Bibliography on Vancouver Lake Watershed, including Burnt Bridge Creek, Flushing Channel, Lake River, and Salmon Creek |
|||||
| Entire Bibliography (.doc format) | Summary | Title Page and Acknowledgements | Timeline | ||
| Vancouver Lake | Burnt Bridge Creek | Salmon Creek | Lake River | Related Links | |
| Bibliography 1900-50 | Bibliography 1951-60 | Bibliography 1961-70 | Bibliography 1971-80 | Bibliography 1981-90 | Bibliography 1991-Present |
Bibliography of Vancouver Lake watershed, including Burnt Bridge Creek, Flushing Channel, Lake River, and Salmon Creek
A history of restoration efforts for Vancouver Lake
U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Vancouver Lake Reclamation
Study, Port of Vancouver, Clark County, Washington: Final Environmental
Impact Statement.
On November 4, 1977, EPA released to the public a draft EIS on a project proposed by the Port of Vancouver for the rehabilitation and restoration of Vancouver Lake. The EPA action requiring the EIS is the approval of grant funds pursuant to Section 314 of Public Law 92-500 for the restoration of publicly owned freshwater lakes. During the public comment period, 15 letters were received from Federal, state and local agencies, and private individuals and groups. These letters, and EPA's response, are included in this document in a new Section IV, Comments and Responses to the Draft EIS. Where required, changes have also been made to the body of the EIS. In addition, EPA held a public hearing on December 6, 1977 for the purpose of receiving oral testimony from concerned citizens. A summary of the hearing can be found on page 87.
During the response period, significant concerns were raised by the Department of the Interior, Corps of Engineers and State of Washington Department of Game and Fisheries. EPA shares many of their concerns and has used the time since receipt of their comments to explore with the agencies and the Port of Vancouver ways of resolving those concerns. During the various meetings and discussions with these agencies, it became apparent that many of the critical concerns can not be addressed without preparation of a detailed operational plan. As a result, EPA has decided that the most appropriate approach in this case would be to approve the project with grant conditions. These grant conditions, some of which follow this Preface, contain decisions which will provide the basis for development of an operational plan. it is expected that during the preparation of the operational plan, the final grant conditions governing construction and operation of this project will be developed. No construction funds will be released until EPA approves the operational plan. The operational plan will address a variety of issues associated with the actual dredging and disposal procedures, including mitigation measures. it will also evaluate the design and operation of the proposed flushing channel and other issues raised by various Federal and State agencies. Permits, easements or other rights-of-way necessary for construction of this project will also be obtained while the operational plan is under preparation. This will ensure that any special conditions required by such permits will be integrated into the development of the operational plan.
Upon approval of the operational plan, EPA will make available to the Port of Vancouver the Federal share of the funds needed to construct the project to the level of 9 million cubic yards (mcy) of dredging. Nine mcy is within alternative 2b, 8-12 mcy, discussed in the EIS. EPA's decision is based on the water quality benefits which could be expected to occur from implementing this alternative. It cannot be shown at this time that dredging more than 9 mcy would provide significant additional water quality benefits that would outweigh the dredging and spoil disposal impacts of a larger project.
The following discussion summarizes the major concerns of EPA and the public and private entities which commented on the EIS. Certain of the decisions discussed in the following paragraphs will be incorporated into the grant conditions required for approval of this project. Those grant conditions pertinent to this discussion are listed at the end of the Preface.
One of the major issues raised is the protection of wetland habitat areas. At the time of the Draft EIS, EPA had not completed its Wetland Habitat Evaluation study. A summary of this study is included in Appendix A of this document and is available for review at Region X, EPA offices in Seattle, Washington and EPA's Oregon Operations Office, 522 SW 5th Ave, Yeon Bldg., 2nd Floor, Portland, Oregon 97204. As a result of this study and consultation with other agencies, EPA has decided to eliminate Site Va as a disposal site. The extent to which Site Vb could be utilized should be evaluated during the operational plan. In addition, at this time, Site VI could only be utilized to the extent possible under Alternative 7 of the Corps of Engineers proposed diking project. Alternative 7 would not cut off the Mulligan Slough area, nor would it encroach upon the habitat of the Columbia River Willow or Wapato, two species that are on the State list of rare, endangered or threatened species (Willow) or the Smithsonian list of rare, endangered or threatened species (Wapato). The Corps of Engineers is currently preparing an EIS on this project. Final decisions on Site VI will take into consideration the Corps EIS. Mulligan Slough will not be utilized as a spoil site in EPA's project, nor will the islands at the north end of the lake be disturbed. EPA will also ensure that all practicable measures are taken to protect these areas from construction related impacts. Under no conditions will areas containing rare or endangered habitat species be used for dredge disposal purposes. In general, dredge spoils will be disposed of in such a manner, location and depth as to result in minimum loss to valuable habitat and to provide maximum opportunity for habitat mitigation and restoration of the aesthetic quality of the area.
Another major issue raised by various agencies concern the impact of the flushing channel on the anadromous fishery resource. There is insufficient data at this time to determine the impacts as the design of the flushing channel will be part of the operational plan. The fisheries agencies have agreed to work with EPA and the Port of Vancouver to determine the most appropriate design and mitigation measures for this structure.
Several comments were received concerning the ties between the 208 Water Quality Management Plan for Burnt Bridge Creek Basin and this project. Some of the expected water quality benefits will result from the implementation of parts of that management plan. Therefore, EPA has decided that no construction funds for the rehabilitation project will be expended unto those parts of the 208 Burnt Bridge Creek Basin plan necessary to improve water quality in Vancouver Lake are implemented.
EPA believes that the unresolved issues can be resolved and that the approach discussed above ensures that environmental impacts will be minimized or mitigated. Therefore, the final EIS recommends approval of the project subject to the grant conditions outlined above.
Files Available for Document:
Last modified:April 17, 2008
Please contact: StreamNet Library if
you have any questions about this page.