-01/0 ER 7 1 Draft Feasibility Report Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report (Separate cover) PINE FLAT DAM FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT RESTORATION, FRESNO, CALIFORNIA US Army Corps ofEngineers Sacramento District South Pacific Division June 2001 &^> Sv+€u/es> EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STUDY AREA The study area is located primarily in Fresno County in the San Joaquin Valley. The study area is the Kings River basin, which includes parts ofthe valley and the western slopes ofthe Sierra Nevada. The largest city near the study area is Fresno. PURPOSE This report identifies measures, formulates, and evaluates alternative plans, and identifies a Recommended Plan to restore and protect the ecosystem for the fish and wildlife resources in Pine Flat Lake and in and along the lower Kings River from Pine Flat Dam to State Highway 180 by improving the fishery habitat, increasing the fishery survival rate, increasing riparian, shaded riverine aquatic (SRA), and oak-woodland habitats, and reestablishing native historic plant and wildlife communities. PROBLEMS The construction ofPine Flat Dam on the Kings River has altered the natural hydraulics and temperatures ofthe river, affected riparian. SRA. and adjacent vegetation, restricted native coldwater fish movements, which resulted in the decline ofthe fishery, affected fish and wildlife resources and aquatic wetland habitats, and further accelerated the decline ofthe riverine ecosystem habitat. Due to the design and operation ofPine Flat Dam, the reservoir can experience a significant increase in water temperature at certain times ofthe year. When there is adequate water, water temperatures are well within the optimal range for the survival of both coldwater and warm water fish. In low-water years, however, the availability of coldwater habitat for native fisheries in the reservoir and lower Kings River can decrease dramatically. Water releases from Pine Flat Lake influences the fishery downstream in the lower Kings River. During dry and below average precipitation years, with below average carryover storage, the coldwater reserves may be depleted from the reservoir by late summer and early fall, causing water temperatures in the reservoir and lower Kings River to exceed levels acceptable for coldwater fish growth and survival. In addition, low instream flows can adversely affect food supply, spatial habitat, and access to SRA habitat, and provide favorable habitat for normative warm water fishery growth, which further declines the native coldwater fishery survival rate. Finally, various land use activities have resulted in some loss ofriparian, SRA, and oak-woodland habitat, which has depleted the food source to the associated wildlife and special-status species along the river. ES-l Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation http://archive.org/details/draftfeasibilityOOusar RESTORATION MEASURES Ten restoration measures were considered: (1) raising Pine Flat Dam, (2) constructing a multilevel intake structure, (3) constructing a turbine bypass system, (4) constructing a new storage facility on Mill Creek, (5) constructing a water transfer pipeline, (6) restoring spawning gravels, (7) restoring Avocado side channel slough, (8) constructing small check dams at Flume Cove on Pine Flat Lake, (9) restoring habitat at a site along Byrd Slough downstream from the dam near the Friant-Kern Canal siphon, and (10) restoring lands on Westlake Farms. From these measures, eight alternative plans were formulated, including a no action plan. ALTERNATIVE PLANS The eight alternative plans included (1) no action; (2) constructing a multilevel intake structure on the upstream face ofthe dam to manage the temperature of downstream water releases to preserve the coldwater in the reservoir and promote downstream water temperatures suitable to sustain the native coldwater fishery throughout the year; (3) constructing a 10.6-mile underground pipeline between the western portion ofthe Fresno Irrigation District's Dry Creek Canal and the upper end of the Mendota Pool to facilitate a water transfer to augment instream flows in part ofthe lower Kings River; (4) reestablishing historic floodplain riparian, SRA, and wildlife habitat at Byrd Slough along the Kings River immediately south ofthe Friant-Kern Canal siphon; (5) a combination ofalternatives 2 and 3; (6) a combination ofalternatives 2 and 4, (7) a combination ofalternatives 3 and 4; and (8) a combination ofalternatives 2, 3, and 4. RECOMMENDED PLAN Based on the evaluation ofthe alternative plans, the Corps and the Kings River Conservation District (KRCD), the non-Federal sponsor, and its cost-sharing partner, the Kings River Water Association (KRWA), identified Alternatives 2, 4, and 6 (combination ofalternatives 2 and 4) as the final alternative plans. The National Ecosystem Restoration Plan is Alternative 6, which is also the Recommended Plan. This plan would meet the objective ofecosystem restoration, maximize ecosystem restoration benefits, and would not have any significant adverse environmental effects. Ecosystem Restoration Benefits and Costs The Recommended Plan would restore about 13 miles ofthe lower Kings River, improve the native coldwater fishery in the reservoir, and restore about 143 acres of riparian and shaded riverine aquatic habitat at Byrd Slough, by increasing, improving, reestablishing, and conserving the amount and quality ofhabitat values for vegetation and wildlife, fisheries, and special status species. The first cost ofthe Recommended Plan is $35,800,000 based on October 2000 price levels. Ofthe estimated project first costs, about $23,190,000 (65 percent offirst ES-2 costs) would be the responsibility ofthe Federal Government, and about $12,610,000 (35 percent offirst cost) the responsibility ofthe non-Federal sponsor. The annual costs are estimated to be $2,734,000, and the quantifiable environmental benefits are estimated to be 40 Weighted Usable Area (WUA) units and 84.56 Average Annual Habitat Unit's (AAHU). The estimated total investment cost is $40,093,000. The non-Federal sponsor would be responsible for annual operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement ofthe project, currently estimated at $56,000. Local Support The KRCD and the KRWA have cooperated fully with the Corps in the preparation ofthis report and have shown strong support for an ecosystem restoration project. The KRCD supports the Recommended Plan and would seek the necessary funding to cost share in construction ofthe proposed project. RECOMMENDATION The Corps recommends that the Recommended Plan be authorized for implementation as a Federal project and that this report be approved as the basis for preparation ofplans and specifications for construction ofthis project. ES-3 CONTENTS CHAPTER INTRODUCTION I 1 BACKGROUND 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 STUDY AUTHORIZATION 2 PRIOR STUDIES AND REPORTS 2 U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers (Corps) 2 Kings River Conservation District (KRCD) 3 STUDY BACKGROUND AND PARTICIPANTS 4 ONGOING ACTIVITIES 4 Kings River Fisheries Management Program 4 CHAPTER DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA II 6 STUDY AREA LOCATION 6 DRAINAGE BASIN DESCRIPTION 6 CLIMATE 6 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 7 Natural Resources 7 Geology and Soils 7 Water Quality 8 Socioeconomics 8 Cultural Resources 8 Hazardous, Toxic, and Radiological Waste 8 HYDROLOGY 9 EXISTING WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS 9 Federal 9 State 10 WATER SUPPLY 10 FLOOD CONTROL 11 HYDROELECTRIC POWER 11 Haas-Kings River Project 11 Balch Project 11 Helms Pumped Storage Project 12 Pine Flat Power Plant 12 FUTURE WITHOUT-PROJECT CONDITIONS 12 CHAPTER III PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES 15 PROBLEMS 15 Limitations ofDam Operations 15 Decline ofFisheries Due to Temperature Fluctuations 17 Decline ofRiparian and SRA Habitat 18 OPPORTUNITIES 20 Modify Dam and Operation 20