Appendix D BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION

Home , Calopogon multiflorus, Coreopsis nudata, Crataegus harbisonii, Crataegus triflora, Fallicambarus danielae, Fallicambarus gordoni

Appendix D

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION

I. INTRODUCTION

This Biological Evaluation (BE) documents analysis and potential for effects on threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) species resulting from making National Forests in Mississippi lands available for federal oil and gas leasing of all federally owned minerals.

There are 3 objectives of this BE: 1) to ensure that Forest Service actions do not contribute to loss of viability of any native or desired non-native plant or animal species, 2) to include concerns for sensitive species within the planning process, thereby reducing potential negative effects to these species, and 3) to ensure that activities will not cause a species to move toward federal listing. Such species are those whose viability is most likely to be put at risk from management actions.

This BE conforms with legal requirements set forth in Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (19 U.S.C. 1536 ©), and the direction given in Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2672, and to meet the biological evaluation standard in the 1989 ROD for Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain. As part of the NEPA decision making process, this evaluation provides information in sufficient detail to determine how proposed actions may affect any TES species. Consideration of the information contained within this BE will ensure that no species is placed in jeopardy by management decisions and actions.

II. CONSULTATION WITH THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Interagency cooperation between the Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding proposed, endangered, or threatened species is described in Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel reviewed the effects of this project on these species, and a signature indicating U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence is attached to this BE. The U.S. Forest Service will request further Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for all exceptions, modifications, and waivers to leasing stipulations.

III. AFFECTED AREAS AND PROPOSED MANAGEMENT ACTIONS

The proposed management action includes the entire National Forests in Mississippi as the affected area excluding Wilderness Areas, RARE II Further Study Areas, and those areas of NFS lands with privately-owned mineral rights (outstanding or reserved mineral rights) as long as the mineral rights remain privately-owned. About 10% of the NFsMS have privately-owned mineral rights. The National Forests in Mississippi cover 1.2 million acres of diverse natural resources and valued public lands. The six proclaimed national forests that make up the National Forests in Mississippi are administratively managed as seven ranger districts. Distributed across the State of Mississippi, National Forest System lands include an array of ecological systems ranging from fire-dependent stands of longleaf pines along the Gulf Coastal Plain to the upland oaks and hickories that dominate dry slopes and ridges in the northern portion of the state.

The federal oil and gas program has a two stage decision process: 1) authorize a lease, 2) authorize operations on a lease (authorize an Application for Permit to Drill (APD)). Each step requires NEPA analysis, and in the case of NFS lands, each step requires decisions by the FS and BLM.

The USDA Forest Service proposes to make all lands on NFsMS, except for designated Wilderness Areas and Sandy Creek RARE II Further Study Area, available for federal oil and gas leasing (first stage of the process). These lands, approximately 1.2 million acres, would be administratively available subject to 1) management direction in the NFsMS Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan), 2) oil and gas lease stipulations, and 3) the wide range of laws and regulations that require environmental protections for oil and gas exploration and development (such as Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, and Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Act of 1987). All lands are proposed to be available except for existing Wilderness.

The USDA Forest Service also proposes to authorize the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to offer these specific lands for oil and gas leasing. All lands authorized for lease would include stipulations in addition to the environmental requirements in the standard lease terms. Current oil and gas leases on the NFsMS will be managed under existing leases until the leases expire, terminate, or are relinquished, at which time the area would be available and offered as specific lands subject to the conditions above. All future mineral leases will require environmental analysis as stated in the National Environmental Policy Act prior to any exploration and/or development.

The FS and BLM decisions to be made based on this analysis apply to the federal decisions needed to offer NFS lands for oil and gas leasing, that is, the leasing stage or first stage of the two stage process. Before any operations can be conducted under a lease, the FS and BLM are required to review the proposed operations (APD) and conduct additional NEPA prior to authorizing ground disturbing operations.

The scope of this analysis also includes connected actions and cumulative actions. The analysis considers the lease operations ( second stage of the process ) that may result from the leasing (first stage of the process ) and estimates the type and amount of post- leasing activity (wells, roads, pipelines) that is reasonably foreseeable for the proposed action. The authorization of a lease grants rights to explore for and develop oil and gas within the terms and stipulations of the lease. However, these rights cannot be exercised until 1) the leaseholder submits an Application for Permit to Drill (APD) to the BLM, 2) the FS and BLM conduct a NEPA analysis, 3) the FS approves the Surface Use Plan of Operations in the APD, and 4) BLM approves the APD. These actions as well as the oil and gas exploration and development conducted under APDs are actions connected with the leasing decision to be made.

Depending on the level of oil and gas activity, the reasonable foreseeable development (RFD) for new leases estimates for the 15 year period a range of 421 to 2,297 acres of surface disturbance (an annual average in the range of 28 to 153 acres and 8 to 23 wells per year). The most probable level of activity is estimated to disturb about 1,072 acres (an

annual average of 71 acres and 16 wells per year). The acres of surface disturbance projected are less than one-quarter of one percent of the NFS lands on the NFsMS.

The proposed action also would include the effects from existing leases. The RFD for existing leases and new leases estimates for the 15 year period the range of 688 to 3,723 acres of surface disturbance (an annual average in the range of 46 to 248 acres and 13 to 38 wells per year). The most probable level of activity is estimated to disturb about 1,737 acres (an annual average of 116 acres and 25 wells per year). The acres of surface disturbance projected are less than one-third of one percent of the NFS lands on the NFsMS.

These expected actions are the basis of the environmental analysis from which the lands availability decision will be made. The decision on the lands that will be available for leasing, and the subsequent authorization of specific lands for leasing, are based upon analysis of the environmental effects.

Connected actions are being considered in this biological evaluation. In this context, connected actions include the post-leasing approval of APDs, Surface Use Plans of Operation, and issuance of Rights-of-Way authorizations for off-lease activities needed to support oil and gas exploration, development, and production on lease and off lease. These actions may authorize or result in other activities such as drilling, construction of production facilities, roads and pipelines as discussed in Reasonable Foreseeable Development Scenario (RFD) (Appendix C of EA).

The process for issuance of these site-specific permits for connected actions requires completion of additional NEPA analyses. Site-specific mitigation measures are prescribed following receipt of Application for Permit to Drill (APD) and during development of the Surface Use Plan of Operation (SUPO).

IV. SPECIES EVALUATED

On August 7, 2001, the Regional Forester for the Southern Region released a list of 843 “sensitive” species. NFsMS biologists reviewed information from the Mississippi Natural Heritage Program, species experts, scientific literature, and Forest Service records and employee observations to determine which of these 843 species occur or are likely to occur on the National Forests in Mississippi. Through this review process, NFsMS biologist identified a sub-set of the Southern Regional Forester’s sensitive species list for the Forest. The Regional Forester’s list of “sensitive” species for the National Forests in Mississippi (USDA 2001) and National Forests in Mississippi Threatened and Endangered Species List (USFWS 2006) were reviewed to devise a target list of TES species for the National Forests in Mississippi.

A review of existing information was conducted to further refine the list of potential sensitive species occurring in the project area. The following information sources were examined: (1) element occurrence records (EORs) from the Mississippi Natural Heritage Program (MSNHP) (2) Ranger District occurrence records and (3) Natureserve’s online

database (2009). Project records and Biological Evaluations for other management activities were also reviewed and included. There are 95 TES species that are confirmed, likely to occur, or have the potential to occur on the National Forests in Mississippi (Tables 1 and 2). It was concluded that all species listed should be evaluated since the proposed project area encompasses the entire Forest.

Table 1. T&E Species Associated with the National Forests in Mississippi T&E Species Known to occur on National Forests in Mississippi T&E Species Status District most likely to occur Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) Endangered Bienville, Chickasawhay, De Soto, Homochitto Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) Threatened Chickasawhay, De Soto Louisiana Black Bear (Ursus americanus luteolis) Threatened Delta, De Soto, Homochitto Mississippi Gopher Frog (Rano sevosa) Endangered De Soto Louisiana Quillwort (Isoetes louisianensis) Endangered Chickasawhay De Soto Pondberry (Lindera melissifolia) Endangered Delta Pallid Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) Endangered Delta T&E Species with potential to occur on National Forests in Mississippi . Gulf Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus De Sotoi) Threatened Chickasawhay, De Soto Mississippi Sandhill Crane (Grus Canadensis pula) Endangered De Soto Historic occurrence /potential on Chickasawhay and De Soto Ranger Districts. Species is Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) Endangered believed extirpated, however it is secretive and difficult to survey. Possible on Noxubee River on the Tombigbee Southern Clubshell (Pleurobema decisum) Endangered NF. Suitable habitat with known associates on the Price’s Potato Bean (Apios priceana) Threatened Trace unit, Tombigbee NF. Mitchell’s Satyr (Neonympha mitchellii) Endangered Holly Springs, Tombigbee

Table 2 National Forests in Mississippi Sensitive Species List* Confirmed or Potential by Unit Group Scientific Name Common Name De Chicka - Holly Tombig Bienville Soto Homochitto sawhay Delta Springs bee Amphibian Plethodon websteri Webster’s salamander Bird Aimophila aestivalis Bachman’s sparrow Bird Halieeatus leucocephalus Bald Eagle Crustacean Hobbseus attenuatus Pearl rivulet crayfish Camp Shelby burrowing Crustacean Fallicambarus gordoni crayfish Crustacean Procambarus barbiger Jackson Prairie crayfish Crustacean Procambarus penni Pearl blackwater crayfish Speckled burrowing Crustacean Fallicambarus danielae crayfish Crustacean Procambarus fitzpatricki Spiny-tailed crayfish Fish Alosa alabamae Alabama shad Fish Notropis melanostomus Blackmouth shiner Fish Fundulus euryzonus Broadstripe topminnow Fish Crystallaria asprella Crystal Darter Fish Noturus munitus Frecklebelly madtom Fish Percina lenticula Freckled darter Fish Noturus stigmosus Northern madtom Fish Percina aurora Pearl Darter Fish Etheostoma raneyi Yazoo darter Insect Atrytone arogos arogos Arogos skipper Insect Haploperla chukcho Chukcho stonefly Insect Alloperla natchez Natchez stonefly Mammal Corynorhinus rafinesquii Rafinesque’s big-eared bat Mammal Myotis austroriparius Southeastern Myotis Mollusk Obovaria unicolor Alabama hickorynut Mollusk Eliptio arca Alabama spike Mollusk Pleurobema beadleianum Mississippi pigtoe Mollusk Pleurobema rubrum Pyramid pigtoe Mollusk Quadrula cylindrica Rabbitsfoot Mollusk Anodontoides radiatus Rayed creek shell Mollusk Plethobasus cyphyus Sheepnose Mollusk Strophitus subvexus Southern Creek Mussel Nonvasc. Plant Trachyxiphium heteroicum Trachyxiphium moss Pithuophis melanoleucus Reptile lodingi Black pine snake Crataegus harbisonii (=C. Vascular Plant ashei) Ashe hawthorne Vascular Plant Carex baltzelli Baltzell’s sedge Vascular Plant Schisandra glabra Bay starvine Vascular Plant Silene ovata Blue Ridge catchfly Vascular Plant Lindera subcoriacea Bog spicebush Vascular Plant Marshallia trinervia Broadleaf Barbara’s buttons Vascular Plant Juglans cinerea Butternut Vascular Plant Tridens carolinianus Carolina fluffgrass Vascular Plant Pinguicula planifolia Chapman’s butterwort Chapman’s yellow-eyed Vascular Plant Xyris chapmanii grass Vascular Plant Pieris phyillyreifolia Climbing fetterbush Vascular Plant Desmodium ochroleucum Cream tick-trefoil Vascular Plant Sarracenia leucophylla Crimson Pitcher Plant Sarracenia rubra ssp. Vascular Plant Wherryi Wherry's pitcherplant Vascular Plant Carex decomposita Cypress-knee sedge Vascular Plant Botrychium jenmanii Dixie grapefern Drummond’s yelloweyed Vascular Plant Xyris drummondii grass Vascular Plant Trillium foetidissimum Fetid trillium Vascular Plant Macranthera flammea Flame flower Vascular Plant Uvularia floridana Florida bellwort Vascular Plant Coreopsis nudata Georgia tickseed 5

Table 2. National Forests in Mississippi Sensitive Species List*— Continued Group Scientific Name Common Name Confirmed or Potential by Unit De Chicka - Holly Tombig Bienville Soto Homochitto sawhay Delta Springs bee Pteroglossaspis ecristata Vascular Plant (=Eulophia ecristata) Giant Orchid Vascular Plant Spiranthes longilabris Giant spiral ladies’-tresses Vascular Plant Rhynchospora crinipes Hairy Peduncled beakrush Vascular Plant Xyris scabrifolia Harper’s yelloweyed grass Vascular Plant Polygala hookeri Hooker’s milkwort Vascular Plant Agrimonia incisa Incised agrimony Vascular Plant Rhynchospora macra Large beakrush Vascular Plant Trillium pusillum Least trillium Vascular Plant Myriophyllum laxum Loose watermilfoil Vascular Plant Amsonia ludoviciana Louisiana bluestar Vascular Plant Xyris louisianica Louisiana yelloweyed grass Vascular Plant Calopogon multiflorus Many-flower grass pink Vascular Plant Ruellia noctiflora Night flowering ruellia Vascular Plant Quercus oglethorpensis Oglethorpe oak Vascular Plant Rhododendron austrinum Orange azalea Vascular Plant Lachnocaulon digynum Pineland bogbutton Vascular Plant Carex impressinervia Ravine sedge Vascular Plant Agalinis pseudaphylla Shinner’s false foxglove Vascular Plant Cleistes bifaria Small spreading pogonia Vascular Plant Dryopteris X australis Small’s woodfern Vascular Plant Polygala leptostachys Slender spike milkwort Vascular Plant Pinguicula primuliflora Southern butterwort Vascular Plant Aristida simpliciflora Southern three-awn grass Vascular Plant Arabis patens Spreading rockcress Vascular Plant Linum macrocarpum Spring Hill flax Vascular Plant Crataegus triflora Three-flower hawthorne White-flowered Vascular Plant Penstemon tenuiflorus beardtongue Vascular Plant Platanthera integra Yellow fringeless orchid

V. DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS

There will be no direct effects on TES related to the leasing, (first stage), but preliminary effects analysis is mandated for second stage effects which are identified as indirect effects as a result of implementation, in particular, surface disturbance associated with drilling and production for oil and gas with the understanding that additional NEPA is required for each connected activity as individual leases and permits are issued.

Threatened and Endangered Species

Mississippi Gopher Frog The Mississippi gopher frog is listed as federally endangered and is distributed across three localities. The largest and best known population, of approximately 100 adult frogs, breed at a pond (Glen’s Pond) located in Harrison County, Mississippi on the De Soto Ranger District of De Soto National Forest. Mississippi gopher frogs were found in 2004 at two other pond sites one of which is owned by the state of Mississippi and the other on private land with the nearest recently found pond at least 20 miles from Glen’s Pond.

Glen’s pond is an ephemeral pond, typically dry during the summer. The frogs come to the pond to breed in the fall and winter in years when there has been adequate rainfall. The adults subsequently leave the pond after breeding. Metamorphosed juveniles leave the pond in the summer.

Gopher frog habitat includes both upland foraging sites with a subterranean refuge and isolated temporary wetland breeding sites embedded within the forested landscape. This species is associated with longleaf pine habitat and utilizes burrows of the Gopher Tortoise and small mammals as a refuge from heat and predators. Frequent fires are necessary to maintain the open canopy and groundcover vegetation in the aquatic and terrestrial habitats (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2001).

The greatest threat to the Mississippi gopher frog is its small population numbers that makes it extremely vulnerable to extinction from natural and man-made processes.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Mississippi Gopher Frogs. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest and down woody material) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Mississippi Gopher Frog would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. The development of oil and gas resources proposed in this action will have minimal cumulative effects on the Mississippi Gopher Frog because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing will be prohibited in the Proposed Glen’s Pond Zoological Area and the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Mississippi gopher frog, it is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Mississippi gopher frog. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Mississippi Sandhill Crane The Mississippi sandhill crane, the most endangered North American crane, is listed as federally endangered has declined in range where it once occurred along most of the northern Gulf of Mexico coast. A small population of 110-120 Mississippi sandhill cranes exists in southern Jackson County, MS from the Pascagoula River west to the county line and from 4 miles north of Vancleave, MS, south to Simmons Bayou which is located on the Mississippi Sandhill Crane Refuge (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1991).

Currently, there are no nests known to occur on the National Forests in Mississippi nor has the crane been sighted in recent years in the NFsMS.

The Mississippi sandhill crane inhabits pine savannahs as well as associated bayheads, swamps, and marshes. These areas are seasonally wet, open to semi-open herbaceous communities dominated by grasses and sedges with poorly formed shrubs and trees. Frequent growing season fires is required to maintain this habitat. This bird uses the wet pine savannas for nesting during the summer breeding season. The ground cover is composed of grasses, sedges, and an array of wet-acid-soil plants. Water at the nest sites may range from none to a foot deep. The nests vary from token piles of grass laid on top of grasses or sedges, to large structures constructed from local vegetation. The nests are built at ground level. The cranes feed on the breeding grounds in savannas, swamps, and open fields in the spring, summer, and fall. During the winter they often feed in the small cornfields and pastures in the northern part of their range (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1991).

Sandhill Crane do not exist on NFsMS lands, but if found in the future, nesting areas would be protected and buffered by at least 250 ft from their nesting area. Since their habitats are considered wetlands, the proposed action will have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects on the Sandhill Crane, thus it is my determination that the proposed action will have “no effect” on the Sandhill Crane. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on populations of this species.

Red-cockaded Woodpecker The Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is a medium-sized woodpecker adapted to the historic fire maintained mature pine forest ecosystems of the southeastern United States. The range of the red-cockaded woodpecker has been reduced to approximately 1 percent of its historic range. It is currently listed as endangered by the USFWS throughout its range. The RCW is native to the open, fire-maintained pine forests of the southeastern U.S. This species required large areas of mature pine forest with open understories to meet both foraging and nesting requirements. They excavate nesting and roosting cavities in live mature pines, 60 years old or older, and forage mainly in pines greater than 30 years of age within a half mile of the colony site and contiguous to the colony.

Species recovery is dependant on land management practices that mimic historical regimes that resulted in open stands of mature pine with understories dominated by forbs and grasses. Presently, 56% of all active Red-cockaded woodpecker groups (known as clusters) reside on U.S. Forest Service land (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003b). Thus, the Forest Service plays a crucial role in the conservation and recovery of the Red- cockaded woodpecker.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that recovery populations of the endangered Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) will be accomplished only within large expanses of mature and overmature pine forests managed for the special nesting and foraging habits of this species. Four districts within NFsMS have been identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Forest Service as support units for this

species. Two are primary core populations, acknowledged to harbor at least 350 potential breeding groups (PBGs) at the time of and after delisting – the Bienville National Forest and the Chickasawhay Ranger District of the De Soto National Forest. Two others are secondary core populations which will hold at least 250 PBGs at the time of and after delisting – the Homochitto National Forest and the De Soto Ranger District of the De Soto National Forest (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003b).

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Red-cockaded Woodpecker. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Red-cockaded Woodpecker would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal indirect and cumulative effects on the Red- cockaded Woodpecker because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas drilling will be prohibited within RCW clusters and the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Red-cockaded Woodpecker, it is my determination that the proposed action will “ not likely adversely affect” the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Gulf Sturgeon Gulf Sturgeon was once widely distributed throughout coastal rivers of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico primarily from the Mississippi River east to the Suwannee River. The Suwannee may support the only remaining population known to spawn successfully in the wild. This fish is anadramous, with adults migrating between fresh water spawning areas and salt water nonspawning areas. It may migrate as far as 140 miles upstream in early spring for spawning, with subadults and adults returning to the Gulf of Mexico in late fall, remaining there through winter (Heise et al. 2004). Young generally stay in the mouth of the river in winter and spring, where they spend the first 2 years of their lives. The substrate in spawning areas in freshwater (sometimes tidal) usually is hard clay, gravel, or shell, and may occur in brackish water. Spawning probably occurs in the natal river, with offspring returning to areas where they were born.

In Mississippi, the Gulf Sturgeon has been collected in the Pearl River and in the Pascagoula watersheds. Historically, a specimen was collected in the Strong River, a major tributary of the Pearl River, which does flow through the boundary of Bienville

National Forest. The closest recorded occurrence location to the Chickasawhay Ranger District of De Soto National Forest in suitable waterway corridors for adults is the confluence of the Leaf River and Chickasawhay River which are well below the forest boundary. While there is a possibility that juveniles may move up into smaller tributaries, no confirmed collections have occurred on the district. The largest creek with water year round that flows directly into the Chickasawhay River on the east side of the district is Big Creek, which is approximately 6 miles from the forest boundary to the river. Areas that contain Gulf Sturgeon critical habitat downstream of the De Soto Ranger District of De Soto National Forest includes: the Leaf River from MS Hwy 588 to its confluence with the Chickasawhay River, the Pascagoula River from the confluence with the Leaf and Chickasawhay Rivers to Pascagoula Bay, and Big Black Creek from the confluence Black and Red Creeks to the confluence with the Pascagoula River (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003a). There are several creeks on the De Soto Ranger District that drain into these areas.

Gulf sturgeon numbers declined due to overfishing throughout most of the 20th century. Dams or sills that are barriers to upstream fish migration during low-water conditions further exacerbated their decline. Other threats and potential threats included modifications to habitat associated with dredged material disposal, desnagging and other navigation maintenance activities; incidental take by commercial fishermen; poor water quality associated with contamination by pesticides, heavy metals, and industrial contaminants; aquaculture and incidental or accidental introductions; land uses that cause excessive sedimentation, loss of spawning habitat, and the Gulf sturgeon's slow growth and late maturation (U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission 1995). Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Gilf Sturgeon. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Gulf Sturgeon could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs) would protect Gulf Sturgeon habitat and the species. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Gulf Sturgeon would be insignificant. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic ecosystems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Gulf Sturgeon because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and

because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored. Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Gulf Sturgeon. It is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Gulf Sturgeon. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Pallid Sturgeon The endangered pallid sturgeon, with a historical range of over 3,500 miles in the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, has been described as one of the rarest fish in North America. This perceived rarity and status have placed the pallid at the center of major conflicts over water and river use in the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. At the time the pallid sturgeon was listed as an endangered species (1990), most information on the species came from the upper Missouri River (~800 historical capture records). The pallid sturgeon looks very similar to the shovelnose sturgeon and has only been recognized as a separate species since 1905 but, is believed to have been rare historically throughout its entire range. Consequently, records kept of total harvest prior to 1905 did not separate the two species. Today, it is essentially restricted to the Lower Yellow Stone River, the Missouri River, and the lower Mississippi River. In the state of Mississippi there have only been three reported captures of pallid sturgeon. Two were captured in the Mississippi River and one in the Big Sunflower River of Sharkey County near Delta National Forest. The later was caught on 23 November 1987, 12 miles northwest of Satartia, Mississippi (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1993a).

Pallid sturgeon habitat preferences are not well known, but it is believed that they prefer to dwell in sandy or rocky bottoms of large, turbid, free-flowing rivers. Pallid sturgeons feed on the bottom of the river and typically consume aquatic insects, crustaceans, mollusks, marine worms, fish and the eggs of other fish. They are generally long-lived, possibly living as long as 41 years. Males reach sexual maturity at 5 to 7 years. Females are believed to first spawn at 15 to 20 years. Very little is known about the reproductive behavior of this species. Spawning behavior is thought to occur April through mid-June, when water temperatures reach a range between 55-70 F (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007).

The pallid sturgeon was probably never a common species throughout its range, and is now considered one of the rarest inhabitants of the Mississippi and Missouri Basins. During the past several decades, populations of the pallid sturgeon have drastically declined. Over-harvesting may have been an initial cause of this. However, they are currently threatened primarily by habitat modifications from channelization, dam construction, and other navigation maintenance activities of major rivers. These changes destroy spawning areas, reduce food supply or access to food, and impede the sturgeon’s ability to move within the river. Dams decrease flow rates and produce cooler water temperatures, making rivers less desirable for pallid sturgeon. Sturgeon can live and grow in reservoirs, but they cannot reproduce there. Water pollution from rural and urban development along rivers may also be a problem for pallid sturgeons. A more recent

problem that will affect the future status of the pallid sturgeon is hybridization with shovelnose sturgeon, which is occurring likely because of a lack of spawning sites for both of these species (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2007).

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Pallid Sturgeon. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Pallid Sturgeon could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs) would protect Pallid Sturgeon habitat and the species. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Pallid Sturgeon would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic ecosystems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impact will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Pallid Sturgeon because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Pallid Sturgeon. It is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Pallid Sturgeon. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Louisiana Black Bear It is estimated that only 50 to 100 black bears still remain in the state. The range for Louisiana black bear described for Mississippi when the Louisiana black bear was listed as threatened in 1992 was the area lying west of the Mississippi river levee and south of Washington County (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995). Black bears, including those that are not Louisiana black bears, are protected in Mississippi due to similarity in appearance. Louisiana black bears in Mississippi, in general, are found in three areas within the state: the Gulf Coast, the Loess Bluffs of southwest Mississippi, and the Mississippi River Delta. These three areas include the De Soto, Homochitto, and Delta National Forests respectively. MDWFP compiles statewide sightings data for black bears in Mississippi. The largest numbers of reported sightings of the Louisiana black bear are located along the Mississippi River basin, mainly Issaquena and Sharkey counties. Over the last 5 years, the numbers of sightings of bears on or around Delta National Forest has

also increased and are believed to be due to habitat afforded by the Delta National Forest, the only bottomland hardwood national forest in the United States (Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks 2006).

Louisiana black bears exist primarily in bottomland hardwood and floodplain forest, although use of upland hardwood, mixed pine/hardwood and coastal Flatwoods and marshes has been documented. Normal forest management activities that support a sustained yield of timber products and wildlife are considered compatible with Louisiana black bear needs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1995). Black bears are adaptable and opportunistic, and can survive in the proximity of humans if afforded areas of retreat that ensure little chance of close contact with humans. Black bears eat a wide variety of foods, but the diet includes vegetable matter, including grasses, fruits, seeds, nuts and roots. Insects, fish, carrion and small rodents are also eaten. Blackberries, hardwoods that produce acorns and other hard mast, shrubs, fallen logs, and brushpiles are part of the black bear's habitat (Black Bear Conservation Committee 2005).

Black bears once common in Mississippi, have seen their habitat significantly reduced or eliminated throughout much of the state. The main reason for this reduction of habitat was the conversion of bottomland timber areas to agricultural farmlands. Habitat fragmentation, vehicle collisions, unrestricted harvests and illegal harvest are among the reasons for their reductions (Black Bear Conservation Committee 1997).

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Louisiana black bears. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest and down woody material) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Louisiana black bear would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Louisiana black bear because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Louisiana black bear. It is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Louisiana black bear. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Gopher Tortoise The gopher tortoise is a terrestrial turtle found in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, but is most abundant in northern central Florida and southern Georgia. Within this range, tortoises occur on the Ocala, Osceola and Apalachicola National Forests (Florida), the Conecuh National Forest (Alabama), and the De Soto National Forest (Mississippi). The "Western Population” of the gopher tortoise, which consists of those tortoises inhabiting the area west of the Mobile and Tombigbee Rivers in Alabama to southeastern Louisiana, has been listed as federally threatened (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1987). This includes all gopher tortoises occurring on the De Soto National Forest.

This species is native to the open, fire-maintained, pine forests of the southeastern U.S. Dry habitats ranging from pine-scrub oak to oak hammocks and coastal dunes are favored by this species. Favored soils are deep sands occurring on ridgetops and sideslopes in which tortoises can easily excavate burrows. On the De Soto NF, the majority of gopher tortoises are found in longleaf pine stands of various ages and condition classes or along road edges that occur in longleaf or other pine stands. However, gopher tortoise also inhabits sites with relatively tight, clayey soils. Other trees and shrubs tend to be xerophytic scrub oaks and associated species such as wiregrass, legumes, and blackberries with broadleaf grasses. In preferred habitats the canopy is relatively open allowing for development of the diverse herbaceous ground flora on which gopher tortoises feed, and sunny areas for nesting. The gopher tortoise digs an extensive burrow with adult burrows generally about 15-20 feet in length and 6-10 feet deep, but may be up to 47 feet long and 12 feet deep.

The primary threat to the gopher tortoise is habitat loss, either through direct means, such as type conversion to pine plantations, agriculture or development; or through indirect means, such as fire suppression that changes the understory rendering the habitat unsuitable for tortoises. Direct threats to habitat could possibly cause immediate mortality in tortoises or result in displacement of tortoises into unsuitable habitats. There is also evidence that past anthropogenic activities associated with widespread conversion of longleaf pine habitat to unsuitable pine plantations may still be impacting current gopher tortoise populations. Although gopher tortoise populations were not completely extirpated from these degraded lands, slow growth and late maturation caused by tortoises forced into unsuitable habitat may contribute to long-term declines (Aresco and Guyer 1999). Other threats include genetic bottlenecking through population isolation, take or harvest, disease, and predation.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on gopher tortoise. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective

Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the gopher tortoise would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the gopher tortoise because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the gopher tortoise. It is my determination that the proposed action will “ not likely adversely affect” the gopher tortoise. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Louisiana Quillwort Louisiana quillwort is a semi-aquatic, primitive, seedless plant related to ferns. Evergreen or semi-evergreen amphibious plants resembling small onions with linear, pointed leaves that at first are erect and eventually curve downward or recline; not producing flowers but instead two types of spores in cavities at the bases of -the underground portion of the leaves. Where the soil has been scoured and a fresh soil substrate is present, new plants can develop roots and continue growth (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996).

The Louisiana quillwort occurs predominantly on sandy soils and gravel bars on small to medium-sized streams. Plants are regularly inundated as much as 50 cm following rains, and may be inundated for long periods in wet seasons. It is predominately found in riparian woodland/bayhead forests of pine Flatwoods and upland longleaf pine (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996). This species is listed as federally endangered (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996) because of its restricted geographic range and small total population size. It occurs in the East Gulf Plain physiographic province in Louisiana and Mississippi. In Mississippi, Louisiana quillwort is found on De Soto National Forest in Wayne, Stone, Perry, Jones, Jackson, Harrison, Greene, Forrest, Hancock, and Pearl River Counties.

Natural threats to Louisiana Quillwort colonies are principally damming of free-flowing intermittent streams by beavers. Browse by marsh rabbits and whitetail deer occur as well as damage from rooting and wallowing by feral hogs, and some species of quillworts are eaten by waterfowl. More serious threats may come from sedimentation from land clearing activities on nearby uplands, soil-laden runoff from unpaved roads entering streams downstream from wetland crossings, ATV recreational traffic through wetlands, 4WD vehicular disturbance by hunters, logging activities, and unauthorized military traffic through quillwort colonies. In addition to threatening activities within the colonies themselves, various activities on adjacent uplands or upstream in the watershed can be potentially damaging to quillworts.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Louisiana quillwort. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Louisiana Quillwort could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs) would protect Louisiana Quillwort habitat and the species. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Louisiana Quillwort would be insignificant. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic ecosystems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impact will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Louisiana Quillwort because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have insignificant direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on the Louisiana Quillwort. It is my determination that the proposed action will “ not likely adversely affect” the Louisiana Quillwort. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Pondberry This endangered deciduous, aromatic shrub is found in the southeastern United States. At present, there are populations in Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, Arkansas, North Carolina, and South Carolina (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1993b). Although the recovery plan states that there are 36 extant populations (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1993b), new colonies have been discovered and some were found to be near known populations (as on the Delta National Forest) thus may be linked thus possible interbreeding could be present (Devall and Schiff 2001).

In Mississippi, pondberry is found in bottomland hardwood forests located in Sharkey, Bolivar, and Sunflower Counties with the majority of populations found on Delta National Forest. Pondberry is usually in or at the edges of low, wet depressions that are usually within or near more extensive ridge-bottom forest within the Lower Mississippi Bottomland and Floodplain Forest. The species grows in dense clumps of numerous, usually branched stems. Both male and female plants produce small yellow flowers. The fruit is a bright red berry. Leaves produce a strong, sassafras-like odor when crushed. Although the recovery plan (1993b) states that growth is vigorous if overstory canopy is

reduced, a recent study has shown that canopy conditions at levels below 40% sunlight are optimal for plant growth and should be considered in management efforts for the species (Aleric and Kirkman 2005).

Threats to the species include timber harvesting, wetland drainage, road construction and conversion of its habitat to agricultural use. A lack of seedling establishment may also be a reason for decline and/or lack of expansion. Most colonies have been found to be clonal and consist primarily of males (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1993b).

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on pondberry. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Pondberry could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Although this potential exists, probability is low because populations are marked and signed “do not enter” and riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs) would protect pondberry habitat and the species along with specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities which can be found in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the pondberry would be insignificant. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic ecosystems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impact will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the pondberry because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have insignificant direct, indirect, and cumulative effects on the pondberry. It is my determination that the proposed action will “ not likely adversely affect” the pondberry. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Eastern Indigo Snake The eastern indigo snake can occur in a wide variety of habitats but are most frequently found in longleaf pine/scrub oak communities. Gopher tortoises frequently inhabit such areas and eastern indigo are widely known to utilize tortoise burrows as refuge and winter denning. Recent studies suggest that Indigo Snakes move from the upland sites during the summer and utilize bottomlands along streams and agricultural areas. Diet includes turtles, frogs, lizards, small mammals and other snakes. Decline is attributed to loss of mature longleaf pine habitat (e.g. conversion to slash plantation, urbanization, etc.),

collection for pet trade, lost refugia due to decline in gopher tortoise populations, stump removal, habitat fragmentation and vehicle mortality.

There are no recent, confirmed records of eastern indigo snakes in Mississippi and it is thought to be functionally extinct in Mississippi (USFWS 2008) and they are not likely to occur on the National Forests in Mississippi even though suitable habitat is present. It is unlikely that the Eastern indigo snake occurs in the project area. If present in the proposed project areas, they are highly mobile and should avoid direct impacts from any activity associated with the proposed project.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Eastern indigo snake. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts if the snake exists on Forest Service lands. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest and down woody debris) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Eastern indigo snake would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Eastern indigo snake because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Eastern indigo snake. It is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Eastern indigo snake. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Southern clubshell Habitat requirements of this species include large volumes of water often found in the lower reaches of 3 rd , 4 th , and 5 th order streams with firm, stable gravel bottoms and large populations of fish to parasitize. Although southern clubshell has the potential to occur in the lower reaches of the Noxubee River within the Tombigbee National Forest (Haag and Warren 1995), this mussel has not been found on the TNF.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on the southern clubshell. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Southern clubshell could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs)

would protect southern clubshell habitat and the species. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the southern clubshell would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic ecosystems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the southern clubshell because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the southern clubshell. It is my determination that the proposed action will “ not likely adversely affect” the southern clubshell. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Price’s potato bean In northern Mississippi, Price’s potato bean has been found in areas of chalk bluffs (calcareous soils) adjacent to black prairie sometimes with a creek nearby. Examples are at the Nature Conservancy’s Coonewah Bluffs area near Tupelo and at a location immediately outside of Starkville near Highway 82. The highest potential habitat areas for the TNF would be on the Trace Unit where the Pontotoc Ridge formation has black prairie soils and calcareous outcrops occurring in various locations near Davis Lake and in the northeastern and southeastern portions of the Trace Unit.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Price’s potato bean. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts if the species exists on Forest Service lands. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Price’s potato bean would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Price’s potato

bean because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Price’s potato bean. It is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Price’s potato bean. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Mitchell’s Satyr This medium-sized, dark brown butterfly, with a distinctive series of orange-rimmed black eyespots on the lower surface of both wings, is in danger of extinction throughout all or most of its range. In recent years, small populations of satyrs also have been found in Virginia, Mississippi and Alabama. Genetic testing currently is under way at Michigan State University to determine whether these are the same species. The habitat requirements of Mitchell's satyr are poorly understood but they can be found in wetlands. Their biggest threat is habitat degradation.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on Mitchell’s satyr. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Mitchell's satyr habitat could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in Applications for Permit to Drill (APDs) would protect Mitchell's satyr habitat and the species. Specific guidance for protection of TES resources from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the Mitchell's satyr would be insignificant and no direct effects would occur. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic ecosystems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the Mitchell's satyr because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Mitchell's satyr. It is my determination that the proposed action will “not likely adversely affect” the Mitchell's satyr. The no action alternative will have “no effect” on this species.

Sensitive Species

After reviewing occurrence and project records, all 82 species on the National Forests in Mississippi sensitive species list were included in the affected species list and habitat associations identified (Appendix 1). This list is based on documented occurrences, habitat presence/suitability within or near the National Forest boundaries, and the geographic range of sensitive species gathered from these records. Affected species’ habitats were reviewed and grouped by “affected areas” to assess effects (Appendix 2). The following habitats were determined to be “affected areas”:

o Flatwoods, Savannahs, and Bogs o Pine Uplands and Sandhills o Swamps, Cypress Ponds, Pond/Lake Margins, River/Stream Banks, Seeps and Springs o Floodplain/Bottomland Hardwoods o Moist Rocky Woods/Outcrops o Aquatic o Prairie and Calcareous Soils o Mesic Slope

Flatwoods, Savannahs, and Bogs This “affected area” represents systems of open forests or woodlands occupying broad, sandy flatlands, open savannas, and open seepage communities with gentle, almost imperceptible slopes maintained by constant seepage zones and/or perched water tables dominated by grasses, sedges, orchids, and carnivorous plants.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on flatwoods, savannahs, and bogs. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Flatwoods, savannahs, and bogs and their associated sensitive species could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Although this potential exists, probability is low because riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in APDs would protect these habitats and their associated species along with protective measures which can be found in the Forest Plan, Chapter 2 of the EA, and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Cumulative effects may occur to Flatwoods, savannahs, and bogs and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects because of the relatively small amount of disturbance

foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the Flatwoods, savannahs, and bogs and associated species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Pine Uplands and Sandhills This “affected area” represents the pine dominated forests and woodlands occurring predominately on upland sites. Sandhills are characterized by deep, somewhat excessively and excessively, well drained loamy sands and sands supporting plants adapted to xeric (i.e., dry) conditions such as wiregrass, prickly pear cactus, and saw palmetto. Gopher tortoise burrows are often a distinctive feature of sandhill communities and provide shelter to many vertebrate and invertebrate species such as the black pine snake.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on pine uplands and sandhills. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest and down woody material) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of sensitive species from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the “affected area” and associated species because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the pine uplands and sandhills and associated species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Swamps, Cypress Ponds, Pond/Lake Margins, River/Stream Banks, Seeps and Springs This “affected area” represents a variety of seasonally and permanently flooded depression wetlands, freshwater marshes, ephemeral ponds, cypress dominated wetlands, seepage-influenced habitats where seepage flow is concentrated and resulting moisture conditions are saturated or inundated, and moist areas along ponds, lakes, rivers and streams.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on swamps, cypress ponds, pond/lake margins, river/stream banks, seeps and springs. Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Swamps, cypress ponds, pond/lake margins, river/stream banks, seeps and springs and their associated sensitive species could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Although this potential exists, probability is low because riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in APDs would protect these habitats and their associated species along with protective measures which can be found in the Forest Plan, Chapter 2 of the EA, and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Cumulative effects may occur to swamps, cypress ponds, pond/lake margins, river/stream banks, seeps and springs and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the swamps, cypress ponds, pond/lake margins, river/stream banks, seeps and springs and their associated sensitive species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Floodplain/Bottomland Hardwoods This “affected area” represents forests dominated by bottomland hardwoods with some areas occurring on alluvial soils in riparian areas.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on this “affected area.” Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Floodplains/bottomland hardwoods and their associated sensitive species could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest and down woody material) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Although this potential exists, probability is low because riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in APDs would protect these habitats and their associated species along with protective measures which can be found in the Forest Plan, Chapter 2 of the EA, and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the floodplains/bottomland hardwoods and their associated sensitive species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Moist Rocky Woods/Outcrops This “affected area” includes rock outcrops which are rare, localized features of the landscape which mainly occur along steep hill slopes, ravines or river channels where soils have eroded away. They are usually embedded in a larger ecological system and rely heavily on surrounding habitats for landscape scale functions and processes. Although of minor extent, the rock outcrops provide quality habitat for several species of animals and plants including Webster’s salamander and spreading rockcress.

these habitats and their associated species along with protective measures which can be found in the Forest Plan, Chapter 2 of the EA, and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the moist rocky woods/outcrops and their associated sensitive species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Aquatic This “affected area” consists of all lotic (flowing-water) aquatic systems and lentic (still, impounded, or otherwise non-flowing) aquatic systems on the NFsMS. These systems provide critical habitats for fish, mussels, invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians, and some insects. They occur on all ranger districts.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on this “affected area.” Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Aquatic systems and their associated sensitive species could be affected by sediment movement off-site from the developments, or from accidental spills of oil and gas materials. Although this potential exists, probability is low because riparian area, waterhole, wetland and pond/lake conditions of approval in APDs would protect these habitats and their associated species along with protective measures which can be found in the Forest Plan, Chapter 2 of the EA, and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Cumulative effects may occur to aquatic systems and their respective species as a result of increases in sediment run-off from well pads and roads; increases in contaminants from point and non-point sources; and potential changes in amounts of surface water if oil and gas drilling intercepts natural underground flow regimes. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on aquatic systems and their associated sensitive species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Prairie and Calcareous Soils This “affected area” represents open grassy areas dominated by characteristic prairie species found in Jackson Prairie and Blackbelt Calcareous Prairie.

Oil and gas leasing will have no direct effects on this “affected area.” Indirect effects as a result of implementation such as exploration and development (construction of roads, well pads, and pipeline corridors) in connection with leasing could have impacts. Habitat quality could be reduced in the vicinity of development activity due to loss of important structural components (canopy levels within the Forest and down woody material) and fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of sensitive species from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the cumulative impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the “affected area” and associated species because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on the prairie and calcareous soils and associated species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

Mesic Slope This “affected area” represents forests dominated by hardwoods occurring on steep slopes, bluffs, or sheltered ravines where fire is naturally rare.

fragmentation of habitat which could cause indirect effects. Specific guidance for protection of sensitive species from effects due to oil and gas activities or other activities is displayed in the Forest Plan, in the Protective Measures section of Chapter 2 of the EA and the Protective Measures Section of this document. Because of these protection measures and the fact that little disturbance is expected to occur as a result of implementing the proposed action, the overall impact to the “affected area” and its associated species would be insignificant. Considering the total amount of disturbance that has, is, and will be occurring within the forest, and which ultimately affects the status and distribution of animal species, the impacts will be minor. The development of oil and gas resources proposed will have minimal cumulative effects on the “affected area” and associated species because of the relatively small amount of disturbance foreseen, and because of the protective measures and stipulations which would be implemented and monitored.

Because oil and gas leasing protective measures will be implemented, the proposed action will have no direct effects and insignificant indirect and cumulative effects on mesic slope ecosystems and associated species. It is my determination that the proposed action “may impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend in federal listing or a loss of viability ”. The no action alternative will have “no impact” on this affected area and its associated species.

DETERMINATION OF EFFECTS SUMMARY Species Determination based on Determination based on the Proposed Action No Action

Red-cockaded Woodpecker NLAA NE Gopher Tortoise NLAA NE Louisiana Black Bear NLAA NE Mississippi Gopher Frog ) NLAA NE Louisiana Quillwort NLAA NE Pondberry NLAA NE Mississippi Sandhill Crane NE NE Gulf Sturgeon NLAA NE Pallid Sturgeon NLAA NE Eastern Indigo Snake NLAA NE Southern Clubshell NLAA NE Price’s Potato Bean NLAA NE Mitchell’s Satyr NLAA NE Flatwoods, Savannahs, and Bogs MII NI Pine Uplands and Sandhills MII NI Swamps, Cypress Ponds, Pond/Lake Margins, MII NI River/Stream Banks, Seeps and Springs Floodplain/Bottomland Hardwoods MII NI Moist Rocky Woods/Outcrops MII NI Aquatic MII NI Prairie and Calcareous Soils MII NI Mesic Slope MII NI Threatened and Endangered Species NE = No Effect, NLAA = Not likely to adversely affect, LAA = Likely to adversely affect Sensitive Species NI = No Impact MII = May impact individuals but not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability BI = Beneficial impact L = Likely to result in a trend to federal listing or loss of viability

VI. PROTECTIVE MEASURES

1. A Timing Stipulation restricting ground disturbing construction and drilling during the wet season from 11/30 thru 3/31 would be applied to leases depending on site specific conditions at the time the Application for Permit to Drill is filed, unless the operator can furnish construction measures to mitigate damages to resources.

2. A Controlled Surface Use Stipulation would be applied to all leases containing areas larger than a 40-acre legal subdivision of high erosion hazard, steep slopes, or high susceptibility to wetness. A Notice to Lessee would be applied to leases where the high erosion hazard, steep slopes, or high susceptibility to wetness are less than a 40-acre legal subdivision. Map locations for these areas are identified in Appendix B.

3. A No Surface Occupancy Stipulation would be applied to leases of Special Areas containing research, botanical, zoological, archaeological, or scenic areas, like the following examples of existing or proposed Special Areas:

National Forest Special Area Bienville Bienville Pines Scenic Area Harrell Prairie Botanical Area Proposed Singleton Prairie Botanical Area Proposed Nutmeg Hickory Research Natural Area (RNA)

Delta Proposed Cypress Bayou Botanical Area Green Ash-Sugarberry RNA Overcup Oak-Water Hickory RNA Red Gum RNA Dowling Bayou Archaeological Site

De Soto Proposed Laurel Oak RNA Tiger Creek Botanical Area Unmanaged Forty Scenic Area Proposed Glen's Pond Zoological Area Red Hills Botanical Area Proposed Ragland Hills RNA Paul B. Johnson State Park Proposed Railroad Creek Titi Botanical Area Proposed Little Florida Botanical Area Proposed Pitcher Plant Botanical Area Proposed Loblolly Bay RNA Black Creek Seed Orchard Erambert Seed Orchard Proposed Granny Creek Bay RNA Proposed Buttercup Flats Botanical Area Black Creek Corridor Black Creek Scenic River 28

Harrison RNA Harrison Experimental Forest Proposed Wyatt Hills Botanical Area

Holly Springs Tallahatchie Experimental Forest Proposed Lee Creek RNA Proposed LA-6 Botanical Area C122S Proposed LA-2 Botanical Area C117S17 USDA:NRCS Jamie L. Whitten Plant Materials Center

Homochitto Proposed Sandy Creek Botanical Area Sandy Creek RARE II Further Study Area Okhissa Lake and Recreation Area

Tombigbee Proposed Bogue Cully RNA Noxubee Crest RNA Proposed Shagbark Hickory Botanical Area Proposed Choctaw #4 Botanical Area Chuquatonchee Bluffs Botanical Area & RNA Owl Creek Mounds Archaeological Site Proposed Prairie Mound RNA

4. A Lease Notice regarding protection of Threatened and Endangered Species, and a Lease Notice regarding protection of wetlands would be applied to all leases (Appendix B of EA).

5. Effects on vegetation and other resources would be minimized by:

a.) locating activities and facilities, when possible, in areas that are least sensitive; b.) using existing roads, corridors, and openings to the extent possible; and c.) re-vegetating disturbed and abandoned areas with native species or non- invasive temporary cover.

6. To minimize the effects of ground disturbance, the well sites, and their associated roads and pipeline corridors, would be located in already disturbed areas whenever possible, preferably along existing roads, corridors and openings. Using already affected areas would not only decrease the direct effects to rare and native species, but would also decrease the potential introduction and spread of NNIS.

7. Standard lease terms and federal regulations allow the Forest Service and BLM to 1) control surface use of proposed activities in the lease area, and 2) prohibit surface occupancy on some areas within the lease area. For example, a proposed oil and gas facility, such as a road, can be relocated up to 200 meters without any stipulation. In addition, under a federal law such as the Endangered Species Act, the Forest Service at the APD stage can control or

prohibit surface occupancy of any size acreage, when justified, without a lease stipulation. The 200 meter provision would be utilized on a case by case basis after analysis indicates that resource damage can be eliminated or minimized by relocation.

8. A buffer of at least 250 feet would be the minimum allowance permitted for surface occupancy within riparian, wetlands, and floodplains. Again, this provision would be based on site-specific analysis rather than a standard operating procedure. In addition, Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to protect soil productivity and water quality from loss due to erosion and mass wasting would be used as appropriate based on site-specific analysis.

9. The BLM Onshore Oil and Gas Orders and BMPs would be applied to environmental protections relating to groundwater, erosion control, hazardous material and waste management, and other environmental matters.

VII. REFERENCES

Aleric, K. M. and L. K. Kirkman. 2005. Growth and photosynthetic responses of the federally endangered shrub, Lindera melissifolia (Lauraceae), to varied light environments. American Journal of Botany 92:682-689.

Aresco, M. J. and C. Guyer. 1999. Growth of the tortoise Gopherus polyphemus in slash pine populations of Southcentral Alabama. Herpetologica 55:499-506.

Black Bear Conservation Committee. 1997. Black Bear Restoration Plan. Black Bear Conservation Committee, Baton Rouge, LA. 133 pp.

Black Bear Conservation Committee. 2005. Black Bear Management Handbook. Black Bear Conservation Committee, Baton Rouge, LA. 88 pp.

Deval, M. and N. Schiff. 2001. Ecology and reproductive biology of the endangered pondberry, Lindera melissifolia (Walt) Blume. Natural Areas Journal 21:250- 258.

Haag, Wendell R. and Melvin L. Warren. 1995. Current Distributional Information on Freshwater Mussels (Family Unionidae) in Mississippi National Forests. General Technical Report SO-119. Southern Forest Experimental Station. USDA Forest Service. New Orleans, Louisiana.

Heise, R. J., W.T. Slack, S. T. Ross, and M. A. Dugo. 2004. Spawning and associated movement patterns of Gulf Sturgeon in the Pascagoula River Drainage, Mississippi. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 133:221-230.

Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks. 2006. Conservationa and Management of Black Bears in Mississippi. Jackson, MS. 54 pp.

NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: October 22, 2009).

USDA Forest Service. 1985. Land and Resource Management Plan (as amended, except amendment 16), National Forests in Mississippi.

USDA Forest Service. 2001. Regional forester's sensitive species list for national forest in Mississippi. 18 pp.

USDA Forest Service. 2003. National Forests in Mississippi PETS Plants Management Initiative DRAFT.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of threatened status of the gopher tortoise ( Gopherus polyphemus ). Federal Register 52 (129): 25376-25380.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Mississippi Sandhill Crane Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia 42 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993a. Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bismarck, North Dakota. 55 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993b. Recovery Plan for Pondberry (Lindera mellissifolia) . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 56 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Louisiana Black Bear Recovery Plan. Jackson, Mississippi. 52 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Recovery Plan for Louisiana quillwort ( Isoetes louisianensis Thieret). Atlanta, Georgia. 26 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; final rule to list the Mississippi gopher frog distinct population segment of dusky gopher frog as endangered. Federal Register 66: 62993-63002.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003a. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; designation of critical habitat for the Gulf Sturgeon. Federal Register 68: 13370- 13495.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003b. Recovery plan for the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis ): second revision. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA. 296 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Letter to National Forests in Mississippi with list of federally listed species by county.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Pallid Sturgeon ( Scaphirhynchus albus ) 5-Year review summary and evaluation. Billings, Montana. 120 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon couperi 5 Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Jackson, Mississippi. 30pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission. 1995. Gulf Sturgeon Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Georgia. 170 pp.

Appendix 1. Forest Service Sensitive Taxa Recorded From or Have the Potential to Occur on National Forests in Mississippi and Their Habitat Associations

Group Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Mature hardwood forest with rocky substrates and large Amphibian Webster’s Salamander Plethodon websteri amounts of coarse woody debris Mature longleaf pine communities with open midstory and relatively dense understory, also young pine Bird Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis woodlands with abundant ground cover. Bird Bald eagle Halieeatus leucocephalus In vicinity of l akes, rivers, marshes, and along sea coasts Camp Shelby burrowing Bogs on the De Soto Ranger District in Perry Co., MS. Crustacean crayfish Fallicambarus gordoni Occurs on some alkaline soil prairie remnants found on Crustacean Jackson Prairie crayfish Procambarus barbiger Bienville Ranger District. Inhabits permanent –or nearly so—streams with clear sandy bottoms. Limited range which is confined to drainages associated with the west bank of the Pearl River and streams associated with the north shore of Crustacean Pearl backwater crayfish Procambaru penni Lake Ponchatrain. Temporary lentic situations. Only known from Pearl Crustacean Pearl riverlet crayfish Hobbseus attenuatus River drainages Speckled burrowing Bogs and roadside ditches Crustacean crayfish Fallicambarus danielae Crustacean Spiny tail crayfish Procambarus fitzpatricki Bogs, roadside ditches and wet pastures Anadromous fish which occurs in Pascagoula River Fish Alabama shad Alosa alabamae drainage. Black Creek and Leaf River. Inhabit clean sand and gravel beds with swiftly flowing water in large rivers. Pascagoula, Pearl, and Tombigbee drainages in the Gulf of Mexico basin and from the Bayou Pierre and Homochitto River systems in the Fish Crystal Darter Crystallaria asperella Lower Mississippi drainage. Most inhabited streams are relatively cool (spring fed) and have plentiful vegetation and a stable substrate. Tributaries of the Tallahatchie and Yocona river Fish Yazoo Darter Etheostoma raneyi systems. Quiet pools and backwaters of creeks and small rivers; major river tributaries, not in small headwater tributaries. Fish Broadstripe topminnow Fundulus euryzonus Found in Amite and Tangipaho River systems. Relatively deep, clean water in backwater streams, oxbow lakes and floodplain ponds in Pascagoula River Fish Blackmouth shiner Notropis melanostomus drainage Fish Frecklebelly madtom Noturus munitus In medium to large rivers, in riffles, rapids, and runs. Typically in large creeks and small rivers with clear to turbid water and moderate current; avoids extremely silty situations; in areas with little cover other than tree Fish Northern madtom Noturus stigmosus limbs and debris. Inhabits the large tributaries and main channel habitats in Fish Pearl darter Percina aurora the Pascagoula River watershed. Fish Freckled darter Percina lenticula Moderate-fast current of small to medium rivers. Associated with small, clear, cold, and unpolluted Insect Natchez stonefly Alloperla natchez streams.

Insect Arogos skipper Atrytone arogos arogos Moist open savannahs and pitcher plant bogs

Group Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Associated with small, clear, cold, and unpolluted Insect Chukcho stonefly Haploperla chukcho streams. Roost under bridges and in large hollow trees. Utilize Mammal Rafinesque’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquil riparian areas for foraging Roost under bridges, in culverts and in hollow trees. Mammal Southeastern myotis Myotis austroriparius Utilize riparian areas for foraging Occurs in Red & Black Creek & Leaf Rv. near De Soto Mollusk Alabama hickorynut Obovaria unicolor NF boundary.

Mollusk Alabama spike Eliptio arca Occurs in Mobile River watershed Small to medium rivers with moderate to swift currents, and in smaller streams it inhabits bars or gravel and cobble close to the fast current. Has been found in the Mollusk Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrical Big Sunflower River. Generally considered a large-river species and usually associated with deep water (>2 m) with slight to swift currents and mud, sand, or gravel bottoms. Has been Mollusk Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus found in the Big Sunflower River.

Mollusk Mississippi pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum Known to occur in Leaf River and Black Creek. Inhabits mainly large rivers and tends to occupy riffles or shoals in relatively shallow water and coarse-particle substrates, along sand bars, or in deep water with mud and sand bottoms. Moderate to swift currents usually are associated with these habitats. Found in Big Black and Mollusk Pyramid pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum Yazoo River drainages.

Mollusk Rayed creekshell Anodontoides radiatus Small streams, not known to occur near the De Soto RD.

Mollusk Southern creek mussel Strophitus subvexus Drainages of Gulf Coast Uplands with well-drained sandy or sandy-loam soils, Reptile Black pine snake Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi with herbaceous understory. Nonvasc. Associated with decaying wood in springs and spring Plant Trachyxiphium heteroicum Trachyxiphium heteroicum seeps. Vascular Mesic-saturated pine Flatwoods and savannas. Plant Shinner's false foxglove Agalinis psuedaphylla Xeric upland pine and mixed pine-hardwood forests; Vascular pine plantations; disturbed open grassy areas; and Plant Incised groovebur Agrimonia incisa roadsides. Vascular Pine Flatwoods, riparian forests, and moist open Plant Louisiana bluestar Amsonia ludoviciana woodlands Vascular Moist rocky woods, limestone outcrops, and shady Plant Spreading rockcress Arabis patens riverbanks. Vascular Mesic-saturated pitcher plant savannas and open areas Plant along edges of bottomland hardwood-yellow pine Southern three-awn grass Aristida simpliciflora forests. Vascular Longleaf pine-mixed hardwoods, from ridges down to Plant moist lower slopes in transition zones to drains, open Dixie grapefern Botrichium jenmanii grassy places and lawns, and in old pastures. Vascular Pine savannahs and Flatwoods, pitcher plant bogs. Plant Many-flower grass pink Calopogon multiflorus Vascular Mesic hardwood slope forests above streams. Plant Baltzell's sedge Carex baltzelli Vascular Aquatic sedge occurring in permanently flooded timber, Plant Cypress-knee sedge Carex decomposita swamps and pond margins. Vascular Southern few fruited sedge Carex impressinervia Mesic hardwood slope forests and pediments along

Group Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Plant perennial streams. Vascular Open pine savannahs and Flatwoods, pitcher plant bogs, Plant Small spreading pogonia Cleistes bifaria upland-drain transition zones. Vascular Wet boggy places, shallow water, cypress ponds, wet Plant Georgia tickseed Coreopsis nudata pine savannahs, ditches. Vascular Found on Jackson Prairie Soils with sparse overstory. Plant Ashe Hawthorne Crataegus harbisonii (=C. ashei) Vascular Grows over limestone, in prairies, and in rich clay-loam Plant Three-flower hawthorne Crataegus triflora soils of hardwood and hardwood/pine forests. Vascular Occurs along roadsides, right-of-ways, prairies or Plant prairie-like openings, and in openings in mixed hardwood of temperate forests. Suitable soil conditions Cream tick-trefoil Desmodium ochroleucum are dry sandy loam soil, especially over limestone. Vascular Moist to wet bottomland forest. Plant Small's woodfern Dryopteris X australis Vascular Typically grows in rich mesophytic forests, lower slopes, Plant ravines, and various types of bottomland, including banks and terraces of creeks and streams, and floodplain forests Populations are often found on north-facing Butternut Juglans cinerea slopes. Vascular Saturated pitcher plant savannas, peaty bogs, and Plant Pineland bogbutton Lachnocaulon digynum pineland pond margins. Vascular Saturated-hydric quaking bogs, open areas of wet peaty Plant Bog spicebush Lindera subcoriacea evergreen shrub bogs, and bay swamp forests Vascular Saturated bogs and swamp forests. Plant Large fruited flax Linum macrocarpum Vascular Saturated pitcher plant savannas and bay swamp forests. Plant Flame flower Macranthera flammea Vascular Broad Leaf Barbara's Bottomlands, edges of streamside thickets, open areas Plant buttons Marshallia trinervia (roadsides, power-lines, etc.) in riverine wetlands Vascular Standing water in ditches, canals, lakes, ponds, sluggish Plant Loose watermilfoil Myriophyllum laxum streams, and sloughs. Vascular Dry open woods, cedar-glades, and calcareous barrens. Plant White-flower beardtongue Penstemon tenuiflorus Thin or sandy soil, usually calcareous. Vascular Cypress gumponds and swamps. Plant Climbing fetterbush Pieris phillyreifolia Vascular Saturated-hydric sphagnous margins of ponds and boggy Plant Chapman's butterwort Pinguicula planifolia pine Flatwoods. On hummocks, mossy buttresses, and stream banks in Vascular swamp forests, often in braided stream channels, and Plant Southern butterwort Pinguicula primuliflora ditches/margins of pitcher plant bogs. Soft, spongy hillside bogs, quaking bogs, peaty Vascular depressions in pitcher plant flats, very wet pine Plant Yellow fringeless orchid Platanthera integra Flatwoods and savannahs. Vascular Pitcher plant bogs, wet pine savannahs Also found in Plant Hooker's milkwort Polygala hookeri moist upland depressions Vascular Ruderal in dry to moist pinelands, sandhills, dry road Plant Slender spike milkwort Polygala leptostachys embankments, and open disturbed areas. Vascular Somewhat open area, with at least filtered sunlight and Plant Pteroglossaspis ecristata no dense shrub competition associated with pine Giant Orchid (=Eupholia ecristata) ecosystem types. Vascular Found in upper reaches of floodplains and in mixed Plant Oglethorpe Oak Quercus oglethorpensis pine-hardwood stands. Vascular Sandy alluvial terraces in hardwood bottomlands. Plant Orange azalea Rhododendron austrinum

Group Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Vascular Saturated-hydric shelving banks along small rivers and Plant Hairy peduncled beakrush Rhyncospora crinipes blackwater streams in peaty silt. Vascular Pitcher plant bogs, wet savannahs. Plant Large beakrush Rhyncospora macra Vascular Mesic-hydric pine savannas, acid bogs, and low Plant Night flowering ruellia Ruellia noctiflora meadows Vascular Pitcher plant bogs, wet pine savannahs. Plant Crimson pitcherplant Sarracenia leucophylla Vascular Pitcher plant bogs, wet pine savannahs. Plant Wherry's pitcherplant Sarracenia rubra ssp. Wherryi Vascular On steep slopes in beech-magnolia forest, and Plant Bay starvine Schisandra glabra occasionally in floodplains Vascular Submesic upper slopes of ravines and terraces in mixed Plant Ovate catchfly Silene ovata hardwood forests. Vascular Saturated pine savannas and Flatwoods, swamps, Plant Giant spiral orchid Spiranthes longilabris marshes, wet prairies, and sandy bogs. Vascular Dry to mesic open longleaf pine woodlands. Plant Carolina fluffgrass Tridens carolinianus Vascular Ravines, floodplains, low ground, in rich woods, even on Plant roadsides and shoulders, in silts, sandy-alluvium, and Fetid trillium Trillium foetidissimum loess soils. Vascular Moist rich woods, swamps, and bogs. Plant Least trillium Trillium pusillum Vascular Edges of swamp forest. Plant Florida bellwort Uvularia floridana Vascular Chapman's yellow-eyed Saturated-hydric quaking bogs in muck soils. Plant grass Xyris chapmanii Saturated-mesic pitcher plant savannas and pine Vascular Drummond's yellow-eyed Flatwoods in moist sandy-silty loam soils; road traces in Plant grass Xyris drummondii moist sandy-silty loam soils in pitcher plant savannas. Acidic, clay-based wet longleaf pine Savannahs, Vascular Louisiana yellow-eyed seasonally wet depressions, ditches, and roadsides Plant grass Xyris louisianica adjacent to wet savannahs. Vascular Saturated-hydric sites in sphagnous areas of pitcher plant Plant Harper's yellow-eyed grass Xyris scabrifolia savannas and sphagnous seepage bogs or slope seeps.

Appendix 2. Sensitive Species Grouped by “Affected Area” Floodplain/Bottomland Hardwoods Small's woodfern Dryopteris X australis Flatwoods, Savannahs, and Bogs Broad Leaf Barbara's buttons Marshallia trinervia Oglethorpe Oak Quercus oglethorpensis Shinner's false foxglove Agalinis psuedaphylla Orange azalea Rhododendron austrinum Louisiana bluestar Amsonia ludoviciana Fetid trillium Trillium foetidissimum Southern three-awn grass Aristida simpliciflora Rafinesque’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquil Many-flower grass pink Calopogon multiflorus Southeastern myotis Myotis austroriparius Small spreading pogonia Cleistes bifaria Butternut Juglans cinerea Pineland bogbutton Lachnocaulon digynum Bog spicebush Lindera subcoriacea Large fruited flax Linum macrocarpum Moist Rocky Woods/Outcrops Flame flower Macranthera flammea Webster’s Salamander Plethodon websteri Hooker's milkwort Polygala hookeri Spreading rockcress Arabis patens Large beakrush Rhyncospora macra Night flowering ruellia Ruellia noctiflora Aquatic Crimson pitcherplant Sarracenia leucophylla Pearl backwater crayfish Procambaru penni Wherry's pitcherplant Sarracenia rubra ssp. Pearl riverlet crayfish Hobbseus attenuatus Wherryi Alabama shad Alosa alabamae Giant spiral orchid Spiranthes longilabris Crystal Darter Crystallaria asperella Chapman's yellow-eyed grass Xyris chapmanii Yazoo Darter Etheostoma raneyi Drummond's yellow-eyed grass Xyris drummondii Broadstripe topminnow Fundulus euryzonus Louisiana yellow-eyed grass Xyris louisianica Blackmouth shiner Notropis melanostomus Harper's yellow-eyed grass Xyris scabrifolia Frecklebelly madtom Noturus munitus Camp Shelby burrowing Fallicambarus gordoni Northern madtom Noturus stigmosus crayfish Pearl darter Percina aurora Speckled burrowing crayfish Fallicambarus danielae Freckled darter Percina lenticula Spiny tail crayfish Procambarus fitzpatricki Alabama hickorynut Obovaria unicolor Arogos skipper Atrytone arogos arogos Alabama spike Eliptio arca

Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrical

Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus Pine Uplands and Sandhills Mississippi pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis Pyramid pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum Black pine snake Pituophis melanoleucus Rayed creekshell Anodontoides radiatus lodingi Southern creek mussel Strophitus subvexus Incised groovebur Agrimonia incisa Loose watermilfoil Myriophyllum laxum Slender spike milkwort Polygala leptostachys Natchez stonefly Alloperla natchez Giant Orchid Pteroglossaspis ecristata Chukcho stonefly Haploperla chukcho (=Eupholia ecristata) Carolina fluffgrass Tridens carolinianus Prairie and Calcareous Soils Jackson Prairie crayfish Procambarus barbiger Ashe Hawthorne Crataegus harbisonii (=C. Swamps, Cypress Ponds, Pond/Lake Margins, ashei) River/Stream Banks, Seeps and Springs Three-flower hawthorne Crataegus triflora Cream tick-trefoil Desmodium ochroleucum Bald eagle Halieeatus leucocephalus White-flower beardtongue Penstemon tenuiflorus Cypress-knee sedge Carex decomposita Georgia tickseed Coreopsis nudata Mesic Slope Climbing fetterbush Pieris phillyreifolia Dixie grapefern Botrichium jenmanii Chapman's butterwort Pinguicula planifolia Baltzell's sedge Carex baltzelli Yellow fringeless orchid Platanthera integra Southern few fruited sedge Carex impressinervia Least trillium Trillium pusillum Bay starvine Schisandra glabra Florida bellwort Uvularia floridana Ovate catchfly Silene ovata Trachyxiphium heteroicum Trachyxiphium heteroicum Southern butterwort Pinguicula primuliflora Hairy peduncled beakrush Rhyncospora crinipes