SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Nature Reviews Genetics”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

41 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

USGS2009

Prevention, early detection and containment of invasive, nonnative plants in the Hawaiian Islands: current efforts and needs

Introduction: Invasive, non-native plants (or environmental weeds) have long been recognized as a major threat to the native biodiversity of oceanic islands (Cronk & Fuller, 1995; Denslow, 2003). Globally, several hundred non-native plant species have been reported to have major impacts on natural areas on oceanic islands (Kueffer et al ., 2009). In Hawaii, at least some 50 non-native plant species reach dominance in natural areas (Kueffer et al ., 2009) and many of them are known to impact ecosystem processes or biodiversity. One example is the invasive Australian tree fern ( Cyathea cooperi ), which has been shown to be very efficient at utilizing soil nitrogen and can grow six times as rapidly in height, maintain four times more fronds, and produce significantly more fertile fronds per month than the native Hawaiian endemic tree ferns, Cibotium spp. (Durand & Goldstein, 2001a, b). Additionally, while native tree ferns provide an ideal substrate for epiphytic growth of many understory ferns and flowering plants, the Australian tree fern has the effect of impoverishing the understory and failing to support an abundance of native epiphytes (Medeiros & Loope, 1993). Other notorious examples of invasive plant species problematic for biodiversity and ecosystem processes in Hawaii include miconia ( Miconia calvescens ), strawberry guava ( Psidium cattleianum ), albizia ( Falcataria moluccana ), firetree ( Morella faya ), clidemia ( Clidemia hirta ), kahili ginger ( Hedychium gardnerianum ), and fountain grass ( Pennisetum setaceum ), to name just a few. Fireweed ( Senecio madagascariensis ) is a recent example of a seriously problematic invasive species for Hawaii’s agriculture and is damaging certain high-elevations native ecosystems as well. The threat of invasive plants has long been recognized in Hawaii and is well documented (e.g. Cox, 1999; Loope & Kraus, 2009 in press; Loope et al ., 2004; Mooney & Drake, 1986; Stone & Scott, 1985; Stone et al. , 1992). In many respects, Hawaii may be near the forefront among national and international efforts to address the burgeoning threat of invasive plants, perhaps especially in the field of outreach and education (Holt, 1996; Van Driesche & Van Driesche, 2000). However, given the scale of the problem many challenges still need to be addressed and gaps in the existing management system need to be identified. In particular, it appears that new non-native plant species are still introduced to the Hawaiian Islands at a high rate with little or no regard for their potential invasiveness. In fact, a Pacific-wide and a global survey of non-native plants on oceanic islands have both shown that on Hawaii among all archipelagos by far the highest number of problematic invasive species known from other areas in the world is already present (Denslow et al . 2009, Kueffer et al . 2009). Hawaii lacks an effective mechanism for tracking what species are present or incoming. For instance, early detection nursery surveys conducted on Maui in 2008 found over 300 species of cultivated vascular plants that have not previously been recorded in Hawaii (Starr et al. , in prep.). In spite of an innovative Hawaii Biological Survey (e.g. Eldredge & Evenhuis, 2003), there is no mechanism for recording presence of a species until it becomes naturalized. Some of these new introductions may quickly become serious pests. Fireweed, first recorded in Hawaii on the Big Island in the early 1980s, is now considered one of the Kueffer & Loope 2009 5/48 worst weeds of pastures and is also invading natural areas from near sea level to above 10,000 feet. Although the cultivated and as yet non-invasive Cortaderia selloana has been present in Hawaii for 50 years or more, the morphologically similar Cortaderia jubata was simultaneously found to be present on Maui and invading on a large scale in 1989. It played an important role in inspiring the establishment of the Maui Invasive Species Committee (MISC) in 1997, and MISC now spends roughly $200,000 per year removing and containing C. jubata to keep it from becoming widespread in high elevation conservation lands of East and West Maui. The existence of many similar examples shows that to date regulatory action to prevent new invasive plant species from establishing and spreading in Hawaii has not yet been as successful as it needs to be. In particular, because some problematic invasive species known from other areas in the world (Kueffer et al ., 2009; Weber, 2003) have not yet been recorded from Hawaii, preventive measures against the introduction and spread of such likely invasive species is therefore an urgent need for Hawaii. Indeed, regulation of importation and early detection and eradication of introduced species before they become abundant and widespread are widely considered the most cost-efficient and often only effective measures against the threat of new invasive species (Kueffer & Hirsch Hadorn, 2008; Wittenberg & Cock, 2001). Timing seems favorable for Hawaii to achieve effective protection against the threat of new invasive species through prevention, early detection, and eradication/containment. Through the establishment and evolution of Invasive Species Committees (ISCs) on each major Hawaiian island, the institutional capacity has been built up for prevention, early detection, containment, and outreach at an island scale. Weed risk assessment (Daehler et al ., 2004) and early detection methodologies (Starr et al. , in review-a, b) have been developed and tested specifically for Hawaii. Containment strategies have been successful (e.g., Special Ecological Areas in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park), and so have eradications of particular species on an island scale (e.g. mullein ( Verbascum thapsus ) and other species on Maui, fireweed ( Senecio madagascariensis ) on Kauai). These successful management strategies may be further strengthened through recently developed novel approaches in research (e.g. remote sensing, species distribution modelling, and molecular genetics tools). Another major recent achievement is the gained support of the plant industry for preventive measures against invasive species (see p. 13ff). Last but not least, regulatory action is also moving forward. Passage of House Bill 2517 by the 2008 Hawaii House and Senate and prompt signing of the bill into law by the Governor provides hope that action to ban the sale of a meaningful suite of restricted weeds can quickly proceed through the rulemaking phase into the implementation phase. This report documents these achievements and experiences and provides a range of perspectives on how to further develop prevention, early detection and containment of invasive species in Hawaii. The report is based on a symposium and workshop held at the 2008 Hawaii Conservation Conference in Honolulu on 31 July 2008.

Hawaii↗

USGS2012

Aquatic organism passage at road-stream crossings—synthesis and guidelines for effectiveness monitoring

Restoration and maintenance of passage for aquatic organisms at road-stream crossings represents a major management priority, involving an investment of hundreds of millions of dollars (for example, U.S. Government Accounting Office, 2001). In recent years, passage at hundreds of crossings has been restored, primarily by replacing barrier road culverts with bridges or stream simulation culverts designed to pass all species and all life stages of aquatic life and simulate natural hydro-geomorphic processes (U.S. Forest Service, 2008). The current situation has motivated two general questions: 1. Are current design standards for stream simulation culverts adequately re-establishing passage for aquatic biota? and 2. How do we monitor and evaluate effectiveness of passage restoration? To address the latter question, a national workshop was held in March 2010, in Portland, Oregon. The workshop included experts on aquatic organism passage from across the nation (see table of participants, APPENDIX) who addressed four classes of methods for monitoring effectiveness of aquatic organism passage—individual movement, occupancy, demography, and genetics. This report has been written, in part, for field biologists who will be undertaking and evaluating the effectiveness of aquatic organism passage restoration projects at road-stream crossings. The report outlines basic methods for evaluating road-stream crossing passage impairment and restoration and discusses under what circumstances and conditions each method will be useful; what questions each method can potentially answer; how to design and implement an evaluation study; and points out the fundamental reality that most evaluation projects will require special funding and partnerships among researchers and resource managers. The report is organized into the following sections, which can be read independently: 1. Historical context: In this section, we provide a brief history of events leading up to the present situation involving aquatic organism passage as a useful context for the issues covered herein. 2. Importance of connectivity for aquatic organisms: In this section, we provide background information regarding the movement characteristics of aquatic organisms and their vulnerability to passage impairment, and the importance of connectivity for a broad diversity of aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates. This section should be useful for practitioners in selecting what species to monitor in relation to aquatic organism passage. 3. Methods for evaluating aquatic organism passage: In this section, we present a range of perspectives on alternatives for assessing and monitoring aquatic organism passage impairment and the effectiveness of passage restoration actions, including the following methods: Individual Movement, Occupancy Models, Abundance (Demography), and Molecular Genetic Markers. 4. Relevance, strengths, and limitations of the four methods: In this section, we discuss the utility of each of the methods as a tool for assessing and quantifying passage impairment and restoration effectiveness. 5. Guidelines for selecting a method: In this section, we review some fundamental criteria and guidelines to consider when selecting a method for monitoring in the context of answering three important questions that should be addressed when developing a plan for evaluating aquatic organism passage. 6. Study and monitoring design considerations: In this section, we discuss four key design elements that need to be considered when developing a monitoring design for assessing passage impairment and restoration. The basic objectives of the report are to: 1. Review the movement characteristics of five groups of aquatic organisms that inhabit streams and to assess their general vulnerability to passage impairment at road-stream crossings; 2. Review four methods for monitoring aquatic organism passage impairment and the effectiveness of actions to restore passage at road-stream crossing structures; 3. Assess the relevance, strengths, and limitations of each method as a monitoring tool; 4. Identify and discuss guidelines that will be useful for selecting a monitoring method; and 5. Discuss what we have identified as the four key elements that need to be considered when developing a monitoring design for assessing passage impairment and restoration at road-stream crossings.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1968

The geologic classification of the meteorites

The meteorite classes of Prior and Mason are assigned to three proposed genetic groups on the basis of a combination of compositional, mineralogical, and elemental characteristics: l) the calcium-poor, volatile-rich carbonaceous chondrites and achondrites; 2) the calcium-poor, volatile-poor chondrites (enstatite, bronzite, hypersthene, and pigeonite), achondrites (enstatite, hypersthene, and pigeonite), stonyirons (pallasites, siderophyre), and irons; and, 3) the calcium-rich (basaltic) achondrites. Chondrites are correlated with calcium-poor achondrites and the silicate phase of the pallasitic meteorites on Fe contents of olivine and pyroxene; and with metal of the stony-irons and irons on the basis of trace elements (Ga and Ge). Transitions in structure and texture between the chondrites and achondrites are recognized. The Van Schmus-Wood chemical-petrologic classification of the chondrites has been modified and expanded to a mineralogic-petrologic classification of the chondrites and calcium-poor achondrites. Chondrites apparently are the first rocks of the solar system. Paragenetic and textural relations in the Murray carbonaceous chondrite shed new light on the manner of accretion, and on the character of dispersed solid materials ('dust', and chondrules and metal) that existed in the solar system before accretion. Two pre-accretionary mineral assemblages (components) are recognized in the carbonaceous chondrites and in the unequilibrated volatile-poor chondrites. They are: 1) a 'low temperature' water-, rare gas-, and carbon-bearing component; and, 2) a high temperature anhydrous silicate and metal component. Paragenetic relations indicate that component 2 materials predate chondrite formation. An accretionary assemblage (component 3) also is recognized in the carbonaceous chondrites and in the unequilibrated volatile-poor chondrites. Component 3 consists of very fine grains of olivine and pyroxene, which occur as pervasive disseminations, as small irregular aggregates of grains, and as large subround to round, finely granular accretional chondrules. Evidence in Murray indicates that component 3 silicates precipitated abruptly and at low pressures, possibly from a high temperature gas, in an environment that contained dispersed component 1 and 2 materials. All component 3 aggregates in Murray contain component 1 material, most commonly as flakes, and locally as tiny granules and larger spherules, some of which are hollow and some of which were broken prior to their mechanical incorporation in accretionary chondrules. Accretion may have occurred as ices associated with dispersed water-bearing component 1 materials temporarily melted during the precipitation of component 3 silicates, and then abruptly refroze to form an icy cementing material. Group 1 materials may be cometary, and group 2 materials may be asteroidal. Schematic models are proposed. Evidence is reviewed for the lunar origin of the pyroxeneplagioclase achondrites. On the basis of natural remanent magnetism, it is suggested that the very scarce diopside-olivine achondrites may be samples from Mars. A classification of the meteorite breccias, including the calcium-poor and calcium-rich mesosiderites, and irons that contain silicate fragments, is proposed. A fragmentation history of the meteorites is outlined on the basis of evidence in the polymict breccias, and from gas retention ages in stones and exposure ages in irons. Cometal impacts appear to have caused the initial fragmentation, stud possibly the perturbation of orbits, of two inferred asteroidal bodies (enstatite and bronzite), one and possibly both events occurring before 2000 m.y. ago. Several impacts apparently occurred on the inferred hypersthene body in the interval 1000 to 2000 m.y. ago. Major breakups of the three bodies apparently occurred as the result of interasteroidal collisions at about 900 m.y. ago, and 600 to 700 m.y. ago. The breakups were followed by a number of fr

Open-File Report↗

USGS2017

Developing an effective Agassiz's Desert Tortoise monitoring program: Final report to the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission

Agassiz’s desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is a conservation-reliant species with populations north and west of the Colorado River protected as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (Averill-Murray et al. 2012). Since it was listed under this category in 1990, a great deal has been learned about the natural history of the species, and it is now one of the best-studied turtles in the United States (Lovich and Ennen 2013). However, the accumulated body of scientific data available for the species has not yet been translated into recovery or delisting of the species. Successful conservation of any species requires knowledge of their natural history and how vital rates affect their ability to maintain stable populations in the face of natural and anthropogenic stresses. Agassiz’s desert tortoises occur from southwestern Utah to near the Mexican border in California – a distance of over 450 km – but population densities vary greatly across this immense landscape (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2015). Tortoises occur in the Sonoran Desert of California, including the eastern and western ends of the Coachella Valley, where it is one of 27 species covered under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP/NCCP). The southern portion of Joshua Tree National Park (JTNP) lies within this 1.1 million acre planning area, and was predicted to be an area of low-density tortoise populations using habitat suitability modeling (Barrows 2011). JTNP is near the southern distributional limit of G. agassizii, yet very little has been published regarding the ecology of tortoises in the Sonoran Desert of California. Reproductive output is an important gross measure of the ability of a population to persist. When integrated with data on fertility and survivorship, this information forms a foundation for assessing population status and formulating effective management strategies (e.g., Congdon et al. 1993, 1994), especially for imperiled species. One aspect of the biology of G. agassizii that has been particularly well-studied is reproductive output. However, most of what we know about this topic comes from research in the Mojave Desert portion of the species’ range (Ernst and Lovich 2009). Comparatively little has been published on the reproductive ecology of populations living in the Sonoran Desert ecosystem of California. Publications by Lovich et al. (1999, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015) constitute the main body of literature on desert tortoise reproductive ecology in the Sonoran Desert of California, with one study population located at the western end of the CVMSHCP/NCCP area. Collecting data on Agassiz’s desert tortoise ecology in the Sonoran Desert ecosystem is important due to significant differences between the two adjacent desert ecosystems, especially the timing and amounts of annual precipitation, and their potential effects on reproductive output (e.g., Lovich et al. 5 2015). There are also differences in the vulnerability of tortoises to the effects of a warming, drying climate between the two deserts (Barrows 2011; Zylstra et al. 2012). The overall goal of this study was to collect data on demography, reproductive output, and genetic affinities at a study site in the Sonoran Desert portion of JTNP in the eastern end of the CVMSHCP/NCCP area. Specific objectives included: 1) Collect data to establish baselines on tortoise populations and/or their habitat suitability in core habitat within the CVNCCP area, including biotic and abiotic variables affecting persistence of tortoise populations; 2) Compare and contrast with data collected on desert tortoises at USGS/BLM study site near Palm Springs over 16 years; 3) Support long-term modeling efforts needed to determine tortoise population viability; 4) Refine modeled relationships with identified threats such as fire, invasive species and climate change; and 5) Prioritize adaptive management needs for the desert tortoise in and beyond the CVNCCP area. The data from this study will aid in determining baseline estimates of the desert tortoise population size within the planning area as well as establish a marked population of Agassiz’s desert tortoises for future monitoring. Data will be integrated with habitat modeling in order to refine model output. Genetic data will be collected on both the north and south sides of Interstate 10 to determine the potential effects of habitat fragmentation and genetic mixing. Analyses are ongoing and results beyond those presented in this report will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals following inclusion of additional data collected on the south side of Shavers Valley in 2017-2018.

Report↗

USGS2021

Connectivity of Mojave Desert tortoise populations—Management implications for maintaining a viable recovery network

Executive Summary The historic distribution of Mojave desert tortoises ( Gopherus agassizii ) was relatively continuous across the range, and the importance of tortoise habitat outside of designated tortoise conservation areas (TCAs) to recovery has long been recognized for its contributions to supporting gene flow between TCAs and to minimizing impacts and edge effects within TCAs. However, connectivity of Mojave desert tortoise populations has become a concern because of recent and proposed development of large tracts of desert tortoise habitat that cross, fragment, and surround designated conservation areas. This paper summarizes the underlying concepts and importance of connectivity for Mojave desert tortoise populations by reviewing current information on connectivity and providing information to managers for maintaining or enhancing desert tortoise population connectivity as they consider future proposals for development and management actions. Maintaining an ecological network for the Mojave desert tortoise, with a system of core habitats (TCAs) connected by linkages, is necessary to support demographically viable populations and long-term gene flow within and between TCAs. There are four points for wildlife and land-management agencies to consider when making decisions that could affect connectivity of Mojave desert tortoise populations (for example, in updating actions in resource management plans or amendments that could help maintain or restore functional connectivity in light of the latest information): Management of all desert tortoise habitat for persistence and connectivity . Desert tortoise populations continue to decline within most TCAs, and it is unlikely that trends are better in populations outside protected areas. Fragmentation exacerbates negative population trends by breaking large continuous populations into smaller isolated populations. Connectivity within large populations can enhance resilience to localized disturbances due to rescue by neighboring individuals. In contrast, smaller fragmented populations are resistant to rescue by their isolation and thus could suffer irreversible declines to extirpation from a variety of threats and stochastic events. Enhanced threat reduction to reverse declines within TCAs and to maintain occupied habitat in the surrounding matrix would help reduce the variability in population growth rates and improve the resilience of protected populations even while implementing efforts to improve connectivity. Each TCA has unique strengths and weaknesses regarding its ability to support minimum sustainable populations based on areal extent and its ability to support population increases based on landscape connection with adjacent populations. Considering how proposed projects (inside or outside of TCAs) affect connectivity and the ability of TCAs to support at least 5,000 adult tortoises (the numerical goal for each TCA) could help managers to maintain the resilience of TCAs to population declines. The same project, in an alternative location, could have very different impacts on local and regional populations. For example, within the habitat matrix surrounding TCAs, narrowly delineated corridors may not allow for natural population dynamics if they do not accommodate overlapping home ranges along most of their widths so that tortoises reside, grow, find mates, and produce offspring that can replace older tortoises. In addition, most habitat outside TCAs may receive more surface disturbance than habitat within TCAs. Therefore, managing the entire remaining matrix of desert tortoise habitat for permeability may be better than delineating fixed corridors. These concepts apply, especially given uncertainty about long-term condition of habitat, within and outside of TCAs under a changing climate. Ultimately, questions such as “ What are the critical linkages that need to be protected ?” could be better framed as “ How can we manage the remaining habitat matrix in ways that sustain ecological processes and habitat suitability for special status species ?” Land-management decisions made in the context of the latter question may be more conducive to maintenance of a functional ecological network. Limitations on landscape-level disturbance across habitat managed for the desert tortoise Clearly delineating habitat linkages and differentiating them from non-delineated areas by the uses that are permitted or prohibited within them by specific management guidelines can help achieve functional connectivity. Such guidelines would be most effective if they considered and accounted for all surface disturbances (for example, temporary disturbances such as fiberoptic lines or off-highway vehicle routes, right-of-ways, utility-scale solar development, urbanization) to the extent possible. A weighted framework that varies with the permanence or severity of the disturbance, and can be additive to quantify cumulative effects, could be useful (Xiong, 2020). For example, minor roads can alter tortoise movements independently of other features (Peaden and others, 2017; Hromada and others, 2020), but if the isolated dirt road is accompanied by a powerline that encourages raven predation (Xiong, 2020), then the two features together may be additive. Ignoring minor or temporary disturbance on the landscape could result in a cumulatively large impact that is not explicitly acknowledged (Goble, 2009); therefore, understanding and quantifying all surface disturbance on a given landscape is prudent. In California, the Bureau of Land Management established 0.1–1.0 percent caps on new surface-disturbance for TCAs and mapped linkages that address the issues described in number 1 of this list. Nevada, Utah, and Arizona currently do not have surface-disturbance limits. Limits comparable to those in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) would be 0.5 percent within TCAs and 1 percent within the linkages modeled by Averill-Murray and others (2013). Limits in some areas of California within the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, such as Ivanpah Valley, are more restrictive, at 0.1 percent. Continuity across the state line in Nevada could be achieved with comparable limits in the adjacent portion of Ivanpah Valley, as well as the Greater Trout Canyon Translocation Area and the Stump Springs Regional Augmentation Site. These more restrictive limits would help protect remaining habitat in the major interstate connectivity pathway through Ivanpah Valley and focal areas of population augmentation that provide additional population connectivity along the western flank of the Spring Mountains. In a recent study that analyzed 13 years of desert tortoise monitoring data, nearly all desert tortoise observations were at sites in which 5 percent or less of the surrounding landscape within 1 kilometer was disturbed (Carter and others, 2020a). To help maintain tortoise habitability and permeability across all other non-conservation-designated tortoise habitat, all surface disturbance could be limited to less than 5-percent development per square kilometer because the 5-percent threshold for development is the point at which tortoise occupation drops precipitously (Carter and others, 2020a). However, although individual desert tortoises were observed at development levels up to 5 percent, we do not know the fitness or reproductive characteristics of these individuals. This level of development also may not allow for long-term persistence of healthy populations that are of adequate size needed for demographic or functional connectivity; therefore, a conservative interpretation suggests that, ideally, development could be lower. Lower development levels would be particularly useful in areas within the upper 5th percentile of connectivity values modeled by Gray and others (2019). Reducing ancillary threats in places where connectivity is restricted to narrow strips of habitat, for example, narrow mountain passes or vegetated strips between solar development, could enhance the functionality of these vulnerable linkages. In such areas, maintaining multiple, redundant linkages could further enhance overall connectivity. Minimization of mortality from roads and maximization of passage under roads . Roads pose a significant threat to the long-term persistence of local tortoise populations, and roads of high traffic volume lead to severe population declines, which ultimately fragments populations farther away from the roads. Three points (a.–c.) pertain to reducing direct mortality of tortoises on the many paved roads that cross desert tortoise habitat and to maintaining a minimal level of permeability across these roads: Tortoise-exclusion fencing tied into culverts, underpasses, overpasses, or other passages below roads in desert tortoise habitat, would limit vehicular mortality of tortoises and provide opportunities for movement across the roads. Installation of shade structures on the habitat side of fences installed in areas with narrow population-depletion zones would limit overheating of tortoises that may pace the fence. Passages below highways could be maintained or retrofitted to ensure safe tortoise access, for example, by filling eroded drop-offs or modifying erosion-control features such as rip-rap to make them safer and more passable for tortoises. Wildlife management agencies could work with transportation departments to develop construction standards that are consistent with hydrologic/erosion management goals, while also incorporating a design and materials consistent with tortoise survival and passage and make the standards widely available. The process would be most effective if the status of passages was regularly monitored and built into management plans. Healthy tortoise populations along fenced highways could be supported by ensuring that land inside tortoise-exclusion fences is not so degraded that it leads to degradation of tortoise habitat outside the exclusion areas. For example, severe invasive plant infestations inside a highway exclusion could cause an increase of invasive plants outside the exclusion area and degrade habitat; therefore, invasive plants inside road rights of way could be mown or treated with herbicide to limit their spread into adjacent tortoise habitat and minimize the risk of these plants carrying wildfires into adjacent habitat. Adaptation of management based on new information . Future research will continue to build upon and refine models related to desert tortoise population connectivity and develop new ones. New models could consider landscape levels of development and be constructed such that they share common foundations to support future synthesis efforts. If model development was undertaken in partnership with entities that are responsible for management of desert tortoise habitat, it would facilitate incorporation of current and future modeling results into their land management decisions. There are specific topics that may be clarified with further evaluation: The effects of climate change on desert tortoise habitat, distribution, and population connectivity; The effects of large-scale fires, especially within repeatedly burned habitat, on desert tortoise distribution and population connectivity; The ability of solar energy facilities or similar developments to support tortoise movement and presence by leaving washes intact; leaving native vegetation intact whenever possible, or if not possible, mowing the site, allowing vegetation to re-sprout, and managing weeds; and allowing tortoises to occupy the sites; and The design and frequency of underpasses necessary to maintain functional demographic and genetic connectivity across linear features, like highways.

Arizona, California, Nevada↗