HomeMy WebLinkAboutBIO EVAL Colgan Bulkhead Project - SHX Letters / Memos - 7/29/2016 i
i
it
Biological Evaluation
J
Colgan Bulkhead Project
g
Lake Cushman, Hoodsport WA
' I
For:
Steve& Brenda Colgan
502 Sumner Ave
Sumner,WA 98390-1736
Prepared by:
BioResources,LLC
Kim Schaumburg
isheries biologist,University of Washington, 1981
10112 Bay View Rd. KPN
Vaughn,WA,98394
(253) 884-5776 or 225-2973
Email: kimberly035@centurytel.net
i
April 2,2016
Revised July 29,2016
i
i
Table of Contents
1.0 Proposed Action.............................................................................. 3
1.1 Background................................................................................... 3
1.2 Project Need and Objectives................................................................ 4
2.0 Project Description........................................................................... 4
2.1 Project Activities.............................................................................. 4-6
2.2 Monitoring and Maintenance............................................................... 6
2.3 Timing.......................................................................................... 6
2.4 Conservation Measures...................................................................... 6-7
2.5 Best Management Practices.................................................................. 7-8
3.0 Action Area.................................................................................... 8-9
4.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information..................................................... 9-10
4.1 ESA Listed Species.......................................................................... 10-12
5.1 Environmental Baseline Conditions....................................................... 12
5.2 Action Area................................................................................. 12-13
5.3 Proposed Project Area..................................................................... 1 3-1 4
6.0 Effects of the Action.......................................................................... 14
6.1 Direct Effects.................................................................................. 14-16
6.2 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ 1 6-1 8
6.3 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species...................................................... 18-19
6.4 Indirect Effects................................................................................. 19-20
6.5 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ 20-21
6.6 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species....................................................... 21
6.7 Interrelated/Interdependent Effects......................................................... 22-23
6.8 Primary Constituent Elements............................................................ ..22
6.9 Cumulative Effects............................................................................ 23
7.0 Conclusion...................................................................................... 23
7.1 Take Analysis.................................................................................. 23
7.2 Determination of Effect....................................................................... 23-24
8.0 References.......................................................................................25-28
Attachments
1. Project location...................................................................................29
2. Site plan with existing development.......................................................... 30
3. Site plan with proposed development........................................................ 31
4. Cross section with proposed development....................................................32
5. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 33
6. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 34
7. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 35
8. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 36
9. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 37
10. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 38
11. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 39
12. Site Photograph.................................................................................. 40
13. Essential Fish Habitat............................................................................ 41-42
Colgan Biological Evaluation 2
1.0 Pro osed ction
This Biological Evaluation has been submitted on behalf of Steve and Brenda Colgan at
the request of the 11 eattle District United States Army Corps of Engineers to comply with
Endangered Species Act(ESA)regulations regarding shoreline development. The
proposed action is the installation of a rock bulkhead on their Lake Cushman property.
Mitigation) at the roposed project includes the removal of existing derelict creosoted
pilings wit i assoc ted concrete cinder blocks from the shoreline and a native planting
plan.
1.1 Backgroond
The propo!-ec proj ct site is located in Mason County at 110 North Discovery Drive,
Hoodsport ashi gton(Attachment 1). The Mason County tax parcel number is 42318-
50-00036. TI e prc erty is located in Section 18,Township 23N, Range 04W of the
Western er dian The latitude is 47.48788 north, and the longitude is-123.24263 west.
The propo e proj ct site is located on Lake Cushman in the Skokomish/Dosewallips
Water Res urce Ir ventory Area 16 (WRIA 16) on a shoreline designated Urban
Residentia by the Shoreline Master Program of Mason County. Lake Cushman is
regulated un4er th Mason County Shoreline Master Program and the Mason County
Resource roinan e as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area.The Shoreline
Management Act of 1971 designated Lake Cushman as a Shoreline of Statewide
Significan e Ina dition, Lake Cushman is regulated by Tacoma Public Utilities (aka
Tacoma P er),which has designated Shoreline Management Classification(SMC)
zones.Th p ropos-d project site is located in an SMC zone classified as"A."Tacoma
Power dens the"A"management classification as shoreline areas with no known
significan e I viro mental/cultural resources or associated resource management goals
precludin e istin or future shoreline uses;this classification acknowledges existing
private us strid a iticipates potential future private and light commercial shoreline uses
(Kleinsch nidt 20 2).
The propo I se pro.ect site is located in a rural neighborhood on a shoreline lot that
supports a si gle-7amily residence located approximately thirteen feet(13') vertically and
fifty-two (52 horizontally from the shoreline of Lake Cushman.Existing shoreline
appurtenaIcts inc lude a four by eight-foot(4' x 8') access ramp, an eight by ten-foot(8'
x 10')pie , n ei t by twenty-foot(8' x 20') float, a three by six-foot(3' x 6')metal
ramp be e n th pier and float, failing wood shoreline access steps, and failed shoreline
protectio i the rm of large woody debris and creosoted pilings(Attachments 2, 3, 6,
8 &9),. e approx. eleven(11) derelict pilings with associated concrete cinder
blocks an ve ' pieces of decomposing large woody debris embedded parallel to the
shoreline T e 1 ` which is located in a small cove, fronts both Lake Cushman and a type
Np peren i ,n fish stream (Attachments 10 & 11).The applicant has reported that the
stream d s of od the proposed bulkhead location on the shoreline when the lake's
waters ar 1 wer
i
3
Colgan Bi 1 gical valuation
1.2 Project Need and Objectives
The seasonal raising and lowering of Lake Cushman and the exposure to wave action
(from the lake)driven by prevailing winds has resulted in moderate to severe erosion to
the shoreline at the site. The applicant's single-family residence is located (only) 52'
horizontally and 13' vertically from the shoreline. The project objective is to install
replacement shoreline protection in the form of a small(averaging approx. 2.5' in above
grade height)rock bulkhead to prevent the potential loss of infrastructure and native
vegetation, while avoiding or minimizing impacts to ESA-listed species.
2.0 Project Description
As per drawings by the applicant(Attachments 2-4), existing derelict creosoted pier
pilings will be removed from the shoreline at the site and approx. ninety feet(90') of rock
bulkhead will be installed, using two-man angular rock. Approximately thirty-five feet
(35') of the bulkhead will be landward of the OHWM(lake elevation 738'),while the
remaining approx. fifty-five feet(55')will be slightly waterward of the OHWM, in order
to follow the contour of the shoreline. The bulkhead will be backed with quarry spalls
and filter fabric. Height of the bulkhead will average two-and-a-half feet(2.5') above
grade with a maximum above grade height of four feet(4'). Base rock will be keyed into
the bank/beach toe to a depth of approx. twelve inches (12")below the existing shoreline
grade. The bulkhead will follow the existing contour of the shoreline. Approximately 20
cubic yards of rock and quarry spalls will be used. The bulkhead will be constructed of
rock, a natural material, and will be the minimal height necessary(approx. 2.5' to 4')to
alleviate bank erosion from Lake Cushman. The bulkhead's face at the east end will be
located approx. fifteen feet(15') from the stream's ordinary high water mark.
A small tractor and various hand tools will be used throughout the proposed project.All
materials, equipment, and debris will be transported to and from the site in a car or truck.
The derelict pilings and any other debris will be disposed of at a licensed landfill or other
licensed disposal site. In addition, geo-textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed
before the commencement of project construction in order to contain any construction
debris or excavated sediments;the fabric will be cleaned upon the cessation of work each
day. No construction will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are lowered.
2.1 Project Activities
Piling Removal
Approximately eleven derelict creosoted pier pilings(Attachment 7& 8)will be removed
from the shoreline at the site using a small tractor. The piling holes will be refilled using
sediments from the excavation of the bulkhead's footing.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 4
i
i
Bulkhea Foot n g Excavation
The substr tte will e excavated to a depth of one-foot(1')and a width of two feet(2'),
using a sm illi tract r. Excavated material will be used to fill the holes or depressions from
the bulkhe id�consi ruction and the derelict pier piling removal. Excavated material may
also be usc d to fill the interstitial spaces between the quarry spalls(that will back-fill the
bulkhead)Any re aining excavated material will be removed from the shoreline at the
site, as pe T1com t Power's rules and regulations.
Bulkhea)I Ins t lation
Following e cava 'on of the footing, a layer of filter fabric will be pinned to the back and
bottom of he exci vated area using rebar stakes.The base rock, consisting of two-man
basalt or a ite, ill be set using a small tractor, and then back-filled using one-man
quarry spa is Sm ler rocks will be used to plug chinks and will be set by hand.
Excavated scdime is will be used as necessary to integrate the bulkhead's quarry spalls
with the b n .The top rocks will be set next and backfilled in the same manner.Rock for
the propo d proj ct will be stored in an upland area and transported to the shoreline by
tractor, as eeded. The bulkhead will include one set of inset rock shoreline access steps.
i
Mitigati on Pla iting
The primal y'Soal f the mitigation plan is to enhance the diversity of the existing native
vegetatior along t ie shoreline at the site.Native vegetation will be planted in an approx.
thirty by ty- of (30' x 20')area along the eastern extent of the property's shoreline,
where veg A tion s currently lacking(Attachment 12). The exact location of the
plantings i 1 be t the applicants' discretion.Due to the potential for the roots of trees
and large hfubs t damage the bulkhead, especially during summer drought conditions, it
is recomniended t iat any trees or large shrubs be installed at least ten feet(10') landward
of the bulkhead. At least 20 plants and five different species will be installed.Planting
will occur in the fill(after the cessation of drought conditions) or in the early spring.
Vegetatio will b in one or two gallon pots,bare root, or harvested from the site or
locally.
Recomm ded nf tive species include: shore pine (Pinus contorta contorta),vine maple
(Ater cir 'nZtum Pacific dogwood(Cornus nuttallii), Western yew(Taxus brevifolia),
mountain e'nloc c(Tsuga mertensiana), evergreen huckleberry(Vaccinium ovatum), red
hucklebe y(Vac inium parvifolium),mock orange (Philadelphis lewisii), Rhododendron
(Rhodode 1dron acrophyllum), Western azalea(Rhododendron occidentale), Pacific
ninebark i Physoc 7rpus capitatus), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), common
snowberr (Symp oricarpos albus), snowbrush(Ceanothus velutinus var. hookeri), salal
(Gaulther'a shall n), Oregon-grape (Mahonia aquifolium, nervosa or repens),
Thimbleb in
(R bus parvi onus var.parviflorus), sword fern (Polystichum munitum),
deer fern Blechn m spicant), kinnikinnick(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi),bleeding heart
Colgan Bi 1 gical valuation 5
I
I
(Dicentra formosa), creeping dogwood (Cornus canadensis), and wild strawberry
(Frageria virginiana).
Additional plant species that are native to Western Washington may be added to the
above list at the applicant's discretion.
2.2 Monitoring and Maintenance
The property owners will monitor and water any native vegetation plantings as needed
during dry months, until the vegetation has become established. Dead plants will be
replaced throughout the monitoring period. Invasive, non-native vegetation will be
removed or cut back as necessary.
2.3 Timing
Work on the bulkhead installation will be completed over an approx.twenty-one(21) day
period during daylight working hours normal to a rural neighborhood. No construction
will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are lowered.
2.4 Conservation Measures
1. No construction will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are lowered
and the unnamed Np stream is flowing at or below its average base flow
width.
2. Geo-textile fabric will be spread over the dry lakebed before the commencement
of project construction in order to contain any construction debris or excavated
sediments;the fabric will be cleaned upon the cessation of work each day.
3. Approximately eleven derelict creosoted pier pilings will be removed from the
shoreline at the site.
4. For the protection of marbled murrelets that may be nesting in the action area,
project activities will occur between two hours after sunrise and two hours
before sunset; suitable nesting habitat will not be removed.
5. Construction to take place as per the HPA provisions from the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
6. Previously discussed BMPs to be strictly adhered to.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 6
i
7. Native vegetation will be planted in an approx.thirty by twenty-foot(30' x
2 ') ar a along the eastern extent of the property's shoreline,where native
vegetat on is currently lacking(see Mitigation Planting).
i
2.5 Bes Mairement Practice
s
In order to nuainta the present water quality of Lake Cushman during project
constructs n,l Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented.BMPs are
defined as physicE 1, structural, and/or managerial practices that prevent or reduce the
pollution f water(WDOE). The following source control BMPs,which are detailed in
the WDO '�Stor water Management Manual for Western Washington, Volume II
Construct n Stor water Pollution Prevention (2012),will be implemented for long-term
protection ofwat r quality at the site:
BMP C1 1: Pre rving Natural Vegetation
Wherever practic 1, native vegetation shall be preserved to reduce erosion. Natural
vegetation s ould be preserved on steep slopes,near perennial and intermittent
watercourse ors ales, and on building sites in wooded areas.
i
The follo i g a itional BMP will be used to insure that water quality is not
degraded durint and after construction:
1. Ec uiiOme t will be cleaned and checked for leaks, offsite and daily, before
c tnenc ng work.
In additio a,the f(llowing Spill Prevention Control measures will also be followed: 1)
The appli apt wil I supply the site with a portable bathroom or allow workers access to an
onsite bal hrbom o that solid or liquid waste will not become a source of stormwater
pollution 2)Th( applicant will be responsible for alerting the appropriate authorities in
the event of a h ardous spill. 3)The applicant will have a spill kit and be able to
perform basic co ttrol, containment, and/or confinement operations within the capabilities
of the res uirces i nd personnel protective equipment available. In other words, small
spills, such as pa nt or oil, will be promptly and fully collected and disposed of at a
suitable C is osal site. In the event of a significant spill, a fish kill, and/or if fish are
observed in distress the Washington State Department of Ecology(800.258.5990) and the
Washing State Department of Fish and Wildlife's Area Habitat Biologist, Joshua
Benton( 6 .602 0364), will be notified immediately.
Colgan B 1 gica Evaluation 7
3.0 Action Area
The action area is located on the shoreline of Lake Cushman at the proposed project site.
Besides the proposed project location, the action area includes the surrounding area
within a designated distance from the site in order to account for construction impacts
that may affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service as either endangered or
threatened. The limits of the action area are based upon the geographic extent(in both
aquatic and terrestrial environments)of the physical, chemical, and biological effects
resulting from the proposed action, including direct and indirect effects, as well as effects
of interrelated and interdependent activities(WSDOT 2010).
Turbidity and noise are expected to be the most detrimental project effects. Because work
will occur when Lake Cushman is lowered,project turbidity is expected to be no greater
than turbidity that is common to the area during heavy rains, when various ephemeral and
perennial streams (including the Np stream at the site) and the north fork of the
Skokomish River discharge sediment laden water into Lake Cushman. It is probable that
the project's distance from the lake's lowered shoreline will be sufficient enough that
disturbed sediments will disperse gradually(via precipitation) over the exposed lakebed
without ever reaching water until the lake is raised. It is possible that the Np stream,
which is closer to the work area than the lake's lowered shoreline, may experience
moderate turbidity from runoff during or following construction at the site; however,
terrestrial noise is expected to be the most far-reaching effect from the proposed bulkhead
installation.
The action area for terrestrial noise effects is based upon an ambient sound level of 40
dBA for an area with a population of less than 100 people per mile (WSDOT 2010). In
addition, the Olympic National Forest programmatic biological assessment uses an
estimated ambient level of 40 dBA for undisturbed forested areas (USDI 2003). Noise
frequency and levels for the bulkhead construction and derelict piling removal with a
small tractor is expected to be intermittent and moderate. The noise level of a backhoe at
50 feet is 78 dBA(WSDOT 2014).A small tractor is not expected to be as noisy as a
backhoe; however, it is expected that the transport and setting of two-man rock and
quarry spalls will intermittently produce the project's maximum noise level. Noise levels
at 50 feet from impact equipment, including pile drivers,jackhammers, and rock drills
can range from 79 to 110 dBA(WSDOT 2014). Other than the intermittent impacting of
two-man angular rock or half-man quarry spalls,the project will not produce noise levels
associated with impact equipment. Therefore,the construction of the bulkhead with a
small tractor has been assigned a noise level of 79 dBA at 50 feet.
To determine the distance that the proposed project's maximum point source construction
noise will travel before it attenuates to the ambient sound level;the following Practical
Spreading Loss Model equation was used:
D=Do * 10((Construction Noise—Ambient Sound Level in dBA)/a) Where D=the
distance from the noise &Do=the reference measurement distance of 50'.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 8
I
n truc on noise from the proposed project will travel approx. 3,970 feet over
Average c P p P J
hard site c n itio s (Lake Cushman) and 1,656 feet over soft site conditions (forested
areas)bef re,it(the noise) attenuates to the ambient sound level. Therefore,the extent of
the action iroa is ,970 feet or 0.75 mi. over the lake's surface and 1,656 feet or 0.31 mi.
inland fro the pr posed project site and adjacent shorelines(Attachment 1).
In additio ,the ac ion area includes several unnamed fish-bearing streams that are
located ap rox. ar prox. 0.28 and 0.42 mi.to the northwest and 0.41 and 1.19 mi.to the
southwest) f the s ite.Numerous non fish-bearing streams are located throughout the
action area, inclu 'ng one at the site and another that is approx. 0.04 mi.to the northeast.
4.0 ES Pa -,ies and Habitat Information
In the prol iosed pi qJect area,there are five species listed under the Endangered Species
Act by the U.S. Fi sh and Wildlife Service(USFWS) as either threatened or endangered.
The bull ti out(Sa velinus confluentus), marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus),
northern motted c wl (Stridex occidentalis), streaked horned lark(Eremophila alpestris
strigata), ind yell w-billed cuckoo(Coccyzus americanus) are listed as threatened and
critical ha it it ha been designated for the former four species.The project area is located
on Lake ma which has been designated critical habitat for the bull trout. Two other
species in th{e pro ect area are listed as proposed. The fisher(Mantes pennanti) is listed as
proposed h aten d, and the Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) is listed as proposed
under the E A "s milarity of appearance"provision.
In the pro osed p oject area,there is one species listed under the Endangered Species Act
by the National N.arine Fisheries Service(NMFS) as either threatened, endangered, or a
candidate species The Puget Sound Chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) is
listed as t11 reatene d and critical habitat has been designated. Lake Cushman is a historical
watershec of the hinook that has been anthropogenically blocked; however, it has been
designate critical habitat.
The Wast ington epartment of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW) GIS maps reveal the
documenle41 pres nce of two other species of salmonids on the State's Priority Habitat
and Spec' s�list v ithin the action area: Kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) and the Puget
Sound/Cc ash al cL fthroat trout(Oncorhynchus clarki clarki).The presence of these two
species h s been locumented in Lake Cushman. WDFW data reveals that Lake Cushman
was stock d with 23,896 cutthroat trout in 2005 and 205,800 Kokanee (landlocked
sockeye s almon) in 2004. A WDFW biologist reported that other species that inhabit the
lake inclu de rain ow trout(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and non-native largemouth bass
(Micropt rus sal oides).
Addition 11y, Tac ma Power is presently working in association with the Skokomish
Tribe an the WI FW to reestablish migrating salmonid runs in the North fork of the
Colgan Bi 1 gical Evaluation 9
Skokomish River. The North Fork Skokomish Powerhouse and Fish Facility has been
completed. This facility collects adult fish at the base of Cushman Dam No. 2 and
transports them to the top of the dam for sorting. It also provides sorting facilities for
juvenile fish and transports them to the base of the dam for release into the river. The fry
will be released in Lake Cushman, and smolts will be collected and released into the
lower North Fork Skokomish River.Returning adult sockeye will eventually be collected
at the base of Cushman Dam No. 2. Two new hatcheries are also under construction, one
on the Hood Canal at Potlatch for sockeye,the other on Lake Kokanee for Chinook,
coho, and steelhead. Hatchery construction is planned to be complete in 2015 (Tacoma
Public Utilities 2015).
4.1 ESA Listed Species
BULL TROUT
Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family and are native to the
Pacific Northwest and western Canada. Water temperature above 15 degrees Celsius is
believed to limit bull trout distribution, as eggs and juveniles require extremely cold
water for survival. Bull trout are also vulnerable to degraded stream habitat, poor water
quality, dams and other stream blocking structures, and predation by non-native fish.
Critical habitat includes Lake Cushman and the upper North Fork of the Skokomish
River(70 FR 56304). Critical Habitat in the former includes spawning and rearing
habitat, while the latter provides rearing, foraging, and migration habitat, so it is expected
that bull trout may be found in the action area of the proposed project site.
MARBLED MURRELET
A small, diving seabird in the family Alcidae, the marbled murrelet forages for small fish
and invertebrates almost exclusively in nearshore marine waters, while nesting inland in
old-growth or mature conifer forests. Threats include loss of habitat,predation, gill-net
fishing operations, oil spills, marine pollution, and disease. The USFWS assembled a
team of scientists in October 2011 to investigate causes for the continued decline in
murrelet populations. The outcome of these discussions listed many factors, chiefly loss
of potential nesting habitat as the main reason for hindrance of population recovery goals
(WDFW 2012).
Potential nest trees are coniferous trees within 55 mi (88.5 km) of marine waters that
support at least one 4-inch(10.2-cm) diameter platform located at least 33 feet(10
meters)above the ground,with horizontal and vertical cover(USFWS 2012). If a tree or
forested area does not support these habitat features, it is"extremely unlikely"to support
a murrelet nest(USFWS 2012).Nest success is influenced by forest structure, the spatial
mix of habitat and non-habitat, human disturbance, prey availability, and marine foraging
conditions. Human disturbance can lead to higher predation levels by Steller's and gray
Colgan Biological Evaluation 10
I
I
I
_ fuse at high-
use re
ven and ot
her sp
ecies that seek human related foods a g
days, crow , p
use recrea oihal am as(Peery et at. 2004,Marzluff and Neatherlin 2006).
Critical ha itat f6i the marbled murrelet,which was designated in May of 1996 and
revised in ctobet of 2011, is not located within the proposed project's action area, but it
is located pprox. D.83 mi. north and 2.1 mi.northwest of the project site;therefore, it is
possible tt at marb led murrelets may be found in the action area.
NORTH I RN SP b TTED OWL
The North ern Spo led Owl is one of the largest owls in North America, and the average
adult fem, is ap roximately 18 inches tall with a 48-inch wingspan.Northern spotted
owls are s ri tly cturnal, and require old-growth forests with multi-layered canopies of
trees, incl ding 1 ge trees with broken tops, deformed limbs, and large holes and cavities
to nest in.l Ttie Nc rthem spotted owl is very territorial and intolerant of habitat
disturban e., and a pair requires a large amount of forest for hunting and nesting.Habitat
loss has o charred as a result of forest conversion,timber harvest, fire, windthrow, insect
outbreak n4 dis se (WDFW 2012).
The USF � des' mated revised critical habitat for the northern spotted owl under the
Endangeredl,Spec es Act. In total, approximately 9,577,969 acres (ac) (3,876,064 hectares
(ha)) in 1 i units rid 60 subunits in California, Oregon, and Washington fall within the
boundari(s of the 2 critical habitat designation.The action area does not include
designate J criticE 1 habitat for the Northern spotted owl;however, critical habitat is
nearby.E ue to tl r close proximity of human habitation, it is unlikely that any Northern
spotted o v1s ma3 be found in the action area.
i
STREA P H RNED LARK
Horned 11 s are birds that utilize wide open spaces with no trees and few or no shrubs.
The stree epd hor ied lark nests on the ground in sparsely vegetated sites dominated by
grasses a id shrubs. Historically this type of habitat was found in prairies in western
Oregon z rid Was ington, in dune habitats along the coast of Washington, on the sandy
beaches nd spit along the Columbia and Willamette Rivers, and in grasslands, estuaries,
and sandy beach,
s in British Columbia(WDFW 2012). Today the streaked horned lark
nests in broad ange of habitats, including native prairies, coastal dunes, fallow and
active a icultur it fields,wetland mudflats, sparsely-vegetated edges of grass fields,
recently lnted hristmas tree farms with extensive bare ground, moderately-to heavily-
grazed s ures, gravel roads or gravel shoulders of lightly-traveled roads, airports, and
dredge p�ositi sites in the lower Columbia River(WDFW 2012).
It is exp coed th t the action area contains unsuitable habitat for the streaked horned lark.
Colgan iologicE 1 Evaluation 1 1
I
I
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO
The yellow-billed cuckoo(Coccyzus americanus) is a neotropical migrant bird that
winters in South America and breeds in western North America. The yellow-billed
cuckoo is insectivorous and lives in riparian woodlands (USFWS 2014). Reports of
individual cuckoos have been very rare in recent decades, with only three known reports
since 2000, these being near Lind(Adams Co.) in 2001,near Eureka(Walla Walla Co.)
in June 2007, and from Little Pend Oreille National Wildlife Refuge (Stevens Co.) in
June 2012. Habitat loss and pesticide use are thought to be two of the main causes for the
precipitous decline of western yellow-billed cuckoos.Agriculture, grazing, reservoir
construction, flood control, urbanization, and other factors across the West have caused
the large-scale loss and degradation of lowland riparian forest, which is the cuckoo's
primary habitat.
It is expected that the action area contains unsuitable habitat for the yellow-billed cuckoo.
CHINOOK SALMON
Chinook salmon in Lake Cushman are a land-locked population that originated from
anadromous fish, although loss of genetic variation makes it difficult to determine
whether they are descended from historical Hood Canal populations or introduced
hatchery fish (NOAA 2006). Lake Cushman Chinook are genetically different, smaller in
size (and presumably less fecund)than their anadromous counterparts (Myers et al.
1998). On Jan. 12,2009,Tacoma Power,the Skokomish Tribal Nation and state and federal
agencies signed a settlement agreement that resolved a$5.8 billion damages claim and
long-standing disputes over the terms of a long-term license for Cushman Hydroelectric
Project. Tacoma Power has proposed to introduce sockeye and spring Chinook and
enhance the existing winter steelhead and coho populations in the North Fork in
cooperation with the WDFW and the Skokomish Tribe (Tacoma Public Utilities 2014). In
addition, Tacoma Power will annually release up to 100,000 rainbow trout for sport
harvest(TPU 2014).
Lake Cushman has been designated Critical habitat, and the site provides rearing,
foraging, and migration habitat, so it is expected that adult and/or juvenile Chinook
salmon may be found in the action area.
5.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions
5.1 Action Area
The environmental baseline represents the existing set of conditions,to which the effects
of the proposed action are then added. The environmental baseline is defined as"the past
and present impacts of all Federal, state, and private actions and other human activities in
the action area,the anticipated impacts of all proposed Federal projects in the action area
Colgan Biological Evaluation 12
i
i
i
i
and the impact of
lr ad I nder one formal or informal section 7 consultation, a p
that have y g
state or pr e ad ions which are contemporaneous with the consultation process" (50
CFR 402.02). The proposed project site is in WRIA 16 on Lake Cushman in Mason
County. T e,maj ity of the fresh and marine waterbodies in WRIA 16 suffer from water
quality iss es;ho ever,Lake Cushman is not listed on the state's 2012 Water Quality
303(d) lisl of imp fired waterbodies for any parameters. Two waterbodies in the
Skokomish water hed,the South Fork of the Skokomish River and Lebar Creek are listed
for the parameter f temperature(high).
The propc sed pro ect site is located in a rural neighborhood on a lot with approximately
130' of frontage Lake Cushman, in an area classified as an Urban Residential
shoreline criviron nent by the Shoreline Master Program of Mason County.Neighboring
parcels su piort si gle-family residences(or recreational cabins), bulkheads,piers, and
floats. Foi es ed IE rid in the vicinity of Lake Cushman has been logged heavily. Erosion
impacts f Dni surt ce flows have been particularly damaging in the logged areas above
the lake's west sb 3re.
Before the ciOmpl tion of two dams in 1926 and 1930, Lake Cushman was a natural
oligotrop ici,lake ith a mean depth of 200 feet. Now Lake Cushman is 4,010-acre water
body in tt e Oly is National Forest, having been altered in size to accommodate the
hydroelec trit dan s.Because of the dams,water levels in Lake Cushman can fluctuate up
to 21 met rs(69 1 eet),with peak levels occurring during summer and minimum levels
during wAiter.TI magnitude of these fluctuations results in periodic inundation of 12
hectares 0 acre )of land surrounding the inlet to the reservoir,resulting in high water
temperatt res in t ie shallow waters of the inlet during the summer months (Brenkman
1998). Ct rrently, the reservoir inundates 17.2 kilometers(10.7 miles)of river, including
areas of t e�origil Lal Lake Cushman (Brenkman 1998).
5.2 Prilposei I Project Area
A field i vestigal ion was conducted on the afternoon of November 20th of 2015.The
project a ea was urveyed visually on foot.The elevation of the lake's water level was
approx. 726 feet which is approx. 12 feet lower than the current ordinary high water
mark of 738 feet
The site $upport, a single-family residence located approximately 13 feet vertically and
52 feet h Azontelly from the shoreline of Lake Cushman, on a small cove that features an
Np streai n.The tream possesses fish habitat,but no fish were observed. There is a
moderat ly heav y cover of native vegetation along the shoreline, including over a dozen
medium o large native trees. The shoreline is accessed via a foot path located northeast
of the sii gle-fan.ily residence.Existing steps that extend onto the shoreline are old and
failing. he slop of the beach is shallow in the vicinity of the proposed bulkhead, and
the subs rate cot sists primarily of sand, clay, gravel,with some cobble and other small
native to k. Thp site is somewhat protected from Lake Cushman's wave action by the
Colgan *gica Eva
luation 13
i
existing pier, ramp, and float, although the site faces into prevailing winds and the bank is
moderately to severely undercut in places.
The stream is located approx. 15 feet from the proposed east end of the bulkhead and
approx. 25 to 30 feet from the west end; it is confined to an incised channel that runs
across the lakebed and angles away from the subject property. When the lake's waters are
raised, it is likely that the stream's confluence with the lake is located approx. 20 to 25
feet from the east end of the bulkhead. The stream is located approximately(approx.)two
to three feet lower in elevation than the proposed bulkhead installation area.According to
the applicant, the stream's waters seldom overflow its banks and never reach the
bulkhead installation area.No indications that the stream overflows its channel were
observed. The stream's channel on the subject property is bordered by a substantial
amount of large and small woody debris,however, it is expected that the woody debris
material is not from upstream flooding but is lake debris that drifted into the cove during
strong winds and was deposited there when the lake's waters receded. Weeds growing
along the lake's upper shoreline at the site appear to indicate that in 2015 the lake was not
raised to full pool or full pool was not maintained for the entire season.
6.0 Effects of the Action
6.1 Direct Effects
Direct effects to the shoreline include: 1)Loss of benthic habitat from the installation of
the rock bulkhead. 2)The modification of the natural transition between terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems. 3) The alteration of natural erosion processes that deliver sediment to
the lake.
1) The proposed rock bulkhead will only occupy approx. 180 sf of benthic habitat. The
removal of existing derelict pier pilings will restore a negligible amount of benthic
habitat.Due to the seasonal fluctuations of the lake's water level, it is probable that
benthic species do not thrive in the nearshore areas of the lake that lack permanent water.
No empirical evidence was found to document if both terrestrial and aquatic species
utilize the upper shoreline habitat, or if it has been too altered to support normal
concentrations of either species.
2)Hard armored bulkheads modify the natural transition between terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems. This can affect movement of materials and organisms between systems.
Structures may also result in alterations to the pattern of natural drainage to the beach.
It is expected that the proposed rock bulkhead,which will be constructed with small
angular rock(two-man, backed with half-man quarry spalls)that results in a smaller
footprint(approx. 2' in width with an average height of 2.5'), will not restrict the
movement of organisms or organic materials such as leaves, twigs, etcetera.A rock
bulkhead constructed of angular rock will have interstitial spaces that may provide refuge
Colgan Biological Evaluation 14
I
habitat fo I j enil salmonids or other aquatic species. Terrestrial species such as native
squirrels, h pmu ks, and lizards have also been observed(by the author)utilizing rock
bulkheads)as habi at. Raccoons and deer have been observed using rock bulkhead steps to
access the shoreli e. In addition,rock provides habitat for bacteria(some involved in
nitrifcati n/denit lification processes), macroalgae, and invertebrates (the latter two,
commonly associ ited with marine shorelines). Rock is also a source of minerals that are
used in re ox(ox dction/reduction)reactions,which are critical for clean water quality.
Addition 1 ,th& asalt riprap to be placed along the bulkhead's eroded toe is natural
rock that i 1 cr e habitat, similar to cobble and other rock on the shorelines of Lake
Cushman I is e ected that angular rock such as basalt is a common and abundant
habitat c Tifi
ne of all Olympic Mountain alpine lakes.The proposed riprap installation
will have nt interstitial spaces that provide refuge habitat for juvenile salmonids
or other tic ecies. In addition,rock provides habitat for bacteria(some involved in
nitrifcati den' ification processes),macroalgae, and invertebrates.Rock is also a
source o ner that are used in redox(oxidation/reduction)reactions,which are
critical f ean': ater quality.
Addition 11 , roc bulkheads are pervious to water and therefore unlikely to impact
natural d i age o the beach.
3) It is eN pe rted at the bulkhead will not alter natural erosion processes that deliver
sediment to the e.The bulkhead is being installed to alleviate unnatural bank erosion
from wai e cti that occurs, primarily, due to the(unnatural) seasonal raising and
lowering of Lak Cushman and wave action from prevailing winds.This will be
discussed rth in 6.4 Indirect Effects.
Tempo ary D ect Effects
Tempor, yldirect effects caused by the proposed project include: 1)Turbidity and
sedimen ation i Lake Cushman or the Np stream. 2)Noise. 3) Water pollution from
incidental uelea of fuel, oil, or other contaminants.
l Disturbed substrate from the installation of the bulkhead may result in increased
turbi lity and sedimentation.As previously discussed, BMPs will be strictly
adhe ed to during construction in order to maintain the present water quality
of L ke Cushman and the Np stream by preventing runoff and pollution. In
addi 'on, the proposed project will take place when the water level in the lake
is ra ch lower than the OHWM(738'), so it is probable that precipitation will
grad ally disperse any disturbed substrate over the exposed lakebed before it
com s into direct contact with the lake's waters. It is possible that the Np
stye' ,which is closer to the proposed work area than the lake lowered
sho line,may experience moderate turbidity from runoff during or following
isa si nific ant
con uction at the site;however, rt expected that the streamg
Colgan iologic 1 Evaluation 15
i
I
source of turbidity and sediments to the small cove that comprises the stream
delta, based on aerial photos(Google Earth 2013),the sediment composition
of the lakebed in the area(which features a high percentage of gravel and
sand), and the slope (which is untypically gentle for Lake Cushman). It is
expected that wave action from the lake distributes sediments throughout the
cove and along the shoreline when the steam's channel is seasonally flooded
by the lake's waters. Therefore,the project may result in moderate turbidity
and sedimentation that is significantly less than turbidity and sedimentation
common to the area.
2) The main source of construction noise will be from the installation of the rock
bulkhead.Noise will be intermittent and is expected to be a maximum of 79
dBA at 50 feet.
3)Potential water pollution from accidental release of fuel, oil, or other
contaminants is another possible temporary direct effect.As previously
discussed, Spill Prevention Control measures and BMPs will be implemented
during the proposed project.
6.2 Primary Constituent Elements
PRIMARY CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS
In order to properly analyze the effects on designated critical habitat, a logical framework
must be utilized. In determining what areas are critical habitat, agency regulations require
the NMFS to focus on the principal biological or physical constituent elements that are
essential to the conservation of the species. The regulations identify Primary Constituent
elements(PCEs) as including, but not limited to: "roost sites, nesting grounds, spawning
sites, feeding sites, seasonal wetland or dryland, water quality or quantity, host species or
plant pollinator, geological formation, vegetation type,tide, and specific soil types(69
FR 71888)."In 2003 NMFS biologists developed a list of PCEs specific to salmon, based
on a decision matrix(NMFS, 1996)that describes general parameters and characteristics
of most of the essential features under consideration when critical habitat is designated.
There are six specific types of sites essential to support one or more life stages of an ESU
(sites for spawning, rearing, migration, and foraging). Each site names physical or
biological features (PCEs) essential to the conservation of salmonids. In 2010, USFWS
biologists developed a list of PCEs specific to bull trout, based on a decision matrix
(NMFS, 1996)that describes general parameters and characteristics of most of the
essential features under consideration when critical habitat is designated. Lakes and
reservoirs figure prominently in meeting the life-cycle requirements of adfluvial bull
trout. Lake Cushman is designated critical habitat for the bull trout and the Chinook
salmon;therefore,the direct effects on the designated critical habitat of bull trout and
Chinook salmon have been analyzed using the appropriate PCEs for the nearshore
lacustrine environment.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 16
I
I
BULL T UT P Es:
Water ten poratu es that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in
streams n ith tem Peraturesfrom 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in
temperat res rah Zing from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no direct effect on
water tern elratur s that support bull trout use.
Migrato corrid rs with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments
between awn i , rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including
intermitte Fit or s sonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows—
the proje will h ve no direct effect on migratory corridors that support bull trout use.
Passage w ill not Se altered during construction as no construction will occur unless the
waters of Lake C tshman are low. The rock bulkhead will have interstitial spaces that
may create new f raging opportunities for bull trout.
An abun a t fo base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, and aquatic
macroin a ebr es—the project is expected to have a minimal direct effect on an
abundant food belie for bull trout. Construction will take place when the Jake's waters are
lowered and no r ative shrubs or trees will be removed.
Perman t wate of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction,
growth, and sur ival are not inhibited--the project is expected to have a minimal direct
effect on water q iality.Project construction may cause temporary turbidity or
sedimentatipri, d ie to the close proximity of the Np stream; however, it will be
significai itl les than turbidity and sedimentation that is common to the area. BMPs are
expected to prev nt or moderate potential water pollution during construction. In
addition,the pro ect will remove existing creosoted pilings that may or may not be a
source ofwater 1 iollution.
CHINO K SA IMON PCEs:
Unobstr cted p ssage—passage will not be altered during construction as no
construe ion will occur unless the waters of Lake Cushman are low.
Water uglity the project is expected to have a minimal direct effect on water quality.
Project onstruc ion may cause temporary turbidity or sedimentation, due to the close
proximi y of the Np stream; however, it will be significantly less than turbidity and
sedimer tation t at is common to the area. BMPs are expected to prevent or moderate
potentia water ollution during construction.In addition,the project will remove existing
creosot-4ilinds that may or may not be a source of water pollution.
Water Ouanti the project will have no effect on water quantity.
Colgan
17
i logic 1 Evaluation
;
i
Forage—the rock bulkhead will have interstitial spaces that may create new foraging
opportunities for Chinook.
Natural Cover—the project will remove derelict pilings that may or may not mimic
natural cover(of large woody debris).
6.3 Direct Effects to ESA Listed Species
The direct effect from the proposed project to other ESA listed species that are likely to
be found in the action area have been analyzed as follows:
NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL
Due to the close proximity of human habitation and the small size of the action area, it is
unlikely that any Northern spotted owls may be found in the action area of the proposed
project site. The rural neighborhood where the site is located extends approx. 0.8 mi.
south of the proposed project site, 0.5 mi. north to State Route 119, and 0.3 mi. northeast.
With the extensive acreage of undeveloped forest land nearby, it seems unlikely that
Northern spotted owls will be nesting,roosting, or foraging in the vicinity of
anthropogenic development.
MARBLED MURRELET
The primary threats to marbled murrelet from anthropogenic activities include loss of
nesting habitat, gill-net fishing operations, oil spills, and marine pollution.Previously
noted BMPs and Spill Prevention Control Measures will be adhered to during project
construction to protect the water quality of Lake Cushman.Noise impacts to any nesting
or foraging murrelets in the action area are expected to be negligible. Construction is
unlikely to occur during the marbled murrelet nesting season between April 1 through
September 23rd, as the lake's waters are expected to be raised during that time frame. To
ensure minimal disturbance to any marbled murrelets that may be nesting in the action
area,the following noise threshold guidelines will be followed during project
construction:
•Project activities will occur between two hours after sunrise and two hours before
sunset.
•Suitable nesting habitat will not be removed.
Note: The rural neighborhood where the site is located extends approx. 0.8 mi. south of
the proposed project site, 0.5 mi.north to State Route 119, and 0.3 mi.northeast. With
the extensive acreage of undeveloped forest land nearby, it seems unlikely that marbled
Colgan Biological Evaluation 18
I
in the vicinity of anthro ogenic
in roost
ing, or foraging y p
e testing, g g
relets� i 1 b g
mur g
developm n .
i
6.4 Indirect ]Effects
Indirect e fects am those effects that are caused by or will result from the proposed action
and are la er in ti rie, but are still reasonably certain to occur(50 CFR 402.02).Possible
indirect e eicts from the proposed project include: 1)The new bulkhead exacerbates
passive ei sion to the shoreline. 2)The bulkhead causes a reduction in the accumulation
of large d ift logs on the beach.
1) When vaves ri flect off shoreline armoring structures,particularly concrete or other
types of flat4acei I bulkheads,they can cause scouring and hardening of the substrate and
steepeni of the beach. The sediment in front of a bulkhead will gradually become
coarser a Wave ction and littoral drift removes the finer sediment and there is no
sediment availab e for replenishment because it is impounded behind the bulkhead
(Macdon t14 eta 1994).Hard-armored bulkheads cut off sediment that was once
available o feed the beach,thus adversely affecting natural beach-forming processes.
The prop s d b ead may impact sediment movement into the lake by impounding
sediment, t it ulkhead) is not expected to result in significant scouring or steepening
of the be c at t site.Unlike the steep,unnatural topography of the majority of Lake
Cushma 's sho lines,the proposed project site is located in a small cove that features a
shallow 1 ed oreline composed predominantly of gravel (from the Np stream, see 6.1
Direct f cts, ,emporary Direct Effects 1));however,the shoreline at the site has still
suffered rosion ue to the raising and lowering of the lake and exposure to prevailing
winds.Also,roc is a natural material. Unlike concrete or wood bulkheads, the uneven
surface d irre lar form of a rock bulkhead has interstitial spaces that absorb and
dissipate Wave diergy and lessen toe erosion and other previously discussed detrimental
effects associate J with hard-armoring. Additionally,the proposed area to be bulkheaded
is low bank and ould not typically be a significant source of sediments. While a small
amount of Iexca ated sediments will be utilized in the project to fill in holes or
depressi nS fror i the derelict piling removal and the bulkhead construction,the majority
(of exca iated sc diments)will be removed from the shoreline following the project's
complet on, as"acoma Power does not allow excavated sediments to be spread over the
shorelin at La Cushman.
Referen e m rials for this report primarily assess bulkhead impacts to marine
shoreli s nd,, particular,Puget Sound. While some impacts are applicable to lake
shoreli s bea` feeding/forming processes appear to differ significantly and be site
specific kes re unique ecosystems that may not be benefited by the addition of
sedime s A 2' 12 study by Stanford University on a large, deep Alpine lake in Italy
reveale tat s' pended sediment concentration(SSC) can significantly affect the
ecologi a hea and function of lakes and reservoirs due to the following:
Colgan 3iologic il Evaluation 19
i
i
I
i
1)Sediment can regulate primary production by limiting light availability and also by
acting as a source of nutrients(Schallenberg and Burns 2004).
2)High sediment concentrations in a lake or reservoir can lead to poor water quality
from high turbidity levels as well as decreased basin volume through
sedimentation(Morris a al. 2008).
3)Lakes and reservoirs can act as sinks for many sediment-bound contaminants that
can accumulate and deleteriously affect aquatic ecosystems(Mariani a al. 2008).
A 2004 USDA Forest Service Technical Report(PSW-GTR-193)revealed that another
large, deep Alpine lake, Lake Tahoe, was found to be very sensitive to the input of fine
sediments (less than 63 micrometers in size). Because of its slow settling rate and the
long hydraulic residence time in the lake, the impact of fine sediment on water clarity is
persistent: a 2 micrometer particle takes 2 years to settle out of the water column.
In conclusion, on Lake Cushman, a lake whose shorelines lack water for roughly six to
seven months each year, it seems counterproductive to consider beach feeding a positive
habitat process as the lake was significantly enlarged to accommodate two hydroelectric
dams that produce environmentally friendly electric power free of carbon emissions.
3) Shoreline armoring can also limit the accumulation of large drift logs on the beach, as
large woody debris is less likely to accumulate on beaches that have steepened due to the
presence of a bulkhead(Macdonald et al. 1994). Large woody debris (LWD)provides
detrital input, food sources, and potential refuge for migrating juvenile salmon. Due to
the moderate number of power boats that utilize the lake in the vicinity of the proposed
project site, it is not safe to recommend anchoring LWD to the beach.Nor is it allowed
by Tacoma Power. In addition,there are numerous existing stumps along the shoreline
throughout the lake and a substantial amount of woody debris at the site, as it collects in
the cove.
6.5 Primary Constituent Elements
PRIMARY CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS
The indirect effects on the designated critical habitat of Bull trout and Puget Sound
Chinook have been analyzed using the appropriate PCEs for the nearshore lacustrine
environment.
BULL TROUT PCEs:
Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in
streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in
temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no indirect effect
on water temperatures that support bull trout use.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 20
I
migratori corrido ors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments
between arvnin , rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including
intermita tor sersonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows—the
project w 1 have o indirect effect on migratory corridors that support bull trout use.
An abun antfoo I base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic
macroin ?rsebrai es, and forage fish--mitigation plantings may eventually provide leaf
matter and insects for aquatic life in Lake Cushman, improving foraging opportunities for
bull trout
Permane t watei of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction,
growth, and sun'val are not inhibited—removal of the derelict pilings is expected to
have a ne ligible effect on water quality due to the small quantity and the fact that any
visible cr osote( n the pilings surface) appears to be long gone.
CHINO :SAL qON PCEs:
Unobstr ctjed p sage—the project will not have any indirect effect on unobstructed
passage. ;
Water QI ality the project will not have any indirect effect on water quality(see bull
trout).
Water Q mti the project will not have any indirect effect on water quantity.
Forage tl e pr ect may have a beneficial effect on forage (see bull trout).
Natural aver the project will not have any indirect effect on natural cover.
6.6 In ilrec Effects to ESA Listed Species
The iO ect effects from the proposed project to other ESA listed species that are likely
to be fo nd in tI e action area have been analyzed as follows:
NORT E NS POTTED OWL &MARBLED MURRELET
While it is�high unlikely that either species would nest in trees that are located in a rural
neighb hod, e proposed project may result in increased recreational usage at the site,
which c uld pr mpt both species to nest elsewhere.
n I i 'lo is 1 Evaluation 21
Colga g
6.7 Interrelated/Interdependent Effects
Interrelated and interdependent effects are described as the effects of the action under
consultation analyzed together with the effects of other activities that are interrelated to,
or interdependent with,that action. An interrelated activity is an activity that is part of the
proposed action and depends on the proposed action for its justification.An
interdependent activity is an activity that has no independent utility apart from the action
under consultation(FWS &NMFS 1998). The project will have no obvious interrelated
or interdependent effects.
6.8 Primary Constituent Elements
BULL TROUT PCEs:
Water temperatures that support bull trout use. Bull trout have been documented in
streams with temperatures from 32 to 72 degrees F but are found more frequently in
temperatures ranging from 36 to 59 degrees F--the project will have no interrelated or
interdependent effects on water temperatures that support bull trout use.
Migratory corridors with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments
between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats, including
intermittent or seasonal barriers induced by high water temperatures or low flows the
project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on migratory corridors that
support bull trout use.
An abundant food base including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic
macroinvertebrates, and forage fish--the project will have no interrelated or
interdependent effects on the bull trout's food base.
Permanent water of sufficient quantity and quality such that normal reproduction,
growth, and survival are not inhibited--the project will have no interrelated or
interdependent effects on water supply or quality.
CHINOOK SALMON PCEs:
Unobstructed passage the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on
unobstructed passage.
Water Quality—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on
unobstructed passage.
Water Quantity—the project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water
quantity.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 22
i
Forage t e Oroje�t will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on water quantity.
Natural Q ver—t project will have no interrelated or interdependent effects on natural cover.
I
6.9 Cu ula ve Ef
fects
Cumulati e effeci s are defined as"those effects of future state or private activities, not
involving Federal activities,that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of
the action subject to consultation"(50 CFR 402.02). Cumulative impacts are difficult to
access. C1 ntinued growth and urbanization is likely to detrimentally impact fish and
wildlife r source . Global warming could raise the water level of Puget Sound, leaving
many waterfront roperties underwater. Global warming could also result in warmer
water teiriperaturl s,to the detriment of species such as bull trout.Additionally, over-
fishing m iy depl to stocks of salmon, even as restoration of habitat in the watershed
furthers t keir like ihood of survival.
I
7.0 Co On on
7.1 Ta 0 A alysis
Section of the SA prohibits take of endangered or threatened species, "take"being
defined i i Section 3 as to harass,harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,wound,trap, capture, or
collect listed spe ies, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. "Harm" is further defined
as a sign ficant t abitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures listed
species "sign ficantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, spawning,
rearing, i igratir g, feeding, and sheltering"(50 CFR 222.102). "Harass" is further
defined an m ntional or negligent act which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife
by anno ing it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns
which i hfde, bat are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). In
regards W the p posed project and the existing development activities, it is extremely
unlikely that an "take"will occur. Previously listed conservation measures will further
insure t llikeli ood that no"take"will occur.
7.2 D terml nation of Effect
A deten 10atiorof May affect, not likely to adversely affect is the appropriate conclusion
when e ects on the species or their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial,
discoun able, oi insignificant. After reviewing the appropriate data and survey
informa ion, I b ive concluded that the proposed project will have an insignificant impact
on the p evious y discussed Endangered or Threatened species if the previously discussed
23
Colgan I liologic, 1 Evaluation
I
I
conservation measures are implemented. In my most honest and professional opinion,
while the proposed project may impact individual Endangered or Threatened species in
the project area, it is not likely to adversely affect or jeopardize the continued existence
of those species or their designated Critical Habitat. The determination of effect for each
of the listed species is:
1. Bull trout and their designated Critical Habitat May affect, not likely to
adversely affect.
2. Chinook salmon--May affect, not likely to adversely affect.
3. Marbled muff elet May affect, not likely to adversely affect.
4. Northern spotted owl No effect.
5. Streaked horned lark---No effect.
6. Yellow-billed cuckoo No effect.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 24
i
8.0 Re eren es
Literature
I
i
Federal Rcgistedvlol. 70,No. 170/September 2, 2005/Rules and Regulations
Federal gister ol. 70,No.185 /September 26, 2005/Rules and Regulations
Federal egister Vol. 71,No. 176/Tuesday, September 12, 2006/Proposed Rules
Federal egister Vol. 75,No. 200/October 18, 2010/Rules and Regulations
Federal egister 77 FR 14062/1\4arch 8, 2012/Proposed Rules
Federal egister ol. 77,No. 106/June 1, 2012/Proposed Rules
Federal egister Vol. 76,No. 193/October 5, 2011/Rules and Regulations
Coats,R 2 04. utrient and sediment transport in the streams of the Lake Tahoe Basin: a
30-year et osp 'tive.USDA Forest Services general technical report PSW-GTR-193.
Google arth. 2 13.Aerial Imagery. Internet report. URL:
htt s:// o le.com/earth/
Johanne seen, J., A.MacLennan, A.Blue, J. Waggoner, S. Williams, W. Gerstel,R.
Barnard R. Can nan, and H. Shipman. 2014.Marine Shoreline Design Guidelines.
Washington Del artment of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington.
Kleinsel midt. 2 12. Shoreline Management Plan, Cushman Project,FERC Project
Number 460. Tcoma Power,Tacoma Washington.
Leigh, ichael. 1996. Grow your own native landscape: a guide to identifying,
propaga inig, ani landscaping with Western Washington native plants. Washington State
Univers tyj Cool ierative Extension/Thurston County, Olympia, WA.
I
Mason oItinty, Washington. 2016.Assessor-Treasurer Electronic Property Information
Profile. Internel report.URL:
htt :// :)pert . o.mason.wa.us/Taxsifter/Search/results.aspx?q=42307-50-00025
Nation Geogr hic. 2002.Field Guide to the Birds of North America.National
Geogra hic So iety, Washington,D.C. pg. 226, 244, 250, & 320.
25
Colgan iologic it Evaluation
I
l
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2014. Distribution of Threatened and Endangered
Species. Internet report. URL: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov
NOAA. 2014. Endangered and Threatened Marine Species. Internet report. URL:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/
Scheu,K.R., D.A.Fong, S. G. Monismith, and O.B.Fringer.2012. Sediment transport
dynamics near a river inflow of a large alpine lake. Environmental Fluids Mechanics
Laboratory, Stanford University. Stanford, CA.
Skokomish Indian Tribe & Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010.
Recovery Plan for Skokomish River Chinook Salmon. Internet Report. URL:
http://hecc.wa.aov/Downloads/Downloads GetFile aspx?id=397519&fd-0
Tacoma Public Utilities. 2014. Cushman Hydro Project. Internet report. URL:
https://www.mylpu.ora/tacomapower/about-tacoma-power/dams power sources/h dro
power/cushman-hydro-pro,ect/
Tacoma Public Utilities. 2015. Cushman Fisheries Program. Internet report. URL:
http://www.mMu.org/tacomapower/fish-wildlife-environment/cushman h, dro
project/cushman-fisheries-program htm
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Recovery Plan for the Threatened Marbled
Murrelet in Washington, Oregon, and California. Published by USFWS, Portland, OR.
URL: http://ecos.fws.aov/docs/recovery plans/1997/970924 pdf
U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Draft Recovery Plan for the Coastal-Puget
Sound Distinct Population Segment of Bull Trout(Salvelinus confluentus). Volume 1I(of
I1): Olympic Peninsula Management Unit.
Portland, Oregon. 277+xvi pp
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Species Profile, Marbled Murrelet. Internet report.
URL: http://www.fws-gov/arcata/es/birds/mm/m murrelet html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Guidance for Identifying Marbled Murrelet Nest
Trees in Washington State. Internet report. URL:
http://www.wsdot.wa.jzov/NR/rdonlyres/2D97D3D8-D448 43A7 8249
E2319095C8C2/0/MAMUhabitatFWS pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Marbled Murrelet Nesting Season and Analytical
Framework for Section 7 Consultation in Washington. Internet report. URL:
http://www.wsdot.wa.�yov/NR/rdonlyres/F3847D4F-BFIC 476C 8E9D
A45A715B624C/0/CoverLtrNestingSeason pdf
Colgan Biological Evaluation 26
i
U.S.Fish nd Wi dlife Service. 2013. Conducting Masking Analysis for Marbled
Murrelets'I and Pil Driving Projects. Internet report. URL:
htt ://ww .iwsdo .wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/3506DAAA-4BI3-4EIB-855D-
36E047EQ7990/ MAMU MaskAnal sis. df
U.S. Fish�and Wi dlife Service. 2015. Official Species List#01EWFW00-2016-SLI-
0346. lnt met rel lort. URL: http•//www.fws.g�ov/wafwo/
U.S. Fis 'land W dlife Service. 2014. Species fact sheet, Streaked Horned Lark,
Eremoph,la alpe tris strigata. Internet report.
URL: htt :/ww .fws. ov/wafwo/s ecies/Fact%20sheets/streakedhornedlarkfinal. df
Washing on Stab Department of Ecology. 2012. 2012 Water Quality Assessment 303(d)
List: Sko omis osewallips Water Resource Inventory Area(WRIA 16). Internet
report. U : htt ://www.ecy.wa.gov/Tro rams/wq/303d/currentassessmt.html
Washin on Stat Department of Ecology. 2012. 2012 Stormwater Management Manual
for West m Wa ington. Internet report.URL:
https:Hfo ress. .gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1410055.htmi
Washin on Sta Department of Natural Resources. 2014. FPARS ARCIMS mapping
applicati n. Inte et report: URL: http://fortress.wa.gov/dnr/a 1/fpars/viewer.htm
Washin I ton Del artment of Fish and Wildlife. 2008.Priority Habitat and Species List.
Olympi Nash'igton. 177 pp.
Washin on De artment of Fish and Wildlife. 2012.Annual Report: Marbled Murrelet.
Internet eport.I�RL:
htt ://w fw.wa. ov/conservation/endan ered/s ecies/marbled murrelet. df
Washin on De artment of Fish and Wildlife. 2012.Annual Report:Northern Spotted
Owl. In rnet re. ort. URL:
htt ://w .wa ov/conservation/endan ered/s ecies/northern s otted owl. df
Washin on De artment of Fish and Wildlife. 2012.Annual Report: Streaked Horned
Lark.Ir temet report.URL:
htt ://w .wagov/conservation/endangered/species/streaked horned lark. df
Washin ton D artment of Fish and Wildlife. 2012.Annual Report: Yellow-billed
Cuckoo, Intern t report.URL:
htt :// fw.wa'gov/conservation/endangered/species/yellow-billed cuckoo. df
Washio gton Dc partment of Fish and Wildlife. 2014. SalmonScape. Internet report. URL:
htto:HaJ)D9.wdfx.wa.gov/ almonscUe/
Colgan,Biologic Ell Ev
aluation 2
i
Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for
Transportation Projects—Advanced Training Manual—Version 4-02-2014. URL:
http://www.wsdot.wa.jzov/NR/rdonlyres/Al F85352-90E0-457l3 9A8C
B5103E097FAE10/BA manualpart2 pdf
Colgan Biological Evaluation 28
Attach ent 1
The vicin y map nd the extent of the action area from a few designated points.
�<" COL GAN PR TY N OPER
110 DISCOVERY N DRIVE ,
l
�.. Vj ._._
. . r
Ob
Q
WIC N I Fore - 0 750 mf
r y:
�� Lake Cushman
stela eprk
0
I
I I
Colgan
29
Biologic 1 Evaluation
I
I
Attachment 2
Site Plan with existing development.
Y.. . ... .. _. \_
G„
67
_. _.
c
_..�.0 tJ�3
REFERENCE:/USACE will provrdt) LOCATION:110 N Discovery Dr, PROPOSED PROJECT: Install 2.5'
Hoodsport,WA 98548 average height rock bulkhead aloe
APPLICANT:Steve Colgan Parcel#42318-50-OW36 8
approximately 90 limml feet shoreline at
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: LAT/C.ONG:47.48788 N hat/ 738 elevation.
1.Flo:42318-50-00022 -123.24263 W long IN:Lake Cushman
2.Molloy:42318-50-0W37 NEAR/AT:Lake Cushman Div.3
PAGE 1 OF s3 DATE:1/27/2016 Lot 36
COUNTY:Mason STATE: WA
Colgan Biological Evaluation 30
i
Attachn e6t 3
Site plan A exi ting development and proposed overwater development
reconfigui atlon.
i
i
lV V'�
3 r
Y>i
I
4
( s
i
CA
41
S r
1 �t
i
, t
,i < 1 1 t T
r,
t�
Reference Number:
Applicant Name:Steve Colgan
proposed project:Bulkhead installation
Location: a Cushn Div.3 Lot 36
Sheet2of maDate:1/27/2016
31
Colgan3io'logic 31 Evaluation
i
Attachment 4
Cross section.
IAI
................................ . .
Rcf—c Number; _—
APPlic ant Name:Steve Colgan
Proposed Project:Bulkhead installation
l ocat on:Lgke Cushman Div,3 Lot 36
Sheceof Date: 1/27/2016
Colgan Biological Evaluation 32
i
Attachn kent 5
The easte -most xtent of the shoreline to be bulkheaded.
�I
i
l
i
I
I
33
Colgan j3i logic il Evaluation
Attachment 6
The existing shoreline access steps along the eastern extent of the shoreline that is
proposed to be bulkheaded.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 34
i
I
h I e
Attac t 7�
The weste exten of the shoreline that is proposed to be bulkheaded with one of the
derelict pi ings to e removed.
EPP
i
r,
1�
it
I
I
i
35
Colgan iologic 1 Evaluation
Attachment 8
The western-most extent of the shoreline that is proposed to be bulkheaded with more of
the derelict pilings that will be removed and the existing pier.
l�R
Colgan Biological Evaluation 36
Attachn emt 9
The existi g float nd pier with the Np stream (upper left) and the ramp/pier(upper right)
in the bac groun
i
Col an
37
i i' is 1 Evaluation
g g
I
Attachment 10
The existing Np stream at the site, and the neighboring property to the northeast.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 38
I
I
Attach It 1
The existi g Np s earn at the site and the neighboring property to the northeast.
I
I
I
I
i
i
ic
I
39
Colgan iologic al Evaluation
Attachment 12
The proposed mitigation planting area along the eastern extent of the property's
shoreline.
Colgan Biological Evaluation 40
i
I
I
I
Attachm nt 13 '
Essential F sh Hab t Assessment
E entia 1 Fish Habi
tat Assessment
ss
I
A. Bac round
The Magn isoln Fis ery Conservation and Management Act was signed into law on April
13, 1976. Oder ovisions of the Act, eight Regional Fishery Management Councils
were estab is ed t prepare FMP's in conformance with national standards published in
50 CFR P 600. 5-340. The Magnuson Act was renamed the Magnuson-Stevens Act
in a 1996 propri tions bill. On October 11, 1996,the Sustainable Fisheries Act,which
amended t e Magnuson-Stevens Act, was signed into law. Provisions included a mandate
that the C(uncils end each IMP to include a description of Essential Fish Habitat,
including adverse mpacts on EFH and conservation measures to protect EFH. Essential
Fish Habit t is del ned as those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning,
breeding, lbeding, or growth to maturity.
The Pacifi c Fisher es Management Council has designated EFH for federally-managed
species on thle Pac fic West Coast, including 82 species of groundfish, 5 coastal pelagic
species, arid 3 spe ies of salmon.The following species may occur in Lake Cushman
during soinie perio I of their life history: Chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
and Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch).
B. Essenritial Fi h Habitat
The desigi awed E H for Pacific salmon species is identified using U.S. Geological
Survey(L SGS)h drologic units as well as habitat association tables and life history
descriptio s i,of ea h life stage(PFMC 1999).The EFH for the Pacific coast salmon
fishery is efined as those waters and substrate necessary for salmon production needed
to supporl a long erm sustainable salmon fishery and salmon contributions to a healthy
ecosyste (WSD T 2014). To achieve that level of production,EFH must include all
those stye ins, lat es,ponds,wetlands, and other currently viable water bodies and most
of the hat'tat hist Drically accessible to salmon in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and
Califomi (WS T 2014). This does not include habitats above the impassible barriers
identified by the acific Fishery Management Council Fishery Management Plan (PFMC
1999).
I
I
i al valuation 41
n Bi ld c
Colga g
C. Proposed Action
The proposed project is the installation of a small bulkhead using two-man rock and the
removal of existing pier pilings.
D. Effects of the Proposed Action
The effects of the proposed project on designated EFH are expected to be comparable to
the effects described in the attached BE.
E. Conservation Measures
The conservation measures and BMPs discussed in the attached BE will be implemented
to minimize any adverse effects to Essential Fish Habitat.
F. Conclusion
The proposed project is likely to have no significant impact on designated EFH for
Pacific salmon.
G. References
NOAA, 2006. Final environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact for
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Essential Fish Habitat. Internet report. Website:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/efh/finalenvironmentalassessmentandfindingofno.htm
PFMC (Pacific Fishery Management Council), 1999. Fisheries Management Plans for
groundfish, coastal pelagic fish, and Pacific salmon. Internet reports. Website:
www.pcouncil.org/
Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for
Transportation Projects—Advanced Training Manual, Chapter 16—Version 4-02-2014.
Internet report. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/AIF85352-90EO-457B-9A8C
B5103E097FAE10/BA manualpart2 pdf
Colgan Biological Evaluation 42