Condit Dam Removal Condit Dam Removal - Access Washington

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Condit Dam Hydroelectric Project Final Supplemental EIS 2003). Hatchery steelhead planted in the White Salmon River have primarily been Skamania Hatchery stocks that belong to the coastal subspecies of rainbow. Anadromous steelhead and resident rainbow populations within river basins, such as the White Salmon River are more closely related to each other than to populations in other river basins. For example, resident rainbow in the Hood River are more closely related to Hood River winter and summer-run steelhead than they are to White Salmon River resident rainbow. If a native population of steelhead exists in the lower White Salmon River, it would also be a member of the coastal subspecies and closely related to the resident rainbow trout in the upper White Salmon River watershed. Genetic analysis of juvenile steelhead collected from the White Salmon River below Condit Dam indicated a mixture of coastal and interior O. mykiss (steelhead or rainbow) subspecies, distinctly different than displayed by native resident rainbow trout populations found above Condit Dam. This indicats that steelhead below Condit Dam are likely descendents of strays from upriver stocks of steelhead (interior subspecies) and out of basin hatchery stocks of the coastal subspecies (i.e. Skamania Hatchery winter- and summer-run steelhead). Resident coastal rainbow appear to be native and distributed throughout the White Salmon River watershed (Bair et al. 2002, Bryne 2001, Allen et al. 2003, Connolly 2005a, Jezorek and Connolly 2003, Thiesfeld et al. 2001). Native resident rainbow trout are found above many existing natural barriers to fish passage (Connolly 2005a) in the White Salmon River watershed and occur far into the headwaters of many of the tributaries (Thiesfeld 2005). Resident rainbows likely coexisted in the White Salmon River basin with the andromous ecotype (steelhead before the construction of Condit Dam as far upstream as RM 16.2 (Cramer et al. 2003, Nielsen 2005). Based on their present distribution, small resident rainbow trout were probably distributed throughout the headwater streams (Thiesfeld et al. 2001, Allen et al. 2003, Bryne 2001). Large fluvial-adfluvial rainbow trout probably were and still are found in the mainstem of the White Salmon River as far upstream as RM 16.2 and perhaps as far upstream as the Trout Lake area (LLA 1981). Because of the prevailing temperature regimes in the river and its tributaries, the number and size of fluvial-adfluvial rainbow trout diminished as a function of temperature and channel size and flow in the mainstem, with trout becoming smaller in upstream reaches (Cramer et al. 2003 and 2005, Nielsen 2005, Bair et al.2002, Connolly 2005a and 2005b). Although substantial movements are possible, large fluvial-adfluvial rainbow trout in the White Salmon tend to spawn within a mile of their holding and foraging habitat in the mainstem of the river. They will frequently utilize tributaries for spawning when they are close by because gravel is relatively scarce in the main channel of the river. It is difficult to reconstruct the historic steelhead runs or spawning and rearing habitat available to steelhead before the construction of Condit Dam, but steelhead spawning in the middle Columbia River tributary rivers tends to occur primarily in warmer tributaries, lower in the basins, where low summer flows and high water temperatures limit growth (McMichael et al. 2000, Hubble et al. 1992, Zimmerman and Reeves 2002, Cramer et al. 2003 and 2005, Nielsen 2005, Everest 1973). Steelhead juveniles utilize intermittent reaches, moving down or upstream to perennial reaches or holding in pools (Cramer et al. 2003, 2005, Zimmerman and Reeves 2002, Hubble et al. 1992, Nielsen 2005). While segregated spatially in some basins (Hubble et al. 1992, Zimmerman and Reeves 2000, 2002), the ranges of resident and anadromous ecotypes of both coastal and interior redband rainbow trout often overlap, both spatially and temporally (McMichael et al. 2000, Cramer et al. 2003 and 2005, Nielsen 2005). Under these conditions the C-9
Condit Dam Hydroelectric Project Final Supplemental EIS resident and anadromous ecotypes of rainbow trout frequently interbreed (McMichael et al. 2000, Cramer et al. 2003, Zimmerman et al. 2003, Nielsen 2005). In some river basins, shifts from one ecotype to another have occurred when habitat conditions change (Marshall et al. 2004, Nielsen 2005). Coastal Cutthroat Trout On July 5, 2002, the USFWS withdrew the proposed rule to list southwestern Washington/Columbia River distinct population segment (DPS) of the coastal cutthroat trout as threatened (USFWS 2002b). The coastal cutthroat trout in the White Salmon River basin is now considered a species of Concern by the USFWS (USFWS 2005a). Coastal cutthroat trout populations in the White Salmon River basin are near the end of their interior range and their distribution within the watershed reflects a species near the edge of their range (Rawding 2005, Connolly 2005a). Cutthroat trout were sampled from Mill Creek (RM 4.0), a tributary of Northwestern Lake, for genetic analysis by NMFS (Johnson 2005, Connolly et al. 2002, Connolly 2005a, Rawding 2005, Campton 2005). The collection took place in Mill Creek between Northwestern Reservoir and the lowest road crossing (Rawding 2005), where 40 trout were selected for their close resemblance to the coastal cutthroat phenotype. Allozyme analysis suggested that the White Salmon coastal cutthroat were relatively similar to cutthroat trout in the Washougal subbasin but, collectively, the White Salmon/Washougal River cutthroat trout were genetically distinct from coastal cutthroat trout elsewhere in the lower Columbia River basin (Connolly et al. 2002). Because of the distinct differences between the White Salmon/Washougal and other populations of coastal cutthroat trout in the lower Columbia River basin, the data was reexamined to determine if this was an artifact of introgression with rainbow trout (i.e., the specimens represent a cutthroat/rainbow trout hybrid swarm) (Connolly et al. 2002, Campton 2005). Analysis of the sample data determined that 16 of the trout were coastal cutthroat trout, 20 were cutthroat/rainbow hybrids, and four were pure rainbow trout (Johnson 2005, Campton 2005). Coastal cutthroat trout were also collected from Spring Creek (RM 6.6) at the pond behind a private dam at RM 0.7 (Rawding 2005, Blakley et al. 2000). Little Buck Creek was electroshocked during a bull trout population assessment conducted by the WDFW and found to contain a robust population of coastal cutthroat trout (Thiesfeld 2005). The Rattlesnake Creek (RM 7.5) drainage was electroshocked during surveys conducted in 2001 and 2002. Coastal cutthroat trout were found in the lower reaches of Rattlesnake Creek below the lower waterfall (RM 1.5) and throughout the sampled reaches of Indian Creek (a tributary of Rattlesnake Creek, entering at RM 0.5) (Allen et al. 2003). Fluvial-adfluvial cutthroat trout have been observed spawning in these reaches of Rattlesnake and Indian Creeks (Connolly 2005a, 2005b, 2005c). Coastal cutthroat trout have been observed in the White Salmon River between Husum Falls and Northwestern Lake, but not above Husum Falls. Some of these fish have been documented to spawn in Rattlesnake and Indian Creeks (Connolly 2005a, 2005b, 2005c). Buck Creek is the only surveyed tributary of the White Salmon River between Condit Dam and Husum Falls that hasn’t been documented to contain a population of coastal cutthroat trout. While coastal rainbow trout appear to be native and distributed throughout the White Salmon River watershed, coastal cutthroat trout appear to be native to the White Salmon River and its tributaries from Husum C-10
Page 1 and 2:
Condit Dam Removal Final SEPA Suppl
Page 3 and 4:
March 23, 2007 Dear interested part
Page 5 and 6:
Condit Dam Hydroelectric Project Fi
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:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
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:
Page 101 and 102:
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:
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:
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: Condit Dam Hydroelectric Project Fi
Page 201: Appendix A Memorandum of Agreement
Page 207 and 208: Appendix C Supplemental Aquatic Res
Page 215: Condit Dam Hydroelectric Project Fi
Page 243 and 244: Agency and Organization Letters and
Page 245 and 246: Agency and Organization Letters Con
Page 247 and 248: Contents Public Meetings Response P
Page 249: Contents Individuals Individuals A-
show all

Condit Dam Removal Condit Dam Removal - Access Washington

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

Delete template?

Save as template?