United States Department of the
Interior![](media/image1.png){width="1.4083333333333334in"
height="1.2097222222222221in"}![](media/image2.wmf){width="1.0576388888888888in"
height="1.2131944444444445in"}

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Missouri Ecological Services Field Office

608 East Cherry Street, Room 200

Columbia, Missouri 65201

Phone: (573) 876-1911 Fax: (573) 876-1914

March 9, 2001

Mr. Jerry Bird

District Ranger

U.S. Forest Service

1104 Walnut St.

Doniphan, Missouri 63935

Dear Mr. Bird:

This letter is in response to your February 9, 2001, request for
site-specific review, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended, of the proposed Prescribed Burning to Maintain
Open Woodland Conditions Biological Evaluation (Open Woodland BE) on the
Doniphan/Eleven Point District, in Carter, Oregon, Ripley, and Shannon
counties, Missouri, for the 2001-2006 planning seasons. On June 23,
1999, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) issued a programmatic
biological opinion for the Mark Twain=s National Forest (MTNF) Land
Resource Management Plan (LRMP). This programmatic biological opinion
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 the event of a Amay affect@ but Anot likely to
adversely affect@ determination, no further evaluation is necessary and
Section 7(a)(2) consultation will be considered completed for that
project.

In issuance of the programmatic biological opinion (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 biological
opinion evaluated the effects of Forest Service management program
activities, including prescribe burning, on the bald eagle (*Haliaeetis
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, 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 prescribed burning to
maintain open woodland conditions on the Doniphan/Eleven Point District
is a Tier 2 consultation. We have reviewed the information contained in
the Open Woodland BE, submitted by your office February 9, 2001,
describing the effects of the proposed project on the above federally
listed species.

We concur that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect
running buffalo clover or mead=s milkweed, and thus, no further
consultation is required for those species. We do not, however, concur
with your determination that the action is not likely to adversely
affect gray bat, Indiana bat, or bald eagle. In conducting our
evaluation, our review focused on determining whether: (1) this proposed
project falls within the scope the programmatic biological opinion
issued for MTNF=s LRMP, (2) the effects of this proposed action are
consistent with those anticipated in the Tier 1 programmatic biological
opinion, and (3), the appropriate terms and conditions associated with
the reasonable and prudent measures identified in the Tier 1 biological
opinion are adhered to. This letter also provides the level of
incidental take that is anticipated and a cumulative tally of incidental
take for the 2001-2006 planning seasons.

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

Although not specifically stated in your BE, we assume that the
preferred alternative is the proposed action (Alternative B). The
proposed action of the Open Woodland BE is to continue a disturbance
regime of low-intensity, frequent fire similar to the natural
disturbance pattern under which the shortleaf pine/oak woodlands of the
Ozarks evolved. Frequent, low-intensity fires will reduce fuel
accumulations and maintain habitat improvements already accomplished by
commercial thinning (i.e., timber harvest of selected individual trees)
and prescribe burning. The action is anticipated to increase
biodiversity within the units by maintaining health and vigor of a
variety of plant species, which in turn would provide a variety of food
and cover sources for wildlife. Fire frequency and intensity will be
planned to closely parallel historic fire patterns associated with Ozark
woodlands.

A prescribed burn of 1,032 acres annually is proposed for the 2001-2006
burning seasons (6,192 acres total) within the Open Woodland BE analysis
area to meet management objectives. The proposed prescribed burning is
necessary to maintain open woodland conditions on 21 burn units within
the Doniphan/Eleven Point District, in Carter, Oregon, Ripley, and
Shannon counties, Missouri. Within the project area, the 6,192 acres
(1,032 acres annually between 2001-2006) are forested acres affected and
are therefore counted toward the annual incidental take as outlined on
page 74 of the programmatic biological opinion. This type of management
prescription was described on page 12, and analyzed under the Effects
sections on pages 21 for gray bat, pages 33-35 for bald eagle, and pages
63-64 for Indiana bat in the programmatic biological opinion.

[Status of the Species]{.underline}

Species descriptions, life histories, population dynamics, status and
distributions are fully described on pages 16-20 for gray bat, pages
26-33 for bald eagle, and pages 40-62 for Indiana bat of the
programmatic biological opinion and are hereby incorporated by
reference.

[Environmental Baseline]{.underline}

The environmental baseline for the species listed above was fully
described on pages 6-16 of the programmatic biological opinion and is
hereby incorporated by reference.

In your BE of February 9, 2001, you concluded that occupied gray bat
caves occur within 0.5 miles of scheduled burn units. You also concluded
that wintering Bald Eagles use areas along the Current or Eleven Point
rivers that are within 2 miles of scheduled burn units, and that a
documented Bald Eagle communal night roost is within 5.5 miles of areas
to be burned. Finally, you determined that an occupied Indiana bat
hibernaculum occurs within 2.5 miles of areas scheduled for burning.
Indiana bats could occur within areas scheduled to be burned during the
winter hibernation season, during spring and fall migration, and during
summer months if males hibernating in White Creek=s Cave linger around
this hibernaculum. Gray bats could occur within the project area during
the winter hibernating season, during spring and fall migration, and
during the summer maternity season. Bald Eagles could occur within areas
scheduled to be burned during spring and fall migration and during the
wintering period (\~ November through March).

[Effects of the Action]{.underline}

Based on our analysis of information provided in your February 9, 2001
BE, we have determined that the adverse effects of the proposed action
are consistent with those contemplated in the programmatic biological
opinion. Even if precautions were taken to eliminate potential adverse
effects (e.g. assure that fires were conducted when the wind originated
from certain quadrants, or prevent prescribed fires during certain
seasons), we believe that there would be seasonal overlap in use by gray
bat, Bald Eagles, and Indiana bat within the scheduled 6,192 acres to be
burned.

Adverse effects to the Indiana bat from this project could occur from:
(1) the removal of potential roost trees which may be used by a
maternity colony (if such colonies do in fact occur within the Open
Woodland Be project area), summering males adjacent to White Creek=s
Creek Cave, migrants during spring and fall migration, or males and
females during the fall swarming period; and (2) prescribed fires on the
occasions listed above when bats are using trees for roosting, or when
prevailing winds drift smoke into occupied caves. Adverse effects to the
gray bat from this project could occur from prescribed fires on the
occasions listed above when prevailing winds drift smoke into occupied
caves. Adverse effects to Bald Eagles could occur when prevailing winds
drift smoke into areas along the Current and Eleven Point rivers used by
roosting eagles or eagles foraging along the river that originated from
adjacent communal night roosts.

Direct impacts to the Indiana bat may result in direct mortality or
injury to individuals or small groups of roosting bats during the
accidental burning of larger diameter trees that may harbor undetected
roosts (if, in fact, such roosts occur within the proposed action area),
or removal of potential roosting trees during and after the prescribed
fires (i.e., snags at or adjacent to the fire line that have become
safety hazards and require removal). The likelihood of cutting a tree
containing a maternity colony or individual roosting Indiana bat,
however, is anticipated to be extremely low because of the extremely
limited amount of potential tree removal, the large number of suitable
roost trees present on the MTNF, the rarity of the species on this
district, and the wide dispersal of Indiana bats and maternity colonies
throughout the species= range. Other direct effects could result if the
removal of suitable roost trees causes bats in a roosting or maternity
colony to abandon a traditionally used site. Additional stress could be
placed on pregnant females that are already expending energy. Lower
reproductive success or lower survival of young could also result with
forced abandonment of lactating females from occupied roosts.

However, 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 adverse effects to the
Indiana bat by maintaining suitable Indiana bat roosting and foraging
habitat and protecting Indiana bats from the potential effects of tree
removal activities.

Prescribed fires conducted during the Indiana bat summer season could
result in direct mortality due to an actual roost tree being incinerated
(especially non-volant young at a maternity colony) or adverse effects
caused by smoke inhalation (Elder and Gunier, 1981- see literature cited
on page 91 of programmatic biological opinion). Currently, 6,192 acres
are proposed for prescribed fire with the Open Woodland BE Project.
Burning would primarily occur between fall and spring during periods
Indiana bats are migrating, hibernating or using habitat adjacent to
White Creek=s Cave during the summer. Implementation of the terms and
conditions associated with the reasonable and prudent measures provided
on pages 76 and 79 in the Service=s programmatic biological opinion,
however, will minimize potential adverse effects to the species from
prescribed fire.

Additionally, prescribed fires will provide some beneficial effects to
the species by opening closed forest canopies, and by decreasing dense
understory vegetation that can inhibit movements to foraging habitats
and roosting sites.

Potential direct impacts to Indiana bat are expected to be minimal
because the only tree removal will be those that result from the use of
prescribed fire. Direct impacts to Indiana bats from prescribed burning
is also expected to be minimal due to the low density of Indiana bats
documented within the project area, the limited amount of suitable
roosting habitat (much of the area is open woodland habitat lacking tree
species of sufficient size or type conducive to suitable roosting
habitat), and due to the terms and conditions associated with the
reasonable and prudent measures outlined on pages 76 and 79 in the
programmatic biological opinion.

The only potential adverse effects to gray bats and Bald Eagles would be
direct effects from smoke inhalation due to smoke drifting on prevailing
winds into occupied gray bat caves or along the Eleven Point and Current
rivers where Bald Eagles roost and forage during the winter months.
Implementation of the terms and conditions associated with the
reasonable and prudent measures (RPMs) provided on pages 25, and 38-39
in the programmatic biological opinion, however, will minimize any
potential adverse effects to the gray bat and Bald Eagle, respectively.

The effects of this project were anticipated and analyzed in the
programmatic biological opinion and we do not anticipate any additional
adverse effects to occur. For further discussion of these effects see
pages 20-22, 33-35, 62-65 of the programmatic biological opinion.

[Conclusion]{.underline}

We believe the proposed Open Woodland prescribed fire is consistent with
the programmatic biological opinion. As such, for the reasons fully
explained on pages 20-23, 33-37, 62-72 of the programmatic biological
opinion, we believe the proposed Open Woodland prescribed fire project,
when considering the baseline status of gray bat, Bald Eagle, Indiana
bat; the effects of the action; and any cumulative effects; is not
likely to jeopardize continued existence of these species.

[Incidental Take Statement]{.underline}

The Service anticipates that the proposed action will result in the
Aincidental take@ of 6,192 forested acres (1,032 acres annually between
2001-2006). This anticipated level brings the cumulative total of
incidental take for MTNF=s 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006
planning seasons to 4,309, 6,745, 1,605, 1,365, 1,427, and 1,032 acres,
respectively. These levels are well within the 12,000 annual, forested
acres of incidental take anticipated and exempted for prescribed burning
in the programmatic biological opinion.

We determined in the programmatic biological opinion that the level of
anticipated and exempted take of gray bats, Bald Eagles, or Indiana bats
from the Open Woodland prescribed burns, in conjunction with the other
management actions taken by the MTNF to date under the LRMP, is not
likely to result in jeopardy to the species.

We understand that the Forest Service is implementing all pertinent
Indiana bat RPMs and implementing Terms and Conditions (TCs) stipulated
on pages 75-81of the programmatic biological opinion. As explained in
the programmatic biological opinion, these measures will minimize the
impact of the anticipated incidental take. We do not believe additional
RPMs or TCs than those currently specified in the programmatic
biological opinion are necessary in connection with this project.

Additionally, by implementing the conservation measures outlined in your
conservation program for federally listed species on the MTNF, developed
pursuant to sections 2(c)(1) and 7(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 and approved in March 2000, adverse effects to gray bat, Bald
Eagle, and Indiana bat will be further minimized.

This fulfills your section 7(a)(2) requirements for this action;
however, 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, should be promptly undertaken.

We appreciate your continued efforts to ensure that this project is
consistent with all provisions outlined in the programmatic biological
opinion. If you have any questions regarding our response or if you need
additional information, please contact Dr. Paul McKenzie at the phone
number listed above, at extension 107.

Sincerely yours,

> Charles M. Scott
>
> Field Supervisor

2001-0673:PM/FS