Mr. Henry B. Hickerson, District Ranger

Poplar Bluff Ranger District

Mark Twain National Forest

P.O. Box 988

Poplar Bluff, Missouri 63901-0988

Dear Mr. Hickerson:

This letter is in response to your May 20, 2002, request for
site-specific review, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended, on the proposed 2002 Tornado Project - Health
and Safety Hazard Abatement, on the Poplar Bluff Ranger District in
Butler and Carter Counties, Missouri for the 2002-2003 planning seasons.
On June 23, 1999, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) issued a
Programmatic Biological Opinion (Programmatic BO) for the Mark Twain=s
National Forest (MTNF) Land Resource Management Plan (LRMP). This
Programmatic BO established a two-tiered consultation process for LRMP
activities, with issuance of the programmatic opinion being Tier 1 and
all subsequent site-specific project analyses constituting Tier 2
consultations. When it is determined that a site-specific project is
likely to adversely affect federally listed species, the Service will
produce a Atiered@ biological opinion.

In issuance of the Programmatic BO (Tier 1 biological opinion), the
Service evaluated the effects of all U.S. Forest Service=s actions
outlined in the LRMP for the MTNF, as well as a number of identified,
proposed site-specific projects that were attached as an appendix to
your biological assessment. The Programmatic BO evaluated the effects of
Forest Service management program activities, including timber
management and prescribe burning, on the bald eagle (*Haliaeetus
leucocephalus*), Curtis= pearly mussel (*Epioblasma florentina
curtisi*), Indiana bat (*Myotis sodalis*), gray bat (*Myotis
grisescens*), Meads milkweed (*Asclepias meadii*), pink mucket pearly
mussel (*Lampsilis abrupta*), running buffalo clover (*Trifolium
stoloniferum*), Topeka shiner (*Notropis topeka).* We concurred with
your determinations of Anot likely to adversely affect@ for Curtis=
pearly mussel, pink mucket pearly mussel, running buffalo clover, and
Topeka shiner. We also concurred with your determination of Alikely to
adversely affect@ for bald eagle, gray bat, Indiana bat, and Mead=s
milkweed.

Your request for Service review of the proposed activities associated
with the 2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement is a
Tier 2 consultation. We have reviewed the information contained in the
2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement Biological
Evaluation (BE), submitted by your office by fax May 20, 2002,
describing the potential effects of the proposed project on the above
federally listed species. On May 1, 2002, Theresa Davidson, a biologist
on my staff, visited the project site with Forest Service wildlife
biologists Megan York and Angelina Trombley.

We concur with your conclusion that there are no additional effects to
federally listed species associated with the 2002 Tornado Project -
Health and Safety Hazard Abatement beyond those that were previously
disclosed and discussed in the Service=s Programmatic BO of June 23,
1999. We also concur with your determination that the only species that
may occur within the project area are pink mucket pearly mussel, Curtis=
pearly mussel, running buffalo clover, Indiana bat, and bald eagle. As
described in the Service=s Programmatic BO, we believe that adverse
effects are likely to occur to the Indiana bat.

[Description of the Proposed Action/Preferred Alternative]{.underline}

On April 24, 2002, an F-4 tornado damaged approximately 4,300 acres of
National Forest lands and 6,700 acres of private lands. As a result of
the tornado, roads, utility lines, landlines, and trails are blocked.
The majority of timber within the direct path of the tornado
(approximately 2 mile wide) is on the ground, leaning, or hung in other
trees. This proposal involves removing timber (hazard trees) on
[only]{.underline} the acreage involved in the maintenance of Forest
System Roads, trails, landlines, utility line, and the removal of trees
on National Forest lands that have fallen, are leaning, or could fall
across county roads. Hazard trees are defined as those down and crossing
roads, trails, utility lines, or landlines, *and* trees that are leaning
toward the road, trails, utility lines, or land lines making the area
unsafe for forest users. There are also many trees tangled among
themselves that may also be hung up in healthy standing trees. If it is
determined that those leaning trees pose a health and safety hazard and
it is necessary to remove the healthy tree to make the area safe, then
the healthy tree may be cut in order to secure the area for Forest
users. Trees greater than 26\" in diameter may be removed
[only]{.underline} if they pose a health and safety hazard.

The following outlines specific actions to be taken:

-   Roads - National Forest System roads will be cleared within
    approximately 100 feet of less of centerline. The removal of these
    trees will include downed trees, leaning trees, and any other trees
    posing a hazard to users of the road. Approximately six miles (147
    acres) of National Forest system roads will be treated. Another 6.4
    miles (156 acres) of highway, state, county, and private roads
    (where National Forest crosses) will be treated.

-   Trails - The Victory Horse Trail was damaged by this tornado. Trees
    across the trails will be cut so they lay flat on the forest floor
    and some may be moved to the side. Trees will be cut within 100 feet
    of either side of the trail only if the tree poses a hazard to users
    of the trail. Approximately 2.1 miles (50 acres) of this trail will
    be maintained.

-   Utility lines - Where utility lines cross National Forest lands,
    hazard trees may be cut within 100 feet of the utility line.
    Approximately 3.7 miles (90 acres) of utility lines will be
    maintained.

-   Landlines - The re-establishment of property boundaries is
    necessary. In order to do this the MTNF will only cut small
    saplings. The saplings will be approximately three inches in
    diameter or less. Downed trees may be cut within these boundary
    lines to make room for the establishment of the property line, but
    it will not be necessary to cut leaning trees within the area.

The District has also agreed to incorporate and implement the reasonable
and prudent measures (RPM) and terms and conditions (TC) of the 1999
Programmatic BO.

In addition to MTNF=s implementation of the RPM=s and TC=s in the
Programmatic BO and other protective measures, the following information
was considered in determining the project=s effects on the bald eagle,
running buffalo clover, Curtis pearly mussel, and pink mucket pearly
mussel:

Bald Eagle: 1) The project area is approximately 8 miles southwest of
the nearest documented bald eagle nest; 2) the project area is
approximately 35 miles northeast of the nearest known communal roost; 3)
the project area is approximately 700 feet south of the nearest
potential winter habitat (Cane Creek); 4) a buffer of approximately 600
feet will remain when removing hazard trees from 10 acres along Butler
County Road 410 (700 feet from Cane Creek); and 5) there is little
potential for soil movement from project activities.

Pink Mucket Pearly Mussel: 1) There is no potential habitat within the
2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement project area;
and 2) there is little to no potential for soil movement from project
activities.

Curtis Pearly Mussel: 1) There is no potential habitat within the 2002
Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement project area; and
2) there is little to no potential for soil movement from project
activities.

Running Buffalo Clover: 1) two occurrences of this species on private
lands are within 5.5 miles of the project area; 2) suitable habitat
exists on Cane Creek within the project area (approximately 76 acres are
suitable); 3) currently there are no populations of this species on the
suitable acres; and 4) clearing 10 acres along Butler County road 410
(700 feet from Cane Creek) will open up habitat for the running buffalo
clover.

Based on the site specific information above, we would concur with a
determination of Anot likely to adversely affect@ for the bald eagle,
pink mucket pearly mussel, Curtis= pearly mussel, and running buffalo
clover.

The following biological opinion is based on likely adverse effects to
the Indiana bat from activities associated with the 2002 Tornado
Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement. In conducting our
evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on Indiana bat, our
review focused on determining whether: (1) this proposed project falls
within the scope of the Programmatic BO issued for MTNF=s LRMP; (2) the
effects of this proposed action are consistent with those anticipated in
the Tier 1 Programmatic BO; and (3) the appropriate implementing terms
and conditions associated with the reasonable and prudent measures
identified in the Tier 1 biological opinion are adhered to. This Tier 2
Biological Opinion also identifies the incidental take anticipated with
the 2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement and the
cumulative total of incidental take for the MTNF for the 2002-2003
planning seasons. It conforms with the Service=s Programmatic BO (page
88) pertaining to individual projects the Service reviews following the
issuance of the Programmatic BO.

[Status of the Species]{.underline}

Species description, life history, population dynamics, status and
distribution for the Indiana bat are fully described on pages 40-62 of
the Programmatic BO and are hereby incorporated by reference. Since
issuance of the Service=s Programmatic BO, a biennial survey was
conducted on Indiana bat Priority 1 hibernacula. Approximately 102,870
Indiana bats were counted during surveys conducted in 2000 and 2001.
This compares to the 115,885 Indiana bats that were estimated in 1999 at
the same locations (Richard Clawson, Missouri Department of
Conservation, [in]{.underline} [litt]{.underline}. 2001- as presented at
the Indiana Bat Symposium held in Lexington, Kentucky, March 29-31,
2001). Mist net surveys were conducted for bats on the Mark Twain
National Forest between 1997 and 2001. These surveys resulted in the
capture of 501 individual bats of 9 species during 594 hours of
mist-netting, but no Indiana bats were captured. Five hundred and twenty
two hours of mist-netting and acoustic surveys at the Wappapello Weekend
Training Site area (about 15 miles east of the project area) during
summer 2000 did not capture any Indiana bats. Mist netting and Anabat
surveys were conducted on the Doniphan/Eleven Point District (about 30
miles from the western portion of the project site) during the summer of
2001. No Indiana bats were captured. The nearest hibernacula are located
approximately 27 air miles from the project area (one is southwest of
the project area, one is northwest of the project area). The nearest
capture site of a reproductively active female is approximately 48 air
miles from the project area. There are no known maternity colonies on
the Poplar Bluff Ranger District. However, because surveys that utilize
a combination of bat detection devices (e.g., Anabat) and mist nets have
apparently not been conducted within the project area and suitable
roosting habitat exists within the compartments scheduled for
management, the exact status of Indiana bat within the 2002 Tornado
Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement project area is unknown.
Without definitive survey data, Indiana bats are assumed to be present
in the project area during the summer and migration periods.

[Environmental Baseline]{.underline}

The environmental baseline for the MTNF was established and fully
described in detail on pages 7-16 of the Service=s June 23, 1999
Programmatic BO. Since issuance of the Service=s Programmatic BO, the
environmental baseline on the MTNF has changed. The percentage of trees
in the 50 years or older class has increased from 72% to 73% (956,841
acres to 970,131 acres) that includes a 4% increase of trees 90 years
old or older-old growth (159,474 acres to 212,631 acres). Additionally,
there has been a decrease of 11% to 9% in the 0-9 years old age class
(146,184 acres to 119,605). The relative percentages of the other two
age classes (20-49 years old and 10-19 years old) was unchanged. Other
changes relate to the decrease in timber harvest on the forest between
1996 and 2000. The average timber harvest on the MTNF has decreased from
an average annual harvest of 18,215 acres between 1986 and 1997 to
11,567 acres between 1997 and 2000. Between 1985 and 2000, the average
annual harvest volume on the MTNF was 55.3 million board feet of
commercial timber, which decreased to an annual harvest volume of 32
million board feet between 1998 and 2000.

Timber management practices utilized on the MNTF have also changed. Of
the 11,567 acres harvested annually on the MTNF between 1996 and 2000,
an average of 5,487 acres (47%) involved thinning, salvage, and
miscellaneous operations (e.g., firewood permits); 3,389 acres (29%)
included uneven-aged management (i.e., group selection, single tree
selection, and single tree selection with groups harvest technique); and
2,691 acres (23%) were associated with even-aged regeneration harvest
techniques (i.e., shelterwood, clearcut, and seedtree harvest methods).
Although approximately 9,300 acres of reforestation via natural
regeneration has occurred per year since 1986, the average of such
activities decreased to about 7,000 acres (\~25%) between 1998 and 2000.
Between 1986 and 1997, timber stand improvements (TSI) averaged about

3,850 acres per year. Since 1998, TSI activities averaged 1,938 acres
per year, a reduction of approximately 50%. Activities to benefit
wildlife (e.g., prescribed fires, tree planting in riparian corridors,
construction of ponds or waterholes, brushhogging, planting of food
plots, conversion of cool season grasses to native warm-season grasses,
etc.) decreased from an annual average of 9,000 acres between 1986 and
1997 to an annual average of approximately 6,000 acres (a reduction of
approximately 33%) between 1998 and 2000 (Jody Eberly, U.S. Forest
Service [in]{.underline} [litt]{.underline}. August 13 and 22, 2001).

Missouri has experienced severe weather in the spring of 2002. Several
tornados in 2002 have damaged timber stands on both private and public
lands in Missouri. Flooding has occurred in many drainages, uprooting
trees and causing other structural damage. Some land owners are removing
the downed timber in many areas and many are burning the wood that is
unsuitable for other products (e.g. sawlogs, firewood, etc.). However,
not all land owners (both public and private), can remove all or most of
the downed timber. Once the wood dries out, an unnaturally high fuel
loading in Missouri forests will have been created, and the risk of
catastrophic fire will increase.

Another situation is causing concern for the health of forests in
Missouri and Arkansas. Thousands of acres are being affected by oak
decline. Many large northern red, southern red, black, and scarlet oaks
are declining and dying. The reason for this problem is complex and is
not linked to any one cause but trees that are old (70 to 90 years), are
on shallow, rocky soils, ridgetops and upper slopes, and that have been
stressed from drought, are predisposed to decline. There are other
factors that contribute to this oak decline: red oak borers, twolined
chestnut borers, armillaria root rot, and others (from brochure AWhy are
the oak trees dying??@ produced by the USDA Forest Service 2001). The
oak decline problem will create habitat for the Indiana bat, but could
also pose a risk from catastrophic wildfire.

[Effects of the Action]{.underline}

Based on our analysis of information provided in your May 20, 2002, BE
for the 2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement, we
have determined that the potential effects of the proposed action are
consistent with those addressed in the Programmatic Biological Opinion
and are hereby incorporated by reference. Summering Indiana bats that
could occur within the project area or migrants could be potentially
impacted from the proposed activities. Adverse effects to the Indiana
bat from this project could occur from the removal of potential roost
trees (leaning or standing trees). The removal of downed trees will not
affect the Indiana bat. In addition to causing timber and other
structural damage, the tornado created suitable habitat for the Indiana
bat. Several snags were created and will not be removed unless they pose
a hazard to humans or other infrastructure. A more complete discussion
of these effects can be found in section D- Effects of the action
(direct and indirect effects), on pages 62-65 of the Service=s June 23,
1999 Programmatic BO.

Harm to Indiana bats could also occur if the removal of suitable roost
trees causes bats to abandon a traditionally used roost site. The
likelihood of cutting a tree containing an individual roosting Indiana
bat, however, is anticipated to be extremely low because of the rarity
of the species on this district and the large number of suitable roost
trees present on the MTNF.

Implementation of the terms and conditions associated with the
reasonable and prudent measures (RPMs) provided on pages 75-81 in the
Programmatic Biological Opinion will minimize any potential adverse
effects to the Indiana bat by maintaining suitable Indiana bat roosting
and foraging habitat.

[Conclusion]{.underline}

The actions and effects associated with the proposed 2002 Tornado
Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement are consistent with those
identified and discussed in the Service=s Programmatic BO. After
reviewing the size and scope of the project, the environmental baseline,
the status of Indiana bat and its potential occurrence within the
project area, the effects of the action; and any cumulative effects, it
is the Service=s biological opinion that this action is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of the Indiana bat.

[Incidental Take Statement]{.underline}

The Service anticipates that the proposed actions associated with the
2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement will result in
the incidental take of Indiana bat habitat (acres) as outlined in
Table 1. The type and amount of anticipated incidental take is
consistent with that described in the Programmatic BO and does not cause
the total annual level of incidental take (forested acres) in the
Programmatic BO (page 74) to be exceeded (Table 1).

The Forest Service must implement all pertinent reasonable and prudent
measures and implementing terms and conditions stipulated in the
Programmatic BO to minimize the impact of the anticipated incidental
take of Indiana bats, and to be exempt from the take prohibitions of
Section 9 of the Act.. We have determined that no new reasonable and
prudent measures, beyond those specified in the Programmatic BO, are
needed to minimize the impact of incidental take anticipated for the
2002 Tornado Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement. Implementing
the measures outlined in your conservation program for federally listed
species on the MTNF (approved March 2000) will further reduce potential
adverse effects on the Indiana bat.

This fulfills your consultation requirements for this action. Should the
proposed project be modified or if the level of take identified above is
exceeded, reinitiation of consultation as outlined in 50 CFR 402.16, is
required.

We appreciate your continued efforts to ensure that this project is
consistent with all provisions outlined in the Programmatic BO. If you
have any questions regarding our response or if you need additional
information, please contact Theresa Davidson at (417) 683-4428 ext. 113.

Sincerely,

> Charles M. Scott
>
> Field Supervisor

cc: Regional Director, USFWS, Fort Snelling, MN (ES) Attn: Jennifer
Szymanski

/media/pszemraj/PeterTrove/project-files/DATA/ms-word-files/big-DOC/562311.doc

**Table 1. Incidental take of Indiana bats for the 2002 Tornado
Project - Health and Safety Hazard Abatement (forested acres affected
annually) and its contribution to the cumulative totals for the Mark
Twain National Forest as outlined on page 74 of the Service=s
Programmatic Biological Opinion of June 23, 1999.**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
  **Action**        **FY 2002**       **FY 2003**       **Acres Exempted
                                                        Annually**

  **Timber          **292**           **150**           **20000**
  harvest**                                             

  **Cumulative**    **13684**         **13362**         
  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------