DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 115/Wednesday, June 14, 2000/Proposed Rules

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 115/Wednesday, June 14, 2000/Proposed Rules Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Proposed Rules 37343 970.5204±17 [Removed and Reserved] (ii) The Department's Board of Contract drainages within its former range. In 10. Section 970.5204±17, Political Appeals or a court has previously ruled as areas where it is still present, activity cost prohibition is removed and unallowable; or populations are often few, small, and reserved. (iii) Was mutually agreed to be widely scattered. Known threats include 11. Section 970.5204±31 is amended unallowable. habitat alteration, destruction, and (d) If the contracting officer determines by revising the introductory paragraph that a cost submitted by the contractor in its fragmentation, predation by nonnative of clause paragraph (h) and adding submission for settlement of cost incurred is: organisms, and disease. Habitat loss clause paragraph (m) to read as follows: (1) Expressly unallowable, then the results from water diversions, dredging, contracting officer shall assess a penalty in livestock grazing, mining, degraded 970.5204±31 Insurance-litigation and an amount equal to the disallowed cost water quality, and groundwater claims. allocated to this contract plus interest on the pumping. Problems associated with * * * * * paid portion of the disallowed cost. Interest small population numbers and size also (h) In addition to the cost reimbursement shall be computed from the date of threaten the species. Evidence suggests limitations contained in FAR part 31, as overpayment to the date of repayment using that adverse effects from water-borne supplemented by DEAR 970.31, and the interest rate specified by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to Public Law 92±41 contaminants may also threaten this notwithstanding any other provision of this species. This proposed rule, if made contract, the contractor's liabilities to third (85 Stat. 97); or persons, including employees but excluding (2) Determined unallowable, then the final, would implement Federal costs incidental to worker's compensation contracting officer shall assess a penalty in protection to this species and provide actions, (and any expenses incidental to such an amount equal to two times the amount of funding for development and liabilities, including litigation costs, counsel the disallowed cost allocated to this contract. implementation of recovery actions. fees, judgments and settlements) shall not be (e) The contracting officer may waive the DATES: We must receive comments from reimbursed if such liabilities were caused by penalty provisions when: all interested parties by September 12, contractor managerial personnel: (1) The contractor withdraws the submission before the formal initiation of an 2000. We must receive public hearing * * * * * requests by July 31, 2000. (m) Reasonable litigation and other legal audit of the submission and submits a expenses are allowable when incurred in revised submission; ADDRESSES: Send comments and accordance with the DOE approved (2) The amount of the unallowable costs materials to the Field Supervisor, contractor legal management procedures allocated to covered contracts is $10,000 or Arizona Ecological Services Field (including cost guidelines) as such less; or Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, procedures may be revised from time to time, (3) The contractor demonstrates to the 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, and if not otherwise made unallowable by contracting officer's satisfaction that: Phoenix, Arizona 85021±4951. law or the provisions of this contract. (i) It has established appropriate policies, personnel training, and an internal control Comments and information received will be available for public inspection, 970.5204±61 [Removed and Reserved] and review system that provides assurances that unallowable costs subject to penalties by appointment, during normal business 12. Section 970.5204±61, Cost are precluded from the contractor's hours at the above address. prohibitions related to legal and other submission for settlement of costs; and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim proceedings is removed and reserved. (ii) The unallowable costs subject to the Rorabaugh, Herpetologist, at the above penalty were inadvertently incorporated into address (telephone 602/640±2720; 970.5204±84 [Removed and Reserved] the submission. facsimile 602/640±2730). 13. Section 970.5204±84, Waiver of (End of clause) limitations on severance payments to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 00±14866 Filed 6±13±00; 8:45 am] foreign nationals, is removed and Background reserved. BILLING CODE 6450±01±P 14. Section 970.5204±XX is added to Leopard frogs (Rana pipiens read as follows: complex), long considered to consist of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR a few highly variable species, are now 970.5204±XX Penalties for recognized as a diverse assemblage of unallowable costs. Fish and Wildlife Service more than two dozen species (Hillis et As prescribed in 970.4207±3 use the al. 1983), with many species described following clause: 50 CFR Part 17 in the last 20 years. Mecham (1968) recognized two distinct variations of Penalties for unallowable costs (APR 2000) RIN 1018±AF41 (a) Contractors which include unallowable ``Rana pipiens'' in the White Mountains cost in a submission for settlement for cost Endangered and Threatened Wildlife of Arizona. One of these, referred to as incurred, may be subject to penalties. and Plants; Proposal to List the the ``southern form,'' was depicted as a (b) If, during the review of a submission for stocky frog with raised folds down both settlement of cost incurred, the contracting Chiricahua Leopard Frog as Threatened With a Special Rule sides of the back (dorsolateral folds) that officer determines that the submission were interrupted and deflected medially contains an expressly unallowable cost or a AGENCY towards the rear. The other form cost determined to be unallowable prior to : Fish and Wildlife Service, the submission, the contracting officer shall Interior. matched previous descriptions of Rana assess a penalty. ACTION: Proposed rule. pipiens. Based on morphology, mating (c) Unallowable costs are either expressly calls, and genetic analyses unallowable or determined unallowable. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and (electrophoretic comparisons of blood (1) An expressly unallowable cost is a Wildlife Service (Service), propose protein samples), Platz and Platz (1973) particular item or type of cost which, under threatened status pursuant to the demonstrated that at least three distinct the express provisions of an applicable law, Endangered Species Act of 1973, as forms of leopard frogs occurred in regulation, or this contract, is specifically amended (Act), for the Chiricahua Arizona, including the southern form. named and stated to be unallowable. (2) A cost determined unallowable is one leopard frog (Rana chiricahuensis). The This southern form was subsequently which, for that contractor, Chiricahua leopard frog is now absent described as the Chiricahua leopard frog (i) Was subject to a contracting officer's from many historical localities and (Rana chiricahuensis) (Platz and final decision and not appealed; numerous mountain ranges, valleys, and Mecham 1979). VerDate 11<MAY>2000 20:24 Jun 13, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14JNP1.SGM pfrm02 PsN: 14JNP1 37344 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Proposed Rules This new species was distinguished atmospheric ozone depletion, over- southern populations (Platz and from other members of the Rana pipiens collection, natural events such as severe Mecham 1979). This and other complex by a combination of characters, storms or floods, global warming or characteristics that differ regionally including a distinctive pattern on the other climatic events, and as a result of throughout the range of the species rear of the thigh consisting of small, the dynamics of small populations and suggest genetic differentiation. This raised, cream-colored spots or tubercles groups of small populations or differentiation is being investigated and on a dark background, dorsolateral folds metapopulations (Berger et al. 1998, may result in a description of the that were interrupted and deflected Lips 1998, Lind et al. 1996, Rosen et al. northern populations as a separate medially, stocky body proportions, 1996, 1994; Hale et al. 1995, Blaustein species from the southern populations relatively rough skin on the back and et al. 1994, Sredl and Howland 1994, (James Platz, Creighton University, pers. sides, and often green coloration on the Pounds and Crump 1994, Sredl 1993, comm. 1994). If the species is split into head and back (Platz and Mecham Bradford 1991, Wyman 1990, Clarkson two distinct taxa, fewer populations 1979). The species also has a distinctive and Rorabaugh 1989, Corn and would exist within each taxon. call consisting of a relatively long snore Fogleman 1984, Baxter and Meyer 1982, Chiricahua leopard frogs were either of 1 to 2 seconds in duration (Davidson Dimmitt 1979). collected or observed at 212 localities in 1996, Platz and Mecham 1979). Snout- The Chiricahua leopard frog is an Arizona (B. Kuvlesky, Buenos Aires vent lengths of adults range from inhabitant of cienegas (mid-elevation National Wildlife Refuge, pers. comm. approximately 54 to 139 millimeters wetland communities often surrounded 1997; Terry Myers, Apache-Sitgreaves (mm) (2.1 to 5.4 inches (in)) (Stebbins by arid environments), pools, livestock National Forest, pers. comm. 1997; 1985, Platz and Mecham 1979). The tanks,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana Chiricahuensis)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Final Recovery Plan April 2007 CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Rana chiricahuensis) RECOVERY PLAN Southwest Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director, or Director, as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature citation of this document should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM. 149 pp. + Appendices A-M. Additional copies may be obtained from: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Ecological Services Field Office Southwest Region 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 500 Gold Avenue, S.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Diversity in the Riverina Rice Fields—
    Reconciling Farming with Wildlife —Managing diversity in the Riverina rice fields— RIRDC Publication No. 10/0007 RIRDCInnovation for rural Australia Reconciling Farming with Wildlife: Managing Biodiversity in the Riverina Rice Fields by J. Sean Doody, Christina M. Castellano, Will Osborne, Ben Corey and Sarah Ross April 2010 RIRDC Publication No 10/007 RIRDC Project No. PRJ-000687 © 2010 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 1 74151 983 7 ISSN 1440-6845 Reconciling Farming with Wildlife: Managing Biodiversity in the Riverina Rice Fields Publication No. 10/007 Project No. PRJ-000687 The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable regions. You must not rely on any information contained in this publication without taking specialist advice relevant to your particular circumstances. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this publication to ensure that information is true and correct, the Commonwealth of Australia gives no assurance as to the accuracy of any information in this publication. The Commonwealth of Australia, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), the authors or contributors expressly disclaim, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth of Australia, RIRDC, the authors or contributors. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the views in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Assessment for the Northern Leopard Frog (Rana Pipiens)
    SPECIES ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTHERN LEOPARD FROG (RANA PIPIENS ) IN WYOMING prepared by 1 2 BRIAN E. SMITH AND DOUG KEINATH 1Department of Biology Black Hills State University1200 University Street Unit 9044, Spearfish, SD 5779 2 Zoology Program Manager, Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave, Dept. 3381, Laramie, Wyoming 82071; 307-766-3013; [email protected] prepared for United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Wyoming State Office Cheyenne, Wyoming January 2004 Smith and Keinath – Rana pipiens January 2004 Table of Contents SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3 NATURAL HISTORY ........................................................................................................................... 5 Morphological Description ...................................................................................................... 5 Taxonomy and Distribution ..................................................................................................... 6 Taxonomy .......................................................................................................................................6 Distribution and Abundance............................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Petition to List the Relict Leopard Frog (Rana Onca) As an Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE RELICT LEOPARD FROG (RANA ONCA) AS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE PETITIONERS May 8, 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The relict leopard frog (Rana onca) has the dubious distinction of being one of the first North American amphibians thought to have become extinct. Although known to have inhabited at least 64 separate locations, the last historical collections of the species were in the 1950s and this frog was only recently rediscovered at 8 (of the original 64) locations in the early 1990s. This extremely endangered amphibian is now restricted to only 6 localities (a 91% reduction from the original 64 locations) in two disjunct areas within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Nevada. The relict leopard frog historically occurred in springs, seeps, and wetlands within the Virgin, Muddy, and Colorado River drainages, in Utah, Nevada, and Arizona. The Vegas Valley leopard frog, which once inhabited springs in the Las Vegas, Nevada area (and is probably now extinct), may eventually prove to be synonymous with R. onca. Relict leopard frogs were recently discovered in eight springs in the early 1990s near Lake Mead and along the Virgin River. The species has subsequently disappeared from two of these localities. Only about 500 to 1,000 adult frogs remain in the population and none of the extant locations are secure from anthropomorphic events, thus putting the species at an almost guaranteed risk of extinction. The relict leopard frog has likely been extirpated from Utah, Arizona, and from the Muddy River drainage in Nevada, and persists in only 9% of its known historical range.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibian Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites in Chiapas and Oaxaca
    Amphibian Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites in Chiapas and Oaxaca John F. Lamoreux, Meghan W. McKnight, and Rodolfo Cabrera Hernandez Occasional Paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 53 Amphibian Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites in Chiapas and Oaxaca John F. Lamoreux, Meghan W. McKnight, and Rodolfo Cabrera Hernandez Occasional Paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 53 The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN or other participating organizations. Published by: IUCN, Gland, Switzerland Copyright: © 2015 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Citation: Lamoreux, J. F., McKnight, M. W., and R. Cabrera Hernandez (2015). Amphibian Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites in Chiapas and Oaxaca. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. xxiv + 320pp. ISBN: 978-2-8317-1717-3 DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2015.SSC-OP.53.en Cover photographs: Totontepec landscape; new Plectrohyla species, Ixalotriton niger, Concepción Pápalo, Thorius minutissimus, Craugastor pozo (panels, left to right) Back cover photograph: Collecting in Chamula, Chiapas Photo credits: The cover photographs were taken by the authors under grant agreements with the two main project funders: NGS and CEPF.
    [Show full text]
  • Reintroduction of the Tarahumara Frog (Rana Tarahumarae) in Arizona: Lessons Learned
    Herpetological Conservation and Biology 15(2):372–389. Submitted: 12 December 2019; Accepted: 11 June 2020; Published: 31 August 2020. REINTRODUCTION OF THE TARAHUMARA FROG (RANA TARAHUMARAE) IN ARIZONA: LESSONS LEARNED JAMES C. RORABAUGH1,8, AUDREY K. OWENS2, ABIGAIL KING3, STEPHEN F. HALE4, STEPHANE POULIN5, MICHAEL J. SREDL6, AND JULIO A. LEMOS-ESPINAL7 1Post Office Box 31, Saint David, Arizona 85630, USA 2Arizona Game and Fish Department, 5000 West Carefree Highway, Phoenix, Arizona 85086, USA 3Jack Creek Preserve Foundation, Post Office Box 3, Ennis, Montana 59716, USA 4EcoPlan Associates, Inc., 3610 North Prince Village Place, Suite 140, Tucson, Arizona 85719, USA 5Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, 2021 North Kinney Road, Tucson, Arizona 85743, USA 6Arizona Game and Fish Department (retired), 5000 West Carefree Highway, Phoenix, Arizona 85086, USA 7Laboratorio de Ecología, Unidad de Biotecnología y Prototipos, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Avenida De Los Barrios No. 1, Colonia Los Reyes Iztacala, Tlalnepantla, Estado de México 54090, México 8Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract.—The Tarahumara Frog (Rana tarahumarae) disappeared from the northern edge of its range in south- central Arizona, USA, after observed declines and die-offs from 1974 to 1983. Similar declines were noted in Sonora, Mexico; however, the species still persists at many sites in Mexico. Chytridiomycosis was detected during some declines and implicated in others; however, airborne pollutants from copper smelters, predation, competition, and extreme weather may have also been contributing factors. We collected Tarahumara Frogs in Sonora for captive rearing and propagation beginning in 1999, and released frogs to two historical localities in Arizona, including Big Casa Blanca Canyon and vicinity, Santa Rita Mountains, and Sycamore Canyon, Atascosa Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • Return of the Tarahumara Frog to Arizona
    Return of the Tarahumara Frog to Arizona James C. Rorabaugh U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Phoenix, AZ Stephen F. Hale Tucson, AZ Michael J. Sredl Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ Craig Ivanyi Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, Tucson, AZ Abstract—The last wild Tarahumara frog (Rana tarahumarae) in Arizona was found dead in Big Casa Blanca Canyon, Santa Rita Mountains, in May 1983. However, the species is still well rep- resented in the majority of its range in the northern Sierra Madre Occidental and adjacent Sky Islands of Sonora and Chihuahua. Plans to re-establish R. tarahumarae in Arizona were initiated in 1992 and have been coordinated by the Tarahumara Frog Conservation Team. Initial experi- mental releases of Tarahumara frogs to Big Casa Blanca Canyon, Santa Cruz County, Arizona, are tentatively scheduled for June 2004. If successful there, releases of R. tarahumarae would also be considered at Sycamore Canyon and other historical Arizona localities. Springs in 1933 (Campbell 1934) and Sycamore Canyon in Introduction 1938. Williams (1960) reported 1948 collections from Tinaja The Tarahumara frog (Rana tarahumarae) is a medium- Canyon in the Tumacacori Mountains, and then in 1972 the sized, drab green-brown frog with small brown to black spots range of the species in Arizona was extended to the Santa Rita on the body and dark crossbars on the legs (figure 1). The spe- Mountains where it was found in Big Casa Blanca, Gardner, cies is known from 63 localities in montane canyons in extreme Adobe, and Walker canyons (Hale et al. 1977). southern Arizona south to northern Sinaloa and southwestern Fifty-two years after their discovery in Alamo Canyon, a Chihuahua, Mexico (Rorabaugh and Hale, in press; see figure wild R.
    [Show full text]
  • CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] Chiricahuensis)
    CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] chiricahuensis) Chiricahua Leopard Frog from Sycamore Canyon, Coronado National Forest, Arizona Photograph by Jim Rorabaugh, USFWS CONSIDERATIONS FOR MAKING EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REDUCING AND AVOIDING ADVERSE EFFECTS Developed by the Southwest Endangered Species Act Team, an affiliate of the Southwest Strategy Funded by U.S. Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program December 2008 (Updated August 31, 2009) ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document was developed by members of the Southwest Endangered Species Act (SWESA) Team comprised of representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BoR), Department of Defense (DoD), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), National Park Service (NPS) and U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Dr. Terry L. Myers gathered and synthesized much of the information for this document. The SWESA Team would especially like to thank Mr. Steve Sekscienski, U.S. Army Environmental Center, DoD, for obtaining the funds needed for this project, and Dr. Patricia Zenone, USFWS, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, for serving as the Contracting Officer’s Representative for this grant. Overall guidance, review, and editing of the document was provided by the CMED Subgroup of the SWESA Team, consisting of: Art Coykendall (BoR), John Nystedt (USFWS), Patricia Zenone (USFWS), Robert L. Palmer (DoD, U.S. Navy), Vicki Herren (BLM), Wade Eakle (USACE), and Ronnie Maes (USFS). The cooperation of many individuals facilitated this effort, including: USFWS: Jim Rorabaugh, Jennifer Graves, Debra Bills, Shaula Hedwall, Melissa Kreutzian, Marilyn Myers, Michelle Christman, Joel Lusk, Harold Namminga; USFS: Mike Rotonda, Susan Lee, Bryce Rickel, Linda WhiteTrifaro; USACE: Ron Fowler, Robert Dummer; BLM: Ted Cordery, Marikay Ramsey; BoR: Robert Clarkson; DoD, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Knife World Books
    SPRING 2019, Issue 55 ® JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN BLADESMITH SOCIETY, INC. Officers Board of Directors In This Issue Editor’s Note Harvey Dean (04) Robert Calvert (07) 4 Chairman 911 Julia Street 5 ABS Calendar 3266 CR 232 Rayville, LA 71269 5 School Calendars Rockdale,TX 76567-4302 318-348-4490 6 Chairman’s Corner 512-446-3111, [email protected] 8 Annual Meeting Schedule [email protected] 9 Auction Knife Descriptions Kevin R. Cashen (11) 10 Mid America Symposium Info Steve Dunn (03) 5615 Tyler Street 11 New England Symposium Flyer Vice Chairman Hubbardston, Michigan 48845-9708 376 Bigger Staff Road 989-981-6780 13 Art of Steel Show Awards Smiths Grove, KY 42171 [email protected] 18 Great Smoky Mountain Hammer-in 270-563-9830, 21 Alabama Forge Council [email protected] Mark Zalesky (11) 26 AD Index 4152 Forest Glen Drive Billy Ray Hughes (76) Knoxville, TN 37919 Carolyn Hughes, Editor Secretary & Founder 865-540-4189 305 Phillips Circle [email protected] American Bladesmith is published 3 times a year Wake Village, TX 75501 by the American Bladesmith Society, PO Box 903-838-0134, James Rodebaugh (15) 160, Grand Rapids, OH 43522 and is printed [email protected] P.O. Box 404 by NeTex Printing, 3101 New Boston Rd., Carpenter, WY 82054 Texarkana, TX 75501. The publishers and staff of Bill Wiggins (09) 307-649-2394 American Bladesmith are not responsible for any Treasurer [email protected] mishaps which might occur from use of published 105 Kaolin Lane information. No part of the publication may be Canton, NC 28716 Robert Wilson (18) reproduced without written permission from the 828-226-2551 3659 Battle Road editor.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation of the Northern Leopard Frog Are Contradictory Management Objectives
    United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Assessment Forest Service for the Northern Leopard Rocky Mountain Region Frog in the Black Hills Black Hills National Forest National Forest South Custer, South Dakota Dakota and Wyoming April 2003 Brian E. Smith Conservation Assessment of the Northern Leopard Frog in the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming Brian E. Smith Department of Biology Black Hills State University 1200 University Street Unit 9044 Spearfish, SD 57799-9044 [email protected] Dr. Brian E. Smith is an assistant professor of biology at Black Hills State University in Spearfish, South Dakota. He is a conservation biologist who primarily studies reptiles and amphibians. He earned his doctorate from the University of Texas at Arlington in January of 1996 and has studied the herpetofauna of the Black Hills since then. He also conducts research on the conservation biology of reptiles in the Caribbean. He is the author of several scholarly and popular publications on the herpetofauna of the Black Hills and the Caribbean. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................................................2 CURRENT MANAGEMENT SITUATION.................................................................................................................2 Management
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonkill Biolcons2009.Pdf
    This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Biological Conservation 142 (2009) 3201–3206 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Short communication The impact of taxonomic change on conservation: Does it kill, can it save, or is it just irrelevant? W.R. Morrison III a,1, J.L. Lohr a,1, P. Duchen a,1, R. Wilches a,1, D. Trujillo a,1, M. Mair a,1, S.S. Renner b,* a Department of Biology, University of Munich, Großhaderner Str. 2, D-82152 Planegg-Martinsried, Germany b Department of Biology, University of Munich, Menzinger Str. 67, D-80638 Munich, Germany article info abstract Article history: The important question of taxonomy and its impact on conservation efforts was brought to general atten- Received 10 April 2009 tion by Robert May in 1990 with a News and Views article in Nature entitled ‘‘Taxonomy as destiny.” Received in revised form 18 July 2009 Taxonomy, however, has built-in instabilities that result in name changes, raising the question of Accepted 23 July 2009 whether name changes have a consistent impact on conservation efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of CFT Legumine (5% Rotenone) on Tadpole Survival and Metamorphosis of Chiricahua Leopard Frogs Lithobates Chiricahuensis, Northern Leopard Frogs L
    Transactions of the American Fisheries Society ISSN: 0002-8487 (Print) 1548-8659 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utaf20 Effects of CFT Legumine (5% Rotenone) on Tadpole Survival and Metamorphosis of Chiricahua Leopard Frogs Lithobates chiricahuensis, Northern Leopard Frogs L. pipiens, and American Bullfrogs L. catesbeianus Guillermo Alvarez, Colleen A. Caldwell & Carter G. Kruse To cite this article: Guillermo Alvarez, Colleen A. Caldwell & Carter G. Kruse (2017) Effects of CFT Legumine (5% Rotenone) on Tadpole Survival and Metamorphosis of Chiricahua Leopard Frogs Lithobates chiricahuensis, Northern Leopard Frogs L. pipiens, and American Bullfrogs L. catesbeianus, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 146:3, 512-522, DOI: 10.1080/00028487.2017.1285355 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00028487.2017.1285355 Published online: 30 Mar 2017. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 3 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=utaf20 Download by: [208.75.143.250] Date: 07 April 2017, At: 04:37 Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 146:512–522, 2017 © American Fisheries Society 2017 ISSN: 0002-8487 print / 1548-8659 online DOI: 10.1080/00028487.2017.1285355 ARTICLE Effects of CFT Legumine (5% Rotenone) on Tadpole Survival and Metamorphosis of Chiricahua Leopard Frogs Lithobates chiricahuensis, Northern Leopard Frogs L. pipiens, and American Bullfrogs L. catesbeianus Guillermo Alvarez Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Ecology, New Mexico State University, Box 30003, Mail Stop Code 4901, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003, USA Colleen A.
    [Show full text]