Full Title Name:  Critical Habitat Summary for Topeka Shiner

Share |
Krista M. Cotter Place of Publication:  Michigan State University College of Law Publish Year:  2005 Primary Citation:  Animal Legal & Historical Center
Summary:

This rule is a correction to a previous final rule designating critical habitat for the Topeka Shiner (Notropis Topeka), published in the Federal Register on July, 24, 2004 (69 FR 44736). In the previous final rule, the FWS designated as critical habitat 1,356 kilometers of stream in Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska. They excluded from designation all previously proposed critical habitat in Kansas, Missouri, and South Dakota, and excluded the Fort Riley Military Installation in Kansas from critical habitat designation.

 

70 FR 15239, Vol. 70, No. 057, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS),   50 CFR Part 17, RIN 1018-AI20 , 70 FR 15239


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for
Topeka Shiner

 

Action: FINAL RULE

Effective:   August 26, 2004 , but enacted March 25, 2005

 

Overview

This rule is a correction to a previous final rule designating critical habitat for the Topeka Shiner ( Notropis Topeka ), published in the Federal Register on July, 24, 2004 (69 FR 44736).  In the previous final rule, the FWS designated as critical habitat 1,356 kilometers of stream in Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska.   They excluded from designation all previously proposed critical habitat in Kansas, Missouri, and South Dakota, and excluded the Fort Riley Military Installation in Kansas from critical habitat designation .  

 

Errors in the Previous Final Rule Being Corrected

The error in the original final rule designated critical habitat for the species that is corrected in this rule is the legends in the five corresponding maps depicting the critical habitat.   The legends of those maps state that the agency action taken was a proposed critical habitat designation, and not a final rule on the critical habitat designation.   Additionally, the maps in the previous the final rule included six transcription errors in legal descriptions of critical habitat, and one of the maps had a typographical error in the title.

 

Share |