ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

1
ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

• ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL INVESTIGATIONS
• PERMITTING FOR UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
• AREA ENDANGERED SPECIES ISSUES ARE WELL KNOWN
• CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION
• ENDANGERED SPECIES ARE OF HIGHEST CONCERN
• PRESERVE IMPACTS VS. HABITAT IMPACTS

2
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

• REQUIRES THAT IMPACTS ON ENDANGERED SPECIES BE
  EVALUATED WHEN THEY ARE KNOWN TO BE OR FOUND TO
  BE IN THE WORK AREA AND YOU MUST DO ONE OR MORE
  THINGS WHERE SPECIES AND THEIR HABITAT ARE
  ENCOUNTERED
• AVOID THEM. IF YOU CANNOT AVOID THEM
• MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS OF YOUR PROPOSAL ON THE
  SPECIES AND THEIR HABITAT. AND IF YOUR MINIMUM
  IMPACTS RESULT IN A SITUATION THAT MAY ADVERSELY
  IMPACT THEM, THEN YOU MUST
• MITIGATE FOR ANY UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS WHICH MUST
  BE INCIDENTAL TO THE PROPOSAL.
• AND, YOU MUST DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS NO
  PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL WITH LESS IMPACT
  TO THE SPECIES THAN YOURS
• IF A PROPOSAL CANNOT DO THESE THINGS, AN
  INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT CANNOT BE OBTAINED FROM
  THE USFWS TO TAKE ENDANGERED SPECIES.

3
TAKE

• Endangered Species Act prohibits take of
  endangered species and their habitat. Take is
  described as killing, maiming, injuring or
  disturbing the life history or habitat of the
  species in such a way that it MAY CAUSE harm to
  the species, either directly or indirectly, and
  this does include the modification to its
  habitat or in proximity to habitat.
• Obviously, however, once a species habitat is
  modified it is no longer regulated as habitat.

4
LOCAL ENDANGERED FAUNA

• Black-capped vireo Vireo atricapillus
• Golden-cheeked warbler Dendroica chrysoparia
• Tooth Cave pseudoscorpion Tartarocreagris texana
• Tooth Cave spider Neoleptoneta myopica
• Bee Creek harvestman Texella reddelli
• Bone Cave harvestman Texella reyesi
• Tooth Cave ground beetle Rhadine persephone
• Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle Texamaurops reddelli
• Others

5
ENDANGERED SPECIES
6
Study and evaluation methods

•  
•   Feb 12, 2007 - met with Mr. Scott Rowin,
  biologist and permitting specialist, USFWS
• Discussed current best available commercial
  science relating impact to Golden-cheeked
  Warbler (GCWA) and the Tooth Cave Ground Beetle
  (Rp)
• USFWS advises that
• take of Rp occurs within 500 feet of occupied
  habitat.
• take of GCWA occurs within 250 feet of occupied
  habitat
• indirect take MAY occur beyond those distances as
  well under certain circumstances.
•  

7

• In May the Design Oversight Committee met to
  discuss results of analysis and ground truth
  field work in several alternative routes.
• In mid May the recommendations of the technical
  consultants were made to the managers of the
  three cities and other attendees at the meeting.
  
• On June 12, the preferred route of the managers
  of the three cities was discussed with the USFWS.
• Result - the opinion of USFWS biologists,
  supported by field work, that the presence of
  known, occupied karst habitat in close proximity
  to areas of Lime Creek Road, Anderson Mill Road
  and Lakeline Boulevard would likely result in a
  finding of take for construction in those areas
  since those routes do not avoid the species but
  another feasible route does.
• August 17, USFWS (S. Rowin and A. Arnold) were
  again advised of the impact issues for the
  several routes for the raw water line project.
• Preferred route places raw water line
  construction in areas more than 500 feet from all
  known karst faunal features,
• Preferred route places raw water line more than
  250 feet from all known GCWA habitat
• Dec. 15, route toured with USFWS representative
  and field biologists.
• Recommended route avoids endangered species and
  their habitat

8

• A biological assessment and biological opinion of
  the findings of the technical consultants to use
  the previously approved LCRA route was finalized
  and has been submitted to the USFWS for their
  consideration and concurrence.
• An application has been made to the Balcones
  Canyonland Preserve manager for a certificate of
  participation to cover one small possible GCWA
  area on the plant site
• A Nationwide Sec 12 Permit application has been
  submitted to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to
  re-use the three already confined and existing
  road crossings of waters of the U. S. along the
  preferred route.
•  
•  

9
Prior Environmental Assessments

• An environmental assessment for a 50 foot wide
  route study area, nearly identical to the
  proposed route with nearly identical impacts, was
  prepared and submitted by LCRA in 2000.
• LCRA also studied alternative routes, discarding
  others and ultimately selecting the Trails End
  route recommended for use by BCRUA.
• LCRA Environmental Assessment was approved under
  similar standards of review by the USFWS, by the
  Corps of Engineers, by Texas Parks and Wildlife
  Department and the Texas Antiquities Commission,
  and those agencies individually and collectively
  determined that the LCRA project included no
  significant adverse impacts neither direct nor
  indirect - to waters of the U. S. and wetlands,
  to endangered species or to other environmental
  elements on this alignment.
• There are no known karst features containing
  endangered species, nor were any new features
  found in our field work on a 1000 foot wide route
  study area of the work zone for the preferred
  alignment.

10
Trails End Road Area
11
Known Rhadine persephone sites
12
Outcrop area with small features
13
HABITAT AND PRESERVE DESIGNATIONS
14
ANOTHER LOOK AT PRESERVES
15
FEASIBILITY AND PRUDENCE MORE THAN ONE ROUTE
WAS BOTH FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT FROM A NARROW
CONSIDERATION OF ENGINEERING ISSUES.PRESENCE OF
EXISTING ENDANGERED SPECIES PRESERVES COVERING
BROAD AREAS MADE SOME ROUTES FAR LESS FEASIBLE OR
INFEASIBLE THAN OTHERS.IF AN AVOIDANCE
PROPOSAL COULD NOT BE ADVANCED, APPROVAL OF A
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN BY THE USFWS THAT
INCLUDES IMPACT TO ONE OR MORE ENDANGERED SPECIES
WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ANY PROPOSAL TO GO FORWARD.
THE REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN A CRUCIAL PERMIT FOR
INCIDENTAL TAKE OF Rp COULD NOT BE MET WITHOUT
NEW LOCATIONS OF Rp BEING AVAILABLE FOR
MITIGATION.NO NEW LOCATIONS OF Rp ARE KNOWN
TO EXIST IN THIS REGION AMONG THE
BIOLOGICAL/SPELEOLOGICAL COMMUNITYONE ROUTE,
THAT PROPOSED, WAS FEASIBLE, AND THEREFORE
PRUDENT, FROM THE NARROW CONSIDERATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.
16
QUESTIONS .
17
LCRA WATER PLANT AND WATERLINE PROJECT
18
USACE APPROVAL LETTER, LCRA
19
USFWS APPROVAL LETTER, LCRA