![](media/image2.png){width="1.0597222222222222in"
height="1.2097222222222221in"}United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Columbia Ecological Services Field Office

608 East Cherry Street, Room 200

Columbia, Missouri 65201

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

March 18, 2003

Mr. John C. Bisbee, District Ranger

Houston/Rolla/Cedar Creek Ranger District

Mark Twain National Forest

108 S. Sam Houston Blvd.

Houston, Missouri 65483

Dear Mr. Bisbee:

This letter is in response to your January 28, 2003, request for
site-specific review, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended, on the proposed Western Star Project on the
Houston/Rolla/Cedar Creek Ranger District (District) in Phelps County,
Missouri for the 2003 to 2012 planning period. 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 "tiered"
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*), and Topeka shiner (*Notropis topeka).* We concurred with
your determinations of "not 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 "likely 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 Western Star Project is a Tier 2 consultation. We have reviewed
the information contained in the Western Star Project Biological
Assessment (BA), submitted by your office on January 28, 2003,
describing the potential effects of the proposed project on the above
federally listed species.

We concur with your conclusion that there are no additional effects to
federally listed species associated with the Western Star Project 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 Hine's
emerald dragonfly (*Somatochlora hineana*), Indiana bat, gray bat,
scaleshell mussel (*Leptodea leptodon*) and bald eagle. As described in
the Service's Programmatic BO, we believe that adverse effects are
likely to occur to the Indiana bat. []{.mark}

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

The MTNF proposes to implement land management activities that are
consistent with the Forest Plan Management Prescription 3.5 and 3.4. The
purpose of activity within Management Prescription 3.5 is to restore the
native flatwood community with a crown closure of 50-70% and to meet
some of the needs of the Indiana bat. The purpose of activity in
Management Prescription 3.4 is to restore native flatwoods and increase
habitat diversity across the landscape. For a description of these
management prescriptions see the Mark Twain National Forest Land and
Resource Management Plan.

The land management activities in the Western Star Project area include
the following:

1)  Maintain and improve the existing Post Oak Flatwoods and savannas
    and improve Indiana bat foraging habitat.

    a.  Maintain 210 acres of existing unique post oak savanna by
        firewood removal and prescribed burning. No loose barked species
        would be cut by firewood removal.

2)  Enhance Post Oak Flatwoods and potential savannas and improve
    Indiana bat foraging habitat.

    a.  Restore savanna habitat by utilizing firewood removal and
        prescribed burning on 75 acres.

    b.  Utilize pre-commercial thinning and prescribed fire in an old 55
        acre clear-cut to increase the proportion and growth rates of
        post oaks.

3)  Improve diversity and reduce fuels in the Western Star area.

    a.  Utilize prescribed fire to reduce fuels on 900 acres (this
        includes the 340 acres already mentioned above).

4)  Associated and connected actions.

    a.  Approximately 2 miles of mechanical and/or hand line would be
        required. None of the mechanical lines would cross live water.
        Any steep firelines would be rehabilitated.

The MTNF has also provided the following resource protection measure to
eliminate prescribed burning effects to bald eagles, gray bats and
Indiana bats: No burning would occur if the wind is blowing out of the
east, southeast or south. If the area has already been ignited and the
wind direction changes to an undesirable direction, all new ignitions
would cease if it would be safe for fire fighters to do so, until the
wind direction changes again.

In addition to the MTNF's implementation of the RPMs and TCs in the
Programmatic BO and other protective measures, the following information
was considered in determining the projects effects on the bald eagle and
gray bat.

[]{.mark}

[Bald eagle:]{.underline} 1) The project area is approximately 8 air
miles southeast from the nearest active nest site; 2) the project area
is approximately 80 air miles northeast of the nearest known communal
roost; 3) Any sediment produced by project activities would not be of a
magnitude where the prey base will be affected; and 4) smoke from the
prescribed burns are not likely to displace bald eagles.

[]{.mark}

[Gray bat:]{.underline} 1) The project area is 8 miles northeast of the
nearest occupied bat cave; 2) there is a perennial stream in the project
area, however there is no riparian corridor that connects this perennial
stream and the nearest occupied gray bat cave; 3) smoke from the
prescribed burns are not likely to effect the gray bat; and; 4) any
sediment produced by the project activities would not be of a magnitude
where the prey base will be affected.

[]{.mark}

Based on the site-specific information above, we would concur with a
determination of "not likely to adversely affect" for the bald eagle and
gray bat. The Service also concurs with your determination that the
project will have "no effect" on the scaleshell mussel and Hine's
emerald dragonfly.

[]{.mark}

## Biological Opinion

[]{.mark}

The following biological opinion is based on likely adverse effects to
the Indiana bat from activities associated with the Western Star
Project. 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 Western Star Project and the
cumulative total of incidental take for the MTNF for the 2002-2003
planning seasons. It conforms to 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 105,420
Indiana bats were counted during surveys conducted in 2000 and 2001.
Surveys by Rick Clawson (Missouri Department of Conservation, email
March 14, 2003) show 93,955 Indiana bats in priority one caves and other
caves. This compares to the 117,270 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.

The Western Star Project are is approximately 3 air miles south of the
nearest Indiana bat hibernaculum, approximately 15 air miles northeast
of the nearest capture site of a reproductive female Indiana bat, and
approximately 130 air miles south of the nearest maternity colony. The
western portion (547 acres) of the project area is within an Indiana bat
area of influence (Management Prescription 3.5).

[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 year old age class
(146,184 acres to 119,605). The relative percentage 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 landowners 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 landowners (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 "Why 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 January 28, 2003,
BA for the Western Star Project, 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. The MTNF provided the following information regarding the
project and its effects to the Indiana bat:

1.  Implementation of the Western Star project would not remove any live
    potential roost trees greater than or equal to 26 inches in diameter
    at breast height (dbh);

2.  Implementation of the Western Star project would not remove any dead
    potential roost trees greater than or equal to 20 inches dbh;

3.  Implementation of the Western Star project would retain all the
    shagbark hickory, shellbark hickory, and lightening struck trees
    greater than or equal to 9 inches dbh. It would also retain all dead
    and dying trees greater than or equal to 9 inches dbh with at least
    10% exfoliating (any loose bark species) bark;

4.  Prescribed burning and/or firewood removal would help to provide the
    60-80 % canopy closure for ideal roosting sites;

5.  Prescribed burning and/or firewood removal would help to reduce the
    dense canopies in areas thereby allowing for better movement of
    Indiana bats in the area. It would maintain 321 acres of foraging
    habitat and improve 193 acres of foraging habitat;

6.  Implementation of the Western Star project would help to maintain
    the open to semi-open savanna like environment in which Indiana bats
    in the Ozarks evolved.

Migrating Indiana bats and bats that stay within the area of influence
(males and non-reproductive females) within the project area potentially
could be impacted from the proposed activities. Adverse effects to the
Indiana bat from this project could occur from removal of potential
roost trees in the firewood removal area. Timber stand improvement
activities could also result in removal of potential roost trees. 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. The prescribed burning will be conducted in
late winter or early spring when bats are still hibernating. The burns
will be conducted using the above mentioned resource protection measures
to push smoke away from the hibernaculum. The prescribed burns may also
have a beneficial effect by opening forest canopies and decreasing dense
understory vegetation that could inhibit bat movements to foraging
habitats and roosting sites. It is possible that some snags with
sloughing bark (potential roost trees) could be created by the
prescribed burn. Because surveys conducted on the MTNF have found no
reproductive Indiana bats, and since all maternity colonies in Missouri
have been found north of the Missouri River or within the floodplain of
the Mississippi River, it is highly unlikely that a maternity colony
exists in the project area. 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.

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 Western Star
Project 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
Western Star Project 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 **one new** reasonable and
prudent measure, beyond those specified in the Programmatic BO, is
needed to minimize the impact of incidental take anticipated for the
Western Star Project.

**Site Specific Reasonable and Prudent Measure:**

1.  Mark or pre-drop all trees that are available for firewood removal
    in the area of influence (Management area 3.5) to discourage
    firewood purchasers from taking suitable roost trees.

**Site Specific Term and Condition:**

1.  Periodically monitor firewood removal activities in the area of
    influence to ensure suitable roost trees are not removed.

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 extension
113.

Sincerely,

> Charles M. Scott
>
> Field Supervisor

cc: Field Supervisor, Indiana ESFO, Bloomington, IN

G:\\Davidson\\Western Star Project.doc

**Table 1. Incidental take of Indiana bats for the Western Star Project
(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.**

  --------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------------ ------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- ------------------------
                  **2003**    **2004**    **2005**   **2006**   **2007**   **2008**     **2009**      **2010**     **2011**     **2012**      **Acres exempted
                                                                                                                                              annually**

  **Timber        **10**      **10**      **10**     **10**     **15**     **15**       **15**        **15**       **15**       **15**        **20000**
  Removal \***                                                                                                                                

  **Cumulative    **15439**   **12123**   **4394**   **3741**   **3669**   **15\*\***   **15\*\***    **15\*\***   **15\*\***   **15\*\***    **\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
  Total**                                                                                                                                     

  **Prescribed    **790**     **0**       **0**      **790**    **0**      **0**        **790**       **0**        **0**        **790**       **12000**
  Fire\***                                                                                                                                    

  **Cumulative    **10014**   **11779**   **6309**   **5600**   **2846**   **0\*\***    **790\*\***   **0\*\***    **0\*\***    **790\*\***   **\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
  Total**                                                                                                                                     

  **Timber Stand  **0**       **18**      **18**     **20**     **0**      **0**        **0**         **0**        **0**        **0**         **4000**
  Improvement**                                                                                                                               

  **Cumulative    **3598**    **3878**    **3772**   **1720**   **870**    **0**        **0**         **0**        **0**        **0**         **\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
  Total**                                                                                                                                     
  --------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------------ ------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- ------------------------

**\*Some of the same acres may be treated more than once during the next
decade.**

**\*\*The Forest wide cumulative effects database does not cover the
years beyond 2007. Therefore the numbers shown just include the acreages
from the Western Star project.**

[]{.mark}

[]{.mark}