United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NM-P020-2018-0605-EA DOI-BLM-NM-P020-2018-0511-EA Oxy USA, Inc. Cedar Canyon Gas ROW from River Bend Header to West Header Right-of-Way Project in Eddy County, New Mexico BLM Serial No. NM-138229 Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Pecos District Carlsbad Field Office 620 East Greene Street Carlsbad, NM 88220 Phone: (575) 887-6544 FAX: (575) 885-9264 April 2018 Confidentiality Policy Any comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, you submit may be made available for public review. Individual respondents may request confidentiality. If you wish to withhold your name or street address from public review or from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your written comment. Such requests will be honored to the extent allowed by law. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public inspection in their entirety. It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Purpose and Need for Action .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action .............................................................................................. 3 1.3 Decision to be Made ........................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Conformance with Applicable Land Use Plan(s) ................................................................ 3 1.5 Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, or Other Plans........................................................ 4 1.6 Scoping, Public Involvement, and Issues ........................................................................... 5 2 Proposed Action And Alternatives ...................................................................................... 7 2.1 Proposed Action .................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 No Action ............................................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study ............................................. 9 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ............................................... 10 3.1 Air Resources .................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Watershed Drainages ....................................................................................................... 12 3.3 Soils .................................................................................................................................. 14 3.4 Vegetation and Invasive, Non-Native Species .................................................................. 14 3.5 Wildlife and Special Status Species .................................................................................. 16 3.6 Karst Resources ................................................................................................................ 19 3.7 Cultural Resources............................................................................................................ 20 3.8 Paleontological Resources ............................................................................................... 21 3.9 Livestock Grazing .............................................................................................................. 22 3.10 Public Health and Safety ................................................................................................... 23 3.11 Cumulative Impacts........................................................................................................... 24 4 Supporting Information ...................................................................................................... 26 4.1 List of Preparers ................................................................................................................ 26 4.2 References Cited .............................................................................................................. 26 Appendices Appendix A. Natural Resources Map and Photographs Appendix B. Special Status Species Data Appendix C. NMDGF Pipeline Trenching Guidelines Environmental Assessment i Oxy USA Inc., Cedar Canyon Gas ROW from River Bend Header to West Header Right-of-Way Project in Eddy County, New Mexico LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. Project vicinity map for the proposed project. ..................................................................... 2 Figure 2.1. Proposed project area. ........................................................................................................ 8 Figure A.1. Natural resources data map. ........................................................................................... A-1 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1. Potential Permits, Approvals, and Clearances Needed for Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of the Proposed Project .......................................................................... 4 Table 1.2. Resource Issues Identified for the Proposed Project .......................................................... 5 Table 1.3. Resource Issues Considered but not Analyzed in Detail for the Proposed Project ............ 6 Table 2.1. Proposed Project Disturbance from the Cedar Canyon Buried Natural Gas Pipeline Right-of-Way Project ........................................................................................................... 7 Table 3.1. Climate Averages for Carlsbad, 1981–2010 ..................................................................... 11 Table 3.2. Watersheds Crossed by the Proposed Project ................................................................. 13 Table 3.3. Soils in the Proposed Project Area ................................................................................... 14 Table 3.4. Plant Species Observed during the Biological Survey of the Proposed Project Area ...... 15 Table 3.5. Wildlife Detected during the Biological Survey of the Proposed Project Area .................. 16 Table 3.6. Special Status Species with the Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Area ........... 17 Table 3.7. BLM CFO Allotments and Range Improvements in the Proposed Project Area .............. 23 Table B.1. Special Status Species for Eddy County, New Mexico ................................................... B-1 Environmental Assessment ii Oxy USA Inc., Cedar Canyon Gas ROW from River Bend Header to West Header Right-of-Way Project in Eddy County, New Mexico LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS °F degrees Fahrenheit ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern AES Applied EnviroSolutions AMS Analysis of the Management Situation amsl above mean sea level BLM Bureau of Land Management CAA Clean Air Act CCA Candidate Conservation Agreement CCCA Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances CEHMM Center of Excellence for Hazardous Material Management CFO Carlsbad Field Office CFR Code of Federal Regulations CO carbon monoxide COA condition of approval EA environmental assessment EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact GHG greenhouse gas GIS geographic information system HAP hazardous air pollutant HUC Hydrologic Unit Code IM Instruction Memorandum IPA Isolated Population Area MLA Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 MOU Memorandum of Understanding NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NATA National Air Toxics Assessment NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NMDGF New Mexico Department of Game and Fish NMOSE New Mexico Office of the State Engineer NMPM New Mexico Principal Meridian NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOx nitrogen oxide(s) NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places O3 ozone Oxy Oxy USA, Inc. Pb lead PBPA Permian Basin Programmatic Agreement PFYC Potential Fossil Yield Classification PM2.5 particulate matter equal to or less than 2.5 microns in diameter PM10 particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter R. Range RMP Resource Management Plan ROW right-of-way SF-299 Standard Form 299 SMA Special Management Area SO2 sulfur dioxide State State of New Mexico SWCA SWCA Environmental Consultants T. Township TCP traditional cultural property USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USC United States Code USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Environmental Assessment iii Oxy USA Inc., Cedar Canyon Gas ROW from River Bend Header to West Header Right-of-Way Project in Eddy County, New Mexico This page intentionally left blank Environmental Assessment iv Oxy USA Inc., Cedar Canyon Gas ROW from River Bend Header to West Header Right-of-Way Project in Eddy County, New Mexico 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1.1 Background Oxy USA, Inc. (Oxy) submitted a Standard Form 299 (SF-299) Application for Transportation and Utility Systems and Facilities on Federal Lands to the Bureau
Recommended publications
  • Fishes of New Mexicoi
    Threatened and Endangered Fishes of New MexicoI BY DAVID L. PROPST ILLUSTRATED BY W. HOWARD BRANDENBURG MAPS BY AMBER L. HOBBES ◆ EDITED BY PAUL C. MARSH TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 1 1999 NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH STATE OF NEW MEXICO: Gary E. Johnson, Governor STATE GAME COMMISSION: William H. Brininstool, Chairman ◆ Jal Gail J. Cramer ◆ Farmington Steve Padilla ◆ Albuquerque Dr. William E. Schuler ◆ Albuquerque George A. Ortega ◆ Santa Fe Bud Hettinga ◆ Las Cruces Stephen E. Doerr ◆ Portales DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH: Gerald A. Maracchini, Director CONSERVATION SERVICES DIVISION: Andrew V. Sandoval, Chief $10.00 1999 Threatened and Endangered FISHES of New Mexico ◆ 1 Propst, D.L. 1999. Threatened and endangered fishes of New Mexico. Tech. Rpt. No. 1. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, NM. 84 pp. Cover by NoBul Graphics, Albuquerque, NM. Design and production by Janelle Harden, The Studio, Albuquerque, NM. Publication and printing supported by the Turner Foundation, Atlanta, GA. In part, a contribution of Federal Aid in Fish and Wildlife Restoration., Project FW–17–RD. Contents may be reprinted if credit is given to the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. Complete copies may be purchased for $10.00 U.S. (see address below). Make checks payable to “New Mexico Department of Game and Fish.” Conservation Services Division New Mexico Department of Game and Fish P.O. Box 25112 Santa Fe, NM 87504 (505) 827-7882 2 ◆ New Mexico Department of Game and Fish FORWARD Threatened and Endangered Fishes of New a major concern. Over half of the rivers in New Mexico Mexico by Dr.
    [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]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Diel Cycle and Turbidity on Antipredator Response
    EFFECTS OF DIEL CYCLE AND TURBIDITY ON ANTIPREDATOR RESPONSE TO MULTIPLE CUES OF PREDATORS BY EURYCEA NANA AND EURYCEA SOSORUM by Kristina Zabierek, B.A. A thesis submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science with a Major in Population and Conservation Biology December 2014 Committee Members: Caitlin R. Gabor, Chair James R. Ott Kristen J. Epp COPYRIGHT by Kristina Zabierek 2014 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgment. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Kristina Zabierek, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. DEDICATION I dedicate this work to the Eurycea salamanders and to all the people working to conserve our aquifers and rivers. My work would be impossible without you. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express extreme gratitude towards Caitlin Gabor for giving me the opportunity to pursue my interests, and for her continual guidance, patience, and support. I would also like to thank my committee members Kristen Epp and Jim Ott for constant moral support, for invaluable study design advice, and for statistical advice. Many thanks to Andrea Aspbury, Floyd Weckerly, and the EEB discussion group for extremely helpful advice and for support.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Ecology and Habitat Preference of the Leopard Darter, Percina Pantherina
    REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY AND HABITAT PREFERENCE OF THE LEOPARD DARTER, PERCINA PANTHERINA By PAUL WILLIAM /~AMES Bachelor of Science University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 1981 ·4::er of Science ...1.issouri State University 3pringfield, Missouri 1983 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the·Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY July, 1989 . - ~· ,• ) "' Oklahoma State Univ. Lihra1 REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY AND HABITAT PREFERENCE OF THE LEOPARD DARTER, PERCINA PANTHERINA Thesis Approved: ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my advisor, Dr. o. Eugene Maughan, for giving me the opportunity to work on this project and for his encouragement throughout my graduate program. I would also like to thank the members of my graduate committee, Dr. William A. Drew, Dr. Anthony A. Echelle, Dr. Rudolph J. Miller, and Dr. Alexander v. Zale, for their professional and personal advice throughout the course of the study. I wish to extend my sincere gratitude to the u. s. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, and the Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit for providing financial and technical support for the study. I am especially grateful to Mr. Frank James of the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation's McCurtain County Wilderness Area for his friendship and hospitality during extended field trips. A sincere thanks goes to Rick Horton, Steve O'Donnell, and Todd Phillips for their help in the field and laboratory. A special thanks goes to Stuart Leon for helping with the development of many of the field and data analysis techniques used in this study.
    [Show full text]
  • The Life History, Behavior, and Ecology of Etheostoma
    THE LIFE HISTORY, BEHAVIOR, AND ECOLOGY OF ETHEOSTOMA SAGITTA (JORDAN AND SWAIN) A Thesis Presented for the Master of Science Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville John Eldon Lowe, Jr. December 1979 1404996 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. D. A. Etnier, the chairman of my supervisory committee. He gave advice and direction during the entire project, including preparation of the manuscript. I am also indebted to the other members of my committee, Drs. M. C. Whiteside and G. M. Burghardt for serving in that capacity. Monetary support for the study was received from the Department of Ecology (my special thanks to Dr. Frank McCormick). The experimental raceway site was provided by the East Tennessee Chest and Disease Hospital by permission of Mr. James Gleason. The Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency issued me a permit for collecting specimens in the state of Tennessee. I am thankful to Mr. R. B. Fitz of the staff of the Division of Forestry, Fisheries, and Wildlife, Tennessee Valley Authority, Norris, Tennessee, for allowing me to use their scale projector. I am also indebted to Mr. Bill Wolfe as a companion on my field trips. My very special thanks go to my wife, Karen, who helped me collect my specimens, did the spawning pair drawing, and exhibited her patience and understanding throughout. ii ABSTRACT The life history, behavior, and ecology of Etheostoma sagitta (Jordan and Swain) were studied in the Cumberland River system in Tennessee. Diving equipment was utilized in making observations on macrohabitat, microhabitat, distribu- tion, seasonal and diurnal activity, feeding behavior, migration, territoriality, associated species, competition, and population density and structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Xerox University Microfilms
    INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated w ith a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproduction, Life History, and Diets of the Greenthroat
    REPRODUCTION, LIFE HISTORY, AND DIETS OF THE GREENTHROAT DARTER ETHEOSTOMA LEPIDUM IN LOW-FLOW AND HIGH-FLOW ENVIRONMENTS by Sabrina E. Thiels, B.S. A thesis submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science with a Major in Aquatic Resources May 2021 Committee Members: Timothy Bonner, Chair David Huffman Caitlin Gabor COPYRIGHT by Sabrina E. Thiels 2021 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Sabrina E. Thiels, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to thank my major advisor Dr. Timothy Bonner. His passion and commitment to his students and career is extremely special and inspiring in the field, lab, and classroom. I could not have completed this project without his guidance. I would also like to thank Dr. Caitlin Gabor and Dr. David Huffman for serving on my committee and their contributions to the completion of this manuscript. To all of the students, past and present; graduate and undergraduate, who had a hand in this project: Jackson Pav, Austin Banks, Christa Edwards, Cody Craig, Jeremy Maikoetter, and Alex Sotola for all of your help and guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Basin Checklists and Dichotomous Keys for Inland Fishes of Texas
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 874: 31–45Drainage (2019) basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas 31 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.874.35618 CHECKLIST http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas Cody Andrew Craig1, Timothy Hallman Bonner1 1 Department of Biology/Aquatic Station, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666, USA Corresponding author: Cody A. Craig ([email protected]) Academic editor: Kyle Piller | Received 22 April 2019 | Accepted 23 July 2019 | Published 2 September 2019 http://zoobank.org/B4110086-4AF6-4E76-BDAC-EA710AF766E6 Citation: Craig CA, Bonner TH (2019) Drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas. ZooKeys 874: 31–45. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.874.35618 Abstract Species checklists and dichotomous keys are valuable tools that provide many services for ecological stud- ies and management through tracking native and non-native species through time. We developed nine drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for 196 inland fishes of Texas, consisting of 171 native fishes and 25 non-native fishes. Our checklists were updated from previous checklists and revised using reports of new established native and non-native fishes in Texas, reports of new fish occurrences among drainages, and changes in species taxonomic nomenclature. We provided the first dichotomous keys for major drainage basins in Texas. Among the 171 native inland fishes, 6 species are considered extinct or extirpated, 13 species are listed as threatened or endangered by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and 59 spe- cies are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) by the state of Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • THREATENED and ENDANGERED SPECIES of NEW MEXICO 2008 Biennial Review and Recommendations
    THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES OF NEW MEXICO 2008 BIENNIAL REVIEW DRAFT First Public Comment Period March 11, 2008 New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Conservation Services Division DRAFT 2008 Biennial Review of T & E Species of NM, 3/11/08 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES OF NEW MEXICO 2008 Biennial Review and Recommendations Authority: Wildlife Conservation Act (17-2-37 through 17-2-46 NMSA 1978) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A total of 118 species and subspecies are on the 2008 list of threatened and endangered New Mexico wildlife. The list includes 2 crustaceans, 25 mollusks, 23 fishes, 6 amphibians, 15 reptiles, 32 birds and 15 mammals (Tables 1, 2). An additional 7 species of mammals has been listed as restricted to facilitate control of traffic in federally protected species. A species is endangered if it is in jeopardy of extinction or extirpation from the state; a species is threatened if it is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range in New Mexico. Species or subspecies of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fishes, mollusks, and crustaceans native to New Mexico may be listed as threatened or endangered under the Wildlife Conservation Act (WCA). During the Biennial Review, species may be upgraded from threatened to endangered, or downgraded from endangered to threatened, based upon data, views, and information regarding the biological and ecological status of the species. Investigations for new listings or removals from the list (delistings) can be undertaken at any time, but require additional procedures from those for the Biennial Review. The 2006 Biennial Review contained a recommendation for maintaining the status for 119 species and subspecies listed as threatened, endangered, or restricted under the WCA, and uplisting four species (Arizona grasshopper sparrow, Pecos bluntnose shiner, spikedace, and meadow jumping mouse ) from threatened to endangered and downlisting two species (shortneck snaggletooth and piping plover) from endangered to threatened.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 3: DELETION TABLES 3.1 Aluminum
    APPENDIX 3: DELETION TABLES APPENDIX 3: DELETION TABLES 3.1 Aluminum TABLE 3.1.1: Deletion process for the Santa Ana River aluminum site-specific database. Phylum Class Order Family Genus/Species Common Name Code Platyhelminthes Turbellaria Tricladida Planarlidae Girardiaia tigrina Flatworm G Annelida Oligochaeta Haplotaxida Tubificidae Tubifex tubifex Worm F Mollusca Gastropoda Limnophila Physidae Physa sp. Snail G Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphnidae Ceriodaphnia dubia Cladoceran O* Arthropoda Branchiopoda Diplostraca Daphnidae Daphnia magna Cladoceran O* Arthropoda Malacostraca Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea aquaticus Isopod F Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Crangonyx pseudogracilis Amphipod F Arthropoda Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus pseudolimnaeus Amphipod G Arthropoda Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria sp. Stonefly O Arthropoda Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Tanytarsus dissimilis Midge G Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout D Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus tschawytscha Chinook Salmon D Chordata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Salmo salar Atlantic salmon D Chordata Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Hybognathus amarus Rio Grande silvery minnow F Chordata Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow S Chordata Actinopterygii Perifomes Centrarchidae Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish S Chordata Actinopterygii Perifomes Centrarchidae Micropterus dolomieui Smallmouth bass G Chordata Actinopterygii
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater And
    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]