DOCSLIB.ORG

USFWS Response Memo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
USFWS Response Memo Gateway West Final Environmental Assessment and Proposed Land Use Plan Amendments for Segments 8 and 9, Idaho Appendix G BLM and FWS Endangered Species Act [ESA] Compliance Memoranda January 5, 2018 United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Idaho State Office 1387 S. Vinnell Way Boise, Idaho 83709 DEC 1 5 2017 In Reply Refer To: 2800 (930) WYW-174598/IDI-35849-01 Gateway West Transmission Line Project EMS TRANSMISSION Memorandum To: Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wyoming Field Office, Cheyenne, WY From: JuneE. Shoemake~~ Deputy State Direc!9f, Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Office Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Compliance Memorandum v. 2.0 Introduction The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is submitting this memorandum to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to document changes in the Gateway West Transmission Line Project (Project) 2016 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and 2017 Environmental Assessment (EA) that have occurred to Segments 8 and 9 since the publication of the 2013 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and 2013 Biological Assessment (BA). In our 2013 BA, BLM determined that the Project "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" the endangered Banbury Springs limpet (currently Lanx sp., technically now ldaholanx fresti; Campbell et al. 2017), Snake River physa (Physa natricina), and Bruneau hot springsnail (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis); the threatened Bliss Rapids snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola); and designated critical habitat for the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). We also determined that the Project "may affect", and was "likely to adversel7 affect" slickspot peppergrass (Lepidiu:ri papilliferum) and its proposed critical habitat. This memorandum provides documentation of BLM's determination that the changes to Segments 8 and 9 presented in the 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA do not modify the effects analyzed for the Banbury Springs limpet, Snake River physa, Bruneau hot springsnail, Bliss Rapids snail, designated critical habitat for the bull trout, and slickspot peppergrass and its proposed critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered as described through criteria1 set forth in 50 CFR §402.16. In addition, current 1 As provided in 50 Code of Federal Regulations §402.16, reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary federal agency involvement or control over the action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if (1) the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded;(2) new information reveals effects of the agency action that may affect Endangered Species Act listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in the Biological Opinion; (3) the agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the ESA-listed species or critical habitat not considered in the Biological Opinion; or (4) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the action. 1 environmental baseline conditions for the Project area in Segments 8 and 9 have not significantly changed from those included in our effects analyses addressed in the 2013 BA. Thus, we have concluded that there will be no significant increase in the intensity or duration of any potential beneficial or adverse effects of Segments 8 and 9 of the Project, inclusive of associated conservation measures, as described in our 2013 BA. Therefore, BLM has determined that the 2013 BA adequately addresses any effects of Segments 8 and 9 such that reinitiation of Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 7 consultation is not necessary. We request USFWS acknowledgement that the existing section 7 consultation adequately addresses effects to listed species and bull trout critical habitat within Segments 8 and 9 as further described below in this memorandum. As described in detail below, BLM has determined that Alternative 1 for Segments 8 and 9 of the 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA "may affect" but are "not likely to adversely affect" Banbury Springs limpet, Snake River physa, and Bliss Rapids snail, and will have "no effect" on Bruneau hot springsnail and bull trout critical habitat. We request USFWS acknowledgement of this "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determination for Banbury Springs limpet, Snake River physa, and Bliss Rapids snail, and "no effect" determination for Bruneau hot springsnail and designated critical habitat for bull trout for Segments 8 and 9 as described below in this memorandum. Slickspot peppergrass was reinstated as a threatened species on September 16, 2016, which was subsequent to the completion of the 2013 BA. As described below, we have determined that implementation of Alternative 1 for Segments 8 and 9 of the 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA "may effect", and is "likely to adversely affect" slickspot peppergrass in a manner or to an extent similar to that which was analyzed in the original 2013 BA and for which the Service provided its 2013 Conference Opinion (CO). We request USFWS acknowledgement of this "may effect, likely to adversely affect" determination for slickspot peppergrass and its proposed critical habitat for Segments 8 and 9 and further request USFWS confirm the conclusion of the 2013 CO as formal consultation and as the USFWS's Biological Opinion. In addition, the yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) was designated as a threatened species on November 2, 2014, which was subsequent to the completion of the 2013 BA. As described below, we have determined that implementation of Alternative 1 for Segments 8 and 9 of the 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA will have "no effect" on the yellow-billed cuckoo or its proposed critical habitat. This analysis of Project-related effects on the yellow-billed cuckoo and its proposed critical habitat only addresses the 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA Alternative 1 for Segments 8 and 9 of the Project. We further request USFWS acknowledgement of this "no effect" determination for the yellow-billed cuckoo and its proposed critical habitat for Segments 8 and 9. Project Summary and Background The Project, as assessed in the 2013 FEIS and BA, included permanent and temporary access roads, laydown and staging areas, three substations, expansions or modifications of nine extant substations, and construction or installation of communications systems, optical fiber regeneration stations, and substation distribution supply lines. The design of the electric transmission line included self-supported steel H-frame 230-kilovolt (kV) structures and lattice steel 500-kV structures. The BA addressed only the routes selected as the Agency Preferred Alternative by the BLM in 2013, which included the construction and operations of about 990 miles of new 230-kV and 500-kV electric transmission lines in 10 segments, from the Windstar Substation at Glenrock, Wyoming, to the Hemingway Substation just west of Melba, Idaho. 2 The BLM published the FEIS for the Project on April 26, 2013 (BLM 2013a) and a Record of Decision (ROD) on November 14, 2013 (BLM 2013b). In that ROD, the BLM deferred a decision for two of the 10 segments (i.e., Segments 8 and 9) to allow additional time for federal, state, and local permitting agencies to examine additional routing options, compensatory mitigation measures, and the enhancement standard applicable to these segments where they intersect the Morley Nelson Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Area (SRBOP). A BA and a request for formal consultation were submitted to the USFWS in March 2013 and April 30, 2013, respectively. In September 2013, the BLM received a Biological Opinion (BO) from the USFWS [Ref#06E13000/WY13F0033] which contained (1) acknowledgement of "no effect" and concurrence for "not likely to adversely affect" determinations; (2) a BO for potential adverse effects associated with depletions from the Colorado and Platte River Basins; and (3) an attached Conference Opinion (CO) for effects of the Project on the proposed slickspot peppergrass and its proposed critical habitat. A summary of the ESA listed species analyzed in the 2013 BA and addressed in the 2013 BO and associated CO is provided in Attachment 1. The BO acknowledged that the Project would have "no effect" on an additional 14 ESA listed species that do not have the potential to occur in the Action Area (Attachment 2). In November 2013, following publication of the FEIS and BA, the BLM requested that the Boise Resource Advisory Council (RAC) consider issues surrounding the siting of Segments 8 and 9 of the Project and examined a number of additional routing options. In August 2014, the Proponents of the Project (i.e., Idaho Power Company and PacifiCorp, doing business as Rocky Mountain Power) submitted a revised Project application for Segments 8 and 9 based on recommendations from the RAC. This new application for Segments 8 and 9 was assessed in the BLM's 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA. The BLM published the SEIS for the Project on October 7, 2016 (BLM 2016a) and a ROD on January 19, 2017 (BLM 2017a). In that ROD, the SEIS Agency Preferred Alternative (Alternative 5 - Route 8G and Route 9K) was selected. Because the SEIS Alternative 5 had the potential to generate different impacts to ESA listed species or critical habitat compared to the Agency Preferred Alternatives considered in the FEIS/BA, the BLM prepared an ESA Section 7 Compliance Memorandum that was submitted to the USFWS on December 13, 2016 (BLM 2016b). On December 16, 2016, the USFWS provided the BLM a memorandum (USFWS 2016a) acknowledging the BLM's determinations outlined in the 2016 ESA Section 7 Compliance Memorandum. The Proposed Action and proposed land use plan amendments assessed in the 2017 EA are different from those selected in the 2017 ROD. Therefore, the analysis and determinations documented in the. 2016 ESA Section 7 Compliance Memorandum are no longer applicable. The BLM's 2016 SEIS and 2017 EA assesses the Proponents' new Revised Proposed Action for Segments 8 and 9 (Alternative l); new routes, variations, and alternatives for Segments 8 and 9; newly proposed design features and mitigation measures; as well as new information that has become available since the 2013 FEIS and ROD were published.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 12. Owyhee Uplands Section
    12. Owyhee Uplands Section Section Description The Owyhee Uplands Section is part of the Columbia Plateau Ecoregion. The Idaho portion, the subject of this review, comprises southwestern Idaho from the lower Payette River valley in the northwest and the Camas Prairie in the northeast, south through the Hagerman Valley and Salmon Falls Creek Drainage (Fig. 12.1, Fig. 12.2). The Owyhee Uplands spans a 1,200 to 2,561 m (4,000 to 8,402 ft) elevation range. This arid region generally receives 18 to 25 cm (7 to 10 in) of annual precipitation at lower elevations. At higher elevations, precipitation falls predominantly during the winter and often as snow. The Owyhee Uplands has the largest human population of any region in Idaho, concentrated in a portion of the section north of the Snake River—the lower Boise and lower Payette River valleys, generally referred to as the Treasure Valley. This area is characterized by urban and suburban development as well as extensive areas devoted to agricultural production of crops for both human and livestock use. Among the conservation issues in the Owyhee Uplands include the ongoing conversion of agricultural lands to urban and suburban development, which limits wildlife habitat values. In addition, the conversion of grazing land used for ranching to development likewise threatens wildlife habitat. Accordingly, the maintenance of opportunity for economically viable Lower Deep Creek, Owyhee Uplands, Idaho © 2011 Will Whelan ranching operations is an important consideration in protecting open space. The aridity of this region requires water management programs, including water storage, delivery, and regulation for agriculture, commercial, and residential uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Usage by the Page Springsnail, Pyrgulopsis Morrisoni (Gastropoda: Hydrobiidae), from Central Arizona
    THE VELIGER ᭧ CMS, Inc., 2006 The Veliger 48(1):8–16 (June 30, 2006) Habitat Usage by the Page Springsnail, Pyrgulopsis morrisoni (Gastropoda: Hydrobiidae), from Central Arizona MICHAEL A. MARTINEZ* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2321 W. Royal Palm Rd., Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona 85021, USA (*Correspondent: mike࿞[email protected]) AND DARRIN M. THOME U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Rm. W-2605, Sacramento, California 95825, USA Abstract. We measured habitat variables and the occurrence and density of the Page springsnail, Pyrgulopsis mor- risoni (Hershler & Landye, 1988), in the Oak Creek Springs Complex of central Arizona during the spring and summer of 2001. Occurrence and high density of P. morrisoni were associated with gravel and pebble substrates, and absence and low density with silt and sand. Occurrence and high density were also associated with lower levels of dissolved oxygen and low conductivity. Occurrence was further associated with shallower water depths. Water velocity may play an important role in maintaining springsnail habitat by influencing substrate composition and other physico-chemical variables. Our study constitutes the first empirical effort to define P. morrisoni habitat and should be useful in assessing the relative suitability of spring environments for the species. The best approach to manage springsnail habitat is to maintain springs in their natural state. INTRODUCTION & Landye, 1988), is medium-sized relative to other con- geners, 1.8 to 2.9 mm in shell height, endemic to the The role that physico-chemical habitat variables play in Upper Verde River drainage of central Arizona (Williams determining the occurrence and density of aquatic micro- et al., 1985; Hershler & Landye, 1988; Hershler, 1994), invertebrates in spring ecosystems has been poorly stud- with all known populations existing within a complex of ied.
    [Show full text]
  • Listing Decisions Under the Endangered Species Act: Why Better Science Isn't Always Better Policy
    Washington University Law Review Volume 75 Issue 3 January 1997 Listing Decisions Under the Endangered Species Act: Why Better Science Isn't Always Better Policy Holly Doremus University of California, Berkeley Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Environmental Law Commons, Evidence Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Holly Doremus, Listing Decisions Under the Endangered Species Act: Why Better Science Isn't Always Better Policy, 75 WASH. U. L. Q. 1029 (1997). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol75/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Law Quarterly VOLUME 75 NUMBER 3 1997 ARTICLES LISTING DECISIONS UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: WHY BETTER SCIENCE ISN'T ALWAYS BETTER POLICY HOLLY DOREMUS* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1031 II. DEVELOPMENT OF THE LEGISLATIVE SCIENCE MANDATE .................. 1037 A. Background................................................................................. 1037 1. Ambivalence Toward Science ............................................ 1037 2. The HistoricDominance ofScience
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Opinion for the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 911NE11 th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97232-4181 In Reply Refer To: FWS/Rl/AES Dan Opalski, Director JUN 2 5 2015 Office of Water and Watersheds U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth A venue Seattle, Washington 98101 Dear Mr. Opalski: Enclosed are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) and concurrence determinations on the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants (proposed action). The Opinion addresses the effects of the proposed action on the following listed species and critical habitats: the endangered Snake River physa snail (Physa natricina), threatened Bliss Rapids snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola), endangered Banbury Springs lanx (Laroe sp.; undescribed), the endangered Bruneau hot springsnail (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis), the threatened bull trout (Salvelinus confluenlus) and its critical habitat, and the endangered Kootenai River white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) and its critical habitat. The concurrence determinations address the following listed species: the threatened grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), endangered Southern Selkirk Mountains woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), threatened Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), threatened northern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus brunneus), threatened MacFarlane's four-o'clock (Mirabilis macfarlanei), threatened water howellia (Howellia aquatilis), threatened Ute ladies' -tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis),
    [Show full text]
  • Bruneau Hot-Spring Springsnail (Pyrgulopsis Bruneauensis)
    BLM LIBRARY xy-A MONITORING REPOR1 BRUNEAU HOT-SPRING SPRINGSNA (PYRGULOPSIS BRUNEAUENSIS) by Jeffrey T. Varricchione G. Wayne Minshall A mobile home doesn't guarantee a place to live. (The Nature Conservancy) IDAHO BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 95-14 JUNE 1995 w ...i- ,. "imnTrw— wMmam Itf ^ ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT Bruneau Hot-spring Springsnail (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis) Jeffrey T. Varricchione and G. Wayne Minshall Stream Ecology Center Department of Biological Sciences Idaho State University Pocatello, Idaho 83209 31 December 1994 Table of Contents List of Figures ii Summary 1 Introduction 1 Results 2 Size Distribution 2 Population Fluctuations 8 Temperature And Water Chemistry Fluctuations 11 Periphyton Levels 13 Conditions At Indian Bathtub And Hot Creek 16 Acknowledgements 19 Literature Cited 20 .. List of Figures Figure la-e. Size histograms for snail populations from the three study sites 3 Figure 2 Snail abundance at the study sites 10 Figure 3 Discharge and maximum temperature at Site 1 (Hot Creek) 12 Figure 4 Maximum/minimum water temperatures at the monitoring sites 14 Figure 5. Water chemistry of the monitoring sites 15 Figure 6. Chlorophyll a of periphyton for the study sites 17 Figure 7 Periphyton biomass (as AFDM) for the study sites 18 ii SUMMARY This report presents the 1994 monitoring results from four sites near the Indian Bathtub that contain populations, of the Bruneau Hot-spring Springsnail {Pyrgulopsls bruneauensis) . Three of these sites were monitored in 1990 and 1991 by Mladenka (1992), in 1992 by Robinson et al. (1992), and in 1993 by Royer and Minshall (1993) . An additional seep at Site 3 was included in the 1994 monitoring efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Biological Assessment for Boise District Noxious Weed and Invasive Plant Management DOI-BLM-ID-B000-2016-0002-EA ESA-Listed Aquatic Invertebrates Bruneau hot springsnail (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis) ESA-Listed Plants Slickspot peppergrass (Lepidium papilliferum) Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Relationship of the Proposed Action to Future Federal Actions ................................................ 8 Consultation History ................................................................................................................... 9 Relationship of Section 7 Consultation for Future Federal Actions of the Proposed Action ..... 9 Species and Critical Habitats .................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2 – Proposed Action ........................................................................................................ 13 Targeted Plant Communities..................................................................................................... 13 Noxious Weeds ..................................................................................................................... 13 Invasive Plants .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Section 7 Consultation Programmatic Biological Opinion
    Endangered Species Act - Section 7 Consultation Programmatic Biological Opinion Addressing Oil and Hazardous Substance Spill/Release Response Activities in Selected Areas of Idaho, Washington, and Oregon U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Reference Number: 01E00000-2015-F-0001 Action Agencies: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 U.S. Coast Guard, 13th Coast Guard District Prepared By: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Interior Region 9 - Columbia-Pacific Northwest _____________________________________________ Marjorie Nelson, Acting Assistant Regional Director Ecological Services ___________________________ Date 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .........................................................................2 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................7 Consultation History ................................................................................8 BIOLOGICAL AND CONFERENCE OPINION ...................................12 Description of the Proposed Action ......................................................................... 12 Response Planning Under the Northwest Area Contingency Plan .................... 13 Response Action Command Structure and Coordination .................................. 15 Role of Geographic Response Plans (GRPs) ..................................................... 17 Coordination of Response Activities with the ESA ............................................ 18 Decision Process for Use of Non-Mechanical Countermeasures ....................
    [Show full text]
  • American Fisheries Society • JUNE 2013
    VOL 38 NO 6 FisheriesAmerican Fisheries Society • www.fisheries.org JUNE 2013 All Things Aquaculture Habitat Connections Hobnobbing Boondoggles? Freshwater Gastropod Status Assessment Effects of Anthropogenic Chemicals 03632415(2013)38(6) Biology and Management of Inland Striped Bass and Hybrid Striped Bass James S. Bulak, Charles C. Coutant, and James A. Rice, editors The book provides a first-ever, comprehensive overview of the biology and management of striped bass and hybrid striped bass in the inland waters of the United States. The book’s 34 chapters are divided into nine major sections: History, Habitat, Growth and Condition, Population and Harvest Evaluation, Stocking Evaluations, Natural Reproduction, Harvest Regulations, Conflicts, and Economics. A concluding chapter discusses challenges and opportunities currently facing these fisheries. This compendium will serve as a single source reference for those who manage or are interested in inland striped bass or hybrid striped bass fisheries. Fishery managers and students will benefit from this up-to-date overview of priority topics and techniques. Serious anglers will benefit from the extensive information on the biology and behavior of these popular sport fishes. 588 pages, index, hardcover List price: $79.00 AFS Member price: $55.00 Item Number: 540.80C Published May 2013 TO ORDER: Online: fisheries.org/ bookstore American Fisheries Society c/o Books International P.O. Box 605 Herndon, VA 20172 Phone: 703-661-1570 Fax: 703-996-1010 Fisheries VOL 38 NO 6 JUNE 2013 Contents COLUMNS President’s Hook 245 Scientific Meetings are Essential If our society considers student participation in our major meetings as a high priority, why are federal and state agen- cies inhibiting attendance by their fisheries professionals at these very same meetings, deeming them non-essential? A colony of the federally threatened Tulotoma attached to the John Boreman—AFS President underside of a small boulder from lower Choccolocco Creek, 262 Talladega County, Alabama.
    [Show full text]
  • (Pyrgulopsis Robusta), Harney Lake Springsnail (Pyrgulopsis Hendersoni), and Columbia Springsnail (Pyrgulopsis New Species 6) As Threatened Or Endangered
    PETITION BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR Petition to List the Jackson Lake springsnail (Pyrgulopsis robusta), Harney Lake springsnail (Pyrgulopsis hendersoni), and Columbia springsnail (Pyrgulopsis new species 6) as Threatened or Endangered Submitted by: Dr. Peter Bowler, Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Native Ecosystems, Western Watersheds Project, The Xerces Society July 2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Invertebrates comprise nearly 99% of the world’s animal diversity and play an invaluable role in maintaining environmental health and integrity. Invertebrates are a part of nearly every food chain, are responsible for recycling plant and animal waste in soils and waters, and are crucial to ensuring the perpetuation of food webs. Mollusks, invertebrates characterized by their shells and which include snails, slugs, clams, mussels, and other creatures, are one of the most diverse group of animals in the world. Worldwide, it is estimated that 50,000-200,000 different mollusk species exist on land and in freshwater. These species exist in an incredible diversity of environments, playing a vital role in sustaining clean and healthy air, soil, water, and vegetation. In the western United States, which includes the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, land and freshwater mollusks are probably the most diverse group of animals and comprise an irreplaceable proportion of worldwide diversity. Over a thousand species of snails, slugs, clams, and mussels are found on land and in freshwater. Scientists estimate hundreds more species have yet to be discovered. Some species in the west exist in only one or two locations, such as a desert spring, a stand of ancient forest, or a coastal island, and are found nowhere else in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 236/Monday, December 9, 2002
    Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 236 / Monday, December 9, 2002 / Notices 72967 Dated: November 18, 2002. The Endangered Species Act (Act) (16 Authority Samuel H. Wilson, U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires the The authority for this action is section Deputy Director, National Institute of development of recovery plans for listed 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 Environmental Health Sciences. species unless such a plan would not U.S.C. 1533 (f). [FR Doc. 02–30960 Filed 12–6–02; 8:45 am] promote the conservation of a particular Dated: September 30, 2002. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P species. Section 4(f) of the Act requires that during recovery plan development, Anne Badgley, the Service provide public notice and an Regional Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR opportunity for public review and comment. Information presented during [FR Doc. 02–30982 Filed 12–6–02; 8:45 am] Fish and Wildlife Service the public comment period has been BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Availability of the Recovery Plan for considered in the preparation of this the Bruneau Hot Springsnail final recovery plan, and is summarized DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis) in an appendix to the recovery plan. The Service will forward substantive Bureau of Indian Affairs AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, comments regarding recovery plan Interior. implementation to appropriate Federal Indian Gaming ACTION: Notice of document availability. or other entities so that they can take AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife these comments into account during the Interior.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Bruneau Subbasin Summary
    Draft Bruneau Subbasin Summary May 17, 2002 Prepared for the Northwest Power Planning Council Subbasin Team Leader Carol Perugini, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Writing Team Members Darin Saul, ecovista Anne Davidson, ecovista Craig Rabe, ecovista Contributors Bureau of Land Management, Elko Resource Area Bureau of Land Management, Jarbidge Resource Area Bureau of Land Management, Bruneau Resource Area Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Idaho Department of Fish and Game Nevada Division of Wildlife Owyhee County Commissioners Shoshone-Paiute Tribes The Nature Conservancy DRAFT: This document has not yet been reviewed or approved by the Northwest Power Planning Council Bruneau Subbasin Summary Table of Contents Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 1 Subbasin Description ......................................................................................................................... 3 General Description ................................................................................................................... 3 Fish and Wildlife Resources............................................................................................................ 30 Fish and Wildlife Status........................................................................................................... 30 Habitat Areas and Quality.......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Species of Concern 2
    Appendix 2: IDENTIFYING SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN IN THE SAGEBRUSH ECOSYSTEM Rich (1999) compiled an initial list of species potentially at risk of local or regional extirpation within the geographic boundaries of the sagebrush ecosystem, based on a variety of information sources. Key sources included species designated as having special status (e.g., sensitive species) by State Offices of the Bureau of Land Management and Regional Offices of the USDA Forest Service. Other sources for terrestrial vertebrates included Saab and Rich (1997), Neel (1999), Idaho Partners in Flight (2000), Wisdom et al. (2000), Altman and Holmes (2000), the Western Bat Working Group Regional Priority Matrix (Western Bat Working Group 1998), and GAP Analysis (e.g., Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 1999). Information sources for plants included comprehensive assessments of sensitive plants (e.g., Croft et al. 1997). Aquatic species highly dependent on watersheds within sagebrush ecosystems also were included on the original list (Rich 1999). We condensed this initial list for several reasons. First, we dropped fish species because we sought to establish a list of terrestrial species explicitly associated with sagebrush habitats. Second, some of the species inhabit areas within the sagebrush ecosystem, but are not explicitly associated with sagebrush habitats (e.g., wetland- and riparian-associated species imbedded in a larger matrix of sagebrush). And third, some species were not at risk within the boundaries of the sagebrush ecosystem (see sagebrush ecoregions, Fig. 1.1, Chapter 1), based on further examination of their status in relation to their geographic occurrence. Consequently, species remaining on our list, following the exlusion of fish, were screened based on 2 criteria: (1) degree of association with sagebrush habitats; and (2) degree of population risk for the species within the sagebrush ecosystem.
    [Show full text]