Draft EIS_072312.pdf - Middle Fork American River Project ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 inflows. Recession rates were typically faster in wet water years than those associated with spills that occurred during above normal water years. On the Long Canyon Creek bypassed reaches, recession rates associated with spring high flows were generally relatively slow and within the range for high seedling survival success identified in the literature. On the larger bypassed and peaking reaches, the lateral distribution of vegetation adjacent to the channel was influenced by the availability of suitable substrate, summer water availability, and magnitude and frequency of scouring flows. Bedrock and large boulders along the channel margins and high, coarse bars limited riparian establishment in many locations. The trees that established following the large scouring events (1986 and 1997) were rooted at elevations that corresponded to the stages of the spring flows that occurred during subsequent years. On the Middle Fork American River bypassed reaches, riparian vegetation was established at similar positions relative to the low-flow channel as that observed along the comparison river reach (North Fork of the Middle Fork American River). On the peaking reach, the amount of vegetation was greater and typically occurred in larger corridors and closer to the channel compared with the comparison reach. Vegetation in the peaking reach was typically established within the elevational range influenced by summer flows (up to about 1,000 cfs, depending on the water year type). In contrast, summer flows are substantially lower on the North Fork American River (40 to 100 cfs), the comparison river reach for the peaking reach. On the North Fork American River, particularly in drier years, PCWA concluded that seedlings would need to be rooted low in the channel to reach water during the late summer and fall, and therefore would be susceptible to erosion during winter flows. In comparison, on the peaking reach, seedlings can survive through the summer farther away from the channel even during drier years due to the higher summer and fall flows and would not be as susceptible to erosion by winter flows. In the narrower, confined reaches of the Rubicon River, riparian vegetation was established at similar locations along the channel as that observed along the comparison reach on the North Fork American River. Where large bars were present, however, the position of the vegetation differed. On the Rubicon River, vegetation was established along the perimeters of large, coarse bars. On the comparison reach, the bars were not as high and the substrate was finer than the bars on the Rubicon River and the majority of the larger trees and shrubs were located towards the back of the bars at the base of the hillslopes. Primarily young shrubs were established along the bar perimeters, where frequent scour by winter and spring flow occurs. Along the small bypassed streams (Duncan, South Fork Long Canyon, and North Fork Long Canyon Creeks) and the comparison reaches upstream of the diversions, the stream valleys are very confined, with a very narrow floodplain zone between the low flow channel and the hillslope (i.e., limited floodplain development). As a result, riparian vegetation, where present, was typically distributed in this narrow zone between the stream margins to the edge of the hillslopes. 142
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 Wildlife Wildlife resources are diverse within the project area due to the associated diverse vegetation community structure and include both resident and migratory species. PCWA obtained data to characterize wildlife resources by conducting a literature review and stakeholder consultation, general avian point count surveys, general terrestrial visual encounter surveys, special-status species surveys, and making observations during studies to characterize project-related vegetation resources. Open water habitats, which include reservoirs and bypassed and peaking reaches, encompass about 60 percent of the acreage in the project area (see table 3.3.3-1). This aquatic habitat can provide foraging habitat for a number of special-status amphibians, reptiles, bats, and birds, such as bald eagle, osprey, American white pelican, harlequin duck, and Vaux’s swift. Eight osprey nests were identified during osprey nest relicensing surveys. This includes six active nests identified during osprey surveys in the study area—three nests at French Meadows reservoir and three nests at Hell Hole reservoir. In addition, numerous incidental osprey observations were recorded during implementation of other technical studies, and two additional active osprey nests were observed at French Meadows reservoir. Montane riparian habitat (
Page 1 and 2:
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
41 Table 3.3.1-1. Average number of
Page 73 and 74:
43 Site/Release Location Gravel Ini
Page 75 and 76:
45 a Q 1 - TSR, Table G-1 (PCWA, 20
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
69 Table 3.3.2-3. Hydrology for sel
Page 101 and 102:
71 Exceedances and Summary Statisti
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122: 91 Figure 3.3.2-6. Fish passage bar
Page 123 and 124: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 135 and 136: 105 Location American River below M
Page 165 and 166: 135 Species Name Status a Butte Cou
Page 171: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 175 and 176: 145 Table 3.3.3-5. Special-status w
Page 177 and 178: 147 Species Name Status Habitat Occ
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
195 Figure 3.3.5-1. French Meadows
Page 227 and 228:
197 Figure 3.3.5-3. Long Canyon, re
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
253 Table 3.3.6-1. Archaeological a
Page 285 and 286:
255 Resource Number Type a Descript
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
275 Table 4-2. Summary of annual co
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
279 Enhancement/Mitigation Measures
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
303 c Base 2010 costs were provided
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
307 Resource No-Action Alternative
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
319 Table 5-2. Staff-recommended mi
Page 351 and 352:
321 Location Middle Fork American R
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
A-1
Page 405 and 406:
A-3
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419:
show all

Draft EIS_072312.pdf - Middle Fork American River Project ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?