DOCSLIB.ORG

Oct 1 4 2011

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oct 1 4 2011 UNITED STATES CEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Silver Spring. MO 2081 0 OCT 1 4 2011 James A. Hanlon Director, EPA Office of Wastewater Management Room 7116A - EPA East 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Mr. Hanlon: Enclosed is the National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) Biological Opinion (Opinion), issued under the authority of section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) as amended, regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) proposal to issue a Pesticides General Permit (PGP). As proposed, the general permit will cover point source pesticide pollutant discharges to waters of the U.S. from pesticide applications in States and 1 Territories where the EPA is the permitting authority: Alaska , American Samoa, District of Columbia, Guam, Idaho, Johnston Atoll, Massachusetts, Midway Island, New Hampshire, New 1 Mexico, Northern Mariana Islands, Oklahoma , Puerto Rico, and Wake Island. The proposed pennit will also authorize pesticide pollutant discharges to waters of the U.S. resulting from pesticide applications on Federal lands in Colorado, Delaware, Vermont and Washington, as well as Indian lands nationwide. This Opinion is based on our review of the EPA's Biological Evaluation/or the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Pesticides General Permit (PGP), reviews of the effectiveness of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program and compliance for existing general permits, pesticide risk assessments and Section 7(a)(2) consultations on pesticide uses, species status revie\vs, listing documents, recovery plans, reports on the status and trends of water quality, past and current research and population dynamics modeling, published and unpublished scientific information and other sources of information as discussed in greater detail in the Approach to the Assessment section of this draft Opinion. This Opinion has been prepared in accordance with section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, regulations that implement that section and applicable agency policy and guidance. This Opinion has concluded that EPA's issuance of the PGP is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of 33 endangered or threatened species under NMFS' jurisdiction and result in the destruction or adverse n10dification of critical habitat that has been designated for 29 of those species. The clause "jeopardize the continued existence of' means "to engage in an action that I Both Alaska and Oklahoma have partial National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs but are not authorized to issue NPDES permits for these applications. The State of Alaska has been authorized to administer the NPDES program but is not obligated to assume permitting responsibilities for discharges from pesticide applications until November, 2011. ~~ I~~~\ \__9 Printed on Recycled Paper * ~ Of<P' reasonably would be expected, directly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood ofboth the survival and recovery of ESA listed species in the wild by reducing the reproduction, numbers or distribution of that species" (50 CFR §402.02). NMFS reached this conclusion because as the general permit is currently structured, the EPA would not be likely to know where or when most of the discharges it intends to authorize would occur; whether these discharges were resulting in exposures to pesticide pollutants in concentrations, durations or frequencies that would cause adverse effects to ESA listed species or designated critical habitat; or whether the permittees were complying with the conditions of the permit designed to protect ESA listed species and designated critical habitat from being exposed. Accordingly, EPA would not be able to take steps to minimize or prevent that exposure. Because we have concluded that the proposed general permit fails to comply with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, we have provided a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative, applicable in Idaho, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, on federal lands in Washington State, and on tribal lands, that will allow EPA to comply with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. As required by Section 7 of the ESA, NMFS has provided an incidental take statement with the Opinion. The Incidental Take Statement (ITS) describes reasonable and prudent measures NMFS considers necessary and appropriate to minimize incidental take associated with this action. The incidental take staten1ent also sets forth nondiscretionary tenns and conditions, including reporting requirements that EPA and any person who performs the action must comply with to carry out the reasonable and prudent measures. Under the terms ofESA Sections 7(b)(4) and 7(0)(2), taking that is incidental to and not intended as part ofthe agency action is not considered to be prohibited under the Act provided that such taking is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this ITS. If you have any questions regarding this draft Opinion, please contact me at (301) 427-8400 . VJ mes H. Lecky Director, Office ofProtected Resources Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Proposed Pesticides General Permit National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources Silver Spring, MD 20910 Consultation History ................................................................................................................................................. 7 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .................................................................................................... 9 Pesticides General Permit ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Obtaining Authorization under the PGP ............................................................................................................ 11 Protective Measures ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Limitations on Coverage .................................................................................................................................... 24 APPROACH TO THE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................... 24 Overview of NMFS’ Assessment Framework ........................................................................................................ 24 Application of this Approach to this Consultation .................................................................................................. 25 Evidence Available for the Consultation ................................................................................................................ 28 ACTION AREA ......................................................................................................................................................... 30 STATUS OF THE SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT AND ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE ............... 31 Species and Critical Habitat Not Likely to be Adversely Affected by the Proposed Action .................................. 34 Marine Mammals ............................................................................................................................................... 34 Sea Turtles ......................................................................................................................................................... 35 Marine Fish ........................................................................................................................................................ 36 Marine Invertebrates .......................................................................................................................................... 37 Johnson’s Seagrass ............................................................................................................................................. 38 Climate Change....................................................................................................................................................... 38 Species and Critical Habitat Likely to be Adversely Affected by the Proposed Action ......................................... 42 Anadromous Fish Species .................................................................................................................................. 43 Salmonid Fish Species ....................................................................................................................................... 50 Marine Mammals ............................................................................................................................................... 97 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE .......................................................................................................................... 103 The Changing Landscapes of the United States ............................................................................................... 104 Status and Trends of Waters of the United States ............................................................................................ 106 Integration and Synthesis of the Environmental Baseline ................................................................................ 110 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hawaiian Birds 1972*
    HAWAIIAN BIRDS 1972* ANDREW J. BERGER More kinds (species and subspecies) of birds have become extinct in Hawaii than on all continents’ of the world combined. These endemic Hawaiian birds have become ex- tinct since 1844l, and most of them have succumbed since the 1890s. Table 1 lists the endemic Hawaiian birds which are presumed to be extinct. Moreover, Hawaiian birds account for nearly one-half of the birds in the U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlifes’ Red Book of rare and endangered species. The follow- ing list contains 16 of the rare and endangered Hawaiian birds: Newells’ Manx Shear- water (Puffinus puffinus newel&), Hawaiian Dark-rumped Petrel (Pterodroma phaeo- pygia sandwichensis), Harcourt s’ Storm Petrel (Oceanodroma Castro cryptoleucura), Nene or Hawaiian Goose (Branta sandvicensis), Koloa or Hawaiian Duck (Anas wyvilliana) , Laysan Duck (Anus laysanensis) , Hawaiian Hawk (Buteo solitarius) , Hawaiian Gallinule (Gallinula chloropus sandvicensis) , Hawaiian Coot (Fulica ameri- cana alai), Hawaiian Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus himantopus knudseni), Hawaiian Crow (Corvus tropicus), Large Kauai Thrush (Phaeornis obscurus myadestina), Molo- kai Thrush (Phaeornis o. rutha), Small Kauai Thrush (Phaeornis palmeri), Nihoa Millerbird (Acrocephalus familiaris kingi), and the Kauai 00 (Moho braccetus). TO this list may be added the non-migratory Hawaiian population of the Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax n. hoactli). But, there are even more endangered Hawaiian birds! Because of their special interest to ornithologists,
    [Show full text]
  • Eulogies for Lost Species
    Daniel Hudon Eulogies for Lost Species THE BUBAL HARTEBEEST Alcelaphus buselaphus buselaphus Though the Bubal Hartebeest carried its huge beam head as stylishly as possible, its melancholy eyes, humped shoul- ders, sloping quarters, and particularly its long, long face gave the antelope a deprecatory appearance, as if it were apologiz- ing for its very existence. Meekness was its virtue. Its small horns strikingly outlined the shape of a lyre though from the side their lazy curves made it seem like a pair of egrets had taken root and spent their time gazing hopelessly skyward. The Bubal Hartebeest moved at a smooth and swinging canter, flicking its rear legs fleetly as it ran with great endur- ance over the lowland mountains of Northern Africa. Chased, it easily fled its pursuers and, perhaps contrite, would often stop and stare its foe full in the face with a most humble look, as if it didn’t mean to escape, as if it couldn’t help itself. Then, with a violent sneeze, once more it would bolt ahead. THE BLACK MAMO Drepanis funerea Deep in the tubes of the lobelia flowers hid the nectar that was perpetually sought by the Black Mamo, a honeycreeper that was black from head to foot except for a small patch of yellow at the base of its absurdly long, curved bill. After for- aging from flower to flower, spending only a few seconds at CLARION 17 59 each, dipping in deep, rapidly darting their tongues in and out so they appeared like a liquid streak, their heads would emerge whimsically encrusted in pollen.
    [Show full text]
  • Inferring Extinction in North American and Hawaiian Birds in the Presence of Sighting Uncertainty
    Inferring extinction in North American and Hawaiian birds in the presence of sighting uncertainty David L. Roberts1 and Ivan Jari¢2,3 1 Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, School of Anthropology & Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, United Kingdom 2 Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Berlin, Germany 3 Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia ABSTRACT For most species the timing of extinction events is uncertain, occurring sometime after the last sighting. However, the sightings themselves may also be uncertain. Recently a number of methods have been developed that incorporate sighting uncertainty in the inference of extinction based on a series of sightings. Here we estimate the timing of extinction for 41 of 52 North American and Hawaiian bird taxa and populations, the results of which suggest all became extinct before 2009. By acknowledging sighting uncertainty it results in two opposite effects, one pushing the timing of extinction away from the last sighting and the other drawing the timing of extinction nearer to it. However, for 14 assessed taxa and populations the upper 95% bounds lie beyond the end of the observation period and therefore suggest the possibility of continued persistence. This has important implications for conservation decision-makers and potentially reduces the likelihood of Romeo's Error. Subjects Biodiversity, Conservation Biology, Zoology Keywords Avian extinction, Conservation triage, Critically endangered, Sighting records, Sighting reliability, Species persistence Submitted 15 July 2016 Accepted 11 August 2016 INTRODUCTION Published 1 September 2016 For many species our knowledge of their persistence is based on sightings that vary in Corresponding author David L.
    [Show full text]
  • A Systematic Analysis of the Endemic Avifauna of the Hawaiian Islands. Harold Douglas Pratt Rj Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1979 A Systematic Analysis of the Endemic Avifauna of the Hawaiian Islands. Harold Douglas Pratt rJ Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Pratt, Harold Douglas Jr, "A Systematic Analysis of the Endemic Avifauna of the Hawaiian Islands." (1979). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3347. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3347 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the Him inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Drepanidini Species Tree
    Drepanidini: Hawaiian Honeycreepers Poo-uli, Melamprosops phaeosoma Akikiki / Kaui Creeper, Oreomystis bairdi ?Oahu Alauahio / Oahu Creeper, Paroreomyza maculata ?Kakawahie / Molokai Creeper, Paroreomyza flammea Maui Alauahio / Maui Creeper, Paroreomyza montana Laysan Finch, Telespiza cantans Nihoa Finch, Telespiza ultima Palila, Loxioides bailleui ?Kona Grosbeak, Chloridops kona ?Lesser Koa-Finch, Rhodacanthis flaviceps ?Greater Koa-Finch, Rhodacanthis palmeri ?Ula-ai-hawane, Ciridops anna Akohekohe / Crested Honeycreeper Drepanis dolei ?*Laysan Honeycreeper, Drepanis fraithii Apapane, Drepanis sanguinea Iiwi, Drepanis coccinea ?Black Mamo, Drepanis funerea ?Hawaii Mamo, Drepanis pacifica ?Greater Amakihi, Viridonia sagittirostris Anianiau, Magumma parva Hawaii Amakihi, Chlorodrepanis virens Kauai Amakihi, Chlorodrepanis stejnegeri Oahu Amakihi, Chlorodrepanis flavus Hawaii Creeper, Loxops mana Akekee / Kauai Akepa, Loxops caeruleirostris ?*Oahu Akepa, Loxops wolstenholmei ?*Maui Akepa, Loxops ochraceus Hawaii Akepa, Loxops coccineus ?Ou, Psittirostra psittacea ?Lanai Hookbill, Dysmorodrepanis munroi Maui Parrotbill / Kiwikiu, Pseudonestor xanthophrys ?Lesser Akialoa / Hawaii Akialoa, Hemignathus obscurus ?*Kauai Akialoa, Hemignathus stejnegeri ?Oahu Akialoa, Hemignathus ellisianus ?*Maui-nui Akialoa, Hemignathus lanaiensis Akiapolaau, Hemignathus wilsoni ?*Kauai Nukupuu, Hemignathus hanapepe ?Oahu Nukupuu, Hemignathus lucidus ?*Maui Nukupuu, Hemignathus affinis Notes: Stars denote recent splits. Red taxa are extinct, orange probably extinct. Question marks indicate that the species was not included in a genetic analysis. In that case the osteology-based phylogeny of James (2004) has generally been used to place the species on the tree. Sources: James (2004), Knowlton et al. (2014), Lerner et al. (2011). Older versions also used Arnaiz-Villena et al. (2007b), Fleischer et al. (2001), Pratt (2001), Reding et al. (2009)..
    [Show full text]
  • The Present Status of the Birds of Hawaii' ANDREW J
    The Present Status of the Birds of Hawaii' ANDREW J. BERGER2 THEGREAT EXPANSES of open ocean that sep­ waii, and in 1962 birds were first released in arate the Hawaiian Islands from the major the Paliku Cabin area of Haleakala Crater on continental land masses of North America and Maui. There is still debate as to whether or Asia resulted in the evolution of a number of not the Nene originally inhabited Maui. unique landbirds. Unfortunately, a higher per­ The Nene was on the verge of extinction in centage of species of birds have become extinct the 1940s, and the species is still included in in Hawaii than in any other region of the the list of endangered species. In 1949 a Nene world. Approximately 40 percent of the en­ Restoration Program was begun by using a pair demic Hawaiian birds are believed to be ex­ of captive birds obtained from Herbert Ship­ tinct, and 25 of the 60 birds in the 1968 list man of Hawaii. This has been a very success­ of "Rare and Endangered Birds of the United ful program, and Nene have been raised in States" are Hawaiian CRare and Endangered captivity both at the Severn Wildfowl Trust Fish and Wildlife of the United States, 1968 at Slimbridge, England, and at the State of edition," Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wild­ Hawaii Fish and Game rearing station at life, Washington, D. C.). Most of the native Pohakuloa on the Saddle Road of Hawaii birds of Oahu have long been extinct, and few (Elder, 1958) . native landbirds are to be found on any of the The program at Pohakuloa has been increas­ main islands below 3,000 feet elevation.
    [Show full text]
  • A Consensus Taxonomy for the Hawaiian Honeycreepers
    A CONSENSUS TAXONOMY FOR THE HAWAIIAN HONEYCREEPERS H. DOUGLAS PRATT OCCASIONAL PAPERS MUSEUM OF NATURAL SCIENCE LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, NO. 85 Baton Rouge, October, 2014 Number 85 October 29, 2014 OCCASIONAL(PAPERS(OF(THE(MUSEUM( OF(NATURAL(SCIENCE( ( LOUISIANA(STATE(UNIVERSITY( BATON(ROUGE,(LOUISIANA(70803( A CONSENSUS TAXONOMY FOR THE HAWAIIAN HONEYCREEPERS H. DOUGLAS PRATT1,2, 3,* 1Museum of Natural Science, 119 Foster Hall, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA. 2North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, 11 West Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 31205 Selwyn Lane, Cary, NC 27511, USA. *Corresponding author; e-mail: [email protected] INTRODUCTION The Hawaiian honeycreepers are a monophyletic group of the Carduelinae (Aves: Fringillidae) endemic to the Hawaiian Islands. They were traditionally classified as a family of their own (Drepanididae), but more recently as a subfamily (AOU 1983, 1998) of Carduelinae, and now a branch embedded within the Carduelinae (Zuccon et al. 2012, Chesser et al. 2013). Along with Darwin’s finches of the Galapagos, they are the “textbook example” of insular adaptive radiation. With species that span and even expand the full range of passerine variation (Ziegler 2002, H. D. Pratt 2005, 2010b; T. K. Pratt et al. 2009), their classification holds interest well beyond their geographic distribution and beyond interest in other cardueline taxonomy. Unfortunately, the alpha taxonomy (Table 1) of the Hawaiian honeycreepers has been rather confusing. In fact, the only names for Hawaiian carduelines that have remained unchanged and unambiguous over time are the English 2 PRATT Occas. Pap. ones derived as loan words from Hawaiian, making familiarity with those names a prerequisite for understanding the technical literature or making sense of taxonomic turbulence.
    [Show full text]
  • Honolulu, Hawaii Avian History Report 1 Winston E. Banko Hawaii
    COOPERATIVE NATIONAL PARK RESOURCES STUDIES UNIT UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA Department of Botany Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 (808) 948- 8218 Clifford W. Smith, Director Associate Professor of Botany Avian History Report 1 HISTORY OF ENDEMIC HAWAIIAN BIRDS INTRODUCTION Winston E. Banko Research Associate Hawaii Field Research Center Hawaii Volcanoes National Park Hawaii 96718 March 1979 UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Contract No. CX 8000 8 Contribution i ABSTRACT The history of endemic Hawaiian birds is developed in three ma j or parts. Narrative accounts of 69 taxa, based on records since 1778, are detailed in Part I. Major ecological factors of population changes, such as depletion of food by foreign organisms, predation, disease, and habitat alteration, are treated in Part Chronological, geographical, and ecological elements of avian depopulation are synthesized and offered with conclusions in Part 111. The Introduction states the objectives, lists the endemic avifauna, defines the historical scope, and outlines the complete work. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.. ........................ i LIST OF TABLES. ...................... ii INTRODUCTION. ....................... ENDEMIC HAWAIIAN AVIFAUNA ................. 2 HISTORICAL SCOPE. ..................... 10 OUTLINE OF COMPLETE WORK. ................. 10 HISTORY OF ENDEMIC HAWAIIAN BIRDS ............. 11 LITERATURE CITED. ..................... 13 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. Endemic Hawaiian avifauna grouped according to characteristic environment ........... 4 'I 2 ENDEMIC HAWAIIAN AVIFAUNA The term " endemic" is used i n this report to include only scientifically described species and subspecies known t o have existed exclusively in the Hawaiian Islands during the historic period (since 1778). Such a definition eliminates all migratory and introduced birds and all but two species of sea birds leaving, according to the authorities consulted, the 69 taxa listed in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Honeycreepers
    Avian Models for 3D Applications by Ken Gilliland 1 Songbird ReMix Endemic Birds of Hawai’i Contents Manual Introduction 4 Overview and Use 4 Conforming Crest Quick Reference 5 Creating a Songbird ReMix Bird 7 Using Conforming Parts with Poser 8 Alternative Beak Controls 9 Using Conforming Parts with DAZ Studio 10 Field Guide List of Species 11 Birds and Hawai’i 12 Evolution of the Finch 13 Albatrosses, Petrels and Shearwaters ka'upu (Black-footed Albatross) 14 ʻaʻo (Hawaiian or Newell’s Shearwater) 16 Pelecaniformes 'a (Masked Booby) 18 iwa (Great Frigatebird) 19 Ducks and Geese nēnē (Hawaiian Goose) 22 Gulls, Terns and Skimmers 'ewa 'ewa (Sooty Tern) 24 noi’o (Hawaiian Black Noddy) 25 Shorebirds ae’o (Hawaiian Stilt) 27 Owls pueo (Hawaiian Owl) 29 Honeyeaters Oʻahu ʻŌʻō (O’ahu Honeyeater) 31 Warblers & Elepaio ‘elepai’o (Hawaiian Wren) 33 2 Millerbirds Nihoa Millerbird 35 Thrushes oma'o (Hawaiian Thrush) 37 kāmaʻo (Large Kauaʻi Thrush) 38 oloma’o (Lana’i Thrush) 40 Crows ‘alala (Hawaiian Crow) 42 Drepanidine Finches palila (Palia) 43 Honeycreepers ʻākepa (ʻākepa) 44 ‘amakihi (Common ‘Amakihi) 46 'akiapola'au ('Akiapola'au) 48 nuku pu’u (Nuku pu’u) 49 ‘akikiki (Kaua’i Creeper) 51 kiwikiu (Mau’i Parrotbill) 53 'apapane (Apapane) 55 ‘I'iwi (‘I'iwi) 56 'akohekohe (Crested Honeycreeper) 58 po’o-uli (Black masked Honeycreeper) 59 Oʻahu ʻalauahio (O’ahu Creeper) 61 kakawahie (Moloka’i Creeper) 63 Hawai’i mamo (Hawai’i Mamo) 65 o'o nuku'umu (Black Mamo) 67 Complete List of Hawaiian Endemic Birds 68 Resources, Credits and Thanks 69 Rendering Tips for 3D Applications 70 Copyrighted 2012 by Ken Gilliland songbirdremix.com Opinions expressed on this booklet are solely that of the author, Ken Gilliland, and may or may not reflect the opinions of the publisher, DAZ 3D.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Early Illustrations and the Juvenile Plumage Of
    boc1294-091117-ind:BOC Bulletin 11/17/2009 4:41 PM Page 206 Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume 206 Bull. B.O.C. 2009 129(4) Notes on early illustrations and the juvenile plumage of the extinct Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica (Drepanidini) by Storrs L. Olson & Julian P. Hume Received 19 February 2009 SUMMARY.—The earliest published illustrations of the extinct Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica are probably all based on one or two adult specimens originating during Cook’s third voyage and the variation between them does not reflect variation in plumage. Two unremarked specimens of Hawaii Mamo in the Paris Museum are in a transitional plumage showing that this species had a previously unknown juvenile plumage in which the black feathers of the adult were dark brown. This fact has further implications for the plumage sequence of other species of the black- and- red clade of Drepanidini. The brilliant black- and- yellow Hawaii Mamo Drepanis pacifica was of cultural signifi- cance to native Hawaiians for making their feather artefacts (Brigham 1899), but the species is now extinct and is among the rarest of Hawaiian birds in museum collections. Only 11 specimens survive (Banko 1979), from four known sources: Cook’s third voyage in 1779 (Medway 1981, Olson 1989), the private collector James Mills of Hilo who flourished in the 1860s (Manning 1978), Théodore Bailleu about 1876 (see below) and Henry Palmer for whom the last specimen was obtained in 1892 (Rothschild 1893–1900). Until now, only adult specimens were thought to exist and no sex or age differences were known (Pratt 2002, 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0257-0945.Pdf
    Draft Pre-Decisional Document for Agency Review Purposes Only: Do Not Distribute DRAFT Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Proposed Pesticides General Permit National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources Silver Spring, MD 20910 Consultation History ................................................................................................................................................. 8 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .................................................................................................. 10 Pesticides General Permit ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Obtaining Authorization under the PGP ............................................................................................................ 12 Protective Measures ........................................................................................................................................... 16 Limitations on Coverage .................................................................................................................................... 24 Overview of NMFS’ Assessment Framework ........................................................................................................ 25 Application of this Approach to this Consultation .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Causes of Avian Extinction and Rarity
    The Causes of Avian Extinction and Rarity by Christopher James Lennard Town Cape of University Thesis submitted in the Faculty of Science (Department of Ornithology); University of Cape Town for the degree of Master of Science. June 1997 The University of Cape Town has been given the rllf'lt to reproduce this ~la In whole or In pil't. Copytlght is held by the autl>p'lr . ' The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgementTown of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Cape Published by the University ofof Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University Declaration: I I certify that this thesis results from my original investigation, except where acknowledged, and has not been submitted for a degree at any other university. Christopher J. Lennard Table of contents Page Table of contents ................................................................................................................ iii List oftigures ................................................................................................................... viii List of tables ....... :............................................................................................................... ix Acknowledgments ..................... , .................................... :.· ................................................. xii Abstract ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]