DOCSLIB.ORG

Multple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 2005-2054

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Multple Species Habitat Conservation Plan 2005-2054 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MULTIPLE SPECIES GENERAL CONSERVATION PLAN DOUGLAS COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared by: Eastern Washington Field Office U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE and Foster Creek Conservation District Waterville, Washington October 2014 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MULTIPLE SPECIES GENERAL CONSERVATION PLAN FOR AGRICULTURE DOUGLAS COUNTY, WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. i LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... iv CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ............................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION....................................................... 5 DECISIONS TO BE MADE ...................................................................................................... 5 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS, POLICIES, AND LAWS ........................................... 6 CHAPTER II - ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................... 11 DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................ 11 SCOPING ................................................................................................................................. 11 ISSUES ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Issues Key to Development and Evaluation of Alternatives ................................................ 12 Issues Eliminated from Detailed Study................................................................................. 14 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER STUDY .......... 15 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL...................................................................... 15 Alternative 1, No-Action ...................................................................................................... 15 Alternative 2, Proposed Action ............................................................................................. 15 Alternative 3, Expanded MSGCP (Additional Conservation Lands) ................................... 18 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................... 20 CHAPTER III – AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ......................................................................... 24 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 24 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ............................................................... 24 County Overview .................................................................................................................. 24 1. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................. 30 2. Economics (Agricultural Production and Socioeconomics) ................................................. 31 Current Land Use .................................................................................................................. 31 Development ......................................................................................................................... 32 Agricultural-Based Revenues ............................................................................................... 32 3. Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 35 4. Earth Resources (Air quality and Soils)................................................................................ 36 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................ 36 Visibility and Particulate Matter ........................................................................................... 37 Soils....................................................................................................................................... 37 Erosion and Sedimentation ................................................................................................... 38 i 5. Fish and Aquatic Species ...................................................................................................... 38 Stream and Creek Characteristics ......................................................................................... 39 Endangered and Threatened Fish Species ............................................................................. 39 Recreational Fisheries ........................................................................................................... 43 Candidate, Sensitive, and Species of Concern- Fish and Aquatic Species ........................... 43 6. Water Resources (Wetlands, Riparian, Water Quality) ........................................................ 46 Streams and Lakes ................................................................................................................ 46 Wetlands and Riparian Habitat ............................................................................................. 48 Wetland/Riparian Species of Concern .................................................................................. 49 Water Quality ........................................................................................................................ 50 7. Covered Wildlife Species ..................................................................................................... 52 Columbia Basin Pygmy Rabbit ............................................................................................. 53 Greater Sage-Grouse ............................................................................................................. 54 Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse ............................................................................................ 55 Washington Ground Squirrel ................................................................................................ 55 8. Range Resources, Habitats, and Other Wildlife and Plant Species ...................................... 56 Shrub-steppe and Rangelands ............................................................................................... 56 Shrub-steppe Plant and Animal Species of Concern ............................................................ 58 CHAPTER IV - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES......................................................... 70 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 70 1. Aesthetics .............................................................................................................................. 70 Effects Common to All Alternatives..................................................................................... 70 Effects from Alternative 1, No-Action Alternative .............................................................. 70 Effects common to Alternatives 2 and 3 ............................................................................... 71 Effects from Alternative 2, Proposed MSGCP ..................................................................... 71 Effects from Alternative 3, Expanded MSGCP .................................................................... 71 2. Economics (Agricultural Production and Socioeconomics) ................................................. 71 Effects Common to All Alternatives..................................................................................... 71 Effects from Alternative 1, No-Action Alternative .............................................................. 72 Effects Common to Alternatives 2 and 3 .............................................................................. 72 Effects from Alternative 2, Proposed MSGCP ..................................................................... 72 Effects from Alternative 3, Expanded MSGCP .................................................................... 73 3. Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 75 Effects Common to All Alternatives..................................................................................... 75 Effects from Alternative 1, No-Action Alternative .............................................................. 75 Effects Common to Alternatives 2 and 3 .............................................................................. 75 4. Earth Resources (Air Quality, Geology, Minerals, and Soils) .............................................. 75 Effects Common to All Alternatives..................................................................................... 75 Effects from Alternative 1, No-Action Alternative .............................................................. 76 Effects Common to Alternatives 2 and 3 .............................................................................. 76 Effects from Alternative 2, Proposed MSGCP ..................................................................... 77 Effects from Alternative 3, Expanded
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chief Joseph Hatchery Program
    Chief Joseph Hatchery Program Draft Environmental Impact Statement DOE/EIS-0384 May 2007 Chief Joseph Hatchery Program Responsible Agency: U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Title of Proposed Project: Chief Joseph Hatchery Program Cooperating Tribe: Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation State Involved: Washington Abstract: The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) describes a Chinook salmon hatchery production program sponsored by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Colville Tribes). BPA proposes to fund the construction, operation and maintenance of the program to help mitigate for anadromous fish affected by the Federal Columbia River Power System dams on the Columbia River. The Colville Tribes want to produce adequate salmon to sustain tribal ceremonial and subsistence fisheries and enhance the potential for a recreational fishery for the general public. The DEIS discloses the environmental effects expected from facility construction and program operations and a No Action alternative. The Proposed Action is to build a hatchery near the base of Chief Joseph Dam on the Columbia River for incubation, rearing and release of summer/fall and spring Chinook. Along the Okanogan River, three existing irrigation ponds, one existing salmon acclimation pond, and two new acclimation ponds (to be built) would be used for final rearing, imprinting and volitional release of chinook smolts. The Chief Joseph Dam Hatchery Program Master Plan (Master Plan, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, May 2004) provides voluminous information on program features. The US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Oroville-Tonasket Irrigation District, and others have cooperated on project design and siting.
    [Show full text]
  • May 12, 2021 – 5:30 PM Douglas County Public Services Building Hearing Room 140 19Th Street NW, East Wenatchee, WA
    AGENDA Wednesday – May 12, 2021 – 5:30 PM Douglas County Public Services Building Hearing Room 140 19th Street NW, East Wenatchee, WA NOTICE, in consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic the meeting is closed to in person attendance. The meeting will be held via Zoom teleconference, attend by phone at 1-253-215-8782, Meeting ID: 937 9170 7816, Password: 520623 or online at: https://zoom.us/j/93791707816?pwd=c25FOGo4QlpUZ3BzME0xek1TMy9hQT09 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER – Roll Call of Planning Commissioners II. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES a) Review minutes of the April 14, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. III. CITIZEN COMMENT The planning commission will allocate 15 minutes for citizen comments regarding items not related to the current agenda. IV. OLD BUSINESS - NONE V. NEW BUSINESS a) A joint Douglas County, WA Department of Ecology public hearing on limited amendments to Douglas County Shoreline Master Program. The proposed amendments are the result of the periodic review process required by RCW Chapter 90.58.080(4). b) A public hearing to consider adopting City of East Wenatchee Ordinances 2021-05, 2021-06 and 2021-08 regarding amendments to the Greater East Wenatchee Area Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code as they apply to the unincorporated portions of the City’s urban growth area. VI. Adjourn Planning Commission meeting materials available at: http://www.douglascountywa.net/311/Planning-Commission DOUGLAS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION & LAND SERVICES 140 19TH STREET NW, SUITE A • EAST WENATCHEE, WA 98802 PHONE: 509/884-7173 • FAX: 509/886-3954 www.douglascountywa.net Douglas County Planning Commission ACTION MINUTES Wednesday, April 14, 2021 Meeting held via Zoom online meeting platform I.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Pateros Relocation Guide
    Visit pateros.com ‖ Contact Pateros City Hall @ 509.923.2571 ‖ 2020 City of Pateros Relocation Guide PATEROS & THE SUNNY OKANOGAN Pateros, population 685, is a small riverfront community in the heart of North Central Washington. Pateros is located in the foothills of the Cascades and the confluence of the Columbia and Methow River, and serves as recreation basecamp for the eastern slopes of the Cascades; the Methow, Okanogan, and Columbia river basins; and the desert landscapes North Central Washington of eastern Washington. To the north is the wild and rugged Corridor that ends at the Grand Coulee Dam. Okanogan Highlands, Omak, and the Canadian Twenty minutes to the south lies the tourist Border. To the east is home of the Colville destination Lake Chelan and it’s Mediterranean‐ Confederated Tribes, Nespelem, and the Coulee like wine country. To the north east the Cascade Leave the frantic blur of counting-time behind. Visit, explore Pateros and savor the moment, or live simply in Pateros and savor life. Pateros ‐ at the confluence of the Methow and Columbia Rivers Visit pateros.com ‖ Contact Pateros City Hall @ 509.923.2571 ‖ 2020 City of Pateros Relocation Guide Loop winds through the Methow Valley, through the logging town of Twisp, and the Western Town of Winthrop, on its way to Liberty Bell Mountain at the top of Washington Pass. Okanogan County is Washington’s largest county, larger than the state of Delaware, Connecticut, or Rhode Island. Public lands cover 70% of the county and the density of population is less than 8 persons per square mile.
    [Show full text]
  • Colville Indian Reservation Non-Member Sport Fishing Regulations
    Colville Indian Reservation Non-Member Sport Fishing Regulations APRIL 1, 2018 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2020 Contents PART I—INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO USE THIS BOOKLET ............................................. 2 PART II—PERMIT PROVISIONS ............................................................................................... 3 PART III—FISHING PERMIT FEES AND EXCEPTIONS ........................................................ 4 PART IV—GENERAL RULES ..................................................................................................... 5 PART V—SPECIAL RULES ......................................................................................................... 9 PART VI—DEFINITIONS .......................................................................................................... 12 PART VII—OTHER INFORMATION RELATED TO FISHING ............................................. 14 PART VIII—FISH AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT 2018–2020 PERMIT OUTLETS ........ 15 PART IX-MAPS AND FIGURES ................................................................................................ 16 The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (CCT or Colville Tribes) welcome you to the Colville Indian Reservation (Reservation). The Reservation encompasses over 1.4 million acres within Ferry and Okanogan counties in northeastern Washington State. The aquatic resources within the Reservation exist in a wide variety of climates, geographies, and habitats. Effective management of these diverse fisheries requires special regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Assessment
    Wells Hydroelectric Project Tract 4 Shoreline Stabilization Project Okanogan County, Washington USFWS Consultation Code: 01EWFW00-2017-SLI-0165 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Prepared For: Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County East Wenatchee, Washington Prepared by: January 26, 2016 Tract 4 Shoreline Stabilization Project Biological Assessment Tract 4 Shoreline Stabilization Project Document Title: Tract 4 Shoreline Stabilization Project Biological Assessment Date: 1/26/17 Client Name: Douglas County PUD Author: Craig Broadhead, Senior Biologist Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 123 East Yakima Ave, Ste. 250 Yakima, Washington 98901 www.jacobs.com 0 Tract 4 Shoreline Stabilization Project Biological Assessment Executive Summary Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County (Douglas PUD) needs to repair an eroding bank on the Columbia River south of Pateros, Washington. The erosion repair project (Project) will restore shoreline protection and enhance both terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The work supports Douglas PUD’s obligations under its Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license to operate the Wells Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2149. The design incorporates biotic and abiotic elements to reduce erosion and increase shoreline stabilization and habitat values. These elements include placing a cobble and gravel berm below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) to dissipate wave energy, constructing a layered coir fabric revetment to protect the shoreline and promote vegetation establishment, flattening steep eroded slopes, and replanting with native vegetation. All work below the OHWM will be completed in the dry during a reservoir drawdown period. Jacobs produced this Biological Assessment (BA) for the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) on behalf of Douglas PUD. The Project is proposed for construction in September 2017, and if possible will be completed concurrently with the Cassimer Bar Dike Breaching project located upstream.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Cumulative Impact Analysis Purpose This
    Cumulative Impact Analysis Purpose This section describes the general State requirements for cumulative impact analysis and discusses the methodology for analyzing potential impacts to Okanogan County shorelines . The draft Shoreline Master Program (SMP) proposes changes to the development regulations that encourage shoreline protection and avoidance, minimization and mitigation activities that would cause adverse impacts to shoreline functions and processes. The evaluation of cumulative impacts should consider: 1. Current circumstances affecting the shorelines and relevant natural processes. 2. Reasonably foreseeable future development and use of the shoreline. 3. Beneficial effects of any established regulatory programs under other local, state, and federal laws. The Shoreline Management Act guidelines require shoreline master programs to regulate new development and to maintain no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. While some impacts are immediate and can be directly addressed through avoidance and mitigation, other impacts are cumulative in nature. The composite of many similar actions over time may lead to a significant cumulative impact to the ecosystem. Key components of the SMP are the development of regulations and mitigation requirements. These requirements are important to achieving no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, but they cannot achieve this goal on their own. Other regulatory and non-regulatory programs are an additional component to achieving no net loss of ecological function. Assumptions This analysis is looking at foreseeable impacts over time. These impacts are being looked at by a group of Analysis Units (AUs) that represent a stream or lake reach. This method is consistent with the SMP Shoreline Characterization Report. The analysis focused on areas where greater development and land use change is expected.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing Guide
    FISHING GUIDE Your guide to fishing in Okanogan Country. Where will you go first? Follow us on Social Media! 1 OKANOGANCOUNTRY.COM / 888-431-3080 To find more information about where fishing permits and license endorsements are available, visit: wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/fishing.html BEST TIME FOR BEST TIME FOR CATCH & RELEASE CATCH & KEEP FISHING OVERALL ICE FISHING 2 OkanoganCountry.com 888.431.3080 TABLE OF CONTENTS WELCOME........................................................ 4-5 THE METHOW REGION..................................... 6-11 Alta Lake..................................................................................................... 6 Big Twin Lake............................................................................................. 6 Patterson Lake........................................................................................... 8 Pearrygin Lake........................................................................................... 8 Methow River............................................................................................ 10 HEART OF THE OKANOGAN.............................. 12-17 Leader Lake.............................................................................................. 12 Green Lake................................................................................................ 13 Conconully Lake...................................................................................... 14 Conconully Reservoir.............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Shoreline Master Program: Appendices a Through H (PDF)
    Appendix A. Inventory and analysis ............................................................................... 1 A.1 Ecosystem-wide processes and characterization ................................................ 1 A.2 Data inventory and materials ............................................................................. 13 A.3 Characterization ................................................................................................ 14 A.4 Analysis- reaches .............................................................................................. 19 A.5 Public access ..................................................................................................... 62 Appendix B. Restoration plan ......................................................................................... 1 B.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 B.2 Purpose and scope .............................................................................................. 1 B.3 Priority needs/areas ............................................................................................. 2 B.4. Existing efforts and programs ............................................................................. 9 B.5. Restoration goals and policies .......................................................................... 16 B.6. Implementation and monitoring ........................................................................ 18 Appendix C. Cumulative effects ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Reach Reservoir Water Quality Monitoring Work Plan
    ROCKY REACH RESERVOIR WATER QUALITY MONITORING WORK PLAN Prepared for PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF CHELAN COUNTY, WASHINGTON P.O. Box 1231 Wenatchee, Washington 98807-1231 Prepared by 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE, Suite 200 Kirkland, Washington 98033-7350 In association with RENSEL ASSOCIATES AQUATIC SCIENCE CONSULTANTS UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO October 1999 INTRODUCTION Relicensing of the Rocky Reach project requires a Water Quality Certification from the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) to comply with Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act. The fundamental requirement for 401 certification is to demonstrate that affected water bodies meet the State water quality standards, as defined by Chapter 173-201A WAC. In addition to the permit requirements, water quality monitoring is needed to provide adequate baseline information on the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of Rocky Reach Reservoir and the tailrace. This information will help define the relationships between water quality and beneficial uses, including fisheries, recreation, water supply, and aesthetics. Water quality monitoring objectives of the present study include the need to: · Compare existing water quality to Washington State standards; · Identify appropriate methods and approach for monitoring key parameters; · Relate the monitoring results to fisheries concerns and other uses of the reservoir; · Compare and contrast results to upstream and downstream conditions from other studies; and · Determine ongoing project-related impacts. Elements of the Rocky Reach Water Quality Monitoring program include a literature review of existing water quality and water rights information, one year of periodic water quality sample collection, laboratory analyses, sample data analyses and interpretation, and preparation of a Rocky Reach Water Quality Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 1: Sections 1-7
    WELLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 2149 PRE-APPLICATION DOCUMENT (PAD) VOLUME 1: SECTIONS 1-7 Prepared by: Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County 1151 Valley Mall Parkway East Wenatchee, WA 98802 www.douglaspud.org/relicensing December 2006 © Copyright 2006. Public Utility District No.1 of Douglas County. All Rights Reserved. For copies of this Pre-Application Document, contact: Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County Attention: Relicensing 1151 Valley Mall Parkway East Wenatchee, WA 98802-4497 Phone: (509)884-7191 E-Mail: [email protected] © Copyright 2006. Public Utility District No.1 of Douglas County. All Rights Reserved. Table of Contents AGENTS FOR DOUGLAS PUD..................................................................................................1 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................2 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................4 1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................5 2.0 PROCESS PLAN AND SCHEDULE...............................................................................7 2.1 Site Visit and Scoping Meetings..................................................................7 2.2 Participation in the ILP ................................................................................8 2.3 Communication Protocol.............................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Common Loon Fact Sheet
    Sensitive Species ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Common Loon (Gavia immer) State Status: Sensitive, 2000 Federal Status: None Recovery Plans: None State Management Plan: None Loons are large birds with 50-55 inch wingspans, and they weigh 8 1/2 - 19 lbs. The striking black and white breeding plumage gives way in winter to a duller gray above, white below garb. They are best known for their vocalizations: they hoot, wail, yodel, and give a tremolo call. Figure 1. Adult male common loon and chick on North Common loons breed across Alaska, Twin Lake, Ferry County, Washington (photo by Dan Poleschook). Canada, and the northern coterminous states. They winter along both coasts, from the Aleutians to Mexico, and from Newfoundland to the Gulf coast. The common loon population in North America is relatively healthy and robust, with a total estimated breeding population of >200,000 territorial pairs (Evers 2007); most of these birds breed in vast lake-rich areas in Canada where they are relatively isolated from shoreline development and recreational activities. The southern limit of common loon breeding has retreated northward since the 19th century due to human factors. In the northwestern U.S., common loons once nested as far south as the Mount Shasta area, but are now extirpated from California, Oregon, and Idaho (Evers 2007, Poleschook and Gumm 2009). Historical data for the state are limited, but loons were probably once a more common nester, particularly in western Washington. Today, small numbers of loons nest on lakes and reservoirs in Ferry, Okanogan, Chelan and Douglas counties in eastern Washington, and King and Whatcom counties in western Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Douglas County Regional Shoreline Master Program
    Douglas County Regional Shoreline Master Program NOTE: Only sections proposed to be amended are included Jameson Lake Last Amended by Ordinance TLS-20-07-19C Effective Date: January 26, 2021 Douglas County Adopting Ordinances TLS 08-09-32B & TLS 09-08-41B Effective Date: August 27, 2009 Public Review Draft 1.5 Public involvement process, advisory committee and agency coordination Public Information and Outreach- The participating jurisdictions created a multi-phased approach to involving the public in the development of the SMP throughout the update effort consistent with the Shoreline Management Act (see RCW 90.58.130) and the SMP Guidelines (WAC 173-26). The jurisdictions prepared a public participation plan that identified specific objectives, key stakeholders (planning commissions, citizens, property owners, local and state agencies, cities and the county, tribal governments, neighboring jurisdictions, etc.), and that established timelines for public participation activities. Multi-jurisdictional Staff Team- A multi-jurisdictional staff team was formed to support this project. Douglas County provided the primary professional and clerical support and was responsible for project management and contracting. Staff assigned by the cities coordinated the cities’ efforts on shorelines within their respective urban growth areas. In these urban areas the cities were responsible for preparing recommended shoreline environment designations; goals, policies and use regulations for the high intensity and urban conservancy environments; restoration plans; and their respective adoption processes. The County coordinated the SMP development process with the Department of Ecology, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, tribal governments and other state agencies as required in the SMP update guidelines. In addition, the County consulted with other entities for scientific, technical or cultural information including federal agencies, watershed planning units, conservation districts, public utility districts, and other institutions as needed.
    [Show full text]