DOCSLIB.ORG

Designation of Critical Habitat for Mississippi Gopher Frog; Proposed Rule

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Designation of Critical Habitat for Mississippi Gopher Frog; Proposed Rule Vol. 76 Tuesday, No. 187 September 27, 2011 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Mississippi Gopher Frog; Proposed Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:53 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\27SEP2.SGM 27SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 59774 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR a comment by clicking on ‘‘Send a species, should be included in the Comment or Submission.’’ designation and why, Fish and Wildlife Service (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail (c) Special management or hand-delivery to: Public Comments considerations or protection that may be 50 CFR Part 17 Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2010– needed in critical habitat areas we are [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2010–0024; MO 0024; Division of Policy and Directives proposing, including managing for the 92210–0–0009] Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife potential effects of climate change, and Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS (d) What areas not occupied at the RIN 1018–AW89 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. time of listing are essential for the We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We conservation of the species and why. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife will post all comments on http:// (3) Land-use designations and current and Plants; Designation of Critical www.regulations.gov. This generally or planned activities in the subject areas Habitat for Mississippi Gopher Frog means that we will post any personal and their possible impacts on proposed AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information you provide us (see Public critical habitat. Interior. Comments section below for more (4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of climate ACTION: Revised proposed rule; information). change on the Mississippi gopher frog availability of draft economic analysis; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and proposed critical habitat. and reopening of comment period. Stephen Ricks, Field Supervisor, U.S. (5) Any probable economic, national Fish and Wildlife Service, Mississippi SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and security, or other relevant impacts of Fish and Wildlife Office, 6578 Dogwood Wildlife Service, propose to designate designating any area (especially Unit 1 View Parkway, Jackson, MS 39213; critical habitat for the Mississippi in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana) that telephone: 601–321–1122; facsimile: gopher frog (Rana sevosa) [= Rana may be included in the final 601–965–4340. If you use a capito sevosa] under the Endangered designation; in particular, any impacts telecommunications device for the deaf Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). on small entities or families, and the (TDD), call the Federal Information We also announce revisions to the benefits of including or excluding areas Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. proposed critical habitat units, as that exhibit these impacts. described in the proposed rule SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (6) Whether any specific areas we are published in the Federal Register on Public Comments proposing for critical habitat June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31387), and designation should be considered for We intend that any final action announce the availability of the draft exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the resulting from this proposed rule will be economic analysis (DEA) for the revised Act, and whether the benefits of based on the best scientific and proposed critical habitat designation. potentially excluding any specific area commercial data available and be as This proposed rule replaces the outweigh the benefits of including that accurate and as effective as possible. previous June 3, 2010, proposed rule in area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Therefore, we request comments or its entirety. In total, approximately (7) Whether we could improve or information from other concerned 2,839 hectares (ha) (7,015 acres (ac)) are modify our approach to designation of governmental agencies, the scientific being proposed for designation as critical habitat in any way to provide for community, industry, or any other critical habitat in 12 units, 3 of which greater public participation and interested party concerning this are divided into 2 subunits each. The understanding, or to better proposed designation of critical habitat proposed critical habitat is located accommodate public concerns and for the Mississippi gopher frog, the DEA within St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, comments. of the proposed designation of critical and Forrest, Harrison, Jackson, and (8) The appropriateness of the habitat for the Mississippi gopher frog, Perry Counties, Mississippi. The taxonomic name change of the and the amended required comment period will allow all Mississippi gopher frog from Rana determinations provided in this interested parties an opportunity to capito sevosa to Rana sevosa. document. We will consider You may submit your comments and comment simultaneously on the revised information and recommendations from materials concerning this proposed rule proposed rule, the associated DEA, and all interested parties. We are by one of the methods listed in the amended required determinations particularly interested in comments ADDRESSES. We will not accept section. concerning: comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an DATES: We will accept comments (1) The reasons why we should or address not listed in ADDRESSES. We received or postmarked on or before should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical will post your entire comment— November 28, 2011. We must receive habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 including your personal identifying requests for public hearings, in writing, U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether information—on http:// at the address shown in the ADDRESSES there are threats to the species from www.regulations.gov. You may request section by November 14, 2011. human activity, the degree of which can at the top of your document that we ADDRESSES: You may submit comments be expected to increase due to the withhold personal information such as by one of the following methods: designation, and whether that increase your street address, phone number, or e- (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal in threat outweighs the benefit of mail address from public review; eRulemaking Portal: http:// designation such that the designation of however, we cannot guarantee that we www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword critical habitat may not be prudent. will be able to do so. box, enter Docket No. FWS–R4–ES– (2) Specific information on: Comments and materials we receive, 2010–0024, which is the docket number (a) The amount and distribution of as well as supporting documentation for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search Mississippi gopher frog habitat, used in preparing the proposed rule and panel on the left side of the screen, (b) What areas, that were occupied at DEA, will be available for public under the Document Type heading, the time of listing (or are currently inspection on http:// click on the Proposed Rules link to occupied) and that contain features www.regulations.gov, or by locate this document. You may submit essential to the conservation of the appointment, during normal business VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:53 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27SEP2.SGM 27SEP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59775 hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Geographic Range, Habitat, and Threats historically the Mississippi gopher frog Service’s Mississippi Fish and Wildlife The Mississippi gopher frog has a was commonly found in the coastal Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION very limited historical range in counties of Mississippi (Allen 1932, p. CONTACT). You may obtain copies of the Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. At 9; Neill 1957, p. 49), very few of the proposed rule and the DEA on the the time of listing in 2001, this species remaining ponds provide potential Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at occurred at only one site, Glen’s Pond, appropriate breeding habitat (Sisson Docket Number FWS–R4–ES–2010– in the DeSoto National Forest in 2003, p. 6). Nevertheless, two new 0024 or by mail from the Mississippi Harrison County, Mississippi (66 FR naturally occurring populations of the Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 62993). Mississippi gopher frog habitat Mississippi gopher frog were found in INFORMATION CONTACT). includes both upland sandy habitats— Jackson County, Mississippi (Sisson 2004, p. 8). Field surveys conducted in historically forest dominated by longleaf Background Alabama and Louisiana have been pine (Pinus palustris)—and isolated unsuccessful in documenting the It is our intent to discuss only those temporary wetland breeding sites continued existence of Mississippi topics directly relevant to the embedded within the forested gopher frogs in these States (Pechmann designation of critical habitat in this landscape. Adult and subadult frogs et al. 2006, pp. 1–23; Bailey 2009, pp. proposed rule. For more information on spend the majority of their lives the Mississippi gopher frog, refer to the 1–2). underground in active and abandoned Due to the paucity of available final rule listing the species as gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) endangered, which was published in the suitable habitat for the Mississippi burrows, abandoned mammal burrows, gopher frog, we have worked with our Federal Register on December 4, 2001 and holes in and under old stumps (66 FR 62993). See also the discussion State, Federal, and nongovernmental (Richter et al. 2001, p. 318). Frequent partners to identify and restore upland of habitat in the Physical and Biological fires are necessary to maintain the open Features section below. and wetland habitats to create canopy and ground cover vegetation of appropriate translocation sites for the Taxonomy and Nomenclature their aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Division of Law Enforcement
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Division of Law Enforcement Annual Report FY 2000 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, working with others, conserves, protects, and enhances fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. As part of this mission, the Service is responsible for enforcing U.S. and international laws, regulations, and treaties that protect wildlife resources. Cover photo by J & K Hollingsworth/USFWS I. Overview ..................................................................................................................1 Program Evolution and Priorities......................................................................2 Major Program Components ..............................................................................2 FY 2000 Investigations Statistical Summary (chart) ....................................3 FY 1999-2000 Wildlife Inspection Activity (chart) ..........................................6 Table of Laws Enforced ......................................................................................................7 Contents II. Organizational Structure ........................................................................................9 III. Regional Highlights ..............................................................................................14 Region One ..........................................................................................................14 Region Two ..........................................................................................................26
    [Show full text]
  • Small-Business Owners from Widely Varied Industries
    No. 17-71 In the Supreme Court of the United States ________________ WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, ET AL., Respondents. ________________ On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ________________ BRIEF OF SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS ________________ Kevin J. Lynch J. Carl Cecere UNIVERSITY OF DENVER Counsel of Record STURM COLLEGE OF LAW CECERE PC ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 6035 McCommas Blvd. CLINIC Dallas, TX 75206 2255 E. Evans Ave. (469) 600-9455 Denver, CO 80208 [email protected] (303) 871-6039 Counsel for Amici Curiae i TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents .................................................................. i Table of Authorities ............................................................. ii Interest of Amici Curiae ..................................................... 1 Introduction and Summary of the Argument .................. 1 Argument ............................................................................. 4 I. Protecting endangered species provides signif- icant economic benefits to small businesses. ............ 4 A. ESA regulations provide small-business opportunities. ....................................................... 4 B. The Service’s experts are an economic asset for many small-businesses. ..................... 16 C. Protection of biodiversity is also essential for the economy as a whole. .............................. 19 II. The Service’s broad, flexible authority to designate
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi
    Mississippi State University Scholars Junction Theses and Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 1-1-2007 Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi Katherine E. Edwards Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td Recommended Citation Edwards, Katherine E., "Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi" (2007). Theses and Dissertations. 2484. https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td/2484 This Graduate Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Scholars Junction. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholars Junction. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HERPETOFAUNA COMMUNITIES AND HABITAT CONDITIONS IN TEMPORARY WETLANDS OF UPLAND AND FLOODPLAIN FORESTS ON PUBLIC LANDS IN NORTH-CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI By Katherine Elise Edwards A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Mississippi State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Wildlife and Fisheries Science in the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Mississippi State, Mississippi May 2007 HERPETOFAUNA COMMUNITIES AND HABITAT CONDITIONS IN TEMPORARY WETLANDS OF UPLAND AND FLOODPLAIN FORESTS ON PUBLIC LANDS IN NORTH-CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI By Katherine Elise Edwards Approved: Jeanne C. Jones Kristina C. Godwin Associate Professor of Wildlife and State Director, USDA APHIS Fisheries Wildlife Services (Director of Thesis) Adjunct Faculty of Wildlife and Fisheries (Committee Member) W. Daryl Jones Bruce D. Leopold Assistant Extension Professor of Professor and Head Wildlife and Fisheries Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (Committee Member) (Committee Member) Bruce D.
    [Show full text]
  • Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 112:9-16
    This authors' personal copy may not be publicly or systematically copied or distributed, or posted on the Open Web, except with written permission of the copyright holder(s). It may be distributed to interested individuals on request. Vol. 112: 9–16, 2014 DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Published November 13 doi: 10.3354/dao02792 Dis Aquat Org High susceptibility of the endangered dusky gopher frog to ranavirus William B. Sutton1,2,*, Matthew J. Gray1, Rebecca H. Hardman1, Rebecca P. Wilkes3, Andrew J. Kouba4, Debra L. Miller1,3 1Center for Wildlife Health, Department of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA 2Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Tennessee State University, Nashville, TN 37209, USA 3Department of Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, University of Tennessee Center of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA 4Memphis Zoo, Conservation and Research Department, Memphis, TN 38112, USA ABSTRACT: Amphibians are one of the most imperiled vertebrate groups, with pathogens playing a role in the decline of some species. Rare species are particularly vulnerable to extinction be - cause populations are often isolated and exist at low abundance. The potential impact of patho- gens on rare amphibian species has seldom been investigated. The dusky gopher frog Lithobates sevosus is one of the most endangered amphibian species in North America, with 100−200 indi- viduals remaining in the wild. Our goal was to determine whether adult L. sevosus were suscep- tible to ranavirus, a pathogen responsible for amphibian die-offs worldwide. We tested the rela- tive susceptibility of adult L. sevosus to ranavirus (103 plaque-forming units) isolated from a morbid bullfrog via 3 routes of exposure: intra-coelomic (IC) injection, oral (OR) inoculation, and water bath (WB) exposure.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk Assessment and Recommended Disease Screening
    A Manual For Control of Infectious Diseases in Amphibian Survival Assurance Colonies and Reintroduction Programs Version 2.0: updated 2017 Based on: Proceedings from a Workshop: 16–18 February 2009 San Diego Zoo Cover photos courtesy of Allan Pessier and Ron Holt. A contribution of the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group in collaboration with Amphibian Ark, San Diego Zoo, and Zoo Atlanta IUCN encourages meetings, workshops and other fora for the consideration and analysis of issues related to conservation, and believes that reports of these meetings are most useful when broadly disseminated. The opinions and views expressed by the authors may not necessarily reflect the formal policies of IUCN, its Commissions, its Secretariat or its members. © Copyright CBSG 2017 The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Pessier, A.P. and J.R. Mendelson III (eds.). 2017. A Manual for Control of Infectious Diseases in Amphibian Survival Assurance Colonies and Reintroduction Programs, Ver. 2.0. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, MN. An electronic version of this report can be downloaded at www.cbsg.org <http://www.cbsg.org/> . This project was supported by grant LG-25-08-0066 from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Any views, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent those of the Institute of Museum and Library Services.
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi Gopher Frog (Rana Capito Sevosa) Dusky Gopher Frog
    Originally listed as: Mississippi Gopher Frog (Rana capito sevosa) Formally now recognized by the USFWS (2012) as: Dusky Gopher Frog (Rana sevosa) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation (Photograph by John Tupy, Western Carolina University, used with permission) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Mississippi Ecological Services Field Office Jackson, Mississippi 5-YEAR REVIEW Dusky gopher frog (Rana sevosa) I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Methodology used to complete the review: In conducting this 5-year review, we relied on the best available information pertaining to historical and current distributions, life history, threats to, and habitats of this species. Our sources included the final rule listing this species under the Endangered Species Act (Act); peer reviewed scientific publications; unpublished field observations by Service, State and other experienced biologists; unpublished survey reports; and notes and communications from other qualified biologists or experts. We announced initiation of this review and requested information in a published Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period on July 6, 2009 (74 FR 31972). The completed draft review was sent to affected Service Field Offices and peer reviewers for their review. Comments were evaluated and incorporated where appropriate into this final document (see Appendix A). We received one public comment during the open comment period. No part of this review was contracted to an outside party. This review was completed by the Service’s lead Recovery biologist in the Mississippi Ecological Services Field Office, Jackson, Mississippi. B. Reviewers Lead Region – Southeast Region: Kelly Bibb, 404-679-7132 Lead Field Office – Jackson, Mississippi, Ecological Services Field Office: Linda LaClaire, 601-321-1126 Cooperating Field Office – Daphne, Alabama, Ecological Services Field Office: Matthias Laschet, 251-441-5842, Lafayette, Louisiana, Ecological Services Field Office: Deborah Fuller, 337-291-3124 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition to List 53 Amphibians and Reptiles in the United States As Threatened Or Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST 53 AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES IN THE UNITED STATES AS THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY JULY 11, 2012 1 Notice of Petition _____________________________________________________________________________ Ken Salazar, Secretary U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Dan Ashe, Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Gary Frazer, Assistant Director for Endangered Species U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Nicole Alt, Chief Division of Conservation and Classification, Endangered Species Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420 Arlington, VA 22203 [email protected] Douglas Krofta, Chief Branch of Listing, Endangered Species Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 420 Arlington, VA 22203 [email protected] AUTHORS Collette L. Adkins Giese Herpetofauna Staff Attorney Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 339 Circle Pines, MN 55014-0339 [email protected] 2 D. Noah Greenwald Endangered Species Program Director Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 11374 Portland, OR 97211-0374 [email protected] Tierra Curry Conservation Biologist P.O. Box 11374 Portland, OR 97211-0374 [email protected] PETITIONERS The Center for Biological Diversity. The Center for Biological Diversity (“Center”) is a non- profit, public interest environmental organization dedicated to the protection of native species and their habitats through science, policy, and environmental law. The Center is supported by over 375,000 members and on-line activists throughout the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibian Conservation INTRODUCTION
    2013 | HIGHLIGHTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS amphibian conservation INTRODUCTION Zoos and aquariums accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) have made long-term commitments, both individually and as a community organized under the Amphibian Taxon Advisory Group (ATAG), to the global conservation of amphibians. The AZA community specifically seeks to 1) increase the capacity of accredited zoos and aquariums to respond to threats facing amphibians, 2) create and sustain assurance populations of threatened amphibians, and 3) increase public awareness of and engagement in amphibian conservation. With the support and hard work of directors, curators, keepers, and partners, AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums saw conservation progress and successes both locally and around the world in 2013. Taken both from submissions to AZA’s Annual Report on Conservation Science (ARCS) and articles submitted directly to AZA, this report features many successes in the areas of citizen science, research, field work, the creation of assurance populations, and conservation breeding. AZA congratulates all members for their ongoing efforts and dedication, and encourages people to do more. The ATAG has many resources to help people get started. Learn how to get involved—or expand your engagement—in amphibian conservation by contacting any of the authors listed in this report or the ATAG Chair, Diane Barber ([email protected]). Shelly Grow is the Director of Conservation Programs at the Association of Zoos and Aquariums INTRODUCTION | 2 Photo: Rachel Rommel TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 INTRODUCTION 4 SPECIES SURVIVAL PLAN ® (SSP) 11 SPECIES–SPECIFIC CONSERVATION 19 CITIZEN SCIENCE 23 RESEARCH 27 INTERNATIONAL (Africa, Asia, Central and South America) Cover Image by Stephanie Adams, Houston Zoo.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of Amphibians in the United States
    The State of Amphibians in the United States More than 25 years ago, scientists began to identify unexplained declines in amphibian populations around the world. Much has been learned since then, but amphibian declines have not abated and the interactions among the various threats to amphibians are not clear. Amphibian decline is a problem of local, national, and international scope that can affect ecosystem function, biodiversity, and commerce. This fact sheet provides a snapshot of the state of the amphibians and introduces examples to illustrate the range of issues in the United States. Are Amphibians Really Declining? 40 Clear evidence of major declines of amphibians in the United States and around the world has been established. The estimated rate of worldwide amphibian extinction since 1980 30 is thought to be 105 times higher than the background rate (McCallum, 2007). These declines threaten the extinction of 30 Decreasing Increasing 20 percent of the world’s approximately 7,000 amphibian species (Stuart and others, 2004). This constitutes the greatest extinction event since the “Pleistocene extinctions” 10,000 years ago Counts of time-series 10 (Wake and Vredenburg, 2008). The number of extinctions in the United States is not as extreme as in other parts of the world, but serious declines 0 < −20 −10 0 10 > 20 have been documented (for example, Mountain Yellow-legged Frog [Drost and Fellers, 1996]; Yosemite Toad [Sherman and Annual percent change in occupancy Morton, 1993]; Boreal Toad [Corn and others, 1989; Muths and others 2003]; and Mississippi Gopher Frog [Richter and others, Distribution of trends in the rate of amphibian occupancy for monitoring 2003]).
    [Show full text]
  • Dusky Gopher Frog (Rana Sevosa) Recovery Plan
    DUSKY GOPHER FROG (Rana sevosa) RECOVERY PLAN Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Plans are reviewed by the public and submitted to additional peer review before they are adopted by the USFWS. Objectives of the plan will be attained and any necessary funds made available contingent upon budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific tasks and may not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in developing the plan other than the USFWS. Recovery plans represent the official position of the USFWS only after they have been signed by the Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. By approving this recovery plan, the Regional Director certifies that the data used in its development represent the best scientific and commercial information available at the time it was written. Copies of all documents reviewed in the development of the plan are available in the administrative record, located at the Mississippi Field Office in Jackson, Mississippi. Literature citation of this document should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Viruses of Amphibians in the Southeastern Us
    SEPARC Information Sheet #1 AMPHIBIAN RANAVIRUSES IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES By: Matthew J. Gray, Jason T. Hoverman, and Debra L. Miller Amphibian Die-offs: While amphibians are susceptible to many pathogens, viruses belonging to the genus Ranavirus are responsible for the majority of amphibian die-offs in North America (1). Ranaviruses cause disease in frogs, toads, and salamanders, and mass mortality events have occurred in all regions of the United States (2). Each year it is estimated that 1 – 3 new states report amphibian die-offs associated with ranaviruses (3). Moreover, the number of reported die-offs in the United States from ranaviruses is 3 – 4X greater than the fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (1). Thus, ranaviruses likely represent the greatest pathogen threat to the biodiversity of amphibians in North America. In the Southeast, known die-offs from ranaviruses have occurred in the wild in Tennessee, North Carolina and Florida (4). A variety of species were affected in these mortality events including wood frogs, pickerel frogs, green frogs, American bullfrogs, green tree frogs, spotted salamanders, and marbled salamanders. Undoubtedly, additional die-offs have occurred but gone unnoticed. It is also important to note that die-offs have been reported in ranaculture facilities in Georgia and Idaho and several zoos throughout the United States (5,6,7). The importance of ranaviruses as a significant pathogen is often dismissed because many of the reported die-offs have been with common species (1). While the frequent occurrence of reported die-offs with common species is likely a consequence of detection probability, die-offs have been reported in several species of concern in the western United States (e.g., mountain yellow- legged frog, California red-legged frog, western toad, Sonoran tiger salamander; 3,8).
    [Show full text]