DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 4/Friday, January 6, 2017/Proposed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 4/Friday, January 6, 2017/Proposed Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1665 Required Determinations PART 17—ENDANGERED AND March 7, 2017. Please note that if you are using the Federal eRulemaking Clarity of the Rule THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Portal (see ADDRESSES), the deadline for We are required by Executive Orders ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 submitting an electronic comment is 12866 and 12988 and by the continues to read as follows: 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on this date. Presidential Memorandum of June 1, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– We must receive requests for public 1998, to write all rules in plain 1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted. hearings, in writing, at the address language. This means that each rule we ■ 2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION publish must: entry for ‘‘Eriogonum gypsophilum’’ CONTACT section below by February 21, (1) Be logically organized; 2017. (2) Use the active voice to address from the List of Endangered and readers directly; Threatened Plants. ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may ■ (3) Use clear language rather than 3. Amend § 17.96(a) by removing the submit comments by one of the jargon; critical habitat entry for ‘‘Family following methods: (4) Be divided into short sections and Polygonaceae: Eriogonum gypsophilum (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal sentences; and (Gypsum Wild Buckwheat).’’ eRulemaking Portal: http:// (5) Use lists and tables wherever Dated: December 22, 2016. www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, possible. Daniel M. Ashe, enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0138, which is If you feel that we have not met these Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. the docket number for this rulemaking. requirements, send us comments by one Then, click on the Search button. On the [FR Doc. 2016–31764 Filed 1–5–17; 8:45 am] of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To resulting page, in the Search panel on better help us revise the rule, your BILLING CODE 4333–15–P the left side of the screen, under the comments should be as specific as Document Type heading, click on the possible. For example, you should tell DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Proposed Rules link to locate this us the section or paragraph numbers document. You may submit a comment that are unclearly written, which Fish and Wildlife Service by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ sections or sentences are too long, the (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail sections where you feel lists or tables 50 CFR Part 17 or hand-delivery to: Public Comments would be useful, etc. Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0138; 0138, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Environmental Policy Act FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls We have determined that RIN 1018–BB91 Church, VA 22041–3803. environmental assessments and We request that you send comments environmental impact statements, as Endangered and Threatened Wildlife only by the methods described above. defined under the National and Plants; Removal of the Lesser We will post all comments on http:// Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Long-Nosed Bat From the Federal List www.regulations.gov. This generally U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) authority, need not of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife means that we will post any personal be prepared in connection with AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information you provide us (see Public regulations pursuant to the Act, Section Interior. Comments, below, for more 4(a). We published a notice outlining ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month information). our reasons for this determination in the petition finding; request for comments. Copies of documents: This proposed Federal Register on October 25, 1983 rule and supporting documents, (48 FR 49244). SUMMARY: Under the authority of the including the Species Status References Cited Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Assessment, are available on http:// amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and www.regulations.gov. In addition, the A complete list of all references cited Wildlife Service (Service), propose to supporting file for this proposed rule in this final rule is available at http:// remove the lesser long-nosed bat will be available for public inspection, www.regulations.gov at Docket No. (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae) by appointment, during normal business FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119, or upon from the Federal List of Endangered and hours, at the Arizona Ecological request from the New Mexico Ecological Threatened Wildlife (List) due to Services Field Office, 2321 W. Royal Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES). recovery. This determination is based Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ Authors on a thorough review of the best 85021. available scientific and commercial The primary authors of this notice are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information, which indicates that the the staff members of the New Mexico Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S. threats to this subspecies have been Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona eliminated or reduced to the point that Fish and Wildlife Service (see Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 the subspecies has recovered and no ADDRESSES). W. Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, longer meets the definition of Phoenix, AZ 85021; by telephone (602– List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 endangered or threatened under the Act. 242–0210); or by facsimile (602–242– This document also serves as the 12- Endangered and threatened species, 2513). If you use a telecommunications month finding on a petition to reclassify Exports, Imports, Reporting and device for the deaf (TDD), call the this subspecies from endangered to recordkeeping requirements, Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339. Transportation. threatened on the List. We are seeking information, data, and comments from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed Regulation Promulgation the public on the proposed rule to Information Requested Accordingly, we propose to amend remove the lesser long-nosed bat from part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title the List. Public Comments 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, DATES: We will accept comments Any final action resulting from this as set forth below: received or postmarked on or before proposed rule will be based on the best VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:49 Jan 05, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06JAP1.SGM 06JAP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 1666 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules scientific and commercial data available mailed comments that are not effective on October 31, 1988, and did and be as accurate and as effective as postmarked by the date specified in not include a critical habitat designation possible. Therefore, we request DATES. If you submit information via for either bat. In 1993, we amended the comments or information from other http://www.regulations.gov, your entire List by revising the entry for the concerned governmental agencies, submission—including any personal Sanborn’s long-nosed bat to ‘‘Bat, lesser Native American Tribes, the scientific identifying information—will be posted (=Sanborn’s) long-nosed’’ with the community, industry, or other on the Web site. Please note that scientific name ‘‘Leptonycteris curasoae interested parties concerning this comments posted to this Web site are yerbabuenae.’’ We issued a recovery proposed rule. The comments that will not immediately viewable. When you plan for the lesser long-nosed bat on be most useful and likely to influence submit a comment, the system receives March 4, 1997. The recovery plan has our decisions are those supported by it immediately. However, the comment not been revised. In 2001, we again data or peer-reviewed studies and those will not be publicly viewable until we amended the List by revising the entry that include citations to, and analyses post it, which might not occur until for the lesser long-nosed bat to remove of, applicable laws and regulations. several days after submission. the synonym of ‘‘Sanborn’s’’; the listing Please make your comments as specific If you mail or hand-deliver hardcopy reads, ‘‘Bat, lesser long-nosed’’ and as possible and explain the basis for comments that includes personal retains the scientific name them. In addition, please include identifying information, you may ‘‘Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae.’’ sufficient information with your request at the top of your document that Cole and Wilson (2006) recommended comments to allow us to authenticate we withhold this information from that L. c. yerbabuenae be recognized as any scientific or commercial data you public review. However, we cannot Leptonycteris yerbabuenae. reference or provide. In particular, we guarantee that we will be able to do so. Additionally, Wilson and Reeder’s seek comments concerning the To ensure that the electronic docket for (2005) ‘‘Mammal Species of the World following: this rulemaking is complete and all (Third Edition), an accepted standard (1) New information on the historical comments we receive are publicly for mammalian taxonomy, also indicates and current status, range, distribution, available, we will post all hardcopy that L. yerbabuenae is a species distinct and population size of lesser long-nosed submissions on http:// from L. curasoae. Currently, the most bats, including the locations of any www.regulations.gov. accepted and currently used additional populations; In addition, comments and materials classification for the lesser long-nosed (2) New information regarding the life we receive, as well as supporting history, ecology, and habitat use of the bat is L. yerbabuenae, however, the documentation we used in preparing Service continues to classify the listed lesser long-nosed bat; this proposed rule, will be available for (3) New information concerning the entity as Leptonycteris curasoae public inspection in two ways: yerbabuenae.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eriogonum Visheri A
    Eriogonum visheri A. Nelson (Visher’s buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project December 18, 2006 Juanita A. R. Ladyman, Ph.D. JnJ Associates LLC 6760 S. Kit Carson Cir E. Centennial, CO 80122 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Ladyman, J.A.R. (2006, December 18). Eriogonum visheri A. Nelson (Visher’s buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumvisheri.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The time spent and help given by all the people and institutions listed in the reference section are gratefully acknowledged. I would also like to thank the North Dakota Parks and Recreation Department, in particular Christine Dirk, and the South Dakota Natural Heritage Program, in particular David Ode, for their generosity in making their records, reports, and photographs available. I thank the Montana Natural Heritage Program, particularly Martin Miller, Mark Gabel of the Black Hills University Herbarium, Robert Tatina of the Dakota Wesleyan University, Christine Niezgoda of the Field Museum of Natural History, Carrie Kiel Academy of Natural Sciences, Dave Dyer of the University of Montana Herbarium, Caleb Morse of the R.L. McGregor Herbarium, Robert Kaul of the C. E. Bessey Herbarium, John La Duke of the University of North Dakota Herbarium, Joe Washington of the Dakota National Grasslands, and Doug Sargent of the Buffalo Gap National Grasslands - Region 2, for the information they provided. I also appreciate the access to files and assistance given to me by Andrew Kratz, Region 2 USDA Forest Service, and Chuck Davis, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Biological Assessment
    RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs Resource Management Plan Amendment FINAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Albuquerque Area Office Albuquerque, New Mexico Eddy County, New Mexico January 2011 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Prepared by: BIO-WEST, Inc. 1063 West 1400 North Logan, Utah 84321-2291 435.752.4202 www.bio-west.com Revised Brantley and Avalon Reservoirs RMPA Final Biological Assessment January 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT BACKGROUND........................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................. 1 PROPOSED FEDERAL ACTION ................................................................................................. 4 NEED FOR THE ACTION ........................................................................................................ 5 PURPOSE FOR THE ACTION ................................................................................................. 5 DESCRIPTION
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 82, No. 4/Friday
    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1657 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail including any additional population or hand-delivery to: Public Comments locations, and; Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– (3) New information regarding 0119; Division of Policy, Performance, Eriogonum gypsophilum life history, 50 CFR Part 17 and Management Programs; U.S. Fish ecology and habitat use. and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Please note that submissions merely [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119; Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA stating support for, or opposition to, the FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] 220411–3803. action being considered, without We request that you send comments providing supporting information, RIN 1018–BB87 only by the methods described above. although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as the Act Endangered and Threatened Wildlife We will post all comments on http:// (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) section and Plants; Removing Eriogonum www.regulations.gov. This generally 4(b)(1)(A) directs that determinations as gypsophilum From the Federal List of means that we will post any personal to whether any species is an endangered Endangered and Threatened Plants information you provide us (see Information Requested, below, for more or threatened species must be made AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information). ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Interior. Copies of Documents: This proposed and commercial data available.’’ Prior to issuing a final rule on this ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month rule and supporting documents are proposed action, we will consider all petition finding; request for comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Assessment for The
    DRAFT Environmental Assessment for the Renewable (Wind and Solar) Energy, Power Line, and Communication Tower Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken LPC Conservation LLC Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas December 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arlington Ecological Services Field Office 2005 Northeast Green Oaks Boulevard, Suite 140 Arlington, Texas 76006 Estimated Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EA: $64,683.00 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RENEWABLE ENERGY, POWER LINE, AND COMMUNICATION TOWER PROPOSED HCP AND ITP FOR LESSER PRAIRIE-CHICKEN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND ...............................................................1 1.1 Introduction and Background ..................................................................................1 1.1.1 Permit Structure ...........................................................................................3 1.1.2 Plan Area and Permit Area ..........................................................................3 1.2 Regulatory Background ...........................................................................................3 1.2.1 Endangered Species Act ..............................................................................3 1.2.2 National Environmental Policy Act .............................................................4 2 PURPOSE AND NEED .......................................................................................................5 2.1 Purpose
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Exilifolium Reveal (Dropleaf Buckwheat): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Eriogonum exilifolium Reveal (dropleaf buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project January 27, 2006 David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523-8002 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Anderson, D.G. (2006, January 27). Eriogonum exilifolium Reveal (dropleaf buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumexilifolium.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The helpfulness and generosity of many people, particularly Chuck Cesar, Janet Coles, Denise Culver, Georgia Doyle, Walt Fertig, Bonnie Heidel, Mary Jane Howell, Lynn Johnson, Barry Johnston, Jennifer Jones, George Jones, Ellen Mayo, Ernie Nelson, John Proctor, James Reveal, Richard Scully, and William Weber, are gratefully acknowledged. Their interest in the project and time spent answering questions were extremely valuable, and their insights into the threats, habitat, and ecology of Eriogonum exilifolium were crucial to this project. Richard Scully and Mary Jane Howell spent countless hours as volunteers surveying for E. exilifolium in Larimer, Jackson, Grand, and Albany counties in 2004 and 2005, and much credit goes to them for expanding our knowledge of this species. The quality of their work has been excellent. John Proctor provided valuable information and photographs of this species on National Forest System lands. Thanks also to Beth Burkhart, Greg Hayward, Gary Patton, Jim Maxwell, Kimberly Nguyen, Andy Kratz, Joy Bartlett, and Kathy Roche, and Janet Coles for assisting with questions and project management. Vernon LaFontaine, Wendy Haas, and John Proctor provided information on grazing allotment status.
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Brandegeei Rydberg (Brandegee's Buckwheat)
    Eriogonum brandegeei Rydberg (Brandegee’s buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project February 27, 2006 David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523-8002 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Anderson, D.G. (2006, February 27). Eriogonum brandegeei Reveal (Brandegee’s buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http:// www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumbrandegeei.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The helpfulness and generosity of many experts, particularly Erik Brekke, Janet Coles, Carol Dawson, Brian Elliott, Tom Grant, Bill Jennings, Barry Johnston, Ellen Mayo, Tamara Naumann, Susan Spackman Panjabi, Jerry Powell, and James Reveal, are gratefully acknowledged. Thanks also to Greg Hayward, Gary Patton, Jim Maxwell, Andy Kratz, and Joy Bartlett for assisting with questions and project management. Carmen Morales, Kathy Alvarez, Mary Olivas, Jane Nusbaum, and Barbara Brayfield helped with project management. Susan Spackman Panjabi provided data on the floral visitation of Eriogonum brandegeei. Annette Miller provided information for the assessment on seed storage status. Karin Decker offered advice and technical expertise on map production. Ron Hartman, Ernie Nelson, and Joy Handley provided assistance and specimen label data from the Rocky Mountain Herbarium. Nan Lederer and Tim Hogan provided assistance at the University of Colorado Herbarium, as did Janet Wingate at the Kalmbach Herbarium and Jennifer Ackerfield and Mark Simmons at the Colorado State University Herbarium. Shannon Gilpin assisted with literature acquisition. Thanks also to my family (Jen, Cleome, and Melia) for their support.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a – Location Maps
    Appendix A – Location Maps Figure 1. Looking east along south edge of the proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 well pad, existing caliche road and north edge of the existing Eagle 34 G Federal 13 well pad. Figure 2. Looking south-southwest across proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 well pad, from northwest corner stake Appendix A - 1 Appendix A - 2 Appendix A - 3 Appendix A - 4 Appendix A - 5 Appendix A - 6 Appendix A - 7 Appendix B – Plats Appendix B - 1 Appendix B - 2 Appendix B - 3 Appendix B - 4 Appendix B - 5 Appendix B - 6 Appendix B - 7 Appendix B - 8 Appendix B - 9 Appendix C – Plant Survey Report Lime Rock Resources II-A, L.P. Proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 Well and Surface Flow Lines SW/NE, Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 27 East, Eddy County, New Mexico Plant Survey Report Prepared by Robyn W. Tierney, Permits West, Inc., Santa Fe, New Mexico April 22, 2016 INTRODUCTION Lime Rock Resources II-A, L.P. (Lime Rock) has filed an Application to Drill (APD) one vertical well (Eagle 34 G Federal 88). Lime Rock also proposes to construct 2,418.98 feet of new surface three-inch O.D. SDR 7 poly flow lines (1 gas and 1 production) in a 30-foot wide corridor from the proposed Eagle 34 G Federal 88 well to the existing Eagle 33/34 Federal Tank Battery. The proposed project is located on BLM lands (Lease No. NMNM-557370) in the SW/4 NE/4, Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 27 East, Eddy County, New Mexico (Spring Lake, NM, 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle), approximately nine miles southeast of Artesia, New Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving North America's Threatened Plants
    Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation By Andrea Kramer, Abby Hird, Kirsty Shaw, Michael Dosmann, and Ray Mims January 2011 Recommended ciTaTion: Kramer, A., A. Hird, K. Shaw, M. Dosmann, and R. Mims. 2011. Conserving North America’s Threatened Plants: Progress report on Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation . BoTanic Gardens ConservaTion InTernaTional U.S. Published by BoTanic Gardens ConservaTion InTernaTional U.S. 1000 Lake Cook Road Glencoe, IL 60022 USA www.bgci.org/usa Design: John Morgan, [email protected] Contents Acknowledgements . .3 Foreword . .4 Executive Summary . .5 Chapter 1. The North American Flora . .6 1.1 North America’s plant diversity . .7 1.2 Threats to North America’s plant diversity . .7 1.3 Conservation status and protection of North America’s plants . .8 1.3.1 Regional conservaTion sTaTus and naTional proTecTion . .9 1.3.2 Global conservaTion sTaTus and proTecTion . .10 1.4 Integrated plant conservation . .11 1.4.1 In situ conservaTion . .11 1.4.2 Ex situ collecTions and conservaTion applicaTions . .12 1.4.3 ParameTers of ex situ collecTions for conservaTion . .16 1.5 Global perspective and work on ex situ conservation . .18 1.5.1 Global STraTegy for PlanT ConservaTion, TargeT 8 . .18 Chapter 2. North American Collections Assessment . .19 2.1 Background . .19 2.2 Methodology . .19 2.2.1 Compiling lisTs of ThreaTened NorTh American Taxa .
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Site R042XC013NM Gyp Hills
    Natural Resources Conservation Service Ecological site R042XC013NM Gyp Hills Accessed: 09/25/2021 General information Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site. Figure 1. Mapped extent Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated. Table 1. Dominant plant species Tree Not specified Shrub Not specified Herbaceous Not specified Physiographic features This site occurs on hills, escarpments and breaks between higher and lower plains or terraces, and canyon sides between deep desert drainageways. Slopes range from 10 to 30 percent. Direction of slope varies, the northern exposures having cooler and more moist soils, and the southern exposures having hotter and drier soils in general. Elevations range from 2,800 to 4,000 feet. Table 2. Representative physiographic features Landforms (1) Hill (2) Canyon Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 853–1,219 m Slope 10–30% Water table depth 0 cm Aspect N, S Climatic features The frost free season ranges from 180 to 221 days between early April and late October. The optimum growing season of the major native warm season plants coincides with the summer rains during June, July, August, and September. However, plants can make some growth at any time during the frost free period when moisture is available and minimum daily temperatures stay above 51 degrees F.
    [Show full text]
  • Removing Eriogonum Gypsophilum from the Federal List Of
    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2017 / Proposed Rules 1657 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail including any additional population or hand-delivery to: Public Comments locations, and; Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2016– (3) New information regarding 0119; Division of Policy, Performance, Eriogonum gypsophilum life history, 50 CFR Part 17 and Management Programs; U.S. Fish ecology and habitat use. and Wildlife Service, MS: BPHC; 5275 Please note that submissions merely [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0119; Leesburg Pike; Falls Church, VA stating support for, or opposition to, the FXES11130900000 178 FF09E42000] 220411–3803. action being considered, without We request that you send comments providing supporting information, RIN 1018–BB87 only by the methods described above. although noted, will not be considered in making a determination, as the Act Endangered and Threatened Wildlife We will post all comments on http:// (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) section and Plants; Removing Eriogonum www.regulations.gov. This generally 4(b)(1)(A) directs that determinations as gypsophilum From the Federal List of means that we will post any personal to whether any species is an endangered Endangered and Threatened Plants information you provide us (see Information Requested, below, for more or threatened species must be made AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, information). ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific Interior. Copies of Documents: This proposed and commercial data available.’’ Prior to issuing a final rule on this ACTION: Proposed rule and 12-month rule and supporting documents are proposed action, we will consider all petition finding; request for comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Spatial Data to Improve Recovery Under the Endangered Species Act
    Using Spatial Data to Improve Recovery Under the Endangered Species Act Consultants Assessing the Recovery of Endangered Species (CARE) CONS680 (Spring 2014) Kimmy Gazenski Rachel Lamb Robb Krehbiel May 14, 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5 Problems with Species Recovery Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) ............................ 5 The Role of Spatial Data in Improving the Recovery Planning Process ..................................... 5 Primary Objectives of CARE’s Study ......................................................................................... 7 Objective 1: Assess the Incorporation of SCB Recommendations .......................................... 7 Objective 2: Determine the Feasibility of a Spatial Tool for All Species ............................... 8 Objective 3: Create a Proof-of-Concept Spatial Tool ............................................................. 8 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 8 Objective 1: Assess the Incorporation of SCB Recommendations ............................................. 8 Objective 2: Determine the Feasibility of a Spatial Tool for All Species ................................... 9 Objective 3:
    [Show full text]
  • Eriogonum Coloradense Small (Colorado Buckwheat): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Eriogonum coloradense Small (Colorado buckwheat): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project October 14, 2004 David G. Anderson Colorado Natural Heritage Program Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Anderson, D.G. (2004, October 14). Eriogonum coloradense Small (Colorado buckwheat): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/ projects/scp/assessments/eriogonumcoloradense.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was facilitated by the helpfulness and generosity of many experts, particularly Drs. James Reveal and Barry Johnston. Their interest in the project and time spent answering questions were extremely valuable. Their insights into the evolution, distribution, habitat, and ecology of Eriogonum coloradense were crucial to this project. Thanks also to Beth Burkhart, Gary Patton, Greg Hayward, Jim Maxwell, Andy Kratz, and Joy Bartlett for assisting with questions and project management. Jane Nusbaum and Barbara Brayfield provided crucial financial oversight. Annette Miller provided information for the report on seed storage status. Alison Loar created an Access database to facilitate searches for element occurrence data. Jill Handwerk and Tara Santi assisted with element occurrence data synthesis. Bill Jennings provided photographs of E. coloradense. Nan Lederer and Tim Hogan provided valuable assistance and insights at the Colorado University Herbarium, as did Janet Wingate and Loraine Yeatts at the Kalmbach Herbarium. Tara Santi assisted with literature acquisition. Special thanks to Dan Cariveau and the Colorado Natural Heritage Program staff (Georgia Doyle, Michael Menefee, Ron Abbott, Jim Gionfriddo, and Jill Handwerk) who reviewed part or all of the first draft of this document, and to the two anonymous peer reviewers for their excellent suggestions.
    [Show full text]