Part 17—Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2019–0009; FF09E21000 FXES11190900000 167]
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 10/10/2019 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2019-21478, and on govinfo.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2019–0009; FF09E21000 FXES11190900000 167] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Domestic and Foreign Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notification of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of review. SUMMARY: In this candidate notice of review (CNOR), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), present an updated list of plant and animal species that we regard as candidates for or have proposed for addition to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Identification of candidate species can assist environmental planning efforts by providing advance notice of potential listings, and by allowing landowners and resource managers to alleviate threats and thereby possibly remove the need to list species as endangered or threatened. Even if we subsequently list a candidate species, the early notice provided here could result in more options for species management and recovery by prompting earlier candidate conservation measures to alleviate threats to the species. This document also includes our findings on resubmitted petitions and describes our 1 progress in revising the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) during the period October 1, 2016, through September 30, 2018. -
Status Review and Surveys for Frecklebelly Madtom, Noturus Munitus
Noturus munitus, Buttahatchee R., Lowndes Co., AL Final Report: Status review and surveys for Frecklebelly Madtom, Noturus munitus. David A. Neely, Ph. D. Tennessee Aquarium Conservation Institute 175 Baylor School Rd Chattanooga, TN 37405 Background: The frecklebelly madtom, Noturus munitus, was described by Suttkus & Taylor (1965) based largely on specimens from the Pearl River in Louisiana and Mississippi. At that time, the only other known populations occupied the Cahaba and Upper Tombigbee rivers in Alabama and Mississippi. Populations were subsequently discovered in the Alabama, Etowah, and Conasauga rivers (Bryant et. al., 1979). The disjunct distribution displayed by the species prompted an examination of morphological and genetic differentiation between populations of frecklebelly madtom. Between 1997-2001 I gathered morphological, meristic, and mtDNA sequence data on frecklebelly madtoms from across their range. Preliminary morphological data suggested that while there was considerable morphological variation across the range, the populations in the Coosa River drainage above the Fall Line were the most distinctive population and were diagnosable as a distinct form. I presented a talk on this at the Association of Southeastern Biologists meeting in 1998, and despite the lack of a formal description, the published abstract referring to a "Coosa Madtom" made it into the public 1 eye (Neely et al 1998, Boschung and Mayden 2004). This has resulted in substantial confusion over conservation priorities and the status of this form. The subsequent (and also unpublished) mitochondrial DNA data set, however, suggested that populations were moderately differentiated, shared no haplotypes and were related to one another in the following pattern: Pearl[Tombigbee[Cahaba+Coosa]]. -
Pu'u Wa'awa'a Biological Assessment
PU‘U WA‘AWA‘A BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT PU‘U WA‘AWA‘A, NORTH KONA, HAWAII Prepared by: Jon G. Giffin Forestry & Wildlife Manager August 2003 STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................................. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. ii GENERAL SETTING...................................................................................................................1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 Land Use Practices...............................................................................................................1 Geology..................................................................................................................................3 Lava Flows............................................................................................................................5 Lava Tubes ...........................................................................................................................5 Cinder Cones ........................................................................................................................7 Soils .......................................................................................................................................9 -
2020 Mississippi Bird EA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Managing Damage and Threats of Damage Caused by Birds in the State of Mississippi Prepared by United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Wildlife Services In Cooperation with: The Tennessee Valley Authority January 2020 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wildlife is an important public resource that can provide economic, recreational, emotional, and esthetic benefits to many people. However, wildlife can cause damage to agricultural resources, natural resources, property, and threaten human safety. When people experience damage caused by wildlife or when wildlife threatens to cause damage, people may seek assistance from other entities. The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (WS) program is the lead federal agency responsible for managing conflicts between people and wildlife. Therefore, people experiencing damage or threats of damage associated with wildlife could seek assistance from WS. In Mississippi, WS has and continues to receive requests for assistance to reduce and prevent damage associated with several bird species. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to incorporate environmental planning into federal agency actions and decision-making processes. Therefore, if WS provided assistance by conducting activities to manage damage caused by bird species, those activities would be a federal action requiring compliance with the NEPA. The NEPA requires federal agencies to have available -
Fish Relationships with Large Wood in Small Streams
Amencan F~sheriesSociety Symposium 37:179-193, 2003 Fish Relationships with Large Wood in Small Streams USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Department ofFisheries and Wildlife Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24060, USA USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station 1000 Front Street, Oxford, Massachusetts 38655, USA Abstracf.-Many ecological processes are associated with large wood in streams, such as forming habitat critical for fish and a host of other organisms. Wood loading in streams varies with age and species of riparian vegetation, stream size, time since last disturbance, and history of land use. Changes in the landscape resulting from homesteading, agriculture, and logging have altered forest environments, which, in turn, changed the physical and biological characteristics of many streams worldwide. Wood is also important in creating refugia for fish and other aquatic species. Removing wood from streams typically results in loss of pool habitat and overall complexity as well as fewer and smaller individuals of both coldwater and warmwater fish species. The life histories of more than 85 species of fish have some association with large wood for cover, spawning (egg attachment, nest materials), and feeding. Many other aquatic organisms, such as crayfish, certain species of freshwater mus- sels, and turtles, also depend on large wood during at least part of their life cycles. Introduction Because decay rate and probability of displace- ment are a function of size, large pieces have a Large wood can profoundly influence the struc- greater influence on habitat and physical processes ture and function of aquatic habitats from head- than small pieces. In general, rootwads, branches, waters to estuaries. -
Norsk Lovtidend
Nr. 7 Side 1067–1285 NORSK LOVTIDEND Avd. I Lover og sentrale forskrifter mv. Nr. 7 Utgitt 30. juli 2015 Innhold Side Lover og ikrafttredelser. Delegering av myndighet 2015 Juni 19. Ikrafts. av lov 19. juni 2015 nr. 60 om endringer i helsepersonelloven og helsetilsynsloven (spesialistutdanningen m.m.) (Nr. 674) ................................................................1079................................ Juni 19. Ikrafts. av lov 19. juni 2015 nr. 77 om endringar i lov om Enhetsregisteret m.m. (registrering av sameigarar m.m.) (Nr. 675) ................................................................................................1079 ..................... Juni 19. Deleg. av Kongens myndighet til Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet for fastsettelse av forskrift for å gi helselover og -forskrifter hel eller delvis anvendelse på Svalbard og Jan Mayen (Nr. 676) ................................................................................................................................1080............................... Juni 19. Ikrafts. av lov 19. juni 2015 nr. 59 om endringer i helsepersonelloven mv. (vilkår for autorisasjon) (Nr. 678) ................................................................................................................................1084 ..................... Juni 19. Ikrafts. av lov 13. mars 2015 nr. 12 om endringer i stiftelsesloven (stiftelsesklagenemnd) (Nr. 679) ................................................................................................................................................................1084 -
BEFORE the SECRETARY of the INTERIOR Petition to List the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus Hudsonius Preblei) As a Distinc
BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR Petition to List the Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) as a Distinct Population Segment under the Endangered Species Act November 9, 2017 Petitioners: Center for Biological Diversity Rocky Mountain Wild Acknowledgment: Conservation Intern Shane O’Neal substantially contributed to drafting of this petition. November 9, 2017 Mr. Ryan Zinke CC: Ms. Noreen Walsh Secretary of the Interior Mountain-Prairie Regional Director Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 18th and C Street, N.W. 134 Union Boulevard, Suite 650 Washington, D.C. 20240 Lakewood, CO 80228 [email protected] Dear Mr. Zinke, Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §1533(b), Section 553(3) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(e), and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity and Rocky Mountain Wild hereby formally petitions the Secretary of the Interior, through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”, “the Service”) to list the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) as a distinct population segment. Although the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse is already currently listed as a subspecies, this petition is necessary because of a petition seeking to de-list the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (“jumping mouse”, “Preble’s”), filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of their clients (PLF 2017), arguing that the jumping mouse no longer qualifies as a subspecies. Should FWS find this petition warrants further consideration (e.g. a positive 90-day finding), we are submitting this petition to ensure that the agency simultaneously considers listing the Preble’s as a distinct population segment of the meadow jumping mouse. -
Endangered Species
FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S. -
Cocoa Beach Maritime Hammock Preserve Management Plan
MANAGEMENT PLAN Cocoa Beach’s Maritime Hammock Preserve City of Cocoa Beach, Florida Florida Communities Trust Project No. 03 – 035 –FF3 Adopted March 18, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I. Introduction ……………………………………………………………. 1 II. Purpose …………………………………………………………….……. 2 a. Future Uses ………….………………………………….…….…… 2 b. Management Objectives ………………………………………….... 2 c. Major Comprehensive Plan Directives ………………………..….... 2 III. Site Development and Improvement ………………………………… 3 a. Existing Physical Improvements ……….…………………………. 3 b. Proposed Physical Improvements…………………………………… 3 c. Wetland Buffer ………...………….………………………………… 4 d. Acknowledgment Sign …………………………………..………… 4 e. Parking ………………………….………………………………… 5 f. Stormwater Facilities …………….………………………………… 5 g. Hazard Mitigation ………………………………………………… 5 h. Permits ………………………….………………………………… 5 i. Easements, Concessions, and Leases …………………………..… 5 IV. Natural Resources ……………………………………………..……… 6 a. Natural Communities ………………………..……………………. 6 b. Listed Animal Species ………………………….…………….……. 7 c. Listed Plant Species …………………………..…………………... 8 d. Inventory of the Natural Communities ………………..………….... 10 e. Water Quality …………..………………………….…..…………... 10 f. Unique Geological Features ………………………………………. 10 g. Trail Network ………………………………….…..………..……... 10 h. Greenways ………………………………….…..……………..……. 11 i Adopted March 18, 2004 V. Resources Enhancement …………………………..…………………… 11 a. Upland Restoration ………………………..………………………. 11 b. Wetland Restoration ………………………….…………….………. 13 c. Invasive Exotic Plants …………………………..…………………... 13 d. Feral -
List 01 Hawaiian Names 01 Plants
V\.{). 3 v BOTANICAL BULLETIN NO.2 JUNE. 1913 TERRITORY OF HAWAII BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY List 01 Hawaiian Names 01 Plants BY JOSEPH F. ROCK Consulting Botanist, Board of Agriculture and Forestry HONOLULU: HAWAIIAN GAZETTE CO., LTD. 1913 ALPHABETICAL LIST OF HAWAIIAN NAMES OF PLANTS. The following list of Hawaiian plant-names has been compiled from various sources. Hillebrand in his valuable Flora of the Hawaiian Islands has given many Hawaiian names, especially of the more common species; these are incorporated in this list with a few corrections. Nearly all Hawaiian plant-names found in this list and not in Hillebrand's Flora were secured from Mr. Francis Gay of the Island of Kauai, an old resident in this Terri tory and well acquainted with its plants from a layman's stand point. It was the writer's privilege to camp with Mr. Gay in the mountains of Kauai collecting botanical material; for almost every species he could give the native name, which he had se cured in the early days from old and reliable natives. Mr. Gay had made spatter prints of many of the native plants in a large record book with their names and uses, as well as their symbolic meaning when occurring in mele (songs) or olioli (chants), at tached to them. For all this information the writer is indebted mainly to Mr. Francis Gay and also to Mr. Augustus F. Knudsen of the same Island. The writer also secured Hawaiian names from old na tives and Kahunas (priests) in the various islands of the group. -
Inclusion of All Species in the Genus Poecilotheria in Appendix II
Prop. 11.52 CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA Amendments to Appendices I and II of CITES Eleventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties Nairobi (Kenya), April 10-20, 2000 A. PROPOSAL Inclusion of all species in the genus Poecilotheria in Appendix II. Poecilotheria spp. are arboreal tarantula spiders that occur in the eastern hemisphere. B. PROPONENT Sri Lanka and the United States of America. C. SUPPORTING STATEMENT 1. Taxonomy 1.1 Class: Arachnida 1.2 Order: Araneae 1.3 Family: Theraphosidae 1.4 Genus and species: Poecilotheria Simon, 1885 (synonym: Scurria C.L. Koch 1851) Poecilotheria fasciata (Latreille, 1804), central Sri Lanka Poecilotheria formosa Pocock, 1899, southern India Poecilotheria hillyardi from the region of Trivandrum, southern India (expected publication and validation in 2000 by P. Kirk) Poecilotheria metallica Pocock, 1899, southwestern India Poecilotheria miranda Pocock, 1900, northeastern India Poecilotheria ornata Pocock, 1899, southern Sri Lanka Poecilotheria pederseni from the region of Yala, southeastern Sri Lanka (expected publication and validation in 2000 by P. Kirk) Poecilotheria regalis Pocock, 1899, southwestern India Poecilotheria rufilata Pocock, 1899, southern India Poecilotheria smithi Kirk, 1996, southcentral Sri Lanka Poecilotheria striata Pocock, 1895, southern India Poecilotheria subfusca Pocock, 1895, southcentral Sri Lanka Poecilotheria uniformis Strand, 1913, Sri Lanka 1.5 Scientific synonyms: P. fasciata Mygale fasciata Latreille, 1804 Avicularia fasciata Lamarck,1818 Theraphosa fasciata Gistel, 1848 Scurria fasciata C.L. Koch, 1851 Lasiodora fasciata Simon, 1864 P. formosa none P. hillyard none Prop. 11.52 – p. 1 P. metallica none P. miranda none P. ornata none P. pederseni none P. -
Species Status Assessment Report New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus Hudsonius Luteus)
Species Status Assessment Report New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus) (photo courtesy of J. Frey) Prepared by the Listing Review Team U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico May 27, 2014 New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse SSA May 27, 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This species status assessment reports the results of the comprehensive status review for the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius luteus) (jumping mouse) and provides a thorough account of the species’ overall viability and, conversely, extinction risk. The jumping mouse is a small mammal whose historical distribution likely included riparian areas and wetlands along streams in the Sangre de Cristo and San Juan Mountains from southern Colorado to central New Mexico, including the Jemez and Sacramento Mountains and the Rio Grande Valley from Española to Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge, and into parts of the White Mountains in eastern Arizona. In conducting our status assessment we first considered what the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse needs to ensure viability. We generally define viability as the ability of the species to persist over the long-term and, conversely, to avoid extinction. We next evaluated whether the identified needs of the New Mexico meadow jumping mouse are currently available and the repercussions to the subspecies when provision of those needs are missing or diminished. We then consider the factors that are causing the species to lack what it needs, including historical, current, and future factors. Finally, considering the information reviewed, we evaluate the current status and future viability of the species in terms of resiliency, redundancy, and representation.