€¦ · Web view20/09/2017 · Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Bald...

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANYAND

THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Bucks Creek Hydroelectric ProjectFERC Project No. 619

Bald Eagle Management Plan

June 2017

©2017, Pacific Gas and Electric Companyand the City of Santa Clara

Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619Bald Eagle Management Plan

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

AND THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA



June 2017

©2017, Pacific Gas and Electric Companyand the City of Santa Clara




TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................1-1

1.1 Project Location and Hydroelectric Feature Description.....................................1-11.2 Purpose of the Bald Eagle Management Plan......................................................1-11.3 Goal and Objectives of the Bald Eagle Management Plan..................................1-11.4 Timing of Primary Bald Eagle Management Plan Tasks.....................................1-21.5 Contents of the Bald Eagle Management Plan.....................................................1-2

SECTION 2.0 BACKGROUND.........................................................2-1

2.1 Bald Eagle Status..................................................................................................2-22.2 Bald Eagle Background........................................................................................2-2

SECTION 3.0 AREA DESCRIPTION.................................................3-1

3.1 General Habitat.....................................................................................................3-13.2 Nesting Area Locations........................................................................................3-2

SECTION 4.0 BALD EAGLE PRODUCTIVITY....................................4-1

4.1 Terminology.........................................................................................................4-14.2 Site Reproductive Histories..................................................................................4-2

SECTION 5.0 BALD EAGLE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION.........5-1

5.1 Breeding Season Surveys.....................................................................................5-15.2 Wintering Observations........................................................................................5-4

SECTION 6.0 BALD EAGLE FORAGING ECOLOGY............................6-1

6.1 Foraging................................................................................................................6-16.2 Prey Base..............................................................................................................6-26.3 Food Habits..........................................................................................................6-4

SECTION 7.0 SILVICULTURAL FEATURES......................................7-1

Table of Contents June 2017

Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619©2017 Pacific Gas and Electric Company

and the City of Santa Clara


SECTION 8.0 PUBLIC USE............................................................8-1

8.1 Existing Facilities.................................................................................................8-18.2 Public Use Levels.................................................................................................8-28.3 Human/Eagle Interactions....................................................................................8-48.4 Recreational Management....................................................................................8-2

SECTION 9.0 BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS..........9-1

9.1 Bald Eagle Nest Management Zones...................................................................9-19.2 USFWS Bald Eagle Management Guidelines......................................................9-1

9.2.1 Guideline Avoidance Measures................................................................9-29.2.2 Implementation/Interpretation of USFWS Guidelines for the Bucks

Creek Project Bald Eagle Management Plan...........................................9-49.3 Bald Eagle Management Recommendations........................................................9-6

SECTION 10.0......................................................................BALD EAGLE MONITORING............................................................................10-1

SECTION 11.0..........................BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT PLAN REVISIONS............................................................................11-1

SECTION 12.0........................................................................................LITERATURE CITED............................................................................12-1

June 2017 Table of Contents




LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1. Nesting Status and Reproduction at the Bucks Lake Bald Eagle Territory Since Its Discovery In 1970............................................................

Table 4-2. Reproduction At The Grizzly Forebay Bald Eagle Nesting Territory Since Its Discovery In 1999............................................................................

Table 4-3. Number of Young Produced at Two Bald Eagle Nesting Territories in the Bucks Creek Project Area from 2006 to 2016..........................................

Table 5-1. Summary of Bald Eagle Sighting Records Along the NFFR in the Rock Creek-Cresta Project Vicinity 2003–2017............................................

Table 5-2. Observations of Bald Eagles Recorded during 2015 and 2016 Midwinter Survey...........................................................................................

Table 6-1. Osprey Nest Locations for Territories Recorded during the 2015 and 2016 Breeding Season Helicopter Surveys at Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay...........................................................................................................

Table 6-2. Number and Biomass of Prey Identified from Remains Collected from the Bucks Lake Bald Eagle Nest on June 4, 1986..........................................

Table 8-1. Number of Boats at One time (BAOT) Counted on Bucks Lake during 3 Surveys in 1986–1987, 10 Surveys from May–Sept. 2002, and 4 Surveys in 2015–2016, and the Timing of First Fishing Boat and Water-Ski Boat Arriving on the Reservoir Each Morning.............................

Table 8-2. Activity at Designated and Non-Designated Campsites and Day Use Areas on Rainbow Point Peninsula 2015–2016.............................................

Table 8-3. Observations of Bald Eagles Recorded during 2015 and 2016 Bucks Lake Human Use Boat Surveys......................................................................

Table of Contents June 2017




LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3-1. Bald eagle and osprey use areas on Bucks Lake 2015–2016 (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a).......................................................................

Figure 3-2. Bald eagle and osprey use areas on Grizzly Forebay 2015–2016 (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a)..........................................................

Figure 5-1. Bald Eagle and Osprey Use Areas in the Project Area in 2002 (PG&E 2005)...............................................................................................................

June 2017 Table of Contents




Definitions of Terms, Acronyms, and Abbreviations

TERM DEFINITION

BBAOT Boats at One time

BEMP Bald Eagle Management Plan

BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act

CCDFG California Department of Fish and Game

CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife

City City of Santa Clara

CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database

DDBH Diameter-at-breast-height

EESA Endangered Species Act

FFERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

FLA Final License Application

Forest Service

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

LLicensees Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara

LOP Limited Operating Period

NNFFR North Fork Feather River

Definitions of Terms vi June 2017




TERM DEFINITION

NFS National Forest System

NMZ Nest management zones

OO&M Operations and Maintenance

ORV Off-road vehicle

PPG&E Pacific Gas and Electric

PNF Plumas National Forest

RRV Recreational Vehicle

SSMP Shoreline Management Plan

UUSFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

yng./occ Young per occupied year

June 2017 vii Definitions of Terms




This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Definitions of Terms viii June 2017




SECTION 1.0

IntroductionPacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and the City of Santa Clara (City) (collectively the “Licensees”) are filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) this Bald Eagle Management Plan (BEMP) to supplement their Final License Application (FLA) for the Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project), FERC Project No. 619. The Licensees are the owners of the Project and hold the current FERC License, which expires on December 31, 2018; PG&E operates the Project.

1.1 Project Location and Hydroelectric Feature Description

The Project is located on Bucks, Grizzly, and Milk Ranch creeks, which are tributaries to the North Fork Feather River in Plumas County, California. The Project has an installed capacity of 84.8 megawatts and consists of two existing developments (Bucks Creek and Grizzly), which collectively include four reservoirs with a combined usable storage capacity of 108,773 acre-feet (Bucks Lake, Lower Bucks Lake, Three Lakes, and Grizzly Forebay), one conduit (Milk Ranch), two tunnels (Grizzly Forebay and Grizzly Powerhouse tunnels), two powerhouses (Bucks Creek and Grizzly powerhouses), and associated equipment and transmission facilities and structures, including recreation facilities and Project Roads.* Most of the Project Area is owned by PG&E. Some of the area within the FERC Project Boundary is located on National Forest System (NFS) land managed by the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Forest Service) as part of the Plumas National Forest (PNF). The Project also contains a small area of private land. All lands within the FERC Project Boundary are included within this Plan.

1.2 Purpose of the Bald Eagle Management Plan This BEMP is intended to provide (1) guidance for mitigating disturbance activities within the FERC Project Boundary potentially affecting bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) including activity buffers (Nest Management Zones) around nests, (2) descriptions of bald eagle habitats and habitat use in the Project Area, and (3) recommendations for annual monitoring of bald eagle productivity and nest site locations.

1.3 Goal and Objectives of the Bald Eagle Management Plan

The goal of the Plan is to ensure that Project operations and maintenance (O&M), as well as Project related recreation activities do not result in “take” of bald eagles, their eggs or nests by implementing measures that are consistent with federal and State of California laws and regulations (see Section 2.1.1 for the definition of take under various applicable laws and

* Project Roads are defined and listed in the Transportation Management Plan filed as part of the Licensees’ FLA for the Project.

June 2017 1 Introduction




regulations).The goal of the BEMP is to provide the necessary details concerning bald eagle ecology in the Project area and how the Licensees will manage bald eagles with respect to Project operations.

The Plan has the following objectives:

1. Provide documentation of historical bald eagle productivity in the Project Area;

2. Summarize current knowledge of bald eagle nesting habitats and overall habitat use in the Project Area;

3. Provide guidance for protections from human disturbance activities within the FERC Project Boundary potentially affecting bald eagles; and

4. Outline annual monitoring requirements of bald eagle productivity, nest site use, and reporting.

1.4 Timing of Primary Bald Eagle Management Plan Tasks

Annual productivity nesting surveys will be implemented in conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and Forest Service during at least the following three time periods: 1) late March/early April to determine site occupancy; 2) May to confirm nesting activity; and, 3) mid- to late June to count nestlings near fledging (Jurek 1990; Jackman and Jenkins 2004). Concurrent with nesting surveys, human use activity within and adjacent to the NMZs will be assessed to identify potential conflicts. Following annual nesting surveys, nest report forms will be completed each August for the CDFW bald eagle database and for the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for all Project bald eagle nesting territories (CDFW 2010). These are provided to CDFW and copied to other appropriate land management agency personnel each year via email.

1.5 Contents of the Bald Eagle Management Plan This Plan includes the following:

Section 1. Introduction. This section includes introductory information, including the purpose and goals of the BEMP and a summary of the timing of primary Plan tasks.

Section 2. Background. This section includes information on previously conducted studies and surveys, monitoring, bald eagle listing status, and general bald eagle biology.

Section 3. Area Description . This section includes information on the natural environment—including bald eagle nesting locations—and Project features in the Project Area.

Introduction 2 June 2017




Section 4. Bald Eagle Productivity . Bald eagle reproductive histories and productivity metrics are provided in this section.

Section 5. Bald Eagle Occurrence and Distribution . This section includes information on winter and breeding season bald eagle habitat use in and adjacent to the Project Area.

Section 6. Bald Eagle Foraging Ecology . This section provides details on what is known about bald eagle foraging ecology, food habits, and prey base in and adjacent to the Project Area.

Section 7. Silviculture Features. A summary of forest habitat features within nesting areas is provided in this section.

Section 8. Public Use. This section details existing recreation facilities and recreation management within the Project Area, including information on levels of public use in eagle habitats and human/eagle interactions.

Section 9. Bald Eagle Management Considerations. This section presents the delineation of bald eagle nest management zones (NMZ), the recommended implementation of USFWS Bald Eagle Guidelines (USFWS 2007), and lists other management recommendations.

Section 10. Bald Eagle Monitoring. Monitoring requirements of annual bald eagle productivity, assessment of human use in NMZs, and reporting are presented in this section.

Section 11. Bald Eagle Management Plan Revisions. This section provides information on agency participation for any revisions to the BEMP.

Section 12. Literature Cited.

June 2017 3 Introduction





Introduction 4 June 2017




SECTION 2.0

BackgroundIn 1988, FERC issued an Order Amending License to PG&E for the proposed Grizzly Powerhouse Development as an addition to the Project. The Grizzly Powerhouse Development was completed in 1993, and the license amendment extended the existing license for the Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project from 2005 to 2018. In 1990, FERC issued an Order Approving a Settlement Agreement between PG&E and the City of Santa Clara concerning the Mokelumne River Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 137), which added the City as a joint licensee for the Project. In lieu of environmental studies that would have been part of relicensing in 2005, Article 103 of the Order Amending License acknowledged requests by the Forest Service for additional studies, including a study of the potential effects of the Bucks Creek Project operations and recreation on nesting bald eagles.

In support of the Forest Service Article 103 requirements for the Project operating license, the Licensees conducted studies in 2002 to survey and monitor all known Project Area bald eagle and osprey (Pandion haliaetus) nesting territories and to search for new nests in the Project Area. In addition to nest searches, detailed boat surveys were conducted to document important aspects of bald eagle use of Bucks Lake in relation to Project operations and recreational activity. A report summarizing information gathered during this study was submitted to the Forest Service in December 2002 (PG&E 2002).

During the subsequent review of study results, it was determined that bald eagle management in the Project Area should be addressed in a specific resource plan with ongoing monitoring. Consequently, following the Summary Report for Article 103 (PG&E 2005), a Bucks Creek Project Bald Eagle Management Plan (PG&E 2006) was prepared and submitted to the Forest Service for review and comments and filed with FERC on February 24, 2006.

As part of the Integrated Licensing Process for relicensing the Project, Licensees filed with FERC on November 15, 2013 the required Notice of Intent and Pre-Application Document for the relicensing of the Bucks Creek Project. As part of this relicensing process, a technical memorandum was prepared documenting the results of implementing relicensing Study RTE-S2/ Bald Eagle and Osprey (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a). The purpose of the relicensing study was to gather information about bald eagles and osprey to supplement existing information for the preparation of the Exhibit E portion of the license application—including appropriate protection, mitigation and enhancement measures for the species—and update the BEMP.

This plan was updated from the original 2006 BEMP, and therefore draws on information gathered during the 2002 Article 103 study (PG&E 2002), a bald eagle management study conducted in 1986–1987 at Bucks Lake (PG&E 1988), the 2015–2016 relicensing study results (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a), and agency and PG&E files.

June 2017 1 Background




2.1 Bald Eagle Status In 1973, the bald eagle was classified as an endangered species by the U.S. Department of Interior under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Populations nationwide had declined due to habitat loss and post-World War II DDT contamination. Since then, bald eagle populations have recovered substantially, and in 1995, the bald eagle was downlisted to threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). In July 1999, the USFWS proposed to delist the bald eagle under the ESA. The bald eagle was federally delisted in August 2007; however, the species still has special-status protection under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). In California, a similar recovery has occurred, although the species is still listed as state endangered by the CDFWunder the California Endangered Species Act (CESA, Fish & G. Code §§ 86 & 2050-2085 and Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 §§ 783-783.8 & 786-786.8), as a CDFW fully protected species (Fish & G. Code § 3511), and as a Forest Service sensitive species. From a low of about eight known territories in the late 1950s (Detrich 1986), 371 territories have been reported since the 1970s (i.e., not necessarily still occupied) in California as of 2016. In 2016, about 29% (109/371) of the 371 territories had survey data reported and entered into the CDFW database, and of those surveyed, 103 were occupied (not all occupied sites were successful). Of the territories surveyed, 78 young fledged (C. Battistone, CDFW Raptor Coordinator, personal communication, March 23, 2017).

Bald eagle protections under the federal BGEPA prohibit “take” of bald eagles, and one component of take is to "disturb," meaning: “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, (1) injury to an eagle, (2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or (3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior" (USFWS 2016). In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also includes impacts that result from human-induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle's return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits, and causes injury, death or nest abandonment.

Bald eagle protections in California under CESA prohibit any person to import into and export out of the State, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within the State, bald eagles or parts or products thereof. Take is defined under Fish and Game Code Section 86 as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill. As a State fully protected bird species (Fish & G. Code § 3511), bald eagle or parts thereof cannot be taken or possessed unless authorized by CDFW for scientific research purposes. Additionally, bald eagles are protected in California by Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5, and 3513, which make it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, including birds of prey, such as bald eagle, and take or possess any migratory non-game birds as designated in the MBTA, respectively.

Background 2 June 2017



Allison, Anna@Wildlife, 09/20/17,

USFWS suggests copying this section from the YRDP Plan.


2.2 Bald Eagle Background Breeding bald eagles require relatively large bodies of water containing a large standing population of suitable-sized fish (Buehler 2000). Most fish taken by bald eagles on reservoirs in northern California are carrion; fish mortality is typically related to spawning and angling stress (Jackman et al. 2007). Waterfowl supplement the diet of bald eagles, especially in the winter and early nesting season (Hunt et al. 1992b). Nests are usually located within one mile of key foraging areas; eagles characteristically require large conifers to build nests, often in relatively secluded locations (Lehman 1979). Bald eagles at the elevation of Bucks Lake typically lay eggs in March that hatch in April, and nestlings fledge by late June/early July (Hunt et al. 1992a). Bald eagles in California are year-round residents where waters within their territories do not freeze over in winter. The breeding and foraging biology of bald eagles in the Project Area (i.e., Bucks Lake) was described for 1986–1987 when a management plan for that territory was also completed (PG&E 1988), and for 2002 during the Article 103 studies (PG&E 2002).

There are currently two known bald eagle nesting territories in the Project Area, one at Bucks Lake and the other at Grizzly Forebay (see Section 3.2). The nesting territory at Bucks Lake includes nest sites at both Rainbow Point as well as an alternate nest site at the Bucks Lake Marina. These two sites are considered to be part of the Bucks Lake territory. No new breeding territories were found during 2015 and 2016 relicensing surveys. The Bucks Lake territory, first reported in 1970, was monitored regularly by the Forest Service from 1979 to 2001 and by the Licensees since 2001. The Grizzly Forebay nest was discovered in 1999 by the PG&E helicopter pilot and has been monitored annually since then by the Licensees.





SECTION 3.0

Area Description3.1 General Habitat The construction of reservoirs in the western U.S. provided bald eagles with habitat for expansion during their recovery, and the management of large reservoirs is of interest for eagle conservation since pool fluctuations and releases can affect riparian habitats and prey populations (Jackman et al. 2007). The primary function of Bucks Creek Project reservoirs—including Three Lakes, Bucks Lake, Lower Bucks Lake, and Grizzly Forebay—is for the storage of water for hydroelectric power, and lake levels can vary depending on precipitation and operational needs, consistent with applicable FERC license requirements. The creation of Bucks Lake, and Grizzly Forebay to a lesser extent, certainly improved habitats for bald eagles from pre-dam conditions by creating a large impoundment capable of supporting standing populations of fish and maintained by periodic stocking for anglers.

In general, the reservoir pool level of Bucks Lake drops gradually during the summer as water is released for power generation. The lower pool levels may increase eagle access to kokanee spawning in Bucks Creek in the fall as the fish enter the shallow delta flume created by the receding reservoir. Reservoir fluctuations can be beneficial for bald eagles (e.g., concentrating fish, uploading nutrients upon re-inundation) unless a prolonged or severe drawdown reduces fish populations (Jackman et al. 2007), which is not expected at Bucks Lake.

Bucks Lake is located 21 km southwest of Quincy, California. The reservoir was formed near the confluence of Bucks Creek, a tributary of the North Fork Feather River (NFFR), with Mill and Haskins creeks. At Bucks Lake normal maximum water surface elevation of 1,572 m, it covers 739 hectares and holds 105,605 acre-feet of gross storage (usable storage is 105,300 acre-feet). Upland vegetation is mostly mixed conifer forest. Brush fields around Mill Creek cove are the result of a fire in 1966. Meadow habitat and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) forest occur on the south shore in Haskins Valley. The reservoir is surrounded by a mild to moderate grade slope, except for the flats around Haskins Valley. The water from Bucks Lake flows into Lower Bucks Lake immediately downstream.

A smaller reservoir, Lower Bucks Lake, is located immediately northwest of Bucks Lake. At its normal maximum water surface elevation of 1,531 m, Lower Bucks Lake covers 55 hectares and contains 5,843 acre-feet of gross storage (usable storage is 2,448 acre-feet). Additional water comes from the Milk Ranch buried conduit which conveys water from Three Lakes and a number of diverted streams. Water flows from Lower Bucks Lake through tunnel and penstock to the Grizzly Powerhouse 6.5 km to the west, located near the inflow of Grizzly Forebay. At its normal maximum water surface elevation of 1,316 m, Grizzly Forebay covers 15 hectares and has a gross storage capacity of 1,112 acre-feet (usable storage is 420 acre-feet). Both Lower Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay are surrounded by mixed conifer forest and moderate grade





topography. Land uses include timber production, recreation, summer homes, and hydroelectric power production. All Project reservoirs often freeze over partially or entirely in the winter.

3.2 Nesting Area Locations Figures 3-1 and 3-2 show recent bald eagle nest locations in the Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay bald eagle nesting territories, respectively. The main bald eagle nesting stand at Bucks Lake is located on Rainbow Point peninsula, situated between the reservoir arms of Mill Creek to the north (Left Hand Branch) and Bucks Creek to the south. Several nest trees have been used since the 1980s, including a Jeffrey pine (Pinus jeffreyi) and a sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana) at the base of the peninsula, and more recently a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) near the tip of the peninsula. The majority of land in the Rainbow Point nesting area is administered by the Forest Service, Plumas National Forest (PNF) as the Bucks Lake Wilderness. Several pockets of PG&E land occur on the peninsula, and much of the southern shoreline is administered by PG&E. In 2016, the Bucks Lake bald eagle pair moved their active nest site from Rainbow Point to a broken-top sugar pine on the south side of the reservoir just upslope from the Bucks Lake Marina and Recreational Vehicle (RV) Campground and Bucks Lake Lodge, on the border between PG&E and National Forest System (NFS) lands. The Grizzly Forebay nest is located in a ponderosa pine just southwest of and downstream from Grizzly Powerhouse (Figure 3-2). The land around the nest and the entire Grizzly Forebay is administered by the Forest Service/PNF.





Figure 3-1. Bald Eagle and Osprey Use Areas on Bucks Lake 2015–2016 (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a)

Figure 3-2. Bald Eagle and Osprey Use Areas on Grizzly Forebay 2015–2016 (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a)





SECTION 4.0

Bald Eagle Productivity4.1 Terminology Data from current and past bald eagle surveys (PG&E files; PG&E 2002; PG&E 1988; G. Rotta, District Biologist, Forest Service, Mt. Hough Ranger District, personal communication; CDFW files) were incorporated to complete the historical breeding records for Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay territories. Bald eagle nesting activity is classified and described using the following categories, after Jurek (1990) and Lehman (1983):

Occupied: two adults present in a territory containing a nest during the breeding season; or one adult observed incubating, with young, or near a recently used nest.

Occupied, Not Successful: an occupied territory where no young were produced (failed) because of egg breakage, egg death, or nestling death, or no breeding attempt was made.

Not Occupied: no nesting activity and no adults in a nesting territory.

Failure: nesting attempt failed due to egg breakage, egg death, or nestling death (same as Occupied, Not Successful).

Successful: one or more young fledged from the nest.

Status Unknown: territory not checked or incompletely checked to determine occupancy.

Occupied, Success Unknown: occupied territory not adequately monitored to determine success.

Mean annual bald eagle productivity was calculated by dividing the number of times a territory was occupied by the total young produced therein over a period of years. Young-per-occupied-territory or year was used to account for nonbreeding periods as recommended by Postupalsky (1974) and to be consistent with other researchers. Nesting success was calculated by dividing the number of years young were raised by the number of years the territory was determined occupied over the same time period.

June 2017 1 Bald Eagle Productivity




4.2 Site Reproductive Histories The complete history of nesting activity for the Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay bald eagle territories is presented in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2, respectively. A pair of bald eagles was reported on Bucks Lake (near Mill Creek) as early as July 1966 (California Department of Fish and Game* [CDFG] 1979). Monitoring efforts at Bucks Lake were sporadic after an active nest was first discovered in 1970, and many years were not surveyed completely during the first decade and periodically throughout the monitoring period. Overall productivity at Bucks Lake from 1970 to 2005 was only 0.6 young per occupied year with a nest success rate of 50 percent. This was below the statewide averages calculated for the period 1986–1990 (1.0 yng./occ. year, 65% nesting success; Jurek 1990) and for a sample of reports in California for the 2001, 2002, and 2003 breeding seasons (also 1.0 yng./occ. year; R. Jurek, CDFG, pers. comm., 2004). The Pacific States Bald Eagle Recovery Plan recommended that to achieve recovery, bald eagle populations should produce an average of 1.0 young per occupied territory with an average success rate for occupied territories of 65 percent (USFWS 1986). Productivity at the Grizzly Forebay territory for the period 1997 to 2005 was closer to average (0.9 yng./occ. year, 57% nesting success).

The two territories were continually occupied during the past 11-year period (2006-2016) and mean productivity (0.9 young per occupied territory) and nest success (59%) during this period (Table 4-3) were just below the statewide average. Examined separately, the Bucks Lake territory showed above average productivity for California, while the Grizzly Forebay territory was below the state average for the period (Table 4-3). Even so, productivity for the last four years (2013–2016) has been well above average for both territories (i.e., 1.5 young per occupied territory, 88% nesting success).

* Now CDFW.

Bald Eagle Occurrence & Distribution 2 June 2017




Table 4-1. Nesting Status and Reproduction at the Bucks Lake Bald Eagle Territory Since Its Discovery In 1970

Year Status # Yng. Notes

1970 Occupied, success unknown Active nest, young not counted.

1971 Status unknown

1972 Status unknown

1973 Unoccupied Only 1 adult, no nest found.

1974 Unoccupied No adults observed.

1975 Status unknown

1976 Status unknown

1977 Status unknown

1978 Status unknown

1979 Occupied, not successful 0 Only 1 adult, new nest found.

1980 Unoccupied 1 adult near nest.

1981 Successful 1

1982 Occupied, not successful 0

1983 Unoccupied 1 adult in territory.

1984 Occupied, not successful 0 Egg materials recovered, alt. nest used.

1985 Occupied, not successful 0 2 adults perched on peninsula (9 April).

1986 Occupied, not successful 0 Only 1 adult, but nest repaired.

1987 Inactive 0 2 adults observed in territory

1988 Successful 1

1989 Successful 1


1991 Occupied, success unknown

1992 Status unknown

1993 Successful 2

1994 Status unknown

1995 Unoccupied

1996 Unoccupied

1997 Successful 1


1999 Successful 1








2002 Successful 2

2003 Successful 1

2004 Successful 1

2005 Successful 2

2006 Successful 1

2007 Successful 2

2008 Successful 1

2009 Successful 2




2013 Successful 2

2014 Successful 2


2016 Successful 2 Moved nest to south shore near Bucks Lake Marina





Table 4-2. Reproduction At The Grizzly Forebay Bald Eagle Nesting Territory Since Its Discovery In 1999


1999 Successful 1 Year discovered by PG&E helicopter pilot


2001 Successful 2

2002 Successful 1


2004 Successful 2



2007 Successful 1


2009 Successful 1




2013 Successful 1

2014 Successful 1

2015 Successful 2

2016 Successful 2





Table 4-3. Number of Young Produced at Two Bald Eagle Nesting Territories in the Bucks Creek Project Area from 2006 to 2016

Nest Territory 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Average 2006-2016

Bucks Lake 1 2 1 2 ONS ONS ONS 2 2 ONS 2 1.1

Grizzly Forebay ONS 1 ONS 1 ONS ONS ONS 1 1 2 2 0.7

No. of Occupied Territory Years of Known Outcome

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.0

Young per Occupied Territory 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.5 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.0 2.0 0.9

% Successful Occupied Territories 50% 100% 50% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 50% 100% 59%

ONS = Occupied, not successful





SECTION 5.0

Bald Eagle Occurrence and Distribution5.1 Breeding Season Surveys Figure 5-1 shows the perches and foraging locations used by the adult bald eagles at Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay as determined during the 2002 Article 103 breeding season surveys. Use areas identified during the 2015–2016 relicensing surveys appear in Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2. Perching, and perch hunting activity, was concentrated in three general areas at Bucks Lake: (1) the Rainbow Point nesting peninsula, (2) Mill Creek cove, and (3) Bucks Creek cove. Most of the perching activity around the nest area was related to loafing, night roosting, and nest attendance from pilot (sentry) perches. The eagles did launch several hunting flights from perches in the nest vicinity, and most of the other perching locations depicted in Figure 5-1 also appeared to be associated with hunting.

In an earlier study, consistent observations of two adult bald eagles were made on Bucks Lake during the 1987 breeding season (PG&E 1988). They concentrated their activities near the mouth of Mill Creek cove and around Haskins Bay during that period. The adults also perched in large conifers, on stumps, and on the shore around the area known as Sandy Point Beach. The lake is relatively shallow around Sandy Point and rising fish were abundant.

No surveys have been conducted to determine the foraging home range of the Grizzly Forebay bald eagles and, with the exception of the perch observation at the forebay shown in Figure 5-1, no other perches were identified. Periodic incidental sightings of adult bald eagles along the NFFR during the nesting season in recent years (Table 5-1) could have been the adults from Grizzly Forebay. While no direct flights were observed between the two areas, the NFFR Rock Creek Reach is only 3.8 km northwest of Grizzly Forebay, although there is an 860 m difference in elevation.

June 2017 1 Bald Eagle Occurrence & Distribution




Figure 5-1. Bald Eagle and Osprey Use Areas in the Project Area in 2002 (PG&E 2005)

Table 5-1. Summary of Bald Eagle Sighting Records Along the NFFR in the Rock Creek-Cresta Project Vicinity 2003–2017

Date #/Age Locations Activity02/19/03 2 adults Rock Creek Reach near Chambers Creek Perched (S. Moock, PG&E biologist)03/25/03 1 adult Rock Creek Reach near Mild Ranch

CreekPerched/flushed (S. Moock, PG&E biologist)

06/06/03 1 adult Cresta Reach upstream of Cresta Powerhouse

Flying upstream

06/06/03 2 subs Cresta Reach upstream of Cresta Powerhouse

Soaring along ridge west of NFFR

06/17/03 1 adult Cresta Reservoir Forage attempt on mallard

05/24/04 1 adult Rock Creek Reservoir Hunting, perched along Hwy. 7006/14/05 1 adult Cresta Reach at Shady Rest Soaring low over slopes

07/05/06 1 sub Cresta Reach just downstream of Grizzly Creek confluence

Standing on a rock along river

01/24/07 1 adult NFFR just downstream of East Branch confluence

Perched at river pool habitat

02/07/08 1 adult On Rock Creek Reach just downstream of Rock Creek Dam

Perched at river pool habitat

04/03/08 1 adult Cresta Reach at Shady Rest Piracy on osprey (K. McGee, PG&E)01/19/11 1 adult Rock Creek Reservoir Perched in snag

Spring 2011

1–2 adults Rock Creek Reach in vicinity of Rodgers Flat

Periodically observed throughout spring (S. Baldwin, pilot)

06/19/12 1 adult Cresta Reach about 1 mile upstream of Cresta Powerhouse

Perched at pool tailout

04/26/13 2 adults Just downstream of Rock Creek Dam Soaring above river (E. Shepard, GANDA botanist)

01/15/14 1 adult Cresta Reach downstream of Cedar Creek confluence

Perched in snagtop conifer above riverine pool

01/15/14 1 adult NFFR at confluence with the East Branch Perched high above the river03/24/15 1 adult Cresta Reach at Milk Ranch Creek Flew upstream to perch at confluence (S.

Wood, Stillwater biologist)July 2015 2 adults Rock Creek Reach in vicinity of Rock

Creek PowerhousePerching (S. Baldwin, PG&E operator)

05/26/16 1 adult Rock Creek Reach just below Rock Creek Dam

Caught fish in pool below dam (J. Tortosa, GANDA biologist)

05/31/16 1 adult Rock Creek Reach over Chipps Creek Soaring high by towers (K. Wiseman, GANDA biologist)

05/31/16 1 adult Rock Creek Reach near Opapee Creek Flying over NFFR with fish (K. Wiseman, GANDA biologist)





Date #/Age Locations Activity06/15/16 1 sub Cresta Reach downstream of Shady Rest Flew downstream, perched at pool02/14/17 1 adult Cresta Reach at Milk Ranch Creek Perched (M. Verdonner, pilot)

Source: PG&E 2008, 2012, 2015; PG&E File Data

5.2 Wintering Observations Use of Bucks Lake by at least one adult bald eagle was fairly consistent during the winter months of December and January in the 1970s and 1980s (Detrich 1981, Detrich 1982, Forest Service file data, PG&E 1988). On December 12, 1979, eight bald eagles were observed feeding on kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) at the mouth of Bucks Creek (CDFG 1981). During the winter of 1977–1978, two adults regularly roosted near the saddle of the nest peninsula.

Winter bald eagle surveys for Rock Creek-Cresta Project (FERC Project No. 1962) Article 409 license compliance were conducted for bald eagles in 2002, 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2017 (PG&E 2008, 2011, 2014). The 2002 and 2005 winter surveys included portions of the Bucks Creek Project; no bald eagles were observed at Bucks Lake, Lower Bucks Lake, Grizzly Forebay, Grizzly Creek between Grizzly Forebay and the NFFR, Bucks Creek between Lower Bucks Lake and the NFFR, and the NFFR between Rock Creek Reservoir and Poe Dam during these single-day helicopter surveys (PG&E file data). During both years, all three Bucks Creek Project impoundments were mostly frozen over and covered with snow. Documentation of all incidental winter sightings along the NFFR is included in Table 5-1. It is likely that the resident Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay adult bald eagles stay around their nesting territories until freeze up, then perhaps move to the NFFR or other ice-free locations until thaw. However, a demonstration of their tenacity to occupy the site in winter is revealed in an historical observation by the owners of Bucks Creek Lodge who reported two adult and two subadult eagles standing near a hole in the ice in the middle of Bucks Lake (PG&E 1988).

During relicensing, midwinter bald eagle surveys of all Project reservoirs were conducted on January 8, 2015 and January 7, 2016. No adult bald eagles were observed in the survey area in 2015; however, three subadult eagles were found: one juvenile at Lower Bucks Lake and a juvenile and subadult on Bucks Lake (Table 5-2, Figure 3-1). Three adult bald eagles were recorded on Bucks Lake during the 2016 survey. No eagles were seen at Grizzly Forebay either year. Ice conditions during the 2015 winter survey were as follows: Bucks Lake – 30 percent, Lower Bucks Lake – ice-free, and Grizzly Forebay – 20 percent. Ice conditions during the 2016 winter survey were as follows: Bucks Lake – 60 percent, Lower Bucks Lake – 90 percent, and Grizzly Forebay – 60 percent.





Table 5-2. Observations of Bald Eagles Recorded during 2015 and 2016 Midwinter Survey

Date Age1 General Location GPS Coordinates Activity Comments

1/8/15 Juvenile Lower Bucks Lake near inflow 4417990N/653090E Flew to unseen

perch near shore

1/8/15 Subadult 2 Bucks Lake northwest shore 4418400N/654290E Perched in

shoreline pineNo adults seen

on survey

1/8/15 Juvenile Bucks Lake Rainbow Point Peninsula 4418010N/655610E Flushed from

shoreline perch

1/7/16 Adult Bucks Lake at Mill Creek arm 4418550N/655460E Perched in fir

1/7/16 Adult Bucks Lake along Bucks Creek arm 4416620N/656590E Perched in fir

1/7/16 Adult Bucks Lake at Bucks Creek inflow 4416200N/657815E Flushed from perch Flew upstream

1 Juvenile is bird hatched previous year; Subadult 2 is bird in its third year.





SECTION 6.0

Bald Eagle Foraging Ecology6.1 Foraging The adult bald eagles nesting at Bucks Lake targeted live and carrion fish as well as live waterfowl during the 1987 and 2002 breeding seasons. In 2002, at first light, one of the adult eagles typically flew out from the nest area to patrol the main open waters of Bucks Lake between the nest and the dam and into the Bucks Creek arm of the reservoir. This flight appeared to involve searching for carrion items that may have surfaced overnight, and some were taken. The adults also launched searching flights at other times during the morning, and occasionally searched Lower Bucks Lake. This was the only evidence of eagles hunting at Lower Bucks Lake, and no prey items were returned.

While targeting live fish, the adult eagles typically perched above the inlets of either Bucks Creek or Mill Creek (Figure 5-1), but sometimes hit fish in open water, apparently either feeding or basking at the surface. Kokanee salmon spawn in Bucks Creek as early as August but mostly in the fall, and bald eagles are known to feed on their carcasses post-spawn (PG&E 1988). The Bucks Lake eagles also targeted live waterfowl, including ducklings.

The Bucks Lake eagles periodically pirated fish from osprey. After spending the winter in Mexico or further south, osprey breeding in northern California arrive in late March, lay eggs in April that hatch in May, and their nestlings fledge in late July through early August. Most active osprey nests found in the Project Area occurred around Bucks Lake. There were nine occupied osprey nests on Bucks Lake in 2002 (Figure 5-1). Surveys during 1986–1987 found only one active osprey nest at the reservoir (PG&E 1988), indicating a sizable increase in the osprey population during that 15-year period. Most osprey nests were in snags, snag-top firs, and live firs close to the shoreline. Osprey nests observed during bald eagle breeding season relicensing surveys from 2015 to 2016 are listed in Table 6-1 and shown in figures 3-1 and 3-2. There were 10 occupied osprey territories on Bucks Lake and one occupied territory near Grizzly Forebay in 2015, and nine occupied territories on Bucks Lake and one near Grizzly Forebay in 2016.

During a visit to Grizzly Forebay on 12 July 2002, trout were rising around the aquatic vegetation near the dam, and an adult bald eagle was observed perched on a snag along the south shore with an approximately 30 cm total length cylindrically shaped fish in its talons. After eating the anterior portion of the fish, the eagle flew off in the direction of the Grizzly Forebay nest. This is the only observation of eagles with prey in the Grizzly Forebay territory. The pair likely hunts off-site as well, perhaps along the NFFR (see Section 5.1).

June 2017 1 Bald Eagle Foraging Ecology




Table 6-1. Osprey Nest Locations for Territories Recorded during the 2015 and 2016 Breeding Season Helicopter Surveys at Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay

Location – Territory NameGPS

Coordinates Substrate

Productivity Status1

2015 2016

Bucks Lake –Dam 4417480N / 653530E snagtop fir Occupied Occupied

Bucks Lake – Hutchins Group Camp 4418500N / 653750E snagtop fir Occupied Occupied

Bucks Lake – Mill Creek Inlet 4419850N / 655000E snag Occupied Occupied

Bucks Lake – Mill Creek Cove 4418751N / 655639E snag Occupied Occupied

Bucks Lake – Upper Mill Creek 4421163N / 655315E fir Not found Not found

Bucks Lake – Middle Fork Mill Creek2 4418950N / 656050E snag Occupied Not found

Bucks Lake – Middle Fork Mill Creek 22 4418790N / 655910E snag Occupied

Bucks Lake – Northeast Shore 2 4417336N / 656414E snagtop fir Occupied Not found

Bucks Lake – Lakeshore Resort 4416000N / 656860E snag Occupied Not found

Bucks Lake – Haskins Bay Narrows 4415360N / 655670E sugar pine Occupied Occupied

Bucks Lake – 4H 4415450N / 654990E snag Occupied Not found

Bucks Lake – Summer Home 4416220N / 653500E snag Occupied Occupied

Rainbow Point Peninsula 4417560N / 655700E snag Occupied

Mill Creek Trail 4417600N / 655990E snag Occupied

Grizzly Forebay – West 4416877N / 644554E snag Occupied Occupied1 Blank cells were years prior to discovery2 Sites with same superscript number may be alternates of same territory.

6.2 Prey Base Several species of trout have been stocked or introduced into Bucks Lake, including rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), brown trout (Salmo trutta), lake trout or mackinaw (Salvelinus namaycush), and kokanee. During the 2015 relicensing studies, all Project reservoirs contained salmonids of sufficient size (>300 mm total length or greater) to be potential prey for eagles. Dominant salmonid species observed in Project reservoirs in 2015 included brown trout, rainbow trout and kokanee in Bucks Lake, brown trout and kokanee in Lower Bucks Lake, brown trout in Grizzly Forebay, and brook trout in Three Lakes (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016c).

CDFW currently stocks rainbow trout, brown trout, and brook trout in Bucks Lake for recreational fishing. Not currently stocked, kokanee salmon spawn and die in Bucks Creek in the fall. Bucks Lake is considered relatively infertile (oligotrophic) because of the granitic nature of the surrounding soils and bedrock, and warmwater species such as bass and catfish do not do well under these conditions. Some recreational angling for trout occurs in Lower Bucks

Bald Eagle Foraging Ecology 2 June 2017




Lake, Three Lakes, and Grizzly Forebay, but these reservoirs are not currently stocked. Following rehabilitation efforts of the 1990s, a predominance of rainbow trout and some brown trout now populate Grizzly Creek upstream of Grizzly Forebay (PG&E 1998). Most were relatively small (<30 cm fork length), and it is unknown if eagles forage in Grizzly Creek upstream or downstream of the forebay. Also found in Grizzly Creek just downstream of the forebay during relicensing studies, rainbow trout and brown trout were mostly <18 cm and <24 cm, respectively (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016d).

While it is unknown if Project Area bald eagles forage in reservoirs or reaches of the NFFR, adults are occasionally observed there (see Section 5.1) and may prey on fish known to occur there. Fish population sampling was conducted in the NFFR in 1992 (Li and ENPLAN, 1994). The Rock Creek Reservoir surveys indicated that the dominant species was hardhead (Mylopharodon conocephalus; 78%), followed by Sacramento sucker (Catostomus occidentalis; 6%), Sacramento pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus grandis) and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides; 5% each), and rainbow trout (<2%). In Cresta Reservoir, Sacramento sucker (41%) and hardhead (37%) were followed by largemouth bass (10%), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu; 5%), Sacramento pikeminnow (4%), and rainbow trout (2%). Small numbers of brown trout, carp (Cyprinus carpio), and brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus) were also present. Electrofishing surveys in the Rock Creek and Cresta river reaches of the NFFR in 2006 found mostly Sacramento sucker, followed by hardhead, pikeminnow, rainbow trout, and smallmouth bass, with some adult suckers exceeding 45 cm fork length (Salamunovich 2007).

No surplus carrion items were found during lake searches on Bucks Lake in 1987 and 2002. Eagles and osprey probably removed all carrion and moribund fish soon after surfacing. Carrion prey sources in previous bald eagle studies in California have included mostly spawning- and angling-associated fish mortality (Hunt et al. 1992b, Jackman et al. 2007). Some hatchery trout often die soon after release as disease infects some individuals starting at the hatchery, since crowded conditions in live wells often damages their protective mucus layer.

Waterfowl occurred in moderate numbers in the Bucks Lake territory during previous studies (PG&E 1988, 2002). During the breeding seasons these were mostly Canada goose (Branta canadensis), mallards (Anas platyrhynchos), and common mergansers (Mergus merganser), with some grebes (i.e., a pied-billed grebe, Podilymbus podiceps, and western grebes, Aechmophorus occidentalis), gulls (Larus sp.), great blue herons (Ardea herodias), and bufflehead (Bucephala albeola). In the winter of 1987, diving ducks, including common mergansers, common goldeneye (Bucephala clangula), scaup (Aythya sp.), and ruddy ducks (Oxyura jamaicensis) were most numerous. Bufflehead and American coot (Fulica americana) were present in the winter during relicensing helicopter surveys. Canada goose and mallard were the most common species during the 2015–2016 breeding seasons; young of the year of both species were observed during boat surveys on Bucks Lake. Western grebe, common merganser, and wood duck (Aix sponsa) were also observed during the breeding season on Bucks Lake during relicensing; no waterfowl were seen at Grizzly Forebay.

June 2017 3 Bald Eagle Foraging Ecology




6.3 Food Habits Very few prey remains were collected during the two previous studies on Bucks Lake, and none were found during relicensing studies. Waterfowl were more prevalent than salmonids in a collection of prey remains collected from the nest in 1986 (Table 6-2). However, it is likely that salmonids were heavily underrepresented in this collection since their bones are relatively soft and often completely consumed by eagles (Jackman and Jenkins 2004). Even so, waterfowl are typically an important component in the diet of eagles nesting on reservoirs managed for trout fishing (Jackman et al. 1999). A mallard duckling was observed taken from a brood on Bucks Lake by a breeding adult bald eagle during the 2002 nesting season.

Table 6-2. Number and Biomass of Prey Identified from Remains Collected from the Bucks Lake Bald Eagle Nest on June 4, 1986

NumberPercent of Number Grams

Percent of Grams

Fish Species

Unidentified Salmonidae 2 33.3 260 7.5

Total Fish 2 33.3 260 7.5

Bird Species

Northern pintail (Anas acuta) 1 16.7 1,011 29.2

Unidentified Anatinae 1 16.7 684 19.7

Unidentified Athyinae 1 16.7 869 25.1

American coot (Fulica americana) 1 16.7 642 18.5

Total Birds 4 66.7 3,206 92.5

Total (Fish + Birds) 6 100.0 3,466 100.0

Bald Eagle Foraging Ecology 4 June 2017




SECTION 7.0

Silvicultural FeaturesThe original Bucks Lake nest tree was a sugar pine that measured 53.3 m in height and 183 cm diameter-at-breast-height (DBH). The nest used in the 1980s was a large Jeffrey pine with a 151 cm DBH. Silvicultural conditions of a 0.1 acre plot around this nest tree at that time included medium sawtimber true fir (red or white fir; Abies magnifica and A. concolor, respectively) and large sawtimber Jeffrey pine and true fir (trees <15.4 cm not included) (PG&E 1988). The medium sawtimber designation includes trees 46-102 cm DBH, and large sawtimber is >102 cm DBH. Prior to 2016, the nest grove occurred completely within the Bucks Lake Wilderness Area on Rainbow Point peninsula, and no recent attempt has been made to evaluate forest stand conditions there. A cursory examination of the habitat around the Bucks Lake nests in 2002 and 2015 revealed a multi-storied canopy of mixed conifer with numerous potential nest trees in the overstory. No information is available on the stand conditions around the Grizzly Forebay nest or at the 2016 Marina area nest on Bucks Lake; however, from the helicopter the stands appeared to be multi-storied with several large trees available for replacements in the vicinity of the current nest tree.

June 2017 1 Silvicultural Features





Silvicultural Features 2 June 2017




SECTION 8.0

Public Use8.1 Existing Facilities. Bucks Lake and its vicinity are popular with recreationists for fishing, boating, hiking, and camping. Because of its altitude and snow cover often lasting into late spring, most lake activities are concentrated from June through August; however, snowmobiling is popular in winter. There are presently 68 licensed lots with recreation residences and three commercial leases on PG&E land abutting the shoreline of Bucks Lake. The PNF has 82 recreation residence permits on NFS lands in the vicinity of the Bucks Lake shoreline, although the majority do not abut the shoreline (PG&E 2007). There are three private resorts (Lakeshore Resort, Bucks Lake Lodge and Marina, and Bucks Lake Campground and RV Park) and six campgrounds located on NFS and PG&E-owned land in the Bucks Lake vicinity: Whitehorse Campground along Bucks Creek (20 sites), Haskins Valley Campground (65 sites), Lower Bucks Lake Campground (6 self-contained-only sites), Sundew Campground (19 sites), Hutchins Group Campground (3 group sites), and Mill Creek Campground (10 sites) (Figure 3-1). Day use facilities on the west shore of Bucks Lake include Sandy Point Day Use Area and Boat Launch that has picnic sites, a swimming beach, and a boat ramp; additional picnic sites are provided at West End Cove and Indian Rock day use areas. Timberwolf Organizational Camp, a Boy Scouts of America camp, is located on the northern shore of Lower Bucks Lake and the Mormon Trail Organizational Camp, operated by Latter Day Saints, is located on the southern shore. The Lower Bucks Lake Day Use Area, located near Timberwolf Organizational Camp along the shoreline, has a boat launch and swimming beach. There is a boat launch and a walk-in/boat-in campground (7 sites) along the north shore of Grizzly Forebay (Figure 3-2).

The 2015 recreation surveys indicated some public use of Grizzly Forebay Recreation Area and the walk-in/boat-in Grizzly Forebay Campground, and little or no confirmed use of the Grizzly Forebay Trail (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016e). It is not known to what degree the Grizzly Forebay eagles tolerate boating activity on the reservoir. It is possible that they are habituated to anglers on the forebay and may occasionally benefit from fish mortality generated by catch and release fishing (Jackman et al. 2007). The Grizzly Powerhouse Fishing Access, Grizzly Forebay Recreation Area, and Grizzly Forebay Campground are typically open from Memorial Day weekend through September, coincidentally avoiding the early nesting season when eagles are most vulnerable to disturbance at the nest.

The 2002 Bucks Lake bald eagle nest on Rainbow Point peninsula was located 200 m through a forest buffer from the Mill Creek Trail in the Bucks Lake Wilderness (Figure 5-1). The historical nest tree shown in Figure 5-1 was located directly adjacent to the trail. The trail receives moderate use during the summer, and several vehicles were observed parked at the Mill Creek Trailhead at Bucks Inlet in summer; however, during the early bald eagle nesting season, the trail is often covered with snow. Distances from the 2016 Bucks Lake Marina nest site to the

June 2017 1 Public Use




nearby existing facilities were approximately 130 m from Bucks Lake Lodge, 225 m from Bucks Lake Marina, 130 m from Marina RV Campground and 145 m to Marina Lakeview Cabins.

8.2 Public Use Levels Levels of public use in bald eagle habitats at Bucks Lake were measured during the 1986–1987, 2002, and 2015–2016 bald eagle studies (PG&E 1988, 2002; PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a). Table 8-1 shows the results of boat counts during lake-wide surveys in 1986–1987, 2002, and 2015–2016. According to these counts, peak boating use of Bucks Lake occurred during late May to early August. The arrival of the first fishing boat each survey morning also appears in Table 8-1; boat fishing usually began one-half to one hour after eagle foraging flights at first-light (civil twilight). In addition, the arrival of the first water-ski or jet-ski boat (personal watercraft) usually occurred at least two hours after civil twilight. Because of their usually slow-moving and predictable travel, fishing boats may be less disturbing to eagles than boats used for watersports (e.g., waterskiing), which regularly change direction and often stop and start suddenly. The data in Table 8-1 show that while the number of boats utilizing Bucks Lake often exceeded 20 boats at one time (BAOT) on weekends, their late morning arrival usually gave the eagles a several-hour, relatively disturbance-free, period in which to forage.

Relicensing surveys to assess shoreline camping restrictions on Rainbow Point peninsula and to document other bald eagle interactions with human activity on Bucks Lake were conducted on May 27 and July 14, 2015 and May 25 and July 8, 2016. There were two Forest Service designated campsites (#4, #5) and three additional non-designated use areas identified on Rainbow Point peninsula (Table 8-2, Figure 3-1). In most locations, activity appeared to be confined to near shore areas. One exception was a primitive campsite located between the Mill Creek Trail and the southern base of the peninsula that showed signs of recent use, including a campfire carelessly placed too close to vegetation. Other than this, there was no evidence of side trail use from the Mill Creek Trail into the Rainbow Point nesting areas. Additionally, there was no sign of any human activity near recent or historic bald eagle nest sites on the Rainbow Point peninsula. Earlier monitoring surveys of Bucks Lake by boat on July 27, 2011 and May 30, 2014 revealed one boat-in campsite occupied and one hiker at a tent on the tip of Rainbow Point on the former date only. No humans were observed near nest sites during the annual helicopter surveys from 2003 to 2016. In June 1986, a pile of spent .38-caliber shells and shot-up cans were found within 200 m of the nest (PG&E 1988).

Public Use 2 June 2017




Table 8-1. Number of Boats at One time (BAOT) Counted on Bucks Lake during 3 Surveys in 1986–1987, 10 Surveys from May–Sept. 2002, and 4 Surveys in 2015–2016, and the Timing of First Fishing Boat and Water-Ski Boat Arriving on the Reservoir Each Morning

Date TimeTotal BAOT

on Lake

Time of First Fishing Boat

(hrs)Time of First Ski Boat (hrs) Comments

05/01/86 1000 0 nd nd

06/04/87 1700 4 nd nd

06/05/87 0830 5 nd nd

05/13/02 1030 0 na na helicopter observation

05/25/02e 0830 19 0630 1030

06/21/02 0940 14 0550 0940 jet ski @ 0940 hrs

06/29/02e 0845 26 0530 0856

07/13/02e 0920 23 0550 0805

07/26/02 0900 19 0610 0803

08/03/02e 0900 26 0636 0842 7 ski boats @ 0900 hrs

08/29/02 1000 7 0715 0825

09/12/02 0900 5 0715 na no water-skiers today

09/28/02e 0900 8 0735 1020

05/27/15 1000 1 0955 nd

07/14/15 0930 23 nd 0900 included 13 kayaks/canoes

05/25/16 0900 3 nd nd

07/08/16 1000 10 nd nde denotes a weekend daynd = no datana = not applicable





Table 8-2. Activity at Designated and Non-Designated Campsites and Day Use Areas on Rainbow Point Peninsula 2015–2016

Campsite No.

GeneralLocation

GPS Coordinates

2015Activity

2016Activity Comments

Forest Service #4 North shore 4418090N /

655725E Recent use Recent use Use appears to be confined to site

Forest Service #5 North shore 4417643N /

655330E Recent use Recent use Use appears to be confined to site

na Tip of peninsula 4417220N / 654760E

No sign of recent use

No sign of recent use

PG&E signs prohibit camping

na South base of peninsula

4417490N / 655863E

Recent day use, no recent campfires

Recent day use, boat parked

there7-8-16

No signage; large beach area, leveled upland

area for tents

naBetween Mill Cr. Trail and

lake

4417538N / 655921E Recent camping Possible light

recent useFire pit burned nearby

vegetation in 2015

na = not available

8.3 Human/Eagle Interactions Not including the observation boat, there were 10 instances of human/eagle interactions at distances of 100 m or less recorded at Bucks Lake in 2002 (PG&E 2002), none in 1986–1987 (PG&E 1988), and one in 2015–2016 (Table 8-3; PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016a). All five occasions where fishing boats passed eagles in shoreline perches yielded no reaction from the eagles (range = 50–100m). One instance of a ski-boat passing within 75 m of a perched eagle also resulted in no eagle reaction. Similarly, perched eagles did not respond to two kayaks and a paddleboard together passing within 50 m.

Two of four incidents where anglers walking along shore within approximately 100 m of perched eagles resulted in flushing the birds. Both occurred at the Mill Creek inlet area. Two similar pedestrian events occurred at the Bucks Creek inlet area with no reaction from the eagles. It appeared that the birds were more habituated to human activity at the latter site, possible because there was far more congestion there. Both anglers along shore and vehicular traffic along the Bucks Lake Road were located in very close proximity to preferred eagle perches in the area (Figure 5-1). During surveys, the adult bald eagles at Bucks Lake appeared to be habituated to boating activity on the lake because they did not flush when boats—including the survey observation boat—passed nearby.





Table 8-3. Observations of Bald Eagles Recorded during 2015 and 2016 Bucks Lake Human Use Boat Surveys

Date AgeGeneral Location

GPS Coordinates Activity Comments

5/27/15 Adult West side of Rainbow Point

4417950N / 655550E Perched in shoreline fir Observer boat passed

within 30m, no reaction

5/27/15 Adult Northeast shore 4416840N / 656350E

Perched in shoreline snag

Observer boat passed within 50 m, no reaction

7/14/15 Adults East base of Rainbow Point

4417370N / 655700E

2 perched together in shoreline snagtop

Observer landed boat on beach 160 m from perch, no reaction

7/14/15 Adult Northeast shore 4417050N / 656250E

Perched in shoreline snagtop

2 kayaks and 1 paddleboard together passed within 50 m, no reaction

7/14/15 Adult Tip of Rainbow Point

4417040N / 654925E

Perched 50 m from shore in pine

No close encounters with boats


4417040N / 654925E



5/25/16 Adult 2016 nest site 4415610N / 655980E

Perched in sugar pine near nest


(Nest and perch are approximately:

130 m from Bucks Lake Lodge

225 m from Bucks Lake Marina

130 m from Marina RV Campground)


4417190N / 654810E




4417155N / 654890E

Perched 100 m from shore in snag






8.4 Recreational Management Under the Draft Recreation Management Plan (PG&E and City of Santa Clara 2016b) only the replacement or reconstruction of existing recreational facilities is proposed, no new campground or day-use facilities are proposed; however, the existing Lower Bucks Lake Campground will be relocated to a new footprint. A Shoreline Management Plan (SMP; PG&E 2007) was developed to assist PG&E in managing PG&E-owned and NFS land uses along the Bucks Lake shoreline to comply with public access, safety, and environmental stewardship license requirements, and facilitate efficient Project operation. Most of the SMP addresses activities around established shoreline residences; however, recommendations in the SMP for shoreline uses in areas also used by bald eagles are included as management recommendations in this BEMP (Section 10.3).





SECTION 9.0

Bald Eagle Management Considerations9.1 Bald Eagle Nest Management Zones The Nest Management Zones (NMZ) for current bald eagle nesting territories in the Project Area are shown in Figure 3-1 for Bucks Lake and Figure 3-2 for Grizzly Forebay. Historically, these management zones provided up to a one-half mile buffer around existing nesting tree stands (less if sheltered by topography) to protect the site from human disturbance and development and provide suitable habitat for future nesting opportunities. Since the 2006 BEMP was written, the Bucks Lake eagles have expanded their nest site use to the entire Rainbow Point peninsula, and consequently the Rainbow Point NMZ was redrawn to include the entire one-mile long peninsula (Figure 3-1). The Grizzly Forebay NMZ remains the same as in the 2006 BEMP (Figure 3-2). Land ownership within these NMZs is either Forest Service or PG&E, and most of the Rainbow Point NMZ is located within the Bucks Lake Wilderness.

The nest used by the Bucks Lake pair in 2016 was located approximately 130 m from Bucks Lake Lodge and the Marina RV Campground, both non-Project facilities. The closest Project facility (Haskins Valley Campground) is located 440 m (over 0.25 mi.) away. All of these nearby facilities predate the eagles’ 2016 arrival. The USFWS Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS Guidelines; USFWS 2007) address this issue as follows:

“Eagles are unlikely to be disturbed by routine use of roads, homes, and other facilities where such use pre-dates the eagles’ successful nesting activity in a given area. Therefore, in most cases ongoing existing uses may proceed with the same intensity with little risk of disturbing bald eagles.”

Consequently, a 200 m (660 ft.) NMZ (Marina NMZ) is delineated (Figure 3-1) to protect and manage timber resources in the Marina NMZ area as per the USFWS Guidelines (see sections 9.2 and 9.3 for further clarification). The 2016 Bucks Lake Marina bald eagle nest was located on the boundary of PG&E and NFS lands.

9.2 USFWS Bald Eagle Management Guidelines The USFWS Guidelines (USFWS 2007) provide comprehensive disturbance avoidance measures for bald eagles for public and private landowners. The USFWS Guidelines state that the sensitivity of particular bald eagles to disturbance “may be related to a number of factors, including visibility, duration, noise levels, extent of the area affected by the activity, prior experiences with humans, and tolerance of the individual nesting pair” (USFWS 2007). It is well documented that certain bald eagle pairs become habituated to familiar, non-threatening human activity, and, since their recovery, may be becoming more habituated to human activity on a population level (Guinn 2013).

June 2017 1 Bald Eagle Management Considerations




Please provide the buffer size for each nest site. The plan refers to the map which doesn’t specify the buffers. The buffers should be provided in the text of the plan for ALL nest sites...old and new at Bucks and the one at Grizzly Forebay.


Measures from the USFWS Guidelines are presented in Section 10.2.1 and interpreted specifically in Section 10.2.2 for delineation of new nest management buffers around Project Area bald eagle nests henceforth, including the new Marina NMZ on Bucks Lake. USFWS Guideline buffer recommendations listed below apply to “active” nests during the ‘breeding season” which will correspond to the BEMP Limited Operating Period (LOP) bounded by the period from January 15 to August 15. In addition, all supported BEMP management recommendations are listed in Section 10.3. These recommendations are intended for interagency use and are not necessarily the responsibility of the Licensees or any specific resource management agency; however, in addition to habitat protections, many are designed to avoid disturbing or harming eagles as prohibited under the BGEPA and other protective laws. The BEMP management recommendations and Guideline buffer distances are designed for the protection of aquatic and terrestrial habitats and to identify specific measures that would effectively minimize disturbance to bald eagles.

9.2.1 Guideline Avoidance Measures

The USFWS Guidelines avoidance measures for establishing buffers around bald eagles nests read as follows (USFWS 2007):

Category A: Building construction, 1 or 2 story, with project footprint of ½ acre or less. Construction of roads, trails, canals, power lines, and other linear utilities. Agriculture and aquaculture – new or expanded operations. Alteration of shorelines or wetlands. Installation of docks or moorings. Water impoundment.

Category B: Building construction, 3 or more stories. Building construction, 1 or 2 story, with project footprint of more than ½ acre. Installation or expansion of marinas with a capacity of 6 or more boats. Mining and associated activities. Oil and natural gas drilling and refining and associated activities.

If there is no similar activity within 1 mile of the nest

If there is similar activity closer than 1 mile from the nest

If the activity will be visible from the nest

660 feet. Landscape buffers are recommended.

660 feet, or as close as existing tolerated activity of similar scope. Landscape buffers are recommended.

If the activity will not be visible from the nest

Category A: 330 feet. Clearing, external construction, and landscaping between 330 feet and 660 feet should be done outside breeding season. Category B: 660 feet.

330 feet, or as close as existing tolerated activity of similar scope. Clearing, external construction and landscaping within 660 feet should be done outside breeding season.

Bald Eagle Management Considerations 2 June 2017



Dillingham, Colin -FS, 09/18/17,

Plumas NF forest service standard LOP distance for eagles is ¼ mile, or 1280 feet.


The numerical distances shown in the table are the closest the activity should be conducted relative to the nest.

Category C. Timber Operations and Forestry Practices

• Avoid clear cutting or removal of overstory trees within 330 feet of the nest at any time.

• Avoid timber harvesting operations, including road construction and chain saw and yarding operations, during the breeding season within 660 feet of the nest. The distance may be decreased to 330 feet around alternate nests within a particular territory, including nests that were attended during the current breeding season but not used to raise young, after eggs laid in another nest within the territory have hatched.

• Selective thinning and other silviculture management practices designed to conserve or enhance habitat, including prescribed burning close to the nest tree, should be undertaken outside the breeding season. Precautions such as raking duff, leaves and woody debris from around the nest tree should be taken to prevent cambium mortality, crown fire or fire climbing the nest tree. If it is determined that a burn during the breeding season would be beneficial, then, to ensure that no take or disturbance will occur, these activities should be conducted only when neither adult eagles nor young are present at the nest tree (i.e., at the beginning of, or end of, the breeding season, either before the particular nest is active or after the young have fledged from that nest)outside of breeding season. Appropriate Federal and state biologists should be consulted before any prescribed burning is conducted during the breeding season.

• Avoid construction of log transfer facilities and in-water log storage areas within 330 feet of the nest.

Category D. Off-road vehicle use (including snowmobiles). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, do not operate off-road vehicles within 330 feet of the nest. In open areas, where there is increased visibility and exposure to noise, this distance should be extended to 660 feet.

Category E. Motorized Watercraft use (including jet skis/personal watercraft). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. During the breeding season, within 330 feet of the nest, (1) do not operate jet skis (personal watercraft), and (2) avoid concentrations of noisy vessels (e.g., commercial fishing boats and tour boats), except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity. Other motorized boat traffic passing within 330 feet of the nest should attempt to minimize trips and avoid stopping in the area where feasible, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to boat traffic. Buffers for airboats should be larger than 330 feet due





Comment from USFWS:There should be no prescribed burns around the nest during the breeding season at all. I suggest removing these 2 sentences.


Comment from USFWS:The buffers are for active nests. If a nest was abandoned and the pair moved to another tree for a second attempt, the buffers shift to the current nest tree. I don’t think this language is necessary.


to the increased noise they generate, combined with their speed, maneuverability, and visibility.

Category F. Non-motorized recreation and human entry (e.g., hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, birdwatching, kayaking, canoeing). No buffer is necessary around nest sites outside the breeding season. If the activity will be visible or highly audible from the nest, maintain a 330-foot buffer during the breeding season, particularly where eagles are unaccustomed to such activity.

Category G. Helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. Except for authorized biologists trained in survey techniques, avoid operating aircraft within 1,000 feet of the nest during the breeding season, except where eagles have demonstrated tolerance for such activity.

Category H. Blasting and other loud, intermittent noises. Avoid blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 1/2 mile of active nests, unless greater tolerance to the activity (or similar activity) has been demonstrated by the eagles in the nesting area. This recommendation applies to the use of fireworks classified by the Federal Department of Transportation as Class B explosives, which includes the larger fireworks that are intended for licensed public display.

[9.2.2] Implementation/Interpretation of USFWS Guidelines for the Bucks Creek Project Bald Eagle Management Plan

Categories A, B, C. There are no plans for new construction or known timber harvest plans in the Project Area. Even so, if any actions such as those outlined in categories A, B, and C above were to occur on Forest Service, Project, or other private lands near bald eagle nests, it is recommended that the most conservative buffer (i.e., 200 m/660 ft.) will be used around nests in all cases since it can be difficult to determine line of sight visibility to eagle nests in forested habitat from their perspective. Exceptions would include emergency removals of hazard trees around powerlines upon collaboration with Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW. If the Licensee is unable to maintain 660 feet for tree removal activities, the Eco Group (alternatively say USFWS, Forest Service, and CDFW) will be consulted to determine if additional measures are necessary.

Category D. It is unlikely that off-road vehicle (ORV) use could occur in most NMZs (i.e., Rainbow Point and Grizzly Forebay); however, Bucks Lake Road and access roads to the Marina Campground occur within the Marina NMZ. Snowmobiles could venture into the Marina NMZ during the early nesting season. It is recommended Tthat the most conservative buffer (i.e., 200 m/660 ft.) recommended for Category D will be used around active bald eagle nests to restrict ORV use as much as possible. If identified as a potential disturbance during nest monitoring, implementation of this recommendation might require blocking ORV access to nest areas (e.g., with large boulders) and working with agencies (via the Ecological Group), concessionaires, and land owners to comply with the BGEPA protections.





USFWS Edits


Category E. All nests used on Bucks Lake were located over 100 m/330 ft. from the shoreline; consequently no restrictions on boating use are recommended on the reservoir under Category E, especially considering the demonstrated tolerance of the resident eagles to watercraft during surveys (Section 8.3). If future eagle nests are constructed along shorelines closer than 100 m/330 ft., a buffer is still not recommended. The types of log boom barriers needed to enforce aquatic closures are difficult to maintain, unpopular with the fishing public (thus generating negative feelings towards eagle management), and unnecessary since shoreline bald eagle nests at other popular recreational reservoirs (e.g., Lake Britton in Shasta County and Bass Lake in Madera County) have been very successful without them.

Category F. Pedestrian and non-motorized traffic in the vicinity of nests (Category F) is difficult to control without drawing additional attention to nest sites (i.e., posting area closure signage). Given the very low levels of use previously documented on Rainbow Point, any preventative measures are likely unnecessary there. Since the Marina nest on Bucks Lake was still active during the 2016 surveys and to avoid disturbing the eagles, no ground visit was made to the vicinity of the Marina nest site in 2016 to assess human use in the area nearest the nest; however, no human activity close to the nest was seen from the helicopter during breeding surveys. Nevertheless, to the extent possible (e.g., through public education, and signage as a last resort) for disturbances identified during nest monitoring, pedestrian and non-motorized traffic (e.g., hiking, equestrian, bicycling) should be discouraged within 200 m/660 ft. of active bald eagle nests, instead of the 100 m/330 ft. buffer recommended, since humans on foot or visible outside vehicles are often more disturbing to eagles than when in vehicles.

Category G. The Licensees use various helipads throughout the Project Area (figures 3-1, 3-2) to access Project facilities due to their remoteness and seasonally deep snow on access roads. The Grizzly Forebay bald eagle pair nest near the Grizzly Powerhouse and Grizzly Forebay helipads. Annual breeding surveys indicated that the bald eagle pair located near Grizzly Powerhouse is habituated to helicopter use, and the PG&E pilots are informed of the bald eagle nest locations during surveys and avoidance is employed by the pilots accordingly. The evidence of nesting bald eagles near Project helipads suggest that Project operations are compatible with bald eagle nesting, including routine helicopter use in and around Grizzly Powerhouse, and therefore with this demonstrated tolerance it is unnecessary to implement this restriction for routine over-flights, patrols, or helipad use. If long periods of hovering or circling are required for operations and maintenance (O&M) or construction near nests, it is recommended that helicopters will stay 1,000 ft. (305 m) away from bald eagle nests as per the USFWS Guidelines Category G recommendations.

If future monitoring indicates a decline in the average number of eagles fledged for the Bucks project (decline in relation to the current average), the Licensee will collaborate with the Eco Group to determine if additional restrictions to helicopter flight are necessary.

Category H. Although loud noise is often considered a potential disturbance to raptors, studies have shown there is little effect on the behavior of bald eagles (e.g., Brown et al. 1999). Still, theThe USFWS Guidelines guidelines recommend avoiding blasting and other activities that produce extremely loud noises within 0.5 mi. of active nests (Category H). The Grizzly Forebay




Dillingham, Colin -FS, 09/18/17,

I agree, good thought to include language, but difficult to implement.


CDFW: What does this mean? Can we implement an actual buffer somehow?USFWS: Human foot traffic can be very disruptive to nesting eagles. We need to discuss this further before I can agree to wording.


CDFW: This was done at Union Valley two years in a row with success.USFWS: We could leave the issue of whether to post signs up to the Eco Group.USFWS: What use? Foot traffic?


CDFW: Not sure I’m comfortable with a blanket statement like this. Of the hundreds of reservoirs in the State these are two examples...USFWS agrees and suggests removing this part of the sentence.


bald eagle nest is located about 0.25 mi. from Grizzly Powerhouse, and therefore may be vulnerable to loud noise disturbance at the powerhouse according to the USFWS Guidelinesguidelines. Maintenance activities at Grizzly Powerhouse that generate loud disturbances (e.g., heavy machinery, blasting, or construction) could disturb nesting bald eagles at Grizzly Forebay should the pair nest closer to the powerhouse. Given their recent reproductive success (Section 3.2), it is likely that the Grizzly Forebay pair are habituated to routine noises emanating from the powerhouse; however, an avian biologist will be on-site to monitoring by a qualified biologist nesting eagles during activities that produce loud noises. Should either of the eagles (or nestlings) demonstrate behavior indicating disturbance during these Project activities, the biologist will have the authority to stop the activities until the agencies are consulted. during construction may be necessary to demonstrate this should the need arise.

9.3 Bald Eagle Management Recommendations The following are management recommendationsavoidance measures shall be implemented by the licensee for each bald eagle nesting territory in the Project Area:

1. For active nests during the bald eagle LOP (January 15 to August 15) follow USFWS Guidelines as interpreted in Section 10.2.2 for establishing new bald eagle NMZs of a 100 m/660 ft. radius if eagles move or colonize future nesting areas or territories in the Project Area. Note: NMZs delineated in this BEMP (figures 3-1 and 3-2) will continue to be implemented as is and as needed whenever active nesting occurs within their boundaries.

2. For active nests during the bald eagle LOP (January 15 to August 15) follow USFWS Guidelines as interpreted in Section 10.2.2 for the following activity categories:

a. Building construction with project footprint of less than 0.5 acre, construction of roads, trails, canals, power lines, and other linear utilities, alteration of shorelines or wetlands, installation of docks or moorings.

b. Building construction with project footprint of more than 0.5 acre, installation or expansion of marinas with a capacity of 6 or more boats, mining and associated activities.

c. Timber operations and forestry practices (see also #3 below).

d. Off-road vehicle use (including snowmobiles).

e. Motorized watercraft use (including jet skis/personal watercraft).

f. Non-motorized recreation and human entry (e.g., hiking, bicycling, equestrian, camping, fishing, hunting, birdwatching, kayaking, canoeing).





CDFW: These should be written as avoidance measures to be implemented by Licensee. These should not be written as recommendation that may or may not be implemented. We need solid measures to be implemented by Licensee to avoid take of eagles.USFWS: I agree with Anna’s concern here. This document is a prescription on how to manage for eagle nests. This isn’t a recommendation document.


USFWS: In the years with higher reproduction, were there blastings and other loud noises at the PH during the nesting season? If so, what month in those higher reproduction years was the noise?


CDFW: This needs to read as a minimization measure to be implemented, not a “maybe”.USFWS: We need to discuss this concept more. I have some questions and concerns.


This needs to read as a minimization measure to be implemented, not a “maybe”.


g. Helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft.

h. Blasting and other loud, intermittent noises.

3. Limit habitat alterations within the NMZs to those that will enhance bald eagle nesting habitat and that pose no hazard to eagles (e.g., timber harvest would be allowed if under a silvicultural prescription to encourage long-term regeneration of large conifers, especially pines, but only outside of the breeding season, or outside of the 660 foot buffer if within the breeding season). An evaluation of fuel loading is recommended in all NMZs, and stand thinning is recommended where necessary. Hand thinning operations would be necessary in the Bucks Lake Wilderness area if indicated.

[4.] Apply seasonal restrictions to all construction, non-routine Project O&M, and compatible habitat alterations in the NMZs. Excepting emergencies, no such activity should be allowed in the management zones within a Limited Operating Period (LOP) between January 15 and August 15. If a nesting attempt fails during a certain year, this LOP restriction may be easedlifted for the remaining of that year, but only after approval of the land or wildlife managerEcological Group.

4.[5.] Discourage new recreational development or policy changes that would alter the current use of the nesting areas by public users. No new permanent access roads or non-motorized trails should be allowed in the NMZs.

5.[6.] Bald eagle requirements for security and sensitivity to disturbance should be considered when implementing recreational facility replacement or construction planned for the Bucks Creek Project Area. Evaluate future recreational developments or improvements within bald eagle use areas (as depicted in figures 3-1, 3-2, and 5-1) and develop strategies to avoid conflicts with bald eagle foraging. In general, current levels of public use appear to be compatible with bald eagle foraging, since eagles typically were active foraging for several hours prior to peak boating use on Bucks Lake and have shown a tolerance to boating use.

[7.] Monitor use and possibly restrict foot travel along the Mill Creek Trail in the Rainbow Point NMZ should the eagles move back to the vicinity of the historical nest tree located immediately adjacent to trail. Restrict foot travel if the nest is within 330 feet of the trail, unless there is a vegetative buffer that precludes direct view of the nest. Other historical nesting locations on Rainbow Point peninsula were adequately buffered by vegetative cover from pedestrian travel along this trail.

6.[8.] Current operations of hydroelectric facilities in the Project Area appear compatible with bald eagle nesting, including routine helicopter use in and around Grizzly Powerhouse. Schedule non-emergency maintenance of power lines (e.g.,





CDFW: How far is the train from the old nest site? I think the direction should be to restrict, not “possibly” restrict.USFWS: I need to know the distances here before I can agree.


Not sure I understand this?


USFWS: See my comments from section 9.2.2 which pertains to this section as well


vegetation removal or trimming operations) outside the bald eagle LOP, if possible.

7.[9.] Managers should consider the effects of any proposed alterations to the operation or configuration of existing water facilities, and to the stocking schedule of game fish, on the availability of eagle foraging habitats and the abundance of bald eagle prey species at Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay.

8.[10.] Continue stocking hatchery salmonids into Bucks Lake.

9.[11.] Support the Shoreline Management Plan (PG&E 2007) measures to protect shoreline habitats and manage recreational use on the reservoir, including (a) “houseboats shall not be permitted on Bucks Lake. Patio boats, cabin cruisers and sailboats are acceptable on a day-use basis only and shall not be utilized for overnight lodging purposes”; and (b) “boat camping or other forms of camping on PG&E lands, which would utilize the lake or its shoreline in areas other than designated campgrounds or resorts shall not be permitted”. “The shoreline is not intended for the long term storage of boats, furniture, or any other equipment. However, boats or other items used by occupants of a nearby campground or cabin while they are residing (spending the night) at Bucks Lake may remain on the shoreline provided they are outside developed public day use or lake access areas and situated so that they do not present a nuisance or an impediment to public access. Outside marinas and other areas of permitted use, boats or personal property owned or used by parties that are not at that time residing at Bucks Lake shall be removed from the shoreline. Motorized wheeled vehicles shall be prohibited from travel between the water line of Bucks Lake and the shoreline except in those areas previously permitted or designated by the Licensees, such as permitted boat ramps.”





CDFW: Who are the “managers”?USFWS: I don’t understand this paragraph. What is it trying to say?


USFWS: See comments within section 9.2.2


SECTION 10.0

Bald Eagle MonitoringPeriodic monitoring over the lifetime of the Project license is recommended to assess bald eagle productivity and to determine BEMP effectiveness and impacts from Project operations and recreational and other human activities. The recommended level of effort and proposed schedule of bald eagle monitoring for the Bucks Creek Project are as follows:

[1.] Continue Licensee shall conduct annual productivity surveys at Bucks Lake and Grizzly Forebay in conjunction with CDFW and Forest Service during at least the following three time periods: 1) late March/early April to determine site occupancy; 2) May to confirm nesting activity; and, 3) mid- to late June to count nestlings near fledging (Jurek 1990; CDFW 2010). If new nests are discovered in the project area, they will also be surveyed annually. Surveys will typically be conducted by helicopter, unless more time is needed to establish nesting status, then a boat may be used (Jackman and Jenkins 2004). Data collected for each territory will include location of active nest, nest tree species, nest condition, occurrence and condition of any alternate nests, time of day, activity for all observed adults and young, and any human activity in the vicinity of the active nest. Data will be recorded onto CDFW Nesting Territory Survey Forms (see CDFW 2010 to view datasheet online and see #3 below).

10.[2.] Monitor human use trends periodically within and adjacent to the NMZs to identify potential conflicts in conjunction with breeding surveys. Search for evidence of intrusions into nesting territories should the nesting attempt fail during any particular year, and assess shoreline camping restrictions around the Rainbow Point NMZ and possible impacts of the Mill Creek trail. If bald eagle productivity or site fidelity is threatened by recreational use in the nesting territory, discuss restrictions with Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW.

11.[3.] Following annual productivity surveys, nest report forms will be compiled and submitted to the CDFW bald eagle database and consequently the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for all Project bald eagle nesting territories in August each year (CDFW 2010). These are provided to CDFW and copied to other appropriate land management agency personnel (i.e., Forest Service and USFWS) each year via email.

12. Surveys shall be conducted by the licensee at least once every five years at Lower Bucks Lake and along the North Fork Feather River between the mouth of Milk Ranch Creek and Bucks Creek to survey for new bald eagle territories. Surveys shall be conducted between March 25 and May 31 using aerial helicopter survey methodology.

June 2017 1 Bald Eagle Monitoring




CDFW: What about an annual productivity report at the Eco Group Meetings?USFWS: I concur with Anna. The Eco Group should get an annual report.


What does this mean? CDFW does not plan to conduct bald eagle surveys at Bucks Lake Project reservoirs...this will be the responsibility of the Licensee as required by the license.


Where? Locations and methods need to be specified. Surveys should be conducted annually at both Bucks Lake locations and Grizzly Forebay. And occasionally at Three Lakes and Lower Bucks.


These should be required measures by the license, not recommendations.


Plan does not include incidental recording of osprey productivity or incidental observations of other special-status birds (nesting, foraging, etc.).


Bald Eagle Monitoring 2 June 2017





June 2017 3 Bald Eagle Monitoring




SECTION 11.0

Bald Eagle Management Plan RevisionsThe Licensees, in consultation with the Forest Service, USFWS, and CDFW, will review, update, and/or revise the BEMP, as needed, when significant changes in existing conditions occur. Any updates to the BEMP will be prepared in coordination and consultation with these agencies. Sixty days will be allowed for the agencies to provide written comments and recommendations before the Licensees file the updated BEMP with FERC, including relevant documentation of coordination and consultation with the agencies, for FERC’s approval. If the Licensees do not adopt a particular recommendation by the agencies, the filing will include the reasons for not doing so, based on Project-specific information. The Licensees will implement the BEMP as approved by FERC.

June 2017 1 Bald Eagle Management Plan Revisions




USFWS: I recommend increasing this to 90 days, which takes into account times when disagreements occur and additional discussion can take place, in order to allow time to come to agreement, if possible.



Bald Eagle ManagementPlan Revisions 2 June 2017




SECTION 12.0

Literature CitedBrown, B.T., G.S. Mills, C. Powels, W.A. Russell, G.D. Therres, and J.J. Pottie. 1999. The

influence of weapons-testing noise on bald eagle behavior. Journal of Raptor Research 33(3): 227-232.

Buehler, D.A. 2000. Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). In The Birds of North America, No. 506 (A. Pool and F. Gill, eds.). The Birds of North American, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1979. Raptor reporting program: bald eagle sighting 1966-72. Nongame Wildlife Investigations, Project W-54-R.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1981. Raptor reporting program: bald eagle sighting 1973-80. Nongame Wildlife Investigations, Appendix.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2010. Bald eagle breeding survey instructions. Website accessed May 12, 2017: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/ FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83706&inline

Detrich, P.J. 1981. Results of the California winter bald eagle survey, 1979-81. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Office, Sacramento, CA.

Detrich, P.J. 1982. Results of the California winter bald eagle survey, 1982. National Wildlife Federation, Raptor Information Center, Washington D.C.

Detrich, P.J. 1986. The status and distribution of the bald eagle in California. M.S. Thesis, California State University, Chico.

Guinn, J.E. 2013. Generational habituation and current bald eagle populations. Human–Wildlife Interactions 7(1): 69–76.

Hunt, W.G., R.E. Jackman, J.M. Jenkins, C.G. Thelander, and R.N. Lehman. 1992a. Northward post-fledging migration of California bald eagles. Journal of Raptor Research 26:19-23.

Hunt, W.G., J.M. Jenkins, R.E. Jackman, C.G. Thelander, and A.T. Gerstell. 1992b. Foraging ecology of bald eagles on a regulated river. Journal of Raptor Research 26:243-256.

June 2017 1 Literature Cited



https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83706&inline



Jackman, R. E., and J. M. Jenkins. 2004. Protocol for evaluating bald eagle habitat and populations in California. Prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Office, Sacramento, CA by Garcia and Associates and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Website accessed July 19, 2016: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83707&inline

Jackman, R.E., W.G. Hunt, and N. Hutchins. 2007. Bald eagle foraging and reservoir management in California. Journal of Raptor Research 41(3):202-211.

Jackman, R.E., W.G. Hunt, J.M. Jenkins, and P.J. Detrich. 1999. Prey of nesting bald eagles in northern California. Journal of Raptor Research 33(2):87-96.

Jurek, R.M. 1990. California bald eagle breeding population survey and trend, 1970-1990. Unpublished Administrative Report, California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and Mammal Section. Sacramento, CA. 16 pp.

Lehman, R.N. 1979. A survey of selected habitat features of 95 bald eagle nest sites in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report No. 79-1. 23pp.

Lehman, R.N. 1983. Breeding status and management of bald eagles in California – 1981. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Branch, Administrative Report 83-1. 24 pp.

Li, S.D. and Environmental and Geospatial Technologies (ENPLAN). 1994. Technical Report. Habitat and fish species composition in the Poe reach NFFR, and fish composition in Rock Creek, Cresta and Poe reservoirs. ENPLAN, Redding, California.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 1988. Compatibility of bald eagles with Pacific Gas and Electric Company facilities and operations. Report by BioSystems Analysis, Inc. for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Department of Research and Development, San Ramon, CA.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 1998. Grizzly Creek 1998 fish population monitoring report, Grizzly Creek Rehabilitation and Monitoring Program, FERC Project 619, Article 404(c).

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2002. Bucks Creek Project, Article 103 Bald Eagle Study. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2005. Bucks Creek Project, FERC No. 619 License Article 103 summary report and environmental mitigation plans. Prepared by Pacific Gas and Electric Company on behalf of the Project 619 Licensees (PG&E and the City of Santa Clara), April 29, 2005.

Literature Cited 2 June 2017





Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2006. Bucks Creek Project, Bald Eagle Management Plan. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. (Filed February 24, 2006).

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2007. FERC Project No. 619 Bucks Lake shoreline management plan - permit requirements and restrictions, land management objectives, August 2007. Draft report by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). 2008. Rock-Creek-Cresta Project (FERC 1962) Bald Eagle Wintering and Breeding Surveys-Three-year Report. Report by Garcia and Associates to Pacific Gas and Electric Company.



Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara. 2013. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 619 Relicensing Pre-Application Document November 2013.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara. 2016a. Technical Memorandum TM-05 RTE-S2 Bald Eagle and Osprey. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Updated September 2016.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara. 2016b. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619 Draft Recreation Management Plan. December 2016.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara. 2016c. Technical Memorandum TM-02_FA-S1_Reservoir_Fish. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Updated July 2016.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara. 2016d. Technical Memorandum TM-11_FA-S5_Stream_Fish_Populations. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Updated September 2016.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the City of Santa Clara. 2016e. Technical Memorandum TM-31_RR-S1_Recreation Questionnaires. Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Updated July 2016.

June 2017 3 Literature Cited




Postupalsky, S. 1974. Raptor reproductive success: some problems with methods, criteria, and terminology. Pages 21-31 in F.N. Hamerstrom, Jr., B.E. Harrell, and R.R. Olendorff (eds.), Management of Raptors, Raptor Research Foundation, Vermillion, S.D.

Salamunovich, T. 2007. Rock Creek-Cresta Project (Ferc No. 1962) Backpack Electrofishing Surveys of Shallow-water Habitats – October 2006. Draft report by Thomas R. Payne & Associates prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Ramon, CA, February 8, 2007 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1986. Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 163pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. May 2007.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Website accessed February 20, 2016: http://www.fws.gov/midwest/midwestbird/ eaglepermits/bagepa.html

Literature Cited 4 June 2017



http://www.fws.gov/midwest/midwestbird/%E2%80%8Ceaglepermits/bagepa.html

http://www.fws.gov/midwest/midwestbird/%E2%80%8Ceaglepermits/bagepa.html

€¦ · Web view20/09/2017 · Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Bald...

Documents

Transcript of €¦ · Web view20/09/2017 · Bucks Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 619. Bald...