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 ......................................................................................... 42 Utah prairie dog (Cynomys parvidens)—Threatened .............................................................................. 44 Mexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida)—Threatened ............................................................. 46 California condor (Gymnogyps californianus)—Endangered and Experimental/Nonessential Listings 48 B. Plants ....................................................................................................................................................... 50 Autumn Buttercup (Ranunculus aestivalis, R. acriformis var. aestivalis)—Endangered ....................... 50 Clay Phacelia (Phacelia argillacea)—Endangered ................................................................................ 51 Clay Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea)—Threatened ............................................................. 53 Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica)—Threatened ................................................................ 53 Shrubby Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe suffrutescens)—Endangered ................................................. 55 Uinta Basin Hookless Cactus (Sclerocactus wetlandicus)—Threatened ................................................ 56 Ute Ladies’-Tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)—Threatened ...................................................................... 57 GENERAL DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS BY PROGRAM AREAS ...................................... 58 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION BY SPECIES ................................................... 61 A. Wildlife and Fish .................................................................................................................................... 61 Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) .............................................................................................................. 61 Utah Prairie Dog (Cynomys parvidens)—Threatened ............................................................................ 63 Figure 3. Utah Prairie Dog and GRSG Mapped Habitat DistributionMexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida)—Threatened ........................................................................................................... 78 California condor (Gymnogyps californianus)—Endangered and Experimental/Nonessential Population ................................................................................................................................................................. 80 B. Plants ....................................................................................................................................................... 81 Autumn Buttercup (Ranunculus aestivalis) ............................................................................................ 81 Clay phacelia (Phacelia argillacea) ........................................................................................................ 82 Clay Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea) ................................................................................... 82 Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica) ...................................................................................... 83 Shrubby Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe suffrutescens) ........................................................................ 84 July, 2015 Page 2 FS_0081606 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Uinta Basin Hookless Cactus (Sclerocactus wetlandicus) ...................................................................... 85 Ute Ladies’-Tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) ............................................................................................ 85 DETERMINATIONS OF EFFECTS SUMMARY BY SPECIES .................................................................. 88 Empidonax traillii extimus .......................................................................................................................... 90 LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................................................... 99 Attachment E: EXISTING UTAH PRAIRIE DOG CONSERVATION MEASURES ................................ 104 July, 2015 Page 3 FS_0081607 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Acronym List APD applications for permits to drill BA Biological Assessment BLM Bureau of Land Management COAs conditions of approval EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESA Endangered Species Act ESR emergency stabilization and rehabilitation ExPA experimental population area FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement GHMA general habitat management areas GRSG Greater Sage-Grouse LUP Land Use Plan MSO Mexican Spotted Owl MUs management units NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NRLMD Northern Rockies Lynx Management Direction OHV off-highway vehicles ORV off-road vehicle PCE primary constituent elements PHMA priority habitat management areas RMP resource management plan ROW right-of-way SFA sagebrush focal areas T&E threatened and endangered TEP threatened, endangered, or proposed TNC The Nature Conservancy UDWR Utah Division of Wildlife Resources UPD Utah prairie dog USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service July, 2015 Page 4 FS_0081608 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement INTRODUCTION Background The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service have prepared amendments to their respective Land Use Plans (LUPs)/Final Environmental Impact Statements (EISs). These documents provide direction for the conservation of greater sage-grouse (GRSG; Centrocercus urophasianus) in the following plans in Utah: Cedar City Field Office, Fillmore Field Office, Grand Staircase/Escalante National Monument, Kanab Field Office, Price Field Office, Richfield Field Office, Salt Lake Field Office, Vernal Field Office, Ashley National Forest, Dixie National Forest, Fishlake National Forest, Manti-La Sal National Forest, and Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest. The LUPs/EISs analyze the environmental effects that could result from implementing the proposed action. A Draft LUP/EIS was published in August 2013. The Proposed LUP amendment, scheduled for publication in June 2015, is a refinement of the Preferred Alternative (Alternative D) from the Draft LUP, with consideration given to comments from the public and the State of Utah, corrections, and rewording for clarification. The purpose of this biological assessment (BA) is to review the Proposed LUP amendments to determine the extent that implementing these amendments may affect proposed threatened and endangered species and proposed or designated critical habitat in the planning area. Because the LUP is a planning document, this BA focuses on the effect of management actions to be implemented. Under provisions of the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 USC, Section 1531 et seq.), federal agencies are directed to conserve threatened and endangered (T&E) species and their habitats. Section 7(a)(1) states that all federal agencies should use “their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered species and threatened species….” Thus, the conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered species is not simply the responsibility of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), but of all federal agencies. In order to meet this requirement, the BLM and Forest Service, through the land use plan, would implement management actions, standards and guidelines, protective stipulations, conditions of approval (COAs), conservation measures, required design features, best management practices, mitigation, habitat restoration, and protections. Section 7(c) of the ESA requires the BLM to complete a BA to determine the effects of implementing a resource management plan (RMP)