DOCSLIB.ORG

Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy Canada Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy 3rd Edition — August 2013 http://www.fs.fed.us/biology/resources/pubs/wildlife/index.html Acknowledgments We would like to thank the interagency Steering Committee, chaired first by Kathy McAllister and later by Jane Cottrell of the USDA Forest Service, Northern Region, for guidance and support. The Science Team published the foundational scientific assessment, “Ecology and Conservation of Lynx in the Unit- ed States” (Ruggiero et al. 2000a) and provided invaluable assistance and advice to the Lynx Biology Team. Even after the Science Team completed its assignment and was dissolved, several of its members continued to give gen- erously of their time and expertise. We are indebted to John Squires, Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, for sharing information and insights from his research on lynx. John contributed directly to this revision of the LCAS by administering the contract to update the conservation assessment, providing review and comment on early drafts, and arranging and administering a formal peer review of this document. We would like to acknowledge the important contributions by Ben Maletzke and Jennifer Burghardt-Dowd. Under the contract administered by the Rocky Mountain Research Station, they compiled relevant new scientific literature produced from 2000 to 2010 and proposed new text that would incorporate the new information on the ecology of lynx and snowshoe hare into the lynx assessment. We would like to acknowledge Eric Odell of Colorado Parks and Wildlife for his participation and contributions throughout the revision of this document, particularly the update of information concerning the Southern Rocky Mountains Geographic Area. Ron Moen, Natural Resource Research Institute, University of Minnesota, Duluth, Minnesota, provided a key role in updating the information concerning the Great Lakes Geographic Area. Thanks to wildlife agency staff from the states of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Oregon and Idaho for their interest in and review of the document. We also appreciate the helpful review provided by Rich Weir, British Columbia, Canada. We are grateful for the thorough, perceptive and constructive comments by a panel of peer reviewers: Drs. Keith Aubry, Gary Koehler, Angela Fuller, and Ron Moen, led by Dr. John Squires. Their review greatly improved the final document, and any remaining errors are our own. Bob Naney and Nancy Warren coordinated reviews, responded to the peer review comments, and served as prin- cipal editors of the revised LCAS. Kim Foiles, Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, formatted the map (Figure 3.1). Technical editing of the final draft in preparation for web publication was provided by Rachel White, Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service. How to cite this publication: Interagency Lynx Biology Team. 2013. Canada lynx conservation assessment and strategy. 3rd edition. USDA Forest Service, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, and USDI National Park Service. Forest Service Publication R1-13-19, Missoula, MT. 128 pp. Cover photo credits: Mark Ball (Canada lynx) USDA Forest Service (Canada lynx at night) Robert Naney (landscape) i Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy Interagency Lynx Biology Team, current members Name: Representing: Scott Jackson USDA Forest Service (Team Leader) Kurt Broderdorp USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region Susan Catton USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region Bryon Holt USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region Lee Jacobson USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region Mark McCollough USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Region Peter McDonald USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region Bob Naney USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region Tamara Smith USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Midwest Region Kristi Swisher USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Jim Sparks USDI Bureau of Land Management Anne Vandehey USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region Nancy Warren USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (contractor) & past representative of USDA Forest Service, Northern Region and Rocky Mountain Region Mike Wrigley USDI National Park Service, Intermountain Region Jim Zelenak USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region Past members Name: Representing: Tim Bertram USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Danielle Chi USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region Jim Claar USDA Forest Service (Team Leader) Phil Delphey USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Midwest Region Steve Gniadek USDI National Park Service, Glacier National Park Lyle Lewis USDI Bureau of Land Management Steve Mighton USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region Bill Noblitt USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region Cay Ogden USDI National Park Service, Intermountain Region Gary Patton USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region Tony Rinaldi USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region Bill Ruediger USDA Forest Service (Team Leader) Joel Trick USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Midwest Region Fred Wahl USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region Dick Wenger USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region Joyce Whitney USDI Bureau of Land Management Al Williamson USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region Anthropogenic influences ii Table of contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................................................................. i Interagency Lynx Biology Team members .................................................................................................................................... ii Chapter 1– INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and history of the Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy .................................................................... 1 Synopsis of major changes from the previous edition........................................................................................................ 1 History of ESA listing actions and relationship to the LCAS ............................................................................................ 2 Why the LCAS is still useful and needed .............................................................................................................................. 3 Guiding principles ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4 How the document is organized ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 2– OVERVIEW OF LYNX ECOLOGY...................................................................................................................... 6 Description of lynx ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Lynx activity patterns ................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Lynx diet ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Snowshoe hare ecology.................................................................................................................................................. 10 Red squirrel ecology ....................................................................................................................................................... 18 Lynx hunting behavior .............................................................................................................................................................. 21 Lynx distribution ....................................................................................................................................................................... 22 States with verified records of lynx ............................................................................................................................. 22 States with verified records but not thought to support resident populations of lynx .................................. 22 Lynx population density and home range size ................................................................................................................... 23 Description of lynx habitat ..................................................................................................................................................... 24 Lynx population dynamics ....................................................................................................................................................... 30 Genetic variation across the range of lynx ......................................................................................................................... 34 Hybridization with bobcats ..................................................................................................................................................... 35 Interspecific relationships with other carnivores .............................................................................................................. 35 Chapter
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Forest Insect and Disease Conditions and Program Highlights
    R1-16-17 03/20/2016 Forest Service Northern Region Montata Department of Natural Resources and Conservation Forestry Division In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description
    Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description Prepared by: Michael A. Kost, Dennis A. Albert, Joshua G. Cohen, Bradford S. Slaughter, Rebecca K. Schillo, Christopher R. Weber, and Kim A. Chapman Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division September 30, 2007 Report Number 2007-21 Version 1.2 Last Updated: July 9, 2010 Suggested Citation: Kost, M.A., D.A. Albert, J.G. Cohen, B.S. Slaughter, R.K. Schillo, C.R. Weber, and K.A. Chapman. 2007. Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report Number 2007-21, Lansing, MI. 314 pp. Copyright 2007 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status or family status. Cover photos: Top left, Dry Sand Prairie at Indian Lake, Newaygo County (M. Kost); top right, Limestone Bedrock Lakeshore, Summer Island, Delta County (J. Cohen); lower left, Muskeg, Luce County (J. Cohen); and lower right, Mesic Northern Forest as a matrix natural community, Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park, Ontonagon County (M. Kost). Acknowledgements We thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division for funding this effort to classify and describe the natural communities of Michigan. This work relied heavily on data collected by many present and former Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) field scientists and collaborators, including members of the Michigan Natural Areas Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife; Threatened and Endangered Species
    2009 SNF Monitoring and Evaluation Report Wildlife; Threatened and Endangered Species Introduction The data described in this report outlines the history, actions, procedures, and direction that the Superior National Forest (aka the Forest or SNF) has implemented in support of the Gray Wolf Recovery Plan and Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy (LCAS). The Forest contributes towards the conservation and recovery of the two federally listed threatened and endangered species: Canada lynx and gray wolf, through habitat and access management practices, collaboration with other federal and state agencies, as well as researchers, tribal bands and non-governmental partners. Canada lynx On 24 March 2000, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated the Canada lynx a “Threatened” species in the lower 48 states. From 2004-2009 the main sources of information about Canada lynx for the SNF included the following: • Since 2003 the Canada lynx study has been investigating key questions needed to contribute to the recovery and conservation of Canada lynx in the Western Great Lakes. Study methods are described in detail in the annual study progress report available online at the following address: http://www.nrri.umn.edu/lynx/ . These methods have included collecting information on distribution, snow tracking lynx, tracking on the ground and in the air radio-collared lynx, studying habitat use, collecting and analyzing genetic samples (for example, from hair or scat) and conducting pellet counts of snowshoe hare (the primary prey). • In 2006 permanent snow tracking routes were established across the Forest. The main objective is to maintain a standardized, repeatable survey to monitor lynx population indices and trends.
    [Show full text]
  • Eurasian Lynx – Your Essential Brief
    Eurasian lynx – Your essential brief Background Q: Are lynx native to Britain? A: Based on archaeological evidence, the range of the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) included Britain until at least 1,300 years ago. It is difficult to be precise about when or why lynx became extinct here, but it was almost certainly related to human activity – deforestation removed their preferred habitat, and also that of their prey, thus reducing prey availability. These declines in prey species may have been exacerbated by human hunting. Q: Where do they live now? A: Across Europe, Scandinavia, Russia, northern China and Southeast Asia. The range used to include other areas of Western Europe, including Britain, where they are no longer present. Q: How many are there? A: There are thought to be around 50,000 in the world, of which 9,000 – 10,000 live in Europe. They are considered to be a species of least concern by the IUCN. Modern range of the Eurasian lynx Q: How big are they? A: Lynx are on average around 1m in length, 75cm tall and around 20kg, with the males being slightly larger than the females. They can live to 15 years old, but this is rare in the wild. Q: What do they eat? A: The preferred prey of the lynx are the smaller deer species, primarily the roe deer. Lynx may also prey upon other deer species, including chamois, sika deer, smaller red deer, muntjac and fallow deer. Q: Do they eat other things? A: Yes. Lynx prey on many other species when their preferred prey is scarce, including rabbits, hares, foxes, wildcats, squirrel, pine marten, domestic pets, sheep, goats and reared gamebirds.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Large Carnivores in Serbia
    Status of large carnivores in Serbia Duško Ćirović Faculty of Biology University of Belgrade, Belgrade Status and threats of large carnivores in Serbia LC have differend distribution, status and population trends Gray wolf Eurasian Linx Brown Bear (Canis lupus) (Lynx lynx ) (Ursus arctos) Distribution of Brown Bear in Serbia Carpathian Dinaric-Pindos East Balkan Population status of Brown Bear in Serbia Dinaric-Pindos: Distribution 10000 km2 N=100-120 Population increase Range expansion Carpathian East Balkan: Distribution 1400 km2 Dinaric-Pindos N= a few East Balkan Population trend: unknown Carpathian: Distribution 8200 km2 N=8±2 Population stable Legal status of Brown Bear in Serbia According Law on Protection of Nature and the Law on Game and Hunting brown bear in Serbia is strictly protected species. He is under the centralized jurisdiction of the Ministry of Environmental Protection Treats of Brown Bear in Serbia Intensive forestry practice and infrastructure development . Illegal killing Low acceptance due to fear for personal safety Distribution of Gray wolf in Serbia Carpathian Dinaric-Pindos East Balkan Population status of Gray wolf in Serbia Dinaric-Balkan: 2 Carpathian Distribution cca 43500 km N=800-900 Population - stabile/slight increasingly Dinaric Range - slight expansion Carpathian: Distribution 480 km2 (was) Population – a few Population status of Gray wolf in Serbia Carpathian population is still undefined Carpathian Peri-Carpathian Legal status of Gray wolf in Serbia According the Law on Game and Hunting the gray wolf in majority pars of its distribution (south from Sava and Danube rivers) is game species with closing season from April 15th to July 1st.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat and Microsite Influence Demography of Two
    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2013 Population Dynamics And Environmental Factors Influencing Herbs In Intact And Degraded Florida Rosemary Scrub Elizabeth Stephens University of Central Florida Part of the Biology Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Doctoral Dissertation (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Stephens, Elizabeth, "Population Dynamics And Environmental Factors Influencing Herbs In Intact And Degraded Florida Rosemary Scrub" (2013). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 2822. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/2822 POPULATION DYNAMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS INFLUENCING HERBS IN INTACT AND DEGRADED FLORIDA ROSEMARY SCRUB by ELIZABETH L. STEPHENS M.S. Purdue University, 2005 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Science in the Department of Biology in the College of Sciences at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Spring Term 2013 Major Professor: Pedro F. Quintana-Ascencio © 2013 Elizabeth L. Stephens ii ABSTRACT Species have complex and contextual relationships with their environment; both the relative contributions of life-history stages to population growth and the effect of environmental factors on each stage can be different among co-existing species. Timing and extent of reproduction, survival, and mortality determine population growth, species distributions, and assemblage patterns. I evaluate the role of habitat (intact, degraded) and microsite (shrub, leaf litter, bare sand) on population dynamics of Florida scrub herbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences in Montana
    Report of Investigation 23 Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences in Montana Richard B. Berg 2015 Cover photo by Richard Berg. Sapphires (very pale green and colorless) concentrated by panning. The small red grains are garnets, commonly found with sapphires in western Montana, and the black sand is mainly magnetite. Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences, RI 23 Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences in Montana Richard B. Berg Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology MBMG Report of Investigation 23 2015 i Compilation of Reported Sapphire Occurrences, RI 23 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................1 Descriptions of Occurrences ..................................................................................................7 Selected Bibliography of Articles on Montana Sapphires ................................................... 75 General Montana ............................................................................................................75 Yogo ................................................................................................................................ 75 Southwestern Montana Alluvial Deposits........................................................................ 76 Specifi cally Rock Creek sapphire district ........................................................................ 76 Specifi cally Dry Cottonwood Creek deposit and the Butte area ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lynx, Felis Lynx, Predation on Red Foxes, Vulpes Vulpes, Caribou
    Lynx, Fe/is lynx, predation on Red Foxes, Vulpes vulpes, Caribou, Rangifer tarandus, and Dall Sheep, Ovis dalli, in Alaska ROBERT 0. STEPHENSON, 1 DANIEL V. GRANGAARD,2 and JOHN BURCH3 1Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1300 College Road, Fairbanks, Alaska, 99701 2Alaska Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 305, Tok, Alaska 99780 JNational Park Service, P.O. Box 9, Denali National Park, Alaska 99755 Stephenson, Robert 0., Daniel Y. Grangaard, and John Burch. 1991. Lynx, Fe/is lynx, predation on Red Foxes, Vulpes vulpes, Caribou, Rangifer tarandus, and Dall Sheep, Ovis dalli, in Alaska. Canadian Field-Naturalist 105(2): 255- 262. Observations of Canada Lynx (Fe/is lynx) predation on Red Foxes ( Vulpes vulpes) and medium-sized ungulates during winter are reviewed. Characteristics of I 3 successful attacks on Red Foxes and 16 cases of predation on Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) and Dall Sheep (Ovis dalli) suggest that Lynx are capable of killing even adults of these species, with foxes being killed most easily. The occurrence of Lynx predation on these relatively large prey appears to be greatest when Snowshoe Hares (Lepus americanus) are scarce. Key Words: Canada Lynx, Fe/is lynx, Red Fox, Vulpes vulpes, Caribou, Rangifer tarandus, Dall Sheep, Ovis dalli, predation, Alaska. Although the European Lynx (Felis lynx lynx) quently reach 25° C in summer and -10 to -40° C in regularly kills large prey (Haglund 1966; Pullianen winter. Snow depths are generally below 80 cm, 1981), the Canada Lynx (Felis lynx canadensis) and snow usually remains loosely packed except at relies largely on small game, primarily Snowshoe high elevations.
    [Show full text]
  • PICA Project Report (Action A2.2 & 2.3)
    PICA Project Report (Action A2.2 & 2.3) Investigation of Pallas’s cat activity patterns and temporal interactions with sympatric species Authors: Katarzyna Ruta, Gustaf Samelius, David Barclay, Emma Nygren PICA - “Conservation of the Pallas’s cat through capacity building, research, and global planning” 1. Introduction: 1.1 Activity patterns of wild felids: Activity patterns form a part of species’ adaptation to their environment (Beltran & Delibes, 1994) and are therefore a fundamental aspect of animal behaviour (Nielsen, 1983; Weller & Bennett, 2001). Felids are generally considered to be crepuscular and nocturnal in their activity (Kitchener, 1991), although they are well adapted to function in a wide range of light conditions (Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002). Numerous abiotic pressures and biotic interactions are known to shape the temporal behaviour of (cat-like) carnivores (Marinho et al., 2018), including changes in temperature (Beltran & Delibes, 1994; Podolski et al., 2013), light (Huck et al., 2017; Heurich et al., 2014) and season (Podolski et al., 2013; Manfredi et al., 2011), sex and reproductive status of the animal (Kolbe & Squires, 2007; Schmidt, 1999; Schmidt et al., 2009), predation risk (Caro, 2005; Farías et al., 2012) and human disturbance (Wolf & Ale, 2009; Ale & Brown, 2009). Owing to the dietary constraints of carnivores whose preys have their own well-defined circadian rhythms (Halle, 2000; Zielinski, 2000), the availability and vulnerability of prey is, however, considered as one of the main influences on predator temporal activity (Zielinski, 1988; Lodé, 1995). According to Optimal Foraging Theory, predators are expected to synchronize their daily activity with the activity of their most profitable prey, increasing the probability of encounters while reducing energy expenditure (MacArthur & Pianka, 1966; Monterroso et al., 2013; Emmons, 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • March 21–25, 2016
    FORTY-SEVENTH LUNAR AND PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE PROGRAM OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS MARCH 21–25, 2016 The Woodlands Waterway Marriott Hotel and Convention Center The Woodlands, Texas INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Universities Space Research Association Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute Eileen Stansbery, NASA Johnson Space Center PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS David Draper, NASA Johnson Space Center Walter Kiefer, Lunar and Planetary Institute PROGRAM COMMITTEE P. Doug Archer, NASA Johnson Space Center Nicolas LeCorvec, Lunar and Planetary Institute Katherine Bermingham, University of Maryland Yo Matsubara, Smithsonian Institute Janice Bishop, SETI and NASA Ames Research Center Francis McCubbin, NASA Johnson Space Center Jeremy Boyce, University of California, Los Angeles Andrew Needham, Carnegie Institution of Washington Lisa Danielson, NASA Johnson Space Center Lan-Anh Nguyen, NASA Johnson Space Center Deepak Dhingra, University of Idaho Paul Niles, NASA Johnson Space Center Stephen Elardo, Carnegie Institution of Washington Dorothy Oehler, NASA Johnson Space Center Marc Fries, NASA Johnson Space Center D. Alex Patthoff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cyrena Goodrich, Lunar and Planetary Institute Elizabeth Rampe, Aerodyne Industries, Jacobs JETS at John Gruener, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA Johnson Space Center Justin Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey Carol Raymond, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Lindsay Hays, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Paul Schenk,
    [Show full text]