DOCSLIB.ORG

Water-Quality Assessment of the Upper Snake River Basin, Idaho and Western Wyoming Summary of Aquatic Biological Data for Surface Water Through 1992

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water-Quality Assessment of the Upper Snake River Basin, Idaho and Western Wyoming Summary of Aquatic Biological Data for Surface Water Through 1992 WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE UPPER SNAKE RIVER BASIN, IDAHO AND WESTERN WYOMING SUMMARY OF AQUATIC BIOLOGICAL DATA FOR SURFACE WATER THROUGH 1992 By TERRY R.MARET U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4006 Boise, Idaho 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bruce Babbitt, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center 230 Collins Road Open-File Reports Section Boise, ID 83702-4520 Box 25286, MS 517 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Describe how water quality is changing over time. (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the Improve understanding of the primary natural and earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ human factors that affect water-quality conditions. tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- This information will help support the develop­ ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound ment and evaluation of management, regulatory, and decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and monitoring decisions by other Federal, State, and local trends is an important part of this overall mission. agencies to protect, use, and enhance water resources. One of the greatest challenges faced by water- The goals of the NAWQA Program are being resources scientists is acquiring reliable information achieved through ongoing and proposed investigations that will guide the use and protection of the Nation's of 60 of the Nation's most important river basins and water resources. That challenge is being addressed by aquifer systems, which are referred to as study units. Federal, State, interstate, and local water-resource These study units are distributed throughout the Nation agencies and by many academic institutions. These and cover a diversity of hydrogeologic settings. More organizations are collecting water-quality data for a than two-thirds of the Nation's freshwater use occurs host of purposes that include: compliance with permits within the 60 study units and more than two-thirds of and water-supply standards; development of remedia­ the people served by public water-supply systems live tion plans for a specific contamination problem; opera­ tional decisions on industrial, wastewater, or water- within their boundaries. supply facilities; and research on factors that affect National synthesis of data analysis, based on water quality. An additional need for water-quality aggregation of comparable information obtained from information is to provide a basis on which regional and the study units, is a major component of the program. national-level policy decisions can be based. Wise This effort focuses on selected water-quality topics decisions must be based on sound information. As a using nationally consistent information. Comparative society we need to know whether certain types of studies will explain differences and similarities in water-quality problems are isolated or ubiquitous, observed water-quality conditions among study areas whether there are significant differences in conditions and will identify changes and trends and their causes. among regions, whether the conditions are changing The first topics addressed by the national synthesis are over time, and why these conditions change from place pesticides, nutrients, volatile organic compounds, and to place and over time. The information can be used to aquatic biology. Discussions on these and other water- help determine the efficacy of existing water-quality quality topics will be published in periodic summaries policies and to help analysts determine the need for and of the quality of the Nation's ground and surface water likely consequences of new policies. as the information becomes available. To address these needs, the Congress appropriated This report is an element of the comprehensive funds in 1986 for the USGS to begin a pilot program in body of information developed as part of the NAWQA seven project areas to develop and refine the National Program. The program depends heavily on the advice, Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program. In cooperation, and information from many Federal, 1991, the USGS began full implementation of the pro­ State, interstate, Tribal, and local agencies and the pub­ gram. The NAWQA Program builds upon an existing lic. The assistance and suggestions of all are greatly base of water-quality studies of the USGS, as well as appreciated. those of other Federal, State, and local agencies. The objectives of the NAWQA Program are to: Describe current water-quality conditions for a large part of the Nation's freshwater streams, Robert M. Hirsch rivers, and aquifers. Chief Hydrologist Foreword Hi CONTENTS Foreword.................................................................................................................................................................................. iii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Rationale for evaluating aquatic biological data............................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and scope............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Sources of biological data................................................................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Environmental setting............................................................................................................................................................... 5 Ecoregions......................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Snake River Basin/High Desert................................................................................................................................. 7 Northern Rockies........................................................................................................................................................ 9 Large river habitat............................................................................................................................................................. 10 Habitat variables................................................................................................................................................................ 10 Land use and water-quality issues...................................................................................................:........................................ 12 Water resource development and stream alterations......................................................................................................... 13 Irrigated agriculture........................................................................................................................................................... 13 Livestock grazing.............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Aquaculture................................................................................................................................... 14 Introduced species............................................................................................................................................................. 15 Status and trends in aquatic life................................................................................................................................................ 15 Macroinvertebrates............................................................................................................................................................ 15 Species of Special Concern........................................................................................................................................ 23 Fish ............................................................................................................................................... 25 Species of Special Concern........................................................................................................................................ 35 Status and trends in fish tissue contaminants........................................................................................................................... 36 Synthetic organic compounds............................................................................................................................................ 39 Trace elements................................................................................................................................................................... 44 Summary............................................................................................................_^
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mckern Presentation
    WHO KILLED THE SNAKE RIVER SALMON JuneCELILO 1 FALLS COMMERCIAL HARVEST – 1860s to 1970s PEAK HARVEST 43 MILLION POUNDS – 1886 -SPRING CHINOOK SECOND PEAK 1910 – 43 MILLION POUNDS - ALL SPECIES EAST BOAT BASIN - ASTORIA MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT - 1972 NOAA RECENT ESTIMATE 20 TO 40 % OF SPRING CHINOOK Gold Dredge at Sumpter, Oregon Dredged Powder River Valley Oregon LOGGING WATERSHED DAMAGE EROSION SPLASH DAMS WATER RETENTION ROAD CONSTRUCTION METHODS Mainstem Snake River Dams WITHOUT FISH PASSAGE Oxbow dam – 1961 Shoshone Falls Hells Canyon Dam – (Upper Limit) 1967 Upper Salmon Falls – 1937 WITH FISH PASSAGE Lower Salmon Falls - Lower Granite Dam – 1910 1975 Bliss Dam – 1950 Little Goose Dam 1970 C. J. Strike Dam - Lower Monumental Dam 1952 – 1969 Swan Falls Dam -1901 Ice Harbor Dam - 1962 Brownlee Dam – 1959 SHOSHONE FALLS Tributary Dams Owyhee River Powder River Wild Horse Dam – 1937 Thief Valley Dam – 1931 Owyhee Dam – 1932 Mason Dam - 1968 Boise River Salmon River Anderson Ranch Dam – 1950 Sunbeam Dam – 1909 – 1934 Arrowrock Dam – 1915 Wallowa River Boise R Diversion Dam – 1912 OFC Dam 1898 - 1914 Lucky Peak Dam - 1955 Clearwater River Barber Dam - 1906 Lewiston Dam – 1917 - 1973 Payette River Grangeville Dam – 1910 – 1963 Black Canyon Dam – 1924 Dworshak Dam - 1972 Deadwood Dam - 1929 Malheur River Warm Springs Dam – 1930 Agency Valley Dam – 1936 Bully Creek Dam – 1963 Sunbeam Dam – Salmon River 1909 to 1934 1909 to 1920s - no fish passage 1920s to 1934 - poor fish passage Channel around by IDF&G 1934 NOTE 3 PEOPLE IN RED CIRCLE
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Fish Passage in Idaho Power Company's
    A Review of Fish Passage Provisions in the License Application for the Hells Canyon Complex August 2003 Prepared For Idaho Rivers United And American Rivers By Ken Witty S.P. Cramer and Associates S.P. Cramer & Associates, Inc. 600 NW Fariss Road Gresham, OR 97030 www.spcramer.com S.P. Cramer & Associates, Inc. Hells Canyon Complex August 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 HISTORIC PROSPECTIVE ................................................................................................................. 1 PASSAGE AT THE HCC ................................................................................................................ 1 PROPOSED DOWNSTREAM DAMS ............................................................................................ 1 LOWER SNAKE RIVER DAMS .................................................................................................... 2 LOWER SNAKE RIVER COMPENSATION PLAN ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • OUTFITTER/GUIDE RIVER BOATING APPLICATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (FOR OG-11) See Rules for Complete Requirements
    OG-5 (10/15) OUTFITTER/GUIDE RIVER BOATING APPLICATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (FOR OG-11) See Rules for complete requirements. Unclassified river section qualifications: To qualify as a float boat guide on unclassified rivers and streams, the applicant shall have had one (1) complete trip on each of the rivers applied for under the supervision of a float boat guide licensed for each of those rivers. A completed OG-11 Training Log shall be submitted giving dates, river section, and the signatures of the supervisor, trainee, and licensed outfitter. Classified river section qualifications: A float boat guide on a classified river shall be licensed as a boatman or a lead boatman according to his experience on that specific river. Each float boat trip on a classified river shall have a lead boat operated by a guide licensed as a lead boatman for that specific river and all other boats participating in that trip shall follow the lead boat and shall be operated by a guide licensed as a boatman or a lead boatman for that specific river. (See Rule 040.01) Each training trip means the total section of river as designated by the Board. (See Rules 040, 041, 042 and 059) An applicant for a float boatman license on classified rivers may qualify in one of three ways: a. The guide shall have had three (3) complete float boat trips on each of the classified rivers applied for, under the direct supervision of a float boatman licensed for that river or they shall have had one or more complete float boat trips on each of the classified rivers applied for under the direct supervision of a float boatman licensed for that river with the remaining trip(s) in a boat with no more than one other trainee following a licensed float boatman for that river but they must not have passengers in the boat; or, b.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Flow Augmentation Impact Analysis Appendix
    SNAKE RIVER FLOW AUGMENTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla District’s Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho February 1999 Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) 1427i A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with large drawdown of Reclamation reservoirs. 1427r A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with reservoir elevations maintained near current levels. BA Biological assessment BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis (U.S. Department of Commerce) BETTER Box Exchange Transport Temperature Ecology Reservoir (a water quality model) BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BID Burley Irrigation District BIOP Biological opinion BLM Bureau of Land Management B.P. Before present BPA Bonneville Power Administration CES Conservation Extension Service cfs Cubic feet per second Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CRFMP Columbia River Fish Mitigation Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program CVPIA Central Valley Project Improvement Act CWA Clean Water Act DO Dissolved Oxygen Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) DREW Drawdown Regional Economic Workgroup DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane EIS Environmental Impact Statement EP Effective Precipitation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ETAW Evapotranspiration of Applied Water FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FIRE Finance, investment, and real estate HCNRA Hells Canyon National Recreation Area HUC Hydrologic unit code I.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Seepage and Discharge Uncertainty in the Middle Snake River, Southwestern Idaho
    Prepared in cooperation with the State of Idaho, Idaho Power Company, and the Idaho Department of Water Resources Evaluation of Seepage and Discharge Uncertainty in the Middle Snake River, Southwestern Idaho Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5091 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Streamgage operated by Idaho Power Company on the Snake River below Swan Falls Dam near Murphy, Idaho (13172500), looking downstream. Photograph taken by Molly Wood, U.S. Geological Survey, March 15, 2010. Evaluation of Seepage and Discharge Uncertainty in the Middle Snake River, Southwestern Idaho By Molly S. Wood, Marshall L. Williams, David M. Evetts, and Peter J. Vidmar Prepared in cooperation with the State of Idaho, Idaho Power Company, and the Idaho Department of Water Resources Scientific-Investigations Report 2014–5091 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Opinion for the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 911NE11 th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97232-4181 In Reply Refer To: FWS/Rl/AES Dan Opalski, Director JUN 2 5 2015 Office of Water and Watersheds U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth A venue Seattle, Washington 98101 Dear Mr. Opalski: Enclosed are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) and concurrence determinations on the Idaho Water Quality Standards for Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Pollutants (proposed action). The Opinion addresses the effects of the proposed action on the following listed species and critical habitats: the endangered Snake River physa snail (Physa natricina), threatened Bliss Rapids snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola), endangered Banbury Springs lanx (Laroe sp.; undescribed), the endangered Bruneau hot springsnail (Pyrgulopsis bruneauensis), the threatened bull trout (Salvelinus confluenlus) and its critical habitat, and the endangered Kootenai River white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) and its critical habitat. The concurrence determinations address the following listed species: the threatened grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), endangered Southern Selkirk Mountains woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), threatened Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), threatened northern Idaho ground squirrel (Spermophilus brunneus brunneus), threatened MacFarlane's four-o'clock (Mirabilis macfarlanei), threatened water howellia (Howellia aquatilis), threatened Ute ladies' -tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis),
    [Show full text]
  • Eology of the Southern Part )F the Lemhi Range, Idaho
    :;eology of the Southern Part )f the Lemhi Range, Idaho 'y CLYDE P. ROSS :oNTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY ~EOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1081-F NITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1961 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRED A. SEATON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washin!1ton 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Abstract--------------------------------------------------------- 189 Introduction------------------------------------------------------ 189 Location and scope of the report________________________________ 189 Acknowledgments--------------------------------------------- 191 TopographY------------------------------------------------------ 192 LemhiRange_________________________________________________ 192 Valley of Birch Creek__________________________________________ 193 Valley of Little Lost River_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 193 Stratigraphy and petrography __________________________ ------------_ 194 Generalfeatures----------------------------------------------- 194 Precambrianrocks--------------------------------------------- 195 Swauger quartzite_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 195 Lower Paleozoic rocks ___ -------________________________________ 201 Kinnikinic quartzite_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 201 Saturday Mountain formation and overlying dolomite__________ 203 Three Forks limestone
    [Show full text]
  • Longitudinal and Seasonal Distribution of Benthic Invertebrates in the Little Lost River, Ldaho
    Longitudinal and Seasonal Distribution of Benthic Invertebrates in the Little Lost River, ldaho DOUGLAS A. ANDREWS and G. WAYNE MINSHALL Department of Biology, Idaho State University, Pocatello 03209 ABSTRACT:A yearlong investigation of the Little Lost River, ldaho (five sites) was conducted to determine the environmental conditions and benthic invertebrate com- munity composition of the stream and to discover factors responsible for distribution of the benthos. All chemical constituents measured showed a tendency to increase from headwaters to mouth. Stream temperatures ranged from 0-15 C near the headwaters and 0 to 22 C near the mouth. Chlorophyll a content of the periphyton was low (1- 19 mg/m2) following heavy winter ice cover and spring runoff, but attained relatively high levels (12-68 mg/m2) by the end of September. Allochthonous detritus levels were highest (64-96 g/m2) near the headwaters; the lowest levels (16-24 g/m2) were found in areas where the riparian vegetation was restricted largely to sagebrush and grass. The study revealed a fauna comparable in richness to other Rocky Mountain streams. Sixty-two of the 68 taxa collected were insects. Ephemeroptera was the predominant group in terms of both species (29% of total) and number (62% of total). The most common species were Rhithrogenn robusta, R. hageni and Baetis tricaudatus (Ephemeroptera) ; Nemoura sp., Alloperla sp. and Isoperla fulua (Plecoptera) ; and Glossosoma sp. and Hydropsyche sp. (Trichoptera). Mean number of invertebrates was between 1500 and 5000/m2 at the various sites. Local environmental conditions exerted a strong influence on the structure of the invertebrate community at the various locations in the river.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Benthic Invertebrates in the Lost Streams of Idaho
    Distribution of Benthic Invertebrates in the Lost Streams of Idaho DOiUGLAS A. ANDREWS and G. WAYNE MINSHALL Department of Biology, Idaho State University, Pocatello 83209 ABSTRACT:The Lost Streams of Idaho (Big Lost and Little Lost rivers; Birch, Medicine Lodge, Beaver and Camas creeks) constitute a unique set of isolated lotic environments. The streams are all similar in size (discharge 1.5-2.5 m3/sec) except for Camas Creek which is 3-4 times larger. Likewise, chemical conditions are similar in all streams except Camas Creek which has generally lower values. The Lost Streams are well-buffered and rich in calcium bicarbonate (100-250 mg/liter as CaCO,). Sixty-one invertebrate taxa were found in the comparative collections, but only 10 (excluding Chironomidae) occurred in all six streams: a beetle (Optioservus quadri- maculatus), two dipterans (Simulium sp., Tipula sp.) three mayflies (Baetis tricauda- tus, Ephemerella grandis, E. inermis), two stone flies (Acroneuria pacifica, Isoperla fulva), and two caddis flies (Brachycentrus occidentalis, Hydropsyche sp.) . Examina- tion of invertebrate collections from both sides of the 80-95 km wide Snake River Plain suggest that the faunas were established before isolation of the Lost Streams during the early Pleistocene. INTRODUCTION The Lost Streams of Idaho constitute a unique set of isolated lotic environments located along a 146-km front in the Upper Snake River Valley of eastern Idaho (Fig. 1). The streams originate in the Rocky Mountains bordering the Continental Divide and flow in a southeasterly direction to the edge of the Snake River Plain. The Snake River Plain is a high plateau built up of basalt lava flows that erupted Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • IDAHO DEPARTMENT of FISH and GAME FISHERY MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT Cal Groen, Director
    IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME FISHERY MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT Cal Groen, Director UPPER SNAKE REGION 2009 Brett High Regional Fisheries Biologist Greg Schoby Regional Fisheries Biologist Damon Keen Regional Fisheries Biologist Dan Garren Regional Fisheries Manager March 2011 IDFG 11-107 1 2009 Upper Snake Region Annual Fishery Management Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Lakes and Reservoirs Investigations HENRYS LAKE ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................ 1 METHODS ................................................................................................................................. 2 Population Monitoring ............................................................................................................. 2 Creel Survey ........................................................................................................................... 3 Water Quality .......................................................................................................................... 4 Spawning Operation ............................................................................................................... 4 Riparian Fencing and Fish Screening ..................................................................................... 4 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................. 5 Population Monitoring ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2 Subbasin Biological Resources
    Upper Snake Provincial Assessment May 2004 2 Subbasin Biological • Comparatively high fish and/or wildlife Resources density • Comparatively high fish and/or wildlife This section of the assessment describes the species diversity environmental conditions and fish and • Important fish and/or wildlife breeding wildlife populations in the Upper Snake habitat province. A key element is information on the • Important fish and/or wildlife seasonal current and potential conditions within each ranges of the 22 watersheds. • Important fish and/or wildlife population or habitat linkage areas This assessment reflects the complex of • Rareness environmental linkages and does not focus on • High vulnerability to habitat alteration a single species. The challenge is to consider • Unique or dependent species the numerous roles of each species in the environment and the consequences of the elimination of or decrease in one habitat and/or species on other habitats and species. This assessment adopts an approach developed by the Interactive Biodiversity Information System (IBIS 2003) for evaluating the ecological functions of species. This assessment focuses on nine habitats and their associated focal species (Figure 2-1 and Table 2-1). Although the discussions are separate, we recognize the hierarchical relationships between focal habitats, focal vegetation species, and focal wildlife species that depend, either directly or indirectly, on the focal vegetation species. Both the aquatic and terrestrial resources sections describe the physical and biological features of a focal habitat. Focal habitats describe a combination of unique vegetative characteristics, dominant plant species, or successional stages with important ecological ties to fish and wildlife (e.g., old growth). Focal habitats may also be composed of specific environmental elements integral to the viability of fish and wildlife populations (e.g., snags, caves).
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior
    Friday J uary 6, 1989 MEN Part IV Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Animal Notice of Review • 554 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 1989 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Regional Director (FWE/SE), U.S. Fish least at times, to merit conSideration for and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, addition to the List of Endangered and Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 (505/ Threatened Wildlife. The accompanying 766-2321 or FTS 474-2321). table identifies many of these taxa 50 CFR Part 17 Region 3. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, (including, by definition, biological Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, subspecies and certain populations of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Wisconsin. vertebrate animals) and assigns each to and Plants; Animal Notice of Review Regional Director (AE/SE), U.S. Fish one of the three categories described AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wildlife Service, Federal Building, below. Unless it is the subject of a Interior. Fort Snelling, Twin Cities, Minnesota current published proposed or final rule 55111 (612/725-3276 or FTS 725-3276). determining endangered or threatened Notice of review. ACTION: Region 4. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, status, none of these taxa receives Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, SUMMARY: The Service issues a revised substantive or procedural protection notice identifying vertebrate and Mississippi, North Carolina, South pursuant to the Act (those species that invertebrate animal taxa, native to the Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, and are the subject of a proposed or final the Virgin Islands.
    [Show full text]