DOCSLIB.ORG

Monsanto Petition (19-091-01P) for Determination of Nonregulated Status for Insect-Protected MON 88702 Cotton

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Monsanto Petition (19-091-01P) for Determination of Nonregulated Status for Insect-Protected MON 88702 Cotton Monsanto Petition (19-091-01p) for Determination of Nonregulated Status for Insect-Protected MON 88702 Cotton OECD Unique Identifier: MON-887Ø2-4 Final Environmental Assessment December 2020 Agency Contact Cindy Eck Biotechnology Regulatory Services 4700 River Road USDA, APHIS Riverdale, MD 20737 In accordance with federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. Mention of companies or commercial products in this report does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) over others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of any product mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report factually on available data and to provide specific information. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1 PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 PURPOSE OF MON 88702 COTTON .................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 COORDINATED FRAMEWORK FOR THE REGULATION OF BIOTECHNOLOGY .................................................................... 1-2 1.4 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR USDA-APHIS ACTION ................................................................................................... 1-3 1.5 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ....................................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.5.1 Public Involvement for Petition 19-091-01p ...................................................................................... 1-3 1.5.2 Public Involvement for the Draft EA for 19-091-01p .......................................................................... 1-4 1.6 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................... 1-4 2 ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE: CONTINUATION AS REGULATED ....................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE: DETERMINATION OF NONREGULATED STATUS FOR MON 88702 COTTON .............................. 2-1 2.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT DISMISSED FROM DETAILED ANALYSIS IN THIS EA ....................................................... 2-1 2.4 SUMMARY OF THE NO ACTION AND PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ANALYSES .................................................................... 2-2 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 U.S. COTTON PRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Areas and Acreage of Cotton Production ........................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Agronomic Practices and Inputs ........................................................................................................ 3-4 3.2 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................................. 3-18 3.2.1 Soil Quality ....................................................................................................................................... 3-18 3.2.2 Water Resources .............................................................................................................................. 3-20 3.2.3 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................................ 3-24 3.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................. 3-25 3.3.1 Soil Biota .......................................................................................................................................... 3-25 3.3.2 Animal Communities ........................................................................................................................ 3-27 3.3.3 Plant Communities ........................................................................................................................... 3-30 3.3.4 Gene Flow and Weediness of Cotton ............................................................................................... 3-31 3.3.5 Biodiversity ...................................................................................................................................... 3-33 3.4 HUMAN HEALTH AND WORKER SAFETY .............................................................................................................. 3-34 3.4.1 Food Safety ...................................................................................................................................... 3-35 3.4.2 Pesticides Used in Cotton Production .............................................................................................. 3-36 3.4.3 Worker Safety .................................................................................................................................. 3-37 3.5 ANIMAL FEED ................................................................................................................................................ 3-37 3.6 SOCIOECONOMICS .......................................................................................................................................... 3-38 3.6.1 Domestic Economic Environment..................................................................................................... 3-38 3.6.2 International Trade .......................................................................................................................... 3-40 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Assumptions and Uncertainties used in Analysis ............................................................................... 4-1 i 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE – DENY THE PETITION .................................................................................................... 4-8 4.3 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE – APPROVE THE PETITION ............................................................................................. 4-10 4.3.1 Agricultural Production of Cotton .................................................................................................... 4-10 4.3.2 Physical Environment ....................................................................................................................... 4-13 4.3.3 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................ 4-14 4.3.4 Human Health and Worker Safety ................................................................................................... 4-28 4.3.5 Animal Health and Welfare ............................................................................................................. 4-28 4.3.6 Socioeconomics ................................................................................................................................ 4-29 5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bexar County Karst Invertebrates Draft Recovery Plan
    Bexar County Karst Invertebrates Draft Recovery Plan March 2008 Bexar County Karst Invertebrates Draft Recovery Plan BEXAR COUNTY KARST INVERTEBRATES DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN Southwest Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico March 2008 Approved: ___DRAFT_______________________________________ Regional Director, Southwest Region Date U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Concur: __DRAFT____________________________________________ Executive Director Date Texas Parks and Wildlife Department ii Bexar County Karst Invertebrates Draft Recovery Plan DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that the best available science indicates are necessary to recover or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), but are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans are guidance and planning documents only. Identification of an action to be implemented by any private or public party does not create a legal obligation beyond existing legal requirements. Nothing in this plan should be construed as a commitment or requirement that any Federal agency obligate or pay funds in contravention of the Anti-Deficiency Act (U.S.C. 1341) or any other law or regulation. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the Service. They represent the official position of the Service only after the plan has been signed by the Regional Director as approved.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States
    Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States September 1993 OTA-F-565 NTIS order #PB94-107679 GPO stock #052-003-01347-9 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States, OTA-F-565 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1993). For Sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office ii Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop, SSOP. Washington, DC 20402-9328 ISBN O-1 6-042075-X Foreword on-indigenous species (NIS)-----those species found beyond their natural ranges—are part and parcel of the U.S. landscape. Many are highly beneficial. Almost all U.S. crops and domesticated animals, many sport fish and aquiculture species, numerous horticultural plants, and most biologicalN control organisms have origins outside the country. A large number of NIS, however, cause significant economic, environmental, and health damage. These harmful species are the focus of this study. The total number of harmful NIS and their cumulative impacts are creating a growing burden for the country. We cannot completely stop the tide of new harmful introductions. Perfect screening, detection, and control are technically impossible and will remain so for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the Federal and State policies designed to protect us from the worst species are not safeguarding our national interests in important areas. These conclusions have a number of policy implications. First, the Nation has no real national policy on harmful introductions; the current system is piecemeal, lacking adequate rigor and comprehensiveness. Second, many Federal and State statutes, regulations, and programs are not keeping pace with new and spreading non-indigenous pests.
    [Show full text]
  • Neuroactive Insecticides: Targets, Selectivity, Resistance, and Secondary Effects
    EN58CH06-Casida ARI 5 December 2012 8:11 Neuroactive Insecticides: Targets, Selectivity, Resistance, and Secondary Effects John E. Casida1,∗ and Kathleen A. Durkin2 1Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology Laboratory, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, 2Molecular Graphics and Computational Facility, College of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720; email: [email protected], [email protected] Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013. 58:99–117 Keywords The Annual Review of Entomology is online at acetylcholinesterase, calcium channels, GABAA receptor, nicotinic ento.annualreviews.org receptor, secondary targets, sodium channel This article’s doi: 10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153645 Abstract Copyright c 2013 by Annual Reviews. Neuroactive insecticides are the principal means of protecting crops, people, All rights reserved livestock, and pets from pest insect attack and disease transmission. Cur- ∗ Corresponding author rently, the four major nerve targets are acetylcholinesterase for organophos- phates and methylcarbamates, the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor for neonicotinoids, the γ-aminobutyric acid receptor/chloride channel for by Public Health Information Access Project on 04/29/14. For personal use only. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013.58:99-117. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org polychlorocyclohexanes and fiproles, and the voltage-gated sodium channel for pyrethroids and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane. Species selectivity and acquired resistance are attributable in part to structural differences in binding subsites, receptor subunit interfaces, or transmembrane regions. Additional targets are sites in the sodium channel (indoxacarb and metaflumizone), the glutamate-gated chloride channel (avermectins), the octopamine receptor (amitraz metabolite), and the calcium-activated calcium channel (diamides). Secondary toxic effects in mammals from off-target serine hydrolase inhibi- tion include organophosphate-induced delayed neuropathy and disruption of the cannabinoid system.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera) (Excluding Anthribidae
    A FAUNAL SURVEY AND ZOOGEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF THE CURCULIONOIDEA (COLEOPTERA) (EXCLUDING ANTHRIBIDAE, PLATPODINAE. AND SCOLYTINAE) OF THE LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY OF TEXAS A Thesis TAMI ANNE CARLOW Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE August 1997 Major Subject; Entomology A FAUNAL SURVEY AND ZOOGEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF THE CURCVLIONOIDEA (COLEOPTERA) (EXCLUDING ANTHRIBIDAE, PLATYPODINAE. AND SCOLYTINAE) OF THE LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY OF TEXAS A Thesis by TAMI ANNE CARLOW Submitted to Texas AgcM University in partial fulltllment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Approved as to style and content by: Horace R. Burke (Chair of Committee) James B. Woolley ay, Frisbie (Member) (Head of Department) Gilbert L. Schroeter (Member) August 1997 Major Subject: Entomology A Faunal Survey and Zoogeographic Analysis of the Curculionoidea (Coleoptera) (Excluding Anthribidae, Platypodinae, and Scolytinae) of the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. (August 1997) Tami Anne Carlow. B.S. , Cornell University Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Horace R. Burke An annotated list of the Curculionoidea (Coleoptem) (excluding Anthribidae, Platypodinae, and Scolytinae) is presented for the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV) of Texas. The list includes species that occur in Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr, and Wigacy counties. Each of the 23S species in 97 genera is tteated according to its geographical range. Lower Rio Grande distribution, seasonal activity, plant associations, and biology. The taxonomic atTangement follows O' Brien &, Wibmer (I og2). A table of the species occuning in patxicular areas of the Lower Rio Grande Valley, such as the Boca Chica Beach area, the Sabal Palm Grove Sanctuary, Bentsen-Rio Grande State Park, and the Falcon Dam area is included.
    [Show full text]
  • Archiv Für Naturgeschichte
    © Biodiversity Heritage Library, http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/; www.zobodat.at Bericht über die wissenschaftlichen Leistungen im Gebiete der Arthropoden während des Jahres 1883. Von Dr. Ph. Bertkaa in Bonn. Eingsley scheint geneigt zu sein, die von ihm aufgeworfene Frage: Is the group Arthropoda a valid one? zu ver- neinen, indem er auf die verschiedene Zahl der Fühler, Mundtheile, die verschiedene Entwickehmg, Beschaffenheit derVerdauungs- und Respirations- und Circulationsorgane der Crustaceen und Insekten hinweist; die Tardigraden, Pycnogoniden , Linguatulinen und Limulus sind vielleicht als Gruppen aequivalent den Insekten und Crustaceen, vielleicht auch als Zweige des Arachniden- stammes anzusehen; jedenfalls gehören sie nicht zum Phylum der Crustaceen; Americ. Naturalist 1883 S. 1034 ff. Packard in seinem Aufsatze: On the Morphology of the Myriapoda führt bei der Benennung der Kopftheile und ihrer Anhänge einige neue Bezeichnungen ein. Auf Grund der Embryonalentwicklung sieht er die Chilognatha als die ursprüng- lichere Ordnung an, die von einem „Leptus-ähnlichen" Vorfahr, d. h. einem Tracheaten, wie es der aus dem Ei schlüpfende junge Chilognath ist, mit 3 Paar Kopfgliedmassen und 3 Bein- paaren, abstammen. Diesem Vorfahr kommen Eurypauropus und Pauropus am nächsten, die nicht als eine besondere Ordnung, sondern als eine zweite Unterordnung der Chilognathen neben den Ch. genuina anzusehen sind, und zwar vermittelt Eurypauropus den üebergang zu Polyxenus. — Scolopendrella ist kein Myria- pode, sondern ein Thysanure. — Palaeocampa, die Scudder zu einem Chilognathen gemacht hatte, ist wahrscheinlich eine haarige Neuropterenlarve. Arcli. f. Natuigesch. L. Jahrg. 2. Bd. A 2 Bertkau: Bericht über die wissenschaftlichen © Biodiversity Heritage Library, http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/; www.zobodat.at Die Myriapoden mit ihren sechsbeinigen Jugendstadien haben keinen gemeinsamen näheren Ursprung mit den Insekten und Arachniden, bei denen gerade in der Embryonalentwickelung vielfach Boiupaare auftreten, die hernach verschwinden.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents 2
    Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) List of Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Taxa from California and Adjacent States including Standard Taxonomic Effort Levels 1 March 2011 Austin Brady Richards and D. Christopher Rogers Table of Contents 2 1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Acknowledgments 5 2.0 Standard Taxonomic Effort 5 2.1 Rules for Developing a Standard Taxonomic Effort Document 5 2.2 Changes from the Previous Version 6 2.3 The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic List 6 3.0 Methods and Materials 7 3.1 Habitat information 7 3.2 Geographic Scope 7 3.3 Abbreviations used in the STE List 8 3.4 Life Stage Terminology 8 4.0 Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 8 5.0 Literature Cited 9 Appendix I. The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic Effort List 10 Phylum Silicea 11 Phylum Cnidaria 12 Phylum Platyhelminthes 14 Phylum Nemertea 15 Phylum Nemata 16 Phylum Nematomorpha 17 Phylum Entoprocta 18 Phylum Ectoprocta 19 Phylum Mollusca 20 Phylum Annelida 32 Class Hirudinea Class Branchiobdella Class Polychaeta Class Oligochaeta Phylum Arthropoda Subphylum Chelicerata, Subclass Acari 35 Subphylum Crustacea 47 Subphylum Hexapoda Class Collembola 69 Class Insecta Order Ephemeroptera 71 Order Odonata 95 Order Plecoptera 112 Order Hemiptera 126 Order Megaloptera 139 Order Neuroptera 141 Order Trichoptera 143 Order Lepidoptera 165 2 Order Coleoptera 167 Order Diptera 219 3 1.0 Introduction The Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) is charged through its charter to develop standardized levels for the taxonomic identification of aquatic macroinvertebrates in support of bioassessment. This document defines the standard levels of taxonomic effort (STE) for bioassessment data compatible with the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioassessment protocols (Ode, 2007) or similar procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Reliance on Insecticides to Manage Spotted Wing Drosophila
    Reducing reliance on insecticides to manage spotted wing drosophila Hannah Burrack, Katie Swoboda-Bhattarai, and Lauren Diepenbrock Department of Entomology Topics New SWD initiatives Research updates Pesticide rotation programs Timing insecticide applications Recommendations Development and Implementation of Systems-Based Organic Management Strategies for Spotted Wing Drosophila Three years: 1 Sept 2015 through 31 Aug 2018 Project goals: Support the development of novel organic SWD management strategies that will increase NOP compliant management options for growers and decrease their reliance on broad-spectrum insecticides. USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA) Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative Award Number 2015-51300-24154 OREI Objectives Objective 1: Develop semiochemical-based behavioral management tactics for SWD Objective 2: Develop cultural control tactics and evaluate their efficacy and feasibility for reduction of SWD damage Objective 3: Develop effective chemical control strategies that minimally disrupt biological suppression of pest complexes Objective 4: Develop an integrated outreach approach to evaluate and implement organic SWD management strategies Project Director: Ash Sial Ahmad University of Georgia Co-Project Directors: Hannah Burrack North Carolina State University Matt Grieshop Michigan State University Christelle Guedot University of Wisconsin-Madison Kelly Hamby University of Maryland Rufus Isaacs Michigan State University Donn Johnson University of Arkansas Jana Lee United
    [Show full text]
  • The Semiaquatic Hemiptera of Minnesota (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) Donald V
    The Semiaquatic Hemiptera of Minnesota (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) Donald V. Bennett Edwin F. Cook Technical Bulletin 332-1981 Agricultural Experiment Station University of Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 CONTENTS PAGE Introduction ...................................3 Key to Adults of Nearctic Families of Semiaquatic Hemiptera ................... 6 Family Saldidae-Shore Bugs ............... 7 Family Mesoveliidae-Water Treaders .......18 Family Hebridae-Velvet Water Bugs .......20 Family Hydrometridae-Marsh Treaders, Water Measurers ...22 Family Veliidae-Small Water striders, Rime bugs ................24 Family Gerridae-Water striders, Pond skaters, Wherry men .....29 Family Ochteridae-Velvety Shore Bugs ....35 Family Gelastocoridae-Toad Bugs ..........36 Literature Cited ..............................37 Figures ......................................44 Maps .........................................55 Index to Scientific Names ....................59 Acknowledgement Sincere appreciation is expressed to the following individuals: R. T. Schuh, for being extremely helpful in reviewing the section on Saldidae, lending specimens, and allowing use of his illustrations of Saldidae; C. L. Smith for reading the section on Veliidae, checking identifications, and advising on problems in the taxon­ omy ofthe Veliidae; D. M. Calabrese, for reviewing the section on the Gerridae and making helpful sugges­ tions; J. T. Polhemus, for advising on taxonomic prob­ lems and checking identifications for several families; C. W. Schaefer, for providing advice and editorial com­ ment; Y. A. Popov, for sending a copy ofhis book on the Nepomorpha; and M. C. Parsons, for supplying its English translation. The University of Minnesota, including the Agricultural Experi­ ment Station, is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, creed, color, sex, national origin, or handicap. The information given in this publication is for educational purposes only.
    [Show full text]
  • OCHTEROIDEA La Superfamilia Ochteroidea, Incluida En El Infraorden Nepomorpha, Comprende Las Familias Ochteridae Y Gelastocoridae
    | 341 Resumen OCHTEROIDEA La superfamilia Ochteroidea, incluida en el infraorden Nepomorpha, comprende las familias Ochteridae y Gelastocoridae. Ambas familias están presentes en todas las regiones biogeográficas del mundo, aunque tienen mayor diversidad y abundancia en las regiones tropicales. Hasta el momento para la Argentina se han citado tres géneros y 10 especies de Gelastocoridae, y una especie de Ochteridae. Se actualiza el estado de conocimiento de sus características morfológicas, bio- logía e historia taxonómica. Se presentan claves para la identificación de las subfamilias de Gelastocoridae y los géneros de Ochteridae, diagnosis de los géneros, la lista de especies y su distribución geográfica en la Argentina. Abstract The superfamily Ochteroidea, included in the in- fraorder Nepomorpha, is comprised of the families Ochteridae and Gelastocoridae. Both of them are present in all biogeographic regions, although they are more abundant and diverse in the tropics. Up to now, three genera and 10 species of Gelastocoridae and a single one of Ochteridae have been recorded from Argentina. I provide an account of the state of knowledge of the morphology, biology and taxonomic history of both families. I present a key to the subfa- María Cecilia MELO milies of Gelastocoridae and genera of Ochteridae, diagnoses of all genera mentioned, and a list of the División Entomología, Museo de La Plata. CONICET. species recorded in Argentina with their geographic Paseo del Bosque, 1900 La Plata, Argentina distribution. [email protected] Introducción La superfamilia Ochteroidea (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Nepomorpha) se encuentra conformada por las familias de “orilleros” Ochteridae y Gelastocoridae, típicas habitantes de las riberas de cuerpos de agua dulce (Hebsgaard et al., 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Comal County Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Environmental Impact Statement
    Draft Comal County Regional Habitat Conservation Plan Environmental Impact Statement Prepared for: Comal County, Texas Comal County Commissioners Court Prepared by: SWCA Environmental Consultants Smith, Robertson, Elliott, Glen, Klein & Bell, L.L.P. Prime Strategies, Inc. Texas Perspectives, Inc. Capital Market Research, Inc. April 2010 SWCA Project Number 12659-139-AUS DRAFT COMAL COUNTY REGIONAL HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT April 2010 Type of Action: Administrative Lead Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Responsible Official: Adam Zerrenner Field Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas For Information: Bill Seawell Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas Tele: 512-490-0057 Abstract: Comal County, Texas, is applying for an incidental take permit (Permit) under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 16 U.S.C. § 1531, et seq. (ESA), to authorize the incidental take of two endangered species, the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) and the black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla), referred to collectively as the “Covered Species.” In support of the Permit application, the County has prepared a regional habitat conservation plan (Proposed RHCP), covering a 30-year period from 2010 to 2040. The Permit Area for the Proposed RHCP and the area of potential effect for this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is Comal County in central Texas. The requested Permit would authorize the following incidental take and mitigation for the golden-cheeked warbler: Take: As conservation credits are created through habitat preservation, authorize up to 5,238 acres (2,120 hectares) of golden-cheeked warbler habitat to be impacted over the 30-year life of the Proposed RHCP.
    [Show full text]
  • Txu-Oclc-252896947.Pdf
    Copyright by Jonathan Ogren 2008 Conservation Planning in Central Texas by Jonathan Ogren, B.A. Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts The University of Texas at Austin May 2008 Conservation Planning in Central Texas Approved by Supervising Committee: Robin W. Doughty, Co-supervisor Kenneth R. Young, Co-supervisor Dedication To Crescent and Simon Acknowledgements Much thanks goes to the many people who helped bring this project to completion. My advisor’s Robin Doughty and Ken Young tirelessly evaluated the quality of the work and the clarity of the writing. Their supervision made this project a profound learning experience on a number of levels. Generous financial support came from a two-year fellowship through The Environmental Protection Agency’s National Network for Environmental Management Studies under the supervision of John Johnston. Additional support in the form of a well equipped, comfortable place to work, flexible hours, and insightful information about open space was supplied by Don Bosse. Many people contributed information and support including: Debbie Benesh, Sinclair Black, David Braun, Kent Butler, Bill Carr, George Coffer, David Diamond, Jeff Francel, Trevon Fuller, Justin Garson, Alan Glen, Frank Heitmuller, Clif Ladd, Flo Oxley, Lars Pomara, Jackie Poole, Jose Portillo, Dana Price, Chuck Sexton, Jason Spangler, and Fritz Steiner. Laura Smith, Sheri Russell, and Crescent, Simon, Linda, and Dennis Ogren offered general support and motivation. E.O.Wilson, Rachel Carson, Sam Beam, and David Orr provided inspirational words and writings.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.7.10 Curculioninae Latreille, 1802 Jetzt Beschriebenen Palaearctischen Ceuthor- Rhynchinen
    Curculioninae Latreille, 1802 305 Schultze, A. (1902): Kritisches Verzeichniss der bis 3.7.10 Curculioninae Latreille, 1802 jetzt beschriebenen palaearctischen Ceuthor- rhynchinen. – Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift Roberto Caldara , Nico M. Franz, and Rolf 1902: 193 – 226. G. Oberprieler Schwarz, E. A. (1894): A “ parasitic ” scolytid. – Pro- ceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 3: Distribution. The subfamily as here composed (see 15 – 17. Phylogeny and Taxonomy below) includes approx- Scudder, S. H. (1893): Tertiary Rhynchophorous Coleo- ptera of the United States. xii + 206 pp. US Geological imately 350 genera and 4500 species (O ’ Brien & Survey, Washington, DC. Wibmer 1978; Thompson 1992; Alonso-Zarazaga Stierlin, G. (1886): Fauna insectorum Helvetiae. Coleo- & Lyal 1999; Oberprieler et al. 2007), provisionally ptera helvetiae , Volume 2. 662 pp. Rothermel & Cie., divided into 34 tribes. These are geographically Schaffhausen. generally restricted to a lesser or larger degree, only Thompson, R. T. (1973): Preliminary studies on the two – Curculionini and Rhamphini – being virtually taxonomy and distribution of the melon weevil, cosmopolitan in distribution and Anthonomini , Acythopeus curvirostris (Boheman) (including Baris and Tychiini only absent from the Australo-Pacifi c granulipennis (Tournier)) (Coleoptera, Curculion- region. Acalyptini , Cionini , Ellescini , Mecinini , idae). – Bulletin of Entomological Research 63: 31 – 48. and Smicronychini occur mainly in the Old World, – (1992): Observations on the morphology and clas- from Africa to the Palaearctic and Oriental regions, sifi cation of weevils (Coleoptera, Curculionidae) with Ellescini, Acalyptini, and Smicronychini also with a key to major groups. – Journal of Natural His- extending into the Nearctic region and at least tory 26: 835 – 891. the latter two also into the Australian one.
    [Show full text]