HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.16 Biological resources and sensitive areas report)
HIGH MESA 16-INCH DISCHARGE PIPELINE
Biological Resources and Sensitive Areas Report
Garfield County, Colorado
Cover: View of the terrain surrounding the proposed alignment.
Prepared for:
EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc.
Prepared by:
WestWater Engineering
2516 Foresight Circle #1
Grand Junction, CO 81505
July 2010
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
At the request ofEnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. (EnCana), WestWater Engineering
(WWE) has prepared this Biological Resources Survey, Impact, and Mitigation Report
for the proposed High Mesa 16 inch pipeline. The proposed pipeline alignment is located
in Sections 35 and 36 T7S R96W and Sections 2 and 3 TSS R96W, 61h Principal
Meridian. This area is located south of the Colorado River between the towns of
Parachute and DeBeque, Colorado (Figure l ).
The proposed alignment follows an existing pipeline corridor between Wallace Creek
Road (Garfield County Road 306) and a compressor station on western High Mesa.
Access to the project area is currently available via Stone Quarry Road (Garfield County
Rd. 300) from U.S. Highway 6. The current primary uses of the area surrounding the
proposed alignment are rangeland, wildlife habitat, and natural resource extraction,
including natural gas development.
1.2 General Survey Information
Information used in the preparation of this report was gathered by WWE biologists
during 20 l 0 field surveys and previous assessments of wildlife, wildlife habitats, and
habitats for sensitive plant species within the general area of the proposed project.
Biological survey boundaries evaluated for this report are shown in Figure I.
The purpose of the surveys was to determine the wildlife and sensitive plant species that
occupy, or may potentially occupy, the project area at varying periods during the year and
species that may potentially be impacted by project development. Factors considered
include: I) soil type and texture; 2) existing land management; 3) absence or presence of
wildlife and plant species including raptors and sensitive migratory birds species; 4)
wildlife and plants with special designations by Federal and State wildlife agencies; and
5) the existing natural vegetation community. This report provides written
documentation that describes survey findings as well as recommended mitigation
measures.
2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING
2.1 Vegetation and climate
Natural vegetation communities around the project area have been affected by residential
development, agriculture, fire, livestock grazing, and natural gas developments.
Native vegetation in the project area consists of pinyon-juniper woodlands (Pinus edulis
and Juniperus osteosperma) accompanied by big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata),
Gam bel oak (Quercus gambelii), and serviceberry (Amalanchier alnifolia). Other
common native plants include broom snakeweed ( Gutierrezia sarothrae ), Fremont
cottonwood (Populus fremontii), Indian rice grass (Achnatherum hymenoides), kingcup
cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus), narrowleaf cottonwood (Populus angustifolia),
prickly pear cactus (Opuntia spp.), soapweed yucca (Yucca glauca), three-leaf sumac
(Rhus trilobata), wavyleafthistle (Cirsium undulatum), and yellow rabbitbrush
(Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus). Common non-native plants included dryland alfalfa
(Medicago sativa), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), yellow salsify (Tragopogon
WestWater Engineering Page I of20 July 2010
dubius), yellow sweet-clover (Melilotus officina/is), and several introduced grasses
including downy brome (Bromus tectorum).
The climate for the Colorado River Valley in the project area is considered semi-arid with
a wide range of annual temperatures and precipitation. The average annual precipitation
in the region ranges between 12 and 15 inches, and temperatures range from about 95
degrees F in the summer months to -I 0 degrees F during the winter months.
2.2 Soils
Four soil types are found in the project area (NRCS 20 I 0) as outlined in Table I.
Table 1. Soil types in project area.
· ...... ,.,
•' < ': ,_-, .. . ,. . · .. .·.·. Approlduiate ~~s 1\i.a~>; ··•· ie~tMfe(s~i' ''.'%'.:· Native Y:egetWtt~~ .. ·· :sii:l~~ 1 % of P:roj~ct . tJnitName.· : ·.· ... :: : ,:'[ I . ·.·· .. ' . · .. ·: ... I . Area. ,_;;. -,:
Big sagebrush, Prairie
junegrass, Western
Ildefonso Stony Loam 6 to 45 wheatgrass, Indian 22.7
ricegrass, Serviceberry,
Antelope bitterbrush
Big sagebrush, Rabbitbrush,
Western wheatgrass,
Potts Loam 3 to 12 Needle-and-thread grass, 33.3 Indian ricegrass, Bluebunch
wheatgrass, Bottlebrush
squirreltail
Big sagebrush, Rabbitbrush,
Loam, Clay Antelope bitterbrush,
Prairie june grass, Western Potts-Loam, wheatgrass, Indian Ildelfonso Stony to 12 to 45 43.5
Complex Very Stony ricegrass, Serviceberry,
Needle-and-thread grass, Loam Bluebunch wheatgrass,
Bottlebrush squirreltail
Big sagebrush, Rabbitbrush,
Antelope bitterbrush,
Torriorthents-Bedrock, Prairie june grass, Western
Camborthids-Sandy 15 to 65 wheatgrass, Indian 0.5 Rock Outcrop Loam, Clay ricegrass, Serviceberry,
Complex Loam Needle-and-thread grass,
Bluebunch wheatgrass,
Bottlebrush squirreltail
WestWater Engineering Page 2 of20 July 2010
These soils formed in non-saline or slightly saline alluvium derived from basalt,
sandstone, and shale. Areas with these soils are primarily used for grazing and wildlife
habitat.
2.3 Terrain
The project area lies south of the Colorado River near Una on U.S. Highway 6. Terrain
at the site is flat to moderately sloping to the Colorado River. The proposed alignment is
crossed by three streams (Wallace Creek, Spring Creek, and Pete and Bill Creek) and
several smaller unnamed drainages that flow to the north. The proposed alignment
terminates on the western edge of High Mesa. Elevation at the site varies from
approximately 5,225 feet above sea level at Wallace Creek, to approximately 6,250 feet
above sea level on High Mesa.
3.0 WILDLIFE AND PLANT SURVEYS
3.1 Background Information
Descriptions of critical habitats for federally listed threatened, endangered, and candidate
fish and wildlife species were reviewed in the Federal Register, U.S. Department of the
Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Wildlife habitat (activities) maps,
provided via the internet web by the Colorado Division of Wildlife's (CDOW) "Natural
Diversity Information Source" (NDIS), were reviewed and incorporated into this report in
reference to mule deer, elk, black bear, mountain lion, and state-listed threatened,
endangered, and species of"special concern"(CDOW 2010a).
A list of Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and their habitats were reviewed. This
list is published by the USFWS through a Memorandum of Understanding with the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), which places
high conservation priorities for BCC species (USFWS 2008). Western Colorado is
included in Bird Conservation Region (BCR) 16 as mapped by the USFWS. Not all of
the BCC species included in the list for Region 16 occur regularly in Colorado, some are
present only as seasonal migrants. Of those known to breed in Colorado, only a portion
are known or suspected to breed within the vicinity of the project area. Avian literature
sources such as the "Birds of Western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country" (Righter et
al. 2004) and the "Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas" (Kingery 1998) were reviewed to
determine the likelihood for species occurrence within the project area. Bird
identification and taxonomic nomenclature are in accordance with that applied by the
Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas Project (Kingery 1998).
The determination of the presence/absence of suitable habitat for threatened, endangered,
and "sensitive species" (TESS) plants was based on previous WWE observations of
typical habitat occupied by BLM or USFS sensitive plants, the Colorado Natural Heritage
Program (CNHP) Rare Plant Field Guide (Spackman et al. 1997) and locations of species
documented in the CNHP statewide database.
3.2 Survey Methods
A preliminary review of the project area, using aerial photographs, was conducted to
familiarize personnel with vegetation types and terrain and as an aid to help determine the
likelihood of the presence of threatened, endangered, or sensitive wildlife and plant
species. Field data, including general project location, boundaries, and reported features,
WestWater Engineering Page 3 of20 July2010
were verified and/or recorded with the aid of a handheld global positioning system (GPS)
receiver utilizing NAD83 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system within Zone 13.
Pedestrian surveys were conducted June 30 and July I, 2010 to identify and locate
wildlife species, wildlife sign (tracks, fecal droppings, and vegetation disturbance),
vegetation communities, and wildlife habitats. Vegetation types were determined
through field identification of plants, aerial photography, and on-the-ground assessments
of plant abundance. Identification of plant species was aided by using pertinent
published field guides (Whitson et al. 2001, Weber and Wittman 2001, CWMA 2007,
Kershaw et al. 1998).
Visual searches for raptor and other bird species nests were focused on the pinyon-
juniper woodlands within the survey area. In addition to a visual search for tree nests,
Great Horned Owl calls were broadcast at approximately 200 meter intervals throughout
the survey area using FoxPro® NX3 wildlife calls. This call-playback methodology has
been shown to elicit a response from nesting raptors in the area, particularly members of
the Genera Accipiter and Buteo (Kennedy and Stahlecker 1993; Reynolds et.al. 1992).
Nest searches and bird identification were aided with the use of binoculars and song
recognition, where needed.
4.0 RESULTS OF SURVEY
4.1 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species of Plants (fESS)
The occurrence and distribution of TESS plants are strongly influenced by geologic
formations and the resulting soil types present in an area. Individual TESS plant
populations are usually scattered and often are comprised of a small number of individual
plants. This is primarily a result of specific soil and moisture requirements of each
species and the high variability in the distribution and surface exposure of the layers
within the suitable soil formations.
Special status species of plants that may be present in the project area and their habitat
preferences are listed in Tables 2 and 3 in two categories: I) Federally Listed Threatened
or Endangered, and Candidate Species, and 2) BLM Sensitive Species. Nomenclature
and habitat descriptions are based on the CNHP literature (Spackman et al. 1997).
Table 2. Potentially present federally-listed plant species.
i~~rli~~~~ '~i~~~~~~#,'r;, :~f~t~j~~~ ~~:~~;,[~~~Jtl.,1,~,~~~\11iii?~~~[~~~.~¢~.··•·>·;·•· ;' .:;:;'
Phacelia
submutica
De beque
phacelia
WestWater Engineering
c
Chocolate-brown or gray clay on Atwell Gulch
and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation;
sparsely vegetated steep slopes. Elev. 4, 700-
6,200 feet
Page 4 of20 July 2010
)
T bl 2 P t f II a e . o en 1a 1y presen t~d llrtdl t e era 1y-1s e plan spec1es.
Scientific Common Status* Habitat Preference Name Name
Typically xeric and fine textured Quaternary
Colorado and Tertiary alluvium soils overla in with
Sclerocactus hookless T cobbles and pebbles ; cold desert shrub and
glaucus cactus pinon-juniper communities along river
benches, valley slopes, and rolling hills.
Elevation 4,500-6,000 feet.
* E= Federal Endangered, T= Federal Threatened , C= Federa l Cand id ate
T bl 3 P t . II a e o entta IY present BLM sens1t1ve pi ant spec1es.
Scientific Common Habitat Preference Name II Name
Astragalus Debeque Varicolored, fine textured, seleniferous, saline soils of
the Wasatch formation-Atwell Gulch member. debequaeus milkvetch Elevation: 5,100-6,400 feet
Astragalus Naturita Sandstone mesas, ledge s, crevices and slopes in
naturitensis milkvetch pinyon-juniper woodlands . E levation 5,000-7,000 feet.
Results: ~No TESS plants were observed during pedestrian surveys of the proposesJ
.a lignmept. The soil characteristics and elevations along the alignment indicate that the
project area could potentially support the species listed in Tables 2 and 3 but there are no
known populations of these plants within several miles.
4.2 Federal Listed Threatened, Endangered, Candidate Wildlife Species
Two federally, endangered fish speciesta re known to occur in the Colorado River, which
lies north of the proj ec t site approximately 0.75 miles. The project area drains into the
Colorado River within designated critical habitat for the federally endangered Colorado
pikeminnow and razorback sucker (Maddux et al. 1993).
4.3 State Listed Threatened, Endangered and Special Concern Wildlife Species
WWE biologists determined that five state listed threatened, endangered, or special..
concern specie ~ may occur within the project area, which are listed in Table 4 (CDOW
2010b).
T bl 4 P t f II t t t r t d ·rdn a e o en 1a 1y presen s a e-1s e WI 1 e spec1es.
Common ~tate :~
Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Preference
American High cliffs near pinon-juniper, ponderosa, or
Peregrine Falco peregrines sc spruce-fir forests. Confirmed breeder in Garfield
ana tum and Mesa counties. Elevations from 4,500 to Falcon over 9,000 feet
WestWater Engineering Page 5 of20 July 2010
)
)
T bl 4 P t f II t t t r t d 'tdn a e . o en Ia 1y presen s a e- 1s e WI 1 e specaes.
Common Scientific Name State Habitat Preference Name Status '"
Open Water -Lakes, Forested Wetlands, Shrub
Haliaeetus Dominated Wetlands, Grass/Forb Dominated
Bald Eagle leucocephalus T Wetlands; Confirmed breeder in Garfield and
Mesa Counties; common winter migrant along
stream corridors; E lev ation: 3,000 -8,000 ft
Breeds during summer periods in temporary
pools in ravines and drainages that experience
Great Basin Spea water flow after heavy rain events; inhabits
sc pinon-juniper woodlands, sagebrush, and semi Spadefoot intermontana desert shrub lands; occurs north of the
Uncompahgre Plateau at e levations below 7,000
feet.
Northern Standing or running water; occurs in Garfield Leopard Rana pipiens sc
Frog County; Elevation: 3,000-11,000 feet
Mesic upland shrub, xeric upland shrub,
Townsend's Corynorhinus deciduous oak, bitterbrush shrub , big sagebrush,
shrubland, desert shrub, saltbush fans & flats, Big-eared townsendii sc greasewood fans & flats, sand dune complex Bat pallescens (Shrub/and), di sturbed shrub land, juniper, pinon-
juniper, riparian ; Elevati on: 3,000-9,500 feet
* E= State Endangered, T= State Threatened, SC =Species of Special Concern
Results: During surveys, no state listed threatened, endangered, or special concern
~ildlife species were observed ·n the project ar~. Bald Eagles nest in cottonwoods
along the Colorado River, but no nesting habitat for these birds exists within the survey
area. No cliffs of sufficient height are found within several miles ofthe proposed
pipeline which could provide nesting habitat for Peregrine Falcons. The project area is
within the elevation range for Townsend's Big-eared bats. They are known to roost in
crevices on rock cliffs such as those that occur in drainages within the project area. The
survey area could also be used as prey foraging habitat by Peregrine Falcons and
Townsend's big-eared bats, though none were observed.
Wallace, Spring, and Pete and Bill Creeks, as well as man-made water catchments in the
project area cou ld provide habitat for northern Jeopard frogs. No leopard frogs were
observed. Great Basin Spadefoot toads could possibly utilize the dry washes and pinyon-
juniper woodlands within the survey area. Conditions were dry during the survey and no
toads were observed .
4.4 Raptors and Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC)
4.4.1 Raptors
WestWater Engineering Page 6 of20 July 2010
In addition to American Peregrine Falcon and Bald Eagle (Table 4), several raptor
species nest, reside, forage, or pass through the general area of the proposed pipeline and
are included in Table 5. Two of these species, the Golden Eagle and Prairie Falcon, are
included on the Federal BCC list.
T bl 5 R t a e a or species th t a b may e presen t. th m . t e pro.1ec area.
ComJDon .·· Scientific BCC · Habitat & Breeding Records · Name · Name .
American Falco Coniferous and deciduous forests and open
Kestrel sparverius N terrain with suitable Jierches. Nests in cavities in
trees, cliffs and buil ings.
Cooper's Accipiter Cottonwood riparian to spruce/fir forests,
Hawk cooperii N includinf, pinon/juniper woodlands. Nests most
frequent y in pines and aspen.
Golden
Grasslands, shrub lands, agricultural areas,
Aquila y pinon-juniper woodlands, and ponderosa forests.
Eagle chrysaetos Prefers nest sites on cliffs and sometimes in trees
in rugged areas.
Great Bubo Occupies diverse habitats including riparian,
Horned virginianus N deciduous and coniferous forests with adjacent
Owl open terrain for hunting.
Long-eared
Occupies mixed shrublands. Nests and roost in
Asio otus N sites m dense cottonwoods, willows, scrub oak,
Owl junipers and dense forest of mixed conifers and
aspens.
Grassland, shrubland, agricultural areas, and
Northern marshes. Nests in areas with abundant cover
Harrier Circus cyaneus N (eJ, tall reeds, cattails, grasses) in grasslands
an marshes. Also known to nest in high-
elevation sagebrush.
Pandion Tall dead trees or power poles used as nest
Osprey haliaetus N building blatforms. Require a nearby body of
water wit fish large enough to catch.
Nest on cliffs near open habitats such as
Prairie Falco y grasslands and shrub lands. Year-round resident
Falcon mexicanus of Colorado. Elevation generally below 10,000
feet, but occasionally above timberline.
Diverse habitats including jlrasslands, f>inon-
Red-tailed Buteo juniper woodlands and deciduous, comferous
Hawk jamaicensis N and riparian forests. Nests in mature trees
( esl}ecially cottonwood, aspen, and pines) and on
eli s and utility poles.
Sharp-Accipiter High densi7c young, or even-aged, stands of
shmned stria/us N coniferous orest and deciduous forests of aspen
Hawk or oak brush with small stands of conifers.
Swainson's Buteo N Arid grassland, desert, and a~ricultural areas
Hawk swainsoni with scattered trees and shru s.
WestWater Engineering Page 7 of20 July 2010
)
)
Results: No occupied raptor nests were found during the surveys1. One unoccupied nest,
suspected to be that of a Cooper's Hawk, was located near the alignment in Wallace
Creek (Figure 1, Photo 1). Although the nest was stable and in good condition, there was
no evidence of current use by any raptor species . UTM coordinates for the nest are: Zone
13, 233189e 4363830n .
A Cooper's Hawk pair is suspected to be nesting approximately 550 meters south of the
proposed alignment in a stand of large Gam bel Oak along Spring Cree~ The defensive
behavior of the birds was focused more than 150 meters outside the survey area and no
exhaustive search was conducted.
American Kestrels, Cooper's Hawks, and Red-tailed Hawks were observed in several
locations along the proposed alignment, but no nests were discovered .
Photo 1. Unoccupied accipiter nest near the proposed alignment in Wallace Creek.
4.4.3 Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) other than raptors
In addition to the raptors discus sed above, WWE biologists surveyed the project area for
the presence ofBCC (songbirds) and their habitat. BCC habitat and nesting records, as
described in the Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas (Kingery 1998), Colorado Birds (Andrews
and Righter 1992), and Birds of Western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country (Righter et
al. 2004) in the vicinity of the project area are summarized in Table 6.
WestWater Engineering Page 8 of20 July 2010
Pinyon Jay Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus Pinyon-juniper woodlands.
Brewer's Sparrow Spizella breweri Sagebrush shrublands
Juniper Titmouse Baeolophus griseus Pinyon-juniper woodlands.
Results: Juniper Titmouse and Pinyon Jays were observed in pinyon-juniper woodlands
between Wallace and Spring Creeks. No nests were discovered. There is adequate
sagebrush habitat for Brewer's Sparrows in the project area but none were observed.
In addition to raptors and BCC, the following bird species were observed in or near the
project area: American Robin (Turdus migratorius), Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (Polioptila
caerulea), Broad-tailed Hummingbird (Selasphorus platycercus), Chipping Sparrow
(Spizella passerina), Common Nighthawk ( Chordeiles minor), Common Raven (Corvus
corax), Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura), Plumbeous Vireo (Vireo plumbeus), Red-
winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), Rock Wren (Salpinctes obsoletus), Spotted
Towhee (Pipilo maculatus), and White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis).
4.5 Terrestrial Species
The proposed alignment for the pipeline lies within Game Management Unit (GMU) 42
and is within overall range for American elk, mule deer, black bear and mountain lion.
An abundance of small mammals utilize the habitat in the project area.
4.5.1 American Elk and Mule Deer
The proposed pipeline lies within CDOW Game Management Unit (GMU) 42 and is
within mule deer and elk winter range, a mule deer critical winter range, and an elk
winter concentration area (Figures 2 and 3) as mapped by the Colorado Division of
Wildlife's Natural Diversity Information System.
Mule deer winter concentration areas and severe winter ranges, and elk winter
concentration areas are considered "sensitive wildlife areas" under Section 1200 of the
Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) Rules (COGCC 2009) and are
defined as follows:
• Big game "Winter Range" is defined as "that part of the overall range where 90
percent of the individuals are located during the average five winters out often
from the first heavy snowfall to spring green-up".
• "Winter Concentration Area" is defined as "that part of the winter range where
densities are at least 200% of the surrounding winter range density during the
same period used to define winter range in 5 out of 10 winters."
• "Severe Winter Range" is defined as "that part of the winter range where 90% of
the individuals are located during the average 5 winters out of 10 from the first
heavy snowfall to spring green-up."
• "Critical Winter Range" for mule deer includes both "Winter Concentration
Areas" and mule deer "Severe Winter Range."
WestWater Engineering Page 9 of20 July2010
Results: Although surveys were conducted during late June, mule deer and elk were
observed during the survey. It is likely that in addition to migrating big game, the habitat
is utilized to some extent by resident populations of both deer and elk. The elements
necessary to provide year-round habitat for these species (forage, water, and cover) are
present in or near the project area.
4.5.2 Black Bear and Mountain Lion
CDOW "NDIS" mapping shows the project area to be within overall range for black bear
and mountain lion (CDOW 2010a). The project area lies within 1.8 miles of a mapped
black bear-human conflict area. The NDIS website defines a black bear-human conflict
area as the portion of the bear's overall range where two or more confirmed complaints
per season were received which results in a CDOW investigation, damage to persons or
property (except livestock) and/or removal of the problem animal.
Black bear are transient species in the project area due to the distribution of adequate
food sources. Black bears are omnivorous and their diet depends largely on what foods
are seasonally available, although their mainstay is vegetation. In spring, emerging
grasses and succulent forbs are favored. In summer and early fall, bears take advantage
of a variety of berries and other fruits. In late fall, preferences are for berries and mast
(acorns), where available. When the opportunity is present, black bears eat a diversity of
insects, including beetle larvae and social insects (ants, wasps, bees, termites, etc.), and
they kill a variety of mammals, including rodents, rabbits, and young or unwary
ungulates. Black bear are in hibernation from mid-November through April or May.
Mountain lions typically follow migrating deer herds as deer are their primary food
source. Mountain lion have large territories and are highly mobile as they search for food
or new territories. Mountain lion prefer to hunt in rocky terrain near woodland habitats.
These habitat conditions occur near the project area.
Results: Black bear sign was observed in each of the three perennial drainages along the
alignment, and the project area is likely inhabited by low densities of black bear year-
round. No mountain lion sign was observed, but this species likely occupies the project
area year-round, especially the pinyon-juniper woodlands and rocky drainages of the
project area.
4.5.3 Small Mammals
Common small mammal species (small game, furbearers, non-game) that may be present
on the project site include coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), golden-mantled
ground squirrel (Spermophilus latera/is), northern pocket gopher (Thomomys talpoides),
desert cottontail (Syvilagus audubonii), white-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus townsendii), and
least chipmunk (Tamias minimus).
Results: During the survey, desert cottontails were observed in the sagebrush shrub land
and pinyon-juniper woodland habitats along the proposed pipeline alignment.
4.5.4 Reptiles
Bull snake (Pituophis catenifer), collared lizard (Crotaphytus collaris), plateau striped
whiptail (Cnemidophorus velox), racer (Coluber constrictor), sagebrush lizard
(Sceloporus graciousus), short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi), western fence
WestWater Engineering Page 10 of20 July 2010
)
)
lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), western terrestrial garter snake (Thamnophis e/egans),
and western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) are reptiles that could potentially occur in the
project area.
Results: Plateau striped whiptail, western fence lizard, and sagebrush lizard were
observed.
4.6 Aquatic Species
4.6.1 Amphibians
The northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), Great Basin spadefoot (Spea intermontana),
tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum), and chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata) are
amphibian species which may occur near the project in any nearby suitable ponds or
drainages.
Results: No amphibian species were observed.
4.7 Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE)
WWE biologists also recorded Army Corps of Engineers (COE) potential jurisdictional
Waters of the United States (WOUS) and potential jurisdictional wetland areas
encountered during the survey.
Results: Three potential wetland areas were encountered during the survey, and the
proposed alignment crosses 5 additional and potentially jurisdictional WOUS drainages
(Figure 1; Table 7). All locations are in Zone 13. Photographs are included in Appendix
A. No wetland delineations were performed.
T bl 7 P . II . . d' ' I WOUS. th a e . otentaa 1y .tuns actaona ID e pro.tect area.
ID Easting Northing Description ~ .'•
COE-1 233215 4363776 Wallace Creek-2ft. wide by 4 in. deep
COE-2 234068 4363765 Dry drainage-3ft. wide by 3 in . deep
COE-3 234653 4363855 Spring Creek-6 ft. wide by 6 in. deep
COE-4 234909 4364049 Dry drainage-No OHWM* No photos available .
COE-5 235573 4364339 Unnamed intermittent stream-No OHWM* at
alignment crossing .
COE-6 236190 4364541 Dry drainage-No OHWM*
COE-7 236279 4364562 Dry drainage-No OHWM*
COE-8 236452 4364697 Pete & Bill Creek-7 ft. wide by 6 in . deep
* OHWM =Ordinary High Water Mark
5.0 EFFECTS TO WILDLIFE
5.1 Wildlife Impact Assessment
Construction of the pipeline will affect on-site native vegetation and wildlife habitat,
although much of the proposed alignment lies within an existing pipeline corridor that
WestWater Engineering Page 11 of20 July 2010
)
)
has been previously disturbed and reclaimed. Locating the pipeline within and adjacent
to an existing pipeline lessens the potential effects to wildlife . The primary effects would
be habitat alteration and displacement of individuals through disturbances related to
increased development.
5.1.1 Terrestrial Species
5.1.1.1 Elk and Mule Deer
Construction of the pipeline will affect on-site vegetation and wildlife habitat by reducing
the forage and cover available by a small amount relative to the total amount of similar
habitat that is available in the project area. Potential effects include the temporary loss of
mule deer and elk winter range. he project will not significantly affect big game
P.OP.ulations, and upon successful reclamation may benefit big game with increased forage
availability if proper seed mixes are used.
Human presence and activities during pipeline construction may create an avoidance area
for elk and mule deer populations within and immediately adjacent to the project area.
However, deer and elk have habituated to human disturbance factors in the area and
establishment of suitable vegetation through reclamation will likely attract big game to
forage within the disturbance area associated with the project.
5.1.1.2 Birds
Passerine Species: The affects to foraging and nesting habitat to a small number of bird
species is expected to be minim~l. Vegetation that will be removed from the site is not
unique and loss of habitat will not affect overall passerine populations.
Raptors: No raptor nests are in danger of direct removal The only nest observed within
the survey area was unoccupied, and therefore there would be no effects to nesting
rap tors from the project Jf the pipeline is constructed before the 201 r raptor nesting
1season If construction is delayed until 2011, it is possible rap tors may select nest sites
during spring 2011 within the project area survey boundaries. These newly established
raptor nests may be affected by disturbance associated with the proposed project and if
project completion is delayed, the area should be resurveyed by qualified biologists .
5 .1.1.3 Black Bear and Mountain Lion
Due to low population densities and large home ranges of both black bear and mountain
lion, and because of the extensive amount of available habitat for these specieS,41Q /
significant effects from this project for these species are expecteQj
5.1.1.4 Small Mammals
The amount of available habitat for small mammals, including bats, should not be
affected significantly by the proposed project. The amount of disturbance is not expected
to affect small mammal populations .
5.1.1.5 Reptiles
The amount of available habitat for reptiles should not be impacted significantly by the
proposed project. The amount of disturbance is not expected to affect reRtile ROpulations.
WestWater Engineering Page 12 of20 July 2010
)
)
5.1.2 Aquatic Species
5.1.2.1 Amphibians
Downstream individuals would be mo st susceptible in the event contaminants were
introduced to s urface water during pipeline construction. The amount of available habitat
for amphibians would not be affected by the project. The amount of disturbance is not
expected to affect amphibian populations .
5.1.2.2 Endangered Fish
The Colorado pikeminnow and the razo rback s ucker are both federally-listed fi sh s pecies
that occur in the Colorado River. Potential impacts from the project include
sedimentation of tributaries to the Colorado River, and spills of chemicals, fuel s from
equipment, or other hazardous materials.
It is unlikely that endangered fish in the Colorado River would be affected by this project
s ince sediments are mostly contained by topography and not likely to reach th e river.
Best Manage ment Practices (BMPs) and Spill Prevention Counter Control (SPCC)
measures should be followed to reduce any potential impacts to aquatic e nvironments.
6.0 EFFECTS TO TESS PLANT SPECIES
No TESS plants or their habitats were found during s urveys, and therefore no affects on
TESS plants are expected.
7.0 MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations for mitigation are presented for maintenance a nd
improvement of wildlife habitat , qu a lity, and prevention of human-cau se d impacts to
reso urces .
7.1 Maintenance and Restoration of Habitat
Reclamation plans should include efforts to restore the native vegetation communities
once construction is complete in the project area. The companion report to this
d ocument, the "Integrated Vegetation and Noxio us Weed Management Pl a n (IVNWMP),
High Mesa 16-Inch Discharge Pipeline" (WWE 201 0) contains a recommende d seed
mixture for reclamation of the disturbed areas. If properly applied, this seed mixture will
benefit all wildlife populations in the area. The IVNWMP also recommends ongoing
control of noxious weeds which will aid the establishment of desired vegetation in the
reclaimed area.
7.2 Planning for Sensitive Time Periods and Areas
7.2.1 Mule Deer and Elk
Because the proposed project lies within a sensitive area for wintering big game (as
define d by the 2009 COGCC rule s), consultation with CDOW is recommended before
project development. Disturbances associated with construction activities will likely
cause elk and mule deer to select habitats in more secluded areas away from construction.
This di s turbance s hould not re s ult in any long-term impacts to mule deer o r elk.
WestWater Engineering Page 13 of20 July 2010
7.2.2 Migratory Birds
In order to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act by showing a good faith effort to
reduce potential impacts on nesting birds, any brush/tree clearing at the project site
should take place outside of the nesting season. Nesting season for migratory birds is
generally considered to occur between May 15 and July 31 in this area for most species.
June I to July 15 is the peak period when most incubation and brood rearing takes place.
If brush/tree clearing can occur prior to May I, most affected birds will relocate to
alternate nesting sites. After mid-to-late July, most fledging has occurred and brush/tree
clearing impacts would be minimized.
7.2.3 Raptors
Pipeline construction activities within the project area are unlikely to affect raptor
populations. If construction is delayed until 20 II or later, the area should be resurveyed
to insure no new raptor nests have been built that may be affected by the project. If nests
are then discovered, the potential for possible effects to raptors could be reduced by
scheduling construction activities so there is no interference with breeding, nesting, and
brood rearing activities of the species occupying the new nest sites.
If new nests are discovered during subsequent surveys, WWE recommends temporal and
spatial restriction guidelines for construction activities near active nests based on BLM
stipulations (BLM 1987), Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) recommendations
(Craig 2002 and Klute 2008) and literature review of nesting season timing for raptors in
the Roan Plateau region (Andrews and Righter 1992, Kingery 1998). These
recommendations are summarized in Table 8.
T bl 8 T" . a e . IIDIDI! an db f~ d . n er recommen atwns or active raptor nests.
' '. i Speeles ·. . '·. Buffer Zone
. .·. Seasonal Restriction '
American Kestrel • •
Bald Eagle 0.50 mile 15 October-31 July
Cooper's Hawk 0.25 mile 1 April-15 August
Golden Eagle 0.50 mile 15 December-15 July
Great Homed Owl • •
Long-eared Owl 0.25 mile 1 March-15 July
Northern Harrier 0.25 mile 1 April-15 August
Osprey 0.25 mile 1 April -31 August
Peregrine Falcon 0.50 mile 15 March-31 July
Prairie Falcon 0.50 mile 15 March -15 July
Red-tailed Hawk 0.33 mile 15 February-15 July
Sharp-shinned Hawk 0.25 mile I April-15 August
Swainson's Hawk 0.25 mile I April-15July
• Great Homed Owls and Kestrels are relatively tolerant of human activity. Keep activity to a m1mmum dunng breedmg season.
WestWater Engineering Page 14 of20 July 2010
7.3 Other Mitigation Practices
7.3.1 Erosion
Efforts to control soil erosion within the project area should be implemented. Disturbed
soils within the project area are susceptible to erosion and downstream water quality
could be negatively affected by increased soil erosion. In addition to stormwater
management around the project site, other current factors (noxious weeds, livestock
grazing, other natural gas development) affecting soil erosion should be managed and
remedial measures implemented.
WestWater Engineering Page 15 of20 July 2010
Legend * Unoccupied COHA Nest
.& COE Crossings
~ Proposed P ipeline
c::J Raptor Survey Buffer
L:=J BLM
...._,
Figure 1:
-
Mesa Grand
<> Mesa
National
Forest
EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc.
High Mesa 16in Discharge Pipeline
Raptor Nest and COE Crossings
June 2010
"'NestWater Engineering
-:;;;! -Cooouhlno-
0.25 0.5
Miles
Legend
Proposed High Mesa 16-•nch Olscharge Pipeline eam Mule Deer CntJCal Winter Range
lS$\SS] Mule Deer Severe Winter Range
....__.,
0
.__;
Figure 2:
EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc.
High Mesa 16in Discharge Pipeline
Mule Deer Activities
June 2010
QtJvf;!!~!~~lti~!'Se~!!eering
0.25 0.5
Miles
Legend
Proposed Hogh Mesa 1~onch O.schalge P opel""'
Elk 1Mn1er Concentr.>tion Are3
8LM
.._
0
-
Figure 3:
EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc.
High Mesa 16in Discharge Pipeline
Elk Activities
June 2010
~tJ!!!~l~~lti~"JJll!eering
0.2 5 0 .5
Miles
8.0 REFERENCES
Andrews, R., and R. Righter. 1992. Colorado Birds: A Reference to Their Distribution
and Habitat. Denver Museum ofNatural History, Colorado.
BLM. 1987. Grand Junction Resource Area Resource Management Plan and Record of
Decision. Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, Grand
Junction.
CDOW. 2010a. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Natural Diversity Information Source.
http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/wildlife.asp.
CDOW. 2010b. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Wildlife Species of Concern.
Threatened and Endangered List. CDOW Web Home Page:
http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/SpeciesOfConcern/ThreatenedEndanger
edList.
COGCC. 2009. Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Complete Rules (100-
1200 Series). http://cogcc.state.co.us/
Craig, Gerald R. 2002. Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for
Colorado Raptors. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver.
CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D'Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, and
K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed
Management Association, Centennial.
Kennedy, P. L., and D. W. Stahlecker.l993. Responsiveness of nesting northern
goshawks to taped broadcasts of 3 conspecific calls. Journal of Wildlife
Management, 57:249-257.
Kershaw, Linda, A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains.
Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington.
Kingery, H. E. 1998. Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership,
Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver.
Klute, D. 2008. Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado
Raptors. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver.
Maddux, H., L. Fitzpatrick, and W. Noonan. 1993. Colorado River Endangered Fishes
Critical Habitat. Biological Support Document. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Utah/Colorado Field Office, Salt Lake City, Utah, 225 pp.
NRCS. 2010. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Web Soil Survey: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.
Reynolds, R. T., R. T. Graham, M. H. Reiser, R. L. Bassett, P. L. Kennedy, D. A. Boyce
Jr., G. Goodwin, R. Smith and E. L Fisher. 1992. Management recommendations
for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. General Technical
Report RM-GTR-217, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service,
Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Righter, R., R. Levad, C. Dexter, and K. Potter. 2004. Birds of Western Colorado Plateau
and Mesa Country. Grand Valley Audubon Society, Grand Junction, Colorado.
Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier.
1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the U.S. Bureau of Land
Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by
the Colorado Natural Heritage Program.
WestWater Engineering Page 19 of20 July 2010
USFWS. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia.
Weber, W. A., and R. C. Wittman. 2001. Colorado Flora Western Slope, Third Edition.
University Press of Colorado, Boulder.
Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D.
Lee, and R. Parker. 2001. Weeds of the West-rJh edition. Western Society of
Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of
Wyoming, Laramie
WWE. 2010. WestWater Engineering. Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weed
Management Plan. High Mesa 16-inch Discharge Pipeline, Garfield County,
Colorado. June, 2010.
WestWater Engineering Page 20 of20 July 2010
-
Appendix A. Photos of potential jurisdictional Waters of the United States (WOUS)
COE-1. Wallace Ck Upstream. COE-1. Wallace Creek Downstream.
COE-2. Crossing. COE-2. Upstream. COE-3. Downstream.
WestWater Engineering Appendix A July 2010
-
Appendix A. Photos of potential jurisdictional Waters of the United States (WOUS)
·' -~ .. ~~~-,_.._,,_ -~-_r~~-, 1?"-. .. ::r;: ·· ..
.;.;:-&:·-..:,_ . ~ .. ~!'··~'v.;j;' --~ .. -::~:':~-;'t·--t
,l. ·' ~ ~\~~-. -... .;,.,./ --I
COE-3. Spring Creek Crossing COE-3. Spring Creek Upstream. COE-3. Spring Creek Downstream.
COE-5. Crossing. COE-5. Downstream.
WestWater Engineering Appendix A July 2010
Appendix A . Photos of potential jurisdictional Waters of the United States (WOUS)
COE-7. No Crossing Photo Available. COE-7 Upstream COE-7. Downstream
WestWater Engineering Appendix A July 2010
-
Appendix A. Photos of potential jurisdictional Waters of the United States (WOUS)
COE-8 . Pete & Bill Ck. Crossing. COE-8. Pete & Bill Ck. Upstream. COE-8. Pete & Bill Ck. Downstream.
WestWater Engineering Appendix A July 2010
Addendum to:
HIGH MESA 16-INCH DISCHARGE PIPELINE
Biological Resources and Sensitive Areas Report
Garfield County, Colorado
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
At the request ofEnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. (EnCana), WestWater Engineering (WWE) has
prepared this addendum to the Biological Resources Survey, Impact, and Mitigation Report
dated July 20 l 0, for the proposed High Mesa 16-inch pipeline (WWE 20 l 0). The addendum is
necessary to describe the biological resources and sensitive areas surveyed for a proposed
pipeline re-alignment which is located in Section 35, T7S, R96W and Section 2, T8S, R96W, 6'11
Principal Meridian in Garfield County, Colorado (Figure 1).
The proposed re-alignment leaves the initial proposed alignment within an existing pipeline
corridor just east of the Spring Creek Road, crosses Spring Creek and rejoins the existing
pipeline corridor on the west side of Spring Creek. Total length of the proposed realignment is
0.68 miles. The area was surveyed on September 15,2010.
Background information and survey methods follow that described in the initial report (WWE
2010). Only data pertaining to raptors, Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and Waters of the
United States (WOUS) that are potentially under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers
(ACOE) is included in this addendum. No other biological issues were identified during the
survey.
Only the area highlighted in Figure l was surveyed to gather data for this report. The initial
survey was conducted in late June and early July 20 l 0, so that area required no further survey
effort.
RESULTS
Raptors
One nest was observed during the survey (UNHA-l in Photo I and Figure I). The nest is about
16-feet high in a 25-footjuniper; it is stable with no evidence of use in 2010. It is a platform nest
adequate for use by a Raven, Great-horned Owl or Long-eared Owl, all of which nest in this type
of habitat. The tree is located on a steep slope facing east northeast.
Birds of Conservation Concern
Three or four Juniper Titmouse were observed in the pinon/juniper (P-J) habitat to the north of
the proposed alignment (Figure 1). No nests were observed. Pinyon Jays are likely using the
area, but no individuals or nests were observed.
WestWater Engineering Pagel of4 September 20 l 0
)
)
Photo 1: UNHA-1 nest is located in a mature juniper north of the proposed alignment
Waters of the United States (WOUS)
The proposed alignment crosses an ephemeral stream just west of Sprin g Creek Ro ad and then
crosses Spring Creek, which carries a steady flow of water. Tab le I provides details for both
dra in age crossings. Var ious widths of fringe wetlands occur along Sp rin g C reek. The lu s h
vegetation is composed of willows, cottonwoods, ru shes a nd sedges, with watercress in the
waterway . No wetland d e lineati ons were perfo rm ed . All locati o ns a re record ed in UTM
coordin ates in Zone 12. Photos of the drainages at each cr ossin g are provided in Appendix A .
Table 1. Potentially jurisdictional WOUS on the proposed re-alignment
ID Eastin2 Northin2 Description
COE-l 75 1522 4363977 e phemeral stream -l foot wide by 2 in ches deep
COE-2 75 1256 4363584 Spr in g C reek -2 feet w id e by 4 in ches deep wi th
perenni a l fl ow and fringe wetlands
WestWater Eng in ee rin g Page 2 of4 Se ptember 20 l 0
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Construction of the pipeline in the revised route will affect on-site vegetation and wildlife
habitat, especially where the pipeline crosses Spring Creek in previously undisturbed habitat.
The primary effects would be habitat alteration and displacement of individuals through
disturbances related to increased development.
No rap tor nests are in danger of direct removal. The observed nest (UNHA-I) is 400 meters
from the proposed alignment and was probably unoccupied in 20IO, so construction of the
pipeline should not have any negative impacts on raptor populations. The effects to foraging and
nesting habitat for BCC species should be minimal. Vegetation that will be removed from the
site is not unique and loss of habitat should not affect overall BCC populations.
Eight potential jurisdictional WOUS were identified during the initial survey of the pipeline
route in July 2010. This reroute would bypass two of the crossings, but add two potential
jurisdictional crossings resulting in the same total. The perennial flows in Spring Creek plus the
associated fringe wetlands along the watercourse will likely require additional permitting from
theACOE.
REFERENCES
WWE 20 I 0. High Mesa I 6-inch Discharge Pipeline, Biological Resources and Sensitive Areas
Report, Garfield County, Colorado. WestWater Engineering, Inc., Grand Junction,
Colorado.
WestWater Engineering Page 3 of4 September 20 I 0
* Unoccupied Raptor N est
A Juni{1er 1itrn ouse S ighti ng
-$-CO f C: wssi ng
=-=-= Pipeline Reroute
=-=-= High M f.SH F' ipline
CJ Rerou te Raptor Bu11er 1/4 l.li le
II:::::J Orig inHI RHptor BuffP.r 1/4 Mi le
f':':'l LL......I Sur veyArea (Sepl2D10)
Figure 1
EnCana. Oil & Gas (USA) Inc.
High Mesa 1 6~nch
Discharge Pipeline Reroute
Biological Survey
.n~stWater Engine e ring 7 Consuldng 1Agkw1111A ScMrnim
0.1 0.2. 0.3
lilies
Septembm 2.010
WestWater Engineering
APPENDIX A
PHOTOS
APPENDIX A September 20 I 0
............
WestWater Engineering APPENDIX A -1
-
crossing
g downstream
September 2010