Biological Assessment Sample Clauses
Biological Assessment. This section provides a concise overview of the taxonomy, life history, demography, population trends, distribution and ecology of the species. Summarized information from the most relevant and authoritative sources 1 The AEWA Conservation Status Report provides population trend estimates of the biogeographical populations and should be used as the reference/starting point: ▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇- ▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇_▇▇▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇_▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇_▇▇▇▇▇▇_▇▇▇▇▇▇_▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇ should be used to describe clearly the key characteristics of the population concerned. Extensive detail should, however, be avoided and graphic presentation should be used wherever possible. Where relevant and necessary, the information included in the overview may be further clarified by results from ringing schemes, satellite telemetry, stable isotope analysis, and distribution surveys. One or more map(s) of key stages of the life cycle (eg breeding and non- breeding distribution, flyways, key stopover sites, historical range) should be included to illustrate the information above (BirdLife produced species’ range maps can be used if appropriate). For plans for species that are huntable in the EU, a web link should be added to the dates of spring migration and breeding on the European Commission website1. If the species is hunted, information about the harvested numbers becomes essential for management and should be included, where available2. The following information on population size and trend by country should be presented as Table 2: • Breeding numbers. Specify if pairs or individuals. The same unit should be used for all breeding countries. • Quality: Good = Reliable quantitative data available (eg atlas, survey or monitoring data) for the whole period and country. Medium = generally well known, but only poor or incomplete quantitative data available. Poor = Poorly known with no quantitative data available. Unknown = information on quality not available. • Breeding population trend in the last 10 years (or three generations). If possible, provide the actual trend (in %) or use the following (with + or - according to direction): 0-19%; 20-29%; 30-49%; 50-79%; >80% or “unknown” when data is lacking. For some species, actual percentage values may not be known due to insufficient data, and the use of categories should be based on the best available data or expert judgement. • Migration or non-breeding numbers: numbers in individuals. • Use separate tables for each biogeographic popula...
Biological Assessment. If, during preparation of the NES-MI, the project is determined to have the potential to result in adverse effects to a federally listed species or critical habitat that necessitate mitigation, preparation of a BA will be required. The BA shall be prepared to evaluate the potential impacts to species that are listed as threatened, endangered, or candidate species under the FESA. The BA shall be prepared in accordance with the legal requirement founds in Section 7(a)(2) of the FESA (16 United States Code [USC] 1536(c) and shall follow the latest template in the Caltrans SER.
Biological Assessment. Although the project area is highly urbanized, the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) shows occurrences of federally listed San Francisco garter snake and western snowy plover within 1 mile, and the Maple Street drainage may provide habitat for those and other species. CONSULTANT will identify species with potential to occur in the project area based on a review of the CNDDB, the California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory, USFWS species lists, and previous studies. CONSULTANT will conduct one focused reconnaissance-level survey of the biotic resources of the project area to characterize its plant and animal communities. Species presence will be evaluated based on the survey, records information, and existing available documentation on species presence from biological studies previously performed in the project vicinity. This scope does not include protocol-level surveys for special-status plants and animals or surveys over multiple seasons. CONSULTANT will prepare a Biological Assessment in accordance with Caltrans District 4 standards. If the USFWS indicates in the project field meeting that compensatory mitigation would be needed for impacts to federally listed species, CONSULTANT will include conceptual-level mitigation options in the Biological Assessment. Detailed mitigation plans are not proposed in this scope of services. USFWS normally prepares the Biological Opinion based on the Biological Assessment; CONSULTANT is therefore not assuming preparation of the Opinion. Although Redwood Creek provides habitat for fish, no project activities would take place there. Drainages in the project area do not appear to support fisheries. A separate Biological Assessment for NOAA Fisheries is therefore not proposed and is assumed to not be required. Any aquatic habitat and aquatic species will therefore only be addressed briefly in the project’s Natural Environment Study.
Biological Assessment. The population of Svalbard pink-footed geese is well studied, with monitoring of several variables to support an international species management plan. For an overview of ongoing monitoring activities, see Appendix 1.
2.1 Taxonomy and biogeographic populations Phylum: Chordata Class: Aves Order: Anseriformes Family: Anatidae Genus: Anser (Linnaeus 1769) Species: Anser brachyrhynchus (Baillon 1834) Biogeographical population: Svalbard
1). On the basis of ring recoveries and resightings of neck-banded individuals, it has been estimated that there is an exchange of individuals between the two populations of 0.1- 0.7% per year (Ebbinge et al. 1984; ▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. 1999). The exchange seems to increase in severe ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ such as in 1995/96, 1996/97 and particularly 2009/10 when there was snow cover for an extended period from Denmark to Belgium (▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ unpubl. data). Analyses of mtDNA from individuals from the two populations show that there is significant genetic differentiation between populations which confirms that there is a low rate of gene flow, highest from the Svalbard population towards the Iceland/Greenland population (Ruokonen et al. 2005).
Fig. 1. The Svalbard pink-footed goose flyway and range states (copyright NINA, Norway).
2.2 Distribution throughout the annual cycle Breeding: According to ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (1963), Norderhaug (1971) and Mehlum (1998) most pinkfeet breed in western Svalbard (primarily Spitsbergen); searches for nesting geese in the eastern parts only gave negative results, despite the fact that suitable habitat was available. The lack of pinkfeet in the eastern parts was thought to be due to late snow melt. On the basis of existing data (compiled from literature sources, reports and personal communication with experienced observers), an update of the distribution of geese in Svalbard has recently been made, providing distribution maps of geese during pre-nesting, nesting, brood-rearing, moulting and post-hatching (Tombre et al. 2010). This shows that pinkfeet are primarily distributed in the lowlands on the west side of Spitsbergen and the fjord systems, but they also now breed in the east, mainly on the west side of Edgeøya, as well as dispersed in the north of Svalbard (Fig. 2). Pinkfeet are now also numerous breeders on Bear Island in the Barents Sea; the exact numbers breeding on the island is uncertain but estimated to be in the hundreds (G. Bangjord pers. comm.). This is probably a recent phenomenon, since it was not previously ...
Biological Assessment. The bridge project will a Biological Assessment and consultation with the USFWS because past surveys have found California red- legged frogs and tadpoles in the West Branch of ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Slough and because the Santa Cruz long-toed salamander is assumed to be present in the project area. ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ will coordinate with the USFWS to discuss California red-legged frog, Santa Cruz long-toed salamander, and other federally listed species that may be affected by the project and to determine the most efficient approach for achieving ESA Section 7 compliance. At this time, it is not known whether be required on listed species in addition to California red- . legged frog and Santa Cruz long-toed salamander. If additional consultation is required, the scope of work and cost estimate will need to be reviewed and possibly revised..
Biological Assessment. If the results of the biological survey conducted during the CEQA phase (Task F) identify that federally listed species (e.g., California red-legged frog, central California coast steelhead DPS) or Critical Habitat (e.g., for central California coast steelhead DPS) may be affected by the project, ESA will prepare a joint USFWS/NMFS Biological Assessment (BA), as appropriate, to assess the effects of the project (based on approved 60% designs) and to support the USACE as the federal lead agency in completing Section 7 Consultation with the appropriate federal resource agencies (USFWS and/or NMFS). Conservation measures utilized in the BA will incorporate avoidance and minimization measures from applicable, species-specific programmatic biological opinions (e.g., Programmatic Biological Opinion for Projects Funded or Approved under the Federal
Biological Assessment. Buyer at Buyer's sole expense may conduct --------------------- a biological survey assessment for Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly and/or San Bernardino County Kangaroo Rat on the Property. Neither Buyer nor Seller will seek an U.S. Fish and Wildlife clearance letter. In addition, Buyer shall have the right to review biological information pertaining to the Property in Seller's possession; provided, however, all such information shall be deemed confidential in accordance with Section 11.12
Biological Assessment. General Information The Madagascar Pond-heron Ardeola idae is a small (45-48 cm) white heron with reddish legs. In breeding plumage it is all white, with long crest and scapular plumes. It has a blue bill and bare orbital skin, the former with dark tip. In non-breeding plumage, it is dark brown on crown and streaked dark brownish on mantle and underparts. It is found singly or in small groups, often with Squacco Heron A. ralloides or egrets. It nests colonially with other herons. It is listed as Endangered in the 2008 IUCN Red List because it has a very small population that is undergoing a continuing decline as a result of many of its breeding colonies being heavily and increasingly exploited for eggs and young (BirdLife International 2008). This exploitation is exacerbated by pressures on its wetland habitats. Currently, the Madagascar Pond-heron is listed in Appendix II (Migratory species conserved through Agreements) of CMS1 and in Column A, Categories 1b and 1c of the AEWA Table 12. Taxonomy and systematics Phylum: Chordata Class: Aves Order: Ciconiiformes Suborder: Ardeae Family: Ardeidae Subfamily: Ardeinae Genus: Ardeola (▇▇▇▇) Species: Ardeola idae (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1860) Ardea idae ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1860. Journal of. Orn. 8, p. 167; east coast of Madagascar. Alternative names: Malagasy Pond Heron, Madagascar Squacco Heron Taxonomic sources: ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇ (1993), ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ (1990, 1993) Population development There is one population which breeds in small colonies in many places in Madagascar (▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ per ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2002), on Aldabra, where the main known breeding site is Ile aux Aigrettes (Betts 2002), in Mayotte (2 breeding sites known: ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ com. pers.) and on the atoll of Europa in the Mozambique Channel. ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (per ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2002) believes that colony size in Madagascar is often less than 10 pairs, and there might be 100-200 colonies or perhaps substantially less, giving a maximum estimate of some 6000 birds, and minimum of 2000. One of the highest counts is 1 Migratory species that have an unfavourable conservation status or would benefit significantly from international co-operation organised by tailored agreements are listed in Appendix II to CMS. For this reason, the Convention encourages the Range States to conclude global or regional Agreements for the conservation and management of individual species or, more often, of a group of species listed on Appendix II. 2 AEWA provides for coordinated and concerted action to be taken by t...
Biological Assessment. The population of Svalbard pink-footed geese is well studied, with monitoring of several variables to support an international species management plan. For an overview of ongoing monitoring activities, see Appendix 1.
2.1 Taxonomy and biogeographic populations
1). On the basis of ring recoveries and resightings of neck-banded individuals, it has been estimated that there is an exchange of individuals between the two populations of 0.1- 0.7% per year (Ebbinge et al. 1984; ▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. 1999). The exchange seems to increase in severe ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ such as in 1995/96, 1996/97 and particularly 2009/10 when there was snow cover for an extended period from Denmark to Belgium (▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ unpubl. data). Analyses of mtDNA from individuals from the two populations show that there is significant genetic differentiation between populations which confirms that there is a low rate of gene flow, highest from the Svalbard population towards the Iceland/Greenland population (Ruokonen et al. 2005).
Fig. 1. The Svalbard pink-footed goose flyway and range states (copyright NINA, Norway).
2.2 Distribution throughout the annual cycle
Biological Assessment. 1.1. Taxonomy and population structure
1.2. Distribution throughout the annual cycle Table 1. Geographical distribution of the Greenland White-fronted Goose.