Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
84-6 DEER HERD COMMITTEE 20 OF 33
114110 Co. PdannfngC `—/ JUL "M R u "E Orow \ ► 0 25 COUNTY CrENTeR DR. i OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380'(91(3) b'04-46311 o a o a °Bun MEMBERS OF THE BOARD HASKEL A. MpINTURF MARTIN) N1010111 JANE DOLAN CHIV AUMINISTnA'TIVI: CTP1= CER HILDA WHEELER ED McLAUGHLIN July 1131 .1985 LEN FULiUN Board of Supervisors County of Butte 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Board Members; Re; Fish and, Game Deer Herd Study in Butte County Please find attached a and Games response to the copy of the State Department of Fish questions months back. raised by your Board some The report has already Planning Commission and will been di stributed to members of the soon be Fish and Game Commission, provided to members of the It is our understanding that the Planning Commission will be holding open di scussi oafs of the report at either their meeting of August 8 or August 22. / 1 Ver/ truly � ,yours, artin J+ icuols Chief Administrative Officer MdN/MP/vs cot ,tettye Kircher, Director of Planning Routh Referra I -----•--- X_ Transmittal. Department AGRICULTURE ASSESSOR �. "UO ITOR. 'r0NTROLLER I C.A,A, COUNTY C LERVEL» CT)ONS L 1-17NTY COUNSEL DISTH&�, t ATTORNEY FII?E DEPARTMENT HEALTH SERVICES t,10RA tY . ,._. PEHSONNEL/P,I.C, PLANNING PROSATION t]Mh1`" �S510N'°I AFCc PLI13LIC I,ORKS PUFiCHAsING_'CIVIL DISASTER RECOADER RISS,' MANAGEMENT -� SIdElilf ;ORONER W _T"-AG(IIiER.'TAX COLLECTOR _ .wt ti'FE'Lt" AIDC 0 C6 1 . Planning Cqrn� Date 511.0 Board Action _. 4/30/85 roville, Callf ornia ��� �r OFFICE OF CLERK OF THE BOARD Document - AOREPMENT(s) Action 'Requested -�, BUDGET TRANsFER(S) g - FOR YOUR FILES CERTIFIED MINUTES "'"<�' FOR YOUR INFORhMAMII --.x CORRESPONDENCE FOR RECORI)ING -_-- DEEDS ter- -._ OBTAIN SIGNATURES ORDINANCE(S) -0. `" RECOMMENDATION -- PENALTY ABATEMENT REOfIE'STS --� REPURT TO M)AHO "---- RrFOLUTION(s) '- ° RETURN ORIGINAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Letter frbin Fish acid GaMe k�A 3 '78J PRSTATE•OF CAUFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY GE DEUI, It, Govemor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAMEAPR 0 "IS 1416 NINTH STREET /� SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 45814 (`b916) 445-3531 mr. Martin J. Nichols Chief Administrative officer County of Butte 25 County Center Drive oroville, CA 95965-3380 Dear Mr. Nichols: April 1(), 1985 WM coo" �ttelstvnrtcv� �� w1e have received your letter requesting information oit deer in rlutt:e3 County and will attempt, to answer your questions to the greatest extent t0ssible. The accepted and documented factor limiting deer herd:, in butte (bounty,—rt California and, in tact, wherever deer are found is the quantity and quality of habitat:. This includes; food -producing areas (both summer and winter), water, thermal cover (protection from extremes of heat or cold), fawning areas (protection from predation during critical times, usually the first few days), and freedom of movement. We can see examples of what happens if only one of the factors is missing and the extreme case can be observed during the winter of 1983-84 when thousands of deer died in 0jom1ngt Colorado, and Utah and to a lesser extent in Northern California. Deep snows and prolonged cold weather conditions made normal feeding areas unavailable and without these areas deer: starved. Deer can also be prevented from using normal feeding areas through other means Large reservoirs can block movements to normal feeding areas or the areas can be Lost through inundation in the reservoir site. other human activities can also interfere with use, such as roads and highways, or of special concern in Butte county, subdivision development. Studies have documented the treed for adequate habitat: and providing for such requirements are the basis Cor the science of wildlife management, So much for the general biology. �h recognize you are specifically interested in Butte County. however, the same principles apply there. All of the elri:ment.,s of adequate habitat must be present or deer populations will not surrvim in response to your specific questions we submit the following. 1 IDENTIr`1'_ VE LIMITING t~ACItORS ON ILIEM PopUr&TrON .AND nA rj' Im grtpr*)rxr �vlrwva�tnva. LLI'11_L_lNU CtVI LUL4J 0I1VU1jU :LLY-L.,UUti, bUl' NCIl`_.k3U LIMITED TO A4 Natural predators Natural pronator:; affecting deer in Butte County ate primarily Mountain ,L,Ons, coyotes, and dogs. Cagles are known to occasionally prey on fo-.Nis but are not consideted significant predators due to ,low ntbbers. Mv. Martin J. Nichols -2- a The mountain lion has been protected b State 1971. Mountain Tionsare extremely eft cove legislative mandate since oC a h agree they kill a deer every seven ve Pr�d�ora Game calculated that the number of rand most sul.1stantially since the Ys' '.faze Department moratorium was imposedmountain l jorrs has gro,,41� 1971 to 4,800 in 1983. 'ihe deerpopulation in th 1�7ir Gt r►t r a0 in shrinking and the increased Mountain 14 �n the Mato haE; been contributinrg factor. Population i COrta my a Coyotes are also known predators on deer, particuiari Cue to their sive they are not as efficient as lions ion winter ranges, animals. Even though they take numbers of deer killing considered to be signiFiohnt in lirniti �g healthy coyotes are not ►�9 ,population size, bags have been documented as a�fft'ctive areas Combined with habitat losses and r i`�tors on deer in suburban play a large k.rstrictians to r9 Dart in lirrtiting beer movement' dogs subdivisions„ We- have populatior in areas surrounding conflicts. enclosed a copy of a report on deer -dog b. fiarvestiny; Veer kill in Butte Cd'crnty for the past six years is as follows. lows 1980 1981 983 _347 G7fi Z 0-5 982 1272 1984 There have been significant charxges in hunting322 last �:ouple of years and ,it is extrom.01Y difczotet and seasons in the under these varjablss l to e? quote hardest No antlerless hunts have been held I h Butte mount Wildlife Areal since 1963 and tl1� r�.lore� no 5 determination t except ul Graylocige of either positive or r�e��atiVe efeets fr.otrrthis ype could !� made harvest of forked horn tsuck;� Onlyof hervest. California shou' have little or no Within tl�c seasons established ri effect on total p61)ulation sire. The type of harvest W11 -ch can affect al l ages Ind sexes. , pop. lations is tll also has an effect oh7rnext 1109al kil�li o . egal harvest of f a d"'e on tt7e Winter rat-ge Fawn is also lost. Cn Vali Qt-nih Production i ofhd he next Year's equal or exceeo the legal tcke. alculated to Variable We athe?r Condtions. Weather conditions affect beer, in a number, b ways taolij negative. positive and Mr. Martin J. Nichols ,3 - Forage production is a highly variable weather conttol,;led factor. Acorns, icor example, which are a staple food item during fall and winter months, may be almost non-existent in sane years while in other years far more acorns may 1,>o produced than are used by deer, Drought conditions may tend to concentrate deet at a few water wurces, making the more susceptible to disease, while above average rainfall can make additional range available. As previously indicated, extended cold and increased nnwfall may cause severs problems. it is generally acknowledged that above average precipitation increases forage i )duction for wildlife while periods of drought cause significant reductions in wildlife populations. These range limitations are usually food -oriented as more food plants are ptrtxluced ani-broWS0 plants have increased growth during wet periods. d, Correlation Between Resident Deer Herd Range Use and Migratory Herd Flange Use. Radio telemetry studies have documented an overlap in ranges botween migratory and resident doer. In the Railroad Flat Deer Herd in Calaveras County, of ten deer trapped within a t4rJ-stxuare mile area, one animal was resident and moved less than 1/2 --mile during the entire year while the remaining anLials made movements of up to 40 miles. we know that sane overlpp occurs in 8utto County but cannot identify any exact percentages or areas. e. Physical sarriers to Herd Migration. Man-made physical.'barrriers include such projects as oroville Reservoir# Miners Ranch Canal, the Hamilton Branch Canal (Plums County), various highways (partial barriers), and residential. develofinents. Dae to its size and location, Oroville ResorVoi- is a Major obstacle to deer movement. (However, an even greater imps • ws the actual loss o1 critical winter range through inu►dation.) At , of Winter range west of the reservoir are now unavailable to deer. Current mitigation policies of the b0paftment require the ptrojecL, sponsor to wupensate for losses of wildlife habitat resulting fin water development, through acquisition and improvement of Lands spE?cif cally for deer. A copy of our agreement on the South Fork American Rivolr Project in El Dorado County is enclosed for your inlornration. As you can sem, Sections IV and V speak specifically to these considerrttion:s canals. Canals can be and were often significant barriers to 111y4r;easCul deer movement. Deer losses in tate ti4arnilton Branch Canal in Ktxnas County (East Tehama Deur Herd of which a part winters in BtAt*t COunty) have been documented at 20 deer year. most oC this mortality reccurs in. approximately a three -mike reach of canal. The DLpart:rr►nrtt has been working with FG&P for a nuWi er of years to reduce or, ollminate these losses through crossings and ultimately fencing, if necessary. Vie Miners Ranch Canal in Butte County also has a canbination of fencing and crossings which are reducing mortalities and crossing problems significantly. On the Butte Hendricks and CO tervill.e Canals (PG&'H De, Sabla Centerville Project) agreanents with PG&8 require a large; number of crossings as well as escape devices to reduce deer mortalities and provide for movement. Y Hiq}ways. Highways and roads are not as much of an actual barrier as they are a source of increased mortality. In Butte County Caltrans figures indicate the road kill may be as much as 14% of the reported buck kill. in other areas read kills are one of the highest sources of mortality, t!brk with Caltrans includes Cehcincg of critical Crossing aveas with provisions for deer undo rcrossings, warning signs for drivers, and various devices have been tested to attaopt to scare deer away from crossing.CfLheset Appt:o�tn��lort�hrcouandsone--ha;1fl method is fencing with Approximately acres of winter range is usurped by one mile of read. in certain instances highways, or more specifically, freeways have been barriers to movement and portions of some herds have been eliminated by freeway fencing aril median barriers. Residential. development ►nay also be a barrier to movement, in additf," to actual building construction and fencing, a serious problem existy- kl with dcrnostic dogs, rn rural areas most people have dogs which in ►any cases are allowed to run free. txjOs can be a barrier to movement ,s W611 well as a predator: Steadies have documented dogs to be very efEe, .,-ti,ve predators w deetk cspecialty in suburban areas. -E. Martin J. Nichols -5- 0 % In relation to defining corridors through subdivisions, a number of factors affect the location and width of necessary corridors. ',These include amount of use, time of use# vegetative ty0es, amount of coverr, steepness of terrain, and typee of development. Generally with steeper terrain and denser cover, less width would be necessary. f. Parcel Sizes. Studies conducted by the Deparb-ftent on the Day Bench areti of Lassen County have shown that there a-,4 specific areas surrounding residential development which are avoided by migratoty deer. A nwber of factors - influence this area of avoidanceso Ifierie include terrain, density and type of vegetation, the amount of dj,-,"urbance at the development, and the presence or absence of dogs. Basically, deer use increases os you irove away fro -n developed areas. This is the basis for our parcel sir -le reccinne ndat ions of 20 acres in non-critical range, 40 acres in critical range, and 80 acres in open sagebrush. habitat type (none of the latter occurs in f3utte County) or an alternative of clustered development with spacifted open space. Parcels of those sizes are intended to provide an adequate buffer in order that part of the habitat will be available to sustain deer. A Copy of the Day Bench Study is also enclosed for your information, g. Conditions Adjacent To and Beyond the Butte County Lines. Similar conditions exist throughout the foothill elevations of northern and central California. Major encroacluents have and are occurring in deer winter. ranges. The Department of Fish and Game is workii-rg with all of the counties in this region to obtain protection for deer habitat, In Yuba County a major effort is underway through preparation of a programatic EIR for a largo number of subdivisions In similar habitat. The Yuba County EM contain,-, many provisions similar to those contained in the Butte county war Can-nittoo Repatt, 4 The current dear ramje and migration ila&pso 'provided to your Planning b -apartment, are considered to accurately reflect the ranges in Butte county. ,i,hey will be updated as additional information becomes available. 4 0* 3. several deer range enhancement programs or Opportunities ava both public and private lands such as; 11 -. able on a. tag fee, the so-called `'Hill Bill", would authorize an i►7crease in deer Lay files to pay for unpXenentaton Of specified plans. These funds will be initially exenconethehinvjeanagement habitat segments of herd plans. beer herd and nt subsequent _tigative and implementation Bucks Mountain deer hebee1-08 `'action or p �nentaiion plans have been preparE�ci for the past Kama, Mooretown County). In fiscal e (Portions of all three are in will y) expended year 1985,/86 $20,000 of the Hotta pended in the K-)oretown--pucks mountain deer, onher��ai X13 bit eget radio-teletetry collars will be placed on deco,- in various ]aca�ons Within the herd and their movements monitored to rnot'e precisely 'll+nty winter range, summer range, y define is Proposed an Fiscal migrelory corridors and ,fawning areas. It used 'to fund habitat mani,pulatio/87p��,�,�svUia�urun��sand dollars Will be hk'oretown-Bucks hlcunt-ain clear, ranges of the b• SB -1704, called the "Vegetative Management P r�-m'+ agreement be�tw4en a rangeland owner and the state allows a cooperaL. Ive (CDC') to do pre;�e gibed burning on private lands to Department Forestry prote?ction and provides increased forage for wildlife ar%,4 ire c. The California �'nrest Improvementlivestock. Director of the State CeAct of 19 8 (C'zP) authorizes the public and private investment in fgrestL Of ere onto Undertake a r cooperative cost --sharia Program of 9 program to improve managOnent through a lands. P imber resources on private d. AB --580 (1983) encourages wildliEe management an landowner submits a wildlife &nanagemOht private lands. ro conse'rvation and wise use Ufat}�e fish encour Qs the roso rces�n Based on Lila effectiveness of h anti wildlife granted hunting ohportunit tx. the plan, the landowner i regulations, ltlis Provides ancorigmiG incentive tolo the ��general "wild state,. retain land in a eCooperative programs are available such as with DFG, Copt BLM, 08r U. s. { "Coordinated Resourco Plans'' landowners where cast sharing and mute ise vatiOn Services and private benefits are shared, -7 - Mr. Martin J. Nichols vioK w INri I S AND LiM�'r ar TxONS I gLIC FI NEE CES INREGCO[3DI TION ARE COhtPAR1; Dl� ,,SREN lZDIN� MI�NAGEMEN'I Com' A , lES'' Sumer DpgDERI[ CWN`I MAN1�oSM�• and East 'I'�'h�tn deur herd 5unm ---------"` j)ownieville e lasses in the gsc� the Mot�r�.own i ac:tefi • Winter rang 'The Bucks lounta t seriously impact, much it�ra�-e than deer herds to ranges are not Ye 1erds have been bin, to the north and the r when V, untain,'c oretov+n st ha��ta herd e ublic north or south, the Ea acre Loss of winter rare n East was a 20,000 e has 1a p rd to the south. s built. 1.he cast T�,' r winter little regi.dential lie p nor wa 7r�va��� h prov.ille ins.- e and 1 e ,ot the Downievill.e herd area. (CUM Tehama Wildlife Zang )same is true access, `ane " U�1J1'X• devel.o�ent O CMrr �'" F'(JI2T E'S� Li3ILXTY C7k� „�F Mrlt1�° 5• DATA TO SUp ratown deer herd 1 the Bucks Mountain/ T �� t a envies, loco Of the basic purposes of .o land mana0m -.n g deer: one: provide ide guidance t , plan Is to L decisions which of OWh re P01 ,- managementand landowners i'- landon the ao�t ve super gc vert iiento plan will del aend �tiability of. the makers• de�.r herds are to restore and maintain oafs for California al1tY, diversified use o1+ the 'me statewide g. rovide for high � as the ulat.p s and to P ° levels were considered Moore healthy pop 1965 population ounts of Neither the Fucks Mountain Or Moo Where possible, The huge` es that hems; attained • ulatiorl levels • reclud restora`, nil level 1965 attain � 965 Pop o f i , since 1e h p .herds ca and mast e scale habitat losses' e habitat lost �Qver 40 that further lam ens other activities winter rarg and it is anti, Priority wildlife Even athere land is kept op , p�55ibility; a given p over will Occur within ?.0 Yearaxingr eta, may such as reforestation, resent pop ulation levels will lie a� fficul �� n Antain p riorilaies and trends• deer herds concernsi resent land u&.0 p retowa considering P the Bucks Mountain and Zhe following axe thc� goals for Mount herd Goals= tr 4,000 deer. ibis A: Sucks Mo of r -►t least ulation average estiiivates• Should. a 'he,rd t about 15% over Current,average shall be 1. Maintain an increase of o bo 10`41 tkle de - .red would be rovid� current estix►ates p raised. of 20:100• m1ni.mm fail. buck to aloe � ratio y iritain a Lawn ratio of itat and the herd Population for a sCyY 0i permenage hal00 does, to 55 • . , ,tt.r t -,,!. h,ra!+":-+w: d..,i�. n• :»-r..:•.v- "�'fird,,.....r. _m.,..: .�. ,_. ... _ yu:tFnir�ltwr e�itinM j�� rfi",rditi'�*' .. .. ... .�7. w Mr. Martin.J. Nichols -9- without that support not only will the pans fall by the wayside, but the substantial loss of deer and their habitat will: continue. We hope to work with you to turn that situation around in Butte County. 6. PMVIDE INFORMATION ON TIME LINE-S`,iRUC11M AND FUNDING _ FOR DEPARTMENT ti"S MV AGD; E-:J—r CAPABILITY IN BUTES COUNTY. The Department of Fish and Game will appraise Butte County Of all "Hili Bill" funding, investigative, and habitat manipulation projects ongoing in the county with an annual update on project results. our Vegion 2 people have discussed this problem at length with your pl.anni'ng department and will be happy to do so with thy: Commission or the Board of Supervisors. Please contact Paul T. Jensen, regional Managorr Fegion 2, 1701 Nimbus Fuad, Rancho Cordova (:AA 95670, telephone '(916) 355-0922. sincerely, Jac, G. Parnell for Attachments: Report: Dog Depredation on Wildlife and Livestock in California Agreement on S. V, American River Project, El Doralo County (SOFAR) Day Bench study Hill Bill - AS--3735 Vegetation Management Program - SB-1704 CFIP Private Lands Managements - AB 500 Eastern Tehema Deer Herd Sumary Bucks MountairVMOOL•etown Deer Nerd Plan March 13, 1985 Butte County Bo rd of Supervisors 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Attention: Chief Administrative Officer Martin J. Nichols Dear Mr. Nichols: As you arc aware, the Department is Very interested in working with Butte County on emironnI011tal planning iSSUOS. Your recent letter listed questions dealing with deer. iZEjtjjer than attemptim j �j lengthy written response, Regional �,Jajjagor Paul Jonsei. ind members of his staf.r- will be in con - ta,!L with members of the Board OE SuperVizors and the Planning Depcjrtmcn,air,', -ittompt to ilnsWer the t3oard's questiorlS. I hope this personal contact Will be saLisfactOrY- 8incerelyt c. Parnell �Otltor unfit COUNTY MAWRIVAllyr. STATE. OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Govemor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 1416 NINTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 (916) 445-3531 March 13, 1985 Butte County Bo rd of Supervisors 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Attention: Chief Administrative Officer Martin J. Nichols Dear Mr. Nichols: As you arc aware, the Department is Very interested in working with Butte County on emironnI011tal planning iSSUOS. Your recent letter listed questions dealing with deer. iZEjtjjer than attemptim j �j lengthy written response, Regional �,Jajjagor Paul Jonsei. ind members of his staf.r- will be in con - ta,!L with members of the Board OE SuperVizors and the Planning Depcjrtmcn,air,', -ittompt to ilnsWer the t3oard's questiorlS. I hope this personal contact Will be saLisfactOrY- 8incerelyt c. Parnell �Otltor unfit COUNTY MAWRIVAllyr. CHIT ADT\/I'IN,is t COUNTY hF 131t'1'"F'I oOUTp zx� C;0UN'T'Y (;I_N1'L-H D11 0tA0VlLr r " 09A(Ir0�r`1NIA 9;�t)f)1,•3:jti0 ff)ilr) o. . c o p �OUMI �rC'r+rRt ><5 i TH1E A2 HA$Kf.', A. Mz NTUR» MAMINJ NICHOLS ,ANE V O!,AN CHIk0'AWAINISTRAMLor€ICEll H71,r" A AHEEIJ4 `' m, ` 1(W)q "7 February 11, 1(MB :'EN Buffo Co. Planning Cohjt,n, F L' B 12 '1985 oroVillo' Caufomtq Mr, Jack Parnell, Director State Department of Fish and Game " 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, f , 95814 Dear Mr. Parnell: Ori January 29, 1985 the Butte County Boavd of Supervisors receivers an interim report and recommendations From its Planning Conmlission as part of the Deer Herd Study Committee in Butte County. As part of the recommendations, several items were mentionud which necessitate clari- fication from the Department of Fishand Gaire, Accordingly, the follnwing information is being requested; I. Identify the limiting factors on herd population and data to support conOusions . L.imiting factors should include, but ;iut be limited to a, Natural predators (numbers, species, correlation to deer)_ b, Harvejting both ovor and llild0t� hAVVLat. c. Variable Wo -Other condutions aitd how they relate to range condition. d, Correlation between resident deer herd range use and migratory hei^d range use, e, Physical barriers to herd migration (both man-made and natural). f. Parcel sires, g. Conditions adjacent to and beyond the Butte County boundary 1;nes, 2i* Update Fish and Came maps for Region 2, as they would affect Butte County to reflect limiting factors identified, s } Mr. Jack Parnell -2 February 11 3. Provide information on range management and improvc`►ner►G i�unding under current or proposed legislation and/or regulations 4. Compare differences in conditions and limitation,'; it, Butte County to those in bordering counties regarding management. Comitare public vsv private managenent. 5, Data to support feasibility of Game Management Mans -in Butte County. G, Provide information on tir"e 1 ine structure and F►►ntiing for depart- ment range management capability in Butte County. ery t rel yo Mar Mari6 0. Nichols Chief Administrative Officer 14A MP/jac cc, vttye Yircher, Director of Planning Paul Jensen, Department of Fish and Game Region 2 Manager Jim Snowden Bob 14apes Inter -Departmental Memorandum TO; 'Board of Supervisors FROM! Planning Commission SOUBJECT* Recommendation, to the Board. of Supervisors regarding the Deer Herd Study v AT E.' January 25, '1985 Tne Planning Commission at their regular meeting held January 24, 1985 recommended the Board of Supervisors request that. the Department of Fish. and Game provide the following information: 1. Identify the limiting factors on herd population and data to support conclusions. Limiting factors should include, but not be limited to: a. Natural predators (numbers, species, correlation to dear). bi Harvesting - both ver and under harvest. c. Variable weather conditions and how they relate to range condition, d, Correlation between, resident deer herd range use and migratory herd range use, e. Physical barriers to herd migration (both man-made and natural). f. Parcel sizes.- g. izes.g. Conditions adjacent to and beyond the Butte County bourdary lines, 2. Update fish and Game maps for Region 21 as they would affect Butte County to reflect limiting factors identified: 3. Provide information on range management and improvement funding under current or proposed legislation and/or regulations, 44 Compare differences in conditions and. limitations in Butte County to those in bordeting Counties regarding management. Compare public vs. private management, 5. Data to support famnJI)ility of Game Management Plans in Butte County. 6. Provide infortiotJon on time line sLructure and rundll%, for department range hintiagemant capabfl,ity in Butto County. Additionally recommend Oat the Comity will: 1, tneourage clustering kil foothill area. 24 Adopt appropriate policy for Study Aron 2. 3, Limiting type of fencing through condiLionsi 4. Consider adopting a dog ordinance, board of Supervisors Deer Hord Study Page -2- January 25, 1985 5. Limit transportation corridor or access where feasib p le, G Incorporate policy tan u i"� Resource Conservation HI to deer herd meat. rrik�tttion and ma��;� ;tsl1tont 7. Consider adopting approprlaata mitigation measures on < when requested data becomes available.I.ttcl;ttr�du.al pa'Lc�! hl Attachments: Planning Commission minutes 1/10/85 Draft Planning Commission minut., 1/24/85 To; PROM., SUSJECT., DATE: Inter -Departmental Memorandum Planning Commission Commissioners Avis and V'ercruse —Deer Herd Sub -Commit , Recommendation to the Board of Supervisors regardingtoy tJt,c Dyer herd Study January 17, 1985 Recommend the Board and of Supervisors request that the D Gime provide the following Information-, etaa��tmeirt of X'tsIA l• Identify the limiting lectors on herd papulation conclusions. Limiting factors should include, but ot tl data to support n be limited to Is Natural predators (numbers, species, 'CarrelatiU�1 b• to deer); Harvesting. both over and under harvest. C, Variable tfeather conditions andhoe , they relate d• LO range condition.. Correlation betigeen resident deer herd rang use �i range usei nd nigrator Y herd e• Physical barriers to herd migratory (both man-made and i• Parcel sizes. natural) 2• Npdate. Kish and Game map; for Re gion County to reflect limiting •� identified, � as 'they would a�i¢ct Butte dentified, Y'rovide information on range management and improvement current or proposed legislation acid/or. regulations, funding under 4. Compere differences iit conditions and limitation in those in bozdering Counties as regarding g Butte County to vs;. Private management, g management, Compare public 5• Data to suPport feasibility of Came Management P Butte Plans in 6• Provide information on t. County, range managoment capabilib line structure and fundingf> y in Butte County. °Y bepartmcut Additionally recommend that the Col.wty will. 1. Encourage clustering ��, gin foothill area Planning Commission Page -2- January J.7, 1985 2• Adopt appropriate policy for Study .Area 2. 8. Limiting type of fencing through conditions,. 44 Dog Ordinance. 5• Limit transportation corridor access where feasible. 6. Incorporate policy language in Resource Conservation Element. and to deep: herd migration and management AA;KV;Ir I tNIFIED Pee: - SPORTSMEN "ova"er 26, 1984 rJIU. boxi 5 Red duff, CA 96080 (916) 345-231,1- Chico ()AOVILLE, C�opojw,4 (916) 527-3588 -tiled "Bluff Ms. Hilda Wheeler DEC 3 EX94 chairman Butte County Board of Supervisors BOARD oF SUPEAVISl)fjS 25 Countr1rCenter DriveC-ov� Chico, CA 95965 SUR Oear Ms. Wheeler: V,- 11 5 1�3t5Lt ! tu 0,0,4% cooQ10A The attached letter is to invite attendance from, you or your appointed repre8entative(s) on the Unified Sportsmen Technical Research Committee (USTRC). The purpose of the, USTRC is to assemble the most highly skilled and techni .'I,y qualified group possible to review and to study the Eastern Teh- Deer Herd. Representation from either the Board or from Your County Fish and Game Commission would add immeasurably to the makeup of USTRC4 Thank you for your cooperationi Sincerely yours, UNIFIED SPORTSMEN Mike Ballew Direct0t/Secretaty YES I I e or my redpresentat ive (s) will attend and be involves in USTRc., N01 I do not with to become involVodi Reason? 1W P.O. Box 308 Red Bluff, CA 96080 (916) 345-2311 Chico (916) 527.358$ - Red Bluff The Unified Sportsmen is a -group of approximately 275 current. members The primary concern of t:he group is the Fastotr6 Tehama Deer Herd. A copy of the activities and goals of the group are attached, The past two decades have produced declining deer populations in most California deer herds. The eastern Tehama Door Herd is no exception. The Unified Sportsmen is a group who have banded together to try to reverse this trend. The Board bf Directors of the organization has moved to form the Unified Sportsmen Technical Research Committee. The purpose of this letter is to invite participation in the Unified Sportsmen Technical. Resinarch Committee (USTRC) . Members of USTRC will be experts in their Cield and will represent agencies or groups who have concerns with regard to this deer herd. The purpose and procedure of USTRC is outlined as follows Phase 1. Identify the characteristics of the herd. In this phase, the primary function of USTRC will be to establish a unanimity of thought with regards to the current status of and problems facing the herzcd currently. The Eastern Tehama Deer Herd Plan will be used during this phase. Phase 2. The second phase will be to organize and review all eXisting data releVent to the deer herd. The data will. be evaluated with regards to the relevency of the problem: areas that USTRC has previously identified in phase I. Phase 3. Completion of phase 2 may point out various data gaps or areas in which more information is required. In the third pha80, USTRC will decide how to fila, the data gaps (to include met:hods of research and supervision of same). Phase 4 Research and evaluation will be ongoinj over time. Phase 4 will be the implementation of USTRC findings into field use with proper monitoring to determine results. Dr. Marshall White Assemblyman Stan Statham Senator Juni Neilsen Sacramento Safari Club Chico Archers The date of the first meeting will be set as those contacted reply. Replys should be mailed back no later than 12/31/59-. The above is a gross outline only. The USTRC will determine it's own course of action by groupconsensus. The first USTRC meeting will Secretary, Unified Sportsmen. be chaired by Mike Ballew, DSSTRIBUTiONs California Department of Fish and Game California Division of Forestry United States Forest Service Bureau of Land Management University of California Extension Service Tehama County Board of Supervisors Butte County Board of Supervisors Plumas County Board of Supervisors Pacific Gas and Electric Rn nhiirm T.I1nS),ar (nmr.�r.es Dr. Marshall White Assemblyman Stan Statham Senator Juni Neilsen Sacramento Safari Club Chico Archers sportsman: UONIFIED 10 SPORTSMEN P.O. Box 308 Red'Bluff, CA 96080 (916) 345-2311- Chico (916) 527-3588 -Red Bluff The purpose of this Letter is to acquaint you with the Unified sportsmen and to encourage your membership participation in this group. There are a number of sportsmen's groups, all organized for different purposes: The Unified sportsmen is unique in that it is an action oriented group with specific goals that will be attained. Group Activities; 1) Annually the group circulates a deer tag to be used by any x-11 hunter. The purpose of this, tag is data collec- tion on the herd and hunter activity within the zone. This information is tabulated and shared with the Department of Fish and Game. 2) Unified Sportsmen work as volunteers on several pro- scribed burns each summer. This donstitutes only the first phase of the habitat improvement work that the group will undertake. 3) During the fail and spring, teams from within the group work in cooperation with b G biologists in making herd composition counts. These teams survey portions of the deer herd that have not been previously surveyed. This allows DVG a mote comprehensive look at the herd without an increase ii -i Depar-hent expenditure. 4) steps are currently being taken to institute a re search project to identify and study problem areas within the Dastern Tehama deer herd. This will be administered by the Unified sportsmen Technical Research committee. The following is a statement of purpose for the Unified Sportsmen; The purpose of Unified sportsmen is to work toward enhancement of the deer herd population (healthy quantity; quality) t-hrobghi a) developing new, restoring old, and maintaining existing deer habitat within sound game managementprinciples; b) research studies deemed neCessaty to more fully understand herd population dynamics- c) huntet education Con sistent with proper utilization of the resource; 6) public support for state programs which utilize all the available game management tools necessary to reach the above goals e) local support restricting the urban development and growth into prime deer habitat areas; f) cooperation With all state, county, and federal agencies whenever poobible in working towards the enhancement of the deer )population; g) providing volunteer workers whenever necessary as an aid in reaching the aforementioned goals; h) developing sources of income to implement the aforementioned. programs. The Unified Sportsmen will take an active role in the management of the deer herd from a politicalr research, financial,, and personnel standpoint. M 2810-F Redding ,4veniae Sacramento, CA 95820 739-8933 A Commercial Industrial Recreational Developments ITE D, aRavi�t�, cA►�foNi� Obi 2��1984 20 October 1984 of $u. �r-RvisnPs eoABo Butte County Commissioners O.coville, California To ALL COMMISSIC3L`TERS We havE, been watching the new3 media for development in t be proposed regulation concerning Migratory Deer and their proposals and recommendations. P7e, as owners of the Swedes 'Fl at Subdivision and adjacent property, as indica- ted by the enclosed map, are deeply concerned with the decisions which have been rendered or those which may be rendered by the Board of Commissioners. jqe want it !mown that we are not in favor of establishing the minim m of 40 acre parcels, We further are Prot in favor of the development ;fees that have been set forth. We do, indeed, agree with those that are protesting and will lend our efforts towards an equitable settlement, providing it is favorable toward property owners and not the deer, which that certain few proponents exploit for their own personal hunting habits. We control over 1000 acres - our praperty holdings and will react imrndiately i.f our investment is jeopordized by adverse decisions of the 'Board of Supervisors. Sincerely yours, 4' William H. Cook Swedes Flat Sadivision Encl Duffi+ Co, Planning Comm, NOV 1 1981 Otovip©, U11=14 !F&,A,, WI SAOM �' nv�r cot��rr, cacrfo�.��o�o •vG pro ,AP sip dl/ .r 1tRIRgf /1 1.•IB ��M RMI ....�e.�..-ter �L. /I /l b/I8 R//t Rd. RMIr /�.d M ► �M. h N T • M l8.►I9 ,v FIN RY R/IY "it RY li �IsOM dl MOM RIIY r N Mr R14.M►. A.IIK A /9 Ix1/f -46 air at /a10. /tI "V ,•",."VIM 10 �:w-- MY t ./T M RIIf !J. R -..of 1.118 �� t Rw .. ills II1. " -.BIB :fes/� 6111 JOS �� N R K. V6 pe Af.. ` /.I� » Y• soR7 M/It R/N M i/I M R Y x,11 A /• .....,J/ /IT b►id t' M.IIt AsAr wr _ ;.% bis H � ".a AdyrAt RiIY Rift FYN 40 Riu /r/ /OTIf—M-1 ""°t R/41t AIIt FB 01 !a iid As7Hrtd w At R/It toll is wr 1k ailiw �i/ loo ""' 9 RYId 1,slo Itr�Ir 9�/a,L•! /'•ld001 /af R1II Air ss o R �.1�o sd ize`�IY r.►.I bsld 17 RIIt 1. dd At O707/ u4 brt/1 O"W - TI ,ell I 1 Q�� ; hilt 7T d/ 04" 7i Y.M RIM Eli R/+tirr. w �.� E,v�riv�d�riNd X cr�wErtap b `� Pt.ONN/�tri� s► w • A �Iras+eaAM44V& OtaM rs er. OtIVitNt'1�t, rlf7r/ 9 Ad B,rlt_. • (9l1) 111•trMO 71 cl _.. . r -i (e 9-18-84 To: Buito county planning commission* co'Ca. 959 ? -6 From: Scott George IaNa Centerville Rd., Chi f. -th,e 6-COU'nty decor- herd, study pan( -11- Subject:,�'R Land owners Of Property in the Butte county foothills outit of Chico subdivide their property down past tho 11,0 acre , Lv: I and Orovil.10 wirll` to ded to preserve deer h6bitat Ytithin parcel size that has been recommen the region* A colftmitlee waL formed at the request Of the county 'L)oard of super' OoLthill a visors, to examine the effects that development bho I d, deerherds. Members Of the committee include v,,ould have on the foOthil two biologists with the state dept. of fish and g-niej a professional environmental consultant, a jtrofessional planner, a loca:1 citizen and also a local real estate agent;. The findings Of the deer herd study commi ittee ndicated, -that there Nvill be 8JGnificant impacts on the foothill deer herds if development is able to continue on at its present rate in the foothill regions' endations that are being opposed the Most Two of the Committee's r"Offim by the land OWn0rs Ire 1. that property cat not be subdivided into smaller patCelS than 40 acres in Critical summer and winter deer range and no smaller than 20 O'Cros in non -Critical summer and Winter deer range. This recortimeniatibn is 'to preserve an much natural deei habitat as Posr ble V,,jtjjOut inflict1 too , &reat of const-raints upon the property .,i'118 ill door habitat JjAprovement fund Which w OWnor and g6 the Creation of a d to pay a in crit' Cal ranges require the `LandOwnOr arld S25/acro it n0n-crical ranges When that land ovtner Wants to 4. develop his proportY6 This MOnGY Would be Used throughout the CQ"- J for door habitat imPrOVOMOAt PrOgralts* 1 t The Califor_n7 a Environmental Quality Act Wad i hi�; C--'IlitOrnia r ion. Map Act path state that When significant i.mpIct door, occur,to t'rildlife becatloe of a development Project ---- m t'L'PRtion Of impacts must be regi. red, these Vy recommendat in to the commission is t;h;it the fin herd study committee he ' lemented, as soon as dins o,f the deer p passible -to help. Preserve deer habitat . the foothills. A.C.T, Atkins CommunityTogether September 11, 1984 7 t 1k R8: M1,,,RAT0jzy bEi tt IIIItU i°I:flpCSAL 1f° "O"Ir Neighbor: the laurpose nE this letter is t would restrict your use and o inform you of a it the foot! ills east o development cif proposal which Of' Oroville. ' 'property wllic�h you awn 4 study entitled PMPORT Ott' dated May 1904 llil; BUx't7a OOYJtV't'1y IiI; ,. through Certain d�roposes tllrrt deer ` f LR 118" tUUy I'tll�iEL pGlrcels of land, such �ratizon "wxt(lows" be designated +40 :acres minimum in er tr,taj w, laarcel,s to ' rwtttaxzl t range to allow dee -11er range and 20 a least made b r movement to occur," These acres its Minter y the Cali. Department o in would bo f l'�ish and Crlme4 Tt is believed that o rlu�trs Property one of the "windoWS" p y r E your oT3hO des 0n4ltecl t shipQ a this .time in - Of for cottus� of private t on what may be rat r 7.00 p. t! propertI'�ur I,arcied as apprn na in the But Co unth'lrSday evcning� September 20, use Center fvp, Oroville CA v 17oard of Supervisors 1984* at Planning commission ' 959651 at which t• Room, 25 Coutlty will hotd <, (final ime the Butto Count,Y 1't is urged that !tearing o11 the proposal,, event that yott attend this hearing you cannot be preaer�t, it to voice your v� your thoughts in writin,, is k• Leas. In the Prior to the to the 81Yt.0 Cot, voted that you submit September 20 hearing date, y tannngottm�isaion Shcotlld you desire to sec a obtainad fro;3 the Buttpy of the I)E1; Cw'rt t c !t }!i r 0 Idj 1't)ItT, such r Drive, Crovillee COCountY P-lantting Department t7ffaeoo Count IV 9.�96�" � y DY alerting you to the restrictvr� i tory deer !'reposral, PIC4ao intposita.ots inherent in the ►ai r to sAtad,uArd basic understand that tae are 4. property rights, Moth Yours and sru g ip an Wort Vary sittecrely, A. C 1, n North it Vice it 9290 tdoodleaf Star 1Coutt Urotr l at CZA 9,5965 tele(916) 50.370 ��- ry �� �� , r rte= z � c i i ' .-rL M4 I ' b'x'.srY _. y � � ...yam } � a'� �u}L,��. .. Ct e ij � `� r .'+ ^, � C a A may. lkY ,r l .rl+c''�"�' � � F"`L' / �y 4� �- �' �:�_ ��� �� � ��� John S. Morgan 9425 Nichols Street Bellflower, California 90706 September l8s 1984 Butte County Planning Department Office But}o Co. Planning Comn]e 7 County Center Drive k 1084 Oroville California 95965 Honorable Board of Supervisors; Orpvill�, Cpliipitiits I h, , just been informed of the Deer heard migration windows and resulting severe constraints in thize e use f valuestedowno with which sh4Yalong with ould mtax property owners and bang property revenue. in my case, I purchased property in Oroville back in 1965 with a dream of developing it into four parcels, keeping one to build on and sell ageoff f the other three to pay for my retirement home. This is somethitlw m now going towards for many years wiked th a- goal of retiring soon. Is this drea to be taken away 'from me just as I have finished the final struggle of paying off my land? (I hope Not!). I believe that with thousands of acres oaction federal land and be justifiediited logging areas in this area that this type PR6C ,7PTB 17proval of these restrictions would be a classic cause of IIFREIl r - 11 � � , � (.0112 of Tess TE". ge,,- � for Personal Property Rights and Basic Freedom. the few things left that sets this great nation apart from the rest of the world)-. I trust you will not vote, in favor of taking away property rights, one of Americas most importan"�Rights so dear to Private c ititOnS. sincerely, �lohn S, �!org n Property Owner cc; Butte County Board of Supervisors Helen Northcutt V.P. of A.C.T. JcOn Boeschen &C John Boeschen & Co' John Boeschen & Co September 19, '1984 Butte CO, Ptatinlag Ccs Butte Co. Planoing Department,� b 19144 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Oroville, c'allfornia Centlepeople t I have only recently been informed of the Migratory Deer Herd Nioposal and wish to voice my strong objections L As a registered land owner, why have I not received any notices from your department addressing this issue or notifying me of scheduled meetings? My interpretation of the Proposal is that it is "allowing" the government to illegally seize land. Further, I do 'hot find any mention of compensating existing land owners for the hardships such a proposal, if passed, would cause, Again, I am strongly against the Migratory Deer Herd Proposal and wish that my objections be recorded, _ Since ely, Jol hen P�acel number; 72--33.50 2901 Miranlo Richmond, ("A 9481,13 0151 22.2-6363 ell,�,/�` 4 14 7 �u rxxe qS" - Butte Co. Planning Comrtii, Le '44 w gs7 0 ^ "RUN 7 & 218 P G OS VERDFS MFORMA 90274 74 rt. 0rov!!1a t 7P "; t e� 6, t r' w e`7 a N. r 18 PI�A1�9'fOta1.DRM - �LO�NLA 90274 SOPteuber 17, 1984 Monday 1J fR CO. flan iag f`, 7 and Sae Richard; L, WWeyan orowilla, CalitoW'4 54l Roxbury Lane Moclomta., CA, .95�3j50 To: '909-$22-94' `" Tole. The Butte County Board of supetivoots & The Butte County p lsntxing De'Y"Went Subject. Parcel. No, 072-33-017- 20th Having received no notice .f`rom your Of September that oould erect the above �and,cl� m��tn�ke�ar �hr� known. 04t bb, ections 'his property tme Purc haseG �,Yeart tagohat h �o provide i foe our retirement. Pncto us to Provide. �'ay 3e of 'vital concernio on Your part mat would a�.ter the land in an you are Mann ng any action that 'hila, e�ecst the tia eabil�:ty o our end 3a Butte County Wil, be atr Valuep zal.eabil.iiy or I yot are Planning anything MVAYQ�p ted to by tis. if all a''vui able � S ca t a ei"�sct this lai2d irl razes t,�y9 ITO are requdstinG motion oar than proposed chatsene T understand there is s z grutnry c1arae,�ird pxoposaY and i wc+uLd llta c-cy of that ril eo. Sincerely,, TO Butte County Planning Commission; Butte 0ounty Board of Supervisors. From : Sack Eb Onyett. owner 67.55 acres, Alis 72-,96-91. Subj : Migratory Deer Hurd Proposal. 1. 1 ars strongly opposed to this proposal ;for Lute following reasons: A. The taking of private property, or limiting the use of ButtoCa,Pian"in9COW& by the Stele or any other governmental agency when I am denied due process of the law. To date I have received no �? ;'9$4 information from any governmental agency rogarding this proposal. p�n�ill0 ltfarnla B. When there are so many thousands of acror3 of government land, in the immediate area for the deer, I can see no valid reason why some group should be able to say that Z. cannot use my land. Limiting my right to use my land is t p same as gcvernment approperation, only worse. C. I think the deer is a beautiful animal, but I don't believe there are deer hurds :'f sufficient quantity that would warrant the taking of ?•rivate property for their use. Since I have no background on this issue I ask the following questions: why did this study come about, who `initiated this proj�osal and what is their power; how many people are on the panel and what are their qualifications; when was this *.ro- osal originated, and why was I not notified? I :enders -and there is a meeting on th s proposal on sept. O, 1934. The only notice that S have had of this action hIas been .from a private group which I recieved on Sept.141 1`84 and. unfortunately I cannot change my schedule to be at the meeting this tune, as much as I would like to Xy ancestors .founded this property in the c old rush nays of ;alifornia. I am the third generation within my family to own this property and I Have spent many happy years there. My ancestors did not intend, not do I, to have this property taken fro us for sush a frivolous reasoni �ack Onyett 1261 Landfe,dt Circle Santa Ana, �la, 92705 Sept. 17, 194 Copics to; C.B. Onyett, Attorney at Law Barbara Onyett Olson 1+ C A 1' PLANNING COMMISSION 7 COUNTY CENTS R ORIVE - OROYILL8, CALIFORNIA O59?j5 August 30, 1984 PHONiit 534.4601 KPAY 2654 Cramer Lane Chico, CA 95926 Attention: Art Douglass '; public Service Announcement The Butte County Planning Commission is holding a public hearing for the purpose of developing land use Planning policies to maintain deer herd levels and minimize the g impact of re development on migratory wildlife. a.to be based upon the report preHearings Count beer Herd Study Panel, Prepared by the Butte The meeting will be held at the Chico Cit Chamber at 421 Main 8treot, Chico on Thursdaounca, 1984 at 7:Oo p.m,, Y, September 13-, The the Dee-'�cHeof rd ShodY is available for public viewin Butte County Planing Department, 7t County Center Drive, Orcville, California; ell 13 i A. K! Director Of planning BAK 6. lIc t Inter -Departmental Memorandum TOi FROM, SUBJECT;` N �! j DATE., �l4e 4 4 �o tjl)�0 /lLa- A a� � r 6,1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA --THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME REGION 2 1701 NIMBUS ROAD, SUITE A RANCI.10 CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA 95670 I GEORGE 'DEUKMEJIAN, C ayonor Oufk4 Ca. Planning Colum• July 26, 198 JUL 11 1984 oroville, californ;a Ms Bettye Kircher; Planning Director Butte County Planning Department 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 Dear Bettye: The Butte County Deer Study Panel's May 1984 report identified two specific tasks for the Department of Fish and Game; jq1e Department 1) would identify deer migration "windows" within specific transportation corridors that were identified in the redort and 2) would update migratory deer range maps at least once every five years. Since the report's designated transportation corridors only Pertains to roads on lands that were .identified in the General Plan's Land `Use Element as Agricultural - Residential, our search for deer migration "windows" was limited to these lands. The minimum parcel site of other land use d.esiornatons of the Land Use Element (i.e., Grazing -Open Space and Timber -Maintain) provide sufficient protection for deer movement elsewhere. Attached are maps which delineate the necessary deer migration "windows". The lands within the designated "windows" should remain either at their existing parcel size or be limited to 40_ and 20 -acre minimum parcels in critical and noncritical deer ranges. The Department plans to update our migratory deer range maps as new data on each deer herd are Obtained. Ne would be pleased to provide you copies of these revised maps at least once every five years. if the Department can be of further assistance; please contact Jerry Mensch Environmental Services Supervisors, telephone (916) 355--7020. sine rely, Paul T. Jensen Regional Manager Inter -Departmental Memorandum To: Planning Commission FROM; Steve Streeter, Planning suer cr; July 26 hearing on Report of the Butte County Deer Herd Study 'Panel DATE: July 19, 1984 The hearing on July 26 will be the first of four :scheduled hearings Oil this subject. A fifth meeting to summarize the position 0lr the Planning Commission may be appropriate. If such a meeting wcIro, deemed appropriate, it could be scheduled for the September• �10, 1984 meeting, The intervening meetings would be ]field on. Augnua. 9, August 23, and September, G, 1984. Our intent, at this point, is to schedule the hearings on the individual deer herds as ;follows August 9 - East Tehama Herd, August 23 Brick's Mountain Herd, September 6 - Mooretown Herd: The members of the neer Boyd Study .panel will be invited to each session to assist staff in interpreting the contents of the report, The colored overlay maps will be avoilabl.e at each hearing to facilitate the understanding of the Commission and the public as to the location and extent of the critical and non-critical (Wer ranges. The blueprint maps previously forwarded to you, con-tdins the same information as tlr,e colored overlay maps, "I, hough there has neon some comment macre about Bolding the hearings orr the individual deer herds within the areas affected, such meetings would. not be possible unles they were head oil a separate evening, Since the Commission Ivill conduct other bearings on the same elate when the report of the Deer Herd Study panel will be discussed, it would greatly simplify matters to hold alb, of the hearings in the Board of Supervisors Boom; in OroNrille, Some highlights of - tile report are; 1. Table of contents list tte Major sections of the report A number of items included, in the draft report were taken out and are listed as references, Copies of all items co:iitlined in the references are available in file #84K6 available at the Planning Department 2. The committee background and introcludt;ioiis on purges i and 1 set forth the scope of the study. 5, The environmental lain sectioli ,u :rs 1 �rric1: 2,c:ite Pertinent sections Of State arid local documents and �. r,0 a 11;ioars which address the migrz- tory deer issue, 4. Three goals arra listed at the #+, ` :aat 0r- .r, The third goal refers to implementation of the 1 ego, )? , to protect door herds The upng natural resources elomer: id, be the 10gical place to insert policies to be implemented at the County level rather than an area plan or specific plan, Planning Commission beer Hord Study Panel Page -Z- July 19, 1984 S, Programs are listed on page 3 Constraint maps have lWo-1i dovelot)od for Planning Area 2, the Cohasset-Forest Ranee m-oll study. The report recommends comparable constraint ma1�t� late t14�'Voloped ror other portions of the foothills. The ilepartmoii 1 Of la 1 t4l tt std. Came has bogtin aerial surveillance of the County to :isle:pit i rfir migration�4111dows" . They still expect to prov i (10 00-- l ti.l`0 11mation to the County by the end of the summer. G. section III - Recommendations introduce the 1,111)ioet 0' iclontifled transportation corridors. These corridors are de l' l nod tit; spcci.f is a raids along which residential development (profo oli'ly c1tistered development) Could occur. The fence design cr i.•t<ei, lu would allow young does to go underneath the fence and other docr to jump the :fence: It is understood that near the homesito t'allcr .fences could, be allowable The doer habitat improvement fund is a mitigat on to off -set the effects of residential d.evel.opmtrnt in critical t nd non-critical deer ranges. Such fees are proposed to apply a,l: the time o " building permits, If adopted, the fees would apply to the Issuance of build- ing permits within the deer ranges identified on the accompanying map, (page q) Scenarios A & B are the two options developed by the panel to address the subject of deer Held preservation. Scenario A Mould involve the concept of transfering development rights. The development area Would be designated along the identified trans- portation corridors with land outside of the designated development area to be left in larger parcels. 1Jttermining the value of the development rights to be transfered, convincing property owners along the transportation corridors to allow potentially greater densities, and adequate usable soil area to accommodate increased densities are among the logistics to be remedied, Scenario B is similar except that land owners further away from elle transportation corridors would not share in the economic benefits of residential. development Table 1 lists the identiti.ed ti*ansportation Corridors. Cel terv.il:l.e Road should be added to the list following Honey Run Road, Cherokee Road is listed, but is not depicted on the map, this 'ddition to the map will be accomplished. The focus is on the agricultural residential designations of the Cenoral plan. The portions of-, the foothills designated grazing pd open land or timber mountain already have 40 acre minimum parcel sues and aro not deemed a key area of concern with regard to doer habitat rcduct ion. 7. Section h e C on page 7 .till be ela.rif i od, If need be at the meeting by stiff and membors of the doer study pttn,el,. Section C encourages maintaining the General Plan designations and parcel sites in areas outside of the Agricultural Residential designation of the Genual Plan. r r] Planning Commission Deer Herd Study Panel .gage -5- July 19, 1984 $ . Sections D F D orr 8 and 9 are Revisions to the ordinancesfor cozltrolinmeclogsoi ; y , 1.111) � �. mGrltatl.On r4�n,4es may generate sone in �ez�est at tlreglr�:arin,1►1a r .4 �, is given to a • x,r G1 t(11 deer appointing an Au Hoc committee ox fit.►1r C rx lcOuStul�Tgeme.ilt cl ovo:lOP constraint map Overlays aloe , cto omic}ors to identify buildabi,e aretls, I'll' t° aiplrr•�ltt�)x tvo 1 g the iclerr�:j.f1,eij t°cans ortai.tl:ar�r lalln az to the Colrasset/T`orest Punch. area stud. h,l.xlnning Area 2 , Would be y G 01idUc ted for tl • Appendix, 1~ is another approach to atrect TUIt t}iat 1�'as not fully clsscitssec} 1�; hetDce�,:i.t►►1)Ortan, t 3v��clIife a1 rxtttaral }la�b'tat combining ri; stri,t �,s l}c, t cl Study Panel.. S1.to plan al rx•avatl is used :Ij l�s►tise�n County. areas . y i nvol,vecl for resli de Stan n I3rol�rn, advanced pl:aainez tiro Catirrty Plarrnang Department for 19 ntial. cle,,j1 Pment in such x r IC,il IU1 t 1 the Lass,�r1 respond to Specific years f1rYd t,�i1l lre ava�;l,able to comm t y e fear>ibi1i ty o � this option, It should be noted t}ratstile nnatnxal habitat colnlllr not seen as a e substitu 4e f'o1' t tile alternrll ivesc�� trio is in Clre report of the Deer Nerd Stud} l?tile I esen.ted The June 7 1984 minutes of of the ini,1 al t?te Planning Commiss all Contoilr a swnlr►ar r Presentation of the Jleer Herd Study Panel., You lrlav find it valuable to r you t}nose minutes in prej)dy -1 ,Jul), 2 hearing. If you have further Of tile report 1. oa for tti Please contact our oficeena ve v11 about any respond to yotr questions or refer y portion Deer Herd Study Panel , you to the: appropl.iate tnemlrer er resp SAS t' 1 r cc.' Deer. Herd Study panel Cities i Inter-Depart ental MOMOrc�fdu . 1)ecT IIcI'd Study PAn01 Tot F RoMt Steve StrcetOT, planning tuoActl Report of the beer Herd Study Panel DATE:: May 21 , 1184 he ng -Littacl�cd draft report !da >�e -e discussed,184. astPa-rt�t�fft oil Tllux4day June Canln1issioil meeting pr esent.ta an by the 1�7.Iir1, 1Vc �V i. L� ftTlVa.xcl an agenda once, it is available. At this � a nt , au ` summary Of l�eaT���� shows the item under miscellaneous �ahicl� would, lie at �ba�tt 9 P:111- Cot :111-r.;ot Board� O�r SuPOTvi sor 5 A�>x.tli ��iutc i paol:ets Planning Cc��ttt»iss on,C u1�okin game Io proserve eendan erect -- his first ever in thQ Natioi ai . San Francisco til 9 round League championship Lin0stror #I 10-year veteran L-. of p,m, i Highlights hin of the d and I.dndstrom, The from Stve;den, tack advanta a of SUNDAY V n Isco Examiner bayg4►1�:✓ IQ Breakers Race (4)« �q�` Islanders, who huYa won tii sloppy play by Smith antl tie,�CII )', 11:z5 p.m, tipa�ts Ftr;af lust four titlesA 0%NA M , never caught up fenseman, Tomas .Jonsson to Rdsene iA>• as the Oilersrabhe;i a 3•l lead p INSURANCE" « 11:45 p,m, - Highlights of poke in a loose uek at,3:22.i rho San Francisco Exa in the best�f-aeven series. Ne�v Xork's 1treAt Sutter rl ap�N7INc",`; �Ye �" miner By winning Bay to Broakers Race (5),s ni ht hd: G i here SltturdaJ Clod a 3$-Eliot wrist shot over the s3xc �gi , Mars wool l .captum shoulder of goalie Andy;Moog-to COTanxuc � ` �•''`` " ��� their fifth t Stapley Qjp In just 1nahe it 2.1 at 14:03. It'19og was 891, ,$163 1 +' �� EIP their a. Fish count ih NHC season. T cy in goal because regular netmin. joined the 1rKagut _ tvhe,� It der Grant 1~uhr was sidelined caR i SAT. +a m-6 Pm e World Backe with a sore shoulder suffe trkc�e QWneighbu, `� e EXNIBITST ,+ 7liursgay Y CTed stare f;drm is there "ice`'_ Sl.1P�d. 9 atT1-4 pm salmon , ; , .,,11 �sociationt in 197"0, the first when chocked by Pat L.aFc rt ,.. r w stcalnead season of the IslAnders reI �`�;,� .. BNTERTAINMENTI �, '' Ann+i�sia�+ AaunF as shad',,. „ ." Q champions, reign as rain© in Game S: Idf3Farml�burartCuCKlmpin s ti w' o EXCITING ChnursnGii EVENTSI uhigr�.aleg dW(Iah......;.,r,,.,,.»,.....w..+,0 flat Mark 111�essler outra Ht1CJ11GR [iOmInilfUt! N�npl w �� , r— .. What reign will came to An But Denis Potvin ciown yur, �.qM _>, GEr 1 DiSCpU squ end it the Islanders figure the left tying with the team: � '` NT TICKETS AT, +.� out a way to cffr it Edmontotl's .� w rocn�o rrl s Furca w�AaQ r�e+vrvv rat skating three a side and put to ar �rAuRAra, ,rr superior.speed. M;i the. eham I- p �:+ cam, q ` � - SAh1 s HOF MAU4 n w (30L)nrdia►r r�pF CENTERS u ons wi11 need ti return to p11-4t shot. past Smith at 47:51, �arsricatAr�r��d d?s�ipi, t�rnl n by gnal3e� Billy Smith, _ forth. Edmonton turned the gani !"A„ `�`~ �______,_ AA91 F Into a rout in the middle.period$ . nd tz�''7 .,tea '�' oi�'ciw • ., Inter-Departmental Memorandum T01 L=eer I•iercl COTnlnittee Stacl Panel Strecter, plojining FROM' SteveJ SUBJECT: Diaft ROPO'rt Of tlt:� °aito7. DATE' �\T',rrj! 27, jL9 8 ct�, the draft reportt ""Ld tort,+art► 'da)', Nl yed re P11-11se t'e i y Fricla}', bia 1, our office or to dike 1vaOurbot:': Inter -Departmental Memorandum TO Board of Supervisors FROOM Planning Department tUBJECT: Progress Report on Deer Herd Committee BATE: Marc'} 21, 1984 The Committee held what was expected to be their :final meeting on Tuesday, March 20th, A preliminary draft report will. be prepared in the next Z weeks and then distributed to the Committee members for further review. A time and date to discuss the report with the Board will be requested once any Committee revisions have been incorporated: into the draft report. Projected dates for the Committee to meet with the Board and discuss their report would be April, 24 or May 7. SAS lv i 1 �Guytj ,. `( � i 1 1�,�,' 00'�, y r4, 1C - 7-'s 1.1 WORT SHOTS AND long casts. -; early spring In those areas," said Ing the trout during their spawning The county general plans vs, deer -��� � ' Pryor, and when the new regs came out March 1 1 had a Cot of my Gus- cycle they should not be concerned, t According to Fizk, "the reproduction mig"44tion Issue is still alive, It's an I:st1e of counties and their sttbdivi= tometscatching big trout" of trout in Folsom from the tribu- alrons and blocka;o of deer migra•;t ,. The new regulation reads, "Anerl- tarles is about r,#1,' ; t;on routes, of counties and their t t can Fiver NorthFark from R gltway 49 to Lake Clementine, Middle Fork STEVE OfJG WON the 33rd inn's t ;norance toward land -use, open- space and conservation elements of f �a from confluence With North Fork to at Sw=mento Chinese Sportsman's their GP's in relation to wildlife, rk2il , r"t.' ' ' r Ralston Afterbay, South Fork from Club tl;ripcd Bai$i Derby. Ong's 35- Thou ,h there were no irimediate ""'" ""�`' Highway 49 to Chill Bar Darn. Limit hound, 9 -ounce striper topped the 97 lawsuits brought against any conn- C "����„� ���q is twc in winter to l0 Insummer.1' fish v cighed In during the two-day ties Burin; the last Fish and Game D CciryVoot PRIOR To THIS Y '�r, those derby last weekend. Many fish in the 5.to,: poundran,ewerecaughtbut ComnilssCott meeting In San Uie o, g stretches of the American River not I facts provided there was direction given by the 'Oe County GP Nye didn't like and i e , were � nl� open docent; the normal. .Outer rgliedeam t,y tournament chairman Freeman , i fission to the artmi;nt of Commission p Worked them outwith Shasta, trout ;acaSon ,-, the last Saturday in Lee: the top 15 fish weighed in were F,., h and Game to come to a May 17 "I think It is an accumulation of April until mid^November, "Last er 20 pounds, sardines were the nleciing with more Information thato thing (as to why some counties are year, the public came in with a re- rSt batt and the best area was Mill- m,iy result in a laWsuit. starting to show more Interest to quest to the fish laid game commis- e r Pari: to Hood. "Tt1e Commission wanted us to wildlife protection, eSPcclgliy deer sloe to fish these tributaries;" said Top finishers behind Ong were provide them with the contents of migration). I_think the la+ . st nubllci= .�1a• Leonard Fisk,, chief off 1,viand tis" Tom Fox (30-41, Gary Massl (27-15), thin general pians in i�uesy#an;' said ty has something to do - .. A it, But I , cries, "Tire reasr„ r was there are Watson Gin (27.13) and ritassi a,atn Red hunt, chid of wildlife manage- e- also like tri think all the n4tort our some big fish #n Folsom Lake that for fifth place with a 27•I ound, 0 - "and enlighten them on the field people have put in during their field runup thoso tributariesin rhewinter ouncer, existing relationship between file dealings with the cuuntles Is finally to spawn. It was a chalice to provide countlos and the department, paying off," a different typo of fishery and we DAN LOEHRER JR., a Wider- i o the (,P Issue came to light INTEREs` I) IN CATO UNG tt recommended jpproval," mist In Yuba City, computes in tr ,sine W „ about ti4i, mortM ago, some coupP U cher 10 -inch trout be fore the trout o a r vt.d and i sion ( u The commission s pp -«^•"+ , n hi, in Taxidermy crtn C h(m ions. s ilroa,� lax d fourth fir s have changed their Way of think= April 28? A figating rainbow within the new lav,• w.nt Into effect tid Atianta and received a -place ' Ingabout ou deer migration vs, subdivi. In„tb t 6 an hour's drivefrom Sacramento? year, Normully, the spring snow award In the Artist division for a slon, Some counties have improved Bill Pryor of Gill's Bait in Auburn runott causes havoc with the three. pintail duck mount, their lvorkit4 re' ationships (not to said the Department of Fish and wutc,-s and fishing is dutacult at brst. Loehror, wlto mw'ns Action Mounta ” ' with D,FG, "Our attention tittrr uP s) th _ Game changed the fishing regular but this year, with ideal co ronions, those have been trying the Crib= Tsiiridermy, has been in the Yuba the - 1 people hna+�a been 1aorlalnt; with i this year concerning a stretch tits.s t y 6 who Cit: area for one ear and was A- " r' - "- ... . ixuttw County, sa"cl Hunt, and we of water In the Sierra district, t utarles, especlat y the middle fork,. only Northern Californian. to enter y r ,s county, e., petit a good plan from thatp "A lot of lite people In Auburn have been the prestigious competition, Wo caught some things In the Shasta know how good the fishing can be in V people are worried about catch- ar.�s-.cx�:.crrXuu:, Y'.t�+rr�+' ..r�,srsa�:isrecL'�rst+•�a:�cssY"":"'"'.•. Iia, -'.13; OJ:CC,tGATt 522p7 11 you w s510 1,14 the t ,port Itz .yam 2h C �., 11 .12 Erich day'a: fa G1'ar pian yt�r qaa as 0111 'kUW Major Ktot i,"110r 2a ,+'p A,.r 10 1 SS i,,5 533 s.5 rat'os aa'ovn r1 chn 1 n gad Al ;,P, ;v4 r r t t`,1,ox,",ctA, it,th HI, UW 'IL Apt 41 1262ri 6,6 5 2 a, 1025ofi 7.0 6?rpm 7 r 12?Dais 2'^ b23 -s C tnatyoux.ltiohia^1 n0�alcrrdarycr 0 Ap .25 , . - 1 , r q p4',20 t 55 2 45 9 2r 010 2:1 1 t0 s4$, -n �iA 110141r,VOU00140-,�1"W1,Mta FdatM t -n 41+tr-a•',Y1ada p',nr ll'atar 1Ra1er O:.t11 C ,:cr oiro Nyhcra wde"Qf A^r.10 116hm 50 ?.55am 05 Apr, 24 '2 �5Am 65 CMM Ilam Apr, 21 B50 3.45 'o 2a 4c5 a.4 tiCN1Ct t.lAtlb the b.a, pdr,aaa tt, l at the .r e, A ,.r2 1L:0 440 n 25 E'.1C 5a^VIAW t.t are + crea:od and 0 25 tm 4.4 1.62 pn 106 2It 1air 5.5 1,16prn „to Apt; 25 i.35,r 51 1,24 hm 60 2.0 Apr; 10 71 a 1 61 µfl d:I 2 6 thW cri 141 !tr an };y,r a -a 4 ha+ ar Air, 23 tt db $�n w 5 5 0.0 1.42 An 55 on 2.4 t vo rturs Ihtteaiter, tna ALoSr pa lots Pea" 6 «;oaf o s are rc�'}t-M by Wl'.' Apr. 20 -.w 1h a 51 an .0 _ .+f , , 4:41 1 4S 5;^.t°m O,t 12„ttom 65 I'm ph r.ti..a dr1t: .r fi C:^noiray. f � ^ ,+ r 0 Apt, 10 F 00uh1 6' 116 am 4.1 dfo of Soao�451i ovier dUrgft �:o Apr 24 1wa5 G.'3 1235 63, Av'S Qt4 e 3 US lis 0tt arprodP. 0 doz,'c^r Apr 2t 2,5t am 5 B 51 d7 0.1 r' VISTA and^ • a R lJn`zr 4sd� cd br Woi;lcp 552 pm 4,0 '10tKpm d 2 Apr. 1. 541a11' b.4 «;16pm r.,57 pi 50 4? ,:n 24 ad:'r.,+n..:,1r,M� 1,0 Apr.21 0.45 am 61 U, eja 4,2 t=n�x>���x� a..a w5.wh art d'1„u'1 Apr.22 t.tI am 4,0 11.6,1 ah 0.1 151 P`+ 3;1 u J ” + Att0 616Ali 64 1226dm - w G .9 a o 25 ��1 � � �L, 0.6 Aar 22 1214am 64 44t,o 442 j;, �,w.jia;,.arn�,y � S f'"t �..�~���tJ�_i�a::?»�t t' a e to , r t&1 V15 Mitt 113 r 0 C a5 11,1'3 31 tAJuIYi19t• Apr 25 i'aJad 4512^3.`+ 05.. ?`d - ----- The Sacramonto poo Thursday, April 19, 1004 AA7 x rn Ra« 1^ Ay�pf,'`" 1yi'rl •` a ' {+ (d Y lk:( '� ^ 121 .' � y a f r.; 3f 4 ±'Fy tMi u 1 F _ «ak•Y' r • Y 1 !T ��} .l.' •�:. a s .r {sy . � `7ww.,. � �' ' K. ' -171 x },..c ,... i r, .,r �y,„K jt1''r • � iJ . Jtl1'4r,'a1'w�a TA�.•+x .1 ., '.« ,{`*l ,:.. fv,'a♦,�.y. .t'• ,., . ,' ,,} t v' ;•.+ a 1 'tit iT- , • 't`�, t ir p * r } a .h i.,y,t al .�qtr •4� V,��•;.'a 1.t i..i :;,.+t .tin •'•'• � i , a Y . t Ra t.v k r7 au,. J yt '+gar Ristbec.7use you need a nrkhotse standard plush ii:tpur o, "ptIoral t;oan't ijear,, �w hve. to be saddled ,athet; Fink., itmwv +s and door with a both, tsar, 'locks. Air conditloni. Evcu, Our X ilto Turbo stir An pm,,�s iu rerilot�l contrc Ud L at6 u lnsteac_i of rr ping onto 11i 'i= ,And it packs a full 76 cu.li f;:et v,ays, i::,w Tur `ort \l'a}gioal attacks of czrgo space. entrance a mips. (145w Many W etas ftzri \oU conte era f� : a lest. =1140M from 045$ IIl 6.6 drive, �'oulll fad liiSd3i+ :'.�3tS;Taita l-lanolim is 3l'S0 VM,"y t1nP,it40ii' 51)u alight t It ha``4 exp`c:CZ. like« Tots �"a�i1'o sis ntalts�o ar��:r,:,� rVf�irdaLlc, Ct1Nd5 a5 many 5jklrt st dam, And0 m g 1 r rock solid on 5trai altaw�l�S, t ;RE U, " 1,r t " x.rd 71 1 atii Inside, tY, e ; 6comfort of by Volvo. ACf~t/4h7=NT0 Fshi® The. Sacramento Bee • Tuesday, April 17,19134 03 ,,,".,ng Po*�'est Bet as have most of his customers, Stampede Reservoir out of Trochee remains good on rainbows and browns,. Rock cad fishing out of Bodega gay has been eiccellent, The 1;0.qweather, W k. been. variable out of Bodega f111 hich. hUa K been good for the past couple of Weeks, i" and limits of big reds have been comb mon, Some ling cod Up to 21 pounds are o also being ct�Ugh t. Y gaar3+ l�bet wr, y N,CASE a V4 DIDN'T litlar, r beukntejian announced Friday a w new director Of the Department of Flph and 08nie, ,tacit Parnell of Aubun�, most recently deputy director nt the Depart ment of .Food and Agriculture, was named to succeed Don Carper, Carer was appointed last .tune but regUested his name be withdrawn from consld`er•. atlon for Senate confirmatla.1, Parnell, 48, is founder and chairman Of the board of Au.hurn Bank of Cot=i', i - merce, He also has owned and operated A building maintenance company and a retail boat ,itore, managed 'a ranching and farming operation in Eli; Grove, 'Worked as a Nife Insurance salesman and been involved in plroperty development around Folsom take, Since 1905 he has owned and operated the DUnlpace Angus Ranch near Auburn as well as a restaurant and golf course above Auburn. Parnellis also active nn- lionally as an auctioneer of purebred livestock (he graduate i froth the, West, ern College of Auctloneering in Mohta= na) and a member of lice California Farm Of Federation lthd the Call• fornla Cattlbmen's A!-,oclation, Parnell may do a gond rob, and this may be a little premattire. but with hil df Parnell's credits, how much is relevant to belh director of the stale',$ fisherles and Wildlife? _ Those who know Parnell say lae l$_,a hard, honest Workbr. DFG people who Met Parnell Friday say they are happy and confident with the choice, but At $52,988 ti year that's the saln- ry the head of the DFtl gets (Deukme• juin Makes less than $5 0,000) let's hope Parhell doesn't turn out to be just an Opensive auctioneer, BUTTE. COUNITY P"'Pl I NG COMMISSION COUNTY CENTEhMFIRIVE OROVILLE CALIFORN — 95965 P►4ONE: 534--4603. Log 4184-04-05-02 ,X0 County Vire Denartl jijcynt i)ATE Apri;t 12 1,984 State Division. of 14orestry PROJECT RTWI Ew_ AND ENVIRON11ENIDAL LVAIZATION Enclosb\d is preliminary data our office has received or generated concerning, the loll wing project: Use Permit to a11ow, a nk yard for th.e Storage or al�tinirrum c s on _priRperty zoned A-2 located on the east sick Of rwan Ave ;Feet south of Palermo '1•tancut Highway, a.denta i=icd nue , AP 26-16-21 in °Ralermo. T. A. PATtMENTIER We are malting ati assessmen\, f possible environmental impacts and will be prepay"ing an environmental do anent, either a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration on an Envy onmental Impact Report. Please ;provide any factual stateme ts; ideas for investit;ati.on; or opinions you can offor in your area of concer or expertise that rhlate to either physical, social'., or economic impacts.'t,hat this project may generate• pleas`c respond within 14 days of the abov noted daL•r:. If no r Pspor se is generated by this inquiry, Lhen it shall be ssumed that there are no significant environmental impacts Which are p tential from the project We appreciate any assistance you can provide. S i.nc erel.y, 4 Rick Rcad�rl g 1� z Planning Technician Comments (Wr i to or type in �;va.co provieled & r•e ern this r;poet. ) Am ESSAGE J Tb—r 'Ti, Y L?ent. e - fizsl i to P-hi�Z Z1 ,DATE T M 4/16/84 �, 7elephAnad kZafurnad CAI1 PlaAa , Cia WWII C011 Aga ri Nos 8a ._ '�xlnforrnalrart wan`x fa See Yui Comment Note Arrd Investigate ae.rayte !?Apay �a"fact AJ, Return S.gntliuee r fie^ Request MESSAGE: 41518,1 article out Co tat Y IDf3 Ttte Sacramento See Thursday, April 50984 OulItes by „ra nth /�+ a r� � ti;iB, Gary Vt18t +, Track �J��"� �OUtduorsi�'e�trr s coVeral bf the state's countles.mlght soon find 1#y-thetnse1ves being sued. by the state Fish and y� d llen SvleSey, » a Bee5tnft Writer Gama Conrmis;llon pverthe failure rd their coup• George Lar en will retire') ty'gende eral pians (GP's) to aquately protect r College's deor;migratidn routes and hAbINA, !"IOM land . Sacratnento'Oily development. Mester at age 52. Such sults) charging the counties with, falling to LRrsen has been SCG's comply with conservation, open-space and land- coach since 1969 and or use elements in relation g to deer migration and Outdoors Coach since 1971, PIS ten habitat, no doubt wlli cause a nasty battle. gy )Gary Voet I coach is the 1. „nest in the F And the suits could even embarrass the state s ry, „Department of Fish and Game, which has been "My orlglnni geaI was given tU"e task of esfabiishing deer management were to go to court." years and retire at 55% Lar plans fear the 80 deer hen ds In the, state by 1985. The Commission acknowledged that the DFG the (Los Rios) District it o date, only ;i$ plans have been comnleted, of had some valid concerns. But one Coilimissior r nt inn . ,those,'.expertssay, some would nave trouble hold- member also acknowledged the concerns "did hot e the Cotnm►sslon false Ing tijt in court In a Dish and Game Commission justify an attempt to giv suit t-against the counties. Some experts view the information to keep the'"ommisslon from purl& corn,eiet,ud DFG reports as nothing more than Ing the matter.” expensive paperwork, And the Commission did pursue It. From Sop. The deer migration/ habitat problem was tember until the February meeting, d Commission pr b brought to the attention of some Commission staff member Chris onkel researched the prob= members fti'e months ago. Commission research lent, C"kel's Wigging rind ultimate report will has proven the problem to be .real, probably I,. ,)vide cause .tar some counties being Friday, In San Fuego, the Commission meets to sued. ` each of the 58 cnunties in SLIP- gain more input for its adoption of the 1984-85 unket wrote to hunting xeguiatlons. At that time, too, the Com- tember, asking how their GVs address deer situ mission also may set wheels in motion for law- deer hablWi. `rite: response was less than ode• r suits against selected counties challenging the quote. p� adequaeyof their general plans. tJnkel sent a follow-up 'letter in November to The problem first wwfaced'through DFG field counties that did not respond. By ,Ian, 31,'n total reports, More and more DFG field people we're, of ,43 of the 58 counties responded, Moat of the � in effect, asking, "What's happening? Where deer responses. however, did not address any or most used to travel now stand subdivisions." of-the questions relevant to an objective cvnlua- `rhe Commission asked Don Carper, then newly tion on the subject. appointed lFt; head, what the ,department In early January, Unket personally contacted thought about Ole problem, the 33 counties In which migratory deer may and told the tlocur and asked them to Send the Comtttis. %n it Carper checked with his staff «' Commission, "We feel prettV comfortable with copy of the latest versions of their ON. By Jan, plaits that have been adopted ... that 'we've 30, a total of 26 counties- had responded. ;. got adequate, reasonably adequate, protections," The GPs sent Iia revealed: gut Carper said he would check into it further onventyfour 193 percent) did not require spp- and report back tit the Commission's Feb, 3 meet- $pacific action project beitaken prior to the lonpwo tt lval of a Ing in 1., at meeting, prior to approval of a subdivision). At that meeting, Commission member Brian f Mahn led the questioning of Carper ant, the DFG', +Twenty-three (89 percent) did not restrict Carper af. ,u staked te department was still land use to protect deer habl':at (such as prohibit- . ; cnmfortai;kw with the general plaits, Ing residential, commercial or other Intensive Red liut:t, rutin assisted t'rirper wl,ii the DFG uses). ' i"ridings, said about `10 plans were dtificlent (did 4Twentythree did not establish some mint• ,lot 'adequately address deer and deer lrabltttt), (num parCcl si2elo protect habitat In some nreras, but It didn't matter because there is a 120,day Instead of the one b%ruse per five acres as request- statute of littilwlon, Those plans were past the ed th, tNFG, the coanties went with slat houses per limit, The DFG raised the statute issue backs in Oetob- oTwenty GPI (77 percent) did not Contain 9pe- er and the Commission, through legal Counsel citic polictev to preserve migratory deer- hnbittat. Dennis sninnge of tiie Attorney 0,enaral's OUICe, oSixteen (12 aerCent) didn't even Identify criti• researched. the statute, Smaage's subsequent cal deer habitat. opinion was that the DFG view was in error, that tlnkol. Concluded. That most counties do re- opinion t b in fact there did not appetr to be a time limit on spend to DFG eoncerns regarding migratory suing over Ole adequacy of general plans, (leer, But In many cases, Critical deer 'habitat .Is � yet, Carper and Hunt maintained five months being adversely affected uy county land-use plpn• later tint nothing cot,id be done about existing, tiers, That GPs rarely suggest either the types of Inadequate lI?s, land uses and` building, restrictions necessary to Why the apparent smoke5creeki by Carper, protect critical habitatorthe research tiweded Co tlunt and the DCG? Incompetence, sloppy re* do sa, This occurs dcspite tite fact most dans Indlw search? Why is the Department opposed to litiga- tate that development Is adversely affecting deer tion over Gips? FecauSe of possible daninge to habitat. Wo king relailtinships with counties? llecatlSe of pinally, 1$nkel found that tits states 1;nviroil- st coffiWient on gcft�r- possible po�tical fatlout between the DVG+ rind �k plans sutal bdivisionmaps,tttships,letc, but won't because ,key 'Capltol ronnirl? Or, is It, its one Cormnisskon Member stated, it thinks It is the Wildlife lvtanttgement Branch's "lack of solid data . » . the I $ completed deer responsilrllity� W B thinks it is l:St's jolt And cad u ti FSS dense t wanttn �t involved In h broad-r1ll i ana�,entent P16119, tile De;xartmett may, k �. . ooking bad by lts poor information it U140 issut; 2 litigation, becai2b It has bean cultivating a work I- xti: :Y .,.. ._,,.— _ _,_ , , �. , ....»,r-*.t�•.e:. rtiu+vc+gw A�rjt„�a',7�9a : u� it TO% 10 1_ cit Dfc�ltr Via e%bita relationship with loco government officials and Commisslon tft proigrl tit't% I believe it is the' d .doesn t want to undo progress that has been resppns.ibility of lite Cttnimt�yioa to consider the g le, f 1;hlii; C 11� W'tw institution of litiga(lontm thio question. it'di;n and the rest of the Governor -appointed do anYthing "That involves it le,a � Vralssion were upset by Unkel's report. g l flag(N5rnent. A mcchanl= "':Find It amazing that after five months we and leas than pur- eat assessment o[ pto h f�vnrktnad) and a policy .a Wi `h 3t)1nadequilto pians and a memp from the i question, Tt we tr'!e ti ldw%ilt, lite working rela- rec��r (Carper) haying s, is comfortable with sue the lS.sue� .tlonships Witti, � petiplp In the field and the e p'1! ns, and. We entt"t do anything about it any- we will be counties wrtttl;I tend t0 Brink dawn. That's a serl tat aecause the statute has run out," sald Kahn. ous point. ' rhere has been a lot of wetter over the dam derelict in our "But 1 think It wu ilii titt,Vlhing ires than pursue ice we first' .starte'd discussion of this,'” said duties.' the Issue, we will bit 00reiirl err Julies. Once these inn" "eve hove a stzltut� r9 responsibiiIr .. " subdivisions fire built, il."p ()ver fr)lhi."' are is SpeaCifie legislation dealing with manage- Brien Kahn A motion was imide 10 Cnrrr<; ''bark with a deci- ent of deer, which mandates the Department $ion at Fridily's me ethig lit r»a flee n. • Golf Ca>otf D.P. 200 Awide based, Smooth rolling trolleghisPo ularmodel combines gualPty and funeiltin . at a reasonable price, Construe ted of riveted tabular 5teet ill"' X1'/4: PVC tires on fluted, high ItnpactwheeK Finger-tip push• button folding Control, one piece foam sleeved tubular ' steeI ag Cradle. 4Y"k4g• t�.'�tli Tmmon: ,. " > rcAPA Golf 9'3t+l lov, wA'z 4 d$"foil a esai)n�'�s�i� Mum's (300; shoe durable water repellent whltevinyislppers +e ooe -31$.90 99 C. cY,aNm.k�UMitft)tQ�tC�t�NNANO A AMERICAN tt ACOMrialeHTO S. SAdO ah®ENTOrt, e^ ci �a ce t�� I a t�r<ii �tttraSarct v^+m t6as)da sir � aV 4M,495111 *024050 S14-210120"aa� ttia tg3��ptita' 5)656iVdr9'AtAvdnUj 1�5 Greenback 34213 fl)Iftq Ay6nu Spofts Golf BC59 y 1 7 14` cordura nylon round pro style Ztipperedctres.s• MOO* "�,,,..� l stay constructlnn. i divider. pro stitle,,FatCut' dL tacoablesling,umbrOahot. S dor travel NO Choose front I gu:ndY.brOUwIn1�Cliaes - WinefbU l nuttna`Jytwheat. � Y 9q 01�eg.4►,tba rcAPA Golf 9'3t+l lov, wA'z 4 d$"foil a esai)n�'�s�i� Mum's (300; shoe durable water repellent whltevinyislppers +e ooe -31$.90 99 C. cY,aNm.k�UMitft)tQ�tC�t�NNANO A AMERICAN tt ACOMrialeHTO S. SAdO ah®ENTOrt, e^ ci �a ce t�� I a t�r<ii �tttraSarct v^+m t6as)da sir � aV 4M,495111 *024050 S14-210120"aa� ttia tg3��ptita' 5)656iVdr9'AtAvdnUj 1�5 Greenback 34213 fl)Iftq Ay6nu BU-'l"_COUNTY IGRATORY DEER EE * -- Development for, residential uses in the foothills OT Butte County has progressed to a point of adverse wttectS upon migration of deer populations. 16hile We -V(%,(%O9niZQ that encror,ticbment of homes in migratory, deer arorLS is Eft Sig- nificant factor in deer herd decline, it is not tho SOTO reason for reduction in numbevs. Forage and sl Chlor axGltls are being eliminated. Disturbance from noise, traffic, and domestic dogs has increased greatly. Poaching problems also generally increase with the improved access and increased numbers of people living in an area, Loss of floor habitat, p,%rticularly Winter range) to development has b000me a major factor th rtj.ong the re&tenihg migratory deer populations Western slopes of the Sierras. Unless planning efforts are directed to identify and protect important door tango areas, CI and to control and direct development to less sensitive areas, our migrat-ory deer herds Will contitile to decline and may disappear! Three separate migratorv, deer herds are found in the ,eastern foothills/mountains of Butte County: the Tehama, Bucks Mountain, and Mootetown deer herds. IVhile some summer and intermediate ranges occur in the County, the majority of the migratory deer habitat it Butte County is winter range, Deer migrate each fall from theAw summer ranges in Tehama, plutna8, and eastern Butte Comity to Winter range areas in central Butte County, During; mild weather herds may linger I at higher elevations Uftt'l :forced down by tho first major snow Storm into their ictitical" winter range, They remain concentrated in or -tical winter Tango areas until early April, -I- Existing laws and the Butte County General Paan dor _ vide for p �� protection and conservation of Wildlife, at1d requ,tro considerations of environmental impacts prion to a a �r ovin development � � �' Projects. Implementation of denial of a tion measures OrPPro,p;e'i.t�tr• tnit�.ga,.» Projects in critical aroas has not occurred, 11011'ever, in part due to a lack ofh 8u,l �`.f�c..�.ont in:l ormation to evaluate the s gni:f'icance of impact; t Upon .Local migratory deer Populations. Development -related impacts have reached t1; lovol significant adverse impacts �� in tnaz�y areas of' dict County, and the Department of Fish and Game has been x'eq'uost$11 Of projects in critical winter range areas, g denial In August of 1988, the Butte Cou'Ity Board of Su e sors created a Deer Study Panel to study rvx y the- Py`oblems of development encroachment into the migratory deer herds' ranges. The panel consisted. of represent,Ita,ves from the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), a member of the Butte County Fish and Game Commission, Butte County Planning Department staff, an independent Planning processional, a private engineer, an environmental consultant, and a private la.h601vn The er, panel l s responsibility has been to study ways to minimize the impact Of development on mx.gr'a,tory door acid to maintain or enhance population loVels of these migratory animals, The panel's objectives were, To establish levels of significance duo to, develop - mein, projects i,n winter and summeii range areas., 2- t r 2,, Identify specific areas ill which developmetq tUld doer herd conflicts are greatest and also j;Q it�rt7�;, tiiy areas of little or no impact. 3. Develop recommended implementation procedures undor rEQA and the Subdivision .Map Ac" to ,reduce or st k�l cumulative advF,rse impacts ti on mi ,rator ' p p y deer populations, while allowing cir encouraging devolty— merit in 1E+ss sensitive areas. A series of overlay maps, developed from "tate an information, have been developed which; d loc rr l a Delineate Migratory deer winter and summer ranges, e Delinea'.c land use... specifically pecixical,ly the A.R. Genea^al Plan de�lignation, with the greatest potential for conflicts and ;adverse impaots, including Parcels of 5 acres or less, 6 to 20 acres, and 21 acres and greater. Delineate access corridors along which development would be encouraged. Areas of ?., eat est conflict were established for study to assist in development of appropriate mitigation The follovin measures. g policy recommendations and implarnontation. measures are in cl,uded as general mitigations for migratory deer areas within the County, 1. Establisiunent of a Habitat Improvement Fund A: This fund will accUMlate monies from Tuture subdivisions of land and building permits to improve wildlife habitat areas in the foothills .. 8 0 of Butte County. Fees will be based on the estimated impact of types of development in critical and non-critical winter and sumnydx range. B. It is also essential to establish a list of cooperative landowners in areas where habitat improvement will increase the carrying capacity for deer in Butte Couinty. A cont:vaat procedure must be established with tlaese 1411 downers to ensure long term (minimum 10 yearn) preservation of improved areas. 2. Strengthen the County dog ordinance to reduce impacts of free -ran ging dogs upon lees (samPle ordinance being prepart-d) 3. Develop a 2 --page handout for distribution to poten- tial developers in Foothill area depicting the major areas of conflict between development and migratory deer herds, and describing gen(-ral mitigation measures to be expected. 41, Expand the Land Development ordinance of the County to include the design criteria fo7r development In sen8iti)10 areas. Examples include types and design Of pea-.neter fences, and clustering of units along or near designated access corridors, 5, Expand the Ladd 'Use Element of the General. Plan to sped lically indiamte areas of Potential conflict between development and migratory deur, 6. Revise the Conservation and Open Space Elemerx oi' the General Plan to include the specific informa't,J,t)II provided on migratory deer herd ranges and incorpor— ate required mitigations as policy and °l,.ia;plementatic>II measures. ? Amend the General Plan to indicate non--(I(Ivolopment areas and limited development areas, 081,1011t;iall, for survival OT migratory deer. 8. Encourage environmentally snts.iti.ve doVOIOPment by Providing faster track processing oy proposals that A nclude the required and recommended design criteria and mitigation- as par+ jf projec 9. Continue to work with the Department of Fish and Garro to acquire more detailed information on deer movement patterns. Lands under consideration can be divided into several categories relative to deer use) present level of land division.. and , Potential for further divisions to establish. more Specific mitigation measures. Land in critical_Nvinter 01, summer rantvi th cbn —� Centrations o�cels of 10 oi^ fewer acres. (120 acres minimum Concentration), Land in this category has been subdivided below the level of critical Winter range require- meets, The maximum habitat itnprovelnent fee should be assessed on all ;Cuturo lot splits and building permits