DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Analysis Methods and Results – Draft Final Document

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Analysis Methods and Results – Draft Final Document Appendix B: Detailed Methods The main text of this report, “Groundwater-Dependent Biodiversity and Associated Threats: A Statewide Screening Methodology and Spatial Assessment of Oregon,” is available online at http://conserveonline.org. Contents: I. OVERVIEW OF APPROACH: ...........................................................................................3 II. MAPPING GROUNDWATER-DEPENDENT ECOSYSTEMS AND SPECIES: ................3 A. SPRINGS: ....................................................................................................................3 1. Data sources: ............................................................................................................3 2. Mapping springs:.......................................................................................................4 3. Determining potential groundwater dependence:......................................................4 B. WETLANDS: ................................................................................................................4 1. Data used:.................................................................................................................4 2. Mapping wetlands: ....................................................................................................4 3. Determining potential groundwater dependence:......................................................5 C. RIVERS:.......................................................................................................................6 1. Data used:.................................................................................................................6 2. Mapping rivers:..........................................................................................................6 3. Determining potential groundwater dependence:.....................................................6 a. Permeability of surficial geologic deposits: ............................................................7 b. Flow gaging data: ..................................................................................................7 D. LAKES:.........................................................................................................................8 1. Data used:.................................................................................................................8 2. Mapping lakes: ..........................................................................................................8 3. Determining potential groundwater dependence:......................................................8 E. SUBTERRANEAN AREAS:..........................................................................................9 F. SPECIES AND ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN: ...9 1. Data sources: ............................................................................................................9 2. Mapping species and communities of conservation concern: ...................................9 3. Determining groundwater dependence: ....................................................................9 a. Vascular plants: .....................................................................................................9 b. Non-vascular plants: ............................................................................................10 c. Amphibians and Reptiles: ....................................................................................11 d. Beetles:................................................................................................................11 e. Birds: ...................................................................................................................11 f. Butterflies:.............................................................................................................12 g. Caddisflies: ..........................................................................................................12 h. Dragonflies, mayflies, and stoneflies: ..................................................................12 i. Fish: ......................................................................................................................12 j. Mollusks:...............................................................................................................12 k. Bats:....................................................................................................................13 l. Other species:.......................................................................................................13 m. Ecological communities: .....................................................................................13 III. SUMMARIZING THE DISTRIBUTION OF GDEs IN OREGON:....................................14 IV. THREATS TO GROUNDWATER QUANTITY: .............................................................14 A. KNOWN WATER TABLE DECLINES ................................................................................. 14 B. CURRENT THREATS:........................................................................................................... 15 Table of Contents B-1 C. FUTURE THREATS:..................................................................................................16 1. Large wells: ............................................................................................................16 2. Small wells: ............................................................................................................16 V. THREATS TO GROUNDWATER QUALITY: .................................................................17 A. KNOWN GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION:........................................................17 1. Nutrients:.................................................................................................................17 a. Draft Groundwater Management Areas: ..............................................................17 b. Groundwater quality data:....................................................................................17 2. Pesticides:...............................................................................................................18 3. Other toxic contaminants:........................................................................................18 B. THREAT OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION — NUTRIENTS: .......................19 1. Nitrates:...................................................................................................................19 a. Agricultural fertilizer use and septic system density:............................................19 b. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations:..........................................................21 c. Underground Injection Control sites for septic systems: ......................................21 2. Phosphorus: ............................................................................................................21 a. Agricultural fertilizer use: .....................................................................................22 b. Urban fertilizer use:..............................................................................................22 C. THREAT OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION — PESTICIDES: ......................22 1. Urban use:...............................................................................................................22 2. Agricultural use:.......................................................................................................23 D. THREAT OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION — OTHER TOXIC CONTAMINANTS: ..........................................................................................................28 1. Leaking underground storage tanks:.......................................................................28 2. Underground Injection Control wells:.......................................................................28 3. Hazardous waste spills:...........................................................................................29 4. Specific land use activities: .....................................................................................29 E. THREAT OF ALTERED THERMAL REGIME – HOT SPRINGS:...............................31 VI. THREAT SYNTHESIS: .................................................................................................31 REFERENCES:..................................................................................................................32 Tables: 1: Criteria used to identify HUC6s in which GDEs occur in Oregon ...................................14 2: Criteria for identifying HUC6s with a threat of altered groundwater quantity ..................14 3: Criteria for identifying HUC6s with threats of altered groundwater quality due to known groundwater contamination.................................................................................17 4: Criteria for identifying HUC6s with threats of altered groundwater quality due to potential contamination by nitrates................................................................................................19 5: Use codes used to identify irrigated areas from the points of use data in the OWRD water rights database. ....................................................................................................20 6: Criteria for identifying HUC6s with threats of altered groundwater quality due to potential contamination by phosphorus ..........................................................................22 7: Criteria used to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Literature Cited
    LITERATURE CITED Abercrombie, M., C. J. Hichman, and M. L. Johnson. 1962. A Dictionary of Biology. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Adkisson, C. S. 1996. Red Crossbill (Loxia curvirostra). In The Birds of North America, No. 256 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and the American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. Agee, J. K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Island Press, Covelo, CA. Albert, S. K., N. Luna, and A. L. Chopito. 1995. Deer, small mammal, and songbird use of thinned piñon–juniper plots: preliminary results. Pages 54–64 in Desired future conditions for piñon–juniper ecosystems (D. W. Shaw, E. F. Aldon, and C. LaSapio, eds.). Gen. Tech. Rep. GTR–RM–258. Fort Collins, CO: Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Aldrich, J. W. 1946. New subspecies of birds from western North America. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 59:129–136. Aldrich, J. W. 1963. Geographic orientation of American Tetraonidae. Journal of Wildlife Management 27:529–545. Allen, R. K. 1984. A new classification of the subfamily Ephemerellinae and the description of a new genus. Pan–Pacific Entomologist 60(3): 245–247. Allen, R. K., and G. F. Edmunds, Jr. 1976. A revision of the genus Ametropus in North America (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 49:625–635. Allen, R. P. 1958. A progress report on the wading bird survey. National Audubon Society, unpubl. rep., Tavernier, FL. American Ornithologists’ Union. 1931. Check–list of North American birds. 4th ed. American Ornithologists’ Union, Lancaster, PA.
    [Show full text]
  • 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid
    2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid IUPAC (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid name 2,4-D Other hedonal names trinoxol Identifiers CAS [94-75-7] number SMILES OC(COC1=CC=C(Cl)C=C1Cl)=O ChemSpider 1441 ID Properties Molecular C H Cl O formula 8 6 2 3 Molar mass 221.04 g mol−1 Appearance white to yellow powder Melting point 140.5 °C (413.5 K) Boiling 160 °C (0.4 mm Hg) point Solubility in 900 mg/L (25 °C) water Related compounds Related 2,4,5-T, Dichlorprop compounds Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C, 100 kPa) 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is a common systemic herbicide used in the control of broadleaf weeds. It is the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the third most commonly used in North America.[1] 2,4-D is also an important synthetic auxin, often used in laboratories for plant research and as a supplement in plant cell culture media such as MS medium. History 2,4-D was developed during World War II by a British team at Rothamsted Experimental Station, under the leadership of Judah Hirsch Quastel, aiming to increase crop yields for a nation at war.[citation needed] When it was commercially released in 1946, it became the first successful selective herbicide and allowed for greatly enhanced weed control in wheat, maize (corn), rice, and similar cereal grass crop, because it only kills dicots, leaving behind monocots. Mechanism of herbicide action 2,4-D is a synthetic auxin, which is a class of plant growth regulators.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcclinton Unr 0139M 13052.Pdf
    University of Nevada, Reno Habitat preferences, intraspecific variation, and restoration of a rare soil specialist in northern Nevada A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resources and Environmental Science by Jamey D. McClinton Dr. Elizabeth A. Leger/Thesis Advisor December, 2019 Copyright by Jamey D. McClinton 2019 All Rights Reserved We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by Jamey D. McClinton Entitled Habitat preferences, intraspecific variation, and restoration of a rare soil specialist in northern Nevada be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Elizabeth Leger, Ph.D., Advisor Paul Verburg, Ph.D., Committee member Thomas Parchman, Ph.D., Graduate School Representative David W. Zeh, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate School December-2019 i Abstract Edaphic specialization in plants is associated with the development of novel adaptations that frequently lead to speciation, causing unique edaphic environments to be associated with rare and endemic plant species worldwide. These species contribute significantly to global biodiversity, but are especially vulnerable to disturbance and climate change because of their inherently patchy distributions and locally adapted populations. Successful conservation of these species depends upon understanding their habitat requirements and the amounts and distributions of genetic and phenotypic diversity among populations. Little is known about the habitat requirements or
    [Show full text]
  • Delayed Fluorescence Imaging of Photosynthesis Inhibitor and Heavy Metal Induced Stress in Potato
    Cent. Eur. J. Biol. • 7(3) • 2012 • 531-541 DOI: 10.2478/s11535-012-0038-z Central European Journal of Biology Delayed fluorescence imaging of photosynthesis inhibitor and heavy metal induced stress in potato Research Article Jaka Razinger1,*, Luka Drinovec2, Maja Berden-Zrimec3 1Agricultural Institute of Slovenia, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia 2Aerosol d.o.o., 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia 3Institute of Physical Biology, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Received 09 November 2011; Accepted 13 March 2012 Abstract: Early chemical-induced stress in Solanum tuberosum leaves was visualized using delayed fluorescence (DF) imaging. The ability to detect spatially heterogeneous responses of plant leaves exposed to several toxicants using delayed fluorescence was compared to prompt fluorescence (PF) imaging and the standard maximum fluorescence yield of PSII measurements (Fv/Fm). The toxicants used in the study were two photosynthesis inhibitors (herbicides), 100 μM methyl viologen (MV) and 140 μM diuron (DCMU), and two heavy metals, 100 μM cadmium and 100 μM copper. The exposure times were 5 and 72 h. Significant photosynthesis-inhibitor effects were already visualized after 5 h. In addition, a significant reduction in the DF/PF index was measured in DCMU- and MV-treated leaves after 5 h. In contrast, only DCMU-treated leaves exhibited a significant decrease in Fv/Fm after 5 h. All treatments resulted in a significant decrease in the DF/PF parameter after 72 h of exposure, when only MV and Cd treatment resulted in visible symptoms. Our study highlights the power of delayed fluorescence imaging. Abundant quantifiable spatial information was obtained with the instrumental setup. Delayed fluorescence imaging has been confirmed as a very responsive and useful technique for detecting stress induced by photosynthesis inhibitors or heavy metals.
    [Show full text]
  • OCR Document
    Abelmoschus-Allium 1 Abelmoschus manihot white-yellow to 2m 110 69 Agastache pallidiflora ssp neomexicana lavender-pink 2 Abies koreana yellow dwarf 50 x 20cm 161 45-75cm 258 3 Acaena myriophylla greenish 15-25cm 106 70 rugosa rose/violet to 120cm 253 4 sericea purple fls/silver lvs 6-25cm 62 242 71 rugosa 'Golden Jubilee' blue-purple/chartreuse lvs 100cm 236 5 Acantholimon araxanum pink 15-20cm 243 72 rugosa 'Honey Bee Blue' blue 60-90cm 130 6 armenum pink/white 10-20cm 233 73 rugosa 'Liquorice Blue' deep blue 60-75cm 130 7 capitatum pink 4-18cm 242 74 rupestris pink-orange 60cm 205 8 halophilum light pink 5-10cm 233 75 rupestris 'Apache Sunset' dp orange/rose purple 45-60cm 149 9 hohenackeri pink 5-10cm 243 76 Ageratum houstonianum white 30-80cm 227 10 kotschyi pink 5-10cm 67 77 Agoseris glauca yellow 5-60cm 67 11 litvinovii pale pink 5-15cm 242 78 grandiflora yellow 25-60cm 227 12 saxifragiforme deep pink 5-10cm 6 79 Agrimonia pilosa v pilosa yellow 30-120cm 256 13 sp white 5cm 6 80 Akebia quinata 'Variegata' cream marbled lvs to 12m 259 14 sp ex Ala Dag pink 5cm 6 81 Albuca humilis white/green 15cm 140 15 venustum pink 10-15cm 233 82 shawii yellow 30-45cm > 16 Acanthus hungaricus pink/mauve to 1.5m 56 83 sp ex JCA 15856 white/green 15cm 105 17 Acer griseum to 12m 229 84 Alcea rosea mix 2-3m 34 18 palmatum 'Sango-kaku' 6-7.5m 198 85 rosea pink 2-3m 238 19 palmatum v dissectum 'Crimson Queen' to 3m 149 86 rosea 'Nigra' dark maroon 1.5-2m 34 20 Achillea clavennae white to 25cm 51 87 rosea spp ficifolia yellow/orange to 2.25m 34 21 millefolium
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Common and Scientific Names for Fish and Wildlife Species Found in Idaho
    APPENDIX A: COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND IN IDAHO. How to Read the Lists. Within these lists, species are listed phylogenetically by class. In cases where phylogeny is incompletely understood, taxonomic units are arranged alphabetically. Listed below are definitions for interpreting NatureServe conservation status ranks (GRanks and SRanks). These ranks reflect an assessment of the condition of the species rangewide (GRank) and statewide (SRank). Rangewide ranks are assigned by NatureServe and statewide ranks are assigned by the Idaho Conservation Data Center. GX or SX Presumed extinct or extirpated: not located despite intensive searches and virtually no likelihood of rediscovery. GH or SH Possibly extinct or extirpated (historical): historically occurred, but may be rediscovered. Its presence may not have been verified in the past 20–40 years. A species could become SH without such a 20–40 year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. The SH rank is reserved for species for which some effort has been made to relocate occurrences, rather than simply using this status for all elements not known from verified extant occurrences. G1 or S1 Critically imperiled: at high risk because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it particularly vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G2 or S2 Imperiled: at risk because of restricted range, few populations (often 20 or fewer), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G3 or S3 Vulnerable: at moderate risk because of restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Status Species List
    APPENDIX J SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES LIST SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES LIST APPENDIX J SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES LIST Common Name Scientific Name State Class Status1 A Caddisfly Farula constricta OR Insect BS Adder’s-tongue Ophioglossum pusillum OR Plant BS Agave, Arizona Agave arizonica AZ Plant FE Agave, Murphey Agave murpheyi AZ Plant BS Agave, Santa Cruz Striped Agave parviflora AZ Plant BS Agoseris, Pink Agoseris lackschewitzii ID Plant BS Albatross, Short-tailed Phoebastris albatrus AK, CA Bird FE Alkaligrass, Howell’s Puccinellia howelli CA Plant BS Alkaligrass, Lemon’s Puccinellia lemmonii CA Plant BS Alkaligrass, Parish’s Puccinellia parishii CA, MT Plant BS Alpine-aster, Tall Oreostemma elatum CA Plant BS Alpine-parsley, Trotter’s Oreoxis trotteri UT Plant BS Alumroot, Duran’s Heuchera duranii CA Plant BS Amaranth, California Amaranthus californicus MT Plant BS Ambersnail, Kanab Oxyloma haydeni kanabensis AZ, UT Snail FE Ambrosia, San Diego Ambrosia pumila CA Plant FE Chlorogalum purpureum var. Amole, Purple CA Plant FT purpureum Amphipod, Malheur Cave Stygobromus hubbsi OR Crustacean BS Amphipod, Noel’s Gammarus desperatus NM Crustacean PE Angelica, King’s Angelica kingii ID Plant BS Angelica, Rough Angelica scabrida NV Plant BS Apachebush Apacheria chircahuensis NM Plant BS Apple, Indian Peraphyllum ramosissimum ID Plant BS Arrowhead, Sanford’s Sagittaria sanfordii CA Plant BS Aster, Gorman’s Eucephalus gormanii OR Plant BS Aster, Pygmy Eurybia pygmaea AK Plant BS Aster, Red Rock Canyon Ionactis caelestis NV Plant BS Avens, Mountain Senecio moresbiensis AK Plant BS Baccharis, Encinitis Baccharis vanessae CA Plant FT Balloonvine Cardiospermum corindum AZ Plant BS Balsamorhiza macrolepis var. Balsamroot, Big-scale CA Plant BS macrolepis Balsamroot, Large-leaved Balsamorhiza macrophylla MT Plant BS Balsamroot, Silky Balsamorhiza sericea CA Plant BS Balsamroot, Woolly Balsamorhiza hookeri var.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of San Bernardino County, California
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region Sensitive Plant Species by Forest
    USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region 1 Sensitive Plant Species by Forest 2013 FS R5 RF Plant Species List Klamath NF Mendocino NF Shasta-Trinity NF NF Rivers Six Lassen NF Modoc NF Plumas NF EldoradoNF Inyo NF LTBMU Tahoe NF Sequoia NF Sierra NF Stanislaus NF Angeles NF Cleveland NF Los Padres NF San Bernardino NF Scientific Name (Common Name) Abies bracteata (Santa Lucia fir) X Abronia alpina (alpine sand verbena) X Abronia nana ssp. covillei (Coville's dwarf abronia) X X Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand verbena) X X Acanthoscyphus parishii var. abramsii (Abrams' flowery puncturebract) X X Acanthoscyphus parishii var. cienegensis (Cienega Seca flowery puncturebract) X Agrostis hooveri (Hoover's bentgrass) X Allium hickmanii (Hickman's onion) X Allium howellii var. clokeyi (Mt. Pinos onion) X Allium jepsonii (Jepson's onion) X X Allium marvinii (Yucaipa onion) X Allium tribracteatum (three-bracted onion) X X Allium yosemitense (Yosemite onion) X X Anisocarpus scabridus (scabrid alpine tarplant) X X X Antennaria marginata (white-margined everlasting) X Antirrhinum subcordatum (dimorphic snapdragon) X Arabis rigidissima var. demota (Carson Range rock cress) X X Arctostaphylos cruzensis (Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita) X Arctostaphylos edmundsii (Little Sur manzanita) X Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. gabrielensis (San Gabriel manzanita) X X Arctostaphylos hooveri (Hoover's manzanita) X Arctostaphylos luciana (Santa Lucia manzanita) X Arctostaphylos nissenana (Nissenan manzanita) X X Arctostaphylos obispoensis (Bishop manzanita) X Arctostphylos parryana subsp. tumescens (interior manzanita) X X Arctostaphylos pilosula (Santa Margarita manzanita) X Arctostaphylos rainbowensis (rainbow manzanita) X Arctostaphylos refugioensis (Refugio manzanita) X Arenaria lanuginosa ssp. saxosa (rock sandwort) X Astragalus anxius (Ash Valley milk-vetch) X Astragalus bernardinus (San Bernardino milk-vetch) X Astragalus bicristatus (crested milk-vetch) X X Pacific Southwest Region, Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List.
    [Show full text]
  • Alma Mater Studiorum Università Degli Studi Di Bologna Pollination
    Alma Mater Studiorum Università degli studi di Bologna Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences Department of Experimental Evolutionary Biology PhD in Biodiversity and Evolution BIO/02 Pollination ecology and reproductive success in isolated populations of flowering plants: Primula apennina Widmer, Dictamnus albus L. and Convolvulus lineatus L. Candidate: Alessandro Fisogni PhD Coordinator: PhD Supervisor: Prof. Barbara Mantovani Marta Galloni, PhD Cycle XXIII 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................7 1.1 Plant breeding systems ..................................................................................7 1.1.1 Distyly .......................................................................................................9 1.1.2 Resource allocation to sexual functions ..............................................10 1.2 Plant – pollinator interactions .......................................................................12 1.2.1 Floral rewards ........................................................................................12 1.2.2 Pollinators behaviour and insect-mediated geitonogamy ..................13 1.2.2 Pollen limitation and reproductive effort ..............................................14 1.3 Isolated populations, habitat fragmentation and demographic consequences ...........................................................................................................16 2. General purposes .....................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Strategy for Multi-Species at Risk in Vernal Pools and Other Ephemeral Wet Areas Associated with Garry Oak Ecosystems in Canada
    Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series Recovery Strategy for Multi-Species at Risk in Vernal Pools and other Ephemeral Wet Areas Associated with Garry Oak Ecosystems in Canada Bog birds-foot trefoil Tall woolly-heads (Pacific population) Water plantain buttercup Kellogg’s rush Rosy owl clover Dwarf sandwort July 2006 About the Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series What is the Species at Risk Act (SARA)? SARA is the Act developed by the federal government as a key contribution to the common national effort to protect and conserve species at risk in Canada. SARA came into force in 2003 and one of its purposes is “to provide for the recovery of wildlife species that are extirpated, endangered or threatened as a result of human activity.” What is recovery? In the context of species at risk conservation, recovery is the process by which the decline of an endangered, threatened or extirpated species is arrested or reversed, and threats are removed or reduced to improve the likelihood of the species’ persistence in the wild. A species will be considered recovered when its long-term persistence in the wild has been secured. What is a recovery strategy? A recovery strategy is a planning document that identifies what needs to be done to arrest or reverse the decline of a species. It sets goals and objectives and identifies the main areas of activities to be undertaken. Detailed planning is done at the action plan stage. Recovery strategy development is a commitment of all provinces and territories and of three federal agencies — Environment Canada, Parks Canada Agency and Fisheries and Oceans Canada — under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Tracking List
    Nevada Division of Natural Heritage Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 901 S. Stewart Street, Suite 5002, Carson City, Nevada 89701-5245 voice: (775) 684-2900 | fax: (775) 684-2909 | web: heritage.nv.gov At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List July 2021 The Nevada Division of Natural Heritage (NDNH) A separate list, the Plant and Animal Watch List, systematically curates information on Nevada's contains taxa that could become at-risk in the future. endangered, threatened, sensitive, rare, and at-risk plants and animals providing the most comprehensive Taxa on the At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List are source of information on Nevada’s imperiled organized by taxonomic group, and presented biodiversity. alphabetically by scientific name within each group. Currently, there are 639 Tracking List taxa: 285 plants, Nevada's health and economic well-being depend 209 invertebrates, 65 fishes, 9 amphibians, 7 reptiles, upon its biodiversity and wise land stewardship. This 27 birds, and 37 mammals. challenge increases as population and land-use pressures continue to grow. Nevada is among the top Documentation of population status, locations, or 10 states for both the diversity and the vulnerability of other updates or corrections for any of the taxa on its living heritage. With early planning and responsible this list are always welcome. Literature citations with development, economic growth and our biological taxonomic revisions and descriptions of new taxa are resources can coexist. NDNH is a central source for also appreciated. The Nevada Native Species Site information critical to achieving this balance. Survey Report form is available on our website under Management priorities for the state’s imperiled the Submit Data tab and is the preferred format for biodiversity are continually assessed, providing submitting information to NDNH.
    [Show full text]