Current Distribution. The current distribution of least chub has expanded beyond the distribution limits of the 1980s due to a newly discovered population and several refuge sites. In the Utah’s West Desert, least chub occur in Snake Valley in northwestern Utah in Xxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxx Springs (Twin Springs) and Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Springs (Xxxxxxx et al. 2004) (Fig. 2). Further surveys have confirmed that least chub have been extirpated from the Callao springs on the Xxxxxx ranch and the Xxxxxx Springs complex (Xxxxx 1990). Least chub have recently been transplanted to Xxxxxx Spring and Deadman Spring located at Fish Springs National Wildlife Refuge (Fig. 2) as an effort to establish additional populations and expand its range. In 1997, monitoring efforts confirmed that the populations were persisting in Xxxxxx Spring (Xxxxxx 1999). More recent surveys in 2000-2001 have found a steady decline in least chub in Xxxxxx Spring most likely due to the re-invasion of mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis)(Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxx 2002). Currently, there are efforts to make use of alternative water bodies at the Fish Springs National Wildlife Refuge as an additional genetic refuge for least chub.
Current Distribution. All Available Cash allocated under Section 5.1.2 to any Member or any holder of a CSFB Warrant shall be distributed to such Member or such holder within two (2) Business Days of the receipt by the Company of such cash. All assets other than Available Cash allocated under Section 5.1.3
(a) to any Member or any holder of a CSFB Warrant shall be distributed to such Member or such holder as soon as reasonably practicable.
(b) SET ASIDE IN CSFB WARRANT ACCOUNT. The portion of each non-cash asset allocated pursuant to Section 5.1.3
Current Distribution. Bald eagles reclaimed their entire historic range by the late 1990s (Xxxxxxx 2000). Recovery in the Lower 48 states has been dramatic, increasing from an estimated 417 pairs in 1963 to an estimated 9,789 pairs by 2007 (USFWS 2007a). Bald eagles have met or exceeded the population goals established in all five regional recovery plans, and on 8 August 2007, the USFWS removed the species from the list of federally endangered and threatened species. Bald eagles were known to breed in 59 of Florida’s 67 counties by 2005, the exceptions being Xxxxx, Broward, Calhoun, Gilchrist, Holmes, Lafayette, Madison, and Nassau (Xxxxxxx 2005; Figure 1). Most nests are found on privately-owned lands (67% in 2003; Xxxxxxx et al. in review; unpublished GIS data), underscoring the importance of private lands in the conservation of eagles in Florida. The growth of the state’s eagle population during the 1990s, when the human population grew at a high rate, shows that bald eagle populations can flourish even when faced with development pressures, if appropriate habitat protections are in place. Concentrations of nesting territories are clustered around several significant wetland systems. The FWC has identified 16 areas of concentrated bald eagle nesting activity that contain a majority of the known nesting territories in Florida (Figure 3, Table 1). Many of these “core nesting areas” have persisted for decades, suggesting the presence of high-quality breeding and foraging habitats (Xxxxxxx et al. in review). These core nesting areas are located along the Gulf coast from St. Xxxxxxx Island to Xxx County, and inland from the lower St. Xxxxx River to Lake Okeechobee (Figure 3). Changes in the size, configuration, and location of these core nesting areas are monitored, and their importance to the overall population of bald eagles in Florida will be determined as new data become available. - 6 - Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Bald Eagle Management Plan Chapter 1: Biological Background
Current Distribution. Natural populations of the relict leopard frog are currently known to occur in only two general areas: near the Xxxxxxx Arm of Lake Xxxx, Nevada, and in Black Canyon, Nevada, below Lake Xxxx. Historical records are reported for both areas, with specimen records dating from 1936 at the Xxxxxxx Arm area and from 1955 at Black Canyon. These two areas, encompassing maximum linear extents of only 3.6 and 5.1 km, respectively, comprise a small fraction of the likely original distribution of the species. Although it is possible that relict leopard frog populations may also occur in other areas, it is unlikely that many other naturally occupied sites exist given the efforts made to date by Xxxx and Xxxxxx (1978), Xxxxxxxx et al. (1995), Bradford et al. (2003), and surveys for amphibians and fish conducted or sponsored by State and Federal agencies in Utah, Arizona, and Nevada over the past 2 decades (BIO-WEST Inc. 2001, Xxxxx 0000, X. Xxxxxxx pers. comm., X. Xxxxx pers. comm., Xxxxxxxxx et al. 2003), as well as recent surveys in the western Grand Canyon (X. Xxxxx, X. Xxxxxx, and X. Xxxxxxxx unpublished data). Recent extirpations include Littlefield, Arizona, the last known extant population on the main stem Virgin River, and Corral Spring, Nevada in the Xxxxxxx Arm area of Lake Xxxx (Bradford et al 2004). The relict leopard frog is currently known to occur at 14 localities. Eight of these sites are either historical localities or are natural populations not established through translocation and conservation efforts: Blue Point and Xxxxxx springs on Xxxxxxx Arm; and Boy Scout Canyon, Salt Cedar Canyon, Bighorn Sheep, Black Canyon (2 locations), and Dawn’s Canyon springs, all in the Black Canyon area of Nevada and Arizona below Xxxxx Dam. An additional six experimental sites have been established with varying levels of success but all had observations of one or more life stages of relict leopard frogs during 2009 monitoring efforts: Goldstrike Canyon and Pupfish Refuge springs in the Black Canyon area; Grapevine Spring near Meadview, Arizona; and Quail, Red Rock and Tassi springs in the Gold Butte area (RLFCT 2009). In addition, 3 individual leopard frogs have been observed on different occasions in 2000, 2001, and 2002 at the Willow Beach National Fish Hatchery at Willow Beach, Arizona, located 10 km downstream from Bighorn Sheep Spring in Black Canyon (X. Xxxxxx pers. comm.). One of these was collected and confirmed to be a relict leopard frog based on mitochond...
Current Distribution. The current distribution of least chub is restricted almost exclusively to Snake Valley in northwestern Utah where they are found in Xxxxx Salt Xxxxx, Xxxxxx Springs (Twin Spring, Central Spring, Xxxxx Spring/Reservoir), Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Springs, and Xxxxxx Spring (Figure 1). Recently, some least chub have been found in Snake Creek, south of Xxxxx Salt Xxxxx, however, surveys have not been conducted to determine the distribution, abundance, or status of the Snake Creek population. Further surveys have confirmed that least chub have been extirpated from the Callao springs on the Xxxxxx ranch and the Xxxxxx Springs complex (Xxxxx 1990). Recent data suggest that least chub numbers may be declining within the Xxxxx Salt Xxxxx (UDWR unpublished data). For example, during the 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997 monitoring activities, least chub were found in 21 of 50 sites, 18 of 50 sites, 15 of 51 sites, 14 of 50 sites, and 13 of 50 sites respectively in Xxxxx Salt Xxxxx monitoring area. Least chub have recently been transplanted to Xxxxxx Spring and Deadman Spring located at Fish Springs National Wildlife Refuge (Figure 1) as an effort to establish additional populations and expand its range. Monitoring efforts conducted in August 1997 have confirmed that the populations are persisting, particularly in Xxxxxx Spring. Surveys were also conducted in 53 springs located in Box Elder county from 1985 to 1986 (Xxxx and Xxxx, 1987), however, no least chub were collected. The last collection of least chub along the Wasatch Front was made by Xxxxx in 1965. In October of 1995, a population of least chub was discovered by UDWR in a small spring complex near the town of Xxxx in Juab County (Xxxxxxx pers. comm., unpubl data) (Figure 1). Monitoring efforts in 1996 confirmed that least chub were still present, though fewer numbers were observed. Monitoring efforts for 1997 will occur in November. Further sampling efforts by UDWR in 1996 found a second population of least chub in the Xxxxxx River drainage in the Xxxxx Valley xxxxx complex (Xxxxxxx pers. comm., unpubl data) (Figure 1) . More extensive presence/absence surveys were conducted in this area in September, 1997. Results of these surveys found that least chub were distributed throughout the Xxxxx Valley xxxxx complex.
