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 4-88 Seventy-three percent of the Route Segment 1c ROW is within the estimated Sage-Grouse population range, and 14 percent of the route segment’s ROW is within the core population range (Figure 3.3-4). Three active leks (Leks #1, #3, and #4) and one inactive lek occur within four miles of Route Segment 1c. Because each of these leks is located closer to another route segment, they are described more fully for the route segment to which they are closest (Table 3.3-7). Lek #1 is located approximately 3.7 miles north of Route Segment 1c (described for Route Segment NNR-3), Lek #3 occurs approximately 3.0 miles northeast of Route Segment 1c (described for Route Segment 1b), Lek #4 occurs approximately 3.9 miles east of Route Segment 1c (described for Route Segment 2b), and an inactive lek is located approximately 1.4 miles northeast of Route Segment 1c (described for Route Segment 1b). Approximately 6.3 miles of Route Segment 1c are within four miles of an active or inactive lek. Potential impacts to lekking Sage- Grouse would be minimized by the implementation of RDFs (refer to Sections 4.3.3.1 and 4.3.3.2). Lek impact levels are anticipated to be low for 6.6 miles and moderate for 6.3 miles. 4.3.4.4 Route Segment 2a Habitat along and immediately adjacent to this route segment appears to be highly disturbed and of poor quality. Long-term disturbance of approximately 2.1 acres of habitat would occur from the construction of Route Segment 2a, including 1.9 acres of annual grassland, and 0.2 acre of perennial grassland. Short- term disturbance would occur to approximately four acres, 3.6 acres of annual grassland, and 0.4 acre of perennial grassland (Table 4.3-4). RDFs would be implemented to minimize habitat loss and degradation, as described in Section 4.3.3.1. Impact levels to habitat are expected to be low for the entire one-mile route segment. The presence of new transmission line structures, which could provide additional perch and/or nesting sites for avian predators, could negatively impact nearby prey species such as small mammals and avian species, particularly when the new structures are built in an area where perching opportunities currently do not exist (i.e., greater than 0.25 mile from existing structures or trees). Construction of Route Segment 2a would require an estimated 7 structures, all of which would be located greater than 0.25 mile from an existing transmission line (Table 4.3-5). Within one mile of Route Segment 2a, potentially suitable habitat is present for 35 special status wildlife species that are possible, likely, or known to occur (Tables 3.3-2, 3.3-3, and 3.3-7). Potential impacts and RDFs to address them are discussed in Sections 4.3.3.1 and 4.3.3.2. Species or wildlife resources that have been documented at specific locations within one mile of Route Segment 2a include priority species regional areas for long-billed curlews nesting area and elk winter range. Route Segment 2a is located approximately 0.8 mile from the edge of a long-billed curlew Priority Species Regional Area and potential habitat is present within the Route Segment 2a ROW. Impacts to long-billed curlew include a reduction and degradation of habitat, disturbance during nesting and brood- rearing periods, increased human activity, introduction and spread of noxious weeds, and injury or mortality due to collision with construction equipment. RDFs that would be implemented include closing access roads not required for ongoing maintenance activities, reseeding disturbed areas, implementing a noxious weed control plan, adherence to reasonable speed limits, and employing seasonal restrictions and buffers to avoid nesting long-billed curlews. Impact levels are expected to include 1 mile of low impacts for long-billed curlews. Approximately 0.3 mile of Route Segment 2a would be just within the west edge of the Rattlesnake Elk Winter Range Regular Concentration area. RDFs to minimize impacts to elk will include a seasonal restriction on construction. Specifically construction would be avoided during the wintering season, typically December 1 through March 1, or as defined by WDFW for each big game population in question (Section 2.3). The avoidance RDF is anticipated to be effective at minimizing impacts to elk, so impacts