Nevada Fish & Wildlife Office
Pacific Southwest Region

 

Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC) Species Lists

Project proponents can now obtain official species lists electronically through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) Information, Planning, and Conservation System (also known as IPaC). This National system is designed for public access to natural resource information for which the Service has trust or regulatory responsibility including threatened and endangered species information. This system is available for both private citizens and agency employees to assist in determining how their activities may impact sensitive natural resources. The information provided by IPaC is generated by the Service and can be obtained quickly electronically when a project proponent needs the information rather than waiting for Service employees to respond in writing to a specific written request. We encourage the use of this system as it should improve project planning efficiency.

For those individuals who do not have computer access to IPaC, we will continue to process species list requests under the current system (written requests mailed to our office). For more information on IPAC and to obtain a species list for a specific project area, please visit the IPaC website at: http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac. If you have additional questions, please contact our office at (775) 861-6300.

Supplemental Information for IPaC Species Lists

The following paragraphs provide additional information for species that are listed or candidates under the Endangered Species Act in Nevada or are considered At-Risk under the Nevada Natural Heritage Program.IPAC Information is also provided for other topics such as for projects occurring in the Spring Mountains, on private lands in Clark County, and that may impact borrowing owls.

When Lahontan cutthroat trout (LCT; Oncorhynchus clarkii henshawi) are included in the species list:

  • For projects in the Truckee River Basin:

Your proposed project is located within a potential and existing metapopulation for LCT, and as such, the area is necessary for the species’ recovery.  The LCT Truckee River Recovery Implementation Team (TRIT) prepared a Short-Term Action Plan (2003) for the species in the Truckee River Basin (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/protected_species/fish/documents/lct/final_trit.pdf).  This Short-Term Action Plan identifies priority areas with current or potential opportunities to support LCT or important habitats that would sustain various life history stages.  Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), completed projects should not preclude future recovery and survival of this species.  We recommend that projects be reviewed for all direct and indirect impacts that they may have on riparian and aquatic habitats as they relate to LCT, and that you or the responsible Federal agency consult with the Service accordingly under section 7 of the ESA.

  • For projects in the Walker River Basin:

Your proposed project is located within a potential and existing metapopulation for LCT, and as such, the area is necessary for the species’ recovery.  The LCT Walker River Recovery Implementation Team (WRIT) has finalized a Short-Term Action Plan (2003) for the species in the Walker River Basin (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/protected_species/fish/documents/lct/final_writ.pdf).  This Short-Term Action Plan identifies priority areas with current or potential opportunities to support LCT or important habitats that would sustain various life history stages.  Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), completed projects should not preclude future recovery and survival of this species.  We recommend that projects be reviewed for all direct and indirect impacts that they may have on riparian and aquatic habitats as they relate to LCT, and that you or the responsible Federal agency consult with the Service accordingly under section 7 of the ESA.

  • For projects not in the Truckee River Basin or the Walker River Basin:

Your proposed project is located within a potential metapopulation for LCT, and as such, the area may be necessary for the species’ recovery.  The Northwestern Geographic Management Unit (GMU) Team and the Humboldt GMU Team have been formed to facilitate the restoration and recovery of LCT populations in these areas.  The Northwestern GMU Team and Humboldt GMU Team are evaluating areas within these basins which could support LCT.  Although a self-sustaining population of LCT may not currently be present in the project area, under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), completed projects should not preclude future recovery and survival of this species.  We recommend that projects be reviewed for all direct and indirect impacts that they may have on riparian and aquatic habitats as they relate to LCT, and that you or the responsible Federal agency consult with the Service accordingly under section 7 of the ESA.

When the desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is included in the species list:
We are concerned that portions of your proposed project may occur within desert tortoise habitat.  Therefore, desert tortoises may be encountered within these areas of your proposed project.  On private land in Clark County, take of desert tortoise for this project may be authorized pursuant to the provisions of section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), under a permit for the Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.  We recommend that you contact Ms. Marci Henson, Desert Conservation Plan Administrator, at (702) 455-3118 for information on your responsibilities under this permit.  On Federal land, the lead Federal agency or its designated representative is responsible for determining whether or not the proposed project may affect a listed species.

When the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) is included in the species list:
Greater sage-grouse are known to occur within or near the project area; therefore, we recommend that you analyze potential impacts from this project on the species to ensure that the proposed action does not exacerbate further decline of the species.  On March 23, 2010, the Service’s 12-month status review finding for the species was published in the Federal Register (75 FR 13910).  We determined that the greater sage-grouse and, on a more local level, the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the greater sage-grouse (previously referred to as the Mono Basin area population) warrant the protection of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), but that listing the species and the Bi-State DPS at this time is precluded by the need to address higher priority species first.  The greater sage-grouse and the Bi-State DPS of the greater sage-grouse have been placed on the candidate list for future action, meaning the species and the DPS do not receive statutory protection under the ESA, and States will continue to be responsible for managing the species.  The Western States Sage and Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse Technical Committee, under direction of the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, has developed and published guidelines to manage and protect greater sage-grouse and their habitats in the Wildlife Society Bulletin (Connelly et al. 2000).  We ask that you consider incorporating these guidelines (http://www.ndow.org/wild/conservation/sg/resources/guidelines.pdf) into the proposed project.  On a more local level, the Sage Grouse Conservation Plan for Nevada and Portions of Eastern California was completed in June 2004.  The Plan is available online at:  Guidelines to manage sage grouse populations and their habitats (.683MB PDF).  Additionally, Appendix L of this Plan is particularly useful in understanding the conservation needs and concerns for the Bi-State DPS of the greater sage-grouse located in portions of Alpine, Inyo, and Mono Counties, California and portions of Carson City, Douglas, Esmeralda, Lyon, and Mineral Counties, Nevada.  We encourage you to adopt all appropriate management guidance from this Plan as you analyze and implement your proposed action and to engage your local State and Federal wildlife biologists early in the project planning process.

When the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris) is included in the species list:
Candidate species, like the Columbia spotted frog, receive no legal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), but the Columbia spotted frog is a protected species under Nevada Administrative Code 503.075.  Per Nevada Administrative Code 503.090 and 503.093, no persons shall capture, kill, or possess any part of protected wildlife without the proper written permission from the Nevada Department of Wildlife.  A conservation agreement/strategy has been developed for the Toiyabe and the Northeast subpopulation of the Columbia spotted frog.  A copy of these conservation agreements is available at:  http://www.fws.gov/nevada/protected_species/amphibians/species/col_spotted_frog.html.  Because Columbia spotted frogs may be found in the project area, we ask that you support the conservation of this candidate species by ensuring that your project is consistent with the requirements of these agreements if you determine that Columbia spotted frogs or their habitat may be affected by the proposed project.

When the Tahoe yellow cress (Rorippa subumbellata) is included in the species list:
We are concerned that the project may impact the Tahoe yellow cress, a species currently classified as a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and listed as endangered by the State of California and as critically endangered by the State of Nevada.  A conservation strategy and agreement (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/protected_species/plants/documents/tyc_cs_trpa2002.pdf) has been developed to guide the conservation and management of Tahoe yellow cress and its habitat, which occurs in the shorezone of Lake Tahoe.  Successful implementation of this strategy should preclude the need to list the species under the ESA.  Therefore, we recommend that all projects under your purview be assessed for potential impacts to existing populations and suitable habitat and that such projects do not inhibit long-term conservation efforts or the survival of Tahoe yellow cress.

When the relict leopard frog (Rana onca) is included in the species list:
We are concerned that the project may impact the relict leopard frog, currently classified as a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and listed as at-risk under the Heritage Program.  Candidate species receive no legal protection under the ESA, but the relict leopard frog is a protected species under Nevada Administrative Code 503.075.  Per Nevada Administrative Code 503.090 and 503.093, no persons shall capture, kill, or possess any part of protected wildlife without the proper written permission from the Nevada Department of Wildlife.  A conservation agreement and strategy for the relict leopard frog was finalized in 2005 (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/es/documents/esa/Rana%20onca%20CAS%20Final.pdf).  Successful implementation of the conservation agreement and strategy is intended to preclude listing of this species under the ESA.  Given that your project may directly or indirectly affect the relict leopard frog and its habitat, we ask that you contact us to ensure your project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the agreement and strategy.      

When the Armagosa toad (Bufo nelsoni) is included in the species list:
We are concerned that the project may impact the Amargosa toad, a species listed as at-risk under the Heritage Program and as a protected species under Nevada Administrative Code 503.075.  Per Nevada Administrative Code 503.090 and 503.093, no persons shall capture, kill, or possess any part of protected wildlife without the proper written permission from the Nevada Department of Wildlife.  A conservation agreement and strategy (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/nv_species/documents/amargosa_toad/cca_amargosa_toad.pdf) for the Amargosa toad and co-occurring sensitive species in the Oasis Valley of Nye County was established in September 2000 and is currently being updated.  The agreement outlines specific conservation measures which will identify and reduce or eliminate threats to the species, enhance habitat, and maintain a properly functioning ecosystem for the species of Oasis Valley.  Successful implementation of the measures in the conservation agreement and strategy must continue in order to preclude the need to list the Amargosa toad under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).  Given that your project may directly or indirectly affect the Amargosa toad and its habitat, we encourage you to support the conservation of this sensitive species by ensuring that your project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the agreement and strategy.

When the Virgin River spinedace (Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis) is included in the species list:
We are concerned that the project may impact the Virgin River spinedace, a species listed as at-risk under the Heritage Program and as a protected species under Nevada Administrative Code 503.065.  Per Nevada Administrative Code 503.090 and 503.093, no persons shall capture, kill, or possess any part of protected wildlife without the proper written permission from the Nevada Department of Wildlife.  The Virgin River spinedace is a small minnow endemic to the Virgin River Basin in Nevada, Utah, and Arizona.  A conservation agreement and strategy for the species was developed in 1995 and revised in 2002 in order to expedite conservation measures needed for the continued existence and recovery of the species.  Successful implementation of the measures in the conservation agreement and strategy must continue in order to preclude the need to list the species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).  Given that your project may directly or indirectly affect the Virgin River spinedace and its habitat, we encourage you to support the conservation of this sensitive species by ensuring that your project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the agreement and strategy (http://wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/spinedace_strategy.pdf).

When the banded Gila monster (Heloderma suspectum) is included in the species list:
We are concerned that the project may impact the Gila monster, a species listed as at-risk under the Heritage Program and as a protected species under Nevada Administrative Code 503.080.  Per Nevada Administrative Code 503.090 and 503.093, no persons shall capture, kill, or possess any part of protected wildlife without the proper written permission from the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW).  The banded Gila monster resides primarily in the Mojave desert scrub and salt desert scrub ecosystems in southern Nevada, southeastern California, southwestern Utah, and western Arizona.  The Gila monster is one of only two venomous lizard species in the world.  Gila monsters are difficult to locate as they spend the majority of the year in underground burrows; however, illegal collection, construction of roads, and loss of habitat continue to threaten this sensitive species.  Given that the Gila monster may occur within the project area, we encourage you to minimize project impacts to any existing populations and suitable habitat for this species.  If it is determined that the project may result in impacts to Gila monsters, we recommend that you contact NDOW.

If the project is located in or near the Spring Mountains:
We are concerned that the project may impact rare, endemic species in the Spring Mountains ecosystem.  A conservation agreement for the Spring Mountains National Recreation Area in Clark and Nye Counties, Nevada, was established in 1998 and protects many endemic and rare species of the Spring Mountains ecosystem.  In 2000, the conservation agreement was included as part of the Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) available at: http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/Depts/dcp/Pages/CurrentHCP.aspx.  Successful implementation of this conservation agreement and conservation activities within the MSHCP should preclude the need to list many of these rare species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).  Therefore, we recommend that the proposed project be assessed for potential impacts to existing populations and suitable habitat, and that the project does not inhibit long-term conservation efforts or the survival of these endemic and rare species.

If the project is located only on non-Federal land within Clark County, with no Federal nexus:
If the proposed project occurs solely on private land in Clark County, and a Federal agency has no part in authorizing, funding or carrying out the project, take of listed species for this project may be authorized pursuant to the provisions of section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, under a permit for the Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.  We recommend that you contact Marci Henson, Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Administrator, at (702) 455-3118, for information on your responsibilities under this permit; or review information and the species covered under this plan at:  http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/Depts/dcp/Pages/CurrentHCP.aspx

If the western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugea) may be located in or adjacent to the project boundary:
We are concerned about the western burrowing owl and potential impacts to this species from the proposed project.  The reduction of habitat in southern Nevada is a major threat to this species.  Therefore, we recommend that the project avoid disturbing burrows that are used by burrowing owls.  If this is not possible, we ask that the project incorporate recommendations in our pamphlet, “Protecting Burrowing Owls at Construction Sites in Nevada’s Mojave Desert Region” (http://www.fws.gov/nevada/nv_species/documents/Protecting_Burrowing_Owls_at_Construction_Sites.pdf).

If new structures or signs are created, consider including the following paragraph:
We recommend the following measures to minimize possible impacts to migratory birds from construction of new structures.  Holes, gaps, or hollow spaces in the proposed facilities or structures could cause cavity-nesting migratory birds to enter and become entrapped in these spaces; holes as small as 0.75-inch in diameter could trap birds.  Gaps or narrow open hollow spaces in the proposed facilities or structures should be closed during construction to prevent bird entry.  In addition, open-ended posts of any material or color, used to mark boundaries at construction sites should be capped; however, since caps can deteriorate over time, use of solid posts is preferred.  To prevent raptors and other migratory birds from getting their feet trapped in metal sign posts, any exposed holes near the top of posts should be filled with rivets, bolts, or nuts.  These conservation measures for migratory birds should be included in the proposed project.  

 

Last updated: September 23, 2014