WSP09435 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SUMMARY Wildlife Mitigation The preferred mitigation plan, described earlier, would fully com- pensate for losses to mule deer, elk, and sage grouse, as well as losses to other wildlife populations as follows: 1. The 720 acres to be acquired at Jordsnelle Reservoir would provide protection and management of an important sage grouse and golden eagle breeding and nesting area. This would compensate for about 57 sage grouse annually and would maintain the use of an historic golden eagle nest- ing area. 2. The 9,461 acres of Bureau of Reclamation lands in Wasatch and Duchesne Counties with management and habitat im- provements (water catchments) would provide enhanced spring, summer, and fall range for mule deer, elk, and sage grouse. This would compensate for about 104 mule deer, 3 elk, and 52 sage grouse annually, in addition to the wildlife already resident on these lands. 3. The 970 acres of Bureau of Reclamation lands at Deer Creek Reservoir with management and habitat improvements (noxious weed control and planting of browse and forb seeds and seedlings) would enhance important big game winter range. This would compensate for about 90 deer annually in addition to the existing deer population. 4. The wildlife warning reflectors to be placed along the relocated sections of U.S. Highway 189 and the new county road would help minimize vehicle/big game collisions and would, thus, minimize road kills of deer and elk as they cross the highways during seasonal and daily movement patterns. Endangered species (Page C-54 of FES) Reclamation reopened consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for further consideration of the bald eagle, an endangered species, and the June sucker, a fish recently listed as an endangered species. Reclamation submitted a biological assessment to the Fish and Wildlife Service concluding that the proposed project would have no effect on the two species. Consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service regarding the im- pacts of project modifications on the bald eagle has concluded with the Fish and Wildlife Service's determination of "no effect." The Fish and Wildlife Service issued its determination of "no effect" (Attachment E) on December 11, 1986, concurring with Reclamation's findings. The Fish and Wildlife Service requested that Reclamation S-15