United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 FAX: (602) 242-2513 In Reply Refer To: AESO/SE 22410-2003-F-0430 April 1, 2008 To: Regional Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico (Attn: L. Roberts) From: Field Supervisor Subject: Intra-Service Biological and Conference Opinion - Issuance of a Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit to Salt River Project for Incidental Take of Threatened and Endangered Species Associated With Operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett Reservoirs This biological and conference opinion responds to the request for consultation with the Arizona Ecological Services Office pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544), as amended (Act). At issue are impacts that may result from issuance of a permit in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(B) (permit) of the Act for incidental take of threatened and endangered species associated with operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett dams and reservoirs by Salt River Project (SRP) in Maricopa and Yavapai counties, Arizona. Issuance of the permit may affect the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) (flycatcher) and its critical habitat, the threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), the threatened spikedace (Meda fulgida), the threatened loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis), the endangered razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) and its critical habitat, the endangered Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis), and the section 10(j) experimental, non- essential population of endangered Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius). Consistent with our policies concerning intra-service consultations and for the purposes of this opinion, we also consider the other affected species: candidate yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) (cuckoo), roundtail chub (Gila robusta), Sonora sucker (Catostomus insignis), desert sucker (Catostomus clarki), longfin dace (Agosia chrysogaster), speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), lowland leopard frog (Rana yavapaiensis), narrow-headed gartersnake (Thamnophis rufipunctatus), and northern Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops) as if they were proposed to be listed as threatened or endangered. Hereinafter, the spikedace, loach minnow, razorback sucker, Gila topminnow, Colorado pikeminnow, roundtail chub, Sonora sucker, desert sucker, longfin dace, speckled dace, lowland leopard frog, narrow-headed gartersnake, and northern Mexican gartersnake will be referred to as “aquatic species” due to the similarities with respect to effects of the action and the associated mitigation and minimization actions, unless otherwise specified. 2 This biological opinion was prepared using information from the following sources: the Fish and Watershed Committee Report (Fish and Watershed Committee 2006), the final habitat conservation plan (HCP) (ERO 2008), final environmental impact statement (EIS) (USFWS 2008), and information in our files. We actively participated in the preparation of the Committee Report, HCP, and EIS; and those documents provide additional detail and supporting information for this biological and conference opinion and are hereby incorporated by reference. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file in our office. CONSULTATION HISTORY • March 31, 2003: Informal consultation on this project began with a meeting among staff from this office and SRP. Initial meeting discussions focused on how SRP’s future operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett reservoirs may result in the incidental take of flycatcher, bald eagle, and cuckoo. • April – June 2003: Interagency meetings were held to discuss effects to other aquatic and semi-aquatic species. • July 15, 2003: A public scoping meeting was held for the purpose of announcing our intention of preparing an EIS to evaluate the impacts of, and alternatives to, the issuance of an incidental take permit (ITP) to SRP authorizing incidental take of threatened and endangered species associated with operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett dams over a fifty-year period. • July 25, 2007: We published a Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Section 10 Permit Application, Draft Horseshoe-Bartlett Habitat Conservation Plan, and Draft Implementing Agreement for Incidental Take by SRP, and Notice of a Public Hearing for the purpose of soliciting public comments on these documents. • September 11, 2007: A public hearing presented project information and background material and received both oral and written comment from the public on the draft EIS and HCP. • 2003-2007: Numerous meetings were held to develop the habitat conservation plan and the accompanying environmental impact statement. Meeting participants included representatives from SRP, their contractor (ERO Resources Corporation) (ERO), the City of Phoenix (who owns entitlements to conservation space in Horseshoe Reservoir), the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR), and us1. 1 Meeting records are maintained in our files and available upon request. 3 • 2003-2007: An Advisory Group was formed in 2003 and met on several occasions. This group consisted of state and Federal agencies, Indian tribes, cities, recreational groups, and environmental groups. • March 7, 2008: A draft biological opinion was provided for stakeholder review. • March 21, 2008: Comments were received on the draft biological opinion. • March 28, 2008: A revised draft biological opinion was provided for stakeholder review. • March 31, 2008: Additional comments on the draft biological opinion were received from SRP and its contractors, and incorporated. BIOLOGICAL AND CONFERENCE OPINION DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action is issuance of a permit to SRP by Region 2 of the Fish and Wildlife Service, in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, for incidental take of flycatcher, bald eagle, spikedace, loach minnow, razorback sucker, Gila topminnow, and Colorado pikeminnow associated with the modified operations of Horseshoe and Bartlett dams. The cuckoo and the remaining aquatic species would also be covered by the permit if listed in the future. The permit would be issued with mandatory conditions, which are also part of the proposed action. The actions that would cause the incidental take - modified operation of both Horseshoe and Bartlett and their respective storage space at elevations 2026 feet and 1798 feet, and measures proposed to minimize, mitigate, and monitor the take - are not actions proposed by us. Operation of the dams as proposed, together with implementation of the proposed minimization, mitigation and monitoring measures, are indirect effects of the proposed action and by regulation (50 C.F.R. § 402.02), must be evaluated herein. Permit conditions, operation of the dams, and mitigation, minimization, and monitoring measures are described below. Additional details about the proposed action and related activities can be found in ERO (2008) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2008a). Permit Conditions: The complete text of the permit conditions appear in Appendix 11 of ERO (2008). Key provisions include: 1) the duration of the permit is 50 years, 2) the permit is in effect for currently listed species on the date the permit is signed and will be in effect for the cuckoo and the remaining aquatic species upon the date any one or more of these species is listed (if listed), 3) take of listed species is permitted (generally indexed to unavailability/loss of, or adverse effects to habitat) as follows: 4 a. Flycatcher and cuckoo: not to exceed 200 acres averaged annually (or up to 400 acres averaged annually with adaptive management), b. Aquatic species: 33.9 river miles, c. Bald eagle – loss of eggs or fledglings due to inundation of nest trees within the conservation space of Horseshoe or Bartlett reservoirs. 4) the permit may be suspended if the permittee is not in compliance with the conditions of the permit or applicable Federal law or regulations, 5) the permit may be revoked in accordance with applicable regulations and policies, 6) changed circumstances are defined and measures are described that would be taken if such circumstances occur during the life of the permit, 7) required notifications and procedures in the event of unforeseen circumstances are defined, including the no surprises policy, and 8) procedures for amending and renewing the permit are set forth. Optimum Operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett: Horseshoe and Bartlett would continue to be operated by SRP in a manner consistent with their purpose as water storage reservoirs and to minimize spills of water past Granite Reef Dam. Under the Optimum Operation Alternative (ERO 2008), two main objectives would be added to the historical operations: 1) maintain tall dense vegetation in Horseshoe, and 2) manage Horseshoe water levels to minimize impacts to covered aquatic species. The addition of those two objectives will ensure the following conditions for Horseshoe and Bartlett: 1) Maintain the safety and integrity of the dams. 2) Maintain sufficient storage to meet water delivery obligations. 3) Optimize reservoir storage within the reservoir system. 4) Maintain adequate carryover storage in case of low runoff. 5) Conjunctively manage groundwater pumping given reservoir storage and projected runoff and demand. 6) Maximize hydrogeneration. 7) Permit necessary facility maintenance. 8) Support stands of tall dense vegetation