WSP04817 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M 1'0 r,;. ,~ such as crop rotations or increasing housing development in our rural area. DISCUSSION Evaluation of the planned wildlife practices in the 255 salinity and 9 CWHEP contracts and of the 21.1 salinity and 6 CWHEP contracts evaluated using HEP indicates replacement of wildlife habitat values forgone will be achieved. Planned projections show a loss in pheasant values, but evaluation of completed contracts show that actually a gain in pheasant values is taking place. A small loss in yellow warbler and marsh wren values is showing up on completed contracts, however this is expected to change as more contracts which contain wildlife practices and management are completed. The 6 CWHEP contracts cover typed are included in the Salinity Program mitigation efforts. However, this does not reflect the benefits this program has provided from the contracts that have not been evaluated through the HEP process. CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that contracts with wildlife practices be reevaluated through HEP and AREM 15 to 20 years following completion. The applied values calculated at the time of contract completion can then be compared to what they are over the life span of the wildlife practices. We will continue to encourage establishment of grass/legume plantings to improve upland habitat in order to offset. the projected habitat loss indicated from the pheasant model and the guild of species it represents. In addition, we will encourage the establishment of cattail wetlands and WOOdy/willow areas to ensure losses do not occur for the marsh wren and yellow warbler as might be suggested by the completed contracts. Priority will be placed on the creation of new wetlands over enhancement of existing wetlands unless the existing wetlands are in poor condition. opportunities for replacement of wildlife values forgone in the salinity project area should be allowed through the development of wildlife only contracts. 20