Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAR2002-00048 Commision Hearing - VAR Letters / Memos - 10/22/2002 ,n Mason County Department of Planning Cs Building I * 411 N. 5th *Street P.O. Box 279 Shelton,Washington 98584 * (360) 427-9670 October 22, 2002 VS/ TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Planning Staff—Rick Mraz ` RE: Variance from the Mason County Resource Ordinance (VAR2002-00048) v SUMMARY: The request is for a variance fr- Resou ce Or finance to lace q a manufactured home with septic system approximately ' '� " om "8 Type 1 and Type 3 streams, may. Staff recommends approval with conditions based upon satisfaction of the review criteria. No comments were received as of this writing. STAFF REPORT I. Introduction. This report evaluates a request for a variance from the Mason County Resource Ordinance No. 77-93, specifically the removal of an existing residence and replacement with a new triple-wide manufactured home and new septic system within two stream buffers (Type I and Type III). i II. Applicants: Ted and Leanna Keith. III. Property Location. 1462 NE Old Belfair Highway, Belfair. Parcel 412320-12- 01060. Tract 6 of N %2 NW NE. IV. Evaluations. A. Characteristics of the site. The parcel is a 2-acre residential tract located at the end of an easement road of off Old Belfair Highway. As detailed in the attached Habitat Management Plan (HMP), two fish-bearing streams bisect the parcel. Shoreline conditions are depicted in photos contained in the HMP. The Keiths also operate an evergreen purchasing service from adjacent buildings west of the type III stream on the same parcel. B. Characteristics of the area. The general area is characterized primarily by residential development east of Old Belfair Highway. C. Comprehensive Plan Designation. The Mason County Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is Rural. V. SEPA Compliance. This activity is SEPA exempt per WAC 197-11-800 (1), VI. Other Permits or Approvals. The proposal will require a Mason County Building Permit for the house placement. The project has already received septic design approval under permit SWG2002-00055. The proposal required review and comment by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Skokomish Tribe. Notification was sent on August 12, 2002. A 28-day review period followed. Analysis: The required buffer for a both Type I and Type III streams is 150 feet plus a 15-foot building setback for a total distance of 165 feet from the stream. Stream typing is per Washington Department of Natural Resources stream typing m``a,g�s The proposal is to emplace a manufactured home and a septic system approximately Wfeet and It feet respectively from the streams. The proposal requires a variance per the requireints associated with Mason County Resource Ordinance No. 77-93, specifically Section 17.01.110, Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas,which details stream buffer requirements and Section 17.01.150, Variances from Standards,which establishes variance procedures and criteria. The location of the house and septic system within the buffer effectively reduces that buffer. Section 17.01.110 (D) (2)(a) directs the procedure for buffer reduction to follow the public review process outlined in Section 17.01.120 (L). Section 17.01.120 concludes with the statement (Q) that"except when application from this Chapter would deny all reasonable use of a site, an applicant who seeks an exception from the regulations of the Chapter shall pursue a variance as provided in Section .150. Section 17.01.150 (E), Review Standards for a variance states that no variance shall be granted unless the County makes findings of fact showing that the following circumstances exist: 1. The granting of the variance shall be consistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter and conditions shall be imposed to ensure compatibility with surrounding conforming uses. 2. The granting of the variance shall not permit the establishment of any use which is prohibited by this Chapter. 3. The granting of the variance must be necessary for the reasonable use of the land or building and the variance as granted by the County is the minimum variance that shall accomplish this purpose. The findings shall fully set forth the circumstances by which this Chapter would deprive the applicant of a reasonable use of his land. Mere loss in value shall not justify a variation. 4. The granting of the variance shall not impair or substantially diminish property values of surrounding neighborhood properties. 5. The granting of the variance shall not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other lands or buildings in the same designation. Staff discussion: Staff notes that the Habitat Management Plan (HMP),prepared by Wayne Daley, addresses many of the variance criteria. However, the HMP contains two disparate site plans. The correct site plan is attached to the staff report as Exhibit#1. This plan should be used a reference when considered actual locations and size of structures,facilities and/or footprints. Staff addresses the variance criteria as follows: 1. The granting of the variance is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Chapter. Conditions have been attached that result in an overall increase in riparian habitat from existing conditions. (See HMP recommendations also). The general area contains several homes that exist at less than the current setback requirements. Three to four homes in the 1000 block on the west side of Old Belfair Highway have setbacks less than 100'from the Union River. At least three more homes exist at setback of less than 50'from the Union River in the 1500 block(on the east side of the road). The residence immediately south of the Keith driveway (address unknown) exists within the 165'setback. 2. f�reduction is allowed per the provisions of Chapter ]7.01.110 (D)(2). The j proposal is for residential construction, which is an allowable use. 3. The granting of the variance is necessary for the placement of the house and drainfield. The building envelope is entirely affected by the stream buffer requirements. No residence may be constructed on the parcel without a variance. As noted above and detailed in the HMP, the restoration plan will result in a 10-1 mitigation ratio of restored functional habitat to impacted buffer. The variance does not attempt to displace any native vegetation or functional buffer and, in combination with the restoration plan, can be described as the minimum impact to the buffer- 4. The structure will be a new manufactured home, built to current codes. The -� drainfield will be a new system, conforming to all state and local health regulations. These features will add value to this and surrounding properties. 5. Variances are contemplated and procedures are established by the provisions of Chapter 17.01.110 (D)(2). Variances are contemplated and procedures are established by the provisions of Chapter 17.01.110 (D)(2). Similar variances (from stream buffer requirements) have been granted in cases VAR2001-0002, VAR2001- 00049 and VAR2002-00010. VII. Conclusions. Upon the above discussion the proposal is consistent with the variance criteria detailed in Section 17.01.150. Staff recommends approval of the proposal, subject to the following conditions: 1. Developers and individuals shall be required to control erosion during construction. Removal of vegetation shall be avoided and any areas disturbed should be restored to prevent erosion and other environmental impacts. 2. The existing natural vegetative buffer shall remain undisturbed by any construction and/or development activities on the parcel. 3. The provisions and recommendations of the Habitat Management Plan shall be enacted. 4. All upland areas disturbed or newly created by construction activities shall be seeded, vegetated or given an equivalent type of erosion protection(silt �� fencing or straw matting). ]5 A detailed planting plan, with species composition, number, and distribution shall be provided to and approved by Planning staff prior to final approval of the building permit. 6. A monitoring plan shall be enacted whereby a qualified biologist shall submit a report detailing the condition of the restoration area. This report shall be due on the anniversary date of the issuance of the building permit and shall be submitted annually for three years. 7. A survival rate of 90% of plantings is required each year during the three-year monitoring period. If survival falls below 90%, the applicant shall replant to restore the required survival percentage and shall extend the monitoring report the necessary period to address the replantings. 8. A restoration bond shall be established with Mason County in the amount necessary to perform the restoration. 9. No degradation of water quality shall occur as a result of this project. VIII. Choices of Action. 1. Approval of the Variance request. 2. Denial of the Variance request. 3. Conditional approval of the Variance request. 4. Postpone the decision for further information. SAMPLE MOTION: IX. I MOVE TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE THE VARIANCE, VAR2002-00048, specifically the removal of an existing residence and replacement with a new triple- wide manufactured home and new septic system within two stream buffers (Type I and Type III), and to authorize the chair to sign the Findings of Fact. RECEIVED Mason County OUL., 11 2002 Department of Community Development 426 W! CEDAR STs Resource Ordinance (Chapter 17.01) 411 N. 5th Street/ P.O. Box 578, Shelton, WA 98584 Environmental Permit Application Variance from Standards Information: * Mason County may consider requests to vary or adapt certain numerical standards of the Resource Ordinance where strict application of said standards would deprive property owners of reasonable use of their property. 1. Describ the specific mo ication from the terms of the Chapter required. i C q- • io ver G S a � 1 o' 2. Describe the reasons for the variance. a -v Ze-- A bo tees v' d— oca-hoH /ho rn e- ws - e 4 Ur a h TAP.y Ye'6C-41 / le, se home- -f o be- a 's /o n Y et s 6- '/-��f�,/ Y 4U14 i- 1r.�9,�L, ,'N tr,p Ile, w lde) `JM AU66Es7S' 3. No variance shall be granted unless the County makes findsngs 6f fact showing that certain 5�� circumstances exist. Please address each of the following standards and how the proposal -++t'-- i pertains to these circumstances. 1. The granting of the variance shall be consistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter and conditions shall be imposed to ensure compatibility with the surrounding conforming uses. LIVL h al/g, CL to C/6 01�- UIV /-'W g-s �i o 2. The granting of the variance shall not permit the establishment of any use that is prohibited by this Chapter. 7 .ej, 4-,A)I1/QI100i S v t/ COq q CIO. e 5, e. c ' !.�!/srz�vy Kzone- 3. The granting of this variance must be necessary for the reasonable use of the land or building and the variance as granted by the County is the minimum variance that shall accomplish this purpose. The findings shall fully set forth the circumstances by which this Chapter would deprive the applicant of a reasonable use of his land. Mere loss in value shall not justify a variation. e ' e, l e r fe Ae-r ✓YlaJo r e ccs e �,�� � r a ova s ve,il / ✓e' - Pro�rfy 4. The granting of the variance shall not impair or substantially diminish property values of surrounding neighborhood properties. Q Y 5. The granting of the variance shall not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other lands or buildings in the same designation. S ecu a v e, sic rl �, Signature Date RECEIVED 1JULA12002' 426 W1 CEDAR STI KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Ted & Leanna Keith P.O. Box 454 Belfair, WA 98528 Parcel No: 12320-12-01060 PREPARED BY: Wayne Daley Sr. Fisheries Biologist Daley Design April 4, 2002 KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Introduction Ted and Leanna Keith have an existing residence located at 1462 NE Old Belfair Highway (Figure 1) that is in failing condition. They are planning to replace the residence with a new home in the location shown on Figure 2. The existing residence is approximately 2,000 square feet in area and is located at the confluence of the Union River and Stream No. 0507 as shown on Figure 1,the Union River Drainage Basin Map (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Stream Catalogue for WRIA 15). Both of these systems are salmon bearing streams. Under the setback requirements of the Mason County Resource Ordinance (Section 17.01.110, Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas), it is not possible to site the proposed new residence due to the presence of the creek and the Union River(150 ft buffer+ 15 ft building setback). The 165-ft setback of the two streams combined covers the entire lot. This HMP is a recommendation for the placement of the house and new drain field system at locations with the least amount of impact on the site and within the defined variance requirements of the Resource Ordinance. In addition there will be recommendations for restrictions on land use such as lawns and vegetation removal. Fisheries Background Information The Hood Canal/Eastem Straight of Juan De Fuca Summer Chum Habitat Recovery Plan identifies several watersheds in the lower reaches of Hood Canal as either supporting or likely to support summer chum salmon(Oncorhynchus, keta) a species listed as threatened by National Marine Fisheries Service. The Union River is identified as the only system in Hood Canal and the Eastern Straight that has shown an increase in the spawning population of summer chum since 1978. The run size is identified as not at its historic level prior to the severe decline of summer chum in the early to mid 1970's. Summer chum utilization in the Union River is currently shown to be limited to the lower 2.5 miles of the river. Utilization of the tributaries in the lower reach of the Union is unknown. In addition to chum salmon, chinook salmon(O. tshawytscha) and coho salmon(O. kisutch) winter run steelhead trout(O. mykiss) and searun cutthroat trout (O. clarki) utilize this area of Hood Canal. A final species of consideration is bull trout/Dolly Varden. There may be some use of the area by migrating bull trout/Dolly Varden as they move in and out of the Union River. Attachment A is a summary of the listed species as published by NMFS and USFWS. The Union River at this site does support chum, chinook and coho salmon in addition to searun cutthroat trout. Although not identified in WDFW documents (1992 SASSI Report) as a defined stock, the Union River in this reach supports a population of steelhead trout(status is disputed between the tribes and WDFW). In addition there have been personal observations of winter run steelhead caught in the sport fishery at the mouth of the Union River. 1 Keith Habitat Management Plan Site Description Figures 3 and 4 are views of the South end of the existing residence adjacent to the Union River and the confluence of stream No. 0507. The tributary is clearly shown in Figure 3 and the riverbank can be seen in the background of Figure 4. The house is within 15 feet of both streams. Figure 5 is view of the North boundary of the site looking East. The area beyond the vehicles at the left side of the photo is the area where the new septic drainfield approved by the Mason County Health Dept. is to be located (Attachment B). The area to the right of the open space is the location of the proposed new residence (beyond the rail fence and trees). A view from the edge of the drain field shows the Union River bank at the edge of the grass (Figure 6). Figures 7 and 8 are views of the riverbank looking south toward the existing residence. The gravel in the river clearly indicated spawning activity at the time the photos were taken. These photos also show the area that will be planted with native vegetation to provide the needed restoration of the riparian buffer adjacent to the stream. Figure 9 is a view of the existing residence from across the Union River. The location of the existing residence will be planted with native vegetation enhancing the riparian habitat in this reach of the stream when the structure is removed. A view of the residence from the opposite direction shows an area adjacent to the small stream that will be planted with native vegetation where there is only grass at the present time (Figure 10). Proposed Project The Keith's are proposing to replace the existing residence with a new structure that will be located approximately 48-ft from the river and the small stream that enters the river at the south boundary of their property. In addition a new septic drainfield will be construct again in a location much further from the river than the existing drainfield. The new house will be positioned an equal distance from the river and the stream. The area of the footprint is proposed at approximately 3,000 sf. This is approximately 1,000 sf larger than the existing structure. There is an additional small structure (play house for grand children) of approximately 120 sf with old vehicles parked adjacent to the small structure east of the proposed new residence. The vehicles area located within 20 ft of the river bank and are often in the water during extreme flood events and they will be removed. Once the new structure is in place the old residence will be removed and the entire area, including the area adjacent to the play house, will be restored to natural riparian habitat. As shown on Figure 11 there will also be a significant amount of river bank and stream bank area planted with native vegetation as called out on the planting plan. This restoration will include a combination of trees and shrubs. Total new riparian area will exceed 15,000 sf. A final significant riparian area that will be set aside as a no touch area is the triangular portion of the property in the Southeast corner, across the Union River. This area is used as a picnic area and will remain as natural habitat. Total area of this section is approximately 15,000 sf bringing the total area of riparian restoration to approximately 30,000 sf (38% of the parcel) 2 Keith Habitat Management Plan Recommendations • Removal of non-native vegetation and plantings of native shrubs and trees (Figure 11) will enhance the area adjacent to the creek and the Union River. An attached plant list provides a variety of trees and shrubs to be considered. • Once the riparian area has been planted the area should remain as a no touch area where only danger trees are removed. • The downspouts from the rooftop should be directed to a sump that will infiltrate the water into the ground water system. • A silt fence should be constructed along the stream banks to prevent any silt or sediment from the construction activities from reaching the water. • Lawn chemicals should be limited to compost or organic fertilizers and no pesticides should be used on the lawn or plantings in the yard where rain runoff can carry the chemicals to the creek. • All trees and native riparian shrubs should be planted during the optimal season of November to March. No trees or shrubs should be planted during the dry cycle of the year. The trees and shrubs that are planted in the narrow buffer adjacent to the creek (West of the new residence) should be monitored during the dry period of the year and watered if they appear to be stressed by drought conditions. The supplier of the trees should be liable for the health of the tress for a period of no less than 3 years. Conclusions The overall environmental impact of the construction of a new residence on this site will be a significant increase in functional riparian habitat. The conversion of approximately 30,000 sf of non-native vegetation grass and man made structures to native trees and shrubs will offset the increase in area of the residence. The conversion rate of non-functional area to functional habitat is in excess of 10 to 1 (1,000sf of additional residence to 15,000 sf of new riparian habitat). The enhancement and development of riparian habitat adjacent to the stream and the Union River will provide an additional increment of temperature enhancement for the stream. In addition after several years of growth the new trees will be a source of new large woody debris for the Union River and the adjacent stream. A final and critical element is the reduced potential for chemicals used for lawn and yard activities reaching the river or the stream by the removal of lawn area and the increased bio- degradation that will occur with the increased buffer dimensions. 3 Keith Habitat Management Plan References Cavender,T.M. 1978. Taxonomy and distribution of the bull trout Salvelinus confluentus(Suckley), from the American Northwest. California Fish and Game 64:139-174. Chan, J. 2000. Personal communication with Jeff Chan of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS)by Wayne Daley of Daley Designs. Haas, G.R. and J.D. McPhail. 1991. Systematics and distributions of Dolly Varden(Salvelinus malma) and bull trout(S. confluentus)in North America. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48:2191-2211. Healey,M.C. 1991. Life history of chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). In: Groot, C. and L. Margolis [eds]. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. University of British Columbia Press. Vancouver, British Columbia. 564 pp. NMFS. 1996. Making Endangered Species Act determinations of effect for individual or grouped actions at the watershed scale. Prepared by NMFS, Environmental and Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation Branch. August 1996. NMFS. 1998. U.S. Department of Commerce, Technical Memoranda on the Status of Chinook (Meyers, et al. 1998) Point No Point Treaty Council. 1999. Draft Hood Canal/Eastern Straight of Juan De Fuca Summer Chum Habitat Recovery Plan Rieman, B.E. and J.D. McIntyre. 1993. Demographic and habitat requirements of bull trout Salvelinus confluentus. General Technical Report INT-GTR-302. Ogden,UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Sandercock, F.C. 1991. Life history of coho salmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch). In: Groot, C. and L. Margolis [eds]. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. University of British Columbia Press. Vancouver, British Columbia. 564 pp. USFWS. 1998a. Bull Trout Interim Conservation Guidance. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. December 9, 1998 USFWS. 1998b. Bull Trout Facts(Salvelinus confluentus). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. May 1998. WDFW. 1975. A catalog of Washington streams and salmon utilization,Volume 1, Puget Sound Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries. November 1975. WDFW. 1992. Salmon and Steelhead Stock Inventory(SASSI)(WDFW and Western Washington Treaty Tribes, 1992)Updated on the WDFW web site in March 2000. WDFW. 1998. 1998 Washington salmonid stock inventory: bull trout/Dolly Varden. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, WA. WDFW. 1999. Washington's native chars. http://wNxiN.wa.gov/wdfi,,-/outreach/fishing/char.htm, referenced October 19, 1999. 4 Keith Habitat Management Plan UNION RIVER DRAINAGES 8 o Qa n O�CvI � 6 / e I J� � � ' -04 —Mm- 7am- 0 4 PROJECT SITE 00 SYMBOLS PASSABLE BARRIERS-IMPASSABLE C, --lTL Cascades Beaver Dams "02 Log J0,rS Dams 40�4 Salmon Hatchery Passage Facility Slrecm Gage -I"m Poi Z;—6 5,ream We DALEY DESIGN KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN FIGURE 1 1646 JEANNETTE PL Bainbridge Is. WA 98110 AREA MAP 11/11/2001 DATE - � .{ .Y .., yam._. • _ _� .-� - y ems_. 4�}. tom. ,?'• > y =: mac.- `� .♦`is "��'�' ,. �.i� z -r Ll a `t FIGURE 3. SOUTH VIEW OF SITE AT ACCESS ROAD BRIDGE. ts4'tir/ r. 1•(. ' ',K•djry=,}mot �* � .� �` �. �`"_ ` -,�- ' ._�.. ' .�.� ,a �j ,, � ram.:.;. a r i• �w��"'�'� 4�� 's'� - A V •4 FIGURE 4. EAST VIEW AT SOUTH SIDE OF EXISTING RESIDENCE . DALEY DESIGN KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1646 JEANNETTE PL Bainbridge Is. WA 98110 SITE PHOTOS DATE 04/04/2002 s,. r , y PF- N,. FIGURE 5. EAST VIEW OF SITE ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE. A 00, .ER• S'y s� 'R[Y'z'�,� of -''�� .�-.. ,�, � i-"s EWA Al le F FIGURE 6. EAST VIEW AT DRAINFIELD LOCATION . DALEY DESIGN KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN j 1646 JEANNETTE PL Bainbridge Is. WA 98110 SITE PHOTOS DATE 04/04/2002 FIGURE 7. SOUTH VIEW OF UNION RIVER BANK E3 r rot' sb 7T �-';71 Z' 4r ik" Zap J Sw� f a Y firk `-. ~ J . �. � 4ry slow FIGURE 8. SOUTH VIEW ALONG RIVER BANK WITH EXISTING RESIDENCE AND AREA TO BE PLANTED AFTER CONSTRUCTION DALEY DESIGN KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1646 JEANNETTE PL j Bainbridge Is. WA 98110 SITE PHOTOS DATE 04/04/2002 t fa -.4 /. - KwYiy - - DT.T. - Ir=TT —71 FIGURE 9. NORTHEAST VIEW ACROSS THE UNION RIVER. A z N• " +tom ,�:c-., s.Rslts..s"m+a_�fe�"�s.���f. -��a._se. ----- --• _ F FIGURE 10. SOUTH VIEW ALONG WEST PROPERTY LINE. DALEY DESIGN KEITH HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1646 JEANNETTE PL Bainbridge Is. WA 98110 SITE PHOTOS DATE 04/04/2002 APPENDIX A Protected Resources NOAA Fisheries National Marine Fisheries Servile CHINOOK SALMON Oncorhynchus tshaviytscha LISTING STATUS: CHINOOK Select an ESU name below to view detailed information about each ESU* - including further links to ESU maps,Federal Register Notices,and Status Reviews. *An Evolutionarily Significant Unit or"ESU'is a distinctive group of Pacific salmon,steelhead,or sea-run cutthroat trout. CIO" ESU Name Status Sacramento River Winter-run Endangered Snake River Fall-run Threatened Deschutes River Summer/Fall-run Not Warranted Snake River SprinaSummer-run Threatened Central Valley Spring-run Threatened Central Valley Fall and Late Fall-run Candidate/Not Warranted Southern Oregon and Northern California Not Warranted Coastal California Coastal Threatened Puget Sound Threatened Lower Columbia River Threatened Upper Willamette River Threatened Upper Columbia River Spring-run Endangered Upper Klamath-Trinity Rivers Not Warranted Oregon Coast Not Warranted Washington Coast Not Warranted Mid-Columbia River Spring-run Not Warranted Upper Columbia River Summer/Fall-run Not Warranted Home I Fact Sheets I Federal Register Notices i ESA Status Pages Maps I Reports&Publications I Search I Contact Us Updated April 18, 2000 1 of 1 04/06/2002 1:06 PM . Protected Resources NOAA Fisheries National Marine Fisheries Service CHUM SALMON oncorhynchus keta LISTING STATUS: CHUM Select an ESU name below to view detailed information about each ESU* - including further links to ESU maps,Federal Register Notices,and Status Reviews. *An Evolutionarily Significant Unit or"ESU"is a distinctive group of Pacific salmon,steelhead,or sea-run cutthroat trout. ESU Name Status Hood Canal Summer-run Threatened Columbia River Threatened Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Not Warranted Pacific Coast Not Warranted Home I Fact Sheets I Federal Register Notices I ESA Status Pages Mans I Reports&Publications I Search I Contact Us Updated April 18, 2000 1 of 1 04/06/2002 1:06 PM l.UllV J7WllVll L.JK LlSIVI�J1oLW v ..v..wu... Protected Resources NOAA Fisheries National Marine Fisheries Service COHO SALMON Oncorhynchus kisutch LISTING STATUS: COHO Select an ESU name below to view detailed information about each ESU* - including further links to ESU maps, Federal Register Notices, and Status Reviews. *An Evolutionarily Significant Unit or"ESU'is a distinctive group of Pacific salmon,steelhead, or sea-run cutthroat trout. ESU Name Status Central California Threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Threatened Coasts Oreon Coast Threatened Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Candidate Lower Columbia River/Southwest Candidate Washiny,ton Olympic Peninsula Not Warranted Home I Fact Sheets I Federal Register Notices ESA Status Pales Maps I Reports&Publications I Search Contact Us Updated December 26, 2001 1 of 1 04/06/2002 1:07 PM V.J.Laswa verreoraret%mmat Jpmruc -vinntvy .a,.a,w.u.a..,..n.Y ----r- ----------o---- --r-o-- ---- _ T Salmon, Chinook(CA Central Valley spring-run) (Oncorhynchus tshmi yi.scha) T Salmon, Chinook(fall Snake R-)( Oncorhynchtts tshaicytsc•ha) T Salmon,chinook(upper Willamette R-)(C)ncorhynchu.s tshast•vtscha) T Salmon, chinook(spring upper Columbia R-)( Oncorhvnchus tshaiwvxscha) T Salmon, chinook(CA coastal)(Oncorlryrtchus ishm+ ty scha) T Salmon, chum(Columbia R-)(Oncorh•nchus keta) T Salmon,chum(summer-run Hood Canal)(Oncorhi.°nchus keta) T Salmon,coho(OR,CA pop.)(Oncorhj:nchus kistttch) T Salmon,coho (central CA coast)(Oncorhjnchits kisutch) E Salmon, sockeye U.S.A. (Snake River,ID stock wherever found.)( Onc:orh1,11chus nerka) T Salmon, sockeye U.S.A. (Ozette Lake,WA)(Oncorhynchus nerka) T Sculpin,pygmy(Cottus pY;-nrtaeus•) T Shiner, Arkansas River(Arkansas R-Basin)(Notropis girardi) T Shiner,beautiful (Cyprinella lorrnostz) T Shiner, blue(C-ypi-inella caerulea) E Shiner,Cahaba Notropis cahabae) E Shiner, Cape Fear(Notropis niekistocholas) E Shiner,palezone(Notropis albizonatus) T Shiner,Pecos bluntnose(Notropis sirnus pecos-en.si.s•) E Shiner,Topeka(NoiLL)pis toLeka) T Silverside,Waccamaw(Menieict to tensa) T Smelt, delta(Hij)omesus iranspaciticus) T Spikedace(/Lfeda f id ida) T Spinedace,Big Spring(Lepidonmeda mg1hHzinis•pratensis) T Spinedace,Little Colorado(Lepidotneda Otiata) E Spinedace,White River( LeLydorneda albivalli.$) T Splittail, Sacramento(Pngonichthts macrolepidotus) E Springfish,Hiko White River((:renichrhys haileygrandi.s•) T Springfish,Railroad Valley(Crenichthi-.s nevadae) E Springfish, White River( Crenichth)a haileyi baileyi) E Steelhead(southern CA coast)(Oncorhynchus mvkiss) E Steelhead(upper Columbia R- Basin)(Oncorhynchus mvkiss) T Steelhead(central CA coast)(Oncorhynchus mvkiss) T Steelhead(south central CA coast)(Oncorhynchus mvkiss) T Steelhead(Central Valley CA)( Oncorh mehtt.s mvkiss) T Steelhead(upper Willamette R)(Oncorh1Lnehus mvkiss) T Steelhead northern CA(Oncorhynchus mvkiss) T Steelhead(middle Columbia R)(Oncorhynchus►nvkrss) T Steelhead(lower Columbia R-)(Oncorhynchus mvkiss) T Steelhead(Snake R- Basin)( Oncorhynchus mvkiss) E Stickleback, unarmored threespine(Gasteromeu.s•aculeants irilliarnsoni) E Sturgeon, Alabama(ScaLhirhknchtrs.suttkusi) T Sturgeon,Gulf(Acipenser oxyinchus desotoi) E Sturgeon,pallid(Scaphir h ynchus al bus) E Sturgeon, shortnose(.4cipenser brevirostrum) E Sturgeon, white U.S.A. (ID,MT), Canada(B.C.),(Kootenai R. system) (_Ac•ipenser transmontanus) E Sucker,June(Chasm istes lionis) E Sucker,Lost River(Deltistes hmants) E Sucker,Modoc(Catostonuts•nticrtttu) 8 of 9 05/15/2001 8:35 AM U.S.Listea verwomie F►I mm Jpm-5 ncpul,v7 a .,awr ----r- ------ -o- . .. . - E Sucker, razorback(Xvrauchen te.ranus) T Sucker, Santa Ana(3 CA river basins)(Catostontus santaanae) E Sucker, shortnose(Chasntistes bre0rostrls) T Sucker,Warner( ' tostorrms lvamerensis) E Topminnow, Gila(U.S.A. only)(f'(jeciliousis occ•identalis•) T Trout, Apache(Oncor hynchits a��ac`he) T Trout, bull (U.S.A.,coterminous, lower 48 states)(Sahyelimis contluentzts) E Trout,Gila(Oncorhyrzchtts lae) T Trout,greenback cutthroat(Oncot hvnchtrs clan ? sronrtas) T Trout,Lahontan cutthroat(Ortcorhyrrcfrtts clarki henshativi) T Trout,Little Kern golden(Oncorhunchus aauabontta whrtel) T Trout,Paiute cutthroat(Oncorhv=tchus c•larki selenhis-) E Woundfin(except Gila R drainage, AZ,NN>7(Pla�,optet-us arXentissinnts) XN Woundfin [XN] (P1agx uterus ar(,Terrti.ssinm.Y) 9 of 9 05/15/2001 8:35 AM APPENDIX B