DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Departhient of the Interior 200? OCT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Departhient of the Interior 200? OCT @2/82 FS PAGE 3øi2@07 @S47 7757268111 CALIENTE United States Departhient of the Interior BUREAU Of LAND MANAGEMENT Ely Field Oftce I-1C33 Bo 33500 (702 N. tndstria Way) TAKE PRIDE. Ely. Nevada 893(11 -940$ INAMERICA http://www.hlm.gov/n’/sVeii.html RecelvQd In Reply Refer to: So. Nevada Field Offlc JUL 2 ‘ 200? 6840(P) (NV-045.07) OCT 122007 Las Vegas, 1W Memorandum To: Assistant field Supervisor, U.S. fish. an Wildlife Service, Southern Nevada. Fish and. Wildlife Office, Las Vegas, NV From: Field Manager. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Fly Fie)d Office, NV Subject: Fornal Section 7 Consultation and Request for Concurrence, Southwest intcrtie Project (SWIP) — Southern Portion The BLM Ely requests formal section 7 consultation under the Endangered Species Act on the proposcd $WIP— Southern Portion due tø possible adverse effects to the Mojave population of lesert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii). The BLM Ely Field Office has prepared a BioJogical Assessment (BA) to update the original BA for the SWIP that was prepared in November, 1993, Please find attached a BA analyzing the potential Impacts of the project to Desert Tortoise. The BA includes analysis on potential impacts to the endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidon fratfli extirnus) and threatened Bald Eagle (Haliacetus leucocephalus) and a finding of “may affect, not likely to adversely affect” for these two species. Thc BLM requests concuiTence with this finding. A discuss n of these species and their associated habitats is included in the attached BA. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Wildlife Biologist Alicia Styles at 775-726-8 128. —- -—x: Attachments: Biological Assessment cc: Elroy Masters. T&E Species Coordinator. Nevada State Office FINAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE SOUTHWEST INTERTIE PROJECT SOUTHERN PORTION Prepared for and under the Direction of: Bureau of Land Management Prepared by: EPG, Inc. On Behalf of: Great Basin Transmission, LLC July 2, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 .0 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Project Description 1 1.3 Prior Studies and Section 7 Consultation 3 1.4 Data Collection 3 2.0 Study Area and Environmental Setting 5 2.1 Physiographic Province 5 2.2 Biotic Communities 5 3.0 Species Accounts 7 3.1 Bald Eagle 7 3.2 Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 9 3.3 Desert Tortoise 14 3.4 Desert Tortoise Habitat 18 3.5 Results of the 2006 Desert Tortoise Surveys 20 4.0 Unmitigated Impacts 24 4.1 Introduction 24 4.2 Bald Eagle 24 4.3 Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 25 4.4 Desert Tortoise 25 4.5 Desert Tortoise Critical Habitat 26 5.0 Mitigation Planning 28 5.1 Mitigation Measures Specifically for the Mojave Desert Tortoise 30 6.0 Cumulative Effects 35 6.1 Introduction 35 6.2 Bald Eagle and Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 35 6.3 Desert Tortoise Mojave Population 35 7.0 Habitat Compensation for the Desert Tortoise 37 8.0 Determination of Effects 38 8.1 Bald Eagle 38 8.2 Southwestern Willow Flycatcher 38 8.3 Mojave Desert Tortoise 38 8.4 Desert Tortoise Critical Habitat 39 9.0 References 40 Final Biological Assessment EPG SWIP — Southern Portion July 2, 2007 Table of Contents (continued) Appendix A - Additional Special Status Species Evaluations Introduction A- 1 Justification for Determinations A- 2 Other Special Status Species Evaluation A-i 1 Mammals A-il Birds A-19 Reptiles A-37 Amphibians A-40 Fish A-41 Invertebrates A-45 Plants A-49 References A-57 EPG Final Biological Assessment ii July 2, 2007 SWIP — Southern Portion LIST OF TABLES 1 Goals and Criteria for Three Categories of Desert Tortoise Habitat Areas 19 2 Desert Tortoise and Sign Thereof Observed on Triangle Transects Along the Project Right-of-Way 22 3 Disturbance Within Critical and Non-Critical Desert Tortoise Habitat Area 26 4 Generic Mitigation Measures Relevant to Species Addressed in this BA 28 5 Selective Mitigation Measures Relevant to Species Addressed in this BA 29 LIST OF FIGURES 1 Project Location 2 2 Desert Tortoise Critical Habitat 21 Final Biological Assessment EPG SWIP — Southern Portion July 2, 2007 -----.—-—- SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.7 PURPOSE This Biological Assessment (BA) has been prepared to assess the potential impacts of construction, operation, and maintenance of the southern portion of the Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP) on the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax trailll extimus), and Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizil; Mojave Desert population) including Desert Tortoise Critical Habitat. This BA identifies measures to mitigate and compensate for potential impacts to these species, and is intended to provide the information needed by the U.S. Fish and WHdlife Service (USFWS) to conduct formal consultation and issue a Biological Opinion (BC) in accordance with requirements of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (1973, as amended). Also included in Appendix A of this document is a brief discussion of other special status species that possess a level of protection or concern in the state of Nevada and could potentially be found in the project area. These are species listed by the Nevada State Office of the Bureau of Land Management fBLM) as sensitive species, and species monitored by the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), and were included in the BA at the request of BLM and NDOW. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Great Basin Transmission, LLC (Great Basin) proposes to construct, operate, and maintain a ) single-circuit, overhead 500 kilovolt (kV) transmission line between the Harry Allen Substation, located in Dry Lake, Nevada, to a point approximately 3 miles west of the proposed White Pine Energy Station (WPES) located approximately 34 miles north of Ely, Nevada (Figure 1). Located in White Pine, Nye, Lincoln, and Clark counties, the transmission line (approximately 264 miles in length) will consist of self-supporting, steel-lattice, and steel-pole H-frame structures placed approximately 1,200 to 1,500 feet apart. The SWIP will also include a new substation located approximately 18 miles northwest of Ely (Thirtymile Substation), where it will interconnect with the existing 345kV Falcon to Gonder line. The transmission line and associated facilities comprise the southern portion of the Midpoint to Dry Lake segment of the SWIP, which was approved by the BLM in 1994. The SWIP right-of- way was granted by the BLM to Idaho Power Company (IPC), when the project was approved in 1994, and reissued (extended) in 1999 and 2004. Great Basin has an option to purchase the SWIP (including the BLM right-of-way) from IPC, and has been authorized by IPC to complete the project permitting process, including obtaining a notice to proceed from the BLM. The transmission line will create a connection between existing electrical grids and service areas in southern Nevada (Nevada Power Company) and northern Nevada (Sierra Pacific), and will contribute to increased transmission reliability and sharing of the electrical supplies between the regions of the West. It also will provide a means to transmit power from the proposed WPES, and possibly from other power generation projects (e.g., proposed wind energy projects north of Ely) to market. Final Biological Assessment EPG 7 SWIP — Southern Portion July 2, 2007 t3 PRIOR STUDIES AND SECTION 7 CONSULTATION The BLM prepared an environmental impact statement for the SWIP—the Southwest Intertie Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (SWIP EIS) and Proposed Plan Amendment (July 1993)—prior to approval of the SWIP right-of-way in 1994. A BA (Dames & Moore/IPC 1993) and two BOs (FWS, March 23, 1994, File No. 1-5-94-F-28R; FWS, May 12, 1993, File No. 1-5-93-F-91) also were prepared in connection with the SWIP EIS and right-of-way approval. The conclusion of the BOs was that the SWIP would adversely affect the threatened Mojave population of the Desert Tortoise but would not jeopardize its continued existence, in light of specified reasonable and prudent measures to minimize take. An incidental take statement was issued for Desert Tortoise in connection with the BOs. The BOs also concurred with the BLM’s conclusion that the SWIP was not likely to adversely affect the endangered Bald Eagle or the Peregrine Falcon. The BLM and USFWS have determined that a new BA (this BA) and a new BO should be prepared for the southern portion of the SWIP, in connection with ongoing efforts by Great Basin and the BLM to finalize the construction, operation, and maintenance plan (COM Plan) for that segment prior to final approval and construction. 1.4 DATA COLLECTION Biological data were initially collected during the biological inventory for the SWIP EIS. Data sources for special status species included scientific literature, existing EPG files, and agency contacts. Biological information was collected within 2-mile-wide study corridors, centered on J the proposed alignments of the various alternative study corridors for the entire 500-mile SWIP project from the Twin Falls area (Midpoint Substation) in Idaho, to Dry Lake, Nevada. In connection with these earlier studies, agency personnel were asked to provide information on potential or known occurrences of sensitive wildlife and plant species, as well as habitats of special concern within the study corridors. Agencies that provided biological information included BLM, Forest Service, USFWS, NDOW, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and Idaho, Nevada, and Utah Natural Heritage programs. No site-specific field-survey work was conducted as part of the biological inventory nor were any such studies conducted for the 1992 BA. The Mojave Desert Tortoise, which had been listed as threatened in 1990, was identified as an important species that occupies habitat within the study corridor; therefore, specific data on distribution and abundance was obtained from the BLM’s Las Vegas District Office, including maps showing the BLM’s Desert Tortoise Habitat Areas for Nevada including the current existing Coyote Springs Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), and maps showing the results of 1.5-mile triangular strip-transect surveys for the Desert Tortoise.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ANTC Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-B010-2013-0024-EA Telecommunication Facilities at Kingston, Dyer, and Hickison Summit July 2013 Applicant: Arizona Nevada Tower Corporation 6220 McLeod Drive Ste. 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120 Battle Mountain District Bureau of Land Management 50 Bastian Road Battle Mountain, Nevada 89820 Table of Contents Page Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Identifying Information 2 1.4 Location of Proposed Action 2 1.5 Preparing Office 2 1.6 Case File Numbers 2 1.7 Applicant 2 1.8 Proposed Action Summary 3 1.9 Conformance 3 1.10 Purpose & Need 3 1.11 Scoping, Public Involvement & Issues 4 Chapter 2 Proposed Action & Alternatives 11 2.1 Proposed Action 11 2.1.1 Best Management Practices 13 2.2 No Action Alternative 13 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 14 Chapter 3 Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences 15 3.1 Project Site Descriptions 15 3.2 Issues 16 3.2.1 Air Quality 18 3.2.1.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.1.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.2 Cultural/Historical Resources 18 3.2.2.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.2.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.3 Noxious Weeds/Invasive Non-native Plants 19 3.2.3.1 Affected Environment 19 3.2.3.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.4 Native American Religious Concerns 20 3.2.4.1 Affected Environment 20 3.2.4.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.5 Migratory Birds 21 3.2.5.1 Affected Environment 21 3.2.5.2 Environmental Consequences 22 3.2.6 Solid/Hazardous
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    NEWS RELEASE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Mountain-Prairie Region 134 Union Boulevard Lakewood, Colorado 80228 For Release on: August 18, 2009 Contact: Ann Carlson 303-236-4264 Diane Katzenberger 303-236-4578 Fish and Wildlife Service to Conduct Status Reviews for 29 Species Three of the species are found in the Service’s Pacific Region Following a review of a petition seeking to protect 206 species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that 29 of the petitioned species may warrant Federal protection. The Service will undertake a more thorough review of these species to determine whether to propose adding them to the Federal list of threatened and endangered wildlife and plants. Two of those species include the northern leatherside chub (Lepidomeda copei) and the longitudinal gland pyrg (Pyrgulopsis anguin). The Service also determined that the petition did not present substantial information that listing may be warranted for nine other species. One of those – the Sunnyside green-gentian (Frasera gypsicola) is found in Nevada. The 38 species addressed in this finding are found in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. The list of the petitioned species can be found in the Federal Register notice published today or at the Service’s web site at http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/endspp/news.htm. Among the species that may warrant federal protection are two found in the Service’s Pacific Region: the northern leatherside chub, a fish found in Idaho, and pale blue-eyed grass, a plant found in Oregon and Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Selection Process
    FINAL Appendix J to S Volume 3, Book 2 JULY 2008 COYOTE SPRINGS INVESTMENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FINAL VOLUME 3 Coyote Springs Investment Planned Development Project Appendix J to S July 2008 Prepared EIS for: LEAD AGENCY U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Reno, NV COOPERATING AGENCIES U.S. Army Corps of Engineers St. George, UT U.S. Bureau of Land Management Ely, NV Prepared MSHCP for: Coyote Springs Investment LLC 6600 North Wingfield Parkway Sparks, NV 89496 Prepared by: ENTRIX, Inc. 2300 Clayton Road, Suite 200 Concord, CA 94520 Huffman-Broadway Group 828 Mission Avenue San Rafael, CA 94901 Resource Concepts, Inc. 340 North Minnesota Street Carson City, NV 89703 PROJECT NO. 3132201 COYOTE SPRINGS INVESTMENT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Appendix J to S ENTRIX, Inc. Huffman-Broadway Group Resource Concepts, Inc. 2300 Clayton Road, Suite 200 828 Mission Avenue 340 North Minnesota Street Concord, CA 94520 San Rafael, CA 94901 Carson City, NV 89703 Phone 925.935.9920 Fax 925.935.5368 Phone 415.925.2000 Fax 415.925.2006 Phone 775.883.1600 Fax 775.883.1656 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix J Mitigation Plan, The Coyote Springs Development Project, Lincoln County, Nevada Appendix K Summary of Nevada Water Law and its Administration Appendix L Alternate Sites and Scenarios Appendix M Section 106 and Tribal Consultation Documents Appendix N Fiscal Impact Analysis Appendix O Executive Summary of Master Traffic Study for Clark County Development Appendix P Applicant for Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit Application, Coyote Springs Project, Lincoln County, Nevada Appendix Q Response to Comments on the Draft EIS Appendix R Agreement for Settlement of all Claims to Groundwater in the Coyote Spring Basin Appendix S Species Selection Process JULY 2008 FINAL i APPENDIX S Species Selection Process Table of Contents Appendix S: Species Selection Process ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Plant Survey of San Juan Public Lands, Colorado
    Rare Plant Survey of San Juan Public Lands, Colorado 2005 Prepared by Colorado Natural Heritage Program 254 General Services Building Colorado State University Fort Collins CO 80523 Rare Plant Survey of San Juan Public Lands, Colorado 2005 Prepared by Peggy Lyon and Julia Hanson Colorado Natural Heritage Program 254 General Services Building Colorado State University Fort Collins CO 80523 December 2005 Cover: Imperiled (G1 and G2) plants of the San Juan Public Lands, top left to bottom right: Lesquerella pruinosa, Draba graminea, Cryptantha gypsophila, Machaeranthera coloradoensis, Astragalus naturitensis, Physaria pulvinata, Ipomopsis polyantha, Townsendia glabella, Townsendia rothrockii. Executive Summary This survey was a continuation of several years of rare plant survey on San Juan Public Lands. Funding for the project was provided by San Juan National Forest and the San Juan Resource Area of the Bureau of Land Management. Previous rare plant surveys on San Juan Public Lands by CNHP were conducted in conjunction with county wide surveys of La Plata, Archuleta, San Juan and San Miguel counties, with partial funding from Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO); and in 2004, public lands only in Dolores and Montezuma counties, funded entirely by the San Juan Public Lands. Funding for 2005 was again provided by San Juan Public Lands. The primary emphases for field work in 2005 were: 1. revisit and update information on rare plant occurrences of agency sensitive species in the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) database that were last observed prior to 2000, in order to have the most current information available for informing the revision of the Resource Management Plan for the San Juan Public Lands (BLM and San Juan National Forest); 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Tracking List
    Nevada Division of Natural Heritage Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 901 S. Stewart Street, Suite 5002, Carson City, Nevada 89701-5245 voice: (775) 684-2900 | fax: (775) 684-2909 | web: heritage.nv.gov At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List July 2021 The Nevada Division of Natural Heritage (NDNH) A separate list, the Plant and Animal Watch List, systematically curates information on Nevada's contains taxa that could become at-risk in the future. endangered, threatened, sensitive, rare, and at-risk plants and animals providing the most comprehensive Taxa on the At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List are source of information on Nevada’s imperiled organized by taxonomic group, and presented biodiversity. alphabetically by scientific name within each group. Currently, there are 639 Tracking List taxa: 285 plants, Nevada's health and economic well-being depend 209 invertebrates, 65 fishes, 9 amphibians, 7 reptiles, upon its biodiversity and wise land stewardship. This 27 birds, and 37 mammals. challenge increases as population and land-use pressures continue to grow. Nevada is among the top Documentation of population status, locations, or 10 states for both the diversity and the vulnerability of other updates or corrections for any of the taxa on its living heritage. With early planning and responsible this list are always welcome. Literature citations with development, economic growth and our biological taxonomic revisions and descriptions of new taxa are resources can coexist. NDNH is a central source for also appreciated. The Nevada Native Species Site information critical to achieving this balance. Survey Report form is available on our website under Management priorities for the state’s imperiled the Submit Data tab and is the preferred format for biodiversity are continually assessed, providing submitting information to NDNH.
    [Show full text]
  • Nye County Agenda Information Form
    NYE COUNTY AGENDA INFORMATION FORM Action Presentation 0 Presentation &Action Department: EDEN Category: Consent Agenda Item 1 Contact: Paula Elefante Phone: Continued from meeting of: I I Return to: EDEN ( Location: Pahrump 1 775-751-1923 Action requested: (Include what, with whom, when, where, why, how much ($)and terms) Approval of the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. Complete description of requested action: (Include, if applicable, background, impact, long-term commitment, existing county policy, future goals, obtained by competitive bid, accountability measures) This document was first prepared and approved by the board in 2002. Once this document is approved it will be submitted to the Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration for their review and approval. This was a total document rewrite. This document is a bi-county document serving both Esmeralda and Nye Counties that identifies a vision, goals and needs for all the communities within the two counties. Any information provided after the agenda is published or during the meeting of the Commissioners will require you to provide 20 copies: one for each Commissioner, one for the Clerk, one for the District Attorney, one for the Public and two for the County Manager. Contracts or documents requiring signature must be submitted with three original copies. I J Ex~enditureImpact by FY(s): (Provide oetai on Financial Form) No financial impact 1 Routing & Approval (sign &Date) 1. Dept Dale 1 6. Dale Approved Disapproved I Amended as follows: I Clerk of
    [Show full text]
  • Management Plan for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Approved April 30, 2013
    Management Plan for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Approved April 30, 2013 Prepared by the Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership Baker, Nevada i ii Great Basin National Heritage Area Management Plan September 23, 2011 Plans prepared previously by several National Heritage Areas provided inspiration for the framework and format for the Great Basin National Heritage Area Management Plan. National Park Service staff and documents provided guidance. We gratefully acknowledge these contributions. This Management Plan was made possible through funding provided by the National Park Service, the State of Nevada, the State of Utah and the generosity of local citizens. 2011 Great Basin National Heritage Area Disclaimer Restriction of Liability The Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership (GBHAP) and the authors of this document have made every reasonable effort to insur e accuracy and objectivity in preparing this plan. However, based on limitations of time, funding and references available, the parties involved make no claims, promises or guarantees about the absolute accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this document and expressly disclaim liability for errors and omissions in the contents of this plan. No warranty of any kind, implied, expressed or statutory, including but not limited to the warranties of non-infringement of third party rights, title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, is given with respect to the contents of this document or its references. Reference in this document to any specific commercial products, processes, or services, or the use of any trade, firm or corporation name is for the inf ormation and convenience of the public, and does not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the GBHAP or the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I: a List of Native Spring-Dependent Species Known from the Area of Projected Groundwater Decline in Nevada, California, Utah, and Arizona Table 1
    Deacon, J.E., A.E. Williams, C. Deacon Williams, and J.E. Williams. 2007. Fueling population growth in Las Vegas: how large-scale groundwater withdrawal could burn regional biodiversity. BioScience 57(8):688-698. Appendix I: A list of native spring-dependent species known from the area of projected groundwater decline in Nevada, California, Utah, and Arizona Table 1. Twenty federally-listed spring-dwelling and riparian species of southern and central Nevada that are dependent upon groundwater for habitat maintenance. NWR = National Wildlife Refuge. _______________________________________________________________________ Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Habitat Special Federal Designation Lands Amargosa vole Microtus E Spring-fed wetland californicus areas scirpensis Southwestern Empidonax trailii E Riparian areas of Pahranagat NWR; Willow Flycatcher extrimus spring-fed streams Ash Meadows NWR Yuma clapper rail Rallus longirostris E Riparian areas of yumanensis spring-fed streams Woundfin Plagopterus E Spring-fed streams argentissimus Virgin River chub Gila seminuda E Spring-fed streams Ash Meadows Rhinichthys E Springs Ash Meadows speckled dace osculus nevadensis NWR Moapa dace Moapa coriacea E Springs Moapa Valley NWR Pahrump poolfish Empetrichthys E Spring pools Desert National latos Wildlife Range Ash Meadows Cyprinodon E Springs Ash Meadows Amargosa pupfish nevadensis NWR mionectes Devils Hole Cyprinodon E Spring pool Death Valley pupfish diabolis National Park Warm springs Cyprinodon E Springs Ash Meadows pupfish nevadensis NWR pectoralis Big Spring Lepidomeda T Springs and spinedace mollispinis spring-fed marshes pratensis White River Lepidomeda E Springs and spinedace albivallis spring-fed creeks Hiko White River Crenichthys baileyi E Springs springfish grandis Railroad Valley Crenichthys T Springs springfish nevadae White River Crenichthys b.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior
    Vol. 76 Tuesday, No. 177 September 13, 2011 Part III Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List 42 Great Basin and Mojave Desert Springsnails as Threatened or Endangered With Critical Habitat; Proposed Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:24 Sep 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\13SEP2.SGM 13SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 56608 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 177 / Tuesday, September 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ADDRESSES: You may submit (d) Historical and current population information by one of the following levels, and current and projected trends; Fish and Wildlife Service methods: and • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// (e) Past and ongoing conservation 50 CFR Part 17 www.regulations.gov. In the box that measures for the species, their habitat, reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the or both. [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0001; 92210–0–0008–B2] Docket number for this finding, which (2) The factors that are the basis for is FWS–R8–ES–2011–0001. You should making a listing determination for a Endangered and Threatened Wildlife then see an icon that reads ‘‘Submit a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Comment.’’ Please ensure that you have U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are: Petition To List 42 Great Basin and found the correct rulemaking before (a) The present or threatened Mojave Desert Springsnails as submitting your comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F3.5 Vegetation Resources
    Appendix F3.5 Vegetation Resources Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement BLM June 2011 Contents Table F3.5-1 Wildfire Frequency and Succession Information for Vegetation Communities Common in the ROW Figure F3.5-1 Fire Regime Condition Classes in the Study Area Fire Regime Condition Class Attributes Weed Species Known to Occur Within the Study Area Table F3.5-2 Noxious Weed Species Documented in ROW Areas, Groundwater Development Areas and Associated Hydrologic Basins Risk Assessment for Noxious and Invasive Weeds: Clark, Lincoln and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project – Right of Way for Main Pipeline Table F3.5-3 Cactus and Yucca Species Inventoried Within the ROW Table F3.5-4 Special Status Plant Species Potentially Occurring Within the Project Area Culturally Significant Plants and Animals Lists • Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation • Ely Shoshone Culturally Sensitive Plants • The Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Figure F3.5-2 No Action - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-3 Proposed Action - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-4 Alternative A - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-5 Alternative B - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes, Springs and Streams Figure F3.5-6 Alternative C - Cumulative Projected Drawdown Greater Than 10’ Phreatophytes,
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D
    This article was downloaded by: [69.144.7.122] On: 24 July 2013, At: 12:35 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Fisheries Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufsh20 Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D. Johnson a , Arthur E. Bogan b , Kenneth M. Brown c , Noel M. Burkhead d , James R. Cordeiro e o , Jeffrey T. Garner f , Paul D. Hartfield g , Dwayne A. W. Lepitzki h , Gerry L. Mackie i , Eva Pip j , Thomas A. Tarpley k , Jeremy S. Tiemann l , Nathan V. Whelan m & Ellen E. Strong n a Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) , 2200 Highway 175, Marion , AL , 36756-5769 E-mail: b North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences , Raleigh , NC c Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge , LA d United States Geological Survey, Southeast Ecological Science Center , Gainesville , FL e University of Massachusetts at Boston , Boston , Massachusetts f Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Florence , AL g U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , Jackson , MS h Wildlife Systems Research , Banff , Alberta , Canada i University of Guelph, Water Systems Analysts , Guelph , Ontario , Canada j University of Winnipeg , Winnipeg , Manitoba , Canada k Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Marion , AL l Illinois Natural History Survey , Champaign , IL m University of Alabama , Tuscaloosa , AL n Smithsonian Institution, Department of Invertebrate Zoology , Washington , DC o Nature-Serve , Boston , MA Published online: 14 Jun 2013.
    [Show full text]