Random header image... Refresh for more!

Candidate Conservation Agreements With Assurances

Partners for Fish and Wildlife is a voluntary program managed by the service to protect, improve and restore wildlife habitat on private (non-federal) land by providing technical and financial assistance to landowners for the restoration of fish and game habitats, in partnership with other federal, public and local governments. , educational institutions, businesses and conservation organizations. With information from the candidate conservation program, the partnership program selects types of candidates who would benefit from their expertise and resources. Our answer: although we do not have separate guidelines or regulations for CCMs, they play an important role in species conservation and have served as the basis for a series of FWS decisions not to list a particular species. It is important that federal authorities work with non-federal landowners to develop agreements that complement the CCAAs, so that there is a smooth implementation of species-specific conservation measures through non-federal and federal lands for species that inhabit several property lands. This table of contents is a navigation tool that is processed from the titles contained in the legal text of the documents of the federal register. This repetition of titles to create internal navigation links has no significant legal effect. Comment (4): One commentator asked whether the standard meant that a CCAA designed solely to “stabilize populations” would never be permitted or whether a CCAA designed solely for habitat preservation would be permitted. Another commentator recommended that services expand the definition of “net conservation benefit” to include habitat and population conservation measures and measures to prevent or minimize related measures. Another commentator stated that any final CCAA rule or policy should also specify that if species and habitat are already actually exploited on a given land, a CCAA may be appropriate even if there is no expected improvement in habitat quality or population growth on the land listed, since such an improvement is unnecessary. Another commentator stated that the requirement for population increase or habitat improvement sets a threshold too high for CCAA approval and does not recognize that the status of a species can be improved in any other way. For example, there will be cash benefits associated with actions that eliminate, reduce or minimize threats; Prevent or limit habitat degradation; Promoting resilience or, by other means, they slow down or stabilize a population decline. We also found that this measure met the standards of dependence on a categorical exclusion in accordance with the NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-A.

Sharing is the Best Form of Caring
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • Mixx