nearly 400 with frontage on the reservoir have residences on them. Entiat, with a 1998 population of 865 people, is the only incorporated town on the reservoir. The only other population centers are the unincorporated communities of Orondo and Chelan Falls, with populations of approximately 75 and 100 respectively. The City of Chelan and the surrounding area on Lake Chelan, to the west of Rocky Reach, has a population of approximately 8,000 people.

E1.6 FLOODS The regulated 100-year flood flow of the Columbia River at Rocky Reach has been calculated by the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) to be 413,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). The regulated flood of record corresponds to the 1894 flood if that flood were to occur today with upstream storage projects in place. The COE has also calculated this regulated flow and expects it to be about 442,000 cfs.

E1.7 CONSULTATION CONDUCTED WITH INTERESTED PARTIES Chelan PUD began meeting with interested parties (Federal, State, County and Local Resource Agencies) March 25, 1999. During the remainder of 1999, Chelan PUD will consult with resource agencies and other interested parties (stakeholders) regarding the proposed relicensing process, descriptions of the existing Project, extent of engineering work, and proposed environmental, historical, archaeological, recreational, and land use studies. This information, along with written comments provided by stakeholders identifying any additional required studies, will be used to prepare a NEPA scoping document.

Following preparation of the scoping documents, Chelan PUD will spend the next several years conducting studies and preparing the final license application and Draft Environmental Assessment. Chelan PUD will submit a preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and license application for the Rocky Reach Hydro Project by June 30, 2004. The existing license expires in 2006.

Issue Identification Process

March 25, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification. April 27, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification.

[In most cases, subsequent meetings will be held on the day after the fourth Wednesday in each month.]

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E1-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E1: General Description of the Locale

Long Term Schedule

2000-2002 Conduct Studies 2003 Draft License and Environmental Assessment 2004 PUD submits Final License Application and Environmental Assessment 2004-2006 FERC Review & Processing of License Application & Environmental Assessment 2006 Existing License Expires/ New License Issued

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E1-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

E2.0 WATER USE AND QUALITY

This report summarizes existing water quantity and water quality information for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project area.

E2.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW The Rocky Reach Project impounds 43 miles of the Columbia River from Rocky Reach Dam at river mile 473.7 to Douglas County PUD’s Wells Dam (FERC No. 2149) at river mile 515.5. The reservoir created by the Project is also known as Lake Entiat. The drainage area of the Columbia River Basin upstream of Rocky Reach Dam is approximately 87,800 square miles. Annual average flows through the reservoir ranged from 82,000 cfs to 150,000 cfs from 1971 to 1991. The annual median flow (i.e., the flow greater than those occurring 50 percent of the time throughout the year) through the reservoir from 1973 to 1998 was 107,000 cfs.

The Columbia River system is primarily fed by snowmelt. Numerous dams and impoundments developed for hydropower and flood control alter the natural flow in the basin. Water is withdrawn from the Columbia River and its tributaries at various locations for agricultural, domestic, municipal, and industrial supply. The two major tributaries within the Rocky Reach Project area are the Chelan and Entiat rivers.

The Entiat River enters the Columbia River at approximately river mile 483. A gage station approximately 16 miles upstream of the river’s confluence with the Columbia River measures flows in the Entiat River (USGS Gage No. 1245280), but measurements taken from that gage station represent only approximately 60 percent of flows for the entire Entiat River Basin. Average monthly discharges at the Entiat River gage station for Water Years 1957-1995 ranged from 112 cfs in September to 1,417 cfs in June. A maximum recorded flow of 6,430 cfs occurred on June 10, 1972, and the mean annual peak flood is 2,866 cfs.

The Chelan River enters the Columbia River at approximately river mile 503. The minimum, mean, and maximum recorded flows for the Chelan River are 0 cfs, 2,060 cfs, and 18,400 cfs, respectively. These flows were recorded at USGS Gage No. 124552500, Chelan River at Chelan, Washington for the period 1952 to 1995. The gage is located at the Lake Chelan Project tailrace and includes powerhouse releases as well as spill from the dam. Average monthly discharges from the Chelan River during Water Years 1952-95 ranged from 12 cfs in April to 3,428 cfs in June (DE&S 1999). The drainage area of the Chelan River basin is approximately 924 square miles. The Lake Chelan Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 637), which is also owned and operated by Chelan PUD, is located approximately four miles upstream on the Chelan River at the outlet of Lake Chelan.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

E2.2 WATER QUANTITY The headwater elevation at the dam is typically held near the normal maximum of 707 feet mean sea level (approximately 80 percent of the time), although it may be drawn down to a normal minimum elevation of 703 feet. The water surface elevation, and therefore the volume of water impounded, varies upstream from the dam as a function of the headwater elevation and as a function of river flow, which is highly regulated by a number of upstream projects. At a flow of 20,000 cfs, the volume of the impoundment at elevation 703 feet would be 346,900 acre-feet, and 383,800 acre-feet at a headwater elevation of 707 feet. At a flow of 220,000 cfs, the volumes would be 363,700 acre-feet and 398,200 acre-feet, respectively. The surface area of the impoundment varies similarly, with a typical value of approximately 8,235 acres at a headwater elevation of 707 feet. Under flood conditions, the headwater elevation is drawn down to 703 feet and floodwaters are stored to an elevation of 710 feet to capture as much of the high flows as possible (FERC 1996).

E2.3 WATER RIGHTS

E2.3.1 Summary of Water Rights in Project Area In western states, water rights are based on the principle, “first in time, first in right,” meaning older claims have precedence over newer ones. In the state of Washington, the Department of Ecology (WDE) has jurisdiction over issuing permits to water use on the Columbia River.

Water right claims filed under the Water Right Claims Registration Act (RCW 90.14) are not confirmed water rights but are possible rights based on pre-state water law rights. Twenty-five claims in Douglas County and five claims in Chelan County are filed with the WDE for surface water rights to Lake Entiat for irrigation and domestic purposes (WDE 1999). Table E2-1 lists certified water rights to Lake Entiat. These data represent the status of surface water rights allocations along the Columbia River between Rocky Reach Dam and Wells Dam as of 1995. Total volumes of water allocated by a water rights certificate, however, are not necessarily used. These water rights will be updated during the relicensing process as it is expected they have changed due to the 1997 Water Rights Claims Registry that closed June 30, 1998.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Table E2-1: Summary of Surface Rights Allocated to Lake Entiat by WDE Number of Water Rights Holdings Total Allocated Annual Diversion Use Type1 A2 B3 acre-feet/year Irrigation C 41 11 7,502.65 Domestic C 11 9 99.8 Domestic Municipal C 1 Commercial/Industrial N 1 4 47 Frost Protection C 4 100.6 Fire Protection C 1 1 21 Livestock Watering C 4 1 3.67 Fish and Wildlife Propagation N 1 2 0.67 Heat Exchange P 1 Power N 4 650,000 Reservoir Storage V 3 1,021,200 Total 70 30 1,678,975.39 1 C = Consumptive Use; P = Partially Consumptive Use; N = Non-consumptive use; V = Where a reservoir stores water for non-consumptive use, such as hydroelectric power generation, and a nearly constant volume of stored water is not maintained in the reservoir under normal operating conditions. 2 Certificates issued upon which diversion volumes are based. 3 Certificates issued with no specified volumes documented. Source: FERC 1996

In addition to those volumes specified in Table E2-1, 11 water rights certificates have been issued to irrigate a total of 2,164 acres of land, although the annual diversion for each certificate is not documented. In addition, the following certificates for water rights are documented, without specified volumes: nine certificates for domestic use, one for domestic municipal, four for commercial/industrial, one for fire protection, one for livestock watering, two for fish and wildlife propagation, and one for heat exchange (Table E2-1). These unspecified volumes, except for those used for irrigation, would not represent a significant diversion from Lake Entiat (FERC 1996).

E2.3.2 Statement of Project Water Rights The Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project currently holds several water rights for various uses. First, it holds two water rights of 185,300 cfs and 24,700 cfs for power purposes. A reservoir permit for the Project allows 390,000 acre-feet of water to be impounded. Chelan PUD also holds several other water rights for fish propagation, irrigation, domestic, and heat exchange.

E2.4 WATER USE: EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES OF PROJECT WATERS The primary consumptive water use in the Project area is for orchard irrigation. Withdrawals for domestic water supply are limited and are primarily for use in irrigating yards and gardens. Water withdrawal rates from Lake Entiat are set by the WDE (FERC 1996). Non-consumptive uses include fish propagation and power production.

E2.4.1 Irrigation Orchards with apple, cherry, peach, apricot, and other fruit trees represent the economic mainstay of the Columbia River valley and its tributary valleys throughout North Central Washington. All orchards throughout the area are reliant upon a source of irrigation water for their existence.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Within the Rocky Reach Project area, irrigation withdrawals constitute the largest segment of consumptive water use. The irrigation season begins in late March or April and continues through October. Peak irrigation use occurs in July and August when temperatures in the region are highest.

Annual irrigation water rights provide for the withdrawal of up to 313 cfs from Rocky Reach Reservoir (FERC 1996). There are no practical means of determining the level to which these rights might be exercised in a certain year. Because water rights represent maximum withdrawals, it is reasonable to assume that actual annual withdrawals would be less than established water rights.

The narrow Columbia River valley through the Project area restricts space available for substantial additions to orchards or other irrigated agricultural activities. Current trends indicate there will be some reduction in irrigated agriculture. Replacement of orchard with residential development would result in a lowering of consumptive withdrawals from Project waters.

E2.4.2 Domestic Water Supply Domestic water supply withdrawals of Project waters are limited. Some withdrawals for use in irrigating yards and gardens may occur. According to WDE water rights, available domestic water within the Project area are 64 cfs (Chelan PUD 1991). No significant change in the use of Project waters for domestic water supply is anticipated.

E2.4.3 Commercial and Industrial Commercial and industrial use account for only 10.5 cfs and stockwatering use is at 3 cfs (Chelan PUD 1991).

E2.4.4 Fisheries and Natural Resources Chelan PUD holds four water rights for fish propagation – one surface water right for 8 cfs and three groundwater rights for a total of 25,140 gpm and 40,539 acre-feet/year (WDE 1999).

E2.4.5 Power Production As described earlier, the Rocky Reach Project holds two surface water rights for power production purposes – one for 185,300 cfs and another for 24,700 cfs. A reservoir permit allows impoundment of up to 390,000 acre-feet of water (WDE 1999).

E2.5 HISTORICAL AND EXISTING WATER QUALITY RESOURCES

E2.5.1 Summary of Previous Studies Information on water quality within the Rocky Reach Reservoir, also called Lake Entiat, and its major tributaries is available from several sources. Data from WDE’s water quality monitoring station (No. 21540000 44A70) just downstream of Rock Island Dam provides the most comprehensive characterization of water quality relevant to the Rocky Reach Project. The period of record for monthly grab sample water quality data from this WDE station is 1977 – 1990. Table E2-2 provides average values for monthly water quality data. A complete record is

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality provided in Appendix A. Although the WDE monitoring data are not from sources within the Project boundary, the data are mostly representative of Lake Entiat. Chelan PUD has conducted water quality surveys within Rocky Reach Reservoir targeting specific water quality concerns; some of these studies include annual monitoring over multiple years. Chelan PUD annually inventoried aquatic plant beds in the reservoir between 1985 and 1991 (Keese 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988; Truscott 1991). Chelan PUD in coordination with the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) has monitored water temperature in the forebay and tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam in 1965 – 1976 (forebay only), 1983 – 1989, and 1993 - present; dissolved gasses monitoring during spring and summer was initiated in 1995 for the forebay and 1997 for the tailrace (McDonald and Priest 1997; Koehler and McDonald 1997, 1998; COE NWD Portland, OR Office DART River Environment database). Douglas County PUD has conducted comparable studies at Wells Dam, headwaters to Lake Entiat. Turbidity data are also available for both the Rocky Reach Dam forebay and Wells Dam forebay (1993 – present). Additional information sources include studies done for site specific projects including the Daroga Park development (Johnstone and Mih 1987) and the license amendment application to raise the reservoir pool elevation (Chelan PUD 1988, 1991). Regional data for the mid and upper Columbia River were also reviewed to provide background descriptions of water quality.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-5 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Table E2-2: Average Values for Water Quality Monthly Grab Samples at WDE Monitoring Station Below Rock Island Dam (1977 - 1990)

Fecal Total NO2+N Total Dis- Coliform Suspend NH3+NH4 Unionized NO2-N NO3-N Mean Mean Dissolved Oxygen O3 Phos- solved (MFM-FCBR) Solids N Total ammonia Nitrite Nitrate Month Flow* Temp. Oxygen Saturation pH Turbidity Conductivity N-Total phates Ortho P (cfs) (C) (mg/L) (%) (NTU) (UMHO) per 100 mL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)

January 135,425 3.6 12.9 98.3 7.9 2 156 12 3 0.02 0.0001 0.010 0.119 0.146 0.033 0.015 February 136,245 4.3 13.5 104.4 7.8 4 165 3 11 0.02 0.0001 0.010 0.176 0.130 0.035 0.018 March 121,100 8.4 13.9 113.0 8.1 3 166 6 33 0.03 0.0003 0.010 0.160 0.188 0.038 0.009 April 132,000 7.6 13.7 116.2 7.9 3 167 8 5 0.03 0.0001 0.010 0.178 0.135 0.035 0.017 May 156,758 10.5 13.1 118.5 8.0 4 156 44 13 0.05 0.0001 0.010 0.160 0.118 0.038 0.010 June 160,567 14.3 11.8 116.7 8.0 5 130 80 10 0.03 0.0002 0.010 0.105 0.057 0.042 0.013 July 141,327 17.6 11.2 118.7 8.0 3 135 124 12 0.04 0.0003 0.010 0.082 0.065 0.029 0.015 August 113,200 19.1 10.2 111.4 8.0 3 140 86 10 0.02 0.0010 0.010 0.089 0.082 0.025 0.017 September 106,745 19.2 10.1 110.3 8.2 2 141 61 5 0.03 0.010 0.117 0.228 0.036 0.017 October 100,979 16.6 10.4 108.1 8.1 2 147 17 4 0.03 0.0006 0.010 0.150 0.137 0.030 0.015 November 103,443 11.8 10.7 99.8 7.9 2 146 33 6 0.02 0.0003 0.010 0.207 0.135 0.035 0.013 December 122,269 6.8 11.4 94.5 7.7 2 161 22 6 0.02 0.0002 0.010 0.163 0.183 0.046 0.015

# Months Sampled 147 147 147 147 142 147 145 142 140 13 82 78 64 136 139 Mean 11.6 11.9 108.8 8.0 2.9 151 40 10 0.03 0.0003 0.010 0.142 0.129 0.035 0.014 Maximum 36.0 16.3 145.8 9.2 11 202 700 300 0.26 0.0010 0.010 0.630 0.420 0.140 0.060 Minimum 0.8 7.9 76.5 6.7 1 96 0 1 0.00 0.0001 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.000 St. Dev. for Sample 6.1 1.7 12.6 0.4 2 20 107 28 0.03 0.0003 0.000 0.098 0.083 0.020 0.009

Notes: * Flow is computed as mean of daily values at which samples were collected.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-6 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

E2.5.2 Major Tributaries to the Project The two signfican water sources within the Rocky Reach Project area are the Entiat and Chelan rivers. WDE and others have conducted studies on these streams. A brief summary of each watershed is described below.

The Entiat River enters the Columbia River at river mile 483. The initial assessment for the Entiat River by the WDE (1995) indicates that it occasionally does not meet water quality requirements for pH and temperature. Average flows in the river are not sufficient to maintain a sustainable fishery. The problem is that most of the annual flow in the Entiat River is received during spring and early summer as snow melts and is not available to meet year-round water uses.

The Chelan watershed includes the 50-mile-long Lake Chelan and 4-mile-long Chelan River, which enters the Columbia River at river mile 503. Several reports have been developed for the Chelan watershed over the years. Lake Chelan has been classified as an ultra-oligotrophic (low biological productivity and high water clarity) lake. Water quality in the lake is considered excellent. Documented water quality deficiencies in the lake have included elevated bacterial levels near water supply intakes, apparent metals toxicity in Railroad Creek, and elevated pesticide residues in lake sediments and fish populations (Chelan PUD 1998).

E2.5.3 Reservoir (Lake Entiat) Nutrients The nutrient balance within an aquatic system is an important determinant of the biological and aesthetic quality of an aquatic environment. Nitrogen and phosphorous are the two primary nutrients. Generally the mid-Columbia River is a low nutrient system; the large volume of water flow and regional geology, combined with a mostly rural watershed, are factors affecting nutrient levels.

Nitrogen is present in aquatic environments in three forms: nitrate, ammonia and organic nitrogen. Sources of nitrogen in a water body include precipitation, internal “fixing” by plants, and surface and groundwater drainage. Several forms of nitrogen in aquatic systems include + - - ammonia (NH4 ), nitrate (NO3 ), nitrite (NO2 ) and organic compounds. The availability of various nitrogen forms affects the community composition and abundance of aquatic life. The concentrations of the various nitrogen compounds in aquatic systems usually follow a general seasonal pattern. The biological uptake of nitrogen by aquatic organisms such as phytoplankton and aquatic plants lowers the nitrogen level in spring and summer within the photic zone (solar light penetration depth). Releases from the sediments, inflow and precipitation replenish nitrate and sometimes ammonia concentrations during the fall, winter and spring runoff (Wetzel 1983).

+ + The range of total nitrogen (NH3 and NH4 ) reported by WDE at the Rock Island monitoring station is 0 – 0.26 mg/l; average total nitrogen for 1977 through 1990 was 0.03 mg/l (Table E2-2). Total nitrogen is typically highest in the spring (due to runoff contribution from the watershed) and is low again by August due to primary production utilization. Nitrates (NO3-N) are highest in the winter months and at seasonal lows in July and August. Average nitrate level

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-7 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality is 0.142 mg/l. Johnstone and Mih (1987) reported comparable nitrate levels for samples collected in the vicinity of Daroga Park in summer, 1986 (0.05 mg/l to below detection limit for river and embayment). Nitrate levels in the Daroga lagoon were also low but displayed some localized spikes possibly due to either groundwater infiltration from fertilizers or trout food in the trout pond. The Rocky Reach Reservoir would be classified as oligo-mesotrophic (low to moderately low productivity) based on total nitrogen and nitrates.

Phosphorous can be a powerful nutrient for control of algal and aquatic plant growth and often limits primary productivity in rivers and lakes (APHA 1985). Phosphorous sources for aquatic bodies are surface runoff (erosion of soils), internal release from sediments and plants, and anthropogenic contributions.

Total phosphates levels below Rock Island Dam as reported by WDE ranged from 0.010 to 0.140 mg/l during 1977 – 1990 (Figure E2-1). The average sample value was 0.035 mg/l total phosphates. Dissolved orthophosphates ranged from 0 mg/l to 0.060 mg/l; average sample value was 0.014 mg/l. Project area waters are oligo-mesotrophic based on phosphates. Phosphate concentrations in Daroga Lagoon reported by Johnstone and Mih (1987) ranged from 0.017 to 0.020 mg/l; these levels indicate phosphate is not a water quality concern within the lagoon. Reported phosphate levels in the Daroga embayment fluctuated more widely (0.015 mg/l to 0.046 mg/l). A high phosphate concentration of 0.141 mg/l and August 11, 1986 in the Daroga Lagoon near the heat pump suggests some septic inflow may have at least historically entered these waters.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-8 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

0.05

0.04

0.03 Mg/L 0.02

0.01

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Total Phosphates Ortho P

WDE Monitor Station below Rock Island Dam, Columbia R., monthly grab samples 1977-1990

0.25

0.2

0.15 Mg/L 0.1

0.05

0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Total Nitrogen Total Nitrates

WDE Monitor Station below Rock Island Dam, Columbia R., monthly grab samples 1977-1990

Figure E2-1: Seasonal Trends in Nutrients for Lake Entiat

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-9 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Turbidity, Light and Transparency The Columbia River in general has relatively low turbidity. The Rocky Reach area consists of igneous and metamorphic rock at the base of the Cascade Mountains to the west, basaltic material from the lava flows that created the Waterville Plateau to the east, and glacial outwash materials from the deep carving of the river valley itself. The tributaries that feed the mid- Columbia are primarily glacially carved. The result is very low sediment loads.

Rocky Reach Dam has trapped almost zero sediment over its years in operation. Turbidity does increase during periods of high inflow from the tributaries. Johnstone and Mih (1987) reported low turbidities within the relatively confined shore environment of Daroga Lagoon as being low; the range was 0.72 to 1.50 FTU (Formazine Turbidity Units) in the lagoon. They attributed the highest readings during August 1986 to algal growth and noted a correlation between turbidity and temperature within the semi-closed flow environment of the embayment.

Monthly sampling data from the nearby WDE monitoring station below Rock Island Dam report a range of 1.0 NTU (Nephelometric Turbidity Units) to 11.0 NTU; mean value 2.9, n = 142. Turbidity data collected daily by Chelan PUD and reported by the US Army Corps of Engineer’s (COE) DART information system for the Rocky Reach forebay report a similar range but a slightly higher mean turbidity value of 5.6 NTU (n = 116; data from April – September 1993, April 94, and April – September 1997). Some settling may occur as water travels through the downstream Rock Island Reservoir. Data from the WDE monitoring station below Rock Island Dam is provided in Appendix A and the COE data for the Rocky Reach forebay are provided in Appendix B. The WDE data shows no seasonal trend for turbidity and no significant correlation for turbidity with temperature or discharge. The Chelan PUD/COE daily data for the Rocky Reach forebay indicate higher maximum daily turbidity values in May and July. Turbidity in the forebay is inversely correlated with discharge (r2 = 0.67) and positively correlated with water temperature (r2 = 0.71). Temperature and discharge also autocorrelate which may explain the relationship between turbidity and discharge. It appears that turbidity may increase slightly in May with the onset of spring runoff and then show a slight increase again in July as primary productivity increases. All reported turbidity data are well below the water quality standard.

Transparency data for Lake Entiat appears to be lacking; however, the distribution of aquatic plants provides a good indication of light transparency. Truscott (1991) reported most aquatic plants grow in water depths of less than 12 feet with small amounts of water-milfoil growing as deep as 16 feet below the water surface. Transparency can be assumed to be approximately 12 feet during summer months and likely greater during winter. Lake Entiat is borderline oligotrophic based on these estimates of transparency.

Temperature Water temperature is a critical factor governing many ecological functions within an aquatic system including controlling egg development and fish growth rates. Water temperature strongly influences primary production of phytoplankton and aquatic plant growth. Water quality standards are established for maximum temperature; however, the duration of elevated temperatures and the diurnal range can also be important factors affecting biological response of organisms to temperature regimes.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-10 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Water temperature data is collected by Chelan PUD at the forebay and tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam. Temperature monitoring in the Rocky Reach forebay was initiated in 1984; three to six hourly values were measured daily until 1997 when continuous recording devices were installed. (Earlier data was collected but not reviewed for this report.) Temperature is generally monitored April through September. The current fixed monitor station in the forebay is on the right side of the dam; NMFS determined there was no bias between sampling sites at the forebay, spillway and mid channel for temperature data. The COE publishes data for this and other Columbia River sites as part of its Data Access in Real Time (DART) information system on the internet. These records provided the data represented in Figure E2-2, which was subsequently reviewed and corrected for anomalies (>2oC change in 24 hour: August 1995 data showed serious stair step pattern which suggested instrument error and has been deleted from data records provided in Appendix B).

Water temperature in Lake Entiat begins warming in March, reaches peak annual temperatures in late July through early September (monthly average daily temperature for August at the forebay is 17.7 oC) then cools again during the fall and winter months to average temperatures in the 3 oC to 4 oC range (Figure E2-2). Daily variability is typically less than 0.5 oC but can range as much as 1oC diurnally during summer when upstream regulation is variable.

25

20

15

10 Temperature (C)

5

0 Jul-97 Jan-93 Jan-94 Jun-94 Jan-95 Jun-96 Apr-98 Oct-96 Nov-97 Feb-96 Mar-97 Sep-93 Sep-95 Aug-98 Dec-98 May-93 May-95

Figure E2-2: Daily water temperatures at Rocky Reach Forebay (1993 – 1998)

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-11 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

The WDE has established a maximum water temperature criteria of 18 oC for this reach of the Columbia River; although biological response to temperature can be variable, the WDE established this criteria as reasonable protecting most aquatic life while also recognizing the physics of heat transfer in large rivers. Daily average water temperatures in the Project forebay exceeded this standard 8 percent of the time in July and approximately 44 percent of the time in August and September (1993 – 1998).

Douglas County PUD began collecting data in the Wells Dam forebay in 1984 and also initiated data collection in the Wells Dam tailrace at the head of Lake Entiat in 1998. The Wells Dam forebay temperature data is considered representative of the headwaters of the Rocky Reach Reservoir based on an average 0.1 oC temperature difference between 1988 data collected in the forebay and tailrace of Wells Dam (COE data provided by DART and reprinted in Appendix B). Temperature appears to change very little as water flows through Lake Entiat. The average difference in the absolute values for daily temperature difference between Wells Dam forebay and Rocky Reach forebay (1993 – 1998) was 0.4 oC. Rocky Reach forebay temperatures are generally slightly cooler than at the head of Lake Entiat. Daily temperature change between the upper and lower end of the reservoir exhibited no pattern or statistically significant relationship to discharge or percent spill at Rocky Reach (Figure E2-3). Based on the 1993 – 1998 daily data (sample size 1282 days), Project operations do not affect water temperature.

The reservoir is not known to stratify (Chelan PUD 1991, Johnstone and Mih 1987). The run-of- river operation of the Project results in a rapid reservoir turnover rate, which likely precludes stratification. At elevation 707 feet MSL, the reservoir turns over in 24.8 hours in May when the mean discharge is 131,000 cfs and in 65.2 hours in July when the mean discharge is 84,800 cfs (Chelan PUD 1991).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-12 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

4 400

350 2 300

0 250 200

-2 150 Discharge (kcfs) 100 -4 Daily Temperature Change (C) 50

-6 0 01/01/93 12/03/93 02/06/95 01/10/96 12/16/96 11/26/97 10/28/98 04/23/93 03/25/94 05/30/95 05/02/96 04/16/97 03/18/98 08/13/93 07/15/94 09/19/95 08/25/96 08/06/97 07/08/98

Temperature Discharge

Figure E2-3: Daily Water Temperature at Rocky Reach Forebay Relative to Discharge

Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved oxygen (DO) is another important indicator of aquatic eutrophication and a major determinant of cold water fisheries. Cold water salmonids are less tolerant of depressed oxygen levels and generally require 7-9 mg/l while warm water species can tolerate DO levels as low as 3-4 mg/l (EPRI 1990). As mentioned earlier, Lake Entiat does not stratify. Dissolved oxygen levels are favorable for salmonids and provide a healthy aquatic environment throughout the year. The annual average DO at the downriver WDE monitor station below Rock Island Dam is 11.9 mg/l. Annual variation is influenced by water temperature (warmer water contains less oxygen). The reported range in DO below Rock Island Dam is 7.9 – 16.3 mg/l (76.5 – 145.8 percent saturation). Monthly DO levels are listed in Table E2-2 and shown in Figure E2-4. A DO level below the water quality standard of 8.0 mg/l was only been noted once between 1977 and 1990. Johnstone and Mih (1987) report similar DO levels within Rocky Reach with the water fully saturated at all times. They also note diurnal fluctuation with peak DO at 1500 hours in summer months. Photosynthesis by aquatic plants accounts for the high DO levels and diurnal fluctuation.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-13 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

14 120

110 12

100

10 Mg/L

90 Percent

8 80

6 70 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Dissolved Oxygen Oxygen Saturation

WDE Monitor Station below Rock Island Dam, Columbia R., monthly grab samples 1977-1990

Figure E2-4: Dissolved Oxygen Levels

PH and Alkalinity The Columbia River pH level at Ecology’s monitoring station below Rock Island Dam averages 8.0 pH, which is on the basic side of neutral. Although pH readings varied between 6.7 and 9.2 for 147 monthly readings taken between October 1977 and January 1990, no correlation appears to exist between pH and flow levels, temperature, or seasons of the year. Aquatic plant growth can influence pH through the utilization of carbon dioxide for photosynthesis. Areas with heavy plant growth often exhibit alkaline pH. The diurnal variation (7.1 to 8.6) noted by Johnstone and Mih (1987) for the Columbia River at Daroga Park is attributable to the effects of photosynthesis.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-14 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Alkalinity, a measurement of the buffering capacity of the water, is associated with pH. Alkalinities of the river measured at Daroga Park (Johnstone and Mih 1987) ranged from 55 to 66 mg/l as calcium carbonate (CaCO3). High alkalinity indicates high carbonate concentrations which promote biological growth. High alkalinities did not necessarily correlate with high pH but did generally correspond with high conductivity measurements.

Conductivity Conductivity, a measure of the concentration of ionic substances including CaCO3 is usually higher in the spring for smaller water bodies as the snowmelt runoff carries dissolved ions from the soil. Conductivity below Rock Island Dam averaged 151 micro-ohms (UMHO) for 1977 – 1990. Conductivity in this reach of the Columbia River is higher in winter months. The large volume associated with spring runoff for the Columbia River tends to dilute ion concentrations. Reduced inflow from the watershed lowers summer conductivity. Figure E2-5 shows seasonal trends in conductivity.

180

160

140

UMHO 120

100

80 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Conductivity

WDE Monitor Station below Rock Island Dam, Columbia R., monthly grab samples 1977-1990 Figure E2-5: Seasonal Trends in Conductivity for Rocky Reach and Rock Island Reservoirs (BPA 1994)

Bacterial Contamination Fecal Coliform organisms are present in the intestinal tracts and feces of warm-blooded animals. Their presence and level of concentration is an indicator of human or warm-blooded animal pollution. The average of 40 fecal coliform organisms per 100 ml sample found at Rock Island Dam station on the Columbia River falls within the Class A (Excellent), and even Class AA (Extraordinary) water quality standards criteria. Less than 10 percent of the samples (6.2 percent) exceeded 200 organisms per 100 ml sample, which is within an acceptable range per the standards (1977 – 1990 WDE station at Rock Island). Although the July average fecal coliform count as reported in Table E2-2 is above the standard, the reported average is affected by two

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-15 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality samples which had high spikes; average fecal coliform count for July excluding those two samples is 22 organisms/100 ml.

Bacteriological studies conducted for the assessment of Daroga Park (Johnstone and Mih 1987) reported low bacterial counts for enterococci (ENT), total E. coli (TEC) and fecal coliform (FC). They found only localized high FC counts in July and relatively low bacterial counts in August. High samples were attributed to concentrated and prolonged activity within the swim area and localized waterfowl usage elsewhere. The bacteria isolated from m-E m-Entero agars for main river samples included Streptacoccus Faecieum and Streptacoccus Faecalis. From the m-FC and m-TEC medi, Escherichia coli was the major species isolated. For the Daroga Park area, E. coli, S. Faecium, and S. Faecalis were determined to be the major species.

The Chelan-Douglas Health District has jurisdiction over individual on-site domestic sewage systems within the two-county area straddled by the Project’s reservoir. Since 1981, it has been the policy of the Chelan-Douglas Health District in issuing individual on-site sewage disposal permits to require drainfield setbacks of 100-feet horizontal and a 3-foot vertical separation between the bottom of the drainfield trench and seasonal high groundwater (Chelan PUD 1991).

Chelan conducted a survey in 1981 of septic tanks and drainfields in the vicinity of the reservoir. These drainfields predate the 1981 Health District policy changes and some of these drainfields encroach upon the Health District’s current horizontal and vertical separation criteria.

Two municipal sewage treatment facilities are located near the Columbia River. The treatment plant at Chelan Falls serves the lower Lake Chelan area, the other at Entiat serves that town.

Heavy Metals, Pesticides, and Contaminants The only industry located adjacent to the Rocky Reach Reservoir that could release toxic or deleterious materials to the river are the Rocky Reach and Wells Hydroelectric Projects. Design considerations within these projects have been instituted to minimize potential releases of petroleum products that are necessary to their operation. Spill Prevention, Containment and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plans for Rocky Reach and the Wells Projects have been prepared and implemented.

A significant portion of land adjacent to the reservoir is in agricultural use, primarily orchard. Fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides are utilized in orchard operation and if allowed to enter the river could have a detrimental effect. Where Chelan PUD has removed orchards along the river to develop parks, soil analyses were conducted. The results showed minimal levels of residual fertilizers and herbicides. Some residual lead-arsenic levels from pre-World War II orchard operations have been found at depth in heavy clay soils. These levels are below any regulated threshold. Sandy soils have not shown any residual effects.

The twenty most important water quality concerns for the Columbia River between Grand Coulee Dam and the Snake River confluence are listed in Table E2-3. Although unquantified within the Rocky Reach Project, many of these concerns focus on pesticides and metals contamination. These concerns may well be restricted to upriver areas of this reach of the

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-16 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Columbia River since Lake Roosevelt acts as a sink to trap many of these pollutants. Efforts to quantify the extent of toxic contamination elsewhere in the upper Columbia are reported in Sedar et al. (1994).

Table E2-3: Top Priority Water Quality Concerns for Columbia River Reach Grand Coulee to Snake River 1 Dissolved Gas 11 Copper 2 Pesticides 12 Selenium 3 Mercury 13 Turbidity 4 Temperature 14 Cesium 137 5 Cadmium 15 Barium 6 Dioxin/Furans 16 Beryllium 7 Arsenic 17 Chromium 8 Lead 18 Iron 9 Aluminum 19 Nickel 10 Zinc 20 Silver

Aquatic Plants Aquatic plants, termed macrophytes, can become a water quality concern when densities reach the nuisance level or otherwise impair beneficial uses. Both native and non-native macrophytes occur in the Lake Entiat with the abundance of non-native plants posing a water quality concern. Eurasian Water-milfoil (EWM) (Myriophyllum spicatum) is a non-native aquatic plant whose proliferation can become a nuisance to recreational activities such as boating, fishing and swimming. Dense weedbeds can also pose an aesthetic concern. Curly pondweed (Potemgeton crispus) is another non-native aquatic plant that is abundant within Lake Entiat. This plant had been formerly considered to be native to the Columbia River in Washington but recent taxonomic work has determined that it is non-native. Documented native macrophytes include Potemgeton pusillus, Elodea canadensis (waterweed), Potemgeton pectinatus (fennel-leaved pondweed) and Potemgeton richardsonii (Richardson’s pondweed).

Chelan PUD in conjunction with the WDFW has conducted annual aquatic plant inventories within the Rocky Reach Reservoir in 1984 through 1988 and 1991 (Keesee 1985; 1986; 1987; 1988, Truscott 1991). The dimensions and species composition were visually estimated and plotted on maps using shoreline references. Annual mapping efforts have been compared to document trends in aquatic plant growth. The 1991 survey documented approximately 990 acres of aquatic plant beds within the reservoir; EWM dominated beds comprised 546 acres (55 percent) of the aquatic plant acreage. The total acreage of aquatic plant beds within Rocky Reach Reservoir has been stable during the period of surveys (864 acres in 1984); however, the dominance of invasive EWM has increased dramatically. Major areas of EWM concentration

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-17 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality occur along the Douglas County shoreline near Turtle Rock Island, downstream of Orondo park and within the Daroga Park vicinity. Along the Chelan County shoreline, EWM is abundant in a large embayment 4.5 miles upstream of Rocky Reach Dam, in front of Entiat Park and just offshore of the new Chelan Falls Park (Truscott 1991). EWM comprised 18 percent of the aquatic plant community in 1984, compared to 55 percent in 1991; this is a three-fold increase in EWM proportion despite only a 15 percent increase in total aquatic plant area abundance since 1984. Figure E2-6 and Figure E2-7 depict changes in aquatic plant communities. The highest proportion of EWM occurs in the upper reservoir. EWM comprised approximately 86 percent of the aquatic plant communities.

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991

P. Crispus E. canadensis M. spicatum

Figure E2-6: Aquatic Plant Distribution Along Douglas County Shoreline

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991

P. Crispus E. canadensis M. spicatum

Figure E2-7: Aquatic Plant Distribution Along Chelan County Shoreline

Truscott (1991) reported most aquatic plants grow in water depths of less than 12 ft with small amounts of milfoil growing as deep as 16 ft below the water surface. EWM typically grows within silt and muck substrates and can create its own favorable substrate by trapping sediments in dense vegetation beds.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-18 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Chelan PUD has investigated methods by which EWM can be contained and controlled. At Entiat Park, several different EPA historically approved aquatic herbicides have been applied in the swim beach and boat launch areas. The designated areas are treated shortly after the weeds emerge from the sediments. This method has proved to be approximately 50 - 60 percent effective in eliminating EWM (Chelan PUD 1991). There is currently no herbicide licensed for use in Washington for flowing waters (pers. Comm., K. Hammel, WDE, March 1999).

In 1990, an aquatic rotovator was used in the late fall to eradicate EWM. This machine is essentially a boat-mounted rototiller, which dislodges the root crowns of plants. The results of this effort were mixed with spotty removal. Elsewhere, managers have reported improved cost effectiveness of rotovation as operators become more skilled and underwater obstructions are removed. Cooke et al. (1993) provides a recent review of rotovation effectiveness, particularly for the removal of EWM. In British Columbia, rotovation reduced EWM by 80-97 percent and carryover benefits were documented to persist for a year or more. They found that two tillage passes were required to provide acceptable standards of control, particularly in silt and clay substrates. They recommend significant overlap in rototilled strips to avoid missing areas of substrate.

Drawdown is widely considered to be one of the most effective tools in the land manager’s arsenal for the control of EWM infestations. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) considers drawdown “the most effective and most economical single method of management available” for the control of aquatic plants, including EWM (TVA 1990). Published results of drawdowns suggest that a more tempered evaluation may be warranted when the target species is EWM. Cooke (1980) grouped EWM with species “strongly resistant to exposure”, requiring at least three weeks of desiccation if any control is to be achieved. His review of all published studies found the genus Myriophyllum showed either no change or no clear response to winter drawdowns. Repeated drawdowns in the Tennessee Valley have required supplementation with large herbicide applications, and EWM still remains a dominant plant in many reservoirs (TVA 1972, 1990, 1993, Goldsby et al. 1978, Bates et al. 1985). The varying success of drawdowns as a control mechanism hinge upon the abundance of EWM seeds, which are not effected by drawdowns, timing, and the compatible use of herbicides.

E2.5.4 Tailrace Water quality within the Rocky Reach tailrace is mostly comparable to water quality within the reservoir as reported above. Total dissolved gasses are an exception as this parameter can be significantly affected by spill at the dam.

Dissolved Gas Spilling of water at hydroelectric projects can entrain atmospheric gases in the tailwater, which forces these gasses into solution. This leads to supersaturation for total dissolved gasses (TDG). High levels of TDG supersaturation are detrimental to a wide array of aquatic animals and may cause a potentially lethal condition known as gas bubble trauma (GBT) in fish. GBT develops when dissolve gasses in the bloodstream of animals come out of solution and form bubbles in the internal and external tissues.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-19 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Chelan PUD, in coordination with the COE and other Columbia River hydroelectric project operators, has been spilling water for downstream fish passage at the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project since 1979. Spill levels are federally mandated in an effort to speed downstream migration of anadromous salmonids. In the Columbia River Basin, a regional effort has been undertaken to monitor and mitigate TDG supersaturation and its biological effects.

Although the level of TDG that is detrimental to aquatic life has not been definitively established, the Washington water quality standards set 110 percent as the upper limit for TDG supersaturation. The WDE granted the Chelan PUD a temporary waiver for TDG supersaturation effects associated with spilling at the Rocky Reach and Rock Island Projects. The waiver was issued to recognize the regional importance of coordinated spill programs to aid downstream fish migration. This five-year waiver, effective March 15, 1998, states that TDG levels as measured in the forebay of Rock Island and Wanapum dams shall not exceed 115 percent. Furthermore, the waiver states that Rocky Reach and Rock Island tailwater shall not exceed 120 percent. These standards are based on the average of the twelve highest hourly TDG readings. The waiver also states that the maximum hourly TDG level shall not exceed 125 percent.

Chelan PUD in coordination with the COE has been monitoring dissolved gas pressure in the forebay and tailrace of the Rocky Reach Project since 1995 and 1997, respectively. Study methods and results are reported in (McDonald and Priest 1997; Koehler and McDonald 1997, 1998). Recent study objectives have been to: • determine if the Chelan PUD is in compliance with the temporary waiver requirements for supersaturation; • examine possible relationships between the percent of total flow spilled and total volume spilled on changes in TDG levels; and • verify that TDG levels recorded by the tailrace monitoring station are representative of the entire tailrace flow.

The Rocky Reach Dam has 11 vertical axis generating units housed within a powerhouse located on the west half of the river parallel to the flow. A complete Project description is provided in Exhibit A. There are twelve 170-ton tainter gates that open individually; these are arranged on the east half of the river perpendicular to river flow. The normal reservoir elevation is 707 feet MSL with a tailrace elevation of 616 feet MSL and a head of 91 feet. The depth immediately downstream of the spill gates is approximately 40 feet.

Hourly data TDG pressure, supersaturation, temperature and barometric pressure are recorded at a fixed station located in the forebay with the instrument probe deployed at a depth of approximately 15 feet. A tailrace monitor has been installed approximately 4.0 miles downriver at the Odabashian Bridge. Data is transmitted to the Project operator.

TDG data for both monitoring stations are reported in Appendix B. TDG levels in the forebay and tailrace vary throughout the spring and summer. This variation is attributable in part to changing spill volumes and upriver TDG levels associated with projects upstream. TDG pressure increased from the forebay to the tailrace with and without spill occurring during the spring and summer of 1997 and 1998. The relative change in TDG supersaturation during the

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-20 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality spring was similar for both years; 2.2 percent in 1998 and 2.3 percent in 1997 (Table E2-4). Supersaturation levels were higher in 1997; total river flow and the proportion spilled were greater in 1997.

Table E2-4: Average, Minimum and Maximum Values of TDG in the Forebays and Tailraces and Changes in Percent TDG from Forebay to Tailrace at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams, 1997 ROCKY REACH SPRING 1997 SUMMER 1997 Change in Change in Forebay Tailrace TDG Forebay Tailrace TDG Average 123.5% 126.0% 2.3% 111.0% 113.1% 3.8% Minimum 98.5% 108.1% -2.4% 99.8% 106.8% -1.2% Maximum 113.5% 138.3% 11.6% 120.8% 128.3% 14.5%

ROCK ISLAND SPRING 1997 SUMMER 1997 Change in Change in Forebay Tailrace TDG Forebay Tailrace TDG Average 121.5% 126.9% 5.3% 109.8% 115.2% 5.6% Minimum 98.9% 106.8% 0.7% 101.3% 106.3% -0.3% Maximum 133.5% 139.8% 15.3% 119.3% 126.3% 11.7%

Chelan PUD used regression analysis to evaluate the relationship between the change in TDG levels from forebay to tailrace and the total volume spilled (kcfs) as well as percent of river spilled. Data were stratified by spring and summer. Generally, the effect on TDG level did not correlate with either total volume spilled nor percent of river flow spilled except during the spring 1998 when moderate causal relationships were determined (r2 = 0.5 total volume spilled and r2 = 0.41 percent spilled). These relationships did not hold for 1997 nor summer 1998 data. Comparison of forebay to tailrace data showed an increase in TDG levels when there was little or no spill.

Transect measurements in the Rocky Reach tailrace indicated highest readings consistently in the east channel, with a downward gradient in TDG levels in the direction of the west channel. Koehler and McDonald (1997) found a gradual descent in TDG with distance from the Project during high spills in 1997 but a similar trend was less apparent in 1998 when spill volumes were lower (Koehler and McDonald (1998).

Although TDG pressure generally increased with greater spill, the increase in TDG from forebay to tailrace when no spill occurred leads to the conclusion that factors other than spill may also influence TDG or there are potentially undetected vertical and/or horizontal gradients in TDG across the river which are not accounted for with a fixed station monitor.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-21 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

In 1998, the spill pattern for fish passage at Rocky Reach generally resulted in an increase in TDG levels from the forebay at Rocky Reach Dam to the forebay at the downriver Rock Island Dam ((Koehler and McDonald (1998). Similar findings were reported for 1996 (McDonald and Priest 1996). In 1997, the spill was distributed across either 7 or 11 spillway bays and the TDG data showed decreasing trends from Rocky Reach to Rock Island. This configuration of spill may benefit reduced TDG supersaturation and confirmation will be a study objective for 1999.

E2.5.5 Groundwater Groundwater in the study area is contained in shallow, unconfined aquifers composed of glacial drift deposits overlying basalt. In the vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir, the depth to high water table is more than six feet. The principal water-bearing units consist of sand and gravel in glacial outwash and glacial till. Well depths range from 50 to 250 feet. The water-yielding capability of the glacial drift aquifer can be highly variable due to the spatial variability of the constituent materials.

Groundwater from the glacial drift aquifer is used as a source of domestic water supply in the region surrounding Rocky Reach Reservoir. Groundwater quality in the glacial drift aquifer is generally good, with some problems related to contamination from agricultural practices, including high levels of nitrates, phosphorus, and coliforms (FERC 1996).

Minimal levels of residual fertilizers and herbicides were detected near the surface in soils within the Project area. Residual lead-arsenic levels from pre-World War II orchard operations were found at depth in heavy clay soils. The measured levels were below the regulated thresholds, however, they are not known to affect groundwater quality in the Project area.

The Columbia River Basalt aquifer underlies the glacial drift aquifer and consists of alternating layers of dense but locally fractured basalt and interbeds of unconsolidated sand and gravel. Groundwater from the Columbia River Basalt aquifer is used predominantly for irrigation. Well depths range from 50 to 750 feet, but may exceed 900 feet (FERC 1996).

E2.6 APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND STREAM SEGMENT CLASSIFICATIONS Rocky Reach Reservoir is designated as a Class A segment of the Columbia River by the State of Washington. A Class A designation generally indicates that the water quality of the stream meets or exceeds the requirements for its use for water supply, livestock watering, fish and shellfish, wildlife habitat, recreation, and commerce and navigation. However, WDE reports impaired use of this segment of the river for rearing, harvesting, and other fish spawning, and salmonid spawning and other fish migration, resulting from flow regulation and modification (FERC 1996). Table E2-5 summarizes the standards for Class A water quality.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-22 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Table E2-5: Summary of Washington Department of Ecology Water Quality Standards Parameter Class A Fecal Coliform Not to exceed geometric mean of 100 col./100 ml, less than 10% of all samples exceeding 200 col./100 ml Dissolved Oxygen Must exceed 8.0 mg/l Total Dissolved Gas Not to exceed 110%5,6 Temperature Must not exceed 18.0OC1,4 pH Within 6.5 - 8.52 Turbidity Not to exceed 5 NTU over background, or 10% over background of 50 NTU or more 1Human activities shall not result in more than a 0.3oC increase when water temperatures naturally exceed this maximum criteria. Incremental temperature increase resulting from point source activities shall not exceed t=28/(T=7) where T=background temperature; maximum incremental increase for non-point sources is 2.8 C. 2Human caused variation must be + 0.2 pH units. 3Does not apply when stream flow exceeds the 7-day, ten-year frequency flood. 4 Special condition for this reach of the Columbia River establishes 20OC as maximum temperature 5 Not applicable when discharge exceeds the 7 day 10 year frequency flood 6 A temporary waiver has been issued (March 1998) to Chelan PUD to facilitate spill for fish passage Source: WAC 173-201A-030

The Rock Island Station, 20 miles downstream of Rocky Reach Dam, provides the nearest comprehensive water quality data for the Project area. These data are maintained by WDE. Water quality in the Columbia River near the Rocky Reach Project has met most water quality standards except for dissolved gas and temperature.

Water quality for the State water classifications within the Project area shall exceed the requirements for all or substantially all uses. Aesthetic values are also protected from impairment by State laws for water quality. Anti-degradation is also an established water quality standard. Table E2-6 lists documented exceedences of State water quality standards.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-23 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Table E2-6: Exceedences of Water Quality Standards Monitoring Station Parameters Exceeding Description of Parameter Location Standards Exceedence Rocky Reach Dam forebay Total Dissolved Gas Mar – Apr – no exceedences (1993-1998)1 >110% supersaturation May - 88 days: avg. exceedence = 121.8%: n = 153 days June – 110 days: avg. exceedence = 122.8%: n = 150 days July – 104 days: avg. exceedence = 113.8% n = 147 days (No adjustment has Aug – 60 days: avg. exceedence = 114.6%: n = 154 days been made to recognize Sept – 3 days: avg. exceedence = 118.5%: n =120 days waiver as of 3/98) Oct – Nov – no exceedences Dec – Jan data not available WDE ambient monitoring Dissolved Oxygen 1987-1 excursion beyond criterion station (RM 450.9) 8 mg/l (1977–1990) 2 WDE ambient monitoring 1990- Two excursions beyond criterion due to stratification 1 station (RM 450.9) behind impoundments (1977 – 1990) 2 Temperature >18.0 C Rocky Reach Dam forebay July – 18 days: n = 209 9% of time (1993-1998)1 August – 92 days: n=216 days 42% of time Sept – 83 days: n=180 days 46% of time Source: 1 COE Data Access in Real Time (DART); data collected by Chelan PUD 2 WDE monitoring station 2154 44A70 below Rock Island Dam

The WDE 303(d) list, which is used to identify statewide water quality concerns, recognizes several water quality concerns within the Project area waters and its tributaries. The Columbia River at Wells Dam is listed for temperature and total dissolved gas. The river at Rocky Reach Dam is listed for total dissolved gas. The Chelan River from its confluence with Lake Entiat to Lake Chelan is listed on the 303(d) list for water quality criteria exceeded for temperature and pH. The Entiat River is listed on the 303(d) list for not meeting instream flow needs for habitat. The WDE recommends establishing total maximum daily loads (TMDL) for each of these situations.

E2.7 EXISTING MAXIMUM FLOW RELEASES AND WATER LEVELS Rocky Reach Dam has a gross head of 92 feet and a hydraulic capacity of 196,000 cfs, which means 196,000 cfs may be passed through the Project turbines without requiring to spill any water. Lake Entiat is controlled within a 4-foot range from elevation 703 to 707 feet MSL and has 36,400 acre-feet of usable flood control and operations storage. The only limitation placed on Project operations is that sufficient water be released to maintain a minimum flow of 36,000 cfs downstream in the Hanford Reach at Vernita Bar to insure sufficient water for salmon and steelhead spawning (COE 1975).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-24 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

E2.8 EXISTING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

E2.8.1 Identification of Responsible Stakeholders Federal and Tribal Management The National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) has water quality management responsibilities as they relate to anadromous fisheries and recovery plans for federally listed salmonids including the mid-Columbia River Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The US Forest Service (USFS) is a primary landowner in the Entiat River Basin, which is tributary to the Project area. The USFS and National Park Service are both major federal landowners within the Lake Chelan watershed, which is the source for the Project tributary Chelan River.

The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Yakama Indian Nation are very interested in cultural resource management at the Rocky Reach Project area. Chelan PUD will work closely with the tribes in assessing and scoping cultural resources studies during relicensing.

The COE is in the final stages of Phase I of preparing a Total Dissolved Gas Abatement Study which is intended to address mitigation and prevention measures on a system wide basis for the Columbia River. This study is an element of the Columbia River Salmon Mitigation Analysis (CRSMA) and is being conducted under the existing authorities for the eight Corps projects on the lower Columbia and lower Snake rivers. Recent coordination of this effort and other dissolved gas abatement and monitoring efforts is being coordinated on an international basis with Canada by the Trans Boundary Gas Group which has representation of provincial agencies, federal and state agencies, tribes, public utilities and industry.

State Management The Washington Department of Ecology is responsible for monitoring and maintaining the water quality standards described in Section E2.7. The Washington Department of Health is responsible for approval and regulation of community water systems with flows between 3,500 and 14,500 gpd. All wastewater systems servicing two or more homes must meet guidelines prescribed by this agency. WDE issues NPDES permits which regulate limits on the amount of wastewater discharge and is responsible for on-site wastewater systems greater than 14,500 gpd. WDE also has authority to issue water rights for all systems that service more than a single- family residence.

Local Management Local agencies providing water quality management include cities of Chelan and Entiat, Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Chelan County, Douglas County, and Chelan-Douglas Health District.

The cities of Chelan and Entiat regulate functions within the city limits which include land use zoning, building code enforcement, water service, wastewater collection and treatment, storm drainage, transportation and solid waste (City of Entiat Comprehensive Land Use Plan 1997).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-25 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Chelan PUD is also funding water quality monitoring in Chelan River, which is tributary to the Project area. Chelan PUD participates in other water quality protection measures within the Rocky Reach Project area including ongoing monitoring activities.

Chelan County has regulatory authority over unincorporated areas not controlled by the City of Chelan or Entiat along the west side of the Columbia River. Douglas County has responsibility for the unincorporated areas on the east side of the river (everything but Orondo). Each county establishes their own guidelines for development.

The Chelan-Douglas Health District issues permits for on-site waste disposal systems and monitors water sources for bacteria contamination.

E2.8.2 Summary of Existing and Relevant Resource Management Plans Dissolved Gas Abatement Study The Total Dissolved Gas Abatement Study was initiated by the COE to determine the best means of reducing TDG supersaturation caused by spillway operations. This effort is being implemented in coordination with numerous representatives of the region, including the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Fish Passage Center, National Biological Service, NMFS, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, WDE, US Environmental Protection Agency and the Bonneville Power Administration, as well as, public utilities including Chelan PUD. Coordination efforts for addressing TDG supersaturation are also encompassing Canadian interests within the Columbia River drainage.

Implementation of the Total Dissolved Gas Abatement Study is intended to address mitigation and prevention measures on a system wide basis for the Columbia River. This study is an element of CRSMA and is being conducted under the existing authorities for the eight Corps projects on the lower Columbia and lower Snake rivers. Recent coordination of this effort and other dissolved gas abatement and monitoring efforts is being coordinated on an international basis with Canada by the Trans Boundary Gas Group which has representation of provincial agencies, federal and state agencies, tribes, public utilities and industry.

Storm Drainage Standards and Guidelines The Chelan County Board of Commissioners, by resolution, has found that future stormwater drainage problems may be reduced or avoided by installation and maintenance of best management practices for stormwater management. The Chelan County Storm Drainage Standards and Guidelines (LCWQC 1995) have yet to be formerly adopted by the County but are commonly practiced by the Public Works Department (LCWQC, May 28, 1998, Personal communication, interview, Gordon Congdon to DE&S). The standards and guidelines represent minimum design standards for the construction and maintenance of storm drainage systems, specify when a drainage plan is needed, and describe a regulatory process for compliance.

E2.8.3 Other Supporting Plans The Lower Lake Chelan Basin Comprehensive Land Use Plan was adopted by the City of Chelan and Chelan County; this plan includes goal and policy statements as well as implementation

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-26 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality guidelines addressing issues of importance to the community. These include preservation of water quality, protection of the natural environment, preservation of agricultural land, and preservation of the quality of life in the area. The Chelan River is tributary to the Rocky Reach Reservoir.

Douglas County adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 1995. The plan is intended to be a guide for the physical growth and development of the county for the forseeable future, or about the next twenty years. It provides goals, policies and recommendations to be used as official policy guidelines to allow County officials to make informed decisions that benefit the best interests of the county as a whole including protection of water quality resources.

Growth Management Act The Growth Management Act, signed into law in 1990, required extensive planning efforts to deal with current and projected growth in the state. The Growth Management Act may indirectly result in the implementation of enhanced septic system design standards.

E2.9 CONSULTATION CONDUCTED WITH INTERESTED PARTIES Chelan PUD began meeting with interested parties (Federal, State, County and Local Resource Agencies) March 25, 1999. During the remainder of 1999, Chelan PUD will consult with resource agencies and other interested parties (stakeholders) regarding the proposed relicensing process, descriptions of the existing Project, extent of engineering work, and proposed environmental, historical, archaeological, recreational, and land use studies. This information, along with written comments provided by stakeholders identifying any additional required studies, will be used to prepare a NEPA scoping document.

Following preparation of the scoping documents, Chelan PUD will spend the next several years conducting studies and preparing the final license application and Draft Environmental Assessment. Chelan PUD will submit a preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and license application for the Rocky Reach Hydro Project by June 30, 2004. The existing license expires in 2006.

Issue Identification Process

March 25, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification. April 27, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification.

[In most cases, subsequent meetings will be held on the day after the fourth Wednesday in each month.]

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E2-27 SS/1181rr Exhibit E2: Water Use and Quality

Long Term Schedule

2000-2002 Conduct Studies 2003 Draft License and Environmental Assessment 2004 PUD submits Final License Application and Environmental Assessment 2004-2006 FERC Review & Processing of License Application & Environmental Assessment 2006 Existing License Expires/ New License Issued

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E2-28 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.0 REPORT ON FISH, WILDLIFE AND BOTANICAL RESOURCES

E3.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW The Rocky Reach Project impounds 43 miles of the Columbia River from Rocky Reach Dam at river mile 473.7 to Douglas County PUD’s Wells Dam (FERC No. 2149) at river mile 515.5. The reservoir created by the Project is also known as Lake Entiat. The drainage area of the Columbia River Basin upstream of Rocky Reach Dam is approximately 87,800 square miles. Annual average flows through the reservoir ranged from 82,000 cfs to 150,000 cfs from 1971 to 1991. The annual median flow (i.e., the flow greater than those occurring 50 percent of the time throughout the year) through the reservoir from 1973 to 1998 was 107,000 cfs.

The Columbia River system is primarily fed by snowmelt. Numerous dams and impoundments developed for hydropower and flood control alter the natural flow in the basin. Water is withdrawn from the Columbia River and its tributaries at various locations for agricultural, domestic, municipal, and industrial supply. The two significant water sources within the Rocky Reach Project area are the Chelan and Entiat rivers.

The Entiat River enters the Columbia River at approximately river mile 483. A gage station approximately 16 miles upstream of the river’s confluence with the Columbia River measures flows in the Entiat River (USGS Gage No. 1245280), but measurements taken from that gage station represent only approximately 60 percent of flows for the entire Entiat River Basin. Average monthly discharges at the Entiat River gage station for Water Years 1957-1995 ranged from 112 cfs in September to 1,417 cfs in June. A maximum recorded flow of 6,430 cfs occurred on June 10, 1972, and the mean annual peak flood is 2,866 cfs.

The Chelan River enters the Columbia River at approximately river mile 503. The minimum, mean, and maximum recorded flows for the Chelan River are 0 cfs, 2,060 cfs, and 18,400 cfs, respectively. These flows were recorded at USGS Gage No. 124552500, Chelan River at Chelan, Washington for the period 1952 to 1995. The gage is located at the Lake Chelan Project tailrace and includes powerhouse releases as well as spill from the dam. Average monthly discharges from the Chelan River during Water Years 1952-95 ranged from 12 cfs in April to 3,428 cfs in June (DE&S 1999). The drainage area of the Chelan River basin is approximately 924 square miles. The Lake Chelan Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 637), which is also owned and operated by Chelan PUD, is located approximately four miles upstream on the Chelan River at the outlet of Lake Chelan.

E3.2 FISHERY RESOURCES

E3.2.1 General Overview of Fishery Resources in the Basin The Rocky Reach pool supports a diverse community of anadromous and resident fish, including endemic and introduced stocks and species. Most resident species spawn and rear in the reservoir or its tributaries, while most anadromous salmon and steelhead trout use the reservoir

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources as a migration route. Anadromous salmonids include spring, summer and fall chinook salmon, sockeye salmon, coho salmon and steelhead trout. Pacific lamprey are the only other anadromous species. White sturgeon, which originally may have had diadromous populations in the Rocky Reach pool, are still present. Native resident fish include mountain whitefish, rainbow trout, bull trout, Northern pikeminnow, peamouth chub, chiselmouth chub, largescale sucker, bridgelip sucker, redside shiner, sculpins and threespine stickleback. Common introduced resident species include carp, tench, largemouth and smallmouth bass, pumpkinseed sunfish, walleye, yellow perch, and brown bullhead. Other species are listed in Table E3-1.

Table E3-1: Scientific Names of Fishes Known or Thought to Occur in Rocky Reach Pool COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Sockeye salmon O. nerka Steelhead O. mykiss Coho salmon O. kisutch Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni Rainbow trout O. mykiss Walleye Stizostedion vitreum Yellow perch Perca flavescens White sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Smallmouth bass M. dolomieui Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus Pumpkinseed L. gibbosus Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus Kokanee O. nerka Cutthroat trout O. clarki Brown trout S. trutta Chiselmouth Acrocheilus alutaceus Carp Cyprinus carpio Peamouth Mylocheilus caurinus Northern pikeminnow Ptychocheilus oregonensis Dace Rhynichthys sp. Redside shiner Richardsonius balteatus Tench Tinca tinca Longnose sucker Catostomus catostomus Bridgelip sucker C. columbianus Largescale sucker C. macrocheilus Mountain sucker C. platyrhynchus Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Bullheads Ictalurus sp. Sandroller Percopsis transmontana Burbot Lota lota Threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus Cottids Cottus sp.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.2.2 Historical Description of Fishery Resources in the Project Vicinity The Columbia River watershed upstream from Rocky Reach Dam supports naturally producing populations of chinook and sockeye salmon and steelhead. Coho salmon were historically present, but the endemic stock was extirpated by the 1940's (Mullan 1984). Artificial production facilities produce chinook salmon and steelhead. Steelhead hatcheries produce a stock derived from steelhead endemic to the upper Columbia River. Chinook hatchery production is a mixture of endemic and introduced stocks, except for the Wells Hatchery program, which raises summer chinook derived from fish endemic to the upper Columbia River.

Adult counts of anadromous salmonids at Rocky Reach Dam for the last 11 years (1980 - 1990) have averaged 3,806 spring, 4,600 summer, and 2,252 fall chinook salmon, 33,179 sockeye salmon, 527 coho salmon and 10,445 steelhead trout. Many of these fish continue on past Wells Dam. For the same time period, counts at Wells Dam averaged 2,435 spring, 3,237 summer, and 1,038 fall chinook salmon, 33,478 sockeye salmon, 88 coho salmon and 9,378 steelhead trout. From 1982 - 1986, escapements to hatcheries (volunteers or trapped fish) averaged 681 adult spring chinook salmon to Entiat National Fish Hatchery (NFH), 888 spring chinook salmon to Winthrop NFH, and 1,048 summer chinook and 670 steelhead to Wells Hatchery. Many progeny of hatchery summer/fall chinook and steelhead escape to spawn naturally because the Rocky Reach and Chelan Falls hatcheries do not collect returning brood stock. The Wells Hatchery only collects a portion of the returning summer chinook and steelhead on site for broodstock. All these fish, except for a portion of the summer/fall chinook run, are returning to hatcheries or to spawning areas in the Entiat, Methow and Okanogan Rivers. Summer/fall chinook spawn in the Rocky Reach pool, as well. Coho (which are most likely returns from smolt plants from the Rocky Reach Hatchery) have not been observed spawning in any areas above Rocky Reach Dam.

The Rocky Reach pool has abundant habitat and large populations of native catostomids (suckers) and cyprinids (Northern pikeminnow, chubs, shiners) and stickleback (Mullan 1986a, Dell et al. 1975). Spawning habitat, rearing habitat, and food supply in the Rocky Reach pool are apparently adequate to support sizeable populations of these fish. Whitefish are also abundant, although spawning success in the reservoir is probably limited because of warm temperatures in the fall and early winter (Mullan 1986a). Rainbow trout are common, but not abundant. Historic hatchery planting of catchable-sized trout in the Entiat River and residualization of hatchery steelhead smolts probably contribute to this population. Bull trout are present, but reduced in numbers. Bull trout populations throughout the tributaries to the mid-Columbia River have declined, probably in large part from over fishing. White sturgeon are present, but rarely observed, and presence of juveniles has not been reported. Recruitment may be limited by lack of larval or juvenile survival because spawning habitat and mature adults are present in the reservoir (Mullan 1986a).

E3.2.3 Description of Current Fishery Resources of the Project and its Vicinity

E3.2.3.1 Existing Fisheries Upstream of the Project Natural anadromous salmonid spawning in the mainstem mid-Columbia River presently is limited primarily to the Hanford reach downstream of Priest Rapids Dam, and to the major tributaries including the Wenatchee, Chelan, Entiat, Methow and Okanogan River systems.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Mainstem spawning also occurs in the upstream portions of the reservoirs in project tailrace areas where streambed hydraulics and substrate conditions allow (Carlson and Dell 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992; Dauble et al. 1994; Chapman et al. 1994a).

Chinook Fall (ocean-type) chinook salmon are known to spawn in the upstream portions of the reservoir in project tailrace areas where stream velocities, substrate and intergravel flows remain sufficient for redd development and embryo incubation (Dauble et al. 1994; Chapman et al. 1994a). Significant fall chinook spawning also occurs downstream of Priest Rapids Dam in the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River (Carlson and Dell 1989; Chapman et al. 1994a).

Sockeye Sockeye spawning in the Okanogan and Wenatchee Rivers has been documented during September to October (Mullan 1986). Limited spawning may occur in the Methow and Entiat Rivers maintaining remnant sockeye populations from previous introductions (Mullan 1986). Because of the necessity for juvenile lake rearing, sockeye are not regarded as a major mainstem mid-Columbia River spawner.

Summer Steelhead Steelhead spawning has not been observed in the reservoirs but some potential spawning could occur in areas of substantial groundwater upwelling. Past decisions regarding mitigation for steelhead spawning habitat (Chelan PUD 1991c) have assumed that if steelhead used the reservoirs, then they would have similar spawning requirements as summer and fall chinook salmon. The effects of reservoir inundation on steelhead spawning production may be expected to be similar to effects on summer and fall chinook.

E3.2.3.2 Existing Fisheries in the Project Impoundment The importance of mainstem Columbia River reservoir habitat for rearing juvenile anadromous salmonids varies by species and race/deme. Stream-type (spring) chinook, steelhead and sockeye do not appear to use the shoreline habitats of the mainstem Columbia River, but outmigrate in the mid-channel areas of reservoirs. The river is regarded as a migration corridor in which food may be encountered. Limnetic zooplankton and drift may be a primary source of food in the diets of yearling outmigrants (Healy and Jordan 1982; Ledgerwood et al. 1991b; Burley and Poe 1994).

Ocean-type (summer and fall) chinook salmon juveniles use the mainstem reservoirs for rearing in late spring and early summer (Chapman et al. 1994a; Burley and Poe 1994). Recently emerged ocean-type chinook juveniles rear throughout the shallow, low velocity areas of the reservoirs in April and May. After reaching approximately 50 mm in size, they move slightly offshore into faster flowing water and typically establish feeding territories along the river bottom (Campbell and Eddy 1988; Rondorf and Gray 1987; Hillman et al. 1988; Chapman et al. 1994a). Chinook may sight feed on limnetic species when available, but prefer benthic macroinvertebrates in the drift when rearing (Chapman et al. 1994a).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Whitefish, trout and char were the dominant resident species. Under present conditions, few salmonids reside in the reservoir and their numbers represent less than one percent of the total fish numbers sampled (Dell et al. 1975; Zook 1983; Mullan et al. 1986).

Non-game fish such as sucker, chub, Northern pikeminnow, and shiners make up the majority of the reservoir resident fish population. The introduced species (walleye, centrarchids, catfish, and carp) are common, but not abundant. Walleye, smallmouth bass and carp recruitment is probably limited by the low temperatures in the Rocky Reach pool in spring and early summer (Bennett 1991, Mullan 1986a). An initial “explosion” of non-game fish after inundation was followed by a reduction and, over the last decade, an eventual leveling off of non-game species. Mullan (1986) theorized that the mid-Columbia reservoirs are dominated by trophic generalists, such as cyprinids, in part because of minimal predation. The reservoirs lack a substantive population of highly piscivorous keystone predators such as walleye (Burley and Poe 1994). Mullan (1986) states that, “Systems lacking piscivores, as in mid-Columbia reservoirs, are competition dominant.” Growth and production are stifled due to lack of resources, with a large component of the energy intake going into maintenance activities (Regier et al. 1979).

E3.2.3.3 Existing Fisheries at the Project Chinook Salmon Historically, chinook salmon entered the Columbia River continually from early spring through late fall. Due to overharvest and the construction of dams without fish passage, segments of the run were greatly reduced in number (Chapman et al. 1994a, 1995a). Timing of peak counts of adults passing upstream of dams is one method now used to divide the continuum into separate stocks. Another method for dividing the run into segments or stocks is through spawning areas. A window of time for egg deposition exists in each spawning area based on water temperature, and the timing of upstream migrating adults matches this window (Miller and Brannon 1982). Therefore, those adults that spawn in the upper reaches of tributaries, in the middle and lower reaches of tributaries, and in the mainstem rivers and lower reaches of tributaries can be divided into three races/demes. Because the adults of the race/deme that spawn in the upper reaches generally return past mainstem dams in the spring, they are known as spring (stream-type) chinook. Similarly, the race/deme that spawn in the middle and lower reaches of tributaries generally return past mainstem dams in the summer, and are known as summer (ocean-type) chinook salmon. Those that spawn in lower tributaries and the mainstem river arrive in the fall and are known as fall (ocean-type) chinook salmon (Meekin 1963; French and Wahle 1965; Chapman et al. 1982; Mullan 1987).

These arbitrary classifications are based on the date of arrival at mainstem dams. The cutoff date for spring chinook, for example, is June 13 at Priest Rapids Dam, and later at upstream projects. These cutoffs are not necessarily reflective of the origin of the adults (Chapman et al. 1995a). Summer and fall (ocean-type) chinook salmon are treated as one evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) since they cannot be electrophoretically separated (Chapman et al. 1994a), and also because the juveniles migrate as age 0+ (subyearlings) while spring (stream-type) chinook salmon juveniles migrate as age 1+ (yearlings).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-5 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Spring (Stream-Type) Chinook Salmon Most adult spring(stream-type) chinook salmon migrate upstream through the Columbia River to spawn after spending two to three years in the ocean (Chapman et al. 1995a; Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority [CBFWA] 1990). Upstream migrants enter the Columbia River during the spring, passing dams along the mid-Columbia from late April through mid-June. Spawning begins during late July and continues through September, although the timing of peak spawning varies among tributaries (Chapman et al. 1995a; Peven 1992). In the mid-Columbia reach, wild populations of spring chinook salmon are found in the Wenatchee, Entiat and Methow river systems (Chapman et al. 1995a; Mullan 1987). Eggs hatch in late winter and early spring after exposure to about 750 daily temperature units (DTU) (Piper et al. 1982) with emergence of fry from the gravel in April and May (Peven 1992) after a total accumulation of about 1,600 DTU (Piper et al. 1982). Juveniles may migrate to rearing areas further upstream or downstream shortly following emergence. Most parr rear in freshwater for one year before migrating to the ocean (age 1+). A small percentage migrate as subyearlings (age 0+) into lower reaches of the watershed for overwintering before immigrating to the ocean. (Chapman et al. 1995a; CBFWA 1990; Palmisano et al. 1993). Outmigrating juveniles pass the mid-Columbia projects from mid-April to mid-June.

Naturally produced stream-type chinook juveniles pass mid-Columbia dams over a longer time period and are generally smaller than the hatchery produced juveniles. Naturally produced stream-type chinook juveniles originating from upriver areas of the mid-Columbia were found to migrate downstream at lengths of 65 to 123 mm; hatchery-reared stream-type chinook juveniles are generally released at larger sizes (117 to 178 mm) (Mullan 1987).

Studies in the lower Columbia River have shown juvenile chinook outmigrants actively feed and grow during their outmigration through reservoirs. Craddock et al. (1976) found that chinook juveniles in the lower Columbia River at Kalama, Washington (of both stream- and ocean-type size) fed on aquatic insects in spring, switched to zooplankton (Daphnia spp.), which were most abundant during July through September and switched back to aquatic insects in the fall. The juveniles actively selected Daphnia and Sida spp. and avoided Bosmina spp. and cyclopoid copepods. Dawley et al. (1986) found that stream-type chinook at Jones Beach on the lower Columbia River (river mile [RM] 47) consumed primarily dipterans, followed in importance by amphipods and plant material. Stream-type chinook smolts in Lower Granite reservoir on the Snake River feed primarily on chironomidae, and also take minor amounts of Cladocera, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Plecoptera and terrestrial insects (Chandler, J., Idaho Power Co., unpublished data). Due to limited reach-specific data, a general assumption is that juvenile chinook outmigrant feeding behavior in the mid-Columbia reach is consistent with outmigrant behavior observed in the lower Columbia River. The rapid reservoir flushing rate and lack of shallow, backwater habitat suggests the mid-Columbia system is more characteristic of a flowing system than a lake system.

The largest run of Columbia River adult spring chinook salmon on record was estimated as 281,000 fish at Bonneville Dam in 1955 with the smallest estimated run at 20,185 fish in 1994 (CBFWA 1990; Fish Passage Center [FPC] 1995a). During 1980 to 1990, the average run size was 84,200 fish (Peven 1992). Meyers, et al. (l998) estimated the 1990-94 geometric run to be

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-6 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

4,880 spawners upstream of Rock Island Dam. They estimate that all current trends of abundance for these stocks are downward and have subsequently recommended these fish be warranted for endangered status under the ESA. On March 9, 1998, the upper Columbia spring chinook ESU was proposed for listing under the ESA. (63 FR 11482).

Since 1970, hatchery production of stream-type chinook juveniles has increased, and the upriver run is now comprised of at least 60 to 70 percent hatchery adults (Palmisano et al. 1993; BPA et al. 1994a). Annual adult spring chinook returns to hatcheries above Bonneville Dam peaked at over 37,000 in 1986 and 34,900 in 1990 (BPA et al. 1994a). In 1993, stream-type chinook salmon hatchery juvenile releases to the mid-Columbia reach totaled 4,171,000 (BPA et al. 1994a). Hatchery produced stream-type chinook smolts migrating through the mid-Columbia originate from Winthrop, Methow, Entiat, Eastbank, Leavenworth and WDF-COOP hatcheries.

Summer and Fall (Ocean-Type) Chinook Salmon As stated previously, summer and fall (ocean-type) chinook salmon are treated as indistinguishable races/demes. However, when spawning is discussed, summer and fall chinook are separately identified. The fall chinook component are defined as those races/demes that spawn in the mainstem Columbia and Snake Rivers, and in the extreme lower reaches of direct tributaries to the mainstem Columbia. The summer chinook component is defined as those stocks that do not spawn in the aforementioned areas but do outmigrate as subyearling juveniles (age 0+), the same as fall chinook. Most summer and fall chinook salmon adults return to spawn after spending three or four years in the ocean (Peven 1992). Adults enter the Columbia River during late May to early July and pass dams on the mid-Columbia from late June through October (Peven 1992). Natural spawning of the summer chinook component occurs in the lower portions of the Similkameen River below Enloe Dam (Chapman et al. 1994a), in the Okanogan River downstream of Lake Osoyoos, in the lowermost 50 miles of the Methow River, in the Wenatchee River downstream of Lake Wenatchee, and in the lower Chelan River (Chapman et al. 1994a). Spawning occurs during late September through November, with the peak spawning activity in October (Peven 1992).

Historically, the fall chinook component spawned in suitable areas from the vicinity of McNary Dam on the lower Columbia, up the Snake River to Shoshone Falls, and up the Columbia River into the Canadian headwaters in the vicinity of Golden, B.C. (Chapman et al. 1994a). Currently, fall chinook are known to spawn in the tailraces of Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Wells and Chief Joseph dams (Chapman et al. 1994a). Fall chinook probably spawn below each of the mid- Columbia River dams (Dauble et al. 1994), and perhaps in other mainstem reservoir segments where suitable water velocities and substrate conditions exist. The main production area of the fall chinook component in the Columbia River basin is located 4 miles below Priest Rapids Dam at Vernita Bar and continues through the Hanford Reach to the upper reaches of McNary reservoir. Peak spawning of Vernita Bar fall chinook occurs in November (Carlson and Dell 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992).

The Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) first observed fall chinook salmon redds in the Rocky Reach reservoir (in the Wells tailrace) in 1967 (Chelan PUD 1991c). Numbers of redds have been highly variable at this location over the years, with peak counts exceeding 100 redds

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-7 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources per year. Giorgi (1992a) described the fall chinook spawning in the Rocky Reach reservoir. He counted 85 redds on the west side of the Columbia River at RM 514 to 515 and regarded their use of the available habitat as sparse. They spawned between 5 and 32 feet deep at nose velocities measured at 2.8 to 2.9 feet per second shortly after spawning. The magnitude of these attributes are within the range of measurements noted for mainstem fall chinook spawning adults at other locales in the mid-Columbia region. Chapman et al. (1994a) suggested mainstem spawning was continuing in the Brewster Bar area following inundation by the Wells reservoir. Other surveyors have indicated potential deep water spawning near Bridgeport Bar, Washburn Island, and in areas near the Chief Joseph tailrace where substantial groundwater upwelling occurs (Hillman and Miller 1994; Chapman et al. 1994a; Swan et al. 1994; Bickford 1994). Chelan PUD (1991c) reported redd count data from other reservoirs including the Priest Rapids and Rock Island reservoirs. Redd counts at Priest Rapids reservoir have ranged from 200 to 492 redds in the recent past (Carlson and Dell 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992). Based on this information, it is apparent that some unknown but significant amount of chinook production occurs in the mainstem river areas from the Priest Rapids Dam tailrace to the Chief Joseph Dam tailrace, as streambed hydraulics and substrate conditions allow.

Juveniles usually emerge in April and May and are displaced downstream within a few days to several weeks after emerging from the redd (Chapman et al. 1994a). Ocean-type (summer and fall) chinook salmon migrate as subyearlings (age 0+). Juveniles produced in the mid-Columbia tributaries, the lower Chelan River and in tailraces of dams tend to spend several weeks in the reservoirs before migrating to the ocean (Chapman et al. 1994a). The timing of juvenile outmigration varies among tributary of origin and hatchery release dates, but juvenile ocean-type chinook salmon generally migrate during the late summer and fall months, passing dams on the mid-Columbia between June and August (Mullan 1987; Peven 1992; Chapman et al. 1994a). The size of juvenile ocean-type chinook passing the mid-Columbia projects varies among the dams and according to the timing of arrival of juveniles at each dam, but lengths range from 40 to 165 mm.

It is generally believed that juvenile ocean-type chinook salmon tend to use nearshore littoral habitat while stream-type juveniles tend to migrate in mid-channel (Ledgerwood et al. 1991b; Chapman et al. 1994a; Burley and Poe 1994). Ocean-type juveniles use shallow littoral areas shortly after emergence in April and May (Chapman et al. 1994a). Campbell and Eddy (1988) believe this partitioning of habitat is related to fish size and predator avoidance, with small fish using the slow velocity nearshore margin areas. They noted that chinook in the Lewis River began to move progressively offshore into faster water and established territorial feeding stations along the river bottom as they increased in size beyond 50 mm. For information on the vertical and diel distribution of ocean-type chinook migrants, see the discussion following the species life-history sections.

Ocean-type chinook migrants actively feed and grow during their outmigration through the mid- Columbia River reservoirs. Studies have shown that their diet consists primarily of aquatic insects, with minor amounts of zooplankton. Becker (1970) found that 81 percent of food items in ocean-type chinook in the Hanford Reach of the mid-Columbia River, in April through June, consisted of Chironomidae spp., followed in importance by Trichoptera spp. and Hemiptera spp.,

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-8 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources with minor amounts of Copepoda and Amphipoda. Dauble et al. (1980) also found that ocean- type chinook migrants in the Hanford Reach consumed primarily Chironomidae in April and May and Trichoptera spp. (80 percent by volume) in June and July. Daphnia spp. and terrestrial Homoptera spp. were also important food items. Newly emerged juveniles (34 to 45 mm) fed exclusively on Chironomids, while the largest juveniles (66 to 81 mm) fed more heavily on Trichoptera and zooplankton. In March the diet consisted of Chironomids, and shifted to Trichoptera and zooplankton by July. Although Cyclops spp. dominated zooplankton drift, fish fed almost exclusively on the less abundant Daphnia (Dauble et al. 1980).

Rondorf et al. (1990) found that ocean-type chinook migrants in McNary pool fed primarily on Diptera, Trichoptera, Daphnia, Corophium, Hymenoptera and Homoptera. Trichoptera disappeared from the diet in limnetic sections of the reservoir. Zooplankton were the dominant food item in embayments, while insects were dominant in littoral and limnetic areas. Preference was shown for terrestrial insects in littoral areas and embayments. These data also support the conclusion that aquatic insects comprise the primary prey items for juvenile salmonids in the mid-Columbia reach due to limited reservoir productivity (see Section 3.2.2).

The late spring and summer components of the Columbia River adult chinook populations were the most abundant, and also the most heavily fished (Chapman et al. 1994a; 1995a). Chapman (1986) estimated historic peak runs of about 2,000,000 adult summer chinook entering the Columbia River annually in 1881 to 1885. In comparison, during 1983 to 1992 the estimated run size averaged 82,580 adults (Chapman et al. 1994a). Escapement estimates at Rock Island Dam from 1933 through 1942 averaged 5,658 adults and jacks. Since 1960, the number of summer and fall chinook salmon passing Priest Rapids Dam has fluctuated from 13,000 to 50,000 adults. Waknitz, et al (1995) determined that the mid-Columbia summer/fall chinook ESU was not in danger of extinction or likely to become so in the future. On March 9, 1998, the NMFS confirmed this and found that summer/fall chinook ESU was not in danger of extinction, nor likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future, and concluded that their listing under the ESA was not warranted. (63 FR 11482).

Hatchery production of summer chinook occurs at the Wells, Eastbank and Rocky Reach/Turtle Rock hatcheries in the mid-Columbia. Fall chinook above McNary Dam are reared at Priest Rapids and Rocky Reach hatcheries (BPA et al. 1994a). Hatcheries have only supplemented the total summer and fall chinook runs. Chapman et al. (1994a) estimate that about 6 percent of the summer and fall run fish are of hatchery origin. Naturally produced fish comprise the majority of adults returning to the mid-Columbia reach (Chapman et al. 1994a). Hatchery releases of ocean- type chinook juveniles into the mid-Columbia in 1993 were 1,800,000 and 8,858,000, respectively (BPA et al. 1994a; FPC 1994).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-9 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Summer Steelhead Adult summer steelhead enter the Columbia River during March through October, and peak migration occurs from late June through early September (CBFWA 1990). Adult steelhead migration is much more protracted than that of other anadromous salmonids in the Columbia River. Most adults pass through the mid-Columbia reach from June through late September, although some adults arrive much later at the upstream dams (Peven 1992). Spawning occurs the following year during March through July (Peven 1992; CBFWA 1990). The Wenatchee, Entiat, Methow and Okanogan Rivers support naturally spawning steelhead populations (Peven 1992). Unlike other anadromous salmonids, all steelhead do not die after spawning, but may return to the ocean. An individual steelhead may spawn more than once during its lifetime or may spawn only once and die depending on the condition of the fish after spawning (Chapman et al. 1994b), but repeat spawning is rare for mid-Columbia River steelhead (21 percent or less, Brown, 1995).

In the Columbia River basin, steelhead juveniles generally emerge from the gravel from July through September. After emergence, juveniles move downstream into overwintering habitats (Chapman et al. 1994b). Most parr rear in freshwater for two to three years, but the duration of freshwater residence can range from one to seven years (CBFWA 1990; Peven 1992). Peven et al. (1994) found that about 90 percent of wild steelhead juveniles in samples taken at Rock Island and Rocky Reach dams were two- and three-winter residents (equally the most common age groups). Juveniles that had spent one, or from four to seven winters in freshwater accounted for about 10 percent of juveniles sampled. Wild steelhead juveniles emigrate during the spring, passing mid-Columbia dams from April through June (Chapman et al. 1994b). In the mid- Columbia basin, naturally produced steelhead juveniles sampled at Rock Island Dam average between 163 to 188 mm long from 1986 through 1994 (Chapman et al. 1994b). Hatchery produced steelhead juveniles passing Rock Island average about 200 mm in length although the average size varies among the months sampled (Peven 1992; Fielder and Peven 1986).

Limited information is available about the feeding habits of steelhead juveniles in the mid- Columbia River reach. Steelhead juveniles in Lower Granite reservoir on the Snake River fed primarily on Chironomidae, and also took minor amounts of Homoptera, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera and Plecoptera (Chandler, J., Idaho Power Co., unpublished data). Of over 100 stomachs examined, only two contained an unidentified fish. It may be reasonable to assume the dietary behavior of steelhead juveniles is the Snake River reservoirs is typical of steelhead juveniles in the mid-Columbia reach.

Chapman (1986) estimated that pre-dam runs of steelhead entering the Columbia River ranged from 449,000 to 554,000. Since 1938, escapement of steelhead to the Columbia River mouth reached a high of 474,000 in 1986 and a low of 105,000 in 1975. Escapement has averaged 292,000 adults since 1990 (WDFW and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [ODFW] 1994). Between 1933 and 1959, adult steelhead counted at Rock Island Dam averaged 2,600 to 3,700. In the 1960s, adult counts increased at Priest Rapids Dam with the beginning of hatchery releases and peaked at 34,000 in 1985. From 1989 to 1995 an average of 9,734 steelhead passed Priest Rapids Dam (Brown 1995).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-10 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Most steelhead adults returning to the mid-Columbia reach are of hatchery origin (Peven 1992). Naturally produced adult steelhead passing Wells Dam during 1982-1993 comprised about 10 percent of the steelhead counted (range 3 to 13 percent) (Chapman et al. 1994b). Naturally produced steelhead accounted for an average of 19 percent of the adults counted from 1986 to 1995 at Priest Rapids Dam (range 10 to 29 percent) (Brown 1995). Naturally produced juveniles averaged 24 percent of steelhead sampled at Rock Island during 1986 to 1994, (range 15 to 38 percent) (Chapman et al. 1994b). Total releases of hatchery produced steelhead juveniles to the mid-Columbia reach from 1982 to 1993 ranged from approximately 700,000 to 1.2 million per year (Brown 1995). Current production continues at a proposed level of about 1 million fish.

Coho Salmon Historically, coho salmon were present in both the Columbia and Snake River basins. Between 1938 and 1942, counts of coho passing Bonneville Dam ranged between 12,000 and 18,000 fish. After this period, the coho salmon run declined substantially due primarily to overharvest (Johnson et al. 1991), with counts ranging from 2,700 to 6,100 between 1954 and 1966. Counts of adult coho salmon passing Bonneville Dam have increased substantially since the late 1960s due to hatchery production. During the 1980s, counts of coho salmon passing Bonneville Dam ranged from 15,000 to 131,000. Wild coho salmon are considered extinct in the upper Columbia River regions (above Priest Rapids Dam) since the 1940s (Mullan 1984) but are still present in a few tributaries in the lower portions of the Columbia Basin (CBFWA 1990). Coho have not been observed spawning in any area upstream of the Project (Chelan PUD 1991c). The State of Washington does not currently recognize any natural coho stock in the mid-Columbia reach (WDF et al. 1993).

Sockeye Salmon Sockeye salmon typically use lakes as rearing areas for one to two years, or more, before migrating to the ocean (Chapman et al. 1995b). Mid-Columbia River sockeye salmon spend two to three years in the ocean, most frequently returning to spawn in their third or fourth year of life (Mullan 1986; Chapman et al. 1995b). Adult sockeye salmon start entering the Columbia River in May and reach dams on the mid-Columbia during late May through mid-August (BPA et al. 1994a). Adults reach natural lakes in the Okanogan and Wenatchee watersheds during July through September and spawn during September to October (Mullan 1986; Chapman al. 1995b).

Sockeye fry emerge in March and April in the Okanogan system and in April in the Little Wenatchee and White Rivers (Allen and Meekin 1973). Immediately after emergence, fry move into freshwater lakes (Chapman et al. 1995b; CBFWA 1990). Newly emerged fry feed primarily in the littoral zone of lakes on Chironomidae larvae, and gradually shift to pelagic feeding on zooplankton, especially Bosmina, Cyclops and Daphnia spp., as they mature (Groot and Margolis 1991). Sockeye salmon migrate as smolts after spending one to three years in their nursery lakes, passing mid-Columbia dams during mid-April through late May (Chapman et al. 1995b). The mean size of wild sockeye salmon outmigrating past Rock Island have been reported to range from about 95 to 154 mm (Peven 1992); hatchery produced sockeye salmon are similarly sized.

Sockeye juveniles outmigrate from lakes during hours of low light (sunset to early morning) (Kerns 1961; Burgner 1962; Groot 1965; Hartman et al. 1967; Chapman et al. 1995b).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-11 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Approximately 90 percent of movement occurs in a 4- to 5-hour period around midnight. Daily peaks have been observed to shift as seasonal changes affect the onset of darkness (Kerns 1961; Hartman et al. 1967), and according to degree of cloud cover (Foerster 1968) and turbidity (Hartman et al. 1967).

Sockeye juveniles actively migrate during their downstream migration, similar to yearling chinook and steelhead (Chapman et al. 1995b). Rates of travel up to 25 miles per day have been measured from the mid-Columbia River to Bonneville Dam before most dams were in place (Chapman et al. 1995b). Limited information is available regarding the feeding habits of sockeye juveniles in the mainstem reservoirs of the Columbia River basin. It is expected that they feed on Chironomidae larvae and zooplankton such as Cladocera during their outmigration.

The abundance of natural stocks of sockeye salmon fluctuates radically in a cyclical dominance pattern of four years duration (Larkin 1988). The largest escapement of sockeye to the Columbia River mouth since 1938 was 335,000 in 1947. Estimates of run size were generally high during the 1950s, often exceeding 200,000 fish, but were generally lower during 1973 to 1983, with ranges from 18,000 to 100,000 adults. The average escapement of sockeye past Priest Rapids Dam from 1989 to 1993 was 65,340 (PSMFC 1993).

Gustafson, et al. (1997) determined that sockeye originating upstream of Rock Island Dam were not presently at risk of extinction. In recent years, the majority of sockeye production in the mid- Columbia reach have returned to the Okanogan River system. However, in many years, the Wenatchee River component is greater than 50 percent of the total number of sockeye adults passing Rock Island Dam (Chapman et al. 1995b). Escapement to the Wenatchee River has ranged from a low of 6,591 in 1978 to a high of 64,614 in 1977 (mean of 24,042). Escapement to the Okanogan River has ranged from a low of 1,662 in 1994 to a high of 127,857 in 1966 (mean of 36,619) (Peven 1992). Hatchery production of sockeye salmon is currently conducted at the Eastbank and Cassimer Bar hatcheries. Releases of juvenile sockeye salmon from mid-Columbia hatcheries totaled 355,000 in 1993 (FPC 1994).

Additional information regarding species present in the Project area can be documented from the non-target catch during the Northern pikeminnow population reduction program (West 1996, 1997, 1998). This program has been conducted from 1994 through 1998 during the spring and summer juvenile salmonid migration seasons. Non-target species caught during the program are shown in Table E3-2.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-12 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-2: Type and Number of Non-Target Fish Species Caught at Rocky Reach Dam During the Northern Pikeminnow Removal Program Species 1996 1997 1998 Total White Sturgeon 6 2 1 9 (Acipenser transmontanus) Chinook salmon 3 0 0 3 (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Steelhead 6 2 0 8 (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Rainbow trout 0 0 1 1 (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Bull trout 4 3 0 7 (Salvelinus confluentus) Smallmouth bass 1 0 0 1 (Micropterus dolomieui) Whitefish 2 0 0 2 (Prosopium spp.) Chiselmouth 4 2 11 17 (Acrocheilus alutaceus) Peamouth 5 4 3 12 (Mylocheilus caurinus) Chub 9 3 0 12 (Acrocheilus spp. or Mylocheilus spp.) Suckers 7 3 2 12 (Catostomus sp.) Mottled sculpin 0 0 7 7 (Cottus bairdi) Burbot 1 2 0 3 (Lota lota) Walleye 11 8 5 24 (Stizostedion vitreum)

E3.2.3.4 Any Species Listed as Threatened or Endangered by the US Fish & Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service

E3.2.3.4.1 US Fish and Wildlife Service Bald Eagles Bald eagles are the only terrestrial species listed by the USFWS as endangered or threatened along the reservoir. Bald eagles are listed as threatened in Washington state. Because Endangered Species consultation must be addressed, Chelan PUD has conducted four winters of bald eagle surveys along the reservoir to aid in the biological assessment of bald eagles in relation to this Project. These surveys document bald eagle abundance, distribution, age composition, and perch site use.

Bull Trout The USFWS listed the Upper Columbia River Bull trout ESU as threatened by USFWS on June 10, 1998 (63 FR 111- pp. 31647-74).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-13 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

E3.2.3.4.2 National Marine Fisheries Service Upper Columbia River Summer Steelhead The NMFS listed the upper Columbia River steelhead ESU as an endangered species under the ESA on August 18, 1997. (62 FR 43937)

Upper Columbia River Spring Chinook Salmon The NMFS listed the upper Columbia River spring chinook salmon ESU as an endangered species under the ESA on March 16, 1999.

E3.2.3.5 Current Operational Measures Relevant to Fishery Resources; e.g., Minimum Flows, Reservoir Level Restrictions, Ramping Rates Adult Fish Passage Operations The Rocky Reach Dam adult fishway is operated all year, except during the annual maintenance period, following criteria similar to those used at federal dams on the lower Columbia and Snake Rivers. For the purpose of operation and maintenance, the period from April through November is the primary passage period for adult salmonids at Rocky Reach. Between December and March, when adult salmonid migration activities are minimal, the fishway is taken out of service for annual inspection and routine maintenance. The fishway is equipped with a counting station for monitoring adult passage at Rocky Reach Dam. The station is operated from April 15 through November 15 each year, collecting information on adult chinook, steelhead, coho and sockeye passage. All other species of fish passing through the fishway are also counted.

Criteria for operating the fishway include specifications for water depth, head differential and entrance gate settings. Current criteria call for five gate entrances to be open at all times: two at the right powerhouse entrance, two at the left powerhouse entrance and one at the spillway entrance. In addition, six of the orifice entrances into the fish collection channel are permanently open. Chelan PUD also modifies turbine operations in an effort to improve adult fish passage at the left powerhouse entrance. During daylight hours from May 1 to October 31 of each year, loading to Turbine Unit 11 is the first to be reduced or discontinued whenever the powerhouse is not at full capacity.

When daytime spill operations are required at the dam during the adult migration period, Chelan PUD follows spillway operating criteria that shape the spillway discharge to avoid occluding attraction to adult fishway entrances. Generally, priority is given to spill gates 6 and 8 for low flow events, and during high flow events a crowned spill pattern is produced using spill gates 2 to 8. Spill gates 1 and 9 to 12 are not used unless very high spill volumes exist. During those periods when both adult and juvenile passage criteria are in effect, the juvenile criteria have precedence (Chelan PUD 1994).

Juvenile Fish Passage Operations Current operations for juvenile anadromous salmonid passage at Rocky Reach Dam are conducted using the now expired Fourth Interim Stipulation as a guide and involve a spill program encompassing major portions of the spring and summer migration periods. Spill during the spring migration period typically begins around the third week of April and is set at 15 percent of the

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-14 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources daily average flow for a 30-day period. The summer spill program entails the release of 10 percent of the daily average flow for 34 days between June 15 and August 15.

Designated Spill Representatives of the fishery agencies, tribes and the Chelan PUD determine the beginning date of spring spill. The Designated Spill Representatives also have the authority to call for a six-day extension of the spring spill program if necessary to encompass 90 percent of the Okanogan River juvenile sockeye migration.

The summer spill program is typically conducted four nights per week, on Tuesdays through Fridays. However, the Designated Spill Representatives have the authority to arrange the days of spill differently to encompass periods when large numbers of migrants are present. Fish passage spill during both spring and summer periods had been typically conducted using spill gates 3 and 4, however, recent studies to reduce dissolved gas entrainment have demonstrated that spreading spill across seven gates reduces dissolved gas entrainment without reducing fish passage efficiency (Steig, et al 1996-1997). Current spill operations balance the requirements of juvenile passage efficiency, dissolved gas abatement, and adult passage.

Two programs to enhance juvenile fish passage were conducted during 1995 as specified in the Third and Fourth Revised Interim Stipulations (FERC 1993, 1996). One was the operation and evaluation of a prototype juvenile surface collection bypass system between April 15 and August 15. The second is a predator control program using concentrated angling efforts to reduce Northern pikeminnow numbers in the tailrace area of Rocky Reach Dam.

Spill Management for Dissolved Gas Control Chelan PUD participates in a basin-wide dissolved gas control program, which at times requires spill transfers to manage dissolved gas levels in the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Spill management requests are placed by the Fish Passage Center (FPC) and are based in part on dissolved gas monitoring data and the observed condition of migrant juveniles and adults, along with juvenile migration monitoring data. Total dissolved gas (TDG) monitoring by Chelan PUD at the Rocky Reach forebay and tailrace has been reported hourly from April through the end of August. Related data reported at the same time include spill volume, total project flow, temperature and barometric pressures. Data are sent hourly to the U. S. Army Corp of Engineers Reservoir Control Center via the Columbia River Operational Hydromet Management System (CROHMS) network.

E3.2.4 Fisheries Management Framework

E3.2.4.1 Identification of State and Federal Agencies and Indian Tribes with Responsibility for Management of Fishery Resources in the Waters of the Project and Its Vicinity

E3.2.4.1.1 Federal Management Chelan PUD is a signatory to the Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation (FERC 1996). The other signatories to the Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation are the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), part of which was formerly called the Department of Game (WDG), and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-15 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Reservation. The Yakama Indian Nation and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation did not oppose the revised stipulation. The Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation governs juvenile fish bypass studies, interim protection through the use of spill, interim hatchery compensation and the conduct of other studies related to anadromous fish protection. The Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation expired December 31, 1998. Federal, state, and local management objectives for fisheries resources relating to the operation of the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project are summarized in the following sections.

US Fish and Wildlife Service The responsibility of the FWS is to co-manage species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as threatened or endangered. The ESA requires consultation with the FWS regarding actions that may affect threatened or endangered species. The FWS primary responsibility in the Project area is the co-management of Bull trout, listed under the ESA in June 1998, and bald eagles. To date, the FWS has not developed specific goals and objectives regarding a Bull trout recovery plan for the Upper Columbia River Basin. Management goals and objectives of the FWS also include reservation and enhancement of the nation’s fish and wildlife resources, and assurance that fish and wildlife will be given equal consideration with the Rocky Reach Project’s purpose (April 23, 1998, Lake Chelan Fish Group Meeting).

National Marine Fisheries Service A primary responsibility for the NMFS is to manage anadromous salmonids in the Rocky Reach Project area. Specific NMFS goals and objectives relative to the Rocky Reach Project are protection of habitat for spawning, incubation and rearing of chinook and sockeye salmon and steelhead in the mainstem mid-Columbia river and associated tributaries, and improving adult and juvenile anadromous fish migration survival past the Project (March 25, 1999, Rocky Reach Relicensing Kick-off Meeting). However, all parties are still following the terms of this agreement pending finalization of the mid-Columbia Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP).

US Forest Service The USFS provides leadership in the protection, management, and use of the Nation’s forests, rangeland, and aquatic ecosystems. Goals and objectives include implementation of management plans to ensure sustainable ecosystems and provide recreation, water, timber, minerals, fish and wildlife, wilderness, and aesthetics for current and future generations (April 23, 1998, Lake Chelan Fish Group Meeting).

Bureau of Land Management The Bureau of Land Management administers public lands within a framework of numerous laws. The most comprehensive of these is the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). All Bureau policies, procedures and management actions must be consistent with FLPMA and the other laws that govern use of the public lands. It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-16 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Bureau of Indian Affairs The BIA strives to meet and maintain a holistic management goal to protect all resources, nature, and human quality of life. Goals and objectives relative to the Rocky Reach Project are to maintain a trust responsibility to the Tribes for the trust lands involved. This trust is a blanket trust for fish, human and cultural resources (March 25, 1999, Rocky Reach Relicensing Kick-off Meeting).

Colville, Yakama and Umatilla Tribes The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Yakama Indian Nation are very interested in cultural resource management at the Rocky Reach Project area. Chelan PUD will work closely with the tribes in assessing and scoping cultural resources studies during relicensing.

E3.2.4.1.2 State Management Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife The WDFW is the state entity responsible for managing fisheries resources in the Rocky Reach Project area. Management goals and objectives are to preserve, protect, and perpetuate diverse fish and wildlife resources and habitat (April 23, 1998, Fish Group Meeting). The WDFW regulates fisheries resources in the Rocky Reach Project area through imposing species catch restrictions, catch limits, minimum size limits, and seasons. Chelan PUD, through the Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation, provides funding and hatchery capacity at Rocky Reach, Turtle Rock, and Chelan Falls facilities for WDFW activities in the following areas:

• Rear up to 54,000 pounds of summer/fall chinook salmon annually. Summer/fall chinook production is split between subyearling releases at 50 fish per pound (29,400 pounds) and yearling releases at 10 fish per pound (25,000 pounds). The primary source of broodstock is the Wells Hatchery channel, supplemented with Priest Rapids Hatchery in case of insufficient egg take at Wells. • Rear up to 30,000 pounds of steelhead annually. The primary source of broodstock is the west fishway at Wells Dam, supplemented with steelhead collected at Dryden Dam trapping facilities on the Wenatchee River. • Rainbow trout stocking program—WDFW hatchery programs rearing and releasing 90,000 catchable size rainbow trout into area lakes to enhance sport fishing opportunities. Chelan PUD funding of these measures is to be maintained throughout the term of the Project license.

Washington Department of Ecology Goals and objectives of the WDE are to protect, preserve, and enhance Washington’s environment, and promote wise management of air, land, and water resources. Specific goals relative to the Rocky Reach Project are to maintain and preserve water quality and quantity (March 25, 1999, Rocky Reach Relicensing Kick-off Meeting). Chelan PUD must satisfy the requirements of Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1341(a). The certification process in Washington is administered by the Department of Ecology pursuant to state statutes codified as sections 90.48.260-262 of the Revised Code of Washington and administrative regulations codified in chapter 173-225 of the Washington Administrative Code.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-17 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

E3.2.4.1.3 County Management Chelan County does not have any direct fisheries resource management responsibility in the Rocky Reach Project area. Chelan County is responsible for management on their respective land holdings.

E3.2.4.2 Summary of Any Existing Resource Management Plans Relevant to the Fishery Resources of the Project and Its Vicinity Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation The Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation reflects the agreement of Chelan PUD and certain Joint Fisheries Parties (JFP) with respect to juvenile bypass studies, interim protection through the use of spill, interim hatchery compensation, and the conduct of other studies related to anadromous fish protection.

Signatories of the Stipulation include the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation. The Yakama Indian Nation and the confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation do not oppose the revised stipulation.

The main goal of the Stipulation was to develop a safe (less than 2 percent mortality) juvenile bypass system capable of bypassing 80 percent of juvenile migrating salmon and steelhead over 90 percent of the migration period. Passage efficiency was to be used in developing a survival based performance standard for the Rocky Reach Project. In an effort to achieve the goal of this Stipulation, Chelan PUD has performed, and is continuing to perform, the following:

Juvenile Bypass Studies Chelan PUD has been testing a prototype surface collector since 1995. Various modifications to the surface collector have been made following each year of testing to improve juvenile collection efficiency. Examples of modifications include the addition of another entrance (SC2), adjustable width guide wall on SC2, floor modifications, installation of turbine bulkheads, and modifications to the first entrance (SC1). In addition to the surface collector, turbine intake screens have been installed in Units 1, 2, and 3 to improve fish guidance efficiency (FGE) of juveniles attempting to pass the project through the powerhouse. Modeling has been and will continue to be conducted to determine the most suitable location in the tailrace for a juvenile outfall site for release of fish guided past the Project through the surface collector.

Interim Protection Spill Interim protection through the use of spill of downstream migrating juvenile salmon and steelhead has been and will continue to be provided while juvenile bypass facilities are being tested. Spill levels included in the Stipulation are:

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-18 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Spring Spill 15 percent of daily average flow for a 30-day period during the spring juvenile migration. Designated Representatives of the JFP and Chelan PUD determine the beginning spill date. An additional six days of spill at the 15 percent of daily average flow level can be provided to encompass 90 percent of the Okanogan River sockeye salmon migration, as determined by the JFP Designated Representatives.

Summer Spill 10 percent of daily average flow for a 34-day period between June 15 and August 15. Spill will normally occur four days per week, Tuesday through Friday, but can be adjusted by the JFP Designated Representatives if desired.

According to the 1998 Annual Report for Chelan PUD, the Rocky Reach Hydro Project spilled 15 percent of the daily average flow during a 36-day period in April and May, and 10 percent of the flow during a 34-day period over the summer months, to assist the downstream migration of juvenile salmon and steelhead. That was the equivalent of 186 million kilowatt hours of power.

Predator Control Program Chelan PUD has been and will continue to conduct a predator control program in an effort to reduce predation-related mortality of juvenile salmon and steelhead. Northern pikeminnow angling and gull hazing is conducted daily during the juvenile spring and summer migration periods to remove Northern pikeminnow from the Project area and reduce the number of avian predators from the tailrace. The efforts are designed to reduce predation in the Project area.

Interim Hatchery Compensation A component of the Stipulation is for Chelan PUD to provide funding and hatchery capacity at Rocky Reach, Turtle Rock, and Chelan Falls facilities. These facilities are to rear up to 54,000 pounds of summer/fall chinook salmon and 30,000 pounds of steelhead annually. Summer/fall chinook production is to be split between sub-yearling releases at 50 fish per pound, 29,400 pounds, and yearling releases at 10 fish per pound, 25,000 pounds. All steelhead are released as yearlings at six to eight fish per pound. Studies associated will hatchery evaluations and development of long-term goals are also included in the Stipulation.

Additional Studies As part of the Stipulation, Chelan PUD is responsible for funding and conducting studies to determine the relative change in mortality and injury rate of the new turbine runners being installed at the powerhouse. Additional studies regarding adult passage are also included in the Stipulation even though adult passage is not included within the jurisdiction of the Mid- Columbia proceeding.

The term of the Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation was September 1, 1995 through December 31, 1997. Although the Stipulation has expired, current operations are still being conducted per the terms and conditions of this Stipulation. Revision of this Stipulation has not occurred due to Chelan and Douglas PUD’s initiating preparation of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in 1994. The HCP is designed to supercede this Stipulation in addressing anadromous salmonid passage

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-19 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources issues at Wells, Rocky Reach, and Rock Island dams. Development of the HCP and the associated National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process is still in progress. One assurance sought by Chelan PUD in development of the HCP is to have it be included in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing process for Rocky Reach Dam.

E3.2.5 Description of the Results of Any Consultation with Applicable Agencies, Tribes, and the Public, Including Any Studies or Measures Recommended During Consultation History of Bypass System Development at Rocky Reach Dam Chelan PUD has developed and evaluated several juvenile bypass systems aimed at reducing the numbers of juvenile salmonids that pass through the Rocky Reach turbine units. Between 1980 and 1984, studies to help understand fish distribution and turbine hydraulics were performed to help develop potential bypass devices. These studies were conducted under the auspices of the 1979 interim Mid-Columbia Settlement Agreement. Guidance for continued evaluation of fish protection measures at Rocky Reach since 1985 has been directed by the Mid-Columbia Stipulation, and a series of subsequent interim stipulations (Chelan PUD 1991c).

The first potential fish bypass devices evaluated at Rocky Reach were a gatewell airlift, a forebay skimmer net, and turbine sluicing (Chelan PUD 1991c). None of these devices were determined to be safe or effective at passing large numbers of downstream juvenile migrants.

In 1985, a submerged travelling screen (STS) was installed and field-tested in one turbine intake. The prototype performed well mechanically, but fish guidance was substantially below the level expected from fish distributions. A total of eight configurations were tested varying in their STS deployment angles, presence or absence of a bulkhead which blocked an open area between the intake gateslot and the trashrack slot, and presence or absence of a perforated flow-reducing plate within the travelling screen. The greatest measured efficiency was 33 percent for spring chinook, the only species captured in sufficient numbers for a reliable determination of fish guidance efficiency (FGE) (Hays 1987).

Additional tests on the STS were conducted in 1986 through 1988. Prototype modifications evaluated during this period included the addition of a trashrack deflector and variations in the gap width between the top of the STS and the bottom of the vertical barrier screen (Steig et al. 1988). All configurations of the STS prototype failed to meet desired levels of fish guidance (Peven 1991c).

In 1989, the STS component of the prototype was replaced with a bar screen deflector (BSD). In 1989, juvenile fish were guided into the trashrack slot. The trashracks were moved in 1988 upstream of the curtain wall. Initial tests of the BSD were promising with FGEs in the vicinity of 40 to 50 percent, but by the end of the first year of evaluation they had dropped to lower than 10 percent (Peven 1991c). A substantial design modification was initiated in 1992 which relocated the BSD to the gatewell slot and added a roof seal at the trashrack slot. The FGE of the new configuration was monitored in 1992 and again in 1994, following design improvements. Results of the 1994 evaluation indicated an overall FGE of lower than 25 percent, with steelhead showing the best guidance efficiency averaging 40.2 percent and sockeye the lowest averaging 14.6 percent (Peven and Abbott 1994).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-20 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Chelan PUD tested a prototype surface collector in 1995 to determine if the concept was feasible for Rocky Reach. It consisted of an opening that was 15 feet wide and 57 feet deep. The opening had guide walls that extended from each side of the entrance to the powerhouse and forebay wall. Approximately 2,000 cfs of water entered the collector, while the final bypass pipe emptied 20 cfs and the fish into the tailrace near the discharge of Unit 3. Approximately 900,000 juvenile fish passed through the prototype, and the Chelan PUD concluded that the concept of surface collection was feasible at Rocky Reach. In addition, 229,000 fish were collected from turbine Unit 1 gatewells where prototype turbine intake screens operated (Peven et al. 1995). Originally intended to provide only a small interim increment in survival, the apparent improvement in collection efficiency of the turbine intake screens since installation of the surface collector has lead the Chelan PUD to reevaluate turbine intake screens. Chelan PUD has since incorporated turbine intake screens into the planning for final design of a hybrid bypass system, using both surface collector entrances and turbine intake screens.

In 1996, the floor of the first prototype (SC1) was extended, and a sloping wall was added upstream of the entrance. These structural changes were made in an effort to improve the hydraulics of forebay currents leading into the SC1 opening, and subsequent fish passage efficiency. Observations in 1996 suggested that SC1 was less effective than in 1995. Hydraulic modeling showed that in 1995, water immediately upstream of the SC1 entrance flowed directly into it, while in 1996, flow was skewed across the face of the entrance.

The total flow into the surface collector was increased and the flow at the rear of the primary screens increased from 100 cfs to 500 cfs. These modifications successfully improved fish passage efficiency. In addition, the turbine intake screen system in turbine Unit 1 was equipped with a weir and pipe collection and bypass system, which achieved rapid passage efficiencies for fish moving from the gatewells into and through the bypass system.

Based on the results from the 1996 study, the extended floor and sloping wall were removed to improve the forebay currents immediately upstream of the entrance for testing in 1997. A weir- pipe system was installed in the Unit 1 bypass pipe that carries fish to the tailrace to transport fish guided by the diversion screens. The concept of a higher velocity entrance was also tested in 1997 by installing a removable steel structure in front of the opening. Results were more fish passed all the way through the system when the slot-narrowing device was present.

Another surface collector (SC2) upstream of units 2 and 3 was constructed and tested in 1998. Based on test results, it was concluded that hydraulic conditions in front of the SC2 entrance were unattractive to juvenile salmonids approaching the structure (Mosey et al. 1999). Upwelling and direction of the flow vector may have contributed to the reduced number of fish entering SC2. Diversion screens and a second weir-pipe system was installed in Unit 2. Fish guided by screens in Unit 2 entered the same transport pipe that collected fish from the Unit 1 gatewell collection system and SC2. A high velocity entrance at SC1 was tested and results showed no significant difference in fish passage efficiency for either the high or low velocity entrances, although fish passage efficiency was higher for steelhead and chinook with the low velocity entrance in place.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-21 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Based on the results of the radio telemetry and PIT tag studies during 1998, Chelan PUD reconfigured the Rocky Reach surface collector for testing in 1999 as follows: 1) modified the surface collector to evaluate the performance of the low velocity entrance only at SC1; 2) installed an articulating wall at the entrance of SC2; 3) installed bulkheads in all three bays of Unit 4 down to 80 ft below the surface; 4) tested a low and high velocity entrance at SC2; and 5) improved the hydraulics of the diversion screens and/or the vertical barrier screens in units 1 and 2.

System-Wide Integration of Operations To make optimum use of the system resources, a central control station, located in Ephrata, Washington, coordinates operations of the seven mid-Columbia Projects from Grand Coulee Dam to Priest Rapids Dam. Thus, these projects are generating power as though they were owned and operated by a single entity. The general objective of the centralized coordination is to maximize energy production while enhancing irrigation, recreation, and other nonpower uses of the river by minimizing reservoir level fluctuations (GCPUD 1980).

The timing of flows from Grand Coulee Dam through the mid-Columbia reach is controlled by the Canadian Treaty, the related Non-Treaty Storage Agreement (NTSA), the Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement (PNCA) and the Hourly Coordination Agreement. Since 1982, when the Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) established its first Fish and Wildlife Program, the Water Budget and other Council programs have played an increasing role in controlling flows to the mid-Columbia reach. In addition, the ESA listings of Snake River chinook and sockeye salmon, and the Kootenai River white sturgeon, have had a profound effect on mid-Columbia flows. The general objective of Hourly Coordination Agreeement is to optimize power production while at the same time enhancing non-power uses of the mid-Columbia River resources.

Project Operations The main factor governing total plant discharges at Rocky Reach Dam is releases from upstream Projects. Discharges are normally adjusted to match the shape of the power demand, taking into account discharge and spill requirements for other purposes such as fish passage, flood control and recreation. At Rocky Reach, power demands can be significantly higher during the day than they are at night. Consequently, there is a high likelihood that several of the 11 turbines will go through one or more on-off cycles during a typical 24-hour period. Units 1 to 7, which are adjustable-blade Kaplan turbines and are efficient over a wide range of operation, have first-on unit priority and are started and loaded first. If additional generation is needed, the fixed-blade propeller turbines in Units 8 to 11 are brought on and loaded at their most efficient setting for the given head conditions. The first seven units do all the “load following” to meet load fluctuations because of their wide range of efficient operation (Chelan PUD 1991c). Following completion of turbine replacement, all units will follow load.

Rocky Reach Dam has a normal forebay operating range of 4.0 feet, between elevations 707.0 and 703.0. During flood conditions, the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) may direct the Chelan PUD to surcharge the reservoir an additional 3.0 feet to elevation 710.0. Headwater

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-22 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources duration curves derived since the onset of the Hourly Coordination Agreement indicate that the Project operates in the top foot of its normal maximum level 78 percent of the time. The current average headwater elevation is approximately 706.5 (Chelan PUD 1991c).

The tailwater elevation at Rocky Reach Dam is impacted by encroachment from the reservoir of Rock Island Dam. In 1978, the forebay elevation at Rock Island Dam was raised six feet as part of its Second Powerhouse Project, which resulted in a loss of about 1.6 feet of operating head for the Rocky Reach turbines. From a performance standpoint, the Rocky Reach turbines now operate at slightly decreased efficiency compared to design conditions. However, since the change in conditions was so small, it is possible to use the same turbine performance curves that were developed for the original Rocky Reach Project, and it has not been necessary to re-rate the turbines because of the head loss (Chelan PUD 1991c).

Rocky Reach Dam has a total maximum turbine discharge capacity of 196,000 cfs. On occasions when river flows at Rocky Reach exceed the turbine discharge capacity, plus any additional nonpower needs for discharge, it becomes necessary to provide forced spill. However, forced spill events have decreased considerably since development of Canadian storage facilities in the mid-1970s. Spill for juvenile fish passage is scheduled and provided independent of reservoir conditions.

Fish Production Facilities The original FERC license for the Rocky Reach Project has provisions requiring the Chelan PUD to construct, operate and maintain facilities to conserve fish and wildlife resources. Consequently, the Chelan PUD entered into agreements with both the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) and the Washington Department of Game (WDG), now merged and called the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), to develop facilities and programs for fish production (Chelan PUD 1961, 1963a, 1963b, 1965). The facilities constructed as a result of these agreements include the Chelan hatchery, Rocky Reach hatchery and Turtle Rock satellite facility.

The hatchery-based compensation program specified in the Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation is being conducted as intended. Annual releases of yearling ocean-type chinook have averaged around 210,000 fish, slightly surpassing the goal of 200,000 fish. The 1993 release of 1,520,000 subyearling ocean-type chinook at 50 fish per pound nearly attained the goal of 1.6 million fish (Chapman et al. 1994a). The number of eggs available has limited production in the past. The five-year average of summer steelhead releases has been 217,300 smolts, slightly exceeding the goal of 195,000 fish (Wold 1993).

Limited data are available on survival to adulthood for fish released from the Rocky Reach mitigation programs. Coded wire tag recoveries from Rocky Reach ocean-type chinook yearlings released between 1982 and 1987 show an average survival of 1.49 percent, with a range from 0.07 percent to 3.62 percent (Chapman et al. 1994a). Steelhead released from the Chelan/Turtle Rock program are marked with a clipped adipose fin, as are all hatchery steelhead in the Columbia River basin, but there have not been any studies conducted to identify and determine the survival of fish raised specifically at this facility.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-23 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Chelan PUD, tribes and fishery agencies have agreed upon an artificial production program to mitigate for all spawning, rearing and passage effects on spring chinook and steelhead due to construction and operation of the Rocky Reach Project (FERC 1995; Chelan PUD 1961, 1963). According to the agreements, the loss of spawning and rearing habitat has been fully mitigated by hatchery production. Mitigation for losses of mainstem spawning habitat due to inundation by Rocky Reach reservoir has been prescribed in agreements dating to the construction of Rocky Reach Dam. For downstream migrant passage losses, Chelan PUD also funds hatchery-based compensation programs for steelhead as part of the original Project mitigation agreement and at the Rocky Reach hatchery complex for yearling summer chinook as prescribed in the Rocky Reach Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife operates the facilities under a formal agreement.

The Chelan hatchery is located next to the WDFW Chelan Trout hatchery, upstream of Rocky Reach Dam near the town of Chelan Falls. These facilities began operation in 1965. Current production facilities consist of 16 standard raceways, two portable vinyl raceways, eight intermediate raceways, one adult-holding raceway and a hatchery building with 80 troughs. The water supply for the site comes from three sources: a well field, springs and the Columbia River. Due to concerns over the presence of disease organisms, the Columbia River water supply is no longer used. Typical usage of the well and spring supplies totals about 6.7 cfs.

Rocky Reach hatchery and annex, located just downstream of Rocky Reach Dam, and the Turtle Rock facilities began operation in 1969-70. Current rearing facilities include eight vinyl raceways and an incubation building containing 22 full stacks, each stack containing 16 Heath-type tray incubators. The water supply consists of 6.2 cfs of pumped pathogen-free well water (Chapman et al. 1994a).

The Turtle Rock satellite facility is located on Turtle Rock Island two miles upstream from Rocky Reach Dam and is accessible only by boat. It was constructed in 1961 to function as a spawning channel, but its use in this capacity was discontinued in 1969 due to high pre-spawn loss of adults and poor survival of eggs and fry. In the early 1970s, the spawning channel was converted into four rearing ponds, each with a volume of about 40,000 cubic feet. About 11 cfs of water can be pumped to each pond directly from the Rocky Reach reservoir (Chapman et al. 1994a).

Interim Spill Program Chelan PUD has been implementing a spill program as determined under the Rocky Reach Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation. During the term of this Interim Protection Plan (IPP), Chelan PUD provided spill at a level of 15 percent of the daily average flow for a 30-day period during the juvenile spring chinook and steelhead outmigration. In addition, Chelan PUD provided up to six extra days of spring spill at the 15 percent of the daily average flow level if necessary to encompass 95 percent of the run of juvenile spring chinook and steelhead.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-24 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.2.6 Description of Any Studies Previously Conducted, Currently Under Way, or Proposed by Licensee for the Purpose of Improving Its Knowledge of the Existing Fisheries or the Project’s Potential Effects on Those Fisheries, Including an Explanation of Licensee’s Position on Any Studies Recommended During Informal Consultation:

E3.2.6.1 Studies Previously Conducted

E3.2.6.1.1 Reservoir Juvenile Bypass Systems Chelan PUD has been actively seeking the best measures to protect downstream migrants at Rocky Reach Dam since the 1970s. Between 1985 and 1994, Chelan PUD attempted to use rotating and passive diversion screens in the turbine intakes of Rocky Reach Dam to guide fish away from the turbines and around the dam. Prototype fish screens were tested annually, except in 1993, but none of the designs provided adequate fish guidance efficiencies (FGE) (Peven and Abbott 1994). As a result of the poor screen prototype performance, Chelan PUD pursued the concept of surface collection, which is based on the success of spillway baffles at Wells Dam. The feasibility of this bypass concept was further supported by the efficiency of fish passage through trash sluiceways at various dams on the Snake and lower Columbia rivers.

Chelan PUD tested a prototype surface collector in 1995 to determine if the concept was feasible for Rocky Reach. It consisted of an opening that was 15 feet wide and 57 feet deep. The opening had guide walls that extended from each side of the entrance to the powerhouse and forebay wall. The exact location of the entrance in the forebay was determined from observations made in a 1:30 scale hydraulic model. Approximately 2,000 cfs of water entered the collector, while the final bypass pipe emptied 20 cfs and the fish into the tailrace near the discharge of Unit 3. Fish that used the collector were counted by recording their passage with video cameras. Approximately 900,000 juvenile fish passed through the prototype, and Chelan PUD concluded that the concept of surface collection was feasible at Rocky Reach. In addition, 229,000 fish were collected from turbine unit 1 gatewells where prototype turbine intake screens operated (Peven et al. 1995). Originally intended to provide only a small interim increment in survival, the apparent improvement in collection efficiency of the turbine intake screens since installation of the surface collector has lead Chelan PUD to reevaluate turbine intake screens. Chelan PUD has since incorporated turbine intake screens into the planning for final design of a hybrid bypass system, using both surface collector entrances and turbine intake screens.

In 1996, modifications to the surface collector were made with the intent of improving flow characteristics and fish passage efficiency (FPE). However, FPE was less than expected. The surface collector passed 12 percent of spring chinook that were tagged with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags and released upstream of the powerhouse. In addition, turbine intake screens in turbine unit 1 collected 10 percent of spring chinook. The total spring chinook FPE from these systems was 22 percent (Peven et al. 1996).

Radio telemetry was used to determine how the migration route of juvenile spring chinook may have been influenced by forebay currents; most spring chinook, regardless of where they entered the forebay near the powerhouse, moved toward the powerhouse and eventually near the entrance

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-25 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources to the surface collector. However, in 1996 only about 41 percent of the radio-tagged spring chinook entering the collector proceeded through the entire system (Stevenson et al. 1997a). The remainder exited the collector and passed the dam via another route. Also, hydroacoustic monitoring determined that the direction of fish movement near the entrance of the surface collector was not oriented directly toward the entrance, as occurred in 1995 (Steig and Adeniyi 1997). Rather, the fish appeared to be moving past the entrance. Hydraulic model measurements determined that the 1996 modifications to the surface collector had the inadvertent effect of increasing the strength of eddy flows, skewing the flow direction to pass at an angle rather than aiming into the surface collector. This interfered with the potential attraction of fish into the surface collector.

In 1997, the surface collector was modified to address both the above problems. The large floor and sloping wall constructed in 1996 were removed. The primary screen area of the surface collector was redesigned to provide a continuous acceleration of flow from the entrance to the rear, with the original overflow weir replaced by a wider, deeper, curved channel where water velocity was greater than seven fps. The total flow into the surface collector was increased and the flow at the rear of the primary screens increased from 100 cfs to 500 cfs. These modifications successfully improved fish passage efficiency. The surface collector passed 23 percent of the PIT tagged spring chinook released in the forebay, while the turbine intake screens passed another 12 percent (Peven and Mosey 1998). Total collection efficiency of spring chinook that passed completely through the system to the tailrace was about 35 percent. Radio telemetry studies indicated that 89 percent of spring chinook entering the surface collector successfully passed through into the bypass system, thus total passage efficiency could be increased in future prototypes (Stevenson et al. 1997b). Hydroacoustic monitoring indicated that fish movement near the entrance was aligned in the direction of the entrance as was the case in 1995 (Steig et al. 1997). In addition, the turbine intake screen system in turbine Unit 1 was equipped with a weir and pipe collection and bypass system, which achieved rapid passage efficiencies for fish moving from the gatewells into and through the bypass system.

In 1998, a second entrance was added to the surface collector, turbine intake screens and gatewell collection system were added to the intakes of Unit 2, and an accelerating flow “trapping velocity” entrance modification was tested on the first surface collector entrance. The “trapping velocity” entrance concept did not improve the proportion of spring chinook and steelhead that passed through the system. The addition of the second collector entrance and the turbine intake screens in Unit 2 did improve spring chinook passage efficiency. The first surface collector entrance passed 25.3 percent of the PIT tagged yearling chinook released into the forebay, while the combination of the second surface collector entrance and the turbine intake screens in Units 1 and 2 passed 17.1 percent of the yearling chinook. The total collection efficiency of the system was 42.4 percent of PIT tagged yearling chinook and 54.3 percent of steelhead (Mosey et al. 1999). These PIT tag estimates of passage efficiency comport well with the passage efficiency of yearling chinook and steelhead monitored with radio telemetry. Antennas in the bypass pipes carrying fish to the tailrace showed passage efficiency was 41.3 percent for yearling chinook and 50.7 percent for steelhead, which were released four kilometers upstream of the dam and able to pass through the spillway, prior to reaching the forebay area affected by the surface collector. An

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-26 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources additional 8 percent of yearling chinook and 12.8 percent of radio tagged steelhead passed through the spillway (English et al. 1999).

Adult Reservoir Passage Once adult fish migrate upstream past a dam successfully, they must swim the reservoir. Reservoir induced changes, such as reduced water velocity and increased holding areas, may benefit migrating adults by decreasing travel times and adult energy consumption. Reservoir impoundments can also potentially result in increased wandering or straying (lost orientation) which could lead to higher pre-spawning mortality or reduced spawning success.

Decreased water velocity in reservoirs does not appear to slow upstream migration of adult salmon and steelhead. Prior to dam construction, chinook salmon migrated upstream in the Snake River at rates of 12 to 14 miles per day (Bjornn and Peery 1992). Steelhead migrated upstream in the unimpounded lower Columbia River at rates of 7 to 11 miles per day (Chapman et al. 1994b), and sockeye migrated at rates of 17 miles per day (Bjornn and Peery 1992).

Travel time of adult salmonids through both impounded and free-flowing reaches is relatively well known in the Columbia River basin. Adult salmonid travel rates range from fewer than 7 to 17 miles per day in unimpounded reaches of the lower Columbia and Snake Rivers. Travel times through Rocky Reach reservoir to Wells Dam of spring chinook, the summer and fall components of ocean-type chinook, and sockeye salmon have been investigated. Spring chinook took a median time of 22.7 hours to travel 42 miles to the Wells Dam tailrace, an average of 44 miles per day. Summer chinook took a median time of 25.8 hours to travel to the Wells Dam tailrace, an average of 39 miles per day. Fall chinook took a median time of 40.8 hours to travel to the Wells Dam tailrace, an average of 25 miles per day (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995). Adult sockeye radio-tagged by Swan et al. (1994) took a median of 1.5 days to travel 39 miles from release three miles above Rocky Reach Dam to the Wells Dam tailrace, an average of 26 miles per day. The travel rates for all races/demes of chinook and sockeye salmon from Rocky Reach Dam to the Wells Dam (one of the smallest reservoirs) tailrace are among the fastest observed in the Columbia River basin.

Similar results to those of Stuehrenberg et al. (1995), discussed previously, were obtained by Bjornn et al. (1995) in a companion study conducted on the four lower Snake River projects. Of the 1,171 adult spring chinook salmon and 844 adult summer steelhead tagged at John Day Dam for both studies, 339 spring chinook and 322 steelhead ascended Ice Harbor Dam, the lowermost dam on the Snake River. The estimated mortality of adults from below Ice Harbor Dam to the head of Lower Granite pool was 10 percent for chinook and 75 percent for steelhead in July and August, and 59 percent for steelhead in the fall (this includes unknown angler harvest and overwintering of adults in the four pools). Migration rates through the four pools ranged from 19 to 40 miles per day for spring chinook, and about 19 miles per day for steelhead. These compared to migration rates in the free-flowing river reaches above Lower Granite pool of 6 to 19 miles per day for spring chinook, and less than 7 miles per day for steelhead (Bjornn et al. 1995b).

Estimates of pre-spawning mortality have been used to assess past and present salmon and steelhead numbers, and to monitor the effectiveness of mitigation procedures. Estimates of pre-

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-27 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources spawning mortalities have been made based on comparing adult dam counts with estimates of spawning numbers in tributaries. Such inferences are inherently poor due to compounding errors associated with adult dam counts, redd counts, fish per redd assumptions, redd life and spawning that may take place in waters too deep to observe or in areas not surveyed. Natural mortality rates in rivers without dams and associated impoundments fluctuate annually in response to natural disturbances and population fluctuations, and therefore are difficult to assess using adult fish counts.

There is little evidence to suggest significant impacts on adult migration and pre-spawning mortality occur in the mid-Columbia River reach reservoir environment. Bjornn and Peery (1992) included information from mid-Columbia and other run-of-river reservoirs in their comprehensive review of the effects of reservoirs on adult salmon. Based on the available information, they concluded that run-of-river reservoirs had minimal effect on migrating adults. Adult salmonids generally pass through these reservoirs at similar or faster rates than they do in the naturally flowing river. Study results have not indicated any evidence of serious disorientation, wandering, straying or mortality associated with reservoir conditions.

Adult Spawning Chelan PUD (1991c) documented an average of 39 fall chinook redds in the lower Chelan River during aerial surveys from 1981 to 1990, and also found an occasional redd in the lower Entiat River from 1958 to 1960 in the area of backwater influence of the Rocky Reach pool. Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) last recorded seven fall chinook adults in the mouth of the Chelan River, four in the mouth of the Entiat and four in Rocky Reach reservoir in the vicinity of Rocky Reach Dam. It is possible some or all of these adults used the reservoir or backwater areas of the tributaries for spawning. However, the Entiat River has had little spawning activity from ocean- type chinook since the cessation of the hatchery program in the 1960s (Mullan 1987).

Fall ocean-type chinook spawning in the tailrace of Wells Dam has been documented (Giorgi 1992a). Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) last recorded 9 percent (26 of 279) of all radio-tagged adult fall chinook in the Wells tailrace area. Peven (1992) summarized aerial redd surveys for the area from Wells Dam to Rocky Reach Dam; redd counts are highly variable, and range from zero, in about half the years, to a maximum of 302 for the period from 1956 to 1991. Most of these redds are located from RM 514 to RM 515, which is in the area influenced by the Wells Dam tailrace. Aerial redd counts only identify redds when extensive deepwater spawning activity causes some fish to spawn in shallower parts of the gravel area. Most redds are placed too deeply to see (Hays, S., pers. comm., 20 July 1995).

Submerged Macrophytes Submergent aquatic plants are abundant in Rocky Reach reservoir, with 990 acres (10 percent) of the surface area of the reservoir in aquatic plant beds (Chelan PUD 1991c). The benthic community in these submerged macrophyte beds is increasing as riverine macrophytes effectively create their own substrate (Chelan PUD 1991c). Substrate is created by velocity reduction and subsequent particle trapping, as well as macrophyte residue, which encourages settling of organic-rich soils (Falter et al. 1991). Macrophyte species inhabiting the reservoir include Potamogeton crispus, Potamogeton pusillus and Elodea canadensis and Eurasian Water-milfoil

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-28 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

(Myriophyllum spicatum) (EWM) (Truscott 1991). The proportion of EWM has increased from 15 percent of the surface area covered by macrophytes in 1984 to 55 percent in 1991 (Truscott 1991). The potential reduction in habitat suitability for fishes that results from invasion by EWM has been well documented (Engel 1995). Macrophyte beds on the whole eventually increase the production of benthic food organisms, and provide surfaces where algae and invertebrates will live. They also provide cover for rearing juvenile salmonids and other fish species.

Predation Northern Pikeminnow Northern pikeminnow, a large, native predatory fish, are abundant in the Rocky Reach Project area and are a significant source of juvenile outmigrant mortality. In a 1993 survey conducted by the WDFW to assess the significance of predation, 864 Northern pikeminnow were captured over 12 days of sampling at Rocky Reach (Burley and Poe 1994). Northern pikeminnow accounted for 94 to 98 percent of the predators caught near Rocky Reach during the spring and summer sampling periods. Northern pikeminnow appeared to be more evenly distributed throughout the Project area at Rocky Reach than at the other mid-Columbia project sites. In the spring, 39 percent of the Northern pikeminnow sampled were caught in the tailrace, while the forebay and mid-reservoir areas each accounted for approximately 30 percent of the catch (Burley and Poe 1994). During the summer, more Northern pikeminnow were caught from the mid-reservoir (44 percent of the catch) than either the forebay (23 percent of the catch) or the tailrace (33 percent of the catch).

Northern pikeminnow caught in the Rocky Reach tailrace tended to be larger than pikeminnow captured in other project areas, averaging 331 mm in length compared to 305 mm in the forebay and 268 mm in the mid-reservoir. Larger Northern pikeminnow consume more and larger salmonids (Poe et al. 1991). Pikeminnow caught in the Rocky Reach tailrace are capable of consuming salmonid juveniles up to 155 mm long (Poe et al. 1991).

Even though similar numbers of pikeminnow were caught in mid-reservoir, forebay and tailrace areas during the 1993 WDFW survey, the density of pikeminnow was highest in the Rocky Reach tailrace. Northern pikeminnow prefer areas of slow water velocity, especially where low velocity borders high-velocity areas (Faler et al. 1988). Such sites are common in the Rocky Reach tailrace. Previous studies have documented high concentrations of Northern pikeminnow in dam tailraces on the lower Columbia, and attributed such concentration to the existence of low velocity refuges near sites which frequently contain large numbers of injured or disoriented prey fish (Beamesderfer and Rieman 1991; Poe et al. 1991). Tailrace angling programs initiated since 1994 have removed over 29,000 predator fish averaging 7,300 fish per year.

The predation index in the Rocky Reach forebay was low during the spring and high during the summer sampling period (Burley and Poe 1994). The Turtle Rock hatchery, located on an island immediately upstream of the Rocky Reach Dam, releases over one million ocean-type chinook annually. The presence of this hatchery, and protected backwater areas associated with Turtle Rock Island, provides favorable Northern pikeminnow habitat. Gut sample contents indicate that salmonids consistently account for approximately 10 to 20 percent of the Northern pikeminnow diet in the Rocky Reach forebay. While salmonids were consumed by Northern pikeminnow in

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-29 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources the forebays of the other mid-Columbia projects during the spring, only the Rocky Reach forebay showed evidence of continued predation throughout the summer for the four days sampled (Sauter et al. 1994).

Predation losses of juvenile salmonids to Northern pikeminnow in the main portion of Rocky Reach reservoir appear to be minimal. Rocky Reach had the second highest mid-reservoir pikeminnow abundance index (Loch et al. 1994); however, no salmonids were found in any of the gut content samples of Northern pikeminnow in either the spring or summer of 1993 (Sauter et al. 1994). The absence of salmonids in the gut contents of Northern pikeminnow taken from the mid-reservoir, as compared to the tailrace and forebay, suggests that juvenile salmon may be more adept at avoiding Northern pikeminnow away from the dam site.

An experimental Northern pikeminnow reduction program was initiated at Rocky Reach Dam in 1994 (Welsh et al. 1994). Northern pikeminnow were caught by hook-and-line in the dam tailrace area from May 16 through July 29, 1994. Program personnel removed 9,633 Northern pikeminnow from an estimated tailrace population of 32,000 during the sampling period. The Northern pikeminnow reduction program has been continued each year since 1994, and has been successful at removing Northern pikeminnow annually (range 4,643 – 9,633). This program has been conducted at Rocky Reach Dam each year since 1994. From 1994 to 1997, 29,354 Northern pikeminnow were removed from the Rocky Reach Project area (West 1999). In 1998, 7,403 Northern pikeminnow were removed from the Rocky Reach Project area (West 1999).

Smallmouth Bass Smallmouth bass were the least abundant predatory fish species captured at the Rocky Reach Project during the 1993 WDFW survey (Burley and Poe 1994). No smallmouth bass were taken at Rocky Reach over six days of sampling in the spring, and 16 were captured over six days in late June. The majority of the smallmouth bass taken at Rocky Reach were captured in the forebay. A small population of smallmouth bass is known to successfully complete their life cycle near the mouth of the Chelan River where water temperatures are elevated by the river inflow (Bennett 1991). This population is likely a source of the bass sampled in the Rocky Reach forebay and Wells tailrace upstream, as well as downstream drift and limited smallmouth fingerling releases from the Turtle Rock facility.

With the exception of the limited area near the mouth of the Chelan River, smallmouth bass are not known to reproduce in Rocky Reach reservoir probably due to water temperature limitations (Bennet 1991). Water temperatures in Rocky Reach reservoir are typically lower than those preferred by smallmouth bass. Preferred spawning temperatures for this species range from 16o to 18oC (Wydoski and Whitney 1979; Scott and Crossman 1973). Such temperatures consistently occur only in late summer in the Rocky Reach Project area. The onset of spring runoff during the time at which smallmouth bass normally spawn may also prevent successful reproduction by smallmouth bass in most of the reservoir. A rise in river flow and associated decrease in water temperature during spawning season will cause adult bass to abandon their nests. It has also been linked to the periodic total loss of annual production in the lower mid-Columbia reach (Zook 1979). Despite the lack of suitable spawning conditions in Rocky Reach reservoir, habitat for adult smallmouth bass is plentiful. Adult fish prefer rocky shoals and moderate depths (Scott and

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-30 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Crossman 1973), and are well adapted to low productivity, flowing water habitat such as that found in the reservoir. Additionally, stickleback and chubs are abundant prey sources.

Based on studies conducted in the lower Columbia River (Tabor et al. 1993), smallmouth bass appear to selectively feed on subyearling ocean-type chinook salmon. Ocean-type chinook outmigrate and rear along the reservoir shoreline and are preyed on by smallmouth bass which inhabit those areas. No data are available on the feeding habits of smallmouth bass in Rocky Reach reservoir, but because of the low numbers of smallmouth bass encountered there, predation by this species is likely minimal at present. If the number of adult smallmouth bass increases, this species could become a significant predator on ocean-type juvenile salmonids.

Walleye Walleye are piscivorous gamefish introduced into the upper Columbia basin to support recreational fishing. Twenty-four walleye were captured during the 1993 WDFW survey at Rocky Reach compared to 40 at Rock Island, 27 at Wells, 18 at Wanapum, and 13 at Priest Rapids. Four of the five walleye caught at Rocky Reach in the spring sampling period were taken in the tailrace (Burley and Poe 1994). A total of 19 walleye were caught at Rocky Reach during the summer, and 53 percent of these fish were taken from the tailrace. Concentrations of walleye observed in the tailraces of the mid-Columbia projects may represent either spawning runs (Brown and Williams 1985) or a feeding response to the concentrations of vulnerable salmonids in the tailrace (Burley and Poe 1994). No data are available describing the feeding habits of walleye in the tailraces of the mid-Columbia projects.

Despite the presence of walleye in the Rocky Reach tailrace, which may represent a spawning run, there is no direct evidence that walleye are successfully reproducing in the Rocky Reach Project area (Zook 1983). Bennett (1991) suggested that the two factors most limiting walleye recruitment in the mid-Columbia River were low turbidity and a lack of juvenile rearing habitat. Walleye require shallow, highly productive backwater areas for rearing. Because of the short water retention times and precipitous shorelines, Rocky Reach reservoir lacks sites with warm, quiet water and abundant plankton production (Brown and Williams 1985). Length distribution of sport-caught walleye in the mid-Columbia revealed an absence of immature fish, supporting the assumption that walleye in the mid-Columbia are recruitment-limited (Brown and Williams 1985). Walleye currently inhabiting Rocky Reach reservoir are believed to have originated upstream in Lake Roosevelt, and have been carried downstream during spring high flows (Zook 1983).

No specific dietary data were available for walleye captured in the Rocky Reach Project area during a 1993 National Biological Service (NBS) study (Sauter et al. 1994). A study of walleye food habits at the John Day reservoir in the lower Columbia River suggested that salmonids consistently accounted for only about 18 to 24 percent of the walleye diet there, even when juvenile outmigrants were abundant and highly concentrated in areas occupied by walleye (Poe et al. 1991).

The walleye’s apparent inability to reproduce successfully in the mid-Columbia precludes the threat of population explosion and serious salmonid predation (Brown and Williams 1985).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-31 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Should the population of walleye at Rocky Reach substantially increase, however, this species could impact survival of the juvenile outmigrants passing the Project.

In summary, because of their number and behavior of targeting outmigrating juvenile salmonids as a food source, Northern pikeminnow are the primary predator of concern at the Rocky Reach Project (Burley and Poe 1994). Smallmouth bass and walleye are not numerous in Rocky Reach reservoir, resulting in minimal predation of juvenile outmigrants. Smallmouth bass may pose a notable risk to subyearling chinook because the subyearlings are a size easily consumed by bass, and they migrate and rear in areas inhabited by bass.

Gulls A 1982 study at Wanapum Dam, downstream of Rocky Reach, indicated that gulls were consuming a substantial number of outmigrating juveniles (Ruggerone 1986). Prior to installation of protective devices, ring-billed gulls consumed an estimated two percent of all juvenile salmonids passing Wanapum Dam. At Rocky Reach, gulls have been observed feeding heavily on juvenile outmigrants in the tailrace area. In 1994, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal Damage Control (ADC) estimated approximately 6,000 gulls were hazed at Rocky Reach Dam (USDA 1994). Hazing measures were the installation of gull wires in the tailrace and use of pyrotechnics to frighten gulls away from the tailrace.

E3.2.6.1.2 Tributaries Key habitat types for young-of-year salmon and steelhead are described by Hillman, et al. (1989a,b). During the daytime, post-emergent fry of both species require low velocities (less than 10 cm/s) in shallow water with abundant cover. Chinook salmon preferred submerged and overhanging brush and woody debris to sand substrate along the stream margins. Steelhead station over small boulder and cobble substrates. As chinook and steelhead fry grew into parr, they selected faster and deeper water. Chinook used brush cover when available, while steelhead selected boulders and cobble for cover. During winter, when water temperatures were below 10oC, both species used the interstitial spaces between boulders along the stream banks were water velocities did not exceed 10 cm/s. At night, both species rested on the bottom in shallow, quiet water.

In the Wenatchee River, Hillman, et al. (1989) noted a scarcity of preferred habitat for both species at high flows during the freshet and during mid - late summer as flows dropped and the stream margins receded from the shoreline vegetation. In May and June, during high flow, nighttime resting habitat for both species was scarce. Nighttime habitat became abundant later in the year as flows receded and the fish grew larger. During high flows, chinook salmon preferred areas with submerged brush and roots that provided both instream and overhead cover. Chinook salmon also extensively used small side channels. In July and August, chinook salmon were observed in areas with little cover, but limited amounts of instream. and overhead cover provided by brush and woody debris were heavily used. Chinook salmon abundance was highest in low gradient (<5 m/km) pools, runs and glides. Steelhead concentrated in high gradient riffles (>5 m/km), where they stationed behind boulders where water surface disturbance provided overhead cover. Boulder cover used by steelhead fry in June lacked water in July and August, and 40 – 60 percent of steelhead were found in habitat without instream or overhead cover.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-32 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Hillman et al.'s observations indicate that cover, or shelter, is an essential habitat parameter in determining where and how many juvenile salmon and trout will rear in a stream. They observed the greatest numbers of salmon and trout in areas with instream and overhead cover. These observations of fish behavior and factors limiting fish habitat apply equally well to the Entiat River.

E3.2.6.1.3 Tailrace In 1993, the WDFW and National Biological Survey (NBS) assessed predation at the Rocky Reach Project and developed consumption, density, abundance and predation indices (Loch et al. 1994; Sauter et al. 1994). They indicated that predation near the tailrace poses the most significant risk to juvenile outmigrants at the Rocky Reach Project. Samples of the gut contents of Northern pikeminnow collected in the tailrace indicated that pikeminnow were consuming juvenile salmonids during the spring and summer (Sauter et al. 1994).

Gut content samples of Northern pikeminnow captured at the Rocky Reach tailrace in the spring suggested that pikeminnow there consumed fewer salmonids than at the other mid-Columbia projects. Few pikeminnow were caught at the tailrace during consumption index sampling, and salmonids accounted for between 35 and 55 percent of their total diet (Sauter et al. 1994). During spring sampling at the other four mid-Columbia projects, salmonids consistently accounted for between 75 and 100 percent of the Northern pikeminnow diet. However, the relative lack of salmonids detected in the Northern pikeminnow gut samples at the Rocky Reach tailrace may be a function of the timing of sampling. Spring sampling at the Rocky Reach tailrace was conducted on 29 and 30 May 1993. Data from the FPC indicate that by late May 1993 greater than 90 percent of the spring chinook and sockeye outmigrants had passed Rock Island Dam, located 21 miles downstream of the Rocky Reach Project (FPC 1994). This suggests that salmonids may have been scarce during the spring sampling period at Rocky Reach and, therefore, unavailable to Northern pikeminnow.

Consumption of salmonids by Northern pikeminnow in the Rocky Reach tailrace was high during the summer sampling period. The Rocky Reach tailrace consumption index was higher than measured at any of the other mid-Columbia projects during the summer. Sampling for consumption indexing at the Rocky Reach tailrace was conducted on July 1 and 2, 1993. Two days before the sampling took place, the WDFW had released 1.5 million subyearling chinook from the Turtle Rock hatchery located in the Rocky Reach forebay. The proximity and timing of the release likely increased the density of salmonids in the tailrace (Loch et al. 1994). Research has shown that Northern pikeminnow respond quickly to the increased densities of smolts associated with hatchery releases (Collis and Beaty 1995). Lower project flows, and associated lower water velocities, during the summer may also allow pikeminnow to approach the dam more closely and, thus, prey more efficiently (Faler et al. 1988).

E3.2.6.1.4 Project Juvenile Passage System survival studies conducted during 1982 and 1983 using juvenile stream-type (spring) chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia reach included a survival estimate for the river segment above Rock Island Dam (McKenzie et al. 1984a, 1984b). By making the assumption that

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-33 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources mortality would be equal for each of the three projects encountered between Pateros (near the confluence of the Methow River) and the Rock Island tailrace, the estimate of survival through Rocky Reach reservoir and dam was reported as about 87 percent in 1982 and 84 percent in 1983, for an average of about 86 percent survival; i.e., a 14 percent project mortality. There were no specific estimates made as to the portions that were associated with direct and indirect turbine mortality, reservoir effects or other factors involved with project passage. However, speculation at the time associated most of the project passage mortality with direct turbine mortality.

A pilot project survival study was conducted in 1998 using yearling fall chinook tagged with PIT tags (Eppard et al., 1998). The objective of the study was to evaluate methods to estimate the overall survival of chinook passing through the Rocky Reach reservoir and dam. The Paired- Release Model (Burnham et al., 1987) was used, relying on PIT tag detection facilities at McNary, John Day and Bonneville dams as the recapture sites. The study was intended to provide survival estimates with a standard error of 0.025. However, lower than expected recapture efficiencies at the PIT tag detection sites resulted in estimates with a standard error of greater than 0.051 (i.e., 95 percent confidence interval of plus/minus about 10 percent) for the estimate. This estimate is too imprecise to provide insight into relative rates of either reservoir or turbine passage survival. A number of alternative models were used to determine survival estimates for the Rocky Reach Project. Survival estimates from the different models for the entire Project (reservoir and dam) ranged from 83.5 - 87.2 percent, with the preferred weighted mean estimate and 95 percent confidence interval being 85.9 ± 8.2 percent (14.1 percent mortality). Survival estimates for passage through the dam only (including forebay and tailrace, but not the reservoir) ranged from 92.2 - 99.3 percent, with the preferred weighted mean estimate being 92.4 ± 13.3 percent (7.6 percent mortality).

A review of nine turbine-passage studies conducted for lower Columbia and Snake river dams found that estimates of total passage mortality (direct and indirect combined) for Kaplan turbines varied from 2 percent to 20 percent (Iwamoto and Williams 1993). At Rocky Reach Dam, the direct survival rate of juvenile chinook passing through the original turbines and the new replacement turbines has been measured in two recent studies using balloon tag methodology. The survival rate for chinook passing through the original Kaplan turbines was estimated to be about 94 percent in 1993 tests and 96 percent during tests in 1996 (RMC and Skalski 1994a; Normandeau and Skalski 1996). The direct survival rate for chinook passing through the fixed- blade turbines was estimated at 96 percent (RMC and Skalski 1994b). The direct survival rate of chinook passing through the first of the new Kaplan turbines presently being installed at Rocky Reach was estimated to be 95 percent (Normandeau and Skalski 1996). The precision range for these estimate was about plus or minus 1 - 2 percent, thus these estimates are not statistically significantly different from each other. As a practical matter, the point estimate of 95 percent survival measured for the new Kaplan turbine is also the mid-point in the range of estimates for the original Kaplan turbines and the fixed-blade turbines. Thus is the appropriate average level of direct survival to expect for fish passing through turbines at Rocky Reach Dam.

The survival rate of fish passing through the turbines may be increased over the average level by selection of operations that optimize the conditions for fish passage, both in regards to direct and indirect effects. In terms of direct effects, there were small differences in survival estimates at

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-34 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources different load settings and for different depths of fish introduction into the turbines in the above studies, but the precision of the estimates could not determine whether these differences were definitively related to the operational settings. For indirect effects, the susceptibility of fish to predation may be influenced by Project operations, such as powerhouse loading. At Rocky Reach, the turbine replacement program includes several actions taken to improve the survival rate of fish passing through the powerhouse turbines.

Several recent studies of direct turbine passage survival on the Columbia and Snake rivers have determined that survival rates tend to be slightly higher for fish released near the middle of the turbine intake than for fish released near the ceiling (RMC and Skalski 1994b, Normandeau and Skalski 1996, Normandeau et al. 1996). This contradicts generally held theories that fish survival should be better for fish that pass near the hub than for fish passing near the blade tips. A plausible explanation for higher mortality of fish released near the ceiling, which are expected to pass near the hub, is the existence of gaps between the blades and hub of a Kaplan turbine. The new turbines at Rocky Reach were designed with the blades recessed at the hub to eliminate these gaps.

Survival rates in several studies have generally been higher when Kaplan turbines are operated within the middle 90 percent of their power load settings, which coincides with the most favorable operating area on their efficiency curves. Bell (1981) showed that fish passage survival is generally higher for more efficient turbines than for less efficient turbines, and survival decreases when turbines are operated at over-gate settings where efficiency is reduced. Recent studies with balloon tags have shown that passage survival tends to be lower at minimum gate settings (Normandeau and Skalski 1996).

At Rocky Reach, the new Kaplan turbines have a higher efficiency than the original turbines and the addition of modern electronic governors and cams (three-dimensional cams) further improves the operating efficiency of the new turbines. The balloon tag survival studies of fish passage through the new Kaplan turbine were conducted before the electronic governor and cam had been installed, and the turbine was not yet tuned for peak efficiency. Thus, the 95 percent estimated direct survival may be conservative. Furthermore, replacement of the four fixed-blade turbines with Kaplan turbines will improve flexibility in powerhouse operations, increasing the proportion of time that the load settings of individual turbines will be in the mid range levels giving highest fish survival. Future operations following completion of the turbine replacement project should be able to further minimize mortality of spring chinook passing through the Rocky Reach turbines.

Indirect effects of turbine passage, principally susceptibility to predation, can be affected by powerhouse operations. Under present conditions, the fixed-blade turbines at Rocky Reach are either operated at full load, where efficiency is high, or not operated. These turbines have a higher hydraulic capacity than the Kaplan turbines, thus the powerhouse flow pattern through the tailrace tends to push flow exiting the first few turbines closer to a shoreline eddy, where predators tend to concentrate. Fish passage rates are higher through the downstream Kaplan turbines than through the fixed-blade turbines, thus more fish are in the shoreline tailrace flow pattern when the fixed-blade units are operating, which is the case during most of the spring

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-35 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources juvenile salmonid migration period. Replacement of the fixed-blade turbines with Kaplan turbines will allow for flexibility in powerhouse load distribution patterns that will favor both improved fish bypass collection efficiencies and reduced juvenile mortality due to predation in the tailrace.

Adult Passage Two recently completed radio-telemetry studies were designed to supplement available information on the behavioral and life history variability of passage of adult migrants in the mid- Columbia system. These studies were conducted on chinook salmon (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995) and sockeye salmon (Swan et al. 1994). The chinook study addressed passage times and fallback for spring, summer and fall chinook throughout the mid-Columbia. The sockeye study addressed migration upstream of Rocky Reach Dam and past Wells Dam. The sockeye study (Swan et al. 1994) focused on the passage times required to negotiate the Wells project fishway facilities, rates of fallback, and the fates of tagged fish. Swan et al. (1994) also examined the distribution of passage times for the population of tagged sockeye allowing for determination of relative delay for various portions of the population. They also attempted to link fallback data with the incidence of spill at Wells Dam.

Spring, summer and fall chinook required an average of 35.1, 22.8 and 60 hours to pass Rocky Reach Dam during 1993 (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995). The efficiency of the entrances at the Rocky Reach bypass varied by location and race/deme in 1993. Spring and summer chinook predominately entered through the left powerhouse entrance and orifice entrance number 18, and exited through the right powerhouse entrance and the spillway entrances. Fall chinook entered and exited nearly equally through all entrances (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995). Reducing the number of entrances may decrease chinook passage time at the Project (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995).

Relative effectiveness of the Rocky Reach fishways has been assessed by comparing performance with other fishways in the mid-Columbia River. The chinook salmon radio- telemetry study by Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) is the only work that includes a systematic evaluation of several mid-Columbia fishways. Based on these results, the Rocky Reach fishways are highly efficient with respect to the attraction of adult chinook to the fishway entrances. The median time required for adult chinook to pass through the collection system and enter ladder sections of the Rocky Reach fishways was among the highest for spring and fall chinook and the lowest for summer chinook, compared to the other mid-Columbia fishways. Data from Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) indicate that adult chinook salmon took approximately the same amount of time to ascend the ladder at Rocky Reach Dam as they did at the other four mid- Columbia projects. The median total passage time at Rocky Reach Dam for spring and summer chinook was similar for all the fishways at mid-Columbia projects. Median total passage time for fall chinook was the highest of the mid-Columbia fishways.

Based on the median time required to locate entrances and negotiate collection systems at the five mid-Columbia dams, Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) stated that fishway entrance efficiency would be enhanced by reducing the number of entrances at each dam to only those openings in close proximity to the bases of the ladders. They also recommended that diffuser flows in collection systems be moved upstream in the fishways to provide less turbulent flow between the

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-36 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources entrances and the ladders. Moving diffuser flows closer to the base of the ladders may reduce confusion in the collection systems, thus providing better attraction to the ladders.

The incidence and rates of fallback for chinook salmon during the 1993 radio-telemetry study is a useful example of the complicated migrational behavior of mid-Columbia anadromous stocks, and the difficulties associated with an analysis of the impact of dams and fishways on pre- spawning mortality and reproductive success. Spring chinook passing Rocky Reach Dam provided the only instance where no fallback occurred during the entire study. At the other dams, spring chinook experienced fallback at rates from 2.5 percent at the Wells Dam, to 17.7 percent at Priest Rapids Dam. For summer chinook, the rates of fallback ranged from 1.0 percent at Wanapum Dam, to 14.3 percent at Wells Dam; the rates for fall chinook ranged from 5.2 percent at the Wanapum Dam, to 21.2 percent at Wells Dam.

The average rate of fallback of chinook salmon over the five mid-Columbia dams varied considerably by race/deme. The summer chinook showed the lowest rate of fallback with a mid- Columbia-wide average of only 3.3 percent. The fall chinook experienced the highest rate of fallback at 12.3 percent, and the spring chinook were intermediate with an average fallback rate of 7.9 percent. The highest rates of fallback were generally associated with dams that were immediately or a relatively short distance upstream from a hatchery release point or a natal tributary, indicating a high potential for overshoot and voluntary fallback. This observation is valid for the high fallback rate for fall chinook at Wells Dam, which is upstream of various juvenile release sites and tributaries/mainstem habitats that support fall chinook spawning. The same observation holds true for summer chinook at Wells Dam and for spring chinook at Priest Rapids Dam. In addition, it is entirely possible that many of the fallbacks observed at Priest Rapids are attributable to overshoots from the Yakima or Snake Rivers (i.e., fish that are voluntarily returning downstream in search of natal streams).

Stuehrenberg et al. (1995) recognized that the high rates of fallback at some mid-Columbia dams are a major deficiency for the determination of “realistic and accurate passage survival and escapement estimates,” and that, “until such adjustments are made, estimates at individual dams will remain significantly biased upward.” Existing estimates of adult mortality that occur during upstream passage past dams and through reservoirs include Basham (1990) at 1 to 5 percent per dam, and Chapman et al. (1994a, 1994b, 1995a), who estimate mortality at 5 percent for summer/fall chinook, 2 to 6 percent for spring chinook and 4 percent for steelhead per dam, respectively. Dauble and Mueller (1993) conclude that there is little evidence that upstream passage contributes to measurable direct mortality of chinook and sockeye salmon in the Snake and lower Columbia Rivers.

Total Dissolved Gas in the Vicinity of the Project Total dissolved gas (TDG) supersaturation is monitored at the Rocky Reach Project as part of the Columbia and Snake River Dissolved Gas Monitoring Program, conducted in cooperation with the COE (1994) and Project owners. Monitoring occurs during the salmonid migration season, April through September. Data are collected hourly and transmitted to the COE North Pacific Division Headquarters. These data are then compiled, along with pertinent flow, spill and water temperature information, and posted on the Columbia River Operational Hydromet Management

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-37 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

System (CROHMS) and COE internet homepage. The CROHMS is used for real-time review by authorized users and potential system spill adjustment recommendations.

Total dissolved gas at Rocky Reach is monitored in the forebay and tailrace of the Project. Data have been collected by the Chelan PUD since 1983 in the forebay and 1996 in the tailrace. Daily average TDG measurements at the Wells, Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams forebay monitoring stations from 1984 to 1994 generally exceeded 100 percent and, therefore, were consistently in a supersaturated condition during the April to September monitoring period. In general, daily average TDG levels most commonly ranged between 105 and 115 percent during 1984 to 1994 (COE 1994). The maximum observed TDG levels, which occurred under high spill conditions at mid-Columbia and upstream projects, were 126 percent, 132 percent and 131 percent, respectively, at the Wells, Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dam forebay stations. Such maximum levels could cause serious Gas Bubble Trauma (GBT) effects depending on duration, species/life stage differences and other conditions, such as depth and water temperature (Ebel et al. 1975).

Total dissolved gas levels at Rocky Reach Dam are primarily determined by TDG levels in water passing from upstream dams. Correlation of TDG data from the Wells and Rocky Reach forebay stations indicates that TDG levels at the two sites do not differ significantly (COE 1991, 1992). This suggests that TDG is neither significantly increased nor dissipated from spill at Wells Dam and subsequent flow through Rocky Reach reservoir. An examination of daily TDG in 1994 from the Rocky Reach and Rock Island forebays indicates that TDG does increase between the stations during periods of continuous spill at Rocky Reach Dam. As spill becomes less frequent, the increase in TDG between the two facilities becomes smaller. During non-spill periods, dissipation of TDG may occur. Data for 1983 to 1997 suggests that a positive relationship between spill and TDG may exist; however, the large variance associated with the data reduces the confidence in this relationship (McDonald and Priest 1996; Koehler and McDonald 1997).

Water Temperature Conditions in the Vicinity of the Project Water temperature monitoring is being conducted by the Chelan PUD in conjunction with TDG monitoring at the Rocky Reach facility. As with the TDG data, water temperature data is obtained from approximately April through September each year. Water temperature and TDG data are collected every hour and transmitted via teletype to the COE CROHMS database. Water temperature in the Rocky Reach forebay can exceed 18oC in July and a maximum of about 20oC in August and September (COE 1993). Water temperature can either increase or decrease between Wells and Rocky Reach dams (COE 1993). The lack of a consistent thermal effect between Wells Dam and Rocky Reach Dam suggests that substantial heat exchange does not occur as water travels through Rocky Reach reservoir. As a run-of-river reservoir, Rocky Reach reservoir has a rapid flushing rate, ranging from 1 to 3 days. Pools with rapid flushing rates have a mostly river-like character, including weak and intermittent or non-existent thermal stratification (Johnson et al. 1978; Kimmel and Groeger 1984; Cox 1984). In addition, rapidly flushed pools often do not permit substantial heat input and concomitant water temperature increases.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-38 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.2.6.2 Studies Currently Under Way

E3.2.6.2.1 Reservoir Juvenile Passage Chelan PUD will continue to modify the fish bypass system to improve passage efficiency and move toward the final design. Currently identified modifications may include:

1. Modify the entrance configuration and flow characteristics of the second entrance to the surface collector. This will include the addition of an articulating outside wall to allow testing of different entrance widths. The inside wall of the entrance will be moved adjacent to the face of the powerhouse. Flow into the entrance will be increased to approximately 4,000 cfs. 2. The trapping velocity shape of the second entrance and the first entrance extension will be removed since they proved to be ineffective in increasing the retention of spring chinook and steelhead in the surface collector entrances. 3. Bulkheads in the intakes to Unit 4, adjacent to and upstream of the second entrance to the surface collector, will be extended to deepen the height of the entrance to the turbine intake by 37 feet to improve hydraulic conditions in front of the surface collector entrance. An additional bulkhead will be added so that all three intakes of Unit 4 have been reduced in height. 4. The hydraulic conditions in the turbine intakes and at the fish diversion screens of Units 1 and 2 will be modified to improve fish safety and condition. 5. Chelan PUD will fund studies to determine the behavioral characteristics of fish that approach and enter the fish bypass system. An acoustic tag study using new technology will be implemented to obtain three-dimensional tracking of fish responses to forebay hydraulics and the surface collector entrances. Chelan PUD will also fund studies to determine the efficiency of the fish bypass system and descaling or injury rates to spring chinook and steelhead using the system. 6. Chelan PUD will continue to fund model work to aid in the determination of the final design of the fish bypass production system. Chelan PUD will continue work to determine the best locations, shape and flow rates for surface collector entrances in the forebay.

Chelan will fund and develop a pilot survival study of juvenile steelhead, or other yearling spring migrant salmon, using radio telemetry. This pilot study will be used to determine the feasibility of future survival studies that will eventually help determine project survival under the proposed HCP.

Northern Pikeminnow Removal Program Chelan PUD will continue the program to remove Northern pikeminnow from the tailrace and forebay of Rocky Reach Dam. Chelan PUD will also investigate Northern pikeminnow movements by radio tracking fish that are released both upstream and downstream of the Project. By tracking Northern pikeminnow movement, Chelan PUD may be able to determine where fish congregate at certain times of the year and focus on removal efforts in these locations. By removing as many Northern pikeminnow as possible, survival of spring chinook and steelhead (and other species) should increase.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-39 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

E3.2.6.2.2 Tailrace Northern Pikeminnow Removal Program Chelan PUD will continue the program to remove Northern pikeminnow from the tailrace and forebay of Rocky Reach Dam. Chelan PUD will also investigate Northern pikeminnow movements by radio tracking fish that are released both upstream and downstream of the Project. By tracking Northern pikeminnow movement, Chelan PUD may be able to determine where fish congregate at certain times of the year and focus on removal efforts in these locations. By removing as many Northern pikeminnow as possible, survival of spring chinook and steelhead (and other species) should increase.

E3.2.6.2.3 Project Juvenile Pilot Survival Study Chelan PUD conducted a pilot PIT tag survival study with yearling chinook in 1998. In 1999, Chelan PUD is conducting a pilot survival study of steelhead smolts at Rocky Reach Dam using radio telemetry. The pilot study will be conducted using releases of radio-tagged steelhead in the reservoir and tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam. Information obtained in the pilot study will be used to determine if radio telemetry is a suitable technique for implementing juvenile salmonid survival studies.

The goal of the Estimating Steelhead Smolt Survival at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams: A Pilot Study, 1999 is to evaluate an alternative method of estimating smolt survival that requires far fewer fish than conventional tagging studies, e.g., PIT-tags (Skalski and Giorgi 1998). This study describes a protocol for comparing capabilities of the telemetry-based approach to the more commonly used PIT-tag approach.

The objectives of this study are to: 1. Compare the behavior of radio-tagged and PIT-tagged steelhead smolts. 2. Estimate steelhead smolt survival through the Rocky Reach and Rock Island Hydroelectric Projects, with 95 percent CI not to exceed +0.05. A project extends from the tailrace of an upstream dam to the tailrace of the next dam downstream. 3. Estimate reservoir and dam survival separately for steelhead at Rocky Reach and Rock Island dams with the same precision prescribed above. Secondarily, provide estimates of smolt survival through the powerhouse, spillway, and bypass system at Rocky Reach, and possibly Rock Island, with no precision criteria specified. 4. Estimate survival of PIT-tagged steelhead smolts at Rock Island Dam for use as a basis of comparison with radio-tagged based survival estimates.

Further survival studies using radio telemetry may be funded and conducted by Chelan PUD in 2000 if the results of the 1999 pilot study warrant further investigation.

Total Dissolved Gas (TDG) Monitoring Chelan has obtained equipment and constructed installations to monitor TDG in the forebay and tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam. This monitoring will include:

1. Chelan will continue to monitor TDG in the forebay and tailrace of Rocky Reach Dam.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-40 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

2. Chelan will continue to analyze data collected under different operational scenarios to determine best operating conditions for gas abatement at Rocky Reach Dam. 3. Chelan will continue to participate in basin-wide gas control programs by accepting spill transfers. 4. Chelan will continue to participate in basin-wide forums, such as the Dissolved Gas Team (DGT), and will participate in the continued development of a basin-wide gas abatement program.

E3.2.6.3 Proposed Studies Adult Steelhead Survival Study The Mid-Columbia Steelhead Radio-Telemetry Study, Fall 1999 has been proposed by Chelan PUD for implementation in 1999. The study is designed to provide upstream migration survival estimates for adult steelhead. Adult migration studies previously conducted used chinook salmon (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995) and sockeye salmon (Swan et al. 1994). Based on the results of past telemetry studies, passage rates for adult chinook and sockeye salmon are acceptable and successful at all five mid-Columbia River projects. However, very little data are available on the ladder passage and fallback rates of summer steelhead in the mid-Columbia River. Collection of adult steelhead passage information is an important objective for each PUD. Radio-telemetry is proposed as the most appropriate technique to collect adult steelhead passage and fallback information. Tagging will be done at Priest Rapids Dam and monitoring will take place at Priest Rapids, Wanapum, Rock Island, Rocky Reach, and Wells dams. During the course of the study, 400 adult summer steelhead will be tagged. Median ladder passage, project passage, and fallback rates will be estimated.

The Rocky Reach Relicensing Team has proposed the following studies for implementation in 1999. These studies are designed to gather “baseline” information regarding the Rocky Reach Project. The data collected during implementation of these studies will be used to satisfy NEPA requirements, and to assist in developing studies to address additional information needs identified by the stakeholders participating in the Rocky Reach collaborative relicensing process.

Aquatic Habitat Survey This study is designed to conduct habitat mapping of the Rocky Reach reservoir (GIS based) to develop the database for evaluating the results of the juvenile rearing and habitat use survey. Similar to cover type mapping of the reservoir shoreline, these data will be used to assess the relative value of the reservoir for production of various fish species, and as the basis for evaluation of management actions or license conditions. (See the detailed study plan, Aquatic Habitat Survey Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Rearing and Habitat Use Survey Currently, we have little data on habitat use by rearing salmon and steelhead or resident species. What do rearing chinook prefer – riprap, aquatic plant beds, or sand/silt bottoms with or without woody debris? The current lack of specific information on the fish habitat value of the reservoir is considered by Fish and Wildlife staff to be an important data gap. (See the detailed study plan, Rearing and Habitat Use Survey Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-41 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Spawning Survey We presently have information regarding the spawning habitat of fall chinook in two locations. The information base needs to be updated for relicensing and the potential of the reservoir as spawning habitat for the endangered Upper Columbia Steelhead. This study is to provide information necessary to complete habitat mapping of substrate and flow velocity ranges for these species. (See the detailed study plan, Spawning Survey Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Benthic Analysis The benthic food organisms, mollusk populations and other features of the river substrate are not available in the literature. This information is needed for Exhibit E of the Application and is also important for the analysis of fish rearing and habitat use. Also, some mollusk species are listed under the ESA or are sensitive species under State criteria. Presence, absence and other information necessary to address these issues requires benthic surveys. Sample collections will be done during the aquatic habitat survey and/or the rearing and habitat use survey. (See the detailed study plan, Benthic Analysis Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Creel Survey The sportfishing value of the reservoir and tailrace has not been documented. Creel surveys are labor intensive and require boat operations and weekend/odd hour work to cover the various fishing activities. (See the detailed study plan, Creel Census Survey Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

RTE Wildlife This study is designed around literature review and subsequent report preparation to update rare, threatened, and endangered wildlife and terrestrial species in the Project area. (See the detailed study plan, RTE Wildlife Survey and Cover-Type Mapping Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Cover-Type Mapping This study will update and bring to current standards the cover-type mapping conducted by Chelan PUD in 1990. (See the detailed study plan, RTE Wildlife Survey and Cover-Type Mapping Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Mule Deer Mortality Study The original license required purchase of extensive areas of big game winter range as mitigation for the effects of the Project. An evaluation of the effectiveness of these land purchases in meeting the needs of the game populations and mitigating Project impacts is needed for the relicense application. This study would also evaluate the benefits for upland bird populations of these mitigation areas. (See the detailed study plan, Mule Deer Mortality Study, which will be posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-42 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

RTE Plants This study is designed to update the RTE plant surveys conducted by Chelan PUD in 1990. (See the detailed study plan, RTE Plants Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

Water Quality Monitoring This study is designed for instrumentation, data collection and analysis of a broader spectrum of water quality information than has been the subject of ongoing dissolved gas and state funded water quality monitoring. (See the detailed study plan, Water Quality Monitoring Study Plan, which is posted on the Chelan PUD web site, www.chelanpud.org.)

E3.2.7 A Description of Measures Being Considered by Licensee, Including, If Applicable, Any Measures to Minimize the Short-Term Impacts on Fisheries of Any Proposed New Development, and An Explanation of Licensee’s Position on Any Measures Recommended During Consultation Rocky Reach Habitat Conservation Plan The combined effects of hydroelectric projects, flood control, irrigation, timber harvesting, agriculture, ranching and other land uses, commercial and sport fishery harvest, as well as changes in ocean conditions have resulted in the decline of some races/demes of mid-Columbia River salmonid fish. Chelan PUD and Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County (Douglas PUD) have submitted joint habitat conservation plans and applications for incidental take permits under Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to assist the recovery of these species

The Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project addresses Project-specific and cumulative impacts associated with operation of the Project. The HCP is intended to be consistent with an evolving basin-wide effort, including both mainstem and tributary activities to protect mid-Columbia River salmonid fish. Chelan PUD’s desire is that by working cooperatively with state and federal fishery agencies and local Native American tribes (Joint Fisheries Parties), the HCP will allow the continued operation of the Rocky Reach Project while providing for the survival of the anadromous salmonid species originating above the Project.

The HCP has been developed to achieve a survival standard of 100 percent No Net Impact (NNI) for Plan Species at Rocky Reach Dam. NNI consists of two components: 1) 91 percent Project survival, achieved within the geographic area of the Project; and 2) 9 percent compensation for unavoidable Project mortality. The 9 percent compensation for unavoidable project mortality has two components: 1) 7 percent compensation provided through hatchery programs; and 2) 2 percent compensation provided through tributary programs.

Chelan PUD’s responsibility is to achieve and maintain the 95 percent juvenile dam passage survival standard at Rocky Reach. This means that 95 percent of the juvenile Plan Species survive passage through the forebay, dam and tailrace within 95 percent of each species’ migration period. It is also Chelan PUD’s responsibility to achieve and maintain the 91 percent Project survival standard at

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-43 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Rocky Reach, which means that 91 percent of each Plan Species, juvenile and adult combined, survive passage past the Project, including delayed mortality.

Chelan PUD is responsible for achieving 91 percent Project survival and 95 percent juvenile dam passage survival for each Plan Species affected by Rocky Reach through Project improvement measures, including adult, juvenile, and reservoir passage measures. Additional Chelan PUD responsibilities are: 1) funding for the Tributary Conservation Plan; 2) providing the capacity and funding for the Hatchery Compensation Plan; and 3) making capacity and funding adjustments to the Hatchery Compensation Plan to reflect and fully compensate for future increases in run size of each Plan Species.

Chelan PUD has the authority to utilize any “Tool” or combination of “Tools” included in the HCP “Toolbox” to achieve 95 percent juvenile dam passage survival by the end of Phase I of the HCP, which is 1998 through March 1, 2003. The ultimate decision on pursuit and implementation of Tools during Phase I is Chelan PUD’s. The Joint Fisheries Parties (JFP) accept the responsibility to develop plans and programs necessary to implement the Tributary Conservation Plan and the Hatchery Compensation Plan, which must include evaluation procedures, to compensate for 9 percent unavoidable Project mortality.

Chelan PUD filed an Application for Incidental Take Permit and HCP with NMFS on July 30, 1998. NMFS filed notice on January 6, 1999 of the initiation of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures for public review and development of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the HCP. The NEPA process is expected to take a minimum of 18 months to complete, with the expectation that NMFS will subsequently issue Chelan PUD a Section 10 Incidental Take Permit (Permit). However, interactions with listed spring chinook and steelhead will occur as a result of operation of the Rocky Reach Project prior to issuance of the Permit. Chelan and Douglas PUDs jointly submitted applications to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on October 9, 1999, for Approval of an Interim Protection Plan (IPP) for Upper Columbia River Steelhead and a Request for Consultation Pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. The FERC designated Chelan and Douglas PUDs as non-federal representatives of FERC for the purpose of conducting informal consultations with NMFS on the IPP for the purpose of preparing a draft biological assessment to determine the effects of the IPP on endangered Upper Columbia River Steelhead. On February 13, 1998, Chelan PUD submitted a Biological Assessment of Rocky Reach Dam Operations for Interim Protection of Steelhead Trout (BA) to FERC, who in turn forwarded the BA to NMFS on March 26, 1998. A draft IPP and BA for Upper Columbia River spring chinook salmon were submitted to FERC and NMFS for review on February 1, 1999. Additional information requests from NMFS are being compiled at the present time. A final spring chinook salmon IPP and BA have not yet been submitted.

Analysis of Steelhead Survival Improvements from Proposed Action The measures in the Interim Protection Plan are expected to increase the survival of steelhead sufficiently to accomplish the juvenile passage standard in the HCP of 95 percent survival of juvenile steelhead migrating past the immediate forebay, dam structure, and tailrace (Table E3-3). The surface collector has safely passed a substantial portion of the steelhead juvenile migration in the past two years. The addition of turbine intake screens in Unit 2, a second

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-44 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources entrance to the collector and further improvements to the existing surface collector entrance should further increase the fish collection efficiency of the bypass system.

Based on survival rate assumptions (Table E3-3) for individual passage routes, the combination of the surface collector, turbine intake screens and the spill program have nearly met the HCP objective of providing 95 percent survival for steehead passing the immediate forebay, dam structure and tailrace of the Rocky Reach Project. Further, with continued improvements to the surface collector and turbine intake screens, the estimated survival has increased in each of the past three years. Table E3-3 uses the following survival rates determined from studies at the Project. Table E3-3: Estimated Survival of Steelhead With Interim Protection Plan Measures

Future Projections

Yearly Passage Efficiency (Proportion of Fish Passing Through Route) Year 1996 1997 1998 Additional Efforts 1999 2000 2001 Bypass 0.270 0.570 0.600 New Turbines 0.520 0.600 0.700 Spill 0.081 0.081 0.081 Added Predator Control 0.090 0.081 0.000 Turbines 0.649 0.349 0.319 0.390 0.319 0.300 Survival Rate By Route Proportion of Fish Survival by Route Bypass 0.970 0.262 0.553 0.582 0.9801 0.510 0.588 0.686 Spill 0.990 0.080 0.080 0.080 0.990 0.089 0.080 0.000 Turbines 0.920 0.597 0.321 0.294 0.930 0.363 0.297 0.279 Total 0.939 0.954 0.956 0.961 0.965 0.965 1 Projected survival increase due to additional efforts.

Powerhouse Passage Survival: The direct survival of chinook salmon passing through the Kaplan turbines at Rocky Reach has been measured in two studies. Balloon tag studies in 1993 found passage survival to be 0.939 (RMC and Skalski 1994b), while tests in 1996 measured survivals of 0.950 and 0.958 for new (Unit 6) and original (Unit 5) Kaplan turbines, respectively (Normandeau and Skalski 1996). For the value in the table, the average direct survival of 0.950 was used. An assumed indirect mortality of 3 percent (0.03) was subtracted from the direct survival rate to estimate the total survival rate of 0.920 for years 1996 - 1998. Cumulative benefits of predator control, along with replacement of original units with more efficient new Kaplan turbines, was assumed to increase the survival rate through the powerhouse for 1999 by 1 percent for both turbine passage and bypass passage. At Rocky Reach, the orientation of the powerhouse and the significant amount of area where predators can find velocity refuge proximal to the flows from the powerhouse were reasons for choosing a 3 percent tailrace mortality initially.

Bypass Survival: The fish examined in the bypass system at Rocky Reach have shown very little evidence of injury, thus survival through the system was assumed to be comparable to survival levels demonstrated for the spillway (0.99 - 1.00). However, since the prototype bypass discharge presently releases fish into the frontroll of the powerhouse turbine discharges, a 2 percent

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-45 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources predation mortality was added to an assumed 1 percent bypass mortality, giving the 0.970 survival used in Table E3-3. Cumulative benefits from predator control were assumed to increase that survival by 1 percent in 1999. Final design and installation of the bypass system will relocate the bypass discharge to a location downstream of the powerhouse where predation mortality should be largely eliminated.

Spillway Passage Survival: The survival was assumed to be 0.980 for years 1996 - 1998, with most of the mortality presumed to be predation related. Improved survival of 0.990 was assumed for 1999 with reduced predator numbers.

Passage Efficiency Rates: The actual steelhead passage rates through the surface collector and turbine intake bypass system, as determined from PIT tag studies, were used for 1996 and 1997. With the addition of another entrance and turbine intake screens in Unit 2 planned for 1998, the fish collection efficiency of the bypass is expected to improve significantly. For the purposes of Table E3-3, only a modest increase in fish collection efficiency to 0.600 was assumed. This conservative estimate was chosen to demonstrate that the 95 percent survival objective of the Interim Protection Plan has been met in 1997 and will easily be met in 1998 and 1999, if predation mortality assumptions are correct.

Spillway passage rates used in Table E3-3 are lower than the actual levels achieved in 1996 and 1997 because Table E3-3 assumes the spill volumes that would occur in the Interim Protection Plan, rather than the high spill levels experienced in 1996 and 1997 (average 35 percent of river flow). The spill efficiency of 6.6 percent of fish passed for 10 percent of flow, determined from hydroacoustic studies (averaged over all species) over a period of several years, was used for all years in Table E3-3.

Based on survival rate assumptions (Table E3-3) for individual passage routes, effective guidance by the surface collector and turbine intake screens during 1997 has accomplished the HCP objective of providing 95 percent survival for steelhead passing the immediate forebay, dam structure and tailrace of the Rocky Reach Project.

Analysis of Spring Chinook Survival Improvements from Proposed Action The measures in the Interim Protection Plan are expected to increase the survival of spring chinook sufficiently to accomplish the juvenile passage standard in the HCP of 95 percent survival of juvenile spring chinook migrating past the immediate forebay, dam structure, and tailrace. The surface collector has safely passed a substantial portion of the spring chinook juvenile migration in the past three years. The addition of turbine intake screens in Unit 2, a second entrance to the collector and further improvements to the existing surface collector entrance further increased the spring chinook collection efficiency of the bypass system to over 40 percent in 1998. The additional improvements in the Interim Protection Plan for implementation in 1999 are expected to further increase survival of spring chinook salmon.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-46 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Based on survival rate assumptions (Table E3-4) for individual passage routes, the combination of the surface collector, turbine intake screens and the spill program have nearly met the HCP objective of providing 95 percent survival for spring chinook salmon passing the immediate forebay, dam structure and tailrace of the Rocky Reach Project. Further, with continued improvements to the surface collector and turbine intake screens, the estimated survival has increased in each of the past three years. Table E3-4 uses the following survival rates determined from studies at the Project. Table E3-4: Estimated Survival of Spring Chinook with Interim Protection Plan Measures

Future Projections Yearly Passage Efficiency (Proportion of Fish Passing Through Route) Year 1996 1997 1998 Additional Efforts 1999 2000 2001 Bypass 0.224 0.351 0.424 New Turbines 0.260 0.500 0.700 Spill 0.081 0.081 0.080 Added Predator Control 0.190 0.081 0.000 Turbines 0.695 0.568 0.496 0.550 0.419 0.300 Survival Rate By Route Proportion of Fish Survival by Route Bypass 0.970 0.217 0.340 0.411 0.9801 0.255 0.490 0.686 Spill 0.990 0.080 0.080 0.079 0.990 0.188 0.080 0.000 Turbines 0.920 0.640 0.523 0.456 0.930 0.512 0.390 0.279 Total 0.937 0.943 0.946 0.954 0.960 0.965 1 Projected survival increase due to additional efforts.

Powerhouse Passage Survival: The direct survival of chinook salmon passing through the Kaplan turbines at Rocky Reach has been measured in two studies. Balloon tag studies in 1993 found passage survival to be 0.939 (RMC and Skalski 1994b), while tests in 1996 measured survivals of 0.950 and 0.958 for new (Unit 6) and original (Unit 5) Kaplan turbines, respectively (Normandeau and Skalski 1996). For the value in the table, the average direct survival of 0.950 was used. An assumed indirect mortality of 3 percent (0.03) was subtracted from the direct survival rate to estimate the total survival rate of 0.920 for years 1996 - 1998. Cumulative benefits of predator control, along with replacement of original units with more efficient new Kaplan turbines, is assumed to increase the survival rate through the powerhouse for 1999 and 2000 by 1 percent for both turbine passage and bypass passage. At Rocky Reach, the orientation of the powerhouse and the significant amount of area where predators can find velocity refuge proximal to the flows from the powerhouse were reasons for choosing a 3 percent tailrace mortality initially.

Bypass Survival: The fish examined in the bypass system at Rocky Reach have shown very little evidence of injury, thus survival through the system was assumed to be comparable to survival levels demonstrated for the spillway (0.99 - 1.00). However, since the prototype bypass discharge presently releases fish into the frontroll of the powerhouse turbine discharges, a 2 percent predation mortality was added to an assumed 1 percent bypass mortality, giving the 0.970 survival used in Table E3-4. Cumulative benefits from predator control are assumed to increase that survival by 1 percent in 1999 and 2000. Final design and installation of the bypass system

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-47 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources will relocate the bypass discharge to a location downstream of the powerhouse where the probability of predation will be reduced.

Spillway Passage Survival: The survival was assumed to be 0.980 for years 1996 - 1998, with most of the mortality presumed to be predation related. Improved survival of 0.990 is assumed for 1999 and 2000 with reduced predator numbers.

Passage Efficiency Rates: The actual spring chinook passage rates through the surface collector and turbine intake bypass system, as determined from PIT tag studies, were used for 1996, 1997 and 1998. With the modifications to the second entrance planned for 1999, the fish collection efficiency of the bypass is expected to improve significantly. For the purposes of Table E3-4, only a modest increase in fish collection efficiency to 0.500 is assumed. This conservative estimate was chosen to demonstrate that the 95 percent survival objective of the Interim Protection Plan was nearly met in 1998 and will be met in 1999 and 2000, if predation mortality assumptions are correct.

Spillway passage rates used in Table E3-4 are lower than the actual levels achieved in 1996 and 1997 because this table assumes the spill volumes that would occur in the Interim Protection Plan, rather than the high spill levels experienced in 1996 and 1997 (average 35 percent of river flow). The spill efficiency of 6.6 percent of fish passed for 10 percent of flow, determined from hydroacoustic studies (averaged over all species) over a period of several years, was used for 1996 and 1997, while the actual efficiency measured in 1998 was used for the remaining years.

Based on survival rate assumptions (Table E3-4) for individual passage routes, effective guidance by the surface collector and turbine intake screens during 1998 has nearly accomplished the HCP objective of providing 95 percent survival for spring chinook passing the immediate forebay, dam structure and tailrace of the Rocky Reach Project.

HCP Hatchery Compensation Program Additional hatchery production or other measures to mitigate for 7 percent of the unavoidable loss at the Rocky Reach Project are contained in the proposed HCP.

During the term of this Interim Protection Plan, Chelan PUD will provide funding and hatchery capacity at the Turtle Rock and Chelan Falls facilities adequate to rear up to 30,000 pounds of steelhead annually. All steelhead will be released as yearlings at 6-8 fish per pound.

Chelan PUD will fund the changes in hatchery procedures and evaluations needed to make the hatchery compensation program consistent with recovery of spring chinook and steelhead populations, as defined in the proposed HCP’s Biological Assessment and Management Plan: Mid-Columbia River Hatchery Program. The Dryden and Tumwater dams will be the primary source of broodstock for steelhead released on the Wenatchee River. This change in broodstock source is the first step in transforming the steelhead hatchery compensation program to a recovery program, based on locally adapted adult based supplementation.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-48 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

HCP Tributary Fund Additional measures to mitigate for 2 percent of the unavoidable loss at the Rocky Reach Project are contained in the proposed HCP.

Adult Passage See description of the Mid-Columbia Steelhead Radio-Telemetry Study, Fall 1999 in Section E3.2.6.3.

Juvenile Passage See description of the Estimating Steelhead Smolt Survival at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams: A Pilot Study, 1999 in Section E3.2.6.2.3

Surface Collector Prototype Testing As a result of the field tests conducted during the 1999 spring and summer migrations and additional modeling as necessary, the 1999 prototype bypass configuration may need additional modifications for testing in 2000. If the bypass results in 1999 and 2000 are high enough to achieve 95 interest survival, as determined by a combination of efficiency tests and pilot survival study results, Chelan PUD will begin construction of the first phases of the final fish bypass system. These components may include, but not be limited to:

1. Construction of two permanent entrances to the surface collector. 2. Diversion screens installed in two units, with the potential to add more. 3. Construction of the transport bypass pipe to the outfall location in the tailrace. Since the production system transport pipe will pass a larger volume of water than the capacity of our current transport pipe, Chelan PUD will design and construct the final transport pipe to the location in the tailrace of the Project that was identified and agreed to by the Mid Columbia Coordinating Committee.

Adult Fish Passage Operations Chelan PUD will use best efforts to maintain and operate adult passage systems at the Project according to the Detailed Fishway Operating Procedure (DFOP) criteria or superior criteria developed through the use of study results. Presently, very little radio telemetry data is available to evaluate steelhead passage success at Rocky Reach Dam. Chelan supports regional and local efforts to study spring chinook and steelhead passage success via radio telemetry. See Section E3.2.6.3 for more detail.

E3.2.8 To the Extent Possible, a Description of the Continuing Impact on Fisheries of Continued Project Operation and, if Applicable, the Incremental Impact of Any Proposed New Development of Project Works or Changes in Project Operations Adult Passage Summer Steelhead The effects of the Rocky Reach Project on the survival of upstream migrating adult summer steelhead are presumed primarily related to passage at the dam. There are currently no estimates of adult summer steelhead survival through mid-Columbia River dams. Telemetry studies conducted in the Snake River estimated interdam loss between 3 – 4 percent (Bjornn et al.,

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-49 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

1994). However, the sources of the loss could not be directly determined. Investigators concluded that a combination of harvest, natural mortality and hydroelectric impacts likely attributed to the 3 – 4 percent loss estimate. No comparable radio telemetry data exist for the mid-Columbia River dams.

Summer steelhead radio-telemetry studies conducted in the Nass (1993) and Skeena (1979 & 1995) river systems accounted for 30 percent to 55 percent of the radio tagged fish at final spawning destinations (Alexander and Koski, 1995; Koski, et al., 1995; Alexander et al., 1996). The authors concluded that the most important determinant of survival in these Canadian river systems, which have no dams, was water temperature. Bjornn et al. (1993) radio tagged summer steelhead at John Day Dam during 1992. Approximately, 45 percent of the steelhead radio-tagged during this study were recovered at final spawning destinations. Based upon the results of these radio-telemetry survival studies, there is no evidence that summer steelhead survival through the mainstem Columbia River dams, including dams in the mid-Columbia River, should differ significantly from the survival of steelhead in natural river systems. Instead, harvest and environmental variables outside the operations of the dams likely play larger roles in determining adult steelhead survival. Therefore, estimates of per Project mortality related directly to hydroelectric dam operations are expected to be comparable to natural river systems. Dam related mortality is expected to be a very small fraction of the overall adult in-river mortality. Based on this assessment, Chelan PUD believes that mortality to adult steelhead caused by the Rocky Reach Project is less than 1 percent above natural causes of mortality.

Direct mortality for adult steelhead is likely very low. However dams also present the potential for sub-lethal effects upon migrating adult steelhead. These effects include delays at fishway facilities, increased rates of energetic expenditure in fishways and rates of involuntary fallback. Sources of delay in upstream migration may include extended passage time at fishway entrances, collection systems and ladders. Fallback, or the downstream movement of upstream migrants, is another potential source of delay or injury. Assessment of the magnitude and effects of migratory delay at fishway facilities is complicated by the lack of information on the time required for adult anadromous fish to migrate through the unimpounded, natural reaches of the mid-Columbia. In addition, there are other environmental factors influencing migration in the mid-Columbia including hydrology, water temperature (in mainstem and tributaries), dissolved gas supersaturation (Dauble and Mueller 1993) and turbidity. Project operations such as turbine and spill schedules may also directly affect passage at these mainstem dams.

Adult fallback may be defined as the involuntary or voluntary downstream movement of upstream migrants. Involuntary fallback occurs when upstream migrants inadvertently pass through the Project to the tailwater downstream of the dam structure, which they must reascend to reach spawning areas. Voluntary fallback refers to the phenomenon of hatchery or tributary "overshoot," when migrants actively move back downstream in search of natal tributaries or hatchery volunteer traps. Some involuntary fallbacks may fail to reascend the dam and eventually spawn or enter a hatchery collection channel at some location downstream of the dam. Voluntary fallbacks (overshoots) exhibit identical behavior. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary fallbacks that fail to reascend the dam.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-50 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

The impacts of delay vary by species, by race/deme, and according to hydrologic and water quality conditions. Species such as steelhead that hold in the river for considerable periods of time prior to spawning are less likely to be negatively affected by slight to moderate delays at fishways. Late migrating species such as fall (ocean-type) chinook and sockeye have a much shorter migratory "window" and may be more susceptible to the effects of delayed migration on pre-spawning mortality or spawning success.

Decreased water velocity in reservoirs, with the exception of zero nighttime flow, does not appear to slow upstream migration of adult salmon and steelhead (Bjornn and Peery 1992). Study data suggest that adult salmon and steelhead travel times through Columbia River reservoirs have decreased compared to travel times through the previous unimpounded system. There is no evidence presented of serious disorientation, wandering, straying or mortality associated with reservoir conditions. Additionally, reduced water velocities may decrease adult energy consumption during upstream migration through the reservoir.

Adult passage delay, if any, appears to be more closely associated with attempts to locate entrances and negotiate transportation channels, trifurcation/bifurcation chambers, trapping facilities and counting stations (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995). Therefore, migratory delay of adults at mid-Columbia fishways, if there is any delay, is generally attributable to the amount of time required to locate entrances and to locate and enter the ladder portions of the fishways rather than traversing the reservoirs.

In terms of total migration timing, more rapid passage through the reservoirs than through a higher velocity riverine environment, appears to compensate for the time fish require to pass the dams. No difference was observed in the travel rate of sockeye between McNary Dam and Rock Island Dam during the period from 1955 - 1994, despite construction of two dams, Priest Rapids and Wanapum, between these two points during that period of time (Quinn, et al. 1997).

Spring Chinook The effects of the Rocky Reach Project on the survival of upstream migrating adult spring chinook are presumed primarily related to passage at the dam. There are currently no estimates of adult spring chinook survival through mid-Columbia River dams. Telemetry studies conducted in the Snake River estimated interdam loss of 5.1 percent (Bjornn et al., 1994). However, the sources of the loss could not be directly determined. Investigators concluded that a combination of harvest, natural mortality and hydroelectric impacts likely attributed to the 5.1 percent loss estimate. Rates of interdam loss were not quantified during the spring chinook telemetry studies in the mid-Columbia River because of confounding factors associated with using radio tags to generate survival estimates (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995). Of 250 tagged spring chinook last detected above Rock Island Dam, only 3 were detected at or below Rocky Reach Dam, while 233 were detected entering tributaries with spawning habitat or returning to a hatchery. Tag regurgitation, tag failure and chance failure to detect a tag at upstream locations, in addition to mortality, are all possible explanations for a tagged fish being last detected in the Columbia River. Of the mortality that could occur in the Columbia River, the loss related to operation of hydroelectric projects is expected to be a very small fraction of the overall adult in-river mortality. Based on this assessment, Chelan believes that mortality to adult spring

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-51 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources chinook caused by the Rocky Reach Project is less than 1 percent above natural levels of mortality.

Direct mortality for adult spring chinook is likely very low. However dams also present the potential for sub-lethal effects upon migrating adult spring chinook. These effects include delays at fishway facilities, increased rates of energetic expenditure in fishways and rates of involuntary fallback. Sources of delay in upstream migration may include extended passage time at fishway entrances, collection systems and ladders. Fallback, or the downstream movement of upstream migrants, is another potential source of delay or injury. Assessment of the magnitude and effects of migratory delay at fishway facilities is complicated by the lack of information on the time required for adult anadromous fish to migrate through the unimpounded, natural reaches of the mid-Columbia. In addition, there are other environmental factors influencing migration in the mid-Columbia including hydrology, water temperature (in mainstem and tributaries), dissolved gas supersaturation (Dauble and Mueller 1993) and turbidity. Project operations such as turbine and spill schedules may also directly affect passage at these mainstem dams.

The impacts of delay vary by species, by race/deme, and according to hydrologic and water quality conditions. Species such as spring chinook that hold in the river for considerable periods of time prior to spawning are less likely to be negatively affected by slight to moderate delays at fishways. Late migrating species such as fall (ocean-type) chinook and sockeye salmon have a much shorter migratory "window" and may be more susceptible to the effects of delayed migration on pre-spawning mortality or spawning success. At Rocky Reach Dam, there was no fallback of spring chinook (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995).

Decreased water velocity in reservoirs, with the exception of zero nighttime flow, does not appear to slow upstream migration of adult salmon and steelhead (Bjornn and Peery 1992). Spring chinook adult migrations in the Columbia River system have been studied with radio telemetry on a number of occasions. Young (1978) determined migration rates of 18, 13 and 12.5 km/day from Bonneville to Little Goose Dam during 1973, 1974, and 1975, respectively. Migration rates for spring chinook through the Rocky Reach Project are more rapid. The median migration rate, from the time of first arrival in the Rocky Reach tailrace to the time of arrival in the tailrace of the upstream Wells project, was 26.8 km/day (60.0 hours to pass the dam and 67 km from tailrace to tailrace).

The peak in spring chinook passage at Rock Island Dam is presently two weeks earlier than in the 1930s and 1940s (Chapman et al. 1995). There is no evidence presented of serious disorientation, wandering, straying or mortality associated with reservoir conditions. Additionally, reduced water velocities may decrease adult energy consumption during upstream migration through the reservoir (Stuehrenberg et al. 1995).

Juvenile Passage Steelhead and Spring Chinook Turbine Passage: To date, the factors causing injury and mortality in turbines have been difficult to assess because it is not been possible to directly observe fish passage through a turbine unit. However, based on

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-52 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources visible observation of test fish, mortality associated with turbine passage has generally been classified in two categories: direct and indirect. Direct mortality occurs within the confines of the turbine and is assumed to originate from mechanical-, pressure-, or hydraulic-related factors (Eicher 1987). Indirect mortality, which occurs after juvenile fish exit the turbine, can result from conditions such as stress and backroll entrapment, which are not normally lethal in themselves, but may result in increased risk of predation or injury during subsequent downstream migration. Most predation of juveniles likely occurs in the tailrace as the juveniles recover from the disorientation and stress of turbine passage (Ledgerwood et al. 1990). Stress may also cause harmful levels of physical or behavioral tension, leading to weakened disease resistance and subsequent delayed mortality (Ferguson 1994).

Juvenile turbine passage survival studies for the Columbia and Snake rivers began in the 1940s and have continued on a sporadic basis to the present. The results of several studies reviewed by Iwamoto and Williams (1993) showed total (direct and indirect) juvenile turbine passage mortality estimates ranging from 2 to 20 percent. Balloon tag studies of direct mortality for Kaplan turbines have been in the range of 4 to 7 percent when averaged over the range of operating conditions (Normandeau and Skalski 1997). At Rocky Reach Dam, balloon tags have been used to measure the direct mortality of yearling chinook (fall chinook) in representative turbines of each type: the original vertical Kaplan and fixed-blade propeller units; and the new Kaplan turbines that have now been installed to replace five of the old Kaplan turbines. The survival estimates were 94-96 percent, 96 percent, and 95 percent, respectively (RMC and Skalski 1994a, 1994b and Normandeau and Skalski 1997). Indirect effects have not been measured specifically, but an indication of the indirect mortality at Lower Granite Dam was obtained in 1995. Concurrent studies with balloon tags (direct mortality) and PIT tags (total mortality) released chinook into the same turbine intake (release hose, location and turbine operating conditions identical). The survival estimate for PIT tagged chinook was 1.3 percent lower than the balloon tag estimate, suggesting that indirect mortality was of low magnitude.

Survival of juvenile fish through turbines has been generally found to correlate positively with turbine operating efficiency (Ferguson 1994). However, an analysis by Eicher (1987) concluded that the data set is too small to draw any direct or statistically significant relationship between turbine operating efficiency and juvenile passage mortality. Some researchers speculate that fish survival is probably best at peak turbine efficiency (Bell 1981), while others believe that settings beyond peak efficiency offer better conditions for fish passage (Sheldon 1995). At Rocky Reach Dam the Kaplan units maintain high efficiency over a broad operating range, while the fixed- blade units, which are currently being replaced with Kaplan turbines, have a high efficiency but must be operated at a single setting for the gross head.

Spill Passage: The objective of passing juveniles over the spillway is to provide an alternative non-turbine passage route. The advantages of spill passage are providing a passage route with higher direct survival, a relatively high effectiveness in diverting fish away from turbine intakes, and the ease and flexibility of its implementation. Survival of fish passing through spillways of dams on the Columbia River has been estimated to be 98 percent to 100 percent (Anderson et al. 1993).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-53 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

However, juveniles passing over the spillway do face several risks. First, the juveniles can sustain physical injuries, such as descaling, that may incapacitate or even kill them. Second, increasing spill may result in higher total dissolved gas (TDG) supersaturation levels, which in turn may cause gas bubble trauma (GBT) in juveniles and adults. Juveniles are also subjected to predation upon entry into the tailrace. Individuals that become injured or disoriented while passing over the spillway may be more susceptible to predation (Chapman et al. 1994a).

Reservoir Passage: Reservoir impoundment can affect the survival of outmigrating anadromous salmonid juveniles by creating habitat for increased predator populations and by reducing water velocities, which can slow the migration rate and increase travel time of juveniles. Increased travel time can affect the size and survival rate of juveniles, timing of ocean transition and thermal imprinting. Increased travel time due to passage through reservoirs also increases potential exposure of juvenile outmigrants to predatory fish, which may reduce migration survival.

Due to reservoir construction, water velocities through the Snake and lower Columbia River are today much slower than historically (CBFWA 1990). Raymond (1968, 1969, 1979) and Bentley and Raymond (1976) estimated that juvenile anadromous salmonids move through the Snake River and lower Columbia River impoundments one-half to one-third slower than they would through free-flowing river sections of the same length. Although these and other studies indicate that water velocity is a primary determinant of juvenile migration speed (Smith 1982; Buettner and Brimmer 1995; Berggren and Filardo 1993), other researchers suggest covariant factors in addition to flow may be affecting the dynamics of out-migration (Achord et al. 1995; Beeman and Rondorf 1992; Mains and Smith 1964; Chapman et al. 1994a; Giorgi et al. 1997). These other factors include fish size, condition, water temperature, and date of release.

Water velocities and migration rates in the Rocky Reach reservoir are favorable for faster migration rates and higher reservoir survival than expected for the Snake and lower Columbia River. Under existing conditions, water velocities in the mid-Columbia reach are roughly twice as fast as water velocities in the Snake and lower Columbia River system. At 80,000 cfs, a commonly occurring base spring flow rate for the Snake River, the average cross-sectional velocity in Lower Granite reservoir is about 0.7 fps (COE 1992). At 130,000 cfs, a similarly common base spring flow rate for Rocky Reach reservoir, the average reservoir velocity is about 1.5 fps. At 140,000 cfs (add 10,000 cfs flow from Wenatchee River), velocities through the downstream Rock Island, Wanapum and Priest Rapids reservoirs are 2.6, 1.0 and 1.5 fps, respectively (FERC 1995).

These higher velocities are reflected in faster migration rates for juvenile spring chinook through the mid-Columbia River. The median migration rate of spring chinook through the lower mid- Columbia (Rock Island Dam to McNary Dam) was 21.5 km/d for PIT tagged juveniles from 1989 - 1995 (Giorgi et al. 1997). In the Snake River, median migration rates reported for spring chinook in 1994, when flows during the migration averaged about 80,000 cfs, ranged from 10.6 - 17.9 km/d for spring chinook migrating from Silcott Island to McNary Dam (Muir et al. 1995). Thus, available evidence indicates that, under normal flow conditions, spring chinook migrate

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-54 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources through the mid-Columbia River about twice as fast as spring chinook migrating through the Snake River system.

Presently, there are no estimates of reservoir passage survival for juvenile spring chinook in the mid-Columbia River reservoirs. Project survival estimates from the Snake River spring chinook survival studies have given estimates of survival for passage through river reaches, including the effects of passage through both reservoirs and dams. Averaging across the entire length of the reach, an average survival rate per kilometer can be calculated. In 1996, the overall survival rate spring chinook over the 187 km reach from Couse Creek to the tailrace of Lower Monumental Dam was 66 percent (Smith et al. 1998). An average survival rate calculated per kilometer traveled by the fish is 99.78 percent. However, there is no indication that this number represents true reservoir survival. Recent research in the Snake River indicates that the majority of total project mortality is attributed to effects of passage at the dam rather than reservoir related effects. Assuming that reservoir effects accounted for 20 percent of the per kilometer loss measured for the Snake River projects, the survival rate per kilometer for reservoir passage only would be 99.96 percent. Applying this rate to the 68 km Rocky Reach reservoir yields an estimated survival rate of 97.3 percent (distance is exponent of survival/km, thus survival = .9996).

Predation: Changes in physical habitat, water quality and downstream passage conditions have combined to increase the abundance of predators and the risk of juvenile outmigrant mortality due to predation (Mullan et al. 1986; Chapman et al. 1994a). Dams present an obstacle to the downstream migration of juvenile anadromous salmonids, often causing them to concentrate in forebays before finding a route past the dam. Concentrations of juvenile anadromous salmonids provide a ready food supply for predators that congregate at such sites (Beamesderfer and Rieman 1991). Passage through turbines, spillways or bypass facilities may stun, disorient or injure some juvenile anadromous salmonids, making them less capable of escaping predators. Sediment that formerly would have been suspended during high spring flows settles out in upstream impoundments, resulting in reduced turbidity in the mid-Columbia River. Clearer water makes juvenile outmigrants potentially more visible and more susceptible to predation.

In addition to juvenile outmigrants being more susceptible to predators while migrating past the dams, it is generally assumed that the number of predators increased with impoundment of the mid-Columbia reach. Mullan et al. (1986) reported the contradictory evidence that counts of Northern pikeminnow in the adult fishways have generally decreased at Columbia River dams since the reservoirs were impounded. Whether this reduction is due to reduced population size or to changes in movement patterns is unknown. The deep, low velocity habitat is preferred by Northern pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), the major native predator fish of juvenile anadromous salmonids. On a per capita basis, predator densities in the mid-Columbia reservoirs were similar to densities in the John Day reservoir (Burley and Poe 1994). Additionally, two gamefish species, walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui), were introduced into the Columbia River system in the 1940s to 1950s to provide sportfishing opportunities (Henderson and Foster 1956; Zook 1983). Research has shown that these species also prey on juvenile salmonids, but to a lesser extent than Northern pikeminnow.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-55 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Total Dissolved Gas Columbia River total dissolved gas (TDG) supersaturation often occurs during periods of high runoff and spill at hydropower facilities, primarily because spill in deep tailrace pools can cause significant entrainment of atmospheric gases during deep plunge of the water. TDG supersaturation conditions can persist and accumulate through the mid-Columbia River reach, since the reach consists of relatively deep pools behind each dam, providing less effective dissipation than naturally shallower, more turbulent river systems. Fish and other aquatic organisms that are exposed to excessive TDG supersaturation can develop GBT, a condition that is often harmful or even fatal (Ebel et al. 1975).

GBT effects on anadromous salmonids are well documented, although most information has been obtained in laboratory or field-based bioassay studies (Weitkamp and Katz 1980). Much remains to be learned about the physiological and behavioral aspects of GBT in the natural environment. Dissolved gas supersaturation thresholds for signs of GBT in anadromous salmonids were developed by the NMFS GBD Panel in June 1994 (NMFS 1995b).

External signs of GBT include exophthalmia or “pop eye,” bubble or blister formation under the skin, hemorrhages, over-inflation of swim bladder and body cavities, and bubbles or emboli in gill blood vessels. Behavioral effects include loss of equilibrium, loss of swimming performance (including speed, direction and avoidance response), violent writhing, lethargy and reduced feeding (Weitkamp and Katz 1980). Exposure to TDG supersaturation can also delay migrations and weaken fish condition (Bjornn et al. 1994). Adult salmon exposed to TDG supersaturation at or above 106 percent gain less distance and swim less time than do unexposed fish (SRSRT 1993). In general, behavioral effects of GBT appear to follow that expected from any fish suffering severe physical stress that impedes or damages its respiratory and equilibrium functions. The physiological and behavioral effects of TDG supersaturation can make anadromous salmonids more susceptible to disease or predation (BPA et al. 1994a).

The occurrence of TDG supersaturation in the Columbia River system is well documented and has been linked to mortalities and migration delays of salmon (Beiningen and Ebel 1970; Gray and Haynes 1977; COE 1994). Total dissolved gas supersaturation in the Columbia and Snake rivers was identified in the 1960s and 1970s as a detriment to salmon, and those concerns have reappeared as management agencies have reinstituted spill as a means of aiding fish passage around hydropower facilities (NMFS 1995). The spill program to improve juvenile salmon passage survival at Rocky Reach Dam is managed to maintain TDG levels within water quality standards (five-year waiver). Spill is spread over a number of gates in an attempt to control introduction of TDG below the Project.

Water Temperature Cumulatively, the storage dams on the Columbia River delay the time when thermal maximums are reached and when cooling begins in late summer (BPA et al. 1994a). The dams may also slightly increase the overall average annual temperature depending on reservoir volume, surface area and thermal stratification potential (BPA et al. 1994a). The two WDE segments of the Columbia River affecting Chelan PUD Projects (WA-CR-1030 and WA-CR-1040) are not on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list as being water quality limited for temperature. However,

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-56 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

EPA has cited water temperature as a concern from Bonneville Dam to Chief Joseph Dam (COE 1994a). Monitoring data from the mid-Columbia reach indicate water temperatures commonly exceed the 180C water temperature standard. Moreover, water temperatures measured in the mid- Columbia River have exceeded levels shown to cause delays in upstream migration and have exceeded criteria set by the NPPC for some species. Annual maximum water temperatures from 1989 to 1994 have been approximately 200C (COE 1993). Water temperatures measured at Chief Joseph Dam are occasionally higher than at Wells or any of the other PUD dams. In 1984, the maximum temperature at Chief Joseph Dam was 23.00C, while the maximum water temperature at mainstem PUD dams was 22.30C (COE 1993).

E3.3 BOTANICAL AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES

E3.3.1 General Overview

E3.3.1.1 Botanical Resources The Rocky Reach Reservoir and Project area lies on the boundary between the Columbia Basin and the foothills of the North Cascades Mountains. It is confined to a wide canyon characterized by basalt cliffs and exposed rock outcrops. Elevation ranges from 707 feet to 730 feet in the band to be surveyed along the reservoir. Average annual precipitation in the Rocky Reach Project area is 8.5 inches, most of which occurs as snow in the winter (Chelan PUD 1991).

The Project area is in the Artemisia tridentata / Pseudoroegneria spicata (big sagebrush/ bluebunch wheatgrass), or “shrub-steppe” ecological zone, which is characteristic of the drier portions of the Columbia basin (Franklin and Dyrness 1973). Occasional stands of Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) and Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper) can also be seen in the Project area. The Artemisia tridentata / Pseudoroegneria spicata association is generally composed of four vegetation layers: 1) shrub layer of principally big sagebrush, bitterbrush, and rabbitbrush, 2) a layer of perennial grasses dominated by bluebunch wheatgrass, 3) a layer of low growing grasses such as Sandberg’s bluegrass and cheatgrass, and 4) a surface crust of crustose lichens and mosses. There is typically also a number of herbaceous perennial plant species represented.

Before European settlement, the vegetation of the area was largely shrub-steppe, which was maintained by frequent wildfires. A number of factors have altered the historic vegetation of the Project area. Some of these occurred both prior to and after the initial inundation of the lake in 1961, and others occurred more recently or are presently occurring. These include: grazing, fires and fire suppression, farming, residential development and weed invasion. Before the Project was constructed in 1961, the area was already much altered by these factors. The historical botanical resources of the Project area closely correlate to that of existing botanical resources, where native vegetation is still present. New riparian and aquatic plant communities have subsequently developed on the present day shoreline.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-57 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Fire and Fire Suppression Historically, frequent wildfires maintained and shaped forested and shrub-steppe areas throughout the Project area, particularly before widespread fire suppression and the introduction of weedy plant species. Fire suppression tends to decrease the area of open shrub-steppe and parkland, and leads to greater understory cover in forested areas. Another result of long-term fire suppression is an increase in fuel levels in unburned shrub-steppe and forested communities, which increases the risk of catastrophic crown fires.

Grazing and Weed Invasion Weed invasion is correlated with grazing, fire and fire supression. Typically, a high cover of weed species decreases the cover and diversity of native species, sometimes to very low levels. Perhaps the most ubiquitous weed species is Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass). There are also a number of noxious weeds that were documented within the Project area during the 1990 survey. These include: several species of Centaurea spp. (knapweed), Linaria genistifolia var. dalmatica (Dalmatian toadflax), Verbascum thapsus (mullein), Hypericum perforatum (St. John’s-wort), and Cardaria spp. (hoarycress).

Other non-native species which may be problematic in the Project area include: Elaeagnus angustifolia (Russian olive), Morus alba (mulberry), Medicago spp. (alfalfa), Melilotus spp. (sweet-clover), Robinia pseudo-acacia (black locust), Convolvulus arvensis (field morning glory), Tragopogon dubius (yellow salsify), Salsola kali (Russian thistle), Cirsium spp. (thistle), and Ulmus sibericus (Siberian elm). A number of these non-native species are large shrubs or trees. Some are are associated with riparian areas.

Agriculture and Residential Development The first highway through the area constructed in 1879 was a military road connecting the White Bluffs area near Hanford with Camp Chelan. A second road called the Colockum Road was built in 1880 and connected to the town of Kittitas near Ellensburg. The railroad came to the Wenatchee area in 1892 from the east and was extended to the Seattle area the following year across Stevens Pass. The fruit industry has been an economic mainstay since the early 1900’s. When the dam was built in 1961, they were relocated and rebuilt. Much of what was inundated by the Rocky Reach Dam had already been converted to orchard lands and grazed areas. Presently, levels of human disturbance and development within the Project area vary widely, ranging from relatively pristine shrub-steppe and vertical cliffs, to completely developed. Approximately half of the lands bordering on the reservoir currently consist of fruit orchards, residential developments and recreational sites. Much of the reservoir shoreline does not presently have functioning native habitat. It is lined with highways, a railroad, riprap, orchards, and residential areas.

E3.3.1.2 Wildlife Resources Prior to inundation, the Columbia River shoreline between what is now the Rocky Reach and Wells dams was comprised largely of cobble, gravel, and sand riverbars, that resulted from scouring during spring runoff. The river width during normal flow was approximately half the width of the river channel. A thin line of riparian vegetation could be found at places along the channel fringe, although episodic flooding and annual dewatering prevented substantial riparian

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-58 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources development. In most places, the arid steppe on both sides of the river extended to the high water mark.

Wildlife typically found along the river prior to inundation included species adapted to the faster run-of-the-river conditions, such as common mergansers and Canada geese, while killdeer, spotted sandpipers, and California gulls would have been found along the unvegetated shorelines. The thin riparian vegetation would have provided nesting habitat for bird species adapted to nesting in, or foraging from, scrubby willows, including the belted kingfisher, willow flycatcher, yellow warbler, yellow-breasted chat, Lazuli bunting, song sparrow, and Bullock’s oriole. The vegetation would also have provided shoreline cover for mink and raccoons.

Over half the area inundated by the reservoir fill was originally shrub-steppe dominated by sagebrush and bitterbrush, or, where heavily disturbed, cheatgrass. These habitats provided winter range for mule deer on the Chelan County side of the river, especially during severe winters when snowfall conditions would drive deer down to the river’s edge. In the years before inundation, winter deer use of the area ranged from very few animals to 2,000, depending on the severity of weather conditions (Patterson 1961).

Approximately one-third of the area inundated by the Rocky Reach pool was orchard. Even though orchards do not typically provide important habitat for wildlife, orchards along the Columbia River, especially apple orchards, are favored by mourning doves for nesting (US Fish and Wildlife Service in Patterson 1961).

Today, the Rocky Reach Project area supports wildlife adapted to reservoirs, environments developed riparian zones, backwater wetlands, orchards, rural residences, and shrub-steppe. Further detail on these species is found in Section E3.3.2.2.

E3.3.2 Description of Existing Resources

E3.3.2.1 Botanical Resources Much of the information here is taken from several reports prepared for Chelan PUD’s pool raise proposal in 1991, particularly the report describing the rare plant survey (Caplow 1990). The following broad categories of plant community types were identified along the reservoir banks: upland communities, riparian communities and wetland communities.

E3.3.2.1.1 Upland Communities Upland community types within the Project area characterized by a diversity of habitats including: forest, shrub and grassland, bare ground and rock, and disturbed habitats.

Forest Types Ponderosa pine series. Occasional small stands of Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) and Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper) can be seen within the study area. This type occurs with greater frequency with increasing elevation outside of the Project area.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-59 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Shrub and Grassland Types Shrub-steppe: The vast majority of the Project area is in the shrub-steppe vegetation zone. Primarily due to a history of grazing, undisturbed shrub-steppe is uncommon along the reservoir. Disturbed and weedy shrub-steppe typically has a low cover and diversity of native plants. Common native shrub-steppe species include: Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush), Chrysothamnus spp. (rabbitbrush), Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush), Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass), Eriogonum spp. (wild buckwheat), Erigeron spp. (daisy), and Poa secunda (Sandberg’s bluegrass).

Islands: There are a number of islands in the reservoir, most of which are near the shoreline. They vary widely, but are generally gravelly or rocky, often with eroding margins. The dominant plant community is shrub-steppe. Most of the islands lie between Rocky Reach Dam and the mouth of the Chelan River, and were part of the mainland before the Project was built. Many of the channels now present between the islands and the reservoir shoreline were once roadcuts on the original highway between Wenatchee and Chelan. Turtle Rock was also once connected to the mainland, but is now separated by a substantial channel. The island was heavily affected by cattle-grazing prior to 1960, and is now affected similarly by the resident deer population.

Bare Ground and Rock Types Bare ground and rock habitat types have a number of distinctive habitats. These are typically very dry and are characterized by low vegetation cover.

Bedrock outcroppings and large boulders: Made up of granite, schist, gneiss and basalt, this habitat is sparsely vegetated with species like Penstemon richardsonii (Richardson’s penstemon), Thelypodium laciniatum (thick-leaved thelypody), Verbascum thapsus (mullein), and Stephanomeria tenuifolia (skeleton-weed).

Steep sand and gravel slopes: Mostly in the upstream portions of the reservoir, steep sand and gravel slopes are typically 30 - 50 feet high and are subject to continuous erosion. They are sparsely vegetated with Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush), Eriogonum spp. (wild buckwheat), and Cryptantha celosioides (cockscomb cryptantha).

Level gravel bars: Several large level gravel bars are present in the upstream stretches of the reservoir. These pavements of cobble-sized rocks support species such as: Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper), Eriogonum compositum (northern buckwheat), Artemisia campestris ssp. borealis var. scouleriana (northern wormwood), Gaillardia aristita, and Allium spp. (wild onion).

Low sand dunes: Low sand dunes are common along the reservoir and are typically sparsely vegetated. Dominant species include: Oenothera pallida var. pallida (pale evening-primrose), Phacelia linearis (thread-leaf phacelia), Phacelia hastata var. leucophylla (white-leaf phacelia), Cymopteris terebinthinus var. terebinthinus (turpentine cymopteris), and Purshia tridentata (bitterbrush).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-60 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Disturbed, Developed, and Modified Habitats Approximately half of the lands bordering the reservoir consist of fruit orchards, residential developments and recreational sites. These areas may be landscaped or more typically support completely altered, non-native vegetation. Because of the steep slopes abutting the reservoir, about one third of the shoreline has been stabilized with riprap (Ebasco 1991). Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and the weedy herbaceous perennial Centaurea diffusa (diffuse knapweed), has invaded many disturbed sites in the study area.

E3.3.2.1.2 Riparian Communities There are four riparian cover types in the Project area: riparian deciduous tree, riparian mixed, riparian shrubland, and riparian grassland. While not uncommon in the reservoir, the riparian zone is restricted to a narrow band along the shoreline, ranging in width from less than 1 foot up to 100 feet. The development of riparian vegetation in the Project area is limited by arid conditions, steep banks that are often stabilized by riprap, and residential and agricultural development along the shoreline (Chelan PUD 1991).

Riparian grassland: Grassy riparian areas are common throughout the reservoir, generally occurring in narrow strips near the waterline. This habitat type is typically weedy, with dominant species such as: Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass), Arrenatherum elatius (oatgrass), Cicuta douglasii (Douglas’ water-hemlock), Melilotus alba (white sweet-clover), Carex spp (sedge species), and Dactylis glomerata (orchard grass). Several populations of the Sensitive species Epipactis gigantea (giant helleborine) was located in this habitat type.

Wooded riparian areas: Wooded riparian areas include riparian deciduous tree, riparian mixed, and riparian shrubland types. They are often in less developed areas and provide important wildlife habitat. The wooded riparian types are similar to the grassy riparian areas, but include a substantial cover of tree and large shrub species such as Populus balsamifera var. trichocarpa (black cottonwood), Salix spp. (willow), Alnus rhombifolia (white alder), Crataegus douglasii (black hawthorne), Rubus discolor (Himalayan blackberry), Cornus stolonifera (red-osier dogwood), and Betula occidentalis (water birch). Phalaris arundinacea (reed canary-grass) is common in wooded riparian areas.

E3.3.2.1.3 Wetland Communities Wetland habitat in the Project area includes submerged aquatic vegetation beds and patches of emergent wetlands. These are typically located in protected coves or in shallow areas where sediment has accumulated. They are also often found in isolated depressions associated with the railroad and the highways which parallel much of both sides of the river (Chelan PUD 1991).

Wetland vegetation, primarily aquatic vegetation beds, are widespread within the Project area (Chelan PUD 1991). Dominant native plant species of these habitat types include: Potamogeton filiformis (slender-leaved pondweed), Elodea canadensis (common waterweed), Typha latifolia (common cattail) and Scirpus validus (tule) (WDFW 1994). Other non-native plant and noxious weed species of concern in aquatic vegetation beds and emergent wetlands include: Potamogeton crispus (curly pondweed), Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife), Iris pseudacorus (yellow iris), and Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian water-milfoil). Programs to control M.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-61 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources spicatum include annual application of aquatic herbicides and mechanical rotovation of the aquatic beds (Truscott 1991). Most of this is done in the vicinity of boat launches and access in state and county parks. M. spicatum typically grows in areas with water depths between 4 and 12 feet. Its preferred habitat ranges from silty, sandy areas with low current, to cobble areas with higher current.

E3.3.2.1.4 Plant Species with Federal and/or State Status For the purposes of this document, a “rare plant” is defined as any plant species or variety of a species which is designated by the FWS, the USFS, or by the State of Washington as Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive. This includes species or varieties which are included on the Washington “Review Group 1” list. Federal and state status designations may change over time, so the status of some of the species found within the Project may be different in the future. Table E3-5 presents the known and potential rare plant species for the Rocky Reach Project Area. Further fieldwork may reveal other resources, which have not yet been identified, including federally listed species.

Sources for information include: the Washington Natural Heritage Information System, Flora of the Pacific Northwest by Hitchcock et al. (1955 - 1969), and the Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California edited by J. Hickman (1993). The status of all plant taxa listed in Table E3-5 reflect the most current information available; however, the status of a particular rare plant taxon is subject to change by the Washington Natural Heritage Program and/or the FWS.

Table E3-5: Rare Plant Taxa Potentially Present In The Rocky Reach Project Area (Based On WNHP 1997). Taxa Listed Include Those Currently Considered Endangered, Threatened, Or Sensitive In Washington, And Those For Whom Not Enough Is Known To Assign A Status (Review Group 1)

Taxon Typical Habitat Status ID+ Agoseris elata meadows, open woods S 5-7 Ammannia robusta wet soil R1 7-9 Antennaria parvifolia dry open places, sandy areas, pine forests S 3-4 Astragalus arrectus shrub-steppe, grassy hillsides S 5-6 Astragalus misellus var. pauper shrub-steppe S 5-6 Astragalus sinuatus rocky hillsides with sagebrush E 4-5 Botrychium lunaria moist to dry areas S 6-7 Botrychium paradoxum moist to dry areas S 6-7 Botrychium pinnatum fields, shrubby slopes S 6-7 Botrychium simplex moist to dry meadows, marshes S 6-7 Camissonia pygmaea shrub-steppe; flood gravels T 5-7 Carex buxbaumii wet, marshy areas S 5-7 Carex comosa lake margins, marshes, drainage ditches S 5-8 Carex hystericina wet areas along streams, rivers S 5-8 Chaenactis thompsonii dry open areas, serpentine slopes S 5-8 Cicuta bulbifera marshes, bogs, wet meadows S 8-9 Cryptantha leucophaea shrub-steppe, dry open sandy areas S 5-6 Cryptantha spiculifera sage steppe, dry, open slopes and flats S 5-7 Cryptogramma stelleri moist shaded cliffs, ledges, limestone S 5-8 Cypripedium fasciculatum moist to dry rocky open coniferous forest T 4-7

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-62 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-5: Rare Plant Taxa Potentially Present In The Rocky Reach Project Area (Based On WNHP 1997). Taxa Listed Include Those Currently Considered Endangered, Threatened, Or Sensitive In Washington, And Those For Whom Not Enough Is Known To Assign A Status (Review Group 1) Eleocharis atropurpurea wet places, lakeshores EX 5-8 *Epipactis gigantea streambanks, lakes, springs, seeps S 4-7 Erigeron piperianus shrub-steppe S 5-6 Githopsis specularioides dry open places in valleys and foothills S 5-6 Hackelia hispida var. disjuncta cliffs, talus S 5-6 Hackelia venusta rocky slopes, with Ponderosa pine E 5-6 Taxon Typical Habitat Status ID+ Iliamna longisepala dry open slopes, open pine forests S 5-9 Mimulus suksdorfii open, moist to dry places S 4-6 Nicotiana attenuata dry sandy bottoms, dry open places S 6-9 Pellaea breweri rock crevices, ledges, talus slopes S 5-8 Pellaea brachyptera rock crevices, ledges, talus slopes S 5-8 Penstemon eriantherus whitedii foothills, shrub-steppe R1 5-7 Petrophyton cinerascens basalt cliffs and bluffs T 5-8 Phacelia lenta basalt cliffs T 5-7 Platanthera sparsiflora open wet areas, bogs S 6-8 Rorippa columbiae riparian shorelines, moist sandy soil T 7-10 Rotala ramosior wet, swampy places R1 6-9 Saxifragopsis fragarioides rock crevices, ledges, talus S 5-7 Sidalcea oregana var. calva moist soils, boggy meadows near streams E/PE 6-7 Silene seelyi steep talus slopes, rock crevices T 5-8 Spiranthes diluvialis rivers, floodplains, mesic and wet meadows T/LT Spiranthes porrifolia moist to wet meadows S 6-9 Teucrium canadense vicidum moist low ground S 6-9 Trifolium thompsonii open areas with sagebrush, sandy soils T 4-6 + Months during which the taxon is typically identifiable. * Plant taxa currently known to occur in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Project Area. E Endangered. Taxa that are in danger of becoming extinct in the state within the near future if factors contributing to their decline continue. T Threatened. Taxa that are likely to become Endangered in the state within the near future if factors contributing their decline continue. S Sensitive. Taxa that are vulnerable or declining, and could become Endangered or Threatened in the state without active management or removal of threats. R1 Review Group 1. Taxa in need of additional field work before a status can be assigned. EX Extirpated. Taxa possibly extirpated from Washington. PE Proposed Endangered. Any taxon which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range and which has been proposed for listing as such in the Federal Register pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act. L Listed by the USFWS

Sources for information include: the Washington Natural Heritage Information System, Flora of the Pacific Northwest by Hitchcock et al. (1955 - 1969) and The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California edited by J. Hickman (1993). The status of all the plant taxa listed in Table E3-5 reflect the most current information available; however, the status of a particular rare plant taxon is subject to change by the WNHP and/or the USFWS.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-63 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

The only known rare plant species known from within the Project area is Epipactis gigantea (giant helleborine). Rare plant species known from near the Project area include: Petrophytum cineracens (Chelan rockmat), Trifolium thompsonii (Thompson’s clover), Phacelia lenta (sticky phacelia), and Camissonia pygmaea (dwarf evening-primrose). A historic population of Cryptantha leucophaea (gray cryptantha) is known from Turtle Rock. It was not relocated during the 1990 survey.

Epipactis gigantea is a large, short-rhizomatous member of the orchid family with large green flowers. It grows in riparian and other wet areas. It is known from nine populations along the lowest 16 miles of the reservoir, from Rocky Reach Dam to Navarre Coulee. In 1990, populations sizes ranged from nine to more than 250 stems. There was an estimated total of 700 stems. The plants were found in the first three vertical feet of the current reservoir level, typically within four feet of the water’s edge, in open, lush, grassy, somewhat wet habitats. Common associates included: Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass), Arrenatherum elatius (oatgrass), Equisetum spp. (horsetail), and Cicuta douglasii (Douglas’ water-hemlock). It is Sensitive in Washington (WNHP 1997), included on the R6 Sensitive plant list for the USFS (1990).

Since the 1990 rare plant survey of the Rocky Reach Reservoir, the federally Threatened species Spiranthes diluvialis (Ute ladies’-tresses) has been located in Washington, in Okanogan County. It is also known from Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Nevada, and Idaho. The preferred habitat of S. diluvialis is low elevation wetland and riparian areas, including spring habitats, mesic to wet meadows, river meanders, and floodplains. Described in 1984, this species is not contained in the flora for this region. Special effort will be made to search for this species within the study area.

E3.3.2.1.5 Habitats of Special Concern At this time no plant communities with the Rocky Reach Project Area have been identified or designated as Habitats of Special Concern by any agency.

E3.3.2.2 Wildlife Resources Lists of the wildlife species expected or known to occur along the Rocky Reach reservoir are included in Table E3-6 to Table E3-13. The Chelan PUD has been conducting wildlife surveys along the reservoir since 1982.

E3.3.2.2.1 Big Game The only big game species of significant numbers found in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach pool are mule deer and bighorn sheep. The shrub-steppe and ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir-covered slopes on the Chelan County side of the river provide wintering habitat for mule deer. As part of the Rocky Reach licensing agreement, Chelan PUD provided funds for the Washington Department of Game (now Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) to purchase 20,400 acres of this habitat to be managed as big game wintering range. Together with an additional 10,100 acres of Department of Natural Resources or Bureau of Land Management leased or managed under a Memorandum of Understanding, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Service manages this land under six habitat management areas (HMAs): Swakane,

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-64 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Entiat, Oklahoma Gulch, Navarre Coulee, Knapp Coulee, and Chelan Butte. Except during severe winter conditions, few deer range as far downslope as Highway 97. Deer rarely cross (or gain access due to fencing in some places) the highway to reach the river. Deer use along the shoreline habitats of the reservoir is, consequently, sporadic. Presently, the mule deer numbers in Chelan County are very low due to severe losses (70 percent) during the winter of 1996-97.

Bighorn sheep are found west of Rocky Reach Reservoir between Rocky Reach Dam and the Entiat River. During the winter, sheep move downslope to the Swakane Habitat Management Area, occasionally as far down as Highway 97. However, they are not known to cross the highway and reach the reservoir.

E3.3.2.2.2 Other Mammals Other mammals in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Reservoir (Table E3-6) include predators such as coyotes, bobcats, raccoons, badgers, mink, and long-tailed weasels. Mink, especially, have benefited from the increased riparian habitats, especially in backwater areas that support muskrats, montane voles, and vagrant shrews. At 11 sites between the dam and Daroga Park, Highway 151 has separated backwater pools from the river. Connected to the river via culverts, these pools, lined with emergent vegetation, provide ideal habitat for muskrats, raccoons, and mink. With the increase in riparian vegetation, and the stable water levels, beaver numbers are likely higher today than before the Project was built. Post-construction studies on the adjacent Rock Island pool showed a significant increase in muskrat and mink numbers (Foster et al. 1984).

Other rodents found near the reservoir include shrub-steppe species such as Great Basin pocket mice, deer mice, western harvest mice, and sagebrush voles. Yellow-bellied marmots, bushy- tailed woodrats, and Nuttall’s cottontails inhabit the rocky areas adjacent to the reservoir. These same rocky habitats, especially cliff areas such as Robinson Cliffs near Earthquake Point, those between Chelan Falls hatchery and Gallagher Flats, and those near Rivermile 511, likely support roosting and nursery sites for bats (especially small-footed myotis, western pipistrelles, pallid bats, and possibly spotted and Townsend’s big-eared bats).

Table E3-6: Mammal Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Insectivores Merriam’s shrew Shrub-steppe None Suitable habitat throughout (Sorex merriami) vicinity Vagrant shrew Moist forests, streams, marshes, and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Sorex vagrans) wet meadows. occurrence vicinity Coast mole All forest types, meadows, Confirmed Suitable habitat in deep soil areas. (Scapanus orarius) agriculture fields, and orchards. occurrence

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-65 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-6: Mammal Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Bats California myotis Forested and shrub-steppe habitat None Suitable habitat throughout (Myotis californicus) near water. vicinity. Small-footed myotis Shrub-steppe habitat and ponderosa Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Myotis ciliolabrum) pine forests, near cliffs and rock occurrence vicinity. outcrops. Long-eared myotis Forested and shrub-steppe habitat None Suitable habitat in riparian. (Myotis evotis) near water. Little brown bat Forested and riparian. None Suitable habitat in riparian. (Myotis lucifugus) Fringed myotis Ponderosa pine forest and shrub- None Suitable habitat throughout (Myotis thysanodes) steppe habitat. vicinity. Long-legged myotis Ponderosa pine forest and Columbia None Suitable habitat throughout (Myotis volans) River riparian. vicinity. Yuma myotis Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine None Suitable habitat throughout (Myotis yumanensis) forests, and arid grasslands. vicinity. Hoary bat All mid-elevation forest types and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout the (Lasiurus cinereus) shrub-steppe habitat. occurrence vicinity. Silver-haired bat All forest types and riparian zones. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout the (Lasionycteris occurrence vicinity. noctivagans) Big brown bat All habitat types. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout the (Eptsicus fuscus) occurrence vicinity. Western pipistrelle Deep river canyons and large water None Suitable habitat throughout the (Pipistrellus hesperus) bodies in arid terrain. vicinity. Spotted bat Deep canyons and steep cliffs in arid None Suitable habitat throughout the (Euderma maculatum) terrain. vicinity. Townsend’s big-eared Low to mid-elevation forest types None Suitable habitat throughout the bat (Corynorhinus and shrub-steppe zone. vicinity. townsendii) Pallid bat Shrub-steppe and dry forests, cliffs, None Suitable habitat throughout the (Antrozous pallidus) mines, and caves. vicinity. Pikas, Rabbits, and Hares Black-tailed Jack Rabbit Shrub-steppe habitat. None Suitable habitat throughout the (Lepus californicus) vicinity. White-tailed jack rabbit Shrub-steppe habitat and lower None Suitable habitat throughout the (Lepus townsendii) elevation ponderosa pine savanna vicinity.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-66 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-6: Mammal Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Nuttall’s cottontail Riparian areas, brushy habitat, shrub- Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout the (Sylvilagus nuttallii) steppe, cultivated fields, and rock occurrence vicinity. outcrops. Rodents Yellow-bellied marmot Rocky areas in shrub-steppe habitat, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Marmota flaviventris) ponderosa pine forest, and lower occurrence vicinity. elevation Douglas-fir forest. Cascade golden-mantled Rock outcrops and talus in all forest None Suitable habitat in ponderosa pine. ground squirrel types. (Spermophilus saturatus) Yellow-pine chipmunk All forested types, moist shrub-steppe Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Tamias amoenus) zone, and riparian areas. occurrence vicinity. Least chipmunk Shrub-steppe habitat. Suitable habitat on Douglas (Tamias minimus) County side. Western gray squirrel Gary oak stands or mixed oak and None Marginal habitat on Chelan (Sciurus griseus) ponderosa pine stands. County side. Douglas’ squirrel Coniferous forests and adjacent Confirmed Suitable habitat in forested areas. (Tamiasciurus hardwood riparian zones. occurrence douglasii) Northern flying squirrel All coniferous and mixed forest Confirmed Suitable habitat in forested areas. (Glaucomys sabrinus) types. occurrence Beaver Along permanent streams, rivers, and Confirmed Suitable habitat in the reservoir. (Castor canadensis) lakes with trees or wood shrubs. occurrence Northern pocket gopher Meadows, grasslands, pastures, Confirmed Suitable habitat occurs throughout (Thomomys talpoides) sagebrush, and cultivated fields. occurrence the vicinity. Great basin pocket Loose, deep soils in shrub-steppe Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout mouse habitat. occurrence vicinity. (Perognathus parvus) Bushy-tailed woodrat Talus, rock, and boulder habitat in all Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Neotoma cinerea) habitat types. occurrence vicinity. Northern grasshopper Shrub-steppe habitat. None. Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe mouse areas. (Onychomys leucogaster) Deer mouse All habitat types. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Peromyscus occurrence vicinity. maniculatus)

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-67 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-6: Mammal Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Western harvest mouse Dense vegetation near water. Confirmed Suitable habitat in patches along (Reithrodontomys occurrence reservoir. megalotis) Sagebrush vole Shrub-steppe habitat. None Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe (Clethrionomys gapperi) areas. Long-tailed vole All forest types, brush habitat, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Microtus longicaudus) marshes, meadows, and rock slides. occurrence vicinity. Montane vole Grasslands, meadows, and marshes Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Microtus montanus) below timberline. occurrence vicinity. Muskrat Ponds, lakes, marshes, and sloughs. Confirmed Suitable habitat occurs along (Ondatra zibethicus) occurrence reservoir. Porcupine All forested types, riparian zones, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Erethizon dorsatum) and some sagebrush habitats. occurrence vicinity. House mouse Cities, towns, and agricultural fields. Confirmed Suitable habitat is limited to (Mus musculus) occurrence developed areas. Norway rat Developed habitats. Confirmed Suitable habitat is limited to (Rattus norvegicus) occurrence developed areas. Black rat Developed habitats. None Suitable habitat is limited to (Rattus rattus) developed areas in Wenatchee. Carnivores Coyote Grassland, open forest, shrub-steppe, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Canis latrans) and forest edge. occurrence vicinity. Raccoon Along rivers, lakes, ponds, and Confirmed Suitable habitat occurs along (Procyon lotor) marshes, and agricultural fields. occurrence reservoir. Long-tailed weasel All habitat types. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Mustela frenata) occurrence vicinity. Mink Along streams, rivers, lakes, ditches, Confirmed Suitable habitat occurs along (Mustela vison) swamps, marshes, and surrounding occurrence reservoir. forests and meadows. Badger Ponderosa pine, grassland, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Taxidea taxus) meadows, and parkland. occurrence vicinity. Striped skunk Open woods, brushy grassland, forest None Suitable habitat throughout (Mephitis mephitis) edges, riparian areas, and agriculture vicinity. areas. River otter Along rivers, streams, and lakes. Confirmed Suitable habitat occurs along (Lutra canadensis) occurrence reservoir. Mountain lion All forest types. None Suitable habitat occurs on deer (Felis concolor) winter range (Chelan County).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-68 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-6: Mammal Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Bobcat All forest types, thickets, grasslands, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Lynx rufus) shrub-steppe, swamps, and rocky occurrence vicinity. hillsides. Deer, Elk, and Goats Elk All forest types, shrub-steppe, None Suitable habitat occurs southeast (Cervus elaphus) bunchgrass, open meadows, and of Lake Chelan in the vicinity. subalpine areas. Mule deer All forest types, dense shrubs, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Odocoileus hemionus) meadows, and grassland. occurrence vicinity. White-tailed deer Mixed woodland, riparian areas, and None Potential habitat occurs in (Odocoileus farms. riparian. virginianus) Bighorn sheep Steep mountain slopes and rocky Confirmed Suitable habitat on rocky slopes of (Ovis canadensis) cliffs. occurrence Chelan County side. 1 Habitat requirements and location data are from Johnson and Cassidy 1997

E3.3.2.2.3 Waterfowl and Other Waterbirds Rocky Reach Reservoir, given its size, provides limited habitat for breeding waterfowl. Canada geese, mallards, and common merganser are probably the most common breeding waterfowl, although wood ducks occasionally use the nesting boxes dotted along the reservoir. The backwater areas also provide nesting habitat for cinnamon teal, green-winged teal, and gadwalls, although specific information on their occurrence is lacking. Backwater areas probably also support a few nesting pairs of pied-billed grebes and coots.

Since 1983, 30 to 80 pairs of geese have nested annually along Rocky Reach Reservoir. Today, Chelan PUD maintains 31 artificial nest structures for these geese, the remaining nesting in more natural situations. Each year about two-thirds of the nests are successful in producing a total of about 200 goslings.

Winter use by waterfowl and other waterbirds is substantially higher. Approximately 16,000 to 17,000 birds winter on the reservoir each year (Fielder 1991); 40 percent are coots. Other dominant waterfowl, in descending importance, are American wigeons, Canada geese, greater/lesser scaup, mallards, and ring-necked ducks. Other wintering waterfowl include gadwalls, shovelers, buffleheads, goldeneyes, ruddy ducks, mergansers, and teal. Common loons and several species of grebes (western/Clark’s, eared, and pied-billed) have also been noted using the reservoir.

Other waterbirds and shorebirds commonly found along Rocky Reach Reservoir include the killdeer, spotted sandpiper, ring-billed gull, California gull, and great blue heron, although no

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-69 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources nesting rookeries are known to occur in the vicinity for the latter. Soras, and possibly Virginia rails, may nest in the emergent vegetation of the backwater areas, although this has not been confirmed. Occasional visitors include American white pelicans, double-crested cormorants, and black-crowned night herons. A list of waterfowl and other waterbirds found at Rocky Reach can be found in Table E3-7.

Table E3-7: Waterfowl And Waterbird Species Known Or Potentially Occurring At The Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Common loon Large lakes and reservoirs within Confirmed Winter resident (Gavia immer) forested landscapes. occurrence Pied-billed grebe Freshwater wetlands with emergent Confirmed Suitable habitat in backwater (Podilymbus podiceps) vegetation. occurrence areas.

Western/Clark’s grebe Large ponds and reservoirs in arid Confirmed Winter resident (Aechmophorus areas. occurrence occidentalis/clarkii) Great blue heron Marshes and agricultural areas; nest Confirmed Suitable habitat along reservoir. (Ardea herodias) colonially in trees near water. occurrence Canada goose Wetlands, waterways, cities, and Confirmed Major breeder at Rocky Reach. (Branta canadensis) agricultural areas. occurrence Wood duck Forested areas with adjacent open Confirmed Nests in a few artificial nest boxes (Aix sponsa) water. occurrence along reservoir. Green-winged teal Freshwater wetlands and water Confirmed Suitable habitat along reservoir, (Anas crecca) bodies. occurrence but winter records only. Mallard Virtually any low-elevation wetland. Confirmed Suitable habitat along reservoir. (Anas platyrhynchos) occurrence Northern pintail Breeds in freshwater ponds and None Probable winter resident. (Anas acuta) wetlands Blue-winged teal Freshwater wetlands and water None Probable winter resident. (Anas discors) bodies. Cinnamon teal Freshwater wetlands and water None Possible breeder in backwater (Anas cyanoptera) bodies. areas. Gadwall Freshwater wetlands and water Confirmed Possible breeder. (Anas strepera) bodies. occurrence American wigeon Freshwater wetlands and water Confirmed Common winter resident. (Anas americana) bodies. occurrence Redhead Freshwater wetlands, ponds, and None Possible breeder in backwater (Aythya americana) slow-moving rivers. areas. Ring-necked duck Low-elevation wetlands. Confirmed Common winter resident. (Aythya collaris) occurrence

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-70 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-7: Waterfowl And Waterbird Species Known Or Potentially Occurring At The Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Lesser scaup Reservoirs. Confirmed Common winter resident. (Athya affinis) occurrence Barrow’s goldeneye Larger ponds, lakes, and reservoirs at Confirmed Winter resident. (Bucephalus islandica) moderate and higher elevations. occurrence Hooded merganser Freshwater wetlands, ponds, lakes None Possible breeder and migrant. (Lophodytes cucullatus) and slow-moving rivers with trees nearby for cavity nesting. Common merganser Freshwater habitat (especially rivers) Confirmed Breeder and winter resident. (Mergus merganser) at low and mid elevations. occurrence Sora Freshwater marshes and wet None Suitable habitat in backwater (Porzana carolina) meadows; wet areas in agricultural areas. areas. American coot Freshwater marshes, lakes, and Confirmed Common winter resident, possible (Fulica americana) reservoirs occurrence breeder in backwater areas. Killdeer Widespread in variety of non- Confirmed Suitable habitat along shoreline. (Charadrius vociferus) forested habitats. occurrence Spotted sandpiper Common in most freshwater habitats Confirmed Suitable habitat along shoreline. (Actitis macularia) at low to moderate elevations. occurrence Ring-billed gull Breeds colonially on gravel islands in Confirmed Possible breeder. (Larus delawarensis) lakes and rivers; feeds in agricultural occurrence lands, cities, and wetlands. California gull Breeds colonially on gravel islands in Confirmed Confirmed breeder. (Larus californicus) lakes and rivers; feeds in agricultural occurrence lands, cities, and wetlands. 1 Habitat requirements and location data are from Smith et al. 1997.

E3.3.2.2.4 Raptors The bald eagle, a species listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act, is a prominent raptor at Rocky Reach Reservoir. Chelan PUD surveyed wintering bald eagle populations since 1974-75, recording peak winter counts ranging from 8 (1974-75) to 56 (1995-96). Since 1988-89 annual peak counts have not been lower than 20. The percentage of subadult bald eagles ranges from 35 to 40 percent, a figure apparently higher than the average for eastern Washington (Fielder and Starkey 1987). Fielder (1982) found these eagles to feed predominately on coots, which is not surprising given that about 6,000 to 7,000 coots winter on the reservoir each year. Wintering bald eagles will also roost communally, usually in dense stands of older-age trees (Stalmaster 1982). One such roost is located in a stand of ponderosa pine trees south of McKinstry Canyon where up to six birds have been recorded at a time.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-71 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

In addition, an active bald eagle nest was first discovered in 1996 in a large ponderosa pine tree south of McKinstry Canyon. This nest has been active since, although productivity information is not available. Nesting bald eagles in the Intermountain West tend to feed more on fish than bird or mammal prey (Stalmaster 1987). Likely important prey at Rocky Reach is largescale suckers, northern pikeminnow (squawfish), walleye, and rainbow trout.

Simultaneous with the bald eagle surveys, Chelan PUD also annually collects information on golden eagles. Since 1988-89 the peak annual golden eagle count has ranged from three to six eagles, except for 1990-91 with eight and 1992-93 when ten eagles were observed. Most birds recorded are probably residents, their presence indicating the location of a nesting territory. Only one nest site, located in the rocky cliffs near Rivermile 511, is known; however, a nest site is suspected to occur between Chelan Falls hatchery and Gallagher Flats.

Red-tailed hawks, American kestrels, ravens, great horned owls, and western screech-owls are common nesters in the reservoir vicinity. Barn owls, long-eared owls, Swainson’s hawks, northern harriers, and turkey vultures likely nest here as well. Northern goshawks, Cooper’s hawks, sharp-shinned hawks, and northern pygmy-owls may be seen during winter.

Two active osprey nests along the reservoir are situated on power poles; one near Chelan Falls, the other downslope of Chelan Butte. These raptors feed almost exclusively on fish greater than 10 inches in length (Poole 1989). Bridgelip and largescale suckers are probably the most important prey of Rocky Reach osprey, although walleye, rainbow trout, mountain whitefish, northern pikeminnow, and carp are also likely taken.

No records exist of peregrine or prairie falcons in the vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir, although suitable nesting habitat may occur for prairie falcons at Robinson Cliffs. Table E3-8 is a list of raptors potentially found at Rocky Reach.

Table E3-8: Raptors Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Eagles, hawks, vultures, and ravens Turkey vulture Lower forest zone and western steppe None Suitable habitat throughout (Cathartes aura) zones. vicinity. Osprey Along large water bodies in forested Confirmed Two active nest sites. (Pandion haliaetus) landscapes. Rare in steppe areas. occurrence Bald eagle Along freshwater bodies at lower Confirmed Common winter resident, and one (Haliaeetus elevations. occurrence nesting territory. leucocephalus) Northern harrier All open habitats. None Suitable habitat occurs along (Circus cyaneus) reservoir.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-72 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-8: Raptors Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Sharp-shinned hawk Conifer forests. None Probable winter resident. (Accipiter striatus) Cooper’s hawk Forested areas at low and middle None Probable winter resident. (Accipiter cooperii) elevations, preferring hardwood stands. Northern goshawk Mature conifer forests. None Probable winter resident. (Accipter gentilis) Swainson’s hawk Nests in forested riparian corridors or Confirmed Locally rare breeder. (Buteo swainsoni) windbreaks in steppe zone. occurrence Red-tailed hawk Most habitats also occurs in urban Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Buteo jamaicensis) areas. occurrence vicinity. Golden eagle Open, dry forests with precipitous Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Aquila chrysaetos) terrain for nesting. occurrence vicinity. American kestrel Most open habitats at lower Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Falco sparverius) elevations. occurrence vicinity. Peregrine falcon Nests on cliffs, near areas with None Likely winter migrant. (Falco peregrinus) abundant shorebirds and waterfowl. Prairie falcon Nests on cliffs in arid regions. Confirmed Locally rare breeder. (Falco mexicanus) occurrence Owls Barn owl Rocky cliffs and agricultural areas. None Suitable habitat in vicinity. (Tyto alba) Western screech owl Forest stands and riparian zones with None Suitable habitat along reservoir. (Otus kennicottii) a dense understory of shrubs. Great horned owl Forests, riparian zones, and poplar Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Bubo virginianus) windbreaks occurrence vicinity. Burrowing owl Shrub-steppe habitats. None Breeds near Wenatchee. (Speotyto cunicularia) Long-eared owl Steppe and ponderosa pine forests, None Suitable habitat in riparian areas. (Asio otus) associated riparian areas. Short-eared owl Steppe and associated wetlands, None Suitable habitat in grasslands and (Asio flammeus) agricultural lands. backwater wetlands. Northern saw-whet owl Forests and tree groves. None Suitable habitat in windbreaks. (Aegolius acadicus) 1 Habitat requirements and location data are from Smith et al. 1997.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-73 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

E3.3.2.2.5 Upland Gamebirds Five species of upland gamebirds can be found along the reservoir: ring-necked pheasant, California quail, chukar, gray partridge, and mourning dove (Table E3-9). None are apparently hunted to any great extent along Rocky Reach and, other than the mourning dove, may not occur in any great abundance. A small put-and-take pheasant release occurred for a few years at Gallagher Flats, but this practice has apparently been discontinued.

Apparently, at least in the 1950s (Patterson 1961), thousands of mourning doves were produced in the orchards along the reservoir. Few of these birds were harvested by hunters in the immediate reservoir vicinity, but they are a popular gamebird at nearby locations where the birds travel to feed. At two of these locations—Blue Grade (north of East Wenatchee) and the Knoll’s Place (north of Entiat)—Chelan PUD has purchased public hunting easements as part of its licensing agreement with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Smith et al. (1997) suggests that sage grouse breeding habitat may occur in the sagebrush on the Douglas County side of the reservoir, but there are no confirmed records for this area. Also, sharp-tailed grouse breed nearby in Douglas County, and wild turkeys in Okanogan County immediately upstream of Wells Dam (Smith et al. 1997).

Table E3-9: Game Birds Species Known or Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records for Species Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach California quail Brushlands, canyons, rangelands. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout vicinity. (Lagopus californicus) occurrence Ring-necked pheasant Farmlands, brushlands. Confirmed Suitable habitat in agricultural and (Phasianus colchicus) occurrence wetland areas. Chukar Canyons, rocky slopes, rangelands, Confirmed Suitable habitat occurs at rocky areas. (Alectoris chukar) brushlands. occurrence Gray partridge Shrub-steppe and dry-land, wheat areas. Confirmed Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe. (Perdix perdix) occurrence Mourning dove Orchards and shrub-steppe. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout vicinity. (Zenaidura macroura) occurrence Sage grouse Sagebrush habitats. None Major breeding areas in Douglas (Centrocercus urophasianus) County west of the reservoir. Sharp-tailed grouse Grassland habitats. None Major breeding areas in Douglas (Tympanuchus phasianellus) County northwest of the reservoir. Wild turkey Steppe, oak, and ponderosa pine None Breeding habitat north along the Wells (Meleagris gallopavo) habitats. Dam pool. 1 Habitat requirements and location data are from Smith et al. 1997.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-74 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.3.2.2.6 Other Birds The willow and cottonwood riparian developed along the reservoir since inundation provides habitat for a number of birds. Common breeders in this habitat are eastern kingbirds, common crows, yellow warblers, Wilson’s warblers, northern orioles, Lazuli buntings, song sparrows, and Brewer’s blackbirds. Belted kingfishers use the willows and cottonwoods as hunting perches. The larger cottonwoods also provide nesting habitat for northern flickers and Lewis woodpeckers. Backwater areas supporting emergent vegetation (cattails) provide nesting habitat for marsh wrens and both red-winged and yellow-headed blackbirds.

Species common in the upland shrub-steppe habitats include the common nighthawk, poorwill, Say’s phoebe, horned lark, black-billed magpie, western meadowlark, Brewer’s sparrow, lark sparrow, and white-crowned sparrow, (although the latter does not breed here). Rocky habitat supports nesting rock doves, rock wrens, swallows, and white-throated swifts. The nighthawks, swallows, and swifts commonly forage for insects (especially midges and mosquitos) over the reservoir. Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir open forest extends nearly to the reservoir at a few locations. This habitat supports calliope hummingbirds, hairy woodpeckers, western wood peewees, chipping sparrows, and western tanagers.

Developed properties, especially residential areas and parks with a variety of ornamental plants, support species such as robins, house finches, house sparrows, starlings, and black-chinned hummingbirds. A full list of passerines and other birds found at Rocky Reach is on Table E3-10.

Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Common nighthawk Open areas at low to moderate Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Chordeiles minor) elevations. occurrence vicinity. Common poorwill Shrubby areas along canyons and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Phalaenoptilus nuttallii) rock outcroppings. occurrence vicinity. Vaux’s swift Forests and residential areas at Confirmed Marginal habitat occurs (Chaetura vauxi) low to mid-elevations. occurrence throughout vicinity. White-throated swift Steppe and ponderosa pine Confirmed Suitable habitat in rocky areas. (Aeronautes saxatalis) stands in conifers. occurrence Black-chinned hummingbird Riparian areas, wetlands, and None Suitable habitat throughout (Archilochus alexandri) urban areas at low elevations. vicinity. Calliope hummingbird Brushlands and dry open forests. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Stellula calliope) occurrence vicinity. Rufous hummingbird Moist habitats and higher None Marginal habitat. (Selasphorus rufus) elevations, conifer forests and shrubby areas. Belted kingfisher Freshwater habitats at low and Confirmed Breeds and forages along (Ceryle alcyon) moderate elevations. occurrence reservoir.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-75 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Western wood-pewee Lower elevation riparian Confirmed Suitable habitat near scattered (Contopus sordidulus) woodlands adjacent to dry occurrence pines. coniferous forests. Lewis’ woodpecker Open forests, woody riparian Confirmed Suitable habitat in riparian and (Melanerpes lewis) corridors, ponderosa pine- occurrence scattered pine. sagebrush transition areas. Red-naped sapsucker Woody areas within coniferous None Suitable habitat in scattered pine. (Sphyrapicus nuchalis) forests. Downy woodpecker Hardwood and mixed forests and Confirmed Suitable habitat in riparian. (Picoides pubescens) riparian areas. occurrence Hairy woodpecker Mixed and coniferous forests. Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pine. (Picoides villosus) occurrence White-headed woodpecker Ponderosa pine forests. Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pine. (Picoides albolarvatus) occurrence Northern flicker Common in most habitats. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Colaptes auratus) occurrence vicinity. Pileated woodpecker Mid- and late-seral hardwood, None Suitable habitat in scattered pine. (Dryocopus pileatus) mixed, and coniferous forests. Willow flycatcher Small wetlands or wet shrubby Confirmed Marginal habitat along reservoir. (Empidonax traillii) areas within forested habitats. occurrence Dusky flycatcher Open dry forests and forest Breeding Suitable habitat occurs throughout (Empidonax oberholseri) openings at all elevations. evidence secondary vicinity. Gray flycatcher Lower elevation open pine Breeding Suitable habitat occurs in eastern (Empidonax wrightii) forests without a shrub evidence portion of secondary vicinity. understory. Say’s Phoebe Shrub-steppe habitats. Confirmed Suitable habitat. (Sayornis saya) occurrence Ash-throated flycatcher Riparian within steppe habitats. None Breeds near Wenatchee. (Myiarchus cinerascens) Western kingbird Steppe habitat, fringes of Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Tyrannus verticalis) ponderosa pine, and agricultural occurrence vicinity. areas. Eastern kingbird Steppe and agricultural lands at Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Tyrannus tyrannus) low elevation. occurrence vicinity. Horned lark Steppe and agricultural habitats, None Potential habitat in shrub-steppe (Eremophila alpestris) especially wheat fields. areas. Tree swallow Open and forested habitats near None Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Tachycineta bicolor) water at mid- to low-elevation.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-76 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Violet-green swallow Open habitats, forests, and rocky Confirmed Suitable habitat in cliff areas. (Tachycineta thalassina) cliffs. occurrence Northern rough-winged swallow Sandy banks and/or high cliffs Confirmed Suitable habitat in cliff areas. (Stelgidopteryx serripennnis) near water. occurrence Bank swallow Sandy banks. Confirmed Suitable habitat along riverbanks. (Riparia riparia) occurrence Cliff swallow Cliffs and man-made structures Confirmed Suitable habitat in cliff areas. (Hirundo pyrrhonota) near open areas at lower occurrence elevations. Barn swallow Man-made structures and cliffs Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Hirundo rustica) in residential and agricultural occurrence vicinity. areas. Steller’s jay Forested habitats and fragmented Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Cyanocitta stelleri) landscapes. occurrence Black-billed magpie Farmlands, steppe, wetlands, Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Pica pica) willows, residential areas. occurrence vicinity. American crow Open habitats near populated Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Corvus brachyrhynchos) areas. occurrence vicinity. Common raven All habitats except urban areas. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Corvus corax) occurrence vicinity, especially cliff areas. Black-capped chickadee Low elevation conifer, hardwood Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Parus atricapillus) forests, and riparian. occurrence vicinity. Mountain chickadee Dry conifer forests at all Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Parus gambeli) elevations. occurrence Red-breasted nuthatch All conifer forest types. Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Sitta canadensis) occurrence White-breasted nuthatch Low elevation ponderosa pine None Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Sitta carolinensis) stands. Pygmy nuthatch Dry, open ponderosa pine forests None Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Sitta pygmaea) at low elevations. Rock wren Rocky canyons, outcroppings, Confirmed Suitable habitat in rocky areas. (Salpinctes obsoletus) and coulees in steppe and dry occurrence forests. Canyon wren Rocky canyons in steppe habitat. Confirmed Suitable habitat in rocky areas. (Catherpes mexicanus) occurrence House wren Open shrubby areas in forest Breeding Suitable habitat in residential (Troglodytes aedon) zones and residential areas. evidence areas. Marsh wren Emergent wetlands None Potential habitat in backwater (Cistothorus palustris) areas.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-77 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Western bluebird Open conifer forests, farmland, Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Sialia mexicana) and steppe habitats. occurrence Mountain bluebird Open agricultural and shrub- Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Sialia currucoides) steppe areas; open ponderosa occurrence pine forests. Townsend’s solitaire Drier forested areas at mid- to None Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Myadestes townsendii) high elevations. Veery Hardwood riparian zones at low None Suitable habitat in riparian. (Catharus fuscescens) elevations. American robin All habitats. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Turdus migratorius) occurrence vicinity. Gray catbird Dense, shrubby riparian None Suitable habitat occurs in riparian. (Dumetella carolinensis) vegetation. Sage thrasher Shrub-steppe habitats. None Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe. (Oreoscoptes montanus) Cedar waxwing Forest clearings, wetlands, bogs, Confirmed Suitable habitat in riparian. (Bombycilla cedrorum) and residential areas. occurrence Loggerhead shrike Shrub-steppe habitats. None Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe. (Lamius ludoricianus) European starling Most habitats at lower Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Sturnus vulgaris) elevations. occurrence vicinity. Solitary vireo Low and moderate elevation Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Vireo solitarius) ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir occurrence forests. Warbling vireo Hardwood forests or thickets in Confirmed Marginal habitat, but breeding (Vireo gilvus) forested landscapes. occurrence record at reservoir. Yellow warbler Riparian habitats. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Dendroica petechia) occurrence vicinity. MacGillivray’s warbler Riparian shrubs in conifer Confirmed Marginal habitat, but breeding (Oporornis tolmiei) forests. occurrence record at reservoir. Yellow-breasted Chat Shrubby riparian habitats Confirmed Suitable habitat in riparian. (Icteria virens) occurrence Western tanager Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine None Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Piranga ludoviciana) forests. Black-headed grosbeak Riparian corridors and deciduous Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Pheucticus melanocephalus) shrubs in conifer forest and occurrence vicinity. steppe habitats. Evening grosbeak Conifer forests. None Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Coccothranustes vespertinus)

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-78 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Lazuli bunting Riparian areas with shrubs. Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Passerina amoena) occurrence vicinity. Spotted towhee Dry forests and fringes of Confirmed Suitable habitat in riparian. (Pipilo maculatus) riparian areas at low elevations. occurrence Chipping sparrow Dry, open forests and woodland Confirmed Suitable habitat along pine fringe. (Spizella passerina) margins. occurrence Brewer’s sparrow Shrub-steppe habitat. Confirmed Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe. (Spizella breweri) occurrence Vesper sparrow Shrub-steppe, grasslands, and None Suitable habitat occurs in shrub- (Pooecetes gramineus) agricultural habitats. steppe and grass fields. Lark sparrow Shrub-steppe and grasslands. Confirmed Suitable habitat in shrub-steppe. (Chondetes grammacus) occurrence Black-throated sparrow Shrub-steppe habitats None Expanding northwood along (Amphispiza bilineata) Columbia River to at least Wenatchee. Sage sparrow Shrub steppe habitats. None Potential habitat in shrub-steppe. (Amphispiza belli) Grasshopper sparrow Grassland habitats. None Potential habitat in grassy areas. (Ammodramos savannanarum) Savannah sparrow Grassland habitats. None Suitable habitat in grassy areas. (Passerculus sandwichensis) Song sparrow Shrubby areas in all habitats. Confirmed Suitable habitat in riparian and (Melospiza melodia) occurrence wetlands. White-crowned sparrow Shrub steppe habitats. None Winter resident: breeds in (Zonotrichia leucophrys) Cascades. House sparrow (Passer Development and agriculture. Confirmed Suitable habitat in developed domesticus) occurrence areas. Dark-eyed junco Wooded habitats with dense None Winter visitor. (Junco hyemalis) herbaceous ground cover. Red-winged blackbird (Agelaius Low elevation wetlands. Confirmed Suitable habitat in backwater phoeniceus) occurrence areas. Western meadowlark Grasslands, shrub-steppe, and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Sturnella neglecta) agricultural areas at low occurrence vicinity. elevation. Yellow-headed blackbird Low elevations in wetlands. None Suitable habitat in backwater (Xanthocephalus areas. xanthocephalus)

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-79 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-10: Passerine Species and Other Birds Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Records Species for Rocky Potential Occurrence in Vicinity (Scientific Name) Habitat Reach Brewer’s blackbird Agricultural areas, wetlands and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Euphagus cyanocephalus) steppe. occurrence vicinity. Brown-headed cowbird Edge habitat and agricultural Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Molothrus ater) areas. occurrence vicinity. Bullock’s oriole Lowland riparian habitats and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Icterus bullockii) orchards. occurrence vicinity. Cassin’s finch Dry, open conifer forests. Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Carpodacus cassinii) occurrence House finch Low elevation agricultural and Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Carpodacus mexicanus) developed areas. occurrence vicinity. Red crossbill Conifer forests. Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Loxia curvirostra) occurrence Pine siskin Conifer and mixed forest Confirmed Suitable habitat in scattered pines. (Carduelis pinus) habitats. occurrence American goldfinch Open grassy and shrubby at low Confirmed Suitable habitat throughout (Cardeulis tristis) elevations. occurrence vicinity. 1 Habitat requirements and location data are from Smith et al. 1997.

E3.3.2.2.7 Amphibians and Reptiles Three species of amphibians—Great Basin spadefoot, western toad, and Columbia spotted frog— have been confirmed as occurring in the immediate vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir, and an additional four species—tiger salamander, long-toed salamander, Pacific treefrog, and bullfrog— may occur based on the availability of suitable habitat (Dvornich et al. 1997) (Table E3-11). All but the spadefoot would have benefited from the increase in backwater slough habitats due to Project construction. The spadefoot is a desert toad that breeds in rain puddles and lies buried underground for most of the year (Hall 1998).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-80 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

Table E3-11: Amphibian Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Species (Scientific Name) Habitat Nearest Record Potential Occurrence in Vicinity Tiger salamander Breeding: Seasonal and permanent ponds 8 mi. north of Reservoir is unsuitable for breeding, (Ambystoma with emergent vegetation or submerged Chelan. but pools in backwater areas may tigrinum) twigs. Non-breeding: Terrestrial; provide some breeding habitat. primarily shrub-steppe. Long-toed Breeding: Predominantly temporary Entiat Valley. Reservoir is unsuitable for breeding, salamander pools and small lakes. Non-breeding: but pools in backwater areas may (A. acrodactylum) Variety of habitats - forests, pastures, provide some breeding habitat. lakes, ponds, residential areas, meadows, forest openings, and shrub-steppe. Great Basin Breeding: Temporary pools, shorelines of Near reservoir. Occurs in shrub-steppe adjacent to spadefoot small lakes, ponds, and irrigation ditches. reservoir. (Scaphiopus Non-breeding: Arid shrub-steppe, and intermontanus) grasslands. Western toad Breeding: Ponds and lakes. Non- Adjacent to May occur in backwater areas. (Bufo boreas) breeding: Near ponds and lakes, but may reservoir. move through shrubby thickets and dry forests. Pacific chorus Breeding: Shallow, vegetated wetlands, Okanogan Co.; May occur in riparian. frog including wet meadows, forested swamps, above Wells (Pseudacris shrubby thickets, and emergent wetlands. Dam. regilla) Non-breeding: Variety of habitats near and far from water including woodlands, meadows, and pastures. Columbia spotted Breeding: Perennial springs, ponds, Adjacent to May occur in backwater ponds. frog lakes, or sluggish streams. Non-breeding: reservoir. (Rana luteiventris) Emergent wetlands. Bullfrog Shorelines of warm lakes, ponds, sloughs, South of Introduced species; may occur in (R. catesbeiana) and reservoirs. Non-breeding: Near Wenatchee. backwater areas. water. 1 Sources: Dvornich et al. 1997; Leonard et al. 1993; Storm and Leonard 1995.

Eleven species of reptiles occur at, or very near, Rocky Reach (Table E3-12). Western rattlesnakes, western skinks, and western fence lizards are relatively common in the rocky areas on the reservoir islands. Fence lizards apparently do not occur on the Douglas County side (Dvornich et al. 1997). Painted turtles and both western terrestrial and common garter snakes can be found along the reservoir edges, especially where emergent cover exists. The adjacent shrub-steppe supports populations of short-horned lizards, northern sagebrush lizards, racers, and gopher snakes. The rocky areas support rubber boas. Four other species—side-blotched lizard, sharptail snake, night snake, and striped whipsnake—have been found a few miles either upriver or downriver of Rocky Reach reservoir, but have not recorded near the reservoir (Dvornich et al. 1997).

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-81 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-12: Reptile Species Known Or Potentially Occurring In The Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir1 Species Potential Occurrence in (Scientific Name) Habitat Nearest Record Vicinity Painted turtle Agricultural waste water Columbia River May occur in backwater areas. (Chrysemys picta) ponds, marshy ponds, small south of Wenatchee. lakes, slow-moving streams. Short-horned lizard Shrub-steppe habitats. Adjacent to Occurs in adjacent shrub- (Phrynosoma douglasii) reservoir. steppe. Northern sagebrush lizard Sagebrush, steppe, open West of Chelan. Should occur in local sandy (Sceloporus graciosus pine forests, rocky areas sagebrush habitats. graciosus) where western fence lizards are absent. Western fence lizard Rocky rims, canyons, Adjacent to Occurs in rocky areas. (Sceloporus occidentalis) boulder strewn hillsides. reservoir on Chelan County side. Side-blotched lizard Rocky basalt areas. South of Hanford. May occur on Douglas County (Uta stansburiana) side in rockier areas. Western skink Grassy slopes in oak At Rocky Reach. Occurs on reservoir islands. (Eumeces skiltonianus) woodlands and drier forests, rocky canyons. Rubber boa Grasslands and deserts to Near middle of May occur throughout the (Charina bottae) woodlands and mountain Lake Chelan on Vicinity. forests. north shore. Racer Moist to arid meadows, Adjacent to Occurs in the adjacent shrub- (Coluber constrictor) sagebrush flats, and talus reservoir. steppe. slopes; seldom in forests. Night snake Arid low-elevation areas, Okanogan Co., Potential habitat exists along (Hypsiglena torquata) mostly near rocky areas. north of Wells Dam. reservoir in rockier areas. Gopher snake Dry deserts to moist Adjacent to Probably common throughout (Pituophis catenifer) agricultural areas; drier reservoir. the Vicinity. forests. Western terrestrial garter Grasslands, shrublands, Along entire Likely occurs throughout snake woodlands, and open reservoir. Vicinity. (Thamnophis elegans) forests; usually near water. Common garter snake Grasslands, shrublands, Along entire May occur throughout (Thamnophis sirtalis) woodlands, and open reservoir. Vicinity. forests; usually near water. Western rattlesnake Rocky dry areas with little Along entire Common on reservoir islands. (Crotalus viridis) vegetation. reservoir. 1 Sources: Dvornich et al. 1997; Leonard et al. 1993; Storm and Leonard 1995.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-82 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.3.2.2.8 Species with Federal and/or State Status At least 27 wildlife species that have federal or state status occur, or potentially occur, in the vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir (Table E3-13). The following four sections present information on species that are federally listed as threatened or endangered; federal candidates for listing; federal species of concern; state listed as threatened, endangered, sensitive, or monitor; or state candidates for listing.

Table E3-13: Species With Federal and/or State Status Known or Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir. Species (Scientific Name) Federal Status1 State Status1 Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris)* SC C Northern sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciosus graciosus)SC-- Great blue heron (Ardea herodias)* -- M Common loon (Gavia immer)--C Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)* -- M Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)* T T Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis)* SC C Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos)* -- C Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus)* E E Sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)SCC Western burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia hypugaea)* SC C Vaux’s swift (Chaetura vauxi)* -- C Lewis’ woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis)* -- C White-headed woodpecker (Picoides albolarvatus)* -- C Pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus)* -- C Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)* SC C Sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli)* -- C Sage thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus)* -- C Little willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii brewesteri)SC-- Fringed myotis (Myotis thyanodes)SC-- Long-eared myotis (M. evotis)SC-- Long-legged myotis (M. volans)SC-- Small-footed myotis (M. ciliolabrum)SC-- Yuma myotis (M. yumanensis)SC-- Pale Townsends’ big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens)* SC C Western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus griseus)* SC T California bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis californicus)SC--

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-83 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Table E3-13: Species With Federal and/or State Status Known or Potentially Occurring in the Vicinity of Rocky Reach Reservoir. Species (Scientific Name) Federal Status1 State Status1 1 Federal Status: E = Endangered - Species in danger of becoming extinct within the foreseeable future. T = Threatened - Taxa likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. C = Candidate - Species which are considered warranted for listing as threatened or endangered but are precluded. SC = Species of Concern - Species which may become listed as threatened or endangered in the future; no legal status. 2 State Status: E = Endangered - Wildlife native to Washington that are seriously threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant part of their ranges within the state. T = Threatened - Wildlife native to Washington that are likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant portion of their ranges within the state without cooperative management or the removal of threats. C = Candidate - Wildlife species that are under review by the WDFW for possible listing as endangered, threatened, or sensitive. M = Monitor - Wildlife species native to Washington that were: (1) classified as endangered, threatened, or sensitive at one time; (2) require habitat that has limited availability during some portions of its life cycle; (3) are indicators of environmental quality; (4) require further field investigations to determine population status; (5) have unresolved taxonomy which may bear upon their status classification; (5) may be competing with and impacting other species of concern; or (7) have significant popular appeal. * WDFW Priority Species - Wildlife species requiring protective measures and/or management guidelines to ensure their perpetuation (WDFW 1996).

Federally Listed Species Only one federally listed species, the bald eagle, is known to occur in the vicinity of Rocky Reach. Although there are no records, peregrine falcons may pass through during migration, or wander from reintroduction sites farther upriver at Lake Roosevelt. Peregrines have been observed at nearby Lake Chelan. Northern spotted owls, gray wolves, and grizzly bears all occur in the nearby Wenatchee National Forest, but there are no records (nor habitat) existing for these species along Rocky Reach reservoir.

Bald Eagle – Between 20 and 60 bald eagles winter annually on Rocky Reach reservoir, taking advantage of thousands of overwintering waterfowl and coot prey (Fielder 1982). Surveys conducted by Chelan PUD have shown that since 1974 the number of eagles present during the winter has gradually increased four- to six-fold. In 1996, a pair established a nest site south of McKinstry Canyon. It has been active every year since. As the population of nesting bald eagles continues to increase in eastern Washington, it is possible that more nesting territories may become established along the reservoir.

Federal Proposal Species No wildlife species currently proposed for federal listing occur in the vicinity of Rocky Reach reservoir.

Federal Species of Concern No wildlife species that are currently identified as candidates for listing as threatened or endangered occur in the vicinity of Rocky Reach. However, there are 15 federal species of

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-84 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources concern potentially occurring here—an amphibian, a reptile, five birds, and eight mammals (six of them bats). Species of concern are not protected under the Endangered Species Act, but this classification includes species that might be listed in the future if current population or habitat trends continue.

Amphibian – The only amphibian species of concern that potentially occurs in the area of Rocky Reach reservoir is the Columbia spotted frog. Potential breeding habitat and a possible breeding record for this species at Rocky Reach was identified by Dvornich et al. (1997). Habitat would include the backwater sloughs and ponds.

Reptile – The northern sagebrush lizard, a federal species of concern, is the only reptile potentially occurring in the vicinity of Rocky Reach. Dvornich et al. (1997) suggests that much of the shrub-steppe adjacent to the reservoir is suitable habitat for this lizard. There are, however, no confirmed records of this species in the vicinity.

Birds – The northern goshawk is a known winter resident, albeit uncommon, along the reservoir. Smith et al. (1997) suggest that suitable habitat may also occur for the burrowing owl, sage grouse, little willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii brewesteri), and loggerhead shrike. The latter three species prefer tall shrubs for nesting. The flycatcher generally prefers areas along wetlands, and the shrike and grouse sagebrush stands. The burrowing owl also prefers open sagebrush stands and short-grass grasslands. Burrowing owls apparently nest near Wenatchee.

Mammals – The California bighorn sheep is the only mammal with federal species of concern status that is definitely known to occur in the area of Rocky Reach. Bighorns occur on the Chelan County side of the reservoir between Rocky Reach Dam and the Entiat River, (although Highway 97 prevents them from actually reaching the reservoir).

The six bat species of concern—fringed myotis, long-eared myotis, long-legged myotis, small- footed myotis, Yuma myotis, and Townsend’s big-eared bat—may breed and roost in the rocky defiles west of the reservoir or the pine snags throughout, and forage over the water during evenings. However, research to confirm the presence of these bats has not yet been conducted (Johnson and Cassidy 1997).

An eighth species, the western gray squirrel, occurs north of the reservoir in Okanogan County. Suitable habitat for this species is shown in Johnson and Cassidy (1997); however, they admit that squirrel populations are much more disjunct than what appears in their distribution maps, and they provide no confirmed records for Chelan or Douglas counties.

Species with State Status The only state threatened or endangered species known to occur at Rocky Reach is the bald eagle (threatened), although American white pelicans and peregrine falcons, both state endangered, may pass through during migration.

State candidate species potentially inhabiting the immediate vicinity of Rocky Reach include the Columbia spotted frog, common loon, northern goshawk, golden eagle, sage grouse, Vaux’s

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-85 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources swift, Lewis’ woodpecker, white-headed woodpecker, pileated woodpecker, sage thrasher, loggerhead shrike, sage sparrow, and Townsend’s big-eared bat. These species have been discussed earlier except the Vaux’s swift, white-headed woodpecker, and pileated woodpecker; all three are denizens of the ponderosa pine scattered at various locations along the reservoir.

The two state monitor species found at Rocky Reach are the osprey and great blue heron.

E3.3.3 Existing Terrestrial Resource Mitigation, Protection and Enhancement Measures Chelan PUD funded the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to conduct studies of wildlife in the proposed Rocky Reach Project area from 1955 to 1959. These studies showed that approximately 4,050 acres were within the Project boundary, of which 34 percent were orchards and 31 percent grazing lands. Much of the area was also important mule deer winter range.

The WDFW and Chelan PUD reached agreement in 1963 to mitigate wildlife impacts resulting from the Rocky Reach Project. Through this agreement, Chelan PUD provided $700,000 for purchasing nearly 20,000 acres of streambank access, public fishing and hunting areas, and deer and upland bird game habitat to be managed by WDFW. These funds purchased:

1. The Chelan Butte, Swakane, and Entiat Habitat Management Areas (HMA), totaling 17,502 acres; 2. Public hunting easements on two privately owned areas, Blue Grade in Douglas County and Boyd in Chelan County; 3. A 160-acre parcel along the reservoir in Chelan County, Gallagher Flats, to be managed by WDFW; 4. 25 public stream bank accesses and fishing areas along the Wenatchee River, to be managed by WDFW; and 5. A spawning channel was constructed at Twentyfive Mile Creek and spawning habitat improvements for kokanee were implemented in Company Creek at Stehekin.

The Blue Grade and Boyd hunting easements currently have no development. It has not been possible for the WDFW to determine the acreage of these two units to date, even with some investigation (WDFW 1993).

The Gallagher Flats unit is located adjacent to the Columbia River just north of the city of Chelan Falls. This area was managed by WDFW for public hunting, especially “under the gun” pheasant releases. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WDOT) acquired this parcel of land from Chelan PUD for a highway right-of-way in the early 1980s. As a result of this transaction, WDFW acquired title to a parcel known as the “Brick House Canyon Addition,” and an additional $50,000.

Stream bank accesses and fishing areas along the Wenatchee River were purchased to improve public access in the lower section of the river. Access and fishing areas purchased are located from the Wenatchee River mouth upstream to approximately one mile below Leavenworth.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-86 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.3.4 Terrestrial Resource Management Framework Chelan PUD has flowage easements on properties and owns some properties surrounding Rocky Reach reservoir. The US Forest Service (USFS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Washington State Department of Parks and Recreation (WDPR), Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Washington State Department of Transportation (WDOT), and Rail America all administer lands in the Project vicinity. Federal, state, and local management objectives for terrestrial resources that relate to the operation of the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project are summarized in the following sections.

E3.3.4.1 Federal Management

E3.3.4.1.1 US Fish and Wildlife Service Management of species that are federally listed or proposed as threatened or endangered is the responsibility of the USFWS. The ESA requires consultation with the USFWS regarding actions that potentially affect a threatened or endangered species. In addition, management of bald eagle habitat in the vicinity of the Project is partially controlled by the federal recovery plan for this species (USFWS 1986), which is administered by the USFWS. The recovery goal of two bald eagle territories in the recovery zone (8) that includes the Rocky Reach Project has been met. Similarly, habitat for the northern spotted owl, gray wolf, and grizzly bear in the project vicinity is covered by recovery plans (USFWS 1992, USFWS 1987, USFWS 1993).

E3.3.4.1.2 US Forest Service Management of the wildlife and botanical resources occurring on USFS lands near the Rocky Reach Project is guided by the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Wenatchee National Forest (USFS 1990). Management activities affecting spotted owl habitat are guided by the President’s Northwest Forest Plan (USFS and BLM 1994) as well as the draft recovery plan for this species. Bald eagle management on USFS land is also guided by the bald eagle species management plan (Rees 1989).

The Northwest Forest Plan’s standards and guidelines are meant to improve conditions for late- successional forest-related species beyond the protection granted in individual forest plans (USFS and BLM 1994). Unless otherwise noted, any standards and guidelines in existing forest plans apply where they are more restrictive or provide greater benefits to late-successional forest-related species than the Northwest Forest Plan. The Northwest Forest Plan includes land allocations for the following categories: • Congressionally Reserved Areas—includes Wilderness Areas, National Parks and Monuments, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and National Wildlife Refuges. • Late Successional Reserves—lands designed to serve as habitat for late-successional and old- growth related species, including the northern spotted owl. • Adaptive Management Areas—lands designed to develop and test new management approaches to integrate and achieve ecological, economic, and other social objectives. • Managed Late Successional Reserves—lands that are either mapped managed spotted owl pair areas or unmapped protection buffers. • Administratively Withdrawn Areas—lands used for recreation and other areas not scheduled for timber harvest.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-87 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

• Riparian Reserves—lands within matrix adjacent to streams, wetlands, ponds, lakes, and unstable areas aimed at protecting the health of the aquatic system. • Matrix—lands outside the other six categories where most timber harvest may occur. • The USFS and BLM are also proposing to develop and implement a coordinated, scientifically sound, ecosystem-based management strategy for lands they administer east of the Cascade Range in Washington and Oregon. Guidelines for terrestrial resources in the Wenatchee National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan include specific wildlife and plant species as well as habitats and focuses on the following: • key deer and elk habitat, • riparian-aquatic habitat protection, • general forest management, • old-growth and mature forest management, • range management, • developed and dispersed recreation resources, and • wilderness (USFS 1990 [pp. IV-107]).

The management direction for the Wenatchee National Forest is to maintain viable populations and distribution of suitable habitat to prevent species from becoming federally listed as endangered or threatened. Wildlife and botanical objectives are aimed at the Management Indicator Species (MIS); endangered, threatened, and sensitive species; and unique or special habitats and species. The MIS for the Wenatchee National Forest include Rocky Mountain elk, mule deer, primary cavity excavators, pileated woodpecker, marten (Martes americana), northern three-toed woodpecker, mountain goat, beaver (Castor canadensis), and ruffed grouse (Bonansa umbellus). Species on the Regional Forester’s List of Sensitive Species include big-horn sheep, Townsend’s big- eared bat (Plecotus townsendi), lynx, wolverine, ferruginous hawk, Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), and long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus). There is one existing Research Natural Areas in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Project (USFS 1990). This area is located in the Swakane Habitat Management Area (HMA). The USFS has completed watershed analyses in the Entiat River Watershed (USFS 1996). A second printing of the “Watershed Analysis of the Entiat River Area” is to be available in June 1999. The watershed analyses address wildlife habitat; late successional habitat; proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive (PETS) plants and animals; noxious weeds; fire effects; and ecosystem health and biological diversity.

E3.3.4.1.3 Bureau of Land Management The BLM administers tracts of land in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Project and manages them according to the Spokane Resource Management Plan (BLM 1987). BLM lands near the Chelan Butte HMA are managed cooperatively with the WDFW for wildlife habitat; fire protection is dictated under a cooperative agreement with the USFS. The BLM tracts are not included within the range of the northern spotted owl. Some BLM lands, however, support owls; in these areas the BLM must adhere to the standards and guidelines of the Northwest Forest Plan (pers. comm., J. Fisher, Area Manager, BLM, Wenatchee, Washington, May 26, 1998).

E3.3.4.1.4 US Army Corps of Engineers The COE is responsible for protecting and maintaining the nation’s waters by administering provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Rivers and Harbors Act. Areas under COE

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-88 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources jurisdiction include wetlands, rivers, intermittent streams, ponds, reservoirs, lakes, and other waters of the United States. Any activity that would potentially alter or affect a wetland or water body may require a permit from the COE. For example, Section 404 of the CWA prohibits the discharge of dredge or fill material into a wetland or water of the United States without a permit. Other activities subject to permitting under Section 404 include mechanized land clearing, ditching, draining, excavating, grading, and placement of pilings. Under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, the COE issues permits for activities “in, over, or affecting” navigable waters. During the Section 10 permit process the COE evaluates potential impacts to navigation, flood control, and fish and wildlife habitat. The Section 10 and Section 404 permit processes are often handled concurrently.

E3.3.4.2 State Management There are four state agencies with terrestrial resource management authority in the Project vicinity—the WDFW, WDPR, WDNR, and WDOT; the management focus of each is summarized as follows.

E3.3.4.2.1 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife The WDFW is responsible for management of wildlife resources in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Project. The WDFW shares wildlife management tasks with the USFWS, USFS, NPS, and BLM on federal lands. WDFW’s overall policy is to provide for diverse and healthy wildlife populations, emphasizing native species and natural production (Washington Wildlife Commission 1991). The goals of this policy are to: • Maintain diversity, distribution, and a reasonable abundance of all native wildlife and their habitats; • Maintain abundant populations of naturally reproducing game species for consumptive use; • Restore depleted native game populations to healthy levels; • Achieve recovery and delisting of threatened and endangered species; • Ensure security of sensitive species populations to prevent the need for them to be listed as threatened or endangered; and • Prevent the illegal harvest, abusive use, and inappropriate commercialization of wildlife.

To meet these goals, WDFW regulates hunting, fishing, and trapping, as well as works with the USFWS in managing habitat for threatened and endangered species. In the Project vicinity, the WDFW and BLM cooperatively manage the Chelan Butte HMA; the primary management objective is enhancement of mule deer and upland game bird habitat. This land was acquired from Chelan PUD in 1969 and Chelan PUD periodically provides management funds and personnel (pers. comm., Mark Hallet, On-site Administrator, WDFW, Wenatchee, Washington, May 22, 1998). Similarly, the WDFW and USFS cooperatively manage the Swakane and Entiat HMAs, west of Highway Alternate 97.

E3.3.4.2.2 Washington State Department of Parks and Recreation Commission The WDPR manages two state parks along the shores of the Rocky Reach Project area: Lincoln Rock State Park and Daroga State Park. Both of these sites are developed with boat launches and overnight camping facilities and accessible by vehicle from Highway Alternate 97.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-89 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

Lincoln Rock State Park is a 60-acre park located on the east shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir just above Rocky Reach Dam. The park expansion increased the developed area at the park from approximately 17 acres to nearly 60 acres. Two new camp loops and 67 campsites were added, increasing the total number of sites to 94.

Daroga State Park is a 140-acre park located on the east shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir, seven miles north of Orondo. Recreation facilities include a two-lane boat launch, three boat tie- up docks, swim beach, restrooms with showers, picnic tables and picnic shelters, playground equipment, jogging trails, athletic fields and courts, RV and tent campsites, two group camping areas, and a RV dump station. The Park's 140 acres include facilities consisting of a camp loop with 25 camping sites, 17 hike-in or boat-in camp sites and one large group camp area with a capacity of 50 camping sites for a total of 92 sites to accommodate camping.

Both parks receive heavy recreational use and have limited wildlife habitat. The parks are owned by Chelan PUD and operated and maintained under a cooperative agreement with the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission.

E3.3.4.2.3 Washington Department of Natural Resources There are WDNR lands directly abutting the Rocky Reach Project area. These lands are managed for timber resources, although several of the parcels are within the range of the northern spotted owl and managed in accordance with the multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) adopted by the WDNR (WDNR 1997). The HCP calls for specific spotted owl and riparian habitat conservation strategies intended to protect and enhance habitat for all federally listed threatened and endangered species in the range of the spotted owl.

E3.3.4.2.4 Washington Department of Transportation The WDOT owns the right-of-way for State Highway 97A in Chelan County located on the west shore of Rocky Reach Reservoir, and for State Highway 97 in Douglas County located on the east shore of the reservoir. Highway 97 is designated as a limited access highway. Highway 97A is not designated as a limited access highway (Ted Hill, WDOT, pers. com.).

In the early 1990s, new RCWs were passed giving WDOT access management control for lands adjacent to existing rights-of-way. Development occurring on lands contiguous to WDOT rights- of-way require permitted access, including lands surrounding Rocky Reach Reservoir. Current development is occurring, primarily, on the Douglas County shoreline between Highway 97 and the reservoir, although some development is occurring on the Chelan County shoreline along Highway 97A as well. Any development is required to purchase an access right from WDOT prior to initiation of development. Proposed accesses must conform to WDOT standards in order to be permitted. The management of access rights by WDOT to highways, particularly 97 and 97A, is focused on public safety (Ted Hill, WDOT, pers. com.). Too many and/or improperly designed accesses to highways 97 and 97A could pose a safety threat to vehicles traveling at high speed along these corridors (Ted Hill, WDOT, pers. com.).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-90 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botanical Resources

E3.3.4.3 County Management Chelan County regulates private land use and has the responsibility for protecting wetlands in the county. The lands in the Project vicinity are subject to the land use regulations of Chelan County. Pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) of 1990, Chelan County implemented Resolution 93-158—Interim Regulations for Resource Lands and Critical Areas. These regulations were found to be out of compliance with GMA; County Commissioners are currently reviewing revised critical area ordinances for wetland and riparian areas (pers. comm., Christy Osborn, Sr. Planner, Chelan County Planning Department, Wenatchee, Washington, May 27, 1998). The Chelan County Shoreline Master Program regulates shoreline development pursuant to the Washington Shoreline Management Act of 1971.

E3.3.5 Botanical and Wildlife Resource Studies

E3.3.5.1 Wildlife Studies Conducted To Date Since 1982, Chelan PUD has conducted annual waterfowl use and goose nesting surveys (4-5 per year) on Rocky Reach Reservoir. This information if provided to the WDFW and USFWS for management purposes. These surveys are not required as part of the existing license.

Since 1982, Chelan PUD has conducted annual winter bald eagle surveys along Rocky Reach Reservoir. This information if provided to the WDFW and USFWS for management purposes. These surveys are not required as part of the existing license.

Chelan PUD has wrapped more than 200 mature trees along Rocky Reach Reservoir with wire mesh to protect them from beavers and to preserve riparian habitat and bald eagle perch sites. This effort is not required as part of the existing license.

Chelan PUD built and maintains four upland bird feeders (55 gallon drum size) along the Rocky Reach Reservoir.

Chelan PUD assists the WDFW by filling and maintaining WDFW upland bird feeders (55 gallon drum size) on the Chelan Butte HMA. This effort is not required as part of the existing license.

Chelan PUD assisted the WDFW by repairing and servicing upland bird watering guzzlers on the Chelan Butte, Entiat, and Swakane HMAs. These efforts are not required as part of the existing license.

E3.3.5.2 Botanical Studies Completed To Date A survey of botanical resources, including rare, threatened, and endangered (RTE) plants, was conducted around the Rocky Reach Reservoir in 1990 as part of the Rocky Reach pool raise application (Chelan PUD 1991). No plant species listed as threatened or endangered by the USFWS was found along the reservoir. Identified during the plant survey were nine populations of a plant, Giant Helliborine (Epipactis gigantea), which the Washington Natural Heritage Program considers a sensitive species in Washington State. These populations were found to inhabit areas close to the edge of the reservoir.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E3-91 SS/1181rr Exhibit E3: Fish, Wildlife and Botantical Resources

E3.3.5.3 Studies Currently Underway The only botanical study currently underway within the Rocky Reach Project area is sponsored by Chelan PUD in preparation for FERC relicensing. This study is being conducted by Calypso Consulting and is expected to include one year of fieldwork in 1999. The primary focus of the study will be the identification and mapping of all state and federally listed rare plants within the Rocky Reach Project area.

E3.4 CONSULTATION CONDUCTED WITH INTERESTED PARTIES Chelan PUD began meeting with interested parties (Federal, State, County and Local Resource Agencies) March 25, 1999. During the remainder of 1999, Chelan PUD will consult with resource agencies and other interested parties (stakeholders) regarding the proposed relicensing process, descriptions of the existing Project, extent of engineering work, and proposed environmental, historical, archaeological, recreational, and land use studies. This information, along with written comments provided by stakeholders identifying any additional required studies, will be used to prepare a NEPA scoping document.

Following preparation of the scoping documents, Chelan PUD will spend the next several years conducting studies and preparing the final license application and Draft Environmental Assessment. Chelan PUD will submit a preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and license application for the Rocky Reach Hydro Project by June 30, 2004. The existing license expires in 2006.

Issue Identification Process

March 25, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification. April 27, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification.

[In most cases, subsequent meetings will be held on the day after the fourth Wednesday in each month.]

Long Term Schedule

2000-2002 Conduct Studies 2003 Draft License and Environmental Assessment 2004 PUD submits Final License Application and Environmental Assessment 2004-2006 FERC Review & Processing of License Application & Environmental Assessment 2006 Existing License Expires/ New License Issued

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E3-92 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

E4.0 HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGIC RESOURCES

E4.1 HISTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL OVERVIEW A detailed historical and archaeological overview of the Project area can be found in Cultural Resources of the Rocky Reach of the Columbia River, Volumes 1 and 2 (Schalk and Mierendorf 1983). The following information has been summarized from this report. Other sources are referenced where appropriate and additional information on these studies is included in Section E4.4

The following section is a brief synopsis of environmental information primarily derived from Schalk and Mierendorf (1983) and Galm (1990).

E4.1.1 Description of Project Area The Rocky Reach of the Columbia River lies between two significantly different physiographic areas. The Project is located in a valley that is north-south trending, with the North Cascades Mountains to the west and the Columbia Plateau to the east. The rugged peaks in the Cascades average around 5,000 feet and reach elevations of over 10,000 feet. The mountains are comprised of highly metamorphosed schists and gneisses, slightly metamorphosed marine sedimentary rocks, volcanic rocks, and granitic batholiths.

The Columbia River Plateau ranges from 750 feet to 2,500 feet in elevation and was created by repeated, extensive lava flows during the Miocene period resulting in numerous vast layers of basalt covering the existing bedrock of the region. On the east side of the Rocky Reach, from about Chelan north, the Columba River Basalts are covered with till from the last advance of the Cordilleran ice approximately 12,000 years ago.

Subsequent to the last glaciation in the region, the Columbia River down-cut through the glacial outwash to its present base level forming a series of terraces along the valley sides while alluvial fans and debris flows shifted masses of unconsolidated drift to downslope positions. The river trench through the Rocky Reach is essentially a gorge interrupted by confluences with a number of tributary valleys. Tributaries include the Methow, Chelan, Entiat, and Wenatchee Rivers on the west, and one major intermittent drainage, Corbally Canyon, to the east. Vertically and horizontally extensive basalt beds that cooled from lava flows during the Miocene characterize the valley.

Precipitation in the region surrounding the Rocky Reach varies from an annual average of more than 35 inches west of the Columbia River, to approximately 15 inches in the valley bottom, to 10 inches on the Columbia Plateau east of the river. Such climatic conditions result in an abrupt vegetation boundary along the river. In the Rocky Reach, the transition from dense forest to steppe is immediate with few areas of open zones of Ponderosa pine.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E4-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

Anadromous fish (salmon and steelhead trout) and ungulates (deer, elk, and mountain sheep) would have been available in the past to people living in the Rocky Reach vicinity as would numerous plant resources (including root crops and berries).

E4.1.2 Ethnographic The native groups that held territory in the Project area are clustered into four tribes: the Chelan, Entiat, Wenatchi, and Columbia. These groups were socially and geographically distinct units, but are referred to in Schalk and Mierendorf (1983) as “Middle Columbia Salish” when sufficient information is not available to make accurate distinctions between the groups. Many of the Middle Columbia Salish camps and villages were seasonal or temporary. Seasonal camps and villages were used when fishing, hunting, and gathering were most productive in those areas.

The Chelan The Chelan occupied the Lake Chelan and Chelan River country in early historic times, evidently considering this area to be the heart of their territory. The Chelan also claimed the western flank of the Columbia Valley north of the Chelan confluence. The boundaries of their territory along Rocky Reach are unclear, but likely extended as far north as the upper reaches of Rocky Reach Reservoir, and south between the Navarre Coulee mouth and Byrd Canyon (Figure E4-1). The focus of the Chelan activity was primarily on the west side of the Columbia River. Their occupancy along the shorelines of the Columbia was comprised of approximately seven villages or camps. The Chelan differed from the other groups in that they were primarily associated with the lake. Both in summer and winter, three times as many of their occupation sites were on Lake Chelan as were on the Columbia banks. During the summer, less than a fourth of the population resided in Columbia River camps, where salmon could be taken. The remainder was up in the lake country gathering and hunting. The Chelan were less dependent on salmon than the Wenatchi and Entiat.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E4-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

Figure E4-1: Approximate Tribal Boundaries of Chelan, Entiat, Wenatchi, and Columbia in the Rocky Reach Sector of the Columbia Valley as of about 1855 or Slightly Earlier (Schalk and Mierendorf 1983)

The Entiat The Entiat territory along the Columbia River extended from approximately one mile south of Navarre Coulee, to the south somewhere between Tenas George Canyon and Swakane Creek (Figure E4-1). There is little evidence showing Entiat occupation on the east shore of the Columbia River. Occupancy was primarily along the west bank and was comprised of approximately five villages and camps. The Entiat were the only Middle Columbia Salish entity that remained wholly on the Columbia River in summer and winter. Salmon was evidently very important in their subsistence pattern. There is little evidence relating specifically to Entiat gathering and hunting, but presumably it did not differ substantially from the Wenatchi.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E4-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

The Wenatchi The Wenatchi occupied the Wenatchee Valley, at least its middle and lower regions, and the adjacent sections of the Columbia River. Their territory along the western shoreline of the Columbia stretched from the southern border of the Entiat territory south to approximately the vicinity of the contemporary Malaga (Figure E4-1). There is little evidence showing Wenatchi occupation on the east shore of the Columbia River, but some reports indicate there may have been a temporary camp opposite the Wenatchee confluence, and another about three miles south of Corbaley Canyon. Unlike the Entiat and Chelan tribes, the Wenatchi were comprised of three bands in the Columbia Valley. There were approximately seven villages and camps on the west side of the Columbia. A village at the Wenatchee confluence was said to have a population of as many as 400. The Wenatchi were distinctly river-oriented in that they utilized the Wenatchee River as well as the Columbia. Their summer camps were about equally divided between the Columbia Valley and the banks of the Wenatchee River and larger numbers of salmon were caught in the Wenatchee than in the Columbia River. In addition to fish, diets were supplemented by roots, berries, and game secured in the small prairies and hills that bordered the two rivers. Winter villages were very nearly all on the Columbia River, though one-third of the population wintered on the Wenatchee River.

The Columbia The Columbia held either much or all of the territory along the east bank of the Columbia River from some point east of the mouth of the Okanogan downriver at least to the Crab Creek confluence and the Saddle Mountains (Figure E4-1). Early historical records suggest the southernmost boundary may have reached as far south as Priest Rapids. Among the Columbia peoples, a number of bands were apparently recognized, all living along the Columbia River. Their villages along the Columbia River were places that made good fishing sites. Many of their other villages were gathering and hunting sites in the arid plains and coulee country east of the Columbia River. There were two known Columbia villages just south of the Rocky Reach Project, but none are documented within the Project area. Except for a very small segment of the group that spent the summer salmon-fishing in the Columbia River, the entire Columbia population moved out into the basin in the early spring. There they dispersed widely to gather roots, and supplemented their diet with non-salmonid fish and small game. As with the Chelan, the Columbia must have been less dependent on salmon than the Wenatchi and Entiat. The Columbia wintered at their cold-season villages along the Columbia River.

E4.1.3 Historic Euroamerican Settlement Fur Traders and Trappers The initial historical accounts of the Columbia River and the Project area environments were obtained from the early Northwest explorers and fur traders. The existence of the Wenatchee River was first recorded when a Yakama Indian chief drew a map for Lewis and Clark depicting the “Wahnaachee River”. In 1811, David Thompson of the Northwest Company passed through the Rocky Reach area and observed two large Indian lodges at the mouth of the Wenatchee. The Columbia River was originally used as a commercial route for traders and trappers, who traded with the local tribes and trapped their lands. Because of their largely transient lifestyle, the overall direct effects of the fur trade period upon the Project area were minimal.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E4-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

Mining By mid-century, the Columbia River corridor was becoming a major pathway between the west coast and the interior of British Columbia and was being used increasingly by miners, ranchers, and later farmers who began to settle on and demand control of Indian lands. Hostilities broke out between Indians and the settlers periodically between 1855 and 1858.

Early settlers along the Columbia corridor turned to mining, and cattle and horse ranching. While the Columbia provided access to the interior, its rapids presented a navigational obstacle to development. Mining and ranching did not require a waterway for shipping exports to distant markets. One group of miners who settled in the Project area was the Chinese. As early as 1865 several hundred Chinese were mining a 150-mile stretch of the Columbia north of Rock Island. Their numbers increased to one thousand by 1875 between Priest Rapids and Colville.

It has been reported that many of the local Indians resented the Chinese. They were reportedly suspicious of what they considered to be oriental aloofness, resentful of Chinese trade with the whites, and angry over their alleged seduction of Indian women. Numerous Indian attacks against the Chinese occurred during the 1860’s and 1870’s, the most notorious taking place in 1875 south of Chelan Falls on the Columbia. Such attacks began to drive the Chinese away. In 1879, there were still 500 to 700 Chinese on the Columbia between the Wenatchee and Spokane rivers.

Prior to the 1875 Chelan massacre, the center for Chinese activities was at their settlement opposite the mouth of the Chelan River, where a prosperous trading post was located. The trading post was described as the first commercial enterprise in north central Washington. The village was reportedly abandoned in the early 1880’s with most of the Chinese departing from the Columbia by the turn of the century.

Mining impacted the Project area in two ways. First, while most miners passed through the Project area in transit to the northern mines, some of them mined locally and eventually settled between Wenatchee and Chelan. Second, the mining boom stimulated government land surveys, and introduced a military presence that established a military camp at the lower end of Lake Chelan. These factors were key in promoting future river navigation which along with railroad, irrigation, and power development projects made Wenatchee the commercial and political hub of north central Washington.

Transportation and Industrial Development Irrigation and Agriculture Until 1914, the steamboat was the only mode of transportation into the Project area other than horseback or wagon. However, since Columbia River navigation was dependent upon water levels, it was often unreliable. Railroad extensions through the Project area, combined with a devastating dock fire at the C & O steamboat company in Wenatchee, brought an end to steamboating on the upper Columbia. The Mansfield line, completed in 1910, took all of the grain shipments of the Big Bend country into Wenatchee that had previously been transported by steamboat.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E4-5 SS/1181rr Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

The cultivation of crops and livestock exports increased dramatically with the development of the railroad. The transcontinental systems of the Northern Pacific and the Great Northern Railroads caused a wave of immigration to the Northwest. Population in the Columbia Plain rose from 100,000 in 1890 to 300,000 in 1910 and the number of incorporated towns and villages rose to one hundred during this period.

With irrigation development, agriculture in the Project area expanded into marginal lands to meet the food demands of the booming urban centers that were connected by rail to the agricultural supply points. The railroads pushed for the irrigation of marginal lands, sometimes acquiring water rights along their right-of-ways, to insure that they would have a monopoly on shipping to distant markets. Although dryland wheat production was still a major factor in the economy of the Columbia Plain, irrigation was allowing for rapid expansion of the fruit-growing industry into areas like the Wenatchee Valley. In 1903, the Highline Canal was constructed in Wenatchee, and most of the newly irrigated lands were cultivated into apple orchards. In 1913, the Wenatchee District production of apples was 4,100 railroad cars; by 1923 it was 18,000.

Hydroelectric Generation The attention given to irrigation development during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was accompanied by a growing recognition of the river's hydroelectric power generating potential. A movement to develop public power resources and the beginning of construction of dams on the Columbia River was underway by the 1930’s. After the completion of the Grand Coulee Dam, the nation found itself at war, which postponed projects like the Columbia Basin Reclamation Project during the conflict. The importance of power generation overtook the importance of irrigation during and after World War II. During the 1950’s, Chief Joseph Dam was built by the Federal Government upriver of the Rocky Reach. Chelan County Public Utility District (Chelan PUD) acquired and expanded Rock Island Dam and built Rocky Reach Dam in the early 1960’s. Grant County Public Utility District built Priest Rapids Dam in 1959 and Wanapum Dam in 1963, and Douglas County Public Utility District built Wells Dam in 1968.

E4.2 EXISTING RESOURCES An intensive archaeological survey of the shoreline of the Rocky Reach Project was conducted in 1981 as part of plans to raise the reservoir level. The purpose of the study was to inventory and document cultural resources that might be affected by the pool raise, and to identify those sites that were currently being affected by the existing reservoir level and Project operation. The survey, which included an evaluation of all previously known archaeological investigations on the reservoir, identified a total of 47 cultural resource sites.

In preparation for a license amendment for the proposed pool raise, a resurvey of cultural resources was conducted in 1990 and complete reexamination of the shoreline was conducted at this time. The primary focus of this work was on areas identified in the 1983 Schalk and Mierendorf survey as having a high potential of buried cultural resources. The 1990 survey found additional cultural materials at four of the sites that were surveyed in 1981. The 1990 resurvey resulted in the recording of twelve new sites and eight sensitive areas. Sensitive areas

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E4-6 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources are locations where no cultural materials were noted but site features indicate that these areas should receive further consideration.

As a result of the above cultural resource work, Chelan PUD contracted with Archaeological and Historical Services in the fall of 1990 to test nine of the newly discovered sites, two of the sensitive areas, and to complete National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) evaluations for three sites. Mitigation measures were identified to address unique circumstances at site 45CH254.

E4.2.1 Archaeological Chelan PUD has detailed information about known prehistoric and historic sites within the Rocky Reach boundary. In order to properly protect these sites from disturbance, detailed information about the locations and contents of sites remains confidential. Therefore, a thorough summary of each site is not provided in this document.

In the survey conducted by Schalk and Mierendorf in the summer and fall of 1981 and 1982, seventeen prehistoric sites were identified and eight of these sites were tested. The tested sites ranged in age from ca. 9000 B.P. to the “late prehistoric/historic” period based on carbon 14 dates and artifact types. Four of the sites appeared to qualify for inclusion in the NRHP. Potential eligibility was not addressed for the nine prehistoric sites that were not tested, and of these it was noted that seven were severely disturbed or lacking in subsurface cultural remains (Galm 1990).

In the 1990 resurvey of the Rocky Reach, eleven additional prehistoric sites were identified (Galm 1990). Four of these sites appeared to be eligible for inclusion in the NRHP. Eligibility will be considered during the upcoming relicensing process.

E4.2.2 Historical Thirty historic cultural resources were identified during the 1981 site survey (Schalk and Mierendorf 1983). Three of sites were just outside the Project boundary. The sites range in function from permanent residences to bridges. One of the identified sites appeared to be potentially eligible for nomination to the NRHP.

E4.3 EXISTING ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL STUDIES A literature review and ethnographic inventory for the Rocky Reach Project area were initiated in 1999 as part of the Lake Chelan relicensing. Since data for each of the study areas may be immediately applicable to both of the Projects, the study area was expanded to include both the Lake Chelan and Rocky Reach Project areas. Specific details about this study are being developed in close consultation with interested stakeholders and Native American Tribes.

E4.3.1 Studies Previously Conducted Cultural resource surveys, site testing, and determinations of eligibility were conducted on the reservoir in 1982 and 1990 in conjunction with the preparation of an application to amend the

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E4-7 SS/1181rr Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

Rocky Reach license to allow a 3-foot increase in headwater elevation. The FERC denied the application in an Order issued on November 18, 1996.

The following reports are considered confidential and are not available for public review.

The most comprehensive work for the Project area is reported in Cultural Resources of the Rocky Reach of the Columbia River, Volumes I and II (Schalk and Mierendorf 1983). This work was completed in 1981 and 1982 as part of the initial Rocky Reach pool raise feasibility study. A concurrent survey, A Cultural Resource Survey of “Exhibit R” Recreation Sites in the Rocky Reach Reservoir (Simmons et al. 1983), was conducted for Rocky Reach Exhibit R sites. These reports, mainly Schalk and Mierendorf (1983), serve as the primary source of cultural resource information for Rocky Reach.

A resurvey of Rocky Reach was completed in 1990 as part of a comprehensive environmental re- examination of the proposed pool raise. This resurvey resulted in two reports: Cultural Resource Investigations in the Rocky Reach Reservoir: The 1990 Resurvey (Galm 1990), and Cultural Resource Investigations Along the Rocky Reach Reservoir: The 1990 Test Excavations (Borenson 1991).

An Archaeological Survey of Rocky Reach Reservoir (Daugherty 1956) constitutes the first and only previous effort to identify archaeological sites to be inundated by the reservoir. Twenty-one sites were recorded and summarized for the lower two-thirds of the reservoir. As a result of the survey, four archaeological sites were excavated in 1959, three of which were within the proposed reservoir. The results of these excavations are reported in The Archaeology of the Rocky Reach Reservoir (Gunkel 1961).

E4.4 EXISTING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Chelan PUD currently does not have a formal cultural resource management plan in place for identified cultural resources located within the Project boundary. The Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project license was amended on March 18, 1983 with the addition of Article 49, requiring Chelan PUD to consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) prior to commencement of any construction associated with the Project. Article 49 was included as part of a FERC Order approving a revision to the Exhibit R recreation plan and the construction of a number of new parks at the Project.

E4.4.1 Federal Management Federal management of cultural resources for the Project is the responsibility of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). FERC is the lead federal agency for all undertakings at the Project and is responsible for initiating and completing Section 106 consultation when a proposed undertaking could potentially affect cultural resources.

The ACHP is the major policy advisor to the federal government regarding historic preservation. The ACHP acts primarily as a reviewing agency and signatory to agreement documents related to

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E4-8 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources cultural resources for FERC-licensed projects. The ACHP also becomes involved with dispute resolution when necessary.

The US Forest Service (Wenatchee National Forest) and the Bureau of Land Management are the federal agencies with land management responsibilities adjacent to the Rocky Reach Project. The Wenatchee National Forest is directed by the "Programmatic Agreement Regarding Cultural Resource Management on National Forests in the State of Washington" for cultural resource management on their lands. The Bureau of Land Management consults with the SHPO prior to commencement of any construction associated with their lands.

E4.4.2 State Management State management of cultural resources is the responsibility of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The SHPO for Washington is the Washington Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The SHPO performs a wide variety of functions under the terms of NHPA, State law, and other authorities. These functions include the nomination of properties to the National Register of Historic Places; the conduct of statewide historic preservation planning and a statewide inventory of historic properties; provision of technical assistance to Federal and State agencies, local governments, hydroelectric projects, and others; the certification of local governments to participate in the national program; and acting as a signatory to agreement documents pertaining to cultural resource management. It is the SHPO's responsibility to work, through State programs and in cooperation with other levels of government, to ensure preservation of historic properties within the State. As such, the SHPO is a key figure in Section 106 activities within the State.

E4.4.3 Tribal Management The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Yakama Indian Nation are very interested in cultural resource management at the Rocky Reach Project area. Chelan PUD will work closely with the tribes in assessing and scoping cultural resources studies during relicensing.

E4.5 CONSULTATION CONDUCTED WITH INTERESTED PARTIES Chelan PUD began meeting with interested parties (Federal, State, County and Local Resource Agencies) March 25, 1999. During the remainder of 1999, Chelan PUD will consult with resource agencies and other interested parties (stakeholders) regarding the proposed relicensing process, descriptions of the existing Project, extent of engineering work, and proposed environmental, historical, archaeological, recreational, and land use studies. This information, along with written comments provided by stakeholders identifying any additional required studies, will be used to prepare a NEPA scoping document.

Following preparation of the scoping documents, Chelan PUD will spend the next several years conducting studies and preparing the final license application and Draft Environmental Assessment. Chelan PUD will submit a preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and license application for the Rocky Reach Hydro Project by June 30, 2004. The existing license expires in 2006.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E4-9 SS/1181rr Exhibit E4: Historic and Archaeologic Resources

Issue Identification Process

March 25, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification. April 27, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification.

[In most cases, subsequent meetings will be held on the day after the fourth Wednesday in each month.]

Long Term Schedule

2000-2002 Conduct Studies 2003 Draft License and Environmental Assessment 2004 PUD submits Final License Application and Environmental Assessment 2004-2006 FERC Review & Processing of License Application & Environmental Assessment 2006 Existing License Expires/ New License Issued

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E4-10 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

E5.0 REPORT ON RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

E5.1 INTRODUCTION Project Location The Rocky Reach Project is located in north central Washington State approximately seven miles north of the City of Wenatchee on the Columbia River in Chelan County. The dam is 215 river miles below the Canadian border and 474 river miles above the mouth of the Columbia at Astoria, Oregon. Lake Entiat, the Rocky Reach Project reservoir, extends upriver 43 miles (to Wells Dam) and has a surface area of approximately 9,100 acres. The reservoir contains 36,400 acre-feet of usable storage.

The drainage area of the Project at the dam is about 87,000 square miles. The watershed lies east of the Cascade Mountains and West of the Rocky Mountains, consisting of parts of Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia. The normal headwater elevation is 707 feet above mean sea level (MSL) and the normal tailwater is at elevation 615 feet. The average annual minimum water temperature of 34 degrees Fahrenheit (F) normally occurs during the month of February. The average annual maximum water temperature of 65ºF occurs during the months of August and September.

Physical Setting The state of Washington encompasses a wide range of geographic diversity, from the marine influenced ocean shores and the Puget Sound, over the rugged Cascade Mountain Range to the rolling hills of central Washington, to the ancient mountain ranges of north central and eastern Washington. The Rocky Reach Project is located on the Columbia River between two significantly different physiographic areas. In the Cascade Mountains to the west, a metamorphosed sedimentary, volcanic, and granitic rock predominates. On the Columbia River Plateau to the east, vast, thick layers of basalt cover bedrock. The vegetation ranges from forest and alpine meadows in the Cascades down to the fertile, irrigated valleys near the Columbia and back up to sparsely vegetated arid plateaus to the east.

Climate The climate in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Project is the semi-arid type, which is typical of eastern Washington. There is a seasonal range of temperatures in the area with winter averaging about 25°F and summer about 75°F. Spring and Fall temperatures average 50°F. Extreme temperatures can approach -30°F in winter and 110°F in summer. The precipitation is generally low with an annual average of about 10 inches, the bulk of which falls between October and March. There are usually no more than 8 to 15 inches of snow on the ground. Flooding on tributary streams has little effect on the rate of flow of the Columbia River.

Regional Economy The economy of the north central Washington region encompassing Chelan and Douglas counties is based primarily on agriculture. Chelan County provides 80 percent of the jobs in the two county area and contains 75 percent of the total number of employers. Apples, pears, cherries,

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources and other fruits are important crops in the Columbia River basin. Other types of agriculture (wheat, hay, and potatoes) retail trades, services, manufacturing, recreation and tourism also support the region’s economy.

Regional Population The region is sparsely populated. In 1997 the population of Chelan County was 57,854, Douglas County’s was 31,054 and the population of the entire state of Washington was 5.4 million people. The largest community on the Rocky Reach reservoir is the Town of Entiat, with a 1997 estimated population of 801. The cities of Wenatchee (1997-population estimate 25,160) and East Wenatchee (1997 population estimate 5,245) are located seven miles south of Rocky Reach Dam.

Current Land Use The Columbia River valley surrounding the Rocky Reach Reservoir is a wide canyon characterized by basalt cliffs and exposed rock outcroppings. The limited valley is generally rural in nature. The Town of Entiat and the communities of Chelan Falls and Orondo are located along the reservoir. Project boundary encroachment includes two sanitary sewer outfalls, storm water outfalls, irrigation withdrawals, and recreational development that is part of Chelan PUD’s existing recreation plan.

Within the Project boundary agricultural uses, recreational sites developed by Chelan PUD, and some residential lands surround approximately half the reservoir. Agricultural uses consist primarily of fruit orchards and some pasture lands. Irrigation pumps and pump houses to withdraw water from the Columbia River are often located on agricultural lands. Recreation sites provide for swimming, boating, fishing, personal watercraft, camping, picnicking, water-skiing, and other recreational uses. Recreational use generated at these sites is intensive during the summer season, Memorial Day through Labor Day.

The remainder of the lands surrounding the reservoir is undeveloped. These lands can be characterized as drylands. They include shrub steppe and grasslands vegetation with patches of exposed rock. Much of the undeveloped shoreline lies in areas where the reservoir is in close proximity to a small, private railroad on the westerly side and to State Routes 97 (westerly) and 97A (easterly). Narrow strips of riparian vegetation, including wetland areas, may be present along those areas of the reservoir where the shoreline slopes are relatively gentle.

Recreation Overview Camping, fishing, hunting, boating, water skiing, swimming, kayaking, personal watercraft, and tubing are just some of the many water-based activities available within the Project boundary. In addition, nearby National Forests, State, and National Parks offer backpacking, hiking, camping, skiing and other year-round outdoor activity adventures.

E5.1.1 History of Recreational Development Rocky Reach Project Recreation Planning History In 1975, the Chelan PUD filed the Exhibit R Recreation Plan for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Power Project with the FERC. The plan was approved by the FERC in 1976.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E5-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

In 1990, during a scheduled inspection of the Rocky Reach Project, the FERC requested that Chelan PUD file a revised Exhibit R and schedules for the completion of recreational facilities development proposed in the original Recreation Plan. In 1991, Chelan PUD responded to this request by filing the Report on the Status of the Rocky Reach Exhibit R Recreation Plan and Request for Revisions of the Recreation Plan. This report was approved by the FERC in 1993.

Rocky Reach Dam Site The Rocky Reach Dam was dedicated in public ceremonies on June 20, 1963. That year the four- story Public Information and Tour Center opened and nearly 200,000 people visited the landscaped grounds, fish viewing rooms, Interpretive History Gallery and information center.

The addition of a second picnic shelter, restroom and parking facilities was opened for public use in mid-summer, 1993. The park continues to be a popular stopping point for the traveling public and area residents.

Orondo Park Orondo Park, located on Lake Entiat behind Rocky Reach Dam, was one of the first formal parks developed at the Project. The Port of Douglas County first developed this park in 1974 and Chelan PUD, through its recreation plan (Exhibit R), acquired additional lands adjacent to the existing park to expand the existing facilities. Completion of the expanded park occurred in the summer of 1980. The facilities completed by Chelan PUD include irrigated lawn areas, added parking, a gazebo and some improvements to the swimming area. Prior to that, facilities within the park consisted of boat launching sites, day use area, restroom and parking areas.

Entiat Park Entiat Park redevelopment and expansion was completed in 1978 and was the first recreation site developed by Chelan PUD. The park redevelopment and the expanded area were constructed by Chelan PUD as part of the recreation plan "Exhibit R" for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project. The redevelopment and expansion joined together two existing community parks; Silico Saska and Will Risk Memorial Park. Park development provided for the improvement and expansion of recreational facilities along approximately 4,000 feet of shoreline and included a day use picnic area, restroom facilities, parking lot area, boat launch and boat handling facilities along with overnight camping. Entiat Park was originally opened to the public from May through September. However, beginning in 1991, its schedule expanded to remain open year around with only partial closures at certain times of the year.

Construction at Entiat Park began early in the summer of 1994 to reconfigure the parks two entrances into one. In 1994 the entrance to the South was designated as the main entrance.

Lincoln Rock State Park Lincoln Rock State Park opened to the public in 1981. Expansion of the park began in 1986, was completed in 1987 and a dedication ceremony was held on September 16, 1987. The original park and the expanded area were constructed by Chelan PUD as part of the "Exhibit R" recreation plan for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

The park has been an extremely popular facility for both local citizens and out of town visitors and is often filled to capacity during the summer months. The park expansion increased the developed area at the park from approximately 17 acres to nearly 60 acres. Two new camp loops were constructed, which added 67 sites to the original 27 sites for a total of 94 campsites at the park. The added camp loops feature full and partial hookups for recreational vehicles. Other park facilities include three picnic shelters, five restrooms, outdoor activity courts, swim area, boat launching and docking facilities, and a multi-use play area.

Daroga Park The park was constructed by Chelan PUD as part of the "Exhibit R" recreation plan for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project. The Park opened to the public in April of 1990 with a dedication program held September 20, 1990.

The park's 140 acres offer facilities consisting of a camp loop with 25 camping units, 17 hike-in or boat-in camp units, and one large group camp area with a capacity of 50 camping units for a total of 92 units to accommodate the public. Partial hookups are provided for recreational vehicles. Other park facilities include two picnic shelters, four restrooms, outdoor activity courts, multi-purpose sports field, shoreline trails, large landscaped day use areas, wind surfing beach area, swim area, boat launching and docking facilities, parking lot facilities, a dump-lift station for recreational vehicles and boats, and site utilities (including domestic and irrigation water systems, power, and sewage facilities).

Chelan PUD opened bids for a Group Camp Expansion at Daroga Park on August 18, 1993. The expansion Project consisted of an additional four acres of landscaping, one restroom, one picnic shelter, and additional parking. Construction of the expansion Project began in October, 1993 and was completed in the summer of 1994.

Chelan Falls/Beebe Bridge Parks These parks were constructed by Chelan PUD as part of the "Exhibit R" recreation plan for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project. Chelan PUD opened bids for this Project on December 13, 1990 and construction of the Project began in February 1991. Chelan Falls Park was opened to the public in early June of 1993 and Beebe Bridge Park opened to the public early in July of 1993. Both parks were formally dedicated by Chelan PUD’s Commission and members of the community on August 20, 1993.

Chelan Falls Park: The development of this site provides a boat ramp, a boat dock, an extensive day use picnic area, restrooms, and irrigated landscaping.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E5-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

Beebe Bridge Park: The development of this site provides one loop of overnight camping (27 units), contact station, restrooms, guest parking, day use and picnic facilities, swim beach, boat ramp and boat docks, and irrigated landscaping. In 1994 an eleven-acre expansion was begun at Beebe Bridge and includes 27 additional overnight campsites. This Project was completed in 1995.

E5.2 DESCRIPTION OF RECREATIONAL RESOURCES OF THE PROJECT AND ITS VICINITY

E5.2.1 Current Recreational Development Public access to Rocky Reach Project lands and waters is widely available. Recreation facilities located within or immediately adjacent to the Rocky Reach Reservoir include the following:

Rocky Reach Dam Recreation Facilities and Visitor Center This 38-acre park site, located on the southwest shoreline at the dam, includes numerous recreation facilities, a visitors center, and museum. Recreation facilities include two picnic shelters, picnic tables, formal gardens, playground equipment, and interpretive displays. There is a primitive boat launch located approximately a half mile downstream of the dam on the west bank, and a primitive fisherman’s access located approximately one-quarter mile downstream on the east bank of the river. This site is owned and operated by Chelan PUD.

Lincoln Rock State Park Lincoln Rock State Park is a 60-acre park located on the east shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir just above Rocky Reach Dam. Recreation facilities include a three-lane boat launch, six boat tie- up docks, swim beach, restrooms with showers, picnic tables, three picnic shelters, amphitheater, playground equipment, jogging trails, athletic fields and courts, RV and tent camp sites, RV dump station, and a concession building. Lincoln Rock State Park is owned by Chelan PUD and operated and maintained under a cooperative agreement with the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission.

Orondo Park Orondo Park is a five-acre park located on the east shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir approximately two miles north of the community of Orondo. Recreation facilities include a one- lane boat launch, marina, three boat tie-up docks, overnight moorage, swim beach, restrooms with showers, picnic tables and a picnic shelter, playground equipment, and tent and RV camp sites. The park is jointly owned by Chelan PUD and the Port of Douglas County. The Port of Douglas County is responsible for managing Orondo Park.

Entiat Park Entiat Park is a 40-acre park located on the west shore of Rocky Reach Reservoir in the City of Entiat north of the Entiat River. Recreation facilities at Entiat Park include a one-lane boat launch, two boat tie-up docks, swim beach, restrooms with showers, a museum, picnic tables and a picnic shelter, playground equipment, RV and tent campsites, and a RV dump station. The park

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-5 SS/1181rr Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources is jointly owned in part by Chelan PUD and the City of Entiat. The park is managed by the City of Entiat’s Park & Recreation Department.

Daroga State Park Daroga State Park is a 140-acre park located on the east shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir seven miles north of Orondo. Recreation facilities include a two-lane boat launch, three boat tie- up docks, swim beach, restrooms with showers, picnic tables and picnic shelters, playground equipment, jogging trails, athletic fields and courts, RV and tent campsites, two group camping areas, and a RV dump station. The park is owned by Chelan PUD and operated and maintained under a cooperative agreement with the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission.

Beebe Bridge Park Beebe Bridge Park is a 56-acre park located on the east shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir just south of the US Highway 97 Beebe Bridge. Beebe Bridge Park is approximately two miles east of the City of Chelan and 32 miles north of Wenatchee. Recreation facilities include a two-lane boat launch, a boat tie-up dock, swim beach, picnic tables and a picnic shelter, restrooms with showers, playground equipment, athletic fields and courts, RV and tent campsites, a group camping area, and a RV dump station. The park is owned and operated by Chelan PUD.

Chelan Falls Park Chelan Falls Park is a 53-acre park on the west shore of the Rocky Reach Reservoir and is located in the community of Chelan Falls, just downstream from the mouth of the Chelan River. Recreation facilities include a two-lane boat launch, two boat tie-up docks, two swim beaches, picnic tables and two picnic shelters, restrooms with showers, playground equipment, and athletic fields and courts. The park is owned and operated by Chelan PUD.

A location map of recreation facilities is provided in the Introduction (Figure 1-1).

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E5-6 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

E5.2.2 An Estimate Of Existing And Potential Recreational Use Of The Project Area In Daytime And Overnight Visits.

Table E5-1: Four-Year Visitor Counts for the Rocky Reach Project Area

1998 1998 1998 1997 1997 1998 Daytime Overnight Total Daytime Overnight Total Rocky Reach Dam 276,488 276,488 150,702 150,702 Lincoln Rock State Park 224,059 32,449 256,508 231,647 41,170 272,817 Daroga State Park 117,469 19,891 137,360 123,837 20,446 144,283 Orondo River Park 36,824 36,824 35,644 35,644 Beebe Bridge Park 98,510 11,418 109,928 80,368 11,437 91,805 Chelan Falls Park 127,073 127,073 65,988 65,988 Entiat Park 150,278 150,278 47,411 47,411 Entire Reservoir 1,030,701 63,758 1,094,459 735,597 73,053 808,650

Table E5-1: Four-Year Visitor Counts for the Rocky Reach Project Area (Continued)

1996 1996 1996 1995 1995 1995 Daytime Overnight Total Daytime Overnight Total Rocky Reach Dam 199,991 199,991 209,141 209,141 Lincoln Rock State Park 237,949 27,124 265,073 196,142 25,780 221,922 Daroga State Park 120,185 24,085 144,270 117,607 25,619 143,226 Orondo River Park 48,833 48,833 59,325 59,325 Beebe Bridge Park 67,433 29,903 97,336 77,094 6,647 83,741 Chelan Falls Park 69,932 69,932 59,881 59,881 Entiat Park 55,455 55,455 64,277 64,277 Entire Reservoir 799,778 81,112 880,890 783,467 58,046 841,513

E5.3 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

E5.3.1 Identification of State and Federal Agencies and Indian Tribes with Responsibility for Management of Recreational Resources on the Affected Lands and Waters Many government agencies as well as numerous private owners manage and maintain the recreational facilities within the Project boundary. Managing agencies include the following; Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Chelan PUD, City of Entiat, and Douglas County Port District.

E5.3.2 Summary of Existing Recreational Resource Management Plans Relevant to the Recreational Resources of the Project and Its Vicinity The Forest Service, Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC), Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, City of Entiat, Douglas County, and Chelan County provide plans that include policies and guidelines for recreation management and development in the Project area. Plans include the following:

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-7 SS/1181rr Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

US Forest Service, Land and Resource Management Plan Wenatchee National Forest The 1990 Forest Plan is part of the 50-year framework for long-range resource planning established by the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (RPA) as amended by the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). As such, it establishes general direction for a period of time, usually between 10 and 15 years. The Forest Plan is a general strategy for managing the Wenatchee National Forest System in an environmentally sound manner to produce goods and services in a way that maximizes long-term public benefits. The Forest Plan establishes multiple use goals, objectives and desired future conditions. The following is a summary of its recreation related goals: • Provide a well-balanced array of recreation opportunities across the breadth of the recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) in accordance with resource capability, public demands, and expectations for outdoor recreation. • Provide a diverse system of safe, well-maintained trails for the enjoyment of all users. • Respond to new opportunities to develop partnerships and joint ventures with other agencies and the private sector to magnify the Forest Service’s abilities to meet expanding public demand for outdoor recreation. • Provide an information program to assist the public in understanding management of various resources and to assist them in their search for a variety of challenging and pleasing experiences. • Provide for the identification, protection, interpretation, and management of cultural resources so as to preserve their historical, cultural, archeological, and/or architectural values for the benefit of the public. • Provide those visiting the Forest a variety of landscape characters with visually appealing scenery. • Manage designated wilderness to perpetuate wilderness character, natural ecological processes, and provide appropriate outdoor recreation opportunities.

Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) Assessment and Policy Plan 1995-2000 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP) Document The Washington State IAC prepared the SCORP as required by RCW 43.99.025 (3), a statute calling for the IAC to “prepare and update a strategic plan for the acquisition, renovation, and development of recreational resources and the preservation and conservation of open space”.

In preparing the assessment, the IAC sought input from the public and professional recreation and habitat providers. Forums included a survey of recreation and habitat professionals, 21 public focus group meetings, a statewide issue-refining (“Delphi”) process including 100s of people in leadership roles, and individual interviews.

Also survey results and public comment heard during previous planning efforts were considered. The following were IAC findings as a result of the assessment:

• People expect the State to provide essential outdoor recreation opportunities, including wildlife habitat and natural areas.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E5-8 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

• Strong public demand for nonmotorized trails and all water access continues to be unmet. • Public demand for quality outdoor recreation opportunities is overwhelming the ability of agencies at all levels (both the public and private sectors) to provide adequate service. • Additional land and facilities are needed. Equally important is the proper stewardship of those lands and facilities already in public ownership.

Based on the public involvement process, its management of significant state grant funds, and research for the assessment, IAC recommends priorities within broad opportunity categories:

• Water access • Trails • State and local parks • Natural areas • Critical fish and wildlife habitat

City of Entiat Master Plan: Entiat Park December, 1992 The City of Entiat Master Plan for Entiat Park is a basic tool for the systematic planning of parks and recreation facilities and recreation programming. The City of Entiat operates and maintains Entiat Park in order to provide its citizens with public areas for socialization and recreation.

The development program for Entiat Park is primarily limited to improving existing facilities through expansion and updating materials and layout. The general use patterns of the park are expected to remain the same with some addition of new facilities. The following is a list of goals related to parks and recreation services that have been recommended under this plan for the Entiat Park:

Existing use areas to be improved and/or expanded: • Boat launch and boat launch parking • Tent camping and group tent camping • RV overnight stations • Swim beach • Picnicking • Parking • Museum

New facilities: • Park entry station including office and check point • Restrooms • Band/picnic shelter • Gazebo (picnic/day use shelter) • Trails to include boardwalks and docks • Activity areas including volleyball and children’s play area

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-9 SS/1181rr Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

Comprehensive Plan Recommendation for Chelan Planning Area Board of Chelan County Commissioners, 1996 This comprehensive plan was prepared by the citizens of the Chelan Planning Area of Chelan County to address growth issues. It represents their land use policy for growth to the year 2012.

In addition to goal and policy statements, the document includes implementation guidelines. The following summarizes its goal and policy statements in regard to park and recreation issues:

Open Space/Recreation Goal 1. Encourage the retention of open space. Goal 2. Identify and provide for the parks and recreation needs of residents and visitors. Goal 3. Encourage the development of recreation facilities and opportunities.

Master Planned Resorts Goal 1. Provide opportunities for master planned resorts which will provide a mixture of recreational, commercial, lodging, and residential land uses that are appropriate for the site and are compatible with adjacent land uses.

Comprehensive Land Use Plan Recommendation for Entiat Planning Area Board of Chelan County Commissioners, February 1996 This comprehensive plan was prepared by the citizens of the Entiat Planning Area of Chelan County to address growth issues. It represents their land use policy for growth to the year 2012.

In addition to goal and policy statements the document includes implementation guidelines. The following summarizes its goal and policy statements in regard to park and recreation issues:

Open Space/Recreation Goal 1: Meet the parks and recreation needs of full time residents and the tourist population. Goal 2: Ensure that parks and recreation development respect significant natural and cultural features. Goal 3: Coordinate parks and recreation planning and development.

Recreation Goals Goal 1: In all activities, promote a quality land, air, and water environment. Goal 2: Coordinate Federal, State, local and private recreation planning needs and facilities. Goal 3: Utilize the recreational facilities of the area to the fullest extent possible. Goal 4: Encourage recreation facilities in the area to the fullest extent possible. Goal 5: Encourage more water related day use recreation facilities. Goal 6: Encourage the development of more community oriented recreation facilities, which can be used on a year-around basis. Goal 7: Preserve and enhance the visual character of the area.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E5-10 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources

Douglas County Comprehensive Plan Board of Douglas County Commissioners, November 28, 1995 This comprehensive plan was developed as part of the Growth Management Act planning program initiated by Douglas County and its communities. It was agreed by the County and Cities that the County Planning staff would be responsible for ensuring all requirements of the GMA were met for all of the communities.

The following are goal and policy statements in regard to park and recreation issues:

Open Space/Recreation Encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks.

Master Planned Resorts To provide opportunities for Master Planned Resorts (MPRs) which will provide a mixture of recreational, commercial, lodging and resort-residential land uses that are appropriate for the site and are compatible with the traditional land uses where the MPR is proposed.

E5.4 DESCRIPTION OF ANY STUDIES PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED OR CURRENTLY UNDERWAY

E5.4.1 Studies Previously Conducted The 1974 “Exhibit R” Recreation Plan was prepared by Chelan PUD and approved by the FERC in 1976. The purpose of the Recreation Plan was to define the overall context of recreation planning for the Rocky Reach reservoir and to develop a concept for the coordinated development and utilization of the Project’s resources. The Recreation Plan examined the need for additional recreational facilities, identified potential recreational sites, evaluated site suitability and resource capacity, and prepared short and long-range alternatives for recreational development. Included in the Recreational Plan was a recommendation that facility development should be consistent within the capability of the lake’s resources to withstand recreational use while maintaining environmental quality and productivity.

E5.4.2 Studies Currently Under way Recreational Use Assessment The purpose of the Recreational Use Assessment is to define the existing recreational use in the study area including recreational activity types, high use locations by activity, daytime and overnight visits, and temporal trends. The Recreational Use Assessment will also evaluate recreation needs in the study area to determine whether the needs can be accommodated by existing facilities, or if additional facilities are needed in the study area.

The information gathered will be recorded in a computerized database and analyzed. A recreation study report including a concise summary of the Recreational Use Assessment information required for the Rocky Reach relicensing will be prepared upon completion of the 1999 field

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-11 SS/1181rr Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources season. Interim reports including the data collected-to-date will be compiled in July and September of 1999.

Recreational Facility Mapping The purpose of the Recreational Facility Mapping Study is to map the existing recreational facilities and other areas reserved for future recreational development. Recreation resource mapping will show the location, nature and managing authority for all existing and proposed recreational facilities, public access areas, undeveloped informal use locations, and areas set- aside for future recreational development within the study area. Mapping should also identify the location and nature of Land and Water Conservation Fund Lands, lands that have been designated for study for possible inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and lands that have been designated as wilderness areas, recommended for such designation, or designated for wilderness area under the Wilderness Act. Mapping will also identify State, Federal and Indian Tribal agencies with responsibility for management of recreational resources on the affected lands and waters within the study area.

Existing Recreation Resource Assessment The purpose of the Existing Recreation Resource Assessment is to gather, review, and summarize all existing recreational resource management plans relevant to the recreational resources of the study area.

Recreation Resource Inventory The purpose of the Recreation Resource Inventory will be to provide a description and general overview of the existing recreation resources available for public use in the study area by identifying and mapping existing:

1. Recreation Features (location, type, significance and sensitivity). 2. Recreation Activity Areas (per SCORP planning) as they relate to the study area. 3. Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) classes per USFS. 4. ADA compliance. 5. Physical carrying capacity of the Recreation Resources. 6. Identification of any safety features to protect the public engaged in recreation. 7. Determine the adequacy and condition of existing recreation facilities. 8. Determine estimated operating costs, and identify the operating agencies, of existing recreation facilities.

E5.5 WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS There are no rivers within or in the vicinity of the proposed Project boundary that are included in, or have been designated for study for inclusion in, the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

E5.6 CONSULTATION CONDUCTED WITH INTERESTED PARTIES Chelan PUD began meeting with interested parties (Federal, State, County and Local Resource Agencies) March 25, 1999. During the remainder of 1999, Chelan PUD will consult with

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E5-12 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E5: Recreational Resources resource agencies and other interested parties (stakeholders) regarding the proposed relicensing process, descriptions of the existing Project, extent of engineering work, and proposed environmental, historical, archaeological, recreational, and land use studies. This information, along with written comments provided by stakeholders identifying any additional required studies, will be used to prepare a NEPA scoping document.

Following preparation of the scoping documents, Chelan PUD will spend the next several years conducting studies and preparing the final license application and Draft Environmental Assessment. Chelan PUD will submit a preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and license application for the Rocky Reach Hydro Project by June 30, 2004. The existing license expires in 2006.

Issue Identification Process

March 25, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification. April 27, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification.

[In most cases, subsequent meetings will be held on the day after the fourth Wednesday in each month.]

Long Term Schedule

2000-2002 Conduct Studies 2003 Draft License and Environmental Assessment 2004 PUD submits Final License Application and Environmental Assessment 2004-2006 FERC Review & Processing of License Application & Environmental Assessment 2006 Existing License Expires/ New License Issued

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E5-13 SS/1181rr

Exhibit E6: Land Management and Aesthetics

E6.0 REPORT ON LAND MANAGEMENT AND AESTHETICS

E6.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW The Rocky Reach Project reservoir (or Lake Entiat) is approximately 43 miles long and lies in a wide canyon in the mid-Columbia River basin. Development around the reservoir is low density and rural in character. About half of the reservoir’s shoreline is, and has historically been, used for agricultural, industrial, recreational, or residential land uses. The remaining shoreline around the reservoir is undeveloped semi-arid land. Limited vegetation occurs along the shoreline given that State Route 97 parallels the eastern shoreline and the Burlington Northern Railroad extends along the western shoreline, along with Highway 97A. The Cities of Wenatchee and East Wenatchee are the closest population centers to the Rocky Reach Project, located approximately six miles downstream of the dam.

The Project area contains a total of 1,345 acres of which Chelan PUD owns an estimated seven percent or 100 acres (Request for FERC Approval of Modification of Project Boundary, 1990). This limited ownership is intended to maintain lands in private ownership and in the tax base. This arrangement benefits the local communities by helping to finance local and county shoreline planning and other services. Chelan PUD holds flowage easements for all lands within the FERC Project boundary. There are no lands within the Project that are surplus to Project operations. The Rocky Reach Project currently occupies 160.040 acres of land owned by the United States. These Federal lands are inventoried on form FERC-587, as submitted on June 12, 1986.

Aesthetic resources in the Project area are characterized by generally uninterrupted views of the Columbia River with minimal shoreline development and sparse dry-land vegetation typical of this high-desert region. The Project offers panoramic views of the Columbia River valley with the foothills of the Cascade mountains to the north, east, and west. Views to the south are characterized by steep foothills and the wide river basin created by the Columbia as it passes through the valley. Natural features (the Columbia River and surrounding mountains) dominate the Rocky Reach Project viewshed thereby minimizing the visual influence of human activity on the area.

E6.2 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF PROJECT LAND The lands in the vicinity of the Rocky Reach Project reservoir are used for transportation (highways), private ownership (including residential areas), industrial development, agricultural activity, and recreation facilities (primarily parks). Approximately 7,500 acres of land adjacent to Lake Entiat between Rocky Reach dam and Wells dam consist of fruit orchards and other agricultural uses. The majority of these lands are privately owned.

The lands within the Rocky Reach Project boundary contain only a few residential lots and houses located along its shoreline. In general, the shoreline is relatively barren consisting of rip-

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E6-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E6: Land Management and Aesthetics rap banks and/or sparse “shrub-steppe” vegetation. Bounded by highways on either side of the Project reservoir, there is limited land area within the FERC Project boundary. The land that is contained in the Project boundary is often steep, rocky, and unsuitable for most land use and recreation activities. Opportunities to access and enjoy the river are abundant at the recreation facilities located along the Project shoreline. Each of these facilities provides a buffer from other land uses and ensures public access and enjoyment of the Project shoreline.

Access to the Columbia River within the Project area is accommodated at formal recreation facilities provided by Chelan PUD, state, and local municipalities along the Project shoreline. These facilities constitute the bulk of the development within the Project area. A summary of the recreation facilities along the Project shoreline follows. See Section E5 of the ICD for a complete description of these facilities.

Rocky Reach Project Recreation Facilities • 6 boat launches • 8 swimming beaches • 7 parks • 5 campgrounds with 319 sites • 367 picnic tables for day use • 1 visitors center • 1 interpretive display • 5 walking or hiking trails • 24 playground areas, athletic courts and playing fields

The City of Wenatchee (pop. 25,290, 1998 data) is the county seat of Chelan County and serves as the primary political and commercial center of the mid-Columbia region (Pers. Comm. City of Wenatchee Chamber of Commerce, March 24, 1999). The greater Wenatchee (pop. 62,600, 1998 data) area offers service industries (hotels/restaurants), industrial (e.g. agricultural packing plants), and professional services (Pers. Comm. City of Wenatchee Chamber of Commerce, March 24, 1999). Waterville, Orondo, Entiat, and Monitor are smaller communities in the area surrounding the Project.

The Rocky Reach Dam is located on the Columbia River at River Mile 473.7, approximately seven miles upstream of the City of Wenatchee. The dam, Project powerhouse and appurtenant structures are included in the Project boundary. The Project boundary varies in elevation along the Rocky Reach Project reservoir and corresponds to the water surface elevation associated with the probably maximum flood (Rocky Reach Project Periodic Safety Inspection Report, 1997).

E6.3 LAND MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK The mid-line of the Rocky Reach Project reservoir forms the boundary between Douglas County to the east and Chelan County to the west. Land use activities on non-federal lands in each county are subject to the relevant comprehensive plans (developed in accordance with the Washington State Growth Management Act 1990) and the municipal zoning that guides specific land use activities under these plans. The Act requires that specific planning elements be

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E6-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E6: Land Management and Aesthetics addressed by each jurisdiction and that implementing regulations (i.e. zoning) be consistent and concurrent with the plan.

The Cities of Wenatchee and East Wenatchee, and the City of Entiat have adopted comprehensive plans and implementing regulations. They have also established either interim or approved urban growth boundaries, which delineate an area around each city designed to contain development based on 20-year population projections. In addition, each community has established critical areas including aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, wetlands and floodplains, geological hazard areas, and fish and wildlife areas. Land use activities in these critical areas are regulated to prevent damage to property and to meet resource protection goals.

Both Douglas and Chelan counties have developed Shoreline Master Programs consistent with the goals of the 1971 Washington State Shoreline Management Act. These programs address shoreline development within a 200-foot buffer zone upland of the normal high water mark on non-federal lands. The program has eight goals; economic development, public access, circulation, recreation, shoreline use, conservation, historical/cultural, and restoration. In addition, the entire shoreline within the Rocky Reach Project area is designated as a shoreline of statewide significance under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act of 1971. Federal lands within the Project boundary have very little shoreline development of any kind.

The following is a list of local, county/state, and federal land management plans or implementing regulations that affect land management activities in and around the Rocky Reach Project area. Where plans do not exist, land management authority is briefly described.

Local Implementing Regulations • Greater East Wenatchee Area Comprehensive Plan (1996), Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan (1997), City of East Wenatchee Comprehensive Plan (1998); • Douglas County Code Title 18 Zoning (1998), Title 14 Development Permit Procedures and Administration (1997), and Title 19 Environment (1993); and • City of Entiat Comprehensive Plan (1997).

County/State Plans • Douglas County Comprehensive Plan (1995); • Douglas County Shoreline Master Program (1972), Chelan County Shoreline Master Program (1981); and • Chelan-Entiat Comprehensive Plan (1977).

Federal Land Management • Bureau of Land Management manages approximately 10 linear miles of shoreline along the Columbia River within the Rocky Reach Project. These lands are managed in accordance with the Spokane Resource Management Plan (1985); and • Bureau of Reclamation owns three pumping station areas along the Project shoreline totaling approximately six acres (only a small portion of which is located within the Project boundary). These lands are managed by the Greater Wenatchee Irrigation District for the exclusive purpose of providing water to agricultural lands in the area.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E6-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E6: Land Management and Aesthetics

Chelan and Douglas Counties and area municipalities participate in a program that has been developed to reduce the number of forms needed in complying with environmental laws that have a redundant purpose and authority. This program uses a Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application (JARPA). One form can now be used to process any and all permits for:

• Shoreline Substantial Development, Variance, or Conditional Use Permit issued by local government; • Temporary Modification of Water Quality Criteria issued by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology); • Hydraulic Project Approval issued by the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW); • Section 401 Water Quality Certification issued by Ecology; and • US Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10 Permits.

All actions undertaken are subject to Washington's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). SEPA is similar to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Act stipulates that compliance with NEPA will be considered adequate compliance with SEPA.

As a part of compliance with its FERC license, Chelan PUD uses a permit system to assess and track land uses within the Project boundary. Chelan PUD's objective is to assure consistency with Project purposes including safety, environmental concerns, and aesthetics. Chelan PUD encourages consistency with local and county management plans and zoning.

An estimated 13 acres of wetlands occur along the Project reservoir shoreline (Wildlife Habitat Evaluation for the Rocky Reach Pool Raise Study, 1990). Although it has limited storage potential in its reservoir, the Project is operated to reduce the potential for downstream flooding minimizing the potential effects on floodplain areas. See Exhibit B.1.1 for a general description of overall Project operations with regard to flooding.

E6.4 DESCRIPTION OF ANY STUDIES PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED OR CURRENTLY UNDERWAY In its 1991 application to raise the Rocky Reach reservoir elevation, Chelan PUD conducted a HEP study. The study provided information on the effects of Project operations on various cover types (e.g., riparian, wetlands, aquatic beds). Chelan PUD has conducted aerial photography of the Project shoreline.

In addition, Chelan PUD is reviewing the relevant land management plans and guidance documents (listed above) in order to ensure consistency with the plans and provide baseline information to support the relicensing process.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E6-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E6: Land Management and Aesthetics

E6.5 CONSULTATION CONDUCTED WITH INTERESTED PARTIES Chelan PUD began meeting with interested parties (Federal, State, County and Local Resource Agencies) March 25, 1999. During the remainder of 1999, Chelan PUD will consult with resource agencies and other interested parties (stakeholders) regarding the proposed relicensing process, descriptions of the existing Project, extent of engineering work, and proposed environmental, historical, archaeological, recreational, and land use studies. This information, along with written comments provided by stakeholders identifying any additional required studies, will be used to prepare a NEPA scoping document.

Following preparation of the scoping documents, Chelan PUD will spend the next several years conducting studies and preparing the final license application and Draft Environmental Assessment. Chelan PUD will submit a preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment and license application for the Rocky Reach Hydro Project by June 30, 2004. The existing license expires in 2006.

Issue Identification Process

March 25, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification. April 27, 1999: Public Agency Meeting: Purpose is to introduce the proposed relicensing process and begin issue identification.

[In most cases, subsequent meetings will be held on the day after the fourth Wednesday in each month.]

Long Term Schedule

2000-2002 Conduct Studies 2003 Draft License and Environmental Assessment 2004 PUD submits Final License Application and Environmental Assessment 2004-2006 FERC Review & Processing of License Application & Environmental Assessment 2006 Existing License Expires/ New License Issued

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E6-5 SS/1181rr

Exhibit E7: List of Literature

E7.0 LIST OF LITERATURE

E7.1 LIST OF LITERATURE

-----, A. Cronquist, M. Owenby and J. W. Thompson. 1955 - 1969. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest, Volumes 1 - 5. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

Achord, S., G.M. Matthews, D.M. Marsh, B.P. Sandford and D.J. Kamikawa. 1994. Monitoring the migrations of wild Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon smolts. Annual Report 1992. Coastal Zone and Estuaries Study Division, NMFS. Project No. 91-28, Contract No. DE-AI79-91BP18800. US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR. 73 pp.

Alexander, R. F. and W. R. Koski. 1995. Distribution, timing and fate of steelhead returning to the Nass River Watershed in 1993. Report by LGL Limited, Sidney, B. C. to the Nisga’a Tribal Council, New Aiyansh, B. C. Nisga’a Fisheries Report NF93-10.

Alexander, R. F., K. K. English and W. R. Koski. 1996. Distribution, timing and numbers of steelhead returning to the Skeena Watershed in 1995. Report by LGL Limited, Sidney, B. C. to B. C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, B. C.

Allen, R.L. and T.K. Meekin. 1973. An evaluation of the Priest Rapids chinook salmon spawning channel, 1963-1971. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Anderson, J., D. Askren, T. Frever, J. Hayes, A. Lockhart, M. McCann, P. Pulliam and R. Zabel. 1993. Columbia River Salmon Passage Model (CRiSP.1) documentation for version 4. University of Washington Center for Quantitative Science report for Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR.

APHA 1985. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 15th ed. American Public Health Association.

Basham, L.R. 1990. Adult fishway inspections on the Columbia and Snake Rivers - 1989 Annual Report. Fish Passage Center, Portland, OR. 35 pp.

Bates, A.L., E.R. Burns, and D.H. Webb. 1985. Eurasian Watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum L.) in the Tennessee Valley: an Update on Biology and Control. Tennessee Valley Authority, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Beamesderfer, R. and B.E. Rieman. 1991. Abundance and distribution of northern squawfish, walleyes, and smallmouth bass in John Day reservoir, Columbia River. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 120:439-447.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-1 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Becker, C.D. 1970. Feeding bionomics of juvenile chinook salmon in the central Columbia River. Northwest Science. 44:2:75-81.

Beeman, J.W. and D.W. Rondorf. 1992. Estimating the effects of river flow, smoltification and other biotic and abiotic variables on the travel time of juvenile salmonids in the Snake and Columbia Rivers. USFWS report to Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR.

Beiningen, K.T. and W.J. Ebel. 1970. Effect of John Day dam on dissolved nitrogen concentrations and salmon in the Columbia River, 1968. In: Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman and F. Utter. 1995a. Status of spring chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID.

Bell, M. C. 1981. Updated compendium on the success of passage of small fish through turbines, US Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Portland, OR. 294 pp. plus tables.

Bennett, D. H. 1991. Potential for predator increase associated with a three foot pool rise in Rocky Reach reservoir, Columbia River, Washington. Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Moscow, ID. 14 pp.

Bentley, W. W. and H. L. Raymond. 1976. Delayed migrations of yearling chinook salmon since completion of Lower Monumental and Little Goose Dams on the Snake River. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 3:422-424 pp.

Berggren, J. and M.J. Filardo. 1993. An analysis of variables influencing the migration of juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River basin. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manag. 13:48-63.

Bickford, S.A. 1994. Habitat Conservation Plan for the enhancement of anadromous salmonid stocks upstream of Wells dam. 1994. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 59 pp.

Bjornn, T. C., J. Hunt, K. Tolotti, P. Keniry and R. Ringe. 1994. Migration of adult chinook salmon and steelhead past dams and through reservoirs in the lower Snake River and into tributaries - 1992. Technical Report 94-1, Idaho Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit report to US Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, WA.

Bjornn, T.C. and C.A. Peery. 1992. A review of literature related to movements of adult salmon and steelhead past dams and through reservoirs in the lower Snake River. Prepared for US Army Corps of Engineers. Walla Walla, WA.

Bjornn, T.C., J. Hunt, P. Keniry, R. Ringe, M. Freely, B. Hastings, J. Nance and C. Vinson. 1995b. Lower Snake River adult chinook salmon and steelhead passage study, 1991-1995. Presentation at the US Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Anadromous Fish Evaluation Program, Annual Program Review. 26-27 September 1995. Walla, Walla, WA.

Bonneville Power Administration, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Department of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation. 1994a. Columbia River System Operation Review-Draft Environmental Impact Statement. SOR Draft EIS. WDE/EIS 0170. Bonneville Power

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-2 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Administration, Portland, OR. Main report, summary and appendices.

Boreson, K. 1991. Cultural resource investigations along the Rocky Reach reservoir: The 1990 test excavations. Eastern Washington University. Cheney, Washington.

Brown, L. and K. Williams. 1985. Mid-Columbia walleye - fisheries - life history - management - 1979-1982. Washington Department of Game, Olympia, WA. 39 pp.

Brown, L.G. 1995. Mid-Columbia River Summer Steelhead Stock Assessment; Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, Progress Report, 87 p.

Buettner, E.W. and A.F. Brimmer. 1995. Smolt monitoring at the head of Lower Granite reservoir and Lower Granite dam - annual report for 1993 operations. Idaho Department of Fish and Game prepared for Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR.

Burgner, R.L. 1962. Studies of red salmon smolts from the Wood River lakes, Alaska. In: Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, F. Utter, M. Hill, J. Stevenson and M. Miller. 1995b. Status of sockeye salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID. 401 pp. plus appendices.

Burley, C. C. and T. P. Poe. 1994. Significance of predation in the Columbia River from Priest Rapids dam to Chief Joseph dam, predator consumption indexing. Contract 430-486. Prepared for PUD No 1 of Chelan County, PUD No. 1 of Douglas County and PUD No. 1 of Grant County. Reports A, B and C plus appendices.

Burnham, K.P., D.R. Anderson, G.C. White, C. Brownie, and K.H. Pollock. 1987. Design and analysis methods for fish survival experiments based on release-recapture. Am. Fish. Soc. Monograph 5:1-437.

Campbell, R.F. and B.R. Eddy. 1988. Verification of habitat utilization criteria for juvenile fall chinook in the north fork of the Lewis River, Washington. Pages 364-389 in: Bovee, K. and J.R. Zuboy, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Interior. Proceedings of a Workshop on the Development and Evaluation of Habitat Suitability Criteria. 8-12 December 1986, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Caplow, F.E. 1990. A botanical inventory and rare and sensitive plant survey of the Rocky Reach Reservoir. Unpublished report prepared for the Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County.

Carlson, C. and M. Dell. 1989. Vernita Bar monitoring for 1988-1989, annual report. Prepared for the Public Utility District of Grant County, Ephrata, WA. 30, 33, 47 pp.

Carlson, C. and M. Dell. 1990. Vernita Bar monitoring for 1989-1990, annual report. Prepared for the Public Utility District of Grant County, Ephrata, WA. 38 pp.

Carlson, C. and M. Dell. 1991. Vernita Bar monitoring for 1990-1991, annual report. Prepared for the Public Utility District of Grant County, Ephrata, WA. 33 pp.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-3 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Carlson, C. and M. Dell. 1992

Chandler, J., Idaho Power Company, Boise, Idaho. Personal communication, telephone conversation regarding information related to diet of chinook and steelhead in Lower Granite reservoir on the Snake River with Tim Fisher (Beak), June 1995.

Chapman, D. and D. McKenzie. 1981. Mid-Columbia river system mortality study- 1980 - final report to Grant, Douglas and Chelan Public Utility Districts. Don Chapman Consultants and Battelle Northwest, Richland, WA. 23 pp. plus appendices.

Chapman, D. W., D. E. Weitkamp, T. L. Welsh, and T. H. Schadt and Parametrix, Inc. 1982. Effects of minimum flow regimes on fall chinook spawning at Vernita Bar. 1978-82. Boise, ID. 84 pp.

Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, M. Hill, A. Maule, S. McCutcheon, D. Park, W. Platts, K. Pratt, J. Seeb, L. Seed and F. Utter. 1991. Status of Snake River chinook salmon. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman and F. Utter. 1995a. Status of spring chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID.

Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, F. Utter, M. Hill, J. Stevenson and M. Miller. 1995b. Status of sockeye salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID. 401 pp. plus appendices.

Chapman, D., M. Peven, T. Hillman, A. Giorgi and F. Utter. 1994b. Status of summer steelhead in the mid-Columbia River. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 235 pp.

Chapman, D.W. 1986. Salmon and steelhead abundance in the Columbia River in the nineteenth century. Trans. of the Am. Fish. Soc. 115:662-670.

Chelan County Commissioners. 1997. Wenatchee Urban Area Comprehensive Plan.

Chelan County Planning Department. 1981. Chelan County Shoreline Master Program.

Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1961. Agreement with the Department of Fisheries, State of Washington. Agreement relating to operation of spawning channel at Rocky Reach Project. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. Wenatchee, WA. 5 pp.

Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1963a. Agreement Between Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County and the Sate of Washington Department of Fisheries for operation

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-4 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

of spawning channel at Rocky Reach Project. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. Wenatchee, WA. 5 pp.

Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1963b. Agreement with the State of Washington, Department of Game. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. Wenatchee, WA. 8 pp.

Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1965. Amendment to agreement of September 16, 1963 between Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County and the State of Washington Department of Fisheries for operation of spawning channel at Rocky Reach Project. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. Wenatchee, WA. 4 pp.

Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1991c. Application for raising pool elevation from 707' to 710'. Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project No. 2145. Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. Appendices.

Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1994b. Detailed Fishery Operating Criteria with 1994 Operating Criteria (draft). Rocky Reach dam. Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA.

Chelan County PUD 1991a (from FERC deis 1995).

Chelan County Regional Planning Council. 1977. Chelan-Entiat Comprehensive Plan.

Citizens Advisory Committee and Chelan County Planning Department. 1997. City of Entiat Comprehensive Plan.

City of East Wenatchee. 1998. City of East Wenatchee Comprehensive Plan.

Cooke, G.D., and M.E. Gorman. 1980. Effectiveness of Dupont Typar Sheeting in Controlling Macrophyte Regrowth After Overwinter Drawdown. Water Resources Bulletin. 16: 353- 355.

Cooke, G.D., E.B. Welch, S.A. Peterson, and P.R. Newroth. 1993. Restoration and Management of Lakes and Resevoirs, Second Edition. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.

Cox, J.P. 1984. Evaluating reservoir trophic status: the TVA approach. Lake and Reservoir Management. EPA 440/5/84-001. pp. 11-16.

Craddock, D.R., T.H. Blahm and W.D. Parente. 1976. Occurrence and utilization of zooplankton by juvenile Chinook Salmon in the lower Columbia River. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 1:72-76.

Cronquist, A., A.H. Holmgren, N.H. Holmgren, J.L. Reveal and P.K. Holmgren. 1977 - 1994. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Columbia University Press.

Dauble, D.D. and R.P. Mueller. 1993. Factors Affecting the Survival of Upstream Migrant Adult

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-5 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Salmonids in the Columbia River Basin. Recovery Issues for Threatened and Endangered Snake River Salmon Technical Report 9 of 11. Prepared for US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Division of Fish and Wildlife. Portland, OR.

Dauble, D.D., R.H. Gray and T.L. Page. 1980. Importance of insects and zooplankton in the diet of 0-Age Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the central Columbia River. Northwest Science. 54:4:253-258.

Dauble, D.D., R.L. Johnson, R.P. Mueller, C.S. Abernethy, P.J. Evans and D.R. Geist. 1994. Identification of fall chinook salmon spawning sites near lower Snake River hydroelectric projects. Funded by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, WA. 28 pp. plus appendices.

Dawley, E.M., R.D. Ledgerwood, T.H. Blahm, C.W. Sims, J.T. Durkin, R.A. Kirn, A.E. Rankis, G.E. Monan and F.J. Ossiander. 1986. Migrational characteristics, biological observations and relative survival of juvenile salmonids entering the Columbia River estuary. Final report 1985. Report funded by Bonneville Power Administration (Contract DE-A179-84BP39652, Project No. 81-102) and Coastal Zone Estuarine Studies Division, NMFS. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR.256 pp.

Dell, M.B., M.W. Erho and B.D. Leman. 1975. Occurrence of gas bubble disease symptoms on fish in mid-Columbia River reservoirs. Mid-Columbia PUDs. Portland, OR.

Department of the Interior – Bureau of Land Management. 1985. Spokane Resource Management Plan/EIS.

Douglas County Shoreline Management Citizens Advisory Committee and Douglas County Regional Planning Board. 1972. Douglas County Shoreline Master Program for Cities of East Wenatchee, Bridgeport, Rock Island and Douglas County.

Douglas County Transportation and Land Services, City of East Wenatchee. 1996. Greater East Wenatchee Area Comprehensive Plan.

Douglas County Transportation and Land Services. 1995. Douglas County Comprehensive Plan.

Douglas County Transportation and Land Services. 1997. Douglas County Code Title 14: Development Permit Procedures and Administration.

Douglas County Transportation and Land Services. 1998. Douglas County Code Title 18: Zoning.

Douglas County Transportation and Land Services. 1993. Douglas County Code Title 19: Environment.

Duke Engineering & Services. March 2, 1999. Personal Communication, M. Frantz to L. Fortney.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-6 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Dvornich K.M., K.R. McAllister, and K.B. Aubrey. 1997. Amphibians and reptiles of Washington State: Location data and predicted distributions, Volume 2 In: Washington State Gap Analysis – Final Report. K.M. Cassidy, C.E. Grue, M.R. Smith, and K.M. Dvornich, eds. Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Washington, Seattle. 146 pp.

Ebasco 1991

Ebasco Environmental, Inc. 1991. Wildlife Habitat Evaluation for the Rocky Reach Pool Raise Study, Final Report, Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County.

Ebel, W. J., H. L. Raymond, G. E. Monan, W. E. Farr and G. K. Tanonaka. 1975. Effect of atmospheric gas supersaturation caused by dams on salmon and steelhead trout of the Snake and Columbia Rivers. National Marine Fisheries Services, Seattle, WA. 111 pp.

ECI (Frederic R. Harris). 1997. Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2145 Periodic Safety Inspection Report, Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Washington.

Eicher and Associates, Inc. 1987. Turbine-related fish mortality: review and evaluation of studies. AP-5480 Research project 2694-4, final report. Prepared for EPRI, Palo Alto, CA.

Engel, S. 1995. Eurasian watermilfoil as a fishery management tool. Pages 20-27 in: Fisheries. 20:3:20-27.

English, K.K., T.C. Nelson, C. Sliwinski, J.R. Stevenson and T.R. Mosey. 1999. Report prepared by LGL Limited, Environmental Research Associates, Sidney, B.C., Canada for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington.

Eppard, M.B., S.G. Smith, B.P. Sanford, G.A. Axel, J.G. Williams, and R.D. McDonald. 1998. Survival estimates for the passage of yearling chinook salmon through Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams, 1998 (Final Draft). National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, Washington.

Faler, M.P., L.M. Miller and K.I. Welke. 1988. Effects of variation in flow on distributions of northern squawfish in the Columbia River below McNary dam. N. Am. Journal of Fish. Man. 8:30-35.

Falter, C.M., C. Baines and J.W. Carlson. 1991. Water quality, fish and wildlife characteristics of Box Canyon reservoir, Washington. Section 2: Water quality. Completion report 1989- 1990. Prepared for the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences, University of Idaho.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 1995. Rocky Reach Project No. 2145, Docket Nos. E-9569 et al. Rocky Reach-Fourth Interim Stipulation. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-7 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Washington D.C. 17 pp.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 1993. Rocky Reach Project No.2145, Docket Nos. E-9569 et al. Rocky Reach-Third Revised Interim Stipulation. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA. 17 pp.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 1996. Rocky Reach Project No.2145, Docket Nos. E-9569 et al. Rocky Reach-Fourth Revised Interim Stipulation. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA. 17 pp.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. June 1996. Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2145, Washington, Final Environmental Impact Statement (Pool Raise). FERC/EIS- 0092-F.

Ferguson, J.W. 1994. A Program to improve fish survival through turbines. Prepared for the US Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, OR. 18 pp.

Fielder, P. C. and C. M. Peven. 1986. Juvenile salmonid monitoring at Rock Island dam bypass sampler - annual report. Contract No. DE-AI79-86BP61748, Project No. 84-54. US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, and Division of Fish and Wildlife. Wenatchee, WA. 21 pp.

Fielder, P.C. 1982. Food habits of bald eagles along the mid-Columbia River, Washington. Murrelet 63:46-50.

Fielder, P.C. 1991. Rocky Reach reservoir waterfowl and bald eagle surveys, winter 1990-91. PUD No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA.

Fielder, P.C., and R.G. Starkey. 1987. Bald eagle winter abundance and distribution in eastern Washington. Northwest Sci. 61:226-232.

Fish Passage Center. 1994. Fish Passage Center annual report 1993. Project No.94-033, Contract No. DE-FC79-88BP38906. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR. 123 pp.

Fish Passage Center. 1995a. Electronic data sent to Tim Fisher (Beak). Portland, OR.

Foster, J.H., P.C. Fielder, D.R. Eldred, and R.L. Perleberg. 1984. Post-flood wildlife inventory; Rock Island hydroelectric project. Washington Dept. of Game, Olympia, WA.

Franklin, J.F., and C.T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW 8. USFS, Portland.

French, R.R. and R.J. Wahle. 1965. Salmon runs -- upper Columbia River, 1956-57. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Galm, J.R. 1990. Cultural resource investigations in the Rocky Reach reservoir: The 1990

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-8 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

resurvey. SR-228. Eastern Washington University. Cheney, Washington.

Giorgi, A. 1992a. Fall chinook spawning in Rocky Reach pool; effects of three-foot increase in pool elevation. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., research report to District, Wenatchee, WA.

Giorgi, A. E., T. W. Hillman, J. R. Stevenson, S. G. Hays and C. M. Peven. 1997. Factors that influence the downstream migration rates of juvenile salmon and steelhead through the hydroelectric system in the Mid-Columbia River Basin. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17:268-282.

Glodsby, T.L., A.L. Bates, and R.A. Stanley. 1978. Effect of Water Level Fluctuation and Herbicide on Eurasian Watermilfoil in Melton Hill Reservoir. Journal of Aquatic Plant Management. 16: 34-38.

Grant County Public Utility District No. 2. 1980. Expansion of Priest Rapids project. Application of license FERC Project No. Grant County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, Washington. Appendices.

Gray, R.H. and J.M. Haynes. 1977. Depth distribution of adult chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawtyscha) in relation to season and gas-supersaturated water. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Groot, C. 1965. On the orientation of young sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) during their seward migration from lakes. Behaviour: an international journal of comparative ethology, supplement XIV. Leiden, Netherlands, 186 pp.

Groot, C. and L. Margolis, editors. 1991. Pacific salmon life histories. UBC Press, Vancouver, B.C.

Gunkel, A. 1961. A comparative cultural analysis of four archaeological sites in the Rocky Reach Reservoir Region, Washington. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington.

Gustafson, R.G.; T.C. Wainwright, G.A. Winans, F.W. Waknitz, L.T. Prker and R.S. Wapless 1997; Status Review of Sockeye Salmon from Washington and Oregon; US Department of Commerce; NOAA Tech. Memo, NMFS-NWFSC-33, 282 pp.

Hall, J.A. 1998. Scaphiopus intermontanus. Catalogue of American amphibians and reptiles. Society for the study of amphibians and reptiles. 16 pp.

Hartman, W.L., W.R. Heard and B. Drucker. 1967. Migratory behavior of sockeye salmon fry and smolts. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada, 24(10):2069-2099.

Hays, S., Fisheries biologist, Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. Personal communication, hand-written comments on the 18 May 1995 Draft MCMCP Overview Document to Jeff Osborn (Beak), 20 July 1995.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-9 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Healy, M.C. and F.P. Jordan. 1982. Observations on juvenile chum and chinook and spawning chinook in Nanaimo River B.C. during 1975-1981. Can. MS. Rept. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1659:31.

Henderson, C. and R.F. Foster. 1956. Studies of smallmouth black bass (Micropterus dolomieu) in the Columbia River near Richland, Washington. Trans. Am. Fish. Society 86:112-127.

Hickman, J.C. ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual: higher plants of California. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.

Hillman, T. W. and M. D. Miller. 1994. Summer/Fall Chinook Salmon Spawning Ground Surveys in the Methow and Okanogan River Basins. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 62 pp.

Hillman, T.W., D.W. Chapman and J.S. Griffith. 1988. Seasonal habitat utilization and behavioral interaction of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead trout in the Wenatchee River, Washington. II. Nighttime habitat selection. In: Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1991c. Application for raising pool elevation from 707' to 710'. Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project No. 2145. Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. Appendices.

Hillman, T.W., D.W. Chapman and J.S. Griffith. 1989b. Seasonal habitat use and behavioral interaction of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead. II: nighttime habitat selection. In: Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman and F. Utter. 1995a. Status of spring chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID.

Hitchcock, C.L. and Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington.

Iwamoto, R.N. and J.G. Williams. 1993. Juvenile salmonid passage and survival through turbines. Funded by US Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, OR. and National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, WA. 27 pp.

Johnson, N. M., J. S. Eaton and J. E. Richey. 1978. Analysis of five North American lake ecosystems. II. Thermal Energy and Mechanical Stability. Verh. Int. Verein. Limnol. 20:562-267.

Johnson, R.E. and K.M. Cassidy. 1997. Terrestrial mammals of Washington State: Location data and predicted distributions, Volume 3 In: Washington State Gap Analysis - Final Report. K.M. Cassidy, C.E. Grue, M.R. Smith, and K.M. Dvornich, eds. Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Washington, Seattle. 304 pp.

Johnstone, D, W. Mih. 1987. Water quality and hydraulic conditions at Daroga Park, WA. March 23, 1997. Washington State University. Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Pullman, WA.

Keesee, B.G. 1985. Results of 1985 Survey of Eurasian watermilfoil on the Columbia River from Rock Island Dam to Wells Dam. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County.,

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-10 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Wenatchee, WA.

Keesee, B.G. 1986. 1986 Survey of Eurasian watermilfoil on the Columbia River from Rock Island Dam to Wells Dam. November 1986. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County., Wenatchee, WA.

Keesee, B.G. 1987. 1987 Survey of Eurasian watermilfoil on the Columbia River from Rock Island Dam to Wells Dam. September 1987. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County., Wenatchee, WA.

Keesee, B.G. 1988. 1988 Survey of Eurasian watermilfoil on the columbia River from Rock Island Dam to Wells Dam. September 1988. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County., Wenatchee, WA.

Kerns, O.E. 1961. Abundance and age of Kvichak River red salmon smolts. Fish. Bull. FWS 61(189):301-320.

Key, L. O., R. Garland and E. E. Kofoot. 1994. Nearshore habitat use by subyearling chinook salmon in the Columbia and Snake Rivers. In: Rondorf, D.W. and K.F. Tiffan, eds. 1994. Identification of the spawning, rearing, and migratory requirements of fall chinook salmon in the Columbia River basin. Prepared for the US Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR. 157 pp.

Kimmel, B.L. and A.W. Groeger. 1984. Factors controlling primary production in lakes and reservoirs: a perspective. Lake and Reservoir Management. EPA 440/5/84-001. pp. 277-281.

Koehler, V.A. and R.D. McDonald, 1997; Total Dissolved Gas Monitoring at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Hydroelectric Projects in 1997. PUD No. 1 of Chelan County, Washington.

Koehler, V.A. and R.D. McDonald. 1997. Total dissolved gas monitoring at Rocky Reach and rock Island Hydroelectric Projects in 1997.December 31, 1997. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County., Wenatchee, WA.

Koehler, V.A. and R.D. McDonald. 1998. Total dissolved gas monitoring at Rocky Reach and rock Island Hydroelectric Projects in 1998. October 14, 1998. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County., Wenatchee, WA.

Koski, W. R., R. F. Alexander and K. K. English. 1995. Distribution, timing and numbers of coho salmon and steelhead returning to the Skeena watershed in 1994. Report by LGL Limited, King City, Ontario to B. C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, B. C.

Lake Chelan Water Quality Committee. 1995. Chelan County Storm drainage standards and guidelines.

Larkin, P.A. 1988. Pacific salmon. In: J.A. Gulland, editor. 1988. Fish population dynamics. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Chichester, U.K. 422 pp.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-11 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Ledgerwood, D.L., E.M. Dawley, L.G. Gilbreath, P.J. Bently, B.P. Sandford and M.H. Schiewe. 1990. Relative survival of subyearling chinook salmon which have passed Bonneville dam via the spillway or the second powerhouse turbines or bypass system in 1989, with comparisons to 1987 and 1988. Contract No. E85890097. Report to the US Army Corps of Engineers, Portland, OR. 64 pp. plus appendices.

Ledgerwood, R., F. Thrower and E. Dawley. 1991b. Diel sampling of migratory juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River estuary. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Leonard, W.P., H.A. Brown, L.L.C. Jones, K.R. McAllister, and R.M. Storm. 1993. Amphibians of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington. 168 pp.

Loch, J.J., D. Ballinger, G. Christofferson, J.A. Ross, M. Hack, C. Foster, D. Snyder and D. Schultz. 1994. Significance of predation in the Columbia River from Priest Rapids dam to Chief Joseph dam: abundance and predation indexing. In: Burley, C. C. and T. P. Poe, editors. 1994. Significance of predation in the Columbia River from Priest Rapids dam to Chief Joseph dam. Contract 430-486. Prepared for PUD No 1 of Chelan County, PUD No. 1 of Douglas County and PUD No. 1 of Grant County. Reports A and B plus appendices.

Mains, E. and J. Smith. 1964. The distribution, size, time and current preferences of seaward migrant chinook salmon in the Columbia and Snake Rivers. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

McDonald, R.D. and J.L. Priest. 1997. Total dissolved gas monitoring project and modified spill gate study 1996. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County., Wenatchee, WA.

McDonald, R.D. and Priest, J.L., 1996; Total Dissolved Gas Monitoring at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Hydroelectric Projects in 1996; PUD No. 1 of Chelan County, Washington.

McKenzie, D., D. Carlile and D. Weitkamp. 1984b. 1983 Systems Mortality Study. Prepared for the PUDs of Chelan, Grant and Douglas Counties. Battelle Northwest. Richland, WA.

McKenzie, D., D. Weitkamp, T. Schadt, D. Carlile and D. Chapman. 1984a. 1982 Systems mortality. Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, WA. 27 pp. plus appendices.

Meekin, T.K. 1963. Salmon escapements above Rock Island dam, 1961 and 1962. In: Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman and F. Utter. 1995a. Status of spring chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-12 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Meyers, J.M., R.G. Kope, G. J. Bryant, D. Teel, L.J. Lierheimer, T. C Wainwright, W. S. Grant, F. W. Waknitz, K. Neely, S. T. Lindley, and R. S. Waples. 1998. Status review of chinook salmon from Washington, Idaho, Oregon and California. US Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-35, 443 p.

Miller, R.J. and E.L. Brannon. 1982. The origin and development of life history patterns in Pacific salmonids. In: Chapman, D., C. Peven, A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, F. Utter, M. Hill, J. Stevenson and M. Miller. 1995b. Status of sockeye salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Inc., Boise, ID. 401 pp. plus appendices.

Mosey, T.R., K.G. Murdoch and B. Bickford. 1999. Biological and hydraulic evaluation of the Rocky Reach surface collector 1998. Final Report, Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, Washington.

Muir, W.D., S.G. Smith, R.N. Iwamoto, D.J. Kamikawa, K.W. McIntyre, E.E. Hockersmith, B.P. Sanford, P.A. Ocker, T.E. Ruehle, J.G. Williams and J.R. Skalski. 1995. Survival estimates for the passage of juvenile salmonids through Snake River dams and reservoirs, 1994. Annual report to BPA and COE. COE, Portland, OR.

Mullan, J. W. 1986b. Determinants of sockeye salmon abundance in the Columbia River 1880s- 1982: A review and synthesis. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fisheries Assistance Office. Levensworth, WA. 135 pp.

Mullan, J. W. 1987. Status and propagation of chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia River through 1985. Biological Report 87(3). US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Research and Development, Washington, D.C. 111 pp.

Mullan, J. W., M. B. Dell, S. G. Hays and J. A. McGee. 1986a. Some factors affecting fish production in the mid-Columbia River 1934 - 1983. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report No. FRI/FAO-86-15. 69 pp.

Mullan, J.W. 1984. Overview of artificial and natural propagation of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) on the mid-Columbia River. US Fish and Wildl. Serv. Rep. No, FRI/FAO-84-4. 37 pp.

National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region. 1995b. Reinitiation of consultation on 1994- 1998 operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System and juvenile transportation program in 1994-1998. National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region. Seattle, WA.

Normandeau Associates, Inc., and J.R. Skalski. 1996. Relative Survival of Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), in passage through a modified Kaplan Turbine at Rocky Reach Dam, Columbia River, Washington. Report prepared by Normandeau Associates, Inc. for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. 51 pp.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-13 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Normandeau Associates, Inc., and J.R. Skalski. 1997. Turbine Passage Survival of Chinook Salmon Smolts at the Rock Island Dam Powerhouse I and II, Columbia River, Washington. Report prepared by Normandeau Associates, Inc. for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington. 20 pp.

Normandeau Associates, Inc., Skalski, J.R. and Mid Columbia Consulting, Inc. 1995. Turbine passage survival of spring chinook salmon smolts at Lower Granite dam, Snake River, Washington. No page number in: Annual Program Review of the North Pacific Division Anadromous Fish Evaluation Program. 26-27 September 1995. Walla Walla, WA.

Palmisano, Ph.D., J.F., R.H. Ellis, Ph.D. and V.W. Kaczynski, Ph.D. 1993. The impact of environmental and management factors on Washington's wild anadromous salmon and trout. Prepared for the Washington Forest Protection Association and The State of Washington Department of Natural Resources. Olympia, WA.

Patterson, J.R. 1961. Report on wildlife studies in the Rocky Reach hydroelectric project area. Wash. Dept. Game, Olympia, WA.15 pp.

Perleberg, A.B. 1996. Northern Squawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) Population Reduction Program, Rocky Reach Dam and Rock Island Dam 1996; Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. 49 pp.

Peven, C. M. And T. R. Mosey. 1998. Biological and hydraulic evaluation of the Rocky Reach surface collector. 1997. Final Report, Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, Washington.

Peven, C.M. 1992. Population status of selected stocks of salmonids from the mid-Columbia River basin. Chelan County Public Utility District Fish and Wildlife Operations, Wenatchee, WA. 52 pp.

Peven, C.M. and A.M. Abbott. 1994. Rocky Reach fish guidance system 1994 developmental testing, final report. Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. 31 pp. plus appendices.

Peven, C.M., A.M. Abbott, and B.M. Bickford. 1995. Biological evaluation of the Rocky Reach surface collector, 1995. Final Report, Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, Washington.

Peven, C.M., T.R. Mosey, and K.B. Truscott. 1996. Biological evaluation of the Rocky Reach surface collector, 1996. Final Report, Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, Washington.

Peven, C.M.. R.R. Whitney and K.R. Williams. 1994. Age and length of steelhead smolts form the mid-Columbia River basin. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 5:115-125.

Piper, R.G., I.B. McElwain, L.E. Orme, J.P. McCraren, L.G. Fowler and J.R. Leonard. 1982. Fish

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-14 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

hatchery management. USFWS, Washington D.C. 517 pp.

Poe, T.P., H.C. Hansel, S. Vigg, D.E. Palmer and L.A. Prendergast. 1991. Feeding of predaceous fishes on out-migrating juvenile salmonids in John Day reservoir, Columbia River. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 120:405-420.

Poole, A.F. 1989. Ospreys: A natural and unnatural history. Cambridge Univ. Press. New York. 246 pp.

PSMFC. 1994. Electronic data contained in the Coordinated Information System (CIS). Obtained from the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Portland, OR.

Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. 1991. Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. August 1991. Application for Raising the Pool Elevation from 707’ to 710’, Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project No. 2145.

Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County. October 5, 1998. Initial Consultation Document, Lake Chelan Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 637.

Quinn, T.P., S. Hodgson and C. Peven. 1997. Temperature, flow, and the migration of adult sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in the Columbia River. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54: 1349-1360.

Raymond, H.L. 1968. Migration rates of yearling chinook salmon in relation to flows and impoundments in the Columbia and Snake Rivers. In: Berggren, J. and M. J. Filardo. 1993. An analysis of variables influencing the migration of juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River basin. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manag. 13:48-63.

Raymond, H.L. 1969. Effect of John Day reservoir on the migration of juvenile chinook salmon in the Columbia River. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 98:513-514.

Raymond, H.L. 1979. Effects of dams and impoundments on migrations of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead from the Snake River, 1966 to 1975. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 108:505- 529 pp.

Regier, H.A., J.E. Paloheimo and V.F. Gallucci. 1979. Factors that influence the abundance of large piscivorous fish. In: Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1. 1991c. Application for raising pool elevation from 707' to 710'. Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project No. 2145. Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. Appendices.

RMC Environmental Services and J.R. Skalski. 1994a. Survival of juvenile fall chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) passage through a fixed blade propeller turbine at the Rocky Reach dam, Washington. Center for Quantitative Science, Seattle, WA. 31 pp.

RMC Environmental Services, Inc. and J.R. Skalski. 1994b. Survival of yearling fall chinook salmon

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-15 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

smolts (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha) in passage through a Kaplan turbine at the Rocky Reach hydroelectric dam, Washington. Center for Quantitative Science, Seattle, WA. 38 pp.

Rondorf, D.W. and G.A. Gray. 1987. Distribution and abundance of age-0 chinook salmon in a Columbia River reservoir. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Rondorf, D.W., G.A. Gray and R.B. Fairley. 1990. Feeding ecology of subyearling chinook salmon in riverine and reservoir habitats of the Columbia River. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 119:16-24.

Ruggerone, G.T. 1986. Consumption of migrating juvenile salmonids by gulls foraging below a Columbia River dam. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 115:736-742.

Sauter, S.T., S.R. Gray, C.N. Frost and J.H. Petersen. 1994. Significance of predation in the Columbia River from Priest Rapids dam to Chief Joseph dam: predator consumption indexing. In: Burley, C. C. and T. P. Poe, editors. 1994. Significance of predation in the Columbia River from Priest Rapids dam to Chief Joseph dam. Contract 430-486. Prepared for PUD No 1 of Chelan County, PUD No. 1 of Douglas County and PUD No. 1 of Grant County. Reports A and B plus appendices.

Schalk, R.F. and R. R. Mierendorf. 1983. Cultural Resources of the Rocky Reach of the Columbia River, Volumes I and II. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington.

Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.

Seattle Marine Laboratories, Division of Xelco Corporation. 1973. Resource and literature review dissolved gas supersaturation and gas bubble disease. Xelco Corporation, Seattle, WA. 60 pp.

Sedar, D. B. Yake, and J. Cubbage. 1994. Contaminant trends in Lake Roosevelt In: D.L. Weber (ed.) Canada/United States Technical Workshop on the Upper Columbia River Basin: An International Dialogue. Washington Water Research Center Rpt 89. Proceed. November 1994. Seattle, WA.

Sheldon, Lee H., Senior Hydromechanical Engineer, Kleinschmidt Associates, Pittsfield, Maine. Personal communication, letter regarding fish passage survival related to turbine operating efficiencies to John W. Ferguson (Portland District, US Army Corps of Engineers), dated 19 June 1995. Simmons, K.A., M.P. Rossillon, and R.F. Schalk. 1983. A cultural resource survey of "Exhibit R" recreation sites in the Rocky Reach Reservoir. Washington State University. Pullman, Washington. Smith, L.S. 1982. Decreased swimming performance as a necessary component of the smolt migration in salmon in the Columbia River. In: Berggren, J. and M. J. Filardo. 1993. An analysis of variables influencing the migration of juvenile salmonids in the Columbia River

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-16 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

basin. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manag. 13:48-63.

Smith, M.R., P.W. Mattocks, Jr., and K.M. Cassidy. 1997. Breeding birds of Washington State: Location data and predicted distributions, Volume 4 In: Washington State Gap Analysis - Final Report. K.M. Cassidy, C.E. Grue, M.R. Smith, and K.M. Dvornich, eds. Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Washington, Seattle. 538 pp.

Smith, S. G., W. D. Muir, E. E. Hockersmith, S. Achord, M. B. Eppard, T. E. Ruehle, J. G. Williams and J. R. Skalski. 1998. Survival estimates for the passage of juvenile salmonids through the Snake River dams and reservoirs, 1996. Annual report to Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. 192 pp.

SRSRT. 1993. Draft Snake River salmon recovery plan. In: Chapman, D., A. Giorgi, T. Hillman, D. Deppert, M. Erho, S. Hays, M. Peven, B. Suzumoto and R. Klinge. 1994a. Status of summer/fall chinook salmon in the mid-Columbia region. Don Chapman Consultants, Boise, ID. 411 pp.

Stalmaster, M.V. 1987. The Bald Eagle. Universe Books, New York, NY. 227 pp.

Steig, T.W. and R. Adeniyi. 1997. Hydroacoustic evaluation of the behavior of juvenile salmon and steelhead approaching the powerhouse of Rocky Reach Dam during spring and summer 1996. Report prepared by Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc. for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington.

Steig, T.W., R. Adeniyi and V. Locke. 1997. Hydroacoustic evaluation of the fish passage through the powerhouse, the spillways, and the surface collector at Rocky Reach Dam in the spring and summer of 1997. Report prepared by Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc. for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington.

Stevenson, J.R. A.E. Giorgi, W.R. Koski, K.K. English, and C.A. Grant. 1997a. Evaluation of juvenile spring chinook and steelhead migratory patterns at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams using radio telemetry techniques, 1996. Report prepared by Bioanalysts, Inc, Boise, Idaho for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington.

Stevenson, J.R. A.E. Giorgi, W.R. Koski, K.K. English, and J.R. Skalski. 1997b. Evaluation of juvenile spring chinook and steelhead migratory patterns at Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams using radio telemetry techniques, 1997. Report prepared by Bioanalysts, Inc, Boise, Idaho for Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, Washington.

Storm, R.M. and W.P. Leonard (editors). 1995. Reptiles of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington. 176pp.

Stuehrenberg, L.C., G.A. Swan, L.K. Timme, P.A. Ocker, M.B. Eppard, R.N. Iwamoto, B.L. Iverson and B.P. Sandford. 1995. Migrational characteristics of adult spring, summer and fall chinook passing through reservoirs and dams of the mid-Columbia River, final report. Funded by the Mid-Columbia PUDs and Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies. Coastal Zone

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-17 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

and Estuarine Studies Division, National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, WA.

Swan, G. A., L. K. Timme, R. N. Iwamoto, L. C. Stuehrenberg, E. E. Hockersmith, B. L. Iverson and B. P. Sandford. 1994. Wells dam radio-telemetry study - 1992. Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division. Seattle, WA. 70 pp.

Tabor, R. A., R. S. Shively and T. P. Poe. 1993. Predation on juvenile salmonids by smallmouth bass and northern squawfish in the Columbia River near Richland, Washington. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manag. 13:831-838 pp.

Truscott 1991

Truscott, K. B. 1991. 1991 Survey of Eurasion watermilfoil on the Columbia River Rock Island and Rocky Reach reservoirs. Chelan County P.U.D. No. 1., Wenatchee, WA. 42. pp.

Truscott, K.B. 1991. 1991 Survey of Eurasian watermilfoil on the Columbia River Rock Island & Rocky Reach Reservoirs. December 1991. Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Wenatchee, WA.

TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority). 1972. Control of Eurasian Watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum L.) in TVA Reservoirs. Environmental Statement TVA-OHES-EIS-72-8. Tennessee Valley Authority Office of Health and Environmental Science, Chattanooga, Tennessee.

TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority). 1990. Final Environmental Assessment: Demonstration of Use of Grass Carp in Management of Aquatic Plants in Guntersville Reservoir. TVA/RDG/EQS-90/3. Aquatic Biology Department, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority). 1993. Aquatic Plant Management Program: Current Status and Seasonal Workplan. Aquatic Biology Department, Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

US Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division. 1991. 1991 Dissolved gas monitoring for the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Portland, OR.

US Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division. 1993. 1993 Dissolved gas monitoring for the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Portland, OR.

US Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District. 1992. Walla Walla River basin. Fisheries Enhancement Potential Reconnaissance Investigations. Walla Walla, WA.

US Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Draft Columbia River salmon mitigation analysis phase I. Prepared for the Northwest Power Planning Council and the Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Program. Walla Walla, WA. (Main report plus appendices A-G)

US Corps of Engineers. April 1975. Columbia River and Tributaries Review Study, Reach Inventory, Columbia River, Headwater McNary Reservoir to Grand Coulee Dam.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-18 July 7, 1999 Exhibit E7: List of Literature

USFS. 1990.

Waknitz, F.W., G.M. Matthews, T. Wainwright and G.A. Winans. 1995. Status review for Mid- Columbia River summer chinook salmon. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFS-NWFSC-22, 80 p. (Available from Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division, 2725 Montlake Blvd., E., Seattle, WA 98112- 2097

Washington Department of Ecology. 1995. Initial Watershed Assessment, Entiat River Watershed.

Washington Department of Ecology. 1999. Water Rights Application Tracking System, Central Regional Office, WRATS Report by TRS, Rocky Reach/Wells Columbia River Research.

Washington Department of Ecology. June 18, 1998. Candidate 1998 Section 303(d) List – WRIA 44 and 45.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1994. Status report Columbia River fish runs and fisheries 1938-93. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, WA.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1996. Priority Habitats and Species List, Habitat Program. Olympia, Washington. January 1996.

Washington Natural Heritage Program. 1997. Endangered, threatened, and sensitive vascular plants of Washington - with working lists of rare non-vascular species. Department of Natural Resources. Olympia, WA. 62p.

WDFW 1994

Weitkamp, D.E. and M. Katz. 1980. A review of dissolved gas supersaturation literature. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 109(6):65.

Welsh, T.L., S.G. Hays and D. Snyder. 1994. Northern squawfish population reduction program Rocky Reach dam tailrace pilot project - 1994. Prepared for the Chelan County Public Utility District and Don Chapman Consultants, Inc. Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. 40 pp.

West, T.R. 1997. Northern Squawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) Population Reduction Program, Rocky Reach Dam and Rock Island Dam 1997; Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. 28 pp.

West, T.R. 1999. Northern Pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) Population Reduction Program, Rocky Reach Dam and Rock Island Dam 1998; Chelan County Public Utility District, Wenatchee, WA. 23 pp.

Wetzel, R.G. 1983. Limnology, 2nd edition. Saunders College Publishing. New York, NY.

Initial Consultation Document Rocky Reach Project 2145 July 7, 1999 Page E7-19 SS/1181rr Exhibit E7: List of Literature

Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA.

Young, F.R., R.T. Michimoto, G. Gibson, and C. Junge. 1978. Passage problems of adult Columbia River salmonids, 1973-1989. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Zook, W. J. 1983. Resident fisheries of Wells pool (a review) - Draft. 1990. Fulton Fisheries Advisors. Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County, East Wenatchee, WA. 56 pp.

Rocky Reach Project No. 2145 Initial Consultation Document SS/1181rr Page E7-20 July 7, 1999