Salmon Subbasin Management Plan May 2004

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Salmon Subbasin Management Plan May 2004 Salmon Subbasin Management Plan May 2004 Coeur d'Alene #S LEWIS WASHINGTON #SMoscow MONTANA NEZ Lewiston #S #S PERCE #S #S OREGON Boise Sun Valley # #S #S Grangeville #S Idaho Falls WYOMING S IDAHO #S a #S Pocatello l m Twin Falls o IDAHO n R i v e r r e v # i . Dixie R k F Salmon River n . Riggins o # N Towns # m l n a erlai S Counties r mb e ha Sa C lmon R v ek iver i re Major streams R C d i p Watershed (HUC) boundaries a L i Salmon R t t r l # e e Big LEMHI . v Cre S i e k k r e a F R k v New l . e i m n e S o r R L o m C e n l r n o m a Meadows R e # S h h t m i l v i n a e a R ADAMS r S P i VALLEY v # e Mid Fk r Yellow Lodge # Pine r e # iv R P n a Leadore o hs lm im a Challis e S ro k # i F R i id ve M r iver on R Stanley Salm # S r a e l v m i R o n n o R lm iv e a S r . k F . E CUSTER 100 1020304050Miles Galena # BLAINE Compiled by IDFG, CDC, 2001 Written by Ecovista Contracted by Nez Perce Tribe Watershed Division and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................6 1.1 Contract Entities and Plan Participants.............................................................................. 7 1.1.1 Northwest Power and Conservation Council ....................................................................7 1.1.2 Bonneville Power Administration......................................................................................7 1.1.3 Nez Perce Tribe .................................................................................................................7 1.1.4 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes..................................................................................................8 1.1.5 Project Team......................................................................................................................8 1.1.6 Planning Team...................................................................................................................9 1.1.7 Technical Teams ..............................................................................................................11 1.2 Public Outreach and Government Involvement .............................................................. 12 1.2.1 Technical Team Participation .........................................................................................12 1.2.2 Planning Team Participation...........................................................................................12 1.2.3 Public Meeting Outreach.................................................................................................13 1.2.4 Ecovista Website Information..........................................................................................13 1.3 Review Process................................................................................................................ 13 2 VISION FOR SALMON SUBBASIN ...............................................................................................15 2.1 Vision Statement.............................................................................................................. 15 2.2 Guiding Principles........................................................................................................... 15 3 PROBLEM STATEMENTS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES .............................................16 3.1 Problem Statement Summary .......................................................................................... 16 3.2 Problem Statements, Objectives, and Strategies.............................................................. 16 3.2.1 Biological Components....................................................................................................17 3.2.2 Environmental Components.............................................................................................33 3.2.3 Socioeconomic Components ..........................................................................................101 4 RESEARCH, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION PLAN......................................................110 4.1 Data Gaps....................................................................................................................... 112 4.2 Research Needs.............................................................................................................. 118 4.3 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan.................................................................................... 123 4.3.1 Aquatics M&E................................................................................................................123 5 COORDINATION WITH EXISTING PROGRAMS...................................................................139 5.1 Endangered Species Act Considerations ....................................................................... 139 5.1.1 Consistency with Applicable Performance Measures in BiOp. .....................................139 5.1.2 Consistency with existing recovery plans ......................................................................141 5.2 Clean Water Act Considerations ................................................................................... 149 5.2.1 Consistency with Idaho State’s Water Quality Management Plan................................149 5.2.2 TMDLs in Salmon subbasin...........................................................................................152 6 PRIORITIZATION..........................................................................................................................153 6.1 Aquatic Prioritizations................................................................................................... 153 6.1.1 Prioritization Discussion ...............................................................................................153 6.2 Terrestrial Prioritizations............................................................................................... 156 7 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................162 7.1 General Recommendations............................................................................................ 162 7.2 Summary and Synthesis of Plan .................................................................................... 162 7.3 Social Impacts Conclusion............................................................................................ 163 7.4 Final Comments............................................................................................................. 165 8 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................166 Salmon Subbasin Management Plan i May 2004 9 TECHNICAL APPENDICES..........................................................................................................172 Appendix A—Participation Summary.................................................................................. 172 Appendix B—Letters of Endorsement.................................................................................. 177 Appendix C—NOAA Fisheries Delisting Criteria ............................................................... 178 Appendix D—Numerical Criteria Reviewed to Develop Subbasin Goals for Adult Fish Returns........................................................................................................................... 180 Appendix E—RM&E Key Performance Measures .............................................................. 182 Appendix F—PFC Metrics ................................................................................................... 190 Appendix G—Chinook and Steelhead Population Units in the Salmon Subbasin............... 192 Appendix H—Socioeconomic Data...................................................................................... 194 Appendix I—Examples of ongoing, regional and subbasin-specific aquatic monitoring and evaluation efforts ........................................................................................................... 216 Appendix J—Final Recommendations of the Upper Salmon Basin Planning Team ........... 219 Salmon Subbasin Management Plan ii May 2004 List of Tables Table 1. The Project Team for the Salmon subbasin..................................................................... 8 Table 2. The Planning Team for the Salmon subbasin. ................................................................. 9 Table 3. Planning Team members who participated infrequently, or who participated through email or telephone............................................................................................................. 10 Table 4. Members of the Technical Teams for the Salmon subbasin.......................................... 11 Table 5. Biological problems statements, objectives, and limiting factors in the Salmon subbasin............................................................................................................................. 18 Table 6. Anadromous adult return objectives for the Salmon subbasin. ..................................... 21 Table 7. Environmental problem statements and objectives for the Salmon subbasin. These must be taken in context with associated strategies and discussion comments in this section about environmental components......................................................................... 33 Table 8. Summarization of limiting factors used to derive environmental problem, objective,
Recommended publications
  • Management Area 12 South Fork Salmon River
    Chapter III South Fork Salmon River Management Area 12 III - 240 Chapter III South Fork Salmon River Management Area 12 Management Area 12 South Fork Salmon River MANAGEMENT AREA DESCRIPTION Management Prescriptions - Management Area 12 has the following management prescriptions (see map on preceding page for distribution of prescriptions). Percent of Management Prescription Category (MPC) Mgt. Area 1.2 – Recommended Wilderness 48 2.2 – Research Natural Areas 1 3.1 – Passive Restoration and Maintenance of Aquatic, Terrestrial & Hydrologic Resources 32 3.2 – Active Restoration and Maintenance of Aquatic, Terrestrial & Hydrologic Resources 16 4.1a - Undeveloped Recreation: Maintain Inventoried Roadless Areas 2 4.1c – Undeveloped Rec.: Maintain Unroaded Character with Allowance for Restoration 1 General Location and Description - Management Area 12 is comprised of lands administered by the Payette National Forest within the South Fork Salmon River drainage, excluding Wilderness lands, the Upper Secesh River, and the upper East Fork South Fork (see map, preceding page). Management Area 12 includes the area near the confluence of the South Fork Salmon River and the Main Salmon River known as Mackay Bar. The management area lies in Idaho and Valley Counties, and is part of the McCall and Krassel Ranger Districts. The management area is an estimated 362,800 acres, which includes several small private inholdings (about 1 percent of the area, total), most of which are along the river corridor. Management Area 12 does not include portions of the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness, and the Upper Secesh River and Upper East Fork South Fork Watersheds that are also in the South Fork Salmon River drainage.
    [Show full text]
  • Riggins & Salmon River Canyon
    RRiiggggiinnss && SSaallmmoonn RRiivveerr CCaannyyoonn EEccoonnoommiicc DDeevveellooppmmeenntt SSttrraatteeggyy (FINAL DRAFT) Prepared for the City of Riggins February 2006 by James A. Birdsall & Associates The Hingston Roach Group, Inc. Bootstrap Solutions FINAL DRAFT [Inside cover.] RIGGINS AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FEBRUARY 2006 FINAL DRAFT CONTENTS 1. Introduction......................................................................................1 Planning Process and Project Phases ..............................................................1 Riggins History and Assets. ..............................................................................2 2. Socio-Economic Trends....................................................................4 Population. ..........................................................................................................4 Age Composition................................................................................................5 Education & Enrollment...................................................................................5 Industry Trends..................................................................................................6 Employment, Wages & Income.......................................................................7 Business Inventory.............................................................................................9 Retail Trends.......................................................................................................9 Tourism
    [Show full text]
  • Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha) Adult Abundance Monitoring in the Secesh River and Lake Creek, Idaho in 2005
    Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Adult Abundance Monitoring in the Secesh River and Lake Creek, Idaho Annual Report 2005 June 2006 DOE/BP-00020615-1 This Document should be cited as follows: Kucera, Paul, Rick Orme, "Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Adult Abundance Monitoring in the Secesh River and Lake Creek, Idaho", 2005 Annual Report, Project No. 199703000, 106 electronic pages, (BPA Report DOE/BP-00020615-1) Bonneville Power Administration P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views in this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Adult Abundance Monitoring in Lake Creek and Secesh River, Idaho in 2005 Annual Report January 2005 – December 2005 Prepared by: Paul A. Kucera and Rick W. Orme Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management Lapwai, ID 83540 Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208-3621 Project Number 199703000 Contract Number 00020615 June 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................. i CHAPTER 1 Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program
    Final Environmental Impact Statement Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program Bonneville Power Administration U.S. Department of Energy Bureau of Indian Affairs U.S. Department of the Interior Nez Perce Tribe July 1997 Final Environmental Impact Statement Responsible Agencies: U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA); U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); Nez Perce Tribe (NPT). Title of Proposed Action: Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program. States Involved: Idaho. Abstract: Bonneville Power Administration, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Nez Perce Tribe propose a supplementation program to restore chinook salmon to the Clearwater River Subbasin in Idaho. The Clearwater River is a tributary to the Snake River, which empties into the Columbia River. The Final EIS includes a new alternative suggested by commentors to the Draft EIS. In the Proposed Action, the Nez Perce Tribe would build and operate two central incubation and rearing hatcheries and six satellite facilities. Spring and fall chinook salmon would be reared and acclimated to different areas in the Subbasin and released at the hatchery and satellite sites or in other watercourses throughout the Subbasin. The supplementation program differs from other hatchery programs because the fish would be released at different sizes and would return to reproduce naturally in the areas where they are released. The Use of Existing Facilities Alternative proposes using existing production hatcheries and the proposed satellite facilities to meet the need. Facilities at Dworshak National Fish Hatchery, Kooskia National Fish Hatchery, and Hagerman National Fish Hatchery would be used as central incubation and rearing facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing Migration and Survival Between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for Juvenile Snake River Sockeye Salmon, 2011-2014
    Characterizing migration and survival between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for juvenile Snake River sockeye salmon, 2011-2014 Gordon A. Axel, Christine C. Kozfkay,† Benjamin P. Sandford, Mike Peterson,† Matthew G. Nesbit, Brian J. Burke, Kinsey E. Frick, and Jesse J. Lamb Report of research by Fish Ecology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112 and †Idaho Department of Fish and Game 1800 Trout Road, Eagle, Idaho 83616 for Division of Fish and Wildlife, Bonneville Power Administration U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208-3621 Project 2010-076-00; covers work performed and completed under contract 46273 REL 78 from March 2010 to March 2016 May 2017 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of its program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. Views in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. ii Executive Summary During spring 2011-2014, we tagged and released groups of juvenile hatchery Snake River sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka to Redfish Lake Creek in the upper Salmon River Basin. These releases were part of a coordinated study to characterize migration and survival of juvenile sockeye to Lower Granite Dam. We estimated detection probability, survival, and travel time based on detections of fish tagged with either a passive integrated transponder (PIT) or radio transmitter and PIT tag.
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho LSRCP Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Report – March 2011
    4U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - Pacific Region Columbia River Basin Hatchery Review Team Columbia River Basin, Mountain Snake Province Snake, Salmon, and Clearwater River Watersheds Idaho Lower Snake River Compensation Plan State Operated Hatcheries Clearwater, Magic Valley, McCall, and Sawtooth Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Summary March 2011 Please cite as: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011. Review of Idaho Lower Snake River Compensation Plan State-Operated Hatcheries, Clearwater, Magic Valley, McCall, and Sawtooth Fish Hatcheries: Assessments and Recommendations. Final Report, Summary, March 2011. Hatchery Review Team, Pacific Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/Pacific/fisheries/ hatcheryreview/reports.html. USFWS COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN HATCHERY REVIEW TEAM Idaho LSRCP Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Report – March 2011 Preface The assessments and recommendations presented in this report represent the independent evaluations of the Hatchery Review Team and do not necessarily represent the conclusions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). The Review Team used the most current scientific information available and the collective knowledge of its members to develop the recommendations presented in this report. The Service will respect existing agreements with comanagers when considering the recommendations presented in this report. The Review Team and Service acknowledge that the U.S. v Oregon process is the appropriate
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Ecoregions of Idaho
    1 0 . C o l u m b i a P l a t e a u 1 3 . C e n t r a l B a s i n a n d R a n g e Ecoregion 10 is an arid grassland and sagebrush steppe that is surrounded by moister, predominantly forested, mountainous ecoregions. It is Ecoregion 13 is internally-drained and composed of north-trending, fault-block ranges and intervening, drier basins. It is vast and includes parts underlain by thick basalt. In the east, where precipitation is greater, deep loess soils have been extensively cultivated for wheat. of Nevada, Utah, California, and Idaho. In Idaho, sagebrush grassland, saltbush–greasewood, mountain brush, and woodland occur; forests are absent unlike in the cooler, wetter, more rugged Ecoregion 19. Grazing is widespread. Cropland is less common than in Ecoregions 12 and 80. Ecoregions of Idaho The unforested hills and plateaus of the Dissected Loess Uplands ecoregion are cut by the canyons of Ecoregion 10l and are disjunct. 10f Pure grasslands dominate lower elevations. Mountain brush grows on higher, moister sites. Grazing and farming have eliminated The arid Shadscale-Dominated Saline Basins ecoregion is nearly flat, internally-drained, and has light-colored alkaline soils that are Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions Literature Cited: much of the original plant cover. Nevertheless, Ecoregion 10f is not as suited to farming as Ecoregions 10h and 10j because it has thinner soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Salmon River SBA and TMDL Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (HUC 17060210)
    Little Salmon River SBA and TMDL Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (HUC 17060210) Prepared by the Idaho Soil and Water Conservation Commission in cooperation with the Adams Soil and Water Conservation District April 2016 Original Plans: Little Salmon River Subbasin Assessment and TMDL (IDEQ February 2006) and Little Salmon River Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan for Agriculture, Forestry, and Urban/Suburban Activities (November 2008) Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Land Use and Land Ownership ..................................................................................................................... 4 Conservation Accomplishments ................................................................................................................... 4 Resource Concerns........................................................................................................................................ 4 Sediment ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 4 References
    4 References Agricultural Extension Office. 2000. Sedges. Available at: http://aquaplant.tamu.edu/Emergent%20Plants/Sedges/Sedges.htm Accessed April 2004 Allen, D.B., B.J. Flatter, J. Nelson and C. Medrow. 1998. Redband Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri Population and Stream Habitat Surveys in Northern Owyhee County and the Owyhee River and Its Tributaries. 1997. Idaho BLM Technical Bulletin No. 98-14. American Fisheries Society, Idaho Chapter (AFS). 2000. Fishes of Idaho. Available at < http://www.fisheries.org/idaho/fishes_of_idaho.htm>. Accessed November 2003. American Ornithologists’ Union (AOU). 1957. Check-list of North American Birds. 5th edition. American Ornithological Union, Washington, DC. Anderson, A. E., and O. C. Wallmo. 1984. Odocoileus hemionus. Mammalian Species 219:1– 9. Anderson, J. L., K. Bacon, and K. Denny. 2002. Salmon River Habitat Enhancement. Annual Report 2001. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Fort Hall, ID. 14 pp. Anderson, M., P. Bourgeron, M. T. Bryer, R. Crawford, L. Engelking, D. Faber-Langendoen, M. Gallyoun, K. Goodin, D. H. Grossman, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K. D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, L. Sneddon, and A. S. Weakley. 1998. International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States. Volume II. The National Vegetation Classification System: List of Types. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. Arno, S. F. 1979. Forest Regions of Montana. Research Paper INT-218. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Arno, S.F. 1980. Forest Fire History in the Northern Rockies. Journal of Forestry 78:460–464. Aubry, K. B., Koehler, G. M., and J. R. Squires.
    [Show full text]
  • The Story of Travel Through the Little Salmon River Canyon
    “Road of No Return” The Story of Travel Through the Little Salmon River Canyon 1 By Amalia Baldwin, M.S., and Jennifer Stevens, Ph.D. December 27, 2017 1 | P a g e Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Early Travel in West Central Idaho, to 1885 ................................................................................................. 5 The North-South Wagon Road, 1885-1901 ................................................................................................ 11 A Highway is Born, 1902-1924 .................................................................................................................... 18 A Road Worth Travelling, 1924-1960s ........................................................................................................ 27 Appendix A: Meadows to Riggins Travel Timeline ...................................................................................... 33 Table of Figures Figure 1 Map of Idaho showing inset of Central Idaho ................................................................................. 4 Figure 2 Central Idaho .................................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 3 Pictographs along the Little Salmon River ..................................................................................... 6 Figure 4 General Land Office Survey Plat of Township 21
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon – Selway Landscape Initiative
    Salmon – Selway Landscape Initiative (Morgan Ranch & Pardoe Rodeo Grounds Ranch) IDAHO Salmon-Challis & Sawtooth National Congressional Districts: 01, 02 Valley & Custer Counties Forests Members: Labrador, Simpson Location Central Idaho, northwest of Stanley Acquired to Date Method Acres Cost ($) Purpose To conserve and enhance ecological integrity, Purchase 23,201 $67,209,5010 wetlands, watershed, scenic, pastoral and fish Exchange 0 $0 and wildlife values within the Frank Church River Donation 50 $0 of No Return (FCRONR) Wilderness, the Main Other 250 $5,000,000 and Middle Fork Salmon River Wild and Scenic Partners 0 $0 (MFW&S) River Corridors, and the Sawtooth National Recreation Area (SNRA) through the President’s Budget FY2012 acquisition of a combination of fee title and Method Acres Cost ($) conservation easements. Purchase 239 $3,500,000 Pending Future Request Purchase Owners of the Morgan Ranch wish to sell a Method Acres Cost ($) Opportunities conservation easement on half of their property Purchase 1,322 $26,470,000 and a fee simple interest on the remainder. Owners of the Rodeo Grounds Ranch wish to sell a conservation easement on their entire property. The Trust for Public Land (TPL) maintains exclusive option rights from both owners. Trust for Public Land Partners TPL, the Sawtooth Society, the Nature Conservancy, and the Wood River Land Trust Cooperators Project The Morgan Ranch inholding lies within the FCRONR Wilderness on Sulphur Creek, just Description upstream from its confluence with the Middle Fork of the Salmon, which was protected by Congress as one of America’s first Wild and Scenic Rivers in 1968. Along its 18-mile length, Sulphur Creek provides significant spawning and rearing habitat for Chinook salmon, steelhead trout and bull trout – all listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
    [Show full text]
  • Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin Above the Dalles, Oregon
    Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin above The Dalles, Oregon Bv W. D. SIMONS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1220 An evaluation of the consumptive use of water based on the amount of irrigation UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1953 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 50 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and scope....................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments......................................................................................................... 3 Irrigation in the basin......................................................................................................... 3 Historical summary...................................................................................................... 3 Legislation................................................................................................................... 6 Records and sources for data..................................................................................... 8 Stream
    [Show full text]