BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FOR THE COPPER CITIES RECLAMATION PLAN OF OPERATIONS

Prepared for: SRK Consulting, Inc.

Prepared on behalf of: BHP Copper Inc.

Prepared by: WestLand Resources, Inc.

Date: March 15, 2017

Project No.: 815.24 07

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...... 1 2. ANALYSIS AREA DESCRIPTION ...... 2 2.1. Land Uses ...... 2 2.2. Physical Features ...... 2 2.3. Surface Water Features ...... 3 2.4. Vegetation ...... 4 3. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES SCREENING ANALYSIS METHODS ...... 4 3.1. Special Status Species Identification ...... 4 3.2. Surveys Within the Analysis Area...... 5 3.3. Special Status Species Screening ...... 5 4. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS ...... 6 4.1. Hedgehog Cactus ...... 15 4.2. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher ...... 16 4.3. Yellow-Billed Cuckoo ...... 17 4.4. Ocelot ...... 18 4.5. Arizona Toad ...... 19 4.6. Lowland Leopard Frog ...... 20 4.7. Sonora Mud Turtle ...... 20 4.8. Golden Eagle ...... 21 4.9. Pinyon Jay ...... 22 5. REFERENCES ...... 24

TABLES

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area ...... 8 Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area ...... follows text

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page ii

FIGURES (follow text)

Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Aerial Overview Figure 3. Geological Resources Map

APPENDICES

Appendix A. 2016 US Fish and Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Conservation Report (IPaC) Online Query Appendix B. Updated (February 2017) Bureau of Land Management Sensitive Species List for Arizona Appendix C. Arizona Game and Fish Department Heritage Database Management System (HDMS) On-Line Review Appendix D. Representative Photographs of the Analysis Area

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

WestLand Resources, Inc. (WestLand) was retained by SRK Consulting, Inc. on behalf of BHP Copper Inc. (BHP) to evaluate the potential for special status species to occur on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within unpatented claims at the Copper Cities Unit (the Analysis Area; Figure 1). Special status species screened for this report include those that have been recorded or have some potential to occur within or near the Analysis Area, and are:

1) Species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that: a. are identified by the USFWS Arizona Ecological Services Field Office Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC) tool (Appendix A), and/or b. are listed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the Phoenix District, and 2) Species listed as BLM Arizona Sensitive Species for the Phoenix District (Appendix B).

The Analysis Area is located in Gila County, north of Miami, Arizona within portions of Sections 11 to 14 of Township 1 North, Range 14 East of the Gila and Salt River Baseline and Meridian (Figure 1). The Analysis Area occupies approximately 219 acres of BLM-administered land within the approximately 4,465 total acres of the Copper Cities Unit (Figure 2). The Analysis Area boundary was determined by a combination of BLM surface management mapping, unpatented claims data, and on-site survey. The Analysis Area includes undisturbed land as well as portions of an inactive leach dump and an inactive overburden rock pile, unpaved haul and access roads, a few structures, surface water management facilities, and old mine workings.

The Copper Cities Unit was a copper extraction and beneficiation facility operated by a predecessor firm from 1951 until 1982, although some prospecting and minor mining took place earlier. Activities during the operational period included open pit mining and ore processing. Sulfide ore was processed by flotation recovery and oxide ore by dump leaching. In the interim since shutdown, virtually all processing infrastructure has been removed and the facility has remained inactive and unstaffed.

Neither open-pit mining nor sulfide ore processing were ever conducted on the Analysis Area. A small portion of the oxide ore leaching operation was conducted and a portion of one overburden rock pile was placed on BLM-administered land. Neither the leach dump nor the overburden rock pile have been added to since facility shutdown in 1982. Other active facilities appurtenant to the mining operation (e.g., roads and water management facilities) are also on the BLM-administered land.

Current activities on the Analysis Area are limited to periodic reclamation projects, water management, and general maintenance and support. Generally, the proposed reclamation and closure activities are intended to promote the establishment of a self-sustaining ecosystem consistent with the biotic communities of the surrounding area, with consideration of the specific conditions that exist at the

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 2

Analysis Area. Post-closure monitoring and maintenance will follow the completion of reclamation to ensure success of the program and compliance with performance criteria.

2. ANALYSIS AREA DESCRIPTION

The Copper Cities Unit lies within a landscape heavily altered by mining activities over the last 65 years; the Analysis Area is at the southern edge of the disturbed lands within Copper Cities Unit. The location, land uses, and physical and biological resources of the Analysis Area are described below.

2.1. LAND USES

The Analysis Area consists of both disturbed and undisturbed lands. Portions of an overburden rock pile and a leach dump occur within the Analysis Area, as well as water management facilities, some utility lines, a network of unpaved roads, and old mine workings. The western portion of the Analysis Area, south of the Diamond H Pit and south and west of Lost Gulch, contains rocky and rugged terrain that has not been affected by mine activities and remains relatively undisturbed.

Access roads associated with the operation of the Copper Cities Unit and subsequent reclamation activities have impacted portions of the Analysis Area. General land-clearing activities for construction yards and transmission lines have impacted some portions as well. Some of the facilities have naturally revegetated since the mine shutdown in 1982, with dense vegetation growth on the top surface, but sparse vegetation on the side slopes. Roads and ponds are bare of vegetation.

2.2. PHYSICAL FEATURES

The Analysis Area is located in the Central Highlands Physiographic Province, a transitional area between the Colorado Plateau Physiographic Province and the Basin and Range Physiographic Province (Ffolliott 1999). Elevation within the Analysis Area ranges from approximately 3,700 to 4,200 feet (ft) above mean sea level (amsl). Surficial geology within the undisturbed portions of the Analysis Area consists primarily of talus, Precambrian Pinal Schist, and Willow Springs Granodiorite, with small areas of diabase, quartz monzonite, dacite, and diorite porphyry (Peterson 1962; Figure 3).

The landscape of the Analysis Area is moderately rugged, situated along uplands and the lower reach of Lost Gulch. Natural topography of the Analysis Area is dominated by moderately steep to rolling terrain of the foothills of surrounding mountains; associated landforms include narrow rocky ridges and rock outcrops and intervening drainage systems. Generally, the top surfaces of the earthwork facilities within the northern portion of the Analysis Area slope to the north, whereas the less- disturbed land within the southern portion of the Analysis Area slopes to the south. The highest elevation occurs at the southwestern corner of the Analysis Area, on the eastern flank of Day Peak; the ground surface slopes steeply to the east in this area (Figure 1).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 3

There are a total of seven abandoned mine features located within the Analysis Area (WestLand Resources 2016). The features primarily consist of shallow excavation sites with small waste rock piles and no openings. Three small adits are present that range from approximately 8 to 15 feet long, and, with the exception of one adit where ringtail (Bassariscus astutus) scat was observed, the features do not appear to be actively used by wildlife.

2.3. SURFACE WATER FEATURES

There is little natural, perennial surface water within the Analysis Area. Lost Gulch, the largest channel within the Analysis Area, historically flowed from near the northwestern corner to the southeastern corner of the Analysis Area. Lost Gulch is now divided into an upper and lower reach by a diversion dam at the northwest edge of the Analysis Area. The diversion dam directs flow to the Diamond H Pit, outside of the Analysis Area. The upper reach (Upper Lost Gulch) is outside of the Analysis Area, and consists of ephemeral and intermittent streams, with small patches of wetlands along portions of the channel. The lower reach extends from the toe of the diversion dam to the reclaimed mining facility known as Webster Lake, along the southern boundary of the Analysis Area. The lower reach is ephemeral at the upstream end, with flows becoming intermittent where Lost Gulch exits the Analysis Area near the center of the southern boundary. The intermittent flow is likely supported by contributions from Diamond H Waste Dump Springs #1 and #2, which discharge into Lost Gulch on rare occasions after heavy rainfall.

These springs also likely support a wetland in Lost Gulch, which is located immediately downstream of the springs (Figure 2). The wetland, which occupies approximately 0.3 acres within the Analysis Area, includes saturated soils but contains little perennial standing water.

Stormwater runoff on the eastern portions of the Analysis Area flows overland into diversion channels that discharge into sediment control ponds. If the ponds reach capacity, overflow is directed to Lost Gulch through stormwater outfalls. The sediment control ponds are located either within the Analysis Area or immediately downstream from the Analysis Area. Some of the process water ponds, which collect seepage from inactive mining facilities, can also contain collected stormwater for extended periods after runoff events. Overflow from large storm events would ultimately discharge to Miami Wash, well east of the Analysis Area.

Surface water flow in the northern portion of the Analysis Area is contained within the Copper Cities Unit or managed for pollution prevention purposes. Most of the earthwork facilities and adjacent land within the northern portion of the Analysis Area lie within non-discharging basins, and surface water in these areas is directed north into the containment basins.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 4

2.4. VEGETATION

Based on the broad scale biotic community mapping of Brown and Lowe (1980), the Analysis Area is mapped as Interior Chaparral. As noted above, the Analysis Area occurs within the Central Highlands Province, a transitional area, and characteristic elements (i.e., plant species) of several other biotic communities were observed within undisturbed portions of the Analysis Area during field surveys.

Elements of Interior Riparian Deciduous Forests and Woodlands (Minckley and Brown 1994) occur along Lost Gulch as a continuous narrow stand of riparian vegetation (approximately 2-4 trees wide) that covers approximately 0.22 acres of the Analysis Area (Figure 2). Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), Goodding’s willow (Salix gooddingii), Arizona sycamore (Platanus wrightii), netleaf hackberry (Celtis reticulata), and the nonnative saltcedar (Tamarix sp.) are the dominant overstory species in these areas, with seepwillow (Baccharis salicifolia), desert broom (B. sarothroides) and coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica) in the understory. The Lost Gulch wetland is characterized by a high water table, indicated by patches of saturated soil and herbaceous hydrophytic vegetation including rabbit’s-foot grass (Polypogon spp.), and common spike rush (Eleocharis palustris).

Elements of Interior Chaparral (Pase and Brown 1994) including scrub live oak (Quercus turbinella), pointleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos pungens), sugar sumac (Rhus ovata), skunkbush (Rhus aromatica), desert ceanothus (Ceanothus greggii), mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus spp.), holly-leaf buckthorn (Rhamnus ilicifolia), barberry (Berberis sp.), and occasional crucifixion thorn (Canotia holacantha) occur on slopes, ridges and along xeric washes.

Elements of Madrean Evergreen Woodland (Brown 1994b) species, including Emory oak (Quercus emoryi), piñon pine (Pinus monophylla), hoptree (Ptelea angustifolia), single seed juniper (Juniperus monosperma) and banana yucca (Yucca baccata) are interspersed with Interior Chaparral species, particularly on north facing slopes in the western portion of the Analysis Area.

3. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES SCREENING ANALYSIS METHODS

3.1. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES IDENTIFICATION

Special status species screened for this report include:

1) Species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that: a. are identified by the USFWS Arizona Ecological Services Field Office IPaC tool (Appendix A), and/or b. are listed by the BLM for the Phoenix District, and 2) Species listed as BLM Arizona Sensitive Species for the Phoenix District (Appendix B).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 5

The USFWS IPaC tool was used to identify USFWS special status species that have some potential to occur within the Analysis Area or vicinity, as well as designated or proposed critical habitat that occurs within or in the vicinity of the Analysis Area1 (Appendix A). Special status species (USFWS) included in this analysis are species listed as endangered, threatened, proposed for listing, candidates for listing, and experimental non-essential populations.

The BLM has identified sensitive species for the Phoenix District in the 2017 BLM Arizona Sensitive Species List (Appendix B). The list includes species within the Phoenix District that meet the BLM- established criteria sensitivity, as well as federally-listed species listed that have the potential to occur within the Phoenix District. The Arizona Game & Fish Department (AGFD) Heritage Database Management System (HDMS) on-line environmental review tool query was used to identify records of special status species within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area (Appendix C).

3.2. SURVEYS WITHIN THE ANALYSIS AREA

WestLand has conducted species- and habitat-specific surveys and other forms of fieldwork within the Analysis Area during multiple visits in 2015 and 2016. During these field visits, the major biotic communities and their dominant vegetation associations were noted, a list of plant and wildlife species observed was made, and representative photographs of the Analysis Area were taken (Appendix D). These field efforts provide supplemental information relevant to the Special Status Screening Analysis and identification of natural resources present in the area. Recent surveys and fieldwork conducted by WestLand within and in the vicinity of the Analysis Area are:

• Jurisdictional delineation of wetlands and drainages with ordinary high water mark for a request for an approved jurisdictional waters determination • Survey for Arizona hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus) • Survey for Sonoran Desert tortoise (Gopherus morafkai) • Survey of abandoned mine features • Survey of sensitive species habitat

3.3. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES SCREENING

A screening analysis was performed of the identified special status species to evaluate the potential for those species or designated or proposed critical habitat to occur within the Analysis Area. Determinations of the potential for special status species or designated or proposed critical habitat to occur in the Analysis Area were informed by:

1 The IPaC list identifies special status species and designated and proposed critical habitat that may occur within one or more delineated United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute quadrangles that the Analysis Area intersects (Appendix A).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 6

• Field observations and habitat assessments of the Analysis Area; • Review of the natural history of special status species; • Review of the known geographical and elevational ranges of special status species; and • Comparisons of this information with the habitats present in the Analysis Area.

The criteria used to determine the potential of occurrence of the species included in this screening analysis are defined as follows:

Present: The species has been observed to occur in the Analysis Area based on known records, the Analysis Area is within the known range of the species, and habitat characteristics required by the species are known to be present.

Possible: The species has not been observed documented in the Analysis Area based on known records, but the known, current distribution of the species includes the Analysis Area and the required habitat characteristics of the species appear to be present in the Analysis Area.

Unlikely: The known, current distribution of the species does not include the Analysis Area, but the distribution of the species is close enough such that the Analysis Area may be within the dispersal or foraging distance of the species. The habitat characteristics required by the species may be present in the Analysis Area.

None: The Analysis Area is outside of the known distribution of the species, and/or the habitat characteristics required by the species are not present.

4. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS

Results from the IPaC query (Appendix A) and the 2017 BLM Arizona Sensitive Species list yielded 21 special status ESA species with some potential to occur in the Analysis Area or its vicinity. There is no proposed or designated critical habitat within the Analysis Area. Based on records and WestLand’s site-specific knowledge, there is potential for four of the special status ESA species to occur within the Analysis Area. Those species and their potential to occur are as follows:

• Unlikely – endangered Arizona hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus; • Unlikely – endangered ocelot (Leopardus pardalis); and • Unlikely – endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailii extimus). • Possible – threatened western Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 7

The basis of determination of each species’ potential to occur within the Analysis Area is provided in Table 1. The four ESA listed species with an unlikely or possible potential to occur are discussed further in Sections 4.1 through 4.4.

The screening analysis of BLM sensitive species in the Phoenix District (Appendix B) and the HDMS query (Appendix C) yielded five sensitive BLM species that have some potential to occur within the Analysis Area.

• Possible – Arizona toad (Anaxyrus [Bufo] microscaphus); • Possible – golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos); • Possible – lowland leopard frog (Lithobates [Rana] yavapaiensis); • Possible – pinyon jay (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus); and • Possible – Sonora mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense sonoriense).

The potential for other sensitive BLM species identified during the initial screening to occur in the Analysis Area was unlikely to none (Table 2). The five BLM sensitive species with a possible potential to occur within the Analysis Area are discussed further in Sections 4.5 through 4.9.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 8

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area PLANTS (3) Occurs on small knolls and ridges, terraces, flats, and slopes of broad dissected hills with fine to coarse grained granite or andesite gravels in Arizona Upland Sonoran desertscrub (AGFD 2016b; ARPC 2001). Occurs as small disjunct populations from northeastern Pinal Acuña cactus to southeastern Maricopa and western Pima counties in Arizona; also known from Sonora, (Echinomastus erectocentrus var. Endangered None Mexico. Occurs from 1,198 to 3,773 ft in elevation (AGFD 2016b). acunensis) The Analysis Area is outside of the known restricted distribution of the species, and IPaC results does not indicate any potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). This cactus occupies rugged steep-walled canyons, boulder-pile ridges and slopes in Interior Chaparral and Madrean Evergreen Woodland habitats transition areas and desert grasslands at elevations between 3,300 and 5,700 ft (1,006 and 1,737 m) (AGFD 2003). Suitable substrate includes bedrock open slopes where individuals occur in cracks and crevices and between boulders on stable rock formations such as Apache Leap Tuff, Schultze Granite, Arizona hedgehog cactus Pinal Schist, and Pioneer Quartzite (TNF 2000b). Occurs only in Arizona, specifically in (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. Endangered Unlikely northeastern Pinal and southwestern Gila counties, in the Pinal, Dripping Springs, arizonicus) Superstition, , and the higher elevation areas between Globe and Superior (AGFD 2003). The Analysis Area contains appropriate habitat but no individuals of this species were observed during surveys immediately to the east and west of the Analysis Area, and the Analysis Area is east of the predicted habitat for this species (Baker 2013). This cactus is discussed further in Section 4.1. This cactus occupies margins of canyon rims, flat terraces or benches, or on the toe of well- drained hills with less than 20 percent slope in Plains and Great Basin grasslands and Great Basin desert scrub habitats at elevations between 4,200 and 5,950 ft (AGFD 2016b). Suitable Fickeisen plains cactus substrate includes shallow, gravelly, and well-drained soils derived from exposed layers of (Pediocactus peeblesianus var. Endangered None Kaibab limestone. Occurs only in Arizona, endemic to the Colorado Plateau (USFWS fickeinseniae) 2013c). The Analysis Area is outside of the known restricted distribution of the species, and IPaC results does not indicate any potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 9

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area FISH (6) This fish occupies perennial aquatic habitats (Minckley and Marsh 2009). This species tolerates saline and warm water (USFWS 1986). Historically inhabited shallow springs, small streams, and marshes at elevations below 4,000 ft. Critical habitat for this species is Desert pupfish Endangered designated extreme SW Pima County, Arizona and Imperial County, (51 FR None (Cyprinodon macularias) 10842). No natural populations of this fish remain in Arizona, but species has been introduced at Ayer Lake at the Boyce Thompson Arboretum (TNF 2000a). No appropriate aquatic habitat is present in the Analysis Area, and IPaC results do not indicate a potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). This fish occupies pools, springs, backwaters and streams at elevations between 2,000 and 5,500 ft (USFWS 2016a; USFWS 2015b). Endemic to the Gila River basin in southwestern Gila chub Endangered * None New Mexico, central and southeastern Arizona (USFWS 2016a). (Gila intermedia) No appropriate aquatic habitat is present in the Analysis Area, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). This fish occupies slow moving low gradient streams, springs, and backwaters at elevations below 4,500 ft, primarily in shallow areas with aquatic vegetation and debris for cover. Gila topminnow Reintroduced and natural locations within historic distribution in the Gila River drainage Endangered (Poeciliopsis occidentalis None and one locality in the Bill Williams River drainage (AGFD 2016b). Remaining natural

occidentalis) occurrences in upper Santa Cruz River (Minckley and Marsh 2009). No appropriate aquatic habitat is present in the Analysis Area, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). Occupies cool to warm waters in middle to headwater reaches of mid-sized streams of the Gila River basin. Populations are known in Ash Creek, Tonto Creek, Spring Creek, and Headwater chub Proposed None Marsh Creek and the Verde River system (AGFD 2016b). (Gila nigra) Threatened * Analysis Area is outside known geographic range of species, there are no HDMS occurrence records within 5 miles (Appendix A) and no fish habitat is present.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 10

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area This fish occupies warm to cool mid-elevation perennial rivers and streams (AGFD 2016b). Populations are known in tributaries of Little Colorado River (two tributaries), Bill Williams Roundtail chub Proposed River (eight tributaries), Salt River (four tributaries), Verde River (5 tributaries), Aravaipa None (Gila robusta) Threatened * Creek, and Eagle Creek (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is outside known geographic range of species and no fish habitat is present in the Analysis Area. This fish occupies shallow riffles with sand, gravel, and rubble substrates of moderate to large perennial streams (USFWS 2012a). Endemic to the Gila River Basin. Currently only Spikedace Endangered considered to occur in Arizona as a natural population in Aravaipa Creek, Graham, and None (Meda fulgida) Pinal counties. Stocked at 5 other locations but these are not considered as established populations (AGFD 2016b; USFWS 2012a). No appropriate aquatic habitat is present in the Analysis Area. AMPHIBIANS (1) Occurs in perennial to near-perennial aquatic environments including springs, creeks, cienegas and rivers; currently most often associated with man-made earthen ponds (Brennan and Holycross 2006). Occurs at elevations of 3,200 to 8,890 ft (USFWS 2012b). At the time of listing (USFWS 2002a), the frog was likely extant at an estimated 87 localities in Arizona and 31 to 41 localities in New Mexico. Historically occurred in central and east-central Arizona into west-central New Mexico, in the mountains and high valleys of southeastern Chiricahua leopard frog Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and south through western Chihuahua and (Lithobates [Rana] Threatened None northeastern Sonora, Mexico. Critical habitat includes a total of 10,346 acres in Apache, chiricahuensis) Cochise, Gila, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, Santa Cruz, and Yavapai Counties, Arizona; and Catron, Grant, Hidalgo, Sierra, and Socorro Counties, New Mexico (USFWS 2012b). Although appropriate habitat of perennial to near perennial waters is present in portions of the Analysis Area, the Analysis Area is outside known geographic range, species was not detected during a dedicated ranid frog survey, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 11

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area REPTILES (1) This reptile inhabits densely vegetated habitats along water sources from 3,000 to 5,000 ft. Populations in Arizona occur within the middle/upper Verde River drainage, middle/lower Northern Mexican Tonto Creek and the Cienega Creek, and in isolated wetlands in Southeast Arizona (AGFD gartersnake Threatened None 2016b). (Thamnophis eques megalops) The Analysis Area is outside of the known distribution of the species and does not contain appropriate aquatic habitat. BIRDS (6) This bird occupies nesting sites in various rock formations, including caves, crevices, and potholes in isolated regions of the southwestern U.S. Reintroduction of a nonessential experimental population of condors was initiated in the Vermillion Cliffs area in northern Endangered Arizona in December 1996. Condors from the Arizona reintroduction are generally found California condor Experimental in the vicinity of, Grand Canyon National Park and the in Arizona and Zion None (Gymnogyps californianus Population, National Park in Utah. The designated experimental population area in Arizona includes Non-essential portions of Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai counties (Arizona Ecological Services Field Office 2009). Analysis Area is outside of the known distribution of the species, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). Occur along coasts, nesting in sparsely vegetated open areas associated with permanent waters. Typical nesting colonies occur on open beaches, mud or sand flats, or gravel pits along shorelines of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs (USFWS 1985; USFWS 2009). Typically, the California least tern pacific coast of California from San Francisco to Baja. May occur in Arizona where suitable Endangered None (Sterna antillarum browni) nesting habitat occurs. Breeding documented in Maricopa County. Transient migrants have been observed in Mohave and Pima counties (USFWS 2009). Analysis Area is outside of the known distribution of the species, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for the species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 12

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area Occurs in mature montane forests and woodlands of mixed conifer dominated by Douglas fir, pine, or true fir, or in ponderosa pine/Gambel oak at elevations of 4,000 to 9,000 ft (Gutiérrez, Franklin, and Lahaye 1995). Also, found in narrow canyons dominated by vertical-walled rocky cliffs within complex watersheds. Nesting typically occurs near a water Mexican spotted owl Threatened source (USFWS, 2004). Winters at lower elevations in pinyon-juniper woodlands, in open None (Strix occidentalis lucida) mountain-shrub, or higher-elevation conifer forests. (Gutiérrez, Franklin, and Lahaye 1995). Analysis Area is below lower elevation limit, and does not support suitable mixed conifer or pine/oak forest habitat. Although HDMS records indicate critical habitat is located with 5 miles of the Analysis Area, there are no occurrence records for this species within that range (Appendix C). Dependent on cottonwood/willow and/or tamarisk riparian communities along rivers and streams. Suitable habitat includes riparian areas with complex habitats, dense under- and mid-story vegetation that is ≥ 10 ft in height, with or without canopy cover, and in close proximity to surface water (AGFD 2016b). In Arizona, this species breeds very locally along dynamic riparian systems, including the middle Gila, Salt, Verde rivers; middle to lower San Southwestern willow Pedro River; and upper San Francisco River (USFWS 2013a). flycatcher Endangered Unlikely Analysis Area does not provide breeding habitat for SWFL. Because migrant SWFLs may (Empidonax trailii extimus) occur in non-riparian or in riparian habitats that are not suitable for breeding (USFWS 2002b), it is possible that this subspecies and other subspecies of the willow flycatcher may occur as transients in the Analysis Area during fall and spring migration. No SWFL critical habitat is mapped within the Analysis Area. The closest designated critical habitat for SWFL is at the Salt River, approximately 11 miles north of the Analysis Area. This bird is discussed further in Section 4.2. This bird has been recorded throughout Arizona, including within Gila County. Critical habitat for this species has been proposed along Pinal Creek to the north and Pinto Creek to the west of the Analysis Area (USFWS 2014a). No proposed critical habitat for YBC is Yellow-billed cuckoo (YBC) mapped within the Analysis Area. (Coccyzus americanus), Threatened Possible The relatively dense under- and mid-story (clover, poison ivy, buckthorn, coyote willow) western DPS portions of Lost Gulch may provide some potential for YBC foraging and, less likely, breeding. Relatively dense, tall patches of riparian trees are outside the Analysis Area, but a small, narrow stand is present. It is possible that migrating YBC could occur as transients in the Analysis Area during fall and spring migration. This bird is discussed further in Section 4.3.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 13

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area Found in freshwater marshes with emergent cover (often cattails, bulrushes, and sedges, although the presence of emergent cover is the relevant habitat indicator, not specific species). Suitable habitat also characterized by high water coverage, low stem density, and mixture of Yuma clapper rail vegetation ages (Rush et al. 2012). Found along the lower Colorado River and on the Gila (Rallus obsoletus (=longirostris) Endangered None River from Gillespie Dam to the Salt River confluence (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). yumanensis) Analysis Area is outside current known distribution, lacks appropriate habitat of freshwater marshes, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). (4) Occupies Sonoran desertscrub through semi-desert grasslands and into oak woodlands where columnar cacti and agaves occur. Roosts in caves, abandoned mines and occasionally old buildings (AGFD 2016b). Occur in southern Arizona from the Picacho Mountains Lesser long-nosed Endangered southwesterly to the and southeasterly to the Galiuro and Chiricahua (Leptonycteris curasoae Proposed for None mountains and then southerly into Mexico. Not present in Arizona during winter months yerbabuenae) Delisting (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is outside known geographic range, does not contain appropriate roosting or foraging habitat, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). In Arizona, this is known to inhabit evergreen pine-oak woodlands (i.e., Madrean woodlands), pinyon-juniper woodlands (i.e., Great Basin conifer forests), and mixed-conifer montane forests (i.e., Rocky Mountain, or petran forests), but are unlikely to occur in desert habitats (BISON-M 2016; USFWS 2016b). Habitat selection is associated with availability Proposed of sufficient prey populations, such as elk and deer. The Mexican Wolf Experimental Mexican wolf Experimental None Population Area extends from eastern New Mexico to western Arizona, and from I-40 south (Canis lupus baileyi) Population, to the US-Mexican border (USFWS 2015a). The Dispersal and Occupancy Zone is located Non-essential east of State Highway 87, and extends from I-40 to the US-Arizona Border. Although the Analysis Area is located within the species’ potential Dispersal and Occupancy Zone, the Analysis Area is outside the species’ known distribution range (USFWS 2016c), and the species has no potential to occur.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 14

Table 1. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of ESA Listed Species within the Analysis Area USFWS Potential to Species Occur in the Basis for Determination Status Analysis Area This mammal occupies dense thickets that are almost impenetrable in chaparral and thornscrub (AGFD 2016b). Established sightings in Arizona are rare for this species; known from very few localities, all considered to be transient individuals. Observations from Ocelot Arizona and Texas represent the extreme northern edge of its range. A male was killed by a Endangered Unlikely (Leopardus pardalis) vehicle on US 60 between Globe and Superior in April 2010 (AGFD 2010). The known, current distribution of the species does not include the Analysis Area but the distribution of the species is close enough such that the Analysis Area may be within the dispersal distance of the species. This species is discussed further in Section 4.4. Inhabits broad alluvial valleys separated by block-faulted mountain and surface volcanics. The Sonoran pronghorn diet typically consists of anywhere from 20 to 99% forbs in certain seasons Endangered so the presence of these plants in the vegetation communities is vital. The species ranges in Sonoran pronghorn Experimental elevation from 2,000 to 4,000 ft (AGFD 2016b). Occupies extreme southwestern Arizona, (Antilocarpa americana None Population, particularly within the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, Organ Pipe Cactus National sonoriensis) Non-essential Monument, and the Luke Air Force Barry M. Goldwater Gunnery Range (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is outside the known restricted geographic range, and IPaC results do not indicate potential for species to occur within the Analysis Area (Appendix A). * Note: The species complex of Gila nigra, G. robusta, and G. intermedia have recently been reclassified as one species, which may impact the listing status of this species (Page et al. 2016). US Fish & Wildlife Service Categories Endangered – Taxon in danger of extinction throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range. Threatened – Taxon likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range. Proposed – Taxon has been determined to warrant listing, but USFWS has not yet made a final determination on endangered vs threatened status Experimental population, non-essential – ESA-listed taxon release outside its current range, but within its historic range, which is considered non-essential to the continued existence of the species. Subject to similar regulatory requirements as a threatened species.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 15

4.1. ARIZONA HEDGEHOG CACTUS

Natural History and Range

Arizona hedgehog cactus (AHC) has been recently reclassified as E. arizonicus subsp. arizonicus (Baker 2006). However, AHC is listed under the ESA as E. triglochidiatus var. arizonicus, and this document follows that nomenclature.

The AHC occupies portions of the highlands of Pinal and Gila counties between the towns of Superior and Globe. Its known range extends from the Superstition Wilderness south to Devils Canyon, east along US 60 to Top of the World, and south to the Mescal and (AGFD 2016b; Baker 2013; Viert 1996).

The AHC occurs from 3,300 to 5,700 ft amsl (1,006 to 1,737 m) in Interior Chaparral and Madrean Evergreen Woodland habitats (Brown 1994a). Suitable substrate includes bedrock open slopes where individuals occur in cracks and crevices and between boulders on stable rock formations such as Apache Leap Tuff (a dacite), Schultze Granite, Pinal Schist, and Pioneer Quartzite (Viert 1996).

The majority of AHC habitat occurs on lands managed by U.S. Forest Service, but is also found on BLM-administered lands, State Trust Land managed by Arizona State Land Department, or privately owned property.

Listing Status

The AHC is federally listed under the ESA as Endangered without critical habitat (USFWS 1979). AHC is also protected by the Arizona Native Plant Law (A.R.S. Title 3, Chapter 7) as a Highly Safeguarded Native Plant and is protected from international trade by the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species.

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The HDMS report (Appendix C) does not indicate any records of AHC within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area. Portions of the Analysis Area include potential AHC habitat within the 3,300- to 5,700- ft amsl elevational range with Interior Chaparral and surficial geology of Pinal Schist. Based on the elevation and the presence of this substrate and vegetation type, AHC does have potential to occur within the Analysis Area. However, this species was not observed during surveys within the immediate vicinity of the Analysis Area, and the Analysis Area is approximately 6.2 miles (10 km) to the east of predicted habitat for this species (Baker 2013).

The potential for this species to occur in the Analysis Area is unlikely.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 16

4.2. SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER

Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (SWFL; (Empidonax traillii extimus) is a riparian obligate species that prefers dense vegetation within close proximity to surface water. The known elevation range for SWFL extends from sea level to 8,530 ft amsl (2,600 m). The species occurs in a range of conditions within the defined dense riparian community (USFWS 2002b) including a range of shrub and understory heights, and variation in canopy heights and coverages. SWFL historically utilized native vegetation, but it has adapted to, and now readily utilizes, invasive saltcedar (Tamarix sp.) and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) (USFWS 2002b). SWFL will readily nest in monotypic or mixed stands of these species. Based on patch size values given in publications and agency reports, mean size of flycatcher breeding patches is 21 acres and median patch size is 4.4 acres (USFWS 2002b).

The SWFL is a migratory species that winters south of the U.S. in Mexico, Central America, and South America. Its breeding range within the U.S. includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah. Areas within Arizona with the largest known populations of SWFL are located in the Grand Canyon, Topock Marsh, Big Sandy River, Alamo Lake, Verde River, White Mountains, Tonto Creek, Salt River, Gila River, and San Pedro River (Ellis et al. 2008). SWFL migrate north from April through June and begin to arrive on breeding grounds in May;2 nest building, breeding, incubation, and fledging occurs from mid-May through mid- to late August; migration south occurs from late July through September (USFWS 2002b).

Listing Status

The SWFL was listed as an endangered species under the ESA in 1995 (USFWS 1995). Critical habitat was designated for the species in 1997 (USFWS 1997), revised in 2005 (USFWS 2005), and revised again in 2013 (USFWS 2013a). The latest revisions include stream segments with the lateral extent including riparian areas and streams that are within the 100-year floodplain or flood prone areas (USFWS 2013a). There is no designated SWFL critical habitat within the Analysis Area. The closest designated critical habitat for SWFL is at the Salt River, approximately 11 miles north of the Analysis Area.

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The HDMS report (Appendix C) does not indicate any records of SWFL within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area. Although SWFL have not been recorded within the Analysis Area, they have been known to occur at Pinal Creek, approximately 6 miles from the Analysis Area.

Lost Gulch has surface water part of the year and supports native riparian vegetation, however it does not provide as dense a riparian community as sites from which SWFL is known to breed; such as a

2 USFWS (2002) also notes that a few individual SWFLs may establish territories in very late April.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 17

range of shrub and understory heights or a variation in canopy heights and coverages; and does not provide bordering habitat that may be important in providing an environmental buffer for this species.

Patches of mesoriparian habitat identified during field reconnaissance varied in size from 0.7 to 1.9 acres, which is smaller than patch size values reported for suitable breeding habitat.

Because migrant SWFLs may occur in non-riparian or in riparian habitats that are not suitable for breeding (USFWS 2002b), it is possible that this subspecies and other subspecies of the willow flycatcher may forage within the Analysis Area or occur as transients in the Analysis Area during fall and spring migration. However, the Analysis Area does not likely provide suitable breeding habitat for SWFL.

The potential for this species to occur in the Analysis Area is unlikely.

4.3. YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO

Natural History and Range

The yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus; YBC) is a habitat specialist that prefers continuous areas of dense riparian habitat dominated by native tree species, especially cottonwoods and willows, for breeding (Halterman et al. 2015). The YBC requires relatively large (less than 50 acres), contiguous patches of multilayered riparian habitat for nesting. This species may also use mesquite bosques and smaller stands of isolated cottonwoods mixed with mesquites (AGFD 2016b). In Arizona, the YBC is most commonly found in lowland riparian woodlands where Fremont cottonwood, willow, velvet ash, Arizona walnut, mesquite, and saltcedar (tamarisk) are dominant (USFWS 2013d) and areas of upland-associated vegetation along drainages dominated by oaks and junipers (WestLand Resources 2013). Dense understory foliage is an important factor for nesting.

Within Arizona, this species ranges throughout the central and southern portions as well as the extreme northeastern corner of the state, usually at elevations of less than 6,600 ft amsl (2,011 m) (AGFD 2016b). Cuckoos have been reported along the Gila and San Pedro rivers in Pinal County; on Pinal Creek, Pinto Creek, Tonto Creek, and the Salt River in Gila County; and on the Salt and Verde rivers in Maricopa County (AGFD 2016b; Halterman et al. 2015).

In Arizona, YBC nesting activities may begin in late May, but typically begin in mid-June and end in late August (Halterman et al. 2015).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 18

Taxonomy and Listing History

The YBC is federally listed under the ESA as Threatened (USFWS 2014b). The USFWS recognizes the western population of YBC as a distinct population segment (DPS) inclusive of all breeding yellow-billed cuckoos west of the Rocky Mountains (USFWS 2001). The YBC is also a Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Arizona. There is no designated YBC critical habitat within the Analysis Area. The proposed critical habitat units nearest to the Analysis Area are along Pinal Creek to the north and along Pinto Creek to the west.

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The HDMS report (Appendix C) does not indicate any record of YBC occurring within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area. The riparian corridor along Lost Gulch provides some elements of habitat that are similar to habitat used by YBC for breeding or foraging, but that are smaller than the relatively large (less than 50 acres), contiguous patches of multilayered riparian habitat required for nesting (Halterman et al. 2015). Although the stretch of Lost Gulch that occurs in Analysis Area is sparse in canopy coverage and density and provides marginal breeding habitat for this bird, the area provides some potential for YBC foraging. It is also possible that migrating YBCs occur as transients in the Analysis Area during fall and spring migration.

The potential for this species to occur in the Analysis Area is possible.

4.4. OCELOT

Natural History and Range

The ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) is a medium-sized spotted cat that historically ranged from the southwestern U.S. to northern Argentina (USFWS 1982).

Ocelots inhabit a wide variety of densely vegetated habitat types, including, but not limited to, thorn scrub, semi-arid woodland, tropical deciduous and semi-deciduous forest, subtropical forest, lowland rainforest, palm savanna, and seasonally flooded savanna woodland. Despite the variation in habitat use, the species does not appear to be a habitat generalist. Ocelot spatial patterns are strongly linked to dense cover or vegetation (USFWS 2016d).

Ocelots are solitary that maintain home ranges that vary in area throughout its geographic range. Established sightings in Arizona are rare for this species. A male ocelot was killed by a vehicle on US 60 between Globe and Superior, approximately 9 miles southwest of the Analysis Area, in April 2010 (AGFD 2010).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 19

Listing Status

Endangered status was extended to the U.S. portion of the ocelot’s range with a final rule published July 21, 1982 (USFWS 1982). No critical habitat has been designated for this species in the U.S.

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The AGFD HDMS report (Appendix C) does not indicate any records of ocelot within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area. The Analysis Area is outside the known geographic range for the ocelot; however, the distribution of the ocelot is close enough such that the Analysis Area may be within the dispersal distance of the species. The Analysis Area does not contain suitable habitat for this species. Based on these findings, the ocelot is considered unlikely to occur within the Analysis Area.

4.5. ARIZONA TOAD

Natural History and Range

The Arizona toad (Anaxyrus microscaphus) is a rather stocky toad with a light-colored stripe across the head and eyelids. The toad is nocturnal except during the breeding season. Arizona toads breed from February to July), and breeding is not dependent on rainfall as with other toads (AGFD 2016b).

The species is usually found in slower water and shallow pools where tree canopy is relatively open in in sandy and rocky streams and canyons in pine-oak habitat and lower deserts at elevations from 0 (sea level) to 8,000 ft (0 to 2,440 m). Artificial habitats are also used (AGFD 2016b; Brennan and Holycross 2006). The species does not stray very far from water or riparian habitats (Brennan and Holycross 2006).

The distribution of this toad in Arizona ranges from east to west central Arizona, in canyons and flood plains south of the Mogollon Rim. Occurs in Apache, Coconino, Gila, Graham, Greenlee, La Paz, Maricopa, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai counties. Hybridization with Woodhouse toad has been thought to be a threat in aquatic systems with still water but the population is stable at other localities (AGFD 2016b).

Listing Status

The Arizona toad is considered a sensitive species in the BLM Phoenix District (Appendix B).

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The Arizona toad has not been documented within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area (Appendix C), however the Analysis Area is within the geographic range, and contains potentially appropriate seasonal breeding or dispersal habitat for the species (ponding areas after run off events). Based on these characteristics the Arizona toad is considered possible to occur within the Analysis Area.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 20

4.6. LOWLAND LEOPARD FROG

Natural History and Range

The lowland leopard frog (Lithobates yavapiensis) is a medium-sized, slender frog with a narrow head and long legs. The frog is active during the day and the night, and year-round, and may live up to 3 years. Lowland leopard frogs breed from January to April, possibly with two annual breeding cycles, and reproduction is aquatic (Brennan and Holycross 2006).

The species is usually found in permanent water with rooted vegetation including ponds, canals, marshes, springs, and streams at elevations from 0 ft (sea level) to 9,155 ft (0 to 2,790 m) (AGFD 2016b; Brennan and Holycross 2006). The species is a habitat generalist and occurs in a variety of habitats including grassland, brushland, woodland, and forest lands.

The distribution of this frog ranges from extreme west New Mexico, west to the Colorado River and south to Sonora, Mexico. The lowland leopard frog is extirpated from more than 50 percent of its historical range. However, the species is still abundant in the central portion of Arizona (AGFD 2016b). Nonnative species establishment, in particular, predatory fish, crayfish, and American bullfrog (L. catesbeianus), in historical lowland leopard frog habitat, has been a major factor in the decline of the species (Brennan and Holycross 2006).

Listing Status

The lowland leopard frog is considered a sensitive species in the BLM Phoenix District (Appendix B).

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The lowland leopard frog has been documented within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area (Appendix C). The Analysis Area is within the geographic range, and contains potentially appropriate seasonal breeding or dispersal habitat for the species (ponding areas after run off events). The species has been known to wander widely and based on these characteristics, the lowland leopard frog is considered possible to occur within the Analysis Area.

4.7. SONORA MUD TURTLE

Natural History and Range

The Sonora mud turtle (Kinosternon sonoriense sonoriense) inhabits springs, creeks, ponds and waterholes of intermittent streams. The turtle mates in the water during spring and lays a clutch of up to 11 brittle-shelled eggs in an underground nest. The turtle is primarily diurnal in spring and fall but can be active at any time of the day or night during the hot summer months. It is aquatic but often travels overland between bodies of water. During the cold months of late fall and winter it hibernates in the

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 21

soil under the water or in cavities along the stream bank. Primary food sources include , snails, fish, frogs, carrion, and some plant material (Brennan and Holycross 2006).

In Arizona, the turtle occupies the Lower Colorado and Gila rivers eastward throughout the Gila drainage into New Mexico, including most of southeastern and sub-Mogollon Rim central Arizona. It is found in the Salt and Gila rivers and their tributaries, tributaries of the Colorado River in west- central Arizona, the Colorado River near Yuma, and several drainages flowing south into Mexico from southeastern and south-central Arizona at elevations from sea level along the Colorado River to 6,700 ft (2,044 m). The species also occupies drainages in Mexico between and including the Sonoyta and Yaqui Rivers (AGFD 1999; Brennan and Holycross 2006).

Listing Status

The Sonora mud turtle is considered a sensitive species in the BLM Phoenix District (Appendix B).

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The Analysis Area is within the geographic range, and contains potentially appropriate seasonal breeding or dispersal habitat for the species (ponding areas). The species often travels overland between bodies of water, and based on these characteristics, the Sonoran mud turtle is considered possible to occur within the Analysis Area

4.8. GOLDEN EAGLE

Natural History and Range

The golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) can be found nesting in a variety of Arizona habitats including pinyon pine-juniper woodlands, Sonoran desertscrub, Madrean evergreen oak woodlands, semiarid grasslands, chaparral, and landscapes dominated by big sagebrush (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). It is known to construct its nest in areas with little to no human activity, in tall trees, cliffs, canyons, or rock ledges, near large open areas where they forage for prey (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). Golden eagles are known to forage within 4.4 miles (7 km) of the nest, generally in open habitats where prey is available (Kochert et al. 2002).

In , golden eagles primarily breed in the west from Alaska and Canada south to central Mexico. In Arizona, the species is described as a fairly common resident in suitable habitat throughout the state. Most golden eagles in Arizona are considered residents, and are present within or near their home range throughout the year (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 22

Listing Status

The golden eagle is protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as amended, and Executive Order 13186, signed by President Clinton on January 10, 2001, which placed procedural requirements on the analysis of federal actions on the conservation of migratory birds. The golden eagle is also protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and is considered a sensitive species in the BLM Phoenix District (Appendix B).

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The golden eagle has been documented at the Boyce Thompson Arboretum west of Superior, Arizona, the Pinal Mountains, Oak Flat, and Rock Creek in the (eBird 2016), and the AGFD HDMS report (Appendix C) indicates that the golden eagle has been documented within 5 miles (8 km) of the Analysis Area. This species has not been documented in the Analysis Area, but the area is within the geographic range and contains potentially suitable habitat for the species (tall trees for perching, open areas where rabbits and small rodents are available). Based on these characteristics, the golden eagle is considered possible to occur within the Analysis Area.

4.9. PINYON JAY

Natural History and Range

The pinyon jay (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus) is a highly social, seed-caching bird of the foothills and lower mountain slopes of the western and southwestern U.S. This bird is named for piñon pines of western North America (genus Pinus). These pines and this jay are associated in a mutualistic relationship. The large, wingless seeds of these pines are dispersed long distances on the wings of the pinyon jay, which reaps the reward of a food source rich in energy and nutrients. Pinyon jays may live up to age 16 years in the wild. This bird is a colonial nester that commences breeding in the cold of winter in areas where pine-seed crops were abundant the previous autumn (Balda 2002). The species is closely associated with piñon pines and adjacent conifers of northern and central Arizona. Pinyon jays are most commonly found in piñon pine-juniper woodlands and adjacent grasslands with scattered stands of juniper and piñon pine, or ponderosa pine at higher elevations. They are also often found in bordering habitats as it wanders widely to forage (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005).

This species is primarily a resident in western North America from central Oregon and southern Montana south into New Mexico, central Arizona, and northern Baja California. Pinyon jays also breed locally in western South Dakota and Nebraska. The species’ Arizona breeding range includes central and northern Arizona, where it closely parallels the distribution of Colorado piñon pine. Generally considered nonmigratory, the species has been known to disperse irregularly to forage when food sources are lacking in the north, sometimes traveling to southeastern Arizona sky islands and beyond (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 23

Listing Status

The pinyon jay is protected under the MBTA and is also considered a sensitive species in the BLM Phoenix District (Appendices B and D).

Potential to Occur Within the Analysis Area

The pinyon jay has not been documented in the vicinity of the Analysis Area (AGFD 2016a; eBird 2016), but range data indicates the species may be an occasional winter visitor within this region (Balda 2002). The nearest breeding record is located north of Lake Roosevelt (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005), and breeding is not anticipated to occur within the Analysis Area. However, the area is located within the species’ geographic range, and contains potentially suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the species (scrub oak, and chaparral communities). The species has been known to wander widely to forage, and is often found in similar habitats. The pinyon jay has been documented at the Boyce Thompson Arboretum west of Superior, Arizona, and Apache and Seneca lakes on the Salt River (eBird 2016). Based on these characteristics, it is considered possible the pinyon jay would forage within the Analysis Area.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 24

5. REFERENCES

Arizona Ecological Services Field Office. 2009. “General Species Information: California Condor (Gymnogyps Californianus).” Phoenix, Arizona: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/Redbook/California Condor RB.pdf.

Arizona Game and Fish Department. 1999. “Sonora Mud Turtle (Kinosternon Sonoriense Sonoriense).” Unpublished Abstract Compiled and Edited by the Heritage Data Management System. Phoenix, Arizona: Arizona Game and Fish Department. http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/edits/documents/Kinososo.d_000.pdf.

_____. 2003. “Arizona Hedgehog Cactus (Echinocereus Triglochidiatus Var. Arizonica).” Unpublished Abstract Compiled and Edited by the Heritage Data Management System. Phoenix, Arizona: Arizona Game and Fish Department.

_____. 2010. “Leopardus Pardalis.” Unpublished Abstract Compiled and Edited by the Heritage Data Management System. Phoenix, Arizona: Arizona Game and Fish Department.

_____. 2016a. “ABBA Query.” HabiMapTM Arizona. http://www.habimap.org/habimap/.

_____. 2016b. “Unpublished Abstracts and Maps Compiled and Edited by the Heritage Data Management System (HDMS).” Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona.

Arizona Rare Plant Committee. 2001. Arizona Rare Plant Field Guide: A Collaboration of Agencies and Organizations. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Averill-Murray, R. C., and C.M. Klug. 2000. “Monitoring and Ecology of Sonoran Desert Tortoises in Arizona.” Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical Report 161. Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Baker, M.A. 2006. “Circumscription of Echinocereus Arizonicus Subsp. Arizonicus: Phenetic Analysis of Morphological Characters in Section Triglochidiatus (Cactaceae), Part II.” Madrono 53 (4): 388–99.

_____. 2013. “Draft Recovery Plan for Echinocereus Arizonicus Subsp. Arizonicus (Arizona Hedgehog Cactus).” Prepared for the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Balda, Russell P. 2002. “Pinyon Jay (Gymnorhinus Cyanocephalus).” The Birds of North America Online. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/605.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 25

BISON-M. 2016. “New Mexico Game and Fish Department and the Fish & Wildlife Information Exchange.” Biotic Information System of New Mexico (BISON-M). Blacksburg, Virginia: Conservation Management Institute, Virginia Tech. http://www.bison- m.org/speciesreports.aspx.

Brennan, T.C., and A.T. Holycross. 2006. A Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles in Arizona. Phoenix, Arizona: Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Brown, D. E., ed. 1994a. Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. 2nd ed. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press.

_____. 1994b. “Madrean Evergreen Woodland.” In Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico, edited by D. E. Brown, 59–65. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press.

Brown, D. E., and C. Lowe. 1980. “Biotic Communities of the Southwest [Map].” General Technical Report RM-78. Fort Collins, Colorado: Reprinted (and revised) 1994 by University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Corman, Troy, and Cathryn Wise-Gervais. 2005. Arizona Breeding Bird Atlas. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

eBird. 2016. “eBird: An Online Database of Bird Distribution and Abundance [Web Application].” eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://www.ebird.org.

Ellis, L. A., D. M. Weddle, S. D. Stump, H. C. English, and A. E. Graber. 2008. “Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Final Survey and Nest Monitoring Report.” Research Technical Guidance Bulletin #10. Phoenix, Arizona: Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Ffolliott, P.F. 1999. “Central Arizona Highlands.” In History of Watershed Research in the Central Arizona Highlands, edited by M.B. Baker, Jr., 1–6. Fort Collins, Colorado: U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-29.

Gutiérrez, R J, A B Franklin, and W S Lahaye. 1995. “Spotted Owl (Strix Occidentalis).” The Birds of North America Online. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/179.

Halterman, M.D., M.J. Johnson, J.A. Holmes, and S.A. Laymon. 2015. “A Natural History Summary and Survey Protocol for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Techniques and Methods.” Final Draft, 45.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 26

Hawker, J. L. 2016. Agaves, Yuccas, and Their Kin: Seven Genera of the Southwest. Lubbock, Texas: Texas Tech University Press.

Kochert, M. N., K. Steenhof, C. L. Mcintyre, and E. H. Craig. 2002. “Golden Eagle (Aquila Chrysaetos).” The Birds of North America Online. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/684.

Minckley, W. L., and D. E. Brown. 1994. “Interior and Californian Riparian Deciduous Forests and Woodlands.” In Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico, edited by D. E. Brown, 250–54. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press.

Minckley, W.L., and P.C. Marsh. 2009. Inland Fishes of the Greater Southwest. Chronicle of a Vanishing Biota. Tucson, Arizona: The University of Arizona Press.

Moore, W.S. 1995. “Gilded Flicker (Colaptes Chrysoides).” The Birds of North America Online. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/166b.

Morris, G., C. Kline, and S. Morris. 2015. “Status of Danaus Plexippus Population in Arizona.” Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 69 (2): 91–97.

Nigro, Ernest, and Jim Rorabaugh. 2008. “Lowland Burrowing Treefrog Smilisca Fodiens.” Online Field Guide to The Reptiles and Amphibians of Arizona. http://www.reptilesofaz.org/Turtle- Amphibs-Subpages/h-s-fodiens.html.

Page, L. M., C. C. Baldwin, H. Espinosa-Pérez, C. R. Gilbert, K. E. Hartel, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, J. J. Schmitter-Soto, and H. J. Walker. 2016. “Final Report of the AFS/ASIH Joint Committee on the Names of Fishes on the of Gila in the Lower Colorado River Basin of Arizona and New Mexico.” Report to the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Pase, C., and D. E. Brown. 1994. “Interior Chaparral.” In Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico, edited by D. E. Brown, Vol. 4 (1-:95–99. Desert Plants. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press.

Peterson, N.P. 1962. “Geology and Ore Deposits of the Globe-Miami District, Arizona.” Professional Paper 342, Plate 1, 1:24,000. U.S. Geological Survey. http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/0342/plate- 1.pdf.

Poulin, Ray L, Danielle Todd, E A Haug, B A Millsap, and M S Martell. 2011. “Burrowing Owl (Athene Cunicularia).” The Birds of North America Online. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/061/articles/distribution.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 27

Rush, Scott A., Karen F. Gaines, William R. Eddleman, and Courtney J. Conway. 2012. “Clapper Rail (Rallus Longirostris).” The Birds of North America Online. Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/340.

Southwest Environmental Information Network. 2016. “Database of Herbarium Collections.” SEINet. http://swbiodiversity.org/seinet/index.php.

Tesky, Julie L. 1994. “Aquila Chrysaetos.” In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. http://www.feis-crs.org/beta/.

Tonto National Forest. 2000a. “Species Abstracts.” http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsbdev3_018579.pdf.

_____. 2000b. “Tonto National Forest Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) Species 2000 Draft Abstracts.” U.S. Forest Service. http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsbdev3_018579.pdf.

Turner, R.M. 1994. Mohave Desertscrub in Biotic Communities Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. Edited by D.E. Brown. University of Utah Press.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Determination That Echinocereus Triglochidiatus Var. Arizonicus Is an Endangered Species.” Federal Register 44: 61556–58.

_____. 1982. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for U.S. Population of the Ocelot, Final Rule.” Federal Register 47 (140). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 31670–72.

_____. 1985. “Recovery Plan for the California Least Tern.” Portland, Oregon: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/850927.pdf.

_____. 1986. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status and Critical Habitat for the Desert Pupfish.” Federal Register 51 (61): 10. https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr1102.pdf.

_____. 1995. “Final Rule Determining Endangered Status for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher.” Federal Register 60 (38). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 10694–715.

_____. 1997. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Determination of Critical Habitat for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher.” Federal Register 62 (140): 39129–47.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 28

_____. 2001. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding for a Petition to List the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus Americanus) in the Western Continental United States.” Federal Register 66 (143). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 38611–26.

_____. 2002a. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing of the Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana Chiricahuensis); Final Rule.” Federal Register 67 (114). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 23.

_____. 2002b. “Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan.” Albuquerque, New Mexico: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

_____. 2004. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Mexican Spotted Owl; Final Rule.” Federal Register. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

_____. 2005. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax Traillii Extimus); Final Rule.” Federal Register 70 (201): 60886–9.

_____. 2009. “General Species Information: California Least Tern.” Phoenix. http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/Redbook/California Least Tern RB.pdf.

_____. 2011. “Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Leucocephalus).” General Species Information. Arizona Ecological Services Field Office. http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/Redbook/Bald Eagle RB.pdf.

_____. 2012a. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status and Designations of Critical Habitat for Spikedace and Loach Minnow.” Federal Register 77 (36). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 10810–934. https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/RecoveryPlans/LoachMinnowRP .PDF.

_____. 2012b. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing and Designation of Critical Habitat for the Chiricahua Leopard Frog; Final Rule.” Federal Register 77 (54): 16324–424.

_____. 2013a. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, Designation of Critical Habitat for Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, Final Rule.” Federal Register 78 (2): 344–534.

_____. 2013b. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Gunnison’s Prairie Dog as an Endangered or Threated Species.” Federal Register 78 (220): 68660–85.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 29

_____. 2013c. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Acuña Cactus and the Fickeisen Plains Cactus; Proposed Rule.” Federal Register 78 (130): 40673–86.

_____. 2013d. “Proposed Threatened Status for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus Americanus); Proposed Rule.” Federal Register 78 (192): 61622–66.

_____. 2014a. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo; Proposed Rule.” Federal Register 79 (158): 48548–652.

_____. 2014b. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus Americanus); Final Rule.” Federal Register 79 (192). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 59992–38.

_____. 2015a. “Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for the Mexican Wolf and Regulations for the Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf; Final Rules.” Federal Register 80 (11): 2488–2512.

_____. 2015b. “Gila Chub (Gila Intermedia) Draft Recovery Plan.” Albuquerque, New Mexico: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region.

_____. 2016a. “Critical Habitat Portal.” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

_____. 2016b. “Gray Wolf (Canis Lupus).” Environmental Conservation Online System. https://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A00D.

_____. 2016c. “Mexican Wolf Occupied Range.” Geoportal. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mexican Wolf Recovery Program. http://fws.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=e87092240501466abd4606 dcdb50ce98.

_____. 2016d. “Recovery Plan for the Ocelot (Leopardus Pardalis), First Revision.” Albuquerque, New Mexico: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region.

Viert, S.R. 1996. “A Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Arizona Hedgehog Cactus (Echinocereus Triglochidiatus Var. Arizonicus) on the Tonto National Forest.” Report Prepared for the USDA. Phoenix, Arizona: Tonto National Forest.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Page 30

WestLand Resources. 2013. “Comments on the 2013 Proposal by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to List the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus Americanus) as Threatened.” Prepared for the Arizona Mining Association. Tucson, Arizona: WestLand Resources, Inc.

_____. 2016a. “2016 Sonoran Desert Tortoise Survey Report: Copper Cities.” Prepared for SRK Consulting, Inc., on Behalf of BHP Copper Inc. Tucson, Arizona: WestLand Resources, Inc.

_____. 2016b. “Copper Cities Abandoned Mine Feature Survey.” Prepared for SRK Consulting, Inc., on Behalf of BHP Copper Inc. Tucson, Arizona: WestLand Resources, Inc. In prep.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc.

TABLE 2

Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 1

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination PLANTS Aravaipa woodfern Occurs in shady canyon bottoms, near streams within Galiuro, , and Superstition Unlikely (Thelypteris puberula var. oak woodlands or deciduous riparian woodlands near mountains, and in Eagle Creek near Morenci Limited habitat occurs in Analysis sonorensis) permanent water. Substrates include alluvium (AGFD 2016b; SEINet 2016). Area but species was not observed comprised of gravel, sand and silt at elevations during wetland surveys. between 1,500 and 5,000 ft amsl (ARPC 2001; AGFD 2016b; SEINet 2016). Arizona Sonoran Inhabits desert scrub and desert grassland, in Occurs in Southwestern Arizona in the Ajo, None rosewood woodland or forest at base of cliffs, along canyon Diablo, Mesquite, and Santa Rosa mountains of Analysis Area is outside known (Vauquelinia californica ssp. bottoms and on moderate to steep slopes (AGFD Pima County, and Sand of restricted geographic range. sonorensis) 2016b). Maricopa County (SEINet 2016; AGFD 2016b). California flannelbush Inhabits well-drained rocky hillsides and ridges, Known from Superstition, Mazatzal, Weaver and Unlikely (Fremontodendron californica) usually north aspect, in chaparral and oak/pine , and upper Verde Valley, Analysis Area occurs east of known woodland. In Arizona, ranges from 3,500 to Arizona (SEINet 2016). records (SEINet 2016) but appropriate 6,500 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b). habitat may occur to a limited extent in the western portion of the Area. Cochise sedge Associated with saturated soils near or in perennial Cochise County: Huachuca, Chiricahua, Dragoon None aka. Giant Sedge seeps, streams, and springs from elevations of and ; Graham County: Galiuro Analysis Area does not contain (Carex ultra; also Carex 2,000 to 6,000 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b; ARPC 2001; Mountains; Pinal County: Aravaipa Canyon; Pima appropriate habitat spissa var. ultra) SEINet 2016). County: , Rincon Valley; Santa Cruz County: Santa Rita and ; Yavapai County: Hieroglyphic and (AGFD 2016b). Hohokam agave aka. Occurs on benches or alluvial terraces associated with Found in Verde River Drainage, and Bradshaw, Unlikely Murphey agave rolling bajadas (not on steep slopes or drainage Paradise Valley (Phoenix Basin), McDowell, New Analysis Area is within known (Agave murpheyi) bottoms) above major drainages in desertscrub River, and Wickenburg mountains, Maricopa geographic range (Hawker 2016) but habitat. Associated with pre-Columbian agricultural County; South Bradshaw and Hieroglyphic lacks appropriate habitat in the form and settlement features at elevations between 1,300 mountains, Castle Creek and Agua Fria rivers, of benches or alluvial terraces (e.g., and 3,400 ft (AGFD 2016b). Isolated record from Yavapai County; Roosevelt Lake, Mazatzal and Lost Gulch is a relatively steep- the northeast Pinal Mountain foothills at ~4400 ft Sierra Ancha mountains, and Tonto Basin, Gila sided, narrow canyon). elevation (SEINet 2016). County; Queen Creek near Superior, Pinal County (AGFD 2016b).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 2

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Joshua tree Occurs in higher elevation Mohave desert scrub at Northwestern Arizona, Mohave and Yavapai None (Yucca brevifolia) elevations between 1,300 to 5,900 ft on sandy, loamy counties (SEINet 2016). Analysis Area is outside known and gravelly soils (Turner 1994; SEINet 2016). geographic range and lacks appropriate habitat. Kofa Mt. Barberry Occurs in the bottoms of deep, shady, rocky Found in the Kofa, Sand Tank and the north end None (Berberis harrisoniana) canyons at elevations of 2,200 to 3,500 ft amsl of the Ajo mountains in southwestern Arizona Analysis Area is outside known (ARPC 2001). (ARPC 2001). geographic range. Pima Indian mallow Occurs on steep rocky slopes and hillsides in moist Found in mountain ranges of Central Arizona Unlikely (Abutilon parishii) soils and full sun within higher elevation Sonoran including the Mineral Hills, Superstition, Picacho, Area is within known geographic Desertscrub, and semidesert grassland. In riparian Tortolita, and Dripping Springs mountains of range and supports very limited areas, it occurs on flat terraces above canyon Pinal County (SEINet 2016). areas of appropriate habitat. bottoms. Elevation ranges from 1,700 to 4,900 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b; ARPC 2001). Schott wire lettuce Sand dunes and sandy flats in Sonoran Desert In Arizona, from Yuma and Maricopa counties None (Stephanomeria exigua ssp. scrub (AGFD 2016b). (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is outside known exigua) geographic range and lacks appropriate habitat. Tumamoc globeberry Occurs in the shade of nurse plants along gullies Occurs in area west of Tucson and south of I-10, None (Tumamoca macdougalii) and sandy washes in Sonoran desert (AGFD except one location in Analysis Area is outside known highly 2016b). (SEINet 2016). restricted geographic range. INVERTEBRATES Monarch butterfly Monarch larvae (caterpillars) in Arizona are known Adult monarchs are also known to overwinter and None (Danaus plexippus plexippus) to feed almost exclusively on milkweed species in breed in the low deserts of Arizona in areas where Analysis Area is outside known the genus Asclepias and have occasionally been water and food (flower nectar) resources are geographic range and lacks observed feeding on fringed twinevine (Funastrum abundant. These areas are generally represented by appropriate flowering species. cynanchoides) (Morris, Kline, and Morris 2015, Gail urban environments (e.g., Yuma, Phoenix and Moris, pers. comm.). vicinity, Tucson) (Morris, Kline, and Morris 2015). FISH Desert sucker Occurs in rapids and flowing pools of rivers and Widespread in Gila and Bill Williams systems None (Catostomus clarki) streams Elevation ranges from 480 to 8,840 ft amsl (Colorado River drainage) Arizona (AGFD Analysis Area does not contain (AGFD 2016b). 2016b). perennial stream environments

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 3

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Longfin dace Found in a variety of aquatic habitats in medium Primarily in the Gila and Bill Williams drainages None (Agosia chrysogaster) to small streams and creeks that can vary from and introduced into the Virgin River basin, Analysis Area does not contain low-elevation sandy bottomed desert streams to Arizona. Also occurs in San Pedro River and stream environments. cool to clear mountain streams. During low water, Cienega Creek (AGFD 2016b). may take refuge in moist detritus and algal mats. It is tolerant of high temperatures and low dissolved oxygen (AGFD 2016b). Can crowd in intermittent pools during drying periods (Minckley and Marsh 2009). Sonora sucker Associated with perennial, flowing streams Relatively widespread in Gila and Bill Williams None (Catostomus insignis) (AGFD 2016b). systems (Colorado River drainage) Arizona Analysis Area does not contain (AGFD 2016b). perennial stream environments. Speckled dace Prefer small to medium rivers and creeks. Found Bill Williams, Colorado, Salt, Verde, and Upper None (Rhinichthys osculus) in rocky riffles, runs, and pools of headwaters. Gila River drainages in Arizona (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area does not contain Elevations range from 1,500 to 8,920 feet amsl perennial stream environments. (AGFD 2016b). AMPHIBIANS Arizona toad Found along rocky, shallow perennial streams in a Southern Apache and Navajo counties, northern Possible (Anaxyrus microscaphus) range of elevations and habitats from low desert to Graham and Greenlee counties, Gila Yavapai and Analysis Area is within geographic mountains (Brennan and Holycross 2006). Mohave counties (Brennan and Holycross 2006). range but generally lacks suitable aquatic environments for this species. Analysis Area does not include any perennial creeks or streams and the few, small isolated seeps in the vicinity likely provide marginal breeding habitat at best. Ponding areas in the Analysis Area could provide seasonal breeding or dispersal habitat. This species is discussed further in Section 4.5.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 4

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Great Plains narrow- Found within wash bottoms and areas near water South-central Arizona, including Tucson area None mouthed toad in Sonoran desertscrub, Semidesert grasslands. (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is outside of restricted (Gastrophryne olivacea) Also found in earthen stock tanks. Elevations geographic range. range from 1,400 to 4,700 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b). Lowland burrowing Inhabits xeric environments usually associated Only known from south-central Arizona (Nigro None treefrog with washes and arroyos, in Sonoran desert scrub and Rorabaugh 2008). Analysis Area is outside of known (Smilisca fodiens) and mesquite grasslands (Nigro and Rorabaugh restricted geographic range. 2008). Elevations range from 1,980 to 2,480 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b). Lowland leopard frog Occurs in a variety of perennial to near perennial Found in central and southeastern Arizona with Possible (Lithobates [Rana] waters (AGFD 2016b). Species occurs in natural the majority found below the Mogollon Rim Analysis Area is within geographic yavapaiensis) and man-made aquatic systems. (AGFD 2016b). range but generally lacks suitable aquatic environments for this species. Analysis Area does not include any perennial creeks or streams and the few, small isolated seeps in the vicinity likely provide marginal breeding habitat at best. Ponding areas in the Analysis Area could provide seasonal breeding or dispersal habitat. HDMS has records within 5 miles of Analysis Area. This species is discussed further in Section 4.6. Northern leopard frog Usually in permanent water with rooted vegetation Found in northern and central Arizona (AGFD None (Lithobates [Rana] pipiens) including ponds, canals, marshes, springs, and 2016b). Very few extant localities remaining in Analysis Area is outside of known streams. Elevations range from 2,640 to 9,155 ft Arizona. restricted geographic range and amsl (AGFD 2016b). lacks appropriate habitat of permanent water Sonoran green toad Found within wash bottoms and areas near water Found in south-central Arizona; limited to Pima None (Anaxyrus retiformis) in grasslands and Sonoran desertscrub. Elevations and southern Pinal and Maricopa counties Analysis Area is outside of restricted range from 500 to 3,225 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b). (Brennan and Holycross 2006). geographic range.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 5

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination REPTILES Sonoran desert tortoise Species primarily occurs in rocky foothills and Occurs throughout southern and parts of central Unlikely (Gopherus morafkai) slopes, occasionally lower bajadas of the Sonoran Arizona (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is at the very eastern Desert., and ephemeral washes extending from the edge of the generalized geographic slopes that offer shelter (such as caliche caves) in range where only isolated records Sonoran Desertscrub. This includes the Arizona appear to be known (AGFD 2016b). Upland and Lower Colorado River subdivisions of No evidence of tortoise or tortoise Sonoran Desertscrub, as well as where these sign was observed during a survey communities transition to other biotic designed to target landscapes and communities including Interior Chaparral and features in the Analysis Area with desert grassland (Averill-Murray and Klug 2000). the highest potential for tortoise Occurs at elevations between 510 and 5,300 ft. occupancy (WestLand Resources 2016a). Potential shelter sites were also uncommon across the Area. A tortoise habitat assessment based on this survey determined that habitat quality in the Area was very low (WestLand Resources 2016a). HDMS does have a record within 5 miles of the Analysis Area (Appendix E). Sonora mud turtle Springs, creeks, ponds and perennial pools of Gila River drainage of central and southeast Arizona Possible (Kinosternon sonoriense intermittent streams that occur in upland biotic and tributaries of the Colorado River in west-central Analysis Area is within geographic sonoriense) communities ranging from Sonoran Desertscrub to Arizona (Brennan and Holycross 2006). range and does contain small areas montane pine forests (Brennan and Holycross 2006). of what is likely perennial surface water that could act as habitat for this species. Ponding areas in the Analysis Area could provide seasonal breeding or dispersal habitat. This species is discussed further in Section 4.7.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 6

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination BIRDS American peregrine Steep, sheer cliffs overlooking woodlands, riparian Includes all areas throughout the state wherever Unlikely falcon areas or other habitats supporting avian prey species there is appropriate habitat. Some individuals Analysis Area is within the (Falco peregrinus anatum) in abundance. In Arizona, it is most often found in remain near breeding territories year-round, while geographic range but contains little forested regions from pinyon pine-juniper and others move to lowlands or migrate south to spend appropriate foraging habitat of evergreen oaks to ponderosa pine and mixed the winter (AGFD 2016b; Corman and Wise- woodlands, riparian areas, and other conifer, to cold-temperate desertscrub and Sonoran Gervais 2005). habitats supporting avian prey desertscrub (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). species in abundance Bald eagle Nests in large riparian trees (cottonwoods, A small, primarily year-round resident population None (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) willows, sycamores) and pines, as well as on ledges occupies areas in Central Arizona, while a Analysis Area does not contain and cliff faces. Nest locations are typically in areas wintering population occupies areas in both appropriate foraging habitat. The of low human disturbance with unimpeded views, Central and Northern Arizona (AGFD 2016b). species has been documented at the and are located near foraging areas with abundant Boyce Thompson Arboretum prey. Wintering habitat has an adequate food approximately 20 miles to the supply, and open water (AGFD 2016b). In southwest but it is considered a rare Arizona, bald eagles feed primarily on fish, but and infrequent visitor present only waterfowl, small mammals, and carrion also during migration (eBird 2016). constitute a portion of the diet (USFWS 2011). Cactus ferruginous Sonoran riparian deciduous woodland within South-central Arizona. Most occurrences in Pima None pygmy-owl Arizona Upland Subdivision of Sonoran County. Few scattered records as far north as Analysis Area is outside of known (Glaucidium brasilianum Desertscrub (AGFD 2016b). Well-vegetated northern Pinal County (AGFD 2016b). restricted geographic range and cactorum) Sonoran desertscrub and mesquite bosques lacks appropriate habitat (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). Desert purple martin In Arizona, this large swallow is found in Sonoran In Arizona, the species breeds in saguaro None (Progne subis hesperia) desertscrub where large saguaros with many associations throughout south-central Arizona and Analysis Area lacks appropriate cavities are in abundance or in higher elevation in open forested areas above and below the breeding and foraging habitat of woodlands including pure stands of ponderosa Mogollon Rim (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). water, saguaros, or woodland with pine, as well as those with a Gambel's oak, oak and pine-juniper components Madrean evergreen oak, or pinyon pine-juniper component, and less frequently in mixed conifer forests. Forages over rivers, lakes, ponds, and earthen stock tanks, often at considerable distances from nest sites (Corman and Wise- Gervais 2005).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 7

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Ferruginous hawk Found in open, flat grassland with nearby knolls Breeds in northern Arizona (Corman and Wise- None (Buteo regalis) and scattered junipers. Sometimes found in Gervais 2005). Found year round in any part of Analysis Area does not contain open sagebrush-shrouded deserts and pine-juniper Arizona with native grasslands or agricultural grassland habitat. woodlands (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). fields (AGFD 2016b). Gilded flicker This species is found primarily in Sonoran Desert Considered a common resident in appropriate Unlikely (Colaptes chrysoides) uplands, in areas containing numerous saguaro habitat throughout Arizona (Moore 1995), Analysis Area does not contain cacti. Fewer are found in more arid and sparsely especially in the south central portion of the state, appropriate habitat (Sonoran Desert vegetated areas. It is also known to use adjacent west to the Colorado River valley, east to the lower uplands with saguaros). However, areas of wooded desert, dry washes, and Sonoran San Pedro River, and north to the Big Sandy and the Analysis Area is within the riparian woodlands containing cottonwood and Santa Maria River drainages (Corman and Wise- geographic range of the species and willow, but mostly for foraging (Corman and Gervais 2005). contains riparian vegetation Wise-Gervais 2005). (cottonwood and willow) that may be used for foraging Golden eagle Breeds in pinyon pine-juniper woodlands, In Arizona, the species is described as a fairly Possible (Aquila chrysaetos) Sonoran desertscrub, Madrean evergreen oak common resident in appropriate habitat Analysis Area is within the woodlands, semiarid grasslands, chaparral, and throughout the state (Corman and Wise-Gervais geographic range and contains landscapes dominated by big sagebrush. 2005). potentially suitable foraging habitat Constructs its nest in areas with little to no human for the species (open habitats where activity, in tall trees, cliffs, canyons, or rock ledges rabbits and small rodents are (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). Golden eagles available) are known to forage within 4.4 miles of the nest HDMS has records within 5 miles of (Tesky 1994), generally in open habitats where Analysis Area. This species is prey is available (Kochert et al. 2002). discussed further in Section 4.8.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 8

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Le Conte's thrasher Pinyon-juniper woodland is used most extensively Arizona breeding range includes central and None (Toxostoma lecontei) but flocks also breed in sagebrush, scrub oak, and northern Arizona, where it closely parallels the Analysis Area is outside of the chaparral communities (Balda 2002). The species distribution of Colorado pinyon pine. Generally geographic range and lacks is closely associated with pinyon pines and considered non-migratory, but when food sources appropriate habitat adjacent conifers or grasslands with scattered are lacking in the north, the species has been stands of juniper. It is also often found in known to disperse irregularly to forage; sometimes bordering habitats as it wanders widely to forage traveling to southeastern Arizona sky islands and (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). Foraging beyond (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). locations vary seasonally. In Arizona, foraging has been documented in meadows, grasslands, woodlands, ponderosa-pine forests, and mixed conifer forests (including burned areas) (Balda 2002). Northern goshawk Pinyon-juniper woodland is used most extensively Arizona breeding range includes central and None (Accipiter gentilis atricapillus) but flocks also breed in sagebrush, scrub oak, and northern Arizona, where it closely parallels the Analysis Area is within the chaparral communities (Balda 2002). The species is distribution of Colorado pinyon pine. Generally documented range of the species but closely associated with pinyon pines and adjacent considered non-migratory, but when food sources lacks suitable habitat of mature conifers or grasslands with scattered stands of are lacking in the north, the species has been forests and elevations of Analysis juniper. It is also often found in bordering habitats known to disperse irregularly to forage; sometimes Area are below lowest known as it wanders widely to forage (Corman and Wise- traveling to southeastern Arizona sky islands and elevational range of species Gervais 2005). Foraging locations vary seasonally. beyond (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). In Arizona, foraging has been documented in meadows, grasslands, woodlands, ponderosa-pine forests, and mixed conifer forests (including burned areas) (Balda 2002).

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 9

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Pinyon jay Pinyon-juniper woodland is used most extensively Arizona breeding range includes central and Possible (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus) but flocks also breed in sagebrush, scrub oak, and northern Arizona, where it closely parallels the Analysis Area is within the chaparral communities (Balda 2002). The species distribution of Colorado pinyon pine. Generally geographic range, although species is closely associated with pinyon pines and considered non-migratory, but when food sources is an uncommon visitor to this area adjacent conifers or grasslands with scattered are lacking in the north, the species has been of the state. Analysis Area contains stands of juniper. It is also often found in known to disperse irregularly to forage; sometimes potentially suitable nesting and bordering habitats as it wanders widely to forage traveling to southeastern Arizona sky islands and foraging habitat for the species (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). Foraging beyond (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). (scrub oak and chaparral locations vary seasonally. In Arizona, foraging has communities), and species has been been documented in meadows, grasslands, known to wander widely to forage, woodlands, ponderosa-pine forests, and mixed and is often found in adjacent conifer forests (including burned areas) (Balda habitats such as these. However, it is 2002). not known to breed in the vicinity of the Analysis Area. This species is discussed further in Section 4.9. Western burrowing owl Species prefers areas with burrowing mammals; Found nesting throughout the state where Unlikely (Athene cunicularia hypugaea) particularly in open, treeless, flat to gently-sloping favorable habitat is present; though there are some Analysis Area is within the known areas characterized by low, sparse vegetation within concentration areas such as near Yuma, in the geographic range of the species and grassland, steppe, and desert biomes (Poulin et al. Detrital and Hualapai valleys north of Kingman. contains potentially suitable habitat 2011). Also use human-influenced landscapes such as Concentrations also in the northeast from (flat, sparsely vegetated terrain). fallow fields, bladed areas for future development, Winslow northeast to Polacca and in the Chinle However, the majority of the flat, irrigation and canal embankments, agricultural lands, Valley, and in the southeast in Cochise County, disturbed areas within the Analysis airports, golf courses, and other open disturbed areas east of the San Pedro River, and from Phoenix Area are made up of tailings and (Corman and Wise-Gervais 2005). down the I-10 corridor to Marana (Corman and waste rock, and do not contain Wise-Gervais 2005). vacant fossorial mammal burrows.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 10

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination MAMMALS Allen’s big-eared bat Species occurs in woodlands and riparian areas in Found across most of Arizona, except the Unlikely aka. Allen’s lappet- proximity to cliffs, rocky outcrops, or lava flows, southwestern deserts. Generally found along Analysis Area is within the known browed bat often above water. Roosts in caves and abandoned Mogollon Rim (AGFD 2016b). The nearest record geographic and elevation range of (Idionycteris phyllotis) underground mines. Elevations range from 1,320 to of this species occurs approximately 30 miles to the species and appropriate foraging 9,800 ft amsl and are most common between 3,500 the north of the Analysis Area (AGFD 2016b). habitat exists there. However, and 7,500 ft amsl. Associated with ponderosa pine, survey of mine features at Copper pinyon juniper, and riparian areas with sycamore, Cities identified no suitable roost cottonwoods and willows (AGFD 2016b). habitat in the Analysis Area. Arizona myotis Forages over or near water in ponderosa pine and Throughout central and eastern portions of Unlikely (Myotis occultus) oak-pine woodlands in higher elevations of 3,200 Arizona (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is within the known to 8,620 ft amsl. Typical roosts found under geographic and elevation range of exfoliating bark of snags (AGFD 2016b). the species and appropriate foraging habitat exists there. However, a survey of mine features at Copper Cities identified no suitable roost habitat in the Analysis Area. California leaf-nosed Primarily found in Sonoran desertscrub Throughout the southern part of Arizona, usually Unlikely bat vegetation. It prefers roost sites with large areas of south of the Mogollon Rim. Occurrence records Analysis Area is within the known (Macrotus californicus) ceiling and flying space including abandoned heavily distributed along western portion of state geographic and elevation range of underground mines, caves, and rock shelters. All (AGFD 2016b). the species and appropriate foraging AGFD records below 4,000 ft amsl (AGFD habitat exists there. However, a 2016b). survey of mine features at Copper Cities identified no suitable roost habitat in the Analysis Area. Cave myotis Roosts in caves, tunnels, mines, and under bridges Primarily south of Mogollon Rim (AGFD 2016b). Unlikely (Myotis velifer) within a few miles of water. Forages in desertscrub Analysis Area is within the known vegetation (AGFD 2016b). geographic and elevation range of the species and appropriate foraging habitat exists there. However, a survey of mine features at Copper Cities identified no suitable roost habitat in the Analysis Area.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation for the Copper Cities March 15, 2017 Reclamation Plan of Operations Table 2 - Page 11

Table 2. Screening Analysis Potential for Occurrence of BLM Phoenix District Sensitive Species within the Analysis Area Potential for Occurrence Species Known Habitat Preferences Distribution and Occurrence Records and Basis for Determination Greater western mastiff bat Forages in lower and upper Sonoran desertscrub Considered a year-round resident in Arizona. They Unlikely aka. Greater western near cliffs. Prefers rocky canyons with abundant are observed in all Arizona counties except Analysis Area is within the known bonneted bat roosting crevices (AGFD 2016b). Yavapai, Navajo, Apache and Santa Cruz (AGFD geographic and elevation range of ( perotis californicus) 2016b). the species and appropriate foraging habitat exists there. However, a survey of mine features at Copper Cities identified no suitable roost habitat in the Analysis Area. Gunnison's prairie dog Occupies gently sloping grasslands, shrub-steppe Occurs in northern Arizona (USFWS 2013b). None (Cynomys gunnisoni) intermountain valleys, and semidesert and Analysis Area is outside of known montane shrublands at elevations of 4,600 to geographic range and lacks high 12,000 ft amsl (USFWS 2013b). elevation grasslands Spotted bat Species associated with low to high elevation Northwestern Arizona with isolated records near None (Euderma maculatum) desertscrub where they apparently roost singly in Yuma and Seligman (AGFD 2016b). Analysis Area is outside known cracks and crevices on rocky cliffs near surface restricted geographic range water (TNF 2000b). Also occupies riparian, pinyon-juniper woodlands, and coniferous forests in northwestern Arizona. It is considered an elevational migrant and occurs at elevations between 110 and 8,670 ft amsl (AGFD 2016b). Townsend’s big-eared Species occurs in a variety of xeric habitats including Widespread throughout Arizona (AGFD 2016b). Unlikely bat sagebrush, desertscrub, chaparral, deciduous forests Analysis Area is within the known (Corynorhinus townsendii and coniferous forests. Roosts in caves and geographic and elevation range of pallescens) abandoned mines. Maternity colonies form from the species and appropriate foraging May through July and disperse in August. Species habitat exists there. However, a occurs on TNF at elevations from 1,200 to 5,600 ft survey of mine features at Copper amsl (TNF 2000b). Cities identified no suitable roost habitat in the Analysis Area.

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_03_15\CC RPO BE_2017_03_15.docx WestLand Resources, Inc.

FIGURES

Path: M:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\MPO_BE\MXD\Figures\Fig01_VicinityBE_12_2_2016.mxd Date: 12/2/2016 User: rwitzke

ARIZONA PORTION OF SOUTHWESTERN GILA COUNTY

GILA COUNTY

FLAGSTAFF

UV188 MARICOPA COUNTY 60 PHOENIX ¤£ PINAL COUNTY YUMA TUCSON

PROJECT ¤£70 LOCATION ¤£60

UV177 UV77

Approximate Scale 1 Inch = 10 Miles

Legend Analysis Area Surface Management Bureau of Land Management (BLM) US Forest Service (USFS) Private Land (No Color)

T1N, R14E, Portions of Sections 13 and 14, Gila County, Arizona, Inspiration USGS 7.5' Quadrangle (2014) BHP COPPER INC. Image Source: ArcGIS Online World Street Map, Biological Evaluation Surface Management: BLM 2014, Adjustments from Environmental Field Services LLC 2016 BHP Copper Cities Unit Activities on BLM Land 0 1,000 2,000 Feet VICINITY MAP 0 300 600 Figure 1 WestLand Resources ± Meters Path: M:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\MPO_BE\MXD\Figures\Fig02_AerialwMineFeatures_BE.mxd Date: 12/2/2016 User: rwitzke

#

# # # # #

#

T1N, R14E, Portions of Sections 13 and 14, Gila County, Arizona Image Source: 2015 USDA NAIP Orthophoto Legend BHP COPPER INC. # Abandoned Mine Feature Biological Evaluation Riparian Area BHP Copper Cities Unit Activities on BLM Land 0 250 500 Wetland Area Feet Analysis Area AERIAL OVERVIEW 0 75 150 Figure 2 WestLand Resources ± Meters Path: M:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\MPO_BE\MXD\Figures\Fig03_Geology_BE.mxd Date: 12/16/2016 User: rwitzke Ydb Dm Qt Me Ydb Ydb Dm Xps Ydb YQm Me Ydb YQm

YQm Dm

Ydb YQm Xps YQm Ydb Ydb Qt Xps YQm Ydb YQm YQm

Ydb Qt Ydb Xps

Qt

Qt Ydb Xps

Xps

Ydb Td YXw

Xps

Ydb Ydb d Dm Xps Ydb Xps Image Source: 2015 USDA NAIP Orthophoto Data Source: Peterson 1962 GeoMap (modified by SRK) Legend Analysis Area Qt: Quaternary talus Yqm: Precambrian Lost Gulch quartz BHP COPPER INC. Note: Map depicts geologic units of natural ground surface, monzonite portions of which have been covered by the West Leach Td: Tertiary Dacite Biological Evaluation Dumps and Overburden Rock Pile. YXw: Precambrian Willow Springs BHP Copper Cities Unit Activities Me: Mississippian Escabrosa Granodiorite Formation on BLM Land 0 250 500 XpsL Precambrian Pinal Schist Feet Dm: Devonian Martin Formation GEOLOGICAL RESOURCES MAP 0 75 150 Ydb: Precambrian diabase Figure 3 WestLand Resources ± Meters d Fault, Showing Dip

APPENDIX A

USFWS IPaC On-Line Query

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Arizona Ecological Services Field Office 2321 WEST ROYAL PALM ROAD, SUITE 103 PHOENIX, AZ 85021 PHONE: (602)242-0210 FAX: (602)242-2513 URL: www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/; www.fws.gov/southwest/es/EndangeredSpecies_Main.html

Consultation Code: 02EAAZ00-2017-SLI-0002 October 03, 2016 Event Code: 02EAAZ00-2017-E-00004 Project Name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is providing this list under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The list you have generated identifies threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species, and designated and proposed critical habitat, that may occur within one or more delineated United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute quadrangles with which your project polygon intersects. Each quadrangle covers, at minimum, 49 square miles. Please refer to the species information links found at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Docs_Species.htm or http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/MiscDocs/AZSpeciesReference.pdf for a quick reference, to determine if suitable habitat for the species on your list occurs in your project area.

The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the habitats upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of Federal trust resources and to determine whether projects may affect federally listed species and/or designated critical habitat. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. If the Federal action agency determines that listed species or critical habitat may be affected by a federally funded, permitted or authorized activity, the agency must consult with us pursuant to 50 CFR 402. Note that a "may affect" determination includes effects that may not be adverse and that may be beneficial, insignificant, or discountable. An effect exists even if only one individual or habitat segment may be affected. The effects analysis should include the entire action area, which often extends well outside the project boundary or "footprint" (e.g., downstream). If the Federal action agency determines that the action may jeopardize a proposed species or adversely modify proposed critical habitat, the agency must enter into a section 7 conference. The agency may choose to confer with us on an action that may affect proposed species or critical habitat.

Candidate species are those for which there is sufficient information to support a proposal for listing. Although candidate species have no legal protection under the Act, we recommend that they be considered in the planning process in the event they become proposed or listed prior to project completion. More information on the regulations (50 CFR 402) and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in our Endangered Species Consultation Handbook at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF.

In addition to species listed under the Act, we advise you to consider species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703-712) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.). Both laws prohibit the take of covered species. The list of MBTA-protected birds is in 50 CFR 10.13 (for an alphabetical list see http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/RegulationsPolicies/mbta/MBTANDX.HTML). The Service's Division of Migratory Birds is the lead for consultations under these laws (Southwest Regional Office phone number: 505/248-7882). For more information regarding the MBTA, BGEPA, and permitting processes, please visit the following web site: http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/mbpermits.html. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers (e.g. cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/CellTower.htm

Although bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are no longer listed under the Act, they are protected under both the BGEPA and the MBTA. If a bald eagle nest occurs in or near the proposed project area, our office should be contacted. An evaluation must be performed to determine whether the project is likely to disturb nesting bald eagles (see http://www.fws.gov/southeast/es/baldeagle/) and the Division of Migratory Birds consulted if necessary. The National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines provide recommendations to minimize potential project impacts to bald eagles (see http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/pdf/NationalBaldEagleManagementGuidelines.pdf).

Activities that involve streams and/or wetlands are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). We recommend that you contact the Corps to determine their interest in proposed projects in these areas. For activities within a National Wildlife Refuge, we recommend that you contact refuge staff for specific information about refuge resources.

If your action is on Indian land or has implications for off-reservation tribal interests, we encourage you to contact the tribe(s) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to discuss potential

2 tribal concerns, and to invite any affected tribe and the BIA to participate in the section 7 consultation. In keeping with our tribal trust responsibility, we will notify tribes that may be affected by proposed actions when section 7 consultation is initiated. For more information, please contact our tribal coordinator, John Nystedt, at (928) 556-2160 or [email protected].

The State of Arizona protects some species not protected by Federal law. We recommend you contact the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) for animals and Arizona Department of Agriculture for plants to determine if species protected by or of concern to the State may occur in your action area. The AGFD has an Environmental Review On-Line Tool that can be accessed at http://www.azgfd.gov/hgis/. We also recommend that you coordinate with the AGFD regarding your project.

For additional communications regarding this project, please refer to the consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter. We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. If we may be of further assistance, please contact Brenda Smith at 928/556-2157 for projects in Northern Arizona, our general Phoenix number (602/242-0210) for central Arizona, or Jean Calhoun at 520/670-6150 (x223) for projects in southern Arizona.

Sincerely,

/s/

Steven L. Spangle

Field Supervisor

Attachment

3 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Official Species List

Provided by: Arizona Ecological Services Field Office 2321 WEST ROYAL PALM ROAD, SUITE 103 PHOENIX, AZ 85021 (602) 242-0210 http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/ http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/EndangeredSpecies_Main.html

Consultation Code: 02EAAZ00-2017-SLI-0002 Event Code: 02EAAZ00-2017-E-00004

Project Type: MINING

Project Name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so it may be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Code matches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by' section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns.

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 10/03/2016 01:39 PM 1 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Project Location Map:

Project Coordinates: The coordinates are too numerous to display here.

Project Counties: Gila, AZ

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 10/03/2016 01:39 PM 2 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Endangered Species Act Species List

There are a total of 7 threatened or endangered species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

Birds Status Has Critical Habitat Condition(s)

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus Threatened Proposed americanus) Population: Western U.S. DPS

Fishes

Headwater chub (Gila nigra) Proposed Population: Wherever found Threatened

Roundtail chub (Gila robusta) Proposed Population: Lower Colorado River Basin Threatened DPS

Flowering Plants

Arizona Hedgehog cactus Endangered (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus) Population: Wherever found

Mammals

Gray wolf (Canis lupus) Proposed Population: Mexican gray wolf, EXPN Experimental population Population, Non-

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 10/03/2016 01:39 PM 3 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Essential ocelot (Leopardus (=felis) pardalis) Endangered Population: wherever found

Reptiles

Northern Mexican gartersnake Threatened Proposed (Thamnophis eques megalops) Population: Wherever found

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 10/03/2016 01:39 PM 4 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Critical habitats that lie within your project area There are no critical habitats within your project area.

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 10/03/2016 01:39 PM 5

APPENDIX B

2017 BLM Arizona Sensitive Species List Phoenix District

United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Arizona State Office One North Central Avenue, Suite 800 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4427

March 1, 2017 In Reply Refer To: 6840 (9300) P

EMS TRANSMISSION 03/03/2017 Instruction Memorandum No. AZ-IM-2017-009 Expires: 9/30/2020

To: All Field Offices

From: State Director

Subject: Updated Bureau of Land Management Sensitive Species List for Arizona

Purpose: The purpose of this Instruction Memorandum (IM) is to replace expired IM No. AZ-2011-005, listing Bureau of Land Management (BLM) sensitive plant and species, which occur on BLM administered lands in Arizona consistent with Manual Section 6840 and current WO-230 guidance.

Policy/Action: The BLM Sensitive Species List for Arizona is contained in the Attachment. The list was developed using the criteria set forth in BLM Manual Section 6840, Special Status Species Management, and also includes: species listed or proposed to be listed as threatened or endangered pursuant to Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), federally designated candidate species, and delisted species in the 5 years following their delisting. Species appearing on the attached list will be managed as BLM sensitive, as described in BLM Manual Section 6840.

In addition to the species identified in the attached list, all species identified by BLM California as BLM sensitive, which occur on public lands in California administered by the Colorado River District, are to be managed as BLM sensitive in California. The lists of BLM California sensitive species can be found on the BLM California public web page at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/fish-and-wildlife/threatened-and-endangered/state-te- data/california

Timeframe: This list is effective immediately.

Budget Impact: None.

2

Background: The BLM Manual Section 6840 describes the following criteria for BLM sensitive species:

In compliance with existing laws, including the BLM multiple-use mission as specified in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, the BLM shall designate BLM sensitive species and implement measures to conserve these species and their habitats, including ESA proposed critical habitat, to promote their conservation and reduce the likelihood and need for such species to be listed pursuant to the ESA. All federally designated candidate species, proposed species, and delisted species in the 5 years following their delisting shall be conserved as BLM sensitive species.

A. State Directors shall designate species within their respective states as BLM sensitive using the following criteria. For species inhabiting multiple states, State Directors shall coordinate with one another in the designation of BLM sensitive species so that species status is consistent across the species’ range on BLM administered lands, where appropriate.

Species designated as BLM sensitive must be native species found on BLM administered lands for which the BLM has the capability to significantly affect the conservation status of the species through management, and either:

(1) There is information that a species has recently undergone, is undergoing, or is predicted to undergo a downward trend such that the viability of the species or a distinct population segment of the species is at risk across all or a significant portion of the species’ range, or

(2) The species depends on ecological refugia or specialized or unique habitats on BLM administered lands, and there is evidence that such areas are threatened with alteration such that the continued viability of the species in that area would be at risk.

The BLM Manual Section 6840 directs the BLM to manage BLM sensitive species and their habitats to minimize or eliminate threats affecting the status of the species or to improve the condition of the species’ habitat.

This revised BLM Arizona Sensitive Species List updates the 2010 list and reflects the following changes:

 The list includes species listed or proposed as threatened or endangered, pursuant to the ESA, as amended, which occur, or potentially occur on BLM managed public lands. This list does not replace the need to obtain a “species list” from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for ESA compliance. Species lists can be obtained on-line at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.

 Should the Service add species to the list of candidates, they will be considered BLM sensitive if they occur or are likely to occur on BLM managed lands in Arizona. 3

 The list includes species covered by conservation agreements to which the BLM is a signatory. Two former candidates with conservation agreements, Sonoran desert tortoise (Gopherus morafkai) and relict leopard frog (Lithobates onca), have been added to the list.

 The list includes species which have been petitioned for listing pursuant to the ESA and received a positive 90-day finding (substantial scientific information was presented indicating listing may be warranted) and which occur or likely occur on BLM administered public lands in Arizona and for which BLM management could likely affect the conservation status. Five species, monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus plexippus), Sonoran tallussnail (Sonorella magdalenensis), Arizona toad (Anaxyrus microscaphus), desert massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus edwarsii) and Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia), have been added to the list.

 Arizona eryngo (Eryngium sparganophyllum), a wetland dependent plant, has been added to the list.

 Generic groupings of Hydrobiid spring snails in genus Pyrgulopsis and Succineid snails in the family Succineidae have been removed from the list.

 Taxonomic updates and the results of status reviews are reflected in this list. Two former candidates, Tucson shovel-nosed snake (Chionactis occipitalis klauberi) and Sprague’s pipit (Anthus spragueii), are not included in the list.

 District occurrence information has been updated.

Directives Affected: Replaces Expired IM No. AZ-2011-005.

Contact: If you have any questions, please contact Tim Hughes at 602-417-9356, or Elroy Masters at 602-417-9346.

SIGNED BY: AUTHENTICATED BY: Deborah K. Rawhouser Susan Williams for Raymond Suazo Staff Assistant

1 Attachment: 1 – BLM Arizona Sensitive Species List (6 pp) cc: Director (WO-230)

Bureau of Land Management, Arizona - Bureau Sensitive Species List (February 2017) INVERTEBRATES Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes Arizona Cave Amphipod Stygobromus arizonensis BLMS h wet caves and mines Bylas Springsnail Pyrgulopsis arizonae BLMS v springs (Positive 90-day Finding) Desert Springsnail Pyrgulopsis deserta BLMS h springs along the Virgin River Gila Tryonia Tryonia gilae BLMS v springs (Positive 90-day Finding) Grand Wash Springsnail Pyrgulopsis bacchus BLMS v springs (Positive 90-day Finding) Kingman Springsnail Pyrgulopsis conica BLMS v springs (Positive 90-day Finding) Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus plexippus BLMS v v v v (Positive 90-day Finding) Sonoran Talussnail Sonorella magdalenensis BLMS v talus slopes (Positive 90-day Finding) FISH Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus BLMS h h Conservation Agreement FE Bonytail Chub Gila elegans w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Desert Pupfish Cyprinodon macularius FE v v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Desert Sucker Catostomus clarki BLMS v v v v aquatic Flannelmouth Sucker Catostomus latipinnis BLMS v Conservation Agreement FE Gila Chub Gila intermedia w/CH v-CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Gila Topminnow Poeciliopsis occidentalis occidentalis FE v v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Little Colorado Spinedace Lepidomeda vittata FT v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Little Colorado Sucker Catostomus sp. BLMS v Conservation Agreement FE Loach Minnow Tiaroga cobitis w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Longfin Dace Agosia chrysogaster BLMS v v v aquatic FE Razorback Sucker Xyrauchen texanus w/CH v-CH h-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan pT Conservation Agreement, See Federal Roundtail Chub Gila robusta BLMS v v Register Sonora Sucker Catostomus insignis BLMS v v v aquatic Speckled Dace Rhinichthys osculus BLMS v v v v aquatic FE Spikedace Meda fulgida w/CH v-CH h See Federal Register & Recovery Plan FE Virgin River Chub Gila seminuda w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Conservation Agreement (Positive 90- Virgin Spinedace Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis BLMS v day Finding)

Attachment 1-1 FE Woundfin Plagopterus argentissimus w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan AMPHIBIANS Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes mid elevation riparian/wetlands Arizona Toad Anaxyrus microscaphus BLMS v v v v (Positive 90-day Finding) FT Chiricahua Leopard Frog Lithobates chiricahuensis w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Great Plains Narrow-mouthed Toad Gastrophryne olivacea BLMS v v healthy grasslands Lowland Burrowing Treefrog Smilisca fodiens BLMS v healthy grasslands Lowland Leopard Frog Lithobates yavapaiensis BLMS v v v wetlands Northern Leopard Frog Lithobates pipiens BLMS v v h wetlands Plains Leopard Frog Lithobates blairi BLMS h wetlands Conservation Agreement, See Federal Relict Leopard Frog Lithobates onca BLMS h v Register (12 Month Finding) Sonoran Green Toad Anaxyrus retiformis BLMS v v healthy grasslands REPTILES Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes healthy grasslands, north end of Wilcox Arizona Striped Whiptail Aspidoscelis arizonae BLMS v Playa (Positive 90-day Finding) healthy grasslands (Positive 90-day Desert Massasauga Sistrurus catenatus edwarsii BLMS h Finding) Desert Ornate Box Turtle Terrapene ornata BLMS v healthy grasslands Flat-tailed Horned Lizard Phrynosoma mcallii BLMS v Conservation Agreement FT Mojave Desert Tortoise Gopherus agassizii w/CH v-CH v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Mojave Fringe-toed Lizard Uma scoparia BLMS v sand FT Narrow-headed Gartersnake Thamnophis rufipunctatus w/pCH h-pCH See Federal Register New Mexico Ridge-nosed Rattlesnake Crotalus willardi obscurus FT v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Northern Mexican FT Gartersnake Thamnophis eques megalops w/pCH v-pCH v-pCH h-pCH See Federal Register Slevin's Bunchgrass Lizard Sceloporus slevini BLMS v healthy grasslands Sonoran Desert Tortoise Gopherus morafkai BLMS v v v Conservation Agreement Sonora Mud Turtle Kinosternon sonoriense sonoriense BLMS v v v Riparian/aquatic Yuman Desert Fringe-toed Lizard Uma rufopunctata BLMS v sand (Positive 90-day Finding) BIRDS (breeding) Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes American Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus anatum BLMS v v v v cliffs Arizona Botteri's Sparrow Peucaea botterii arizonae BLMS v healthy grasslands Attachment 1-2 Arizona Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum ammolegus BLMS v healthy grasslands Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BLMS h v v v Conservation Agreement [BGEPA] Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum BLMS v v dense Sonoran scrub washes California Black Rail Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus BLMS v h marshes See Federal Register, Recovery Plan California Condor Gymnogyps californianus FE/NEP v h h h & 10(j) Rule California Least Tern Sterna antillarum browni FE h h h See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Desert Purple Martin Progne subis hesperia BLMS h v v saguaro cacti Ferruginous Hawk Buteo regalis BLMS v h v h healthy grasslands Gilded Flicker Colaptes chrysoides BLMS v v v saguaro cacti Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos BLMS v v v v [BGEPA] Le Conte's Thrasher Toxostoma lecontei BLMS v v v remote creosote scrub FT Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida w/CH h-CH h v h See Federal Register & Recovery Plan See Federal Register, Recovery Plan Northern Aplomado Falcon Falco femoralis septentrionalis FE/NEP h & 10(j) Rule Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis atricapillus BLMS v v h h healthy forests Pinyon Jay Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus BLMS v v v v healthy pinyon pine Southwestern Willow FE Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus w/CH v-CH v-CH v-CH h See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Western Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia hypugaea BLMS v v v v grasslands, undeveloped valley bottoms Western Yellow-billed FT Cuckoo (DPS) Coccyzus americanus w/pCH v-pCH v-pCH v-pCH v-pCH See Federal Register Yuma Ridgway’s (Clapper) Rail Rallus obsoletus (=longirostris) yumanensis FE h v h v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan MAMMALS Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes Allen’s Big-eared Bat Idionycteris phyllotis BLMS v v v h caves, mines Arizona Myotis Myotis occultus BLMS h v v h caves, mines Banner-tailed Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys spectabilis BLMS v healthy grasslands Black-tailed Prairie Dog Cynomys ludovicianus BLMS v healthy grasslands California Leaf-nosed Bat Macrotus californicus BLMS h v v v caves, mines Cave Myotis Myotis velifer BLMS v v v caves, mines Greater Western Mastiff Bat Eumops perotis californicus BLMS v v v v caves, mines Gunnison's Prairie Dog Cynomys gunnisoni BLMS h v h healthy grasslands Houserock Valley Chisel- toothed Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys microps leucotis BLMS v Atriplex scrub FE Hualapai Mexican Vole Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis pDelist v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan FE Jaguar Panthera onca w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan FE Lesser Long-nosed Bat Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae pDelist v v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan

Attachment 1-3 See Federal Register, Recovery Plan Mexican Gray Wolf Canis lupus baileyi FE/NEP h h & 10(j) Rule Mexican Long-tongued Bat Choeronycteris mexicana BLMS v caves/mines Ocelot Leoparus pardalis FE h See Federal Register & Recovery Plan See Federal Register, Recovery Plan Sonoran Pronghorn Antilocapra americana sonoriensis FE/NEP v h v & 10(j) Rule Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum BLMS v h h h caves/ mines Townsend’s Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) townsendii BLMS v v v v caves/mines PLANTS Common Name Scientific Name Status ASDO CRDO GDO PDO Habitat/Notes FE Acuna Cactus Echinomastus erectocentrus var. acunensis w/CH v-CH v-CH See Federal Register narrow range, limestone deposits, Burro Aquarius Milkvetch Astragalus newberryi var. aquaria BLMS v Creek area narrow range, floodplain terraces in Aravaipa Sage Salvia amissa BLMS v shady canyons Aravaipa Woodfern Thelypteris puberula var. sonorensis BLMS v v h few scattered springs Arizona Cliffrose Purshia subintegra FE v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Arizona Eryngo Eryngium sparganophyllum BLMS v Arid land springs, cienegas Arizona Hedgehog Cactus Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. arizonicus FE v h See Federal Register Arizona Sonoran Rosewood Vauquelinia californica ssp. sonorensis BLMS v v relict species in shady canyons narrow range, rocky outcrops in canyons w/Madrean Woodland (Positive 90-day Bartram Stonecrop Graptopetalum bartramii BLMS v Finding) Blue Sand Lily Triteleiopsis palmeri BLMS v sand dunes and sandy soils Brady Pincushion Cactus Pediocactus bradyi FE v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan California Flannelbush Fremontodendron californicum BLMS v v relict populations in shady canyons Chihuahua Breadroot Healthy grasslands (Positive 90-day (Scurfpea) Pediomelum pentaphyllum BLMS v Finding) narrow range, cliff faces of Gila Clifton Rock Daisy Perityle ambrosiifolia BLMS v Conglomerate Dalhouse Spleenwort Asplenium (=Ceterach) dalhousiae BLMS v cliff face seeps, narrow range, Moenkopi Formation Diamond Butte Milkvetch Astragalus toanus var. scidulus BLMS v badlands w/red soils FE Fickeisen Plains Cactus Pediocactus peeblesianus var. fickeiseniae w/CH v-CH v-CH See Federal Register narrow range, floodplain terraces shady Fish Creek Fleabane Erigeron piscaticus BLMS v canyons (Positive 90-day Finding) narrow range, floodplain terraces in Gentry Indigo Bush Dalea tentaculoides BLMS v shady canyons Giant Sedge Carex spissa BLMS v v springs FE Gierisch Mallow Sphaeralcea gierischii w/CH v-CH See Federal Register Grand Canyon Rose Rosa stellata var. abyssa BLMS v narrow range, limestone cliff rims Attachment 1-4 Holmgren (Paradox) Milk FE Vetch Astragalus holmgreniorum w/CH v-CH See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Huachuca Golden Aster Heterotheca rutteri BLMS v narrow range, Plains Grassland, LCNCA Huachuca Milkvetch Astragalus hypoxylus BLMS h narrow range FE Huachuca Water Umbel Lilaeopsis schaffneriana ssp. recurva w/CH v-CH See Federal Register Jones Cycladenia Cycladenia humilis var. jonesii FT v See Federal Register Joshua Tree Yucca brevifolia BLMS v v v (Positive 90-day Finding) Kaibab (Paradine) Plains Cactus Pediocactus paradinei BLMS v Conservation Agreement Kearney’s Blue Star Amsonia kearneyana FE v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Kearney Sumac Rhus kearneyi ssp. kearneyi BLMS v relict species in shady canyons Kofa Mountain Barberry Berberis harrisoniana BLMS v v relict species in shady canyons narrow range, red soils of Moenkopi Marble Canyon Indigo Bush Psorothamnus arborescens var. pubescens BLMS v Formation, Marble Canyon narrow range, limestone cliff rims, Marble Canyon Milkvetch Astragalus cremnophylax var. hevronii BLMS v Marble Canyon Mt Trumbull Beardtongue Penstemon distans BLMS v narrow range, limestone soils Murphey Agave Agave murpheyi BLMS h v low numbers, desert foothills, central AZ Nichol Turk’s Head Cactus Echinocactus horizonthalonius var. nicholii FE v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Paria Plateau (Siler) Fishhook Cactus Sclerocactus sileri BLMS v narrow range, sandy soils, Paria Plateau narrow range, limestone deposits, Burro Parish Phacelia Phacelia parishii BLMS v Creek area, dry lake beds, Red Lake narrow range, higher elevation desert Parish Wild Onion Allium parishii BLMS v mountains, Peebles Navajo Cactus Pediocactus peeblesianus var. peeblesianus FE v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan Pima Indian Mallow Abutilon parishii BLMS h v h rocky slopes, desert mountains Pima Pineapple Cactus Coryphantha scheeri var. robustispina FE v See Federal Register narrow range, desert washes, Black Pinto Beardtongue Penstemon bicolor BLMS v Mountains few populations, leaf litter under Purple-spike Coralroot Hexalectris warnockii BLMS v Madrean Woodland, Mule Mtns narrow range, Shinarump Hills, Round-leaf Broom Errazurizia rotundata BLMS v Holbrook area San Pedro River Wild narrow range, limestone and clay soils of Buckwheat Eriogonum terrenatum BLMS v St. David Formation, SPRNCA Sand Food Pholisma sonorae BLMS v sand dunes, Yuma area Scaly Sand Food Pholisma arenarium BLMS v sand dunes, Cactus Plain Schott Wire-lettuce Stephanomeria exiqua ssp. exiqua BLMS v h sand dunes, sandy soils narrow range, gypsum soils of September 11 Stickleaf Mentzelia memorabilis BLMS v Harrisburg Formation Siler Pincushion Cactus Pediocactus sileri FT v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan

Attachment 1-5 narrow range, gypsum soils of Silverleaf Sunray Enceliopsis argophylla BLMS v v Moenkopi Formation

Smooth Catseye Cryptantha semiglabra BLMS v extremely narrow range narrow range, sandy loam soils, Virgin Sticky Wild Buckwheat Eriogonum viscidulum BLMS v River Valley narrow range, sandy loam soils, Virgin Three-cornered Milkvetch Astragalus geyeri var. triquetrus BLMS v River Valley Tumamoc Globeberry Tumamoca macdougalii BLMS v v few populations, Sonoran Desert plains Welch’s Milkweed Asclepias welshii FT v See Federal Register & Recovery Plan White-margined Penstemon Penstemon albomarginatus BLMS v narrow range, sandy loam soils

Status and Occurrence Abbreviations:

Abbreviation Definition FE Federally Endangered pE Proposed Endangered FT Federally Threatened pT Proposed Threatened CH Designated Critical Habitat pCH Proposed Critical Habitat pDelist Proposed for Delisting NEP Nonessential Experimental Population designated pursuant to Section 10(j) of the ESA DPS Distinct Population Segment C Federal Candidate BLMS Arizona Bureau of Land Management Sensitive BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 v Known Occurrence within the last 10 years h Historic or Potential Occurrence Positive 90-day Finding Petition for listing was found to contain substantial information indicating listing may be warranted. ASDO Arizona Strip District Office: [Grand Canyon – Parashant NM & Arizona Strip Field Office including Vermillion Cliffs NM] CRDO Colorado River District Office: [Kingman, Lake Havasu and Yuma field offices] Gila District Office: [Safford Field Office including Gila Box Riparian NCA & Tucson Field Office including Ironwood Forest NM, San Pedro GDO Riparian NCA, & Las Cienegas NCA] PDO Phoenix District Office: [Hassayampa Field Office including Agua Fria NM & Lower Sonoran Field Office including Sonoran Desert NM]

Attachment 1-6

APPENDIX C

AGFD HDMS On-Line Review

Arizona Environmental Online Review Tool Report

Arizona Game and Fish Department Mission To conserve Arizona's diverse wildlife resources and manage for safe, compatible outdoor recreation opportunities for current and future generations.

Project Name: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Project Description: Copper Cities BLM MPO

Project Type: Mining, Extraction Other minerals (copper, limestone, cinders, shale, salt), Other minerals (copper, limestone, cinders, shale, salt)

Contact Person: Janet Fox

Organization: WestLand Resources Inc.

On Behalf Of: CONSULTING

Project ID: HGIS-04316

Please review the entire report for project type and/or species recommendations for the location information entered. Please retain a copy for future reference.

Page 1 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Disclaimer:

1. This Environmental Review is based on the project study area that was entered. The report must be updated if the project study area, location, or the type of project changes. 2. This is a preliminary environmental screening tool. It is not a substitute for the potential knowledge gained by having a biologist conduct a field survey of the project area. This review is also not intended to replace environmental consultation (including federal consultation under the Endangered Species Act), land use permitting, or the Departments review of site-specific projects. 3. The Departments Heritage Data Management System (HDMS) data is not intended to include potential distribution of special status species. Arizona is large and diverse with plants, animals, and environmental conditions that are ever changing. Consequently, many areas may contain species that biologists do not know about or species previously noted in a particular area may no longer occur there. HDMS data contains information about species occurrences that have actually been reported to the Department. Not all of Arizona has been surveyed for special status species, and surveys that have been conducted have varied greatly in scope and intensity. Such surveys may reveal previously undocumented population of species of special concern. 4. HabiMap Arizona data, specifically Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) under our State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) and Species of Economic and Recreational Importance (SERI), represent potential species distribution models for the State of Arizona which are subject to ongoing change, modification and refinement. The status of a wildlife resource can change quickly, and the availability of new data will necessitate a refined assessment.

Locations Accuracy Disclaimer: Project locations are assumed to be both precise and accurate for the purposes of environmental review. The creator/owner of the Project Review Report is solely responsible for the project location and thus the correctness of the Project Review Report content.

Page 2 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Recommendations Disclaimer:

1. The Department is interested in the conservation of all fish and wildlife resources, including those species listed in this report and those that may have not been documented within the project vicinity as well as other game and nongame wildlife. 2. Recommendations have been made by the Department, under authority of Arizona Revised Statutes Title 5 (Amusements and Sports), 17 (Game and Fish), and 28 (Transportation). 3. Potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources may be minimized or avoided by the recommendations generated from information submitted for your proposed project. These recommendations are preliminary in scope, designed to provide early considerations on all species of wildlife. 4. Making this information directly available does not substitute for the Department's review of project proposals, and should not decrease our opportunity to review and evaluate additional project information and/or new project proposals. 5. Further coordination with the Department requires the submittal of this Environmental Review Report with a cover letter and project plans or documentation that includes project narrative, acreage to be impacted, how construction or project activity(s) are to be accomplished, and project locality information (including site map). Once AGFD had received the information, please allow 30 days for completion of project reviews. Send requests to: Project Evaluation Program, Habitat Branch Arizona Game and Fish Department 5000 West Carefree Highway Phoenix, Arizona 85086-5000 Phone Number: (623) 236-7600 Fax Number: (623) 236-7366 Or [email protected] 6. Coordination may also be necessary under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and/or Endangered Species Act (ESA). Site specific recommendations may be proposed during further NEPA/ESA analysis or through coordination with affected agencies

Page 3 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Page 4 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Page 5 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Page 6 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Special Status Species and Special Areas Documented within 5 Miles of Project Vicinity Scientific Name Common Name FWS USFS BLM NPL SGCN Agave delamateri Tonto Basin Agave SC S HS Aquila chrysaetos Golden Eagle BGA S 1B CH for Strix occidentalis lucida Mexican Spotted Owl Designated Critical Habitat Eriogonum capillare San Carlos Wild-buckwheat SC SR Lithobates yavapaiensis Lowland Leopard Frog SC S S 1A Mammillaria viridiflora Varied Fishhook Cactus SR

Note: Status code definitions can be found at https://www.azgfd.com/wildlife/planning/wildlifeguidelines/statusdefinitions/ .

Species of Greatest Conservation Need Predicted within Project Vicinity based on Predicted Range Models Scientific Name Common Name FWS USFS BLM NPL SGCN Accipiter gentilis atricapillus Northern Goshawk SC S 1B Agosia chrysogaster Longfin Dace SC S 1B Aix sponsa Wood Duck 1B Ammodramus savannarum Arizona grasshopper sparrow S S 1B ammolegus Ammodramus savannarum Western Grasshopper Sparrow 1B perpallidus Ammospermophilus harrisii Harris' Antelope Squirrel 1B Anaxyrus microscaphus Arizona Toad SC 1B Aquila chrysaetos Golden Eagle S 1B Aspidoscelis flagellicauda Gila Spotted Whiptail 1B Botaurus lentiginosus American Bittern 1B Buteo regalis Ferruginous Hawk SC S 1B Castor canadensis American Beaver 1B Catostomus clarkii Desert Sucker SC S S 1B Chilomeniscus stramineus Variable Sandsnake 1B Chordeiles minor Common Nighthawk 1B Coccothraustes vespertinus Evening Grosbeak 1B Coccyzus americanus Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Western DPS) LT S 1A Colaptes chrysoides Gilded Flicker S 1B Coluber bilineatus Sonoran Whipsnake 1B Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens Pale Townsend's Big-eared Bat SC S S 1B Crotalus cerberus Arizona Black Rattlesnake 1B Crotalus tigris Tiger Rattlesnake 1B Empidonax traillii extimus Southwestern Willow Flycatcher LE 1A Euderma maculatum Spotted Bat SC S S 1B Eugenes fulgens Magnificent Hummingbird 1B

Page 7 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Species of Greatest Conservation Need Predicted within Project Vicinity based on Predicted Range Models Scientific Name Common Name FWS USFS BLM NPL SGCN Eumops perotis californicus Greater Western Bonneted Bat SC S 1B Falco peregrinus anatum American Peregrine Falcon SC S S 1A Gopherus morafkai Sonoran Desert Tortoise CCA S 1A Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle SC S S 1A Heloderma suspectum Gila Monster 1A Idionycteris phyllotis Allen's Lappet-browed Bat SC S S 1B Incilius alvarius Sonoran Desert Toad 1B Junco phaeonotus Yellow-eyed Junco S 1B Kinosternon sonoriense sonoriense Desert Mud Turtle S 1B Lasiurus blossevillii Western Red Bat S 1B Leopardus pardalis Ocelot LE 1A Lithobates yavapaiensis Lowland Leopard Frog SC S S 1A Lontra canadensis sonora Southwestern River Otter SC 1B Macrotus californicus California Leaf-nosed Bat SC S 1B Melanerpes uropygialis Gila Woodpecker 1B Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln's Sparrow 1B Melozone aberti Abert's Towhee S 1B Microtus mexicanus Mexican Vole 1B Micruroides euryxanthus Sonoran Coralsnake 1B Myotis occultus Arizona Myotis SC S 1B Myotis velifer Cave Myotis SC S 1B Myotis yumanensis Yuma Myotis SC 1B Nyctinomops femorosaccus Pocketed Free-tailed Bat 1B Odocoileus virginianus White-tailed Deer 1B Panthera onca Jaguar LE 1A Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah Sparrow 1B Perognathus amplus Arizona Pocket Mouse 1B Phrynosoma solare Regal Horned Lizard 1B Poeciliopsis occidentalis Gila Topminnow LE 1A occidentalis Progne subis hesperia Desert Purple Martin S 1B Setophaga petechia Yellow Warbler 1B Strix occidentalis lucida Mexican Spotted Owl LT 1A Tadarida brasiliensis Brazilian Free-tailed Bat 1B Troglodytes pacificus Pacific Wren 1B Vireo bellii arizonae Arizona Bell's Vireo 1B Vulpes macrotis Kit Fox No 1B Status Xantusia bezyi Bezy's Night Lizard S 1B

Page 8 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Species of Economic and Recreation Importance Predicted within Project Vicinity Scientific Name Common Name FWS USFS BLM NPL SGCN Callipepla gambelii Gambel's Quail Odocoileus hemionus Mule Deer Odocoileus virginianus White-tailed Deer 1B Patagioenas fasciata Band-tailed Pigeon 1C Pecari tajacu Javelina Puma concolor Mountain Lion Sciurus aberti Abert's Squirrel Ursus americanus American Black Bear Zenaida asiatica White-winged Dove Zenaida macroura Mourning Dove

Project Type: Mining, Extraction Other minerals (copper, limestone, cinders, shale, salt), Other minerals (copper, limestone, cinders, shale, salt)

Project Type Recommendations:

Fence recommendations will be dependant upon the goals of the fence project and the wildlife species expected to be impacted by the project. General guidelines for ensuring wildlife-friendly fences include: barbless wire on the top and bottom with the maximum fence height 42", minimum height for bottom 16". Modifications to this design may be considered for fencing anticipated to be routinely encountered by elk, bighorn sheep or pronghorn (e.g., Pronghorn fencing would require 18" minimum height on the bottom). Please refer to the Department's Fencing Guidelines located on Wildlife Friendly Guidelines page, which is part of the WIldlife Planning button at https://www.azgfd.com/wildlife/planning/wildlifeguidelines/.

During the planning stages of your project, please consider the local or regional needs of wildlife in regards to movement, connectivity, and access to habitat needs. Loss of this permeability prevents wildlife from accessing resources, finding mates, reduces gene flow, prevents wildlife from re-colonizing areas where local extirpations may have occurred, and ultimately prevents wildlife from contributing to ecosystem functions, such as pollination, seed dispersal, control of prey numbers, and resistance to invasive species. In many cases, streams and washes provide natural movement corridors for wildlife and should be maintained in their natural state. Uplands also support a large diversity of species, and should be contained within important wildlife movement corridors. In addition, maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem functions can be facilitated through improving designs of structures, fences, roadways, and culverts to promote passage for a variety of wildlife. Guidelines for many of these can be found at: https://www.azgfd.com/wildlife/planning/wildlifeguidelines/.

Consider impacts of outdoor lighting on wildlife and develop measures or alternatives that can be taken to increase human safety while minimizing potential impacts to wildlife. Conduct wildlife surveys to determine species within project area, and evaluate proposed activities based on species biology and natural history to determine if artificial lighting may disrupt behavior patterns or habitat use. Use only the minimum amount of light needed for safety. Narrow spectrum bulbs should be used as often as possible to lower the range of species affected by lighting. All lighting should be shielded, canted, or cut to ensure that light reaches only areas needing illumination.

Page 9 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Minimize potential introduction or spread of exotic invasive species. Invasive species can be plants, animals (exotic snails), and other organisms (e.g., microbes), which may cause alteration to ecological functions or compete with or prey upon native species and can cause social impacts (e.g., livestock forage reduction, increase wildfire risk). The terms noxious weed or invasive plants are often used interchangeably. Precautions should be taken to wash all equipment utilized in the project activities before leaving the site. Arizona has noxious weed regulations (Arizona Revised Statutes, Rules R3-4-244 and R3-4-245). See Arizona Department of Agriculture website for restricted plants, https://agriculture.az.gov/. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has information regarding pest and invasive plant control methods including: pesticide, herbicide, biological control agents, and mechanical control, http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usdahome. The Department regulates the importation, purchasing, and transportation of wildlife and fish (Restricted Live Wildlife), please refer to the hunting regulations for further information https://www.azgfd.com/hunting/regulations.

Minimization and mitigation of impacts to wildlife and fish species due to changes in water quality, quantity, chemistry, temperature, and alteration to flow regimes (timing, magnitude, duration, and frequency of floods) should be evaluated. Minimize impacts to springs, in-stream flow, and consider irrigation improvements to decrease water use. If dredging is a project component, consider timing of the project in order to minimize impacts to spawning fish and other aquatic species (include spawning seasons), and to reduce spread of exotic invasive species. We recommend early direct coordination with Project Evaluation Program for projects that could impact water resources, wetlands, streams, springs, and/or riparian habitats.

The Department recommends that wildlife surveys are conducted to determine if noise-sensitive species occur within the project area. Avoidance or minimization measures could include conducting project activities outside of breeding seasons.

Based on the project type entered, coordination with the Office of Surface Mining may be required (http://www.osmre.gov/index.shtm).

Based on the project type entered, coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency may be required (http://www.epa.gov/).

Based on the project type entered, coordination with State Historic Preservation Office may be required (http://azstateparks.com/SHPO/index.html).

Pre- and post-survey/monitoring should be conducted to determine alternative access/exits to mines and to identify and/or minimize potential impacts to bat species. For further information when developing alternatives to mine closures, contact the Arizona Game and Fish Department Nongame Bat Coordinator at the Main Office in Terrestrial Branch, https://www.azgfd.com/agency/offices or (602) 942-3000.

Based on the project type entered, coordination with Arizona Department of Environmental Quality may be required (http://www.azdeq.gov/).

Based on the project type entered, coordination with Arizona Department of Water Resources may be required (http://www.azwater.gov/azdwr/default.aspx).

Vegetation restoration projects (including treatments of invasive or exotic species) should have a completed site- evaluation plan (identifying environmental conditions necessary to re-establish native vegetation), a revegetation plan (species, density, method of establishment), a short and long-term monitoring plan, including adaptive management guidelines to address needs for replacement vegetation.

Avoid/minimize wildlife impacts related to contacting hazardous and other human-made substances in facility water collection/storage basins, evaporation or settling ponds and/or facility storage yards. Design slopes to discourage wading birds and use fencing, netting, hazing or other measures to exclude wildlife.

Page 10 of 11 Arizona Game and Fish Department project_report_copper_cities_blm_mpo_20541_22786.pdf Project ID: HGIS-04316 Review Date: 3/7/2017 01:39:17 PM

Project Location and/or Species Recommendations:

HDMS records indicate that one or more native plants listed on the Arizona Native Plant Law and Antiquities Act have been documented within the vicinity of your project area. Please contact: Arizona Department of Agriculture 1688 W Adams St. Phoenix, AZ 85007 Phone: 602.542.4373 https://agriculture.az.gov/environmental-services/np1

HDMS records indicate that one or more listed, proposed, or candidate species or Critical Habitat (Designated or Proposed) have been documented in the vicinity of your project. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) gives the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regulatory authority over all federally listed species. Please contact USFWS Ecological Services Offices at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/ or:

Phoenix Main Office Tucson Sub-Office Flagstaff Sub-Office 2321 W. Royal Palm Rd, Suite 103 201 N. Bonita Suite 141 SW Forest Science Complex Phoenix, AZ 85021 Tucson, AZ 85745 2500 S. Pine Knoll Dr. Phone: 602-242-0210 Phone: 520-670-6144 Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Fax: 602-242-2513 Fax: 520-670-6155 Phone: 928-556-2157 Fax: 928-556-2121

Page 11 of 11

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

APPENDIX D

Representative Photographs of the Analysis Area

Photo 1.

View of upland vegetation in the Analysis Area, showing elements of Interior Chaparral and Madrean Evergreen Woodland including pointleaf manzanita, scrub live oak, oneseed juniper and banana yucca.

Photo 2.

View of upland vegetation in the Analysis Area, showing elements of Interior Chaparral and

Madrean Evergreen Woodland including pinon pine, pointleaf manzanita, scrub live oak, oneseed juniper and Emory oak. Also evident is vegetation regrowth on disturbed areas.

Photo 3.

View of upland vegetation south of Lost Gulch,

showing elements of Interior Chaparral and

Madrean Evergreen Woodland including pinon

pine, pointleaf manzanita, scrub live oak and

Emory oak.

Representative Photographs of the Vegetation within the Analysis Area Appendix D

Page 1

Q:\Jobs\800's \815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_01_03\Appendices\Appendix D. Representative Photographs of the Analysis Area.docx Photo 4.

View of upland vegetation north of Lost Gulch,

showing elements of Interior Chaparral and Madrean Evergreen Woodland including sugar sumac, scrub live oak and Emory oak.

Photo 5.

View of the riparian vegetation in Lost Gulch, showing Fremont cottonwood, Goodding’s willow, and seepwillow.

Photo 6.

View of the riparian vegetation in Lost Gulch, showing Fremont cottonwood, netleaf hackberry, and saltcedar.

Representative Photographs of the Vegetation within the Analysis Area Appendix D Page 2

Q:\Jobs\800's\815.24\ENV\BE\Submittal 2017_01_03\Appendices\Appendix D. Representative Photographs of the Analysis Area.docx