DOCSLIB.ORG

For the Dusky Gopher Frog Scientific Name for the Species Was on Or Before May 30, 2012

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Vol. 77 Tuesday, No. 113 June 12, 2012 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Dusky Gopher Frog (Previously Mississippi Gopher Frog); Final Rule and Proposed Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:56 Jun 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\12JNR2.SGM 12JNR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 35118 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR issue a rule to designate critical habitat. Taxonomy and Nomenclature Designation of critical habitat for the Subsequent to the listing of the dusky Fish and Wildlife Service dusky gopher frog was found to be gopher frog (=Mississippi gopher frog), prudent and a proposed rule to taxonomic research was completed that 50 CFR Part 17 designate critical habitat was published indicated that the entity (which we [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2010–0024; on June 3, 2010. We subsequently listed as a DPS of the dusky gopher frog 4500030114] reproposed critical habitat on (Rana capito [sic] sevosa)) is different September 27, 2011, and announced the RIN 1018–AW89 from other gopher frogs and warrants availability of an economic analysis. acceptance as its own species (Young Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Pursuant to a court-approved settlement and Crother 2001, pp. 382–388). The and Plants; Designation of Critical agreement, we must deliver to the herpetological scientific community Habitat for Dusky Gopher Frog Federal Register our final designation of accepted this taxonomic change and the (Previously Mississippi Gopher Frog) critical habitat for the dusky gopher frog scientific name for the species was on or before May 30, 2012. This action changed to Rana sevosa. In addition, all AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, fulfills our obligations under the Act comments on taxonomy that we Interior. and the settlement agreement. received during the comment periods ACTION: Final rule. This rule designates critical habitat for the revised critical habitat proposal were in agreement that the frog warrants SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and for the dusky gopher frog. Wildlife Service, designate critical • Approximately 625 hectares (1,544 acceptance as its own species. Therefore, listing as a DPS is no longer habitat for the dusky gopher frog under acres) are designated as critical habitat appropriate. The taxonomic change the Endangered Species Act. In previous in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana. publications, we used the common meant that a change in the common • Approximately 1,996 hectares name from Mississippi gopher frog to name ‘‘Mississippi gopher frog’’ for this (4,933 acres) are designated as critical species. We are taking this action to dusky gopher frog was appropriate habitat in Forrest, Harrison, Jackson, (Crother et al. 2003, p. 197). Most fulfill our obligations under the Act. and Perry Counties, Mississippi. Land in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, comments we received on this subject • and Forrest, Harrison, Jackson, and In total, approximately 2,621 indicated that we should change the Perry Counties, Mississippi, is being hectares (ha) (6,477 acres (ac)) are common name to dusky gopher frog designated under a court approved designated as critical habitat for the from Mississippi gopher frog. Therefore, settlement agreement to finalize critical dusky gopher frog. although in the revised proposed critical habitat rule (76 FR 59774) we stated that habitat for the species. The effect of this Peer reviewers support our methods. we would continue to use the common regulation is to conserve the habitat We solicited expert opinions from seven name ‘‘Mississippi gopher frog’’ we now upon which dusky gopher frog depends. knowledgeable individuals with believe the common name dusky gopher scientific expertise that included DATES: This rule becomes effective on frog should be used to describe the familiarity with the species, the July 12, 2012. listed species rather than Mississippi geographic region in which the species ADDRESSES: This final rule and the gopher frog and, in this rule, we use the occurs, and conservation biology associated final economic analysis are common name ‘‘dusky gopher frog’’ for principles. We received responses from available on the Internet at http:// this species. www.regulations.gov. Comments and six of the peer reviewers. The peer We received other comments on materials received, as well as supporting reviewers generally concurred with our changes that have been proposed in the documentation used in preparing this methods and conclusions, and provided scientific literature regarding removing final rule, are available for public additional information, clarifications, the genus name Rana from a group of inspection, by appointment, during and suggestions to improve the final North American frogs and replacing it normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish critical habitat rule. with the genus Lithobates (see Crother and Wildlife Service, Mississippi Background 2008, p. 7). There is still reluctance by Ecological Services Field Office, 6578 some in the scientific community to Dogwood View Parkway, Jackson, MS It is our intent to discuss in this final accept this change (Hillis 2007, p. 331; 39213; telephone: 601–321–1122; rule only those topics directly relevant Pauly et al. 2009, p. 115; Wiens et al. facsimile: 601–965–4340. to the development and designation of 2009, p. 1220). Until there is a clear FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: critical habitat for the dusky gopher frog consensus within the scientific Stephen Ricks, Field Supervisor, U.S. under the Endangered Species Act of community, we will continue to use the Fish and Wildlife Service, Mississippi 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 scientific name of Rana sevosa for the Ecological Services Field Office, 6578 et seq.). For more information on the dusky gopher frog. Dogwood View Parkway, Jackson, MS biology and ecology of the dusky gopher 39213; telephone: 601–321–1122; frog, refer to the final listing rule Previous Federal Actions facsimile: 601–965–4340. If you use a published in the Federal Register on The dusky gopher frog was listed as telecommunications device for the deaf December 4, 2001 (66 FR 62993). For an endangered species under the Act on (TDD), call the Federal Information additional information on dusky gopher December 4, 2001 (66 FR 62993). The Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. frog critical habitat, refer to the revised species was at that time identified as the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: proposed rule to designate critical Mississippi gopher frog, Rana capito habitat for the dusky gopher frog sevosa, a distinct population segment of Executive Summary published in the Federal Register on the dusky gopher frog (Rana capito) (see Why we need to publish a rule. Under September 27, 2011 (76 FR 59774) and Taxonomy and Nomenclature the Endangered Species Act, we are the announcement of the public hearing discussion above). At the time of listing, required to designate critical habitat for for the revised proposed rule published the Service found that designation of any endangered or threatened species if in the Federal Register on January 17, critical habitat was prudent. However, prudent and determinable and we must 2012 (77 FR 2254). the development of a designation was VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:56 Jun 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12JNR2.SGM 12JNR2 srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 35119 deferred due to budgetary and workload of the availability of the associated draft common name of the listed entity from constraints. economic analysis (76 FR 59774), Mississippi gopher frog to dusky gopher On November 27, 2007, the Center for opened on September 27, 2011 and frog. Two of the peer reviewers Biological Diversity and Friends of closed on November 28, 2011. The suggested changing the scientific name Mississippi Public Lands (plaintiffs) second comment period, associated of Rana sevosa to Lithobates sevosus filed a lawsuit against the Service and with a public hearing held on January based on recent publications in the the Secretary of the Interior for our 31, 2012, in Gulfport, Mississippi, scientific literature. However, one of failure to timely designate critical opened on January 17, 2012 and closed these peer reviewers stated that habitat for the dusky gopher frog on March 2, 2012. We also contacted although the four major herpetological (Friends of Mississippi Public Lands and appropriate Federal, State, and local societies require authors submitting Center for Biological Diversity v. agencies; scientific organizations; and papers to their publications to use the Kempthorne (07–CV–02073)). In a court- other interested parties, and invited standard English names of Crother approved settlement, the Service agreed them to comment on the revised (2008, p. 8) [=dusky gopher frog], to submit to the Federal Register a new proposed rule and draft economic authors may use their discretion on the prudency determination, and if the analysis during these comment periods. scientific name used (within scientific designation was found to be prudent, a During the first comment period, we reason and with citation when needed). proposed designation of critical habitat received 46 comment letters directly Our Response: See ‘‘Taxonomy and by May 30, 2010, and a final designation addressing the revised critical habitat Nomenclature’’ above. The Service is by May 30, 2011. Designation of critical designation or the draft economic changing the name of the listed entity to habitat for the dusky gopher frog was analysis. During the second comment Rana sevosa, the dusky gopher frog. again found to be prudent, and a period, we received 57 comment letters However, because disagreement exists proposed rule to designate critical directly addressing the revised proposed in the scientific community regarding habitat for the dusky gopher frog was critical habitat designation or the draft the taxonomic support for replacing published on June 3, 2010 (75 FR economic analysis.
Recommended publications
  • Division of Law Enforcement

    Division of Law Enforcement

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Division of Law Enforcement Annual Report FY 2000 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, working with others, conserves, protects, and enhances fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. As part of this mission, the Service is responsible for enforcing U.S. and international laws, regulations, and treaties that protect wildlife resources. Cover photo by J & K Hollingsworth/USFWS I. Overview ..................................................................................................................1 Program Evolution and Priorities......................................................................2 Major Program Components ..............................................................................2 FY 2000 Investigations Statistical Summary (chart) ....................................3 FY 1999-2000 Wildlife Inspection Activity (chart) ..........................................6 Table of Laws Enforced ......................................................................................................7 Contents II. Organizational Structure ........................................................................................9 III. Regional Highlights ..............................................................................................14 Region One ..........................................................................................................14 Region Two ..........................................................................................................26
  • Notophthalmus Perstriatus) Version 1.0

    Notophthalmus Perstriatus) Version 1.0

    Species Status Assessment for the Striped Newt (Notophthalmus perstriatus) Version 1.0 Striped newt eft. Photo credit Ryan Means (used with permission). May 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4 Jacksonville, Florida 1 Acknowledgements This document was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s North Florida Field Office with assistance from the Georgia Field Office, and the striped newt Species Status Assessment Team (Sabrina West (USFWS-Region 8), Kaye London (USFWS-Region 4) Christopher Coppola (USFWS-Region 4), and Lourdes Mena (USFWS-Region 4)). Additionally, valuable peer reviews of a draft of this document were provided by Lora Smith (Jones Ecological Research Center) , Dirk Stevenson (Altamaha Consulting), Dr. Eric Hoffman (University of Central Florida), Dr. Susan Walls (USGS), and other partners, including members of the Striped Newt Working Group. We appreciate their comments, which resulted in a more robust status assessment and final report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Species Status Assessment (SSA) is an in-depth review of the striped newt's (Notophthalmus perstriatus) biology and threats, an evaluation of its biological status, and an assessment of the resources and conditions needed to maintain species viability. We begin the SSA with an understanding of the species’ unique life history, and from that we evaluate the biological requirements of individuals, populations, and species using the principles of population resiliency, species redundancy, and species representation. All three concepts (or analogous ones) apply at both the population and species levels, and are explained that way below for simplicity and clarity as we introduce them. The striped newt is a small salamander that uses ephemeral wetlands and the upland habitat (scrub, mesic flatwoods, and sandhills) that surrounds those wetlands.
  • Morphological Abnormalities in Anurans from Central Mexico: a Case Study (Anura: Ranidae, Hylidae)

    Morphological Abnormalities in Anurans from Central Mexico: a Case Study (Anura: Ranidae, Hylidae)

    heRPetoZoa 27 (3/4): 115 - 121 115 Wien, 30. Jänner 2015 Morphological abnormalities in anurans from central Mexico: a case study (anura: Ranidae, hylidae) Morphologische anomalien bei anuren aus dem mittleren Mexiko: ein Fallbericht (anura: Ranidae, hylidae) oCtavIo MonRoy -v IlChIs & l ouRDes lIZZoulI PaRRa -l óPeZ & t RInIDaD BeltRán -l eón & J oRge a. l ugo & á ngel BalDeRas & M aRtha M. Z aRCo -g onZáleZ KuRZFassung hohe Raten an morphologischen anomalien (Mißbildungen) werden bei amphibien auf die einwirkung von Parasiten, chemischen substanzen, uv-strahlung und Beutegreifern zurückgeführt. Ziele der vorliegenden untersuchung waren die quantitative und qualitative erfassung grobmorphologischer äußerer Mißbildungen an anuren des sierra nanchititla naturreservats (Mexiko) sowie die Identifizierung möglicher ursachen. sechs (6.23 %) der 95 gefangenen Individuen von Lithobates forreri (BoulengeR , 1883) sowie je ein „Beifangexemplar“ von Lithobates zweifeli (h IllIs , F Rost & W eBB , 1984) und Hyla arenicolor CoPe , 1866 zeigten insgesamt acht typen morphologischer Mißbildungen . Die beobachtete Mißbildungsrate lag somit geringfügig über dem mit fünf Prozent angenommenen hintergrundwert einer Population. an Makroparasiten wurden nematoda (Ozwaldocruzi a sp. und Rhabdias savagei ) und trematoda ( Haematoloechus sp. und Gorgoderina tarascae ) an inneren organen sowie Milben der gattung Hannemania auf der Körperoberfläche festgestellt. In den Muskel - gewebsproben, waren die Metalle Blei (Pb) und Kupfer (Cu) nicht nachweis- oder quantifzierbar, während Zink (Zn) in niedrigen (physiologischen) Konzentrationen vorlag. In den Wasserproben wurde Pb nicht nachgewiesen, die Zn and Cu Konzentrationen lagen innerhalb der in Mexiko zulässigen grenzwerte für Fließgewässer. Die autoren schließen als ursache der beobachteten, erhöhten Mißbildungsrate aus: (1) die tätigkeit von Makroparasiten, auf - grund des Fehlens von trematoda der gattung Riberoia , von denen man weiß, das sie Mißbildungen verursachen können und (2) die einwirkung von Pb, Cu and Zn.
  • Deicing Salts Influence Ranavirus Outbreaks in Wood Frog (Lithobates Sylvaticus) Tadpoles Sarah Jacobson Sarah.Jacobson@Uconn.Edu

    Deicing Salts Influence Ranavirus Outbreaks in Wood Frog (Lithobates Sylvaticus) Tadpoles Sarah Jacobson [email protected]

    University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn Honors Scholar Theses Honors Scholar Program Spring 5-2-2019 Deicing Salts Influence Ranavirus Outbreaks in Wood Frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) Tadpoles Sarah Jacobson [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/srhonors_theses Part of the Animal Diseases Commons, Animal Experimentation and Research Commons, Biodiversity Commons, Population Biology Commons, Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Virus Diseases Commons Recommended Citation Jacobson, Sarah, "Deicing Salts Influence Ranavirus Outbreaks in Wood Frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) Tadpoles" (2019). Honors Scholar Theses. 618. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/srhonors_theses/618 Jacobson 1 Deicing Salts Influence Ranavirus Outbreaks in Wood Frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) Tadpoles Sarah K. Jacobson Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Center for Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Center, University of Connecticut Tracy A. G. Rittenhouse Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Center for Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Center, University of Connecticut Jacobson 2 Abstract Ecosystems are increasingly being exposed to anthropogenic stressors that could make animals and thus populations more susceptible to disease. For example, the application of deicing salts to roads is increasing in the northeastern United States. Chronic stress that larval amphibians experience when living in vernal pools with high salinity may alter their susceptibility to ranavirus, a pathogen responsible for mass mortality events worldwide. This project quantifies the effects of road salts and ranavirus exposure on larval wood frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) growth and survival. Using outdoor mesocsoms, we raised wood frog tadpoles in salt treatments and then exposed them to the FV3 strain of ranavirus, with the hypothesis that individuals raised in salt treatments would have lower survival, and metamorph earlier at larger size when exposed to ranavirus than those from no salt treatments.
  • CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] Chiricahuensis)

    CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] Chiricahuensis)

    CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Lithobates [Rana] chiricahuensis) Chiricahua Leopard Frog from Sycamore Canyon, Coronado National Forest, Arizona Photograph by Jim Rorabaugh, USFWS CONSIDERATIONS FOR MAKING EFFECTS DETERMINATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REDUCING AND AVOIDING ADVERSE EFFECTS Developed by the Southwest Endangered Species Act Team, an affiliate of the Southwest Strategy Funded by U.S. Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program December 2008 (Updated August 31, 2009) ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document was developed by members of the Southwest Endangered Species Act (SWESA) Team comprised of representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BoR), Department of Defense (DoD), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Forest Service (USFS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), National Park Service (NPS) and U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Dr. Terry L. Myers gathered and synthesized much of the information for this document. The SWESA Team would especially like to thank Mr. Steve Sekscienski, U.S. Army Environmental Center, DoD, for obtaining the funds needed for this project, and Dr. Patricia Zenone, USFWS, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, for serving as the Contracting Officer’s Representative for this grant. Overall guidance, review, and editing of the document was provided by the CMED Subgroup of the SWESA Team, consisting of: Art Coykendall (BoR), John Nystedt (USFWS), Patricia Zenone (USFWS), Robert L. Palmer (DoD, U.S. Navy), Vicki Herren (BLM), Wade Eakle (USACE), and Ronnie Maes (USFS). The cooperation of many individuals facilitated this effort, including: USFWS: Jim Rorabaugh, Jennifer Graves, Debra Bills, Shaula Hedwall, Melissa Kreutzian, Marilyn Myers, Michelle Christman, Joel Lusk, Harold Namminga; USFS: Mike Rotonda, Susan Lee, Bryce Rickel, Linda WhiteTrifaro; USACE: Ron Fowler, Robert Dummer; BLM: Ted Cordery, Marikay Ramsey; BoR: Robert Clarkson; DoD, U.S.
  • Postbreeding Movements of the Dark Gopher Frog, Rana Sevosa Goin and Netting: Implications for Conservation and Management

    Postbreeding Movements of the Dark Gopher Frog, Rana Sevosa Goin and Netting: Implications for Conservation and Management

    Journal o fieryefology, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 336-321, 2001 CopyriJt 2001 Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Postbreeding Movements of the Dark Gopher Frog, Rana sevosa Goin and Netting: Implications for Conservation and Management 'Departmmzt of Biological Sciences, Southeastern Louisiana Uniwsity, SLU 10736, Hammod, Louisiamla 70403-0736, USA 4USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Southern Institute of Forest Genetics, 23332 Highmy 67, Saucier, Mississippi 39574, USA ABSTRACT.-Conservation plans for amphibians often focus on activities at the breeding site, but for species that use temstrial habitats for much of the year, an understanding of nonbreeding habitat use is also essential. We used radio telemetry to study the postbreeding movements of individuals of the only known population of dark gopher frogs, Rana sevosa, during two breeding seasons (1994 and 1996). Move- ments away from the pond were relatively short (< 300 m) and usually occurred within a two-day period after frogs initially exited the breeding pond. However, dispersal distances for some individuals may have been constrained by a recent clearcut on adjacent private property. Final recorded locations for all individ- uals were underground retreats associated with stump holes, root mounds of fallen trees, or mammal bur- rows in surrounding upland areas. When implementing a conservation plan for Rana sevosa and other amphibians with similar habitat utilization patterns, we recommend that a temstrial buffer zone of pro- tection include the aquatic breeding site and adjacent nonbreeding season habitat. When the habitat is fragmented, the buffer zone should include additional habitat to lessen edge effects and provide connec- tivity between critical habitats.
  • Distribution of Some Amphibians from Central Western Mexico: Jalisco

    Distribution of Some Amphibians from Central Western Mexico: Jalisco

    Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 84: 690-696, 2013 690 Rosas-Espinoza et al.- AmphibiansDOI: from 10.7550/rmb.31945 western Mexico Research note Distribution of some amphibians from central western Mexico: Jalisco Distribución de algunos anfibios del centro occidente de México: Jalisco Verónica Carolina Rosas-Espinoza1, Jesús Mauricio Rodríguez-Canseco1 , Ana Luisa Santiago-Pérez1, Alberto Ayón-Escobedo1 and Matías Domínguez-Laso2 1Universidad de Guadalajara, Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias, Km 15.5 carretera Guadalajara- Nogales, 45110 Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico. 2UMA Coatzin, Prol. Piñón Núm. 39, Barrio de la Cruz. 76800 San Juan del Río, Querétaro, México. [email protected] Abstract. The amphibian fauna from central western Mexico has not been studied thoroughly. Particularly for the state of Jalisco, until 1994 the majority of herpetofauna checklists were made on seasonally tropical dry forest at the Pacific coast. Recently, the herpetofauna checklists for some natural protected areas and surroundings of central and northeastern localities of Jalisco were reported. Sierra de Quila is a natural protected area located in central Jalisco, and these results are part of the first formal study for this area. During 15 months, from January 2009 to September 2010, we surveyed amphibians on an altitudinal gradient including all vegetation types: cloud forest, pine-oak forest, oak forest, riparian forest and tropical deciduous forest. We registered 11 noteworthy range extensions for amphibians within Jalisco and into the Sierra de Quila. Key words: range extension, protected area, Sierra de Quila. Resumen. Los anfibios de la parte centro-occidente de México han sido poco estudiados. Particularmente para el estado de Jalisco y hasta 1994, la mayoría de los inventarios de herpetoafuna fueron realizados en el bosque tropical caducifolio en la costa del Pacífico.
  • Status Assessment of Known Gopher Frog (Lithobates Capito) Breeding Wetlands and Upland Habitats in Georgia

    Status Assessment of Known Gopher Frog (Lithobates Capito) Breeding Wetlands and Upland Habitats in Georgia

    Status Assessment of Known Gopher Frog (Lithobates capito) Breeding Wetlands and Upland Habitats in Georgia A Final Report to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Mrs. Vanessa Kinney Terrell Dr. John C. Maerz Final Performance Report State: Georgia Grant No.: Grant Title: Statewide Imperiled Species Grant Duration: 2 years Start Date: July 15, 2013 End Date: July 31, 2015 Period Covering Report: Final Report Project Costs: Federal: State: Total: $4,500 Study/Project Title: Status assessment of known Gopher Frog (Lithobates capito) breeding wetlands and upland habitats in Georgia. GPRA Goals: N/A ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------- *Deviations: Several of the Gopher frog sites that are not located in the site clusters of Ft. Stewart, Ft. Benning, and Ichauway are located on private property. We have visited a subset of these private sites from public roads to obtain GPS coordinates and to visually see the condition of the pond and upland. However, we have not obtained access to dip net these historic sites. Acknowledgements This status assessment relied heavily on the generous collaboration of John Jensen (GA DNR), Lora Smith (Joseph W. Jones Ecological Research Center), Anna McKee (USGS), Beth Schlimm (Orianne Society), Dirk Stevenson (Orianne Society), and Roy King (Ft. Stewart). William Booker and Emily Jolly assisted with ground-truthing of field sites. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prepared By: John C Maerz and Vanessa C. K. Terrell Date: 3/1/2016 Study/Project Objective: The objective of this project was to update the known status of Gopher frogs (Lithobates capito) in Georgia by coalescing data on known extant populations from state experts and evaluating wetland and upland habitat conditions at historic and extant localities to determine whether the sites are suitable for sustaining Gopher frog populations.
  • Northern Leopard Frogs Range from the Northern United States and Canada to the More Northern Parts of the Southwestern United States

    Northern Leopard Frogs Range from the Northern United States and Canada to the More Northern Parts of the Southwestern United States

    COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE Leopard Frogs ASSESSING HABITAT QUALITY FOR PRIORITY WILDLIFE SPECIES IN COLORADO WETLANDS Species Distribution Range Northern leopard frogs range from the northern United States and Canada to the more northern parts of the southwestern United States. With the exception of a few counties, they occur throughout Colorado. Plains leopard frogs have a much smaller distribution than northern leopard frogs, occurring through the Great Plains into southeastern Arizona and eastern Colorado. NORTHERN LEOPARD FROG © KEITH PENNER / PLAINS LEOPARD FROG © RENEE RONDEAU, CNHP RONDEAU, FROGRENEE © LEOPARD PLAINS / PENNER FROGKEITH © LEOPARD NORTHERN Two species of leopard frogs occur in Colorado. Northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens; primary photo, brighter green) are more widespread than plains leopard frogs (L. blairi; inset). eral, plains leopard frogs breed in more Species Description ephemeral ponds, while northern leopard Identification frogs use semi-permanent ponds. Two leopard frogs are included in this Diet guild: northern leopard frog (Lithobates Adult leopard frogs eat primarily insects pipiens) and plains leopard frog (L. blairi). and other invertebrates, including They are roughly the same size (3–4 inches crustaceans, mollusks, and worms, as as adults). Northern leopard frogs can be well as small vertebrates, such as other green or brown and plains leopard frogs amphibians and snakes. Leopard frog are typically brown. Both species have two tadpoles are herbivorous, eating mostly light dorsolateral ridges along the back; in free-floating algae, but also consuming plains leopard frog there is a break in this some animal material. ridge near the rear legs. Conservation Status Preferred Habitats Northern leopard frog populations have Due to their complicated life history traits, declined throughout their range; they are leopard frogs occupy many habitats during listed in all western states and Canada different seasons and stages of develop- as sensitive, threatened, or endangered.
  • Small-Business Owners from Widely Varied Industries

    Small-Business Owners from Widely Varied Industries

    No. 17-71 In the Supreme Court of the United States ________________ WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, ET AL., Respondents. ________________ On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ________________ BRIEF OF SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS ________________ Kevin J. Lynch J. Carl Cecere UNIVERSITY OF DENVER Counsel of Record STURM COLLEGE OF LAW CECERE PC ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 6035 McCommas Blvd. CLINIC Dallas, TX 75206 2255 E. Evans Ave. (469) 600-9455 Denver, CO 80208 [email protected] (303) 871-6039 Counsel for Amici Curiae i TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents .................................................................. i Table of Authorities ............................................................. ii Interest of Amici Curiae ..................................................... 1 Introduction and Summary of the Argument .................. 1 Argument ............................................................................. 4 I. Protecting endangered species provides signif- icant economic benefits to small businesses. ............ 4 A. ESA regulations provide small-business opportunities. ....................................................... 4 B. The Service’s experts are an economic asset for many small-businesses. ..................... 16 C. Protection of biodiversity is also essential for the economy as a whole. .............................. 19 II. The Service’s broad, flexible authority to designate
  • Northern Leopard Frog

    Northern Leopard Frog

    Maine 2015 Wildlife Action Plan Revision Report Date: January 13, 2016 Lithobates pipiens (Northern Leopard Frog) Priority 2 Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) Class: Amphibia (Amphibians) Order: Anura (Frogs And Toads) Family: Ranidae (True Frogs) General comments: There are >100 occurrences statewide, but concerns remain about declines in southern Maine and range-wide. 6 of 6 reviewers recommend SC listing. Species Conservation Range Maps for Northern Leopard Frog: Town Map: Lithobates pipiens_Towns.pdf Subwatershed Map: Lithobates pipiens_HUC12.pdf SGCN Priority Ranking - Designation Criteria: Risk of Extirpation: NA State Special Concern or NMFS Species of Concern: Lithobates pipiens is listed as a species of Special Concern in Maine. Recent Significant Declines: NA Regional Endemic: NA High Regional Conservation Priority: Northeast Endangered Species and Wildlife Diversity Technical Committee: Risk: Yes, Data: Yes, Area: No, Spec: Yes, Warrant Listing: No, Total Categories with "Yes": 3 Northeast Partners In Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (NEPARC): Regional Responsibility:< 50 % US Distribution, Concern: >= 50 % of States Listed in WAP High Climate Change Vulnerability: NA Understudied rare taxa: NA Historical: NA Culturally Significant: NA Habitats Assigned to Northern Leopard Frog: Formation Name Agricultural Macrogroup Name Agricultural Habitat System Name: Pasture-Hay Formation Name Boreal Wetland Forest Macrogroup Name Boreal Forested Peatland Habitat System Name: Boreal-Laurentian Conifer Acidic Swamp Formation
  • Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi

    Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi

    Mississippi State University Scholars Junction Theses and Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 1-1-2007 Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi Katherine E. Edwards Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td Recommended Citation Edwards, Katherine E., "Herpetofauna Communities and Habitat Conditions in Temporary Wetlands of Upland and Floodplain Forests on Public Lands in North-Central Mississippi" (2007). Theses and Dissertations. 2484. https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td/2484 This Graduate Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Scholars Junction. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholars Junction. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HERPETOFAUNA COMMUNITIES AND HABITAT CONDITIONS IN TEMPORARY WETLANDS OF UPLAND AND FLOODPLAIN FORESTS ON PUBLIC LANDS IN NORTH-CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI By Katherine Elise Edwards A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Mississippi State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Wildlife and Fisheries Science in the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Mississippi State, Mississippi May 2007 HERPETOFAUNA COMMUNITIES AND HABITAT CONDITIONS IN TEMPORARY WETLANDS OF UPLAND AND FLOODPLAIN FORESTS ON PUBLIC LANDS IN NORTH-CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI By Katherine Elise Edwards Approved: Jeanne C. Jones Kristina C. Godwin Associate Professor of Wildlife and State Director, USDA APHIS Fisheries Wildlife Services (Director of Thesis) Adjunct Faculty of Wildlife and Fisheries (Committee Member) W. Daryl Jones Bruce D. Leopold Assistant Extension Professor of Professor and Head Wildlife and Fisheries Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (Committee Member) (Committee Member) Bruce D.