Draft Crab Creek Subbasin Summary

August 3, 2001

Prepared for the Northwest Power Planning Council

Subbasin Team Leader Mark Quinn, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)

Contributors (in alphabetical order):

Paul Ashley, WDFW Tom McCall, WDFW Dan Blatt, WDFW Michell Mazolla, Foster Creek Tim Cullinan, Washington State Audubon Conservation District Eric Cummins, WDFW Matt Monda, WDFW Lance Davisson, Washington Department of John Pierce, WDFW Natural Resources Timothy Quinn, WDFW Gary DeVore, Adams County Conservation Elizabeth Rodrick, WDFW District Rod Sayler, Washington State University Jenene Fenton, WDFW Michael Schroeder, WDFW Jim Fisher, US Bureau of Land Management Lisa Shipley, Washington State Ron Friesz, WDFW University Joe Foster, WDFW Shelly Snyder, WDFW Marc Hayes, WDFW Jim Tabor, WDFW Dave Hays, WDFW Kate Terrell, US Fish and Wildlife Jerry Hickman, WDFW Service Randy Hill, US Fish and Wildlife Service Todd Thompson, Bureau of Land Steve Herman, Evergreen State University Management John Jacobson, WDFW Chris Thompson, WDFW Robert Kent, WDFW Stefanie Utter, US Bureau of Reclamation Jeff Korth, WDFW Matt Vander Haegen, WDFW Dave Koller, Upper Grant and Warden Nancy Warner, The Nature Conservancy Conservation District Jim Watson, WDFW

DRAFT: This document has not yet been reviewed or approved by the Northwest Power Planning Council

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary i Crab Creek Subbasin Summary

Table of Contents

FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES ...... 1 Subbasin Description...... 1 Major Land Uses ...... 6 Water Quality ...... 6 Fish and Wildlife Status ...... 7 Fish...... 7 Birds ...... 22 Mammals...... 27 Reptiles and Amphibians ...... 29 Habitat Areas and Quality...... 30 Major Limiting Factors ...... 45 Existing and Past Efforts...... 47 Efforts Funded Outside of Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program ...... 57 SUBBASIN MANAGEMENT ...... 61 Existing Plans, Policies, and Guidelines ...... 61 Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Recommended Actions ...... 63 BPA-funded Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Activities ...... 79 Non BPA-funded Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Activities ...... 80 Statement of Fish and Wildlife Needs...... 81 Summary ...... 83 REFERENCES...... 84 SUBBASIN SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS...... 92

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary ii Crab Creek Subbasin Summary

List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of Crab Creek Subbasin in the Columbia Plateau ...... 2 Figure 2. Communities and Landmarks ...... 3 Figure 3. Priority Species...... 24 Figure 4. Historic Landcover ...... 39 Figure 5. Current Landcover ...... 40 Figure 6. Current Ownership...... 41 Figure 7. Location of the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area in Crab Creek Subbasin ...... 48 Figure 8. WDFW Sharp-Tailed Grouse Management Zones...... 51 Figure 9. Location of Specific Management Units within the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area...... 52 Figure 10. WDFW Sage Grouse Management Zones...... 55

List of Tables

Table 1. Fish species of Interest within the Crab Creek Subbasin...... 8 Table 2. Wildlife Species of Interest within Crab Creek Subbasin...... 16 Table 3. Historic Landcover Type by Ownership (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) ... 42 Table 4. Current Landcover Type by Ownership (Jacobson and Synder 2000) .. 43 Table 5. Habitat type and quantity on the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area...... 49 Table 6. Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area cover types and acreage...... 53 Table 7. Efforts to monitor wildlife and habitat in Crab Creek Subbasin...... 81

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary iii Crab Creek Subbasin Summary

FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES

Subbasin Description

General Location The Crab Creek Subbasin is located in central Washington in portions of Douglas, Lincoln, Adams, Grant, and Spokane counties, within the Columbia Plateau Province (Figure 1). It is bounded on the east by the Palouse Subbasin, on the south by the Lower Mid-Columbia Mainstem Subbasin, on the west by the Upper Mid-Columbia Mainstem Subbasin, and on the north by the Rufus Woods and Roosevelt Lake Subbasins. The head waters begin in Lincoln County near the town of Reardan approximately 30 km west of Spokane and include a small part of western Spokane County 13 km west of Cheney. Crab Creek flows southwest for approximately 225 km draining into the Columbia River near the town of Schwana in Grant County, five miles south of the Wanapum Dam. This planning effort includes part of southern Douglas County, which is outside of the Crab Creek watershed, and includes the drainages for McCarteney and Douglas creeks that flow, via Moses Coulee, into the Columbia River 8 km down stream from Rock Island Dam.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 1 Figure 1. Location of Crab Creek Subbasin in the Columbia Plateau

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 2 Figure 2. Communities and Landmarks

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 3 Drainage Area/Hydrology The size of this Subbasin is 13,200 square kilometers. Major tributaries of Crab Creek include the following creeks Blue Stem, Rock (Lincoln County), Lords, Coal, Duck, Lake, Canniiwai, Wilson, Homestead Creek and Rocky Ford, and various intermittent and permanent irrigation return-flow (wasteways) of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. In addition several coulees that had intermittent streams prior to the Columbia Basin Project now support perennial flow, and include Rocky, Lind, and Red Rock coulees. Crab Creek flows through several lakes starting with Sylvan Lake in south-central Lincoln County, then Brook Lake, Round Lake, Willow Lake, Moses Lake, and Potholes Reservoir in Grant County. In many areas along its way Crab Creek flows below the surface. Changes in adjacent hydrology affect when and where the creek may resurface which can vary from year to year.

In southern Douglas County, the Moses Coulee watershed includes Jameson and Grimes Lakes. The ground-water table in lower Crab Creek has risen between 50 and 500 ft since 1950, as a result of the Irrigation Project. During the same time period upper Crab Creek’s ground-water table has declined 150 ft, because of increased ground water withdrawals for irrigation.

Hydrology Within the Crab Creek Subbasin The Bureau of Reclamation’s Columbia Basin Irrigation Project has the greatest influences on hydrology within the Crab Creek Subbasin (www.usbr.gov). More water is pumped into the Subbasin from the Columbia River than all natural sources within the Subbasin. Return flows after irrigation use, excess water, and leakage from the project all contribute considerable water to this system. O'Sullivan Dam impounds Crab Creek below Moses Lake and collects Columbia Basin Irrigation water to create Potholes Reservoir (11,100 hectares). O'Sullivan Dam restricts upstream fish travel. This lower section below the dam contains approximately 40 linear miles of perennial stream habitat. Many lakes now occur as a result of the Irrigation Project that supports significant recreational fisheries.

Crab Creek has been described as the longest intermittent creek in North America. However, the upper portion of Crab Creek, many of its tributaries (such as Sinking Creek), and McCarteney Creek actually have perennial flow of water that occurs immediately below the surface layer of basalt. This pattern of flow has resulted in creeks that fluctuate between surface and subsurface depending on the specific location, time of year, and weather conditions. In contrast, lower Crab Creek now has perennial surface flow as a result of return flow from the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. Lower Crab Creek has four to five times the flow that occurred prior to the irrigation project (http://wa.water.usgs.gov). This section of the creek has been highly modified with irrigation diversions, water- control structures, and channelization. These modifications along with increased

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 4 flow have caused severe erosion, bank sloughing, and head cutting. Fish passage, habitat, and water-quality have all been compromised.

Topography/Geomorphology Uplands areas of the Plateau are characterized by gently rolling loess-covered hills interspersed with channeled scablands – wide basalt terraces with steep walls. The landscape within much of this Subbasin was sculpted by the torrential Spokane Floods which took place approximately 12,000 to 15,000 years ago. Glaciated areas in portions of Lincoln and Douglas counties are marked with small water bodies, most of which are shallow ephemeral ponds that are watered in wet cycles and dry during drought years. The substrate consists of unconsolidated quaternary sediments and Columbia River basalt. Most of the soils in the subbasin are related to the volcanic history or the subsequent effects of glaciation, runoff, and flooding. The main soils in cropland-dominated areas are Bagdad, Broadax, Hanning, Renslow, Ritzville, Shano, Touhey, Willis, and Zen (Beieler 1978, Stockman 1978). The Aquolls, Haploxerolls, and Esquatzel soils are prone to wetness and/or flooding. The typical soils in rangeland areas include Anders, Bakeoven, Benge, Heytou, Lickskillet, Rock Creek, Roloff, Stratford, and Tucannon. Ponderosa pine areas tend to be dominated with Badge, Ewall, and Springdale soils.

Climate The average temperatures in the Crab Creek Subbasin are 51°F minimum and 83°F maximum during summer and 21°F minimum and 36°F maximum during winter (U.S. Weather Service Website). The record minimum temperature was - 33°F recorded in Waterville and Moses Lake and the record maximum temperature was 115°F recorded in Ephrata and Wilson Creek. Waterville tends to be the coldest location in the subbasin during winter (18 - 33°F average range); other locations tend to be 4 - 6°F warmer. Waterville, Wilbur, and Harrington tend to be the coolest locations during summer (50 - 80°F typical range). The other locations typically reach the mid-80°F range for summer highs and about 50°F for summer lows, with 2 exceptions; Ephrata and Quincy are typically in the upper 50°F range for summer lows.

The average precipitation in the subbasin is 10.1 inches. The driest locations (< 10 inches/year) include Quincy, Ephrata, Moses Lake, Wilson Creek, Lind, and Othello. Locations in the 10 – 12 inch precipitation zone include Ritzville, Odessa, and Waterville. Harrington and Wilbur are in the > 12 inch precipitation zone. The wettest year recorded in any community in the Crab Creek Subbasin was 24 inches in 1948 in Waterville. The driest year was 3 inches recorded for Ephrata in 1976. Winter is typically the wettest season in the subbasin, with substantial portions of the precipitation falling as snow. The average annual snowfall is 21.4 inches. Othello receives the smallest amount at < 10 inches; Odessa, Moses Lake, Quincy, Lind, Ephrata, and Ritzville average 10 – 20 inches; Harrington and Wilson Creek average 20 – 30 inches; and Waterville

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 5 averages > 40 inches. The highest annual snowfall was 105 inches recorded in Waterville in 1942.

Major Land Uses The economy is dominated by agriculture. Although the area has a long history of occupation by native peoples (Coullier et al. 1942), large-scale conversion of land from shrubsteppe to cropland began in the late 1800’s and expanded when irrigation became widespread after the damming of the Columbia River in the 1930’s (National Research Council 1995). The delivery of irrigation water to the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project in 1952 dramatically changed the appearance and ecology of the southwest corner of this Subbasin from mostly shrubsteppe to a huge system of reservoirs, canals, wasteways, and irrigated farmland. The Columbia Basin Project irrigates greater than 2500 square kilometers of land. Outside of the Irrigation Project dry-land wheat farming and cattle grazing dominate. The major crops in the eastern and northern Crab Creek Subbasin are cereal grains. Agriculture within the irrigation project is more diverse and crops include alfalfa, wheat, corn, potatoes, various tree fruits and many different seed crops. Vineyards and pulp farms have begun to appear recently.

The major municipalities within this Subbasin are Moses Lake (pop. 14,290), Ephrata (pop. 6,170), Othello (pop. 5,445), Quincy (pop. 4,185), Warden (pop. 2,335), Ritzville (1,730), Royal City (pop. 1,680), and Odessa (pop. 987) (Figure 2).

Water Quality Water quality in lower Crab Creek is poor (USGS 1998). High levels of nutrients occur, primarily from fertilizer. Nitrate concentrations in the groundwater are high and exceed the drinking water standards in many wells. Nitrate concentrations in shallow wells in irrigated areas are among the highest in the nation. Levels of pesticides in water and fish tissue are relatively high, one or more organochlorine compounds exceed aquatic-life guidelines. Concentrations of long-banned organochlorine pesticides (such as DDT) or total PCBs exceed environmental guidelines. Shallow wells in the Quincy area had the highest levels of pesticides and the largest number of different kinds of pesticides.

Riparian habitats have been seriously reduced, and present-day agricultural practices limit natural recovery of vegetation. Over the last 50 years, Moses Lake and its watershed, including groundwater, have been altered permanently by human activities, especially the use of Columbia River water for irrigation farming (Washington Department of Ecology 2000).

During the last 30 years, at least 13 studies of Moses Lake indicate that anthropogenic activities, particularly agricultural practices, have contributed to a hypereutrophic state for the lake. It has been estimated that over 75% of the total phosphorus (TP) load to Moses Lake originates from agricultural fertilizers and

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 6 farm animal wastes. As of 1989, it was reported that only 20% of the irrigated land had implemented recommended water and nutrient controls, resulting in a nutrient concentration reduction of less than 2% in the Crab Creek inflows to the lake. In addition to these agricultural impacts, climatic variation, internal loading, and adding dilution water to the lake can also have a significant influence on the water quality of Moses Lake.

Four years of baseline monitoring in upper Crab Creek (Shumacher 1998) indicate local exceedences of pH and fecal coliform bacteria, and high concentrations of suspended sediment and associated phosphorus. Upper Crab Creek is included on the state’s “303d list” for exceedences of Class A pH criteria.

In most streams, sediment loading has reduced instream habitat. Riparian habitats have been seriously reduced, and present-day agricultural practices limit natural recovery of vegetation.

Vegetation Habitats that are not converted are typically shrubsteppe. Daubenmire (1970) described shrubsteppe as vegetative communities consisting of one or more layers of perennial grass with a conspicuous but discontinuous overstory layer of shrubs. In the Crab Creek Subbasin, shrubsteppe also includes ‘meadowsteppe’ and ‘steppe’ habitats which may have a relatively low frequency of shrubs. The dominant shrubs include sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.), bitterbrush (Purshia tridentate), grease wood (Sarcobatus spp.), and Spiny hopsage (Grayia spinosa). The dominant grasses include native bunchgrasses (Poa, Stipa, and Agropyron spp.) and non-native downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Riparian vegetation consists of willows (Salix spp.), rose (Rosa spp.), water birch ( Betula occidentalis), black cottonwood (Populus angustifolia ), aspen ( P. termuloides), hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii), and service berry (Amelanchier anifolia).

Fish and Wildlife Status Fish

The Crab Creek Sub basin hosts a rather large assemblage of piscine fauna (Table 1). Much of this assemblage has developed over the past 100 years as human settlement in the region contributed to establishment of many alien species and stocks. However, trout were one of the native fishes of Crab Creek.

Perhaps the earliest recorded observations of fish in Crab Creek came from Strong (1906), who spoke of Crab Creek: “At its source near Medical Lake it is a mere brook, and here in 1870, there were trout, little fingerlings, by the hundreds.” No mention was made as to the species. This was prior to the first of many hatchery stockings in this watershed, the earliest being two releases of eastern brook trout

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 7 in 1903 and 1904, followed by two releases of Westslope cutthroat of Lake Chelan origin in 1907 and 1908 (Riseland 1905; Riseland 1909). The U.S. Bureau of Fisheries workers collected trout in 1908 at a road crossing north of Ritzville, and many miles west of Strong’s 1870 observations. They established the trout of Crab Creek as cutthroat (Evermann and Nichols 1909). Dr. Robert J. Behnke, a world authority on trout taxonomy, pondered the descriptions of these trout and concluded they belonged to the Yellowstone cutthroat subspecies Oncorhynchus clarki bouveri, a cutthroat not known from any other Washington waters, although he also thought this subspecies might have been in the Palouse Watershed as well (Behnke 1992). Questions still remain on the origin of trout described by Evermann and Nichols (1909) whose 1908 survey came one year after the first release of Westslope cutthroat in Upper Crab Creek. Washington waters, although he also thought that this subspecies might have been in the Palouse Watershed as well (Behnke 1992).

Table 1. Fish species of Interest within the Crab Creek Subbasin. Common name Scientific Status1 Locations/abundance name

Pacific lamprey Entosphenus N Possibly sub-basin tributary tridentatus mouths; infrequent White sturgeon Acipenser Food, G Moses Lake, likely Banks transmontanus and Billy Clapp lakes; rare occurrences Lake whitefish Coregonus G Banks, Billy Clapp, Moses, clupeaformis Potholes Res., Soda, Long, Crescent lakes; abundant Mountain whitefish Prosopiun G Crab Creek below Hwy. 26; williamsoni Red Rock Creek; uncommon Brown trout Salmo trutta G Several tribs and most perennial reaches of Crab Creek; several lakes; common Cutthroat trout, Oncorhynchus G A few lakes connected to Lahontan clarki Crab Creek; Grimes Lk. (Moses Coulee drainage); common Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus G Most waters w/in sub-basin; gairdneri abundant Steelhead, Summer, O. gairdneri G, SC, Lower Crab Ck; Red Rock Upper Columbia FE Ck; Lower Sand Hollow stock Ck; mouths of several tribs to Col. River; uncommon

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 8 Common name Scientific Status1 Locations/abundance name Brook trout Salvelinus G A few lakes and streams fontinalis entering Crab Creek; locally common Lake trout Salvelinus G Deep Lk., Grant County namaycush only; rare Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus Food, G Lower Crab, Red Rock, summer/fall run tshawytscha Lower Sand Hollow Cks.; common in fall Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus Food, G Lower Sand Hollow Ck. nerka (observed in 1991 only); uncommon Kokanee O. nerka G Banks, Billy Clapp Lks; common Tiger muskellunge Esox lucius X G Evergreen and Red Rock E. reservoirs; uncommon masquinongy Common carp Cyprinus N Ubiquitous carpio Grass carp Ctenopharyng N Few small ponds and odon idella irrigation ditches; uncommon Goldfish Carassius N Moses Lake; uncommon auratus Tench Tinca tinca N Lower Crab Ck.; uncommon Redside shiner Richardsoni N Lower Crab Ck.; locally balteatus common Longnose dace Rhinichthys N Uncertain distribution cataractae N. pikeminnow Ptychocheilus N Small numbers in all major oregonensis reservoirs w/in sub-basin; Lower Crab Cr.; common Tui chub Gila bilcolor N Lower Crab Cr.; uncommon Peamouth Mylocheilus N Uncertain distribution caurinus Leopard dace Rhinichthys N Uncertain distribution falcatus Speckled dace Rhinichthys N Occurs in a few isolated osculus lakes; all major reservoirs; locally common Largescale sucker Catostomus N All major reservoirs w/in macrocheilus sub-basin; Lower Crab Cr.; common Bridgelip sucker Catostomus N Uncertain distribution columbianus

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 9 Common name Scientific Status1 Locations/abundance name Channel catfish Ictalurus G All major reservoirs w/in punctatus sub-basin; uncommon Brown bullhead Ictalurus G Ubiquitous nebulosus Burbot Lota lota G Small numbers in Banks, Billy Clapp, Moses Lks., Potholes Res; rare Three-spine Gasterosteus N Ubiquitous stickleback aculeatus Sandroller Percopsis N Columbia River, possibly transmontana tributary mouths; rare Largemouth bass Micropterus G All major reservoirs, many salmoides isolated lakes; Crab Cr. below Brook Lake; abundant Smallmouth bass Micropterus G All major reservoirs, Crab dolomieui Cr. Below Brook Lk.; abundant Black crappie Pomoxis G All major reservoirs; Crab nigromaculatu Cr. below Brook Lk.; s abundant White crappie Pomoxis G Moses Lake; uncommon annularis Bluegill Lepomis G All major reservoirs and macrochirus several isolated lakes; Crab Cr. below Brook Lk.; abundant Pumpkinseed Lepomis G Ubiquitous gibbosus Walleye Stizostedion G All major reservoirs, few vitreum isolated lakes; Crab Cr. below Brook Lk.; common Yellow perch Perca G Ubiquitous flavescens Torrent sculpin Cottus N Uncertain distribution rhotheus Prickly sculpin Cottus asper N Ubiquitous Mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi N Uncertain distribution 1Status: SC = State candidate; G = Game species subject to harvest regulations; FE = Federal endangered; N=no special status; Food = Food fish of commercial value (modified from PHS WDFW 1991; WDFW 1999).

The primary species of commercial or recreational importance within the watershed are lake whitefish, steelhead and rainbow trout, brown trout, Lahontan cutthroat trout, chinook salmon (summer/fall run), kokanee, brown bullhead,

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 10 walleye, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, bluegill, black crappie and yellow perch. More details on the abundance and distribution of these, and a few other species of interest, is presented in the following.

White Sturgeon Sturgeon are resident in the Columbia River, including upstream of Grand Coulee Dam. A few fish have been seen and/or rescued from the Banks Lake feeder canal during dewatering in the fall. One sturgeon was caught by an angler in Moses Lake in the early 1990s and pictured in the Moses Lake Herald newspaper. Their occurrence is likely in other large waters connected to the irrigation canal system.

Lake Whitefish Lake whitefish, an alien species, attract a small following of anglers, primarily in Banks Lake, but the species is widespread and abundant in all major lakes/reservoirs of the sub-basin: Banks, Billy Clapp, Brook (Stratford), Moses, Soda, Crescent, and Long lakes, and in Potholes and Red Rock reservoirs. All of these waters have direct connection with Crab Creek. They gained access to the sub-basin via water withdrawal from Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake (Columbia River) into Banks Lake, thence through the irrigation water delivery system. Nothing is known about their biology and interaction with other species within the sub-basin, although limited summer die-offs have been noted in Moses Lake and Potholes reservoirs (J. Foster, WDFW, pers. obs.)

Mountain Whitefish While not of recreational importance within the sub-basin, of note is that this species has been found in Red Rock Creek, a tributary entering Crab Creek at about stream km 26 from the Columbia River (R. Starkey, former USFWS biologist, pers. comm.). There is no information on reproduction here, or of this species occurring in other parts of the sub-basin.

Brown Trout The WDFW regularly stocks fingerling brown trout in several lakes and flowages within the sub-basin, many of which have direct connection with Crab Creek. The upper permanent flowing reaches of the creek (generally in Lincoln County) have received hatchery releases intermittently in the past, as have some of the main tributaries in the upper Crab Creek basin. Stocking records indicate releases of browns in upper Crab Creek in eight of the years spanning 1946 – 1996. Most, if not all, were released at the bridge on Marcellus Road, a crossing historically known as Rocky Ford. In the permanent flowing section, between Moses Lake and upstream to Willow Lakes area (including Homestead Creek and Homestead Lake), brown trout are stocked either annually or every two years. Browns do not appear to reproduce well anywhere within the Crab Creek watershed and outside of the lakes, they support very little angling activity. Their overall distribution within flowing waters of the sub-basin is sketchy at best. Hatchery releases of browns are a regular part of the stocking program for many trout lakes, where

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 11 they grow well, have minimal impact on rainbow fry releases, and are well received by anglers.

Steelhead Trout The presence of steelhead (adults) have only been confirmed within Sand Hollow Creek (near the mouth) and in Red Rock Creek. Anglers have caught steelhead in April in Sand Hollow (J. Foster, WDFW, pers. observ.) and at the mouth of Red Rock Creek (M. Spence, retired WDFW biologist, pers. comm.). Steelhead may be able to ascend higher in Crab Creek, but potential passage barriers have not been thoroughly described for most of the reach, which is privately owned. Even so, a natural falls south of McManamon Road may be the uppermost known barrier, about 56 km above the mouth. As with chinook salmon, steelhead use of Crab Creek prior to irrigation development was probably very limited, and most certainly the stream would not have produced smolts, given its ephemeral character. With present perennial flows, no information has yet been discovered that indicates lower Crab Creek produces smolts. Adult steelhead might find some spawning sites in Crab and Red Rock creeks, but any eggs and parr would have to endure heavy silt loads and high summer water temperatures in Crab Creek, and do so for the normal two- to three-year freshwater life before seaward migration. Conceivably, young parr might move out of Crab Creek and finish rearing in the Columbia. Yet surveys over many years in the Columbia downstream of Crab Creek have yielded no evidence of steelhead parr, i.e., mainstem rearing. The presence of resident rainbows in Red Rock suggests that steelhead might well be successful in producing smolts in this tributary. We can find no records of hatchery reared rainbow trout or steelhead being stocked directly into Red Rock Creek. Rainbows were released in Red Rock Lake several times after it first formed in 1966, but the last release was in 1976 (WDFW file data). Since fish may pass out of the lake, these might be the parent stock of present-day populations in the creek.

Rainbow Trout Rainbow trout provide the mainstay of recreational fishing in the subbasin, rainbow trout stocking totals 1.5 million fish annually, mostly all fry or fingerling size, within the sub-basin. In upper Crab Creek (presumably at Marcellus Road crossing), rainbows have been stocked during all but nine years between 1946 and 1996. Most of these were released at “catchable” sizes, i.e., about 17 - 25 cm (WDFW file data). Roughly, 100 lakes within the subbasin are managed solely for trout angling. Others are managed for both trout and warmwater species, but in these waters, rainbows are usually released at a size of 17 - 25 cm. Although there is no evidence of redband rainbow being native to the subbasin, unconfirmed reports of trout with external characteristics of of redband exist from upper Crab Creek (Van Buren, pers comm.). Little scientific documentation exists regarding existing trout species and their current distribution in upper Crab Creek and its tributaries (Lawlor, WDFW pers. comm.).

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 12 As mentioned previously, cutthroat were the only known trout indigenous to the upper permanent reaches of Crab Creek, and likely for its permanent tributaries as well. The original cutthroat stock (O. c. bouveri) is believed extirpated early in the twentieth century by any number of causes. However, thorough surveys have not been done in the watershed, leaving the question of cutthroat presence somewhat clouded.

Chinook Salmon The spring-run race of chinook, listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act as endangered of extinction, has not been identified within the Crab Creek Subbasin. [One documented release of 45,840 chinook (race unknown) into Banks Lake, averaging 53 fish/kg (24/lb.), was made by the former Wash. Department of Fisheries in September 1976.] However, the summer/fall race of chinook has long been noted by WDFW biologists for entering most of the tributaries within the sub-basin, at least for short distances, and of spawning attempts. Crab Creek and Sand Hollow creeks annually attract several adults in the extreme lower end, but the success of their spawning is not clear. Stream survey work, now underway by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation(BOR), shows that adults travel as far upstream in Crab Creek as the mouth of Red Rock Creek, and on into Red Rock Creek. Spawning redds have been found at various locations in both creeks (M. Bowen, BOR, pers. comm.). This effort (report in preparation) is the most intensive to date on the use of these streams by anadromous species, although the work is restricted to flows within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. Given that Crab Creek and Sand Hollow Creek were not perennial streams prior to irrigation development, chinook, with their fall spawning habit, were unlikely to have used Crab Creek historically. According to Strong (1906), Crab Creek below Moses Lake disappeared into the ground.

Kokanee Kokanee gained access to Banks Lake from water pumped out of the Columbia River at Grand Coulee. Stober et al. (1979) determined they were successfully reproducing in Banks Lake, at least until the late-1970s. However, kokanee were also stocked in Banks as early as 1962 and sporadically thereafter (based on availability). Uninterrupted annual stocking of fry or fingerlings has been done since 1992, with numbers varying between a low of 159,000 and a high of 1,678,000 (WDFW file data). The fishery for kokanee was excellent and very popular during the 1960s and 1970s, based on creel checks by biologists for the former Wash. Dept. of Game (now WDFW)(WDFW file data) and by the later work done by Stober et al. (1979). By mid-1980s, however, kokanee harvest dropped to the point that anglers gave up targeting kokanee.

Cyprinids and Suckers Redside shiner and speckled dace were probably native to upper Crab Creek watershed where flows were perennial. Several other species may have been as well, but a thorough examination of early-day writings has not been attempted, nor have more recent surveys been conducted. While the species assemblage of

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 13 the overall subbasin is large, the majority of this is found within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project (Project), and obviously a consequence of distribution through the irrigation system and illegal species introductions. Today, vast areas of the subbasin are populated with the near ubiquitous carp, both in waters isolated from and directly connected to the Project. Until the late 1970s when markets declined, carp were an important commercial species, processed into fish feed meal and as fresh fish for table fare. The carp fishery on Moses Lake was the most productive of any in Washington. During the heyday of commercial netting (1959 – 1977), harvests ranged from a low of about 10 tons to a high of over 400 tons, averaging about 305 tons (avdp. measure) per year (WDFW file data).

Brown Bullhead Another widespread species that occurs throughout Crab Creek and connected reservoirs, the brown bullhead is present in great abundance, especially Moses Lake and Potholes Reservoir where it commonly exceeds 30 cm. The species is not as avidly sought as are other game fish, but do contribute to the fishing enjoyment of juveniles and culinary fare of many ethnic groups. Brown bullhead continues to be a perennial competitor in many waters managed for trout, and as well in lakes dedicated to centrarchid management. Once established, the species all but defies eradication attempts and can quickly deplete productivity of a water for other management species.

Centrachids All centrarchids are alien species to Washington. Within the Crab Creek subbasin, pumpkinseed sunfish, largemouth and smallmouth bass, black crappie and bluegill are the most abundant and widespread of the centrarchids present. They occur both in several flowing waters, including Crab Creek below Brook (Stratford) Lake, and in many small lakes and all reservoirs. With the exception of the diminutive pumpkinseed, these species are highly sought after by anglers. The Crab Creek Subbasin has the distinction of being noted as the best warmwater fishery in the state with thousands of anglers from across the state attracted to its waters. At least 40 percent of the state’s bass tournaments take place in the subbasin. Yet as popular as these species are, their numbers have waned since the early 1980s for reasons undefined. Intensive research is underway on Moses Lake, and to a lesser degree effort is being directed at Potholes Reservoir, to discover remedial actions.

Percids Yellow perch has long been a staple of the general angler and tremendous numbers were harvested annually until the early 1980s in all major reservoirs of the subbasin. The Potholes Reservoir perch fishery grew to legendary status, surpassing in importance (angler participation and harvest) all fisheries of any other single water body in Central Washington. Other major reservoirs also produced well. But declines began to be noticed in the late 1970s, and by the mid-1980s, the excellence of this fishery faded away to almost nothing. During

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 14 this same period walleye began appearing commonly in the catches from Banks Lake, and thence down through the irrigation system to Billy Clapp, Moses lakes, Potholes Reservoir, and other waters connected by surface flow to the irrigation system. Both species alien to Washington and are widespread in the subbasin and the Columbia River. Perch in particular, have also been illegally transplanted to many waters reserved for trout production with consequences unfavorable to trout angling. Walleye are now as nearly as popular in the subbasin with warmwater anglers as fishing for bass, and the subbasin is one of the state’s most preferred locations for walleye tournaments. The origin of walleye in Washington is unclear but generally believed from a release made in the Columbia River upstream of Grand Coulee Dam in the 1950s (WDFW 1996)

Caspian Terns Predation In 1980, at least 3000 pairs of Caspian terns bred at only three locations in Washington (Gray’s Harbor, Willapa Bay, and the Potholes Reservoir), and a total of only 200 pairs bred in one location in Oregon (WDFW unpublished data; Craig et al., in press). By 2000, more than 9,500 pairs bred in the Columbia River Estuary on Rice and East Sand islands (Roby et al. 1998, Collis et al. 1999) with additional pairs breeding in at least four locations in eastern Washington, including the persistent colony at the Potholes Reservoir. About 75 pairs of Caspian terns bred at the Potholes Reservoir in 2000 (Roby et al., unpubl. data). At the tern colonies in the Columbia River estuary, between 44% and 91% of their diet is juvenile salmonids, resulting in a total annual depredation of 5 – 15 million juvenile salmonids (6 - 21% of all juvenile salmonids)(Roby et al., unpubl. data). At the site in Commencement Bay near Tacoma, 50% of the Caspian tern diet is juvenile salmonids. At the Potholes Caspian tern colony, nearly 2000 PIT tags were recovered in 2000 from juvenile salmonids, including about 2% of all Steelhead tagged in the mid-Columbia. Although over 80% of juvenile salmonids consumed by terns are hatchery-reared, there is concern that terns may consume sufficient juvenile wild salmonids, including ESA-listed stocks, to pose a significant threat to the future viability of these stocks. In addition, the tern colony on East Sand Island in the Columbia River estuary is the largest in the World, representing about 25% of all Caspian terns in North America, and more than 70% of the west coast population.

Wildlife Many of the wildlife species found in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Table 2) are listed by the state of Washington or the U.S. government as sensitive, threatened, endangered or as candidates for listing. The presence, distribution, and abundance of these species has been affected by habitat losses due to several factors including hydropower, agriculture, irrigation, urbanization, road construction, legal and illegal wildlife harvest, livestock grazing, and introduction of noxious weeds.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 15 Specific habitat-population impacts have been documented for many of the species in Table 1. For some, like many species of bats, complete life history information is lacking.

Table 2. Wildlife Species of Interest within Crab Creek Subbasin Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Behavior2 References MAMMALS: Mammals are addressed in general by the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program (WDFW 2000b). Merriam’s Shrew Sorex trowbridgii SC Y, S WDFW 2000b Northern Onychomys Y, S WDFW 2000b Grasshopper leucogaster Mouse Washington Spermophilus C, FC Y, S WDFW 2000b Ground Squirrel washingtoni Sagebrush Vole Lagurus curtatus Y, S WDFW 2000b Pygmy Rabbit Sylvilagus E, SC Y, S WDFW 1995c, idahoensis 2000b; Musser and McCall 2000 White-tailed Lepus townsendii C Y, S WDFW 2000b Jackrabbit Black-tailed Lepus californicus C Y, S WDFW 2000b Jackrabbit Mountain Sylvilagus nuttalli G Y, S, R, U, WDFW 2000b Cottontail D, F Badger Taxidea taxus G Y, S WDFW 2000b Bobcat Lynx rufus G Y, S, C WDFW 2000b Gray Wolf Canis lupus G Y, S, C WDFW 2000b Raccoon Procyon lotor G Y, R, I, F, WDFW 2000b G, W Columbian Citellus G Y, S WDFW 2000b Ground Squirrel columbianus Mink Mustela vison G Y, R, W WDFW 2000b Muskrat Ondatra zibethica G Y, W, R WDFW 2000b Beaver Castor canadensis G Y, W, R WDFW 2000b River Otter Lutra canadensis G Y, W, R WDFW 2000b Cougar Felix concolor G Y, S, C WDFW 2000b Black Bear Ursus americanus G Y, R, F WDFW 2000b Myotis bats: The WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program identifies roosting areas for Myotis bats as a priority. Little Brown Bat Myotis lucifugus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Yuma mMotis Myotis yumanensis SC M, S, C WDFW 2000b Keen’s Myotis Myotiz keenii M, S, C WDFW 2000b Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes M, S, C WDFW 2000b

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 16 Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Behavior2 References Small-footed Myotis subulatus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Myotis Long-eared Myotis evotis M, S, C WDFW 2000b Myotis Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes M, S, C WDFW 2000b Long-legged Myotis volans M, S, C WDFW 2000b Myotis California Myotis Myotis californicus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Silver-Haired Bat Lasionycteris M, S, C WDFW 2000b noctivagans Western Pipistrellus hesperus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Pipistrelle Big Brown Bat Eptesicus fuscus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Pallid Bat Antrozous pallidus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus M, S, C WDFW 2000b Townsend's Corynorhinus C, SC M, S, C WDFW 2000b Big-eared Bat townsendii Spotted Bat Euderma maculata M, S, C WDFW 2000b Mule Deer Odocoileus G Y, G WDFW 2000b hemionus White-tailed Deer Odocoileus G Y, G WDFW 2000b virginianus Birds: Birds are addressed in general by the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program (Hickman 1987, Smith et al. 1997, Schroeder 2000, WDFW 2000b). Common Loon Gavia immer S M, W Lewis et al. 2000 American White Pelecanus E M, W Doran et al. Pelican erythrorhynchos 2000 Black-crowned Nycticorax M, W, R Smith et al. Night Heron nycticorax 1997 Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias M, W, R Quinn and Milner 2000 American Bittern Botaurus B, W, R WDFW 2000b lentiginosus Double Crested Phalacrocorax B, W, R, F WDFW 2000b Cormorant auritus Common Egret Casmerodius albus B, W, R, F WDFW 2000b Western Grebe Aechmophorus B, W WDFW 2000b occidentalis Clarks Grebe B, W WDFW 2000b Horned Grebe Podiceps auritus B, W, R WDFW 2000b Eared Grebe Podiceps caspicus B, W, R WDFW 2000b Terns: The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Priority Habitat and Species Program identifies areas where terns breed as a priority.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 17 Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Behavior2 References Black Tern Chlidonias niger M, W Smith et al. 1997 Caspian Tern Sterna caspia M, W Smith et al. 1997 Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri B, M, W WDFW 2000b Swans: The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Priority Habitat and Species Program identifies areas where native swans occur as a priority. Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus G M, W, D, I WDFW 2000b Trumpeter Swan Cygnus buccinator G M, W, D, I WDFW 2000b Waterfowl concentrations: Significant breeding areas and locations where regular large concentrations occur are identified as a priority by the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program. Greater White- Anser albifrons G M, W, D, I WDFW 2000b Fronted Goose frontalis Tule White- Anser albifrons G M, W, D, I, WDFW 2000b Fronted Goose gambelli Canada Goose Branta canadensis G M, B, W, Smith et al. (multiple spp. D, I 1997, WDFW subspecies) 2000b Mallard Anas platyrhynchos G M, B, W, Smith et al. D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b Gadwall Anas strepera G M, B, W, Smith et al. D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b Green-winged Anas crecca G M, B, W, Smith et al. Teal D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b American Anas americana G M, B, W, Smith et al. Wigeon D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b Northern Pintail Anas acuta G M, B, W, Smith et al. D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b Northern Anas clypeata G M, B, W, Smith et al. Shoveler D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b Blue-Winged Anas discors G M, B, W, Smith et al. Teal D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b Cinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera G M, B, W, Smith et al. D, I 1997, WDFW 2000b

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 18 Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Behavior2 References Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis G M, B, W Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Canvasback Aythya valisineria G M, B, W Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Redhead Aythya Americana G M, B, W Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Ring-necked Aythya collaris G M, B, W Smith et al. Duck 1997, WDFW 2000b Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis G M, B, W Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Bald Eagle Haleaeetus T, FT Y, G Smith et al. leucocephalus 1997, WDFW 2000b Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos C Y, S, C Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni B, S WDFW 2000b Ferruginous Buteo regalis T, SC B, S Richardson et Hawk al. 2000, WDFW 1996 Northern Accipiter gentilis C, SC M, R, F Smith et al. Goshawk 1997, WDFW 2000b Merlin Falco columbarius C M, R, F, U Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus E, SC Y, C Hays and Milner 2000 Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus G3 Y, S, C Hays and Dobler 2000 Gyrfalcons Falco rusticolus G4 WDFW 2000b Sharp-tailed Tympanuchus T, SC Y, S, R, D WDFW 1995b, Grouse phasianellus Hays et al. 1998b, Schroeder et al. 2000a

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 19 Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Behavior2 References Sage Grouse Centrocercus T, SC Y, S, D WDFW 1995a, urophasianus Hays et al. 1998a, Schroeder et al. 2000b Blue Grouse Dendragapus G B, S, F Ware 2000, obscurus WDFW 2000b California Quail Lophortyx G Y, S, R, R WDFW 2000b californicus Gray Partridge Perdix perdix G Y, S, D WDFW 2000b Chukar Alectoris chukar G Y, S, C Ware and Tirhi 2000a Ring-necked Phasianus colchicus G Y, S, I, R Ware and Tirhi Pheasant 2000b Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo G B, S, D, R, Hickman 1998, F Ware and Hickman 1999, Morgan et al. 2000 Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis E M, D Bettinger and Milner 2000 Upland Sandpiper Bartramia E X, S Smith et al. longicauda 1997, WDFW 2000b Long-billed Numenius N B, S Smith et al. Curlew americanus 1997 Phalaropes, avocets, and stilts: The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Priority Habitat and Species Program identifies breeding areas for phalaropes, avocets, and stilts as a priority. Wilson’s Phalaropus tricolor N B, W Smith et al. Phalarope 1997 American Avocet Recurvirostra N B, W Smith et al. Americana 1997 Black-necked Himantopus N B, W Smith et al. Stilt mexicanus 1997 Yellow-billed Cuccyzus C, SC X, R, F Smith et al. Cuckoo americanus 1997, WDFW 2000b Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca M WDFW 2000b Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia C, SC B, S Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Lewis’ Melanerpes lewis C Y, R, S Smith et al. Woodpecker 1997, WDFW 2000b

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 20 Common Name Scientific Name Status1 Behavior2 References Olive-sided Contopus borealis SC B, R Smith et al. Flycatcher 1997, WDFW 2000b Willow Empidonax traillii SC B, R Smith et al. Flycatcher 1997, WDFW 2000b Sage Thrasher Oreoscoptes C B, S Smith et al. montanus 1997, WDFW 2000b Loggerhead Lanius ludovicianus C, SC B, S Smith et al. Shrike 1997, WDFW 2000b Sage Sparrow Amphispiza belli C B, S Smith et al. 1997, WDFW 2000b Brewer’s Sparrow Spizella breweri B, S Smith et al. 1997 Grasshopper Ammodramus B, S Smith et al. Sparrow savannarum 1997 Reptiles: Reptiles are addressed in general by the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program (Larsen 1997, WDFW 2000b). Sagebrush Lizard Sceloporus SC Y, S WDFW 2000b graciosus Pygmy horned Phrynosoma Y, S WDFW 2000b Lizard douglassi Striped Masticophis C Y, S Nordstrom and Whipsnake taeniatus Whalen 1997 Ringneck Snake Diadophis punctatus C S WDFW 2000b Western Crotalus veridus Y, S, C WDFW 2000b Rattlesnake Night Snake Hypsiglena torquata Y, S, C WDFW 2000b Amphibians: Amphibians are addressed in general by the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program (Larsen 1997, WDFW 2000b). Columbia Spotted Rana luteiventris C, SC Y, W, R Nordstrom and Frog Milner 1997 Northern Leopard Rana pipiens E Y, W, R Nordstrom Frog 1997 Western Toad Bufo boreas C, SC Y, W, R WDFW 2000b Invertebrates: Invertebrates are addressed in general by the WDFW’s Priority Habitat and Species Program (Larsen et al. 1995, WDFW 2000b). Yuma Skipper Ochlodes yuma C W, R Larsen et al. 1995 Silver-bordered Boloria selene C R Larsen et al. Bog Fritillary atrocostalis 1995

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 21 1Status: C = State candidate; T = State threatened; E = State endangered; S = State sensitive; G = Game animal subject to harvest regulations; SC = Federal species of concern; FC = Federal candidate; FT = Federal threatened; and FE = Federal endangered; N=no special status 2Behavior and habitat designations: B = Breeding; M = Migratory and/or winter; Y = yearlong resident; X = Extinct in area; S = Shrub steppe; W = Open water; R = Riparian and wetland; C = Cliffs; U = urban; I = Irrigated cropland; D = Nonirrigated cropland; F = forest; and G = General use of most or all habitats. 3Take of prairie falcons for recreational purposes (falconry) is by state and federal permits 4Take of gyrfalcons for recreational purposes is restricted by state permit to 5 per year; most are taken from the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Birds

Shrubsteppe Obligates The vast majority of the Crab Creek Subbasin historically consisted of shrubsteppe (Daubenmire 1970). Many of the species of interest (Table 2) are those that require shrubsteppe habitat for all, or a substantial portion, of their annual life cycle. Many of these species have been adversely impacted by habitat conversion to alternate uses, such as irrigated and dry land agriculture, water impoundments associated with dams, and urban/residential development. Changes in the landscape related to habitat conversion that have affected shrubsteppe wildlife include: fragmentation of extant shrubsteppe habitat, differential loss of deep-soil communities, and alteration of the vegetation community resulting from grazing by livestock, invasion by exotic plants, and increased fire frequencies (Vander Haegen et al. 2001).

Sage Grouse Sage grouse were historically found in shrubsteppe habitats throughout eastern Washington. The current population in Washington is estimated to be around 1000, with about 700 of the birds residing in a contiguous subpopulation in Douglas and Grant counties; almost entirely within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3)(Schroeder et al. 2000b). An additional subpopulation of 300 birds is found in Yakima and Kittitas counties, approximately 50 km from the Crab Creek population. The 2 populations are largely separated by the Columbia Basin Project in western Grant County. Their populations are continuing to decline in Washington due to long-term effects of habitat conversion, degradation, fragmentation, and population isolation (Hays et al. 1998a, Schroeder et al. 2000b). Sage grouse in Washington declined 77% between 1960 and 1999 (Schroeder et al. 2000b).

Sharp-tailed Grouse Sharp-tailed grouse were historically found in shrubsteppe and deciduous shrub communities throughout eastern Washington. The current population in Washington is estimated to be 600, with about one third of the birds residing in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3)(Schroeder et al. 2000a). Sharp-tailed grouse populations in Washington declined 94% between 1960 and 2000. The remaining birds are found in eight relatively small, isolated, subpopulations; one

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 22 subpopulation is found entirely within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Lincoln County), and two other subpopulations are on the edge of the subbasin (NW and NE Douglas County). Subpopulations are separated from adjacent subpopulations by at least 20 km. Sharp-tailed grouse are continuing to decline in Washington due to long-term effects of habitat conversion, degradation, fragmentation, and population isolation (Hays et al. 1998b, Schroeder et al. 2000a).

Ferruginous Hawk Ferruginous hawks were historically found in shrubsteppe habitat throughout the Crab Creek Subbasin. Data from 1995 – 1997 indicate that < 30% of at least 222 historic breeding territories were occupied, mostly along Moses Coulee and Crab Creek (Figure 3)(WDFW 1996; WDFW, unpubl. data). The regional decline in abundance of ferruginous hawks has been tied to shrubsteppe habitat alteration associated with cultivation and grazing, and with subsequent declines in abundance of prey species. Historic information suggests black-tailed jackrabbits, white-tailed jackrabbits, and Washington ground squirrels were important prey for nesting ferruginous hawks in Washington (Watson and Pierce 2000). All three species of mammals currently are candidates for listing within Washington due to their low and/or declining abundance; the Washington ground squirrel is also a candidate for federal listing (Table 1). Research on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation confirmed that adult ferruginous hawks were flying up to 15 km off site to forage for pocket gophers, a small alternate prey species (Leary 1996). These long flights to foraging areas may reduce adult nest attendance and potentially may increase mortality of young.

Golden Eagles Golden eagles are prominent raptors in shrubsteppe habitats throughout Washington. Data collected since 1987 suggests that < 50% of 200 historic golden eagle territories in Washington are currently occupied (WDFW, unpubl. data). Thirteen golden eagle territories have been documented in the Crab Creek Subbasin, primarily north of Quincy (Figure 3)

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 23 Figure 3. Priority Species

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 24 Reasons for low site occupancy in the subbasin may be related to low prey abundance in shrubsteppe habitats near nest sites. Principal prey, such as black- tailed jackrabbits, white-tailed jackrabbits, and Washington ground squirrels, have declined dramatically, largely as a result of conversion and degradation of shrubsteppe habitat. A further concern may be toxic lead poisoning, possibly associated with pesticide residues in orchards along the Columbia River (W. Yake, WDOE, pers. comm.) or with lead shot or bullets in the carcasses of prey (E. Stauber, Washington State University, pers. comm.; T. Talcott, University of Idaho, pers. comm.).

Other Shrubsteppe Obligates Sage thrasher, loggerhead shrike, sage sparrow, and Brewer’s sparrow are neotropical migrants that appear to be closely associated with shrubsteppe habitat (Vander Haegen et al. 2000). Populations of most shrubsteppe-associated songbirds appear to be declining (Saab and Rich 1997). Fragmentation and degradation of shrubsteppe adversely affect some species, although relatively few have been studied. Sage sparrows are less abundant (Vander Haegen et al. 2000) and Brewer’s sparrows and sage thrashers are less productive (WDFW, unpubl. data) in fragmented landscapes. In addition, Brewer’s sparrows and sage thrashers are less abundant in shrubsteppe habitats of relatively poor quality (Vander Haegen et al. 2000). Habitat-specific population parameters, including productivity, dispersal, and adult and juvenile survival are unknown for most of these species. Numerous species, including sage sparrows and grasshopper sparrows, are not monitored adequately by the Breeding Bird Survey and will require specialized monitoring to detect and monitor population changes (Saab and Rich 1997).

Colonial Nesting Birds American white pelicans, Caspian terns, black-crowned night herons, double crested cormorants, common Egrets and great blue herons are known to nest in relatively clustered and identifiable locations, typically referred to as colonies (Smith et al. 1997, Doran et al. 2000, Quinn and Milner 2000). Because of the identifiable, and potential limiting nature of colonial habitats (Figure 3), their protection is an important consideration in management. For example, black- crowned night herons, great blue herons, common egrets, and double crested cormorants, use specific riparian habitats in the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project for nesting. In contrast, Caspian terns tend to nest on specific islands that have resulted from the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, i.e. Potholes Reservoir. Some of these colonial nesters feed on young salmonids in the Columbia River. Their foraging habits and impacts on anadromous fish may be enormous.

Burrowing Owl Burrowing owls appear to be associated with open habitats, particularly shrubsteppe, in Washington. Although these sites are often relatively disturbed, burrowing owls appear to be declining in the subbasin, based on incidental

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 25 observations and recent inventories (Bartels and Tabor 1999). Some of the declines appear to be related to long-term loss in availability of potential burrows. The decline in number of burrows may be an indirect result of declines of mammals including pygmy rabbits, badgers, and ground squirrels whose deserted burrows are readily used by burrowing owls. In some parts of the subbasin, however, burrowing owls have declined at locations where burrows were available. The explanation for these declines is not clear.

Upland Game Birds Ring-necked pheasant, an introduced species, is the most popular game animal in the subbasin. Although pheasant numbers increased dramatically as a result of the Columbia Basin Project and establishment of irrigated farming in the subbasin, they have declined dramatically in the last 20 years (WDFW 2000a). The specific causes of the decline in recent years have not been accurately identified but are suspected to be related to changing agricultural practices and loss of winter habitat. The other upland game birds (chukar, gray partridge, California quail, wild turkey) have been influenced both negatively and positively by changes in the Subbasin, depending on the species, habitat, and location.

Waterfowl Waterfowl are seasonally abundant in the Crab Creek Subbasin. The semiarid climate and irregular precipitation patterns support highly productive ephemeral and semi-permanent wetlands, particularly in Lincoln and Douglas counties. During years with adequate precipitation, these wetlands support the most productive and diverse waterfowl breeding communities in the Pacific Northwest. Grasslands and shrubsteppe habitats surrounding these wetlands provide habitat for upland nesting ducks The Columbia Basin Irrigation Project has created numerous wetlands that are more persistent but less productive for breeding waterfowl as a result of wetland succession and invasion by exotic, undesirable vegetation. The cereal grains, corn, and other crops that are grown in this Subbasin, in concert with large reservoirs, wetlands, canals, and wasteways provide ideal conditions for migrating and wintering waterfowl. In general, the Columbia Basin Project has provided major benefits for waterfowl and waterfowl- related recreation.

Other Birds Common loons, Wilson’s phalaropes, American avocets, and black-necked stilts are associated with open water and/or the shallower portions of large bodies of open water. Although populations of these species appear to be declining throughout their broader ranges, there is little evidence that their respective declines are due to declining habitat quantity and quality within the Crab Creek Subbasin. Bald eagles also utilize the open water areas of the Crab Creek Subbasin, primarily for winter habitat and foraging. Although little recent nesting by bald eagles has been recorded in this subbasin, historic nesting was common. Maintaining high quality habitat for prey species, (fish and waterfowl), potential

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 26 nesting sites, and winter roost sites is critical to encourage and perpetuate eagle use of the area.

Numerous species such as the olive-sided flycatcher and willow flycatcher are associated with riparian areas during the breeding season. In contrast, sharp- tailed grouse (a shrubsteppe obligate) may use riparian areas during periods of harsh winter weather. Because of the small size, poor condition, and isolated nature of much of the riparian habitat in the Crab Creek Subbasin, this habitat type is critical in its overall importance.

Mammals

Shrubsteppe Obligates

Washington Ground Squirrel Washington ground squirrels are endemic to Washington and Oregon (Betts 1990), and have declined dramatically in both states (Betts 1999). They are associated with relatively deep soils within shrubsteppe communities (Dobler et al. 1996, Betts 1990, 1999). Because deep soil habitats were preferred areas for conversion, most are now used for irrigated and dryland agriculture. The widespread loss and fragmentation of shrubsteppe has resulted in dramatic declines in the statewide population of Washington ground squirrels (Dobler et al. 1996). Most of the known populations of ground squirrels are within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3). The remaining populations appear to be at risk of extinction due to their isolation and the continued risk of habitat conversion, fragmentation, and degradation. Recent research in Grant County may reveal additional information on the species (Sherman 1999, 2000).

Pygmy Rabbit Pygmy rabbit populations are associated with relatively deep soils dominated by shrubsteppe habitat (WDFW 1995c). However because the deep soil habitats were preferred areas for conversion, most are now used for irrigated and dryland crops. The widespread loss and fragmentation of shrubsteppe has resulted in dramatic declines in the statewide population of pygmy rabbits (Musser and McCall 2000). There are only three small and isolated populations of pygmy rabbits remaining in the state, all within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3). Lack of genetic diversity in the remaining populations of pygmy rabbits may also be contributing to their decline (K. Warheit, WDFW, pers. comm.).

White-tailed Jackrabbits and Black-tailed Jackrabbits White-tailed jackrabbits and black-tailed of jackrabbits are closely associated with shrubsteppe habitats, and consequently, their populations have shown the same downward trends as other shrubsteppe obligates. White-tailed jackrabbits tend to be closely associated with the more mesic shrubsteppe habitats, and black-tailed

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 27 jackrabbits with the relatively arid and/or disturbed sites. Although population figures are not available, the long-term declines appear to be dramatic.

Other Shrubsteppe Obligates Other species including the sagebrush vole are largely restricted to shrubsteppe habitat and populations appear to be declining. Unfortunately the population, behavior, and habitat information is insufficient to understand the long-term relationships between populations and declining quality and quantity of shrubsteppe.

Mule Deer and White-tailed Deer Mule deer and white-tailed deer occur primarily in shrubsteppe habitat in the subbasin but also use other habitats including cereal crops if the cropland is near shrubsteppe. Both species are important game species in the subbasin although whitetails are not as widely distributed as mule deer. Neither species appears to have declined in recent years, but both species have been impacted by the changing landscape in the Columbia Province in general, and the Crab Creek Subbasin in particular. This has occurred because of the loss of winter habitat at lower elevations (due to water impoundments associated with dams, irrigated agriculture, and development) and the fact that winter habitat within higher elevations of the Crab Creek Subbasin has declined in both quantity and quality.

Irrigation canals in the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project are problematic for mule deer. These large (approx. 20 ft deep x 100 ft wide) concrete lined and steeply banked canals trap and kill many deer and occasionally moose and elk when stray into the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project within the subbasin. The total number of deer lost in the main canals is estimated at 200-300 per year in the Grant County portion of the subbasin.

Raccoon, coyote, bobcat, badger, mink, muskrat, beaver, and river otter are the primary furbearers in the Crab Creek Subbasin. All but the coyote and muskrat are significantly lower in abundance than they were historically. In general, the declines appear to be related to an overall decline in habitat quality with an associated decline in food and/or prey abundance (J. Tabor, WDFW, pers. comm.)

Bats The Crab Creek Subbasin is an important area in the state for bats because of their abundance and diversity and because of the presence of unique and/or limiting habitat features. For example, although water is the most limiting factor in the distribution of bats in arid areas, it is available adjacent to roosting, breeding, and wintering (hibernacula) sites in this subbasin. Cliffs, mines, caves, and buildings provide the structures needed to form breeding colonies and hibernacula for most species. Although some species are flexible in their use of these structural features, other species require specific elevations, aspects, and temperature ranges. Spotted Bats appear to be exclusive cliff dwellers during the young- rearing period. The Crab Creek Subbasin probably represents a significant core

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 28 of Washington’s Spotted Bat distribution. Buildings provide a significant source of roosting habitat in areas where water occurs but no suitable geological roost features exist. Townsend’s Big-eared bats are found almost exclusively roosting in buildings in cave-deficient areas. Risks to bats in the Crab Creek Subbasin include loss or degradation of roosting and feeding habitat (mine closure, shrub removal), loss of available clean water, and disturbance of roost, breeding, and hibernation sites.

Reptiles and Amphibians

Shrubsteppe obligates Eight reptile and two amphibian species in Washington State are Columbia Basin dependent, i.e., their ranges in Washington are contained mostly or entirely within the Columbia Basin. Of these 10 species, the short-horned lizard (Phyrnosoma douglassi), sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciosus), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), night snake (Hypsiglena torquata), striped whipsnake (Masticophis taeniatus), California mountain kingsnake (Lampropeltis zonata), and blotched tiger salamander (Ambystoma mavortium melanostictum [formerly A. tigrinum melanostictum) are considered at risk (Cassidy et al. 1997). Two species, the California mountain kingsnake and striped whipsnake are also listed as State Candidate species. Three cryptozoic reptiles, the ring-necked snake (Diadophis punctatus), the sharp-tailed snake (Contia tenuis), and the southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata) reach the northwest limits of their respective distributions in the western margin of the Columbia basin, and are likely to be particularly vulnerable at the edge of their range. Both the blotched tiger salamander the Great Basin spadefoot (Spea intermontana), may be especially vulnerable to the hydrological modification of their habitat.

Other Reptiles and Amphibians The northern leopard frog has declined dramatically throughout its historic range; the Crab Creek Subbasin is one of the few regions where they remain. The historic distribution was principally along wetlands of the Columbia River and its tributaries (McAllister et al. 1999). Surveys since 1992 have located leopard frogs in 2 of 18 historic locations in Washington, both within the Crab Creek Subbasin. Loss of wetland habitat along the Columbia River and its tributaries, competition and predation by non-native fish, and introduced bullfrogs (Rana catesbiana) appear to be significant factors in the decline of northern leopard frogs. Current populations also appear to be influenced by fluctuations in water levels within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. The Snake River may have provided an aquatic corridor to historically abundant leopard frog populations in Idaho and Montana (McAllister et al. 1999). Alteration of the major rivers and tributaries appears to be a major cause of the current population problems with the northern leopard frog.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 29 Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) is distributed within the Crab Creek subbasin in portions of Lincoln County (ie. Coal Creek, Wilson Creek, mainstem Crab Creek @ Rocky Forde). Basically the channeled scabland flood coulees with perennial water sources. Columbia Spotted Frog appears to be declining for the same reason most reptiles and amphibians are declining in the Columbia Basin, habitat loss and fragmentation.

Habitat Areas and Quality

Fish General descriptions of the subbasin habitat setting can be found in the succeeding section on wildlife habitat. This section deals with the major watercourses and lakes and is presented by watershed. Much of the flowages have not been well surveyed for habitat as most courses lie on private ground. Therefore we are limited in knowledge on the amount and quality of habitat, and lack up-to-date precision on fish assemblages within the various watercourses, particularly in areas outside the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. The following describes what is currently known for each of the significant drainages within the sub-basin. However, the reader should be aware this information is not based on an exhaustive search of historic literature.

Moses Coulee Watershed The coulee heads in wheat fields north of Grimes Lake in Douglas County and meanders southerly through Sagebrush Flat on the Douglas/Grant County line, and continuing on to join the Columbia River about 18 river km south of Rock Island Dam.

Grimes Lake is the uppermost point of permanent water in Moses Coulee. It receives water from snowmelt feed via several small drainages. The lake occasionally fills to overflow into Jameson Lake, 3.6 km south. Grimes Lake, with relatively high alkalinity, did not support fish life until 1981, when alkaline tolerant Lahontan cutthroat trout were introduced by WDFW. The lake is now stocked each fall with about 5000 fingerling cutthroat and supports a fine fishery for trout up to about 3.6 kg, averaging 1.6 kg.

Jameson Lake has somewhat lower alkalinity and has long been a popular lake for stocked rainbow trout. Annual spring releases of 175,000 - 200,000 fry sustain a fishery that draws anglers from all over Washington State. The lake has been rehabilitated once (1980) with the fish toxicant rotenone to remove redside shiners (WDFW files). Shiners were illegally released into Jameson in the early 1970s (K. Williams, retired WDFW biologist, pers. comm.). An excellent trout fishery existed in Jameson until the mid-1970s, at which time the shiner population swelled to huge numbers and consumed most of the lake’s invertebrate food base. Shiners have not been observed since 1980 and the recreational fishery continues at its former excellence.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 30 Jameson has increased greatly in size (more than doubled) since first surveyed by U.S. Army explorers in the mid-1800s (J. Wittig, landowner, pers. comm.). Within the past 15 years water levels have risen several feet and the lake twice has filled to overflowing, a condition unknown to early homesteaders and present- day residents alike. The last flood (1995) was an amazing event in that a late- January thaw brought snowmelt onto the frozen lake, flooding one resort, inundating access to a second, and flooding the basement of one residence located well above historic high water marks. So much water flowed from Jameson that a low rise of gravel and loess beyond the south end of the lake was breached and water cascaded down the coulee, eventually ending at the springs of McCarteney Creek, a distance of about 21 km down the coulee. An ancient flowage channel winds through upper Moses Coulee that speaks to other deluges—either rapid early-spring snowmelt, or thunderstorms that rake across local areas of the upper coulee.

But such events—connection with McCarteney Creek—are obviously rare. Indeed, surface flows starting anywhere in the upper Moses Coulee are very uncommon, and when runoff does enter the coulee, it seldom travels but a short time before disappearing into porous, rocky soils on the coulee floor. Permanent flows within upper Moses Coulee are not found until just north of Rim Rock Meadows. Here, McCarteney Creek issues, from springs, a small but steady stream of cool, clear water, flowing approximately 6.5 Km, all of it on private land. Despite past use of the area for cattle grazing, the stream banks still sprout some fair to good riparian cover. Rainbow trout are found here, likely from private stockings, but have been known since at least 1968 (WDFW file data). Other species may be present, but thorough fish surveys have not been done. There has been one unconfirmed report of sunfish (species unknown) in a diked section of the creek just prior to where it falls into the Palisades part of Moses Coulee (lower Moses Coulee). McCarteney disappears after spilling onto the rubble of Moses Coulee’s floor, a point at which upstream fish passage would be impossible, even if floods carrying water from McCarteney Creek ever made it to the Columbia.

The largest stream in the Moses Coulee watershed is Douglas Creek, with fish life restricted to rainbow trout in Douglas Canyon, and rainbow trout and suckers in the Palisades section. Rearing chinook salmon have been found near the mouth (RM 0 – 0.1) (WDFW file data) when flows are sufficient to connect with the Columbia River. The creek originates in dryland wheat country just north of the town of Douglas. The watershed covers approximately 533 sq. km (206 sq. mi.) (So. Douglas Cons. District, circa 1987). Flow is southeasterly, and most years intermittently, into the rugged, steep canyon of Douglas Creek. Even though flow volume near the town of Douglas and the Alstown siding is meager at best during most of the year, a trout persist in desiccated pools and shallow ponds through the dry months (B. Steele, WDFW biologist, pers. comm.). Once into the picturesque canyon, contributions from Duffy Creek, several small springs, and groundwater accretion contribute to a good, permanent flow year around.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 31 Trout do well in the canyon reach, and thrive solely by natural reproduction. Stream surveys document an abundance of trout represented in several age classes (Jackson and Jackson 1994). WDFW records show a long history of stocking from as early as 1933 until 1969, often with extremely high numbers. One year in particular (1943), 105,000 rainbow trout fry were released into Douglas Creek. Along with rainbows, eastern brook trout were planted heavily during much of the 1930s, but did not persist. The tributary Duffy Creek was also stocked with brooks and rainbows during five years between 1940 and 1954. No recent surveys have been done, but rainbow trout were present in Duffy Creek during an electrofishing reconnaissance in June 1987 (WDFW file data). Records do not show any further trout releases since 1969. Retired WDFW biologist L. Wadkins stated that Douglas County, in the early 1900s, operated a small fish hatchery on a spring (probably McCue Spring) draining into Douglas Creek. County records have not been checked to verify this.

In any case, the rainbows of Douglas Creek are an isolated population with extraordinary tenacity and resilience. They flourish in a hostile environment of high summer water temperatures; low flows, both summer and winter; normal annual spring runoffs that bring a heavy soil load from dryland tillage on the Waterville Plateau; infrequent, but torrential, scouring floods that flush hundreds of trout into Moses Coulee to await death as floods recede; floods that flatten cottonwood trees, rip out great chunks of streamside willows, and gouge tons of soils from what appeared to be stable banks. The fish have also weathered through a long and liberal harvest fishery, and, until recent years, an unscreened irrigation intake that claimed untold numbers of trout each year. The transition of Douglas Creek into Moses Coulee permits only downstream passage.

In most years surface flow seldom reaches much beyond the settlement of Palisades. But there are frequent exceptions as the following illustrates. While these figures show periodic high flows, they do not depict what is necessary to achieve connection with the Columbia River. Elmore and Oakley (1974) report peak discharges during the highest floods at the U.S.G.S gauging station near Alstown at 6,420 cfs on June 10, 1948 (based on floodmarks and slope-area measurements); 3,360 cfs on March 18, 1957; and 1,350 cfs on June 15, 1950. Maximum flows for four other years ranged from 214 cfs (March 25, 1952) to 678 cfs (January 29, 1967). In more recent years a devastating flood occurred in early March 1989, causing severe destruction of riparian growth and extensive channel damage. Surprisingly, streamside vegetation rebounded quite rapidly. Major flooding occurred again in late January 1995, but with less devastating consequences, this partly a result of incomplete recovery from the 1989 flood.

Minimum stream flows generally take place a short time after the last spring freshet. During summer and fall months of some years flows at Alstown cease altogether (Elmore and Oakley 1974). At the mouth of Douglas Canyon, minimum flows generally occur in December and January at around 6 – 7 cfs,

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 32 followed closely by those of the summer months July – September. Irrigation diversion near here removes 50 percent or more of the creek’s discharge into Moses Coulee.

In years of normal snow pack and elevated groundwater storage, Douglas Creek may flow on through Moses Coulee to the Columbia River. Such flows may, but rarely do, continue throughout the year. Usually, spring freshets provide connection for only a brief few weeks with the Columbia. If the timing of runoff is right and of sufficient magnitude, young salmon and steelhead may wander into Douglas Creek for a short distance from the Columbia, as was observed in February 1986 (WDFW file data).

Summary assessment: All told, Douglas Creek offers almost nothing for anadromous salmonids, nor can conditions be improved. There is little that can be done to improve flows for resident fish in Douglas Creek Canyon, short of converting all uplands back to shrub steppe. Reclamation with native plants over a large area of the drainage would reduce the severity of some rapid runoffs, but storms and flash floods will continue to raise havoc in the watershed. Any improvement in slowing runoff would improve trout populations in Douglas Creek Canyon, but nowhere else. The only practical enhancements would be to work with landowners in vicinity of the town of Douglas and throughout the drainage basin to use farming practices that lessen erosion, and to reestablish trees, shrubs and protective grasses in draws and swales feeding into Douglas Creek Canyon.

Trinidad Creek: Draining Lynch Coulee, this small creek empties into the Columbia River at the upper end of Crescent Bar, approximately 9.6 km due west of Quincy, Washington. It is mentioned here only to note that juvenile rainbow (or steelhead?) rearing has been observed in the lower few hundred yards of the creek (J. Foster, WDFW, pers. observ.). The drainage extends some 22 km northeasterly, draining entirely wheat farms and rangeland. A significant amount of farmland in this drainage has been converted to the Conservation Reserve Program. Except for subsurface infusion of irrigation wastewater out of Babcock Ridge and Crater lakes some 1.6 km above the mouth, the drainage is strictly a snowmelt or storm water discharge vessel, with perennial flow existing but a short distance above its mouth.

During late summer, flow in the creek is so reduced that it is doubtful that the creek attracts spawning chinook. And there is virtually no riparian vegetation in the drainage owing to xeric conditions, and possibly to some lesser extent, decades of cattle grazing.

Summary assessment: Nothing can be improved upon.

Sand Hollow Creek: This “creek” discharges excess irrigation water to the Columbia River about 1.6 km south of the Highway I-90 Bridge at Vantage,

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 33 Wash. The flow is appreciable and year around, but its permanence exists as a consequence of irrigation development on lands of the Royal Slope area of Grant County. Prior to irrigated farming, the natural drainage contained water only during periods of snowmelt or random thunderstorm events. Indeed, except for the lower 4 km or so, the creek is nothing more than a channeled drain ditch. It crosses via culverts under Highway 26 at stream km 1.6, the approximate boundary of upstream fish passage. Adult steelhead have been caught by anglers below the highway crossing. Sockeye have been collected there on one occasion, and spawning chinook are an annual fall spectacle in this shallow, roadside stream. The channel banks are sometimes littered with carcasses in late October (J. Foster, WDFW, pers. observ.). The success of smolt production in this stream has not been determined.

Summary assessment: The drain channel above Highway 26 should be examined for potential anadromous production over its length. If such surveys show favorable cost/benefits, then removal of passage barriers is in order, provided smolt production can be demonstrated in the downstream reach.

Crab Creek Watershed: Sometimes referred to as the longest ephemeral stream in North America, Crab Creek defies simple description. Some 225 km in length, it drains a vast area of some 13,200 square kilometers. The creek winds through scabrock channels for most of its length, channels believed carved by floods of ancient Lake Missoula. For ease of discussion, we separate the creek into to three reaches in the following: (1) Upper Crab Creek—from its source near Reardon, Washington downstream to Brook (Stratford) Lake; (2) Middle Crab Creek— from Brook Lake to, and including, Potholes Reservoir; (3) Lower Crab Creek— from below Potholes Reservoir to the Columbia River.

Upper Crab Creek was historically, and remains to present-day, a disappearing stream---reaches of permanent flow interspersed with miles of dry creek beds, or at best, isolated, stagnant pools during most of the year. Several tributaries (e.g., Wilson, Duck and Coal creeks) exhibit the same hydrologic patterns. Whether modern land use has changed flow volume and the lengths of permanent reaches is unknown, yet as discussed earlier, the ground water table has dropped some 45 m (150 ft.) over the past few decades. Over a century of livestock use within the upper watershed have likely changed the amount and character of riparian vegetation somewhat, but has not obliterated it entirely. Tillage of the uplands for wheat production has undeniably increased soil erosion and contributed to heavy silt transport during snowmelt and rainwater runoff. Yet in spite of this perturbation, permanent reaches in general lack heavy deposits of silt and run cool enough in summer, at least near springs, to hold rainbow trout. Perhaps the greatest impact on salmonids are carp. These are established at least as far upstream as 2.4 km west of Odessa.

Portions of creek between Odessa and Brook Lake have been channeled and diked to reduce spring flooding of farm crops in the coulee floor. Numerous springs

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 34 occur throughout the upper basin. One rather large drainage--Lake Creek, with its numerous lakes and recreational trout population--feeds southwest to within a few miles of Crab Creek before disappearing into the ground. There is likely subterranean contact with the Crab channel.

Summary assessment: Water quality could be enhanced in the Upper Crab Creek basin from a practical standpoint. Removal of dikes in channeled reaches could lessen soil transport to, and deposition in, Middle Crab Creek (especially Moses Lake) by allowing diffusion of flows (velocity reduction) over the valley bottom. Improved soil conservation practices on croplands throughout the upper basin could further benefit downstream areas, as well as permanent flows in the upper watershed.

Middle Crab Creek is the most heavily populated reach within the Crab Creek subbasin, with Moses Lake as the main human population center. It is this reach that bears the brunt of winter and spring runoff that carry agricultural chemicals and eroded soils from Upper Crab, although Brook Lake intercepts Crab flows and acts as a sump for much of the silt and chemicals.

Historical information indicates that long before irrigation development perennial connection between Crab Creek at Brook and/or Round lakes and Moses Lake did not occur (Evermann and Nichols 1909). Groves (1951) states that only two tributaries fed Moses Lake: Rocky Ford Creek, and a small tributary emanating from two points above Parker Horn (probably in the Willow Lakes area and at Homestead Creek). Only during high water conditions did Upper Crab thread its way through the present Willow Lakes area and on to Moses Lake at Parker Horn. Today, several springs join the Crab Creek channel in this reach, a result of elevated groundwater from irrigation development. The springs creating the seven miles of Rocky Ford Creek are widely accepted now as connected by underground flows to Crab Creek in the vicinity of Round and Willow lakes (Bain 1990).

Groves (1951) also mentions that an Indian legend held that Moses Lake was once dry. The concept has plausibility given that shifting sand created large dunes on the south end of the lake, effectively damming the outlet. A disastrous flood in 1904 washed through the dune and lowered the lake eight feet. Groves (1951) leaves a telling note: “Soon after the great flood of 1904 when the Moses Lake overflow reached the Columbia River, carp were noticed.” The deduction then is that Crab Creek did not reach the Columbia River except during flood events. At least temporary connections with the Columbia undoubtedly occurred off and on prior to 1904, as Northern pikeminnow, a species indigenous to the Columbia River, was one of the original inhabitants of Moses. Carp were first introduced to the Northwest in 1880, and escaped into the Columbia in 1881 (Lampman 1946).

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 35 Water quality has been touched on earlier in this document. More detail for this reach can be found in Williamson, et al. (1998). Several waters are on the federal Clean Water Act “303 (d) list” as not meeting water quality standards. With one exception, listed waters fail to meet standards for one or more of the parameters temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen (Weaver 1999). Dieldrin has been found in edible fish tissue (largemouth bass and lake whitefish) in Potholes Reservoir. Moses Lake has come of interest to the Washington Department of Ecology in the last 15 years because of high levels of nutrients (primarily nitrates and phosphates). On-farm demonstration projects sought to lower nutrient discharge to Moses Lake (Bain 1990). While effective, the methods have not been widely employed. Flushing the lake with fresh water directly out of canals has had some benefits, where water is poured into Rocky Coulee Wasteway, which drains into Crab Creek a short ways above Parker Horn.

Summary assessment: The middle reach of Crab Creek suffers from muddy water during spring through summer from several causes: flood-born silt from eroded soils in the upper watershed; carp that stir up mud in shallow areas of lakes and streams; and irrigation return water bearing silt and fertilizers from croplands. The repository for these flows is Moses Lake. Most of this cannot be helped. Temperature and dissolved oxygen, while unsatisfactory at times and contributing to small, localized losses of fish during summer, do not presently have major negative impacts on fish life within either Middle Crab Creek or Moses Lake. Further increases in nutrient loading may at some point, however, have detrimental effects on existing fisheries.

Lower Crab Creek (from below O’Sullivan Dam on Potholes Reservoir to the Columbia River): This is the only reach supporting anadromy. Fall chinook and steelhead have been found upstream as far as, and into, Red Rock Creek. Chinook in significant numbers spawn near the mouth of Crab, and do so in Rock Creek. It is presumed that steelhead also spawn in Red Rock , and may be the progeny of steelhead smolt releases made several decades ago (WDFW file data). Adults have long been known to move into the stream in spring, and occasionally steelhead have been caught by anglers near the mouth of Red Rock and in the over the years (M. Spence, retired WDFW biologist). That steelhead show some affinity to the creek hints that reproduction may be successful, at best in the cooler and cleaner waters of Red Rock. The converse is that these adults are pioneers from another run. This seems most probable, considering the long freshwater life of juvenile steelhead. Requiring two or more years of rearing in freshwater before heading seaward, young steelhead would, in Lower Crab Creek probably succumb to temperatures that approach the high 80s from late spring to late summer. Fall chinook are better adapted to such places with their fall spawning habit (during cool temps) and the departure of age-0 young prior to deadly summer heat. The small rainbow trout of Red Rock are of undefined origin. Are they resident rainbows with origins in long-since discontinued hatchery stockings in Red Rock Lake? Or are they young steelhead? The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is completing a report on two years of inventory on

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 36 anadromous fish in the Columbia Basin Project. This will be the most thorough work to date on presence, distribution, spawning sites and habitat use and may shed more light on steelhead origins and use within the drainage.

The extent of anadromous passage upstream is uncertain. A falls just downstream of McManamon Road is probably a formidable barrier. Private land below the road has not been assessed for passage barriers.

From O’Sullivan Dam where several springs join into the renewal of Crab Creek, WDFW for many years stocked fingerling rainbow and brown trout in the stream, and as well the many nearby lakes whose outlets contribute to Crab Creek flow. The section down to McManamon Road produced fat and large trout, some well over 2.3 kg. This fishery was maintained for several years with periodic rotenone treatments to control carp and other competitor species. Unable to prevent the return of carp, and a change in management emphasis by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Columbia National Wildlife Refuge) on key parts of the area, led WDFW abandoning efforts to maintain this fishery. Below the falls near McManamon Road, there is little opportunity to develop a notable fishery for any species. Too much of the fish biomass is comprised of sunfish, carp, sculpins and several other species to allow even a modest warmwater fishery.

The stream passes through an area dotted with scores of small lakes and marshes. Nearly all contain fish. Many are managed solely for warmwater species, primarily largemouth bass, bluegill, crappie. Several lakes support a large mix of warmwater fishes, in addition to the species listed above: smallmouth bass, yellow perch, walleye, pumpkinseed sunfish, bullhead and channel catfish, and may also contain carp. These latter lakes generally yield low catch rates to anglers and offer sporadic success. Very popular trout fisheries exist in many other lakes. The management aim here is to keep these lakes free of non- salmonid species to maintain high yield to anglers. Lakes that have gained high notoriety over years include the ten-lake Pillar-Widgeon group, Hampton Lakes, Hutchinson and Shiner Lakes. All of the above lie on the Columbia National Wildlife Refuge. Elsewhere, anglers favor the Warden Lakes, Corral, Canal, Heart and the Windmill group of lakes. The darlings of Washington’s fly anglers are Lenice, Merry and Nunnally near the mouth of Crab Creek. This Lower Crab Creek reach of the subbasin has a long history as a destination fishery, providing lowland lakes fisheries equal to the best that Washington has to offer. Almost 75 percent of the anglers using this area reside outside the Crab Creek drainage, with over 60 percent originating in Western Washington.

Water quality and habitat of the stream itself is poor throughout and contaminants include PCBs and dieldrin (Weaver 1999). Temperatures reach lethal levels for salmonids in the lower end. Soil laden irrigation return flows, the activities of carp, and occasional flooding disallow good water clarity during warm months and have left much of the streambed buried in muck, mostly that downstream of Highway 26. Much of the Lower Crab reach from below Highway 26 and west to

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 37 its juncture with Red Rock Creek is contained within dikes to protect adjacent croplands. Cattle operations over past 100 years and poor tillage practices have directly and indirectly stripped channel banks of riparian cover.

Summary assessment: Irrespective of these perturbations, Lower Crab Creek flows in quantities far above historic levels (pre-irrigation development), and it flows year around. This alone makes the lower reach better habitat for fish and wildlife than it ever was during pre-settlement. Water temperatures are elevated to extreme levels in summer, as much a natural condition for desert streams as a consequence of warmed discharge of lakes and irrigation return flows high in the reach. Riparian development along Lower Crab Creek, although appealing to the eye, will decrease stream temperatures only slightly.

Wildlife Habitat

Shrubsteppe The historic habitat within the Crab Creek Subbasin included shrubsteppe (including, meadow steppe, and steppe [grass]), forest/shrub, cliffs, open water, and riparian (Daubenmire 1970) (Figure 4). Shrubsteppe habitat types were clearly the most dominant, covering > 95% of the overall subbasin. Habitat within the subbasin has been dramatically altered (Dobler et al. 1996, Jacobson and Snyder 2000) (Figure 5). Substantial portions (> 60%) of the shrubsteppe have been converted, primarily for the production of irrigated and dryland crops (Table 2). Significant quantities of original habitat have also been converted to urban, commercial, and residential sites in addition to being altered by road construction, canal construction, and recreational development and use. Moreover, the pattern of cropland conversion has resulted in a disproportionate loss of deep soil communities (Vander Haegen et al. 2000). In addition, much of the remaining shrub steppe has been fragmented into relatively small patches of habitat that are degraded in quality (Dobler et al. 1996). Ownership in the Crab Creek Subbasin is extremely diverse (Figure 6). Although most of the land is privately owned, there are substantial quantities owned by local, state, and federal government agencies (Table 4 and Table 3).

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 38 Figure 4. Historic Landcover

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 39 Figure 5. Current Landcover

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 40 Figure 6. Current Ownership

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 41 Table 3. Historic Landcover Type by Ownership (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)

Historic Land Cover by Ownership in Hectares Wetlands Forest/ Salt Background Total Hectres Ownership Water and Shrubsteppe Cropland Urban Grasslands Shrub Scrub (no data) by Entity Riparian Private 132 2240 1117951 22183 0 0 16826 4941 6439 1170713 Unknown 2 0 5392 67 0 0 0 0 0 5461 TNC 0 2810 0 0 0 0 0 202 3012 NSFWS 0 0 10860 378 0 0 261 0 8 11508 BLM 0 0 35815 1183 0 0 459 0 164 37622 Dept of Energy 00 50000000 50 Bureau of Reclamation 1189 60 39436 1945 0 0 182 96 162 43069 WDFW 0 0 21083 747 0 0 468 0 73 22371 Wa State Parks 0 0 00 0000 1 1 Wa DNR 0 0 56228 1269 0 0 480 59 288 58324 City 00 278000000 278 Other 0 0 346.85545 0 0 0 0 0 29.781987 377 Total Hectres by class 1323 2300 1290252 27773 0 0 18676 5096 7367 1345420 1352787

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 42 Table 4. Current Landcover Type by Ownership (Jacobson and Synder 2000)

Current Land Cover by Ownership in hectares

Wetlands and Forest/ CRP Total Hectres by Ownership Water Shrubsteppe Cropland Urban Grass % of Total Riparian Shrub Lands Entity

Private 7754 9453 281691 904 715309 135899 7875 126 1159012 86.47 Unknown 368 206 3988 0 892 1 0 0 5457 .41 TNC 16 2 2729 0 38 7 0 0 2792 .21 NSFWS 482 788 9008 6 1223 0 0 0 11507 .86 BLM 381 240 34631 18 1950 363 11 0 37594 2.80 Dept of Energy 005000000 50 00 Bureau of Reclamation 8695 3139 25506 8 5566 114 36 0 43064 3.21 WDFW 733 1210 16925 1 3046 455 0 0 22370 1.67 Wa State Parks 00100000 1.00 Wa DNR 753 834 29455 126 24451 2083 122 53 57877 4.32 University 00000000 0.00 County 00000000 0.00 City 2236801050800 278 .02 Other 22 33 16 17 68 0 211 8 376 .03 Total Hectres by class 19207 15928 404070 1080 752650 138922 8334 188 1340380 100

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 43 Cropland Crop production is the most abundant current land use within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 5), (Table 4). Most croplands are in irrigated or dryland crops or cattle pasture (Jacobson and Snyder 2000, Johnson and O’Neil, 2001 (in press)). The major crops include cereal grains like wheat, barley, and corn, potatoes, onions, and fruit (apples, cherries, peaches, and pears). Most of the cereal grains (other than corn) are produced without irrigation; the other crops are typically irrigated, most with the benefit of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. Although certain amounts of cropland have been shown to benefit wildlife, particularly when configured appropriately with native habitat, the widespread and continuous nature of the current croplands have been shown to be detrimental for most species (Buss and Dziedzic 1955).

The deep soil habitats were the first areas to be used for commercial crops by the earliest pioneers. Buss (1965) indicated that the first pioneers were homesteading in the valleys and canyons and that domestic livestock created ecological disturbances which helped to modify the wildlife community. For example, as agriculture became more common in the Crab Creek Subbasin, Canada geese became year round residents and nested here (Buss, 1965), and sandhill cranes became less common except during migration. Generally, “monoculture agriculture” has greatly changed the distribution and abundance of wildlife species in this subbasin. Examples are sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, mule deer, and neotropical migrants (sage sparrow, sage thrasher, loggerhead shrike, and others).

CRP CRP (Conservation Reserve Program) is a federal program with contracts of at least 10 years that resulted in the ‘set-aside’ of approximately 25% of the cropland in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 5). These habitats were planted with perennial grasses starting in the mid-1980’s. Although most of the earlier CRP was planted in a monoculture of crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), most of the recent CRP includes a diversity of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Research has indicated that CRP may benefit key species of wildlife within the Crab Creek Subbasin including sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse (Schroeder et al. 2000a, b). This benefit appears be due, in part, to a synergistic relationship between CRP and native shrubsteppe habitat. The quality of CRP appears to be improved when it’s adjacent to shrubsteppe and the quality of shrubsteppe appears to be improved when the remaining native habitat is interconnected by CRP.

Cliffs Barren ground such as steep canyon walls and cliffs can offer protective habitat for numerous species of wildlife. This may include nesting and roosting habitat, perches for hunting, and hibernacula for winter. Cliffs form a relatively small but

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 44 important part of the habitat within this Subbasin. Indirect impacts to this habitat and the species that depend on it include conversion and alteration of the surrounding habitats and direct disturbance from mining and human recreation (target shooting, rock climbing, camping near bat roost sites, etc.).

Open Water Water is an important resource in the Crab Creek Subbasin, especially for wildlife. The usefulness of open water is increased when the adjacent habitats are of high quality and quantity and offer necessary cover for nesting, roosting, and feeding. In addition, the negative consequences of poor land use in adjacent habitats can negatively impact the quality of the open water by adding numerous chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers (Williamson et al. 1998). These chemicals can impact wildlife directly through poisoning or indirectly through reduction and/or alteration of the food base.

Riparian and wetland Riparian and wetland habitats are limited geographically and are vulnerable to loss and degradation through human activities and land use decisions. Since the arrival of settlers in the early 1800’s, 50 to 90% of riparian habitat in Washington has been lost or extensively modified. (Buss 1965). Protecting riparian habitat may yield the greatest gains for fish and wildlife while involving the least amount of area (Knutson and Naef 1997). Negative impacts of fragmentation on wildlife require that increased attention be given to buffer zone design around riparian habitats (O’Connell et at. 2000). Currently, riparian buffers average 9.1 m for Crab Creek tributaries (Washington State Forest Practices Board 1988).

Other Habitats Other habitats include infrequent types like sand dunes, forest/shrubs, and urban. Although none of these habitats are abundant, urban habitats are increasing in size, distribution, and influence throughout the Crab Creek Subbasin. The subbasin has grown in popularity as a preferred area for primary residential and secondary recreational home sites. As the population increases, more impacts to habitat and water quality are inevitable. Residential growth is moderate in most communities in this subbasin with the exception of Moses Lake where growth is occurring rapidly. Development is particularly rapid along lakeshores and streams.

Major Limiting Factors

Fisheries Hydropower facilities without fish passage have eliminated functional fish passage upstream and downstream. Consequently, most of the fishery in the Crab

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 45 Creek Subbasin is non-native and/or altered dramatically by widespread changes in land-use. For example, rainbow trout are not native to Crab Creek but have been able to survive in those stretches of the stream where cool temperatures make life possible. Artificial habitats (islands for nesting Caspian terns) and altered fish and wildlife communities have resulted in high levels of predation and competition. Restoration of native fisheries is also limited by the direct and indirect impacts of runoff from croplands including extreme water flows (quantity and speed), movement of sediments and chemicals, and alteration of habitat. The current definition of riparian corridors and standards for protection of riparian buffers appear to be insufficient to protect Crab Creek, McCarteney Creek, and the associated tributaries from damage due to agricultural runoff.

Wildlife Limiting Factors Isolation and fragmentation of native habitat are the biggest factors influencing the long-term changes in abundance and distribution of wildlife populations in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Buss and Dziedzic 1955, Buss 1965, Swenson et al. 1987, McDonald and Reese 1998). This habitat alteration has occurred due to conversion of native habitat for production of irrigated and dryland crops, degradation of remaining native habitat, development and urbanization, road construction, and hydropower. Fragmentation has severely reduced habitat for area-sensitive species. Sage sparrows, for example, are generally found only in blocks of shrubsteppe greater than 1,000 ha (2,470 acres) (Vander Haegen et al. 2001). Populations of species with small home ranges and limited dispersal capabilities are likely to become isolated and vulnerable to extirpation. The isolation and fragmentation of shrubsteppe habitat also has reduced the integrity of the remaining populations of sharp-tailed grouse, thus putting them at risk of extinction. Wildlife populations in fragmented habitats may be more vulnerable to predation. In Washington, Brewer’s sparrows, lark sparrows, and sage thrashers had greater nest predation rates in fragmented habitats than in continuous habitats (WDFW, unpubl. data).

Agricultural conversion has decreased the overall quantity of habitat for many native species, but loss of specific communities may be particularly critical for habitat specialists. Pygmy rabbits, for example, require deep-soil big sagebrush communities. This community type has been severely reduced on the landscape (Vander Haegen et al. 2000), possibly driving pygmy rabbits towards extirpation.

Lack of knowledge for some species but in particular regarding herptiles further imperils these Columbia Basin dependent species. Specifically, our lack of understanding of habitat-use patterns and the population dynamics under different land use scenarios prevents us from making reasonable management recommendations that would protect these species where they still occur.

The single most significant habitat alteration in the subbasin occurred as a direct result of the construction of Grand Coulee Dam (Pitzer 1994). The Bureau of

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 46 Reclamation’s Columbia Basin Irrigation Project (CBIP), which began water deliveries in 1952, essentially resulted in the conversion of approximately 750,000 acres of irrigated farmland 70% of which occurs in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

The CBIP caused the formation of numerous new wetlands, wasteways, reservoirs and canals that have provided significant benefits for some species of wildlife in terms of surface water and an interspersion of irrigated agriculture. These conditions have been particularly beneficial for migrating waterfowl and nesting ring-necked pheasants. However these benefits have been countered to some degree by negative impacts including: 1) relatively low nesting success for breeding waterfowl (Guidice et al. 2000); 2) direct mortality of 200-200 deer in irrigation canals (WDFW 1997; J. Tabor, WDFW, pers. comm.); and 3) expansion of non-native species of plants, fish, and wildlife. Non-native species have resulted in reduction and extirpation of many native species; a trend that will likely continue without intervention. For example, introduced bullfrogs and non- native fish have likely contributed to the decline of the endangered northern leopard frog (McAllister et al. 1999).

Restoration direction in the subbasin is limited by a lack of information on the type, distribution, quality, and quantity of habitat, and the wildlife response to habitat management activities. The CRP (Conservation Reserve Program) is one example of current restoration activities. Lands enrolled in CRP appear to be improving the situation for numerous species of interest including sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and some species of waterfowl (Schroeder et al. 2000a, b). This improvement appears to be related to the direct increase in quantity of shrubsteppe habitat (CRP), the indirect enhancement of habitats adjacent to CRP, and the improvement in the science of restoration.

Artificial Production Artificial production in the Crab Creek Subbasin is used to support non-native recreational fisheries. Artificial production is not currently being used to restore native fisheries.

Existing and Past Efforts

BPA Funded Projects

Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area The 8,094 hectare (20,000 acre) Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area (SLWA) is located in Lincoln County, Washington approximately 21 kilometers (35 miles) southeast of Grand Coulee Dam (Figure 7). This wildlife area was established in 1992 primarily to support the recovery of sharp-tailed grouse and to partially mitigate for wildlife losses resulting from the construction of Grand Coulee and Chief

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 47 Joseph Dams. More than 16,000 sharp-tailed grouse habitat units (HUs) were lost due to construction of Grand Coulee Dam and over 1,000 HUs were lost at Chief Joseph Dam (both totals reflect only state losses – not tribal losses). The SLWA is comprised of lands purchased and/or owned by WDFW (2,517 hectares/6,220 acres), Bonneville Power Administration (5,059 hectares/12,500 acres), and the Washington Department of Natural Resources (518 hectares/1,280 acres). In addition, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) owns approximately 6,071 hectares (15,000 acres) that adjoins SLWA on the south.

Figure 7. Location of the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area in Crab Creek Subbasin

Shrubsteppe is the dominant cover type on the SLWA (Table 6). WDFW manages the SLWA principally for shrubsteppe obligate wildlife species such as sharp-tailed grouse and sage grouse and to provide public recreational opportunities. Mule deer is also a high priority management species because of its high recreational value (Anderson and Ashley 1993). Sharp-tailed grouse,

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 48 sage grouse, and mule deer are loss-assessment species associated with Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams ( Howerton 1986, Berger and Kuehn 1992).

Table 5. Habitat type and quantity on the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area. Habitat type Acres Shrubsteppe (including meadowsteppe and steppe) 14,676 Ephemeral pond 98 Lacustrine (includes semi-permanent water) 132 Wetland 83 Wet meadow 1,754 Riparian shrub 35 Ponderosa pine 1 Cliff/talus 485 Agriculture 275 Conservation Reserve Program (includes ‘soil bank’ fields) 2,396 Farmstead 65 Total 20,000

Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area management strategies address several critical landscape scale limiting factors, such as shrubsteppe habitat conversion, degradation, and fragmentation (Hays et al. 1998b, Schroeder et al. 2000a), as well as species-specific limiting factors. Management activities that have been implemented to address habitat conversion and degradation factors include seeding agricultural fields to native-like vegetation, removing livestock, protecting and maintaining existing habitat, and controlling introduced vegetation (Anderson and Ashley1993, WDFW 1998). These activities and strategies also address factors that limit local populations of sharp-tailed grouse and sage grouse such as quality and availability of nesting and wintering habitat (WDFW 1995a, b). The large project acreage and contiguous nature of the parcels that comprise the wildlife area reduces shrub-steppe habitat fragmentation within this portion of the subbasin.

Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area management goals, objectives, and strategies for sharp-tailed grouse (see section on Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area for information on goals and objectives for sage grouse) support WDFW statewide goals and objectives for this species (WDFW 1995b). The sharp-tailed grouse population in Washington will be considered secure when statewide objectives have been met or exceeded for 10 consecutive years. Management goals and objectives for sharp-tailed grouse on the SLWA are listed below.

Goal 1: Establish and maintain a viable sharp-tailed grouse population at the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area. This goal is consistent with the statewide goal to increase the population size and distribution of sharp-tailed grouse (WDFW

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 49 1995b). This goal is also consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin goal to recover sharp-tailed grouse populations to viable levels within the subbasin.

Objective 1: Conduct research on sharp-tailed grouse on the SLWA through 2005 in conjunction with WDFW’s statewide sharp-tailed grouse research program.

Strategy: Monitor population size, determine population viability, and evaluate population responses to habitat alteration.

Objective 2: Increase the number of sharp-tailed grouse from approximately 180 (estimated number currently occupying SLWA [M. Schroeder, pers. comm.) to 400 by 2010. This objective is consistent with the statewide objective to increase the breeding population of sharp-tailed grouse to more than 2,000 distributed throughout four management zones (SLWA is considered the ‘core’ property in WDFW’s Sharp-tailed Grouse Management Zone 4, Figure 8). This objective also is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to establish a population of at least 1,000 sharp-tailed grouse by 2010.

Goal 2: Protect, enhance, and maintain 20,000 acres of shrubsteppe habitat for sharp-tailed grouse and other shrubsteppe obligates. This goal is consistent with the statewide goal to protect, enhance, and increase shrubsteppe habitat (WDFW 2000b).

Objective 1: Implement management activities and schedules described in the SLWA Enhancement Plan (Anderson, J. Ashley, P. R. 1993). This objective is consistent with the statewide objective to protect at least 98,000 acres of high quality, relatively contiguous (<2 mile gaps) habitat that is currently occupied (WDFW 1995b). This objective also is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to improve the quantity, quality, and configuration of shrubsteppe habitat necessary to support a viable population of sharp-tailed grouse by 2010.

Objective 2: Monitor wildlife and habitat response to protection, maintenance, and enhancement measures annually. This objective is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to evaluate habitat restoration activities.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 50 Figure 8. WDFW Sharp-Tailed Grouse Management Zones

Monitoring (WDFW 1995b). Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area is located in zone 4. Sharp-tailed grouse leks (traditional display sites for concentrations of males) have been monitored on and near SLWA annually since the early 1970s. Sharp- tailed grouse movements have also been documented with the aid of radio telemetry. In addition, WDFW personnel and/or volunteers conduct neotropical bird surveys, sage grouse surveys, mule deer production counts, and hunter harvest surveys annually. Although less frequent, small mammal transects, winter raptor counts, and habitat data are also conducted on the SLWA.

This BPA funded mitigation project provides habitat for several threatened and endangered species and is an important link in WDFW’s ongoing efforts to reverse downward population trends in shrubsteppe obligate wildlife species such as sharp-tailed grouse and sage grouse. Continued funding and support for the SLWA is crucial to addressing impacts caused by fragmentation, degradation and conversion of shrubsteppe habitat.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 51 Figure 9. Location of Specific Management Units within the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area.

Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area The 3,487 hectare (8,616 acres) Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area (SFWA) is located in Douglas County, Washington and is comprised of four separate parcels (Units) owned and/or managed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The SFWA includes the 1,515 hectare (3,740 acres) Sagebrush Flat Unit, the 130 hectare (320 acres) Dormaier Unit, the 893 hectare (2,206 acres) Chester Butte Unit, and the 951 hectare (2,350 acres) West Foster Creek Unit (Figure 9).

The Sagebrush Flat Unit was acquired by WDFW in1997 from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) through a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program (WWRP) grant administered by the Interagency Committee (IAC) for outdoor recreation. The entire Dormaier (purchased in 1995) and Chester Butte (purchased in 1998) Units were purchased by BPA. A 152 hectare (376 acres) portion of the West Foster Creek Unit was purchased in 2000 through a WWRP grant

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 52 The SFWA was established to promote recovery of sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and pygmy rabbits. In addition, mule deer and a host of shrubsteppe obligate species benefit significantly from habitat protection, maintenance, and enhancement measures already implemented and/or planned for the wildlife area. Sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and mule deer are loss assessment species for Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams (Howerton 1986, Berger and Kuehn 1992). The SFWA partially mitigates for wildlife losses resulting from construction of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams.

Shrubsteppe (including shrub- and grass-dominated types) is the dominant habitat on the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area (WDFW 1998, WDFW 2001) (Table 6).

Table 6. Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area cover types and acreage. Habitat type Sagebrush Dormaier Chester West Flat Unit Unit Butte Unit Foster Creek Unit1 Shrubsteppe – 3,410 320 1,986 1,605 shrub dominated Shrubsteppe – grass 100 2 647 dominated Cropland 230 7 CRP 171 59 Wet meadow 45 Ephemeral pond 2 Riparian 21 Cliff/talus 11 Total 3,740 320 2,206 2,350 1The West Foster Creek Unit described here includes a larger area than the smaller 376 acre portion involving the BPA; it is outside the Crab Creek Subbasin.

SFWA management strategies address several key subbasin landscape scale limiting factors, such as shrubsteppe habitat conversion, degradation, and fragmentation (Hays et al. 1998a, Schroeder et al. 2000b), as well as species- specific limiting factors. Management activities that have been implemented to address habitat conversion and degradation factors include seeding agricultural fields to native-like vegetation, removing livestock and/or modifying grazing operations, protecting and maintaining existing habitat, and controlling introduced vegetation (DNR 1997, WDFW 1998, WDFW 2001). These same activities and strategies either address factors that limit sharp-tailed grouse and sage grouse populations, such as nesting and wintering habitat quality and availability (WDFW 1995a, b), or they support management of pygmy rabbits. Although geographically separated, the SFWA Units provide protected ‘core’ habitat areas

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 53 for many shrubsteppe obligate species. These parcels will become increasingly important in future efforts to manage larger landscapes.

The West Foster Creek Unit was purchased to provide habitat primarily for sharp- tailed grouse and mule deer. This Unit occurs within WDFW’s sharp-tailed grouse Management Zone 3 (WDFW 1995b, Figure 8). Management goals and objectives for Sharp-tailed grouse are similar to the goals and objectives described for the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area.

The Chester Butte, Dormaier, and Sagebrush Flat Units were acquired to protect and enhance habitat primarily for sage grouse, pygmy rabbits and other shrubsteppe obligate species. As described below, SFWA management goals, objectives, and strategies support statewide and subbasin goals, objectives, and strategies for sage grouse and pygmy rabbits (WDFW 1995a, c) as well as addressing subbasin limiting factors and needs.

Goal 1: Recover populations of sage grouse to viable levels on the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area and adjacent lands. This goal is consistent with the statewide goal to increase the population size and distribution of sage grouse (WDFW 1995a). This goal is also consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin goal to recover sage grouse populations to viable levels within the subbasin.

Objective 1: Conduct research on sage grouse on the SFWA through 2005 in conjunction with WDFW’s statewide sage grouse research program.

Strategy: Monitor population size, determine population viability, and evaluate population responses to habitat alteration.

Objective 2: Increase the number of sage grouse to approximately 400 on the SFWA and adjacent properties by 2010. This objective is consistent with the statewide objective to increase the breeding population of sage grouse to more than 1,500 distributed throughout six management zones (SFWA is considered the ‘core’ property in WDFW’s Sage Grouse Management Zone 2, Figure 10). This objective also is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to establish a population of at least 1,000 sage grouse by 2010.

Goal 2: Protect, enhance, and maintain shrubsteppe habitat for sage grouse and other shrubsteppe obligates. This goal is consistent with the statewide goal to protect, enhance, and increase shrubsteppe habitat (WDFW 2000b).

Objective 1: Improve shrubsteppe habitat quality and configuration on the SFWA by 2005. This objective is consistent with the statewide objective to protect >16,000 (40,000 acres) of high quality, relatively contiguous habitat that is currently occupied (WDFW 1995a). This

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 54 objective also is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to improve the quantity, quality, and configuration of shrubsteppe habitat necessary to support a viable population of sage grouse by 2010.

Strategy: Base habitat management activities on sage grouse habitat research results and ‘best science’ principles.

Objective 2: Monitor wildlife and habitat response to protection, maintenance, and enhancement measures annually. This objective is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to evaluate habitat restoration activities.

Figure 10. WDFW Sage Grouse Management Zones

(WDFW 1995a). Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area is located in Zone 2. Like sage grouse, pygmy rabbits are dependent upon sagebrush for >90% of their winter diet. The pygmy rabbit is the smallest rabbit in North America and is the only rabbit known to dig its own burrow. Dense sagebrush and relatively deep, loose soil are important characteristics of pygmy rabbit habitat. As a result, protection, enhancement, and/or development of suitable shrubsteppe habitat is critical to the recovery of this species.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 55 The current Washington population is estimated to be less than 250 rabbits. Of the three pygmy rabbit areas known to remain in Washington (all in Crab Creek Subbasin), the SFWA supports the largest remaining concentration of pygmy rabbits which may be fewer than 150 rabbits (Figure 3). The other two populations are significantly smaller (WDFW 1995c; T. McCall, WDFW, pers. comm.). As described below, SFWA management goals, objectives, and strategies for pygmy rabbits are consistent with state and subbasin goals, objectives, and strategies.

Goal: Establish and/or maintain two viable populations of pygmy rabbits on the SFWA; one population on the Sagebrush Flat Unit and a second population on the Dormaier/Chester Butte Units. This goal is consistent with the WDFW statewide goal (WDFW 1995c) and the Crab Creek Subbasin goal to recover and maintain a viable pygmy rabbit population in Washington and the Crab Creek Subbasin, respectively.

Strategy 1: Protect and increase the remaining pygmy rabbit population and associated habitats on the Sagebrush Flat and Dormaier (may not have any rabbits currently) Units. This strategy is consistent with the statewide objective to establish and maintain four populations with at least 500 adults each and eight populations with at least 100 adult rabbits each for a minimum 5-year average total of 2,800 pygmy rabbits (WDFW 1995c).

Strategy 2: Monitor and conduct research on pygmy rabbit populations, determine population viability, and evaluate population responses to habitat alteration and other management activities. This strategy is consistent with statewide objectives to: 1) investigate genetic similarities and differences between pygmy rabbits in Oregon, Idaho, and Montana; 2) determine if the genetic diversity of Washington’s pygmy rabbit population is sufficient for the species to persist for a long time period; 3) evaluate the effectiveness of rearing pygmy rabbits in captivity; 4) monitor existing pygmy rabbit populations and survey areas of potential pygmy rabbit occurrence; and 5) monitor the effectiveness of translocation techniques (WDFW 1995c).

Strategy 3: Manage and improve the quantity, quality, and configuration of shrubsteppe habitat as needed to benefit pygmy rabbits. This strategy is consistent with the statewide objective to protect and manage pygmy rabbit habitat to increase their abundance and distribution (WDFW 1995c).

Strategy 4: Conduct searches on the Dormaier and Chester Butte Units to locate additional pygmy rabbit populations and/or suitable habitat for relocations. Augment existing pygmy rabbit populations and establish new populations in suitable habitat through captive rearing or

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 56 translocations. This strategy is consistent with the statewide objective to establish pygmy rabbit populations in new areas (WDFW 1995c).

Monitoring A cooperative study (including Washington State University, WDFW, BPA, DNR, and local cattlemen) has been funded by BPA to examine vegetation differences between grazed and ungrazed areas on the Sagebrush Flat Unit and the potential impacts to pygmy rabbits resulting from grazing or lack of grazing. Sharp-tailed grouse and sage grouse leks (traditional display sites for concentrations of males) are also monitored annually. In addition, WDFW personnel and/or volunteers conduct annual neotropical bird surveys, mule deer production counts, and hunter harvest surveys.

This BPA funded mitigation project provides habitat for several threatened and endangered species and is an important link in WDFW’s ongoing efforts to reverse downward population trends in shrubsteppe obligate wildlife species such as pygmy rabbits, sharp-tailed grouse, and sage grouse. Continued funding and support for the SFWA is crucial to addressing impacts caused by fragmentation, degradation and conversion of shrub-steppe habitat.

Efforts Funded Outside of Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program

Adams County Conservation District The Adams Conservation District’s resource management efforts are focused upon three sub drainages all of which flow into Crab Creek. Recognizing the large volume of sediment that has accumulated in the Lind Coulee Arm of the Potholes Reservoir, the primary emphasis has been toward developing solutions that would quickly educate cooperators about methods to control and reduce future storm water runoff events. One major concern was from conventional tillage practices by dry land wheat farmers, which left 50% of agriculture ground in a fallow condition resulting in tremendous sediment erosion events.

In support of that concern a four-year Odessa aquifer erosion control study was initiated to seek solutions and this project concluded in 1989. A DOE funded Weber Coulee “Watershed Plan” followed and was completed in 1992. A Weber Coulee “Implementation Program” supported by NRCS technical assistance developed cost effective sediment containment projects in addition to numerous upland treatment concepts. The introduction of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) also idled thousands of acres of Adams County farm ground resulting in significant increases in the wildlife population habitat.

Through support from Washington Conservation Commission, Department of Ecology and Environmental Protection Agency additional funding was located to initiate the development of a larger “Agriculture Best Management Practice” project. Through this program GIS mapping technology was developed and

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 57 offered producers improved farm conservation plans with useful maps for documenting specific tasks associated to targeted goals. An “Irrigation Water Monitoring” (IWM) program provided informative and useful data for identifying specific water application rates for avoiding over the application of water. One new concept that has been on leading edge technology for the agriculture industry is minimum tillage direct seed concepts where we maintain annual cover crops. While the concept works in most of the areas, selling the method takes a great deal of persuasion. Numerous other conservation practices were implemented. A final report was submitted in March 2000.

Among the long term goals and objectives are to develop a harmony between agriculture needs while expanding the habitat needs as required for our wildlife through natural resource preservation and conservation opportunities.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) administers the Columbia Basin Wildlife Areas, 14 scattered management units encompassing approximately 200,000 acres in the subbasin. These lands include owned lands (38,000 acres) with the balance administered through agreements with other state and federal landowners. Most of the Columbia Basin Wildlife Areas, 142,000 acres, are U.S. Bureau of Reclamation lands acquired as part of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. The Columbia Basin Wildlife Areas were established in 1952 by a 50 year Management Agreement between U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and Washington State. Land acquisitions adding to the wildlife areas were mostly completed by 1984.

The three most common habitats in the Columbia Basin Wildlife Areas are open water (63,500 acres), shrubsteppe (106,500 acres), and riparian (7,200 acres). The open water and riparian areas are almost entirely a result of the irrigation project. Both of these habitats were probably shrubsteppe before 1950. The wildlife areas are managed to preserve priority habitats and to benefit a variety of wildlife. Although the highest priority wildlife are native species listed as threatened or endangered, the shrubsteppe habitats within the Columbia Basin Wildlife Areas are managed primarily for introduced exotics (ring-necked pheasants), small game, and native wildlife species. Riparian and shallow areas of open water are managed primarily for dabbling ducks. Open water is managed for game fish, waterfowl and native wildlife.

Compatible recreation is allowed in all of the Columbia Basin Wildlife Areas. The total use on the wildlife areas is estimated to be over 800,000 visitors per year. Fishing is the most popular recreation activity on the Wildlife Areas and accounts for 50% of the total. Hunting accounts for about 10% of the use and other uses, such as water sports, camping, horseback riding, rock climbing, and wildlife viewing, make up the balance. There are fifteen grazing agreements and nineteen farming agreements on the wildlife areas that involve about 27,000 acres. All but two of these leases are on federal land.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 58 Between 1991 and 1994 the WDFW purchased 18 properties (1,117 acres) within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project. These are managed along with 19 other parcels (600 acres owned or managed) for farmland wildlife. Activities on these properties include noxious weed control, and habitat development primarily for ring-necked pheasant.

WDFW continues to work cooperatively with the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Farm Service Agency, and private landowners on implementation of the Conservation Reserve Program. To date, over 280 water guzzlers have been installed and thousands of acres enhanced on private lands (150 Habitat Protection Agreements with private landowners) within the subbasin by WDFW’s Upland Wildlife Restoration Program.

Washington Department of Natural Resources The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) manages approximately 144,000 acres in the subbasin (Table 2). Approximately 69,800 acres are in rangeland, 43,700 acres are in dryland agriculture, and 6,500 acres are in irrigated agriculture. These lands are managed to generate revenue for state trust beneficiaries. The DNR’s land management activities are designed to provide good stewardship and resource protection necessary to ensure that state trust lands provide support to the beneficiaries in perpetuity.

Approximately 480 acres of DNR land within the subbasin are managed as Natural Area Preserves. These areas are set aside for research and education and help to maintain Washington’s native biological diversity. They protect the highest quality examples of native ecosystems and rare plant and animal species, as well as features of state, regional or national significance.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service The Columbia National Wildlife Refuge (CNWR) includes 23,200 acres of core lands surrounding Crab Creek downstream from O’Sullivan Dam. The refuge was established in 1944 as a feature of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project (CBIP). A majority of the refuge was purchased in fee title, but more than 2,600 acres, mostly along the dam face and Potholes Canal, are owned by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The refuge was established “for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds” and “as a refuge and breeding ground for migratory birds and other wildlife.”

The original acquisition boundary of the refuge included the entire length of Crab Creek below Potholes Reservoir to its junction with the Columbia River. More than 6,000 acres outside the current primary management area were acquired from Public Domain lands and through fee purchase. Priorities for purchase were

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 59 reduced when the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project was scaled back and the flood zone associated with using Crab Creek as a wasteway capable of sustained 2000 cubic-feet-per-second flows was no longer needed. Approximately 4,000 acres of intermingled refuge lands along lower Crab Creek are currently managed through agreement by WDFW. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service owns an additional 5,787 acres adjacent to Lake Lenore (once a national wildlife refuge) that is managed cooperatively by WDFW.

The most common habitats on CNWR are wetland (including lake, marsh and riparian) and shrubsteppe (19,000 acres). Before the CBIP changed the hydrology of the refuge area, the scenery was dominated by scablands combining expansive rock outcrops carved by glacial flood flows 12-15,000 years ago. The Refuge is the largest single land holding in the Drumheller Channels National Natural Landmark, designated in 1986 for its scenic beauty and geologic history. Water was restricted to a few shallow lakes and Crab Creek, which was reduced to intermittent and subsurface flows during the summer. The majority of the vegetation was shrubsteppe. Leakage through O’Sullivan Dam, the Potholes Canal, a higher water table, and drainage via wasteways has increased the wetland acreage from less than 300 to the current 3,800 acres, and has turned lower Crab Creek into a stream with perennial surface flow.

Bureau of Land Management The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administers approximately 100,900 acres of federal lands within the subbasin (Table 2). These lands are located primarily in the Moses Coulee area and along upper Crab Creek. The lands vary from scattered small tracts of less than 40 acres to blocks of approximately 15,000 acres. All of the larger blocks were created by land tenure adjustments, primarily through land exchange. BLM has had an active land exchange program since the mid 1970’s, however the majority of the consolidation has occurred in the last 10 years. Some lands also have been acquired by purchase with federal Land and Water Conservation Funds and by donation. The BLM has been targeting acquisition of shrubsteppe and associated riparian area in their land tenure adjustment program. This program is expected to continue at least in the near future.

Most of the BLM lands in the subbasin are classified as shrubsteppe. About 2% of the BLM lands are converted dryland wheat fields or old CRP. The BLM also manages an estimated 40 miles of important riparian habitat along Douglas Creek, upper Crab Creek, and the major tributaries of Crab Creek (Lake Creek, Coal Creek, and Rock Creek). The BLM also manages lakeshore habitat on several lakes in the upper Crab Creek drainage. The BLM lands are managed under the principle of multiple use. Dispersed recreation and grazing are common uses of BLM lands. Access to public lands has been a major component in their consolidation program. BLM policy gives priority to habitat for sensitive species and riparian areas.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 60 Bureau of Reclamation The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) owns about 144,600 acres in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Table 2). Most of this acreage is in the Potholes Reservoir area and is managed as part of the Columbian Basin Wildlife Areas by the WDFW or as part of the Columbia National Wildlife Refuge by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The lands were acquired as part of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project.

The Nature Conservancy The Nature Conservancy (TNC) owns 3,500 acres within Moses Coulee, 325 acres on Badger Mountain, and 5,000 acres in the Beezley Hills. TNC also has 2,800 acres in a conservation easement within Moses Coulee near Sagebrush Flats (Rimrock Meadows). The lands are owned and managed primarily for the protection and restoration of shrubsteppe habitat and associated wildlife, although educational, research and permitted recreational uses are allowed.

SUBBASIN MANAGEMENT

Existing Plans, Policies, and Guidelines

Federal Government Management within the Crab Creek Subbasin is coordinated by numerous federal agencies including The Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. Most lands are managed with considerations of agricultural requirements and compromises between resource use and protection. Current policies give priority to areas and/or habitats occupied by sensitive, threatened, and/or endangered species.

State Government

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife The Department of Fish and Wildlife has the responsibility to preserve, protect, and perpetuate all fish and wildlife resources in the state of Washington. The WDFW also enforces all laws pertaining to fish and wildlife resources within the state including marine and fresh waters. The Wild Salmonid Policy (WSP)(State of Washington 1997) is one of the guidance documents used to review and modify current management goals, objectives, and strategies related to wild salmonids and their ecosystems to sustain ceremonial, subsistence, commercial, recreational, and non-consumptive fisheries, and other related cultural and ecological values. The WSP will serve as the primary basis for watershed-based plans that insure adequate habitat protection.

Washington Department of Ecology The mission of the Department of Ecology (Ecology) is to protect, preserve, and enhance Washington’s environment, and to promote the wise management of its air, land, and water for the benefit of current and future generations. Ecology’s

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 61 goals are to prevent pollution, clean up existing pollution, and support sustainable communities and natural resources. A major role is to allocate surface and ground water rights between industry, agriculture, homes, and wildlife.

Ecology has administered two water quality monitoring grants performed by Lincoln County Conservation District, and in October 2000 funded the Initiating Phase of an Upper Crab (WRIA 43) Watershed Planning Act project authorized under HB 2514. Ecology also participates on the local planning unit representing the State of Washington.

Ecology will soon begin working with local jurisdictions, agricultural interests and others to develop clean-up plans, or Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for pollutants exceeding state water quality criteria in upper Crab Creek. The initial primary concern is phosphorus loading to Moses Lake, and pH. More data is required to determine if Crab Creek exceeds other parameters, such as temperature, fecal coliform bacteria, and dissolved oxygen.

Local Government Local public utility districts, conservation districts, water boards, noxious weed boards, county commissions, and city governments have an impact on resource planning within the Crab Creek Subbasin. Because the economy of this subbasin is largely driven by agriculture, there is a tremendous involvement by local governments in resource-related issues, particular those related to water.

Lincoln County is Lead Agency for the Upper Crab (WRIA 43) Watershed Planning Unit, which will address water supply, and consider water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, and instream flows. Lincoln County Conservation District facilitates the Planning Unit, which, after completing the Initiating Phase, will have four years to produce a watershed assessment and develop a plan to address water supply and related issues.

Douglas County HCP The Foster Creek Conservation District in Douglas County is developing a countywide Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The District’s mission in undertaking this project is to enhance the local quality of life in Douglas County by protecting and increasing wildlife species habitat while at the same time providing regulatory certainty and protection from incidental takings for local farmers, ranchers, and orchardists.

Adams County Conservation District The Adams County Conservation District recently (March 2000) submitted a final report to Department of Ecology for a three year Agriculture BMP Implementation plan that addresses specific conservation practices for that conservation district. They have previously completed a comprehensive Weber Coulee Watershed Plan, and followed with a Weber Coulee Implementation plan.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 62 Lincoln County Conservation District Lincoln County Conservation District has completed four years of baseline water quality monitoring at 19 locations along Crab Creek and its tributaries. They have worked with local crop and livestock producers to reduce erosion and nonpoint pollution utilizing programs such as Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), Centennial Clean Water Funds, and EPA Section 319 nonpoint source funds.

Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Recommended Actions

Fish

Overall Goal: Protect, enhance, and restore fish populations to ensure population viability, self-sustaining persistence, and ecological, cultural, and sociological benefits. Goal 1: Restore viable populations of native salmonids to the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Goal 2: Minimize negative consequences of hydropower on fisheries in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Goal 3: Assess current distribution of trout species in upper Crab Creek.

Goal 4: Maintain and enhance a harvestable recreational rainbow trout fish population in upper Crab Creek and tributaries, including Lake Creek.

Wildlife

Overall Goal: Protect, enhance, and restore native habitats, particularly shrubsteppe, to provide the quality and continuity necessary to support viable populations of wildlife within the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Habitat Distribution Habitat mapping within the Crab Creek Subbasin in particular, and eastern Washington in general, is a priority for numerous agencies and organizations including the WDFW (Dobler et al. 1996; Jacobson and Snyder 2000; Hays et al., in prep.), DNR (R. Crawford, pers. comm.), BLM (T. Thompson, pers. comm.), TNC (N. Warner, pers. comm.), and the Foster Creek Conservation District (M. Mazola, pers. comm.). Although the distribution of basic habitats such as shrubsteppe and cropland is known (Figure 5), the distribution of specific variations in the types and condition of shrubsteppe is not. In addition, the location of CRP was mapped based on NRCS data from the mid-1990’s; the current distribution of CRP is different and it has not been mapped.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 63 Status: Shrubsteppe is considered a priority habitat by the WDFW (2000b). A general map of shrubsteppe habitat in eastern Washington and in the Crab Creek Subbasin was completed in 2000 (Jacobson and Snyder).

Limiting Factors: The lack of an adequate map of distribution of specific shrubsteppe habitats is adversely impacting management efforts in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Goal 1: Map specific types of shrubsteppe habitat within the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Objective: Map all habitat within the subbasin using a method that permits evaluation of habitat potential, habitat condition, and endemic features of the landscape such as slope, aspect, soil, and weather by the year 2005.

Task 1: Use current habitat map for subbasin (Jacobson and Snyder 2000) as a ‘starting point’ for distribution of habitat by general habitat category.

Task 2: Define specific habitat types within general categories that reflect variation in habitat potential (Daubenmire 1970), habitat condition, and endemic features of the landscape such as slope, aspect, soil, and weather.

Task 3: Map CRP with aid of aerial photography in county offices of the National Resources Conservation Service.

Task 4: Use digitized maps for soil type (when and where available) to refine current maps on habitat potential.

Task 5: Use satellite data to refine mapped distributions of habitat.

Task 6: Use ground-reconnaissance data to evaluate specific variation within general habitat categories and to refine and finalize subbasin habitat maps.

Goal 2: Monitor periodic changes in habitat distributions.

Objective: Develop a system for monitoring changes in habitat on a regular 5-year interval by the year 2005.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 64 Task 1: Develop the funding and resources necessary to insure a periodic (every 5 years) evaluation in habitat, and hence, habitat changes.

Task 2: Evaluate periodic changes in abundance of specific habitats within broad categories of shrubsteppe and CRP and changes in condition within identifiable habitat types.

Shrubsteppe Restoration Numerous species of shrubsteppe obligates are found in the Crab Creek Subbasin including sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbits, Washington ground squirrels, sage thrashers, sage sparrows, Brewer’s sparrows, loggerhead shrikes, and ferruginous hawks (WDFW 2000b). Although all have current distributions that are dramatically reduced from their historic ranges, they are all still found within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3). Because of the presence of many shrubsteppe obligates and the dramatic efforts to restore shrubsteppe habitat in the Crab Creek Subbasin, this subbasin is an ideal location to evaluate the effectiveness of ongoing restoration activities.

Status: Most populations of shrubsteppe obligates appear to be declining and some species appear to be close to extinction (WDFW 2000b). The Washington ground squirrel, sage sparrow, and loggerhead shrike are candidates for state listing; the sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and ferruginous hawk are listed as threatened; and the pygmy rabbit is listed as endangered.

Limiting Factors: Declining quantity and quality of shrubsteppe habitat is both a direct and an indirect cause for the declines in distributions and populations of shrubsteppe obligates (Vander Haegen et al. 2000, WDFW 2000b).

Goal: Recover populations of shrubsteppe obligates in the Crab Creek Subbasin to the level where populations are viable.

Strategy 1: Evaluate shrubsteppe restoration activities, including the Conservation Reserve Program, the WDFW’s Habitat Restoration Program, and species-specific restoration activities on BPA-funded Wildlife Areas (Swanson Lakes and Sagebrush Flats Wildlife Areas).

Task 1: Evaluate characteristics of shrubsteppe habitat including distribution, configuration, fragmentation, quantity, condition, and potential.

Task 2: Compare shrubsteppe characteristics with management history, but particularly restoration activities.

Task 3: Evaluate relationship between shrubsteppe habitat restoration activities and associated species of shrubsteppe

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 65 obligates (including sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbits, Washington ground squirrels, ferruginous hawks, loggerhead shrikes, Brewer’s sparrows, sage sparrows, and sage thrashers).

Strategy 2: Develop restoration guidelines for shrubsteppe habitat including grazing management, seed mixtures for revegetation efforts, weed control methods, and considerations for landscape configuration.

Strategy 3: Improve quantity, quality, and configuration of shrubsteppe habitat so that viable populations of shrubsteppe obligates will be supported.

Task 1: Improve CRP plantings throughout the subbasin so that they meet standards for plant composition and for distribution and configuration in relation to shrubsteppe habitat.

Task 2: Continue restoration of habitat on public lands and education of private landowners about restoration opportunities on private land.

Task 3: Purchase properties or easements based on their applicability to published objectives for management and recovery plans for shrubsteppe obligates.

Sage Grouse Sage grouse were historically found in shrubsteppe habitats throughout eastern Washington. Sage grouse populations in Washington declined 77% between 1960 and 1999 (Schroeder et al. 2000b). One of the 2 remaining populations is centered in Douglas County, within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3). The subbasin also includes an additional 5 zones designated for recovery of sage grouse populations (Hays et al., in prep.).

Status: The current population in Washington is estimated to be about 1,000 and is listed as a threatened species by the state of Washington. (Schroeder et al. 2000b).

Limiting Factors: Availability of shrubsteppe habitat with a substantial component of herbaceous cover (grasses and forbs). The lack of big sagebrush in shrubsteppe habitats may also limit sage grouse in the Crab Creek Subbasin, but to a lesser extent.

Goal: Recover populations of sage grouse in the Crab Creek Subbasin to the level where populations are viable.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 66 Objective 1: Conduct research on sage grouse through 2005 to monitor population size, determine population viability, and evaluate population responses to habitat alteration.

Task 1: Monitor all traditional sage grouse display sites (leks) on an annual basis throughout the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Task 2: Collect and examine tissue samples of sage grouse to monitor genetic heterogeneity and population viability.

Task 3: Evaluate movement of radio-marked sage grouse in the Crab Creek Subbasin to examine population viability and habitat connectivity.

Task 4: Monitor changes in sage grouse populations in relation to habitat restoration activities.

Objective 2: Improve quantity, quality, and configuration of the shrubsteppe habitat necessary to support a viable population of sage grouse by 2010.

Task 1: Improve CRP plantings throughout the subbasin so that they meet standards for plant composition and for distribution and configuration in relation to shrubsteppe habitat.

Task 2: Continue restoration of habitat on public lands and education of private landowners about restoration opportunities on private land.

Task 3: Purchase properties or easements based on their applicability to published objectives for management and recovery plans for sage grouse.

Objective 3: Use translocations of sage grouse into Washington from populations in other states so that a population of at least 1,000 is supported in the Crab Creek Subbasin by 2010.

Task 1: Select a source population in another region based on genetic similarity to birds in Washington.

Task 2: Translocate sage grouse into portions of the Crab Creek Subbasin where they are currently absent, such as the Lincoln County area.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 67 Task 3: Translocate sage grouse into portions of the Crab Creek Subbasin where population and/or genetic augmentation will be useful for long-term improvement in population viability.

Task 4: Monitor and evaluate the success and/or failure of all translocation activities.

Sharp-tailed Grouse Sharp-tailed grouse were historically found in shrubsteppe and deciduous shrub habitats throughout eastern Washington. Sharp-tailed grouse populations in Washington declined 94% between 1960 and 2000 (Schroeder et al. 2000a). About 33% of the remaining birds are found within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3). The subbasin includes 6 zones designated for recovery of sharp-tailed grouse populations (Hays et al., in prep.).

Status: The current population in Washington is estimated to be around 600 and is listed as a threatened species by the state of Washington. (Schroeder et al. 2000a).

Limiting Factors: Availability of shrubsteppe habitat dominated by herbaceous cover (grasses and forbs). The distribution of riparian habitats dominated by deciduous shrubs also limits wintering opportunities.

Goal: Recover populations of sharp-tailed grouse in the Crab Creek Subbasin to the level where populations are viable.

Objective 1: Conduct research on sharp-tailed grouse through 2005 to monitor population size, determine population viability, and evaluate population responses to habitat alteration.

Task 1: Monitor all traditional sharp-tailed grouse display sites (leks) on an annual basis throughout the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Task 2: Collect and examine tissue samples of sharp-tailed grouse to monitor genetic heterogeneity and population viability.

Task 3: Evaluate movement of radio-marked sharp-tailed grouse in the Crab Creek Subbasin to examine population viability and habitat connectivity.

Task 4: Monitor changes in sharp-tailed grouse populations in relation to habitat restoration activities.

Objective 2: Improve quantity, quality, and configuration of the shrubsteppe habitat necessary to support a viable population of sharp- tailed grouse by 2010.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 68 Task 1: Improve CRP plantings throughout the subbasin so that they meet standards for plant composition and for distribution and configuration in relation to shrubsteppe habitat.

Task 2: Continue restoration of habitat on public lands and education of private landowners about restoration opportunities on private land.

Task 3: Purchase properties or easements based on their applicability to published objectives for management and recovery plans for sharp-tailed grouse.

Objective 3: Use translocations of sharp-tailed grouse into Washington from populations in other states so that a population of at least 1,000 is supported in the Crab Creek Subbasin by 2010.

Task 1: Select a source population in another region based on genetic similarity to birds in Washington.

Task 2: Translocate sharp-tailed grouse into portions of the Crab Creek Subbasin where they are currently absent, such as the Lincoln County area.

Task 3: Translocate sharp-tailed grouse into portions of the Crab Creek Subbasin where population and/or genetic augmentation will be useful for long-term improvement in population viability.

Task 4: Monitor and evaluate the success and/or failure of all translocation activities.

Pygmy Rabbit Pygmy rabbit populations are associated with relatively deep soils dominated by shrubsteppe habitat. The availability of this habitat has declined dramatically in Washington (WDFW 1995c). There are only three small and isolated populations of pygmy rabbits remaining in the state, all within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3).

Status: The current Washington population is estimated to be less than 250 rabbits and is listed as an endangered species by the state of Washington.

Limiting Factors: Quantity and distribution of shrubsteppe habitat with relatively deep soil.

Goal: Recover populations of pygmy rabbits in the Crab Creek Subbasin to the level where populations are viable.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 69 Strategy 1: Monitor pygmy rabbit populations, determine population viability, and evaluate population responses to habitat alteration.

Task 1: Monitor all known pygmy rabbit populations annually with the aid of burrow surveys.

Task 2: Conduct regular searches for ‘new’ and or additional populations of pygmy rabbits.

Task 3: Develop a habitat model to predict likely locations of pygmy rabbits.

Task 4: Evaluate the effectiveness of captive rearing pygmy rabbits.

Task 5: Monitor rabbits returned or released into the wild.

Task 6: Evaluate the effectiveness of translocation techniques for pygmy rabbits.

Task 7: Evaluate the applicability and effectiveness of the recommended habitat restoration activities.

Task 8: Develop techniques for estimating numbers of pygmy rabbits.

Task 9: Conduct research on viability of pygmy rabbits in the Crab Creek Subbasin, and throughout Washington, Idaho, and Oregon.

Task 10: Determine the amount of habitat needed to support a recovered population.

Task 11: Investigate genetic similarities and differences between pygmy rabbits in Washington and those in Oregon, Idaho, and Montana.

Task 12: Determine whether the genetic diversity of Washington’s pygmy rabbit population is sufficient for the species to persist for a long period of time.

Strategy 2: Improve quantity, quality, and configuration of shrubsteppe habitat needed to support a viable population of pygmy rabbits in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 70 Task 1: Protect the remaining pygmy rabbit population and associated habitats.

Task 2: Take measures to reduce the potential for destructive fires in pygmy rabbit habitat.

Task 3: Reestablish sagebrush immediately after wildfire in areas supporting pygmy rabbits.

Task 4: Support continuation and improvement of CRP throughout the subbasin by conducting the necessary research and by providing both education and resources.

Task 5: Restore additional pygmy rabbit habitat.

Task 6: Increase habitat availability for pygmy rabbits with the aid of acquisitions and easements.

Strategy 3: Improve viability of pygmy rabbit populations in Washington, with the majority in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Task 1: Augment the remaining pygmy rabbit populations through captive rearing or translocations, or a combination of methods designed to increase or maintain population size while preserving the genetic integrity of Washington’s population.

Task 2: Reduce predation where populations are in danger of extirpation.

Burrowing Owl Burrowing owls are rare raptors of the shrub-steppe and meadow steppe communities. Once a common inhabitant of the Columbia Basin, the current range of burrowing owls has declined significantly. Burrowing owls are no longer found in Okanogan, Spokane, Kittitas, and Lincoln counties, and have declined greatly in Yakima, Douglas, Whitman, and Adams counties. Approximately 200 occupied burrows were found during surveys in 1999 and 2000 (WDFW 2000). Remaining owls are principally found in Grant, western Adams, Franklin and Benton counties. Burrowing owls have colonized some disturbed and developed habitats in a portion of their range, such as golf courses, industrial areas and adjacent to irrigation canals.

Status: Burrowing owls are a candidate species in Washington State, federally endangered in Canada and Mexico, and a federal species of concern.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 71 Limiting Factors: Despite widespread declines of burrowing owls, the reasons for the declines are not well known. Agricultural development has likely adversely affected their habitat, and declines in ground squirrels, pygmy rabbits, and in some areas badgers may contribute to a loss of available burrows for nesting. Winter habitats are not known for Washington’s burrowing owls, and potentially could be limiting.

Goal: Halt the decline of burrowing owls, increase distribution of burrowing owls to include many of the historic regions occupied in the Columbia Basin, and maintain a stable population of burrowing owls in Washington.

Objective 1: Determine factors limiting burrowing owl populations in Washington.

Task 1: Investigate burrowing owl habitat selection in native habitats. Determine factors influencing burrow occupancy and burrow fidelity in native habitats.

Task 2: Investigate winter habitat and survival of burrowing owls on winter ranges.

Task 3: Evaluate nesting productivity, natal recruitment, and annual survival in eastern Washington. Compare these parameters between large, stable colonies and more ephemeral sites. Also compare these parameters between native and disturbed habitats used.

Task 4: Monitor year round movements and long-term survival through marking and radio- telemetry. Determine dispersal distances and colonization potential of adjacent areas.

Objective 2: Develop conservation measures to protect burrowing owls.

Task 1: Develop management strategies for continued occupancy and enhancement of both native and disturbed habitats, like irrigation canals, golf courses, and other disturbed habitats.

Task 2: Evaluate the usefulness of artificial burrows in enhancing and re-establishing burrowing owl colonies in both native and disturbed habitats.

Task 3: Determine management strategies for re-establishment, augmentation, and re-colonizing unoccupied habitats.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 72 Ferruginous Hawk Ferruginous hawks are prominent shrub-steppe raptor throughout Washington state. Statewide, occupancy rates of this species are low. Since 1987, <27% of historic ferruginous hawk territories (n = 222) have been occupied annually. Thirty ferruginous hawk territories are documented within the Crab Creek Subbasin and are primarily distributed along Moses Coulee and Crab Creek. Breeding data in 3 years for which complete surveys were conducted in the basin (1995-97) found <30% annual rate of occupancy. The Crab Creek Subbasin is located in the North Recovery Zone for ferruginous hawks (WDFW 1996).

Status: The ferruginous hawk is a state designated threatened species.

Limiting Factors: Reasons for low occupancy of ferruginous hawk territories in Washington State and in the Crab Creek Subbasin are unknown. Regional declines of ferruginous hawks have been tied to changes in native habitat conditions from such factors as cultivation and grazing, that may be associated with prey declines. Changes in the abundance and distribution of prey associated with shrubsteppe habitats in the Subbasin, particularly blacktail jackrabbits (Lepus californicus) and Washington ground squirrels (Spermophilus washingtoni), may reduce nesting of ferruginous hawks. Historic information suggests black-tailed jackrabbits were important prey for nesting ferruginous hawks in Washington, but a sampling of 34 nests in 1995 found an absence of jackrabbits and ground squirrels and a predominance of northern pocket gophers in the diet. Due to statewide declines, blacktail jackrabbits are being considered for threatened species listing, and Washington ground squirrels are a Protected Species in the state. Low occupancy of ferruginous hawk nest sites could also result from low survival of adults on winter areas. Recent research suggests the possibility of poisoning from rodenticides used widely in California where Washington ferruginous hawks winter.

Goal: Recover ferruginous hawks from threatened status by maintaining a population of at least 60 nesting pairs statewide, including at least 10 pairs in the North Recovery Zone (WDFW 1996).

Objective 1: Improve our understanding of the suitability and security of ferruginous hawk nesting habitats (see Goal 3.1 and research topics in section 7 of Recovery Plan, WDFW 1996).

Task 1: Investigate ferruginous hawk occupancy and productivity characteristics in relation to jackrabbit and ground squirrel distribution and abundance in shrubsteppe habitats.

Task 2: Investigate rates of prey delivery, food habits, and adult nest attendance to nestling survival through video monitoring.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 73 Task 3: Evaluate habitat alteration and human activity relationships to ferruginous hawk productivity and occupancy, including the efficacy of existing platform nests erected to enhance nesting.

Objective 2: Assess the importance of survival rates and contaminants of adult and juvenile ferruginous hawks to low rates of nest occupancy, and relate these to hawk movements (see Goal 3.1 and research topics in section 7 of Recovery Plan, WDFW 1996).

Task 1: Capture and take blood samples from adult and juvenile hawks for pesticide analysis.

Task 2: Monitor year round movements and long-term survival through marking and satellite telemetry.

Objective 3: Improve ferruginous hawk nest occupancy by identifying and promoting protection and enhancement (i.e., erect nest platforms) of the highest quality nesting habitats based on assessment of prey, survival, and human activity. Refine recommended spatial and temporal management buffers around nests and provide site specific recommendations for nest protection.

Washington Ground Squirrel Washington ground squirrels are associated with relatively deep soils within shrubsteppe communities (Dobler et al. 1996, Betts 1990, 1999). Because most deep soil habitats have been converted, Washington ground squirrels have declined. Most remaining populations of ground squirrels are within the Crab Creek Subbasin (Figure 3).

Status: Washington ground squirrels are candidates for both state and federal listing as a threatened or endangered species.

Limiting Factors: Lack of shrubsteppe habitat with relatively deep soil.

Goal: Recover populations of Washington ground squirrels in the Crab Creek Subbasin to the level where populations are viable.

Strategy 1: Determine distribution and abundance of Washington ground squirrels in Crab Creek Subbasin.

Task 1: Monitor all known Washington ground squirrel populations annually.

Task 2: Conduct regular searches for ‘new’ and or additional populations of Washington ground squirrels.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 74 Task 3: Determine habitat characteristics at occupied and unoccupied colonies.

Task 4: Evaluate the effects of habitat management on Washington ground squirrels.

Strategy 2: Develop habitat management strategies for Washington ground squirrels and incorporate specific management objectives into Wildlife Area and landscape plans.

Northern Leopard Frog Surveys since 1992 indicate that northern leopard frogs may be found in only 2 locations in Washington, both within the Crab Creek Subbasin. The historic distribution was principally along wetlands of the Columbia River and its tributaries; most of these habitats have been dramatically altered (McAllister et al. 1999).

Status: The northern leopard frog has declined dramatically throughout its historic range resulting in its listing as an endangered species by the state of Washington.

Limiting Factors: Loss of wetland habitat along the Columbia River and its tributaries, competition and predation by non-native fish, introduced bullfrogs (Rana catesbiana), and fluctuations in water levels within the CBIP appear to be significant factors in the decline of northern leopard frogs.

Goal: Conserve the remaining populations of northern leopard frogs in Washington and reestablish additional populations.

Strategy 1: Develop needed information on distribution, habitat and relationships with other species, and implement recovery of leopard frogs.

Task 1: Complete surveys and determine specific distribution of northern leopard frogs in Crab Creek Subbasin.

Task 2: Investigate breeding, migratory, and over-wintering habitat relationships of northern leopard frogs.

Task 3: Evaluate range of suitable habitats, juxtaposition of habitats, and appropriate conditions for northern leopard frogs.

Task 4: Determine effects of reservoir inundation on habitat for the Potholes Reservoir population of northern leopard frogs.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 75 Task 5: Determine effects of non-native fish and introduced bullfrogs on northern leopard frogs.

Task 6: Determine effects of wetland restoration projects for waterfowl on northern leopard frogs.

Strategy 2: Plan and implement recovery programs, translocations and re-establishment of leopard frogs throughout the historic range of the species.

Breeding Ducks within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project As a byproduct of the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, extensive wetland and deepwater habitats were created in central Washington (Johnsgard 1956). WDFW’s Desert Wildlife Area (DWA) contains about 3,035 hectares of wetlands associated with Frenchman Hills and Winchester wasteways; in the early 1980’s these habitats supported breeding densities as high as 77 breeding-duck pairs per km2. At least 10 species of ducks are known to breed on the DWA, with mallards and redheads being the most numerous.

Status: The breeding waterfowl population on the DWA has declined steadily since the mid 1980’s. The numbers have declined form about 25,000 to about 5,000 in the last 16 years. This decline is common to all breeding duck species and may be due to several factors including decline in the quantity and quality of wetland habitats. Shallow wetlands have filled with organic deposits and wind- blown sediments, dense stands of emergent vegetation have replaced open-water habitat, and non-indigenous plants have replaced native species. Carp have also changed or eliminated the submerged-plant community. Recent research indicates that nesting success and brood survival is very low, and populations cannot maintain themselves without annual immigration from other populations (Giudice et al. 2000).

Limiting Factor: Habitat that can support successful nesting and brood-rearing for ducks breeding on the Desert Wildlife Area. Goal: Recover breeding duck populations within the Desert Wildlife Area to the levels found in the late 1980’s (>10,000 breeding ducks).

Strategy 1: Limit populations of nest predators and monitor response by nesting ducks.

Task 1: Eliminate Russian olive stands within 1 mile of wetlands managed for breeding duck species (Russian olives support nest sites and perches for magpies, and provide structure to support raccoon and striped skunk populations).

Task 2: Measure nest success before and after Russian olive removal.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 76 Tasks 3: Remove large debris from the wildlife area that may harbor unwanted nest predators (raccoons and skunks).

Strategy 2: Improve nesting habitat to provide extensive and uniform stands of dense nesting cover.

Task 1: Plant areas where Russian olive has been removed to native grass/legume mixes and evaluate mixes to determine best mix for area.

Task 2: Plant areas with persistent exotic-weed problems to native grass/legume mixes.

Task 3: Remove cattle grazing remove from areas that have significant nesting potential.

Strategy 3: Enhance wetlands to improve the productivity of foods for breeding ducks and ducklings.

Task 1: Remove carp from wetlands managed for breeding waterfowl

Task 2: Manage water-level, where possible, to simulate the natural drought-wet cycle of natural wetlands and enhance productivity of invertebrates and plant foods.

Task 3: Control exotic wetland plants such as purple loosestrife and Eurasian milfoil in favor of more beneficial native plants.

Pheasants and Farmland Wildlife Much of the native shrub-steppe habitat that once was present within the Crab Creek Subbasin has been converted to agricultural lands. Although it is impossible to reconstruct or replace this vast amount of native vegetation, it is not impossible to enhance these lands for wildlife. Pheasants and other farmland wildlife thrived in response to new federal irrigation projects initiated in eastern Washington over 50 years ago. During the early to mid-1960s, pheasants in particular, provided exceptional hunting opportunities in those areas converted to irrigated farmland. In 1963, the pheasant harvest in Grant County alone was in excess of 134,000 birds. Increases and diversity of other wildlife was also evident due to the changing landscape that provided the necessary habitat for farmland wildlife.

Status: Farmland wildlife (primarily pheasant and California quail) that were abundant during the 1960s and 1970s are now present in much lower densities (WDFW 2000). Significant changes in irrigation and other farming practices

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 77 have had a major impact on the ability of irrigated lands within the Columbia Basin Project to support large populations of pheasant and quail. .

Limiting Factors: The decline in farmland wildlife was the result of the reduction in the amount, distribution, and quality of permanent wildlife habitat. Modern agriculture, grazing, and other developments (i.e., residential) have reduced the habitat base to small isolated patches of cover. Pheasant and other farmland wildlife densities are now approaching levels similar to those that existed prior to irrigation development.

Goal: Prevent further declines in populations of pheasant and quail in irrigated portions of the Columbia Basin Project within the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Objective: Increase pheasant productivity brood survey index by 25% over current levels in specific areas within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project.

Task 1: Continue and complete the ecosystem model acquisition project within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project (specifically Irrigation Block 43). In addition, purchase other strategically placed properties in other areas where this acquisition process has already occurred. Maintain and manage these sites for increased levels of wildlife throughout the entire localized area.

Task 2: Continue to create and foster wildlife partnerships with private landowners within the Crab Creek Subbasin. Cooperative agreements for habitat restoration and public access are a key element in providing wildlife benefits and wildlife related public opportunities.

Task 3: Continue to assist and participate with landowners in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Technical assistance, cost share participation, and habitat restoration efforts by WDFW can provide immense benefits for wildlife during contract periods and beyond.

Task 4: Continue to foster partnerships with conservation organizations, sporting groups, and the general public. Volunteer time and donated funds have greatly assisted in meeting farmland wildlife restoration goals during the past decade.

Mule Deer Mule deer are found throughout the Crab Creek Subbasin and are especially abundant in the north and east portions of the subbasin. Most mule deer populations in the subbasin are migratory and may move up to 120 km between

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 78 summer and winter ranges. Each year 200-300 deer drown in irrigation canals in the summer or become stranded in the empty canals during winter.

Limiting Factors: Large, concrete lined irrigation canals are barriers to herd movement and hazards for individual deer that either try to swim across the canal or become stranded inside the canals during the winter.

Goal: Reduce or eliminate deer mortality in CBIP canals.

Strategy: Develop technologies to keep deer out of the canals and minimize the canals impact as a barrier to movement within and between home ranges.

Task 1: Construct additional deer escape ramp in the West Canal between Soap Lake and Ephrata (location has already been identified during consultations with Quincy Columbia Basin Irrigation District)

Task 2: Construct additional deer escape ramp in the East Canal east of Stratford Road and below the second siphon.

Task 3: Fence the main canal from Billy Clapp Lake to the Soap Lake Siphon.

Task 4: Develop mechanism to permit deer movement across the main canal between Billy Clapp Lake and the Soap Lake Siphon.

BPA-funded Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Activities

Adaptive Management Monitoring is a tool for detecting change and identifying problems. If detected early, problems can be addressed while cost effective solutions are still available. For example, an invasive weed species is much easier to eradicate/control at the initial stages than attempting to eradicate it once established. Monitoring is also critical for measuring management success. Good monitoring can demonstrate that management strategies are working and provide evidence supporting the continuation of management. Conversely, monitoring can also show a need to change current management strategies. Monitoring is a key component of ‘adaptive management’ in which monitoring measures progress towards, or away from, management goals and objectives. Monitoring provides evidence to continue or change current management strategies (Ringold et al. 1996).

The adaptive management cycle consists of 4 basic steps: 1) resource objectives are developed to describe the desired condition; 2) management is designed to meet the objectives; 3) the response of the resource is monitored to determine if the management objective has been met; and 4) management is adapted (changed)

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 79 if objectives are not reached. Note that monitoring provides the link between objectives and adaptive management. Monitoring, as part of the adaptive management cycle, has two primary components. The first is that monitoring is driven by management objectives (what is measured, how it is measured, and how often it is measured). The second component is that monitoring is only initiated if opportunities for management change exist. If no alternative management options are available, expending resources to monitor something is probably futile.

Vegetation monitoring Habitat evaluation procedures (HEP) should be conducted by WDFW Wildlife Area staff, Vegetation Management Team personnel, and volunteers every five years to monitor general habitat trends. At least two baseline transects should be replicated in each cover type for each area evaluated. Areas should be selected on the basis of differences in cover type, management history, and current management/restoration protocols. Data on shrub and herbaceous cover (Daubenmire 1970), visual obstruction (Robel et al. 1970), and species composition should be systematically collected using standard techniques. HEP surveys should be conducted within the same general time frame and location as the original baseline transects to ensure similar plant phenology. All transects should be documented with standard photographs.

Substantial areas of noxious weeds should be mapped and monitored every two years. Standard and periodic photographs should be taken at each area monitored. Site specific enhancement/maintenance monitoring should be done with similar techniques, but with more flexibility in periodicity (every 1 to 5 years). All techniques should be designed to be rigorous under field conditions, to produce data that is statistically sound when analyzed, and to document results that are potentially useful with regard to future management opportunities.

Wildlife Monitoring Monitoring should occur annually or on a rotating basis depending on the status of the species. The primary species to be monitored include shrubsteppe obligates and those that are listed as species of concern, candidates, threatened, or endangered (Table 1). The technique used to monitor wildlife should be determined based on the species monitored and the purpose of the research (Table 5). Furthermore, coordination between habitat and wildlife surveys will help ensure valid assessments of wildlife responses to habitat management efforts.

Non BPA-funded Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Activities Research and monitoring activities are ongoing for numerous species of wildlife in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Table 5). Despite the relatively thorough list, many of the listed activities are temporary and/or project related. In addition, many of the activities are influenced by annual variations in the availability of personnel and/or budget.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 80 Table 7. Efforts to monitor wildlife and habitat in Crab Creek Subbasin Surveys and research projects Agency conducting survey or research Eastern Washington mule deer study WDFW, CTCR, Chelan County PUD Pre-season aerial and/or ground surveys for WDFW deer Post-season aerial and/or ground surveys for WDFW deer Columbian sharp-tailed grouse lek surveys WDFW, CTCR Sage grouse lek surveys WDFW Upland game bird brood counts WDFW Waterfowl pair and brood counts WDFW, USFWS Bald eagle nest surveys WDFW, Douglas County PUD Peregrine falcon survey WDFW, NPS Columbian sharp-tailed grouse lek surveys WDFW, CTCR Ferruginous hawk nest occupancy and WDFW productivity surveys Ferruginous hawk ecology study WDFW Monthly waterfowl surveys WDFW, USFWS Mid-Winter waterfowl survey WDFW, USFWS Pygmy rabbit burrow survey WDFW, WSU, TNC Pygmy rabbit habitat evaluation WDFW, WSU Burrowing owl surveys WDFW, WSU, BLM, USFWS Northern leopard frog habitat and movement CWU Washington ground squirrel social interaction Cornell University study Washington ground squirrel surveys Eastern Oregon University Amphibian and reptile surveys DNR Bat Surveys The Nature Conservancy, Shrubsteppe breeding bird surveys WDFW Fragmentation effects on migratory songbirds WDFW

Statement of Fish and Wildlife Needs

Fisheries • Obtain baseline information on status of native fish communities.

• Reduce negative impacts of non-native fish on native species of fish and wildlife.

• Minimize negative impacts of Caspian terns of survival of salmonids.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 81 • Enhance instream flows, water quality and habitat conditions to benefit resident salmonids

Wildlife • Obtain detailed distribution and description of shrubsteppe habitats with reference to dominant plant species, vegetative condition, and habitat potential.

• Continue and/or expand surveys to monitor distribution, abundance, and viability of species of interest including sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbit, Washington ground squirrel, ferruginous hawk, golden eagle, and neotropical migrants.

• Evaluate shrubsteppe habitat characteristics in relation to use by shrubsteppe obligates such as sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbits, Washington ground squirrels, and neotropical migrants.

• Evaluate shrubsteppe restoration activities in relation to wildlife potential; including activities associated with BPA, WDFW, BLM, USFWS, NRCS, and private land.

• Evaluate landscape configuration in relation to population viability for species of interest including sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbits, Washington ground squirrels, and neotropical migrants.

• Expand shrubsteppe quantity with the aid of acquisitions, easements, and landowner incentives such as the Conservation Reserve Program.

• Enhance shrubsteppe in poor quality with implementation and expansion of shrubsteppe restoration activities.

• Enhance and maintain artificial wetlands within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project to support habitat diversity and wildlife production including breeding ducks and northern leopard frogs.

• Enhance artificial wetlands within the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project to allow for water level management, where possible, to maximize wildlife benefits and better simulate the drought/wet cycle experienced by natural wetlands within the subbasin.

• Control invasive-exotic vegetation throughout the subbasin to improve nesting habitats, food sources, and reduce nest-predator habitat.

• Provide a suitable matrix of breeding, feeding, drinking, and hibernating habitat for bats.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 82 • Improve riparian habitats along Crab Creek and associated tributaries for fish and wildlife; reduce and mitigate impacts from crop production and livestock grazing activities.

• Obtain financial support to continue operation and management of existing government property that is critical for wildlife.

• Integrate Crab Creek Subbasin needs with those of adjacent subbasins.

• Coordinate with multiple agencies, groups, and individuals to achieve goals, objectives, and strategies

Summary This document represents the efforts of many individuals who in turn represented numerous state, federal, county and private interests in the Crab Creek Subbasin. Together they attempted to bring together, under one cover, a physical description of the subbasin’s current and past natural history along with a record of efforts directed at protecting its natural resources. Considering the size of the landscape and the limits of time and personnel, this document should serve as an excellent guide and reference for future natural resource planning efforts within the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 83 REFERENCES

Adams County Conservation District: Agriculture BMP Implementation Project, March 2000; Weber Coulee Watershed Plan (January 1992); Weber Coulee Implementation Program,(June 1996); Odessa Aquifer Erosion Control Study, (March1989); Middle Columbia River Watershed Plan. (undated)

Anderson, J., and P. R. Ashley. 1993. Swanson Lakes Columbia River Mitigation Project Enhancement Plan. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 37p.

Bain, R. C. 1990. Moses Lake Clean Lake Project: irrigation water management final report. Moses Lake Irrigation and Reclamation District.

Behnke, R. J. 1992. Native trout of Western North America. Amer. Fish. Soc., Monogr. 6. Bethesda, Maryland.

Bartels and Tabor 1999

Berger, M., and D. Kuehn. 1992. Chief Joseph Dam loss assessment. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Beieler, V. E. 1978. Soil survey of Douglas County, Washington. USDA, Soil Conservation Service.

Bettinger, K. A., and R. Milner. 2000. Sandhill crane (Grus canadensis). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Betts, B. 1990. Geographic distribution and habitat preferences of Washington ground squirrels (Spermophilus washingtoni). Northwest Naturalist 71:27-37.

Betts, B. 1999. Current status of Washington ground squirrels in Oregon and Washington. Northwest Naturalist 80:35-38.

Buss, I. O. 1965. Wildlife Ecology. Washington State University. Pullman.

Buss, I. O., and E. S. Dziedzic. 1955. Relation of cultivation to the disappearance of the Columbian sharp-tailed grouse from southeastern Washington. Condor 57:185-187.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 84 Collis, K., D. D. Roby, D. P. Craig, D. E. Lyons, and S. L. Adamany. 1999. Avian predation on juvenile salmonids in the Lower Columbia River. Draft 1998 Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Craig, D. P., D. D. Roby, D. E. Lyons, K. Collis, T. Zimmerman, and N. Chelgren. In press. Population status of Caspian terns on the Pacific Coast of North America: The coalescence of the World’s largest colony in the Columbia River Estuary. Condor.

Craig, E. H., and T. H. Craig. 1998. Lead and mercury levels in golden and bald eagles and annual movements of golden eagles wintering in east central Idaho 1990-1997. Idaho Bureau of Land Management. Technical Bulletin 98-12. Boise.

Coullier, D., A. E. Hudson, and A. Ford. 1942. Archaeology of the Upper Columbia Region. University of Washington Publications in Anthropology, Seattle. 9:1-178.

Daubenmire, R. 1970. Steppe vegetation of Washington. Bulletin EB 1446. Washington State University Cooperative Extension. Pullman. 131p.

Dobler, F. C., J. Eby, C. Perry, S. Richardson, and M. Vander Haegen. 1996. Status of Washington’s shrub-steppe ecosystem: extent, ownership, and wildlife/vegetation relationships. Phase One Completion Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 39p.

Doran, P. J., M. Whalen, K. Riener, and L. Fitzner. 2000. American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Douglas Creek Conservation District. circa 1987. Douglas Creek watershed water quality project. Unpub. file doc., Douglas Cr. Cons. Dist., Waterville, Wash. 5pp.

Giudice, J. H., M. J. Monda, and J. T. Ratti. 2000. Recruitment and survival of dabbling ducks using irrigation-created habitats in central Washington. Project Completion Report, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Ephrata.

Groves, K. E. 1951. Fishes of Moses Lake, Washington. Walla Walla College Dept. Biol. Sci., College Place, Washington. 22pp.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 85 Elmore, W., and A. Oakley. 1974. Douglas stream inventory and analysis. U.S.D.I./Bur. Land Mgmt., unpubl. report. 10pp.

Evermann, B. W., and J. T. Nichols. 1909. Notes on the fishes of Crab Creek, Washington, with description of a new species of trout. Proc. Biol. Soc. of Wash. 22:91-94

Hays, D. W., and F. C. Dobler. 2000. Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Hays, D. W., and R. L. Milner. 2000. Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Hays, D. W., M. J. Tirhi, and D. W. Stinson. 1998a. Washington State status report for the sage grouse. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 62p.

Hays, D. W., M. J. Tirhi, and D. W. Stinson. 1998b. Washington State status report for the sharp-tailed grouse. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 57p.

Hickman, G. J. 1998. Wild turkey annual regional report. In Game status and trend report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Howerton, Jack. 1986. Wildlife protection, mitigation and enhancement planning for Grand Coulee Dam. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 121p.

Jackson, T. B., and S. Y. Jackson. 1994. A comparative tagging study of wild rainbow trout in a stream (1992). Unpub. report, Fish. Mgmt. Div., Wash. Dept. Fish and Wildl. 16pp.

Jacobson, J. E., and M. C. Snyder. 2000. Shrubsteppe mapping of eastern Washington using Landsat Satellite Thematic Mapper data. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 35p.

Johnson, D. H. and T. A. O'Neil 2001 (in press) Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon pp. 768

Johnsgard, P. A. 1956. Effects of water fluctuation and vegetation change on bird populations, particularly waterfowl. Ecology 37:689-701

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 86 Lampman, B. H. 1946. Coming of the pond fishes. Binford and Mort, Portland, Washington. 177pp.

Leary, A. W. 1996. Home ranges, core use areas, and dietary habits of ferruginous hawks in southcentral Washington. M.S. thesis. Boise State University, Idaho.

Larsen, E. M. (Technical editor). 1997. Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species. Volume III: amphibians and reptiles. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Larsen, E. M., E. Rodrick, and R. Milner (Technical editors). 1995. Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species. Volume I: invertebrates. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Lewis, J. C., R. Milner, and M. Whalen. 2000. Common loon (Gavia immer). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

McAllister, K. R., W. P. Leonard, D. W. Hays, and R. C. Friesz. 1999. Washington State status report for the northern leopard frog. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 36p.

McDonald, M. W., and K. P. Reese. 1998. Landscape changes within the historical distribution of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in eastern Washington: is there hope? Northwest Science 72:34-41.

Morgan, J. T., D. A. Ware, M. Tirhi, and R. L. Milner. 2000. Wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Musser, J., and T. McCall. 2000. Pygmy rabbit management. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 12p.

National Research Council. 1995. Upstream: salmon and society.

Nordstrom, N. 1997. Northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens). In Larsen, E. M. (Technical editor) Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species. Volume III: amphibians and reptiles. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Nordstrom, N., and R. Milner. 1997. Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris). In Larsen, E. M. (Technical editor) Management recommendations for

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 87 Washington’s priority species. Volume III: amphibians and reptiles. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Nordstrom, N., and M. Whalen. 1997. Striped whipsnake (Masticophis taeniatus). In Larsen, E. M. (Technical editor) Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species. Volume III: amphibians and reptiles. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Quinn, T., and R. Milner. 2000. Great blue heron (Ardea herodias). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Richardson, S., M. Whalen, D. Demers, and R. Milner. 2000. Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Riseland, J. L. 1905. 14th and 15th annual reports of the State Fish Commissioner for the years 1903 and 1904. Wash. Dept. Fish and Game, Olympia.

Riseland, J. L. 1909. 18th and 19th annual reports of the State Fish Commissioner for the year for the years 1907 and 1908. Wash. Dept. Fish and Game, Olympia.

Rodrick, E., and R. Milner (eds.). 1991. Management recommendations for Washington’s priority habitats and species. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wildl. , Olympia.

Robel, R. J., J. N. Briggs, A. D. Dayton, and L. C. Hulbert. 1970. Relationships between visual obstruction measurements and weight of grassland vegetation. J. Range Manage. 23:295-297.

Roby, D. D., D. P. Craig, K. Collis, and S. L. Adamany. 1998. Avian predation on juvenile salmonids in the Lower Columbia River. 1997 Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Schroeder, M. A. 2000. Breeding bird diversity and density in relation to restoration efforts for sharp-tailed grouse on wildlife areas in north-central Washington. Progress Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 14p.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 88 Schroeder, M. A., D. W. Hays, M. A. Murphy, and D. J. Pierce. 2000a. Changes in the distribution and abundance of Columbian sharp-tailed grouse in Washington. Northwestern Naturalist 81:95-103.

Schroeder, M. A., D. W. Hays, M. F. Livingston, L. E. Stream, J. E. Jacobson, and D. J. Pierce. 2000b. Changes in the distribution and abundance of sage grouse in Washington. Northwestern Naturalist 81:104-112.

Sherman 1999. Annual Report on Field Activities Re: 1999 Scientific Collection Permit. 10 p.

Sherman 2000. Annual Report on Field Activities Re: Scientific Collection Permit 00-27 12 p.

Shumacher, R. 1998. Crab Creek Water Quality Monitoring Report. For Lincoln County Conservation District. Davenport, Washington.

Smith, M. R., P. W. Mattocks, Jr., and K. M. Cassidy. 1997. Breeding birds of Washington State. Location data and predicted distributions. Volume 4 in Washington State Gap Analysis – Final Report (K. M. Cassidy, C. E. Grue, M. R. Smith, and K. M. Dvornich, eds.). Seattle Audubon Society Publications in Zoology No. 1. Seattle, Washington. 538p.

Stockman, D. D. 1978. Soil survey of Lincoln County, Washington. USDA, Soil Conservation Service.

Stober, Q. J., R. W. Tyler, C. E. Petrosky, K. R. Johnson, C. F. Cowman, Jr., J. Wicock, and R. E.Nakatani. 1979. Development and evaluation of a net barrier to reduce entrainment loss of kokanee from Banks Lake. Final report, Fish. Res. Inst., Univ. Wash, Seattle

Strong, T. N. 1906. Cathlamet on the Columbia. Metropolitan Press, Portland, Oregon.

Swenson, J. E., C. A. Simmons, and C. D. Eustace. 1987. Decrease of sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus after ploughing of sagebrush steppe. Biological Conservation 41:125-132.

USGS. 1998. Water quality in the central Columbia Plateau. Circular 1144.

Vander Haegen, W. M., F. C. Dobler, and D. J. Pierce. 2000. Shrubsteppe bird response to habitat and landscape variables in eastern Washington, USA. Conservation Biology 14:1145-1160.

Vander Haegen, W. M., S. M. McCorquodale, C. R. Peterson, G. A. Green, and E. Yensen. 2001. Wildlife communities of eastside shrubland and grassland

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 89 habitats. In D. H. Johnson and T. A. O'Neil, editors. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. University of Oregon Press, Corvallis, Oregon.

Watson, J. W., and D. J. Pierce. 2000. Migration and winter ranges of ferruginous hawks from Washington. Annual Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia.

Ware, D. A. 2000. Blue grouse (Dendragapus obscurus). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Ware, D. A., and G. J. Hickman. 1999. Statewide wild turkey annual report. In Game status and trend report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Ware, D. A., and M. Tirhi. 2000a. Chukar (Alectoris chukar). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Ware, D. A., and M. Tirhi. 2000b. Ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus). In Management recommendations for Washington’s priority species (web site). Volume IV: birds. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Washington Department of Ecology. 2000. Moses Lake proposed phosphorus criterion and preliminary load allocations based on historical review. WDOE 00-03-036.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1995a. Washington State management plan for sage grouse. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 101p.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1995b. Washington State management plan for sharp-tailed grouse. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 99p.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1995c. Washington State recovery plan for the pygmy rabbit. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 73p.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1996. Washington State recovery plan for ferruginous hawk. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 63p.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 90 [WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1997. Report to Bureau of Reclamation and Columbia Basin Irrigation Districts on Deer Mortality in Irrigation Canals. 3 p.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1998. Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area work plan. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 34p.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000a. Game status and trend report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000b. Priority Habitats and Species. Web site. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

[WDFW] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2001. Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area Work Plan Addendum (draft). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia.

Washington Department of Natural Resources. 1997. Coordinated Resource Management Plan for Sagebrush Flat. Washington Department of Natural Resources. Ephrata. 58p.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1996. Warmwater fish of Washington. Angler Ed. Ecosystems Prog, Wash. Dept. Fish and Wildl. Rpt. # FM93-9, Olympia. (revised. Feb., 1996), 28pp.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1999. Update on state candidate and listed species through July 6, 1999. Wash. Dept. Fish and Wildl., Olympia. 2pp.

Williamson, A. K., M. D. Munn, S. J. Ryker, R. J. Wagner, J. C. Ebbert, and A. M. Vanderpool. 1998. Water quality in the Central Columbia Plateau: Washington and Idaho, 1992-1995. USGS. Geological Survey Circular 1144. Denver, CO. 35p.

Weaver, D. 1999. A case study evaluating a change to the surface water quality standards from “class-based” to “use-based” within the Columbia Basin Project Area. Wash. St. Dept. Ecol., Water Quality Prog. Publ. No. 99-27. 68pp.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 91 SUBBASIN SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS

FY 2002 Projects Proposals Review The following subbasin proposals were reviewed by the Crab Creek Subbasin Team and are recommended for Bonneville Power Administration project funding.

Project: 199106100– Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: Protect, increase, and maintain a viable sharp-tailed grouse meta population, re- establish a viable sage grouse population, increase mule deer use of the project site, and enhance shrubsteppe habitat for shrub-steppe obligate species.

Abbreviated Abstract Established in 1993, the 8,094 ha (20,000 ac) Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area (SLWA) is managed by the Washington Department of fish and Wildlife (WDFW) primarily to support sharp-tailed grouse recovery efforts within Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Sharp-tailed Grouse Management Zone Four. The SLWA mitigation project is the "core" property within WDFW’s Sharp-tailed Grouse Management Zone Four and is currently occupied by approximately 180 sharp-tailed grouse (Schroeder pers. comm. 1999). WDFW’s primary biological goal is to establish and maintain a viable sharp-tailed grouse population at the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area. Similarly the primary biological objective is to increase the sharp-tailed grouse population to at least 400 grouse by 2010 through habitat manipulation, maintenance, and protection measures, and by natural recruitment and population augmentation if necessary. Mule deer, sage grouse and numerous shrub-steppe obligate species are also high priority management species at the SLWA.

The SWLA is comprised of lands purchased and/or owned by WDFW (2,517 ha/6,220 ac), Bonneville Power Administration (5,059 ha/12,500 ac), and the Washington Department of Natural Resources (518 ha/1,280 ac). In addition, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) owns approximately 6,071 ha (15,000 ac) that adjoins SLWA on the south.

The white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus Richardson) population in the Kootenai River was listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 6, 1994, due to a virtual lack of recruitment since 1974. The Kootenai River White Sturgeon

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 92 Relationship to Other Projects

Project ID Title Nature of Relationship 199609400 Scotch Creek Wildlife Area Supports this project and WDFW goals and objectives 1994044 Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area Supports this project and WDFW (Douglas County Pygmy goals and objectives Rabbit Project) 21034 Colville Tribes restore habitat Supports Tribal (CCT) and WDFW for sharp-tailed grouse goals and objectives 199204800 Hells Gate big game winter Supports Tribal (CCT) and WDFW range wildlife mitigation goals and objectives project

Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies Northwest Power Planning Council Fish and Wildlife Program (1994/2000): The NWPPC system-wide goal in the 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program is a healthy Columbia Basin: "one that supports both human settlement and the long-term sustainability of native fish and wildlife species in native habitats where possible, while recognizing that where impacts have irrevocably changed the ecosystem, we must protect and enhance the ecosystem that remains” (NWPPC 1994). The overall vision in the NWPPC’s 2000 Draft Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPPC 2000) is “a Columbia River ecosystem that sustains an abundant, productive, and diverse community of fish and wildlife, mitigating across the basin for the adverse effects to fish and wildlife caused by the development and operation of the hydrosystem and providing the benefits from fish and wildlife valued by the people of the region.”

The Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area was acquired to partially mitigate for losses resulting from construction of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams. Sharp- tailed grouse, sage grouse, and mule deer are listed in the loss assessments for both dams (Howerton 1986, Berger, M., and D. Kuehn 1992) and were used as habitat indicator species during the Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) analysis (Berger, Cope 1992). Funding for the SLWA has been provided by BPA under terms specified in the Washington Agreement (MOA).

As an ongoing mitigation project, the SLWA project is consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program including, but not limited to the following sections: Overall Vision (Section III A-1) “Wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem….”, Planning Assumptions (Section III, A-2) “This is a habitat based program, rebuilding healthy, natural producing fish and wildlife populations by protecting, mitigating, and restoring habitats and the biological systems within them…”, Scientific Principles (Section III, B-2) i.e., Principles one through eight, Biological Objectives (Section III, C-1) “Recovery of fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of the hydro system that are listed under the

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 93 Endangered Species Act,” (Section III, C-2a.4) “Develop and implement habitat acquisition and enhancement projects to fully mitigate for identified losses; Coordinate fish and wildlife activities throughout the basin…; maintain existing and created habitat values; and monitor and evaluate habitat and species responses to mitigation actions,” and Wildlife (Section III, D-7) “Complete the current mitigation program for construction and inundation losses and include wildlife mitigation for all operational losses as an integrated part of habitat protection and restoration”.

Wildlife/habitat management activities at the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area focus primarily on recovery of sharp-tailed grouse and, to a lesser extent, sage grouse. Sharp-tailed grouse were historically found in shrubsteppe and deciduous shrub habitats throughout eastern Washington, but have declined 94% between 1960 and 2000 (Schroeder et al. 2000). The current population in Washington is estimated to be around 600 and is listed as a threatened species by the state of Washington. (Schroeder et al. 2000). Approximately 33% of the remaining birds are found within the Crab Creek Subbasin.

The overall goal of the Crab Creek Subbasin Summary is to: Protect, enhance, and restore native habitats, particularly shrubsteppe, to provide the quality and continuity necessary to support viable populations of wildlife within the Crab Creek Subbasin. The goals and objectives described in the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area mitigation project management plan (Anderson J., P. R. Ashley 1995) support both WDFW and Crab Creek Subbasin goals and objectives.

WDFW State Goal(s) Crab Subbasin Goal(s) SLWA Project Goal(s) Recover populations of sharp- Increase the population size and tailed grouse in the Crab Establish and maintain a viable distribution of sharp-tailed grouse sharp-tailed grouse population at and protect, enhance, and Creek Subbasin to the level the Swanson Lakes Wildlife increase shrub/meadow steppe. where populations are viable. Area.

Protect, enhance, and maintain 20,000 acres of shrub-steppe habitat for sharp-tailed grouse and other shrub-steppe obligate species.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 94 WDFW State Objective(s) Crab Subbasin Objective(s) SLWA Project Objective(s) Use translocations of sharp-tailed Increase the breeding population grouse into Washington from Increase the number of sharp- of sharp-tails from 380 to more populations in other states so that tailed grouse at SLWA from 180 than 2,000 distributed throughout a population of at least 1,000 is to 400 by 2010. four management zones. supported in the Crab Creek Subbasin by 2010.

Conduct research on sharp-tailed Increase the breeding population grouse through 2005 to monitor Monitor wildlife and habitat of sharp-tails in WDFW’s Sharp- population size, determine response to protection, tailed Grouse Management Zone population viability, and evaluate maintenance, and enhancement 4 to a minimum of 800 grouse. population responses to habitat measures annually. alteration

Improve quantity, quality, and Protect at least 98,000 acres of configuration of the shrubsteppe Implement habitat management high quality, relatively habitat necessary to support a activities and schedules described contiguous (<2 mile gaps) habitat viable population of sharp-tailed in the SLWA Enhancement Plan. that is currently occupied. grouse by 2010.

The Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area was acquired to partially mitigate for losses resulting from construction of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams. Sharp- tailed grouse, sage grouse, and mule deer are listed in the loss assessments for both dams (Howerton 1986, Berger, M., and D. Kuehn 1992) and were used as habitat indicator species during the Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) analysis (Berger, Cope 1992). Funding for the SLWA has been provided by BPA under terms specified in the Washington Agreement (MOA).

Review Comments No Project Review Comments

Budget FY02 FY03 FY04 290,238 290,137 265,137 Category: High Priority Category: High Priority Category: High Priority

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 95 Project: 199404400– Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: Protect, and enhance shrub-steppe habitat necessary to maintain and expand viable populations of pygmy rabbits, sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse and other shrub-steppe obligate species.

Abbreviated Abstract The 3,487 hectare (8,616 acre) Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area (SFWA) is located in Douglas County, Washington and is comprised of four disjunct parcels (Units) owned and/or managed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The SFWA includes the 1,515 hectare (3,740 acre) Sagebrush Flat Unit, the 130 hectare (320 acre) Dormaier Unit, the 893 hectare (2,206 acre) Chester Butte Unit, and the 951 hectare (2,350 acre) West Foster Creek Unit. The SFWA is predominantly shrubsteppe habitat and was acquired to promote recovery of pygmy rabbits, sage grouse, and sharp-tailed grouse as well as protect/provide habitat for other shrubsteppe obligate species.

Each Unit was acquired and is managed for specific priority species. The Sagebrush Flat, Dormaier, and Chester Butte Units are managed primarily for pygmy rabbits, sage grouse, and mule deer while the West Foster Creek Unit was acquired to protect sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, and mule deer habitat. Future habitat enhancement and protection measures include: controlling introduced weedy vegetation, maintaining perimeter fences, seeding native herbaceous vegetation, planting shrubs and trees, thinning decadent, dense sagebrush stands, and enhancing stream riparian habitat and springs. In addition, a cooperative research project conducted by Washington State University (WSU) designed to study the impacts of grazing on pygmy rabbit habitat/endemic populations at Sagebrush Flat will be concluded in 2001.

Planned monitoring activities include vegetation sampling, Habitat Evaluations Procedures (HEP), sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse lek counts, pygmy rabbit population surveys, neotropical bird surveys, mule deer counts, and hunter harvest bag checks. Furthermore, considerable effort will be spent on identifying suitable habitat for pygmy rabbit reintroductions.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 96 Relationship to Other Projects Project # Title/description Nature of relationship 199609400 Scotch Creek Wildlife Area Supports this project and WDFW goals and objectives 199106100 Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area Supports this project and WDFW goals and objectives 21034 Colville Tribes restore habitat Supports Tribal (CCT) and WDFW goals for sharp-tailed grouse and objectives Pygmy rabbit captive rearing Rabbits will be obtained from and released project proposal on the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area. Shrubsteppe/CRP mapping The SFWA will be evaluated if the proposal proposal is funded.

Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies The goals and objectives described in the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area mitigation project management plan (WDFW 1998) support both WDFW and Crab Creek Subbasin goals and objectives

WDFW State Goal(s) Crab Subbasin Goal(s) SFWA Project Goal(s) Increase the population size and Recover populations of sharp- Protect and enhance existing distribution of sharp-tailed grouse tailed grouse in the Crab Creek habitat conditions for the benefit and protect, enhance, and Subbasin to the level where of resident sharp-tailed grouse increase shrub/meadow steppe in populations are viable. and other endemic wildlife Washington State. species. Establish and/or maintain two viable populations of pygmy Recover and maintain viable Recover and maintain a viable rabbits on the SFWA; one pygmy rabbit populations in pygmy rabbit population in the population on the Sagebrush Flat Washington State Crab Creek Subbasin. Unit and a second population on the Dormaier/Chester Butte Units. Increase the population size and Recover populations of sage Recover populations of sage distribution of sage grouse in grouse in the Crab Creek grouse to viable levels on the Washington State. Subbasin to the level where Sagebrush Flat Wildlife populations are viable. Protect, enhance, and maintain Protect, enhance, and maintain Protect, enhance, and increase shrubsteppe habitat for sage shrubsteppe habitat for sage shrubsteppe habitat in grouse and other shrubsteppe grouse and other shrubsteppe Washington State. obligates. obligates. Map and evaluate wildlife use of Map and evaluate wildlife use of Map Priority Habitats and shrubsteppe/key habitats in the shrubsteppe/key habitats on the Species (PHS) across the state. Subbasin. SFWA.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 97 WDFW State Objective(s) Crab Subbasin Objective(s) SFWA Project Objective(s) Use translocations of sharp-tailed grouse into Washington from Increase the number of sharp- Increase the breeding population populations in other states so that tailed grouse at SFWA to 200 by of sharp-tails from 380 to more a population of at least 1,000 is 2010 (as described in the Chester than 2,000 distributed throughout supported in the Crab Creek Butte addendum [unpublished]). four management zones. Subbasin by 2010. Protect at least 98,000 acres of Improve quantity, quality, and high quality, relatively configuration of the shrubsteppe Implement habitat management contiguous (<2 mile gaps) habitat habitat necessary to support a activities and schedules described that is currently occupied by viable population of sharp-tailed in the SFWA Management Plan. sharp-tailed grouse. grouse by 2010. Conduct research on sharp-tailed Increase the breeding population grouse through 2005 to monitor Monitor wildlife and habitat of sharp-tails in WDFW’s Sharp- population size, determine response to protection, tailed Grouse Management Zone population viability, and evaluate maintenance, and enhancement 4 to a minimum of 800 grouse. population responses to habitat measures annually. alteration

Establish and maintain four Protect and increase the pygmy rabbit populations with at remaining pygmy rabbit Improve viability of pygmy rabbit least 500 adults each and eight population on the Sagebrush Flat populations in Washington, with populations with at least 100 Unit and vicinity to at least 500 the majority in the Crab Creek adult rabbits each for a minimum adult rabbits and 100 adult rabbits Subbasin. 5-year average total of 2,800 on the Dormaier/Chesterbutte pygmy rabbits. Units by 2010. Improve the quantity, quality, and Improve shrubsteppe habitat Protect >16,000 (40,000 acres) configuration of shrubsteppe quality and configuration on the of high quality, relatively habitat necessary to support a SFWA by 2005 and implement contiguous sage grouse habitat viable population of sage grouse the Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area that is currently occupied. by 2010. Management Plan. Increase the breeding population Increase the number of sage Establish a population of at least of sage grouse to more than 1,500 grouse to approximately 400 on 1,000 sage grouse by 2010 in the distributed throughout six the SFWA and adjacent area by subbasin. management zones in the state. 2010. Monitored habitat quality and composition and conduct HEP Map Priority Habitats and Map CRP and shrubsteppe transects as described in the Species (PHS) in all WDFW habitats and determine wildlife monitoring section. Monitor Regions. use by end of FY 2004. species response to habitat manipulation/protection measures annually.

As an ongoing mitigation project, the SLWA project is consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program including, but not limited to the following sections: Overall Vision (Section III A-1) “Wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem….”, Planning Assumptions (Section III, A-2) “This is a habitat based program, rebuilding healthy, natural producing fish and wildlife populations by protecting, mitigating, and restoring habitats and the biological systems within them…”, Scientific Principles (Section III, B-2) i.e., Principles one through eight, Biological Objectives (Section III, C-1) “Recovery of fish and wildlife affected by

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 98 the development and operation of the hydro system that are listed under the Endangered Species Act,” (Section III, C-2a.4) “Develop and implement habitat acquisition and enhancement projects to fully mitigate for identified losses; Coordinate fish and wildlife activities throughout the basin…; maintain existing and created habitat values; and monitor and evaluate habitat and species responses to mitigation actions,” and Wildlife (Section III, D-7) “Complete the current mitigation program for construction and inundation losses and include wildlife mitigation for all operational losses as an integrated part of habitat protection and restoration”.

Review Comments: No Review Comments

Budget: FY02 FY03 FY04 908,375 249,363 249,362 Category: High Priority Category: High Priority Category: High Priority

Project: 25001- Acquire Sharp-tailed Grouse Habitat at the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: Purchase 259 ha (640 ac) of shrubsteppe habitat currently bordered on three sides by the SLWA in order to increase and maintain a viable sharp-tailed grouse population on and/or near the SLWA.

Abbreviated Abstract Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) proposes to acquire 259 ha (640 acres) of shrubsteppe habitat located on the east side of the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area (SLWA) mitigation project in order to protect and enhance sharp-tailed grouse nesting and winter habitat. This property, which is currently grazed under private ownership, is for sale and has been offered to WDFW. The parcel is currently bordered by the SLWA on three sides and, if purchased, would alleviate access problems to adjacent SLWA project lands, provide additional quality shrubsteppe habitat for sharp-tailed grouse and other shrubsteppe dependent species, and make available public recreational opportunities.

As part of the 8,094 ha (20,000 ac) Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area (SLWA), this proposed acquisition will be managed by WDFW primarily to support sharp-

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 99 tailed grouse recovery efforts within Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Sharp-tailed Grouse Management Zone Four. The SLWA mitigation project is the "core" property within WDFW’s Sharp-tailed Grouse Management Zone Four and is currently occupied by approximately 180 sharp-tailed grouse (Schroeder pers. comm. 1999).

Goal(s) and objective(s) described for the proposed project site and the SLWA support and are consistent with Crab Creek Subbasin goals and objectives. WDFW’s biological goal is to establish and maintain a viable sharp-tailed grouse population on the SLWA and surrounding landscape. Similarly, the primary biological objective at the SLWA is to increase the sharp-tailed grouse population to at least 400 grouse by 2010 through habitat manipulation, maintenance, and protection measures, and by natural recruitment and population augmentation if necessary. Proposed habitat enhancement, maintenance, and protection measures include fencing, weed control activities, and shrub and tree plantings. Monitoring includes sharp-tailed/sage grouse surveys, neotropical bird surveys, hunter harvest bag checks, big game surveys, Habitat and Evaluation Procedure (HEP) surveys, and vegetation transects. Both habitat manipulation and monitoring activities would be incorporated into existing SLWA work plans and accomplished by existing WDFW staff.

Relationship to Other Projects:

Project ID Title Nature of Relationship 199106100 Swanson Lakes Wildlife This proposed acquisition Area would become part of the SLWA. 199609400 Scotch Creek Wildlife Supports this project and Area WDFW goals and objectives 1994044 Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Supports this project and Area (Douglas County WDFW goals and objectives Pygmy Rabbit Project) 21034 Colville Tribes restore Supports Tribal (CCT/STOI) habitat for sharp-tailed and WDFW goals and grouse. objectives 199204800 Hells Gate big game Supports Tribal (CCT) and winter range wildlife WDFW goals and objectives mitigation project

Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies Northwest Power Planning Council Fish and Wildlife Program (1994/2000): The NWPPC system-wide goal in the 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program is a healthy Columbia Basin: "one that supports both human settlement and the long-term sustainability of native fish and wildlife species in native

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 100 habitats where possible, while recognizing that where impacts have irrevocably changed the ecosystem, we must protect and enhance the ecosystem that remains” (NWPPC 1994). The overall vision in the NWPPC’s 2000 Draft Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPPC 2000) is “a Columbia River ecosystem that sustains an abundant, productive, and diverse community of fish and wildlife, mitigating across the basin for the adverse effects to fish and wildlife caused by the development and operation of the hydrosystem and providing the benefits from fish and wildlife valued by the people of the region.”

If funded, this proposal will partially mitigate for losses resulting from construction of Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph Dams. Sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, and mule deer are listed in the loss assessments for both dams (Howerton 1986, Berger, M., and D. Kuehn 1992) and will be used as habitat indicator species during the Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) analysis. Funding for the SLWA has been provided by BPA under terms specified in the Washington Agreement (MOA).

The overall goal of the Crab Creek Subbasin Summary is to: Protect, enhance, and restore native habitats, particularly shrubsteppe, to provide the quality and continuity necessary to support viable populations of wildlife within the Crab Creek Subbasin. The goals and objectives described in the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area mitigation project management plan (Anderson J., P. R. Ashley 1995) support both WDFW and Crab Creek Subbasin goals and objectives.

A comparison of WDFW, Crab Creek Subbasin, and SLWA sharp-tailed grouse goals and objectives. WDFW State Goal(s) Crab Subbasin Goal(s) SLWA Project Goal(s) Recover populations of sharp- Increase the population size and Establish and maintain a viable tailed grouse in the Crab Creek distribution of sharp-tailed grouse sharp-tailed grouse population at Subbasin to the level where and protect, enhance, and the Swanson Lakes Wildlife populations are viable. increase shrub/meadow steppe. Area. Protect, enhance, and maintain 20,000 acres of shrub-steppe habitat for sharp-tailed grouse and other shrub-steppe obligate species. WDFW State Objective(s) Crab Subbasin Objective(s) SLWA Project Objective(s) Use translocations of sharp-tailed Increase the breeding population grouse into Washington from Increase the number of sharp- of sharp-tails from 380 to more populations in other states so that tailed grouse at SLWA from 180 than 2,000 distributed throughout a population of at least 1,000 is to 400 by 2010. four management zones. supported in the Crab Creek Subbasin by 2010.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 101 WDFW State Objective(s) Crab Subbasin Objective(s) SLWA Project Objective(s) Conduct research on sharp-tailed Increase the breeding population grouse through 2005 to monitor Monitor wildlife and habitat of sharp-tails in WDFW’s Sharp- population size, determine response to protection, tailed Grouse Management Zone population viability, and evaluate maintenance, and enhancement 4 to a minimum of 800 grouse. population responses to habitat measures annually. alteration

Improve quantity, quality, and Protect at least 98,000 acres of configuration of the shrubsteppe Implement habitat management high quality, relatively habitat necessary to support a activities and schedules described contiguous (<2 mile gaps) habitat viable population of sharp-tailed in the SLWA Enhancement Plan. that is currently occupied. grouse by 2010.

This project proposal is consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program including, but not limited to the following sections: Overall Vision (Section III A-1) “Wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem….”, Planning Assumptions (Section III, A-2) “This is a habitat based program, rebuilding healthy, natural producing fish and wildlife populations by protecting, mitigating, and restoring habitats and the biological systems within them…”, Scientific Principles (Section III, B-2) i.e., Principles one through eight, Biological Objectives (Section III, C-1) “Recovery of fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of the hydro system that are listed under the Endangered Species Act,” (Section III, C-2a.4) “Develop and implement habitat acquisition and enhancement projects to fully mitigate for identified losses; Coordinate fish and wildlife activities throughout the basin…; maintain existing and created habitat values; and monitor and evaluate habitat and species responses to mitigation actions,” and Wildlife (Section III, D-7) “Complete the current mitigation program for construction and inundation losses and include wildlife mitigation for all operational losses as an integrated part of habitat protection and restoration”.

In addition, the FCRPS Biological Opinion identifies the importance of functioning aquatic habitat as in RPA 150. Similar actions should be taken when possible to protect functioning terrestrial habitat.

WDFW’s primary biological goal is to establish and maintain a viable sharp- tailed grouse population at the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area and surrounding landscape (this acquisition will become part of the SLWA). Similarly, the primary biological objective for the SLWA is to increase the sharp-tailed grouse population to at least 400 grouse by 2010 through habitat manipulation, maintenance, and protection measures, and by local population recruitment and population augmentation if necessary. The proposed project goal, objective, and tasks are described below. These compliment goals, objectives, and tasks at the SLWA.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 102 Goal 1: Establish and maintain a viable sharp-tailed grouse population at the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area and surrounding landscape. This goal is consistent with the statewide goal to increase the population size and distribution of sharp- tailed grouse (WDFW 1995). This goal is also consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin goal to recover sharp-tailed grouse populations to viable levels within the subbasin.

Biological Objective 1: Increase the number of sharp-tailed grouse from approximately 180 (estimated number currently occupying SLWA [M. Schroeder, pers. comm. 1999) to 400 by 2010. This objective is consistent with the statewide objective to increase the breeding population of sharp-tailed grouse to more than 2,000 distributed throughout four management zones (SLWA is considered the ‘core’ property in WDFW’s Sharp-tailed Grouse Management Zone 4). This objective also is consistent with the Crab Creek Subbasin objective to establish a population of at least 1,000 sharp-tailed grouse by 2010.

Task 1. Purchase 259 ha (640 ac) of potential sharp-tailed grouse nesting and wintering habitat (includes land appraisal, hazardous waste surveys, etc.).

Task 2. Survey property boundaries, remove dilapidated fence, and construct 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of new fence to protect habitat from livestock/vehicle encroachment.

Task 3. Control weeds, plant shrubs and trees, and seed native herbaceous cover as required. An aggressive weed control program will be initiated upon purchase of the land; however, passive success ional restoration will be encouraged prior to seeding herbaceous cover, or planting shrubs and trees in areas where remnant woody species are present and/or likely to develop from seed, clones, or roots.

Review Comments No Project Review Comments

Budget FY02 FY03 FY04 237,053 32,900 5,000 Category: Crediting Category: Crediting Category: Crediting Resolution Resolution Resolution

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 103 Project: 25043- Northern Leopard Frog Distribution and Habitat Association

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: The proposed project examines the breeding distribution of northern leopard frogs, and breeding success and recruitment in association with introduced fish, bullfrogs and reservoir inundation.

Abbreviated Abstract The northern leopard frog is an endangered species in Washington, with remaining populations located at two sites near Moses Lake in the BPA Crab Creek Subbasin. Once distributed throughout eastern Washington along the Columbia River and its tributaries, leopard frogs have declined for unknown reasons, but dam construction, introduced fish and bullfrogs, agricultural chemicals, and agricultural development are all possible factors. We propose determining the distribution of leopard frog breeding ponds at the remaining sites, and assessing the effects of reservoir inundation and introduced fish and bullfrogs on breeding leopard frogs. The project will be conducted in two phases. The first year surveys will be conducted to determine occupied and unoccupied ponds by leopard frogs. The second year, randomly selected ponds will be sampled for introduced fish, leopard frogs, and bullfrogs. Sampled ponds will include those that are inundated by the Potholes Reservoir, those that do not have leopard frogs, and those that do have leopard frogs. Results of the project will help us understand potential benefits of pond rehabilitation and damming ponds to prevent inundation. Results will be used to develop a recovery strategy for the northern leopard frog in Washington as well as management of the Potholes Reservoir. The project will be conducted by WDFW Wildlife Research Division, and will be headed by a WDFW research scientist.

Relationship to Other Projects:

Project ID Title Nature of Relationship Leopard Frog recovery Provides information for the plan development of a statewide recovery plan Potholes Reservoir Provides information essential Management Plan for implementation of the management plan.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 104 Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies Northwest Power Planning Council Fish and Wildlife Program (1994/2000): The NWPPC system-wide goal in the 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program is a healthy Columbia Basin: "one that supports both human settlement and the long-term sustainability of native fish and wildlife species in native habitats where possible, while recognizing that where impacts have irrevocably changed the ecosystem, we must protect and enhance the ecosystem that remains” (NWPPC 1994). The overall vision in the NWPPC’s 2000 Draft Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NWPPC 2000) is “a Columbia River ecosystem that sustains an abundant, productive, and diverse community of fish and wildlife, mitigating across the basin for the adverse effects to fish and wildlife caused by the development and operation of the hydrosystem and providing the benefits from fish and wildlife valued by the people of the region.”

The proposed project is consistent with the vision for the NWPPC Fish and Wildlife Program 2000. “Wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River Basin” (Section IIIA). The endangered leopard frog is threatened by numerous introduced and water system factors. The proposed project will provide needed information to restore natural habitats of the northern leopard frog. In context of restoring native ponds for leopard frogs, we anticipate potential benefits to invertebrate diversity in the Columbia Basin as well. The proposed project is also consistent with the Scientific Principals (Section IIIB).

The goal for leopard frogs in the Crab Creek Subbasin Plan is simply to recover populations. The proposed project provides needed information on the distribution and relative abundance of leopard frogs in a variety of habitats. Strategy 1 of the Crab Creek Subbasin Plan is to develop needed information on distribution, habitat and relationships with other species, and implement recovery of leopard frogs. This project addresses, and provides significant development of information for the following tasks; Task 1 (complete surveys and determine distribution), Task 2 (investigate breeding, migratory, and over-wintering habitat relationships of northern leopard frogs), Task 3 (evaluate range of suitable habitats, juxtaposition of habitats, and appropriate conditions for northern leopard frogs), Task 4 (determine effects of reservoir inundation of habitat for the Potholes Reservoir population of northern leopard frogs, Task 5 (determine effects of non-native fish and introduced bullfrogs on northern leopard frogs). As discussed above, leopard frogs were likely affected by both development of dams on the Columbia River and development of the Columbia Basin project; therefore, the species is a suitable candidate for BPA funding.

Objective 1: Determine the distribution and abundance of leopard frog breeding ponds at Potholes Wildlife Area and Floyd Seeps Wildlife Area by winter FY 2003.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 105 Task a) Locate leopard frog breeding ponds

Task b) Develop a database of occupied and unoccupied ponds with associated habitat attributes and survey results.

Objective 2. Determine the effects of introduced fish, bullfrogs, and reservoir inundation on the productivity of leopard frogs by FY2004

Task a) Sample ponds in the Gloyd Seeps population for introduced fish and bullfrogs.

Task b) Sample ponds at the Potholes Wildlife Area for introduced fish, bullfrogs, and leopard frogs in FY 2003.

Task c) Prepare a report evaluating the effort, summarizing information, and assessing impacts of introduced fish, reservoir inundation, and bullfrogs on northern leopard frogs.

Objective 3. Determine leopard frog population structure at 12 structurally similar ponds that represent three groups of distinctly different ecological conditions (four lacking bullfrogs or fish, four with fish and lacking bullfrogs, and four with bullfrogs and fish).

Task a) Determine the size- and sex-specific population structure of leopard frogs using the three pond types.

Task b) Determine the size-specific age structure of leopard frogs at target ponds. Task c) Prepare a report evaluating the effort, summarizing information and assessing impacts of introduced fish, reservoir inundation, and bullfrogs on northern leopard frogs.

Review Comments No Project Review Comments

Budget FY02 FY03 FY04 41,754 91,680 22,920 Category: High Priority Category: High Priority Category: High Priority

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 106 Project: 25046 – A cooperative approach to evaluating avian and mammalian responses to shrubsteppe restoration in the Crab Creek Subbasin

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: Evaluate the effectiveness of ongoing restoration efforts within the Crab Creek Subbasin in providing the critical habitat for avian and mammalian species that are dependent on shrubsteppe.

Abbreviated Abstract Shrubsteppe is a priority habitat within the state of Washington. Although the decline in quantity and quality of shrubsteppe is a key issue throughout eastern Washington, the declines in the Crab Creek Subbasin of the Columbia Plateau Province have been particularly dramatic. Shrubsteppe declined from 97.7% of the area historically to 30.2% of the area currently; representing a 69% decline. The declines in habitat have resulted in corresponding declines in populations of numerous species, many of which are dependent on shrubsteppe habitat. Many of the species of shrubsteppe obligates in Washington are listed by the state of Washington or the United States federal government as ‘endangered’, ‘threatened’, or ‘species of concern’; additional species are candidates for potential listing. Conservation concerns for the shrubsteppe ecosystem and its associated fauna and flora have resulted in a variety of restoration activities including ‘set-aside’ cropland associated with the Conservation Reserve Program and state- and federally-funded restoration activities on state-owned wildlife areas. The area currently being restored with the various programs totals more than 1,900 km2 in the Crab Creek Subbasin. We are proposing a cooperative, four-year research investigation involving the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the University of Washington to evaluate the effectiveness of the various restoration strategies. Field studies will evaluate the responsiveness of shrubsteppe-associated wildlife in relation to characteristics of the habitat being restored. The characteristics will include management and restoration history, configuration with alternate habitats, and specific characteristics of the shrubs, grasses, and forbs. The results will be used by wildlife managers to increase the effectiveness of ongoing restoration activities. The results will also provide a foundation for the periodic sampling necessary to monitor restoration activities in the future.

Relationship to Other Projects This project will be integrated with ongoing research to evaluate the population dynamics of various species of shrubsteppe obligates including sage grouse (Schroeder et al. 2000b), sharp-tailed grouse (Schroeder et al. 2000a), Washington ground squirrel (Betts 1999), pygmy rabbit (Musser and McCall 2000),

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 107 ferruginous hawk (Watson and Pierce 2000), and numerous species of neotropical migrants (Schroeder 2000, Vander Haegen et al. 2000). This research will also be compatible with ongoing efforts by the Foster Creek Conservation District to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan on private lands in Douglas County. The cooperators in these efforts include numerous private landowners and groups including the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Colville Confederated Tribes, Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, National Resource Conservation Service, Yakama Indian Nation, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, Department of Defense, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition, this project will support proposed research on the distribution and abundance of wildlife in relation to remnant shrubsteppe in the Crab Creek Subbasin (Vander Hagen, Effects of agricultural conversion and associated habitat fragmentation on shrubsteppe-associated wildlife and the condition of extant shrubsteppe in the CRP) project proposal for Northwest Power Planning Council).

Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies This proposed research would contribute to the wildlife goals, objectives, strategies, and tasks identified in the subbasin summary for the Crab Creek Subbasin (Quinn 2001) (as well as other subbasin summaries). The overall goal stated for the Crab Creek Subbasin is “protect, enhance, and restore native habitats, particularly shrubsteppe, to provide the quality and continuity necessary to support viable populations of wildlife” (Quinn 2001). The proposed research is also consistent with the specific goals for shrubsteppe restoration (Quinn 2001) and population management and recovery of sage grouse (WDFW 1995a, Hays et al. 1998a), sharp-tailed grouse (WDFW 1995b, Hays et al. 1998b), pygmy rabbit (WDFW 1995c), burrowing owl (Quinn 2001), ferruginous hawk (WDFW 1996), and Washington ground squirrel (Quinn 2001). In addition, the research would be consistent with management goals for the Swanson Lakes, Sagebrush Flats, Dormaier, Chester Butte, and Desert Wildlife Areas (Anderson and Ashley 1993, WDNR 1997, WDFW 1998, Quinn 2001, WDFW 2001). For example, one of the goals for the Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area is to “protect, enhance, and maintain 20,000 acres of shrubsteppe habitat for sharp-tailed grouse and other shrubsteppe obligates” (Quinn 2001). The goals are comparable for the other wildlife areas except that pygmy rabbits or sage grouse can be substituted for sharp-tailed grouse.

This research would be consistent with the Partners in Flight (Ashley et al. 2000) recommendations for priority habitats and species in the Columbia Plateau physiographic area. They list shrubsteppe as a priority habitat and prairie falcon, sage grouse, sage thrasher, Brewer’s sparrow, and sage sparrow as priority species.

This proposed research will be consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program (www.nwcouncil.org/library/2000/2000-19/index.htm)

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 108 including “wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem” (Overall Vision, Section III, A-1). It will also be consistent with “This is a habitat based program, rebuilding healthy, natural producing fish and wildlife populations by protecting, mitigating, and restoring habitats and the biological systems within them” (Planning Assumptions, Section III, A-2). The Biological Objectives (Section III, C) are also consistent with this project: “recovery of fish and wildlife”, “develop and implement habitat acquisition and enhancement projects”, “maintain existing and created habitat values”, and “monitor and evaluate habitat and species responses to mitigation actions”.

Review Comments No Project Review Comments

Budget FY02 FY03 FY04 $141,184 $139,306 $139,306 Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Action Action Action

Project: 25089 – The Effects of Agriculture on Amphibians of the Columbia Plateau

Sponsor:WDFW

Short Description: Compare historic versus current distribution of four amphibian species, representing different hydorperiod requirement to determine how agriculture affects these species, to identify valuable conservation areas, and to refine distribution model.

Abbreviated Abstract Agriculture, like other land uses, can result in the direct loss and degradation of wildlife habitat. Agriculture can also influence ecosystem processes such as the hydrological cycle, especially in semi-arid areas where water is often limiting. We propose to examine occupancy patterns of four focal amphibian species occupying the Columbia Plateau that require habitats that vary broadly in hydroperiod. We will use these data to: 1) understand how changes in land-use and surface hydrology may affect basin-obligate amphibians, and 2) compare the historic and current distributions of these species to update Washington

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 109 Department of Fish and Wildlife databases in order to help focus management of Columbia Plateau amphibians in four ways: a) by developing a ranking of habitat patches that will facilitate their conservation, b) by identifying those opportunities especially suited to mitigate the undesirable effects of agriculture, 3) by testing the predictions about the distributions of these amphibians made by the Washington State Gap Analysis Project, and 4) by refining the Gap Analysis Habitat Model to better predict the distribution of focal amphibians on the Columbia Plateau.

Review Comments No comments available.

Budget

FY02 FY03 FY04 $121,945 $85,000 $95,000 Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Action Action Action

Project: 25030– Factors Limiting Raptors in the Columbia Basin of Eastern Washington

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: Assess habitat, prey, and contaminants of ferruginous hawks and golden eagles in native habitats and provide recommendations on how to improve their rates of nest occupancy in the Columbia Basin.

Abbreviated Abstract Because raptors occupy the highest trophic level in the food web, factors that limit their populations are reflective of problems affecting entire ecosystems. In the shrubsteppe ecosystem of the Columbia Basin, the population of ferruginous hawks (Buteo regalis) is Threatened, and the golden eagle is a Candidate for listing. Both raptor populations are characterized by low nest occupancy and are potentially limited from the loss of shrubsteppe habitats due to increased irrigated agriculture and the decline of associated prey including the Washington ground squirrel (Spermophilus washingtoni) and black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) Research on ferruginous hawks has suggested that decreased prey abundance near nests has the potential to increase flight time to foraging areas, resulting in reduced adult nest attendance, and hence survival of young. Low

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 110 occupancy of ferruginous hawks may also be the result of poor winter survival, in part associated with use of rodenticides and organophosphates on wintering areas in California. Similarly, recent analysis of dead and dying golden eagles in the Columbia Basin suggests lead contaminants may be increasing adult mortality. It is unknown if golden eagles in Washington reside in the state throughout the year, and what habitat components are limiting on their home ranges, and if low winter survival may reduce nest occupancy. Research described in this proposal will address these topics, first by examining historic and recent productivity and occupancy rates of hawks and eagles in respect to the availability of shrubsteppe habitats associated with their nests. Indices of prey abundance for shrubsteppe habitats will be compared to prey consumed by raptors, to establish relationships of hawks and eagles to shrubsteppe availability. VHF and satellite telemetry, and video monitoring of nests will be used to provide information on adult nest attendance, home range size, foraging locations, and movements of hawks and eagles to better understand their long-term survival and potential for mortality through biocides. Blood taken from captured hawks and eagles and tissues samples of dead specimens will be analyzed for the presence of rodenticides, organophosphates, and lead. Research will provide recommendations to reduce the effects of factors limiting these raptors in the CPP, principally those related to the maintenance and improvement of habitat characteristics. Research will also identify whether more detailed research into contaminant issues and pathways may be needed in the Columbia Basin.

Relationship to Other Projects Project # Title/description Nature of relationship 0 Ferruginous Hawk Winter Ranges and data sharing Migration (ongoing cooperative project between WDFW/USFWS/Woodland Park Zoo) 0 Effects of Agriculture Conversion and Detailed vegetation mapping Associated Habitat Fragmentation on produced by this project will be Shrubsteppe-associated Wildlife and the used in analysis of habitat/raptor Condition of Extant Shrubsteppe in the productivity relationships, as will Columbia Plateau Province (BPA proposal habitat-specific occurrence of submitted by M. Vander Haegen, S. West, small mammals that will be used and S. Snyder) in analysis of raptor diets/habitat availability. 0 A Cooperative Approach to Evaluating Habitat-specific occurrence of Avian and Mammalian Responses to small mammals in restored Shrubsteppe Restoration in the Crab Creek shrubsteppe habitats determined in Subbasin (BPA proposal submitted by M. this study will be used in analysis Schroeder and J. Skalski) of raptor diets/habitat availability

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 111 Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies This project addresses the goals, objectives, and tasks regarding raptors of concern described in the Crab Creek (CC), Yakima (Y), and Mainstem Columbia (MC) Subbasin summary reviews of the CPP. For ferruginous hawks, the project investigates whether habitat and prey limit nest occupancy (CC, Y, and MC Subbasins), how movements and survival relate to nest occupancy (CC, Y, and MC Subbasins), and whether contaminants affect survival (CC, Y, and MC Subbasins). For golden eagles, the project investigates whether habitat and prey limit nest occupancy (Y, and MC Subbasins), how movements and survival relate to nest occupancy (Y, and MC Subbasins), and whether contaminants affect survival (Y, and MC Subbasins). For golden eagles in the Crab Creek Subbasin these research topics were identified as areas of concern. The results of this work are applicable to other subbasins that identified these species needs (e.g., Tucannon, Walla Walla, and Palouse). We expect to collect dead golden eagles for contaminants analysis throughout the Columbia Basin including Oregon. The project emphasis is to identify factors limiting these species in shrubsteppe habitats, principally those reduced by agricultural land irrigated from the Columbia River, and to promote effective restoration of habitat characteristics needed to maintain viable populations of these species. This supports the stated goal of the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority which is to coordinate and promote effective restoration of fish, wildlife, and their habitats. Goals and objectives state in the recovery plan for state listed ferruginous hawks (WDFW 1996) are addressed directly by the project (see below objectives, tasks, and methods). For golden eagles, a statewide Candidate for listing, the need is to identify factors causing their reduced populations and reverse them to prevent their listing.

This project will be integrated and coordinated with an ongoing research project and two BPA projects presently proposed in the Columbia Plateau Province. Ongoing cooperative research initiated in 1999 between the WDFW, Woodland Park Zoo and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is investigating the migration ecology and winter ranges of ferruginous hawks from Washington (Watson and Pierce 2000). Individual hawks and territories currently under study in the Mainstem Columbia Subbasin on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will become part of the sample for the proposed project. In 2002, ongoing research will test the effectiveness of using a remote video cam at a ferruginous nest site for collection of nest behavior data. If successful, the technique will be used in the proposed project for data collection. The proposed BPA project “Effects of agricultural conversion and associated habitat fragmentation on shrubsteppe- associated wildlife and the condition of extant shrubsteppe in the Columbia Plateau Province” will provide detailed mapping of shrubsteppe habitats used to analyze relationships of habitats in raptor territories and raptor productivity. Habitat-specific occurrence of small mammals and reptiles from this study will be used to validate findings for analysis of raptor food habits and shrubsteppe habitats, as will occurrence of small mammals in restored shrubsteppe habitats examined in the other BPA proposal, “A cooperative approach to evaluating

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 112 avian and mammalian responses to shrubsteppe restoration in the Crab Creek Subbasin”).

Review Comments: No Project Review Comments

Budget FY02 FY03 FY04 $16,580 $94,330 $62,080 Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Action Action Action

Project: 25039- Effects of Agricultural Conversion on Shrubsteppe Wildlife

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: Map shrubsteppe vegetation using a detailed classification system and determine habitat associations of shrubsteppe wildlife to support restoration and conservation in the Columbia Plateau Province

Abbreviated Abstract This project will map vegetation communities and ecological condition of extant shrubsteppe within the Crab Creek Subbasin. Low-altitude color aerial photography and photo-interpretation methods will be employed for delineating communities, and vegetation components will be quantified on the ground. This effort will provide detail not available from previous efforts using satellite data and will allow us to identify the physiognomic characteristics of the vegetation, as well as plant alliances and associations. This level of detail is necessary for understanding the complex relationships between shrubsteppe obligate wildlife species and the diverse composition, distribution, and condition of shrubsteppe vegetation. In a related task, we will map the current status and condition of agricultural fields enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) within the CCP in Washington. CRP lands represent potential habitat for shrubsteppe- associate wildlife. Mapping efforts will be incorporated into a Geographic Information System (GIS) and made available to all interested users via the Internet.

We will examine occurrence and relative abundance of shrubsteppe wildlife species among different vegetation communities and levels of disturbance (condition) and fragmentation. Surveys will focus on species groups that have

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 113 received little attention in the past and will provide much needed information on distribution and status of shrubsteppe associated species. Habitat associations derived from the surveys will be combined with the vegetation map in a GIS to provide an assessment of available habitat on the landscape to help focus restoration and acquisition efforts.

Relationship to Other Projects Project # Title/description Nature of relationship A cooperative approach to The project described herein will provide evaluating avian and mammalian comparative data on composition of responses to shrubsteppe restoration shrubsteppe wildlife communities (i.e., in the Crab Creek Subbasin benchmarks for restoration efforts). Factors limiting the shrubsteppe The project described herein will provide raptor community in the CPP data on habitat availability and relative abundances of prey species that will be used to examine habitat value for shrubsteppe raptors.

Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies Shrubsteppe habitats are recognized by the Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) as high priority in the Columbia Plateau Province (CRP) Their extent on the landscape has been severely reduced as a result of widespread conversion to agriculture (Fig. 1), largely made possible by damming of the Columbia River (National Research Council 1995). The overall goal for the Crab Creek Subbasin Summary is to protect, enhance, and restore native habitats, particularly shrubsteppe, to provide the quality and continuity necessary to support viable populations of wildlife within the Crab Creek Subbasin.

This project will address limiting factors and needs identified in the Crab Creek, Yakima, Walla Walla, Mainstem Columbia River, Palouse, and Lower Snake Subbasin summaries.

Objective 1 (habitat mapping) directly addresses Crab Creek Subbasin Wildlife Limiting Factor, “Restoration direction is limited by lack of information on the type, distribution, quality, and quantity of habitat…” and Wildlife Needs, “Obtain detailed distribution and description of shrubsteppe habitats with reference to dominant plant species, vegetative condition, and habitat potential”; Yakima Subbasin Wildlife Needs, “For most wildlife species limited by habitat availability, key habitat areas need to be identified…”; Lower Snake Subbasin Wildlife Needs, “GIS data base of soils, vegetation, ….”, and “current aerial photography…to establish a current cover map”; Walla Walla Subbasin existing

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 114 shrubsteppe habitat objectives, “Maintain sites dominate by native vegetation…”, and wildlife needs “Protect, maintain, and enhance shrubsteppe habitats”.

Objectives 2-5 (wildlife surveys and habitat associations) directly address Crab Creek Subbasin Limiting Factors “ Isolation and fragmentation of native habitat are the biggest factors influencing the long-term changes in abundance and distribution of wildlife populations”, and “Lack of knowledge for some species, but in particular regarding herptiles, further imperils these Columbia Basin dependent species. Specifically, our lack of understanding of habitat-use patterns and population dynamics…” Palouse Subbasin Limiting Factor “Abundance of wildlife has been affected by habitat loss caused by conversion to agriculture and grazing, fragmentation of habitat, exotic vegetation…” and Existing Needs (IDFG), Objective 3, Strategy 1, “determine distribution, abundance, population trends, and limiting factors for [state and federal species of concern]…by direct investigation”; Yakima Subbasin Wildlife Needs, “For many species lack of information is the significant limiting factor…[we need] a better understanding of ecology, demographics, and life histories…”, and Existing Identified Needs, objective 17, strategy 1, “Conduct base line inventories and population assessments for species where insufficient or no population and distribution information exists…”, Strategy 2, “Improve our understanding of baseline ecology of Golden Eagles…and other species…to prevent further declines that would lead to state or federal listing..”, and Strategy 5, “Determine habitat associations of shrubsteppe obligate and shrubsteppe associate species…”; Mainstem Columbia River Subbasin Existing Goals, Objectives, and Strategies, Goal 3, Objective 1, Strategy 1, Action 1.1, “Determine and monitor abundance and distribution of wildlife species to identify and prioritize wildlife habitat restoration needs.”

Objectives 2 and 5 (passerine and Washington ground squirrel surveys) specifically address Crab Creek Subbasin Wildlife Needs, 1. “Continue and/or expand surveys to monitor distribution, abundance, and viability of species of interest including sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbit, Washington ground squirrel, ferruginous hawk, golden eagle, and neotropical migrants”, and 2. “Evaluate shrubsteppe habitat characteristics in relation to use by shrubsteppe obligates such as…Washington ground squirrels, and neotropical migrants”, and Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Recommended Actions, Washington Ground Squirrel Strategy 1, “Determine distribution and abundance of Washington ground squirrels in Crab Creek Subbasin”. Objectives 3 and 4 (small mammal and reptile surveys) specifically address Mainstem Columbia River Subbasin Wildlife Needs, “Baseline surveys and inventories and monitoring of [reptile] populations”, and “A better understanding of [reptile] ecology and life histories”; Yakima Subbasin Wildlife Needs, “Baseline surveys and inventories, monitoring of populations…a better understanding of ecology and life histories [of reptiles]”; Walla Walla Subbasin Wildlife Need, “Inventory small mammals and herptiles and their habitats…”

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 115 This project proposal is consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program including, but not limited to the following sections: Overall Vision (Section III A-1) “Wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem….”, Planning Assumptions (Section III, A-2) “This is a habitat based program, rebuilding healthy, natural producing fish and wildlife populations by protecting, mitigating, and restoring habitats and the biological systems within them…”

This project addresses specific research topics identified as important to effective conservation of shrubsteppe passerines in the Oregon/Washington Partners In Flight planning document, “Conservation strategy for landbirds in the Columbia Plateau of eastern Oregon and Washington” (Altman and Holmes 2000).

Review Comments: No Project Review Comments Received

Budget: FY02 FY03 FY04 $681,215 $670,834 $653,981 Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Category: Recommended Action Action Action

Project: 25042-Pygmy Rabbit Recovery

Sponsor: WDFW

Short Description: The project involves captive husbandry and captive breeding of wild-caught Washington pygmy rabbits, as well as augmentation of wild populations in the Crab Creek Subbasin with captive reared rabbits.

Abbreviated Abstract Washington’s endangered pygmy rabbit population has dramatically declined over the past decade, during which time efforts to acquire, protect, and restore habitat have been implemented. Current numbers of pygmy rabbits have declined to 3 small populations, and we estimate fewer than 100 rabbits remain. At two of the three remaining populations, there are, perhaps, few than 10 individuals. Genetic analyses of pygmy rabbits in Montana, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington have confirmed that the Washington population of pygmy rabbit is distinct and

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 116 isolated from the rest of the species’ range. Because small populations of rabbits are susceptible to extirpation from severe winter weather and predation, extinction of this unique pygmy rabbit subspecies or race may occur at any time. We therefore have initiated a study with the Oregon Zoo of captive Idaho pygmy rabbits to develop of husbandry techniques for captive rearing, release, and augmentation of Washington’s population. The goal of the proposed augmentation project submitted for BPA funding is to ensure maintenance of Washington’s pygmy rabbits until habitat acquisition, recovery and restoration is sufficient to maintain populations without augmentation. We propose immediately applying the results of the Oregon Zoo husbandry study to implement captive rearing and augmenting Washington’s pygmy rabbits. We propose a cooperative, three-year project involving the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the lead agency, Washington State University, where captive breeding of Washington’s pygmy rabbits will occur, and the Oregon Zoo, where husbandry techniques are being studied. A doctoral student under the direction of Dr. Lisa Shipley will be hired to conduct captive rearing, release, and monitoring phases of the project. They will annually report on production, release and post- release survival phases of the project. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will assist with construction of the breeding facility, capture, and release of pygmy rabbits. Dr. Kenneth Warheit of WDFW will conduct genetic analyses of the captive population. The Oregon Zoo will consult on husbandry methods and participate in oversight of the project. A technical oversight team with members from the Oregon Zoo, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Nature Conservancy and Washington State University will review all aspects of the project.

Relationship to Other Projects Project # Title/description Nature of relationship 1194044 Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area Supports management of Sagebrush Flat (Douglas County Pygmy Rabbit and continued existence of pygmy rabbits Project) at Sagebrush Flat

Relationship to Existing Goals, Objectives and Strategies The project proposal is consistent with the overall vision of the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program to restore the “natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River Basin” (Section IIIA-1). The proposed project includes an adaptive management design, which is consistent with the specific planning assumptions outlined in the 2000 Fish and Wildlife Program Goals (Section IIIA-2). The project proposal is also consistent with the eight scientific principals outlined in the 2000 Fish and Wildlife program Goals (Section IIIB-2), especially principals 5-8, regarding the role and importance of protecting biological diversity and adaptive management.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 117 The proposed project is necessary to support viable populations of pygmy rabbits, and therefore is consistent with the Subbasin goal for wildlife, and the overall goal to recover pygmy rabbit populations. The project is consistent with the Crab Creek subbasin goal to recover pygmy rabbits under strategies 1 and 3. Strategy 1, Task 3 is evaluate the effectiveness of captive rearing and release of pygmy rabbits. Strategy 3, Task 1 is to augment populations of pygmy rabbits through captive rearing and translocations.

The proposed project is also consistent with the Washington State Recovery Plan for the Pygmy Rabbit (1995), which anticipated that captive reared animals might be needed for population recovery (Section 4.3-Recovery Goals and Objectives).

The largest numbers of pygmy rabbits in Washington remain at Sagebrush Flat, and operation and maintenance of Sagebrush Flat is funded by BPA. WDFW purchased, with BPA funds, the Chester Butte and Smith properties in part as potential habitat for pygmy rabbits. Research on the effects of cattle grazing at Sagebrush Flat is being conducted by WSU on a contract funded by BPA. WDFW currently funds surveys for pygmy rabbits in many locations in eastern Washington, and funds twice-yearly control of coyotes at Sagebrush Flat. Annual monitoring of pygmy rabbits at Sagebrush Flat is conducted by WDFW with the assistance of many volunteers.

Pygmy rabbits have been the focus of habitat acquisition efforts in Douglas County by WDFW for the past decade, and WDFW has worked with the Natural Resources Conservation District to include sagebrush seeding and planting into the popular Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Pygmy rabbits have used CRP lands in Douglas County and establishment of sagebrush on CRP lands is a positive step for many shrub-steppe species beside pygmy rabbits. Pygmy rabbits have become a focus of land acquisition by The Nature Conservancy and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), as each has made significant ownership gains in Douglas County. The Nature Conservancy and the BLM have funded surveys for pygmy rabbits in Douglas County and elsewhere.

Review Comments This project relies on habitat improvements to sustain any gains in population abundance.

Budget FY02 FY03 FY04 $220,914 $120,102 $120,102 Category: High Category: High Priority Category: High Priority Priority

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 118 Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Activities

Existing Projects Monitoring and evaluation for wildlife mitigation projects (ongoing) has been designed for each mitigation project to address both vegetative and wildlife population responses to restoration and enhancement actions. This work will allow for the managers to adaptively manage projects in order to benefit habitat and associated wildlife, as well as identify whether or not mitigation actions are contributing to broader recovery or improvement of habitat and associated wildlife. Extensive work and analysis has already been completed on existing and continuing projects. A thorough description of specific Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) and other standardized monitoring techniques used on Projects 199106100 Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area and 199404400 Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area can be found in current project proposals and project work plan and by visiting. http://www.cbfwa.org/files/province/plateau/projects/199106100n.doc for Swanson Lakes Wildlife Area or http://www.cbfwa.org/files/province/plateau/projects/199404400n.doc for Sagebrush Flat Wildlife Area

New Projects Most of the new projects are evaluation and monitoring projects to measure the success of previous and ongoing shrubsteppe restoration activities or to collect baseline information to better identify future restoration needs and design projects. These ongoing efforts have been and continue to be conducted by various entities including BPA, WDFW, TNC, Douglas County, NRCS, BLM and individual landowners. All of these efforts are attempts to restore the shrubsteppe ecosystem so that it can support viable populations of native shrubsteppe wildlife including sage grouse, pygmy rabbits, sharp-tail grouse, etc. These efforts are also consistent with the Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000 Program (www.nwcouncil.org/library/2000/2000-19/index.htm) including “wherever feasible, this program will be accomplished by protecting and restoring the natural ecological functions, habitats, and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem” (Overall Vision, Section III, A-1). It will also be consistent with “This is a habitat based program, rebuilding healthy, natural producing fish and wildlife populations by protecting, mitigating, and restoring habitats and the biological systems within them” (Planning Assumptions, Section III, A-2). The Biological Objectives (Section III, C) are also consistent with this project: “recovery of fish and wildlife”, “develop and implement habitat acquisition and enhancement projects”, “maintain existing and created habitat values”, and “monitor and evaluate habitat and species responses to mitigation actions”. Declines in populations of sage grouse and sharp-tailed grouse have resulted in their consideration as threatened or endangered wildlife. Consequently, there is a continual demand for information on prairie grouse that justifies thorough research. The objectives of this research are directed toward the ultimate goal of

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 119 stabilizing, improving, and/or expanding populations of prairie grouse. Several specific questions are being addressed for populations of prairie grouse in north- central Washington with a focus in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Project 25030 (Factors limiting the shrubsteppe raptor community in the Columbia Plateau Province of Eastern Washington) proposes to Use the WDFW digital cover map developed from recent satellite imagery (Jacobson and Snyder 2000) to examine distribution of 8 general cover classes at detail of 30 m X 30m, including shrubsteppe, associated with all golden eagle and ferruginous hawk nests in the CRP; collect and analyze prey remains from under and in hawk and eagle nests; Capture 10 adult ferruginous hawks and 10 adult golden eagles in the using dho-ghaza nets with owl lures (Watson and Pierce 2000) and radio-controlled bownets (Jackman et al. 1994). Deploy satellite/VHF transmitters on ferruginous hawks, and golden eagles. Conduct intensive monitoring of telemetered birds during systematic focal observations to determine home range size, foraging locations with respect to habitat type, and use of habitats. Assess contaminant levels in adult ferruginous hawks and golden eagles.

Project 25046 (A cooperative approach to evaluating avian and mammalian responses to shrubsteppe restoration in the Crab Creek Subbasin) Two general shrubsteppe restoration habitats with a history of crop production will be selected in April-May 2002: 1) habitats with > 50% coverage of grasses and forbs and < 3% coverage of shrubs and 2) habitats with > 50% coverage of grasses and forbs and 10-25% coverage of big sagebrush. These two habitat types will be selected systematically within BPA-funded wildlife areas (Swanson Lakes, Sagebrush Flats, and Desert Wildlife Areas), CRP (throughout subbasin), and WDFW restoration program areas (Columbia Basin Wildlife Area); producing six habitat/administration categories. Eight replicates will be selected for each of the resulting 6-habitat/administration types producing a total of 48 habitat plots. Each habitat plot will be at least 100 ha in size and selected to provide a relatively consistent representation of habitat throughout the plot. Breeding bird surveys will be conducted twice on each of 48 different habitat plots. Small mammal surveys will be conducted on each of 48 different areas. Results for breeding bird and small mammal surveys in relation to habitat type and administration will be analyzed in a general linear model in autumn-winter 2004-2005. The relationship between specific habitat parameters and the presence of wildlife species will be evaluated for habitat restoration plots in the Crab Creek Subbasin by May 2005. Upon completion of final analysis, results will be made available to all agencies interested in and engaged in shrubsteppe restoration activities.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 120 Project 25042 (pygmy rabbit recovery - captive breeding) This project is a last resort effort to save from extirpation what may be a unique subspecies of pygmy rabbit and the only representative of the specie left in Washington. This project will capture and maintain 10 - 14 pygmy rabbits in captivity to breed in each of 3 successive years to produce 50-100 young rabbits per year in each of FY2002, 2003, and 2004 for eventual return to the wild in the Crab Creek Subbasin.

Project 25039 (Effects of agricultural conversion on shrubsteppe wildlife and condition of extant shrubsteppe habitat) The overall goal of this project is to achieve a general understanding of the current extent and condition of the shrubsteppe habitat resource in the Columbia Plateau Province and how human-caused changes in the landscape influence shrubsteppe-associated species of wildlife. This project along with Project 25046 will provide the best overall assessment and direction for future shrubsteppe restoration efforts in many of the subbasins within the Columbia Plateau. This project will complete detailed, large-scale vegetation mapping of shrubsteppe communities and their condition in Crab Creek Subbasin by 2005.

Project 25043 (Northern Leopard Frog Distribution and Habitat Association) This project will identify the condition and extent of northern leopard frog populations in and around Potholes Reservoir in the Columbia Basin Project. It will also assess the impacts of introduced fish, reservoir inundation, and bullfrogs on northern leopard frogs.

Needed Future Actions

Wildlife NWPPC, BPA and CBFWA need to more clearly articulate the extent of BPA’s mitigation responsibilities relating to operational and secondary impacts associated with Columbia River Hydro Development. The Crab Creek Subbasin planning team assumed, based on the original solicitation for Crab Creek Subbasin work that the Columbia Basin Irrigation Project, operated by the Bureau of Reclamation is a significant secondary affect of Grand Coulee Dam. Many reviewers including members of the ISRP questioned the validity of that assumption and it is still unclear to this planning group what BPA mitigation responsibilities are to that end. • Develop a GIS-based inventory showing extent and condition of shrubsteppe habitats and wildlife for the entire subbasin. Such a system should be consistent with work about to be done for Washington’s ecoregions. This system should also allow comparisons between subbasins within the Columbia Plateau and allow comparisons between Provinces within the entire Columbia Basin.

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 121 • A mechanism to better incorporate informed public input needs to be developed so that decisions made by government and other public entities has the benefit of a sound foundation from informed public opinion.

• A fully functional shrubsteppe ecosystem is a vital component to: “… restoring the natural ecological functions … and biological diversity of the Columbia River ecosystem….”, (Northwest Power Planning Council’s 2000, Overall Vision Section III A-1). Most entities and individuals do not fully understand the significance of a functioning shrubsteppe ecosystem in the overall context of the Columbia River. It is the condition of the uplands that ultimately will determine the health of the River. More effort needs to be directed at increasing that understanding

Actions by Others The Nature Conservancy (TNC), The Bureau of Land Management, The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, local governments and landowners are all involved in shrubsteppe restoration activities in The Columbia Basin and The Crab Creek Subbasin. Millions of dollars have been spent on habitat acquisition and wildlife and habitat research.

More specific information can be found above in the sections under background and existing and past efforts.

WDFW is engaging more fully in TNC’s process of ecoregional planning. This is being funded in agency and though outside grants and represents the most comprehensive attempts to date to coordinate habitat and wildlife conservation efforts both spatially and functionally in Washington as well as politically. Salmonid information is also being integrated into this ecoregional process further refining priorities for protection so that functioning ecosystems can be protected.

As BPA, CBFWA and the NWPPC further refine their subbasin planning process to effect the desired outcome of the Columbia River Program, they should consider the ecoregional process as an important part of their more directed effort to protect salmonids in the Columbia River.

H\work\province\plateau\010803DPWPfinal\CrabCreekDraft.doc

Crab Creek Subbasin Summary 122