Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 1 of 8

Decision Memo Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project

USDA Forest Service Mount Hough Ranger District

Plumas County, CA

Background We, (the USDA Forest Service, Plumas National Forest, Mt. Hough Ranger District) are proposing the Clear Creek Watershed Project. The purpose of the Clear Creek Watershed project is to restore natural stream flow and aquatic ecosystem processes in the watershed.

Project Location The project is located in the Clear Creek watershed near Forest Road 26N89. The proposed activities are located in sections 7 and 18 of T26N, R8E, MDBM. Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed activities.

Purpose and Need for Action Clear Creek flows into the North Fork of the Feather River, which is section 303d listed as an impaired waterbody by the State of California for water temperature. The Clear Creek watershed was impacted by the Chips, Storrie, and Rich Fires, resulting in increasing erosion, loss of vegetation, and flooding. Conditions in the Clear Creek watershed could result in downstream effects to the North Fork of the Feather River.

Along Clear Creek there is a man-made dam at an abandoned cabin and dump site on Forest Road 26N89, commonly known as ‘Perini Place.’ Flooding deposited an unsupportable load of stream bed material (cobbles, boulders and sand) behind the dam. Eventually the dam breached, creating a wide, deep channel around the east side of the dam. The dam continues to impede the natural flow of water and natural stream processes. In addition, several roads located in close proximity to the stream are contributing sediment to the stream or have the potential to impact stream water quality.

The purpose of the Clear Creek Watershed project is to restore natural stream flow and aquatic ecosystem processes in the watershed. We need to modify the man-made dam at the “Perini Place” cabin to create a more natural stream flow. We need to restore the stream channel width, gradient, and forest vegetation up and down-stream from the dam to a more natural and characteristic condition. We also need to obliterate two non-system roads and remove the associated drainage structures. Lastly, we need to maintain approximately 0.5 miles of National Forest System Road 26N89 and 0.75 miles of the Pacific Gas and Electric power line access road (26N89 extension) to improve drainage and protect the downstream water quality. Restoring Clear Creek would improve stream temperature and water quality downstream through the fire areas and into the North Fork of the Feather River.

Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 2 of 8

Figure 1. Map showing Clear Creek Watershed Project area

Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 3 of 8

Decision I have decided to remove a portion of the dam and reshape the stream bed upstream and downstream to create a more natural stream channel. Restoration activities will include constructing instream structures to stop the channel degradation around the dam. We will move the flood-deposited stream bed material to recreate a naturally meandering channel that matches the grade and riffles/pools of the natural channel. We will use heavy equipment (excavator, back-hoe, bull dozer) alongside and in the stream channel to move boulders (approximately 24 inches in diameter), and large woody debris. We will plant native riparian vegetation such as willow, cottonwood, big-leaf maple, red-osier dogwood, and alder, from the surrounding area to accelerate stream bank stabilization.

We will also:

• Obliterate and re-contour 1.1 miles of non-system road along the east side of Clear Creek using heavy equipment. We will remove all culverts and recontour and stabilize the stream crossings to conform to existing stream gradients.

• Reconstruct approximately 0.5 miles of National Forest System Road 26N89 and 0.75 miles of the Pacific Gas and Electric power line access road (26N89 extension) by installing armored rolling dips to discourage road surface erosion, outsloping road segments, realigning tributary streams diverted down this road, and armoring low water stream crossings.

Forest Service Best Management Practices, Plumas National Forest Land Management Plan (as amended by the Sierra Nevada Framework) standards and guidelines or other design features will be incorporated to minimize project impacts to water quality, aquatic species, wildlife, botany and heritage resources as follows.

Table 1: Project design features

Resource Design Feature

Aquatics Standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be applied, unless monitoring discovers presence of special status species. For species that are not federally listed (e.g., Forest Service sensitive), the aquatics specialist may determine that seasonal restrictions and additional mitigation may be necessary. Within suitable Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog habitat the project will comply with all applicable Conservation measures and Terms and Conditions identified in the Programmatic Biological Opinion dated February 17, 2015, in addition within the Riparian Conservation Area the project will meet all Riparian Conservation Objectives and apply applicable forest-wide standards and guidelines (USDA Forest Service 2004).

Wildlife There are two spotted owl activity centers and one northern goshawk protected activity center that could be affected by disturbance associated with the proposed heavy equipment operations (see map in project file). A limited operating period (LOP) restriction would be implemented within ¼ mile of the spotted owl nest centers between March 1 and August 15 to limit effects. The Clear Creek Northern Goshawk PAC will have a LOP of February 15 to September 15. LOPs may be able to be modified after consulting with District Wildlife Biologist regarding survey results.

Botany Flag and avoid known sensitive plant sites and others that may be discovered within 100 feet of project activities (see map in project file).

Non-native invasive species

The invasive plant Himalayan blackberry is present in the project area at several locations (see map in project file). Implementing preventive and control measures described below

Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 4 of 8

Resource Design Feature

will considerably reduce the project’s risk of introducing or spreading invasive plant species.

a) Use standard vehicle cleaning clause to clean vehicles before entering Plumas National Forest to reduce the potential spread of Non-native Invasive Species.

b) Use weed-free equipment and materials, mulches, and seed sources. Avoid seeding in areas where revegetation will occur naturally, unless noxious weeds are a concern. Save topsoil from disturbance and put it back to use in onsite revegetation, unless contaminated with noxious weeds. All activities that require seeding or planting will need to use only locally collected native seed sources. As necessary, Plumas National Forest botanists will develop project and site-specific revegetation and seeding guidelines that will be customized from existing general guidelines.

c) If possible, avoid staging equipment, materials, or crews in noxious weed infested areas. As practical, flag and avoid known invasive sites (see map in project file).

d) Flag and avoid, or treat and monitor noxious weed locations discovered during project implementation. Implement treatment consistent with existing approved projects (such as the Storrie and Rich Fire Areas Invasive Plant Treatment Project Environmental Assessment).

Hydrology Use standard BMP’s to minimize floodplain disturbances and sediment mobilization when reconfiguring the channel and removing culverts.

Heritage Three cultural resource sites are located near the project site. The archeologist has provided site specific restrictions to protect these sites in the project file.

Vegetation Conduct decommissioning activities to ensure they do not damage newly planted seedlings in unit just above this road.

Safety Place appropriate safety signing and notification of construction activities to reduce conflicts with public or permittees.

This action is categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement (EIS) or an environmental assessment (EA). The applicable category of actions is identified in agency procedures as 36 CFR 220.6(e)(18, 19, and 20) and 36 CFR 220.6(d)(4).

I find that there are no extraordinary circumstances that would warrant further analysis and documentation in an EA or EIS. I took into account resource conditions identified in agency procedures that should be considered in determining whether extraordinary circumstances might exist:

• Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species – There will be no significant adverse effects to federally listed or forest service sensitive species.

o The project was designed to minimize and not adversely impact the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog and its habitat. The project was included among many other projects on all nine Sierra Nevada forests in a U.S. Forest Service Region-wide programmatic formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (June 16, 2014), addressing effects of Forest Service actions on three species of Threatened and Endangered amphibians. The agency requested concurrence from USFWS on the determination of May Affect and Likely to Adversely Affect Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frogs and Not Likely to Destroy or Adversely Modify its proposed critical habitat for the set of projects included in the region-wide programmatic formal consultation. The final

Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 5 of 8

Biological Opinion was issued by USFWS on December 19, 2014. The project will comply with all applicable Terms and Conditions identified in the programmatic Biological Opinion dated February 17, 2015. The entire project area is suitable habitat for the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog. Chico State collected two historic specimens of SNYLF in 1961 north of the proposed project in the Butt Creek sub-watershed. However, to date, no known detections of SNYLF have occurred within the Clear Creek sub-watershed and it is believed their presence is highly unlikely. Short-term (few years) negative effects (e.g., increased sediment, cover removal) within suitable amphibian habitat are expected to occur due to heavy equipment use within and near the stream channel. The long-term result is expected to be improved aquatic habitat due to a more natural stream channel configuration, and reduced road-related sediment input adjacent and downstream of culvert removal sites and road obliteration/maintenance segments.

o The project area passes through or near several protected activity centers (PACs) for sensitive wildlife species including: one Northern goshawk PAC and two California spotted owl PACs. LOPs (see Table 1) will limit effects to California spotted owl and Northern goshawk. No road activity is within ¼ mile of any Willow flycatcher habitat. The proposed treatment within ¼ mile of the Canyon Dam falcon nest is not expected to have any negative effects because the disturbance is on top of the ridge and not in direct line-of-sight to the nest.

o No Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive (TES) are known to occur along the central corridors and areas of expected soil disturbances. However, a larger population of clustered lady’s slipper (Cypripedium fasciculatum) is present in and around the project area, and three individual plant occurrences are within 100 feet of the proposal. These will be flagged for avoidance.

• Flood plains, wetlands, or municipal watersheds – Plumas National Forest corporate GIS data was reviewed to determine if floodplains, wetlands or municipal watersheds are present within project boundaries. As the work will take place in the channel, short-term increases in sediment and turbidity can be expected immediately downstream due to ground disturbance. The potential effects of the proposed action on the floodplain would be limited in magnitude given the small footprint and the implementation of BMPs. A small wetland is located within the floodplain upstream from the proposed stream bed construction site. A 401/404/CEQA permit will be processed to show that all state water quality standards will be met. There are no municipal watersheds. Therefore no effects to these are expected from this action.

• Congressionally designated areas such as wilderness, wilderness study areas, or national recreation areas – none present.

• Inventoried roadless areas or potential wilderness areas – none present.

• Research natural areas – none present.

• American Indians and Alaska Native religious or cultural sites – none present.

• Archaeological sites, or historic properties or areas – There are four historic sites within the area of potential effect (APE) for this project. As a result, the mitigation measures outlined above will need to be followed to protect these sites and avoid impacts.

Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 7 of 8

Acting District Ranger

Decision Memo –Clear Creek Watershed Restoration Project Page 8 of 8

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.