Our new Biological Assessment is out - Klamath Basin Crisis

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Klamath Project Operations Biological Assessment Coho Salmon: Environmental Baseline Table 3-17. The 2002 to 2012 NMFS BO recommended long-term minimum flows IGD discharge by month, by water year type. Month Water Year Type (values in minimum daily cfs) Dry Below Average Average Above Average Wet October to February 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,300 March 1,450 1,725 2,750 2,525 2,300 April 1,500 1,575 2,850 2,700 2,050 May 1,500 1,400 3,025 3,025 2,600 June 1,400 1,525 1,500 3,000 2,900 July to September 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Source: Table 9, p. 71, NMFS 2002. Figure 3-13. The 2002 to 2012 NMFS BO recommended long-term IGD discharge by water year type, by month. Iron Gate CFS 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Average Year Type Wet Year Type Dry Year Type 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Wet Above Average Average Below Average Dry 207
Klamath Project Operations Biological Assessment Coho Salmon: Proposed Action In the NMFS 2002 BO, NMFS expressed that if the scientific findings from additional studies and reports warrant modifying these IGD minimum flows, they would consider those findings and make appropriate adjustments. NMFS (2002 BO) further expressed that adjustments could include dividing certain months (e.g., March through June) into weekly flow recommendations to better mimic the natural hydrograph. If NMFS finds that the long-term minimum flows should be modified based on the findings from these additional studies and reports, they will amend the long-term minimum flows accordingly (Section 11.4.5, p. 70, NMFS 2002 BO). The NMFS 2002 BO provides for the incorporation of new knowledge to amend the long-term minimum flows, which may be defined as adaptive management 28 . Proposed Action A more thorough description of the Proposed Action is available in Part I of this BA. A summary of the Proposed Action as it relates to impact on coho salmon is provided below. Under the Proposed Action, Reclamation will retain the NMFS 2002’s recommended long-term minimum flows for releases from IGD during the October through February period. Under the NMFS 2002 BO, the minimum flow regime for this time period (1,300 cfs) was based on limited measurements and observations “that fall [C]hinook spawning habitat would be adequate in the IGD to Shasta River reach under this IGD discharge” (p. 68, NMFS 2002 BO). NMFS further assumed that main stem passage, tributary access, and spawning habitat for coho salmon will be adequate under this IGD flow regime (see Section 11.4.4 – Rationale for long-term flow targets: October through February, pages to 68 to 69, NMFS 2002 BO). At this time, Reclamation proposes no changes to the recommended long-term minimum flows as outlined in the NMFS 2002 BO for the October through February period. Under the Proposed Action, Reclamation will also retain the NMFS 2002 BO’s recommended 1,000 cfs as a long-term minimum flow for releases from IGD during the July through September period (p. 68, NMFS 2002 BO). This recommendation was based, in part; on Hardly and Addley’s (2001) recommend minimum dry summer flows of 1,000 cfs (see Section 11.4.3 – Rationale for long- 28 Adaptive may be defined as a type of natural resource management in which decisions are made as part of an ongoing science-based process. Adaptive management involves testing, monitoring, and evaluating applied strategies, and incorporating new knowledge into management approaches that are based on scientific findings and the needs of society. Results are used to modify management policy, strategies, and practices. 208
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:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183: 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 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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?