DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal and State Endangered and Threatened Species Expenditures Fiscal Year 2001

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal and State Endangered and Threatened Species Expenditures Fiscal Year 2001 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Federal and State Endangered and Threatened Species Expenditures Fiscal Year 2001 January 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................................ii What is the purpose of this report?........................................................................................................ii What expenditures are reported? ..........................................................................................................ii What expenditures were formerly not included?....................................................................................ii What are the expenditures reported for FY 2001? ................................................................................ii How does the FY 2001 expenditure report compare to other years?...................................................iii ENDANGERED SPECIES EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 2001 .................................................. 1 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................ 1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 1 What does "Reasonably Identifiable Expenditures" mean?......................................................... 1 What is not included in the report? .............................................................................................. 2 What is included in the report? .................................................................................................... 2 SECTION 18(1), FEDERAL EXPENDITURES..................................................................................... 3 What expenditures are reported by the Fish and Wildlife Service? ............................................. 3 What expenditures are reported by other Federal agencies?...................................................... 3 SECTION 18(2), STATE EXPENDITURES.......................................................................................... 3 What is included in the State expenditures?................................................................................ 3 SUMMARY OF DATA........................................................................................................................... 4 What is the format for the report=s tables?................................................................................... 4 What are the expenditures reported for FY 2001?....................................................................... 4 The 10 listed entities with the highest reported expenditures in Fiscal Year 2001 ....................................................................................................................... 5 The 10 species with the highest reported expenditures in Fiscal Year 2001 ....................................................................................................................... 5 How do the expenditures compare among species? ................................................................... 6 COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS REPORTS......................................................................................... 6 Why are comparisons with other reports difficult? ....................................................................... 6 Forgone Revenues ...................................................................................................................... 7 Table A. OTHER ESA EXPENSES FOR BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION (1993-2001; FROM BPA REPORTS)… ………………………………………………………...7 Table B. SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES AND ASSOCIATED STATISTICS FROM FY 1989-2001 ........ 8 Table 1. FY 2001 Reported Expenditures for Endangered and Threatened Species, Not Including Land Acquisition ....................................... 9 Table 2. Species Ranked in Descending Order of Total FY 2001 Reported Expenditures, Not Including Land Acquisition......................... 45 Table 3. FY 2001 Reported Land Acquisition Expenditures For Endangered and Threatened Species….75 Appendix A. Supplemental Guidance for Reporting Expenditures for the Conservation of Endangered and Threatened Species .............................................................................................................. 82 Appendix B. Reports Provided by Other Federal Agencies ....................................................................... 85 Appendix C. Summary of Comments from Reporting Agencies for “Other ESA Expenses” Category………………………………………………………………………………………………………...157 ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY What is the purpose of this report? Section 18 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973 requires the Secretary of the Interior (working through the Fish and Wildlife Service) to annually report certain expenditures for the conservation of threatened and endangered species. This report presents the reported expenditures for Fiscal Year 2001 (October 2000 - September 2001). What expenditures are reported? Beginning with this report, we have sought to more fully identify other Act-related expenditures by asking for expenditures not identifiable to specific individual species, in addition to the standard request. In the past and for this report, expenditures that are reasonably identifiable for a specific listed species have been reported. All Federal agencies and those States receiving section 6 grant-in-aid funds pursuant to the Act are asked to report. Since only a few foreign species are receiving expenditures from U.S. governmental agencies, we restrict these annual reports to a discussion concerning listed U.S. species (foreign species are tabulated as “Other ESA Expenses”). Expenditures are identified by listed entity, which may be a species, subspecies, Distinct Population Segment, or Evolutionarily Significant Unit as identified in 50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12. They are reported separately for the Service, the States, and in aggregate for all other reporting Federal agencies. The Service and 20 other Federal agencies identified expenditures for the conservation of individual threatened and endangered species. Two additional Federal agencies responded that their expenditures were not reasonably identifiable to specific individual species, and they could not provide data. We included the data from all Federal agencies in Appendix B. What expenditures were formerly not included? The reporting Federal and State agencies made a good faith effort to develop species-by-species expenditures for this report. However, a significant portion of threatened and endangered species conservation activities includes law enforcement, consultation, recovery coordination activities benefiting multiple species, and other actions that are not easily identifiable to specific individual species. Accounting procedures by all agencies for most staff salaries, operations, maintenance, and other support services are not recorded to specific individual species and were not reflected in the reported expenditures in past reports. These costs are included in this report for the first time as “Other ESA Expenses.” What are the expenditures reported for FY 2001? • Total Expenditures reported were $2,442,355,500, of which $777,760,141 was reported as expenditures for specific individual species, including $130,180,425 for land acquisition; and $1,664,595,359 was reported as “Other ESA Expenses” (not identified to species), of which $47,302,545 was for land acquisition. • Table 1 shows expenditures reasonably identifiable to specific individual species, for each species, by the Service, other Federal agencies collectively, and the States collectively. Non-specific “Other ESA Expenses” by each of these categories are shown at the end of this Table. Table 2 displays species-specific expenditures by species expenditure rank, in descending order. Table 3 displays land acquisition expenditures, and individual agency reports are in Appendix B. C The percent of threatened and endangered species with expenditures reported: 87.6 (not including “Other ESA Expenses”) iii C The median and maximum general (non-land) expenditure for species with at least $100 reported expenditures (not including “Other ESA Expenses”)(Table B): Median - $17,000 Maximum species total - $46,782,971 C The range of general (non-land) expenditures for all species: $0 to $46,782,971 (Table 2) (not including “Other ESA Expenses”) • The number of species with general (non-land) expenditures exceeding $1 million (not including “Other ESA Expenses”): 84 species (including 5 with both endangered and threatened vertebrate populations)(Table 2) C The number of species with 50 percent of expenditures: 16 (1.2 percent of the ESA list) (Table 2) (not including “Other ESA Expenses”) C The number of species with 90 percent of expenditures: 80 (6.3 percent of the ESA list) (Table 2) (not including “Other ESA Expenses”) How does the FY 2001 expenditure report compare to other years? Due to differences in reporting methods, this report cannot be easily compared to prior expenditure reports. These year-to-year differences include changes in the number of States reporting, changes in how expenditures are calculated, changes in the agencies= ability to track expenditures, and changes in the number of listed species. Therefore, real dollar increases or decreases cannot be accurately calculated or inferred from the overall or individual totals. This year for
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 144/Friday, July 30, 2021/Proposed
    40996 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 144 / Friday, July 30, 2021 / Proposed Rules Critical component/end Percentage of domestic Line item No. product content [List as necessary] the left side of the screen, under the the evaluation of the accuracy of the (End of clause) Document Type heading, check the current taxonomic interpretation. [FR Doc. 2021–15881 Filed 7–29–21; 8:45 am] Proposed Rule box to locate this Please include sufficient information BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P document. You may submit a comment with your submission (such as scientific by clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’ journal articles or other publications) to (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail allow us to verify any scientific or to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR commercial information you include. FWS–R4–ES–2020–0125, U.S. Fish and Please note that submissions merely Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 stating support for, or opposition to, the Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– action under consideration without 50 CFR Part 17 3803. providing supporting information, We request that you send comments although noted, will not be considered [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2020–0125; only by the methods described above. in making a determination, as section FF09E22000 FXES11130900000 212] We will post all comments on http:// 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that RIN 1018–BE41 www.regulations.gov. This generally determinations as to whether any means that we will post any personal species is an endangered or a threatened Endangered and Threatened Wildlife information you provide us (see species must be made ‘‘solely on the and Plants; Removing Adiantum Information Requested, below, for more basis of the best scientific and vivesii From the Federal List of information).
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
    Thursday, February 27, 2003 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation or Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for 95 Plant Species From the Islands of Kauai and Niihau, HI; Final Rule VerDate Jan<31>2003 13:12 Feb 26, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\27FER2.SGM 27FER2 9116 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 39 / Thursday, February 27, 2003 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR units designated for the 83 species. This FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul critical habitat designation requires the Henson, Field Supervisor, Pacific Fish and Wildlife Service Service to consult under section 7 of the Islands Office at the above address Act with regard to actions carried out, (telephone 808/541–3441; facsimile 50 CFR Part 17 funded, or authorized by a Federal 808/541–3470). agency. Section 4 of the Act requires us SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: RIN 1018–AG71 to consider economic and other relevant impacts when specifying any particular Background Endangered and Threatened Wildlife area as critical habitat. This rule also and Plants; Final Designation or In the Lists of Endangered and determines that designating critical Nondesignation of Critical Habitat for Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12), there habitat would not be prudent for seven 95 Plant Species From the Islands of are 95 plant species that, at the time of species. We solicited data and Kauai and Niihau, HI listing, were reported from the islands comments from the public on all aspects of Kauai and/or Niihau (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Mcclinton Unr 0139M 13052.Pdf
    University of Nevada, Reno Habitat preferences, intraspecific variation, and restoration of a rare soil specialist in northern Nevada A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resources and Environmental Science by Jamey D. McClinton Dr. Elizabeth A. Leger/Thesis Advisor December, 2019 Copyright by Jamey D. McClinton 2019 All Rights Reserved We recommend that the thesis prepared under our supervision by Jamey D. McClinton Entitled Habitat preferences, intraspecific variation, and restoration of a rare soil specialist in northern Nevada be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Elizabeth Leger, Ph.D., Advisor Paul Verburg, Ph.D., Committee member Thomas Parchman, Ph.D., Graduate School Representative David W. Zeh, Ph.D., Dean, Graduate School December-2019 i Abstract Edaphic specialization in plants is associated with the development of novel adaptations that frequently lead to speciation, causing unique edaphic environments to be associated with rare and endemic plant species worldwide. These species contribute significantly to global biodiversity, but are especially vulnerable to disturbance and climate change because of their inherently patchy distributions and locally adapted populations. Successful conservation of these species depends upon understanding their habitat requirements and the amounts and distributions of genetic and phenotypic diversity among populations. Little is known about the habitat requirements or
    [Show full text]
  • Reporton the Rare Plants of Puerto Rico
    REPORTON THE RARE PLANTS OF PUERTO RICO tii:>. CENTER FOR PLANT CONSERVATION ~ Missouri Botanical Garden St. Louis, Missouri July 15, l' 992 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Center for Plant Conservation would like to acknowledge the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the W. Alton Jones Foundation for their generous support of the Center's work in the priority region of Puerto Rico. We would also like to thank all the participants in the task force meetings, without whose information this report would not be possible. Cover: Zanthoxy7um thomasianum is known from several sites in Puerto Rico and the U.S . Virgin Islands. It is a small shrub (2-3 meters) that grows on the banks of cliffs. Threats to this taxon include development, seed consumption by insects, and road erosion. The seeds are difficult to germinate, but Fairchild Tropical Garden in Miami has plants growing as part of the Center for Plant Conservation's .National Collection of Endangered Plants. (Drawing taken from USFWS 1987 Draft Recovery Plan.) REPORT ON THE RARE PLANTS OF PUERTO RICO TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements A. Summary 8. All Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands Species of Conservation Concern Explanation of Attached Lists C. Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands [A] and [8] species D. Blank Taxon Questionnaire E. Data Sources for Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands [A] and [B] species F. Pue~to Rico\Virgin Islands Task Force Invitees G. Reviewers of Puerto Rico\Virgin Islands [A] and [8] Species REPORT ON THE RARE PLANTS OF PUERTO RICO SUMMARY The Center for Plant Conservation (Center) has held two meetings of the Puerto Rlco\Virgin Islands Task Force in Puerto Rico.
    [Show full text]
  • Botanischer Garten Der Universität Tübingen
    Botanischer Garten der Universität Tübingen 1974 – 2008 2 System FRANZ OBERWINKLER Emeritus für Spezielle Botanik und Mykologie Ehemaliger Direktor des Botanischen Gartens 2016 2016 zur Erinnerung an LEONHART FUCHS (1501-1566), 450. Todesjahr 40 Jahre Alpenpflanzen-Lehrpfad am Iseler, Oberjoch, ab 1976 20 Jahre Förderkreis Botanischer Garten der Universität Tübingen, ab 1996 für alle, die im Garten gearbeitet und nachgedacht haben 2 Inhalt Vorwort ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Baupläne und Funktionen der Blüten ......................................................................................... 9 Hierarchie der Taxa .................................................................................................................. 13 Systeme der Bedecktsamer, Magnoliophytina ......................................................................... 15 Das System von ANTOINE-LAURENT DE JUSSIEU ................................................................. 16 Das System von AUGUST EICHLER ....................................................................................... 17 Das System von ADOLF ENGLER .......................................................................................... 19 Das System von ARMEN TAKHTAJAN ................................................................................... 21 Das System nach molekularen Phylogenien ........................................................................ 22
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • A Landscape-Based Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerability for All Native Hawaiian Plants
    Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDscape-bASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMatE CHANGE VULNEraBILITY FOR ALL NatIVE HAWAIIAN PLANts Lucas Fortini1,2, Jonathan Price3, James Jacobi2, Adam Vorsino4, Jeff Burgett1,4, Kevin Brinck5, Fred Amidon4, Steve Miller4, Sam `Ohukani`ohi`a Gon III6, Gregory Koob7, and Eben Paxton2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaii National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service —Ecological Services, Division of Climate Change and Strategic Habitat Management, Honolulu, HI 96850 5 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawai‘i National Park, HI 96718 6 The Nature Conservancy, Hawai‘i Chapter, Honolulu, HI 96817 7 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Hawaii/Pacific Islands Area State Office, Honolulu, HI 96850 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai‘i at Hilo 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 November 2013 This product was prepared under Cooperative Agreement CAG09AC00070 for the Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey. Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDSCAPE-BASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY FOR ALL NATIVE HAWAIIAN PLANTS LUCAS FORTINI1,2, JONATHAN PRICE3, JAMES JACOBI2, ADAM VORSINO4, JEFF BURGETT1,4, KEVIN BRINCK5, FRED AMIDON4, STEVE MILLER4, SAM ʽOHUKANIʽOHIʽA GON III 6, GREGORY KOOB7, AND EBEN PAXTON2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaiʽi National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawaiʽi at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Expenditure Report (1998)
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Federal and State Endangered and Threatened Species Expenditures Fiscal Year 1998 January 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... ii What is the purpose of this report? ....................................................................................................... ii What expenditures are reported?.......................................................................................................... ii What expenditures are not included?.................................................................................................... ii What are the expenditures reported for FY 1998?................................................................................ ii How does the 1998 expenditure report compare to other years? ......................................................... ii ENDANGERED SPECIES EXPENDITURES FISCAL YEAR 1998...................................................1 PURPOSE.............................................................................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................1 What does "Reasonably Identifiable Expenditures" mean? .........................................................1 What is not included in the report? ...............................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA-Pesticides; Dodine
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDESDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES PC Code: 044301 DP Barcode: D338148 Date: January 22, 2008 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Dodine Section 3 New Use on Peanuts and Bananas TO: Robert Westin, Product Manager Mary Waller, Team Leader Registration Division (7505P) FROM: Christopher J. Salice, P.h.D, Biologist Marietta Echeverria, Envronmental Scientist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) REVIEWED BY: Thomas Steeger, Ph.D., Senior Biologist R. David Jones, Ph.D., Senior Agronomist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) APPROVED BY: Elizabeth Behl, Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has reviewed the proposed label for the use of dodine (n-dodecylguanidine monoacetate; CAS 2439-10-3) and its end-use product SYLLIT® FL (39.6% dodine) fungicide on peanuts and bananas. The results of this screening-level risk assessment indicate that the proposed new uses of dodine on peanuts and bananas have the potential for direct adverse effects on listed and non-listed freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates, listed and non-listed vascular and non-vascular plants, and listed and non-listed birds and mammals. Major data gaps are listed below. Without these data potential risk to the associated taxa can not be precluded: • Aquatic vascular plant toxicity data (850.4400) There is uncertainty regarding the potential chronic effects of dodine to saltwater invertebrates and fish since there are no toxicity data. Using acute-to-chronic ratios (ACR) from freshwater species to calculate chronic endpoints for the saltwater species, however, suggests that risks may be low.
    [Show full text]
  • 2002 Federal Register, 67 FR 37207
    Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2002 / Proposed Rules 37207 Oahu M considered essential for their requirements in Section D, and in the conservation on Oahu, and provides table for Oahu M). The proposed unit Oahu M provides habitat to support one or more This unit contains a total of 100 ha unoccupied habitat for two species: additional populations necessary to (246 ac) on State (Malaekahana State Centaurium sebaeoides and Sesbania meet the recovery objectives for these Recreation Area), Federal (James tomentosa. Designation of this unit is species of 8 to 10 populations and 300 Campbell National Wildlife Refuge), and essential to the conservation of these mature individuals per population private lands. The natural feature found species because it contains the physical throughout their known historical range in this unit is the coastline from Kahuku and biological features that are (see the discussion of conservation Point to Makahoa Point. VerDate May<14>2002 20:19 May 24, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28MYP3.SGM pfrm15 PsN: 28MYP3 37208 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2002 / Proposed Rules VerDate May<14>2002 20:19 May 24, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28MYP3.SGM pfrm15 PsN: 28MYP3 EP28my02.087</GPH> Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2002 / Proposed Rules 37209 Oahu N and biological features that are throughout their known historical range considered essential for their (see the discussion of conservation The proposed unit Oahu N provides conservation on Oahu, and provides requirements in Section D, and in the unoccupied habitat for two species: habitat to support one or more table for Oahu N).
    [Show full text]