Laserfiche WebLink
<br />;' <br />~ <br /> <br />r' <br />"~ <br />f. <br /> <br />Leucochloridium sp" with 8.3 to 9.5% of the mature snails expressing sporocysts in August, 1995 <br />(Stevens et al" 1995), Potential vertebrate predators ofKAS at Vaseys Paradise include rainbow <br />trout (Oncorhynchus ll'\Ylcis&) in the stream mouth, summer breeding Says and black phoebe <br />(S~ornis SA)i and S, nii!ican&), canyon wren (Cathet:pes mexicanu&), and winter resident <br />American dipper (Cinclus mexicanu&), <br /> <br />, <br />t~ <br />t~; <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />, <br />>. <br /> <br />Impact.! to the Kanab ambennail as a result of the 1996 BeachJHabitat-Building flow <br /> <br />In a December 21, 1994, Final Biological Opinion (BO) the Service evaluated impacts to KAS <br />from the operation of Glen Canyon Dam according to operating and other criteria of the MLFF <br />contained in the GCD-EIS, They determined implementation of the MLFF would not jeopardize <br />the continued existence of the KAS, This opinion also supported the concept of a beachlhabitat <br />building flow of 40,000 to 45,000 cfs, which is part ofMLFF, However, the opinion clearly <br />articulates that incidental take ofKAS will be exceeded ifmore than 10% of the occupied habitat <br />in Grand Canyon will be inundated by high flows or a controlled flood, <br /> <br />;~'-) <br /> <br />;;c, <br /> <br />In 1996 the opportunity to conduct a Beach/Habitat-Building flow in the month of March <br />occurred. At this time the ROD had not been signed, and in an effort to advance the <br />recommendations of the 1994 BO and purposes described in the GCD-EIS, Reclamation decided <br />to conduct separate compliance activities, An environmental assessment was prepared to satisfy <br />NEP A, and Reclamation consulted with the Service on endangered species, In the resulting, <br />opinion, the Service concluded that incidental take limits could be exceeded, and developed <br />reasonable and prudent measures (RPM) to reduce the level of incidental take, RPM number 2 <br />the Service stated that "Before another habitat-building flow, Reclamation will enter into informal <br />consultation with the Service to evaluate test flow studies, the establishment or discovery of a <br />second population ofKanab ambersnail in Arizona, and .." <br /> <br />(~~:,i <br />:':.'" <br />i:.': <br />i4: <br />r~ <br />~t} <br />~~ <br /> <br /> <br />This second population has not been established or discovered, however several efforts have <br />advanced the goal of establishing such a population a great deal. <br /> <br />,'.',". <br />!,;~i'. <br /> <br />;'>'-,>- <br />f.tf< <br />',,'.' <br /> <br />1, A Kanab amberSnail working group has been formed, and meetS regu1arly to discuss ' <br />and recommend actiOIll which will lead to the recovery of the species, . Members of the <br />group are the National Parle Service, Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGF), Fish and <br />Wlldlife Service (Service), Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, CUP <br />Completion Act office (CUPCA), the Phoenix Zoo, Reclamation, and at times the Bureau <br />of Land Management. <br /> <br />~~~:;~ <br />~~?~; <br />~~ <br /> <br />; .:'~,,,,. <br />~'r~;~ <br /> <br />Efforts Toward Recovery <br /> <br />,.'"',, <br />:~-'r,-: <br />~>-' <br /> <br />2, The habitat at Vaseys Paradise has been evaluated and monitored, Habitat at minus <br />ninemile and Indian Gardens in Grand Canyon, and at Three Lakes near Kanab Utah has <br />also been evaluated, This worle, together with information from Spammer (cit) allowed <br />for a better understanding of the KAS habitat requirements, The AGF developed habitat <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />i~f:t~, <br />