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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 opportunities on the Murderer’s Bar Run, and increase opportunities on the Confluence Run, especially during below normal and critical water years. Similar to PCWA’s proposal, the flows specified by the agencies would release water earlier in the day and increase boating opportunities. Because the agencies specify more days of providing early-day releases of a longer duration, there would be more class II boating opportunities provided than if the project is operated under PCWA’s proposed flow schedule. Higher instream flows in the peaking reach could also affect other recreational uses related to the Western States Trail and angling, which also are outstandingly remarkable values of the reach. On an hourly basis, PCWA’s proposed flow schedule would not substantially affect crossing opportunities at key crossing locations. Across all water year types it would reduce easy/moderate crossing opportunities at the crossings in the peaking reach by an average of 22 minutes a day compared to existing conditions and reduce moderate/difficult crossing opportunities at the crossings in the peaking reach by an average of 17 minutes a day. These changes would not be appreciably different from what exists under existing conditions. Implementing flows specified by the agencies would reduce easy/moderate crossing opportunities at the crossings in the peaking reach by an average of 62 minutes a day and reduce moderate/difficult crossing opportunities at the crossings in the peaking reach by an average of 5 minutes a day. Compared to PCWA’s proposal and existing conditions, the flows recommended by the agencies would noticeably reduce easy/moderate crossings in the peaking reach. This effect would be reduced by implementing measures to provide real-time and projected flow information to the public, which would enable recreationists that use the crossings to plan their trips accordingly. As discussed in section 3.3.2, Aquatic Resources, improved fish habitat provided by increased flows as PCWA proposes and the agencies specify, would likely improve angling in terms of there being more fish in both the bypassed and peaking reaches compared to existing conditions. Because the higher flows in the peaking reach could affect wading, PCWA evaluated the effects using a suitable range of flows both for wading and fishing and determined that implementing either flows proposed by PCWA or provided by the agencies would be similar to what currently exists. Because fish habitat would be improved and wading opportunities would be maintained in the peaking reach, conditions for angling would be improved over what currently exists by implementing either PCWA’s proposed flows or the flows specified by the agencies. These flows would also maintain or improve the outstandingly remarkable value related to fish in both the Rubicon River and the peaking reach. Because the flow-dependent recreational uses in the peaking reach have different suitable flow ranges, there could be user conflicts among whitewater boating, angling, and crossing the river by trails. PCWA’s proposed flow schedule attempts to make the tradeoffs between user groups while maintaining or improving opportunities for whitewater boating. However the agencies’ flow schedule refines PCWA’s flow schedule to provide flows in the optimal boating range, as opposed to the suitable range, 242
20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 07/23/2012 and increase number of boating days, yet schedule releases to create suitable conditions for trail crossings at key times (i.e., races and special events) and locations. The flows specified by the agencies’ also give greater consideration to the non-commercial boating opportunities in the peaking reach. The flow schedule provided by the agencies was developed in consultation with commercial and private boaters and it reflects flows (magnitude and schedule) that would minimize user conflicts while providing higher quality whitewater boating and suitable flows for a wider variety of recreational uses as compared to PCWA’s flow proposal. Ramping PCWA’s proposed ramping rates below Oxbow powerhouse are the same as what the agencies specify (see section 3.3.2, Aquatic Resources, table 3.3.2-10). Our Analysis PCWA’s proposed ramping rates would represent a large reduction in the ramping rate of Oxbow powerhouse flow releases (50 percent reduction of upramping rate and 41 percent reduction of the downramping rate) and, during the driest water year types (dry, critical, extreme critical), a 900 cfs maximum limit on the Oxbow powerhouse releases from Memorial Day weekend to Labor Day. Reducing the ramping rate from Oxbow powerhouse would enhance recreation in the peaking reach by allowing recreationists to have more time to adjust their activities to changing flows. PCWA’s proposed ramping rates in this reach would provide better conditions for angling compared to what currently exists. Land Use This section presents the environmental effects of (1) changes to the project boundary; (2) PCWA’s proposed and Alternative 1 Transportation System Management plans and (3) PCWA’s proposed Fire Management and Response Plan. The Forest Service provided 18 preliminary 4(e) conditions that we consider standard, administrative, and/or legal in nature and are not specific environmental measures. The basis for these measures is to achieve consistency with forest plans and comply with various agency policies and applicable laws and regulations. Some of these conditions also relate to more specific resource measures (e.g., annual consultation with the Forest Service, protection of Forest Service special status species, and pesticide use on NFS lands) that are already analyzed in applicable resource sections. The remaining administrative conditions are not addressed in this EIS. California Fish and Game submitted some of these same conditions as section 10(a) and 10(j) recommendations. Changes to the Project Boundary PCWA proposes to increase the area within the project boundary to include: (1) proposed project facilities; (2) existing facilities that are necessary for project operation and maintenance; and (3) all existing and proposed project recreation facilities, roads, and 243
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:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
105 Location American River below M
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
135 Species Name Status a Butte Cou
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
145 Table 3.3.3-5. Special-status w
Page 177 and 178:
147 Species Name Status Habitat Occ
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
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 271: 20120723-4002 FERC PDF (Unofficial)
Page 283 and 284: 253 Table 3.3.6-1. Archaeological a
Page 285 and 286: 255 Resource Number Type a Descript
Page 305 and 306: 275 Table 4-2. Summary of annual co
Page 309 and 310: 279 Enhancement/Mitigation Measures
Page 323 and 324:
293 Enhancement/Mitigation Measures
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?