lower imnaha rangeland analysis feis aquatics biological...

Lower Imnaha Rangeland Analysis FEIS

Aquatics Biological Evaluation For

Snake River Steelhead

Snake River Chinook Salmon

Columbia River Bull Trout

February 2, 2015

Prepared by: Alan Miller Fisheries Biologist Wallowa Ranger District Joseph Oregon

Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1

Analysis Area .................................................................................................................. 2

ESA Listed Fish Species within Allotments ................................................................... 4

Snake River Steelhead (Threatened) ........................................................................... 4

Snake River Basin Fall Chinook Salmon (Threatened) .............................................. 8

SR Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Threatened) .................................................. 12

CR Bull Trout (Threatened) ...................................................................................... 16

Summary Of ESA-listed Fish Species Distribution .................................................. 23

COW CREEK ALLOTMENT ...................................................................................... 24

A. Allotment Description and Existing Condition ................................................... 24

B. Proposed Action .................................................................................................. 35

C. Species/Critical Habitat Presence on the Allotment ........................................... 37

D. Analysis of Potential Effects ............................................................................... 37

F. Determination of Effects ....................................................................................... 56

G. Magnuson-Stevens Act ....................................................................................... 58

H. Summary of Determinations ............................................................................... 59

LONE PINE ALLOTMENT ......................................................................................... 60


B. Proposed Action .................................................................................................. 69

C. Species/Critical Habitat Presence on the Allotment ........................................... 70

D. Analysis of Potential Effects ............................................................................... 71

F. Determination of Effects ....................................................................................... 91

G. Magnuson-Stevens Act ....................................................................................... 93

H. Summary of Determinations ............................................................................... 94

RHODES CREEK ALLOTMENT ............................................................................... 95


B. Proposed Action ................................................................................................ 111

C. Species/Critical Habitat Presence on the Allotment ......................................... 114

D. Analysis of Potential Effects ............................................................................. 115

F. Determination of Effects ..................................................................................... 138

G. Magnuson-Stevens Act ..................................................................................... 141

H. Summary of Determinations ............................................................................. 141

TOOMEY ALLOTMENT .......................................................................................... 142

A. Allotment Description and Existing Condition ................................................. 142

B. Proposed Action ................................................................................................ 151

C. Species/Critical Habitat Presence on the Allotment ......................................... 152

E. Analysis of Potential Effects ............................................................................. 153

F. Determination of Effects ..................................................................................... 169

G. Magnuson-Stevens Act ..................................................................................... 171

H. Summary of Determinations ............................................................................. 171

Cumulative Effects ...................................................................................................... 172

References ................................................................................................................... 182

Appendix A – Riparian Habitat Conditions ................................................................ 191

Deep Creek .............................................................................................................. 191

Cow Creek .............................................................................................................. 204

Rhodes Creek .......................................................................................................... 214

Lightning Creek ...................................................................................................... 216

Introduction This Biological Evaluation (BE) for fish and aquatic invertebrates satisfies requirements of Forest

Service Manual 2672.4 requiring the Forest Service to review all planned, funded, executed or permitted programs and activities for possible effects on proposed, endangered, threatened or sensitive species by completing a BE. The BE process is intended to review the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis Project (LIRA) in sufficient detail to determine effects of alternatives on species in this evaluation and ensure proposed management actions would not:

• likely jeopardize the continued existence, or cause adverse modification of habitat, for a species that is proposed or listed as endangered or threatened by the USFWS or NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service; or

• contribute to the loss of viability for species designated as sensitive by USDA Forest Service, Region 6, or any native or desired, non-native species; nor cause any species to move toward federal listing (FSM 2672.4).

The following sources were used during the prefield review phase to determine the presence or

absence of aquatic ESA-listed or Region 6 sensitive species in the effects area for the LIRA: • Wallowa-Whitman N.F. GIS database • Regional Forester’s (R6) special status species list (Dated 12/01/2011) • ODFW stream survey and fish survey reports • Forest Service stream survey reports, Wallowa Valley RD (on file at Joseph, OR) • Oregon Natural Heritage Program (ORNHP) database • Natural Heritage Conservation database (Biosource) • Oregon Native Fish Report (2005 Public Review Draft) • Species lists from USFWS (Wallowa County, 06/09/2012) and NMFS (08/11/2011)

Previously, an Aquatics Specialist Report/BE was developed for the LIRA Draft Environmental Impact Statement. During the Endangered Species Act consultation for the LIRA the Services requested that the USFS review effects determinations for the action alternatives on ESA-listed fish populations. As a result of that request effects to ESA-listed fish species were reanalyzed. Effects for Alternative 1 (No Action) or effects to Region 6 sensitive species were not reanalyzed (See Aquatics Specialist/BE for the LIRA DEIS).

The four action alternatives, Alternatives B, C, D, and E, will authorize various levels of grazing on

the four allotments in the action area over the next 10 years. Differences between the four action alternatives are driven by upland conditions and rare plants. Livestock impacts to riparian areas and aquatic habitat are likely to be essentially the same for the four grazing alternatives which are typified by the current conditions of riparian areas under Alternative B (current management). Therefore, effects of the four action alternatives on ESA-listed fish species will be similar.

1

Analysis Area The LIRA allotments are located on the Wallowa-Whitman NF (WWNF) in northeast Oregon; entirely

within Wallowa County. The LIRA allotments are generally located in Township 4 North, Ranges 48 and 49 East; Township 3 North, Ranges 48 and 49 East; and Township 2 North, Ranges 48 and 49 East, Willamette Meridian. Three allotments, Cow Creek, Rhodes Creek and Toomey are located in Imnaha River drainage (Figure 1). Lone Pine Allotment is located in both the Snake River and Imnaha River drainages (Figure 1). The action area is located in portions of three watersheds and twelve subwatersheds (Table 1).

Table 1. Location of Allotments in the Lower Imnaha Rangeland Analysis by subwatershed. The Snake River-Dug Bar and Deep Creek subwatersheds are located in the Snake River drainage. All other subwatersheds are located in the Imnaha River drainage. *Snake River subwatersheds

Subwatershed SWS Code

Allotment

Cow Creek Rhodes Creek Toomey Lone Pine

Imnaha River-Thorn Creek 170601020510 X X X

Lower Cow Creek 170601020509 X X

Lower Lightning Creek 170601020507 X

Sleepy Creek 170601020506 X

Upper Lightning Creek 170601020505 X

Snake River-Dug Bar* 170601010305 X

Deep Creek* 170601010303 X

2

Figure 1. Location of Analysis Area for the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis.

3

ESA Listed Fish Species within Allotments The following ESA-listed fish species are present on the allotment: Snake River (SR) steelhead, SR

spring/summer Chinook salmon, SR fall Chinook salmon, and Columbia River (CR) bull trout. This BA also initiates consultation for critical habitat for SR steelhead (2005 rule), SR spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon (1993 rule), and CR bull trout (2010 rule). Consultation for these species and critical habitats may be reinitiated prior to 2025 in the event that grazing activities are modified as a result of reauthorizing grazing on the allotment through the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process.

Snake River Steelhead (Threatened) SR steelhead were listed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as threatened under the

federal ESA on March 25, 1999 (64 FR 15417). SR steelhead are widely distributed in the action area (Figure ). SR steelhead are also a WWNF management indicator species for aquatic habitat. Critical habitat for SR steelhead was designated on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52630). Critical habitat is present in the action area.

Life History Steelhead trout are the anadromous form of Oncorhynchus mykiss. Adult summer steelhead migrate

from the ocean to freshwater from June through September. Adults overwinter in large rivers while sexually maturing. Adults resume migration to spawning streams in early spring the following year. Spawning generally takes place from March through May. Eggs incubate during the spring and emergence occurs from June through July depending on water temperatures. Juveniles typically spend two to three years in freshwater. Juvenile steelhead generally utilize habitats with higher water velocities than juvenile Chinook salmon. In winter, juvenile steelhead utilize deep pools with abundant cover. Juvenile steelhead may reside in their natal stream for their entire freshwater rearing phase or may migrate to other streams within a watershed. Smoltification occurs during late winter and juvenile steelhead emigrate to the ocean during spring, normally in their second year. Smoltification is the process where juvenile salmonids undergo physiological, morphological and behavioral changes that enable them to live in salt water environments. Summer steelhead populations in the Grande Ronde and Imnaha river systems normally spend 1 to 2 years maturing in the ocean.

Abundance Steelhead are widely distributed in the Lower Imnaha watershed including throughout the action area

(Figure 2). The Nez Perce Tribe monitors steelhead escapement to streams in the Imnaha Subbasin including lower Imnaha tributaries. Natural escapement to the Imnaha Subbasin has averaged about 3,270 fish for 2011 and 2012 (NPT data). Cow Creek and Lightning Creek accounted for about 10% of

4

the natural escapement to the Imnaha Subbasin in 2011 (Harbeck and Espinoza, 2012). As a distinct subpopulation, the lower Imnaha tributaries (Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Horse Creek) contributed to about 17% of the total natural escapement to the Imnaha Subbasin in 2011. Corral Creek and Fence Creek also part of the Lower Imnaha subpopulation but had not been monitored for adult escapement in 2011.

Within the action area, NPT has monitored steelhead escapement into Cow Creek and Lightning Creek

in the past (Young and Hatch, 2012). The mean escapement into Cow Creek was 77 adults (range 27 to 128) from 2001 to 2007 (Table 2). The mean escapement into Lightning Creek was 126 adults (range 36 to 232) from 2000 to 2007. The escapement levels appear to be asynchronous between the two streams.

Table 2. Escapement Estimates for Steelhead for Cow Creek (2001 – 2007) and Lightning Creek (2000 – 2007). Data Source: Young and Hatch 2012.

Stream Year

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Mean

Cow Creek N/D 87 64 104 128 88 27 39 77

Lightning Creek 36 141 232 220 119 70 95 93 126

Distribution Within the Imnaha Subbasin, action area provides about 21.8 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for

SR steelhead which represents about 6.7% of the total spawning and rearing habitat available in the subbasin. The action area provides about 25% of the spawning and rearing habitat for the Lower Imnaha Subpopulation. Within the action area, Forest Service lands provide about 61% of the spawning and rearing habitat (Table 3). An additional 0.5 miles of spawning and rearing habitat is present in Deep Creek outside of the Imnaha Subbasin.

Table 3. Miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead in the Imnaha Subbasin and action area. Does not include 0.5 miles in Deep Creek which is outside the Imnaha Subbasin.

Area Miles of Spawning and Rearing Habitat

Imnaha Subbasin 324.9

Lower Imnaha Subpopultaion Area 89.1

Action Area Total 21.8

Action Area Private 8.5

Action Area Forest Service 13.3

5

About 13.8 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead is present on the four allotments in the action area (Table 4).

Table 4. Miles of SR steelhead spawning and rearing habitat in the action area by allotment. Based on StreamNet Data. Includes 0.5 miles in Deep Creek which is outside the Imnaha Subbasin.

Allotment Miles of Spawning and Rearing Habitat

Cow Creek 4.6

Rhodes Creek 8.7

Toomey 0.0

Lone Pine 0.5

6

Figure 2. Distribution of SR steelhead in in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area.

7

Critical Habitat Status and Description Critical habitat was designated for the SR steelhead DPS on February 16, 2000 (65 FR 7764) and

revised on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52808). Critical habitat includes the stream channels within the designated stream reaches, and includes a lateral extent as defined by the ordinary high-water line (33 CFR 319.11). In areas where ordinary high-water line has not been defined, the lateral extent is defined by the bankfull elevation. Bankfull elevation is the level at which water begins to leave the channel and move into the floodplain and is reached at a discharge which generally has a recurrence interval of 1 to 2 years on the annual flood series. Critical habitat in lake areas is defined by the perimeter of the water body as displayed on standard 1:24,000 scale topographic maps or the elevation of ordinary high water, whichever is greater. In estuarine and near shore marine areas critical habitat includes areas contiguous with the shoreline from the line of extreme high water out to a depth no greater than 30 meters relative to mean lower low water.

There is about 19.7 miles of critical habitat for SR steelhead on NFS lands in the action area (Table 5).

Table 5. Miles of Steelhead Critical Habitat Present in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis Action Area. Habitat use types: SR=spawning and rearing, FMO=feeding, migration, overwinter.

Stream Habitat Use Type Miles

Cow Creek SR 5.6

Deep Creek SR 0.5

Imnaha River FMO 5.9

Lightning Creek SR 5.2

Sleepy Creek SR 2.5

Total 19.7

Snake River Basin Fall Chinook Salmon (Threatened) SR fall Chinook salmon were listed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as threatened

under the federal ESA on 04/22/1992 (57 FR 14653; corrected on 06/03/1992 - 57 FR 23458). SR utilized the Imnaha River and Snake River in the action area (Figure 1). Critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon was designated on 12/02/1992 (57 FR 57051). Critical habitat is present in the action area. SR fall Chinook salmon utilize the Imnaha River and Snake River for spawning and rearing in the action area (Figure 3).

Life History The life history of SR fall Chinook salmon is classified as an ocean-type life history, migrating

downstream towards the ocean almost immediately as subyearling fry or parr and may spend an extended period in estuarine habitats. Ocean-type fish have a late return as adults, sexually maturing while in the ocean and returning to freshwater late summer or fall and spawning almost immediately.

8

SR fall Chinook salmon spend three to five years in the Pacific Ocean prior to returning to freshwater

to spawn. Adults enter the Columbia River from August through November and proceed upstream through the Snake River reaching the Imnaha River vicinity from October through November. Unlike SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, spawning takes place once the adults reach spawning areas. Also unlike SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, juvenile fall Chinook emerge in the spring, rear for two to three months and then emigrate seaward. Rearing primarily takes place in the Snake River.

Abundance Redd counts are conducted annually by an interagency group (NPT, IPC, USFWS, WDFW). In 2012,

85 redds were counted in the Lower Imnaha (mouth to town of Imnaha). From 1991 to 1999 the mean number of redds observed in the Imnaha River was 4.8 redds, ranging from 0 to 13. Since 2000, the mean number of redds observed in the Imnaha River has been 48.6, ranging from 9 to 132. The lowest redd count for the Imnaha River, since intensive surveys began was zero redds in 1994, while the highest count was 132 in 2010.

In 2012, 1828 redds were counted in the Snake River. From 1991 to 1999 the mean number of redds

observed in the Snake River was 113.4 redds, ranging from 47 to 373. Since 2000, the mean number of redds observed in the Snake River has been 1577.6 redds, ranging from 346 to 2944. The lowest redd count for the Snake River, since intensive, cooperative surveys began, was 47 redds in 1991, while the highest count was 2,944 redds in 2010.

Table 6. Redd Count Data for SR Fall Chinook Salmon in the Imnaha River and Snake River, 2000 to 2012. (Source IPC data).

Stream 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Imnaha River 9 38 72 44 35 36 36 17 68 36 132 24 85

Snake River 346 710 1113 1524 1709 1442 1025 1117 1819 2095 2944 2837 1828

Distribution Within the Imnaha Subbasin, the action area provides about 5.9 miles of spawning and rearing habitat

for SR fall Chinook salmon which represents about 31% of the total spawning and rearing habitat available in the subbasin. Within the action area, Forest Service lands provide about 63% of the spawning and rearing habitat (Table 7). An additional 7.9 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon is present in the Snake River the action area.

9

Table 7. Miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon in the lower Imnaha Subbasin (Below the town of Imnaha).

Area Miles of Spawning and Rearing Habitat

Imnaha Subbasin 19.0

Lower Imnaha Subpopultaion Area 19.0

Action Area Total 5.9

Action Area Private 2.2

Action Area Forest Service 3.7

About 11.6 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon are present on the four

allotments in the action area (Table 8).

Table 8. Miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon in the action area by allotment. Based on StreamNet Data. Rhode Creek and Toomey allotments are adjacent to the Imnaha River. Lone Pine Allotment is adjacent to both the Imnaha and Snake rivers.

Allotment Miles of Spawning and Rearing Habitat

Cow Creek 0.0

Rhodes Creek 1.3

Toomey 1.3

Lone Pine 9.0

10

Figure 3. Distribution of SR fall Chinook salmon in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area.

11

Critical Habitat Status and Description Critical habitat was designated for the SR fall Chinook salmon ESU on December 28, 1993 (58 FR

68543). Critical habitat consists of river reaches of the Columbia, Snake, and Salmon Rivers, and all tributaries of the Snake and Salmon Rivers presently or historically accessible to SR fall Chinook salmon (except reaches above impassible natural falls and Dworshak and Hells Canyon Dams).

Critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon is described as “all accessible stream reaches” by NOAA

Fisheries (64 FR 57399). Using accessible Category 1 streams as a surrogate for “all accessible stream reaches”, there are about 41.3 miles of critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon in the action area. Two streams in the action area currently provide habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon; totaling about 13.8 miles (Table 9).

Table 9. Miles of Occupied Critical Habitat on NFS Lands for SR Fall Chinook Salmon in Lower Imnaha Range Analysis Area.


Imnaha River Spawning and Rearing 5.9

Snake River Spawning and Rearing 7.9

Total 13.8

SR Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Threatened) Spring/summer Chinook salmon, Snake River ESU, were listed as threatened under the ESA on April

22, 1992 (57 CFR 14653; see correction on June 3, 1992, 57 CFR 23458); threatened status reaffirmed on June 28, 2005 (70 CFR 37160).. Migratory habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon is present in the action area (Figure 4). Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for spring/summer Chinook salmon has been designated by NMFS in the action area.

SR spring/summer Chinook salmon seasonally present in the Imnaha River in the action area belong to

the Imnaha River and Big Sheep Creek spring/summer Chinook salmon populations of the Grande Ronde/Imnaha spring/summer Chinook salmon major population group (MPG). See Figure for the distribution of SR spring/summer Chinook salmon in the action area.

Limited spawning and rearing habitat is present in the Snake River subbasin upstream of the

confluence of the Imnaha River. Historically, spring/summer Chinook salmon spawned and reared in tributaries of the Snake River above the Hells Dam Complex and below Shoshone Falls (e.g. Powder River, Malheur River, and Weiser River). Limited spawning habitat is currently available in Granite Creek and Sheep Creek. SR spring/summer Chinook salmon migrating through the Snake River in the action area are primarily of hatchery origin and are migrating to the base of Hells Canyon Dam.

12

Life History The life history of SR spring/summer Chinook salmon is classified as a stream-type life history, with

juveniles rearing in freshwater streams, undergoing smoltification as yearlings, and quickly migrating to the Pacific Ocean. Stream-type fish have an early adult return migration, returning to freshwater in the spring and holding in freshwater over the summer while sexually maturing and spawning in early fall.

Juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon are generally associated with pool habitats. An increase in

sediment lowers spawning success and reduces the quantity and quality of pool and interstitial habitat. Other important habitat features include healthy riparian vegetation, undercut banks and LWD.

Adult spring/summer Chinook salmon return to the Imnaha River during the spring. Adults hold in

deep pools above the action area during the summer while sexually maturing. Spawning occurs during fall, generally from August through September. Spawning occurs above the town of Imnaha in the subbasin. Embryos incubate over the winter and emergence occurs the following spring. Juveniles generally rear for one year in freshwater and use habitats with slower water velocities (pools, glides, and side channels). Juveniles overwinter in deep pools with abundant cover. Some juveniles will migrate from upstream areas in the Imnaha subbasin into the action area to rear during winter months. Winter rearing areas include the Imnaha River, Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Smoltification and emigration to the ocean occurs in the spring of their second year. The ocean rearing phase lasts from one to three years.

Abundance Spring/summer Chinook salmon are widely distributed in the Imnaha Subbasin with spawning habitat

present in Big Sheep Creek and the Imnaha River above Freezeout Creek. Spring/summer Chinook salmon in the subbasin are managed as one population and a tribal and sport fishery occurs occasionally on the Imnaha River.

The Imnaha local population is currently rated as at high risk of extinction. The proposed minimum

abundance and productivity thresholds for recovery of the Imnaha MPG is an abundance of 1000 and minimum productivity of 1.45 (Draft Recovery Plan). Spawner estimates from 2001 to 2012 exceed the abundance threshold 7 of the 12 years with a mean of (ODFW unpublished data).

ODFW conducts annual redds counts and weir counts to estimate trends in escapement for the

subbasin (Imnaha Subbasin Plan 2004). The Imnaha spring/summer Chinook salmon population exceeds benchmarks for distribution, abundance, productivity, and independence from hatchery influence (ODFW 2005). Recent data (since 2000) indicates higher than average number of redds for the last three years compared to the mean number of 561 redds from the period of 2000 to 2012 (Table 10).

13

Table 10. Redd Count Data for the Imnaha Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon Population. (Source ODFW unpublished data).

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Redds 261 635 1111 727 495 349 235 252 536 391 751 813 738

Distribution SR spring/summer Chinook salmon are seasonally present in the action area. Both the Snake River

and Imnaha River serve as migration routes to spawning areas upstream of the action area (Figure 4). There are 11.6 miles of migratory and rearing habitat in the Imnaha and Snake Rivers in the action area. There is an additional 2.2 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile SR spring/summer Chinook salmon in Lightning Creek and Cow Creek on the Cow Creek and Rhodes Creek allotments in the action area.

Table 11. Miles of migration and rearing habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon in the action area by allotment. Based on StreamNet Data. Rhode Creek and Toomey allotments are adjacent to the Imnaha River. Lone Pine Allotment is adjacent to both the Imnaha and Snake rivers.

Allotment Miles of Migration Habitat

Rearing Habitat

Cow Creek 0.0 4.6

Rhodes Creek 2.3 2.3

Toomey 2.5 0.0

Lone Pine 9.0 0.0

14

Figure 4. Distribution of SR spring/summer Chinook salmon in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. Spawning habitat is not present in the analysis area.

15

Critical Habitat Status and Description Critical habitat was designated for the SR spring/summer Chinook salmon ESU on December 28,

1993 (58 FR 68543) and revised on October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57399). Critical habitat consists of river reaches of the Columbia, Snake, and Salmon Rivers, and all tributaries of the Snake and Salmon Rivers presently or historically accessible to SR spring/summer Chinook salmon (except reaches above impassible natural falls and Dworshak and Hells Canyon Dams).

Critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon is described as “all accessible stream reaches”

by NOAA Fisheries (64 FR 57399). Using accessible Category 1 streams as a surrogate for “all accessible stream reaches”, there are about 41.3 miles of critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon in the action area. Two streams in the action area currently provide habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon; totaling about 13.8 miles (Table 12).

Table 1. Miles of Occupied Critical Habitat on NFS for SR Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon in Lower Imnaha Range Analysis Area.


Imnaha River Migration 5.9

Snake River Migration 7.9

Total 13.8

CR Bull Trout (Threatened) CR bull trout were listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as threatened under the

federal ESA on June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31647). Bull trout utilize the Imnaha River and Snake River in the action area (Figure 5). Critical habitat for CR bull trout was most recently designated on January 14, 2010 (75 FR 2270). Critical habitat is present in the action area.

The Imnaha River local population is present seasonally in the action area. The Imnaha River local

population consists of resident and fluvial life histories. The 5-Year Status review rated the Imnaha River population as stable with “potential risk” of extinction (http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/5-yr%20Review/BTFINAL_42508.pdf, accessed 3/20/2013).

The following information on the Imnaha local populations is from the latest version of the draft

recovery plan (http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/recovery.html, accessed 3/21/2013; see original document for citations):

Depending on the season, bull trout can be found throughout the Imnaha River (see Buchanan et al. 1997). For examples, summer distribution in the mainstem Imnaha River extends from at least river kilometer 64 (river mile 39.8) to the Forks at river kilometer 118 (river mile 73.3), whereas fall and spring distributions include the lower Imnaha and Snake Rivers. Bull trout have been

16

http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/5-yr%20Review/BTFINAL_42508.pdf

http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/5-yr%20Review/BTFINAL_42508.pdf

http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/recovery.html

observed throughout the mainstem of the Imnaha River as well as in the South Fork, Middle Fork, and North Fork of the Imnaha. In the Middle Fork, upstream distribution appears to be limited by a waterfall that is approximately 2 river kilometers (1.2 river miles) from the mouth. Bull trout have also been observed in Bear, Blue, and Soldier Creeks, all tributaries to the South Fork of the Imnaha River. Although there have been isolated reports of bull trout in Lightning Creek (Buchanan et al. 1997), standard surveys have not been able to document meaningful numbers of spawning and rearing fish.

Spawning in the Imnaha River presumably occurs in the headwater areas as well as in some headwater tributaries. Most known summer rearing and holding areas in the Imnaha River are on National Forest or wilderness lands above Summit Creek. On an intermittent basis, bull trout can also be found distributed throughout the mainstem Imnaha River, perhaps migrating to and from various tributaries or following sources of food. It is certain that some fluvial bull trout from the Imnaha River migrate out of the Imnaha River and overwinter in the Snake River and, given recent radio telemetry data (Chandler and Richter 2001), fish found in the Imnaha River below Summit Creek are probably moving between summer or spawning habitat and overwinter habitat in the lower Imnaha or Snake Rivers. Fluvial adults appear to migrate upstream in the Imnaha River during the months of May, June, July, and perhaps August. Fluvial adults appear to move downstream in the Imnaha River during the months of August, September, October, and perhaps November.

Limited information is available on the abundance of bull trout in the Imnaha River. Standard redd counts (G. Sausen, U.S. Forest Service, pers. comm. 2001) have been conducted only recently. Migratory adults captured at a Chinook salmon weir (near river kilometer 74; river mile 46) have been enumerated since the mid-1980's (P. Sankovich, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, pers. comm. 2002). However, in many years the weir did not begin operating until after the middle of July (S. Parker, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, pers. comm. 2002). In some years, standard creel surveys are conducted between September and April for a summer steelhead fishery (Flesher, in litt. 2002). Although these surveys collect some information on bull trout, they are not done in a manner conducive to estimating abundance. Ratliff and Howell (1992) considered bull trout from the Imnaha River at low risk of extinction. Little information is available on the size of these fish at spawning, age at maturation, sex ratio, fecundity, time of emergence, or survival rates. It seems likely that bull trout in this population complex exhibit both resident and fluvial life history forms.

Life History Bull trout spawn from approximately September 1 to October 31. Hatching may occur in winter or

early spring (McPhail and Murray 1979). Emergence from gravels occurs at the end of April. Growth, maturation, and longevity vary with environment; first spawning is often noted after age four, with individuals living 10 or more years (Rieman and McIntyre 1993).

17

Two distinct life history forms, fluvial and resident, occur in inland bull trout populations (Pratt 1992, Buchanan et al. 1997). Fluvial forms rear in natal tributaries for one to four years before moving to larger rivers to mature. Fluvial bull trout may use a wide range of habitats ranging from second to sixth order streams and varying by season and life stage. They live for another two to four years in these larger systems, growing to much larger sizes than resident forms, before returning to natal tributaries to spawn (Meehan and Bjornn 1991). Seasonal movements may range up to 300 km as migratory fish move from spawning and rearing areas into overwintering habitat in downstream reaches of larger basins (Bjornn and Mallet 1964, Elle et al., 1994). The resident form may be restricted to headwater streams throughout life. Both forms are believed to exist together in some areas, but migratory fish may dominate populations where corridors and subadult rearing areas are in good condition (Rieman and McIntyre 1993).

Abundance The action area is located in the Imnaha core area of the Mid-Columbia recovery unit (draft). The 5-

Year Status review rated the Imnaha population at “potential risk” (USFWS 2008). One local bull trout populations are present in the action area; the Imnaha local population. The

Imnaha local population is considered by USFWS to be a stronghold populations with multiple life history strategies and primary spawning areas located in roadless/wilderness areas. USFWS conducts annual redds counts to monitor the population trend. Since 2001, redds per mile have varied from a high of 13.3 redds per mile in 2005 to a low of 2.8 redds per mile in 2009 for the adfluvial population (Table 13).

Table 2. Number of redds per mile for index reaches for the Upper Imnaha Bull Trout Population. Excludes Cliff Creek data. Data source: USFWS, 2012 Draft Bull Spawning Data.

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Redds/Mile 10.1 5.3 11.1 11.2 13.3 8.3 11.3 6.1 2.8 4.3 4.5 9.1

18

Distribution CR bull trout are seasonally present in the action area. Both the Snake River and Imnaha River serve

as migration routes to spawning areas upstream of the action area (Figure 5). There are 13.8 miles of migratory habitat in the action area (Table 14).

Table 3. Miles of migration habitat for CR bull trout in the action area by allotment. Based on StreamNet Data. Rhode Creek and Toomey allotments are adjacent to the Imnaha River. Lone Pine Allotment is adjacent to both the Imnaha and Snake rivers.

Allotment Miles of Migration Habitat

Cow Creek 0.0

Rhodes Creek 2.3

Toomey 2.5

Lone Pine 9.0

19

Figure 5. Distribution of CR Bull Trout salmon in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. Bull trout spawning habitat is not present in the analysis area.

20

Critical Habitat Status and Description The USFWS issued a Final Rule for bull trout critical habitat for the coterminous United States on

January 14, 2010 (75 FR 2270). The bull trout critical habitat designation includes approximately 5730.8 miles of streams for the Mid-Columbia River Recovery Unit including the Imnaha River and Snake River in the action area.

Critical habitat includes the stream channels within the designated stream reaches and a lateral extent

as defined by the bankfull elevation on one bank to the bankfull elevation on the opposite bank. Bankfull elevation is the level at which water begins to leave the channel and move into the floodplain and is reached at a discharge that generally has a recurrence interval of 1 to 2 years on the annual flood series. If bankfull elevation is not evident on either bank, the ordinary high-water line must be used to determine the lateral extent of critical habitat. The lateral extent of designated lakes is defined by the perimeter of the waterbody as mapped on standard 1:24,000 scale topographic maps. Critical habit for CR bull trout is present in the analysis area (Figure 6). In the action area, critical habitat consists of feeding, migration, and overwinter habitat. There are about 14 miles of critical habitat for CR bull trout in the action area (Table 15).

Table 4. Miles of Bull Trout Critical Habitat Present in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. Habitat use types: SR=spawning and rearing, FMO=feeding, migration, overwinter.


Imnaha River FMO 5.9

Snake River FMO 7.9

Total 13.8

21

Figure 6. Critical habitat of CR Bull Trout salmon in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. Habitat Use Types: FMO = feeding, migration, and overwinter habitat; SR = spawning and rearing habitat.

22

Summary Of ESA-listed Fish Species Distribution

Table 16. ESA listed fish distribution and habitat use within LIRA allotments.

Allotment Stream Name

Spring Chinook Salmon Habitat

(Miles)

Fall Chinook Salmon Habitat

(Miles) Steelhead Habitat

(Miles) Bull Trout

Habitat (Miles)

S/R R M S/R R M S/R R M S/R FMO Cow Cr. Cow Creek Cr. 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Lone Pine Snake River 0.0 0.0 6.9 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 6.9 Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.8

Deep Cr 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Rhodes Creek

Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 2.3 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.3 Cow Cr 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Lightning Cr 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sleepy Cr 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Toomey Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 2.1 FMO=Forage, Migration, Overwintering (Bull trout) S/R=Spawning/Rearing R=Rearing habitat M=Migration habitat only

Table 17. Critical habitat for ESA-listed fish within the LIRA allotments.

Allotment Stream Name Spring Chinook

Salmon (miles)

Fall Chinook Salmon (miles)

Steelhead (miles)

Bull Trout (miles)

Cow Cr. Cow Creek Cr. 4.6 0.0 4.6 0.0

Lone Pine Snake River 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 Imnaha River 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8

Deep Cr 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0

Rhodes Creek

Imnaha River 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Cow Cr 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0

Lightning Cr 1.8 0.0 5.3 0.0 Sleepy Cr 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0

Toomey Imnaha River 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1

23

COW CREEK ALLOTMENT

A. Allotment Description and Existing Condition

1. Location of Allotment The Cow Creek Allotment is located entirely in the Lower Cow Creek Subwatershed (HUC

170601020509). Private land within the subwatershed is not part of the allotment; therefore the Forest Service has no management oversight of private lands within the subwatershed.

2. Allotment General Description, Rangeland Condition and Trend

General Description The Cow Creek Allotment is classified as a winter allotment. The winter grazing period includes late

fall, winter and early spring grazing. The allotment is grazed from February 1 through May 15. The Cow Creek Allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger grazing system that includes Rhodes Creek and Toomey allotments, as well as private land. The Cow Creek Allotment is about 5814 acres in size and consists entirely of NFS lands. Private land is not part of the allotment and the Forest Service has no oversight over private land adjacent to the allotment.

The Cow Creek allotment is currently divided into ten pastures; West Cow Creek, Rowley, Upper

Rowley, Fingerboard, Upper Fingerboard, Schleur, Upper Schleur, Salt Gulch and Upper Salt Gulch, and Deer Creek. The pastures are divided east and west pastures by Cow Creek. Pastures can generally be classified as “bench” (less than 10% slope) and “breaks” (greater than 10% slope) pastures based on their topography.

The bench pastures in the Cow Creek are Rowley and West Cow Creek, and are predominately

bluebunch wheatgrass plant associations. West Cow Creek, because it is largely north facing, has a higher component of Idaho fescue dominated plant associations inspite of the lower elevation. Many of the benches have been degraded to annual brome and warm season grasses such as red three-awn and sand dropseed as a result of historical farming and grazing activities.

Schleur, Salt Gulch, and Fingerboard pastures are more similar to breaks pastures in general because

they are higher in elevation. However, because they are largely south facing there is larger portion vegetation of bluebunch wheatgrass dominated plant associations. Further up towards Summit Ridge and thus higher elevation is Upper Schleur, Upper Salt Gulch, and Upper Fingerboard pastures. The “upper” pastures are mostly Idaho fescue plant association dominated where there isn’t rocky shallow soils. These smaller pastures “in the rims” were created historically to get full utilization of the forage by holding livestock up higher on the ridge. Deer Creek is the only breaks pasture on the west side of Cow Creek, and is primarily composed of Idaho fescue plant associations dissected by timber stringers.

24

The Cow Creek Allotment has a mixture of fences and natural barriers to create distinct pastures or

grazing areas. The livestock water from a few areas along Cow Creek. Air temperature, thick riparian vegetation, and large substrate focus the watering areas and discourage livestock from loitering in riparian areas on the Cow Creek Allotment. Research has shown that during the cold winter months cattle do not congregate in riparian areas where air temperatures are lower than on adjoining uplands beyond watering because the drainages are cold air sinks, and are the areas that get the least sun in the winter due to short day lengths (Masters, et al. 1996).. Results from Keren and Olson (2006) indicate that solar radiation contributes strongly to the thermal balance of a cow during the winter months. In order for the livestock to thermal balance (i.e. get warm) they tend to graze where they can find sun in areas away from the colder riparian areas. Olson and Wallander (2002) discuss that livestock under long term selecting for performing in winter conditions adjust physiologically and behaviorally to daily and seasonal weather. This supports observations in the LIRA area that behavior, physiological needs, and preferred forage drive the livestock use the uplands significantly more during late fall, winter, and early spring grazing. Several livestock grazing studies support that this would likely be the opposite if the same area was grazed during the summer months (Gillen, et al, 1984).

25

Figure 8. Cow Creek Allotment.

26

Rangeland Vegetation Condition and Trend Based on a combination of results from assessment and monitoring, and field inspections all pastures

within the Cow Creek Allotment are generally in satisfactory condition with the exception of the Rowley pasture.

Structural Improvements Off-site Water Developments

Cow Creek Allotment has 2 developed water sources. Since the allotment is used during the winter grazing season (February 1 through May 15) the location of water sources is not a determinant of cattle distribution. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperature differentials and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas.

Table 18 below shows the number of existing off-site water sources in the Cow Creek Allotment.

Table 18. Existing and planned off-site water developments in the Cow Creek Allotment. Allotment Existing Off-site Water Cow Creek 2

Fences Terrain features, herding practices and local climate are the primary methods for controlling cattle

distribution on the Cow Creek Allotment with fencing located at strategic locations; thus fencing is limited to about 8.0 miles on the allotment. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperature differentials and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas. Cattle are placed in small bands within pastures and are moved as needed to insure utilization objectives are met.

Stream and Riparian Existing Conditions Rosgen Stream Types in the Cow Creek Allotment (Rosgen 1996)

The Cow Creek Allotment contains one stream that provides habitat for ESA-listed fish species: Cow Creek. Cow Creek is a Rosgen B3a type channel (Table 19). Banks are composed of cobble and thus are resistant to damage from livestock. Cow Creek is located within a Rosgen Type II valley type. These valley types act as cold air drainages in the winter grazing season (late fall through early spring) thus cattle spend only a small amount of time along Cow Creek due to the significantly colder air temperatures present.

27

Table 19. Mean gradient (weighted), dominant substrate class, and Rosgen stream type for fish bearing streams by allotment. Rosgen stream class based on stream gradient and substrate.

Allotment Stream Mean Weighted Gradient (%)

Dominant Substrate Class

Rosgen Stream Type

Cow Creek Cow Creek 5.3 Cobble B3a

Riparian Plant Associations

Riparian plant associations were determined following Wells (2006) Deep Canyon and Subalpine Riparian and Wetland Plant Associations of the Malheur, Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. The riparian plant associations for ESA streams within the Cow Creek Allotment are shown below (Table 20). The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek was determined to be at Potential Natural Vegetation (PNV).

Table 20. Riparian plant associations for ESA streams in the Cow Creek Allotment. Stream Name Reach Plant Association Condition

Cow Creek 1 Douglas-Fir/Mountain Maple-Ninebark-Floodplain Plant Community

Potential Natural Vegetation

Cow Creek 2 Black Cottonwood/Mountain Alder-Red Osier Dogwood Plant Community




Stream Habitat Surveys

The stream survey on Cow Creek was conducted in 1993 using the Region 6 (R-6) stream survey protocol. Stream surveys provide a snapshot in time of aquatic habitat conditions. Additional information of current aquatic habitat was gathered along all fish-bearing stream reaches during PFC assessments in 2009 and site visits since 2010. Streambank stability along Cow Creek is currently greater than 90% and thus meets the streambank stability indicator. Based on professional opinion, Cow Creek pool frequency and width-to-depth ratio are within the natural potential for Cow Creek.

Table 21. Habitat Summary data for Category 1 streams in the action area. Shading indicates that a habitat element is meeting LRMP RMOs and BO Matrix indicators.

Stream Name Year of Stream Survey

Rosgen Type

Ave Wetted Width

Pools/Mile1 Pieces LWD/Mile

% Particles <6.3mm

W/D Ratio

% Stable Banks

Cow Creek 1993 B3a 11.4 15.6 49.1 11 16.8 77

RMO/Indicator See Note 1 20 <20% <10 >90

Notes 1) RMO based on stream wetted width: < 10 ft, > 96 pools/mile; 10 to 20 ft, 56 to 96 pools/mile; 20 to 25 ft, 47 to 56 pools/mi; 25 to 50 ft, 26 to 47 pools/mile; 50 to 75 ft, 23 to 26 pools/mile.

28

PACFISH INFISH Biological Opinion Monitoring (PIBO) (Archer et al. 2010) Monitoring reaches are defined below:

• Designated Monitoring Area – Reach identified by field unit personnel as the location utilized for livestock implementation monitoring.

• Integrator Reach – Downstream most low gradient (< 3%) reach within Interior Columbia Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) 6th field Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC). Integrator reaches are randomly selected and sampled as part of the five year rotating sampling design.

Reaches are at least 20 bankfull widths in length or a minimum of 160 meters (approximately 525

feet). PIBO effectiveness monitoring sites were not established in the Cow Creek Allotment when the PIBO

study began. The WMO has not established a DMA on Cow Creek due to the current excellent condition the stream and riparian habitat is in and the use patterns of livestock during the winter grazing period. Cattle in the allotment primarily utilize the uplands and bench areas because these areas these areas are warmer than the stream bottoms and are where the forage is primarily located.

Stream Temperature Monitoring Long term stream temperature monitoring sites are located on some streams within all three

allotments. Years missing can be attributed to an error in the data resulting in unusable information or the site was not monitored that year. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) state water quality standard is based on the maximum 7-day running average. Stream temperatures shown in the following tables are the maximum 7-day running average.

Limited water temperature monitoring has occurred on the Cow Creek Allotment. Water temperature

monitoring has occurred in the lower Cow Creek downstream of the allotment by the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT). These water temperatures indicate that rearing habitat for juvenile steelhead extends into the lower reach of Cow Creek during July and August (Figure 9).

29

Figure 9. Water temperatures in lower Cow Creek. Site is located near the mouth of Cow Creek (Source: Nez Perce Tribe).

Additional water temperature data is available from Forest Service stream surveys. Maximum recorded water temperatures for all reaches of Cow Creek was below the PACFISH RMO of 64°F for migration/rearing habitats (Table 22). Based on water temperature data collected during stream surveys, the middle reaches of Cow Creek located on the Cow Creek Allotment are meeting the PACFISH RMO of 60°F for spawning habitat (Table 22). The upper most reach of Cow Creek, upstream of the allotment, exceeded 60°F though the maximum temperature was recorded in a seep at the end of the survey and thus likely don’t reflect average mean maximum temperature for this stream reach.

Table 22. Water temperature data from stream surveys in the Imnaha Range Analysis Area. Stream Survey Dates Reach Stream Miles Max Temp (F) Mean Temp

(F)

Cow Creek 7/6/1993 - 8/4/1993

1 0 – 8.7 61 56.0

2 8.7 – 10.9 54 51.2

3 10.9 – 13.9 52 49.5

4 13.9 - 19.3 61 50.1

30

Proper Functioning Condition Surveys (PFC)

PFC assessments were completed on Cow Creek in 2009 in the Cow Creek Allotment using the protocol of Prichard et al. (1998). The PFC assessment data is used in this analysis to determine areas where cattle grazing is impacting stream/riparian features and supplement stream survey data. The PFC teams consisted of range management specialists, a fish biologist, and vegetation specialist (normally a botanist). All stream reaches were found to be properly functioning and riparian plant communities were determined to be at PNV. A summary of PFC assessment is presented in Table 23.

Table 23. Result of 2009 PFC Assessments for Allotments in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis. N/A = Not Applicable

LIRA Proper Functioning Condition 2009

Stream Reach Determination Trend Stream Type

Plant Community

Allotment / Location Comments

Cow Cr 1 PFC N/A B3

PSME/ ACGL- PHMA5_ Floodplain

Cow Cr Allotment / FS boundary (Fingerboard gulch) to TNC land

Current grazing management has little impact on riparian area. Shrub dominant community with PIPO/PSME overstory. Banks are armored with rocks and boulders. Livestock use in small open areas. Plant Community in late seral stage.

Cow Cr 2 PFC N/A B3 POTR15/ ALIN2- COST4

Cow Cr Allotment / TNC boundary to Litch Ranch

Current grazing management has little impact on riparian area. Shrub dominant with white alder/cottonwood overstory. Banks armored with cobbles. More cattle use compared to Reach 1. Reach 2 is a little more open with a little less overstory and shrub diversity compared to Reach 1. Plant community is in mid-late seral stage.

Cow Cr 3 PFC N/A B3 POTR15/ ALIN2- COST5

Cow Cr Allotment / Litch Ranch to north border of allotment

Formerly private land. More livestock use is evident in Reach 3. Cottonwood and hawthorn are dominant species. More weedy species are evident. Banks rock armored.

31

Pastures and Streams with ESA-Listed Fish and/or Critical Habitat, and Livestock Access to Streams Allotment Pastures and Streams With ESA Listed Fish and/or Designated Critical Habitat

Cow Creek is the only stream in the Cow Creek Allotment that provides habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Cow Creek provides habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. SR fall Chinook salmon and critical habitat are not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. CR bull trout and critical habitat are not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Cow Creek provides spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead. Table 24 provides habitat

mileages by pasture on the Cow Creek Allotment for SR steelhead. Pasture boundaries on the Cow Creek Allotment are located along Cow Creek in many cases resulting in a reach being accessible from more than one pasture.

Table 24. Steelhead distribution, stream use, and critical habitat by pastures for Cow Creek Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream

Stream Use

DCH (miles) Migration

(miles) Rearing (miles)

Spawning and

Rearing (miles)

Total (miles)

Deer Creek Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 2.9 2.9 2.9

Fingerboard Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Rowley Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.6

Salt Gulch Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1

Schleur Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3

West Cow Creek Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.7 1.7

Cow Creek also provides winter rearing habitat for juvenile SR spring/summer Chinook salmon.

Table 25 provides habitat mileages by pasture on the Cow Creek Allotment for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. Pasture boundaries on the Cow Creek Allotment are located along Cow Creek in many cases resulting in a reach being in more than one pasture.

32

Table 5. Spring/summer Chinook salmon distribution, stream use, and critical habitat by pastures for Cow Creek Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream

Stream Use

DCH (miles) Migration (miles)

Rearing* (miles)

Spawning and

Rearing (miles)

Total (miles)

Deer Creek Cow Creek 0.0 2.9 0.0 2.9 2.9

Fingerboard Cow Creek 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

Rowley Cow Creek 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.6

Salt Gulch Cow Creek 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1

Schleur Cow Creek 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3

West Cow Creek Cow Creek 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7

* Juvenile winter rearing habitat.

Livestock Access to Streams Cow Creek is a Rosgen stream type “B” channel constrained by a moderately narrow valley (Rosgen

Type II). These valley types act as cold air drainages in northeast Oregon in the winter thus cattle spend only a small amount of time along Cow Creek due to the significantly colder air temperatures present. Livestock access to Cow Creek is also restricted by physical barriers such as topography, down timber, and dense shrubs. Livestock may not be able to develop trails if the terrain is extremely rocky and rugged or if barriers such as thick timber are present (Bailey 2005). Cattle establish routes of least effort in rugged terrain (Ganskopp et al. 2000). Two areas were identified during the PFC survey where the majority of cattle use along Cow Creek in the allotment occurs. The primary area of the two is located at an old vehicle ford upstream of the Litch Ranch. The second site is located downstream of the Litch Ranch.

Individual Stream Descriptions Cow Creek

Cow Creek is a small, narrow valley, high gradient, Rosgen B3a channel stream. Cow Creek provides high quality spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead and winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon. Streambank stability is high, LWD levels are high and fine sediment levels are low. Streambanks are composed of cobbles and are resistant to alteration by cattle. The adjacent riparian community is composed of an overstory of mature conifers with a midstory of shrubs that transitions downstream to an overstory of mature shrubs. Riparian communities are rated as being at natural potential vegetation. Cow Creek is located in a Rosgen Type II valley type. These valley types act as cold air drainages during the winter grazing season. Cattle avoid the Cow Creek riparian area

33

during fall, winter, and spring months due to warmer air temperatures on bench areas compared to air temperatures in the Cow Creek riparian area.

3. Management History The Cow Creek Allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger

grazing system that includes Rhodes Creek and Toomey allotments, as well as private land. These three allotments are grazed by the same permittee. The Cow Creek Allotment is managed under an elevationally-determined rotational grazing system within the pastures. Generally, in the beginning of February the cattle enter the allotment after they have calved and move from the lower to higher elevation during the grazing season until mid-May. Pasture moves are based on resource condition and utilization standards (Forest Plan) in key areas. At the end of the authorized season of use, the livestock are herded back through the lower elevation pastures to exit the allotment, utilizing roads to avoid trailing on steep slopes with soil concerns and riparian areas.

In mid-February, as the cattle are calving, the livestock start entering the Rowley pasture from the

Rhodes Creek Allotment from the East Lightning Bench, Foster, and private land pastures until there is a herd of 300 cow/calf pairs. The cattle graze in Rowley pasture until the end of March. They are then split into three herds; one herd goes to the Upper Schleur, Schleur, Salt Gulch, and Upper Salt Gulch pastures; the second herd goes to Fingerboard; and the third herd goes to Deer Creek for the month of April. A small group from East Lightning Bench and enters West Cow Creek in February and remains there until the beginning of May. Due to the geography of the area, it is shorter distance and safer for the riders that they enter from the Lightning Creek bench and trail the cattle north and east staying at bench level elevation rather than coming up from Cow Creek. In early May all of the cattle within the allotment are gathered and processed (calves are branded and vaccinated) at the corrals at the Litch place, herded back into Rowley pasture for two weeks, and then herded out of the Cow Creek Allotment to exit the Imnaha canyon by mid-May.

Range monitoring in the Cow Creek Allotment is focused on bench areas where cattle spend the

majority of their time when on the allotment. Majority of key areas are located in upland areas of the allotment. Recent utilization monitoring (2010 -2014) shows that the permittee has consistently met objectives for utilization (See Range Specialist Report).

Multiple Indicator Monitoring System (MIMS), (Burton et al., 2010) Riparian monitoring is still conducted on the Cow Creek Allotment using the previous “Key Area”

monitoring strategy. DMAs have not been established along Cow Creek in the Cow Creek Allotment. Multiple indicator monitoring in the Cow Creek Allotment is a low priority because cattle spend the majority of their time in upland areas in the allotment and the current conditions of aquatic and riparian

34

habitat are in excellent condition. Monitoring greenline stubble height, shrub utilization and streambank alteration along Cow Creek is inappropriate for the Cow Creek Allotment because the allotment is grazed during the winter, streambanks are armored with rock (Cow Creek is a Rosgen B3a channel type), and cattle spend little time in the riparian area due to cold air temperatures compared to adjacent bench and upland areas.

Limited monitoring along Cow Creek has occurred at key areas. Monitoring of along Cow Creek

shows that the permittee has met objectives for end of season objectives (Table 26).

Table 26. Implementation Monitoring Data for the Cow Creek Allotment, 2008 to 2014. nm = not measured.

Pasture Stream Key Area Key Species / Indicator Year Allowable

Use End of Season Measurement

Standard Met?

West Cow Riparian

Greenline

Cow Creek K4A Bluegrass / Mixed Spp 2011 4" 5" Y

West Cow Riparian Terrace

Cow Creek K4A Bluegrass / Mixed Spp 2011 3" 6.3" Y

B. Proposed Action

1. Stocking Rates and Allotment and Pasture Use Descriptions The action alternatives, Alternatives B, C, D, and E, for the Cow Creek Allotment will authorize

livestock grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment for the period of 2015 through 2025. A total of 1,255 head months of livestock are authorized on the 5,824 acre Cow Creek Allotment annually between the dates of February 1 through May 15 (Table 27).

Table 27. Animal class, number and on/off dates for the Cow Creek Allotment.

Class* Number On/Off Dates

c/c 231 2/1-5/15 * c/c = cow/calf pairs; h/m = horses/mules

The Cow Creek Allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger

grazing system that includes Rhodes Creek and Toomey allotments, as well as private land. The three allotments are grazed by the same permittee. Private land is not waived to the Forest Service and the Forest Service has no management oversight of these lands.

The Cow Creek Allotment would continue to be managed under an elevationally-determined rotational

grazing system within the pastures. Grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment would continue to be managed to maintain desired upland and riparian conditions. Generally, in the beginning of February the cattle

35

would enter the allotment after they have calved and move from the lower to higher elevation during the grazing season until mid-May. Pasture moves are based on resource condition and utilization standards (Forest Plan) in key areas. At the end of the authorized season of use, the livestock would be herded back through the lower elevation pastures to exit the allotment, utilizing roads to avoid trailing on steep slopes with soil concerns or through riparian areas.

The Cow Creek allotment is currently divided into ten pastures; West Cow Creek, Rowley, Upper

Rowley, Fingerboard, Upper Fingerboard, Schleur, Upper Schleur, Salt Gulch and Upper Salt Gulch, and Deer Creek. As part of the proposed action pastures would be combined for administrative purposes and reflect the way the pastures will be utilized. Fingerboard, Upper Fingerboard, Schleur, Upper Schleur, Salt Gulch, Upper Salt Gulch and Deer Creek will be combined into one pasture named Fingerboard. For the same reason, Upper Rowley and Rowley would be combined into a pasture named Rowley. West Cow Creek and Deer Creek pastures would remain the same.

There are 4.6 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead in the Cow Creek Allotment.

Spawning and Rearing habitat is present in the West Cow Creek, Rowley, Fingerboard, Schleur, Salt Gulch, and Deer Creek pastures. Because the allotment is managed under a rotational system, cattle will be present in pastures with spawning habitat during the steelhead spawning and incubation period (March 1 through June 30) every grazing season. However, cattle utilize Cow Creek for watering only and spend the majority of their time in upland areas because the upland areas are warmer compared to the riparian area along Cow Creek during the period the allotment is grazed. Access to Cow Creek is also limited by locally steep terrain, LWD and dense riparian vegetation. Therefore the potential for cattle disturbing redds is low.

Spawning habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, SR fall Chinook salmon and CR bull trout is

not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. There are 4.6 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon in the allotment. Winter rearing habitat is present in the West Cow Creek, Rowley, Fingerboard, Schleur, Salt Gulch, and Deer Creek pastures. Cattle utilize Cow Creek for watering only and spend the majority of their time in upland areas because the upland areas are warmer compared to the riparian area along Cow Creek during the period the allotment is grazed. Access to Cow Creek is also limited by locally steep terrain, LWD and dense riparian vegetation. Therefore the potential for cattle impacts to winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon is low.

Habitat for bull trout and fall Chinook salmon is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

4. Monitoring Additional monitoring for aquatic resources will occur on the Cow Creek Allotment under the

proposed action:

36

• Cattle distribution monitoring will be carried out periodically during the spring gazing period to verify that cattle are not congregating in riparian areas during the steelhead spawning/incubation period (March 15 – July 1). Responsible entity: Permittee and Forest Service.

C. Species/Critical Habitat Presence on the Allotment

1. Fall Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat SR fall Chinook salmon are not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. There is 4.6 miles of designated

critical habitat on the Cow Creek Allotment.

2. Spring Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat Cow Creek is the only stream on the Cow Creek Allotment that provide habitat for SR spring/summer

Chinook salmon. Cow Creek provides 4.6 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Cow Creek Allotment. There is 4.6 miles of designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Cow Creek Allotment.

3. Summer Steelhead and Designated Critical Habitat Cow Creek is the only stream on the Cow Creek Allotment that provide habitat for SR steelhead. Cow

Creek provides 4.6 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead on the Cow Creek Allotment. There is 4.6 miles of designated critical habitat for SR steelhead on the Cow Creek Allotment.

4. Bull Trout and Designated Critical Habitat CR bull trout are not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. Critical habitat for CR bull trout is not

present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

D. Analysis of Potential Effects

1. Evaluation Criteria The following is a site-specific analysis of the potential direct and indirect effects on spring/summer

Chinook salmon and their designated critical habitat, summer steelhead and their designated critical habitat, and bull trout and their designated critical habitat. Based on the consequence and likelihood of adverse effects from the actions, the potential risk to matrix indicators (Table 28) are rated as no risk, low, moderate, or high risk. This analysis uses the best available scientific information and site-specific professional judgment to determine potential effects.

37

Evaluation of effects was based on current habitat conditions, previously identified RMOs, and the Matrix of Pathways and Indicators as described in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale (NMFS 1996) and A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulation Watershed Scale (USFWS 1998).

Table 28. Determination of Risk to Listed Species for the Cow Creek Allotment. Risk of Risk of Indirect Effects to Each Matrix Indicator * *Direct Effects

Temp

Sed

Chem Cont

Phys Barr

LWM

Pool Freq / Qual

Off- Chan

Refug

W/D

Bank Stab

Flood plain

Road Dens

Distur Hist / Flows

RHCA

Disturb Reg

L/M L L N N N N N N L L N N N L N

*P =Positive Effect, N=No Risk, L =Low Risk, M=Moderate Risk, H=High Risk

2. Direct and Indirect Effects This chapter analyzes the potential direct and indirect effects that livestock grazing on the Cow Creek

Allotment may have on listed fish and/or their habitat. This analysis uses the best available scientific information and site specific professional judgment to determine these effects. The direct and indirect effects that this project may have on fall Chinook salmon, spring/summer Chinook salmon, summer steelhead, bull trout and their designated critical habitats are analyzed.

Direct Effects to Listed Fish Those areas that have the potential for direct effects to ESA-listed salmonid populations are those

areas where spawning occurs and livestock congregate. These are the areas where livestock, if present during spawning, could potentially affect spawning fish and/or incubation of eggs or alevins developing in the gravel.

Direct Effects to Fall Chinook Salmon Spawning habitat for fall Chinook salmon is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Summary of Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon There is no risk of direct effects to fall Chinook salmon as a result of trampling of redds by livestock.

Chinook spawning habitat is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. There is no risk to juvenile fall Chinook salmon because juvenile rearing habitat is not present on the

Cow Creek Allotment.

38

Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon Spawning habitat for spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Summary of Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon There is no risk of direct effects to spring Chinook salmon as a result of trampling of redds by

livestock. Chinook spawning habitat is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. Direct effects to Chinook juveniles in accessible areas are considered low. In the event that livestock

should enter the stream, juvenile fish will exhibit avoidance behavior either moving a short distance upstream or downstream.

Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead Cow Creek within the Cow Creek Allotment provides spawning and rearing habitat for summer

steelhead. Table 24 and Figure 2shows the miles of summer steelhead distribution and designated critical habitat by stream on the allotment.

Steelhead fry will emerge from gravels by the first of July. The use period for Cow Creek Allotment

is from February 1 to April 15. Pastures containing steelhead spawning habitat on the Cow Creek Allotment include the following:

• Deer Creek • Fingerboard • Rowley • Salt Gulch • Schleur • West Cow

Researchers from the PNW lab at the Starkey Experimental Forest in the Blue Mountains near

Starkey, Oregon submitted the following telemetry data regarding cattle distribution during steelhead spawning times:

DelCurto et al. (2000) determined cattle locations from the Starkey Project Loran telemetry system, to determine relative use of creek bottoms and the potential for direct impacts (trampling) to spawning steelhead. The cattle locations summarized here are those from years 1991, 1993, and 1995, during the period from turn-out (approximately 6/15) through 7/1. Cattle were monitored 24 hours a day. A total of 20,371 cattle locations were logged for the three years during this two week period. Of these, 36 locations included the stream channel (0.2%) and 61 locations (0.3%) included the area within 30 meters of the channel. This clearly shows that the potential for direct impacts to

39

spawning steelhead is extremely low. During this early season of use, forage quality in the uplands is extremely high, and cattle are widely dispersed.

Parsons et al. (2003) found that the season of use affected livestock distribution patterns throughout

their study. During early summer, cattle were consistently observed further from the stream at any given hour than during late summer. During early season grazing (early April through mid-July), livestock can be drawn to the uplands by succulent, herbaceous forage and cool temperatures that discourage cattle from loitering in riparian areas and where warmer temperatures in the uplands serve as an attractant to grazing (Gillen et al. 1985, Clary and Webster 1989, Kinch 1989, Clary and Booth 1993).

Research demonstrates that during the early season of use prior to steelhead emergence cattle prefer

uplands and not riparian areas greatly reducing the risk of redd trampling. Salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover (Witzel and

MacCrimmon 1983). This could further reduce the risk of redd trampling since spawning sites may be located where livestock cannot trample redds due to physical obstructions.

Given that: • cattle prefer uplands and not riparian areas during the spawning and incubation period, • that salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover, • the relatively low redd density and scattered nature of summer steelhead redds,

There is a low risk of direct effects to steelhead redds from livestock trampling since take is not certain to occur in the six pastures of the Cow Creek Allotment that contain spawning habitat for steelhead.

There are 4.6 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead in the Cow Creek Allotment.

Because the allotment is managed under a rotational system, cattle will be present in pastures with spawning habitat during the steelhead spawning and incubation period (March 1 through June 30) every grazing season. However, cattle utilize Cow Creek for watering only and spend the majority of their time in upland areas because the upland areas are warmer compared to the riparian area along Cow Creek during the period the allotment is grazed. Access to Cow Creek is also limited by locally steep terrain, LWD and dense riparian vegetation. Therefore the potential for cattle disturbing redds is low.

Direct effects to steelhead juveniles in accessible areas are considered low. In the event that livestock


Summary of Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead In the Cow Creek Allotment, there is steelhead spawning habitat that is accessible to livestock, and

there is a 2.5 month period where livestock are present and fry have not yet emerged from the gravel. The risk of trampling of steelhead by livestock is considered low for the following reasons:

40

• cattle prefer uplands and not riparian areas during the period the Cow Creek Allotment is grazed

• salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover • the relatively low redd density and scattered nature of summer steelhead redds • physical obstructions to livestock access to the majority of spawning habitat



Direct Effects to Bull Trout Cow Creek does not provide habitat for bull trout on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Summary of Direct Effects to Bull Trout There would be no direct effects to bull trout from livestock grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment

because bull trout are not present in Cow Creek.

Indirect Effects The environmental baseline for the subwatersheds encompassing the action area are rated overall as

“Functioning at Risk” (Table 29). The following analysis focuses on indicators that have the potential to be affected by grazing and related activities proposed under the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis. These are: 1) Temperature, 2) Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate, 3) Width/Depth Ratio, 4) Streambank Condition, and 5) Riparian Conservation Area indicators.

The matrix used to assess impacts to SR spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon is the same as used

for SR steelhead (NMFS 1996). Therefore the analysis used for determining impacts to matrix habitat indicators for SR steelhead are applicable to SR spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon.

The matrix used to assess impacts to CR bull trout is similar to the matrix used for SR steelhead

(NMFS 1996, USFWS 1998). There are minor differences in the groupings and labeling of habitat indicators. The major differences with regard to habitat indicators is that the numeric criteria for 1) the temperature indicator differ due to the lower temperatures required by bull trout compared to steelhead and Chinook salmon and 2) the Road Density indicator.

The potential indirect effects that livestock grazing may have on the limiting factors and the matrix

indicators are discussed below. This discussion is based on professional judgment along with site specific knowledge of the project area, past monitoring results, stream habitat survey data, and temperature data. Habitat Indicators which have the greatest risk of being affected by these projects (rated as Low in Table 28) include Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank

41

Condition, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicators. Potential effects to these habitat indicators are discussed below.

42

Table 29. Current multi-species matrix ratings for subwatersheds of the Cow Creek Allotment in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. See Table 1 for names and full HUC of subwatersheds. * Habitat indicators with potential to be modified by livestock grazing. (See note below for a description of functionality ratings)

Diagnostic or Pathway Functioning Appropriately

Functioning at Risk

Functioning at Unacceptable

Risk

Effects of the Action(s)1

Water Quality Indicators:

Temperature (Steelhead/Salmon)* 509 Maintain

Temperature (Bull Trout)* 509 Maintain

Sediment/Turbidity* 509 Maintain Chemical Contamination/ Nutrients 509 Maintain

Habitat Access Indicators:

Physical Barriers 509 Maintain

Habitat Elements Indicators:

Substrate* 509 Maintain

Large Woody Debris 509 Maintain

Pool Quality/ Frequency* 509 Maintain

Off-Channel Habitat 509 Maintain

Refugia 509 Maintain

Channel Condition and Dynamics Indicators:

Width/Depth Ratio* 509 Maintain

Streambank Condition* 509 Maintain

Floodplain Connectivity 509 Maintain

Flow/ Hydrology Indicators:

Change in Peak/Base Flows 509 Maintain

Increase in Drainage Network 509 Maintain

Watershed Conditions Indicators:

Road Density (Steelhead/Salmon) 509 Maintain

Road Density (Bull Trout) 509 Maintain

Disturbance History 509 Maintain

Riparian Conservation Areas* 509 Maintain

Disturbance Regime 509 Maintain

Overall SWS Rating 509 Maintain 1) Restore: to change the function of a “functioning at risk” indicator to “functioning appropriately”, or change the function of a “functioning at unacceptable risk” indicator to “functioning at risk or “functioning appropriately” (i.e. it does not apply to “functioning appropriately” indicators). Maintain: the function of an indicator does not change (i.e. it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). Degrade: to change the function of an indicator for the worse (i.e. it applies to all indicators

43

regardless of functional level). In some cases, a “functioning at unacceptable risk” indicator may be further worsened, and this should be noted.

Temperature

Table 30. ESA Matrix Criteria for Temperature Indicator for SR Steelhead, and Chinook Salmon (NMFS 1996)

Species Properly Functioning At Risk Not Properly Functioning

Steelhead, Chinook Salmon

50-57° F 57-60°F (spawning) 57-64°F (migration & rearing)

> 60°F (spawning) > 64°F (migration & rearing)

Table 31. ESA Matrix Criteria for Temperature Indicator for Bull trout) (USFWS 1998)

Species Functioning Appropriately Functioning At Risk Functioning at

Unacceptable Risk

Bull Trout 7 day average maximum temperature in a reach during the following life history stages: incubation 2 - 5°C rearing 4 - 12 °C spawning 4 - 9°C also temperatures do not exceed 15°C in areas used by adults during migration (no thermal barriers)

7 day average maximum temperature in a reach during the following life history stages: incubation <2°C or 6°C rearing <4°C or 13 - 15°C spawning <4 °C or 10°C also temperatures sometimes exceeds 15°C in areas used by adults during migration (no thermal barriers)

7 day average maximum temperature in a reach during the following life history stages: incubation <1°C or >6°C rearing >15 °C spawning <4 °C or > 10°C also temperatures regularly exceeds 15°C in areas used by adults during migration (no thermal barriers)

NMFS considers water temperatures from 50 – 57°F (max 7-day average) to be properly functioning

for steelhead and salmon. USFWS considers water temperatures from 39.2 – 53.6°F (rearing) and 39.2 – 48.2°F (spawning) to be functioning appropriately for bull trout.

44

Table 32. Peak use periods of fishbearing streams by ESA-listed fish species in the Cow Creek Allotment.

Species Life Stage Cow Creek

Steelhead Adult Migration (lower reach; mid-April through mid-June) Spawning (middle reaches; mid-April through mid-June)

Juvenile Rearing (middle reaches; year round)

Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon

Adult Not present

Juvenile Winter rearing (Sept through May)

Fall Chinook Salmon Adult Not present

Juvenile Not present

Bull Trout Adult (includes subadults)

Not present


Cow Creek, spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead, consistently exceeded 57 °F, NMFS’s upper

threshold to be considered properly functioning for spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead (Figure 9). During the rearing period for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon (September through May), Cow Creek is properly functioning.

45

Figure 9. Comparison of stream temperatures to NMFS temperature thresholds for lower Cow Creek.

Water temperature data collected during the stream survey on Cow Creek suggest that water temperatures in spawning and rearing areas are within recommended ranges for steelhead (Table 33). Spawning in Cow Creek general occurs during the period from early March through early June (Young and Hatch, 2012).

Table 33. Water temperature data from stream surveys in the Imnaha analysis area. Stream Survey Dates Reach Stream Miles Max Temp (F) Mean Temp

(F)

Cow Creek 7/6/1993 - 8/4/1993

1 0 – 8.7 61 56.0

2 8.7 – 10.9 54 51.2

3 10.9 – 13.9 52 49.5

4 13.9 - 19.3 61 50.1

Cattle grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to Cow

Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing

46

period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing.

Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock

grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness

Table 34. ESA Matrix Criteria for Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Indicators (NMFS 1996, USFWS 1998)

Species Properly Functioning* At Risk* Not Properly Functioning*

Steelhead, Chinook Salmon, Bull Trout

< 12% fines (<0.85mm) in gravel, turbidity low; dominant substrate is gravel or cobble (interstitial spaces clear), or embeddedness <20%

12-20% (east-side), turbidity moderate; gravel and cobble is subdominant, or if dominant, embeddedness 20-30%

>20% fines at surface or depth in spawning habitat, turbidity high; bedrock, sand, silt or small gravel dominant, or if gravel and cobble dominant, embeddedness >30%

* For Bull Trout: Functioning Appropriately, Functioning at Risk, Functioning at Unacceptable Risk

Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11%) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998).

Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock

grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Width/Depth Ratio

Table 35. ESA Matrix Criteria for Width/Depth Ratio Indicator (NMFS 1996, USFWS 1998)


Steelhead, Chinook Salmon, <10 10 - 12 >12

Bull Trout** <10 11 - 20 >20

47

* For Bull Trout: Functioning Appropriately, Functioning at Risk, Functioning at Unacceptable Risk. **Average Wetted Width/ Maximum Depth Ratio in scour pools in a reach.

Width-to-depth ratios of streams in the action area exceed the PACFISH RMO (<10). However, the PACFISH RMO was developed prior to advances in our understandings of the relationship between width-to-depth ratios and natural channel forms (sensu Rosgen, 1996). Of the four Rosgen channel types that reflect natural channels (A, B, E, and C channel types) only E channel types have average width-to-depth ratios of less than 10 (Rosgen, 1996). Due to topography, there are no areas in the action area where E channel types would be expected to occur. Normal ranges for width-to-depth ratios (bankfull width) for Rosgen B and C channels are 12 to 20 and 13.5 to 28.7, respectively (Rosgen, 1996). The width-to-depth ratio in Cow Creek was 16.8 during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits indicate the current width-to-depth ratio is within the normal range for a Rosgen B channel type.

Streambanks along Cow Creek are resistant to streambank alteration from livestock, which could lead

to an increase in width-to-depth ratios, because they are armored with cobbles and soils are mostly frozen during the period the Cow Creek Allotment is grazed. Additionally, cattle presence along Cow Creek is limited due to cold air temperatures, locally steep cliffy terrain, heavy brush, and downed wood.

The width-to-depth ratio of Cow Creek is expected to be maintained under the action alternatives

because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Streambank Condition

Table 36. ESA Matrix Criteria for Streambank Stability Indicator (NMFS 1996, USFWS 1998)



>90% stable; i.e., on average, less than 10% of banks are actively eroding2

80-90% stable <80% stable


Streambank stability was lower than desired for Cow Creek when this stream was surveyed in the 1993. Independent observations made during the PFC assessment indicate that Cow Creek is stable stream channels and are meeting the bank stability RMO.

Streambanks along Cow Creek are resistant to streambank alteration from livestock because they are

armored with cobbles and soils are mostly frozen during the period the Cow Creek Allotment is grazed. Additionally, cattle presence along Cow Creek is limited due to cold air temperatures, locally steep cliffy terrain, heavy brush, and downed wood.

48

Streambank stability of Cow Creek is expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas

Table 37. ESA Matrix Criteria for Riparian Reserves/Conservation Areas Indicator (NMFS 1996, USFWS 1998)



the riparian reserve system provides adequate shade, large woody debris recruitment, and habitat protection and connectivity in all subwatersheds, and buffers or includes known refugia for sensitive aquatic species (>80% intact),and/or for grazing impacts: percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/composition >50%

moderate loss of connectivity or function (shade, LWD recruitment, etc.) of riparian reserve system, or incomplete protection of habitats and refugia for sensitive aquatic species (.70-80% intact), and/or for grazing impacts: percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/composition 25-50% or better

riparian reserve system is fragmented, poorly connected, or provides inadequate protection of habitats and refugia for sensitive aquatic species (<70% intact), and/or for grazing impacts: percent similarity of riparian vegetation to the potential natural community/composition <25%


Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek are currently in good condition (See photos in Appendix A). The PFC assessment of Cow Creek found healthy riparian communities consisting of overstories of pine, cottonwood, and white alder with understories of lower growing shrubs such as dogwood and willows. Riparian plant communities were determined to be at PNV.


Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing.

Riparian areas of Cow Creek are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the

livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

49

Summary of Effects on Environmental Baseline Proposed livestock grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment will maintain all habitat indicators.

3. Effects on Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for Steelhead, Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout

Each of these elements is addressed by indicators in the matrix of pathways and indicators discussed in the indirect effects section.

Steelhead Critical Habitat PCEs Freshwater Spawning Sites

Substrate Substrate is addressed by the Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness indicator.

Water Quality Water quality is addressed by the Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness. The

Chemical Contamination and Nutrients indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.

Water Quantity: Water quantity is addressed by the Change in Peak/Base Flows indicator. The Change in Peak/Base

Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11%) during the 1993 stream

survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.


Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when

50

riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Fresh Water Rearing Sites Floodplain Connectivity Floodplain connectivity is addressed by the floodplain connectivity indicator. The floodplain

connectivity indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.

Forage Forage is addressed by the Temperature and Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness indicator.

Natural Cover Natural cover is addressed by the Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas, Large Woody Debris, and

Pool Quality indicators. LWD and pool quality indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.

Water Quality Water quality is addressed by the Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, and

Chemical Contamination and Nutrients indicators. The Chemical Contamination and Nutrients indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.

Water Quantity Water quantity is addressed by the Change in Peak/Base Flows indicator. The Change in Peak/Base

Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11%) during the 1993 stream



Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other

51

upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Freshwater Migration Free of Artificial Obstruction Artificial obstruction is addressed by the Physical Barrier indicator. The Physical Barrier indicator

will not be affected by the proposed grazing.






Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Cattle grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to Cow

Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

52

Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11%) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat PCEs Spawning and Juvenile Rearing Areas

Cover/Shelter Cover/shelter is addressed by the Large Woody Material, Pool Quality, Off-Channel Habitat, Refugia,

Streambank Condition, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicators. The Large Woody Material, Pool Quality, Off-Channel Habitat, and Refugia indicators will not be affected by the proposed grazing.

Riparian Vegetation Riparian vegetation is addressed by the Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicator.

Space Space is addressed by the Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Pool Quality, Off-channel

Habitat, Refugia, Width-to-Depth Ratio, Floodplain Connectivity, and Change in Peak/Base Flows indicators. The Large Woody Material, Pool Quality, Off-Channel Habitat, Refugia and Change in Peak/Base Flows indicators will not be affected by the proposed grazing.

Spawning Gravel Spawning gravel is addressed by the Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness indicator.




Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.

53

Cattle grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11%) during the 1993 stream


Adult and Juvenile Migration Corridors Cover/Shelter Cover/shelter is addressed by the Large Woody Material, Pool Quality, Off-Channel Habitat, Refugia,



Safe Passage Safe passage is addressed by the Physical Barrier indicator. The Physical Barrier indicator will not be

affected by the proposed grazing.



54






Water Temperature Water temperature is addressed by the Temperature indicator.

Water Velocity Water velocity is addressed by the Change in Peak/Base Flows indicator. The Change in Peak/Base

Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Cattle grazing on the Cow Creek Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to Cow

Creek. The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek is currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11%) during the 1993 stream

survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed

55

under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Bull Trout Critical Habitat PCEs Critical habitat for bull trout is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Bull Trout PCE Summary Livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E

will have no effect to bull trout PCEs because critical habitat for bull trout is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

F. Determination of Effects

1. Introduction After a determination of the direct and indirect risks to listed fish and their habitat indicators has been

completed, the next step is to determine the actual effect that these projects will have on the listed fish. This analysis must involve a check of the existing baseline condition for the project areas, coupled with a specific analysis of the effects the projects may have on the life history of the listed fish. Guidance for making this biological determination was provided by Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale (NFMS 1996) and A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulation Watershed Scale (USFWS 1998b). These methods were combined to provide a consistent approach for all listed fish species analyzed in this document.

2. Summary of Determinations

Fall Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat: Species Determination

Livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR fall Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• SR fall Chinook salmon are not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Designated Critical Habitat Determination Livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E

May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon due to the following:

56

• Cattle spend little time in riparian areas as a result of microclimatic, topographic, and vegetative features of the Cow Creek Allotment when the allotment is grazed.

• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek are considered to be at PNV • Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek are rated good.

Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat: Species Determination

Livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• Spawning habitat is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment. • Cattle spend little time in riparian areas as a result of microclimatic, topographic, and

vegetative features of the Cow Creek Allotment when the allotment is grazed. • Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek are considered to be at PNV • Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek are rated good.


May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon due to the following:



Summer Steelhead and Designated Critical Habitat: Species Determination

Livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect summer steelhead. This determination was based on the following:

• Salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover • The relatively low redd density and scattered nature of summer steelhead redds. • Physical obstructions are present to prevent livestock access to the majority of spawning

habitat. • Cattle spend little time in riparian areas as a result of microclimatic, topographic, and

vegetative features of the Cow Creek Allotment when the allotment is grazed. • Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek are considered to be at PNV

57

• Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek are rated good.


May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for steelhead. This determination was based on the following:

• Physical obstructions are present to prevent livestock access to the majority of spawning habitat.


• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek are considered to be at PNV • Aquatic and riparian habitat conditions for Cow Creek are in good condition.

Bull Trout and Designated Critical Habitat: Species Determination

Livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:

• CR bull trout are not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.


will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:

• Designated critical habitat for CR bull trout is not present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

G. Magnuson-Stevens Act

1. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), as amended by the

Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), requires the inclusion of essential fish habitat (EFH) descriptions in Federal fishery management plans. In addition, the MSA requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect EFH. The Imnaha Subbasin has been designated as EFH for Chinook salmon. EFH is present on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Based on the ESA effects analysis for the proposed grazing on habitat for Chinook salmon, proposed

livestock grazing activities on the Cow Creek Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E May Affect,

58

but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect EFH for MSA-managed species on the Cow Creek Allotment. This determination was based on the following:



H. Summary of Determinations

Table 38. Summary of Effects Determinations for the Cow Creek Allotment for Alternatives B, C, D, and E. NE = No Effect, NLAA = May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect, LAA = May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect, N/A = Not Applicable.

Effects Determination CR Bull trout SR Steelhead SR


SR Fall Chinook Salmon

Species NE NLAA NLAA NE

Designated Critical Habitat NE NLAA NLAA NLAA

Essential Fish Habitat N/A N/A NLAA NE

59

LONE PINE ALLOTMENT


1. Location of Allotment The Lone Pine Allotment is located in three subwatersheds; the Imnaha River-Thorn Creek

Subwatershed (HUC 170601020510) in the Imnaha River system; and in the Snake River-Dug Bar SWS (HUC 170601010305) and Deep Creek SWS (HUC 170601010303) in the Snake River system. Private land within the subwatersheds are not part of the allotment; therefore the Forest Service has no management oversight of private lands within the subwatersheds.


General Description The Lone Pine Allotment is classified as a winter allotment. The Lone Pine Allotment is about 11,006

acres in size and consists entirely of NFS lands. The Lone Pine allotment is currently vacant due to the previous permittees permit cancellation due to non-compliance; the permit was not cancelled due to resource concerns. The Nez Perce Tribe also grazes the Lone Pine Allotment under the terms of the 1855 Treaty. Tribal grazing is managed exclusively by the Tribe and is not managed by the Forest Service nor does the Forest Service have any oversight over tribal grazers.

The Lone Pine Allotment is currently divided into six pastures; Big Canyon, Birch Creek, Dug Creek,

Little Deep Creek and the Hospital Area. A horse pasture is also adjacent to the Dug Bar facilities. The allotment also contains closed areas adjacent to the Imnaha River and Snake River. Cattle are not permitted to graze in the closed areas. Closed areas are either fenced or inaccessible to livestock due to steep, cliffy terrain.

The predominately low elevation pastures in the Lone Pine Allotment are the Big Canyon, Hospital

Area, Birch Creek, and lower half of Dug Creek pastures. Although the Big Canyon pasture begins at the Snake River level, it goes up in elevation to the top of Cactus Mountain. The Big Canyon pasture is divided by low and high elevation by a drift fence along the Dug Bar road. The Big Canyon pasture is primarily dominated by bluebunch wheatgrass communities, at the higher elevation points there are bands of Idaho fescue dominated plant associations. The Hospital Area is along the Snake River on a degraded bench, primarily composed of warm season perennial grasses such as sand dropseed and red threeawn and annual species. In areas of steeper slopes and less historical impact there is bluebunch wheatgrass. The Birch Creek pasture is largely bluebunch wheatgrass plant associations in the lower elevations and as the elevation increases towards Summit ridge the vegetation shifts to a shrub and Idaho fescue mix. The Dug Creek pasture follows the same basic vegetation pattern as the Birch Creek pasture. However the Dug Creek pasture has more area of bench land, and in some areas like Dug Basin, evidence of past historical

60

land uses such as haying and cultivation are visible in the vegetation and infrastructure to get to the field such as old roads. The highest elevation pasture, or breaks pasture is Little Deep Creek pasture. In the lower part of the pasture closer to the Snake River the dominant plant association is more aligned with that of bluebunch wheatgrass.

The Lone Pine Allotment has a mixture of fences and natural barriers to create district pastures or

grazing areas. Water sources are a mix of springs and small nonfish bearing streams in the allotment. In the Big Canyon pasture the livestock water is in the form of springs that have been developed at or above bench level. There are also upland water sources in the Birch Creek, Dug Creek, and Little Deep Creek pastures at bench level or higher. In the Birch Creek, Dug Creek and Little Deep Creek livestock can also water out of creeks. The air and water temperature, thick riparian vegetation, and in some places Himalayan blackberry focus the water areas and discourage livestock from staying beyond getting a drink.

61

Figure 10. Lone Pine Allotment.

62

Rangeland Vegetation Condition and Trend Based on a combination of results from assessment and monitoring, and field inspections all pastures

within the Lone Pine Allotment are in satisfactory condition.

3. Structural Improvements

Off-site Water Developments Lone Pine Allotment has 17 developed water sources. Since the allotment is used during the winter

grazing season (i.e. late fall, winter, and early spring) the location of water sources is not a determinant of cattle distribution. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperature differentials and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas.

Table 39 below shows the number of existing off-site water sources in the Lone Pine Allotment.

Table 39. Existing and planned off-site water developments in the Lone Pine Allotment. Allotment Existing Off-site Water Lone Pine Allotment 17


distribution on the Lone Pine Allotment, thus fencing is limited to 10.1 miles on the allotment. Accessible areas of the Snake River are fenced to exclude cattle. Majority of this fencing was reconstructed in 2012 by the Forest Service.

4. Stream and Riparian Existing Conditions

Rosgen Stream Types in the Lone Pine Allotment (Rosgen 1996) The Lone Pine Allotment is bordered by three streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species:

Snake River, Imnaha River, and Deep Creek (Table 40). These streams are inaccessible to livestock due to fencing or steep cliffy terrain. Streambanks of all streams are either boulder (Snake River and Imnaha River) or cobble (Deep Creek) and thus are resistant to alteration by livestock.

63




Rosgen Stream Type

Lone Pine Snake River 0.2 Boulder G2c

Imnaha River 4.0 Cobble B3

Deep Creek 8.4 Cobble A3

Riparian Plant Associations Riparian plant associations were determined following Wells (2006) Deep Canyon and Subalpine

Riparian and Wetland Plant Associations of the Malheur, Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. The riparian plant associations for ESA streams within the Lone Pine Allotment are shown below (Table 41). The riparian area adjacent to the Snake River is Functioning at Risk (FAR) due to historic homesteading activities. The riparian area adjacent to the Imnaha River is Functioning at Risk (FAR) due to the construction of the Eureka Bar Trail and historic mining activities.

Table 41. Plant associations of riparian areas on the Lone Pine Allotment Stream Name Reach Plant Association Condition

Snake River 1 Netleaf Hackberry/Bluebunch Wheatgrass Community FAR

Imnaha River 1 Netleaf Hackberry/Brome Plant Community FAR

Stream Habitat Surveys The stream survey on Deep Creek was conducted in 1997 using the Region 6 (R-6) stream survey

protocol. Stream surveys provide a snapshot in time of aquatic habitat conditions. Stream survey data for Deep Creek was lost in the 2010 office fire, though some data was available in the electronic database. Stream surveys provide a snapshot in time of aquatic habitat conditions. A stream survey of the Snake River has not been accomplished because its size is outside the scope of the R-6 stream survey protocol. Based on professional opinion, Deep Creek pool frequency and width-to-depth ratio are within the natural potential for Deep Creek.

64



Rosgen Type

Ave Wetted Width


% Particles <6.3mm

W/D Ratio

% Stable Banks

Deep Creek 1997 A 10.3 19.6 47.9 6 12.4 N/D


Notes 1) RMO based on stream wetted width: < 10 ft, > 96 pools/mile; 10 to 20 ft, 56 to 96 pools/mile; 20 to 25 ft, 47 to 56 pools/mi; 25 to 50 ft, 26 to 47 pools/mile; 50 to 75 ft, 23 to 26 pools/mile.



• Integrator Reach – Downstream most low gradient (< 3%) reach within Interior Columbia

Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP) 6th field Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC). Integrator reaches are randomly selected and sampled as part of the five year rotating sampling design.


feet). PIBO effectiveness monitoring sites were not established in the Lone Pine Allotment when the PIBO

study began. The WMO has not established a DMA on the Imnaha River, Snake River or Deep Creek due to the use patterns of livestock during the grazing period. Cattle in the allotment primarily utilize the uplands and bench areas because these areas are where the forage is primarily located and these areas are warmer than the stream bottoms. The Imnaha River and Deep Creek are not accessible to livestock due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River area is not authorized for grazing and accessible areas are fenced off from the rest of the allotment or are inaccessible due to steep cliffy terrain. Cattle use nonfish bearing streams and upland water sources in the allotment for watering.

65



Limited water temperature monitoring has occurred on the Lone Pine Allotment. Water temperature

monitoring for the Imnaha River is discussed under the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Based on water temperature data collected during 1997 stream survey of Deep Creek, the upper reaches of Deep Creek are meeting the PACFISH RMO of 60°F for spawning habitat (Table 43). The lowest reach of Deep Creek, below the lower fish barrier, also exceeded the PACFISH RMO of 60°F for spawning habitat. This reach of Deep Creek likely provides spawning habitat for steelhead.


(F)

Deep Creek 7/7/1997 - 1 0.0 – 6.4 68 61.3

2 6.4 – 8.5 53.6 53.2

3 8.5 – 11.9 51.8 47.1

4 11.9 – 14.2 48.2 46.2

Proper Functioning Condition Surveys (PFC) PFC assessments have not been completed on the Lone Pine Allotment because fish bearing streams

are either inaccessible to livestock due to steep cliffy terrain (Imnaha River, Deep Creek), or fencing and steep cliffy terrain (Snake River).

5. Pastures and Streams with ESA-Listed Fish and/or Critical Habitat, and Livestock Access to Streams

Allotment Pastures and Streams with ESA Listed Fish and/or Designated Critical Habitat Three streams with ESA fish species border the Lone Pine Allotment: the Snake River, the Imnaha

River, and Deep Creek. The Snake River provides spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon, migration habitat for SR steelhead, and feeding/overwinter/migration habitat for CR bull trout. The Imnaha River provides spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon, migration habitat for SR steelhead, and feeding/overwinter/migration habitat for CR bull trout. Deep Creek provides spawning and rearing habitat for habitat for SR steelhead in the lower 0.5 mile (a passage barrier is

66

present at the head of this reach). Tables 44 – 47 provide habitat mileages by pasture on the Lone Pine Allotment for ESA-listed fish species.

Table 44. Steelhead distribution and stream use by pastures for Lone Pine Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream Migration Rearing Spawning

and Rearing

Total DCH

Birch Creek Snake River 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5

Closed Areas Imnaha River 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8

Snake River 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.4 3.4

Dug Creek Deep Creek 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5

Snake River 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0

Hospital Area Snake River 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

Table 45. Spring/summer Chinook salmon distribution and stream use by pastures for Lone Pine Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream Migration Rearing Spawning

and Rearing

Total DCH



Snake River 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.4 3.4

Dug Creek Snake River 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0


Table 46. Fall Chinook salmon distribution and stream use by pastures for Lone Pine Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream Migration Rearing Spawning and Rearing Total DCH



Snake River 0.0 0.0 3.4 3.4 3.4

Dug Creek Snake River 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


67

Table 47. Bull trout distribution and stream use by pastures for Lone Pine Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream FMO Spawning and Rearing Total DCH

Birch Creek Snake River 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5

Closed Areas Imnaha River 1.8 0.0 1.8 1.8

Snake River 3.4 0.0 3.4 3.4

Dug Creek Snake River 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0

Hospital Area Snake River 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

Livestock Access to Streams Deep Creek is a Rosgen stream type “B” channel constrained by a narrow valley. Deep Creek is not

accessible to livestock due to steep terrain. The Imnaha River is not accessible to livestock due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to livestock due to fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Cattle utilize spring developments or nonfish bearing streams for water sources.

6. Individual Stream Descriptions

Snake River The Snake River is a large river that is a G2 Rosgen channel type. The Snake River provides high

quality spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon. The Snake River also provides migratory habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding, migration and overwinter habitat for CR bull trout. Due to the size of the Snake River, it is beyond the scope of the R6 stream survey methodology. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Majority of the fencing was reconstructed in 2012. The adjacent riparian community is a netleaf hackberry/bluebunch wheatgrass community.

Imnaha River The Imnaha River adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment is located in a narrow canyon. The Imnaha

River provides high quality spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon. The Imnaha River also provides migratory habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding, migration and overwinter habitat for CR bull trout. The Imnaha River is not accessible to livestock from the Lone Pine Allotment due to steep cliffy terrain.

Deep Creek Deep Creek is a small, narrow valley, high gradient, Rosgen B3a channel stream. Deep Creek

provides high quality spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead. The lower 0.5 mile of Deep Creek is

68

accessible to steelhead. Above this point is a barrier that is not passible to fish. A second impassible waterfall is located about 3.2 miles above the confluence with the Snake River (marked on the map). Streambank stability is high, LWD levels are high and fine sediment levels are low. The adjacent riparian community is composed of an overstory of mature shrubs. Riparian communities are rated as being at natural potential vegetation. Except for the portion located in the Wild and Scenic River corridor, all of Deep Creek is located in the Hells Canyon Wilderness. Deep Creek is not accessible to livestock due to steep cliffy terrain.

7. Management History The Lone Pine allotment is currently vacant because of the previous permittee’s permit cancellation

due to non-compliance in June of 2009 for failing to comply with the terms of the grazing permit; the permit was not cancelled due to resource concerns.

The Forest Service grazing permit for the Lone Pine Allotment has been vacant since 2009. The Nez Perce Tribe is currently grazing the allotment under the provisions of the 1855 Treaty. Management of the Tribal grazing program is the sole responsibility of the Tribe and the Forest Service has no management oversight of tribal grazers.

Multiple Indicator Monitoring System (MIMS), (Burton et al., 2010) DMAs have not been established along the Imnaha River, Snake River, and Deep Creek on the Lone

Pine Allotment. Multiple Indicator monitoring on the Lone Pine Allotment is a low priority because access by cattle to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek is blocked steep cliffy terrain. Access to the Snake River is blocked by fencing and steep cliffy terrain.

B. Proposed Action

1. Stocking Rates and Allotment and Pasture Use Descriptions The proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and

E will authorize livestock grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment for the period of 2015 through 2025. A total of 1,833 head months of livestock grazing would be authorized in the 11,138 acre Lone Pine Allotment between the dates of December 1 and May 31, annually (Table 48).

Table 48. Animal class, number and on/off dates for the Lone Pine Allotment.


c/c 300 12/1-5/31

h/m 6 12/1-5/31 * c/c = cow/calf pairs; h/m = horses/mules

69

Under the proposed action, grazing would continue to be managed to maintain desired upland and riparian conditions. Grazing use by the Nez Perce Tribe would reduce the head months available to the Forest Service Permittee to insure that the total HM authorized for the Lone Pine Allotment would not be exceeded. The number of head and dates may vary from pasture to pasture, based on climatic condition, utilization, and/or resource conditions. The Lone Pine Allotment grazing is rotated every year on a north to south and south to north basis.

The Lone Pine Allotment is currently divided into six pastures; Big Canyon, Birch Creek, Dug Creek,

Little Deep Creek and the Hospital Area. A horse pasture is also adjacent to the Dug Bar facilities. The Little Deep Creek pasture contains 0.5 miles of spawning habitat for steelhead. Every other year,

cattle would be present in the Little Deep Creek pasture during the steelhead spawning and incubation period (March through June 30). However, the area where steelhead spawning habitat is present is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain.

Spawning habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon is present in the Imnaha River and Snake River adjacent

to the allotment. However, spawning habitat is either fenced off from livestock or is inaccessible to livestock due to steep cliffy terrain.

Spawning habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon and CR bull trout is not present on the

allotment.

4. Monitoring No additional monitoring for aquatic resources is proposed for the Lone Pine Allotment because

streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species are not accessible to cattle on the Lone Pine Allotment. Deep Creek and the Imnaha River are not accessible due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of fences and steep cliffy terrain.


1. Fall Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat There are two streams adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment that provide habitat for SR fall Chinook

salmon: the Imnaha River (1.8 miles) and the Snake River (6.9 miles). Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of fences and steep cliffy terrain. There is 8.7 miles of designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon on the Lone Pine Allotment.

70

2. Spring Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat There are two streams adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment that provide habitat for SR spring/summer

Chinook salmon: the Imnaha River (1.8 miles) and the Snake River (6.9 miles). Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of fences and steep cliffy terrain. There is 8.7 miles of designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Lone Pine Allotment.

3. Summer Steelhead and Designated Critical Habitat There are three streams adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment that provide habitat for SR steelhead: the

Imnaha River (1.8 miles), the Snake River (6.9 miles), and Deep Creek (0.5 miles). Deep Creek and the Imnaha River are not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of fences and steep cliffy terrain. There is 9.2 miles of designated critical habitat for SR steelhead on the Lone Pine Allotment.

4. Bull Trout and Designated Critical Habitat There are two streams adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment that provide habitat for CR bull trout: the

Imnaha River (1.8 miles) and the Snake River (6.9 miles). Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of fences and steep cliffy terrain. There is 8.7 miles of designated critical habitat for CR bull trout on the Lone Pine Allotment.




Evaluation of effects was based on current habitat conditions, previously identified RMOs, and the

Matrix of Pathways and Indicators as described in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale (NMFS 1996) and A Framework to Assist in Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Bull Trout Subpopulation Watershed Scale (USFWS 1998).

71

Table 49. Determination of Risk to Listed Species for the Lone Pine Allotment. Risk of Risk of Indirect Effects to Each Matrix Indicator * *Direct Effects

Temp

Sed

Chem Cont

Phys Barr

LWM

Pool Freq / Qual

Off- Chan

Refug

W/D

Bank Stab

Flood plain

Road Dens

Distur Hist / Flows

RHCA

Disturb Reg

L/M N L N N N N N N L L N N N L N


2. Direct and Indirect Effects This chapter analyzes the potential direct and indirect effects that livestock grazing on the Cow Creek




Direct Effects to Fall Chinook Salmon Spawning habitat for fall Chinook salmon is not accessible to cattle on the Lone Pine Allotment. The

Imnaha River are not accessible due to steep cliffy terrain. The Snake River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of fences and steep cliffy terrain.

Summary of Direct Effects to Fall Chinook Salmon There is no risk of direct effects to fall Chinook salmon as a result of trampling of redds by livestock.

Chinook spawning habitat is not accessible to cattle on the Lone Pine Allotment. There is no risk to juvenile fall Chinook salmon because juvenile rearing habitat is not accessible to

cattle on the Lone Pine Allotment

Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon Spawning habitat for spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present in the Imnaha River or Snake

River adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment.

72


livestock. Spring/summer Chinook salmon spawning habitat is not present on the Lone Pine Allotment. There is no risk to juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon because juvenile rearing habitat is not

accessible to cattle on the Lone Pine Allotment.

Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead Deep Creek adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment provides spawning and rearing habitat for summer

steelhead. However, Deep Creek is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain.

Summary of Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead There is no risk of direct effects to SR steelhead as a result of trampling of redds by livestock because

spawning and rearing habitat in Deep Creek is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. There is no risk to juvenile spring/summer steelhead because juvenile rearing habitat is not accessible

to cattle on the Lone Pine Allotment.

Direct Effects to Bull Trout Spawning habitat for bull trout is not present in the Imnaha River or Snake River adjacent to the Lone

Pine Allotment.

Summary of Direct Effects to Bull Trout There is no risk of direct effects to bull trout as a result of trampling of redds by livestock. Bull trout

spawning habitat is not present on the Lone Pine Allotment. There is no risk to juvenile/adult bull trout because rearing habitat is not accessible to cattle on the

Lone Pine Allotment.



73

The matrix used to assess impacts to SR spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon is the same as used for SR steelhead (NMFS 1996). Therefore the analysis used for determining impacts to matrix habitat indicators for SR steelhead are applicable to SR spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon.




indicators are discussed below. This discussion is based on professional judgment along with site specific knowledge of the project area, past monitoring results, stream habitat survey data, and temperature data. Habitat Indicators which have the greatest risk of being affected by these projects include Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicators. Potential effects to these habitat indicators are discussed below.

74

Table 50. Current multi-species matrix ratings for Lone Pine Allotment subwatersheds in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. See Table A-1 for names and full HUC of subwatersheds. * Habitat indicators with potential to be modified by livestock grazing. (See note below for a description of functionality ratings)


Functioning at Risk


Risk



Temperature (Steelhead/Salmon)* 510, 305,303 Maintain

Temperature (Bull Trout)* 510, 305,303 Maintain

Sediment/Turbidity* 510, 305,303 Maintain Chemical Contamination/ Nutrients 510 305,303 Maintain


Physical Barriers 510, 305,303 Maintain


Substrate* 510, 305,303 Maintain

Large Woody Debris 303 510,305 Maintain

Pool Quality/ Frequency 510, 305,303 Maintain

Off-Channel Habitat 510, 305,303 Maintain

Refugia 305,303 510 Maintain


Width/Depth Ratio* 510, 305,303 Maintain

Streambank Condition* 305,303 510 Maintain

Floodplain Connectivity 510, 305,303 Maintain


Change in Peak/Base Flows 510, 303 305 Maintain

Increase in Drainage Network 510, 305,303 Maintain


Road Density (Steelhead/Salmon) 510, 305,303 Maintain

Road Density (Bull Trout) 303,305 510 Maintain

Disturbance History 510, 305,303 Maintain

Riparian Conservation Areas* 305,303 510 Maintain

Disturbance Regime 510, 305,303 Maintain

Overall SWS Rating 510, 305,303 Maintain 1) Restore: to change the function of a “functioning at risk” indicator to “functioning appropriately”, or change the function of a “functioning at unacceptable risk” indicator to “functioning at risk or “functioning appropriately” (i.e. it does not apply to “functioning appropriately” indicators). Maintain: the function of an indicator does not change (i.e. it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). Degrade: to change the function of an indicator for the worse (i.e. it applies to all indicators

75


Temperature








Unacceptable Risk






76

Table 53. Peak use periods of fishbearing streams by ESA-listed fish species in the Lone Pine Allotment.

Species Life Stage Imnaha River Snake River Deep Creek

Steelhead Adult Migration (mid-Feb through mid-April)

Migration (mid-Feb through mid-April)

Spawning (below lower falls; mid-April through mid-June)

Juvenile Smolt migration (mid-April through May) Rearing (Sept through May)

Smolt migration (mid-April through May) Rearing (Sept through May)

Rearing (below lower falls; year round?)


Adult Migration (late May through early July)

Migration (late May through early July)

Not present

Juvenile Smolt migration (mid-Feb through mid-May) Rearing (Sept through May)

Smolt migration (mid-Feb through mid-May) Rearing (Sept through May)

Not present

Fall Chinook Salmon Adult Spawning (mid-Sept through Nov)

Spawning (mid-Sept through Nov)

Not present

Juvenile Rearing (mid-Feb through mid-July)

Rearing (mid-Feb through mid-July)

Not present


Migration (May through June) Rearing (Nov through June)


Not present

Juvenile Not present Not present Not present

The Imnaha River, spawning and rearing habitat for fall Chinook salmon, consistently exceeded 57 °F

during the first half of the spawning period, NMFS’s upper threshold to be considered properly functioning for spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead (Figure 11). The Imnaha River also consistently exceeded 57 °F during the latter half of the rearing period for juvenile fall Chinook salmon and the adult migration period of spring Chinook salmon (Figure 11). During the migration period for adult spring/summer Chinook salmon (May through early July), the Imnaha River is properly functioning for temperature. During the rearing period for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon (September through May), the Imnaha River is properly functioning for temperature. USFWS does not provide a criterion for migration habitat for bull trout.

77

Figure 11. Comparison of stream temperatures to NMFS temperature thresholds for the lower Imnaha River.

Water temperature data is not available for the Snake River or Deep Creek. Water temperature in Deep Creek is likely at its natural potential since the riparian habitat is in excellent condition and no management activities are occurring that would alter the form and function of riparian areas.

Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not

have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect on stream temperatures.

78









Fine sediment levels in Deep Creek were found to be at low levels (6%) during the 1997 stream

survey. Fine sediment levels in the Imnaha River were found to be at moderate levels (10%) during the 1998 stream survey. Observations made during site visits corroborated the stream survey data. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Data for the Snake River is unavailable.

Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the livestock grazing activities on the Lone

Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.


have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore there is a low potential for the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have an effect on fine sediment levels.

Width/Depth Ratio




Bull Trout** <10 11 - 20 >20 * For Bull Trout: Functioning Appropriately, Functioning at Risk, Functioning at Unacceptable Risk. **Average Wetted Width/ Maximum Depth Ratio in scour pools in a reach.

79

Width-to-depth ratios of streams in the action area exceed the PACFISH RMO (<10). However, the PACFISH RMO was developed prior to advances in our understandings of the relationship between width-to-depth ratios and natural channel forms (sensu Rosgen, 1996). Of the four Rosgen channel types that reflect natural channels (A, B, E, and C channel types) only E channel types have average width-to-depth ratios of less than 10 (Rosgen, 1996). Due to topography, there are no areas in the action area where E channel types would be expected to occur. Normal ranges for width-to-depth ratios (bankfull width) for Rosgen B and C channels are 12 to 20 and 13.5 to 28.7, respectively (Rosgen, 1996). The width-to-depth ratio in Deep Creek was 12.4 during the 1997 stream survey and the width-to-depth ratio for the Imnaha River was 13.2 during the 1998 stream survey. Observations made site visits indicate the current width-to-depth ratio is within the normal range for both streams.


have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on stream temperatures.

The width-to-depth ratios of streams adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment are expected to be

maintained under the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.








Streambank stability was 95% for the Imnaha River during the 1998 stream survey. Streambank stability data for Deep Creek was lost during the 2010 WMO office fire. However, observations made during recent site visits indicate that Deep Creek is stable stream channel and is meeting the bank stability RMO. Data for the Snake River is unavailable.


have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on streambank stability.

Streambank stability of streams adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment are expected to be maintained

under the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

80









Riparian areas adjacent to Deep Creek are currently in good condition (See photos in Appendix A). Recent visits to Deep Creek found healthy riparian communities consisting of overstories of pine, cottonwood, and white alder with understories of lower growing shrubs such as dogwood and willows. These riparian plant communities are at PNV.

Riparian areas adjacent to the Imnaha River and Snake River display effects from historic activities.

Homesteading along both rivers has altered the species composition and structure of riparian areas. The riparian area adjacent to the Imnaha River has been impacted by past trail construction and historic mining activities.


have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment under the action alternatives, Alternatives B, C, D and E, will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species.

Riparian areas of Deep Creek, the Imnaha River and the Snake River are expected to be maintained

because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

81

Summary of Effects on Environmental Baseline Proposed livestock grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment under the action alternatives, Alternatives B,

C, D and E, will maintain all habitat indicators susceptible to alteration by livestock grazing (Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Stability, and RHCAs) because:

• Riparian areas adjacent to the Snake River are not accessible due to fencing and steep cliffy terrain

• Riparian areas adjacent to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek are not accessible due to steep cliffy terrain.








Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Fine sediment levels in Deep Creek were found to be at low levels (6%) during the 1997 stream



have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams

82

that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.









Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Fine sediment levels in Deep Creek were found to be at low levels (6%) during the 1997 stream



have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under

83

Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.








Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not

have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas are expected to be maintained because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.



84



Streambank Condition, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicators. The Large Woody Material, Pool Quality, Off-Channel Habitat, and Refugia indicators will not be affected by livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E.









have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

85

Fine sediment levels in Deep Creek were found to be at low levels (6%) during the 1997 stream survey. Fine sediment levels in the Imnaha River were found to be at moderate levels (10%) during the 1998 stream survey. Observations made during site visits corroborated the stream survey data. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Data for the Snake River is unavailable.













86




have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.



Bull Trout Critical Habitat PCEs PCE 1. Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity (hyporehic flows) to

contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia. This PCE is addressed by the Floodplain Connectivity and Change in Peak/Base Flow indicators. The

Floodplain Connectivity and Change in Peak/Base Flow indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect on PCE 1.

PCE 2. Migratory habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between

spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not limited to permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers.

This PCE is addressed by the Chemical Contaminants/Nutrients, Temperature, and Change in

Peak/Base Flows indicators. The Chemical Contaminants/Nutrients and Change in Peak/Base Flows indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.

87

Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species.

Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E

will have no effect on PCE 2. PCE 3. An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic

macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. This PCE is addressed by the Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Chemical

Contamination/Nutrients, Physical Barriers, Large Wood, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Refugia, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, and Floodplain Connectivity indicators. The Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Physical Barriers, Large Wood, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Refugia, and Floodplain Connectivity indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.


have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the proposed action because the proposed action will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.




have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect to PCE 3.

PCE 4. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and

processes with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure.

88

This PCE is addressed by the Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency and Quality, Large Pools, Off

Channel Habitat, and Refugia indicators. The Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency and Quality, Large Pools, Off Channel Habitat, and Refugia indicators are unlikely to be affected by the proposed grazing.


will have no effect on PCE 4. PCE 5. Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15° C (36 to 59 ° F), with adequate thermal refugia

available for temperatures at the upper end of this range. Specific temperatures within this range will vary depending on bull trout life-history stage and form; geography; elevation, diurnal and seasonal variation; shade such as that provided by riparian habitat; and local groundwater influence.

This PCE is addressed by the Temperature indicator. Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not

have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the proposed action because the proposed action will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.


will have no effect on PCE 5. PCE 6. Substrates of sufficient amount, size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo

overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A minimal amount (e.g. less than 12 percent) of fine substrate less than 0.85 mm (0.03 in) in diameter and minimal embeddedness of these fines in larger substrates are characteristic of these conditions.

This PCE is addressed by the Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness indicator. Fine sediment levels in Deep Creek were found to be at low levels (6%) during the 1997 stream


89

Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect to PCE 6.

PCE 7. A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, if

regulated, currently operate under a biological opinion that addresses bull trout, or a hydrograph that demonstrates the ability to support bull trout populations by minimizing daily and day-to-day fluctuations and minimizing departures from the natural cycle of flow levels corresponding with seasonal variation.

This PCE is addressed by the Change in Peak/Base flows indicators. Water quantity is addressed by

the Change in Peak/Base Flows indicator. The Change in Peak/Base Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.


will have no effect on PCE 7. PCE 8. Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are

not inhibited. This PCE is addressed by the Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Chemical

Contamination/Nutrients, and Change in Peak Base Flow indicators. Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, and Change in Peak Base Flow indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.


have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed grazing on the Lone Pine Allotment will have no effect on riparian areas adjacent to streams that provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.



90

Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect to PCE 8.

PCE 9. Few or no nonnative predatory (e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass;

inbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competitive (e.g. brown trout) species present. This PCE is addressed by the Persistence and Genetic Integrity indicators. Livestock grazing will not result in the introduction, spread, or augmentation of brook trout or other

nonnative species on the Lone Pine Allotment. Smallmouth bass are present in the lower Imnaha River and the Snake River. Proposed livestock grazing will not result in the increase in water temperatures that could facilitate spread of smallmouth bass because of cattle are not having effects to water temperatures on the Lone Pine Allotment.


will have no effect on PCE 9.

Bull Trout PCE Summary Cattle do not have access to the Imnaha River and Deep Creek due to steep cliffy terrain and do not

have access to the Snake River due to a combination of fencing and steep cliffy terrain. Therefore proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect to designated critical habitat for bull trout.




91



Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR fall Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for fall Chinook.

Designated Critical Habitat Determination Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E

will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon due to the following: • Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for fall Chinook. • Upland conditions on the Lone Pine Allotment are rated good.


Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for spring/summer Chinook.


will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon due to the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for spring/summer Chinook. • Upland conditions on the Lone Pine Allotment are rated good.


Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR steelhead. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for steelhead.


will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for SR steelhead due to the following:

92

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for steelhead. • Upland conditions on the Lone Pine Allotment are rated good.


Proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for bull trout.


will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for CR bull trout due to the following: • Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for bull trout. • Upland conditions on the Lone Pine Allotment are rated good.



Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), requires the inclusion of essential fish habitat (EFH) descriptions in Federal fishery management plans. In addition, the MSA requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect EFH. The Imnaha Subbasin has been designated as EFH for Chinook salmon. EFH is present on the Lone Pine Allotment.

Based on the ESA effects analysis for the proposed livestock grazing activities on the Lone Pine

Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E on habitat for Chinook salmon, proposed activities will have No Effect on EFH for MSA-managed species on the Lone Pine Allotment. This determination was based on the following:

• The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle from the Lone Pine Allotment due to steep cliffy terrain.

• The Snake River is not accessible to cattle from the Lone Pine Allotment due to fencing and steep cliffy terrain.

93


Table 58. Summary of Effects Determinations for the Lone Pine Allotment for Alternatives B, C, D, and E. NE = No Effect, NLAA = May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect, LAA = May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect, N/A = Not Applicable.




Species NE NE NE NE

Designated Critical Habitat NE NE NE NE

Essential Fish Habitat N/A N/A NE NE

94

RHODES CREEK ALLOTMENT


1. Location of Allotment The Rhodes Creek Allotment is located in five subwatersheds; the Imnaha River-Thorn Creek

Subwatershed (HUC 170601020510), Lower Cow Creek SWS (HUC 170601020509), Lower Lightning Creek SWS (HUC 170601020507), Sleepy Creek SWS (HUC 170601020506),and Upper Lightning Creek SWS (170601020505). Private land within the subwatersheds are not part of the allotment; therefore the Forest Service has no management oversight of private lands within the subwatersheds.


General Description The Rhodes Creek Allotment is classified as a winter allotment. The Rhodes Creek Allotment is

currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger grazing system that includes Cow Creek and Toomey allotments, as well as private land. The allotment consists of two geographically separate units. The main portion of the allotment is located east of the Imnaha River. This portion is about 19,535 acres in size. The smaller portion of the allotment (Tulley pasture) is located west of the Imnaha River and is about 1,014 acres in size. This smaller portion will be transferred to the Toomey Allotment with which it is contiguous to. The allotment consists entirely of NFS lands

The Rhodes Creek Allotment is currently divided into 17 pastures including; Sleepy Breaks,

Lightning/Hangover, Butcher Knife, Rhodes Creek, North Roy, South Roy, Bull Pasture, East Lightning Bench, West Lightning Bench, Westside Cow, Willow Springs, Holmes, Foster, Homestead, McClaren, Lightning Creek, and Tulley pastures. The Tulley pasture will become part of the Toomey Allotment.

The Rhodes Creek Allotment is the largest allotment in the LIRA area, and has the most pastures. The

low elevation pastures include Willow Springs, McClaran (private), Foster, Holmes, and Westside Cow (see Map 10). This set of pastures is to the east of the Imnaha River, and north of Lightning Creek, including pastures on either side of Cow Creek near the confluence with the Imnaha River. These pastures are predominately bluebunch wheatgrass plant association dominant as a result of the lower elevation and south facing slopes. There are pockets of Idaho fescue dominant plant associations within these pastures on north facing slopes. The north facing slope in Westside Cow that faces Cow Creek is the largest exception to the general pattern and is Idaho fescue dominant from the edge of the bench down to the creek, and on the north facing highest elevation portion of the pasture at the very end of Windy Ridge. These pastures are the lowest in elevation (generally) and have the earliest cool-season grass growth and development within the allotment. Many of the “flat” benches (less than 10% slope) have been degraded to annual brome and warm season grasses such as red threeawn and sand dropseed.

95

The bench pastures include East Bench Lightning, on the east side of Lightning Creek, and West Bench Lightning, Bull, North Roy, South Roy, and Homestead (private) on the west side of Lightning Creek. The vegetation in these pastures shift from bluebunch wheatgrass in the lower elevation (Imnaha River side) to Idaho fescue dominated plant associations up Lightning Creek (see Map 11). In West Lightning Bench and Bull pasture the predominant plant associations are bluebunch wheatgrass dominant with a band of Idaho fescue dominant plant associations at the toe of the slope up to the end of Haas Ridge. In East Lighting Bench pasture the dominant plant associations are bluebunch wheatgrass except for the narrowest portion of the canyon before the confluence of Rhodes Creek and Lightning Creek. North Roy and South Roy are dominated by Idaho fescue plant associations. The bench pastures are the most heterogeneous pastures in terms of cool season grass growth and development because of the increasing elevation gradient and undulating aspects. Many of the “flat” benches (less than 10% slope) have been degraded to annual brome and warm season grasses such as red threeawn and sand dropseed, this is a prominent pattern in the East and West Bench Lightning pastures.

The breaks pastures include Lightning Creek pasture, that includes the confluence of Lightning and

Rhodes Creeks, Butcherknife pasture on the east side of Rhodes Creek, Sleepy Breaks pasture that that straddles Rhodes Creek, and Lightning/Hangover that straddles Lighting Creek. The breaks pastures are predominately Idaho fescue plant associations dominant because they are higher in elevation. There are pockets of bluebunch wheatgrass plant associations in the sunnier and drier south facing slopes. As the elevation increases in these pastures so does the occurrence of timber stringers up towards Summit Ridge. Due to the more rugged and steep topography, the breaks pastures appear to have the least legacy impacts from historical land uses associated with the homesteading era besides heavy grazing. Due to the highest elevations within the project area, the breaks pastures have the most delayed growth in the cool season perennial grasses. The Tulley pasture is also high elevation, however is discussed in the Toomey Allotment discussion because it is on the west side of the Imnaha River.

Similar to the Cow Creek Allotment, the Rhodes Creek Allotment has a mixture of fences and natural

barriers to create district pastures or grazing areas. In the Willow Springs pasture the livestock water is in the form of springs that have been developed at or above bench level. There are also upland water sources in the Holmes and Foster pastures. Livestock distribution to the south side of Westside Cow would benefit from an additional water development and serve as Alternative from watering out of Cow Creek. For the pastures in the Lightning Creek drainage the livestock water from a few narrow places along Lightning Creek and Rhodes Creek. Air and water temperature, thick riparian vegetation, and large substrate focus the water areas and discourage livestock from staying beyond getting a drink. Due to grazing during the cold winter months cattle do not congregate in the riparian area (Masters, et al. 1996) beyond watering because the drainages in the LIRA area tend to act like cold air sinks, and are the areas that get the least sun in the winter due to short day lengths. Results from Keren and Olson (2006) indicate that solar radiation contributes strongly to the thermal balance of a cow during the winter months. In order for the livestock to thermal balance (get warm) they tend to graze where they can find sun in areas

96

away from the colder riparian area. Olson and Wallander (2002) discuss that livestock under long term selecting for performing in winter conditions adjust physiologically and behaviorally to daily and seasonal weather. This supports observations in the LIRA area that behavior, physiological needs, and preferred forage drive the livestock use the uplands significantly more during winter grazing. Several livestock grazing studies support that this would likely be the opposite if the same area was grazed during the summer months (Gillen, et al, 1984).

97

Figure 12. Rhodes Creek Allotment. (Note: Tulley pasture will be transferred to the Toomey Allotment.

98

Rangeland Vegetation Condition and Trend Based on a combination of results from assessment and monitoring, and field inspections all of the

pastures within the Rhodes Creek allotment are in satisfactory condition with the exception of the East and West Lightning Bench, and Bull Pastures.


Off-site Water Developments Rhodes Creek Allotment has 16 developed water sources. Since the allotment is used during the

winter grazing season (i.e. late fall, winter, and early spring) the location of water sources is not a determinant of cattle distribution. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperature differentials and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas.

Table 59 below shows the number of existing off-site water sources in the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

Table 59. Existing and planned off-site water developments in the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Allotment Existing Off-site Water Rhodes Creek 16


distribution on the Rhodes Creek Allotment, thus fencing is limited to 20.0 miles on the allotment. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperature differentials and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas. Cattle are placed in small bands within pastures and are moved as needed to insure utilization objectives are met.


Rosgen Stream Types in the Lone Pine Allotment (Rosgen 1996) The Rhodes Creek Allotment is bordered by the Imnaha River and contains three streams that provide

habitat for ESA-listed fish species: Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek (Table 60). These streams are either Rosgen B3 or A channel types. Banks are composed of cobble and thus are resistant to damage from livestock.

99




Rosgen Stream Type

Rhodes Creek Imnaha River* 4.0 Cobble B3

Cow Creek 5.3 Cobble B3a

Lightning Creek 4.6 Cobble B3a

Sleepy Creek 7.0 Cobble A *Imnaha River forms allotment boundary


Riparian and Wetland Plant Associations of the Malheur, Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. The riparian plant associations for ESA streams within the Cow Creek Allotment are shown below (Table 61). The riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek was determined to be at Potential Natural Vegetation (PNV). The riparian area adjacent to the Imnaha River is FAR due to historic mining activities and the construction of the Eureka Bar Trail. Riparian areas adjacent to Lightning Creek are shrub dominated and PNV in the upper reach and PFC in the lower reaches. The riparian area adjacent to Sleepy Creek is a shrub dominated community and is PFC.

Table 61. Riparian plant associations for ESA streams in the Cow Creek Allotment. Stream Name Reach Plant Association Condition

Imnaha River 1 Netleaf Hackberry/Bluebunch Wheatgrass Community FAR



Lightning Creek 1 Black Cottonwood/Mountain Alder-Red Osier Dogwood Plant Community


Lightning Creek 2 White Alder/Mesic Shrub Plant Community PFC

Lightning Creek 3 White Alder/Mesic Shrub Plant Community PFC

Sleepy Creek 1 White Alder/Mesic Shrub Plant Community PFC

Stream Habitat Surveys Stream survey on Cow Creek (1993), the Imnaha River (1998), and Lightning Creek (1993) using the

Region 6 (R-6) stream survey protocol. Stream surveys provide a snapshot in time of aquatic habitat conditions. Additional information of current aquatic habitat was gathered along all fish-bearing stream

100

reaches during PFC assessments in 2009 and site visits since 2010. Streambank stability along Lightning Creek is currently greater than 90% and thus meets the streambank indicator. A stream survey has not been completed on Sleepy Creek; however, stream habitat is in good condition based on observations made during the 2009 PFC assessment. Based on professional opinion, pool frequencies and width-to-depth ratios are within the natural potential for Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek.



Rosgen Type

Ave Wetted Width


% Particles <6.3mm

W/D Ratio

% Stable Banks

Cow Creek 1993 B 11.4 15.6 49.1 11 16.8 77

Imnaha River2 1998 C 63.7 6.6 1.3 10 13.2 95

Lightning Creek 1993 B 12.6 12.7 30.6 13 14.0 83


Notes 1) RMO based on stream wetted width: < 10 ft, > 96 pools/mile; 10 to 20 ft, 56 to 96 pools/mile; 20 to 25 ft, 47 to 56 pools/mi; 25 to 50 ft, 26 to 47 pools/mile; 50 to 75 ft, 23 to 26 pools/mile. 2) Reaches 1 – 3 (Confluence of Snake River upstream to about Fence Creek).





feet). One stream in the action area, Lightning Creek, is monitored as part of the PIBO Effectiveness

Monitoring Project (Site 136-04-I). PIBO effectiveness monitoring was conducted on Lightning Creek in 2004 and 2009 (Table 63).

With two cycles of PIBO effectiveness monitoring completed at the Lightning Creek DMA, trends in

habitat condition are difficult to determine. Lightning Creek was meeting the RMOs for pool frequency,

101

fine sediment, streambank stability and LWD in 2004. In 2009, Lightning Creek was meeting the RMOs for fine sediment, streambank stability and LWD.

Since no changes in management activities or large channel altering events (e.g. floods, fires) have

occurred from 2004 to 2009 it’s difficult to rationalize the change in RMO values for pool frequency and bankfull width-to- depth ratio between the two surveys. Both of these features have a relatively high resistance to change in Rosgen B-type channels. Taken at face value, three of the habitat indicators (fine sediment, width-to-depth ratio, and LWD) improved from 2004 to 2009, one remained unchanged (streambank stability), and two declined (pool frequency, undercut banks).

Table 63. PIBO Effectiveness Monitoring Data action area for channel-based RMOs, 2004 and 2009. N/D = No data. See Figure 23 for location of sites. Data from 2010 unpublished PIBO data. Shading indicates that applicable RMO is being met. N/O = no RMO identified, N/A = Not Applicable.

Stream PIBO Site

Name (Site ID)

Year Pools per km

Percent Fines (< 6

mm)

Width-to-Depth Ratio (Bf-Riffles)

Percent Undercut

Banks

Stream-bank

Stability

Large Wood per

km

Lightning Cr

136-04-I (882)

2004 38.70 6.6 51.3 21.4 97.7 103.7

2009 28.09 4.4 24.6 9.1 97.7 133.9

RMO 34.8 – 59.7 <20 <10* N/A** ≥90 32.2 *PACFISH RMO is for wetted width-to-depth ratio; **Lightning Creek is a forested stream system.



Limited water temperature monitoring has occurred in the Rhodes Creek Allotment. The most recent

water temperature data has been collected by the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT). Water temperature monitoring has occurred in the lower Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and the Imnaha River.

Water temperatures in the lower Imnaha are seasonally high during July and August (Figure 13).

Salmonids are likely either absent during this period or present only in larger thermally stratified pools or areas where cool water sources are present. Water temperatures during the rest of the year are below 75°F, indicating that the river is habitable by salmonids during the rest of the year.

102

Figure 13. Water temperatures in the lower Imnaha River. Site is located at near the Cow Creek Bridge (Source: Nez Perce Tribe).

Water temperature regimes in lower Cow and Lightning creeks are similar to the temperature regime in the lower Imnaha River but a few degrees cooler (Figure 14). These water temperatures indicate that the lower reaches of Cow and Lightning creeks are cool enough to provide habitat for juvenile steelhead and redband trout during July and August.

103

Figure 14. Water temperatures in lower Lightning Creek. Site is located near the mouth of Lightning Creek (Source: Nez Perce Tribe).

Additional water temperature data is available from Forest Service stream surveys. Maximum recorded water temperatures for all reaches of Lightning Creek were below the PACFISH RMO of 64°F for migration/rearing habitats (Table 64).

Based on water temperature data collected during stream surveys, the upper reaches of Lightning is

meeting the PACFISH RMO of 60°F for spawning habitat (Table 64). The lower reach of Lightning Creek had recorded water temperatures above the PACFISH RMO of 60°F for spawning habitat, though this reach is unlikely to be used for spawning by steelhead.

104


(F)

Lightning Creek 7/6/1993 - 8/4/1993

1 0.0 – 2.8 62 55.4

2 2.8 – 4.8 61 56.9

3 4.8 – 17.3 58 53.4

4 17.3 – 23.5 57 50.9

5 23.5 – 25.7 51 49.0

Proper Functioning Condition Surveys (PFC) PFC assessments were completed on Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek in 2009 in the Rhodes Creek

Allotment using the protocol of Prichard et al. (1998). The PFC assessment data is used in this analysis to supplement stream survey data. The PFC teams consisted of range management specialists, a fish biologist, and vegetation specialist (normally a botanist). All stream reaches were found to be properly functioning. The lower reach of Lightning Creek (PFC Reach 3) was revisited in December 2014 after it was discovered that a portion of the PFC reach was located on private land. Table 65 has been updated to reflect the change in reach boundaries. A summary of PFC assessments are presented in Table 65.

Table 65. Result of 2009 PFC Assessments for Allotments in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis. N/A = Not Applicable



Plant Community


Lightning Cr 1 PFC N/A B/C3

POTR15/ ALIN2-COST4

On FS, between pvt land, down from Rhodes Creek

Rock and shrub stabilized. PIPO, Cottonwood, hawthorn, and alder dominant community. Reach recovering after large flow event (1996-97?). Banks rock and shrub armored. Late seral plant community.

Lightning Cr 2 PFC N/A B3

ALRH2/ Mesic Shrub

Rhodes Cr Allotment / On FS, from pvt land to mouth of Lightning Creek

Historical use (roads, grazing, haying), and presence of Himalayan blackberry has led to a current lower (mid) seral state in understory. Banks armored with rock. Overstory vegetation dominated with white alder. (updated after 2014 field visit) .

105



Plant Community


Lightning Cr 3 PFC N/A B3

ALRH2/ Mesic Shrub

Rhodes Cr Allotment / Start at the confluence of Sleepy Cr and travel upstream

Cobble and woody vegetation armored streambanks. Little livestock impact to stream and access is limited.

Sleepy Cr 1 PFC N/A B3

ALRH2/ Mesic Shrub

Rhodes Cr Allotment / Start at the confluence of Lightning and travel upstream

Weedy areas adjacent to riparian. Streambank rock and woody vegetation armored. Some old gullied areas. Little livestock impact to stream and access is limited. Low amount of fine sediment.


Allotment Pastures and Streams with ESA Listed Fish and/or Designated Critical Habitat Four streams on the Lone Pine Allotment provide habitat for ESA-listed fish species: the Imnaha

River, Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek. The Imnaha River provides spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon, migration habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding/overwinter/migration habitat for CR bull trout. Cow Creek and Lightning Creek provide spawning and rearing habitat for habitat for SR steelhead and winter rearing habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon.

Tables 66 – 69 provide habitat mileages by pasture on the Rhodes Creek Allotment for each species.

Pasture boundaries on the Rhodes Creek Allotment are located on streams in many cases in a reach being accessible from more than one pasture.

Table 66. Steelhead distribution and stream use by pastures for Rhodes Creek Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).


Bull Lightning Creek 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.6

East Bench Lightning Creek 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.8

Foster Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1

Holmes Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3

Horse Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3

106


Imnaha River 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3

Lightning/Hangover Lightning Creek 0.0 0.0 3.5 3.5 3.5

Lightning Creek Lightning Creek 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.7

Sleepy Creek 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.6

McClaran Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3

Sleepy Breaks Sleepy Creek 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

South Roy Canyon Lightning Creek 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.4

Westbench Lightning Lightning Creek 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5

Westside Cow Cow Creek 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5

Willows Springs Imnaha River 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

Table 67. Spring/summer Chinook salmon distribution and stream use by pastures for Rhodes Creek Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).


Bull Lightning Creek 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.6

East Bench Lightning Creek 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.8

Foster Cow Creek 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1

Holmes Cow Creek 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3

Horse Cow Creek 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3

Imnaha River 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3

Lightning Creek Lightning Creek 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.4

McClaran Cow Creek 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3

South Roy Canyon Lightning Creek 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.4

Westbench Lightning Lightning Creek 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5

Westside Cow Cow Creek 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5


Table 68. Fall Chinook salmon distribution and stream use by pastures for Rhodes Creek Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).


Horse Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3 1.3


107

Table 69. Bull trout distribution and stream use by pastures for Rhodes Creek Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream FMO Spawning and Rearing Total DCH

Horse Imnaha River 1.3 0.0 1.3 1.3

Willows Springs Imnaha River 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0

Livestock Access to Streams There is a mix of accessible and inaccessible stream reaches on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. The

portion of the Imnaha River adjacent to the allotment is located in a steep narrow canyon and is inaccessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. The portion of Cow Creek located on the allotment is generally inaccessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. Lightning Creek is generally accessible to cattle. However, cattle generally spend little time along the upper reaches due to the significantly colder air temperatures in the riparian area compared to adjacent benches and uplands. Dense riparian vegetation, locally steep terrain, and LWD also limit access. The lowest reach of Lightning Creek is accessible to cattle. Air temperatures are not a deterrent to cattle along this reach because the valley bottom is fairly broad. Other environmental factors that limit cattle access (dense riparian vegetation, LWD, and steep terrain) are not present along this reach of Lightning Creek. Sleep Creek is similar to upper Lightning Creek; access by cattle is limited by air temperature differentials, dense riparian vegetation, LWD, and steep terrain.


Imnaha River The Imnaha River adjacent to the Rhodes Creek Allotment is located in a narrow canyon. The Imnaha

River provides high quality spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon. The Imnaha River also provides migratory habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding, migration and overwinter habitat for CR bull trout. The Imnaha River is not accessible to livestock due to steep cliffy terrain.

Cow Creek Cow Creek is a small, narrow valley, high gradient, Rosgen B3a channel stream. Cow Creek provides

high quality habitat for steelhead and juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon. Streambank stability is high, LWD levels are high and fine sediment levels are low. Streambanks are composed of cobbles and are resistant to alteration by cattle. The adjacent riparian community is composed of an overstory of mature conifers with a midstory of shrubs that transitions downstream to an overstory of mature shrubs. Riparian communities are rated as being at natural potential vegetation. The portion of Cow Creek

108

located on the allotment is generally inaccessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. Areas of Cow Creek above the Cow Creek Ranch are similar to those on the Cow Creek Allotment.

Lightning Creek Lightning Creek is a small, narrow valley, high gradient, Rosgen B3a channel stream. Lightning

Creek provides high quality habitat for steelhead and juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon. Streambank stability is high, LWD levels are high and fine sediment levels are low. Streambanks are composed of cobbles and are resistant to alteration by cattle. The adjacent riparian community is composed of an overstory of mature conifers with a midstory of shrubs that transitions downstream to an overstory of mature shrubs. Riparian communities are rated as being at natural potential vegetation in the upper reach and PFC in the lower reaches.

Lightning Creek is generally accessible to cattle. However, cattle generally spend little time along the

upper reaches due to the significantly colder air temperatures in the riparian area compared to adjacent benches and uplands. Dense riparian vegetation, locally steep terrain, and LWD also limit access. The lowest reach of Lightning Creek is accessible to cattle. Air temperatures are not a deterrent to cattle along this reach because the valley bottom is fairly broad. Other environmental factors that limit cattle access (dense riparian vegetation, LWD, and steep terrain) are not present along this reach of Lightning Creek.

Sleepy Creek Sleepy Creek is a small, narrow valley, high gradient, Rosgen A3 channel stream. Sleepy Creek

provides high quality habitat for steelhead. Streambank stability is high, LWD levels are high and fine sediment levels are low. Streambanks are composed of cobbles and are resistant to alteration by cattle. The adjacent riparian community is composed of an overstory of mature conifers with a midstory of shrubs that transitions downstream to an overstory of mature shrubs. Riparian communities are rated as being at PFC. Access to Sleepy Creek by cattle is limited by air temperature differentials, dense riparian vegetation, LWD, and steep terrain.

7. Management History This allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger grazing system

which includes Cow Creek and Toomey allotments, as well as private land. These three allotments are grazed by the same permittee. A decreased stocking rate has occurred on this allotment as a result of the current permittees acquirement of Cow Creek and Toomey allotments in 2004. The later season of use (March-May) of the Lightning Creek bench pastures has been significantly reduced since that time. Pasture use within the allotment is based on elevation and weather conditions. When the cattle enter the allotment in November they are placed in the higher elevation “breaks” pastures up the Lightning and Rhodes Creek drainages. The cattle move from pasture to pasture during the grazing season, with moves

109

based on resource condition and utilization standards in key areas. In the higher elevations the cattle may also be moved earlier depending on the weather, as it snows and the forage is no longer readily available, the livestock are moved to lower elevation pastures where the forage is exposed. The cattle are moved into pastures in adjacent allotments (Toomey and Cow Creek Allotments) before and during the calving period which begins in March and a portion of the herd are moved back into the lower elevation pastures in the Rhodes Creek Allotment before exiting the allotment for the grazing season. At the end of the authorized season of use, the livestock are herded utilizing existing trails and roads to avoid trailing through riparian areas before being moved off the allotment. For the Rhodes Creek Allotment this is mainly the Dug Bar Road and the road adjacent to the Lightning and Rhodes Creek drainages.

Range monitoring in the Rhodes Creek Allotment is focused on bench areas where cattle spend the majority of their time when on the allotment. Majority of key areas are located in upland areas of the allotment. Recent utilization monitoring (2008 -2014) shows that the permittee has consistently met objectives for utilization (See Range Specialist report).

Multiple Indicator Monitoring System (MIMS), (Burton et al., 2010) Riparian monitoring is still conducted on the Rhodes Creek Allotment using the previous “Key Area”

monitoring strategy. DMAs have not been established along streams in the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Multiple indicator monitoring in the Rhodes Creek Allotment is a low priority because cattle spend the majority of their time in upland areas in the allotment and the current conditions of aquatic and riparian habitat are in generally excellent condition. Monitoring greenline stubble height and shrub utilization along Cow Creek and Lightning Creek indicate that very little use occurs along these streams during the winter grazing period when the Rhodes Creek Allotment is used.

Monitoring of along Lightning Creek and Cow Creek shows that the permittee has consistently met

objectives for end of season objectives (Table 70).

110

Table 70. Riparian/Greenline Monitoring Data for the Rhodes Creek Allotment, 2008 to 2014.

Pasture Stream Key Area Key Species / Indicator Year End of Season

Objective End of Season Measurement

Objective Met?

Holmes Riparian Terrace

Cow Cr K2A Bluegrass / Mixed Spp 2011 3" 9" Y

Foster Riparian Cow Cr K3A Browse 2011 30% 0% Y Foster Riparian

Terrace Cow Cr K3A Browse 2011 30% 0% Y

Westside Cow Creek

Greenline Cow Cr K4A Bluegrass /

Mixed Spp 2011 3" 5" Y

Westside Cow Creek Terrace Cow Cr K4A Bluegrass /

Mixed Spp 2011 3" 6.3" Y

Eastbench Lightning Riparian

Lightning Cr K6A Bluegrass / Mixed Spp 2010 3" 12" Y

Eastbench Lightning Riparian

Lightning Cr K6 Bluegrass / Mixed Spp 2009 3" 10" Y

Rhodes Creek Greenline Lightning Cr K8A Sedges / Mixed 2009 4" 13" Y

Rhodes Creek Riparian Lightning Cr K8A Bluegrass /

Mixed Spp 2009 3" 15" Y

Lightning Creek Riparian Lightning Cr K13 Browse 2008 30% 18.53% Y

B. Proposed Action

1. Stocking Rates and Allotment and Pasture Use Descriptions The proposed livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D,

and E will authorize livestock grazing on the Rhodes Creek Allotment for the period of 2015 through 2025. A total of 4,495 head months of livestock would be authorized on the 22,660 acre Rhodes Creek Allotment annually between the dates of November 1 and May 15 (Table 71).

Table 71. Animal class, number and on/off dates for the Rhodes Creek Allotment.


c/c 784 11/1-2/15

c/c 500 2/16-4/15

c/c 784 4/16-5/15

h/m 15 11/1-5/15 * c/c = cow/calf pairs; h/m = horses/mules

111

The Rhodes Creek Allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger

grazing system that includes Cow Creek and Toomey allotments, as well as private land. The three allotments are grazed by the same permittee. Private land is not waived to the Forest Service and the Forest Service has no management oversight of these lands.

The Rhodes Creek Allotment would continue to be managed under an elevationally-determined

rotational grazing system within the pastures. Grazing on the Rhodes Creek Allotment would continue to be managed to maintain desired upland and riparian conditions. A decreased stocking rate has occurred on this allotment as a result of the current permittees acquirement of Cow Creek and Toomey allotments in 2004. The later season of use (March-May) of the Lightning Creek bench pastures has significantly reduced since that time.

When the cattle enter the allotment in November they will be placed in the higher elevation pastures in

the Lightning and Rhodes Creek drainages. The cattle will move from pasture to pasture during the grazing season, with moves based on resource condition and utilization standards in key areas. In the higher elevations the cattle may also be moved earlier depending on the weather, as it snows and the forage is no longer readily available, the livestock would be moved to lower elevation pastures where the forage is exposed. The cattle will be moved into pastures in adjacent allotments (Toomey and Cow Creek Allotments) before and during the calving period which begins in March and a portion of the herd will be moved back into the lower elevation pastures in the Rhodes Creek Allotment before exiting the allotment for the grazing season. At the end of the authorized season of use, the livestock will be herded utilizing existing trails and roads to avoid trailing through riparian areas before being moved off the allotment. For the Rhodes Creek Allotment this is mainly the Dug Bar Road and the road adjacent to the Lightning and Rhodes Creek drainages.

The Rhodes Creek Allotment is currently divided into 17 pastures: Sleepy Breaks,

Lightning/Hangover, Butcherknife, Rhodes Creek, North Roy, South Roy, Bull Pasture, East Lightning Bench, West Lightning Bench, Westside Cow, Willow Springs, Holmes, Foster, Homestead pasture, Tulley, and private land pastures (not counted). The proposed action would incorporate the Tulley pasture into the Toomey Allotment, which would reduce the number of pastures in Rhodes Creek to 16.

There are 8.7 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead in the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

Spawning and rearing habitat is present in Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek. All pastures contain spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead except the Willow Springs Pasture. Since the allotment is managed under a rotational system, cattle will be present in pastures with spawning habitat during the steelhead spawning and incubation period (March 1 through June 30) every grazing season. However, cattle utilize Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek for watering only and spend the majority of their time in upland areas because the upland areas are warmer compared to the riparian area

112

along these streams during the period the allotment is grazed. Access to these streams is also limited by locally steep terrain, LWD and dense riparian vegetation. Therefore the potential for cattle disturbing redds is low.

There are 2.3 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook on the Rhodes Creek

Allotment. Spawning and rearing habitat is present in the Imnaha River. Spawning habitat is located in the Horse and Willow Springs pastures. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle in these pastures due to steep cliffy terrain. Therefore the potential for cattle disturbing redds is nonexistent.

Spawning habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon and CR bull trout is not present on the

Rhodes Creek Allotment. There are 1.5 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon in Cow Creek and Lighting Creek in the allotment. Cattle utilize these streams for watering only and spend the majority of their time in upland areas because the upland areas are warmer compared to the riparian areas along Cow Creek and Lightning Creek during the period the allotment is grazed. Access to these streams is also limited by locally steep terrain, LWD and dense riparian vegetation. Therefore the potential for cattle impacts to winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon is low. There is an additional 2.3 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon in the Imnaha River. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle in due to steep cliffy terrain.

There is 2.3 miles of feeding, migration and overwinter habitat for bull trout in the Imnaha River. The

Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle in due to steep cliffy terrain.

4. Monitoring The proposed monitoring strategy for the Rhodes Creek Allotment will utilize implementation and

effectiveness monitoring to assess achievement of Wallowa-Whitman Land and Resource Management Plan (W-W LRMP) goals and objectives, and any Biological Opinion terms and conditions that may result from consultation for ESA listed species.

Additional Monitoring • Cattle distribution monitoring will be carried out periodically during the spring gazing period

to verify that cattle are not congregating in riparian areas during the steelhead spawning/incubation period (March 15 – July 1). Responsible entity: Permittee and Forest Service.

113


1. Fall Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat The Imnaha River adjacent to the Rhodes Creek Allotment provides 2.3 miles of spawning and rearing

habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon. Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. There is 2.3 miles of designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon on the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

2. Spring Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat Spawning habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present on the Rhodes Creek

Allotment. Cow Creek provides 0.8 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Lightning Creek provides 1.8 miles of winter rearing habitat for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. The Imnaha River adjacent to the Rhodes Creek Allotment provides 2.3 miles of migration habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. There is 4.9 miles of designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

3. Summer Steelhead and Designated Critical Habitat Cow Creek provides 0.8 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead on the Rhodes Creek

Allotment. Lightning Creek provides 5.3 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Sleepy Creek provides 2.6 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. The Imnaha River adjacent to the Rhodes Creek Allotment provides 2.3 miles of migration habitat for SR steelhead. Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. There is 11.0 miles of designated critical habitat for SR steelhead on the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

4. Bull Trout and Designated Critical Habitat Spawning and rearing habitat for bull trout is not present on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. The Imnaha

River adjacent to the Rhodes Creek Allotment provides 2.3 miles of feeding, migration, and overwintering habitat for CR bull trout. Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. There is 2.3 miles of designated critical habitat for CR bull trout on the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

114







Temp

Sed

Chem Cont

Phys Barr

LWM

Pool Freq / Qual

Off- Chan

Refug

W/D

Bank Stab

Flood plain

Road Dens

Distur Hist / Flows

RHCA

Disturb Reg

L/M L L N N N N N N L L N N N L N


2. Direct and Indirect Effects This chapter analyzes the potential direct and indirect effects that livestock grazing on the Rhodes

Creek Allotment may have on listed fish and/or their habitat. This analysis uses the best available scientific information and site specific professional judgment to determine these effects. The direct and indirect effects that this project may have on fall Chinook salmon, spring/summer Chinook salmon, summer steelhead, bull trout and their designated critical habitats are analyzed.



115

Direct Effects to Fall Chinook Salmon The Imnaha River provides 2.3 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for fall Chinook salmon on the

Rhodes Creek Allotment. However, the Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain.

Summary of Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon There is no risk of direct effects to fall Chinook salmon as a result of trampling of redds by livestock.

Chinook spawning habitat is present but is not accessible to cattle on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. There is no risk to juvenile fall Chinook salmon because juvenile rearing habitat is not accessible to

cattle on the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon Spawning habitat for spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present on the Rhodes Creek Allotment.


livestock. Chinook spawning habitat is not present on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Direct effects to Chinook juveniles in accessible areas are considered low. In the event that livestock


Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek on the Rhodes Creek Allotment provide spawning and

rearing habitat for summer steelhead. Steelhead fry emerge from gravels by the first of July on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. The use period for the Rhodes Creek Allotment is from November 1 and May 15.

The following pastures on the Rhodes Creek Allotment contain portions of Cow Creek which contain

spawning and rearing habitat: • Horse Pasture • Westside Pasture • Foster Pasture

The following pastures on the Rhodes Creek Allotment contain portions of Lightning Creek which

contain spawning and rearing habitat: • Westbench Pasture • Bull Pasture

116

• Lightning Pasture • Lightning/Hangover Pasture

The following pastures on the Rhodes Creek Allotment contain portions of Sleepy Creek which

contain spawning and rearing habitat: • Lightning Pasture • Sleepy Breaks Pasture

Researchers from the PNW lab at the Starkey Experimental Forest in the Blue Mountains near

Starkey, Oregon submitted the following telemetry data regarding cattle distribution during steelhead spawning times:

DelCurto et al. (2000) determined cattle locations from the Starkey Project Loran telemetry system, to determine relative use of creek bottoms and the potential for direct impacts (trampling) to spawning steelhead. The cattle locations summarized here are those from years 1991, 1993, and 1995, during the period from turn-out (approximately 6/15) through 7/1. Cattle were monitored 24 hours a day. A total of 20,371 cattle locations were logged for the three years during this two week period. Of these, 36 locations included the stream channel (0.2%) and 61 locations (0.3%) included the area within 30 meters of the channel. This clearly shows that the potential for direct impacts to spawning steelhead is extremely low. During this early season of use, forage quality in the uplands is extremely high, and cattle are widely dispersed.

Parsons et al. (2003) found that the season of use affected livestock distribution patterns throughout

their study. During early summer, cattle were consistently observed further from the stream at any given hour than during late summer. During early season grazing (early April through mid July), livestock can be drawn to the uplands by succulent, herbaceous forage and cool temperatures that discourage cattle from loitering in riparian areas and where warmer temperatures in the uplands serve as an attractant to grazing (Gillen et al. 1985, Clary and Webster 1989, Kinch 1989, Clary and Booth 1993).

Research demonstrates that during the early season of use prior to steelhead emergence cattle prefer

uplands and not riparian areas greatly reducing the risk of redd trampling. Salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover (Witzel and

MacCrimmon 1983). This could further reduce the risk of redd trampling since spawning sites may be located where livestock cannot trample redds due to physical obstructions.

Given that: • cattle prefer uplands and not riparian areas during the spawning and incubation period, • that salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover, • the relatively low redd density and scattered nature of summer steelhead redds,

117

There is a low risk of direct effects to steelhead redds from livestock trampling since take is not certain to occur in the nine pastures of the Rhodes Creek Allotment that contain spawning habitat for steelhead.

There are 8.7 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead in the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

Because the allotment is managed under a rotational system, cattle will be present in pastures with spawning habitat during the steelhead spawning and incubation period (March 1 through June 30) every grazing season. However, cattle utilize Cow Creek, Lighting Creek and Sleepy Creek for watering only and spend the majority of their time in upland areas because the upland areas are warmer compared to the riparian area along Cow Creek during the period the allotment is grazed. Access to Cow Creek, Lighting Creek and Sleepy Creek is also limited by locally steep terrain, LWD and dense riparian vegetation. Therefore the potential for cattle disturbing redds is low.



Summary of Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead In the Rhodes Creek Allotment, there is steelhead spawning habitat that is accessible to livestock, and

there is a 2.5 month period where livestock are present and fry have not yet emerged from the gravel. The risk of trampling of steelhead by livestock is considered low for the following reasons:

• cattle prefer uplands and not riparian areas during the period the Rhodes Creek Allotment is grazed

• salmonids have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover • the relatively low redd density and scattered nature of summer steelhead redds • physical obstructions to livestock access to the majority of spawning habitat



Direct Effects to Bull Trout Spawning and rearing habitat are not present on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. Feeding, migration and

overwinter habitat is present in the Imnaha River adjacent to the Rhodes Creek Allotment. This reach of the Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain.

118

Summary of Direct Effects to Bull Trout There would be no direct effects to bull trout from proposed livestock grazing on the Rhodes Creek

Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D and E because spawning habitat for bull trout is not present on the Rhodes Creek Allotment and FMO habitat is inaccessible to cattle.


“Functioning at Risk” (Table 73). The following analysis focuses on indicators that have the potential to be affected by grazing and related activities proposed for the Rhodes Creek Allotment. These are: 1) Temperature, 2) Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate, 3) Width/Depth Ratio, 4) Streambank Condition, and 5) Riparian Conservation Area indicators.






indicators are discussed below. This discussion is based on professional judgment along with site specific knowledge of the project area, past monitoring results, stream habitat survey data, and temperature data. Habitat Indicators which have the greatest risk of being affected by these projects include Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicators. Potential effects to these habitat indicators are discussed below.

119

Table 73. Current multi-species matrix ratings for subwatersheds on the Rhodes Creek Allotment in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. See Table 1 for names and full HUC of subwatersheds. * Habitat indicators with potential to be modified by livestock grazing. (See note below for a description of functionality ratings)

Diagnostic or Pathway Functioning Appropriately Functioning at Risk


Risk


Water Quality Indicators: Temperature (Steelhead/Salmon)* 506,505 510,509,507 Maintain

Temperature (Bull Trout)* All Maintain

Sediment/Turbidity* All Maintain Chemical Contamination/ Nutrients 510,509,507,506,505 Maintain


Physical Barriers All Maintain


Substrate* All Maintain

Large Woody Debris 509,507,505,505 510 Maintain

Pool Quality/ Frequency All Maintain

Off-Channel Habitat All Maintain

Refugia 506,505 510,509,507 Maintain


Width/Depth Ratio* All Maintain

Streambank Condition* 509,507,505,505 510 Maintain

Floodplain Connectivity All Maintain


Change in Peak/Base Flows 510,509,507,506,505 Maintain

Increase in Drainage Network All Maintain


Road Density (Steelhead/Salmon) All Maintain

Road Density (Bull Trout) 510,509,507,506,505 Maintain

Disturbance History All Maintain

Riparian Conservation Areas* 509,507,506,505 510 Maintain

Disturbance Regime All Maintain

Overall SWS Rating All Maintain 1) Restore: to change the function of a “functioning at risk” indicator to “functioning appropriately”, or change the function of a “functioning at unacceptable risk” indicator to “functioning at risk or “functioning appropriately” (i.e. it does not apply to “functioning appropriately” indicators). Maintain: the function of an indicator does not change (i.e. it applies to all indicators

120

regardless of functional level). Degrade: to change the function of an indicator for the worse (i.e. it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). In some cases, a “functioning at unacceptable risk” indicator may be further worsened, and this should be noted.

Temperature








Unacceptable Risk




121

Rhodes Creek provides spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead (Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, Sleepy Creek) and fall Chinook salmon (Imnaha River). NMFS considers water temperatures from 50 – 57°F (max 7-day average) to be properly functioning for steelhead and salmon.

Table 76. Peak use periods of fishbearing streams by ESA-listed fish species in the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

Species Life Stage Imnaha River Cow Creek Lightning Creek Sleepy Creek


Migration (lower reach; mid-April through mid-June) Spawning (middle reaches; mid-April through mid-June)

Migration (lower reach; mid-April through mid-June) Spawning (middle reaches; mid-April through mid-June )

Migration (lower reach; mid-April through mid-June) Spawning (middle reaches; mid-April through mid-June )


Rearing (middle reaches; year round)





Not present Not present Not present


Winter rearing (Sept through May)










Juvenile Not present Not present Not present Not present

Water temperatures in lower Cow Creek and Lightning Creek, spawning and rearing habitat for

steelhead, consistently exceeded 57 °F, NMFS’s upper threshold to be considered properly functioning

122

for spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead from early June through late September (Figure 4). During the rearing period for juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon (September through May), Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are properly functioning.

Figure 1. Comparison of stream temperatures to NMFS temperature thresholds for lower Cow Creek.

Water temperature data collected during the stream surveys on Cow Creek suggest that water temperatures in spawning and rearing areas are within recommended ranges for steelhead (Table 77). Water temperatures for Lightning Creek are functioning at risk for rearing habitat for juvenile steelhead during summer months (Table 77).

123


(F)

Cow Creek 7/6/1993 - 8/4/1993

1 0 – 8.7 61 56.0

2 8.7 – 10.9 54 51.2

3 10.9 – 13.9 52 49.5

4 13.9 - 19.3 61 50.1

Lightning Creek 7/6/1993 - 8/4/1993

1 0.0 – 2.8 62 55.4

2 2.8 – 4.8 61 56.9

3 4.8 – 17.3 58 53.4

4 17.3 – 23.5 57 50.9

5 23.5 – 25.7 51 49.0

Cattle grazing on the Rhodes Creek Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to Cow

Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek. The riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and are rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian areas of Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing.

Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock

grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

124









Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11% and 13%, respectively) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data for Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Visual observations of Sleepy Creek are also below the 20% threshold. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are not susceptible to increase in fine sediment from livestock grazing. Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are armored with cobbles and cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with upland areas, and soils in riparian areas are normally frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek is grazed.

Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock

grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Width/Depth Ratio





Width-to-depth ratios of streams in the action area exceed the PACFISH RMO (<10). However, the PACFISH RMO was developed prior to advances in our understandings of the relationship between width-to-depth ratios and natural channel forms (sensu Rosgen, 1996). Of the four Rosgen channel types that reflect natural channels (A, B, E, and C channel types) only E channel types have average width-to-

125

depth ratios of less than 10 (Rosgen, 1996). Due to topography, there are no areas in the action area where E channel types would be expected to occur. Normal ranges for width-to-depth ratios (bankfull width) for Rosgen B and C channels are 12 to 20 and 13.5 to 28.7, respectively (Rosgen, 1996). The width-to-depth ratio in Cow Creek was 16.8 and Lightning Creek was 14.0 during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits indicate the current width-to-depth ratios for Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are within the normal range for a Rosgen B channel type.

Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are resistant to streambank

alteration from livestock, which could lead to an increase in width-to-depth ratios, because they are armored with cobbles and soils are mostly frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek Allotment is grazed. Additionally, cattle presence along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek is limited due to cold air temperatures, locally steep cliffy terrain, heavy brush, and downed wood.

The width-to-depth ratio of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are expected to be

maintained under action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.








Streambank stability was lower than desired for Cow Creek when this stream was surveyed in the 1993. Independent observations made during the PFC assessment indicate that Cow Creek is stable stream channels and are meeting the bank stability RMO.

Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are resistant to streambank

alteration from livestock because they are armored with cobbles and soils are mostly frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek Allotment is grazed. Additionally, cattle presence along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek is limited due to cold air temperatures, locally steep cliffy terrain, heavy brush, and downed wood.

Streambank stability of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek is expected to be maintained

under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment

126

proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.









Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are currently in good condition (See photos in Appendix E). The PFC assessment of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek found healthy riparian communities consisting of overstories of pine, cottonwood, and white alder with understories of lower growing shrubs such as dogwood and willows. Riparian plant communities were determined to be at PNV.


Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek. The riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and is rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing.

Riparian areas of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are expected to be maintained under

the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed

127

under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Summary of Effects on Environmental Baseline Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and

E will maintain all habitat indicators susceptible to alteration by livestock grazing (Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Stability, and RHCAs) because:

• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are in good condition,

• Streambanks are armored with cobbles, • Cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with uplands during

the winter grazing period (late fall through early spring), • Riparian soils are normally frozen during the period the allotment is grazed (November 1

through April 15), • Dense riparian vegetation, LWD and locally steep terrain limit access, • The Imnaha River is not accessible due to steep cliffy terrain.









128

Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11% and 13%, respectively) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data for Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Visual observations of Sleepy Creek are also below the 20% threshold. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are not susceptible to increase in fine sediment from livestock grazing. Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are armored with cobbles and cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with upland areas, and soils in riparian areas are normally frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek is grazed. Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.


Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek. The riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and are rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.






129




Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11% and

13%, respectively) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data for Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Visual observations of Sleepy Creek are also below the 20% threshold. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are not susceptible to increase in fine sediment from livestock grazing. Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are armored with cobbles and cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with upland areas, and soils in riparian areas are normally frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek is grazed. Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.





130






Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Cattle grazing on the Rhodes Creek Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to Cow


Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek were found to be at moderate levels (11% and

13%, respectively) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data for Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Visual observations of Sleepy Creek are also below the 20% threshold. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are not susceptible to increase in fine sediment from livestock grazing. Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are armored with cobbles and cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with upland areas, and soils in riparian areas are normally frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek is grazed. Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the

131

Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.












Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek. The riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and are rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and

132

breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the proposed action because the proposed action will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.


13%, respectively) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data for Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Visual observations of Sleepy Creek are also below the 20% threshold. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are not susceptible to increase in fine sediment from livestock grazing. Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are armored with cobbles and cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with upland areas, and soils in riparian areas are normally frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek is grazed. Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.








133









Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek. The riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are currently in excellent condition with regards to riparian shrubs that provide shade during summer months and are rated as PNV. During winter grazing period (late fall through early spring) air temperatures can be significantly warmer on benches and other upland areas compared to the narrow canyon riparian areas. Thus cattle spend the majority of their time on the warmer benches and breaks and limit their presence in the riparian area of Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek to quick trips for watering. Cattle are not grazed on the allotment during summer and early fall months when riparian shrubs are vulnerable to livestock grazing. Water temperatures and riparian habitats are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.


13%, respectively) during the 1993 stream survey. Observations made during PFC assessments and other site visits corroborated the stream survey data for Cow Creek and Lightning Creek. Visual observations of Sleepy Creek are also below the 20% threshold. Overall fine sediment levels do not exceed the 20% threshold established under ESA consultation for the Forest Plan (NMFS 1995, NMFS 1998). Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are not susceptible to increase in fine sediment from livestock

134

grazing. Streambanks along Cow Creek, Lightning Creek and Sleepy Creek are armored with cobbles and cattle spend little time in riparian areas due to temperature differentials with upland areas, and soils in riparian areas are normally frozen during the period the Rhodes Creek is grazed. Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.



Floodplain Connectivity and Change in Peak/Base Flow indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Range monitoring in the Rhodes Creek Allotment is focused on bench areas where cattle spend the majority of their time when on the allotment. Majority of key areas are located in upland areas of the allotment. Recent utilization monitoring (2008 -2014) shows that the permittee has consistently met objectives for utilization (See Range Specialist report). Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect on PCE 1.





The Imnaha River provides 2.3 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on

the Rhodes Creek Allotment. This section of the river is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain. Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and

E will have no effect on PCE 2. PCE 3. An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic

macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. This PCE is addressed by the Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Chemical

Contamination/Nutrients, Physical Barriers, Large Wood, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Off-channel

135

Habitat, Refugia, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, and Floodplain Connectivity indicators. The Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Physical Barriers, Large Wood, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Refugia, and Floodplain Connectivity indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.



E will have no effect on PCE 3. PCE 4. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and




Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and

E will have no effect on PCE 4. PCE 5. Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15° C (36 to 59 ° F), with adequate thermal refugia


This PCE is addressed by the Temperature indicator. The Imnaha River provides 2.3 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on


E will have no effect on PCE 5. PCE 6. Substrates of sufficient amount, size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo

overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A minimal amount (e.g. less than 12 percent) of fine substrate less than 0.85 mm (0.03 in) in diameter and minimal embeddedness of these fines in larger substrates are characteristic of these conditions.

136

This PCE is addressed by the Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness indicator. The Imnaha River provides 2.3 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on


E will have no effect on PCE 6. PCE 7. A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, if





E will have no effect on PCE 7. PCE 8. Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are





E will have no effect on PCE 8. PCE 9. Few or no nonnative predatory (e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass;

inbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competitive (e.g. brown trout) species present. This PCE is addressed by the Persistence and Genetic Integrity indicators.

137

Livestock grazing will not result in the introduction, spread, or augmentation of brook trout or other nonnative species on the Toomey Allotment. Smallmouth bass are present in the lower Imnaha River. Proposed livestock grazing will not result in the increase in water temperatures in the Imnaha River that could facilitate spread of smallmouth bass because of cattle are not having effects to water temperatures on the allotment.


E will have no effect on PCE 9.

Bull Trout PCE Summary Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and

E will have no effect on all PCEs. The Imnaha River provides 2.3 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. This section of the river is not accessible to cattle due to steep cliffy terrain.






Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR fall Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• SR fall Chinook salmon are present in the Imnaha River, • The Imnaha River is not accessible from the Rhodes Creek Allotment due to steep cliffy

terrain.

138

Designated Critical Habitat Determination Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and

E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon due to the following:

• Cattle spend little time in riparian areas as a result of microclimatic, topographic, and vegetative features of the Rhodes Creek Allotment when the allotment is grazed.

• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are considered to be at PNV

• The Imnaha River is not accessible from the Rhodes Creek Allotment due to steep cliffy terrain.

• Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are rated good.


Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• Spawning habitat is not present on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. • Cattle spend little time in riparian areas as a result of microclimatic, topographic, and

vegetative features of the Rhodes Creek Allotment when the allotment is grazed. • Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are considered to be at PNV • Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are rated good.


E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon due to the following:


• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are considered to be at PNV • Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are rated good.


Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect summer steelhead. This determination was based on the following:

139

• Salmonids, including steelhead, have been shown to select spawning sites relatively close to cover

• The relatively low redd density and scattered nature of summer steelhead redds. • Physical obstructions are present to prevent livestock access to the majority of spawning

habitat. • Cattle spend little time in riparian areas as a result of microclimatic, topographic, and

vegetative features of the Rhodes Creek Allotment when the allotment is grazed. • Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are considered to

be at PNV • Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are rated good.


E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for steelhead. This determination was based on the following:

• Physical obstructions are present to prevent livestock access to the majority of spawning habitat.


• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are considered to be at PNV

• Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek, Lightning Creek, and Sleepy Creek are rated good.


Livestock grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:

• CR bull trout are seasonally present in the Imnaha River, • The Imnaha River is not accessible from the Rhodes Creek Allotment due to steep cliffy

terrain.


E will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:

• Feeding, migration, overwintering habitat for CR bull trout is present in the Imnaha River,

140

• The Imnaha River is not accessible from the Rhodes Creek Allotment due to steep cliffy terrain.



Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), requires the inclusion of essential fish habitat (EFH) descriptions in Federal fishery management plans. In addition, the MSA requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect EFH. The Imnaha Subbasin has been designated as EFH for Chinook salmon. EFH is present on the Lone Pine Allotment.

Based on the ESA effects analysis for the proposed grazing on habitat for Chinook salmon, livestock

grazing activities on the Rhodes Creek Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect EFH for MSA-managed species on the Rhodes Creek Allotment. This determination was based on the following:


• Riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are considered to be at PNV • Aquatic habitat conditions in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are rated good. • The Imnaha River is not accessible from the Rhodes Creek Allotment due to steep cliffy

terrain.


Table 82. Summary of Effects Determinations for the Rhodes Creek Allotment for Alternatives B, C, D, and E. NE = No Effect, NLAA = May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect, LAA = May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect, N/A = Not Applicable.




Species NE NLAA NE NE

Designated Critical Habitat NE NLAA NE NLAA

Essential Fish Habitat N/A N/A NE NLAA

141

TOOMEY ALLOTMENT


1. Location of Allotment The Toomey Allotment is located in the Imnaha River-Thorn Creek Subwatershed (HUC

170601020510), Private land within the subwatersheds are not part of the allotment; therefore the Forest Service has no management oversight of private lands within the subwatersheds.


General Description The Toomey Allotment is classified as a winter allotment. The Toomey Allotment is currently

managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger grazing system that includes Rhodes Creek and Cow Creek allotments, as well as private land. The Toomey Allotment is about 3716 acres in size and consists entirely of NFS lands. Management of private land grazed in association with the Toomey Allotment is not waived to the Forest Service and the Forest Service has no oversight in the management of these lands.

The Toomey Allotment is currently divided into six pastures including; Upper Spain Saddle, Lower

Spain Saddle, Spring Gulch, Johnson Canyon, Toomey, and private land pastures. The allotment also contains closed areas adjacent to the Imnaha River. Cattle are not permitted to graze in the closed areas. The proposed action would incorporate the Tulley pasture of the Rhodes Creek Allotment into the Toomey Allotment for administrative purposes. Both allotments are grazed by the same permittee.

All of the pastures within the Toomey Allotment are east of the Imnaha River, and increase in

elevation from the river level to the top of Cemetery Ridge. Spring Gulch is the only pasture primarily below bench level, and is comprised mostly of blue bunch wheatgrass plant associations with pockets of Idaho fescue dominated north facing slopes. Johnson Canyon is a mix of low elevation and bench landscape position, and resulting mix of plant associations depending on aspect. Tulley Creek, and Lower Spain Saddle pastures are primarily bench pastures, and are also predominately bluebunch wheatgrass plant associations with Idaho fescue inclusions on the north aspects. Toomey, Upper Spain Saddle, and Tulley (Rhodes Creek Allotment) are the higher elevation breaks pastures that are dominated by Idaho fescue plant associations, with bluebunch wheatgrass on the sunnier drier south facing aspects. Many of the “flat” benches (less than 10% slope) have been degraded to annual brome and warm season grasses such as red threeawn and sand dropseed.

Similar to the other allotments in the LIRA area, the Toomey Allotment has a mixture of fences and

natural barriers to create district pastures or grazing areas. Water sources are a mix of springs and small nonfish bearing streams in the allotment. In the Johnsen Canyon pasture the livestock water is in the form

142

of springs that have been developed at or above bench level. There are also upland water sources in the Upper and Lower Spain Saddle pastures. For the Spring Gulch pasture the livestock water from a few narrow places along the Imnaha River on private land. Results from Keren and Olson (2006) indicate that solar radiation contributes strongly to the thermal balance of a cow during the winter months. In order for the livestock to thermal balance (get warm) they tend to graze where they can find sun, which in the Toomey allotment is on south facing aspects. Olson and Wallander (2002) discuss that livestock under long term selecting for performing in winter conditions adjust physiologically and behaviorally to daily and seasonal weather.

143

Figure 16. Toomey Allotment

144

Rangeland Vegetation Condition and Trend Based on a combination of results from assessment and monitoring, and field inspections all of the

pastures within the Toomey allotment are generally in satisfactory condition with the exception of the Johnsen Canyon, Spring Gulch, and Lower Spain Saddle.


Off-site Water Developments Toomey Allotment has 6 developed water sources. Since the allotment is used during the winter

grazing season (i.e. late fall, winter, and early spring) the location of water sources is not a determinant of cattle distribution. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperature differentials and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas.

Table 83 below shows the number of existing off-site water sources in the Toomey Allotment.

Table 83. Existing and planned off-site water developments in the Toomey Allotment. Allotment Existing Off-site Water Toomey 6


distribution on the Toomey Allotment, thus fencing is limited to 9.7 miles on the allotment. During the winter grazing period cattle distribution is primarily a function of air temperatures and forage. Cattle are primarily found on the benches and other upland areas where air temperatures are significantly warmer and forage is more palatable compared to riparian areas. Cattle are placed in small bands within pastures and are moved as needed to insure utilization objectives are met.


Rosgen Stream Types in the Lone Pine Allotment (Rosgen 1996) The Toomey Allotment is bordered by one stream that provides habitat for ESA-listed fish species: the

Imnaha River (Table 84). The Imnaha River is not assessable to livestock on the Toomey Allotment due to steep terrain and a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail. The gate will be reconstructed as part of the proposed action. Banks of the Imnaha River are composed of primarily boulders.

145




Rosgen Stream Type

Toomey Imnaha River* 4.0 Cobble B3 *Imnaha River forms allotment boundary


Riparian and Wetland Plant Associations of the Malheur, Umatilla and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. The riparian plant associations for ESA streams within the Toomey Allotment are shown below (Table 85). The riparian area adjacent to the Imnaha River is Functioning at Risk (FAR) due to historic homesteading activities.

Table 85. Riparian plant associations for ESA streams in the Toomey Allotment. Stream Name Reach Plant Association Condition

Imnaha River 2 Netleaf Hackberry/Bluebunch Wheatgrass Community FAR

Stream Habitat Surveys The stream survey on the Imnaha River was conducted in 1998 using the Region 6 (R-6) stream

survey protocol. Stream surveys provide a snapshot in time of aquatic habitat conditions.



Rosgen Type

Ave Wetted Width


% Particles <6.3mm

W/D Ratio

% Stable Banks

Imnaha River2 1998 C 63.7 6.6 1.3 10 13.2 95


Notes 1) RMO based on stream wetted width: < 10 ft, > 96 pools/mile; 10 to 20 ft, 56 to 96 pools/mile; 20 to 25 ft, 47 to 56 pools/mi; 25 to 50 ft, 26 to 47 pools/mile; 50 to 75 ft, 23 to 26 pools/mile. 2) Reaches 1 – 3 (Confluence of Snake River upstream to about Fence Creek).



146



feet). PIBO effectiveness monitoring sites were not established in the Toomey Allotment when the PIBO

study began. The WMO has not established a DMA on the Imnaha River because the river is not accessible to livestock. Cattle use nonfish bearing streams and upland water sources in the allotment for watering.



The Imnaha River is the only stream that provides habitat for ESA-listed fish species on the Toomey

Allotment. Water temperature monitoring for the Imnaha River is discussed under the Rhodes Creek Allotment.

Proper Functioning Condition Surveys (PFC) PFC assessments have not been completed on the Toomey Allotment because the Imnaha River is not

accessible to cattle due to fencing and steep cliffy terrain.


Allotment Pastures and Streams With ESA Listed Fish and/or Designated Critical Habitat The Imnaha River is the only stream in the Toomey Allotment that provides habitat for ESA-listed fish

species. The Imnaha River provides spawning and rearing for SR fall Chinook salmon, migration habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout.

147

The area along the Imnaha River downstream from the Cow Creek Bridge is closed to grazing on the Toomey Allotment. Access to this reach of the river is blocked by a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain.

Table 87. Steelhead distribution and stream use by pastures for Toomey Allotment (Based on StreamNet data). Mileages include miles of streams on parcels purchased from TNC.

Pasture Stream Migration Rearing Spawning and Rearing Total

Closed Area Imnaha River 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.1

Total 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.1

Johnsen Canyon Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Spring Gulch Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Table 88. Spring/summer Chinook salmon distribution and stream use by pastures for Toomey Allotment (Based on StreamNet data). Mileages include miles of streams on parcels purchased from TNC.



Total 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.1


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

148

Table 89. Fall Chinook salmon distribution and stream use by pastures for Toomey Allotment (Based on StreamNet data). Mileages include miles of streams on parcels purchased from TNC.



Total 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.1


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Table 90. Bull trout distribution and stream use by pastures for Toomey Allotment (Based on StreamNet data).

Pasture Stream Spawning and Rearing

Feeding, Migration,

Overwintering Total

Closed Area Imnaha River 0.0 2.1 2.1

Total 0.0 2.1 2.1

Johnsen Canyon Imnaha River 0.0 0.1 0.1

Total 0.0 0.0 0.0

Spring Gulch Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 0.0 0.0 0.0

Toomey Imnaha River 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 0.0 0.0 0.0

Livestock Access to Streams The area along the Imnaha River downstream from the Cow Creek Bridge (2.1 miles) is closed to

grazing on the Toomey Allotment. Access to this reach of the river is blocked by a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain.

149


Imnaha River The Imnaha River adjacent to the Lone Pine Allotment is located in a narrow canyon. The Imnaha

River provides high quality spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon. The Imnaha River also provides migratory habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding, migration and overwinter habitat for CR bull trout. The Imnaha River is not accessible to livestock from the Toomey Allotment due to a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain. The gate on the Eureka Bar Trail will be replaced as part of the propose action.

7. Management History The Toomey Allotment is currently divided into six pastures including; Upper Spain Saddle, Lower

Spain Saddle, Spring Gulch, Johnson Canyon, Toomey, and private land pastures. The proposed action would incorporate the Tulley pasture of the Rhodes Creek Allotment into the Toomey Allotment. This allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger grazing system which includes Cow Creek and Rhodes Creek allotments as well as private land. These three allotments are grazed by the same permittee. Under the proposed action the rotational schedule that is currently in use would continue and grazing would continue to be managed to maintain desired upland and riparian conditions.

Cattle are placed in the Upper and Lower Spain Saddle in December, about 140 cows and 40 bulls.

They are moved into the Johnson Canyon pasture in January, then the cows are taken to private land at the Cow Creek Ranch and the bulls are left on the private land at the Tulley Creek Ranch through December before being moved to the Rhodes Creek Allotment for the rest of the season. A herd from Rhodes Creek comes over to Johnson Canyon pasture to be staged to move to other Rhodes Creek pastures, about 200 from February 20 to March 10. This also facilitates the cows calving closer to the ranch houses where they can be more closely monitored. The cattle that were taken to the Cow Creek Ranch private land re-enter the allotments in two herds, one herd of 70 reenters into the Willow Springs pasture (Rhodes Creek Allotment) on March 1, and the other herd of 70 enters March 15 into Spring Creek. In early March a herd from the Rhodes Creek Allotment, Holmes pasture, are brought to the Toomey allotment to graze in the Toomey pasture before exiting the allotment in May. The cattle placed in Spring Gulch pasture move one more time into the Tulley Creek pasture until they exit the allotment in May. Cattle from Rhodes Creek Allotment are placed into Upper and Lower Spain Saddle in early April to be staged to exit the allotment around May 15th. There is an area closed to livestock grazing by the Imnaha River.

Range monitoring in the Toomey Allotment is focused on bench areas where cattle spend the majority

of their time when on the allotment. All key areas are located in upland areas of the allotment. Recent utilization monitoring (2008 -2014) shows that the permittee has consistently met objectives for utilization.

150

Multiple Indicator Monitoring System (MIMS), (Burton et al., 2010) DMAs have not been established along the Imnaha River in the Toomey Allotment. Multiple

Indicator monitoring in the Toomey Allotment is a low priority because access to the Imnaha River is blocked by a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain. Additionally, impacts to this portion of the Imnaha River are primarily from recreation activities.

B. Proposed Action

1. Stocking Rates and Allotment and Pasture Use Descriptions The action alternatives will authorize livestock grazing on the Toomey Allotment for the period of

2015 through 2025. A maximum of 1,000 head months of livestock grazing would be authorized in the 4,203 acre Toomey Allotment annually between the dates of November 1 through May 15 (Table 91).

Table 91. Animal class, number and on/off dates for the Toomey Allotment.


c/c 184 11/1-12/31

c/c 184 2/1-5/15 * c/c = cow/calf pairs; h/m = horses, mules

The Toomey Allotment is currently managed under a rotational system and as part of a larger grazing

system that includes Rhodes Creek and Cow Creek allotments, as well as private land. The three allotments are grazed by the same permittee. Private land is not waived to the Forest Service and the Forest Service has no management oversight of these lands.

The Toomey Allotment is currently divided into six pastures including; Upper Spain Saddle, Lower

Spain Saddle, Spring Gulch, Johnson Canyon, Toomey, and private land pastures. The proposed action would incorporate the Tulley pasture of the Rhodes Creek Allotment into the Toomey Allotment. This would result in an increase of 1,014 acres in the size of the Toomey Allotment.

The Imnaha River provides high quality 2.1 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook

salmon in the Closed Area on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River also provides migratory habitat for SR steelhead and SR spring/summer Chinook salmon, and feeding, migration and overwinter habitat for CR bull trout. The Imnaha River is not accessible to livestock due to a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain. The gate on the Eureka Bar Trail will be replaced as part of the propose action. Also, about 730 feet of fence will be constructed just north of the trailhead to prevent cattle from getting the canyon portion of the Imnaha River.

151

4. Monitoring The proposed monitoring strategy for the three allotments will utilize implementation and

effectiveness monitoring to assess achievement of Wallowa-Whitman Land and Resource Management Plan (W-W LRMP) goals and objectives, and any Biological Opinion terms and conditions that may result from consultation for ESA listed species.

Additional Monitoring No additional monitoring is proposed for the Toomey Allotment because streams that provide habitat

for ESA-listed fish species are not accessible to cattle on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.


1. Fall Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of high quality spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook

salmon on the Toomey Allotment. This section of the river is not accessible to cattle due to a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain. There is 2.1 miles of designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon on the Toomey Allotment.

2. Spring Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of migration habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on

the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain. There is 2.1 miles of designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Toomey Allotment.

3. Summer Steelhead and Designated Critical Habitat The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of migration habitat for SR steelhead on the Toomey Allotment.

The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain. There is 2.1 miles of designated critical habitat for SR steelhead on the Toomey Allotment.

4. Bull Trout and Designated Critical Habitat The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of feeding, migration, and overwintering habitat for CR bull

trout on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a

152

gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain. There is 2.1 miles of designated critical habitat for CR bull trout on the Toomey Allotment.

E. Analysis of Potential Effects






Temp

Sed

Chem Cont

Phys Barr

LWM

Pool Freq / Qual

Off- Chan

Refug

W/D

Bank Stab

Flood plain

Road Dens

Distur Hist / Flows

RHCA

Disturb Reg

N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N


2. Direct and Indirect Effects This chapter analyzes the potential direct and indirect effects that livestock grazing on the Toomey



areas where spawning occurs and livestock congregate. These are the areas where livestock, if present

153

during spawning, could potentially affect spawning fish and/or incubation of eggs or alevins developing in the gravel.

Direct Effects to Fall Chinook Salmon There is no risk of direct effects to fall Chinook salmon as a result of trampling of redds by livestock.

The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of high quality spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon on the Toomey Allotment. However, the Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.

Summary of Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon There would be no direct effects to fall Chinook salmon from the proposed livestock grazing activities

on the Toomey Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E. Fall Chinook salmon spawning habitat is present on the allotment but cattle cannot access to the Imnaha River.

Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon There is no risk of direct effects to spring/summer Chinook salmon as a result of trampling of redds by

livestock. Spawning habitat for spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of migration habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain. There is no risk to juvenile spring/summer Chinook salmon because cattle cannot access to the Imnaha River on the Toomey Allotment.

Summary of Direct Effects to Spring Chinook Salmon There would be no direct effects to spring/summer Chinook salmon from the proposed livestock

grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E. Spawning habitat for spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present on the allotment and cattle cannot access to the Imnaha River.

Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead There is no risk of direct effects to steelhead as a result of trampling of redds by livestock. Steelhead

spawning habitat is not present on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of migration habitat for SR steelhead on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain. There is no risk to juvenile steelhead because cattle cannot access to the Imnaha River on the Toomey Allotment.

154

Summary of Direct Effects to Summer Steelhead There would be no direct effects to steelhead from the proposed livestock grazing activities on the

Toomey Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E. Steelhead spawning habitat is not present on the allotment and cattle cannot access to the Imnaha River.

Direct Effects to Bull Trout There is no risk of direct effects to bull trout as a result of trampling of redds by livestock. Bull trout

spawning habitat is not present on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for Cr bull trout on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.

Summary of Direct Effects to Bull Trout There would be no direct effects to bull trout from the proposed livestock grazing activities on the

Toomey Allotment under Alternatives B, C, D, and E. Bull trout spawning habitat is not present on the allotment and cattle cannot access to the Imnaha River.

.








indicators are discussed below. This discussion is based on professional judgment along with site specific knowledge of the project area, past monitoring results, stream habitat survey data, and temperature data. Habitat Indicators which have the greatest risk of being affected by these projects include Temperature,

155

Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, and Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas indicators. Potential effects to these habitat indicators are discussed below.

156

Table 93. Current multi-species matrix ratings for subwatersheds of the Toomey Allotment in the Lower Imnaha Range Analysis action area. See Table 1 for names and full HUC of subwatersheds. * Habitat indicators with potential to be modified by livestock grazing. (See note below for a description of functionality ratings)


Functioning at Risk


Risk



Temperature (Steelhead/Salmon)* 510 Maintain

Temperature (Bull Trout)* 510 Maintain

Sediment/Turbidity* 510 Maintain Chemical Contamination/ Nutrients 510 Maintain


Physical Barriers 510 Maintain


Substrate* 510 Maintain

Large Woody Debris 510 Maintain

Pool Quality/ Frequency* 510 Maintain

Off-Channel Habitat 510 Maintain

Refugia 510 Maintain


Width/Depth Ratio* 510 Maintain

Streambank Condition* 510 Maintain

Floodplain Connectivity 510 Maintain


Change in Peak/Base Flows 510 Maintain

Increase in Drainage Network 510 Maintain


Road Density (Steelhead/Salmon) 510 Maintain

Road Density (Bull Trout) 510 Maintain

Disturbance History 510 Maintain

Riparian Conservation Areas* 510 Maintain

Disturbance Regime 510 Maintain

Overall SWS Rating 510 Maintain 1) Restore: to change the function of a “functioning at risk” indicator to “functioning appropriately”, or change the function of a “functioning at unacceptable risk” indicator to “functioning at risk or “functioning appropriately” (i.e. it does not apply to “functioning appropriately” indicators). Maintain: the function of an indicator does not change (i.e. it applies to all indicators regardless of functional level). Degrade: to change the function of an indicator for the worse (i.e. it applies to all indicators

157


Temperature








Unacceptable Risk






158

Table 96. Peak use periods of fishbearing streams by ESA-listed fish species in the Cow Creek Allotment.

Species Life Stage Imnaha River








Bull Trout Adult (includes subadults) Feeding/Migration/Overwintering (Nov through June)


Cattle grazing on the Toomey Allotment has little impact to the riparian areas adjacent to the Imnaha

River. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of habitat for ESA-listed fish on the Toomey Allotment. This section of the river is not accessible to cattle due to a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail and steep cliffy terrain.

Water temperatures are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the proposed

livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.









Fine sediment levels in the Imnaha River were found to be at moderate levels (10%) during the 1998 stream survey. Cattle grazing on the Toomey Allotment has had little impact to fine sediment levels in the Imnaha River. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of habitat for ESA-listed fish on the Toomey

159

Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.

Fine sediment levels are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because the proposed

livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Width/Depth Ratio





Width-to-depth ratios of streams in the action area exceed the PACFISH RMO (<10). However, the PACFISH RMO was developed prior to advances in our understandings of the relationship between width-to-depth ratios and natural channel forms (sensu Rosgen, 1996). Of the four Rosgen channel types that reflect natural channels (A, B, E, and C channel types) only E channel types have average width-to-depth ratios of less than 10 (Rosgen, 1996). Due to topography, there are no areas in the action area where E channel types would be expected to occur. Normal ranges for width-to-depth ratios (bankfull width) for Rosgen B and C channels are 12 to 20 and 13.5 to 28.7, respectively (Rosgen, 1996). The width-to-depth ratio of the Imnaha River was 13.2 during the 1998 stream survey. Observations made during site visits indicate the current width-to-depth ratio is within the normal range for a Rosgen B channel type.

Cattle grazing on the Toomey Allotment has had little impact to the width-to-depth ratio of the Imnaha

River. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of habitat for ESA-listed fish on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.

The width-to-depth ratio of Imnaha River is expected to be maintained under the action alternatives

because the proposed livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

160








Streambank stability of the Imnaha River was 95% when this stream was surveyed in the 1998. Cattle

grazing on the Toomey Allotment has had little impact to the streambank stability of the Imnaha River. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of habitat for ESA-listed fish on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.

Streambank stability of the Imnaha River is expected to be maintained under the action alternatives

because the proposed livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.









Cattle grazing on the Toomey Allotment has had little impact to the riparian area adjacent to the Imnaha River. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of habitat for ESA-listed fish on the Toomey

161

Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.

The riparian area of Imnaha River are expected to be maintained under the action alternatives because

the livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will result in the same use patterns, timing and numbers as the current grazing system.

Summary of Effects on Environmental Baseline Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will

maintain all habitat indicators susceptible to alteration by livestock grazing (Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Stability, and RHCAs) because:

• Cattle cannot access the Imnaha River due to a gate and steep cliffy terrain.








Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Spawning habitat for SR steelhead is not present on the Toomey Allotment.

162









Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Rearing habitat for SR steelhead is not present on the Toomey Allotment.







163


Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of migration habitat for SR steelhead on the Toomey Allotment.

The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.












164

The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of spawning and rearing habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain. Spawning and rearing habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon is not present on the allotment.














165


Flows indicator is unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of migration habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon on

the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.



Floodplain Connectivity and Change in Peak/Base Flow indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing. Range monitoring in the Toomey Allotment is focused on bench areas where cattle spend the majority of their time when on the allotment. Recent utilization monitoring (2008 -2014) shows that the permittee has consistently met objectives for utilization. Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have no effect on PCE 1.







Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will

have no effect on PCE 2. PCE 3. An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic

macroinvertebrates, and forage fish.

166

This PCE is addressed by the Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness, Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Physical Barriers, Large Wood, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Refugia, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, and Floodplain Connectivity indicators. The Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Physical Barriers, Large Wood, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Refugia, and Floodplain Connectivity indicators are unlikely to be affected by livestock grazing.




have no effect on PCE 3. PCE 4. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments and





have no effect on PCE 4. PCE 5. Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15° C (36 to 59 ° F), with adequate thermal refugia


This PCE is addressed by the Temperature indicator. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on



have no effect on PCE 5.

167

PCE 6. Substrates of sufficient amount, size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A minimal amount (e.g. less than 12 percent) of fine substrate less than 0.85 mm (0.03 in) in diameter and minimal embeddedness of these fines in larger substrates are characteristic of these conditions.

This PCE is addressed by the Sediment/Turbidity/Substrate Embeddedness indicator. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on



have no effect on PCE 6. PCE 7. A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic ranges or, if





have no effect on PCE 7. PCE 8. Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are







168

PCE 9. Few or no nonnative predatory (e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass;

inbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competitive (e.g. brown trout) species present. This PCE is addressed by the Persistence and Genetic Integrity indicators. Livestock grazing will not result in the introduction, spread, or augmentation of brook trout or other

nonnative species on the Toomey Allotment. Smallmouth bass are present in the lower Imnaha River. Proposed livestock grazing will not result in the increase in water temperatures in the Imnaha River that could facilitate spread of smallmouth bass because of cattle are not having effects to water temperatures on the allotment.



Bull Trout PCE Summary Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will

have no effect on all PCEs. The Imnaha River provides 2.1 miles of feeding/migration/overwintering habitat for CR bull trout on the Toomey Allotment. The Imnaha River is not accessible to cattle due to a combination of a gate on the Eureka Bar Trail, about 730 feet of new fence just north of the trailhead, and steep cliffy terrain.




169



Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR fall Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for fall Chinook.

Designated Critical Habitat Determination Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will

have No Effect on designated critical habitat for SR fall Chinook salmon due to the following: • Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for fall Chinook.


Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR spring/summer Chinook salmon. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for spring/summer Chinook.


have No Effect on designated critical habitat for SR spring/summer Chinook salmon due to the following: • Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for spring/summer Chinook.


Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on SR steelhead. This determination was based on the following:

• Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for steelhead.


have No Effect on designated critical habitat for SR steelhead due to the following: • Cattle do not have access to streams that provide habitat for steelhead.

170


Livestock grazing activities on the Toomey Allotment proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:



have No Effect on designated critical habitat for CR bull trout. This determination was based on the following:




Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), requires the inclusion of essential fish habitat (EFH) descriptions in Federal fishery management plans. In addition, the MSA requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on activities that may adversely affect EFH. The Imnaha Subbasin has been designated as EFH for Chinook salmon. EFH is present on the Toomey Allotment.

Based on the ESA effects analysis for the proposed grazing on habitat for Chinook salmon, activities

proposed under Alternatives B, C, D, and E will have No Effect on EFH for MSA-managed species on the Toomey Allotment. This determination was based on the following:

• A gate, a new drift fence, and steep cliffy terrain block access by cattle to the Imnaha River


Table 101. Summary of Effects Determinations for the Toomey Allotment for Alternatives B, C, D, and E. NE = No Effect, NLAA = May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect, LAA = May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect, N/A = Not Applicable.




Species NE NE NE NE

Designated Critical Habitat NE NE NE NE

Essential Fish Habitat N/A N/A NE NE

171

Cumulative Effects

Analysis Area The cumulative effects analysis area for aquatic habitat are in general the same as the aquatics effects

analysis area used for the direct and indirect effects analysis to aquatic habitat. This is an appropriate scale to analyze cumulative effects because: 1) the lower portions of streams that flow through the LIRAA are inaccessible to livestock, and 2) measureable effects from proposed activities are unlikely to extend downstream of the LIRAA.

Time frames for this cumulative effects discussion are the same as those used for the direct/indirect effects analysis: short-term (0 to 5 years), mid-term (5 to 10 years), and long-term (10+ years).

Actions/Activities Considered Refer to Appendix B-4 of the LIRA Project DEIS for a list of projects and activities occurring in the

analysis area that were considered for cumulative effects to aquatic habitat. Only activities that pose a risk of cumulative effects (adverse or beneficial) are discussed below. The risks of cumulative effects with the effects of activities proposed under the action alternatives for the LIRA occurring are rated as:

• Low – insignificant or discountable cumulative effects to aquatic habitat may occur. Insignificant effects are defined as effects that a person, based on professional judgment, would not be able to meaningfully measure, detect, or evaluate. Discountable effects are those that are extremely unlikely to occur.

• Moderate – insignificant cumulative effects to aquatic habitat are likely to occur. A moderate rating assumes potential effects to aquatic habitat. The level of effects will not result in measureable changes in survival rates or population levels of aquatic species with special management status (i.e. ESA listed, MIS, or Sensitive).

• High – measureable cumulative effects to aquatic habitat are likely to occur. Measurable effects to aquatic habitat are likely to result in changes in survival rates and population levels of aquatic species with special management status (i.e. ESA listed, MIS, or Sensitive). A high rating assumes obvious adverse effects to habitat and aquatic species with special management status.

Past and Present Activities Past management activities that have occurred in the LIRAA include grazing, homesteading, mining,

limited timber harvesting, road and trail construction, construction of a high voltage powerline, prescribed burning, and wildfires and fire suppression activities. Present activities occurring on NFS Lands include road maintenance, grazing (see discussion of effects of Alternative B), invasive plant treatments, and dispersed recreation. Effects occurring on other lands in the cumulative effects analysis areas include grazing and road maintenance.

172

Grazing Grazing of livestock has occurred in the LIRAA since about 1730’s (See Range Specialist Report for

more information of historic grazing in the LIRAA). Impacts from past grazing activities are reflected in the current conditions of the four allotments in the LIRAA.

Homesteading Homesteading in the LIRAA was primarily concentrated along flatter areas adjacent to streams.

Historic homesteads are still present adjacent to Cow Creek (McClaren Ranch and Litch Ranch) and Lightning Creek (Rhodes Creek Ranch). Dug Bar ranch is located adjacent to the Snake River. These sites are still used to support ranching activities. Deep Creek Ranch is located on Deep Creek adjacent to Lone Pine Allotment. It is no longer used. Other homestead sites and dryland farm fields are located in the bench areas in the LIRAA.

Where homesteads were located adjacent to streams, homesteading has likely resulted in decreases in width of riparian areas where agricultural fields were developed and/or structures constructed. Historical, agricultural fields adjacent to streams were irrigated evidenced by the presence of ditches though irrigation no longer occurs in the LIRAA. Decreases in riparian are widths would result in warming of cooler microclimates associated with shrub dominated riparian communities.

Homesteading activities have resulted in long-term changes in riparian conditions adjacent to homesteads and fields. There is a moderate risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and past homesteading activities.

Mining A number of mining claims were located adjacent to the lower Imnaha River (Toomey Gulch area)

and along the lower Cow Creek (primarily along the eastern side of the drainage). (Note: The mining claims along Cow Creek were later developed into the McClaran Ranch.) None of the mines apparently produced commercial quantities of ore. The Mountain Chief Mine, located at the confluence of the Snake and Imnaha rivers, was the most extensively developed claim in the LIRAA. Little evidence is present at other mining sites in the LIRAA.

Mining activities in the LIRAA have had little impact to aquatic habitat, primarily having occurred in uplands areas and was primarily exploratory in nature. Development of the Mountain Chief Mine resulted in altered streambank areas along the Imnaha River localized to the vicinity of the mouth of the river. There is a low risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and past mining activities.

Trail and Road Construction and Maintenance The original trails in the area were developed by the Nez Perce. Trails and later roads were

constructed in the LIRAA to support ranching and mining activities. A bridge was constructed at Big Eddy on the Imnaha River in the early 1900’s in part to facilitate movement of livestock from one side of

173

the river to the other. The current bridge at this location is called the “Cow Creek Bridge”; though it is not located at Cow Creek. The current road system dates from the late 1940’s when a road was constructed from Fence Creek to Cow Creek. The road was extended to Dug Bar in early 1950’s. This road is known as the Dug Bar Road. Additional road construction occurred in the mid 1950’s when logging occurred in the Lightning Creek drainage.

Trail and road construction in the LIRAA has had moderate impacts to aquatic habitat in the LIRAA. Portions of the Dug Bar Road above Cow Creek Bridge have been constructed in what were formerly riparian areas adjacent to the Imnaha River. The Lightning Creek Road is primarily located outside and upslope of the riparian areas adjacent to Lightning Creek; however, there are eight fords across Lightning Creek. The Cow Creek Road is primarily located outside and upslope of the riparian areas adjacent to Cow Creek.

Impacts to aquatic habitat from trails and roads in the LIRAA are primarily localized to areas where roads occupy portions of riparian areas and at ford sites. Fine sediment levels in Cow Creek and Lightning Creek are at moderate levels indicating that the road system is not having a measureable impact to these streams.

Currently, Wallowa County conducts annual road maintenance along the Dug Bar road. Maintenance on other roads in the LIRAA is haphazard. Maintenance of Forest Service trails occurs infrequently. There is a moderate risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and road maintenance activities.

High Voltage Powerline Construction and Maintenance A high voltage powerline was constructed through the LIRAA in the 1950’s. the powerline is located

in upland areas through the LIRAA, crossing the Snake River just to the south of the confluence with the Imnaha River and the Imnaha River about 2.5 miles above the mouth. The powerline is not impacting aquatic habitat in the LIRAA.

Wildfires and Fire Suppression Wildfires are a natural component of the disturbance regime for the NRA: with wildfires burning

frequently in Hells Canyon NRA. However, since the creation of the Chesnimnus and Wallowa Forest Reserves in 1905, all documented large fires (>10 acres) in the LIRAA have occurred since 2000. In large areas of the Lightning Creek and Cow Creek drainages large wildfires have not been documented during the last 100 years. Of the seven large fires that have been documented in the LIRAA, two have accounted for the majority of acres burning in riparian areas adjacent to fish bearing streams.

The Deep Creek Fire (2000) burned into riparian areas in the upper Deep Creek drainage resulting in the mortality of large firs and pines. Riparian shrubs have increased as a result of the more open canopy conditions. The Deep Creek fire also burned into the riparian area adjacent to Cow Creek. The fire resulted in some mortality of large firs and pines but overall did not result in a measureable change in conditions of the riparian community.

174

The Haas Ridge Fire (2003) and the Haas Ridge Fire II (2005) burned into the riparian areas adjacent to upper and lower Lightning Creek, respectively. There is little evidence of impacts of these fires on aquatic or riparian habitats adjacent to Lightning Creek.

Fire suppression activities on NFS lands are implemented to minimize effects to riparian and aquatic habitats. There is a low risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and fire suppression activities.

Invasive Plants and Treatments Treatments to control and eradicate invasive plants are occurring on both NFS lands and private lands

in the LIRAA. Treatment areas include riparian areas as well as upland areas. Currently on NFS lands treatments are restricted to sites identified sites under the 1992 and 1994 WWNF Weed Treatment EAs. Additional sites will be treated once litigation is settled over the 2010 Blue Mountains Invasive Plants EIS.

Riparian areas in the LIRAA are at risk of invasion by two invasive plants; Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry. Japanese knotweed can create dense colonies that exclude native vegetation and greatly alter natural tree regeneration. The Forest has successfully treated Japanese knotweed along Cow Creek and the lower Imnaha River in the LIRAA. These sites are being actively managed to prevent a resurgence of Japanese knotweed.

Himalayan blackberry has invaded riparian areas throughout the Hells Canyon NRA. Himalayan blackberry can dominate riparian areas, increasing the frequency and severity of wildfires and lead to the elimination of native vegetation, including shrubs, in riparian areas. The presence of dense thickets Himalayan blackberry in riparian areas eventually leads to altered stream channels resulting in degradation of aquatic habitat. Himalayan blackberry are easily dispersed by birds and bears from one drainage to the next. Currently, Himalayan blackberry is present at low level along Lightning Creek and Cow Creek. Continued expansion of Himalayan blackberry in riparian areas in the LIRAA would result in a significant decline in conditions of riparian areas and aquatic habitat in the future.

Timber Harvest Timber harvest likely accompanied development of homesteads in the LIRAA to provide wood for

structures. Since then, limited commercial timber harvesting has occurred on NFS lands in the Lightning Creek drainage in the mid 1950’s. There is little evidence today of the commercial harvest that has occurred along Lightning Creek, or the timber harvest associated with homesteading along Lightning, Cow and Deep creeks.

Recreation The lower Imnaha River Corridor is a high use area for dispersed recreation. The highest use period

coincides with the spring steelhead run. Camps, located both on private and NFS lands, are primarily located in areas adjacent to the river, the majority of which are located within the riparian area. These

175

camps result in areas of bare ground that are prone to erosion and establishment of invasive plants, and removal of dead wood for fires. These camps have localized impacts to riparian and aquatic habitat within the LIRAA. There is a moderate risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and dispersed recreation activities.

Nez Perce Tribe Activities Tribal Grazing – Tribal grazing occurs on NFS lands. Currently the Lone Pine Allotment and the

Thorn Creek Administrative Pasture are utilized by a Tribal grazer. Timing of Tribal grazing is generally similar to timing of grazing on NFS lands; grazing primarily occurs from late fall through early spring. The Forest Service takes into consideration Tribal grazing when developing AOIs for Forest Service permittees by reducing the number of authorized head months so that the total number of head months of both the Tribal grazers and Forest Service permittees does not exceed the carry capacity of the allotment in question. The Forest Service has no oversight of where, when or how Tribal grazers utilize NFS lands, therefore the risk of cumulative effects with grazing on private lands is moderate. There is a moderate risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and Tribal grazing activities.

Tribal Fisheries Management Activities – The Nez Perce Tribe conducts fish research and population monitoring activities in the LIRAA. Activities include smolt monitoring (trap located just below the Cow Creek Bridge on private land), escapement monitoring using traps (trap currently located on Horse Creek on NFS land) and operation of two passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag arrays. There is a low risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and Tribal fisheries management activities.

Global Climate Change Global climate change has the potential to have impacts to aquatic habitat through increases in water

temperature and changes in streamflows in response to changes in climates. The following information was developed by the Forest Service to highlight potential impacts to aquatic habitat in the Pacific Northwest:

Salmon and Trout in the Pacific Northwest and Climate Change [Preparer: Pete Bisson, Aquatic and Land Interactions Program, Pacific Northwest Research

Station. (http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/topics/salmon-trout.shtml) See original document for literature cited.]

Issue One of the most important long-term threats to fish habitat resilience is climate change. A recent

review of the effects of climate change on salmon (ISAB 2007) identified the following probable consequences of global warming along the Pacific coast of North America: (1) warmer temperatures will result in more precipitation falling as rain rather than snow, (2) snowpack will diminish and streamflow timing will be altered, (3) peak river flows will likely increase, and (4)

176

http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/topics/salmon-trout.shtml

water temperatures will continue to rise. Not all of these anticipated trends are necessarily harmful to aquatic habitat, and many pale in comparison to other anthropogenic factors, but they do have implications for salmon and trout populations.

Climate change scenarios predict an increase in large flood events, wildfires, and forest pathogen outbreaks, all of which have some potential to improve fish habitat complexity as a result of flood plain reconnection and large wood recruitment. Many effects of climate warming, however, will have negative habitat consequences for salmon. A higher frequency of severe floods will result in increased egg and alevin mortality owing to gravel scour, especially for fall- and winter-spawning species. Retreating winter snowpacks will run off earlier in the spring (Mote et al. 2003), potentially altering the life cycles of salmon whose seaward migration is timed to coincide with nearshore plankton blooms (Pearcy 1997). Summer base flows will be lower, and the network of perennially flowing streams in a drainage system will shrink during the summer dry period, forcing fish into smaller wetted channels and less diverse habitats (Battin et al. 2006). Warmer water temperatures will increase physiological rearing costs and lower growth rates if warmer streams do not produce sufficient food resources to offset heightened metabolic demands. Additionally, summer temperatures may approach or exceed incipient lethal levels for salmon and trout (Crozier and Zabel 2006, Crozier et al. 2008), and higher temperatures will likely favor non-salmonid species that are better adapted to warmer water, including potential predators and competitors (Reeves et al. 1987).

As noted by Battin et al. (2006), climate change will force shifts in the distribution of salmon populations that will affect their ability to cope with natural disturbances, particularly drought. Streams located high in watersheds that historically provided some of the best habitat may no longer be accessible to salmon if snowpack is reduced, thus limiting available rearing areas and access to thermal refugia in summer. Crozier et al. (2008) modeled Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) population response to alternative climate scenarios in Idaho's Salmon River and found that even moderate changes significantly increased the risk of local population extirpation. Crozier and Zabel (2006) suggested that two climate-related factors (temperature and streamflow) could affect habitat in different ways depending on local site characteristics; narrow, confined streams were more sensitive to flow changes, and wide streams were more sensitive to temperature changes. They concluded that different aspects of climate change were important at different spatial scales, and that a diversity of conditions was needed for metapopulation stability.

Trout and salmon within the interior Columbia River Basin may be especially sensitive to climate change, according to a recent report by a scientific panel (ISAB 2007). Although the intensity of the effects will vary spatially, climate change will alter virtually all streams and rivers in the basin. Current predictions suggest that temperature increases alone will render 2 to 7 percent of headwater trout habitat in the Pacific Northwest unsuitable by 2030, 5 to 20 percent by 2060, and 8 to 33 percent by 2090. Salmon habitat may be more severely affected, in part because these fish are usually restricted to lower, hence warmer, elevations within the region. Salmon habitat loss

177

would be most severe in Oregon and Idaho with potential losses exceeding 40 percent by 2090. Loss of salmon habitat in Washington would be less severe, with the worst-case scenario indicating about 22 percent loss by 2090.

Likely Changes Temperature records show that the Pacific Northwest has warmed 1.8 ºF since 1900,

approximately 50 percent more than the average global warming during the same period. The warming rate for the region in the 21st century is projected to range from 0.2 to 1.1 ˚F per decade. Until late in the 21st century, precipitation changes for the region are projected to be relatively modest and likely to be indistinguishable from natural variability; however, some models suggest an increase in winter storm severity. Most climate models project long-term increases in winter precipitation and decreases in summer precipitation. These changes in temperature and precipitation will alter the snowpack, streamflow, and water quality, particularly in the Columbia River Basin. Warmer temperatures will result in more precipitation falling as rain rather than snow. Snowpack will diminish, winter snow lines will retreat to higher elevations, and snowmelt timing will be altered. With earlier runoff, peak river flow will occur earlier in the year, and summer water temperatures will continue to rise as water levels drop.

Climate change has the potential to affect most freshwater life-history stages of trout and salmon. Increased frequency and severity of flood flows during winter will affect over-wintering juvenile fish and incubating eggs in the streambed. Eggs of fall- and winter- spawning fish, including Chinook, coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch), chum (O. keta) , sockeye salmon (O. nerka), and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), may suffer higher levels of mortality when exposed to increased flood flows. Warmer winter water temperatures will accelerate embryo development and may cause premature emergence of fry. Bull trout require very cold headwater streams for spawning; therefore, a warming climate will disproportionately affect this species.

Options for Management From a habitat resilience standpoint, maintaining as much water as possible in streams and lakes

during periods of low flow will likely be the most effective way to combat the harmful effects of climate change, but other management actions could also produce long-term benefits. Zabel et al. (2006) used population viability analyses to predict that "increasing the freshwater carrying capacity for juveniles is most likely important for recovery. This may include improving the quality of existing habitats and making areas currently unoccupied accessible or suitable." Increased flooding associated with higher peak discharge in winter may result in greater societal pressure to prevent damage to homes and infrastructure by isolating rivers from their flood plains; therefore, habitat managers would be well served to ask where flooding can be allowed in a watershed and in particular where flooding will reconnect the river with flood-plain habitats of direct importance to overwintering salmon. Maintaining key flood-plain connections will also act as a hydrologic safety valve that helps reduce the scouring effect of high flows on redds.

Another management response to climate change involves restoring longitudinal connections throughout a drainage network, i.e., removing anthropogenic blockages to fish migrations up and

178

down the watershed. With a constricted system of perennial stream channels in summer it will be important for all potentially usable habitats to be available.

A fourth management safeguard involves protecting and restoring riparian forests on valley floors and on alluvial terraces adjacent to stream channels. Riparian forests play an important role in the dynamics of the water table beneath and adjacent to streams, in moderating discharge during flow extremes, in controlling the concentration of soluble nutrients, in mediating the seasonal input of organic matter and terrestrial food items to aquatic ecosystems, and in regulating microclimate (Naiman et al. 2005).

Policies that explicitly maintain instream flows by limiting water withdrawals, enhancing flood-plain connectivity by opening historically flooded areas where possible, removing anthropogenic barriers to fish movement, and protecting riparian forests will be needed to conserve habitat resilience in the face of climate change. Without such policies in place, aquatic habitats are likely to become increasingly isolated, simplified, and less likely to recover after significant disturbance events.

Although options for forest managers to minimize the harm to aquatic resources from climate change are limited, there are several management actions that can help protect salmon and trout:

• Minimize anthropogenic increases in water temperature by maintaining well-shaded riparian areas.

• Maintain a forest stand structure that retains snow, reduces the "rain on snow" effect associated with forest openings, and promotes fog drip.

• Disconnect road drainage from the stream network to soften discharge peaks during heavy rainstorms.

• Ensure that fish have access to seasonal habitats, e.g., off-channel wintering areas or summer thermal refugia.

• Protect springs and large groundwater seeps from development and water removal, as these subterranean water sources will become increasingly important when surface flows are altered by climate change.

Climate Change Impacts in the LIRAA Stream temperatures in the Pacific Northwest have increased an average of 0.22 °C during summer

months per decade from 1980 – 2009 (Isaak et al., 2012) Additionally, maximum air temperatures are predicted to increase 2 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit while precipitation is predicted to remain unchanged in Wallowa County during the period 2025-2049 (USGS Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program; http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp; accessed 12/30/2013). These predictions are similar to generalized predictions of changes in climate predicted for the northwest in “Salmon and Trout in the Pacific Northwest and Climate Change” by Bisson.

Impacts to aquatic habitat in the LIRAA: Based on the above information, long-term changes to aquatic habitat in the LIRAA may occur as a result of climate change. These changes may be:

• Increases in water temperatures in response to increases in air temperature,

179

http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nex-dcp30.asp

• Changes in runoff patterns in response to an increase in the amount of winter precipitation that falls as rain:

o Decreases in summer streamflows in response to a reduction in snowpack. o Reduced duration of spring runoff but higher peak flows due to an increase the

amount of winter precipitation that falls as rain These impacts from climate change will likely result in decreased summer habitat for salmonids

during the warmest months (July and August) due to increases in water temperatures above the thermal range for salmonids and reduced streamflows. Occupied habitat for salmonids during the warmest months is likely to shift upstream in response to the higher water temperatures and lower streamflows in the LIRAA.

Fall Chinook salmon are likely the most vulnerable of salmonid species to climate change that currently occupy the LIRAA. Fall Chinook salmon use the lower Imnaha River for spawning habitat and juveniles use the river for their initial rearing period prior to their migration toward the ocean. Increases in water temperatures in the lower Imnaha River could potentially decrease the initial rearing period thus reducing growth of juveniles prior to their down river migration into the Snake River. Growth rate of juveniles is important because in general, larger smolts have a higher survival rate to adulthood (Woodson et al. 2013).

Increasing water temperatures will also likely shift the distribution of other fish species to the detriment of juvenile salmonids. Habitat for smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui) is likely to seasonally expand in the Imnaha River system in response to warmer water temperatures thus increasing predation on juvenile salmonids. Additionally, interspecific competition between juvenile northern pike minnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) and juvenile salmonids will likely increase as stream temperatures increase (Reese and Harvey, 2002).

Proposed changes in livestock grazing management in the LIRAA are intended to achieve the following objectives: 1) maintain aquatic and riparian habitats where desired habitat conditions have been achieved, 2) maintain the current rate of recovery of aquatic and riparian habitats where a near natural rate of recovery is being achieved, and 3) increase the rate of recovery of aquatic and riparian habitats where a near natural rate of recovery is not being achieved. Maintaining the current condition of riparian vegetation along Deep Creek, Cow Creek and Lightning Creek will be important in buffering water temperatures as air temperatures increase in the future. The objectives for maintaining and improving riparian habitat in the LIRAA are consistent with the recommendation to improve the carrying capacity of freshwater habitats as a response to adverse impacts to salmonids populations in the Pacific Northwest from climate change. There is a low risk of cumulative effects between proposed livestock grazing under Alternatives B, C, D, and E and global climate change.

Foreseeable Future Actions Recreation, invasive plant treatments and road maintenance activities will continue in the future.

Impacts would be similar to those described under current management activities.

180

Conclusions Effects past and current management activities in the LIRAA are reflected in the current condition of

aquatic and riparian habitats in the LIRAA (See Aquatic Habitat discussion). Overall, the aquatic and riparian habitats are in good condition in the LIRAA as evidenced by the current conditions of riparian areas adjacent to Cow, Deep and Lightning creeks. The riparian area adjacent to the Imnaha River has likely been altered the most. The majority of this alteration occurred during the homesteading and road building periods.

Alternative A (No Grazing) would not likely result in great changes in aquatic and riparian habitats because aquatic and riparian habitats are in good condition of NFS lands. Under Alternative A, livestock grazing would not be authorized in the LIRAA. As stated in the direct and indirect effects for Alternative A, some conditions that reflect past management activities, terracing and establishment of nonnative vegetation would continue for the next ten years. Riparian shrub levels will likely improve in areas where livestock congregate, such as crossings and watering sites, over the next ten years due to the removal of herbivory from livestock. However, these areas do not represent a significant portion of riparian areas on NFS lands.

The grazing alternatives (Alternatives B, C, D and E) would also not likely result in great changes in aquatic and riparian habitats because they vary little from the current grazing activities with respect to impacts to the riparian and aquatic habitats. Under Alternative B, livestock grazing would be authorized to occur for the next 10 years on the four allotments in the LIRAA. Grazing on the four allotments would be similar to current grazing activities. Increased management by permittees and agency personnel would be used to improve livestock distribution in order to address current and emerging issues with the current grazing activities on the four allotments.

Overall, the aquatic and riparian habitats are in good condition on NFS lands in the LIRAA as evidenced by the current condition of riparian and aquatic habitats of Cow, Deep, and Lightning Creeks. Proposed changes in livestock grazing activities under the grazing alternatives are designed to improve conditions in upland areas and will maintain the current condition of aquatic and riparian habitats for the next 10 years.

In the long-term, two factors will have significant impacts to riparian and aquatic habitat; expansion of Himalayan blackberry and climate change. Continued expansion of Himalayan blackberry in riparian areas in the LIRAA would result in a significant decline in conditions of riparian areas and aquatic habitat in the future as native vegetation is eliminated and fire regimes are altered.

Based on our current understanding of changes that will occur in aquatic habitats as a result of climate change, significant impacts to SR fall Chinook salmon are likely to occur from warming water temperatures. Smallmouth bass are likely to expand their habitat; occupying areas that currently provide spawning and rearing habitat for SR steelhead. These changes will occur likely occur sometime after 2050 given the current predicted rates of increase in air and water temperatures.

181

References

Al-Chokhachy, R., B.B. Roper, E.K. Archer, and S. Miller. 2011. Quantifying the extent of and factors associated with the temporal variability of physical stream habitat in headwater streams in the Interior Columbia River Basin. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 140:399-414.

Archer, E. J., A. Birnie, B. Bouwes, J. Heitke, and G. Kliewer. 2008. Effectiveness monitoring program for streams and riaprian areas within the Upper Columbia River Basin. Annual Summary Report 2001-2008. Ft. Collins, CO: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Armour, C.L., D.A. Duff and W. Elmore. AFS Position Statement. Fisheries, Jan/Feb 1991. pp 7-11

Bailey, D. W. 2004. Management strategies for optimal grazing distribution and use of arid rangelands. Journal of Animal Science. 82(E. Suppl.): E147-E153.

Bailey, D. W. 2005. Identification and creation of optimum habitat conditions for livestock. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 109-118.

Bailey, D.W. and G.R. Welling. 1999. Modification of cattle grazing distribution with dehydrated molasses supplement. J Range Management 52(6):575-582.

Bailey, D. W, H. C. Van Wagoner, R. Weinmeister, and D. Jensen. 2008. Evaluation of low stress herding and supplement placement for managing cattle grazing in riparian and upland areas. Rangeland Ecology Management 61: 26-37.

Behnke, R.J. 1992. Native Trout of Western North America. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Bell, T. A. 1998. Sediment trapping by riparian vegetation of varying heights for gully restoration. In: W. P. Clary and W. C. Leininger. 2000. Stubble height as a tool for management of riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 53: 562-573.

Belsky, A.J., A, Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1999. Survey of livestock influences on stream and riparian ecosystems in the western United States. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 54: 419–431.

Bjornn, T.C. and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:83-138. (On file at Wallowa RD Office, Joseph OR)

Bradford, M., M.L. Keefer, C.A. Peery, B. High. 2009. Behavioral thermoregulation and associated mortality trade-offs in migrating adult steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): variability among sympatric populations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 66:10, 1734-1747

182

Brim Box, J., J. Howard, D. Wolf, C. O’Brian, D. Nez and D. Close. 2006. Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia: Unionoida) of the Umatilla and Middle Fork John Day Rivers in Eastern Oregon. Northwest Science 80:95-107.

Brookshire, E.N.J., J.B.Kauffman, D. Lytjen, and N. Otting. 2002. Cumulative effects of wild ungulate and livestock herbivory on riparian willows. Oecologia 132:559–566.

Brunsfeld S.J. and F.D.Johnson.1985. Field guide to the willows of east-central Idaho. Forest, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station Bull. No. 39. University of Idaho, Moscow

Butler, P.J. 2000. Cattle distribution under intensive herded management. Rangelands 22:21-23.

Burton, T. A., S. J. Smith, and E. R. Cowley. 2010. Multiple Indicator Monitoring (MIM) of Stream Channels and Riparian Vegetation. Technical Reference 1737-23. USDI Bureau of Land Management. Idaho State Office. Boise, ID.

Carter, K. 2005. The effects of temperature on steelhead trout, coho salmon, and Chinook salmon biology and function by life stage. Implications for the Klamath River total maximum daily loads. California Regional Water Quality Control Board. North Coast Region, Santa Rosa, California.

Case, R.L. and J.B. Kauffman. 1997. Wild ungulate influences on the recovery of willow, black cottonwood and thin-leaf alder following cessation of cattle grazing in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Science 71: 115-126.

Chamberlain, D. J. and M. S. Doverspike. 2001. Water tanks protect streambanks. Rangelands 23(2) 3-5.

Clary, W. P. 1999. Stream channel and vegetation responses to late spring cattle grazing. In: Scrimgeour G. J., and S. Kendall. 2003. Effects of livestock grazing on benthic invertebrates from a native grassland ecosystem. Freshwater biology 48:347-362.

Clary W. P. and B. F. Webster. 1989. Managing grazing of riparian areas in the intermountain region. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-263. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 11 p.

Clary, W. P. and G. D. Booth. 1993. Early season utilization of mountain meadow riparian pastures. In: T. M. DelCurto, M. Porath, C. T. Parsons, and J. A. Morrison. 2005. Management strategies for sustainable beef cattle grazing on forested rangelands in the Pacific Northwest. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 119-127.

Clary, W. P. and J. W. Kinney. 2000. Streambank response to simulated grazing. In: W. P. Clary and W. C. Leininger. 2000. Stubble height as a tool for management of riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 53: 562-573.

Clary, W. P. and W. C. Leininger. 2000. Stubble height as a tool for management of riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 53: 562-573.

183

Clary W. P., C. I. Thornton, and S. R. Abt. 1996. Riparian stubble height and recovery of degraded streambanks. In: Warren P Clary and Wayne C. Leininger. 2000. Stubble height as a tool for management of riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 53: 562-573.

Clawson, J. E. 1993. The use of off-stream water developments and various water gap configurations to modify the behavior of grazing cattle. M. Sc. In: S. McIver. 2004. Using off-stream water sources as a beneficial management practice in riparian areas - a literature review. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, Canada.

Cook, C. W. 1966. Factors affecting utilization of mountain slopes by Cattle. In: J. G. Kie and B. B. Boroski. 1996. Cattle distribution, habitats, and diets in the Sierra Nevada of California. Journal of Range Management 49(6): 482-488.

Coles-Ritchie, M.C., D.W. Roberts, J.L. Kershner, and R. C. Henderson. 2007. Use of a wetland index to evaluate changes in riparian vegetation after livestock exclusion. Journal of American Water Resources Association 43(3):731-743.

Cowley, E.R. and T.A. Burton. 2005. Monitoring streambanks and riparian vegetation – multiple indicators. Technical Bulletin No. 2005-2, USDI BLM, Idaho State Office, Boise ID.

Crowe, E. A, and R. R. Clausnitzer. 1997. Mid-montane plant associations of the Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. Technical Paper R6-NR-ECOL-22-97.

Darambazar, E., T. DelCurto, C. Ackerman, G. Pulsipher, and D. Damiran. 2003. Changes in forage quantity and quality with continued cattle grazing in a mountain riparian pasture. In: Proceedings of the West. Sec. of Amer. Soc. Anim. Sci. 54:324-328.

DelCurto, T.; Johnson, B.K.; Vavra, M.; Ager, A.A.; Coe, P.K. 2000. The influence of season on distribution patterns relative to water and resource use by cattle grazing mixed forested rangelands. Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of Animal Science 51:171-175.

DelCurto, T., M. Porath, C. T. Parsons, and J. A. Morrison. 2005. Management strategies for sustainable beef cattle grazing on forested rangelands in the Pacific Northwest. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 119-127.

Dollof, C.A. and M.L. Warren. 2003. Fish relationships with large wood in small streams. American Fisheries Symposium, 37:179-193.

Ebersol, J.L.; W.J Liss and C.A. Frissell. 2003. Thermal heterogeneity, stream channel morphology, salmonid abundance in northeast Oregon streams. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 60: 1266–1280.

Ecovista. 2004. Imnaha Subbasin Assessment. 480 pp.

Everest, F.H., and R.D. Harr. 1982. Influence of forest and rangeland management on anadromous fish habitat in western North America; 6. Silvicultural Treatments. USDA, Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-134. PNW Forest and Range Exp. Station, Portland, Ore. 19 pp.

184

Ganskopp, D. 2001. Manipulating cattle distribution with salt and water in large arid-land pastures: a GPS/GIS assessment. Applied Animal Behavior Science 73: 251-262.

Ganskopp, D., R. Cruz, and D. E. Johnson. 2000. Least effort pathways? A GIS analysis of livestock trails in rugged terrain. In: D. W. Bailey. 2005. Identification and creation of optimum habitat conditions for livestock. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 109-118.

Gillen R. L., W. C. Krueger, and R. F. Miller. 1984. Cattle Distribution on Mountain Rangeland in Northeastern Oregon. Journal of Range Management, Vol. 37(6): 549-553.

Gillen, R. L., W. C. Krueger, and R. F. Miller. 1985. Cattle use of riparian meadows in the Blue Mountains of northeastern Oregon. In: T. M. DelCurto, M. Porath, C. T. Parsons, and J. A. Morrison. 2005. Management strategies for sustainable beef cattle grazing on forested rangelands in the Pacific Northwest. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 119-127.

Godwin, D. C., and J. R. Miner. 1996. The potential of off-stream livestock watering to reduce water quality impacts. Bioresource Technology 58(1996): 285-290.

Hall, F. C. 1999. Test of observer variability in measuring riparian shrub twig length. In: Alma H. Winward. 2000. Monitoring the vegetation resources in riparian areas. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-46. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 49 p.

Hall, Fredrick C., and L. Bryant. 1995. Herbaceous stubble height as a warning of impending cattle grazing damage to riparian areas.

Harris, N. R., D. E. Johnson, M. R. George, and N. K. McDougald. 2002. The effect of topography, vegetation, and weather on Cattle Distribution at the San Joaquin experimental range, California. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-184.

Harbeck, J.R., and N.P. Espinosa. 2012. Imnaha River steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss adult monitoring Project; 2011 Annual Report. Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management. Prepared for: U.S. Dept. Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Project Number 2012-032-00

Henderson, R.C.; Archer, E. K.; Bouwes, B. A; Coles-Ritchie, M.S.; Kershner, J.L. 2005. PACFISH/INFISH Biological Opinion (PIBO): Effectiveness Monitoring Program seven-year status report 1998 through 2004. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-162. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 16 p.

Howery, L. D., F. D. Provenza, R. E. Banner, and C. B. Scott. 1996. Differences in home range and habitat use among individuals in a cattle herd. In: N. R. Harris, D. E. Johnson, M. R. George, and N. K. McDougald. 2002. The effect of topography, vegetation, and weather on Cattle Distribution at the San Joaquin experimental range, California. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-184.

185

Isaak, D.J., S. Wollrab, D. Horan, G. Chandler. 2012. Climate change effects on stream and river temperatures across the northwest U.S. from 1980–2009 and implications for salmonid fishes. Climatic Change, 113(2):499-524

Jackson, C. R., and C. A. Sturm.2002. Woody debris and channel morphology in first- and second-order forested channels in Washington’s coast range. Water Resour. Res., 38: 16.1-16.14

Kauffman, J. B., and W. C. Kruger. 1984. Livestock impacts on riparian ecosystems and streamside management implications.: a review. Journal of Range Management 37:430-438.

Keren, E. N., and B. E. Olson. "Thermal balance of cattle grazing winter range: Model application." Journal of animal science 84, no. 5 (2006): 1238-1247.

Kershner, J.K, and B.B. Roper. 2010. An evaluation of management objectives used to assess stream habitat conditions on federal lands within the interior Columbia Basin. Fisheries 35:269-277.

Kinch, G. 1989. Riparian area management: Grazing management in riparian areas. TR 1737-4. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Service Center, Denver, CO. 44 pp.

Kinch, G. 1989. Riparian area management: grazing management in riparian areas. In: T. M. DelCurto, M. Porath, C. T. Parsons, and J. A. Morrison. 2005. Management strategies for sustainable beef cattle grazing on forested rangelands in the Pacific Northwest. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 119-127.

Masters, Linda, Sherman Swanson, and Wayne Burkhardt. "Riparian grazing management that worked: I. Introduction and winter grazing." Rangelands (1996): 192-195.

McInnis, M. L., and J. McIver. 2001. Influence of off-stream supplements on streambanks of riparian pastures. Journal of Range Management. 54: 648-652.

McIver, S. 2004. Using off-stream water sources as a beneficial management practice in riparian areas - a literature review. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, Canada.

McPhail, J.D. and C.B. Murray. 1979. The early life history and ecology of Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) in the upper Arrow Lakes. Submitted to BC Hydro and Power Authority and Kootenay Region Fish and Wildlife. 113 p.

Meehan, W.R. and T.C. Bjornn. 1991. Salmonid distributions and life histories. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:47-82.

Miller, R. F. and W. C. Krueger. 1976. Cattle use on summer foothill rangelands in northeastern Oregon. Journal of Range Management 29(5): 367-371.

Miner, J. R., J. C. Buckhouse, and J. A. Moore. 1992. Will a water trough reduce the amount of time hay-fed livestock spend in the stream (and therefore improve water quality)? In: D. W.

186

Bailey. 2004. Management strategies for optimal grazing distribution and use of arid rangelands. Journal of Animal Science 82 (Suppl.) E147-E153.

Montgomery, D.R, J.M Buffington, R.D. Smith, K.M. Schmidt and G. Pess. 1995. Pool spacing in forest channels. Water Resources Research 31:1097-1105.

Muegler, W. F. 1965. Cattle distribution on steep slopes. In: J. G. Kie and B. B. Boroski. 1996. Cattle distribution, habitats, and diets in the Sierra Nevada of California. Journal of Range Management 49(6): 482-488.

Myers, L. 1989. Grazing and riparian management in southwestern Montana. Fifteen years of experience. Proceedings: Practical Approaches to Riparian Resource Management an Educational Workshop. Billings, MT. pp 117-120.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1995. Biological Opinion: Land and Resource Management Plans for the Boise, Challis, Nez Perce, Payette, Salmon, Sawtooth, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. Northwest Region Office, Seattle, WA.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1996. Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale. NMFS Environmental and Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation Branch, Seattle, WA.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1998. Biological Opinion: Land and Resource Management Plans for National Forests and Bureau of Land Management Resource Areas in the Upper Columbia River Basin and Snake River Basin evolutionarily significant units. Northwest Region Office, Seattle, WA.

Nielsen, J.L., T.E. Lisle, and V. Ozaki. 1994. Thermally stratified pools and their use by steelhead in Northern California streams. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 123:613-626.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). 2004. Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan

Ohmart, R.D. 1996. Historical and present impacts of livestock grazing on fish and wildlife resources in western riparian habitats. p. 245-279. In: P.R. Krausman (ed.), Rangeland wildlife. Soc. for Range Manage., Denver CO.

Olson, B. E., and R. T Wallander. "Influence of winter weather and shelter on activity patterns of beef cows." Canadian journal of animal science 82, no. 4 (2002): 491-501.

Parsons, C. T., P. A. Momont, T. Delcurto, M. McInnis, and M. L. Porath. 2003. Cattle distribution patterns and vegetation use in mountain riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 56(4): 334-341.

Pinchak, W. P., M. A. Smith, R. H. Hart, and J. W. Waggoner. 1991. Beef cattle distribution patterns on foothill range. Journal of Range Management 44(3): 267-275.

187

Phillips, R.W., R.L. Lantz, E.W. Claire, and J.R. Moring. 1975. Some effects of gravel mixtures on emergence of coho salmon and steelhead trout fry. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 104:461-466.

Porath, M. L., P. A. Momont, T. DelCurto, N. R. Rimbey, J. A. Tanaka, and M. McInnis. 2002. Offstream water and trace mineral salt as management strategies for improved cattle distribution. Journal of Animal Science 80:346-356.

Prichard, D., J. Anderson, C. Correll, J. Fogg, K. Gebhardt, R. Krapf, S. Leonard, B. Mitchell, and J. Staats. 1998. Riparian area management: A user guide to assessing proper functioning condition and the supporting science for lotic areas. TR1737-15. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Applied Resource Sciences Center, Denver, CO. 126 pp.

Provenza, F.D. 2003. Foraging behavior: Managing to survive in a world of change. Department of Forest, Range, and Wildlife Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT. 63 pp.

Reese, C.D. and B.C. Harvey. 2002. Temperature-dependent interactions between juvenile steelhead and Sacramento pikeminnow in Laboratory Streams. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 131:599–606.

Reid, L.M., and M.J. Furniss. 1998. On the use of regional channel-based indicators for monitoring. Unpublished report. USDA Forest Service, Redwood Sciences Laboratory, Arcata, California. 24 p.

Richter, A., and S. A. Kolmes. 2005. Maximum temperature limits for Chinook, coho, and chum salmon, and steelhead trout in the Pacific Northwest. Reviews in Fisheries Science. 13:23-49.Roberts, B.C., and R.G. White. 1992. Effects of angler wading on survival of trout eggs and pre-emergent fry. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:450-459.

Roath, L. R. and W. C. Krueger. 1982. Cattle grazing and behavior on a forested range. Journal of Range Management 35(3): 332-338.

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied river morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, CO.

Rumsey, C. J. 1996. The effect of three residual vegetation heights on streambank sediment deposition and vegetation production. In: W. P. Clary and W. C. Leininger. 2000. Stubble height as a tool for management of riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 53: 562-573.

Sack, D. and S. da Luz. 2003. Sediment flux and compaction trend on off-road vehicle (ORV) and other trails in an Appalachian forest setting. Physical Geography 24:536-554.

Senft, R. L., M. B. Coughenour, D. W. Bailey, L. R. Rittenhouse, O. E. Sala, and D. M. Swift. 1987. Large Herbivore foraging and ecological hierarchies. In: N. R. Harris, D. E. Johnson, M. R. George, and N. K. McDougald. 2002. The effect of topography, vegetation, and weather on Cattle Distribution at the San Joaquin experimental range, California. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-184.

188

Sheffield, R. E., S. Mostaghimi, D. H. Vaughn, E. R. Collins, and V. G. Allen. 1997. Off-stream water sources for grazing cattle as a stream bank stabilization and water quality BMP. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 40(3): 596-604.

Siekert, R. E., Q. D. Skinner, M. A. Smith, J. L. Dodd, and J. D. Rodgers. 1985. Channel response of an ephemeral stream in Wyoming to selected grazing treatments. In: T. M. DelCurto, M. Porath, C. T. Parsons, and J. A. Morrison. 2005. Management strategies for sustainable beef cattle grazing on forested rangelands in the Pacific Northwest. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58(2): 119-127.

Smith, S. M. S.1988. Modeling: three approaches to predicting how herbivore impact is distributed in rangelands. In: N. R. Harris, D. E. Johnson, M. R. George, and N. K. McDougald. 2002. The effect of topography, vegetation, and weather on Cattle Distribution at the San Joaquin experimental range, California. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-184.

StreamNet GIS Data. 2009. StreamNet Mapper. Portland, OR. http://map.streamnet.org.

Thorne, M. S., P. J. Meiman, Q. D. Skinner, M. A. Smith, and J. L. Dodd. 2005. Clipping frequency affects canopy volume and biomass production in planeleaf willow (Salix planifolia var planifolia Prush) In: T. A. Burton, T. A., S. J. Smith, and E. R. Cowley. 2008. Monitoring stream channels and riparian vegetation multiple indicators. Version 5.0. USDI Bureau of Land Management. Idaho State Office. Boise, ID.

Thornton, C. I., S. R. Abt, and W.P Clary. 1997. Vegetation influence on small stream siltation. In: Warren P Clary and Wayne C. Leininger. 2000. Stubble height as a tool for management of riparian areas. Journal of Range Management 53: 562-573.

Torgersen, C.E., D.M. Price, H.W. Li, and B.A. McIntosh. 1999. Multiscale thermal refugia and stream habitat associations of Chinook salmon in northeast Oregon. Ecological Applications 9:301–319.

University of Idaho Stubble Height Review Team. 2004. University of Idaho stubble height study report. University of Idaho, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station Contribution No. 986, Moscow, Idaho.

USDA Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 1990. Land and Resource Management Plan. Baker City, OR.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1995. Interim strategies for managing anadromous fish-producing watersheds in eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, and portions of California (PACFISH).

USDI Bureau of Land Management. 1998. A user guide to assessing proper functioning condition and the supporting science for lotic areas. Technical Reference 1337-15

Veira, D. and L. Liggins. 2002. Do cattle need to be fenced out of riparian areas? In: S. McIver. 2004. Using off-stream water sources as a beneficial management practice in riparian

189

areas - a literature review. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, Canada.

Winward, Alma H. 2000. Monitoring the vegetation resources in riparian areas. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-46. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 49 p.

Witzel, L. D., and H. R. MacCrimmon. 1983 Redd site selection by brook trout and brown trout in southwestern Ontario streams. In: J. S. Gregory and B. L.

Whitacre, H.W., B.B. Roper, and J.L. Kershner. 2007. A Comparison of Protocols and Observer Precision for Measuring Physical Stream Attributes. Journal of American Water Resources Association 43:923-937.

Woodson, L.E., B.K. Wells, P.K. Weber, R.B. MacFarlane, G.E. Whitman, R.C. Johnson. 2013. Size, growth, and origin-dependent mortality of juvenile Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha during early ocean residence. Marine Ecology Progress Series 487: 163–175

Wyman, S., D. Bailey, M. Borman, S. Cote, J. Eisner, W. Elmore, B. Leinard, S. Leonard, F. Reed, S. Swanson, L. Van Riper, T. Westfall, R. Wiley, and A. Winward. 2006. Riparian area management: Grazing management processes and strategies for riparian-wetland areas. Technical Reference 1737-20. BLM/ST/ST-06/002+1737. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Science and Technology Center, Denver, CO. 105 pp.

Young, W. and J. Hatch 2012. Adult Steelhead Evaluations in Imnaha River Tributaries. Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management. Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Cooperative Agreement Number 141101J005

190

Appendix A – Riparian Habitat Conditions

Deep Creek

Figure E-1. Deep Creek below Deep Creek Ranch. The Snake River is located in top left hand corner of photo.

Snake River

191

Figure E-2. Riparian conditions along Deep Creek at Deep Creek Ranch. Note wet meadow in foreground.

192

Figure E-3. Riparian conditions along Deep Creek at Deep Creek Ranch

193

Figure E-4. Riparian conditions along Deep Creek at Deep Creek Ranch

194

Figure E-5. Riparian conditions along Deep Creek upstream of Deep Creek Ranch

195


196


197


198

Figure E-9. Riparian conditions along Deep Creek upstream of Deep Creek Ranch. Area is located in the burned area of the Deep Creek Fire (2000).

199


200


201


202


203

Cow Creek

Figure E-14. Cow Creek near upstream boundary of Cow Creek Allotment. Photo taken 04/27/2009.

204

Figure E-15. Equipment/vehicle ford now used as a crossing/watering area on Cow Creek above the Litch Ranch. A former hayfield is located across the creek. Photo taken 04/27/2009.

205

Figure E-16. Cow Creek. Photo taken 04/27/2009.

206

Figure E-17. Cow Creek. Photo taken 04/27/2009.

207

Figure E-18. Crossing/watering area on Cow Creek. Photo taken 04/27/2009.

208

Figure E-19. Cow Creek at Litch Ranch. Photo taken 06/21/2011.

209

Figure E-20. Cow Creek at Litch Ranch. Photo taken 06/21/2011.

210

Figure E-21. Cow Creek below Litch Ranch. Photo taken 04/27/2009.

211


212


213

Rhodes Creek

Figure E-24. Rhodes Creek. Photo taken 04/28/2009.

214

Figure E-25. Riparian area adjacent to lower Rhodes Creek. Photo taken 04/28/2009.

215

Lightning Creek

Figure E-26. Lightning Creek. Photo taken 04/28/2009.

216

Figure E-27. Lightning Creek. Photo taken 04/28/2009.

217

Figure E-28. Lightning Creek at upper vehicle ford. Photo taken 04/28/2009.

218

Figure E-29. Lower Lightning Creek. Photo taken 08/06/2008.

219


220


221

lower imnaha rangeland analysis feis aquatics biological...

Documents