DOCSLIB.ORG

Endangered Species Protection

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Endangered Species Conservation Endangered Species Act of 1973 O Requires the Secretary of the Interior (through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service) to identify and publish lists of species that are endangered or threatened O The lists include both U.S. and foreign species, and include animals, plants and invertebrates. O Decision whether to list must be based solely on the biological evidence O Anybody that can provide adequate evidence can make a proposal for listing. O Recognizes that species have aesthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational and scientific value to the nation and its people. O The Supreme Court has interpreted the ESA to mean that the value of species cannot be calculated, and that listed species should be protected whatever the cost Definitions •An endangered species means any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range – other than a species of the Class Insecta determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of this chapter would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man. •A threatened species is one that may soon become endangered if its situation is not improved. •A candidate species is one that is being considered for listing as an endangered or a threatened species, but is not yet the subject of a proposed rule. This designation does not confer any protection on the candidate species Steps involved in listing a species Endangered species O Cannot be "taken ". O "Take" means harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in such conduct. O Such activities directed against animals are illegal even on private land (not true for plants!) O A recovery plan must be developed and the recovery of the species must be monitored. O The species or its products cannot be exported or imported. Species, Subspecies, and Evolutionarily Significant Units • The original ESA applied only to named species and subspecies. • Some species exist as multiple reproductively isolated population segments, that might represent enough evolutionarily significant genetic diversity to make all of the segments worth preserving. • Anadromous fish populations (e.g. salmon) associated with specific rivers represent some of the main examples of such subdivided species. • In 1978 the ESA was amended to allow listing of "distinct population segments" of vertebrates. – populations that are reproductively isolated from other populations of the same species and might provide the genetic raw material for future evolutionary changes • 26 populations of West Coast salmon and steelhead were listed as endangered or threatened. http://www.ocregister.com/news/fish-193070-creek-steelhead.html Species given protection (Endangered + Threatened) Admin. Period Number Species of species per year Ford74-774715 Carter 77-81 126 32 Reagan 81-89 255 32 Bush 1st 89-93 231 58 Clinton 93-01 521 65 Bush 01-08 60 8 Obama 08-09 2 2 Endangered and Threatened Species (As of 5/14/2008) U.S. animal species listed 608 U.S. plant species listed 744 U.S. species with designated critical habitat 506 Animal species candidates for listing 144 Plant species candidates for listing 138 Habitat conservation plans approved 894 Species with approved recovery plans. 1117 Endangered Species Committee (1978): Can decide on extinction Secretary of the Interior Secretary of Agriculture Secretary of the Army Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors Head of the Environmental Protection Agency Head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration A representative from the affected state. Applications for exemption from the ESA • Tellico Dam in Tennessee (Snail Darter fish) - exemption refused; later approved by Congress and President Carter. 1979. • Grayrocks Dam, WY (whooping crane) granted in 1979. • Bureau of Land Management for timber harvesting in Pacific Northwest (Northern Spotted Owl) : Led to a compromise: the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) 1993 Penguins: 17 species, feed mostly on krill Center for Biological Diversity sued to get protection for 11 species threatened by loss of sea ice. USFWS listed seven species: •African penguin •Yellow-eyed penguin •White-flippered penguin •Fiordland crested penguin •Humboldt penguin •Erect-crested penguin •Some populations of southern rockhopper penguin USFWS declined to review Emperor Penguin (star of “March of the Penguins”), despite 50% decline in population Island fox subspecies <100 Was 15 – now 38 Was 14 – now 54 Total in 1994: 6,000 Total in 2001: <1,660. San Miguel Island Fox: Historic: 450 1999: 15 (14 in captivity) • All four subspecies of Island Fox are threatened by introduced diseases, such as canine distemper, habitat alteration related to the introduction of pigs, goats, deer, cattle, sheep, and elk, and predation by golden eagles • 4-17-03: The Center for Biological Diversity sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for refusing to list the island foxes as endangered species. • 3-4-04: Channel Island Fox listed as Endangered Endangered Species at Upper Newport Bay 3 Clapper Rail Rallus longirostris Light-footed clapper rail Rallus longirostris levipes FE, SE Least Tern Sterna antillarum California least tern Sterna antillarum browni FE, SE Black Skimmer Rynchops niger http://www.arkive.org/black-skimmer/rynchops-niger/video-08.html http://ibc.lynxeds.com/video/black-skimmer-rynchops-niger/several-birds-skimming-canal Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Belding’s savannah sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi SE Other Endangered Species of Southern California Santa Ana Sucker Tidewater Goby California gnatcatcher Riverside Fairy Shrimp California Gnatcatcher Polioptila californica Coastal California gnatcatcher Polioptila californica californica FT Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae), Tidewater Goby Scientific Name Eucyclogobius newberryi Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lindahli (Picture of a close relative) Red Abalone (Cabrillo Marine Aquarium) Abalone (8 species in E. Pacific) White: Listed as Endangered in 2001 (first federally endangered marine invertebrate). No critical habitat designation (might increase poaching) Black: Listed as Endangered, January 2009. Declined by 99%, Critical Habitat under review. Sea otter decline in the Aleutian Islands Alaska Aleutian Islands Decline Continuing 2000-2003 Status of Sea Otter Stocks Reintroduced in 1969 and 1970: 2005: (In response to lawsuit from Center for Biological Diversity) Southwest stock listed as Threatened 2006: Center for Biological Diversity sued to compel the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to designate critical habitat Southeast stock is increasing! Ecosystem collapse in the Aleutian Islands (N. Pacific) 1977-2000 • Overfishing • Decline in Steller sea lions and harbor seals (usual food of Killer whales) • Increased predation on sea otters by killer whales. • Decline in Sea Otters • Population explosion (8x increase) of sea urchins (usual food of sea otters) • Depletion of kelp beds (food of sea urchins) • Depletion of king crabs, shrimp, smelt • Less food for seals and sea lions California Sea Otter •Thought to have numbered 20,000 before exploitation •Thought to be extinct until about 300 discovered in 1938 •Listed as Threatened since 1977 •Slowly recovering: 2007 count: 3,026 The California Endangered Species Act (1970) Reauthorized 1997 • California has the largest number of rare plant and animal species of any State in the nation • California was the first State to establish an Endangered Species Act • Parallels the main provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act • Administered by the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) • Limited to species or subspecies native to California • Consultation: State lead agencies are required to consult with DFG to ensure that any action it undertakes is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in destruction or adverse modification of essential habitat • California law allows the designation of a species as Fully Protected, which is a greater level of protection than is afforded by the California Endangered Species Act. – Such a designation means the listed species cannot be killed, nor can its habitat be destroyed if this would ultimately lead to its death or destruction. – Fully Protected Species has been given to the Southern Sea Otter, California Condor, California Least Tern, Golden Eagle, Peregrine Falcon, Bighorn Sheep, Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and many others. Is the Endangered Species Act Working? ● 52 listed species potentially extinct, but… ● Only 21 (1.5%) disappeared after listing, and… 1. Prevent extinction ● Only 2-5 savable at the time of listing ● ESA at least 99.6% successful by this measure 2. Move toward recovery 3. Achieve full recovery CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY Is the Endangered Species Act Working? ● 52 listed species potentially extinct, but… ● Only 21 (1.5%) disappeared after listing, and… 1. Prevent extinction ● Only 2-5 savable at the time of listing ● ESA at least 99.6% successful by this measure 2. Move toward recovery ● 17 species fully recovered and removed from endangered list 3. Achieve full recovery ● ESA only 1.0% successful by this measure CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY Is the Endangered Species Act Working? ● 52 listed species potentially extinct, but… ● Only 21 (1.5%) disappeared after listing, and… 1. Prevent extinction ● Only 2-5 savable at the time
Recommended publications
  • Endangered Species

    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.
  • Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(S): Noel M

    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(S): Noel M

    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(s): Noel M. Burkhead Source: BioScience, 62(9):798-808. 2012. Published By: American Institute of Biological Sciences URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.5 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Articles Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 NOEL M. BURKHEAD Widespread evidence shows that the modern rates of extinction in many plants and animals exceed background rates in the fossil record. In the present article, I investigate this issue with regard to North American freshwater fishes. From 1898 to 2006, 57 taxa became extinct, and three distinct populations were extirpated from the continent. Since 1989, the numbers of extinct North American fishes have increased by 25%. From the end of the nineteenth century to the present, modern extinctions varied by decade but significantly increased after 1950 (post-1950s mean = 7.5 extinct taxa per decade).
  • Brandon Ballengée Vulnerability

    Brandon Ballengée Vulnerability

    Sea of Brandon Ballengée Vulnerability SEPTEMBER 14 – NOVEMBER 5, 2017 ROWANART UNIVERSITYGALLERY ‘TRANSDISCIPLINARY’ IS HOW BEST TO DESCRIBE BRANDON BALLENGÉE’S PRACTICE. He is an artist, biologist and environmental educator who cre- ates artworks inspired from his ecological feldwork and lab- oratory research. His scientific research informs his artistic inquiry resulting in works that are balanced in its artistic and scientifc statements. In Sea of Vulnerability we presented a se- ries of his artworks in the form of installations, assemblages, and mixed media that ofer dramatic visual representations of species that are in decline, threatened, or already lost to extinc- tion. The results are beautifully composed artistic expressions that are also informative of some of our most pressing envi- ronmental issues. In his work Collapse for example we encounter a monumental pyramid of preserved aquatic specimens from the Gulf of Mexico meant to reference the fragile inter-relationship between gulf species and the food chain post the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the largest oil spill in human history. The narrative expressed in the work is dire, but visually the installation is a stun- ning example of formal visual aesthetics. The 455 jars (containing 370+ diferent species) are me- ticulously spaced into evenly measured rows punctuated by various shades of amber placed in purposeful sequences. The precision of the placement invites the viewer in where they encoun- ter the meaning in the work. As you follow the rows towards the top many of the glass jars are 1 Collapse: 2012, preserved specimens, glass and Carosafe preservative solutions, 9 x 12.8 x 12.8 feet, in scientifc collabora- tion with Todd Gardner, Jack Rudloe, Brian Schiering and Peter Warny courtesy of the artist and Ronald Feldman Fine Arts, New York.
  • The Frequency of Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Ohio Stream Fishes: 1979 Through 1995

    The Frequency of Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Ohio Stream Fishes: 1979 Through 1995

    Ohio Biological Survey Notes 2: 53-62, 1999. © Ohio Biological Survey The Frequency of Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Ohio Stream Fishes: 1979 Through 1995 RANDALL E. SANDERS1, CHARLES STAUDT2, DENNIS MISHNE2, MARC SMITH2, EDWARD T. RANKIN2, CHRIS O. YODER2, ROGER THOMA2, DAVID A LTFATER2, CHARLES B OUCHER2, KELLY C APUZZI2, ROBERT M ILTNER2, BRIAN ALSDORF2, DANIEL L. RICE3, AND TED M. CAVENDER4 1Fish Management and Research, Division of Wildlife, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1840 Belcher Drive G-3, Columbus, OH 43224. 2Ecological Assessment, Division of Surface Water, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 4675 Homer Ohio Lane, Groveport, OH 43125. 3Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Fountain Square F-1, Columbus, OH 43224. 4Division of Fishes, Museum of Biological Diversity, The Ohio State University, 1315 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 Introduction Ohio streams have a rich history of ichthyological investigations. Statewide distribution maps for game fish species were first reported by Wickliff and Trautman (1931). The first edition of The Fishes of Ohio published statewide distribution maps for all Ohio fish species for collections made during 1840 through 1955 (Trautman, 1957). This book was revised for collections made during 1956 through 1980—a period when fish populations in many streams were severely degraded by high levels of pollution and other environmental changes (Trautman, 1981). Although these publications are excellent sources for the historical distributions, identification, and preferred habitats of Ohio fish, they do not provide quantitative frequency of occurrence or relative abundance information for current stream fish populations that have increased as the result of improved water quality (e.g., Ohio Environmental Protection Agency [OEPA] 1992; 1995; 1996), become established through introductions, or continued to decline.
  • Reversing America's Wildlife Crisis

    Reversing America's Wildlife Crisis

    ReveRsing AmeRicA’s WILDLIFE CRISIS SECURING THE FUTURE OF OUR FISH AND WILDLIFE MARCH 2018 REVERSING AMERICA’s Wildlife CRISIS 1 ReveRsing AmeRicA’s Wildlife cRisis SECURING THE FUTURE OF OUR FISH AND WILDLIFE Copyright © 2018 National Wildlife Federation Lead Authors: Bruce A. Stein, Naomi Edelson, Lauren Anderson, John J. Kanter, and Jodi Stemler. Suggested citation: Stein, B. A., N. Edelson, L. Anderson, J. Kanter, and J. Stemler. 2018. Reversing America’s Wildlife Crisis: Securing the Future of Our Fish and Wildlife. Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation. Acknowledgments: This report is a collaboration among National Wildlife Federation (NWF), American Fisheries Society (AFS), and The Wildlife Society (TWS). The authors would like to thank the many individuals from these organizations that contributed to this report: Taran Catania, Kathleen Collins, Patty Glick, Lacey McCormick, and David Mizejewski from NWF; Douglas Austen, Thomas Bigford, Dan Cassidy, Steve McMullin, Mark Porath, Martha Wilson, and Drue Winters from AFS; and John E. McDonald, Jr., Darren Miller, Keith Norris, Bruce Thompson, and Gary White from TWS. We are especially grateful to Maja Smith of MajaDesign, Inc. for report design and production. Cover image: Swift fox (Vulpes macrotis), North America’s smallest wild canid, has disappeared from about 60 percent of its historic Great Plains range. Once a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act, collaborative state and federal conservation efforts have stabilized the species across much of its remaining range. Photo: Rob Palmer Reversing America’s Wildlife Crisis is available online at: www.nwf.org/ReversingWildlifeCrisis National Wildlife Federation 1200 G Street, NW, Suite 900 Washington, D.C.
  • Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 19002010

    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 19002010

    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(s): Noel M. Burkhead Reviewed work(s): Source: BioScience, Vol. 62, No. 9 (September 2012), pp. 798-808 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.5 . Accessed: 21/09/2012 12:59 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of California Press and American Institute of Biological Sciences are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to BioScience. http://www.jstor.org Articles Articles Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 NOEL M. BURKHEAD Widespread evidence shows that the modern rates of extinction in many plants and animals exceed background rates in the fossil record. In the present article, I investigate this issue with regard to North American freshwater fishes. From 1898 to 2006, 57 taxa became extinct, and three distinct populations were extirpated from the continent. Since 1989, the numbers of extinct North American fishes have increased by 25%. From the end of the nineteenth century to the present, modern extinctions varied by decade but significantly increased after 1950 (post-1950s mean = 7.5 extinct taxa per decade).
  • NSW Pest Fish List As Part of a Consistent Approach to the Management of Ornamental Fish Throughout Australia

    NSW Pest Fish List As Part of a Consistent Approach to the Management of Ornamental Fish Throughout Australia

    Ornamental Fish Update – Important Information Regarding Pest Fish July 2017 On 16 December 2016, NSW government introduced further changes to the NSW Pest Fish List as part of a consistent approach to the management of ornamental fish throughout Australia. The NSW Pest Fish List now includes an additional 65 listings that have been nationally agreed as having a high-risk potential. ____________________________________________________________________________________ part 2, schedule 1 of the Biosecurity Regulation Why are there changes to the pest 2017, are subject to notification and must not be fish list? dealt with. Compliance with the NSW Pest Fish List is mandatory by law. In 2006, all Australian governments, in consultation with representatives of the ornamental fish industry, developed a National Strategy called the What should I do with any pest ‘A Strategic Approach to the Management of fish that I have? Ornamental Fish in Australia’. The National A number of ornamental fish species that were Strategy contains seven recommendations for the previously traded by the aquarium industry, management of ornamental fish in Australia, aquarium enthusiasts or hobbyists are now including the development of an agreed National prohibited from being sold and/or being in your Pest Fish List. possession. Pest fish possess characteristics that have the However, NSW DPI is providing a six month potential to trigger, or contribute to, aquatic pest or advisory period, which commenced on 1 March disease outbreaks, impacting upon natural 2017 to provide time for advisory materials to be biodiversity and fisheries resources. Weatherloach distributed and ornamental fish owners to comply and Tilapia are two examples of pest species with the new additions to the NSW pest fish list which, when released, are known to have impacts on our natural aquatic systems.
  • Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater And

    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.
  • The Sustainability of Freshwater Species and Water Resources Development Policy of the Army Corps of Engineers

    The Sustainability of Freshwater Species and Water Resources Development Policy of the Army Corps of Engineers

    April 2009 The Sustainability of Freshwater Species and Water Resources Development Policy of the Army Corps of Engineers 09-R-9 U.S. Army Institute for Water Resources The Institute for Water Resources (IWR) is a Corps of Engineers Field Operating Activity located within the Washington DC National Capital Region (NCR), in Alexandria, Virginia and with satellite centers in New Orleans, LA and Davis, CA. IWR was created in 1969 to analyze and anticipate changing water resources management conditions, and to develop planning methods and analytical tools to address economic, social, institutional, and environmental needs in water resources planning and policy. Since its inception, IWR has been a leader in the development of strategies and tools for planning and executing the Corps water resources planning and water management programs. IWR strives to improve the performance of the Corps water resources program by examining water resources problems and offering practical solutions through a wide variety of technology transfer mechanisms. In addition to hosting and leading Corps participation in national forums, these include the production of white papers, reports, workshops, training courses, guidance and manuals of practice; the development of new planning, socio-economic, and risk-based decision-support methodologies, improved hydrologic engineering methods and software tools; and the management of national waterborne commerce statistics and other Civil Works information systems. IWR serves as the Corps expertise center for integrated water resources planning and management; hydrologic engineering; collaborative planning and environmental conflict resolution; and waterborne commerce data and marine transportation systems. The Institute’s Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC), located in Davis, CA specializes in the development, documentation, training, and application of hydrologic engineering and hydrologic models.
  • A “Precaução Padrão”

    A “Precaução Padrão”

    ABSTRACTS – 2007 JOINT MEETING OF ICHTHYOLOGISTS & HERPETOLOGISTS COMPLIED BY M.A. DONNELLY (for co-authored abstracts, underlined name = presenter) Abrams, Alyssa Pheromone Production and Volatility in the Copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) in Captivity Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, United States Snakes were collected during the summer in central Missouri and maintained in captivity at Washington University's Tyson Research Center. Snakes were maintained at 24oC and fed weekly. Beginning in late August females were tested for the presence of pheromones. Male courtship behaviors served as the bioassay for pheromone presence. All experiments were conducted in an outdoor arena lined with a disposable plastic liner. Volatility of pheromones was measured by placing the female in a clean opaque plastic container, containing 3-3mm diameter holes, on a six cm pedestal in the arena containing one male. Male behavior was observed for 30 min after which the female was removed and placed directly in the arena to determine her attractivity. All eight females tested elicited some male courtship behaviors during at least some trials. All males responded to attractive females. Males showed no interest in other males. Male behaviors included: tongue flicking, trailing, head jerking, head bobbing, head poking and tail searching. No mating was observed. In three trials, males were attracted to the cages containing the females, indication the attractivity pheromone may be volatile, however, in tests using skin wipes from attractive females no males responded. An immediately post-partum female was attractive to males. ______________________________________________________________________________ Adams, Cory; Saenz, Daniel; Pierce, Josh Anuran Use of Primary Successional Ponds USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Nacogdoches, TX, United States Freshwater habitats exist along a continuum ranging from short duration ephemeral sites to permanent bodies of water.
  • Report on Legislation by the Animal Law Committee S. 1863

    Report on Legislation by the Animal Law Committee S. 1863

    CONTACT POLICY DEPARTMENT MARIA CILENTI 212.382.6655 | [email protected] ELIZABETH KOCIENDA 212.382.4788 | [email protected] REPORT ON LEGISLATION BY THE ANIMAL LAW COMMITTEE S. 1863 Sen. Lee To clarify that noncommercial species found entirely within the borders of a single State are not in interstate commerce or subject to regulation under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 or any other provision of law enacted as an exercise of the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. Native Species Protection Act THIS LEGISLATION IS OPPOSED I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED LAW The Native Species Protection Act (the “Bill”) would remove “intrastate species” from the scope of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) of 1973, or any other provision of law under which regulatory authority is based on the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause. The Bill defines an “intrastate species” as any species of plant or fish or wildlife that is found entirely within the borders of a single state1 and that is not part of a national market for any commodity.2 Despite its name, the Native Species Protection Act does not protect native species; instead, by undermining the protections of the ESA, it puts these species at risk. If the Bill passes, roughly 50 animal species that exist purely within one state,3 such as the Nashville crayfish and the Utah prairie dog, 4 will no longer be protected by the ESA. 1 The ESA defines “State” as “any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.” 16 U.S.
  • Extinction and the Endangered Species Act1

    Extinction and the Endangered Species Act1

    EXTINCTION AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT By Kieran Suckling, Rhiwena Slack, and Brian Nowicki May 1, 2004 EXTINCTION AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT1 SUMMARY One hundred eight U.S. species are known to have become extinct in the first 21 years following the creation of the Endangered Species Act. We analyzed the conservation histories of these species and found that 23 species became extinct after they were placed on the endangered species list, but the majority of extinctions (85) involved species that were not on the endangered species list. There were lengthy delays in the listing process for 83 (77%) of the species that became extinct: 29 of these species became extinct before a listing process was initiated, 42 became extinct during a delay in the listing process, and eleven listed species became extinct after a delay in the listing decision. The use of the candidate list as a tool to defer listings for many years was particularly dangerous: 24 species became extinct after being placed on the candidate or warrant-review list. Listing petitions were routinely ignored to the detriment of the species: 17 species became extinct while their listing petition was under a long-delayed review. If extinction is the ultimate criteria by which to judge agency implementation of the ESA, the failure has been spectacular. In many cases is has been purposeful. The agency has knowingly delayed listings to avoid political controversy even when it knew the likely result would be the extinction of the species. Full support and implementation of the endangered species listing program is necessary to avoid unnecessary future extinctions.