B I O L O G I C A L A SSESSMENT FOR T HREATENED , E NDANGERED , A N D P R O P O S E D F I S H S P E C I E S T H A T M A Y B E A FFECTED B Y T H E T R I N I T Y P O S T F I R E H A Z A R D R EDUCTION AND S A L V A G E P ROJECT Trinity River Management Unit and South Fork Management Unit Shasta-Trinity National Forest January 6, 2017 Prepared and Finalized by: Brenda Olson, Environmental Coordinator Date Approved by: Date William A. Brock, Fish Program Manager Shasta-Trinity National Forest PROJECT NAME: Trinity Post Fire Hazard Reduction and Salvage Project ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT: Shasta-Trinity National Forest; Trinity River Management Unit, South Fork Management Unit FOURTH FIELD South Fork Trinity River and Trinity River WATERSHED: FIFTH FIELD Browns Creek WATERSHEDS: Canyon Creek New River Burnt Ranch Upper South Fork Trinity River Middle South Fork Trinity River Lower South Fork Trinity River Upper Hayfork Creek Lower Hayfork Creek Lower Trinity River SEVENTH FIELD Appendix C WATERSHEDS: WATERSHED ANALYSES: See list in Section VI. Environmental Baseline and Biological Requirements of the Species NEPA DOCUMENTATION: Trinity Post Fire Hazard Reduction and Salvage Project DEIS (STNF, in progress) ESA SPECIES Southern Oregon Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho CONSIDERED: Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Effects of the project on Essential Fish Habitat will be ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT: immeasurable and will not adversely affect (and may have long- term positive effects through sediment source reduction) on coho salmon and Chinook salmon EFH. ESA DETERMINATIONS: May Affect and is Not Likely to Adversely Affect SONCC coho salmon or its designated CH Shasta-Trinity National Forest Contents Section Page I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 1 II. Consultation to Date ........................................................................................................................................... 1 III. Proposed Action ................................................................................................................................................. 2 IV. Description of the Action area .......................................................................................................................... 10 V. Analysis Methods ............................................................................................................................................. 11 VI. Environmental Baseline ................................................................................................................................... 17 VII. Effects of the Action ........................................................................................................................................ 43 VIII. Cumulative Effects ........................................................................................................................................... 67 IX. Species and Habitat Effects Summary ............................................................................................................. 68 X. ESA Effects Determination .............................................................................................................................. 71 XI. Essential Fish Habitat Assessment ................................................................................................................... 71 XII. References ........................................................................................................................................................ 72 Shasta-Trinity National Forest List of Tables Table 1. Roadside Vegetation Treatment Acres by Watershed. .................................................... 2 Table 2. Riparian Reserve Widths for the Action Area. ................................................................. 9 Table 3. CWE Risk Matrix (Mai, 2015). ...................................................................................... 15 Table 4. Watershed Burn Severity (2015 Wildfires). ................................................................... 20 Table 5. STNF CWE Risk Matrix Criteria. .................................................................................. 22 Table 6. Browns Creek CWE Model Results Summary. .............................................................. 22 Table 7. Browns Creek Water Temperatures at Smith Lane Bridge. ........................................... 23 Table 8. River Complex Burn Severity from 2015 Wildfires ....................................................... 25 Table 9. River Complex Fire Pre- and Post-fire Runoff. ............... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 10. New River and Burnt Ranch CWE Model Results Summary. ..................................... 26 Table 11. New River and Burnt Ranch Subwatersheds - Stream Temperatures. ......................... 28 Table 12. Middle South Fork Trinity River HUC 5 CWE Model Results Summary. .................. 29 Table 13. Middle South Fork Trinity River - Water Temperatures. ............................................. 31 Table 14. Lower South Fork Trinity River HUC 5 CWE Model Results Summary. ................... 32 Table 15. Lower South Fork Trinity River HUC 5 - Water Temperatures. .................................. 34 Table 16. Upper Hayfork Creek HUC 5 CWE Model Results Summary. ................................... 35 Table 17. Upper Hayfork Creek - Water Temperatures. .............................................................. 37 Table 18. Lower Hayfork Creek HUC 5 CWE Model Results Summary. ................................... 39 Table 19. Lower Hayfork Creek HUC 5 - Water Temperatures................................................... 40 Table 20. Acres of RRs Proposed for Vegetation Treatments by HUC 5 Watershed. ................. 47 Table 21. Legacy Sediment Site Locations, Fill Volumes and Distance to CH. .......................... 54 Table 22. Road Restoration and Stream Crossing Information. ................................................... 55 Table 23. Summary of Indirect Adverse Effects to Habitat Indicators. ........................................ 69 Shasta-Trinity National Forest Appendices Appendix A: Project Maps Appendix B: STNF Table of Population and Habitat Indicators Appendix C: Environmental Baseline and Effects Checklists for HUC 7 Watersheds Appendix D: Project Design Features, Best Management Practices and Wet Weather Operation Standards Appendix E: Species and Habitat Information Shasta-Trinity National Forest Biological Assessment for Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed Fish Species That May Be Affected by the Trinity Post Fire Hazard Reduction and Salvage Project Biological Assessment for Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed Fish Species That May be Affected by the Trinity Post Fire Hazard Reduction and Salvage Project I. Introduction The purpose of this biological assessment (BA) is to determine effects of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest’s (STNF) Trinity Post Fire Hazard Reduction and Salvage Project (the Project) on Southern Oregon Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho salmon listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). SONCC coho salmon occur within the action area as well as designated Critical Habitat (CH) for SONCC coho salmon. Species status and general life history information is provided in Appendix E. A determination of effects to coho and Chinook salmon Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) designated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) is also included in the BA. The Project Draft Environment Impact Statement (DEIS) includes five action alternatives and a no action alternative that all focus on roadside treatments to mitigate hazard trees and reduce hazardous fuel loading within six areas that were burned by wildfires in 2015. Alternative 1 is the proposed action and was designed to meet the purpose and need for action and will treat a total of approximately 8,100 acres along 233 miles of open public roads. Alternative 1 is the action analyzed in this BA and is referred to as the Project. This BA has been prepared in accordance with legal requirements set forth under Section 7 of the ESA of 1973, as amended (16 United States Code [USC] 1531 et. seq.; 50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 402), EFH consultation under 305(b) (4) (A) of the MSFCMA; and is consistent with standards established in Forest Service Manual direction (FSM 2672.42; USDA Forest Service 2009). This BA analyzes effects on the following: Endangered: None Threatened: SONCC coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) (NOAA, 1999b) and their designated CH (NOAA, 1999a) Proposed: None Candidate: None Essential Fish SONCC coho salmon and Upper Klamath-Trinity (UKT) Habitat: Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) Appendices: Supporting documents to this BA are located in the following appendices: Appendix A. Project Maps Appendix B. STNF Table of Population and Habitat Indicators Appendix C. Environmental Baseline and Effects Checklists, HUC 7 watersheds Appendix D. Resource Protection Measures, Best Management Practices and Wet Weather Operation Standards Appendix E. Species Life History and Biological Requirements II. Consultation to Date National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) representative S. Naman attended (by conference call) an initial Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meeting on October 29, 2015. Both S. Naman and W. Smith (NMFS) attended two additional IDT meetings (by conference