DOCSLIB.ORG

Species Status Assessment Report for the Altamaha Spinymussel (Elliptio Spinosa)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Species Status Assessment Report for the Altamaha Spinymussel (Elliptio Spinosa) Species Status Assessment Report for the Altamaha spinymussel (Elliptio spinosa) Version 1.0 Photo Credit Jason Wisniewski June 2021 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, GA TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. ii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ vii 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 9 1.1 Species Protection Status ............................................................................................... 11 2 SPECIES BIOLOGY AND INDIVIDUAL NEEDS ........................................................ 12 2.1 Species Description and Taxonomy ............................................................................... 12 2.2 Life History .................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 Genetics .......................................................................................................................... 17 2.4 Diet ................................................................................................................................. 17 2.5 Habitat ............................................................................................................................ 17 2.5.1 Critical Habitat ....................................................................................................... 18 2.6 Distribution and Abundance........................................................................................... 20 2.6.1 Altamaha River ....................................................................................................... 21 2.6.2 Oconee River ........................................................................................................... 21 2.6.3 Ohoopee River ........................................................................................................ 22 2.6.4 Ocmulgee River ....................................................................................................... 22 2.7 Individual Needs Summary ............................................................................................ 23 3 INFLUENCES ON VIABILITY ....................................................................................... 24 3.1 Factor A: Habitat destruction and modification ............................................................. 24 3.1.1 Sedimentation .......................................................................................................... 24 3.1.2 Water Quality and Quantity .................................................................................... 26 3.2 Factor B: Overutilization ................................................................................................ 27 3.3 Factor C: Disease or predation ....................................................................................... 28 3.4 Factor D: Inadequacy of existing regulation .................................................................. 28 3.5 Factor E: Other natural or man-made factors ................................................................. 29 3.6 Conservation Efforts ...................................................................................................... 32 4 POPULATION AND SPECIES NEEDS AND CURRENT CONDITION ................... 32 4.1 Delineating Populations ................................................................................................. 33 4.2 Population Needs – Resiliency ....................................................................................... 34 4.2.1 Population Factor – Presence ................................................................................ 34 SSA Report – Altamaha spinymussel ii June 2021 4.2.2 Population Factor – Evidence of Reproduction ..................................................... 39 4.2.3 Habitat Factor – Water Quality .............................................................................. 40 4.2.4 Habitat Factor – Water Quantity ............................................................................ 52 4.2.5 Habitat Factor – Host Fish Community ................................................................. 57 4.2.6 Current Resiliency .................................................................................................. 58 4.3 Species Needs -- Redundancy and Representation ........................................................ 59 4.3.1 Current Redundancy ............................................................................................... 59 4.3.2 Current Representation ........................................................................................... 60 5 FUTURE CONDITIONS AND VIABILITY ................................................................... 61 5.1 Future Scenarios Approach ............................................................................................ 61 5.1.1 Climate Change ...................................................................................................... 62 5.1.2 Land Use Change .................................................................................................... 64 5.1.3 Water Quantity ........................................................................................................ 67 5.2 Future Scenarios – 20 Year Time Frame ....................................................................... 70 5.2.1 Persistence .............................................................................................................. 70 5.2.2 Extinction ................................................................................................................ 71 5.3 Future Scenarios– 50 Year Time Frame ........................................................................ 71 5.3.1 Status Quo ............................................................................................................... 72 5.3.2 Conservation ........................................................................................................... 74 5.3.3 + Captive Propagation ........................................................................................... 75 5.4 Future Resiliency ............................................................................................................ 76 5.5 Future Redundancy ........................................................................................................ 76 5.6 Future Representation .................................................................................................... 76 LITERATURE CITED .............................................................................................................. 78 APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................................. 88 APPENDIX B .............................................................................................................................. 89 APPENDIX C .............................................................................................................................. 97 SSA Report – Altamaha spinymussel iii June 2021 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1. Species status assessment framework ........................................................................ 11 Figure 2-1. Altamaha spinymussel. Photo by Jason Wisniewski. ................................................. 13 Figure 2-2. Generic illustration of the freshwater mussel reproductive cycle (FMCS 2019). ..... 15 Figure 2-3. Scanning electron microscope image of hookless Altamaha spinymussel (Elliptio spinosa) glochidia. Image reproduced from Johnson et al. (2012, p. 741). ................................. 16 Figure 2-4. Distribution of the Altamaha spinymussel, categorized by how recently live specimens have been observed (“current” year for reference is 2020). ...................................... 20 Figure 3-1. Influence diagram illustrating relationships between key habitat and population factors, influences on these factors, and species viability. This diagram does not represent a comprehensive view of all factors and influences on Altamaha spinymussel viability but highlights key components. ........................................................................................................... 24 Figure 4-1. Altamaha spinymussel populations (lines) and population watersheds (shaded). .... 34 Figure 4-2. Georgia 303(d) status of rivers as of 2018. ............................................................... 41 Figure 4-3. Point source pollution discharging facilities reporting to the EPA. ......................... 45 Figure 4-4. Number of discharging facilities, volume of discharge, and toxicity of discharge from reporting facilities in Altamaha spinymussel population watersheds. Graphs in the right column are zoomed in versions of their counterpart on the left. ..............................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director
    North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director March 1, 2016 Honorable Jimmy Dixon Honorable Chuck McGrady N.C. House of Representatives N.C. House of Representatives 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 416B 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 304 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Senator Trudy Wade N.C. Senate 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 521 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Dear Honorables: I am submitting this report to the Environmental Review Committee in fulfillment of the requirements of Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765). As directed, this report includes a review of methods and criteria used by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission on the State protected animal list as defined in G.S. 113-331 and compares them to federal and state agencies in the region. This report also reviews North Carolina policies specific to introduced species along with determining recommendations for improvements to these policies among state and federally listed species as well as nonlisted animals. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at (919) 707-0151 or via email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Gordon Myers Executive Director North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Report on Study Conducted Pursuant to S.L. 2015-286 To the Environmental Review Commission March 1, 2016 Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765) directed the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) to “review the methods and criteria by which it adds, removes, or changes the status of animals on the state protected animal list as defined in G.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report- HWY-2009-16 Propagation and Culture of Federally Listed Freshwater Mussel Species
    Final Report- HWY-2009-16 Propagation and Culture of Federally Listed Freshwater Mussel Species Prepared By Jay F- Levine, Co-Principal Investigator1 Christopher B- Eads, Co-Investigator1 Renae Greiner, Graduate Student Assistant1 Arthur E- Bogan, Co- Investigator2 1North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine 4700 Hillsborough Street Raleigh, NC 27606 2 NC State Museum of Natural Sciences 4301 Reedy Creek Rd- Raleigh, NC 27607 November 2011 Technical Report Documentation Page 1- Report No- 2-Government Accession No- 3- Recipient’s Catalog No- FHWA/NC/2009-16 4- Title and Subtitle 5- Report Date Propagation and Culture of Federally Listed Freshwater November 2011 Mussel Species 6-Performing Organization Code 7- Author(s) 8-Performing Organization Report No- Jay F- Levine, Co-Principal Investigator Arthur E- Bogan, Co-Principal Investigator Renae Greiner, Graduate Student Assistant 9- Performing Organization Name and Address 10- Work Unit No- (TRAIS) North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine 11- Contract or Grant No- 4700 Hillsborough Street Raleigh, NC 27606 12- Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13-Type of Report and Period Covered North Carolina Department of Transportation Final Report P-O- Box 25201 August 16, 2008 – June 30, 2011 Raleigh, NC 27611 14- Sponsoring Agency Code HWY-2009-16 15- Supplementary Notes 16- Abstract Road and related crossing construction can markedly alter stream habitat and adversely affect resident native flora. The National Native Mussel Conservation Committee has recognized artificial propagation and culture as an important potential management tool for sustaining remaining freshwater mussel populations and has called for additional propagation research to help conserve and restore this faunal group.
    [Show full text]
  • September 24, 2018
    September 24, 2018 Sent via Federal eRulemaking Portal to: http://www.regulations.gov Docket Nos. FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0006 FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007 FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0009 Bridget Fahey Chief, Division of Conservation and Classification U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES Falls Church, VA 22041-3808 [email protected] Craig Aubrey Chief, Division of Environmental Review Ecological Services Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: ES Falls Church, VA 22041 [email protected] Samuel D. Rauch, III National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Protected Resources 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 [email protected] Re: Proposed Revisions of Endangered Species Act Regulations Dear Mr. Aubrey, Ms. Fahey, and Mr. Rauch: The Southern Environmental Law Center (“SELC”) submits the following comments in opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s and National Marine Fisheries Service’s proposed revisions to the Endangered Species Act’s implementing regulations.1 We submit these comments on behalf of 57 organizations working to protect the natural resources of the 1 Revision of the Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,174 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 17); Revision of Regulations for Interagency Cooperation, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,178 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R. pt. 402); Revision of the Regulations for Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat, 83 Fed. Reg. 35,193 (proposed July 25, 2018) (to be codified at 50 C.F.R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development and Evaluation of a Freshwater Mussel Sampling
    THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A FRESHWATER MUSSEL SAMPLING PROTOCOL FOR A LARGE LOWLAND RIVER by JASON RAY MEADOR Under the direction of James T. Peterson ABSTRACT Freshwater mussels are among the most imperiled aquatic species within the southeastern United States. Mangers are faced with the task gathering information via monitoring, and making decisions based on available information about local mussel populations. I gathered data on mussel behavior, demography, distribution, and detection to develop a cost-effective protocol for monitoring freshwater mussel populations within the Altamaha River. Surface abundance, survival, occupancy, and detection varied spatially, temporally, and among species. I then developed sampling stratum within mesohabitats based on empirical data and evaluated the efficacy of several sampling protocols via simulation. Spatial and temporal variation among species emphasize the importance for properly estimating and evaluating habitat based on use and detection and suggest refraining from raw count indices. INDEX WORDS: Altamaha River, Freshwater Mussels, Occupancy, Abundance, Estimation, Robust Design, Migration Patterns, Sample Design, Detection THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A FRESHWATER MUSSEL SAMPLING PROTOCOL FOR A LARGE LOWLAND RIVER by JASON RAY MEADOR B.S., North Carolina State University, 2004 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2008 © 2008 Jason Ray Meador All Rights Reserved THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A FRESHWATER MUSSEL SAMPLING PROTOCOL FOR A LARGE LOWLAND RIVER by JASON RAY MEADOR Major Professor: James T. Peterson Committee: Brett Albanese Michael J. Conroy Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people that offered assistance throughout the duration of this project for whom I am grateful.
    [Show full text]
  • List of the Freshwater Bivalve Species of North Carolina
    List of the Freshwater Bivalve species of North Carolina - printed 2021-09-24 This is a listing of the bivalve mollusk species that have been documented or reported to occur in the freshwater systems of the state. Because bivalves can be very difficult to identify to genus and to species, and because there are a number of historical (often over 100 years ago) and poorly documented reports of many species, it is impossible to state the number of freshwater bivalve species that have been documented in the state. The scientific and common names used in this list are from Williams et al. (2017) for the taxa in the family Unionidae, and from NatureServe Explorer for the taxa in Corbiculidae and Sphaeriidae. The list also includes the State Rank, Global Rank, State Status, and U.S. Status (if it has such statuses) for each species. The ranks are those of the Biotics database of the N. C. Natural Heritage Program and NatureServe, October 2016. Ranks in parentheses are provided by the N.C. Biodiversity Project, based on data in Williams et al. (2017). Status information is given on Page 3. Unionidae: Freshwater Mussels [48] [Rank: State Global] [Status: State US] Range (by river basins) 1 Alasmidonta heterodon ................ Dwarf Wedgemussel ................... [S1 G1G2] [E E] NS, TP 2 Alasmidonta raveneliana .............. Appalachian Elktoe ...................... [S1 G1] [E E] FB, LT 3 Alasmidonta undulata ................... Triangle Floater ........................... [S3 G4] [T] CF, CH, NS, RO, TP, YP 4 Alasmidonta varicosa ................... Brook Floater ............................... [S2 G3] [E] CA, CF, NS, YP 5 Alasmidonta viridis ....................... Slippershell Mussel ..................... [S1 G4G5] [E] FB, LT 6 Cyclonaias tuberculata ................
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Hickory Nut Gorge Green Salamander (Aneides caryaensis) Photo by Austin Patton 2014 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. The list is published periodically, generally every two years.
    [Show full text]
  • Correlations Between Biotic Indices, Water Quality, And
    CURRENT STATUS OF ENDEMIC MUSSELS IN THE LOWER OCMULGEE AND ALTAMAHA RIVERS Jason M. Wisniewski, Greg Krakow, and Brett Albanese AUTHORS: Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division, Natural Heritage Program, Social Circle, GA 30025 REFERENCE: Proceedings of the 2005 Georgia Water Resources Conference, held April 25-27, 2005, at the University of Georgia. Kathryn J. Hatcher, editor, Institute of Ecology, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. Abstract. The Altamaha River Basin is well known to stable. As a result, the current status of the endemic among malacologists for its high percentage (ca. 40%) of mussels of the lower Altamaha River system was reviewed. endemic mussels. While little historical data exists to This review will provide information to policy makers and quantify changes in mussel abundance, many biologists regulatory agencies for developing conservation strategies believe that some species are declining. We assembled a that may affect the persistence and habitat quality of large database of mussel occurrence records from imperiled mussels. surveys conducted since 1967 and used this data to assess the current status of endemic mussels in the lower Ocmulgee and Altamaha rivers. The percentage of sites BACKGROUND occupied and the ranges of the Altamaha arcmussel, Altamaha spinymussel, and inflated floater have declined The Altamaha River Basin is the largest basin in Georgia over the past 10 years. The remaining endemic mussel (36,976 km2). Major tributaries in the basin include: the species occupy a large percentage of sites and appear to Ocmulgee, Oconee, and Ohoopee rivers (Figure 1). be stable. We recommend the development of a long- Although historic collections date back to the 1830’s, most term monitoring program for Altamaha basin endemic major surveys have been conducted since the late 1960's mussels.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Working Plan
    Distribution, Genetic Characterization, and Life History of the James spinymussel, Pleurobema collina (Bivalvia: Unionidae), in Virginia and North Carolina by Melissa A. Petty Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences Approved: ____________________________ _____________________________ Dr. Richard J. Neves, Chairperson Dr. Eric M. Hallerman _________________________ Dr. Paul Angermeier February 11, 2005 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: James spinymussel, Pleurobema collina, Distribution, Survey, Life History, DNA Sequences, Fish Host, Phenotype, Morphology, Monophyletic, Genetic Drift Distribution, Genetic Characterization, and Life History of the James spinymussel, Pleurobema collina (Bivalvia: Unionidae), in Virginia and North Carolina by Melissa A. Petty Richard J. Neves, Chairperson Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences (ABSTRACT) Three spined, mussel species occur in the United States along the Atlantic slope; James spinymussel (Pleurobema collina), Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana), and Altamaha spinymussel (E. spinosa). The James spinymussel was listed as endangered in 1988, and was until recently considered to be endemic to the James River basin (Clarke and Neves 1984; USFWS 1990). Biologists with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) discovered spinymussel populations in the Dan and Mayo rivers in NC in 2000 and 2001, respectively. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) tentatively identified this species as Pleurobema collina. My project proposed by the Virginia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit to the USFWS and the Virginia Transportation Research Council, determined where P. collina resides in VA and what the extent of its range is within the state. An informal preliminary survey design for P.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) of Nebraska
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies Nebraska Academy of Sciences 11-2011 The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) of Nebraska Ellet Hoke Midwest Malacology, Inc., [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas Part of the Life Sciences Commons Hoke, Ellet, "The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) of Nebraska" (2011). Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies. 2. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Academy of Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societiesy b an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) Of Nebraska Ellet Hoke Midwest Malacology, Inc. Correspondence: Ellet Hoke, 1878 Ridgeview Circle Drive, Manchester, MO 63021 [email protected] 636-391-9459 This paper reports the results of the first statewide survey of the freshwater mussels of Nebraska. Survey goals were: (1) to document current distributions through collection of recent shells; (2) to document former distributions through collection of relict shells and examination of museum collections; (3) to identify changes in distribution; (4) to identify the primary natural and anthropomorphic factors impacting unionids; and (5) to develop a model to explain the documented distributions. The survey confirmed 30 unionid species and the exotic Corbicula fluminea for the state, and museum vouchers documented one additional unionid species. Analysis of museum records and an extensive literature search coupled with research in adjacent states identified 13 additional unionid species with known distributions near the Nebraska border.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Savannah River Watershed
    Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Savannah River Watershed Suggested Citation: Crist, P.J., R. White, M. Chesnutt, C. Scott, R. Sutter, E. Linden, P. Cutter, and G. Dobson. Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Savannah River Watershed. 2019. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. IMPORTANT INFORMATION/DISCLAIMER: This report represents a Regional Coastal Resilience Assessment that can be used to identify places on the landscape for resilience-building efforts and conservation actions through understanding coastal flood threats, the exposure of populations and infrastructure have to those threats, and the presence of suitable fish and wildlife habitat. As with all remotely sensed or publicly available data, all features should be verified with a site visit, as the locations of suitable landscapes or areas containing flood hazards and community assets are approximate. The data, maps, and analysis provided should be used only as a screening-level resource to support management decisions. This report should be used strictly as a planning reference tool and not for permitting or other legal purposes. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government, or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s partners. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation or its funding sources. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION DISCLAIMER: The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of NOAA or the Department of Commerce.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment on the Effects of the Issuance of a Scientific Research Permit (File No
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OP COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admlnletratlon PROGRAM PLANNING AND INTEGRATION S ilv e r S p ring, Maryland 2 09 1 0 OCT 7 2009 To All Interested Government Agencies and Public Groups: Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), an environmental review has been performed on the following action. TITLE: Environmental Assessment on the Effects of the Issuance of a Scientific Research Permit (File No. 14394) to Conduct Research on Shortnose Sturgeon in the Altamaha River, Georgia LOCATION: The proposed research would occur in the Altamaha River, Georgia, between the Altamaha Sound and the confluence of the Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers (rkm 215). Most sampling, however, would occur in the tidally influenced portions of the river to river kilometer 65. SUMMARY: The current EA analyzed the effects of shortnose sturgeon research on the environment in the Altamaha River. This proposed research is a continuation of similar research objectives conducted under Permit 1420-01 which expired on September 30, 2009. The permit would be valid for five years from the date of issuance and would authorize non-lethal sampling methods on up to 500 shortnose sturgeon annually, but not to exceed 1,500 over the life of the permit. Research activities would include netting, measurement (length, weight, photos), genetic and fin-ray tissue sampling, PIT and sonic tagging, anesthesia, laparoscopy, and gastric lavage. To document spawning in the river, up to 20 eggs or larvae would be lethally collected with artificial substrates annually. Additionally, one incidence of unintentional mortality or serious injury is proposed over the life of the permit.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 109/Wednesday, June 9, 2021
    30688 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 9, 2021 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR from which the maps are generated are present or threatened destruction, included in the administrative record modification, or curtailment of its Fish and Wildlife Service and are available at http:// habitat or range; (B) overutilization for www.regulations.gov at Docket No. commercial, recreational, scientific, or 50 CFR Part 17 FWS–R4–ES–2018–0092, and at the educational purposes; (C) disease or [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2018–0092; Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office predation; (D) the inadequacy of FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212] (https://www.fws.gov/raleigh; street existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) address provided above). Any other natural or manmade factors RIN 1018–BC28 additional tools or supporting affecting its continued existence. We have determined that habitat Endangered and Threatened Wildlife information that we developed for this degradation (Factor A), resulting from and Plants; Threatened Species Status critical habitat designation will also be available at the Fish and Wildlife the cumulative impacts of land use With Section 4(d) Rule for Neuse River change and associated watershed-level Waterdog, Endangered Species Status Service website and Field Office identified above, and may also be effects on water quality, water quantity, for Carolina Madtom, and Designations habitat connectivity, and instream of Critical Habitat included in the preamble and at http:// www.regulations.gov. habitat suitability, poses the largest risk AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pete to the future viability of both species. Interior. Benjamin, Field Supervisor, U.S.
    [Show full text]