DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Evaluation Sensitive Flora and Fauna 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Silver Standard Resources, Inc. Biological Evaluation For Sensitive Flora and Fauna 2016 PERDITO EXPLORATION PROJECT NOVEMBER, 2016 Silver Standard Resources, Inc. Perdito Exploration Project BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION - 2016 FOR SENSITIVE FLORA AND FAUNA 1.0 INTRODUCTION Cedar Creek Associates, Inc. (Cedar Creek) was retained in 2016 by Silver Standard Resources, Inc. (Silver Standard) to re-evaluate an historic exploration area near Conglomerate Mesa, California for sensitive fauna and to verify a sensitive floral survey that occurred in 1997 with follow-up surveys completed in 2014 by Mr. Mark Bagley of Bishop, California. Also in 1997, BHP Minerals International Exploration, Inc. (BHP) retained Kiva Biological Consulting (aka Mr. Peter Woodman of Bakersfield, California) to evaluate an area for faunal resources, the footprint of which appears identical to that of the current Perdito project, but was known at the time as the Conglomerate Mesa Project. To facilitate this work, Cedar Creek consulted with the Ridgecrest Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management (Ms. Caroline Woods) to coordinate locations for surveys and target flora and fauna. At present, Silver Standard is proposing to conduct a drilling program in this remote area of Inyo County within Township 17S, Range 39E, Sections 3 and 4 on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Ridgecrest Field Office. As indicated above, the proposed drill roads appear to be identical to those established, reclaimed, and revegetated in 2000, by BHP. In addition to these previously disturbed alignments, the BLM has provided a few alternate alignment segments and locations that occur on undisturbed native ground. Project area elevations range from 6400 to 7400 feet above MSL and climate is temperate continental (hot dry summers and cold dry winters) with average annual precipitation in the 6-inch range. Dominant vegetation of the area is largely black sagebrush scrub, but is transitional with desert (shadscale) scrub with pockets of single-leaf Piñon (and occasional California juniper) as scattered stands at elevation. Immediately to the east of the project across Santa Rosa Flat (shadscale scrublands) is a large area visually dominated by Joshua trees (Yucca brevifolia) a few of which extend into the project area. 2.0 METHODS Prior to fieldwork in 2016, a list of potential sensitive fauna and flora that may be resident in the project area was compiled and evaluated for veracity of that potential (e.g., Western Grebe is not possible given the lack of open water in the project area). Sources included past survey efforts by Bagley and Woodman as well as an IPaC Trust Resource Report (1/18/16) from the US Fish & Wildlife Service. Also evaluated were California Dept. of Fish and Game information sources and most important, information provided by the BLM. California Natural CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC. PAGE 1 Diversity Database searches were included with previous investigations so were not repeated in 2016. These efforts yielded the following fauna and flora (Table 1) with the potential for residence in the project area rated as “remote” or greater. Also indicated on Table 1 is the optimal survey window for each taxon (May provided the best coverage as indicated in red) as well as an indication of past observations of specific taxa. Table 1 - Perdito Project - Taxa of Interest to the BLM - Survey Windows for Fauna (Primary Interest) and Flora (Secondary Interest) Fauna March April May June July Aug Sept Obsvd.* Golden eagle XXX XXX XXX Sharp-shinned hawk XXX XXX XXX XXX Cooper's hawk XXX XXX XXX Prairie falcon XXX XXX XXX XXX Loggerhead shrike XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX OOO Pallid bat XXX XXX Spotted bat XXX XXX Townsend's big-eared bat XXX XXX Western mastiff bat XXX XXX American badger XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX Nelson's bighorn sheep XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX Mountain lion XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX Panamint alligator lizard XXX XXX XXX Black swift XXX XXX XXX Flora March April May June July Aug Sept Obsvd. Ericameria nana XXX XXX XXX Purshia mexicana var. dubia XXX XXX Cymopterus ripleyi XXX XXX XXX Erythranthe calcicola XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX Oxytheca watsonii XXX XXX XXX Mentzelia inyoensis XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX Perityle inyoensis XXX XXX XXX OOO Sclerocactus polyancistrus XXX XXX XXX XXX OOO Cryptantha tumulosa XXX XXX XXX XXX Astragalus cimae var. sufflatus XXX XXX XXX Alliuym atrorubens var. cristatum XXX XXX XXX OOO Boechera shockleyi XXX XXX OOO Erioneuron pilosum XXX XXX OOO Hecastocleis shockleyi XXX XXX XXX OOO Oenothera caespitosa ssp. crinita XXX XXX XXX XXX OOO * Taxa historically observed by either Woodman (fauna) or Bagley (flora) within the project area. As indicated, the primary emphasis of 2016 surveys was an evaluation of sensitive fauna, however, a secondary emphasis was “verification” of the previous floral surveys, the most recent of which was by Bagley in 2014. In this regard, Table 2 indicates the “sensitive” status of the 15 floral taxa rated as having at least some remote potential for existence in the project area as well as an indication of those that have been observed in the area (bold print). Prior to 2016 field activities, a field guide to these 15 floral taxa was prepared and included photos, line drawings, taxonomic characters, habitat requisites, etc. to facilitate positive identification of any observed specimens while in the field. This field guide is included with this document as Appendix A. CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC. PAGE 2 Table 2 - Perdito Project - Rare and Sensitive Plants - 2016 BLM/USFS CNPS Global State Scientific Name (Synonyms) * Common Names Status Rank Rank Rank Allium atrorubens var. cristatum Crested onion 4.3 G4T4 S4 Astragalus cimae var. sufflatus Inflated Cima milkvetch BLMS 1B.3 G3T3 S2 Boechera shockleyi Shockley's rock cress USFSS 2B.2 G3 S2 Cryptantha tumulosa New york mountain cryptantha 4.3 G4 S4 Cymopterus ripleyi var. saniculoides Ripley's springparsley BLMS 1B.2 G3G4T3Q S1 Ericameria nana dwarf goldenbush 4.3 G5 S4 Erioneuron pilosum Hairy erioneuron 2B.3 G5 S3 Erythranthe calcicola Limestone monkeyflower BLMS 1B.3 G2 S1 Hecastocleis shockleyi Shockley's prickleleaf 3 G3G4 S3S4 Mentzelia inyoensis Inyo blazingstar BLMS USFSS 1B.3 G3 S3 Oenothera caespitosa ssp. crinita Cespitose evening-primrose 4.2 G5T4T5 S4 Oxytheca watsonii Watson's oxytheca 2B.2 G3 S1 Perityle inyoensis Inyo rockdaisy BLMS 1B.2 G2 S2 Purshia mexicana var. dubia Mexican cliffrose G5 Sclerocactus polyancistrus Mojave fish hook cactus 4.2 G3 S3 * Bold print indicates observed in the project area. From May 6th through May 8th 2016, Cedar Creek’s Senior Range / Wildlife Ecologist (Mr. Steven R. Viert) surveyed the Perdito project area for evidence or direct observations of the taxa indicated on Table 1. Weather was partly sunny with short periods of light rain and one short period of snow flurries with highs in the 50’s and 60’s. Winds were restricted to light breezy conditions at worst, calm at best. Surveys largely consisted of a series of pedestrian transects across the project area (as indicated on Map 1); binocular surveys of appropriate landscape features (cliffs, trees, volcanic rock outcrops, etc.) out to the 500 meter boundary for faunal habitats, nests, etc.; and a spotlight survey during evening hours for potential bat identification. A Garmin 650t Montana GPS was carried during all daily surveys to record pedestrian transects, with one exception. The exception involved the easternmost surveys implemented during the first day when the GPS battery failed and transects were necessarily recorded on detailed field maps. The GPS battery was replaced with new AA batteries purchased prior to the next field day. At the time of survey, alternative road alignments as proposed by the BLM had not been developed and therefore, were unknown to Mr. Viert. As a result, these alternative alignments were not directly surveyed in the field. To the contrary, Silver Standard’s proposed alignment that followed BHP’s old reclaimed road was the principal alignment for site-specific field surveys given the potential for direct impact. As such, a quick perusal of Map 1 indicates survey routes that either were directly on the proposed alignment, or were slightly uphill or downhill, but parallel to, the proposed alignment. Holding to this alignment facilitated a careful review of the previous disturbance footprint to see if new individuals of the 15 sensitive species had taken root over the intervening 16+ years, while allowing a review to either side for both floral and faunal observations. Binocular surveys were completed using 10x50 Redfield optics (military quality) that provide an inordinate ability to gather light for searching dark grottos, caves, rock crevices, etc. for evidence of habitation by bats, raptor nests, or materials associated with wildlife use. Scans of rock outcrops and/or tree canopies occurred at CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES, INC. PAGE 3 approximate 200-meter intervals along each transect indicated on Map 1. In the northern half of the project area with significant numbers of Piñons, binocular scans were completed on approximate 100-meter intervals to facilitate multiple angle views of the various tree canopies for raptor nests. Scans typically occurred over a one or two minute period, but occasionally scan durations were increased to as much as four or five minutes depending on outcrop and tree density. Spotlight surveys were completed during a single evening (6th) using a 1M candlepower spotlight with both flood and spot capabilities. This survey occurred from approximately one hour before to one hour after sundown. Given that the parking area on the eastern side of the project was in the lowest portion of the project area and within a canyon, it was determined to be the most conducive for making observations of any foraging bats.
Recommended publications
  • Hecastocleideae (Hecastocleidoideae)

    Hecastocleideae (Hecastocleidoideae)

    Chapter 16 Hecastocleideae (Hecastocleidoideae) Vicki A. Funk and D.J. Nicholas Hind HISTORICAL OVERVIEW AND MORPHOLOGY Carduoideae—'rest of the family' split (see Chapters 12 and 44) and this placement has 100% bootstrap support. Hecastodeis shockleyi A. Gray was described in 1882 and its Its current position is supported by its distinct morphol- unusual morphology and restricted distribution has made ogy and strong support from molecular data. Its near- it sought after for herbarium specimens. This shrub is est downstream neighbor, however, is somewhat tenu- easily identified because of its single flowered heads that ous, because the position of the branch just below it are re-aggregated on a receptacle in groups of one to five (Gochnatieae) has only 65% bootstrap support (Panero heads; each group of heads is subtended by a relatively and Funk 2008) and might collapse into a polytomy large spiny whitish or greenish bract (Fig. 16.1). Gray with Mutisieae s.str. If one does the phylogenetic analysis (1882) commented that is was "a remarkable addition without Hecastodeis, there is no change in the phylogeny to the few known North American Mutisieae, to stand of the family. near Ainsliaea DC. but altogether sui generis and of pecu- liar habit." According to Williams (1977) the generic name Hecastodeis, "... comes from the Greek roots, ekastos TAXONOMY meaning 'each' and kleio meaning 'to shut up'", referring to each flower having its own involucre. The species The genus is monotypic and has always been recognized was named after William H. Shockley one of the first as such since its original description by Gray (1882).
  • California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP

    California Vegetation Map in Support of the DRECP

    CALIFORNIA VEGETATION MAP IN SUPPORT OF THE DESERT RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN (2014-2016 ADDITIONS) John Menke, Edward Reyes, Anne Hepburn, Deborah Johnson, and Janet Reyes Aerial Information Systems, Inc. Prepared for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Renewable Energy Program and the California Energy Commission Final Report May 2016 Prepared by: Primary Authors John Menke Edward Reyes Anne Hepburn Deborah Johnson Janet Reyes Report Graphics Ben Johnson Cover Page Photo Credits: Joshua Tree: John Fulton Blue Palo Verde: Ed Reyes Mojave Yucca: John Fulton Kingston Range, Pinyon: Arin Glass Aerial Information Systems, Inc. 112 First Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 793-9493 [email protected] in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Wildlife Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program 1807 13th Street, Suite 202 Sacramento, CA 95811 and California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento, CA 95816 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this project was provided by: California Energy Commission US Bureau of Land Management California Wildlife Conservation Board California Department of Fish and Wildlife Personnel involved in developing the methodology and implementing this project included: Aerial Information Systems: Lisa Cotterman, Mark Fox, John Fulton, Arin Glass, Anne Hepburn, Ben Johnson, Debbie Johnson, John Menke, Lisa Morse, Mike Nelson, Ed Reyes, Janet Reyes, Patrick Yiu California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Diana Hickson, Todd Keeler‐Wolf, Anne Klein, Aicha Ougzin, Rosalie Yacoub California
  • Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report

    Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report

    Appendix F3 Rare Plant Survey Report Draft CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Rare Plant Survey Report Prepared for May 2011 Santa Margarita Water District Draft CADIZ VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION, RECOVERY, AND STORAGE PROJECT Rare Plant Survey Report Prepared for May 2011 Santa Margarita Water District 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.599.4300 www.esassoc.com Oakland Olympia Petaluma Portland Sacramento San Diego San Francisco Seattle Tampa Woodland Hills D210324 TABLE OF CONTENTS Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project: Rare Plant Survey Report Page Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................2 Objective .......................................................................................................................... 2 Project Location and Description .....................................................................................2 Setting ................................................................................................................................... 5 Climate ............................................................................................................................. 5 Topography and Soils ......................................................................................................5
  • Townsendia Condensata Parry Ex Gray Var. Anomala (Heiser) Dorn (Cushion Townsend Daisy): a Technical Conservation Assessment

    Townsendia Condensata Parry Ex Gray Var. Anomala (Heiser) Dorn (Cushion Townsend Daisy): a Technical Conservation Assessment

    Townsendia condensata Parry ex Gray var. anomala (Heiser) Dorn (cushion Townsend daisy): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project May 9, 2006 Hollis Marriott and Jennifer C. Lyman, Ph.D. Garcia and Associates 7550 Shedhorn Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 Peer Review Administered by Society for Conservation Biology Marriott, H. and J.C. Lyman. (2006, May 9). Townsendia condensata Parry ex Gray var. anomala (Heiser) Dorn (cushion Townsend daisy): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/townsendiacondensatavaranomala.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are grateful to several of our colleagues who have authored thorough and clearly-written technical conservation assessments, providing us with excellent examples to follow, including Bonnie Heidel (Wyoming Natural Diversity Database [WYNDD]), Joy Handley (WYNDD), Denise Culver (Colorado Natural Heritage Program), and Juanita Ladyman (JnJ Associates LLC). Beth Burkhart, Kathy Roche, and Richard Vacirca of the Species Conservation Project of the Rocky Mountain Region, USDA Forest Service, gave useful feedback on meeting the goals of the project. Field botanists Kevin and Amy Taylor, Walt Fertig, Bob Dorn, and Erwin Evert generously shared insights on the distribution, habitat requirements, and potential threats for Townsendia condensata var. anomala. Kent Houston of the Shoshone National Forest provided information regarding its conservation status and management issues. Bonnie Heidel and Tessa Dutcher (WYNDD) once again provided much needed information in a timely fashion. We thank Curator Ron Hartman and Manager Ernie Nelson of the Rocky Mountain Herbarium, University of Wyoming, for their assistance and for continued access to their fine facilities.
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny

    Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny

    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
  • Alplains 2013 Seed Catalog P.O

    Alplains 2013 Seed Catalog P.O

    ALPLAINS 2013 SEED CATALOG P.O. BOX 489, KIOWA, CO 80117-0489, U.S.A. Three ways to contact us: FAX: (303) 621-2864 (24 HRS.) email: [email protected] website: www.alplains.com Dear Growing Friends: Welcome to our 23rd annual seed catalog! The summer of 2012 was long, hot and brutal, with drought afflicting most of the U.S. Most of my botanical explorations were restricted to Idaho, Wash- ington, Oregon and northern California but even there moisture was below average. In a year like this, seeps, swales, springs, vestigial snowbanks and localized rainstorms became much more important in my search for seeding plants. On the Snake River Plains of southern Idaho and the scab- lands of eastern Washington, early bloomers such as Viola beckwithii, V. trinervata, Ranunculus glaberrimus, Ranunculus andersonii, Fritillaria pudica and Primula cusickiana put on quite a show in mid-April but many populations could not set seed. In northern Idaho, Erythronium idahoense flowered extensively, whole meadows were covered with thousands of the creamy, pendant blossoms. One of my most satisfying finds in the Hells Canyon area had to be Sedum valens. The tiny glaucous rosettes, surround- ed by a ring of red leaves, are a succulent connoisseur’s dream. Higher up, the brilliant blue spikes of Synthyris missurica punctuated the canyon walls. In southern Oregon, the brilliant red spikes of Pedicularis densiflora lit up the Siskiyou forest floor. Further north in Oregon, large populations of Erythronium elegans, Erythronium oregonum ssp. leucandrum, Erythro- nium revolutum, trilliums and sedums provided wonderful picture-taking opportunities. Eriogonum species did well despite the drought, many of them true xerics.
  • Germination and Seedling Establishment of Spiny Hopsage (Grayia Spinosa [Hook.] Moq.)

    Germination and Seedling Establishment of Spiny Hopsage (Grayia Spinosa [Hook.] Moq.)

    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Nancy L. Shaw for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Crop and Soil Sciences presented on March 19, 1992 Title: Germination and Seedling Establishment of Spiny Hopsage (Grayia Spinosa [Hook.] Moq.) Abstract approved:_Redactedfor Privacy von r. ULdUe Reestablishment of spiny hopsage(Grayia spinosa [Hook.] Moq.) where depleted or lost on shrub steppe sites can improve forage, plant cover, and soil stabilization. The objectives of this study were to: 1) determine direct-seeding requirements; 2) develop optimum germination pretreatments; and 3) examine dormancy mechanisms in spiny hopsage fruits and seeds. The effects of seed source, planting date,and site preparation method onseed germination and seedling establishment (SE) were examined at Birds of Prey and Reynolds Creek in southwestern Idaho. Three seed sources were planted on rough or compact seedbeds on 4 dates in 1986-87 and 3 dates in 1987-88. Exposure to cool-moist environments improved spring SE from early fall (EF) and late fall (LF) plantings. Few seedlings emerged from early (ESp) or late spring (LSp) plantings. SE was low at: 1 site in 1986-87 and atboth sites in 1987-88, probably due to lack of precipitation. For the successful 1986-87 planting, seedling density was greater on rough compared to compact seedbeds in April andMay, possiblydue to improved microclimate conditions. Growth rate varied among seed sources, but seedlings developed a deep taproot (mean length 266 mm) with few lateral roots the first season. Seeds were planted on 3 dates in 1986-87 and 1987-88, andnylon bags containing seeds were planted on 4 dates each year to study microenvironment effects on germination (G), germination rate (GR), and SE.
  • CDFG Natural Communities List

    CDFG Natural Communities List

    Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by The California Natural Diversity Database September 2003 Edition Introduction: This document supersedes all other lists of terrestrial natural communities developed by the Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). It is based on the classification put forth in “A Manual of California Vegetation” (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995 and upcoming new edition). However, it is structured to be compatible with previous CNDDB lists (e.g., Holland 1986). For those familiar with the Holland numerical coding system you will see a general similarity in the upper levels of the hierarchy. You will also see a greater detail at the lower levels of the hierarchy. The numbering system has been modified to incorporate this richer detail. Decimal points have been added to separate major groupings and two additional digits have been added to encompass the finest hierarchal detail. One of the objectives of the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV) was to apply a uniform hierarchical structure to the State’s vegetation types. Quantifiable classification rules were established to define the major floristic groups, called alliances and associations in the National Vegetation Classification (Grossman et al. 1998). In this document, the alliance level is denoted in the center triplet of the coding system and the associations in the right hand pair of numbers to the left of the final decimal. The numbers of the alliance in the center triplet attempt to denote relationships in floristic similarity. For example, the Chamise-Eastwood Manzanita alliance (37.106.00) is more closely related to the Chamise- Cupleaf Ceanothus alliance (37.105.00) than it is to the Chaparral Whitethorn alliance (37.205.00).
  • December 2012 Number 1

    December 2012 Number 1

    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
  • IP Athos Renewable Energy Project, Plan of Development, Appendix D.2

    IP Athos Renewable Energy Project, Plan of Development, Appendix D.2

    APPENDIX D.2 Plant Survey Memorandum Athos Memo Report To: Aspen Environmental Group From: Lehong Chow, Ironwood Consulting, Inc. Date: April 3, 2019 Re: Athos Supplemental Spring 2019 Botanical Surveys This memo report presents the methods and results for supplemental botanical surveys conducted for the Athos Solar Energy Project in March 2019 and supplements the Biological Resources Technical Report (BRTR; Ironwood 2019) which reported on field surveys conducted in 2018. BACKGROUND Botanical surveys were previously conducted in the spring and fall of 2018 for the entirety of the project site for the Athos Solar Energy Project (Athos). However, due to insufficient rain, many plant species did not germinate for proper identification during 2018 spring surveys. Fall surveys in 2018 were conducted only on a reconnaissance-level due to low levels of rain. Regional winter rainfall from the two nearest weather stations showed rainfall averaging at 0.1 inches during botanical surveys conducted in 2018 (Ironwood, 2019). In addition, gen-tie alignments have changed slightly and alternatives, access roads and spur roads have been added. PURPOSE The purpose of this survey was to survey all new additions and re-survey areas of interest including public lands (limited to portions of the gen-tie segments), parcels supporting native vegetation and habitat, and windblown sandy areas where sensitive plant species may occur. The private land parcels in current or former agricultural use were not surveyed (parcel groups A, B, C, E, and part of G). METHODS Survey Areas: The area surveyed for biological resources included the entirety of gen-tie routes (including alternates), spur roads, access roads on public land, parcels supporting native vegetation (parcel groups D and F), and areas covered by windblown sand where sensitive species may occur (portion of parcel group G).
  • Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations

    Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations

    Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations Revised Report and Documentation Prepared for: Department of Defense U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Submitted by: January 2004 Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations: Revised Report and Documentation CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary..........................................................................................iii 2.0 Introduction – Project Description................................................................. 1 3.0 Methods ................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 NatureServe Data................................................................................................ 3 3.2 DOD Installations............................................................................................... 5 3.3 Species at Risk .................................................................................................... 6 4.0 Results................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Nationwide Assessment of Species at Risk on DOD Installations..................... 8 4.2 Assessment of Species at Risk by Military Service.......................................... 13 4.3 Assessment of Species at Risk on Installations ................................................ 15 5.0 Conclusion and Management Recommendations.................................... 22 6.0 Future Directions.............................................................................................
  • A Fljeristic SURVJ I'm

    A Fljeristic SURVJ I'm

    A FLJeRISTIC SURVJ i'M DISTRIBUTION OF THIS OOCUMEKT IS UNLMTEQ "SoelNtfttMA-- l^t A FLORISTIC SURVEY OF YUCCA MOUNTAIN AND VICINITY NYE COUNTY, NEVADA by Wesley E. Niles Patrick J. Leary James S. Holland Fred H. Landau December, 1995 Prepared for U. S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office under Contract No. DE/NV DE-FC08-90NV10872 MASTER DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi• bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer• ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom• mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. DISCS-AIMER Portions <ff this document may lie illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document ABSTRACT A survey of the vascular flora of Yucca Mountain and vicinity, Nye County, Nevada, was conducted from March to June 1994, and from March to October 1995. An annotated checklist of recorded taxa was compiled. Voucher plant specimens were collected and accessioned into the Herbarium at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.