Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments
Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments
Fish spawning- Other fish potentially utilizing the project area in Emerald Bay are either nonnative or not listed as sensitive species, however, covering the substrate with benthic mats could remove potential spawning habitat during the short term. The mouth of Emerald Bay receives high boat use and associated wake and wave action which reduces the suitability of the area for spawning. AC can reduce food for fish by filtering planktonic plants and animals out of the water column, which many species of fish, especially when young, depend on for growth. Treatment of the AC infestation area would result in a less than significant short term impact, with potentially substantial long term gains as fish do not have to compete locally with AC for the plankton-based food source upon which they depend. Sensitive Natural Plant Communities Sensitive plant communities are regionally uncommon or unique, unusually diverse, or of special concern to local, state, and federal agencies. Removal or substantial degradation of these plant communities constitutes a significant adverse impact under CEQA. A search of the CNDDB did not show any sensitive natural plant communities near the project area (CNDDB 2009), but the deep water plant communities in Lake Tahoe are of concern because they are important ecological components in Lake Tahoe and have experienced substantial long term declines. These plant communities consist of mosses, liverworts, stoneworts, and algae and are typically found at depths greater than 200 feet. Control activities will occur in waters generally less than 30 feet deep and research has also indicated that AC may be able to impact the algal biomass in the lake littoral zone and cause local decreases in the algal biomass in near shore areas, while also stimulating the growth of undesirable filamentous algae (Whittmann et al. 2011). Project activities are not expected to impact deep water plant communities. Wetlands and Waters of the United States The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) defines wetlands as lands that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has jurisdictional authority of wetlands under provisions found in Section 404 of the CWA. Typically, the USACE jurisdictional wetlands meet three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Waters of the U.S. (Other Waters) are regulated by the USACE under Section 404 and by the state water pollution control authority (Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board) under Section 4041 of the CWA. They are defined as all waters used in interstate or foreign commerce, waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, all interstate waters including interstate wetlands and all other waters such as: intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, and natural ponds. Waters of the U.S. are under the USACE jurisdiction. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) Goals and Policy, Chapter IV: Conservation Element, Vegetation Goal #2 is to “Provide for maintenance and restoration of such unique Asian Clam Control Project IS/MND Emerald Bay State Park California Department of Parks and Recreation 30
ecosystems as wetlands, meadows, and other riparian vegetation.” TRPA’s goals and policy are implemented by TRPA and the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board by special designation for wetlands and other waters known as Stream Environment Zones (SEZs). SEZs have additional protective regulations. WOULD THE PROJECT: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a sensitive, candidate, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by §404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? LESS THAN POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT NO IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT IMPACT DISCUSSION a) While the placement of the underwater benthic barriers over the substrate in Emerald Bay is not expected to have significant impacts on any species identified as sensitive, candidate, or special status, the installation and removal of the barriers could potentially create visual or noise disturbance for nesting osprey and bald eagles near the project area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Bio-1 would reduce this potential visual and noise disturbance to a less than significant level. Asian Clam Control Project IS/MND Emerald Bay State Park California Department of Parks and Recreation 31
- Page 5 and 6: Emerald Bay will require traffic co
- Page 7 and 8: 7 Asian Clam Control Project Final
- Page 9 and 10: 9 Asian Clam Control Project Final
- Page 11 and 12: LAHONTAN REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CON
- Page 13 and 14: the infestation is 600 feet. The ba
- Page 15 and 16: 15 Asian Clam Control Project Final
- Page 17 and 18: 17 Asian Clam Control Project Final
- Page 19 and 20: 19 Asian Clam Control Project Final
- Page 21 and 22: More detail on the range of lake bo
- Page 23 and 24: The MND states that there will be n
- Page 25 and 26: arriers have not been secured with
- Page 27 and 28: INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DE
- Page 29 and 30: Pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the
- Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUC
- Page 33 and 34: This chapter provides a list of tho
- Page 35 and 36: The invasion and establishment of A
- Page 37 and 38: the edges of the rubber sheets for
- Page 39 and 40: 2.10 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS DPR re
- Page 41 and 42: 1. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALL
- Page 43 and 44: and receives approval from the Cali
- Page 45 and 46: DISCUSSION a-e) As noted in the Env
- Page 47 and 48: for six criteria pollutants after t
- Page 49 and 50: IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. ENVIRONME
- Page 51 and 52: Water Plant Community are not expec
- Page 53 and 54: (Helisoma newberryi) creeks. Lake T
- Page 55: mouth of Emerald Bay. Creating nois
- Page 59 and 60: V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. ENVIRONMENTA
- Page 61 and 62: and prolonged droughts (Lindström
- Page 63 and 64: Roads expanded and upgraded the roa
- Page 65 and 66: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AC
- Page 67 and 68: esources in consultation with the O
- Page 69 and 70: Liquefaction and Landslide Hazards
- Page 71 and 72: would not increase as a result of t
- Page 73 and 74: • Carbon Dioxide - The natural pr
- Page 75 and 76: VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIA
- Page 77 and 78: emergencies and activities would al
- Page 79 and 80: WOULD THE PROJECT: a) Violate any w
- Page 81 and 82: Mitigation Measure Hydro-1: Water Q
- Page 83 and 84: DISCUSSION a) The proposed project
- Page 85 and 86: XII. NOISE. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING T
- Page 87 and 88: DISCUSSION a) Project activities re
- Page 89 and 90: DISCUSSION a-c) The project does no
- Page 91 and 92: WOULD THE PROJECT: a) Result in sig
- Page 93 and 94: implemented to inform the public, s
- Page 95 and 96: D E F convenience decreasing as den
- Page 97 and 98: c) This project will not will not i
- Page 99 and 100: significant environmental effects?
- Page 101 and 102: d) Most project-related environment
- Page 103 and 104: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS No project
- Page 105 and 106: CHAPTER 6 REFERENCES Chapter 2 Univ
ecosystems as wetl<strong>and</strong>s, meadows, <strong>and</strong> other riparian vegetation.” TRPA’s goals <strong>and</strong> policy<br />
are implemented by TRPA <strong>and</strong> the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board by special<br />
designation for wetl<strong>and</strong>s <strong>and</strong> other waters known as Stream Environment Zones (SEZs).<br />
SEZs have additional protective regulations.<br />
WOULD THE PROJECT:<br />
a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or<br />
through habitat modification, on any species<br />
identified as a sensitive, c<strong>and</strong>idate, or special status<br />
species in local or regional plans, policies, or<br />
regulations, or by the California Department of<br />
Fish <strong>and</strong> Game or the U.S. Fish <strong>and</strong> Wildlife Service?<br />
b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian<br />
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified<br />
in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or<br />
by the California Department of Fish <strong>and</strong> Game or<br />
the U.S. Fish <strong>and</strong> Wildlife Service?<br />
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally<br />
protected wetl<strong>and</strong>s, as defined by §404 of the Clean<br />
Water Act (including, but not limited <strong>to</strong>, marsh,<br />
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,<br />
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?<br />
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any<br />
native resident or migra<strong>to</strong>ry fish or wildlife species<br />
or with established native resident or migra<strong>to</strong>ry<br />
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native<br />
wildlife nursery sites?<br />
e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances<br />
protecting biological resources, such as a tree<br />
preservation policy or ordinance?<br />
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat<br />
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation<br />
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state<br />
habitat conservation plan?<br />
LESS THAN<br />
POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN<br />
SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT NO<br />
IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT IMPACT<br />
DISCUSSION<br />
a) While the placement of the underwater benthic barriers over the substrate in Emerald Bay is<br />
not expected <strong>to</strong> have significant impacts on any species identified as sensitive, c<strong>and</strong>idate,<br />
or special status, the installation <strong>and</strong> removal of the barriers could potentially create visual<br />
or noise disturbance for nesting osprey <strong>and</strong> bald eagles near the project area.<br />
Implementation of Mitigation Measure Bio-1 would reduce this potential visual <strong>and</strong> noise<br />
disturbance <strong>to</strong> a less than significant level.<br />
Asian Clam Control Project IS/MND<br />
Emerald Bay State Park<br />
California Department of Parks <strong>and</strong> Recreation<br />
31
Change language