DOCSLIB.ORG

Listing Protection Proposed for Eleven Plants and Animals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Listing Protection Proposed for Eleven Plants and Animals August 1987 Vol. XII No. 8 D| iIIa^im Department of interior. U.S. Fish and Wiidlife Service 1 CvUmW^I DUIICViri Endangered Species Program, Washington, D.c. 20240 Listing Protection Proposed for Eleven Plants and Animals During July 1987, seven plant and four animal taxa were proposed for addition to the Federal lists of Endangered and Threatened wildlife and plants. If the list- ings become final, Endangered Species Act protection will be extended to the fol- lowing: Chisos Mountain Hedgehog Cactus {Echinocereus reichenbachii var. chisoensis) Native to the southwestern United States, the Chisos Mountain hedgehog cactus is very restricted in numbers and distribution. Its entire population of approx- imately 1,000 plants is known from only a few places in southern Brewster County, Texas. Fortunately, these sites are pro- The Chisos Mountain hedgehog cactus tected as part of Big Bend National Park. is a small, barrel-shaped variety with The species' low numbers and localized deep green to bluish-green stems up to occurrence nevertheless make it vulner- 6 inches (15 centimeters) tall. Its attrac- able to extinction from collecting or habitat tive flowers have petals that are red at disruption. To help increase Its protection, the base, white at mid-length, and the Service has proposed to list the Chisos fuschia at the tips. Mountain hedgehog cactus as Threatened (F.R. 7/6/87). able to harm from road maintenance and flowers, measures up to 3 inches (76 milli- This cactus grows amid sparse Chihua- trail building unless these activities take meters), compared to a maximum head huan Desert vegetation on alluvial flats the species' presence into account. No and body length of about 3.75 inches (90 near the Chisos Mountains, the local range Federal activities that might adversely af- mm). Both L. nivalis and L. sanborni are from which the cactus takes its name. Be- fect the cactus are known or expected. adapted for life in arid country, and are tween World War I and World War II, be- found mainly in desert scrub habitat In the fore the park was established, this area northern parts of their ranges; farther was heavily overgrazed by livestock. Re- south, however, they sometimes occur at moval of the native short grass cover may Two Southwestern Bats high elevations on wooded mountains. For have altered the preferred habitat condi- roosting during the day, these bats depend tions for establishment of Chisos Mountain Two other residents of the southwest almost entirely on caves and abandoned hedgehog cactus seedlings. The return of also have been proposed for listing (F.R. mine tunnels. Populations in the U.S. and native grasses may create an environment 7/6/87), this time as Endangered: the Mex- northern Mexico apparently migrate south- more favorable to the cactus seedlings; ican long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris ward in the fall and return in the spring, however, recovery of overgrazed desert nivalis and Sanborn's long-nosed bat with groups occupying the same roosting rangelands Is a slow process and some (L. sanborni). Both species occur as far sites year after year. desert plant communities never return to south as Central America and reach the their former composition. U.S. at the northern end of their ranges. Because the Chisos Mountain hedge- They have declined dramatically In recent The only known L. nivalis roosting site in hog cactus Is so rare and has such attrac- years, primarily the result of killing by hu- the U.S. still in use Is a shallow cave within tive flowers, some private and commercial mans and overexploltation of the bats' Big Bend National Park in Texas. Even collectors find It desirable. Although col- food plants. though the cave is protected. Its L. nivalis lecting any cacti in the park without a per- Bats in the genus Leptonycteris are population has plunged from an estimated mit is prohibited, taking of the Chisos small, weighing at most one ounce (28 10,650 bats in 1967 to about 1,000 in Mountain hedgehog cactus probably has grams). They differ strikingly from most 1983. A recent FWS-funded survey indi- occurred in recent years, and any illegal others in the U.S. in having an elongated cated that populations in Mexico also are collecting is detrimental to such small pop- muzzle with a small nose "leaf" at the tip. ulations. They also are potentially vulner- The long tongue, an adaption to feeding on (continued on page 5) ENDANGERED SPECIES TECHNICAL BULLETIN Vol. XII No. 8 (1987) 1 Creek) in the East Walker River drainage. The salvaged fish will be held in that gla- cial-fed stream until they can be used for a planned reintroduction into Slinkard Creek later this year. Dr. Jack Williams, of the Fish and Wild- life Service's Sacramento (California) En- dangered Species Office, recently pre- sented a draft protocol for conducting introductions of Endangered and Threat- ened fishes at the American Society of Ich- thyologists and Herpetologists meeting in Albany, New York. A manuscript describ- ing the protocol will be submitted to the American Fisheries Society for official Endangered species program regional of July to salvage Lahontan cutthroat trout adoption. staff members have reported the fol- {Salmo clarki henshawi) from sections of lowing news for the month of July: By-Day Creek (f\/lono County, California), which is drying up because of this year's Region 1 — An interagency rescue low runoff. Over 200 fish were rescued and Four bald eagle {Haliaeetus leuc- effort was carried out during the first week taken to a headwater stream (Horse ocephalus) nestlings removed from nests along coastal British Columbia, Canada, Region 3. Federal BIdg,. Fort Snelling. Twin U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were released at key hack sites in Califor- Washington, D.C. 20240 Cities, MN 55111 (612-725-3500): Har- vey Nelson. Regional Director; John 8. nia by the Ventana Wilderness Sanctuary. Frank Dunkle. Director Popowski, Assistant Regional Director: (202-343-4717) James M. Engel. Endangered Species Ronald E. Lamberlson Specialist. Assistar^l Director for Fish Three productive bald eagle nests were and Wildlife Enhancement Region 4, Richard 8. Russell Federal BIdg.. observed at Cascade Reservoir near (202-343-4646) 75 Spring St.. S W. Atlanta. GA 30303 William E. Knapp, Acting Chief (404-331-3580): James W. Pulliam, Re- Boise, Idaho. Idaho's 1987 total includes Office of Endangered Species gional Director: John I Christian, Assi 26 productive nests and 31 active nests. (703-235-2771) stant Regional Director. Marshall P Richard L. Jachowski, Acting Chief, Jones. Endangered Species Specialist Federal Wildlife Permit Office Region 5, One Gateway Center, Suite 700 (703-235-1937) Newton Corner, MA 02158 (617-965 Clark R. Bavin, Chief. 5100): Howard Larson. Regional Direc The 1987 southern sea otter {Enhydra Division of Law Enforcement tor: Stephen W. Parry. Assistant Re lutris nereis) census was completed re- (202-343-9242) gional Director: Paul Nickerson. En cently by the Service and the California dangered Species Specialist. TECHNICAL BULLETIN Staff Department of Fish and Game. The total of Michael Bender. Editor Region 6. P O Box 25486. Denver Federal 1,650 included 220 pups and was up from Denise Henne. Assistant Editor Center, Denver. CO 80225 (303-236- last year's total of 1,570. Although this (703-235-2407) 7920): Galen Buterbaugh, Regional Di- rector: John D. Green, Assistant Re- year's census appears promising, the indi- gional Director: Barry S. Mulder, En- cated upward trend has not been statis- Regional Offices dangered Species Specialist. tically substantiated. Region 1, Lloyd 500 BIdg,, Suite 1692. 500 Region 7, 1011 E, Tudor Rd., Anchorage, Editor's note: A final rule authorizing es- N,E, Multnomah St., Portland. OR AK 99503 (907-786-3542); Walter O. tablishment and containment of an experi- 97232 (503-231-61 18): Rolf L, Wal- Stieglitz, Regional Director; Jon Nelson, mental population of southern sea otters in lenstrom. Regional Director: William F, Assistant Regional Director: Dennis the vicinity of San Nicolas Island, off the Shake. Assistant Regional Director: Money. Endangered Species Special- Wayne S. White. Endangered Species ist. coast of southern California, was pub- Specialist. lished in the August 11,1987, Federal Region 8 (FWS Research and Develop- Region 2. P,0, Box 1306. Albuquerque. NM ment), Washington, D C. 20240: Register. Future editions of the BULLETIN 87103 (505-766-2321): Michael J Richard N. Smith, Regional Director: will contain more news on this recovery Spear, Regional Director: Conrad A, Endangered Species Staff: Clarence effort. Fjetland. Assistant Regional Director: Johnson, fish and crustaceans (202- James Johnson. Endangered Species 653-8772): Bettina Sparrowe, other ani- Specialist. mals and plants (202-653-8762) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regions A recent 3-acre fire at California's Anti- och Dunes National Wildlife Refuge could Region 1: Calitornia, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Trust Territories Region 2: Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas Region 3; Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin Re- enhance Antioch Dunes evening-primrose gion 4: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Ten- (Oenothera deltoides ssp. howellii) propa- nessee, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands Region 5: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire. New Jersey New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia Reglorvfi; Colorado, gation by opening overgrown habitat. For- Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming Region 7; Alaska Region 8; Research tunately, the fire occurred in an area where and Development nationwide there were not any Antioch Dunes eve- The ENDANGERED SPECIES TECHNICAL BULLETIN is published monthly by the U. S Fish ning-primroses, Contra Costa wallflowers and Wildlife Service.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reporton the Rare Plants of Puerto Rico
    REPORTON THE RARE PLANTS OF PUERTO RICO tii:>. CENTER FOR PLANT CONSERVATION ~ Missouri Botanical Garden St. Louis, Missouri July 15, l' 992 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Center for Plant Conservation would like to acknowledge the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the W. Alton Jones Foundation for their generous support of the Center's work in the priority region of Puerto Rico. We would also like to thank all the participants in the task force meetings, without whose information this report would not be possible. Cover: Zanthoxy7um thomasianum is known from several sites in Puerto Rico and the U.S . Virgin Islands. It is a small shrub (2-3 meters) that grows on the banks of cliffs. Threats to this taxon include development, seed consumption by insects, and road erosion. The seeds are difficult to germinate, but Fairchild Tropical Garden in Miami has plants growing as part of the Center for Plant Conservation's .National Collection of Endangered Plants. (Drawing taken from USFWS 1987 Draft Recovery Plan.) REPORT ON THE RARE PLANTS OF PUERTO RICO TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements A. Summary 8. All Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands Species of Conservation Concern Explanation of Attached Lists C. Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands [A] and [8] species D. Blank Taxon Questionnaire E. Data Sources for Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands [A] and [B] species F. Pue~to Rico\Virgin Islands Task Force Invitees G. Reviewers of Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands [A] and [8] Species REPORT ON THE RARE PLANTS OF PUERTO RICO SUMMARY The Center for Plant Conservation (Center) has held two meetings of the Puerto Rlco\Virgin Islands Task Force in Puerto Rico.
    [Show full text]
  • Nontraditional Agricultural Exports Regulatory Guide for Latin America and the Caribbean
    ` NONTRADITIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS REGULATORY GUIDE FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean U.S. Agency for International Development Office of Pesticide Programs U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. U.S.A. Nontraditional Agricultural Exports Regulatory Guide for Latin America and the Caribbean Acknowledgements Several branches and many individuals of the U.S. Government contributed to the preparation and review of this guide. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) extends special recognition to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Management Technical Services Project (LACTECH II) of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which planned the document, managed its development, and provided overall technical direction. EPA wishes to thank Robert Kahn and Robert Bailey, LACTECH II Project Officers, who designed, promoted, and disseminated the contents of this guide; the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture for special assistance and collaboration; and all the U.S. Government branches cited herein. Initial funding for the preparation of this guide was provided by the Bureau for Latin America NTAE Regulatory Guide for LAC Countries iii and the Caribbean, USAID, to the LACTECH II Project. Additional funding for the editing, Spanish translation, and dissemination was provided by the AID/EPA Central American Project and the AID/EPA Mexico Project, both based at EPA. iv NTAE Regulatory Guide for LAC Countries Contents Page
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register / Vol, 53, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules 23725
    Federal Register / Vol, 53, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules 23725 4. In § 642.10, paragraph (b) and the may select one or more of the following (14) Project evaluation. authority citation are revised to read as subjects as training priorities: (15) Budget management. follows: (1) Basic skills instruction in reading, (16) Personnel management. mathematics, written and oral § 642.10 Activities the Secretary assists (17) Reporting student and project under the Training Program. communication, and study skills. * * ★ * * (2) Counseling. performance. (18) Coordinating project activities (b) The grants may provide support (3) Assessment of student needs. (4) Academic tests and testing. with other available resources and for conferences, seminars, internships, activities. workshops, and the publication of (5) College and university admissions manuals designed to improve the policies and procedures. (19) General project management for operations of the Special Programs. (6) Student financial aid. new directors. (7) Cultural enrichment programs. (b) The Secretary may consider an (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070-ld) (8) Career planning. application for a Training Program 5. Section 642.34 is revised to read as (9) Tutorial programs. project that does not address one of the follows: (10) Retention and graduation established priorities if the applicant strategies. § 624.34 Priorities for funding. addresses another significant training (11) Support services for persons of need in the local area being served hy (a) The Secretary, after consultation limited proficiency in English. the Special Programs. with regional and State professional (12) Support services for physically associations of persons having special handicapped persons. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070d, 1070d-ld) knowledge with respect to the training (13) Strategies for preparing students [FR Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Transportation
    Programmatic Environmental Assessment Transportation: Bridges, Culverts, Roads, and Landslides Commonwealth of Puerto Rico August 2020 U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Region II Caribbean Area Division - Joint Recovery Office 50 Carr. 165, Guaynabo, PR 00968 Programmatic Environmental Assessment FEMA Puerto Rico Transportation PEA TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ II LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ IV LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................. V 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 8 2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................................................................ 8 3.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND ..................................................................... 9 4.0 ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 ALTERNATIVE 1: NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ..................................................................................................... 12 4.2 ALTERNATIVE 2: BRIDGE AND CULVERT REPLACEMENT ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 20131121 Draft Puertoricanpa
    DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE REINTRODUCTION OF THE THIRD WILD POPULATION OF THE PUERTO RICAN PARROT IN PUERTO RICO November 21, 2013 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office Puerto Rican Parrot Recovery Program Office P.O. Box 1600 Río Grande, PR 00745 Phone: (787) 887-8769 Fax: (787) 887-7512 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I - PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION ............................................. 1 1.1 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 NEED .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 REQUIRED DECISIONS .................................................................................................... 3 1.4 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. 3 SECTION II - ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................... 4 2.1 HISTORY AND PROCESS USED TO FORMULATE THE ALTERNATIVES .............. 4 2.2 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN, EVALUATION AND SELECTION CRITERIA ................... 5 2.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROMDETAILED ANALYSIS6 2.4 ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN DETAIL ..................................................................... 6 2.4.1 Alternative A – No Action ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Intent to Sue for Violations of the Endangered Species Act Concerning Registration of Pesticide Products Containing Malathion
    March 20, 2018 Sent via Email and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested Scott Pruitt, Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Mail Code: 1101A Washington, DC 20460 [email protected] Ryan Zinke, Secretary of the Interior Greg Sheehan, Acting Director U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street, NW 1849 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20240 Washington, DC 20240 [email protected] [email protected] Wilbur L. Ross, Secretary of Commerce Chris Oliver, Assistant Administrator U.S. Department of Commerce NOAA Fisheries 1401 Constitution Ave., NW 1315 East-West Highway Washington, DC 20230 Silver Spring, MD 20910 [email protected] [email protected] Re: Notice of Intent to Sue for Violations of the Endangered Species Act Concerning Registration of Pesticide Products Containing Malathion Dear Administrator Pruitt and Secretary Zinke: On behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Environmental Health, and Californians for Pesticide Reform (collectively, “Center”), this letter provides notice of intent to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”) for violations of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C § 1536, 1538 and the ESA Interagency Cooperation Regulations, 50 C.F.R. Part 402. This notice is provided pursuant to Section 11(g) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1540(g). Specifically, EPA is in violation of ESA Section 7(a)(2), 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2), Section 7(d), 16 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Interior § 17.12
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Interior § 17.12 747—70 FR 17916; April 8, 2005. EDITORIAL NOTE 2: For FEDERAL REGISTER 748—70 FR 69465; November 16, 2005. citations affecting § 17.11, see the List of CFR 754—70 FR 58350; October 6, 2005. Sections Affected, which appears in the 755—70 FR 66706; November 2, 2005. Finding Aids section of the printed volume 756—71 FR 26851; May 9, 2006. and on GPO Access. 757—71 FR 40673; July 18, 2006. 758—71 FR 42314; July 26, 2006. EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: At 75 FR 59656, 759—72 FR 14938; March 29, 2007. Sept. 28, 2010, § 17.11 was amended by adding 760—73 FR 3178; January 16, 2008. a new entry for ‘‘Penguin, African,’’ in al- 761—73 FR 74370; December 8, 2008. phabetical order under BIRDS to the List of 763—74 FR 46930; September 14, 2009. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, effec- 764—74 FR 52010; October 8, 2009. tive Oct. 29, 2010. For the convenience of the 765—75 FR 19045; April 13, 2010. user, the added text is set forth as follows: 766—75 FR 249; January 5, 2010. 767—75 FR 43853, 43864; July 27, 2010. § 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife. 769—75 FR 21188; April 23, 2010. 771—75 FR 45526; August 3, 2010. 778—75 FR 53604; September 1, 2010. * * * * * EDITORIAL NOTE 1: For FEDERAL REGISTER (h) * * * citations affecting the table in § 17.11(h), see the listing above. Species Vertebrate population where Crit- Spe- Historic endan- Sta- When ical cial Common Scientific name range gered or tus listed habi- rules name threat- tat ened ******* BIRDS ******* Penguin, Af- Spheniscus demersus ...............
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Impact Statement for Arecibor Observatory
    NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Environmental Impact Statement for the Arecibo Observatory Arecibo, Puerto Rico Final July 27, 2017 ES033114173203WDC Final Environmental Impact Statement for Arecibo Observatory, Arecibo, Puerto Rico Prepared for National Science Foundation July 27, 2017 Cover Sheet Final Environmental Impact Statement Arecibo Observatory, Arecibo, Puerto Rico Responsible Agency: The National Science Foundation (NSF) For more information, contact: Ms. Elizabeth Pentecost National Science Foundation, Division of Astronomical Sciences Suite 1045, 4201 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, Virginia 22230 Abstract: The National Science Foundation has produced a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with potential funding changes for Arecibo Observatory in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. The six Alternatives analyzed in the FEIS are as follows: 1) collaboration with interested parties for continued science‐focused operations (the Agency‐preferred Alternative); 2) collaboration with interested parties for transition to education‐focused operations; 3) mothballing of facilities; 4) partial demolition and site restoration; 5) complete demolition and site restoration; and 6) the No‐Action Alternative. The environmental resources and concerns considered in the FEIS are biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, groundwater, hazardous materials, solid waste, health and safety, noise, socioeconomics, traffic and transportation, and visual resources. Table of Contents Executive
    [Show full text]
  • (11) Response to Argument (12) Period O F Response to New
    Federal Register / Vol. 53, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 1988 / Rules and Regulations 23737 (11) Response to Argument A statement of whether the examiner disagrees with each of the contentions of appellant in the brief with respect to the issues presented and an explanation of the reasons for disagreement with any such contention. If any ground of rejection is not argued and responded to by appellant, the response shall point out each claim affected. (12) Period of Response to New Ground of Rejection A statement setting the period for appellant to file a reply to any new ground of rejection, if necessary. Dated: May 3,1988. Donald }. Quigg, A ssistant S ecretary an d C om m ission er o f Patents and Trademarks. [FR Doc. 88-14160 Filed 6-22-88; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-M Thursday June 23, 1988 Part Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Daphnopsis helierana, Hymenoxys acaulis, and Arenenaria cumberlandensis; Final Rules 23740 Federal Register / Voi. 53, No. 121 / Thursday, June 23, 1988 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Department of Health and Human 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, as amended in Services) and leased to the University of 1982. The Service subsequently found in Fish and Wildlife Seryice Puerto Rico School of Medicine. The October of 1983,1984, and 1985, that Dorado population is on Commonwealth listing Daphnopsis hellerana was 50 CFR Part 17 public land. These 14 individuals are thè warranted but precluded by other Endangered and Threatened Wiidfife only plants of this species known to pending listing actions, in accordance and Plants; Determination of exist.
    [Show full text]
  • (A) the List in This
    1 Title 50—Wildlife and Fisheries without public notice: the spelling of species' that the references in the "Special rules" names, historical range, footnotes, references column list all the regulations of the two PART 17—ENDANGERED AND to certain other applicable portions of this Services which might apply to the species or THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS title, synonyms, and more current names. In to the regulations of other Federal agencies any of these revised entries, neither the or State or local governments. species, as defined in paragraph (b) of this (g) The listing of a particular taxon section, nor its status may be changed without Subpart B—Lists includes all lower taxonomic units. For following the procedures of Part 424 of this example, the genus Hylobates (gibbons) is §17.11 Endangered and threatened title. listed as Endangered throughout its entire (e) The "historic range" indicates the wildlife. range (China, India, and SE Asia); known general distribution of the species or (a) The list in this section contains the consequently, all species, subspecies, and subspecies as reported in the current scientific names of all species of wildlife which have populations of that genus are considered literature. The present distribution may be been determined by the Services to be listed as Endangered for the purposes of the greatly reduced from this historic range. This Endangered or Threatened. It also contains Act. In 1978 (43 FR 6230-6233) the species column does not imply any limitation on the the names of species of wildlife treated as Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) was application of the prohibitions in the Act or Endangered or Threatened because they are listed as Threatened in "USA (WA, OR, MN, implementing rules.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Interior § 17.12
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Interior § 17.12 * * * * * ticable on the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) to deter- § 17.12 Endangered and threatened mine a species’ scientific name. ITIS plants. incorporates the naming principles es- (a) The list in paragraph (h) of this tablished by the International Code of section contains the plant species de- Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants termined by the Service or the Na- (see paragraph (g) of this section). If tional Marine Fisheries Service the scientific name in ITIS differs from (NMFS) of the Department of Com- the scientific name adopted for use merce’s National Oceanic and Atmos- under the Convention on International pheric Administration (hereafter in Trade in Endangered Species of Wild this section referred to as ‘‘the Serv- Fauna and Flora (CITES), the CITES ices’’) to be endangered species or nomenclature will be provided in threatened species. It also contains the brackets ‘‘[ ]’’ within the ‘‘Scientific plant species treated as endangered or name’’ column following the ITIS no- threatened because they are similar in menclature. appearance to and may be confused (c) ‘‘Common name’’ column. Although with endangered or threatened species common names are included, they can- (see §§ 17.50 through 17.52). The ‘‘Com- not be relied upon for identification of mon name,’’ ‘‘Scientific name,’’ any specimen, since they may vary ‘‘Where listed,’’ and ‘‘Status’’ columns greatly in local usage. In cases where provide regulatory information; to- gether, they identify listed plant spe- confusion might arise, one or more cies within the meaning of the Act and synonyms are provided in parentheses describe where they are protected.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Trends of the Nation's Biological Resources
    Status and Trends of the Nation’s Biological Resources — Volume 2 911 Subject Index abalones, 612, 814, 816, 846 land-use change, 38–39, 48, 51 black, 614–15 Northeast, 192, 195 California, 614–15 prairie loss and, 42 f = figure flat, 614 Rocky Mountains, 478 green, 614–15 Agricultural Quarantine Enforcement Act (1989), 127t t = table pink, 614–15 air pollution, 142, See also contaminants; pollution pinto, 614 climate change and, 93 red, 614–15 Fraser fir mortality and, 276 threaded, 614 Great Basin–Mojave Desert region, 529 white, 614–15 Lower Rio Grande, 271 Abandoned Mined Program, 527 prescribed fires and, 608–9 absolute desert communities, 510, 511t Rocky Mountains, 482, 488f abyssal, defined, 895 water pollution and, 73 acacia, cat-claw, 78, 508, 557 akepa, 765 acanthocephalan parasites, 613 akialoa, Hawaiian, 765 Acartia species, 416 alachlor, 74, 133t, 151 tonsa, 416 ala kumu (7–11), 828f accretion Alaska, 707–40 defined, 895 amphibians, 709 delta lobes, 392–93 Arctic tundra, 731–36 Achatinella (tree snails), 767 biogeographic regions, 708, 709f achene, defined, 895 Aleutian region, 728–31 Acid Deposition Control Program, 184 coastal temperate rainforest and Coast Range, 709–16 acid mine drainage, 75, 134–35 interior boreal forest, 716–20 acid precipitation, 132, 135–38 interior mountains, 720–23 amphibian declines and, 197 marine tundra of southwestern and western Alaska, 724–28 defined, 137 birds Northeast forest effects, 184 Aleutian region, 730 sensitive areas, 135 Arctic tundra, 733–34 sources of, 134–35 coastal temperate
    [Show full text]