Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Roosevelt Habitat Conservation Plan Gila and Maricopa Counties, Arizona U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE July 2002 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE ROOSEVELT HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior Additional information may be obtained from: Ms. Sherry Barrett Mr. Jim Rorabaugh Assistant Field Supervisor Arizona State Office Tucson Suboffice U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 110 S. Church Street, Ste. 3450 Phoenix, AZ 85021 Tucson, AZ 85701 (602) 242-0210 (520) 670-4617 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS DOCUMENT AF Acre-feet AGFD Arizona Game and Fish AMA Active Management Area AWS Assured Water Supply BO Biological Opinion CAP Central Arizona Project CAWCS Central Arizona Water Control Study CFR Code of Federal Regulations Cities Cities with water rights in Modified Roosevelt: Chandler, Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Cuckoo Yellow-billed cuckoo ADWR Arizona Department of Water Resources EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement EO Executive Order ESA Endangered Species Act Flycatcher Southwestern Willow Flycatcher FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact FPO Forest Protection Officer FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service GRUSP Granite Reef Underground Storage Project HCP Habitat Conservation Plan IA Implementing Agreement ITP Incidental Take Permit Listed species Species listed as federally threatened or endangered under the ESA Modified Roosevelt Roosevelt Dam as modified by construction in the 1990s NCS New Conservation Space NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NRHP National Register of Historic Places Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation RHCP Roosevelt Habitat Conservation Plan ROD Record of Decision Roosevelt Roosevelt Dam and Reservoir RPA Reasonable and Prudent Alternative RPM Reasonable and Prudent Measure Section 10 Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA SOD Safety of Dams SROG Sub-regional Operating Group (operators of 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant) SRP Salt River Project TCRU Tonto Creek Riparian Unit Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation USFS U.S. Forest Service ABSTRACT The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is considering issuance of an incidental take permit under Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to the Salt River Project (SRP) for continued operation of Theodore Roosevelt Dam and Lake. The permit would address the take of federally listed species incidental to operation of Roosevelt Dam and Lake. If the permit is approved, SRP will implement the Roosevelt Habitat Conservation Plan (RHCP) in fulfillment of requirements of the ESA. The RHCP provides measures to minimize and mitigate, to the maximum extent practicable, the effects of Roosevelt Dam operation on listed species and their habitat and to ensure that any take of listed species will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild. A candidate species is also addressed in the event that it is listed in the future. The four species are: the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) and Yuma clapper rail (Rallus longirostris yumanensis), the threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and the yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), a candidate species. FWS is issuing this draft Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the potential impacts associated with implementation of the RHCP and issuance of an incidental take permit, and to evaluate alternatives. Three alternatives, including a no action alternative (No Permit), are considered. The preferred alternative is issuance of an incidental take permit to allow continued operation of Roosevelt Dam and Lake up to the maximum elevation of 2,151 feet (Full Operation alternative), in conjunction with implementation of the RHCP. The Re-Operation alternative would involve FWS issuance of a permit authorizing the modified operation of Roosevelt Dam in order to reduce the short-term impact of reservoir operations on listed and candidate species. This alternative would also include measures to minimize and mitigate the take of federally listed species. The consequences of these actions on natural, cultural, and socioeconomic resources are discussed in this draft Environmental Impact Statement. Public Comment: If you wish to comment on this draft Environmental Impact Statement, you may send comments to the address below. Your comments must be received by close of business on September 17, 2002. Please note that the names and addresses of people who comment become part of the public record. If you wish to have your name and/or address withheld, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comments. Anonymous comments will not be considered. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety. Please submit your comments as follows: • By mail or hand delivery: Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ 85021 • By fax: (602) 242-2513 • In person: At a public hearing to be held on August 27, 2002, 6-9 p.m. at the offices of the Salt River Project, 1521 Project Drive, Tempe, AZ CONTENTS Chapter 1 Purpose and Need.........................................................................................1 1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................1 1.1.1 Relationship Between the EIS and the RHCP......................................3 1.1.2 Document Organization ......................................................................4 1.2 Purpose of the Proposed Action......................................................................4 1.3 Need for the Proposed Action.........................................................................5 1.4 Scoping and Public Involvement ....................................................................7 1.4.1 Advisory Group, Scoping, and Meetings.............................................7 1.4.2 Issues Raised during Scoping..............................................................7 1.4.2.1 Water Supply Alternatives....................................................8 1.4.2.2 Impacts on the Flycatcher and Recovery Efforts...................8 1.4.2.3 Impacts on the Bald Eagle, Yuma Clapper Rail, and Cuckoo.................................................................................9 1.4.2.4 Mitigation of Impacts on Listed Species...............................9 1.4.2.5 Impacts on Recreation..........................................................9 1.4.2.6 Impacts on Flood Control.....................................................9 1.4.2.7 Impacts on Water Quality.....................................................9 1.4.2.8 Impacts on Wildlife Habitat..................................................9 1.4.2.9 Impacts on Socioeconomics ...............................................10 1.4.3 Issues Selected for Further Consideration..........................................10 1.5 Decisions, Permits, and Approvals ...............................................................10 1.5.1 Decisions and Actions by FWS.........................................................10 1.5.2 Decisions and Actions by SRP..........................................................11 Chapter 2 Background ................................................................................................13 2.1 Description of Applicant and Beneficiaries...................................................13 2.2 Description of SRP Reservoir System and Storage Operations......................15 2.2.1 Overview..........................................................................................15 2.2.2 History ...........................................................................................15 2.2.3 Salt River Reservoir System .............................................................18 2.2.4 Roosevelt Operations........................................................................20 2.2.5 Verde Reservoirs ..............................................................................24 2.2.6 Roosevelt Recreation ........................................................................25 2.3 History of NEPA Compliance at Roosevelt Lake..........................................25 2.4 History of ESA Compliance at Roosevelt Lake ............................................26 2.4.1 1983/1984.........................................................................................26 2.4.2 1989/1990.........................................................................................27 2.4.3 1992/1993.........................................................................................28 2.4.4 1995/1996.........................................................................................29 2.4.5 Summary of Reclamation’s ESA Compliance ...................................31 2.5 Forest Service Consultations ........................................................................31 i Chapter 3 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action..............................................33 3.1 Introduction..................................................................................................33 3.2 Formulation and Evaluation