SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 1

APPENDIX E. OVERVIEW OF CONSIDERATIONS RELEVANT TO EXPOSURE AND 

RESPONSE ANALYSES

The following sections provide a high-level overview of considerations relevant to exposure and 

response analysis for each guild addressed in the Biological Opinion. (This section is not 

intended to take the place of site- or species-specific analysis in future step-down section 7 

consultations or the technical assistance coordination process described in this programmatic 

Biological Opinion and the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 Dispute Resolution Process

(Appendices A and B).

1.1.1 Birds – Cuckoos

The yellow-billed cuckoo represents this guild. Effects to cuckoos from mining may occur in the 

form of direct mortality, harassment, habitat loss, prey reduction, and fragmentation. Direct 

mortality of adults, juveniles, or eggs could occur if vegetation removal occurs when nesting 

cuckoos are present. Disturbance of individuals living within and adjacent to surface coal mining 

operations may occur from the increased presence of human activity, noise, and dust generated 

during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased energetic costs associated 

with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. Habitat could be lost directly through clearing 

and grubbing in riparian areas or through groundwater pumping. Groundwater pumping may 

result in depletion of surface flows, degradation and loss of riparian habitats, and local declines 

or extirpations of aquatic and riparian plants and animals. Loss of suitable breeding, roosting, or 

foraging habitat could result in reduced breeding success and stress due to competition for 

remaining suitable habitat. Fragmentation of habitats as a result of coal mining reduce 

connectivity of cuckoo breeding areas and therefore reduce genetic dispersal. Reductions in flow 

regime in riparian areas could also reduce prey abundance (e.g., tree frogs, and adult aquatic 

insects, such as dragonflies, flies and beetles). Population viability would be affected if 

populations become isolated to the extent that adults and juveniles cannot successfully disperse 

between remaining patches. These effects would result in fewer offspring and lowered 

population size. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may 

result in harassment of individuals or capture and collection of individuals if tagging and nest 

monitoring is included in the survey protocol.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect cuckoos 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of loss of habitat, mortality, harassment, causing displacement, reduced 

productivity and survivorship as a result of noise and increased activity from mining activities 

occurring adjacent to occupied habitat. 

Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the 

Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific 

protective measures incorporated into permits through stepdown section 7 consultations and the 

technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, 

and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect cuckoos to 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 2

potentially be harassed, trapped, or collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols 

recommended by the Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of 

cuckoos to result in injury or death of individuals.

We do not expect future coal mining to occur near proposed designated critical habitat areas in 

Arizona but proposed critical habitat areas of riparian habitat may overlap with mining activity in 

Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico. If mining were to occur in yellow-billed cuckoo critical 

habitat, effects to the physical and biological features (PBFs) may occur. Removal of riparian 

vegetation cover would eliminate necessary habitat structure and likely their insect prey PBF. 

Replacement of riparian vegetation could occur but would likely not develop into suitable habitat 

before bond release. The loss of habitat could require mandatory wildlife enhancement measures 

that would reduce effects to some extent, but local changes to groundwater or hydrologic balance 

may be long-term. 

1.1.2 Birds – Raptors

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) and the 

Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida). Effects to raptors from mining may occur from 

direct mortality, harassment, habitat loss, and fragmentation. Direct mortality of adults, 

juveniles, or eggs could occur if vegetation removal occurs when nesting raptors are present. 

Disturbance of individuals living adjacent to surface coal mining operations may occur from the 

increased presence of human activity, noise, and dust generated during the mining process. Such 

disturbance could result in increased energetic costs associated with stress and abandonment of 

normal behaviors. Loss of suitable breeding, roosting, or foraging habitat could result in reduced 

breeding success and stress due to competition for remaining suitable habitat. Fragmentation of 

forested habitats as a result of coal mining would affect connectivity of raptor breeding areas and 

therefore reduce genetic dispersal. Population viability would be affected if populations become 

isolated to the extent that adults and juveniles cannot successfully disperse between remaining 

patches. These effects would result in fewer offspring and lowered population size. Habitat 

effects are more likely for habitat specialists like the Mexican spotted owl than for a generalist 

like the California condor. 

Disturbance effects may come from lights from nighttime activities or from noise, or both. 

Artificial lighting may cause prey species to alter their behavior and be less available to foraging 

raptors. Noise may cause stress, behavioral alterations, or suppress breeding. Sources of noise 

include rock drills and blasting. The degree of effects depends largely on local conditions, 

including vegetation, topography, and weather. For example, OSMRE (2011) determined that on 

the Kayenta mine in Arizona, occupied habitat would have to be relatively close (less than two 

miles) to the activity for noise related disturbance to be an impact to individuals. Modeling 

further showed that mining related noises coming from many coal resource areas would not 

reach the level at which behavioral impacts would occur, even in adjacent habitats (OSMRE 

2011). 

Effects would be lessened by the requirement to develop a protection and enhancement plan that 

describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and wildlife, 

including ESA-listed and proposed species. The plan would include protective measures to be 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 3

used during mining and enhancement measures that will be used during reclamation and the 

postmining phase to develop terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The operator would also be required 

to identify habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats 

would make it possible to avoid or restore them.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect raptors 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation 

measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help 

avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective 

measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical 

assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further 

clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), 

are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific 

monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect raptors to potentially be harassed, 

trapped, or collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. 

We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of raptors to result in injury or 

death of individuals.

None of the designated critical habitat for the California condor overlaps the coal resources 

layer. Therefore, consequences to the critical habitat are highly unlikely given the distance from 

the closest boundary of the designated critical habitat to the areas within the coal resource layer. 

Total Mexican spotted owl critical habitat overlaps mineable coal by 4.2%. The PBFs for the 

Mexican spotted owl pertain to forest structure and the maintenance of adequate prey species. If 

mining were to occur in Mexican spotted owl critical habitat, effects to the PBFs may occur. 

Removal of forest cover would eliminate the PBFs. Replacement of trees could occur but it 

would take decades to achieve trees of 12 inches diameter at breast height, as well as creation of 

large dead trees. These PBFs would not be present on the site, if at all, until long after the bond 

release had occurred. The loss of habitat could require mandatory wildlife enhancement 

measures that would reduce effects to some extent. Enhancement measures must be 

commensurate with the impact and must also be permanent whenever possible.

1.1.3 Birds – Woodpeckers

One ESA-listed species represents this guild, the red cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis). 

Effects to woodpeckers from mining may occur from direct mortality, disturbance, habitat loss, 

and habitat fragmentation. Direct mortality of adults, juveniles, or eggs could occur if vegetation 

removal occurs when nesting woodpeckers are present. Loss of suitable breeding, roosting, or 

foraging habitat could result in reduced breeding success and stress due to competition for 

remaining suitable habitat. Disturbance of individuals living adjacent to surface coal mining 

operations may occur from the increased presence of human activity, noise, and dust generated 

during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased energetic costs associated 

with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. Fragmentation of forested habitats as a result 

of coal mining would affect connectivity of woodpecker breeding areas and therefore reduce 

genetic dispersal. Population viability would be affected if populations become isolated to the 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 4

extent that adults and juveniles cannot successfully disperse between remaining patches. These 

effects would result in fewer offspring and lowered population size. Species-specific monitoring 

may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment of individuals or capture and 

collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included in the survey protocol.

These effects will be lessened by the requirement to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed or proposed species. These plans must include protective 

measures to be used during mining and enhancement measures that will be used during 

reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The mining 

permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife. 

Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid or restore them. Effects would 

also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental 

values.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

woodpeckers nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. 

Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the 

Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific 

protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the 

technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, 

and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect woodpeckers 

to potentially be harassed, trapped, or collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols 

recommended by the Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of 

woodpeckers to result in injury or death of individuals.

Critical habitat has not been designated for the red-cockaded woodpecker.

1.1.4 Birds – Passerines

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii 

extimus). Effects to passerines from mining may occur from direct mortality, harassment, prey 

reductions, habitat loss and habitat fragmentation. Direct mortality of adults, juveniles, or eggs 

could occur if vegetation removal occurs when nesting passerines are present. Disturbance of 

individuals living adjacent to surface coal mining operations may occur from the increased 

presence of human activity, noise, and dust generated during the mining process. Such 

disturbance could result in increased energetic costs associated with stress and abandonment of 

nest sites, resulting in failed nests and lower productivity. Habitat could be lost directly through 

clearing and grubbing in riparian areas or through groundwater pumping. Groundwater pumping 

may result in depletion of surface flows, degradation, and loss of riparian habitats, and local 

declines or extirpations of aquatic and riparian and aquatic plants and animals (OSMRE 2011). 

Loss of suitable breeding, roosting, or foraging habitat could result in reduced breeding success 

and stress due to competition for remaining suitable habitat. Fragmentation of forested habitats 

as a result of coal mining would affect connectivity of passerine breeding areas and therefore 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 5

reduce genetic dispersal. Population viability would be affected if populations become isolated to 

the extent that adults and juveniles cannot successfully disperse between remaining patches. 

These effects would result in fewer offspring and lowered population size. Species-specific 

monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment of individuals or 

capture and collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included in the survey 

protocol.

Noise and increased human activity in and around the mine may affect many passerines. 

OSMRE has consulted on the southwestern willow flycatcher in regard to the Kayenta Mine 

project, and found that willow flycatchers continued to use stopover sites while disturbances 

from noise and mining activity were occurring. However, the stopover habitat was nearly six 

miles away from the source of the mining noise (OSMRE 2011). Mining operations closer to 

passerine habitat may result in disturbance of individuals.

Effects to passerines will be lessened by the requirement to develop a protection and 

enhancement plan that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse 

impacts to fish and wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or 

proposed critical habitat. These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining 

and enhancement measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to 

develop terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify 

habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make 

it possible to avoid or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for 

protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include 

avoiding disturbing, enhancing where practicable or restoring habitats of unusually high value 

for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

passerines nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance, and loss 

or reduction in emergent adult aquatic insect prey in riparian corridors. Conservation measures 

incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or 

minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures 

incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination process described in 

SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination 

Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid 

impacts to federal trust resources. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through the technical assistance coordination process described in this further clarified 

for permits issued by State RAs in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 Dispute 

Resolution Process (Appendices A and B) are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal 

trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we 

expect passerines to potentially be harassed, trapped, or collected depending on the survey or 

tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved 

monitoring of passerines to result in injury or death of individuals.

If mining were to occur in southwestern willow flycatcher critical habitat, effects to the PBFs 

may occur. Removal of riparian vegetation cover would eliminate the riparian vegetation PBF 

and likely the insect prey PBF. Replacement of riparian vegetation could occur but would likely 

not develop into suitable habitat before bond release. The regulatory authority would have no 

control over the site after bond release and the landowner may choose to remove the vegetation. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 6

That said, stream construction on surface coal mines occurs commonly as a means of replacing 

stream resources that have been disturbed by mining, and measures to maximize benefits for 

southwestern willow flycatcher can be incorporated into PEPs. For example, restoration of 

aquatic life and processes in such streams can be encouraged by establishing woody vegetation –

trees and shrubs – in these streams’ riparian areas and elsewhere in their watersheds. This can be 

accomplished by combining practices recommended by the Forestry Reclamation Approach for 

establishing forest trees on surface coal mines with those used commonly for riparian 

reforestation in non-mining areas. Successful riparian reforestation is a positive outcome for 

aquatic life, wildlife, and people, and can greatly enhance the overall reclaimed ecosystem 

(Zipper et al., 2018). 

1.1.5 Birds—Wading Birds

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed whooping crane (Grus americana). This group 

includes cranes, herons, egrets, storks, spoonbills, and ibises. Wading birds have physical and 

behavioral adaptations for living in aquatic or semi-aquatic habitats. Their legs, neck, toes, and 

bills all may be specialized for living around water and finding food. Most wading birds are 

colonial nesters, however the one wading bird which may be affected by this action, the 

whooping crane, is not. 

Effects to this guild may include habitat loss and low reproductive rates coupled with low 

juvenile recruitment. This guild is highly sensitive to human disturbance so it is unlikely that 

these birds would utilize and active mine site. The main population of whooping cranes migrates 

through the Central Flyway between Wood Buffalo National Park in north-central Canada and 

the Aransas National Wildlife refuge on the Texas coast. During this migration they have been 

observed using surface mines as stopover habitat. Whooping cranes are highly sensitive to 

human disturbance so it is unlikely they would use an active mine. They would also likely leave 

the area if mining operations began to get too close to the stopover areas they were using. Thus, 

we anticipate adverse effects to whooping cranes from this action would be rare. 

Future state or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur include diversions and 

groundwater pumping, removal of riparian vegetation, livestock grazing, recreation, fire, 

agricultural development, and urbanization. If these activities occur in or near whooping crane 

habitat, loss or degradation of the habitat could occur or prey availability could be reduced, 

leading to disturbance and reduced reproductive success.

Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment 

of individuals or capture and collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included 

in the survey protocol.

Effects to wading birds could be minimized or reduced by the hydrologic balance protections 

required by the regulations. Under the existing SMCRA regulations, mines are to be designed to 

prevent material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area and to protect surface 

water and groundwater. Sediment control measures must be used to prevent, to the extent 

possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 7

With minor exceptions, mines must be designed so that all surface drainage is passed through a 

siltation structure before leaving the permit area, and discharges of water must meet applicable 

state and federal laws and effluent limitations.

Effects to wading birds will be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and 

enhancement plan that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse 

impacts to fish and wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or 

proposed critical habitat. These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining 

and enhancement measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to

develop terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify 

habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make 

it possible to avoid or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for 

protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental values.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect wading 

birds nesting or feeding in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations 

to experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. 

Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the 

Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific 

protective measures incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect wading birds to potentially be harassed, captured, or 

collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would 

not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of wading birds to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

Critical habitat for the whooping crane will likely not be impacted by the action, since there is no 

overlap of mineable coal with designated critical habitat for whooping crane. 

1.1.6 Birds – Shorebirds

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed piping plover (Charadrius melodus), rufa red knot

(Calidris canutus rufa), and interior least tern (Sternula antillarum). Effects to this guild may 

occur through direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat degradation. Direct mortality may occur 

during active mining if nests or chicks are destroyed. Noise from surface coal mining operations 

may also cause birds to avoid nesting near active surface coal mining operations. Mining may 

also result in impacts to habitat through changes in water resources such as quality and quantity 

changes, diversions, and increases in sedimentation. These hydrologic changes may result in loss 

or degradation of nesting and foraging habitat. These effects may result in reduced nesting 

success and lowered population size. However, nesting and foraging habitat degradation is 

unlikely to result from coal mining. Coal mining is unlikely to affect the hydrograph and 

sediment deposition characteristics of larger river systems that create the sandbars and bare 

islands this guild depends on for nesting. Coal mining is also unlikely to affect foraging habitat 

(mud flats) on larger rivers for the same reasons. Positive effects may result from the creation of 

new nesting habitat through land reshaping by filling and excavating during reclamation. Interior 

least terns are known to nest on disturbed ground as would be created during vegetation removal. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 8

If shorebirds such as interior least terns nest on land cleared for coal extraction, disturbance and 

mortality to adults and juveniles may occur from the mining process. Species-specific 

monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment of individuals or 

capture and collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included in the survey 

protocol.

Effects to shorebirds could be minimized or reduced by the hydrologic balance protections 

required by the regulations. Under the existing SMCRA regulations, mines are to be designed to 

prevent material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area and to protect surface 

water and groundwater. Sediment control measures must be used to prevent, to the extent 

possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. 

With minor exceptions, mines must be designed so that all surface drainage is passed through a 

siltation structure before leaving the permit area, and discharges of water must meet applicable 

state and federal laws and effluent limitations.

Effects to shorebirds will be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and 

enhancement plan that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse 

impacts to fish and wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or 

proposed critical habitat. These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining 

and enhancement measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to 

develop terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify 

habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make 

it possible to avoid or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for 

protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental values.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

shorebirds nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. 

Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the 

Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific 

protective measures incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect shorebirds to potentially be harassed, captured, or 

collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would 

not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of shorebirds to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

Critical habitat has not been designated for the interior least tern or the rufa red knot. Critical 

habitat has been designated for the Great Lakes breeding population, the northern Great Plains 

breeding population, and wintering populations of the piping plover. Only the Northern Great 

Plains breeding population critical habitat overlaps mineable coal, by approximately 32 percent.

The one overriding biological PBF for the Great Plains breeding population of the piping plover 

that must be present at all sites is the dynamic ecological processes that create and maintain 

piping plover habitat. This biological process allows the physical processes to develop (USFWS 

2002c). These processes occur on different habitat types in the northern Great Plains. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 9

Critical habitat for the piping plover will likely not be heavily impacted since coal mining is 

unlikely to affect the hydrograph and sediment deposition characteristics of larger river systems 

that create the sandbars and bare islands this guild depends on for nesting. Coal mining is also 

unlikely to affect foraging habitat (mud flats) on larger rivers for the same reasons.

1.1.7 Birds – Grouse

This guild is represented by ESA-listed the Gunnison sage grouse (Centrocercus minimus). 

Effects to grouse from mining may occur from direct mortality, disturbance, habitat loss, and 

habitat fragmentation. Direct mortality of adults, juveniles, or eggs could occur if vegetation 

removal occurs when nesting grouse are present. Disturbance of individuals living adjacent to 

surface coal mining operations may occur from the increased presence of human activity, noise, 

and dust generated during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased 

energetic costs associated with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. Loss of suitable 

breeding or foraging habitat could result in reduced breeding success and stress due to 

competition for remaining suitable habitat. Fragmentation of sagebrush habitats as a result of 

coal mining would affect connectivity of grouse breeding areas and therefore reduce genetic 

dispersal. Population viability would be affected if populations become isolated to the extent that 

adults and juveniles cannot successfully disperse between remaining patches. These effects 

would result in fewer offspring and lowered population size. Species-specific monitoring may be 

included as a permit condition and may result in harassment of individuals or capture and 

collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included in the survey protocol.

Disturbance, in the form of noise and increased human presence, from mining activities may 

affect resting, dispersing, foraging, display, and nesting behaviors of individuals. These effects 

may induce some individuals to abandon affected areas. These individuals may then either have 

to relocate to other suitable habitat or continue to utilize the affected habitat despite the less than 

ideal circumstances. Individuals that stay in the degraded habitat may exhibit reduced fitness due 

to the increased disturbance. They may have increased stress due to the startling effects of 

intermittent noise or due to the threat perceived from the presence of tall structures. Intermittent 

noise disturbance may reduce nesting success due to an increased frequency of flushing from the 

nest, which would decrease time spent sitting on eggs or feeding hatchlings, and increase the 

likelihood of predation on the nest. Individuals that relocate to other suitable habitat may suffer 

increased mortality risk during dispersal and reduced fitness if after finding suitable habitat they 

have to compete with other individuals to claim a portion of the territory. Some areas may not 

have sufficient unoccupied habitat to absorb the displaced individuals.

These effects will be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 10

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect grouse 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation 

measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help 

avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective 

measures incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination process 

described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the 2020 SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect grouse to potentially be harassed, captured, or 

collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would 

not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of grouse to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

If mining were to occur in Gunnison sage-grouse critical habitat, effects to the PBFs would occur 

through vegetation removal. Replacement of vegetation could occur but it would take decades to 

achieve the type of vegetative community structure that comprises the PBFs. These PBFs would 

not be present on the site, if at all, until long after the bond release had occurred. The loss of the 

habitat, if not replaceable before final bond release, could require mandatory wildlife 

enhancement measures that would reduce effects to some extent. Enhancement measures must be 

commensurate with the impact and must also be permanent whenever possible.

1.1.8 Reptiles – Snakes

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed northern Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis eques 

megalops), the narrow-headed gartersnake (Thamnophis rufipunctatus), the black pine snake 

(Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi), the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus), and 

the Louisiana pinesnake (Pituophis ruthveni). 

The primary threats to the gartersnakes in this guild are predation and competition from harmful 

nonnative fish, frog and crayfish species (USFWS 2014n). The primary threat to the black pine 

snake and Louisiana pine snake is habitat loss, due to the loss of longleaf pine stands from 

conversion to other land uses as well as from fire suppression (USFWS 2014o). Habitat loss is 

also the primary threat to the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. Habitat for the eastern massasauga 

rattlesnake may be lost due to destruction of native habitat, conversion to agriculture, 

development and infrastructure conversion (Szymanski 2015). Mining is not specifically 

identified as a threat; however, any land use that would divert, dry up, or significantly pollute 

aquatic habitat would threaten the species in this guild that use it. 

Effects to this guild from mining may occur from direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss 

or fragmentation. Site clearing could result in loss of existing vegetation and disturbance of the 

soil profile as well as possible direct mortality from crushing of individuals. Disturbance of 

individuals living adjacent to surface coal mining operations may occur from the increased 

presence of human activity during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased 

energetic costs associated with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. Habitat degradation 

may occur due to the delay in the return of suitable site conditions for prey species as well as 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 11

hibernation/aestivation. Streams that are mined through may be dewatered resulting in unsuitable 

habitat conditions for the riparian specialists in this guild. Habitat loss or degradation may result 

in reduced fitness due to loss of nest sites or reduced prey availability. Habitat fragmentation 

may lead to genetic isolation and increased vulnerability of remaining populations to disease, and 

loss due to stochastic events. These effects may lead to lowered population sizes. Speciesspecific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment of 

individuals or capture and collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included in 

the survey protocol.

These effects will be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect snakes 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation 

measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help 

avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective 

measures incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination process 

described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect snakes to potentially be harassed, captured, or 

collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would 

not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of snakes to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

If mining were to occur in black pine snake proposed critical habitat, effects to the PBFs would 

occur. Forest and groundcover would be removed, refugia would be eliminated and soil texture 

would be altered. Replacement of vegetation, groundcover, and soils could occur but would 

likely not develop into suitable habitat before bond release. The loss of the habitat, if it cannot be 

fully restored before final bond release, could require mandatory wildlife enhancement measures 

that would reduce effects to some extent. Enhancement measures would also have to be 

commensurate with the impact and permanent whenever possible.

1.1.9 Reptiles – Turtles

This guild is represented by the following ESA-listed species: the yellow-blotched map turtle 

(Graptemys flavimaculata), the ringed map turtle (Graptemys oculifera), the flattened musk 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 12

turtle (Sternotherus depressus) and the bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii). Effects to this guild 

from mining may occur from direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or fragmentation. Site 

clearing could result in direct mortality from crushing of individuals. Disturbance of individuals 

living adjacent to surface coal mining operations may occur from the increased presence of 

human activity during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased energetic 

costs associated with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. Effects to individuals may 

occur from direct mortality from crushing by heavy machinery during land clearing and 

construction of drainage control structures and other infrastructure. Effects to habitat may occur 

from land clearing which leads to habitat loss and fragmentation. Loss of breeding, feeding, and 

basking habitat may occur from these activities. Nest predation may also increase as a result of 

habitat loss close to riparian zones. Habitat loss from these activities is likely to be long term. 

Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment 

of individuals or capture and collection of individuals if tagging and nest monitoring is included 

in the survey protocol.

Habitat loss or degradation may also occur from changes in water quality or quantity caused by 

mining. Changes in water chemistry or sediment loading regimes may result in the loss or 

degradation of habitat, including nesting habitat. Water chemistry changes may also affect prey 

availability. Contaminants may accumulate in individual turtles, particularly in internal organs or 

in the blood, may be transferred maternally through eggs, and may affect females differently than 

males resulting in skewed sex ratios (Shuangying et al. 2011).

Habitat loss or degradation may result in reduced fitness due to loss of nest sites or nest 

predation. Habitat fragmentation may lead to genetic isolation and increased vulnerability of 

remaining populations to disease, and loss due to stochastic events. Exposure to contaminants or 

degraded water quality may cause individual turtles to abandon an area, have reduced fitness, 

suffer physiological effects, and produce fewer offspring. These effects may lead to lowered 

population sizes.

These effects will be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

That said, without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

turtles nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. 

Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the 

Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific 

protective measures incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 13

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect turtles to potentially be harassed, captured, or collected 

depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of turtles to result in injury or death of individuals.

1.1.10 Amphibians – Salamanders

The ESA-listed species representing this guild include the Cheat Mountain salamander 

(Plethodon nettingi), the Jemez Mountains salamander (P. neomexicanus), and the Black Warrior 

waterdog (Necturis alabamensis). Effects to this guild from mining may occur from direct 

mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or fragmentation. Site clearing and in-stream work could 

result in direct mortality from crushing of individuals, desiccation, or suffocation. Disturbance of 

individuals living adjacent to surface coal mining operations may occur from the increased 

presence of human activity during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased 

energetic costs associated with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. If coal mining were 

to occur within or upstream from these species’ habitat, effects may occur as a result of land 

clearing activities. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may 

result in harassment of individuals or capture and collection of individuals if marking is included 

in the survey protocol.

As salamanders lack the mobility to retreat from the mining area, the clearing and grubbing of 

surface vegetation and removal of soil and overburden or discharges of effluent would cause 

direct mortality to any individuals within the affected area. Long term habitat loss and/or 

fragmentation and degradation are likely while mining and reclamation activities occur. The long 

term loss of a tree canopy would increase ambient temperature at ground level and decrease soil 

moisture making the habitat unsuitable for salamander species. In addition, increased surface 

temperatures and soil compaction influence the type of vegetation that can survive on mined land 

and the extent and rate at which the premining plant community and associated fauna can 

recolonize the site. Reestablishment of suitable forest habitat for this guild would take many 

decades if not centuries (Petranka 1993). Reduced habitat availability would reduce suitable 

shelter and forage availability which in turn directly affects survivorship and reproduction. 

Lowered survivorship and reproduction lead to reduced population size. Disruptions of habitat 

may also lead to fragmentation or dissection of single large populations into smaller subunits and 

create barriers to dispersal and gene flow. The loss of genetic material in a population can reduce 

genetic variability and could be costly to populations if diseases are introduced or other 

ecosystem perturbations occur (Pauley 2008). All these stressors can lead to reduced fitness and 

lower population sizes.

These effects would be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement 

plan that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

The plan must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement measures 

that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial and aquatic 

habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually high value 

for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid or restore 

them. Effects would also be reduced by the protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 14

values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, enhancing where practicable or restoring 

habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife. 

Effects to salamanders would be reduced by sediment control measures and effluent limitations. 

Maintenance of riparian buffer zones of sufficient width to slow and reduce direct runoff from 

coal sites and associated contaminants into aquatic habitats. Maintenance of riparian corridors 

provides autochthonous leaf matter to streams, moderates stream water temperatures that 

supports salamanders and sensitive benthic macroinvertebrate prey, such as caddisflies and 

mayflies. Diversion ditches route sediment to ponds where the sediment settles out and ponds 

must meet effluent limitations. 

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

salamanders nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations or 

within close proximity to the affected area to experience take in the form of mortality and harm 

through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits 

through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining 

activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into permits through the 

technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, 

and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect salamanders to 

potentially be harassed, captured, or collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols 

recommended by the Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of 

salamanders to result in injury or death of individuals.

Critical habitat is not designated for the Cheat mountain salamander. Critical habitat for the 

Jemez mountain salamander does not overlap mineable coal reserves. 

Approximately 39% of designated critical habitat for the Black Warrior waterdog overlaps 

mineable coal (Table 1) and adverse effects to PBFs including water quality, invertebrate prey, 

and leaf-pack habitats are anticipated to occur.Coal mining in the Black Warrior River basin is 

an ongoing threat to the black warrior waterdog, and as of 2018 new coal mines have been 

proposed in Sipsey Fork and Mulberry Fork (Alabama Surface Mining Commission in 2012). 

Based on a review of publicly available Alabama Surface Mining Commission permit data, there 

appears to be many active mine permits and permitted point source discharges located within 

areas recently designated as critical habitat and considered occupied. Run off from coal surface 

mining can lead to stream acidification, sediment deposition on the stream bottom, and changes 

in bioavailabilty of contaminants. Black Warrior waterdog use stream leaf packs for both cover 

from predators and as a source of benthic macroinvertebrate prey, such as caddisflies and 

mayflies, and water quality impairments related to coal mine run off have also been linked to 

declines in benthic macroinvertebrate prey richness and abundance.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 15

1.1.11 Amphibians – Frogs

The list of species that may be affected by the action includes the Chiricahua leopard frog 

(Lithobates chiricahuensis) and the Houston toad (Bufo houstonensis). Active coal mining 

currently exists within the range of the Houston toad, however, not within the known distribution 

of this species. Impacts of coal mining conducted within frog habitat may include, effects to the 

species as a result of direct mortality, increased sedimentation, changes to water chemistry 

including elevated conductivity, loss or modification of habitat, and creation of dispersal 

barriers. Although frogs are relatively mobile, the clearing and grubbing of surface vegetation 

and removal of soil and overburden would cause direct mortality to any individuals within the

disturbance boundary. Long-term habitat loss and/or fragmentation and degradation are likely 

while mining and reclamation activities occur. The long-term loss of a tree canopy would 

increase ambient temperature at ground level and decrease soil moisture. In addition, increased 

surface temperatures and soil compaction influence the type of vegetation that can survive on 

mined land and the extent and rate at which the premining plant community and associated fauna 

can recolonize the site. Reestablishment of suitable forest habitat for this guild would take many 

decades if not centuries. Reduced habitat availability would reduce suitable shelter and forage

availability which in turn directly affects survivorship and reproduction. Lowered survivorship 

and reproduction lead to reduced population size. Disruptions of habitat may also lead to 

fragmentation or dissection of single large populations into smaller subunits and create barriers 

to dispersal and gene flow. The loss of genetic material in a population can reduce genetic 

variability and could be costly to populations if diseases are introduced or other ecosystem 

perturbations occur (Pauley 2008). All these stressors can lead to reduced fitness and lower 

population sizes. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may 

result in harassment, capture and collection of individuals depending on the survey protocol.

These effects will be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the protection of fish, wildlife, and related 

environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, enhancing where 

practicable or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Effects to frogs would be reduced by sediment control measures and effluent limitations. 

Diversion ditches route sediment to ponds where the sediment settles out and ponds must meet 

effluent limitations. Sediment ponds used during mining activities are often converted to stock 

ponds or fish and wildlife habitat during reclamation. These water resources may provide 

potential suitable habitat previously unavailable to frogs prior to mining.

Within central Arizona, small isolated portions of the Colorado Plateau coal basin overlap 

portions (less than one percent) of the Chiricahua leopard frog’s range. No active coal mining 

currently exists within the range of the species. However, if coal mining was conducted within 

Chiricahua leopard frog habitat, effects to the species may occur as a result of increased 

sedimentation, changes to water chemistry including elevated conductivity, loss or modification 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 16

of habitat, and creation of dispersal barriers. All these stressors can lead to reduced fitness and 

lower population sizes. 

Effects to the Chiricahua leopard frog would be reduced by the requirements for sediment 

control measures and the effluent limitations. Diversion ditches route sediment to ponds where 

the sediment settles out and ponds must meet effluent limitations. Sediment ponds used during 

mining activities are often converted to stock ponds or fish and wildlife habitat during 

reclamation. These water resources may provide suitable habitat for the Chiricahua leopard frog 

previously unavailable to the frog prior to mining. 

According to OSMRE’s 2020 BE, no active coal mining currently exists within the known 

occupied distribution of the Houston toad, and the nearest mines to known populations are in 

reclamation only with no additional mining expected in the area. Houston toad total critical 

habitat overlaps 86% with mineable coal. However, if coal mining were conducted within 

Houston toad habitat, effects to the species may occur as a result of loss and modification of 

habitat, dispersal barriers, creation of sedimentation ponds that may not have suitable water 

chemistry and nutrients for larva and tadpole stages, and reclamation to a non-suitable habitat 

type. All these stressors can lead to reduced survival, habitat, and lower population sizes.

Effects to the Houston toad would be reduced by the requirements for sediment control measures 

and effluent limitations. Sediment ponds used during mining activities are often converted to 

stock ponds during reclamation. These water resources would provide vegetation, algae, and 

organic matter that would support larval and tadpool stages of the Houston toad and may replace 

smaller and more numerous ponds that were present before mining (that may have contributed to 

reduction of chorus magnitude). Enhancement of permanent ponds with wooded canopy along 

the fringe would improve the water temperature and provide shade to the water and adjacent 

soils and vegetation.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect frogs 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation 

measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help 

avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective 

measures incorporated into permits through the technical assistance coordination process 

described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect turtles to potentially be harassed, captured, or collected 

depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of frogs to result in injury or death of individuals.

Critical habitat for the Chiricahua leopard frog does not overlap mineable coal reserves. 

Approximately 86 percent of critical habitat designated for the Houston toad overlaps mineable 

reserves. However, the nearest mines to known populations are in late stages of reclamation and 

OSMRE does not anticipate additional mining within the area. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 17

1.1.12 Insects – Bumble Bees

While data demonstrates that coal mining historically has not affected this species or its critical 

habitat, effects to the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) may result from ground 

disturbance activities and habitat modifications that may result from coal mining and impact the 

bees breeding, feeding, and sheltering. The primary factors influencing the status include risks 

posed by “pathogens, pesticides, habitat loss and degradation, small population dynamics, and 

climate change” (82 FR3186-3209). Any rusty patched bumble bee occupying the area within the 

affected area of the mine during clearing and grubbing activities will likely be disturbed, or 

crushed. Rusty patched bumble bee nests and overwintering queens would be expected to be 

crushed by machinery during vegetation removal and construction. We expect rusty patched 

bumble bee workers foraging in the area would fly away or avoid the area during vegetation 

removal. Displaced workers will have to travel further to forage, which will affect the ability of 

the workers to provide sufficient resources to a colony, resulting in reduced health of some 

individual workers, reduced reproductive capacity of the queen, and reduced production of 

foundress queens and males. Clearing of herbaceous vegetation while rusty patched bumble bees 

are present in habitat is expected to have a direct effect on the quality, quantity, and timing of 

floral resources, thereby reducing survivability and reproductive success of queens; equipment 

used could crush individuals, queens, or colonies. Long-term and permanent land cover changes 

may also affect the rusty patched bumble bee. 

Conventional reclamation techniques have not relied heavily on pollinator friendly species for 

revegetation. However, a presidential memorandum issued June 20, 2014 was designed to create 

a federal strategy to promote the health of honeybees and other pollinators. As a result of the 

Presidential Memorandum and the listing of the rusty patched bumble bee, reclamation 

techniques are incorporating more pollinator friendly species within revegetation plans. States 

that appear to have the highest overlap of mineable coal with rusty patched bumble bee range are 

Iowa, Illinois and West Virginia.

As stated above, provisions within the SMCRA regulations require a revegetation plan, including 

being compatible with the postmining land use, being compatible with the plant and animal 

species of the area, and meeting the requirements of applicable state and federal seed, poisonous 

and noxious plant, and introduced species laws or regulations. While these requirements do not 

necessarily result in reestablishment of habitat designed specifically for use by the Rusty patched 

bumble bee, they could be used by the Rusty patched bumble bee. Also, SMCRA regulations do 

not restrict the use of pesticides within the permit area; however, they are rarely used as they are 

only useful to certain types of cropland and only add an extra cost to the permittee, which 

provides limited use on coal mining operations.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect bees 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation 

measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help 

avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective 

measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical 

assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further 

clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), 

are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 18

monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect beetles to potentially be harassed, 

captured, or collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the 

Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of beetles to result in 

injury or death of individuals.

Critical habitat has not been designated for the rusty patched bumble bee. 

1.1.13 Insects – Beetles

This guild is represented by the American burying beetle (Nicrophorous americanus). Effects to 

this guild from mining may occur from direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or 

fragmentation. Effects to beetles, including the American burying beetle may occur as a result of 

ground disturbance activities and habitat modifications. Any beetles occupying the soil within 

the disturbance boundary of the mine during clearing and grubbing activities will likely be 

crushed. Long-term and permanent land cover changes may also affect beetles. Conventional 

reclamation techniques typically result in heavily compacted soils. Removal of the tree canopy 

increases ambient temperature at ground level and decreases soil moisture. These effects may 

produce soils ill-suited to ground beetle’s reproduction and overwintering needs. All these 

stressors can lead to reduced fitness and lower population sizes. Species-specific monitoring may 

be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, capture, and collection of 

individuals.

Provisions within the current regulations require the salvage and redistribution of topsoil during 

reclamation but these requirements do not necessarily result in reestablishment of soils suitable 

for use by burying beetles. The American burying beetle is commonly addressed in surface coal 

mining permits in eastern Oklahoma by surveying for presence/absence and timing land clearing 

activities to avoid disrupting soil during the reproductive season.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect beetles 

nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience 

take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation 

measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help 

avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective 

measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical 

assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further 

clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), 

are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific 

monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect beetles to potentially be harassed, 

captured, or collected depending on the survey or tagging protocols recommended by the 

Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of beetles to result in 

injury or death of individuals.

Critical habitat has not been designated for the American burying beetle. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 19

1.1.14 Insects – Butterflies

This guild is represented by the Mitchell’s satyr butterfly (Neonympha mitchelli mitchelli), 

Dakota skipper (Hesperius dacotae). Effects to this guild from mining may occur from direct 

mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or fragmentation. Effects to butterflies may occur as a 

result of ground disturbance activities and habitat modifications. Any butterflies occupying the 

vegetation within the disturbance boundary of the mine during clearing and grubbing activities 

may be crushed. All these stressors can lead to reduced fitness and lower population sizes. 

Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, 

capture, and collection of individuals.

Due its restrictive habitat requirements and isolated populations, it is unlikely surface coal 

mining operations would be conducted directly through known Mitchell’s satyr butterfly 

occupied habitat. However, if Mitchell’s satyr butterfly habitat was mined the species may suffer 

effects including mortality, habitat degradation, and habitat loss. More potential exists for mines 

in proximity to Mitchell’s satyr butterfly habitat to indirectly effect to the species by negatively 

impacting connected surface and/or groundwater hydrology. Mining can potentially impact 

surface and ground water quantity, quality, and flow. These changes could impact the vegetative 

community of a hydrologically connected Mitchell’s satyr butterfly occupied wetland resulting 

in a habitat ill-suited to the foraging needs of the species. Reduced food supplies could lead to 

lowered survivorship and reproduction which could lead to lowered population size. Mining that 

resulted in habitat loss for the Dakota skipper could further fragment its habitat and lead to 

isolation of small populations resulting in dispersal barriers and restricted gene flow. Small, 

isolated populations are more likely to be extirpated if there is no opportunity for recruitment 

from other, nearby populations. The loss of genetic material in a population can reduce genetic 

variability and could be costly to populations if diseases are introduced.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

butterflies nesting in and around the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. 

Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the 

Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The species-specific 

protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the 

technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, 

and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect butterflies to 

potentially be harassed, captured, or collected depending on the survey protocols recommended 

by the Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of butterflies to 

result in injury or death of individuals.

1.1.15 Fishes

Coal mining affects fish and the habitats upon which they depend. These effects occur to streams 

within the SMCRA permit boundary as well as to waters downstream of a permit boundary. 

Stream habitat loss may occur within the permit boundary by placement of excess spoil fills in 

streams, temporary or permanent diversion of streams, creation of instream sediment ponds and 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 20

impoundments, and hydrologic changes which degrade water quantity. Fish within filled streams 

may become trapped and suffer direct mortality. Habitat degradation may occur both on and off 

the permit boundary by producing changes in surface or ground water quantity and/or quality 

including: increased total suspended solids (TSS) and sediment load, introduction of 

contaminants (e.g., TDS, acidity, alkalinity, iron, aluminum, etc.), increased or reduced stream 

flow, and increased water temperature. These effects include: habitat fragmentation, geomorphic 

changes, chronic toxicity issues, altered food webs, and enhanced competition with other native 

and non-native species. These effects may reduce the fitness of listed fish species and reduce the 

availability and suitability of the habitats upon which they depend.

Clearing, grubbing, construction, and other earth moving and disturbance activities associated 

with coal mining operations produce point and non-point sources of sediment within and 

downstream of a coal mine. Sediment can affect fish through multiple pathways, including 

reproduction (lack of visual cues; reduction in interstitial spaces for benthic egg deposition or 

buried nests), feeding (altered prey base, reduced visibility of prey), and physiology (abraded or 

clogged gills). Consequently, fish exposed to unacceptable levels of sediment exhibit reduced 

survivability and reproductive success.

Most adverse impacts of surface coal mining operations on water quality occur as a result of the 

excavation and fracturing of the rock layers above the coal seam to produce spoil. Surface water 

and groundwater infiltrate the pore spaces in mine spoil placed in the backfilled area of a mine or 

in an excess spoil fill and react with air and the surfaces of the rock fragments to produce 

drainage with high ionic concentrations contributing to high total dissolved solids. Total 

dissolved solids cause toxicity through increases in salinity, changes in the ionic composition of 

the water and toxicity of individual ions. Elevated TDS and corresponding conductivity in 

freshwater streams interferes with native fish and other aquatic organisms’ ability to 

osmoregulate. Sensitive fish species decline as osmotic tolerances are exceeded (Hitt et al. 2016). 

Elevated TDS also impact fish indirectly by modifying or reducing their macroinvertebrate food 

source.

In locations with geological formations that contain selenium, mining has sometimes resulted in 

elevated levels of selenium in streams draining the mine site. Mining exposes elemental selenium 

to air, thus, facilitating oxidation to selenite and selenate, which are soluble in water. 

Ziemkiewicz & Lovett (2012) experimentally found that the rate of selenium release from mine 

spoil can initially be rapid. Selenium bioaccumulates in fish tissues, causing reproductive 

problems, physical deformities, and, in extreme cases, mortality in fish in the affected waters 

(Lindberg, et al. 2011; Lemly, 1993, 2009). 

Mining may affect the flow regime of streams by removing springs and otherwise causing 

changes in base flow, water temperature, seasonal variations in flow, and fluctuations in flow in 

response to storm events. Reclaimed mine sites generally exhibit reduced evapotranspiration (as 

a result of forest loss due to mining) and reduced infiltration of rainfall (as a result of soil 

compaction during reclamation), compared to unmined areas. Increased surface runoff in 

response to storms increases the potential for flood damage and may adversely impact the 

hydrologic function of the stream by causing stream channelization. These hydrologic changes 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 21

may affect the suitability of a stream for listed fish species. Channelized streams often lack 

habitat features such as pools, riffles and glides as well as suitable epifaunal substrate to support 

a diverse community of fish species. By causing geomorphic changes, altered flow regimes can 

eliminate fish spawning beds, fill in pools, and destabilize banks. These effects reduce the fitness 

of sensitive fish species by reducing the availability and suitability of the habitats upon which 

they depend.

All listed fish species with ranges that overlap mineable coal are anticipated to be affected by the 

action. In their BA, OSMRE considered the nature of these effects in reference to their likelihood 

to occur in waters that may be permitted for coal mining, or within watersheds of coal mining 

areas, as these activities are likely to cause at minimum effects to listed fish species and their 

habitats.

NPDES permits provide some protection to aquatic species, and CWA programs may require 

additional criteria to protect water quality standards. These requirements, coupled with site 

specific Protection and Enhancement Plans (PEP) should work in unison to minimize or prevent 

adverse impacts to ESA aquatic species, including sturgeon. 

1.1.15.1 Fish – Sturgeon

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed Alabama Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus sutkussi), Gulf 

Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus desotoi), and Pallid Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus). Coal 

mining’s direct environmental effects generally occur far upstream of the large rivers inhabited 

by sturgeon. We anticipate effects from mining may extend farther downstream (Daniel et al. 

2015). Therefore, although difficult to quantify, coal mining under the current program may 

indirectly affect sturgeon species. At a landscape level, coal mining contributes to the total 

anthropogenic impact on large rivers. Coal mining’s alteration of upstream hydrology, fish, algal, 

and macroinvertebrate assemblages, food webs, and mining’s contributions to sediment, metals, 

and conductivity loads may affect the health of downstream waters including large rivers and 

may indirectly contribute to a reduction in sturgeon species’ fitness. Species-specific monitoring 

may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, capture, and collection of 

individuals.

Historically the range of Alabama sturgeon consisted of approximately 994 mi of river habitat in 

the Mobile River Basin in Alabama and Mississippi (USFWS 2010b). Alabama sturgeon has 

been recorded from the Black Warrior, Tombigbee, Alabama, Coosa, Tallapoosa, Mobile, 

Tensaw, and Cahaba rivers (Burke and Ramsey 1985, 1995). However, only 7 individuals were 

captured during targeted sampling efforts from the Cahaba and Alabama rivers (Kuhajda and 

Rider 2016), this decline has been attributed to impoundments and alteration of natural flow 

regimes, hydrology, sediment deposition as well as declines in water quality. 

Effects to sturgeon are reduced by the hydrologic balance protections required. Material damage 

to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area must be prevented and surface water and 

groundwater must be protected. Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent possible, 

additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. With minor 

exceptions, all surface drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure before 

leaving the permit area and discharges of water must meet applicable State and Federal laws and 

effluent limitations.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 22

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect sturgeon 

downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in 

the form of harm through habitat loss and degradation. Conservation measures incorporated into 

individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect sturgeon to potentially be harassed, captured, or 

collected depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of sturgeon to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

The percentage of Alabama sturgeon total critical habitat that overlaps with mineable coal is 

14.4%. The PBF’s for Alabama sturgeon critical habitat are as follows: 

(1)A flow regime (i.e., the magnitude, frequency, duration, seasonality of discharge over time) 

necessary to maintain all life stages of the species in the riverine environment, including 

migration, breeding site selection, resting, larval development, and protection of cool water 

refuges (i.e., tributaries). (2) River channel with stable sand and gravel river bottoms, and 

bedrock walls, including associated mussel beds. (3) Limestone outcrops and cut limestone 

banks, large gravel or cobble such as that found around channel training devices, and bedrock 

channel walls that provide riverine spawning sites with substrates suitable for egg deposition and 

development. (4) Long sections of free-flowing water to allow spawning migrations and 

development of embryos and larvae. (5) Water temperature not exceeding 32 °C (90 °F); 

dissolved oxygen levels not less than 5 mg/L (5 ppm), except under extreme conditions due to 

natural causes or downstream of existing hydroelectric impoundments, where it can range from 5 

mg/L to 4 mg/L (5 ppm to 4 ppm); and pH (a measure of acidity) within the range of 6.0 to 8.5.

Since critical habitat for this guild is typically located in large rivers unlikely to be directly 

affected by coal mining, these types of effects to critical habitat are unlikely. However, other 

effects, such as degradation of water quality (acid mine effluent and heavy metals) or increased 

sedimentation may occur. That’s said, we anticipate effects to be minimized by the use of special 

provisions or conservation measures, as identified through the coordination process.

1.1.15.2 Fish – Madtoms

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed Neosho Madtom (Noturus placidus) and the 

Yellowfin Madtom (Noturus flavipinnis). Effects to madtoms may occur from direct mortality, 

harassment, and habitat loss or degradation through increased sedimentation and water quality 

degradation. Sediment may degrade habitat and/or have effects to fish. It may clog gills; reduce 

aquatic insect diversity and abundance either directly or by blocking primary production; impair 

feeding success by reducing visibility of prey; bury nests; reduce growth rates; reduce disease 

tolerance; reduce spawning habitat and egg, larvae, and juvenile development; interfere with 

migration patterns; and reduce foraging efficiency (Waters 1995; Wood and Armitage 1997). 

Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, 

capture, and collection of individuals. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 23

condition and may result in harassment, capture, and collection of individuals. Capture of young 

individuals could result in mortality.

In addition, madtoms, which are heavily dependent on chemoreception (detection of chemicals) 

for survival, might be susceptible to human-induced disturbances such as chemical and sediment 

inputs, because the olfactory (sense of smell) “noise” they produce could interfere with a 

madtom’s ability to obtain food and otherwise monitor its environment (Etnier and Jenkins 1980; 

USFWS 2010c). These effects may lead to lowered survivorship, lowered reproductive success, 

and reduced fitness, all of which may lead to lowered population sizes.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect madtoms 

within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss, degradation, and 

disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination 

with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities The speciesspecific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations 

and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing 

regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect madtoms to 

potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service.

Critical habitat for the Neosho and yellowfin madtoms does not overlap mineable coal basins.

1.1.15.3 Fish – Darters

This guild is represented by 15 ESA-listed darters (Table 1). Effects to darters may occur from 

may occur from direct mortality, harassment, and habitat loss or degradation through increased 

sedimentation and water quality degradation. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a 

permit condition and may result in harassment, capture, and collection of individuals. Capture of 

individuals could result in mortality. Sediment may degrade habitat and/or otherwise affect fish. 

It may clog gills; reduce aquatic insect prey diversity and abundance either directly or by 

blocking primary production; impair feeding success by reducing visibility of prey; bury nests; 

reduce growth rates; reduce disease tolerance; reduce spawning habitat and egg, larvae, and 

juvenile development; interfere with migration patterns; and reduce foraging efficiency (Waters 

1995; Wood and Armitage 1997).

Elevated conductivity disrupts effective osmoregulation in fish and macroinvertebrates and 

impacts an organism’s ability to extract energy from food, regulate internal pH and water 

volume, excrete wastes, develop embryos properly, and fertilize eggs (USFWS 2013n; Pond et 

al. 2008; USEPA 2011), and has been shown to negatively affect biological communities 

through loss of sensitive insect taxa and lowered fish diversity (Chambers and Messinger 2001; 

Fulk et al. 2003; Pond et al. 2008, 2014; Pond 2004; Stauffer and Ferreri 2002; Hitt and 

Chambers 2014; Black et al. 2013). Loss of sensitive insect taxa may result in reduced prey 

availability for darters and darters have been shown to be less abundant in areas of high 

conductivity (USFWS 2015e).

These effects may lead to lowered survivorship, lowered reproductive success, and reduced 

fitness, all of which may lead to lowered population sizes.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 24

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect darters 

within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality and harm through habitat loss, degradation, and 

disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination 

with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The speciesspecific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations 

and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing 

regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect darters to 

potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service.

Coal mining may adversely affect PBFs for critical habitat of darters. It may alter flow regimes, 

channel characteristics, and reduce water and sediment quality. PBFs shared in common among 

darters in this guild include a prey base of diverse benthic macroinvertebrates, stream 

geomorphology and suitable substrate, suitable flow regimes including hydrological 

connectivity, adequate water quality characterized by moderate stream temperatures, acceptable 

dissolved oxygen concentrations, moderate pH, and low levels of pollutants. Adequate water 

quality is defined as the quality necessary for normal behavior, growth, and viability of all life 

stages.

Effects to darter critical habitat would be reduced by the required hydrologic balance protections. 

Material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area must be prevented and surface 

water and groundwater must be protected. Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent 

possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. 

With minor exceptions, all surface drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure

before leaving the permit area and discharges of water must meet applicable state and federal 

laws and effluent limitations. 

1.1.15.4 Fish – Minnows

This guild is represented by 12 ESA-listed species of cyprinids, all of which are currently 

classified within the subfamily Leuciscinae. Effects to minnows may occur from direct mortality, 

disturbance, and habitat loss or degradation through increased sedimentation and water quality 

degradation. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result 

in harassment, capture, and collection of individuals. Capture of individuals could also result in 

mortality. Sediment may degrade habitat and/or otherwise affect fish. It may clog gills; reduce 

aquatic insect diversity and abundance either directly or by blocking primary production; impair 

feeding success by reducing visibility of prey; bury nests; reduce growth rates; reduce disease 

tolerance; reduce spawning habitat and egg, larvae, and juvenile development; interfere with 

migration patterns; and reduce foraging efficiency (Waters 1995; Wood and Armitage 1997).

Elevated conductivity disrupts effective osmoregulation in fish and macroinvertebrates and 

impacts an organism’s ability to extract energy from food, regulate internal pH and water 

volume, excrete wastes, develop embryos properly, and fertilize eggs (USFWS 2013n; Pond et 

al. 2008; USEPA 2011) and has been shown to negatively affect biological communities through 

loss of sensitive insect taxa and lowered fish diversity (Chambers and Messinger 2001; Fulk et 

al. 2003; Pond et al. 2008, 2014; Pond 2004; Stauffer and Ferreri 2002; Hitt and Chambers 2014; 

Black et al. 2013; Hitt et al. 2016). Loss of sensitive insect taxa may result in reduced prey 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 25

availability for minnows. Increased conductivity may result in decreased minnow species 

richness (Fulk et al. 2003). These effects may lead to lowered survivorship, lowered reproductive 

success, and reduced fitness, all of which may lead to lowered population sizes.

Effects to minnows would be reduced by the hydrologic balance protections required. Material 

damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area must be prevented and surface water 

and groundwater must be protected. Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent 

possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. 

With minor exceptions, all surface drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure 

before leaving the permit area and discharges of water must meet applicable State and Federal 

laws and effluent limitations.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect minnows 

within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss, degradation, and 

disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination 

with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The speciesspecific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations 

and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing 

regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect minnows to 

potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service.

Coal mining may adversely affect PBFs for critical habitat of the laurel dace. It may alter flow 

regimes, channel characteristics, and reduce water quality and increase sedimentation. 

Effects to Laurel Dace critical habitat would be reduced by the required hydrologic balance 

protections. For example, material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area 

must be prevented and surface water and groundwater must be protected. Sediment control 

measures must prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to 

streamflow outside the permit area. To address these issues, measures such as siltation structures 

should be properly installed and should effectively filter surface runoff before leaving the permit 

area and discharges of water must meet applicable state and federal laws and effluent limitations.

Critical habitat for the humpback chub, bonytail, and Colorado pikeminnow is located in large 

rivers and is less likely to be directly affected by coal mining. However, effects to PBFs for the 

three species may occur, such as alteration of water quantity or water quality and an increase in 

sedimentation.

1.1.15.5 Fish – Suckers

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed Zuni Bluehead Sucker (Catostomus discobolus 

yarrow) and the Razorback Sucker (Xyrauchen texanus). Effects to suckers may occur from 

direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or degradation from increased sedimentation, 

elevated conductivity, and changes to water quality. Species-specific monitoring may be 

included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, capture, and collection of 

individuals. Capture of individuals could also result in mortality. Sediment may degrade habitat 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 26

and/or otherwise affect fish. It may clog gills; reduce aquatic insect diversity and abundance 

either directly or by blocking primary production; impair feeding success by reducing visibility 

of prey; bury nests; reduce growth rates; reduce disease tolerance; reduce spawning habitat and 

egg, larvae, and juvenile development; interfere with migration patterns; and reduce foraging 

efficiency (Waters 1995; Wood and Armitage 1997). Elevated conductivity disrupts effective 

osmoregulation in fish and macroinvertebrates and impacts an organism’s ability to extract 

energy from food, regulate internal pH and water volume, excrete wastes, develop embryos 

properly, and fertilize eggs (USFWS 2013n; Pond et al. 2008; USEPA 2011), and has been 

shown to negatively affect biological communities through loss of sensitive insect taxa and 

lowered fish diversity (Pond et al. 2008, 2014; Pond 2004; Stauffer and Ferreri 2002; Hitt and 

Chambers 2014; Black et al. 2013).

These effects may lead to lowered survivorship, lowered reproductive success, and reduced 

fitness, all of which may lead to lowered population sizes. These effects are reduced with 

increased distance downstream from active mining. For larger river species such as the 

Razorback Sucker, some effects from coal mining are less likely. However, since effects from 

mining may extend farther downstream (Daniel et al. 2015), other effects may occur. Therefore, 

although difficult to quantify, coal mining under the current program may indirectly affect both 

sucker species. At a landscape level, coal mining contributes to the total anthropogenic impact on 

large rivers. Coal mining’s alteration of upstream hydrology, fish, algal, and macroinvertebrate 

assemblages, food webs, and mining’s contributions to sediment, metals, and conductivity loads 

may affect the health of downstream waters including large rivers and may indirectly contribute 

to a reduction in sucker species’ fitness.

Effects to suckers may be reduced by the required hydrologic balance protections. Material 

damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area must be prevented and surface water 

and groundwater must be protected. Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent 

possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. 

With minor exceptions, all surface drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure 

before leaving the permit area and discharges of water must meet applicable State and Federal 

laws and effluent limitations.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect suckers 

within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss, degradation, and 

disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination 

with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The speciesspecific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations 

and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing 

regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect suckers to 

potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service.

Coal mining may adversely affect PBFs for critical habitat of suckers. It may alter flow regimes, 

channel characteristics, and reduce water and sediment quality. Effects to sucker critical habitat 

would be reduced by hydrologic balance protections. Damage to the hydrologic balance outside 

the permit area must be prevented and surface water and groundwater must be protected. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 27

Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of 

suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. With minor exceptions, all surface 

drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure before leaving the permit area and 

discharges of water must meet applicable State and Federal laws and effluent limitations.

1.1.15.6 Fish – Trout

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed Apache Trout (Oncorhynchus apache), Greenback 

Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkia stomias), and the Gila Trout (Oncorhynchus gilae). 

Effects to trout may occur from direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or degradation 

from increased sedimentation, elevated conductivity, and changes to water quality. Speciesspecific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, capture, 

and collection of individuals. Capture of individuals could also result in mortality. Sediment may 

degrade habitat and/or otherwise affect fish. It may clog gills; reduce aquatic insect diversity and 

abundance either directly or by blocking primary production; impair feeding success by reducing 

visibility of prey; bury nests; reduce growth rates; reduce disease tolerance; reduce spawning 

habitat and egg, larvae, and juvenile development; interfere with migration patterns; and reduce 

foraging efficiency (Waters 1995; Wood and Armitage 1997). Elevated conductivity disrupts 

effective osmoregulation in fish and macroinvertebrates and impacts an organism’s ability to 

extract energy from food, regulate internal pH and water volume, excrete wastes, develop 

embryos properly, and fertilize eggs (USFWS 2013n; Pond et al. 2008; USEPA 2011) and has 

been shown to negatively affect biological communities through loss of sensitive insect taxa and 

lowered fish diversity (Pond et al. 2008, 2014; Pond 2004; Stauffer and Ferreri 2002; Hitt and 

Chambers 2014; Black et al. 2013).

These effects may lead to lowered survivorship, lowered reproductive success, and reduced 

fitness, all of which may lead to lowered population sizes.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect trout 

within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss, degradation, and 

disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination 

with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The speciesspecific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations 

and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing 

regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect trout to 

potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service. 

Critical habitat is not designated for any of the trout species in this guild that may be affected by 

the action.

1.1.16 Crustaceans – Crayfishes

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed Big Sandy crayfish (Cambarus callainus), the 

Guyandotte River crayfish (C. veteranus), and the Slenderclaw crayfish (Cambarus cracens). 

The Guyandotte River crayfish has experienced a significant reduction in its historical range and 

is now restricted to two streams (Loughman et al. 2016). There has been a likely reduction in the 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 28

Big Sandy crayfish’s historical range as well. The populations of both species appear to be 

depressed, critically so for the Guyandotte River crayfish. Threats to the slenderclaw crayfish 

include hydrologic variation and alteration, poultry farming and agriculture, degraded water 

quality, low abundance, and non-native species. Slenderclaw crayfish range overlaps with 

mineable coal, but coal mining is not mentioned as a threat. Effects to crayfish from mining may 

come from direct mortality, harassment, and habitat loss or degradation of aquatic habitat from 

increased conductivity, increased sedimentation, and increased levels of manganese and iron. 

Water quality is degraded in both the Big Sandy and Upper Guyandotte River basins with metals 

and pH impairment common (USFWS 2016e). The sources of these impairments include: coal 

mining; roads; logging; oil and gas development; on-road and off-road transportation; and 

residential/commercial development and associated stream modifications.

Recent field study shows the Guyandotte River crayfish has not been found in streams with 

conductivity higher than 460 μS/cm or sulfate levels higher than 200 mg/l (Loughman 2016). 

Because both species are tertiary burrowers, increased sedimentation may render habitat 

unsuitable, and allow them to be outcompeted by secondary burrowers. Excessive iron and 

manganese may adversely affect reproduction and immature egg cells, as well as bonding to their 

exoskeletons, reducing overall health. These effects may reduce overall fitness, leading to 

reduced population size. 

Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, 

capture, and collection of individuals. Capture of individuals could also result in mortality. 

Crayfish may be more sensitive to elevated conductivity during molting. They may experience 

stressful molts or die in mid-molt. 

Properly designed, monitored and enforced effects to crayfish are reduced by the hydrologic 

balance protections required by SMCRA regulations. Under the regulations, mining operations 

must avoid material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area and must protect 

surface water and groundwater. The regulations also require sediment control measures to 

prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside 

the permit area. The regulations require, with minor exceptions, all surface drainage to pass 

through a siltation structure before leaving the permit area and that discharges of water meet 

applicable state and federal laws and effluent limitations. 

Even after the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

crayfish within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

continue to experience take in the form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss, degradation, 

and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through 

coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. 

The species-specific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 

consultations and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its 

implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 

DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal 

trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we 

expect crayfish to potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey 

protocols recommended by the Service.

Critical habitat has been proposed but has not been finalized for Big Sandy crayfish, Guyandotte 

River crayfish, and slenderclaw crayfish. Proposed critical habitat for the Big Sandy crayfish 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 29

overlaps mineable coal by 90% and 100% of proposed critical habitat for the Guyandotte River 

crayfish overlaps mineable coal. Given the high degree of overlap of mineable coal with 

proposed designated critical habitat for both Big Sandy River crayfish and Guyandotte River 

crayfish effects to critical habitat from the action are anticipated to occur. 

Adverse effects to PBFs to proposed critical habitats for Big Sandy River crayfish and 

Guyandotte River crayfish from coal mining that are anticipated include alterations to flow 

regimes, channel characteristics, reductions to water quality, increased sedimentation, and 

reduced invertebrate prey abundance and diversity. Effects to proposed crayfish critical habitat 

would be reduced by hydrologic balance protections. Damage to the hydrologic balance outside 

the permit area must be prevented and surface water and groundwater must be protected. 

Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of 

suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. With minor exceptions, all surface 

drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure before leaving the permit area and 

discharges of water must meet applicable State and Federal laws and effluent limitations.

1.1.17 Mollusks – Freshwater Mussels

This guild is represented by 51 species of freshwater mussels (Table 1). Effects to mussels from 

mining may occur as direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss or degradation from increased 

sedimentation (including coal fines) and turbidity, and increased metals concentrations. Effects 

from mining may extend farther downstream (Daniel et al. 2015). If mussels inhabit stream beds 

that are mined through or that function as a low-water crossing, they would likely be killed by 

direct contact with mining equipment. Species-specific monitoring or relocation efforts may be 

included as a permit condition and may result in harassment, capture, and collection of 

individuals. Capture or relocation of individuals could also result in mortality.

Specific biological effects from sedimentation include reduced feeding and respiratory efficiency 

from clogged gills, disrupted metabolic processes, reduced growth rates, limited burrowing 

activity, physical smothering, and disrupted host fish attraction mechanisms (USFWS 2013b). 

Sedimentation may also cause physical changes in the habitat which can result in mussels being 

dislodged, transported downstream, or stranded. Sediment contamination from coal mining also 

affects survival and growth of mussels (Wang et al. 2013). Recruitment failure can occur due to 

clogging of interstitial spaces needed for juvenile mussel survival (USFWS 2013b). Since 

juvenile mussels ingest sediment when they feed, contaminants which may be in the sediment 

are ingested as well and may bioaccumulate. This may affect juvenile survival.

Research indicates that mussel populations were inversely correlated with coal fines in the 

substrate and when coal fines were present, decreased filtration times and increased movements 

were noted in laboratory-held mussels (Kitchel et al. 1981). Increased turbidity can interfere with 

the feeding ability of sight-feeding fishes that may serve as hosts and may also reduce mussels’ 

ability to attract fish hosts. All of the above-mentioned effects may result in reduced 

reproductive success, reduced recruitment and lower population numbers.

Coal mining may result in the release of metals and other trace elements to which mussels are 

known to be sensitive (Price et al. 2011, 2014; Zipper et al. 2014; Soucek et al. 2003). SMCRA 

requires iron, manganese, and pH to meet effluent limits but not other metals and trace elements. 

Increased metals concentrations may disrupt enzyme efficiency, alter filtration rates, reduce 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 30

growth, and change behavior (USFWS 2012b, 2013b). This may result in reduced recruitment or 

mortality.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mussels 

within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience take in the form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss, degradation, and 

disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits through coordination 

with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining activities. The speciesspecific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations 

and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing 

regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents 

(Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In 

the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect mussels to 

potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service.

Coal mining is listed as a threat to critical habitat for a number of mussel species. It is mentioned 

as an activity involving a Federal action that may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat for 

the slabside pearlymussel and the fluted kidneyshell: “Contaminants associated with coal mining 

(metals, other dissolved solids), municipal effluents (bacteria, nutrients, pharmaceuticals), and 

agriculture (fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, and animal waste) cause degradation of water 

quality and habitats. The Clean Water Act has been insufficient to significantly reduce or remove 

these threats to the fluted kidneyshell and slabside pearlymussel” (USFWS 2013e). Coal mining 

is mentioned as an activity that is negatively affecting water quality in Neosho mucket and 

rabbitsfoot habitat: “Coal mining activities, resulting in heavy metal-rich drainage, and

associated sedimentation has adversely affected many drainages...low pH commonly

associated with mine runoff can reduce glochidial attachment rates on host fish” (USFWS 

2012b). The pH of effluent from mines is required to be between 6.0 and 9.0 standard units, 

which prevents the mobilization of acid-soluble metals (Price et al. 2011). Iron, manganese, 

and solids must also meet effluent limitations. Other metals and trace elements do not have 

to meet any effluent limits.

Coal mining may otherwise adversely affect PBFs for critical habitat of mussels. It may alter 

flow regimes, channel characteristics, and reduce water and sediment quality. Effects to mussel 

critical habitat under the SMCRA regulations would be reduced by the required hydrologic 

balance protections. Material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area must be 

prevented and surface water and groundwater must be protected. Sediment control measures 

must prevent, to the extent possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow 

outside the permit area. With minor exceptions, all surface drainage is required to be passed 

through a siltation structure before leaving the permit area and discharges of water must meet 

applicable State and Federal laws and effluent limitations.

1.1.18 Mollusks – Freshwater Snails

This guild is represented by five ESA-listed species of freshwater snails (Table 1). Effects to 

freshwater snails from mining may occur as direct mortality, or habitat loss or degradation 

through sedimentation. Effects from mining may extend farther downstream (Daniel et al. 2015). 

Snails in stream beds or wetlands that are mined through or that function as a low-water crossing 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 31

would likely be killed by direct contact with mining equipment. Species-specific monitoring may 

be included as a permit condition and may result in capture and collection of individuals. Capture 

of individuals could also result in mortality.

Excessive sedimentation can make their habitat unsuitable for feeding or reproduction. 

Periphyton upon which they may feed may be smothered, and respiration, growth, and 

reproductive success may be impaired. All these stressors can lead to reduced fitness and lower 

population sizes.

Effects to snails may be reduced by the required hydrologic balance protections. Material 

damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area must be prevented and surface water 

and groundwater must be protected. Sediment control measures must prevent, to the extent 

possible, additional contributions of suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area. 

With minor exceptions, all surface drainage is required to be passed through a siltation structure 

before leaving the permit area and discharges of water must meet applicable State and Federal 

laws and effluent limitations.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect 

freshwater snails within and downstream of the footprint of individual surface coal mining 

operations to experience take in the form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss, 

degradation, and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated into individual permits 

through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take associated with mining 

activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into permits through step-down 

section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination process described in SMCRA, 

its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 

DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal 

trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we 

expect mussels to potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or killed depending on the survey 

protocols recommended by the Service.

Critical habitat is not designated for any of the freshwater snail species in this guild that may be 

affected by the action.

1.1.19 Mollusks – Terrestrial Snails

This guild is represented by the flat-spired three-toothed snail (Triodopsis platysayoides). If 

mining were to occur in terrestrial snail habitat, effects may occur from direct mortality and 

habitat loss. Snails in habitat that is cleared, grubbed, and mined through would likely be killed 

by direct contact with mining equipment. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a 

permit condition and may result in capture and collection of individuals. Capture of individuals 

could also result in mortality. Habitat loss leads to reduced food availability and egg laying area 

which in turn directly affects survivorship and reproduction. Lowered survivorship and 

reproduction lead to reduced population size.

These effects would be lessened by the requirement to identify habitats of unusually high value 

for fish and wildlife and for a fish and wildlife protection and enhancement plan. Identification 

of these habitats would make it possible to avoid or restore them. Effects would also be reduced 

by the requirements for protection of fish, wildlife, and related environmental values. These 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 32

requirements include avoiding disturbing, enhancing where practicable or restoring habitats of 

unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect terrestrial 

snails within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the 

form of mortality, and harm through habitat loss. Conservation measures incorporated into 

individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect snails to potentially be harassed, captured, collected, or 

killed depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service.

Critical habitat is not designated for the flat-spired three-toothed snail. 

1.1.20 Mammals – Bats

The four ESA-listed bats representing this guild are all in the family Vespertilionidae. Effects to 

bats from mining may occur through direct mortality, disturbance, and habitat loss and 

degradation by elimination of forested roosting and foraging habitat. Disturbance of individuals 

living adjacent to surface coal mining operations may occur from the increased presence of 

human activity, noise, and dust generated during the mining process. Such disturbance could

result in increased energetic costs associated with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. 

Habitat could be lost directly through clearing and grubbing in riparian areas or through 

groundwater pumping. Groundwater pumping may result in depletion of surface flows, 

degradation, and loss of riparian habitats, and local declines or extirpations of aquatic and 

riparian plants and animals (OSMRE 2011). Loss of suitable breeding, roosting, or foraging 

habitat could result in reduced breeding success and stress due to competition for remaining 

suitable habitat. Fragmentation of forested habitats as a result of coal mining would affect 

connectivity of bat breeding areas and therefore reduce genetic dispersal. Population viability 

would be affected if populations become isolated to the extent that adults and juveniles cannot 

successfully disperse between remaining patches. These effects would result in fewer offspring 

and lowered population size. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition 

and may result in harassment of individuals or capture and collection of individuals if tagging 

and nest monitoring is included in the survey protocol.

Bats in habitat that is cleared, grubbed, and mined through may be killed by direct contact with 

mining equipment. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may 

result in harassment, capture and collection of individuals. Loss of foraging habitat leads to 

lowered food availability while loss of roosting habitat may lead to lowered reproductive 

success, both of which directly affect survivorship and reproduction and may lead to lowered 

population size. There may also be effects to bats that roost or hibernate in caves from blasting 

vibrations that disturb or disrupt hibernation or maternity roosts. Blasting may cause hibernating 

bats to arouse and use up energy reserves necessary for hibernation (USFWS 2011a). In 

maternity caves it may cause mothers to abandon pups prematurely. Both of these situations 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 33

could lead to mortality which could lead to lowered population size. Abandoned mines may 

collapse or may have surrounding habitat that affects mine airflow or is less valuable for 

swarming, which makes the abandoned mines less likely to support the species’ roosting needs.

These effects would be lessened by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement 

plan that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

The plan must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement measures 

that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial and aquatic 

habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually high value 

for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid or restore 

them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, wildlife, and 

related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, enhancing where 

practicable or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Range-wide guidelines for the development of protection and enhancement plans for the Indiana 

bat were developed by a group comprised of OSMRE, Service, and representatives of several 

state regulatory authorities (USFWS et al. 2009). These measures include replacement of 

forested habitat, limitations on blasting vibration levels, time of year restrictions on tree cutting, 

buffer zones around maternity colonies and hibernacula, and other habitat replacement and 

enhancement measures. Time of year restrictions on tree cutting are especially important as they 

prevent direct mortality by ensuring occupied trees will not be cut down.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect bats 

within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the form 

of mortality, and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated 

into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect bats to potentially be harassed, captured, and collected 

depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service. We would not typically expect 

Service-approved monitoring of bats to result in injury or death of individuals.

Both the Virginia big-eared bat and the Indiana bat have critical habitat designated (USFWS 

1976, 1977a, 1979). Critical habitat for these bats consists of caves in several eastern states. 

None of the critical habitat overlaps mineable coal; therefore, there should be no adverse effects 

from this action to the critical habitat of these species.

1.1.21 Mammals – Cats

This guild is represented by three listed species in three different genera: Canada lynx (Lynx 

canadensis); Gulf Coast ocelot (Leopardus pardalis); and jaguarundi (Herpailurus 

yagouaroundi). 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 34

If mining were to occur in Canada lynx habitat, effects may occur from habitat loss and 

fragmentation; disturbance to denning or foraging; mortality from vehicle collisions; and 

changes in winter access which may increase competition and disturbance (USFS 2017). Habitat 

loss or fragmentation is possible from subsidence, landslides, or the installation of mine 

ventilation boreholes at underground mines (OSMRE 2019). Habitat loss leads to reduced food 

availability which in turn directly affects survivorship and reproduction. Lowered survivorship 

and reproduction lead to reduced population size. Habitat fragmentation leads to reduced 

dispersal and genetic exchange, reducing population viability.

In the action area, ocelots, and jaguarundis, are associated with the Tamaulipan thornshrub 

communities in southern Texas. The ocelot’s range overlaps mineable coal by approximately 

21%; the range of the jaguarundi overlaps mineable coal by approximately 25%. Effects of the 

action on jaguarundi and ocelot would be unlikely, if they occurred at all, due to the rarity and 

specific habitat requirements of these species. However, if effects do occur mortality from 

vehicle strikes and habitat loss is possible. Future state and private actions likely to occur include 

industrial development, such as liquefied natural gas terminals. 

These effects would be reduced by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement 

plan that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

The plan must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement measures 

that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial and aquatic 

habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually high value 

for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid or restore 

them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, wildlife, and 

related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, enhancing where 

practicable, or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mammals 

within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the form 

of mortality, and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated 

into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect mammals to potentially be harassed, captured, and 

collected depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of mammals to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

Approximately 1% of designated critical habitat for Canada lynx overlaps with mineable coal. 

Given the habitat preference of Canada lynx in the northwest for evergreen forests on steep 

slopes, it is anticipated that coal reserves may be inaccessible for mining, and therefore; effects 

from coal mining are less likely to occur within the designated critical habitat for the species. If 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 35

effects were to occur to PBFs they are likely to be related to habitat fragmentation through 

construction of roads in remote or roadless areas and habitat loss through changes in land use.

No critical habitat is designated for either Gulf Coast jaguarundi or ocelot. 

1.1.22 Mammals – Jumping Mice

This guild is represented by the ESA-listed Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius 

preblei), and the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus). If mining were 

to occur in jumping mice habitat, effects may occur primarily from direct mortality, disturbance, 

and habitat loss and fragmentation. Disturbance of individuals living adjacent to surface coal 

mining operations may occur from the increased presence of human activity, noise, and dust 

generated during the mining process. Such disturbance could result in increased energetic costs 

associated with stress and abandonment of normal behaviors. Habitat could be lost directly 

through clearing and grubbing in riparian areas or through groundwater pumping. Groundwater 

pumping may result in depletion of surface flows, degradation, and loss of riparian habitats, and 

local declines or extirpations of aquatic and riparian plants and animals (OSMRE 2011). Loss of 

suitable breeding, sheltering, or foraging habitat could result in reduced breeding success and 

stress due to competition for remaining suitable habitat. Population viability would be affected if 

populations become isolated to the extent that adults and juveniles cannot successfully disperse 

between remaining patches. These effects would result in fewer offspring and lowered 

population size. Species-specific monitoring may be included as a permit condition and may 

result in harassment of individuals or capture and collection of individuals if tagging is included 

in the survey protocol.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mammals 

within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the form 

of mortality, and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated 

into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect mammals to potentially be harassed, captured, and 

collected depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of mammals to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

Approximately 4.4 percent of Preble’s meadow jumping mouse critical habitat overlaps mineable 

coal. The PBFs that could be affected if coal mining were to occur in Preble’s meadow jumping 

mouse critical habitat are as follows: 

(1) Riparian corridors: (a) Formed and maintained by normal, dynamic, geomorphological, and 

hydrological processes that create and maintain river and stream channels, floodplains, and 

floodplain benches and that promote patterns of vegetation favorable to the PMJM; (b) 

Containing dense, riparian vegetation consisting of grasses, forbs, or shrubs, or any combination 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 36

thereof, in areas along rivers and streams that normally provide open water through the PMJM’s 

active season; and (c) Including specific movement corridors that provide connectivity between 

and within populations. This may include river and stream reaches with minimal vegetative 

cover or that are armored for erosion control; travel ways beneath bridges, through culverts, 

along canals and ditches; and other areas that have experienced substantial human alteration or 

disturbance. 

(2) Additional adjacent floodplain and upland habitat with limited human disturbance (including 

hayed fields, grazed pasture, other agricultural lands that are not plowed or disked regularly, 

areas that have been restored after past aggregate extraction, areas supporting recreational trails, 

and urban–wildland interfaces).

Critical habitat for the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse was designated in 2016. 

Approximately 9.3 percent of this critical habitat overlaps mineable coal. The PBFs that could be 

affected if coal mining were to occur in New Mexico meadow jumping mouse critical habitat are 

as follows: (1) Riparian communities along rivers and streams, springs and wetlands, or canals 

and ditches that contain: (a) Persistent emergent herbaceous wetlands especially characterized by 

the presence of primarily forbs and sedges (Carex spp. or Schoenoplectus pungens); or (b) 

Scrub-shrub riparian areas that are dominated by willows (Salix spp.) or alders (Alnus spp.) with 

an understory of primarily forbs and sedges.(2) Flowing water that provides saturated soils 

throughout the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse’s active season that supports tall (average 

stubble height of herbaceous vegetation of at least 61 cm (24 inches) and dense herbaceous 

riparian vegetation composed primarily of sedges (Carex spp. or Schoenoplectus pungens)) and 

forbs, including, but not limited to one or more of the following associated species: spikerush 

(Eleocharis macrostachya), beaked sedge (Carex rostrata), rushes (Juncus spp. and Scirpus

spp.), and numerous species of grasses such as bluegrass (Poa spp.), slender wheatgrass (Elymus 

trachycaulus), brome (Bromus spp.), foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum), or Japanese brome 

(Bromus japonicas), and forbs such as water hemlock (Circuta douglasii), field mint (Mentha 

arvense), asters (Aster spp.), or cutleaf coneflower (Rudbeckia laciniata). (3) Sufficient areas of 

9 to 24 km (5.6 to 15 mi) along a stream, ditch, or canal that contain suitable or restorable habitat 

to support movements of individual New Mexico meadow jumping mice. (4) Adjacent 

floodplain and upland areas extending approximately 100 m (330 ft) outward from the boundary 

between the active water channel and the floodplain (as defined by the bankfull stage of streams) 

or from the top edge of the ditch or canal.

If mining were to occur in jumping mouse critical habitat, effects to the PBFs would occur. 

Removal of riparian vegetation cover would eliminate the riparian vegetation PBF. Replacement 

of riparian vegetation could occur but would likely not develop into suitable habitat before bond 

release. Under SMCRA the regulatory authority would have no control over the site after bond 

release, and the landowner may choose to remove the vegetation. 

These effects will be reduced by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 37

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable, or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

1.1.23 Mammals – Other mammals

The guild of other mammals is represented by the ESA-listed Utah prairie dog (Cynomys 

parvidens), and black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). If mining were to occur in Utah prairie 

dog habitat, effects may occur primarily from habitat loss and fragmentation. Approximately 

13% of Utah prairie dog’s range overlaps mineable coal. Habitat loss leads to reduced food 

availability which in turn directly affects survivorship and reproduction. Lowered survivorship 

and reproduction lead to reduced population size. Habitat fragmentation leads to reduced 

dispersal and genetic exchange, reducing population viability. 

If mining were to occur in black-footed ferret habitat, effects may occur primarily from habitat 

loss. Approximately 11% of black-footed ferret habitat range overlaps with mineable coal. 

Prairie dog burrows and vegetation that they rely on for food would be eliminated. Habitat loss 

leads to reduced food availability, which, in turn, directly affects survivorship and reproduction. 

Lowered survivorship and reproduction lead to reduced population size. 

These effects will be reduced by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable, or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mammals 

within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the form 

of mortality, and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated 

into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect mammals to potentially be harassed, captured, and 

collected depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of mammals to result in injury or death of 

individuals.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 38

No critical habitat is designated for either the Utah prairie dog or black-footed ferret.

1.1.24 Mammals – North American wolverine

There appear to be two separate wolverine populations in the contiguous United States: one in 

the North Cascades in Washington, and one in the northern Rocky Mountains in Idaho, Montana, 

and Wyoming, as well as the Wallowa Range in Oregon (USFWS 2016g). Approximately 2% of 

its range overlaps mineable coal.

If mining were to occur in wolverine habitat, effects may occur from habitat loss or degradation. 

Habitat loss leads to reduced food availability, which, in turn, directly affects survivorship and 

reproduction. Lowered survivorship and reproduction lead to reduced population size. However, 

these effects are unlikely since little if any mining is likely to take place in wolverine habitat. 

There is very little information regarding wolverine response to human disturbance, but it 

appears they can adjust to moderate amounts of disturbance (USFWS 2016g). 

These effects will be reduced by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable, or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mammals 

within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the form 

of mortality, and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated 

into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect mammals to potentially be harassed, captured, and 

collected depending on the survey protocols recommended by the Service. We would not 

typically expect Service-approved monitoring of mammals to result in injury or death of 

individuals.

No critical habitat is designated for the North American wolverine.

1.1.25 Mammals – Grizzly Bear

There would likely be little effect on grizzly bears from this action due to the small amount of 

habitat overlap with mineable coal (1%) and their large home ranges.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 39

These effects will be reduced by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable, or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mammals 

within the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to experience take in the form 

of mortality, and harm through habitat loss and disturbance. Conservation measures incorporated 

into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize take 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in the this programmatic BiOp and the 2020 coordination and dispute 

resolution process (Appendices A and B) are expected to minimize or avoid impacts to ESAresources. In the event species-specific monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect 

mammals to potentially be harassed, captured, and collected depending on the survey protocols 

recommended by the Service. We would not typically expect Service-approved monitoring of 

mammals to result in injury or death of individuals.

Critical habitat is not designated for the grizzly bear.

1.1.26 Plants – Xeric Species

This guild is represented by 18 species; eight are listed as endangered and nine are listed as 

threatened (Table 1). Effects to this guild from mining under the current program may occur 

from direct mortality or habitat loss and degradation. Species-specific monitoring or relocation 

may be included as a permit condition. No adverse effects would likely be associated with plant 

surveys; however, relocation efforts would include collection and possible mortality of plants. 

Plants within the permit boundary may be directly killed from vegetative clearing, grubbing, and 

from coal excavation. Effects from disturbance may occur as a result of: (1) increasing dust, 

which increases tissue temperature and reduces photosynthesis, vigor, and water use efficiency 

(Farmer 1993; Sharifi et al. 1997); (2) degrading habitat of pollinators and other beneficial 

organisms; and (3) erosion and sedimentation that may bury plants.

Effects to habitat may occur by: (1) habitat fragmentation (the division of continuous habitat into 

smaller, more isolated remnants) which modifies plants’ interactions with other individuals of 

the same species and their pollinators (e.g., lower cross-pollination); (2) increasing edge effects 

(this fragmented habitat results in an increased boundary, or transition habitat) which may 

decrease acceptable habitat and create a suitable entry for plants that outcompete species in this 

guild (e.g., noxious weeds); (3) further introducing noxious weeds and other aggressive plants by 

moving soil and contaminated machinery throughout the permitted site, and (4) lowering the 

number of pollinator visits by spraying pesticides (including herbicides to kill unwanted plants 

that are not the within this xeric guild but are also utilized by this guild’s pollinators). Effects 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 40

may also occur from harming or destroying seeds by increasing erosion, soil compaction, and 

sedimentation that may bury or otherwise preventing successful seed germination and 

establishment.

Effects during reclamation may occur from: (1) introducing plant species within the approved 

reclamation seed mix that are designed to grow and spread (i.e., reproduce) quickly to prevent 

erosion. These (and other species brought in via contaminated machinery) can outcompete 

individuals and/or outcompete plants that are a source of nutrition for pollinators that also visit 

the species in this guild; (2) changing the topography, contour, and/or aspect of the landscape. 

Some species in this guild prefer south facing and steep slopes and very specific soil 

characteristics. Without accurate reconstruction of the original landscape this habitat may be 

eliminated within the permit boundary; and (3) the homogenization of topsoil during its 

redistribution. This not only changes the soil structure and composition but also changes the 

depth where the seeds occur within the soil profile, lowering seed bank viability (seeds are very 

important to the persistence of most of the species within this guild). Changes in soil structure 

can also lead to a breakdown of the obligate association between fungal communities and some 

plant species, reducing plant viability.

Other effects to this guild are not likely within the permit boundary. If mining occurs in their 

habitats, they are likely to be directly affected as described above. However, effects are possible 

on adjacent and other connected lands. These effects may be created by certain postmining land 

uses such as livestock grazing and permanent structures such as buildings, roads, or 

impoundments.

Effects from roads may result from an increase in human activity. Permanent roads can result in 

access points to undisturbed adjacent lands, causing the increased use of off-highway vehicles 

and other types of human activity, including camping and hiking. These activities can kill and 

injure plants and destroy and degrade habitat by entering into habitat and running over and/or 

trampling individuals and disturbing the ground, introducing competitive plants species via 

contaminated equipment, and affecting pollinator habitat to cause lower reproductive capacity. 

These activities may also create habitat fragmentation and edge effects through repeated 

disturbance. Activities near habitat can result in its degradation due to an increase in soil erosion, 

compaction, dust, and introduction of plants that outcompete ESA-listed xeric species.

Other permanent structures (e.g., buildings, fences, permanent water diversions, and 

impoundments), especially those located on or near the former permit boundary also have the 

potential to cause impacts on adjacent lands by concentrating disturbance activities in and around 

these structures and may serve as similar access points and result in the same effects as 

permanent roads.

Effects may also occur from reclaiming lands using approved plant species that establish quickly, 

produce a large amount of biomass, persist, reproduce, and spread on their own. These 

characteristics that support soil stabilization and certain wildlife also tend to produce aggressive 

and permanent populations on adjacent and otherwise connected lands. These plants have the 

ability to degrade habitat by outcompeting individuals and by changing the soil, light, and water 

characteristics of this habitat. They may also outcompete other plants that are used by the 

pollinators of the xeric guild, further degrading the habitat by lowering local populations of 

pollinators.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 41

These effects may result in lower population vitality (e.g., greater susceptibility to competition 

and disease) reduced reproductive success, and reduced fitness, which may lead to a lower 

number of populations and lower population sizes.

Species within this guild tend to be short plants with shallow root systems that can be affected by 

the addition and/or removal of soil into their habitat. Sedimentation, siltation, and erosion 

(including air pollution as a result of erosion, i.e., the collection of dust onto plant tissues) of 

soils may affect this guild, by either adding or removing too much soil from their habitats. 

Adding too much soil to their habitats could result in the burying of adults, seedlings, and seeds, 

a reduction in photosynthetic capacity and root growth, and change the surface hydrology to 

individual plant habitat resulting in the loss of water available to plants. Excess dust may also 

prevent pollinators from successfully fertilizing these plants.

The effects of sedimentation, siltation, and erosion (including air pollution as a result of erosion) 

would be lessened by retaining sediment within disturbed areas and diverting runoff away from 

disturbed areas to avoid excess sedimentation and erosion outside the permit area; and 

requirements that would reduce dust and erosion from surface activities, including roads.

Topsoil is required to be protected from contaminants, unnecessary compaction, and erosion that 

would interfere with revegetation. Seeds and the seed bank are an important part of this guild’s 

reproductive strategy, and seed longevity of many of the species within this guild is unknown. 

Topsoil salvage and direct haul topsoil salvage (using topsoil to reclaim an area directly after it is 

removed from its original area) may allow these seeds to germinate and establish populations.

These effects will be reduced by the requirements to develop a protection and enhancement plan 

that describes how the operator will minimize disturbances and adverse impacts to fish and 

wildlife, including ESA-listed and proposed species and designated or proposed critical habitat. 

These plans must include protective measures to be used during mining and enhancement 

measures that will be used during reclamation and the postmining phase to develop terrestrial 

and aquatic habitat. The mining permit applicant is also required to identify habitats of unusually 

high value for fish and wildlife. Identification of these habitats would make it possible to avoid 

or restore them. Effects would also be reduced by the requirements for protection of fish, 

wildlife, and related environmental values. These requirements include avoiding disturbing, 

enhancing where practicable, or restoring habitats of unusually high value for fish and wildlife.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect xeric 

plants within and adjacent to the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience mortality and harm through habitat loss and degradation. Conservation measures 

incorporated into individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or 

minimize impacts associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures 

incorporated into permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance 

coordination process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in 

the SMCRA Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are 

expected to minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific 

monitoring is included as a permit condition, we expect minimal adverse impact from Serviceapproved surveys of xeric plants. If species-specific plant relocation is included as a permit 

condition, we expect target plants to experience effects in the form of collection and possible 

mortality.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 42

If mining were to occur in the critical habitat of the Debeque phacelia, effects to the PBFs would 

occur. Removal of topsoil, the vegetative community, and landscape characteristics would 

eliminate PBFs. Topsoil formation could occur, but it would take many years to reform and the 

landscape characteristics may never return. These PBFs would not be present on the site, if at all, 

until long after the bond release had occurred. That said, we anticipate effects to critical habitat 

to be minimized through the coordination process, when the Service has the opportunity to 

identify measures that will minimize effects.

1.1.27 Plants – Mesic Species

This guild is represented by 18 species; nine are listed as endangered and nine are listed as 

threatened (Table 1). Effects to this guild from mining may occur from direct mortality or 

through habitat loss and degradation. Species-specific monitoring or relocation may be included 

as a permit condition. No adverse effects would likely be associated with plant surveys; however, 

relocation efforts would include collection and possible mortality of plants. Plants within the 

permit boundary may be directly killed from vegetative clearing, grubbing, and from coal 

excavation. Effects from disturbing individuals may occur as a result of damage to soil (erosion, 

sedimentation, and compaction) that may bury or expose individual plants.

Effects to habitat may occur by: (1) habitat fragmentation (the division of continuous habitat into 

smaller, more isolated remnants) which modifies plants’ interactions with other individuals of 

the same species and their pollinators (e.g., lower cross-pollination), (2) increasing edge effects 

(this fragmented habitat results in an increased boundary, or transition habitat) which may 

decrease acceptable habitat and create a suitable entry for plants that outcompete species in this 

guild (e.g., invasive weeds), (3) further introducing noxious weeds and other aggressive plants 

by moving soil and contaminated machinery throughout the permitted site, and (4) lowering the 

number of pollinator visits by spraying pesticides (including herbicides to kill unwanted plants 

that are not the within this mesic guild but are also utilized by pollinators). Effects may also 

occur from harming or destroying seeds by increasing erosion, soil compaction, and 

sedimentation that may bury and/or otherwise harm seeds, preventing successful germination and 

establishment.

Effects during reclamation may occur from: (1) introducing plant species within the approved 

reclamation seed mix that are designed to grow and spread (i.e., reproduce) quickly to prevent 

erosion. These (and other species brought in via contaminated machinery) can outcompete 

individuals and/or outcompete plants that are a source of nutrition for pollinators that also visit 

the species in this guild; (2) changing of topography, contour, and/or aspect of the landscape. 

Some species in this guild prefer south facing land and rock outcrops. Without accurate 

reconstruction of the original landscape this habitat may be eliminated within the permit 

boundary; and (3) the homogenization of topsoil during its redistribution. This not only changes 

the soil structure and composition but also changes the depth where the seeds occur within the 

soil profile, lowering seed bank viability. Changes in soil structure can also lead to a breakdown 

of the obligate association between fungal communities and some plant species, reducing plant 

viability.

Other effects to this guild are not likely within the permit boundary. If mining occurs in their 

habitats, they are likely to be affected as described above. However, effects are possible on 

adjacent and other connected lands. These effects may be created by certain postmining land 

uses (e.g., intensive livestock grazing, agricultural development) and establishing permanent 

structures such as buildings, roads, or water impoundments.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 43

Effects from roads may result from an increase in human activity. Permanent roads can result in 

access points to undisturbed or minimally used adjacent lands, causing the increased use of offhighway vehicles and other types of human activity, including camping and hiking. These 

activities can kill and injure plants and destroy and degrade habitat by entering into habitat and 

running over and/or trampling individuals and disturbing the ground, introducing competitive 

plants species via contaminated equipment, and affecting pollinator habitat to cause lower 

reproductive capacity. For example, the two species that occur in glade habitats may experience 

dramatic habitat loss and individual death when access to these environments increases human 

activities, as these open habitats within forests could be used for camping and off-highway 

vehicle use. These activities may also create habitat fragmentation and edge effects through 

repeated disturbance. Activities near habitat can result in degradation due to an increase in soil 

erosion, compaction, and introduction of plants that outcompete these mesic species.

Other permanent structures (e.g., buildings, fences, permanent water diversions, and 

impoundments), especially those located on or near the former permit boundary also have the 

potential to cause impacts on adjacent lands by concentrating disturbance activities in and around 

these structures and may serve as similar access points and result in the same effects as 

permanent roads.

Effects may also occur from reclaiming lands using approved plant species that establish quickly, 

produce a large amount of biomass, persist, reproduce, and spread on their own. These 

characteristics that support soil stabilization and certain wildlife species also tend to produce 

aggressive and permanent populations on adjacent and otherwise connected lands. These plants 

have the ability to degrade habitat by outcompeting individuals and by changing the soil, light, 

and water characteristics of this habitat. They may also outcompete other plants that are used by 

the pollinators of this guild, further degrading the habitat by lowering local populations of 

pollinators.

These actions could result in loss of individuals and habitat, and also habitat degradation and 

fragmentation, and could result in demographic fluctuations and lowered genetic diversity. These 

effects may result in lower population vitality (e.g., more susceptibility to competition and 

disease), reduced reproductive success, and reduced fitness, which may lead to a lower number 

of populations, and lower population sizes.

These effects to mesic species under the current requirements would be lessened by several 

performance standards. Requirements specific to erosion control measures would reduce dust 

and erosion from surface activities, including roads, and would provide pollinators of these 

species further protection. Requirements designed to protect soil resources, including the seed 

bank, would reduce effects to the species within this guild that exist in prairie and grassland 

habitats. Soil that is redistributed without first being stored would allow these species a chance to 

germinate and establish viable populations.

Surface and ground water levels and flow rates (i.e., quantity) are important to this guild and can 

be affected by coal mining. SMCRA regulations have performance standards designed to protect 

seasonal water quantity fluctuations including: protection of surface water flow rates and 

required surface water monitoring; required compliance with all applicable State and Federal 

water quality laws and regulations; requirements that all diversions of perennial and intermittent 

streams have no adverse effect on water quantity (i.e., seasonal flow rates); and establishment of 

standards to prevent discharge structures from affecting quantity below the disturbance area.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 44

Some species of this guild rely on water quality that is based upon local and specific water 

quality characteristics; these habitats and individuals connected to surface and ground water are 

sensitive to deviations from these local water quality conditions. Changes in water quality may 

result in habitat degradation and reduced fitness of individual plants. Requirements to protect 

local water composition (i.e., surface and ground water quality) include: protection of surface 

and groundwater quality; required surface and groundwater quality monitoring; requirement to 

use diversions that will not adversely affect the water quality and related environmental 

resources of streams; and the protection of water quality from durable rock fills, refuse pile 

contamination, permitted roads, and the waters below the lowest coal seam when mountaintop 

removal mining is used.

Sedimentation, siltation, erosion, and compaction of soils may also affect this guild, by either 

adding or removing too much soil to or from their habitats, and changing the density (e.g.,

compaction) of soil within habitat. This could result in the burying of seedlings and seeds, a 

reduction in photosynthetic capacity and root growth, and hydrologic and drainage changes to 

individual plant habitat. Requirements protecting against sedimentation, siltation, erosion, and 

compaction of soils require to the extent possible, the prevention of additional contributions of 

sediment to runoff outside the permit area and the minimization of erosion.

If mining were to occur in the critical habitat of the Short’s bladderpod, effects to the PBFs 

would occur. Removal of topsoil and the vegetative community, and the change in landscape 

characteristics would eliminate PBFs. Topsoil formation could occur but it would take many 

years to reform landscape characteristics, and they may never return. These PBFs would not be 

present on the site, if at all, until long after bond release had occurred.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect mesic 

plants within and adjacent to the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience mortality, and habitat loss and degradation. Conservation measures incorporated into 

individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize impacts 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect minimal adverse impact from Service-approved 

surveys of mesic plants. If species-specific plant relocation is included as a permit condition, we 

expect target plants to experience take in the form of collection and possible mortality.

1.1.28 Plants – Hydric Species

This guild is represented by 20 species; eight are listed as endangered, 12 are listed as threatened, 

and one is proposed to be listed as threatened (Table 1). 

Although coal mining is not mentioned as a threat to most of the species analyzed, mining is 

specifically mentioned as a threat to four species. The Federal Register listing for Kral’s water 

plantain (Sagittaria secundifolia) lists land being cleared for surface mining as a threat and 

describes how these activities contribute to water quality degradation and increase stream 

turbidity and siltation (USFWS 1990a). The 2014 5-year review for this species reiterates this 

threat (USFWS 2014s). The Navajo sedge (Carex specuicola) recovery plan lists the lowering of 

the aquifer as a main threat to this species (USFWS 1987), and the Kayenta surface mine 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 45

(located on the Navajo Indian Reservation) does pump water from an aquifer where populations 

of this species occur (USFWS 2014k). In 2011, OSMRE determined that pumping to support 

mine operations would not decrease flows in seeps/springs that support Navajo sedge based on 

hydrogeology of the sedge habitat and groundwater monitoring. Since 2006 these mining 

operations have decreased their use of this aquifer, but the threat remains (USFWS 2014k). 

Competing demands on the aquifer and the impact on springs is unclear, but it appears a 

combination of factors including mining operations, diminished aquifer recharge due to drought, 

and regional domestic demand for drinking water, have contributed to increasing drawdown of 

the aquifer. The recovery plan for harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum) mentions pollution from coal 

mines entering into the Potomac River and the reactivation of a coal mine (in North Carolina) 

upstream from populations as threatening this species (USFWS 1990b). This reactivation of the 

North Carolina mine has not happened as of yet and it does not appear likely. The Cumberland 

rosemary (Conradina verticillata) has historically been threatened by the downstream effects of 

coal mining (USFWS 1991b), and this has been reiterated in its latest 5-year review (USFWS 

2011f).

Effects to this guild from mining may occur from direct mortality or through habitat loss and 

degradation. Species-specific monitoring or relocation may be included as a permit condition. No 

adverse effects would likely be associated with plant surveys; however, relocation efforts would 

include collection and possible mortality of plants. Plants within the permit boundary may be 

directly killed from vegetative clearing, grubbing, and from coal excavation. Large scale 

disturbances such as permitted coal mining operations create dramatic changes to local and 

watershed-scale environments. Many species in this guild prefer open canopy habitats that 

experience occasional disturbance such as fires and scouring floods during certain times of year. 

Disturbances from coal mining create effects to this guild that are larger in size, longer in time, 

and occur more often and in different locations than the occasional disturbances that benefit 

these species.

Effects to this guild from mining may occur from direct mortality by killing (e.g., running over, 

clearing land for mining, creating impoundments and diversion structures within species’ 

habitats) or degrading habitat. Effects from degraded habitat may occur as a result of damage to 

soil (erosion, sedimentation, and compaction) that may bury or expose individual plants, and 

impounding or diverting water away from habitat.

Effects to habitat may occur by: (1) erosion, sedimentation, and siltation, (2) changing the 

seasonal hydrology of ground and surface water, (3) disturbing pollinators and other beneficial 

organisms, (4) habitat fragmentation (the division of continuous habitat into smaller, more 

isolated remnants) which modifies plants’ interactions with other individuals of the same species 

and their pollinators (e.g., lower cross-pollination), (5) increasing edge effects (this fragmented 

habitat results in an increased boundary, or transition habitat) which may decrease acceptable 

habitat and create a suitable entry for plants (e.g., noxious and other invasive weeds) that 

outcompete species in this guild, (6) further introducing noxious weeds and other aggressive 

plants by moving soil and contaminated machinery throughout the permitted site, and (7) 

lowering the number of pollinator visits by spraying pesticides (including herbicides to kill 

unwanted plants that are not the within this hydric guild but are also utilized by pollinators). 

Effects may also occur from harming or destroying seeds by increasing erosion, soil compaction, 

and sedimentation that may bury and/or otherwise harm seeds, preventing successful germination 

and establishment.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 46

Effects during reclamation may occur from: (1) introducing plant species within the approved 

reclamation seed mix that are designed to grow and spread (i.e., reproduce) quickly to prevent 

erosion: these plants (and other species brought in via contaminated machinery) can outcompete 

individuals and other plants that are a source of nutrition for pollinators that also visit the species 

in this guild, (2) redirecting or otherwise affecting ground and surface water flow when 

reconstructing the landscape: these modifications may change the seasonal differences in water 

regime within these species’ habitats, and (3) the homogenization of topsoil during its 

redistribution: this not only changes the soil structure and composition but also changes the depth 

where the seeds occur within the soil profile, lowering seed bank viability. Changes in soil 

structure can also lead to a breakdown of the obligate association between fungal communities 

and some plant species, reducing plant viability.

Other effects to this guild are not likely within the permit boundary. If mining occurs in their 

habitats, they are likely to be directly affected as described above. However, effects are possible 

on adjacent and other connected lands. These effects may be created by certain postmining land 

uses (e.g., intensive livestock grazing, agriculture, residential development, timber production) 

and establishing permanent structures such as buildings, roads, or permanent water 

impoundments and diversions.

Effects from roads may result from an increase in human activity. Permanent roads can result in 

access points to undisturbed or minimally used adjacent lands, causing the increased use of offhighway vehicles and other types of human activity, including camping, hiking, mountain biking, 

and horseback riding. These activities can kill and injure plants and destroy and degrade habitat 

by entering into habitat and running over and/or trampling individuals and disturbing the ground, 

introducing competitive plants species via contaminated equipment, and affecting pollinator 

habitat to cause lower reproductive capacity of the species within this guild. These activities may 

also create habitat fragmentation and edge effects through repeated disturbance. Activities near 

habitat can result in degradation due to an increase in soil erosion, sedimentation, siltation, and 

compaction, and introduce plants that outcompete these hydric species.

Other permanent structures(e.g., buildings, fences, permanent water diversions, and 

impoundments), especially those located on or near the former permit boundary also have the 

potential to cause impacts on adjacent lands by concentrating disturbance activities in and around 

these structures and may serve as similar access points and result in the same effects as 

permanent roads. Permanent structures such as diversions and impoundments can also affect 

habitat by altering the season flow regime of both surface and groundwater, resulting in degraded 

habitat.

Effects may also occur from reclaiming lands using approved plant species that establish quickly, 

produce a large amount of biomass, persist, reproduce, and spread on their own. Those 

characteristics that support soil stabilization and some wildlife also tend to produce aggressive 

and permanent populations on adjacent and otherwise connected lands. These plants may also 

affect seasonal ground and surface water flow and have the ability to degrade habitat by 

outcompeting individuals and by changing the soil, light, and water quality characteristics of this 

habitat. They may also outcompete other plants that are used by the pollinators of this guild, 

further degrading the habitat by lowering local populations of pollinators. These effects may 

result in lower population vitality (e.g., more susceptibility to competition and disease) reduced 

reproductive success, and reduced fitness, which may lead to lowered population sizes and 

genetic diversity.
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 47

Surface and ground water flow rates are important to this guild and can be affected by coal 

mining. Many of these species persist in their current locations due to occasional scouring of the 

streambed (i.e., surface water quantity fluctuations throughout the year), which eliminates direct 

competition and can create higher sunlight conditions by washing away habitat populated by 

taller plants. These surface water produced scouring events may also dislodge individual plants 

from this guild which then travel downstream, potentially establishing new populations.

Some species of this guild rely on water quality that is based upon localized, consistent chemical 

constituents (i.e., local, specific water quality characteristics). Therefore, habitats and individuals 

connected to surface and ground water (e.g., saturated soils, streams) are sensitive to deviations 

from these local water quality conditions. Changes in flow regimes, water quality and water 

quality may result in habitat degradation and reduced fitness of individual plants.

There are a number of requirements to protect local water composition (i.e., surface and ground 

water quality) including: protection of surface and groundwater quality and requirement of 

surface and groundwater quality monitoring; requirement that diversions not adversely affect the 

water quality and related environmental resources of streams; and protection of water quality 

from durable rock fills, refuse pile contamination, permitted roads, and the waters below the 

lowest coal seam when mountaintop removal mining is used.

Sedimentation, siltation, erosion, and compaction of soils may also affect this guild, by either 

adding or removing too much soil to or from their habitats, and changing the density (e.g.,

compaction) of soil within habitat. This could result in the burying of seedlings and seeds, a 

reduction in photosynthetic capacity and root growth, and hydrologic and drainage changes to 

individual plant habitat.

Seeds and the seed bank are an important part of this guild’s reproductive strategies. Topsoil 

salvage and direct haul topsoil salvage (using topsoil to reclaim an area directly after it is 

removed from its original area) may allow these seeds to germinate and establish populations. If 

topsoil is protected from contaminants, unnecessary compaction, and erosion that would interfere 

with revegetation and reclamation it would benefit these species.

Without the implementation of special provisions or conservation measures, we expect hydric 

plants within and adjacent to the footprint of individual surface coal mining operations to 

experience mortality, and habitat loss and degradation. Conservation measures incorporated into 

individual permits through coordination with the Service will help avoid or minimize impacts 

associated with mining activities. The species-specific protective measures incorporated into 

permits through step-down section 7 consultations and the technical assistance coordination 

process described in SMCRA, its implementing regulations, and further clarified in the SMCRA 

Coordination Process and 2020 DRP documents (Appendices A and B), are expected to 

minimize or avoid impacts to federal trust resources. In the event species-specific monitoring is 

included as a permit condition, we expect minimal adverse impact from Service-approved 

surveys of hydric plants. If species-specific plant relocation is included as a permit condition, we 

expect target plants to experience take in the form of collection and possible mortality.

The four species in this guild that have designated critical habitat are Navajo sedge, Pecos 

sunflower, Neches River rose-mallow, and Texas golden gladecress. Designated critical habitats 

for Navajo sedge and Pecos sunflower do not overlap with mineable coal; therefore, there should 

be no adverse effects from coal mining to the critical habitat of these species. 
SMCRA Biological Opinion 10/16/2020

E - 48

Neches River rose-mallow and Texas golden gladecress designated critical habitats overlap 

approximately 100% with mineable coal. Coal mining in Neches River rose-mallow designated 

critical habitat may affect PBFs such as intermittent or perennial wetland habitats and may 

impact habitat through land disturbance, removal of native woody or associated herbaceous 

vegetation, and thereby increasing opportunities for nonnative species to establish. PBFs for the 

Texas golden gladecress that may be adversely affected by coal mining include land disturbance 

that changes soil profiles, destroys outcrop ledges, and leads to the establishment of nonnative 

and native shrubs, trees, and vines into formerly open-sun, herbaceous, glade vegetation 

communities.