San Luis Valley Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Draft for Public Review
|
|  Yüklə 4.45 Mb.
|
9.0ReferencesAldrich, J.W. 1951. A review of the races of the Traill’s flycatcher. Wilson Bull. 63:192-197. Aldrich, J.W. 1953. Habitats and habitat differences in two races of Traill’s Flycatcher. Wilson Bull. 65:8-11. AOU (American Ornithologists Union). 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. Seventh Edition. American Ornithologists Union, Washington, D.C. Baker, T.T., 2001. Management of New Mexico’s Riparian Areas. New Mexico Watershed Management: Restoration, Utilization, and Protection. New Mexico Water Resources Research Institute, Guide B- 119, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico. Barlow, J.C. and W.B. McGillivray. 1983. Foraging and habitat relationships of the sibling species Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) and Alder Flycatcher (E. alnorum) in southern Ontario. Can. J. Zool. 61:1510-1516. Beal, F.E.L. 1912. Food of our more important flycatchers. U.S. Bureau of Biological Survey, Bulletin 4. Washington, D.C. Bent, A.C. 1940. Life histories of North American cuckoos, goatsuckers, hummingbirds, and their allies. In Corman, T.E. and R.T. Magill. Western yellow-billed cuckoo in Arizona: 1998 and 1999 survey results, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Tech. Rep. 150. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ. Browning, M. R. 1993. Comments on the taxonomy of Empidonax traillii (willow flycatcher). Western Birds 24:241-257. Busch, J.D., M.P. Miller, E.H. Paxton, M.K. Sogge, and P. Keim. 2000. Genetic Variation in the Endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Auk 117:586-595. Cardinal, S. N. 2005. Conservation of Southwestern Willow Flycatchers: home range and habitat use by an endangered passerine. Thesis, Northern Arizona University. Flagstaff, AZ. Cardinal, S.N. and E.H. Paxton. 2004. Home range, movement, and habitat use of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, Roosevelt Lake- 2003. U.S. Geological Survey Report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Phoenix, AZ. 25 pp. Cardinal, S.N. and E.H. Paxton. 2005. Home Range, movement, and habitat use of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, Roosevelt Lake, AZ - 2004. U.S. Geological Survey report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Phoenix. 26 pp. Carter, M. 1998. Yellow Billed Cuckoo. In Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas. Kingery, H. (ed.). Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership and Colorado Division of Wildlife. City of Alamosa. 2009. Alamosa City Ranch Planning Study. Prepared by Design Concepts, Inc. February. Climate Wizard. 2011. Change in Annual Temperature by the 2050s . Model: Ensemble Average, SRES emission scenario: A2. Available at: www.climatewizard.org. Last accessed: December 12, 2011. Colorado Decision Support System (CDSS). 2011. GIS data download. Available at cdss.state.co.us/. Developed by the Colorado Water Conservation Board and the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA). 2005. Land Use Planning in Colorado. Available at: http://www.dola.state.co.us/smartgrowth/Documents/. Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW). 2005. Colorado Wetlands Initiative. Available at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/habitat/wetlands/initiative/index.asp. Colorado LMI Gateway. 2009. State of Colorado Department of Labor and Employment. Colorado Areas Labor Force Data. Available at: http://lmigateway.coworkforce.com/lmigateway/default.asp. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2004. Wetlands Classification of Blanca Wetlands, San Luis Valley, Colorado. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, La Jara Field Office. Prepared by Joe Rocchio. Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB). 2005. Draft Alamosa River Watershed Restoration Master Plan. Prepared for the Summitville Natural Resource Drainage Trustees. Prepared by MWH. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 1997. Environmental Justice; guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act. Washington, D.C. 20502 Cotton, C. 2005. Results of the 2005 southwestern willow flycatcher surveys. August 2. Report prepared for U.S. Bureau of Land Management. 2 pp. Drost, C.A., M.K. Sogge, and E. Paxton. 1997. Preliminary diet study of the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher. USGS Colorado Plateau Field Station, Flagstaff, Arizona . Durst, S.L., M.K. Sogge, A.B. Smith, S.O. Williams III, B.E. Kus, and S.J. Sferra. 2005a. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Breeding Site and Territory Summary – 2003. USGS Southwest Biological Science Center report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Durst, S.L., M.K. Sogge, H.C. English, S.O. Williams, III, B.E. Kus, and S.J. Sferra. 2005b. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Breeding Site and Territory Summary – 2004. . USGS Southwest Biological Science Center report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Durst, S.L., T.C. Theimer, E.B. Paxton, and M.K. Sogge. 2008. Age, habitat, and yearly variation in the diet of a generalist insectivore, the southwestern willow flycatcher. The Condor 100:514-525. Ehrlich, P., D. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1992. Birds in jeopardy. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. Franzreb, K.E. and S.A. Laymon. 1993. A reassessment of the taxonomic status of the yellow billed cuckoo. Western Birds 24:17-28. Gallegos, F. 2005. Alamosa County Land Use Administrator. Personal communication with Bill Mangle, ERO Resources Corporation. April 5. Ghormley, R. 2011. Southwestern willow flycatcher & Mexican spotted owl survey and status report. Rio Grande National Forest, December 2011. Report compiled by Randy Ghormley, Wildlife Program Manager, San Luis Valley Public Lands Center. Monte Vista, CO. Gibson, M. 2005. Manager, San Luis Valley Water Conservation District. Personal communication with Bill Mangle, ERO Resources Corporation. July 27. Gorski, L.J. 1969. Traill’s Flycatchers of the “fitz-bew” songform wintering in Panama. Auk 86:745-747. Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO). 2004. News Release: $3.7 million to the Saguache Creek Corridor Project sponsored by the Colorado Cattlemen’s Agricultural Land Trust. Available at: http://www.goco.org/forms/release_final_statewide_dec04.pdf. Harris, J.H., S.D. Sanders, and M.A. Flett. 1987. The status and distribution of the willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) in the Sierra Nevada. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report 87-2. Hatten, J. R. and C. E. Paradzick. 2003. A multiscaled model of Southwestern Willow Flycatcher breeding habitat. Journal of Wildlife Management 67:774-788. Hawks Aloft, Inc. 2002. Southwestern willow flycatcher surveys in the San Luis Valley, CO. Report submitted to Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge, Alamosa, CO. November 26. Hawks Aloft, Inc. 2003. Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailii extimus) surveys in the San Luis Valley, CO. Report submitted to Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge, Alamosa, CO. October 23. Hawks Aloft, Inc. 2004. 2004 willow flycatcher surveys in Southern Colorado; Annual Report. Report submitted to David Klute, Colorado Division of Wildlife. September 30. Hawks Aloft, Inc. 2005. Southwestern willow flycatcher surveys in the San Luis Valley, CO. Preliminary Report submitted to David Klute, Colorado Division of Wildlife. Howell, S.N.G. and S. Webb. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford University Press. Hughes, J.M. 1999. Yellow-billed cuckoo. In Birds of North America. Poole and Gill (eds.). No. 418. Ireland, T. 2010. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Personal communication with Ron Beane, ERO Resources Corporation. June. Kenwood, K. E. and E. H. Paxton. 2001. Survivorship and movements of southwestern willow flycatchers at Roosevelt Lake, Arizona – 2001. U.S. Geological Survey report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Phoenix. 46 pp. Kittel, G., E.V. Wie, M. Damm, R. Rondeau, S. Kettler, A. Mcmullen, and J. Sanderson. 1999. A classification of riparian wetland plant associations of Colorado: user guide to the classification project. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Koronkiewicz, T., M.K. Sogge, and C.A. Drost. 1998. A preliminary survey for wintering willow flycatchers in Costa Rica. USGS Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Colorado Plateau Field Station, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. Koronkiewicz, T.J., 2002, Intraspecific territoriality and site fidelity of wintering Willow Flycatchers (Empidonax traillii) in Costa Rica: Flagstaff, Arizona, Northern Arizona University, M.S. thesis, 73 p. Koskelin. D. 2005. Public Works Director, City of Alamosa. Person al communication with Bill Mangle, ERO Resources Corporation. July 26. Laymon, S.A. 2001. Cuckoos, Roadrunners and Anis. Pp 332-335. In The Sibley guide to bird life and behavior. (C. Elphick, J.B. Dunning, Jr., and D.A. Sibley, eds.). Alfred A.Knopf, NY. Lucero, J. 2005. Bureau of Land Management. Personal communication with Elaine Davinroy, Rio Grande Water Conservation District. August 22. Lucero, J. and A. Cariveau. 2004. Yellow-billed cuckoo in the San Luis Valley. Colorado Birds. 38(2):67-68. McCabe, R.A. 1991. The little green bird: ecology of the willow flycatcher. Palmer publications, Inc., Amherst, WI. McKernan and Braden. 2001. Status, distribution, and habitat affinities of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher along the Lower Colorado River, Year 5 – 2000. Report by the San Bernardino County Museum, Redlands, CA.Miller, B. 2005. National Agricultural Statistics Service - Colorado Field Office. 2009. Colorado Agricultural Statistics - 2008 Preliminary - 2007 Revised. July. NatureServe 2012. Coccyzus americanus – Yellow-Billed cuckoo. NatureServe Explorer; An online encyclopedia of life. Available at: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?searchName=Coccyzus+americanus Updated February 2012. Last accessed June 11, 2012. Newell, P. J., C. Causey, M. Pollock, E. H. Paxton, and M. K. Sogge. 2005. Survivorship and movements of Southwestern Willow flycatchers at Roosevelt Lake, Arizona – 2004. U.S. Geological Survey report to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Phoenix. Noss, R.F., and A.Y. Cooperrider. 1994. Saving Nature’s Legacy: Protecting and Restoring Biodiversity. Island Press, Washington D.C. Owen, J.C. and M.K. Sogge. 1997. Banding and genetic sampling of Willow Flycatchers in Colorado - 1996 & 1997 summary report. U.S.G.S. Colorado Plateau Field Station/Northern Arizona University report. Paxton, E.H. 2000. Molecular genetic structuring and demographic history of the willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii). Master’s Thesis. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff. May. Paxton, E.H., M.K. Sogge, T.C. Theimer, J. Girard, and P. Keim. 2008. Using molecular genetic markers to resolve a subspecies boundary: the northern boundary of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher in the fourcorner states: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1117, 20 p. Phillips, A.R. 1948. Geographic variation in Empidonax traillii. Auk 65:507-514. Reclamation (Bureau of Reclamation). 2005. Albuquerque Area Office Water Operations Group Fact Sheet 2005. Available at: http://www.usbr.gov/uc/albuq/water/SanJuanChama/Reservoirs/fs/sjc_platoro.html. Ridgely, R.S. and J. Gwynne. 1989. A guide to the birds of Panama with Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Honduras. Princeton Press, Princeton, NJ. Robbins, R. 2005. Conejos Water Conservancy District. Personal communication with Bill Mangle, ERO Resources Corporation. June 14. San Luis Valley Heritage. 2010. San Luis People’s Ditch. http://www.slvheritage.com/heritage-attractions/san-luis-peoples-ditch/?show_more=1. Accessed: November 10, 2010. San Luis Valley Museum Association (SLVMA). 2010. History of the San Luis Valley. http://museumtrail.org/ValleyHistory.asp. Accessed: November 10, 2010. San Luis Valley Regional Planning Commission (SLVRPC). 2004. Colorado Department of Transportation - San Luis Valley 2030 Regional Transportation Plan. November 1. San Luis Valley Water Conservancy District (SLVWCD). 2001. Rio Grande Headwaters Restoration Project. Prepared for SLVWCD, RGHRP Technical Advisory Committee, and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. October. Sedgwick, J.A., 2001, Geographic variation in the song of Willow Flycatchers—Differentiation between Empidonax traillii adastus and E.t. extimus: Auk, v. 118, p. 366-379. Seutin, G. and J-P Simon. 1988. Genetic variation in sympatric Willow Flycatchers (Empidonax traillii) and Alder flycatchers (E. alnorum). Auk 105(2):235-243. Sogge, M.K,, T.J. Tibbitts, and J.R. Petterson. 1997a. Status and breeding ecology of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher in the Grand Canyon. Western Birds 28:142-157. Sogge, M.K., R.M. Marshall, S.J. Sferra, and T.J. Tibbitts. 1997b. A southwestern willow flycatcher natural history summary and survey protocol. National Park Service Technical Report NPS/NAUCPRS/NRTR-97/12. Sogge, M. K., S. J. Sferra, T. McCarthey, S. O. Williams & B. E. Kus. 2001. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Breeding Site and Territory Summary - 2000. USGS. [Technical Report] Sogge, M.K., D. Ahlers, and S.J. Sferra. 2010. A natural history summary and survey protocol for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods. 2A-10, 38 p. Spencer, J.A., S.J. Sferra, T.E. Corman, J.W. Rourke, and M.W. Sumner. 1996. Arizona Partners in Flight 1995. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher survey. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix. Nongame Technical Report 97. Stafford, M.D. and B.E. Valentine. 1985. A preliminary report on the biology of the willow flycatcher in the central Sierra Nevada. California-Nevada Wildlife Trans. Stiles, F.G. and A.F. Skutch. 1989. A guide to the birds of Costa Rica. Cornell University Press, NY. Stone, K. 2005. Refuge Biologist. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Personal communication with Elaine Davinroy, Rio Grande Water Conservation District. August 22. Unitt, P. 1987. Empidonax traillii extimus: An endangered subspecies. Western Birds 18:137-162. Unitt, P. 1997. Winter range of Empidonax traillii extimus as documented by existing museum collections. Report to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Phoenix, AZ. Unitt, P. 1999. Winter Range and discriminate function analysis of the Willow Flycatcher. Final report submitted to the Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office (Federal Grant No. 98-FG-32-0200), Phoenix, AZ. U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS). 2009. Agricultural Baseline Projections: U.S. Livestock, 2009-2018. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Baseline/livestock.htm/. Last accessed: December 7. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 1995. Final rule determining endangered status for the southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Federal Register 60:10694. February 27. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 1997a. Final determination of critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Federal Register 62(140):39129-39147. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 1997b. Final determination of critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher: Correction. Federal Register 62(161):44228. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2001. 12-month finding for a petition to list the yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) in the western United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2002a. Final Recovery Plan Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Region 2, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, NM. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2002b. Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge Environmental Assessment and Land Protection Plan for the Lillpop Ranch Habitat Addition. November. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2003. Alamosa-Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge Complex – Comprehensive Conservation Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2005. Baca National Wildlife Refuge - Draft Conceptual Management Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2009a. Rising to the Challenge: Strategic Plan for Responding to Accelerating Climate Change. Draft. September 21. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 2009b. Northern Leopard Frog in West may Warrant Federal Protection. News Release. Arizona Ecological Services Field Office. June 30, 2009. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service (Service and NMFS). 1996. Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook. Vandiver, S. 2005. (Former) Division 3 Engineer for the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Letter to Field Supervisor re: Comments on the Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher in the San Luis Valley in Colorado. May 26. Walkinshaw, L.H. 1966. Summer biology of Traill’s Flycatcher. Wilson Bulletin 78:31-46. Wetland Ecological Services Team LLC. WEST. 2007. Southwestern willow flycatcher surveys – Final Report. Prepared for Colorado Division of Wildlife. 38 pp. Willet, M. 2005. Personal communication with R. Beane, ERO Resources Corporation. July. Williams, B. K., R. C. Szaro, and C. D. Shapiro. 2009. Adaptive Management: The U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Guide. Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. Winker, K. 1994. Divergence in mitochondrial DNA of Empidonax traillii and E. alnorum, with notes on hybridization. Auk 111:710-713.
Appendix A – Estimated Impact Calculations Appendix B – Sample Landowner Cooperative Agreement Appendix C – Sample Habitat Management Agreement Appendix D – Education and Outreach Framework Appendix E – Model County HCP Enabling Ordinance Appendix F – Draft Steering Committee Charter Appendix G – Habitat Quality Index Monitoring Approach Appendix H – Proposed Permit Terms and Conditions Appendix I – Draft Implementing Agreement 1 Riparian habitat is generally defined as the plant communities that are found near streams and other bodies of water. In the Valley, the riparian habitat is characterized by clusters of cottonwood and willow trees; and shrubs surrounded by open water, wet meadows, and wetland areas (see Section 2.2). 2 While there are nine counties within the watershed basin, only the six on the valley floor are parties to this HCP. 3 Other incorporated towns in the Valley do not contain habitat for the covered species, are not Applicants, and are not included in this HCP. 4 The term “take” under the ESA means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or attempt to engage in such conduct (16 USC § 1531(18)). 5 The Forest Service boundary was chosen because it is a locatable property boundary that demarcates the limit of lower-elevation lands with mixed ownership (private, State, and BLM). 6 With the exception of the Applicant cities, no habitat for the covered species exists within any incorporated municipal boundaries in the Valley. The Applicant municipalities of Alamosa, Monte Vista, Del Norte, and South Fork have portions of the Rio Grande riparian corridor within their municipal boundaries, and/or have public infrastructure interests related to the Rio Grande corridor. 7 Activities needed to ensure Rio Grande Compact administration and sustain the State system of water administration (surface water storage and diversions, ground water pumping, water distribution, and water depletions). The District and/or Applicants, and/or water managers whose activities are covered by the HCP do not waive any argument that such activities cannot be regulated by, and are not subject to, the Endangered Species Act and its enacting rules and regulations. 8 Thresholds for large-scale water projects are based upon a combination of Section 404 wetland permitting guidance and the maximum size of dams to be considered jurisdictional dams by the Colorado State Engineer (CDWR 2007). 9 These goals and objectives are intended to articulate the intended outcomes of HCP implementation, and are not specific resource management or biological goals that would typically be found in a habitat management plan. 10 Other DNR agencies that may conduct the covered activities include the Colorado State Land Board, while other divisions typically do not conduct the covered activities. 11 Costilla County, which lies in the southeastern part of the San Luis Valley and is known to contain flycatcher habitat, is an ITP Applicant and has authorized the District to represent it in this process. 12 In 2008, the Service initiated a five-year review of the flycatcher and 27 other listed species in the southwestern United States to assess the best available scientific and commercial data and to ensure that the classification status is accurate (73 FR 14995). 13 Select habitat photos courtesy of Rio de la Vista and Aaron Thompson, BLM. 14 Section 2302 (b) of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992, Public Law 102-575, provides that “title to the Platoro Dam and Reservoir and all associated facilities shall remain with the United States…” 15 Covered activities conducted on State Land Board lands by the State or by private lessees will receive the same incidental take coverage under the HCP as other private or State lands. 16 The HCP quantifies impacts that are expected to occur beyond the current environmental baseline conditions. This HCP does not address impacts to riparian habitat that have occurred in the past. 17 In accordance with the definition of baseline in the HCP Handbook (Service and NMFS 1996), previous grazing impacts are part of the current baseline conditions and are not quantified as impacts in this HCP. 18 Although most of the floodplain areas do not support habitat for the covered species, the floodplain was used as a conservative measure to be inclusive of any potential habitat. While there are 335 miles of ditches and canals within the floodplain, only 55 miles of those intersect mapped riparian habitat. 19 These thresholds are based on Section 404 wetland permitting guidance and the State’s definition of “non-jurisdictional” dams (CDWR 2007). 20 The use of herbicides is regulated by the State of Colorado and the Environmental Protection Agency through NPDES Pesticide General Permit process; effects of those herbicides on ESA-listed species are to be covered separately through a Section 7 consultation (in process) and are not included in this HCP. 21 This approach is supported by the HCP Handbook, which states that proposed incidental take levels can be expressed “in terms of habitat acres…to be affected generally or because of a specified activity, in cases where the specific number of individuals is unknown or indeterminable” (Service and NMFS 1996). 22 Over 32,000 easement acres contain about 1,700 acres of mapped riparian habitat – see Tables 4 and 5. 23 Most conservation easements are in perpetuity, though some have shorter time periods (10 yr., 20 yr., etc.); eligible easements must have a time period that is equal to or greater than the time period that mitigation credits are obtained. If a time-limited easement expires, it is no longer eligible for HCP mitigation (unless the landowner and the District develop a separate habitat management agreement). 24 Because the HCP requires no minimization and mitigation measures by landowners other than the Permittees, the Service does not need access to landowners’ lands for HCP compliance monitoring. However, the Service may monitor those lands belonging to landowners who have volunteered to sign a Landowner Cooperative Agreement or Habitat Management Agreement to help the District fulfill the HCP’s mitigation obligations. The purpose of such monitoring is to assess the effectiveness of the mitigation effort on that property. To follow-up on the effectiveness of the mitigation efforts on a particular property, the Service will make arrangements with the voluntary landowner for property access at least 14 days in advance. During monitoring, the Service may be accompanied by the District or the District’s designated representatives. The Permittees shall allow the Service, or other properly permitted and qualified persons designated by the Service, to enter the Permittees’ lands covered by the HCP at reasonable hours and times in accordance with 50 CFR §§13.21 (e)(2) and 13.47. Nothing in this section precludes the Service from carrying out its duties as required and authorized by law. 25 Municipalities are not required to adopt an ordinance, since individual activities of individual landowners within municipal boundaries are not considered to result in take (see Residential Activities in Section 3.6). Municipal ITP coverage is therefore limited to activities conducted by the municipality. 26 Annual reports will be provided to both U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services staff, and local refuge staff. 27 As described in Section 2.2, riparian habitat mapping was conducted in 2005 (based on 2002-2004 imagery) and updated in 2009 to reconcile changes in habitat conditions and aerial imagery, and to map additional stream reaches. Repeat mapping of original stream reaches between 2005 and 2009 resulted in a 0.6% increase in habitat (most of which can be attributed to mapping error rather than actual habitat changes). 28 Based on current impact estimates of 270 acres of temporary impacts per year, a 15 percent change would constitute an additional 40.5 acres of habitat impacts (out of 15,128 total acres). This threshold for determining minor versus major changes is intended to distinguish normal fluctuations in the covered activities (less than 15 percent change), from larger changes in the nature and impacts of those activities (greater than 15 percent change). 29 Major (greater than 15 percent) reductions in HCP impacts and mitigation would not require an amendment because the impacts would be within the range of impacts documented in this HCP, which are currently mitigated at the high end of the range. This approach also provides an incentive to reduce impacts over time through outreach and education efforts and voluntary conservation and enhancement of riparian habitat. 30 Based on annual average changes by the 2050s as reported by www.climatewizard.org; Model: Ensemble Average, SRES emission scenario: A2 31 “Unforeseen circumstances” are defined as “changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by a conservation plan that could not reasonably have been anticipated by plan developers and the Service at the time of the conservation plan’s negotiation and development, and that result in a substantial and adverse change in the status of the covered species” (50 CFR § 17.3). |