DOCSLIB.ORG

Restoring Wildlife Habitat on Rat Island: Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Restoring Wildlife Habitat on Rat Island: Environmental Assessment University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln US Fish & Wildlife Publications US Fish & Wildlife Service 12-2007 Restoring Wildlife Habitat on Rat Island: Environmental Assessment Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons "Restoring Wildlife Habitat on Rat Island: Environmental Assessment" (2007). US Fish & Wildlife Publications. 77. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs/77 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Fish & Wildlife Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in US Fish & Wildlife Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Restoring Wildlife Habitat on Rat Island Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Aleutian Islands Unit Environmental Assessment U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge December 2007 Executive Summary Restoration of natural ecosystem function on Rat Island promises to re-establish native seabirds and other native species, thus returning this wilderness island to a healthy natural community. This restoration cannot occur until the island is cleared of the invasive non-native rats that now dominate the living community. Introduced non-native species are a leading cause of extinctions in island communities worldwide. Increasingly, land managers are removing introduced species to aid in the restoration of native ecosystems. Rats are responsible for 40-60% of all recorded bird and reptile extinctions worldwide. Given their widespread successful colonization on islands and the resulting impact to native species, introduced rats are identified as key species for eradication. Most of the Aleutian Islands lying within the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) provide important breeding habitat for seabirds, including many for which the Aleutians provide a substantial portion of their worldwide range. Norway rats are established on at least 10 Aleutian islands or island groups, and the diversity and numbers of breeding seabirds occurring on those islands are now conspicuously low. Rat-caused modifications to other components of the island ecosystems (e.g., other birds, plants, and invertebrates) are also evident. The restoration of Aleutian ecosystems through introduced predator eradications has long been identified as a priority for Alaska Maritime NWR, and the initial efforts have been directed to removing introduced foxes. The focus now has turned to rats. This Environmental Assessment evaluates the environmental effects of eradicating introduced non-native rats from Rat Island, located in the central Aleutians within Alaska Maritime NWR. The consequences of the No Action alternative are addressed along with the Preferred Alternative (Proposed Action hereafter) which is to eradicate rats from Rat Island employing an aerial broadcast of rodenticide, and subsequently maintaining the island in rodent-free status. The intent of the Proposed Action is to facilitate the restoration of the natural island ecosystem by improving habitat quality for native species. Figure 1. Rat Island is located in the central Aleutian Islands. ii Public Comment Period: December 12, 2007 through January 11, 2008 The Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge is seeking public comment on this Environmental Assessment which proposes the restoration of native species and natural ecosystem function on Rat Island through the eradication of invasive rats. A 30 day comment period opens December 12, 2007. Written comments via fax, mail or email are requested by the close of business January 11, 2008. The document is available online at http://alaskamaritime.fws.gov/news.htm. Reading copies have been placed in the public libraries of the communities of Unalaska, Homer and at the US Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Regional Office reception desk located at 1011 E. Tudor Road in midtown Anchorage. If you need a paper copy please contact the Refuge. Following the closing of the comment period, the Service will examine the comments and determine whether the Environmental Assessment action warrants a “Finding of No Significant Impact”. If a Finding of No Significant Impact is warranted, plans will proceed for rat eradication on Rat Island. Contact Person: Will Meeks, Deputy Refuge Manager Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge 95 Sterling Highway, Suite 1. Homer, AK 99603 FAX: (907) 235-7783 email: [email protected] iii Table of Contents Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ ii Public Comment Period:................................................................................................................iii Table of Contents........................................................................................................................... iv 1. Purpose & Need .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Purpose of Action .................................................................................................................... 1 1.3. Need for Action........................................................................................................................ 1 1.3.1. Introduced Rats on the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge............................. 2 1.3.2. Impacts of Introduced Rats on Island Ecosystems in General...................................... 3 1.3.3. Eradication of Rats from Islands................................................................................... 5 1.4. Scope of Analysis .................................................................................................................... 5 1.5. Authority for Action & Regulations Governing Action .......................................................... 6 1.5.1. Authorities for Taking Action....................................................................................... 6 1.5.1.1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service statutes, policies, and plans.................................. 6 1.5.1.2. Executive Orders.................................................................................................... 7 1.5.2. Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................. 7 1.5.2.1. Federal laws ........................................................................................................... 8 1.5.2.2 Alaska state laws and policies................................................................................. 8 1.5.2.2.1 Alaska Board of Game..................................................................................... 8 1.5.2.2.2. Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) .......................................... 9 1.5.2.2.3. Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Public Health, Section of Epidemiology............................................................................................... 10 1.5.2.2.4. Alaska pesticide-related laws and responsible entities ................................. 10 1.6. Purpose of This Analysis ....................................................................................................... 11 2. Alternatives............................................................................................................................... 12 2.1. Alternative A: No Action....................................................................................................... 12 2.2. Alternative B (Proposed Action): Introduced Rat Eradication from Rat Island, Aerial Bait Broadcast Technique..................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1. Summary of Actions ................................................................................................... 12 2.2.2. Description of Action Operations ............................................................................... 13 2.2.2..1 Timing.................................................................................................................. 13 2.2.2.2. Project staging...................................................................................................... 15 2.2.2.3. Introduction to broadcast bait application............................................................ 16 2.2.2.4. Bait pellet composition ........................................................................................ 17 2.2.2.5. Determining application rate................................................................................ 18 2.2.2.6. Number of bait applications................................................................................. 18 2.2.2.7. Bait hopper........................................................................................................... 18 2.2.2.8. Equipment calibration.......................................................................................... 19 2.2.2.9. Flight plan ............................................................................................................ 19 2.2.2.10. Monitoring bait application...............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GAO-13-121, Regional Alaska Native Corporations: Status 40 Years After Establishment, and Future Considerations
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters GAO December 2012 REGIONAL ALASKA NATIVE CORPORATIONS Status 40 Years after Establishment, and Future Considerations GAO-13-121 December 2012 REGIONAL ALASKA NATIVE CORPORATIONS Status 40 Years after Establishment, and Future Considerations Highlights of GAO-13-121, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Incorporated under Alaska state law, regional Alaska Native corporations share Settlement Act was enacted to resolve fundamental characteristics, although they have chosen a variety of governance long-standing aboriginal land claims practices. Like other Alaska corporations, the regional corporations are subject to and to foster economic development the state’s corporate laws (with limited exceptions) and are run by an elected for Alaska Natives. This federal law board of directors. Nevertheless, each regional corporation has chosen its own directed that corporations be created organization and governance approach in terms of board operations, executive under Alaska state law, which were to and board compensation, board elections, and shareholder involvement. be the vehicles for distributing the settlement. As directed by the act, Alaska Native corporations are subject to some financial reporting requirements 12 for-profit regional corporations were under federal and state law, but oversight of the reporting is limited. The Alaska established, representing geographical Native Claims Settlement Act generally exempts the corporations from complying regions in the state. Later, a with federal securities laws while requiring them to annually provide a report to 13th regional corporation was formed their shareholders that contains “substantially all the information” required to be to represent Alaska Natives residing included in an annual report to shareholders by U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Resource Utilization in Atka, Aleutian Islands, Alaska
    RESOURCEUTILIZATION IN ATKA, ALEUTIAN ISLANDS, ALASKA Douglas W. Veltre, Ph.D. and Mary J. Veltre, B.A. Technical Paper Number 88 Prepared for State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Contract 83-0496 December 1983 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To the people of Atka, who have shared so much with us over the years, go our sincere thanks for making this report possible. A number of individuals gave generously of their time and knowledge, and the Atx^am Corporation and the Atka Village Council, who assisted us in many ways, deserve particular appreciation. Mr. Moses Dirks, an Aleut language specialist from Atka, kindly helped us with Atkan Aleut terminology and place names, and these contributions are noted throughout this report. Finally, thanks go to Dr. Linda Ellanna, Deputy Director of the Division of Subsistence, for her support for this project, and to her and other individuals who offered valuable comments on an earlier draft of this report. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . e . a . ii Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION . e . 1 Purpose ........................ Research objectives .................. Research methods Discussion of rese~r~h*m~t~odoio~y .................... Organization of the report .............. 2 THE NATURAL SETTING . 10 Introduction ........... 10 Location, geog;aih;,' &d*&oio&’ ........... 10 Climate ........................ 16 Flora ......................... 22 Terrestrial fauna ................... 22 Marine fauna ..................... 23 Birds ......................... 31 Conclusions ...................... 32 3 LITERATURE REVIEW AND HISTORY OF RESEARCH ON ATKA . e . 37 Introduction ..................... 37 Netsvetov .............. ......... 37 Jochelson and HrdliEka ................ 38 Bank ....................... 39 Bergslind . 40 Veltre and'Vll;r;! .................................... 41 Taniisif. ....................... 41 Bilingual materials .................. 41 Conclusions ...................... 42 iii 4 OVERVIEW OF ALEUT RESOURCE UTILIZATION . 43 Introduction ............
    [Show full text]
  • 45 YEARS of REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT We
    ANCSA 1971-2016 ................................. CELEBRATING 45 YEARS OF REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT We................................... Are ANCSA ANCSA Regional Corporations, as unique as the people we represent. Arctic Slope NANA Doyon Bering Straits Calista Ahtna Chugach CIRI Bristol Bay Sealaska Koniag Aleut 2016 ANCSA Economic Report Message from ANCSA Regional Association.......................................04 Board of Directors..................................................................05 Building Sustainable Futures Celebrating 45 Years of ANCSA....................................................06 What Everyone Should Know About ANCSA Corporations. 08 Financial Results for 2011-2015.....................................................11 Alaska Regional Corporations • Mission and Business Activities Ahtna, Incorporated................................................................17 Aleut Corporation..................................................................18 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation.................................................19 Bering Straits Native Corporation..................................................20 Bristol Bay Native Corporation.....................................................21 Calista Corporation.................................................................22 Chugach Alaska Corporation.......................................................23 CIRI................................................................................24 Doyon, Limited.....................................................................25
    [Show full text]
  • 60-Day Notice
    XAVIER BECERRA State ofCalifornia Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1300 I STREET, SUITE 125 P.O. BOX 944255 SACRAMENTO, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 210-7827 Facsimile: (916) 322-5609 E-Mail: [email protected] February 20, 2020 Via Certified Mail (Priority), Return Receipt Requested David Bernhardt Secretary ofthe Interior Department of the Interior 1849 C St., NW Washington, D.C. 20240 Wilbur Ross Secretary of Commerce Department of Commerce 1401 Constitution Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20230 Brenda Burman Commissioner Bureau of Reclamation 1849 C St., NW Washington, D. C. 20240 RE: Potential Reclamation Action Following Final Enviromnental Impact Statement Regarding Reinitiation of Consultation on the Coordinated Long-Tenn Operation ofthe Central Valley Project and State Water Project Dear Secretary Bernhardt, Secretary Ross, and Commissioner Burman: This letter provides written notice that the California Natural Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the California Attorney General intend to initiate litigation against the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) for violating the Endangered Species Act in its proposed operation of the Central Valley Project. See 16 U.S.C. § l 540(g)(l )(A), (2)(A). This decision is not made lightly. We appreciate the fruitful discussions concerning our many shared interests in the Bay-Delta in which we have been engaged and which we continue to hope will yield a final agreement concerning this complex matter. Rest assured, the State of California remains committed to this productive process. Nevertheless, on February 19, 2020, Reclamation issued a Record of Decision adopting the fatally flawed biological opinions issued by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • NZ Journal of Ecology, In
    1 2 FORUM/REVIEW ARTICLE 3 4 A research strategy for biodiversity conservation on New Zealand’s 5 offshore islands 6 7 David R. Towns 1* , Peter J. Bellingham 2, Christa P.H. Mulder 3, Phil O’B. Lyver 2 8 1Research and Development Group, Department of Conservation, Private Bag 68 908, 9 Newton, Auckland 1145, New Zealand. 10 2Landcare Research, PO Box 40, Lincoln 7640, New Zealand 11 3 Department of Biology and Wildlife & Institute of Arctic Biology, University of 12 Alaska Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA 13 *Author for correspondence (Email: [email protected]) 14 15 Abstract: New Zealand’s (NZ) offshore islands are refuges for many threatened 16 species, a high proportion of vertebrate diversity, and the world’s most diverse fauna 17 of seabirds. We present key issues and questions that can be used to guide research on 18 the conservation of biodiversity on these islands. Four global reviews formed a basis 19 from which we identified research questions of potential relevance to the management 20 of NZ islands. The research questions were assigned in the context of nine objectives 21 proposed as a means of achieving ecological integrity. For each of the nine 22 objectives, we then asked what has been achieved in terms of island research and 23 management, and what needs to be achieved in order to meet long term goals. We 24 used local examples to identify issues and questions specific to islands in the NZ 25 region. Our analyses revealed two research areas in which current understanding is 1 26 poor.
    [Show full text]
  • San Nicolas Island Restoration Project, California
    San Nicolas Island Restoration Project, California OUR MISSION To protect the Critically Endangered San Nicolas Island Fox, San Nicolas Island Night Lizard, and large colonies of Brandt’s Cormorants from the threat of extinction by removing feral cats. OUR VISION Native animal and plant species on San Nicolas Island reclaim their island home and are thriving. THE PROBLEM For years, introduced feral cats competed with foxes for resources and directly preyed on seabirds and lizards. THE SOLUTION WHY IS SAN NICOLAS In 2010, the U.S. Navy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Island Conservation, Institute IMPORTANT? for Wildlife Studies, The Humane Society of the United States, and the Montrose Settlement Restoration Program completed the removal and relocation of feral cats to • HOME TO THE ENDEMIC, the permanent, fully enclosed Fund For Animals Wildlife Center in Ramona, California. CRITICALLY ENDANGERED SAN NICOLAS ISLAND THE RESULTS FOX AND FEDERALLY ENDANGERED ISLAND NIGHT Native populations of Critically Endangered San Nicolas Island Foxes (as listed by the LIZARD International Union for the Conservation of Nature) and Brandt’s Cormorants are no • ESSENTIAL NESTING longer at risk of competition and direct predation, and no sign of feral cats has been HABITAT FOR LARGE detected since June 2010. POPULATIONS OF SEABIRD San Nicolas Island This 14,569-acre island, located SPECIES 61 miles due west of Los Angeles, is the most remote of the eight islands in the Channel Island • HOSTS EXPANSIVE Archipelago. The island is owned and managed by ROOKERIES OF SEA LIONS the U.S. Navy. The island is the setting for Scott AND ELEPHANT SEALS O’Dell’s prize-winning 1960 novel, Island of the Blue Dolphins.
    [Show full text]
  • Henderson Island News
    October 2015 The Henderson fruitdove is one of the endemic landbirds found on Henderson Island Steffen Oppel (RSPB) Phase 1 complete Henderson Island is a 4,600 ha raised coralline atoll In this issue located in the South Pacific. Part of the Pitcairn Island, UK Overseas Territory, the island is home to Expedition to Henderson Island over 50 endemic species. The island sits roughly The ecology of rats on Henderson Island 35 m above sea level with no human settlement, infrastructure and none of the ‘necessities’ of modern Increasing our knowledge of petrel biology life. Henderson landbirds Henderson Island is one of the last remaining The plant life of Henderson Island examples of this type of habitat in the world not yet destroyed by development or other human activity. Plastic in paradise Still, Henderson’s unique biodiversity is currently The voyage home under threat due to the presence of introduced Pacific rats. Rats are negatively affecting many Jennifer's wedding native species on Henderson Island. Following the failed eradication attempt in 2011, more research is The new team needed to ensure that an operation is indeed feasible before we can begin planning and fundraising. In Hope for the future May of this year, the RSPB mounted a six-month expedition to Henderson Island. Divided into two phases, the first team have now returned home and the second team have just started their work on Henderson. Working together to give nature a home Expedition to Henderson Island On 22 May 2015, the Phase 1 team of the Camp life RSPB’s expedition arrived on Henderson.
    [Show full text]
  • One Hundred Seventh Congress of the United States of America
    S. 1325 One Hundred Seventh Congress of the United States of America AT THE SECOND SESSION Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two An Act To ratify an agreement between The Aleut Corporation and the United States of America to exchange land rights received under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act for certain land interests on Adak Island, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. FINDINGS. Congress finds that: (1) Adak Island is an isolated island located 1,200 miles southwest of Anchorage, Alaska, between the Pacific Ocean and the Bering Sea. The Island, with its unique physical and biological features, including a deep water harbor and abundant marine-associated wildlife, was recognized early for both its natural and military values. In 1913, Adak Island was reserved and set aside as a Preserve because of its value to seabirds, marine mammals, and fisheries. Withdrawals of portions of Adak Island for various military purposes date back to 1901 and culminated in the 1959 withdrawal of approximately half of the Island for use by the Department of the Navy for military purposes. (2) By 1990, military development on Adak Island sup- ported a community of 6,000 residents. Outside of the Adak Naval Complex, there was no independent community on Adak Island. (3) As a result of the Defense Base Closure and Realign- ment Act of 1990 (104 Stat. 1808), as amended, the Adak Naval Complex has been closed by the Department of Defense.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Mollusks of Attu, Aleutian Islands, Alaska BARRY ROTH’ and DAVID R
    ARCTK: VOL. 34, NO. 1 (MARCH 1981), P. 43-47 Terrestrial Mollusks of Attu, Aleutian Islands, Alaska BARRY ROTH’ and DAVID R. LINDBERG’ ABSTRACT. Seven species of land mollusk (2 slugs, 5 snails) were collected on Attu in July 1979. Three are circumboreal species, two are amphi-arctic (Palearctic and Nearctic but not circumboreal), and two are Nearctic. Barring chance survival of mollusks in local refugia, the fauna was assembled overwater since deglaciation, perhaps within the last 10 OOO years. Mollusk faunas from Kamchatka to southeastern Alaska all have a Holarctic component. A Palearctic component present on Kamchatka and the Commander Islands is absent from the Aleutians, which have a Nearctic component that diminishes westward. This pattern is similar to that of other soil-dwelling invertebrate groups. RESUM& Sept espbces de mollusques terrestres (2 limaces et 5 escargots) furent prklevkes sur I’ile d’Attu en juillet 1979. Trois sont des espbces circomborkales, deux amphi-arctiques (Palkarctiques et Nkarctiques mais non circomborkales), et deux Nkarctiques. Si I’on excepte la survivance de mollusques due auhasard dans des refuges locaux, cette faune s’est retrouvke de part et d’autre des eauxdepuis la dkglaciation, peut-&re depuis les derniers 10 OOO ans. Les faunes de mollusques de la pkninsule de Kamchatkajusqu’au sud-est de 1’Alaska on toutes une composante Holarctique. Une composante Palkarctique prksente sur leKamchatka et les iles Commandeur ne se retrouve pas aux Alkoutiennes, oil la composante Nkarctique diminue vers I’ouest. Ce patron est similaire il celui de d’autres groupes d’invertkbrks terrestres . Traduit par Jean-Guy Brossard, Laboratoire d’ArchCologie de I’Universitk du Qukbec il Montrkal.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulatory Impact Review / Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to Amend Regulations for Participants in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands Regulatory Areas
    Regulatory Impact Review / Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to Amend Regulations for Participants in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands Regulatory Areas. COST RECOVERY FROM AMENDMENT 80, GROUNDFISH AND HALIBUT/SABLEFISH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUOTA, AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT AND ALEUTIAN ISLANDS POLLOCK QUOTA RECIPIENTS, AND THE FREEZER LONGLINE COALITION Second Review Draft September 2013 Lead Agency: National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Region National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Responsible Official: James Balsiger, Administrator Alaska Regional Office, National Marine Fisheries Service For further information contact: X, National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Region P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802 (907) 586-XXXX Abstract: This document is a Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis analyzing implementation of a cost recovery program from the Amendment 80 program, the groundfish and halibut/sablefish Community Development program, the American Fisheries Act program, and the Freezer Longline Coalition. The measures under consideration would define the fee structure to collect of up to 3 percent of the ex-vessel value of species allocated to participants in these programs. The fee paid by beneficiaries of each program would offset the actual costs agencies incur that are directly related to the management, data collection, and enforcement of each program that would not have been incurred had the program not been implemented. i Executive Summary The proposed actions would, first, implement a Limited Access Permit (LAP) program cost recovery fee for the American Fisheries Act (AFA) and Aleutian Islands (AI) pollock, Amendment 80, Community Development Quota (CDQ) program for halibut and groundfish, and the Freezer Longline Coalition (FLC) for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Pacific cod, programs as required under the MSA.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 3:21-Cv-01182 Document 1 Filed 02/18/21 Page 1 of 17
    Case 3:21-cv-01182 Document 1 Filed 02/18/21 Page 1 of 17 1 Miyoko Sakashita (Cal. Bar # 239639) CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 2 1212 Broadway, Suite 800 Oakland, CA 94612 3 Tel: (510) 844-7108 4 Fax: (510) 844-7150 Email: [email protected] 5 Lalli Venkatakrishnan (Cal. Bar # 323747) 6 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 1212 Broadway, Suite 800 7 Oakland, CA 94612 8 Phone: (510) 676-0348 Fax: (510) 844-7150 9 Email: [email protected] 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity 11 and Turtle Island Restoration Network 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 15 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, Civ. No: 3:21-cv-1182 a non-profit organization, and TURTLE 16 ISLAND RESTORATION NETWORK, COMPLAINT a non-profit organization, 17 (Marine Mammal Protection Act, Plaintiffs, 16 U.S.C. § 1361 et seq.) 18 19 v. 20 SCOTT DE LA VEGA,1 Acting Secretary, United States Department of Interior, and 21 UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, 22 23 Defendants. 24 25 26 1 27 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), David Bernhardt’s successor is automatically substituted as a party when Mr. Bernhardt ceases to hold office as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior, 28 and any misnomer not affecting the parties’ substantial rights must be disregarded. Case 3:21-cv-01182 Document 1 Filed 02/18/21 Page 2 of 17 1 INTRODUCTION 2 1. This is an action challenging the failure of Defendants Scott de la Vega, Acting 3 Secretary of the Interior, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (collectively “the 4 Service”) to comply with their non-discretionary obligations under the Marine Mammal 5 Protection Act (“MMPA”).
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Little Sitkin Island, Alaska
    Geology of Little Sitkin Island By G. L. SNYDER INVESTIGATIONS OF ALASKAN VOLCANOES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1028-H Prepared in cooperation with the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1959 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRED A. SEATON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U. S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publication as follows : Snyder, George Leonard, 1927- Geology of Little Sitkin Island, Alaska. Washington, U. S. Govt. Print. Off., 1958. - vi, 169-210 p. illus., 2 maps (1 fold. col. in pocket) tables. 24 cm. (U. S. Geological Survey. Bulletin 1028-H. Investigations of Alas- kan volcanoes) Prepared in cooperation with the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. "References cited" : p. 206-207. 1. Rocks, Igneous. 2. Petrology Aleutian Islands. 3. Little Sitkin Island. I. Title. (Series: U. S. Geological Survey. Bulletin 1028-H. Series: U. S. Geological Survey. Investigations of Alaskau volcanoes) 557.98 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. PKEFACE In October 1945 the War Department (now Department of the Army) requested the Geological Survey to undertake a program of volcano investigations in the Aleutian Islands-Alaska Peninsula area. The field studies were made during the years 1946-1954. The results of the first year's field, laboratory, and library work were hastily assembled as two administrative reports, and most of these data have been revised for publication in Geological Survey Bulletin 1028. Part of the early work was published in 1950 in Bulletin 974-B, Volcanic activity in the Aleutian arc, and in 1951 in Bulletin 989-A, Geology of Buldir Island, Aleutian Islands, Alaska, both by Robert R.
    [Show full text]