50 CFR 223.203 - Anadromous fish

Cite as50 CFR 223.203
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
87 practice notes
  • Friends Of The River v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv. ., No. Civ. S-06-2845 LKK/JFM.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • July 8, 2010
    ...was filed, take of steelhead and spring run Chinook was largely prohibited, but take of green sturgeon was not. See 50 C.F.R. §§ 223.101, 223.203. NMFS may relax the prohibition on take when take is incidental to activity for which NMFS has issued a “no jeopardy” BiOp. This relaxation takes......
  • California State Grange v. National Marine Fish., No. 1:06-CV-00308 OWW DLB.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • October 27, 2008
    ...pursuant to municipal governments' ordinances or plans that NMFS determines will adequately provide for salmon conservation." 50 C.F.R. § 223.203(b)(12). The second challenged provision "creates an exemption from the take prohibition for non-federal forestry activities [undertaken] in Washi......
  • Audubon Soc'y of Portland v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., No. 03:11–cv–00494–HU.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Oregon)
    • July 29, 2011
    ...and conservation actions, and ensuring that such actions provide for the survival and recovery of listed species.’ ” Id. (quoting 50 C.F.R. § 223.203(b)(4)(i)(B)). They assert that use of the VSP criteria for this purpose has been upheld by the courts repeatedly. Dkt. # 19, p. 12 (citing Tr......
  • Soc'y v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., Case No. 3:12–cv–00431–HA.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Oregon)
    • January 16, 2014
    ...Significant Units, 65 Fed.Reg. 42, 422, 47, 475–81 (July 10, 2000); 70 Fed.Reg. at 37,194 (amending 2000 rule) (codified at 50 C.F.R. § 223.203). As a part of the 4(d) rule, NMFS established exceptions to § 9's take prohibition known as “4(d) Limits.” Id. Limit 5 creates an exemption from §......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • Friends Of The River v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv. ., No. Civ. S-06-2845 LKK/JFM.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • July 8, 2010
    ...was filed, take of steelhead and spring run Chinook was largely prohibited, but take of green sturgeon was not. See 50 C.F.R. §§ 223.101, 223.203. NMFS may relax the prohibition on take when take is incidental to activity for which NMFS has issued a “no jeopardy” BiOp. This relaxation takes......
  • California State Grange v. National Marine Fish., No. 1:06-CV-00308 OWW DLB.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • October 27, 2008
    ...pursuant to municipal governments' ordinances or plans that NMFS determines will adequately provide for salmon conservation." 50 C.F.R. § 223.203(b)(12). The second challenged provision "creates an exemption from the take prohibition for non-federal forestry activities [undertaken......
  • Audubon Soc'y of Portland v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., No. 03:11–cv–00494–HU.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Oregon)
    • July 29, 2011
    ...and conservation actions, and ensuring that such actions provide for the survival and recovery of listed species.’ ” Id. (quoting 50 C.F.R. § 223.203(b)(4)(i)(B)). They assert that use of the VSP criteria for this purpose has been upheld by the courts repeatedly. Dkt. # 19, p. 12 (citing Tr......
  • Soc'y v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., Case No. 3:12–cv–00431–HA.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Oregon)
    • January 16, 2014
    ...Significant Units, 65 Fed.Reg. 42, 422, 47, 475–81 (July 10, 2000); 70 Fed.Reg. at 37,194 (amending 2000 rule) (codified at 50 C.F.R. § 223.203). As a part of the 4(d) rule, NMFS established exceptions to § 9's take prohibition known as “4(d) Limits.” Id. Limit 5 creates an exemption from §......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT