United States Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021 Telephone: (602) 242-0210 FAX: (602) 242-2513 AESO/SE 2-21-94-F-192R2 September 30, 2002 Memorandum To: Field Manager, Phoenix Field Office, Bureau of Land Management From: Acting Field Supervisor Subject: Biological Opinion for Five Livestock Grazing Allotments in the Vicinity of Ajo, Arizona This biological opinion responds to your request for consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531- 1544), as amended (Act). Your request for formal consultation was dated April 19, 2002, and received by us on April 23, 2002. At issue are impacts that may result from the proposed reauthorization of livestock grazing on the Sentinel, Cameron, Childs, Coyote Flat, and Why allotments located in Maricopa and Pima counties, Arizona. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has determined that the proposed action for the five allotments may adversely affect the endangered Sonoran pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriensis), and the proposed action for the Cameron and Childs allotments may adversely affect the endangered cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum). In your letter, you also requested our concurrence that the proposed action on the Cameron, Childs, Coyote Flat, and Why allotments may affect, but will not likely adversely affect, the endangered lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuena). We concur with that determination, which is based on sound analysis and guidance criteria for the species mutually agreed upon by our agencies. This biological opinion is based on information provided during the previous consultations on this action, updated information on the proposed action provided by your agency, new information on the status of endangered species in the action area, telephone conversations, and other sources of information as detailed in the consultation history. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file in the Phoenix, Arizona, Ecological Services Field Office (ESO). Biological Opinion - Five Livestock Grazing Allotments in the Vicinity of Ajo, Arizona 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONSULTATION HISTORY ....................................................3 BIOLOGICAL OPINION .......................................................4 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ...................................4 SONORAN PRONGHORN ..............................................10 STATUS OF THE SPECIES ...........................................10 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE .......................................21 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................46 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ............................................56 CONCLUSION .....................................................57 INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT ....................................59 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................60 CACTUS FERRUGINOUS PYGMY-OWL ..................................60 STATUS OF THE SPECIES ...........................................60 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ......................................74 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION ..........................................77 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ............................................81 CONCLUSION .....................................................81 INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT ....................................82 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................82 REINITIATION NOTICE ......................................................83 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................84 TABLES AND FIGURES .....................................................101 APPENDICES ..............................................................115 Biological Opinion - Five Livestock Grazing Allotments in the Vicinity of Ajo, Arizona 3 CONSULTATION HISTORY The December 3, 1997, biological opinion on this action provides a history of the consultation from January 31, 1994, through the issuance of that opinion. The 1997 biological opinion concluded that proposed livestock grazing activities on the five allotments were not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the pronghorn. The opinion also included our concurrences with BLM’s determinations that the action may affect, but was not likely to adversely affect, the lesser long-nosed bat and cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl. The 1997 biological opinion was remanded to FWS on February 12, 2001. On that date, Judge Ellen Huvelle, in response to Civil Action No. 99-927 [ESH], Defenders of Wildlife, et al. v. Bruce Babbitt, et al., ruled (in part): “...that the Fish and Wildlife Service has acted in a manner that is arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law by issuing biological opinions that fail to address the impact of each defendant’s activities on the pronghorn when added to the environmental baseline, 50 C.F.R. §§ 402.02, 402.12(g), and fail to include in the environmental baseline the impacts of all Federal activities in the area in which defendants are proposing or engaging in action that may affect, directly or indirectly, the pronghorn, 50 C.F.R. §402.02. The final remanded biological opinion was issued on November 16, 2001. That opinion provided a detailed consultation history from 1998 through its issuance. The Federal action considered in that opinion was the issuance of a 10-year grazing permit on the five allotments. The opinion was issued, however, with the understanding that during January 2002, BLM would finalize their Rangeland Health Allotment Evaluations conducted during 2001, and reinitiate consultation regarding continued grazing of these allotments. The BLM estimated that the implementation of the revised project description based on these evaluations would occur by November 1, 2002. Therefore, the 2001 biological opinion analyzed the effects of the proposed action only for the interim period. The life of the project, as specified in the 2001 opinion, will expire as of November 1, 2002. The BLM reinitiated consultation on these five allotments on April 23, 2002. The following details the history of the consultation from that date forward: April 23, 2002: We received BLM’s request for reinitiation of consultation, revised biological assessments, and draft-final Ajo block Rangeland Health Evaluation. July 10, 2002: We conducted a site visit to the Ajo block allotments. July 25, 2002: After conversations between FWS and BLM staff, the BLM changed their original determination of the effect of the proposed action for the Sentinel Allotment on the Sonoran pronghorn to may affect, likely to adversely affect. July 30, 2002: We requested additional information and clarification of some aspects of the proposed action from BLM. August 7, 2002: BLM provided us with the information that we requested on July 30, 2002. September 20, 2002: BLM provided us with a list of proposed conservation measures for the Sonoran pronghorn. September 24, 2002: We provided a draft biological opinion to the BLM. Biological Opinion - Five Livestock Grazing Allotments in the Vicinity of Ajo, Arizona 4 September 27, 2002: BLM provided comments to us on the draft opinion, including comments from their applicants. BIOLOGICAL OPINION DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION Proposed Action The Federal action is the reissuance of 10-year grazing permits on five allotments, totaling 213,616 acres (ac), within the management authority of BLM’s Phoenix Field Office in Maricopa and Pima counties. The five allotments consist of the Cameron Allotment (67,234 ac), Childs Allotment (102,480 ac), Coyote Flat Allotment (11,520 ac), Why Allotment (10,506 ac), and Sentinel Allotment (21,876 ac) (Figure 1). The Sentinel Allotment is just south of Interstate 8 and separated from the other four allotments by the Barry M. Goldwater Range (BMGR), which forms the southern boundary of the allotment. The other four allotments form a block of land that surrounds the towns of Ajo and Why, Arizona. This block of allotments (Ajo allotments) has its northern boundary and the northern portion of its western boundary with the BMGR, the majority of the western boundary with Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), the southern boundary with Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument (NM), and the eastern boundary with the Tohono O’Odham Nation. State Route 85 (SR 85) bisects the Childs, Cameron, and Coyote Flat allotments and a small portion of the Why allotment. The five allotments are classified as perennial/ephemeral, meaning they have a base allocation of animal unit months (AUMs) (the amount of forage required to feed a cow with a calf for one month) for year-long operation. Perennial/ephemeral allotments are generally cow-calf operations, but may also graze steers during years of favorable ephemeral forage growth. Cameron Allotment BLM will adjust permitted use from 2,532 to 684 AUMs (57 cows year long) annually. Year- round use of this allotment will continue. Cattle will be rotated between use areas, which are centered around the following water developments: Highway Tank, Bob’s Tank, Cameron Tank, Darby Well, Valentine Well, and a proposed pipeline (discussed below). Water sources will not be used during the same season in consecutive grazing years. From September 16- April 1, cattle will use the entire allotment. Summer grazing (May 1-September 15) will not be authorized in the southern portion of the allotment, south of the fence to be constructed as shown in Figure 2. North