Common use of Expected Conservation Benefits Clause in Contracts

Expected Conservation Benefits. As identified in the FWS’s Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances Final Policy (USFWS and NMFS 1999), the FWS “must determine that the benefits of the conservation measures to be implemented, when combined with those benefits that would be achieved if it is assumed that conservation measures were also implemented on other necessary properties, would preclude or remove any need to list” the LPC and/or the SDL (64 FR 32726). Conservation benefits for the LPC and/or SDL from implementation of the CCAA are expected in the form of avoidance of negative impacts, enhancement, and restoration of habitat intended to contribute to establishing or augmenting, and maintaining viable populations of LPCs and/or SDLs in Lea, Eddy, De Baca, Curry, Roosevelt, Quay, and Xxxxxx counties. In addition, conservation of LPCs and/or SDLs would be enhanced by improving and encouraging cooperative management efforts between the CEHMM, FWS, and Participating Landowners who own and control LPC and/or SDL habitat. Also, this CCAA may be used as a model for CCAAs in other parts of the LPC’s range to encourage cooperative management and conservation. Under this CCAA, LPC and/or SDL conservation will be enhanced by providing ESA regulatory assurances such that, should Participating Landowners have or attract LPCs and/or SDLs to their property, the Participating Landowner will not incur additional land use restrictions. Without regulatory assurances, landowners may be unwilling to initiate conservation measures for these species. In addition to habitat conservation, release of captive-reared LPC that leads to establishment of viable populations in the Planning Area, or augmentation of existing LPC numbers by translocation and release of LPCs from other areas, will contribute to recovery and reduce the need for listing under the ESA.

Expected Conservation Benefits. ‌ As identified in the FWS’s Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances Final Policy (USFWS and NMFS 1999), the FWS “must determine that the benefits of the conservation measures to be implementedand the expected benefits, when combined with those benefits that would be achieved if it is assumed that similar conservation measures were also implemented on other necessary properties, would preclude or remove any the need to list” list the LPC and/or LPCand/or the SDL (64 FR 32726)SDL. Conservation benefits for the LPC and/or SDL from implementation of the CCAA Agreement are expected in the form of avoidance of negative impacts, enhancement, and restoration of habitat intended to contribute to establishing or augmenting, and maintaining viable populations of LPCs and/or SDLs in Lea, Eddy, De Baca, Curry, Roosevelt, Quay, Lea and Xxxxxx Eddy counties. In addition, conservation of LPCs and/or SDLs would be enhanced by improving and encouraging cooperative management efforts between the CEHMM, FWS, and Participating Landowners who own and control LPC and/or SDL habitat. Also, this CCAA Agreement may be used as a model for CCAAs in other parts of the LPC’s LPCs range to encourage cooperative management and conservation. Under this CCAAAgreement, LPC and/or SDL conservation will be enhanced by providing ESA regulatory assurances such that, should Participating Landowners have or attract LPCs and/or SDLs to their property, the Participating Landowner will not incur additional land use restrictions. Without regulatory assurances, landowners may be unwilling to initiate conservation measures for these species. In addition to habitat conservation, release of captive-reared LPC that leads to establishment of viable populations in the Planning Area, or augmentation of existing LPC numbers by translocation and release of LPCs from other areas, will contribute to recovery and reduce the need for listing under the ESA.