A04_Attachment_01_CLNWR_Section_7_RV_Site_20220615.doc

INTRA-SERVICE SECTION 7 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FORM

Originating Person: Jeremy Dixon Telephone Number: 305-451-4223 E-Mail: Jeremy_Dixon@fws.gov Date: 6/15/2022 PROJECT NAME: Crocodile Lake NWR RV Site Project I.

Service Program:

___ Ecological Services

___ Federal Aid

___ Clean Vessel Act

___ Coastal Wetlands

___ Endangered Species Section 6

___ Partners for Fish and Wildlife

___ Sport Fish Restoration

___ Wildlife Restoration

___ Fisheries

X Refuges/Wildlife

II.

State/Agency:

III.

Station Name: Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge

IV.

Description of Proposed Action A couple of large concrete slabs (over 9,000 ft2) were left over from a failed residential development prior to Refuge establishment. Rather than the costly demolition of these assets, they will be repurposed and will be used to create an RV area with 4 hookups. These four sites will help facilitate refuge operations by providing researchers and volunteers who help conduct refuge operations including maintenance work involving the upkeep of buildings and grounds; habitat management projects including tree planting and invasive plant removal; biological work on listed wildlife species, research and removal of invasive wildlife including pythons, feral cats and iguanas; environmental education within schools and for community events; leading and managing other volunteers; and, the operation and staffing of the Refuge’s visitor contact station.

Work Site Specifics This project will create four separate RV sites within the existing concrete slabs. To conduct this project, there will be two trenches created within the footprint of the existing administrative road that will contain water/sewer and electric/coaxial cable. Along the administrative road into the RV sites and around the RV site, vegetation will be trimmed at the most minimal extent possible using hand or chain saws that will be supervised by Refuge staff to ensure protection of Stock Island and Florida tree snails and will follow the SFESO standards for tree snail mitigation (2013 FKEC BO). Cut vegetation will be placed into the forest adjacent to the sites to naturally decompose. Along this road, the contractor will avoid disturbing any Key Largo woodrat nests and maintain a 6 foot buffer from these nests. Refuge staff will flag these nests, prior to work beginning. Any RV site improvements will only occur in areas that were previously disturbed. The following figures 1-4 show the project specifics as it relates to the installation of utilities.

Figure 1. Map showing trenching areas, existing concrete pads, KLWTD sewer connection point, FKAA tap, and the planned concrete electrical vaults and the utility main.

Figure 2. Map showing trenching area, existing concrete pads, planned utility main, RV hook-ups and utility lines from the RV hook-ups to the utility main.

Figure 3. Map showing trenching areas, existing concrete pads, planned utility main, RV hook-ups, new concrete pads, parking bumpers, and limestone ramps.

Figure 4. Road entrance including KLWTD Sewer connection, electrical vault, sewer and water trench, electrical and coaxial cable trench, water line trench, existing road, and placement location for electric gate.

V.

Pertinent Species and Habitat:

A.

Include species/habitat occurrence map:

B. Complete the following table:

1STATUS: E=endangered, T=threatened, PE=proposed endangered, PT=proposed threatened, CH=critical habitat, PCH=proposed critical habitat, C=candidate species, S/A=Similar Appearance

VI.

Location (attach map): Refer to the Multi-Species Recovery Plan of South Florida for the most up to date location maps (USFWS 1999).

A.

Ecoregion Number and Name: 53, Southeast Region B.

County and State: Monroe County, Florida C. Section, township, and range (or latitude and longitude:

N 25° 10’ 31.01” W 80° 22’ 22.77” D. Distance (miles) and direction to nearest town: ¼ mile North of Key Largo, Florida E.

Species/habitat occurrence: See VII below.

VII.

Determination of Effects:

A. Explanation of effects of the action on species and critical habitats in item V. B:

SPECIES/

CRITICAL HABITAT

IMPACTS TO SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT

Keys Tree Cactus (Pilosocereus robinii)

NE

STATUS OF THE SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT

All KLWR nests will be marked by Refuge personnel. The sparse removal of vegetation to provide access to this site will not likely adversely affect KLWR or KLCM.

The Florida Semaphore Cactus and Keys Tree Cactus do not occur within the project area, and only occurs on the Refuge in maintained out-plantings. Therefore the proposed project will not have an effect on the Florida semaphore cactus and its designated critical habitat or the Keys Tree Cactus.

The project area is within upland habitats, so there would be no impacts to wetland habitats or crocodiles. The proposed project will have no effect on the American crocodile and its designated critical habitat.

Historically, the eastern indigo snake ranged throughout the upland habitats of the Florida Keys; however, its present distribution is uncertain. CLNWR staff will implement the FWS’s Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Measures; therefore, the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the eastern indigo snake.

The Schaus’ is a blackish-large brown and yellow butterfly found in the tropical hardwood hammocks extending from Southern Miami-Dade County to Lower Matecumbe Key. A minimal amount of vegetation removal is expected to occur, which will likely have a positive impact on Schaus’ populations. Therefore, the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Schaus’.

Stock Island tree snails feed primarily on wild tamarind (Lysiloma bahamensis), willow bustic (Bumelia salicifolia), poisonwood (Metopium toxiferum ), gumbo limbo (Bursera simaruba), pigeon plum (Coccoloba diversifola), ironwood (Krugiodendron ferreum), wild lime, mastic (Mastichodendron foetidissimum), and strongbark (Bourreria sp.), but may also feed on other species. All of these tree species are found within CLNWR and may be present in a density or environment at the work areas that may create a microclimate (shade, humidity, temperature) favorable for tree snails. The sites contain suitable habitat for this species and Stock Island Tree Snail is known to be present within CLNWR. The scope of work requires a minimal amount of vegetation removal. To minimize the possibility of affecting the Stock Island Tree Snail, the CLNWR will follow the SFESO standards for tree snail mitigation (2013 FKEC BO) to properly relocate tree snails to adjacent habitat. Therefore, the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Stock Island tree snail.

Explanation of actions to be implemented to reduce adverse effects:

SPECIES/

CRITICAL HABITAT

ACTIONS TO MITIGATE/MINIMIZE IMPACTS

VIII.

Effect Determination and Response Requested:

Key Largo Woodrat (Neotoma floridana smalli)

X

Concurrence

Key Largo Cotton Mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus allapaticola)

X

Concurrence

Schaus’ Swallowtail Butterfly (Heraclides aristodemus ponceanus)

X

Concurrence

Concurrence

Concurrence

Concurrence

Stock Island Tree Snail (Orthalicus reses)

X

Concurrence

Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais couperi)

X

Concurrence

1DETERMINATION/ RESPONSE REQUESTED:

NE = no effect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action will not directly, indirectly, or cumulatively impact, either positively or negatively, any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat. Response Requested is optional but a “Concurrence” is recommended for a complete Administrative Record.

NA = not likely to adversely affect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action is not likely to adversely impact any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat or there may be beneficial effects to these resources. Response Requested is a” Concurrence”.

AA = likely to adversely affect. This determination is appropriate when the proposed action is likely to adversely impact any listed, proposed, candidate species or designated/proposed critical habitat. Response Requested for listed species is “Formal Consultation”. Response requested for proposed and candidate species is “Conference”.

____06-15-2022____________________

Signature (originating station)

Date __Refuge Manager_________________ Title

IX.

Reviewing Ecological Services Office Evaluation:

A. Concurrence ______ Nonconcurrence _______ B. Formal consultation required _______ C. Conference required _______ D. Informal conference required ________ E. Remarks (attach additional pages as needed):

Signature

Date

Title

Office