Current Distribution Clause Samples

Current Distribution. All Available Cash allocated under Section 5.1.2 to any Member or any holder of a CS 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 CS Warrant shall be distributed to such Member or such holder as soon as reasonably practicable. (b) Set Aside in CS Warrant Account. The portion of each non-cash asset allocated pursuant to Section 5.1.3

Current Distribution. ‌ Natural populations of the relict leopard frog are currently known to occur in only two general areas: near the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Arm of Lake ▇▇▇▇, Nevada, and in Black Canyon, Nevada, below Lake ▇▇▇▇. Historical records are reported for both areas, with specimen records dating from 1936 at the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ (1978), ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ pers. comm., ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ pers. comm., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. 2003), as well as recent surveys in the western Grand Canyon (▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ unpublished data). Recent extirpations include Littlefield, Arizona, the last known extant population on the main stem Virgin River, and Corral Spring, Nevada in the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Arm area of Lake ▇▇▇▇ (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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ springs on ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ 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 (▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ Salt ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Springs (Twin Spring, Central Spring, ▇▇▇▇▇ Spring/Reservoir), ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Springs, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Spring (Figure 1). Recently, some least chub have been found in Snake Creek, south of ▇▇▇▇▇ Salt ▇▇▇▇▇, 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ranch and the ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Springs complex (▇▇▇▇▇ 1990). Recent data suggest that least chub numbers may be declining within the ▇▇▇▇▇ Salt ▇▇▇▇▇ (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 ▇▇▇▇▇ Salt ▇▇▇▇▇ monitoring area. Least chub have recently been transplanted to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Spring. Surveys were also conducted in 53 springs located in Box Elder county from 1985 to 1986 (▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇, 1987), however, no least chub were collected. The last collection of least chub along the Wasatch Front was made by ▇▇▇▇▇ in 1965. In October of 1995, a population of least chub was discovered by UDWR in a small spring complex near the town of ▇▇▇▇ in Juab County (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ River drainage in the ▇▇▇▇▇ Valley ▇▇▇▇▇ complex (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇ Valley ▇▇▇▇▇ complex.

Current Distribution. Bald eagles reclaimed their entire historic range by the late 1990s (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 ▇▇▇▇▇, Broward, Calhoun, Gilchrist, Holmes, Lafayette, Madison, and Nassau (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2005; Figure 1). Most nests are found on privately-owned lands (67% in 2003; ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 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 (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. in review). These core nesting areas are located along the Gulf coast from St. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Island to ▇▇▇ County, and inland from the lower St. ▇▇▇▇▇ 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