United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Louisiana Ecological Services 200 Dulles Drive Lafayette, Louisiana 70506 October 24, 2019 Mr. Walt Dinkelacker President, Headwaters Inc. PO Box 2836 Ridgeland, MS 39158 Dear Mr. Dinkelacker: This document transmits the Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) biological opinion (enclosed), regarding the Rankin Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District’s (District) Pearl River Basin, Mississippi, Federal Flood Risk Management Project, Hinds and Rankin Counties, Mississippi (commonly referred to as the One Lake Project). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) is authorized by Congressional actions to construct a flood risk reduction project; the District has undertaken the plan formulation and environmental compliance for that project’s study. The enclosed biological opinion addresses the proposed flood risk management projects effects on the ringed map (sawback) turtle (Graptemys oculifera), Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus desotoi), wood stork (Mycteria americana), the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and the inflated heelsplitter (Potamilus inflatus) in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 United States Code [U.S.C.] 1531 et seq.). The enclosed biological opinion, is based on information provided in the District’s June 17, 2019, biological assessment (BA) and the August 23, 2019, revised BA. Additional information was also provided informally during the consultation process. A complete administrative record of this consultation (Service Log No. 04EL1000-2020-F-0109) is on file at the Service’s Louisiana Ecological Services Office. The Service appreciates the District’s continued cooperation in the conservation of the threatened and endangered species, and their critical habitats. If you have any questions regarding the enclosed biological opinion, please contact Mr. David Walther (337-291-3122) of this office. Sincerely, Joseph A. Ranson Field Supervisor Louisiana Ecological Services Office Biological Opinion Pearl River Watershed, Hinds and Rankin Counties, Mississippi Flood Reduction Project FWS Log #: 04EL1000-2020-F-0109 Prepared by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Louisiana Ecological Services Field Office 200 Dulles Drive Lafayette, LA 70506 October 23, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 7 2. PROPOSED ACTION 9 2.1. Action Area 10 2.2. Channel Excavation and Levee Relocation 14 2.3. Weir Construction and Impoundment 15 2.4. Non-Federal Activities caused by the Federal Action 18 2.5. Tables and Figures for Proposed Action 19 3. CONCURRENCE 27 3.1 Wood Stork 27 3.2 Northern Long-eared Bat 27 4. Gulf Sturgeon 28 4.1. Status of Gulf Sturgeon 28 4.1.1. Description of Gulf Sturgeon 28 4.1.2. Life History of Gulf Sturgeon 28 4.1.3. Numbers, Reproduction, and Distribution of Gulf Sturgeon 31 4.1.4. Conservation Needs of and Threats to Gulf Sturgeon 32 4.1.5. Tables and Figures for Status of Gulf Sturgeon 33 4.2. Environmental Baseline for Gulf Sturgeon 34 4.2.1. Action Area Numbers, Reproduction, and Distribution of Gulf Sturgeon 34 4.2.2. Action Area Conservation Needs of and Threats to Gulf Sturgeon 35 4.2.3. Tables and Figures for Environmental Baseline for Gulf Sturgeon 36 4.3. Effects of the Action on Gulf Sturgeon 39 4.3.1. Effects of Channel Excavation and Levee Relocation on Gulf Sturgeon 39 4.3.2. Effects of Weir Construction and Impoundment on Gulf Sturgeon 40 4.3.3. Effects of Non-Federal Activities caused by the Federal Action on Gulf Sturgeon42 4.3.4 Summary of Effects of the Action on Gulf Sturgeon 43 4.4. Cumulative Effects on Gulf Sturgeon 43 4.5. Conclusion for Gulf Sturgeon 43 5. CRITICAL HABITAT FOR GULF STURGEON 44 5.1. Status of Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 44 5.1.1. Description of Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 45 5.1.2. Conservation Value of Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 47 5.1.3. Tables and Figures for Status of Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 50 2 5.2. Environmental Baseline for Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 50 5.2.1. Action Area Conservation Value of Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 50 5.3. Effects of the Action on Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 52 5.3.1. Effects of Channel Excavation and Levee Relocation on Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 52 5.3.2. Effects of Weir Construction and Impoundment on Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 52 5.3.3. Effects of Non-Federal Activities caused by the Federal Action on Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 53 5.3.4 Summary of Effects of the Action on Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 54 5.4. Cumulative Effects on Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 54 5.5. Conclusion for Gulf Sturgeon Critical Habitat 54 6. Ringed Map Turtle 55 6.1. Status of the Ringed Map Turtle 55 6.1.1. Description of the Ringed Map Turtle 55 6.1.2. Life History of the Ringed Map Turtle 55 6.1.3. Numbers, Reproduction, and Distribution of the Ringed Map Turtle 57 6.1.4. Conservation Needs of and Threats to the Ringed Map Turtle 58 6.1.5. Tables and Figures for Status of the Ringed Map Turtle 60 6.2. Environmental Baseline for the Ringed Map Turtle 64 6.2.1. Action Area Numbers, Reproduction, and Distribution of the Ringed Map Turtle 64 6.2.2. Action Area Conservation Needs of and Threats to the Ringed Map Turtle 66 6.3. Effects of the Action on the Ringed Map Turtle 67 6.3.1. Effects of channel excavation and levee relocation on the Ringed Map Turtle 67 6.3.2. Effects of Weir Construction and Impoundment on the Ringed Map Turtle 71 6.3.3. Effects of Non-Federal Activities caused by the Federal Action on Ringed Map Turtle 75 6.3.4. Summary of the Effects of the Action on the Ringed Map Turtle 75 6.3.5. Tables and Figures for Effects of the Action on Ringed Map Turtle 76 6.4. Cumulative Effects on the Ringed Map Turtle 76 6.5. Conclusion for the Ringed Map Turtle 76 7. INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT 77 7.1. Amount or Extent of Take 78 7.1.1. Gulf Sturgeon 78 7.1.2. Ringed Map Turtle 79 3 7.2. Reasonable and Prudent Measures 81 7.2.1. Gulf Sturgeon 81 7.2.2. Ringed Map Turtle 81 7.3. Terms and Conditions 82 7.3.1. Gulf Sturgeon 82 7.3.2. Ringed Map Turtle 83 7.4. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements 84 8. CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 85 9. REINITIATION NOTICE 85 10. LITERATURE CITED 86 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Endangered Species Act (ESA) Biological Opinion (BO) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) addresses the potential effects of the Pearl River Basin, Mississippi, Federal Flood Risk Management Project, Hinds and Rankin Counties, Mississippi being proposed by the Rankin Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District (FDCD). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Vicksburg District (USACE) by a January 31, 2018, letter has agreed that the FDCD will be the designated non-federal representative for the consultation. That project is proposed to provide economic and flood control benefits to the Jackson, Mississippi, area by the deepening and widening the floodplain and the installation of a new downstream weir. The FDCD determined that the Action is likely to adversely affect the ringed map (sawback) turtle (Graptemys oculifera), Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus desotoi) and its critical habitat and requested formal consultation with the Service. The BO concludes that the Action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of these species and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. This conclusion fulfills the requirements applicable to the Action for completing consultation under §7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, with respect to these species and designated critical habitats. The FDCD also determined and requested Service concurrence that the Action is not likely to adversely affect the wood stork (Mycteria americana), the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and the inflated heelsplitter (Potamilus inflatus); these species have no designated critical habitat within the project area. We provide our basis for this concurrence in section 3 of the BO. This concurrence fulfills the requirements applicable to the Action for completing consultation with respect to these species and designated critical habitats. In addition, the BA addressed the previously listed bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Louisiana black bear (Ursus americanus luteolus) and the extirpated (from the Pearl River drainage basin) pearl darter (Percina aurora). Because the eagle and the bear are no longer listed the ESA does not apply to them and the darter is not found in the project area thus it will not be impacted by the project therefore we will not address them in this BO. The FDCD has developed a Channel Improvement Plan, also referred to as Alternative C, or the One Lake project, that consists of excavation of approximately 25 million cubic yards from the floodplain, extending from River Mile (RM) 284.0 to RM 293.5 (approximately 9.5 miles), and ranging in width from 400 to 2,000 feet. Some existing levees will be set back and new levees constructed with large amounts of fill areas placed behind them. The elevated land mass behind the levees will range from 200 to over 1,000 feet in width. To maintain water supply at the J. H. Fewell Water Treatment Plant (WTP) located at RM 290.7, an approximately 1,500-foot-long weir will be constructed at RM 284, creating a 1,500-acre pool area at the downstream limits of the project area and providing flood risk management benefits, recreation, and long-term maintenance reduction.