Piping Plover - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.3.2 Listing history FR notice: 50 FR 50726, Determination of Endangered and Threatened Status for Piping Plover Date listed: Rule published December 11, 1985; effective January 10, 1986 Entity listed: Piping plover (Charadrius melodus), listed rangewide Classification: Endangered (Great Lakes watershed in States of IL, IN, MI, MN, NY, OH, PA, and WI and Province of Ontario) and Threatened (Entire, except those areas where listed as endangered) 1.3.3 Associated rulemakings Critical habitat for the Great Lakes breeding population: Designated May 7, 2001 (66 FR 22938). Includes 35 units along approximately 201 miles of shoreline in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York. Critical habitat for the Northern Great Plains breeding population: Designated September 11, 2002 (67 FR 57637). Nineteen critical habitat units originally contained approximately 183,422 acres of prairie alkali wetlands, inland and reservoir lakes, and portions of four rivers totaling approximately 1,207.5 river miles in Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Minnesota. The Nebraska portion of the critical habitat was vacated by U.S. District Court on October 13, 2005. Critical habitat for wintering piping plovers (including individuals from the Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains breeding populations as well as birds that nest along the Atlantic Coast): Designated on July 10, 2001 (66 FR 36038). Designated wintering piping plover critical habitat originally included 142 areas (the rule erroneously states 137 units) encompassing about 1,793 miles of mapped shoreline and 165,211 acres of mapped areas along the coasts of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. In 2004, the Courts vacated and remanded back to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for reconsideration four units within Cape Hatteras National Seashore, North Carolina (Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance v. U.S. Department of Interior (344 F. Supp. 2d 108 (D.D.C. 2004)). A revised designation for these four units was published on October 21, 2008 (73 FR 62816). On February 6, 2009, Cape Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance and Dare and Hyde counties, North Carolina, filed a legal challenge to the revised designation. In 2006, 19 units (TX- 3,4,7-10, 14-19, 22, 23, 27,28, and 31-33) in Texas were vacated and remanded back to the USFWS for reconsideration by Court order (Texas General Land Office v. U.S. Department of Interior (Case No. V-06-CV-00032)). On May 19, 2009, the USFWS published a final rule designating 18 revised critical habitat units in Texas, totaling approximately 139,029 acres (74 FR 23476). 2
1.3.4 Review history The piping plover was included in a cursory 5-year review of all species listed before 1991(56 FR 56882). No new information regarding piping plover status was received, nor was a change in status recommended. This review constitutes the first species-specific 5year review of the piping plover since its listing. 1.3.5 Species’ Recovery Priority Number at start of 5-year review 2C. This ranking refers to an entity listed at the species level with a high degree of threat and high recovery potential. The “C” denotes taxa that are in conflict with construction, other development projects, or other forms of economic activity. 1.3.6 Recovery plans Name: Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) Atlantic Coast Population, Revised Recovery Plan Date issued: May 1996 Date of previous plan: March 1988 Name: Recovery Plan for the Great Lakes Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) Date issued: September 2003 Date of previous plan: Supersedes pertinent portions of the 1988 Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan Name: Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan 1 Date issued: May 1988 1 Because the sections of this plan that pertain to the Great Lakes breeding population have been superseded by the 2003 recovery plan, the 1988 plan is generally referred to as the Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan, a convention that we follow in this review. 3
Page 1: Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus)
Page 4 and 5: NGP 2.4.4 Synthesis ……………
Page 6 and 7: Table AC1. Tier 2 (project-specific
Page 9: 1.1 Reviewers Review Team (primary
Page 14 and 15: 2.1 TAXONOMIC CLASSIFICATION AND AP
Page 16 and 17: Table 1. Number of piping plover ad
Page 18 and 19: population segment to the species t
Page 20 and 21: eeding adults (unpubl. data from Ma
Page 22 and 23: Piping plovers in both the U.S. and
Page 24 and 25: Evaluation of the persistence of th
Page 26 and 27: clarification of the listing would
Page 28 and 29: Lingle, G. R. and J.G. Sidle. 1989.
Page 30 and 31: Goossen, J.P. 2008. Discussion info
Page 32 and 33: Figure WM1. Breeding population dis
Page 34 and 35: Coast, suggests that shared over-wi
Page 36 and 37: in December 2006 to peak counts of
Page 38 and 39: drawn attention to washover passes,
Page 40 and 41: Gulf of Mexico region (Helmers 1992
Page 42 and 43: At least 668 of 2,340 coastal shore
Page 44 and 45: Table WM4. Number of recent groin i
Page 46 and 47: Tilling beaches to reduce soil comp
Page 48 and 49: While public lands may not be at ri
Page 50 and 51: crouching when in the presence of a
Page 52 and 53: insufficiency of regulations to pro
Page 54 and 55: inlet where off-road vehicle use is
Page 56 and 57: consultation was concluded informal
Page 58 and 59: In sum, although the risk for impac
Page 60 and 61:
accelerated habitat changes, there
Page 62 and 63:
wrack. Another example of indirect
Page 64 and 65:
Brault, S. 2007. Population viabili
Page 66 and 67:
Gibson, M., C.W. Nathan, A.K. Killi
Page 68 and 69:
Lott, C.A., P.A. Durkee, W.A. Gierh
Page 70 and 71:
Roche, E.A., J.B. Cohen, D.H. Catli
Page 72 and 73:
USFWS. 2008c. Biological opinion on
Page 74 and 75:
Farley, R. 2009. Phone conversation
Page 76 and 77:
GL 2.3 UPDATED INFORMATION AND CURR
Page 78 and 79:
Habitat degradation and loss contin
Page 80 and 81:
commitments to implementation. Incr
Page 82 and 83:
average rate of 1.76 (Stucker et al
Page 84 and 85:
GL 2.3.2.4 Taxonomic classification
Page 86 and 87:
4% 28% 13% Great Lakes Region 78 Fe
Page 88 and 89:
GL 2.3.3 Five-factor analysis In th
Page 90 and 91:
GL 2.3.3.2 Factor B. Overutilizatio
Page 92 and 93:
plovers. As predation by merlins is
Page 94 and 95:
acknowledged that a large percentag
Page 96 and 97:
Several years of population growth
Page 98 and 99:
Roche, E.A., J.B. Cohen, D.H. Catli
Page 100 and 101:
Recovery Criterion A. Number of bir
Page 102 and 103:
Recovery Criterion C. The Canadian
Page 104 and 105:
Piping Plover Pairs 900 800 700 600
Page 106 and 107:
Piping Plover Pairs 600 500 400 300
Page 108 and 109:
NGP 2.4.2 Biology and habitat Since
Page 110 and 111:
the population trend for the entire
Page 112 and 113:
year period on average. The upper b
Page 114 and 115:
International Piping Plover Census
Page 116 and 117:
Individual Ploves Surveyed 1200 100
Page 118 and 119:
provide sandbar habitat for plover
Page 120 and 121:
etween available acres, plover abun
Page 122 and 123:
Alkali lakes As on the Missouri Riv
Page 124 and 125:
occurs in the middle of the season,
Page 126 and 127:
Freshening of water on saline wetla
Page 128 and 129:
nation for wind energy potential, a
Page 130 and 131:
The 1988 recovery plan suggests the
Page 132 and 133:
In addition, the states in which pi
Page 134 and 135:
2009). Overhead power lines have be
Page 136 and 137:
difficult to ascertain, because the
Page 138 and 139:
NGP 2.4.5 Section references Americ
Page 140 and 141:
Haig, S., T. Eubanks, R. Lock, J. S
Page 142 and 143:
National Research Council. 2004. En
Page 144 and 145:
USACE. 2008b. Northwestern Division
Page 146 and 147:
Mulhern, D. 2008. Electronic mail d
Page 148 and 149:
Recovery Criterion 1. Increase and
Page 150 and 151:
Recovery Criterion 4. Institute lon
Page 152 and 153:
Productivity Annual productivity es
Page 154 and 155:
anded as adults exhibited fidelity
Page 156 and 157:
half of the Southern recovery unit
Page 158 and 159:
a third of the approximately 2.5-mi
Page 160 and 161:
adverse effects (including indirect
Page 162 and 163:
(2002; 2003). Permit conditions res
Page 164 and 165:
Table AC1. Tier 2 (project-specific
Page 166 and 167:
Habitat restoration efforts Efforts
Page 168 and 169:
each-nesting birds. Examples of sit
Page 170 and 171:
New Jersey state regulations protec
Page 172 and 173:
often place their nests near cobble
Page 174 and 175:
approximately five miles off the co
Page 176 and 177:
increased coastal storm activity an
Page 178 and 179:
However, all of the major threats (
Page 180 and 181:
Calvert, A.M., D.L. Amirault, F. Sh
Page 182 and 183:
Jones, K. 1997. Piping plover habit
Page 184 and 185:
National Park Service. 2008b. Pipin
Page 186 and 187:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 200
Page 188 and 189:
Hoeh, J. 2009. February 13, 2009 em
Page 190 and 191:
182
Page 192 and 193:
3.2 Recommended Recovery Priority N
Page 194 and 195:
186
Page 196 and 197:
processes are impeded. Compare with
Page 198 and 199:
a. Continue to encourage and improv
Page 200 and 201:
Recommended research and data needs
Page 202 and 203:
increases flow velocity and thus sa
Page 204 and 205:
5. Conduct studies to understand po
Page 206:
198
Page 209 and 210:
Appendix A The outside experts and
Page 211 and 212:
Appendix B Estimated abundance of b
Page 213 and 214:
Appendix C Wind turbine generator (
show all

Piping Plover - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?