DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Review Draft Pahranagat Roundtail Chub

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Technical Review Draft Pahranagat Roundtail Chub TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT PAHRANAGAT ROUNDTAIL CHUB RECOVERY PLAN U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 NE Multnomah Street Portland, Oregon 97232 September, 1982 DISCLAIMER FOR TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT This is a technical review draft of the Pahranagat Roundtail chub recovery plan. It is not an official government document. It has not been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or any other agency. It does not necessarily represent official positions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or any other agencies (and it does not necessarily represent the views of all indi- viduals involved in the plan formulation). It has been prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to delineate reasonable actions believed required to place the Pahranagat roundtail chub species in the best possible position. This proposal is subject to modification following review and receipt of comments by cooperating agencies and other informed and interested parties. Goals a-nd objectives will be attained and funds expended contingent upon appro- priations priorities and other budgetary constraints. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. introduction A. Historic Range B. Present Range C. Reasons for Decline D. Life History E. Habitat Requirements F. Conservation Efforts II. Recovery A. Objective B. Step-down Outline C. Narrative D. References III. Implementation Schedule IV. Appendix Part 1 Introduction The Pahranagat roundtail chub, Gila robusta jordani, was listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on October 13, 1970 (CFR 35:16047). The Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners also lists this species as endangered (NRS 503:065). This member of the minnow family is endemic to waters of the Pahranagat Valley, Lincoln County, Nevada; its closest relatives are associated with the Colorado River drainage (Miller 1946, Hubbs and Miller 1948, La Rivers 1962). The entrance of its progenitor into the Pahranagat Valley is believed to have occurred during the Pleistocene Epoch when the pluvial White River was tributary to the Colorado River (Hubbs and Miller 1948, Smith 1978). The exact distribution and population size of this roundtail chub prior to its decline is uncertain; however, it has been collected in Crystal, Hiko, and the Pahranagat River downstream from Ash Springs. It was first collected in 1948 (La Rivers 1962) then described in 1950 from three individuals collected in Hiko Spring and three individuals collected in Crystal Springs (Tanner 1950). The few roundtail chubs caught during intensive sampling for this description suggests the fish was rare during 1950. This paucity prompted Tanner (1950) to voice concern for the continued existence of the species. The species has become even less common today; it has been eliminated in Crystal and Hiko Springs and is now restricted to the Pahranagat River on the Burns Ranch where less than 40 adults are believed to constitute the single remaining population (Hardy 1981). The decline of the Pahranagat roundtail chub is attributed to alteration of its habitat for agricultural irrigation and cattle grazing and to the introduction of a variety of competing and predatory aquatic organisms such as the convict cichlid (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum), carp Cyprinis carpio), mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), shortfin molly a mexicana), the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), and the oriental snail anoides sp.). The Pahranagat roundtail chub is taxonomically aligned with the round- tail chub (Gila robusta) complex associated with the Colorado River drain- age (Miller 1946, Minckley 1973). Tanner (1950) granted the chub specific recognition; later authors have, however, recognzied its similarity with other roundtail chubs and concluded it is a subspecifically distinct form (La Rivers 1962; Hubbs et al. 1974). G. r. jordani is most similar to G. r. robusta of the larger tributaries and mainstem Colorado River; differing from it by typically having more scales in, above, and below the lateral line, being less elongate, and having a greenish color with black blotches (Tanner 1950, La Rivers 1962). The Pahranagat roundtail chub is one of six fishes native to the 'Pahranagat Valley. The other native fishes are: the White River spring- fish (Crenichthys baileyi baileyi), Hiko White River springfish (Crenichthys baileyi grandis), Pahranagat spinedace (Lepidomeda altivellis), White River speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus velifer), and the White River desert sucker (Catostomus intermedius). Of these species, the two springfish, the spine- dace, and the roundtail chub are recognized as being endemic to the Pahranagat Valley; the speckled dace and the desert sucker, while being local forms, are found in other portions of the pluvial White River system. All of these species have undergone dramatic declines during recent times. The most catastrophic declines affected the extinction of Pahranagat spinedace in the 1950's (La Rivers 1962, Minckley and Deacgn 1968) and the desert sucker in the 1960's (J. E. Deacon field notes 1967). The springfishes were the most abundant of fishes inhabiting the source pools of Hiko, Crystal, and Ash Springs when initial fishery surveys were conducted in the Pahranagat Valley during 1891 (Gilbert 1893). These two fishes have been displaced in portions of their historic habitat and now exist in extremely low numbers amidst large populations of competing and predatory species. Whereas the Hiko White River springfish once occupied Hiko, and Crystal Springs, it is now restricted to a small popualtion in Crystal Spring. A depressed population of the White River springfish persists in its single locality, Ash Springs. Both of these fish are presently being considered for listing as endangered by the USFWS. The local form of speckled dace is currently the only native fish that is found with any regularity in the Pahranagat Valley. Springs in the Pahranagat Valley also provide habitat for a rare mollusk, the White River tryonia snail (Tryonia clathrata). This species is found only in portions of the pluvial White River system and was proposed for list- ing as threatened (CFR 41, 6-28-76) but dropped because of 1978 amendments to the Endangered Species Act. The close ecological relationship of the aquatic species native to the Pahranagat Valley mandates that all management practices undertaken for a particular organism shall proceed only with consideration for the conserva- tion of all members of the aquatic system. Although this recovery plan outlines those actions necessary to recover the Pahranagat roundtail chub, it is mandatory that such actions consider all native members of the springs in the Pahranagat Valley. Because the Pahranagat roundtail chub is in extreme danger of extinction, it must be given high priority in recovery programs to insure its continued existence and restore it to non-endangered status. Historic Range The Pahranagat roundtail chub is endemic to the thermal waters in the Pahranagat Valley. Precise distribution within these waters is uncertain because the species was not collected before aquatic habitats in the area had been dramatically altered, beginning in the later portion of the 1800's, and exotic fishes introduced. However, collections made in the late 1940's, and its present distribution show that the species existed in portions of Crystal, Hiko, Ash Springs, and the Pahranagat River. The springs provide the primary source of surface water in the Pahranagat Valley. Early (Gilbert 1893) and recent (Hardy 1981: Kamin 1981 field notes), investiga- tions and consideration of those habitats preferred by its closest relatives, indicate it preferentially inhabitated the spring outflow channels rather than the spring source areas. The amount of historically occupied habitat is estimated to have included three springs, a total of approximately 30 miles of stream, and a small lake at the south end of the valley. Present Range The Pahranagat roundtail chub is now limited to the Pahranagat River on the Burns Ranch. It hasn't been seen in either Crystal or Hiko Springs since the early 1950's (Deacon, field notes; La Rivers, 1962). Distribution within the Pahranagat River is restricted from that found historically, because much of the outflow channel has been lined with concrete. Approximately 2,300 meters of unlined channel of the Pahranagat River are presently occupied by a total of 37 to 45 adult chubs (Hardy 1981). This habitat is on the Burns Ranch. Distribution within the Pahranagat River is local and changes seasonally. From late April through January the adult population does not move from a single pool that is approximately 10 meters in length. Reasons for Decline Reasons for the decline of the Pahranagat roundtail chub are poorly understood; however, there is strong indication that influences that have been quantified as causing the decline of other native fishes in the southwest are similar to those associated with affecting G. r. jordani. The two factors believed to have had the greatest detrimental influence on this roundtail chub are the dramatic physical alteration of habitat resulting from modification to facilitate irrigation, and the introduction of competing and predatory species. These two factors have eliminated or seriously degraded the status of numerous native fishes in the southwest (Deacon et al. 1979; Hubbs, et al. 1974; Deacon and Minckley 1968). Habitat alteration typically involves construction activities that dry habitats and/or change them so they are no longer inhabit- able by native species. This has recently happened with the White River spine- dace (Lepidomeda
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "Ground Water in White River Valley, White Pine, Nye, and Lincoln
    STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN No. 8 GROUND WATER IN WHITE RIVER VALLEY, WHITE PINE, NYE, AND LINCOLN COUNTIES, NEVADA By G. B. MAXEY and T. E. EAKIN Prepared in cooperation with the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geological Survey 1 949 CARSON CITY. NEVADA STATE PRINTING OFFICE JACK MCCARTHY. SUPERINTENDENT 1930 CONTENTS PAGE Foreword ............................................... 5 Abstract ............................................... 7 Introduction .............................................. 9 Location and general features .............................. 12 Drainage ................................................ 14 Climate ................................................ 18 Precipitation ................................................ 18 Temperature ................................................ 19 Vegetation ............................................... 25 Geology and water-bearing characteristics of the rocks . 26 General relations . .............. 26 Older sedimentary and igneous rocks . ............................................. 26 MCCARTHY. SUPERINTENDENT Tertiary and Quaternary alluvial and lacustrine deposits ..... 29 Ground water ................................................ 33 Occurrence ............................................... 33 Springs ............................................... 35 Source and amount of recharge . ............. 40 Movement ............................................... 41 Discharge ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated List of the Fishes of Nevada
    14 June 1984 PROC. BIOL. SOC. WASH. 97(1), 1984, pp. 103-118 ANNOTATED LIST OF THE FISHES OF NEVADA James E. Deacon and Jack E. Williams Abstract.-160 native and introduced fishes referable to 108 species, 56 genera, and 19 families are recorded for Nevada. The increasing proportion of introduced fishes continues to burden the native ichthyofauna. The first list of all fishes known from Nevada by La Rivers and Trelease (1952) eventually culminated in La Rivers' Fishes and Fisheries of Nevada, published in 1962. Over the past twenty years, a number of changes have occurred in the fish fauna of the state. These include additions through "official" actions as well as by "unofficial" means. Some taxa have become extinct and many have become much less abundant (Deacon 1979, Deacon et al. 1979). Numerous changes have also occurred in our understanding of probable taxonomic relationships of the fishes. The increased number of subspecies recognized since the 1962 list reflects a better understanding of distribution and geographic variation of the ichthyo- fauna. Our purpose is to produce a checklist that includes all taxa known from the state within historical times. The list includes all fishes native to Nevada and those that have been introduced into the state, whether or not they have become established. Our checklist reflects current understanding of the fauna and high- lights those areas where additional work is needed. Including subspecies, we record 160 fishes in the present fauna of Nevada referable to 108 species, 56 genera, and 19 families. We recognize 67 subspecies referable to 15 species.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Nevada Reno Analysis of the White River Groundwater Flow System Using a Deuterium-Calibrated Discrete-State Compar
    MINIS lilR A ftt University of Nevada Reno Analysis of the White River Groundwater Flow System Using a Deuterium-Calibrated Discrete-State Compartment Model A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Hydrology and Hydrogeology Mines Library University of Nevada - Reno Reno, Nevada 89557-0044 by Stephen T. Kirk i' * July 1987 II WINtS UMARY " i i t S ' S The thesis of Stephen Thomas Kirk is approved: \AAjiC&OjJ C. Cr Thesis Advisor " University of Nevada Reno July 1987 ACNOWLED GEMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges the advice and guidance of Dr. Michael Cam- pana throughout this project. Additional advice was provided by Dr. W. Miller and Dr. D. Tibbitts. Special thanks go to Marcia Olson Kirk for her advice, en­ couragement, and patience. Financial support for this project was provided by the State of Nevada’s Carbonate Aquifers Studies Program and Desert Research Institute, Water Resources Center. IV ABSTRACT The White River Flow System (WRFS), a regional carbonate flow system in eastern Nevada, can be delineated with a discrete-state compartment model using environmental isotope (deuterium) data. Calibrated model results yield the following differences with an earlier conceptual model of WRFS: 1) minimum underflow out of the system along the Pahranagat Shear Zone is 4,000 acre feet per year; 2) minimum recharge from the Sheep Range to Coyote Springs Valley is 5,000 acre feet per year; and 3) minimum underflow from Meadow Valley Wash to Upper Moapa Valley is 4,500 acre feet per year. Calibration of the model using a paleoclimatically induced shift in re­ charge amounts (+35%) and deuterium concentrations (-8<5D) during the Pleistocene support these results.
    [Show full text]
  • Monsoon Passage Fact Sheet
    Monsoon Passage Fact Sheet Safe haven stepping stones from the Mojave Desert to the Northern Great Basin East Pass a few years after a fire in the Clover Mountains of the southern Great Basin looking down into the Mojave’s Tule Desert © Louis Provencher/TNC Monsoon Passage The connected mountain ranges and wet valley bottoms of this natural highway provide desert tortoises, bighorn sheep, Cooper’s hawk, mule deer and other species escape routes from growing climate impacts, allowing them to find new homes where they can thrive. The region's name comes from being at the western edge of the summer monsoons that provide needed eastern-facing moisture to buffer rising temperatures and a pathway for species moving north. Imagine populations of raptors, small carnivores, small mammals, mule deer, bighorn sheep, passerine birds, insects, and plant species pushed northward or up and around mountains by warming temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns. Non-migratory species flow from the hot Mojave Desert ecoregion to the cooler Columbia Plateau ecoregion passing through the entirety of the Great Basin ecoregion is not easily guaranteed. There are less than five corridors of passably connected mountains ranges and wet valley bottoms that fully allow species movement within a viable thermal environment that may be viewed as steppingstones of safe havens. The Nevada Chapter is proposing one such thermal corridor in eastern Nevada titled Monsoon Passage. The corridor follows the Nevada-Utah border and is mostly in Nevada. For those familiar
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Survey of the Aquatic and Semiaquatic Hemiptera
    Polhemus and Polhemus: Aquatic Hemiptera of Desert Hot Springs 1 A preliminary survey of the aquatic and semiaquatic Hemiptera occurring in the springs of the Railroad Valley, White River, and Amargosa River drainage systems, Nevada and California, with special reference to thermal relicts Dan A. Polhemus Dept. of Entomology, Bishop Museum, P. 0. Box 19000-A, Honolulu, HI 96817 ard John T. Polhemus Univ. of Colorado Museum, 3115 S. York St., Englewood, CO 80110 INTRODUCTION One of the most remarkable concentrations of disjunct and endemic aquatic Hemiptera in North America is found in the thermal refugia of the Railroad Valley, White River, and Amargosa River drainages of Nevada and California. These drainages represent former tributaries to the Colorado system that were continuous systems in the Pliocene and Pleistocene, but have been subsequently dessicated and reduced to discontinous spring fed aquatic refugia. The thermal springs of these three systems contain a large number of endemic aquatic Hemiptera species, as well as many highly disjunct populations of other taxa. The current report details the distributions of these species, addresses certain taxonomic problems relating to them, and considers the biogeographic significance of this thermally relictual fauna. LOCALITIES SAMPLED The information upon which this report is based has been collected by the authors over a period of thirty years, and in many cases the passage of several decades has seen a serious degredation of the aquatic habita~s listed below. For this reason an attempt has been made in the last three years to revisit many of the most critical habitats and &scertain the status of their aquatic Hemiptera faunas.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Environmental Contaminants in Muddy River Fishes, Clark County, Nevada
    Assessment of Environmental Contaminants in Muddy River Fishes, Clark County, Nevada. Final Report Study ill: IF38 Prepared by: Erik L. Orsak U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Environmental Contaminants Program Southern Nevada Field Office 4701 North Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89130 July 2004 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission Statement "Our mission is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people." Suggested citation: Orsak E.L. 2004. Assessment of Environmental Contaminants in Muddy River Fishes, Clark County, Nevada. USFWS. Southern Nevada Field Office. Report Number 200210008 (FFS #: 14320A-1130­ 1F38). Las Vegas, Nevada. On the Cover (clockwise from left): Watm Springs area of Moapa Valley looking east towards Mormon Peak, Playboy Spring (a.k.a. Peterson East), Moapa speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus moapae), Virgin River chub (Gila seminuda). 2 ABSTRACT In 2002 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Southern Nevada Field Office initiated a study to identify environmental contaminant impacts to native fish ofthe Muddy River, Clark County, Nevada. Potential sources ofpollution include a coal-fired power plant, dairy cattle operation, agriculture, and irrigation return flows. The Muddy River Ecosystem provides habitat for at least eight rare aquatic species including the endangered Moapa dace (Moapa coriacea). Between February 2002 and April 2003, over five hundred fish were surveyed for external health. Overall fish condition was good and incidence of external lesions, parasites, and physical anomalies were low in representative fish species. A total of sixty non­ native fish were collected at six stations throughout the Muddy River and submitted for inorganic (trace metal) analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Springs Conservation Plan Acknowledgements
    Nevada SpriNgS Conservation Plan ackNowledgemeNtS We would like to thank the Nevada Division of State Lands Conservation and Resource Protection Grant Program, known as ‘Question 1 Program’ and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for funding the development of this Springs Conservation Plan. Without the support of Nevada voters who passed Question 1 in 2002 to ‘protect, preserve, and obtain the benefits of the property and natural resources of this state’, this effort to support conservation of Nevada’s aquatic biodiversity would not have been possible. The Springs Conservation Plan working group dedicated time and travel to multiple workshops to ensure the content of this plan represented a multi-agency effort. Special thanks to Don Sada, Jennifer Newmark, Victor Cobos, and Bob Conrad for their extra time and commitment that facilitated the integration of the data collection and planning components of this project. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the individuals who reviewed this Plan and provided valuable comments. Recommended Citation: Abele, S.L. (ed.) 2011. Nevada Springs Conservation Plan. Springs Conservation Plan Working Group. The Nature Conservancy, Reno, NV. Cover photo: Charnock Ranch, Nevada. © Janel Johnson about this rePort introduction ................................3 How do we determine if a Spring is Healthy? ..................9 what are the concerns for the Future? ......................... 15 taking action to conserve Nevada’s Springs ................... 23 Significant Spring landscapes ..............................27 Next Steps for Springs conservation in Nevada.........36 references ............................... 39 appendix 1 ............................... 41 Ash Springs, Pahranagat Valley, NV. © Christiana Manville appendix 2 ................................47 he purpose of this Plan is to summarize the current condition, identify future threats, and highlight necessary actions to con- serve some of nevada’s most significant aquatic environments.
    [Show full text]
  • Rock Aquifer System, White Pine County, Nevada, and Adjacent Areas in Nevada and Utah
    Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management Water-Level Surface Maps of the Carbonate-Rock and Basin-Fill Aquifers in the Basin and Range Carbonate- Rock Aquifer System, White Pine County, Nevada, and Adjacent Areas in Nevada and Utah Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5089 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Water-Level Surface Maps of the Carbonate- Rock and Basin-Fill Aquifers in the Basin and Range Carbonate-Rock Aquifer System, White Pine County, Nevada, and Adjacent Areas in Nevada and Utah By J.W. Wilson Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5089 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Wilson, J.W., 2007, Water-level surface maps of the carbonate-rock and basin-fill aquifers in the Basin and Range carbonate-rock aquifer system, White Pine County, Nevada, and adjacent areas in Nevada and Utah: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Proposed Construction of an Improved Water Delivery System Pahranagat National Wildli
    Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Proposed Construction of an Improved Water Delivery System Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuge Prepared for: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuge Alamo, Nevada Prepared by: Harris Environmental Group April 2019 Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuge Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Description of the Proposed Action .......................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Need for Action .................................................................................................................... 1 Decision to be Made ................................................................................................................................. 3 II. ALTERNATIVES ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Alternative A – No Action Alternative ....................................................................................................... 4 Alternative B – Proposed Action ............................................................................................................... 4 III.
    [Show full text]
  • White River Valley (Updated 2014)
    Site Description White River Valley (updated 2014) Geologic setting: The White River Valley is located approximately 60 km south of Ely, Nevada between the Grant Range and Schell Creek Range. The geology is classic Basin and Range structure due to tectonic extensional processes. Several geothermal features exist throughout the White River Valley but have had limited testing and information available (Garside and Schilling, 1979). Geothermal features: Flag Springs: Flag Spring 3 (Sec. 33, T7N, R62E) was reported 22°C when tested in 1984 by the USGS (Great Basin Groundwater Geochemistry Database). Hot Creek Ranch Springs: Hot Creek Ranch Springs (Sec. 18, T6N, R61E) have been measured from 26.7°C to 33.3°C (Great Basin Groundwater Geochemical Database). Moon River Springs: The most recent temperature taken at Moon River Springs (Sec. 25, T6N, R60E) was 32°C by the USGS water service in 1984 (Great Basin Groundwater Geochemical Database). Moorman Spring: Moorman Spring (C N½SE¼ Sec. 32, T9N, R61E) is near of a number of Late Quaternary faults along the axis of White River Valley (Sawyer, 1998). The highest temperature reported is 37.8ºC (Great Basin Groundwater Geochemical Database). Riordan Ranch Springs: Riordan Ranch Springs, 5 km northeast of Moorman Spring, are at most 21.1ºC (Garside and Schilling, 1979). These springs are associated with a Late Quaternary fault at the foot of the Egan Range. Sunnyside Springs (T6N R61E S18): Warm spring with temperatures between 20 and 37ºC (Garside and Schilling, 1979). The site was sampled 7/8/2013 and its temperature on that date was 30ºC.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Aquatic and Riparian Species of Pahranagat Valley Region 1 Portland, Oregon RECOVERY PLAN
    Recovery Plan for the Aquatic and Riparian Species of Pahranagat Valley Region 1 Portland, Oregon RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE AQUATIC AND RIPARIAN SPECIES OF PAHRANAGAT VALLEY U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 1 Portland, Oregon R~lnal Fish and Wildlife Service Approved: Dir~~{J.S. Date: This plan covers the following federally listed species in Pahranagat Valley: Pahranagat roundtail chub, White River springfish and Hiko White River springfish. DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. This document was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Reno Fish and Wildlife Office, Reno, Nevada. 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, official positions, nor approval ofany 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 ofrecovery tasks. Literature Citation should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Recovery Plan for the Aquatic and Riparian Species ofPahranagat Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln County Rock Art Guide
    Lincoln County Rock Art Guide Table of Contents What is rock art? . .2 How to find the rock art sites . .6 Traveling to the rock art sites . .6 Vehicle access rating system . .6 Getting there . .8 Rock art etiquette . .12 Safety tips . .15 Terminology . .16 Ash Springs Rock Art Site . .18 Crystal Wash Rock Art Site - Entrance . .24 Crystal Wash Rock Art Site - Main Site . .28 Mount Irish Rock Art and Archeological District . .34 Rainbow Canyon Archeological Site . .41 Shooting Gallery Game Drive District . .45 White River Narrows Archaeological District . .48 Pahranagats and Presidents . .50 The Antiquities Act . .54 Designating national monuments . .54 The Antiquities Act as an enforcement tool . .55 1 What is rock Long ago, the ancient art? inhabitants of the Great Basin created a system of communication that is now referred to as “rock art.” It once played an essential role in the transmission, reception and storage of information. Although it’s difficult to understand the meaning of most rock art today, it was deeply significant to those who created it. Some rock art is believed to have been ceremonial and contained sacred knowledge. 2 3 Rock Art Guide Lincoln County Lincoln County Rock Art Guide Other rock art might have marked game trails, designated cultural territories or functioned as astronomical markers pertaining to such phenomena as the solstices and equinoxes. Rock art is etched onto rock faces by pecking, abrading, scratching or a combination of these techniques. It’s composed of separate motifs or designs called elements. These elements are often arranged in groups on the sides of rock faces and are referred to as panels.
    [Show full text]