EDA#05-01-06143_Environmental Assessment, Biological Report.pdf

BIOLOGICAL FIELD SURVEY REPORT FOR THE

CORTEZ TO TOWAOC FIBER LINE PROJECT

MONTEZUMA COUNTY, COLORADO

Kleinfelder Project 20220811.001A

June 2021

Copyright 2021 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved

ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC

PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED.

http://www.kleinfelder.com/

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page ii of iii June 2021 © 2021 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com

A Report Prepared for:

Southwest Colorado Council of Governments and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Biological Field Survey Report for the Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project Montezuma County, Colorado

Biological Field Survey Report for the Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project

Prepared by:

Diane Kruse, CEO NEO Connect PO Box 2664 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Phone: 970.309.3500 Email: Diane@NEOconnect.us and

Mitchell Reese, Biologist Karen Simpson, Project Manager III Kleinfelder 707 17th Street, Suite 3000 Denver, CO 80202 Phone: 303.237.6601

June 2021 Project Number: 20220811.001A http://www.kleinfelder.com/ mailto:Diane@NEOconnect.us

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page iii of iii June 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1 INTRODUCTION

Project Description General Setting

Soils Vegetation

2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Wetlands and Waters of the United States Raptors and Migratory Birds Federally Protected Species State Protected Species Colorado Noxious Weeds

3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

Wetland and Stream Identification Protected Species and Habitat Identification

4 SURVEY RESULTS

Land Cover and Vegetation Biological Survey Findings

Raptors and Migratory Birds Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species

Potentially Jurisdictional Waterbodies and Wetlands

5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS

USFWS and CPW

USACE

Montezuma County Noxious Weed Program

6 LIMITATIONS

7 REFERENCES

TABLES

1 Soils Units within Survey Area 2 Listed Species with Potential to Occur in Montezuma County, Colorado 3 Plant Species Encountered in the Survey Area 4 Bird Nests Encountered in the Survey Area 5 Wetland and Stream Features Delineated in the Survey Area 7 Effects to RTE Species with Potential to Occur in Montezuma County, CO

APPENDICES

A Project Maps B Photograph Log C USACE Wetland Determination Forms and Stream Datasheets D IPaC Report E Summary of Potential Impacts for RTE Species in the Project Area

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 4 of 22 June 2021

1 INTRODUCTION

NEO Fiber, Inc., doing business as NEO Connect, was hired by the Southwest Colorado Council of Governments (SWCCOG), in collaboration with the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe to complete an environmental review and biological survey for the proposed Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project

(Project) located in Montezuma County, Colorado. At the request of NEO Connect, Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder) completed a biological survey for this route. This report has been prepared to summarize the biological and aquatic resources in the Survey Area that may require design and permitting consideration during planning and construction of the Project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed Project consists of constructing a fiber optic line along Highway 160 in Montezuma

County, Colorado, totaling approximately 8.8 miles. The new fiber line will be buried almost entirely within an existing Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way (ROW) from Arrowhead Lane (Cortez) south to the intersection of Highway 160 and Mike Wash Road.

The Project location is depicted on the Project Overview Map (included in Appendix A, Project

Maps). Kleinfelder understands that the construction of the proposed fiber line will occur within a

60-foot-wide construction easement almost entirely within the CDOT ROW. The survey was completed for all areas of the construction easement within the CDOT ROW (Survey Area), as adjacent landowners were not informed of the survey, using publicly available data and Project location data (KMZ files) provided to Kleinfelder by eX² Technology, LLC on May 18, 2021.

GENERAL SETTING

1.2.1 Soils

Soils within the Survey Area were identified using the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s

(NRCS) Web Soil Survey (WSS). A total of 17 NRCS Soil Map Units are mapped within the Survey

Area, the majority with clay or stony loam textures. The mapped soil types within the Survey Area are depicted on Figure 2 in Appendix A and listed in Table 1.

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 5 of 22 June 2021

Table 1 – Soil Units within the Survey Area

Map Unit Name Hydric Soils

Hydric Rating

Acreage within Survey Area

Barx-Gapmesa complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes No 0 2.7

Fluvents-Fluvaquents complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes Yes 30 0.0

Mikett clay loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes No 0 3.9

Mikett clay loam, saline-sodic, 0 to 3 percent slopes Yes 5 0.7

Mikim clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes No 0 22.8

Mikim clay loam, sodic, 0 to 3 percent slopes Yes 5 3.2

Mikim loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes No 0 22.1

Ramper loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Yes 1 1.8

Rizno-Gapmesa complex, 3 to 9 percent slopes No 0 4.1

Romberg-Crosscan complex, 6 to 25 percent slopes, very stony No 0 0.5

Sideshow silty clay loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Yes 5 1.1

Ustic Torriorthents-Gullied land complex, 1 to 60 percent slopes Yes 3 3.1

Wauquie very stony loam, 6 to 25 percent slopes, very stony No 0 0.6

Source: United States Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service – Web Soil Survey

1.2.2 Vegetation

The Project area is in central Montezuma County, Colorado, in the Colorado Plateau Province

(Ramsey 2003). This province is characterized by isolated high mountains, rugged canyons, and high plateaus which drain to a gently sloping plain in the Project area that is generally dominated by sagebrush and rabbitbrush.

As the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Gap Analysis Project (GAP) data indicates, the primary ecosystem in the Survey Area is developed land (CDOT ROW). Adjacent ecosystems include pastures, cropland, Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland, Colorado Plateau Pinyon-

Juniper Woodlands, and Disturbed/Successional - Shrub Regeneration (USGS 2011).

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 6 of 22 June 2021

2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

2.1 WETLANDS AND WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

Within the State of Colorado, the United States (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material within Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS), including wetlands, under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). WOTUS are defined within the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) at Title 33 CFR 328.3. Title 33 CFR 328.4 provides the criteria for identifying the limits of potential jurisdictional WOTUS, whereas the limits of potential wetlands are defined and determined according to the USACE 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual and the

Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region

(Version 2.0).

As detailed in the 1987 USACE Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2008 Regional Supplement to this Manual, the USACE requires three criteria to determine if an area meets its technical definition of a wetland: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and indicators of hydrology. Federal waters include both tidal and non-tidal surface waters. Non-tidal surface waters are defined as the extent of the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM). The OHWM is defined as:

“The term ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.”

While certain lands may meet the USACE technical definition of a wetland and/or surface water as described above, the USACE may not claim regulatory jurisdiction over certain areas due to a lack of connectivity to the WOTUS, henceforth referred to as “Waters.” The Code of Federal

Regulation (CFR) at Title 33 CFR 328 defines what constitutes Waters.

On April 21, 2020, the USACE and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) published the Navigable Waters Protection Rule in the Federal Register to finalize a revised definition of

Waters under the CWA. The final rule became effective on June 22, 2020. The Navigable Waters

Protection Rule regulates the nation’s navigable waters and the core tributary systems that provide perennial or intermittent flow into them. In this final rule, the agencies interpret Waters to encompass:

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 7 of 22 June 2021

• the territorial seas and traditional navigable waters;

• perennial and intermittent tributaries that contribute surface water flow to such waters;

• certain lakes, ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and

• wetlands adjacent to other jurisdictional waters.

The final rule excludes from the definition of ‘‘WOTUS” all waters or features not mentioned above.

In addition to this general exclusion, the final rule specifically clarifies that WOTUS do not include the following:

• groundwater;

• ephemeral features that flow only in direct response to precipitation;

• diffuse stormwater runoff and directional sheet flow over upland;

• ditches that are not traditional navigable waters;

• prior converted cropland;

• artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland if artificial irrigation ceases;

• artificial lakes and ponds that are not jurisdictional impoundments and that are constructed or excavated in upland or non-jurisdictional waters;

• water-filled depressions constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters incidental to mining or construction activity, and pits excavated in upland or in nonjurisdictional waters for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel;

• stormwater control features constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters to convey, treat, infiltrate, or store stormwater runoff; and

• groundwater recharge, water reuse, and wastewater recycling structures constructed or excavated in upland or in non-jurisdictional waters.

However, on June 9, 2021, the USACE and USEPA announced their intent to revise the definition of “WOTUS” to “better protect the nation’s vital water resources that support public health, environmental protection, agricultural activity, and economic growth.” The agencies’ new regulatory effort will be guided by protection of water resources, effects of climate change waters, emphasizing a rule with a practical implementation approach for state and Tribal partners, and reflecting the experience of and input received from landowners, the agricultural community that fuels and feeds the world, states, Tribes, local governments, community organizations, environmental groups, and disadvantaged communities with environmental justice concerns.

2.2 RAPTORS AND MIGRATORY BIRDS

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 United States Code [U.S.C.] 668-668c), enacted in 1940 and since amended several times, prohibits anyone without a permit issued by the

Secretary of the Interior from “taking” bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), including their parts, nests, or eggs. The Act provides criminal penalties for persons who “take, possess, sell, 20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 8 of 22 June 2021 purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle … [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof.”

The Act defines “take” as “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest, or disturb [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 1940)].” Golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) are included in the provisions of this Act due to their similarity to juvenile bald eagles.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) decreed that all migratory birds and their parts

(including eggs, nests, and feathers) were fully protected. The MBTA established a federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention . . . for the protection of migratory birds . . . or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird" (16 U.S.C. 703).

Exceptions to the MBTA include invasive species such as house sparrows, European starlings, and rock doves (i.e. pigeons).

2.3 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES

Section 7(a) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires federal agencies to evaluate their actions with respect to any species that are proposed or listed as endangered or threatened, and their critical habitat, if any has been formally designated. Regulations implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the ESA are codified at 50 Federal Register (FR) 402.

Section 7(a)(2) requires federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to “adversely affect” or “jeopardize the continued existence” of a federally listed species or result in the adverse modification or destruction of its critical habitat. If a federal action

“is likely to adversely affect” a federally listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible federal agency must enter formal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

Candidate species for listing under the ESA are also managed to prevent future listing as threatened or endangered.

2.4 STATE PROTECTED SPECIES

The Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) has the responsibility for managing and conserving wildlife resources within state borders, including state-listed threatened and endangered species.

In Colorado, CPW has also identified sensitive wildlife in their defined ‘Species of Greatest

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 9 of 22 June 2021

Conservation Need.’ Table 2 lists the rare, threatened, and endangered (RTE) species that potentially occur in Montezuma County.

Table 2 – Listed Species with Potential to Occur in Montezuma County, CO

Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status 1

CO

Status 2

Federally Designated

Critical Habitat in the Survey Area

BIRDS

American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anatum -- SSC N/A

Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus -- SSC N/A

Burrowing owl Athene cuniculalria -- T N/A

Mexican spotted owl Strix occidentalis lucida T T No

Sandhill crane Grus canadensis -- SSC N/A

Southwestern willow flycatcher

Empidonax traillii extimus E E No

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus T SSC No

FISH

Colorado pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius E T No

Razorback sucker Xyrauchen texanus E E No

MAMMALS

New Mexico meadow jumping mouse

Zapus hudsonius luteus E -- No

River otter Lontra canadensis -- T N/A

Townsend's big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens

-- SSC N/A

REPTILES

Long-nosed leopard lizard Gambelia wislizenii -- SSC N/A

PLANTS

Chapin Mesa milkvetch Astragalus schmolliae PT -- No

Mancos milkvetch Astragalus humillimus E -- No

Mesa Verde cactus Sclerocactus mesae-verdae T -- No

1. USFWS IPaC (2021)

2. CPW Species Profiles (2020b)

2.5 COLORADO NOXIOUS WEEDS

As defined by the Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA), noxious weeds are nonnative aggressive invaders that replace native vegetation, reduce agricultural productivity, cause wind

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 10 of 22 June 2021 and water erosion, and pose an increased threat to communities from wildfire. Noxious weeds are ranked by the CDA into one of the following lists based on the severity of potential impacts and other factors:

• List A – Includes noxious weed species designated in the state of Colorado for eradication upon detection.

• List B – Includes noxious weed species common enough in parts of the state that eradication is not feasible, though the species are still recommended for eradication, suppression, or containment depending on distribution and densities around the state.

• List C – Includes noxious weed species widespread within the state. Noxious weed management plans for these species are designed to provide additional educational, research, and biological resources to reduce the harm associated with these species.

• Watch List Species – Includes weed species that may pose a threat but are not yet designated a noxious weed. The CDA asks that land managers collect location and extent data for these species. Watch list species are included in the list to educate and encourage identification and reporting.

Montezuma County has completed a Comprehensive Weed Management & Enforcement Plan

(Montezuma County 2020) as required under the Colorado Noxious Weed Act. Under the

Montezuma County Plan, all List A species are subject to eradication. The Plan also requires management of all List B species to 1) suppress the weed from spreading onto adjacent properties or 2) eradicate List B species if outside of county containment boundary or within the associated buffer zone. Montezuma County currently does not have any required management and control plans for List C or Watch List species.

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 11 of 22 June 2021

3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

3.1 WETLAND AND STREAM IDENTIFICATION

Preceding the field surveys, Kleinfelder conducted a brief desktop review of available site maps, aerial imagery, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps, National Hydrologic Dataset (NHD), and WSS maps to identify areas that may contain potentially jurisdictional waters in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route. These maps can be found on Figure 3 in Appendix A.

Focused pedestrian field surveys for the proposed Project occurred on May 26 and 27, 2021. All areas within the proposed 60-foot temporary construction boundary, referred to as the Survey

Area, were investigated. Survey methods and feature identification followed techniques established by the USACE, detailed in the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental

Laboratory-USACE 1987), Arid West-Regional Supplement (USACE 2008), and USACE Ordinary

High Water Mark (OHWM) Field Guide (USACE 2008). Photographs of features identified during the survey are included in Appendix B.

When potentially jurisdictional waterbodies were encountered, Kleinfelder characterized, mapped, and photographed the edges of wetland boundaries, stream banks, and/or ponds using a Trimble Geo7x model Global Positioning System (GPS) with sub-meter accuracy in the NAD83 datum. Features identified as potentially jurisdictional were documented on a USACE Wetland

Determination Data Form or Stream Characterization Form (included in Appendix C). Stream

Characterization Forms were used to collect general data about stream crossings. Flagging was not used during the survey as construction would not begin close to the time of the survey.

3.2 PROTECTED SPECIES AND HABITAT IDENTIFICATION

Prior to field surveys for protected species, the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation

(IPaC) website was consulted to identify federally listed species, or designated critical habitat areas, that may occur in or near the Survey Area (USFWS 2018). Based on the IPaC report

(included as Appendix D), no USFWS-designated critical habitat occurs within the Survey Area.

Kleinfelder’s biologist conducted a pedestrian survey within the Survey Area to record general wildlife habitat, vegetation communities (including state- and county-listed noxious weeds), and habitat suitable for listed species within the Survey Area. Additionally, the biologist used binoculars to check for potential raptor nests within 0.5 mile of the Survey Area.

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 12 of 22 June 2021

4 SURVEY RESULTS

4.1 LAND COVER AND VEGETATION

The surveys confirmed that the land use within the Survey Area was primarily highway ROW and shrubland adjacent to dry streambed riparian corridors, agricultural fields, and urban uses. The urban land use types observed were a mixture of residential, commercial, and industrial and occurred primarily where the Project traversed areas near the City of Cortez.

Dominant vegetation observed in the Survey Area was typical of a maintained ROW (grasses and roadside weeds including smooth brome [Bromus inermis], basin wildrye [Leymus cinereus], sideoats grama [Bouteloua curtipendula], cheatgrass [Bromus tectorum], Russian thistle [Salsola tragus], and kochia [Bassia prostrata]). Typical shrub species observed in the Survey Area included big basin sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) and rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa). At stream crossings, the vegetation observed consisted of a variable tree and shrub cover (primarily Siberian elm [Ulmus pumila], cottonwood [Populus spp.], narrowleaf willow [Salix exigua], and saltcedar [Tamarix chinensis]) with an understory of kochia and grasses including smooth brome and basin wildrye.

Table 3 presents a representative list of the plant species observed in the Survey Area. The list includes species with a USACE Arid West wetland indicator status and state listed noxious weeds.

Of the eight noxious weeds identified, six were List B species and two were List C species.

Cheatgrass was the most common noxious weed and was the dominant species in many areas.

Table 3 – Plant Species Encountered in the Survey Area

Species Name Common Name USACE Arid

West Wetland Indicator Status

Colorado Noxious Weed

TREES

Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive FAC List B

Populus deltoides Rio Grande cottonwood NI No

Populus fremontii Freemont cottonwood NI No

Salix alba White willow FACW No

Ulmus pumila Siberian elm UPL Watch list

SHRUBS

Artemisia tridentata Basin big sagebrush NI No

Atriplex canescens Fourwing saltbush NI No

Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Yellow rabbitbrush NI No

Ericameria nauseosa Rubber rabbitbrush NI No

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 13 of 22 June 2021

Species Name Common Name USACE Arid

West Wetland Indicator Status

Colorado Noxious Weed

Lonicera tatarica Tatarian honeysuckle UPL No

Sarcobatus vermiculatus Greasewood FACU No

Tamarix chinensis Saltcedar FAC List B

Salix exigua Narrowleaf willow FACW No

HERBS

Acroptilon repens Russian knapweed NI List B

Achillea millefolium Common yarrow FACU No

Achnatherum hymenoides Indian ricegrass UPL No

Achnatherum occidentale Western needlegrass NI No

Alyssum desertorum Desert madwort NI No

Bassia prostrata Kochia NI No

Bouteloua curtipendula Sideoats grama NI No

Bromus inermis Smooth brome FACU No

Bromus tectorum Cheatgrass NI List C

Carduus nutans Musk thistle FACU List B

Cirsium arvense Canada thistle FACU List B

Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed NI List C

Dactylis glomerata Orchardgrass FACU No

Distichlis spicata Saltgrass FAC No

Echinochloa crus-galli Barnyardgrass FACW No

Elymus elymoides Squirreltail FACU No

Erodium cicutarium Redstem filaree NI No

Heterotheca villosa Hairy false goldenaster NI No

Hordeum murinum Wall barley NI No

Lepidium draba Hoary cress NI List B

Lepidium perfoliatum Clasping pepperweed FACU No

Leymus cinereus Basin wildrye FAC No

Marrubium vulgare Horehound FACU No

Muhlenbergia asperifolia Scratchgrass FACW No

Oenothera curtiflora Velvetweed FACU No

Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass FAC No

Pleuraphis jamesii James' galleta NI No

Rumex crispus Curly dock FAC No

Salsola tragus Russian thistle FACU No

Sisymbrium altissimum Tall tumblemustard FACU No

Sphaeralcea coccinea Scarlet globemallow NI No

Sporobolus airoides Alkali sacaton FAC No

USACE = United States Army Corps of Engineers; OBL = obligate; FAC = facultative; UPL = upland; FACU = facultative upland; FACW = facultative wet; NI = no indicator

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 14 of 22 June 2021

4.2 BIOLOGICAL SURVEY FINDINGS

Of the general wildlife encountered during the survey, one reptile species was observed; a plateau striped whiptail (Aspidoscelis velox). Mammal species observed included Gunnison's prairie dog

(Cynomys gunnisoni) and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). Two butterfly species were identified during the field survey; the Edith's checkerspot (Euphydryas editha) and the cabbage white butterfly (Pieris rapae).

4.2.2 Raptors and Migratory Birds

The biologist used binoculars to identify avian nests in the Survey Area and raptor nests within

0.5 mile of the Survey Area (analysis area). Raptor habitat within the Survey Area is limited to large trees associated with homesteads, and small areas classified as Colorado Plateau Pinyon-

Juniper Woodlands. Cliff-faces were identified more than one-half mile outside the Survey Area to the west. Raptor species known to nest in the region include bald eagle, golden eagle, northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperi), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), northern goshawk

(Accipiter gentilis), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia).

Bird species observed within or adjacent to the Survey Area included red-winged blackbird

(Agelaius phoeniceus), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), barn swallow (Hirundo rustica), Bullock's oriole (Icterus bullockii), house sparrow

(Passer domesticus), black-billed magpie (Pica hudsonia), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), American robin (Turdus migratorius), western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), and mourning dove

(Zenaida macroura). One active red-tailed hawk nest was identified west-northwest of the Survey

Area. Three other bird nests (one active house sparrow and two inactive stick nests estimated to be one-foot-wide) also were observed. The nest locations are included in Figure 5, Appendix A and summarized in Table 4.

Table 4 – Bird Nests Encountered in the Survey Area

Nest Coordinates Nest Type Documented Proximity to Survey Area

1 37.324197, -108.607978 Active house sparrow 1 May 2021 5 feet E

2 37.285208, -108.628067 Active red-tailed hawk 2 May 2021 610 feet W-NW

3 37.283039, -108.625956 Inactive stick May 2021 250 feet E-SE

4 37.237450, -108.658375 Inactive stick May 2021 110 feet E-SE

1. As a non-native, invasive species, the house sparrow is not protected under the MTBA.

2. CPW-recommends no permitted, authorized, or human encroachment activities within 1/3 mile radius of active nests from February 15 through July 15 (CPW 2020a).

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 15 of 22 June 2021

4.2.3 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species

The USFWS and the CPW have collectively identified 13 animal and three plant species with the potential to occur within the Survey Area in Montezuma County, Colorado. No USFWS-designated critical habitat exists within the Survey Area. A summary of habitat and the potential for project related impacts to federal/state RTE species is included as Appendix E. RTE species that have been determined to be potentially impacted by the Project are further described below.

Burrowing Owl (Athene cuniculalria)

The burrowing owl usually inhabits gently sloping open areas with low and/or sparse vegetation with no trees. The burrowing owl is closely associated with burrows created by prairie dogs, ground squirrels and badgers. The species can be found throughout much of Colorado in suitable habitats, although they are more common on the eastern short-grass prairies (CPW 2020b).

Potential suitable habitat was identified during the field assessment as four prairie dog towns were observed within 150 feet of the proposed ROW (see Figure 5 of Appendix A). Prior and current disturbances, including minor construction, ROW mowing, and traffic associated with highway, industrial, and commercial properties, were noted within the identified potentially suitable habitat.

Due to this disturbance, little of this habitat would be characterized as optimal for burrowing owl nesting.

Long-nosed Leopard Lizard (Gambelia wislizenii)

This reptile is a relatively large (up to 14 inches) lizard that prefers areas with bare ground or sparse vegetation, including greasewood, sagebrush, and rabbitbrush (CPW 2020b). The presence of numerous rodent burrows is also preferred as these lizards will take refuge in the burrows at night or during the winter. The Project area is on the far eastern periphery of Long-nosed Leopard Lizard documented habitat. Based on the relatively common habitat preferences of this species, portions of the Project area, in particular areas with sagebrush-dominated communities or open areas (including urban areas), could potentially be considered suitable habitat.

This species is not listed by USFWS but appears on Colorado’s State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) as a Tier 2 Species of Greatest Conservation Need, which is not a statutory category. The SWAP notes that “Tier 2 species remain important in light of forestalling population trends or habitat conditions that may lead to a threatened or endangered listing status, but the urgency of such action has been judged to be less.” As a result, there are no constraints related to this species for the Project.

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 16 of 22 June 2021

4.3 POTENTIALLY JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS AND WATERS

The USFWS NWI and the USGS NHD provide preliminary digital data layers of potential areas including wetlands, rivers, streams, and ponds, to the public. Currently, the data layer for the lower

48 states contains information for approximately 60 percent of the conterminous U.S. NWI and

NHD data are available for all areas within the Survey Area. All NWI- and NHD-mapped features are included in Figure 3 of Appendix A. NWI-mapped potential wetlands or streams are only preliminary and their presence or absence must be confirmed using the USACE 1987 methodology.

As a result of Kleinfelder’s field assessment, three wetlands and 10 streams were recorded within the 60-foot-wide survey corridor. Limitations to the stream delineations included US-160 culverts

(box or pipe culverts) near the eastern shoulder of the highway and no access outside of the

CDOT ROW at the eastern edge of the Survey Area. Delineation data forms are provided in

Appendix C. All wetlands and surface water features delineated in the Survey Area are summarized in Table 4 and depicted on Figure 4 in Appendix A. In addition, several upland swale locations were recorded in the 100-foot Survey Area at NHD crossings. These features, which consisted of upland vegetation and lacked ordinary highwater marks (OHWM), are not considered jurisdictional features and not included in Table 4 or Appendix A.

Table 5 – Wetland and Stream Features Delineated in the Survey Area

Feature Name

Type Coordinates Linear Feet in ROW Acres in ROW Permanent

Impacts

WETLANDS

Wetland 1 Stream fringe 37.320747, -108.609082 N/A 0.016 None

Wetland 2 Roadside ditch 37.310393, -108.610498 N/A 0.027 None

Wetland 3 Roadside ditch 37.280950, -108.628202 N/A 0.193 None

Wetland Totals N/A 0.236 None

STREAMS

Stream 1 Perennial 37.320702, -108.609093 67 0.018 None

Stream 2 Ephemeral 37.297723, -108.618109 11 0.001 None

Stream 3 Intermittent 37.292851, -108.621013 20 0.002 None

Stream 4 Intermittent 37.281855, -108.627639 66 0.003 None

Stream 5 Ephemeral 37.273924, -108.632401 16 0.001 None

Stream 6 Ephemeral 37.265201, -108.637642 12 0.000 None

Stream 7 Ephemeral 37.244868, -108.652359 31 0.001 None

Stream 8 Ephemeral 37.242478, -108.654474 18 0.001 None

Stream 9 Ephemeral 37.231156, -108.664384 N/A N/A None

Stream 10 Ephemeral 37.217495, -108.676635 67 0.004 None

Stream Totals 211 0.031 None

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 17 of 22 June 2021

5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS

5.1 USFWS AND CPW

Construction associated with the Project will be almost entirely conducted within the existing

CDOT ROW and will result in temporary disturbance. Potential for indirect displacement from nearby habitats, and potential mortality could result from construction activities such as (grading, excavation, etc.).

Burrowing Owl

Nesting burrowing owls may not be easily visible, therefore, CPW recommends that targeted surveys are implemented to determine if burrows are occupied via Recommended Survey

Protocol and Actions to Protect Nesting Burrowing Owls (CPW 2021). Surveys conducted in accordance with this protocol should be conducted for any activities resulting in ground-disturbing destruction or poisoning of burrows between March 15 and October 31. CPW also recommends multiple visits to each site should be conducted to maximize the likelihood of detecting owls if they are present. At least three surveys should be conducted at each survey point, separated by approximately one week. When active burrows are identified, surface activity can proceed in areas greater than 660 feet from the nest burrow.

Prior to initiating surveys, Kleinfelder recommends informal consultation with the CPW to confirm the need for target surveys based on the location of prairie dog towns (directly adjacent to busy highway).

Red-tailed Hawk

One active red-tailed hawk nest was observed within 0.5 mile of the Survey Area, approximately

610 feet west-northwest from the existing easement (Appendix A). CPW (2020a) recommends that, “No permitted, authorized, or human encroachment activities within 1/3-mile radius of active nests from February 15 through July 15. However, some individuals of this species have adapted to urbanization and may exhibit a high tolerance to human habitation and activities within 100 yards of their nest. Development that encroaches on rural nest sites is more likely to cause abandonment.”

Kleinfelder recommends informal consultation with the CPW to review the potential impacts to this nest, which is relatively close to a busy US highway. Due to the potentially substantial

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 18 of 22 June 2021 passage of time between the conducted surveys and project initiation, Kleinfelder recommends a nest survey be conducted one to two weeks prior to construction (if within breeding season) to determine if the red-tailed hawk, or any other active nests, are present in the Project area.

Other Raptors

While not observed during the May 2021 survey, several other raptor species have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the Survey Area. Potential impacts to these species could also be avoided by conducting seasonally appropriate species-specific surveys, and if occupied habitat is documented, implementation of species-specific spatial and timing limitations per CPW’s

Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors (CPW 2020a).

Migratory Birds

Kleinfelder recommends the following step-down approach consistent with state and federal recommendations to avoid disturbing active migratory bird nests during construction:

• Avoidance – Conduct habitat-disturbing activities (e.g., grading, scraping, and grubbing) in the nonbreeding season (September 1 to March 31) to the extent practicable.

• Habitat Manipulation/Removal – If work activities are planned between April 1 and August

31, remove or alter vegetation within construction footprints and road rights-of-way prior to April 1 to discourage nesting within areas scheduled for summer construction.

• Habitat Maintenance – Once vegetation has been removed or trimmed, appropriate measures (i.e., repeated mowing/trimming) should be implemented to assure vegetation does not grow to more than six inches high.

• Preconstruction Clearance Surveys – If activities 1 through 3 cannot be completed, preconstruction clearance surveys should be conducted by a trained biologist during the nesting season, as described below, to identify any active nests.

Due to the potentially substantial passage of time between the conducted surveys and Project initiation, Kleinfelder recommends a nest survey be conducted one to two weeks prior to construction to determine if any active nests are present in the Project area. If active nests are found, any work that would destroy the nests could not be conducted until the birds have vacated the nests. Therefore, it is important to work with a trained biologist to develop nest avoidance measures. A minimum 50-foot buffer around the nests may be warranted to avoid nest abandonment and should be determined on a case-by-case basis.

5.2 USACE

Based on Kleinfelder’s field observations and analysis of preliminary development plans there are three wetlands and 10 streams located within the 60-foot Survey Area, all of which are

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 19 of 22 June 2021 potentially jurisdictional. In addition, the survey identified several upland drainage features within the Survey Area, none of which contained an OHWM or observable banks, and are presumed nonjurisdictional. The identified features are depicted on Figure 4, Appendix A.

The USACE Durango Regulatory Field Office, of the Albuquerque District, reviews project impacts to jurisdictional waters on an individual basis, meaning each stream or wetland crossing is reviewed separately rather than cumulatively. Should the wetland and stream features be avoided via bore, no consultation with the USACE would be necessary. If impacts are anticipated at wetland or stream crossings, USACE Nationwide Permit 57 authorizes temporary structures, fills, and work, including the use of temporary mats, necessary to conduct telecommunications utility line activity. In this case, “Appropriate measures must be taken to maintain normal downstream flows and minimize flooding to the maximum extent practicable, when temporary structures, work, and discharges of dredged or fill material, including cofferdams, are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of construction sites. Temporary fills must consist of materials, and be placed in a manner, that will not be eroded by expected high flows. After construction, temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations. The areas affected by temporary fills must be revegetated, as appropriate. (USACE 2021b)”

A pre-construction notification (PCN) submittal to the USACE district engineer will not be required for the Project as 1) a Section 10 permit will not be necessary and 2) a loss of greater than 1/10-acre of WOTUS will not occur due to the temporary construction impacts anticipated by the

Project.

5.3 MONTEZUMA COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED PROGRAM

Based on Kleinfelder’s field observations, eight Montezuma County- and Colorado-listed noxious weeds were identified within the 60-foot Survey Area. Of the eight species identified, six are recognized as List B noxious weeds, which under the Montezuma County Plan, require management to 1) suppress the weed from spreading onto adjacent properties or 2) eradicate

List B species if outside of county containment boundary or within the associated buffer zone.

The most effective way to control noxious weeds is to integrate several different control methods

(cultural, biological, mechanical, and chemical) targeted to the specific species, size of population, and land use. Kleinfelder recommends that NEO Connect consult with Montezuma County and

CDOT prior to construction to establish an integrated noxious weed management strategy.

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 20 of 22 June 2021

6 LIMITATIONS

This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder’s profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions, and at the date the services are provided. Our conclusions, opinions, and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. It is possible that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee, or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication (oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided.

Recommendations and conclusions contained in this report are based on interpretation of publicly available databases, the status of field conditions at the time of review, and our limited knowledge of the proposed construction. It is possible that soil and hydrological conditions could vary from the time of site visits. The conditions observed during the site visit represent a snapshot view of environmental conditions present at the time of the visit and do not represent the full range of climate, vegetation, and soils that Colorado environments experience over the course of a full growing season. If vegetation, soil, or hydrological conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those described herein, the client is responsible for ensuring that Kleinfelder is notified immediately so that we may reevaluate the recommendations of this report. If the scope of the proposed construction changes from that described in this report, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are not considered valid unless the changes are reviewed, and the conclusions of this report are modified or approved in writing by Kleinfelder.

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 21 of 22 June 2021

7 REFERENCES

Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership. 2016. The Second Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas online database.

Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership, Denver, CO. Available at: http://www.cobreedingbirdatlasii.org.

Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2015. State Wildlife Action Plan: A Strategy for Conserving Wildlife in

Colorado. Denver, Colorado.

———.2020a. Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors. Assessed

May 2021: at:https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/WildlifeSpecies/LivingWithWildlife/Raptor-Buffer-

Guidelines.pdf

———.2020b. Species Profiles: Threatened & Endangered Species. Available at:

https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SpeciesProfiles.aspx?species. Accessed May 2021.

———.2021. Recommended Survey Protocol and Actions to Protect Nesting Burrowing Owls. Assessed

May 2021 at https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/WildlifeSpecies/LivingWithWildlife/Recommended-

Survey-Protocol-Burrowing-Owls.pdf

Conway, C. J. and J. C. Simon. 2003. Comparison of detection probability associated with Burrowing Owl survey methods. Journal of Wildlife Management 67:501-511.

Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published April 28, 2016. ISSN 2153 733X.

Montezuma County. 2020. Resolution 7-2016: Montezuma County Comprehensive Weed Management &

Enforcement Plan (amended). Available at: Montezuma-County-Noxious-Weed-Plan-104.pdf

(montezumacounty.org)

Neely, B., S. Panjabi, E. Lane, P. Lewis, C. Dawson, A. Kratz, B. Kurzel, T. Hogan, J. Handwerk, S.

Krishnan, J. Neale, and N. Ripley. 2009. Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Strategy. Developed by the Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Initiative. The Nature Conservancy, Boulder, Colorado. 88 pp.

Ramsey, D.K., 2003, Soil survey of Cortez Area, Colorado, parts of Dolores and Montezuma Counties:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U. S. Department of

Agriculture.

Schorr, Robert A. and Lambert, Brad. 2006. Longnose leopard lizard (Gambelia wislizenii) home range and habitat use on Cannonball Mesa, Colorado. Colorado Natural Heritage Program. November

2006. Fort Collins, Colorado.

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008. A Field Guide to the Identification of the

Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid Region of the Western United States. Edited by R.W.

Lichvar,and S.M. McColley. ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer

Research and Development Center.

_____. 2021a. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the Navigable Waters Protection Rule. Available at:

https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Regulatory-Program-and-Permits/juris_info/

_____. 2021b. Nationwide Permit 57: Electric Utility Line and Telecommunications Activities. Available at:

https://www.swf.usace.army.mil/Portals/47/docs/regulatory/Permitting/Nationwide/NWP57TX.pdf?ver

=GkUCo5chGlYxORKHWUdHNA%3d%3d

20220811.001A/DEN21R127212 Page 22 of 22 June 2021

_____. 2021c. Regional Conditions to Nationwide Permits in the State of Colorado. Available at:

https://www.spa.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Program-and-Permits/NWP/

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

2018. Soil Resource Report. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Accessed May 2021.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1918. Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 16 U.S.C. 703-712.

_____. 1940. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. 16 U.S.C. 668-668c.

_____. 1988. The Primary Indicators Method – A Practical Approach to Wetland Recognition and

Delineation in the US. Hadley, MA. Available at: https://www.fws.gov /wetlands/Documents%5CThe-

Primary-Indicators-Method-A-Practical-Approach-to-Wetland-Recognition-and-Delineation-in-the-

United-States.pdf.

_____. 2014. Species Fact Sheet: Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)

Region 2.

https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/Documents/SpeciesDocs/YellowBilledCuckoo/WYBC-factsheet-southwestlearning.pdf.

———. 2017. USFWS Endangered Species Program. Environmental Conservation Online System, Species by County Report. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered. Accessed May 2021.

———.2018. Species Profile for Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus).

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?spcode=B094.

_____. 2020. Species status assessment report for the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus), 1st Revision. January 2020. Albuquerque, NM. 160 pp.

———. 2021. IPaC - Information, Planning, and Conservation System. Available at:

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed May 2021.

U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2020. Ecosystem Management.

https://www.fs.fed.us/land/ecosysmgmt/colorimagemap/images/331.html. Accessed May 2021.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2011. National Gap Analysis Project (GAP). Land cover dataset, version

2. Available at: http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/gaplandcover/viewer/. Accessed May 2021.

http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/ http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/gaplandcover/viewer/

APPENDIX A

PROJECT MAPS

Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS

Overview Map

NEO Connect Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project

Montezuma County, Colorado

20220811

6/21/2021

ALeonard

MReese

Fig1_Overview

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

PROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

FIGURE0 5 102.5

Miles

D at e:

/2 1/

U se r:

A Le on ar d

P at h:

az rg is st or p0

1\ G

IS

_P ro je ct s\

C lie nt \E x2 Te ch no lo gy

\E x2

Te ch no lo gy _C or te zT oT oa w ac F ib er

\E x2

Te ch no lo gy _C or te zT oT oa w ac F ib er

.a pr x

Legend County Boundary

Survey Area

M cE lm o Creek

Maxar

Hydrology Map

NEO Connect Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project

Montezuma County, Colorado

MReese

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

20220811

6/23/2021

ALeonard

F2_Hyd

LEGEND

NHD Waterbodies NWI Wetlands NHD Streams Survey Area

06001,200300Feet

D at e:

/2 3/ r:

A Le on h:

az rg is st or p0

1\ G

IS

_P ro je ct s\

C lie nt \E x2 Te ch no lo gy

\E x2

Te ch no lo gy _C or te zT oT oa w ac F ib er

\E x2

Te ch no lo gy _C or te zT oT oa w ac F ib er

.a pr x

Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, NGA, USGS, NPS

Maxar

Hydrology Map

NEO Connect Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project

Montezuma County, Colorado

MReese

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

20220811

6/23/2021

ALeonard

F2_Hyd

LEGEND

NHD Waterbodies NWI Wetlands NHD Streams Survey Area

06001,200300Feet

D at e:

/2 3/ r:

A Le on h:

az rg is st or p0

1\ G

IS

_P ro je ct s\

C lie nt \E x2 Te ch no lo gy

\E x2

Te ch no lo gy _C or te zT oT oa w ac F ib er

\E x2

Te ch no lo gy _C or te zT oT oa w ac F ib er

.a pr x

Bureau of Land Management, Esri, Roc ky

Ford

Ditc h

Rocky Ford Ditch

Maxar

Hydrology Map

NEO Connect Cortez to Towaoc Fiber Line Project

Montezuma County, Colorado

MReese

The information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is it designed or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the information contained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing the information.

FIGUREPROJECT NO.

CREATED:

CREATED BY:

CHECKED BY:

FILE NAME:

www.kleinfelder.com

20220811

6/23/2021

ALeonard