Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are proposing to issue an Eagle Take permit (eagle permit) under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16 United States Code [U.S.C.] 668–668d and 50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 22.26) for take of eagles that is incidental to otherwise lawful operation of the Biglow Canyon Wind Farm (Biglow Canyon or Project). The Service’s proposal to issue an eagle permit constitutes a discretionary Federal action that is subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). This Final Environmental Assessment (EA) is tiered to the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Eagle Rule Revision (PEIS; USFWS 2016b). Our proposed action and preferred alternative is Alternative 2 – to issue a 30-year permit to the applicant based on their Eagle Conservation Plan (ECP; Appendix A) and other application materials. Two alternatives to the proposed action analyzed in this EA are to deny the issuance of the permit, also called the No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) and to issue a 5-year permit (Alternative 3). Denying the issuance of this eagle permit (Alternative 1) would result in no requirement for monitoring, adaptive management, or compensatory mitigation to offset predicted impacts of the Project. Issuing a 5-year permit (Alternative 3) would limit long-term conservation benefits to eagles and would not mandate long-term fatality monitoring due to the 5-year permit tenure.
We received an application for a 30-year eagle permit from Portland General Electric (PGE, or the Applicant) on April 2, 2015, requesting authorization of non-purposeful or “incidental” take of bald and golden eagles under the Eagle Act from Project operation. The Applicant’s ECP (Appendix A) is the foundation of the permit application and is referenced frequently herein. The analyses in this EA consider the potential effects on the human environment under the two action alternatives as compared with the No Action Alternative.