ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AQUATIC RODENT DAMAGE MANAGEMENT IN OKLAHOMA Prepared by: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA) ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE (APHIS) WILDLIFE SERVICES (WS) In Cooperation With: OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOOD AND FORESTRY (ODAFF) January 2015 i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS .............................................................................................................................................. iii CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1.1 PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 NEED FOR ACTION ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 SCOPE OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................. 11 1.4 RELATIONSHIP OF THIS EA TO OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS ................... 14 1.5 AUTHORITY OF FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES ........................................................... 14 1.6 COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND STATUTES ....................................................................... 15 1.7 DECISIONS TO BE MADE ......................................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER 2: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ISSUES 2.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................................... 20 2.2 ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH AQUATIC RODENT DAMAGE MANAGEMENT................. 22 2.3 ISSUES CONSIDERED BUT NOT IN DETAIL WITH RATIONALE ...................................... 29 CHAPTER 3: ALTERNATIVES 3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................ 33 3.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL .................................. 42 3.3 STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR DAMAGE MANAGEMENT ...................... 46 3.4 ADDITIONAL STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES SPECIFIC TO THE ISSUES ...... 47 CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES FOR ISSUES ANALYZED IN DETAIL .................. 50 4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION BY ISSUE .................................... 88 CHAPTER 5: LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED 5.1 LIST OF PREPARERS.................................................................................................................. 96 5.2 LIST OF PERSONS CONSULTED .............................................................................................. 96 LIST OF APPENDICES: APPENDIX A – LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................. A-1 APPENDIX B – METHODS AVAILABLE FOR RESOLVING OR PREVENTING AQUATIC RODENT DAMAGE IN OKLAHOMA ....................................................................... B-1 APPENDIX C – FEDERAL LIST OF THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES .................... C-1 APPENDIX D – STATE LIST OF THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ......................... D-1 APPENDIX E - CRITERIA FOR BEAVER DAM BREACHING/REMOVAL ..................................... E-1 ii ACRONYMS AMDUCA Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWA Clean Water Act EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act FLIR Forward Looking Infrared FR Federal Register FY Fiscal Year IV Intravenous IC Intracardiac MOU Memorandum of Understanding NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NWP Nationwide Permit NWRC National Wildlife Research Center ODAFF Oklahoma Department of Food and Forestry ODWC Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation PL Public Law SOP Standard Operating Procedure T&E Threatened and Endangered USC United States Code USDA United States Department of Agriculture USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Services WS United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services iii CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1.1 PURPOSE The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Wildlife Services (WS)1 program in Oklahoma continues to receive requests for assistance or anticipates receiving requests for assistance to resolve or prevent damage occurring to agricultural resources, natural resources, and property, including threats to human safety, associated with beaver (Castor canadensis), muskrats (Ondatra zibethicus), and nutria (Myocastor coypus). This document will collectively refer to those mammal species as aquatic rodents. Individual damage management projects conducted by the WS program could be categorically excluded from further analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), in accordance with APHIS implementing regulations for the NEPA (7 CFR 372.5(c), 60 FR 6000-6003). The purpose of this Environmental Assessment (EA) is to evaluate cumulatively the individual projects that WS could conduct to manage damage and threats to agricultural resources, property, natural resources, and threats to people caused by aquatic rodent species. This EA will assist in determining if the proposed cumulative management of damage caused by aquatic rodents could have a significant impact on the environment based on previous activities conducted by WS and based on the anticipation of conducting additional efforts to manage damage caused by those species. Because the goal of WS would be to conduct a coordinated program to alleviate damage in accordance with plans, goals, and objectives developed to reduce damage, and because the program’s goals and directives2 would be to provide assistance when requested, within the constraints of available funding and workforce, it is conceivable that additional damage management efforts could occur. Thus, this EA anticipates those additional efforts and the analyses would apply to actions that may occur in any locale and at any time within Oklahoma as part of a coordinated program. This EA analyzes the potential effects of damage management when requested, as coordinated between WS, the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry (ODAFF), and the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC). The EA evaluates the need for action to manage damage associated with aquatic rodents in the State, the potential issues associated with managing damage, and the environmental consequences of conducting different alternatives to meet the need for action while addressing the identified issues. WS initially developed the issues and alternatives associated with managing damage caused by aquatic rodents in consultation with the ODWC. The ODWC has regulatory authority to manage populations of aquatic rodent species in the State. To assist with additional issues and alternatives to managing damage associated with aquatic rodents in Oklahoma, WS will make this EA available to the public for review and comment prior to the issuance of a Decision3. WS previously developed two EAs that addressed WS’ activities to manage damage associated with aquatic rodents. Based on the analyses of those EAs, WS signed a Decision and Finding of No Significant Impact selecting the proposed action alternative. The proposed action alternative implemented a damage management program using a variety of methods in an integrated approach. WS 1 The WS program is authorized to protect agriculture and other resources from damage caused by wildlife through the Act of March 2, 1931 (46 Stat. 1468; 7 USC 426-426b) as amended, and the Act of December 22, 1987 (101 Stat. 1329-331, 7 USC 426c). 2 At the time of preparation, WS’ Directives occurred at the following web address: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/ws_directives.shtml. 3 After the development of the EA by WS and consulting agencies and after public involvement in identifying new issues and alternatives, WS will issue a Decision. Based on the analyses in the EA after public involvement, WS will make a decision to publish a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement or WS will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact notice to the public in accordance to the NEPA and the Council of Environmental Quality regulations. 1 is preparing this EA to: 1) facilitate planning, 2) promote interagency coordination, 3) streamline program management, 4) clearly communicate to the public the analysis of individual and cumulative impacts of proposed activities, and 5) evaluate and determine if there would be any potentially significant or cumulative effects from the alternative approaches developed to meet the need for action. Since this EA will re-evaluate activities conducted under the previous EAs, this analysis and the outcome of the Decision issued based on the analyses in this EA will supersede the previous EAs that addressed managing damage caused by aquatic rodents. The analyses contained in this EA are based on information derived from WS’ Management Information System, published documents (see Appendix A), interagency consultations, and public involvement. This EA will analyze several alternatives to address the need for action and assist in determining if the proposed management of damage associated