20161268 Ver 1_Email_20090923

1a
Wainwright, David
From: Gary [e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:15 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Wilson, Travis
W.; Wainwright, David; Wrenn, Brian; McInnis, Jay; Farr, Olivia J; Beauregard, Rachelle;
Sollod, Steve; Gledhill-earley, Renee; [e-mail], [e-mail];
Will [e-mail]
Subject: R-3_0 Hampstead Bypass
Dear Merger Team,
On September 10, I had a meeting with NCDOT to discuss a significant Section 7 issue for the Hampstead
Bypass. This meeting came about as a result of NCDOT presenting me with a draft red-cockaded woodpecker
(RCW) foraging habitat analysis for existing habitat within the project area. Throughout the Merger Process I
have drawn attention to the fact that RCWs could be a significant issue for this project. Based on the new
information I now have, it appears that the RCW issue is even bigger than-1 originally thought.
As you know, all alternatives still under consideration terminate just south of Holly Shelter Gameland at
existing US 17. In close proximity to the project area are 4 RCW groups. All 4 groups had active nests in 2009.
Three of these 4 groups have their cavity trees within Holly Shelter Gameland, but their 1 /2 mile radius
partitions extend outside the boundaries of Holly Shelter and into the project corridors. One of the 4 groups is
entirely outside of Holly Shelter on private land and its 1/2 mile radius partition extends into the project
corridors. The 3 groups within Holly Shelter are part ,of the managed Coastal NC Primary Core Population
(CNCPCP). The CNCPCP includes Holly Shelter Gameland, Camp Lejeune and Croatan National Forest. The
group entirely outside of Holly Shelter is not part of this population. The 3 groups that are part of the CNCPCP
are of heightened importance as per the 2003 Recovery Plan for RCWs. To recover the RCW, the Recovery
Plan requires, among other things, that the CNCPCP have 350 potential breeding groups. Holly Shelter
Gameland has a goal of 38 active groups to contribute towards this recovery requirement. Currently, Holly
Shelter only has 34 active groups.
Based on the draft foraging habitat analysis of existing habitat, the RCWs are existing on extremely poor habitat
quality and quantity. Without going into the details of the analysis, it appears that all alternatives will involve
take of RCWs. At worst, all 4 groups would be taken (the most likely scenario). At best, 2 groups would be
taken (unlikely scenario of existing US 17 being widened between Holly Shelter and the high school). The big
question that will need to be answered for the USFWS is can Holly Shelter Gameland lose 3 active groups and
still meet its recovery goal of 3,8 active groups. This analysis has not been done, but it does not look good at the
moment. What all this means is that this project may lead to a Jeopardy Biological Opinion. Note that I said
"may lead". Without doing the jeopardy analysis, we cannot say one way or the other at this time. However, it is
a real possibilty and everyone needs to be aware that this may be a fatal flaw for the project.
Since this project is not federally funded, the lead Federal Action Agency is the USACE. Therefore, the Section
7 consultation will be between us and them. During the September 10 meeting, we tried to brainstorm some
other possible alternatives, but could not come up with anything reasonable that would avoid take of RCWs.
NCDOT expressed that they would like to continue on and take their chances with the potential for a Jeopardy
Biological Opinion. For obvious reasons, the USFWS will not be able to concur on any of the alternatives at
Concurrence Point 3.
Gary Jordan
US Fish and Wildlife Service