DOCSLIB.ORG

Snohomish River Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant Report Grant # G0400041

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Snohomish River Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant Report Grant # G0400041 Snohomish County Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Snohomish River Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant Report Grant # G0400041 December 21, 2007 Snohomish County Public Works Department Surface Water Management Division Snohomish Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant # G0400041 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Snohomish County Elected Officials, 2007 County Council District 1………………………..… John Koster County Council District 2………………………..… Kirke Sievers County Council District 3………………………..… Gary Nelson County Council District 4………………………..… Dave Gossett, Chair County Council District 5…………………..……… Dave Somers, Vice-Chair County Executive……………………………..…… Aaron Reardon Public Works Department Public Works Director……………………………... Steve Thomsen, P.E. Surface Water Management Division Director…….. David Brookings Water Quality and Habitat Sciences Supervisor…… Kathy Thornburgh Project Team This project was funded by a Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant from the Washington Department of Ecology and Snohomish County. Andrew Haas served as project manager and editor. Mike Rustay, Frank Leonetti, Steve Britsch, Brett Gaddis, Janet Carroll, John Herrmann and Ted Parker co-authored the report and served leading roles in completing the project work plan. Special thanks go out to the project team members that made this project a success. Megan Olsen and Evelyn Fotheringill managed billing and provided financial oversight. Rob Simmonds and Suzy Brunzell assisted with map development. Michael Purser and Allan Wahl assisted with data collection. Scott Moore led riparian restoration at Field’s Riffle, Lake Crescent and Swan Trail Slough. Dale Kolbe assisted with invasive weed control at Field’s Riffle. Rodney Pond evaluated the success and survival of plantings. Bob Aldrich acquired large woody debris. Scot Roetcisoender and the road maintenance crew breached an old road to reconnect a wetland with the Snohomish River. Dave Lucas prepared design drawing for the road fill reconnection. Jed Marshall obtained the permit. Washington Conservation Corps crew members prepared, planted and maintained the planting sites. The Snohomish Conservation District worked collaboratively to restore Swan Trail Slough and follow-up with landowners to address water quality problems. ii Snohomish Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant # G0400041 Recommended Citation Haas, A., M. Rustay, F. Leonetti, S. Britsch, B. Gaddis, J. Carroll, J. Herrmann, and T. Parker. 2007. Snohomish River Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project. Snohomish County Public Works, Surface Water Management Division, Everett, WA. Report Inquiries Inquires regarding this report should be directed to: Snohomish County Department of Public Works, Surface Water Management Division 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, M/S 607 Everett, WA 98201 Phone: (425)388-3464 Internet: www.salmon.surfacewater.info Disclaimer Snohomish County disclaims any warranty of merchantability or warranty of fitness of the maps in the plan for any particular purpose, either expressed or implied, No representation or warranty is made concerning the accuracy, currency, completeness or quality of data depicted on these maps. Any user of these maps assumes all responsibility for use thereof, and further agrees to hold Snohomish County harmless from and against any damage, loss or liability arising from any use of these maps. i Snohomish Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant # G0400041 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... vi 1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Goal and Objectives.................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Study Area ................................................................................................................. 1 1.4 Conceptual Framework............................................................................................ 4 1.4.1 Diagnostic Phase................................................................................................ 4 1.4.2 Response Phase.................................................................................................. 5 2.0 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Water Quality Survey.............................................................................................. 6 2.1.1 Sample Site Identification ................................................................................ 6 2.1.2 Sampling Methods ............................................................................................ 6 2.1.3 Laboratory Methods......................................................................................... 7 2.1.4 Data Management............................................................................................. 8 2.2 Stream Temperature Survey ................................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Data Collection.................................................................................................. 9 2.2.2 Data Management........................................................................................... 10 2.3 Bank Condition and Aquatic Habitat Survey ...................................................... 10 2.3.1 Data Collection................................................................................................ 10 2.3.2 Data Management........................................................................................... 11 2.4 Restoration Opportunities Analysis ...................................................................... 12 3.0 DIAGNOSTIC PHASE .............................................................................................. 16 3.1 Outfall Water Quality Survey................................................................................ 16 3.1.1 Results .............................................................................................................. 16 3.1.2 Discussion......................................................................................................... 27 3.2 Stream Temperature Survey ................................................................................. 33 3.2.1 Results .............................................................................................................. 33 3.2.2 Discussion......................................................................................................... 36 3.3 Bank Conditions and Aquatic Habitat Survey..................................................... 41 3.3.1 Results .............................................................................................................. 41 3.3.2 Discussion......................................................................................................... 65 3.4 Restoration Opportunities Analysis ...................................................................... 74 3.4.1 Results .............................................................................................................. 74 3.4.2 Discussion......................................................................................................... 75 4.0 RESPONSE PHASE ................................................................................................... 78 4.1 Landowner Assistance and Referrals.................................................................... 78 4.2 Snoqualmie Lake Crescent Restoration................................................................ 83 4.3 Field’s Riffle Restoration ....................................................................................... 88 4.4 Swan Trail Slough Restoration.............................................................................. 97 5.0 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................... 102 i Snohomish Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant # G0400041 5.1 Summary of Project Accomplishments............................................................... 102 5.2 Next Steps .............................................................................................................. 102 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................... 103 APPENDICES........................................................................................................................... 107 Appendix A: Quality Assurance Project Plan............................................................. 107 Appendix B: Aquatic Habitat Sampling Plan ............................................................. 149 ii Snohomish Pollutant Diagnosis and Implementation Project Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant # G0400041 TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 1.1 Project study area....................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1.2 Snohomish River basin (WRIA 7) land ownership. ...............................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Community Relations Plan
    Community Relations Plan Rainy, Sunset, and Kromona Mine and Mill Sites Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Clean-Up Project Prepared by: Curtis Spalding Environmental Coordinator Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest and Rod Lentz On-Scene Coordinator Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests Approved By: _____________________________ Date: _____________ Y. ROBERT IWAMOTO Forest Supervisor Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS OVERVIEW ...............................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................4 Rainy Mine and Mill ...............................................................................................................4 Sunset Mine and Mill .............................................................................................................5 Kromona Mine and Mill ........................................................................................................6 SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES ............................................................................................8 COMMUNICATION STRATEGY ..............................................................................................8 History of Community Involvement and Project Awareness .................................................8 Key Community Concerns .....................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River Project Ferc No. 2157 Anadromws Fish
    SULTAN RIVER PROJECT FERC NO. 2157 ANADROMWS FISH MITIGATION STUDY PLANS (PROPOSED) JUNE, 1983 (Revised September. 1983) (Revised October, 1983) PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 1 OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY EVERETT, WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 11. Steelhead Fishability (Creel Census) 111. Sediment Analysis (Textural composition) Study IV. Gravel Quantity Study v. Ramping Rate Study VI . Fish Passage (Powerhouse Berm) Study VII. River Temperature Study VIII. Schedule IX. References Appendix A Agreement on Additional Sediment Sampling I. INTRODUCTION Thls document presents fish mi tigation study plans for agency and tribal review and comment so as to jointly develop studies of the effect of project operation on anadromous fishery resources of the Sultan River. When Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1 (District) applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for Stage I1 of the Sultan River Project (FERC No. 2157). several state and federal agencies and the Tulalip Tribes intervened over mitigation and enhancement issues concerning Sultan River aquatic resources. Subsequently, several 1icense articles addressed those issues in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Order Amending License dated October 16, 1981. In accordance with Article 60 a document entitled "Uncontested Offer of Settlement - Joint Agencies" was executed in April, 1982. The Commission approved this settlement on February 9, 1983. It included the series of studies mentioned in the Settlement Agreement and are described more fully in the next sections. During subsequent implementing steps in the studies the Joint Agencies have requested participation. Specific activities anticipated include technical review of consultant/contractor study plans, periodic monitoring of work through a study committee, and appropriate participation in field studies as described later.
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River, Wa
    Hydropower Project Summary SULTAN RIVER, WA HENRY M JACKSON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (P-2157) Photo Credit: Snohomish County Public Utility District This summary was produced by the Hydropower Reform Coalition and River Management Society Sultan River, Washington SULTAN RIVER, WA HENRY M JACKSON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (P-2157) DESCRIPTION: The Jackson Project is located on the Sultan River in northwestern Washington. The project’s authorized capacity is 111.8 megawatts (MW). The project is located on the Sultan River, 20 miles east of the City of Everett, Washington, in Snohomish County. The project occupies 10.9 acres of the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service). Downstream of the project’s Culmback dam at Spada Lake, the Sultan River flows through a deep forested gorge for nearly 14 miles. The project powerhouse is located near the downstream end of the gorge. The District (Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County) currently operates the project to satisfy the City of Everett’s municipal water supply needs, protect aquatic resources, maintain Spada lake levels for summer recreation, and generate electricity. The new license requires additional measures to protect and enhance water quality, fish, wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources. The twelve signatories to the Settlement Agreement are the District, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Forest Service; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. National Park Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Washington DFW), Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), Tulalip Tribes of Washington (Tulalip Tribes), Snohomish County, Washington; City of Everett; City of Sultan; and American Whitewater.
    [Show full text]
  • 20110209-5130 Ferc
    20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Consultation Biological Opinion And Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation And Management Act Consultation Federal Energy Regulatory Commission License to operate the Jackson Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2157 Located on the Sultan River HUC 17100090402 Snohomish County, Washington Action Agency: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Consultation Conducted by: National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Region Hydropower Division NOAA Fisheries Log Number: F/NWR/2010/01972 Date: February 9, 2011 20110209-5130 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 2/9/2011 2:27:21 PM Jackson Hydroelectric Project Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 7 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 9 1.1 Background and Consultation History
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Natural Environment
    CHAPTER 5: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 5.1 Introduction Sultan’s natural environment has shaped the city since its very inception with Sultan and Skykomish Rivers providing key transportation routes, accommodating the floating logs from the surrounding forest, to the bluff and plateau shaping the traditional Sultan core. The Natural Environment element combines several environmentally related topics, including critical areas (wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, and geologically hazardous areas), water and air quality, and shorelines. Sultan has many of these features throughout its 2,304 acre Urban Growth Area. The purpose of this chapter is to identify those natural features, especially those classified as critical areas. Perhaps one of Sultan’s most prominent features is its rivers and creeks. Three major rivers, a creek, and numerous minor streams drain the Sultan urban growth area. The Skykomish River flows west across the southern city draining into Puget Sound at Everett. The Sultan River flows south across the western city limits to its confluence with the Skykomish River. The Wallace River south and east of Sultan joins the Skykomish River in Sultan near Skywall Drive. Winters Creek originates north of Sultan and flows southwest before joining the Sultan River north of Osprey Park. Wagley Creek originates east of the City and flows west and southwest before joining the Skykomish River near Sultan Basin Road. Unnamed streams and water courses flow into the Sultan River and Wagley Creek. The river and tributaries drain the Sultan UGA within 3 principal basins: The Lower Sultan River Basin drains the Sultan River valley into Winters Creek and the Sultan River.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin July 2021
    Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin July 2021 Prepared for: Snohomish River Basin Salmon Recovery Technical Committee Prepared by: Josh Kubo, Andrew Miller, and Emily Davis. King County Water Land and Resources Division. Acknowledgements: Project Team: Emily Davis, Elissa Ostergaard, Kollin Higgins, Andrew Miller, and Josh Kubo Reviewers: Matt Baerwalde, Dave Beedle, Keith Binkley, Steve Britsch, Curtis DeGasperi, Aimee Fullerton, Kollin Higgins, Heather Kahn, Janne Kaje, Frank Leonetti, Kurt Nelson, Elissa Ostergaard, Colin Wahl. Recommended Citation: Kubo, J., A. Miller, and E. Davis. 2021. Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin. King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Water Land and Resources Division, Seattle, WA. July, 2021 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 Why is water temperature important for salmon recovery? ................................................................... 6 Drivers of Water Temperature ............................................................................................................... 10 Human Alterations to Aquatic Thermal Regimes ................................................................................... 16 Water Temperature Standards in the Snohomish River Basin ............................................................... 21 Water Temperature Conditions in the Snohomish River Basin .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sultan River Physical Process Studies Final Technical Report
    Study Plan 22: Sultan River Physical Process Studies Final Technical Report Prepared for Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1 Everett, WA Prepared by Stillwater Sciences 1314 NE 43rd Street, Suite 210 Seattle, WA 98105 and Meridian Environmental 1900 N Northlake Way Suite 211 Seattle, WA 98103 June 2008 Jackson Hydroelectric Project Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................V 1.0 STUDY OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................1 1.1 Study Area Description and River Reach Delineation ................................................ 1 2.0 INDIVIDUAL STUDIES.........................................................................................................5 2.1 Sediment Input, Routing, and Fate .............................................................................. 5 2.1.1 Sediment Input ............................................................................................................ 5 2.1.1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 5 2.1.1.2 Methods for estimating sediment production ............................................... 5 2.1.1.3 Results .......................................................................................................... 6 2.1.2 Sediment Transport Capacity (EASI).......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Snoqualmie, Sultan, and Skykomish Rivers, Washington
    DEPABTMEI7T OF THE INTEKIOB. UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS RMITH, DIBECTOR WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 366 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR * WATER- SUPPLY PAPER 366 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1914 CONTENTS. Page. General features of Snohomish River basin.................................. 5 Gaging stations............................................................ 6 Publications.............................................................. 7 ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATE I. A-D, Plan and profile of Snoqualmie River and certain tributaries above Fall City, Wash..............................At end of volume. II. A-B, Plan and profile of Sultan River above Sultan, Wash......... At end of volume. III. A-F, Plan and profile of Skykomish River and certain tributaries above Gold Bar, Wash..............................At end of volume. 49607° WSP 366 14 3 PROFILE SURVEYS OF SNOQUALMIE, SULTAN, AND SKYKOMISH RIVERS, WASHINGTON. Prepared under the direction of R. B. MAKSHALL, Chief Geographer. GENERAL. FEATURES OF SNOHOMISH RIVER BASIN. Snohomish River is formed by the union of Skykomish and Sno- qualmie rivers, in the southwestern part of Snohomish County, Wash., and flows northwestward into Puget Sound. Skykomish River drains the west slope of the Cascade Mountains for a distance of 30 miles as measured along the divide or 22 miles in a straight line, northward between the point common to King, Kittitas, and Chelan counties, along the eastern boundary of King and Snohomish counties to a point 1 mile south of Indian Pass, at the divide between the Skykomish and Sauk drainage basins.
    [Show full text]
  • Recreation Needs Analysis (RSP 13)
    Recreation Needs Analysis (RSP 13) Henry M. Jackson Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 2157 October 2008 Prepared for: Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County Everett, WA Prepared by: EDAW, Inc Seattle, WA Jackson Hydroelectric Project Executive Summary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) guidelines identify the requirement to prepare a Recreation Needs Analysis as part of a hydroelectric project license application. The Henry M. Jackson Hydroelectric Project (Project)(FERC Project No. 2157) Recreation Needs Analysis (RSP 13) informs stakeholders, as well as the Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County (District) and City of Everett (City), by synthesizing recreation- and public use-related information collected during relicensing. The Recreation Needs Analysis also defines recreation needs that may be considered for implementation during a new license term; however, the results should not be interpreted as potential protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures. The Recreation Needs Analysis results will be considered along with the results of other relicensing studies to develop potential PM&E measures that take into account all resource needs, not only recreation and public access. The Recreation Needs Analysis consists of four primary components: Supply, Demand, Capacity, and Needs (including a non-motorized trail assessment). Pertinent summary results from each of these components include the following: Recreation Supply Analysis • District Recreation Opportunities – The existing supply of District-managed developed recreation sites in the Project area (definitions of the Project boundary, Project, and study area are provided in Section 2.1) offer multiple recreation opportunities, including flat-water boating (on Spada Lake), fishing, picnicking, sightseeing, resting and relaxing, walking and hiking (within recreation sites and along Project roads), mountain biking (along Project roads), whitewater boating (on the Sultan River), and photography and wildlife observation, among others.
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish County Hiking Guide
    2015- 2016 TO OUTDOOR ADVENTURE! 30 GREAT HIKES • DRIVING DIRECTIONS MAPS • ACCOMMODATIONS • LOCAL RESOURCES photo by Scott Morris PB | www.snohomish.org www.snohomish.org | 1 SCTB Print - Hiking Guide Cover 5.5” x 8.5” - Full Color 5-2015 HIKE NAME 1 Hike subtitle ROUNDTRIP m ile ELEVATION GAIN m ile HIKING SEASON m ile MAP m ile NOTES m ile DRIVING DIRECTIONS m ile CONTACT INFO m ile Hard to imagine, but one of the finest beaches River Delta. A fairly large lagoon has developed on in all of Snohomish County is just minutes from the island where you can watch for sandpipers, downtown Everett! And this two mile long sandy osprey, kingfishers, herons, finches, ducks, and expanse was created by man, not nature. Beginning more. in the 1890s, the Army Corp of Engineers built a You won’t be able to walk around the island as the jetty just north of Port Gardiner—then commenced channel side contains no beach. But the beach to dredge a channel. The spoils along with silt and on Possession Sound is wide and smooth and you sedimentation from the Snohomish River eventually can easily walk 4 to 5 miles going from tip to tip. created an island. Sand accumulated from tidal Soak up views of the Olympic Mountains; Whidbey, influences, birds arrived and nested, and plants Camano, and Gedney Islands; and downtown Everett soon colonized the island. against a backdrop of Cascades Mountains. In the 1980s the Everett Parks and Recreation Department began providing passenger ferry service to the island. Over 50,000 folks visit this sandy gem each year.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Skykomish River Reach-Scale Plan
    July 2017 Sustainable Lands Strategy Lower Skykomish River Reach-scale Plan Snohomish County Department of Public Works, Surface Water Management and the Executive Committee of the Sustainable Lands Strategy July 2017 Sustainable Lands Strategy Lower Skykomish River Reach-scale Plan Prepared for Prepared by Snohomish County Anchor QEA, LLC Department of Public Works 720 Olive Way, Suite 1900 Surface Water Management Seattle, Washington 98101 3000 Rockefeller Ave., M/S 607 Everett, Washington 98201 and The Executive Committee of the Sustainable Lands Strategy Recommended Citation Snohomish County Surface Water Management and the SLS Executive Committee, 2017. Lower Skykomish River Reach-scale Plan. Snohomish County Department of Public Works and the Executive Committee of the Sustainable Lands Strategy. Everett, Washington. Project Number: 160723-03.01 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Project Team Snohomish County Staff Consultants Steve Britsch Aaron Kopp Anchor QEA, LLC, Lynn Turner Zach Brown Frank Leonetti Carlstad Consulting, Cynthia Carlstad Ann Bylin Beth Liddell Dan Evans Consulting, Dan Evans Chien Chang Dave Lucas Donald “Kit” Crump Mike Rustay Brett Gaddis Erik Stockdale Jessica Hamill Lauren Tracy Mary Hurner David Wilson Linda Neunzig Reviewers The Nature Conservancy Tulalip Tribes Jenn Baker Julie Morse Kurt Nelson Morgan Ruff Heather Cole NOAA Restoration Center Snohomish Conservation District Paul Cereghino Cindy Dittbrenner Kate Riley Ducks Unlimited C.K. Eidem SLS Executive Committee Klesick Family Farm Ducks Unlimited Tristan Klesick,
    [Show full text]
  • United State's Department of the Interror
    -- .. ' llr\\,t V - United State'SDepartment of the Interror FISHAND WILDLIFE SERVICE WashingtonFish and Wildlife Office 510Desmond Dr. SE, Suite102 Lacey,Washington 98503 FEB2 2 2011 HonorableKimberly D. Bose Secretary FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street,NE WashingtonD.C. 20426 Dear SecretaryBose: This documenttransmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's(FWS) Biological Opinion (Opinion) basedon our review of the proposed issuanceof a new 45-yearFederal Energy RegulatoryCommission (FERC) hydropowerlicense for the Henry M. JacksonHydroelectric Project (Project)located on the SultanRiver in SnohomishCounty, Washington. We evaluate the Project'seffects on marbledmurrelet (Brachyramphusmarmoratus), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus),and bull trout critical habitatin accordancewith Section7 of the Endangered SpeciesAct (ESA) of 1973,as amended (16 U.S.C.1531 et seq.). Your requestfor formal consultationwas receivedon August 13,2009. The FWS concurswith the FERC's determinationin its August 13,2010,letter that the proposedProject "may affect,but is not likely to adversely affect" the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). The FERC also determinedthat the proposedProject would have "no effect" on grizzlybear (Ursus arctos),gray wolf (Canis lupus), and Canadalynx (Lynx canadensis). Should the action agencydetermine that thereis no effect to listed speciesor critical habitat,there is no requirementfor FWS concunence,nor do the regulationsprovide the FWS with the authorityto concurwith that determination.The determinationthat therewill be no effect to listed speciesrests with the action agency,and no consultationwith the FWS is required. We recommendthat the action agencydocument their analysison effectsto listed species,and maintain that documentationas part of the project file. Thereis no designatedor proposedcritical habitat for federallylisted terrestrialwildlife specieswithin the action area.
    [Show full text]