Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Ocelot (Leopardus pardalis, 52547-52549 [2010-21249]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 165 / Thursday, August 26, 2010 / Notices
Federal Register on February 25, 2009
(74 FR 8564).
The Hakalau Forest Refuge is located
on the Island of Hawai’i. It encompasses
two refuge units, the Hakalau Forest
Unit and the Kona Forest Unit. The
Hakalau Forest Unit was established in
1985 to protect endangered forest birds
and their rainforest habitat. The Hakalau
Forest Unit encompasses 32,733 acres of
land, located on the eastern or
windward slope of Mauna Kea, which
supports a diversity of native birds and
plants. The refuge’s Kona Forest Unit
was established in 1997, on the
southwestern or leeward slope of Mauna
Loa, to protect native forest birds and
the ‘alala, an endangered Hawaiian
crow. The Kona Forest Unit supports
diverse native bird and plant species, as
well as rare habitats found in lava tubes
and lava tube skylights.
Background
The CCP Process
The CCP/EA was prepared under the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
668dd–668ee), as amended (Refuge
Administration Act), and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA). The Refuge
Administration Act requires us to
develop a CCP for each national wildlife
refuge. The purpose of developing a
CCP is to provide refuge managers a 15year plan for achieving refuge purposes
and contributing toward the mission of
the National Wildlife Refuge System,
consistent with sound principles of fish
and wildlife conservation, management,
legal mandates, and our policies. In
addition to outlining broad management
direction for conserving wildlife and
their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities
available to the public, including
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation
and photography, and environmental
education and interpretation. We will
review and update the CCPs at least
every 15 years in accordance with the
Refuge Administration Act.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Public Outreach
We began the public scoping phase of
the CCP planning process by publishing
a notice of intent in the Federal Register
on February 25, 2009 (74 FR 8564),
announcing our intention to complete a
CCP/EA for the refuge, inviting the
public to two open house meetings, and
requesting public comments.
Simultaneously, we distributed
Planning Update 1 to our mailing list
announcing the beginning of the CCP
planning process, requesting comments
on refuge management issues, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:12 Aug 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
inviting the public to attend two open
house meetings. The meetings were held
March 3 and 4, 2009, in Hilo, HI, and
Captain Cook, HI, respectively.
In October 2009 we distributed
Planning Update 2. In Planning Update
2 we provided a summary of the
comments we received and draft vision
statements. The public comments we
received throughout the planning
process were considered during
development of the Draft CCP/EA.
Draft Alternatives We Are Considering
We drafted three alternatives for
managing the refuge. All of the
alternatives will include actions to
control invasive species, develop or
improve partnerships, continue
coordination with Hawai’i’s Department
of Forestry and Wildlife, develop
volunteer opportunities, and construct a
fence around the Kona Forest Unit. Brief
descriptions of the alternatives follow.
Alternative A
Alternative A is the no-action
alternative. We would continue existing
refuge management activities under
Alternative A, including fencing
projects currently under way at the
Kona Forest Unit. Staff would conduct
limited additional restoration of various
koa forest habitats. Volunteer
opportunities to assist refuge staff with
planting native plants would continue.
Refuge staff would provide limited
outreach regarding management
activities.
Alternative B
Alternative B is the preferred
alternative. We would increase
reforestation, restoration, and ungulate
removal efforts under Alternative B.
Additional areas in both units would be
protected through fencing and ungulate
removal. Refuge staff, with the
assistance of volunteers, would increase
efforts to restore understory species in
reforested areas. Staff would provide
additional opportunities for outreach
and environmental education and
interpretation. We would work with
partners and neighboring landowners to
explore habitat protection and
restoration opportunities, including the
potential for refuge boundary
expansion. Opportunities for additional
land acquisition would focus on
protection of forest birds and their
habitats in response to climate change
concerns.
Alternative C
Under Alternative C, we would focus
on maintaining existing koa forest and
allowing natural regeneration of the
understory on the Kona Forest Unit. We
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52547
would place less emphasis on ungulate
removal and maintenance. Additional
grassland areas would be maintained for
¯ ¯
foraging and nesting nene. We would
open additional areas of the Hakalau
Forest Unit to the public. Fewer
volunteer opportunities would be
provided. As in Alternative B, we would
explore habitat protection opportunities.
Public Availability of Documents
We encourage you to stay involved in
the CCP planning process by reviewing
and commenting on the proposals we
have developed in the Draft CCP/EA.
Copies of the Draft CCP/EA are available
by request from Jim Kraus or via the
internet (see ADDRESSES).
Next Steps
After this comment period ends, we
will analyze the comments and address
them in the final CCP.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Dated: August 10, 2010.
Theresa E. Rabot,
Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland,
Oregon.
[FR Doc. 2010–21289 Filed 8–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R2–ES–2010–N167; 20124–1113–
0000–C2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Draft Ocelot (LEOPARDUS
PARDALIS) Recovery Plan, First Revision
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of document availability
for public review.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of the Draft Ocelot
(Leopardus pardalis) Recovery Plan,
First Revision. We request review and
comment from the public on this draft
revised recovery plan. We will also
accept any new information on the
status of the ocelot throughout its range
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
52548
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 165 / Thursday, August 26, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
to assist in finalizing the revised
recovery plan.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we
must receive any comments no later
than October 25, 2010.
ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the
recovery plan can be obtained from our
Web site at https://www.fws.gov/
southwest/es/Library/. Copies of the
recovery plan are also available by
request. To obtain a copy, contact Jody
Mays by U.S. mail at Laguna Atascosa
National Wildlife Refuge, 22817 Ocelot
Road, Los Fresnos, TX 78566; by phone
at (956) 748–3607; or by e-mail at
Jody_Mays@fws.gov. Written comments
and materials on the draft revised
recovery plan may be mailed to Jody
Mays at the address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jody
Mays (see ADDRESSES).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Endangered Species Act of 1973
(Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), requires the development of
recovery plans for listed species unless
such a plan would not promote the
conservation of a particular species.
Recovery plans help guide the recovery
effort by describing actions considered
necessary for the conservation of the
species, and estimating time and costs
for implementing the measures needed
for recovery. A recovery plan was
originally completed for the ocelot in
1990 (The Listed Cats of Texas and
Arizona Recovery Plan), but the
recommendations contained in that plan
are outdated given the species’ current
status.
Section 4(f) of the Act requires that
we provide public notice and an
opportunity for public review and
comment during recovery plan
development. We will consider all
information presented during a public
comment period prior to approval of
each new or revised recovery plan. We
will also take these comments into
account in the course of implementing
recovery actions. In fulfillment of this
requirement, we are making this draft
first revision of the recovery plan for the
ocelot available for a 60-day public
comment period.
The ocelot was listed as an
endangered foreign species in 1972
under the authority of the Endangered
Species Conservation Act of 1969 (37 FR
6476; March 30, 1972). Following
passage of the Endangered Species Act
in 1973, the ocelot was included on the
January 4, 1974 (39 FR 1158; January 4,
1974), list of ‘‘Endangered Foreign
Wildlife’’ that ‘‘grandfathered’’ species
from the lists under the 1969
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:12 Aug 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
Endangered Species Conservation Act
into a new list under the ESA.
Endangered status was extended to
ocelots in the U.S. portion of the
species’ range for the first time, with a
final rule published July 21, 1982 (47 FR
31670). In that rule, we made a
determination that designation of
critical habitat was not prudent, because
such a designation would not be in the
best interests of conservation of the
species. Currently, the ocelot is listed as
endangered throughout its range, from
southern Texas and southern Arizona
through Central and South America into
northern Argentina and Uruguay.
The ocelot requires dense vegetation
(more than 75 percent canopy cover),
with 95 percent cover preferred in
Texas. Habitats used by the ocelot
throughout its range vary from tropical
rainforest, pine forest, gallery forest,
riparian forest, semideciduous forest,
and dry tropical forest, to savanna,
shrublands, and marshlands.
Contiguous areas of vegetation are
necessary for ocelot dispersal. In south
Texas, 2 remaining ocelot populations
of less than 25 total known individuals
inhabit dense thornscrub communities
on the Lower Rio Grande Valley and
Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife
Refuges, as well as on private lands. Its
prey consists primarily of rabbits,
rodents, birds, and lizards.
In November 2009, an ocelot was
documented in Arizona with the use of
camera traps for the first time since
1964, when the last known ocelot in
Arizona was legally shot. However, a
number of ocelots have been recently
documented 30–35 miles south of the
Arizona border in Sonora, Mexico.
Habitat conversion, fragmentation,
and loss, comprise the primary threats
to the ocelot today. In Texas, over 95
percent of the dense thornscrub habitat
in the Lower Rio Grande Valley has
been converted to agriculture,
rangelands, or urban land uses. Small
population sizes in Texas and isolation
from conspecifics in Mexico endanger
the ocelot in Texas with genetic
impoverishment and increased
susceptibility to stochastic (random)
events. Connectivity among ocelot
populations or colonization of new
habitats is discouraged by the
proliferation of highways and increased
road mortality among dispersing
ocelots. Issues associated with
developing and patrolling the boundary
between the United States and Mexico
further exacerbate the isolation of Texas
ocelots from those in Mexico.
While the draft ocelot recovery plan
considers the ocelot throughout its
range, its major focus is on two crossborder management units, the Texas/
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Tamaulipas Management Unit and the
Arizona/Sonora Management Unit. The
draft ocelot recovery plan includes
scientific information about the species
and provides objectives and actions
needed for recovery and to ultimately
remove it from the list of threatened and
endangered species. Recovery actions
include:
• Assessment, protection,
reconnection, and restoration of
sufficient habitat to support viable
populations of the ocelot in the
borderlands of the United States and
Mexico;
• Reduction of effects of human
population growth and development to
ocelot survival and mortality;
• Maintenance or improvement of
genetic fitness, demographic conditions,
and health of the ocelot;
• Assurance of long-term viability of
ocelot conservation through
partnerships, the development and
application of incentives for
landowners, application of existing
regulations, and public education and
outreach;
• Use of adaptive management, in
which recovery is monitored and
recovery tasks are revised by the Service
in coordination with the Ocelot
Recovery Team as new information
becomes available; and
• Support of international efforts to
ascertain the status of and conserve the
ocelot south of Tamaulipas and Sonora.
Public Comments
We are accepting written comments
and information during this comment
period on the revised draft recovery
plan. All comments received by the date
specified above will be considered prior
to approval of the final recovery plan.
Comments and materials we receive will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the Laguna Atascosa National
Wildlife Refuge (see ADDRESSES).
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment, including your
personal identifying information, may
be made publically available at any
time. While you can ask us in your
comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public
review, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
Authority: The authority for this action is
section 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act,
16 U.S.C. 1533(f).
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 165 / Thursday, August 26, 2010 / Notices
Dated: August 4, 2010.
Joy E. Nicholopoulos,
Regional Director, Region 2.
Under the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), we
announce that we intend to gather
information necessary to prepare an EIS
on the draft ABM GCP Project under the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2010–21249 Filed 8–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R4–ES–2010–N166; 40120–1112–
0000–F2]
Environmental Impact Statement;
Alabama Beach Mouse Draft General
Conservation Plan; Fort Morgan
Peninsula, Baldwin County, AL
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent; announcement
of public meetings.
AGENCY:
Under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we,
the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
advise the public that we intend to
gather information necessary to prepare
an environmental impact statement
(EIS) on the draft Alabama Beach Mouse
General Conservation Plan (ABM GCP)
Project. We are preparing the ABM GCP
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). We provide this
notice to (1) Describe the proposed
action and possible alternatives; (2)
advise other Federal and State agencies,
affected Tribes, and the public of our
intent to prepare an EIS; (3) announce
the initiation of a public scoping period;
and (4) obtain suggestions and
information on the scope of issues to be
included in the EIS.
DATES: Comments: We must receive any
written comments at our Field Office
(see ADDRESSES) on or before September
27, 2010.
Public Meetings: Two public scoping
meetings will be held on September 29,
2010: The first from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
and the second from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Public Meetings: Gulf
Shores Adult Activities Center, 260
Club House Drive, Gulf Shores, AL
36542.
Document Availability: Documents
will be available for public inspection
by appointment during normal business
hours at the Fish and Wildlife Service
Field Office, 1208–B Main Street,
Daphne, AL 36526.
Comments: For how and where to
submit comments, see Public Comments
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Darren LeBlanc, Project Manager, at the
Alabama Field Office (see ADDRESSES),
telephone: 251/441–5868.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:12 Aug 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
Background
Section 9 of the Act and Federal
regulations prohibit the ‘‘take’’ of
wildlife species listed as endangered or
threatened (16 U.S.C. 1538). The Act
defines the term ‘‘take’’ as to harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, capture, or collect listed species, or
to attempt to engage in such conduct (16
U.S.C. 1532). Harm includes significant
habitat modification or degradation that
actually kills or injures listed wildlife
by significantly impairing essential
behavioral patterns, including breeding,
feeding, and sheltering [50 CFR 17.3(c)].
Under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, the
Service may issue permits to authorize
‘‘incidental take’’ of listed species.
‘‘Incidental Take’’ is defined by the Act
as take that is incidental to, and not the
purpose of, carrying out an otherwise
lawful activity. Regulations governing
permits for threatened species and
endangered species, respectively, are in
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at
50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22. All
species included on an incidental take
permit would receive assurances under
the Service’s ‘‘No Surprises’’ regulations
[50 CFR 17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5)].
Proposed ABM GCP
Species we propose for coverage in
the ABM GCP are species that are
currently listed as federally threatened
or endangered and have some likelihood
to occur within the project area. Three
protected species covered by the ABM
GCP are known to occur within the area.
Currently the following listed animal
species are included in the plan:
Alabama beach mouse (ABM)
(Peromyscus polionotus ammobates),
Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta),
and Kemp’s ridley sea turtle
(Lepidochelys kempii).
The proposed ABM GCP utilizes a
conservation strategy that would
provide for preservation of a large
portion of the developable habitat for
the ABM while still allowing economic
growth to occur in the area. The ABM
GCP coverage area extends along the
Gulf of Mexico for about 17 miles,
encompassing approximately 2,400
acres of open beach and associated
nearshore coastal dune environments on
the Fort Morgan Peninsula, Baldwin
County, AL. The coverage area begins at
Little Lagoon Pass, on State Hwy 182 in
Gulf Shores, and extends westward to
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52549
the tip of the Fort Morgan State Historic
site at the western terminus of the Fort
Morgan Peninsula. The area is defined
biologically as that area where an ABM
population and/or subpopulations (i.e.,
metapopulations) could be affected by
the proposed actions. The coverage area
is based on what the Service currently
knows about ABM movement and
dispersal, locations of separate yet
connected populations, and where
future development could occur within
these areas. It is important that suitable
habitat be maintained within these areas
so that barriers to dispersal do not
develop, to allow for expansion of
subpopulations, and for maintaining or
increasing genetic diversity.
The ABM GCP would result in take
authorization for otherwise lawful
actions, such as private development
that may incidentally take or harm
animal species or their habitats within
the ABM GCP area, in exchange for the
assembly and management of a
coordinated ABM GCP area.
Specifically, these activities would
include residential development and
infrastructure improvement, as well as
response activities related to impacts
from tropical weather systems. The
ABM GCP would develop a program of
take avoidance, minimization, and
mitigation, with an emphasis on
preservation of remaining natural lands
that will support viable populations and
the continued existence of federally
listed threatened or endangered species,
including an in-lieu-fee proposal. The
ABM GCP creates a framework for
complying with federally listed
threatened or endangered species
regulations for specified species while
accommodating future growth in the
ABM GCP area. The framework
established by the ABM GCP in-lieu-fee
plan will allow for the purchase of
select parcels of high-priority habitat,
preserve movement corridors within
viable habitat, conduct post-storm
habitat restoration on public lands and
assist the public with the same on
private property, and assist in the
conservation of species through
research.
If the ABM GCP is established,
property owners who wish to develop
low-density residences on the Fort
Morgan peninsula in Alabama, and who
meet the qualifying conditions of the
ABM GCP, may apply for a 50-year
Incidental Take Permit (ITP) from the
Service. The ITP is needed to authorize
the incidental take of threatened and
endangered species that would occur as
a result of private residential
development.
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 165 (Thursday, August 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52547-52549]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21249]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R2-ES-2010-N167; 20124-1113-0000-C2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Ocelot
(Leopardus pardalis) Recovery Plan, First Revision
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of document availability for public review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of the Draft Ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) Recovery Plan,
First Revision. We request review and comment from the public on this
draft revised recovery plan. We will also accept any new information on
the status of the ocelot throughout its range
[[Page 52548]]
to assist in finalizing the revised recovery plan.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive any comments no later
than October 25, 2010.
ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the recovery plan can be obtained from
our Web site at https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/Library/. Copies of the
recovery plan are also available by request. To obtain a copy, contact
Jody Mays by U.S. mail at Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge,
22817 Ocelot Road, Los Fresnos, TX 78566; by phone at (956) 748-3607;
or by e-mail at Jody_Mays@fws.gov. Written comments and materials on
the draft revised recovery plan may be mailed to Jody Mays at the
address above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jody Mays (see ADDRESSES).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), requires the development of recovery plans for listed
species unless such a plan would not promote the conservation of a
particular species. Recovery plans help guide the recovery effort by
describing actions considered necessary for the conservation of the
species, and estimating time and costs for implementing the measures
needed for recovery. A recovery plan was originally completed for the
ocelot in 1990 (The Listed Cats of Texas and Arizona Recovery Plan),
but the recommendations contained in that plan are outdated given the
species' current status.
Section 4(f) of the Act requires that we provide public notice and
an opportunity for public review and comment during recovery plan
development. We will consider all information presented during a public
comment period prior to approval of each new or revised recovery plan.
We will also take these comments into account in the course of
implementing recovery actions. In fulfillment of this requirement, we
are making this draft first revision of the recovery plan for the
ocelot available for a 60-day public comment period.
The ocelot was listed as an endangered foreign species in 1972
under the authority of the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969
(37 FR 6476; March 30, 1972). Following passage of the Endangered
Species Act in 1973, the ocelot was included on the January 4, 1974 (39
FR 1158; January 4, 1974), list of ``Endangered Foreign Wildlife'' that
``grandfathered'' species from the lists under the 1969 Endangered
Species Conservation Act into a new list under the ESA. Endangered
status was extended to ocelots in the U.S. portion of the species'
range for the first time, with a final rule published July 21, 1982 (47
FR 31670). In that rule, we made a determination that designation of
critical habitat was not prudent, because such a designation would not
be in the best interests of conservation of the species. Currently, the
ocelot is listed as endangered throughout its range, from southern
Texas and southern Arizona through Central and South America into
northern Argentina and Uruguay.
The ocelot requires dense vegetation (more than 75 percent canopy
cover), with 95 percent cover preferred in Texas. Habitats used by the
ocelot throughout its range vary from tropical rainforest, pine forest,
gallery forest, riparian forest, semideciduous forest, and dry tropical
forest, to savanna, shrublands, and marshlands. Contiguous areas of
vegetation are necessary for ocelot dispersal. In south Texas, 2
remaining ocelot populations of less than 25 total known individuals
inhabit dense thornscrub communities on the Lower Rio Grande Valley and
Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuges, as well as on private lands.
Its prey consists primarily of rabbits, rodents, birds, and lizards.
In November 2009, an ocelot was documented in Arizona with the use
of camera traps for the first time since 1964, when the last known
ocelot in Arizona was legally shot. However, a number of ocelots have
been recently documented 30-35 miles south of the Arizona border in
Sonora, Mexico.
Habitat conversion, fragmentation, and loss, comprise the primary
threats to the ocelot today. In Texas, over 95 percent of the dense
thornscrub habitat in the Lower Rio Grande Valley has been converted to
agriculture, rangelands, or urban land uses. Small population sizes in
Texas and isolation from conspecifics in Mexico endanger the ocelot in
Texas with genetic impoverishment and increased susceptibility to
stochastic (random) events. Connectivity among ocelot populations or
colonization of new habitats is discouraged by the proliferation of
highways and increased road mortality among dispersing ocelots. Issues
associated with developing and patrolling the boundary between the
United States and Mexico further exacerbate the isolation of Texas
ocelots from those in Mexico.
While the draft ocelot recovery plan considers the ocelot
throughout its range, its major focus is on two cross-border management
units, the Texas/Tamaulipas Management Unit and the Arizona/Sonora
Management Unit. The draft ocelot recovery plan includes scientific
information about the species and provides objectives and actions
needed for recovery and to ultimately remove it from the list of
threatened and endangered species. Recovery actions include:
Assessment, protection, reconnection, and restoration of
sufficient habitat to support viable populations of the ocelot in the
borderlands of the United States and Mexico;
Reduction of effects of human population growth and
development to ocelot survival and mortality;
Maintenance or improvement of genetic fitness, demographic
conditions, and health of the ocelot;
Assurance of long-term viability of ocelot conservation
through partnerships, the development and application of incentives for
landowners, application of existing regulations, and public education
and outreach;
Use of adaptive management, in which recovery is monitored
and recovery tasks are revised by the Service in coordination with the
Ocelot Recovery Team as new information becomes available; and
Support of international efforts to ascertain the status
of and conserve the ocelot south of Tamaulipas and Sonora.
Public Comments
We are accepting written comments and information during this
comment period on the revised draft recovery plan. All comments
received by the date specified above will be considered prior to
approval of the final recovery plan. Comments and materials we receive
will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal
business hours at the Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge (see
ADDRESSES).
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying
information, may be made publically available at any time. While you
can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Authority: The authority for this action is section 4(f) of the
Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f).
[[Page 52549]]
Dated: August 4, 2010.
Joy E. Nicholopoulos,
Regional Director, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2010-21249 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
