Or. Admin. Code § 350-082-0670 - Special Management Areas Natural Resource Review Criteria
(1) All new
development and uses, as described in a site plan prepared by the applicant,
shall be evaluated using the following guidelines to ensure that natural
resources are protected from adverse effects. Cumulative effects analysis is
not required for expedited review uses or development. Comments from state and
federal agencies shall be carefully considered.
(2) Water Resources (Wetlands, Streams,
Ponds, Lakes, and Riparian Areas)
(a) All
Water Resources shall, in part, be protected by establishing undisturbed buffer
zones as specified in subsections (2)(a)(B)(i) and (ii) below. These buffer
zones are measured horizontally from a wetland, stream, lake, or pond boundary
as defined below.
(A) All buffer zones shall
be retained undisturbed and in their natural condition, except as permitted
with a mitigation plan.
(B) Buffer
zones shall be measured outward from the bank full flow boundary for streams,
the high water mark for ponds and lakes, the normal pool elevation for the
Columbia River, and the wetland delineation boundary for wetlands on a
horizontal scale that is perpendicular to the wetlands, stream, pond or lake
boundary. On the main stem of the Columbia River above Bonneville Dam, buffer
zones shall be measured landward from the normal pool elevation of the Columbia
River. The following buffer zone widths shall be required:
(i) A minimum 200-foot buffer on each
wetland, pond, lake, and each bank of a perennial or fish bearing stream, some
of which can be intermittent.
(ii)
A 50-foot buffer zone along each bank of intermittent (including ephemeral),
non-fish bearing streams.
(iii)
Maintenance, repair, reconstruction and realignment of roads and railroads
within their rights-of-way shall be exempted from the wetlands and riparian
guidelines upon demonstration of all of the following:
(I) The wetland within the right-of-way is a
drainage ditch not part of a larger wetland outside of the
right-of-way;
(II) The wetland is
not critical habitat; and
(III)
Proposed activities within the right-of-way would not adversely affect a
wetland adjacent to the right-of-way.
(C) The buffer width shall be increased for
the following:
(i) When the channel migration
zone exceeds the recommended buffer width, the buffer width shall extend to the
outer edge of the channel migration zone;
(ii) When the frequently flooded area exceeds
the recommended riparian buffer zone width, the buffer width shall be extended
to the outer edge of the frequently flooded area; or
(iii) When an erosion or landslide hazard
area exceeds the recommended width of the buffer, the buffer width shall be
extended to include the hazard area.
(D) Buffer zones can be reconfigured if a
project applicant demonstrates the integrity and function of the buffer zones
is maintained, the total buffer area on the development proposal is not
decreased, the width reduction shall not occur within another buffer, and the
buffer zone width is not reduced more than 50% at any particular location. Such
features as intervening topography, vegetation, human-made features, natural
plant or wildlife habitat boundaries, and flood plain characteristics could be
considered.
(E) Requests to
reconfigure buffer zones shall be considered if an appropriate professional
(botanist, plant ecologist, wildlife biologist, or hydrologist), hired by the
project applicant identifies the precise location of the rare wildlife or plant
or water resource, describes the biology of the rare wildlife or plant or
hydrologic condition of the water resource, and demonstrates that the proposed
use will not have any negative effects, either direct or indirect, on the
affected wildlife or plant and their surrounding habitat that is vital to their
long-term survival or water resource and its long term function.
(F) The Executive Director shall submit all
requests to re-configure rare wildlife or plant or water resource buffers to
the Forest Service and the appropriate state agencies for review. All written
comments shall be included in the project file. Based on the comments from the
state and federal agencies, the Executive Director will make a final decision
on whether the reconfigured buffer zones are justified. If the final decision
contradicts the comments submitted by the federal and state agencies, the
Executive Director shall justify how the opposing conclusion was
reached.
(b) When a
buffer zone is disturbed by a new use, it shall be replanted with only native
plant species of the Columbia River Gorge.
(c) The applicant shall be responsible for
identifying all water resources and their appropriate buffers.
(d) Wetlands Boundaries shall be delineated
using the following:
(A) The approximate
location and extent of wetlands in the National Scenic Area is shown on the
National Wetlands Inventory (U. S. Department of the Interior). In addition,
the list of hydric soils and the soil survey maps shall be used as an indicator
of wetlands.
(B) Some wetlands may
not be shown on the wetlands inventory or soil survey maps. Wetlands that are
discovered by the local planning staff during an inspection of a potential
project site shall be delineated and protected.
(C) The project applicant shall be
responsible for determining the exact location of a wetlands boundary. Wetlands
boundaries shall be delineated using the procedures specified in the Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (on-line edition) and applicable Regional
Supplements.
(D) All wetlands
delineations shall be conducted by a professional who has been trained to use
the federal delineation procedures.
(e) Stream, pond, and lake boundaries shall
be delineated using the bank full flow boundary for streams and the high water
mark for ponds and lakes. The project applicant shall be responsible for
determining the exact location of the appropriate boundary for the water
resource.
(f) The Executive
Director may verify the accuracy of, and render adjustments to, a bank full
flow, high water mark, normal pool elevation (for the Columbia River), or
wetland boundary delineation. If the adjusted boundary is contested by the
project applicant, the Executive Director shall obtain professional services,
at the project applicant's expense, or ask for technical assistance from the
Forest Service to render a final delineation.
(g) Buffer zones shall be undisturbed unless
the following criteria have been satisfied:
(A) The proposed use must have no practicable
alternative as determined by
350-082-0680.
(B) Those portions of a proposed use that
have a practicable alternative will not be located in water resources or their
buffer zone.
(C) Filling and
draining of wetlands shall be prohibited with exceptions related to public
safety or restoration or enhancement activities as permitted when all of the
following criteria have been met:
(i) A
documented public safety hazard exists or a restoration or enhancement project
exists that would benefit the public and is corrected or achieved only by
impacting the wetland in question;
(ii) Impacts to the wetland must be the last
possible documented alternative in fixing the public safety concern or
completing the restoration or enhancement project; and
(iii) The proposed project minimizes the
impacts to the wetland.
(D) Unavoidable impacts to wetlands and
aquatic and riparian areas and their buffer zones shall be offset by deliberate
restoration and enhancement or creation (wetlands only) measures as required by
the completion of a SMA mitigation plan.
(h) Proposed uses and development within
water resources and their buffer zones shall be evaluated for cumulative
effects to natural resources and cumulative effects that are adverse shall be
prohibited.
(3) Wildlife
and Plants
(a) Protection of wildlife and
plant areas and sites shall begin when proposed new development or uses are
within 1000 feet of a rare wildlife or rare plant area or site. Rare wildlife
areas are those areas depicted in wildlife and plant data and all Priority
Habitats and endemic plant species listed in
350-082-0690 tables 1 and 2. The
approximate locations of rare wildlife and plant areas and sites are shown in
wildlife and rare plant data.
(b)
The Executive Director shall submit site plans (of uses that are proposed
within 1,000 feet of a rare wildlife or rare plant area or site) for review to
the Forest Service and the appropriate state agencies (Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife or the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for
wildlife issues and by the Oregon Biodiversity Information Center or Washington
Natural Heritage Program for plant issues).
(c) The Forest Service wildlife biologists
and botanists, in consultation with the appropriate state biologists, shall
review the site plan and their field survey records. They shall:
(A) Identify and verify the precise location
of the wildlife or plant area or site,
(B) Determine if a field survey will be
required,
(C) Determine, based on
the biology and habitat requirements of the affected wildlife or plant species,
if the proposed use would compromise the integrity and function of or result in
adverse effects (including cumulative effects) to the wildlife and plant area
or site. This would include considering the time of year when wildlife and
plant species are sensitive to disturbance, such as nesting, rearing seasons,
or flowering season, and,
(D)
Delineate the undisturbed 200-foot buffer on the site plan for rare plants or
the appropriate buffer for rare wildlife areas or sites, including nesting,
roosting, and perching sites.
(i) Buffer zones
can be reconfigured if a project applicant demonstrates the integrity and
function of the buffer zones is maintained, the total buffer area on the
development proposal is not decreased, the width reduction shall not occur
within another buffer, and the buffer zone width is not reduced more than 50%
at any particular location. Such features as intervening topography,
vegetation, man-made features, natural plant or wildlife habitat boundaries,
and flood plain characteristics could be considered.
(ii) Requests to reduce buffer zones shall be
considered if an appropriate professional (botanist, plant ecologist, wildlife
biologist, or hydrologist), hired by the project applicant, identifies the
precise location of the rare wildlife or plant or water resource describes the
biology of the rare wildlife or plant or hydrologic condition of the water
resource, and demonstrates that the proposed use will not have any negative
effects, either direct or indirect, on the affected wildlife or plant and their
surrounding habitat that is vital to their long-term survival or to the water
resource and its long term function.
(iii) The Executive Director shall submit all
requests to re-configure rare wildlife or plant or water resource buffers to
the Forest Service and the appropriate state agencies for review. All written
comments shall be included in the record of application and based on the
comments from the state and federal agencies, the Executive Director will make
a final decision on whether the reduced buffer zone is justified. If the final
decision contradicts the comments submitted by the federal and state agencies,
the Executive Director shall justify how the opposing conclusion was
reached
(d)
The Executive Director, in consultation with the state and federal wildlife
biologists and botanists, shall use the following criteria in reviewing and
evaluating the site plan to ensure that the proposed development or uses do not
compromise the integrity and function of or result in adverse effects to the
wildlife and plant area or site:
(A) Published
guidelines regarding the protection and management of the affected wildlife or
plant species. Examples include: the Oregon Department of Forestry management
guidelines for osprey and great blue heron and the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife guidelines for a variety of species, including the western
pond turtle, the peregrine falcon, and the Larch Mountain salamander.
(B) Physical characteristics of the subject
parcel and vicinity, including topography and vegetation.
(C) Historic, current, and proposed uses in
the vicinity of the rare wildlife or plant area or site.
(D) Existing condition of the wildlife or
plant area or site and the surrounding habitat of the area or site.
(E) In areas of winter range, habitat
components, such as forage, and thermal cover, important to the viability of
the wildlife must be maintained or, if impacts are to occur, enhancement must
mitigate the impacts so as to maintain overall values and function of winter
range.
(F) The site plan is
consistent with published guidance documents such as "Oregon Guidelines for
Timing of In-Water Work to Protect Fish and Wildlife Resources" (Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008, or most recent version) and Washington's
Aquatic Habitat Guidelines (2002, or most recent version).
(G) The site plan activities coincide with
periods when fish and wildlife are least sensitive to disturbance. These would
include, among others, nesting and brooding periods (from nest building to
fledgling of young) and those periods specified.
(H) The site plan illustrates that new
development and uses, including bridges, culverts, and utility corridors, shall
not interfere with fish and wildlife passage.
(I) Maintain, protect, and enhance the
integrity and function of Priority Habitats as listed in
350-082-0690 Table 1 -Priority
Habitats. This includes maintaining structural, species, and age diversity,
maintaining connectivity within and between plant communities, and ensuring
that cumulative impacts are considered in documenting integrity and
function.
(e) The
wildlife and plant protection process may conclude if the Executive Director,
in consultation with the Forest Service and state wildlife agency or heritage
program, determines the rare wildlife area or site is not active, the proposed
use is not within the buffer zones and would not compromise the integrity of
the wildlife or plant area or site, or the proposed use is within the buffer
and could be easily moved out of the buffer by simply modifying the project
proposal (site plan modifications). If the project applicant accepts these
recommendations, the Executive Director shall incorporate them into the final
decision and the wildlife and plant protection process may conclude.
(f) If the above measures fail to eliminate
the adverse effects, the proposed project shall be prohibited, unless the
project applicant can meet the practicable alternative test in
350-082-0680 and prepare a
mitigation plan to offset the adverse effects by deliberate restoration and
enhancement.
(g) The Executive
Director shall submit a copy of all field surveys (if completed) and mitigation
plans to the Forest Service and appropriate state agencies. The Executive
Director shall include all comments in the record of application and address
any written comments submitted by the state and federal wildlife agency and
heritage programs in the Executive Director's decision.
(h) Based on the comments from the state and
federal wildlife agency and heritage program, the Executive Director shall make
a final decision on whether the proposed use would be consistent with the
wildlife and plant policies and guidelines. If the final decision contradicts
the comments submitted by the state and federal wildlife agency and heritage
program, the Executive Director shall justify how the opposing conclusion was
reached.
(i) The Executive Director
shall require the project applicant to revise the mitigation plan as necessary
to ensure that the proposed use would not adversely affect a rare wildlife or
plant area or site.
(j) Proposed
uses and developments within 1,000 feet of rare wildlife areas and sites or
within 1,000 feet of rare plants shall be evaluated for cumulative effects to
natural resources and cumulative effects that are adverse shall be
prohibited.
(4) Soil
Productivity. Soil productivity shall be protected using the following
guidelines:
(a) The application shall include
a description or illustration showing the mitigation measures to control soil
erosion and stream sedimentation.
(b) New developments and land uses shall
control all soil movement within the area shown on the site plan.
(c) The soil area disturbed by new
development or land uses, except for new cultivation, shall not exceed 15
percent of the project area.
(d)
Within one year of project completion, 80 percent of the project area with
surface disturbance shall be established with effective native ground cover
species or other soil-stabilizing methods to prevent soil erosion until the
area has 80 percent vegetative cover.
(5) SMA Mitigation Plans
(a) Mitigation Plan shall be prepared when:
(A) The proposed development or use is within
a buffer zone (water resources, or wildlife or plant areas or sites).
(B) There is no practicable alternative as
determined by 350-082-0680.
(b) In all cases, mitigation plans
are the responsibility of the applicant and shall be prepared by an appropriate
professional (botanist or ecologist for plant sites, a wildlife or fish
biologist for wildlife or fish sites, and a qualified professional for water
resource sites).
(c) The primary
purpose of this information is to provide a basis for the project applicant to
redesign the proposed use in a manner that protects the identified water
resources, and rare wildlife or plant areas and sites, that maximizes their
development options, and that mitigates, through restoration, enhancement,
creation, and replacement measures, impacts to the water resources and wildlife
and plant area or site and buffer zones.
(d) The applicant shall submit the mitigation
plan to the Executive Director. The Executive Director shall submit a copy of
the mitigation plan to the Forest Service, and appropriate state agencies. If
the final decision contradicts the comments submitted by the state and federal
wildlife agency and heritage program, the Executive Director shall justify how
the opposite conclusion was reached.
(e) A project applicant shall demonstrate
sufficient fiscal, technical, and administrative competence to successfully
execute a mitigation plan involving wetland creation.
(f) Mitigation plans shall include maps,
photographs, and text. The text shall:
(A)
Describe the biology and function of the protected resources (e.g., wildlife or
plant species, or wetland) that will be affected by a proposed use. An
ecological assessment of the protected resource and the condition of the
resource that will result after restoration shall be required. Reference
published protection and management guidelines.
(B) Describe the physical characteristics of
the subject parcel, past, present, and future uses, and the past, present, and
future potential impacts to the protected resources. Include the size, scope,
configuration, or density of new uses being proposed within the buffer
zone.
(C) Explain the techniques
that will be used to protect the protected resources and their surrounding
habitat that will not be altered (for example, delineation of core habitat of
the rare wildlife or plant species and key components that are essential to
maintain the long-term use and integrity of the wildlife or plant area or
site).
(D) Show how restoration,
enhancement, and creation measures will be applied to ensure that the proposed
use results in minimum feasible impacts to protected resources, their buffer
zones, and associated habitats.
(E)
Show how the proposed restoration, enhancement, or creation mitigation measures
are NOT alternatives to avoidance. A proposed development or land use must
first avoid a protected resource, and only if this is not possible should
restoration, enhancement, or creation be considered as mitigation. In reviewing
mitigation plans, the Executive Director, appropriate state agencies, and
Forest Service shall critically examine all proposals to ensure that they are
indeed last resort options.
(g) At a minimum, a project applicant shall
provide to the Executive Director a progress report every three years until all
conditions are met. The progress report shall document milestones, successes,
problems, and contingency actions. Photographic monitoring stations shall be
established and photographs shall be used to monitor all mitigation
progress.
(h) A final monitoring
report shall be submitted to the Executive Director for review upon completion
of the restoration, enhancement, created, or replacement activity. This
monitoring report shall document successes, problems encountered, resource
recovery, status of any rare wildlife or plant species and shall demonstrate
the success of restoration or enhancement actions. The Executive Director shall
submit copies of the monitoring report to the Forest Service; which shall offer
technical assistance to the Executive Director in helping to evaluate the
completion of the mitigation plan. In instances where restoration and
enhancement efforts have failed, the monitoring process shall be extended until
the applicant satisfies the restoration and enhancement guidelines.
(i) Mitigation measures to offset impacts to
resources and buffers shall result in no net loss of water quality; natural
drainage; fish, wildlife, and plant habitat; and water resources by addressing
the following:
(A) Restoration and enhancement
efforts shall be completed no later than one year after the protected resource
or buffer zone has been altered or as soon thereafter as is
practicable.
(B) All natural
vegetation within the buffer zone shall be retained to the greatest extent
practicable. Appropriate protection and maintenance techniques shall be
applied, such as fencing, conservation buffers, livestock management, and
noxious weed control. Within five years, at least 75 percent of the replacement
vegetation shall survive. All plantings shall be with native plant species that
replicate the original vegetation community.
(C) Habitat that will be affected by either
temporary or permanent uses shall be rehabilitated to a natural condition.
Habitat shall be replicated in composition, structure, and function, including
tree, shrub and herbaceous species, snags, pool-riffle ratios, substrata, and
structures, such as large woody debris and boulders.
(D) If no net loss is not feasible or
practical because of technical constraints, a protected resource of equal or
greater benefit may be substituted, provided that no net loss of protected
resource functions occurs and provided the Executive Director, in consultation
with the appropriate state and federal agencies, determines that such
substitution is justified.
(E) Rare
plants that will be altered shall be transplanted or replaced, to the maximum
extent practicable. Replacement is used here to mean the establishment of a
particular plant species in areas of suitable habitat not affected by new uses.
Replacement may be accomplished by seeds, cuttings, or other appropriate
methods. Replacement shall occur as close to the original plant site as
practicable. The project applicant shall ensure that at least 75 percent of the
replacement plants survive three years after the date they are
planted.
(F) Nonstructural controls
and natural processes shall be used to the greatest extent practicable.
(i) Bridges, roads, pipeline and utility
corridors, and other water crossings shall be minimized and should serve
multiple purposes and properties.
(ii) Stream channels shall not be placed in
culverts unless absolutely necessary for property access. Bridges are preferred
for water crossings to reduce disruption to hydrologic and biologic functions.
Culverts shall only be permitted if there are no practicable alternatives as
demonstrated by 350-082-0680.
(iii) Fish passage shall be protected from
obstruction.
(iv) Restoration of
fish passage should occur wherever possible.
(v) Show location and nature of temporary and
permanent control measures that shall be applied to minimize erosion and
sedimentation when riparian areas are disturbed, including slope netting, berms
and ditches, tree protection, sediment barriers, infiltration systems, and
culverts.
(vi) Groundwater and
surface water quality will not be degraded by the proposed use. Natural
hydrologic conditions shall be maintained, restored, or enhanced in such a
manner that replicates natural conditions, including current patterns
(circulation, velocity, volume, and normal water fluctuation), natural stream
channel and shoreline dimensions and materials, including slope, depth, width,
length, cross-sectional profile, and gradient.
(vii) Those portions of a proposed use that
are not water-dependent or that have a practicable alternative shall be located
outside of stream, pond, and lake buffer zones.
(viii) Streambank and shoreline stability
shall be maintained or restored with natural revegetation.
(ix) The size of restored, enhanced, and
created wetlands shall equal or exceed the following ratios. The first number
specifies the required acreage of replacement wetlands, and the second number
specifies the acreage of wetlands altered.
(I) Restoration: 2:1
(II) Creation: 3:1
(III) Enhancement: 4:1
(G) Wetland creation mitigation
shall be deemed complete when the wetland is self-functioning for five
consecutive years. Self-functioning is defined by the expected function of the
wetland as written in the mitigation plan. The monitoring report shall be
submitted to the Executive Director to ensure compliance. The Forest Service,
in consultation with appropriate state agencies, shall extend technical
assistance to the Executive Director to help evaluate such reports and any
subsequent activities associated with compliance.
(H) Wetland restoration or enhancement can be
mitigated successfully by donating appropriate funds to a non-profit wetland
conservancy or land trust with explicit instructions that those funds are to be
used specifically to purchase protection easements or fee title protection of
appropriate wetlands acreage in or adjacent to the Columbia River Gorge meeting
the ratios given above in subsection (F)(ix) above. These transactions shall be
explained in detail in the Mitigation Plan and shall be fully monitored and
documented in the monitoring report.
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.