DOCSLIB.ORG

Revised Critical Habitat for the Santa Ana Sucker

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revised Critical Habitat for the Santa Ana Sucker 65056 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules * * * * * means that we will post any personal to the Santa Ana River below Prado Dated: November 19, 2009. information you provide us (see the Dam (Subunit 1B). (6) Specific information on the Santa Thomas L. Strickland, Public Comments section below for more information). Ana sucker, habitat conditions, and the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and presence of potential permanent barriers Parks. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim to movement in Big Tujunga Wash [FR Doc. E9–29020 Filed 12–8–09; 8:45 am] Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and (Subunit 3A), particularly between the BILLING CODE 4310–55–C Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Big Tujunga Canyon Road Bridge and Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011; the Big Tujunga Dam. See Critical Habitat Units section below. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR telephone (760) 431–9440; facsimile (760) 431–5901. If you use a (7) Specific information on in-stream Fish and Wildlife Service telecommunications device for the deaf gradient (slope) limitations of the (TDD), call the Federal Information species. In this proposed revised rule, 50 CFR Part 17 Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877–8339. we assume that Santa Ana suckers are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: unable to occupy stream sections where [FWS–R8–ES–2009–0072] the in-stream slope exceeds 7 degrees. [92210-1117-0000-B4] Public Comments See Primary Constituent Elements [RIN 1018–AW23] We intend any final action resulting (PCEs) section below. from this proposal to be as accurate and (8) Land-use designations and current Endangered and Threatened Wildlife as effective as possible. Therefore, we or planned activities in the areas and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for request comments or suggestions on this proposed as critical habitat, as well as the Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus proposed rule. We particularly seek their possible effects on proposed santaanae); Proposed Rule comments concerning: critical habitat. (1) The reasons we should or should (9) Comments or information that may AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, not revise the designation of habitat as assist us in identifying or clarifying the Interior. ‘‘critical habitat’’ under section 4 of the PCEs. See Primary Constituent ACTION: Proposed rule. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Elements section below for further amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), discussion of PCEs. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and including whether the benefit of (10) How the proposed revised critical Wildlife Service (Service), propose to designation would outweigh any threats habitat boundaries could be refined to revise the designated critical habitat for to the species caused by the designation, more closely circumscribe the areas the Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus such that the designation of critical identified as containing the features santaanae). The areas identified in this habitat is prudent. essential to the species’ conservation. proposed rule constitute a revision of (2) Specific information on: (11) Any probable economic, national- the areas designated as critical habitat • Areas that provide habitat for the security, or other impacts of designating for the Santa Ana sucker on January 4, Santa Ana sucker that we did not particular areas as critical habitat, and, 2005. In the 2005 final rule, we discuss in this proposed critical habitat in particular, any impacts on small designated 8,305 ac (3,361 ha) of critical rule, entities (e.g., small businesses or small habitat in Los Angeles County. • Areas within the geographical area governments), and the benefits of Approximately 9,605 acres (ac) (3,887 occupied by the species at the time of including or excluding areas that exhibit hectares (ha)) of habitat in the Santa listing that contain the physical and these impacts. Ana River (San Bernardino, Riverside, biological features essential to the (12) Whether any specific areas being and Orange Counties) and the San conservation of the species which may proposed as critical habitat should be Gabriel River and Big Tujunga Creek require special management excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the (Los Angeles County) in southern considerations or protection, that we Act, and whether the benefits of California fall within the boundaries of should include in the designation and potentially excluding any particular the proposed revised critical habitat reason(s) why (see Physical and area outweigh the benefits of including designation. Biological Features section below for that area under section 4(b)(2) of the further discussion.), and Act. See Exclusions section below for DATES: We will consider comments we • Areas outside the geographical area further discussion. receive on or before February 8, 2010. occupied by the species at the time of (13) The potential exclusion of We must receive requests for public listing that are essential for the Subunits 1B and 1C under section hearings, in writing, at the address conservation of the species and why. 4(b)(2) of the Act based on the benefits shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION (3) Specific information on our to the species provided by CONTACT section by January 25, 2010. proposed designation of City Creek and implementation of the Santa Ana Sucker ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the Santa Ana River above Seven Oaks Conservation Program and whether the by one of the following methods: Dam to provide habitat for future benefits of exclusion of this area • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// reintroduction of the Santa Ana sucker outweigh the benefits of including this www.regulations.gov. Follow the to augment the Santa Ana sucker area as critical habitat, and why. See instructions for submitting comments to population in the Santa Ana River. See Exclusions section below for further Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2009-0072. Critical Habitat Units section below. discussion. • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public (4) Specific information on the Santa (14) Information on any quantifiable Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R8– Ana sucker, habitat conditions, and the economic costs or benefits of the ES–2009–0072; Division of Policy and presence of physical and biological proposed revised designation of critical Directives Management; U.S. Fish and features essential for the conservation of habitat. Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, the species in Subunit 1B below Prado (15) Whether we could improve or Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. Dam. modify our approach to designating We will post all comments on http:// (5) Specific information on the critical habitat in any way to provide for www.regulations.gov. This generally sediment contribution from tributaries greater public participation and VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:54 Dec 08, 2009 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09DEP1.SGM 09DEP1 WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 65057 understanding, or to better Background Sediment loads are high in the San accommodate public concerns and It is our intent to discuss only those Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains comments. topics directly relevant to the revised (National Research Council 1996, p. 29). Our final determination concerning designation of critical habitat in this The streams that this species inhabits critical habitat for the Santa Ana sucker proposed rule. This rule incorporates are generally perennial streams with water ranging in depth from a few will take into consideration all written new information on the distribution of inches to several feet and with currents comments we receive during the the Santa Ana sucker and its habitat ranging from slight to swift (Haglund comment period, including comments within the Santa Ana River that we did and Baskin 2003, p. 2). They are also we have requested from peer reviewers, not discuss in the 2005 final critical naturally subject to periodic, severe comments we receive during a public habitat designation for this species. No flooding (Moyle 2002, p.183). However, hearing should we receive a request for new information pertaining to the decades of groundwater extraction have one, and any additional information we species’ description, life history, or lowered subsurface groundwater levels ecology was received following the 2005 receive during the 60–day comment within the historical range of the Santa final critical habitat designation for this period. Our final determination will Ana sucker (California Regional Water also consider all written comments and species; summary information relevant Quality Control Board 1995, pp. 1-4 to any additional information we receive to this species critical habitat is 1-5). In conjunction with periodic during the comment period for the draft provided below. For more information reductions in stream flows during economic analysis. All comments will on the Santa Ana sucker, refer to the extended periods of drought typical of be included in the public record for this final listing rule published in the southern California climate cycles, all rulemaking. On the basis of peer Federal Register on April 12, 2000 (65 streams that support the Santa Ana reviewer and public comments, we may, FR 19686), and the designation and sucker experience less perennial flow during the development of our final revision of critical habitat for the Santa (California Regional Water Quality determination, find that areas within Ana sucker published in the Federal Control Board 1995, p. 1–4). Flows also those proposed do not meet the Register on February 26, 2004 (69 FR fluctuate artificially, either increasing or definition of critical habitat, that some 8839), and on January 4, 2005 (70 FR decreasing in an unnatural manner as a modifications to the described 426), respectively. result of dam operations and, in some boundaries are appropriate, or that some Species Description areas, discharges from wastewater areas may be excluded from the final treatment plants. determination under section 4(b)(2) of The Santa Ana sucker is a small, Santa Ana suckers are most abundant the Act based on Secretarial discretion.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Santa Ana Sucker Habitat, Santa Ana River
    Santa Ana succker (Catostomus santaanae) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Santa Ana sucker habitat, Santa Ana River. Photo credit Christine Medak (USFWS). U.S. Fish and Wildliffee Service Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office Carlsbad, CA March 10, 2011 2011 5-Year Review for Santa Ana sucker 5-YEAR REVIEW Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed. Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing of a species as endangered or threatened is based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of a species. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process defined in the Act that includes public review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Macroparasite Study of Cypriniform fishes in the Santa Clara Drainage Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3kp0q16j Author Murray, Max DeLonais Publication Date 2019 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles Macroparasite Study of Cypriniform fishes in the Santa Clara Drainage A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Biology by Max DeLonais Murray 2019 © Copyrite by Max DeLonais Murray 2019 ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS Macroparasite Study of Cypriniform fishes in the Santa Clara Drainage by Max DeLonais Murray Master of Science in Biology University of California, Los Angeles, 2019 Professor Donald G. Buth, Chair Several species of fishes have been introduced into the Santa Clara River system in southern California, including Catostomus santaanae (Santa Ana sucker), Catostomus fumeiventris (Owens sucker), Gila orcutti (arroyo chub), and Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow). These species are known to inhabit similar ecological niches but little is known about their associated parasite fauna. Two C. fumeiventris, 35 C. santaanae, 63 hybrid catostomids, 214 G. orcutti, and 18 P. promelas were collected and necropsied in the summers of 2017 and 2018. Nine macroparasite taxa were harvested including seven native, and two nonnative parasites Schyzocotyle acheilognathi (Asian fish tapeworm) and Lernaea cyprinacea (anchor worm). Prevalence and intensity of parasites were not related to the genetic history of these catostomids. This is the first host-association record for G. orcutti with Gyrodactylus sp., S. acheilognathi, ii diplostomid metacercariae, Rhabdochona sp, Contracaecum sp., and larval acuariid cysts and for P.
    [Show full text]
  • Target Species Mapping for the Green Visions Plan
    Target Species Habitat Mapping California Quail and Mountain Quail (Callipepla californica and Oreortyx pictus) Family: Phasianidae Order: Galliformes Class: Aves WHR #: B140 and B141 Distribution: California quail are found in southern Oregon, northern Nevada, California, and Baja California, and have been introduced in other states such as Hawaii, Washington, Idaho, Colorado, and Utah (Peterson 1961). In California, they are widespread but absent from the higher elevations of the Sierra Nevada, the Cascades, the White Mountains, and the Warner Mountains, and are replaced by the related Gambel’s quail (C. gambelii) in some desert regions (Peterson 1961, Small 1994). In southern California, they are found from the Coast Range south to the Mexican border, and occur as far east as the western fringes of the Mojave and Sonoran deserts, such as in the Antelope Valley (Garrett and Dunn 1981, Small 1994). California quail range from sea level to about 5000 ft (1524 meters; Stephenson and Calcarone 1999) Mountain quail are resident from northern Washington and northern Idaho, south through parts of Oregon, northwestern Nevada, California, and northern Baja California (Peterson 1961). In southern California, mountain quail are found in nearly all of the mountain ranges west of the deserts, including the southern Coast Ranges, from the Santa Lucia Mountains south through Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, and the Peninsular Ranges south to the Mexican border (Garrot and Dunn 1981, Small 1994). In the Transverse Ranges, a small population occurs in the western Santa Monica Mountains, and larger populations occur in the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains (Small 1994). Mountain quail are found at elevations from below 2000 ft (610 meters) to over 9000 ft (2743 meters; Stephenson and Calcarone 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes As a Template for Reticulate Evolution
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2016 Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America Max Russell Bangs University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Evolution Commons, Molecular Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Bangs, Max Russell, "Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1847. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1847 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology by Max Russell Bangs University of South Carolina Bachelor of Science in Biological Sciences, 2009 University of South Carolina Master of Science in Integrative Biology, 2011 December 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. _____________________________________ Dr. Michael E. Douglas Dissertation Director _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Marlis R. Douglas Dr. Andrew J. Alverson Dissertation Co-Director Committee Member _____________________________________ Dr. Thomas F. Turner Ex-Officio Member Abstract Hybridization is neither simplistic nor phylogenetically constrained, and post hoc introgression can have profound evolutionary effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Doing Zooarchaeology As If It Mattered: Use of Faunal Data To
    In, Zooarchaeoloqy and Conseryation Biology 2004, R. Lee Lyman and Kenneth P. Cannon,-eds. pp. 25-44, The University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 2 Doing Zooarchaeologyas if It Mattered: Use of Faunal Data to AddressCurrent Issuesin Fish ConservationBiology in OwensValley, California VIRGINIA L. BUTLERAND MICHAEL G. DELACORTE "V cologists are increasingly incorporating conceptssuch as "legacy" into l::Jtheir explanations of current ecosystems(Harding et al. 1:998). This approach acknowledges that understanding the structure and function of extant ecosystems(or predicting future responsesto climate change)re- quires knowledge of historical forces that have beenoperating for decades, centuries, or longer (Foster 2.000;Moorhead et al. 1:999).Indeed, recog- nition of the needfor such long-term historical records is demonstratedby the level of National ScienceFoundation funding for the Long-Term Eco- logical Research(LTER) network (Kaiser 2.oo1:b;LTER Network 2.001:). Over 1:,1:00researcqers funded by the LTER carry out researchon 2..4des- ignated sites that have been studied;from a few years to several decades (Kaiser 2.O01:b).These studies cover a range of topics with the overall goal of "investigating ecological processesover long temporal and broad spa- tial scales" (LTER Network 2.001:).This goal is precisely that of zoo- archaeology.Yet, to our knowledge, zooarchaeologicalexpertise and data have not been incorporated into the LTER network. Our point is simply I that ecological sciencesseeking to understand the long-term properties of ecosystemshave direct accessto such information through zooarchaeology. Zooarchaeology needsto tollaborate with wildlife sciencesbecause of the increasing speedwith which habitats and biotas are being lost in the face of human population growth and habitat destruction (Minckley and Deacon 1:991:;Vitousek et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 06 Fisheries & Aquatic Resources.Pdf
    CHAPTER 6 Fisheries and Aquatic Resources CHAPTER 6 FISHERIES AND AQUATIC RESOURCES This chapter describes the existing fisheries and aquatic resources conditions, the applicable regulations, and potential impacts from implementation of the Proposed Project Alternative and other alternatives on the fisheries and aquatic resources in the Project Area. 6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING This section describes the environmental setting related to fisheries and aquatic resources that may be influenced by implementation of the Proposed Project Alternative or other alternatives in the Project Area including Lake Mary, Mammoth Creek extending from Lake Mary to its confluence with Hot Creek, and Hot Creek from its confluence with Mammoth Creek downstream to the USGS Hot Creek Flume Gage. 6.1.1 LAKE MARY Lake Mary is a cirque lake (a deep, steep-walled basin on a mountain) formed by the filling of remnant moraine depressions left by receding glaciers (USGS 1999). Lake Mary contains prominent granite features, and cold, clear water, making it a popular angling destination. A "fishing enhancement" program is implemented by both the Town of Mammoth Lakes and CDFG to maintain the lake’s appeal as a “trophy” trout destination. The recreational fishery in Lake Mary is maintained by both the Town of Mammoth Lakes and CDFG because of its economic importance to the Mammoth Lakes Basin (Mammoth City Concierge 2010). Lake Mary has been, and continues to be managed as a put-and-take recreational fishery. Hatchery rainbow trout have been regularly planted by CDFG beginning in the late spring and extending through the summer. The lake also is often planted with “Alpers trout.” The Alpers trout is a genetic hybrid of rainbow trout, Kamloops trout and steelhead, raised in the streams and ponds of Alpers Owens River Ranch.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    Joey Steil From: Leslie Jordan <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 1:13 PM To: Angela Ruberto Subject: Potential Environmental Beneficial Users of Surface Water in Your GSA Attachments: Paso Basin - County of San Luis Obispo Groundwater Sustainabilit_detail.xls; Field_Descriptions.xlsx; Freshwater_Species_Data_Sources.xls; FW_Paper_PLOSONE.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S1.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S2.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S3.pdf; FW_Paper_PLOSONE_S4.pdf CALIFORNIA WATER | GROUNDWATER To: GSAs We write to provide a starting point for addressing environmental beneficial users of surface water, as required under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA seeks to achieve sustainability, which is defined as the absence of several undesirable results, including “depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial users of surface water” (Water Code §10721). The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is a science-based, nonprofit organization with a mission to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends. Like humans, plants and animals often rely on groundwater for survival, which is why TNC helped develop, and is now helping to implement, SGMA. Earlier this year, we launched the Groundwater Resource Hub, which is an online resource intended to help make it easier and cheaper to address environmental requirements under SGMA. As a first step in addressing when depletions might have an adverse impact, The Nature Conservancy recommends identifying the beneficial users of surface water, which include environmental users. This is a critical step, as it is impossible to define “significant and unreasonable adverse impacts” without knowing what is being impacted. To make this easy, we are providing this letter and the accompanying documents as the best available science on the freshwater species within the boundary of your groundwater sustainability agency (GSA).
    [Show full text]
  • Owens Basin Wetland and Aquatic Species Recovery Plan Lnyo and Mono Counties,California OWENS BASIN WETLAND and AQUATIC SPECIES RECOVERY PLAN
    Owens Basin Wetland and Aquatic Species Recovery Plan lnyo and Mono Counties,California OWENS BASIN WETLAND AND AQUATIC SPECIES RECOVERY PLAN INYG AND MONO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA Owens pupfish, Owens tui chub, and Fish Slough milk-vetch and Selected Species of Concern Region I U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon Approved: U.S. ish and Wildlife Service Date: Cooperators r Concurred ~ .L~ ~zz:~~;WN ~ Director, California Department of Fish and Game Concurred K2) ~ C)\\Q~~~ \ CN ~N State Director, U.S. Bureau of Lana Management Concurred Regional ii DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), and sometimes prepared with the assistance ofrecovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and 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 do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or approval ofany individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. LITERATURE CITATIONS The literature citation for this recovery plan should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [Show full text]
  • A List of Freshwater, Anadromous, and Euryhaline Fishes of California
    CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME California Fish and Game 86(4):244-258 2000 A LIST OF FRESHWATER, ANADROMOUS, AND EURYHALINE FISHES OF CALIFORNIA PETER B. MOYLE Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology University of California, Davis 1 Shields Avenue Davis, California 95616 e-mail: pbmoyle @ ucdavis.edu LIAM H. DAVIS California Department of Fish and Game 7329 Silverado Trail Yountville, California 94558 The freshwater fishes of California include 67 native resident or anadromous species, 53 non-native species, and 5 marine species that occur in fresh water, for a total of 125 species. Within these species, 100 taxa at lower levels (subspecies, Evolutionary Significant Units, runs of anadromous fish) are recognized. The number of freshwater fish species in California is increasing due to invasions of non-native fishes, which are becoming established at a rate of about 1 species every 3 years. Of the native fishes, 5 full species are extinct in California. Thus, the actual number of species maintaining populations in the state is 120. Of extant native species, 15 (22%) are threatened with extinction in the near future. Only 27 native species (40%) can be regarded as having secure populations. INTRODUCTION The fishes of California’s inland waters are a mixture of resident, anadromous, and euryhaline species, both native and non-native. The first attempt to compile a comprehensive list of these species was Evermann and Clark (1931), who listed 78 native species and 32 introduced species. Native species included an anomalous Pacific hagfish, Epatretus stouti, from the Eel River, 14 forms all now considered to be rainbow trout, and 18 other forms that are either no longer recognized as species or were mistakenly considered to be part of the California fish fauna.
    [Show full text]
  • Prado Basin Sediment Management Demonstration Project Biological Conditions Technical Report
    PRADO BASIN SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT BIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS TECHNICAL REPORT Prepared By Orange County Water District 18700 Ward Street Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Contact: Richard Zembal Daniel Bott July 2013 Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................1-1 2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ................................................................ 2-1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Regional Setting ................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Local Setting ......................................................................................... 3-3 3.3 Relevant Biological Resource Management Programs ......................... 3-8 4.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ....................................................................4-1 4.1 Methodology ......................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Vegetation Communities ....................................................................... 4-3 4.3 Sensitive Communities/Special Status Plants ..................................... 4-11 4.4 Wildlife ................................................................................................4-19 4.5 Wildlife Movement Corridors ............................................................... 4-51 5.0 SUMMARY OF BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................... 5-1 6.0
    [Show full text]
  • Owens Tui Chub (Siphateles Bicolor Snyderi), Which Is Listed As an Endangered Species Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA)
    Item No. 17 STAFF SUMMARY FOR DECEMBER 9-10, 2020 17. OWEN'S TUI CHUB (CONSENT) Today’s Item Information ☒ Action ☐ Receive the DFW’s five-year status review report for Owens tui chub (Siphateles bicolor snyderi), which is listed as an endangered species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Summary of Previous/Future Actions • Determined listing Owen’s tui chub 1974 as endangered was warranted • Today receive DFW’s five-year Dec 9-10, 2020; Webinar/Teleconference status review report • DFW presentation Feb 10-11, 2021 Background Owen’s tui chub is a moderate-sized freshwater fish endemic to the Owens Basin in eastern- central California, near the communities of Mammoth Lakes, Bishop, Big Pine, and Lone Pine. Owen’s tui chub was listed as an endangered species in California by FGC in 1974, pursuant to CESA, and is included in FGC’s list of endangered animals (Section 670.5). Pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 2077, upon the allocation of specific funding, DFW must reevaluate threatened and endangered species every five years by conducting a status review to determine whether conditions that led to the original listing are still present or have changed. The last status review for Owen’s tui chub was completed in 2009 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); DFW makes an effort to coordinate such reviews with USFWS when species are listed under both the state and federal endangered species acts. Today, DFW provides a 2020 status review report of Owen’s tui chub in California, which updates descriptions, habitat requirements, threats, research needs, and other topics for this species (Exhibit 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Nutritional Physiology of the Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus Santaanae): a Threatened Freshwater Fish Endemic to Southern California
    Received: 23 July 2019 | Revised: 14 December 2019 | Accepted: 7 January 2020 DOI: 10.1111/azo.12320 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Nutritional physiology of the Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae): A threatened freshwater fish endemic to Southern California Bao-Quang Nguyen-Phuc1 | Carl Demetropoulos2 | Sam Stewart2 | Parsa Saffarinia3 | José Bastian Salgado4 | Elin Hawkins1 | Alyssa R. Frederick1 | Donovan P. German1 1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine, Abstract California The herbivorous fish Catostomus santaanae is a federally “threatened” freshwater 2Southwest Aquatic & Terrestrial Biology, fish species endemic to southern California and is the centre of legal battles over Thousand Oaks, California water use. Because little is known about the nutritional ecology of this species, we 3Department of Evolution, Ecology, investigated the nutritional physiology of C. santaanae to better understand their & Organismal Biology, University of California, Riverside, California dietary and energetic needs with the goal of generating data useful in conservation 4Department of Biology, California efforts. Individuals of C. santaanae were raised for six weeks on an algal diet in Lutheran University, Thousand Oaks, the laboratory. They digested approximately 45%, 55% and 80% of protein, solu- California ble carbohydrate and lipid, respectively, from the algal diet. Their metabolic rate −1 −1 Correspondence (~0.0024 mg O2 min g ) suggested they would need to eat more than their body Donovan P. German, Department of mass per day of an algal diet to thrive. Digestive enzyme activities of the laboratory- Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697. reared and wild-caught fish showed patterns typical of a “plug-flow reactor” gut Email: [email protected] with high intake and rapid gut transit.
    [Show full text]