Difference between revisions of "Species of Management Concern"
Cellsworth (Talk | contribs) |
Cellsworth (Talk | contribs) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<p class=MsoNormal> | <p class=MsoNormal> | ||
| − | [[File:Kanab Ambersnail- EP.jpg|thumb]] | + | [[File:Kanab Ambersnail- EP.jpg|center|thumb]] |
</p> | </p> | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
of management concern in the CRE: A review of information about an | of management concern in the CRE: A review of information about an | ||
assessment of the status of habitat needs and availability, and ecosystem | assessment of the status of habitat needs and availability, and ecosystem | ||
| − | roles of the species.” [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | roles of the species.” [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2011-08-24-amwg-meeting/Attach_05.pdf] |
'''Endangered or Previously Listed TMC:''' A total of 18 taxa (21 percent of the TMC) are | '''Endangered or Previously Listed TMC:''' A total of 18 taxa (21 percent of the TMC) are | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
Tribes, either through the ESA, through separate federal legislation, or through state or Tribal | Tribes, either through the ESA, through separate federal legislation, or through state or Tribal | ||
recognition. Among these 18 taxa are at least 10 extant endangered species exist in the CRE, | recognition. Among these 18 taxa are at least 10 extant endangered species exist in the CRE, | ||
| − | including: 1 terrestrial gastropod, 1 fish species, 4 bird species, and several | + | including: 1 terrestrial gastropod, 1 fish species, 4 bird species, and several incidentally occurring |
listed bird taxa (Appendix A). <br> | listed bird taxa (Appendix A). <br> | ||
| + | |||
'''Non-listed Extirpated, Declining, and At-risk TMC:''' Extirpated or at-risk species that are not | '''Non-listed Extirpated, Declining, and At-risk TMC:''' Extirpated or at-risk species that are not | ||
federally listed make up the majority of the TMC in the CRE. These species include all of the | federally listed make up the majority of the TMC in the CRE. These species include all of the | ||
| Line 56: | Line 57: | ||
Council, Inc. 2009). However, the quality of status and distribution data on at least 52 (61 | Council, Inc. 2009). However, the quality of status and distribution data on at least 52 (61 | ||
percent) of the TMC was inadequate to determine management needs or options for many rare | percent) of the TMC was inadequate to determine management needs or options for many rare | ||
| − | taxa, including plant, invertebrate, herpetofaunal (especially amphibians and snakes), | + | taxa, including plant, invertebrate, herpetofaunal (especially amphibians and snakes), mammal, |
and migratory bird and bat taxa. <br> | and migratory bird and bat taxa. <br> | ||
| + | |||
'''Non-Native Species:''' Although the focus of this report is on native TMC, we note the presence of | '''Non-Native Species:''' Although the focus of this report is on native TMC, we note the presence of | ||
several hundred non-native taxa (particularly plants, fish, several invertebrates, and several | several hundred non-native taxa (particularly plants, fish, several invertebrates, and several | ||
birds), which interact with native species in complex fashions and play important ecological | birds), which interact with native species in complex fashions and play important ecological | ||
roles in the CRE. A more comprehensive ecosystem-based understanding of the role of nonnative | roles in the CRE. A more comprehensive ecosystem-based understanding of the role of nonnative | ||
| − | species is warranted, but is beyond the scope of this report. [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | species is warranted, but is beyond the scope of this report. [https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2011-08-24-amwg-meeting/Attach_05.pdf] |
|}<!-- | |}<!-- | ||
| Line 103: | Line 105: | ||
=='''Birds'''== | =='''Birds'''== | ||
| + | *[http://gcdamp.com/index.php?title=Southwestern_Willow_Flycatcher-_EP Southwestern Willow Flycatcher] | ||
*California Condor | *California Condor | ||
*Mexican Spotted Owl | *Mexican Spotted Owl | ||
| Line 132: | Line 135: | ||
*Tamarisk and Tamarisk leaf-beetles | *Tamarisk and Tamarisk leaf-beetles | ||
*Camel thorn | *Camel thorn | ||
| − | |||
|} | |} | ||
| − | |||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
| Line 154: | Line 155: | ||
|style="color:#000;"| | |style="color:#000;"| | ||
| − | + | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2011-08-24-amwg-meeting/Attach_03.pdf Litigation Updates (HR 1719, S1224, HR1144, FRN on Grand Canyon Cave Pseudoscorpion, and FWS Critical Habitat on SWWF)] | |
| − | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2011-08-24-amwg-meeting/Attach_05.pdf Species of Concern and PPT] |
| − | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2011-06-28-twg-meeting/Attach_09a.pdf GCWC Draft White Paper: AMP Goal 3 White Paper, "Assessment of Taxa of Management Concern in the Colorado River Ecosystem, Glen and Grand Canyons, Arizona, USA: Habitat Needs, Availability, and Ecosystem Roles Draft Final Report 15 June 2011] |
| − | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/twg/2011-06-28-twg-meeting/Attach_09b.pdf AMP Goal 3: Assessing Restoration Potential of Taxa of Management Concern in the Colorado River Ecosystem Downstream from Glen Canyon Dam PPT] |
| − | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/amp/amwg/2009-04-29-amwg-meeting/Attach_12b.pdf Extirpated or At-risk Species in the Colorado River Ecosystem Downstream from Glen Canyon Dam PPT] |
| − | *[https://www.usbr.gov/uc/ | + | |
|- | |- | ||
| Line 167: | Line 167: | ||
*[[Media:141007 SMCAHG PPT-opt.pdf| Species of Management Concern AHG PPT]] | *[[Media:141007 SMCAHG PPT-opt.pdf| Species of Management Concern AHG PPT]] | ||
| − | *Final Minutes of August 24-25, 2010 Meeting:(page 20) | + | *Final Minutes of August 24-25, 2010 Meeting:(page 20) "NPS 2006 Management Policies; maintaining, enhancing and where practical, restoring native species, natural habitats, and natural ecosystems processes..." |
*[[Media:110715 Assessment of Taxa of Management Concern- White Paper- AMP goal 3.PDF| Assessment of Taxa of Management Concern- White Paper- AMP goal 3]] | *[[Media:110715 Assessment of Taxa of Management Concern- White Paper- AMP goal 3.PDF| Assessment of Taxa of Management Concern- White Paper- AMP goal 3]] | ||
*There are 11 plants and animals that are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act and 68 species that are recognized as species of special or management concern. | *There are 11 plants and animals that are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act and 68 species that are recognized as species of special or management concern. | ||
Latest revision as of 11:42, 25 January 2022
|
Taxa of Management Concern (TMC)April 2009 motion: Endangered or Previously Listed TMC: A total of 18 taxa (21 percent of the TMC) are
presently, or recently have been federally or state-protected, or are of specific importance to
Tribes, either through the ESA, through separate federal legislation, or through state or Tribal
recognition. Among these 18 taxa are at least 10 extant endangered species exist in the CRE,
including: 1 terrestrial gastropod, 1 fish species, 4 bird species, and several incidentally occurring
listed bird taxa (Appendix A). Non-listed Extirpated, Declining, and At-risk TMC: Extirpated or at-risk species that are not
federally listed make up the majority of the TMC in the CRE. These species include all of the
above taxa. A total of 46 (53.5 percent) of all TMC had restoration potential scores >50,
suggesting that they may warrant management attention, including research, monitoring, or
restoration. For example, Goodding’s willow (Salix gooddingii) has disappeared from numerous
localities at which it occurred at and before 1963, with loss related to beaver foraging and postdam
recruitment failure driven by coarsened grain size (Stevens 1989, Grand Canyon Wildlands
Council, Inc. 2009). However, the quality of status and distribution data on at least 52 (61
percent) of the TMC was inadequate to determine management needs or options for many rare
taxa, including plant, invertebrate, herpetofaunal (especially amphibians and snakes), mammal,
and migratory bird and bat taxa. Non-Native Species: Although the focus of this report is on native TMC, we note the presence of several hundred non-native taxa (particularly plants, fish, several invertebrates, and several birds), which interact with native species in complex fashions and play important ecological roles in the CRE. A more comprehensive ecosystem-based understanding of the role of nonnative species is warranted, but is beyond the scope of this report. [2] |
| --- |
--- |
--- |
|---|
|
