DOCSLIB.ORG

Preliminary Oages

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preliminary Oages RECORD OF DECISION for Newfield Exploration Company Monument Butte Oil and Gas Development Project in Uintah and Duchesne Counties, Utah UT-G010-2009-0217 DOI-BLM-UT-G010-2016-0065 U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, Utah 84078 2016 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Newfield Exploration Company Monument Butte Oil and Gas Development Project .................. 1 1. Approval ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 The Decision ............................................................................................................................. 5 3.1 What the Decision Includes .................................................................................................. 5 3.1.1 The Selected Alternative ................................................................................................ 5 3.1.2 Big Wash Lands with Wilderness Characteristics Submission ..................................... 7 3.2 What the Decision Does Not Include .................................................................................... 7 3.2.1 Decisions on Lands or Minerals other than BLM-Administered................................... 8 3.2.2 Site-Specific Permits ...................................................................................................... 8 3.2.3 Acquired Land in the Pariette ACEC............................................................................. 8 3.2.5 FEIS Mitigation Measures Not Carried Forward as ROD COAs .................................. 8 4.0 Management Considerations ................................................................................................... 11 4.1 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................... 11 4.2 Conformance with BLM Land Use Plans, Laws, and Policy ............................................. 11 4.3 Consistency with Other Plans, Statutes, and Objectives..................................................... 12 4.4 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 13 4.4.1 Alternative A: Proposed Action ................................................................................... 13 4.4.2 Alternative B: No Action (Environmentally Preferable Alternative) .......................... 14 4.4.3 Alternative C: Field-Wide Electrification .................................................................... 14 4.4.4 DEIS Alternative D: Original Resource Protection (Agency Preferred Alternative) .. 15 4.4.5 FEIS Alternative D: Resource Protection (Agency Preferred Alternative) ................. 16 4.5 Consultation and Coordination ........................................................................................... 17 4.5.1 Cooperating Agencies .................................................................................................. 17 4.5.2 Air Resource Coordination .......................................................................................... 18 4.5.3 NHPA Section 106 Consultation and Government to Government Consultation ....... 18 4.5.4 ESA Section 7 Consultation......................................................................................... 19 4.6 Public Involvement ............................................................................................................. 20 4.6.1 Public Scoping ............................................................................................................. 20 4.6.2 Draft EIS ...................................................................................................................... 21 1 4.6.3 Final EIS ...................................................................................................................... 22 5.0 Appeal Process ........................................................................................................................ 25 6.0 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................................... 27 Attachment 1: Maps and Figures .................................................................................................. 29 Attachment 2: Data Collection and Reporting Requirements and Conditions of Approval ......... 37 Attachment 3: Air Mitigation Strategy – Applicant Committed Environmental Protection Measures ....................................................................................................................................... 89 Attachment 4: Final Cactus Conservation and Mitigation Strategy ............................................. 95 Attachment 5: Biological Opinion .............................................................................................. 117 Attachment 6: Comment Responses ........................................................................................... 131 Attachment 7: Errata ................................................................................................................... 159 Attachment 8: Appeals Form 1842-1 .......................................................................................... 167 2 1. Approval I approve the Monument Butte Oil and Gas Development Project as described in the Decision section of this document (Section 3) and the maps and figures in Attachment 1, subject to the Data Collection and Reporting Requirements and Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment 2, which are formed from the FEIS, the Air Quality Strategy (Attachment 3), the Final Cactus Strategy (Attachment 4), and the Biological Opinion (Attachment 5). Approved By: Jenna Whitlock Date Acting State Director 1 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 2 2.0 Summary Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the United States (U.S.) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Vernal Field Office has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement on the impacts of proposed oil and natural gas development within the Greater Monument Butte Project Area (MBPA) (Attachment 1). The MBPA is located in southeastern Duchesne County and southwestern Uintah County. The MBPA consists of approximately 119,743 acres of Federal, State, and private lands. The Bureau of Land Management Utah State Director is the Authorized Officer for this decision. Implementation of the Decision has been delegated to the Vernal Field Office and/or the Green River District. Newfield Exploration Company (Newfield) notified the BLM Vernal Field Office on January 14, 2009 of its need and plan to expand their ongoing oil and natural gas development within the MBPA. This Record of Decision (ROD) documents the BLM’s final decision regarding Newfield’s plan (Section 3) as well as the BLM’s management considerations (Section 4) in making the decision including: purpose and need of the project, conformance of the project with existing Land Use Plans, the potential impacts of the proposed oil and natural gas development under the four alternatives as documented in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), outcomes of the consultations undertaken for the project, and responses to public comments on the FEIS (Attachment 6) and the resulting FEIS errata (Attachment 7). The form to be completed by any party adversely affected by and wishing to appeal the Decision is included as Attachment 8. 3 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 4 3.0 The Decision BLM has determined that the analysis contained in the FEIS is adequate for the purposes of reaching an informed decision regarding implementation of Newfield’s plan on BLM- administered lands or minerals. However, all components of the selected alternative as described below are subject to further site-specific permitting and NEPA requirements. Newfield must obtain federal, state, and local permits, along with right-of-way (ROW)1 grants, licenses, easement agreements, and other authorizing actions to proceed with all project-related development. 3.1 What the Decision Includes The decision is hereby made to allow oil and natural gas drilling on leased federal lands as described in the FEIS Section 2.6 Alternative D – Agency Preferred Alternative subject to the attached Conditions of Approval (hereafter referred to as the Selected Alternative). The Selected Alternative is programmatically depicted in Map 2-4 included in Attachment 1 of this ROD. The Conditions of Approval are listed in Attachment 2: Data Collection and Reporting Requirements and Conditions of Approval, and formed from the FEIS, the Air Quality Strategy in Attachment 3, the Final Cactus Strategy in Attachment 4, and the Biological Opinion in Attachment 5. 3.1.1 The Selected Alternative The Selected Alternative includes the following primary components. 1) Wells and facility development and construction in the project area as described in FEIS Section 2.6 including: a. Development of up to 750 new Green River vertical oil wells to be drilled from a combination of new, small and large well pads, all of which would eventually be converted into waterflood injection wells; b. Development of up to 2,500 new deep gas wells that would be vertically or directionally drilled from a combination of new and existing, large well pads; c.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reproductive Biology, Hybridization, and Flower Visitors of Rare Sclerocactus Taxa in Utah's Uintah Basin
    Western North American Naturalist Volume 70 Number 3 Article 10 10-11-2010 Reproductive biology, hybridization, and flower visitors of rare Sclerocactus taxa in Utah's Uintah Basin Vincent J. Tepedino Utah State University, Logan, [email protected] Terry L. Griswold Utah State University, Logan, [email protected] William R. Bowlin Utah State University, Logan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Recommended Citation Tepedino, Vincent J.; Griswold, Terry L.; and Bowlin, William R. (2010) "Reproductive biology, hybridization, and flower visitors of rare Sclerocactus taxa in Utah's Uintah Basin," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 70 : No. 3 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol70/iss3/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Western North American Naturalist 70(3), © 2010, pp. 377–386 REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, HYBRIDIZATION, AND FLOWER VISITORS OF RARE SCLEROCACTUS TAXA IN UTAH’S UINTAH BASIN Vincent J. Tepedino1,2, Terry L. Griswold1, and William R. Bowlin1,3 ABSTRACT.—We studied the mating system and flower visitors of 2 threatened species of Sclerocactus (Cactaceae) in the Uintah Basin of eastern Utah—an area undergoing rapid energy development. We found that both S. wetlandicus and S. brevispinus are predominantly outcrossed and are essentially self-incompatible. A third presumptive taxon (unde- scribed; here called S. wetlandicus-var1) is fully self-compatible but cannot produce seeds unless the flowers are visited by pollinators.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened, Endangered, Candidate & Proposed Plant Species of Utah
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho and Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 52 MARCH 2011 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE & PROPOSED PLANT SPECIES OF UTAH Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho Casey Burns, State Biologist, NRCS, Salt Lake City, Utah Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica). Photo by Megan Robinson. This technical note identifies the current threatened, endangered, candidate and proposed plant species listed by the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS) in Utah. Review your county list of threatened and endangered species and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Conservation Data Center (CDC) GIS T&E database to see if any of these species have been identified in your area of work. Additional information on these listed species can be found on the USDI FWS web site under “endangered species”. Consideration of these species during the planning process and determination of potential impacts related to scheduled work will help in the conservation of these rare plants. Contact your Plant Material Specialist, Plant Materials Center, State Biologist and Area Biologist for additional guidance on identification of these plants and NRCS responsibilities related to the Endangered Species Act. 2 Table of Contents Map of Utah Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species 4 Threatened & Endangered Species Profiles Arctomecon humilis Dwarf Bear-poppy ARHU3 6 Asclepias welshii Welsh’s Milkweed ASWE3 8 Astragalus ampullarioides Shivwits Milkvetch ASAM14 10 Astragalus desereticus Deseret Milkvetch ASDE2 12 Astragalus holmgreniorum Holmgren Milkvetch ASHO5 14 Astragalus limnocharis var.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal for Amendment of Appendix I Or II for CITES Cop16
    Original language: English CoP17 Prop. XXX CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA ____________________ Seventeenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties Johannesburg (South Africa), 24 September – 5 October 2016 CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENT OF APPENDICES I AND II A. Proposal Transfer of fishhook cacti Sclerocactus spinosior ssp. blainei (= Sclerocactus blainei), Sclerocactus cloverae (CITES-listed synonym of Sclerocactus parviflorus), and Sclerocactus sileri from Appendix II to Appendix I, as per the outcome of the CITES Periodic Review of the Appendices, in accordance with Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 1, paragraph B) iii): Populations are restricted and are characterized by a high vulnerability to intrinsic and extrinsic factors and an observed, inferred, or projected decrease in the number of subpopulations and the number of individuals. Nomenclature amendment to the Appendix-I listing of Sclerocactus glaucus, formerly treated as a complex, to three distinct species: Sclerocactus glaucus, Sclerocactus brevispinus, and Sclerocactus wetlandicus (the last two are CITES-listed synonyms of S. glaucus), as per the outcome of a Periodic Review of the Appendices. The three species continue to meet the criteria for Appendix I in accordance with Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 1, paragraph B) iii): Populations are restricted and are characterized by a high vulnerability to intrinsic and extrinsic factors and an observed, inferred, or projected decrease in the number of subpopulations and the number of individuals. B. Proponent United States of America* C. Supporting statement 1. Taxonomy 1.1 Class: Magnoliopsida 1.2 Order: Caryophyllales 1.3 Family: Cactaceae 1.4 Genus, species or subspecies, including author and year: The scientific names Sclerocactus blainei (CITES-listed Sclerocactus spinosior ssp.
    [Show full text]
  • Estrutura Genética De Amostras De Mandacaru Usando Locos Heterólogos De Microssatélites
    UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DE MARINGÁ PROGRAMA DE PÓS GRADUAÇÃO EM GENÉTICA E MELHORAMENTO VANESSA NEVES DE AZEVEDO FERNANDES Estrutura genética de amostras de mandacaru usando locos heterólogos de microssatélites MARINGÁ PARANÁ – BRASIL FEVEREIRO 2013 VANESSA NEVES DE AZEVEDO FERNANDES Estrutura genética de amostras de mandacaru usando locos heterólogos de microssatélites Dissertação apresentada à Universidade Estadual de Maringá como parte das exigências do programa de Pós–Graduação em Genética e Melhoramento, para obtenção do título de Mestre. Orientadora: Profª Drª Claudete Aparecida Mangolin. MARINGÁ PARANÁ – BRASIL FEVEREIRO 2013 À minha família, pelo incentivo e apoio em todas as minhas decisões. iii AGRADECIMENTOS Primeiramente a Deus. Ao Programa de Pós-graduação em Genética e Melhoramento (PGM) da Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM), pela oportunidade da realização deste trabalho. Ao Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnológico (CNPq), pela bolsa de estudo concedida e pelo apoio financeiro. À minha orientadora, professora doutora Claudete Aparecida Mangolin, pela orientação segura e competente deste trabalho, por sua dedicação incansável, pelo seu apoio e incentivo. À professora doutora Maria de Fátima Pires da Silva Machado, pela sabedoria e atenção dedicadas durante a realização deste trabalho e a todos os professores do Programa de Pós-graduação em Genética e Melhoramento, pela transmissão de conhecimentos e apoio. Aos professores do Laboratório de Cultura de Tecidos e Eletroforese de Vegetais e do Laboratório de Genética Animal, Erasmo Renesto, Maria Claudia Takasusuki e Sandra Collet, pelo carinho e amizade. Também à Leila Frota e ao Sérgio Luiz, pela ajuda nas rotinas do laboratório. À minha família, especialmente ao meu pai, Antonio Luiz Fernandes, à minha mãe, Isaura Maria Neves de Azevedo Fernandes, e ao meu irmão, Luiz Eduardo, por todo carinho, apoio, incentivo e por tantos momentos de suas vidas dedicados a mim.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft RECOVERY PLAN
    Winkler cactus (Pediocactus winkleri) AND San Rafael cactus (Pediocactus despainii) Draft RECOVERY PLAN December 2015 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado DISCLAIMER Recovery plans use the best available information to identify reasonable actions for protecting and recovering listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, or others. Attainment of recovery objectives and availability of funds are subject to budgetary and other constraints as well as the need to address other priorities. Nothing in this plan should be construed as a commitment or requirement for any Federal agency to obligate or pay funds in contravention of the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1341, or any other law or regulation. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views, official position, or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in plan formulation other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director. Approved plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. The literature citation for this document should read: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. Winkler cactus (Pediocactus winkleri) and San Rafael cactus (Pediocactus despainii) recovery plan. Technical/agency draft. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado. xii + 133 pp. Additional copies of the draft document can be obtained from: Utah Ecological Services Office U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Kaktuszok Télállósága Magyarországon
    KAKTUSZOK TÉLÁLLÓSÁGA MAGYARORSZÁGON Doktori értekezés MOHÁCSINÉ SZABÓ KRISZTINA Budapest, 2007. A doktori iskola megnevezése: Kertészettudományi (Interdiszciplináris) tudományága : Növénytermesztési és kertészeti tudományok vezet ője: Dr. Papp János egyetemi tanár, DSc Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem, Kertészettudományi Kar Gyümölcsterm ő Növények Tanszék Témavezet ők: Dr. Schmidt Gábor tanszékvezető egyetemi tanár, DSc Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem Kertészettudományi Kar Dísznövénytermesztési és Dendrológiai Tanszék Dr. Mészáros Zoltán egyetemi tanár, DSc Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem A jelölt a Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem Doktori Szabályzatában el őírt valamennyi feltételnek eleget tett, az értekezés m űhelyvitájában elhangzott észrevételeket és javaslatokat az értekezés átdolgozásakor figyelembe vette, ezért az értekezés nyilvános vitára bocsátható. ........................................................... ........................................................................... Az iskolavezet ő jóváhagyása Témavezet ők jóváhagyása A Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem Élettudományi Területi Doktori Tanács 2007. december 11-i határozatában a nyilvános vita lefolytatására az alábbi bíráló Bizottságot jelölte ki: BÍRÁLÓ BIZOTTSÁG : Elnöke Rimóczi Imre DSc Tagjai Terbe István CSc Mihalik Erzsébet CSc Kiss Istvánné CSc Opponensek Isépy István CSc Neményi András PhD Titkár Nagy József PhD TARTALOMJEGYZÉK 1. Bevezetés……………………………………………………………………………..………1 2. Irodalmi áttekintés……………………………………………………………………..……..4 2. 1. A kaktuszok botanikai jellemzése……………...…………………………………..….4
    [Show full text]
  • Special-Status Plant Species Report
    SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORT Operator: Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Project: NBU 1022-9K Well Pad Expansion Survey Location: Section 9, Township 10 South, Range 22 East; Uintah County, Utah Survey Type(s): Uinta Basin hookless cactus ( Sclerocactus wetlandicus ) Survey Date(s): July 10 and 12, 2015 Survey Company: SWCA Environmental Consultants 2028 West 500 North Vernal, Utah 84078 (435) 789-9388 Project Manager: Jared Bigler Survey Crew: Stephen Fuller (crew leader), Meghan McCormick, Joseph May, Lucy Parham, and Jason Pierce Weather: Date Temperature Range Cloud Cover Wind Speed Precipitation (oF) (%) (miles per hour) 7/10/2015 80–85 10–80 0–10 Thunder storm 7/12/2015 60–85 5–20 0–5 None Survey Results: Total Acres Surveyed: 29.05 Plant Surveyed for: Species Suitable Habitat Occupied Habitat No. of (acres) (acres) Plants Observed Uinta Basin hookless cactus 5.45 0 0 (Sclerocactus wetlandicus ) Invasive Weeds Cheatgrass ( Bromus tectorum ) Observed: Halogeton ( Halogeton glomeratus ) Kochia weed (Bassia scoparia ) Noxious Weeds Salt-cedar ( Tamarix chinensis ) Observed: NBU 1022-9K Well Pad Expansion Special-Status Plant Species Report PROPOSED PROJECT Table 1 provides the basic details of the project. Table 1. Project Details Operator Name Anadarko Petroleum Corporation Expansion of the NBU 1022-9K well pad, and construction of associated well connect pipelines Project Description and access road. Project Location Section 9, Township 10 South, Range 22 East; Uintah County, Utah Land Agency Bureau of Land Management Mineral extraction activities, transportation corridors, agricultural and ranching activities, livestock Historical Impacts grazing, and erosion have historically impacted the project area. PROJECT AREA AND SURVEY AREA DESCRIPTIONS Table 2 provides descriptions of the project area and survey area, and Figure 1 shows the location of the project area and survey area.
    [Show full text]
  • Octubre-Diciembre 2016 Vol. 61 No. 4
    98 Volumen 61 No. 4 Octubre-diciembre 2016 Cactáceas y Suculentas Mexicanas es una revista trimestral de circulación Editor Fundador Jorge Meyrán internacional y arbitrada, publicada por la Sociedad Mexicana de Cacto- Consejo Editorial logía, A.C. desde 1955, su finalidad es promover el estudio científico y Anatomía y Morfología despertar el interés en esta rama de la botánica. Dra. Teresa Terrazas Instituto de Biología, UNAM El contenido de los artículos es responsabilidad exclusiva de los autores y Ecología se encuentran bajo la licencia Creative Commons . Dr. Arturo Flores-Martínez Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas, IPN Dr. Pablo Ortega-Baes La revista Cactáceas y Suculentas Mexicanas se encuentra registrada Universidad de Salta Argentina en los siguientes índices: CAB Abstracts, BIOSIS (Thomson Reuters), Etnobotánica Periodica y Latindex. Dr. Javier Caballero Nieto Jardín Botánico IB-UNAM Evolución y Genética The journal Cactáceas y Suculentas Mexicanas is a publication of the Dr. Luis Eguiarte Mexican Society of Cactology, published since 1955. Instituto de Ecología, UNAM Fisiología The articles are under the Creative Commons license . Dr. Oscar Briones Instituto de Ecología A. C. The journal Cactáceas y Suculentas Mexicanas is registered in Florística M. en C. Francisco González Medrano the following indices: CAB Abstracts, BIOSIS (Thomson Reuters), Periodica Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Xochimilco and Latindex. Horticultura Dr. Candelario Mondragón Jacobo, INIFAP-UAQ Dirección editorial (editor’s address): Cactáceas y Suculentas Mexicanas, Dr. Elhadi Yahia Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro Instituto de Ecología, UNAM, Aptdo. Postal 70-275, Cd. Universitaria, Química y Biotecnología 04510, México, D.F. Dr. Francisco Roberto Quiroz Figueroa Instituto de Biotecnología, UNAM Correo electrónico: [email protected] Sistemas Reproductivos Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement
    Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement July 14, 2015 FS_0081605 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Purpose and Need for GRSG LUP Amendment ........................................................................................... 6 Description of Planning Area ........................................................................................................................ 6 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................................................... 10 SPECIES CONSIDERED IN THE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 10 SPECIES INFORMATION AND CRITICAL HABITAT ............................................................................. 42 A. Wildlife and Fish .................................................................................................................................... 42 Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)—Threatened ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tharp's Blue-Star (2013-2014)
    Brack’s Hardwall Cactus Distribution, Habitat, and Status Survey 2015 Natural Heritage New Mexico Report 393 – May, 2016 Brack’s Hardwall Cactus Distribution, Habitat, and Status Survey 20151 Esteban Muldavin,2 Robert Sivinski,3 Mitchell East, Yvonne Chauvin, and Mark Horner Natural Heritage New Mexico, Museum of Southwestern Biology and Department of Biology University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131 May 2016 ________________________________________________________________________ Summary Brack’s hardwall cactus (Sclerocactus cloverae subsp. brackii) is a rare plant that occurs on the Nacimiento Formation of northwestern New Mexico. It is listed as a BLM sensitive species and is included on the State of New Mexico list of endangered plant species. Most of the known populations of Brack’s are on lands under Bureau of Land Management (BLM) jurisdiction (about 80%), but it is also present on the Navajo Nation, State of New Mexico Trust Lands, and private property. Portions of the Nacimiento Formation have actively developing oil and gas fields that include the construction of well pads, roads and pipelines that have the potential to significantly negatively impact this species. Yet, the full extent of the species regionally, its habitat requirements, and abundance have not been systematically addressed to support the management of the species. Accordingly, Natural Heritage New Mexico (NHNM) conducted field study in 2015 with two primary objectives: 1) provide a regional assessment of the overall distribution of Sclerocactus cloverae ssp. brackii on the Nacimiento Formation in the context of other closely related Sclerocactus species; and 2 ) describe the potential habitats and relative degree of occupancy by the species within those habitats focusing on the Lybrook area, a major population center for the species and an area of ongoing intensive oil and gas exploration.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Status of Sclerocactus Brevispinus, S. Wetlandicus, and S
    Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany Volume 30 | Issue 2 Article 2 2013 Species Status of Sclerocactus brevispinus, S. wetlandicus, and S. glaucus: Inferences from Morphology, Chloroplast DNA Sequences, and AFLP Markers J. Mark Porter Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, Claremont, California Jennifer Cruse-Sanders Atlanta Botanical Garden, Atlanta, Georgia Linda Prince Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, Claremont, California Robert Lauri San Diego State University, San Diego, California Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso Part of the Botany Commons, and the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Porter, J. Mark; Cruse-Sanders, Jennifer; Prince, Linda; and Lauri, Robert (2013) "Species Status of Sclerocactus brevispinus, S. wetlandicus, and S. glaucus: Inferences from Morphology, Chloroplast DNA Sequences, and AFLP Markers," Aliso: A Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany: Vol. 30: Iss. 2, Article 2. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/aliso/vol30/iss2/2 Aliso, 30(2), pp. 69–83 ’ 2012, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden SPECIES STATUS OF SCLEROCACTUS BREVISPINUS, S. WETLANDICUS, AND S. GLAUCUS: INFERENCES FROM MORPHOLOGY, CHLOROPLAST DNA SEQUENCES, AND AFLP MARKERS J. MARK PORTER,1,4 JENNIFER CRUSE-SANDERS,2 LINDA PRINCE,1 AND ROBERT LAURI1,3 1Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, 1500 North College Avenue, Claremont, California 91711, USA; 2Atlanta Botanical Garden, 345 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30309, USA; 3San Diego State University, Biology Department, 5500 Campanile Drive, San Diego, California 92182, USA 4Corresponding author ([email protected]) ABSTRACT We examine patterns of variation in 12 continuous morphological traits, chloroplast DNA sequences from 10 intergenic spacer regions (petA-psbJ, psbk-trnS, psbM-trnD, rpob-trnC, trnC-trnD, trnGCU- trnG2S, trnFM-trnUGA, atpF-atpH, trnT-trnD, trnQ-psbk), atpF, and rpl16, and Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) genetic markers in Sclerocactus glaucus sensu lato (5S.
    [Show full text]