DOCSLIB.ORG

Agricultural Lands

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Agricultural Lands BENTON COUNTY VOLUNTARY STEWARDSHIP (VSP) PROGRAM ADAMS KITTITAS Agricultural Lands Map Colum b ia GRANT R iv e r Watershed Boundaries Agricultural Lands Rivers and Streams Aqueducts, Canals, and Siphons Waterbodies City Limits Alkali - Squilchuck Urban Growth Areas FRANKLIN County Boundaries Hanford Site Federal Government Lands C o ld State Government Lands C re ek YAKIMA Lower Yakima West Richland S p r Richland i ng Benton C re City ek r i v e a R m ki Ya Kennewick 0 5 10 Prosser WALLA WALLA ¯ Miles k e re C e d Rock - Glade la G h c n a r B t s a E River bia KLICKITAT m lu o C Date: 12/8/2016. Source: Benton County; BCD; BERK; DNR; ECY; NHD; WSDA; Microsoft Bing (Aerial). BENTON COUNTY VOLUNTARY STEWARDSHIP (VSP) PROGRAM ADAMS KITTITAS Agricultural Lands Map Colum b ia GRANT R iv e r Watershed Boundaries Dryland Agriculture Irrigated Agriculture Rangelands Aqueducts, Canals, and Siphons Waterbodies Alkali - Squilchuck City Limits FRANKLIN Urban Growth Areas Hanford Site County Boundaries C o ld Federal Government Lands C re ek State Government Lands YAKIMA Lower Yakima West Richland S p r Richland i ng Benton C re City ek r i v e a R m ki Ya Kennewick 0 5 10 Prosser WALLA WALLA ¯ Miles k e re C e d Rock - Glade la G h c n a r B t s a E River bia KLICKITAT m lu o C Date: 12/8/2016. Source: Benton County; BCD; BERK; DNR; ECY; NHD; WSDA; Microsoft Bing (Aerial). Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas on Agricultural Lands ADAMS Mattawa (! GRANT er iv R ia b m C ol u Mesa (! Alkali - Squilchuck FRANKLIN Cold Cree k Lower Yakima YAKIMA West Richland S pr Richland in g C re ek er iv Benton City a R kim Grandview Ya (! C o lum bia Pasco Ri (! ver Kennewick Prosser WALLA WALLA k e e r C e d Rock - Glade a l G h c n a r B t s a E G l ad e C re e k KLICKITAT WRIA Boundaries Co lum Dryland Agriculture bia River Irrigated Agriculture Rangelands Streams Aqueducts, Canals, and Siphons Waterbodies Federal Lands State Lands City Limits UGA CARAs on New Irrigated Agriculture (2011-2015) Potential Wellhead Protection Zone (1,000 Ft) Wellhead Protection Zone (10 Yr Time of Travel) Combined Hydrologic Soil Group A & Alluvial Parent Material 01.53 Source: Benton County, 2016; BCD, 2016; DNR, 2009; DOE, 2012; USGS, 2015; WSDA, 2015 ¯ Miles Geological Hazards on Agricultural Lands ADAMS Mattawa (! GRANT er iv R ia b m C ol u Mesa (! Alkali - Squilchuck FRANKLIN Cold Cree k Lower Yakima YAKIMA West Richland S pr Richland in g C re ek er iv Benton City a R kim Grandview Ya (! C o lum bia Pasco Ri (! ver Kennewick Prosser WALLA WALLA k e e r C e d Rock - Glade a l G h c n a r B t s a E G l ad e C re e KLICKITAT k C olu mb WRIA Boundaries ia R iver Dryland Agriculture Irrigated Agriculture Rangelands Streams Aqueducts, Canals, and Siphons Waterbodies Federal Lands State Lands City Limits UGA Geological Hazards on New Irrigated Ag Land (2011-2015) Channel Migration Zone Moderate Soil Erosion Potential Severe Soil Erosion Potential 01.53 Source: Benton County, 2016; BCD, 2016; DNR, 2009; DOE, 2012; USGS, 2015; WSDA, 2015 ¯ Miles Hydrological Features on Agricultural Lands ADAMS Mattawa !( GRANT er iv R ia b m C ol u Mesa !( Alkali - Squilchuck FRANKLIN Cold Cree k Lower Yakima YAKIMA West Ric hland Sp ri Richland ng Cr ee r k ve R i Benton City ma Ya ki Grandview !( Co lumb ia R Pasco iver !( Kennewick Prosser WALLA WALLA k e e r C e d Rock - Glade a l G h c n a r B t s a E G l ad e C re e KLICKITAT k C WRIA Boundaries olu mb Dryland Agriculture ia R iver Irrigated Agriculture Rangelands Streams Aqueducts, Canals, and Siphons Waterbodies Federal Lands State Lands City Limits UGA Streams on New Irrigated Agriculture (2011-2015) Hydrology Features on New Irrigated Agriculture (2011-2015) One Hundred Year Floodplain Floodway Wetlands 01.53 Source: Benton County, 2016; BCD, 2016; DNR, 2009; DOE, 2012; USGS, 2015; WSDA, 2015 ¯ Miles Priority Habitat and Species on Agricultural Lands ADAMS Mattawa !( GRANT er iv R ia b m C ol u Mesa !( Alkali - Squilchuck FRANKLIN Cold Cree k Lower Yakima YAKIMA West Ric hland Sp ri Richland ng Cr ee r k ve R i Benton City ma Ya ki Grandview !( Co lumb ia R Pasco iver !( Kennewick Prosser WALLA WALLA k e e r C e d Rock - Glade a l G h c n a r B t s a E G l ad e C re e KLICKITAT k Co lum bia River WRIA Boundaries Dryland Agriculture Irrigated Agriculture Rangelands Streams Aqueducts, Canals, and Siphons Waterbodies Federal Lands State Lands City Limits UGA Priority Habitat and Species (PHS ) and WNHP Plant Communities New Irrigated Ag in PHS Areas (2011-2015) 01.53 Source: Benton County, 2016; BCD, 2016; DNR, 2009; DOE, 2012; USGS, 2015; WSDA, 2015 ¯ Miles July 2016 Appendix B. Mapping Approach The combined agricultural dataset uses Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) field data as well as BCD data, and removes rangeland on Hanford, and agricultural land in city limits. Where the data overlap, WSDA field level data serves as the primary dataset; areas not covered by WSDA would represent the BCD dataset; followed by other federal and state rangeland datasets. Under GMA, critical areas include fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, wetlands, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, and critical aquifer recharge areas used for potable water. Consistent with GMA, the Benton County regulates critical areas. General definitions are provided below. See the matrix below summarizing critical area designation and classification criteria in State laws and rules as well as the Benton County Code. Map sets and individual layers are available at the following map link: Benton County VSP Online Map: http://arcg.is/293MetO Login: BERK_MapReader Password: MapReader<2016> Matrix of Mapping Definitions and Sources State Definitions and Classification County Definitions and Classification Mapping Sources and Notes Aquifers WAC 365-190-030 (3) "Critical aquifer recharge areas" Adopted: Wellhead Protection Areas: are areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers State Department of Health 15.25.020 DEFINITIONS. (5) "Critical Aquifer used for potable water, including areas where an aquifer dataset; downloaded 6-24- Recharge/Interchange Areas" means those aquifer that is a source of drinking water is vulnerable to 2016. Five feature classes recharge/interchange areas that have an effect on, or contamination that would affect the potability of the showing wellhead protection are associated with, aquifers used for potable water in water, or is susceptible to reduced recharge. areas and derived migration. community water systems. WAC 365-190-100 (3) Counties and cities must classify Well Locations: Ecology dataset Proposed: (same) recharge areas for aquifers according to the aquifer from April 2016; downloaded vulnerability. Vulnerability is the combined effect of 6-24-2016. hydrogeological susceptibility to contamination and the contamination loading potential. High vulnerability is 1 State Definitions and Classification County Definitions and Classification Mapping Sources and Notes indicated by land uses that contribute directly or Alluvial Geology: Derived from indirectly to contamination that may degrade NRCS Soil Geodatabase. groundwater, and hydrogeologic conditions that facilitate degradation. Low vulnerability is indicated by land uses that do not contribute contaminants that will degrade groundwater, and by hydrogeologic conditions that do not facilitate degradation. Hydrological conditions may include those induced by limited recharge of an aquifer. Reduced aquifer recharge from effective impervious surfaces may result in higher concentrations of contaminants than would otherwise occur. *** (4) A classification strategy for aquifer recharge areas should be to maintain the quality, and if needed, the quantity of the groundwater, with particular attention to recharge areas of high susceptibility. (a) In recharge areas that are highly vulnerable, studies should be initiated to determine if groundwater contamination has occurred. Classification of these areas should include consideration of the degree to which the aquifer is used as a potable water source, feasibility of protective measures to preclude further degradation, availability of treatment measures to maintain potability, and availability of alternative potable water sources. (b) Examples of areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water may include: (i) Recharge areas for sole source aquifers designated pursuant to the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act; (ii) Areas established for special protection pursuant to a groundwater management program, chapters 90.44, 90.48, and 90.54 RCW, and chapters 173-100 and 173-200 WAC; (iii) Areas designated for wellhead protection pursuant to the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act; (iv) Areas near marine waters where aquifers may be subject to saltwater intrusion; and DRAFT July 2016 | Benton County Voluntary Stewardship Program 2 State Definitions and Classification County Definitions and Classification Mapping Sources and Notes (v) Other areas meeting the definition of "areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water" in these guidelines. (c) Some aquifers may also have critical recharging effects on streams, lakes, and wetlands that provide critical fish and wildlife habitat. Protecting adequate recharge of these aquifers may provide additional benefits in maintaining fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas WAC 365-190-030 (6)(a) "Fish and wildlife habitat Adopted: 15.40.020 (2) "Fish and Wildlife Conservation Federally-identified Critical conservation areas" are areas that serve a critical role in Areas" refer to the following: Habitat: USFWS dataset.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Natural Streamflow Estimates for Watersheds in the Lower Yakima River
    Natural Streamflow Estimates for Watersheds in the Lower Yakima River 1 David L. Smith 2 Gardner Johnson 3 Ted Williams 1 Senior Scientist-Ecohydraulics, S.P. Cramer and Associates, 121 W. Sweet Ave., Moscow, ID 83843, [email protected], 208-310-9518 (mobile), 208-892-9669 (office) 2 Hydrologist, S.P. Cramer and Associates, 600 NW Fariss Road, Gresham, OR 97030 3 GIS Technician, S.P. Cramer and Associates, 600 NW Fariss Road, Gresham, OR 97030 S.P. Cramer and Associates Executive Summary Irrigation in the Yakima Valley has altered the regional hydrology through changes in streamflow and the spatial extent of groundwater. Natural topographic features such as draws, coulees and ravines are used as drains to discharge irrigation water (surface and groundwater) back to the Yakima River. Salmonids are documented in some of the drains raising the question of irrigation impacts on habitat as there is speculation that the drains were historic habitat. We assessed the volume and temporal variability of streamflow that would occur in six drains without the influence of irrigation. We used gage data from other streams that are not influenced by irrigation to estimate streamflow volume and timing, and we compared the results to two reference streams in the Yakima River Valley that have a small amount of perennial streamflow. We estimate that natural streamflow in the six study drains ranged from 33 to 390 acre·ft/year depending on the contributing area. Runoff occurred infrequently often spanning years between flow events, and was unpredictable. The geology of the study drains was highly permeable indicating that infiltration of what runoff occurs would be rapid.
    [Show full text]
  • Title 232 WAC FISH and WILDLIFE, DEPARTMENT OF
    Wildlife Chapter 232-12 Title 232 232-12-107 Falconry permit license required. [Statutory Authority: Title 232 WAC RCW 77.12.040 and 77.12.010. 96-18-062 (Order 96- 138), § 232-12-107, filed 8/30/96, effective 9/30/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 77.12.040. 90-22-064 FISH AND WILDLIFE, (Order 472), § 232-12-107, filed 11/5/90, effective 12/6/90; 82-04-034 (Order 177), § 232-12-107, filed DEPARTMENT OF 1/28/82; 81-12-029 (Order 165), § 232-12-107, filed 6/1/81. Formerly WAC 232-12-232.] Repealed by 10- 18-012 (Order 10-214), filed 8/20/10, effective 9/20/10. (WILDLIFE) Statutory Authority: RCW 77.04.012, 77.04.020, 77.04.055, 77.12.047, 77.12.210, and C.F.R. Title 50, Part 21, Subpart C, Section 21.29; Migratory Bird Chapters Treaty Act. 232-12 Permanent regulations. 232-12-114 Permit required for capture of raptors. [Statutory Authority: RCW 77.12.047. 03-02-005 (Order 02-301), 232-16 Game reserves. § 232-12-114, filed 12/20/02, effective 1/20/03. Statu- 232-28 Seasons and limits. tory Authority: RCW 77.12.040 and 77.12.010. 96-18- 232-30 Falconry regulations. 064 (Order 96-140), § 232-12-114, filed 8/30/96, effec- tive 9/30/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 77.12.040. 90- 232-36 Wildlife interaction regulations. 22-062 (Order 470), § 232-12-114, filed 11/5/90, effec- tive 12/6/90; 82-04-034 (Order 177), § 232-12-114, filed 1/28/82; 81-12-029 (Order 165), § 232-12-114, Chapter 232-12 Chapter 232-12 WAC filed 6/1/81.
    [Show full text]
  • Kennewick School District
    1 Amistad Elementary................................................930 W. 4th Ave. 13 Southgate Elementary......................................3121 W. 19th Ave.˜ 25 Kennewick High.......................................... 500 S. Dayton St. 2 Amon Creek Elementary................18 Center Parkway, Richland WA 14 Sunset View Elementary................................711 N. Center Pkwy. 26 Legacy High...............................................4624 W. 10th Ave. 3 Canyon View Elementary.......................................1229 W. 22nd Pl. 15 Vista Elementary...............................................1701 N. Young St. 27 Phoenix High...............................................1315 W. 4th Ave. 4 Cascade Elementary...........................................505 S. Highland Dr. 16 Washington Elementary.....................................105 W. 21st Ave. 28 Southridge High..................................3520 Southridge˜Blvd. 5 Cottonwood Elementary..................16734 Cottonwood Creek Blvd. 17 Westgate Elementary ........................................2514 W. 4th Ave. 29 Tri- Tech Skills Center...........................5929 W. Metaline Ave. 6 Eastgate Elementary...............................................910 E. 10th Ave. 18 Mid-Coulmbia Partnership .................................5980 W. 12 Ave. 30 Administration Center..................................1000 W. 4th Ave. 7 Edison Elementary................................................. 201 S. Dawes St. 19 Chinook Middle................................................4891
    [Show full text]
  • SR 240 I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange (Columbia Causeway) Mitigation Site
    SR 240 I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange (Columbia Causeway) Mitigation Site USACE IP 2004-00043 South Central Region 2018 MONITORING REPORT Wetlands Program Issued March 2019 Environmental Services Office Author: Jennie Husby Editor: Kristen Andrews Contributors: Kristen Andrews Jennie Husby Tom Mohagen Sean Patrick For additional information about this report or the WSDOT Wetlands Program, please contact: Kristen Andrews, Wetlands Program WSDOT, Environmental Services Office P. O. Box 47332, Olympia, WA 98504 Phone: 360-570-2588 E-mail: [email protected] Monitoring reports are published on the web at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/environment/technical/disciplines/wetlands/monitoring- reports SR 240 I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange (Columbia Causeway) Mitigation Site USACE IP 2004-00043 General Site Information USACE IP Number 2004-00043 Ecology WQC 1760 On both sides of SR 240 at milepost 37 in Mitigation Location Benton County LLID Number 1192477462437 Construction Date 2005–2007 Monitoring Period 2009-2018 Year of Monitoring 10 of 10 Type of Impact Permanent Wetland Area of Project Impact1 9.65 acres Upland Wetland Wetland Type of Mitigation Vegetation Establishment Enhancement Preservation Planned Area of 10.19 acres 5.62 acres 0.7 acre Mitigation2 1 Impact and mitigation numbers sourced from SR 240, I-182 to Columbia Center Interchange Construct Additional Lanes Final Mitigation Plan Addendum (WSDOT 2008). 2 Additional off-site mitigation credit of 3.2 acres obtained from Amon Creek for fish passage enhancement and
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 Management Plan
    Table of Contents: Chapter 4 1 Management Plan Foundations 3 1.1 Yakima Subbasin Vision and Guiding Principles 3 1.1.1 Vision 2020 3 1.1.2 Guiding Principles for the Yakima Subbasin Plan 4 1.1.3 Elements of a Management Plan 4 1.1.4 Adaptive Management of the Subbasin 6 2 Wildlife Key Findings Table 6 2.1 FOCAL HABITAT: MONTANE CONIFEROUS WETLAND 7 2.2 FOCAL HABITAT: PONDEROSA PINE/OAK WOODLANDS 9 2.3 FOCAL HABITAT: SHRUB STEPPE 11 2.4 FOCAL HABITAT: INTERIOR RIPARIAN WETLANDS 14 3 Aquatic Key Findings 17 3.1 Protection Key Findings for Fish Focal Species 17 3.1.1 Protection Key Findings for Fall Chinook: 17 3.1.2 Protection Key Findings for Steelhead: 17 3.1.3 Protection Key Findings for Bull Trout: 17 3.2 Protection Key Findings for Assessment Units 18 3.2.1 Protection Key Findings for the Lower Yakima Assessment Unit: 18 3.2.2 Protection Key Findings for the Mid Yakima Floodplain: 18 3.2.3 Protection Key Findings for Low Elevation Tributaries Assessment Unit: 19 3.2.4 Protection Key Habitat Findings for Mid Elevation Yakima Assessment Unit: 20 3.2.5 Protection Key Findings for High Elevation Yakima Assessment Unit: 21 3.2.6 Protection Key Habitat Findings for the Mid Elevation Naches-Tieton Assessment Unit: 22 3.2.7 Protection Key Habitat Findings for the High Elevation Naches Assessment Unit: 23 3.3 Explanation of Subbasin-Specific Aquatic Restoration Key Findings, Objectives and Strategies 24 3.4 Explanation of Key Findings Tables 31 3.4.1 Focal Species Populations- Restoration Key Findings, Objective and Strategies 33 3.4.2 Basinwide
    [Show full text]
  • City of Richland Comprehensive Plan Update Comment Matrix – Part 1 August 2017
    City of Richland Comprehensive Plan Update Comment Matrix – Part 1 August 2017 General Statistics Open House: 104 comments Commissioners: 3 comments Online: 45 comments Organizations: 2 comments Other Public: 2 comments Tribal: 1 comment Agencies/Departments: 8 comments Major Categories General ‒ General Columbia Point South ‒ Stronger downtown ‒ Preserve area as open space ‒ Badger Mountain ‒ Concerns over increased traffic from development ‒ Schools ‒ Concerns over type of development Parks and open space (specifically protecting open space City View West in the cities) ‒ Potential interference with the airport Environment Goals and Policies ‒ General Transportation ‒ Climate Change ‒ General ‒ Sustainability and renewable energy ‒ Public transit ‒ Critical Areas ‒ Bike lanes and trails Fish and wildlife ‒ Duportail Bridge ‒ Cultural and historic resources ‒ Traffic Utilities ‒ Road construction (especially concerns around Housing Rachel Road) ‒ Types of housing Land Use ‒ Distribution of housing 1 City of Richland Comprehensive Plan – Draft Comments Responses- Part 1 Comments # Name/Affiliation Date Sub-topic Comment Response General Comments 1 Laurie Ness 9/7/2016 Public On the Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Public Participation Plan was adopted participation Washington State Law requires through RCW per GMA in 2016. See Appendix D. 36.70A.130 (2)(a), RCW 36.70A.140 and RCW 36.70A.035 for the establishment of a Public Participation Program. 1) This is a program that identifies procedures and schedules for the public to participate in the periodic update. 2) The program must provide for early and continuous public participation. 3) The program should clearly identify the scope of the review and 4) identify when legislative action on the review and update component are proposed to occur.
    [Show full text]
  • Times When Spawning Or Incubating Salmonids Are Least Likely to Be Within Washington State Freshwaters
    Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife TIMES WHEN SPAWNING OR INCUBATING SALMONIDS ARE LEAST LIKELY TO BE WITHIN WASHINGTON STATE FRESHWATERS June 1, 2018 Page 1 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) biologists will use this table as a starting point when they consider timing restrictions for any hydraulic project for which they will issue a written HPA. WDFW developed this table based on the general conditions and fish life histories present within broad reaches of stream or sub- basins. Based on the site-specific conditions, circumstances, work proposed, and fish life stages present, timing restrictions for individual hydraulic project sites may differ from those upon which this table was based; therefore alternative work times may be appropriate for some projects. The table identifies times when salmonid eggs and fry are least likely to be incubating within stream gravels. In the case of some large streams, such as the Columbia and Snake Rivers, outmigration timing of smolts was also considered. Check the listing for the county in which in-water work will occur to identify times that may avoid impact to spawning and incubating fish life. Biologists will also consider such things as the expected impact of construction activities, equipment type and access, life history stages of all species of fish life present, presence or absence of spawning habitat and incubating fish at or near the project site, weather (heavy rain, snow, frozen soils), work site containment, wastewater management, best management practices proposed by the project proponent, mitigation measures volunteered or imposed upon the project, and other circumstances and conditions when permitting in-water work.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Report for the Rachel Road Alignment Study in Richland, Benton County, Washington
    Wildlife Report for the Rachel Road Alignment Study in Richland, Benton County, Washington Dated February 3, 2017 Prepared for: Pete Rogalsky, Public Works Director City of Richland 840 Northgate Avenue P.O. Box 190, MS-26 Richland, WA 99352 Office (509) 942-7558 [email protected] Prepared by: Vincent Barthels, Biologist J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. 422 W. Riverside, Suite 304 Spokane, WA 99201 Office (509) 458-3727 Cell (509) 951-9564 [email protected] Preface The attached Wildlife Report was developed pursuant to Richland Municipal Code (Title 22.10) and details the listed sensitive species and current habitat conditions that fall within the defined project study area, which is the Amon Creek Natural Preserve (ACNP). This report aims to evaluate plant communities and wildlife functions and values contained within the study area. This report also outlines Best Management Practices (BMPs) and potential mitigation measures that could be implemented to offset any encroachments from roadway development activities implemented in this area. It should be noted that the proposed trail enhancement renderings and vegetation re-plantings outlined in the report are preliminary conceptual designs; final designs have not been performed by J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. The vegetation planting suggestions presented herein are intended for general habitat functionality only. Prior to final design, J-U-B ENGINEERS, Inc. suggests that the impacts of the recommendations outlined in this report be analyzed by a licensed professional engineer with regard to bank stability and slope protection. Should the engineering analysis show that changes to the proposed recommendations are required, such changes should be analyzed for habitat functionality by the project biologist.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Spaces, Trails, and Open Space Protection in the Mid-Columbia Today
    RROSN Vision Plan III. Open Spaces, Trails, and Open Space Protection in the Mid-Columbia Today No other place on Earth is like the Mid-Columbia. Massive basalt flows, cataclysmic floods, and other geologic processes created the ridges and rivers landscape that defines our sense of place. Visual and physical access to these places – views of them and from them – help us to understand and physically and emotionally connect with a landscape we recognize as “home”. Open spaces, whether viewed or explored, are our portals to making these connections. Our unique geographic region (Figure 3) is the home of a significant number of open space and trail resources that benefit both Tri-City residents and visitors. In fact, the “To be rooted is Mid-Columbia region is a hub for numerous trail perhaps the most networks (Figure 4) and federal, state, regional, and important but least local open space areas (Figure 5). These resources understood need of include a National Monument, several National Wildlife Refuges, a National Historic Landmark, a Wilderness the human soul.” Area, a State Park, sites eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, a tri-state water trail system spanning - Simone Weil over 1000 river miles, several large regional parks, and many other special places and long-distance trails. This chapter presents brief descriptions of some of the federal, state, and larger regional-scale open space and trail recreational resources that are found in the Mid- Columbia Region. They form the context for the many other city and county resources that are also listed. This chapter also lists policies and regulations available to jurisdictions associated with hillside and floodplain developments.
    [Show full text]
  • SRFB Grants Awarded 2020
    Salmon Recovery Grants Awarded 2020 Projects in Asotin County Total Grants Awarded: $270,000 Asotin County Conservation District Grant Awarded: $56,000 Adding Log Structures to Couse Creek The Asotin County Conservation District will use this grant to place about 250 logs, tree root wads, and engineered log structures in nearly 2 miles of Couse Creek, a Snake River tributary, in Asotin County. Adding log to a river slows the water, which reduces erosion and encourages the water to flow into the protected side channels, creating additional areas for salmon to spawn. Logs also create places for fish to rest, feed, and hide from predators. Finally, logs change the flow of the river, creating riffles and pools, which give salmon more varied and productive habitat. This project is the first phase of a broader effort to improve stream habitat. The river is used by summer steelhead trout, which is a species listed as threatened with extinction under the federal Endangered Species Act. The Asotin County Conservation District will contribute $12,000 in a federal grant. Visit RCO’s online Project Snapshot for more information and photographs of this project. (20-1037) Asotin County Conservation District Grant Awarded: $80,000 Designing a Barrier Removal in Cougar Creek The Asotin County Conservation District will use this grant to develop a construction-ready design to replace a culvert where Cougar Creek flows under the Grande Ronde River Road in southeast Washington. Culverts are pipes or other structures that carry water under roads and often block fish migration because they are too steep, too tall, or too small to allow fish to pass through easily.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Field Reports in Support of Upcoming Land Use Planning for the Spokane District Office of the Bureau of Land Management
    Community Field Reports in Support of Upcoming Land Use Planning For the Spokane District Office of the Bureau of Land Management: Submitted to Scott Pavey, BLM Planning Lead BLM Spokane District Office Submitted by Kevin Preister, Ph.D. Trish Malone, M.A. Eric Darsow April 2, 2010 PO Box 1267 Basalt, CO 81621 970/ 927-4424 FAX 970/ 927-4607 [email protected] POB ox 3493 Ashland, OR 97520 541/ 601-4797 FAX 541/ 552-9683 [email protected] P.O. Box 1214 Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 808/443-9445 FAX 808/324-4543 pacificrim@jkagrou p.com www.jkagroup.com Enhancing Productive Harmony between Hum an and Natural Environment s Community Field Reports in Support of Upcoming Land Use Planning For the Spokane District Office of the Bureau of Land Management: Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Chapter One: Toward a Strategy of Community-Based Collaborative Land Use Planning 2 Chapter Two: Background and Approach 11 Chapter Three: The San Juans Human Resource Unit 19 Chapter Four: The Okanogan Human Resource Unit 37 Chapter Five: The Chelan-Douglas Human Resource Unit 57 Chapter Six: The Kittitas and Yakima Human Resource Units 76 Chapter Seven: The Tri-Cities Human Resource Unit 86 Chapter Eight: The Upper Crab Creek Human Resource Unit 108 Chapter Nine: The Colville Human Resource Unit 128 Appendix A: Background of JKA History with the Bureau of Land Management 138 Appendix B: Seven Cultural Descriptors Used in Human Geographic Mapping 144 Tables and Figures Table 1: Research Days and Types of Citizen Contact in Each Geographic Area 14
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Provides More Detail on the Planning Process and Its Broader Context
    per Yakima Steelhead Recovery Plan Extracted from the 2005 Yakima Subbasin Salmon Recovery Plan with Updates September 30th, 2009 Compiled by: Alex Conley, Yakima Basin Fish & Wildlife Recovery Board Joel Freudenthal, Yakima County David Lind, Yakama Nation Phil Mees, Benton County Richard Visser, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Cover photo by Ken Bevis, WDFW Yakima Basin Fish & Wildlife Recovery Board http://www.ybfwrb.org/ Contact: [email protected] or (509) 453-4104 p. i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires listing species that have declined to the point that they are threatened with extinction and sets up regulations to protect these species. Recovering a listed species to the point that it no longer needs protection under the ESA is an important goal, both for people with a direct interest in the health of that species and for the individuals and groups who may be negatively affected by regulations put into place to protect a listed species. The ESA requires development of recovery plans that review a listed species’ status, set recovery goals, and identify actions required to recover it and remove it from the list. Recovery plans are non-regulatory documents that provide guidance on how to recover a species; they do not create any binding commitments or legal mandates. In 1999, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) classified Middle Columbia River Steelhead as a threatened species under the ESA. In 2006, NOAA Fisheries revised its listing to apply only to the anadromous (ocean-going) form of Oncorhynchus mykiss, commonly known as steelhead.1 This listing applies to steelhead that spawn in a large portion of central and eastern Washington and Oregon (See Figure 1.1).
    [Show full text]