DOCSLIB.ORG

Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement Revised Biological Assessment for the Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement July 14, 2015 FS_0081605 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Background ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Purpose and Need for GRSG LUP Amendment ........................................................................................... 6 Description of Planning Area ........................................................................................................................ 6 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................................................... 10 SPECIES CONSIDERED IN THE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 10 SPECIES INFORMATION AND CRITICAL HABITAT ............................................................................. 42 A. Wildlife and Fish .................................................................................................................................... 42 Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)—Threatened ......................................................................................... 42 Utah prairie dog (Cynomys parvidens)—Threatened .............................................................................. 44 Mexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida)—Threatened ............................................................. 46 California condor (Gymnogyps californianus)—Endangered and Experimental/Nonessential Listings 48 B. Plants ....................................................................................................................................................... 50 Autumn Buttercup (Ranunculus aestivalis, R. acriformis var. aestivalis)—Endangered ....................... 50 Clay Phacelia (Phacelia argillacea)—Endangered ................................................................................ 51 Clay Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea)—Threatened ............................................................. 53 Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica)—Threatened ................................................................ 53 Shrubby Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe suffrutescens)—Endangered ................................................. 55 Uinta Basin Hookless Cactus (Sclerocactus wetlandicus)—Threatened ................................................ 56 Ute Ladies’-Tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis)—Threatened ...................................................................... 57 GENERAL DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS BY PROGRAM AREAS ...................................... 58 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION BY SPECIES ................................................... 61 A. Wildlife and Fish .................................................................................................................................... 61 Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) .............................................................................................................. 61 Utah Prairie Dog (Cynomys parvidens)—Threatened ............................................................................ 63 Figure 3. Utah Prairie Dog and GRSG Mapped Habitat DistributionMexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida)—Threatened ........................................................................................................... 78 California condor (Gymnogyps californianus)—Endangered and Experimental/Nonessential Population ................................................................................................................................................................. 80 B. Plants ....................................................................................................................................................... 81 Autumn Buttercup (Ranunculus aestivalis) ............................................................................................ 81 Clay phacelia (Phacelia argillacea) ........................................................................................................ 82 Clay Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea) ................................................................................... 82 Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica) ...................................................................................... 83 Shrubby Reed-Mustard (Schoenocrambe suffrutescens) ........................................................................ 84 July, 2015 Page 2 FS_0081606 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Uinta Basin Hookless Cactus (Sclerocactus wetlandicus) ...................................................................... 85 Ute Ladies’-Tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) ............................................................................................ 85 DETERMINATIONS OF EFFECTS SUMMARY BY SPECIES .................................................................. 88 Empidonax traillii extimus .......................................................................................................................... 90 LITERATURE CITED .................................................................................................................................... 99 Attachment E: EXISTING UTAH PRAIRIE DOG CONSERVATION MEASURES ................................ 104 July, 2015 Page 3 FS_0081607 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement Acronym List APD applications for permits to drill BA Biological Assessment BLM Bureau of Land Management COAs conditions of approval EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESA Endangered Species Act ESR emergency stabilization and rehabilitation ExPA experimental population area FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement GHMA general habitat management areas GRSG Greater Sage-Grouse LUP Land Use Plan MSO Mexican Spotted Owl MUs management units NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NRLMD Northern Rockies Lynx Management Direction OHV off-highway vehicles ORV off-road vehicle PCE primary constituent elements PHMA priority habitat management areas RMP resource management plan ROW right-of-way SFA sagebrush focal areas T&E threatened and endangered TEP threatened, endangered, or proposed TNC The Nature Conservancy UDWR Utah Division of Wildlife Resources UPD Utah prairie dog USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service July, 2015 Page 4 FS_0081608 Revised Biological Assessment for Utah Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement INTRODUCTION Background The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service have prepared amendments to their respective Land Use Plans (LUPs)/Final Environmental Impact Statements (EISs). These documents provide direction for the conservation of greater sage-grouse (GRSG; Centrocercus urophasianus) in the following plans in Utah: Cedar City Field Office, Fillmore Field Office, Grand Staircase/Escalante National Monument, Kanab Field Office, Price Field Office, Richfield Field Office, Salt Lake Field Office, Vernal Field Office, Ashley National Forest, Dixie National Forest, Fishlake National Forest, Manti-La Sal National Forest, and Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest. The LUPs/EISs analyze the environmental effects that could result from implementing the proposed action. A Draft LUP/EIS was published in August 2013. The Proposed LUP amendment, scheduled for publication in June 2015, is a refinement of the Preferred Alternative (Alternative D) from the Draft LUP, with consideration given to comments from the public and the State of Utah, corrections, and rewording for clarification. The purpose of this biological assessment (BA) is to review the Proposed LUP amendments to determine the extent that implementing these amendments may affect proposed threatened and endangered species and proposed or designated critical habitat in the planning area. Because the LUP is a planning document, this BA focuses on the effect of management actions to be implemented. Under provisions of the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 USC, Section 1531 et seq.), federal agencies are directed to conserve threatened and endangered (T&E) species and their habitats. Section 7(a)(1) states that all federal agencies should use “their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered species and threatened species….” Thus, the conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered species is not simply the responsibility of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), but of all federal agencies. In order to meet this requirement, the BLM and Forest Service, through the land use plan, would implement management actions, standards and guidelines, protective stipulations, conditions of approval (COAs), conservation measures, required design features, best management practices, mitigation, habitat restoration, and protections. Section 7(c) of the ESA requires the BLM to complete a BA to determine the effects of implementing a resource management plan (RMP)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • US Fish and Wildlife Service
    BARNEBY REED-MUSTARD (S. barnebyi ) CLAY REED-MUSTARD SHRUBBY REED-MUSTARD (S,arguillacea) (S. suffrutescens) .-~ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTAH REED—MUSTARDS: CLAY REED-MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE ARGILLACEA) BARNEBY REED—MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE BARNEBYI) SI-IRUBBY REED-MUSTARD (SCHOENOCRAMBE SUFFRUTESCENS) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by Region 6, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Approved: Date: (~19~- Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect the species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, involved in the plan formulation. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as an~roved Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Citation should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Utah reed—mustards: clay reed—mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea), Barneby reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe barnebyl), shrubby reed—mustard (Schoenacranibe suffrutescens) recovery plan. Denver, Colorado. 22 pp. Additional copies may be purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Telephone: 301/492—6403 or 1—800—582—3421 The fee for the plan varies depending on the number of pages of the plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Biology, Hybridization, and Flower Visitors of Rare Sclerocactus Taxa in Utah's Uintah Basin
    Western North American Naturalist Volume 70 Number 3 Article 10 10-11-2010 Reproductive biology, hybridization, and flower visitors of rare Sclerocactus taxa in Utah's Uintah Basin Vincent J. Tepedino Utah State University, Logan, [email protected] Terry L. Griswold Utah State University, Logan, [email protected] William R. Bowlin Utah State University, Logan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Recommended Citation Tepedino, Vincent J.; Griswold, Terry L.; and Bowlin, William R. (2010) "Reproductive biology, hybridization, and flower visitors of rare Sclerocactus taxa in Utah's Uintah Basin," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 70 : No. 3 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol70/iss3/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Western North American Naturalist 70(3), © 2010, pp. 377–386 REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, HYBRIDIZATION, AND FLOWER VISITORS OF RARE SCLEROCACTUS TAXA IN UTAH’S UINTAH BASIN Vincent J. Tepedino1,2, Terry L. Griswold1, and William R. Bowlin1,3 ABSTRACT.—We studied the mating system and flower visitors of 2 threatened species of Sclerocactus (Cactaceae) in the Uintah Basin of eastern Utah—an area undergoing rapid energy development. We found that both S. wetlandicus and S. brevispinus are predominantly outcrossed and are essentially self-incompatible. A third presumptive taxon (unde- scribed; here called S. wetlandicus-var1) is fully self-compatible but cannot produce seeds unless the flowers are visited by pollinators.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [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]
  • Threatened, Endangered, Candidate & Proposed Plant Species of Utah
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho and Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 52 MARCH 2011 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE & PROPOSED PLANT SPECIES OF UTAH Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho Casey Burns, State Biologist, NRCS, Salt Lake City, Utah Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica). Photo by Megan Robinson. This technical note identifies the current threatened, endangered, candidate and proposed plant species listed by the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS) in Utah. Review your county list of threatened and endangered species and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Conservation Data Center (CDC) GIS T&E database to see if any of these species have been identified in your area of work. Additional information on these listed species can be found on the USDI FWS web site under “endangered species”. Consideration of these species during the planning process and determination of potential impacts related to scheduled work will help in the conservation of these rare plants. Contact your Plant Material Specialist, Plant Materials Center, State Biologist and Area Biologist for additional guidance on identification of these plants and NRCS responsibilities related to the Endangered Species Act. 2 Table of Contents Map of Utah Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species 4 Threatened & Endangered Species Profiles Arctomecon humilis Dwarf Bear-poppy ARHU3 6 Asclepias welshii Welsh’s Milkweed ASWE3 8 Astragalus ampullarioides Shivwits Milkvetch ASAM14 10 Astragalus desereticus Deseret Milkvetch ASDE2 12 Astragalus holmgreniorum Holmgren Milkvetch ASHO5 14 Astragalus limnocharis var.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants
    35906 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 118 / Monday, June 20, 2011 / Notices Screen outs Stayers Movers ALL MODES Total Number Responses ..................................................................................................... 8572 ........................ ........................ Total Burden Hours .............................................................................................................. 602 ........................ ........................ Status of the proposed information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires us to collection: Continuing under current request information, see ‘‘VIII. review each listed species’ status at least authorization. Contacts.’’ Individuals who are hearing once every 5 years. Then, under section Authority: Section 8(C)(1) of the United impaired or speech impaired may call 4(c)(2)(B), we determine whether to States Housing Act of 1937. the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877– remove any species from the List 8337 for TTY (telephone typewriter or (delist), to reclassify it from endangered Dated: June 9, 2011. teletypewriter) assistance. to threatened, or to reclassify it from Raphael W. Bostic, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are threatened to endangered. Any change Assistant Secretary for Policy Development initiating 5-year status reviews under in Federal classification requires a & Research. the Act of 2 animal and 10 plant separate rulemaking process. [FR Doc. 2011–15275 Filed 6–17–11; 8:45 am] species: Autumn buttercup (Ranunculus In classifying,
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment UT- 080 – 06 – 280 October OIL SHALE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT WHITE RIVER MINE, UINTAH COUNTY, UTAH U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, Utah 84078 Phone: 435-781-4400 Fax: 435-781-4410 United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, UT 84078 (435) 781-4400 Fax: (435) 781-4410 IN REPLY REFER TO: UT-080-06-280 September 18, 2006 Dear Reader: Enclosed for your review and comment is the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Oil Shale Research, Development And Demonstration Project at the location of the former White River Shale Oil Company Mine in Uintah County, Utah. The EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) directing the preparation of the document. The EA describes the three phases of work that would occur to test the ATP retort process, and its ability to extract oil from mined oil shale. The project is located approximately 30 miles south of Vernal, Utah, within Township 10 South, Range 24 East of Uintah County, Utah. The Proposed Action calls for 3 different phases of work. The first phase would consist mainly of hauling stockpiles of oil shale to a retorting demonstration plant in Canada. The second phase would consist of moving a demonstration retort processing plant to the former White River Mine area, processing stockpiles of oil shale that are on the surface, and eventually re-opening the White River Mine, and the commencement of mining of oil shale.
    [Show full text]
  • The Genus Ranunculus : a Phytochemical and Ethnopharmacological Review
    AAAcccaaadddeeemmmiiiccc SSSccciiieeennnccceeesss International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences ISSN- 0975-1491 Vol 4, Suppl 5, 2012 Review Article THE GENUS RANUNCULUS : A PHYTOCHEMICAL AND ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL REVIEW M SHAHZAD ASLAM*, BASHIR A. CHOUDHARY, M UZAIR, A SUBHAN IJAZ Department of pharmacy, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan. Email: [email protected] Received: 12 july 2012, Revised and Accep17 agu 2012 ABSTRACT The genus Ranunculus has been reviewed for distribution in the world, traditional uses, isolated chemical constituents and their pharmacological activities of some common species. Almost 600 species belong to the genus Ranunculus. It is distributed throughout the northern hemisphere and southern temperate regions in the tropic where they usually limited to higher altitude. The most common use of Ranunculus species in traditional medicines are anti-rheumatism, intermittent fever and rubefacient. The findings in some Ranunculus species of, for example, Protoanemonin (21) , anemonin (3) , may justify the uses of these species against fever, rheumatism and rubefacient in Asian traditional medicines. The aim of the present paper is to review the comprehensive knowledge of the plants of this genus including the traditional uses, chemical constituents and pharmacology. Keywords: Ranunculus; Anti-rheumatism; Anemonin; Intermittent fevers; Protoanemonin. INTRODUCTION are used for the compilation of all data. All the data are reported in alphabetical order. Throughout our research
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Conference Opinions Glen Canyon
    United States DeDanment... of Lh.e Interior Fish and Wildlife Se:vice Arizona EcJlogic:l1 Se..-.rices Field Office 2:321 w. Roy.I P::.1.r:l Road. Suite 103 Ph.oeni:::. ArizoC!.2. 85021-:'9S1 • [n Reply R.efC" To: (602) 640-2:7"-0 M..::; (602) 640-ZT.!Q ABSO/SE 2-21-93-F-167 February 16, 1996 MEM:ORAND illvf TO: Regional Director, Bureau of Reciamation. Salt La.1ce Cicy, Utah FRO~!: Field Supervisor SUBJECT: Biological and Conference Opinions on OpeT:arion of Glen Canyon Dam ­ Conrrolled Rele3.Se for Habitat and Beach Building (Your Refere:lce UC-320, aN-l.OO) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed the Bureau of Reclamation's proposed. test of beachlhabir:at-building flow (rest flow) from Glen Canyon Dam. in spring 1996 in the CoLorado Rivet: located in Coconino County, Arizona. Your November 20, 1995, request for formal consultation was received on November 21, 1995. This doc..uneru: represents the Service's biological and conference opinions on the effects of that action on the following endangered •• species: humpback: chub (Gila cypha); Kanab ambermail (Oxy{oma. haydeni kCJwbensis); and southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidon.ax traillii e:xtimus); and on critic:tl habitat for the humpback: chub and proposed. critical habitat for southwes-..ern willow flyC3.!Cher, in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as ame::lde:i, (16 U.S.C. 1531 ec seq.). Tnese biologiCJ..1 and confere~ opinions are based. on information provided in the November 1995 biological assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered and Threatened Animals of Utah
    Endangered and Threatened Animals of Utah Quinney Professorship for Wildlife Conflict Management Jack H. Berryman Institute U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife Resources Utah State University Extension Service Endangered and Threatened Animals of Utah 1998 Acknowledgments This publication was produced by Utah State University Extension Service Department of Fisheries and Wildlife The Jack H. Berryman Institute Utah Division of Wildlife U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Extension and Publications Contributing Authors Purpose and Introduction Terry Messmer Marilet Zablan Mammals Boyde Blackwell Athena Menses Birds Frank Howe Fishes Leo Lentsch Terry Messmer Richard Drake Reptiles and Invertebrates Terry Messmer Richard Drake Utah Sensitive Species List Frank Howe Editors Terry Messmer Richard Drake Audrey McElrone Publication Publication Assistance by Remani Rajagopal Layout and design by Gail Christensen USU Publication Design and Production Quinney Professorship for Wildlife Conflict Management This bulletin was developed under the auspices of the Quinney Professorship for Wildlife Conflict Management through the sponsorship of the S. J. and Jessie E. Quinney Foundation in partnership with the College of Natural Resources, Jack H. Berryman Institute for Wild- life Damage Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Department of Natural Resources, and Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. i Contents Purpose of this Guide . iii Introduction . v What are endangered and threatened species? . vi Why some species become endangered or threatened? . vi Why protect endangered species? . vi The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) . viii Mammals Black-footed Ferret . 1 Grizzly Bear . 5 Gray Wolf . 9 Utah Prairie Dog . 13 Birds Bald Eagle .
    [Show full text]
  • Nontraditional Agricultural Exports Regulatory Guide for Latin America and the Caribbean
    ` NONTRADITIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS REGULATORY GUIDE FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean U.S. Agency for International Development Office of Pesticide Programs U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. U.S.A. Nontraditional Agricultural Exports Regulatory Guide for Latin America and the Caribbean Acknowledgements Several branches and many individuals of the U.S. Government contributed to the preparation and review of this guide. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) extends special recognition to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Management Technical Services Project (LACTECH II) of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which planned the document, managed its development, and provided overall technical direction. EPA wishes to thank Robert Kahn and Robert Bailey, LACTECH II Project Officers, who designed, promoted, and disseminated the contents of this guide; the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture for special assistance and collaboration; and all the U.S. Government branches cited herein. Initial funding for the preparation of this guide was provided by the Bureau for Latin America NTAE Regulatory Guide for LAC Countries iii and the Caribbean, USAID, to the LACTECH II Project. Additional funding for the editing, Spanish translation, and dissemination was provided by the AID/EPA Central American Project and the AID/EPA Mexico Project, both based at EPA. iv NTAE Regulatory Guide for LAC Countries Contents Page
    [Show full text]
  • Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(S): Noel M
    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(s): Noel M. Burkhead Source: BioScience, 62(9):798-808. 2012. Published By: American Institute of Biological Sciences URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.5 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Articles Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 NOEL M. BURKHEAD Widespread evidence shows that the modern rates of extinction in many plants and animals exceed background rates in the fossil record. In the present article, I investigate this issue with regard to North American freshwater fishes. From 1898 to 2006, 57 taxa became extinct, and three distinct populations were extirpated from the continent. Since 1989, the numbers of extinct North American fishes have increased by 25%. From the end of the nineteenth century to the present, modern extinctions varied by decade but significantly increased after 1950 (post-1950s mean = 7.5 extinct taxa per decade).
    [Show full text]