1. Formal Consultation between Fort Huachuca and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service June 2007

2. Basis for Consultation Section 7 of ESA requires Federal agencies to consult with FWS on actions that may affect listed species Section 7 of ESA requires Federal agencies to consult with FWS on actions that may affect listed species Section 9 of ESA Section 9 of ESA prohibits take of listed species. Prohibitions for plants are limited

3. Section 9 Take is defined as [to] “..harass, harm, pursue, hunt shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed animal species, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. Take is defined as [to] “..harass, harm, pursue, hunt shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed animal species, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. Harm includes significant habitat modification where it actually kills or injures listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering. Harm includes significant habitat modification where it actually kills or injures listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering.

4. Biological Opinion-Effects Analysis Direct Effects: First order, proximate, and immediate effects of the proposed action Direct Effects: First order, proximate, and immediate effects of the proposed action Indirect effects: Caused by proposed action but are later in time Indirect effects: Caused by proposed action but are later in time Cumulative Effects: Cumulative Effects: Effects of future non-Federal and Tribal activities within the action area

5. Effect Determinations for Proposed Actions No effect on listed species No effect on listed species Narrow definition, requires no FWS involvement Narrow definition, requires no FWS involvement May affect, but is not likely to adversely affect listed species May affect, but is not likely to adversely affect listed species effects are wholly beneficial; discountable (unlikely to occur); or insignificant (unlikely to reach scale where take would occur). effects are wholly beneficial; discountable (unlikely to occur); or insignificant (unlikely to reach scale where take would occur). Requires FWS’s written concurrence Requires FWS’s written concurrence Will adversely affect listed species Will adversely affect listed species Triggers formal consultation and culminates in a biological opinion Triggers formal consultation and culminates in a biological opinion

6. Biological Conclusions Biological Opinion concludes whether or not proposed action will jeopardize the species or adversely modify critical habitat. Biological Opinion concludes whether or not proposed action will jeopardize the species or adversely modify critical habitat. Conclusion is based on analyses of the proposed action’s direct, indirect, and cumulative effects relative to the species’ status, baseline, and recovery needs. Conclusion is based on analyses of the proposed action’s direct, indirect, and cumulative effects relative to the species’ status, baseline, and recovery needs.

7. Section 321 FWS cannot consider cumulative effects in whether or not the Fort’s activities will jeopardize listed species or adversely modify critical habitat FWS cannot consider cumulative effects in whether or not the Fort’s activities will jeopardize listed species or adversely modify critical habitat Fort remains responsible for direct and indirect effects associated with their action, including water use in community from people who would not be there “but for” the Fort (induced population) Fort remains responsible for direct and indirect effects associated with their action, including water use in community from people who would not be there “but for” the Fort (induced population) Recognizes and requires the USPP to address cumulative effects Recognizes and requires the USPP to address cumulative effects

8. Reinitiation Criteria Formal consultation must be reinitiated when: Formal consultation must be reinitiated when: The amount or extent of authorized incidental take is exceeded; The amount or extent of authorized incidental take is exceeded; New information reveals that the action may adversely affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in the opinion; New information reveals that the action may adversely affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in the opinion; The agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to a listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in the opinion; or The agency action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to a listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in the opinion; or A new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the action. A new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the action.

9. Fort Huachuca Consultation Proposed Action Includes all operations on post, at Libby Army Airfield, and remote sites; Includes all operations on post, at Libby Army Airfield, and remote sites; Land management, fire management, and recreational activities in Huachuca Mountains Land management, fire management, and recreational activities in Huachuca Mountains Water use and mitigation Water use and mitigation 10-year cycle for consultation 10-year cycle for consultation

10. Fort Huachuca Consultation Biological Assessment completed in Feb 2007 No effect: Cochise pincushion cactus, Lemmon fleabane, northern aplomado falcon, ocelot, Chiricahua leopard frog, New Mexico ridge- nosed rattlesnake, California brown pelican, Gila chub, beautiful shiner, and the Yaqui catfish, chub, and topminnow No effect: Cochise pincushion cactus, Lemmon fleabane, northern aplomado falcon, ocelot, Chiricahua leopard frog, New Mexico ridge- nosed rattlesnake, California brown pelican, Gila chub, beautiful shiner, and the Yaqui catfish, chub, and topminnow Not likely to adversely affect: Canelo Hills ladies’ tresses, bald eagle, jaguar, spikedace, Gila topminnow and desert pupfish. Not likely to adversely affect: Canelo Hills ladies’ tresses, bald eagle, jaguar, spikedace, Gila topminnow and desert pupfish.

11. Fort Huachuca Consultation Adversely affect (species addressed in biological opinion): Adversely affect (species addressed in biological opinion): Huachuca water umbel, southwestern willow flycatcher, lesser long-nosed bat, Mexican spotted owl, and Sonora tiger salamander Huachuca water umbel, southwestern willow flycatcher, lesser long-nosed bat, Mexican spotted owl, and Sonora tiger salamander

12. Fort Huachuca’s Effects “ Interior” effects “ Interior” effects Aquatic and upland species in grasslands and mountains (umbel in canyons; spotted owl; lesser long-nosed bat in caves and foraging areas; Sonora tiger salamander in ponds and stock tanks) Aquatic and upland species in grasslands and mountains (umbel in canyons; spotted owl; lesser long-nosed bat in caves and foraging areas; Sonora tiger salamander in ponds and stock tanks) Traditional land management activities (travel/access, RX and wildfire, habitat protection) Traditional land management activities (travel/access, RX and wildfire, habitat protection)

13. Fort Huachuca’s Effects San Pedro and Babocomari Rivers San Pedro and Babocomari Rivers Effects to Huachuca water umbel and SW flycatcher Effects to Huachuca water umbel and SW flycatcher Effects are indirect: pumping on Fort and water use of human population that wouldn’t reside in subwatershed “but for” Fort Huachuca. Effects are indirect: pumping on Fort and water use of human population that wouldn’t reside in subwatershed “but for” Fort Huachuca.

14. Hydrologic Impacts on the Species Considered in the BA/BO Analyses Potential changes to baseflow Potential changes to baseflow Potential changes in flood flows Potential changes in flood flows Potential impacts to species and its habitat Potential impacts to species and its habitat

15. Key Differences in 2002 and 2006 Biological Assessments 2002 BA 10 years consultation covered 2002-2011 10 years consultation covered 2002-2011 Post 9/11 projected personnel flux was estimated at 500 employees Post 9/11 projected personnel flux was estimated at 500 employees Deficit-based mitigation responsibility Deficit-based mitigation responsibility Fort accounted for 54% of SVS population Fort accounted for 54% of SVS population Fort committed to 3,077 afa of mitigation Fort committed to 3,077 afa of mitigation Goal was to “zero out” the Fort’s impacts on the GW deficit Goal was to “zero out” the Fort’s impacts on the GW deficit Section 321 did not exist Section 321 did not exist

16. Key Differences in 2002 and 2006 Biological Assessments 2006 BA 10 years consultation covered 2007-2016 10 years consultation covered 2007-2016 True post-9/11 personnel flux better understood and varies significantly from month to month True post-9/11 personnel flux better understood and varies significantly from month to month 3000 personnel flexibility should cover mission fluxes, especially students 3000 personnel flexibility should cover mission fluxes, especially students Demand-based mitigation responsibility Demand-based mitigation responsibility Fort calculates GW demand attributable to per capita use, estimates impacts to river, then seeks to minimize that impact Fort calculates GW demand attributable to per capita use, estimates impacts to river, then seeks to minimize that impact Section 321 applied to the consultation and opinion for the first time Section 321 applied to the consultation and opinion for the first time

17. 2006 BA/BO – Impact Assessment Net GW demand attributable to Fort = 3,530 afa in 2005 Net GW demand attributable to Fort = 3,530 afa in 2005 Demand reductions to date considered Demand reductions to date considered 2016 estimated net demand reduced through 1003 afa additional mitigation 2016 estimated net demand reduced through 1003 afa additional mitigation Estimated impact to San Pedro Estimated impact to San Pedro 0.3 CFS from 2005 net demand with previous reductions 0.3 CFS from 2005 net demand with previous reductions 0.04 CFS from 2016 net demand with mitigation 0.04 CFS from 2016 net demand with mitigation

18. Challenges Ahead Need to continue reducing water pumping and increasing recharge Need to continue reducing water pumping and increasing recharge A lack of progress could result in: A lack of progress could result in: adverse impacts to the Huachuca water umbel and its designated critical habitat adverse impacts to the Huachuca water umbel and its designated critical habitat Reduction to Fort Huachuca’s ability to accomplish its mission Reduction to Fort Huachuca’s ability to accomplish its mission Reconsultation Reconsultation

19. Hydrologic Effects to Species The anticipated, eventual effects to the habitat are: The anticipated, eventual effects to the habitat are: Small in magnitude Small in magnitude Within range of natural variation and instrument error Within range of natural variation and instrument error Huachuca water umbel not jeopardized, critical habitat not adversely modified, recovery not impeded, take not authorized (plant) Huachuca water umbel not jeopardized, critical habitat not adversely modified, recovery not impeded, take not authorized (plant) SW Flycatcher not jeopardized, critical habitat not in SVS, recovery not impeded, incidental take not anticipated SW Flycatcher not jeopardized, critical habitat not in SVS, recovery not impeded, incidental take not anticipated

20. Implementation and Compliance Fort Huachuca will continue to meet with FWS annually to: Fort Huachuca will continue to meet with FWS annually to: Assess status of listed species in action area (monitoring reports) Assess status of listed species in action area (monitoring reports) Report on water usage and conservation projects Report on water usage and conservation projects Report on current population of Fort Huachuca Report on current population of Fort Huachuca Evaluate relevance of new information (including, but not limited to MODFLOW, DSS, population estimates, etc.) Evaluate relevance of new information (including, but not limited to MODFLOW, DSS, population estimates, etc.) Reinitiation of formal consultation – Fort Huachuca evaluates biological ramifications of changed circumstances and informs FWS if necessary. Reinitiation of formal consultation – Fort Huachuca evaluates biological ramifications of changed circumstances and informs FWS if necessary.

21. Fort’s Bottom Line BO is good for mission flexibility BO is good for mission flexibility Compliance will be challenging and expensive (projects) Compliance will be challenging and expensive (projects) Demand-based approach is measurable and predictable Demand-based approach is measurable and predictable Requires continuing Fort commitment to USPP Requires continuing Fort commitment to USPP Does not change magnitude of work to be done Does not change magnitude of work to be done

22. Regional Cumulative Effects Fort Huachuca’s methodology was applied to the remainder of the population in the Sierra Vista subwatershed Fort Huachuca’s methodology was applied to the remainder of the population in the Sierra Vista subwatershed Assumption: most water use is non- Federal Assumption: most water use is non- Federal Other Federal agencies (DHS, FS, BLM, USPS, etc.) are small fraction of SVS population Other Federal agencies (DHS, FS, BLM, USPS, etc.) are small fraction of SVS population

23. Magnitude of Cumulative Effects Based on non-Federal projects implemented as of 2005, the cumulative reduction in the baseflow of the San Pedro River is anticipated to eventually reach 0.71 CFS Based on non-Federal projects implemented as of 2005, the cumulative reduction in the baseflow of the San Pedro River is anticipated to eventually reach 0.71 CFS Based on anticipated population growth (2% per annum, 20% in 10 years), the cumulative baseflow change is anticipated to increase to 0.85 CFS by 2016 Based on anticipated population growth (2% per annum, 20% in 10 years), the cumulative baseflow change is anticipated to increase to 0.85 CFS by 2016

24. Cumulative Effects Concerns Increase in total water pumping is the major concern Increase in total water pumping is the major concern May be considered in ESA consultation with other Federal agencies May be considered in ESA consultation with other Federal agencies Increased justification for USPP and increasing importance moving forward Increased justification for USPP and increasing importance moving forward Fort Huachuca and FWS will continue to be engaged in USPP Fort Huachuca and FWS will continue to be engaged in USPP

25. Section 321 and this BO Cumulative effects were disclosed in BO but were not considered in conclusion Cumulative effects were disclosed in BO but were not considered in conclusion USPP-funded studies were crucial (SPRNCA water needs) USPP-funded studies were crucial (SPRNCA water needs) Gains made by USPP projects in community benefit Fort Huachuca because off-post population’s water use is minimized by them. Gains made by USPP projects in community benefit Fort Huachuca because off-post population’s water use is minimized by them. 2011-deficit-reduction date still applies to USPP 2011-deficit-reduction date still applies to USPP

26. QUESTIONS?