DOCSLIB.ORG

In This Issue Legislative Mandates of the Endangered Speciesact and A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In This Issue Legislative Mandates of the Endangered Speciesact and A UPDATEEndangeredincluding a Reprint Species of theTechnical latest USFWSBulletin May/June 1997 School of Natural Resources and Environment Vol. 14 Nos. 5&6 THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN In this Issue 3 Legislative Mandates of the Endangered SpeciesAct and a Plea for Consistent Use of Technical Terms Jay O'Laughlin Public Opinion on Species and Endangered Species Conservation Brian Czech and Paul R. Krausman 11 Oregon Embarks on Bold Recovery Plan for Pacific Salmon: Should it be Used as an Alternative to an ESA Listing? Glen Spain 17 Conservation Spotlight: Desert Fish Mike Demlong 19 News From Zoos Insert: MayIJune U.S. Fish and Wildlife Endangered Species Bulletin Species LT?CFITE A forum for information exchange on Letter to the Editor endangered species issues MayIJune 1997 Vol. 14 Nos. 5&6 M. Elsbeth McPhee ............................Editor Katherine Irvine .................Associate Editor 1 wanted to express my concern with Kimberley Walley's David Bidwell ..................Editorial Assistant article in the Opinion section of the Oct Nov issue which was Gideon Lachman .......Web Page Coordinator / ,,, subscription Coordinator critical of Habitat Conservation Plans being developed in con- Terv Root ......................... Faculty Advisor cert with the Administration's "No Surprised" policy for private Adviso~~~~~d landowners. In an effort to illustrate her concerns, she used RichrdBlock Plum Creek's recently completed Cascades HCP in Washington ,,,,Indianapolis Zoo as an example of "inadequate protection" for affected species. National Biological Service, Ms. Walley inaccurately described the protection offered in Oregon State University the HCP as limited to harvest deferrals on 4,300 acres of the International Consultant in 170,000 acre area covered under the plan. In reality, 38 separate Environment and Development mitigation measures are described in the plan to address the Chevron Ecological Services Hal Salwasser biological needs of 285 species included in the HCP approved by U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Boone and Crockett club Service. These include harvest restrictions to retain nesting and forA,,rJ,. ,Ehge, dispersal habitat in specific areas totaling 5,600 acres which are species up~~TEwelcomadcles, editorial comments, and announcements related to currently used by resident spotted owls and retention of a swesp,,on, ForfunhervJarmation minimum of 8% of Plum Creek ownership in nesting, roosting conkttheeditor. and foraging habitat for spotted owls. Moreover, riparian s~sc~ptio,,lnfomtion,. neEndangrred buffers on fish-bearing streams are 8 times the width required species ~PDATEispubli~hedsixaper year, plus occasional special issues, by the under current state forest practices rules. The HCP establishes school ofNamalResources and Environment requirements for marbled murrelet surveys, goshawk nest site at TheUivenityofMichigan. Annuairmare $23 for regular subscriptions, and $18 for protection, road and habitat management for grizzly bears and smdents md ,,,,, (dd, forposhge wolves, and watershed analysis to address fish and forest hy- outsidetheus). Sendcheckormoney order (payable to The University of Michigan) to: drology concerns. The plan also specifies targets to maintain a Endangered Species UPDATE diversity of forest vertebrate species. A significant element of school of Natural Resources and Environment the plan is a research and monitoring program which will The University of Michigan provide both compliance and biological data necessary to evalu- Ann Arbor. MI 48109-1 115 (313) 763-3243 ate the plan's success and modify it in the future if necessary. E-mail: [email protected] Ms. Walley is entitled to her opinions about the content and http://~~~,~mi~h.ed~~-esupdate quality of habitat conservation plans being prepared by private of Pacific landowners in cooperation with the Departments of Interior and salmon. ~~nstitutefor ~isheries~esources. Commerce. It seems reasonable to expect that she would at least ,views in fhe read and accurately describe the plans she chooses to criticize. species UPDATE~~Ynot necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or The University of Michigan. Lorin Hicks, Ph.D. Production of this issue was made possible in Director, Fish and Wildlife Resources part by sumfrom the Boone and Crocked Plum Creek Timber Company, L.P. club, Chevron ~o~poration,U.S. FWS Division of Endangered Species Region 3, and Walt Seattle, Washington hneyWorld Company. printed on recycled paper 2 EndangeredSpecies UPDATE Vol. 14 Nos. 5&6 1997 Legislative Mandates of the Endangered Species Act and a Plea for Consistent Use of Technical Terms Jay O'Laughlin Introduction not describing a legislative man- agency responsibilities. I use ESA- The Endangered Species Act date. "Diversity" is a term absent defined technical terms (see (ESA) is a public policy for pro- from the ESA, however, "destruc- Sidebar), and separate legislative tecting, and improving the status tion" is used in section 7 in refer- mandates from agency viewpoints, of, plants and animals whose con- ence to critical habitat. The ESA's administrative regulations, judicial tinued existence is imperiled. ESA imperfect blend of biological sci- interpretations, and court rulings. policy consists of a legislative stat- ence and law (Rohlf 1991) makes ute, administrative regulations and understanding its mandates any- Section 7 protection guidelines, and judicial rulings. thing but clear. The statute mandates that The ESA statute includes hortatory The ESA's mandates can be federal agencies neither jeopar- declarations such as the purpose explained by analyzing the three -dize listed species nor adversely of the Act (ESA 8 2), definitions key parts of the statutory design- modify their critical habitat. In (ESA 8 3), and mandates for ex- identification, protection, and re- her brief discussion of section 7, ecutive agencies. These mandates covery (O'Laughlin and Cook Clark (1996) failed to mention include interagency cooperation 1995). First, Clark (1996) clearly the two protection provisions of (ESA 8 7) and substantive out- explained identification, which is the ESA's "Interagency Coop- comes, such as a list of protected the section 4 process for listing eration": jeopardy protection and species and their recovery plans threatened or endangered species. habitat protection. (ESA 8 4) and protection against Second, she described protection (ESA 9). (See Sidebar for as the "primary objective" of the Jeopardy protection definitions of underlined terms.) ESA program (Clark 1996). How- Clarkstated that the Interior Sec- Understanding the goals of the ever, she inexplicably omitted sec- retary, acting through the FWS, ESA statute and the Act's imple- tion 7 jeopardy and critical habitat "overseesthe protection and conser- mentation mechanisms can en- protections, while section 9 &&g vation of fish, wildlife, and plants hance species conservation pro- protection was adequately ex- found to be in serious jeopardyf' grams by improving communica- plained. Third, although Clarkcon- (Clark 1996). This use of jeopardy tion among interested parties. siders recovery to be the "ultimate adds confusion and vagueness by Describing ESA ends and means purpose" of the Act (Clark 1996), inconsistentlyusing a technical term. with consistent and precise use of she substituted some interpreta- "Seriously imperiled" would have ESA-defined terms facilitates dis- tions for mandates. For example, been a more appropriate phrase, es- cussion of and improvements to Clark said the FWS oversees re- pecially when Clark used "imper- implementation issues. covery activities, but failed to men- iled" in a similar context in her con- An Endangered Species UP- tion that section 4(f) mandates the cluding paragraph. Absent from the DATE article by a U.S. Fish and FWS to develop and implement ESA statute or regulations, "imper- Wildlife Service (FWS) official recovery plans. Finally, although iled" is convenient for avoiding re- (Clark 1996) reviewing the ESA's they are not mandates, Clark (1996) petitive use of "threatened and en- . legislative mandates did only a also described how responsibili- dangered." partial job, in my opinion. Per- ties for marine animals are split Jeovardy is a vague standard sonal or agency viewpoints some- between agencies-these assign- used for protecting listed species. times obscured the underlying ments have far-reaching implica- Section 7 provides statutory pro- statutory requirements and sev- tions deserving more discussion tection by mandating that any ac- eral terms were misused. For ex- than was provided. tion by a federal agency may not ample, by stating that the ESA is a This article complements jeovardize the continued existence "clear public policy.. .to prevent Clark's article on southern sea ot- of a listed species. Through the the destruction of nature's diver- ter (Enhydra lutris nereis) conser- consultation process defined in sec- sity," Clark (1996) was offering vation by focusing on section 7 tion 7, the FWS or the NMFS must an interpretation of ESA policy, protection, recovery mandates, and provide a written statement, called Vol. 14 Nos. 5&6 1997 Endangeredspecies UPDA 7E 3 a biological opinion, if a federal action may ~eopardizea species. Sidebar -- Essential Endangered Species Act Definitions " Jeo~ardize"is not defined in the ESA statute, but is in FWS regula- Section 3 of the ESA provides definitions of the terms used tions (see Sidebar). There are no
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roundtail Chub (Gila Robusta Robusta): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta robusta): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project May 3, 2005 David E. Rees, Jonathan A. Ptacek, and William J. Miller Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. 1113 Stoney Hill Drive, Suite A Fort Collins, Colorado 80525-1275 Peer Review Administered by American Fisheries Society Rees, D.E., J.A. Ptacek, and W.J. Miller. (2005, May 3). Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta robusta): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http:// www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/roundtailchub.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank those people who promoted, assisted, and supported this species assessment for the Region 2 USDA Forest Service. Ryan Carr and Kellie Richardson conducted preliminary literature reviews and were valuable in the determination of important or usable literature. Laura Hillger provided assistance with report preparation and dissemination. Numerous individuals from Region 2 national forests were willing to discuss the status and management of this species. Thanks go to Greg Eaglin (Medicine Bow National Forest), Dave Gerhardt (San Juan National Forest), Kathy Foster (Routt National Forest), Clay Spease and Chris James (Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forest), Christine Hirsch (White River National Forest), as well as Gary Patton and Joy Bartlett from the Regional Office. Dan Brauh, Lory Martin, Tom Nesler, Kevin Rogers, and Allen Zincush, all of the Colorado Division of Wildlife, provided information on species distribution, management, and current regulations. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES David E. Rees studied fishery biology, aquatic ecology, and ecotoxicology at Colorado State University where he received his B.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Bonytail Chub (Pimephales Promelas ) Thermal Tolerance Analyses – Juvenile and Adult, Summer March 2016
    DRAFT Bonytail Chub (Pimephales promelas ) Thermal Tolerance Analyses – Juvenile and Adult, Summer March 2016 Introduction Recommended summer chronic and acute thermal tolerance values for juvenile and adult bonytail chub and their justification are discussed below. The recommended tolerance values were developed in accordance with the “ DRAFT Methodology for Developing Thermal Tolerance Thresholds for Various Fish in Nevada – Juvenile and Adult, Summer ” (September 2015). Chronic Thermal Tolerance Thresholds Table 1 provides a summary of the range of chronic temperature tolerance values for bonytail chub for various lines of evidence. These values are based upon a review of 2 papers and publications, the details of which are summarized in Attachment A. There is obviously a wide range of temperatures from which to select an appropriate value and best professional judgment is called for. NDEP’s approach is to accept the EPA recommendations from Brungs and Jones (1977) unless the literature review provides a compelling reason to utilize other values. However, in the case of the bonytail chub, EPA has not recommended a chronic thermal tolerance value. As discussed in the methodology, chronic temperature criteria are generally not set to ensure the most optimum conditions. In fact, Brungs and Jones (1977) recommends chronic criterion for a given fish species that is between the optimum temperature and the UUILT. Based upon the available data, the recommended chronic threshold for bonytail chub is 29°C. This value is consistent with the upper
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Effects of Four Flaming Gorge Dam Hydropower Operational Scenarios on the Fishes of the Green River, Utah and Colorado
    ,jj^- ANUEADATM-n .1 ' Potential Effects of Four Flaming Gorge Dam Hydropower Operational Scenarios on the Fishes of the Green River, Utah and Colorado Environmental Assessment Division Argonne National Laboratory / /O^ Operated by The University of Chicago, under Contract W-31-109-Eng-3B, for the United States Department of Energy Argonne National Laboratory Argonne National Laboratory, with facilities in the states of Illinois and Idaho, is owned by the United States Govemment, and operated by the University of Chicago under the provisions of a contract with the Department of Energy. This technical memo is a product of Argonne's Environmental Assessment Division (EAD). For information on the division's scientific and engineering activities, contact: Director, Environmental Assessment Division Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, Illinois 60439-4815 Telephone (708) 252-3107 Presented in this technical memo are preliminary results of ongoing work or work that is more limited in scope and depth than that described in formal reports issued by the EAD. Publishing support services were provided by Argonne's Information and Publishing Division. Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Govemment nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legat liability or resporisibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Govemment or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Arachnides 55
    The electronic publication Arachnides - Bulletin de Terrariophile et de Recherche N°55 (2008) has been archived at http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/ (repository of University Library Frankfurt, Germany). Please include its persistent identifier urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-371590 whenever you cite this electronic publication. ARACHNIDES BULLETIN DE TERRARIOPHILIE ET DE RECHERCHES DE L’A.P.C.I. (Association Pour la Connaissance des Invertébrés) 55 DECEMBRE 2008 ISSN 1148-9979 1 EDITORIAL Voici le second numéro d’Arachnides depuis sa reparution. Le numéro 54 a été bien reçu par les lecteurs, sa version électronique facilitant beaucoup sa diffusion (rapidité et gratuité !). Dans ce numéro 55, de nombreux articles informent sur de nouvelles espèces de Theraphosidae ainsi qu’un bilan des nouvelles espèces de scorpions pour l’année 2007. Les lecteurs qui auraient des articles à soumettre, peuvent nous les faire parvenir par courrier éléctronique ou à l’adresse de l’association : DUPRE, 26 rue Villebois Mareuil, 94190 Villeneuve St Geoges. Une version gratuite est donc disponible sur Internet sur simple demande par l’intermédiaire du courrier électronique : [email protected]. Les annonces de parution sont relayées sur divers sites d’Internet et dans la presse terrariophile. L’A.P.C.I. vous annonce également que la seconde exposition Natures Exotiques de Verrières-le-Buisson aura lieu les 20 et 21 juin 2009. Dès que nous aurons la liste des exposants, nous en ferons part dans un futur numéro. Gérard DUPRE. E X O N A T U R E S I Mygales Q Scorpions U Insectes E Reptiles S Plantes carnivores Cactus.....
    [Show full text]
  • March 1988 Vol
    March 1988 Vol. XIII No. 3 Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Technical Bulletin Service, Washington, D.C. 20204 Help Is On the Way for Rare Fishes of the Upper Colorado River Basin Sharon Rose and John Hamill Denver Regional Office On January 21-22, 1988, the Governors of Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah joined Secretary of the Interior Model and the Administrator of the Western Area Power Administration in signing a cooperative agreement to implement a recovery pro- gram for rare and endangered species of fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The recovery program is a milestone effort that coordinates Federal, State, and private actions to conserve the fish in a manner compatible with States' water rights allocation systems and the various interstate compacts that guide water al- location, development, and management in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The Colorado River is over 1,400 miles long, passes through two countries, and has a drainage basin of 242,000 square miles in the United States, yet it provides less water per square mile in its basin than any other major river system in the United States. Demands on this limited resource are high. The Colorado River serves 15 million people by supplying water for irrigation, hydroelectric power generation, industrial and municipal pur- poses, recreation, and fish and wildlife enhancement. The headwater streams of the Upper Colorado River originate in the Rocky and Uinta Mountains. Downstream, the main- stem river historically was characterized by silty, turbulent flows with large varia- tions in annual discharge. The native warmwater fishes adapted to this de- manding environment; however, to meet 'J.
    [Show full text]
  • (Gila Elegans) (BONY) Basic Conceptual Ecological Model for the Lower Colorado River
    Bonytail (Gila elegans) (BONY) Basic Conceptual Ecological Model for the Lower Colorado River 2018 Updates 1. Eggs & Early Larvae G1-2 R5-1 S1-2 5. Spawning 2. Fry & Adults Juveniles S5-4 G2-4 G4-4 P4-5 S2-4 S4-4 4. Established Adults G3-4 3. Newly- S3-4 Stocked SHR Adults Photo courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation March 2019 Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program Steering Committee Members Federal Participant Group California Participant Group Bureau of Reclamation California Department of Fish and Wildlife U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service City of Needles National Park Service Coachella Valley Water District Bureau of Land Management Colorado River Board of California Bureau of Indian Affairs Bard Water District Western Area Power Administration Imperial Irrigation District Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Palo Verde Irrigation District Arizona Participant Group San Diego County Water Authority Southern California Edison Company Arizona Department of Water Resources Southern California Public Power Authority Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern Arizona Game and Fish Department California Arizona Power Authority Central Arizona Water Conservation District Cibola Valley Irrigation and Drainage District Nevada Participant Group City of Bullhead City City of Lake Havasu City Colorado River Commission of Nevada City of Mesa Nevada Department of Wildlife City of Somerton Southern Nevada Water Authority City of Yuma Colorado River Commission Power Users Electrical District
    [Show full text]
  • Classification Success of Species Within the Gila Robusta Complex Using Morphometric and Meristic Characters—A Reexamination Authors: Julie Meka Carter, Matthew J
    Classification Success of Species within the Gila robusta Complex Using Morphometric and Meristic Characters—A Reexamination Authors: Julie Meka Carter, Matthew J. Clement, Andy S. Makinster, Clayton D. Crowder, and Brian T. Hickerson Source: Copeia, 106(2) : 279-291 Published By: American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists URL: https://doi.org/10.1643/CG-17-614 BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use. Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Copeia on 17 Jun 2019 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use Access provided by Arizona Game & Fish Department Copeia 106, No. 2, 2018, 279–291 Classification Success of Species within the Gila robusta Complex Using Morphometric and Meristic Characters—A Reexamination Julie Meka Carter1, Matthew J. Clement2, Andy S. Makinster3,4, Clayton D. Crowder3, and Brian T. Hickerson3,5 Three cyprinids often referred to as the Gila robusta complex, G.
    [Show full text]
  • Roundtail Chub (Gila Robusta) Status Survey of the Lower Colorado River Basin
    ROUNDTAIL CHUB (GILA ROBUSTA) STATUS SURVEY OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN Jeremy B. Voeltz, Wildlife Technician Nongame Branch, Wildlife Management Division Final Report to The Central Arizona Project Native Fish Conservation and Nonnative Aquatic Species Management and Control Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Field Office Phoenix, Arizona and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office Phoenix, Arizona Technical Report 186 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Program Manager: Terry B. Johnson Arizona Game and Fish Department 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 January 2002 CIVIL RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Commission receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration. Under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information please write to: Arizona Game and Fish Department Office of the Deputy Director, DOHQ 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 and The Office for Diversity and Civil Rights U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Room 300 Arlington, Virginia 22203 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with all provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Assessment for Restoring Fish Passage at the Price-Stubb Diversion Dam on the Colorado River Near Palisade, Color
    BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR RESTORING FISH PASSAGE AT THE PRICE-STUBB DIVERSION DAM ON THE COLORADO RIVER NEAR PALISADE, COLORADO Bureau of Reclamation Western Colorado Area Office Upper Colorado Region Grand Junction, Colorado June 2003 Price-Stubb Fish Passage Biological Assessment - 1 - Price-Stubb Diversion Dam Vicinity Map Rifle X( r e iv R o d DeBeque ra lo X( o C Loma Pa ( lis Gr and Va lley P roje ct Dive rs ion Da m X ad $Z X( Fruita e Grand X( $Z Price-Stubb Diversion Dam Junction $Z GVIC Diversion Dam and Fish Passage N # Redlands Diversion Dam S and Fish Ladder $Z G u W E n n is o n R S iv e r x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Grand Valley Project x x $Zx x Diversion Dam x . x r x C x u x a x e x t x x la x x P x x r x x e x x v i x x R x x x o x d x a x r x x o x l x x xx xx o x x C x x x x x x x x x #·x Colorado River Siphon x x %[x Ute Water Pump Plant x x x $Zx x Price-Stubb x x Interstate 70 x x x Diversion Dam S# x Palisade x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Hwy 6 x x 232.x 3 x $Zx GVIC Diversion Dam x x x x x x xx x x x x x x xx xx x and Fish Passage x x xx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Price-Stubb Fish Passage Biological Assessment - 2 - Table of Contents Page 1.1 Purpose 01 1.2 Recovery Program 02 2.1 Project Description 03 2.2 Construction 04 2.3 Operation, Maintenance and Replacement Measures 04 3.0 Federally Listed Species 04 3.1.0 Colorado River Endangered Fishes 05 3.1.1 Colorado Pikeminnow 05 3.1.2 Colorado Pikeminnow Distribution-Colorado River 06 3.1.3 Colorado Pikeminnow
    [Show full text]
  • Araneae (Spider) Photos
    Araneae (Spider) Photos Araneae (Spiders) About Information on: Spider Photos of Links to WWW Spiders Spiders of North America Relationships Spider Groups Spider Resources -- An Identification Manual About Spiders As in the other arachnid orders, appendage specialization is very important in the evolution of spiders. In spiders the five pairs of appendages of the prosoma (one of the two main body sections) that follow the chelicerae are the pedipalps followed by four pairs of walking legs. The pedipalps are modified to serve as mating organs by mature male spiders. These modifications are often very complicated and differences in their structure are important characteristics used by araneologists in the classification of spiders. Pedipalps in female spiders are structurally much simpler and are used for sensing, manipulating food and sometimes in locomotion. It is relatively easy to tell mature or nearly mature males from female spiders (at least in most groups) by looking at the pedipalps -- in females they look like functional but small legs while in males the ends tend to be enlarged, often greatly so. In young spiders these differences are not evident. There are also appendages on the opisthosoma (the rear body section, the one with no walking legs) the best known being the spinnerets. In the first spiders there were four pairs of spinnerets. Living spiders may have four e.g., (liphistiomorph spiders) or three pairs (e.g., mygalomorph and ecribellate araneomorphs) or three paris of spinnerets and a silk spinning plate called a cribellum (the earliest and many extant araneomorph spiders). Spinnerets' history as appendages is suggested in part by their being projections away from the opisthosoma and the fact that they may retain muscles for movement Much of the success of spiders traces directly to their extensive use of silk and poison.
    [Show full text]
  • VKM Rapportmal
    VKM Report 2016: 36 Assessment of the risks to Norwegian biodiversity from the import and keeping of terrestrial arachnids and insects Opinion of the Panel on Alien Organisms and Trade in Endangered species of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety Report from the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) 2016: Assessment of risks to Norwegian biodiversity from the import and keeping of terrestrial arachnids and insects Opinion of the Panel on Alien Organisms and Trade in Endangered species of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety 29.06.2016 ISBN: 978-82-8259-226-0 Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) Po 4404 Nydalen N – 0403 Oslo Norway Phone: +47 21 62 28 00 Email: [email protected] www.vkm.no www.english.vkm.no Suggested citation: VKM (2016). Assessment of risks to Norwegian biodiversity from the import and keeping of terrestrial arachnids and insects. Scientific Opinion on the Panel on Alien Organisms and Trade in Endangered species of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety, ISBN: 978-82-8259-226-0, Oslo, Norway VKM Report 2016: 36 Assessment of risks to Norwegian biodiversity from the import and keeping of terrestrial arachnids and insects Authors preparing the draft opinion Anders Nielsen (chair), Merethe Aasmo Finne (VKM staff), Maria Asmyhr (VKM staff), Jan Ove Gjershaug, Lawrence R. Kirkendall, Vigdis Vandvik, Gaute Velle (Authors in alphabetical order after chair of the working group) Assessed and approved The opinion has been assessed and approved by Panel on Alien Organisms and Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Members of the panel are: Vigdis Vandvik (chair), Hugo de Boer, Jan Ove Gjershaug, Kjetil Hindar, Lawrence R.
    [Show full text]