Federal Register / Vol

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Federal Register / Vol 60362 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules PART 395—HOURS OF SERVICE OF concerning this regulatory guidance. issue 12-month findings on the DRIVERS The FMCSA will consider comments petitions, which will address whether or received by the closing date of the not the petitioned action is warranted, Section 395.1 Scope of the rules in this comment period to determine whether in accordance with the Act. In addition, part any further clarification of these we announce a correction to Question 34: Does the agricultural regulatory provisions is necessary. In information contained in the 90-day commodity exception (§ 395.1(k)(1)) addition to comments concerning the petition finding for the leopard apply to drivers while driving unloaded proposed regulatory guidance above, (Panthera pardus), which clarifies the to a source where an agricultural including the issue of ‘‘sources’’ of range and entity we are evaluating in commodity will be loaded, and to an agricultural commodities, as outlined our status review of the species. unloaded return trip after delivering an above, the Agency is seeking agricultural commodity under the DATES: These findings were made on information on the following: December 20, 2017. exception? 1. Are there particular segments of the Guidance: Yes, provided that the trip industry that would take advantage of ADDRESSES: Summaries of the bases for does not involve transporting other this change more than others? the petition findings contained in this cargo and the sole purpose of the trip is 2. How does the flexibility provided document are available on http:// to complete the delivery or pick up of in this guidance impact a carrier’s need www.regulations.gov under the agricultural commodities, as defined in for an electronic logging device? appropriate docket number (see table § 395.2. In that case, driving and on- 3. How many carriers and drivers are under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). duty time are not limited, nor do other there transporting agricultural Supporting information in preparing requirements of 49 CFR part 395 apply. commodities in various segments these findings is available for public Question 35: Does the agricultural (livestock, unprocessed food, others) inspection, by appointment, during commodity exception (§ 395.1(k)(1)) that are impacted by this guidance? normal business hours by contacting the apply if the destination for the appropriate person, as specified in FOR commodity is beyond the 150 air-mile Issued on: December 13, 2017. Cathy F. Gautreaux, FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If you radius from the source? have new information concerning the Guidance: The exception applies to Deputy Administrator. status of, or threats to, the species for transportation during the initial 150 air- [FR Doc. 2017–27310 Filed 12–19–17; 8:45 am] which we made these petition findings, miles from the source of the commodity. BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P or their habitats, please submit that Once a driver operates beyond the 150 information by one of the following air-mile radius of the source, part 395 methods: applies. Starting at zero from that point, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the driver must then begin recording his (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal or her duty time, and the limits under Fish and Wildlife Service eRulemaking Portal: http:// the 11-hour, 14-hour, and the 60-/70- www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, hour rules apply. Once the hours of 50 CFR Part 17 enter the appropriate docket number service rules begin to apply on a given (see table under SUPPLEMENTARY [4500030115] trip, they continue to apply for the INFORMATION). Then, click on the Search button. After finding the correct duration of that trip, until the driver Endangered and Threatened Wildlife document, you may submit information crosses back into the area within 150 and Plants; 90-Day Findings for Five by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ If your air-miles of the original source of the Species commodities and is returning to that information will fit in the provided source. If the driver is not returning to AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, comment box, please use this feature of the original source, the HOS rules Interior. http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most continue to apply, even if the driver ACTION: Notification of petition findings compatible with our information review reenters the 150-mile radius. and initiation of status reviews. procedures. If you attach your information as a separate document, our VI. Expiration Date for the Proposed SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and preferred file format is Microsoft Word. Regulatory Guidance Wildlife Service (Service), announce 90- If you attach multiple comments (such In accordance with section day findings on several petitions to list as form letters), our preferred format is 5203(a)(2)(A) and (a)(3) of the Fixing or reclassify wildlife or plants under the a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. America’s Surface Transportation Endangered Species Act of 1973, as (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail (FAST) Act, Public Law 114–94, 129 amended (Act). Based on our review, we or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Stat. 1312, 1535 (Dec. 4, 2015), the find that the petitions present Processing, Attn: [Insert appropriate proposed regulatory guidance will be substantial scientific or commercial docket number; see table under posted on FMCSA’s website, information indicating that the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION], U.S. Fish www.fmcsa.dot.gov, if finalized. It petitioned actions may be warranted and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 would be reviewed by the Agency no with respect to the species mentioned in Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA 22041– later than five years after it is finalized. this notification. Therefore, with the 3803. The Agency would consider at that time publication of this document, we announce that we plan to initiate a We request that you send information whether the guidance should be only by the methods described above. withdrawn, reissued for another period review of the status of each of these species to determine if the petitioned We will post all information we receive up to five years, or incorporated into the on http://www.regulations.gov. This safety regulations. actions are warranted. To ensure that these status reviews are comprehensive, generally means that we will post any VII. Request for Comments we are requesting scientific and personal information you provide us (see Request for Information for Status Refer to the ADDRESSES section above commercial data and other information for instructions on submitting regarding these species. After Reviews, below, for more information). comments to the public docket completing the status reviews, we will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:03 Dec 19, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM 20DEP1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2017 / Proposed Rules 60363 Common name Contact person Oblong rocksnail ....................................................................................... Brian Evans, 404–679–7118; brian_evans@fws.gov. Sturgeon chub and sicklefin chub ............................................................ Justin Shoemaker, 309–757–5800 x214; justin_shoemaker@fws.gov. Tricolored bat ............................................................................................ Krishna Gifford, 413–253–8619; krishna_gifford@fws.gov. Venus flytrap ............................................................................................. Brian Evans, 404–679–7118; brian_evans@fws.gov. Leopard ..................................................................................................... Janine Van Norman, 703–358–2370; janine_vannorman@fws.gov. If you use a telecommunications reasonable person to believe that the evidence sufficient to suggest that these device for the deaf (TDD), please call the measure proposed in the petition may threats may be affecting the species to Federal Relay Service (FIRS) at 800– be warranted’’ (former 50 CFR the point that the species may meet the 877–8339. 424.14(b)). definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A species may be determined to be an ‘‘threatened species’’ under the Act. endangered or threatened species Background If we find that a petition presents because of one or more of the five such information, our subsequent status Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the review will evaluate all identified and its implementing regulations in title Act. The five factors are: threats by considering the individual, 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (a) The present or threatened population, and species-level effects, (50 CFR part 424) set forth the destruction, modification, or and the expected response by the procedures for adding a species to, or curtailment of its habitat or range species. We will evaluate individual removing a species from, the Federal (Factor A); threats and their expected effects on the Lists of Endangered and Threatened (b) Overutilization for commercial, species, then analyze the cumulative Wildlife and Plants. Section 4(b)(3)(A) recreational, scientific, or educational effect of the threats on the species as a of the Act requires that we make a purposes (Factor B); whole. We also consider the cumulative finding on whether a petition to list, (c) Disease or predation (Factor C); effect of the threats in light
Recommended publications
  • Sturgeon Chub (Macrhybopsis Gelida): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Sturgeon Chub (Macrhybopsis gelida): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project August 31, 2004 Frank J. Rahel and Laura A. Thel Department of Zoology and Physiology University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071 Peer Review Administered by American Fisheries Society Rahel, F.J. and L.A. Thel. (2004, August 31). Sturgeon Chub (Macrhybopsis gelida): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/sturgeonchub.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank biologists from Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming, and from the national forests and national grasslands within Region 2 who provided information about sturgeon chub within their jurisdictions. We especially thank Gregory Hayward and Richard Vacirca of the USDA Forest Service for their review of this species assessment. Comments also were provided by two anonymous reviewers. David B. McDonald of the University of Wyoming provided the population demographic matrix analysis. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Frank J. Rahel is a professor in the Department of Zoology and Physiology at the University of Wyoming where he teaches courses in fi sheries management, ichthyology, and conservation biology. His research interests are centered around fi sh ecology and the infl uence of anthropogenic disturbances on fi sh assemblages. Laura A. Thel is a graduate research assistant in the Department of Zoology and Physiology at the University of Wyoming with research interests involving stream ecology, hydrology, and landscape ecology, especially as these are related to the management of native fi shes. COVER PHOTO CREDIT Sturgeon Chub (Macrhybopsis gelida).
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Workgroup Annual Report
    UPPER BASIN PALLID STURGEON RECOVERY WORKGROUP 2004 ANNUAL REPORT Upper Basin Pallid Sturgeon Workgroup c/o Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks 1420 East Sixth Helena MT 59620 August 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION WORKGROUP MEETING NOTES 2004 Annual Meeting Notes – December 1-2, 2004 .............................................................5 March 9, 2005 Meeting Notes ...............................................................................................21 WORKGROUP LETTERS AND DOCUMENTS Intake BOR Letter..................................................................................................................29 Garrison Review Team Report Submission Letter to USFWS..............................................31 Review of pallid sturgeon culture at Garrison Dam NFH by the Upper Basin Pallid Sturgeon Review Team, March, 2005 ..............................................................36 RESEARCH AND MONITORING 2004 Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Efforts in the Upper Missouri River, Montana (RPMA #1), Bill Gardner, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Lewistown, MT...................49 Habitat Use, Diet, and Growth of Hatchery-reared Juvenile Pallid Sturgeon And Indigenous shovelnose sturgeon in the Missouri River avove Fort Peck Reservoir, Montana, Paul C. Gerrity, Christopher S. Guy, and William M. Gardner, Montana Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, Montana State University.............................65 Lower Missouri and Yellowstone Rivers Pallid Sturgeon Study, 2004 Report, Mtthew M. Klungle and Matthew W. Baxter, Montana
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of SDAS 1997
    Proceedings of the South Dakota Academy of Science Volume 76 1997 Published by the South Dakota Academy of Science Academy Founded November 22, 1915 Editor Kenneth F. Higgins Terri Symens, Wildlife & Fisheries, SDSU provided secretarial assistance Tom Holmlund, Graphic Designer We thank former editor Emil Knapp for compiling the articles contained in this volume. TABLE OF CONTENTS Minutes of the Eighty-Second Annual Meeting of the South Dakota Academy of Science........................................................................................1 Presidential Address: Can we live with our paradigms? Sharon A. Clay ..........5 Complete Senior Research Papers presented at The 82nd Annual Meeting of the South Dakota Academy of Science Fishes of the Mainstem Cheyenne River in South Dakota. Douglas R. Hampton and Charles R. Berry, Jr. ...........................................11 Impacts of the John Morrell Meat Packing Plant on Macroinvertebrates in the Big Sioux River in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Craig N. Spencer, Gwen Warkenthien, Steven F. Lehtinen, Elizabeth A. Ring, and Cullen R. Robbins ...................................................27 Winter Survival and Overwintering Behavior in South Dakota Oniscidea (Crustacea, Isopoda). Jonathan C. Wright ................................45 Fluctuations in Daily Activity of Muskrates in Eastern South Dakota. Joel F. Lyons, Craig D. Kost, and Jonathan A. Jenks..................................57 Occurrence of Small, Nongame Mammals in South Dakota’s Eastern Border Counties, 1994-1995. Kenneth F. Higgins, Rex R. Johnson, Mark R. Dorhout, and William A. Meeks ....................................................65 Use of a Mail Survey to Present Mammal Distributions in South Dakota. Carmen A. Blumberg, Jonathan A. Jenks, and Kenneth F. Higgins ................................................................................75 A Survey of Natural Resource Professionals Participating in Waterfowl Hunting in South Dakota. Jeffrey S. Gleason and Jonathan A.
    [Show full text]
  • Biobasics Contents
    Illinois Biodiversity Basics a biodiversity education program of Illinois Department of Natural Resources Chicago Wilderness World Wildlife Fund Adapted from Biodiversity Basics, © 1999, a publication of World Wildlife Fund’s Windows on the Wild biodiversity education program. For more information see <www.worldwildlife.org/windows>. Table of Contents About Illinois Biodiversity Basics ................................................................................................................. 2 Biodiversity Background ............................................................................................................................... 4 Biodiversity of Illinois CD-ROM series ........................................................................................................ 6 Activities Section 1: What is Biodiversity? ...................................................................................................... 7 Activity 1-1: What’s Your Biodiversity IQ?.................................................................... 8 Activity 1-2: Sizing Up Species .................................................................................... 19 Activity 1-3: Backyard BioBlitz.................................................................................... 31 Activity 1-4: The Gene Scene ....................................................................................... 43 Section 2: Why is Biodiversity Important? .................................................................................... 61 Activity
    [Show full text]
  • SCIENTIFIC COLLECTING PERMITS Valid: One Year from Date of Issuance Resident - Nonresident
    SCP – Page 1 SCIENTIFIC COLLECTING PERMITS Valid: one year from date of issuance Resident - Nonresident Alabama Game, Fish and Wildlife Law; Article 12; beginning with 9-11-231 PRIVILEGE: • An INDIVIDUAL, EDUCATIONAL OR AGENCY SCP authorizes permit holder to collect any wild invertebrate or vertebrate species or their eggs in this state for propagation or scientific purposes. • A FEDERAL / STATE PROTECTED SCP authorizes permit holder to collect endangered / protected species (copy of USFWS permit must be submitted if required by federal law). PERMITS TYPES: • INDIVIDUAL SCP: for an individual collector. • EDUCATIONAL SCP: for a professor/teacher and their current students. • AGENCY MEMBER SCP: for an agency and their current members. • FEDERAL / STATE PROTECTED SCP: Issued in addition to an Individual, Educational or Agency SCP. STUDENTS / AGENCY MEMBERS: • Each student / agency member must complete the Educational & Agency SCP Dependent Information Form and be approved to work under an Educational or Agency SCP. (See The SCP section online at https://www.outdooralabama.com/licenses/commercial-licenses-permits) COLLECTIONS: • A SCP Collection Data Form must be completed and faxed for approval prior to any scheduled collection. (See The SCP section online at https://www.outdooralabama.com/licenses/commercial-licenses-permits) • Annual reports required. Must be submitted prior to renewal requests. RESTRICTIONS: • Must have a SCP to obtain a Federal / State Protected Species permit. • Federal / State Protected permit must meet strict guidelines prior to issuance. • No species collected are to be sold. NOTE: • Electronic system processes all applications and reports. • For areas under Marine Resources jurisdiction, call (251) 861-2882. • Applicant should allow 3 weeks for processing and issuance.
    [Show full text]
  • September 24, 2018
    September 24, 2018 Sent via Federal eRulemaking Portal to: http://www.regulations.gov Docket Nos. FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0006 FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007 FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0009 Bridget Fahey Chief, Division of Conservation and Classification U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES Falls Church, VA 22041-3808 bridget_fahey@fws.gov Craig Aubrey Chief, Division of Environmental Review Ecological Services Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES Falls Church, VA 22041 craig_aubrey@fws.gov Samuel D. Rauch, III National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 Samuel.rauch@noaa.gov Re: Proposed Revisions of Endangered Species Act Regulations Dear Mr. Aubrey, Ms. Fahey, and Mr. Rauch: The Southern Environmental Law Center (“SELC”) submits the following comments in opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s and National Marine Fisheries Service’s proposed revisions to the Endangered Species Act’s implementing regulations.1 We submit these comments on behalf of 57 organizations working to protect the natural resources of the 1 Revision of the Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,174 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 17); Revision of Regulations for Interagency Cooperation, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,178 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 402); Revision of the Regulations for Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,193 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R.
    [Show full text]
  • US Fish & Wildlife Service Revised
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Revised RECOVERY PLAN for the Pallid Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) Original Plan Approved: November 1993 Prepared by: Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Montana Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office Billings, Montana For Mountain-Prairie Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Denver, CO January 2014 DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Plans are reviewed by the public and subject to additional peer review before they are adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific tasks. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any 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 of recovery tasks. Copies of all documents reviewed in development of the plan are available in the administrative record, located at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Montana Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, Billings, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat, Snail, and Popular Plant May Need Endangered Species Protection
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 20, 2017 Contacts: Denise Rowell, denise_rowell@fws.gov, 251-441-6630 (Alabama) Jennifer Koches, jennifer_koches@fws.gov , 843-727-4707 ext. 214 (South Carolina) Lilibeth Serrano, lilibeth_serrano@fws.gov, 252-933-2255 (North Carolina) Phil Kloer, philip_kloer@fws.gov, 404-679-7299 (Regional Office) Bat, snail, and popular plant may need endangered species protection Fish and Wildlife Service to Gather More Information More research is needed on three species before U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials can determine whether to add them to the threatened and endangered species list. More scientific and commercial information will be compiled for the Venus flytrap, located in the Carolinas; oblong rocksnail, located in Alabama; and tricolored bat, located in 38 states, including Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. The Service and its partners will continue to research the species’ life history, biological requirements and habitats to develop a Species Status Assessment (SSA) and 12-month finding. A 12-month finding is a decision after the SSA regarding whether the species warrants listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Today’s decision, known as a 90-day finding, is in response to multiple petitions for these species to receive federal protection. The 90-day finding decided these petitions presented substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the petitioned actions may be warranted. ● Venus flytrap - The plant hailed by Charles Darwin as “one of the most wonderful plants in the world” is in decline. The widely recognized insect-eating plant naturally occurs within a narrow range of longleaf pine habitat in southeastern North Carolina and northeastern South Carolina, but has been lost from large portions of its historic range.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Animals Tracking List
    Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) ‐ Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals ‐ 2020 MOLLUSKS Common Name Scientific Name G‐Rank S‐Rank Federal Status State Status Mucket Actinonaias ligamentina G5 S1 Rayed Creekshell Anodontoides radiatus G3 S2 Western Fanshell Cyprogenia aberti G2G3Q SH Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata G4G5 S1 Elephant‐ear Elliptio crassidens G5 S3 Spike Elliptio dilatata G5 S2S3 Texas Pigtoe Fusconaia askewi G2G3 S3 Ebonyshell Fusconaia ebena G4G5 S3 Round Pearlshell Glebula rotundata G4G5 S4 Pink Mucket Lampsilis abrupta G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Plain Pocketbook Lampsilis cardium G5 S1 Southern Pocketbook Lampsilis ornata G5 S3 Sandbank Pocketbook Lampsilis satura G2 S2 Fatmucket Lampsilis siliquoidea G5 S2 White Heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata G5 S1 Black Sandshell Ligumia recta G4G5 S1 Louisiana Pearlshell Margaritifera hembeli G1 S1 Threatened Threatened Southern Hickorynut Obovaria jacksoniana G2 S1S2 Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria G4 S1 Alabama Hickorynut Obovaria unicolor G3 S1 Mississippi Pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum G3 S2 Louisiana Pigtoe Pleurobema riddellii G1G2 S1S2 Pyramid Pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum G2G3 S2 Texas Heelsplitter Potamilus amphichaenus G1G2 SH Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Inflated Heelsplitter Potamilus inflatus G1G2Q S1 Threatened Threatened Ouachita Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus occidentalis G3G4 S1 Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica G3G4 S1 Threatened Threatened Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra G4 S1 Southern Creekmussel Strophitus subvexus
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2020 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (CESCF) Traditional Conservation Grants Program Notice of Funding Opportunity
    FY 2020 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (CESCF) Traditional Conservation Grants Program Notice of Funding Opportunity Notice of Funding Opportunity Number: F20AS00070 Federal Program: Department of the Interior, United States (U.S.) Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services & Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 15.615 Authorizing Legislation Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. 1535, as amended Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: We are collecting this information in accordance with the authorizing legislation identified above. Your response is required to obtain or retain a benefit. We will use the information you provide to conduct a competitive review and select projects for funding and, if awarded, to evaluate performance. We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. We estimate that it will take you on average about 40 hours to complete an initial application, about 3 hours to revise the terms of an award, and about 8 hours per report to prepare and submit financial and performance reports, including time to maintain records and gather information. Actual time for these activities will vary depending on program-specific requirements. You may send comments on the burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection to the Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803. OMB Control Number: 1018-0100 (Expiration Date: 7/31/2021) I. Program Description More than half of all species listed as endangered or threatened spend at least part of their life cycle on non-federal lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D
    This article was downloaded by: [69.144.7.122] On: 24 July 2013, At: 12:35 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Fisheries Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufsh20 Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D. Johnson a , Arthur E. Bogan b , Kenneth M. Brown c , Noel M. Burkhead d , James R. Cordeiro e o , Jeffrey T. Garner f , Paul D. Hartfield g , Dwayne A. W. Lepitzki h , Gerry L. Mackie i , Eva Pip j , Thomas A. Tarpley k , Jeremy S. Tiemann l , Nathan V. Whelan m & Ellen E. Strong n a Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) , 2200 Highway 175, Marion , AL , 36756-5769 E-mail: b North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences , Raleigh , NC c Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge , LA d United States Geological Survey, Southeast Ecological Science Center , Gainesville , FL e University of Massachusetts at Boston , Boston , Massachusetts f Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Florence , AL g U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , Jackson , MS h Wildlife Systems Research , Banff , Alberta , Canada i University of Guelph, Water Systems Analysts , Guelph , Ontario , Canada j University of Winnipeg , Winnipeg , Manitoba , Canada k Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Marion , AL l Illinois Natural History Survey , Champaign , IL m University of Alabama , Tuscaloosa , AL n Smithsonian Institution, Department of Invertebrate Zoology , Washington , DC o Nature-Serve , Boston , MA Published online: 14 Jun 2013.
    [Show full text]