Vantage to Pomona FEIS Index 34 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Vantage to Pomona Heights Chapter 4 230 kV Transmission Line Project FEIS Environmental Consequences PAGE 4-53 4.3 WILDLIFE AND SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES 4.3.1 Methods and Impact Types 4.3.1.1 Analysis Methods The impact analysis for wildlife and special status wildlife species identified in Section 3.3 focused on impacts resulting from actions that alter habitat. The three areas of focus for this analysis included biological change, habitat degradation, and disturbance. Alteration may occur through direct habitat loss via surface disturbance, direct mortality from construction activities, and indirectly through the reduction in habitat quality such as increased noise levels or the presence of anthropogenic structures. Both the direct and indirect impacts of transmission line development are associated with ground disturbance caused by constructing road networks for access; installation of transmission structures, conductors, and other infrastructure; and ongoing maintenance. In addition to localized effects to wildlife, the proposed transmission line could fragment habitat and reduce connectivity among patches of habitat. Wildlife habitats were assembled from vegetation categories described in Section 3.2 - Vegetation and Special Status Plants, Affected Environment. Refer to Chapter 2 for a description of the disturbance model that was ran to calculate the proposed Vantage to Pomona Heights 230 kilovolt (kV) Transmission Line Project (Project) impacts and to Section 4.2 for a discussion of the impacts specific to vegetation. For the purposes of the analysis for general wildlife and special status animal species and habitat, the Project study area was defined as a two-mile wide corridor (i.e., one mile on either side of the route segment centerlines of each Action Alternative). However, where appropriate, the Project study area was expanded to address potential impacts to species based on known ranges and their potential to occur within the Project vicinity. The Project study area was expanded to address impacts to Greater Sage- Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; Sage-Grouse) based on input from Joint Base Lewis-McChord Yakima Training Center (JBLM YTC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). For Sage-Grouse, the analysis area is defined as an eight-mile wide corridor surrounding each Action Alternative (i.e., four miles on either side of the route segment centerline of each Action Alternative). Please note that the buffer around each route segment overlaps with the adjacent route segments. This was done to allow for a discrete discussion of the affected environment and comparison of each route segment. As a result, the sum of the route segment analysis areas is greater than the overall route analysis area for each Action Alternative. The impact analysis for Sage-Grouse was guided and informed by agency conservation objectives, including the Conservation Objectives Team (COT) Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Objectives: Final Report (USFWS 2013b), the Washington State Greater Sage-Grouse Recovery Plan (Stinson et al. 2004), and the JBLM YTC Western Sage-Grouse Management Plan (Livingston 1998). Agency objectives for Sage-Grouse conservation and mitigation are described in Appendix B-5—Sage-Grouse Analysis and Mitigation Report and Appendix B-7—Compliance with Applicable Greater Sage-Grouse Policies, Plans, and Procedures. Potential impacts analyzed specifically for Sage-Grouse are habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation; increased predation; behavioral avoidance; disturbance and displacement; impairment of habitat connectivity; and collision. Impacts to Sage-Grouse were evaluated using: 1) geographic information systems (GIS) data analysis of existing habitat within the Project study area; 2) habitat loss calculated by using typical disturbance types associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed Action Alternatives (e.g., new access road construction, work areas); 3) the total number of structures per route segment and the anticipated number of new structures located greater than 0.25 mile from an existing line; 4) analysis of JBLM YTC corvid (raven) data; 5) analysis of the Washington Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Working Group (WHCWG) habitat connectivity and linkage reports; 6) GIS data on active, inactive and historical lek locations and observations; and 7) Sage-Grouse telemetry location data (Cadwell et al. 1998; Livingston and Nyland 2002; Stell Environmental Enterprises [SEE]