BASELINE DETERMINATION. The Parties understand that the Permittee may enroll a wide variety of privately owned lands that could have a wide degree of baseline conditions. It is understood that baseline determinations will be made at a site-specific level and described in individual Cooperative Agreements to capture each unique situation. Baseline may be determined as numbers/populations of LCT, habitat conditions or both. Typically baseline determinations will be based on habitat conditions due to the migratory behavior of the species and the need to reestablish networked populations. Habitat conditions which define baseline will be detailed in each individual Cooperative Agreement based on each particular situation and will be based on a variety of conditions such as stream width, riparian vegetation, substrate, etc. Enrollment of the private landholdings will permit access to many miles of publicly owned stream habitat for LCT restoration and recovery activities that is currently not useable.
BASELINE DETERMINATION. The Parties agree that the baseline conditions applicable to this Agreement are as follows: [Describe baseline conditions in terms appropriate for each covered species. Baseline conditions may in some instances be expressed as measures of the utilization of the enrolled property by the covered species (e.g., numbers of individuals, occupied breeding territories, etc.), particularly where such measures typically experience little seasonal or year-to-year variability. More commonly, baseline conditions will be expressed as measures of the quantity and/or quality of habitat suitable for or occupied by the covered species.]
BASELINE DETERMINATION. This Agreement provides a mechanism for the District to enhance, restore, and manage ponds and native grassland habitat for the benefit of the Covered Species without incurring additional regulatory restrictions on the use of the Enrolled Property. The Agreement, however, does not release the District from the responsibility to avoid take of any endangered or threatened species already occupying portions of their property. To receive the assurances regarding take of Covered Species specified in this Agreement, the District must maintain the Baseline conditions on the Enrolled Property. Baseline conditions are also included for Xxxxx’x piperia for conservation and recovery purposes.
BASELINE DETERMINATION. Baseline is a measure of the conditions associated with the covered species or its habitat that occur on eligible lands at the time of enrollment in the Agreement. Measuring prairie dog population numbers and spatial extent is time-consuming and expensive. These parameters can also fluctuate greatly over time. Therefore, the most reasonable and practical approach for determining baseline under this Agreement would be the number of black-footed ferrets present at the time of enrollment. Since the last remaining wild ferrets were taken into captivity for captive breeding purposes, extensive efforts to find additional wild ferrets have been unsuccessful (Hanebury and Xxxxxxx 2006). Therefore, the baseline on eligible lands for this Agreement will be zero ferrets.
BASELINE DETERMINATION. The area covered by this proposed Agreement and its associated 10(a)(1)(A) EOS permit encompasses approximately 344,955 acres (139,598 ha) of the Armendaris Ranch in Socorro and Sierra Counties, New Mexico (Figures 1 and 2). The Armendaris Ranch is bounded on the east by Jornada del Muerto, which in turn is bounded by the San Xxxxxx Mountains on the west by the Fra Cristobal Mountain range and the Rio Grande valley, including Elephant Butte Lake, and on the north by Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge. The tortoise is a rare endemic to central Mexico, that has disjunct populations, and does not have a population in the United States (Xxxxxxxxx and Xxxxxxx 1989). The baseline population condition for the tortoise will be zero free ranging individuals (i.e., zero baseline). The free ranging population started with zero individuals at the Armendaris Ranch and may be returned to that amount under this Agreement without violating the permit (NHNM 2017). Xxxxxxxxx involved in the TESF conservation effort are currently maintained in captivity or are part of a research project that was initiated before this Agreement was developed. Tortoises in either group are not part of baseline population for this Agreement. XXXX started the Xxxxxx tortoise conservation effort in 2006 with 33 tortoises (26 adults and 7 hatchlings). Currently, approximately 500 tortoises are in captivity at the Ladder Ranch, including about 400 individuals that are maintained in predator-proof “headstart” enclosures. These tortoises are not a part of this Agreement, beyond including individuals for release at the Armendaris. At the Armendaris, about 90 tortoises are held in an 18-acre (7.2-ha) pen designed to restrict tortoises’ movements without restricting the movements of most other wildlife species. These tortoises are not considered a part of the baseline population for this Agreement. In addition to these tortoises, another 101 individuals have been released for research purposes with radio transmitters in a controlled environment at the Armendaris. These tortoises are not part of the baseline population since their presence principally aims to advance understanding of movement and survival patterns rather than population restoration. Unfenced areas at the Armendaris will be used for releasing tortoises due to this Agreement which has a principal aim of facilitating population restoration. This will allow released animals to range freely. The high survival rates of tortoises that...
BASELINE DETERMINATION. This Agreement provides a mechanism for the Landowner to enhance, restore, and manage native riparian habitat for the benefit of the Covered Species without incurring additional regulatory restrictions on the use of the Enrolled Property. The Agreement, however, does not release the Landowner from the responsibility to avoid take of any endangered or threatened species already occupying portions of their property. To receive the assurances regarding take of Covered Species specified in this Agreement, the Landowner must maintain the Baseline conditions on the Enrolled Property. The California red-legged frog occurs at the Enrolled Property. Because of their cryptic nature and the difficulty in detecting the actual number of California red-legged frogs in each life stage, the Parties have agreed to set the Baseline for the California red-legged frog as the current area of suitable habitat for the California red-legged frog at the Enrolled Property. Because California red-legged frogs have been observed at the Enrolled Property in the manmade pond and in multiple pools along Swallow Creek; they could also occur in Swallow Creek between these sites in the uplands adjacent to the creek, and they could use the creek and uplands for dispersal. Suitable habitat exists in the manmade pond, along the length of Swallow Creek, and in the adjacent uplands, as identified in Part 3 of this Agreement. The total area of suitable habitat for the California red-legged frog at the Enrolled Property is the area of suitable aquatic habitat plus the area of suitable upland habitat. The area of suitable aquatic habitat consists of the manmade pond and the area from the pond downstream the entire length of Swallow Creek that occurs within the Enrolled Property. The area of suitable upland habitat consists of the area adjacent to Swallow Creek that includes the riparian vegetation along the length of Swallow Creek and other areas within the fenced area along the length of Swallow Creek that occurs within the Enrolled Property. The Parties have agreed to set the Baseline for the California red-legged frog at the Enrolled Property as this total area of suitable habitat. The Baseline area is 7.2 acres of suitable habitat for the California red-legged frog (Figure 3).
BASELINE DETERMINATION. The Parties agree that the baseline condition applicable to this Agreement is the number of nene currently found on the Ranch premises. Nene probably were extirpated on Maui by the end of the nineteenth century and today are found primarily within the boundaries of Haleakala National Park where reintroduction efforts began in 1962 (USFWS 1999). In addition, DOFAW is establishing a population in West Maui through a reintroduction program at Hanaula which began in 1995 (DOFAW 2000). There have been no known sightings of wild nene whatsoever on Ranch premises by either the local DOFAW biologist (X. Xxxxxxxx, pers. comm. 2003) or Ranch staff (X. Xxxxxxx, pers. comm. 2003). Therefore, the baseline for this Agreement is zero (0).
BASELINE DETERMINATION. Pursuant to this Cooperative Agreement, the Cooperator agrees to carry out or allow EDF’s authorized representatives to carry out, the specific habitat baseline determination, as described below. Based upon site surveys conducted on the Cooperator’s property on (insert dates) the following has been determined:
A. Baseline determination for the Safe Harbor Agreement – This determination shall include a description of baseline conditions and how they were measured. Baseline conditions should be described on any part of the property where incidental take is likely to occur due to the conservation activities on an adjacent or nearby property enrolled in the Safe Harbor Agreement.
1. Habitat conditions – Baseline vegetation conditions shall be surveyed across the ranch sufficient to characterize the structure, composition, and extent (in acreage) of all vegetation types present. Other baseline habitat conditions shall be described. This description will include the following characteristics: Known history, presence, and reproductive activity of the Houston toad on the property including survey reports with positive and negative results, if available Potential breeding pond characteristics including size, depth, slope, vegetation conditions and distance to nearby forest or woodland Aquatic species present in ponds including the presence of predatory fish, insect, and amphibian species Water quality status including eutrophication or other water quality conditions that could be detrimental to the development of Houston toad tadpoles Current vegetation conditions characterizing the structure, composition, and extent of all vegetation types present including canopy cover, density, and ground layer conditions with an explanation of the sampling methods used to determine suitability in different habitat areas on the property Soil conditions characterizing the structure, texture, and consistency of soil types present on the property (e.g., deep xxxxx soils that are loose or friable or soils that contain more clay particles than sand)
2. Land management practices – Land management practices will be considered part of the baseline and shall be described. This description will include the following practices: Livestock management activities including size of herd, grazing regime, and cattle water source locations Hunting activities Silviculture (forestry) activities Fence line, road, and facilities maintenance activities Pesticide/herbicide use and ...
BASELINE DETERMINATION. The Parties understand that the Permittee may enroll a wide variety of non-federal lands that could have a wide degree of baseline conditions. It is understood that baseline determinations will be made at a site-specific level and described in individual CAs to capture each unique situation. Baseline may be determined as numbers/populations of LCT, habitat conditions, or both. Typically, baseline determinations will be based on habitat conditions due to the migratory behavior of the species and the need to reestablish networked populations. Habitat conditions which define baseline will be detailed in each individual CA based on each particular situation and will be based on a variety of conditions such as stream width, riparian vegetation, substrate, etc. Enrollment of non federal lands will allow LCT to access many miles of publicly-owned stream habitat for LCT restoration and recovery activities that is currently not useable.
BASELINE DETERMINATION. The proposed area covered by this Agreement and its associated 10(a)(1)(A) permit encompasses approximately 24,585 acres of the Xxxxxx Creek drainage on the 99 Bar and BarBoot ranches in Cochise County, Arizona. The drainage is bounded on the east by the Chiricahua Mountains; on the west by the Xxxxxxxxx Mountains; the north edge of the drainage is an indistinct valley ridge, and the south edge is bounded by LCNWR. The valley bottom is dominated by rolling hills of desert grassland and the upper slopes of the drainage transition from xxxxx-juniper to oak- dominated woodlands. Land ownership of the area covered by this Agreement is approximately 15% State land and about 85% privately held by 99 Bar and Bar Boot ranches; a small area (~1%) is federally owned (Bureau of Land Management). Federal land is not covered by this Agreement. Ranching activities occur on private land and through grazing leases on State or Federal land. All private land within the covered area, with the exception of small parcels around certain existing buildings, are protected from future development by conservation easements held by the FWS. The covered area is delineated in Figure 1. The 99 Bar Ranch and the Bar Boot Ranch contain very little perennial water and limited riparian hardwood vegetation. Based upon the combination of the limited amount of suitable habitat and surveys conducted by Xxxxxx Canyon NWR personnel for the covered species, the baseline for Chiricahua leopard frog, Yaqui topminnow, Yaqui catfish, beautiful shiner, and Huachuca water xxxxx is set at zero (FWS files). The baseline condition for Yaqui chub on the 99 Bar Ranch is also zero, but based upon results of surveys conducted in 2007 and 2008 the baseline condition for Yaqui chub on the Bar Boot Ranch is set at one occupied site. In 2007 and 2008, Yaqui chub was discovered on the Bar Boot Ranch at the Chalk Tank Complex. In 2007, a viable population of Yaqui chub with multiple age classes was found in Lower Chalk Tank, but none were found in Upper Chalk Tank. In 2008, multiple age classes were found during monitoring in Upper Chalk Tank, but none were located in Lower Chalk Tank. Since Lower Chalk Tank is formed from the overflow and seepage from Upper Chalk Tank, these two tanks are considered to make up one population site. Enumeration of the population size is difficult for Yaqui chub and biologically irrelevant based upon the natural fluctuations that occur in Xxxxxx Creek on the Xxxxxx Canyon NWR. Popula...
