Download EDWG Grouse Presentation_10.9.15

Federal Actions and Greater Sage-Grouse
The Current Status: Proposed High Voltage Transmission Lines
Endangered Species Act of 1973
• Purpose: Conserve endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems on which they
depend as key components of America’s heritage.
2010 - Greater Sage-grouse were identified by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
as “warranted [for federal for federal protection under the ESA] but precluded”
A species is added to the list when it is determined to be endangered or
threatened because of any of the following 5 CRITERIA (those in yellow flagged
as concerns sage-grouse):
•
•
•
•
•
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;
Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;
disease or predation;
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms
other natural or manmade factors affecting its survival.
About Sage-Grouse
Grouse Population by State:
BLM plays a big
role, their
Resource
Management
Plans provide
regulatory
certainty
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service identified primary threats to Greater Sage-Grouse:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Loss and fragmentation of sagebrush habitat
Infrastructure: transmission towers, energy development, fences, roads, pipelines
Lack of regulatory mechanisms to protect sagebrush habitat
Invasive plants: cheatgrass, Piñyon-Juniper encroachment
Agricultural conversion
Urbanization, ranchette development
Fire cycle (amplified by cheatgrass)
Males are known for their elaborate communal mating dances
on breeding grounds known as “leks.”
USFWS - Why Transmission Lines Are a Concern for Grouse:
“Roads, railroads, power lines, communication towers, wind turbines and fences result in
habitat loss and fragmentation, and can cause greater sage-grouse to avoid otherwise
suitable habitat. Infrastructure can also facilitate the spread of invasive plants, increase fire
risk, and provide food, water and perches for predators, which may increase densities of
ravens, foxes, skunks and other predators.”
BLM’s National Planning Strategy:
• Goal of Strategy: to preserve, conserve, and restore sagebrush habitat, the ecological home
of the greater sage-grouse
• Between 2011 and 2015, BLM revised
or amended 98 Resource Management
Plans – provide “regulatory certainty”
USFWS - Threats vary across range:
Western Range (Great Basin Region):
• Primary threats are the expansion of invasive
grasses such as cheatgrass (which results in
more frequent and intense wildfires) and
conifer encroachment.
Eastern Range (Rocky Mountain Region):
• habitat loss is driven primarily by energy development and infrastructure needed to
support it.
Sept 30, 2015: Court-ordered deadline for final decision – list (threatened/endangered) or not
Sept 22, 2015: Department of Interior makes announcement
Video released on Twitter by Department
of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, in
addition to formal announcement on stage
alongside four Western Governors
Closing statement made by Audubon’s Brian Rutledge
“ Because of an unprecedented effort by dozens of partners across 11 western states, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that the greater sage-grouse does not
require protection under the Endangered Species Act.”
Why did the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service make this determination?
“The Service evaluated the best available scientific and commercial information
regarding the greater sage-grouse, including threats to the species and its sagebrush
habitat and concluded that the threats
which caused the Service to initially
designate the bird as “warranted but
precluded” in 2010 had been significantly
reduced due to federal and state land use
conservation plans.
Implementation of these plans will reduce
threats to the greater sage-grouse across
90 percent of the species’ breeding
habitat.”
Dave Showalter/Sage Spirit
What Do These RMPs Mean for Proposed Transmission Lines?
• BLM/USFS plans take a layered management
approach, with strongest protections in the
areas of highest value to grouse (see green
areas in map, representing “priority habitat”)
• In Priority Habitat, avoid or minimize
infrastructure development, with limited
exceptions (*) for new transmission
rights-of-way.
 To be avoided and only permitting with
special protective stipulations, but are not excluded anywhere (note: Utah is unusual
in that it has no “avoidance” requirement or major protective stipulations for largescale transmission lines in general habitat)
• RMPs include seasonal timing restrictions, noise restrictions, buffer distances from leks,
and required design features to minimize infrastructure impacts on greater sage-grouse.
• State sage-grouse plans in Wyoming, Montana, Oregon and Utah contain regulatory
measures intended to minimize impacts from infrastructure on state lands and, in some
instances, on private lands.
Sage Grouse Habitat
Categories
Sagebrush Focal Areas: Most valuable habitat with highest level of protection. the plans seek
to eliminate new surface disturbance from various sources, including new mining, in these
areas.
Priority habitat Management Areas: The encompass the SFAs and additional priority habitat.
The plans seek to limit or eliminate new habitat disturbance with limited exceptions. The plans
put in place a disturbance cap in priority habitat that limits how much fragmentation of habitat
can occur. The caps take into account both existing disturbance and new authorized
disturbance.
General habitat: Areas that require some special management to protect and sustain greater
sage-grouse populations, but permit more flexible management and resource development.
While the federal plans differ in specifics to reflect local landscapes, threats and conservation
approaches, their overall goal is to prevent further degradation of the best remaining sagegrouse habitat, minimize disturbance where possible and mitigate unavoidable impacts by
protecting and improving similar habitats.
More About these Special Exception Transmission Lines?
• Exceptions were made for certain transmission lines (i.e. TransWest Express and
Gateway South) that were previously identified as priorities for completion, along with
commitments to seek compensatory mitigation in the individual project decision
processes.
“The BLM, working with the proponents, will seek
to achieve net conservation gain by analyzing and
including appropriate mitigation measures that
aim to avoid, minimize, and provide compensatory
mitigation for impacts to GRSG in the project
specific NEPA document for these two lines.”
Gerrit Vyn
Now What?:
•
•
•
•
States continue to manage the species … but scrutiny continues
BLM Resource Management Plans in place – habitat protections vary
Implementation of federal and state plans – critical!
Two lawsuits already filed:
- State of Idaho
- 2 Nevada counties/mining companies
For More Information:
•
•
www.doi.gov/sagegrouse
www.fws.gov/greatersagegrouse/index.php