DOCSLIB.ORG

Alabama Power Company Birmingham, Alabama

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA COOSA AND WARRIOR RIVER PROJECTS E6 – THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DATABASE SUMMARY REPORT APRIL 2004 Prepared by: ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA COOSA AND WARRIOR RIVER PROJECTS E6 – THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DATABASE SUMMARY REPORT APRIL 2004 Prepared by: ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA COOSA AND WARRIOR RIVER PROJECTS E6 – THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DATABASE SUMMARY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1-1 2.0 DATABASE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE..................................2-1 2.1 Content and Geographic Scope........................................................................2-1 2.2 Database Sources.............................................................................................2-2 2.3 Data Reconciliation..........................................................................................2-5 2.4 Maintenance.....................................................................................................2-6 3.0 DATABASE SPECIES SUMMARY..................................................................3-1 3.1 Coosa River Basin............................................................................................3-1 3.2 Black Warrior River Basin...............................................................................3-1 3.3 Alabama River Basin .......................................................................................3-1 4.0 DISCUSSION......................................................................................................4-1 5.0 LITERATURE CITED........................................................................................5-1 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 List of Counties intersecting the CWA Basins. ...........................................T-1 Table 2 Species Removed from the RTE database...................................................T-2 Table 3 Federally listed species in the RTE database by drainage ...........................T-3 Table 4 List of Critical Habitat Units in the Coosa, Black Warrior, and Alabama River drainages ............................................................................................T-5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Counties within the CWA Basins ................................................................F-1 - i - LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A CCRT and WCRT Meeting Summaries, June 20, 2001 Appendix B E-6 IAG Work Plan - ii - ALABAMA POWER COMPANY BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA COOSA AND WARRIOR RIVER PROJECTS E6 – THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DATABASE SUMMARY REPORT 1.0 INTRODUCTION Alabama Power Company (APC) is currently relicensing nine hydroelectric developments on the Coosa and Warrior Rivers in Alabama. These developments include Smith and Bankhead in the Warrior Basin (FERC No. 2165); Weiss, Neely Henry, Logan Martin, Lay, and Bouldin in the Coosa Basin (FERC No. 2146); and the Mitchell (FERC No. 82) and Jordan (FERC No. 618) Projects, also in the Coosa Basin. The relicensing process includes a multi-year cooperative effort between APC and interested stakeholders to address operational, recreational, and ecological concerns associated with hydroelectric project operations. During the initial (scoping) phase of the relicensing process, APC organized a wide variety of stakeholders, including state and federal resource agencies, non-governmental organizations, and concerned citizens, to form the Warrior Cooperative Relicensing Team (WCRT) and the Coosa Cooperative Relicensing Team (CCRT). The WCRT and CCRT are plenary groups that guide efforts to address relicensing issues. As part of the relicensing process, the WCRT and CCRT agreed to form an Issue Action Group (IAG) to address issues related to threatened and endangered species (Issue E6) (Appendix A - WCRT Meeting Summary, June 20, 2001; CCRT Meeting Summary, June 20, 2001). The E6 IAG approved a work plan (Appendix B) at its initial meeting on August 7, 2001. This work plan called for the development of a database of sensitive, threatened, and endangered species. The IAG determined the geographic scope of the database. The database includes the entire Coosa River Basin, the portion of the Alabama River Basin upstream of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Claiborne Lock and Dam (located approximately 240 river - 1-1 - miles below Jordan Dam), and the entire Black Warrior River Basin. The IAG also identified several sources of data that should be included in the database. Kleinschmidt gathered species data from sources identified by the IAG and entered the data into a relational database (MS Access). The draft database was presented to the IAG on October 24, 2001. Based on comments at that meeting, the database was revised to include additional information. On January 15, 2002, the IAG met to review revisions to the draft database and develop recommendations to present to the WCRT and CCRT. The E6 IAG recommendations regarding the database were presented on January 29, 2002 and approved by the WCRT and CCRT (see Appendix A – Meeting Notes). This report was prepared to document the development and maintenance of the species database, which will herein be referred to as the Coosa-Warrior-Alabama Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Database or RTE Database. - 1-2 - 2.0 DATABASE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE 2.1 Content and Geographic Scope The RTE database is a relational database created and maintained in Microsoft Access. The RTE database contains over 1,400 individual records on 378 species of plants and animals in the Coosa and Black Warrior river basins, as well as the Alabama River basin upstream of Claiborne Lock and Dam (collectively “CWA Basins”). Records for each species include data in several categories, which are described below. Scientific name - Each species in the database was assigned a unique numeric identification number that is linked to its scientific name. Common name - The common names for each species are associated with the scientific names. For species that do not have common names, such as aquatic insects, a simple placeholder name was used (e.g., “a caddisfly”). Species type - Each species in the database is categorized by species type. Species types include fish, amphibians, mussels, snails, insects, arachnids, crustaceans, birds, mammals, reptiles, vascular and non-vascular plants. Federal status - All species that are designated as endangered, threatened, proposed for listing, candidates for listing, or for which critical habitat has been designated are uniquely identified as such in the RTE database. State status - In Alabama, certain non-game and invertebrate species are covered by the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) regulations (Alabama Administrative Code 220-2-.92, 220-2-.98). Species covered by these regulations are uniquely identified in the RTE database. Global and State Ranks - NatureServe, The Nature Conservancy, and the Natural Heritage Network have created a system that ranks the conservation status of species according to criteria developed by those organizations (NatureServe 2003). The RTE database includes the global and state rank assigned by the NatureServe system for each species in the database. - 2-1 - Forest Service Status - The U.S. Forest Service designates certain species that occur on lands it manages as sensitive. Species designated as sensitive that are reportedly present in Bankhead National Forest adjacent to Lewis Smith Lake are uniquely identified in the RTE database. Habitat information - Information regarding the habitat preferences of certain species is contained in the RTE database. This information was derived from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recovery plans, as well as USFWS and NatureServe species accounts. Location data - Location information for many species is contained in the RTE database. The Location data is in latitude/longitude format and is accurate to the nearest minute (approx. 1.3 mi2) due to limitations of mapping technology. In some instances, more accurate data is available but is not being made available to the public to ensure protection of the species. While every effort was made to use the best available data during construction of the database, it should be noted that locational data has not been independently verified by APC or the E6 IAG. Several of the sources (including the Alabama Natural Heritage Program and the Georgia Natural Heritage Program) caution that location information in their databases may not be up-to-date, and in some instances, has not have been verified by recent on-site field surveys by the source database (Georgia Natural Heritage Program 2004, Alabama Natural Heritage Program 2003). 2.2 Database Sources The RTE database was developed based on information from the USFWS, Alabama Natural Heritage Program, NatureServe, the ADCNR State Lands Division – Natural Heritage Section, and the Georgia Natural Heritage Program. A detailed description of each of these information sources and their contribution to the RTE database is provided below. - 2-2 - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service The USFWS Daphne Field Office maintains a web-based list of all Alabama species designated as threatened, endangered, proposed for listing, candidate for listing, and species for which critical habitat has been designated (USFWS 2003). The USFWS list includes the common name, scientific name, and status of federally listed species for each county in Alabama.
Recommended publications
  • APPENDIX 2A. Recovery Plans 20100714

    APPENDIX 2A. Recovery Plans 20100714

    Listed Species with Recovery Plans in the Appalachian LCC Area All listed species recovery plans may be found at http://www.fws.gov/ecos/ajax/tess_public/TESSWebpageRecovery?sort=1 Common Name Scientific Name Plan Name Mammals Carolina northern flying Glaucomys sabrinus Appalachian Northern Flying Squirrels (2 spp.) squirrel coloratus Gray bat Myotis grisescens Gray Bat Indiana bat Myotis sodalis Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) Draft Recovery Plan: First Revision Virginia big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii Ozark/Virginia Big-eared Bats (2 spp.) virginianus Birds Red‐cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Red-cockaded Woodpecker Recovery Plan, Second Revision Whooping crane Grus americana Whooping Crane Recovery Plan, Final Third Revision Reptiles Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Recovery Plan for the Bog Turtle, Northern Population Flattened musk turtle Sternotherus depressus Flattened Musk Turtle Amphibians Cheat Mountain salamander Plethodon nettingi Cheat Mountain Salamander Fishes Alabama cavefish Speoplatyrhinus poulsoni Alabama Cavefish Amber darter Percina antecella Conasauga Logperch/Amber Darter (2 spp.) Blackside dace Phoxinus cumberlandensis Blackside Dace Blue shiner Cyprinella caerulia Blue Shiner Bluemask darter Etheostoma spp Bluemask (=Jewel) Darter (Etheostoma (Doration) sp.) Recovery Plan Boulder darter Etheostoma wapiti Boulder Darter Cahaba shiner Notropis cahabae Cahaba Shiner Conasauga logperch Percina jenkinsi Conasauga Logperch/Amber Darter (2 spp.) Duskytail darter Etheostoma percnurum Duskytail Darter Common Name
  • Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Generating Plants

    Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Generating Plants

    PNNL-14468 Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Generating Plants M. R. Sackschewsky January 2004 Prepared for the License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Branch Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-76RL01830 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC06-76RL01830 PNNL-14468 Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation for Operating Commercial Nuclear Power Generating Plants M. R. Sackschewsky January 2004 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-76RL01830 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, and related implementing regulations of the jurisdictional federal agencies, the U.S.
  • Draft Environmental Assessment

    Draft Environmental Assessment

    Document Type: EA-Administrative Record Index Field: Final Environmental Document Project Name: Economic Development Grant – City of Fort Payne Project Number: 2014-27 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROPOSAL FOR PREPARATION OF A PAD-READY SITE AT FORT PAYNE INDUSTRIAL PARK, CITY OF FORT PAYNE, ALABAMA DeKalb County, Alabama PREPARED BY: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY JULY 2014 For more information, please contact: Amy B. Henry, Manager NEPA Program and Valley Projects Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Phone: (865) 632-4045 Fax: (865) 632-3451 E-mail: [email protected] Page intentionally blank 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TVA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROPOSAL FOR PREPARATION OF A PAD- READY SITE AT FORT PAYNE INDUSTRIAL PARK, CITY OF FORT PAYNE, ALABAMA DEKALB COUNTY, ALABAMA TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY JULY 2014 The Proposed Decision and Need The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) proposes to provide a grant to the Industrial Development Board of the City of Fort Payne (City) for the preparation of a 330,000 square feet (SF) (400 by 825 feet) earthen/gravel “pad ready” site and access road within a 39.6-acre parcel which has been zoned for “Light Industrial” activity. The “pad ready” site would be raised to an elevation of approximately 974 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL). The elevation of this “pad ready” site would eliminate the primary barrier to making the site eligible for industrial development. (see Attachment A). TVA contribution would be 50 percent of the estimated total cost. The primary purpose of this project is to prepare an industrial site in the Fort Payne Industrial Park in DeKalb County, Alabama.
  • Appendix C - Threatened & Endangered Species List

    Appendix C - Threatened & Endangered Species List

    Appendix C - Threatened & Endangered Species List pw: USGS :29435.01 \07\07\Environ_ Assessment Stanley Consultants fo)llmJ)JilW�fm �/sf( I NOV 2 5 2020 fill JiJU- I- (J)_ /3 BY: ....&J........... United States Department of the Interior U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water Mission Area Officeof the Chief Operating Officer Reston, Virginia 20192 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1208-B - Daphne, Alabama 36526 Phone: 251-441-5181 Fax: 251-441-6222 November 23, 2020 Your project site contains suitable spring/summer habitat for the endangered Indiana bat and/or threatened northern long-eared bat. However, you have stated that tree Mr. Bill Pearson removal will occur between October 15 and March 31; therefore, we concur that your Field Supervisor proposed project is not likely to adversely affect the Indiana bat and/or northern long­ US Fish & WildlifeServices eared bat. No other federally listed species/critical habitat are known to occur in the project area. IF PROJECT DESJGN CHANGES ARE MADE, PLEASE SUBMIT Daphne Ecological Services Field Station NEW PLANS FOR REVIEW. We recommend the use of best management practices 1208 Main St. B specific to your project (See http://www.fws.gov/daphne/section7/bmp.htrnl). Daphne AL 36526 RE: USGS IDF Concurrence William J. Pearson, Field Supervisor Date ffi Dear Bill: The United States Geological Society (USGS) proposes construction of a new Hydrologic Instrumentation Facility (HIF) on the University of Alabama campus in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. This letter is to request concurrence on our proposed considerations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. An interested party letter was submitted to USFWS in June 2020 and was followed up with an iPAC submittal.
  • Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 44/Monday, March 9, 2009/Notices

    Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 44/Monday, March 9, 2009/Notices

    10064 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 44 / Monday, March 9, 2009 / Notices Applicant: Copperhead Environmental (Rhus michauxii), bunched arrowhead March 24–26, 2009. The meeting is open Consulting, Inc., Paint Lick, (Sagittaria fasciculata), mountain sweet to the public. The meeting agenda will Kentucky, TE171516 pitcher-plant (Sarracenia jonesii), include reports from the Subcommittees The applicant requests amendment of largeflower skullcap (Scutellaria on Incentives, Legal, Science Tools & existing authorization to add authority montana), blue ridge goldenrod Procedures, and Synthesis, and to capture, handle, and release 31 (Solidago spithamaea), Virginia spirea discussion of the draft species of freshwater mussel for (Spiraea virginiana), Cooley’s Recommendations to the Secretary. presence surveys throughout the species meadowrue (Thalictrum cooleyi), and DATES: The meeting is scheduled for ranges in the eastern United States. running buffalo clover (Trifolium March 24–26, 2009, from 11 a.m. to stoloniferum) to develop and maintain Applicant: South Carolina Parks, 5:30 p.m. on March 24, 8 a.m. to 5:30 germ plasm and propagated specimens Recreation and Tourism, Columbia, p.m. on March 25, and 8 a.m. to 3:30 of plants collected from throughout South Carolina TE207117 p.m. on March 26. North Carolina, South Carolina, The applicant requests authorization ADDRESSES: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Rooms to harass, inspect nest cavities, and West Virginia, Virginia, and Maryland. conduct other management activities 200 A & B, Arlington, VA 22203. For Applicant: International Carnivorous with the red-cockaded woodpecker more information, see ‘‘Meeting Plant Society, Pinole, California, (Picoides borealis) throughout South Location Information.’’ TE061005 Carolina.
  • September 24, 2018

    September 24, 2018

    September 24, 2018 Sent via Federal eRulemaking Portal to: http://www.regulations.gov Docket Nos. FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0006 FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007 FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0009 Bridget Fahey Chief, Division of Conservation and Classification U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES Falls Church, VA 22041-3808 [email protected] Craig Aubrey Chief, Division of Environmental Review Ecological Services Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES Falls Church, VA 22041 [email protected] Samuel D. Rauch, III National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 [email protected] Re: Proposed Revisions of Endangered Species Act Regulations Dear Mr. Aubrey, Ms. Fahey, and Mr. Rauch: The Southern Environmental Law Center (“SELC”) submits the following comments in opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s and National Marine Fisheries Service’s proposed revisions to the Endangered Species Act’s implementing regulations.1 We submit these comments on behalf of 57 organizations working to protect the natural resources of the 1 Revision of the Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,174 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 17); Revision of Regulations for Interagency Cooperation, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,178 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 402); Revision of the Regulations for Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,193 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R.
  • Biological Evaluation of Proposed, Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species

    Biological Evaluation of Proposed, Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species

    Biological Evaluation of Proposed, Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species Wildlife Habitat Improvement and Fuels Reduction Project Proposed Action within Winston County, Alabama Responsible Agency: USDA Forest Service National Forests in Alabama William B. Bankhead Ranger District Contact: Deciding Officer: District Ranger Glen D. Gaines Biological Evaluation Preparer: Biological Scientist Allison Cochran PO Box 278 Double Springs, Alabama 35553 Telephone 205-489-5111 FAX 205-489-3427 E-mail [email protected] [email protected] Type of Document Categorical Exclusion – BE Summary The proposed project will reduce midstory and understory trees and shrubs in two sites, totaling approximately 47 acres, noted on the attached maps. The project sites are located in the Black Pond and Hickory Grove communities. They are found in Forest Service management compartments 163 and 19. The sites proposed for treatment are loblolly pine stands. They were thinned in 2005 and 2006, respectively. Selected vegetation between 1 inch and 6 inches DBH will be removed in upland pine- dominant habitat. In compartment 163, the result will be an open pine stand with reduced fuel loading and advanced hardwood regeneration. In compartment 19, the result will be an open pine stand with reduced fuel loading. The result will allow for restoration and maintenance of native forest communities, including upland oak-hickory forest in compartment 163 and fire dependent pine woodlands in compartment 19. The purpose and need for the project is to improve wildlife habitat, improve conditions for native upland plants, restore and maintain native forest communities, and to decrease the risk of catastrophic wildfires by reducing fuels.
  • 2003-2004 Recovery Report to Congress

    2003-2004 Recovery Report to Congress

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Report to Congress on the Recovery of Threatened and Endangered Species Fiscal Years 2003-2004 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Endangered Species Program www.fws.gov/endangered December 2006 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible under the Endangered Species Act for conserving and recovering our nation’s rarest plant and animal species and their habitats, working in cooperation with other public and private partners. From the Director Endangered Species Program Contacts Do you want more information on a particular threatened or endangered species or recovery effort near you? Please contact the Regional Office that covers the This 2004 report provides an update on the State(s) you are interested in. If they cannot help you, they will gladly direct you recovery of threatened and endangered species to the nearest Service office. for the period between October 1, 2002, and Region Six — Mountain-Prairie September 30, 2004, and chronicles the progress Washington D.C. Office Region Four — Southeast 134 Union Boulevard, Suite 650 of efforts by the Fish and Wildlife Service and Endangered Species Program 1875 Century Boulevard, Suite 200 Lakewood, CO 80228 the many partners involved in recovery efforts. 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420 Atlanta, GA 30345 http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/endspp Arlington, VA 22203 http://www.fws.gov/southeast/es/ During this time, recovery efforts enabled three http://www.fws.gov/endangered Chief, Division of Ecological Services: species to be removed from the Endangered and Chief,
  • Addendum to the Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary

    Addendum to the Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary

    ADDENDUM TO THE UIDE TO THE ATURAL OMMUNITIES G N C OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY SEPTEMBER0 2009 Citation: Largay, E. and L. Sneddon. 2009. Addendum to the Guide to the Ecological Systems and Vegetation Communities of the Delaware Estuary. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia. Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, Report #09-XX. 112 pp. PDE Report No. 09-XX Copyright © 2009 NatureServe COVER PHOTOS Top L: Overwash Dunes, photo from Delaware Natural Heritage Program Top R: Coastal Plain Muck Pondshore, photo by Kathleen Strakosch Walz, New Jersey Natural Heritage Program Bottom L: Dry Oak Hickory Forest, photo by Tony Davis, Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program Bottom R: Inland Dune and Ridge Forest/Woodland, Kathleen Strakosch Walz, New Jersey Natural Heritage Program ADDENDUM TO THE GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY Ery Largay Lesley Sneddon September 2009 Acknowledgements: This work was made possible through funding from the Delaware Estuary Program (EPA 320 Funding). Kristin Snow and Mary Russo from NatureServe provided essential data management services to develop this report and report format. Robert Coxe and Bill McAvoy from the Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Kathleen Strakosch Walz from the New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Tony Davis from the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Linda Kelly and Karl Anderson, independent botanists, provided ecological expertise, energy and insight. Mark Anderson and Charles Ferree from The Nature Conservancy developed ecological systems maps to accompany this work. Danielle Kreeger, Laura Whalen, and Martha-Maxwell Doyle from the Partnership for the Delaware Estuary provided support and guidance throughout this project. We thank everyone who helped us with this effort.
  • Freshwater Mussel Survey Protocol for the Southeastern Atlantic Slope and Northeastern Gulf Drainages in Florida and Georgia

    Freshwater Mussel Survey Protocol for the Southeastern Atlantic Slope and Northeastern Gulf Drainages in Florida and Georgia

    FRESHWATER MUSSEL SURVEY PROTOCOL FOR THE SOUTHEASTERN ATLANTIC SLOPE AND NORTHEASTERN GULF DRAINAGES IN FLORIDA AND GEORGIA United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services and Fisheries Resources Offices Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Environment and Location April 2008 Stacey Carlson, Alice Lawrence, Holly Blalock-Herod, Katie McCafferty, and Sandy Abbott ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For field assistance, we would like to thank Bill Birkhead (Columbus State University), Steve Butler (Auburn University), Tom Dickenson (The Catena Group), Ben Dickerson (FWS), Beau Dudley (FWS), Will Duncan (FWS), Matt Elliott (GDNR), Tracy Feltman (GDNR), Mike Gangloff (Auburn University), Robin Goodloe (FWS), Emily Hartfield (Auburn University), Will Heath, Debbie Henry (NRCS), Jeff Herod (FWS), Chris Hughes (Ecological Solutions), Mark Hughes (International Paper), Kelly Huizenga (FWS), Joy Jackson (FDEP), Trent Jett (Student Conservation Association), Stuart McGregor (Geological Survey of Alabama), Beau Marshall (URSCorp), Jason Meador (UGA), Jonathon Miller (Troy State University), Trina Morris (GDNR), Ana Papagni (Ecological Solutions), Megan Pilarczyk (Troy State University), Eric Prowell (FWS), Jon Ray (FDEP), Jimmy Rickard (FWS), Craig Robbins (GDNR), Tim Savidge (The Catena Group), Doug Shelton (Alabama Malacological Research Center), George Stanton (Columbus State University), Mike Stewart (Troy State University), Carson Stringfellow (Columbus State University), Teresa Thom (FWS), Warren Wagner (Environmental Services), Deb
  • This Proposed Action Is Located in Winston County, Alabama

    This Proposed Action Is Located in Winston County, Alabama

    U. S. Forest Service Bankhead National Forest Biological Evaluation of Proposed Salvage of Forestland Damaged by Hurricane Rita – 2006 Winston County, Alabama This proposed action is located in Winston County, Alabama. Contact: Glen D. Gaines District Ranger P. O. Box 278 Double Springs, Alabama 35553 Telephone 205-489-5111 FAX 205-489-3427 E-mail [email protected] Summary: Hurricane Rita came through Bankhead National Forest on September of 2005. Several areas within the Bankhead National Forest received damage from high winds associated with the storm. Stands of hardwood and pine trees were uprooted, broken, blown over and root sprung in the areas covered by this evaluation. The damaged, merchantable timber within these three areas is proposed for removal using a Salvage Timber sale. These areas vary in both cover type and age class but are primarily a mixture of mature pine and hardwoods. The salvage timber sale proposed for implementation under this proposal covers an estimated 97 acres over at least three sites. Sites have been proposed for salvage operations south of Fairview in Winston County (see attached map identified as Figure #1). As with any Forest Service activity, considerations of the potential impacts to environmental resources of this project were evaluated. Some of the protected species of plants and wildlife that could potentially be impacted by these activities include those plant communities found in upland areas, riparian areas, streams and those found on rock outcrops. No incidental take of any federally listed species is expected or anticipated with this proposed action. Proposed salvage sale areas were initially located, then reviewed by biological staff.
  • Environmental Assessment Project Name: Calhoun, Georgia 115-Kv TL Project Number: 2013-26

    Environmental Assessment Project Name: Calhoun, Georgia 115-Kv TL Project Number: 2013-26

    Document Type: EA-Administrative Record Index Field: Final Environmental Assessment Project Name: Calhoun, Georgia 115-kV TL Project Number: 2013-26 CALHOUN, GEORGIA – AREA POWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Gordon and Whitfield Counties, Georgia Prepared by: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Chattanooga, Tennessee April 2016 Direct Comments to: Anita E. Masters NEPA Program and Valley Projects Tennessee Valley Authority 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402 Phone: 423-751-8697 E-mail: [email protected] This page intentionally left blank Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Proposed Action – Improve Power Supply .............................................................................. 1 1.2 Need for the Proposed Action .................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Decisions to be Made ............................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Related Environmental Reviews or Documentation ................................................................ 5 1.5 Scoping Process and Public Involvement ................................................................................ 5 1.6 Issues to be Addressed............................................................................................................ 9 1.7 Necessary Federal Permits and Licenses