**ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT**

**May 2007**

Streelow Creek Fish Passage

Redwood National and State Parks

Humboldt County, California

**Introduction**

The National Park Service is proposing to remove failing culverts and
replace them with a footbridge on an abandoned logging road that has
been converted to the Streelow Creek Trail used by hikers and bicyclists
in Redwood National Park. Replacing the culverts with a footbridge would
improve habitat for threatened fish species. Several other failing
drainage structures would be replaced and unstable road sections would
be removed to prevent future damage to fish habitat. This project has
been awarded a grant for \$43,950 under the California Department of
Fish and Game Fisheries (CDFG) Restoration Grant Program for restoration
of salmonid habitat in California streams.

Redwood National Park was established by Congress in 1968 to \"preserve
significant examples of the coastal redwood ... forests and the streams
and seashores with which they are associated for purposes of public
inspiration, enjoyment, and scientific study.\" The NPS was directed to
"minimize human-induced erosional threats and impacts to terrestrial and
aquatic resources within the park" that resulted from logging practices
allowed at that time. \[Public Law 90-245, Section 3(e)\]

In 1978, Congress expanded the national park by acquiring privately
owned timber lands that had already been logged and directed the NPS to
develop a watershed rehabilitation program to "minimize human-caused
sediment entering Redwood Creek and its tributaries." \[Public Law
95-250, Section 101(a)(6)\] Since 1978, the NPS has been conducting
watershed rehabilitation and restoration activities in accordance with
the legislative direction.

The 1999 Redwood National and State Parks *Final General Management
Plan/General Plan, Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report* (RNSP GMP/EIS) included proposals to remove or treat abandoned
logging roads to reduce the potential for erosion at stream crossings
and from unstable road segments. The proposed action is intended to
implement the watershed restoration program described in the GMP; the
environmental assessment is tiered off the GMP/EIS.

# Purpose and Need for Action

The Streelow Creek Trail was a former logging road that was converted to
a hike/bike trail. The trail crosses the North Fork of Streelow Creek
just upstream of the confluence of the North Fork and the main stem of
the creek. Streelow Creek is a tributary of Prairie Creek, which has
some of the best remaining salmonid spawning habitat in the region.

The crossing on the North Fork of Streelow Creek is earthen fill
covering three 36-inch-diameter corrugated metal pipe culverts placed in
the original stream channel to allow the stream to flow beneath the
road. These culverts are currently above the grade of the streambed and
act as a barrier to fish passage up the North Fork of Streelow Creek.
The configuration of the inlets in relation to the stream channel has
caused ponding at the inlets and has led to aggradation of approximately
100 feet of channel upstream of the crossing. The outlets are perched 2½
feet above the downstream end of the culvert and the discharge from the
elevated outlet has scoured out the streambed. The configuration of the
culvert outlets and the elevated discharge (essentially a waterfall) are
obstacles to fish passage upstream of the culvert.

The culvert inlets are prone to plugging by woody debris and sediment
that wash into the stream from the hillslopes upstream and that are
carried down the stream channel at high stream flows. Because the area
was logged prior to becoming part of the park, logging debris upstream
and upslope can be carried into the stream and plug the culvert. A
plugged culvert can cause sediment from upstream to be deposited in the
streambed, artificially raising the level of the bed and causing
streamflow to exceed the capacity of the channel.

In addition to the culverts now above the grade of the streambed and the
inlets that are prone to plugging, the pipes have rusted. These pipes
are possibly the original pipes installed during construction of the
road and are in poor condition. Water leaks through holes in the rusted
pipes into the surrounding road fill, which saturates and weakens the
earthen fill and leads to collapse of adjacent stream banks, road fill
failure, and holes along the road surface.

A metal trash rack intended to catch debris and keep the upstream
culvert opening clear has accumulated debris that has plugged the main
channel of the North Fork of Streelow Creek a few feet upstream of the
culverts. The plugged channel has caused aggradation of approximately
500 cubic yards of sediment, causing the stream to divert around the
plugged trash rack and scour the left bank of the North Fork of Streelow
Creek.

Two additional stream crossings are located on the North Fork of
Streelow Creek approximately ½ mile upstream of the trail crossing. One
is a failing log stringer bridge across the North Fork and the second is
an earthen fill crossing of a side channel of the North Fork with a
plugged drainage structure. The type of drainage structure is unknown
because of the volume of debris plugging both the upstream and
downstream ends. It is possible that this crossing is a Humboldt
crossing because several stream crossings nearby incorporate woody
debris to create a Humboldt crossing (logs placed parallel to the
original stream channel and filled with sediment to create a level road
bed).

The potential for failure of drainage structures and roads increases as
the culverts continue to deteriorate and the channels fill with debris.
In a large storm, the crossings would not be able to convey the volume
of water and would act as dams, saturating the fill and increasing the
likelihood of failure. Failure of any of the three stream crossings is
likely to lead to failure of the adjacent road prisms, causing sediment
to be delivered into both Streelow Creek and Prairie Creek and damaging
aquatic habitat.

Complete failure of the North Fork crossing on the trail would destroy
portions of the Streelow Creek Trail. As the crossing gradually
deteriorates, holes and slumps on the trail surface are growing larger
and the uneven surface creates hazards on the trail for both hikers and
bicyclists.

The NPS proposes to replace the damaged undersized culverts at the trail
crossing on the North Fork of Streelow Creek with a footbridge to
improve fish passage for three species of salmonids listed as threatened
and to improve visitor safety on the Streelow Creek Trail. The NPS would
also remove the log stringer bridge and the earth-fill stream crossing
to prevent eventual failure, which would cause further damage to fish
habitat on the North Fork of Streelow Creek.

The purpose of this project is to remove culverts and a failing log
bridge to improve habitat for threatened fish species. This project is
needed to prevent additional damage to fish habitat from sediment
associated with failure of these drainage structures and stream
crossings. One set of culverts would be replaced with a footbridge to
ensure that the Streelow Creek Trail continues to provide a safe and
enjoyable experience for hikers and bicyclists.

**Background**

Redwood National Park was established by Congress in 1968 to \"preserve
significant examples of the coastal redwood ... forests and the streams
and seashores with which they are associated for purposes of public
inspiration, enjoyment, and scientific study.\" (Public Law 90-545)

In 1978, Congress expanded the national park, in part \"to establish a
more meaningful Redwood National Park for the use and enjoyment of
visitors.\" (Public Law 95-250) (see Figure 1: RNSP Location Map)

The expanded park area included approximately 50,000 acres that had been
privately owned timber lands. A road network had been constructed to
provide access to timber cutting areas and to haul the cut logs on
trucks to a mill. The expansion area included many miles of roads that
were abandoned when the timber companies vacated the land.

The old logging roads now in the park were constructed and maintained at
a lower standard than the current California Forest Practice Rules
require. In particular, drainage structures such as ditches and culverts
were not designed to modern standards intended to protect streams and
watersheds.

Stream crossings are places where roads cross streams or drainage
channels. Stream crossings are composed of road fill and a drainage
structure, although many smaller crossings in timber harvest areas were
built with no drainage structure at all. When streamflow exceeds the
capacity of the channel and drainage structure, the stream overtops the
fill and erodes it, causing failure of the road fill. Road failures also
occur when the fill becomes saturated which causes slumps and holes in
the roadbed. When crossings fail, either a significant proportion of the
road fill placed in the stream valley and the accumulated sediment will
erode, or the stream will divert out of its original channel and run
down the road or hillslopes, creating gullies or initiating landslides.
The majority of sediment eroded from failed roads and stream crossings
ends up in the stream system.

Although bridges are used to cross larger streams, they are expensive to
construct, so logging roads often used culverts to convey a stream
beneath a road and filled around the culvert with soil to create a level
roadway. Culverts channel water under a road to keep the road base and
surface dry and stable. Logging road stream crossings typically used a
zinc-plated corrugated metal pipe culvert as the drainage structure.
Zinc-plated pipes are prone to rusting as sediment, gravel, and rocks
transported through the pipe during higher flows abrade the surface of
the pipes and remove the protective zinc plating, exposing the
underlying iron and leading to rusting and corrosion. Corroded culverts
allow rainfall and runoff to leak which saturates and destabilizes road
fills.

Water flowing through a culvert can erode the stream channel at the
downstream end if the culvert is located on a steep area. With high
enough flows in soft road fill, water running from the culvert outflow
is essentially a waterfall that further erodes the soil at the
downstream culvert outlet.

Culverts do not function properly when they become plugged with debris,
when they deteriorate because of rust, or when they are crushed or bent.
In some crossings, two culverts are joined together with a metal band
that may break, causing the two culverts to separate and leak at the
separation.

The older culverts are smaller than current logging regulations require
and are too small to carry high flows. Current state Forest Practice
Rules require culverts with a 100-year-storm-event capacity to protect
the road fill and reduce road failure that deposits sediment into
streams.

Most permanent streams in RNSP are occupied by three species of
anadromous salmonid fishes that are listed as threatened under the
federal Endangered Species Act. Anadromous fish spend most of their
adult lives in the ocean and migrate from the ocean to spawn in the same
freshwater streams in which they spent the first part of their lives.
These fish require spawning gravels that are free of sediment to allow
the eggs and early life stages to obtain enough oxygen to survive.

Culverts that are too small, plugged by debris, collapsed, or placed
higher than the level of the streambed act as barriers to fish migration
and reduce the numbers of fish that are able to spawn. As old culverts
are replaced due to failure or as part of watershed restoration or
routine road maintenance, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS,
aka NOAA Fisheries) requires that NPS install culverts capable of
accommodating a 100-year storm event on its roads.

**Overview of the Project Area**

The Streelow Creek Trail is located on a logging road that was abandoned
when the area was acquired for the park (see Figure 2: Project
Location). The Arcata Redwood Company constructed the 240 Road in the
early 1960s to move logs from harvest sites to its Mill B south of
Davison Road via a major haul road that runs along Prairie Creek.
Davison Road turns west from US Highway 101 about three miles north of
Orick to Gold Bluffs Beach Road, which provides access along the coast
to Fern Canyon, one of the most visited attractions in Prairie Creek
Redwoods State Park.

In 1996, the NPS developed the Elk Meadow Trailhead on the site of the
former Arcata Redwood Company Mill B and converted the haul road along
Prairie Creek to the Davison Trail. The Davison Trail is a hike-bike
trail between Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park and the Elk Meadow
Trailhead.

As part of the trailhead and trail development project, the Streelow
Creek Trail was established on the 240 Road as a hike/bike trail to
connect the Davison Trail to Davison Road and the Coastal Trail. These
trails are very popular because they form a loop with the Ossagon and
Coastal Trails, and with portions of both the Davison Road and the
Newton B. Drury Scenic Parkway, a low speed paved road through old
growth redwood forest at Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park.

![](media/image1.wmf){width="6.338888888888889in" height="7.93125in"}

Figure 1. Redwood National and State Parks Location Map

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="7.3284722222222225in"
height="3.915277777777778in"}

Map 2: Project Location. The proposed project is located along the
Streelow Creek Trail, approximately 1 mile west of the intersection of
the Streelow Creek Trail and the Davison Trail. Proposed project site is
outline by the red ellipse in the middle of the lower part of the
figure.

# Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action

Two alternatives are being considered for this project: removal of three
failing stream crossings, one of which would be replaced by a bridge on
the trail (the proposed action), and a no action alternative.

The no action alternative is required under NPS guidelines for
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and is used
to compare the existing conditions with the proposed action. No action
means either a continuation of existing management practices or "no
project." In this case, no action (the current management action)
includes maintenance of the existing culverts and trail surface but no
removal or replacement of the two culverts or the log stringer bridge.

*Alternative 1: No Action--*Under this alternative, the NPS would
perform minimal maintenance of the existing culverts by periodically
removing debris that accumulates at the culvert inlets and wash rack.
Holes and slumps in the trail surface would be marked as trail hazards
to warn hikers and bicyclists. The log stringer bridge has never been
repaired or received any routine maintenance because of its location on
an unmaintained abandoned logging road.

*Alternative 2: Improve Fish Passage (Proposed Action, Environmentally
Preferred Alternative)--*Under this alternative, the NPS would remove
three stream crossings and unstable portions of associated road fill and
restore the stream channels to resemble their original configuration as
closely as possible. The three corrugated metal pipe culverts on the
Streelow Creek Trail stream crossing would be replaced by a footbridge.

The stream would be diverted around excavation sites if there is
sufficient flow to warrant diversion. If fish are present in the reaches
of stream that would be affected by dewatering, the protocols required
by NMFS for fish relocation and dewatering would be followed (Appendix
1).

Heavy equipment (excavator, bulldozer) would be used to excavate 4900
cubic yards of fill altogether from the three stream crossings, the
associated road segments and material that has aggraded above the lower
culverts. Of that total, 2400 cubic yards would be excavated from the
road segment adjacent to the three lower culverts that would be replaced
by the footbridge. Removal of the three culverts is estimated to require
excavation of 1000 cubic yards. An additional 1000 cubic yards of
material that has aggraded upstream of the three culverts would be
excavated. Removing the log stringer bridge and the earthen fill
crossing on the North Fork one-half mile upstream of the trail crossing
would entail the excavation of approximately 150 and 350 cubic yards of
material, respectively.

All excavated material would be moved to a stable location near the
excavation site where it would not erode into the stream and shaped to
blend in with the surrounding topography. Excavated fill placed along
the trail and finished slopes exposed during excavation would be covered
with vegetation removed during excavation or other locally obtained
mulch to reduce post-excavation erosion of newly disturbed soils.
Mulching with local native plant materials would avoid the need for
revegetation.

The metal trash rack and any culverts associated with the crossing
upstream of the trail would be removed and salvaged if possible for use
elsewhere in the park. If these structures are not salvageable, they
would be disposed off site in an approved disposal facility along with
the three damaged culverts that would be replaced with the bridge.

The three culverts on the Streelow Creek Trail would be replaced by a
footbridge delivered as a kit and assembled on site. The wooden bridge
would be 8 feet wide and 80 feet long, with laminated wooden stringers
("glulams") and pedestrian guard rails 54 inches in height.
Metal-reinforced concrete abutments would be poured on site.

Concrete bridge abutments covering approximately 18 square feet and
containing about 5 cubic yards would be constructed on each end of the
excavated crossing. The abutments would be located above the high water
mark on the North Fork of Streelow Creek. The new bridge would be hauled
in kit form along the Davison Hike-Bike Trail and the Streelow Creek
Trail on a truck and trailer. Heavy equipment and block and tackle would
be used to lay the stringers across the abutments. Bridge decking and
handrails would be constructed with hand tools.

An earthen fill stream crossing with a plugged drainage channel would be
removed by excavating road fill down to the level of the original stream
channel and the channel reshaped to resemble its original configuration.
The earthen fill crossing is estimated to contain 350 cubic yards of
material, including fill material and any woody debris that might be
part of a Humboldt crossing. If the earthen crossing contains a metal
pipe culvert or drainage structure other than woody material, the
structure would be removed and disposed offsite in an approved disposal
facility. If the crossing contains woody material, the wood would be
dispersed on the slopes after excavation to degrade and contribute to
the initial stabilization of the newly excavated slopes.

The old log stringer bridge upstream of the trail crossing is 40 feet
long and contains an estimated 150 cubic yards of material, including
the log stringers. Sediment associated with the bridge would be
excavated and placed on a stable location adjacent to the site, and the
log stringers placed on the finished slopes.

The proposed action would require excavation or disturbance of an
estimated total of 8080 square feet (0.23 acre) of soils for
construction of a pedestrian footbridge with an additional estimated
1200 square feet of disturbance associated with the excavation of the
two upstream stream crossings of North Fork of Streelow Creek.

Heavy equipment and other tools that create noise in excess of ambient
noise would be used for all work performed after September 15^th^ to
reduce adverse effects on noise-sensitive threatened bird species.
Instream channel excavation would occur after September 15^th^ and would
be completed prior to the onset of the rainy season to avoid erosion and
run-off of disturbed soils into the stream. Instream work generally must
be completed prior to October 15^th^. If work involves soil excavation
adjacent to the active stream channel after October 15^th^, work sites
would be "winterized" at the end of each work day to reduce the chance
of erosion and run-off in the event of an unexpected rain storm.
Winterizing, seasonal timing and other best management practices
(Appendix A) would be implemented to reduce short-term adverse effects
on listed salmonids from erosion. A complete list of required mitigation
measures to minimize adverse effects on listed fish species from
projects funded under the CDFG Fisheries Restoration Grant Program is
found in the CDFG California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual,
Third Edition, Volume II with three new chapters added in 2003 and 2004
(Part IX: Fish Passage Evaluation at Stream Crossings, Part X: Upslope
Assessment and Restoration Practices, and Part XI: Riparian Habitat
Restoration) (Flosi *et al,* 1998).

The trail would be closed during equipment operations and bridge
construction. Information and trail closures related to the project
would be posted at the trailheads and visitor centers and announced
through news releases. The project is expected to require trail closure
for about four weeks. Wet soil conditions might require longer closures
for safety and resource protection.

**Environmentally Preferred Alternative**

The environmentally preferred alternative is the one that best meets the
criteria identified in Section 101 of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) as outlined below.

-   Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the
    environment for succeeding generations.

-   Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment
    without degradation, risk of health or safety, or other undesirable
    and unintended consequences.

-   Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our
    national heritage.

-   Enhance the quality of renewable resources.

The NPS has determined that Alternative 2: Improve Fish Passage (the
Proposed Action) is the environmentally preferred alternative. This
alternative would improve designated critical habitat for three species
of anadromous salmonids listed as threatened species by

-   improving passage to upstream spawning areas by removing stream
    crossings that completely or partially block the stream channel;

-   restoring the stream channel through removal of aggraded sediment;

-   reducing the threat of erosion from unstable road fill that reduces
    water quality through input of fine sediment.

The Proposed Action would also improve visitor safety and enjoyment by
stabilizing the old logging road that has been converted to a hike-bike
trail. The existing trail has holes and slumps that form in the original
logging road fill due to improper drainage and unstable soils on which
the road was constructed.

The No Action alternative is not the environmentally preferred
alternative because it would not reduce the potential for eventual
failure of the culverts and the unstable road segments. The culverts,
other stream crossings, and the associated road segment would continue
to erode gradually or eventually fail massively in a storm. Sediment
would continue to be delivered into streams either slowly through
gradual erosion or from large-scale slope, culvert, and stream-crossing
failures. The sediment delivered into streams would move downstream and
further degrade the quality of spawning habitat for threatened coho and
chinook salmon and steelhead trout.

**Consultation with Other Agencies**

Removing the stream crossings, associated road segments and aggraded
material in the stream channel, and installing a pedestrian footbridge
on the trail at the North Fork of Streelow Creek would be conducted
under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) San Francisco District's
Regional General Permit No. 12 (RGP 12, Corps File No.: 27922N) in
compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The RGP was issued
on September 9, 2004 and expires on December 1, 2009. RGP 12 covers all
projects funded by the CDFG Fisheries Restoration Grant Program for the
purpose of restoring salmonid fisheries habitat in non-tidal reaches of
rivers and streams, improving watershed conditions impacting salmonid
streams and improving the survival, growth, migration and reproduction
of native salmonids. Specific activities listed in the RGP that would
occur under the proposed action include improving fish passage at stream
crossings by replacing barrier culverts with bridges; fish passage
improvements such as the removal of obstructions such as landslides;
upslope restoration to reduce sediment delivery to streams through
activities such as road upgrading and removal of unstable sidecast and
fill materials from steep slopes; and watershed and stream bank
stability activities to reduce sediment from watershed and stream bank
erosion.

Effects on listed salmonids and their designated critical habitat from
activities authorized under RGP12 have been analyzed in NOAA Fisheries'
RGP 12 Biological Opinion, dated May 21, 2004
(151422SWR03AR8912:FRR/JTJ) in accordance with section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16U.S.C.1521 *et
seq*.). The NOAA Fisheries RGP 12 Biological Opinion analyzed the
effects of the RGP 12 authorized activities on six populations of
threatened salmonids occupying coastal streams in northern and central
California. The NOAA Fisheries' RGP 12 Biological Opinion provides
section 7 consultation coverage for the potential effects to listed
salmonids from the North Fork of Streelow Creek fish passage improvement
project.

Three federally-listed threatened salmonids occupy the project
area----the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon
(*Oncorhynchus* *kisutch*), California Coastal Chinook salmon (*O.
tshawytscha*) and the Northern California steelhead (*O. mykiss*). NOAA
Fisheries determined that the location and proposed timing authorized
through the RGP would not affect the California Coastal Chinook salmon.
NOAA Fisheries also determined that the proposed RGP is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of the Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coast coho salmon or Northern California steelhead. NOAA
Fisheries anticipates that take of listed species as a result of
projects authorized under the RGP will be in the nature of temporary
displacement and/or reduction in feeding rates (with a possible minimal
level of mortality) and will have no long-term negative effects on the
survival and recovery of listed species.

NPS wildlife biologists have inspected the project area and determined
that no suitable habitat or designated critical habitat for spotted owl
or marbled murrelets would be affected by the proposed action. The
project would be conducted after September 15 and completed prior to
February 1, so there would no noise or disturbance effects on either
northern spotted owls or marbled murrelets. Therefore, there would be no
effects on northern spotted owls and marbled murrelets from this project
and the NPS did not consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

**Compliance with Floodplains and Wetlands Executive Orders**

The NPS carries out its responsibilities to manage floodplains and
wetlands in compliance with with Executive Orders 11988 "Floodplain
Management" and 11990 "Protection of Wetlands" under procedures
described in Director's Orders #77-1 Wetland Protection and #77-2
Floodplain Management and their associated implementation manuals. A
Statement of Findings (SOF) for effects to Floodplains and Wetlands will
not be prepared for this project. Actions designed specifically for the
purpose of restoring degraded natural wetland, stream, riparian, or
other aquatic habitats or ecological processes are exempt from the NPS
requirement to prepare a wetland SOF. Actions located in floodplains
that involve little physical development and do not involve overnight
occupation, including foot trails in non-high hazard areas, are exempt
from the NPS requirement to prepare a floodplain SOF. The purpose of the
proposed action is to remove structures that degrade the natural
floodplain and wetland values associated with Streelow Creek and its
tributaries, and to restore natural floodplain and wetlands functions
and values in a small area.

**Public Involvement**

This project is similar to the watershed restoration project that is
underway in the Lost Man Creek drainage although the Streelow Creek
project is on a much smaller scale. Public comment received on the
watershed restoration proposal in the 1999 GMP/EIS, the Lost Man Creek
restoration project, and other similar projects in and around the parks
and in the region directed at restoration of salmonid habitat indicates
broad public support for such projects. Therefore, no specific public
involvement was conducted for this project. The impact topics addressed
in this environmental assessment are the same for natural and cultural
resources as those addressed in the Lost Man Creek restoration project.
In addition to effects on resources, this environmental assessment
addresses effects on visitors from making improvements to an existing
trail that would be damaged by culvert and slope failure.

**Affected Environment**

*Climate and Air Quality*----The project area has a mild climate due to
its low elevation and proximity to the Pacific Ocean. The average
temperature range reported at Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park during
winter is 35-55°F and 40-75°F in summer. Mean daytime temperatures at
Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park are 47°F in January and 59°F in June.
Most precipitation falls as rain between November and April. Average
rainfall in the project area is about 60 inches annually. Snow is very
rare. High winds occur in the Prairie Creek valley during major winter
storms. Sustained wind speeds exceeding 35 mile per hours generally
cause trees and branches to fall, and result in road and trail closures
throughout the parks.

Air quality in the project area, as in all of RNSP, is excellent due to
lack of major pollutant sources from the direction of the prevailing
northwest winds across the Pacific Ocean. Primary pollutant sources are
vehicle emissions from roads and highways, dust created by vehicles
driving on dirt roads, smoke from woodstoves during cold months,
prescribed fires in the region, and wildfires. Only wildfires and
prescribed fires have the potential to reduce air quality below state or
federal air quality standards.

*Topography, Geology, and Soils*----Streelow Creek drains the east side
of Gold Bluffs, the first ridge of the Coast Range along the Pacific
Ocean. The ridgetop lies at about 640 feet above sea level. Streelow
Creek joins Prairie Creek at an elevation of 60 feet above sea level.
The project area lies in the inner gorge of the North Fork of Streelow
Creek, with relatively steep sides and unstable soils characteristic of
park streams.

The North Fork of Streelow Creek flows entirely through the Prairie
Creek Formation. Soil materials of the Prairie Creek Formation are
weakly consolidated and are highly unstable due to the low amounts of
clay and high amounts of sand, gravel, cobbles, and silts thought to
have been deposited in a river delta laid down by the Klamath River more
than two million years ago.

Downstream of the North Fork confluence with the main stem, Streelow
Creek is underlain by the Franciscan formation comprised of Mesozoic-age
(Jurassic to Cretaceous) rocks laid down on the ocean floor as deposits
of sand and mud about 150 to 100 million years ago. The Franciscan
formation underlies most of RNSP. These deposits were carried eastward
on the oceanic plate, accreted to the North American continent, and
eventually uplifted to form the Coast Range. Through time, folding and
faulting further complicated the Franciscan complex rocks. Bedrock
beneath the parks is mostly composed of sedimentary graywacke sandstone,
mudstone, metamorphic schist, and minor amounts of conglomerates and
mélange.

*Hydrology and Water Quality*----Streelow Creek is a tributary of
Prairie Creek, which is the largest tributary of Redwood Creek with a
drainage area of 40.6 square miles. The North Fork of Streelow Creek has
a drainage area of slightly more than 1 square mile and flows for 2.2
miles to its confluence with the main stem of Streelow Creek. Streelow
Creek (exclusive of its North Fork tributary) has a drainage area of
2.76 square miles and a length of 3.15 miles from its headwaters to its
confluence with Prairie Creek. At the project area, the streamflow for
Streelow Creek ranges from 1-2 cubic feet per second (cfs) at low flow
periods to an estimated 400 cfs in a 100-year flow event. The 100-year
flow event on Prairie Creek at Davison Road about 3 miles downstream of
the project site is estimated to be 16,200 cfs.

Temperature and turbidity are the two primary indicators of water
quality in park streams. There are essentially no other point-source or
non-point-source pollutants (pesticides, fertilizers, bacteria) that
affect park streams, which are mostly upstream of residential and
agricultural areas. Petrochemical runoff from roads and highways do not
cause major pollution problems. Water quality in Prairie Creek at the
confluence with Streelow Creek is very good, especially in comparison to
other park streams that have been affected by logging. Most of the
Prairie Creek watershed upstream of Streelow Creek was unlogged. As
soils stabilized and vegetation regrew (particularly overstory trees
that provide shade to cool a stream) since logging ceased in 1964, water
quality in Streelow Creek is assumed to have improved.

*Floodplains and Wetlands*--The floodplain of Streelow Creek is narrow
because of the stream gradient and narrow channel. Prior to logging and
road construction, the Streelow Creek floodplain was probably less
developed but aggradation of the stream channel from eroded sediment has
produced a wider floodplain. The Prairie Creek floodplain is seasonally
inundated by high flows on a yearly basis. The road that is now the
Streelow Creek Trail is located in the Prairie Creek floodplain. Based
on the size of the existing culverts to be removed, the road is assumed
to be subject to inundation by storms exceeding the 25-year event. If
culverts plug with debris during a storm, the road would likely be
flooded by lesser flows.

Wetlands in the project area consist of riparian zones that line both
Streelow and Prairie Creeks. The riparian zone is most extensive at the
confluence of the creeks and the downstream reaches. The narrow Streelow
Creek watershed is well-drained because of its gradient, precluding the
development of extensive riparian zones and wetlands. Red alder and
skunk cabbage in the riparian zones are the primary obligate wetland
plants in the project area.

*Vegetation*----The entire Streelow Creek watershed was logged between
1954 and 1964. The Prairie Creek corridor in the project area was also
logged but occasional old growth redwood trees remain along what is now
the trail. The original vegetation was redwood forest, which includes
coast redwood, Douglas-fir, and Sitka spruce as the dominant tree
species.

Following clear-cut logging, the forest regrew without forest management
practices typically employed in industrial timberlands (slash removal,
re-seeding, thinning.) The project area exhibits some multi-layered
canopy development, with understory vegetation and higher plant species
diversity than other unmanaged second growth redwood forest in the
parks.

The current vegetation away from the creeks is a dense stand of second
growth redwood, Douglas-fir, and Sitka spruce. The largest redwoods are
about 24 inches in diameter. Red alder have regrown along the riparian
zones. The understory vegetation consists of huckleberry, salal, ferns,
and other species typically found in second-growth forests in regrown
clear-cuts. The most common invasive exotic plants along the Streelow
Creek trail are foxglove and Himalaya berry, with some pampas grass in
areas with sufficient sunlight, but the project area itself is too
overgrown and shady for these unwanted plants.

*Fish and Wildlife*---- Sensitive or threatened fish that occupy
Streelow Creek are described below under *Sensitive, Threatened and
Endangered Species*. Other fish identified or reported in Streelow Creek
include resident rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*), prickly sculpin
(*Cottus asper*), coastrange sculpin (*Cottus aleuticus*), riffle
sculpin (*Cottus gulosus* Girard), threespine stickleback (*Gasterosteus
aculeatus*), and Pacific lamprey (*Lampetra tridentata*).

The project area is inhabited by amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals
typically found in well-established second-growth redwood forest and
riparian zones in the parks. Pacific giant salamander larvae
(*Dicamptodon ensatus*) have been observed in the Streelow Creek and
probably occur throughout perennial streams in the watershed. Adult
Pacific giant salamanders have been observed on roads or under logs and
bark. The project area is also inhabited by northern red-legged frogs
(*Rana aurora)* and tailed frogs (*Ascaphus truei*). Larger mammals that
have been seen in the vicinity of the project area include black bears,
cougars, bobcats, Roosevelt elk, and blacktail deer.

*Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Species*----Botanical surveys of
the project area were conducted under contracts issued by CDFG. No rare
or sensitive plants were discovered in the project area.

No suitable habitat or designated critical habitat for spotted owl or
marbled murrelets would be affected by the proposed action. The project
would be conducted after September 15 and completed prior to February 1,
so there would no noise or disturbance effects on either northern
spotted owls or marbled murrelets.

Four species of anadromous salmon and trout occupy the stream in the
project area. Anadromous fish spend most of their life cycle in the
ocean and return to freshwater to spawn. Anadromous salmonids identified
in Streelow Creek include steelhead (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*), coastal
cutthroat trout (*O. clarki*), coho salmon (*O. kisutch*), and Chinook
salmon (*O. tshawytscha*). Most spawning and rearing occurs along the
main stem of Streelow Creek.

Coastal cutthroat trout are native to northwestern California,
inhabiting most coastal streams north of the Eel River. Adult anadromous
cutthroat return to freshwater in late autumn and early winter and spawn
in small streams between February and May. Cutthroat trout are often
found in the summer in the Redwood Creek estuary. Anadromous coastal
cutthroat trout occupy the project area are anadromous but this species
is not currently listed or proposed, or a candidate species for listing,
as threatened or endangered. RNSP fisheries staff suspects that a few
resident, non-migratory populations of cutthroat trout inhabit Streelow
Creek. The project area also is inhabited by resident rainbow trout (*O.
mykiss*), the non-anadromous form of steelhead trout.

Streelow Creek contains designated critical habitat for Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon, Coastal California Chinook
salmon and Northern California steelhead. All three species are listed
as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. Coho salmon are
listed as threatened by the State of California. Reaches of streams
accessible to coho and Chinook salmon in RNSP are designated critical
habitat. Critical habitat consists of the water, substrate and adjacent
riparian zones. Accessible reaches are those within their historical
range that can still be occupied by any life stage of salmon. The three
fish species and critical habitat would be adversely affected if excess
sediment were delivered into Streelow Creek.

*Cultural Resources*----RNSP contain a significant set of cultural
resources including archeological sites, historic structures, cultural
landscapes, ethnographic properties and objects.

*Archeological Resource*s*--*Archeological sites, the majority of which
are prehistoric, are recorded throughout the parks, along the coast,
inland and especially in the Bald Hills of the Redwood Creek basin.
These sites range from temporary and seasonal camps to trail use sites
to villages and sacred places, representing a 4,500-year continuous
record of habitation extending until after Euroamerican contact at about
1850 by at least three different Native American groups and their
ancestors. Fish, game, and acorns were particularly significant foods
for the local Native Americans. In addition to villages of wooden plank
houses and sweathouses, there were also numerous temporary summer camps
and specialized use areas throughout the region. An extensive trade and
travel network also existed. Today, the Tolowa, the Yurok, and the Hupa
have ancestral ties to the parks. At the time of contact with
Euroamericans, the Yurok lived along the coast and the Chilula along
Redwood Creek. The Chilula, whose territory included parklands in the
Redwood Creek basin, were almost decimated after contact; most of those
who remained were assimilated by the Hupa to the east of the parks.

The Streelow Creek project area lies within the ancestral lands of the
Yurok people. No prehistoric archeological sites are known within the
project area.

Historic archeological resources in RNSP consist of remains of
Euroamerican settlement and activities from the late 1800s. Evidence of
historic settlements, ranching, logging, mining, and recreation are all
types of resources that can be found. Logging was the primary historic
activity that occurred in the Prairie Creek watershed. No historic
archeological sites are known within the project area. However a log
stringer bridge was recorded and documented and is described below in
the Historic Resources Section.

*Ethnographic Properties*----The project area contains plant resources
traditionally important to the Yurok including alder, hazel,
huckleberry, iris, maidenhair fern, redwood, salmonberry, sword fern,
thimbleberry, wild ginger, and *Woodwardia* fern. No national
register-eligible gathering areas or specific resources were identified.

*Historic Resources*----The following historic resources summary was
derived from Burns (2006). Most of the northern part of the state of
California was not populated by Euroamerican settlers as early or as
quickly as other parts of the state south of San Francisco. The densely
timbered tracts of land bordering the bay and extending like a "great
belt" into the interior were a hindrance to early settlement by
Euro-Americans. With the exception of a Russian colony at Fort Ross
(Sonoma County, 200 hundred miles south of RNSP) established in 1812,
exploration and occupancy of the densely forested northern California
did not begin on a major scale until gold was discovered there in the
early 1850s. The Union Gold Bluffs mine was established at Major Creek
in what is now RNSP after gold was discovered there in 1850.

The dense forests of northern California provided the timber needed by
the rush of settlers arriving to stake out a claim. Mills sprang up and
large-scale logging was soon underway resulting in the diminishing of
the once immense stands of coastal redwood forest by the end of the
1800s.

Initially the only way of transporting lumber was by custom-built
schooners adept at carrying lumber through the steep and rocky coastal
terrain of the west coast. Transportation became less difficult with the
organization of the San Francisco and North Pacific Railroad Company in
1869. The railroad became the fastest way to transport logs to mills and
timber harvesting rapidly became the largest industry in this region. In
the absence of motorized heavy equipment, land was cleared to construct
railroads and highways through the redwood forest by blasting with
explosives, which was also an efficient means of clearing stumps,
grading and excavating through rock masses. By the mid 1890s, the
northwest lumber industry had been infused with new industrial machinery
that exponentially increased production and drove down market prices.
The capitalization of the lumber industry caused smaller, local-run
mills to be consumed by larger corporations as early as 1910.

The demand for lumber across the U.S. was leading to the rapid depletion
of the ancient forests. Preservation of the dwindling redwood forests
along the coast and the giant sequoias in the Sierra Nevada became a
concern as early as the 1860s. Save-the-Redwoods League, founded in
1918, succeeded in preserving intact stands of North Coast redwood
groves that became the nuclei of Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park, Del
Norte Coast Redwoods State Park, and Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park.
Logging continued in the redwoods most of which had become privately
owned by the 1890s. With the onset of WWII, the subsequent economic boom
of the 1950s and the use of gasoline powered chain saws and heavy trucks
and bulldozers, logging peaked so that by the 1960s nearly 90 percent of
the original redwood forests had been logged. In 1968, Redwood National
Park was established to secure some of the last stands of North Coast
redwoods. In 1978, the national park was expanded; the majority of the
expansion lands had already been logged. The project area was part of
the 1978 expansion.

A 1960s era log stringer bridge was identified and recorded in the
project area. This type of structure is common in Humboldt County and is
common to the northwest coast of California timber operations. The
bridge is estimated to have been constructed in the 1960s during the
time logging operations are known to have occurred in Streelow Creek.
The bridge is not yet 50 years old and therefore does not meet
eligibility criteria for the National Register of Historic Places.

*Visitor Use and Experience*----Streelow Creek Trail is a 2-mile-long
hike-bike trail that connects the Davison Trail to Davison Road. Davison
Road is a narrow, winding gravel road that runs about 4 miles from U.S.
Highway 101 to Gold Bluffs Beach; it is closed to trailers. Gold Bluffs
Beach Road is a gravel road that runs about 3.75 miles along the base of
the ocean bluffs to Fern Canyon, one of the major visitor attractions in
northern Humboldt County.

Bicyclists on the Streelow Creek Trail can ride along Davison Road to
Gold Bluffs Beach Road. It is possible by riding or walking a bike
across the sandy beach to reach Ossagon Trail, an unpaved trail which
climbs the steep bluffs and descends down to the Newton B. Drury Scenic
Parkway. By riding along the parkway towards Elk Prairie, a cyclist can
pick up the Davison Trail at the south end of the parkway and make a
loop back to Streelow Creek Trail. Cyclists generally do not use the
Ossagon Trail as part of a loop because the trail descends onto a broad
sandy beach on which riding a bike is very difficult. Trailheads at Elk
Meadow south of Davison Road, at the Elk Prairie Visitor Center in
Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park, and along the parkway provide access
for hikers.

The parkway and Ossagon Trail pass through old growth redwood forest.
Davison and Streelow Creek trails traverse riparian zones through
advanced second growth forests with occasional remaining old growth
trees.

**Environmental Consequences**

This section describes the anticipated affects of the alternatives on
natural and cultural resources, and park operations and visitors, and is
followed by a discussion of the NPS legal and policy requirements for
non-impairment of park resources and values.

*Methodology for Assessing Impacts*----Impacts to resources were
assessed using several methods, including best professional judgment and
knowledge of the effects of similar actions undertaken by the NPS in
RNSP and other NPS units. Impacts to vegetation, wildlife, threatened
and endangered species and cultural resources were assessed through site
visits and discussions among RNSP botanists, biologists and the
archeologist. Impacts on threatened and endangered species were assessed
in consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries
personnel and review of the biological opinions issued by these
agencies. Impacts on water quality, hydrology and geomorphology were
determined through inspection of the project area and on-site analyses
by RNSP watershed restoration geologists.

General impact analyses on fish and aquatic habitat from removal of
migration barriers and associated watershed restoration are based on the
impacts described in the NOAA Fisheries RGP 12 Biological Opinion for
projects funded under CDFG Fisheries Restoration Grant Program.

Some of the short-term effects of culvert removal and restoration of
associated logging road segments such as erosion and vegetation removal
are considered to be adverse. However, these effects are unavoidable in
order to remove potential threats to water quality, stream and riparian
functions, and threatened fish species from the existing culverts and
road segment. The short-term adverse effects on the stream system can be
readily mitigated through accepted best management practices such as
erosion control and timing of the project. The potential long-term
adverse effects from not removing failing drainage structures or road
segments would be longer-lasting and more intense than the short-term
effects. These long-term adverse effects are considered unacceptable,
particularly in the context of the legislation establishing and
expanding Redwood National Park that directs the NPS to rehabilitate
areas within the park "contributing significant sedimentation because of
past logging disturbances and road conditions, and to the extent
feasible, to reduce the risk of damage to streamside areas...." (16 USC
79j)

*Effects on Air Quality*--Under the no action alternative, there would
be no effects on air quality from periodic removal of debris to clear
blocked culverts. Under the proposed action, there would be temporary
localized decreases in air quality from emissions on heavy equipment
working at the site and from dust during excavation. These effects would
be adverse but negligible.

*Cumulative Effects*----Cumulative effects on air quality in the parks
result from dust from soil disturbance and emissions from vehicles and
power tools associated with maintenance of park roads and trails, second
growth management, fire management including preparation of roads and
firelines and smoke from prescribed fires and wildfire suppression,
timber harvest on adjacent lands, vehicle emissions from public roads
and highways, and smoke from wood stoves in adjacent communities.
Adverse effects from smoke from prescribed fire and wildfires would have
the greatest potential for moderate adverse effects but smoke is
temporary for the duration of the fire. These effects are adverse,
localized to widespread, temporary but repeated, and negligible to
moderate. No long-term cumulative adverse effects on air quality or air
quality related values in the parks are anticipated for the foreseeable
future because the regional prevailing winds are from the northwest
across the Pacific Ocean where there are no sources of air pollution.
The cumulative effects on air quality under either alternative would be
negligible, because the primary sources of air pollution in the project
area are vehicle emissions on highways and smoke from fires, and state
air quality standards in the project area are rarely violated by either
source.

*Effects on Soils and Topography*----Under the no action alternative,
there would be no new changes to topography of the project area, which
was altered by previous road-building associated with logging. The no
action alternative would not have any project-related construction
effects to soils in the project area, all of which was previously
disturbed by logging and road building. The road fill and soils adjacent
to the stream crossings would continue to gradually erode in rain
storms. The erosion rate would increase as the culverts, stream
crossings and road fill degrade. Eventually, the culverts and stream
crossings would fail completely, causing erosion of an estimated 2500
cubic yards of road fill that could be delivered directly into the North
Fork of Streelow Creek.

Catastrophic failure of stream crossings and adjacent road segments
could also lead to stream bank failures as the stream channels adjust to
an influx of eroded sediment. Bank failures are a common source of slope
failures in steep inner gorges such as that along a portion of the North
Fork of Streelow Creek.

Gradual erosion at stream crossings under the no action alternative
would be a long-term adverse effect on soils adjacent to the road
corridor; this adverse effect would range from negligible in years of
low rainfall to moderate in wet years or intense storms. Catastrophic or
eventual complete failure of the stream crossings would be a moderate to
severe adverse effect on soils in the project area and could result in
moderate adverse effects to local topography if slope failures result.

The proposed action would require excavation or disturbance of an
estimated total of 8080 square feet (0.23 acre) of soils for
construction of a pedestrian footbridge with an additional estimated
1200 square feet of disturbance associated with the excavation of the
two upstream stream crossings of North Fork of Streelow Creek. These
soils were previously disturbed for original road construction and
timber harvest operations.

Under the proposed action, a total of 4900 cubic yards of soils would be
excavated for removal of all three stream crossings and the road segment
associated with the trail crossing. All these soils are either road fill
or sediment that has aggraded into the stream channel. Removal of the
North Fork crossing on the Streelow Creek Trail would require excavation
of 1000 cubic yards to remove the three culverts and an additional 1000
cubic yards of aggraded material in the stream channel. Excavation of
soils to remove the portion of the road adjacent to the crossing would
disturb an additional 2400 cubic yards and 500 cubic yards would be
disturbed to excavate the upstream crossing of the North Fork side
channel (350 cubic yards) and remove the log stringer bridge (150 cubic
yards). The stream channels would be excavated to the level and shape of
the original channel, which is determined by locating the rock armoring
of the original stream bed and matching the steepness of the adjacent
slopes. The excavated road fill would be moved to stable locations as
close as possible to the work site and where it would not erode into the
stream. Newly excavated soils would be covered with mulch obtained by
grubbing vegetation from the excavation areas on the slopes and adjacent
to the stream crossings.

There would be short-term effects of the proposed action on soils and
topography from excavation of 4900 cubic yards of road fill from the
stream crossings, stream channel, and associated road segments. The
effects on soil and topography are judged to be beneficial and minor
from restoration of topography in the Streelow Creek stream channel, and
beneficial and moderate for reduction of erosional threat to Streelow
Creek and Prairie Creek posed by failing culverts and road fill. The
benefit to Streelow Creek would be greater than the benefit to Prairie
Creek because the Streelow Creek channel would be directly blocked if
the North Fork crossing fails and because Streelow Creek is smaller than
Prairie Creek so that a given volume of soil has a proportionately
greater impact on the smaller stream.

*Cumulative Effects on Soils and Topography*--Under the proposed action,
removal of stream crossings and associated road segments in the North
Fork of Streelow Creek would have no direct effect on topography and
soils in other subbasins in the Redwood Creek watershed. Topography in
the other subbasins of Redwood Creek would remain altered by presence of
logging roads. Soils would continue to erode in unstable areas along
roads in the rest of the watershed. Landslides related to the presence
of untreated roads would occasionally alter topography, particularly
after major storms.

Around 1,400 miles of forest roads and over 5,000 miles of skid trails
are estimated to have been built within the Redwood Creek basin. About
445 miles of roads and 3,000 miles of skid trails were included within
the national park boundaries. Removal of a few hundred feet of abandoned
logging road under the proposed action would have negligible short-term
or long-term benefits to the watershed as a whole, and minor benefits to
soils and topography in the project area over the long-term. There would
be negligible benefits to the main stem of Redwood Creek and Redwood
Creek estuary and minor benefits to Prairie Creek from the proposed
action. Over the very long-term, if failing roads within the park are
removed and if roads upstream and outside the park are maintained and
effective erosion control implemented prior to major storms, there would
be a major benefit to soils and topography in the Redwood Creek basin
from preventing unnaturally high levels of erosion. The long-term
benefit to the Redwood Creek estuary from reducing the influx of
sediment would be a moderate benefit to estuary functioning because the
Redwood Creek levees would continue to alter the hydrology and
functioning of the estuary.

*Effects on Water Quality, Hydrology and the Adjacent
Watershed*----Under the no action alternative, there would be no
construction-related effects on water quality from excavation to remove
the culverts or the stream crossings. The culverts and stream-crossing
would gradually degrade as these drainage structures continue to age and
deteriorate. Gradual failure would release small quantities of sediment
into the streams during storms. Major storms would cause more sediment
to enter the streams. Eventually, the culverts and stream crossing would
fail completely, which would most likely occur during a major storm.
Complete failure would release at least 2500 cubic yards of road fill
directly into the North Fork of Streelow Creek. Because the largest
crossing is at the confluence of the North Fork and the main stem of
Streelow Creek, failure of the crossing and associated road segment
would deliver sediment almost directly into Streelow Creek. This eroded
material would in turn be delivered into Prairie Creek which is located
several hundred yards downstream. Gradual delivery of small volumes of
sediment into the streams would have a long-term adverse effect on water
quality from increased turbidity and sedimentation. This long-term
chronic turbidity would be a minor adverse effect most noticeable after
rainstorms. Complete failure of the stream crossings would have a
moderate to significant adverse effect on water quality in Streelow
Creek and Prairie Creek that could persist for decades, based on effects
on other park streams where stream crossings and roads have failed
catastrophically.

Under the proposed action, there would be short-term adverse effects on
water quality from erosion of sediment from excavation of 4900 cubic
yards of road fill to remove culverts, adjacent road segments, and the
stream crossings to expose the natural channel elements and side banks.
Erosion would be reduced by working during low flow periods in
September, use of silt fences and other standard best management
practices for erosion control, by mulching of newly exposed soils, and
by completing the project prior to the onset of the rainy season. The
mitigation measures to minimize degradation of water quality would
reduce the short-term effects on water quality from increased sediment
in the stream and higher turbidity to minor.

There would be long-term beneficial effects to water quality and
hydrology from removal of failing undersized culverts and from restoring
the stream channel to its original configuration. The benefit is judged
to be minor to moderate, depending on the intensity and duration of
rainfall events. In the event of minor flooding (10 year flood events),
the benefit from removal of the stream crossings would most likely be
minor. In large flood events (25 years flood events) or intense rainfall
over a period of weeks, there would be moderate benefit from removal of
road fill that could fail and be delivered into the creek.

The footbridge that would replace the culverts on the Streelow Creek
Trail would completely span the active channel and would not constrict
most flows. Removal of the log stringer bridge upstream would completely
remove the constriction to the channel. These actions would have a
moderate long-term benefit to the hydrology of the North Fork of
Streelow Creek and a minor benefit to Streelow Creek hydrology.

The proposed action would have temporary adverse effects on water
quality from erosion of newly excavated soils, primarily in the first
rainy season as small quantities of sediment are flushed from the stream
channel. This adverse effect on water quality would be minor for
Streelow Creek and negligible for Prairie Creek. There would be an
immediate benefit to Streelow Creek hydrology from removal of undersized
stream crossings and restoration of the channel morphology. This benefit
would be minor to moderate. The benefit to the hydrology of Prairie
Creek would be indirect, long-term, and minor.

*Cumulative Effects on Hydrology and Water Quality*---- The overall
cumulative effects on hydrology and water quality in the park relate to
past logging and road building, both within what is now the national
park and upstream of current park boundaries in the Redwood Creek basin.

The effect of stream crossing removal and associated minor watershed
restoration would be a benefit to the water quality of Prairie Creek and
Redwood Creek but the benefit would be negligible because of the adverse
effects of remaining abandoned roads and numerous unrestored stream
crossings. The removal of stream crossings on the North Fork of Streelow
Creek would not improve hydrological conditions or water quality in
Redwood Creek upstream of its confluence with Prairie Creek.

Damage to forest resources and fish in the Redwood Creek watershed
coincided with both intensive timber harvest and a series of large
storms between 1955 and 1983 that were accompanied by widespread
flooding and erosion. Land use activities significantly increased
erosion above naturally high levels associated with storms. The large
number of improperly designed and maintained roads, landings and skid
trails in the Redwood Creek watershed causes increased surface erosion
and fine sediment production and delivery, and an increased potential
for stream diversions, rill and gully erosion, and road related
landslides with corresponding increased in sediment production and
delivery. Past timber harvest in what is now the park and outside the
park on unstable slopes prior to the enactment of the state Forest
Practice Rules and removal of riparian vegetation also contributed to
increased erosion and sediment production. These factors led to the
designation of Redwood Creek as a sediment-impaired stream by the EPA
under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act.

Key changes in Redwood Creek mainstem channel structure over the past 40
years include increases in the volume of stored sediment; decreases in
pool numbers and depth; increases in stream width and decreases in
stream depth; reduced recruitment of large woody debris; deposition of
high levels of fine sediments on the stream bottom; and reduced volumes
of large woody debris.

NPS researchers estimate that approximately 55% of 1400 miles of roads
in the basin are not maintained and are therefore more likely to fail
during storms than maintained roads. There are several thousand
crossings associated with these roads and it is likely that hundreds if
not thousands of crossings continue to have diversion potential.

Long-term improvement to the mainstem of Redwood Creek from reducing
sediment associated with stream crossings on the North Fork of Streelow
Creek would be negligible because of the small amount of sediment
removed under the proposed action compared to the erosion potential
remaining in the Redwood Creek watershed. A major storm would cause
erosion in unrestored areas in the Redwood Creek basin and the
contribution of the North Fork of Streelow Creek to improved conditions
in Redwood Creek would be negligible in comparison to the magnitude of
adverse effects basinwide.

*Effects on Floodplains and Wetlands----*Under the no action
alternative, the floodplain of Streelow Creek near its confluence with
Prairie Creek would continue to be altered by undersized culverts and
road fill within the stream channel. When the culverts eventually fail,
approximately 1000 cubic yards of road fill would be delivered directly
into Streelow Creek. If the road segment fails, at least 1000 additional
cubic yards would be delivered directly into Prairie Creek. This volume
of sediment would move several hundred yards downstream and be delivered
to Prairie Creek, where it would fill in the channel and cause the
floodplain to widen (aggrade). Floodwaters would move into the
floodplain on Prairie Creek, and would probably cause loss of riparian
wetland vegetation, primarily red alder. Delivery of sediment to the
Prairie Creek floodplain following catastrophic failure of stream
crossings on Streelow Creek would be a long-term adverse effect that
would vary from minor to severe, depending on the intensity of the storm
and the volume of the flood flows. A storm of sufficient intensity to
cause catastrophic failure of old roads on Streelow Creek would cause
similar effects on other tributaries of Prairie Creek, which would cause
severe damage to the floodplain through scouring and aggradation of the
stream channel and loss of riparian vegetation.

Under the proposed action, there would be temporary adverse effects to
the riparian wetlands adjacent to excavation areas from removal of about
1500 square feet of riparian vegetation, primarily red alders and
understory plants. This adverse effect would be negligible because the
riparian vegetation would recover in one to two growing seasons, and all
the riparian vegetation present is regrowth following the original
disturbance from road construction and logging. There would be an
immediate benefit to the floodplain of Streelow Creek at its confluence
with Prairie Creek and a long-term benefit to riparian wetlands along
Streelow Creek from removal of undersized drainage structures and
restoration of the original stream channel. This benefit would be
negligible in the short-term but minor to moderate in the long-term from
prevention of future catastrophic failure of the drainage structures and
road fill that could bury riparian zones and fill in the floodplain.

*Cumulative Effects on Floodplains and Riparian Wetlands*----Restoration
within the project area would have negligible short-term adverse effects
and minor long-term benefits to the floodplain of Prairie Creek. As
watershed restoration projects are completed within and outside the
parks, and new logging roads upstream of the parks are constructed and
maintained to standards in the state Forest Practice Act, there would be
a long-term moderate benefits to the floodplain of Redwood Creek.
Removal of stream crossings and associated road removal would have a
negligible benefit to the Redwood Creek floodplain, because Prairie
Creek enter the Redwood Creek floodplain at a point where the floodplain
is confined by flood control levees.

Riparian wetlands in the project area, and along Redwood Creek and some
of the more heavily logged tributaries, have been destroyed or degraded
by the original logging and road construction, and the effects of road
failures. Riparian zones along the main stem of Prairie Creek were not
as damaged as some other tributaries of Redwood Creek because the upper
portion of the watershed within Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park was
not logged, so that the riparian zone retained most natural functions
and values. The greatest benefit to riparian wetlands outside the
project area relies on the effectiveness of watershed restoration at
preventing erosion that would lead to landslides that could bury
riparian areas and vegetation with sediment.

Road removal and landform restoration drain the isolated wetlands that
form behind blocked culverts, filled stream channels, ditches with no
outflow, and slumps in road fills. These ponds and puddles serve as
breeding habitat for some amphibians, which are adversely affected by
loss of this habitat. The overall effect on the forest ecosystem is
negligible because the wetlands are not an original component of the
ecosystem and have very limited values. The adverse effect from loss of
these wetlands is negligible compared to the potential adverse effects
of loss of stream functions, including riparian wetlands, in the event
of road and stream crossing failures.

*Effects on Vegetation----*The vegetation in the project area was
previously disturbed by clear-cut logging and road building. Under both
the no action alternative and the proposed action, vegetation growing
along the trail would be occasionally trimmed and downed trees and limbs
removed to maintain an open trail corridor. No other vegetation would be
removed under the no action alternative. Therefore, the no action
alternative would have a negligible effect on vegetation in the
short-term. In the long-term, catastrophic failure of the stream
crossings would cause loss of riparian vegetation along both Streelow
and Prairie Creeks. This effect would be adverse, and minor to moderate
depending on the intensity of the storm that causes the failure.

Under the proposed action, approximately 10,000 square feet of
vegetation that has regrown following the original disturbance from road
construction and logging would be cut or grubbed for excavation of
culverts, stream crossings, and adjacent road corridor. The largest
trees that would be cut would be red alders and Douglas-fir less than 18
inches in diameter at breast height. No old growth or mature conifers
would be removed. The vegetation that would be removed is common in the
project area. Vegetation along the trail corridor is routinely cut or
trimmed to maintain an open trail corridor. Understory vegetation would
regrow within several months depending on the severity of the following
winter and would be completely regrown within a few years.

Newly disturbed soils would be covered with mulch to reduce erosion. To
avoid importing unwanted exotic plants, vegetation removed along the
roadsides during excavation would be salvaged and replaced on the
excavation sites on the slope. Revegetation would occur naturally from
the seed bank in the mulch and from the adjacent areas. Natural
revegetation occurs quickly in the moist heavily vegetated project area.

Under the proposed action, the primary impact to vegetation is the
removal of trees that have regrown following clear-cut logging in the
1960s. Roadside understory vegetation would be removed in conjunction
with the culverts being removed and slope excavation, but most of the
disturbed area is road surface that does not support vegetation or that
has been routinely cleared. Road construction and maintenance have
continuously disturbed all vegetation adjacent to the road corridor for
many years and the entire area associated with the project site has been
previously logged.

*Cumulative Effects on Vegetation*----Cumulative effects on vegetation
outside the project area include removal of vegetation along roads
slated for removal in the Lost Man Creek watershed restoration project
that was initiated in 2006 and will continue through 2010 (NPS 2006a).
Restoration on about 1700 acres of second growth forests (thinning dense
Douglas-fir and tan oak) in the Lost Man Creek drainage is proposed.
Second growth forests along streams or in old-growth buffer zones would
not be thinned. The proposed second growth management would not occur in
same areas where soils and vegetation would be disturbed by watershed
restoration. Outside the watershed and forest restoration project areas,
logged areas of the parks would continue to recover although the
recovery in some dense second growth stands that were not thinned after
replanting would require centuries to reattain characteristics and
functions associated with old growth forest. Fire in the project area
would be managed with a full suppression strategy, which will require
preparation of several ridgetop roads to ensure access for fire engines
and crews NPS 2004). Fire road preparation includes brushing, culvert
and ditch cleaning, and grading.

*Effects on Wildlife----*Under both no action and the proposed action,
there would be long-term effects on wildlife from noise and disturbance
associated with routine maintenance and use of the trail. Noise from US
Highway 101 is audible at the confluence of Streelow Creek and Prairie
Creek. Typical wildlife that occupy the area such as winter wrens,
varied thrushes, ravens, Steller's jays, blacktail deer, Roosevelt elk,
black bear, raccoon, and mountain lions are accustomed to the occasional
presence of humans on the trail; other wildlife such as small mammals
are rarely seen during daylight hours when humans are likely to using
the trail. Overall visitation and trail use is light in comparison to
other areas and consists of temporary passage along the trail. The
adverse effect on wildlife from use and maintenance of the trail is
negligible.

Under the proposed action, there would be adverse effects on sedentary
wildlife that live within or immediately adjacent to the excavation
sites from noise during construction and any soil or ground-dwelling
organisms that live within the project site would be displaced or
destroyed. The effect on wildlife species that are not tolerant of human
presence and that can move out of the area would be adverse, short-term
and negligible to minor depending on the species and its tolerance of
humans. For those individuals that are permanently displaced from their
territories or are killed by equipment, the adverse effect is long-term
or permanent and major. There is sufficient habitat in the vicinity of
the project area for persistence of all wildlife species and there would
be no long-term adverse effect on park populations of any wildlife
species. Therefore, the overall adverse effect on wildlife from
project-related excavation or bridge installation would be negligible.
The long-term effect on wildlife in the project area would be a
negligible to minor benefit from reduction of the potential for
catastrophic slope failures from unstable road fill.

*Cumulative Effects on Wildlife*----The logging that occurred in the
project area prior to park establishment and expansion had significant
adverse effects on certain terrestrial and aquatic species of wildlife.
Small terrestrial species that are less mobile were directly affected by
logging. More mobile wildlife species were indirectly affected by
widespread loss of forest habitat and damage to streams. Aquatic species
were directly affected where stream channels were blocked with Humboldt
crossings and indirectly affected by loss of shade when the forest
canopy was removed and by sedimentation of streams from landslides and
erosion from bare slopes. The adverse effects of sedimentation continued
after forest vegetation regrew. Several species that suffered major
population declines from loss of forest habitat due to logging
throughout their range were listed as threatened under the federal or
California endangered species acts.

*Effects on Sensitive, Threatened or Endangered Species----* There are
no state- or federally listed plants in the project area that would be
affected by either the no action alternative or the proposed action.

There would be no adverse effects on northern spotted owls and marbled
murrelets because there is no suitable habitat or designated critical
habitat for spotted owl or marbled murrelets would be affected by the
proposed action. The project would have no adverse effects on northern
spotted owls or marbled murrelets from noise disturbance because the
project would be conducted after September 15 and completed prior to
February 1. Heavy equipment work would create noise and disturbance
within one-quarter mile of murrelet habitat but would occur outside the
noise restriction period.

*Cumulative Effects on Threatened Birds----*Timber harvest is on-going
on private timberlands adjacent to the parks. Spotted owls and/or
marbled murrelets that nest in habitat adjacent to private timberlands
would continue to be subject to increased noise disturbance from heavy
equipment being operated on private lands, from helicopter logging that
has occurred on private lands near the ridge top in the past few years,
or from increased predation threat.

Cumulative effects on northern spotted owls would result from continued
loss of suitable habitat and from increasing competition with barred
owls, which are expanding their range and are considered to constitute
the most imminent threat to the recovery and continued survival of
northern spotted owl populations.

The total allowable incidental take authorized by the USFWS for marbled
murrelets for all park projects for consultations completed by December
2005 is 5,671 acres of habitat potentially affected by noise
disturbance. The NPS reported potential incidental take of 3,687 acres
(64% of total allowed) in 2005. Projects for which take of murrelets due
to noise disturbance was reported in 2005 were annual maintenance of
facilities, roads and trails (2,110 acres in six locations under
authorization originally obtained in 1998); Skunk Cabbage Trail use (59
acres under 1998 authorization); and Howland Hill Road repair (1,577
acres under 1999 authorization). Projects for which take was authorized
but not reported in 2005 because no actions were taken under these
authorizations are two watershed restoration projects (take originally
authorized in 1998 and 2001); helicopter use for emergency access (2001
authorization); and culvert replacement on the Mill Creek and Lost Man
Creek trails (2005 authorization). The Lost Man Creek watershed
restoration project begun in 2006 has been authorized incidental take by
the USFWS for expected adverse effects on marbled murrelets in occupied
or potentially occupied nesting habitat due to degradation of 24 acres
of suitable nesting habitat due to habitat modification; harassment on 2
acres of suitable habitat from heavy equipment operation during the
breeding season; and harm from degradation of habitat due to the
increased risk of corvid predation on 73 acres (NPS 2006b). The NPS has
requested and the USFWS has authorized incidental take for operation,
use, maintenance and construction of visitor facilities including
campgrounds, picnic areas, trails and backcountry facilities from now
through 2017 due to harm from increased corvid predation threat in
occupied nesting habitat along existing and proposed trails on 11,539
acres and harassment from noise disturbance from facility operation,
construction and maintenance on 3,763 acres of occupied nesting habitat
(NPS 2006c, USFWS 2007).

The total allowable incidental take for northern spotted owls authorized
by the USFWS for all park projects under consultations completed by
December 2005 (other than the Lost Man Creek watershed restoration
project) is 5,167 acres of habitat potentially affected by noise
disturbance. The NPS reported potential incidental take of northern
spotted owls on 775 acres (15% of total allowed) in 2005. All reported
take of spotted owls in 2005 was due to noise disturbance for annual
maintenance of facilities, roads and trails due to downed tree removal
and brushing trails. Other sites and projects for which incidental take
of marbled murrelets was reported either do not affect northern spotted
owls (helicopter use, Lost Man Creek watershed restoration under the
2001 authorization) or surveys were completed to determine that no owls
would be affected in these areas. The 2006-2010 Lost Man Creek watershed
restoration project was determined to have negligible to minor adverse
effects on spotted owls through loss or modification of suitable habitat
(NPS 2006b). Approximately 118 acres (1.3%) of the total suitable owl
habitat in the Lost Man Creek restoration project area would be removed
by road rehabilitation activities in the home ranges of the three known
owl territories that overlap the action area. An additional 82 acres of
suitable owl habitat would be removed outside the known home ranges. The
NPS has requested and the USFWS has authorized incidental take of
northern spotted owls for operation, use, maintenance and construction
of visitor facilities including campgrounds, picnic areas, trails and
backcountry facilities from now through 2017 due to harassment from
noise disturbance from facility operation, construction and maintenance
on 2,475 acres of unsurveyed nesting and roosting habitat (NPS 2006c,
USFWS 2007).

On-going projects for which consultations with the USFWS have been
completed and which have been determined that the projects may affect
but are not likely to adversely affect northern spotted owls or marbled
murrelets are management of exotic plants throughout RNSP, fire
management throughout the parks, management of Port-Orford-cedar in the
northern part of the parks, and vehicle beach access (although beach
access does have adverse effects on western snowy plovers and the NPS
has been authorized direct take of one plover annually.) The NPS has
been authorized incidental take of up to six breeding adult western
snowy plovers and their broods and 15 wintering adults annually through
2017 from harassment due to disturbance from recreational facilities on
park beaches.

Projects for which consultations with the USFWS have been completed but
the project has not been implemented include rehabilitation of Alder
Camp Road in Del Norte County, and development of visitor facilities at
Freshwater Lagoon Spit. The USFWS has concurred with the NPS
determination that these projects may affect but are not likely to
adversely affect northern spotted owls or marbled murrelets and would
not affect western snowy plovers.

Proposed projects for which consultations are underway and for which
incidental take is expected to be requested in 2007 but the amount of
take has not been determined include tree-clearing from 2005-6 winter
storms and management of second growth forests in the South Fork of Lost
Man Creek.

*Effects on Threatened Fish*

Three federally-listed threatened salmonids, the Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon (*Oncorhynchus* *kisutch*),
California Coastal Chinook salmon (*O. tshawytscha*) and the Northern
California steelhead (*O. mykiss*), occupy the project area. The
proposed action has the potential to affect these listed threatened fish
species and their designated critical habitat. Effects on listed
salmonids and their designated critical habitat have been analyzed in
NOAA Fisheries' RGP 12 Biological Opinion under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act. NOAA Fisheries determined that the location and
proposed timing authorized through the RGP would not affect the
California Coastal Chinook salmon. NOAA Fisheries also determined that
the proposed RGP is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon or Northern
California steelhead. NOAA Fisheries anticipates that take of listed
species as a result of projects authorized under the RGP will be in the
nature of temporary displacement and/or reduction in feeding rates (with
a possible minimal level of mortality) and will have no long-term
negative effects on the survival and recovery of listed species.
Multiple fish and habitat protection measures that would be applied as
conditions of the Corps' RGP would minimize the level and effect of take
associated with the restoration project. Best management practices
typically applied to park watershed restoration and road maintenance
projects would reduce the site-specific incidental take for listed fish.
Appendix A lists some of the mitigation measures typically used for park
watershed restoration projects. A complete list of required mitigation
measures to minimize adverse effects on listed fish species from
projects funded under the CDFG Fisheries Restoration Grant Program is
found in the CDFG *California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration
Manual* (Flosi *et al,* 1998).

Replacing culverts on Streelow Creek would have long-term benefits to
coho and Chinook salmon and steelhead trout and to designated critical
habitat for coho and Chinook salmon. Coho salmon are also listed as
threatened by the State of California. The existing three metal pipe
culverts would be replaced with a pedestrian footbridge beneath which
fish can pass more easily. Pedestrian footbridges are not prone to
culvert failures in which holes worn from rusting and abrasion allow the
stream to flow but up which fish cannot swim. Bridges also reduce the
potential for streams to scour the streambed at the downstream end of
the culvert which creates an abrupt drop between the streambed and
culvert bottom.

Removing the culverts that are currently a fish barrier and providing
fish access to the upper basin of the North Fork of Streelow Creek would
increase the amount of available habitat for several endangered
anadromous fish species, as well as reducing the immediate threat to the
fish from erosion of sediment if the culvert fails completely.

Short-term adverse effects on listed salmonids and their habitat from
instream work and increased turbidity in the first season following
restoration activities would be minimized by application of mitigation
measures required for projects funded through the DFG Fisheries
Restoration Grant Program. The short-term adverse effects would be
negligible to minor.

The long-term effects on listed salmonids from the project to improve
fish passage, restore portions of the watershed adjacent to the spawning
streams, and reduce the threat of erosion would be beneficial and
moderate.

*Cumulative Effects on Fish*----Anadromous fish stocks throughout the
Pacific Northwest region are threatened by the cumulative impacts of
livestock use, road construction, timber harvest, stream channelization,
water diversions, hydroelectric development, overfishing, and the
influence of hatchery fish on both disease resistance and genetic
fitness of native stocks (USDC 1997a and 1997b).

Though few scientific data are available for accurate estimates of past
salmonid populations in Redwood Creek, the limited data available
indicate that the anadromous fishery of Redwood Creek has experienced a
substantial reduction during the last 30 years. Present populations of
salmonid species are well below those reported in historical accounts.
The earliest accounts circa 1890 reported Redwood Creek as having
supported a substantial salmonid fishery (Van Kirk 1994).

Degraded stream habitat is a major contributor to the decline in numbers
of salmon and trout. The combined effects of timber harvest (i.e.,
removal of forest cover and construction of logging roads) and
significant storms have deposited large amounts of sediment in Redwood
Creek and degraded habitat. Erosion and hillslope mass wasting caused
sedimentation of the mainstem that filled deep pools, and major flood
events caused significant channel adjustments including channel
widening, aggradation, and bank erosion. The resultant widened streambed
and shallow riffles provide little or no cover for fish. Sedimentation
negatively affects egg survival and fry emergence, and fish food
organisms, i.e. benthic invertebrate production. The relatively unlogged
Prairie Creek drainage in Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park was
negatively affected by a large influx of fine sediment in 1989 from a
slope failure during construction of the U.S. Highway 101 Redwood Park
Bypass. Other factors contributing to and exacerbating population
declines are natural events including severe floods, extended drought
and poor ocean conditions, overfishing, and the prolonged effects of
past hatchery practices.

The Redwood Creek TMDL describes fish populations in Redwood Creek as
"much reduced" compared to historic accounts. Habitat conditions are
still degraded relative to pristine conditions but are showing signs of
improvement. Although channel deepening and pool development have been
observed in all but the lower few miles of Redwood Creek, the mainstem
generally lacks an adequate pool-riffle structure and cover. Coarse
sediment deposited in the mainstem allows a large proportion of the
summer base flow to infiltrate and flow subsurface, thereby limiting the
surface water available to fish and increasing surface water
temperatures. Spawning habitat in Redwood Creek is slowly improving as
gravels are cleaned of fine sediment. Tributary water temperatures are
generally suitable for salmonids but suboptimal along much of the
mainstem.

Other on-going and reasonably foreseeable projects for which the NPS has
prepared biological assessments and completed consultations with NMFS
for potential effects to listed fish species throughout the parks
include annual and periodic road maintenance (NMFS biological opinion
and letter of concurrence 151422SWR02AR6347, March 2003); Lost Man Creek
Watershed Restoration projects (151422SRW01AR54:BW, July 2003); fire
management (NMFS biological opinion and letter of
concurrence151422SWR04AR99149:BW, January 2005); and relocation of the
RNSP maintenance facility (NMFS biological opinion
151422SWR2003AR8948:BAD, October 2005). The maintenance facility project
will be located outside the Redwood Creek watershed and will not have
any effects on fish in the project area or in Redwood Creek but will
have short-term adverse effects on juvenile coho salmon from minor
habitat disturbance to replace undersized culverts with a larger arch
culvert that will have long-term benefits by improving fish passage to
upstream reaches of a stream.

The NPS requested incidental take for California Coastal chinook salmon,
Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts coho salmon, and Northern
California steelhead under the NPS biological assessment prepared in
2003 for the Annual and Periodic Road Maintenance program, and the 2006
addendum. NMFS authorized an unquantified amount of take based on miles
of stream affected under a biological opinion and letter of concurrence
151422SWR02AR66347 issued in March 2003.

Future actions anticipated within the project area include road and
trail maintenance downstream of the project area, fire suppression in
case of wildfire but no planned fire management actions (fuel reduction,
prescribed fire), and management of second growth forests on less than
400 acres outside riparian and old growth areas. Of these projects,
trail and road maintenance is likely to have negligible to minor
short-term adverse effects on listed fish if culverts are replaced.

Using the guidelines for project implementation outlined in the current
and previous biological assessments and terms and conditions specified
in associated biological opinions, cumulative adverse effects to
anadromous fish or their habitat throughout the parks are expected to be
minor and short-term. Long-term benefits to listed fish are expected
from the reduction of threats associated with erosion and sedimentation
of streams resulting from failure of untreated roads and stream
crossings, and from restoration of drainage patterns and geomorphic
processes.

Based on the size, nature and duration of the 2006-2010 Lost Man Creek
watershed restoration project and other planned watershed restoration
actions in the parks, the NPS has determined that the proposed projects
may affect and are likely to adversely affect California Coastal chinook
salmon, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts coho salmon, and
Northern California steelhead, their habitat, and Essential Fish Habitat
(NPS 2006b). However, the short term adverse affects will be outweighed
by the long-term benefits to the species and their habitats from the
long-term reduction in sedimentation of streams in the parks.

*Methodology to Assess Effects on Cultural Resources*

Cultural Resources are defined as archeological resources, prehistoric
or historic structures, cultural landscapes, and traditional cultural
properties. These resources are called "Historic Properties" when they
are either listed in or are determined eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places under §106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (36 CFR 800, *Protection of Historic Properties*).
Criteria for determining eligibility of listing such resources on the
National Register include the following:

Potential impacts to historic properties either listed in or eligible to
be listed in the National Register of Historic Places for this project
were identified and evaluated in accordance with the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation's regulations implementing §106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800, *Protection of Historic
Properties*): by (1) determining the area of potential effects; (2)
identifying resources present in the area of potential effects that are
National Register listed or eligible; (3) applying the criteria of
adverse effect to affected resources; and (4) considering ways to avoid,
minimize or mitigate adverse effects.

Under the Advisory Council's regulations a determination of *no historic
properties affected*, *adverse effect,* or *no adverse effect* must be
made for historic properties. A determination of *no historic properties
affected* means that either there are no historic properties present or
there are historic properties present but the undertaking will have no
effect upon them \[36 CFR 800.4(d)(1)\]. An *adverse effect* occurs
whenever an impact alters, directly or indirectly, any characteristic of
a cultural resource that qualifies it for inclusion in the National
Register, e.g. diminishing the integrity (or the extent to which a
resource retains its historic appearance) of its location, design,
setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Adverse
effects also include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the
alternatives that would occur later in time, be farther removed in
distance or be cumulative \[36 CFR 800.5(a)(1)\]. A determination of *no
adverse effect* means there is an effect, but the effect would not meet
the criteria of an adverse effect, i.e. diminish the characteristics of
the cultural resource that qualify it for inclusion in the National
Register \[36 CFR 800.5(b)\].

Thus, the criteria for characterizing the severity or intensity of
impacts to National Register listed or eligible archeological resources,
prehistoric or historic structures, cultural landscapes, and traditional
cultural properties are the §106 determinations of effect: *no historic
properties affected*, *adverse effect,* or *no adverse effect*. A §106
determination of effect is included in the conclusion section for each
analysis of impacts to National Register listed or eligible cultural
resources.

*Effects on Cultural Resources*----No adverse effects to cultural
resources are anticipated from either no action (routine maintenance,
grading and culvert replacement) or the proposed action because the work
would be confined to areas of existing disturbance from recent logging
and road construction and no significant cultural resources were
identified in the project area.

Based on field knowledge of cultural resources throughout RNSP and the
vicinity, the project area is considered to have low sensitivity for
cultural resources because it was a densely forested area prior to being
logged. The project area was systematically inventoried for cultural
resources by contractors for CDFG. No surface evidence of cultural
resources was found and it was determined that the likelihood of
affecting previously unknown cultural resources would be extremely low.
Under regulations of the National Register of Historic Places (36 CFR
800) this means that no historic properties are expected to be affected
by the proposed project.

In the unlikely event that previously undocumented prehistoric or
historic archeological resources (e.g. flaked stone, bone, shellfish,
historic bottles and cans, old wooden structures) are encountered during
project implementation, work in that area will be suspended until an
archeologist qualified under the Secretary of the Interior Standards has
evaluated the find. Resources that should be evaluated by an
archeologist could include, but are not limited to concentrations of
historic bottles and cans, wood, metal or ceramic artifacts, bone,
flaked stone artifacts, and shellfish. In that event that such resources
are encountered, the NPS would then further consult with the SHPO under
standard 36 CFR 800 regulations.

*Cumulative Effects on Cultural Resources*

The proposed action would have no cumulative affect on cultural
resources. Although cultural resources that may occur in the vicinity of
the Streelow Creek watershed may be important cultural resources, no
known significant cultural resources are located within the project
area.

In addition, the proposed action (Alternative 2) would not change the
treatment and/or management of archeological resources in Redwood
National and State Parks. Cultural resources throughout the remainder of
the Redwood National and State Parks would be unaffected.

Under the terminology of the implementing regulations of Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CR 800), no adverse affect to
historic properties determined eligible for or listed on the National
Register of Historic Places is expected from either the No Action or
proposed Action.

*Effects on Visitors and Visitor Experience----*This project would
provide an opportunity to educate and inform park visitors about the
history of the national park, the effects of roads on park resources,
and current efforts to remove roads and improve fish habitat in the
parks and the region.

Under the no action alternative, there would be no direct effects on
visitors or the visitor experience. If the Streelow Creek culvert fails
catastrophically, visitors would be unable use the Streelow Creek Trail
to reach Gold Bluffs Beach and Fern Canyon, two of the most visited
places in RNSP, until repairs can be made. The length of time that
visitors are inconvenienced would depend on when the culvert fails, but
major failure during wet periods could close the trail (old road) for
substantially longer than the few hours the trail would be closed under
the proposed action. Under the proposed action, there would be
short-term adverse effects on visitor use from the trail closure until
project is complete.

Removing the present crossing and constructing a pedestrian footbridge
would improve safety and visitor experience by providing an attractive
bridge with a good walking-riding surface and handrails. The visitor
experience would also be improved by removal of the damaged metal trash
rack immediately upstream of the stream crossing.

The project would have long-term benefits to public safety and the
quality of the experience of park visitors. Both the no action and the
proposed action would have minor to moderate short-term adverse effects
on the public from construction delays outside the primary visitor
season, depending on how fast the concrete sets at the Streelow Creek
site.

**Non-Impairment of Park Resources**

The NPS is prohibited by law and policy from taking an action that will
impair park resources or values. NPS *Management Policies 2006* (NPS
2006e) require the NPS to assess and disclose whether a proposal has the
potential to impair park resources or values. This section discusses the
effects on resources under the proposed action and why those effects
would not impair park resources or values.

The impairment that is prohibited by the Organic Act (16 USC 1) and the
General Authorities Act (16 USC 1a-1) is an impact that, in the
professional judgment of the responsible NPS manager, would harm the
integrity of park resources or values, including the opportunities that
otherwise would be present for the enjoyment of those resources or
values. Whether an impact meets this definition depends on the
particular resources and values that would be affected; the severity,
duration, and timing of the impact; the direct and indirect effects of
the impact; and the cumulative effects of the impact in question and
other impacts.

An impact to any park resource or value may, but does not necessarily,
constitute an impairment. An impact would be more likely to constitute
impairment to the extent that it

-   affects a resource or value whose conservation is necessary to
    > fulfill specific purposes identified in the establishing
    > legislation or proclamation of the park, or

-   is key to the natural or cultural integrity of the park or to
    > opportunities for enjoyment of the park, or

-   is identified in the park's general management plan or other
    > relevant NPS planning documents as being of significance.

An impact would be less likely to constitute an impairment if it is an
unavoidable result of an action necessary to preserve or restore the
integrity of park resources or values and it cannot be further
mitigated.

*Non-Impairment of* *Air Quality*----Under the no action alternative,
there would be negligible adverse effects on air quality or air-quality
related values in the park from emissions from vehicles and equipment
used for maintenance of the Streelow Creek Trail. The no action
alternative would not impair air quality or air-quality related values
in the park.

Under the proposed action, there would be short-term localized adverse
effects on air quality from dust from excavation of culverts and the
stream crossing, and from emissions from construction vehicles and
motorized equipment. These effects would be negligible and therefore the
proposed action would not impair air quality or air quality related
values of the parks.

*Non-Impairment of* *Soils and Topography*----Under the no action
alternative, soils would continue to erode from logged slopes and
abandoned roads upstream of the trail crossing. The soil resources in
the project area were previously disturbed through logging and road
construction. Road construction altered the original topography but the
alteration within the small project area does not approach the level of
impairment. However, the widespread alteration of soils and topography
from road construction and logging throughout the parks, especially
tractor logging, and the resulting road-related landslides are
considered an impairment. The no action alternative would not reduce the
overall impairment to soils and topography throughout the parks that
resulted from logging and road construction prior to park establishment
and expansion.

Under the proposed action, 4900 cubic yards of soil would be excavated
from the stream crossings, the associated road segment, and what has
aggraded into the stream upstream of the trail crossing. These soils are
road fill, or aggraded material that has washed downstream from logged
slopes and abandoned logging roads. Therefore, excavation of soils under
the proposed action would not impair or derogate park values but would
reduce the overall impairment by a negligible amount.

*Water Quality, Hydrology, Floodplains, and Wetlands*----Under the no
action alternative, there would be continued adverse effects on water
quality and hydrology of the North Fork and main stem of Streelow Creek
during and following rain events large enough to cause erosion of stream
banks that have been altered by previous logging, the associated roads
and the earthen stream crossing. Water quality and hydrology in Streelow
Creek would be impaired in the event of a catastrophic failure of any of
the stream crossings or the road, and might be impaired for many years
by a road fill failure that is less than a complete catastrophic
failure.

Under the no action alternative, there would be adverse effects to the
floodplain of Streelow Creek and the riparian wetlands associated with
the Streelow Creek crossing in the event of catastrophic failure of any
of the three stream crossings or adjacent abandoned roads. If the
culverts fail catastrophically, wetlands and the floodplain would be
adversely affected from deposition of sediment into the riparian zones
and the floodplain would be blocked when the road fill is deposited
directly into the stream channel. The capacity and orientation of the
drainage system upslope of the creek would not be improved under the no
action alternative. In periods of heavy rainfall, drainage from the road
ditch would enter the creek directly and deposit sediments washed down
the ditch, which would increase the volume of sediment delivered into
the creek.

Therefore, the no action alternative could substantially impair water
quality, hydrology, the floodplain and riparian wetlands associated with
the North Fork and the main stem of Streelow Creek in the event of a
catastrophic failure of a stream crossing or the associated road
segments.

Under the proposed action, there would be unavoidable localized
short-term adverse effects on water quality of the creek and associated
riparian wetlands from removal of the stream crossings, the associated
road segment and aggraded sediment in the stream channel. There would be
a long-term benefit to water quality, hydrology, the floodplain and
riparian wetlands from removal of stream crossings, aggraded sediment
and the associated road segment that alter the original drainage
patterns and pose an erosional threat. Therefore, the proposed action
would not impair water quality, hydrology, the floodplain and riparian
wetlands in the North Fork and the main stem of Streelow Creek and would
reduce the potential for impairment to these resources related to the
stream crossings and the associated roads.

The overall impairment to hydrology, water quality, floodplains and
riparian wetlands in heavily logged areas in the Redwood Creek basin
outside of the Prairie Creek drainage would not be reduced by the
proposed action. The overall impairment is being gradually reduced
through watershed restoration projects in the Redwood Creek basin both
within and upstream of the park, and through application of regulations
for construction and maintenance of roads associated with timber harvest
outside the park.

*Vegetation*----Under the no action alternative, there would be no
effects on vegetation. The vegetation is considered to be impaired by
clear-cut logging prior to park establishment and expansion. The no
action alternative would have no effect toward reducing the impairment
to any vegetation resources. The impairment to old growth redwood forest
can only be reduced over centuries of regrowth.

Under the proposed action, there would be adverse effects on vegetation
from removal of small numbers of small trees and understory vegetation
for removal of the stream crossings and associated road segment. The
vegetation has regrown following original disturbance from clear-cut
logging and road construction. The vegetation is common in the park and
routinely cut for annual trail and road maintenance. The alders would
re-establish within five years and the understory vegetation by the next
growing season. No large mature conifers would be removed. Therefore,
vegetation in the project area would not be impaired under the proposed
action.

*Terrestrial Wildlife and Aquatic Biota*----Under the no action
alternative, there would be no direct effects on terrestrial wildlife or
aquatic biota. Aquatic biota would suffer indirect adverse effects in
the event of catastrophic failure of any of the stream crossings or
associated road segments. In the event of catastrophic failure, aquatic
biota in the downstream reaches of the North Fork or the main stem of
Streelow Creek could be impaired if the stream channel is completely
buried with sediment. Catastrophic failure of the Streelow Creek stream
crossings would likely be associated with widespread road and stream
crossing failures throughout the parks, leading to impairment of aquatic
biota over a larger area than the lower reaches of Streelow Creek. The
no action alternative has the potential for localized impairment of
aquatic resources in Streelow Creek.

Under the proposed action, soil-dwelling organisms and small sedentary
non-threatened or endangered animals would be affected by removal of
soils and vegetation. This is an unavoidable impact but the numbers of
individual animals affected is very small in comparison to the total
populations of these animals in the parks. Individuals of larger more
mobile wildlife would move away from the work area during project work
and would move back into the area when people and equipment are not
working at night and when the project is done. None of the affected
animals are considered sensitive by any agency. Therefore, the proposed
action would not impair wildlife resources.

*Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Species*----Under the no action
alternative, there would be no direct effects on sensitive, threatened
or endangered plants or terrestrial animals. The no action alternative
has the potential for adverse effects on listed anadromous fish and
their designated critical habitat. Under the no action alternative,
designated critical habitat for the fish would continue to be adversely
affected by the stream crossings that block free movement upstream of
the crossings because the crossings constrict the stream channel. In the
event of failure of the stream crossings or the associated road
segments, there could be direct adverse effects on fish should failure
occur when fish are spawning or during early life stages that require
clean water for successful growth and development. Any fish, redds,
eggs, or early life stages that are present in the stream in the event
of stream crossing failure would be destroyed, which would be considered
an impairment of the fish resources of the North Fork of Streelow Creek
or the main stem below the North Fork crossing. Catastrophic failure of
the Streelow Creek stream crossings would likely be associated with
widespread road and stream crossing failures throughout the parks,
leading to impairment of designated critical habitat over a larger area
than the lower reaches of Streelow Creek. Depending on the timing of a
storm large enough to cause catastrophic failure of the stream
crossings, there could be direct effects on fish that might be present
in the stream. The no action alternative has the potential for localized
impairment of listed threatened fish resources and designated critical
habitat and associated impairment of listed threatened fish and
designated critical habitat in other streams in the park.

Under the proposed action, there would be no direct adverse impacts on
adult fish during construction because the work would be accomplished
when adult fish are not present. Should juvenile fish be observed in the
stream when work is planned, standard best management practices outlined
in the NOAA Fisheries Biological Opinion for RGP 12 as excerpted from
the CDFG *California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual* would
be used to capture and move juveniles out of the immediate work area.

Excavation of sediment from the stream channel and excavation to remove
the culverts and log stringer bridge would directly affect designated
critical habitat in the short-term by increasing turbidity from
mobilization of sediment but would have a long-term benefit from
restoration of the stream channels to their original configuration and
removal of the erosional threat posed by the stream crossings, the
associated road segments and the aggraded fine sediments that reduce the
depth of the stream and cover spawning gravels. Standard erosion control
methods and best management practices would be used to minimize erosion
of soils outside the stream channel and thus minimize deposition of
excess sediment into Streelow Creek after the work is completed. For the
first rainy season following stream restoration, there would be adverse
effects on fish from increased sediment (reduced water quality) that
washes out of the newly excavated stream channel as it adjusts to its
original level and configuration. The overall benefit to fish from
restoration of the stream channel to allow passage for adult fish to
upstream spawning habitat, from reduction of the erosional threat posed
by the stream crossings and associated road segment, and from the
removal of 1000 cubic yards of aggraded sediment within designated
critical habitat has been determined by NOAA Fisheries and CDFG to
outweigh the short-term adverse effects of excavation within the stream
channel. Therefore, the proposed action would not constitute an
impairment to the fish themselves or to designated critical habitat for
listed fish species, and would reduce the level of impairment to
critical habitat that has led to the listing of the fish as threatened
species.

*Cultural Resources*----There are no significant cultural resources in
the project area. Therefore, cultural resources would not be impaired.

# Coordination and Consultation

*Preparers*

Karin Anderson, Cultural Resources Branch Chief, RNSP, Orick, CA

Baker Holden III, Fisheries Biologist, RNSP, Orick, CA

Aida Parkinson, Environmental Specialist, RNSP, Orick, CA

## RNSP Staff Consulted

Keith Bensen, Wildlife Biologist, Orick, CA

Dick Mayle, Roads and Trails Foreman, Requa, CA

Mike Sanders, Geologist, RNSP (project leader), Orick, CA

Kristin Schmidt, Acting Supervisory Fish and Wildlife Ecologist, RNSP,
Orick, CA

**References**

Burns, J. 2006. A Cultural Resources Investigation of the Streelow Creek
Fish Passage Project, Located in Humboldt County, California. California
Department of Fish and Game Project #122-R-1. Prepared for Javier
Gloria, California Department of Fish and Game, Yountville, California
by Cultural Resource Facility, Center for Indian Community Development,
Humboldt State University, Arcata, Ca.

Flosi, G., S. Downis, J. Hopelain, M. Bird, R. Coey, and B. Collins.
1998. California Salmonid Stream Restoration Manual. Third Edition. Plus
Part IX: Fish Passage Evaluation at Stream Crossings (April 2003), Part
X: Upslope Assessment and Restoration Practices (April 2006), and Part
XI: Riparian Habitat Restoration (May 2004). Inland Fisheries Division.
California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA.

McConnell, R. B., and J. P. Eidsness. 2000. Report on Ethnographic
Inventory/Contemporary concerns for Lost Man and Little Lost Man Creek
Watershed Restoration Project. Copy available from park archives in
Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2004. Fire
Management Plan Environmental Assessment. Redwood National and State
Parks. Copy available at park office in Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2005. Finding of
No Significant Impact. Fire Management Plan Environmental Assessment.
Redwood National and State Parks. Copy available at park office in
Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006a. Lost Man
Creek Erosion Control and Disturbed Land Restoration Plan Environmental
Assessment. Copy available at park office in Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006b. A
Biological Assessment of Impacts to Terrestrial Threatened and
Endangered Species from Lost Man Creek Erosion Control and Disturbed
Land Restoration Plan in Redwood National and State Parks (RNSP). On
file at park office in Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006c. A
Biological Assessment of Impacts to Terrestrial and Non-Anadromous
Aquatic Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Species from the Trail and
Backcountry Management Plan in Redwood National and State Parks. On file
at park office in Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006d. A
Biological Assessment of Impacts to Aquatic Threatened Species from Lost
Man Creek Erosion Control and Disturbed Land Restoration Plan in Redwood
National and State Parks (RNSP). On file at park office in Orick, CA.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006e Management
Policies 2006. 180 pp. Available on the internet at www.nps.gov/policy,
accessed May 7, 2007.

National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006f. Finding
of No Significant Impact. Lost Man Creek Erosion Control and Disturbed
Land Restoration Plan Environmental Assessment. Copy available at park
office in Orick, CA.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 1997. Endangered and
threatened species; threatened status for the southern Oregon/northern
California coast evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) coho salmon;
final rule. Fed. Reg. 62(117):33038-33039.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 1998. Biological Opinion
and Conference Opinion. Watershed Restoration Program: Routine and
Non-Routine Road Maintenance in Redwood National and State Parks. Copy
available at park office in Orick, CA.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 1999a. Designated critical
habitat; central California coast and southern Oregon/northern
California coasts coho salmon; final rule and correction. Fed. Reg.
64(86):24049-24062.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 1999b. Endangered and
threatened species; threatened status for two chinook salmon
evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) in California. Fed. Reg.
64(179):50394-50415.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 2000. Endangered and
Threatened Species: Threatened Status for One Steelhead Evolutionarily
Significant Unit (ESU) in California; Final Rule. Fed. Reg. 65(110):
36074-36094.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 2004. Biological Opinion.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, Regional
General Permit for California Department of Fish and Game *California
Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual*. File No.
151422SWR03AR8912:FRR/JTJ. May 21, 2004. Copy available at park office
in Orick, CA.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 2006. Endangered and
Threatened Species: Final Listing Determination for 10 Distinct
Population Segments of West Coast Steelhead; Final Rule. Fed. Reg.
71(3):834-862.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. 2001. Water Drafting
Specifications. National Marine Fish\[eries\] Service Southwest Region.
August 2001. http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/hcd/WaterDrafting-02.htm, accessed
March 22, 2007.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. 2007.
Formal Consultation on the Trail and Backcountry Management Plan,
Redwood National and State Parks, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties,
California. Memo on file at park office in Orick, CA.

Van Kirk, S. 1994. Historical information on Redwood Creek. Unpub. Rep.
on file at Redwood National and State Parks, Arcata, CA.

**Appendix 1- Protocol for Fish Relocation and Dewatering**

The following steps shall be followed in the listed order for
coordinating timing of fish relocation and dewatering during stream
crossing removal within the known range of anadromous salmonids and/or
coastal cutthroat (NMFS 2001).

a\) When there is stream flow:

i.  Fish exclusion fencing shall be installed on the upstream edge of
    the work area, far enough from the construction area so as not to be
    disturbed by the construction activities.

ii. A first attempt to capture fish stranded in the construction area
    upstream of the crossing shall be made using seine nets and dip
    nets, where possible, and, if necessary, electrofishing.

iii. Install fish exclusion fencing downstream of the crossing, far
     enough downstream from the construction area so as not to be
     disturbed by the construction activities.

iv. A first attempt to capture fish, stranded downstream of the
    construction area, shall be made using seine nets and dip nets,
    where possible, and, if necessary, electrofishing.

v.  After all of the fish found have been relocated, install a water
    diversion structure several feet downstream of the upstream
    exclusion fence. Divert stream flow to the downstream end of the
    culvert, ensuring stream flow through the lower pool while the upper
    pool is dewatered.

vi. If necessary, begin dewatering the pool above the culvert. Siphon
    water off the top of the pool to keep the water in the pool as cool
    as possible and prevent sucking sediment off the bottom. The water
    shall be pumped out of the channel and prevented from flowing back
    into the channel. As the pool is lowered, fish shall continuously be
    removed using seine nets and dip nets when possible before
    electrofishing.

vii. After all of the fish found have been removed from the upstream
     construction area, the diversion shall be extended to just upstream
     of the lower fish exclusion fence, ensuring continuous stream flow
     downstream of the construction area. The lower pool shall be
     dewatered while continuously removing the stranded fish using seine
     nets and dip nets when possible before electrofishing.

viii. Another attempt shall be made to capture any stranded fish the
      following morning.

b\) If there is standing water but no stream flow, at the time of
construction:

i.  Make the first attempt to remove fish both upstream and downstream
    of crossing using seine nets and dip nets before electrofishing.

ii. If necessary, begin dewatering pools above and below the crossing.
    Siphon water off the top of the pool to keep the water in the pool
    as cool as possible and to prevent stirring up sediment from the
    bottom. The water shall be pumped out of the channel and prevented
    from flowing back into the channel. As the pool is lowered, fish
    shall continuously be removed using seine nets and dip nets when
    possible before electrofishing.

c\) For all dewatering, place pumps in flat areas well away from the
stream channel. Secure pumps by tying off to a tree or stake in place to
prevent movement by vibration. Refuel in an area outside of the active
channel and place fuel absorbent mats under the pump while refueling.
Pump intakes shall be covered with 2.38 mm (3/32 inch) mesh screen.
Water drafting from fish-bearing streams will be conducted only within
sites approved by a Park fishery biologist, and shall be done in
accordance with NOAA Fisheries's *Water Drafting Specfications* (NMFS
2001).

d\) The following procedures will be used for fish capture and
relocation:

i.  Prior to capturing fish, determine the most appropriate release
    location. Suitable areas shall be identified based on quality of
    habitat, risk of predation, stranding, and water quality using the
    following order of preference:

    1.  In the same stream, upstream of the work area

    2.  In the same stream, downstream of the work area

    3.  In an adjacent but similar tributary

    4.  In the mainstem stream

ii. Perform initial fish relocation efforts *3-5* days prior to the
    start of construction. This provides the qualified fisheries
    biologist an opportunity to return to the work area and perform
    additional electrofishing passes prior to construction. A second
    attempt, the morning following the initial endeavor, shall be made
    to capture any stranded fish.

iii. Exclude fish from re-entering work area by blocking the stream
     channel above and below the work area with fine-meshed net or
     screens. Mesh should be no greater than 1/8". It is vital to
     completely secure bottom edge of the net or screen to channel bed
     to prevent fish form re-entering work area. Exclusion fencing
     should be placed in areas of low water velocity to minimize
     impingement of fish. Screens should be checked periodically and
     cleaned of debris to permit free flow of water.

iv. Periodically measure air and stream temperatures. Cease activities
    when water temperatures exceed 68 degrees Fahrenheit.

v.  Minimize handling of salmonids. When handling is necessary, always
    wet hands or nets prior to touching fish. Periodically measure air
    and stream temperatures. Cease activities when water temperatures
    exceed 68 degrees Fahrenheit.

vi. Place captured fish in cool, shaded, aerated, dark colored container
    filled with cool, clear water. Provide aeration with a battery
    powered external bubbler. Protect fish from jostling and noise and
    do not remove fish from this container until time of release.
    Release fish when the container reaches capacity or within one and a
    half hours after capture.

vii. Place a thermometer in the holding container, and periodically
     conduct partial water exchanges, if water temperature gets too warm
     or there is more than an hour of delay between when the holding
     container was brought to maximum capacity and the time of release.

viii. Avoid overcrowding in containers. Have at least two containers and
      segregate young of the year fish from larger age classes to avoid
      predation. Densities shall not exceed *5* fish per gallon of water
      in each container. If found, place large amphibians, such as
      Pacific Giant salamanders, in the container with the larger fish.

ix. Cease capture, and release listed salmonids when containers are
    filled to capacity.

x.  Visually identify species and estimate year classes of listed
    salmonids at time of release. Do not anesthetize or measure listed
    salmonids.

xi. If mortality during relocation exceeds *5%* of fish captured, stop
    efforts and immediately contact NOAA Fisheries.

> **Appendix 2--Best Management Practices to Minimize Project Effects on
> Fish**

The following best management practices (BMPs) were developed for the
Lost Man Creek watershed restoration project which began in 2006 and is
expected to continue through 2010 (NPS 2006a, NPS 2006d.) These BMPs are
implemented for all NPS projects that have the potential to affect
listed salmonid species or their habitat within the park.

Riparian cover on fish-bearing streams and where non-fish bearing
streams lead immediately into fish-bearing waters will be protected
wherever reasonably feasible, balancing quality and benefits of the
riparian cover against risks of sediment delivery.

Effective erosion control measures shall be in place at all times during
restoration activities. Activities within the 5-year floodplain of
fish-bearing streams will not begin until all temporary erosion controls
(e.g., straw bales, silt fences that are effectively keyed in) are in
place, downslope of project activities within the riparian area. Erosion
control structures shall be maintained throughout, and possibly after,
activities. Erosion control devices such as check dams, silt fences, and
other acceptable techniques shall be used when the potential exists to
have sediment or other materials entering bodies of water.

-   Any disturbed ground must receive appropriate erosion control
    treatment prior to the beginning of the wet season.

-   All non-emergency project work will be completed during the normal
    operating season (NOS), that is, between June 15 and October 15 of
    each year. If more than 0.5 inches of rain is forecast during the
    dry season, project operations will temporarily cease and sites will
    be winterized. If periods of dry weather are predicted outside of
    the NOS, additional small work items may be done, if they can be
    completed within the window of predicted dry weather. Only those
    repairs needed to reduce risks from active erosion will be
    undertaken outside of the NOS, in coordination with NOAA Fisheries.

-   Work sites will be winterized at the end of each day when
    significant rains are forecast that may cause unfinished excavations
    to erode. Winterization procedures are supervised at all times by
    RNSP geologists and involve taking measures necessary to minimize
    erosion on unfinished work surfaces. Winterization includes the
    following: smoothing unfinished surfaces to allow water to freely
    drain across them without concentrating or ponding; compacting
    unfinished surfaces where concentrated runoff may flow with an
    excavator bucket or similar to minimize surface erosion and the
    formation of rills; and installation of culverts, silt fences and
    other erosion control devices where necessary to convey concentrated
    water across unfinished surfaces, and trap eroded sediment before it
    leaves the work site. Adequate erosion control supplies (gravel,
    straw bales, shovels, etc.) shall be kept at all restoration sites
    to ensure excavated material is kept out of water bodies.

-   Equipment, both hand tools and heavy equipment, will be inspected
    daily to check for leaks. Equipment that may leak lubricants or
    fuels into drainage will not be used until leaks are repaired. All
    equipment will be stored, serviced and fueled outside of riparian
    areas and away from stream crossings. Heavy equipment will be
    cleaned (e.g., power washed, steam cleaned) prior to use below the
    ordinary high water mark.

-   A spill plan and materials for spill containment will be available
    to onsite personnel and all personnel shall know how to use them. In
    the event of a spill, work shall be stopped immediately, clean up
    shall begin and the appropriate authorities will be notified.

-   Petroleum products, chemicals, fresh cement, deleterious materials,
    or water contaminated by the aforementioned shall not be allowed to
    enter flowing waters.

-   Disruption of natural hydrologic flow paths, including diversion of
    streamflow and interception of surface and subsurface flows, shall
    be minimized during excavation.

-   Streams with significant surface flow capable of sediment transport
    off-site must be diverted around excavation areas. The diverted
    flows shall be returned to their natural stream course as soon as
    restoration is complete and prior to the rainy season. Any turbid
    wastewater from project activities and de-watering is disposed of
    off-site in a location that will not drain directly into a stream
    channel or carry sediment-laden water into a stream channel.