ARCHIVED REPORTS_1993_1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Michael Niblock , City of Stockton 3 and considers the specific elements to represent the desirable sequence of steps in the mitigation planning process. Accordingly, we maintain that the best way to mitigate for adverse biological impacts is to avoid them altogether. The Report should describe all measures proposed to avoid, minimize, or compensate for impacts to fish, wildlife, and their habitats. The measures should be presented in as much detail as possible to allow ' evaluation of their probable effectiveness. Should it be determined that compensatory mitigation of project impacts is appropriate, there should be no net loss of in-kind habitat values or acres. Baseline information would need to be gathered within the landfill area to be able to quantify this goal and identify success criteria in terms of plant species composition, cover, density, and structure. The mitigation plan must also provide a time frame for implementation relative to the proposed project. We recommend that mitigation be initiated prior to the onset of project construction. If there will be a substantial time lag between project construction and completion of the mitigation work, a net loss of habitat values could result, and additional mitigation would be required to offset this loss. In addition, the mitigation plan should include 1) a monitoring plan to assess the progress of the mitigation work during its developmental stages, 2) identification of the entity performing the maintenance activities, as well as the entity that will ultimately own and manage the site, 3) a mechanism to fund the long term operation and maintenance of the site, and 4) a contingency plan to assure there is no net loss of habitat values should the mitigation fail to meet the objectives of the success criteria. A permanent easement that will preclude incompatible activities should be placed on the property used for the mitigation as well as on any on-site areas that include avoided wetlands. . Endangered Species. The federally threatened valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorvhus) may inhabit the area if its host plant, elderberry (Sambucus spp.) , is present. This species is fully protected under the mandates of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) and its implementing regulations prohibit the "take" of a federally listed wildlife species. Take is defined by the Act "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect. . ." any such species. Take may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or shelter (SO CFR § 17.3) . Take incidental to an otherwise lawful activity may be authorized by one of two procedures. If a Federal agency is involved with the permitting, funding, or carrying out of this project, then initiation of formal consultation between that agency and the Service pursuant to Section 7 of the Act is required if it is determined that the proposed project may affect a federally listed species. Such consultation would result in'a biological opinion that addresses anticipated effects of the project to listed and proposed species, and may authorize a limited level of incidental take. If a Federal agency is