Laserfiche WebLink
- <br />alluvial soils, a cite-specific determination revealed no YJmta basin hookIess cactus and <br />microhabitat conditions unsuitable for this speraes. Likewise, reo suitable soils that could <br />produce potential habitat for the De Beque phacelia or Parachute penstemon were found at the <br />site. used on the information provided to your analysis and the BA, ihe: Service concurs with <br />your `4eo effect" findings for the Mexican spotted owl, Canada lynx, Uirfta basin hookless cactus, <br />De Beque phaeeiia, acid Parachute penstemon. <br />Your analysis arrives at "way affect; but not Likely to adversely affect" determinations for the <br />bald eaglo and yellow-billed cuckoo. Bald eagles are lortown to use tho Grand VaIley's Colorado <br />River corridor as winter foraging habitat, but on-sits surveys revealed no suitable roosting or nest <br />sites. Migrant eagles using the East Salt Creek drainage could potentially be adversely affected <br />by vehicular collisions or contact with power lines at or near the site. Regarding the yellow <br />billed cuc3:oo, approximately 2 acres ofpereweial and 4 acres of ephemeral riparian habitat was <br />found within or adjacent to the proposed action area. Ftowever, a `dot h'kely to adversely affect" <br />determination was reached because the density of the cottonwood canopy is Iikely too low bo be <br />used by this species. Based on the information provided in your analysis and the $A, the Service <br />concurs with your "may effect, but aoi le7cely to adversoly affect" detonninations for the bald <br />eagle and yellow-billed cuckoo. <br />Regarding the Colorado pikemiivnow, humpback chub, razorback sucker, aced bonytail, the <br />Service's view is that any water depletions from the Upper Colorado River Basin are considered <br />to adversely affect these federally-listed, endangered fishes or their habitats. Therefore, you <br />were correct to request sec#ioa 7 consultation regarding the potential effects of the project. It is <br />our understanding that the e,ction proposed at thin limo involves no inentase in the estimated net <br />annual wafer depiction to the Upper Colorado River Basin. Prior coresuJtations for the depletions <br />at tlee McClave Canyon 1Vfiae occurred in 19$6,1992, 2000, and 2002, and for the Munger <br />Canyon Mine in 1989, as outlined in your letter. Therefore, the existing Recovery <br />Implementation Program for Bndangercd Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin will <br />continue to serve as the reasonable and prudent altornative to avoid jeopardy to the endangered <br />fishes by the project-caused depletions. <br />The Service decisions in this document are based on the information provided by the Cffsce of <br />Surface Mining, lf'now information becomes availabley if a new species becomes listed, if <br />incidental take occurs, if the total average annual amount of watrr depleted by this prof ect <br />changes, or if any other project element changes which alters the operation of the project from <br />that which is described in your correspondence and which may affect any endangered ar <br />Chreatened species in a mariner or to an extent not considered in this biolog'ecal opinion, formal <br />section 7 consultation should be reinitiated. The Office of Surface 1Vfu3ing should oondition its <br />approval documents to retain jurisdiction should section 7 consultation need to be reinitiated. <br />1£ the Service can be of further assistance, please contact Larry Thompson at the letterhead <br />address or (970) 243 277$, extension 39. <br />L'r6omMon:oSMCenlrulAppaiaehL~Mh-ln6M~iane[~yonb`Mut~e+Cagyon M iaecPamiuCt„doe;061606 <br />