DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of the Interior

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of the Interior Vol. 80 Thursday, No. 247 December 24, 2015 Part III Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions; Notice VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:10 Dec 23, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\24DEP3.SGM 24DEP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 80584 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 247 / Thursday, December 24, 2015 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR period October 1, 2014, through to the notice of review. We also request September 30, 2015. information on additional species to Fish and Wildlife Service Moreover, we request any additional consider including as candidates as we status information that may be available prepare future updates of this notice. 50 CFR Part 17 for the candidate species identified in this CNOR. Candidate Notice of Review [Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2015–0135; FF09E21000 FXES11190900000 156] DATES: We will accept information on Background any of the species in this Candidate The Endangered Species Act of 1973, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Notice of Review at any time. as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; and Plants; Review of Native Species ADDRESSES: This notice is available on ESA), requires that we identify species That Are Candidates for Listing as the Internet at http:// of wildlife and plants that are Endangered or Threatened; Annual www.regulations.gov and http:// endangered or threatened based on the Notice of Findings on Resubmitted www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/ best available scientific and commercial Petitions; Annual Description of cnor.html. Species assessment forms information. As defined in section 3 of Progress on Listing Actions with information and references on a the ESA, an endangered species is any particular candidate species’ range, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, species that is in danger of extinction status, habitat needs, and listing priority Interior. throughout all or a significant portion of assignment are available for review at its range, and a threatened species is ACTION: Notice of review. the appropriate Regional Office listed any species that is likely to become an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SUMMARY: In this Candidate Notice of below in or endangered species within the Review (CNOR), we, the U.S. Fish and at the Branch of Communications and foreseeable future throughout all or a Wildlife Service (Service), present an Candidate Conservation, Falls Church, significant portion of its range. Through FOR FURTHER updated list of plant and animal species VA (see address under the Federal rulemaking process, we add INFORMATION CONTACT), or on our Web native to the United States that we _ species that meet these definitions to regard as candidates for or have site (http://ecos.fws.gov/tess public/ the List of Endangered and Threatened proposed for addition to the Lists of reports/candidate-species-report). Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 or the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Please submit any new information, Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 materials, comments, or questions of a and Plants under the Endangered CFR 17.12. As part of this program, we general nature on this notice to the Falls Species Act of 1973, as amended. maintain a list of species that we regard Church, VA, address listed under FOR Identification of candidate species can as candidates for listing. A candidate FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please assist environmental planning efforts by species is one for which we have on file submit any new information, materials, providing advance notice of potential sufficient information on biological comments, or questions pertaining to a listings, and by allowing landowners vulnerability and threats to support a particular species to the address of the and resource managers to alleviate proposal for listing as endangered or Endangered Species Coordinator in the threats and thereby possibly remove the threatened, but for which preparation appropriate Regional Office listed in need to list species as endangered or and publication of a proposal is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Species- threatened. Even if we subsequently list precluded by higher priority listing specific information and materials we a candidate species, the early notice actions. We may identify a species as a receive will be available for public provided here could result in more candidate for listing after we have inspection by appointment, during options for species management and conducted an evaluation of its status— normal business hours, at the recovery by prompting candidate either on our own initiative, or in appropriate Regional Office listed below conservation measures to alleviate response to a petition we have received. under Request for Information in threats to the species. If we have made a finding on a petition SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. General This CNOR summarizes the status and to list a species, and have found that information we receive will be available threats that we evaluated in order to listing is warranted but precluded by at the Branch of Communications and determine that species qualify as other higher priority listing actions, we Candidate Conservation, Falls Church, candidates, to assign a listing priority will add the species to our list of VA (see address under FOR FURTHER number (LPN) to each species, and to candidates. INFORMATION CONTACT). determine whether a species should be We maintain this list of candidates for removed from candidate status. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: a variety of reasons: (1) To notify the Additional material that we relied on is Chief, Branch of Communications and public that these species are facing available in the Species Assessment and Candidate Conservation, U.S. Fish and threats to their survival; (2) to provide Listing Priority Assignment Forms Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: ES, advance knowledge of potential listings (species assessment forms) for each 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA that could affect decisions of candidate species. 22041–3803 (telephone 703–358–2171). environmental planners and developers; This CNOR changes the LPN for two Persons who use a telecommunications (3) to provide information that may candidates and removes two species device for the deaf may call the Federal stimulate and guide conservation efforts from candidate status. Combined with Information Relay Service at 800–877– that will remove or reduce threats to other decisions for individual species 8339. these species and possibly make listing that were published separately from this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: unnecessary; (4) to request input from CNOR in the past year, the current We request additional status interested parties to help us identify number of species that are candidates information that may be available for those candidate species that may not for listing is 60. any of the candidate species identified require protection under the ESA, as This document also includes our in this CNOR. We will consider this well as additional species that may findings on resubmitted petitions and information to monitor changes in the require the ESA’s protections; and (5) to describes our progress in revising the status or LPN of candidate species and request necessary information for setting Lists of Endangered and Threatened to manage candidates as we prepare priorities for preparing listing proposals. Wildlife and Plants (Lists) during the listing documents and future revisions We encourage collaborative VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:10 Dec 23, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24DEP3.SGM 24DEP3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 247 / Thursday, December 24, 2015 / Notices 80585 conservation efforts for candidate (1) The number of populations or extent For more information on the process species, and offer technical and of range of the species affected by the and standards used in assigning LPNs, financial assistance to facilitate such threat(s), or both; (2) the biological a copy of the 1983 guidance is available efforts. For additional information significance of the affected on our Web site at: http://www.fws.gov/ regarding such assistance, please population(s), taking into consideration endangered/esa-library/pdf/1983_LPN_ contact the appropriate Regional Office the life-history characteristics of the Policy_FR_pub.pdf. Information on the listed under Request for Information or species and its current abundance and LPN assigned to a particular species is visit our Web site, http://www.fws.gov/ distribution; (3) whether the threats summarized in this CNOR, and the endangered/what-we-do/cca.html. affect the species in only a portion of its species assessment for each candidate contains the LPN chart and a rationale Previous Notices of Review range, and, if so, the likelihood of persistence of the species in the for the determination of the magnitude We have been publishing CNORs unaffected portions; (4) the severity of and immediacy of threat(s) and since 1975. The most recent was the effects and the rapidity with which assignment of the LPN. published on December 5, 2014 (79 FR they have caused or are likely to cause To the extent this revised notice 72450). CNORs published since 1994 mortality to individuals and differs from all previous animal, plant, are available on our Web site, http:// accompanying declines in population and combined candidate notices of www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/ levels; (5) whether the effects are likely review for native species or previous 12- cnor.html. For copies of CNORs to be permanent; and (6) the extent to month warranted-but-precluded petition published prior to 1994, please contact which any ongoing conservation efforts findings for those candidate species that the Branch of Communications and reduce the severity of the threat(s). were petitioned for listing, this notice FOR Candidate Conservation (see As used in our priority-ranking supercedes them.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aquatic Insects Are Dramatically Underrepresented in Genomic Research
    insects Communication Aquatic Insects Are Dramatically Underrepresented in Genomic Research Scott Hotaling 1,* , Joanna L. Kelley 1 and Paul B. Frandsen 2,3,* 1 School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA; [email protected] 2 Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84062, USA 3 Data Science Lab, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20002, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] (S.H.); [email protected] (P.B.F.); Tel.: +1-(828)-507-9950 (S.H.); +1-(801)-422-2283 (P.B.F.) Received: 20 August 2020; Accepted: 3 September 2020; Published: 5 September 2020 Simple Summary: The genome is the basic evolutionary unit underpinning life on Earth. Knowing its sequence, including the many thousands of genes coding for proteins in an organism, empowers scientific discovery for both the focal organism and related species. Aquatic insects represent 10% of all insect diversity, can be found on every continent except Antarctica, and are key components of freshwater ecosystems. However, aquatic insect genome biology lags dramatically behind that of terrestrial insects. If genomic effort was spread evenly, one aquatic insect genome would be sequenced for every ~9 terrestrial insect genomes. Instead, ~24 terrestrial insect genomes have been sequenced for every aquatic insect genome. A lack of aquatic genomes is limiting research progress in the field at both fundamental and applied scales. We argue that the limited availability of aquatic insect genomes is not due to practical limitations—small body sizes or overly complex genomes—but instead reflects a lack of research interest. We call for targeted efforts to expand the availability of aquatic insect genomic resources to empower future research.
    [Show full text]
  • 32 Annual Meeting 23-25 January 2018 UAPB & Pine Bluff
    32nd Annual Meeting 23-25 January 2018 UAPB & Pine Bluff *ON THE COVER: Artwork by Olaf Nelson. Redhorse ID cheatsheets can be downloaded from moxostoma.com. Art prints are also available. ARKANSAS CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE – 2017-2018 ERIC BRINKMAN, PRESIDENT MIKE EGGLETON, PRESIDENT-ELECT TATE WENTZ, PAST-PRESIDENT CASEY COX, TREASURER JESSIE GREEN, SECRETARY FOR ASSISTING WITH PLANNING OF THE 2018 MEETING, THE CHAPTER GREATLY APPRECIATES: ETHEL CREGGETT, UAPB FACILITIES MANAGEMENT RICHARD REDUS, UAPB TECHNICAL SUPPORT FRED FRAZER, UAPB-AQFI TECHNICAL SUPPORT ROSSIA BROUGHTON-BROWN AND AVERY SHELTON, UAPB FOOD SERVICES UAPB SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE FISHERIES AND HUMAN SCIENCES UAPB DEPARTMENT OF AQUACULTURE AND FISHERIES UAPB AQUACULTURE/FISHERIES CLUB THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO THANK OUR SPONSORS! January 10, 2018 Dear Chapter Membership: Welcome to the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Arkansas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society. Please make full use of this opportunity to reconnect with our fisheries colleagues from around the state, network with new ones, and learn about the excellent aquatic research that is occurring throughout Arkansas. For some, this will be an opportunity to visit a part of the state you have never seen. Take time to see Bayou Bartholomew, “The World’s Longest Bayou” and one of Arkansas’s most diverse stream communities that flows through Pine Bluff. You will also have the opportunity to learn more about the Arkansas Delta at the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission’s Mike Huckabee Delta Rivers Nature Center during the Welcome Social Tuesday evening. The Chapter’s Conference Organizing Committee has planned an excellent meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Modelando La Distribución De Atlantea Tulita : Especie Endémica En Peligro
    ModelandoModelando lala distribucidistribuci óónn dede AtlanteaAtlantea tulitatulita :: especieespecie endend éémicamica enen peligropeligro dede extinciextinci óónn enen PuertoPuerto RicoRico Andr és V élez Estudiante de Maestr ía Universidad de Puerto Rico, Mayag üez Departamento de Biolog ía Franz Lab - Insect Systematics & Evolution http:// academic.uprm.edu /franz /ave.html IntroducciIntroducci óónn yy justificacijustificaci óónn • Perdida de diversidad Modificación paisaje • Endemismos Cambio climático (Thomas et al 2004) • Condición de Puerto Rico Pérdida de habitad • Conocimiento para CONSERVAR • Herramienta Modelación potencial distribución • Áreas protegidas conocer la actual o futura distribución EstatusEstatus A.A. tulitatulita -Lista 88 especies amenazadas DRNA (Departamento de Recursos Naturales y Ambientales de Puerto Rico) 2007 (Protección federal) -El DRNA (2009) 1°invertebrado lista de especies en peligro de extinción -Petición comunidad (2010) por destrucción de hábitat -Presencia restringida a el municipio Quebradillas y otra en el municipio de Maricao (Carrión, 2003) -Especie en amenaza? -Falta de investigaciones para concluir • Elaborar un modelo de predicción de distribución • Área idóneas en Puerto Rico • Trabajos de bilogía y ecología • Pautas para conservación ObjetivoObjetivo Realizar un modelo de predicción de la distribución potencial para la mariposa endémica A. tulita , actualmente en peligro de extinción en Puerto Rico ÁÁrearea dede estudioestudio PuertoPuerto RicoRico -Las-Área temperaturas aproximada dey lluvias 8990 km2 • El norte fresco y lluvioso -temperaturas Isla principal deentre Puerto 13-32°C Rico, •Mona, El sur semiáridoVieques y temperaturasCulebra. entre 13-38°C •-Diversidad El centro montañoso de ecosistemas: lluvioso y frío,0-1330m. promedio Bosques lluvias secos, 2540 mm temperaturasB. lluviosos, zona entre cársica, 4-32°C. áreas montañosas, -ecosistemas La cobertura costeros vegetal sey ha desarrolladomarinos.
    [Show full text]
  • Eradication of Feral Goats and Pigs and Consequences for Other Biota on Sarigan Island, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
    Eradication of feral goats and pigs and consequences for other biota on Sarigan Island, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. C. C. Kessler 4815 Saddle Ave., Flagstaff, AZ 86004. USA Abstract Sarigan Island (c.500 ha) is one of the 15 Mariana Islands in the tropical western Pacific Ocean. The native forest on Sarigan was in an advanced state of decline due to the presence of feral goats (Capra hircus) and pigs (Sus scrofa). During January and February 1998, 68 pigs and 904 goats were removed by helicopter shooting, ground shooting, trapping, and tracking with dogs. The goal was to stop and reverse the loss of forest and accompanying erosion and thus improve habitat for the endangered Micronesian megapode (Megapodius laperouse) and other native species. Follow-up control in 1999 and 2000 removed an additional six goats. Sarigan Island is now considered free of feral ungulates. Vegetation monitoring before and after eradication shows an increase in plant species richness, an increase in tree seedlings, and the rapid expansion of the introduced vine Operculina ventricosa. Skinks also increased, but numbers of fruit bats, land birds, and rats have not yet showed change. It is still undetermined as to what effect the vine Operculina ventricosa will have on the regeneration and expansion of the native forest. Keywords Vegetation; megapode; Operculina ventricosa. INTRODUCTION means to improve habitat (through vegetation recovery) Of the 11 islands in the Mariana chain (15 islands total) for endangered Micronesian megapodes. that are uninhabited, the largest five have feral animals. The uncontrolled existence of these populations jeopard- METHODS ises the continued existence of the unique native plant and wildlife species on these islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Landscape-Based Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerability for All Native Hawaiian Plants
    Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDscape-bASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMatE CHANGE VULNEraBILITY FOR ALL NatIVE HAWAIIAN PLANts Lucas Fortini1,2, Jonathan Price3, James Jacobi2, Adam Vorsino4, Jeff Burgett1,4, Kevin Brinck5, Fred Amidon4, Steve Miller4, Sam `Ohukani`ohi`a Gon III6, Gregory Koob7, and Eben Paxton2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaii National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service —Ecological Services, Division of Climate Change and Strategic Habitat Management, Honolulu, HI 96850 5 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawai‘i National Park, HI 96718 6 The Nature Conservancy, Hawai‘i Chapter, Honolulu, HI 96817 7 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Hawaii/Pacific Islands Area State Office, Honolulu, HI 96850 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai‘i at Hilo 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 November 2013 This product was prepared under Cooperative Agreement CAG09AC00070 for the Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey. Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDSCAPE-BASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY FOR ALL NATIVE HAWAIIAN PLANTS LUCAS FORTINI1,2, JONATHAN PRICE3, JAMES JACOBI2, ADAM VORSINO4, JEFF BURGETT1,4, KEVIN BRINCK5, FRED AMIDON4, STEVE MILLER4, SAM ʽOHUKANIʽOHIʽA GON III 6, GREGORY KOOB7, AND EBEN PAXTON2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaiʽi National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawaiʽi at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2017
    Ellipsaria Vol. 19 - No. 4 December 2017 Newsletter of the Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society Volume 19 – Number 4 December 2017 Cover Story . 1 Society News . 4 Announcements . 7 Regional Meetings . 8 March 12 – 15, 2018 Upcoming Radisson Hotel and Conference Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin Meetings . 9 How do you know if your mussels are healthy? Do your sickly snails have flukes or some other problem? Contributed Why did the mussels die in your local stream? The 2018 FMCS Workshop will focus on freshwater mollusk Articles . 10 health assessment, characterization of disease risk, and strategies for responding to mollusk die-off events. FMCS Officers . 19 It will present a basic understanding of aquatic disease organisms, health assessment and disease diagnostic tools, and pathways of disease transmission. Nearly 20 Committee Chairs individuals will be presenting talks and/or facilitating small group sessions during this Workshop. This and Co-chairs . 20 Workshop team includes freshwater malacologists and experts in animal health and disease from: the School Parting Shot . 21 of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota; School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin; School 1 Ellipsaria Vol. 19 - No. 4 December 2017 of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences, Auburn University; the US Geological Survey Wildlife Disease Center; and the US Fish and Wildlife Service Fish Health Center. The opening session of this three-day Workshop will include a review of freshwater mollusk declines, the current state of knowledge on freshwater mollusk health and disease, and a crash course in disease organisms. The afternoon session that day will include small panel presentations on health assessment tools, mollusk die-offs and kills, and risk characterization of disease organisms to freshwater mollusks.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of a Novel Predator on Aquatic Invertebrates in Fishless Lakes: Implications for Conservation Translocations
    Impacts of a novel predator on aquatic invertebrates in fishless lakes: Implications for conservation translocations by Allison L K Banting A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conservation Biology Department of Renewable Resources University of Alberta © Allison L K Banting, 2018 ABSTRACT Fishless mountain lakes hold important ecological and conservation value. As such, managers are establishing conservation goals (e.g., non-native fish removal) to restore the naturalness to many of these lakes. Managers who are recovering native coldwater fish populations threatened by climate change (e.g., Westslope Cutthroat Trout, Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi and Bull Trout, Salvelinus confluentus) are simultaneously exploring conservation strategies involving the intentional translocation of native fish species to more suitable areas. These areas include unoccupied, or naturally fishless, stream and lake habitat within their native range or favorable habitats outside their native range. This action presents a potential threat for fishless mountain lakes as conservation managers view these as recovery habitat for imperiled native fish species. The purpose of my study was to inform native fish recovery efforts by assessing the potential consequences of translocating native fishes to naturally fishless lakes, thus outside their historic distribution. Forty alpine and sub-alpine lakes in Banff National Park, Alberta and Kootenay National Park, British Columbia were sampled and divided into three lake types, including: 13 naturally fishless lakes, 13 native fish-bearing or native fish-stocked lakes, and 14 non-native fish-stocked lakes historically unoccupied by fish. Littoral invertebrate community composition (presence or absence), density and diversity were examined among lake types to 1) quantify the impacts of introducing non-native fishes into historically fishless lakes, and 2) quantify the differences between native fish lakes and naturally fishless lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic
    Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic Biological Opinion and Conference Opinion on the United States Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement’s Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act Title V Regulatory Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Program Division of Environmental Review Falls Church, Virginia October 16, 2020 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................3 2 Consultation History .........................................................................................................4 3 Background .......................................................................................................................5 4 Description of the Action ...................................................................................................7 The Mining Process .............................................................................................................. 8 4.1.1 Exploration ........................................................................................................................ 8 4.1.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Controls .................................................................................. 9 4.1.3 Clearing and Grubbing ....................................................................................................... 9 4.1.4 Excavation of Overburden and Coal ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTAMENTO DE ESTADO Núm. Reglamento: 6766 Secr .O De
    ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO DEPARTAMENTO DE RECURSOS NATURALES Y AMBIENTALES DEPARTAMENTO DE ESTADO Núm. Reglamento: 6766 Fecha Radicación: 11de febrero de 2004 Aprobado : José Miguel Izquierdo Encarnación Secr .o de Estado C) Por: (1 ft p SOCIADO of Gis ' -. IF'arcía R~ A(~ Secretaria liar de Servicios F,Q 0~ TO C) 01 yy' O t7 N m w lo 01W C A DRNA C 4ctfRsOS NPT REGLAMENTO PARA REGIR LAS ESPECIES VULNERABLES Y EN PELIGRO DE EXTINCIÓN EN EL ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO C') Cy REGLAMENTO PARA REGIR LAS ESPECIES VULNERABLES Y EN PELIGRO DE EXTINCIÓN EN EL ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO INDICE O INDICE 1 ARTÍCULO 1 DISPOSICIONES GENERALES 2 1 .01 TÍTULO 2 1 .02 BASE LEGAL 2 1 .03 PROPOSITOS 2 1 .04 APLICABILIDAD 2 1 .05 DISPOSICIONES ESPECIALES 2 C. 1 .06 APROBACION Y VIGENCIA DEL REGLAMENTO 3 1 .07 DEFINICIONES 3 1 .08 SIGLAS 8 1 .09 USO DE PALABRAS 8 1 .10 CLAUSULA DE SEPARABILIDAD 8 ARTÍCULO 2 DISPOSICIONES ESPECIALES 8 O) 2 .01 PROHIBICIONES GENERALES 8 2 .02 PROHIBICIONES ESPECFICAS 9 2.03 EXCEPCIONES A LAS PROHIBICIONES 9 2.04 PRUEBA DE EXCEPCIÓN 9 2.05 PROHIBICIONES RELATIVAS A FAUNA SILVESTRE VULNERABLE O EN PELIGRO DE EXTINCIÓN 10 O 2 .06 PROHIBICIONES RELATIVAS A PLANTAS VULNERABLES O EN PELIGRO DE EXTINCIÓN ... 11 2 .07 AVISO PÚBLICO 11 2 .08 PARTICIPACIÓN CIUDADANA 12 2 .09 CONSULTA INTERAGENCIAL 12 12 2 .10 ACUERDOS -. ARTICULO 3 IDENTIFICACIÓN, DESIGNACIÓN Y DETERMINACIÓN DE ESPECIES VULNERABLES O Y ESPECIES EN PELIGRO DE EXTINCION 12 3 .01 IDENTIFICACIÓN Y DESIGNACIÓN 12 3 .02 OTROS ASPECTOS 16 3 .03 SOLICITUD DE DESIGNACION 16 3 .04 DETERMINACIÓN 16 3 .05 LISTA DE ESPECIES : 17 3 .06 REVISIÓN DE LA LISTA 17 O ARTICULO 4 HÁBITAT NATURAL CRÍTICO Y HABITAT NATURAL CRÍTICO ESENCIAL 17 4.01 DESIGNACION 17 4.02 REQUISITOS DE DETERMINACIÓN 17 4.03 CRITERIOS PARA LA DESIGNACIÓN DE UN HÁBITAT NATURAL CRÍTICO ESENCIAL : 18 4.04 CRITERIOS PARA LA DESIGNACIÓN DE UN HÁBITAT NATURAL CRÍTICO.
    [Show full text]
  • Poaceae) De México Species Richness, Classification and a Checklist of the Grasses (Poaceae) of Mexico
    Artículo de investigación Riqueza de especies, clasificación y listado de las gramíneas (Poaceae) de México Species richness, classification and a checklist of the grasses (Poaceae) of Mexico J. Gabriel Sánchez-Ken Resumen: Antecedentes y Objetivos: En 2006 se dio a conocer el catálogo de las gramíneas de México, pero desde entonces tanto la clasificación como la apa- rición de especies nuevas cambiaron las cifras de esta familia en México y en el mundo. El objetivo principal de este estudio fue actualizar la lista de taxa en México, reuniendo el mayor número posible de bases de datos en línea. Otros objetivos incluyeron la comparación de la riqueza de especies de la familia Poaceae entre los países con mayor diversidad, así como analizar la riqueza de sus taxa a nivel estatal y por categorías taxonómicas. Métodos: Se consultaron bases de datos en línea, tanto nacionales como extranjeras, que incluían ejemplares de referencia de México, se descarga- ron y se curaron, además de una confirmación visual de la identidad de un gran porcentaje de ejemplares. Se extrajeron los nombres de las especies, estados donde fueron colectadas y los acrónimos de los herbarios. La base resultante se complementó solo con bibliografía a partir de 2006 y la no incluida en el catálogo que mostraba ejemplares de respaldo. Resultados clave: Se revisaron 227,973 registros que contabilizaron, en total, 1416 taxa, que incluyen 215 géneros, 1312 especies y 214 categorías infraespecíficas. Del total de especies, 1092 se consideran nativas y 224 introducidas (cultivadas y/o malezas). Las especies endémicas de México son 304 (27.83%) o 311 (28.10%) si se consideran categorías inferiores.
    [Show full text]
  • Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    APPENDIX A. VIRGINIA SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Taxa Common Scientific Name Tier Cons. Opp. Habitat Descriptive Habitat Notes Name Ranking Amphibians Barking Hyla gratiosa II a Forest Forests near or within The Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System indicates treefrog shallow wetlands the loss suitable wetlands constitute the greatest threats to this species. DGIF recommends working to maintain or restore forested buffers surrounding occupied wetlands. These needs are consistent with action plan priorities to conserve and restore wetland habitats and associated buffers. Recently discovered populations within its known range, may indicate this species is more abundant than previously believed. An in-depth investigation into its status may warrant delisting. This species will be prioritized as Tier 2a. Amphibians Blue Ridge Desmognathus IV c Forest High elevation seeps, This species' distribution is very limited. Other than limiting dusky orestes streams, wet rock faces, logging activity in the occupied areas, no conservation salamander and riparian forests actions have been identified. Unless other threats or actions are identified, this species will be listed as Tier 4c. Amphibians Blue Ridge Eurycea III a Wetland Mountain streams and The needs of this species are consistent with priorities for two-lined wilderae adjacent riparian areas maintaining and enhancing riparian forests and aquatic salamander with mixed hardwood or habitats. This species will be listed as Tier 3a. spruce-fir forests up to 6000 feet. Amphibians Carpenter Lithobates III a Wetland Freshwater wetlands with The needs of this species are consistent with action plan frog virgatipes sphagnum moss priorities to preserve and restore aquatic and wetland habitats and water quality.
    [Show full text]