Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 349–356 | Cite as

Protecting the piping plover under section 7 of the endangered species act

  • John G. Sidle
  • Karen Mayne
  • Elizabeth N. McPhillips
Profile

Abstract

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act directs federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of endangered and threatened species. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) issues jeopardy or nonjeopardy biological opinions on proposed federal actions that affect endangered and threatened species. We summarize several biological opinions issued by the USFWS to protect the threatened piping plover (Charadrius melodus). These opinions address federal actions involving hundreds of piping plovers on the Missouri River system and a few piping plover pairs on short stretches of Atlantic coast beach. Some of these opinions are decisive, but most allow the proposed action to proceed conditional upon a lengthy set of reasonable and prudent alternatives to protect the piping plover. These conditions may prove difficult to track and will add to the workload of the USFWS.

Key words

Endangered Species Act Piping plover Interagency consultation Biological opinion 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Cairns, W. E. 1977. Breeding biology and behavior of the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) in southern Nova Scotia. MS thesis. Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 115 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Currier, P. J., G. R. Lingle, and J. G. VanDerwalker. 1985. Migratory bird habitat on the Platte and North Platte rivers in Nebraska. Platte River Whopping Crane Habitat Maintenance Trust, Grand Island, Nebraska.Google Scholar
  3. Dryer, M. P., and P. J. Dryer. 1985. Investigations into the population, breeding sites, habitat characteristics, threats and productivity of the least tern in North Dakota. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bismarck, North Dakota.Google Scholar
  4. Ducey, J. 1981. Breeding of the least tern and piping plover on the lower Platte River, Nebraska.Nebraska Bird Review 49:45–51.Google Scholar
  5. Flemming, S. P. 1984. The status and responses of piping plover (Charadrius melodus) to recreational activity in Nova Scotia. BS thesis. Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova Scotia. 150 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Goossen, J. P. 1990. Piping plover research and conservation in Canada.Blue Jay 48:139–153.Google Scholar
  7. Haig, S. M., and L. W. Oring. 1988. Distribution and dispersal in the piping plover.Auk 105:630–638.Google Scholar
  8. Mayer, P. M., and M. P. Dryer. 1988. Population biology of piping plovers and least terns on the Missouri River in North Dakota and Montana: 1988 field season report. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bismarck, North Dakota.Google Scholar
  9. Nicholls, J. L. 1989. Distribution and other ecological aspects of piping plovers (Charadrius melodus) wintering along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. MS thesis. Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama. 164 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Prindiville-Gaines, E., and M. R. Ryan. 1988. Piping plover habitat use and reproductive success in North Dakota.Journal of Wildlife Management 52:266–273.Google Scholar
  11. Ryan, M. R., B. G. Root, and P. M. Mayer. 1990. A population viability model for piping plovers in the Great Plains. The 52nd Midwest Fish & Wildlife Conference, 2–5 December 1990, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Abstract only.Google Scholar
  12. Schmulbach, J. C., J. J. Schuckman, and E. A. Nelson. 1981. Aquatic habitat of the Missouri River from Gavins Point Dam to Ponca State Park, Nebraska. US Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha. Unpublished report.Google Scholar
  13. Schwalbach, M. 1988. Conservation of least terns and piping plovers along the Missouri River and its major western tributaries in South Dakota. South Dakota State University, Brookings.Google Scholar
  14. Short, C. 1989. Implementation of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Results of a workshop. US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Ecology Research Center, Ft. Collins, Colorado. NERC-89/01. 56 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Sidle, J. G. 1987. Critical habitat designation: Is it prudent?Environmental Management 11:429–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sidle, J. G., and D. B. Bowman. 1988. Habitat protection under the Endangered Species Act.Conservation Biology 2:116–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sidle, J. G., E. D. Miller, and P. J. Currier. 1989. Changing habitats in the Platte River valley of Nebraska.Prairie Naturalist 21:91–104.Google Scholar
  18. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1987. Biological opinion on the Platte River off-site effects of the Denver Water Department's Two Forks Dam project. Letter from US Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado, to US Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, dated 14 October 1987.Google Scholar
  19. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1988a. Atlantic coast piping plover recovery plan. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  20. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1988b. Great Lakes and northern Great Plains piping plover recovery plan. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Twin Cities, Minnesota.Google Scholar
  21. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1989a. Biological opinion on a proposed community pier on Cedar Island, Accomack County, Virginia. Letter from US Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts, to US Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk, Virginia dated 10 April 1989.Google Scholar
  22. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1989b. Biological opinion on the impacts of National Park Service management activities on the piping plover within the Gateway National Recreation Area. Letter from US Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts, to Superintendent, Gateway National Recreation Area, Brooklyn, New York, dated 24 January 1989.Google Scholar
  23. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1989c. Biological opinion on the effects of the Plaza del Rio project. Letter from US Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico, to US Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston, Texas, dated 28 July 1989.Google Scholar
  24. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1990. Biological opinion on the operation of the Missouri River system. Letter from US Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, Colorado, to US Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, dated 14 November 1990.Google Scholar
  25. Whyte, A. J. 1985. Breeding ecology of the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) in central Saskatchewan. MS thesis. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • John G. Sidle
    • 1
  • Karen Mayne
    • 2
  • Elizabeth N. McPhillips
    • 3
  1. 1.US Fish and Wildlife ServiceGrand IslandUSA
  2. 2.US Fish and Wildlife ServiceWhite MarshUSA
  3. 3.US Fish and Wildlife ServicePierreUSA

Personalised recommendations