Project Name: Cheyenne Canyon Tussock Moth Control Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2016. 5. 31. · Biological Evaluation – Cheyenne Mountain Tussock

Biological Evaluation – Cheyenne Mountain Tussock Moth Control Biological Evaluation pg. 1

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT FOR WILDLIFE & FISHERIES

PIKES PEAK RANGER DISTRICT – PIKE NATIONAL FOREST

May 16, 2016

Project Name: Cheyenne Canyon Tussock Moth Control Project

Purpose and Need: The purpose of this project is to minimize the spread and intensity of the Douglas-fir

Tussock Moth outbreak in the Colorado Springs area. The project is needed to complement state and

local agency and landowner efforts to control the moth. The greater Colorado Springs area is mosaic of

private, city, state, and federal lands. The juxtaposition of different landownership, as well as divergent

management objectives among local, state, and federal agencies, requires a high level of collaboration and

communication to control the current outbreak. The Tussock Moth causes defoliation and kills Douglas-

fir and other coniferous trees. These trees are a valued component of the scenic backdrop for the

communities, enhance recreation values, and provide watershed protection and wildlife habitat.

On National Forest lands, the Tussock Moth outbreak is immediately adjacent to private, municipal, and

state lands; lies within the Wildland Urban Interface; and is occurring within a heavily-used recreation

area. There are concerns that the outbreak may continue to spread on National Forest lands and onto

adjacent private, city, and state lands. The project is intended to minimize additional Douglas-fir

mortality on the Pike National Forest adjacent to current infestations.

The Tussock Moth is a native defoliator with well documented outbreaks occurring in Colorado since at

least the 1930’s. These outbreaks typically last for two to four years. On the Pike National Forest, the

1993 to 1996 outbreak resulted in 30 to 40 percent Douglas-fir mortality, affecting 18,000 acres. Other

outbreaks have been smaller and more isolated. The current outbreak was first noticed in 2014 on

Cheyenne Mountain State Park and Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station land.

The current Cheyenne Canyon Tussock Moth infestation covers approximately 1,000 acres across private,

city, state, and federal land ownership. In the Cheyenne Canyon area, there are approximately 50 acres of

infestation on National Forest lands. There are mixed stands of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and white fir

adjacent to existing infestations that could potentially be affected by spread of the Tussock Moth. Within

the project area there are old growth Douglas-fir and Douglas-fir plantations that are now 80 to 110 years

old. Treatments within the project area would maintain desired forest structure by protecting high-value

trees, including old growth and large diameter Douglas-fir adjacent to current infestations, and

complement moth control actions on nearby lands under state, local and private ownership.

Proposed Action: The Pike & San Isabel National Forests and Cimarron & Comanche National

Grasslands propose to implement control measures to minimize the spread and intensity of the Douglas-

fir Tussock Moth outbreak on National Forest System Lands within the Wildland Urban Interface near

Colorado Springs.

The Project Area encompasses 408 acres near Cheyenne Canyon in El Paso County, Colorado. The

affected areas are in portions of T14S, R67W, Sections 28, 29, 32, and 33; and T15S, R67W, Sections 4,

5, 9, and 10. The attached map shows the current outbreak and the areas on National Forest System Land

that are proposed for treatment.


In separate actions, treatments are scheduled to occur on private, city, and state lands adjacent to the

National Forest. Those treatments are separate from this proposal and are not part of the Forest Service

proposed action.

Control of the moth would be accomplished using Foray 48B Biological Insecticide. The insecticide

would be applied from the air by helicopter. A single treatment would occur during the period when

treatment would be most effective, which is most likely to happen during the month of June 2016. No

application would occur in areas where surface water is present, including ponds, lakes, and wetlands and

perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams. A 100 foot no spray buffer on either side of all perennial

and ephemeral streams will be applied. Best management practices and all EPA label directions will be

strictly followed.

The treatment area would be closed to the public during the period of aerial application.

Habitat Description: The proposed project area is within the ecotone of the Pikes Peak-Rampart

Range and the Northern Arkansas Granitics ecological subsections as defined by McNab, et al. (2007).

The area lies within the Cheyenne Creek and City of Colorado Springs-Fountain Creek sixth level

watersheds.

The project area is in a montane climate zone at elevation between 7,000 and 8,500 feet. All aspects are

present in the vicinity, and slopes may be over 60 percent. Vegetation is described as mixed conifer,

Ponderosa Pine-Douglas-fir, Ponderosa Pine/Gambel Oak, and Ponderosa Pine/grass dominated. There

are plantations of Douglas-fir intermixed with Ponderosa Pine and White Fir.

Extraordinary Circumstances Discussion: There are two threatened species that could inhabit the

area. One terrestrial wildlife species, the Mexican spotted owl and one threatened fish species, the

Greenback cutthroat trout in the nearby watershed. There will be no effect on the fish species, Greenback

cutthroat trout. The project may affect, not likely adversely affect the Mexican spotted owl, but the

species is not known to be present in the area. One treatment polygon in the southwest corner of the

project area contained modeled Mexican spotted owl Habitat. That polygon was removed from the

proposed action. Surveys conducted for the project found poor quality habitat in that polygon.

Threatened Endangered & Sensitive Species: Based on habitat type and records from the Pikes

Peak Ranger District, the project area could provide suitable habitat for the Mexican spotted owl

(threatened species) and is located in the neighboring watershed of the only wild remaining Greenback

cutthroat trout (threatened species) stream fishery.

The fringed myotis, hoary bat, Townsends’ big-eared bat, flammulated owl, peregrine falcon, northern

goshawk, and olive-sided flycatcher are designated as sensitive by the Regional Forester in Region 2 of

the USDA, Forest Service. These species may be dependent on a component of forested ecosystems to

fulfill habitat requirements for foraging, rest, reproduction, and/or protection. For more information, see

Appendix A - Species federally listed, or proposed to be listed, as Threatened or Endangered, and

Regional Forester’s Sensitive species considered for the Cheyenne Mountain Tussock Moth Control

Project.

Map 1. Project Area



Species Federally Listed as Threatened

GREENBACK CUTTHROAT TROUT

(Oncorhynchus clarki stomias)

Status and Distribution

Approximately 3.4 miles of the upper Bear Creek Watershed, located north of the project area, contains

the extremely important population of greenback cutthroat trout as there are only two populations of

greenbacks present in the wild, Bear Creek containing the only remaining greenback stream population

(USFWS 2016, Metcalf et al. 20012, Bestgen et al. 2013). North Cheyenne Creek contains greenbacks

also, but have been determined to be more similar to the Colorado River basin than to greenback

populations in the Arkansas or South Platte rivers (Metcalf 2007). This location is also outside of the

project area. More information can be found in the Bear Creek Watershed Restoration Biological

Assessment/Biological Evaluation of Fisheries and Wildlife Resources (Quesada, Bohon 2015).

Map 2. Protected greenback populations and stream reached areas relative to the project area.

Presently, eight populations on the Pike and San Isabel National Forests are protected under the ESA and

have been managed to contribute to recovery and delisting goals and objectives. The U.S. Fish &

Wildlife Service and the Greenback Recovery Team are in the process of examining the current


classification, threats, and risks to greenback cutthroat trout populations in order to determine the need for

a change to the listing status of this species in Colorado (USDI FWS 2012, USDI FWS 2014). Pending a

new status determination, all populations on the Pike & San Isabel National Forests will continue to be

federally listed and managed as threatened species. This species is also managed as an aquatic

Management Indicator Species (MIS) on the PSICC.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Btk is not toxic to fish (Durkin 2004). At high concentrations, Btk may decrease available oxygen

affecting some aquatic invertebrates (Durkin 2004). Application of Btk may cause some aquatic

invertebrates to drift from the application site where concentrations are high (Kreutzweiser, et al., 1994).

Studies have shown 4 to 30 percent mortality in some groups of stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies, but

copepods, glass shrimp and some other caddisflies are tolerant (Durkin 2004).

The proposed tussock moth control management actions will not occur over any open water within the

project area for both private and public lands. In addition, a 100 foot no spray buffer will be applied on

either side of all streams on the National Forest. Aquatic insect populations will not be reduced and food

availability for trout will remain approximately the same within the streams. Spraying will avoid all the

protected streams, the entire Bear Creek watershed, and occur downstream of the greenback population in

North Cheyenne Creek.

Terrestrial invertebrates (including lepidopterans) comprise some of the greenback diet (Durkin 2004,

USFWS 2016). By avoidance of these areas, insect densities should remain approximately the same

along the protected streams before and after treatment.

Cumulative Effects

Tussock Moth management on private lands within North and South Cheyenne Canyon will be similar to

the USFS management and avoid live streams by buffering perennial and ephemeral streams (50 foot and

25 foot buffer) and greenback cutthroat populations. If live trees along the streams of Bear Creek, North

Cheyenne and South Cheyenne Creeks are defoliated and eventually die, stream conditions will likely

change in temperature, amount of sediment and large wood material.

Determination of Effects

The Cheyenne Canyon Tussock Moth Control Project will have no effect on the greenback cutthroat trout.

MEXICAN SPOTTED OWL (Strix occidentalis lucida)

Status and Distribution

The Mexican spotted owl (MSO or spotted owl) is one of three subspecies of spotted owl that includes the

California and northern spotted owl subspecies (USDI FWS 2012). The Mexican spotted owl occurs in

areas that correspond with isolated mountain ranges and canyon systems over a broad geographic area

that includes Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and the western portions of Texas south into several

States of Mexico (USDI FWS 2012).

Mexican spotted owls nest, roost, forage, and disperse in a diverse array of biotic communities. Spotted

owl can be found in heavily forested areas as well as in rocky canyons with sparse or no forest cover

(USDI FWS 2012). In both forest and canyon environments, spotted owls tend to select roosting and

nesting sites that provide thermal protection. In the case of forested sites, large trees, dense canopy cover,

and first or second order tributaries all act to create a cooler microclimate during warm ambient

temperatures of the breeding season (USDI FWS 2012).


Mexican spotted owls consume a variety of prey throughout their range. Spotted owls commonly eat

small- and medium-sized rodents such as woodrats, mice, and voles, but they also consume bats, birds,

reptiles, and arthropods (USDI FWS 2012). Spotted owls utilize a wider variety of cover types for

foraging than for roosting or nesting, including: managed and unmanaged forests, piñon-juniper

woodlands, mixed-conifer and ponderosa pine forests, on cliff faces and terraces between cliffs, and along

riparian zones (multiple sources in USDI FWS 2012).

Habitat Assessment

About 8.6 million acres of critical habitat (i.e., habitat that is essential for the conservation of this species)

is designated for the Mexican spotted owl on Federal lands in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah.

The northwest and southeast portions of the Pikes Peak Ranger District occur within two critical habitat

units that encompass about 54,365 acres of the district. The critical habitat designation includes areas

within these mapped units that are protected or restricted habitat as defined in the original Recovery Plan

(USDI FWS 1995). The proposed project area is located approximately two miles north of these critical

habitat units (MSO Protected Activity Centers [PAC]).

Within the project area, forested stands with the vegetative type and structural features that may support

this species encompass about 96 acres of the project area (USDA FS 2014). According to the MSO

Model for the Pike/San Isabel National Forest (USDA FS 2014), the project area contains 68.4 acres of

stands suitable as foraging habitat for the spotted owl and are considered forested recovery habitat (i.e.,

replacement nest/roost habitat). The project area also contains 24.7 acres of rocky canyon habitat on

National Forest System Lands.

Map 3: Mexican Spotted Owl Habitat Types Modeled within the Project Area on National Forest Service


Survey Results & Field Reconnaissance

Several Mexican spotted owl surveys were conducted at 16 sites across the Pikes Peak Ranger District

during the early 1990’s. As a result of these early survey efforts, two Protected Activity Centers (i.e.,

known or historical nest and/or roost sites) were established at Rock Creek and Little Fountain Creek,

located about 2 miles south of the project area. The Forest Service conducted four MSO surveys each in

South Cheyenne Creek in 1990 and in North Cheyenne in 1992 and had negative results. The species has

not been documented in the project area.

Further analysis of the modeled MSO habitat in the field occurred on April 20, 2016 by Stephanie

Shively, Ed Biery and Steve Olson from the Pike and San Isabel National Forests, Cimarron and

Comanche National Grasslands (PSICC). Reclassification of the modeled habitat was conducted during

field reconnaissance. The 3.24 acres of nest/roosting habitat located on National Forest is showing

tussock moth infestation and is of poor quality for nesting MSO (Photo 1). This area, the southwest

treatment polygon, was removed from the proposed action.


Photo 1 - Nest/Roost Habitat Modeled on National Forest Lands along Gold Camp Road

In addition, several of the polygons identified as MSO forested nest/roost habitat were actually poor

quality sites of Douglas-fir plantations approximately 100 years in age. It is difficult to pull some of these

characteristics out of a habitat model covering an entire forest. An example of one site is shown in Photo

2. The trees are evening spaced in rows, all the same species and less than 15 inches in diameter. These

units are neighboring treatment units on National Forest. In general, the mixed conifer forest on the

National Forest within the project area was of poor quality for Mexican spotted owls due to a lack of the

following: dense forest canopy, large diameter trees, rocky canyons and riparian zones.


Photo 2 – Example of the Douglas-fir stands planted in the early 1900's.

All photos were shared with the USFWS Biologist, Leslie Ellwood, who agreed that the nesting/roosting

habitat modeled for MSO would not need further survey work and is not likely to contain nesting birds

(USFWS April 28, 2016).

Direct and Indirect Effects

The proposed tussock moth control management actions will avoid all the MSO Protected Activity

Centers at Rock Creek and Little Fountain Creek, located approximately two miles of the project. If an

active MSO nest is present in the project area, disturbance from helicopters flying during implementation

could cause adult birds to flush from the nest during fledgling periods, but research has shown they will

not, or are less likely, to flush during incubation and nestling periods (Delany et al. 1999). The helicopter

activities during one day in June are not likely to affect nesting success or nest abandonment. Mexican

spotted owl seem to be more tolerant of human activities than other raptor species (Delany et al. 1999).

No direct mortality or nest failure is likely to be caused by the project. No direct mortality is likely from

the spray itself (Durkin 2004).

Field Reconnaissance of the project area determined the MSO habitat on Forest Service Lands provides

conditions for foraging. The Mexican spotted owl diet relies mainly on small mammals such as woodrats,

mice, and voles. There is no plausible basis for concern regarding adverse effects in birds, plants, soil

microorganisms or invertebrates other than insects after exposure to B.t.k. (Durkin 2004). Small mammal

availability for the MSO is not likely to be reduced by the treatment/spraying for tussock moth. During


implementation, some prey species might be displaced, but likely to return shortly after to their home

ranges, nests, etc. The nocturnal habits of the foraging owl are suspected to remain the same after the

project is completed during daylight hours. Foraging habitat within the mixed conifer forest will remain

the same with the treatment for tussock moth. Without the treatment, prey habitat conditions are likely to

be altered and potentially reduce the quality of foraging habitat for the Mexican spotted owl as fir tree

mortality increases.

Cumulative Effects

The treatment area on National Forest System Lands contains relatively poor Mexican spotted owl habitat

relative to lands along the North and South Cheyenne Canyon bottoms, privately owned by Colorado

Springs, CO and others. These areas contain higher quality habitat due to the presence of rocky-canyons,

riparian corridors and dense canopy cover in mixed-conifer forest (MSO nesting/roosting). Most of these

sites show heavy tussock moth infestation and are likely to be experiencing tree mortality in the near

future, altering the suitability of MSO habitat (Photo 3).

Photo 3 - Colorado Springs Lands along North Cheyenne Canyon

It is possible an active nest could be present within these private lands which could be disturbed during

the application and spraying with a helicopter. There is a risk a nest could be abandoned during the

implementation of the project, resulting in a loss of reproduction, but research of military helicopter

flights and noise on MSO has shown it does not occur with a single, short duration flight (Delaney et al.

1999) and the birds return to the nest within 10-15 minutes after the disturbance. This research was

specific to site conditions and types of helicopter used, so is possible different results could occur within

the Cheyenne Canyon project area. The process of feeding young on the nest could also be impacted by

the helicopter flights if within close proximity of the nest. The closer the proximity to the nest, the greater

likelihood of flushing the birds (USFWS 2006, Delany et al. 1999).


Cheyenne Canyon is located in the foothills of Colorado Springs and contains several miles of roads and

trails popular with the public. Noise disturbance associated with these human activities is present,

particularly during spring, summer and fall. Military operations (Air force academy and Fort Carson

Army Base) and a local Colorado Springs airport are present nearby. Some wildlife species may have

habituated to these types of human activities.

As the progression of the tussock moth continues, habitat for the Mexican spotted owl may decline in the

project area and birds will be displaced to lands outside the Cheyenne Canyon watershed. The proposed

treatment will reduce the risk of further Douglas-fir mortality in the area and will protect what habitat

currently exists.

Determination of Effects

The determination of the effect of the Proposed Action is ‘may affect, not likely to adversely affect’ the

Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida).

Sensitive Species

FRINGED MYOTIS, HOARY BAT, TOWNSEND’S BIG-EARED BAT, AMERICAN PEREGRINE FALCON,

FLAMMULATED OWL, NORTHERN GOSHAWK, AND OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHER

The following species have the potential to occur within the project area based on habitat requirements

and known distribution, and have been grouped in order to simplify the analysis and disclosure of effects

for the proposed project. Although the manner in which these species utilize habitats may vary, they are

similarly impacted by forage availability and noise disturbance.

FRINGED MYOTIS (Myotis thysanodes): The status and occurrence of the fringed myotis is not well

known in Colorado, but the species is not particularly abundant. The fringed myotis may inhabit

ponderosa pine woodlands, shrublands, up to 7,500 feet in elevation. Caves, mines and buildings may be

used as both day and night roosts (Armstrong et al. 2011). This species regularly roosts underneath the

bark and inside hollows of large dead standing trees, particularly ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir in

medium stages of decay (Keinath 2004). The fringed myotis has a broad diet of moths, beetles,

caddisflies and other insects (Armstrong et al. 2001).

HOARY BAT (Lasiurus cinereus): The hoary bat is the most widespread bat in North America (Adams

2003). This bat is solitary and roosts primarily in the foliage of mainly ponderosa pine forests in the

mountains of Colorado (Armstrong et al. 2011). The hoary bat forages predominately in open areas,

including riparian forests, and prefers to consume moths (Adams 2003).

TOWNSEND’S BIG-EARED BAT (Plecotus townsendii syn. Corynorhinus townsendii): The Townsend’s

big-eared bat is a cave dwelling bat primarily. It inhabits semi-desert shrublands, pinon juniper

woodlands, and open montane forests (Armstrong et al. 2011). It occasionally will use hollows of old-

growth trees within coniferous and deciduous trees, mines abandoned buildings and crevices on rock

cliffs up to 9,500 feet. Townsend’s are gleaners, picking mainly moths, flies and other insects from leaves

for food.

Direct and Indirect Effects to Bats


Field studies have shown that mammal species inhabiting a project area during spraying of Foray 48B, the

bacterium Btk, do not demonstrate adverse effects on their populations (Durkin 2004). Most inhalation

studies do not suggest a potential for adverse effects even at Btk concentrations much greater than those

likely to be encountered in the environment. Helicopter spraying will occur during the daylight hours

while bats are typically roosting in more protected sites (mines, caves, beneath the bark of tree, etc.). The

implementation of the project has a low risk of bat mortality.

Bat species present in the project area may have a reduction in available food supply. The active

ingredient of Foray 48B, the bacterium Btk, can cause large declines in populations of many species of

butterfly and moth caterpillars that are active at the time of spraying. Mortality rates are 80 to 94 percent

in susceptible species, but are much lower in tolerant species. This varies by family of butterfly and

moth. Butterflies are more sensitive than many moth families (Durkin 2004). Some studies have

observed recovery in about a year. Other studies have shown that at least two years is required for

Lepidoptera populations to recover. The local abundance of caterpillars was shown to be back to

pretreatment levels in three years in one study, but species diversity was below that of prior to treatment

(Manderino, et al. 2014). Foraging opportunities will be reduced for the three sensitive bat species within

the project area (approximately 411 acres) for 1-3 years.

AMERICAN PEREGRINE FALCON (Falco peregrinus anatum): The peregrine falcon is a migratory species

which breeds in Colorado. Nest sites typically occur between 4,500 to 10,000 feet in elevation and are

situated 200 feet or higher on ledges or holes on the face of vertical rocky cliffs, walls of canyons and

gorges, or crags (White et al. 2002, Kingery 1998). Ideal nest locations also include undisturbed areas

with a wide view, proximity to water, and plentiful prey, mainly birds (Kingery 1998).

Habitat Assessment

This species has been documented nesting in the Bear Creek watershed since the 1980’s (Quesada and

Bohon 2015). Threats to this species include a decline in habitat quality and human disturbance of nest

sites. A seasonal closure of a rock feature is in place that prohibits human occupation annually from

April 1st through July 15

th for the protection of nesting habitat. Treatment activities associated with the

helicopter routes and landing areas will avoid the active nesting site restricted area (see Map 4) (Estep,

CPW 2016) to reduce the potential of disturbing nesting activities.


Map 4. Restricted Area for Peregrine Falcon Nesting in Bear Creek Watershed

NORTHERN GOSHAWK (Accipiter gentilis): The northern goshawk is considered a forest habitat

generalist, at a large spatial scale, that uses a wide variety of forest types, forest ages, structural

conditions, and successional stages (Reynolds et al. 1992, Kennedy 2003). Northern goshawk forage in

all forest types focusing on small mammals and forest bird species as prey. Nest territories are typically

found in mature forests with large trees, relatively closed canopies (i.e., 60–90%), and open understories.


FLAMMULATED OWL (Otus flammeolus): In Colorado, the flammulated owl occurs regularly from 6,000

to 10,000 feet in elevation (Kingery 1998). Flammulated owls primarily inhabit open ponderosa pine or

old-growth ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests (Reynolds and Linkhart 1992). They are insectivores that

feed mainly on nocturnal arthropods and moths (McCallum 1994, Reynolds and Linkhart 1987). As other

prey become available, this species feeds on caterpillars, grasshoppers, spiders, crickets, and beetles.

OLIVE-SIDED FLYCATCHER (Contopus cooperi): The olive-sided flycatcher is a migratory bird which

breeds in Colorado and is most commonly found in the higher elevations in the spruce/fir forests. The

species forages along edges of early successional forests, severe burned areas, blowdown, small forest

gaps resulting from tree death in old-growth forests, and openings with snags. This species most

commonly nests in live coniferous trees, typically using short-needled conifers (e.g., Douglas-fir and

spruce) (Kotliar 2007). They prey upon flying insects such as moths, flies, bees, grasshoppers and

dragonflies (Kingery 1998).

Direct and Indirect Effects to Birds

Similar to mammals, Btk has not been shown to cause direct mortality to bird species (Durkin 2004). The

process of spraying with a helicopter during June could cause disturbance while adult birds are on the

nests of these species during incubation, nestling or fledgling periods. Potentially they could abandon

their nest and/or not successfully reproduce if the disturbance is significant. A restricted area has been

created for the Peregrine Falcon active nest site in the Bear Creek Watershed. This will relieve pressure

on this species during critical nesting periods. Nest locations for the remaining bird species are not

known, but assumed present. The proposed action includes only a single treatment for the project area.

The short-term disturbance caused by a helicopter flight covering the project area just above the tree

canopy could flush birds and disrupt feeding of young. Reactions of raptors in general to helicopters are

mixed and may be related to the amount of helicopter hovering time spent above a nest, height above the

nest, or the frequency of aircraft flights within a nest’s vicinity (USFWS 2002). Implementation during a

one-day event will allow for a quick return of adults to their nests. There is a risk a species such as the

northern goshawk could abandon their nest as research has shown they are less tolerant then falcons or

owl species (USFWS 2002). Cheyenne Canyon is a popular recreation site with several miles of trail and

roads, developed sight-seeing facilities tied to the Hellen Hunt Falls and Silver Cascade Falls. Birds

present are likely somewhat habituated with human activities, noise and associated disturbances.

The Flammulated owl and Olive-sided flycatcher diets rely partially on moths which populations will be

reduced with the proposed treatment. Foraging availability will be reduced for potentially several years in

the area causing them to find alternative sites.

As discussed in the hazard identification, there is no plausible basis for concern regarding adverse effects

in birds, plants, soil microorganisms or invertebrates other than insects after exposure to B.t.k. (Durkin

2004).

Cumulative Effects to Birds

Treating the tussock moth infestation within North and Cheyenne Canyon on both public and private

lands could slow the spread, reduce further Douglas-fir and White fir mortality and allow for the current

amount of live trees to remain approximately the same. Neighboring watersheds could be protected. The

Bear Creek Watershed, where the greenback cutthroat trout is present, is experiencing tussock moth


defoliation, but no treatments will be done. Because of this, habitat provided by recently infested mixed

conifer forest will be available to wildlife species in the surrounding area. Bat species, olive-sided

flycatcher, flammulated owl foraging will be available in these areas of non-treatment.

Determination of Effects on Sensitive Species

The Cheyenne Mountain Tussock Moth Control Project may adversely impact individuals, but not likely

to result in a loss of viability on the Planning area, nor cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of species

viability range wide.

Prepared by:

/s/ Stephanie Shively Date: May 10, 2016

Stephanie Shively

Salida Ranger District Wildlife Biologist

Reviewed by:

/s/ Mike Welker Date: May 16, 2016

Mike Welker

PSICC Fish and Wildlife Program Leader

Note: Any questions regarding this Biological Evaluation should be directed to Mike Welker.

LITERATURE CITED/REFERENCES

Adams, R.A. 2003. Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation. Univ. Press

Colorado, Boulder, 328 pp.

Altman, B. and R. Sallabanks. 2000. Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), The Birds of North America

Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online.

Available:<http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/502doi:10.2173/bna.502>

Andrews, R. and R. Righter. 1992. Colorado Birds. The Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, CO. 442 pp.

Armstrong, D. M., J. P. Fitzgerald, and C. A. Meaney. 2011. Mammals of Colorado, Second Edition. University

Press of Colorado, Boulder, CO. 704 pp.

Bestgen, K.R., K.B. Rogers, and R. Granger. 2013. Phenotype predicts genotype for lineages of native cutthroat

trout in the Southern Rocky Mountains. Final Report to US Fish and Wildlife Service, Colorado Field Office,

Denver Federal Center (MS 65412), Denver, CO. Larval Fish Laboratory Contribution 177.

Dare, M., M. Carrillo, and C. Speas. 2011. Cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) Species and Conservation

Assessment for the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests. Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre,

and Gunnison National Forests, Delta, Colorado.

Delaney, D.K., T.G. Grubb, P. Beier, L.L. Pater, M.H. Reiser. 1999. Effects of helicopter noise on Mexican spotted

owls. Journal of Wildlife Management 63(1):60-76.

Durkin, P.R. 2004. Control/eradication agents for the gypsy moth – human health and ecological risk assessment

for Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki (B.t.k.) final report. For USDA, Forest Service, Forest Health

Protection. Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc., Fayetteville, New York.


Ellison, L. E., M. B. Wunder, C. A. Jones, C. Mosch, K. W. Navo, K. Peckham, J. E. Burghardt, J. Annear, R. West,

J. Siemers, R. A. Adams, and E. Brekke. 2003. Colorado bat conservation plan. Colorado Committee of the

Western Bat Working Group. 107 pp.

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

Estep, A. 2016. CPW Falcon Activity in Bear Creek. Personal Communication with Felix Quesada, Colorado

Springs, CO. April 2016.

Gallagher, J.P. 2011. Aquatic Habitat Assessment - Bear Creek - Fountain Creek Watershed, Colorado. Prepared

by Fin-Up Habitat Consultants, Inc. for the Pike National Forest.

Gallagher, J.P. 2015. Bear Creek basin-wide habitat assessment and V* monitoring. Document in Progress.

Gruver, J. C. and D. A. Keinath. 2006. Townsend’s Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii): A Technical

Conservation Assessment. USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 91 pp.

Hammerson, G. A. 1999. Amphibians and Reptiles in Colorado. Second edition. University Press of Colorado and

Colorado Division of Wildlife, Niwot, CO. 484 pp.

Hirsch, C.L., S.E. Albeke, and T.P. Nesler. 2006. Range-wide status of Colorado River cutthroat trout

(Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus): 2005. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, CO.

Keinath, D. A. 2004. Fringed Myotis (Myotis thysanodes): A Technical Conservation Assessment. USDA, Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 63 pp.

Kennedy, P. L. 2003. Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis atricapillus): A Technical Conservation Assessment.

USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 142 pp.

Kingery, H.E. (editor). 1998. Colorado breeding bird atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership and Colorado Division

of Wildlife. Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation. Denver, CO. 636 pp.

Kotliar, N. B. 2007. Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi): A Technical Conservation Assessment. USDA,

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 37 pp.

Kreutzweiser, D.P., S.S. Capell, and D.R. Thomas. 1994. Aquatic insect responses to Bacillus thuringiensis var.

kurstaki in a forest stream. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 24:2041-2049.

Krieger, D. 2014. Personal Communications with Doug Krieger, Senior Aquatic Biologist, Parks and Wildlife,

regarding the habitat conditions, reproductive chorology, potential effects of in-stream restoration, and other

observations of the Bear Creek population of greenback cutthroat trout.

Manderino, R., T.O. Crist, and K.J. Haynes. 2014. Lepidoptera-specific insecticide used to suppress gypsy moth

outbreaks may benefit non-target forest Lepidoptera. Agricultural and Forest Entomology. The Royal

Entomological Society. 10 pp.

Martin, A. 2008. Genetic identification of cutthroat trout in Rocky Mountain National Park based on mtDNA and

microsatellite analysis. University of Colorado, Boulder.

Metcalf, J. L., V. L. Pritchard, S. M. Silvestri, J. B. Jenkins, J. S. Wood, D. E. Cowley, R. P. Evans, D. K. Shiozawa,

and A. P. Martin. 2007. Across the great divide: genetic forensics reveals misidentification of endangered

cutthroat trout populations. Molecular Ecology 16 (21):4445-4454.

Metcalf, J. L. , S. Love Stowell, C. M. Kennedy, K. B. Rodgers, D. McDonald, J. Epp, K. Keepers, A. Cooper, J. J.

Austin, and A. P. Martin. 2012. Historical stocking data and 19th century DNA reveal human-induced changes

to native diversity and distribution of cutthroat trout. Molecular Ecology, 21: 5194–5207.

Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks (MFWP). 2011. Montana Animal Field Guide. Montana Natural Heritage

Program and Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Available: <http://fieldguide.mt.gov/>.

McCallum, D. A. 1994. Flammulated Owl (Otus flammeolus), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.).

Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online:

<http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna>.


NatureServe. 2013. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1.

NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available: <http://www.natureserve.org/explorer>. (Accessed: April 11,

2016).

Nehring, J. 2015. Personal Communications with Josh Nehring, Acting Senior Aquatic Biologist, Colorado Parks

and Wildlife, regarding fish sampling data from Bear Creek.

Olson, S. 2015. Endangered, threatened, proposed and Regional forester’s sensitive species in the Rocky Mountain

Region (R2). What’s important for the Pike and San Isabel National Forests and the Cimarron and Comanche

National Grasslands (PSICC)? Pueblo, CO. 166 pp.

Quesada, F., D. Bohon. 2015. Bear Creek Watershed Restoration Biological Assessment/Biological Evaluation of

Fisheries and Wildlife Resources. Pikes Peak Ranger District, Pike and San Isabel National Forests and

Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands. 77pp.

Reynolds, R. T., and B. D. Linkhart. 1992. Flammulated owl in ponderosa pine: evidence of preference for old

growth. Pages 166-169 in M.R. Kaufman, W.H. Moir, and R.L. Bassett, technical coordinators. Proceedings of

the workshop on old-growth in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Region. Portal, AZ.

Reynolds, R. T., R. T. Graham, M. H. Reiser, and others. 1992. Management recommendations for the northern

goshawk in the southwestern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-217, Ft. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 90 pp.

Ryke, N., S. Olson, T. Wagner, and M. Elson. 2003. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive of the Pike & San

Isabel National Forests & Comanche & Cimarron National Grasslands. 35 pp.

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Recovery plan for the Mexican spotted owl: Vol.I. Albuquerque, New

Mexico. 347 pp.

____. 1998b. Greenback cutthroat trout recovery plan. Denver, Colorado. 62 pp.

____. 2002. Romin, L.A. and J.A. Muck (Prep). Utah Field Office Guidelines for Raptor Protection. Utah Field

Office, Salt Lake City.

___ .2006. Estimating the Effects of Auditory and Visual Disturbance on the Northern Spotted owl and Marbled

Murrlet in Northwestern California.

____ .2012. Recent cutthroat trout studies in Colorado. Overview of the Endangered Species Act evaluation process

of recent cutthroat trout research in Colorado. Region 6, Colorado Field Office, Denver, Colorado. 1 p.

____ .2012b. Final Recovery Plan for the Mexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida), First Revision.

Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. 413 pp.

____ .2014. Greenback Cutthroat Trout Genetics and Meristics Studies Facilitated Expert Panel Workshop. Final

Summary Report. Region 6, Mountain-Prairie Region, Lakewood, Colorado. 197 pp.

____ . 2016. USWFS and USFS Communication Record on MSO with Cheyenne Canyon Tussock Moth Control

Project. Salida, CO. April 16 & 28, 2016.

USDA Forest Service. 1984. Land and Resource Management Plan, Pike and San Isabel National Forests;

Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands, Rocky Mountain Region.

____ 2013. Region 2 Regional Foresters sensitive species list (dated July 1, 2013). Region 2 supplement no. 2600-

2013-1.

____ 2014. Mexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) Recovery Habitat Mapping for the Pike & San Isabel

National Forests. C. Beal, Pikes Peak Ranger District, Colorado Springs, CO. 16 pp.

White, C. M., N. J. Clum, T. J. Cade and W. G. Hunt. 2002. Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus), The Birds of

North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North

America Online. Available: <http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/660doi:bna.660>

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/660

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/660


Winters, D.S., E.N.Bennett and J.P.Gallagher. – USDA, Forest Service. 1994. Basinwide Stream Habitat Inventory

– Greenback Cutthroat Trout Streams of the Pike and San Isabel National Forests in Colorado. Pike and San

Isabel National Forests and the Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands. 57pp.

Woodbridge, B.; Hargis, C.D. 2006. Northern goshawk inventory and monitoring technical guide. Gen.Tech. Rep.

WO-71. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 80 p.

Wrigley, M.J., M. White, B. Elliot, M. Comer, R.E. Torretta, P. Gaines, S. Olson, K. Meyer, M. Painter, J.

Windorski, F. Quesada, and M. Welker. 2012. Threatened, endangered and Forest Service sensitive species on

the Pike and San Isabel National Forests (updated June 2012). Unpubl. Rpt. U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service. Pike and San Isabel National Forests and Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands. Salida,

Colorado. 115pp + appendices.

Young, M.K. 2009. Greenback Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii stomias): A Technical Conservation

Assessment. USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 99 pp.

Young, M. K. and A.L. Harig. 2001. A Critique of the Recovery of Greenback Cutthroat Trout. Conservation

Biology, 15(6): 1575–1584.

Documents

Project Name: Cheyenne Canyon Tussock Moth Control Projecta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · 2016. 5. 31. · Biological Evaluation – Cheyenne Mountain Tussock