DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Department of the Interior

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Department of the Interior United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 512 490-0057 FAX 490-0974 JAN 11 2012 Janice Brown Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 300 East 8th Street, Room 826 Austin, Texas 78701 Stephen Brooks Chief, Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 17300 Fort Worth, Texas 76102-0300 Consultation No. 21450-2011-F-0317 Dear Ms. Brown and Mr. Brooks: This transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) proposed authorization under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 – 1376) for the replacement of Cape Road bridge. The USACE is considering a Nationwide Permit (SWF-2011-00322) to authorize work (including fill) in the San Marcos River beneath and near Cape Road Bridge. This project also includes improvements to Cape Road adjacent to the bridge and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is funding 80 percent of the project. The City of San Marcos (City) and Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) propose to replace and enlarge the Cape Road Bridge, incorporating various improvements to protect the San Marcos River. Additional funding for the project (20 percent) would be provided by the State of Texas. In accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act), the USACE has determined this project may affect two listed endangered species: Texas wild-rice (Zizania texana), and fountain darter (Etheostoma fonticola). The USACE and FHWA are the Federal agencies involved in this project and formal consultation. The USACE has provided a biological assessment (BA) of the project prepared by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), and requested formal consultation in an August 31, 2011, letter. This biological opinion is based on information from: (1) your initiation letter, (2) the BA, (3) conversations with the USACE, TxDOT, FHWA, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), (4) field investigations by the Service, TPWD, Texas State University – San Marcos, Baylor University, and BIO WEST, Inc., and (5) other sources of information. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at our office. Brown and Brooks Page 2 Consultation History August 26, 2011 The USACE notifies the Service about the Cape Road Bridge Replacement project by e-mail. August 31, 2011 The USACE requests formal consultation on the Cape Road Bridge by letter. October 13, 2011 TxDOT provides clarification on stormwater aspects of Cape Road and Cape Road bridge. FHWA joins the formal consultation by e-mail. October 14, 2011 Meeting at project site with TxDOT, FHWA, TPWD, City of San Marcos, and Service. October 27, 2011 TxDOT provides photographs of sheet piling for the similar project. November 3, 2011 TxDOT provides additional information on aquatic plants in project area. December 22, 2011 The Service provides FHWA and USACE with draft biological opinion. December 28, 2011 USACE provides comments on draft biological opinion. January 6, 2011 FHWA and TxDOT provide comments on draft biological opinion. BIOLOGICAL OPINION The BA identifies 12 federally listed species and one candidate species that either may occur in Hays County, Texas or potentially be affected by activities in Hays County. Of these 12 species, the USACE has determined that the project may adversely affect Texas wild-rice and fountain darter. Additionally, the USACE has determined that the project may affect federally designated critical habitat (CH) of Texas wild-rice and fountain darter. Table 1 summarizes the USACE’s determinations. USACE Species Status Determination Texas wild-rice Endangered May Affect Comal Springs riffle beetle Endangered No Effect Comal Springs dryopid beetle Endangered No Effect Peck's cave amphipod Endangered No Effect San Marcos gambusia Endangered No Effect fountain darter Endangered May Affect Austin blind salamander Candidate - Not Listed No Effect Barton Springs salamander Endangered No Effect San Marcos salamander Threatened No Effect Texas blind salamander Endangered No Effect whooping crane Endangered No Effect golden-cheeked warbler Endangered No Effect black-capped vireo Endangered No Effect Table 1. Listed and Candidate Species Considered in Biological Assessment. Brown and Brooks Page 3 The San Marcos gambusia (Gambusia georgei) is presumed to be extinct. Multiple extensive surveys have not found evidence of the species in the wild. However, the project is located in federally designated critical habitat of the San Marcos gambusia. The Service is also including an analysis of the effects of the project on San Marcos gambusia critical habitat. This biological opinion does not rely on the regulatory definition of “destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat” at 50 CFR 402.02. Instead, we have relied on the statutory provision of the Endangered Species Act to complete the following analysis with respect to critical habitat. I. Description of Proposed Action The BA provides a detailed description of the proposed improvements to the Cape Road bridge over the original channel of the San Marcos River and adjacent sections of Cape Road. The purpose of the project is to build a new bridge with a life expectancy exceeding 50 years. The project will also improve the approach geometry to the bridge by slightly realigning adjacent sections of Cape Road. Figure 1 shows the upper San Marcos River, San Marcos Springs, various dams, and the location of the project. The proposed action can be divided into two phases: (1) construction, and (2) operation-maintenance. Water recreationists will be excluded from the construction area during construction. All traffic near Cape Road bridge will be halted during construction. Figure 2 shows the details of the project including: (1) the new bridge; (2) adjacent road improvements; (3) the grassy swale; (4) rock-sack gabion bank stabilization, and (5) sheet piling. Construction Design features and construction measures to minimize adverse effects to the San Marcos River and its biota during and after construction are described in the BA. Construction would take about 18 weeks to complete and occur in late Fall and Winter. The following steps summarize the progression of construction: 1. Temporary Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize stormwater pollution would be installed before construction begins 2. The contractor would install a temporary debris protection system to be placed under the bridge and would cover the river between the existing abutments to prevent any debris from falling in the river. 3. The existing bridge slab and attached structural parts would be removed in as few pieces as possible 4. Sheet pilings would be installed. 5. Remaining bridge elements would be removed. 6. Remove existing bridge abutments and excavate material from behind existing bridge abutments back to sheet pile wall. 7. H pilings will be cut below ground level with the remainder being covered by rock riprap. Brown and Brooks Page 4 8. Rock riprap would be placed in the river at the base of the sheet piling within the footprint previously occupied by the existing bridge abutments, concrete riprap, wing walls, and river bank. 9. New bridge abutments would be installed on the bank side of the sheet pilings. 10. Pre-stressed concrete slabs would be placed and a concrete riding surface would be poured. 11. Solid concrete rail would be constructed along the bridge to prevent runoff from discharging directly into the river. Operation of Cape Road Bridge The replacement bridge will be one lane in each direction, which is the existing condition. The project will change the load rating for the Cape Road Bridge. This will affect the size, number, and type of vehicles that use Cape Road, the Cape Road Bridge, and the bridge over Cape’s mill race (Figure 2). Depending on the change in the Cape Road bridge load rating and implementation of recommendations, the project may affect the transportation of hazardous cargo in San Marcos. More specifically, the project may affect which bridge over the San Marcos River will be used for hazardous cargo. Description of the Action Area “Action area” means all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action (50 CFR 402.02). For the purposes of this biological opinion, the action area includes: (1) Cape Road and Cape Road Bridge, (2) the San Marcos River from Interstate Highway 35 (IH-35) downstream to Cummings Dam, and (3) certain nearby roads that may be affected in the short-term by project construction or in the long-term due to project improvements to Cape Road Bridge (including Riverside Drive, Luciano Flores Boulevard, IH-35 and its frontage roads). Figure 3 shows the action area highlighting the involved roads and sections of the river. II. Status of the Species and Critical Habitat Texas wild-rice Texas wild-rice was listed as endangered on April 26, 1978, and its critical habitat was designated on July 14, 1980. Critical habitat includes Spring Lake and its outflow, and the San Marcos River, downstream to the confluence with the Blanco River (Figure 4). Species Description and Life History Texas wild-rice is an aquatic perennial grass. Leaves are about 3 to 6.5 feet long. Texas wild- rice is typically submergent. When flowering, the inflorescence and the upper culms and leaves emerge above the water surface. In slow moving waters, Texas wild-rice functions as an annual, exhibiting less robust vegetative growth, then flowering, setting seed, and dying within a single season. Texas wild-rice forms stands in the San Marcos River at depths from 0.7 to 7.0 feet. The species requires clear, relatively cool, thermally constant (about 72°F) flowing water. Texas wild-rice prefers gravel and sand substrates overlaying Crawford black silt and clay soils (Poole and Bowles 1999, Saunders et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Melanoides Tuberculata), Species Habitat Associations and Life History Investigations in the San Solomon Spring Complex, Texas
    FINAL REPORT As Required by THE ENDANGERED SPECIES PROGRAM TEXAS Grant No. TX E-121-R Endangered and Threatened Species Conservation Native springsnails and the invasive red-rim melania snail (Melanoides tuberculata), species habitat associations and life history investigations in the San Solomon Spring complex, Texas Prepared by: David Rogowski Carter Smith Executive Director Clayton Wolf Director, Wildlife 3 October 2012 FINAL REPORT STATE: ____Texas_______________ GRANT NUMBER: ___ TX E-121-R___ GRANT TITLE: Native springsnails and the invasive red-rim melania snail (Melanoides tuberculata), species habitat associations and life history investigations in the San Solomon Spring complex, Texas. REPORTING PERIOD: ____17 Sep 09 to 31 May 12_ OBJECTIVE(S): To determine patterns of abundance, distribution, and habitat use of the Phantom Cave snail (Cochliopa texana), Phantom Spring tryonia (Tryonia cheatumi), and the invasive red-rim melania snail (Melanoides tuberculta) in San Solomon Springs, and potential interactions. Segment Objectives: Task 1. January - February 2010. A reconnaissance visit(s) will be made to the region to investigate the study area and work on specific sampling procedural methods. Visit with TPWD at the Balmorhea State Park, as well as meet The Nature Conservancy personnel at Diamond Y and Sandia springs complexes. Task 2. March 2010– August 2011. Begin sampling. Field sampling will be conducted every 6-8 weeks, over a period of a year and a half. Sampling methods are outlined below stated Tasks. Task 3. December 2010. Completion of first year of study. With four seasonal samples completed, preliminary data analysis and statistical modeling will begin. Preliminary results will be presented at the Texas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Comal County Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Environmental Impact Statement
    Draft Comal County Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Environmental Impact Statement Prepared for: Comal County, Texas Comal County Commissioners Court Prepared by: SWCA Environmental Consultants Smith, Robertson, Elliott, Glen, Klein & Bell, L.L.P. Prime Strategies, Inc. Texas Perspectives, Inc. Capital Market Research, Inc. April 2010 SWCA Project Number 12659-139-AUS DRAFT COMAL COUNTY REGIONAL HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT April 2010 Type of Action: Administrative Lead Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Responsible Official: Adam Zerrenner Field Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas For Information: Bill Seawell Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas Tele: 512-490-0057 Abstract: Comal County, Texas, is applying for an incidental take permit (Permit) under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 16 U.S.C. § 1531, et seq. (ESA), to authorize the incidental take of two endangered species, the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) and the black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla), referred to collectively as the “Covered Species.” In support of the Permit application, the County has prepared a regional habitat conservation plan (Proposed RHCP), covering a 30-year period from 2010 to 2040. The Permit Area for the Proposed RHCP and the area of potential effect for this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is Comal County in central Texas. The requested Permit would authorize the following incidental take and mitigation for the golden-cheeked warbler: Take: As conservation credits are created through habitat preservation, authorize up to 5,238 acres (2,120 hectares) of golden-cheeked warbler habitat to be impacted over the 30-year life of the Proposed RHCP.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 512 490-0057 FAX 490-0974 In Reply Refer to: Consultation 02ETAU00-2016-F-0216 AUG 15 2016 Stephen Brooks Chief, Regulatory Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 17300 Fort Worth, Texas 76102-0300 Dear Mr. Brooks: This transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) proposed authorization under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 U.S.C. 1251 – 1376) for activities that are part of the development of the New Braunfels Utilities (NBU) Comal Springs Conservation Center (CSCC) in New Braunfels, Comal County, Texas. The USACE is proposing authorization of partial removal of the concrete spring cap at the head of Comal Springs spring run 4 under a CWA Nationwide Permit. The spring cap modification is part of an 18-acre project to replace the NBU service yard with an educational facility focused on conservation. The NBU proposes to build the CSCC on its property near Landa Lake, Comal Springs spring run 4, and Blieders Creek. In accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act), the USACE has determined this project may affect four listed endangered species: Peck’s cave amphipod (Stygobromus comalensis), Comal Springs dryopid beetle (Stygoparnus comalensis), Comal Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis comalensis), and fountain darter (Etheostoma fonticola). In addition, the USACE has determined the project may affect federally designated critical habitat of Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior FISH and WILDLIFE SERVICE 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 512490-0057 FAX 490-0974
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 512490-0057 FAX 490-0974 Memorandum To: Regional Director, Region 2, Albuquerque, New Mexico ThrOUgh:/~sistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Region 2, Albuquerque, New Mexico From: Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological Services Field Office, Austin, Te as Subject: Biological and Conference Opinions for the Edwards Aquifer Recovery Implementation Program Habitat Conservation Plan - Permit TE-63663A-0 (Consultation No. 214S0-201O-F-OllO) Enclosed are the biological and conference opinions for the final Edwards Aquifer Recovery Implementation Program (EARlP) Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) that describes actions the Applicants have proposed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate adverse effects to the endangered Texas wild-rice (Zizania texana), Comal Springs dryopid beetle (Stygoparnus comalensis), Comal Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis comalensis), Peck's Cave amphipod (Stygobromus pecki), fountain darter (Etheostomafonticola), San Marcos gambusia (Gambusia georgei), Texas blind salamander (Typhlomolge [=EwyceaJ rathbuni), the threatened San Marcos salamander (Eurycea nana), and the non-listed Texas cave diving beetle (Haideoporus texanus, also referred to as the Edwards Aquifer diving beetle), Texas troglobitic water slater (Lirceolus smithii), and Comal Springs salamander (Eurycea sp.) over a period of IS-years. We appreciate your staffs assistance throughout this consultation. If you have any questions regarding this biological opinion, please contact Tanya Sommer at SI2-490-00S7, extension 222. The biological opinion is based on the EARIP HCP dated December 2011 and the associated Enviromnental Impact Statement dated June 2012 pursuant to the National Enviromnental Policy Act of 1969; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) files; discussions with species experts; published and un-published literature on the species of concern and related impacts; and other sources of information available to the Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Life History Aspects of a Relict Ironcolor Shiner Notropis Chalybaeus Population in a Novel Spring Environment Author(S) :Joshuah S
    Life History Aspects of a Relict Ironcolor Shiner Notropis chalybaeus Population in a Novel Spring Environment Author(s) :Joshuah S. Perkin, Zachary R. Shattuck, and Timothy H. Bonner Source: The American Midland Naturalist, 167(1):111-126. 2012. Published By: University of Notre Dame DOI: URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1674/0003-0031-167.1.111 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Am. Midl. Nat. (2012) 167:111–126 Life History Aspects of a Relict Ironcolor Shiner Notropis chalybaeus Population in a Novel Spring Environment 1 2 JOSHUAH S. PERKIN, ZACHARY R. SHATTUCK AND TIMOTHY H. BONNER Department of Biology/Aquatic Station, Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos 78666 ABSTRACT.—Ironcolor shiner Notropis chalybaeus is generally absent from groundwater- dominated systems throughout its range; however, a relict disjunct population occurs within the spring-fed upper reaches of the San Marcos River in central Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 3: DELETION TABLES 3.1 Aluminum
    APPENDIX 3: DELETION TABLES APPENDIX 3: DELETION TABLES 3.1 Aluminum TABLE 3.1.1: Deletion process for the Santa Ana River aluminum site-specific database. Phylum Class Order Family Genus/Species Common Name Code Platyhelminthes Turbellaria Tricladida Planarlidae Girardiaia tigrina Flatworm G Annelida Oligochaeta Haplotaxida Tubificidae Tubifex tubifex Worm F Mollusca Gastropoda Limnophila Physidae Physa sp. Snail G Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphnidae Ceriodaphnia dubia Cladoceran O* Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphnidae Daphnia magna Cladoceran O* Arthropoda Malacostraca Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea aquaticus Isopod F Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Crangonyx pseudogracilis Amphipod F Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus pseudolimnaeus Amphipod G Arthropoda Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria sp. Stonefly O Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Tanytarsus dissimilis Midge G Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout D Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus tschawytscha Chinook Salmon D Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Salmo salar Atlantic salmon D Chordata Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Hybognathus amarus Rio Grande silvery minnow F Chordata Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow S Chordata Actinopterygii Perifomes Centrarchidae Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish S Chordata Actinopterygii Perifomes Centrarchidae Micropterus dolomieui Smallmouth bass G Chordata Actinopterygii
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater And
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Special Provisions and Other Conditions Placed on Gdot Projects for Imperiled Species Protection
    GEORGIA DOT RESEARCH PROJECT 18-06 FINAL REPORT REVIEW OF SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND OTHER CONDITIONS PLACED ON GDOT PROJECTS FOR IMPERILED SPECIES PROTECTION VOLUME I OFFICE OF PERFORMANCE-BASED MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH 600 WEST PEACHTREE STREET NW ATLANTA, GA 30308 TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No.: 2. Government Accession No.: 3. Recipient's Catalog No.: FHWA-GA-20-1806 Volume I N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle: 5. Report Date: Review of Special Provisions and Other Conditions Placed on January 2021 GDOT Projects For Imperiled Aquatic Species Protection, 6. Performing Organization Code: Volume I N/A 7. Author(s): 8. Performing Organization Report No.: Jace M. Nelson, Timothy A. Stephens, Robert B. Bringolf, Jon 18-06 Calabria, Byron J. Freeman, Katie S. Hill, William H. Mattison, Brian P. Melchionni, Jon W. Skaggs, R. Alfie Vick, Brian P. Bledsoe, (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0779-0127), Seth J. Wenger (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7858-960X) 9. Performing Organization Name and Address: 10. Work Unit No.: Odum School of Ecology N/A University of Georgia 11. Contract or Grant No.: 140 E. Green Str. PI#0016335 Athens, GA 30602 208-340-7046 or 706-542-2968 [email protected] 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address: 13. Type of Report and Period Covered: Georgia Department of Transportation Final; September 2018 – January 2021 Office of Performance-based 14. Sponsoring Agency Code: Management and Research N/A 600 West Peachtree St. NW Atlanta, GA 30308 15. Supplementary Notes: Conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • San Marcos Salamander Critical Habitat Was Designated July 14, 1980
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 (512) 490-0057 JAN 11 2008 Consultation No. 21450-2007-F-0056 Mark. A. Pohlmeier, Colonel Department of the Air Force HQ AETC/A7C 266 F Street West Randolph AFB, TX 78150-4319 Dear Colonel Pohlmeier: This is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion based on our review of the effects of ongoing Edwards aquifer (Balcones Fault Zone) well withdrawals by the Department of Defense (DoD) on listed threatened and endangered species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act). The groundwater withdrawals support the existing and future missions at the following Department of Defense (DoD) military installations in Bexar County, Texas: (1) Fort Sam Houston, (2) Lackland Air Force Base (AFB), and (3) Randolph AFB (Figure 1). Species evaluated for effects are the following: (1) Texas wild-rice (Zizania texana), (2) Peck’s cave amphipod (Stygobromus pecki), (3) Comal Springs dryopid beetle (Stygoparnus comalensis), (4) Comal Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis comalensis), (5) San Marcos gambusia (Gambusia georgei), (6) fountain darter (Etheostoma fonticola), (7) San Marcos salamander (Eurycea nana), and (8) Texas blind salamander (Eurycea rathbuni). We evaluated effects to designated critical habitat of the following species: Texas wild-rice, fountain darter, San Marcos gambusia, San Marcos salamander, Peck’s cave amphipod, Comal Springs dryopid beetle, and Comal Springs riffle beetle. Brooks City-Base also uses water from the Edwards aquifer. However, DoD did not want to include it in this consultation.
    [Show full text]
  • Effectiveness of Host Snail Removal in the Comal River, Texas and Its Impact on Densities of the Gill Parasite Centrocestus Formosanus (Trematoda: Heterophyidae)
    Effectiveness of Host Snail Removal in the Comal River, Texas and its Impact on Densities of the Gill Parasite Centrocestus formosanus (Trematoda: Heterophyidae) Submitted to: Edwards Aquifer Recovery Implementation Program Attn: Dr. Robert Gulley Prepared by: USFWS San Marcos National Fish Hatchery and Technology Center and BIO-WEST, Inc. February 2011 This report summarizes the effort by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) San Marcos National Fish Hatchery and Technology Center (SMNFHTC) and BIO-WEST, Inc. to determine the effectiveness of Melanoides tuberculatus removal on lowering drifting gill parasite (Centrocestus formosanus cercariae) numbers in the Comal River. INTRODUCTION Centrocestus formosanus (Nishigori 1924) is a digenetic trematode originally described in Taiwan that has become widely distributed throughout Asia and warm-watered areas of the world (Mitchell et al. 2000). The trematode was likely introduced into Mexico in 1979 but was not confirmed until 1985 (Scholz and Zalgado-Maldonado 2000) and possibly spread to the United States in the early 1980’s (Blazer and Gratzek 1985, Mitchell et al. 2000, 2002). In 1996, metacercariae of the invasive trematode were observed infecting the gills of the endangered fountain darter, Etheostoma fonticola (Jordan and Gilbert 1886), in the Comal River in Comal County, Texas (Mitchell et al. 2000). USFWS SMNFHTC biologists observed considerable gill damage caused by the encystment of up to 1,500 metacercariae per fish. The life cycle of C. formosanus has three stages, including a definitive host, a first intermediate host, and a second intermediate host. The definitive host for C. formosanus in central Texas appears to be the Green Heron, Butorides virescens (Linnaeus 1758), where adult trematodes colonize the colon (Kuhlman 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Gambusia Georgei
    The San Marcos Recovery Plan FOR San Marcos River Endangered and Threatened Species San Marcos Gambusia (Gambusia georgei) Hubbs and Peden Fountain Darter (Etheostoma fonticola) (Jordan and Gilbert) San Marcos Salamander (Eurycea nana) Texas Wildrice (Zizania texana) Hitchcock PREPARED BY THE SAN MARCOS RECOVERY TEAM Dr. Robert J. Edwards, Leader, Pan American University, Edinburg, Texas 78539 Mr. Harold E. Beaty, 3414 Forest Trail, Temple, Texas 76502 Dr. Glenn Longley, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666 Mr. David H. Riskind, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas 78744 Dr. Dianna D.Tupa, Center for Research and Water Resources, University of , Texas Balcones Research Center, Austin, Texas 78758 Dr. Bobby G. Whiteside, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666 ODNSULTANTS Mr. Harry Bishop, USFWS, Fish Cult. & Develop. Res. Center, San Marcos, Texas 78666 Dr. W. H. P. Emery, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 7C666 (Member 1981-82) Mr. Russell L. Masters, Edwards Underground Water District, San Antonio, Texas 78205 Mr. William McPherson, Soil Conservation Service, Bastrop, Texas 78602 Mr. Floyd E. Potter, Jr., Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas 78759 1 Approved: tt RegioMa $i ,4or, Region 2 U.S. Fish a4i4 Wildlife Service Date: SUMMARY 1. GOAL: Secure the survival and eventual recovery of the San Marcos gambusia, fountain darter, San Marcos salamander, and Texas wildrice through protection of their natural ecosystem, the San Marcos River. 2. THREATS: The San Marcos River ecosystem and the biota comprising the system are endangered by a number of threats. The most serious is cessation of flow of thermally constant, clear, clean water from the San Marcos Springs due to overdrafting of groundwater from the Edwards Aquifer.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Materials
    Teleconference/Video Board Meeting AGENDA Board of Wildlife Resources 7870 Villa Park Drive Henrico, Virginia 23228 Thursday, August 20, 2020 9:00 am Call to Order and Welcome Roll Call Vote 1. Approval of the May 27, 2020 Board Meeting Minutes Final Action 2. Staff Recommendations – Aquatic Regulations Action 3. Regulation proposal for camping on Department Lands Action 4. Wildlife Regulations public scoping period 5. Annual Finance Report – Fiscal Year 2020 6. Report on 2020 State Audit (2019 Fiscal year) 7. Law Enforcement Accreditation Resolution Final Action 8. Regulation proposal for changing DGIF to DWR Action 9. Regulation proposal for Facility Use Fee on boat ramps Action 10. Director’s Report 11. Chair’s Report 12. Next Meeting Date: Thursday, October 22, 2020 at 9:00 am 13. Closed Session 14. Adjournment Teleconference/Video Board Meeting DRAFT Board Minutes Board of Game and Inland Fisheries 7870 Villa Park Drive Henrico, VA 23228 May 27, 2020 9:00 am Present: Dr. Mamie Parker, Chair, Mr. John Daniel, II, Vice Chair; Board Members: Mr. G. K. Washington, Mr. Leon Boyd, Ms. Karen Terwilliger, Mr. Tom Sadler, Ms. Catherine Claiborne, Mr. Douglas Dear, Mr. Brian Vincent; Absent: Mr. Frank Adams; Executive Director: Mr. Ryan Brown; Director’s Working Group: Mr. Gary Martel, Mr. Tom Guess, Dr. Gray Anderson, Dr. Mike Bednarski, Mr. George Braxton, Mr. Darin Moore, Mr. Lee Walker, Major Bryan Young, Major Scott Naff, Ms. Paige Pearson Ms. Kelci Block, Assistant Attorney General attended the Board meeting by Teleconference. The Chair opened the meeting at 9:00 am. The Chair welcomed everyone attending the virtual meeting and thanked everyone for being able to teleconference; the Chair thanked the Director and staff for making this virtual meeting possible, the Chair noted for the record that a quorum was present.
    [Show full text]