The URL can be used to link to this page

1994-24344-Ordinance No. 94-004 Recorded 6/16/199494-24344 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES REVIEWED 13W U3 LEGAL COUNSEL COUNTY, OREGON *An Ordinance Amending *The Deschutes County P11 3: 20 *Comprehensive Plan Resource *Element To Adopt ESEE Conflict *Analysis and Decisions For *Sensitive Bird and Mammal Sites* *And Declaring An Emergency. * 0135-2267 NO. 94-004 WHEREAS, the Land Conservation and Development Commission issued a Remand Order 93 -RA -883, requiring Deschutes County to amend the County Comprehensive Plan Resource Element, "Fish and Wildlife Inventories Conflict ESEE Analyses" as adopted by Ordinance 92-041 to adopt site specific economic, social, environmental and energy consequence analysis (ESEE) for the inventoried sensitive bird and mammal habitat sites; and WHEREAS, public hearings have been held in conformance with state law before the Deschutes County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners for Deschutes County; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has considered the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the public; now therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO RESOURCE ELEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - SENSITIVE BIRDS. That the "Habitat Areas For Sensitive Birds" section (p. 41 - 55) of the Fish and Wildlife Element of of the Resource Element of PL -20, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance 92-041, is repealed and replaced with the inventories and ESEE analyses contained in Exhibit 111". Section 2. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO RESOURCE ELEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BATS. That the "Habitat Areas For Townsend's Big -eared Bats" section (p. 69 - 72) of the Fish and Wildlife Element of of the Resource Element of PL -20, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance 92-041 and amended by Ordinance 94-003, is further amended as shown in Exhibit 11211. KEY CHEP 1 - ORDINANCE - NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) �,i' 7 1r�' 0135-2268 Section 3. ADOPTION OF ESEEs FOR TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BATS. That the "Habitat Areas For Townsend's Big -eared Bats" section of the Fish and Wildlife Element of the Resource Element of PL -20, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance 92-041 and amended by Ordinance 94-003, is further amended by adding the ESEE analysis and decision for the Stookey Ranch and Skylight Cave Townsend's big -eared bat sites contained in Exhibit 113". Section 4. ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO RESOURCE ELEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - UPLAND GAME BIRDS AND SAGE GROUSE. That the "Upland Game Bird Habitat" section (p. 60 - 65) of the Fish and Wildlife Element of the Resource Element of PL -20, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance 92-041 is hereby repealed and replaced with the inventory and ESEE analysis for upland game bird habitat and the inventory and ESEE analyses for sage grouse as shown in Exhibit 114". Section 5. FINDINGS. The Board of County Commissioners adopts as its findings and conclusions in support of this ordinance the findings attached as Exhibit 115" by this reference incorporated herein. Section 6. SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance or any exhibit thereto is adjudged to be invalid by a court or competent jurisdiction that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or exhibit thereto. Section 7. CODIFICATION. County Legal Counsel shall have the authority to format the provisions contained herein in a manner that will integrate them into the County Code consistent with the County Legal Counsel form and style for ordinance codification. Such codification shall include the authority to make format changes, to make changes in numbering systems and to make such numbering changes consistent with interrelated code sections. In addition, as part of codification of these ordinances, County Legal Counsel may insert appropriate legislative history reference. Any legislative history references included herein are not adopted as part of the substance of this ordinance, but are included for administrative convenience and as a reference. They may be changed to correct errors and to conform to proper style without action of the Board of County Commissioners. Section 8. REPEAL OF ORDINANCES AS AFFECTING EXISTING LIABILITIES. The repeal, express or implied, of any ordinance, ordinance provision, code section, or any map or any line on a map incorporated therein by reference, by this amending ordinance shall not release or extinguish any duty, condition, penalty, forfeiture, or liability previously incurred or that may hereafter be incurred under such ordinance, unless a provision of this amending ordinance 2 - ORDINANCE - NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2269 shall so expressly provide, and such ordinance repealed shall be treated as still remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such duty, condition, penalty, forfeiture, or liability, and for the purpose of authorizing the prosecution, conviction and punishment of the person or persons who previously violated the repealed ordinance. Section 9. EMERGENCY. for the immediate preservation and safety, an emergency is Ordinance takes effect on its DATED this _1-5 day of This ordinance being necessary of the public peace, health declared to exist, and this , Chair / L�V Told THROO , Commissioner OF ATT T: Recording secretary BARRY H. SLAUGHTER, Commissioner 3 - ORDINANCE - NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) EXHIBIT "1" - ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 0135-2270 HABITAT AREAS FOR SENSITIVE BIRDS Description: The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified nest sites for northern bald eagle, osprey, golden eagle, prairie falcon, great grey owl, and great blue heron rookeries as sensitive bird habitat sites. Inventory: The sensitive bird sites on federal land and sites deleted from the inventory adopted by Ordinance 92-041 are identified by species in Tables 5 - 11. The data has been provided by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Oregon Department of Forestry, Oregon State University Cooperative Wilalife Research Unit and the Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base. The sensitive bird sites on private land, non-federal land or with sensitive habitat areas that extend on to non-federal are listed on Tables 12 - 17. Site specific ESEE analyses and decisions follow for each of these sites. The area required around each nest site needed to protect the nest from conflict varies between species. This area is called the "sensitive habitat area." The minimum sensitive habitat area required for protection of nest sites has been identified by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in their management guidelines for protecting colony nesting birds, osprey, eagles and raptor nests. The sensitive habitat area recommended for eagle, osprey and prairie falcon nests is a radius of 1320 feet from the nest site. The recommended radius from .a great blue heron rookery is 300 feet and 900 feet from a great gray owl nest site. The county recognizes these distances to establish the boundaries for a "sensitive habitat area" around inventoried nest or rookery sites. Location, Quality and Quantity: The location of the sites on federal land is provided on the tables for each species. The location for sites on private land or with sensitive habitat areas that extend onto non- federal land is identified in the site specific ESEE analysis and decision for that site and is also shown on a countywide map titled "Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone" (adopted by Ordinance 94-021). The quality of the habitat sites is good as the sites are currently being used for nesting purposes. However, the 1 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 135'-22'71 Deschutes County/City of Bend River Study (p. 6-9) notes that the number of active nest sites for golden eagles has decreased 75 percent in the 20 year observation period 1965 - 1984. This decrease is attributed to the increase in land development and human activities. The Deschutes County/City of Bend River Study, Chapter 6 provides detailed information on the habitat needs of the sensitive bird species. Program to Achieve Goal 5: The sites where the nest and the entire sensitive habitat area are located on federal land are not analyzed further in the Goal 5 process as they protected through the management and planning process for federal lands. The county does not regulate land use on federal land. These federal sites are classified as 112A" Goal 5 resources in accordance with OAR 660-16-005(1) and are managed to preserve their original character by either the Bureau of Land Management or the Deschutes National Forest. The ESEE analysis and decision to achieve Goal 5 for each sensitive bird site located on Non -Federal land, or with a non-federal land sensitive habitat area follows the inventory tables for the federal sensitive bird sites. 2 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) TABLE 5 0135-2272 BALD EAGLE NEST SITE INVENTORY NEST SITES ON FEDERAL LAND 112A" Goal 5 Resource Township Range Section Quarter General Location 18S 08E 32 NE Elk Lake 18S 08E 33 NE Hosmer Lake 19S 08E 27 SW Lava Lakes - W 19S 08E 27 SE Lava Lakes - E 20S 07E 35 SW Lemish Butte 20S 07E 35 S 1/2 Lemish Butte 20S 08E 08 SE Benchmark Bu - W 20S 08E 09 SW Benchmark Bu - SE 20S 08E 09 SW Benchmark Bu - NE 20S 08E 33 SE Crane Pr Res NE -S 20S 08E 33 SE Crane Pr Res NE -NE 20S 08E 33 SE Crane Pr Res NE 20S 08E 33 NE Crane Pr Res NE - NW 21S 07E 01 SE Crane Pr Res W 21S 07E 01 SW Crane Pr Res W 21S 07E 01 SE Crane Pr Res W 21S 07E 01 NW Quinn River 21S 08E 05 SE Crane Pr Res E 21S 08E 04 NW Crane Pr Res E 21S 08E 04 W 1/2 Crane Pr Res E - SE 21S 08E 04 W 1/2 Crane Pr Res E - NW 21S 08E 07 SE Crane Pr Res S 21S 08E 08 SW Crane Pr Res S 21S 08E 08 SW Crane Pr Res S 21S 08E 20 SE Browns Mountain 21S 08E 32 NE Browns Creek - W 21S 08E 32 NE Browns Creek -E 21S 08E 34 SW Wickiup Res N 21S 08E 34 SE Wickiup Res N 21S 08E 34 SE Wickiup Res N 21S 08E 34 SE Wickiup Res N 21S 08E 34 SE Wickiup Res N 21S 08E 34 SE Wickiup Res N 21S 09E 13 NE Tetherow Mdw 21S 09E 34 NE Deschutes R Ox 21S 13E 19 SE East Lake E 21S 13E 19 SW East Lake SW 21S 13E 19 S 1/2 East Lake SE 22S 07E 26 SW Davis Lake NW 22E 07E 26 SW Davis Lake NW 22E 07E 34 SW Davis Lake W - W 22S 07E 34 SW Davis Lake W - E 22S 08E 07 NE Davis Creek - S 22S 08E 06 SE Davis Creek - N 22S 08E 06 SE Davis Creek 3 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0.35-22'73 Township Range Section Quarter General Location 22S 08E 06 SE Davis Creek - E 22S 08E 15 SW Wickiup Res W - W 22S 08E 15 SE Wickiup Res W - E 22S 08E 23 NE Wickiup Res S - E 22S 08E 23 N 1/2 Wickiup Res S - S 22S 08E 23 NW Wickiup Res S - W 22S 08E 23 NW Wickiup Res S - N 22S 08E 25 NE Round Swamp - E 22S 08E 24 S 1/2 Round Swamp - NE 22S 08E 25 NE Round Swamp - S 22S 08E 24 SE Round Swamp - N 22S 09E 06 SE Wickiup Dam - E 22S 09E 20 SW Eaton Butte 22S 09E 20 SW Eaton Butte 22S 09E 20 SW Eaton Butte 4 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-22'74 TABLE 6 GOLDEN EAGLE NEST SITE INVEN'T'ORY NEST SITES ON FEDERAL LAND 112A" Goal 5 Resource ODFW Site # Township Range Section General Location DE -0001-00 21S 19E 04 Imperial Valley DE -0003-00 15S 11E 07 Fryrear Butte Area DE -0005-00 16S 12E 09 Mid -Deschutes River (Awbry Falls) DE -0005-01 16S 12E 09 Mid -Deschutes River (Awbry Falls) DE -0017-00 21S 16E 12 Pine Ridge DE -0018-00 20S 15E 19 Pine Mountain West DE -0019-00 20S 15E 25 Pine Mountain East DE -0020-00 19S 14E 24 Horse Ridge/Dry River Canyon 5 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) Township Range 2 3 2 3 5 4 7 3 2 3 2 4 4 5 3 3 2 2 041011: 1 0135-2275 OSPREY - NEST SITE INVEN`T'ORY NEST SITES ON FEDERAL LAND 112A" Goal 5 Resource Section Quarter General Location 18S 11E 04 Desch Ri/Dillon Fall 18S 11E 34 Desch Ri .2 mi W 18S 11E 35 Desch Ri 1.2 mi W 19S 08E 09 Lava Lake .5 mi S 19S 08E 14 Lava lake 1.1 mi SW 19S 08E 23 Lt Lava Lake .2 mi W 19S 08E 27 Lt Lava Lake .2 mi N 19S 08E 33 Lt Lave Lake 2.2 mi N 19S 09E 15 Lava Lake .3 mi SW 19S 10E 18 Desch River 19S 11E 09 Desch Ri/Benham Fall 19S 11E 09 Desch River 19S 11E 10 Desch Ri 1.1 mi W 19S 11E 16 Desch River 19S 11E 19 Desch River 20S 08E 03 Lt Lava Lake 2.3 mi N 20S 08E 08 Crane Pra Lake 4.6 MS 20S 08E 14 Crane Pra Lake 3.1 MS 20S 08E 23 Crane Pra Lake 3.1 MS 20S 08E 27 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 28 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 29 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 31 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 32 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 33 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 34 Crane Pra Lake 20S 08E 36 Crane Pra Lake 20S 10E 02 Desch Ri 1.0 mi W 20S 10E 30 Fall River .6 mi S 21S 07E 01 Crane Pra Lake 21S 07E 02 Crane Pra Lake 21S 07E 14 Crane Pra Lake 21S 07E 25 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 04 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 05 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 08 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 09 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 16 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 17 Crane Pra Lake 21S 08E 21 Crane Pra Lake 21S 09E 01 Fall River 21S 09E 02 Fall River 21S 09E 09 Desch Ri 2.1 mi SE 21S 09E 11 Desch Ri 1.3 mi S 6 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2270 Township Range Section Quarter General Location 21S 09E 13 Desch Ri 1.0 mi S 21S 09E 15 Crane Pra Lake 4 ME 21S 09E 15 Desch River 3 21s 09e 22 Desch River 2 21S 09E 23 Desch River 2 21S 09E 26 Desch River 21S 09E 27 Desch River 21S 09E 28 Desch River 2 21S 09E 33 Desch River 3 21S 09E 34 Desch River 21S 10E 29 Desch Ri 4.0 mi W 21S 10E 30 Desch Ri 3.5 mi W 21S 11E 36 Paulina Lk 3 mi E 21S 12E 18 Paulina Lk 1.9 mi SE 5 22S 07E O1 Crane Pra Lake 3 MW 22S 07E 02 Wickiup Lake 3 22S 07E 10 Wickiup Lake 2 22S 07E 11 Wickiup Lake 22E 07E 12 Crane Pra Lake 22S 07E 15 Wickiup Lake 3 22S 07E 16 Wickiup Lake 3 22S 07E 22 Wickiup Lake 22S 07E 23 Wickiup Lake 3 22S 07E 28 Wickiup Lake 22S 08E 09 Crane Pra Lake 22S 09E 04 Desch River 2 23S 09E 08 Wickiup Lake 7 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2277 TABLE 8 HERON ROOKERY SITE INVENTORY ROOKERY SITE ON FEDERAL LANDS 112A" Goal 5 Resource ODFW Site # Map & Tax Lot Quarter General Location Section DE 0980-01 14-09-00-100 SENE Black Butte Ranch DE 0981-01 21-08-03 NENW E. of Crane Prairie Reservoir 8 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2278 HERON ROOKERY - Black Butte Ranch QV 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) identified a great blue heron rookery in Township 14S, Range 9E, Section 10 SENE. The county inventoried and adopted this site as a Goal 5 resources in Ordinance 92-041. 2. Site Characteristics. The rookery is located in aspen and ponderosa pine trees along Indian Ford Creek on the Deschutes National Forest just east of the Black Butte Ranch. The location of the rookery is shown on the map attached as Exhibit "A" The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a three hundred (300) foot radius of the nest site. The rookery and the sensitive habitat area are entirely on National Forest land and subject to the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 3. Conflicts Identification. The Deschutes National Forest is managing the site to protect the rookery from conflicting uses. There are no conflicting uses within the sensitive habitat area that are subject to county jurisdiction. 4. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that there are no conflicting uses subject to county jurisdiction. The site and the sensitive habitat area are entirely on federal land and are managed by the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Therefore, the county designates the resources as a 112A" Goal 5 resource and relies on the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan to manage the site to preserve its original character. This decision is made in conformance with OAR 660-16-005(1). - ESEE Findings and Decision - Heron Rookery (Black Butte) Page 1 "�t um r Y r-0 weima- dw---W. .!. .600.ft- u� bNNOW16 ram Mir .��. --- _ .. SCALE 1 : 48000 2000 0 2000 4000 FEET 0 2 1 See Mop 14 e >i xti I %_ 1 _ _ ..KILOMETER _ I i 1 L fa I Y1. I 1!."'~`I .� a' RI" I1.1 \` i;a I hr I �ti I %_ ►a ' K I Fn, 1 "i i� I X I i 1 T ------ --L-----L--L.^--Ls n L--1- 1 O 1�zoo \ r I wN I o 0 0 S' 1 L � i �• 1/T 1 `-1 l o•� �4p 1 ,j, r-Syoo IST r _- oo� ay A rn -I 1 I SCE `EE mAP 4 9 21C l4 9 18 co O m to E'"--- C7 - o l o a v m ID 3O n / Y m U m m .o m m m I o N I N; - m / (--- i -i G my uln �a n o' I ! O ��_ � 11 •-l�� rte. N - � a ,� I / W �--_zrmi 1 1 ipm V/, r. 1 i 1 � I 1 0 �� ♦>' ' - - y- o o I to I j y I �---• . L 1 I i � 1 I -.- - __-- 1CF, 4- I 1 O I I to / ggc 8° I •qNl I �--_ o $m o 1 � 01 COOID- pd Set Map 14 10 Exhibit "A-1" cD Heron Rookery DE-OOXX-00 14-09-10/SENE TABLE 9 0135-2280 GREAT GREY OWL NEST SITE INVEN`T'ORY SITES ON FEDERAL LANDS 112A" Goal 5 Resource Township Range Section Quarter General Location 22S 09E 09 SESW Dorrance Meadow TABLE 10 GREAT GREY OWL NEST SITES DELETED FROM INVENTORY ODFW Site # Map § Tax Lot Quarter General Location DE -0047-00 22-09-36 SWSW DE -0048-00 21-10-14 NWSE 9 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION X135-2281 GREAT GREY OWL #DE0047-00 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife identified a great grey owl nest site DE0047-01 (22-09-36-SWSW). The county adopted this site as a Goal 5 resource in Ordinance 92-041. This nest no longer exists. The site was located in a lodgepole pine stand which was killed by mountain pine beetles. The mortality of trees resulted in the destruction of the nest and abandonment of the site by the owls. The Board finds that this site is not important and designates it as a 111A" Goal 5 resource in accordance with OAR 660-16-000(5)(a). The site is deleted from the County Goal 5 inventory of great grey owl sites on non-federal land by Ordinance 94-004). ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0047-00 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION GREAT GREY OWL #DE0048-00 0135-2282 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife identified a great grey owl nest site DE0048-01 (map number 21-10-00-1401). The county adopted this site as a Goal 5 resource in Ordinance 92-041. This nest no longer exists. The site was located in a lodgepole pine stand which was killed by mountain pine beetles. The mortality of trees resulted in the destruction of the nest and abandonment of the site by the owls. The Board finds that this site is not important and designates it as a "lA" Goal 5 resource in accordance with OAR 660-16-000(5)(a). The site is deleted from the County Goal 5 inventory of great grey owl sites on non-federal land by Ordinance 94-004). ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0048-00 0135-2283 TABLE 11 PRAIRIE FALCON SITE INVENTORY SITES ON FEDERAL LANDS "2A" Goal 5 Resource ODFW Site # Township Range Section General Location DE -0463-00 19S 12E 04 Imperial Valley DE -0007-00 15S 12E 35 Mid -Deschutes River DE -0010-00 16S 12E 02 Mid -Deschutes River DE -0021-00 19S 14E 24 Horse Ridge/Dry River Canyon DE -0031-00 16S 11E 20 Tumalo Dam Natural Area 10 - EXHIBIT 111" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2284 TABLE 12 BALD EAGLE NEST SITE INVEN'T'ORY NEST SITES ON NON-FEDERAL LAND OR WITH NON-FEDERAL SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS ODFW Site # Map & Tax Lot Quarter Site Name Section DE 0035-00 15-10-00-1400 23/NWNE Cloverdale NW DE 0035-01 15-10-00-1400 23/NENE Cloverdale NE DE 0039-00 22-09-00-0500 06/SESW Wickiup Dam DE -0046-00 20-10-34-3401 34/NWSE Bates Butte Exhibit "1" for Ordinance No. 94-004 (06/15/94) TABLE 13 0135-2285 BALD EAGLE NEST SITES DELETED FROM INVEN`T'ORY ODFW Site # Township Quarter Site Name and Range Section DE 0036-00 17-11- 26/NESE Shevlin Park DE 0037-00 22-09- 04/SENE Wickiup Reservoir DE 0038-00 22-09- 34/NESW Haner Park Exhibit 111" for Ordinance No. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION BALD EAGLE HABITAT SITES 0135-212,86 DE0035-00 and DE0035-01 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified two bald eagle nests in Township 15S, Range 10E, Section 23, Tax Lot 1400. The ODFW identifiers for these sites are DE0035-00 and DE0035-01. The sites are also known as Cloverdale. The sites are described in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Region Administrative Report No. 93-1. The sensitive habitat area is identified as the area east of Highway 20 that is within a 1/4 mile radius of each nest site. The nest sites and the sensitive habitat area are mapped on Exhibit "A". 2. Sensitive Habitat Area Site Characteristics. The nests are alternate nests sites for a single pair of birds. The nest sites and the sensitive habitat area in section 23 is under U.S. Forest Service jurisdiction. The sensitive habitat area in sections 13, 14, and 24 is located on private land and is the subject of this ESEE analysis. There are portions of three ownerships within the sensitive habitat area: 15-10-00-1400 federal 15-10-14-700 Squaw Creek Irrigation District 15-10-24-200 private Both nest sites are located in large ponderosa pine trees. A large irrigation pond is located on private land north of the nests and within the sensitive habitat area. The Squaw Creek Irrigation Canal runs through the sensitive habitat area. The habitat site contains land zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFUTRB, EFUSC) and Forest (F1). Portions of the sensitive habitat site are also zoned Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM) and Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zone (SMIA). The combining zones are overlays on the underlying base zones. The uses permitted in base zone are also permitted in the SMIA and LM combining zones. The minimum lot sizes in the EFU zone will maintain a lot size of at least 20 acres for nonfarm lots and require a parcel containing at least 23 acres of irrigation for farm parcels. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0035-00 and DE0035-01 Page 1 3. Conflicts Identification Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site. Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction 0135-220c"I -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast F1 -Same as EFU -Parks and campgrounds -Distribution lines -Fire station -Portable processing forest products The nesting season ranges from January 15 through August 1. Conflicting uses occuring during this time period could cause disturbance of the birds leading to nest failure or abandonment of the site. Disturbance and harassment by the public has been a conflict prior to 1992 when the U.S. Forest Service placed an administrative closure on the Forest Service lands adjacent to the nest sites. Construction or use of buildings if conducted during the nesting season could interfere with nesting. A residence, agricultural building, church or school located within the sensitive habitat area could increase disturbance and cause a loss of solitude. Expansion of the highway could cause disturbances to the nest site. Any of the conditional uses could cause disturbance to the nesting birds if conducted during the nesting period. Although agricultural and or forest practices could alter foraging areas or disturb the birds, these uses are not regulated by the County. The county has no authority to regulate commercial forest practices. Forest practices are regulated by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODOF). The State Forest Practices Act establishes a procedure for notification of forest operations which requires a management plan for forest operations within one half mile of eagle nests. 4. Economic Social, Environmental and Enercty Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0035-00 and DE0035-01 Page 2 0135-2288 The economic consequence of restricting highway expansion or relocation could be an increased public cost for transportation facilities. Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. Restricting development options for individual property owners could have a negative social consequence. However, the two private ownerships with land in the sensitive habitat area already have dwellings on their lots which are outside of the habitat area. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with minor economic, or social consequence as owners have the potential to place structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. Farming activity may occur within the sensitive habitat area. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging_ area. Highway noise and activity could cause nest abandonment, if the highway is moved or widened closer to the sites. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There could be an increased energy use if Highway 20 is relocated or redesigned to accommodate the eagle nest sites. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0035-00 and DE0035-01 Page 3 0135-2289 the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply in the sensitive habitat area: 1. The county shall require site plan review in conformance with the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternate locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Agricultural and forest practices may occur during the nesting period. The county does not regulate these activities. 4. The U.S. Forest Service has placed an administrative closure restricting public access on the Federal lands within the site. 5. The Oregon Department of Transportation must coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for any project near the nest site in order to comply with the Federal Endangered Species Act. 6. The State Forest Practices Act establishes a procedure for notification of forest operations. A a management plan for forest operations is required for certain forest practices within one half mile of bald eagle nests. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0035-00 and DE0035-01 Page 4 0135-2290 6 72 2 0 Bhn 3103 a '^3120 i II 3093 Cloverdale • .3149 P I Gravel Pit � � / � \ .3/eo. \ -ate / _ �. I / 17 — — — — — — — — — — — zi 320 0l I Q�I Gravel; Pits KDAL 14 -7 32 c N 3100 & re r I-,\ — 11 '-77/ 0 � 3200 31a3 \ \ I 119 V.) r= 0 zaazz Ain I rn E- 19 V 23 z a C::) r 31 cn 0 Exhibit "A-111 Bald Eagle DE-0035-00/DE-0035-01 15-10-23/NWNE/NENE 0135-291 '� 3laUd3n0lJ j d n ' V'` V a a ..... CL CL a V to . 1>a W f.o W ((t W f Q W —+ W /s .• \ W \1l ( cn (n �l Q Cr) (n ro -:^ (D �i `� 6 1 - P �i • • ° �c •Tn i H. , _ i• O � Lx -' ��_� � /` vim, • �� S `.s•�� - -- - � �� - _'� Tse ' ■n a F� a ars �• • • ,� T1Y `I \Y y CX! i • Lim• � 1.� 0 �_ m ' " ¢�iLLI •(71'. 1.T' • •ate,. .0 1 o vapd /``tel es/ � t d 1 W U O -m W �•' V - • (n • g ° o � R •n: vim - ` •• �. � < n ... ,�^, �-1 co Lcz rn — : M y w ,t _l w 1�-711 1. :IqA— �rGil y r•._... 612 �, s': c�.10�' v d4W 33S �.�,- v "- d h'•pIWS •4lS fin .. ••''yy., d: JJ `1 IN - ` �•�.. ° o co Y.. G.. to • h. _ I..I.a _ N .�1 • • Nei d Q Xl-/(,) N L ; %k `1 • piny •�f•�•�•�• •i � • •a. •� c■�.i AV4 oW %c�ISFFF /�.TTLLI t , _t I � 1 ns 1 .a -! 1 ^'= i n• i • y. * I �� na • 1 .1 • d313wo�i�t \. s s1 a•w •n Z L 0 133 000v 0003 0 0 Z Exhibit "A-2" 0008V Bald Eagle - - - - ---- -- - - DE-0035-00/DE-0035-01 15-10-23/NWNE/NENE -,r. �� -+...� -�., .r�1 �� arm � �� •� N•6 10 0 0135-2292 T02 MUA10 s A-4 UUU o�. FR C.&._110 J w, % 1 �LOT 2 00 40C LOT 3 \A • 1 300 I .o µ ' 6 ` Exhibit "A-3" Bald Eagle DE-0035-00/DE-0035-01 15-10-23/NWNE/NENE i*i �4 DOa4ZU030Z[ef.`7m1:1o703xo1&4-0):1 BALD EAGLE HABITAT SITE 0135-2293 DE0036-00 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has inventoried a former bald eagle nest site in Township 17S, Range 11E, Section 26, Tax Lot 5900. The ODFW identifier for this site is DE0036-00. The site is also known as Shevlin Park. The site is described in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Region Administrative Report No. 93-1. 2. Sensitive Habitat Area Site Characteristics The nest site is in a large tree located on the west side of Tumalo Creek in Shevlin Park. Shevlin Park is managed by the Bend Metro Park and Recreation District. The area is forested. A recreation trail is close by on an old railroad grade. The nest was partially blown out of the tree in 1992 and the site is not active at this time. Eagles have been observed in the area, but nesting has not occurred since 1988. The nest site is zoned Open Space Conservation (OSC). Land within one quarter mile is zoned Forest Use (Fl) and Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10). The UAR-10 zoned land is within the city limits of Bend and is therefore outside county jurisdiction. 3. Conflict Identification The nesting season ranges from January 15 through August 31. Conflicting uses occuring during this time period could cause disturbance of the birds leading to nest failure or abandonment of the site. The potential conflicting uses with this site are recreational uses in Shevlin Park and forest practices on industrial forest land. The county has no authority to regulate commercial forest practices. Forest practices are regulated by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODOF). The State Forest Practices Act establishes a procedure for notification of forest operations which requires a management plan for forest operations within one half mile of eagle nests. The area within Shevlin Park around the nest tree is closed to motor vehicles and is managed to retain natural characteristics. The only recreational activity in the vicinity of the nest site is hiking. According to the Bend Metro Park and Recreation District no intensification of development or use is planned for the area of the park with the nest site. It is unknown if recreational use in the park ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0036-00 Page 1 caused abandonment of the nest site. 0135-2294 The surface mine located to the north west of the site (site #296) is over one half mile from the nest site. The nest site was not identified as a conflicting use in the ESEE for the surface mine. 4. Program To Meet Goal 5 The Board of County Commissioners finds that because the nest site has not been active since 1988 and the nest has been partially destroyed, the site should be deleted from the inventory of sensitive bird habitat (OAR 660-16-000(5)(a)). The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will continue to monitor the site and if eagles reestablish the nest, then the county will add the site to the inventory and proceed with the Goal 5 process according to OAR 660-16. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0036-00 Page 2 0135-2205 185 90 000 EET "A-1" le 00 /NESE I ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION BALD EAGLE HABITAT SITE 0135-212"96 DE0037-00 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a bald eagle nest in Township 22S, Range 09E, Section 04, Tax Lot 500. The ODFW identifier for this site is DE0037-00, Wickiup Reservoir. The site is described in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Region Administrative Report No. 93-1. 2. Sensitive Habitat Area Site Characteristics. The site is located on the Deschutes National Forest. The nest site and the sensitive habitat area are mapped on Attachment "A". The sensitive habitat area includes the area within one quarter mile of the nest site and is entirely on federal land. This nest site and alternate nests (DE -0038-00 and DE0039-00) have produced 11 young in a 14 year period. The area is forested and the eagles forage in Wickiup reservoir, the Deschutes River and other lakes in the vicinity. The sensitive habitat area is zoned Forest Use (F-1) and Open Space Conservation (OCS) with Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM) and Wildlife Management Combining Zone (WA) for deer migration corridor. The minimum lot size in the F1 zone is 80 acres. 3. Conflict Identification. The nesting season ranges from January 15 through August 31. Conflicting uses occuring during this time period could cause disturbance of the birds leading to nest failure or abandonment of the site. The primary conflicting uses are forest practices and recreation activity which could cause loss of solitude for the birds. This nest site is managed by the Deschutes National Forest in compliance with the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and the Federal Endangered Species Act. 4. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that because the site and sensitive habitat area are entirely on U.S. Forest Service land, there are no conflicting uses that can be regulated by the county. The site will be classified as 112A" (OAR 660-16-005(1). Consequently the site shall be deleted from the inventory of sensitive bird habitat sites on non-federal land by Ordinance 94-004. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0037-00 Page 1 0135-2pg"i .... ..... ...... 4332 4�- 22 2 29 3 ri .330 z J,Fi z 114327 — — — — — — — — — — P4 j�1287 .......... -------------- 1.320 ............ it Sri 33 of n.............. If ... ......... It II 4 43/8 z 2 It It it If If amp r 41 .4 5 # --------- 4522 t It kk V1 -T 4 143Jy 12 At # V 4300— % Z� It 4887 43' Exhibit "A-111 Bald Eagle DE -0037-00 22-09-04/SFNE ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-22,98 BALD EAGLE HABITAT SITE DE0038-00 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a bald eagle nest in Township 22S, Range 09E, Section 34, Tax Lot 500. The ODFW identifier for this site is DE0038-00, Haner Park. The site is described in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Region Administrative Report No. 93-1. The nest site and the sensitive habitat area are mapped on Exhibit "A". The sensitive habitat area includes the area within one quarter mile of the nest site. 2. Sensitive Habitat Area Site Characteristics. According to ODFW, the nest was last used in 1983. Subsequently, the nest was blown out of the tree. The nest tree is located on the Deschutes National Forest on the west side of the Deschutes River north of Haner Park. The sensitive habitat area extends into the Haner Park development. Haner Park is a property owned by the Elks Lodge and is divided into over 150 leased lots on 80 acres. The county assessor's records indicate that there are 18 dwellings within 1320 feet of the nest. Most of the dwellings are seasonal. The former nest site is on the Deschutes National Forest are zoned Forest Use (F-1) with a Landscape Management Combining zone along the Deschutes River. Haner Park (22-09-04CC) is zoned Forest Use (F-2) and LM. The minimum lot size in the F1 and the F-2 zone is 80 acres. 3. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that the nest_ site has not been active since 1983 and has been destroyed. Therefore, the site is not an important Goal 5 resource and may be deleted from the inventory of sensitive bird habitat (OAR 660-16-000(5)(a)). The site will be deleted from the inventory of sensitive bird habitat sites by Ordinance 94-004. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will continue to monitor the site and if eagles reestablish the nest, then the county will add the site to the inventory and proceed with the Goal 5 process according to OAR 660-16. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0038-00 Page 1 0135-2299 .�,. ... .... i .•.V:. �i�Y 4332 ____________-- •n � . 30 �. o ,; Q� ` 29 :14322 8 • yu - /tel : � // _________= ____ - 0. .1.93 // - -- „ter-:. /�, I �,., .__• ,�____� 4327Y1-4 \\C'c fc� \ ( •\ `�a/ r O III =1 33 • � ; � .,, -•� •=rte t - :n( \ If - I O �. • a II I / n n G^d PtF ti -11 U kG 11 1Gz =-�.f �a 1 It :y 14318-Z56iIt' it I - 0' i fit✓ Itid to ::/J I o 5 I I __ \ __-------_-- I _- ` �, 1f • D--Oo31-oo ••\ <30Si••G i •1%43/2 - 6 •\./,�y .. moi' .:.In A 43 ..hi111e�'�a __ - °�_ �� •M 3' .. _4 Exhibit "A-111 Eagle \r DE -0038-00 22-09-34/NESW ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION ��jj0135-2300 BALD EAGLE HABITAT SITE DE0039-00 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a bald eagle nest in Township 22S, Range 09E, Section 06, Tax Lot 500. The ODFW identifier for this site is DE0039-00, Wickiup Dam. The site is described in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Region Administrative Report No. 93-1. The nest site and the sensitive habitat area are mapped on Exhibit "A". 2. Sensitive Habitat Area Site Characteristics. The site is located on the Deschutes National Forest. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within one quarter mile of the nest site and is entirely on federal land. This nest site and alternate nests (DE -0038-00 and DE0037-00) have produced 11 young in a 14 year period. The area is forested and the eagles forage in Wickiup reservoir, the Deschutes River and other lakes in the vicinity. The sensitive habitat site is zoned Forest Use (F-1) and Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM). The LM zone is an overlay on the underlying base zone. The uses permitted in base zone are also permitted in the LM zone with some restrictions. The minimum lot size in the F1 zone is 80 acres. 3. Conflicts Identification Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site: Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use F1 -Forest practices -Distribution lines -Portable processing forest products -Parks and campgrounds -Fire station -Forest management dwelling -Caretaker residences for parks or hatcheries. The nesting season ranges from January 15 through August 1. Conflicting uses occuring during this time period could cause disturbance of the birds leading to nest failure or abandonment of the site. The primary conflicting uses are forest practices and recreation activity which could cause loss of solitude for the birds. This nest site is managed by the Deschutes National Forest in compliance with the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and the Federal Endangered Species Act. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0039-00 Page 1 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. 0135-2301 The Board of County Commissioners finds that because the site and the area within one quarter mile of the site is entirely on US Forest Service land, that here are no conflicting uses that can be regulated by the county. Therefore, the site will be maintained on the county inventory of sensitive bird sites on federal land. The site will be classified as 112A" (OAR 660-16-005(1). ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0039-00 Page 2 0135-2302 4332 - -__-_ •1� - 30 294322 28 = 0 - _- .rte: •T�3�'$ :'�{,.i., d i/C - PIT—w� —_-- 8M 11 „ 4327. 33 y ` J \\\ ✓'' j��-. _cr\'�t��`4: S. ti V:'t''�t.. e\' II i \`per / '_ _.. a=== -__y 6 dnl�mc „`tom PIt IF I4318- � it �� \l•�-1��.-�. ;: � i fl y reg'"/ 0x2 - _ { - (gyp r 5 .._,., ___ i �• _ .-- I �. � saa=ala+ � • Pa �a e I tl� / - - �� q 1 11.7 tl ,i .. .. `. a Q • � $��% �` _ < +$ -max o. 4. '! - 6 ' - \ � - K r � SIX �.•• . ,�,��,.�F3 i... .: :� �: 1 I3 - It It1 / Exhibit "A-1" Bald Eagle DE -0039-00 .?,)-na-nA/gvgw ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2303 BALD EAGLE HABITAT SITE DE0046-00 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a bald eagle nest in Township 20S, Range 10E, Section 34, Tax Lot 3401. The ODFW identifier for this site is DE0046-00, Bates Butte. The site is described in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Central Region Administrative Report No. 93-1. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within one quarter mile of the nest site. The nest site and the sensitive habitat area are mapped on Exhibit "A". 2. Sensitive Habitat Area Site Characteristics. The site is located on land owned by the State of Oregon and the sensitive habitat area extends onto Deschutes National Forest land. 20-10-34-3401 Oregon State Parks 20-10-34-3400 Federal USFS The nest is located in a tree on state owned land. The state owned land is part of the La Pine State Recreation Area and is managed by the Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department. The La Pine State Recreation Area Master Plan (1986) does not propose any development within the sensitive habitat area. The state manages the site in its natural condition to limit conflicts with the nesting birds. The sensitive habitat area on the federal and state land is zoned Forest Use (F-1) with a wildlife combining zone (WA) for a deer migration corridor. The WA zone is an overlay on the underlying base zone. The uses permitted in the base zone are also permitted in the WA zone with some restrictions. The minimum lot size in the F1 zone is 80 acres. The nest site has produced 27 young over a 20 year period. The birds forage in the Deschutes River, Fall River and nearby lakes. 3. Conflict Identification Potentially conflicting uses with habitat site: Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use F1 -Forest practices -Parks and campgrounds -Distribution lines -Fire station -Portable processing -Forest management dwelling ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0046-00 Page 1 forest products -Exploration for minerals The nesting season ranges from Conflicting uses occuring during disturbance of the birds leading of the site. 0135-2304 -Caretaker residences for parks or hatcheries. January 15 through August 1. this time period could cause to est failure or abandonment The county has no authority to regulate commercial forest practices. Forest practices are regulate by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODOF). The State Forest Practices Act establishes a procedure for notification of forest operations which requires a management plan for forest operations within one half mile of bald eagle nests. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. Developed park facilities including trails near the nest or a campground would create congregations of people during the nesting season which could cause disturbance to the birds. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences The economic consequence of restricting forest practices could result in a reduction of timber available for harvest. Limiting the construction of developed recreation facilities in the La Pine State Recreation Area would have a negligible economic consequence as the state does not plan to develop recreation facilities within the sensitive habitat area. Prohibiting a_ caretaker's residence or fire station would have little economic consequence as there are alternate sites on the state land for these uses outside of the sensitive habitat area. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0046-00 Page 2 and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. 0135-2305 (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, that both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses the following restrictions shall apply to the sensitive habitat area: 1. The county shall require site plan review in conformance with the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a conditional use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 3. Developed recreational facilities shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area. 4. Forest practices may occur during the nesting period. However, the Oregon Department of Forestry regulates forest practices and is required by the State Forest Practices Act to develop a management plan for forest practices within one half mile of a bald eagle nest. 5. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan recognizes the La Pine State Recreation Area Master Plan (1986) as the controlling document for guiding development within the recreation area (Policy Number 13, Recreation Chapter). The master plan does not propose any development within the ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0046-00 Page 3 0135-2306 sensitive habitat area that would conflict with the site. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0046-00 Page 4 0135-2307 t;xnibiL ..�-l. Bald Eagle DE -0046-00 *1n-1 A -"I A /ATVOT.T 0135-2308 Exhibit "A-2" Bald Eagle DE -0046-00 20-10-34/NESW J N �J N 0135-2308 Exhibit "A-2" Bald Eagle DE -0046-00 20-10-34/NESW TABLE 14 0135-2309 GOLDEN EAGLE NEST SITE INVENTORY NEST SITES ON NON-FEDERAL LAND OR WITH NON-FEDERAL SENSITIVE HABITAT AREA ODFW Site # Kap & Tax Lot Quarter General Location Section DE -0002-00 14-13-11-100 11/SENW Smith Rock State Park DE -0002-01 14-13-11-100 11/SENW Smith Rock State Park DE -0002-02 14-13-11-100 11/SENW Smith Rock State Park DE -0002-03 14-13-11-100 11/NWNE Smith Rock State Park DE -0002-04 14-13-11-100 11/NWNE Smith Rock State Park DE -0002-05 14-13-11-100 11/NWNE Smith Rock State Park DE -0002-06 14-13-11-100 it/NWNE Smith Rock State Park DE -0006-00 15-12-00-1502 35/SENE Mid Deschutes DE -0006-01 15-12-00-1502 35/SENE Mid Deschutes DE -0006-02 15-12-00-1502 35/SENE Mid Deschutes DE -0006-04 15-12-00-1502 35/SENE Mid Deschutes DE -0006-05 15-12-00-1503 35/NESE Mid Deshcutes DE -0009-00 14-12-22D-300 23/NWSW N. Odin Falls DE -0011-00 15-12-00-100 1/NWSE Radio Tower/Deschutes DE -0011-01 15-12-00-100 1/NESE Radio Tower/Deschutes DE -0012-00 15-11-00-800 3/NENE Upper Deep Canyon DE -0014-00 16-11-00-7800 29/NWSE Tumalo Dam DE 0015-01 14-11-00-400 3/NENW Squaw Creek DE 0015-00 14-11-00-400 3/SESW Rimrock Ranch DE -0029-00 20-17-00-3801 36/NWSE Twin Pines DE -0034-00 15-10-00-1400 15/SENW Lazy Z/USFS DE -0034-01 15-10-00-1400 15/SENW Lazy Z/USFS Exhibit 111" for Ordinance No. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2310 TABLE 15 GOLDEN EAGLE NEST SITES DELETED FROM COUNTY INVENTORY OF NEST SITES ON NON-FEDERAL LAND OR WITH NON-FEDERAL SENSITIVE HABITAT AREA ODFW Site # Tnshp/Range/Sec. DE -0003-00 15-11-17 DE -0003-01 15-11-16 DE -0013-00 14-12-28 Quarter General Location Section NWSE Fryrear Road - 1 SWSE Fryrear Road - 2 NWNW Buckhorn Canyon Exhibit "1" for Ordinance No. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2311 GOLDEN EAGLE SITES DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 SMITH ROCK STATE PARK 1. Inventory. The Oregon State Parks Division has identified seven golden eagle cliff nest sites in Smith Rock State Park. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) identifiers for the nest sites are DE0002-00, DE0002-01, DE0002-02, DE0002-03, DE0002-04, DE0002-05, DE0002-06. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of each nest site. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat areas are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The nests are located in the cliffs of the rock formations in the Smith Rock State Park. The park is zoned Open Space Conservation (OSC). The land within the sensitive habitat area that is outside of the state park is Exclusive Farm Use (EFU-TE). The land within the sensitive habitat area that is within 660 feet of the Crooked River is zoned Landscape Management Combining zone (LM) which protects the scenic values of the Crooked River corridor. The LM zone is an overlay zone. The uses permitted in the underlying zone are also permitted in the LM zone. The land within the sensitive habitat area north of the Crooked River is also zoned Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA) because it is deer winter range. The seven golden eagle nest sites are alternate nest sites for a single pair of golden eagles. The golden eagle nests are in the north part of the park. One of the golden eagle nests was active in 1993 but no birds were fledged. The nesting season for golden eagles is from February 1 through August 1. The sensitive habitat area for three of the golden eagle nests is entirely within the state park. The sensitive habitat area for the other four nests (DE0002-03, DE0002-04, DE0002-05 and DE0002-06) extends outside of the park to the north and east and includes the following tax lots: 14-13-00-500 Private 120 acres 14-13-00-400 Private 40 acres 14-13-00-100 USA BLM 14-13-11-200 Private 20 acres 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use OSC -Farm use -Picnic or campground ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 Page 1 -Public museum -Wildlife refuge -Public park,recreation area EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction 0135-2312 -Utility facility -Golf course -Water supply treatment facility -Commercial recreation -Public camp or resort -Rockhound site -Fill and removal in stream -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast The most significant conflicting use is recreational hiking and rock climbing in the state park. This activity has the potential to bring humans into close contact with the birds during the nesting season. The park is regulated by a master plan administered by the Oregon State Parks. One of the objectives of the master plan for the park is: "Maximize protection of significant wildlife and vegetation in the siting and construction of all park development projects." The park manager reports that there is little climbing activity near the golden eagle nest sites. According to the park manager, the birds do not appear to be disturbed by hikers on established trails. The park closes some climbing routes during the nesting season to minimize the conflicts with the falcons. The potential for conflicting uses permitted in the EFU zone on the private or BLM land within the sensitive habitat area north of the state park is unlikely because of difficult access and the restrictions of the WA and LM zones. A single farm or nonfarm dwelling within the sensitive habitat area on each of the two private undeveloped ownerships (14-13-10-500 or 14-13-00-400,500 and 14-13-11-200) would probably not be a significant conflicting use if the rest of the lots remained in farm use/open space. However, two new residences would significantly increase the density of residential development within the sensitive habitat area. There is considerably more land in these ownerships outside of the ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 Page 2 sensitive habitat area than within. 0135-2313 If nonfarm partitions are permitted within the sensitive habitat area, it could significantly increase the residential density within the sensitive habitat area which would reduce the effectiveness of the open space buffer adjacent to the state park. A personal use airport or storage and crushing of aggregate could conflict with the birds because of increased noise. A private park or campground, bed and breakfast, church or school could conflict with the birds by introducing a level of human activity in an area that is currently undeveloped. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Farm use on the private and BLM land is limited to grazing which is not a conflicting use. State statute prevents regulations to restrict farm practices. Deschutes County has not zoned the area within the sensitive habitat area for destination resorts. Therefore, destination resorts are not addressed as a conflicting use in this ESEE analysis. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences In 1992 the visitation at Smith Rock State park was 350,000; up from 220,000 in 1987. Fifteen thousand visitors camped at the park in 1992; up from 4,600 in 1987. The park manager reports that there are between 45 and 50 jobs in the county directly related to the rock climbing occuring at the park. These jobs include manufacturing of climbing equipment, climbing walls and guiding. Parking and camping fees generated $72,000 dollars for the state park in 1993. This level of visitation generates tourism dollars throughout the_ county. The management plan for the park regulates some climbing routes during the nesting season to reduce the conflict with nesting eagles and falcons. Residential or other structural development could be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area on the EFU zoned land north and west of Smith Rock State Park with minor economic consequence. Only a small portion of the one undeveloped private ownership consisting of three tax lots is within the sensitive area. Structural development could occur outside of the sensitive area on the remaining undeveloped ownership. Construction costs ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 Page 3 0135-2314 could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. (B) Social Consequences Prohibiting or restricting the location of structural or other development outside of the park could have a minor social consequence if the property owner wanted to build or otherwise develop within the sensitive habitat area. There are places outside of the sensitive habitat area where structural development could occur, as permitted by EFU zone, on the one undeveloped private ownership outside of the state park. However, prohibiting structures within the sensitive habitat area may prevent an owner from locating a structure in a preferred location. Permitting the managed recreational use in the state park has a positive social consequence because visitors to the park can enjoy the scenery, hiking, rock climbing, bird watching, picnicing and camping. Placing more restrictions on use of the park could limit the recreational opportunities available. (C) Environmental Consequences Suitable cliff habitat is a scarce resource and could not be replaced. If the recreational use is not managed to reduce the conflict with the birds during nesting season, climbers and hikers could harass the birds and cause nest failure or abandonment. Permitting development which would significantly alter the open space characteristics of the EFU zoned land may alter the foraging patterns of the birds threatening nesting_ success. Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of regulating conflicting recreational uses or prohibiting structural development on the EFU zoned land within the sensitive habitat area. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 Page 4 0135-2315 (D) Energy Consequences There are no significant energy consequences resulting from prohibiting or permitting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). The Smith Rock State Park Master Plan and management policies for the park reduce the conflict from recreation activities and rock climbing. Each year in March and April the park management, assisted by ODFW or Audubon Society, determines which nests are active. Certain rock climbing routes are closed during the nesting season to protect the active nests. The closure remains in effect until June 30. The climbing route closure program has been in effect for 4 years. The manager of the park reports that the rock climbing community supports the closures. In order to protect both the nest sites and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following requirements shall apply: 1. Site plan review under Section 18.90 of Title 18, Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone, shall be required for all conditional uses, occuring within the sensitive habitat area as designated on exhibit "A". 2. One farm or non farm dwelling approved under Title 18.16 may be established within the sensitive habitat area on the ownership including the three tax lots described as 14-13-00-500, 14-13-00-400 and 14-13-11-200. The dwelling shall be setback at least 50 feet from the uppermost rimrock of the Crooked River canyon. A restrictive covenant shall be required to protect and maintain existing native vegetation between the residential development and the inventoried nest sites. 3. Construction activities for expansion, maintenance, replacement of existing structures or construction of new structures requiring a building permit from the Deschutes County Community Development Department or septic installation requiring a permit from the Environmental Health Division shall be prohibited during the nesting season from ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 Page 5 0135-2316 February 1 through August 1. Maintenance and repair of existing structures not requiring a construction permit, permitted work conducted within a closed structure, or repair of a failing septic system are exempt from this requirement. Construction activity subject to a construction permit from the Community Development Department or a septic installation permit from the Environmental Health Division may occur after May 1, if ODFW determines in writing that the nest site is not active or that the young birds have fledged. 4. Partitions creating a residential building site or campground within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area in Township 14S, Range 13, Section 2 or 11. 5. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan recognizes the Smith Rock State Park Master Plan as the controlling document for guiding development within the park (Policy Number 13, Recreation Chapter). The County shall not require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone for development described in the "Objectives" section of the Development Plan for Smith Rock State Park. Campground or other structural development not included in the Development Plan Objectives (1990) shall be subject to site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone. Construction activities requiring a building permit shall be subject to the construction period limitations of Number 3 above. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0002-00 - DE0002-06 Page 6 0135-2311 m N 6 `s g ITS b _c:� r) Z w n F Uf C) o m ♦ � a` 3 om Ar m rrps Y ' ` _ a ,, ••mow) �' �, ,tea': _ ..... �t� .. �� • cm I 1 y 1 +• o { 1�' � O 1 •I - - '� • 1000.1% I ` ; �` `LTi w ✓•' .... ' �, " men t • • any' �'.. 1 cif f s .0 •1 -, ' mo c w -�� 3 �.•�•+moi:• .� -i A n 1 r �� r ..�' ;.• m 8 a O 4 co _ O e Exhibit "A-1" Golden Eagle O }fir DE -0002-00-06 ® 14-13-11/SENW O 14-13-11/NWNE m N m D 3 D 0135--2318 W.� ' FEET 0 1 2 KILOMETER PARTITION PLAT NO 1991-77 See Mop 14 12 CiL 1 N its 7f c �✓ tb � 4 Jq ( j t ; �. "'. � � • s •-� .ins;` `i N} r SEE MAP EE MAP SEE MAP 2 c «��r 14 11 KO 4 19A m a y �ti• er" "'� .3 Y m ? Q .t�iS 14 13 18 D o j3 Edi s d'g v m m D .D m r%), m lJ D(\ 1 N n u a m m U) m a N m W D � a (A m m - CROOK COUNTY D ..7 T m m .( m..► --y �-. D Dv ST i m m m i ,' m i m ST = D D D 'C fn t R o � �7 I:a In Q CN 5T m cn 40 t! = Z m TN — m m ` -< Ie T 1w iif 7 ``� \, f; •�...��. �.�, , r� �gy iia 'c `'� ♦ �`� i, v)� m o eTN ST �•� .�. 7. I• e0 _ ♦ - r- 8: rpJl��• - o rn 8 -. o w �• �j09 - •4p • I „ Iii 1 0, ` ♦,` mil rm f -Its f 1 Ir` _ CA Z �I 4 p K ii Exhibit "A-2" -- Golden Eagle DE -0002-00-06 14-13-11/SENW 14-13-11/NWNE ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2339 GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0003-00 and DE0003-01 Fryrear Road 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified two golden eagle nest sites: DE0003-00 (map number 15-11-17-NWSE) and DE0003-01 (map number 15-11-16-SWSE). The sites are also known as Fryrear. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of each nest site. The habitat sites are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. Site DE003-00 is located in a ponderosa pine tree within Deep Canyon. This site has not been used by eagles in at least five years. It is currently being used as a raven nest. The site is located on a county owned parcel zoned for surface mining (site number 274). The sensitiva habitat area includes land zoned surface mining and Exclusive Farm Use. A road in the bottom of Deep Canyon is within 200 feet of the nest tree. There are no residences or other development within the sensitive habitat area. ODFW recommends that this nest be deleted from the county inventory because it has not been active for over five years. Site DE0003-01 is in a ponderosa pine tree and was active in 1993 and 1994. The nest tree and the quarter mile sensitive habitat area are on Bureau of Land Management land. A dirt road is located within 200 feet of the nest and a power line is located within 500 feet of the nest. The site and the sensitive habitat area area zoned Exclusive Farm Use. 3. Conflicts Identification. The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from February 1 through August 1. Construction activities, off road vehicle use on the roads adjacent to the nests, or shooting could all conflict with the nesting birds. Surface mining activities on the property zoned Surface Mine (SM) must comply with a site plan approved in compliance with the site specific ESEE for the surface mining site. 4. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, the county ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0003-00 and DE0003-01 Page 1 0135-2320 has no jurisdiction over conflicting uses on Site DE0003-01 because the nest and the sensitive habitat area are located on federal, Bureau of Land Management Land. Therefore the site shall be designated as a 112A" site and be managed by the Bureau of Land Management. This decision is in accordance with OAR 660-16-005(1). The Board finds that Site DE0003-00 has not been used by golden eagles for over 5 years and therefore shall be deleted from the county inventory. The site is designated as a "lA" site in accordance with OAR 660-16-000(5)(a)If the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife finds that the nest has become active, the county shall complete the Goal 5 ESEE analysis and decision prior to the next periodic review. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0003-00 and DE0003-01 Page 2 0 0135-2321 \ u x-3,40 °\<—s. 0 14 a -- �6------- -- 3o�z== a ri _o ------ -- It \\ II , it i Well 1 � / • 0 „ � 6 M � J� .0 93 3 Cloverdale 0;72 \ •�'_'_- 307/ `�e�• — R-== _� \ i p n I �1 l It i It / -- j�----------��'-------/�8 1\4\T g 60 I IIDIm 3000 11 � 1 it L 4P 1 11 II W I 3100it /br U z Fre' r It 3200kk It 119 Desert ul / NVIt \� 19 Exhibit "A" Golden Eagle DE-0003-00/DE-0003-01 15-11-17/NESW 1 9i-1 1 —1 f / CF.CW ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2322 �� -�2 �� GOLDEN EAGLE SITES #DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified five golden eagle cliff nest sites in the canyon of the Deschutes River southwest of Redmond: DE0006-00, DE0006-01, DE0006-02, DE0006-03, DE0006-04, and DE0006-05. The sites are also identified as the Mid -Deschutes sites. They are located in Township 15 South, Range 12 East, Sections 35 and 36. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of each nest site. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat area are designated on a maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. These five sites are alternate nest sites for a single pair of golden eagles. The sensitive habitat area extends approximately one half mile along the Deschutes River canyon. The nesting season is from February 1 to August 1. Site DE0006-03 has not been active since before 1985. The site has been used by Canadian geese since 1985. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife recommends that this site be deleted from the inventory because it has not been used by golden eagles for at least five years. Twenty-six lots are entirely or partially located within the sensitive habitat area for sites DE0006-00, 01, 02, 04 and 05. Thirteen of the lots abut the Deschutes River or are located on the rim of the canyon. The west side of the canyon is predominately undeveloped Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land. The sensitive habitat area on the east side of the river is zoned either Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) or Multiple Use Agriculture (MUA-10). All of the land within the sensitive habitat area is also zoned Landscape Management Combining zone (LM) which protects the scenic values of the Deschutes River corridor. This is an overlay zone. The uses permitted in the underlying zone are also permitted in the combining zone. One of the nests was active in 1993. The nests have been monitored since the 1970's by ODFW. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use MUA-10 -Single family dwelling -Public park, playground ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 1 -Utility facility -Farm Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Dude ranch 0135-230203 -Home occupation -Personal use landing strip -Recreation Facility -Bed and breakfast inn -Guest house -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Farm use occurs adjacent to the rim on the southern end of the half mile long sensitive habitat area. The farm use is pasture and hay and is probably not a conflict with nesting activity. The significant conflicting use is residential development along the rim of the Deschutes River canyon. Construction activity or excavation with heavy machinery could produce excessive noise and activity on or near the canyon rim during the nesting season which could disturb the birds. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. Existing residential development which is located in the quarter mile sensitive habitat area away from the rim of the canyon is apparently not a significant conflict as the birds have continued to nest in the canyon. However, in recent years the birds have nested closer to the BLM land which is not developed rather than in the site DE0006-03 which is closest to the existing development. Construction of a residence on the one undeveloped lot within the sensitive habitat area that is not located on the rim will not be a conflicting use because all of the lots around this lot are developed and it is not located on the rim. Excluding the federal (BLM) and Deschutes County land, the ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 2 0135-234 following lots are located along the rimrock in the sensitive habitat area, and according to assessor's records, are currently undeveloped and have the potential for a residence. Construction activities during the nesting period on these lots could be a significant conflict because of noise and activity close to the rim and alteration of existing vegetation near the rim that may be providing a buffer between the nest and existing and potential development. Map and Tax Lot Number Zone 15 -12 -36 -BO -3800 EFU 15 -12 -36 -BO -3700 EFU 15 -12 -36 -BO -3000 MUA-10 15 -12 -36 -BO -2100 MUA-10 Partition of the EFU zoned land within the sensitive habitat area into smaller nonfarm parcels would increase the number of potential dwellings in the sensitive habitat area and could result in increased road construction, alteration of native vegetation and residences close to the canyon rim where it is currently undeveloped. Developed recreation sites on public land such as campgrounds, parking areas for trails could increase the number of people on the rim, in the canyon and along the river in the vicinity of the nest. This increased activity could be a conflict to the birds because they are unaccustomed to such activity. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Prohibiting residential development on the two undeveloped MUA-10 zoned lots on the rim would have have significant economic impact by reducing the value of the properties. Construction costs could increase if_ building activity is restricted during the nesting season. It is unknown if residential development would be possible on the two private EFU zoned lots because a proposed residence would be required to comply with EFU conditional use criteria. Limiting the location of development would not reduce the value of the property to the degree of development prohibition. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 3 sites. 0135-2325 Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Some home buyers will pay a higher price for property that has resident wildlife or wildlife such as golden eagles in close proximity to the property. (B) Social Consequences Prohibiting or restricting the location of residential development on the two MUA-10 zone lots on the rim of the canyon would have significant social impact as property owners would be unable to develop their property with a use permitted by the zone. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. (C) Environmental Consequences Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. Suitable cliff habitat is a scarce resource and could not be replaced. Development in the sensitive habitat area could cause nest failure and would result in alteration of foraging. Allowing residential development on the two undeveloped MUA-10 zoned lots on the rim in the Chaparral Estates subdivision would probably not significantly conflict with the nesting of the eagles because lots on both sides of each of the lots are already developed. The natural environment is already altered by residences located along the rim on narrow lots. Two additional dwellings meeting the rimrock setback and landscape management standards to protect native vegetation would not significantly increase the current level of conflict or significantly alter the natural environment in the area. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 4 0135-2326 Construction during the nesting period could create noise that would disturb the birds. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences The energy consequence of allowing residential development is the increased use of fuels for transportation to a remote development. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that golden eagle nest site DE0006-03 has not been used since 1985 and is therefore not a significant Goal 5 resource. The nest site and sensitive habitat area is designated as a "lA" resource in accordance with OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) and is not included on the inventory of sensitive bird habitat sites. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource sites DE0006-01, DE0006-02, DE0006-04 and DE0006-05 and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest sites and sensitive habitat areas and allow limited conflicting uses, the following requirements shall apply to specific properties within the sensitive habitat area. For the following properties located along the rim of the Deschutes River Canyon, the conditions below shall apply within the sensitive habitat area: 15-12-00-00-1502 15-12-00-00-1503 15 -12 -36 -BO -2000 15 -12 -36 -BO -2100 15 -12 -36 -BO -2300 15 -12 -36 -BO -2500 15 -12 -36 -BO -2800 15 -12 -36 -BO -3000 15 -12 -36 -BO -3100 15 -12 -36 -BO -3300 15 -12 -36 -BO -3400 15 -12 -36 -BO -3700 15 -12 -36 -BO -3800 15 -12 -35 -DO -200 15 -12 -35 -DO -500 ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 5 1. Site plan review under Section 18.90 of TYtZ0 v18`jr�� Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone, shall be required for all conditional uses occuring within the sensitive habitat area as designated on Exhibit "A". 2. New structural development, shall be setback at least 50 feet from the rimrock of the Deschutes River canyon. 3. Construction activity requiring a building permit from the Deschutes. County Community Development Department or septic installation requiring a permit from the Environmental Health Division shall be prohibited during the nesting season from February 1 through August 1. Maintenance and repair of existing structures not requiring a construction permit, permitted work conducted within a closed structure, or repair of a failing septic system are exempt from this requirement. Construction activity subject to a construction permit from the Community Development Department or a septic installation permit from the Environmental Health Division may occur after May 1, if ODFW determines in writing that the nest site is not active or that the young birds have fledged. 4. Heavy machinery operation associated with new development may occur after May 1, if ODFW determines in writing that the nest site is not active or that the young birds have fledged. Otherwise, heavy machinery operation for new road or driveway construction, septic installation or excavation for construction activities shall be prohibited during the nesting season from February 1 through August 1. An exception to this condition may be made for emergency repairs of septic systems with a septic repair permit issued by the County Environmental Health Division. 5. Nonfarm partitions for nonfarm dwellings which would be located within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited on the following EFU zoned properties: 15 -12 -35 -DO -200 15 -12 -35 -DO -500 15 -12 -35 -DO -101 15-12-00-00-1502 15 -12 -36 -BO -3700 15 -12 -36 -BO -3800 6. A restrictive covenant shall be granted to ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 6 0135-2jr)8 Deschutes County to protect native vegetation prior to issuance of a building permit for any structure within 100 feet of the rimrock. The restrictive covenant shall require retention of native vegetation between the structure and the rimrock. Map and Tax Lot Number Zone 15 -12 -36 -BO -3800 EFU 15 -12 -36 -BO -3700 EFU 15 -12 -36 -BO -3000 MUA-10 15 -12 -36 -BO -2100 MUA-10 ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0006-00 - DE0006-05 Page 7 0135-2329 �i :`,yRedmond Pumping Plant -" --- Y a C Og r `�� 3077 - ... 1 _ c q p p r lle COX ROAD 6645 � N =y66• Q•If �•.�).J •- yyb 075 i / by � � 66 --� •1i _ _ .•, \jig\� • pA ' �� CF o -'G CANYON • RIVE 1,,•_i-• �•--^- -1 / 3/25 h 3127x@ SM �/. 3157 3/52 .WH/TTEMOR£ RD- WHITTEMOR£ i •R0.40� 3/25 / •6aa " 3152,— - — � \ - � � • __ I\ �'� �.,::- j: � • %Nil' '.3`�o J i (3136 �� 1• 2 0 .- '_ - C . ?^ � _ �J �!' �J�_, f�^ .__--J'-''�r- ' •'. —`% d i a `Ary PC '� P' 200 • r'-=�-o, .. / .� _ #".•..a'.,`a"' / .•. \ num � _ � — � !-�" •off:;=:< =v�—v .0 314 .� A _Zzilin t ROAD 3180 PETERSON c�' ° RD -PETERSON RD !• ' - ` . �' i. i- 3/72•:.• a :?= K -W-m- 40--= �- --- Exhibit "A-1" Golden Eagle DE-0006-00-05 15-12-35/SENE l q-1 7-19 /gwmuT J5-I;1-3�-8' • FP4 0135-233 l EFUSC / P. mum owe boo / 2-4 y ,r 2.00 DzIZ z z G500 REYSTONE (1 Soo 14� Idol �1 c 9 \ •. C ` lP r lio a to 12 SCALE 1 : 4800 MU �'5 �� 1 i 200 0 200 400 �' 4 1 s y?00 / C x.10 " . �•-nooo �1 �•k 34 1 1100 1200 1120 KILOMETER I= soo l eoo I .a� soc 6 1300 ;_ ; - � JJ T 10i\ i _l o � 4 7 9 11 rml va 3 bC ('T r�i�' :-�r� �� 3 r r, 1202 IZ03 4 1D 4.- .- .- ... .-. 1000 lair 1320 bl{ Isis 1514 1501 DE oo - MUA10 ' 5„w.bo .000 , rFFARTITION LAT N0:1990-8 y�y ..-- Y rsatcrc* . n. r•i77.r1�>rarf%3 .s <xn.ti�r� r�wQw' r.r. ,�, �, ,r,r,r. .• soi ; 200 �� WO1400 ! .504 n••••1 q21 15 -351 EFUSC • ►� 1 MMES z M.,. i ; • 4 2-3 EFUTRB 5�5 Exhibit "A-2" ,y' 300 / Golden Eagle Fp, DE -0006-00-05 ��• _ - 15-12-35/SENE .... 35 >s 15-12-36/SWNW -� _ ..�_.,,.a>j�ia�.+...., .:, •• eau>•,.., ,. 1•,Mr�#K�'�•. «„ieez<<i nr<n.ru ln.rv< ... X �- 5-233 SEVA SEC. 35 T.15S. R.12E-WM. FIRM MAP J,oc DESCHUTES COUNTY $CALF 1 : 4800 : WF,"fLM 60 /F -•Zoo 200 0 200 400 FEET KILOMETER '6 ■ PARCEL t AVE fq'Exhibit "A-3" Golden Eagle DE -0006-00-05 15-12-35/SENE 15-12-36/SWNW ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0009-00 1. Inventory. 0135-2332 The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a golden eagle nest as site DE0009-00 (map number 14-12-22D-300.) The site is also identified as the Odin Falls site. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a one quarter mile (1320 feet) radius of the nest site. The nest site and sensitive habitat area are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. Site DE0009-00 is a cliff site located on the west side of the Deschutes River. The nest is on a parcel in the Lower Bridge Estates subdivision. There are two rimrock cliffs on the west side of the river. The nest is on the lower cliff. There is evidence that the eagles use the upper cliff as a roosting site. The nest is active and has been monitored since the 1970's by ODFW. The nesting period ranges from February 1 through August 1. The land in the sensitive habitat area on the west side of the river is zoned Rural Residential (RR -10) and Exclusive Farm Use (EFUTE). On the east side of the river the parcels in the sensitive habitat area are zoned Multiple Use Agriculture (MUA-10.) All of the property within the sensitive habitat area is also in the Federal Wild and Scenic River corridor and in the County Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM). The following table lists the parcels entirely or partially within the sensitive habitat area. Map and Lot # Zone Size Ownership 14 -12 -22 -AO -100 EFUTE 120ac USA 14 -12 -22 -DO -100 RR -10 private 14 -12 -22 -DO -200 RR -10 private 14 -12 -22 -DO -300 RR -10 private 14 -12 -22 -DO -400 RR -10 private 14 -12 -22 -DO -500 EFUTE 46ac Outward Bound 14 -12 -22 -DO -600 RR -10 private 14 -12 -22 -DO -700 RR -10 private 14 -12 -23 -BO -1000 RR -10 private 14 -12 -23 -BO -900 RR -10 private 14-12-23-00-600 MUA-10 26ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -400 MUA-10 2.50ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -500 MUA-10 2.49ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -600 MUA-10 2.54ac private ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 1 0135-2333 14 -12 -23 -CO -900 MUA-10 2.24ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -1000 MUA-10 2.44ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -1100 MUA-10 2.51ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -1200 MUA-10 2.24ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -1300 MUA-10 2.25ac private 14 -12 -23 -CO -099 MUA-10 28.97ac common Except for the Outward Bound parcel, the parcels in the sensitive habitat area are undeveloped and therefore provide solitude, roosting and foraging areas for the birds. The Outward Bound property is used as a base camp and training center. During the nesting period there is considerable activity on the Outward Bound Property. There is a low rimrock adjacent to the river on the east side. A broad juniper covered bench is above the rimrock and extends to Grubsteak Way. A 26 acre parcel (14-12-23-00-600) encompasses most of the relatively flat juniper covered bench adjacent to the river across from the nest. The sensitive habitat area also includes four smaller parcels and a portion of a fifth east of the 26 acre parcel and west of Grubstake Way. One additional parcel and portions of two others are within the sensitive habitat area east of Grubsteak Way. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use RR -10 -Single family dwelling -Utility facility -Farm use MUA-10 -Single family dwelling -Farm use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Public park, playground -Dude ranch -Home occupation -Personal use landing strip -Recreation facility -Bed and breakfast inn -same as RR -10 -Guest house -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 2 0135--2334 -Bed and breakfast The significant conflicting use would be residential development of the RR -10 and MUA-10 zoned parcels which would reduce the solitude and foraging area for the birds. Even if the residential development is restricted in the sensitive habitat area, if the Lower Bridge Estates and Odin Falls Ranch subdivisions are built -out, the density of development may alter the foraging area and solitude of the birds sufficiently to cause abandonment of the site. The pair of birds using this site are accustomed to an environment with little disturbance because, except for the use of the Outward Bound property, there is little human activity within the sensitive habitat area or nearby. Development on lots on the east side of the river which are opposite of the nest would be a conflict with the nest because the elevation of the bench is near the elevation of the nest and the homes and residential activities would be visible and audible from the nest. On the west side, the upper rimrock could provide visual separation from the nest. However, construction near the upper rimrock would encroach severely on the nest site because the birds use the upper rim as a perching area. Noise from construction activities, lawn mowing, vehicles, loud music or voices could all disturb the birds during the nesting period (February 1 through August 1.) Disturbance could cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest which would leave the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold or predation. Increased recreational use of the river during nesting season could also be a significant conflict. This recreational use is unlikely with the present ownership pattern because there is no public access to the river. However, intensification of recreational or training activities on the Outward Bound property during the nesting period could cause significant conflict with the birds. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. There is no evidence of farm use within the sensitive habitat area. The county is prohibited by state statute from regulating farm practices. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Enercgy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Restricting residential development for the sixteen ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 3 0135-2335 RR -10 zoned parcels would have significant economic impact by reducing the value of the properties. Limiting the location of development would not reduce the value of the property to the degree of prohibition of development. The site is not commercial forest land so economic consequences of forest practices is non-existent. Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Limiting expansion of the Outward Bound facility could result in added training costs for the organization. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. Some home buyers will pray higher prices for property that has resident wildlife or wildlife, such as golden eagles, in close proximity. Property value may decrease if special setbacks or covenants are required that could diminish the view from a home site. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequence of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. Prohibiting residential development on the parcels within the sensitive habitat area would have significant social impact as property owners would be unable to develop their property. Limiting the location of development would have less social consequence because homes could still be constructed. (C) Environmental Consequences There is a high probability that the environmental consequence of allowing unregulated residential development in the sensitive habitat area would be abandonment of the nest. Suitable cliff habitat is a scarce resource and could not be replaced. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 4 0135-2336 Development in the sensitive habitat area could cause nest failure and would result in alteration of foraging range. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. Residential development might include the establishment of lawns which would require removal of native vegetation which could provide screening for the houses from the nest and also provide habitat for other wildlife. Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. (D) Energy Consequences The energy consequence of allowing residential development are the increased use of fuels for transportation to a remote development and the increased cost of other services such as law enforcement and fire protection. There are no negative energy consequences from prohibiting development in the sensitive habitat area. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). 1. In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited_ conflicting uses, single family dwellings within the sensitive habitat area shall be allowed if they meet the special setbacks established below and mapped on "Attachment B" Map and Lot # Special Setback 14 -12 -22 -DO -100 50 feet from upper rimrock 14 -12 -22 -DO -200 150 feet from upper rimrock 14 -12 -22 -DO -300 150 feet from upper rimrock 14 -12 -22 -DO -400 150 feet from lower rimrock and south of existing driveway. 14 -12 -22 -DO -500 no additional structural development within sensitive ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 5 0135-233' habitat area 14 -12 -22 -DO -600 no special setback 14 -12 -22 -DO -700 no special setback 14 -12 -23 -BO -1000 no structural development within sensitive habitat area. 14 -12 -23 -BO -900 no special setback 14-12-23-00-600 no structural development within to river no build area on Exhibit "A-3" 14 -12 -23 -CO -400 no special setback 14 -12 -23 -CO -500 no special setback 14 -12 -23 -CO -600 no special setback 14 -12 -23 -CO -900 50 feet from rear lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1000 50 feet from rear lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1100 50 feet from rear lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1200 50 feet from rear lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1300 50 feet from rear lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -099 common area - no structural development in sensitive habitat Structure(s) area. 2. On the following lots native vegetation must be maintained on the side(s) of the house or accessory structures facing the nest to provide screening between the development and the nest site. A restrictive covenant for the area between the structures and the river or the rear property line to insure the maintenance of native vegetation shall be granted to the county prior to issuance of a building or septic installation permit. Lawns shall be prohibited within the area subject to the restrictive covenant. Map and Lot # Restrictive Covenant 14 -12 -22 -DO -100 Structure(s) to river 14 -12 -22 -DO -200 Structure(s) to river 14 -12 -22 -DO -300 Structure(s) to river 14 -12 -22 -DO -400 Structure(s) to river and to north lot line 14 -12 -23 -BO -1000 Structure(s) to river and to south lot line 14-12-23-00-600 Structure(s) to river and towards nest site 14 -12 -23 -CO -900 Structure(s) to rear (west) lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1000 Structure(s) to rear (west) lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1100 Structure(s) to rear (west) lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1200 Structure(s) to rear (west) lot line 14 -12 -23 -CO -1300 Structure(s) to rear (west) lot line 3. Conditional uses listed in Title 18.60.030 (RR -10) or ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 6 0135-2338 Title 18.32.030 (MUA-10) shall not be permitted within the sensitive habitat area. 4. For all lots within the sensitive habitat area, construction activities for expansion, maintenance, replacement of existing structures or construction of new structures requiring a building permit from the Deschutes County Community Development Department or septic installation requiring a permit from the Environmental Health Division shall be prohibited during the nesting season from February 1 through August 1. Maintenance and repair of existing structures .not requiring a construction permit, permitted work conducted within a closed structure, or repair of a failing septic system are exempt from this requirement. Construction activity subject to a construction permit from the Community Development Department or a septic installation permit from the Environmental Health Division may occur after May 1, if ODFW determines in writing that the nest site is not active or that the young birds have fledged. 5. Nonfarm partitions to create a parcel for a nonfarm dwelling shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area on 14 -12 -22 -DO -500. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0009-00 Page 7 0135--2339 b lu RAE % LOWER BRIO ----- /�.— a / /, / 1 ' I I j/i V 1 ,Strip...Mme / /i � 2645 �Q BM2 Mil wer -Stri Mlne ridge u p Irem 16 i Qit . ,' /iSTRIP MIrtE� Tank nom— '—��- I / ✓ r�� t 2664 ' H ROAD ,� •' ! '' 2665+ I I I90 r 264 21' 22 c% j o: 0 AA 2990 it it it BM If a 28 27 .�-- --. X3045/ Exhibit Golden Eagle �1 �,% 1 //,� �• /,�� 4 1 14-12-22/NWSW Q135-234O o - N o_ I � Z � o / 4-) rn N tea; /• .-I >~ 0 1 ,Q NON f� 0 Ld r /�� 41 1 C\ir Z g ,r t� W C7 Q an.1000*1 O •r �4 0 o _ Ir A� pal LAJ ,� . - V tit• _ O � r W O 1' y \ M v. 7 w r N zvi - N O VV VO P W N ■irl 1■1illiiii iiT.lii iTi ■ll�[i�i�■li?i ■li?i■li■�lwll ..w N N m U = W U U W Q 0 W N W F-� 0135--23 LOT #, BLK S, L0E CITIZENS SAV. & LOAN . LEGEND 3347 MICNCLSON OR; LL 14-12-23-99 T.L 14-12-23C-1000 I IRIAML CA #2713 RNER SPRINGS ESTATES NO Q CAI EATTLE ANDERSONK EXISTING PROPERTY BOUNDARY & bc �A0AREA SCM INC. M, w LEND. OR. 1937 MOtMpIN QUAD OR LOT 26, BLK 1, OFRP1 ODIN FALLS MNON — — — — — PROPOSED PARTITION UNE LOT i, KK S. LBE OCA CK DONAHOE REDMOND. OR 97756 3220 NW WAY ^„` PLAN REDMOND. OR 97756 OFRP1 ODIN FALLS RANCH, PHASE t T.L 14-12-230-800 r N'T?•k, LOT 7, RK e, LLE S* LOT 30, OLX 1, OFRPI LBE LOWER BRIDGE ESTATES 78284M" 7828 ROURST WAY .i ODIN FALLS RANCH �L s/CMNENTO. CA. 95478 *) • ••••••••••• • APPROX. ADJOINER J BOUNDARY LINE No S�Mu.c�-r�.rz4,i Del% j, o p fh en 530V - 153.6 GENERAL NOTES SCALE 1" = 200' LL 14-12-738-200 r 1) PAST AND PRESENT ZONING MUA-10. LOT 6. OLK S. LLE y R.340.0 PROPOSED USE TO COMPLY WITH SAME. WAYNE KAUTH n L-36.4 300 R STATE ST. ('4707 cHluco, ti wa1 PARCEL 1 2) ACCESS VIA GRUBSTAKE WAY. 0 h� ± 13.1 AC. 3) ACTUAL DIMENSIONS MAY VARY SLIGHTLY i DEPENDANT UPON FIELD SURVEY.APPROK L LOCATIONw 7 4) DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY BY AVION WATER CO. EXISTING RESIDENCE CE E r T.L 14-12-23-12 RNER SPRNCS ESTATES OUNDATION 5) SEWAGE DISPOSAL BY INDIVIDUAL SEPTIC. I' • SO INC.A�� h~ 1937 MOUNTAIN NO. OR f7D� DR REDMO' 736 6) POWER BY CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOP. T.L 14-12-238-1000 LOT 5. MX S, LBE 7) FIRE PROTECTION BY DESCHUTES COUNTY 2e a ANACE OF FS UC 166E - 60.0 RURAL FIRE DISTRICT NO, 1. SAN JOSE, CA. 05134 8) NO WATER RIGHTS APPURTENANT.•' I """" / Ss6'fti R-419.3 I le L-90.93 T.L 14-12-22D-100 LOT t, RLN S. LBC o/ KIT KORISH Box / P.O. BO% 3 r BEND, OR. 97708 T.L 14-12-220-200 LOT 3. BLK 3, LBE WAYNE KAUTH 300 N. STATE ST. /5707 C"ICAGO. IL 60610 4#.W .... r T.L. 14-12-220-300 LOT 2. 8LK 5. LBE =74 Bu MAMELD ACOMONO on nue <� so CEL 2 .0 CEL ± .I AC. , 0,J / SSYE - 89.3 SCE 117.2 v� i LOT 33. LLK I 2 1 OFRPI �•1 O V �,,LOo �JOSt q• 2679 / R-735.3 Rh.• / L-297.5 T.L. 14-12-23C-900 LOT 32, 9LX 1, OFRP1 ODIN FALLS PARCH $38 W HLCHLAND REDMOND, OR 97756 LESTATEOWER S ESTATBRIOOE RNEHES SPR9N7 • S LOCATION '000,�, 4' FALLS TETMEROW 5188tH Q_ CROSSNO 0 1/2 1 = SCALE - MILES T.L 14-12-23C-99 T.L 14-12-23C-1000 I OFRP1. COMMON AREA ........ NO Q CAI EATTLE ANDERSONK 11045 & bc SE THIRD02 M, w LEND. OR. LOT 26, BLK 1, OFRP1 ODIN FALLS MNON LOT i, KK S. LBE OCA CK DONAHOE S E ^• .3 ; 3220 NW WAY ' PLAN REDMOND. OR 97756 W.M. N'T?•k, T.L 14-12-23C-1100 LOT 30, OLX 1, OFRPI ♦ ODIN FALLS RANCH �L 538 W HIGHLAND REDMOND, OR 97756 LESTATEOWER S ESTATBRIOOE RNEHES SPR9N7 • S LOCATION '000,�, 4' FALLS TETMEROW 5188tH Q_ CROSSNO 0 1/2 1 = SCALE - MILES T.L 14-12-23C-99 OFRP1. COMMON AREA ........ ' OWNERS ASSOC. 538 W MCHLANO REDMOND, OR. 97736 T.L 14-12-23C-1200 ' LOT 26, BLK 1, OFRP1 ODIN FALLS MNON 538 W HIGHLAND REDMOND. OR 97756 TENTATIVE PARTITION PLAN LOCATED IN SECTION 23, T14S, R12E, W.M. VICINITY MAP TO MADW TO REDMOND 1. APPLICANT & OWNER: RENEE WHITE 12350 SW MILLVIEW COURT TTr`A13n nD 0'70'3Q Exhibit 11A-3'1 Golden Eagle DE -0009-00 14-12-22/NWSW ®135-2� 42 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION GOLDEN EAGLE SITES #DE0011-00 and DE0011-01 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified two golden eagle nest sites as DE0011-00 (map number 15-12-00-100) The sites are known as Radio Tower/Deschutes. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the nest sites. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The nests are both cliff nests located in the rimrock of the Deschutes River Canyon. Site DE0011-00 is located on the west side of the canyon. Site DE0011-01 is approximately 200 yards downstream on the east side of the canyon. Both sites are on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land. Site DE0011-00 was active in 1993. The nesting period is from February 1 through August 1. The sensitive habitat area on the west side of the river is zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFUTE) and contains BLM land and Deschutes County land. On the east side of the river, there are 13 lots zoned multiple use agriculture (MUA-10) in the sensitive habitat area. Eleven of the MUA-10 zoned lots contain residences. Seven lots, developed with residences, are located along the canyon rimrock. The nests are not in line -of -sight of the existing dwellings. The two undeveloped MUA10 zoned lots are approximately 600 feet from the canyon rim. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0011-00 and DE0011-01 Page 1 MUA-10 0135-2343 -Single family dwelling -Public park, playground -Utility facility -Dude ranch -Farm use -Home occupation -Personal use landing strip -Recreation facility -Bed and breakfast inn -Destination resort -Guest house The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from February 1 through August 1. There are already 11 residences within 1320 feet of nest DE0011-00. The closest residence is approximately 800 feet on the other side of the canyon from the nest site. The land immediately adjacent to the nest is undeveloped and is owned by the BLM or Deschutes County. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. There is an undeveloped subdivision beyond the western edge of the sensitive habitat area. The undeveloped subdivision, in addition to the adjacent county and BLM land, provides foraging habitat and buffer from conflicting noise and activity. Development of this subdivision may increase the recreational activity along the rim of the canyon and disturb the birds during the nesting season. However, the subdivision is outside of the sensitive habitat area. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Farm use on the private and BLM land is limited to grazing which is not a conflicting use. State statute prohibits regulation of farm practices. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Restricting ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0011-00 and DE0011-01 Page 2 0135-2344 structural development within one quarter mile of the nest site would prevent two owners of MUA-10 zoned lots from constructing residences. This would be a loss of economic value of their land. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of prohibiting residential development on the two undeveloped MUA-10 lots would be significant, as the owners would be unable to develop their property with uses that are permitted in the zone. Prohibiting development on the publicly owned land within the sensitive habitat area would provide a positive social consequences by providing continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds and have public access to the canyon rim and river. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing residential development of the two undeveloped MUA-10 zoned lots in the sensitive habitat area would be minor because the nest site is buffered on the west side by BLM and Deschutes County land which will be managed to protect the habitat. Also, the MUA-10 zoned lots adjacent to the undeveloped lots are already developed and the increase of two houses would not significantly alter the_ existing condition of the habitat. Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0011-00 and DE0011-01 Page 3 0135-2345 There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource sites and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. The County shall require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 3. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive hatitat area shall be prohibited on the following lots because they are in public ownership, and there is area outside the sensitive habitat area for structural development: 15-12-01DO-2900 Deschutes County 15-12-01CO-100 Deschutes County 15-12-0000-100 BLM 4. Residential development will be allowed on the following two lots zoned MUA-10: 15-12-01DO-600 15-12-OIDO-900 ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0011-00 and DE0011-01 Page 4 0135-2346 .,�jl / Z600r/J. 29/9c- rw,/, r \ V I 1 •' _ 2935 1 -J to n 2ea 7"1a d-� =-- ---- f 0 17Etx 1- c� uz ` 5 JiL 'I X2940 e✓ • ___ � -- 1. Radi t Fa I � a .Mlle a . i/� ✓_ 14 �. ' I Flume'- 2 16 FRAN I! ROAD �'• �� ROAD .\ 00%� 2863111= I� `� _ 2950 .• 2957 •:' n � � .% �� / I \._/1''60- �. \� �- 29' ` RD0 t �ti6oJ // I�W oo 2960 . w. •2982 / _ pi- o �� -'�� 297d `gyp OGG •.�I RO - :ll ^ -- - SEDGEW/ K R1 3002 r g 00,1t 0 is BM ' 2988 o / o 18 .. .Redmond 17 "13� i. �' o �;-:Substation eM o 99270 u. 3013 ; • :. �� ... • ° o o ii o :o O `•� ,�{r• - _ 303/'`: .. 3007 TK/NSON - ROAD I t 8M 8 1893 H3011. 0 , 3000 -. ° i o Ii � 631' • Exhibit n Golden Eagle I•= % �� ;r -° o - DE-0011-00/DE-0011-01 /3041. 15-12-01/NWSE/NESE SCALE 1 : 48000 0135-234"1 1200010 2000 4000 FEET 0 1 2 s<■ Mop 15 .1 KILOf ETER O — I t I 1 = $1 / —1--1-- ----1--L-- -- L-- L-- L- m _ u - N C o ~ 8 `8ml ly Ik - d I I 8 (• C T \• O /� i NC7 1 O+II V V' {t• O W I 'Ln ± - 8 O O pO r1772 "" m m o I t 0 ml I 0 O X11 � I Ya o� ■gp�■w[f' c/i I I w - �! bS�' • r,., m N I -- I to 9 ` r a , ? _ -- C C CO C, ' C O N n %- • O O 'D Ul ■�.■�•.� i O a n ! o p= cn M. >OO(n IV _a,,,, n m m ARl W V� N m C/.,) N m — NO� B _2 r v m - zEz Uy C.02 F C.: f m m ccn N m rn m i ?i 9 .: uIA D w 1 i• a til■3 u o a OOOF"O •� , `7 �� -N3 N O D � ♦ ti.l.fo 1 N V 1 1 G� Q; s rn N..��((�� m s mi > �9 � N I 5 cn Lti� s z W ( 1� N U 9n+ s Ito cn to p - 21. '� 00 -Dp `'ate ; .� —■ rV.:N 20 f V Y En s« MaD 15 13 PARTITION PL AT NQ 1991-43' 7,) (� C, N Exhibit "A-2" Golden Eagle - - DE-0011-00/DE-0011-01 l 15-12-01/NWSE/NESE 'c+C N T1 C ! `, � \.J`+ rr �A �♦ m `o \`•' G 0 *� Fr _ T •`�� t f �� o , 0 911 4. : I` Nin I ^�;Lk10 0 O O ' '' O STREET t 55TH. - )ro.Y a.. �1• N L N :� � � a A • m w i M � 4 0 1 ro a o I v ~ N •N• N `0 Lu m ` a 53RD. s _ 7Z7.< <� 17 w 1 N p O m O O O O C .. ♦ — • N�) N t N C=D O O O m jf o • I - a' Set Mon lS ID 6 /1 J �. O 'n K _, m m m O 0 m � o a c o o , d� r-� j 7' i m� cn � n - m. Q 0 0 C: z O N O O_ K jm j OM A m O 00o Z7 O O N A O O t=i U1 N 0 x NO�2.N N O (D V _— t O F� rt- 1. � -0 \ O Q 7 � 1 O cL2 > !n0(D w txi tai - 1 z 0 -- c=i 0 �N to N 0 0135-2`19 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0012-00 and DE0012-01 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified two nest sites: DE0012-00 (map number 15-11-00-800) and DE0012-01 (14-11-00-6200). The sites are located on the rim of in Deep Canyon. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of each nest site. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". Site DE0012-01 and the sensitive habitat area are located on federal land (Bureau of Land Management) and is therefore not subject to this ESEE analysis and decision. The site is included on the inventory of golden eagle sites on federal land. 2. Site Characteristics. Site DE0012-00 and DE0012-01 are alternate nest sites for a pair of golden eagles. Site DE0012-00, Upper Deep Canyon, is located in an old growth ponderosa pine tree approximately one quarter mile north of Highway 126. Approximately 10 acres of a 99 acre, privately owned, undeveloped parcel is located within the sensitive habitat area (15-11-00-900). The remainder of the sensitive habitat area is federal land. The sensitive habitat area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFUSC). 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast RR -10 -Single family dwelling -Public park, playground -Utility facility -Dude ranch -Farm Use -Home occupation -Personal Use landing strip ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0012-00 and DE0012-01 Page 1 -Recreation Facility 0135--2350 -Bed and breakfast inn The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance, including noise or human activity, within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from February 1 through August 1. Dwelling location is restricted by the Wildlife Area Combining zone to the area within 300 feet of an existing road. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Farm use in the sensitive habitat area is limited to grazing which is not a conflicting use. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Restricting structural development within the sensitive habitat area for the privately owned parcel would not preclude development of this parcel and therefore the value of the property would not be significantly reduced. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0012-00 and DE0012-01 Page 2 watchers to study and enjoy the birds. 0135-2`51 Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence because only approximately 10 acres of the 93 acre privately owned parcel are within the sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. The county shall require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 3. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited on the following properties because they are federal land or there are alternate locations for structures ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0012-00 and DE0012-01 Page 3 outside of the sensitive habitat area. 15-11-00-502 15-11-00-800 15-11-00-900 15-11-00-6200 ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0012-00 and DE0012-01 Page 4 Ur, -V V 1G -V V 1 Ur: -V V lz-V l 15-11-03/NWNE 14-11-35/SWNW 0135-2354 202. -'�� S��-,�F ' 6-3 . P' Ful, •-• 2025 17 (6- / I 14 SEE 23 � EfU � ,< 6-13A 16.23 a 200 e Ef USC - �1 aA F A _ ,, EFULB �� SEE MAP 2011 21SB ._._._. •' _l SEE AP •�,� �� 91 0 ,600 • 2ro1 + 3 1 21, i ti t !4600 4400 _ �` 5601 EfU '6•22 C USCI T? ,�. _._ M«3; VY SEE MAP P AP 'SEE -Map EFULB ..700 450Q_ 0/ 6 i 6302 6400 moo 1 F.:..T 6.12 _._.1 2.3 . 5601 i , 5600 4800 r 620C' 6200, 6302 1 6300 EF_SC r ; SEE MAeL.,"I ; -SEE, MAPF. i I 51300 _—:32 - _�_.:_.,: 31 3f} 3,_.�._•• 36 -- -..y � - ..cos DE0012-0 j 8 -3C0 t00 , 200200 100 o I _ ¢ 600 . 2 , 600 400 ---- 400 300 SEE MAP SEE MAP 5 4 soft •fin 302 90C? 02 x So3 — 301 MC K IE -HIGHWAY .q Soo 1000 " .;••,�� .�._ ..,._ .�.�' 7!3'!'^' SEE MAP SEE ni�■ �� + •'_'• m 15 tinge 15 11 9A e00 SEE MAP 2500 r ` 8 j ` 604 2411 2403 21300 I I &1EFusC °� n 2300 2600 2600 400 2401 2500 2500 1302 2600 2600 SO2 SEE MAP X96 2402 2500 1302 zsoa 1 Sm i 3000 ". 3000 _ s 623 2-3 EfUSC 3301 zea ceo01 2401 2700 -- - •, • 2500 — EEuTus 1 "M ---- Exhibit "A-2" Golden Eagle DE-0012-00/DE-0012-01 14-11-03/NWNE 14-11-35/SWNW ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2U`55 GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0013-00 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a golden eagle nest site in Buckhorn Canyon, DE0013-00 (map number 14-12-00-2603). The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of each nest site. The habitat site is designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. Site DE0013-00 is located parcel zoned Exclusive Farm the site has been abandoned may be used by other raptors 3. Program To Meet Goal 5. on a privately owned 319 acre Use (EFUTE). ODFW reports that since the mid 1970s. However, it and future nesting eagles. The Board of County Commissioners finds that because the nest site has been abandoned for approximately 20 years it is not an important Goal 5 resource. The site will be removed from the county inventory in accordance with OAR 660-16-000(5)(a). The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will continue to monitor the site. If ODFW provides the county with information that the site is active, the county shall review the site in accordance with OAR 660-16 to determine its significance as Goal 5 resources. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0013-00 Page 1 0135-2350 LOWER BRIDGE •� p 11 n v�trlp .Mine B z J j Mil � c I •fie /C �; 1 / ' wer �"I �� o° r �,. � ��/ / o Strip Mined 1 �/ i I ridge I f'. �� p BM 25✓ .16 x ,STRIP Tank \f i / �`�� . �i. ,� %rte �, � � � ��•-� I //_-� -� .-'12664 �r ROSi j 266 / i 00 21 ) "— 22 _NI _ Z � 00 +1990 0 i o u / / #�4 28 27 0/ 9 B / tl _ 3045 i -. J\J /u_� _tel` ,✓ �j 264 BM Exhibit "A-1" Golden Eagle DE -0013-00 I n — I 'I — `% 0 1 1,TT.T1.TT.7 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 01352 i GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0014-00 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a golden eagle nest site DE0014-00 (map number 16-11-00-00-7800). The site is also known as Tumalo Dam. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of each nest site. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The site is located on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land in an old growth ponderosa pine tree east of Sisemore Road. The nest has been active off and on for 40 years. It produced two young in 1992. The area around the nest is forested with sparse juniper and ponderosa pine. To the west of the nest is a flat grassy area known as Bull Flat. Tumalo Reservoir is south west of the site. The property within the sensitive habitat area is either BLM or Tumalo Irrigation District land. The sensitive habitat area is zoned Open Space Conservation (OSC), Flood Plain (FP), Wildlife Habitat Combining Zone (WA), and Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM). 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use OSC -Farm use -Picnic or campground -Public park, recreation -Utility facility area -Commercial recreation facility -Rockhound site -Water supply & treatment facility. Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use FP -Farm use (no structure) -Road or bridge -Forest management -Single family dwelling -Open space -Agricultural accessory buildings -Recreation Uses The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0014-00 Page 1 0 141- during the nesting period from February 1 through 1 ugust 1� Residential development is improbable because of the zoning and the ownership of the land in the sensitive habitat area. Except for grazing, farm use is not likely in the area because of ownership, topography, and soil capability. The most significant conflict to this site is traffic or road construction work on Sisemore Road during the nesting period. Road construction or maintenance during the nesting period could disturb the birds. Scheduling of these activities is not subject to review under the zoning ordinance. Also increased recreation use could cause disturbance to the birds during the nesting period. There are currently no plans for intensive recreational development in the area. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Farm use in the area is limited to grazing which is not a conflicting use. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Prohibiting structural development within the sensitive habitat area would have insignificant economic consequences as the types of structures permitted in the OSC and FP zone are limited and could be located in other places on the two properties within the sensitive habitat area. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. (B) Social Consequences ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0014-00 Page 2 0135-2359 The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence because the current zoning limits the use and type of structure. Recreational development could occur on other portions of the two properties which are partially within the sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, uses both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Structural development shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area. 2. The county shall require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0014-00 Page 3 requiring a land use permit. 0135"2360 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0014-00 Page 4 "IMV 0135-2361 j3300•` r- 22 \ a 11 i� 3400 II �� 1 1 V i II J RO 3401 !I II u \ u 41a 27` -i io ,r k Dam e 5J �NA3IONALFOREST, li i ROAD ii it Exhibit "A-1" Golden Eagle DE -0014-00 1 ti -1 1 —70 /ATT.TQ' M aSMN/6Z—TT-9T 00—VT00—aa ajbpg uapZoD ,V,, gtgtyx3 #135 -72362 --- SCALE 1 : 48000 2000 0 2000 4000 FEET 0 1 2 KILOMETER Se. M 16 10 rri .�A y"' —' O. YI I t I tN I i- i♦ T M � r I .- I :1 '•N I � N I = fl u t E � — 1 — 1 _ `� �•�•�m'i+." — � n V m D 4 em• \� I 1 i'•.: �Mt,3 a 1.. ti p�,y OI O O En rn OD :P r •�it•�• � J 1 � � �► 25 ��DO ' tJl � • ;ice ^{ �I■� N m '� 8 0 0 '2��•rn j v� m m(1 m •: W e' c` w D V' (I // m z c .... .�. cnrr .L.......o / 1 z cn m -< cn m m m 1 M cn m _ W m N m N O of D >D CO* 'gym D D D 4tt 0 8 _ n .�.�..... t — e N Cn m �m gm m `N _ > 2s 'v o S.. M■• 16 12 Exhibit "A-2" _ .. - ---- - Golden Eagle DE -0014-00 16-11-29/NWSE ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION M35-2363 GOLDEN EAGLE SITES #DE0015-00 and DE0015-01 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified two golden eagle nest sites in Township 14S, Range 11E, Section 3, Tax Lot 400. The ODFW identifiers for the sites are DE0015-00 and DE0015-01. The sites are known as Squaw Creek/Rimrock. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of the nest sites. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. One nest is located in an old growth ponderosa pine tree on the east side of Squaw Creek. Another nest, which has been active most recently is located on a cliff down stream on the east side of the creek. Access to the sites is limited by locked gates. The nest sites are located on a private ownership that is approximately 443 acres. The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use in the Sisters Cloverdale subzone (EFUSC). There are also Flood Plain, Landscape Management Combining (LM) and Wildlife Area Combining (WA, deer winter range) zones on the property. The assessor's records do not show a dwelling on the property. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0015-00 and DE0015-01 Page 1 0135-2364 The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from February 1 through August 1. Because the property is remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited located within the sensitive habitat area. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. A farm or nonfarm dwelling, if approved as a conditional use, could be located outside of the senstive habitat area as the property is over 400 acres in size and the sensitive habitat area is 125 acres. Dwelling location is also restricted by the landscape management zone, wildlife area combining zone and flood plain. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Farm use on the private BLM land is limited to grazing which is not a confliciting use. 4. Economic Social Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences The economic consequence of restricting forest practices could result in a reduction of timber available for harvest. Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the nest site would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0015-00 and DE0015-01 Page 2 (B) Social Consequences 0135-2355 The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However, because the nest and senstive habitat area are on private land public access is limited. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Structural development shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area. 2. The county shall require site plan review under the ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0015-00 and DE0015-01 Page 3 0135-2366 Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 4. Forest practices may occur during the nesting period. However, the Oregon Department of Forestry regulates forest practices and is required by the State Forest Practices Act to develop a management plan for forest practices.within one half mile of a sensitive bird nest site. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0015-00 and DE0015-01 Page 4 0135-2367 Golden Eagle DE-0015-00/DE-0015-01 14-11-03/NENW/SESW 0135-2368 Fq ZI 611 a,w ,ag -t,2-Z66 I'ON IVId NOU118Vd 8 Ej< C= EJ X — - LA— LLN' I L.Lj W M.3 + N -02 ;Z A k7-- - a ilin, CO"J 10 N fir. CC 2,L 10 C—I 2 C\j C\j uiw W, zm- W 0 z Z cr 0 3n CQL :0 0 < ma it LO "fto t.cm w w w CLL- ga� f) LAj LN -I w Lz 10 8 10 C\j J C%4 (D ti QO L&- w w rT 48 LLJ uj WW 01 'A 0 133-q Owl? -000?. 0 OOOZ 0008V : L 3-1vos C4 w do" 4-5 Exhibit "A-2" Golden Eagle DE-0015-00/DE-0015-01 14-11-03/NFNWISPRW ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 2369 GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0029-00 p135— 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified a golden eagle nest site in Township 20S, Range 17E, Section 36 (map number 20-17-00-3801). The ODFW identifier for the site is DE0029-00. The site is known as Twin Pines. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of the nest site. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The nest is located in a ponderosa pine tree. It was active in 1992 and produced one eagle. The nest is located on a private 635 acre parcel zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFUHR) and Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA). The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from February 1 through August 1. Because the property is remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be located within the sensitive habitat area. A farm or nonfarm dwelling, if approved as a conditional use, could be located outside of the sensitive habitat area as the property is ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0029-00 Page 1 0135--2370 635 in size and the sensitive habitat area includes only 125 acres of the property. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Enercty Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the nest site would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However, because the land in the sensitive habitat area is private, public access may be prohibited. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0029-00 Page 2 0135-23'71 Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Structural development shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area. 2. The county shall require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0029-00 Page 3 0135-2372 n' it l; / if 453 5�r-cra�� 4852 X4574 4,550 Ik 600 47'30„ —�t "JI �i-1�\1� -J\! .,4""� \✓ l!1 'I 1 Q w •1 15 1 1 ��1 _ I � O0 .4886 u 3 "50 y 4826 `eso ,Soo 176 \. {,4854 fl---_ .4 7 �\\ \ 14996 73 X. 4849 4.850 !919 48561 i � � 4 1795 \ ' 4848 751 .......... .p � � �� s� •�,\ 1 � ( 4750 4820 11 iy 1 \ -- vv 4-11 Exhibit "A-1" Golden Eagle DE -0029-00 �n-i�-ztiiNwcF T 22 5 77— w W J N 14 N G Cyt` c 0135-2373 Fit 14, _ _ (� I,♦� . f � � .-------- - �• 2{j _ _ yf O •D 1 O �� ♦�wa� c i�- •-- -- --_._ � � �1 C o,� Om '. � y m � i .ren -l- L fA Cq io I � C; J�O� � y �a k� •. ;u•+ CIT to .1c iD N 1 i J o J 1-- -- 4 Z� f .co M Q m W I 2 N_ W W W W 0 W W io co 40 a�lg 1 Q -- _ 0z ' "S Exhibit "A-2" 8313W01,N Golden Eagle DE -0029-00 a L 0 209-17-36/NWSE 133 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION GOLDEN EAGLE SITE #DE0034-00 and DE0034-01 0135-2374 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified two golden eagle nest sites: DE0034-00 (map number 15-10-00-00-1400) and DE0034-01 (map number number 15-11-00-00-1400). The sites are also known as the Lazy Z/USFS sites. Both sites are located on Deschutes National Forest land. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of each nest site. The habitat sites and.sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The sites are alternate nest sites for a single pair of birds. The area around the nests is forested. The sensitive habitat area for site DE00034-00 is entirely on federal land and is zoned Forest Use (F1). The sensitive habitat are for site DE00034-01 includes federal land and a portion of a 156 acre tax lot (15-10-00-1800) that is part of a large ranch. Sixty acres of the tax lot are irrigated and the remainder is dry. The sensitive habitat area for site DE0034-01 is zoned Forest Use (F1) and Exclusive Farm Use (EFUSC). 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use F1 -Forest practices -Parks and campgrounds -Distribution lines -Fire station -Portable processing -Forest management dwelling ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0034-00 and DE0034-01 Page 1 0135-2375 forest products -Caretaker residences for parks or hatcheries The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from February 1 through August 1. The private land within the sensitive habitat area is currently undeveloped. There is land outside of the sensitive habitat area where structural development could occur. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. The county has no authority to regulate commercial forest practices. Forest practices are regulated by the Oregon Department of Forestry through the Oregon Forest Practices. Farm use on the private and USFS is limited to grazing which is not a conflicting use. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Prohibiting structural development within the sensitive habitat area on the one private parcel would have minimal economic impact as there are other locations where farm buildings or residences could be constructed. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. Restricting commercial forest activity could reduce revenues or increase expenses for private land owners. However, the county does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial forest practices. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. (B) Social Consequences ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0034-00 and DE0034-01 Page 2 0135-23'76 The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence because owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences Golden eagles, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Structural development shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area on the tax lot identified as 15-10-00-1800. 2. The county shall require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0034-00 and DE0034-01 Page 3 0135--237 for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 4. Forest practices may occur during the nesting period either on the Deschutes National Forest or on the private forest land. However, the Oregon Department of Forestry regulates commercial forest practices on private land. Forest practices on the Deschutes National Forest are regulated by the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0034-00 and DE0034-01 Page 4 0135-23'8 If \ , tri I (� 11'1 yyilil l l �' ( Sisters I • ° I \`'' OIL A379 f I I 2 'r 2 '� •/ I�bndg�l Park I •I � -co ,�� 9 BD A\ ' • ' I _� - a, rr • _ _�=—.1__ - - 'i --ter 1 0 m ' !1 rr � � ✓'/li4 \ it �O •i // I \ \�\ 4 _ v �I I /ir E' '0 al a i1/ ~ �� — — ---- 6 - -- (( Exhibit "A-1" Golden Eagle DE-0034-00/DE-0034-01 u -„ ( 15-10-15/SENW Ox _w 0 IN -BI-13VA! !2- N01S 3L! i ro w , 1 ' uwi �= N to n 'm a¢ 'OWN 'mmn n • • d ••Q•• ,.I..n • • • ( m_•: N • w r n� ti V •^tr "s 0135-23`9 Q a Q a 2 v to LJ N ! r-1 w tV w d w H O 1 M O O I - W 3 0 Z I r•+ � w 4 IT O cA O \ w I In i-3 d' H -,I M I ,Q lv 0 0 -,A 'O O r I x 0 U) W0tot-A `� s u 2C • - �•• 1• z\ Q M a • p Q0 ro _._ cn i • o •� K � C u 1 a W W • I• �' N N d 11 w[may _ �,I � �(^ 45 �w I �cn a I �Fry� _ `` 1 . •. N.. LTL' I — _ - - �• • 1 0 � _ �Y�.. �.�BI'Z ^t tater ��1. ��' i �_� •� N ww y...u.n f.i► �P 0��-1•—•—•�':d�W 335v 3-n -'=—•�.r ^ .. _—. —_' 99 rte♦ _ r��` 0 �d to a� ; Q ti ('� S m �•�ti; ` cv ....•rte 'W w : i�- — W S •:, N� •, M W N•r �� W , 1 •>. V17 lip�1 o •- x o ti 1 w �.+.: °' Li M 'ern - `+ � it • - 1- a l I - I • >I 1 t t a l � _ ! + 1 s l s r l a l `,Y .\ - I •,•! 1 ,u= '' I -a 1 "'L t nt I .a y I ..4 1 n• I es ;. • t ,"'e I na 1 ra -• I N= I "c .,.1 6 SI a•w •aS 133131NO�i� z 0 133 0001, OOOZ 0 OOOZ 0008V : L 31VOS 0135-2380 TABLE 16 PRAIRIE FALCON NEST SITE INVENTORY NEST SITES ON NON-FEDERAL LAND OR WITH NON-FEDERAL SENSITIVE HABITAT AREA ODFW Site # Map & Tax Lot Quarter General Location Section DE 0016-00 22-16-00-100 12/SWSE Dickerson Flat DE 0031-00 16-11-00-5600 20/NESE Tumalo Dam DE 0031-01 16-11-20-400 20/SESW Tumalo Dam DE 0794-01 14-13-11-100 it/NWSW Smith Rock State Park Exhibit 111" for Ordinance No. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2381 PRAIRIE FALCON SITE# DE0016-00 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a prairie falcon nest site in Township 22S, Range 16E, Section 12 (map number 22-16-00-100). The ODFW identifier for the site is DE0016-00. The site is known as Dickerson Flat. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the nest site. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The nest has been active since it was first observed in 1970. The nest is located on a private 959 acre parcel zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA). The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast The conflicting uses would be any structure or activity which would cause disturbance within 1320 feet of the nest site during the nesting period from March 1 through August 1. Noise from construction activities, machinery operation, vehicles, loud music, voices or human activity within the sensitive habitat area could disturb the birds ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0016-00 Page 1 0135-2382 during the nesting period. Disturbance could interfere with establishment of the nest or cause the adults to temporarily abandon the nest leaving the eggs or young birds vulnerable to cold, heat, or predation. Because the property is remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. A farm or nonfarm dwelling, if approved as a conditional use, could be located more than 1320 feet from the nest sites as the property is 635 acres and there is land outside of the sensitive habitat area where a residence could be located. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the nest site would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0016-00 Page 2 0135-2383 (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0016-00 Page 3 0135-22M ?I 7T 1 FL IFL Ij 18 Z 51Z 902 FL\ t 48sm!,L Z72 1X483, - - - - - - - - - - - 4 90 9T - X X.) Ij ( D'1 IX 81 1P 431670 X SAA -V12-72' 4EL X 4S5 X 01 < T 48 3 Cl T X Y. !.'4820.7 , Whiskey Rock L4 V;- LDX 60V 71� Exhibit "A-1" Prairie Falcon DE -0016-00 22-16-12/SWNE 0135-2385 FEET 0 2 See M.♦ 22 Is KILOMETER ;J "'� r v r 's • ifii ;r! '♦ ♦ ;• ,r it v Iv io • W I V N ^i J'� �- (� A I p W I� N 1� � I O a 1 •11 4. N I I r I l A 1 0 V 1♦ A WO l� J► --- ,,° — •------I------ —•yam---�---- II It �� a I u 11 ;i II 'O 0p e% L� r• v. 11 li N u� �•��1 -- e� OD-- -j------v-- —T—=^I iP N 11 II 1 J it .II 1♦ A I II I J II , - 6 T7 ( II ♦ 1 " 1y u 11 N---- G � • ( 11 1 ° 1 iC 1 ItIt r of It I" f 11 Ip �►/� I I 1 1 I° lu _ f IJ a I u � • If 1 W II� Op 1♦ N Z 01 • ( 11 A IV Ia N Na a � � - __ _— 0I a Q Se. Mop 22 17 Q !! Ir I - 113— Exhibit "A-1" CI Prairie Falcon DE -0016-00 22-16-00-100 0135-23-86 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION --- PRAIRIE FALCON SITES DE0031-00 and DE0031-01 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a two prairie falcon nest sites in Township 16S, Range 11E, Section 20 (map number 16-11-00-5600 and 16-11-20-400). The ODFW identifiers for the sites are DE0031-00 and DE0031-01. The sites are also known as Tumalo Dam. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the each nest site. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat areas are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The sites are located in the cliffs in the canyon below Tumalo Dam. They are alternate sites for a single pair of birds. Site DE0031-00 was active in 1993 and produced two young. Site DE0031-00 and the sensitive habitat area are located entirely on federal (BLM) land and is zoned Forest (Fl) . Site DE0031-01 is located on private land and the sensitive habitat area includes two private 20 acre parcels zoned Forest (F-2). The two private parcels are both developed with residences. Both sites are also zoned Wildlife area Combining Zone (WA) because of deer winter range. The federal land within the sensitive habitat area is part of the Tumalo Natural Area which is an area managed jointly by the Bend Parks and Recreation Foundation Bureau of Land Management as a wildlife refuge and natural area. The nesting period for prairie falcons occurs between March 1 and August 1. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use F1 -Forest practices -Distribution lines -Portable processing forest products -Farm use F2 -Same as F1 above -Parks and campgrounds -Fire station -Forest management dwelling -Caretaker residences for parks/hatcheries. -Same as F1 above -Private hunting and ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0031-00 and DE0031-01 Page 1 0135-238'7 -Nonforest dwelling -Temporary hardship dwelling -Home occupation -Campground The two private parcels within the sensitive habitat area are already developed with residences. Except for a medical hardship dwelling, there is no potential for additional residential development or land division because of the forest zoning (F2). A medical hardship dwelling could be a conflict because of the increase in traffic and the number of people and resulting activity in the sensitive habitat area. A home occupation could be a conflict if it increased traffic or generated noise during the nesting season. A campground or hunting lodge are unlikely potential developments because the two private lots are already developed for residential use. However, if allowed on the public land, the increased number of visitors could cause disturbance to the birds during nesting season. The sensitive habitat is predominately juniper forest and is not commercial forest. Therefore, commercial forest activities are not a conflict. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences The two private properties are already developed with residences. Therefore, restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the nest site would have a negligible economic effect because the property is already developed. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Some home buyers will pay higher prices for property that has resident wildlife or wildlife such as falcons in close proximity to the property. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the nest site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0031-00 and DE0031-01 Page 2 0135-2388 Additional structural development not associated with the existing residential use within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have already realized the residential use of the property. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the failure of nesting, abandonment of the nest site, or alteration of foraging area. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Medical hardship residences, campgrounds and hunting or fishing lodges shall be prohibited. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. In addition the Tumalo Natural Area is jointly managed by the Bend Parks and Recreation Foundation and the Bureau of Land Management to enhance wildlife habitat. ESEE Findings and Decision - Sites DE0031-00 and DE0031-01 Page 3 0135-2389 22 01 Ila In 1 473 ' l DOUGH. 3401 UMALO N It 4-4 .--,. �` � •^� \ �\ \�\ � � �— � ms`s _..�- �\ 1 ` � _ / ,yk ;, � _ i11��1 — 41•/ ��_ 5:`. •: '•)i �.`;` , ' r k Dem _�: i/rs► n ::r -:.i:<,: : �..• .� ;Fiume .. �i .�. �•�'+;.?�: :•" TUMALO ESERVOIR :O• _y�f ROAD • �@a` : /�,� jJ..? �Q..t"•�'•." ¢�N..t.'::,•:.1� i../� �ITVMALO ` � N� _ � p [,31 • ''a•�'��' ',, ,+d.••.,,,: d?,-,- tea'` :'.. -soen sa N '�� •'e � �� °.1�. �:"Y, ......' t�� J�\JJJ .'�� --�• .. • sem _ . �,„ � •`s�.•• _ / ,•.�NAYTBNAL� .�•�FOII$ - A BOtFNDARY 1 0� yr '�.. .• ._ : �s off a � _ N Exhibit "A-1" Prairie Falcon DE-0031-00/DE-0031-01 16-11-20/NESE/SESW O V1. r U b M 1all r1 w � r O H* P.r O ti CY I w N• r• Nr m rt O 10 F�J Z o W rndn n� m m o - � I � cn o m o En w r 0 5.. Moo 16 12 0135-2390 KILOMETER 0135-2391 11 91 deal -S Exhibit "A-3" Prairie Falcon DE-0031-00/DE-0031-01 16-11-20/NESE/SESW 0135-2392 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION PRAIRIE FALCON SITE DE0794-00 and DE0794-01 SMITH ROCK STATE PARK 1. Inventor The Oregon State Parks Division has identified two prairie falcon cliff nest sites in Smith Rock State Park. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) identifiers for the prairie falcon sites are DE0794-00 and DE0794-01. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile (1320 feet) radius of each nest site. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat areas are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The nests are located in the cliffs of the rock formations in the Smith Rock State Park. The park is zoned Open Space Conservation (OSC). The land within the sensitive habitat area that is outside of the state park is Exclusive Farm Use (EFU-TE). The land within the sensitive habitat area that is within 660 feet of the Crooked River is zoned Landscape Management Combining zone (LM) which protects the scenic values of the Crooked River corridor. The LM zone is an overlay zone. The uses permitted in the underlying zone are also permitted in the LM zone. The land within the sensitive habitat area north of the Crooked River is also zoned Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA) because it is deer winter range. Two pairs of prairie falcons have nested in the park at the same time. The prairie falcon nests are in the southern part of the park. Site DE0794-00 was active in 1992; Site DE0794-01 has been active every year since at least 1988. The nesting season for prairie falcons is from March 1 through August 1. The entire sensitive habitat area for one of the prairie falcon nests is within Smith Rock State Park. The sensitive habitat area for the southern -most prairie falcon nest (DE -794-01) extends outside of the park and includes portions of the following tax lots which are zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU-TE): 14-13-10-600 Private 30 acres 14-13-10-500 Private 326 acres Approximately 20 acres of the 30 acre tax lot are within the sensitive habitat area. A residence on the 30 acre tax lot is within the sensitive habitat area. The 326 acre tax lot is a ranch with almost 200 acres of irrigated land and no residence. Approximately 20 acres of the 326 acre lot are within the sensitive habitat area. At least 10 of the 20 acres within the sensitive habitat area are located within the Crooked River Canyon below the rimrock. 3. Conflicts Identification. ESEE Findings and Decision - SMITH ROCK STATE PARK SITES Page 1 Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use OSC -Farm use -Public museum -Wildlife refuge -Public park,recreation area EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Farm accessory building -Some road construction 0135-2393 -Picnic or campground -Utility facility -Golf course -Water supply treatment facility -Commercial recreation -Public camp or resort -Rockhound site -Fill and removal in stream -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast The most significant conflicting use is recreational hiking and rock climbing in the state park. This activity has the potential to bring humans into close contact with the birds during the nesting season. The park is regulated by a master plan administered by the Oregon State Parks. One of the objectives of the master plan for the park is: "Maximize protection of significant wildlife and vegetation in the siting and construction of all park development projects." The prairie falcons are disturbed by some climbing routes; but, according to the park manager, the birds do not appear to be disturbed by hikers on established trails. The park closes some climbing routes during the nesting season to minimize the conflicts with the falcons. The potential for conflicting uses permitted in the EFU zone on the private or BLM land within the sensitive habitat area north of the state park is unlikely because of difficult access and the restrictions of the WA and LM zones. A single farm or nonfarm dwelling within the sensitive habitat area the one undeveloped ownership (14-13-10-500) would probably not be a significant conflicting use if the rest of the lot remained in farm use/open space. However, ESEE Findings and Decision - SMITH ROCK STATE PARK SITES Page 2 0135-2394 there is considerably more land on the parcel outside of the sensitive habitat area than within. If nonfarm partitions are permitted within the sensitive habitat area, it could significantly increase the residential density within the sensitive habitat area which would reduce the effectiveness of the open space buffer adjacent to the state park. A personal use airport or storage and crushing of aggregate could conflict with the birds because of increased noise. A private park or campground, bed and breakfast, church or school could conflict with the birds by introducing a level of human activity in an area that is currently undeveloped. Forest practices are not a conflicting use because there is no commercial forest land within the sensitive habitat area. Farm use on the private and BLM land is limited to grazing which is not a conflicting use. State statute prevents regulations to restrict farm practices. Deschutes County has not zoned the area within the sensitive habitat area for destination resorts. Therefore, destination resorts are not addressed as a conflicting use in this ESEE analysis. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences In 1992 the visitation at Smith Rock State park was 350,000; up from 220,000 in 1987. Fifteen thousand visitors camped at the park in 1992; up from 4,600 in 1987. The park manager reports that there are between 45 and 50 jobs in the county directly related to the rock climbing occuring at the park. These jobs include manufacturing of climbing equipment, climbing walls and guiding. Parking and camping fees generated $72,000 dollars for the state park in 1993. This level of_ visitation generates tourism dollars throughout the county. The management plan for the park regulates some climbing routes during the nesting season to reduce the conflict with nesting eagles and falcons. Residential or other structural development could be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area on the EFU zoned land north and west of Smith Rock State Park with minor economic consequence. Only small portions of the two undeveloped private ownerships are within the sensitive area. The private ownership which is mostly within the sensitive habitat area already has a ESEE Findings and Decision - SMITH ROCK STATE PARK SITES Page 3 0135-2395 residence. Structural development could occur outside of the sensitive area on the remaining two ownerships; however, the value of the property may be less because the area within the sensitive habitat on one of the properties (14-13-10-500) is located on the rimrock of the canyon which may be more desireable for building. Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the nesting season. Maintaining nest sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. (B) Social Consequences Prohibiting or restricting the location of structural or other development outside of the park could have a minor social consequence if the property owner wanted to build or otherwise develop within the sensitive habitat area. There are places outside of the sensitive habitat area where structural development could occur, as permitted by EFU zone, on the two undeveloped private ownerships outside of the state park. However, prohibiting structures within the sensitive habitat area may prevent an owner from locating a structure in a preferred location. Permitting the managed recreational use in the state park has a positive social consequence because visitors to the park can enjoy the scenery, hiking, rock climbing, bird watching, picnicing and camping. Placing more restrictions on use of the park could limit the recreational opportunities available. (C) Environmental Consequences Suitable cliff habitat is a scarce resource and could not be replaced. If the recreational use is not managed_ to reduce the conflict with the birds during nesting season, climbers and hikers could harass the birds and cause nest failure or abandonment. Permitting development which would significantly alter the open space characteristics of the EFU zoned land may alter the foraging patterns of the birds threatening nesting success. Raptors, consume considerable numbers of rabbits, ground squirrels and other small prey. Farmers are constantly trying to control these small mammal populations. Loss of raptors could mean a higher use of chemical pesticides which can affect many other mammals, insects and birds. ESEE Findings and Decision - SMITH ROCK STATE PARK SITES Page 4 0135-2396 There are no identified negative environmental consequences of regulating conflicting recreational uses or prohibiting structural development on the EFU zoned land within the sensitive habitat area. (D) Energy Consequences There are no significant energy consequences resulting from prohibiting or permitting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). The Smith Rock State Park Master Plan and management policies for the park reduce the conflict from recreation activities and rock climbing. Each year in March and April the park management, assisted by ODFW or Audubon Society, determines which nests are active. Certain rock climbing routes are closed during the nesting season to protect the active nests. The closure remains in effect until June 30. The climbing route closure program has been in effect for 4 years. The manager of the park reports that the rock climbing community supports the closures. In order to protect both the nest site and sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following requirements shall apply: 1. Site plan review under Section 18.90 of Title 18, Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone, shall be required for all conditional uses, occuring within the sensitive habitat area as designated on Exhibit "A". 2. One farm or non farm dwelling approved under Title 18.16 may be established within the sensitive habitat area on the tax lot described as 14-13-10-500. The dwellings shall be setback at least 50 feet from the uppermost rimrock of the Crooked River canyon. A restrictive covenant shall be required to protect and maintain existing native vegetation between the residential development and the inventoried nest site DE0794-01. 3. Construction activities for expansion, maintenance, replacement of existing structures or construction ESEE Findings and Decision - SMITH ROCK STATE PARK SITES Page 5 0135-2397 of new structures requiring a building permit from the Deschutes County Community Development Department or septic installation requiring a permit from the Environmental Health Division shall be prohibited during the nesting season from March 1 through August 1. Maintenance and repair of existing structures not requiring a construction permit, permitted work conducted within a closed structure, or repair of a failing septic system are exempt from this requirement. Construction activity subject to a construction permit from the Community Development Department or a septic installation permit from the Environmental Health Division may occur after May 1, if ODFW determines in writing that the nest site is not active or that the young birds have fledged. 4. Nonfarm partitions which would create new parcels for residential use or for campgrounds shall be prohibited within the sensitive habitat area in Township 14S, Range 13E, Section 2, 10 or 11. 5. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan recognizes the Smith Rock State Park Master Plan as the controlling document for guiding development within the park (Policy Number 13, Recreation Chapter). The County shall not require site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone for development described in the "Objectives" section of the Development Plan for Smith Rock State Park. Campground or other structural development not included in the Development Plan Objectives (1990) shall be subject to site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone. Construction activities requiring a building permit shall be subject to the construction period limitations of Number 3 above. ESEE Findings and Decision - SMITH ROCK STATE PARK SITES Page 6 0135-2398 s m m m �s s_- - C: •1 rn N d ri CO IV –tm r { $ r m g m --------- • ..�r ...... ;w. . :D '� . o t.— rig t .'. - m } c g ��,•Cm•, •`••,v'• t v -moi �••^ `r _, �•�' i r » 1� .`• _ _ _ •.-.»_�._.».4„ rr'...w�-,n. -gam iivz - -� O % •• i 1 •� i � �' `e r RO W01 - t -..may' `• 1 1 0 m rA o rn 8 IS CO -=-::• ::4)� JET / a - Exhibit "A-1" Prairie Falcon DE -0794-00-01 b 14-13-11/NESW/SWSW 0135-2399 TABLE 17 OSPREY NEST SITE INVENTORY NEST SITES ON NON-FEDERAL LANDS OR WITH NON-FEDERAL HABITAT AREA ODFW Site # Map & Tax Lot Quarter General Location Section DE 0080-00 20-11-00-1300 07/NWNE Sunriver/Meadowland Exhibit 111" for Ordinance No. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION OSPREY NEST - #DE0080-00 1. Inventory. 0135-2400 The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified an osprey nest DE0080-00 (map number 20-11-00-1300). The site is also known as Sunriver/ Meadowland. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 300 foot radius of the nest site. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on maps attached as Exhibit "A". 2. Site Characteristics. The nest is located on a 537 acre parcel south of Spring River Road that is being developed as a golf course and residential development expansion of the Sunriver Resort. The property is zoned Forest (F1) and Flood Plain (FP) with Landscape Management (LM) and Wildlife Area (WA) combining zones. 3. Conflicts Identification. The parcel with the nest is subject to a master plan for a golf course and residential development approved with applications TP -93-817 and SP -2-17. The tentative plat and site plan establish a 300 setback for residential lot lines and roads adjacent to the site. This setback and the design of the golf course mitigates the potential conflicts with the nest. Golf course or road construction activities during the nesting season could disturb the nesting birds, causing nest failure or abandonment. However, construction activities will only occur once. 4. Program to Achieve Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that there are no identified conflicting uses that are not mitigated by the site plan for the Sunriver Resort expansion approved_by TP -93-817 and SP -92-173. The osprey nest is hereby designated a 112A" Goal 5 resource and shall be managed by the master plan for the Sunriver Resort. The plan requires a 300 foot setback from the nest in order to preserve the original character of the nest and adjacent sensitive habitat. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE0080-00 OSPREY Page 1 0135`2401 fi r,� / i SPG �'� :% !7f%ice �� . •%� _�C .1-: ��: Uh - % .. mnver �i 4183 o P •• -�' �r O. - x `' fes, 1... �, (' 8 _ Mile 41691 • � s r // .u4 • �• V' I 11 • I.. i • N • • y / 4_-- xis '!76' ` 17 — �i n I �• • • 1 I .. r ,�,i � • ile 19 11• I <' -�i ( •I 1Vandevert VANUEVERT I • ------' - •' ` •'' Banc . ` I/ 1 h / 4/7" ------ It,%--------- --- `- i� -. • 4173. I p 1 . � 11 11• V 11 it _119 r 20 , x •��y� It L_ �ya4 l.Cd! a n it 1. Exhibit "A-1" Osprey Nest DE -0080-00 20-11-07/NWNE PROP05ED 2C ROA EA6E"ENT TO REPS E ROADWAY EA5EMENT RECORDED IN 332-D- -33 -AIN END PRIVATE ROAD SYSTEM HAVE 2 -\ .-I T G )JR6E 4 ,PAGE 3E 4 R W Ll 013.5-2021 , I - . � . I `-FLOOD PLAIN LIMITS HARPER -sE 5RIDC U E 4 EN SPA a !9 PHASE 4 05f=,FEy NEST /00 Fc NE COR. ... ... SEC. I PHASE F-2 Fc NE COR. ... ... SEC. I EXHIBIT "2" FOR ORDINANCE 94-004 0.135-2403 NOTE: New text is BOLD and deleted text is in brackets [ ]. HABITAT AREAS FOR TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BATS [Description: Caves and other sites used by the Townsend's big -eared bats for hibernating, roosting and nursery.] 1. Inventory: The inventory information presented in the following tables has been provided by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Oregon State University Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit and the Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base. The sites are caves used by Townsend's big -eared bats as nursery and hibernating habitat. The inventory separates sites located on federal land from those on private land. [The federal sites are not analyzed further in the Goal 5 process as they are protected through the management and planning process for federal lands. The sites located on private land are mapped on the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Map. The federal sites are not included on the map unless the impact area around the habitat site extends into private land.] The economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences of conflicting uses for the two sites on private land, Stookey Ranch and Skylight, are analyzed in a separate site specific ESEE analyses and decisions. TABLE [18]20 TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BAT HABITAT SITE INVENTORY PRIVATE LAND SITES Township Range Section Quarter General Location [15S 13E 21 SE Redmond Cave] 19S 13E 13 [E 1/2]SWNE Stookey Ranch 14S 09E 19 NWNE Skylight Cave TABLE [19]21 TOWNSEND"S BIG -EARED BAT HABITAT SITES ON FEDERAL LAND Township Range Section Quarter General Location 19S 09E 14 SE 1/2 Edison Ice Cave 19S 11E 26 SE 1/4 Lava River Cave 1 - EXHIBIT "2" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2404 19S 13E 04 SW 1/4 Skeleton Cave 19S 13E 08 SENW Boyd Cave 19S 13E 14 SE 1/4 Wind Cave 19S 13E 14 SE 1/4 Pictograph Cave 19S 13E 23 SW 1/4 Charley the Cave 19S 13E 27 NENW Charcoal Cave 19S 13E 23 W 1/2 DEG Cave 22S 15E 07 Lees Cave 22S 15E 16 SW 1/4 LQM Cave The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife non -game biologist recommends that the sensitive habitat [impact] area around the cave site where Townsend's big -eared bats are found should be a radius of 1,320 feet. The biologist recommends that prior to approval of any development within the radius of the cave that a management plan be developed to protect the habitat needs of the bats. Researchers are currently studying the bats to learn more about the extent of the habitat. 2. Location, Quality and Quantity: The location of the habitat sites is described above in Tables 16[,] and 17 [2, and 3]. Information on the number of bats is available in a report by J. Mark Perkins, Summary of Fort Rock District Use by Bats With Emphasis on Plecotus Townsendii - 1985-1991. The U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest has additional information on the quality and quantity of the habitat for the Townsend's big -eared bats. The Townsend's big -eared bat is listed as an Oregon sensitive species with a vulnerable classification. The bat is classified as a federal Category 2 sensitive species. The Category 2 species need additional information in order to be proposed for federal listing as a threatened or endangered species under the federal Threatened and Endangered Species Act. 3. Conflicting Uses Determination and Analysis: [The Redmond Cave site is zoned Exclusive Farm Use -40. The Stookey Ranch site is zoned Exclusive Farm Use -320.] The bats are especially sensitive to noise, dust, light, smoke and vibration. All of the caves on federal land are zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) or Forest Use (F-1). The uses permitted in these zones that could conflict with the habitat site are surface mining, recreation facilities 2 - EXHIBIT "2" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2405 including golf courses and destination resorts, roads, logging, air strips. The report identified above, cites recreational conflicts at most of the caves located on federal land. [Large numbers of v] Visitors can disturb the bats. Cavers and rock climbers visit the caves for recreation. The Deschutes National Forest has also identified the removal of nearby riparian vegetation where the bats feed as a conflicting use. [Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences of Conserving sensitive bird sites 1. Economic Consequences: Limiting aggregate extraction as a conflicting use does not have an economic consequence at this time because there are not any identified aggregate sites adjacent to the identified bat habitat sites located on non-federal land. There are no identified aggregate sites with in the impact area of the identified habitat sites on private land. The economic consequences of protecting sensitive bat habitat sites from residential conflicts could prohibit the development of a property for residential use which would lower its value. However, both of the identified sites are located on large parcels where a residence could be located outside of the habitat site. Regulating or prohibiting conflicting uses associated with intensive recreational use or resort development to protect could restrict the area available for such development. Caves are visited by tourists who are interested in geology and natural history. By limiting development and vegetation removal around the bat caves, the caves retain their natural characteristics and attraction to some tourists. If tourist use is limited to reduce conflict with the bats, there could be a minor negative economic consequence. 2. Social Consequences: The negative social consequence of limiting recreational use in or near an identified significant bat cave would cause those activities to be channeled to other areas. Limiting such recreational use on federal lands is not within the jurisdiction of the county. By limiting conflicting uses people interested in wildlife would have enhanced opportunities for viewing the bats in their natural habitat. 3. Environmental Consequences: The environmental consequences of limiting development near sensitive bat caves are positive. Opportunities for bats to thrive in a habitat without repeated interference or disturbances from man should be a positive consequence. Restricting vegetation removal through a management plan will retain habitat features which are necessary for the foraging bats. Limiting residential, recreational and resort 3 - EXHIBIT 112" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2406 development in the vicinity of a cave would limit disturbance which could cause the bats to leave the habitat site. 4. Energy Consequences: There are no significant energy consequences associated with limiting conflicts with bat habitat sites. 5. Conclusion: Based on the ESEE analysis, the identified consequences should be balanced so as to allow the conflicting uses but in a limited way so as to protect the resource to a desired extent.] 4[6]. Program to Achieve the Goal [(protect sensitive bird sites) ] [Ordinance 92-042 adopted the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Combining Zone for the sensitive birds and the Townsend's big -eared bat. The zone requires that a management plan be developed and reviewed by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife if a development is proposed within the 1,320 feet of an inventoried Townsend's big -eared bat habitat site on private land. The zone does not regulate forest practices which are regulated by the Forest Practices Act.] The county does not regulate federal lands. Therefore, the inventoried sites on federal land shall be classified as "2A" Goal 5 resources in accordance with OAR 660-16-005(1) and managed to preserve their original character by the management plans of the federal agencies. The Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan has provisions for cave management which prohibit clear cutting within 250 feet of the entrance of caves with significant bat populations. The plan also requires a 150 to 200 foot wide forested corridor between the entrance of the cave and the nearest foraging area. If the foraging area is a nearby stream, trees will not be harvested for 75 to 100 feet on either side. The Forest Service has a guideline which states that significant and potentially significant caves will be protected and managed in accordance with the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988. 4 - EXHIBIT 112" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) EXHIBIT "3" FOR ORDNANCE 94-004 0135-2407 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BAT SITE IDE 0993-00 1. Inventory Location, Quality and Ouantit Stookey Ranch Cave is a site used by hibernating Townsend's big -eared bats. The cave is located in Township 19E, Range 13S, Section 13, tax lot 200 and is shown on themaps attached as Exhibit "A." The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) identifier for the site is DE 0993-00. The cave is especially important because approximately one half of the 500 Townsend's big -eared bats in Central Oregon use this cave for hibernating. The bats occupy the cave from October 15 through April 15. Additional information on the number of bats is available in a report by J. Mark Perkins, Summary of Fort Rock District Use by Bats With Emphasis on Plecotus Townsendii - 1985-1991. The Townsend's big -eared bat is listed as an Oregon sensitive species with a vulnerable classification. The bat is also a candidate for federal listing as a threatened species under the Federal Threatened and Endangered Species Act. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife non -game biologist recommends that the sensitive habitat area around a cave site where Townsend's big -eared bats are found should be a radius of 1,320 feet. The biologist recommends that prior to approval of any development within the radius of the cave that a site plan be developed to protect the habitat needs of the bats. Researchers are currently studying the bats to learn more about the extent of the habitat. The 1320 foot radius sensitive habitat area includes Bureau of Land Management land and a portion of a 237 acre property that is developed as a private recreational vehicle park. 2. Conflicts Identification The primary conflict with the hibernating bats is recreational use of the cave by explorers and rock climbers during the hibernation season. Visitors to the cave can disturb the bats causing them to expend energy that is needed to sustain them during their hibernation. The hibernating bats are especially sensitive to disturbance in the cave from noise, dust, light, smoke and vibration. Visitors during the hibernation season can disturb the bats and alter the delicate biology of the cave environment. However, other activities within the 1,320 foot radius which could create noise, dust, vibration or alteration of existing vegetation should also be considered conflicts because the animals are so sensitive and there is not enough information on their 1 - EXHIBIT 113" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) habitat needs. 0135-2408 The Stookey Ranch Cave site is zoned Exclusive Farm Use -320. The uses permitted in this zone that could conflict with the habitat site are surface mining, recreation facilities including golf courses and destination resorts, roads, logging, air strips and residences. The cave is located on a 237 acre parcel owned by Sundance Meadows. The property contains a recreational development including a recreational vehicle camping area, swimming pool, bunk house, lodge, horse stable and private air strip. The development currently has 600 owners who are eligible to use the facilities. Most of the use is in the summer time when it is not a conflict with the hibernating bats. At this time there is no evidence of cave visitation by Sundance Meadows owners during the hibernation season. However, rock climbers, spelunkers and naturalists know about the cave and do visit it even though it is on private land. The sensitive habitat area extends onto Bureau of Land Management land to the north and west of the Sundance Meadows property. 3. Economic Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences (A)Economic Consequences: Limiting aggregate extraction as a conflicting use does not have an economic consequence at this time because there is is no identified aggregate site within the sensitive habitat area. The property is already developed as private recreational vehicle park. Alteration or expansion of the facility will require a land use permit. Regulating or prohibiting conflicting uses associated with intensive recreational use or resort development to protect could restrict the ability of Sundance Meadows to expand. Caves are visited by tourists who are interested in geology and natural history. By limiting development and vegetation removal around the bat caves, the caves retain their natural characteristics and attraction to some tourists. However, at this time, because the site is on private land and there is little tourist or recreational activity near the cave during the hibernating season, there is no economic consequence restricting additional recreational development within the sensitive habitat area. (B) Social Consequences: The negative social consequence of limiting recreational use in or near the cave would cause those activities to be channeled to other areas. By limiting access to the cave during the hibernating season, people interested in wildlife would not be able to view the bats in their natural habitat. 2 - EXHIBIT 113" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) (C) Environmental Consequences: 0135-2409 The environmental consequences of limiting development near sensitive bat caves are positive. Opportunities for bats to thrive in a habitat without repeated interference or disturbances from people should be a positive consequence. Restricting vegetation removal through a site plan could retain habitat features which are necessary for the foraging bats. Limiting residential, recreational and resort development in the vicinity of a cave would limit disturbance which could cause the bats to leave the habitat site. (D) Energy Consequences: There are no significant energy consequences associated with limiting conflicts with bat habitat sites. 4. Program to Achieve the Goal The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). The Board finds that it has no authority to regulate the primary conflicting use which is recreational use of the cave by explorers, climbers during the hibernating season. These activities are not land use actions subject to county regulation. In order to protect both the Stookey Cave hibernaculum and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 3. If ODFW finds that the bats are being disturbed by winter visitation in the cave, the county will work with ODFW and the Sundance Meadows Owner's Association to place signs at the cave entrances to restrict entry during the hibernation season and to educate the public about maintaining the cave and surrounding habitat in its natural condition during other times of the year. 3 - EXHIBIT 113" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) ( )8L�, 131 >85 0 q3 0135-2410 4428'2, 0446E I 60, Y, Exhibit "A-1" Townsend's Big -Eared Bat DE -0993-00 19-13-13/SWNE 0135-2411 See Map 19 12 L (A 0 _) \ It. 1 i I 0 C,2 CX3 C/? CA Q4 X tz 8 :cul cn C-) mO�E C: ZD Z --i 6 0 f E .— _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 L -LI C= cp CA I 1 (P*7 I . a C4 C.02 0 %.D txj ci 0 LO %D cn a' e, �O (D H - w 0 rt I CL CD t� Q'N I 1 i� ... . ....... En �> I —vi _CZ (D S�e M.p 19 14 rt ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2412 TOWNSEND'S BIG -EARED BAT SITE IDE 0992-00 1. Inventory Location, Quality and Quantity Skylight Cave is a site used by hibernating Townsend's big -eared bats. The cave is located in Township 14S, Range 9E, Section 19, tax lot 200 and is shown on the maps attached as Exhibit "A." The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) identifier for the site is DE 0992-00. The cave is used by 10 Townsend's big -eared bats for hibernation from October 15 to April 15. The main entrance to the cave is on the Deschutes National Forest and the cave is under the surface of both forest service and private land. The hole in the roof of the cave that is the feature giving it the name "skylight" is on private, Willamette Industries land. Willamette Industries has placed a rock over the skylight hole to prevent potential accidents at the site. The Townsend's big -eared bat is listed as an Oregon sensitive species with a vulnerable classification. The bat is also a candidate for federal listing as a threatened species under the Federal Threatened and Endangered Species Act. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife non -game biologist recommends that the sensitive habitat area around a cave site where Townsend's big -eared bats are found should be a radius of 1,320 feet. The biologist recommends that prior to approval of any development within the radius of the cave that a site plan be developed to protect the habitat needs of the bats. Researchers are currently studying the bats to learn more about the habitat needs of the Townsend's big -eared bat. 2. Conflicts Identification The primary conflict with the hibernating bats is recreational use of the cave for parties and exploration during the hibernation season. Visitors to the cave_ can disturb the bats causing them to expend energy that is needed to sustain them during their hibernation. The hibernating bats are especially sensitive to disturbance in the cave from noise, dust, light, smoke and vibration. However, other activities within the 1,320 foot radius which could create noise, dust, vibration or alteration of existing vegetation should also be considered conflicts because the animals are so sensitive and there is not enough information on their habitat needs. The main entrance to the cave is located on the Deschutes National Forest very near the boundary with Willamette Industry land. The cave and the sensitive habitat area are on both private and U.S. Forest Service land. The land is zoned Forest Use (F1). The uses permitted in this zone that 4 - EXHIBIT "3" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2413 could conflict with the habitat site are timber harvest, road building and other conditional uses which could create vibration or noise during the hibernation season. The county does not regulate forest practices which include road building and timber harvest. These practices are regulated by the Department of Forestry through the Oregon Forest Practices Act. 3. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences (A)Economic Consequences: Limiting aggregate extraction as a conflicting use does not have an economic consequence at this time because there is no identified aggregate site within the sensitive habitat area. Caves are visited by tourists who are interested in geology and natural history. By limiting development and vegetation removal around the bat caves, the caves retain their natural characteristics and attraction to some tourists. Limiting forest practices could have an economic consequence if timing or location of timber harvest is regulated. However, forest practices are not regulated by the county but are regulated by the Oregon Department of Forestry through the Forest Practices Act. (B) Social Consequences: The negative social consequence of limiting recreational use in or near the cave would cause those activities to be channeled to other areas. By limiting access to the cave during the hibernating season, people interested in wildlife would not be able to view the bats in their natural habitat. The county does not regulate recreational use that is not a land use action requiring a permit. (C) Environmental Consequences: The environmental consequences of limiting development within the sensitive habitat area are positive. Opportunities for bats to thrive in a habitat without repeated interference or disturbances from man should be a positive consequence. Restricting vegetation removal through a management plan will retain habitat features which are necessary for the foraging bats. Limiting residential, recreational and resort development in the vicinity of a cave might reduce disturbance which could cause the bats to leave the habitat site. (D) Energy Consequences: 5 - EXHIBIT 113" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 4135-2414 There are no significant energy consequences associated with limiting conflicts with bat habitat sites. 4. Program to Achieve the Goal The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). The Board finds that it has no authority to regulate the primary conflicting use which is recreational use of the cave by explorers, climbers and people having parties. These activities are not land use actions subject to county regulation. The county will work with the ODFW, the private land owner and the Deschutes National Forest to encourage placement of signs at the cave entrance to restrict entry during the hibernation season and to educate the public about the habitat needs of the bats. The Board finds that it has no authority to regulate forest practices which are regulated by the Oregon Department of Forest through the Oregon Forest Practices Act. In order to protect both the Skylight Cave Townsend's big-eard bat hibernaculum and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 6 - EXHIBIT "3" ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2415 tvwuacuu t: i.b--a.at cal Jat DE -0992-00 14-09-19/NWNE � v✓ c I�,'�' If � � s Ste Mop 14 8 �� .� O Qi =E ,;A, � 0 O V d N 8 SCALE 1 ' 48000 2000 0 2000 4000 FEET 2 0 ILOMETER qtr CN , " a) ILiu __ L I�,'�' If A .Sf O 01 •N~�e Id i 64 qtr CN , " a) ILiu __ L m 0 z L o >m to ^' N ; N V m I / 1 I 1 I I A to I m tD m to i 0 A N(/)�) A m I cn mom' " to fn D/ 01 _ tAot" WM5 D r pI C mas YN ?m y m A rn / I C M tD r"m �t -- 0 > E5OC- Cl L W 1 fN -C ) , tc = z 7C7 �1 f t � Vit" i .000, I I : I 1 -----+---- p I --y--- 1 I + � AV\ KN _A �--_- 1 't '� �p N \ I N / MM O - �W1 C %j pl See Mop 14 10 Exhibit "A-2" Townsend's Big -Eared Bat DE -0992-00 14-09-19/NWNE EXHIBIT "4" - ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 0135-241 UPLAND GAME BIRD HABITAT 1. Inventory The following upland game birds are found in Deschutes County: Estimated upland game population in 1980 (ODF&W 1985): Ring-necked Pheasant 200 Valley Quail 10,000 Mountain Quail 50 Chukar Partridge 300 Turkey 50 Blue Grouse 900 Sage Grouse 1,800 Ruffed Grouse 100 Mourning Dove 8,000 2. Location, Quality and Quantity The habitat for upland game birds is dispersed throughout the county in the riparian, forest, agricultural and rangeland areas of the county. Valley quail and mourning doves are the most common upland game birds. Pheasants, and to a lesser extent valley quail, are truly products of and dependent upon agriculture for their existence. Ideal habitat includes a varied patchwork of seed -producing crops interspersed with brushy fence rows, ditches, streams and woodlots. This type of land cover pattern provides their basic needs of food, water and cover. These birds are primarily found in the Terrebonne and Alfalfa areas. Since pheasants are products of agriculture, they are generally found on farmlands, with no area being essentially more critical than another. However, in many places, riparian vegetation is the only cover available and these thin strips are considered as sensitive areas. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has not identified critical habitat areas for any of the upland game species except for the sage grouse. The inventory and ESEE for sage grouse follows this inventory and ESEE analysis for upland game birds. Ruffed grouse and turkey are found mostly on the Deschutes National Forest in forested and riparian habitat. Blue grouse are also mostly on the national forest and are frequently found on ridge tops. Chukars live in grass land habitat and in grassy canyons and also rely on riparian habitat. 1 - Exhibit 114" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2418 3. Conflicting Uses Determination and Analysis: Pheasant and quail are affected whenever agricultural land is taken out of production through urban sprawl, road construction, industrial development, and other land clearing activities. Farming practices on existing agricultural lands also have an impact. The trend today is to farm as much land as possible. Brushy fence rows, woodlots, and riparian vegetation are constantly being removed at the expense of upland game bird use. Reduced acres of agricultural land combined with clean farming techniques (burning fence rows and removing brush areas) has significantly reduced the ring-necked pheasant population in Deschutes County. The Deschutes County/City of Bend River Study identifies conflicting uses with upland game bird habitat (Chapter 6) and is incorporated here by reference. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences of Conserving riparian and wetland habitat Economic Consequences: The positive economic consequences of limiting conflicting uses are the protection of habitat which will maintain or increase the upland game bird populations in the county. Abundant wildlife and natural areas are a main reason tourists visit the county. The maintenance of riparian and wetland habitat may increase the value of property because of the aesthetic values often associated with natural areas and wildlife. Social Consequences: The positive social consequence of limiting conflicting uses is the the protection of habitat which has aesthetic qualities appreciated by residents of the area and tourists. Limiting conflicting uses could prevent someone from developing their property in a manner they desire. However, the county does not regulate accepted farming practices which could cause destruction of some habitat outside of riparian areas. Environmental Consequences: The environmental consequences of limiting conflicts with upland game bird habitat are positive. The habitat would be retained or enhanced which results in stable upland game populations. There are no significant negative environmental consequences. Energy Consequences: Except for the possible limits on development of 2 - Exhibit "4" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135-2419 hydroelectric facilities, the energy consequences are not significant. The consequences of hydroelectric development are described in detail in the Deschutes County/City of Bend River Study. Additional information and ESEE analysis is provided in the Deschutes County/City of Bend River Study, Chapter 6 and the River Study Staff Report which are hereby incorporated by reference. 5. Conclusion: Based on the ESEE analysis, consequences should be balanced to allow the conflicting uses but in a limited way in order to protect the resource to the desired extent. 6. Program to Achieve the Goal (protect upland game birds) : For all of the upland game birds except sage grouse, the habitat is adequately protected by the existing exclusive farm use and forest zoning and the provisions to protect wetlands and riparian areas. The habitat for upland game birds is in the farm and forest zones which provide for minimum lot sizes greater than 20 acres to limit the density of development and the consequent conversion or deterioration of habitat. Any residential development in either the EFU or forest zone requires a conditional use permit. Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone and the county does not regulate ordinary farming practices which could cause some loss of cover habitat. The county provisions to protect riparian areas and wetlands protect one of the most significant components of upland game habitat. The Oregon Forest Practices Act also contains provisions which regulate forest activities in riparian areas. Most of the ruffed grouse, blue grouse, and turkey are found on National Forest lands where the habitat is managed under the Deschutes National Forest Land and Management Plan. 3 - Exhibit "4" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) SAGE GROUSE HABITAT 0135-2420 Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the County. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Research Report "Sage Grouse in Oregon" (April, 1993) lists the populatio of adult sage grouse in Deschutes County as 775. The Bureau of Land Management estimates there are 275 adult birds in Deschutes County. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified a radius of 1320 feet around a lek as a sensitive habitat area where conflicting uses with the habitat or strutting birds should be regulated. Table 18 inventories the sage grouse leks on federal land. The sites located on federal land are classified as 112A" Goal 5 resources in accordance with OAR 660-16-1) and are managed to preserve their original character by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The BLM is in the process of developing a off road vehicle trail system to minimize the conflict with off-road vehicles and the sage grouse leks. Table 19 inventories the sage grouse leks on private (non-federal) land or with a sensitive habitat area that extends onto private land or non-federal land. The ESEE analysis and decision for each private lek site follows Table 15. 4 - Exhibit 114" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 5 - Exhibit 114" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) TABLE 18. 0135-2421 SAGE GROUSE LEK INVENTORY SITES ON FEDERAL LANDS Township Range Section Quarter General Location 20S 17E 05 NWSW County Line/ Audubon Site 20S 19E 13-24 Todd Well 21S 15E 12 NENWSW Kotzman Basin 21S 16E 22/24 NESW Mahogony Butte/ The Gap 21S 17E 18 NE Whiskey Springs 21S 17E 28 NENE Moonshine 21S 18E 22 NENE South Well 21S 18E 24 SWSE Viewpoint 22S 16E 11 SWSE Antelope Butte 22E 17E 02 SENW Spicer Flat 22S 17E 16 NW The Rock 22S 17E 32 SWSW Jaynes Well 22S 18E 06 SWNE Little Mid Lake 22S 18E 11 SENEW Squaw Lake 5 - Exhibit 114" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) TABLE 19 ►135-2422 SAGE GROUSE LER INVENTORY LEKS ON NON-FEDERAL LANDS OR WITH NON-FEDERAL SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS ODFW Site # Map & Tax Lot Quarter Site Name Section DE 0994-01 20-18-00-700 05/SWSE Circle F Reservoir DE 0995-01 20-19-00-800 06/NWSE Merril Rd DE 0996-01 20-17-00-600 06/SWSW Dickerson Well DE 0997-01 20-16-00-2400 25/SENW Moffit Ranch DE 0997-02 20-16-00-2400 26/NENE Moffit Ranch Satellite DE 0998-01 20-14-00-400 10/NWNW Evans Well DE 0998-02 20-14-00-400 10/SWNW Evans Well Sattellite DE 0999-01 19-14-00-2200 26/SESE Millican Pit 6 - Exhibit 114" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) ESE GS DEISIN SAGE EGROUSE NSITE ND DEC C0994-01 0135-242S Circle F Reservoir 1. Inventory. In 1992, the Bureau of Land Management identified a sage grouse lek in Township 205, Range 18E, Section 5 SW (map number 20-18-00-700). The ODFW identifier for the site is DE 0994-01. The site is also known as Circle F Reservoir. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the lek site. The quarter mile sensitive habitat area is necessary to buffer the lek site and protect- the habitat used by the birds for day roosting and cover during the mating season. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the County. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that the current population of adult birds in Deschutes County is 275. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in a 1992 report estimated the population as 775. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. 2. Site Characteristics. The lek site is used by the sage grouse for strutting display and mating grouse from February 1 through April 30 with the peak of activity in March and April. The site is located on a seasonal reservoir. The area the birds use for display moves depending on the level of the water in the reservoir. The lek is located on a 1,358 acre tax lot zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU), Flood Plain (FP) and Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA). The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Single family dwelling -Forest use -Residential homes -Exploration for -Private park, minerals campground -Some road construction -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0994-01 Page 1 0135-2424 -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use FP -Farm use (no structure) -Forest management -Road or bridge -Single family dwelling -Agricultural accessory buildings -Recreation Uses Conflicts with sage grouse habitat are reduced by the limitations on uses in the exclusive farm use and flood plain zone, by the 320 acre minimum lot size, and by the predominance of Bureau of Land Management land throughout their range. However, because of their sensitivity and importance, the sage grouse leks or strutting grounds need additional protection. Uses conflicting with the leks are activities or development which would disturb birds during the breeding season, disturb or occupy the ground in the lek area which could displace the birds, or destroy the vegetation within the sensitive habitat area the birds use for roosting and cover. These activities could include road construction, surface mining, or any construction activity, structural development and associated use of structures within 1320 feet of the lek. Surface mining is not a conflicting use as none of the sensitive habitat area is zoned for surface mining. New road construction through the habitat area is unlikely as the roads in the area are established public or ranch roads with no anticipated need for relocation or expansion. Because the lek and sensitive habitat area are remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. Additional structural development on the ranch could occur outside of the sensitive habitat area and would not be a conflict. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0994-01 Page 2 0135-2425 Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone. Grazing is the principal agricultural use in the sensitive habitat area. Grazing during the mating season can disrupt the breeding cycle. The Bureau of Land Management works with the grazing permitees to minimize the grazing conflicts with the sage grouse leks during the breeding season. Another potential conflicting use is recreational off-road vehicle use because it fragments habitat and can disrupt the birds during the breeding season. Off-road vehicle use in the area is regulated by the BLM. A private park or campground would be a conflicting use because it would attract people and vehicles and alter the landscape. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the lek would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining lek sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining nest sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the lek site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However, because the site is on private land, access to the public may not be available. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0994-01 Page 3 0135-2426 owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the destruction of the characteristics which make the lek and the sensitive habitat area desireable to the birds which could cause abandonment of the site, failure of breeding and reduction in the sage grouse population. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a conditional use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. In addition the Bureau of Land Management is working with private property owners to develop grazing management plans to minimize grazing conflict with the lek site. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0994-01 Page 4 i \ r1r 0135-2427 :486 8 \ I v4G89 i G57 Exhibit "A-1" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0994-01 20-18-05/SWSE — � O \` \\ 454 <s \\ " s° 1 \\ \\\ = 4554,•— `• `5 G57 Exhibit "A-1" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0994-01 20-18-05/SWSE I.N 10- + Ijw ooi:N Imo- I� I I mss.. Mao 20 n 0135-2425ILOMETER /Al - CC it -- — -- -- `----1-- 4�- — --t -- yN •m c� e= "'o •:.,a_Ia w'i '$' t� o Iav - - 61 pi� W �i, N OI I q �T • � / o�• I / l •I ---- -- F` S cc / a�ii ; r C� �f ' O• ` q 41 O 0 NI o! as V' � ROAD ,�11�NQ • I I 8 I a�ii ; r t ' O• ` .o;_ It i N .,: � ♦ � m o l , c� A i g /a o 1 ee 0 co CS :12 u 0o I 41 O 0 NI o! as V' Qi .. :!_ \ °�" _'^`•:'Sts+ CA N / o. Rio l 0t QI ao S°♦ Map 20 19 z � CA w m m I: Sp Ia a. Z 0 �D X 01) Exhibit "A-2" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0994-01 20-18-05/SWSE � ROAD ,�11�NQ • I `- till I a�ii r I wN .o;_ It i N .,: � ♦ � m o l , c� A g /a o fi A 0 E 0 co CS M �♦I i � - —' I I ^ W i •' O.{ + ; N 1 A {� 1 � 0 0• I $ o a 0. Qi .. :!_ \ °�" _'^`•:'Sts+ CA N / o. Rio l 0t QI ao S°♦ Map 20 19 z � CA w m m I: Sp Ia a. Z 0 �D X 01) Exhibit "A-2" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0994-01 20-18-05/SWSE ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION SAGE GROUSE SITE - DE 0995-01 Merril Road 1. Inventory. 0135-2429 In 1992, the Bureau of Land Management identified a sage grouse lek in Township 20S, Range 19E, Section 6 NWSE (map number 20-19-00-800). The ODFW identifier for the site is DE 0995-01. The site is also known as Merril Road. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the lek site. The quarter mile sensitive habitat area is necessary to buffer the lek site and protect the habitat used by the birds for day roosting and cover during the mating season. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the county. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that the current population of adult birds in Deschutes County is 275. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in a 1992 report estimated the population as 775. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. 2. Site Characteristics. The lek site is used by the sage grouse for strutting display and mating grouse from February 1 through April 30, with the peak of activity in March and April. The lek is located on a 791 acre tax lot zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU), Flood Plain (FP) and Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA). The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0995-01 Page 1 0135-2430 -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Sage grouse depend on large areas of undeveloped rangeland habitat. Conflicts with sage grouse habitat are reduced by the limitations on uses in the exclusive farm use and flood plain zone, by the 320 acre minimum lot size, and by the predominance of Bureau of Land Management land throughout their range. However, because of their sensitivity and importance, the sage grouse leks or strutting grounds need additional protection. Uses conflicting with the leks are activities or development which would disturb birds during the breeding season, disturb or occupy the ground in the lek area which could displace the birds, or destroy the vegetation within the sensitive habitat area the birds use for roosting and cover. These activities could include road construction, surface mining, or any construction activity, structural development and associated use of structures within 1320 feet of the lek. Surface mining is not a conflicting use as none of the sensitive habitat area is zoned for surface mining. New road construction through the habitat area is unlikely as the roads in the area are established public or ranch roads with no anticipated need for relocation or expansion. Because the lek and sensitive habitat area are remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. Additional structural development on the ranch could occur outside of the sensitive habitat area and would not be a conflict. Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone. Grazing is the principal agricultural use in the sensitive habitat area. Grazing during the mating season can disrupt the breeding cycle. The Bureau of Land Management works with the grazing permitees to minimize the grazing conflicts with the sage grouse leks during the breeding season. Another potential conflicting use is recreational off-road vehicle use because it fragments habitat and ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0995-01 Page 2 0135-2431 can disrupt the birds during the breeding season. Off-road vehicle use in the area is regulated by the BLM. A private park or campground would be a conflicting use because it would attract people and vehicles and alter the landscape. 4. Economic Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the lek would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining lek sites and sensitive habitat areas will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining lek sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the lek site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However, because the site is on private land, access to the public may not be available. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the destruction of the characteristics which make the lek and the sensitive habitat area desireable to the birds which could cause abandonment of the site, failure of breeding and ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0995-01 Page 3 0135-2432 reduction in the sage grouse population. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a conditional use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. In addition the Bureau of Land Management is working with private property owners to develop grazing management plans to minimize grazing conflict with the lek site. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0995-01 Page 4 0135-2433 Sage Grouse Lek DE -0995-01 20-19-06/NWSE ,I P QwOEi—_.io n o `1 J t ii I 'o • ''I y � I 0 «I .31 .. 'I •I J I a313w011>1 a o 133 o0ob , 000z 0 000a 0 n 0135-2434 NOONO N �8 U) 0 I 1 ( I • I iN � I •7 i - :1 0 lo ivoi ---- -- �r in �LOo N I N • 0 a) G Ol I ! N•I � I r -1 fn I (l I to I SC M� I I 1 , l0 1 I I I O • ,I P QwOEi—_.io n o `1 J t ii I 'o • ''I y � I 0 «I .31 .. 'I •I J I a313w011>1 a o 133 o0ob , 000z 0 000a 0 n 0135-2434 NOONO N �8 U) 0 I 1 ( II Ksi 1 - - -_...— -rto • - :1 0 lo ivoi ---- -- �r in �LOo N I N • 0 a) G Ol I •' H NOrl I I 1 T' I w 7 ^ I y� 1 A P YV I -^ N? i A? ; I b 1 ^ P w i -• 1 w I X QfWO O • �. �- i WCl�QN —•. .. 81 oa doyq ••S _ � I N 1N' I—N---=---,tn I/ I 77770 — In tPN.�----- Exhibit "A-2" N �8 1- I 1 ( II Ksi 1 - - -_...— -rto -- - n_ lo ivoi ---- -- I 2 i a) I I 1 T' I w 7 ^ I y� 1 A P YV I -^ N? i A? ; I b 1 ^ P w i -• 1 w " e n o j 1 O • �. �- i —•. .. 81 oa doyq ••S Exhibit "A-2" ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2435 SAGE GROUSE LEK SITE DE 0996-01 - Dickerson Well 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified a sage grouse lek in Township 22S, Range 17E, Section 6 SWSW (map number 22-17-00-600). The ODFW identifier for the site is DE 0996-01 and is also known as Dickerson Well. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the lek site. The quarter mile sensitive habitat area is necessary to buffer the lek site and protect the habitat used by the birds for day roosting and cover during the mating season. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the County. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that the current population of adult birds in Deschutes County is 275. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in a 1992 report estimated the population as 775. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. 2. Site Characteristics. The lek site is used by the sage grouse for strutting display and mating grouse from February 1 through April 30 with the peak of activity in March and April. The lek is located on a large ranch zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA). The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. The lek is on the site of an abandoned homestead where the ground is disturbed. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Some road construction -Single family dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE 0996-01 Page 1 0135-2436 products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Sage grouse depend on large areas of undeveloped rangeland habitat. Conflicts with sage grouse habitat are reduced by the limitations on uses in the exclusive farm use zone, by the 320 acre minimum lot size, and by the predominance of Bureau of Land Management land throughout their range. However, because of their sensitivity and importance, the sage grouse leks or strutting grounds need additional protection. Uses conflicting with the leks are activities or development which would disturb birds during the breeding season, disturb or occupy the ground in the lek area which could displace the birds, or destroy the vegetation within the sensitive habitat area the birds use for roosting and cover. These activities could include road construction, surface mining, or any construction activity, structural development and associated use of structures within 1320 feet of the lek. Surface mining is not a conflicting use as none of the sensitive habitat area is zoned for surface mining. New road construction through the habitat area is unlikely as the roads in the area are established public or ranch roads with no anticipated need for relocation or expansion. Because the lek and sensitive habitat area are remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. Additional structural development on the ranch could occur outside of the sensitive habitat area elsewhere on the ranch and would not be a conflict. Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone. Grazing is the principal agricultural use in the sensitive habitat area. Grazing during the mating season can disrupt the breeding cycle. The Bureau of Land Management works with the grazing permitees to minimize the grazing conflicts with the sage grouse leks during the breeding season. Another potential conflicting use is recreational off-road vehicle use because it fragments habitat and ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE 0996-01 Page 2 0135-2431 can disrupt the birds during the breeding season. However, ODFW reports that, at this time, there is not a problem with off-road vehicle use at this site. The Bureau of Land Management has a seasonal off-road vehicle closure from March 15 through September 1 south of Highway 20. A private park or campground would be a conflicting use because it would attract people and vehicles and alter the landscape. 4. Economic Social Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the lek would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining the lek and sensitive habitat area will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining lek sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the lek site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However, because the site is on private land, access to the public may not be available. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the destruction of the ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE 0996-01 Page 3 0135-2438 characteristics which make the lek and the sensitive habitat area desireable to the birds which could cause abandonment of the site, failure of breeding and reduction in the sage grouse population. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a conditional use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. In addition, the Bureau of Land Management is working with private property owners to develop grazing management plans to minimize grazing conflict with the lek site. ESEE Findings and Decision - Site DE 0996-01 Page 4 0135-2439 fn i 1 L,� Cn m ------•--• - -- �/ � � ( X311� I 4 1-0 711 CD Al N rr J^ \ -- LJ t alb, /; J Al� � q Exhibit "A-1" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0996-01 20-17-06/SWSW r 0 m el z2 aoy4 »s N 0135-2440 I I 0 O _ e 0 Q pl 010 N a$ r a� I rl N rl al o tl N 111:0 r �� n tl0 fl9 O p o ,1N 1 I i1 el z2 aoy4 »s N 0135-2440 I 0 O Q pl N a$ r 0 N rl pi Q pl AI I rl - AI AI I fl N pl wI fl9 O p o yr U7 M N o� rl pi Q pl AI I rl - AI AI I fl N pl wI fl9 O p o yr O O 0 O O m dl N d: In wl a, Ip q p Yd :• AS V LO `� N � N e M a� o v I'I — Ln , a$ N d° N �S M q O O I o_ I i i e N �= ° N M o I [I C, C) m O � O-- O CO 01 • • aii �w O O_ •, w ___�.- ..-wr--a •' J -}�---N N d 1I NI P a J' AI v Y w N n i! Y ♦ - n N I If O Q A - d N w l M A l r' A w l N M 1160 91 zz do" aes Z L 0 133 000V 000Z 0 000Z Mnt>fi • t 7- well Exhibit "A-2" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0996-01 20-17-06/SWSW 0135-2441 ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION SAGE GROUSE SITES DE 0997-01 and DE 0997-02 Moffit Ranch and Moffit Ranch Satelite 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a two sage grouse leks in Township 20S, Range 16E. Site DE 0997-01, known as Moffit Ranch, is located in section 25 SENW. Site DE 0997-02, known as Moffit Ranch Satelite, is located in section 26 NENE. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of each lek site. The quarter mile sensitive habitat area is necessary to buffer the lek site and protect the habitat used by the birds for day roosting and cover during the mating season. The habitat sites and sensitive habitat areas are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the county. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that the current population of adult birds in Deschutes County is 275. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in a 1992 report estimated the population as 775. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. 2. Site Characteristics. The lek site is used by the sage grouse for strutting display and mating grouse from February 1 through April 30, with the peak of activity in March and April. The leks are located a 3,018 acre tax lot that is part of the Moffit Ranch. The lek sites are zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining (SBM) and Wildlife Habitat Combining Zone. The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. A small amount of BLM land is included in the sensitive habitat area of the Moffit Ranch Satelite lek. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Single family dwelling -Forest use -Residential homes -Exploration for -Private park, ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0997-01 and DE 0997-02 Page 1 minerals -Some road construction 0135-2442 campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Sage grouse depend on large areas of undeveloped rangeland habitat. Conflicts with sage grouse habitat are reduced by the limitations on uses in the exclusive farm use zone, by the 320 acre minimum lot size, and by the predominance of Bureau of Land Management land throughout their range. However, because of their sensitivity and importance, the sage grouse leks or strutting grounds need additional protection. Uses conflicting with the leks are any activity or development which would interfere with the lek during the breeding season, disturb or occupy the ground in the lek area which could displace the birds, or destroy the vegetation within the sensitive habitat area the birds use for roosting and cover. These activities could include road construction, surface mining, or any construction activity, structural development and associated use of structures within 1320 feet of the lek. Surface mining is not a conflicting use as none of the sensitive habitat area is zoned for surface mining. New road construction through the habitat area is unlikely as the roads in the area are established public or ranch roads with no anticipated need for relocation or expansion. Because the lek and sensitive habitat area are remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. Additional structural development on the ranch could occur outside of the sensitive habitat area elsewhere on the ranch and would not be a conflict. Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone. Grazing is the principal agricultural use in the sensitive habitat area. Grazing during the mating season can disrupt the breeding cycle. The Bureau of Land Management works with the grazing permitees to minimize the grazing conflicts with the sage grouse leks ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0997-01 and DE 0997-02 Page 2 0135-2443 during the breeding season. Another potential conflicting use is recreational off-road vehicle use because it fragments habitat and can disrupt the birds during the breeding season. However, ODFW reports that, at this time, there is not a problem with off-road vehicle use at this site. The Bureau of Land Management has a seasonal off-road vehicle closure from March 15 through September 1 south of Highway 20. A private park or campground would be a conflicting use because it would attract people and vehicles and alter the landscape. 4. Economic Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the lek would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining lek sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining lek sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the lek site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However, because the site is on private land access to the public may not be available. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0997-01 and DE 0997-02 Page 3 0135-2444 (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the destruction of the characteristics which make the lek desireable to the birds which could cause abandonment of the site and failure of breeding and reduction in the sage grouse population. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a conditional use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. In addition the Bureau of Land Management is working with private property owners to develop grazing management plans to minimize grazing conflict with the lek site. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0997-01 and DE 0997-02 Page 4 0135-2445 o ell f — r 43 7 ay --O ! I Exhibit "A-1" Sage Grouse Lek DE-0997-01/DE-0997-02 20-16-25/SENW 20-16-26/NENE 11 OZ doly ..S IZ3 m zv- - Iv / ig . T!- ID 0 LO 00 N;0 01 tD Hw 0 . % ID —tc) Z CQ jj. ♦ A91 Oz do" "S I 83-L3VYOII>l L 0 IaEl-q 00017 000Z 0 0003 000817 : L FIVOS Exhibit "A-211 Sage Grouse Lek DE-0997-01/DE-0997-02 20-16-25/SENW ?n-1 6-26 MENE 0135-2446 (D cq LO <g n A' ypy ro 0 L 0 IaEl-q 00017 000Z 0 0003 000817 : L FIVOS Exhibit "A-211 Sage Grouse Lek DE-0997-01/DE-0997-02 20-16-25/SENW ?n-1 6-26 MENE (D cq LO <g n A' ypy L 0 IaEl-q 00017 000Z 0 0003 000817 : L FIVOS Exhibit "A-211 Sage Grouse Lek DE-0997-01/DE-0997-02 20-16-25/SENW ?n-1 6-26 MENE ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-244 SAGE GROUSE SITE DE 0998-01 - Evans Well DE 0998-02 - Evans Well Satellite 1. Inventor The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified two sage grouse leks in Township 20S, Range 14E, Section 10 NENW (map number 20-14-00-400). The ODFW identifiers for the leks are DE 0998-01 and DE 0998-02. The sites are known as Evans Well. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of each lek site. The quarter mile sensitive habitat area is necessary to buffer the lek site and protect the habitat used by the birds for day roosting and cover during the mating season. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on a map attached as Exhibit 1. Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the County. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that the current population of adult birds in Deschutes County is 275. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in a 1992 report estimated the population as 775. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. 2. Site Characteristics. The lek site is used by the sage grouse for strutting display and mating grouse from February 1 through April 30, with the peak of activity in March and April. The lek is located on a private 317 acre parcel zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Wildlife Area Combining Zone (WA). The wildlife combining zone is for antelope habitat. The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. There are two other tax lots partially within the sensitive habitat area which are Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Single family dwelling -Forest use -Residential homes -Exploration for -Private park, minerals campground -Some road construction -Personal use airstrip ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0998-01/DE 0998-02 Page 1 0135-2448 -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Sage grouse depend on large areas of undeveloped rangeland habitat. Conflicts with sage grouse habitat are reduced by the limitations on uses in the exclusive farm use zone, by the 320 acre minimum lot size, and by the predominance of Bureau of Land Management land throughout their range. However, because of their sensitivity and importance, the sage grouse leks or strutting grounds need additional protection. Uses conflicting with the leks are any activity or development which would interfere with the lek during the breeding season, disturb or occupy the ground in the lek area which could displace the birds, or destroy the vegetation within the sensitive habitat area the birds use for roosting and cover. These activities could include road construction, surface mining, or any construction activity, structural development and associated use of structures within 1320 feet of the lek. Surface mining is not a conflicting use as none of the sensitive habitat area is zoned for surface mining. New road construction through the habitat area is unlikely as the roads in the area are established public or ranch roads with no anticipated need for relocation or expansion. Because the lek and sensitive habitat area are remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. Additional structural development on the ranch could occur outside of the sensitive habitat area elsewhere on the ranch and would not be a conflict. Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone. Grazing is the principal agricultural use in the sensitive habitat area. Grazing during the mating season can disrupt the breeding cycle. The Bureau of Land Management works with the grazing permitees to minimize the grazing conflicts with the sage grouse leks during the breeding season. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0998-01/DE 0998-02 Page 2 0135-2449 Another potential conflicting use is recreational off-road vehicle use because it fragments habitat and can disrupt the birds during the breeding season. However, ODFW reports that, at this time, there is not a problem with off-road vehicle use at this site. The Bureau of Land Management has a seasonal off-road vehicle closure from March 15 through September 1 south of Highway 20. A private park or campground would be a conflicting use because it would attract people and vehicles and alter the landscape. 4. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Construction costs could increase if building activity is restricted during the breeding season. Restricting structural development within one quarter mile of the lek would have a negligible economic effect because there is land available outside of the sensitive habitat area for residences or other structural development. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining the lek site and sensitive habitat area sites will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining lek sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the lek site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. However because the site is on private land opportunity for public access may be limited. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. (C) Environmental Consequences ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0998-01/DE 0998-02 Page 3 0135-2450 The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the destruction of the characteristics which make the lek desireable to the birds which could cause abandonment of the site and failure of breeding and reduction in the sage grouse population. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a conditional use permit. 2. New structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Existing structures may be repaired and maintained. 4. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. In addition, the Bureau of Land Management is working with private property owners to develop grazing management plans to minimize grazing conflict with the lek site. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0998-01/DE 0998-02 Page 4 0135-2451 Or ...\\\`g' eco' � � I j • .. � 1 1 •''\ �rn. CD Coll ee 1 N • N 1•' q: ee .__. �O WX fli Nr e WII - '• I w - •� � � N �ceee� - •� KN ` ` •'` _—_.— r -_ ( ��a� �J/0 ��\'2/• �r>'� ��v� '�Li- � �� -- _` \ 1 � t� s � _ � `cam o ._�', �//%`'.�\`\ �� `� � S ��. •-� jam` `�`t,Q Up J � • ` _ � I `t i 111i . 1 9 p 4450 J O u < —. _ w _a CD a p _•, 'per � - - •` � I ''l. - �`A... \. '� - P tz _ •�:.� � L� moi_` �'�� I. j:. - / ,/` •-i I=jb�\ 44-S Mt. TO U.S. ?O N 1 Exhibit "A-111 Sage Grouse Lek DE -0998-01 20-14-10/NENW .013572452 cl n- d.vv ..s 0 J2— !L C\iIle 7� so 0 0 (D f L-L— L-46J so c CO\ LA.J NLA— zo , N iii lia I o' 18 rV `Vr . . . . . . A N 'Z'2i co LA— LA— o so* I C\j cli lo LA. lo LA- 0 (D n � I �� tie � _ _ _ _ I _ m,/ _ _ I _ _ —\:Io _ _ _. T V oz w • C) Q IT v oz dow ass O0 PO LLI F - w w Ui �E LL -211 Exhibit "A Sage Grouse Lek DE-0998-01/DE-0998-02 20-14-10/NENW ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION 0135-2 53 SAGE GROUSE SITE u DE 0999-01 - Millican Pit 1. Inventory. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified a Sage Grouse lek in Township 19S, Range 14E, Section 26 SESE (map number 19-14-00-2200). The ODFW identifier for the site is DE 0997-01. The site is also known as Millican Pit. The sensitive habitat area includes the area within a 1/4 mile radius of the lek site. The quarter mile sensitive habitat area is necessary to buffer the lek site and protect the habitat used by the birds for day roosting and cover during the mating season. The habitat site and sensitive habitat area are designated on a map attached as Exhibit "A". Sage grouse inhabit the sagebrush -grass areas in the eastern portion of the county. The population of sage grouse has shown considerable fluctuation over the years. The Bureau of Land Management estimates that the current population of adult birds in Deschutes County is 275. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in a 1992 report estimated the population as 775. Areas of particular concern for the sage grouse are the strutting grounds, known as leks. Strutting grounds are flat areas with vegetation less than six inches high on which the males exhibit a breeding display called strutting to attract the females. 2. Site Characteristics. The lek site is used by the sage grouse for strutting display and mating grouse from February 1 through April 30 with the peak of activity in March and April. The lek is located on a state owned parcel that is zoned for surface mining (SM, Site #498). The area around the surface mine site is zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA) and Landscape Management Combining zone (LM). The minimum lot size for the area is 320 acres. There are portions of two Bureau of Land Management tax lots within the sensitive habitat area. South of the lek site there is an unrecorded subdivision with about 60 mostly 10 acre lots. This area is zoned EFU and Flood Plain (FP). Portions of two of these 10 acre tax lots are within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. 3. Conflicts Identification. Potentially Conflicting Uses With Habitat Site Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use EFU -Farm use -Single family ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0999-01 Page 1 -Forest use -Exploration for minerals -Some road construction 0135-2454 dwelling -Residential homes -Private park, campground -Personal use airstrip -Home occupation -Process forest products -Solid waste disposal site -Storage, crushing, processing of aggregate -Church or school -Certain road projects -Bed and breakfast Zone Permitted Use Conditional Use FP -Farm use (no structure) -Forest management -Open space -Road or bridge -Single family dwelling -Agricultural accessory buildings -Recreation Uses Zone Subject to Site Plan Conditional Uses SM -Extraction of minerals -Storage of minerals -Screening, washing -Structures necessary for extraction, storage -Geothermal exploration -Crushing -Batching asphalt concrete Sage grouse depend on large areas of undeveloped rangeland habitat. Conflicts with sage grouse habitat are reduced by the limitations on uses in the exclusive farm use zone, by the 320 acre minimum lot size, and by the predominance of Bureau of Land Management land throughout their range. However, because of their sensitivity and importance, the sage grouse leks or strutting grounds need additional protection. Uses conflicting with the leks are any activity or development which would interfere with the lek during the breeding season, disturb or occupy the ground in the lek area which could displace the birds, or destroy the vegetation within the sensitive habitat area the birds use for roosting and cover. These activities could include road construction, surface mining, or any construction activity, structural development and associated use of structures within 1320 feet of the lek. The primary conflict at this site is potential surface mining or mineral processing on the site zoned for surface ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0999-01 Page 2 mining. 01.35-12.141.55 Because the lek and sensitive habitat area are remote, it is unlikely that a church or school would be sited within the sensitive habitat area. Residential development on two lots within the sensitive habitat area is a possible conflict. Although the 60 lot subdivision is mostly outside of the sensitive habitat development of these 5 acre lots would alter the vegetation used as cover and roosting habitat and introduce conflict with noise, traffic and dogs. Agriculture is a permitted use in the exclusive farm use zone. Grazing is the principal agricultural use in the sensitive habitat area. Grazing during the mating season can disrupt the breeding cycle. The Bureau of Land Management works with the grazing permitees to minimize the grazing conflicts with the sage grouse leks during the breeding season. Another potential conflicting use is recreational off-road vehicle use because it fragments habitat and can disrupt the birds during the breeding season. However, ODFW reports that, at this time, there is not a problem with off-road vehicle use at this site. The Bureau of Land Management has a seasonal off-road vehicle closure from March 15 through September 1 south of Highway 20. A private park or campground would be a conflicting use because it would attract people and vehicles and alter the landscape. 4. Economic Social Environmental and Enercty Consequences Analysis. (A) Economic Consequences Surface mining costs could increase if the surface mining activities are restricted during the season the lek is in use. The amount of material available form the site might be reduced if the extraction of minerals would alter the characteristics of the site. Restricting structural development on the EFU zoned land within one quarter mile of the lek would have a negligible economic effect because most of the land is BLM and structural development is not anticipated in the BLM management plans for the area. The economic consequences to the owners of the two private tax lots (19-14-35-101 and 19-14-35-100) to the south of the lek would be minor because nonfarm residential development could occur outside of the sensitive habitat area on the two private lots. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0999-01 Page 3 6135-2456 Residential development would also be restricted by the LM, SMIA and FP zones. Limiting the development of parks or campgrounds would have a negligible economic consequence as there are numerous private and public recreational facilities throughout the county. Maintaining lek sites and sensitive habitat area will help assure that the species does not become a federally threatened and endangered species. Should this happen, the protection criteria would be much more restrictive around the remaining lek sites. (B) Social Consequences The social consequence of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the abandonment of the lek site which would be be a loss to the segment of society that enjoys viewing wildlife. The positive social consequences of limiting conflicting uses would be continuing opportunities for naturalists and bird watchers to study and enjoy the birds. Structural development within the sensitive habitat area could be prohibited with little social consequence as owners have the potential to develop their properties outside of the quarter mile sensitive habitat area. Residential development is a conditional use and is also subject to the SMIA and LM site plan requirements. (C) Environmental Consequences The environmental consequences of allowing unregulated conflicting uses could be the destruction of the characteristics which make the lek desireable to the birds which could cause abandonment of the site and failure of breeding and reduction in the sage grouse population. There are no identified negative environmental consequences of prohibiting conflicting uses. (D) Energy Consequences There are no identified significant energy consequences from either permitting or limiting conflicting uses. 5. Program To Meet Goal 5. The Board of County Commissioners finds that, based on the ESEE consequences, both the resource site and the conflicting uses are important relative to each other and that the ESEE consequences should be balanced to allow conflicting uses in a limited way (OAR ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0999-01 Page 4 0135-245, 660-16-010(3)). In order to protect both the lek and the sensitive habitat area and allow limited conflicting uses, the following restrictions shall apply: 1. Site plan review under the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining zone shall be required for all land uses within the sensitive habitat area requiring a land use permit. 2. Structural development within the quarter mile sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited because . there are alternative locations for structures outside of the sensitive habitat area. 3. Partitions creating a residential building site within the sensitive habitat area shall be prohibited. 4. The amended ESEE analysis for the surface mine (Site #494) identifies the lek as a conflicting use and requires consultation with ODFW prior to operation or expansion of the site to determine what specific requirements are necessary to protect the lek from surface mining conflicts. ESEE Findings and Decision - DE 0999-01 Page 5 0 0 0135-2458 Ho,se-Ri )2 <cb III -4 OT - If 4223 11 it if . 5if If F— orro------ ur 4865 55, 4864 4863 4862 . .. .............. 4961 40 -------------- 210 -41 Y, 36 34 A L II 4 .. .......... If .. Exhibit "A-111 Sage Grouse Lek DE -0999-01 19-14-26/SESE C.0 Lz V 61 ft" .-S 0135-2459 L_ ____ _ , __ �t Yl- i� NOO CQ to VI 6t 4W1 s*5 O OV CM w w LL 4, Exhibit "A'-211 U) n; Sage Grouse Lek DE -0999-01 C) C,4 CD 19-14-26/SESE O VI 6t 4W1 s*5 O OV CM w w LL 0 Exhibit "A'-211 U) Sage Grouse Lek DE -0999-01 C) C,4 19-14-26/SESE M n.q.910cn L O 8 O N G 3 r w F - 'T z o U o H a U') M = U O W H � U w 41 W Exhibit "A-3" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0999-01 19-14-26/SESE N �'I rt1 co N N c M r W !11 Q LL - U 0 Exhibit "A-3" Sage Grouse Lek DE -0999-01 19-14-26/SESE 0135-2461 EXHIBIT 115" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 FINDINGS OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUPPORTING ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE FISH AND WILDLIFE CHAPTER OF THE RESOURCE ELEMENT OF PL -20 THE DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Ordinance 92-041 adopted amendments to the Fish and Wildlife chapter of the Resource Element of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. The ordinance was adopted as part of periodic review of the county comprehensive plan in order to comply with OAR 660-16, the Goal 5 administrative rule. The amendments adopted inventories, and economic, social, environmental and energy consequences analyses and decisions (ESEE) for fish and wildlife resources. Oregonians in Action, a state land use organization, objected to the County's final periodic review order. The objections pertained to the Goal 5 ESEE analysis for sensitive bird and mammal species. The Land Conservation and Development Commission upheld the objections of Oregonians in Action and issued a periodic review remand order (93 -RA -883). The remand order required the county to: 1. Identify specific conflicting uses and evaluate the ESEE consequences of those conflicting uses for the inventoried sensitive bird habitat sites. 2. Revise the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone to: (1) require that any special condition resulting from the site-specific ESEE analysis (e.g., setbacks timing of activities, etc,) be applied as a condition of approval to the development approval; (2) clarify how a proposed action in the identified "sensitive" area triggers a review; and (3) delete the repetitive step in the review process (Section 18. 90.050 (A)) The Department of Land Conservation and Development approved a Periodic Review Work Plan (Order #00055) for Deschutes County. Work Task #3 of the approved work plan includes a requirement to adopt site specific ESEE analysis for each sensitive bird and mammal site. During the spring and summer of 1993 the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) conducted field work to obtain more accurate inventory information on the precise location of certain sensitive bird sites and to determine if the sites were active. Based on this information, the county staff amended the inventory of sensitive bird and mammal sites and prepared site specific ESEE analyses and decisions for 1 - EXHIBIT 115" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94) 0135—orb sensitive bird and mammal sites on non-federal land and sites where the designated sensitive habitat area included non-federal land. Site specific ESEEs were not prepared for federal sensitive bird and mammal sites where the sensitive habitat area is entirely on federal land. Federal sites are maintained on the county inventory as 112A" Goal 5 resources (OAR 660-16-005(1)). The Board finds that for federal sites there are no conflicting uses which can be regulated by the county. The federal sites are managed by either the Bureau of Land Management or the National Forest Service. The Deschutes County Planning Commission conducted public hearings on File TA -94-2 and Ordinance 94-004, on March 30 and April 14, 1994. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to all property owners within the sensitive habitat area of the inventoried sensitive bird and mammal sites. Staff revised the site specific ESEEs based on testimony received and recommendations from the planning commission. The planning commission forwarded the revised site specific ESEE analyses and decisions to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for adoption. The Board of County Commissioners (Board) conducted a public hearing on the proposed amendment to Title 18.90 on May 23, 1994. Notice of the Board public hearing was mailed to all individuals or agencies who testified in writing or orally at the public hearing, who requested copies of site specific ESEEs or who requested notification. After consideration of the record and testimony at the public hearing, the Board finds that with the adoption of Ordinance No. 94-004 the county complies with the Periodic Review Remand Order requirement to identify specific conflicting uses and evaluate the ESEE consequences of those conflicting uses for the inventoried sensitive bird and mammal habitat sites. The Board finds that the amendments to the Fish and Wildlife Chapter of the Resource Element of the Comprehensive Plan comply with the requirements of OAR 660-16. 2 - EXHIBIT 115" FOR ORDINANCE NO. 94-004 (06/15/94)