Our new Biological Assessment is out - Klamath Basin Crisis

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Klamath Project Operations Biological Assessment Coho Salmon: Environmental Baseline • Funding of Natural Flow Study • Funding of Oregon State University (OSU) Public Outreach meetings • Funding of Temperature Control Device Investigation for PacifiCorp Reservoirs • Funding of Karuk Tribes Fisheries Monitoring Efforts; • Funding of Indian Creek Gauge • Funding of Yurok Tribes Fisheries Monitoring Efforts • Funding of Escapement data upon sun setting of Task Force • Funding of Green Sturgeon Monitoring • Funding of Lamprey Monitoring • Funding for Inter-Tribal Fish and Water Commission • Funding of TMDL Model Review for Lost River • Funding for Collier Map Model. Additionally, in a May 18, 2007 new release, Reclamation’s KBAO, in partnership with other Federal and State agencies (California and Oregon), participated in a basin-wide technical review process to evaluate and rank a total of 16 proposals submitted under the Fiscal Year 2007 solicitation. Reclamation was able to increase the available funding from the original solicitation total of $650,000 to a total of over $1.6 million and, therefore, was able to award grants to fund 13 proposals in FY 2007 The proposals were sought to: (1) Restore the Klamath River ecosystem (2) Help enhance populations of threatened coho salmon and endangered shortnose and Lost River suckers (3) Further the fulfillment of the Federal Government’s tribal trust responsibilities as they relate to the natural resources in the Klamath River watershed The projects funded in FY 2007 represent a variety of restoration, scientific research, and planning approaches, with project grants varying from $48K to $366K. The projects funded in FY 2007 were: • Shackleford Creek Diversion Improvement (Siskiyou County RCD) • Bluff Creek Habitat Protection – Road Decommission (Karuk Tribe) • Lower Klamath River – Upslope Erosion Control (Yurok Tribe Watershed Restoration Dept.); Keno Reservoir Treatment Wetlands Feasibility, Phase II (Rabe Consulting) • Whites Gulch Migration Barrier Removal Project (Trinity County Planning Dept.) 195
Klamath Project Operations Biological Assessment Coho Salmon: Environmental Baseline • Plan, Coordinate, Manage Restoration Projects in the Shasta Valley (Shasta Valley RCD • Baseline Habitat and Habitat Usage: Salmonids of the Shasta River (Center for Watershed Sciences - University of California at Davis) • Cotton Creek Fish Passage Improvement (Resource Management) • Water Quality Sampling/Monitoring below IGD (Yurok Tribe Environmental ProgramHotelling Gulch Stream Modification Feasibility (Salmon River Restoration Council) • Red Cap/Camp Creek Fisheries Monitoring (Mid-Klamath Watershed Council) • Fluvial Geomorphology and Vegetation Monitoring – Sprague River (Klamath Tribes) • Salmon River Temperature Dynamics (Salmon River Restoration Council) In Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008, Reclamation budgeted $4.8 million for CIP and Endangered Species recovery activities to be expended within the CIP. NMFS and CDFG NMFS administers several grant programs to further restoration efforts in the Klamath River Basin. From 2000 through 2005, NMFS issued grants of nearly 13.9 million dollars to the State of California and 6.2 million dollars to Klamath River Basin Tribes that funded restoration projects within the Klamath River Basin. In 2006, the State of California dedicated 10 million dollars toward restoration actions specifically identified within the Klamath River Basin (p. 17, NMFS 2007). Projects funded by these two agencies include a wide range of activities including: establishing conservation easements; conducting road inventories and restorations; improving fish passage; fostering public out reach and watershed planning; fencing off riparian habitat; and species and habitat monitoring. Additional Efforts Regulations (50 CFR §402.02) implementing section 7 of the ESA define reasonable and prudent alternatives as alternative actions, identified during formal consultation, that: (1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended purpose of the action (2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the action agency’s legal authority and jurisdiction (3) Are economically and technologically feasible 196
Page 1 and 2:
Biological Assessment The Effects o
Page 3:
Biological Assessment The Effects o
Page 7 and 8:
Klamath Project Operations Biologic
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 20 and 21:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This biological a
Page 22 and 23:
Part 1 INTRODUCTION, ACTION AREA, A
Page 24:
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 56 and 57:
Part 2 ENDANGERED SUCKERS Sucker De
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Table 2-7. Upper Klamath Basin Nutr
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Part 3 COHO SALMON Information abou
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171: Klamath Project Operations Biologic
Page 200 and 201: Environmental Baseline Klamath Proj
Page 224 and 225: T&C 5 T&C 6 T&C 7 T&C 8 Fund instre
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 312 and 313:
Description Part 5 BALD EAGLES A la
Page 314 and 315:
Figure 5-1. Bald Eagle range in Nor
Page 316:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 322 and 323:
Part 7 CONSULTATION HISTORY Section
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326:
Page 330 and 331:
Part 9 LITERATURE CITED Agrawal, A.
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Page 346 and 347:
Page 348 and 349:
Page 350 and 351:
Page 352 and 353:
Page 354 and 355:
Page 356 and 357:
Accomplishment Report, Winter 2007.
show all

Our new Biological Assessment is out - Klamath Basin Crisis

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?