Second Community Drinking Water Well Table Bluff Reservation – Wiyot Tribe

Final Environmental Assessment

February 2010

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region Regional Office Sacramento, CA

Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitment to island communities.

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public.

Contents

Section 1 Purpose and Need for Action ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ...... 1 1.3 Potential Resource Issues ...... 3 1.4 Resources Not Analyzed in Detail ...... 3 Section 2 Alternatives Including Proposed Action ...... 4 2.1 No Action Alternative ...... 4 2.2 Proposed Action Alternative ...... 4 Section 3 Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences ...... 6 3.1 Surface Water Resources ...... 6 3.1.1 Affected Environment ...... 6 3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 6 3.2 Groundwater Resources ...... 6 3.2.1 Affected Environment ...... 6 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 9 3.3 Land use ...... 10 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...... 10 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 11 3.4 Geology and Soils ...... 11 3.4.1 Affected Environment ...... 11 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 12 3.5 Biological Resources ...... 12 3.5.1 Affected Environment ...... 12 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 14 3.6 Cultural Resources ...... 15 3.6.1 Affected Environment ...... 15 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 15 3.7 Indian Trust Assets ...... 16 3.7.1 Affected Environment ...... 16 3.7.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 16 3.8 Environmental Justice ...... 17 3.8.1 Affected Environment ...... 17 3.8.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 17 3.9 Global Climate Change ...... 17 3.9.1 Affected Environment ...... 17 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 18 Section 4 Consultation and Coordination ...... 19 4.1 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC. 651 et seq.) ...... 19 4.2 Endangered Species Act (16 USC. 1521 et seq.) ...... 19 4.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC § 703 ET SEQ.) ...... 19 4.4 National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470 et seq.) ...... 20 Section 5 Public Involvement ...... 21 Section 6 List of Preparers and Reviewers ...... 22

Final Environmental Assessment i February 2010

Section 7 References ...... 23 Appendix A - Photos of Potential Well Location ...... 24 Appendix B – Maps of Proposed Well Location ...... 28 Appendix C – Cultural Resources Concurrence ...... 29

List of Figures

Figure 1 Table Bluff Reservation Location

Final Environmental Assessment ii February 2010

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

APE Area of Potential Effect ARRA American Recovery & Reinvestment Act CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Federal Endangered Species Act FWCA Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act gpm gallons per minute ITA Indian Trust Assets MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mg/l milligrams per liter NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NRHP National Register of Historic Places Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation SDWR Secondary Drinking Water Regulation (EPA) System Wiyot Tribe Community Water System THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Office Tribe Wiyot Tribe USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Final Environmental Assessment iii February 2010

Section 1 Purpose and Need for Action 1.1 Introduction

Under the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991, as amended (Drought Act), and other authorities, Reclamation is planning to use $40 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to fund emergency drought relief projects that can quickly and effectively mitigate the consequences of the current drought in California.

2009 was the third consecutive year of drought conditions in the State of California and Governor Schwarzenegger declared a drought emergency for the entire state. The Wiyot Tribe (Tribe) is suffering from the prolonged drought which has resulted in severe effects to the health and safety of tribal members. In compliance with Section 104 of the Drought Act, the Tribe has declared a drought emergency and requested Reclamation’s assistance for the purpose of installing a second community drinking water well on the Table Bluff Reservation (Reservation) in Northern California. Figure 1 shows the location of the Reservation. 1.2 Purpose and Need

In response to the ongoing drought and the Tribe’s request for assistance, Reclamation proposes to provide ARRA funding for the installation of a second community drinking well on the Reservation. The purpose of the Proposed Action is to provide an alternative source of drinking water for the Tribe and to reduce the health risks associated with their current operation. The Tribe needs a second well on the Reservation for several reasons: (1) the Tribe wishes to create redundancy in its water system for cautionary purposes; (2) presently, the production rate of the existing well should be adequate for the community it serves, but may be inadequate should the community grow; (3) the Tribe wishes to eventually abandon the existing well at the old Reservation, but cannot do so until an alternate backup water source is developed; and (4) having all wells on the Reservation increases the reliability and security of the Tribe’s water system.

Final Environmental Assessment 1 February 2010

Table Bluff Reservation

Miles 0 0.5 1 U.S.G.S. Quad Cannibal Island Second Community Drinking Water Well Table Bluff Reservation - Wiyot Tribe ± Figure 1 Project Location Date: November 18, 2009 File N ame: N:\SpecialProjects\AR RAWTA\Figure1.mxd November 2009 214-202-79

1.3 Potential Resource Issues

The resource areas listed below have the potential to be affected by the Proposed Action and are discussed further in Section 3.

• Surface Water Resources • Groundwater Resources • Land Use • Geology and Soils • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Indian Trust Assets • Environmental Justice • Climate Change 1.4 Resources Not Analyzed in Detail

It was determined that the following resources would not be impacted by the Proposed Action: water quality, fisheries, recreation, air quality, visual, transportation, noise, hazards and hazardous materials, and socioeconomics. Therefore, impacts to these resources are not analyzed in this Environmental Assessment.

Final Environmental Assessment 3 February 2010

Section 2 Alternatives Including Proposed Action 2.1 No Action Alternative

The No Action Alternative includes not drilling a second community drinking well for the Tribe. Under this alternative, the Tribe would not be able to provide high-quality, reliable drinking water for its members and their health and safety may be compromised as a result. 2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

The Wiyot Tribe proposes to drill and develop a drinking water well on the Reservation with a pumping capacity of approximately 500 to 1,000 acre-feet per year. The project would involve drilling a test hole to 600 feet, installing a pump, and geophysically logging the hole. Power would be brought to the well site via two possible routes. The longer alignment requires approximately 700 feet of underground electrical cable routed from the new proposed well to an existing Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) electrical junction box near the intersection of Wiyot Drive and Bay View Drive. Alternatively, about 120 feet of underground cable may be routed from an existing power pole on the east side of the Table Bluff Road/Phelan Road intersection. The proposed access route leading from Bay View Drive to the new well would not be improved since the flat, mowed pasture is easily driven over. Complete well development would include pouring a concrete pad around the well casing and installing a water line to connect to the existing system. Approximately 1,200 feet of water pipe line would be installed to connect the new well to the existing raw water transmission line. Data collected from the logging and test pumping activities would help determine final pump size, depth, electrical requirements, and details for setting the casing and screen.

Reclamation has determined that the area of potential effects (APE) includes an approximately 1.07-acre area that includes the new well, access road, two possible power line routes, and construction and staging around the new well. The construction and staging area around the well totals approximately 0.4 acres (16,995 square feet) and encompasses a partial 100-foot radius to the north and west as measured from the proposed well site, which is reduced to about 50 feet on the west side of Phelan Drive and 50 feet on the north side of Table Bluff Road. The new access road would be about 210 feet long and 15 feet wide for a total of 0.06 acres (2,596 square feet). The installation area for the longer power line route measures approximately 700 feet long and 15 feet wide, totaling 0.32 acres (13,886 square feet). The construction area for the shorter power line route is about 120 feet long and 10 feet wide, totaling about 0.03 acres (1,240 square feet). The new water pipeline construction area measures approximately 1,200 feet long and 15 feet wide, totaling 0.46 acres (19,842 square feet). An approximately 497-foot long portion of the pipeline corridor and the longer power line route overlap, an area measuring 0.2 acres (7,455 square feet). The project is located in an undeveloped area

Final Environmental Assessment 4 February 2010

south of the tribal residential community at the corner of Phelan Drive and Table Bluff Road (Appendix B). This site was chosen because the geophysical surveys in 2006 indicated that it had the highest potential for a high-quality and high-quantity water source (Geoconsultants 2006). The site is also more than 1,200 feet away from the new well installed in 2008, which should help minimize or eliminate any interference with drawdown between the two wells. The only disadvantage to this site is its distance (approximately 1,200 feet) from the existing raw water transmission line that the new well would eventually tie into.

The typical construction season for ground-disturbing activities in Humboldt County is April 1 through October 31. Well drilling and development have a very limited footprint and can be done year-round. However, trenching for electrical connection would result in ground disturbance and should only occur during the construction season window. In addition, it is also desirable to drill during dry weather for a number of reasons, including: (1) to minimize erosion damage to the site and site access due to the heavy drilling equipment, (2) to take advantage of the longer amount of daylight for the drillers to work each day, (3) to minimize adverse impacts of rain and mud on the drilling samples used to determine the various underground formations, and (4) to provide better site conditions for the drilling crew and inspectors rather than wet weather conditions.

Construction of the new well is expected to begin by April 1, 2010. Drilling and development of the well would take approximately three weeks to complete. First, a test hole would be drilled to 600 feet in conjunction with geophysical logging of the hole. Information garnered from the logging would determine how much of the test hole to abandon and how much to fully develop by reaming, setting the casing and screen, gravel-packing, etc. In the event that the test hole is determined to not be developable, it would be abandoned. Geophysical logging and test pumping would provide information needed to determine pump size and depth placement, which would in turn determine electrical requirements for the well.

Final Environmental Assessment 5 February 2010

Section 3 Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences

The aboriginal territory of the Wiyot people encompasses the lands immediately surrounding Humboldt Bay in Northern California. It extends from the southern watershed of Little River a few miles south of Trinidad to the Bear River Mountains just south of the Eel River. The eastern boundary crosses the river at the mouth of the Van Duzen fork just above Blue Lake. 3.1 Surface Water Resources

3.1.1 Affected Environment The closest source of surface water is McNulty Slough located approximately ¼ mile to the southwest of the proposed well location. There are no wetlands in the proposed construction area and the area is outside of the 100-year floodplain of McNulty Slough.

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would continue to pump water from existing wells on the Reservation. The Tribe would not be able to provide high-quality drinking water for its members and their health and safety may be compromised as a result. Under the No Action Alternative, surface water use would neither increase nor decrease and, therefore, would have no impacts to surface water.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well on the Reservation. The Proposed Action would neither increase nor decrease surface water in the project area and, therefore, would not result in short-term or long-term adverse impacts to surface water or resources dependent on surface water.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action would not contribute to changes in surface water and therefore; would not contribute to cumulative effects to surface water resources. 3.2 Groundwater Resources

3.2.1 Affected Environment The Reservation is located within the North Coast Hydrologic Area - Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin. The prime source of groundwater lies in the Eel River and Van Duzen delta. Though the storage capacity is about 136,000 acre feet, the usable yield of this ground water storage basin is estimated to be 40,000 to 60,000 acre-feet annually (Humboldt County 2007). Estimates of groundwater extraction are based on a survey conducted by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in 1996. The survey

Final Environmental Assessment 6 February 2010

included land use and sources of water. Estimates of groundwater extraction for agricultural and municipal/industrial uses are 49,000 and 1,400 acre-feet respectively. Deep percolation from applied water is estimated to be 9,500 acre-feet. (DWR 2004)

The Tribe owns and operates a Community Water System (System) that serves the 145 year-round residents of the new Reservation. The water system consists of the following components: (1) a well; (2) transmission line from the well to the treatment building with processes for iron and manganese removal, disinfection and fluoridation; (3) a treated water storage tank; (4) pressure adjustment; and (5) ultimate distribution to the community residents through a looped piping system. Currently, 34 homes and the Tribal Community Center are connected to the System. The System, regulated by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX, which oversees drinking water quality, has always been in compliance with all requirements of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.

Currently, the sole water source for the Tribe’s water system is a well located on the old Reservation, on property privately owned by a Tribal member. The well’s total depth is reportedly 132 feet deep with a pumping level of 100 feet. It is outfitted with a five (5) horsepower (HP) pump and motor and has a pumping rate of between 35 and 50 gallons per minute. There is no sampling port or meter located directly at the old well.

Use of the Tribe’s previous community well on the old Reservation, located about 100 feet away from the old well, was discontinued in 1990-91 due to contamination from failed nearby septic systems1. During the ensuing lawsuit, the Federal court mandated new land be purchased and the Tribe moved to another location. As a result, the new Reservation was acquired in 1991 and the old well and water system were installed. Because the lawsuit regarding water contamination on the old Reservation limits the spending of federal funding on certain activities, the old Reservation is not currently supplied by the old well; tribal members who live on the old Reservation have their own wells.

The current community (old) well has an elevation of about 10 feet above mean sea level. An attempt was made when the well was drilled to protect it from the possibility of flooding by building an approximately 7-foot high mound at the well head and extending the casing above the top of the mound; in December of 2002, flooding of the Eel River Estuary brought surface water within 10 horizontal feet of the well head. The well is located within 50 feet of McNulty Slough, a saltwater marsh that opens into the mouth of the Eel River and the Pacific Ocean. In 2003, the Tribe initiated a chloride monitoring program to assess if salt water intrusion might be the cause of unpleasant briny flavors of the well water. While on-going sodium monitoring has yielded no alarming results, monthly sampling for chlorides has resulted in detections of concentrations ranging from

1 The ‘previous well’, located on the old Reservation, was contaminated with feces and its use discontinued in 1991. The ‘old well’, also located on the old Reservation, has been in use since 1991 and is still the sole source of drinking water for residents on the new Reservation (over one mile away). The ‘new well’, drilled on the new Reservation in 2008, will be the primary drinking water source for the tribe at the beginning of 2010. The ‘proposed well’ is the subject of this EA and would be installed in 2010 on the new Reservation.

Final Environmental Assessment 7 February 2010

380 to 490 mg/L, well in excess of the EPA’s Secondary Drinking Water Regulation (SDWR) of 250 mg/L, and corroborating the evidence for salt water intrusion. Excessive manganese and iron, also in exceedance of SDWRs in the raw water, are removed by filtration. Additionally, the well is located immediately adjacent to a livestock grazing area, although nitrate has not been detected in any annual water samples to date.

Finally, the old Reservation is the site of illegal dumping and illicit methamphetamine production, leaving the groundwater vulnerable to contamination by leachates from methamphetamine by-products, domestic refuse, burn ash pits, paints, lubricants, battery acid, coolant, hydraulic fluid and other pollutants. After the water leaves the wellhead, it travels to the treatment building via approximately 1,430 feet of four inch PVC pipe. A shut-off valve is located at the point where the waterline undergoes a 90 degree bend between the well access road and the main road leading to the Reservation, but until recently this was the only shut-off valve along the entire one-mile run between the well and the treatment facility. The water next passes through the treatment building where it is treated for iron and manganese removal and is disinfected and fluoridated. The treated water is then sent to a 105,000-gallon water storage tank. From storage it returns to the treatment building where it passes through a 1,750-gallon hydro-pneumatic tank with booster pumps to increase water pressure before it is distributed to the residences. A Sanitary Survey conducted by Indian Health Services in February 2003 resulted in the following descriptions of, and recommendations for, the Tribe’s water system:

(1) Source - The System relies on one well for all drinking water and does not have emergency electrical capacity. The current well is prone to numerous risks, including nitrate contamination due to agricultural runoff from the lands surrounding the old Reservation, contamination due to failing/failed septic systems on the old Reservation, contamination from illegal dumping activity on the old Reservation, and salt-water intrusion from McNulty Slough. Additionally, the land upon which the well is situated is no longer held in trust status. Because the land is held in fee-simple status, the well is on privately owned property, and thus under the control of the property owner. The existing well could be kept online to be used as an emergency backup.

(2) Storage Tank – The storage tank is in excellent condition. However, since the Reservation is located in a highly seismic area, the recommendation is to anchor the tank to its concrete foundation.

(3) Distribution – The Tribe wishes to install more shut-off valves in the mile line leading from the well to the tank to isolate portions of the waterline in the event of a break. The Tribe should install a backup generator to power the distribution system in the event of power outages.

Final Environmental Assessment 8 February 2010

Recent Improvements In 2003, the Tribe installed a backup generator to pressurize the treated water distribution lines. Prior to installation of the generator, power loss during winter storms resulted in loss of pressure in the distribution lines, effectively denying residents drinking water at their houses and disabling the community’s five fire hydrants; additionally, partial power outages had also caused damage to water system equipment. Because of the numerous risks posed to the well on the old Reservation, the fact that the tribal government holds no legal control over the wellhead (it is situated on a privately owned fee-simple lot), and that the chloride concentrations of the water were keeping residents from drinking the water, the Tribe sought installation of a new well on the current Reservation. In 2006, the Tribe hired hydrogeologists to perform a geological and geophysical survey for recommendations for possible locations and depths of a new well on the Reservation, with positive results. Several sites on the 88.5-acre reservation were deemed suitable for drilling a new well. In 2008, the Tribe drilled and developed a well at one of the better sites indicated by the geophysical survey. The site was chosen because it had the second best water signature (indicating an adequate water-holding formation) of all the sites, and was adjacent to the existing raw water transmission line from the well at the old reservation to the treatment building on the current Reservation. The well was drilled to a depth of 600 feet and pump testing has indicated that the well will produce a maximum of 25 gpm. Water quality analyses have indicated that the water is of much higher quality than the well at the old Reservation, with no iron, manganese, sodium, or chloride issues.

In 2009, electrical supply was brought to the wellhead, a pump was installed at a depth of 280 feet, and the new well was connected to the existing raw water transmission line. Additionally, flush hydrants, check valves, and gate valves were installed on the existing raw water line on the reservation, and the piping at the 105,000-gallon water storage tank was retrofitted for seismic stability. The flow meters can separately measure total gallons for the old (off-Reservation well) and the new (on-Reservation) well. As of October 2009, only two items remain to be completed before the well on the current Reservation is actively supplying water for the community drinking water system: installation of an exclusionary security fence around the wellhead, and a minor modifications to the treatment plant piping and chemical injection system to allow treatment of water from the new well and also treatment of water from the old well. The current concept is to use the new well exclusively and the old well for backup or emergency purposes.

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would continue to receive water from existing wells on the Reservation. The Tribe would not be able to provide high-quality drinking water for its members and their health and safety may be compromised as a result. Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would continue with current practices and no additional groundwater resources would be affected.

Final Environmental Assessment 9 February 2010

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well with a pumping capacity of approximately 500 to 1,000 acre-feet per year. The well would be managed and monitored by the Tribe to ensure water use efficiency and water conservation and would pump a minimal amount of water in the area, therefore; the Proposed Action would not result in short-term or long-term adverse impacts to groundwater resources.

Fecal contamination occurred at the Tribe’s previous well (described in Footnote 1) in 1991. This well is over 4,000 feet away from the Proposed Action. It is unlikely due to distance that the Proposed Action would draw contamination from the previous well. The previous well also experienced saltwater intrusion whereas the new well on the Reservation extracts very fresh water, further demonstrating that the Proposed Action would be drawing water from the contaminated aquifer.

The Proposed Action would be drawing approximately 1.25 to 2.5 % of the total acre-feet of water available in the Eel River Valley Groundwater Basin.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action would not result in adverse impacts to groundwater resources and due to the fact that at this time there are no additional projects planned on the Reservation, the Proposed Action would not contribute to cumulative impacts to groundwater resources. 3.3 Land use

3.3.1 Affected Environment The Table Bluff Reservation – Wiyot Tribe, a federally recognized Tribe, is located at the south end of Humboldt Bay in Humboldt County, California. The Reservation consists of a 20-acre old Reservation held in status fee simple, and a 88.5-acre new Reservation held in trust status, about one mile from the old Reservation. It extends from the southern watershed of Little River a few miles south of Trinidad to the Bear River Mountains just south of the Eel River. The eastern boundary crosses the river at the mouth of the Van Duzen fork just above Blue Lake. The physical features of the new Reservation include gently rolling pastureland and a steep bluff overlooking the southern reach of Humboldt Bay. The closest town is Loleta, five miles to the south. The largest town with a population over 10,000 is Eureka, approximately 12 miles to the north by road.

The population on the Reservation has remained steady for several years, at around 145 year-round residents. The new Reservation consists of 34 residences and a community center that houses the tribal offices. However, there is a possibility of several new homes being built on the Reservation, including several for elderly occupation. These residences would be constructed near the already existing homes, concentrating growth and keeping the developed area of the Reservation limited. The maximum number of new residential buildings that could be added to the Reservation is around 13, with a maximum Reservation population increase to 180 during the next couple of decades.

Final Environmental Assessment 10 February 2010

3.3.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would continue to receive water from existing wells on the Reservation. The Tribe would not be able to provide high-quality drinking water for its members and their health and safety may be compromised as a result. Land use would remain unchanged under the No Action Alternative.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well in an area that has previously been disturbed; therefore, the action would not be changing the historic land use. The area where the new well would be located is approximately 1.07- acres, including the new well, access road, power line, and construction and staging around the new well. The project is located in an undeveloped area south of the tribal residential community at the corner of Phelan Drive and Table Bluff Road (Appendix B). The Proposed Action does not conflict with any land use plans on the Reservation.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action is located in an area that has previously been disturbed and would only require disturbance to an area of approximately 1.07 acres. Hence, the Proposed Action would not contribute to cumulative impacts on land use. 3.4 Geology and Soils

3.4.1 Affected Environment Geologic materials underlying the Reservation consist of deposits of gravels, sands, silts and clays of the upper Pleistocene Hookton Formation. The fine black sand intervals of this unit are particularly productive. Underlying the Hookton Formation are conglomerate, sandstone, and claystone of the Carlotta Formation of lower Pleistocene age. Subsurface folding and faulting my control groundwater movement and flow, and the subsurface may be separated into separate compartments. (Geoconsultants 2006)

The sands and gravels store and transmit varying quantities of groundwater where penetrated by wells. The more permeable sand and gravel units that connect with better recharge sources will produce a greater quantity of water. In this hydrogeologic setting, significant quantities of groundwater in storage and available for transmission to a well will only be found in the more permeable and continuous sand and gravel units. Another factor influencing the feasibility of water well development in this setting is the amount of average annual recharge that will replenish the groundwater reservoir. (Geoconsultants 2006)

Final Environmental Assessment 11 February 2010

3.4.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would continue to receive water from existing wells on the Reservation. The Tribe would not be able to provide high-quality drinking water for its members and their health and safety may be compromised as a result. Geology and soils would remain unchanged on the Reservation under the No Action Alternative.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well in an area that has previously been disturbed. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, geology and soils would be minimally impacted by installation of the well and pipeline since the area has been previously disturbed and the amount of area required for the proposed well is only approximately 1.07 acres.

3.5.1 Affected Environment The Reservation has low diversity of habitat types. The vast majority of the Reservation is bluff prairie that has historically served as agricultural land for potato cultivation and, more recently, range land for dairy and beef cattle, although no grazing has taken place on the Reservation for three years. Some of this prairie is now developed with residential housing, a community center, paved roads, a water treatment system, and a wastewater treatment system including a leachfield. The prairie grassland immediately surrounding the developed portion of the Reservation is mowed frequently during the spring and summer. The bluff prairie transitions into a bluff scrub habitat at the north end of the Reservation as it slopes downhill towards Humboldt Bay. The Reservation boundaries fall short of the bay, however, and do not include any salt marsh habitat.

Final Environmental Assessment 12 February 2010

A botanical survey of the Reservation was performed by tribal Environmental Specialists on May 20 and 21, 2009. The survey indicated that the bluff prairie habitat is almost entirely dominated by non-native grasses, including sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum oderatum), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), and perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne). Other common non-native species on the Reservation include orchard grass (Dactylis glomeratum), oatgrass (Danthonia pilosa), slender oat (Avena barbata), English daisy (Bellis perennis), white clover (Trifolium repens), flax (Linum bienne), scarlet pimpernel (Anagallis arvensis), and rough cat’s-ear (Hypochaeris radicata). One area of exception is the eastern boundary of the Reservation, between the fence and Phelan Road, which contains a much higher density of native species, including snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus var. laevigatus), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), coast angelica (Angelica hendersonii), cascara (Rhamnus purshianus), and wood fern (Dryopteris arguta). Although two rare vascular plant species are known to occur near the Reservation on Table Bluff, these species were not detected during the surveys.

A species list, included in Table 1 below, was generated from the USFWS Arcata Field Office’s website on November 17, 2009 (USFWS 2009).

Table 1: Species Identified as Potentially Occurring in the Cannibal Island and Fields Landing USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangles Common Name Scientific Name Federal Habitat in Area Status1 INVERTEBRATES Haliotis cracherodii Black abalone2 PE No FISH Acipenser medirostris Green sturgeon 2, 3 T No Eucyclogobius newberryi Tidewater goby3 E No Oncorhynchus kisutch S.OR/N.CA coho salmon2, 3 T No Oncorhynchus mykiss Central Valley steelhead2, 3 T No Oncorhynchus tshawytscha CA coastal Chinook T No salmon2, 3 Thaleichthys pacificus Southern eulachon DPS PT No REPTILES Caretta caretta Loggerhead turtle T No Chelonia mydas (incl. Green turtle T No agassizi) Dermochelys coriacea Leatherback turtle3 E No Lepidochelys olivacea Olive (=Pacific) Ridley sea T No turtle BIRDS Brachyramphus marmoratus Marbled murrelet3 T No Charadrius alexandrinus Western snowy plover3 T No nivosus Coccyzus americanus Western yellow-billed C No cuckoo Phoebastris albatrus Short-tailed albatross E No Strix occidentalis caurina Northern spotted owl3 T No Synthliboramphus hypoleucus Xantus’s murrelet C No

Final Environmental Assessment 13 February 2010

Table 1: Species Identified as Potentially Occurring in the Cannibal Island and Fields Landing USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangles Common Name Scientific Name Federal Habitat in Area Status1 MAMMALS Balaenoptera borealis Sei whale E No Balaenoptera musculus Blue whale E No Balaenoptera physalus Fin whale E No Eumetopias jubatus Steller (=northern) sea-lion3 T No Megaptera novaengliae Humpback whale E No Physeter macrocephalus Sperm whale E No PLANTS Erysimum menziesii Menzie’s wallflower E No Layia carnosa Beach layia E No Lilium occidentale Western lily E No 1 PE=Proposed Endangered, PT=Proposed Threatened, E=Endangered, T=Threatened, C=Candidate 2 Listed under the jurisdiction of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries 3 Critical Habitat designated for this species

Non-listed species that could occur in the surrounding area include: mule (black-tailed) deer (Odocoileus hemionus), black-tailed Jackrabbit (Lepus spp.), opossum (Didelphis marsupialis), coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), raven (Corvus corax), robin (Turdus migratorius), Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri), killdeer (Charadrius vociferous), and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis).

3.5.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would continue their current land use practices resulting in no adverse impacts to biological resources.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well on the Reservation. The Proposed Action area has previously been disturbed; therefore, the action would not be changing the land use practices on the Reservation. Due to the Proposed Action area being previously disturbed, no wilderness designations or unique ecosystem, biological community or its inhabitants are expected to be impacted by the project.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action would not result in adverse impacts to biological resources and due to the fact that at this time there are no additional projects planned on the Reservation, the Proposed Action would not contribute to cumulative impacts to biological resources.

Final Environmental Assessment 14 February 2010

3.6 Cultural Resources

3.6.1 Affected Environment A cultural resource is a broad term that includes prehistoric, historic, architectural, and traditional cultural properties. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 is the primary Federal legislation that outlines the Federal Government’s responsibility to cultural resources. Section 106 of the NHPA requires the Federal Government to take into consideration the effects of an undertaking on cultural resources listed on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Those resources that are on, or eligible for inclusion on, the NRHP are referred to as historic properties.

The Section 106 process is outlined in the Federal regulations at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800. These regulations describe the process that the Federal agency (Reclamation) takes to identify cultural resources and the level of effect that the proposed undertaking will have on historic properties. In summary, Reclamation must first determine if the action is the type of action that has the potential to affect historic properties. If the action is the type of action to affect historic properties, Reclamation must identify the area of potential effects (APE), determine if historic properties are present within that APE, determine the effect that the undertaking will have on historic properties, and consult with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), to seek concurrence on Reclamation’s findings. In addition, Reclamation is required through the Section 106 process to consult with Indian Tribes concerning the identification of sites of religious or cultural significance, and consult with individuals or groups who are entitled to be consulting parties or have requested to be consulting parties.

Helene Rouvier, the former Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Wiyot Tribe, conducted a records search and pedestrian survey of the APE for the proposed drinking water well. The attached letter dated November 2, 2009 documents these identification efforts (Appendix C). No cultural resources were identified. Reclamation sent a letter to the Wiyot Tribe on December 7, 2009 to invite their assistance in identifying sites of religious and cultural significance pursuant to the regulations at 36 CFR 800.3(f)(2) and 36 CFR Part 800.4(a)(4). No response has been received to this inquiry. Reclamation consulted with the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) on December 21, 2009 regarding a finding that the proposed action will result in no historic properties affected pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.4(d)(1). The THPO concurred with Reclamation’s determination and findings on January 19, 2010 (Appendix C).

3.6.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, there are no impacts to cultural resources since there would be no change in operations and no ground disturbance. Conditions related to cultural resources would remain the same as existing conditions.

Final Environmental Assessment 15 February 2010

Proposed Action The Proposed Action is the type of activity that has the potential to affect historic properties. A records search, pedestrian survey, and Tribal consultation failed to identify any historic properties within the project area. Since no historic properties will be affected, no cultural resources will be impacted as a result of implementing proposed action.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action would not result in adverse impacts to cultural resources and, therefore, would not contribute to cumulative impacts to cultural resources. 3.7 Indian Trust Assets

3.7.1 Affected Environment Indian Trust Assets (ITAs) are legal interests in property or rights held in trust by the United States for Indian Tribes or individuals. Trust status originates from rights imparted by treaties, statutes, or executive orders. These rights are reserved for, or granted to, tribes. A defining characteristic of an ITA is that such assets cannot be sold, leased, or otherwise alienated without Federal approval.

Indian reservations, rancherias, and allotments are common ITAs. Allotments can occur both within and outside of reservation boundaries and are parcels of land where title is held in trust for specific individuals. Additionally, ITAs include the right to access certain traditional use areas and perform certain traditional activities.

It is Reclamation policy to protect ITAs from adverse impacts resulting from its’ programs and activities whenever possible. Types of actions that could affect ITAs include an interference with the exercise of a reserved water right, degradation of water quality where there is a water right or noise near a land asset where it adversely affects uses of the reserved land.

3.7.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would continue their current land use practices resulting in no adverse impacts to ITAs.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action Alternative, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well on the Reservation. The Proposed Action does not affect ITAs. The project location is inside Table Bluff Reservation.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action would not result in adverse impacts to ITAs and, therefore, would not contribute to cumulative impacts to ITAs.

Final Environmental Assessment 16 February 2010

3.8 Environmental Justice

3.8.1 Affected Environment Executive Order 12898 requires each Federal agency to achieve environmental justice as part of its mission, by identifying and addressing disproportionately high adverse human health or environmental effects, including social and economic effects, of its programs and activities on minority populations and low-income populations of the United States.

3.8.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well on the Reservation. The Tribe would not be able to provide high-quality drinking water for its members and their health and safety may be compromised as a result which would be an adverse impact to Tribe members and, thus, an adverse impact to environmental justice.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well on the Reservation. The Proposed Action would not disproportionately impact economically disadvantaged or minority populations. In fact, the Proposed Action would address existing negative effects upon a minority population and improve the standard of living by providing clean water. The Proposed Action would not cause environmental justice issues.

Cumulative Effects As the Proposed Action does not have the potential to cause adverse impacts to economically disadvantaged or minority populations, and in fact would actually benefit the Tribe by providing clean water on the Reservation, the Proposed Action could potentially result in cumulative benefits for the Tribe. 3.9 Global Climate Change

3.9.1 Affected Environment The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that changes in the earth's climate will continue through the 21st century and that the rate of change may increase significantly in the future because of human activity. Many researchers studying California's climate believe that changes in the earth's climate have already affected California and will continue to do so in the future. Climate change may seriously affect the State's water resources. Temperature increases could affect water demand and aquatic ecosystems. Changes in the timing and amount of precipitation and runoff could occur.

Climate change is identified in the 2005 update of the California Water Plan (Bulletin 160-05) as a key consideration in planning for the State's future water management. The 2005 Water Plan update qualitatively describes the effects that climate change may have on the State's water supply. It also describes efforts that should be taken to quantitatively evaluate climate change effects for the next Water Plan update.

Final Environmental Assessment 17 February 2010

3.9.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Tribe would not drill a second drinking water well and would have no effect on climate change.

Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the Tribe would drill a second drinking water well on the Reservation. The Proposed Action would not include any significant change on the composition of the atmosphere and therefore would not result in adverse impacts to climate change.

Cumulative Effects The Proposed Action would not result in adverse impacts to climate change and, therefore, would not contribute to cumulative impacts to climate change.

Final Environmental Assessment 18 February 2010

Section 4 Consultation and Coordination

While no impacts to endangered species or to historic/cultural resources have been indicated by the Proposed Action, consultation and coordination was conducted with the agencies and mandates considered below. 4.1 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC. 651 et seq.)

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) requires that Reclamation consult with fish and wildlife agencies (federal and state) on all water development projects that could affect biological resources. There are no listed, proposed, or species of concern in the project area; therefore, no consultation is required. 4.2 Endangered Species Act (16 USC. 1521 et seq.)

Section 7 of this Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that all federally associated activities within the United States do not jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat of these species. Action agencies must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which maintains current lists of species that have been designated as threatened or endangered, to determine the potential impacts a project may have on protected species.

Reclamation determined that the Proposed Action would have no effect on federally proposed or listed threatened and endangered species or their proposed or designated critical habitat. No further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. 4.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC § 703 ET SEQ.)

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act implements various treaties and conventions between the U.S. and Canada, Japan, Mexico and the former Soviet Union for the protection of migratory birds. Unless permitted by regulations, the Act provides that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take, capture or kill; possess, offer to or sell, barter, purchase, deliver or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg or product, manufactured or not. Subject to limitations in the Act, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) may adopt regulations determining the extent to which, if at all, hunting, taking, capturing, killing, possessing, selling, purchasing, shipping, transporting or exporting of any migratory bird, part, nest or egg will be allowed, having regard for temperature zones, distribution, abundance, economic value, breeding habits and migratory flight patterns.

Migratory bird surveys would be completed prior to project construction in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Final Environmental Assessment 19 February 2010

4.4 National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470 et seq.)

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires federal agencies to evaluate the effects of federal undertakings on historical, archaeological and cultural resources. Due to the nature of the proposed project, there will be no effect on any historical, archaeological, or cultural resources and no further compliance actions are required.

Final Environmental Assessment 20 February 2010

Section 5 Public Involvement

The Draft EA was circulated to interested parties for a 15-day public review period that began February 2, 2010 and ended February 16, 2010. The Draft EA was posted on Reclamation’s Mid-Pacific (MP) Region NEPA website. No comment letters were received.

Final Environmental Assessment 21 February 2010

Section 6 List of Preparers and Reviewers

Shelly Hatleberg, Natural Resources Specialist, Mid-Pacific Region Tamara LaFramboise, Natural Resources Specialist, Mid-Pacific Region Amy Barnes, Archaeologist, Mid-Pacific Region

Final Environmental Assessment 22 February 2010

Section 7 References

California Department of Fish and Game. 2009. California Natural Diversity Database Search of Threatened and Endangered Species Occurrences on Cannibal Island and Fields Landing Quads. Report printed on November 17, 2009.

California Department of Water Resources. 2004. California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118. Updated February 27, 2004.

Geoconsultants, Inc. 2006. Geological and Geophysical Survey for Water Well Location, Wiyot Tribe, Portions of Table Bluff Reservation. Prepared for Wiyot Tribe. June 21, 2006.

Humboldt County Community Development Services Department. 2007. Draft Drought Report. August 2007. Found online at: co.humboldt.ca.us/planning/HazardMitigation/docs/DraftDrought0807.doc

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Listed/Proposed Threatened and Endangered Species for the Cannibal Island Quad. November 17, 2009. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/specieslist/speciesreport.asp

Final Environmental Assessment 23 February 2010

Appendix A - Photos of Potential Well Location

Final Environmental Assessment 24 February 2010

View #1 of Proposed Well Site

View #2 of Proposed Well Site

Final Environmental Assessment 25 February 2010

View #3 of Proposed Well Site

View #4 of Proposed Well Site

Final Environmental Assessment 26 February 2010

View #5 of Proposed Well Site

View #6 of Proposed Well Site

Final Environmental Assessment 27 February 2010

Appendix B – Maps of Proposed Well Location

Final Environmental Assessment 28 February 2010

MAP 1: TABLE BLUFF RESERVATION

MAP 2: PROJECT SITE MAP, GENERAL

MAP 3: PROJECT SITE MAP: DETAIL

Appendix C – Cultural Resources Concurrence

Final Environmental Assessment 29 February 2010