OpportunityTitle: Five Year Review of the Status of the Genus Achatinella
Description: ATTACHMENT 15-Year Reviews for 41 Achatinella Tree Snail SpeciesScope of WorkBackgroundOnly one genus of tree snails is listed as endangered or threatened in the Pacific Islands under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The status of each species listed in the genus under the Act must be reviewed at least once every five years. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the Federal agency mandated to conduct the 5-year review. Completion of these 5-year reviews will satisfy this requirement. Product DeliverablesThe Contractor will provide using the template in APPENDIX 1, per instructions embedded in the review form; the review will include the following information: Section 2.3, updated information and current species status; Section 2.4., synthesis of all information from the previous sections; Section 4.0, Recommendations for Future Actions, making use of the information collected during the review to recommend next steps to address the species&#146; recovery needs; Section 5.0 References. Copies of references (reports, journal articles, personal communications, etc.) not provided initially by the Service will be provided either as hard copy or in electronic format. The status reviews will be completed using existing knowledge, and no additional field work is required. The contractor will provide the reports to the Service in digital format. 1. Achatinella apexfulva 2. Achatinella bulimoides 3. Achatinella byronii 4. Achatinella curta 5. Achatinella decipiens 6. Achatinella leucorraphe 7. Achatinella lila 8. Achatinella livida 9. Achatinella mustelina 10. Achatinella pulcherrima 11. Achatinella sowerbyana 12. Achatinella caesia 13. Achatinella casta 14. Achatinella decora 15. Achatinella dimorpha 16. Achatinella elegans 17. Achatinella juncea 18. Achatinella lehuiensis 19. Achatinella papyracea 20. Achatinella rosea 21. Achatinella spaldingi 22. Achatinella swiftii 23. Achatinella thaanumi 24. Achatinella valida 25. Achatinella abbreviate 26. Achatinella bellula 27. Achatinella buddi 28. Achatinella cestus 29. Achatinella concavospira 30. Achatinella fulgens 31. Achatinella fuscobasis 32. Achatinella juddi 33. Achatinella lorata 34. Achatinella phaeozona 35. Achatinella pupukanioe 36. Achatinella stewartii 37. Achatinella taeniolata 38. Achatinella turgida 39. Achatinella viridans 40. Achatinella vittata 41. Achatinella vulpina APPENDIX 1TEMPLATES5-Year Review Template With Notes*Contractor only needs to complete asterisked sectionsINTRODUCTIONThe following template is designed to guide a reviewer through the analysis and documentation steps of the 5-year review process, and to record available information and a deliberative process during the review of the species. The use of summary documents (past reviews, etc.) may streamline the process; however, you should have confidence that these documents contain valid information and any questionable information should be verified. The result should not be an exhaustive report; rather, the review should be a concise document that summarizes and cites sufficient information to reflect the rationale and thought process used to arrive at the results.If, in the 5-year review, a change in classification is recommended, the recommended change will be further considered in a separate rule-making process.TEMPLATE SEQUENCEThe template is provided as a general guide to conducting a 5-year review. Section 1.0 addresses general information about how the review was conducted, who conducted the review, what species was reviewed, and its history under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Section 2.0 is the Review Analysis. Section 2.1., Application of the 1996 Distinct Population Segment (DPS) policy, pertains only to vertebrate species and is only required if it was listed as a DPS prior to 1996, or if new information leads the agency to re-consider its DPS status. It reviews whether a DPS is a listable entity under the ESA (meets the discreteness and significance criteria of the DPS policy). This section appears first because a determination that the species is not a valid DPS (does not meet the discreteness or significance criteria) could lead to a recommendation to delist the species without the need to analyze the species conservation status (review of recovery criteria in section 2.2. or status and threats in section 2.3.). Section 2.2., Recovery Criteria, assesses whether recovery criteria are up-to-date and adequately address threats to the species. Section 2.3 should be completed for all species. All the information from the previous sections is then summarized in section 2.4., Synthesis. This synthesis provides the rationale for the recommendations regarding whether or not to change a species&#146; classification in section 3.0, Results. Section 3.0, Results also recommends a new recovery priority number for the species and a reclassification or delisting priority number, if applicable. Section 4.0, Recommendations for Future Actions, makes use of the information collected during the review to recommend next steps to address the species&#146; recovery needs. The reviewer is strongly encouraged to make recommendations that can guide future conservation actions for the species in this section of the 5-year review. Guidance on how to complete each section of the template is provided in section 2.2 of the guidance, Completion of the Template. A cover page and table of contents are included to facilitate producing a document ready for posting on the web. The template introduction and italicized explanatory text may be deleted upon completion of the 5-year Review. Note any sections that are not applicable. Scientific name (Common Name)5-Year ReviewSummary and EvaluationU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceOffice NameCity, State 5-YEAR REVIEWSpecies reviewed: scientific name (common name)TABLE OF CONTENTS(a table of contents may be useful for longer 5-year reviews or any 5-year reviews that provide figures or appendices as attachments) 5-YEAR REVIEWscientific name/ common name1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION1.1 Reviewers (list primary reviewers of species information below)Lead Regional or Headquarters Office (Contact name(s), Office, and phone numbers): Lead Field Office (Contact name(s), Office, and phone numbers): Cooperating Field Office(s) (Contact name(s), Office, and phone numbers): Cooperating Regional Office(s) (Contact name(s), Office, and phone numbers): Cooperating Science Center(s) (NMFS only) (Contact name(s), Office, and phone numbers):1.2 Methodology used to complete the review:Briefly provide information that describes the method or process used in conducting this 5-year review; for example, whether the review was a team or individual effort, whether some or all of the review was contracted out, whether certain documents and data were relied on more heavily than others, whether a structured decision-making process was used, and other pertinent information. If all or portions of the review were peer reviewed, provide information on peer review methods or processes used or, if done in accordance with the OMB Peer Review Bulletin, give the weblink to the peer review information.1.3 Background:The background section of the template asks the reviewer to provide general information and identify previous documentation regarding the species (e.g. listing documents, status reviews, associated actions, recovery plans). This provides the backdrop for the incorporation and analysis of new information when reviewing the species&#146; status and classification. 1.3.1 FR Notice citation announcing initiation of this review: 1.3.2 Listing historyOriginal Listing FR notice (Federal Register Volume and page number):Date listed: Entity listed (species, subspecies, DPS; exactly as listed in 50 CFR 17.11 or 17.22):Classification (threatened or endangered):Revised Listing, if applicableFR notice (Federal Register Volume and page number):Date listed:Entity listed (species, subspecies, DPS):Classification (threatened or endangered):1.3.3 Associated rulemakings (if applicable, identify any critical habitat, 4(d) rules, experimental populations, or similarity of appearance cases and provide FR citations): 1.3.4 Review History (List, in chronological order, agency status review(s), 5-year review(s) or other relevant reviews/documents. Include dates, and results, if applicable): 1.3.5 Species&#146; Recovery Priority Number at start of this 5-year review (For FWS, information is available from TESS): 1.3.6 Current Recovery Plan or Outline Name of plan or outline: Date issued: Dates of previous revisions, if applicable: 2.0 REVIEW ANALYSIS 2.1 Application of the 1996 Distinct Population Segment (DPS) policyUsing section 1.3 of the 5-year Review Guidance, Consideration of the DPS Policy during the 5-year review, and the DPS Policy (61 FR 4722) to guide you, respond to the questions below. Note that only a vertebrate can be listed as a DPS under the ESA (see guidance for more information).2.1.1 Is the species under review a vertebrate? _____Yes, go to section 2.1.2. _____No, go to section 2.2.2.1.2 Is the species under review listed as a DPS? ____ Yes, go to section 2.1.3. ____ No, go to section 2.1.42.1.3 Was the DPS listed prior to 1996? ____ Yes, give date and go to section 2.1.3.1. ____ No, go to section 2.1.4.2.1.3.1 Prior to this 5-year review, was the DPS classification reviewed to ensure it meets the 1996 policy standards? ____ Yes, provide citation and go to section 2.1.4. ____ No, go to section 2.1.3.2.2.1.3.2 Does the DPS listing meet the discreteness and significance elements of the 1996 DPS policy? ____ Yes, discuss how it meets the DPS policy, and go to section 2.1.4. ____ No, discuss how it is not consistent with the DPS policy and consider the 5-year review completed. Go to section 2.4., Synthesis. 2.1.4 Is there relevant new information for this species regarding the application of the DPS policy? ____ Yes, provide citation(s) and a brief summary of the new information; explain how this new information affects our understanding of the species and/or the need to list as DPSs. This may be reflected in section 4.0, Recommendations for Future Actions. If the DPS listing remains valid, go to section 2.2, Recovery Criteria. If the new information indicates the DPS listing is no longer valid, consider the 5-year review completed, and go to section 2.4, Synthesis.____ No, go to section 2.2., Recovery Criteria. 2.2 Recovery CriteriaRecovery plans contain downlisting and delisting criteria which, if up-to-date with regard to both the species&#146; status and threats, should simplify the 5-year review process. If current, a recommendation on whether or not to change the species status may be made based on evaluating whether recovery criteria have been achieved, and briefly completing section 2.3 as appropriate.2.2.1 Does the species have a final, approved recovery plan containing objective, measurable criteria? (Note: Some plans may not contain recovery criteria, either because they are older plans, or because criteria could not be determined due to lack of information. These plans may still contain goals or other objectives that provide a benchmark for measuring progress toward recovery and may warrant discussion in this section. If you discuss them here, be sure to distinguish them from formal recovery criteria.) ____ Yes, continue to section 2.2.2.____ No, consider recommending development of a recovery plan or recovery criteria in section IV, Recommendations for Future Actions, and go to section 2.3., Updated Information and Current Species Status. 2.2.2 Adequacy of recovery criteria. Recovery criteria should reflect the best available and most up-to-date information on the species and its habitat and address threats to the species relative to the five factor analysis. If criteria are current, the status of the species and its threats should be discussed briefly under each criterion in section 2.2.3., which will help serve as the updated information on which the 5-year review results are based.2.2.2.1 Do the recovery criteria reflect the best available and most up-to date information on the biology of the species and its habitat? ____ Yes, go to section 2.2.2.2.____ No, go to section 2.2.3, and note why these criteria do not reflect the best available information. Consider developing recommendations for revising recovery criteria in section 4.0. 2.2.2.2 Are all of the 5 listing factors that are relevant to the species addressed in the recovery criteria? ____ Yes, go to section 2.2.3.____ No, go to section 2.2.3, and note which factors do not have corresponding criteria. Consider developing recommendations for revising recovery criteria in section 4.0.2.2.3 List the recovery criteria as they appear in the recovery plan, and discuss how each criterion has or has not been met, citing information (for threats-related recovery criteria, please note which of the 5 listing factors are addressed by that criterion. If any of the 5-listing factors are not relevant to this species, please note that here):2.3 Updated Information and Current Species Status Briefly summarize new information, citing detailed information and analyses. Each summary of information below should indicate whether there is a change in species status or change in magnitude or imminence of threats since the last status review.2.3.1 Biology and HabitatProvide an updated status of the species, citing new information about the species and its habitat; then go to 2.3.2. For species that are presumed extinct, note whether surveys have been completed or any other information that could be relevant to the species. The following provides a checklist of possible information to consider.2.3.1.1 New information on the species&#146; biology and life history: 2.3.1.2 Abundance, population trends (e.g. increasing, decreasing, stable), demographic features (e.g., age structure, sex ratio, family size, birth rate, age at mortality, mortality rate, etc.), or demographic trends:2.3.1.3 Genetics, genetic variation, or trends in genetic variation (e.g., loss of genetic variation, genetic drift, inbreeding, etc.):2.3.1.4 Taxonomic classification or changes in nomenclature:2.3.1.5 Spatial distribution, trends in spatial distribution (e.g. increasingly fragmented, increased numbers of corridors, etc.), or historic range (e.g. corrections to the historical range, change in distribution of the species&#146; within its historic range, etc.):2.3.1.6 Habitat or ecosystem conditions (e.g., amount, distribution, and suitability of the habitat or ecosystem):2.3.1.7 Other:2.3.2 Five-Factor Analysis (threats, conservation measures, and regulatory mechanisms) - For each of the five listing factors outlined below, provide a brief summary and citation(s) of any relevant new information, including conservation measures, regarding the magnitude (scope and severity) and imminence of previously identified threats to the species or new threats to the species. Note if any of the factors are not relevant to the species. Upon completion, go to 2.4., Synthesis.2.3.2.1 Present or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of its habitat or range: 2.3.2.2 Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes: 2.3.2.3 Disease or predation: 2.3.2.4 Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms: 2.3.2.5 Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence: *2.4 Synthesis - Provide a synthesis of the information discussed in sections 2.1., 2.2., and that would have been discussed in section 2.3, to provide an updated assessment of the status of the species and its threats. Please note any significant changes in the species&#146; status or its associated threats since the last review, and explain why the species meets the definition of threatened or endangered, as appropriate. This section should conclude with a recommended classification (downlist, uplist, delist, remain the same). See guidance and 50 CFR 424.11 (the factors considered for delisting are the same factors considered for listing; species may be delisted due to extinction, recovery, and/or data error). This synthesis will provide a basis for the results provided in section 3.0, Results, and the baseline by which to measure changes in status for the next review.3.0 RESULTS3.1 Recommended Classification: Given your responses to previous sections, particularly section 2.4. Synthesis, make a recommendation with regard to the listing classification of the species ____ Downlist to Threatened ____ Uplist to Endangered ____ Delist (Indicate reasons for delisting per 50 CFR 424.11): ____ Extinction ____ Recovery ____ Original data for classification in error ____ No change is needed3.2 New Recovery Priority Number (indicate if no change; see Appendix E): Brief Rationale: 3.3 Listing and Reclassification Priority Number, if reclassification is recommended (see Appendix E) Reclassification (from Threatened to Endangered) Priority Number: ____ Reclassification (from Endangered to Threatened) Priority Number: ____ Delisting (regardless of current classification) Priority Number: ____ Brief Rationale: *4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE ACTIONS - Provide recommendations for future actions that stem from this review and that focus on the highest priority actions needed prior to the
GrantorContactEmailDescription: office email
GrantorContactText: Marie Bruegmann &lt;br/&gt;Biologist  &lt;br/&gt;Phone 8087929400