FERC Project No. 2079 - PCWA Middle Fork American River Project ...

Application for New License Middle Fork American River Project (FERC Project No. 2079)
5.2 LISTED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
Provided below is a brief description of the amphibians and mammals (listed and
candidate species) known or potentially occurring in the vicinity of the MFP. Refer to
BA/BE Appendix B for a detailed life history of each species.
5.2.1 Amphibians
5.2.1.1 California Red-Legged Frog
Only one CRLF record is known within 1 mile of the MFP area. This record is a single
adult CRLF that was observed on the western end of Ralston Ridge in the right-of-way
below a PG&E transmission line. No individuals have been observed at this location
since 2001. This site was burned in the Ralston Ridge Fire in 2006. The closest known
population in the vicinity of the MFP is located on private land more than a mile north of
the MFP at Michigan Bluff.
No USFWS-designated critical habitat for CRLF is found in the vicinity of the MFP. The
closest critical habitat units are the ELD-1 unit, located in El Dorado County
approximately 30 miles south of the MFP, and the NEV-1 unit, located in Nevada
County approximately 40 miles to the northwest of the MFP (BA/BE Appendix D). A
recovery plan for CRLF was issued by USFWS in February 2002 (USFWS 2002). The
objective of the recovery plan is to reduce threats and improve the population status of
CRLF sufficiently to warrant delisting.
A site assessment and field studies were completed as part of the MFP relicensing to
determine the presence of CRLF populations and potential habitat in the vicinity of the
MFP. The site assessment is included as BA/BE Appendix D of this document. Based
on the site assessments, field surveys, and consultation with USFWS, it was
determined that rivers and reservoirs (e.g., the Middle Fork American River, Rubicon
River, Hell Hole Reservoir and Ralston Afterbay) associated with MFP do not represent
CRLF aquatic breeding habitat. As defined by USFWS (2006), these large rivers and
reservoirs represent barriers that would restrict the northward and/or southward
movement of CRLF throughout the study area.
Potential aquatic breeding habitat was identified by USFWS at three off-channel ponds
at Horseshoe Bar (Ponds C, E, and F). As requested by USFWS, protocol-level surveys
were completed at these sites. No CRLF were observed (BA/BE Appendix E). The
CRLF protocol-level survey report is included as BA/BE Appendix E of this document.
Potential CRLF dispersal habitats in the vicinity of the MFP would include riparian
areas, grasslands that contain seeps and springs (USFWS 2002), or deeply shaded
forest streams immediately adjacent to aquatic breeding areas (Barry, pers. comm.,
2007). However, any habitat that does not contain significant barriers to dispersal may
also potentially be used by CRLF during dispersal (USFWS 2002).
February 2011 5-2