DOCSLIB.ORG

Hells Canyon and Salmon River Steelhead and Spring/Summer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hells Canyon and Salmon River Steelhead and Spring/Summer United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Room 368 Boise, Idaho 83709 Telephone (208) 378-5243 http://www.fws.gov/idaho Allyson Purcell, Acting Chief National Marine Fisheries Service West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon 97232 Subject: National Marine Fisheries Service Authorization of the Continued Operation of the Hells Canyon and Salmon River Steelhead and Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon Programs—Idaho (Adams, Custer, Clearwater, Gooding, Idaho, Lemhi, Valley, and Valley Counties) and Oregon (Baker County)—Biological Opinion In Reply Refer to: 01EIFW00-2017-F-1079 Dear Ms. Purcell: Enclosed is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) and concurrence on the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS), the Bonneville Power Administration’s (BPA), the Service’s, the Service’s Lower Snake River Compensation Plan’s (LSRCP), and the Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps), collectively the federal action agencies (action agencies), determinations of effect on species listed under the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended, for the authorization and funding of the continued operation of the Hells Canyon and Salmon River Steelhead and Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon Programs (Programs), encompassing facilities and operations in Idaho and Oregon. This consultation addresses all aspects of the Programs as outlined in the Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans (HGMPs), and is intended to document compliance with the Act for all associated partners who authorize, fund, or carry out various components of the Programs. In addition to the federal action agencies, partners include Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG), the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (SBT), and Idaho Power Company (IPC) as Program operators. In an email dated June 9, 2017 and received by the Service on the same day, IDFG, on behalf of federal action agencies1, requested formal consultation on the determination under section 7 of the Act that the proposed actions (i.e., authorization and funding) are likely to adversely affect bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), bull trout critical habitat, the Bliss Rapids snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola), and the Snake River physa snail (Physa natricina)2. The agencies 1 BPA initiated Section 7 consultation via a letter dated August 25, 2017 that referenced the June 9, 2017 IDFG initiation email and biological assessment. 2 Although the agencies determined that the Programs are likely to adversely affect the Snake River physa, based on the best available information, the Service concluded that the physa is not likely to be adversely affected by implementation of the Programs. We provide our rationale in the enclosed Opinion. Allyson Purcell, Acting Chief 01EIFW00-2017-F-1079 NMFS, West Coast Region Authorization of the Hells Canyon and Salmon River Hatchery Programs determined that the proposed actions are not likely to adversely affect Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), northern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus brunneus), or North American wolverine. The agencies also determined that the proposed action will have no effect on critical habitat for the Canada lynx and will not jeopardize the continued existence of the North American wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus). The Service acknowledges these determinations. The enclosed Opinion is based primarily on our review of the proposed action, as described in the 2017 Biological Assessment (Assessment)3; other associated documents; the Addendum to Assessment, received on October 12, 2017; and the anticipated effects of the action on listed species, and was prepared in accordance with section 7 of the Act. Our Opinion concludes that the proposed action will not jeopardize the survival and recovery of bull trout or the Bliss Rapids snail, and will not adversely modify bull trout critical habitat. A complete record of this consultation is on file at this office. Thank you for your continued interest in the conservation of threatened and endangered species. Please contact Clay Fletcher at 971-701-1497 or Russ Holder at 208-378-5384 if you have questions concerning this Opinion. Sincerely, For Gregory M. Hughes State Supervisor Enclosure cc: NMFS, Portland (Hurst, Meyers-Cherry) BPA, Portland (Grange) NPT, Lapwai (Johnson) SBT, Fort Hall (Denny) LSRCP, Boise (Collins, Robertson) Corps, Walla Walla (Setter) IDFG, Boise (Hebdon) IPC, Boise (Rosenberger) 3 The Assessment was prepared by HDR consultants and submitted for consultation on behalf of the federal action agencies by IDFG. 2 BIOLOGICAL OPINION FOR THE AUTHORIZATIONS AND FUNDING OF THE CONTINUED OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, MONITORING, AND EVALUATION OF THE HELLS CANYON AND SALMON RIVER STEELHEAD AND SPRING/SUMMER CHINOOK SALMON HATCHERY PROGRAMS 01EIFW00-2017-F-1079 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IDAHO FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE BOISE, IDAHO Supervisor ___________________________________ Date ________________________________________ Allyson Purcell, Acting Chief 01EIFW00-2017-F-1079 NMFS, West Coast Region Authorization and Funding of the Hells Canyon and Salmon River Hatchery Programs Table of Contents 1. BACKGROUND AND INFORMAL CONSULTATION ........................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Consultation History ............................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Informal Consultations.......................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 Canada Lynx .................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.2 Northern Idaho Ground Squirrel ................................................................................... 4 1.3.3 Snake River Physa ......................................................................................................... 4 1.3.4 North American Wolverine ........................................................................................... 5 2. BIOLOGICAL OPINION .......................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Description of the Proposed/Ongoing Action ....................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 6 Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) ............................................................. 6 Hells Canyon Settlement Agreement (HCSA) ................................................................... 6 Bonneville Power Administration....................................................................................... 7 Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans (HGMP) ........................................................... 7 Section 6 Cooperative Agreement for Bull Trout Take Associated with IDFG Wild Fish Research and Monitoring .................................................................................................... 7 Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resource Management Section 10 Permits ...... 8 2.1.2 Action Area ................................................................................................................... 8 2.1.3 Proposed Action .......................................................................................................... 10 2.1.3.1 Hells Canyon Programs ....................................................................................... 10 2.1.3.2 Salmon River Programs ....................................................................................... 18 2.1.3.3 Research, Monitoring and Evaluation.................................................................. 39 2.1.3.4 Impact Minimization Measures ........................................................................... 39 2.2 Analytical Framework for the Jeopardy and Adverse Modification Determinations ......... 49 2.2.1 Jeopardy Determination .............................................................................................. 49 2.2.2 Adverse Modification Determination .......................................................................... 50 2.3 Status of the Species and Critical Habitat ........................................................................... 51 2.3.1 Bliss Rapids Snail ........................................................................................................ 51 2.3.1.1 Listing Status ....................................................................................................... 51 2.3.1.2 Species Description .............................................................................................. 52 2.3.1.3 Life History .......................................................................................................... 52 i Allyson Purcell, Acting Chief 01EIFW00-2017-F-1079 NMFS, West Coast Region Authorization and Funding of the Hells Canyon and Salmon River Hatchery Programs 2.3.1.4 Status and Distribution ......................................................................................... 54 2.3.1.5 Conservation Needs ............................................................................................. 55 2.3.2 Bull Trout ...................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mckern Presentation
    WHO KILLED THE SNAKE RIVER SALMON JuneCELILO 1 FALLS COMMERCIAL HARVEST – 1860s to 1970s PEAK HARVEST 43 MILLION POUNDS – 1886 -SPRING CHINOOK SECOND PEAK 1910 – 43 MILLION POUNDS - ALL SPECIES EAST BOAT BASIN - ASTORIA MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT - 1972 NOAA RECENT ESTIMATE 20 TO 40 % OF SPRING CHINOOK Gold Dredge at Sumpter, Oregon Dredged Powder River Valley Oregon LOGGING WATERSHED DAMAGE EROSION SPLASH DAMS WATER RETENTION ROAD CONSTRUCTION METHODS Mainstem Snake River Dams WITHOUT FISH PASSAGE Oxbow dam – 1961 Shoshone Falls Hells Canyon Dam – (Upper Limit) 1967 Upper Salmon Falls – 1937 WITH FISH PASSAGE Lower Salmon Falls - Lower Granite Dam – 1910 1975 Bliss Dam – 1950 Little Goose Dam 1970 C. J. Strike Dam - Lower Monumental Dam 1952 – 1969 Swan Falls Dam -1901 Ice Harbor Dam - 1962 Brownlee Dam – 1959 SHOSHONE FALLS Tributary Dams Owyhee River Powder River Wild Horse Dam – 1937 Thief Valley Dam – 1931 Owyhee Dam – 1932 Mason Dam - 1968 Boise River Salmon River Anderson Ranch Dam – 1950 Sunbeam Dam – 1909 – 1934 Arrowrock Dam – 1915 Wallowa River Boise R Diversion Dam – 1912 OFC Dam 1898 - 1914 Lucky Peak Dam - 1955 Clearwater River Barber Dam - 1906 Lewiston Dam – 1917 - 1973 Payette River Grangeville Dam – 1910 – 1963 Black Canyon Dam – 1924 Dworshak Dam - 1972 Deadwood Dam - 1929 Malheur River Warm Springs Dam – 1930 Agency Valley Dam – 1936 Bully Creek Dam – 1963 Sunbeam Dam – Salmon River 1909 to 1934 1909 to 1920s - no fish passage 1920s to 1934 - poor fish passage Channel around by IDF&G 1934 NOTE 3 PEOPLE IN RED CIRCLE
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Fish Passage in Idaho Power Company's
    A Review of Fish Passage Provisions in the License Application for the Hells Canyon Complex August 2003 Prepared For Idaho Rivers United And American Rivers By Ken Witty S.P. Cramer and Associates S.P. Cramer & Associates, Inc. 600 NW Fariss Road Gresham, OR 97030 www.spcramer.com S.P. Cramer & Associates, Inc. Hells Canyon Complex August 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 HISTORIC PROSPECTIVE ................................................................................................................. 1 PASSAGE AT THE HCC ................................................................................................................ 1 PROPOSED DOWNSTREAM DAMS ............................................................................................ 1 LOWER SNAKE RIVER DAMS .................................................................................................... 2 LOWER SNAKE RIVER COMPENSATION PLAN ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sensitivity of Freshwater Snails to Aquatic Contaminants: Survival and Growth of Endangered Snail Species and Surrogates in 28-D
    Sensitivity of freshwater snails to aquatic contaminants: Survival and growth of endangered snail species and surrogates in 28-day exposures to copper, ammonia and pentachlorophenol John M. Besser, Douglas L. Hardesty, I. Eugene Greer, and Christopher G. Ingersoll U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center, Columbia, Missouri Administrative Report (CERC-8335-FY07-20-10) submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Project Number: 05-TOX-04, Basis 8335C2F, Task 3. Project Officer: Dr. David R. Mount USEPA/ORD/NHEERL Mid-Continent Ecology Division 6201 Congdon Blvd, Duluth, MN 55804 USA April 13, 2009 Abstract – Water quality degradation may be an important factor affecting declining populations of freshwater snails, many of which are listed as endangered or threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Toxicity data for snails used to develop U.S. national recommended water quality criteria include mainly results of acute tests with pulmonate (air-breathing) snails, rather than the non-pulmonate snail taxa that are more frequently endangered. Pulmonate pond snails (Lymnaea stagnalis) were obtained from established laboratory cultures and four taxa of non-pulmonate taxa from field collections. Field-collected snails included two endangered species from the Snake River valley of Idaho -- Idaho springsnail (Pyrgulopsis idahoensis; which has since been de-listed) and Bliss Rapids snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola) -- and two non-listed taxa, a pebblesnail (Fluminicola sp.) collected from the Snake River and Ozark springsnail (Fontigens aldrichi) from southern Missouri. Cultures were maintained using simple static-renewal systems, with adults removed periodically from aquaria to allow isolation of neonates for long-term toxicity testing.
    [Show full text]
  • Dolen, Timothy P
    Historical Development of Durable Concrete for the Bureau of Reclamation Timothy P. Dolen Research Civil Engineer - Senior Technical Specialist Materials Engineering and Research Laboratory Technical Service Center - Denver, Colorado Introduction The Bureau of Reclamation infrastructure stretches across many different climates and environments in the seventeen western states. Many of the dams, spillways, pumping plants, power plants, canals, and tunnels are constructed with concrete. These structures were built from Arizona to Montana, across the plains and in the mountains and deserts. Concrete structures had to remain durable to resist both the design loads and the natural environments of the western climate zones. Many natural environments can be quite destructive to concrete and the earliest Reclamation projects were faced with a variety of durability problems. The state-of-the-art of concrete construction advanced from hand mixing and horse and wagon transporting operations to automated mixing plants, underwater canal construction, and pumping and conveyor placing. This paper first overviews the challenges facing concrete construction in the beginning of the 20th Century. It then traces the Bureau of Reclamation’s role in the development of durable concrete to resist the environments of the west. What is Concrete? Before we begin, we must first understand what is concrete, the most versatile building material. The American Concrete Institute defines concrete as “a composite material that consists essentially of a binding medium within which are embedded particles or fragments of aggregate, usually a combination of fine aggregate and coarse aggregate; in portland-cement concrete, the binder is a mixture of portland cement and water.”1 The earliest concretes date at least as far back as early Roman times including the aqueducts and the historic Pantheon in Rome.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 10024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior ,C£$ PftRKSERVIC National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Pla Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not ap property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcatei instructins. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name: American Falls Reservoir Flooded Townsite other name/site number: 2. Location street & number American Falls Reservoir [ ] not for publication city or town American Falls ______ [ X ] vicinity state: Idaho code: ID county: Power code: 077 zip code: 83211 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this [X] nomination [ ] request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36
    [Show full text]
  • Early Irrigation in the Boise Valley By, Paul L. Murphy Source
    Early Irrigation in the Boise Valley By, Paul L. Murphy Source: Pacific Northwest Quarterly, XLIV (October, 1935), 177-184. Agriculture is the dominant feature of Idaho's economy and the major portion of Idaho's agricultural development is predicated upon irrigation. The early pioneering efforts, ambitious as they were, merely opened the door to the vast projects that followed. The difficulties faced and overcome by the early developers were legion: eastern capital had to be enlisted and fluctuations in the money market compounded this problem; the problems of trial-and-error methods in actual construction while the engineering science developed; increasing operational expenses; inadequate legislative statutes to determine the rights and use of the water and the ensuing litigation in the courts all hampered development. The story of how these problems were solved in the early development of irrigation in the Boise Valley is told in the following informative article by Professor Paul L. Murphy. Those interested in further reading will find considerable material available. A classic study is William E. Smythe, The Conquest of Arid America (1899, 1905; reprint ed., Seattle, 1969). George Thomas, Early Irrigation in the Western States (Salt lake City, 1948), is valuable. Mikel H. Williams, The History 6f Development and Current Status of the Carey Act in Idaho (Boise, 1970), is informative. Students should consult the Biennial Report of the Department of Reclamation to the Governor of Idaho, beginning in 1919-1920. A valuable survey of Idaho irrigation is in "Mineral and Water Resources of Idaho," a report prepared by the United States Geological Survey (Washington: 1964).
    [Show full text]
  • OUTFITTER/GUIDE RIVER BOATING APPLICATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (FOR OG-11) See Rules for Complete Requirements
    OG-5 (10/15) OUTFITTER/GUIDE RIVER BOATING APPLICATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (FOR OG-11) See Rules for complete requirements. Unclassified river section qualifications: To qualify as a float boat guide on unclassified rivers and streams, the applicant shall have had one (1) complete trip on each of the rivers applied for under the supervision of a float boat guide licensed for each of those rivers. A completed OG-11 Training Log shall be submitted giving dates, river section, and the signatures of the supervisor, trainee, and licensed outfitter. Classified river section qualifications: A float boat guide on a classified river shall be licensed as a boatman or a lead boatman according to his experience on that specific river. Each float boat trip on a classified river shall have a lead boat operated by a guide licensed as a lead boatman for that specific river and all other boats participating in that trip shall follow the lead boat and shall be operated by a guide licensed as a boatman or a lead boatman for that specific river. (See Rule 040.01) Each training trip means the total section of river as designated by the Board. (See Rules 040, 041, 042 and 059) An applicant for a float boatman license on classified rivers may qualify in one of three ways: a. The guide shall have had three (3) complete float boat trips on each of the classified rivers applied for, under the direct supervision of a float boatman licensed for that river or they shall have had one or more complete float boat trips on each of the classified rivers applied for under the direct supervision of a float boatman licensed for that river with the remaining trip(s) in a boat with no more than one other trainee following a licensed float boatman for that river but they must not have passengers in the boat; or, b.
    [Show full text]
  • 12-Month Finding on a Petition to Remove the Bliss Rapids Snail
    47536 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules (2) The amount of the allotment for (1) The State has submitted to the claimed during a 2-year period of each of the 50 States and the District of Secretary, and has approved by the availability, beginning with the fiscal Columbia, and for each of the Secretary a State plan amendment or year of the final allotment and ending Commonwealths and Territories (not waiver request relating to an expansion with the end of the succeeding fiscal including the additional amount for FY of eligibility for children or benefits year following the fiscal year. 2009 determined under paragraph under title XXI of the Act that becomes Authority: (Section 1102 of the Social (c)(2)(ii) of this section) is equal to the effective for a fiscal year (beginning Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302) product of: with FY 2010 and ending with FY (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (i) The percentage determined by 2013); and Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance dividing the amount in paragraph (2) The State has submitted to the Program) (e)(2)(i)(A) by the amount in paragraph Secretary, before the August 31 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (e)(2)(i)(B) of this section. preceding the beginning of the fiscal Program No. 93.767, State Children’s Health (A) The amount of the State allotment year, a request for an expansion Insurance Program)) allotment adjustment under this for each of the 50 States and the District Dated: June 19, 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Unionoida Surveys, Distribution, and Metapopulation Dynamics in the Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage, UT
    Version 1.5 Native Unionoida Surveys, Distribution, and Metapopulation Dynamics in the Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage, UT Report To: Wasatch Front Water Quality Council Salt Lake City, UT By: David C. Richards, Ph.D. OreoHelix Consulting Vineyard, UT 84058 email: [email protected] phone: 406.580.7816 May 26, 2017 Native Unionoida Surveys and Metapopulation Dynamics Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage 1 One of the few remaining live adult Anodonta found lying on the surface of what was mostly comprised of thousands of invasive Asian clams, Corbicula, in Currant Creek, a former tributary to Utah Lake, August 2016. Summary North America supports the richest diversity of freshwater mollusks on the planet. Although the western USA is relatively mollusk depauperate, the one exception is the historically rich molluskan fauna of the Bonneville Basin area, including waters that enter terminal Great Salt Lake and in particular those waters in the Jordan River-Utah Lake drainage. These mollusk taxa serve vital ecosystem functions and are truly a Utah natural heritage. Unfortunately, freshwater mollusks are also the most imperiled animal groups in the world, including those found in UT. The distribution, status, and ecologies of Utah’s freshwater mussels are poorly known, despite this unique and irreplaceable natural heritage and their protection under the Clean Water Act. Very few mussel specific surveys have been conducted in UT which requires specialized training, survey methods, and identification. We conducted the most extensive and intensive survey of native mussels in the Jordan River-Utah Lake drainage to date from 2014 to 2016 using a combination of reconnaissance and qualitative mussel survey methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Flow Augmentation Impact Analysis Appendix
    SNAKE RIVER FLOW AUGMENTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla District’s Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho February 1999 Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) 1427i A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with large drawdown of Reclamation reservoirs. 1427r A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with reservoir elevations maintained near current levels. BA Biological assessment BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis (U.S. Department of Commerce) BETTER Box Exchange Transport Temperature Ecology Reservoir (a water quality model) BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BID Burley Irrigation District BIOP Biological opinion BLM Bureau of Land Management B.P. Before present BPA Bonneville Power Administration CES Conservation Extension Service cfs Cubic feet per second Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CRFMP Columbia River Fish Mitigation Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program CVPIA Central Valley Project Improvement Act CWA Clean Water Act DO Dissolved Oxygen Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) DREW Drawdown Regional Economic Workgroup DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane EIS Environmental Impact Statement EP Effective Precipitation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ETAW Evapotranspiration of Applied Water FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FIRE Finance, investment, and real estate HCNRA Hells Canyon National Recreation Area HUC Hydrologic unit code I.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement
    Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region States of Oregon and Washington, Including Portions of Del Norte and Siskiyou Counties in California, and Portions of Nez Perce, Salmon, Idaho, and Adams Counties in Idaho Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Responsible Official: Linda Goodman, Regional Forester Pacific Northwest Region 333 SW First Ave. PO Box 3623 Portland, OR 97208 For More Information: IPEIS, Eugene Skrine, Team Leader PO Box 3623 Portland, OR 97208 Ph: (503) 808-2685 Fax: (503) 808-2699 Email: [email protected] www.fs.fed.us/r6/invasiveplant-eis Abstract: The Forest Service proposes to add management direction to all existing National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans in the Pacific Northwest Region (Region Six). This direction would standardize invasive plant prevention, and expand the set of invasive plant treatment tools available for use on National Forests in Region Six. The FEIS considers four alternatives in detail (including No Action). Adoption of the standards in any of the action alternatives would likely reduce the extent and rate of spread of invasive plants across the region, and help prevent new infestations. All of the action alternatives include standards to protect human health and the environment. The Forest Service preferred alternative is the Proposed Action. Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants Final Environmental Impact Statement April 2005 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status.
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of the Upper Snake River Basin, Idaho and Western Wyoming Summary of Aquatic Biological Data for Surface Water Through 1992
    WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE UPPER SNAKE RIVER BASIN, IDAHO AND WESTERN WYOMING SUMMARY OF AQUATIC BIOLOGICAL DATA FOR SURFACE WATER THROUGH 1992 By TERRY R.MARET U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4006 Boise, Idaho 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bruce Babbitt, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center 230 Collins Road Open-File Reports Section Boise, ID 83702-4520 Box 25286, MS 517 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Describe how water quality is changing over time. (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the Improve understanding of the primary natural and earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ human factors that affect water-quality conditions. tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- This information will help support the develop­ ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound ment and evaluation of management, regulatory, and decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and monitoring decisions by other Federal, State, and local trends is an important part of this overall mission. agencies to protect, use, and enhance water resources. One of the greatest challenges faced by water- The goals of the NAWQA Program are being resources scientists is acquiring reliable information achieved through ongoing and proposed investigations that will guide the use and protection of the Nation's of 60 of the Nation's most important river basins and water resources.
    [Show full text]