Appendix H 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical 

Study

In coordination with Oklahoma DOT 

 

Threatened and 

Endangered Species 

Technical Study 

Prepared by 

 

July 2016 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page iii 

TBG102114052932SCO

Contents 

Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. vii

1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 Service Type Descriptions .............................................................................................. 1-4

 Conventional Rail .......................................................................................................... 1-4 

 Higher-Speed Rail ......................................................................................................... 1-4 

 High-Speed Rail ............................................................................................................. 1-4 

1.2 Alternative Descriptions ................................................................................................. 1-5

 No Build Alternative ...................................................................................................... 1-5 

 Northern Section: Oklahoma City to Dallas and Fort Worth ....................................... 1-6 

 Central Section: Dallas and Fort Worth to San Antonio ............................................. 1-7 

 Southern Section: San Antonio to South Texas .......................................................... 1-9 

 Station Cities ............................................................................................................... 1-10 

2.0 Regulatory Context and Purpose ............................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 Evaluation Methods ................................................................................................................. 3-1

4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment .............................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Study Area ....................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Regional Environment .................................................................................................... 4-1

4.3 Regulatory Environment ................................................................................................. 4-1

 Federal ........................................................................................................................... 4-1 

 State Regulations ......................................................................................................... 4-4 

4.4 Sensitive Plants ............................................................................................................... 4-5

 Acres of Potential Sensitive Plant Occurrences .......................................................... 4-8 

4.5 Sensitive Wildlife .......................................................................................................... 4-13

 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................... 4-19 

 Fishes .......................................................................................................................... 4-20 

 Reptiles and Amphibians ........................................................................................... 4-20 

 Birds 4-20 

 Mammals .................................................................................................................... 4-20 

 Acres of Potential Sensitive Wildlife Occurrences .................................................... 4-21 

4.6 Critical Habitat .............................................................................................................. 4-28

5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species .................................................... 5-1

5.1 No Build Alternative ........................................................................................................ 5-1

5.2 Northern Section: Oklahoma City to Dallas and Fort Worth ......................................... 5-1

 Sensitive Plants ............................................................................................................ 5-1 

 Sensitive Wildlife ........................................................................................................... 5-1 

 Critical Habitat .............................................................................................................. 5-2 

 Construction Effects ..................................................................................................... 5-2
Contents 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page iv 

TBG102114052932SCO

 Operational Effects ....................................................................................................... 5-3 

5.3 Central Section (Dallas and Fort Worth to San Antonio) .............................................. 5-3

 Sensitive Plants ............................................................................................................ 5-3 

 Sensitive Wildlife ........................................................................................................... 5-3 

 Critical Habitat .............................................................................................................. 5-3 

 Construction Effects ..................................................................................................... 5-4

 Operational Effects ....................................................................................................... 5-4 

5.4 Southern Section – San Antonio to South Texas .......................................................... 5-4

 Sensitive Plants ............................................................................................................ 5-4 

 Sensitive Wildlife ........................................................................................................... 5-5 

 Critical Habitat .............................................................................................................. 5-5 

 Construction Effects ..................................................................................................... 5-6

 Operational Effects ....................................................................................................... 5-6 

5.5 Summary of Potential Effects ......................................................................................... 5-6

5.6 Subsequent Analysis and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Strategies ......... 5-7

6.0 References ............................................................................................................................... 6-1

7.0 Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 7-1

List of Figures 

1-1: Build Alternatives ............................................................................................................................ 1-2

4-1: Sensitive Plant Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 .............................................................. 4-10

4-2: Sensitive Plant Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 .............................................................. 4-11

4-3: Sensitive Plant Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 .............................................................. 4-12

4-4: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Central Section Alternatives ................................... 4-22

4-5: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Central Section Alternatives ................................... 4-23

4-6: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 .......................................................... 4-25

4-7: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 .......................................................... 4-26

4-8: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 .......................................................... 4-27

4-9: Critical Habitat – Northern Section Alternative .......................................................................... 4-29

List of Tables 

1-1: Alternatives Carried Forward for Further Evaluation ................................................................... 1-3

1-2: Cities with Potential Stations ....................................................................................................... 1-10

4-1: Sensitive Plant Species within EIS Study Area by Section and Alternative ................................. 4-5

4-2: Acres of Potential Sensitive Plant Occurrences within Southern Section EIS Study Area ........ 4-9

4-3: Sensitive Wildlife Species within EIS Study Area by Section and Alternative .......................... 4-13

4-4. Acres of Potential Sensitive Wildlife Occurrences within Central Section EIS Study Area ..... 4-21
TBG102114052932SCO

Contents 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page v 

4-5: Acres of Potential Sensitive Wildlife Habitat within Southern Section EIS Study Area .......... 4-24

5-1: Summary of Acres within EIS Study Area by Section and Alternative .......................................... 5-9

 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page vii 

TBG102114052932SCO

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

°F degrees Fahrenheit 

BMP best management practice 

BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

EIS environmental impact statement 

emerg. eff. emergency effect 

EMST Ecological Mapping Systems of Texas 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

FRA Federal Railroad Administration 

GIS geographic information system 

HrSR higher-speed rail 

HSR high-speed rail 

IH-35 Interstate Highway 35 

KCS Kansas City Southern 

Magnuson-Stevens Act Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act 

mph miles per hour 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NLCD National Land Cover Database 

NOAA Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine 

Fisheries Service 

ODOT Oklahoma Department of Transportation 

ODWC Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation 

Program Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Program 

REAP Regional Ecological Assessment Protocol 

Study Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study 

TAC Texas Administrative Code 

TPWD Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 
Acronyms and Abbreviations 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page viii 

TBG102114052932SCO

TRE Trinity Railway Express 

TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation 

TXNDD Texas Natural Diversity Database 

UPRR Union Pacific Railroad 

U.S.C. United States Code 

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-1 

1.0 Introduction 

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), along with the Federal Railroad Administration 

(FRA), is preparing a service-level environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate intercity 

passenger rail service alternatives for the Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Program (Program). The 

purpose of the Program is to enhance intercity mobility by providing enhanced passenger rail 

service as a transportation alternative that is competitive with automobile, bus, and air travel. 

Preparation of the service-level EIS, in support of which this technical study has been prepared, is 

one of two primary objectives of the Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study (Study). In addition to 

the service-level EIS, TxDOT and FRA are preparing a service development plan for the corridor to 

guide further development and capital investment in passenger rail improvements identified in the 

EIS Record of Decision. The Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) is a partnering state 

agency for the Study and the EIS. 

The 850-mile corridor analyzed for the Study runs north-south and roughly parallels Interstate 

Highway 35 (IH-35), with the northern point in Edmond, Oklahoma (i.e., northern end of the 

Oklahoma City portion of the corridor), and the southern end in south Texas, potentially in Corpus 

Christi, Brownsville, Laredo, or the Rio Grande Valley, as shown on Figure 1-1. For this service-level 

analysis, a preliminary alignment was developed to represent each EIS alternative, based on 

conceptual engineering that considered and avoided obvious physical or environmental constraints. 

These alignments were not refined to optimize performance, reduce cost, avoid specific properties 

or individual environmental resources, or for any other such considerations. If an alternative is 

selected at the service-level for further development, the above considerations would be assessed 

at the project level. A broad corridor of study with a width of 500 feet has been identified along 

each route (EIS Study Area). This EIS Study Area provides an envelope that could accommodate 

areas for associated effects, including necessary roadway shifts, grade separations, construction 

activities, and affiliated features such as stations and parking, traction-power substations, power 

lines, and maintenance-of-way facilities. The area for which data were collected is identified as the 

Study Vicinity. Typically, county-wide data were collected for counties partially or completely within 

the Study Area. 

The analysis provides quantitative information about threatened and endangered species within 

the EIS Study Area for each alternative and compares it against the No Build Alternative and other 

build alternatives in the same geographic region. The discussion of effects also provides qualitative 

differences in permanent, temporary, and direct and indirect effects that are associated with the 

service type (conventional rail, higher-speed rail, or high-speed rail) relative to the environmental 

context. However, because the 500-foot EIS Study Area does not represent the actual footprint of 

operation or construction phases, the analysis is primarily comparative, based on the presence of 

the resource within the EIS Study Area and the likelihood of effects as appropriate for this servicelevel analysis. 
1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-2 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 1-1: Build Alternatives 
TBG102114052932SCO

1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-3 

The build alternatives are divided into the following three geographic sections based on the key 

regional markets that could be served by passenger rail improvements: 

 Northern Section: Oklahoma City to Dallas and Fort Worth 

 Central Section: Dallas and Fort Worth to San Antonio 

 Southern Section: San Antonio to South Texas 

In addition, the alternatives consist of both a route, which refers to the specific corridor that a 

potential alignment follows, and a service type, which refers to the speed or category of rail 

transportation (conventional rail, higher-speed rail, or high-speed rail). The alternatives that have 

been carried forward for analysis in the EIS, including their geographic sections, routes, and service 

types, are listed in Table 1-1. 

Table 1-1: Alternatives Carried Forward for Further 

Evaluation 

Route Service Type a 

Northern Section 

N4A CONV 

Central Section 

C4A 

HrSR 

HSR 

C4B 

HrSR 

HSR 

C4C 

HrSR 

HSR 

Southern Section 

S4 HrSR 

S6 

HrSR 

HSR 

a CONV = conventional rail (up to 79 to 90 miles per hour [mph]); 

HrSR = higher-speed rail (up to 110 to 125 mph); HSR = high-speed 

rail (up to 220 to 250 mph) 

The route alternatives were based on the alignments of existing transportation networks with 

corridors potentially suitable for passenger rail operations1 (i.e., the existing railroad network and 

the existing interstate highway network, or they were located on new alignments outside existing 

 

1 The term “operations” includes maintenance of the facilities as well. 
1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-4 

TBG102114052932SCO

transportation corridors. Potential alignments described as “following” railway corridors share 

existing tracks, are located within an existing right-of-way, or are generally adjacent to existing 

tracks, depending on the service type. Alternatives that are outside the existing transportation 

corridor could have greater indirect effects than those located in the existing transportation 

corridor; for example, alternatives outside existing corridors could divide neighborhoods or wildlife 

communities or create a potential new barrier. 

1.1 Service Type Descriptions 

The three service types (conventional rail, higher-speed rail, and high-speed rail) considered in this 

EIS are described below. 

Conventional Rail 

Conventional rail typically includes diesel-powered, steel-wheeled trains operating on steel tracks. 

Roadway crossings may be grade-separated depending on the type of roadway and amount of 

traffic, and rail rights-of-way may be fenced. Conventional rail would be operated at speeds up to 

79 to 90 miles per hour (mph) and would mostly use existing railroad rights-of-way. For 

conventional rail alternatives, existing railroad track may be used, or in some cases, modifications 

such as double-tracking could be constructed within the existing right-of-way to accommodate 

additional trains. 

Higher-Speed Rail 

Higher-speed rail is similar to conventional rail in several respects. In many cases, higher-speed rail 

trains can run on the same steel tracks that support conventional rail, but higher speeds can 

require improvements such as upgrading wooden ties with concrete ties, improving signaling, and 

upgrading roadway crossings. In this case, higher-speed rail trains are assumed to be dieselpowered. Higher-speed rail would be operated at speeds up to 110 to 125 mph. Where proposed 

within an existing railroad right-of-way, a shared right-of-way with separate tracks for freight and 

passenger services would be constructed. Because of its maximum speed and because train 

frequency would be similar to conventional rail, higher-speed rail could operate on a single track 

with passing locations and would not require double-tracking. Where higher-speed rail is proposed 

outside an existing transportation corridor, the new alignment would be designed with curves and 

other features that could accommodate high-speed rail service if warranted by ridership and 

economic feasibility in the future. However, unlike high-speed rail, the design would not include 

electrification or a full double track, and some grade crossings would remain. 

High-Speed Rail 

High-speed rail includes electric trains powered by an overhead power supply system. Train sets are 

steel wheel on steel rail, but are designed to operate at high speeds with an aerodynamic shape, 
TBG102114052932SCO

1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-5 

and suspension and braking systems are designed for high-speed travel. High-speed rail would be 

operated at speeds up to 220 to 250 mph. The entire right-of-way would be fenced and fully gradeseparated. The alignment would be electrified and double-tracked. This service type could only 

reach its maximum speeds outside existing transportation corridors because existing railroad 

alignments are not compatible with the speeds required and they do not have the required space 

for separation of freight and high-speed rail. In areas where this service type is within existing 

transportation corridors, it would operate at lower speeds. 

1.2 Alternative Descriptions 

For this service-level analysis, a preliminary alignment was developed to represent each route 

alternative, based on conceptual engineering that considered obvious physical or environmental 

constraints. They are not detailed alignments that have been refined to optimize performance, 

reduce cost, avoid specific properties or individual environmental resources, or similar 

considerations, which would be assessed at the project-level phase for alternatives carried forward 

for further analysis. 

The alternatives evaluated in the service-level EIS, shown on Figure 1-1, have been developed to a 

level of detail appropriate for a service-level analysis: the route alternatives represent a potential 

corridor where rail improvements could be implemented but do not specify the precise location of 

the track alignment. When a route alternative is refined to include a service type (conventional, 

higher-speed, or high-speed rail), it is then referred to as an alternative. Alternatives in the 

Northern, Central, and Southern sections could be built as individual, stand-alone projects or in 

combination with alternatives in another section. In addition, more than one alternative in the 

Central Section and Southern Section could be built in the future because the alternatives provide 

different service types for independent destinations. Details on connecting the alternatives would 

be determined during project-level studies. 

Potential alignments are described below in terms of nearby transportation corridors and cities. 

The Southern Section alternatives include a potential extension to Monterrey, Mexico. The EIS 

evaluates alignment corridors only within the United States; however, the potential extension to 

Monterrey has been included for ridership analysis purposes, and FRA and TxDOT have initiated 

coordination with the Mexican government about the potential extension. 

No Build Alternative 

The No Build Alternative would not fulfill the Program’s purpose and need but is carried forward as 

a baseline alternative against which the build alternatives are compared. The No Build Alternative 

would consist of the existing transportation network, including roadway, passenger rail, and air 

travel in the Study Vicinity and committed improvements to these systems. The No Build Alternative 

includes existing and planned roadway, passenger rail, and air travel in the Study Vicinity (including 

operation, maintenance, and expansion). Information was collected from current regional 

transportation plans within the Study Vicinity and websites describing services such as train 
1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-6 

TBG102114052932SCO

schedules. These improvements and their evaluation at this service-level stage would require 

project-specific assessment. Conducting detailed project-specific assessments at this stage of the 

program development process is not feasible, except from a cumulative analysis perspective as 

included in the service-level EIS. 

Northern Section: Oklahoma City to Dallas and Fort Worth 

Due to feasibility based on initial ridership and cost information, only one route alternative with one 

service type was considered feasible in the Northern Section: Alternative N4A with conventional rail. 

1.2.2.1 Alternative N4A Conventional Rail 

Alternative N4A would begin in Edmond, Oklahoma, and follow 

the BNSF rail alignment south to Oklahoma City. The alternative 

would continue south along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe 

(BNSF) rail alignment to Norman, Oklahoma; through Metro 

Junction, near Denton, Texas; and on to Fort Worth (as does the 

Heartland Flyer). From Fort Worth, the alternative would 

continue east to Dallas following the Trinity Railway Express 

(TRE) tracks. From Edmond, Oklahoma to Dallas, the route 

would be approximately 260 miles long. Because existing freight 

traffic would not preclude passenger service along this section 

of track, the route would provide passenger rail service on the 

existing BNSF track, with potential improvements within the 

existing BNSF right-of-way. 

Alternative N4A would provide several improvements over the 

existing Heartland Flyer service. Alternative N4A would increase 

the number of daily round trips along this route (the Heartland 

Flyer currently offers one round trip per day), and the N4A route 

would extend from Fort Worth to Dallas without requiring a 

transfer (the Heartland Flyer service currently terminates in Fort Worth). In addition, Alternative N4A 

would provide improvements to existing station facilities and new train equipment with more 

onboard amenities, including business class available for a premium price. 

Alternative N4A assumes diesel-locomotive hauled equipment running three to six daily round trips. 

Two or three of the round trips would operate on an accelerated schedule, making roughly seven 

stops, with the remaining local trains making up to 12 stops.
TBG102114052932SCO

1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-7 

Central Section: Dallas and Fort Worth to San Antonio 

Three route alternatives, each with higher-speed and high-speed rail options, were evaluated in the 

Central Section: Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C. 

The Central Section alternatives would provide several improvements over the existing Texas Eagle 

service in this corridor. All of the alternatives would increase the number of daily round trips along 

this route (the Texas Eagle currently offers one round trip per day). The high-speed options would 

provide faster service between Dallas and Fort Worth and Antonio – 2 hours versus 8 hours for the 

Texas Eagle Service. In addition, the Central Section alternatives would provide improvements to 

existing station facilities and new train equipment. 

1.2.3.1 Alternative C4A Higher-Speed and High-Speed Rail 

Alternative C4A would begin in Fort Worth and follow the TRE 

tracks east to Dallas. From Dallas, it would follow the BNSF 

alignment south toward Waxahachie where it would enter a 

new alignment outside existing highway and rail corridors to 

accommodate maximum operating speeds. Though outside 

existing transportation corridors, the southern portion of 

Alternative C4A would generally follow the BNSF alignment for 

about 250 miles, traveling south from Waxahachie through 

Hillsboro, Waco, Temple, Taylor, and Austin to San Antonio. 

Alternative C4A Higher-Speed Rail assumes new highperformance diesel-locomotive hauled equipment running six to 

12 daily round trips. Express trains would likely make seven 

stops, and local trains would make up to 12 stops. 

Alternative C4A High-Speed Rail assumes true electric-powered, 

high-speed service running 12 to 20 daily round trips. Express 

trains would likely make six stops, and local trains would make 

up to nine stops. 
1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-8 

TBG102114052932SCO

1.2.3.2 Alternative C4B Higher-Speed and High-Speed Rail 

Alternative C4B would serve both Fort Worth and Dallas, with 

trains following a new elevated high-speed rail alignment over 

IH-30. In Arlington (between Dallas and Fort Worth), the 

alternative would turn south to Hillsboro on an alignment outside 

existing transportation corridors. The alternative would then 

follow the same high-speed rail alignment as Alternative C4A 

from Hillsboro to San Antonio. 

Alternative C4B Higher-Speed Rail assumes new highperformance diesel-locomotive hauled equipment running six to 

12 daily round trips. Express trains would likely make seven 

stops, and local trains would make up to 12 stops. 

Alternative C4B High-Speed Rail assumes true electric-powered, 

high-speed service running 12 to 20 daily round trips. Express 

trains would likely make six stops, and local trains would make 

up to eight stops. 

1.2.3.3 Alternative C4C Higher-Speed and High-Speed Rail 

Alternative C4C would follow the same potential alignment as 

Alternative C4A from Fort Worth east to Dallas and south to San 

Antonio, but would include a link from Hillsboro directly to Fort 

Worth parallel to the UPRR alignment. Service on the Alternative 

C4C route would operate in a clockwise direction, running from 

Hillsboro to Fort Worth, to Dallas, back to Hillsboro, and south to 

San Antonio in order to serve Fort Worth directly (while also 

being compatible with the general service for Alternative C4A). 

Alternative C4C Higher-Speed Rail assumes new highperformance diesel-locomotive hauled equipment running six to 

12 daily round trips. Express trains would likely make seven 

stops, and local trains would make up to 12 stops. 

Alternative C4C High-Speed Rail assumes true electric-powered 

high-speed service running 12 to 20 daily round trips. Express 

trains would likely make six stops, and local trains would make 

up to nine stops. 
TBG102114052932SCO

1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-9 

Southern Section: San Antonio to South Texas 

Two route alternatives were evaluated in the Southern Section: Alternative S4, with higher-speed 

rail, and Alternative S6, with higher-speed and high-speed rail options. 

1.2.4.1 Alternative S4 Higher-Speed Rail 

Alternative S4 would begin in San Antonio and travel southeast 

along the UPRR alignment to George West, where it would 

continue outside existing transportation corridors to Alice. At 

Alice, the alternative would divide into three legs at a stop. The 

first leg would travel west along the Kansas City Southern (KCS) 

Railway to San Diego, Texas; it would then travel outside existing 

transportation corridors to east of Laredo in an alignment that 

would allow higher speeds and rejoin the KCS Railway to enter 

the highly developed Laredo area. The second leg would travel 

south along abandoned railroad tracks to McAllen and east to 

Harlingen and Brownsville. The third leg would travel east along 

the KCS Railway to Corpus Christi. 

Alternative S4 assumes new high-performance diesel-locomotive 

hauled equipment running four to six daily round trips. 

Depending on corridor demand model forecasts, the primary 

service may be designated as Laredo-Alice-San Antonio and 

Corpus Christie-Alice-San Antonio, with a connecting feeder from 

Brownsville, Harlingen, and McAllen. 

1.2.4.2 Alternative S6 Higher-Speed and High-Speed Rail 

Alternative S6 would begin in San Antonio and travel south on a 

new alignment outside existing transportation corridors to a 

station near the Laredo-Columbia Solidarity Bridge, which 

crosses the Rio Grande north of Laredo. The alternative would 

then cross on a new railway bridge to join a new rail line being 

constructed in Mexico, which would continue to Monterrey. This 

study only examines the physical effects of the U.S. component 

of this new line, but it does consider the ridership effect of such 

a connection. 

Alternative S6 Higher-Speed Rail assumes new highperformance diesel-locomotive hauled equipment running four 

to six daily round trips between San Antonio and Laredo, which 

would be the only United States stops for the alternative. If an 
1.0 Introduction 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 1-10 

TBG102114052932SCO

extension from Laredo to Monterrey is added, the frequency of trips to Monterrey is assumed to be 

the same as those from San Antonio to Laredo. 

Alternative S6 High-Speed Rail assumes true electric-powered, high-speed service running eight to 

12 daily round trips between San Antonio and Laredo. If an extension from Laredo to Monterrey is 

added, the frequency of trips to Monterrey is assumed to be the same as those from San Antonio to 

Laredo. 

Station Cities 

The study does not evaluate specific station locations, and no conclusion about the exact location 

of stations will be made as part of the service-level EIS process. However, based on ridership data 

and transit connectivity information developed as part of the Alternatives Analysis (TxDOT 2014), 

and based on stakeholder input, the cities in which stations would most likely be located have been 

assumed. The size and design of stations would be appropriate for the service type and the route of 

the alternative. Cities that could have stations are listed in Table 1-2. 

Table 1-2: Cities with Potential Stations 

Oklahoma 

Edmond Pauls Valley 

Oklahoma City Ardmore 

Norman 

Texas 

Gainesville Austin 

Fort Worth San Antonio 

Arlington Alice 

Dallas Corpus Christi 

Waxahachie Harlingen 

Waco McAllen 

Temple (also serving Killeen) Brownsville 

Taylor Laredo 
TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 2-1 

2.0 Regulatory Context and Purpose 

FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts states: “The EIS should address both 

construction period and long-term impacts of alternatives on wildlife and vegetation in the affected 

environment. Where an alternative proposes to control or modify a stream or other body of water in 

some way, it shall contain evidence of consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

and with the agencies exercising administration over the wildlife resources of affected States, as 

required by section 2(a) of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16. U.S.C 662(a),” and “If 

applicable, the EIS shall discuss the impacts of the alternatives on endangered or threatened 

species of wildlife. The Department of the Interior lists such species in 50 CFR Part 17. There 

should be evidence of consultation with the Department of the Interior as required by Section 7 of 

the Endangered Species Act, 16 United States Code (U.S.C.) 1536.” (64 Federal Register 28545). 

The purpose of this technical study is to identify habitats and documented occurrences of federally 

and state-listed threatened and endangered species of flora and fauna within the EIS Study Area. 

This study identifies areas where these resources could be potentially affected by Program 

alternatives. 

TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 3-1 

3.0 Evaluation Methods 

The methodology used for the threatened and endangered plant and animal species effect 

evaluation consists of a combination of qualitative and quantitative assessments. A qualitative 

assessment was used for general comparisons of the Study alternatives when discussing issues 

such as the significance of effects or other issues that require a more detailed approach than 

warranted for in this technical report. A more detailed quantification of potential effects and 

biological analysis would occur during the project-level analysis. For each alternative, general 

conclusions are generated to support the relative predicted change in effects among the 

alternatives. The No Build Alternative is the primary basis of comparison. The intensity of an effect 

as a result of the build alternatives is characterized as negligible, moderate, or substantial 

compared to the No Build alternative. For threatened and endangered species, these terms are 

defined as follows: 

 Negligible intensity effects from construction and operation of an alternative would have no 

effect on threatened and endangered species or their designated critical habitat. 

 Moderate intensity effects from construction and operation of an alternative may affect, but 

would not likely adversely affect, threatened and endangered species or their designated critical 

habitat. 

 Substantial intensity effects from construction and operation of an alternative may affect and 

would likely adversely affect threatened and endangered species or their designated critical 

habitat. 

Readily available information, including special-status species occurrence data and mapped critical 

habitat, was used to quantitatively assess the potential magnitude of effects in the 500-foot-wide 

EIS Study Area for each build alternative. To evaluate the potential effects on threatened and 

endangered species, the following acreages were quantified: 

 The locations and acreages of special-status plant and animal species occurrences within the 

EIS Study Area were determined. The analysis represents only known occurrences within the EIS 

Study Area, based on available data. Potential habitats for listed species would be more 

widespread and would be determined during focused surveys during the project-level analysis. 

The data used for analysis of the corridor within Texas were obtained from the 2011 

Environmental Occurrences for Federal and State Listed and Tracked Threatened, Endangered, 

and Rare Species spatial dataset, acquired from the Texas Natural Diversity Database (TXNDD) 

(Michael Baker Jr., Inc. 2012). Federally and state-listed species in the portion of the EIS Study 

Area in Oklahoma were identified through a review of the county-by-county list of endangered 

and threatened species published by Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC). 

For the service-level analysis of threatened and endangered plant and animal species, only 

TXNDD data and the county-by-county list were used. Based on direction received from TxDOT 

regarding the methods of analysis for each of the environmental disciplines that were 

considered and included in the service-level EIS, data acquired via the Ecological Mapping 
3.0 Evaluation Methods 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 3-2 

TBG102114052932SCO

Systems of Texas (EMST), the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) and composite data from 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Regional Ecological Assessment Protocol 

(REAP) were included in the Natural Ecological Systems and Wildlife Technical Study and 

corresponding EIS section (CH2M 2016). Such data were used to assess the potential 

magnitude, or intensity, of the effects on land use coverage, ecoregions, wildlife corridors and 

assemblages, and sensitive plant communities and not incorporated within the threatened and 

endangered species analysis. During subsequent, project-level analysis, data from EMST, NLCD 

and REAP, as well as data from TXNDD and ODWC, will be used to determine if habitat is 

present within the study area of a preferred alternative and will be used to conduct a detailed 

analysis to determine actual effects on threatened and endangered species and habitats. 

 The acreage of potential critical habitat within the EIS Study Area within the state of Texas was 

determined using data from the TXNDD. Critical habitat spatial data for the portion of the EIS 

Study Area in Oklahoma were acquired from the ODOT High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail IH35 data collection report (Meshek & Associates Inc. 2013).
TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-1 

4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

4.1 Study Area 

As a first step in the threatened and endangered species effect analysis, a geographic information 

system (GIS) database in ARC/View was used to identify existing resources within the EIS Study 

Area, an approximately 850-mile-long corridor. The extent of the threatened and endangered 

species effect analysis conducted for the Northern, Central and Southern sections, including route 

alternatives and station locations, was limited to a 500-foot-wide buffer along the corridor. It is 

important to note that the EIS Study Area is not the actual area of effect associated with 

construction and operation of any of the alternatives. For example, the construction of a passenger 

rail alignment can reasonably occur within a 100-foot-wide right-of-way. The purpose of this servicelevel analysis is to use the EIS Study Area to determine the types of resources that may be affected, 

and the relative magnitude of resources that may be affected. 

4.2 Regional Environment 

The EIS Study Area spans over 850 miles, from central Oklahoma to southern Texas. The Program 

encompasses a broad geographic area with climates that include semi-arid, humid subtropical, and 

modified subtropical conditions. The EIS Study Area generally crosses through low-elevation basins 

and valleys associated with the rolling Great Plains in the northern part of the Program corridor and 

the Coastal Plains in the southern part. Land cover types within the corridor include developed land 

and vegetated land with open grasslands, agricultural land, shrubland, and forests. The climate is 

characterized by a regime of moderate to hot summer drought and winter rain. Winter rain occurs 

as a result of low-pressure depressions associated with Pacific and Arctic fronts (University of 

Oklahoma 2014; Texas Climate Data 2014). Precipitation in the Northern Section averages about 

48 inches per year near Oklahoma City and 37 inches near the Dallas and Fort Worth area. In the 

Central Section, precipitation averages 36 inches in Waco to 34 inches in Austin. In the Southern 

Section, annual precipitation ranges from 32 inches in San Antonio to 20 inches in Laredo. 

Precipitation is generally rain except during winter in the Northern Section, where it can snow. The 

daily high temperature ranges, on average, from 50 to 94 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in the Northern 

Section to 67 to 100°F in the Southern Section; however, temperatures over 100°F are common 

in summer throughout the entire EIS Study Area (U.S. Climate Data 2014). 

4.3 Regulatory Environment 

Applicable federal and state legislation, regulations, and orders pertaining to federally and state 

listed threatened and endangered species within the EIS Study Area are summarized below. 

Federal 

4.3.1.1 Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544 and 42 U.S.C. §4321, et seq.) 

The purpose of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is to protect and recover imperiled species and 

the ecosystems upon which they depend. USFWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-2 

TBG102114052932SCO

Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) administer the ESA. USFWS has 

primary responsibility for terrestrial and freshwater organisms; the responsibilities of NOAA 

Fisheries are mainly marine wildlife including whales and anadromous fish, such as salmon. Under 

the ESA, species may be listed as either endangered or threatened. “Endangered” means a species 

is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. “Threatened” means a 

species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. All species of plants and 

animals, except pest insects, are eligible for listing if they meet the criteria for endangered or 

threatened classification. The ESA and subsequent amendments provide guidance for conserving 

federally listed species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The following are applicable 

sections of the ESA: 

 Section 4 (Listing, Critical Habitat and Recovery). Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. Section 1533) 

includes the procedures for listing a species and requires species to be listed as endangered or 

threatened solely on the basis of their biological status and threats to their existence. When 

evaluating a species for listing, USFWS considers five factors: (1) damage to, or destruction of, a 

species’ habitat; (2) overutilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 

educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) inadequacy of existing protection; and (5) 

other natural or manmade factors that affect the continued existence of the species. When one 

or more of these factors imperils the survival of a species, USFWS takes action to protect it. 

Section 4 also requires USFWS and NOAA Fisheries to designate critical habitat for any species 

it lists under the ESA. Critical habitat is defined as specific areas: 

- Within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing, if they contain 

physical or biological features essential to conservation, and those features may require 

special management considerations or protection 

- Outside the geographical area occupied by the species if the agency determines that the 

area is essential for conservation 

Section 4 of the ESA directs USFWS and NOAA Fisheries to develop and implement recovery 

plans for threatened and endangered species, unless such a plan would not promote 

conservation of the species. 

 Section 7 (Interagency Consultation and Biological Assessments). Section 7 of the ESA (16 

U.S.C. Section 1536) requires federal agencies to consult with USFWS or NOAA Fisheries, as 

appropriate, so actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of threatened or endangered fish, wildlife, or plant species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for any such species. 

“Destruction or adverse modification” means a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably 

diminishes the value of critical habitat for the conservation of a listed species. Such alterations 

may include those that alter the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of a 

species or that preclude or significantly delay development of such features. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-3 

TBG102114052932SCO

 Section 9 (Prohibited Acts). Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. Section 1538) and its implementing 

regulations prohibit the “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed under the ESA as endangered 

or threatened, unless otherwise authorized by federal regulations. Take includes the destruction 

of a listed species’ habitat. Take also refers to activities that could harm a listed species (e.g., 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage 

in any such conduct). Section 9 also prohibits specific activities with respect to endangered and 

threatened plants. 

 Section 10 (Permitting and Conservation Plans). Section 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. Section 1539) 

provides a process by which nonfederal entities may obtain an Incidental Take Permit from 

USFWS or NOAA Fisheries for otherwise lawful activities that might incidentally result in the take 

of endangered or threatened species, subject to specific conditions. Take refers to activities 

that could result in harm to a listed species (e.g., harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, 

trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct). 

4.3.1.2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934 (16 U.S.C. Sections 661 to 667e et seq.) 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act applies to any federal project where any body of water is 

impounded, diverted, deepened, or otherwise modified. Project proponents are required to consult 

with USFWS and the appropriate state wildlife agencies (ODWC and Texas Parks and Wildlife 

Department [TPWD]). 

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act provides the basic authority for USFWS’ involvement in 

evaluating impacts on fish and wildlife from proposed water resource development projects. It 

requires that fish and wildlife resources receive equal consideration to other project features. It 

also requires federal agencies that construct, license, or permit water resource development 

projects to first consult with USFWS (and NOAA Fisheries in some instances) and state fish and 

wildlife agencies regarding the impacts on fish and wildlife resources and measures to mitigate 

these impacts. 

4.3.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. Sections 703 to 712) 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects selected species of birds that cross international 

boundaries (i.e., species that occur in more than one country at some point during their life cycle). 

The law prohibits the take of such species, including the removal of nests, eggs, and feathers. 

The MBTA makes it illegal for anyone to take, possess, import, export, transport, sell, purchase, 

barter, or offer for sale, purchase, or barter, any migratory bird, or the parts, nests, or eggs of such 

a bird except under the terms of a valid permit issued pursuant to federal regulations. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-4 

TBG102114052932SCO

4.3.1.4 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. Sections 668 to 668d, 50 Code of 

Federal Regulations 22) 

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibits the destruction of bald and golden eagles and 

their occupied and unoccupied nests. It also makes it illegal to take, transport, or possess eagles or 

engage in commerce of these species. 

4.3.1.1 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) 

(16 U.S.C. §§ 1801-1884) 

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) is the 

primary law governing marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters. First passed in 1976, 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act fosters long-term biological and economic sustainability of our nation's 

marine fisheries out to 200 nautical miles from shore. 

State Regulations 

 Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Code (Oklahoma Statue Title 29). This statute gives the state 

the authority to list a wildlife species as threatened or endangered within Oklahoma, although it 

might not be classified as federally threatened or endangered through the ESA. At the present 

time, four wildlife species are listed as state-threatened or state-endangered in Oklahoma. 

“Endangered” refers to any wildlife species or subspecies in the wild or in captivity whose 

prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy and includes those species 

listed as endangered by the federal government, as well as any species or subspecies identified 

as threatened by Oklahoma statute or Commission resolution, as outlined in Oklahoma Statute 

Title 29 (Laws 1974, c. 17, §2-109, emergency effect [emerg. eff.] April 8, 1974; Laws 1985, c. 

172, §1, emerg. eff. June 18, 1985). State regulations also prohibit possession, hunting, 

chasing, harassing, and capture, shooting at, wounding or killing, take or attempt to take, trap 

or attempting to trap any endangered or threatened species or subspecies without specific 

written permission of the Director. In no event, however, may that permission conflict with 

federal law. Added by Laws 1974, c. 17, §5-412, emerg. eff. April 8, 1974. Amended by Laws 

1985, c. 172, §3, emerg. eff. June 18, 1985; Laws 1992, c. 149, §8, emerg. eff. April 30, 

1992; Laws 2010, c. 80, §3, emerg. eff. April 12, 2010. 

 Texas Parks and Wildlife Code Chapters 6 and 68 and 31 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 

§65.171-65.176. The Texas legislature authorized TPWD to establish a list of endangered 

animals in the state in 1973. State regulations prohibit the taking, possession, transportation, 

or sale of any of the animal species designated as endangered or threatened without the 

issuance of a permit, as outlined in Chapters 6 and 68 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code as 

well as 31 TAC §65.171-65.176. Endangered species are those species the executive director 

of TPWD has named as being threatened with statewide extinction. Threatened species are 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-5 

TBG102114052932SCO

those species which the TPWD Commission has determined are likely to become endangered in 

the future. 

 Texas Parks and Wildlife Code Chapter 88 and 31 TAC §69.01-69.9. These state regulations 

prohibit commerce in threatened and endangered plants and prohibit collection of listed plant 

species from public land without the issuance of a permit. 

4.4 Sensitive Plants 

Federal and state regulations protect imperiled species and facilitate the recovery of such species 

and the ecosystems upon which they depend. No threatened, endangered, or rare plant species 

were identified as potentially occurring in the Northern or Central sections. In the Southern Section, 

Alternative S6 also had no threatened, endangered, or rare plant species identified. Federal and 

state regulations also provide guidance on how and when a species is listed and condition of a 

species sensitivity (e.g., endangered or threatened). Table 4-1 lists the sensitive plant species that 

potentially occur within the EIS Study Area and describes each species general habitat type and 

requirements. These species were identified by occurrences of federally and state-listed and 

tracked threatened, endangered, and rare species and a general description of their habitat types 

from a spatial dataset acquired from the TPWD TXNDD. Federally and state-listed species in the 

portion of the EIS Study Area in Oklahoma were identified through a review of the county-by-county 

list of endangered and threatened species published by ODWC because no spatial data are 

available at this time. Eighteen federally and state-listed or state-ranked plant species potentially 

occur within the Alternative S4 EIS Study Area. 

Table 4-1: Sensitive Plant Species within EIS Study Area by Section and Alternative 

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/ 

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Northern Section 

Alternative N4A (Conventional Rail) 

None 

Central Section 

Alternative C4A (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

None 

Alternative C4B (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

None 

Alternative C4C (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

None 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-6 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/ 

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Southern Section 

Alternative S4 (Higher-Speed Rail) 

Bailey's ballmoss Tillandsia baileyi -- / -- / S2 

An air plant that grows on trees in 

woodland, savanna/open woodland, and 

shrubland in Texas. 

Elmendorf's onion 

Allium 

elmendorfii -- / -- / S2 

Savanna/open woodland; known only from 

the Carrizo sands of eastern Bexar, Frio, 

Wilson, and Atacosa counties. 

Falfurrias milkvine Matelea radiata -- / -- / SH Unknown. 

Green Island 

echeandia 

Echeandia 

texensis -- / -- / S1 Grassland; on clay dunes, llanos, and open areas in Texas. 

Johnston's 

frankenia 

Frankenia 

johnstonii LE, PDL / E / S3 

Shrubland; found in high-saline, rocky or 

eroding and reddish soil, associated with 

the Maverick soil series. It is found in Webb, 

Zapata, and Starr counties of south Texas; 

also in northern Mexico. 

Lila de los llanos 

Echeandia 

chandleri -- / -- / S2 Grassland; coastal plains in Texas and Mexico (San Luis Potosí, Tamaulipas). 

Mexican mudplantain Heteranthera 

mexicana -- / -- / S1 

Freshwater wetland (playas); riparian 

(resacas); populations are located in swales 

and ditches in an area that is subject to 

irregular rainfall. 

Plains gumweed Grindelia oolepis -- / -- / S2 

Grassland; endemic to Texas and primarily 

found along roadsides and other disturbed 

rights-of-way. 

Runyon's cory 

cactus 

Coryphantha 

macromeris var. 

runyonii 

-- / -- / S2 

Shrubland (Chihuahuan desert scrub, 

Tamaulipan thorn scrub), on nearly all 

substrates including nearly pure gypsum, 

gravelly soils, usually sandy alluvium or 

clay, rarely crevices or steep slopes in New 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-7 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/ 

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Mexico, Texas and Mexico (Chihuahua, 

Coahuila, Durango, Zacatecas). 

Runyon's waterwillow Justicia runyonii -- / -- / S2 Shrubland and woodland in Texas, Rio 

Grande Valley, and Northern Mexico. 

Sandhill 

woolywhite 

Hymenopappus 

carrizoanus -- / -- / S2 Savanna/open woodland (sandhills), oak woodlands on sandy soils. 

Slender rushpea Hoffmannseggia 

tenella LE / E / S1 

Grassland; known to occur in four 

populations in Nueces and Kleberg 

counties in Texas. 

South Texas 

ambrosia 

Ambrosia 

cheiranthifolia LE / E / S2 Grassland; on seasonally wet clay and sands in Texas and Mexico (Tamaulipas). 

St. Joseph's staff 

Manfreda 

longiflora -- / -- / S2 

Shrubland on clay slopes, dry gravelly hills 

or sandy prairies in Texas and Mexico 

(Tamaulipas). 

Texas ayenia Ayenia limitaris LE / E / S1 

Shrubland; known to occur in only one 

small population of about 20 individuals in 

Hidalgo County. 

Texas windmillgrass 

Chloris texensis -- / -- / S2 Grassland (coastal prairie, saline prairie). 

Vasey's adelia Adelia vaseyi -- / -- / S2 Shrubland. 

Walker's manioc 

Manihot 

walkerae LE / E / S1 

Shrubland; historically, Walker's manioc is 

known only from the lower Rio Grande 

Valley of Texas (Hidalgo and Starr counties) 

and northern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Now, 

located in three areas on the Lower Rio 

Grande National Wildlife Refuge in Starr 

and Hidalgo counties. 

Alternative S6 (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

None 

Notes: 

-- = Not listed 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-8 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/ 

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Federal Rankings 

LE = federally endangered 

LT = federally threatened 

PE = proposed endangered 

PT = proposed threatened 

C = Category 1 candidate for listing as threatened or endangered by USFWS 

PDL = proposed delisted 

State Rankings 

E = state endangered 

T = state threatened 

TPWD Rankings 

S1 = less than six occurrences known in Texas; critically imperiled in Texas; especially vulnerable to extirpation from the 

state 

S2 = 6 to 20 known occurrences in Texas; imperiled in Texas because of rarity; very vulnerable to extirpation from the 

state 

S3 = 21 to 100 known occurrences in Texas; either rare or uncommon in Texas 

S4 = more than 100 occurrences in Texas; apparently secure in Texas although it may be quite rare in some areas of 

Texas 

S5 = demonstrably secure in Texas 

SH = historical in Texas, not verified within the past 40 years but suspected to exist 

SR = reported from Texas in literature but not verified via specimens or field observations 

SX = presumed extirpated from Texas 

Sources: TPWD (2014b). 

Acres of Potential Sensitive Plant Occurrences 

No federally or state-listed plant species were identified within the EIS Study Area for either the 

Northern or Central Section. As identified in Table 4-1, 18 federally and state-listed or state-ranked 

plant species occur within the Southern Section EIS Study Area, all of which are located within the 

EIS Study Area for Alternative S4. No federally or state-listed plant species were identified within the 

EIS Study Area for Alternative S6. Table 4-2 lists the potential acres of the 18 habitats within the 

EIS Study Area associated with Alternative S4. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-9 

TBG102114052932SCO

Table 4-2: Acres of Potential Sensitive Plant Occurrences 

within Southern Section EIS Study Area 

Common Name Acres of Potential Habitat in the 

Study Area 

Alternative S4 (Higher-Speed Rail) 

Bailey's ballmoss 521 

Elmendorf's onion 76 

Falfurrias milkvine 600 

Green Island echeandia 474 

Johnston's frankenia 1 

Lila de los llanos 170 

Mexican mud-plantain 1,767 

Plains gumweed 453 

Runyon's cory cactus 384 

Runyon's water-willow 304 

Sandhill woolywhite 624 

Slender rushpea 18 

South Texas ambrosia 195 

St. Joseph's staff 546 

Texas ayenia 693 

Texas windmill-grass 577 

Vasey's adelia 120 

Walker's manioc 600 

Sources: Meshek & Associates (2013); Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (2012). 

As shown on Figures 4-1 through 4-3, the majority of the known occurrences of listed plant species 

that intersect with the Alternative S4 EIS Study Area are located in Atascosa, Bexar, Brooks, 

Cameron, Hidalgo, Jim Wells, and Nueces counties, in areas that would be constructed on an 

existing abandoned rail. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-10 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-1: Sensitive Plant Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-11 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-2: Sensitive Plant Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-12 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-3: Sensitive Plant Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-13 

TBG102114052932SCO

4.5 Sensitive Wildlife 

Sensitive wildlife species include federally and state-listed endangered and threatened species and 

federally proposed endangered and proposed threatened species. Twenty-two federally and statelisted wildlife species occur within the EIS Study Area. 

Table 4-3 lists sensitive wildlife species, and their general habitat requirements, that occur within 

the EIS Study Area based on the spatial dataset acquired from the TXNDD. As previously stated, 

federally and state-listed species in Oklahoma were identified through a review of the county-bycounty list of endangered and threatened species published by ODWC because no spatial data are 

available at this time. Additional details regarding sensitive wildlife habitat requirements and where 

each species is known to occur within the EIS Study Area are included in Sections 4.5.1 

through 4.5.5. 

Table 4-3: Sensitive Wildlife Species within EIS Study Area by Section and Alternative 

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Northern Section 

Alternative N4A (Conventional Rail)l 

Arkansas River 

shiner 

Notropis girardi LT / -- / -- Historically inhabited the main channels of 

wide, shallow, sand-bottomed rivers and 

larger streams of the Arkansas River basin. 

Adults are uncommon in quiet pools or 

backwaters, and almost never occur in 

tributaries having deep water and bottoms 

of mud or stone. Juveniles associated most 

strongly with current, conductivity (total 

dissolved solids), and backwater and island 

habitat types. 

Black-capped 

vireo 

Vireo atricapillus LE / -- / -- Rangelands with scattered clumps of shrubs 

separated by open grassland. There are two 

known populations of black-capped vireos in 

Oklahoma. One population is large (more 

than 2,000 birds) and is located in the 

Wichita Mountains of northern Comanche 

County. The other population is small (less 

than 30 birds) and occurs in the canyon 

lands of northern Blaine County, north of 

Watonga. 

Black-sided 

darter 

Percina maculata -- / T / -- Clear, gravel-bottom, perennial streams. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-14 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Interior least tern Sterna antillarum LE / -- / -- Nesting habitat–bare or sparsely vegetated 

sand, shell, and gravel beaches, sandbars, 

islands, and salt flats associated with rivers 

and reservoirs. 

For feeding, needs shallow water with an 

abundance of small fish. Shallow water 

areas of lakes, ponds, and rivers located 

close to nesting areas are preferred. 

Occurs in Oklahoma during the late spring 

and summer breeding season (mid-May 

through late August) on portions of the 

Arkansas, Cimarron, Canadian, and Red 

rivers. 

Piping plover Charadrius 

melodus 

LT / -- / -- Estuary/estuarine and coastal. 

Winter – beaches, sand flats, mudflats, 

algal mats, emergent sea grass beds, washover passes, and very small dunes where 

seaweed (sargassum) or other debris has 

accumulated sand; spoil islands along the 

Intracoastal Waterway; bare or sparsely 

vegetated coastal areas. There are two 

nesting records for the piping plover in the 

Oklahoma panhandle, but it is normally a 

spring and fall migrant through the state. 

Most records for migrating piping plovers 

occur across the main body of the state, 

with recent records including Woodward, 

Alfalfa, Oklahoma, Cleveland, Tulsa, and 

Washington counties. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-15 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Whooping crane Grus Americana LE / -- / -- Saltwater wetland and estuary. 

Winter – primarily freshwater and brackish 

marshes of south Texas, salt marshes, and 

tidal flats on the mainland and barrier 

islands dominated by salt grass, saltwort, 

smooth cordgrass, glasswort, and sea oxeyebut; recently a few flocks have used 

waterbodies (e.g., Granger Lake), stopping 

short of coastal destination; shallow, 

seasonally and semi-permanently flooded 

palustrine wetlands for roosting, and 

various cropland and emergent wetlands. 

During migration, whooping cranes pass 

through the western half of Oklahoma, with 

most sightings occurring west of IH-35 and 

east of Guymon, in the panhandle. 

Central Section 

Alternative C4A (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Mountain plover Charadrius 

montanus 

PT / -- /S2 Agricultural and grassland. 

Winter – shortgrass prairie, heavily grazed 

rangelands and agricultural fields in south 

Texas. 

Breeding – short- and mixed-grass prairie, 

prairie dog colonies, agricultural lands, and 

semidesert habitats in west Texas and 

panhandle. 

Nest locally in the western Great Plains from 

Montana south to New Mexico, in Utah, and 

in Mexico; winter in a broad band from 

Texas west and north to the Central Valley 

of California. 

Texas garter 

snake 

Thamnophis 

sirtalis annectens 

-- / -- / S3 Riparian, around lacustrine and cultural 

aquatic sites; marshy, flooded pastureland 

or meadows, particularly in spring when 

frogs are present in numbers; at other 

times, grassy or brushy terrain near hill 

country streams and ponds. Central and 

north Texas and Oklahoma. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-16 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Alternative C4B (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Mountain plover Charadrius 

montanus 

PT / -- /S2 See above. 

Texas garter 

snake 

Thamnophis 

sirtalis annectens 

-- / -- / S3 See above. 

Alternative C4C (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Mountain plover Charadrius 

montanus 

PT / -- /S2 See above. 

Texas garter 

snake 

Thamnophis 

sirtalis annectens 

-- / -- / S3 See above. 

Southern Section 

Alternative S4 (Higher-Speed Rail) 

Black-spotted 

newt 

Notophthalmus 

meridionalis 

-- / -- / S2 Freshwater wetland, riparian, riverine, 

cultural aquatic; edaphically limited: deep, 

poorly drained, clayey sediments (such as 

the Tiocano and Edroy clay soils) with slow 

permeability allow formation of ephemeral 

ponds or wetlands during periods of heavy 

rain, within a matrix of native, intact 

Tamaulipan thornscrub; permanent and 

temporary ponds, roadside ditches, and 

pools of small streams may also be used; 

breed in shallow ephemeral ponds ranging 

in depth from 0.5–2 meters, with firm clay 

bottoms, and some with rooted 

macrophytes; salinities ranging from 0.5–

1.0%; not found in water bodies with 

predatory fish, high salinity, intense cattle 

usage, or agricultural runoff. Texas counties 

bordering the Gulf Coast, south from 

Aransas and Refugio counties, and the 

central portion of the Tamaulipan Province, 

south from Bexar County. 

Black-striped 

snake 

Coniophanes 

imperialis 

-- / -- / S2 Savannas, thornscrub, agricultural 

landscapes, and edges of wet or marshy 

areas; semiarid coastal sandplain; also 

survives around buildings and in vacant lots 

in localized suburban areas. South Texas 

along the Gulf Coast to Veracruz, Mexico. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-17 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Jaguar Panthera onca LE / E / SH Forest, woodland, and riparian. Broadleaf 

deciduous and mixed mature forest, 

canyons and rocky caves or dense thickets 

for denning, large blocks. 

Jaguarundia Herpailurus 

yaguarondi 

LE / E/ S1 Shrubland; dense thornscrub over loamy 

clay soils (holding moisture); riparian areas 

and brushy arroyos. 

Keeled earless 

lizard 

Holbrookia 

propinqua 

-- / -- / S3 Coastal, barren/sparse vegetation, 

shrubland; native coastal grasslands, 

barrier islands. South Texas and along the 

Gulf Coast of Mexico. 

Mexican 

blackhead snake 

Tantilla atriceps -- / -- / S1 Shrubland; wooded and grassland/thorn 

brush communities, desert flats to wooded 

mountain canyons. Restricted to two 

counties (Kleburg and Duval) in south 

Texas. In Mexico, occurs from central 

Coahuila south to San Luis Potosi, with 

isolated populations found in Tamaulipas. 

Mexican treefrog Smilisca baudinii -- / -- / S3 Riparian, freshwater wetland, cultural 

aquatic, woodland; nocturnal and most 

active after rains; forested and brushy areas 

around streams, resacas, and roadside 

ditches; observed in tops of palm trees; 

seek shelter from heat and dry conditions 

under loose tree bark, in tree holes, in damp 

soil, and in the leaves of palms, banana 

plants, and other broadleaves. Restricted to 

the extreme southern tip of Texas, in 

Cameron and Hidalgo counties. 

Northern cat-eyed 

snake 

Leptodeira 

septentrionalis 

-- / T / S2 Forest, woodland, thornscrub with ponds or 

streams (frogs and toads are primary food). 

Restricted to counties along the Rio Grande 

Valley in the few remaining stretches of 

thornscrub and subtropical habitats. 

Reticulate 

collared lizard 

Crotaphytus 

reticulatus 

-- / T / S2 Desert scrub, scrubland; thornscrub 

vegetation, usually on well-drained rolling 

terrain of shallow gravel, caliche, or sandy 

soils; scattered flat rocks below 

escarpments or isolated rock outcrops 

among scattered clumps of prickly-pear and 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-18 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

mesquite; mesquite savanna and 

grasslands near rocky outcrops; shrub and 

rock structure in habitat are important. 

Occurs in the Rio Grande Valley of south 

Texas and Mexico, excluding the coastal 

areas. 

Sheep frog Hypopachus 

variolosus 

-- / T / S2 Shrubland, riparian, cultural aquatic; 

thornscrub, oak woodland, mesquite 

savanna, short and mixed grassland, 

agricultural areas and other open areas; 

ephemeral and permanent wetlands key for 

breeding. Occurs from the eastern half of 

south Texas, from Bee County south to 

Cameron, Hidalgo, and Starr counties. 

South Texas siren 

(large form) 

Siren sp. 1 -- / T / S2 Freshwater wetland, cultural aquatic, 

lacustrine; wholly aquatic; shallow, muddy, 

vegetated wetlands, resacas, ditches, 

swamps, ponds and larger lakes and 

streams; structure (thick vegetation, rocks, 

and logs) and muddy bottom typically 

associated with unmanaged or 

unmanipulated waterways. Eastern third of 

Texas, from the lower Rio Grande Valley 

northward along the Gulf Coast to 

Louisiana. 

Texas indigo 

snake 

Drymarchon 

melanurus 

erebennus 

-- / T / S4 Shrubland, savanna; riparian corridors in 

thorn brush woodland, mesquite savanna of 

the coastal plain, mixed-grass prairies, 

coastal sandhills, and desert scrubland; 

often uses small mammal burrows (e.g., 

gopher [Geomys]). Southern Texas south 

into Mexico. 

Texas scarlet 

snake 

Cemophora 

coccinea lineri 

-- / T / S1 Coastal, shrubland, and desert scrub. 

Known to occur in several counties located 

along the Texas coastal bend and in adjunct 

south Texas. 

Alternative S6 (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Texas tortoise Gopherus 

berlandieri 

-- / -- / S2 Savanna, shrubland; semi-desert scrub and 

barrier islands, on sand, clay or caliche; 

lomas surrounded by salt flats and 

marshes; south of a line through Del Rio, 

San Antonio, and Rockport, Texas. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-19 

TBG102114052932SCO

Common 

Name 

Scientific 

Name 

Status 

(Federal/State/

TPWD Ranking) General Habitat Type(s) 

Notes: 

-- = Not listed 

Federal Rankings 

LE = federally endangered 

LT = federally threatened 

PE = proposed endangered 

PT = proposed threatened 

C = Category 1 candidate for listing as threatened or endangered by USFWS 

PDL = proposed delisted 

State Rankings 

E = state endangered 

T = state threatened 

TPWD Rankings 

S1 = less than six occurrences known in Texas; critically imperiled in Texas; especially vulnerable to extirpation from 

the state 

S2 = 6 to 20 known occurrences in Texas; imperiled in Texas because of rarity; very vulnerable to extirpation from the 

state 

S3 = 21 to 100 known occurrences in Texas; either rare or uncommon in Texas 

S4 = more than 100 occurrences in Texas; apparently secure in Texas although it may be quite rare in some areas of 

Texas 

S5 = demonstrably secure in Texas 

SH = historical in Texas, not verified within the past 40 years but suspected to exist 

SR = reported from Texas in literature but not verified via specimens or field observations 

SX = presumed extirpated from Texas 

a TxDOT staff noted that jaguarundi are no longer found in Texas; however, the species was included in information 

from the resource agency databases and is therefore referenced in this document. TxDOT staff also noted that black 

bear and ocelot are found in the area. These species were not included in the resource agency databases and are, 

therefore, not referenced in this document. Assessment of these species will be included in project-level analysis as 

appropriate. 

Sources: Meshek & Associates (2013); Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (2012); Southwestern Center for Herpetological 

Research (2014); ODWC (2014a); ODWC (2014b); Texas Natural Sciences Center (2014); TPWD (2014a); TPWD 

(2014b). 

Invertebrates 

Analysis of the GIS database and other occurrence records indicate that no sensitive invertebrates 

occur within the EIS Study Area. In addition, there are no proposed or final designated critical 

habitat areas for any invertebrate species within the EIS Study Area. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-20 

TBG102114052932SCO

Fishes 

According to records of previous occurrences, sensitive fish species potentially occurring within the 

EIS Study Area include the Arkansas River shiner and the black-sided darter. The Arkansas River 

shiner is federally threatened and inhabits the shallow braided channels of wide sandy prairie rivers 

in the Arkansas River system. The black-sided darter is listed as threatened by ODWC and is found 

in clear, gravel-bottom, perennial streams in eastern Oklahoma along the state line with Arkansas 

(ODWC 2014). 

Reptiles and Amphibians 

According to records of previous occurrences, sensitive reptile and amphibian species potentially 

occurring within the EIS Study Area include the black-spotted newt (S2), black-striped snake (S2), 

keeled earless lizard (S3), Mexican blackhead snake (S1), Mexican treefrog (S3), northern cat-eyed 

snake (T, S2), reticulate collared lizard (T, S2), sheep frog (T, S2), south Texas siren (T, S2), Texas 

indigo snake (T, S4), Texas garter snake (T, S3), Texas scarlet snake (S1), and Texas tortoise (S2) 

(TPWD 2014a, TPWD 2014b; ODWC 2014; Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research 

2014; Texas Natural Science Center 2014). General habitat requirements and occurrences for 

each species are included in Table 4-3. 

Birds 

According to records of previous occurrences, sensitive bird species potentially occurring within the 

EIS Study Area include the black-capped vireo (LE) interior least tern (LE), mountain plover (PT, S2), 

piping plover (LT), and whooping crane (LE) (TPWD 2014a, TPWD 2014b; ODWC 2014). General 

habitat requirements and occurrences for each species are included in Table 4-3. 

Mammals 

Sensitive mammal species potentially occurring within the EIS Study Area include the jaguar and 

jaguarundi. The jaguar is federally and state endangered and once was recorded from southern 

California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and perhaps farther east in Louisiana. Jaguars are now 

absent from much of its former range and has been extirpated as a resident in most or all of the 

northern extent of the range in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. The 

jaguarundi is federally and state endangered and found in the south Texas brush country and lower 

Rio Grande Valley. Jaguarundis are also found in northern Mexico, Central America, and South 

America (TPWD 2014b). (Note: TxDOT staff noted that jaguarundi are no longer found in Texas; 

however, the species was included in information from the resource agency databases and is 

therefore referenced in this document. TxDOT staff also noted that black bear and ocelot are found 

in the area. These species were not included in the resource agency databases and are, therefore, 

not referenced in this document. Assessment of these species will be included in project-level 

analysis as appropriate.) 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-21 

TBG102114052932SCO

Acres of Potential Sensitive Wildlife Occurrences 

Spatial data for special-status species in Oklahoma were not available for this assessment; 

therefore, federally and state-listed species were identified through a review of the county-by-county 

list of endangered and threatened species published by ODWC. 

According to the list, the following six special-status species (five of which are federally listed as 

endangered or threatened) are known to occur within the EIS Study Area for Alternative N4A 

(conventional rail): 

 Arkansas River shiner 

 Black-capped vireo 

 Black-sided darter 

 Interior least tern 

 Piping plover 

 Whooping crane 

As listed in Table 4-4, two special-status wildlife species have the potential to occur within or near 

the EIS Study Areas for Alternatives C4A (higher- and high-speed rail), C4B (higher- and high-speed 

rail), and C4C (higher- and high-speed rail) and could be affected by the construction and operation 

of the alternatives. Table 4-4 also summarizes acreage of habitat within the EIS Study Area 

associated with each species by alternative. 

Table 4-4. Acres of Potential Sensitive Wildlife Occurrences 

within Central Section EIS Study Area 

Common Name Acres of Wildlife Occurrences 

Alternative C4A (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Mountain plover 324 

Texas garter snake 1,490 

Alternative C4B (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Mountain plover 324 

Texas garter snake 1,493 

Alternative C4C (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Mountain plover 324 

Texas garter snake 1,604 

Sources: Meshek & Associates (2013); Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (2012). 

As shown on Figures 4-4 and 4-5, the recorded occurrences of sensitive wildlife species identified 

within the EIS Study Areas for Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C are represented by relatively large 

areas intersected by the EIS Study Area. In addition, the occurrences are located in the portions of 

each Central Section alternative that would be outside of existing transportation corridors. 

As listed in Table 4-5, 13 federally or state-listed wildlife species potentially occur within the EIS 

Study Area for Alternative S4 (higher-speed rail), and one state-listed wildlife species potentially 

occurs within the EIS Study Area for Alternative S6 (higher- and high-speed rail). Table 4-5 also lists 

the potential acres of habitats within the EIS Study Area associated with the Southern Section 

alternatives. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-22 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-4: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Central Section Alternatives 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-23 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-5: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Central Section Alternatives 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-24 

TBG102114052932SCO

Table 4-5: Acres of Potential Sensitive Wildlife Habitat within 

Southern Section EIS Study Area 

Common Name Acres of Potential Habitat 

Alternative S4 (Higher-Speed Rail) 

Black-spotted newt 1,477 

Black-striped snake 160 

Jaguar 601 

Jaguarundia 515 

Keeled earless lizard 150 

Mexican blackhead snake 151 

Mexican treefrog 402 

Northern cat-eyed snake 374 

Reticulate collared lizard 94 

Sheep frog 906 

South Texas siren (large form) 1,288 

Texas indigo snake 1,195 

Texas scarlet snake 3 

Alternative S6 (Higher- and High-Speed Rail) 

Texas tortoise 3 

Sources: Meshek & Associates (2013); Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (2012) 

a TxDOT staff noted that jaguarundi are no longer found in Texas; however, the 

species was included in information from the resource agency databases and 

is therefore referenced in this document. TxDOT staff also noted that black 

bear and ocelot are found in the area. These species were not included in the 

resource agency databases and are, therefore, not referenced in this 

document. Assessment of these species will be included in project-level 

analysis as appropriate. 

As shown on Figures 4-6 through 4-8, most of the known occurrences of listed wildlife species that 

intersect with the Alternative S4 EIS Study Area are located in Brooks, Cameron, Hidalgo, Jim Wells, 

Live Oak, and Nueces counties in areas that would be constructed on an existing abandoned rail. 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-25 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-6: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-26 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-7: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-27 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-8: Sensitive Wildlife Species Occurrences – Alternative S4 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-28 

TBG102114052932SCO

4.6 Critical Habitat 

Critical habitats are areas considered essential for the conservation of a federally listed species. 

These areas provide notice to the public and land managers of the importance of these areas to the 

conservation of listed species. Special protections and/or restrictions are possible in areas where 

federal funding, permits, licenses, authorizations, or actions occur or are required. According to the 

spatial dataset acquired from the TXNDD and ODWC, critical habitat for one species, the Arkansas 

River shiner, is located within the Alternative N4A EIS Study Area. As identified on Figure 4-9, the 

critical habitat for the Arkansas River shiner is represented by a relatively narrow line (the Canadian 

River) that perpendicularly intersects the EIS Study Area for Alternative N4A (conventional rail), 

immediately south of Norman, Okla. Alternative N4A (conventional rail), which passes over the 

critical habitat, would follow the BNSF rail alignment and existing TRE tracks. No other designated 

critical habitat areas were identified as being within the EIS Study Area (TPWD 2014b; ODWC 

2014). 

 
4.0 Baseline/Affected Environment 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 4-29 

TBG102114052932SCO

Figure 4-9: Critical Habitat – Northern Section Alternative 

TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-1 

5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

The potential effects of the build alternatives and No Build Alternative on threatened and 

endangered species within the EIS Study Area are presented in this section. Some alternatives in 

the Northern, Central, and Southern sections could be built alone or combined with alternatives. 

More than one alternative in the Central and Southern sections could also be built in the future, 

because the alternatives within these sections provide different service options for independent 

destinations. Details about how alternatives might connect would be analyzed in the project-level 

EIS. Therefore, this study does not provide a summary of effects for the entire corridor from 

Oklahoma City to Laredo and Brownsville, Texas. Rather, this analysis compares each alternative to 

the No Build Alternative and, if applicable, to another build alternative for that same section. 

Specific station locations were not analyzed as part of this service-level threatened and endangered 

species technical study. To maximize access, stations generally tend to be constructed in populated 

areas (i.e., urban or suburban areas) and not in undeveloped or rural locations. Therefore, potential 

effects associated with the construction and operation of stations on threatened and endangered 

plants and wildlife would likely not be more than the potential resources captured during the 

analysis of the 500-foot-wide EIS Study Area. 

5.1 No Build Alternative 

The No Build Alternative, as described in Section 1.2.1, is used as the baseline for comparison. The 

No Build Alternative would not implement the Program of rail improvements associated with this 

service-level evaluation and would not meet the purpose and need of the Program; therefore, the 

No Build Alternative would not affect threatened, endangered, or sensitive species, nor any critical 

habitat. 

5.2 Northern Section: Oklahoma City to Dallas and Fort Worth 

The following sections provide potential effects and their relative intensity from construction and 

operation of the build alternative in the Northern Section on sensitive plants, wildlife, and critical 

habitat. 

Sensitive Plants 

No federally or state-listed plant species were identified within the Alternative N4A EIS Study Area. 

Furthermore, Alternative N4A (conventional rail) would follow the BNSF rail alignment and existing 

TRE tracks. Therefore, effects on sensitive plant species due to the construction and operation of 

Alternative N4A would be negligible compared to the No Build Alternative. 

Sensitive Wildlife 

The probability of the six federally listed species occurring within the existing rights-of-way 

associated with Alternative N4A (conventional rail) is low because of the noise and land 

disturbances associated with the active rail line operation and maintenance. Therefore, effects on 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-2 

TBG102114052932SCO

wildlife species due to the construction of Alternative N4A would be negligible compared to the No 

Build Alternative. 

Operations effects for Alternative N4A would be moderate because this alternative would not likely 

be fenced, making wildlife, including the listed species known to occur within the EIS Study Area, 

vulnerable to an increased risk for strikes from the additional rail traffic along the route. 

Additionally, more noise and vibration from the added rail traffic along the route could disrupt listed 

species in the area. Habitats throughout the EIS Study Area could be potential roosting/nesting 

habitat for migratory and resident birds (including federally and state-listed species). Removal of or 

disturbance to the habitat during the bird nesting season (February 1 to September 15) could result 

in effects on nesting species that are protected by the MBTA. Such effects would have a noticeable 

effect on wildlife, including sensitive species. 

Critical Habitat 

Approximately 34 acres of designated critical habitat for the federally threatened Arkansas River 

shiner are located within the Alternative N4A EIS Study Area. Best management practices (BMPs) 

would be implemented during construction and operation to limit potential effects. Therefore, the 

potential effects associated with construction and operation of Alternative N4A (conventional rail) 

would be negligible compared with the No Build Alternative. 

Construction Effects 

No federally or state-listed plant species were identified within the Alternative N4A EIS Study Area, 

and negligible effects on listed wildlife and critical habitat would be anticipated. However, further 

studies and analysis would be necessary during the project-level analysis to assess qualitative and 

quantitative effects on threatened and endangered species and critical habitat in the Northern 

Section. During the project-level analysis, field investigations or surveys would be conducted to 

determine the likelihood of effects on listed species and their habitats within the Alternative N4A 

EIS Study Area. Significant loss of habitat for the listed species (if present) due to the construction 

of Alternative N4A (conventional rail) would constitute a substantial effect. 

Effects on listed wildlife species and associated habitats as a result of constructing Alternative N4A 

could result from vegetation clearing for construction equipment and the stockpiling of soil, ballast, 

or other construction materials. Additionally, short-term noise, vibration, and air pollution from 

construction equipment and activities could affect nearby terrestrial habitats and their 

corresponding wildlife. However, such effects would not be substantial given the anticipated size of 

these potential construction effect areas compared to the amount of listed-species habitat that 

would remain in the area. In addition, no permanent effects on listed species would be expected 

because Alternative N4A would use existing rights-of-way. 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-3 

TBG102114052932SCO

Operational Effects 

Potential operational (including maintenance) effects of Alternative N4A (conventional rail) would 

be considered moderate compared to the No Build Alternative because the additional rail traffic 

that would occur in the EIS Study Area would make listed bird species vulnerable to an increased 

risk for strikes. Additional operational effects associated with the Northern Section include 

disruption of listed species, increased potential for spills or releases, and noise and vibration from 

the additional rail traffic. These effects would be moderate and have a noticeable effect on listed 

wildlife, but the effects could be mitigated through the use of BMPs during operation. 

5.3 Central Section (Dallas and Fort Worth to San Antonio) 

The following sections provide potential effects and their relative intensity from the construction 

and operation of the build alternatives on sensitive plants and wildlife and critical habitat within the 

Central Section. 

Sensitive Plants 

No federally or state-listed plant species were identified within the EIS Study Areas for Alternatives 

C4A (higher- and high-speed rail), C4B (higher- and high-speed rail), and C4C (higher- and highspeed rail). Therefore, effects on sensitive plant species due to the construction and operation of 

Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C would be negligible compared to the No Build Alternative. 

Sensitive Wildlife 

Potential effects on listed wildlife species associated with construction of Alternatives C4A (higherand high-speed rail), C4B (higher- and high-speed rail), and C4C (higher- and high-speed rail) would 

be substantial compared to the No Build Alternative because construction outside of existing 

transportation corridors would have a noticeable, inevitable effect. Loss of habitat for listed species 

(if present) would be an adverse effect. TxDOT and ODOT would initiate Section 7 consultation with 

USFWS for effects on listed species. Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C would be fully fenced, 

reducing the likelihood of some wildlife strikes. However, contiguous fencing can create a barrier 

that results in isolation of small populations of animals. Additional subsequent analysis, including 

effects of fencing, will be conducted during project-level analysis. 

Critical Habitat 

No critical habitat was identified within the EIS Study Areas for Alternatives C4A (higher- and highspeed rail), C4B (higher- and high-speed rail), and C4C (higher- and high-speed rail). Therefore, 

effects on critical habitats due to the construction and operation of Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C 

would be negligible compared to the No Build Alternative. 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-4 

TBG102114052932SCO

Construction Effects 

No federally or state-listed plant species and no critical habitats were identified within the EIS Study 

Areas for Alternatives C4A (higher- and high-speed rail), C4B (higher- and high-speed rail), and C4C 

(higher- and high-speed rail). However, two special-status wildlife species have the potential to 

occur within or near the EIS Study Areas and could be affected by the construction of the build 

alternatives. Short- and long-term effects on mountain plover and Texas garter snake could occur 

and could include the temporary clearing of potential habitat to accommodate construction 

equipment and stockpile soil, ballast, and other construction materials. Additionally, short-term 

noise, vibration, and air pollution from construction equipment and activities could temporarily 

affect listed species by disrupting life history requirements (e.g., foraging and nesting). Further 

studies and analyses would be necessary in the project-level EIS to assess effects on wildlife 

species in the Central Section. Loss of habitat for the listed species (if present) during construction 

would constitute a substantial adverse effect. TxDOT and ODOT would initiate Section 7 

consultation with USFWS in response to potential effects on special-status species. 

Operational Effects 

Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C have higher- and high-speed rail options, and portions of each 

would be constructed outside of existing transportation corridors. Potential operational effects of 

the higher-speed rail alternatives would be moderate compared to the No Build Alternative because 

of the disruption of listed species caused by noise and vibration from the added rail traffic. The 

high-speed rail alternatives have greater potential for effects on threatened and endangered 

wildlife species than the higher-speed rail alternatives because the noise and vibration generated 

by high-speed rail travels farther than that generated by higher-speed rail. However, the effects 

would be mitigated to a certain extent as Alternatives C4A, C4B, and C4C would be fully fenced, 

reducing the likelihood of some strikes. Although fencing would be installed, portions of the 

alternatives outside of existing transportation corridors could also be designed with undercrossings 

to maintain wildlife migratory paths or corridors. As described in Section 5.3.2, contiguous fencing 

can create a barrier that results in isolation of small populations of animals. Additional subsequent 

analysis, including effects of fencing, will be conducted during project-level analysis. 

5.4 Southern Section – San Antonio to South Texas 

The following sections provide potential effects and their relative intensity from the construction 

and operation of the build alternatives on sensitive plants, wildlife, and critical habitat within the 

Southern Section. 

Sensitive Plants 

Alternative S4 (higher-speed rail) would have a substantial effect on listed plant species in the 

Southern Section because construction of the alternative would occur outside of existing 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-5 

TBG102114052932SCO

transportation corridors (e.g., in Duval County). Although significant portions of Alternative S4 would 

be constructed within existing transportation corridors (e.g., KCS Railway and revitalization of 

abandoned tracks), effects on sensitive plant species along the portion of the alternative outside of 

existing transportation corridors would be considered a substantial effect compared to the No Build 

Alternative. Effects on sensitive plants are typically related to construction activities such as grading 

and vegetation removal; therefore, operation of Alternative S4 is not expected to cause additional 

effects and would be considered negligible. Loss of habitat for listed species (if present) would be 

an adverse effect. TxDOT and ODOT would initiate Section 7 consultation with USFWS for effects on 

listed species. 

Under Alternative S6 (higher- and high-speed rail), potential effects on listed plant species would be 

negligible compared to the No Build Alternative because no listed plant species have been recorded 

within the EIS Study Area. 

Sensitive Wildlife 

Alternative S4 (higher-speed rail) would have a substantial effect on listed wildlife species because 

of potential effects on habitats during construction located outside of existing transportation 

corridors (e.g., in Duval and Webb counties). Although significant portions of Alternative S4 would 

be constructed within existing transportation corridors (e.g., KCS Railway and revitalization of 

abandoned tracks), effects on sensitive wildlife species where construction would occur outside of 

existing transportation corridors would have a substantial effect compared to the No Build 

Alternative. Loss of habitat for listed species (if present) would be an adverse effect. TxDOT and 

ODOT would initiate Section 7 consultation with USFWS for effects on listed species. 

Based on the spatial dataset acquired from the TXNDD, 3 acres of listed wildlife habitat (state-listed 

Texas tortoise) are within the EIS Study Area for Alternative S6 (higher-speed rail). Potential effects 

on sensitive wildlife species from construction of Alternative S6 Higher-Speed Rail would be 

negligible because effects on this particular species (Texas tortoise) could be reduced with 

preconstruction surveys and monitoring. Potential operations effects would be moderate because 

of disruption of listed species from noise and vibration from the added rail traffic along the route. 

Such effects would have a noticeable effect on wildlife, but the effects could be reduced through 

the use of BMPs. 

Critical Habitat 

No critical habitat was identified within the EIS Study Areas for Alternatives S4 (higher-speed rail) 

and S6 (higher- and high-speed rail). Therefore, effects on critical habitat due to the construction 

and operation would be negligible compared to the No Build Alternative. 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-6 

TBG102114052932SCO

Construction Effects 

Effects on listed plant and wildlife species could occur during construction of Alternatives S4 

(higher-speed rail) and S6 (higher- and high-speed rail) outside of existing transportation corridors. 

Effects could include the clearing of vegetation for construction equipment and the stockpiling of 

soil, ballast, or other construction materials. These effects would be considered long-term to 

permanent. In addition, short-term noise, vibration, and air pollution from construction equipment 

and activities could temporarily affect listed species by disrupting life history requirements (e.g., 

foraging) or causing avoidance behavior. Further studies and analysis would be necessary in the 

project-level EIS to further assess effects on plant and wildlife species in the Southern Section. 

Loss of habitat for listed species (if present) would be an adverse effect. TxDOT and ODOT would 

initiate Section 7 consultation with USFWS for effects on listed species. 

Operational Effects 

Potential operational effects for Alternatives S4 (higher-speed rail) and S6 (higher- and high-speed 

rail) would be moderate compared to the No Build Alternative because of the disruption of listed 

species caused by noise and vibration from the additional rail traffic. The high-speed rail option of 

Alternative S6 would have higher potential for effects on threatened and endangered wildlife 

species than Alternative S4 and the higher-speed option of Alternative S6 because the noise and 

vibration generated by the high-speed rail travels farther than that generated by higher-speed rail. 

However, Alternatives S4 and S6 would be fully fenced, reducing the likelihood of strikes. 

Additionally, portions of the alternatives located outside of existing transportation corridors could 

be designed with pathways or undercrossings to maintain wildlife migratory paths or corridors. 

5.5 Summary of Potential Effects 

The construction of Alternative N4A (conventional rail) would have a negligible effect on sensitive 

plants, wildlife, and critical habitat because the alternative would be constructed within existing 

transportation corridors, in areas already disturbed by development. However, from an operations 

standpoint, Alternative N4A would have a moderate effect on wildlife species. The alternative would 

not likely be fenced, making wildlife (including listed species) vulnerable to an increased risk for 

strikes from the additional rail traffic that would occur. 

The Central Section alternatives would have a negligible effect on sensitive plant species and 

critical habitat because there are no occurrences of these resources within the EIS Study Area. 

However, construction of the Central Section alternatives would have a substantial effect on 

sensitive wildlife species because significant acreage of one federally listed and one sensitive 

species is known to occur in the portions of the EIS Study Area. From an operations standpoint, 

effects would be moderate because disruption of wildlife species from noise and vibration would 

occur. 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-7 

TBG102114052932SCO

In the Southern Section, Alternative S4 (higher-speed rail) would have a substantial effect on 

sensitive plant and wildlife species. Seven federally listed and 24 other sensitive plant and wildlife 

species have the potential to occur within the EIS Study Area. Within portions of the alternative 

outside existing transportation corridors, effects would be long-term or permanent and would likely 

adversely affect threatened and endangered species. Although Alternative S6 (higher- and highspeed rail) would be constructed in a new, direct route, outside existing transportation corridors, 

construction effects would be negligible because only 3 acres of one sensitive wildlife species 

(Texas tortoise) and no plant species or critical habitat occurs within the EIS Study Area. 

Table 5-1 summarizes the qualitative assessment of potential effects (negligible, moderate, or 

substantial) for the alternatives and includes measures that could be taken to avoid or reduce the 

potential effects of the alternatives. As stated previously, this service-level analysis did not include 

detailed fieldwork to identify potential habitats or populations of threatened and endangered 

species. Acreages listed below are not the actual areas of effect associated with construction and 

operation of any of the alternatives. This service-level analysis uses the 500-foot EIS Study Area to 

determine the types of resources that may be affected and, more importantly, the relative 

magnitude of resources that may be affected. Some alternatives could be built alone or combined 

with other section alternatives. In addition, more than one alternative in the Central and Southern 

sections could be built in the future because the alternatives provide different service options for 

the independent destinations. Details about how alternatives might connect, as well as measures 

to reduce effects, would be analyzed at the project-level EIS phase. 

5.6 Subsequent Analysis and Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Strategies 

Once a preferred alternative is selected, field investigations or surveys will be conducted to define 

actual critical habitats and to develop avoidance and minimization strategies and to determine the 

likelihood of impacts on listed species and their habitats within the EIS Study Area during 

subsequent analysis. Critical habitats and species assessments will be conducted in accordance 

with federal and state regulations, including formal biological assessments for protected species 

and consultation with USFWS, TPWD and ODWC, as needed. The boundaries of listed plant and 

wildlife habitat will be confirmed to avoid or minimize effects on these areas. Habitat and species 

assessments will be conducted in accordance with federal and state regulations. 

BMPs, design features, and mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate impacts on sensitive 

habitats and species would be coordinated with federal and state agencies. To minimize 

construction effects and minimize disturbance of terrestrial and aquatic habitats and wildlife, BMPs 

used during construction and operations would include the following: 

 Conduct preconstruction surveys and monitoring in advance of clearing, grading, or construction 

to identify protected nest sites and avoid these areas until nesting has completed. 
5.0 Potential Effects on Threatened and Endangered Species 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 5-8 

TBG102114052932SCO

 Construct multiple and varying crossing structures at a crossing point to provide connectivity for 

species likely to use a given area. 

 Construct at least one crossing structure within an individual’s home range and where suitable 

habitat for species occurs (if possible) on both sides of the crossing structure. 

 Monitor structures for obstructions, such as detritus or silt blockages, that impede movement. 

 Manage human activity near crossing structures with the use of fencing, signage, etc. 

Local ordinances would be followed for erosion, sediment, and stormwater controls during 

construction to minimize potential effects on aquatic resources. For terrestrial habitats that might 

be temporarily disturbed by construction, preconstruction conditions or better would be restored 

once construction is complete. 
TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study 

Table 5-1: Summary of Acres within EIS Study Area by Section and Alternative 

Resource 

Status 

Federal/State/TPW

D Ranking 

No Build 

Alternative 

Northern Section Central Section 

N4A 

(CONV) 

C4A 

(HrSR and HSR) 

C4B 

(HrSR and HSR) 

C4

(HrSR an

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Sensitive Plants Bailey's ballmoss -- / -- / S2 0 0 Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Negligible

0 Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Negligible 

0 Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Negligible 

0 

Elmendorf's onion 

-- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Falfurrias milkvine 

-- / -- / SH 0 0 0 0 0 

Green Island echeandia 

-- / -- / S1 0 0 0 0 0 

Johnston's frankenia 

LE, PDL / E / S3 0 0 0 0 0 

Lila de los llanos -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Mexican mudplantain -- / -- / S1 0 0 0 0 0 Plains gumweed -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Runyon's cory cactus 

-- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Runyon's waterwillow -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Sandhill woolywhite 

-- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Slender rushpea LE / E / S1 0 0 0 0 0 South Texas ambrosia 

LE / E / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

St. Joseph's staff -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Texas ayenia LE / E / S1 0 0 0 0 0 Texas windmillgrass -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Vasey's adelia -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Walker's manioc LE / E / S1 0 0 0 0 0 
TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study 

Resource 

Status 

Federal/State/TPW

D Ranking 

No Build 

Alternative 

Northern Section Central Section 

N4A 

(CONV) 

C4A 

(HrSR and HSR) 

C4B 

(HrSR and HSR) 

C4

(HrSR an

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Sensitive Wildlife Arkansas River shiner 

LT / -- / -- 0 Present Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Moderate 

0 Construction – 

Substantial

Operations - 

Moderate 

0 Construction – 

Substantial

Operations - 

Moderate 

0 

Black-capped vireo 

LE / -- / -- 0 Present 0 0 0 

Black-sided darter 

-- / T / -- 0 Present 0 0 0 

Black-spotted newt 

-- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Black-striped snake 

-- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Interior least tern LE / -- / -- 0 Present 0 0 0 Jaguar LE / E / SH 0 0 0 0 0 Jaguarundia LE / E/ S1 0 0 0 0 0 Keeled earless lizard 

-- / -- / S3 0 0 0 0 0 

Mexican blackhead snake 

-- / -- / S1 0 0 0 0 0 

Mexican treefrog -- / -- / S3 0 0 0 0 0 Mountain plover PT / -- /S2 0 0 324 324 324 Northern cateyed snake -- / T / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Piping plover LT / -- / -- 0 Present 0 0 0 Reticulate collared lizard 

-- / T / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Sheep frog -- / T / S2 0 0 0 0 0 South Texas siren (large form) 

-- / T / S2 0 0 0 0 0 

Texas garter snake 

-- / -- / S3 0 0 1,490 1,492 1,604 

Texas indigo snake 

-- / T / S4 0 0 0 0 0 

Texas scarlet snake 

-- / T / S1 0 0 0 0 0 

Texas tortoise -- / -- / S2 0 0 0 0 0 Whooping crane LE / -- / -- 0 Present 0 0 0 
TBG102114052932SCO

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study 

Resource 

Status 

Federal/State/TPW

D Ranking 

No Build 

Alternative 

Northern Section Central Section 

N4A 

(CONV) 

C4A 

(HrSR and HSR) 

C4B 

(HrSR and HSR) 

C4

(HrSR an

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Qualitative 

Analysis 

Potential Acres 

of Occurrences 

within EIS Study 

Area 

Critical Habitat 

Arkansas River shiner 0 34 Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Negligible

0 Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Negligible 

0 Construction – 

Negligible

Operations - 

Negligible 

0 

Notes: -- = Not listed Federal Rankings LE = federally endangered LT = federally threatened PE = proposed endangered PT = proposed threatened C = Category 1 candidate for listing as threatened or endangered by USFWS PDL = proposed delisted State Rankings E = state endangered T = state threatened S1 = less than six occurrences known in Texas; critically imperiled in Texas; vulnerable to extirpation from the state S2 = 6 to 20 known occurrences in Texas; imperiled in Texas because of rarity; vulnerable to extirpation from the state S3 = 21 to 100 known occurrences in Texas; either rare or uncommon in Texas S4 = more than 100 occurrences in Texas; apparently secure in Texas although it may be rare in some areas of Texas S5 = demonstrably secure in Texas SH = historical in Texas, not verified within the past 40 years but suspected to exist SR = reported from Texas in literature but not verified via specimens or field observations SX = presumed extirpated from Texas a Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) staff noted that jaguarundi are no longer found in Texas; however, the species was included in information from the resostaff also noted that black bear and ocelot are found in the area. These species were not included in the resource agency databases and are, therefore, not referenced analysis as appropriate.

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 6-1 

TBG102114052932SCO

6.0 References 

CH2M HILL (CH2M). 2016. Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study, Natural Ecological Systems and 

Wildlife Technical Study. Prepared for TxDOT and FRA. May. 

Meshek & Associates, Inc. 2013. Oklahoma Department of Transportation, High-Speed Intercity 

Passenger Rail I-35 Corridor, Oklahoma, Data Collection Report. May. 

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. 2012. Texas Department of Transportation, High-Speed Intercity Passenger 

Rail I-35 Corridor Constraints Update, April. 

Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC). 2014a. Oklahoma’s Threatened, 

Endangered and Rare Species. Available at 

http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/wildlifemgmt/endangeredspecies.htm. Accessed May 

30, 2014. 

Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC). 2014b. County by County List of 

Endangered and Threatened Species. Available at 

http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/wildlifemgmt/endangered/State_Listed_by_County.pdf. 

Accessed May 13, 2014. 

Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research. 2014. Snakes of the American Southwest.

Available at http://www.southwesternherp.com/snakes/index.html. Accessed May 30, 

2014. 

Texas Climate Data. 2014. Available at http://web2.airmail.net/danb1/climate.htm. Accessed April 

23, 2014. 

Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). 2014. Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study Route 

Alternatives Analysis. June 

Texas Natural Science Center. 2014 Herps of Texas. University of Texas at Austin. Available at 

http://www.herpsoftexas.org/. Accessed May 30, 2014. 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). 2014a. Nongame and Rare Species Program: 

Federal and State Listed Species. Available at 

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/wildlife_diversity/nongame/listed-species/. 

Accessed May 30, 2014. 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). 2014b. Texas Conservation Action Plan: Species of 

Greatest Conservation Need. Available at 

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/landwater/land/tcap/sgcn.phtml. Accessed July 2, 2014. 
TBG102114052932SCO

6.0 References 

Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 6-2 

U.S. Climate Data. 2014. Temperature – Precipitation – Sunshine – Snowfall. Available at 

http://usclimatedata.com/. Accessed April 23, 2014. 

University of Oklahoma. 2014. Oklahoma Climatology Survey: Climate of Oklahoma. Available at 

http://climate.ok.gov/index.php/site/page/climate_of_oklahoma. Accessed April 23, 2014. 
Texas-Oklahoma Passenger Rail Study July 2016 

Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Study Page 7-1 

TBG102114052932SCO

7.0 Preparers 

Christopher Powers/CH2M HILL, Project Manager/Senior Biologist 

B.S., 1999, Biology, Union College, Schenectady, New York 

M.A., 2001, Science Education, Union College, Schenectady, New York 

Years of Experience: 13 

Robert Price/CH2M HILL, Senior Environmental Scientist 

B.S., 1992, Zoology, History, Miami University, Ohio 

M.S., 1994, Environmental Science, Indiana University, Indiana 

Master of Public Affairs, 1994, Aquatic Ecosystems Management, Indiana University 

Years of Experience: 18 
This report was written on behalf of the Texas Department of Transportation by 

www.ch2m.com