Matching Items (295)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

35500-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1998
DescriptionSelected article titles: Miss Hollie's New Career; Flagstaff produces 2nd annual pridefest; Gay singer-songwriter continues family tradition; New plays to get staged readings at PT; Horrorscopes
35502-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1998
DescriptionSelected article titles: Closets are for Speedos; Over 800 gather at Biltmore for AHRF; Flagstaff pride moved downtown; A Unique Persepective on the Law; Here & queer — & yet to come
35505-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1998
DescriptionSelected article titles: Bold! Blunt! Brutal! They were Nurses gone Bad!; '98 Phoenix Pridefest shows minimal profit: $15K emergency loan from AGRA was needed to open gates; AZ Senate approves anti-discrimination amendment; HeatStroke snares four '97 Press Club Awards; LifeGuard offers HIV home test kits
43448-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2005-12-31
Description

Whether reintroduction and recovery should be allowed, and if so where and how, were hotly debated through the 1990s, when reintroduction was formally proposed. They still are. Regardless, the proposal process ended with a nonessential experimental population rule (hereafter Final Rule) approved on January 12, 1998. In keeping with the

Whether reintroduction and recovery should be allowed, and if so where and how, were hotly debated through the 1990s, when reintroduction was formally proposed. They still are. Regardless, the proposal process ended with a nonessential experimental population rule (hereafter Final Rule) approved on January 12, 1998. In keeping with the stated experimental nature of the reintroduction effort, and respectful of the doubts expressed by many, the Final Rule required full evaluations after 3 and 5 years to recommend continuation, modification, or termination of the Reintroduction Project. The 3-Year Review, conducted in 2001, concluded that reintroduction should continue, albeit with important modifications. However, as we discuss elsewhere in this report, for many reasons the 3-Year Review recommendations were not implemented, at least not to the extent that interested parties and stakeholders expected or desired. Regardless of cause, the apparent lack of closure was a significant agency and public concern when the time came for the next review.

By agreement among the primary cooperating agencies, responsibility for the Reintroduction Project’s 5-Year Review fell to the Mexican Wolf Blue Range Adaptive Management Oversight Committee (AMOC) that oversees the Project on behalf of six Lead Agencies and various formal and informal Cooperator agencies. AMOC and the Project's Interagency Field Team conducted the 5-Year Review to comply with the Final Rule, but above and beyond that the intent was to identify and implement improvements in the Project. The Review consists of several primary components: Administrative, Technical, Socioeconomic, and Recommendations. Each is detailed in this report. Review and adaptive management of the Reintroduction Project will not stop with this review. Project cooperators will continue to seek internal and public input regarding Mexican wolf reintroduction to help achieve recovery goals and objectives.

39297-Thumbnail Image.jpg
Created1983
DescriptionA close up shot of two women speaking to each other.
39298-Thumbnail Image.jpg
Created1983
DescriptionA line of people stand in white shirts before a seated audience.
39299-Thumbnail Image.jpg
Created1983
DescriptionA woman in a white sleeveless dress dances.
39212-Thumbnail Image.jpg
DescriptionA man plays guitar and sings on stage.
39213-Thumbnail Image.jpg
DescriptionA stack of protest signs sit on the floor.
39214-Thumbnail Image.jpg
DescriptionPeople hold up pro-gay protest signs and balloons while standing together.