40.240.860    General Management Area Sensitive Wildlife Review Criteria

A.    Site Plans and Field Surveys for Review Uses Near Priority Habitats and Sensitive Wildlife Sites.

1.    Except uses allowed outright, proposed uses may be allowed within one thousand (1,000) feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife area or site subject to compliance with Sections 40.240.800 through 40.240.900 and 40.240.860(E).

2.    Proposed uses within one thousand (1,000) feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site shall be evaluated for adverse effects, including cumulative effects, and adverse effects shall be prohibited.

3.    In addition to the information required in all site plans, uses within one thousand (1,000) feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site shall include a map prepared at a scale of one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet (1:1,200), or a scale providing greater detail.

4.    Proposed uses that would adversely affect priority habitats or sensitive wildlife sites shall be prohibited.

(Amended: Ord. 2018-03-04)

B.    Uses.

    Uses allowed outright in sensitive wildlife areas are listed in Section 40.240.120.

C.    Field Survey.

    A field survey to identify priority habitat and sensitive wildlife sites shall be required for:

1.    Land divisions that create four (4) or more parcels;

2.    Recreation facilities that contain parking areas for more than ten (10) cars, overnight camping facilities, boat ramps, and visitor information and environmental education facilities;

3.    Public transportation facilities that are outside improved rights-of-way;

4.    Electric facilities, lines, equipment, and appurtenances that are thirty-three (33) kilovolts or greater; and

5.    Communications, water and sewer, and natural gas transmission (as opposed to distribution) lines, pipes, equipment, and appurtenances and other project-related activities except when all of their impacts will occur inside previously disturbed road, railroad or utility corridors, or existing development utility sites, that are maintained annually.

6.    Field surveys shall cover all areas affected by the proposed use or recreation development. They shall be conducted by a professional wildlife biologist hired by the project applicant. All priority habitat and sensitive wildlife sites discovered in a project area shall be described and shown on the site plan map.

(Amended: Ord. 2007-11-13)

D.    Uses not listed in Section 40.240.860(B) may be allowed within one thousand (1,000) feet of a sensitive wildlife area or site, when approved pursuant to Section 40.240.860(E) and reviewed under the applicable provisions of Sections 40.240.800 through 40.240.900.

E.    The approximate locations of sensitive wildlife sites are maintained by the Gorge Commission, Forest Service, and state wildlife agencies. State wildlife biologists will help determine if a new use would adversely affect a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife area or site. Uses that are proposed within one thousand (1,000) feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site shall be reviewed as follows:

1.    Site plans shall be submitted to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife by the responsible official. State wildlife biologists will review the site plan and their field survey records and:

a.    Identify or verify the precise location of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site;

b.    Ascertain whether the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site is active or abandoned; and

c.    Determine if the proposed use may compromise the integrity of the wildlife habitat or site or occur during the time of the year when wildlife species are sensitive to disturbance, such as nesting or rearing seasons. In some instances, state wildlife biologists may conduct field surveys to verify wildlife data and assess the potential effects of a proposed use.

2.    Oregon white oak shall not be removed if practicable alternatives exist. If no practicable alternative exists, a wildlife survey and mitigation plan shall be required. This criterion shall not apply to forest practices that are otherwise allowed and that do not violate conditions of approval for other approved uses.

3.    The following factors may be considered when site plans are reviewed:

a.    Biology of the affected wildlife species;

b.    Published guidelines regarding the protection and management of the affected wildlife species. For example, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has prepared guidelines for a variety of species, including the western pond turtle, the peregrine falcon, Oregon white oak and the Larch Mountain salamander;

c.    Physical characteristics of the subject parcel and vicinity, including topography and vegetation;

d.    Historic, current, and proposed uses in the vicinity of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site;

e.    Existing condition of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site and the surrounding habitat.

4.    The wildlife protection process may terminate if the responsible official, in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, determines:

a.    The sensitive wildlife site is not active; or

b.    The proposed use would not compromise the integrity of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site or occur during the time of the year when wildlife species are sensitive to disturbance.

5.    If the responsible official, in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, determines that the proposed use would have only minor effects on the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site that could be eliminated through measures recommended by the state wildlife biologist or by simply modifying the site plan or regulating the timing of new uses, a letter shall be sent to the applicant that describes the effects and measures needed to eliminate them. If the project applicant accepts these recommendations, the responsible official or examiner shall incorporate them into the administrative or examiner’s decision and the wildlife protection process may conclude.

6.    The project applicant shall prepare a wildlife mitigation plan if the responsible official, in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, determines that the proposed use would adversely affect a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site and the effects of the proposed use cannot be eliminated through site plan modifications or project timing.

7.    The responsible official shall submit a copy of all field surveys and wildlife mitigation plans to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will have thirty (30) days from the date that a field survey or management plan is sent to submit written comments to the responsible official.

8.    The responsible official or examiner shall record and address any written comments submitted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife in the administrative or examiner’s decision.

9.    Based on the comments from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the responsible official or examiner will make a decision on whether the proposed use would be consistent with the wildlife policies and guidelines. If the decision contradicts the comments submitted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the responsible official or examiner shall justify how the opposing conclusion was reached.

10.    The responsible official or examiner shall require the applicant to revise the wildlife mitigation plan as necessary to ensure that the proposed use would not adversely affect a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site.

11.    If the responsible official discovers a new protected wildlife location during the review process, the responsible official shall submit this information to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to be updated in their species databases.

F.    Wildlife Mitigation Plans.

    Wildlife mitigation plans shall be prepared when a proposed use is likely to adversely affect a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site. Their primary purpose is to document the special characteristics of a project site and the habitat requirements of affected wildlife species. This information provides a basis for the project applicant to redesign the proposed use in a manner that protects priority habitats and sensitive wildlife sites, maximizes their development options, mitigates temporary impacts to the sensitive wildlife site or buffer zone, and offsets unavoidable negative impacts to priority habitats and sensitive wildlife sites. Wildlife mitigation plans shall meet the following guidelines:

1.    Wildlife mitigation plans shall be prepared by a professional wildlife biologist hired by the project applicant.

2.    All relevant background information shall be documented and considered, including biology of the affected species, published protection and management guidelines, physical characteristics of the subject parcel, past and present use of the subject parcel, and habitat value of the wildlife site.

3.    Where applicable, the core habitat of the rare wildlife species shall be delineated. It shall encompass the sensitive wildlife area or site and the attributes, or key components, that are essential to maintain the long-term use and integrity of the wildlife site.

4.    A wildlife buffer zone shall be employed. It shall be wide enough to ensure that the core habitat is not adversely affected by new uses, or natural forces, such as fire and wind. Buffer zones shall be delineated on the site plan map and shall reflect the physical characteristics of the project site and the biology of the affected species.

5.    The size, scope, configuration, or density of new uses within the core habitat and the wildlife buffer zone shall be regulated to protect the rare wildlife species. The timing and duration of all uses shall also be regulated to ensure that they do not occur during the time of the year when wildlife species are sensitive to disturbance. The following shall apply:

a.    New uses shall generally be prohibited within the core habitat. Exceptions may include uses that have temporary and negligible effects, such as the installation of minor underground utilities or the maintenance of existing structures.

b.    Intensive uses shall be generally prohibited in wildlife buffer zones. Such uses may be conditionally authorized when a wildlife area or site is inhabited seasonally, provided they will have only temporary effects on the wildlife buffer zone and rehabilitation or enhancement will be completed before a particular species returns.

6.    Rehabilitation or enhancement shall be required when new uses are authorized within wildlife buffer zones. When a buffer zone has been altered in the past, it shall be rehabilitated to its natural condition to the maximum extent practicable. When complete rehabilitation is not possible, such as when new structures permanently displace wildlife habitat, enhancement shall also be required. Enhancement shall achieve a no net loss of the integrity of the wildlife site. Rehabilitation and enhancement actions shall be documented in the wildlife mitigation plan and shall include a map and text.

7.    The applicant shall prepare and implement a three (3) year monitoring plan when the affected priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site is occupied by a species that is listed as endangered or threatened pursuant to federal or state wildlife lists. It shall include an annual report and shall track the status of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site and the success of rehabilitation or enhancement actions.

8.    At the end of three (3) years, rehabilitation and enhancement efforts may conclude if they are successful. In instances where rehabilitation and enhancement efforts have failed, the monitoring process shall be extended until the applicant satisfies the wildlife mitigation plan guidelines.

G.    New Fences in Deer and Elk Winter Range.

1.    New fences in deer and elk winter range may be allowed only when necessary to control livestock or exclude wildlife from specified areas, such as gardens, priority habitat or sensitive wildlife sites. The areas fenced shall be the minimum necessary to meet the immediate needs of the project applicant.

2.    New and replacement fences that are allowed in winter range shall comply with the guidelines in the Forest Service document Specifications for Structural Range Improvements (Sanderson, et al., 1990), as summarized below, and may be revised from time to time, unless the applicant demonstrates the need for an alternative design. To allow deer and other wildlife safe passage:

a.    To make it easier for deer to jump over the fence, the top wire shall not be more than forty-two (42) inches high.

b.    The distance between the top two (2) wires is critical for adult deer because their hind legs often become entangled between these wires. A gap of at least ten (10) inches shall be maintained between the top two (2) wires to make it easier for deer to free themselves if they become entangled.

c.    The bottom wire shall be at least sixteen (16) inches above the ground to allow fawns to crawl under the fence. It should consist of smooth wire because barbs often injure animals as they crawl under fences.

d.    Stays, or braces placed between strands of wire, shall be positioned between fence’s posts where deer are most likely to cross. Stays create a more rigid fence, which allows deer a better chance to wiggle free if their hind legs become caught between the top two (2) wires.

3.    Woven wire fences may be authorized only when it is clearly demonstrated that such a fence is required to meet specific and immediate needs, such as controlling hogs and sheep.

4.    Any fencing permanently erected within deer and elk winter range, as a result of an emergency/disaster response, shall comply with Section 40.240.860(G)(2).

(Amended: Ord. 2006-05-04; Ord. 2021-12-02)