Table Of Content-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
