DOCSLIB.ORG

Mark Twain National Forest Missouri Programmatic Biological Assessment Forest Plan Revision June 14, 2005

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mark Twain National Forest Missouri Programmatic Biological Assessment Forest Plan Revision June 14, 2005 Biological Assessment Mark Twain National Forest June 2005 Revised Forest Plan Mark Twain National Forest Missouri Programmatic Biological Assessment Forest Plan Revision June 14, 2005 USDA Forest Service Eastern Region Milwaukee, Wisconsin Prepared by: Jody Eberly, Wildlife Biologist Mary Lane, Wildlife Biologist Larry Furniss, Fisheries Biologist Dave Moore, Botanist Lori Wilson, Hydrologist Paul Nelson, Ecologist Margaret Olson, GIS Coordinator Monica McKee, GIS Support Mark Twain National Forest Programmatic Consultation Page 1 of 303 Biological Assessment Mark Twain National Forest June 2005 Revised Forest Plan Biological Assessment for Forest Plan Revision Executive Summary Introduction Purpose and Need Proposed Action Description of Affected Area Species Information Request for Formal Consultation Species Plants Asclepias meadii Mead’s milkweed Helenium virginicum Virginia sneezeweed Trifolium stoloniferum Running buffalo clover Insects Somatochlora hineana Hine’s emerald dragonfly Naiades Antrobia culveri Tumbling Creek cavesnail Lampsilis orbiculata Pink mucket pearlymussel Leptodea leptodon Scaleshell mussel Fish Notropis topeka Topeka shiner Birds Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle Mammals Myotis grisescens Gray bat Myotis sodalis Indiana bat Literature Cited Appendix A – Consultation History Appendix B – Species List Appendix C – Overview of Forest Plan Revision Process and Project Level Decision- making Appendix D – Forest Plan Standards & Guidelines Appendix E –Indiana bat Survey Strategy Appendix F – Photographs Summary of Biological Assessment Programmatic Consultation Mark Twain National Forest, Missouri Forest Plan Revision Page 2 of 303 Biological Assessment Mark Twain National Forest June 2005 Revised Forest Plan Federal agencies are required to comply with provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. This includes the requirement to consult with the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service on projects which may affect species federally listed as threatened or endangered (ESA section 7(a)(2)). Consultation History: In August 1985, formal consultation was completed for the newly developed Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan). Seven species were covered during that consultation. No incidental take statement was issued with the 1985 opinion. The biological opinion stated: “if standards and guidelines as modified were followed, the proposed action is likely to promote the conservation of TE species” and is “not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species listed or result in destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat”. Continuing research and inventory of TE species populations, as well as a refinement of our knowledge of species’ habitat requirements led to the development of a new Biological Assessment and formal consultation on four species in 1998. The Biological Opinion issued in June 1999 stated: “it is the Service’s biological opinion that forest management and other activities authorized, funded, or carried out by the MTNF through implementation of the LRMP, are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of”…the gray bat, bald eagle, Indiana bat, or Mead’s milkweed. “the Service concluded that activities outlined in the LRMP were not likely to adversely affect running buffalo clover or the Tumbling Creek cavesnail and stated that a “no effect” determination was appropriate for Topeka shiner, Curtis’ pearly mussel, pink mucket pearly mussel, and Hall’s bulrush.” and “Because critical habitat has not been designated for this species (gray bat, bald eagle, Mead’s milkweed), none will be adversely affected by the continued implementation of the LRMP.” “Of the six caves in Missouri designated as critical habitat, none are owned by the MTNF and none will be adversely affected by the continued implementation of the LRMP.” Forest Plan Amendment #25, dated March 2000, incorporated the RPM/TC into the Forest Plan. Forest Plan Amendment #26, dated August 2002, added Management Prescription 3.5 as areas of influence (AOI) for Indiana bat habitat. On August 13, 2004, the Forest Supervisor made the decision to amend the Forest Plan to incorporate the Brown’s Hollow Area of Influence for a newly discovered maternity colony on MTNF. Since the issuance of the 1999 programmatic BO, hundreds of individual consultations have occurred for site-specific projects to implement the Plan. In addition, MTNF has monitored the level of incidental take for bald eagle, gray bat and Indiana bat. There has Page 3 of 303 Biological Assessment Mark Twain National Forest June 2005 Revised Forest Plan been no documented take for bald eagle or gray bat from 1999-2004. Incidental take for Indiana bats has been measured in acres of forest cover affected by various management activities (USFWS 1999). Table BA-1: Indiana Bat Take Acres Baseline (1999-2004) Forested Total 6 % Acres Year Maximum % Activity 1999 2000 2001 2002** 2003 2004 TOTAL Annual Maximum Annual MTNF Maximum Acres Acres Timber harvest 20,000 12,011 2,648 5,259 8,845 8,506 9,276 46,545 120,000 39% 4% Prescribed fire 12,000 9,429 5,878 8,656 10,478 6,581 6,195 47,217 72,000 66% 4% Wildlife habitat improvement 2,000 95 1,716 223 112 266 470 2,882 12,000 24% 0.33% Timber stand improvement 4,000 1,107 2,570 2,689 1,896 3,660 3,146 15,068 24,000 63% 1% Soil & water improvement 150 52 2 55 50 74 62 295 900 33% 0.03% Range management 50 38 10 15 0 0 0 63 300 21% 0.01% Mineral exploration & development 50 6 4 7 5 10 12 44 300 15% 0.01% Wildfire fire lines 50 47 10 31 22 35 21 166 300 55% 0.01% Special uses 50 2 2 6 5 43 0 58 300 19% 0.01% Road construction* 25 8 7 19 8 0 0 42 150 28% 0.004% TOTAL 38,375 22,795 12,847 16,960 21,421 19,175 19,182 150,755 230,250 65% 10% *All acres are road reconstruction - No acres of new road construction. **Numbers may not match Annual Report - chart in 2002 Annual Report was copied from 2001 and never updated - numbers in this chart are more accurate…. Jae 1/14/05 The acres in this chart do not match total acres accomplished in a year for some activities because a) activities for which there was a No Effect or Not likely to Adversely Affect determinations by definition do not have incidental take, and therefore do not count toward the incidental take acres tracked here; and b) only acres in forest cover are included in the estimation of incidental take; i.e. activities which take place on acres of open pasture, open glade or other openlands are not included in the incidental take estimate. Consultation Need: The Mark Twain National Forest is in the process of revising the existing Forest Plan. This Biological Assessment analyzes the potential effects of that revision on federally listed species. Critical Habitat: There is no critical habitat designated on Mark Twain National Forest for any of the listed species that occur on or may be affected by Mark Twain National Forest management (Theresa Davidson, USFWS pers. comm.. 12/01/04). Therefore, there would be no destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat due to actions proposed in the Revised Mark Twain National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Page 4 of 303 Biological Assessment Mark Twain National Forest June 2005 Revised Forest Plan Federal Species List: On June 27, 2003 the Mark Twain National Forest submitted a species list to USDI FWS for review and concurrence. ON July 14, 2003, the FWS replied concurring with the submitted species list including 11 federally listed species to consider in evaluation of Forest Plan revision. On November 29, 2004, a second list was submitted via e-mail to USDI FWS for review, including 4 additional species to consider. On December 1, 2004, USDI FWS replied via e-mail that the new list was complete and those 15 species should be considered in the programmatic Biological Assessment. On April 20, 2005 the USDI FWS and USDA Forest Service discussed the proposed list and agreed to drop the candidate species from consideration in this assessment, leaving eleven federally listed species to consider. Limiting Factors for Federal Species: Limiting factors are well-known for some species and are uncertain for other species. However, major factors that are known or suspected include: Table BA-2: Limiting Factors Limiting Factor Species Affected Hine’s emerald dragonfly, Tumbling Creek cavesnail Threats to water quality Pink mucket pearly mussel, Scaleshell mussel, , Topeka shiner, Bald eagle, Gray bat, Indiana bat Conversion of habitat to urban/agricultural/industrial All species uses Human disturbance at caves Tumbling Creek cavesnail, Gray bat, Indiana bat Lack of fire and encroachment Mead’s milkweed, Indiana bat of woody vegetation Pesticide contamination Bald eagle, gray bat, Indiana bat Mead’s milkweed, Virginia sneezeweed, Running buffalo clover, HIne’s emerald dragonfly, Pink Non-native invasive species mucket pearly mussel, Scaleshell mussel, Indiana bat Climate change Tumbling Creek cavesnail; Indiana bat Summary of Existing Conditions on MTNF: Species Occurrences » There are no known sites on MTNF for Virginia sneezeweed, running buffalo clover, Topeka shiner, or pink mucket pearly mussel. » Tumbling Creek cavesnail has one known location in the world, and although not on MTNF lands, about 24% of the cave recharge area is comprised of MTNF lands. » There is one known site for Mead’s milkweed on MTNF. » There is one inactive bald eagle nest known to occur on MTNF lands along the Eleven Point National Scenic River, and an additional 4 active nests adjacent to or very near MTNF lands (St. Francis River, Black River, Eleven Point National Scenic River, Big Piney River). » There are 9 known locations for Hine’s emerald dragonfly, with other sites possible. Page 5 of 303 Biological Assessment Mark Twain National Forest June 2005 Revised Forest Plan » There are 4 known Indiana bat hibernacula, and capture sites for 5 Indiana bats on MTNF.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TAUM SAUK AREA THREATENED by HYDRO PLANT by Susan Flader
    (This article was first published in Heritage, the Newsletter of the Missouri Parks Association, August 2001) TAUM SAUK AREA THREATENED BY HYDRO PLANT by Susan Flader When state park officials selected a cover photo to illustrate their first-ever assessment of "threats to the parks" nearly a decade ago, they chose not a scene of despoliation but a symbolic representation of the best of what they were seeking to protect. It was a vista at the core of the Ozarks, looking from the state's grandest waterfall near its tallest peak across its deepest valley into the heart of Taum Sauk Mountain State Park, Missouri's then-newest public park but also its geologically oldest, wildest, most intact, and most ecologically diverse landscape. Scarcely could one imagine that the very symbol of what they were seeking to protect through their threats study, titled "Challenge of the '90s," would itself become the most seriously threatened landscape in Missouri at the dawn of the new millennium. The photo showed two forest-blanketed, time-gentled igneous knobs in the heart of the St. Francois Mountains, on the left Smoke Hill, recently acquired by the state, and on the right Church Mountain, leased to the Department of Natural Resources for park trail development by Union Electric Company of St. Louis (now AmerenUE). But on June 8, the Ameren Development Company, a subsidiary of Ameren Corporation, filed an application for a preliminary permit with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the Church Mountain Pumped Storage Project. It would consist of a 130-acre reservoir ringed by a 12,350-foot-long, 90-foot-high dam on the top of Church Mountain, a lower reservoir of 400 acres formed by a 1,900-foot-long, 100-foot high dam flooding several miles of Taum Sauk Creek, which has been designated a State Outstanding Resource Water, and associated tunnels, powerhouse, transmission lines, roads, and related facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 66, No. 248/Thursday
    Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 248 / Thursday, December 27, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 66803 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Federal Communications Commission. Service at 1–800–877–8337 for TTY COMMISSION John A. Karousos, assistance. Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules 47 CFR Part 73 Division, Mass Media Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [DA 01–2846; MM Docket No. 00–173; RM– [FR Doc. 01–31830 Filed 12–26–01; 8:45 am] Background 9964, RM–10328] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P The Tumbling Creek cavesnail Radio Broadcasting Services; Burgin (Antrobia culveri) was described as a and Science Hill, KY DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR new species by Hubricht (1971) from specimens taken by David Culver, AGENCY: Federal Communications Fish and Wildlife Service Thomas Aley, and Leslie Hubricht in Commission 1969 and 1970. Antrobia culveri is the ACTION: Final rule. 50 CFR Part 17 type species for the genus Antrobia, also described new to science in 1971 by SUMMARY: At the request of Vernon R. RIN: 1018–AI19 Hubricht. Hershler and Hubricht (1988) Baldwin this document allots Channel Endangered and Threatened Wildlife examined specimens of Antrobia culveri 290A to Burgin, Kentucky. At the and confirmed the taxonomic placement request of Pulaski County Broadcasting, and Plants; Listing the Tumbling Creek Cavesnail as Endangered of this species in the subfamily this document also allots Channel 291A Littoridininae of the Gastropod family to Science Hill, Kentucky. See 65 FR AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Hydrobiidae. They also noted the 59164, published October 4, 2000. The Interior. apparent close relatedness of the genus reference coordinates for the Channel ACTION: Emergency rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Forty Years at Tumbling Creek Cave
    Karst Conservation in the Ozarks: Forty Years at Tumbling Creek Cave William R. Elliott Missouri Department of Conservation Resource Science Division PO Box 180 Jefferson City, MO 65102-0180 Thomas J. Aley Ozark Underground Laboratory 1572 Aley Lane Protem, MO 65733 Abstract In this paper we detail nearly 40 years of scientific work and land manage- ment in and around Tumbling Creek Cave, Missouri. Tumbling Creek Cave is a famous educational and research cave on a rural property called the “Ozark Un- derground Laboratory.” Tumbling Creek Cave has the highest cave biodiversity west of the Mississippi River, with about 112 species, including 12 troglobites and three endangered species: gray bats, Indiana bats and Tumbling Creek cavesnail. The cavesnail began declining in the 1990s, which prompted more intensive work towards land restoration and recovery of cavesnails and gray bats. The gray bat population has increased again, but the cavesnail will require more time and effort to recover. Land and cave remediation work have taught us many lessons that should be useful to others who manage large caves with rich resources. Introduction of the Mississippi River, rivaled only by Tooth Cave and Stovepipe Cave in Austin, Texas. Cur- Tumbling Creek Cave, in Taney County, Mis- rently 112 species are listed in the Missouri Cave souri, has many interesting and valuable resources Life Database from Tumbling Creek Cave, includ- (Figure 1). A 1,032-hectare (2,550-acre) tract in ing 12 species of troglobites (Table 1, Figure 2,4). southern Missouri karst serves as the home of the Tumbling Creek Cave has appeared in a National Ozark Underground Laboratory, established in Geographic special, other TV programs, news and 1966 and operated by Tom and Cathy Aley and scientific articles.
    [Show full text]
  • Missouri Conservationist July 2019
    VOLUME 80, ISSUE 7, JULY 2019 MISSOURI SERVING NATURE & YOU CONSERVATIONIST BeCoMe HuNtEr EdUcAtIoN CeRtIfIeD OnLiNe ToDaY! Missouri adults 16 and older can complete hunter education training all online. _ Flexibility to learn _ Access _ No in-person skills at your own pace 24/7 session required The all-online course includes engaging video and animation on hunter safety, firearm safety, ethics, regulations, and wildlife management. LeArN MoRe aBoUt MDC’s hUnTeR education pRoGrAm at mDc.mO.gOv/huntereducation MISSOURI CONSERVATIONIST JULY 2019 Contents VOLUME 80, ISSUE 7 10 ON THE COVER A bobolink enjoys a caterpillar : NOPPADOL PAOTHONG 500mm lens +2.0 teleconverter f/8, 1/320 sec, ISO 200 GOVERNOR Michael L. Parson THE CONSERVATION COMMISSION CHAIR Marilynn J. Bradford VICE CHAIR David W. Murphy SECRETARY Don C. Bedell 16 MEMBER Wm. L. (Barry) Orscheln DIRECTOR Sara Parker Pauley DEPUTY DIRECTORS Mike Hubbard, Aaron Jeffries, Jennifer Battson Warren MAGAZINE STAFF EDITOR 22 Angie Daly Morfeld ASSOCIATE EDITOR FEATURES Larry Archer STAFF WRITERS Bonnie Chasteen, Heather Feeler, 10 Kristie Hilgedick, Joe Jerek Helping Landowners CREATIVE DIRECTOR Stephanie Thurber Protect Missouri’s Rare ART DIRECTOR Places and Species Cliff White DESIGNERS Partnerships and funding Les Fortenberry, Marci Porter key to meeting unique PHOTOGRAPHERS ecological challenges. Noppadol Paothong, David Stonner by Bill Graham CIRCULATION MANAGER Laura Scheuler 16 mdc.mo.gov/conmag A Force for Nature DEPARTMENTS Tom and Cathy Aley have spent their lives advancing karst 2 Inbox studies and securing the future 3 Up Front With Sara Parker Pauley of Tumbling Creek Cave. Nature Lab by Bonnie Chasteen 4 5 In Brief 22 28 Get Outside Hunting Snipe and Rail 30 Places To Go Download this A waterfowl hunter’s solution to issue to your the late-summer doldrums.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerfield, J., and J. Wen. 2002. A morphometric analysis of Hedera L. (the ivy genus, Araliaceae) and its taxonomic implications. Adansonia 24: 197-212. Adams, P. 1961. Observations on the Sagittaria subulata complex. Rhodora 63: 247-265. Adams, R.M. II, and W.J. Dress. 1982. Nodding Lilium species of eastern North America (Liliaceae). Baileya 21: 165-188. Adams, R.P. 1986. Geographic variation in Juniperus silicicola and J. virginiana of the Southeastern United States: multivariant analyses of morphology and terpenoids. Taxon 35: 31-75. ------. 1995. Revisionary study of Caribbean species of Juniperus (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 78: 134-150. ------, and T. Demeke. 1993. Systematic relationships in Juniperus based on random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Taxon 42: 553-571. Adams, W.P. 1957. A revision of the genus Ascyrum (Hypericaceae). Rhodora 59: 73-95. ------. 1962. Studies in the Guttiferae. I. A synopsis of Hypericum section Myriandra. Contr. Gray Herbarium Harv. 182: 1-51. ------, and N.K.B. Robson. 1961. A re-evaluation of the generic status of Ascyrum and Crookea (Guttiferae). Rhodora 63: 10-16. Adams, W.P. 1973. Clusiaceae of the southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 89: 62-71. Adler, L. 1999. Polygonum perfoliatum (mile-a-minute weed). Chinquapin 7: 4. Aedo, C., J.J. Aldasoro, and C. Navarro. 1998. Taxonomic revision of Geranium sections Batrachioidea and Divaricata (Geraniaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 594-630. Affolter, J.M. 1985. A monograph of the genus Lilaeopsis (Umbelliferae). Systematic Bot. Monographs 6. Ahles, H.E., and A.E.
    [Show full text]
  • R1090) Cullimore Family
    Information Sheet R Cullimore family. 1090 Collection, 1973-1992. Four folders. This collection is available at The State Historical Society of Missouri. If you would like more information, please contact us at [email protected]. These are papers of the Cullimore family of journalists and outdoor writers. The collection consists of correspondence between Donald B. “Rocky” Cullimore and Dan Saults, and a compi- lation of Saults’s articles in Branson and Springfield, Missouri, newspapers. This collection represents the first installment of what will be a much larger assemblage of Cullimore family papers. It centers on conservationist and author Dan Saults, a close friend of the Cullimore family, and supplements materials in the Saults collection (WHMC-Rolla R403). Saults was a leader in promoting conservation efforts in Missouri. A native of Knob Noster, Mis- souri, he bought the Knob Noster Weekly Gem after graduating from the University of Missouri School of Journalism. He operated the paper until World War Two. Saults served as an officer in the 339th Infantry Regiment in North Africa and Italy during the war, after which he spent a year in Texas. In 1947, Saults joined the Missouri Department of Conservation, heading the depart- ment’s information service and editing the Missouri Conservationist. Later he became the deputy director of the department. In 1964, Saults joined the U. S. Department of the Interior and moved to Washington, D.C., where he worked with the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service. He retired in 1973. Saults and his wife, Helen, a former National Park Service employee, moved to a home near Branson, Missouri.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G - Roadless Area/Wilderness Evaluations and Wild and Scenic Rivers
    Appendix G - Roadless Area/Wilderness Evaluations and Wild and Scenic Rivers In accordance with 36 CFR 219.17, a new inventory of roadless areas was completed for this plan revision, and areas of the Ouachita National Forest that met the criteria for inclusion in the roadless area inventory (Chapter 7 of Forest Service Handbook 1909.12) were further evaluated for recommendation as potential wilderness areas. The reinventory of roadless areas included previously recognized roadless areas considered during development of the 1986 Forest Plan and the 1990 Amended Forest Plan. These areas were: Beech Creek, Rich Mountain, Blue Mountain, Brush Heap, Bear Mountain, and Little Blakely. Also, two areas near Broken Bow Lake in Southeastern Oklahoma, Bee Mountain and Ashford Peak, were identified in the January 2002 FEIS for Acquired Lands in Southeastern Oklahoma. Possible additions to existing wilderness areas were also considered. The roadless inventory for the Ouachita National Forest was updated for this iteration of plan revision using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology. Evaluation of the Forest for areas meeting the criterion of one-half mile of improved [National Forest System] road or less per 1,000 acres yielded a significant number of candidate polygons and all polygons over 1,000 acres in size were considered to determine if there were any possibility of expanding the area to a suitable size to warrant consideration as possible wilderness. Polygons meeting the initial criteria were further analyzed using criteria found in FSH 1909.12 (Chapter 7.11) to produce the inventoried roadless areas described in this appendix. The planning team determined that, of the former RARE II areas, the only ones that meet the criteria for inclusion in the roadless area inventory are portions of Blue Mountain and Brush Heap.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • Addendum to the Guide to the Natural Communities of the Delaware Estuary
    ADDENDUM TO THE UIDE TO THE ATURAL OMMUNITIES G N C OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY SEPTEMBER0 2009 Citation: Largay, E. and L. Sneddon. 2009. Addendum to the Guide to the Ecological Systems and Vegetation Communities of the Delaware Estuary. NatureServe. Arlington, Virginia. Partnership for the Delaware Estuary, Report #09-XX. 112 pp. PDE Report No. 09-XX Copyright © 2009 NatureServe COVER PHOTOS Top L: Overwash Dunes, photo from Delaware Natural Heritage Program Top R: Coastal Plain Muck Pondshore, photo by Kathleen Strakosch Walz, New Jersey Natural Heritage Program Bottom L: Dry Oak Hickory Forest, photo by Tony Davis, Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program Bottom R: Inland Dune and Ridge Forest/Woodland, Kathleen Strakosch Walz, New Jersey Natural Heritage Program ADDENDUM TO THE GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF THE DELAWARE ESTUARY Ery Largay Lesley Sneddon September 2009 Acknowledgements: This work was made possible through funding from the Delaware Estuary Program (EPA 320 Funding). Kristin Snow and Mary Russo from NatureServe provided essential data management services to develop this report and report format. Robert Coxe and Bill McAvoy from the Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Kathleen Strakosch Walz from the New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Tony Davis from the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Linda Kelly and Karl Anderson, independent botanists, provided ecological expertise, energy and insight. Mark Anderson and Charles Ferree from The Nature Conservancy developed ecological systems maps to accompany this work. Danielle Kreeger, Laura Whalen, and Martha-Maxwell Doyle from the Partnership for the Delaware Estuary provided support and guidance throughout this project. We thank everyone who helped us with this effort.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae (PDF)
    CURRICULUM VITAE Steven J. Taylor April 2020 Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903 [email protected] Cell: 217-714-2871 EDUCATION: Ph.D. in Zoology May 1996. Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois; Dr. J. E. McPherson, Chair. M.S. in Biology August 1987. Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas; Dr. Merrill H. Sweet, Chair. B.A. with Distinction in Biology 1983. Hendrix College, Conway, Arkansas. PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: • Associate Research Professor, Colorado College (Fall 2017 – April 2020) • Research Associate, Zoology Department, Denver Museum of Nature & Science (January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2020) • Research Affiliate, Illinois Natural History Survey, Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (16 February 2018 – present) • Department of Entomology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2005 – present) • Department of Animal Biology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (March 2016 – July 2017) • Program in Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology (PEEC), School of Integrative Biology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (December 2011 – July 2017) • Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (2005 – July 2017) • Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign (2004 – 2007) PEER REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS: Swanson, D.R., S.W. Heads, S.J. Taylor, and Y. Wang. A new remarkably preserved fossil assassin bug (Insecta: Heteroptera: Reduviidae) from the Eocene Green River Formation of Colorado. Palaeontology or Papers in Palaeontology (Submitted 13 February 2020) Cable, A.B., J.M. O’Keefe, J.L. Deppe, T.C. Hohoff, S.J. Taylor, M.A. Davis. Habitat suitability and connectivity modeling reveal priority areas for Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) conservation in a complex habitat mosaic.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011
    Appendix F - Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest April 2011 Appendix F - Species Diversity Report George Washington National Forest Draft EIS April 2011 Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... i 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 Species Diversity..................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Ecosystem Context for Species ............................................................................................ 5 2.2 Identification and Screening of Species ............................................................................... 6 3.0 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................... 7 3.1 Threatened and Endangered Species List ............................................................................ 7 3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species Descriptions and Plan Components .......................... 8 3.2.1 Indiana Bat ........................................................................................................................ 8 3.2.2 Virginia Big-Eared Bat ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]