DOCSLIB.ORG

Rare Plant Stabilization Plan Status

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2-1-1 Chapter 2.1.0: RARE PLANT STABILIZATION PLAN STATUS General Rare Plant Issues This section includes a discussion on the taxon status, genetic storage, outplanting and threats for each rare plant taxa covered by the MIP. The requirements for stabilization are to achieve a stable number of mature plants, have a population structure which can maintain that number of mature plants, obtain full genetic storage, and control all observed threats at each MFS PU. This will be done by implementing Population Unit (PU) and Management Unit (MU) management at all of the ‘Manage for Stability’ PUs. The most current list of the MFS PUs were proposed in the 2006 Status Report. Management designation changes discussed at last years IT meeting have been incorporated in this year report. In addition, NRS have included a Stabilization Plan for Gouania vitifolia that was found to require stabilization by the 2007 Mākua Military Reservation Biological Opinion from the USFWS. General rare plant issues are discussed below followed by 27 Species Status Summaries for each of the MIP taxa and the Stabilization Plan from Gouania vitifolia. Propagation infrastructure NRS has been working with NARS on the construction of an additional shade-house at the Pahole Mid-elevation Nursery. The frame and ground work is largely complete and NRS expect to have the shade cloth attached and benches and irrigation infrastructure complete in the next year. NRS has continued to work with State NARS Horticulturist, Doug Okamoto, on projects at the Pahole Mid-Elevation Nursery and on stock from Pahole NAR. Mr. Okamoto has been extremely valuable in providing assistance in maintaining stock and providing expertise on propagation and outplanting. He has been maintaining critical stock from the Pahole NAR at the Pahole Mid-Elevation Nursery and at Lyon Arboretum. NRS continue to use two plant growth chambers at the Schofield baseyard for germination and early stage propagation. Research Issues Research issues related to propagation and threats are discussed in detail in Chapter 5 Research Activities and in the Species Status Summary for each taxon. NRS had identified several propagation research projects in the last year. In particular, methods to produce seed from greenhouse collections of Dubautia herbstobatae, Viola chamissoniana, and Schiedea obovata were to be studied. These projects were successful in determining pollination techniques and producing viable seeds from hand-pollination and these methods will be utilized for producing propagules for meeting genetic storage goals in the coming years. In addition, research on determining the best collection and storage techniques for Cyanea superba subsp. superba showed that mature seeds which are collected and dried can be germinated and stored with greater success than previously observed collections. Living Collections NRS has identified several MIP taxa that would benefit from having a living collection of plants for genetic storage, propagation, and threat control research. In the last year, NRS began preliminary discussions with Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) about expanding sites at Waimea Botanical Garden. During a site visit, potential planting sites for several taxa were discussed and a proposal will be submitted to OHA in January 2008, once the transfer of management from the Audubon Society is complete. This site can be used to hold stock from 2007 Mākua Implementation Plan Status Report Chapter 2.1.0 Rare Plant Stabilization Plan Status 2-1-2 PUs where threat control is not yet in place, produce propagules for genetic storage and conduct propagation research. Monitoring NRS was unable to fill the Monitoring Program Manager Position. In the next year, NRS will contract Jim Jacobi (USGS Botanist) to address monitoring issues, develop monitoring protocols, oversee implementation of sampling methods, and begin analysis. In the absence of a Monitoring Manger NRS was involved in a limited number of projects including the three discussed below. First, intensive monitoring of Sanicula mariversa to begin to collect demography data and develop Population Viability Analysis (PVA) models for the species to better guide management (see Chapter 2.1.23). Second, the deployment of weather stations at Phyllostegia kaalaensis reintroduction sites to measure micro site variation and begin to collect environmental data that may be important for developing future reintroduction plans (see Chapter 2.1.20). Finally, this year NRS began a trial vegetation mapping project for Mākua Military Reservation with help from the Jim Jacobi and Stephen Ambagas, of USGS. The two objectives of this project are to prepare a detailed vegetation map focused on the northwestern section of the Mākua Action Area and conduct a pilot study using very high resolution multi- spectral imagery to map the distribution and abundance of selected native and alien plant species in Kahanahāiki and ‘Ōhikilolo management units. The vegetation mapping will follow methodologies developed by S. Ambagis and J. Jacobi and will utilize the object-based classification software eCognition with IKONOS and QuickBird satellite imagery as well as very high resolution digital image data. This data is collected with a multi-spectral camera mounted on a helicopter to be flown over Mākua Valley. In March of this year, high resolution (15-20cm) imagery was collected with a multi-spectral camera and other equipment brought here from the mainland. Unfortunately, the weather was not optimal for collecting data and many of the areas covered are not useful because of cloud shadow. To supplement this data lower resolution Quickbird (MS 2.6m) and IKONOS (MS 4m) data will need to be used in more areas than initially planned. The imagery has been processed and S. Ambagis is looking at it along with the Quickbird data. S. Ambagis is working on coming up with spectral signatures for the different plant species that could be identified in the images. NRS is assisting by collecting ground data on areas identified by S. Ambagis. In August 2007 a meeting was held to go over some possible signature areas and to confirm these sites with NRS knowledge of the ground in those areas. NRS and USGS-BRD continue to move forward with this project, and are planning to use it to stratify monitoring plot placement in the near future. NRS are interested in other very high-resolution imaging systems currently being developed that can be deployed in Hawai‘i such as the project being led by Dr. Greg Asner of the Carnegie Institute (Asner et al. 2007). Stabilization Strategy This is the third year that NRS has used the stabilization strategy for designing rare plant management. The new stabilization species Gouania vitifolia was analyzed with the strategy described previously (OANRP 2006) and a draft stabilization plan is included here (Chapter 2.1.12). 2007 Mākua Implementation Plan Status Report Chapter 2.1.0 Rare Plant Stabilization Plan Status 2-1-3 Example of Species Status Summary The species status summary outlines all PU work conducted for each of the 28 MIP taxa. Each species summary has the same format. Each section is explained in detail in the example below: Requirements for Stability: This section defines requirements for reaching stability for each taxon. • 3 Population Units (PUs) are designated for all species. However, for species meeting the following criteria 4 PUs have been designated: o with presence in both Makua Action Area (AA) and Schofield AA (Example: Plantago princeps) o for species occurring in the high fire threat area of the Makua AA (Example Chamaesyce celastroides) o for taxa that have no extant wild PUs and therefore rely completely on reintroduction for stability (Example Cyanea superba) • [25-100] reproducing individuals in each PU (justification based on the number of individuals, average life span, life form, and other factors from the final MIP) • Threats controlled: may include fences, weed control, arthropod and rodent control • Complete genetic representation of all PUs in storage: may include nursery living collections, seed storage, and tissue culture storage • Expedited Stabilization: (5 or 10 yrs) Expedited Stabilization is required for 12 species identified in the 2007 Biological Opinion (BO). Expedited stabilization actions will not begin until NRS receive the additional funding needed to accomplish these new goals. How many of the 4 How many of the How many of the 4 How many of the 4 How many MFS MFS PUs have 4 MFS PUs have MFS PUs have full MFS PUs are PUs that need stable numbers of had in situ genetic storage? protected from reintroductions mature individuals? recruitment? ungulates? have been initiated? 2/4 3/4 1/4 1/4 0/2 This table provides a general overview of progress on the stabilization of the MFS PUs for each species. The second and fifth questions have changed slightly to reflect shorter term assessments of the long term goals outlined in the 20 year MIP plan. Taxon-Level Discussion The taxon-level discussion covers the topics below related to taxon status: • Are any of the threats controlled for all or any of the PUs? Is there a trend in threat levels at the PU that warrant a management change? • Does the taxon or any of its’ PUs have stable numbers of reproducing individuals? Stable population structure? • Are any of the PUs in need of reintroduction or augmentation? If so, has this begun? How is it going? • Are there significant propagation or genetic storage issues? • Are there new taxonomy issues? • General prognosis for the taxon given current threat control trends. 2007 Mākua Implementation Plan Status Report Chapter 2.1.0 Rare Plant Stabilization Plan Status 2-1-4 Table Table 2.1.2a Taxon Status Summary Example ‘Taxon Status’ Example ‘Taxon 2007 Mākua Implementation Plan Status Report Chapter 2.1.0 Rare Plant Stabilization Plan Status 2-1-5 This table displays the current status of the wild and outplanted plants in each PU and the 2006 population estimates for comparison.
Recommended publications
  • US EPA-Pesticides; Dodine

    US EPA-Pesticides; Dodine

    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDESDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES PC Code: 044301 DP Barcode: D338148 Date: January 22, 2008 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Dodine Section 3 New Use on Peanuts and Bananas TO: Robert Westin, Product Manager Mary Waller, Team Leader Registration Division (7505P) FROM: Christopher J. Salice, P.h.D, Biologist Marietta Echeverria, Envronmental Scientist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) REVIEWED BY: Thomas Steeger, Ph.D., Senior Biologist R. David Jones, Ph.D., Senior Agronomist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) APPROVED BY: Elizabeth Behl, Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has reviewed the proposed label for the use of dodine (n-dodecylguanidine monoacetate; CAS 2439-10-3) and its end-use product SYLLIT® FL (39.6% dodine) fungicide on peanuts and bananas. The results of this screening-level risk assessment indicate that the proposed new uses of dodine on peanuts and bananas have the potential for direct adverse effects on listed and non-listed freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates, listed and non-listed vascular and non-vascular plants, and listed and non-listed birds and mammals. Major data gaps are listed below. Without these data potential risk to the associated taxa can not be precluded: • Aquatic vascular plant toxicity data (850.4400) There is uncertainty regarding the potential chronic effects of dodine to saltwater invertebrates and fish since there are no toxicity data. Using acute-to-chronic ratios (ACR) from freshwater species to calculate chronic endpoints for the saltwater species, however, suggests that risks may be low.
  • Conservation of Hawaiian Lobelioids — in Vitro and Molecular Studies

    Conservation of Hawaiian Lobelioids — in Vitro and Molecular Studies

    CONSERVATION OF HAWAIIAN LOBELIOIDS — IN VITRO AND MOLECULAR STUDIES A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAW ATI IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN HORTICULTURE MAY 1996 By Gregory A. Koob Dissertation Committee: Yoneo Sagawa, Co-Chairperson Sterling Keeley, Co-Chairperson Adelheid Kuehnle Fred Rauch Clifford Smith We certify that we have read this dissertation and that, in our opinion, it is satisfactory in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Horticulture. DISSERTATION COMMITTEE I (^Chairperson^ !^-Chairperson AkjJU^jA ■ UilU 11 © Copyright 1996 by Gregory A. Koob All Rights Reserved 111 Acknowledgments I would like to thank the staff and volunteers at the Harold L. Lyon Arboretum and the Lyon Arboretum Association for their support of the in vitro research. The staff of the National Tropical Botanical Garden, the State of Hawai'i Division of Forestry and Wildlife, the Nature Conservancy of Hawai'i, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, John Obata, and Rick Palmer are appreciated for supplying plant material. Partial funding was supplied by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the State of Hawai'i Division of Forestry and Wildlife, the Center for Plant Conservation, the University of Hawai'i Foundation, and Sigma Xi Grants-in-Aid of Research. Thank you to Dave Lorence, Kay Lynch, Loyal Mehrhoff, Carol Nakamura, John Obata, Rick Palmer, Joshlyn Sands, and Alvin Yoshinaga for information used in this report. Special thanks to Sterling Keeley for the use of her lab and supplies and support for the RAPDs work and to Yoneo Sagawa for his knowledgeable support of the in vitro research.
  • Is Recovery Outline For

    Is Recovery Outline For

    ______________________________________________________________________ U.S.Is Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Outline for the Island of Oʻahu July 2018 Scientific Name/ Common Name PLANTS ANIMALS Bidens amplectens/ Ko‘oko‘olau Hylaeus kuakea/ Hawaiian yellow-faced bee Cyanea calycina/ Hāhā Hylaeus mana/ Hawaiian yellow-faced bee Cyanea lanceolata/ Hāhā Megalagrion nigrohamatum nigrolineatum/ Cyanea purpurellifolia/ Hāhā Blackline Hawaiian damselfly Cyrtandra gracilis/ Ha‘iwale Megalagrion leptodemas/ Crimson Hawaiian Cyrtandra kaulantha/ Ha‘iwale damselfly Cyrtandra sessilis/ Ha‘iwale Megalagrion oceanicum/ Oceanic Hawaiian Cyrtandra waiolani/ Ha‘iwale damselfly Doryopteris takeuchii/ No common name Korthalsella degeneri/ Hulumoa Melicope christophersenii/ Alani Melicope hiiakae/ Alani Melicope makahae/ Alani Platydesma cornuta var. cornuta/ No common name Platydesma cornuta var. decurrens/ No common name Pleomele forbesii/ Hala pepe Polyscias lydgatei/ No common name Pritchardia bakeri/ Baker’s Loulu Psychotria hexandra subsp. oahuensis/ Kōpiko Pteralyxia macrocarpa/ Kaulu Stenogyne kaalae subsp. sherffii/ No common name Zanthoxylum oahuense/ Mānele Recovery Outline for the Island of Oʻahu • 2018 Listing Status and Date Endangered; September 18, 2012 (77 FR 57648) and September 30, 2015 (80 FR 58820) Lead Agency/Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1 Lead Field Office Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3-122, Honolulu, Hawaiʻi 96850, (808) 792–9400 Purpose of the Recovery Outline: This document lays out a preliminary course of action for the survival and recovery of 20 plants and 3 damselflies endemic to the island of Oʻahu, all of which were listed endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2012; and 2 plants and 2 Hawaiian yellow-faced bees also endemic to the island of Oʻahu, listed as endangered under the ESA in 2016 (USFWS 2012b, 2016b).
  • *Wagner Et Al. --Intro

    *Wagner Et Al. --Intro

    NUMBER 60, 58 pages 15 September 1999 BISHOP MUSEUM OCCASIONAL PAPERS HAWAIIAN VASCULAR PLANTS AT RISK: 1999 WARREN L. WAGNER, MARIE M. BRUEGMANN, DERRAL M. HERBST, AND JOEL Q.C. LAU BISHOP MUSEUM PRESS HONOLULU Printed on recycled paper Cover illustration: Lobelia gloria-montis Rock, an endemic lobeliad from Maui. [From Wagner et al., 1990, Manual of flowering plants of Hawai‘i, pl. 57.] A SPECIAL PUBLICATION OF THE RECORDS OF THE HAWAII BIOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR 1998 Research publications of Bishop Museum are issued irregularly in the RESEARCH following active series: • Bishop Museum Occasional Papers. A series of short papers PUBLICATIONS OF describing original research in the natural and cultural sciences. Publications containing larger, monographic works are issued in BISHOP MUSEUM four areas: • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Anthropology • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Botany • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Entomology • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Zoology Numbering by volume of Occasional Papers ceased with volume 31. Each Occasional Paper now has its own individual number starting with Number 32. Each paper is separately paginated. The Museum also publishes Bishop Museum Technical Reports, a series containing information relative to scholarly research and collections activities. Issue is authorized by the Museum’s Scientific Publications Committee, but manuscripts do not necessarily receive peer review and are not intended as formal publications. Institutions and individuals may subscribe to any of the above or pur- chase separate publications from Bishop Museum Press, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817-0916, USA. Phone: (808) 848-4135; fax: (808) 841-8968; email: [email protected]. Institutional libraries interested in exchanging publications should write to: Library Exchange Program, Bishop Museum Library, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817-0916, USA; fax: (808) 848-4133; email: [email protected].
  • 1 DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife

    1 DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife

    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 08/04/2016 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2016-17322, and on FDsys.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2008–0063; 92300-1113-0000-9B] RIN 1018–AU62 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Amending the Formats of the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, amend the format of the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) to reflect current practices and standards that will make the regulations and Lists easier to understand. The Lists, in the new format, are included in their entirety and have been updated to correct identified errors. 1 DATES: This rule is effective [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Morgan, Ecological Services Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA, 22041; telephone 703– 358–2171. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists), found in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17.11 for wildlife and 50 CFR 17.12 for plants, contain the names of endangered species and threatened species officially listed pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
  • 2004 Status Update Implementation Plan Makua Military Reservation

    2004 Status Update Implementation Plan Makua Military Reservation

    2004 STATUS UPDATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MAKUA MILITARY RESERVATION ISLAND OF OAHU September 2004 Prepared by: United States Army Garrison, Hawaii Directorate of Public Works Environmental Division Schofield Barracks, Hawaii 96857 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Contributors.................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary.................................................................................................................. ii Chapter 1: Introduction....................................................................................................... 1-1 Chapter 2: Urgent Actions 3............................................................................................... 2-1 Chapter 3: Achatinella mustelina Management.................................................................. 3-1 Attachment 1: Captive Snail Propagation Data ............................................. 3-22 Attachment 2: Grouping of 18 A. mustelina Sampling Sites into 6 ESUs..... 3-23 Chapter 4: ‘Elepaio Management ....................................................................................... 4-1 Chapter 5: Rare Plant Stabilization Plan Status.................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Alectryon macrococcus var. macrococcus.................................................. 5-7 5.2 Alsinidendron obovatum ........................................................................... 5-13 5.3 Cenchrus agrimonioides var. agrimonioides...........................................
  • Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 198 / Thursday, October 10, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 53089

    Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 198 / Thursday, October 10, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 53089

    Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 198 / Thursday, October 10, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 53089 Species Historic Family Status When listed Critical Special Scientific name Common name range habitat rules ******* Schiedea None ........................ U.S.A.(HI) CaryophyllaceaeÐPink ............... E 590 NA NA stellarioides. ******* Viola kauaensis Nani wai'ale'ale ....... U.S.A.(HI) ViolaceaeÐViolet ........................ E 590 NA NA var. wahiawaensis. ******* Dated: September 24, 1996. rule implements the Federal protection centimeters (cm) (50 to 250 inches (in.)), John G. Rogers, provisions provided by the Act for these most of which is received at higher Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. plant taxa. elevations along the entire length of the [FR Doc. 96±25558 Filed 10±09±96; 8:45 am] EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule takes effect windward (northeastern) side BILLING CODE 4310±55±P November 12, 1996. (Taliaferro 1959). ADDRESSES: The complete file for this Nineteen of the plant taxa in this final rule is available for inspection, by rule occur in the Koolau MountainsÐ 50 CFR Part 17 appointment, during normal business Chamaesyce rockii, Cyanea acuminata, hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Cyanea humboldtiana, Cyanea RIN 1018±AD50 Service, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, koolauensis, Cyanea longiflora, Cyanea st.-johnii, Cyrtandra dentata, Cyrtandra Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Room 3108, P.O. Box 5088, Honolulu, subumbellata, Cyrtandra viridiflora, and Plants; Determination of Hawaii 96850. Delissea subcordata, Gardenia mannii, Endangered Status for Twenty-five FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Labordia cyrtandrae, Lobelia Plant Species From the Island of Oahu, Brooks Harper, Field Supervisor, gaudichaudii ssp. koolauensis, Lobelia Hawaii Ecological Services (see ADDRESSES section) (telephone: 808/541±3441; monostachya, Melicope saint-johnii, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, facsimile 808/541±3470).
  • 2010 Rare Plant Survey, O'ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi'o, O

    2010 Rare Plant Survey, O'ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi'o, O

    2010 Rare Plant Survey, O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi‘o, O‘ahu Clyde Imada, Patti Clifford, and Joel Q.C. Lau Honolulu, Hawai‘i October 2011 Cover: A vegetative specimen of an endemic species of Lobelia, likely the federally listed Endangered L. koolauensis. Photo by Alex Lau 2010 Rare Plant Survey, O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Waipi‘o, O‘ahu Final Report Prepared by: Clyde Imada 1, Patti Clifford 2,, and Joel Q.C. Lau Hawaii Biological Survey Bishop Museum Honolulu, HI 96817 1. Bishop Museum, Department of Natural Sciences 2. Hawai‘i Invasive Species Council, Weed Risk Assessment Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge Complex 66-590 Kamehameha Hwy, Room 2C Hale‘iwa, HI 96812 Bishop Musem Technical Report 55 Honolulu, Hawai‘i October 2011 Published by: BISHOP MUSEUM The State Museum of Natural and Cultural History 1525 Bernice Street Honolulu, Hawai’i 96817–2704, USA Copyright © 2011 Bishop Museum All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America ISSN 1085-455X Contribution No. 2011-022 to the Hawaii Biological Survey O‘ahu Forest National Wildlife Refuge Botanical Survey TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ iii I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Ia. Setting .............................................................................................................................................................
  • Revised Determinations of Prudency and Proposed Designations of Critical Habitat for Plant Species from the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, Hawaii; Proposed Rule

    Revised Determinations of Prudency and Proposed Designations of Critical Habitat for Plant Species from the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, Hawaii; Proposed Rule

    Monday, January 28, 2002 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Determinations of Prudency and Proposed Designations of Critical Habitat for Plant Species From the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, Hawaii; Proposed Rule VerDate 11<MAY>2000 22:02 Jan 25, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\28JAP2.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 28JAP2 3940 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 18 / Monday, January 28, 2002 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR critical habitat for nine of these species proposed for three species of loulu (Ctenitis squamigera, Diellia erecta, palm, Pritchardia aylmer-robinsonii, P. Fish and Wildlife Service Diplazium molokaiense, Hibiscus napaliensis, and P. viscosa for which we brackenridgei, Ischaemum byrone, determined, on November 7, 2000, that 50 CFR Part 17 Mariscus pennatiformis, Phlegmariurus critical habitat designation is not RIN 1018–AG71 manni, Silene lanceolata, and Vigna o- prudent because it would likely increase wahuensis) in other proposed rules the threats from vandalism or collection Endangered and Threatened Wildlife published on December 18, 2000 (Maui of these species on Kauai and Niihau, and Plants; Revised Determinations of and Kahoolawe), on December 27, 2000 and no change is made to that Prudency and Proposed Designations (Lanai), and on December 29, 2000 determination here. Critical habitat is of Critical Habitat for Plant Species (Molokai). In this proposal we not proposed for two species, Melicope From the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, incorporate the prudency quadrangularis and Acaena exigua, for Hawaii determinations for these nine species which we determined, on November 7, and propose designation of critical 2000, and December 18, 2000, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, habitat for Ctenitis squamigera, Diellia respectively, that critical habitat was not Interior.
  • Non-Timber Forest Produces and Their Conservation in Buxa Tiger Reserve, West Bengal, India

    Non-Timber Forest Produces and Their Conservation in Buxa Tiger Reserve, West Bengal, India

    NON-TIMBER FOREST PRODUCES AND THEIR CONSERVATION IN BUXA TIGER RESERVE, WEST BENGAL, INDIA THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN SCIENCE (BOTANY) UNDER THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH BENGAL 2014 BY ANfM6St-t SAR..KAR UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF Prof. A. P. DAS TAXONOMY AND ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGY LABORATORY DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY UNIVERSITY OF NORTH BENGAL DARJEELING, WEST BENGAL, INDIA -1k 6 ~y I 9 ~ 0 ~' 5 2.. s 2l1 ~ ~ 272109 3 tAUbl015 Thts. s.VVtaLL -pLece of wor-~ ~s. oteot~cfilteot to VVttj teacVter-s. a 11\,ot VVttj fa VVt~Ltj DECLARATION I declare that the thesis entitled 'Non-Timber Forest Produces and Their Conservation in Buxa Tiger Reserve, West Bengal, India' has been prepared by me under the guidance of A. P. Das, Professor Botany, University of North Bengal. No part of this thesis has formed the basis for the award any degree of fellowship previously. [ANIMESH SARKAR] Taxonomy and Environmental Biology Laboratory Department of Botany University ofNorth Bengal Raja Ramrnoh~~arjeeling-734013 Date: ~-'it.t--05 ·-2014 Taxonomy & Environmental Biology Laboratory A . P . [)AS MSc, DIIT, PhD, FLS, FIAT Department of Botany FNScT, FEHT, FES, ISCON Professor North Bengal University Darjeeling 734 430 WB India Member: SSC-IUCN Phone: 091-353-2581847 (R), 2776337 (0) Chief Editor: PLEIONE Mobile: 091-9434061591; FAX: 091-353-2699001 Former President: IAAT e-mail: [email protected] April 15, 2014 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN This is my privilege to endorse that Mr. Animesh Sarkar, M.Sc. in Botany has carried out a piece of research work under my supervision.
  • What Is the Evidence That Invasive Species Are a Significant Contributor to the Decline Or Loss of Threatened Species? Philip D

    What Is the Evidence That Invasive Species Are a Significant Contributor to the Decline Or Loss of Threatened Species? Philip D

    Invasive Species Systematic Review, March 2015 What is the evidence that invasive species are a significant contributor to the decline or loss of threatened species? Philip D. Roberts, Hilda Diaz-Soltero, David J. Hemming, Martin J. Parr, Richard H. Shaw, Nicola Wakefield, Holly J. Wright, Arne B.R. Witt www.cabi.org KNOWLEDGE FOR LIFE Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................. 1 Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 3 Keywords ................................................................................................................................. 4 Definitions ................................................................................................................................ 4 Background .............................................................................................................................. 5 Objective of the review ............................................................................................................ 7 The primary review question: ....................................................................................... 7 Secondary question 1: ................................................................................................. 7 Secondary question 2: ................................................................................................. 7 Methods
  • Department of the Interior

    Department of the Interior

    Vol. 77 Monday, No. 112 June 11, 2012 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing 38 Species on Molokai, Lanai, and Maui as Endangered and Designating Critical Habitat on Molokai, Lanai, Maui, and Kahoolawe for 135 Species; Proposed Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:18 Jun 08, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\11JNP2.SGM 11JNP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS6 34464 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2012 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR writing, at the address shown in the FOR • Reaffirm the listing for two listed FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section plants with taxonomic changes. Fish and Wildlife Service by July 26, 2012. • Designate critical habitat for 37 of ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the 38 proposed species and for the two 50 CFR Part 17 by one of the following methods: listed plants with taxonomic changes. • • Revise designated critical habitat [Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2011–0098; MO Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 92210–0–0009] www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS– for 85 listed plants. R1–ES–2011–0098, which is the docket • Designate critical habitat for 11 RIN 1018–AX14 number for this proposed rule. listed plants and animals that do not • U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public have designated critical habitat on these Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R1– islands. and Plants; Listing 38 Species on ES–2011–0098; Division of Policy and One or more of the 38 proposed Molokai, Lanai, and Maui as Directives Management; U.S.