117 



STATEMENT OF BETTY BURGE, DESERT TORTOISE COUNCIL, LAS 



VEGAS, NV 



Ms. BuRGE. The Desert Tortoise Council is a professional organi- 

 zation, composed mainly of wildlife biologists and some interested 

 laymen. 



In 1984, Council biologists prepared an 850 page report for the 

 Fish and Wildlife Service on the status of the desert tortoise. We 

 documented declining tortoise numbers and increasing cumulative 

 impacts to tortoise habitat. 



In 1985, the Fish and Wildlife Service determined that listing the 

 tortoise was warranted. However, this has yet to be implemented. 



On-going investigations show that declines continue. The tortoise 

 is in trouble. 



As a field biologist working with the tortoise for 14 years, I have 

 helped with these investigations. 



In Nevada, the tortoise is confined to the southern tip, near Las 

 Vegas. Within this distribution, the Council delineated six areas 

 that may continue to support viable populations in the future if the 

 land is managed properly. 



We call these areas "crucial desert tortoise habitats." 



Coyote Springs Valley is located within one of the least impacted 

 of the six habitats. As yet, no land has been set aside in Nevada 

 where the tortoise would be protected into the future. Meanwhile, 

 degradation and loss of habitat continue. This is particularly true 

 at the rapidly expanding boundary of Las Vegas. As degradation 

 and loss occur, the importance of Coyote Springs Valley increases. 



Aerojet would fragment this crucial habitat by taking the core of 

 it. This would result in immediate loss of some land and tortoises, 

 adding to the cumulative impact to crucial habitat by a substantial 

 increment, and hastening the need for listing. And there is no 

 guarantee that after 20 years, the entire 50 square miles would not 

 be sold and developed. The advisory board could concur. 



Benefits of prior mitigation would be cancelled. The mitigation 

 proposed by Aerojet is inadequate. Their proposed action regarding 

 fencing roads and relocating tortoises are biologically unsound. 



The environmental documents associated with S. 854 are flawed. 



I refer you to the numerous examples described in our position 

 statement. 



We are led to believe that the project will benefit the tortoise. 

 Actually, the net effects will be negative. 



If Aerojet were to utilize tortoise habitat, specified mitigation 

 and compensation measures proposed by tortoise experts should be 

 incorporated into the agreement. As it is now and would be with 

 an advisory board, proposals for sound tortoise management would 

 be subject to arbitrary rejection by Aerojet. 



Economic diversity and additional employment opportunities 

 would be possible if Aerojet were to locate elsewhere in Nevada. 

 Aerojet should explore alternative locations in Nevada, and the De- 

 partment of Interior should evaluate all proposed sites, including 

 Coyote Springs Valley, prepare formal Environmental Impact 

 Statements, and include the public commenting process. 



This project deserves more than the cursory evaluation that it 

 has received so far from Federal and State agencies. 



