DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Department of the Interior

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Department of the Interior United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 512 490-0057 FAX 490-0974 December 3, 2004 Wayne A. Lea Chief, Regulatory Branch Fort Worth District, Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 17300 Fort Worth, Texas 76102-0300 Consultation No. 2-15-F-2004-0242 Dear Mr. Lea: This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion based on our review of the proposed water operations by the Colorado River Municipal Water District (District) on the Colorado and Concho rivers, located in Coleman, Concho, Coke, Tom Green, and Runnels counties. These actions are authorized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under Permit Number 197900225, Ivie (Stacy) Reservoir project, pursuant to compliance with the Clean Water Act. The District and the Corps have indicated, through letters dated September 10, 2004, and September 13, 2004, respectively, that an emergency condition affecting human health and safety exists with this action. We have considered the effects of the proposed action on the federally listed threatened Concho water snake (Nerodia harteri paucimaculata) in accordance with formal interagency consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The emergency consultation provisions are contained within 50 CFR section 402.05 of the Interagency Regulations. Your July 8, 2004, request for reinitiating formal consultation was received on July 12, 2004. You designated District as your non-federal representative. This biological opinion is based on information provided in agency reports, telephone conversations, field investigations, and other sources of information. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at the Austin Ecological Services Field Office. Consultation History Conference Report On February 21, 1986, the Corps requested the Service prepare a section 7 Conference Report for the Concho water snake under Section 7(a)(4) of the Act. That report, dated May 5, 1986, concurred with the Corps' finding that Stacy Dam was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Concho water snake (then proposed for listing) and was likely to adversely modify proposed critical habitat. The Concho water snake was listed as a threatened species on September 3, 1986. Critical habitat, proposed for the snake on January 22, 1986, was deferred until the economic data on the impact of that proposal could be gathered and assessed. Biological Opinion, USACE/CRMWD (2-15-F-2004-0242) December 3, 2004 Original biological opinion On December 19, 1986, the Service issued its biological opinion, finding the proposed action was likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Concho water snake and adversely modify the proposed critical habitat (Service 1986). The Federal action under consultation was the proposal by the Corps to issue a Section 404 (Clean Water Act) and Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) permit to the District for the construction and operation of the proposed Stacy Dam, O.H. Ivie Reservoir, and pump station on the Colorado River in Coleman, Concho, and Runnels counties, Texas. The biological opinion was the culmination of all the research that had been completed on the Concho water snake from 1979 through 1986. It provided detailed information on the snake, its known biology, distribution, and presented a comprehensive account of the potential threats plus viability of the species based upon a computer generated risk analysis model. The opinion provided ten (10) reasonable and prudent alternatives (RPAs) to be implemented by the District to avoid jeopardizing the snake. A commitment to carry out the RPAs was confirmed in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), signed March 1987, between the District, the Service, and the Corps. The Corps issued a Federal permit on April 8, 1987. Amendment No. 1 On March 7, 1989, the biological opinion was amended as a result of new information that had been collected. Some of the reasonable and prudent alternatives were modified to be consistent with the new available information. Amendment No. 2 The final rule designating critical habitat for Concho water snake was published June 29, 1989. On November 28, 1989, the biological opinion was amended to address critical habitat (adverse modification was determined) and removed some requirements to move snakes within reservoir basins. Amendment No. 3 On November 23, 1992, the biological opinion was amended (labeled Amendment #2) to include District plans to construct a water pipeline from the San Angelo pump station to the Midland/Odessa metropolitan area. The pipeline crossed the Concho River roughly 3 miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of the community of Paint Rock. Amendment No. 4 On December 21, 2000, the Service issued another amendment to the biological opinion (Consultation Number 2-15-00-F-0636). This amendment included an additional action by District to construct a pump station at Ivie Reservoir, a water pipeline to Abilene and a water treatment plant in Taylor County. Present Consultation The Corps requested the Service reinitiate consultation on this project by letter dated July 8, 2004. The Service responded by letter to the Corps dated July 16, 2004, to reinitiate formal 2 Biological Opinion, USACE/CRMWD (2-15-F-2004-0242) December 3, 2004 consultation (Consultation Number 2-15-F-2004-0242). District indicated to the Service by letter dated September 10, 2004, that an emergency situation existed due to a limited water supply endangering public health and safety to their municipal customers (450,000 people). The Corps concurred with the emergency consultation by email to the Service, dated September 13, 2004. The Interagency Regulations define an emergency as "situations involving acts of God, disasters, casualties, national defense or security emergencies, etc." The 10-year drought and the implementation of the conditions in the Service's December 19, 1986, biological opinion, were the basis for this emergency. District documented, by letter dated September 16, 2004, their intent to decrease reservoir releases from Spence and Ivie reservoirs as a result of the ongoing low water situation. District indicated the low water situation would be alleviated when both reservoirs reach 50 percent capacity (at the time Spence Reservoir was at 7 percent capacity and Ivie Reservoir was at 30 percent capacity). The Service concurred with the District emergency procedures by letter dated September 21, 2004. This consultation will apply once the current emergency has ended, in other words when both Spence and Ivie reservoirs are at, or above, 50 percent capacity in water storage or once the District, in discussions with the Corps and the Service, has determined that other factors have ended the emergency condition. The District will notify the Corps and the Service when either of the above conditions trigger the end of the emergency condition. This Revised Biological Opinion replaces the Biological Opinion dated December 19, 1986. When the emergency condition ends, the requirements of this Revised Biological Opinion will go into effect. BIOLOGICAL OPINION I. Description of Proposed Action Historical Operation. The District was authorized in 1949 by an Act of the 51st Legislature of the State of Texas for the purpose of providing water to the District's Member Cities of Odessa, Big Spring, and Snyder (see Figure 1). The District also has contracts to provide specified quantities of water to the Cities of Midland, San Angelo, Stanton, Robert Lee, Grandfalls, Pyote, and Abilene (through the West Central Texas Municipal Water District). A twelve-member Board of Directors governs the District. Each Member City appoints four Board members. Members serve on the Board for two-year terms. The District owns and operates three major surface water supplies on the Colorado River in west Texas. These are Lake J. B. Thomas, the E. V. Spence Reservoir, and the O. H. Ivie Reservoir. Together, the full combined capacity of these reservoirs is 1.247 million acre-feet (1,538 million cubic meters). Additionally, District operates four well fields for water supply. The Member Cities prior to 1949 developed two of these fields. The third field, located in Martin County, began delivering water in 1952. The fourth field, located in Ward County southwest of Monahans, can supply up to 21 million gallons (79,500 cubic meters) of water per day. The District primarily uses these well fields to supplement surface water deliveries during the summer months when municipal demand is high. 3 Biological Opinion, USACE/CRMWD (2-15-F-2004-0242) December 3, 2004 The District also operates a "diverted water" supply system. The primary function of this system is to prevent the highly mineralized low flow of the Colorado River and Beals Creek (a tributary of the Colorado River) from reaching the Spence Reservoir. The system delivers this highly mineralized water to oil companies for use in oil field secondary recovery operations. Figure 1. Member and customer cities of the District. Colorado River Municipal Water District Water Supply System. The District's water supply system includes three major reservoirs, three diversion works, numerous storage reservoirs, and more than 600 miles (966 kilometers) of transmission line. Lake J. B. Thomas is the oldest water supply reservoir. It was constructed in Borden and Scurry counties in 1952. The E. V. Spence Reservoir was completed in Coke County in 1969, and the O. H. Ivie Reservoir, the District's newest water supply reservoir, was finished in 1990. Five of the reservoirs are used to control and evaporate poor quality "diverted water". The Barber Reservoir and its diversion works, located near Colorado City, were built in 1969 to reduce the chloride pollution entering the Spence Reservoir downstream. Red Draw Reservoir was constructed in 1985 along with a diversion works on Beals Creek. Both the Natural Dam Lake improvements and the Sulphur Draw Reservoir were built following the 1986 spill of poor quality water from Natural Dam Lake.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Concho River & Upper Colorado River Basins
    CONCHO RIVER & UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASINS Brush Control Feasibility Study Prepared By The: UPPER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY In Cooperation with TEXAS STATE SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION BOARD and TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY December 2000 Cover Photograph: Rocky Creek located in Irion County, Texas following restoration though a comprehensive brush control program. Photo courtesy of United States Natural Resources Conservation Services. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The preparation of this report is the result of action by many state, federal and local entities and of many individuals dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of water resources within the State of Texas. This report is one of several funded by the Legislature of Texas to be implemented by the Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board during FYE2000. We commend the Texas Legislature for its’ extraordinary insight and boldness in moving ahead with planning that will be critical to water supply provision in future decades. In particular, the efforts of State Representative Robert Junell are especially recognized for his vision in coordinating the initial feasibility study conducted on the North Concho River and his support for studies of additional watershed basins in Texas. The following individuals are recognized as having made substantial contributions to this study and preparation of this report: Arlan Youngblood Ben Wilde Bill Tullos Billy Williams Bob Buckley Bob Jennings Bob Northcutt Brent Murphy C. Wade Clifton C.J. Robinson Carl Schlinke David Wilson Don Davis Eddy Spurgin Edwin Garner Gary Askins Tommy Morrison Woody Anderson Gary Grogan Howard Morrison J.P. Bach James Moore Jessie Whitlow Jimmy Sterling Joe Dean Weatherby Joe Funk John Anderson John Walker Johnny Oswald Keith Collom Kevin Spreen Kevin Wagner Lad Lithicum Lisa Barker Marjorie Mathis Max S.
    [Show full text]
  • Occasional Papers Museum of Texas Tech University Number 265 21 December 2006
    Occasional Papers Museum of Texas Tech University Number 265 21 December 2006 THE MAMMALS OF SAN ANGELO STATE PARK, TOM GREEN COUNTY, TEXAS JOEL G. BRANT, ROBERT C. DOWLER, AND CARLA E. EBELING ABSTRACT A survey of the mammalian fauna of San Angelo State Park, Tom Green County, Texas, began in April 1999 and includes data collected through November 2005. Thirty-one species of native mammals, representing 7 orders and 18 families, were verified at the state park. The mammalian fauna at the state park is composed primarily of western Edwards Plateau mam- mals, which include many Chihuahuan species, and mammals with widespread distributions. The most abundant species of small mammal at the state park were Neotoma micropus and Peromyscus maniculatus. The total trap success for this study (1.5%) was lower than expected and may reflect the drought conditions experienced in this area during the study period. Key words: Edwards Plateau, mammal survey, San Angelo State Park, Texas, Tom Green County, zoogeography INTRODUCTION San Angelo State Park (SASP) is located about tributaries, and the North Concho River with its asso- 10 km (6 mi.) west of San Angelo in Tom Green ciated tributaries and O. C. Fisher Reservoir (Fig. 1). County, Texas, and is situated around O. C. Fisher The North Concho River creates a dispersal corridor Reservoir and the North Concho River (Figs. 1 and for eastern species to move west into west-central 2). This area is an ecotonal zone at the junction of Texas. two major biotic regions in Texas, the Edwards Pla- teau (Balconian) to the south and the Rolling Plains to The soils of SASP are composed mostly of the north (Blair 1950).
    [Show full text]
  • San Angelo Project History
    San Angelo Project Jennifer E. Zuniga Bureau of Reclamation 1999 Table of Contents The San Angelo Project.........................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Project Authorization.....................................................4 Construction History .....................................................7 Post Construction History ................................................12 Settlement of Project Lands ...............................................16 Project Benefits and Use of Project Water ...................................16 Conclusion............................................................17 About the Author .............................................................17 Bibliography ................................................................18 Archival and Manuscript Collections .......................................18 Government Documents .................................................18 Articles...............................................................18 Books ................................................................18 Index ......................................................................19 1 The San Angelo Project The San Angelo Project is a multipurpose project in the Concho River Basin of west- central Texas. In a region historically known for intermittent droughts and floods, the project provides protection against both weather extremes.
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Term Trends in Streamflow from Semiarid Rangelands
    Global Change Biology (2008) 14, 1676–1689, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01578.x Long-term trends in streamflow from semiarid rangelands: uncovering drivers of change BRADFORD P. WILCOX*, YUN HUANG* andJOHN W. WALKERw *Ecosystem Science and Management, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA, wTexas AgriLIFE Research, San Angelo, TX 76901, USA Abstract In the last 100 years or so, desertification, degradation, and woody plant encroachment have altered huge tracts of semiarid rangelands. It is expected that the changes thus brought about significantly affect water balance in these regions; and in fact, at the headwater-catchment and smaller scales, such effects are reasonably well documented. For larger scales, however, there is surprisingly little documentation of hydrological change. In this paper, we evaluate the extent to which streamflow from large rangeland watersheds in central Texas has changed concurrent with the dramatic shifts in vegeta- tion cover (transition from pristine prairie to degraded grassland to woodland/savanna) that have taken place during the last century. Our study focused on the three watersheds that supply the major tributaries of the Concho River – those of the North Concho (3279 km2), the Middle Concho (5398 km2), and the South Concho (1070 km2). Using data from the period of record (1926–2005), we found that annual streamflow for the North Concho decreased by about 70% between 1960 and 2005. Not only did we find no downtrend in precipitation that might explain this reduced flow, we found no corre- sponding change in annual streamflow for the other two watersheds (which have more karst parent material).
    [Show full text]
  • Comment (2) of Ross Melinchuk on Behalf of Texas Parks and Wildlife
    HULY'VjVLCIVES ~7r~ ~~/2 November 5, 2010 ~NOV~F I Ac 'N- 8:5 3 UEAPAKU Life's better outside.: Ms. Cindy K. Bladey Chief, Rulemaking and Directives Branch R .HF\Ac:D Commissioners Office of Administration Mail Stop: TWB-05-BOIM Peter M.Holt Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission San Antonio Washington, DC 20555-0001 T. Dan Friedkin Vice-Chairman Houston RE: Proposed Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plants Units 3 and 4 Combined Mark E. Bivins Amarillo License Application Review, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Ralph H. Duggins (DEIS), Somervell and Hood Counties Fort Worth Antonio Falcon, M.D. Rio Grande City Dear Ms. Bladey: Karen J. Hixon San Antonio Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) received the August 6, 2010 Dan Allen Hughes, Jr. notification for issuance of and request for comment on the above-referenced Beeville DEIS. The notification was submitted in accordance with the National Margaret Martin Boerne Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Fish and S. Reed Morian Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934, as amended. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Houston (NRC) prepared the DEIS as part of its review of Luminant Generation Company Lee M. Bass Chairman-Emeritus LLC (Luminant) application for combined licenses for construction and operation Fort Worth of two new nuclear units at its existing Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP) site near Glen Rose, Texas. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Worth Carter R Smith District (USACE) is a cooperating agency in the DEIS so that the EIS can be used Executive Director to decide on issuance of permits pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List
    Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List Associated Tables The Texas Priority Species List……………..733 Introduction For many years the management and conservation of wildlife species has focused on the individual animal or population of interest. Many times, directing research and conservation plans toward individual species also benefits incidental species; sometimes entire ecosystems. Unfortunately, there are times when highly focused research and conservation of particular species can also harm peripheral species and their habitats. Management that is focused on entire habitats or communities would decrease the possibility of harming those incidental species or their habitats. A holistic management approach would potentially allow species within a community to take care of themselves (Savory 1988); however, the study of particular species of concern is still necessary due to the smaller scale at which individuals are studied. Until we understand all of the parts that make up the whole can we then focus more on the habitat management approach to conservation. Species Conservation In terms of species diversity, Texas is considered the second most diverse state in the Union. Texas has the highest number of bird and reptile taxon and is second in number of plants and mammals in the United States (NatureServe 2002). There have been over 600 species of bird that have been identified within the borders of Texas and 184 known species of mammal, including marine species that inhabit Texas’ coastal waters (Schmidly 2004). It is estimated that approximately 29,000 species of insect in Texas take up residence in every conceivable habitat, including rocky outcroppings, pitcher plant bogs, and on individual species of plants (Riley in publication).
    [Show full text]
  • Camp Elizabeth, Sterling County, Texas
    Camp Elizabeth, Sterling County, Texas: . An Archaeological and Archival Investigation of a u.s. Army Subpost, and Evidence Supporting Its Use by the Military and "Buffalo Soldiers 11 Maureen Brown, Jose E. Zapata, and Bruce K. Moses with contributions by Anne A. Fox, C. Britt Bousman, I. Waymle Cox, and Cynthia L. Tennis Sponsored by: San Angelo District Texas Department of Transportation Archaeological Survey Report, No. 267 Center for Archaeological Research The University of Texas at San Antonio 1998 Camp Elizabeth, Sterling County, Texas: An Archaeological and Archival Investigation of a U.S. Army Subpost, and Evidence Supporting Its Use by the Military and "Buffalo Soldiers" Maureen Brown, Jose E. Zapata, and Bruce K. Moses with contributions by Anne A. Fox, C. Britt Bousman, L Waynne Cox, and Cynthia L. Tennis Robert J. Hard and C. Britt Bousman Principal Investigators Texas Antiquities Permit No. 1866 Archaeological Survey Report, No. 267 Center for Archaeological Research The University of Texas at San Antonio ©copyright 1998 The following information is provided in accordance with the General Rules of Practice and Procedure, Chapter 41.11 (Investigative Reports), Texas Antiquities Committee: 1. Type of investigation: Archaeological and archival mitigation 2. Project name: Camp Elizabeth 3. County: Sterling 4. Principal investigator: Robert J. Hard and C. Britt Bousman 5. Name and location of sponsoring agency: Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, Texas 78701 6. Texas Antiquities Permit No.: 1866 7. Published by the Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio, 6900 N. Loop 1604 W., San Antonio, Texas 78249-0658, 1998 A list of publications offered by the Center for Archaeological Research is available.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Assessment US 377 Relief Route
    Final Environmental Assessment US 377 Relief Route CSJs: 0080-11-001 and 0080-12-001 City of Cresson, Hood and Johnson Counties, Texas Fort Worth District Date: August 2017 The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried-out by TxDOT pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated December 16, 2014, and executed by FHWA and TxDOT. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 A. Need and Purpose for the Proposed Project .............................................................................. 2 1. Need .......................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Purpose ..................................................................................................................................... 4 II. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING FACILITY ........................................................................................ 5 A. Existing Facility Design / Conditions ........................................................................................... 5 B. Land Use ....................................................................................................................................... 5 III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles & Crocodilians
    STANDARD COMMON AND CURRENT SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR NORTH AMERICAN AMPHIBIANS, TURTLES, REPTILES & CROCODILIANS Sixth Edition Joseph T. Collins TraVis W. TAGGart The Center for North American Herpetology THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY www.cnah.org Joseph T. Collins, Director The Center for North American Herpetology 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 (785) 393-4757 Single copies of this publication are available gratis from The Center for North American Herpetology, 1502 Medinah Circle, Lawrence, Kansas 66047 USA; within the United States and Canada, please send a self-addressed 7x10-inch manila envelope with sufficient U.S. first class postage affixed for four ounces. Individuals outside the United States and Canada should contact CNAH via email before requesting a copy. A list of previous editions of this title is printed on the inside back cover. THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY BO A RD OF DIRE ct ORS Joseph T. Collins Suzanne L. Collins Kansas Biological Survey The Center for The University of Kansas North American Herpetology 2021 Constant Avenue 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Kelly J. Irwin James L. Knight Arkansas Game & Fish South Carolina Commission State Museum 915 East Sevier Street P. O. Box 100107 Benton, Arkansas 72015 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Walter E. Meshaka, Jr. Robert Powell Section of Zoology Department of Biology State Museum of Pennsylvania Avila University 300 North Street 11901 Wornall Road Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Kansas City, Missouri 64145 Travis W. Taggart Sternberg Museum of Natural History Fort Hays State University 3000 Sternberg Drive Hays, Kansas 67601 Front cover images of an Eastern Collared Lizard (Crotaphytus collaris) and Cajun Chorus Frog (Pseudacris fouquettei) by Suzanne L.
    [Show full text]
  • North Concho River Improvement/Bank Stabilization Project
    North Concho River Improvement/Bank Stabilization Project FINAL REPORT Upper Colorado River Authority San Angelo, Texas 76903 Funding Source: Nonpoint Source Program CWA §319(h) Prepared in cooperation with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contract 582.12.10082 Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 2 Project Significance and Background .............................................................................................. 2 Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Construction Methods ................................................................................................................ 4 Sediment Load Reduction Volumetric Calculation Methods ...................................................... 4 Bacteria Load Reduction Estimation Methods ............................................................................ 4 NO3-N and P Load Reduction Estimation Methods..................................................................... 5 Potential Ancillary Improvements in DO ..................................................................................... 5 Results and Observations ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Applicant Information Project Name and Location
    2017 NOMINATION FORM: TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES SET-ASIDE PROGRAM Additional program information can be found in TxDOT's 2017 Transportation Set-Aside Program Guide http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/public-transportation/bicycle-pedestrian.html NOTE: All attachments must be submitted in letter-sized (8.5" x 11") format. APPLICANT INFORMATION 1. Project Sponsor Name (Only one entity can act as project sponsor) 2. Jurisdiction Population City of San Angelo 93,200 (Based on 2010 US Census) 3. Type of Organization/Agency/Authority (Select from dropdown below) Small Urban Enabling legislation/ legislative authority for Project Sponsor (if applicable): 4. Project Sponsor Contact Information (Authorized representative) Contact Person: Rick Weise Title: Assistant City Manager Mailing Address: 72 W. College Ave Physical Address: 72 W. College Ave. City: San Angelo City: San Angelo Zip Code: 76903 Zip Code: 76903 Contact's Phone: 325-657-4241 Entity's Main Phone: 325-657-4241 Email: [email protected] Website: www.cosatx.us PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION 5. Project Name Downtown San Angelo Connectivity Project 6. Eligible Project Activity (Select the activity from the dropdown list that best describes the project) 7. Project Location Information TxDOT District: Texas County: Project location: Describe using street name, adjacent waterway, or other identifying landmark. On or adj. to: Chadbourne Street From: W. Beauregard Avenue (ex. 1st Avenue) (ex. Main Street) To: Concho River (ex. 3rd Avenue) If project involves multiple locations, describe primary location below (latitude/longitude) and provide total project length. Create a complete list of all improvement locations using the descriptive limits and beginning and ending latitude/longitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Ecosystems 3 Chapter 1
    TERRESTRIAL Chapter 1: Terrestrial Ecosystems 3 Chapter 1: What are the history, Terrestrial status, and projected future of terrestrial wildlife habitat types and Ecosystems species in the South? Margaret Katherine Trani (Griep) Southern Region, USDA Forest Service ■ Since presettlement, there have insect infestation, advanced age, Key Findings been significant losses of community climatic processes, and distur- biodiversity in the South (Noss and bance influence mast yields. ■ There are 132 terrestrial vertebrate others 1995). Fourteen communities ■ The ranges of many species species that are considered to be are critically endangered (greater cross both public and private of conservation concern in the South than 98-percent decline), 25 are land ownerships. The numbers of by State Natural Heritage agencies. endangered (85- to 98-percent imperiled and endangered species Of the species that warrant conser- decline), and 11 are threatened inhabiting private land indicate its vation focus, 3 percent are classed (70- to 84-percent decline). Common critical importance for conservation. factors contributing to the loss of as critically imperiled, 3 percent ■ The significance of land owner- as imperiled, and 6 percent as these communities include urban development, fire suppression, ship in the South for the provision vulnerable. Eighty-six percent of species habitat cannot be of terrestrial vertebrate species exotic species invasion, and recreational activity. overstated. Each major landowner are designated as relatively secure. has an important role to play in ■ The remaining 2 percent are either The term “fragmentation” the conservation of species and known or presumed to be extinct, references the insularization of their habitats. or have questionable status. habitat on a landscape.
    [Show full text]