SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

XII. SUMMARY OF COMMMENTS AND RESPONSESB. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSESComment I-2: ‘…there’s a reference in that same section to the clearing [of] the areasurrounding the storage ponds of vegetation, and I’m kind of assuming that’s not non nativevegetation, but it doesn’t say that. And I’m trying to think how is that going to preserve theenvironment. If it’s going to have that, the statement should say “nonnative vegetation” becausewe should be encouraging native vegetation to try to save as much habitats as we can.’ (JoanneFreemire – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Response: This comment refers to mitigation measures that were designed to keep special statusplant communities from establishing in disturbed areas where chances of long-term survival arelow. It is unlikely that native plants or special status species would establish and/or prosper inthese already disturbed areas (areas where ongoing mining is occurring). Removal of non-nativeplant species will most probably be the predominant action under this mitigation measure. Thepoint of this measure is to keep these areas clear of all vegetation and wildlife.2.0 SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE2.1 SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIESComment I-3: ‘The Service believes several of the proposals within the management plan mayresult in take of federally listed species. Take is defined by the Act as “to harass, harm, pursue,hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect” any listed wildlife species. “Harm” in thisdefinition includes significant habitat modification of degradation where it actually kills or injureswildlife, by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, orsheltering.If a Federal agency is involved with the permitting, funding, or carrying out of this project, theninitiation of formal consultation between that agency and the Service pursuant to section 7 of theAct, may be required. Such consultation would result in a biological opinion addressinganticipated effects of the project to listed and proposed species and may authorize a limited levelof incidental take. If a Federal agency is not involved with the project, and federally-listedspecies may be taken as part of the project, then an “incidental take” permit pursuant tosection 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act should be obtained. The Service may issue such a permit uponcompletion by the permit applicant of a satisfactory conservation plan for the listed species thatwould be affected by the project. The completion of a Habitat Conservation Plan by the SFPUCis discussed within the management plan. We encourages the SFPUC to begin working with usto achieve this goal.’ (United States Fish and Wildlife Service)Response: USFWS regulatory requirements are noted with respect to the federal EndangeredSpecies Act. Consultation will occur as appropriate when specific projects are proposed andconsidered by the SFPUC. The USFWS support of the Management Plan action calling for aHabitat Conservation Plan is also noted.Comment I-4: “The Draft Environmental Impact Report has some serious failings in itsassessment of the natural resources of the watershed. Section III.E inadequately addresses theNOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan C&R.52 ESA / 930385