-
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/8850de1f7ff1d25217e73702d4d83dae.pdf
dc72eacd84ad51a52a3cdc8cf52e427a
PDF Text
Text
ÿ
ÿ
23456789 34ÿÿ955655 64 ÿÿ94 ÿ
ÿ
23456789 34ÿÿ5 79 6��ÿÿ�37ÿÿ5� � ÿÿ
ÿ
�3�ÿÿ4ÿÿ�6ÿÿ�4 6 ÿÿ5ÿ9 65ÿ�ÿ����ÿÿ�� 9 6ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
�ÿ
23456ÿ89ÿ8 26 2 ÿ
ÿ
�����������������������������������������ÿ �ÿ
ÿ
������1�ÿ!���"#$������������������������ÿ %ÿ
&1��ÿ�'ÿ�#��$�����������������������������ÿ (ÿ
&1��ÿ�'ÿ)"*���ÿ"��ÿ+1��#������������������������ÿ ,ÿ
����-�1�.�����ÿ'�#ÿ%/��0%/%%��������������������ÿ 1ÿ
2����#"�1��ÿ���������3ÿ%/%4��������������������ÿ%Sÿ
2����#"�1��ÿ��"������������������������ÿ %Sÿ
56789:7ÿ7<=9><?@9<ABÿ8B7ÿC8?<989ÿ8==:==D:B9�����������ÿ%Sÿ
E1��ÿ"��������������������������������ÿ 4(ÿ
FÿG#�����ÿ�#ÿ�.#�"�����ÿ����#���1��3ÿ���1'1�"�1��3ÿ�#ÿ
ÿ
H@>98<ID:B9ÿAJÿ9C:ÿ=6:H<:=KÿC8?<989ÿA>ÿ>8BL:��������ÿ 4,ÿ
MFÿN �#��1�1O"�1��ÿ'�#ÿ�����#�1"�3ÿ#��#�"�1��"�3ÿ��1���1'1�3ÿ�#ÿ
ÿ
����"�1��"�ÿ-�#-����������������������ÿ 4Sÿ
2FÿP1��"��ÿ"��ÿ-#��"�1���������������������ÿ (�ÿ
PFÿQ�"��R�"�$ÿ�'ÿ��1��1��ÿ#����"��#$ÿ���."�1����������ÿ ((ÿ
�FÿN�.�#ÿ�"��#"�ÿ�#ÿ�"��"��ÿ'"���#�ÿ"''���1��ÿ1��ÿ����1����ÿ
ÿ
��1������������������������������ÿ (,ÿ
2����#"�1��ÿ!�#"���$3ÿ%/%40%/4%�������������������ÿ (Vÿ
Q��#�����1�����������������������������ÿ(Vÿ
T�"�������������������������������ÿ(Vÿ
N*U���1��3ÿ��#"���1��3ÿ"��ÿ"��11�1����������������ÿ ,/ÿ
ÿ
&1��#"��#�ÿ21�����������������������������ÿ ,4ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
2��#ÿ-.���ÿWÿ)#"1�ÿ�"��#"ÿ��#�$�ÿ."�ÿ*�����ÿ�.�ÿ����ÿ-�-��"#ÿ���.��ÿ�'ÿ
���1��#1��ÿ��1'�ÿ'��ÿ-�-��"�1���Fÿ).�ÿ��1'�ÿ'��ÿ�.���ÿ.�#�ÿ�"�ÿ-.����#"-.��ÿ1�ÿ
XA@9CÿY8ZA98ÿ?[ÿAB:ÿAJÿ\D<I[ÿ]<9HC:IIK=ÿ9>8<IÿH8D:>8=ÿ8=ÿ68>9ÿAJÿC:>ÿD8=9:>K=ÿ9C:=<=�ÿÿÿ
11ÿ
ÿ
�ÿ
23456789 95 �ÿ
ÿ
����ÿ�����������ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ��ÿ!�����"ÿ�#ÿ���ÿ����$���%ÿ!��ÿ$����&��ÿ�����������ÿ
�������"ÿ��ÿ��'�������"ÿ���ÿ��ÿ$���ÿ��������(ÿ)����ÿ�"����ÿ��&������������ÿ�#ÿ��ÿ
)!�#�ÿ*�+ÿ,�����������ÿ-��$ÿ.)*,-/ÿ����ÿ&�������ÿ��#��$�����ÿ��ÿ01234543678ÿ:;7;<ÿ
=>?@><::Aÿ��!���ÿÿ��B�������ÿ#����ÿ��ÿ��ÿ0CDD?E=84:FE<2;:ÿG?>ÿHIJJ'HIHHAÿ:<D;4?2(ÿ
- �ÿ������ÿ���ÿ������������ÿ��������ÿ���KÿL�����%ÿ,�������ÿM��K�ÿ���ÿN�����#�ÿ.,MN/Oÿ
����ÿM��K%ÿP�����ÿQ�&���$���ÿ�#ÿN�����#�ÿ���ÿM��K�ÿ.PQNM/OÿR����ÿP��"�%ÿS$���ÿ
�������%ÿ���ÿT�����ÿ)K���%ÿ�������ÿ*��%ÿN�����#�ÿ���ÿM��K�ÿ.�*NM/Oÿ)�$ÿN�����%ÿ
R�����K�ÿU�$�ÿ���ÿM��K�ÿ,�$$������ÿ.RUM,/OÿR������ÿ*��$��ÿ���ÿV�$��ÿ)�����%ÿ
R�!ÿ��+���ÿQ�&���$���ÿ�#ÿU�$�ÿ���ÿ*�� ÿ.R�QU*/OÿM�����KÿW��K���%ÿR���ÿQ�K���ÿ
U�$�ÿ���ÿ*��ÿQ�&���$���ÿ.RQU*/Oÿ���KÿX�!���%ÿYK�� �$�ÿQ�&���$���ÿ�#ÿN�����#�ÿ
,�����������ÿ.YQN,/OÿS�����ÿQ�!�ÿ)��K��%ÿ)���ÿQ�K���ÿQ�&���$���ÿ�#ÿU�$�%ÿ*��ÿ
���ÿM��K�ÿ.)QU*M/OÿQ���ÿP������%ÿ-�+��ÿM��K�ÿ���ÿN�����#�ÿQ�&���$���ÿ.-MNQ/Oÿ
Z<7;F<>ÿ[\]>4<2%ÿN��$��"ÿU�$�ÿ���ÿ*��ÿQ�&���$���ÿ.NU*Q/OÿV��ÿX������K%ÿ
^���������ÿ�#ÿN��$��"OÿQ���ÿR�����%ÿ,��$���ÿ^���������ÿ���ÿ)$��������ÿW����������Oÿ
-����ÿ_���%ÿS����"����ÿN��#ÿ,�����Oÿ���ÿX���ÿ) �$��%ÿ)$��������ÿW��������(ÿN�ÿ����ÿ
��K��!���"�ÿ���ÿ&�������ÿ�#ÿ���ÿ����$���ÿ!���ÿ���&���ÿ#��$ÿ��ÿ̀a11ÿ,b,)ÿ.Q�!�ÿ
)��K��ÿ̀a11/(ÿ
ÿ
N�ÿ!����ÿ��K�ÿ��ÿ��K��!���"�ÿR�����ÿTB������ÿ���ÿX�����ÿX�����%ÿ! �ÿ������ÿ��ÿ)!�#�ÿ
*�+ÿ,�����������ÿ-��$ÿ,�'�����ÿ! ��ÿ���ÿ����$���ÿ��������ÿ���"������ÿ���ÿ���Kÿ��ÿ
����ÿ��ÿ&������"ÿ��ÿ��������ÿ�����"ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ���"��(ÿN�ÿ����ÿ��K��!���"�ÿV�����ÿV����ÿ
!��ÿPQNMÿ! �ÿ���������ÿ��ÿb��UW)ÿ��������ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ�!�#�ÿ#�+ÿ���"�ÿ
#�"����(ÿb��ÿ!�ÿ���KÿQ���ÿM�������ÿ!��ÿ^���������ÿ�#ÿP�����%ÿP�����ÿb&&����ÿ
_�$���ÿ)�����"ÿ&��"��$%ÿ! �ÿ���������ÿ��ÿ������$���ÿ�#ÿ����"����ÿ���ÿ�������ÿ
�"���������ÿ�����ÿ&��������ÿ��ÿ��ÿ�&�����ÿ������ÿ������$���ÿ�������(ÿÿ
ÿ
- ��ÿ����$���ÿ!��ÿ��$&����ÿ���ÿ������ÿ��ÿ����ÿM��K%ÿ! �ÿ������ÿ��ÿ)*,-ÿ, ���ÿ
�����"ÿ��ÿ��!����(ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
)�""�����ÿ��������cÿÿ
ÿ
M��K%ÿ�����!ÿ)(%ÿ��(ÿ̀a`d(ÿ,�����������ÿ������$���ÿ���ÿ������������ÿ������"�ÿ#��ÿ
�!�#�ÿ#�+ÿ��ÿ��ÿ^�����ÿ)�����ÿ'ÿ̀a`eÿ^&����(ÿP�����ÿQ�&���$���ÿ�#ÿN�����#�ÿ���ÿ
M��K�%ÿS$&����%ÿP�����(ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
232456782ÿ5 �ÿ
ÿ
��ÿ���1�ÿ���ÿ������ÿ������ÿ������ÿ���ÿ���ÿ!�"�"�#�ÿ��$%�&�ÿ��� !��ÿ$�&��%��ÿ�ÿ'�����(�ÿ
�(ÿ"���ÿ���ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ+���$ÿ���ÿ#���$�"ÿ,����-�$��ÿ�'�&���ÿ.&�ÿ�,�.�ÿ��ÿ���ÿ�($���$�ÿ
/012304ÿ06ÿ278ÿ9/8:389;ÿ1<4=8ÿ>?042<4<@ÿA0127ÿB<C02<@ÿD0E27ÿB<C02<@ÿ<4FÿA8G1<9C<H@ÿ36ÿ
�(�ÿ���ÿ����$�ÿ$��-��ÿ��ÿ���I�ÿ���ÿ�� !�ÿ&(�&"+���ÿ����ÿ"�����-ÿ)��ÿ)�$$�����ÿ��ÿ���ÿ
����$�ÿ$��-��ÿ��ÿ$��'(���ÿ�(ÿ����ÿ#�����-�ÿ���ÿ�Jÿ�##�&���ÿ�����ÿ)�"�"�#�ÿK���-�K���ÿ
�-��&���ÿ���ÿ����$�����ÿ&(('�$��($�ÿ#($K��ÿ���ÿ� LMÿ)���ÿ�ÿ-(�"ÿ(#ÿ��%�"('��-ÿ�ÿ
�(&+K���ÿ����ÿ&(+"�ÿ���&$�N�ÿ���ÿ����+�ÿ���ÿ������ÿ���ÿ��$����ÿ�(ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*��ÿ��ÿ���ÿ
����ÿ���ÿ-+���ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ&(���$%���(�ÿ�##($��ÿ�+&�ÿ����ÿ#���$�"ÿ"�����-ÿ)(+"�ÿ�(�ÿN�ÿ
��&����$O�ÿ��ÿ���P�ÿ)���ÿQ�()"��-�ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ#($K���(�ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ� LM�ÿ���ÿ�� !�ÿ
'+N"�����ÿ����$ÿ�1RK(���ÿ#�����-ÿ)��&�ÿ����-�����ÿ���ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ��ÿ�ÿ#���$�"ÿ&��������ÿ
�'�&���ÿ)���ÿ"�����-ÿ)�$$�����ÿN+�ÿ'$�&"+���ÿNOÿ��-��$ÿ"�����-ÿ'$�($������ÿM��ÿ� LMÿ
&(K'"����ÿ�ÿSTUVWXYZ[\TUÿ^VVWVV_WU[ÿZU`ÿSTUVWXYZ[\TUÿa[XZ[WbcÿdTXÿae\d[ÿfTgÿ\Uÿ[hWÿ
iU\[W`ÿa[Z[WVÿ�L.L��ÿ��ÿ���j�ÿM���ÿ�(&+K���ÿ$�'$�������ÿ�ÿ&(($�������ÿ�''$(�&�ÿ�(ÿ
$��-�)���ÿ&(���$%���(�ÿ���ÿK���-�K����ÿ.�ÿ�ÿ$��+"�ÿ(#ÿ��)ÿ��#($K���(�ÿ���ÿ�K'$(%��ÿ
&(($������(�ÿ�K(�-ÿ'�$���$��ÿ���ÿ�� !�ÿ$�K(%��ÿ���ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ#$(Kÿ���ÿ&��������ÿ
�'�&���ÿ"���ÿ��ÿ1JJ�ÿ�k()�ÿ��+Q�"ÿ1J����ÿÿ
ÿ
��ÿ1J���ÿ��ÿ+'�����ÿL.L�ÿ)��ÿ'+N"�����ÿ������#O��-ÿ��-��ÿ(Nl�&��%��ÿ#($ÿ��&+$��-ÿ�)�#�ÿ
#(*ÿ&(���$%���(�ÿ�k()�ÿ��+Q�"ÿ1J����ÿ.ÿ&���-�ÿ�(ÿ���ÿ#($K��ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ1J��ÿ�(&+K���ÿ
#$(Kÿ���ÿ'$�%�(+�ÿ%�$��(�ÿ&(�������ÿ(#ÿ'$(%����-ÿ�&&(K'"���K����ÿ���ÿ�ÿ&(���$%���(�ÿ
������K���ÿN����ÿ��$�&�"Oÿ(�ÿ���ÿ#�%�ÿ#�&�($�ÿ���ÿ�� !�ÿ+���ÿ�(ÿ�%�"+���ÿ�'�&���ÿ#($ÿ
"�����-ÿ01ÿF8m39234=ÿE4F81ÿ278ÿnDopÿoÿq<r01ÿ:04:mE9304ÿ06ÿ27<2ÿF0:Eq842ÿs<9ÿ278ÿDtuv;9ÿ
������K���ÿ����ÿ�(��ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ#�%�ÿ"�����-ÿ#�&�($�ÿ���ÿ$����ÿ�(ÿ���ÿ"�%�"ÿ(#ÿ�ÿ��$����ÿ
ÿ
M���ÿ��ÿ���ÿ���$�ÿ%�$��(�ÿ(#ÿL.L��ÿ��ÿ��������-ÿ���ÿ(Nl�&��%��ÿ������#���ÿ��ÿ���ÿ'$�%�(+�ÿ
L.L��ÿ)�ÿN�"��%�ÿ�����ÿ(Nl�&��%��ÿ�$�ÿ&+$$���"OÿN���-ÿK���ÿ��(+-�ÿ�(K�ÿ+���$"O��-ÿ
��$���-���ÿ���ÿ�&��%�����ÿ$�K���ÿ��&(K'"����ÿw�Q�ÿ���ÿ'$�%�(+�ÿL.L��ÿ)�ÿ'$(%���ÿ�ÿ
&(���$%���(�ÿ������K���ÿ($-���x��ÿNOÿ"�����-ÿ#�&�($�ÿ���ÿ�-���ÿ&(�&"+��ÿ�(��ÿ(#ÿ�����ÿ
#�&�($�ÿ&+$$���"Oÿ$���ÿ�(ÿ���ÿ"�%�"ÿ(#ÿ�ÿ��$����ÿM�(+-�ÿy+����(��ÿ�N(+�ÿ���ÿ����+�ÿ(#ÿ�)�#�ÿ
#(*��ÿ��ÿ'($��(��ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ$��-�ÿ�*����ÿ)�ÿ�(ÿ�(��ÿ���ÿ�''�$���ÿ$��-�ÿ�*'����(�ÿ
�(&+K�����ÿ��ÿ����ÿ'+N"�&���(��ÿ!�ÿ�"�(ÿ�(��ÿ���ÿ��-��#�&���ÿ�K(+��ÿ(#ÿ$����$&�ÿ
&(��+&���ÿ���ÿQ�()"��-�ÿ-�����ÿ�N(+�ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*��ÿ���&�ÿ���ÿ��&�'��(�ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ� LM�ÿ
z(��N"�ÿ�+KK�$Oÿ�(&+K����ÿ��&"+��ÿ���ÿN((Qÿ�����"��ÿM��ÿ�)�#�ÿ(*{ÿ,&("(-Oÿ���ÿ
L(���$%���(�ÿ(#ÿ�)�#�ÿ(*��ÿ��ÿ�ÿL���-��-ÿ!($"�ÿ��(%���ÿ���ÿL�$NO�ÿ1JJ|�ÿ���ÿK($�ÿ
$�&���"Oÿ�ÿN((Qÿ&��'��$ÿ(�ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ�}��Qÿ��ÿ�"�ÿ1J1I��ÿ��ÿ������(��ÿL"�$Q�ÿ~$�ÿ�1J�I�ÿ
������#���ÿ(%�$ÿ�JJÿ'+N"�&���(��ÿ(�ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*��ÿ)���ÿK��OÿK($�ÿ��ÿ���$"Oÿ�ÿ��&���ÿ���&��ÿÿ
ÿ
!���ÿK(��ÿ������ÿ��%��-ÿ�(&+K�����ÿ"(�-R��$Kÿ���N�"��Oÿ($ÿ�%��ÿ��ÿ��&$����ÿ��ÿ
����$�N+��(�ÿ��ÿ���ÿ��&����ÿ���&�ÿ���ÿ��&�'��(�ÿ(#ÿ���ÿ� LM�ÿ���ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ��ÿ�()ÿN���-ÿ
�+$'�����ÿNOÿ�'�&���ÿ(#ÿ��-��$ÿ&(���$%���(�ÿ'$�($��Oÿ��ÿK��Oÿ�������ÿ.�ÿ�ÿ$��+"��ÿ���ÿ
'�$��&�'���(�ÿ(#ÿ�(K�ÿ(#ÿ(+$ÿ#���$�"ÿ'�$���$�ÿ���ÿ)�����ÿ��ÿ������(��ÿ�)�#�ÿ#(*ÿ��N����ÿ
&(���$%���(�ÿ��ÿK(��ÿ������ÿ��ÿ��&$�����-"OÿN���-ÿ���$�����ÿ��ÿ�ÿ"����&�'�ÿ"�%�"�ÿK+"��R
1ÿ
�ÿ
2345642ÿ7338975 ÿ2ÿ7ÿ842���ÿ����ÿ8438424��7�6�42ÿ7�4�ÿ72ÿ�6845�4�ÿ6�ÿ�4ÿ����ÿ
�9�248�7�69�ÿ��87�4��ÿ�75�69�ÿ��1��ÿ59�26�484�ÿ�4ÿ�454226��ÿ7��ÿ89�4ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ����ÿ
6��9ÿ�4ÿ��84ÿ
ÿ
� 424ÿ�6252269�2ÿ484ÿ�6�7�6!4�ÿ7�ÿ�4ÿ���1ÿ"7�272ÿ#44�6���ÿ 484ÿ����ÿ
8438424��7�6�42ÿ59�5��4�ÿ�7��ÿ�9 � ÿ�4ÿ�9��$�48#ÿ2�7�2ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ2 6��ÿ�9%ÿ72ÿ24584�ÿ
�4ÿ����ÿ72ÿ2�6��ÿ248�6��ÿ7ÿ24��ÿ3 83924ÿ84�7�6�4ÿ�9ÿ2 6��ÿ�9%ÿ59�248�7�69��ÿ
378�65�78��ÿ6�ÿ�48#2ÿ9�ÿ7224226��ÿ�4ÿ87��4 6�4ÿ2�7�2ÿ9�ÿ2 6��ÿ�9%ÿ&724�ÿ9�ÿ�62�86& �69�ÿ
7��ÿ9�48ÿ�75�982ÿ7��ÿ389�6�6��ÿ7ÿ�98#ÿ�98ÿ59��7&987�69�ÿ7��ÿ6��98#7�69�ÿ4%57��4ÿ
'�48ÿ�456269�2ÿ#7�4ÿ7�ÿ�4ÿ#44�6��ÿ6��4��4�ÿ�9ÿ2�847#�6�4ÿ�4ÿ75�6�6�642ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ�89 3�ÿ
4�6#6�7�4ÿ��4542278�ÿ4��98�2�ÿ7��ÿ2784ÿ�4ÿ84239�26&6�6�642ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ����ÿ&4�44�ÿ�4ÿ
8438424��7�6�42ÿ484ÿ�9ÿ59��6� 4ÿ&64��67�ÿ#44�6��2ÿ9�ÿ7ÿ89�7�69�7�ÿ&7262ÿ&724�ÿ9�ÿ
�9��42�ÿ� 87�69�ÿ26�54ÿ92�6��ÿ�244ÿ334��6%ÿ���ÿ7226��6��ÿ�4ÿ5768ÿ3926�69�ÿ�9ÿ�4ÿ2�7�4ÿ
7�4�5�ÿ8438424��7�6�4ÿ92�6��ÿ�4ÿ#44�6���ÿ7��ÿ�4�6�6��ÿ�4ÿ� �642ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ5768ÿ72ÿ
6�5��6��ÿ�4�4�936��ÿ7ÿ#44�6��ÿ7�4��7�ÿ5 7686��ÿ�4ÿ#44�6���ÿ7��ÿ59#3�4�6��ÿ7ÿ84398�ÿ
9�ÿ�4ÿ#44�6��ÿ#6� �42ÿ�9ÿ&4ÿ3 &�624�ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ����ÿ4&26�4ÿ72ÿ7�ÿ7��48�7�6�4ÿ�9ÿ
384�69 2��ÿ3 &�624�ÿ7�� 7�ÿ98ÿ&64��67�ÿ84398�2ÿÿ
ÿ
(4�78�6��ÿ�4ÿ� ���ÿ�4ÿ�97�ÿ7��ÿ2�87�4�642ÿ484ÿ3�7�4�ÿ&724�ÿ9�ÿ)*+ÿ-./012ÿ342)ÿ
456ÿ7899+5)ÿ39:;9:):+2<ÿ0*+ÿ5+=ÿ>;4?ÿ2)4)+@+5)ÿ9+A?+7)2ÿ)*+ÿ-./012ÿ:5)+9+2)ÿ:5ÿB++3:5>ÿ
�4ÿ2 6��ÿ�9%ÿ�89#ÿ�62�6��ÿ��48ÿ�4ÿC�ÿD� ÿ� 65ÿ72ÿ384�69 2��ÿ7ÿ2�87�4���ÿ� 4ÿ�4 ÿ
2)94)+>:+2ÿ9+A?+7)ÿ)*+ÿ-./012ÿ:5)+9+2)ÿ:5ÿ:6+5):AE:5>ÿF845):A:4G�4ÿ2�87�4�642ÿ�6845�4�ÿ#984ÿ
23456�657���ÿ�9 78�ÿ�4ÿ2 6��ÿ�9%ÿÿH4�ÿ59#39�4��ÿ9�ÿ�62ÿ�95#4��ÿ84#76�2ÿ�4ÿ
�9�248�7�69�ÿ22422#4��ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ2 6��ÿ�9%ÿ&724�ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ�6�4ÿD� ÿ�62�6��ÿ�75�982ÿI�ÿ62ÿ
7��65637�4�ÿ�7�ÿ�4ÿ2�7�2ÿ9�ÿ�4ÿ����ÿ7��ÿ�62ÿ�95#4��ÿ6��ÿ&4ÿ84�64 4�ÿ6�ÿ��ÿ�4782ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
2345ÿ78ÿ9 7 �4ÿ
ÿ
�����ÿ�ÿ������ÿ���ÿ�����ÿ������ÿ�������!�ÿ��"#��ÿ
�$�ÿ�ÿ���!����!�ÿ!%ÿ$!!�ÿ���ÿ�&'�"�'��ÿ
()*ÿ�ÿ('"��'ÿ!%ÿ)���ÿ*���+�����ÿ
,�,�ÿ�ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿ����������ÿ���ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿ��"���+-ÿ
,�.ÿ�ÿ,!�!"��!ÿ��"/�ÿ���ÿ.�����%�ÿ
,0�ÿ�ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿ0���"#�ÿ�"!+"��ÿ
12ÿ�ÿ1'/�ÿ2��������ÿ
3��ÿ�ÿ3�#�"!�������ÿ�"!�� ��!�ÿ�+��-ÿ
3��ÿ�ÿ3����+�"��ÿ������ÿ� �ÿ
4��ÿ�ÿ4��ÿ����-���ÿ�"!+"��ÿ
4��ÿ�ÿ4�!+"����ÿ��%!"����!�ÿ�-����ÿ
51.�ÿ�ÿ5�����ÿ1���"�����ÿ!%ÿ.�����%�ÿ���ÿ��"/�ÿ
*6.�ÿ�ÿ*!�����ÿ6���7ÿ.�����%�ÿ���ÿ��"/�ÿ
8146ÿ�ÿ8!"��ÿ1�/!��ÿ4���ÿ���ÿ6���ÿ1���"�����ÿ
849ÿ�ÿ8!�:4!#�"�����ÿ9"+���;���!�ÿ
84�,ÿ�ÿ8�<"��/�ÿ4���ÿ���ÿ��"/�ÿ,!������!�ÿ
8*146ÿ�ÿ8�=ÿ*�>�!ÿ1���"�����ÿ!%ÿ4���ÿ���ÿ6���ÿ
80,�ÿ�ÿ8��'"��ÿ0��!'"��ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿ��"#��ÿ
80�ÿ�ÿ8���!���ÿ0��!'"��ÿ��#���!"-ÿ
91.,ÿ�ÿ9/���!��ÿ1���"�����ÿ!%ÿ.�����%�ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿÿ
�146�ÿ�ÿ�!'��ÿ1�/!��ÿ1���"�����ÿ!%ÿ4���7ÿ6���ÿ���ÿ��"/�ÿ
�6,?ÿ�ÿ�=�%�ÿ6!>ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿ?���ÿ
���ÿ�ÿ������ÿ�'"#�#��ÿ����ÿ
�4,8ÿ�ÿ������ÿ!%ÿ4"������ÿ,!���"#���!�ÿ8���ÿ
�.��ÿ�ÿ�����ÿ.�����%�ÿ� ��!�ÿ����ÿ
?�4ÿ�ÿ?�>!�ÿ��#��!"-ÿ4"!'�ÿ
?8,ÿ�ÿ?��ÿ8��'"�ÿ,!���"#�� -ÿÿ
?�.1ÿ�ÿ?�>��ÿ��"/�ÿ���ÿ.�����%�ÿ1���"�����ÿ
2�1�ÿ�ÿ2@�@ÿ1���"�����ÿ!%ÿ�+"�'��'"�ÿ
2�6�ÿ�ÿ2@�@ÿ6!"���ÿ��"#��ÿ
2�6.�ÿ�ÿ2@�@ÿ6���ÿ���ÿ.�����%�ÿ��"#��ÿ
2�4�ÿ�ÿ2@�@ÿ4�!�!+���ÿ�'"#�-ÿ
.�6.�ÿ�ÿ.����"�ÿ���!����!�ÿ!%ÿ6���ÿ���ÿ.�����%�ÿ�+�����ÿ
.461ÿ�ÿ.-!���+ÿ4���ÿ���ÿ6���ÿ1���"�����ÿ
ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
2345ÿ78ÿ59 2 4ÿÿ
ÿ
���ÿ��ÿ����ÿ��ÿ�����������ÿ����������ÿ� ÿ!���������ÿ���"ÿ�#�ÿ$%��ÿ&'&(ÿ)*�+ ÿ ÿ
(�,-��ÿ$.//011111111111111111111�������������������1122ÿ 3ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ$�ÿ4���" �� ÿ�� ÿ��ÿ�+���ÿ��5ÿ#��������ÿ������,����ÿ� ÿ���,!�� ÿ�� ÿ+��#��ÿ ÿ
�# �ÿ������,����ÿ� �� ÿ��ÿ��,��6ÿ�����ÿ �ÿ�������� ÿ���"ÿ$%�78$%�9�ÿ� ÿ ÿ
�#�ÿ�# ���ÿ��ÿ��,��6ÿ� ÿ�� ÿ���,! ��6ÿ���"ÿ�#�ÿ$%%�8$%%:ÿ�,���6�ÿ
ÿ
)(�� ÿ��ÿ��ÿ$%%;<ÿ��ÿ�#�ÿ$%�78$%�9ÿ=>?@AB=1111111�1111122ÿC%ÿ
ÿ
���ÿC�ÿ4���" �� ÿ�� ÿ��ÿ�+���ÿ��5ÿ#��������ÿ������,����ÿ��ÿ�#�ÿD�(��ÿ�#�ÿ�� ÿ��ÿ ÿ
�,�����ÿ# ����ÿ+��#��ÿ�# �ÿ������,�����ÿ� ÿ�#�ÿ�� ÿ��ÿ�,�����ÿ# ����ÿ
ÿ
���,!�� ÿ�6ÿ�+���ÿ��5��ÿ���"ÿ$%�78$%�9�11111111112211�21222��ÿCCÿ
�ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ7�ÿ'�� ÿ��ÿ������ÿ����8,!ÿ&EFÿ������"���ÿ�6ÿ����ÿ+��#��ÿ�#�ÿ�+���ÿ��5ÿ
������,����ÿ� ÿ�#�ÿ���������ÿ��ÿ������"���ÿ���+���ÿ$%��ÿ� ÿ$%$%�����������ÿ C3ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ1�ÿ'�� ÿ��ÿ������ ÿ&EFÿ������"���ÿ�6ÿ����ÿ+��#��ÿ�#�ÿ#�������ÿ�+���ÿ��5ÿ ÿ
������,����ÿ��ÿ$%$%�11111111111111111121122222222222222��ÿC3ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ:�ÿ(���ÿ��� �ÿ���,�ÿ� ÿ# �����ÿ�� ����ÿ���ÿ�+���ÿ��5�ÿ$%$$11111221��ÿ 7%ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
2345ÿ78ÿ83GHI 4ÿ
ÿ
ÿÿJ��,��ÿ��ÿ(+���ÿ��5ÿ������,����ÿ��ÿ�#�ÿD�(�ÿ�6ÿ��,��6ÿ� �� ÿ��ÿ���,! ��6ÿ �ÿ ÿ
KLMMAKNAOÿQ?LRÿS./TÿNLÿS./U111121111111111211�����������������ÿ C�ÿ
ÿÿJ��,��ÿ$�ÿ&# ���ÿ��ÿ�+���ÿ��5ÿ���,! ��6ÿ��ÿ�#�ÿD�(�ÿ�6ÿ��,��6ÿ���"ÿ�#�ÿ$%%�8$%%:ÿ ÿ
�,���6�ÿ)(�� ÿ��ÿ��ÿ$%%;<ÿ��ÿ�#�ÿ$%�78$%�9ÿ�,���6������������������1221211ÿC$ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
233456789 5 9ÿ�4�ÿ���������ÿ
ÿ
233456789 5 9ÿ9�552�8� �ÿ��ÿ4�� 3 8� 9ÿ��45ÿ ÿ9�8� ÿ�4�ÿ
34 9 ��2 84 ÿ299 995 ÿ2 �ÿ34 9 ��2 84 ÿ9 �2 ���ÿ����ÿ
ÿ
� !"#$%&'()ÿ
ÿ
*+,ÿ-./0ÿ.1ÿ2+,ÿ3455ÿ6.78,9:/2;.7ÿ<29/2,-=ÿ>/8ÿ?@AÿCDEFGH?FGHÿ@IÿIJK?@IJÿKLGM?ÿM@Nÿ
O.OP0/2;.78ÿ>;2+;7ÿ,/Q+ÿ82/2,ÿ2.ÿO9.:;R,ÿ2+,ÿ8O/2;/0Sÿ-,7,2;Qÿ/7RÿR,T.-9/O+;Qÿ829PQ2P9,ÿ
.1ÿ2+,ÿU7;2,Rÿ<2/2,8ÿ8>;12ÿ1.VÿO.OP0/2;.7ÿ2.ÿ,78P9,ÿ0.7-W2,9Tÿ8O,Q;,8ÿ:;/X;0;2=Sÿ2.ÿO9.:;R,ÿ
8O,Q;,8ÿT/7/-,T,72ÿ10,V;X;0;2=Sÿ/7Rÿ2.ÿ,7Q.P9/-,ÿO.OP0/2;.7ÿQ.77,Q2;:;2=YZÿ[\.>Rÿ
<2P],0ÿ3455^Yÿ_;2+ÿ2+,ÿ;72,72ÿ.1ÿ/Q+;,:;7-ÿ2+;8ÿ-./0Sÿ2+,ÿ6.78,9:/2;.7ÿ<29/2,-=ÿO.92;.7ÿ.1ÿ
2+,ÿ3455ÿ6`6<ÿ;R,72;1;,Rÿ,;-+2ÿ.Xa,Q2;:,8Sÿ>;2+ÿQ.99,8O.7R;7-ÿ829/2,-;,8ÿ/7Rÿ/Q2;:;2;,8ÿ
[*/X0,ÿ5^Yÿÿ
ÿ
`QQ.TO0;8+T,728ÿ.1ÿ2+,ÿ<b6*ÿ/9,ÿO9.:;R,RÿX,0.>ÿX=ÿ.Xa,Q2;:,Sÿ1;982ÿ/8ÿ/ÿ<b6*ÿ
8PTT/9=ÿ/7Rÿ2+,7ÿ;7R;:;RP/00=ÿX=ÿ82/2,ÿcÿ/8ÿO9.:;R,RÿX=ÿ82/2,ÿ/-,7Q=ÿ9,O9,8,72/2;:,8ÿ
.7ÿ2+,ÿ<b6*Yÿ_,ÿR.ÿ7.2,ÿ2+/2ÿ8.T,ÿ/QQ.TO0;8+T,728ÿ9,O9,8,72ÿ2+,ÿ>.9]ÿ.1ÿ.2+,9ÿ
Q..O,9/2.98SÿXP2ÿ2+/2ÿ/7=ÿ>.9]ÿX,7,1;22;7-ÿ8>;12ÿ1.V,8ÿ>;2+;7ÿ2+,ÿ82/2,ÿRP9;7-ÿ2+,ÿ3455W
3433ÿ2;T,ÿ19/T,ÿ>.P0RÿX,ÿ/OO0;Q/X0,ÿ2.ÿ2+;8ÿ8,Q2;.7Yÿ
ÿ
*+;8ÿ;8ÿT,/72ÿ2.ÿX,ÿ/7ÿ/XX9,:;/2,Rÿ8PTT/9=Sÿ/7RÿT.9,ÿR,2/;0,Rÿ;71.9T/2;.7ÿ.7ÿ2+,8,ÿ
/7Rÿ.2+,9ÿ/QQ.TO0;8+T,728ÿQ/7ÿX,ÿ1.P7Rÿ;7ÿOPX0;8+,Rÿ0;2,9/2P9,ÿ.9ÿ.7ÿ2+,ÿ<b6*ÿ
>,X8;2,Sÿ>+;Q+ÿ;8ÿ+.82,RÿX=ÿ6.0.9/R.ÿd/9]8ÿ/7Rÿ_;0R0;1,ÿ/2eÿ
+22O8effQO>Y82/2,YQ.YP8f0,/97fd/-,8f<>;12b.V6.78,9:/2;.7*,/TY/8OVYÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
23456ÿ78ÿ9 ÿ�ÿ4�6��6 �ÿ�36�6 �ÿ3��ÿ3�� 6 ÿ���ÿ�6ÿ��77ÿ����ÿ�� �ÿ�!"65�ÿÿ
��778#ÿ
ÿ
$%&'()*+'ÿ
-)./)'0*'1ÿ/23ÿ/()*+*)*'1ÿ
45ÿ6/*2)/*2ÿ/ÿ-7*8)ÿ9:;ÿ 787ÿ2�6ÿ�F�2ÿÿ��G�6�ÿ�ÿ3ÿ��56ÿ�6G�6 6�3�6ÿ���ÿ63��ÿ�ÿ�6ÿ7�ÿ
<:21'.+/)*:2ÿ='/>?ÿ 36ÿ 5�5�6ÿ�6 !��6ÿ3�6��6ÿ� 36#�ÿH9Iÿ��6� �35#�ÿJ�F�ÿ��6� �35#�ÿ
@-9<=Aÿ):ÿ*2(BC3'ÿ4ÿ J8�8ÿK6 5��35ÿ�6���6ÿ�J�K�#ÿ��6� �35#�ÿ���35ÿ3��ÿL53�ÿM635�ÿ
.'D.'1'2)/)*+'ÿ:8ÿ'/(Eÿ N�G6� �ÿ�6���6ÿ��LMN�#ÿ��6� �35#�ÿ3��ÿJ�FO�ÿ��6� �35#8ÿN�6�6 6�ÿ
:8ÿ)E'ÿ1)/)'ÿ7*B3B*8'ÿ � G6�3 �ÿ3�6ÿ6��!�3�6�ÿ ÿG3��G36ÿ �ÿ�6ÿ63�ÿ� �6�ÿ 36ÿ3��ÿ
/0'2(*'1ÿ7*)E*2ÿ)E'ÿ �6�6�35ÿ3�6��6�ÿ36ÿ!��6� 6�ÿ�435ÿ� �6���6� �ÿ� �6��3 �ÿ
E*1):.*(/Bÿ./20'ÿ:8ÿ)E'ÿ ��3�P3 ��ÿ�6 63���ÿ� ! ��ÿ�3�3�3�ÿ�6��6�Qÿ63�#8ÿ2�6ÿ�F�2ÿÿ
17*8)ÿ8:;ÿ
ÿ� ���36ÿ3��ÿ3 ÿ�ÿ��6���ÿ�3�3�6�6�ÿ3��ÿ�663���ÿ3�� 6ÿ
!5�6�ÿ�ÿ�6ÿ�� 6��3 �ÿ�36�Q8ÿ2�6ÿ�F�2ÿ 55ÿ3��!355Qÿ� � �ÿ�6ÿ
3 3��6�ÿ�ÿ4�6��6ÿ3��ÿ6�35!36ÿ�6ÿ��G56 �ÿ�ÿG6���ÿ3�� 6ÿ
��ÿ63��ÿ368ÿ
78787ÿR6G � 456ÿ�ÿ�6ÿ�F�2ÿ3�6ÿ Sÿ7#ÿ�66�� �6ÿG� �6ÿ3��ÿ6ÿ
�63456ÿ��ÿ� �6��3 �ÿ �36�Qÿ4�6��6ÿ3��ÿ3�� 6�ÿ�#ÿ
6 345�ÿ�6�63�ÿ6����35ÿ��� 66ÿ�3ÿ 55ÿ3���6 ÿG6���ÿ
�3�3�6�6�ÿ�ÿ�663���ÿ�66�ÿ ÿ3�� �G5�ÿ36�ÿ4�6��6�ÿT#ÿ��3�ÿ
�343ÿ3��ÿG6�6ÿ�3�3�6�6�ÿ�!�65�6ÿ�6�ÿ3GG�G�36�ÿU#ÿ
G���6ÿ3ÿ��!�ÿ��ÿ6����35ÿ����3 �ÿ6V��3��6�ÿ3��ÿW#ÿG�� 6ÿ
36ÿ3��ÿ�6�6�35ÿ�!����ÿ!GG �ÿ��ÿG6���ÿ3�� 68ÿÿ
7878�ÿ2�6ÿ�F�2ÿ 55ÿ�6�6�36ÿ3�ÿ3��!35ÿ�ÿ46��35ÿ�6G �ÿ ÿG�66�ÿ
36ÿ3��ÿ�6� �35ÿG���6 ÿ 3��ÿ3 3��6�ÿ�ÿ� �6��3 �ÿ�36�Qÿ
4�6��68ÿ��ÿ3��!35ÿ�ÿ46��35ÿ�F�2ÿ�66��ÿÿ ÿ46ÿ��6�!56�ÿ4Qÿ
�6ÿ3GG �6�ÿ��3�ÿ ÿQ��6 P6ÿ����3 �ÿ3��ÿG�6G3�6ÿ�6ÿ3��!35ÿ�ÿ
46��35ÿ�6G �8ÿ
7878Tÿ26�ÿQ63�ÿ�55 ��ÿG!45�3 �ÿ�ÿ� ÿ�6� ��ÿ�F�2ÿ�6�46�ÿ
3��ÿ� G6�3 �ÿ 55ÿ6�35!36ÿG���6 ÿ�ÿ�66��ÿ4�6��6ÿ3��ÿ
� �G56��ÿ3�� 68ÿX�35!3 �ÿ�ÿG���6 ÿ 55ÿ��5!�6ÿ� �! �ÿ�ÿ
�6�6�ÿ�6ÿ�F�2ÿ�3Qÿ� 43��ÿ46�3!6ÿÿ�3ÿ3�� �G5�6�ÿ ÿ���35ÿ
G!�G 6ÿ ÿ�6 ��ÿ3��ÿ�G56�6�ÿ3ÿ�!5Y 36ÿ3GG�3��ÿ ÿ3 !�6ÿ5��Y
6��ÿ �ÿ�VÿG6� 6��68ÿ
Z5ÿ6/*2)/*2ÿ17*8)ÿ8:;ÿ �87ÿ�36ÿ 5�5�6ÿ3�6��6ÿ 55ÿG6� ��355Qÿ!G�36ÿ36 �6ÿG6�6ÿ
3*1).*%C)*:2ÿ*2ÿ/)ÿB'/1)ÿ � �4! �ÿ�3Gÿ ÿ� � �ÿ5��Y6��ÿ��3��6ÿ�ÿ� �4! �ÿ3��ÿ6�35!36ÿ
[\ÿD'.('2)ÿ:8ÿ)E'ÿ G���6 ÿ 3��ÿ��6��3 �ÿ�36�Qÿ4�6��68ÿI3G ÿ 55ÿ46ÿ!G�36�ÿ�ÿ
1C*)/%B'?ÿ/+/*B/%B'ÿ � ��6�ÿ6�6�QÿWÿQ63�8ÿ� �3�3ÿ6ÿ358ÿ���]ÿ� !5�ÿ46ÿ!G�36�ÿ3��ÿ
!4� 6�ÿ��ÿG!45�3 �ÿ �ÿ�6 ÿ����3 �ÿWÿQ63�ÿ�55 ��ÿ ÿ
E/%*)/)ÿ
G!45�3 �ÿ�368ÿ
ÿ
�8�ÿXVG3��ÿ� �4! �ÿ�ÿ6V ��ÿ 36ÿG G!53 �ÿ3��ÿ�6 �6ÿ �ÿ�V6ÿ
ÿ!� ��!G6�ÿ!3456ÿ�3438ÿL�� 6ÿ�3!�35ÿ� G6�35ÿ��!��ÿG6�6ÿ
G� 6� �ÿ�63!�6 ÿ�56ÿ�6�65G��ÿ�6� � 5�Qÿ3��ÿG� �Qÿ3�63ÿ��ÿ
3!��6�3 �ÿ��!��ÿ 5�Y�3G!�6�ÿ �ÿ�Vÿ�3�5�3 �8ÿ
�8�87ÿ2�6ÿ�F�2ÿ 55ÿ �"ÿ �ÿ36ÿ 5�5�6ÿ3�6��6�ÿ�6�6�35ÿ53��ÿ
�3�3�6�6�ÿ3�6��6ÿ3��ÿ� G6�3 �ÿ ÿG� �P6ÿG 6�35ÿ�6 �3 �ÿ
6��� ÿ�ÿ3�63ÿ �ÿ3ÿ5� 6�ÿ� �4! �ÿ3��ÿG 6�355Qÿ!3456ÿ�343�ÿ
�6�ÿ�66�6�8ÿ
ÿ
�8TÿX3��ÿ36ÿ 5�5�6ÿ3�6��Qÿ 55ÿ�3�3�ÿ3�6^!36ÿ�6�!53 �Qÿ�6��3� � ÿ
ÿG�� 6ÿ3ÿ65�Y! 3���ÿ �ÿ�VÿG G!53 �8ÿ
�8T87ÿ2�6ÿ36ÿ 5�5�6ÿ3�6��6ÿ�ÿ� 5�3� �ÿ_3�3�ÿI �3�3�ÿ̀6 ÿ
I6V� �ÿ3��ÿ26V3�ÿ���ÿ�!��6�5Qÿ355 ÿ3ÿ56�35ÿ�3��6 �ÿ 55ÿ6�35!36ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
234ÿ546789882ÿ5ÿ8�4 4�28��ÿ6ÿ�4�872�628���42ÿ26��8��ÿ����6 ÿ8�ÿ
6��828�ÿ2ÿ�����28��ÿ 6��62�ÿ�6��677ÿ� 4�28�7�ÿ
��ÿ�������!""#ÿ
.�/ÿ0 �82�ÿ71852ÿ52ÿ�872�89�28�ÿ18238�ÿ46�3ÿ72624ÿ�78��ÿ36�8�7ÿ�424�28�ÿ
�$!"%!&�ÿ&'�ÿ(&!&%(ÿ�)ÿ 423 �7ÿ6����ÿ7�4�847ÿ36�3472ÿ�626�ÿ4 724 628�ÿ��474��4�6974��4ÿ6��ÿ
(*�)&ÿ)�+ÿ,�,%"!&��-(ÿ � ��628�ÿ7��347ÿ�ÿ� �88��ÿ782457�4�858�ÿ36�3472ÿ8�5� 628�ÿ73 ��ÿ
��38�4ÿ46�3ÿ72624ÿ1823ÿ6�46�624ÿ8�5� 628�ÿ2ÿ�48�4624ÿ6��ÿ �82�ÿ
7262418�4ÿ7�4�847ÿ�872�89�28�7�ÿ
.�/�/ÿ42624ÿ18�854ÿ6�4��847ÿ18ÿ� �28��4ÿ2ÿ� 4�2ÿ6��ÿ� �84ÿ428728��ÿ
7�4�847ÿ�872�89�28�ÿ�626ÿ8�24��6 ÿ6��ÿ5� ÿ� �4�62�7�ÿ42624ÿ6�4��847ÿ
6��ÿ� �4�62�7ÿ 6ÿ�44�ÿ2ÿ� 4�2ÿ6��828�6ÿ8�5� 628�ÿ�28878��ÿ
36�8�7ÿ7 ���47ÿ7��3ÿ678ÿ/9ÿ7�4�847ÿ� ��628�ÿ7��347:ÿ;9ÿ72624ÿ6��ÿ
54�4�6ÿ6�4��ÿ�����4��4ÿ�4� �27:ÿ.9ÿ7 8�828��ÿ��98�ÿ�6�28�8�628�:ÿ<9ÿ
7�84�2858�ÿ584�ÿ8�34728�628�7:ÿ�ÿ=9ÿ2�6��4�ÿ6��ÿ3��24�ÿ36�3472ÿ�626�ÿ
<�/ÿE �28��4ÿ2ÿ8�4�285Fÿ�47��894Fÿ6��ÿ�48�4624ÿ428728��ÿ7�82694ÿ71852ÿ52ÿ
>�ÿ?��-&�)#ÿ!-�ÿ
�-(��$�ÿ�+�(&�-@ÿ 3698262ÿ18238�ÿ46�3ÿ72624�ÿG387ÿ455�2ÿ18ÿ5� ÿ234ÿ96787ÿ5�ÿ436�628��ÿ
-!&�$�ÿ('��&@�!((ÿ!-�ÿ �4 68�8��ÿ7�4�847ÿ�472�628�ÿ6�28382847ÿ6��ÿ8�4�285ÿ� �72�68�27ÿ6��ÿ
�� �2��82847ÿ18238�ÿ46�3ÿ72624ÿ5�ÿ� 77894ÿ71852ÿ52ÿ� �74�3628�ÿ455�27�ÿ
A�+��B@�!((ÿ
@�!(("!-�(Cÿ)� %(�-@ÿ <�/�/ÿH6�3ÿ72624ÿ18�854ÿ6�4��ÿ18ÿ� ��8�624ÿ1823ÿ72624Fÿ2�896Fÿ6��ÿ
�-ÿ&'�(�ÿ*�&'ÿ'!D�&!&ÿ 54�4�6ÿ6��ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ6�4��847ÿ6��ÿ��83624ÿ6�� 1�4�7ÿ2ÿ�����2ÿ
'!�! &���(&�(ÿ
6��ÿ� �28��4ÿ3698262ÿ8�34�2�847ÿ6��ÿ2ÿ�47��894ÿ6��ÿ1�4�738�ÿ
�6224��7�ÿI6��7�6�4ÿ6�6 787ÿ5ÿ7�82694ÿ��68�84ÿ3698262ÿ73 ��ÿ�28874ÿ234ÿ
�-�% �$�ÿ&�ÿ(*�)&ÿ
)�+�(ÿ
9472ÿ6368694ÿ6��7�6�4ÿ�626Fÿ�78��ÿ7���4 4�26ÿ 6�ÿ2 7ÿJ7 87Fÿ
34�42628�9FÿK4 ��6�38�ÿL�5� 628�ÿ4 724 7ÿJKL49Fÿ6��ÿK6�ÿM�6 787ÿ
N���6 ÿJKMN9Fÿ8�ÿ6��828�ÿ2ÿ64�86ÿ�ÿ�����ÿ7��347�ÿG387ÿ6�28382ÿ 6ÿ
8����4ÿ� �4�628�ÿ5� ÿ234ÿOI0FÿP4Q4FÿR62��6ÿS4�826�4ÿN���6 7Fÿ
RTE4Fÿ72624ÿ��834�782847Fÿ6��ÿ234�ÿ4�282847ÿ1823ÿKL4�K6�ÿM�6 787ÿ
6��8��ÿ�6�69882847�ÿÿ
=�/ÿL�4�285ÿ6��ÿ�48�4624ÿ6��7ÿ���4�ÿ54�4�6Fÿ72624Fÿ�ÿ2�896ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ
U�ÿV! �"�&!&�ÿ
,!�&-��('�,(ÿ!-�ÿ � �2� ÿ8�ÿ����84��7�82694ÿ71852ÿ52ÿ3698262�ÿG34ÿ69882ÿ2ÿ 68�268�ÿ�ÿ
��,��!&�$�ÿ�))��&(ÿ&�ÿ �472�4ÿ72624ÿ71852ÿ52ÿ� ��628�7ÿ18ÿ�4�4��ÿ�ÿ��74�38��ÿ�4�ÿ7�6�4ÿ8�ÿ
,��&� &Cÿ��(&���Cÿ!-�ÿ 234ÿ428728��ÿ��6776��ÿ6��7�6�4�ÿG387ÿ6�28382ÿ18ÿ� 24�286 ÿ94ÿ 72ÿ
�-'!- �ÿ(%�&!D"�ÿ 4554�2834ÿ134�ÿ5��74�ÿ�ÿ 6W�ÿ6��7�6�457�64ÿ3698262ÿ8�828628347�ÿÿ
=�/�/ÿH6�3ÿ72624ÿ18�854ÿ6�4��ÿ18ÿ� ��8�624ÿ1823ÿ234ÿ54�4�6ÿ6��ÿ72624ÿ
'!D�&!&(ÿ*�&'�-ÿ
,�&�-&�!"ÿ(*�)&ÿ)�+ÿ
6��ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ6�4��847ÿ2ÿ436�624ÿ����4�2ÿ4347ÿ5ÿ4�6ÿ��24�28�ÿ
�!-@��ÿ
5ÿ�62834ÿ��6776��7ÿ�624�ÿ18238�ÿ54�4�6ÿ6��ÿ72624ÿ1�4�738��ÿG3474ÿ
6�467ÿ6�4ÿ2ÿ94ÿ�48�4624�ÿ67ÿ6�ÿ6��828�6ÿ� 34�ÿ64�ÿ1823ÿ7�82694ÿ
3698262ÿ6��ÿ����4�2ÿ71852ÿ52ÿ�872�89�28��ÿN�24�24�ÿ78247ÿ6�4ÿ2ÿ94ÿ
6��4�ÿ6��ÿ6��46�47ÿ�424� 8�4�ÿ18238�ÿ234ÿ/Xÿ726247�ÿ4�6286ÿ
�4628�738�7Fÿ7��3ÿ67ÿ�458�8��ÿ3698262ÿ���8� �7ÿ�ÿ3698262ÿ9 �Y7Fÿ18ÿ94ÿ
426 8�4��ÿN�68�84ÿ3698262ÿ87ÿ2ÿ94ÿ�6778584�ÿ67ÿ����4�2ÿ��24�24�Fÿ8�ÿ
�44�ÿ5ÿ��24�28�Fÿ�ÿ5�ÿ7�4�86ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ�44�7ÿ9674�ÿ�ÿ
68�268�8��ÿ�ÿ4�36��8��ÿ3698262ÿ6�682ÿ5�ÿ71852ÿ5247�ÿÿ
=�/�;ÿ42624ÿ6��ÿ54�4�6ÿ18�854ÿ6�4��847ÿ18ÿ8�34728�624ÿ3698262ÿ
� �74�3628�ÿ6��44 4�27ÿ1823ÿ54�4�6ÿ6��ÿ72624ÿ6��ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ
6�4��847Fÿ67ÿ3698262ÿ�44�7ÿ6�4ÿ8�4�28584��ÿH7269873ÿ 4 �6��� 7ÿ5ÿ
���4�726��8��ÿJ0ZP9ÿ6��ÿ3698262ÿ� �74�3628�ÿ6��44 4�27ÿJSEM9ÿ5�ÿ
3698262ÿ��24�28�ÿ6��ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ1823ÿ6��ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ6�4��847ÿ2ÿ
� �74�34ÿ�ÿ4�36��4ÿ7�82694ÿ��68�84ÿ36982627ÿ���4�ÿ��98�ÿ1�4�738��ÿ
=�/�.ÿL�4�285ÿ3698262ÿ���8� �7ÿ6��ÿ7������8��ÿ6�467ÿ942144�ÿ3698262ÿ
9 �Y7Fÿ9674�ÿ�ÿ234ÿ7�6286ÿ �628�ÿ5ÿ7�82694ÿ3698262ÿ2362ÿ87ÿ6368694ÿ
2ÿ94ÿ 6�6�4�ÿ5�ÿ71852ÿ5247�ÿG387ÿ6�28382ÿ18ÿ8�4�285ÿ134�4ÿ3698262ÿ
� �74�3628�ÿ6��ÿ 6�6�4 4�2ÿ455�27ÿ73 ��ÿ����ÿ2ÿ��24�2Fÿ4�36��4Fÿ
�ÿ8 ��34ÿ7�82694ÿ3698262�ÿH6�3ÿ72624ÿ87ÿ2ÿ8�4�285ÿ6��ÿ�48�4624ÿ23474ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
23425ÿ67389 7ÿ 2 � ÿ68ÿ74�ÿ�8�543�268�ÿ 4259345�ÿ2 344 4�65�ÿ83ÿ
72�626ÿ4�72��4 4�6ÿ4��8365�ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ��4�6��ÿ2��ÿ�4��4264ÿ3�264ÿ�2��ÿ8��4357 ÿ26643�5ÿ9��43ÿ����92�ÿ83ÿ
�8383264ÿ�8�638�ÿ�ÿ8��9 4�ÿ2��ÿ5962��4ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ72�626�ÿ�74ÿ2��6�ÿ68ÿ
2�62�ÿ83ÿ3456834ÿ56264ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ8 9�268�5ÿ���ÿ�4 4��ÿ8�ÿ�8�543�� ÿ
4�56� ÿ3234ÿ72�626�ÿ
�����ÿ6264ÿ2��ÿ�4�432�ÿ�����4ÿ2 4��45ÿ234ÿ68ÿ�6264ÿ�2��ÿ�8�543�268�ÿ
83ÿ3864�68�ÿ 4259345ÿ9��43ÿ�9334�6ÿ�2��5ÿ38 32 5ÿ25ÿ� 64�ÿ��ÿ
383645ÿ2��ÿ�67�ÿ�9��� ÿ2��6��ÿ83ÿ234ÿ68ÿ�8�5�43ÿ�3426� ÿ2ÿ�2��5ÿ
38 32 ÿ�67ÿ�4�ÿ83ÿ34�34�64�ÿ�9��� ÿ5893�45�ÿ! 4��45ÿ���ÿ
��456 264ÿ674ÿ�425��6�ÿ8�ÿ236�4357 5ÿ�67ÿ674ÿ3�264ÿ54�683�ÿ"�ÿ
�4�6�4�ÿ�36�2�ÿ3�264ÿ�2��5ÿ56264ÿ2 4��45ÿ5789��ÿ96�#4ÿ�8�543�268�ÿ
4254 4�65ÿ83ÿ2 344 4�65�ÿ�42545�ÿ�8�268�5�ÿ4��72� 45�ÿ83ÿ
2�$9568�5�ÿ%4�432�ÿ�����4ÿ2 4��45ÿ5789��ÿ�8�5�43ÿ72�626ÿ
�8�543�268�ÿ�2�5ÿ&'()5*ÿ2��ÿ�4�432�ÿ�2��ÿ 2�2 4 4�6ÿ2 4��45ÿ
5789��ÿ�8�5�43ÿ�2��ÿ4��72� 45ÿ2��ÿ2�$9568�5�ÿ6264ÿ�����4ÿ
2 4��45ÿ 2�ÿ954ÿ�����4ÿ2�68�ÿ�2�ÿ �4 4�6268�ÿ2�6�645ÿ68ÿ25556ÿ
�67ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ2��ÿ�26�4ÿ72�626ÿ 2�2 4 4�6�ÿ
ÿ
��+ÿ�74ÿ%(�ÿ5789��ÿ4��8932 4ÿ��456 268�ÿ8�ÿ8 8369�645ÿ68ÿ38��4ÿ
8 9�268�ÿ�8��4�6�6�ÿ67389 7ÿ�883��264�ÿ72�626ÿ 2 � ÿ2��ÿ
34�638�9�68�ÿ2 8� ÿ236�43ÿ562645�ÿ63�45�ÿ2 4��45�ÿ2��ÿ3�264ÿ
�2��8��435�ÿ
ÿ
��,ÿ��64 3264ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ�8�543�268�ÿ563264 �ÿ8�-4�6�45ÿ�67ÿ 2�2 4 4�6ÿ
2��ÿ72�626ÿ8�-4�6�45ÿ8�ÿ86743ÿ3234ÿ4�85�564 ÿ5 4�45ÿ59�7ÿ25ÿ�58�ÿ
&./012ÿ4/012*�ÿ��2�56�8864�ÿ�43346ÿ&7809:;<ÿ2/=>/?:0*�ÿ�9338�� ÿ8��ÿ&@9A:2:ÿ
B82/B8;<>/<*�ÿ 89�62�ÿ�8�43ÿ&CA<><D>/80ÿE129<280*�ÿ3234ÿ�7�54�ÿ
&FGE?<28BA80ÿ5 H*�ÿ2��ÿ3234ÿ�8 ÿ&CG21EG0ÿ5 H*�ÿ
��,��ÿ)38��4ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ�563�968�ÿ2��ÿ5962��4ÿ72�626ÿ��83 268�ÿ68ÿ
86743ÿ3234ÿ4�85�564 ÿ�8�543�268�ÿ4��8365ÿ67389 7ÿ2�6�645ÿ
2558�264�ÿ�67ÿ674ÿI45643�ÿ!558�268�ÿ8�ÿ%57ÿ2��ÿI ����4ÿ! 4��45�ÿ
J2��5�2 4ÿ(8�543�268�ÿ(88 4326�45�ÿ!558�268�ÿ8�ÿK885ÿ2��ÿ
!$9239 5�ÿL8�6ÿM4�69345�ÿ2��ÿ86743ÿ34�4�2�6ÿ�8�543�268�ÿ2�6�645ÿ
6726ÿ�3855ÿ56264ÿ2��ÿ2 4���ÿ�89��2345�ÿÿ
e��ÿ)38��4ÿ2ÿ5�4�6��ÿ�255ÿ�83ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ 2�2 4 4�6ÿ2��ÿ2�ÿ2�4�94ÿ�83ÿ
NOÿPQRSTUVWÿXSQÿ
RSYZ[\X]Rÿ\R^RX\Y_ÿ 64�7��2�ÿ��83 268�ÿ4��72� 4�ÿ
^T[QUR^ÿT_XTÿYZST\Ù[TRÿ e����ÿ�74ÿ%(�ÿ���ÿ�8�6�94ÿ68ÿ38��4ÿ34�8 4��268�5ÿ8�ÿ562��23�ÿ
TZÿ^aUVTÿVZbÿ
2�2 4 4�6ÿ9�4��45�ÿ�4�4��2�ÿ32� 4ÿ 2�2 4 4�6ÿ32�6�45ÿ�83ÿ
YZS^R\cXTUZSÿXSQÿ
5��6ÿ�8�45�ÿ 4678�5ÿ�83ÿ�262ÿ�8��4�68�f�262�254ÿ 2�2 4 4�6�ÿ2��ÿ
dXSX]RdRSTÿ
�9334�6ÿ��83 268�ÿ8�ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ4�8�8 ��ÿ 2�2 4 4�6�ÿ2��ÿ345423�7ÿ68ÿ
�����4ÿ2��ÿ�2��ÿ 2�2 435gÿ8�43� 4�6ÿ4�6645gÿ�2��ÿ�2��435gÿ2��ÿ
56264ÿ2��ÿ�4�432�ÿ8���ÿ 25435�ÿ
e����ÿ�74ÿ%(�ÿ���ÿ�8�5�43ÿ�88 4326� ÿ8�ÿ2ÿ-8�6ÿ9���268�ÿ6726ÿ
38 8645ÿ674ÿ5�4�6��ÿ�255ÿ�83ÿ�8�543�� ÿ3234ÿ5 4�45�ÿ���9�� ÿ
5��6ÿ�8��ÿ�83ÿ�563�968�ÿ68ÿ�����4ÿ2��ÿ�2��ÿ 2�2 435�ÿ��ÿ6ÿ5ÿ�4643 �4�ÿ
6726ÿ675ÿ�8�9 4�6ÿ5ÿ�44�4�ÿ2��ÿ-8�6��ÿ59 8364��ÿ�9��� ÿ���ÿ�4ÿ
58��64�ÿ�38 ÿ�88 4326835ÿ2��ÿ236�435�ÿ
e���+ÿ�74ÿ%(�ÿ5ÿ68ÿ�4�6��ÿ2��ÿ4��8932 4ÿ345423�7ÿ569�45ÿ
2��3455� ÿ�6435 4���ÿ�6432�68�5�ÿ�� 264ÿ�72� 4�ÿ4�43�ÿ
�4�4�8 4�6�ÿ2��ÿ86743ÿ�2�6835ÿ6726ÿ 2�ÿ2��4�6ÿ5��6ÿ�8�ÿ�8�543�268��ÿ
e���+��ÿ6264ÿ�����4ÿ2 4��45ÿ2��ÿ�88 4326835ÿ���ÿ2��3455ÿ
5 4�45f72�626ÿ�44�5ÿ�ÿ56465 4���ÿ23425ÿ�4�6�4�ÿ25ÿ72�� ÿ
5 4�2�ÿ�8��43�5ÿ�83ÿ8 9�268�ÿ 2�64�2��4�ÿ!�ÿ4�2 �4ÿ 2�ÿ�4ÿ
1ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ56378394ÿ ÿ 954937ÿ� 3�9�ÿ ÿ45�ÿ545���ÿ�5657 �549ÿ4ÿ34ÿ
3�53ÿ�9�ÿ�4 �4ÿ�� 9ÿ �ÿ��8 394�ÿ
��1��ÿ�4� 8�3�5ÿ34�ÿ3�9� 395ÿ4ÿ�98�5�ÿ9�39ÿ�545ÿ�4�8�ÿ63�75ÿ
8739 4ÿ��5ÿ5�9�395��ÿ
��1��ÿ ��1��ÿ 4�8�9ÿ5� ��ÿ95�94�ÿ34�ÿ3437���ÿ ÿ�5459�ÿ63�39 4ÿ3� 4�ÿ
�9395ÿ 87394�ÿ9ÿ637�395ÿ9�5ÿ�3��ÿ ÿ9�5ÿ�593 8739 4ÿ�4�5 9ÿ9ÿ
54�8�5ÿ� 5�5�ÿ5���954�5�ÿ!97�5ÿ�9395"ÿ5�5�37"ÿ�ÿ4�9989437ÿ�7�75ÿ
34�ÿ6595�43��ÿ73� �39�5�ÿ9�39ÿ�34ÿ�8 �9ÿ3 � �395ÿ3437����ÿ
#8�7��ÿ�5�879�ÿ ÿ�5459�ÿ3437���ÿ1�ÿ�53��ÿ 77�4�ÿ9�5ÿ8�7�394ÿ ÿ
9��ÿ 4�5�6394ÿ$��5���549ÿ34�ÿ%9�395��ÿ�56� 4�ÿ
&'ÿ)*+,+-.ÿ/01234ÿ ?�1ÿ@�5ÿ%A @ÿ�77ÿ� 49485ÿ9ÿ�5657 ÿ4 ��39437ÿ34�ÿ5�8�39437ÿ
50//+*-ÿ6+*ÿ5736-ÿ6+8ÿ �395�37�ÿ9ÿ54�8�3�5ÿ�8 �9ÿ��ÿ34ÿ4 ��5�ÿ8�7��ÿ%8��ÿ�8 �9ÿ�77ÿ
4+95.*:;-3+9ÿ;4-3:3-3.5ÿ 54�34�5ÿ84�4�ÿ �98495�ÿ34�ÿ53�5ÿ� 75�54939 4ÿ ÿ� 4�5�6394ÿ
-<*+0=<ÿ.>04;-3+9ÿ;9>ÿ �9�395��ÿ3�9695��ÿ$� 4�ÿ8�7��ÿ9ÿ�5ÿ93��595�ÿ3�5ÿ9�3 5��"ÿ�8495��"ÿ
396+*,;-3+9ÿ.84<;9=.'ÿ �7�75ÿ65�5��"ÿ765�9��ÿ34�ÿ3��ÿ��8 �"ÿ�6395ÿ734� �45��"ÿ�4�5�6394ÿ
��34�394�"ÿ8�7�ÿ��� 7�"ÿ34�ÿ�9�B�849�ÿ� 65�4�549��ÿA84�4�ÿ�77ÿ�5ÿ
� 7�95�"ÿ3�ÿ455�5�"ÿ��ÿ3�9� 394�ÿ�9395�ÿ34�ÿ� 5�39���ÿÿ
?�1�1ÿ%A @ÿ�77ÿ� 49485ÿ9ÿ�3�5ÿ8�5ÿ ÿ%A @ÿ�5��95ÿ9ÿ �9ÿ�5 �9�"ÿ
344837ÿ45��75995��"ÿ34�ÿ9�5�ÿ4 ��39 4ÿ ÿ495�5�9ÿ9ÿ3�945��ÿ34�ÿ9�5ÿ
�545�37ÿ8�7��ÿÿ
?�1�CÿD� 75�549ÿ�59� ��ÿ34�ÿ95��4E85�ÿ9ÿ�34ÿ34�ÿ�34934ÿ
� 5�39 4ÿ�9�ÿ�6395ÿ734� �45��ÿ9�39ÿ�77ÿ47854�5ÿ�34�5ÿ
�343�5�549ÿ�3�9�5�"ÿ��3�7�ÿ9��8��ÿ�9395ÿ5�954� 4ÿ3�549�"ÿ5�5�37ÿ
��3�4�ÿ753�5�"ÿ34�ÿFG %ÿ�34�5ÿ� 5�37�9��ÿ� �9�ÿ�77ÿ�5ÿ��5�95�ÿ
��3�7�ÿ39ÿ��8 5�ÿ�3�939ÿ34�ÿ�5�4�3�7�ÿ39ÿ�893�75ÿ�3�939�ÿ
ÿ
?�Cÿ@�5ÿ%A @ÿ�77ÿ� ��4395ÿ�9�ÿ9�5ÿ$�� �394ÿ ÿH �ÿ34�ÿ$E83�8��ÿ
I$H$Jÿ9ÿ�6�5ÿ��549�377�K�8 �93�75ÿ4 ��394ÿ�ÿ4 89ÿ4ÿ
5�8�39437ÿ�� 73��ÿ�ÿ9�5�ÿ$H$ÿ4 ��394ÿ9ÿ�57ÿ�5�549ÿ9�5ÿ� �9ÿ
3��8�395ÿ34�ÿ�8��549ÿ4 ��394ÿ4ÿ�� 9ÿ �ÿ� 4�5�6394ÿ34�ÿ
�343�5�549�ÿ
ÿ
?�Lÿ@�5ÿ%A @ÿ�77ÿ� 49485ÿ9ÿ�8 �9ÿ9�5ÿ$H$ÿ4ÿ9�ÿ5 �9�ÿ9ÿ�34934ÿ3ÿ
63�75ÿ�3 965ÿ 87394�ÿ
M'ÿN;39-;39ÿ5736-ÿ6+8ÿ U�1ÿ%9395�ÿ�77ÿ� 49485ÿ9ÿ3�9� 395ÿ4ÿ� 5�3965ÿ4 ��394"ÿ� 49�4�"ÿ
/+/02;-3+9ÿ:3;1323-Oÿ 34�ÿ�5�53���ÿ5 �9�ÿ9ÿ�8 �9ÿ�� 9ÿ �ÿ�8�9343�79�ÿ34�ÿ9ÿ3�79395ÿ
504<ÿ-<;-ÿ235-39=ÿ09>.*ÿ �343�5�549ÿ39ÿ3ÿ�593 8739 4ÿ75657�ÿ
-<.ÿP'Q'ÿR9>;9=.*.>ÿ
Q/.43.5ÿS4-ÿ35ÿ9+-ÿ
T05-363.>'ÿ
ÿ
U�Cÿ@��ÿ� �8�549ÿ�3�ÿ�3��349ÿ5� ��ÿ�56� 4ÿ9ÿ4� � �395ÿ�57395�ÿ
�V5�965�"ÿ�9�395�5�"ÿ�ÿ3�9695�ÿ9�39ÿ�3�ÿ�5ÿ89745�ÿ4ÿ9�5�ÿ�3�5ÿ
� 5�5�ÿ�4�5�6394ÿ734��ÿ
ÿ
U�Lÿ�3��ÿ�9395ÿ�7�75ÿ3�54��"ÿ�9�ÿ3���934�5ÿ ÿ� 5�39��"ÿ�77ÿ�49485ÿ
9ÿ�545ÿ�343�5�549ÿ�8�5745�ÿ9�39ÿ4�78�5ÿ� 5�5�ÿ34�ÿ�3�939ÿ
� 4�5�6394ÿ�53�8�5�ÿ9ÿ3��8�5ÿ� 5�5�ÿ5���954�5�ÿ@�5�5ÿ�3�ÿ46765ÿ3ÿ
�565�ÿ ÿ�9395ÿ75�37ÿ�73�� �394ÿ34�ÿ�95�94Wÿ74�K95��ÿ���3��ÿ9ÿ
� 49�ÿ� 5�5�ÿ��9��894"ÿ 87394ÿ��5"ÿ34�ÿ�3�939ÿ�3495434�5Wÿ34�ÿ
�3�ÿ4�78�5ÿ�3�65�9ÿ�9�395�5�ÿ3� 65ÿ93��59ÿ 87394ÿ75657��ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
234567895 ÿ
ÿ
ÿ��������ÿ�ÿ����ÿ���ÿ6�����������ÿ7���ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿ
� !"ÿ#$%&$'(()ÿ
"*'ÿ� !"ÿ+,(ÿ-%$.,//0ÿ'(1,2/3(*'4ÿ35ÿ1667ÿ,54ÿ8%5(3(1(ÿ%-ÿ$'#$'('51,139'(ÿ-$%.ÿ1*'ÿ1:ÿ
(1,1'ÿ+3/4/3-'ÿ,&'583'(ÿ+31*35ÿ1*'ÿ*3(1%$38,/ÿ(+3-1ÿ-%;ÿ$,5&'ÿ,(ÿ+'//ÿ,(ÿ-'4'$,/<ÿ1$32,/<ÿ
5%5&%9'$5.'51,/<ÿ,54ÿ=539'$(310ÿ$'(',$8*ÿ#,$15'$(>ÿ"*'ÿ� !"ÿ.'1ÿ,55=,//0ÿ-$%.ÿ1667?
@::AÿB';8'#1ÿ-%$ÿ@::7Cÿ,54ÿ1*'5ÿ23'553,//0ÿ-$%.ÿ@:1:?@:1AÿBD##'543;ÿ1C>ÿDÿ#/,55'4ÿ
@:@:ÿ.''135&ÿ+,(ÿ8,58'//'4ÿ4='ÿ1%ÿ!%934<ÿ,54ÿ1*'ÿ&$%=#ÿ.'1ÿ93$1=,//0ÿB%5/35'Cÿ35ÿ@:@@>ÿ
"',.ÿ.''135&(ÿ,$'ÿ%#'5ÿ1%ÿ1*'ÿ#=2/38ÿ,54ÿ#$%934'ÿ,ÿ-%$=.ÿ-%$ÿ35-%$.,13%5ÿ';8*,5&'ÿ
,54ÿ43(8=((3%5ÿ,(ÿ+'//ÿ,(ÿ8%%$435,13%5ÿ-%$ÿ4%8=.'5135&ÿ1',.ÿ,8139313'(ÿ35ÿ1*'ÿ-%$.ÿ%-ÿ
,55=,/ÿ%$ÿ23'553,/ÿ$'#%$1(>ÿ
ÿ
!EFÿ*%(1(ÿ,ÿ� !"ÿ+'2(31'ÿ+*'$'ÿ8%51,81ÿ35-%$.,13%5ÿ-%$ÿ� !"ÿ$'#$'('51,139'(ÿ8,5ÿ2'ÿ
GHIJKÿMNÿOPQQÿMNÿRMSTHINÿKHUIVPJWNÿKPNUSTXTJYÿWZPÿ[PMV\Nÿ,88%.#/3(*.'51(ÿ,54ÿ
,8139313'(>ÿ"*3(ÿ358/=4'(ÿ1*'ÿ166]ÿ,54ÿ@:11ÿ!%5('$9,13%5ÿD(('((.'51ÿ,54ÿ!%5('$9,13%5ÿ
�1$,1'&3'(ÿ,54ÿ,QQÿHGÿWZPÿ[PMV\Nÿ,55=,/ÿ,54ÿ23'553,/ÿ$'#%$1(>ÿ
B*11#()^^8#+>(1,1'>8%>=(^/',$5^E,&'(^�+3-1%;!%5('$9,13%5"',.>,(#;Cÿ
ÿ
_543934=,/ÿ(1,1'ÿ#$%&$'(()ÿ
`ÿD//ÿ1:ÿ(1,1'(ÿ*,9'ÿ*,4ÿ,ÿ$'#$'('51,139'ÿ%5ÿ1*'ÿ� !"ÿ(358'ÿ31(ÿ358'#13%5ÿ35ÿ1667<ÿ,54ÿ
,//ÿ$'#$'('51,139'(ÿ*,9'ÿ$'.,35'4ÿ,8139'ÿ+31*35ÿ1*'ÿ&$%=#ÿ35ÿ1'$.(ÿ%-ÿ.''135&ÿ
,11'54,58'<ÿ,((3(135&ÿ+31*ÿ4%8=.'51ÿ,54ÿ(1,1=(ÿ=#4,1'(<ÿ35-%$.,13%5ÿ43(('.35,13%5<ÿ
,54ÿ&'5'$,/ÿ#,$1383#,13%5>ÿÿ
ÿ
aÿ��������ÿ�����ÿ���ÿb�����cd����ÿ��ÿ��ÿe����ÿfgÿh��i���ÿ��ÿ�j�ÿ�d���ce�kÿ����e�ce�ÿ
j�c����ÿ
ÿ
� !"ÿ#$%&$'(()ÿ
l%8=.'5135&ÿ1*'ÿ43(1$32=13%5ÿ%-ÿ(+3-1ÿ-%;'(ÿ*,(ÿ2''5ÿ,ÿ.,m%$ÿ8*,//'5&'ÿ-%$ÿ1*'ÿ� !"ÿ
NTJUPÿWZPÿWPMV\NÿTJUPnWTHJoÿE,(1ÿ'--%$1(ÿ358/=4'4ÿ1*'ÿ(1,1'(ÿ8%.#3/35&ÿ(=$9'0ÿ,54ÿ
%2('$9,13%5ÿ4,1,ÿ-$%.ÿ,ÿp?0',$ÿ#'$3%4ÿ,54ÿ(=2.31135&ÿ1%ÿ$'(',$8*'$(ÿ-$%.ÿq%$1*'$5ÿ
E$,3$3'ÿF3/4/3-'ÿr'(',$8*ÿ!'51'$ÿBqEFr!C<ÿ+*%ÿ#$%4=8'4ÿ=#4,1'4ÿ'(13.,1'(ÿ%-ÿ
$,5&'+34'ÿ43(1$32=13%5ÿB�%9,4,ÿ,54ÿ�8*'38sÿ1666<ÿ�%9,4,ÿ,54ÿD(('5.,8*'$ÿ@::p<ÿ
�%9,4,ÿ'1ÿ,/>ÿ@::6C>ÿ�%9,4,ÿ'1ÿ,/>ÿB@::6Cÿ5%+ÿ&'5'$,//0ÿ$'#$'('51(ÿ1*'ÿWPMV\Nÿ,88'#1'4ÿ
.'1*%4%/%&0ÿ-%$ÿ,(('((35&ÿ$,5&'+34'ÿ(1,1=(ÿ%-ÿ(+3-1ÿ-%;'(>ÿD1ÿ,ÿ13.'ÿ-$,.'ÿ4'1'$.35'4ÿ
20ÿ1*'ÿ� !"<ÿ',8*ÿ(1,1'ÿ(*%=/4ÿ(=2.31ÿ8%=510?/'9'/ÿ#$'('58'?,2('58'ÿ4,1,ÿ-$%.ÿ+31*35ÿ
1*'ÿ*3(1%$38,/ÿ$,5&'ÿ35ÿ1*,1ÿ(1,1'ÿ-%$ÿ,ÿp?0',$ÿ#'$3%4>ÿt'1*%4(ÿ=('4ÿ1%ÿ34'513-0ÿ8%=510?
/'9'/ÿ#$'('58'?,2('58'ÿ,$'ÿ5%1ÿ(1,54,$43u'4ÿ35ÿ$'8%&5313%5ÿ%-ÿ(+3-1ÿ-%;ÿ#%#=/,13%5(<ÿ
/,54ÿ,88'((<ÿ$%,4ÿ4'5(313'(<ÿ,54ÿ%1*'$ÿ8*,$,81'$3(138(ÿ1*,1ÿ9,$0ÿ2'1+''5ÿ(1,1'(<ÿ2=1ÿ1*'ÿ
8%.235'4ÿ4,1,ÿ$'#$'('51ÿ1*'ÿ2'(1ÿ,9,3/,2/'ÿ4'#3813%5ÿ%-ÿ(+3-1ÿ-%;ÿ43(1$32=13%5>ÿÿÿ
ÿ
11ÿ
�ÿ
345ÿ2611ÿ7879ÿ5 �5 ÿ�ÿ���5ÿ��ÿ�� � �ÿ45ÿ�� �5� 5ÿ����ÿ����ÿ5�5��ÿ�ÿ�5���ÿ
����5��5ÿ2�1�ÿ345ÿ5��ÿ4��ÿ��!!5 ÿ�4��ÿ��ÿ4�ÿ���5��5"ÿ��ÿ� 4 ÿ4�ÿ���!��� "ÿ� ÿ
�� �5 ÿ����ÿ��ÿ45ÿ�� �5� 5ÿ ����� ÿ��ÿ���ÿ��#ÿ�ÿ���� 5 ÿ���ÿ45ÿ�5���ÿ261$%
261&�ÿ34�ÿ5���5ÿ��ÿ�����5 ÿ ����� ÿ���ÿ$'(ÿ��ÿ45ÿ4�����!ÿ�� �5"ÿ��ÿ����ÿ
45ÿ5���5ÿ��ÿ$$(ÿ��� ÿÿ9��� �ÿ5ÿ�!�ÿ�266'�ÿÿÿ
ÿ
)4!5ÿ�5ÿ��5ÿ����5 ÿ� 4ÿ4�ÿ�54� �!���ÿ���ÿ���5�� �ÿ ����� "ÿ�5ÿ�ÿ�5ÿ45�5ÿ
*+ÿ-./0123*.24ÿ356-2ÿ7832ÿ/6.+2*2-20+ÿ9+-*235:0;ÿ3<3*:35:0ÿ835*232=>ÿ?6@0ÿ3103+ÿ7*28*.ÿ280ÿ
4�����!ÿ�� �5ÿ4�ÿ�5�5ÿ4���4ÿ�ÿ4��5ÿ����!5ÿ�����!� ÿ4���ÿ4��5ÿ�5��!5 ÿÿ
� ����5����!ÿ�5 �� ��� �ÿ��ÿ4��5ÿ�ÿ�55 ÿ�5�����5 ÿ��ÿ� ���5 ÿ���ÿ��#ÿ
����!�� ��ÿ34�ÿ���ÿ�5ÿ45ÿ�5��!ÿ��ÿ�4� � �ÿ��5���� ÿ!5�5!�"ÿ�!5�5 ÿ�5�5�� ÿ
��5�"ÿ��ÿ�ÿ�� �5 ÿ�!ÿ�� ÿ����� ��ÿ7� � 5� �ÿ45ÿ ����!�ÿ��ÿ5� �ÿ�� ��!5ÿ
4���"ÿ���5�� �ÿ����5��ÿ����ÿ4�ÿ���5��5ÿ�ÿ���5�4�ÿ ����!�ÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
345ÿ9A73ÿ�� �5�ÿ�ÿ������ÿ�5 �� ��� ÿ5�����ÿ����ÿ��5�ÿ� 4ÿ�5���5ÿ���ÿ��#ÿ
����!�� �ÿ�ÿ��5��ÿ��ÿ��5 �!!�ÿ����!5ÿ��ÿ� �����5 ÿ4���ÿÿ�45�ÿ��5��ÿ
B��5�5�"ÿ!���5ÿ���� �ÿ��ÿ�����!� ÿÿ45ÿ5��5�ÿ����ÿ��ÿ45ÿ4����ÿ���ÿ��#ÿ�� �5ÿ
�5�� ÿ� �����5 �ÿ)5ÿ�ÿ�5ÿ4�ÿÿ�ÿC�5�� ��!5ÿ�4545�ÿ45�5ÿ4����ÿ��5ÿ
����5 !�ÿ����!5�ÿ345�5ÿ��5��ÿ��5ÿ�����!�ÿ� #5 ÿ�����ÿ����5"ÿ� ÿ45ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ
���!�ÿ�5ÿ��ÿ�!!ÿ���ÿ���ÿ��#5�ÿ�ÿ�����5ÿ� 5�ÿ5#� �ÿ�� � ��ÿDÿ� � ÿ�ÿ
�����5 �� ÿ��ÿ45ÿ����5"ÿ�5ÿ�ÿ�5ÿ�4� �5�ÿ� �5ÿ4�����!ÿ�5�ÿÿ���E �ÿ
�4�����!ÿ��� ÿ� ÿ� ��!�5ÿ���E �ÿ�5�!��5 ÿ��ÿ�� 5�ÿ�� !5ÿ���E �"ÿ��5ÿ�5��5�"ÿ
� ÿ45ÿ�� ÿ45����4�ÿ�� 4ÿ45ÿ�5����!ÿ��ÿ��!�5�ÿ� ÿ������!5ÿ��5��5ÿÿ����5ÿ
� F��ÿ�5 ÿ��#ÿ��� � �5ÿ� ÿ5 ��"ÿ������!�ÿ5#��5���5 ÿ��ÿ45ÿ��5�5 �5ÿ��ÿ
�����!��5�ÿ74� �5�ÿÿ���E �ÿ� ÿ�!��5ÿ���4ÿ5��5����5ÿ� ÿ��5���� ÿ���ÿ
4��5ÿ�5��!5 ÿÿ�4� �5�ÿÿ�����!� ÿ������5ÿ� F��ÿ������ � "ÿ���� 5 ÿ� 4ÿ45ÿ
����5 ÿ 5���5���ÿ����5 � ÿ��5����5�"ÿ4�ÿ�5 5�ÿ45�5ÿ4����ÿ� ����!5�ÿÿ
ÿ
G5��� �ÿ�5��!����ÿ��5���4"ÿ���ÿ7879�ÿ�!� 5 ÿ�ÿ�5����5 �� ÿ4�ÿ��5�ÿ
4�ÿ�!!��ÿ4���5�ÿ�� � 5�ÿ�5!ÿ��� �ÿ��ÿ�ÿ�5� �ÿ��ÿ����5 �ÿ4���5�ÿ�9A73ÿ
1''H"ÿI�� ÿ9�J5!ÿ2611�ÿ34���4ÿ������5ÿ4���5�ÿ5���5�ÿ�� ÿ�!��ÿ�5ÿ� � 5 ÿ����ÿ
����5�!�ÿ5�� 5 ÿ����5��"ÿ�5�5��!ÿ��5�ÿ�!!ÿ�����!5ÿ� 4ÿ4���5�ÿ5���� �ÿ95�5��!ÿ
��5�ÿ4��5ÿ5�5!��5 ÿ�54� �ÿ�ÿ���5��ÿ���� ��!5ÿ4���5�ÿ!5�5!�ÿ��55ÿ7� �5���� ÿ
8��5���5 "ÿ95�� ÿK�ÿB���5�ÿÿ5��4ÿ��ÿ45�5ÿ��5�ÿ���ÿ�5!!ÿ�5!��ÿ45�ÿ
5���!�45 ÿ4�5�4�!��ÿ9��ÿ��#ÿ����!�� �ÿ��5ÿ�� � 5�5 ÿ���!5ÿ��ÿ��5�� �ÿÿ�!!ÿ
��5�ÿ4�ÿ�!!��ÿ4���5�ÿ� 4ÿ45ÿ�����!5ÿ5#�5�� ÿ��ÿ35#��ÿ�L55Jÿ5ÿ�!�ÿ262$�ÿÿ
ÿ
D � ��!ÿ��5ÿ�����5��Mÿ
Nÿ7�!��� �ÿOÿ7L)ÿ�ÿ�ÿ5 ���5 ÿÿ� �ÿ�����!ÿ��5�5�%��5���ÿ5�����ÿ�ÿ5#�� ÿ
����� ÿ��ÿ������ ��ÿ��ÿ�5�ÿ����!5ÿ4���ÿ�ÿPÿ&6(�ÿ345�ÿ�ÿ�� ���5ÿ�ÿ
��%��%��5ÿ�5 �� ��� ÿ5������ÿ345ÿ���ÿ��#ÿ�ÿ4���5�5 ÿ����5��5�ÿÿ7�!��� ��ÿ
B���5�ÿ5���5ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�4� 5F 5�5ÿ����5�ÿ��ÿ4� 5��ÿ� 4ÿ����5��5�ÿ!�5 �5ÿ��ÿ
�5�� �ÿL5!ÿ��� �ÿ�ÿ�ÿ�5C��5 �ÿÿÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3ÿ456757ÿ8ÿ49 ÿ57ÿ6 �ÿ7�������5���ÿ�����ÿ�ÿ���56�ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ� ���5��67ÿ�57��5��ÿ
�6ÿ��ÿ7�5���ÿ� ���ÿ���ÿ5��ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�7����ÿ�56��ÿ�7ÿ�6 ��������ÿ� ���ÿ�7ÿ6 ÿ
�56�7�5��ÿ�����ÿ5�����ÿ�����6ÿ�������ÿ56�ÿ�6 �������ÿ5 ��5��ÿ56�ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ�������ÿ
7����ÿ���7ÿ� ���ÿ5��ÿ�� �������ÿ��ÿ�57���6ÿ�5��ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�7����ÿ�56��ÿ���� ÿ
65���5�ÿ��7���75�ÿ��ÿ��ÿ5 ��5�ÿ�57ÿ7���5 ���ÿ!�ÿ�7ÿ�������ÿ���ÿ5��ÿ6 �ÿ��5�7�ÿ
�56���56�ÿ�����5��6ÿ�7ÿ� ÿ�5��ÿ��ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ�ÿ7������ÿ�6���ÿ�����6�ÿ�6����67ÿ"����ÿ
�56�ÿ�7�ÿ56�ÿ����ÿ"#$%&'ÿ)$*+$%',ÿ��67����7,�ÿ� �ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ-565���ÿ57ÿ5ÿ
����5����ÿ���ÿ����ÿ�5���6�ÿ��.������ÿ/6ÿ5���5��ÿ�ÿ100ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ����ÿ�5����ÿ
566�5���ÿ��-ÿ011120100�ÿ9��5��-�6�ÿ���766��ÿ�� ���6�7���5���ÿ������ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ
��5��6ÿ�6��-5��6ÿ��5�2��6��ÿ49 ÿ57ÿ���5���ÿ5�����ÿ�ÿ������ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ��ÿ
��ÿ3 ��ÿ4��565�ÿ���6�������6�ÿ��ÿ���ÿ5��ÿ6 �ÿ���ÿ��-5���ÿ5������ÿ��ÿ���7�ÿ
3ÿ6 6�565ÿ8ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ5��ÿ��577�����ÿ57ÿ5ÿ7�����7ÿ�ÿ�6���6ÿ�6ÿ6 6�565ÿ��ÿ5��ÿ5ÿ
5���7�5 ��ÿ����5���ÿ�6ÿ5ÿ7-5��ÿ� ���6ÿ�ÿ��ÿ7�5���ÿ85���7���ÿ56�-5�7ÿ-�7�ÿ�ÿ
��� ����ÿ����6ÿ09ÿ ��7�ÿ56�ÿ����ÿ�7ÿ5ÿ-56�5���ÿ���5�ÿ����ÿ�5���6��ÿ56�ÿ:5�ÿ
�������6�ÿ/ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ���6�������6ÿ��:���ÿ�7ÿ�����6���ÿ�6����5�ÿ6�ÿ3 ��ÿ4��565�ÿ
���5�ÿ�56�7�ÿ;57�ÿ��5�ÿ"0100,ÿ�57ÿ��ÿ2��ÿ��5�ÿ�ÿ��567��5��67�ÿ56�ÿ112ÿ���7ÿ
5��ÿ��6ÿ��567��5���ÿ�ÿ�5���ÿÿ
3ÿ<� �5755ÿ8ÿ� �ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ��������ÿ�6ÿ<� �5755ÿ57ÿ5ÿ7�5��ÿ�6�56�����ÿ7�����7�ÿ
� �7ÿ��������ÿ7�5��7ÿ�5�����5��7ÿ65���5�ÿ���567�6�ÿ
3ÿ<��ÿ6����ÿ8ÿ< ÿ7�������ÿ�����7ÿ5��ÿ��6ÿ-5��ÿ�6ÿ<��ÿ6����ÿ�ÿ���56�ÿ7����ÿ
��ÿ� ���5��67�ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ5��ÿ��577�����ÿ57ÿ��������ÿ����5���7�ÿ� ��ÿ5��ÿ
5���7�5 ��ÿ����6�ÿ��ÿ��6ÿ7�576�ÿ85���7�ÿ�7ÿ- 6�����ÿ���� ÿ-56�5���ÿ
5���7�ÿ��� ���6��ÿ��ÿ� ��ÿ��ÿ�����5���ÿ5��ÿ=>2?1@ÿ��� ���6�ÿ�5���ÿ� ��ÿ� ÿ6 �ÿ
����ÿ�5��ÿA���6ÿ��ÿ��ÿ6�- ��7ÿ�ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ5���7���ÿ�5�ÿ��5��ÿ��ÿ5��ÿ�6����6�ÿ�6ÿ
5���7�ÿ��� ���6�ÿ������6�ÿ� �7�ÿ�5�5ÿ6ÿ��ÿ6�- ��ÿ�ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ5���7����ÿ
3ÿ< ��ÿ955�5ÿ8ÿ<9A3ÿ57ÿ6 �ÿ-5��ÿ56�ÿ�����7ÿ�ÿ���56�ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ�56���ÿ� ��ÿ5��ÿ
��577�����ÿ57ÿ5ÿ����5���ÿ���ÿ5ÿ��7��ÿ7�576�ÿÿ
3ÿB5�5 -5ÿ2ÿB9 Cÿ�6��6��7ÿ�ÿ- 6���ÿ��ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ� ���5��6ÿ�ÿ�����-�6�ÿ��ÿ
�����6���ÿ�������ÿ�56��ÿ56�ÿ56ÿ�6���ÿ�ÿ� ���5��6ÿ���6��ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ
�6����ÿB5�5 -5ÿ�56 56���ÿ"56ÿ5��5ÿ�ÿ>�D11ÿ7.�5��ÿ-���7,ÿ������ÿ��ÿ��ÿ
6 ����7���6ÿEÿ��67��7ÿ"56ÿ5��5ÿ�ÿ5�����-5����ÿ011ÿ7.�5��ÿ-���7,ÿ5��6�ÿ4�5�5ÿ
6�75�ÿ� ��ÿ�7ÿ5ÿ����ÿ56�ÿ��7�ÿ�56�7�5��ÿ577��5���ÿ���ÿ��ÿF �5�ÿ6 �6�5�67�ÿ
!6ÿ5�����6ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�56 56����ÿ7����ÿ���7ÿ5��ÿ��5���ÿ�ÿ����ÿ�6ÿ� ���67ÿ�ÿ�� ÿ� �6���7ÿ
�6ÿ��ÿ-5�6ÿ ��ÿ�ÿ��ÿ7�5��ÿ5�:5��6�ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�56 56����ÿ� ��ÿ5���5�ÿ�ÿ����ÿ5�ÿ5ÿ
����ÿ��67���ÿ�6ÿ��ÿ-5�6ÿ ��ÿ�ÿ��ÿ7�5���ÿ56�ÿ��ÿ5 ��5�ÿ�7ÿ�5�� ����ÿ��������ÿ
���ÿ5��ÿ- ��ÿ���������ÿ�ÿ�������ÿ� �ÿ5��5ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ7�5��ÿ�5�ÿ�7ÿ�����6���ÿ�������ÿ
�ÿ7����ÿ�GHIJÿLJÿMNÿOIMJNÿPQRÿGSÿNTIÿJUIVLIJWÿTLJNGXLVÿXMYZIÿMY[ÿUGJJL\O]ÿ^GXIÿ
[IUIY[LYZÿ_UGYÿNTIÿSGHWJÿJNMN_JÿLYÿNTIÿǸGÿVG_YNLIJÿLYÿNTIÿ^MLYÿ\G[]ÿGSÿNTIÿJNMNIaÿ
� �ÿ���5�ÿ7�5��7ÿ�ÿ��ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ5�7ÿ57ÿ��-5�6��ÿ�6�56���ÿ����6�ÿ��ÿ112��5�ÿ
�����bÿ����ÿ��-5�67ÿ5ÿ��5�2��6�ÿ��7��ÿ7�576ÿ6ÿ��ÿ7����ÿ3 �ÿ56�ÿ��ÿ��-5�67ÿ
��577�����ÿ57ÿ5ÿ7�����7ÿ�ÿA��5��7�ÿC 67���5��6ÿ<���ÿ"7AC<,ÿ�6ÿ��ÿB5�5 -5ÿ
7�5��ÿ �������ÿ/���6ÿ�56�ÿ
3ÿ7 ��ÿ955�5ÿ8ÿ79A3 ÿ�����ÿ�ÿ��6�ÿ������ÿ565��7�7ÿ�ÿ�5�5ÿ56�ÿ�-����5��67ÿ�ÿ5ÿ
7����ÿ��ÿ������7��ÿ��6���ÿ6ÿ7����ÿ��ÿ���6�������6ÿ6ÿ��ÿ45�ÿF����ÿF56��7ÿ�6ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456789ÿ 6ÿ�8�68�ÿ� �4ÿ8589��4�ÿ85�ÿ749864�ÿ� �9�386�5�ÿ�474ÿ3 ��9464�ÿ��ÿ
�5�785�ÿ8��89ÿ86ÿ 6ÿ�8�68ÿ6864ÿ�5��47��6��ÿ� ��3ÿ8748�ÿ�539�4�ÿ8��686ÿ
�49436�5ÿ��ÿ�4�894ÿ����6ÿ��4�ÿ� 7�5�ÿ64ÿ� �7487�5�ÿ�48�5!ÿ�4546�3ÿ���47��6�ÿ�5ÿ8ÿ
74�567� 34�ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ� � 986�5!ÿ85�ÿ74948�4ÿ�46 �ÿ4�8986�5ÿ�7ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ
74�567� 36�5ÿ86ÿ"8�ÿ#��47ÿ#8534�ÿ$8��89ÿ46ÿ89�ÿ%&11!ÿ8��89ÿ46ÿ89�ÿ%&1'!ÿ
8��89ÿ46ÿ89�ÿ%&1()�ÿ� 4ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ��ÿ398�����4�ÿ8�ÿ8ÿ�6864ÿ67486454�ÿ��43�4�ÿ�5ÿ 6ÿ
�8� 68�ÿ
*ÿ�4�8�ÿ+ÿ�,-�ÿ8�ÿ5 6ÿ�8�4ÿ85�ÿ4��76�ÿ6ÿ4��85�ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ785�4�ÿ� 4�ÿ874ÿ8ÿ
87�4�68�94ÿ�7�48747.ÿ5 ÿ�496ÿ68�ÿ��ÿ74/ �74�ÿ85�ÿ6474ÿ��ÿ5 ÿ4�6��86�5ÿ�ÿ87�4�6�ÿ
���6ÿ��4�ÿ�474ÿ��456���4�ÿ8�ÿ8ÿ012ÿ�5ÿ64ÿ%&1%ÿ�4�8�ÿ1 5�47�86�5ÿ336�5ÿ,985ÿ
$6864ÿ-�9�9��4ÿ336�5ÿ,985)�ÿ
*ÿ-���5�ÿ+286789ÿ785�4ÿ4��85��5ÿ8�ÿ33774�ÿ�5ÿ-���5�ÿ�5ÿ743456ÿ�487��ÿ� 4�ÿ
8�4ÿ5 6ÿ8�ÿ85�ÿ�5�6864ÿ74�567� 36�5�ÿ7ÿ6785�9386�5�ÿ� 7�5�ÿ64ÿ74� 76�5�ÿ
�47��!ÿ� 6ÿ64�ÿ8�4ÿ�7���4�ÿ��4�ÿ�7ÿ64ÿ4 76ÿ"49�58�ÿ74�567� 36�5�ÿ���6ÿ��4�ÿ
74�8�5ÿ398�����4�ÿ8�ÿ8ÿ�764364�ÿ��43�4�ÿ�5ÿ64ÿ6864ÿ�ÿ-���5�ÿ��6ÿ5 ÿ94�89ÿ
87�4�6ÿ�48�5�ÿÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
56ÿ89:;<=;>?@@Aÿ9B?@C?D9ÿDE9ÿFD?DCFÿ<GÿFH;GDÿG<IÿJ<JC@?D;<KF6ÿ
ÿ
41�ÿ�7�74��Lÿ
� 4ÿ41�ÿ8�ÿ��456ÿ85ÿ4�645���4ÿ8� 56ÿ�ÿ6��4ÿ8��4���5�ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ� 7�4�ÿ85�ÿ
� 5�67�5�ÿ6435�/ 4��ÿ� 4ÿ1MMNÿ131 ÿ��456���4�ÿ64ÿ544�ÿ6ÿ4�68�9��ÿ8ÿ�685�87��O4�ÿ
� 5�67�5�ÿ�7639ÿ$67864��ÿ'�1.ÿ41�ÿ1MMN)�ÿP �4�47!ÿ64ÿ41�ÿ85�ÿ647�ÿ
4�456899�ÿ3539�4�ÿ686ÿ8ÿ3���6�456ÿ6ÿ74� 987ÿ� 5�67�5�ÿ�8�ÿ� 74ÿ��� 76856ÿ685ÿ
�685�87��O4�ÿ�46 ��!ÿ� �3ÿ�474ÿ5 6ÿ748�58�9�ÿ8668�58�94ÿ���45ÿ�87�86�5ÿ�5ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ
� � 986�5�ÿ85�ÿ647ÿ�8367�ÿ�46�445ÿ�6864�ÿ$� ��ÿ6�49ÿ%&11)�ÿ35 647ÿ�8�6ÿ
�Q436��4ÿ4�456899�ÿ�4647��54�ÿ�5�48���94ÿ�8�ÿ85ÿ4��76ÿ6ÿ�4647��54ÿ��5�� �ÿ��8�94ÿ
� � 986�5ÿ��O4ÿ4�6��864��ÿ�6ÿ�8�ÿ4�456899�ÿ3539�4�ÿ64�4ÿ4��76�ÿ74/ �74�ÿ85ÿ
4�34����4ÿ8� 56ÿ�ÿ�868ÿ�7ÿ�743��4ÿ4�6��864�!ÿ85�ÿ686ÿ3 56�5 4�ÿ� � 986�5ÿ
RSTUVSWUTXÿZ[WS\\ÿV]^ÿ\_^[U^\ÿ̀WZTX^ÿaSbcdÿd^V^[Vÿ[]ZTX^\ÿUTÿZebTdZT[^ÿSWÿdU\VWUebVUSTÿ
5434���686�5�ÿ��43���3ÿ35�47�86�5ÿ7ÿ�858�4�456ÿ836�5�ÿ$� ��ÿ6�49ÿ%&11)�ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
1 5�4/ 4569�!ÿ64ÿ�74�456ÿ�3�ÿ��ÿ5ÿ���64�86�3ÿ� 5�67�5�ÿ� �68�94ÿ6ÿ483ÿ�5����� 89ÿ
�6864�ÿ� � ÿ��4ÿ�6864�ÿ8�4ÿ4�68�9��4�ÿ�7�4�ÿ�46 � 9��!ÿ6��ÿ74�8�5�ÿ85ÿ���4ÿ
�5ÿ647�ÿ� 474ÿ9���64�ÿ985�ÿ8334��ÿ85�f7ÿ9�ÿ� � 986�5�ÿ3��9�3864ÿ64�4ÿ4��76��ÿ
� � ÿ� 7�4�ÿ�4���5�ÿ�87�!ÿ� �6ÿ�6864�ÿ�74�4569�ÿ�4ÿ� 6�5ÿ836��864�ÿ38�478�ÿ�7ÿ
� 5�67�5�ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ� � 986�5��ÿ
ÿ
�5����� 89ÿ�6864ÿ�7�74��Lÿ
*ÿ1 978� ÿ+ÿ1,-ÿ35� 36�ÿ33�853�ÿ� 7�4��ÿ�ÿ� 76�78��ÿ�78�7�4ÿ8��686�ÿ4�47�ÿ(ÿ
�487�ÿ$%&11!ÿ%&1g!ÿ%&%1)�ÿÿh33�853�ÿ��ÿ87 5�ÿi&jÿ85�ÿ5 ÿ3 85�4ÿ8�ÿ�445ÿ
�464364�ÿ�5ÿ64ÿ98�6ÿ1(ÿ�487��ÿ
*ÿk85�8�ÿ+ÿk�-,ÿ� 4�ÿ5 6ÿ3774569�ÿ8�4ÿ85ÿ4�68�9��4�!ÿ74�4868�94ÿ�7�4�ÿ
�46 � 9��ÿ6ÿ8��4��ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ���67�� 6�5ÿ85�f7ÿ8� 5�8534�ÿ�783�ÿ� 7�4��ÿ�474ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
345673896ÿ5ÿ89ÿ �8ÿ�� ��9 58ÿ98ÿ��ÿ���2�ÿ�78ÿ�9�9ÿ�4��83���ÿ6��37�8ÿ84ÿ3456738ÿ
334�65�ÿ84ÿ�48434�ÿ56ÿ�9�9ÿ��8ÿ345673896ÿ5ÿ�����ÿ�4�9ÿ�93958���ÿ5ÿ9�895� 9ÿ
3!9�ÿ8� 5�ÿ9��4�8ÿ� �ÿ345673896ÿ84ÿ��9��ÿ6�8��7845ÿ56ÿ �88ÿ7�9ÿ�"9�69�ÿ
������ÿ" �9ÿ89ÿ58958ÿ�ÿ84ÿ�9 9 8ÿ89ÿ �88ÿ! 5�ÿ4�845ÿ4�ÿ8�ÿ�4#938�ÿ89ÿ
3!9�ÿ8� 5�ÿ4�845ÿ4�ÿ89ÿ�4#938ÿ� �ÿ�4� ���ÿ844ÿ9�895� 9ÿ84ÿ67 �389ÿ� 95ÿ
89ÿ6��37�8�ÿ4�ÿ4�8 55�ÿ� 89ÿ�56ÿ339��ÿ8ÿ$%�ÿ�89��ÿ&4�99��ÿ3!9�ÿ8� 5�ÿ
�ÿ89ÿ�9�9��96ÿ�7�9�ÿ!98464�4��ÿ5ÿ' 5���ÿ56ÿ�4!9ÿ�967396ÿ9��45ÿ! �ÿ�9ÿÿ
4����8��ÿ' 5��ÿ�4��89��ÿ89�ÿ433�45 �ÿ�7�9�ÿ6 8ÿ�8ÿ34758�ÿ4�ÿ �9�8ÿ6 8ÿ
��4!ÿ! 56 84��ÿ9�8ÿ8��5�ÿ4�ÿ �9�896ÿ���8ÿ�4�9�ÿ�ÿ�9��ÿ�ÿ4 4�875�83ÿ
6437!958845ÿ4�ÿ4��9� 845�ÿ��ÿ'(")ÿ9! �4�99��ÿÿ
*ÿ�4585 ÿ+ÿ�,")-.ÿ.0123ÿ245ÿ466789:6;ÿ<224=3.ÿ0<=<ÿ64:>763<>ÿ1:ÿ3?<ÿ29=ÿ<9.3<=:ÿ
4�845ÿ4�ÿ89ÿ�889ÿ5ÿ��1�ÿ56ÿ��12ÿ7�5�ÿ���89! 83ÿ8� �ÿ3!9�ÿ�7�9���ÿ@ÿ
395�7�ÿ �ÿ�995ÿ345673896ÿ�ÿ8!9�ÿ�����+���1�ÿ����+���2�ÿ��1�+��12�ÿ��1A+
��1B��ÿ�8ÿ89ÿ28ÿ9��4�8ÿ4337��5�ÿ5ÿ�589�ÿ����+���$�ÿC �ÿ9��4�8ÿ�ÿ345673896ÿ
�45�ÿ89ÿD 5 6 E�4585 ÿ�4�69��ÿ� 9�9ÿ���8ÿ�4�ÿ �9�8ÿ�ÿ��4�96�ÿ56ÿ7�9�ÿÿ
! �87�9ÿ4�ÿ8� �ÿ3!9�ÿ56ÿ�9ÿ3 87�9ÿ8�5�938�ÿ��ÿ84�5� �ÿ�,")ÿ���ÿ�9�5ÿÿ
�889�69ÿ���89! 83ÿ8� �ÿ3 !9�ÿ�7�9�ÿ9��4�8�ÿ�9�555�ÿ5ÿ���$�ÿC �ÿ9��4�8ÿ���ÿ�9ÿ
ÿ$+�9 �ÿ�4 5�ÿ9��4�8�ÿF5ÿ���1ÿ56ÿ����ÿ�953�ÿ9��4559�ÿ345673896ÿ �48ÿ9��4�8�ÿ84ÿ
�9889�ÿ5�4�!ÿ89ÿ�7�9�ÿ69��5�ÿ@8ÿ8 �ÿ8!9ÿ89ÿ��9G7953�ÿ8ÿ� 3ÿ84ÿ�9 9 8ÿ8 �ÿ
�7�9�ÿ69 956�ÿ45ÿ89ÿ�7339��ÿ4�ÿ8�ÿ7 34!5�ÿ9��4�8�ÿ
*ÿH9���I ÿJÿHK)Dÿ34��938�ÿ���8ÿ�4�ÿ4��9� 845�ÿ��4 6I���ÿ 484��ÿ983��ÿ��4!ÿ89ÿ
7��3�ÿ�889ÿ56ÿ�969��ÿ�953�ÿ9��4559��ÿ56ÿ489�ÿ�47�39��ÿ� 3ÿ�9ÿ
6437!95896ÿ56ÿ! 96�ÿ�3958ÿ�8845ÿ�7�9��ÿ 9ÿ�995ÿ7�96ÿ5ÿ�9 47�ÿ�9 ���ÿ
C� �ÿ3 !9�ÿ�7�9��ÿ�9�9ÿ34! �9896ÿ67�5�ÿ��1�+��1%�ÿC� �ÿ3!9�ÿ�7�9��ÿ���ÿ
�9ÿ345673896ÿ99��ÿ2+1�ÿ�9 ���ÿ
*ÿH9�ÿ�9�34ÿJÿH�(K,ÿ!4584��ÿ6�8��7845ÿ557 ���ÿ8�47� ÿ �9�8ÿ�9 4�85��ÿF5ÿ
����ÿ89�ÿ�9� 5ÿ4 4�875�83���ÿ34��9385�ÿ8��79ÿ�! �9�ÿ��4!ÿ �9�896ÿ���8ÿ56ÿ
I8ÿ�4�9�ÿ�LMNOPQÿSTUVWXYQ�ÿ84ÿ337!7�89ÿÿ6 8� �9ÿ�4�ÿ�787�9ÿ�95983ÿ5 ����ÿ84ÿ
�44Iÿ8ÿ69�59 845ÿ4�ÿ6�8��7845ÿ�4�ÿ9 3ÿ�939�ÿ56ÿ48958�ÿ���6Z845�ÿF5ÿ
��1Bÿ56ÿ�����ÿ�9ÿ345673896ÿÿ545+5 � 9ÿ�95983ÿ�876�ÿ34��9385�ÿ�38ÿ5ÿÿ
� 8�ÿ3 87�9+�93 87�9ÿ��!9�4�Iÿ84ÿ9�8! 89ÿ4 7�845ÿ695�8�ÿ5ÿ54�89 �89�5ÿ
H9�ÿ�9�34�ÿ�469�ÿ9�8! 89�ÿ�9�9ÿB��ÿ���8ÿ�4�9�ÿ9�ÿ1��ÿI!�ÿ�%�2+1��2�ÿB2[ÿDF�ÿ
7�5�ÿ!469��ÿ8 8ÿ534�4�896ÿ�9�+9��938�ÿ45ÿ69893845ÿ56ÿ!49!958ÿ56ÿÿ
�9 4��ÿ9��938ÿ45ÿ69893845ÿ�4�ÿ� 896ÿ�89��ÿ
*ÿH4�8ÿ( I48ÿJÿH(K,ÿ!4584��ÿ���8ÿ�4�9�ÿ5��9G7958��ÿ�8ÿ3!9�ÿ8� ��ÿD�96��9ÿ
�� 85��ÿ�9ÿ59�8� 896ÿ84ÿ8��ÿ56ÿ9����ÿ
*ÿ\I� 4! ÿJÿ\("Dÿ7�9�ÿÿ8�3I+�9 �3ÿ!9846ÿ84ÿ6989�! 59ÿ89ÿ�9�9539�ÿ@ÿ
�7�9�ÿ��6ÿ �ÿ�995ÿ�396ÿ3�4��ÿ89ÿ8�99ÿ\I� 4! ÿ 5 56�9ÿ347589�ÿ56ÿ
99��+489�ÿ84�5� ÿ5ÿ8 8ÿ��6ÿ�ÿ�7�9�96ÿ45ÿ �4�! 89��ÿÿ8�99+�9 �ÿ�48845�ÿ
�8ÿ89ÿ9�39 845ÿ4�ÿ8�99ÿ84�5� �ÿ5ÿ89ÿ54�8�9�89�5ÿ34�59�ÿ4�ÿ89ÿ 5 56�9ÿ5ÿ
5ÿ�9 ÿI54�5ÿ�ÿ]�3Iÿ�9� �ÿC 9ÿ\I� 4! ÿ 5 56�9ÿ�ÿ34! ��96ÿ4�ÿ8�99ÿ
347589�ÿ56ÿ1%Aÿ84�5� ��ÿÿ"9ÿ�7�9�ÿ ��ÿ4�ÿ84�9ÿ84�5� �ÿ�A��ÿ9�39 8ÿ�4�ÿ
8�99ÿ8 8ÿ3458 5ÿ54ÿ�78��9ÿ �88ÿ56ÿ5489�ÿ459ÿ8 8ÿ3458 5�ÿ54ÿ7��3ÿ�4 6��ÿÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3ÿ45678ÿ9 57ÿÿ49 ��ÿ8 �ÿ�57ÿ��7ÿ�����5���ÿÿ��������ÿ�5��75����ÿ7��8���6�ÿ�5�ÿ
78��ÿ�������ÿ!8��ÿ85��ÿ75ÿ�5�ÿ��78ÿÿ�6�"� ���ÿ��������7#���� ��8��ÿ75ÿ8���ÿ
�5��6�7�ÿ��ÿ��������7ÿ���� 7"��ÿ��ÿ�5���7�����$�� ��"��ÿ�5��75����ÿ�6����ÿ78�ÿ
��%7ÿ������ÿ�� ��ÿ&�ÿ78�ÿ�� �7���'ÿ78��ÿ�5�7��6�ÿ75ÿ�5����7ÿ� 7ÿ��ÿ5"����7�5��ÿ
�5�ÿ��7��ÿ��75ÿ78�ÿ45678ÿ9 57ÿ( 76��ÿ)���7��ÿ9 7" ��ÿ
3ÿ!�%�ÿÿ!�*9ÿ�6����ÿ� ���ÿ7������#5��6� ���ÿ�6�����ÿ����5����ÿ��ÿ+,1-ÿ��ÿ
+,1.ÿ!�*9ÿ�7��ÿ��5ÿ�6��5�7��ÿÿ*��7ÿ!�%�ÿ/01ÿ����7ÿ�5%ÿ�5��75����ÿ��52��7ÿ
3����ÿ7���4ÿ��5�ÿ+,+,ÿ$ÿ+,++ÿ5�ÿ5�7ÿ6���ÿ( 7�5� �ÿ�������ÿ76����7��ÿ
78���ÿ��ÿ�5ÿ��7ÿ�5��75����ÿ��8��6��8ÿ85�����'ÿ!�*9ÿ��ÿ�������ÿ�676��ÿ�5��75����ÿ
��78ÿ� ���ÿ7���ÿ
3ÿ*�5����ÿÿ* �9ÿ�5�7��6��ÿ75ÿ�6����ÿ����7ÿ�5%ÿ5�ÿÿ9$�� �ÿ" ���ÿ��ÿ5��6� ���ÿ
�6�����ÿ78 7ÿ67���:�ÿ7���ÿ� ����ÿ��ÿ�6��ÿ46����ÿ����ÿ�����ÿ8 ��ÿ"���ÿ�%� ����ÿ
�6����ÿ78�ÿ���5�7���ÿ����5�ÿ75ÿ����6��ÿ���ÿ����5��ÿ��ÿ�5���ÿ8 "�77�ÿ��78��ÿ78�ÿ�77�ÿ
�8���ÿ����7ÿ�5%��ÿ��� �ÿ75ÿ"�ÿ�%� �����ÿ78���ÿ����ÿ��ÿ���7��"67�5�ÿ46�����ÿ��ÿ
+,1-ÿ�5�������ÿ78�ÿ��������ÿ5�ÿ����7ÿ�5%��ÿ��ÿ���7���ÿ�5�7�5��ÿ5�ÿ78�ÿ�77�'ÿ��ÿ
���� 7ÿ�6�����ÿ��ÿ�6����7��ÿ"����ÿ�5��6�7��ÿ��ÿ� ��ÿ+,+;ÿ75ÿ�5�����ÿ��ÿ78�ÿ�������ÿ
8 �ÿ�%� ����ÿ�6�78��ÿ��78��ÿ78�ÿ�77�ÿ9��7��"67�5�ÿ� ��ÿ��ÿ��� 7��ÿ" ���ÿ5�ÿ78���ÿ
�6�����ÿ��ÿ�5�������ÿ5"����7�5��ÿ5�ÿ78�ÿ�������ÿ��7����ÿ��75ÿ78�ÿ�77�����ÿ��������ÿ
5"����7�5�ÿ���7��ÿ� 7" ��ÿ� ��7����ÿ"�ÿ78�ÿ*�5����ÿ( 76��ÿ9������7�ÿ
9 7" ��ÿ��78ÿ���67ÿ��5�ÿ78�ÿ* �9ÿ
ÿ
<=ÿ?@ABCDEFÿGB@ÿHIBJAKLAÿAMDJCDBNÿBGCDLAÿJOIKCNKGJJÿGB@ÿPDMA@QNKGJJÿNKGJJRGB@J=ÿ
ÿ
4�7!ÿ��5�����Sÿ
!8���ÿ��ÿÿ����7�ÿ5�ÿ755��ÿ78 7ÿ��5�6��ÿÿ�� 7��ÿ��������7ÿ5�ÿ�������ÿ8 "�77�ÿ��ÿ
��ÿ5�ÿ�5�7�5��ÿ5�ÿ78�ÿ����7ÿ�5%ÿ����ÿ45�� ÿ�7ÿ�ÿ3+,,T4ÿ����7�����ÿ�%��7���ÿ�������ÿ
8 "�77ÿ��78��ÿ78�ÿ8��75���ÿ��ÿ5��6����ÿ����7ÿ����ÿ6����ÿ/�ÿ�5�ÿ78�ÿU4ÿ�5�7�5�ÿ*�ÿ
6���ÿ+,12ÿV/(9�&5Wÿ� 7ÿ3877��S##�����������5�#4ÿ75ÿ�6����7�ÿ78���ÿ���5�7�ÿ
"��6��ÿ/�ÿ� 7ÿ�5�ÿ�5��ÿ�����7ÿ�� ��ÿ��ÿ�57ÿ���"��ÿ3���ÿ75�����7�5�ÿ
/��������7'ÿ���7�5�ÿ/4ÿX78��ÿ�����7ÿ755��ÿ����6��ÿ78�ÿ7��7��ÿ�������ÿ55 �� �ÿ
�8��8ÿ��ÿÿ�5��"5�7���ÿ���5�7ÿ75ÿ��7"���8ÿ��ÿ� ��7��ÿ��������7ÿ��ÿ�5����7��ÿ
��������ÿ��ÿ86� �ÿ�5��6��7���ÿ3877��S##������������5 �� �5��#4ÿ��ÿ!8�ÿ
1�����7ÿ75�����7�5�ÿ6�6�����7ÿ�8��8ÿ��ÿÿ" ��� �ÿ5�ÿ���5��7�ÿ����ÿ��ÿ� 7���ÿ�5�ÿ
�5�����7�5�ÿ��ÿ78�ÿ1�����7ÿ3877��S##���$���86" ������5�#� ���#������7$
�5�����7�5�$"�6�����74ÿ/�578��ÿ���56���ÿ��ÿ78�ÿ������ÿ��ÿ4 ��"�6�8ÿ
75�����7�5�ÿ�5�7�'ÿ�8��8ÿ����6���ÿ� ��'ÿ� 7ÿ��ÿ578��ÿ���56����ÿ�5�ÿ�������ÿ��ÿ
��������7���ÿ�5�����7�5�ÿ�7�5��ÿ3877��S##��$�5�7�$���86" ������5�#4ÿ9 ����5�ÿ�7ÿ
�ÿ3+,+;4ÿ�����5���ÿÿ�5�����7�5�ÿ�������ÿ755�ÿ�5�ÿ78�ÿ"��$7����ÿ������ÿ�5�ÿ
�� "��ÿ5�ÿ�� 7��ÿ� �����ÿ�5���������ÿ�57ÿ26�7ÿ78�ÿ��5�5����'ÿ"67ÿ��5ÿ78�ÿ�5���'ÿ
�5��7���'ÿ��ÿ78�� 7ÿ��������ÿ��78ÿ78�ÿ��7��7ÿ78 7ÿ�6�8ÿ��������ÿ�56��ÿ"�ÿ���5��5�7��ÿ
��75ÿ578��ÿ����$����'ÿ�6�7�$�������ÿ�5�����7�5�ÿ�������ÿ���5�7�ÿ"����ÿ�����5���ÿ�5�ÿ
78�ÿ7��7��ÿ�������ÿ5�ÿ(5�78ÿ/����� ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456789 45ÿ4ÿ�866�5�6ÿ6ÿÿ���ÿ�848�ÿ48ÿ� 5�ÿ7�78�ÿ5�ÿ6 7ÿ�75�76ÿ5�ÿ
545��49785�75ÿ48� 5� 456�ÿ��6ÿ6ÿ87�7�7�ÿ5ÿ�7ÿ� 5�ÿ�84�8�6ÿ575�7�ÿ4ÿ
�4567897ÿ�866�5�6�ÿ���7ÿ5457ÿ4ÿ�767ÿ�84�8�6ÿ�787ÿ�76�57�ÿ6�7� ����ÿ48ÿ6� ÿ
4�76�ÿ7 486ÿ4ÿ�847�ÿ5�ÿ876487ÿ�866�5�6ÿ4ÿ6� ��7ÿ68���87ÿ5�ÿ�7��ÿ6�4���ÿ
��� 7��ÿ�757 ÿ6� ÿ4�76�ÿ4�7ÿ4ÿ�7ÿ� !48ÿ5 45 �ÿ48ÿ87�45 �ÿ�84�8�6ÿ� �ÿÿ
�866�5�ÿ�456789 45ÿ�4��4575ÿ87ÿ5����7�ÿ�7�4��ÿ"46ÿ4ÿ�767ÿ�84�8�6ÿ87ÿ
�5�7�ÿ�84���ÿ�7ÿ7�78�ÿ# 8�ÿ$���ÿÿ
ÿ
�76785ÿ%866�5�6ÿ&5 97ÿ'ÿ��6ÿ6ÿÿ�84 ��6��7�ÿ����6 7ÿ5 97ÿ4ÿ�(#�(ÿ
575�7�ÿ4ÿ�87 7ÿ� 85786��6ÿ5�ÿ�44�78 97ÿ7 486ÿ4ÿ6 ���7ÿ5�ÿ7�� 5�ÿ
�866�5�6ÿ���7ÿ� �5�ÿ5�ÿ8797865�ÿ�7��576ÿ5ÿ����7ÿ6�7�76ÿ�7�75�75ÿ45ÿ�7��ÿ
��6ÿ5 97ÿ�49786ÿ�46ÿ4ÿ�7ÿ�648��ÿ6� ÿ4�ÿ85�7ÿ5ÿ�7ÿ)��ÿ
ÿ
�48*5�ÿ+ 5�6ÿ48ÿ� ���7ÿ,�+#�-ÿ'ÿ��6ÿ./3 ÿ�84�8�ÿ4 786ÿÿ 8�77�ÿ��84 ��ÿ4ÿ
�4567895�ÿ����7ÿ6�7�76ÿ�84���ÿ6�6 5 ��7ÿ 8� 5�ÿ5�ÿ85��5��ÿ08��76ÿ�87�7�ÿ
ÿ�4567895�ÿ�866�5�6ÿ� ÿ�4���ÿ�7ÿ������7ÿ� �5ÿ�7ÿ6� ÿ4�ÿ85�7ÿ87ÿ
�76�8�7�ÿ5ÿ5ÿ./3 ÿ����� 45ÿ�76�8�5�ÿÿ8�7�48*ÿ48ÿ�456789 45ÿ�45ÿ5ÿ�7ÿ
%87 ÿ0�56ÿ�866�5�6ÿ�4�7ÿ,./3 ÿ1211-�ÿÿ
ÿ
%87 ÿ0�56ÿ%866�5�ÿ&5 97ÿ,%03&-�ÿ��6ÿ�84�8�ÿ6ÿ� 8ÿ4ÿ�7ÿ./3 ÿ�+#�ÿ
�84�8�ÿ5�ÿ 8�76ÿ5 �ÿ�866�5�ÿ�4876�ÿ&ÿ6ÿ575�7�ÿ4ÿ� 5 5ÿ�767ÿ87 6ÿ��ÿ
� 5 �5�ÿ�44��ÿ59645ÿ5�ÿ5�87 65�ÿ�876�8�7�ÿ87�ÿ
ÿ
359845�75 �ÿ4� ��ÿ&5�75976ÿ084�8�ÿ,34&0-ÿ'ÿ��6ÿ./3 ÿ�84�8�ÿ4 786ÿÿ���ÿ
6�7ÿ4ÿ85�7�5�ÿ�8��76�ÿ
ÿ
3456789 45ÿ/767897ÿ084�8�ÿ,3/0-ÿ'ÿ��6ÿ�84�8�ÿ�� 56787�ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ# 8�ÿ
789�7ÿ(�75��ÿ,# (-ÿ�849�76ÿÿ�7 8��ÿ875 �ÿ� ��75ÿ4ÿ 8�786ÿ��4ÿ87�497ÿ
759845�75 ���ÿ6756 97ÿ�5�ÿ84�ÿ�8����8�ÿ�84���45ÿ5�ÿ��5ÿ6�7�76ÿ� ÿ���ÿ
��8497ÿ759845�75 �ÿ�7 ��ÿ5�ÿ5� ���ÿ
ÿ
%866�5�6ÿ3/0ÿ�ÿ%866�5�6ÿ3/0ÿ6ÿ� 8ÿ4ÿ�7ÿ3/0ÿ�84�8��ÿ3�65�ÿ�866�5�6ÿ87ÿ
7����7ÿ��787 6ÿ45��ÿ 8�7�ÿ�5�6ÿ87ÿ7����7ÿ� �ÿ8� 45 �ÿ3/0�ÿ��6ÿ�84�8�ÿ�7��6ÿ
�5�4�5786ÿ5�ÿ4�78 486ÿ�847�ÿ�866�5��ÿ5����5�ÿ85�7�5��ÿ� 6�87�5��ÿ5�ÿ
�78 5ÿ4�78ÿ�5�6�ÿ���7ÿ� 5 55�ÿ�7ÿ87 6ÿ6ÿ�8�5�ÿ�5�6�ÿ
ÿ
(�8����8�ÿ3456789 45ÿ3 67�75ÿ084�8�ÿ�ÿ(�8����8�ÿ+ 5�ÿ3 67�75ÿ,(330�
(+3-ÿ'ÿ��6ÿ�84�8�ÿ���7�757�ÿ��ÿ./3 ÿ�847�6ÿ�89 7ÿ�8����8�ÿ�5�ÿ84�ÿ
�45978645ÿ4ÿ545��8����8�ÿ�676ÿ��ÿ�5�5�ÿ�456789 45ÿ7 67�756ÿ45ÿ 8�ÿ5�ÿ
85��ÿ�5��ÿ
ÿ
0 85786ÿ48ÿ#6�ÿ5�ÿ� ���7ÿ084�8�ÿ�ÿ��6ÿ�84�8�ÿ��56787�ÿ��ÿ) #� ÿ
�849�76ÿ7��5��ÿ5�ÿ5 5� �ÿ666 5�7ÿ4ÿ�5�4�5786ÿ578767�ÿ5ÿ876485�ÿ5�ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
345647849ÿ8 83ÿ56�8�6�ÿ�4ÿ�538�ÿ64 �ÿ��6��3�ÿ�ÿ56�8�6�ÿ��36��34��ÿ84���849ÿ
9�6��64 �ÿ847� 3ÿ��3�7�8�3 ÿ���4849ÿ64 ÿ46�8�3ÿ9�6��ÿ64 ÿ���ÿ�64�849��ÿÿÿ
ÿ
�39343�6�8�3ÿ��6�849ÿ�64 �ÿ�����ÿÿ!"#$ÿ#$ÿ!"&ÿ'()*+&ÿ,-.$&+/(.012$ÿ�345�ÿ���6�396ÿ
��ÿ����37�849ÿ64 ÿ�3����849ÿ789ÿ�88�4ÿ67�3�ÿ�ÿ84�67�ÿ9�6�849ÿ64 �ÿ84ÿ�53ÿ:�;�ÿ�6ÿ79<9ÿ
�5���95ÿ36�3�34��ÿ64 ÿ7�6���6�8�3ÿ�64693�34��ÿÿ
ÿ
=�3�3��849ÿ���ÿ=�68�83�ÿ>48�86�8�3ÿÿ358�ÿ?�7@�ÿ:48�8�3 ÿ�?:�ÿ���9�6�ÿ� 3��ÿ
7�4�3��6�8�4ÿ36�3�34��ÿ7���34�6�849ÿ��� �73��ÿ��ÿ�538�ÿ3 ����ÿ��ÿ7�4�3��3ÿ3�64 �ÿ
��ÿ9�6��64 ��ÿ?:ÿ6��ÿ53��ÿ64 � 43��ÿ7�4�3��ÿ83 ÿ83 �ÿ84��ÿ43 ÿ9�6��64 ÿ
�5���95ÿ56�8�6�ÿ� �3�ÿ���9�6���ÿ
ÿ
>4 8�8�6ÿ��6�3ÿ���9�3��Aÿ
Bÿ5���6 �ÿCÿ��6��64 ÿ7�4�3��6�8�4ÿ3 ���ÿ8�ÿ4��ÿ��37887ÿ��ÿ� 8�ÿ��ÿ���ÿ�53�3ÿ8�ÿ6ÿ68�ÿ
�8�ÿ�56�ÿ8�ÿ�77���849ÿ8�5ÿ64786�6ÿ�3438��ÿ��ÿ� 8�ÿ��ÿ847� 849ÿ��@ÿ�4ÿ��68�83ÿ�9Dÿ
�67@C���3 ÿ3��3�Dÿ9343�6ÿ9�6��64 ÿ36�3�34�ÿ��@Dÿ��8�6�86ÿ��ÿ69ÿ������3�Dÿ
7�4�3��8�4ÿ�ÿ�6�9846ÿ69ÿ64 �ÿ��ÿ�33��6�8�53 ÿ9�6��64 �ÿ�5�=Dÿ��6�3ÿ5�=C8@3ÿ
���9�6���Dÿ7�4�3��8�4ÿ�ÿ5�=ÿ��ÿ9�6�849Dÿ3�7�ÿEÿ68�ÿ�8�ÿ�ÿ��@ÿ8�ÿ�77���849ÿ�4ÿ
��8�6�3ÿ�649364 �ÿ�86ÿ5=Fÿ�6��43�ÿ�8��98��ÿ���9�6��ÿ6��3���849ÿ��ÿ3456473ÿ
9�6�849ÿ�64693�34�ÿ��ÿ����8849ÿ43 ÿ84�6����7���3ÿ�4ÿ3�8��849ÿ9�6��64 ��ÿ
G� 3�3�ÿ� 8�ÿ��ÿ�33�ÿ��ÿ�ÿH�8�3ÿ3ÿ84ÿ536�86ÿ9�6�3 ÿ64 ÿ��34ÿ39�6 3 ÿ
�649364 �Dÿ5875ÿ7�4��8���3ÿ�53ÿ��@ÿ�ÿ�53ÿ�5���9�6��ÿ��68�83ÿ84ÿ5���6 ��ÿ353�3ÿ8�ÿ
8�8�3 ÿ���6ÿ��48���849ÿ�77���849ÿ�4ÿ9�6��64 �ÿ����83ÿ�ÿ�3H�8�3�34��ÿ��ÿ�6�8���ÿ
3 3�6ÿ���9�6���ÿ5=Fÿ56�ÿ84�3��3 ÿ84ÿ76�678�6ÿ��ÿ�58�ÿ�6�3ÿ�ÿ��48���849ÿ��@ÿ84ÿ
�53ÿ�6��ÿ���ÿ8�ÿ8�ÿ6ÿ�84��ÿ�6��ÿ�ÿ���ÿ7���34�ÿ9�6��64 ÿ3 �����ÿF8�5ÿ6 8�8�46ÿ56�8�6�ÿ
�8��98��ÿ76�678�6ÿ84ÿ�53ÿ����3Dÿ5=Fÿ�66ÿ84�3��ÿ���3ÿ3 ���ÿ84��ÿ��48���849�ÿ
BÿI64�6�ÿCÿEÿ43 ÿ��6�86ÿ6��3���34�ÿ���ÿ��ÿ834�86849ÿ9�6��64 �ÿ64 ÿ��53�ÿ56�8�6��ÿ
84ÿI64�6�ÿ64 ÿ43��6�@6ÿ6�ÿ�3734�6ÿ3�3��3 ÿ�?86��4 ÿ3�ÿ6�ÿ7971��ÿI?F=ÿ56�ÿ
6ÿ��8�6�3ÿ64 �ÿ���9�6�ÿ763 ÿG6�8�6�ÿJ8���ÿ�56�ÿ����83�ÿ�4 849ÿ��ÿ6ÿ�6�83�6ÿ�ÿ
56�8�6�ÿ��67�873�ÿ847� 849ÿ���3ÿ��37887ÿ��ÿ9�6��64 ÿ7�4�3��6�8�4ÿ847� 849ÿ
��3�7�8�3 ÿ8�3Dÿ9�6�849ÿ�64�Dÿ64 ÿ��33ÿ�3���6�ÿF8�5ÿ�646ÿ67�3�ÿ�ÿ5�=ÿ���ÿ84ÿ
�3734�ÿ636��DÿI?F=ÿ56�ÿ�6�93�3 ÿ�53�3ÿ����3��83�ÿ8�5ÿ7���ÿ�56�3ÿ��ÿ347849ÿ64 ÿ
6�3�ÿ3�3���34�ÿ��ÿ��6ÿ64 ÿ�684�684ÿ�53�ÿ6�ÿ9�6�849ÿ64 ÿ�6�53�ÿ�564ÿ56�849ÿ�53�ÿ
�3���4ÿ��ÿ69�87����3ÿ�4ÿ��43�6�3ÿ��8��ÿ>4ÿI64�6�ÿ53�3ÿ�69�6��ÿ��3783�ÿ6�3ÿ
�64�3 ÿ84��ÿ5�=Dÿ�3849ÿ�3���3 ÿ���ÿ5�=ÿ64 ÿ9�6�3 ÿ�� ÿ67��66ÿ8�����3ÿ�538�ÿ
56�8�6�ÿH�68�6ÿ��ÿ� 8�ÿ��3��ÿI?F=ÿ6��ÿ��@�ÿ7��36ÿ8�5ÿ6ÿ�6�83�6ÿ�ÿ9��3�4�34�ÿ
64 ÿ4�4C9��3�4�34�ÿ34�8�83�ÿ��ÿ������3ÿ���5ÿ��6�3ÿ64 ÿ3 3�6ÿ9�6��64 ÿ
�64693�34�ÿ���9�6���ÿÿ
BÿK�4�646ÿCÿKJF=ÿ848�86�3 ÿ6ÿ��6��64 ÿ>48�86�8�3ÿ���9�6�ÿ84ÿ��3�ÿ��ÿ����37�ÿ84�67�Dÿ
46�8�3ÿ9�6��64 �ÿ��849ÿ<9C636�ÿ56�8�6�ÿ36�3��ÿ353ÿ� 8�ÿ��ÿ6�ÿ�43ÿ�ÿ�53ÿ
9�6��64 ÿ��3783�ÿ�ÿ7�473�4ÿ��ÿ5875ÿ�536ÿ3�3ÿ��@849ÿ��ÿ����37�ÿ56�8�6�ÿ6�ÿ�6��ÿ
�ÿ�56�ÿ848�86�8�3�ÿ>4ÿ7977ÿ�53ÿ693476ÿ84��� �73 ÿ6ÿ43 ÿ56�8�6�ÿ36�3ÿ���9�6�ÿ
�7��849ÿ�4ÿ����37�849ÿ84�67�Dÿ46�8�3ÿ9�6��64 �ÿ��ÿ<9C89ÿ636���ÿ3536ÿ6�3ÿ4��ÿ
��3788766ÿ��48���849ÿ64 ÿ�6��849ÿ9�6��64 ÿ6�36�ÿ�4ÿ6ÿ�39�6�ÿ�6�8��ÿG� 3�3�Dÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456ÿ78ÿ95 96ÿ�8��389ÿ9�� �7�ÿ�759ÿ5 �5�5�3�ÿ�7ÿ5 �5�ÿ�89ÿ4 ��33ÿ
�8��59��8��ÿ�456ÿ4 �5ÿ �8ÿ�55�ÿ45 ��6ÿ���8�57ÿ��34ÿ� 9�8 �ÿ5�3�3�5�ÿ38ÿ53ÿÿ887ÿ
�89��� ÿ����3ÿ�8�ÿ4 ��33ÿ��3���36ÿ�875ÿ�89ÿ345ÿ�335ÿ8�ÿ�8�3� �ÿ�456ÿ� 995�36ÿ
4 �5ÿ�8 9ÿ7���595�3ÿ�875�ÿ� 75ÿ�7ÿ�57ÿ�89ÿ����3ÿ�8�ÿ5��893��ÿ48�5�59ÿ�8�5ÿ8�ÿ
345�ÿ�89�ÿ� �35ÿ�ÿ�5ÿ�ÿ3456ÿ�8 7ÿ��5ÿ�98��ÿ345ÿ�335��75ÿ9� 5�ÿ
�ÿ�5�9�� ÿÿ!�ÿ�5�9���ÿ9� 5 �7ÿ� � 5�5�3ÿ��� 7�� ÿ� 359ÿ75�58"�5�3�ÿ
�5���� �ÿ�7ÿ9#�� ÿ� � 5�5�3ÿ" ���ÿ95ÿ�5�� ÿ78�5ÿ3498 4ÿ$�%�ÿ&5" 93�5�3ÿ
8�ÿ' 9�� 395ÿ($%&')ÿ�8��59�3�8�ÿ"98 9���ÿ�45ÿ$���59��36ÿ8�ÿ�5�9�� ÿ�8��389�ÿ
�95�ÿ8�ÿ9�� �7ÿ8�3ÿ38ÿ�98" �7ÿ�7ÿ5��98 �4�5�3ÿ�6ÿ������5ÿ3955�ÿ(* �359�ÿ
957+�57 9�ÿ98��6ÿ�8 �3��ÿ,��"59�ÿ53��)�ÿ
�ÿ�5�ÿ�5���8ÿÿ��&-.ÿ4 �ÿ" 93�5957ÿ��34ÿ345ÿ/ 6 ÿ0 �5�ÿ18��3ÿ25�395ÿ�7ÿ
" 93���" 3�� ÿ�78��59�3�7ÿ� � 59�ÿ4 �5ÿ95�38957ÿ14ÿ" 6 �ÿ��ÿ5 �359�ÿ�5�ÿ
�5���8�ÿ/ 6ÿ�5�ÿ95ÿ�5�5����ÿ38ÿÿ��75ÿ�9�536ÿ8�ÿ��7��5ÿ�83ÿ8�6ÿ�5� �5ÿ3456ÿ
"98��75ÿ� 359ÿ��ÿ�ÿ9�7ÿ�7��"5�ÿ� 3ÿ�8ÿ�5� �5ÿ3456ÿ"98��75ÿ4�4ÿ� �36ÿ
4 ��33ÿ�7ÿ�89 5ÿ��ÿ345ÿ9�� �7ÿ� ��59ÿ�998 �7�� ÿ345ÿ" 6�ÿ�45ÿ�8�3�� ÿ�6�5ÿ
8�ÿ487�� ÿ� 359ÿ�7ÿ796�� ÿ8 3ÿ"98��75�ÿÿ��� 5ÿ5�8�6�35�ÿ�5�5��33�� ÿ� �6ÿ
�"5��5�ÿ7 "357ÿ38ÿ345�5ÿ�8�7�3�8���ÿ�45ÿ� 6ÿ�8338�ÿ8�ÿ345ÿ" 6�ÿ 8��ÿ�89ÿ� 359ÿ
95�4 95ÿ38ÿ345ÿ5 ÿ'� ��59�ÿ
�ÿ�8934ÿ& �83ÿÿ�&-.ÿ4 �ÿ�5 �ÿ�ÿ5��893ÿ38ÿ�834ÿ"9835�3ÿ(8� ÿ359�ÿ 955�5�3)ÿ
�7ÿ95�3895ÿ(" �3�� �)ÿ� 3��5ÿ9�� �7�ÿ��ÿ345ÿ9� 5ÿ8�ÿ345ÿ����3ÿ�8�ÿ��ÿ�&�ÿ
�ÿ5� 48� ÿ+ÿ5&67ÿ�8�3�� 5�ÿ38ÿ�8��389ÿ�7ÿ�5ÿ�4 � 5�ÿ��ÿ345ÿ" �4 �75ÿ�7ÿ
�8934�5�359�ÿ5� 48� �ÿ5�59ÿ345ÿ55�5�+65 9ÿ"59�87�ÿ34595ÿ4 �ÿ�55�ÿÿ�� ÿ
���95 �5ÿ��ÿ345ÿ�95 5ÿ8�ÿ�7ÿ�57ÿ�89ÿ�5�359+"��83+�99� 357ÿ�98"ÿ��57��ÿ�4��ÿ��ÿ345ÿ
95� 3ÿ8�ÿ345ÿ�8��59��8�ÿ8�ÿ�8�+�99� 357ÿ�98" �7ÿ38ÿ�99� 357ÿ�98"ÿ�7ÿ�7ÿ345ÿ
�8��59��8�ÿ8�ÿ�8�5ÿ�7ÿ�98�ÿ78/ÿ5 �5�5�3�ÿ38ÿ�5�359+"��83ÿ�99� 3�8��ÿ�4595ÿ4 �ÿ
�55�ÿ�596ÿ�335ÿ�8��59��8�ÿ8�ÿ"9�9�5ÿ38ÿ�98"ÿ��57��ÿ�7ÿ345ÿ�95 5ÿ8�ÿ�7ÿ��ÿ78/ÿ
4 �ÿ75���57ÿ�6ÿ5��ÿ34 �ÿ19:�ÿ%5�59 ÿ95ÿ���7+5�596ÿ75�58"�5�3�ÿ4 �5ÿ�55�ÿ
�8��39�357ÿ��ÿ345ÿ" �4 �75ÿ7 9�� ÿ345ÿ" �3ÿ5�43ÿ65 9��ÿ�45�5ÿ8��9ÿ8�ÿÿ�5 96ÿ
5� ÿ93�8ÿ8�ÿ�8�+�99� 357ÿ�98"ÿ��57�ÿ�7ÿ�48939��ÿ"9�9�5ÿ9� 5 �7�ÿ5�59 �ÿ�5ÿ
;<=>?ÿABCDÿB=EÿF=;FGB?F<=ÿ?AB?ÿ���7ÿ5�596ÿ75�58"�5�3ÿ75 975�ÿ����3ÿ�8�ÿ4 ��33�ÿÿÿ
�ÿ%8 34ÿ& �83ÿÿ%&-./ÿ�7ÿÿ� ��59ÿ8�ÿ�-5ÿ" 93�59�ÿ4 �5ÿ���95 �57ÿ"95�5��5ÿ
�7ÿ�3���� ÿ��ÿ�5�359�ÿ%8 34ÿ& �83ÿ38ÿ����335ÿ�5�ÿ�78��59ÿ4 ��33ÿ
" 93�59�4�"��ÿ��34ÿ�ÿ5�"4 ���ÿ8�ÿ� 3��5ÿ9�� �7��ÿÿÿÿ
�ÿ�5��ÿ+ÿH ��33ÿ� � 5�5�3ÿ��ÿ"95��9��57ÿ9#�� ÿ4 �ÿ�55�ÿ"59�89�57ÿ�6ÿ345ÿ$�%�ÿ
.895�3ÿ%59���5ÿ3ÿ8�3ÿI ��ÿ� 3�8� ÿ-9�� �7��ÿ�4595ÿ95ÿJK�2LMÿ�95�ÿ5�9857ÿ
��ÿ78/ÿ��ÿ& �ÿ78 �36ÿ�ÿ8�ÿM9M9�ÿ
�ÿ668��� ÿ+ÿ6-.&ÿ�8�3�� 5�ÿ38ÿ�8897�� 35ÿ��34ÿ345ÿI0��ÿ$�%�ÿ.895�3ÿ%59���5ÿ
($%.%)�ÿ�7ÿ�87%ÿ38ÿ� ��3��ÿ��3�5ÿ9�� �7ÿ4 ��33�ÿ38ÿ�""893ÿÿ� �35ÿ8�ÿ
��8��357ÿ%-7��ÿ��� 7�� ÿ����3ÿ�8�5��ÿ7 995�3ÿ�8��59��ÿ��� 75ÿ345ÿ5�" ���8�ÿ8�ÿ
�834ÿ���7ÿ�7ÿ�8 9ÿ5�596ÿ"98,5�3�ÿ�7ÿ95� 3�� ÿ�9 �5�33�8�ÿ8�ÿ9�� �7ÿ�7ÿ
"9�9�5ÿ4 ��33��ÿ6-.&ÿ"98��75�ÿ�8��5�3�ÿ�7ÿ95�8��5�7 3�8��ÿ38ÿ5�596ÿ
��7 �396ÿ75�58"59�ÿ8�ÿ" ���ÿ�7�ÿ��34ÿ345ÿ8 ÿ8�ÿ������#�� ÿ��" �3�ÿ38ÿ%-7�ÿ
�"5��5��ÿ�8�3ÿ4 ��33ÿ�89�ÿ38ÿ��"98�53� ��3��ÿ� 5�9�439�� �7�ÿ4 ��33�ÿ��ÿ
��35�757ÿ38ÿ�5�5��3ÿ� 5ÿ98 �5�ÿ�95 3�5�3�ÿ��� 75ÿ,��"59ÿ95�8� �ÿ�45 39��ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567489ÿ 3 5�38ÿ67 6 56ÿ4�ÿ� 3� 56ÿ5��47ÿ� 5�ÿ� � �7��ÿ�65���ÿ�6 7ÿ
345�7�6�45ÿ��476�ÿ�538�� ÿ �6�� 6�45ÿ4�ÿ5 7��ÿ� �84� 56�ÿ���5�9ÿ�487�ÿ5�ÿ
738 6�45ÿ4�ÿ867�ÿ��6�ÿ�4�8�� ��ÿ��6ÿ5 6��ÿ� � �7��ÿ�6�� ��7��85�ÿ
�� 3���ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
!ÿ"#$%&%'#'(ÿ)#*'+(*,-%),ÿ#+.ÿ$//)(*#'%0(ÿ(11/*',ÿ'/ÿ)*/'($'2ÿ*(,'/*(2ÿ#+.ÿ(+-#+$(ÿ
,3%'#4&(ÿ-#4%'#',ÿ5%'-%+ÿ)/'(+'%#&ÿ,5%1'ÿ1/6ÿ*#+7(!ÿ
ÿ
89:;ÿ�74�7��<ÿ
; ��ÿ4�=36��ÿ�538�� �ÿ�����5�ÿ6 ÿ4�5 7���ÿ5�ÿ 5 � 56ÿ4�ÿ>��6�5�ÿ85���ÿ
?� 56���36�45ÿ4�ÿ���8�3ÿ85��ÿ��ÿ7 ��8�ÿ��8�8ÿ��6ÿ3�7756ÿ ���5�ÿ635484��ÿ5�ÿ
5� 74��ÿ ���5�ÿ6448�ÿ54�ÿ>��6ÿ6 6ÿ884�ÿ�47ÿÿ�� 3�8ÿ5 8����ÿ4�ÿ85�ÿ4�5 7����ÿ
5�ÿ ��66ÿ6�� �ÿ�� ÿ��=36��ÿ@��ÿA88ÿ�66�ÿ54�ÿ� 76�3�� 6ÿ�5ÿ� 7�4��ÿ�74 �ÿ
�7��85�ÿ345�7�6�45ÿ��476�ÿ6 6ÿ7ÿ� 76ÿ4�ÿ6 �7ÿ87� 7ÿ� 53�ÿ ����45ÿ�565� �ÿ64ÿ
5��7ÿ6 ÿ345�7�6�45ÿ4�ÿ 5�ÿ�� 3���ÿB 765 7�ÿ�5ÿ6��ÿ��476ÿ64ÿ�74636ÿ5�ÿ
7 ��8�66ÿ�476�7��ÿ5�ÿ �>�ÿ�7��ÿ�7�7��ÿ�538�� ÿ�� 78ÿ� 53��ÿ��3ÿ�ÿ
C89D89ÿEF:8ÿ5�ÿ98A9ÿ5�ÿ545G�4�75 56ÿ47� 5�H6�45�ÿ��3ÿ�ÿ; ÿE 6�7ÿ
:45�7�53�9ÿA 7�35ÿB7�7�ÿ94�5� 6�459ÿD478�ÿD�8�8��ÿ9�5�9ÿIC9ÿ5�ÿB �56�ÿ
947� 7�ÿA� �59ÿ6 �ÿ� 765 7����ÿ5�ÿ��476�ÿ7ÿ778�ÿ��736�ÿ�� 3���388�ÿ6ÿ����6ÿ
�4>�ÿ��6ÿ7ÿ 47ÿ�74 �8�ÿ��736�ÿ6ÿ�7��85�ÿ345�7�6�45�ÿ�5 ÿ>3�6�45ÿ� �ÿ6 ÿ
� �84� 56ÿ4�ÿÿ����6ÿ�4>ÿ ��66ÿ 5 � 56ÿ8 �86ÿ�5ÿ122Jÿ��ÿEF:8ÿ5�ÿ6 ÿ
D�8�8��ÿK ��66ÿ:4�53�8�ÿ; ��ÿ���8�36�45ÿ� �37�� �ÿ6 ÿ�� 3��ÿ ��66ÿ7L��7 56�ÿ
5�ÿ�74��� �ÿ���� 53ÿ64ÿ85�4�5 7�ÿ5�ÿ 5 � 7�ÿ����5�ÿ64ÿ�5347�476ÿ6 ÿ
5 � 56ÿ5 ��ÿ4�ÿ����6ÿ�4>�ÿ�564ÿ�7��85�ÿ 5 � 56ÿ�85�ÿ�EF:8ÿ122M��ÿÿ
ÿ
?5������ 8ÿ�66ÿ�74�7��<ÿ
Nÿ:4847�4ÿGÿ?5�47 6�45ÿ45ÿ�� 56����ÿ85��ÿ��ÿ��8�8ÿ64ÿ� 765 7�ÿ5�ÿ��ÿ�538�� �ÿ
� 5 788�ÿ�5ÿ6 ÿ�66ÿ��8�8��ÿ36�45ÿ�85ÿ5�ÿ��ÿ8�O8�ÿ64ÿ� ÿ�538�� �ÿ�5ÿ4�7ÿ�66��� ÿ
���ÿ� ÿ ��66ÿ3455 36���6�ÿ5�ÿ345�7�6�45ÿ�85ÿ6 6ÿ��ÿ�5ÿ 78�ÿ�6� �ÿ4�ÿ
� �84� 56�ÿ; 7ÿ7ÿ �86��8ÿ� 765 7����ÿ�43���ÿ45ÿ�7��85�ÿ345�7�6�45ÿ
5�ÿ:BDÿ �ÿ�47O�5�ÿ786�45����ÿ��6ÿ:4847�4ÿ: 668 5P�ÿA��43�6�459ÿ
:4847�4ÿ9 7 ÿQ�7 �9ÿ�7�4��ÿ46 7ÿ�ÿ34 4��6�ÿ�74���ÿ�� 6ÿ�74� 7�9ÿ3475ÿ
�74� 7�ÿ63��9ÿEF:89ÿ98A9ÿ345� 7�6�45ÿ���67�36�9ÿB �56�ÿ947�79ÿQ�7�ÿ
:45�7�53�ÿ4�ÿ6 ÿF43O��9ÿK�� ÿB8�5�ÿR 5�ÿ:45�7�53�9ÿ�7�4��ÿ34�56�ÿ47ÿ
34 �5�6�ÿ4� 5ÿ�� 3ÿ� 53��9ÿC89D8ÿ5 6�45 8ÿ��8�8��ÿ7��� �9ÿC898ÿ5 6�45 8ÿ
�7��85��ÿ63�ÿ; ÿ�74�7 ÿ6�� �ÿ7ÿ� 5 788�ÿ3 6�47�H�ÿ�ÿ345�7�6�45ÿ
� 56�ÿ� 5 788�ÿ7�67�36�5�ÿ� �84� 56ÿ47ÿ345�7��45ÿ�74 ÿ�ÿ���9ÿ ��66ÿ
5 53 56�9ÿ�7 ÿ��88ÿ�74�7 ÿ� 8��7�ÿ5�ÿ� �8 566�459ÿ635�38ÿ����653 ÿ
5�ÿ�855�5�9ÿ�66ÿ7�5ÿ ��66ÿ5 53 56ÿ�5356��ÿ�74�7 �G� 5 788�ÿ
�7��85�ÿ�6�8�� 56ÿ45ÿ�7��4��8�ÿ374�� �ÿ85��ÿ47ÿ�7��85�ÿ ��66ÿ
5 53 56�9ÿ�5����ÿ55� 8ÿ�7��ÿ3456748ÿ64ÿ����476ÿ�7��85�ÿ 86ÿ5�ÿ
�74��36���6�9ÿ3456748ÿ4�ÿ�5����ÿ7�� 7�5ÿ67 �9ÿ5�ÿ�4 ÿ3456748ÿ4�ÿ��5�45�=�5�� 7ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567897ÿ ÿ�67�7�67�8ÿ97�ÿ�688�67�8ÿ688�96�3�ÿ�9��ÿÿ8�9�ÿ 4ÿ67�3�ÿ���ÿ
98ÿ97ÿ��3ÿ5 �388ÿ ÿ�3�3�597�ÿ6ÿ�9�ÿ�6 3ÿ�6�9�6�ÿ�773��9�9��ÿ67�ÿ�783�6�97ÿ
5�67ÿ��6�ÿ�9��ÿ�3�65ÿ�9��ÿ�688�67�ÿ�6�9�6�ÿ733�8ÿ ÿ8�9�ÿ 4�ÿ� 688�67�ÿ�6�9�6�ÿ98ÿ
�3736���ÿ6��3883�ÿ97ÿ8�6�3ÿ�9���93ÿ6��97ÿ5�67�ÿ���ÿ�68ÿ56�9�956�3�ÿ67�ÿ
8�55 �3�ÿ�6�3ÿ�688�67�ÿ�783�6�97ÿ5�67797�ÿ3 �8ÿ8���ÿ68ÿ��3ÿ�37�6�ÿ
� 688�67�8ÿ� 6� 65ÿ67�ÿ�5 5 83�ÿ! ��ÿ" 39�67ÿ� 688�67�8ÿ� 783�6�97ÿ"���ÿ
#ÿ$67868ÿ%ÿ$67868ÿ98ÿ7��ÿ6� ��ÿ1&ÿ5���9�ÿ�67�ÿ8 ÿ3 3��9�3ÿ 676�3 37�ÿ ÿ�9���93ÿ98ÿ
�3537�37�ÿ�5 7ÿ3 3��9�3ÿ59�6�3ÿ�67�8ÿ 676�3 37�ÿ97ÿ��98ÿ8�6�3�ÿ$'��ÿ98ÿ�9����ÿ
37�6�3�ÿ97ÿ5 �97�ÿ(6 ÿ)9��ÿ�783�6�97ÿ5 �6 8�ÿ$'��ÿ6�8ÿ56�738ÿ�9��ÿ
��36867�8ÿ( 3�3ÿ�ÿ�93ÿ6��9�976�ÿ8�6 ÿ��6�9�6�ÿ853�96�98�8ÿ�� ÿ5 �3ÿ8�6�3ÿ
67�ÿ3�36�ÿ�783�6�97ÿ5 �6 8ÿ97����97�ÿ�� 83ÿ ��83�ÿ7ÿ�688�67�ÿ
�783�6�97�ÿ*�98ÿ98ÿ67ÿ7� 97�ÿ�68+ÿ��6�ÿ98ÿ�3736���ÿ,-./ÿ12ÿ/34ÿ-546789:ÿ;-.54.ÿ
98897�ÿÿ
#ÿ< 7�676ÿ=ÿ>�6�3?ÿ3�36�?ÿ67�ÿ59�6�3ÿ�67�8ÿ63ÿ�3�9736�3�ÿ ÿ��3ÿ37�93ÿ8�6�3�ÿ<(��ÿ
� +8ÿ�9��ÿ59�6�3ÿ�67� �738ÿ�ÿ� 783�3ÿ�688�67�8ÿ�9��ÿ5353��6�ÿ3683 37�8?ÿ
@A=BAÿ�36ÿ�36838?ÿ67�ÿ�688�67�ÿ38� 6�97ÿ5 C3��8�ÿ*�3�ÿ6�8ÿ� �976�3ÿ67�ÿ
� 37�ÿ7ÿ3�36�ÿ67�ÿ8�6�3ÿ�67�ÿ 676�3 37�ÿ5�678?ÿ68ÿ�3��ÿ68ÿ��68976���ÿ
56�7397�ÿ�9��ÿ!��>ÿ67�ÿ��3ÿ6�37�938ÿ7ÿ5353��6�ÿ3683 37�8ÿ67�ÿ�688�67�ÿ
38� 6�97ÿ3 �8�ÿ>�6�3ÿ6�37��ÿ538773�ÿ3���6��ÿ6��37�ÿ67�ÿ56�9�956�3ÿ97ÿ��3ÿ
>(�*?ÿ67�ÿ3���6��ÿ53837�ÿ�6�6ÿ67�ÿ97�97�8ÿ ÿ��39ÿ 8�ÿ3�37�ÿ3 �8ÿ�ÿ��6�ÿ
� �5�ÿD7ÿ��6897?ÿ6�37��ÿ538773�ÿ ÿ8���37�8ÿ� +97�ÿ7ÿ6�37��ÿ5 C3��8ÿ
53837�ÿ�� 83ÿ97�97�8ÿ6�ÿ�7337�38�ÿ"��ÿ3836��ÿ67�ÿ 79� 97�ÿ3 �8ÿ63ÿ�83�ÿ
�ÿ 6+3ÿ��3ÿ�38�ÿ 676�3 37�ÿ�3�9897ÿ ÿ��3ÿ853�938�ÿ
#ÿ!3�68+6ÿ=ÿ!���ÿ98ÿ6�63ÿ ÿ��9��ÿ5���9�ÿ�67�8ÿ63ÿ�9��97ÿ8�9�ÿ 4ÿ8�9�6��3ÿ�6�9�6��ÿ
*�3�ÿ56�73ÿ�9��ÿ5���9�ÿ�67�ÿ6�37�938ÿ��9�3ÿ�7����97�ÿ8��3�8ÿ67�ÿ� ��3��97�ÿ
�6�68838�ÿ*�3�ÿ6�8ÿ56�73ÿ�9��ÿ59�6�3ÿ�67� �738ÿ�� ���ÿ8�6�3ÿ67�ÿ3�36�ÿ�67�ÿ
676�3 37�ÿ5 �6 8ÿ67�ÿ�� ���ÿ� 536�97ÿ�9��ÿ*!��ÿÿ
#ÿ!3�ÿ<349�ÿ%ÿ*�3ÿ!6�976�ÿ(98�ÿ67�ÿ�9���93ÿ( �7�6�97ÿ�68ÿ6�6�3�ÿ6ÿ�67�ÿ�ÿ
8�55 �ÿ��3ÿ� +ÿ ÿ��3ÿ��6�6ÿE6+38ÿF 97�ÿG37��3ÿ67�ÿHÿ�67�ÿ��8�8?ÿ97����97�ÿ��3ÿ
!3�ÿ<349�ÿE67�ÿ� 783�67���ÿÿ(�7�97�ÿ�9��ÿ8�55 �ÿ�7�97�ÿ73�ÿ�783�6�97ÿ
3683 37�8?ÿ��36��ÿ�ÿ�67� �738ÿ�ÿ37��6�3ÿ37 ��37�ÿ97ÿ� 783�6�97ÿ
3683 37�8?ÿ67�ÿ�ÿ38� 3ÿ67�ÿ 676�3ÿ�688�67�8ÿ ÿ��3ÿ�3739�ÿ ÿ�9���93�ÿ
#ÿ! ��ÿ'6+�6ÿ=ÿ!'�(ÿ�68ÿ�3��7ÿ67ÿ3 �ÿ�ÿ� ��ÿ5 �3��ÿ��7�ÿ�3 ÿ6�33 37�ÿ67�ÿ
38� 3ÿ�5�67�97�8ÿ76�9�3ÿ�688�67�8ÿ�9��97ÿ��3ÿ8�6�3�9�3ÿ67�3ÿ ÿ8�9�ÿ 438�ÿ>�9�ÿ
438ÿ63ÿ�98�3�ÿ97ÿ��3ÿ>�6�3ÿ�9���93ÿ"��97ÿ��67ÿ�>�"�ÿ68ÿ6ÿ853�938ÿ ÿ
�783�6�97ÿ59 9���ÿ*�3ÿ>�"�ÿ ��838ÿ7ÿ�6�9�6�ÿ5 �3��97ÿ67�ÿ38� 6�97ÿ�ÿ
697�697ÿ853�938ÿ�9�389���ÿ
#ÿD+�6� 6ÿ%ÿD'��ÿ�68ÿ7 �ÿ�337ÿ� +97�ÿ6��9�3��ÿ7ÿ��98ÿ8�6�3��ÿ�3�6�83ÿ ÿ
�99�3�ÿ8�6 ÿ38��38ÿ67�ÿ978� 9�937�ÿ9767�96�ÿ38��38ÿ�ÿ8�55 �ÿ� 783�6�97ÿ
3683 37�8ÿ67�ÿ�67�ÿ6�I�989�978ÿ�9��97ÿ��3ÿ8�9�ÿ1J9:ÿ.-654Kÿ
#ÿ> ���ÿ'6+�6ÿ%ÿ>33ÿ385 783ÿ�ÿLBÿ6� �3�ÿ*�3ÿ8�9�ÿ 4ÿ98ÿ6ÿ>��!ÿ97ÿ> ���ÿ
'6+ �6M8ÿ>�"�?ÿ 6+97�ÿ��3ÿ853�938ÿ3�9�9��3ÿ ÿ>�6�3ÿ�9���93ÿ� 67�ÿ�7�97��ÿE9+3ÿ
��3ÿ8�6�38?ÿ>'�(�ÿ�68ÿ 6�3ÿ�6�9�6�ÿ56�738�958ÿ�9��ÿ59�6�3ÿ�67� �738ÿ6ÿ
�356� 37�ÿ59 9��?ÿ�9��ÿ59�6�3ÿ�67�8ÿ�9��98�8ÿ8�6�973�ÿ�� ��� ��ÿ��3ÿ8�6�3�ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
23456ÿ789ÿ7 ��9ÿ���ÿ����78ÿ7������9ÿ7��ÿ�4�9ÿ ÿ����ÿ9�7��ÿ7 ��ÿ
��8��99ÿ ÿ9���ÿ7ÿ9���87ÿ������ÿ�ÿ���7�����ÿ�7��7ÿ�9 7��ÿ7��ÿ
���7������ÿ7��ÿ�� ����ÿ7���99ÿ ÿ��9�ÿ�7��79ÿ� ÿ�������ÿ7 ���ÿ7��ÿ
7��8����ÿÿ
�ÿ �!79ÿ"ÿ6#3ÿ� $9ÿ���ÿ ��7�ÿ87�� ���9ÿ7��ÿ���ÿ��ÿ%�2�ÿ5 �9ÿ2�����ÿ7ÿ
&�7ÿ'87��7ÿ�7��78ÿ4 79987��9ÿ ÿ��9���ÿ�79987��9�ÿ��(ÿ789ÿ����8 ��ÿ7ÿ
97�ÿ��9��7��ÿ87�ÿ��ÿ1)11ÿ� ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ ÿ9� ÿ�99��9ÿ���������ÿ��ÿ��ÿ1)*1ÿ
�!79ÿ+ �9��7��ÿ,���ÿ687�ÿ-�!79ÿ2#,6.�ÿ
�ÿ#(����ÿ"ÿ#453ÿ� ���7�9ÿ���878(ÿ���ÿ����78ÿ87��ÿ�7�7�����ÿ7������9ÿ��ÿ
��ÿ97�ÿ ÿ ����ÿ�����9ÿ7��ÿ�������7��9ÿ�ÿ��8��ÿ87��ÿ /��9ÿ�7ÿ
�7(ÿ�� 7�ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ9��7�8�ÿ�7��7�ÿ��(ÿ����8 ��ÿ97��7��0��ÿ87���7��ÿ ÿ
����ÿ��9�9��ÿ��������ÿ��7����ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ �9����ÿ7��ÿ�9�ÿ�ÿ�7��79ÿ�7ÿ
��87 ÿ 9��ÿ����8 ���ÿ /��9�ÿ7��ÿ� $ÿ���ÿ����8 �9ÿ ÿ����7�ÿ
���78ÿ�� 7�9ÿ ÿ9���ÿ�!�9ÿ�����ÿ 9��ÿ /��ÿ7�79�ÿ��(ÿ789 ÿ�887� 7�ÿ
���878(ÿ���ÿ�����ÿ'79��ÿ4 79987��9ÿ67���ÿ1�9(9��ÿ,99��7���ÿ27�ÿ
�7��7ÿ7��ÿ��8�8���ÿ��8��99ÿ�7��ÿ7 ����ÿ���ÿ��9ÿ� � ÿ�ÿ����78�ÿ97��ÿ8�78�ÿ
����9 (�ÿ7��ÿ ��7�ÿ����99ÿ ÿ���9ÿ�������ÿ7��ÿ�9�7��ÿ �7�9ÿ /��9ÿ�����ÿ
��ÿ'�4ÿ��9(9��ÿ�����ÿ,9ÿ7�ÿ24+��ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ �9����ÿ7��ÿ�7��7ÿ�9�ÿ�9ÿ
��9�����ÿ7��ÿ��78�7��ÿ�87���ÿ ÿ7�(ÿ����8 ���9ÿ ÿ7������9ÿ9������ÿ�(ÿ
����9 (ÿ� ÿ�������7��9�ÿÿÿ
ÿ
23ÿ56789:;<ÿ=86ÿ78>?@A=B7ÿA7C7=A>DÿC9@6:7Cÿ9D=9ÿ>?89A:E@97ÿ9?ÿCF:;9ÿ;?Gÿ
>?8C7AH=9:?8ÿ=86ÿI=8=B7I789ÿ
ÿ
25+ ÿ ��99Jÿ
,ÿ9��97��78ÿ7� ��ÿ�ÿ�9�7��ÿ�ÿ9���ÿ�!�9ÿ�79ÿ����ÿ�������ÿ9����ÿ��ÿ� �7��ÿ
�ÿ��ÿ25+ ÿ-9��ÿ+87$�ÿK�ÿ1)*L.�ÿ,ÿ� 7�ÿ7��ÿ�� ����9���ÿ� $ÿ�ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ
��8�(ÿ7��ÿ�7�7�����ÿ�79ÿ��8�9���ÿ��ÿ1))Mÿ-2 �7�7ÿ7��ÿ+7�(�ÿ1))M.�ÿN �ÿ
����8(�ÿ7ÿ�� ����9���ÿ�� �87��ÿ�ÿ��� �7��ÿ�ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ�79ÿ��8�9���ÿ��ÿ��ÿ
� �ÿ�ÿ7ÿ� $ÿ��7 �ÿ-6��$ÿ�ÿ78�ÿ1)1L.�ÿ#��8�ÿ9 ��ÿ��� �7��ÿ�7 9ÿ��7���ÿ����ÿ�9ÿ
$� ��ÿ7� �ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ��8�(�ÿ�7��7ÿ�O������9ÿ7��ÿ� �9��7��ÿ����9�ÿ2���78ÿ
9 7����9ÿ���������ÿ��ÿ��9ÿ9����ÿ7��ÿ� ÿ7��� 8�9���ÿ-/��ÿ��8��7��ÿ�ÿ 7���ÿ
��9��7���ÿ�������ÿ��7�8�ÿ �87��ÿ9�0�ÿ������7��.ÿ�7��ÿ� ÿ�� ����ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ
��9��7��ÿ��ÿ7ÿ����7�8�ÿ�7(�ÿÿ
ÿ
P�������78ÿ97�ÿ ��99Jÿ
�ÿ+ 8 7� ÿQÿ� ÿ���ÿ� �78ÿ�9�7��ÿ /��9ÿ�7��ÿ����ÿ�������ÿ9����ÿ1)*)�ÿ
78� ���ÿ9�������7�ÿ� $ÿ�79ÿ� ��ÿ��ÿ+ 8 7� ÿ��ÿ��ÿ ����9ÿ1)Rÿ(�79�ÿ
�ÿS7�979ÿQÿS3#6ÿ�79ÿ������ÿ��ÿ�7/ ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ�9�7��ÿ /��ÿ��ÿ����ÿ(�79ÿ
�������ÿ ÿ�� �ÿ��� �ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ��9 �����ÿ7��ÿ�7��7ÿ��ÿ��ÿ97�ÿ-#���8ÿ1)11.�ÿ
��9ÿ /��ÿ��88ÿ��ÿ�9��ÿ ÿ799�99ÿ��7���9ÿ��ÿ�7��7ÿ7��ÿ �7�8�ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ
��9 �����ÿ��ÿ��ÿ�����ÿÿÿÿ
�ÿN �7�7ÿ"ÿP�ÿ1)*1ÿ7��ÿ1)*T�ÿN5#6ÿ7 ����ÿ���ÿ�4�9ÿ7��ÿ%����9�(ÿ�9���8ÿ
ÿ�����ÿ9(9��7��ÿ7�8ÿ�7��7ÿ9���(ÿ��� 9ÿ� ÿ9���ÿ�!ÿ��ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ�79��ÿ7 ÿ
11ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ567ÿ85957ÿ 3 ÿ1����1���ÿ567ÿ9�7���ÿ69�ÿ9ÿ�9��957ÿ85��7�5ÿ7879�6���ÿ8��45ÿ
43�ÿ69��595ÿ�87�ÿ�3���95�3�ÿ���9 ��8�ÿ9��ÿ�3��7�5��5�ÿ��ÿ567ÿ�37ÿ979ÿ34ÿ567ÿ8��45ÿ
43�ÿ�3���95�3�ÿ!�3ÿ������95�3�8ÿ�9 7ÿ43 ÿ56�8ÿ7879�6ÿ��ÿ1�1�ÿ"#�5�7ÿ75ÿ9�ÿ
1�1�$�ÿ#�5�7ÿ75ÿ9�ÿ1�1�%&ÿ 3 ÿ1��'ÿ(ÿ1�11�ÿ��3�3��858ÿ697ÿ�3��7�57�ÿ�959ÿ3�ÿ
��87987ÿ7��38�7�ÿ9��3ÿ�3��97�ÿ9��ÿ59�)7�ÿ8��45ÿ43�78ÿ�67�ÿ4���8ÿ9��ÿ5�7ÿ
9��3�7��ÿ988�857�ÿ��56ÿ�77�3� 7�5ÿ34ÿ�7�ÿ9��3ÿ�3��9ÿ57�6�3�3���ÿ�3��7�ÿ�959ÿ53ÿ
��43 ÿ�7�ÿ69��595ÿ8��59����5�ÿ 3�7�8�ÿ9��ÿ�3����57�ÿ744358ÿ53ÿ��37ÿ8���788ÿ34ÿ
�9 79ÿ8� 7�8ÿ*8ÿ�95ÿ34ÿ567ÿ59�8�3�95�3�ÿ74435ÿ3�ÿ5��9�ÿ�9��8�ÿ567ÿ+ �5683��9�ÿ
,�85�5�57ÿ�8ÿ 3��53���ÿ9��ÿ7879�6���ÿ567ÿ7�7987�ÿ43�78ÿ- ./ÿ698ÿ7���9��ÿ
�95�77�ÿ��56ÿ09�9�9ÿ53ÿ�3����5ÿ567ÿ-3�59�9109�9�9ÿ�3���95�3�ÿ�7�8�8�ÿ9��ÿ698ÿ
���3�3957�ÿ��4477�5ÿ�959ÿ�3��7�5�3�ÿ5��78ÿ53ÿ 37ÿ798���ÿ 3��53ÿ567ÿ�3���95�3�ÿ9��ÿ
��37ÿ78��58ÿ
2ÿ37�98)9ÿ(ÿ*ÿ��887595�3�ÿ�98ÿ�3 ��757�ÿ"03 9�ÿ1���&ÿ�6��6ÿ78��57�ÿ��ÿ8779�ÿ
9���5�3�9�ÿ������95�3�8ÿ"03 9�ÿ75ÿ9�ÿ1�119�ÿ03 9�ÿ75ÿ9�ÿ1�11�&ÿ
2ÿ37�ÿ-7���3ÿ�ÿ,�ÿ1�1��ÿ3-45 ÿ�7�9�ÿ3��35���85��9���ÿ�3��7�5���ÿ5�88�7ÿ89 ��78ÿ
43 ÿ69 7857�ÿ8��45ÿ9��ÿ)�5ÿ43�ÿ53ÿ9��� ��957ÿ9ÿ�959�987ÿ43ÿ4�5�7ÿ�7�75��ÿ9�9��8�8ÿ
��785��95���ÿ567ÿ��85���5�3�ÿ34ÿ79�6ÿ8�7��78ÿ9��ÿ�357�5�9�ÿ6�����695�3�ÿ,�ÿ1�1�ÿ9��ÿ
1�1��ÿ3-45 ÿ�3����57�ÿ9ÿ�3����98�7ÿ�7�75��ÿ85���ÿ�3��7�5���ÿ8�95ÿ��ÿ9ÿ8�95�9�ÿ
�9�5�7�7�9�5�7ÿ49 7�3)ÿ53ÿ785�957ÿ�3���95�3�ÿ�7�8�5�ÿ��ÿ�35679857�ÿ37�ÿ
-7���3ÿ3��6���7�ÿ9��ÿ8��5��5677ÿ89 ��78ÿ�77ÿ�3��7�57�ÿ34ÿ�6��6ÿ787ÿ69�ÿ
�89��7ÿ43*ÿ94ÿ56387�ÿ77'ÿ�77ÿ43 ÿ8��45ÿ43�ÿ"'ÿ43 ÿ�3�357&ÿ+��ÿ3ÿ 37ÿ
��38957���57ÿ�3��ÿ�77ÿ9 ���4�7�ÿ43ÿ�':ÿ34ÿ567ÿ89 ��78�ÿ�6��6ÿ�77ÿ 95�67�ÿ��ÿ
�7�35��7ÿ�34��78ÿ53ÿ�7�7957ÿ�������9�ÿ�9�5�7ÿ6�853�78ÿ-3�7�ÿ785�9578ÿ�77ÿ;�ÿ
8��45ÿ43�78ÿ�7ÿ���ÿ) 1ÿ"�8��18�ÿ;8:ÿ0,&ÿ�8���ÿ 3�7�8ÿ5695ÿ���3�3957�ÿ87��
7447�58ÿ3�ÿ�757�5�3�ÿ9��ÿ 37 7�5ÿ9��ÿ9ÿ�769�39�ÿ7447�5ÿ3�ÿ�757�5�3�ÿ43ÿ�9�57�ÿ
8�578ÿ
2ÿ3356ÿ49)359ÿ�ÿ+��65���ÿ��43 95�3�ÿ�8ÿ�87�ÿ53ÿ��43 ÿ9ÿ8�7��78ÿ8��59����5�ÿ 3�7�ÿ43ÿ
�7857�ÿ341<9857�ÿ-!ÿ
2ÿ9)�963 9ÿ(ÿÿ94.0ÿ�3��78ÿ4��9���9�ÿ8���35ÿ53�9�ÿ9��788���ÿ3�ÿ 385ÿ�788���ÿ
7879�6ÿ�77�8ÿ�����ÿ567ÿ�7�3�ÿ�75�77�ÿ�;;�ÿ9��ÿ1��'ÿ+���7ÿ1��'�ÿ�7ÿ697ÿ
43��87�ÿ3�ÿ7879�6ÿ783��78ÿ3�ÿ6��67ÿ��3�5�ÿ8�7��78ÿ9��ÿ697ÿ�35ÿ4���7�ÿ9��ÿ
7879�6ÿ��53ÿ8��45ÿ43�ÿ7�3�3��ÿ
2ÿ+3�56ÿ49)359ÿ�ÿ+45 /ÿ4���7�ÿ567ÿ43��3����ÿ�3>7�5?ÿ*88788���ÿ8��45ÿ43�ÿ�787��7ÿ
��56ÿ567ÿ��85���5�3�ÿ34ÿ3567ÿ�9��378ÿ��ÿ�7857�ÿ+3�56ÿ49)359�ÿ�3����57�ÿ��ÿ- +ÿ
85��7�5ÿ< ���ÿ-�5�67���ÿ@3�ÿ@7�)8ÿ"+3�56ÿ49)359ÿ+5957&ÿ9��ÿ43��ÿ+�6�9� ÿ"9 7�3�ÿ
+5957&ÿ, �359�5ÿ4������8?ÿ�ÿ03�3578ÿ3�����7�ÿ�2��;:ÿ34ÿ567ÿ8��45ÿ43�ÿ85���ÿ979�ÿ
9��ÿ7�ÿ43�ÿ3�����7�ÿ7��82: ÿ1ÿ* 79�7ÿ��557ÿ8�678ÿ�77ÿ218ÿ���8ÿ03 �97�ÿ53ÿ
3567ÿ85���78�ÿ567ÿ7879�678ÿ43���ÿ8��45ÿ43�ÿ��ÿ56�8ÿ85���ÿ53ÿ697ÿ�9�7ÿ63 7ÿ
9��78�ÿ�9�7ÿ��8�789�ÿ��859��78�ÿ6��6ÿ8� �9��ÿ9��ÿ�7�8ÿ�3�957�ÿ49567ÿ43 ÿ39�8ÿ
2ÿ+��45ÿ43�ÿ69�ÿ6��6ÿ�79�7��7ÿ34ÿ�9���7ÿ�9 3��8ÿ9��ÿ567ÿ�9�895�7ÿ9�7�5ÿ43ÿ
5��97 �9ÿ��5ÿ�3�ÿ�79�7��7ÿ34ÿ�9���7ÿ��857 �7ÿ9��ÿ567ÿ�9�895�7ÿ9�7�5ÿ43ÿ
8��95��ÿ��9��7ÿ
2ÿ!7�98ÿ�ÿ!/.4ÿ4���7�ÿ9ÿ�3>7�5ÿ�8���ÿ�9 79ÿ59�8ÿ9��ÿ8�95ÿ�3��7�5�3�ÿ43 ÿ1��'�
1��;�ÿA*88788���ÿ��85���5�3��ÿ�7�75��ÿ��78�5��ÿ3����9����ÿ9��ÿ69��595ÿ8��59����5�ÿ43ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567ÿ689ÿ5ÿ 93�ÿ� 93ÿ� ��3ÿ �ÿ�5���56ÿ� � �7� 7ÿ�8 7��7ÿ�2������ÿ
!��5758 ��"#ÿ���ÿ3766ÿ33537�ÿ457$ÿÿ34567ÿ689ÿ��8%�7ÿ7$�8&'$ÿ� 37ÿ 93ÿ!()ÿ
* 5+�357"ÿ4$5�$ÿ68�&3�ÿ8 ÿ34567ÿ689ÿ8��&� �"ÿ�8 578�5'ÿ457$ÿ�� �ÿ7��3ÿ8 ÿ
,57ÿ-� �ÿ. 758 �ÿ/�33� �3ÿ6�8�ÿ1�1�01�11ÿ
1ÿ�"8�5'2ÿÿ�/3�ÿ$ 3ÿ6�5�577�ÿ�&�75��ÿ�3 ��$ÿ��8%�73ÿ78ÿ4 77�ÿ& � �37 �ÿ
34567ÿ689ÿ�8�&�758 3#ÿ� ' ÿ9� 358 #ÿ$ 4577ÿ&3#ÿ �ÿ' 75�ÿ�5+�357"ÿ457$5ÿ7$ ÿ
377 ÿ�"8�5'ÿ$ 3ÿ�38ÿ�8 7�54&7�ÿ34567ÿ6893ÿ68�ÿ7� 3�8�758 ÿ78ÿ7�54 �ÿ� �3ÿ �ÿ
87$ �ÿ3773ÿ78ÿ� 374�53$ÿ�8�&�758 3ÿ457$5ÿ7$ 5�ÿ$5378�5�ÿ� ' ÿ!��ÿ86ÿ7$ 3ÿ37&�53ÿ
�ÿ�8 7�54&758 3ÿ3$8&��ÿ$ ��ÿ6&�7$ �ÿ8&�ÿ�84��' ÿ4 3ÿ86ÿ7$ ÿ377&3ÿ �ÿ
�8 75& �ÿ9� 358 ÿ86ÿ7$ ÿ3� �53ÿ457$5ÿ7$ ÿ377#ÿ �ÿ��8+5� ÿ��5758 �ÿ� 7ÿ78ÿ
� �ÿ�8�ÿ568�� �ÿ� ' � 7ÿ� �5358 3ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
67ÿ89:;:<=ÿ>?@ABCÿD?>>:9<ÿE:9ÿDFBE<ÿE:GÿC:HD=9IJ<B:HÿJC<BIB<B=Dÿ<K9:?LKÿ=M?CJ<B:Hÿ
JHMÿBHE:9;J<B:Hÿ=GCKJHL=7ÿ
ÿ
N3� ÿ��8'�332ÿ
���ÿ�8 75& 3ÿ78ÿ$837ÿÿ4 4357ÿ4$ �ÿ��8�73#ÿ 43�77�3#ÿ3��7ÿ� �ÿ�+54 �ÿ
�75��3#ÿ �ÿ87$ �ÿ� �75 7ÿ�8�&� 73ÿ86ÿ7$ ÿN3� ÿ�ÿ� 575 �ÿ �ÿ� � ÿ�&4�5��"ÿ
+5�4�ÿ)837ÿ668�73ÿ78ÿ' 5ÿ3&��8�7ÿ68�ÿ �ÿ��8�87ÿ��8'��3ÿ68�ÿ'�33� �ÿ
�8 3�+758 ÿ457$ÿ� �ÿ� ' �3ÿ6��ÿ4�8 ��"ÿ457$5ÿ7$ ÿ�53358 ÿ86ÿ7$ ÿN3� ÿ� �4 �ÿ
' �53ÿ �ÿ�ÿ�38ÿÿ��58�57"ÿ68�ÿ� "ÿ86ÿ7$ ÿ� �75�5� 75'ÿ�88� �78�3ÿ$ 3ÿ668�73ÿ
�ÿ7"�5���"ÿ57 � �ÿ78ÿ4 657ÿÿ$837ÿ86ÿ'�33� �ÿ3� �53ÿ5��&�5'ÿ34567ÿ689ÿÿ
ÿ
$ ÿN3� ÿ$ 3ÿ� 575 �ÿÿ37�8 'ÿ� �7 �3$5�ÿ457$ÿ���3 775+3ÿ86ÿ!O!ÿ$ ÿ!O!ÿ
$ 3ÿ4 ÿ ÿ5��8�7 7ÿ� �7 �ÿ5ÿ3$ �5'ÿ568�� 758 ÿ48&7ÿ34567ÿ689 3ÿ78ÿP88ÿ+53578�3ÿ
�8& �ÿ7$ ÿ�8& 7�"ÿ �ÿ5ÿ� 5755'ÿ� �75+ ÿ34567ÿ6893ÿ5ÿ!O!0� �4 �ÿ6�5�5753ÿ$ ÿ
QRSTUÿTWXÿTYZZQÿ[\]^_ÿÙ^ÿabacQÿdY\S]ÿ �ÿe" 5�ÿ 98 ÿ!�+538�"ÿ/�8&�ÿ�!/�ÿ$ ÿ
� 5�ÿ!/ÿ�� 7�ÿÿN� �53ÿN&�+5+�ÿ�� ÿ�NN��ÿ68�ÿ7$ ÿ34567ÿ689ÿ-87$ÿ7$ ÿ37&�488�ÿ
� � �ÿ �ÿ7$ ÿ34567ÿ689ÿNN�ÿ�88��5 78�ÿ�ÿ�75+ÿ� �7 �3ÿ �ÿ� �75�5� 73ÿ5ÿN3� ÿ
�75+5753#ÿ ' '5'ÿ457$ÿ7$ ÿ'�8&�ÿ8 ÿ!O!ÿ �3ÿ68�ÿ��75+ÿ34567ÿ6893ÿ �ÿ�53�&335'ÿ
�&�758 �ÿ8��8�7& 5753ÿ338�57�ÿ457$ÿ34567ÿ6893ÿ �ÿ'�33� �ÿ�83"37�3ÿ$ ÿ
!O!ÿ8��358 ��"ÿ �3ÿ 4ÿ34567ÿ6893ÿ5ÿ7$ 5�ÿ� �75+ÿ�8�&�758 ÿ78ÿ� 575ÿ' 75�ÿ
�5+�357"#ÿ �ÿN3� ÿ�� 53ÿ�8��577�ÿ78ÿ3&��8�75'ÿ7$ 3ÿ �ÿ87$ �ÿ!O!ÿ �3ÿ78ÿ
� 575ÿÿ+54�ÿ� �75+ÿ�8�&�758 ÿ
ÿ
f�5+5�& �ÿ377ÿ��8'�332ÿ
1ÿ�8�8��8ÿgÿ���ÿ$8373ÿ7$ ÿN3� ÿ4 4� ' #ÿ4$5�$ÿ53ÿ� �58�5���"ÿ&�� 7�ÿ457$ÿ 4ÿ
�75��3ÿ �ÿ568�� 758 ÿ$ "ÿ�38ÿ�� 7�"ÿ� +�8� �ÿÿ3&�4 ��ÿ4 4� ' ÿ457$ÿ
3� �565�ÿ34567ÿ689ÿ568�� 758 ÿ5��&�5'ÿ8��&� �"ÿ�8 578�5'ÿ��8�73ÿ �ÿ
��863358 �ÿ+5� 8ÿ86ÿ�� 7ÿ�57�8�&�758 ÿ668�73ÿ78ÿ37ÿ- �� �ÿ
1ÿh 33ÿgÿh���ÿ$ 3ÿ87ÿ�� 7�"ÿ ' ' �ÿ5ÿ3� �565�ÿ668�73ÿ78ÿ��8�87ÿ34567ÿ689ÿ
�8 3�+758 ÿ4&7ÿ�8 3ÿ' ���"ÿ�8ÿ38ÿ3ÿ� �7ÿ86ÿ7$ ÿ6&�4 ��ÿ��8'��ÿ�4 4357#ÿ
�&4�53$ �ÿ� 7�5�3#ÿ�5��7ÿ�8 7�7ÿ457$ÿ6&�$ �+37�3ÿ�&�5'ÿ� �7ÿ7''5'#ÿ6&�4 ��ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456ÿ78935 ÿ6ÿ 6�ÿ4�4�6�ÿ46����ÿ� �ÿ5�7 ��4�9ÿ�7ÿ� � �4�9ÿ�84�ÿ9�8�6ÿ��49ÿ
����5ÿ8�ÿ� �99�ÿ� 6ÿ86ÿ89ÿ59ÿ�58�45ÿ���4��ÿ��ÿ9�8�6ÿ��49ÿ89ÿ6�4ÿ7�8�8��ÿ��6�ÿ
8�ÿ�ÿ� � �4�4�6ÿ74�898�9ÿ� 74ÿ� ÿ6�494ÿ8�78�87 59�ÿÿÿ
�ÿ� �6� ÿÿ! �5ÿ�85�8969ÿ� �4ÿ��4 647ÿ8���� 68�ÿ9�4469ÿ�7ÿ�64�ÿ� �7ÿ6�4�ÿ 6ÿ
�7ÿ65�ÿ� 6ÿ9�8�6ÿ��49ÿ6ÿ3�47 6�ÿ� �6ÿ�549ÿ�4468��9ÿ�7ÿ�86�ÿ6�4ÿ3 �58��ÿ
" �� �4ÿ�85�8969ÿ��99ÿ6�4ÿ9�8�6ÿ��ÿ���4ÿ� �4ÿ65�47ÿ�86�ÿ9�� 5ÿ�879ÿ� 6ÿ
9�8�6ÿ��49ÿ�7ÿ�#$%ÿ�494 ���ÿ�7ÿ� �86�8��ÿ4���69�ÿ&�8�6ÿ��ÿ8���� 68�ÿ�7ÿ �ÿ
�494 ���ÿ�7ÿ� �86�8��ÿ4���69ÿ� �4ÿ�44�ÿ3 9647ÿ� 6ÿ� 568354ÿ68�49ÿ�ÿ78��4�4�6ÿ
9�85ÿ�478ÿ356ÿ���9�ÿ'�ÿ1()*�ÿ� �6� ÿ+ 67 �9ÿ� � ,8�4ÿ3 �589�47ÿ�ÿ�68�54ÿ
� 6ÿ6�4ÿ�494 ���ÿ�7ÿ� �94��68�ÿ4���69ÿ6� �7ÿ9�8�6ÿ��ÿ8�ÿ4 964��ÿ� �6� �ÿ'�ÿ
1()-�ÿ�#$%ÿ664�3647ÿ�9��499�55ÿ6ÿ�46ÿ��78��ÿ6ÿ74�453ÿÿ�8�6 5ÿ54 ��8��ÿ
�7ÿ�868,4�ÿ9�84��4ÿ� �94ÿ� 6ÿ9�8�6ÿ��ÿ9�84��4ÿ64 ��4�9ÿ6ÿ6858,4�ÿ
�ÿ"4��9� ÿÿ.98��ÿÿ�8/ 4ÿ33� ��ÿ��8��ÿ8���3 �649ÿ5�7 ��4�9ÿ8�ÿ6�4ÿ
��94��68�ÿ3��499�ÿ�74���7 64ÿ9674�69ÿ�4�4ÿ94�6ÿ� ��ÿ6ÿ6�48�ÿ��85ÿ
����49ÿ6ÿ9��4ÿ��ÿ9�8�6ÿ���ÿ� �ÿ9674�69ÿ8�ÿ� �94��68�ÿ� 0�9ÿ6ÿ1� 7��ÿ
&664ÿ1 554�4ÿ�7ÿ.�8�4�986ÿ�ÿ"4��9� !8��5�ÿ�4ÿ���ÿ� ��8��ÿ����49ÿ8�ÿ
$4964��ÿ"4��9��ÿ��8��ÿ55�9ÿ6�4�ÿ6ÿ99896ÿ"2%1�ÿ"4��9�ÿ343 �6�4�6ÿ�ÿ
4 795"4��9�ÿ343 �6�4�6ÿ�ÿ6��93 �668��ÿ�7ÿ.&#&ÿ8�ÿ��858668��ÿ6�4ÿ
��94��68�ÿ�ÿ9�8�6ÿ��49�ÿ6�89ÿ3�04�6ÿ��4 65ÿ8���4 947ÿ� �4�499ÿ�ÿ9�8�6ÿ��49�ÿ
3 �68�5�5ÿ8�ÿ�4 9ÿ�86�ÿ9 86�54ÿ� �866�ÿ"2%1ÿ� 9ÿ74�45347ÿÿ9�8�6ÿ��ÿ
8���� 68�ÿ3 �4ÿ�ÿ6�48�ÿ�4��ÿ�4�9864ÿ7 67 ��4��9��� �59�8�6��5��ÿ
�ÿ"4�ÿ�4�8�ÿÿ'�ÿ�ÿ4���6ÿ6ÿ47 �64ÿ���4 �4�ÿ6�334�9ÿ�7ÿ� �64�9ÿ�ÿ6�4ÿ
����4��4ÿ�ÿ9�8�6ÿ�7ÿ�86ÿ��49ÿ�7ÿ�4��86ÿ6�4�ÿ6ÿ3��874ÿ68994ÿ9�3549ÿ���ÿ
6�48�ÿ� ��49647ÿ��49�ÿ"�32#ÿ8��5747ÿÿ3 �4ÿ8�ÿ6�48�ÿ89:;<=>;=;ÿ@:A=Bÿ>CDÿECFGHÿ
3 �58�68�ÿ�4/ 4968��ÿ9�3549ÿ�7ÿ�8�8��ÿ� 98�ÿ8���� 68�ÿ�ÿ874�68�8�68��ÿ
7896�8� 68��ÿ�7ÿ�85�ÿ��ÿ6�4ÿ6� ÿ934�849�ÿ
�ÿ" �6�ÿ3 �6ÿÿI�ÿ8���� 68� 5ÿ3 964�ÿ� 9ÿ3�7 �47ÿ�7ÿ7896�8� 647ÿ�86�8�ÿ6�4ÿ
���4ÿ6ÿ�453ÿ�4�4�64ÿ98��68��ÿ8���� 68��ÿ
�ÿ+�5� � ÿJÿ+3$1ÿ� 9ÿ� 6ÿ��947ÿ�49 ��49ÿ�ÿ6�89ÿ96�64�ÿ7 �8��ÿ6�4ÿ3 96ÿ
454�4�ÿ4 �9�ÿ
�ÿ& 6�ÿ3 �6ÿÿI9ÿÿ9664ÿ6��4 64�47ÿ934�849�ÿ9�8�6ÿ��ÿ89ÿ77�49947ÿ7 �8��ÿ& 6�ÿ
3 � 6K9ÿ�84��85ÿ6LMÿ934�849ÿ9669ÿ�4�84��ÿ6�89ÿ7 ��4�6ÿ89ÿ37 647ÿ�ÿ&32#%ÿ
96���ÿ3�494�647ÿ6ÿ6�4ÿ&32#%ÿ1 ��8998��ÿ�7ÿ9� �47ÿ�86�ÿ6�4ÿ3 �58��ÿ6�4ÿ
7 ��4�6ÿ�4�54�69ÿ98��8�8��6ÿ37 649ÿ7 �8��ÿ6�4ÿ3�4�8 9ÿ6� ÿ4 �9�ÿ&32#%ÿ� 9ÿ� 6ÿ
��� 5647ÿ7458968��ÿ� 59ÿ��ÿ6�89ÿ934�849ÿ34�78��ÿ��6�4�ÿ7 6ÿ� 6ÿ� 34ÿ77868� 5ÿ
7 6ÿ�49568��ÿ���ÿ96�7 �78,47ÿ� �86�8��ÿ7944ÿ�493 �94ÿ6ÿNO�ÿ�855ÿ3��874ÿ
8���� 68�ÿ�44747ÿ6ÿ74�453ÿ6�89ÿ� 5�ÿ
�ÿ64�9ÿJÿ" �4�ÿ
�ÿ$ �8��ÿÿ$2#3ÿ� �� �4ÿ�85�8969ÿ�4� 5�5ÿ� �6�8� 64ÿ�43 �69�ÿ�478ÿ�454 949�ÿ
�7ÿ>;PQRA=BÿSQPTQCÿPT=ÿ>U=CRVWBÿSQADAQF=ÿX>U>YQC=Zÿ>CDÿ[;=B=CP>PQGCBÿPGÿRGCB=;\>PQGCÿ
�� �8,68�9ÿ�7ÿ9�� 59ÿ�4� �78��ÿ6�4ÿ�4�4�5ÿ�85��ÿ3 3 568�ÿ9669�ÿ�7ÿ
�494 ���ÿ�68�86849ÿ��98��ÿ�ÿ9�8�6ÿ��49ÿ�86�8�ÿ6�4ÿ9664�ÿÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ6789789ÿ 8ÿ��ÿ�����78�9ÿ�87�8�8�ÿ���ÿ�7ÿ�8 89�ÿ�9���ÿ��ÿ�4�4ÿ
�9�79�����ÿ����8� ÿ��ÿ8ÿ9�ÿ� 88��4ÿ
ÿ
!"#$ÿ%&'(&)**+ÿ
$,)ÿ!"#$ÿ,-*ÿ&).-/0)1ÿ-23/4)ÿ-01ÿ&)%&)*)03*ÿ-ÿ.-5'&ÿ-4)06)ÿ'7ÿ/07'&.-3/'0ÿ*,-&/0(ÿ
-01ÿ2'88-9'&-3/'0ÿ'0ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ2'0*)&4-3/'0<ÿ=88ÿ*3-3)*ÿ);2)%3ÿ$);-*ÿ2'0*/1)&ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ
%'%68-3/'0*ÿ3'ÿ9)ÿ*3-98)ÿ'&ÿ/02&)-*/0(ÿ>*))ÿ?))@ÿ)3ÿ-8<ÿ1A1BC<ÿ!'4-1-ÿ)3ÿ-8<ÿ>1AADCÿ
&)%&)*)03*ÿ-0ÿ-22)%3-98)ÿ7&-.):'&@ÿ7'&ÿ.'0/3'&/0(ÿ3,)ÿ&-0():/1)ÿ1/*3&/963/'0ÿ'7ÿ*:/73ÿ
7';)*Eÿ-01ÿ'6&ÿ)77'&3ÿ3'ÿ16%8/2-3)ÿ3,)/&ÿ.)3,'1*ÿ/0ÿ3,/*ÿ%698/2-3/'0ÿ/01/2-3)*ÿ3,)ÿ
1/*3&/963/'0ÿ'7ÿ*:/73ÿ7';)*ÿ,-*ÿ/02&)-*)1<ÿF/3,ÿ-ÿ*'8/1ÿ7&-.):'&@ÿ7'&ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ
2'0*)&4-3/'0ÿ)*3-98/*,)1ÿ-01ÿ3,)ÿ&-0():/1)ÿ*3-36*ÿ'7ÿ3,)ÿ*%)2/)*ÿ2'0*/1)&)1ÿ*)26&)Eÿ
3,/*ÿ'95)23/4)ÿ/*ÿ9)/0(ÿ.)3<ÿÿ
ÿ
G01/4/16-8ÿ*3-3)ÿ%&'(&)**+ÿ
Hÿ#'8'&-1'ÿIÿJ'96*3ÿ'226%-02Kÿ*6&4)K*ÿ'7ÿ*,'&3(&-**ÿ%&-/&/)ÿ,-9/3-3*ÿ1'0L3ÿ*6%%'&3ÿ
)4/1)02)ÿ'7ÿ1)28/0)<ÿG0ÿ7-23Eÿ*:/73ÿ7';)*ÿ,-4)ÿ9))0ÿ2'..'08Kÿ1'26.)03)1ÿ/0ÿ'3,)&ÿ
,-9/3-3ÿ3K%)*ÿ3,-3ÿ-&)0L3ÿ*6&4)K)1<ÿ
HÿM-0*-*ÿIÿ$,)ÿ1/*3&/963/'0ÿ'7ÿ*:/73ÿ7';)*ÿ/0ÿM-0*-*ÿ,-*ÿ9))0ÿ*3-98)ÿ/0ÿ&)2)03ÿ
1)2-1)*<ÿ$,'6(,ÿ-ÿ.'&)ÿ*K*3).-3/2ÿ-%%&'-2,ÿ3'ÿ.'0/3'&/0(ÿ:'681ÿ9)ÿ.'&)ÿ
*)0*/3/4)ÿ3'ÿ2,-0()*ÿ/0ÿ1/*3&/963/'0ÿ-01ÿ-9601-02)Eÿ:)ÿ1'ÿ0'3ÿ9)8/)4)ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ
4/-9/8/3Kÿ,-*ÿ1)2&)-*)1ÿ16&/0(ÿ3,)ÿ%-*3ÿNAÿK)-&*<ÿÿÿ
HÿO'03-0-ÿPÿO"F?ÿ,-*ÿ2'03/06)1ÿ3'ÿ.'0/3'&ÿ3,)ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ/0ÿ3,)ÿ0'&3,)-*3ÿ
&)(/'0ÿ:,)&)ÿ,-&4)*3ÿ/*ÿ-88':)1<ÿ$,)ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ2)0*6*ÿ*6&4)Kÿ:-*ÿ&)2)038Kÿ
2'.%8)3)1ÿ/0ÿ1A11P1A1Q<ÿ?&)8/./0-&Kÿ&)*683*ÿ/01/2-3)ÿ-0ÿ/02&)-*)1ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ7&'.ÿ
3,)ÿ1ANBPNRÿ2)0*6*ÿ*6&4)K<ÿ#'03/06)1ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ.'0/3'&/0(ÿ/*ÿ%8-00)1ÿ/0ÿ
2'88-9'&-3/'0ÿ:/3,ÿ#-0-1-Eÿ*/02)ÿ3,)ÿ0'&3,)-*3ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ/*ÿ*%8/3ÿ9)3:))0ÿO'03-0-ÿ
-01ÿ#-0-1-<ÿG0ÿ-11/3/'0Eÿ-ÿ*3-3):/1)ÿ'226%-02Kÿ*6&4)Kÿ/*ÿ26&&)038Kÿ601)&:-Kÿ-01ÿ
:/88ÿ2'03/06)ÿ603/8ÿ1A12<ÿ
HÿS)9&-*@-ÿPÿ!:/73ÿ7';)*ÿ-&)ÿ%&'3)23)1ÿ-*ÿ-0ÿ)01-0()&)1ÿ*%)2/)*ÿ/0ÿS)9&-*@-Eÿ-01ÿ
3,)/&ÿ1/*3&/963/'0ÿ,-*ÿ9))0ÿ*3-98)ÿ'4)&ÿ3,)ÿ8-*3ÿ7):ÿ1)2-1)*<ÿ$,)&)ÿ/*ÿ0'ÿ&)2)03ÿ
)4/1)02)ÿ'7ÿ-ÿ1)2&)-*)ÿ/0ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ4/-9/8/3K<ÿ
HÿS):ÿO);/2'ÿPÿT/4)0ÿ8':ÿ,-&4)*3ÿ-01ÿ&)8-3/4)ÿ*3-9/8/3Kÿ'7ÿ8-01ÿ6*)ÿ%&-23/2)*ÿ-2&'**ÿ
*:/73ÿ7';ÿ&-0()Eÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ%'%68-3/'0*ÿ-&)ÿ2'0*/1)&)1ÿ*3-98)<ÿSOUT"ÿ:/88ÿ2'03/06)ÿ3'ÿ
.'0/3'&ÿ3,)ÿ*3-36*ÿ'7ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ4/-ÿ,-&4)*3ÿ&)%'&3/0(ÿ-01ÿ.'0/3'&/0(ÿ)77'&3*Eÿ
%-&3/268-&8Kÿ:,)&)ÿ3,)ÿ.'*3ÿ&'96*3ÿ%'%68-3/'0*ÿ>-01ÿ3,)ÿ.'*3ÿ,-9/3-3Cÿ'226&ÿ/0ÿ3,)ÿ
0'&3,)-*3)&0ÿ%-&3ÿ'7ÿ3,)ÿ*3-3)<ÿ"6&3,)&ÿ/04)*3/(-3/'0ÿ'7ÿ3,)ÿ,K9&/1ÿV'0)ÿ9)3:))0ÿ*:/73ÿ
-01ÿ@/3ÿ7';)*ÿ/0ÿ*'63,)-*3)&0ÿS):ÿO);/2'Eÿ:,)&)ÿ*,&69ÿ)02&'-2,.)03ÿ/03'ÿ
(&-**8-01*ÿ2'681ÿ&)*683ÿ/0ÿ8'**ÿ'7ÿ%6&)ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ%'%68-3/'0*Eÿ/*ÿ:-&&-03)1<ÿT&-**8-01ÿ
2'0*)&4-3/'0ÿ)77'&3*ÿ/0ÿ)-*3)&0ÿS):ÿO);/2'ÿ3,-3ÿ:'681ÿ9)0)7/3ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ:'681ÿ9)ÿ
%8-00)1ÿ-01ÿ601)&3-@)0ÿ:/3,ÿ-ÿ.683/P*%)2/)*ÿ7'26*<ÿ
HÿS'&3,ÿU-@'3-ÿPÿ!:/73ÿ7';ÿ'226&&)02)*ÿ-&)ÿ1'26.)03)1ÿ/0ÿ3,)ÿSUT"Uÿ76&9)-&)&ÿ
1-3-9-*)<ÿ
HÿW@8-,'.-ÿÿPÿWUF#ÿ2'03/06)*ÿ3'ÿ.'0/3'&ÿ3,)ÿW@8-,'.-ÿ*:/73ÿ7';ÿ%'%68-3/'0ÿ-01ÿ
8-01ÿ6*)ÿ2,-0()*ÿ:/3,/0ÿ/3*ÿ'226%/)1ÿ&-0()<ÿF)ÿ-8*'ÿ%&'4/1)1ÿ*3-3)ÿ6%1-3)*ÿ7'&ÿ3,)ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
345678ÿ ��ÿ�����8ÿ� �ÿ�� �� ÿ��ÿ�� �� ÿ�ÿ�������ÿ���8�ÿ�������ÿ����!ÿ
"!ÿ# $����"!ÿ%"��ÿ&�ÿ'&�(�����ÿ$�)��*+ÿ
,ÿ3 &��ÿ-�.��ÿ/ÿ0 ÿ1 #&*�!��1ÿ#��!)�ÿ"!ÿ$ $&2��"!ÿ�"�("2"�3+ÿ
,ÿ6�4��ÿ/ÿ6����ÿ���ÿ(��!ÿ(�����1ÿ�%"'�ÿ'4ÿ��!)�ÿ#!���#�"!ÿ(��%��!ÿ1566ÿ�!1ÿ
1511ÿ%"��"!ÿ0 �����!ÿ6�4��ÿ�!1ÿ'&�����* ��7ÿ%"��"!ÿ-�22�*ÿ5 &!�3+ÿ3%"'�ÿ'4��ÿ���ÿ
!��"��ÿ�ÿ28ÿ#&!�"��ÿ"!ÿ0 �����!ÿ6�4��+ÿ9 %����7ÿ��ÿ'ÿ���2"��ÿ�&���3�ÿ"!ÿ155:/
15527ÿ���3ÿ%���ÿ!23ÿ'&!1ÿ"!ÿ1ÿ# &!�"��7ÿ-�22�*ÿ�!1ÿ3���*�!ÿ;3#�%�2*ÿ1552<+ÿ
-&�"!)ÿ##&$�!#3ÿ�&���3�ÿ�#���ÿ6=ÿ#&!�"��ÿ"!ÿ1562ÿ�!1ÿ156>7ÿ�%"'�ÿ'4��ÿ%���ÿ
!23ÿ'&!1ÿ"!ÿ-�22�*ÿ5 &!�3ÿ�!1ÿ�ÿ�"!)2�ÿ1���#�"!ÿ"!ÿ9���2�3ÿ5 &!�3+ÿ5&���!�23ÿ���ÿ
�$�#"��ÿ"�ÿ!23ÿ.! %!ÿ�ÿ##&�ÿ"!ÿ?"��ÿ@2�!#�ÿ0��"!�2ÿA����2�!1�ÿ�!1ÿ�&��&!1"!)ÿ
$�"����ÿ2�!1�+ÿ-&�ÿ�ÿ��"�ÿ1�#2"!�7ÿ�����ÿ"�ÿ#!#��!ÿ�( &�ÿ���ÿ�$�#"��Bÿ�"�("2"�3ÿ"!ÿ
6�4��+ÿ
,ÿCD�� EFÿÿCD�� EÿG�8ÿ ÿH���� ��ÿ�E��� Eÿ8IH�ÿH�Jÿ�������� ÿ8����8ÿ� �ÿ
J�� 8� ÿ�Hÿ�G ÿ8� � 8ÿ��ÿ���ÿG� ���8ÿI�G ÿ�G ÿ�����Eÿ� ���KÿL� ��� Eÿ
� �ÿ�8���Gÿÿ�� �ÿD��8ÿG��ÿH���8�ÿ� ÿ� � �8�� � Eÿ�G ÿ� �G� 8�8ÿ�Hÿ�G8ÿ
J�� 8� Mÿ� �ÿIG �G �ÿ�G ÿ�8ÿ�Hÿ���ÿG� ���8ÿI��ÿ�� �� ÿ��ÿJ�� �ÿ��ÿ�� �����ÿ
ÿH����ÿD��8KÿCNOPÿ�� �� 8ÿ��ÿ����� ����ÿI�Gÿ��Q�� �ÿ8���8ÿ� �ÿ�G ÿROSTÿ��ÿ
8G��ÿ�8���Gÿ� �ÿ�� ��� Eÿ�8���8ÿ��ÿ ÿ���������ÿ����88ÿ�G ÿ����U8���ÿ
�� E ÿ�Hÿ8IH�ÿH�J8KÿCG�ÿ�� E ÿJ�� 8� ÿ��� ��8ÿ��ÿ�� �� MÿCNOPÿG�8ÿ�ÿ
��� 8ÿ��ÿ����ÿ�G ÿ�������ÿ8����8ÿ�Hÿ�G ÿ8� � 8ÿÿ�G ÿ8���KÿT�ÿ���ÿ�G �ÿG�8ÿ ÿ
�ÿ�� 88� �ÿ��8�ÿH���ÿ�G ÿ�� ��ÿ��ÿ����ÿ��ÿ��G �I8ÿG���8�ÿ8IH�ÿH�J8KÿV� EU
���ÿ�� ��� Eÿ�Hÿ8IH�ÿH�Jÿ�������� 8ÿ��ÿ������ �Dÿ8���D8ÿ�� �� 8ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ
WUD��ÿ�����8ÿ� �ÿG�8ÿJ�� � �ÿ��ÿ8���I� ÿ��ÿ ���ÿ� � �8�� �ÿ�� �8ÿÿ
8� � 8ÿ8����8ÿ�G���EG���ÿ�G ÿ8���Kÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456789 45ÿ66766�75 �ÿ����ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ�������ÿ��ÿ����ÿ������!����ÿ!�����"���ÿ��ÿ��ÿ#�����$�ÿ���ÿ�������ÿ%��&�ÿ��!���ÿ��ÿ
���ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ��ÿ���ÿ()*)ÿ!�#ÿ��ÿ�#�����+ÿ!�#ÿ!�����ÿ���%�ÿ��ÿ���ÿ�������ÿ,*-.�ÿ/0012)ÿÿ
ÿ
33456789:;34ÿ6:9:<5ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ&!�ÿ��"��#ÿ���"ÿ���ÿ��#��!=ÿ�!�#�#!��ÿ=���ÿ��ÿ1>>/)ÿ?���!��#ÿ����+ÿ
�������ÿ�!�ÿ��#��!��#ÿ���ÿ�!�@�&�#�ÿ#�����$�����ÿ��ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ��ÿ�����!���@)ÿ*�!#!ÿ��ÿ!=)ÿ
,1>>02ÿ�������#ÿ!ÿABÿ�����!��ÿ��ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ�����!��+ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ��������ÿ�!�@�ÿ$��&���ÿ
/00AC00ÿ!�#ÿ1>>/C>Dÿ����+ÿ�����#�)ÿE�ÿ������ÿ!�ÿ!##�����!=ÿABÿ�����!��ÿ���"ÿ���ÿ
=!����ÿ����+ÿ�����#ÿ��ÿ���ÿ1>/FC1>/2ÿ����+ÿ�����#ÿ,���ÿGHIJKLMJÿJOPLQORSLOTUÿKUJÿ
VKROLKLÿKPPMPPWMULXÿ$�=�&2)ÿ?�����=+Yÿ��!��ÿ!@���+ÿ���������!����ÿ���"ÿ!==ÿ��!���ÿ
�'����ÿ��'!�ÿ��#��!��#ÿ���ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ&!�ÿ��!$=�ÿ��ÿ�����!���@ÿ&�����ÿ�����ÿZ����#������ÿ
,���ÿ[��%ÿ��ÿ!=)ÿ1>1F2)ÿÿ
ÿ
\���ÿ���ÿ��!$�=��+ÿ��ÿ�"����"���ÿ��ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ����=!����ÿ��!���ÿ��ÿ"���ÿ��!���ÿ��ÿ���ÿ
#��!#��ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ*-.�ÿ&!�ÿ���"�#Yÿ���ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ�!�ÿ$���ÿ����!���#ÿ!�ÿ!ÿ
"!�!@�"���ÿ�������ÿ��ÿ"���ÿ��!���ÿ$+ÿ"���ÿ!�C���%ÿ�������ÿ,[��%ÿ��ÿ!=)ÿ1>1F2)ÿ]�ÿ
!##�����Yÿ!@������ÿ!��ÿ@����!==+ÿ�������@ÿ���������ÿ���"ÿ���@=�ÿ�������ÿ��ÿ!ÿ=!�#��!��C
=��=ÿ"!�!@�"���ÿ�����ÿ�"�!����@ÿ��"�����ÿ�������ÿ,�)�)ÿ@�!��=!�#ÿ������!����2ÿ
����ÿ��!�ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ������!����ÿ���#�ÿ!��ÿ$���@ÿ��#�����=+ÿ!##�����#ÿ�����@�ÿ$��!#ÿ
!������ÿ��ÿ!@������ÿ!�#ÿ�����ÿ�!������)ÿÿÿ
ÿ
E�ÿ!=��ÿ����ÿ!ÿ�!����ÿ����=!����ÿ��ÿ$���@ÿ"!���!���#ÿ!�#ÿ"!�!@�#ÿ��#��ÿ!�ÿ**[Yÿ
#������#ÿ$+ÿ���ÿ^_^)ÿ���ÿ�!����ÿ$���#��@ÿ���@�!"ÿ��ÿ$���@ÿ"!���!���#ÿ�����@�ÿ�!����=ÿ
"!�!@�"���ÿ!�#ÿ���!����!=ÿ��������!����ÿ��ÿ��&ÿ�&���ÿ��'��ÿ����ÿ����ÿ����=!����Yÿ&����ÿ
��"$���ÿ!����'�"!��=+ÿF>ÿ��'��ÿ�����#ÿ!�ÿ���ÿ1>ÿ������������)ÿ
ÿ
`ab9:6bÿc;5:7;d<:;34ÿ94bÿe9d;:9:ÿ55655f64:ÿ
ÿ
*�!#!ÿ��ÿ!=)ÿ,1>>02ÿ����"!��#ÿ���ÿ��������!=ÿ#�����$�����ÿ��ÿ���ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ$!��#ÿ=!�@�=+ÿ��ÿ
���ÿ���C����=�"���ÿ�'����ÿ��ÿ����1�@�!��ÿ!�#ÿ"�'�#ÿ@�!��ÿ�1�!�����)ÿ���+ÿ����"!��#ÿ!ÿ���!=ÿ
��������!=ÿ�!�@�ÿ��ÿ/YFF2Y>A1ÿ%" ÿ���=�#��@ÿ/Y>2AYD1/ÿ%" ÿ��ÿ���ÿ()*)ÿ���+ÿ!=��ÿ
!������#ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ#�����$�����ÿ$!��#ÿ��ÿ�����+C=��=ÿ��������C!$�����)ÿ���+ÿ
#�������#ÿ���ÿ!#!��!@��ÿ!�#ÿ#��!#!��!@��ÿ��ÿ!�������@ÿ#�����$�����ÿ!�ÿ��!�ÿ��!=�)ÿE�ÿ
������ÿ&���ÿ���"ÿ��!�ÿ����ÿ��ÿ!ÿ����!$=�ÿ��!=�ÿ���ÿ!�������@ÿ#�����$�����ÿ�!�@�&�#�ÿ���ÿ
��"�Yÿ&��=�ÿ����@��g��@ÿ��!�ÿ"��������@ÿ!�ÿ!ÿ�����ÿ��!=�ÿ"!+ÿ$�ÿ#����!$=�ÿ&�����ÿ"���ÿ
��!���)ÿ*�!#!ÿ��ÿ!=)ÿ,1>>02ÿ����"!��#ÿ��!�ÿ�&���ÿ��'��ÿ�������#ÿFFBÿ��ÿ�����ÿ��������!=ÿ
#�����$�����ÿ��ÿ���ÿ()*)ÿ!�#ÿhBÿ��ÿ.!�!#!ÿ$!��#ÿ��ÿ#!�!ÿ��==����#ÿ���"ÿ1>>/C1>>D)ÿ
���+ÿ!=��ÿ!������#ÿ�!$��!�ÿ!!�=!$�=��+ÿ$+ÿ�#�����+��@ÿ�'�����@ÿ@�!��=!�#ÿ!�#ÿ����=!�#ÿ
�!$��!��ÿ&�����ÿ���ÿ��������ÿ!�#ÿ�������#ÿ�&���ÿ��'ÿ�!�@�ÿ����@ÿ\^[ÿ���ÿ���ÿ()*)ÿ�������)ÿ
���+ÿ����"!��#ÿh0Bÿ��ÿ���ÿ��������!=ÿ#�����$�����ÿ��ÿ���ÿ()*)ÿ&!�ÿ��@�Ci�!=��+ÿ@�!��=!�#ÿ
�!$��!�ÿ!�#ÿ!�ÿ!##�����!=ÿ/hBÿ&!�ÿ"�#��"Ci�!=��+)ÿ���+ÿ!=��ÿ����"!��#ÿ/FBÿ��ÿ���ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567849 ÿ45684�647�ÿ� 5ÿ�� 4����� 46�ÿ�8� � �ÿ987� � ÿ3 466ÿ� ÿ�ÿ 4647� ÿ
11�ÿ� 5ÿ7���� 46�ÿ�4884� 6� �ÿ987� � �ÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
�7ÿ�� 6�ÿ63�ÿ45684�647�ÿ7�ÿ63�ÿ5�4�6ÿ�7�ÿ4�ÿ63�ÿ���ÿ� ÿ8� 55�55ÿ!4 �ÿ3 466"ÿ��ÿ
8��� 6� ÿ63�ÿ��637 5ÿ7�ÿ7! ÿ�6ÿ �ÿ�1##2��ÿ$�ÿ97�96� ÿ8����4�ÿ97��6���!�ÿ
�8�5��9�� 5��9�ÿ 6ÿ�78ÿ63�ÿ�� 85ÿ1#%&�1#%'ÿ�87�ÿ63�ÿ%#ÿ566�5ÿ�4634�ÿ63�ÿ34567849 ÿ
5�4�6ÿ�7�ÿ45684�647��ÿ()*ÿ 6ÿ��8�ÿ�76ÿ!4 �ÿ8����4�ÿ�78ÿ63�ÿ�� 85ÿ4�ÿ���5647�"ÿ
57ÿ��ÿ�5� ÿ1#%+ÿ,)-./012ÿ 6ÿ�366�5344����� �48���7!4�ÿ�78ÿ63�ÿ3 466ÿ
55�55���6�ÿ$�ÿ66���6� ÿ67ÿ��496�ÿ63�ÿ3 466ÿ�� 46�ÿ9 554�49647�5ÿ7�ÿ7! ÿ�6ÿ
�ÿ�1##2�"ÿ�463ÿ477�4565ÿ�87�ÿ� 93ÿ566�ÿ9 554��4��ÿ53786ÿ568�96�8� ÿ�855 � 5ÿ�4637�6ÿ
ÿ538� ÿ97��7���6ÿ5ÿ34�3��� 46�"ÿ�855 � 5ÿ�463ÿÿ53786"ÿ5� 85�ÿ538� ÿ97��7���6ÿ5ÿ
�� 4��ÿ�� 46�"ÿ8� � ÿ987� � 5ÿ5ÿ�� 4����� 46�"ÿ� ÿ4884� 6� ÿ987� � 5ÿ5ÿ7��
�� 46��ÿ$�ÿ�4�!�ÿ,)-./012ÿ�4ÿ�87!4�ÿÿ97�5456��6ÿ 6ÿ��8ÿ63 6ÿ�4ÿ 7�ÿ�78ÿ
97�� 8457�ÿ4�ÿ��6�8�ÿ� �5�5�ÿ
ÿ
,)-./012ÿ9 554�4� ÿ�849�6�8 ÿ3 4665ÿ�6ÿ4ÿ�76ÿ4���8��646�ÿ4884� 6� ÿ� ÿ8� � ÿ
�849�6�8��ÿ57�5�����6�"ÿÿ 65�6ÿ9 � ÿ, � 0.ÿ�64�ÿ�6ÿ �ÿ1#1%7ÿ
366�53448��7 7�78�48�9785499&'999�ÿ� 5ÿ�5� ÿ67ÿ4��64��ÿ4884� 6� ÿ� 5ÿ�78ÿ1#%+ÿ�4634�ÿ
63�ÿ8����ÿ�3��ÿ6345ÿ676 ÿ� 5ÿ5� 6896� ÿ�87�ÿ63�ÿ676 ÿ�849�6�8 ÿ8� ÿ4��64�4� ÿ�ÿ
,)-./012ÿ67ÿ�564� 6�ÿ63�ÿ676ÿ8� � ÿ98�5�ÿ57�5456��6ÿ�463ÿ7! ÿ�6ÿ �ÿ�1##2�"ÿ��ÿ
9 554�4� ÿ ÿ�849�6�8 ÿ� 5ÿ4�ÿ-7863ÿ. :76ÿ� ÿ7�63ÿ. :76ÿ5ÿ7���� 46�ÿ�4!��ÿ
63�ÿ9:ÿ7�ÿ55794647�ÿ�463ÿ�849�6�8�ÿ�ÿ5�4�6ÿ�7��5ÿ4�ÿ6375�ÿ566�5�ÿÿ
ÿ
)ÿ5��� 8�ÿ7�ÿ63�ÿ566���!�ÿ97��6�ÿ799�� �9�ÿ 6ÿ97�96� ÿ�84��ÿ6345ÿ55�55���6ÿ45ÿ
�87!4� ÿ4�ÿ� �ÿ1�ÿ�3�ÿ799��4�1ÿ8� ÿ�4634�ÿ63�ÿ34567849 ÿ45684�647�ÿ7�ÿ63�ÿ5�4�6ÿ�7�ÿ4�ÿ
63�ÿ���ÿ4�98� 5� ÿ�ÿ9;"#%9ÿ:� ÿ�87�ÿ63�ÿ1##%�1##+ÿ67ÿ63�ÿ1#%&�1#%'ÿ5�8!��ÿ��847 5�ÿ
�345ÿ8��8�5��65ÿÿ9�ÿ4�98� 5�ÿ4�ÿ799��4� ÿ8� ÿ�87�ÿ&&ÿ67ÿ&2�ÿ7�ÿ63�ÿ34567849 ÿ8����ÿ
$�ÿ7ÿ�76�ÿ63 6ÿ7�8ÿ�564� 6�5ÿ7�ÿ566��4�ÿ� ÿ676ÿ34567849 ÿ45684�647�ÿ8�ÿ54�36�ÿ
4���8��6ÿ�#�#%+��ÿ63 �ÿ6375�ÿ7�ÿ7! ÿ�6ÿ�ÿ�1##2�ÿ�5�46�ÿ7�8ÿ�5�ÿ7�ÿ63�48ÿ34567849 ÿ
8���ÿ53 ���4�"ÿ� ÿ�4�!�ÿ6345ÿ9�ÿ�ÿ6684�6� ÿ67ÿ�� 6� ÿ��75� 64ÿ 6ÿ� ÿ
6�93�77�4�5�ÿ0�ÿ 4647�ÿ67ÿ7�8ÿ799�� �9�ÿ�564� 6�5"ÿ5�4�6ÿ�7��5ÿ��18�ÿ79����6� ÿ
�84��ÿ6345ÿ5�8!��ÿ��847 ÿ4�ÿ638��ÿ97��64�5ÿ97!�84��ÿ7!�8ÿ9+"###ÿ:� ÿ7�654�ÿ63�ÿ
34567849 ÿ8���ÿ4�ÿ$�7�4��"ÿ�3493ÿ8�ÿ�76ÿ4�9� � ÿ4�ÿ6345ÿ� �545"ÿ�6ÿ8�ÿ537��ÿ4�ÿ
63�ÿ�� 6� ÿ��49647�ÿ7�ÿ5�4�6ÿ�7�ÿ45684�647�ÿ4�ÿ63�ÿ��ÿ�87!4� ÿ4�ÿ/4��8�ÿ%�ÿ57��6��
�!�ÿ93 ���5ÿ4�ÿ799�� �9�ÿ566�5ÿ�6����ÿ63�ÿ6�7ÿ5�8!��ÿ��847 5ÿ8�ÿ��496� ÿ4�ÿ
/4��8�ÿ1�ÿ
ÿ
<�8ÿ�564� 6�5ÿ7�ÿ5�46 �ÿ5�4�6ÿ�7�ÿ3 466ÿ�4634�ÿ63�ÿ34567849 ÿ45684�647�"ÿ5ÿ��ÿ5ÿ63�ÿ
�7��6ÿ7�ÿ5�46 �ÿ3 466ÿ799��4� "ÿ�ÿ566�"ÿ9�ÿ�ÿ�7�� ÿ4�ÿ� �ÿ=�ÿ$�ÿ�564� 6� ÿ
63 6ÿ34�3��� 46�ÿ3 466ÿ97�5646�6� ÿ=%�ÿ7�ÿ63�ÿ34567849 ÿ45684�647�ÿ4�ÿ63�ÿ���"ÿ�ÿ
4647� ÿ%9�ÿ� 5ÿ�� 4��ÿ�� 46�ÿ�855 � ÿ3 466"ÿ� ÿ%;ÿ� ÿ1#�ÿ��8�ÿ�� 4��ÿ
� ÿ7�ÿ�� 46�ÿ987� � ÿ3 4665"ÿ8�5��964!���ÿ$�ÿ8��786ÿ54�48ÿ 6ÿ3�8�ÿ67ÿ63 6ÿ�7�� ÿ
4�ÿ7! ÿ�6ÿ�ÿ�1##2�ÿ�6ÿ�76�ÿ63 6ÿ�9�5�ÿ4���8��6ÿ 6ÿ��85ÿ��8�ÿ�5� ÿ4�ÿ63�5�ÿ
6�7ÿ� �5�5"ÿ5�46 �ÿ3 466ÿ�564� 6�5ÿ�7�� ÿ4�ÿ� 93ÿ8�ÿ�76ÿ48�96�ÿ97�� 8 ��ÿÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
345ÿ4678969ÿ9 5ÿ�6 8�85�ÿ6 ÿ�8967�5ÿ�8948�ÿ564ÿ9695ÿ6�5ÿ�����ÿ8�ÿ� 5��8�ÿ��ÿ�5ÿ
��ÿ��95ÿ4��5�5��ÿ945ÿ��5�968�9ÿ9469ÿ5�89ÿ�5�6��8��ÿ�469ÿ��989�95 ÿ�8967�5ÿ4678969ÿ
���5�ÿ���5�9ÿ�6�� 6 5ÿ���898�� �ÿ���ÿ5�6� �5�ÿ46��5ÿ8�ÿ��68���ÿ�8�5ÿ��5!�5� ÿ
6��ÿ98�8���ÿ�5889698���ÿ8�9�6 58�8ÿ�5�69��ÿ�55�5ÿ6��ÿ�5�8985�ÿ6��ÿ�945�ÿ
�6 9��ÿ�6ÿ�5��5�ÿ��98��ÿ��ÿ6 6�5�9�ÿ�8967�5ÿ4678969ÿ�8948�ÿ945ÿ489��8ÿ�6��5ÿ6 ÿ
���8967�5�ÿ���ÿ5�6� �5�ÿ��98��ÿ��ÿ945ÿ�8�5�ÿ��6 ÿ�68�85ÿ8�ÿ945ÿ5695��ÿ6�9ÿ��ÿ9458�ÿ
489��8ÿ�89�87�98��ÿ�484ÿ�6ÿ46�5ÿ�5�8���ÿ� ��95�ÿ�8�9ÿ���5ÿ�6ÿ���ÿ75ÿ9��ÿ
96���ÿ9��ÿ��6��5�95��ÿ��ÿ46�5ÿ9��ÿ48�4ÿ��ÿ� �95ÿ��ÿ�5�ÿ���ÿ�5�8985ÿ���ÿ�8�9ÿ���5ÿ9�ÿ
5�89�ÿÿ
ÿ
�5ÿ6��ÿ��95ÿ9469ÿ"��6�6ÿ59ÿ6��ÿ#�22$%ÿ�6 8�85�ÿ&'(ÿ�85�� ÿ8�ÿ)6�6ÿ6 ÿ�5�8��ÿ
!�6�89ÿ4678969ÿ756�5ÿ&'(ÿ8ÿ��6��ÿ�6�95�ÿ9�ÿ96����6 ÿ 585 ÿ8�ÿ)6�6ÿ6��ÿ
5����ÿ�5�ÿ7ÿ�8�9ÿ���5ÿ#"��6�6ÿ59ÿ6��ÿ�221%�ÿ*��5�5��ÿ�5ÿ�5�5ÿ��67�5ÿ9�ÿ8�5�98�ÿ
��ÿ�5�8�5695ÿ&'(ÿ�85��ÿ8�ÿ+6���8�5ÿ6ÿ"��6�6ÿ59ÿ6��ÿ#�22$%ÿ�8�ÿ�894ÿ,�(�ÿ(�5��67�ÿ
���89��75�ÿ&'(ÿ8�ÿ)6�6ÿ�6ÿ�6 8�85�ÿ6ÿ36����6 ÿ�68�85ÿ7ÿ+6���8�5ÿ�484ÿ�6ÿ
��8�5�5�ÿ���8967�5�ÿ7�9ÿ�89��75�ÿ&'(ÿ#465�ÿ��ÿ��65�%ÿ�6ÿ�8-5�ÿ�6 8�85�ÿ8�9�ÿ
��5ÿ�945�ÿ4678969ÿ695���ÿ7ÿ+6���8�5�ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
�5ÿ�����5ÿ7ÿ6-����5��8��ÿ6��898��6�ÿ�556�4ÿ8ÿ�55�5�ÿ9�ÿ6 5 ÿ945ÿ�89678�89ÿ
��ÿ��5ÿ��ÿ945ÿ4678969ÿ9 5ÿ8�5�98�85�ÿ8�ÿ+6���8�5�ÿ�894ÿ�6�ÿ9695ÿ46�8��ÿ6��56�ÿ
����95�ÿ6�5�6ÿ���5 ÿ9�ÿ6 5 ÿ�8�9ÿ���ÿ� � 6� �ÿ945ÿ�696ÿ�55�5�ÿ9�ÿ�� 6�5ÿ
� � 6� ÿ�894ÿ+6���8�5ÿ4678969ÿ9 5ÿ�6ÿ6��56�ÿ5�89ÿ���ÿ�6�ÿ6�56�ÿÿ
ÿ
367�5ÿ��ÿ/ 98�695�ÿ6�56ÿ��ÿ�8�9ÿ���ÿ489��86�ÿ�89�87�98��ÿ6��ÿ� � 85�ÿ6�56ÿ�8948�ÿ9469ÿ
�89�87�98��ÿ765�ÿ��ÿ���9ÿ�5�5�ÿ�696ÿ���595�ÿ����ÿ�2012�203�ÿ6��ÿ945ÿ46��5ÿ8�ÿ
���9ÿ6��ÿ6�56ÿ� � 6� ÿ����ÿ945ÿ�2202�224ÿ���5 ÿ#"��6�6ÿ59ÿ6��ÿ�22$%ÿ9�ÿ945ÿ
�ÿ2012�203ÿ���5 �ÿÿÿ
ÿÿ
3�96�ÿ 3�96�ÿ��56ÿ 5 � 85�ÿ 5 � 85�ÿ��56ÿ &���985ÿ &���985ÿ ��56ÿ&46��5ÿ
"9695ÿ
&���985ÿ #-��%ÿ &���985ÿ #-��%ÿ #6%ÿ ,68�5�ÿ +� 9ÿ #-��%ÿ #6%ÿ
�$ÿ 023��4�ÿ ��ÿ 02�744ÿ $76ÿ 7ÿ
2ÿ 07�7$8ÿ 016ÿ
&����6��ÿÿ
)6� 6ÿ
7$ÿ 00$�$12ÿ �7ÿ 78413ÿ 136ÿ 0ÿ
�ÿ 2$8$ÿ 206ÿ
9��96�6ÿ
18ÿ 0$$�7�$ÿ �7ÿ 07$70$ÿ 326ÿ 01ÿ
7ÿ 74�707ÿ �36ÿ
:57�6-6ÿ
71ÿ 33�13�ÿ 0�ÿ 10721ÿ 146ÿ 4ÿ
2ÿ 01�738ÿ 076ÿ
:5�ÿ95�8�ÿ 0�ÿ 18�22�ÿ 3ÿ �$4$2ÿ 416ÿ 2ÿ
1ÿ 201�447ÿ 2�$6ÿ
:��94ÿ;6-�96ÿ 71ÿ 048�204ÿ 1ÿ
3722ÿ 76ÿ 1ÿ
2ÿ 3�722ÿ 76ÿ
5-�64��6ÿ
01ÿ 10�111ÿ 1ÿ 01$4�ÿ 176ÿ 2ÿ
1ÿ 2$�2$2ÿ 2�$6ÿ
8ÿ 2�1�34�ÿ 2076ÿ
"��94ÿ;6-�96ÿ 74ÿ 041��21ÿ 02ÿ 71�77ÿ 116ÿ �ÿ
35�6ÿ
7�ÿ 34�$80ÿ �ÿ
8480ÿ $6ÿ 0ÿ
0ÿ 0�130ÿ �6ÿ
� ��8��0ÿ
01ÿ 8��301ÿ 0�ÿ 4821�ÿ $�6ÿ 1ÿ
0ÿ $�210ÿ 0�6ÿ
3�96�ÿÿ
188ÿ 0�237�11�ÿ 0��ÿ 71��118ÿ 1$6ÿ 17ÿ
��ÿ 78�207ÿ 76ÿ
ÿ
0ÿ
34�55ÿ6��898��6�ÿ� � 85�ÿ���985ÿ��98�5ÿ945ÿ489��86�ÿ�6��5ÿ8�ÿ� ��8��ÿ�5 �5 5�98��ÿ6�ÿ6��898��6�ÿ
ÿ
74�031ÿ-��ÿ6�5ÿ5����5�ÿ����ÿ948ÿ967�5�ÿÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
ÿ
345678ÿ29ÿ 4ÿ��ÿ�4�74�64��ÿ4�ÿ�8ÿ�99ÿ��ÿ��6��ÿ���8�ÿ��ÿ���6�����ÿ���ÿ����8�8�ÿ
7��ÿ��2�ÿ�ÿ��2�9ÿ
12ÿ
ÿ
�ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
345678ÿ29ÿ 58ÿ4ÿ��4��ÿ���ÿ���6� ��ÿ4ÿ�8ÿ�9�9ÿ��ÿ��6 ��ÿ�7��ÿ�8ÿ2����2���ÿ
�67�8��ÿ���! ÿ8�ÿ"9ÿ2��#$ÿ��ÿ�8ÿ2��%�2��&ÿ�67�8��9ÿÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�11ÿ
4�39953� ÿ3� ÿ9�3�96ÿ9���453�
$���53�
0/�ÿ3�35�
*6 � ÿ3�35�
*6 � ÿ3�35�
2��ÿ3�35�
1�63ÿ��ÿ
�9���35ÿ ÿ09���35ÿ ÿ-����6 ÿ ÿ09���35ÿ ÿ-����6 ÿ ÿ09���35ÿ ÿ-����6 ÿ ÿ09���35ÿ ÿ-����6 ÿ
�36
����69
�3�/6
����69
�3�/6
�3�/6
�3�/6
����69
�3�/6
����69
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
"
" # " # " # " # " # " # " # "� #
$�5��3 � ÿÿÿÿ��!��%� ÿÿÿ
&��1'� ÿ�! ÿÿÿÿ
&��!%� ÿ(( ÿÿÿÿÿ��!%! ÿÿÿ1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ���11 ÿ!& ÿÿÿ�&�!�! ÿ�� �1!!� ÿ(1 ÿÿÿÿÿ%��!� ÿÿÿ% ÿÿÿÿÿÿ&�%�% ÿ(�
)3�939
ÿÿÿÿ��(�(1� ÿÿÿ
1'���& ÿ1� ÿÿÿÿ
�&�1!1 ÿ��
ÿÿÿ&%�1�' ÿ�' 1��1� ÿ&� ÿÿÿ����11 ÿÿÿ( ÿÿÿÿÿÿ%�%(� ÿ%�
*��3�3
ÿÿÿÿ�((�&�( ÿÿÿ
'��''� ÿ1% ÿÿÿÿ
%����� ÿ!% ÿÿÿ���'(' ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿ1��!�� ÿ'% ÿÿÿ�(���( ÿ�& 1''&% ÿ'% ÿÿÿÿÿ1���' ÿÿÿ� ÿÿÿÿÿÿ��((� ÿ%�
+64�39"3 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!!�1!� ÿÿÿ
1��(�% ÿ1' ÿÿÿÿ
�&��!& ÿ�% ÿÿÿÿÿ���(' ÿÿÿ& ÿÿÿÿÿÿ����% ÿ1& ÿÿÿ�'���� ÿ�( '�1� ÿ�� ÿÿÿ�'��!( ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿÿÿ��!�' ÿ�%
+6�ÿ*6��� ÿÿÿÿÿÿ�'���� ÿÿÿ
�(��(� ÿ%� ÿÿÿÿ
�(�'(% ÿ%! ÿÿÿÿÿ%���( ÿ�1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ1�('( ÿ%� ÿÿÿÿÿ1��(% ÿÿÿ'
(%( ÿ1� ÿÿÿÿÿ���(� ÿÿÿ1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ�(� ÿ��
+���ÿ,3"�3 ÿÿÿÿ�%'���% ÿÿÿ
1%��1! ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
1�!&1 ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿÿ����1 ÿÿÿ� ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ��! ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
� ÿÿÿ(&���% ÿ&' ÿÿÿÿÿÿ��(�� ÿÿÿ1
-"53�� 3 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ1��11� ÿÿÿ
�!�!(� ÿ%� ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
'�(&� ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿÿ���&% ÿÿÿ& ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ�%1 ÿ1� ÿÿÿÿÿ%��'% ÿ�� 1�!� ÿ�( ÿÿÿÿÿ��%%( ÿÿÿ& ÿÿÿÿÿÿ��&�� ÿ(�
����ÿ,3"�3 ÿÿÿÿ�%����1 ÿÿÿÿÿ
��&�' ÿÿÿ1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
���!! ÿ�! ÿÿÿ'��(�% ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿ1&�!�% ÿ�( ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
� ÿÿÿ%1���� ÿ1! ÿÿÿÿÿÿ'�'(� ÿ��
26�39
ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!%�('� ÿÿÿ
���1�� ÿ�1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
1�(�� ÿ�( ÿÿÿÿÿ%��1! ÿÿÿ' ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ1�� ÿÿÿ% ÿÿÿ���''! ÿ�%
!�� ÿÿÿ� ÿÿÿ����%1 ÿ�' ÿÿÿÿÿÿ��!(� ÿ�1
.�� �/ ÿÿÿÿÿÿ'��!�1 ÿÿÿ
1��'�� ÿ�! ÿÿÿÿ
1���(( ÿ!! ÿÿÿ�%���� ÿ1% ÿÿÿÿ�&��&� ÿ(' ÿÿÿÿÿ��(�� ÿÿÿ1 ��!% ÿ'! ÿÿÿÿÿ��%�% ÿÿÿ� ÿÿÿÿÿÿ���!' ÿ'�
2�35
ÿ���!&���� ÿ
11!�'!( ÿ1� ÿÿ
����('� ÿ%1 ÿ�%��&�% ÿ�& ÿÿ����&1! ÿ%� ÿ�!��'�� ÿ�' ÿÿ��&�&%� ÿ&! ÿ����!&� ÿ�� ÿÿÿÿ1��(&% ÿ�& ÿ
ÿ
23456ÿ17ÿ89 36 ÿ3�63ÿ��ÿ9��ÿ���ÿ�9���35ÿ 9�4���ÿ�ÿ�6ÿ�7�7�ÿ�6ÿ3�63ÿ��ÿ9�3456ÿ�343ÿ� ��ÿ�3ÿ 9�4����ÿ
3� ÿ�6ÿ3�63ÿ��ÿ9�3456ÿ�343ÿ�����6 ÿ4�ÿ9��ÿ���69ÿ��� ÿ�������!7ÿ
ÿÿ
�ÿ
3456ÿ855955 9 ÿ
ÿ
�ÿ���������ÿ��������ÿ������ÿ���ÿ������!ÿ"#$%#ÿ&'ÿ()*&+,-./ÿ)0ÿ-1.ÿ2#3ÿ-(ÿ,�,*04.ÿ-1.ÿ
.55.6-'ÿ7&8.8ÿ-19.,-':ÿ(5ÿ5&;.ÿ5,6-(9'ÿ(�ÿ-1.ÿ'<.6&.'8ÿ=.-,&*./ÿ,66(><*&'1>.�-'ÿ<.9-,&�&�+ÿ
-(ÿ.,61ÿ(5ÿ-1.'.ÿ2#3ÿ*&'-&�+ÿ5,6-(9'ÿ?.9.ÿ<9(;&/./ÿ&�ÿ-1.ÿ@ABBÿC3C#!ÿ,�/ÿ-1.ÿ9&'Dÿ
,''.''>.�-ÿ?,'ÿ(9+,�&4./ÿ&�ÿ/&9.6-ÿ9.'<(�'.ÿ-(ÿ-1.'.ÿ5,6-(9'ÿ7=(?/ÿ#-ED.*ÿ@ABB:8ÿ%.ÿ
6(>)&�./ÿ-1('.ÿ-?(ÿ,<<9(,61.'ÿ&�-(ÿ-1.ÿ9&'Dÿ,''.''>.�-ÿ).*(?8ÿF1.ÿ5&;.ÿ2#3ÿ*&'-&�+ÿ
5,6-(9'ÿ,9.ÿ,'ÿ5(**(?'Gÿÿ
ÿ
38ÿH9.'.�-ÿ(9ÿ-19.,-.�./ÿ/.'-9E6-&(�!ÿ>(/&5&6,-&(�!ÿ(9ÿ6E9-,&*>.�-ÿ(5ÿ�I�ÿ��������ÿ
1,)&-,-ÿ(9ÿ9,�+.Jÿÿ
K8ÿL;.9E-&*&4,-&(�ÿ5(9ÿ6(>>.96&,*!ÿ9.69.,-&(�,*!ÿ'6&.�-&5&6!ÿ(9ÿ./E6,-&(�,*ÿ<E9<('.'Jÿÿ
C8ÿ=&'.,'.ÿ(9ÿ<9./,-&(�Jÿÿ
=8ÿ�,/.ME,60ÿ(5ÿ.N&'-&�+ÿ9.+E*,-(90ÿ>.61,�&'>'Jÿ,�/ÿÿ
28ÿL-1.9ÿ�,-E9,*ÿ(9ÿ>,�>,/.ÿ5,6-(9'ÿ,55.6-&�+ÿ&-'ÿ6(�-&�E./ÿ.N&'-.�6.8ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ 67898 ÿ7ÿ 78�8 8�ÿ�897��� �ÿ� ������� �ÿ7ÿ��7����8 ÿ�ÿ 8ÿ
��������ÿ����ÿ7ÿ7� �84ÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
!ÿ#$%&'(!(ÿ)*ÿ+#(),!(ÿ-.'/,ÿ/%0ÿ1('-,$'2+,'%*ÿ)*(ÿ3)2',),ÿ)--!--4!*,5ÿ'*ÿ,3'-ÿ(%6+4!*,ÿ
789ÿ:;<9ÿ=>?ÿ@AB@ÿBCBDEFGFHÿI>ÿ>F@GJB@>Kÿ@AB@ÿFIGL@ÿLMN>FÿMOOP8EÿB88?MNGJB@>DEÿQRSÿMLÿ
@A>G?ÿAGF@M?GOBDÿKGF@?GTP@GMCHÿIAGOAÿGCO?>BF>Kÿ2SÿL?MJÿ@A>ÿ8?>UGMPFÿBCBDEFGFÿ7VMUBKBÿ>@ÿ
BD9ÿ:WWR<9ÿXCÿ@>?JFÿMLÿBUBGDBTD>ÿABTG@B@HÿAGYAZ[PBDG@EÿABTG@B@ÿOMCF@G@P@>Kÿ1\SÿMLÿ@A>ÿ
AGF@M?GOBDÿKGF@?GTP@GMCÿGCÿ@A>ÿ]9V9ÿ7TBF>KÿMCÿ:W\^ÿ_BCKLG?>ÿKB@B<HÿBCÿBKKG@GMCBDÿ\2SÿIBFÿ
J>KGPJZ[PBDG@EÿY?BFFDBCKÿABTG@B@HÿBCKÿ\`ÿBCKÿ:WSÿI>?>ÿJ>KGPJZÿBCKÿDMIZ[PBDG@Eÿ
O?M8DBCKÿABTG@B@FHÿ?>F8>O@GU>DE9ÿXCÿFPJHÿMU>?ÿABDLÿMLÿ@A>ÿABTG@B@ÿIG@AGCÿ@A>ÿAGF@M?GOBDÿ
KGF@?GTP@GMCÿB88B?>C@DEÿ?>JBGCFÿFPG@BTD>ÿBCKÿBDJMF@ÿABDLÿ@A>ÿAGF@M?GOBDÿKGF@?GTP@GMCÿGFÿ
MOOP8G>K9ÿÿ
ÿ
aA>ÿbB@GMCBDÿc>FMP?O>FÿXCU>C@M?Eÿ7bcX<ÿ8?MUGK>FÿGCLM?JB@GMCÿMCÿF@B@PFÿBCKÿ@?>CKFÿMLÿ
DBCKHÿFMGDHÿIB@>?HÿBCKÿ?>DB@>Kÿ?>FMP?O>FÿMCÿCMCL>K>?BDÿDBCKFÿGCÿ@A>ÿ]9V9ÿaA>F>ÿDBCKFÿ
JBEÿT>ÿ8?GUB@>DEÿMIC>KHÿ@?GTBDÿBCKÿ@?PF@ÿDBCKFHÿBCKÿDBCKFÿJBCBY>KÿTEÿF@B@>ÿBCKÿDMOBDÿ
YMU>?CJ>C@F9ÿbcXÿKB@BÿABU>ÿT>>CÿOMDD>O@>KÿKP?GCYÿ\R;:Hÿ\R;`Hÿ\RR:Hÿ\RR`HÿBCKÿ
BCCPBDDEÿFGCO>ÿ:WWW9ÿaA>ÿJMF@ÿ?>O>C@ÿbcXÿFPJJB?Eÿ?>8M?@ÿK>FO?GT>KÿKB@BÿOMDD>O@>Kÿ
KP?GCYÿ:W\`HÿBCKÿ8?MUGK>KÿOMJ8B?GFMCFÿB@ÿ8>?GMKGOÿGC@>?UBDFÿGCODPKGCYÿT>@I>>Cÿ\R;:ÿ
BCKÿ:W\`ÿBCKÿ:W\:ÿBCKÿ:W\`ÿ7]Vdeÿ:W:W<9ÿaA?>>ÿT?MBKÿABTG@B@ÿOB@>YM?G>FÿIG@AÿFMJ>ÿ
?>D>UBCO>ÿ@MÿFIGL@ÿLMN>FÿGCÿ@A>ÿ]9V9ÿB?>ÿ8BF@P?>DBCKHÿ?BCY>DBCKHÿBCKÿfc=9ÿdP?GCYÿ@AMF>ÿ
@A?>>ÿE>B?Fÿ7\R;:Hÿ:W\:HÿBCKÿ:W\`Hÿ?>F8>O@GU>DE<HÿDBCKÿOMU>?ÿGCÿ8BF@P?>DBCKÿIBFÿ
\1\H:QRH;WWÿBO9Hÿ\::HR21HQWWÿBOHÿBCKÿ\:\H^\WH:WWÿBO9ÿ_BCKÿOMU>?ÿGCÿ?BCY>DBCKÿIBFÿ
Q\;H^\`H1WWÿBOHÿQW2H\W2H:WWÿBOHÿBCKÿQW1H;R`H̀WWÿBO9ÿfc=ÿKGKÿCM@ÿ>NGF@ÿGCÿ\R;:HÿTP@ÿ
K>ODGC>KÿL?MJÿ1:H^RQH;WWÿBOÿGCÿ\R;`ÿ@Mÿ:1H̀Q`H̀WWÿBOÿGCÿ:W\:ÿBCKÿ\2HRQ\H\WWÿBOÿGCÿ
:W\`ÿ7]Vdeÿ:W:W<9ÿXCÿFPJHÿKP?GCYÿ@AB@ÿ12ZE>B?ÿF8BCÿ7\R;:Z:W\`<Hÿ8BF@P?>DBCKÿB?>Bÿ
K>ODGC>KÿTEÿ̀91SÿBCKÿ?BCY>DBCKÿB?>BÿK>ODGC>KÿTEÿ192S9ÿdP?GCYÿ@A>ÿ1WZE>B?ÿF8BCÿ
8?MUGK>KÿLM?ÿfc=ÿKB@Bÿ7\R;`Z:W\`<Hÿfc=ÿB?>BÿK>ODGC>KÿTEÿ2\9:S9ÿÿ
ÿ
fMCFGK>?GCYÿfc=ÿGCÿgPF@ÿ@A>ÿF@B@>FÿIG@AGCÿ@A>ÿFIGL@ÿLMNÿ?BCY>Hÿ@M@BDÿB?>BÿMLÿY>C>?BDÿFGYCZ
P8ÿfc=ÿGCÿ>BOAÿF@B@>ÿBCKÿ@A>ÿOABCY>ÿGCÿfc=ÿB?>BÿT>@I>>Cÿ:W\\ÿBCKÿ:W:Wÿ7@A>ÿJMF@ÿ
?>O>C@ÿE>B?ÿKB@BÿI>?>ÿBUBGDBTD><ÿGFÿLMPCKÿGCÿaBTD>ÿQ9ÿXCÿFPJHÿ2:SÿMLÿY>C>?BDÿFGYCZP8ÿ
fc=ÿIBFÿDMF@ÿKP?GCYÿ@AB@ÿ@GJ>ÿ8>?GMK9ÿhMI>U>?Hÿ@A>ÿ:W\QÿiB?JÿjGDDÿ8?MUGK>KÿBP@AM?G@Eÿ@Mÿ
>C?MDDÿP8ÿ@Mÿ:ÿJGDDGMCÿBO?>FÿMLÿY?BFFDBCKFÿGC@Mÿfc=9ÿaAGFÿ8?MY?BJHÿkCMICÿBFÿY?BFFDBCKÿ
fc=Hÿ?>8?>F>C@>KÿBÿC>IÿOB@>YM?EÿMLÿ>DGYGTD>ÿDBCKÿIAGOAÿKGKÿCM@ÿABU>ÿBÿO?M8ÿAGF@M?Eÿ
?>[PG?>J>C@HÿBCKÿ?>FPD@>KÿGCÿ@A>ÿ8?M@>O@GMCÿMLÿ̀;\HR`:ÿBO?>FÿY?BFFDBCKFÿGCÿ:W:Wÿ7aBTD>ÿ
2<9ÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
aA>ÿDBOkÿMLÿ8?M@>O@GMCÿBCKÿDMFFÿMLÿCB@GU>ÿY?BFFDBCKFÿGFÿBÿOMCO>?C9ÿXCÿBKKG@GMCÿ@MÿKG?>O@ÿ
DMFFÿGCODPKGCYÿ@A>ÿOMCU>?FGMCÿMLÿCB@GU>ÿ8?BG?G>ÿ@MÿBY?GOPD@P?>ÿBCKÿM@A>?ÿPF>FHÿ[P>F@GMCFÿ
?>JBGCÿBTMP@ÿ@A>ÿ8M@>C@GBDÿGJ8BO@FÿMLÿ>C>?YEÿK>U>DM8J>C@ÿMCÿ?BCY>DBCKÿBCKÿFIGL@ÿLMNÿ
3)2',),ÿ+-!lÿ#)$,'6+m)$mnÿ$!m),!(ÿ,%ÿ1o$!!*5ÿ!*!$onÿ'*6m+('*oÿ.'*(ÿ)*(ÿ!-#!6')mmnÿ-%m)$pÿeFÿ
GCKGOB@>KÿGCÿeOOMJ8DGFAJ>C@ÿF>O@GMCÿQÿGCÿ@AGFÿKMOPJ>C@HÿJBCEÿY?MP8FÿB?>ÿIM?kGCYÿ
@MIB?KFÿUMDPC@B?EÿOMCF>?UB@GMCÿMLÿY?BFFDBCKFÿBCKÿY?BFFDBCKFÿB?>ÿIGK>DEÿ?>OMYCGq>KÿBFÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3ÿ4564ÿ789 3�589ÿ�585���ÿ� ÿ3ÿ ����ÿ�8�3�ÿ�8 ÿ8�ÿ63 �39�ÿ43ÿ� 9ÿ8� �43�ÿ
�5�5��ÿ59ÿ 79�ÿ� 73� ÿ���1�ÿ8�ÿ�3�� �39�ÿ39�ÿ1���ÿ8�ÿ396 �39��ÿ!"�ÿ#$#$%�ÿ&9ÿ
3��5�589�ÿ�5��ÿ�8' ÿ43 ÿ� 5��ÿ39�ÿ 9ÿ'�39� �ÿ59ÿ�5�5���589ÿ�9� ÿ�4 ÿ7� 9�ÿ
�3936 � 9�ÿ� � ÿ89ÿ�4 ÿ�39�73� �ÿ� ÿ�74�ÿ5�ÿ5ÿ�4 ÿ5�ÿ8�ÿ�4 ÿ!()*ÿ�43�ÿ�45ÿ
�37�8ÿ43ÿ98�ÿ5 9ÿ�8ÿ�4 ÿ� �ÿ8�ÿ3ÿ�4 3�ÿ
ÿ
+8�9�53�ÿ�8�57ÿ�8ÿ���4 ÿ 374,ÿ
-�ÿ.895�8ÿ74396 ÿ59ÿ�5��ÿ�8'ÿ�5�5���589ÿ �3�5 ÿ�8ÿ�39�73� ÿ� �ÿ74396 ÿ59ÿ
43�5�3�ÿ�74ÿ3ÿ �83�589ÿ8�ÿ93�5 ÿ396 �39��ÿ45��ÿ�8ÿ8ÿ�8�ÿ5563��ÿ�8ÿ
���39�ÿ78��596ÿ��� �ÿ39�ÿ74396 ÿ59ÿ)/+ÿ98��� 9��ÿ
#�ÿ0 3��3�ÿ�4 ÿ��7�ÿ8�ÿ93�5 ÿ�355ÿ�3�74ÿ51 �ÿ 6 �3�589ÿ4 564��ÿ39�ÿ
2�'�3�85�589ÿ8�ÿ3657����3�ÿ�39�ÿ39�ÿ�355 ÿ89ÿ�5��ÿ�8' ÿ�8ÿ� �� ÿ� �59 ÿ39�ÿ
3456789:45ÿ<=:9ÿ>?489@93968ÿA83@9:BC6ÿ=:B@9:9�Dÿ
1�ÿ0'3�59 ÿ�4�ÿ�5��ÿ�8'ÿ� ÿ8�ÿ78��39�ÿ5ÿ353���ÿ
E�ÿF3�5�3�ÿ�5��ÿ�8'ÿ43�5�3�ÿ�5�3�5�5��ÿ7�3 5�573�589ÿ8�ÿG�H"(&/0ÿ43�5�3�ÿ��� ÿ�8ÿ
� �� ÿ �5�3�ÿ�4 ÿ3 3ÿ8�ÿ�5�3��ÿ43�5�3�ÿ396 �5� �ÿÿ
��ÿ+8�9�53�ÿ5��37�ÿ8�ÿ9 6�ÿ� �8�� 9�ÿ�8�ÿ�8�4ÿ59�3��7�� ÿ39�ÿ43�5�3�ÿ�8 ÿ
89ÿ�5��ÿ�8' �ÿ
2�ÿ+8�9�53�ÿ5��37�ÿ8�ÿ�58�� �ÿ89ÿ�5��ÿ�8' ÿ�5���ÿ43�5�3�ÿ�8 ÿ�8�ÿ789 589ÿ8�ÿ
93�5 ÿ43�5�3�ÿ�8ÿ�8987���� %�ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567ÿ89ÿ 74ÿ ÿ�7�746ÿ�������ÿ���ÿ7� 66�7��ÿ5�ÿ��4�7ÿ������ÿ��7ÿ����ÿ �ÿ�����5����ÿ
4��ÿ��7ÿ��77��7ÿ��ÿ7� 66�7��ÿ57��77�ÿ!""ÿ4��ÿ! !9ÿ
ÿ
$%&&'ÿ $%$%)ÿ ÿ
*+'+,ÿ
-./,0ÿ -./,0ÿ 12'34,ÿ
1565/'75ÿ
$8&9&8:9;ÿ&8<&=8%%9ÿ >$<?ÿ
@'30'0ÿÿ
$8<%:8&%;ÿ &==89&;ÿ >9:?ÿ
AB6'25C'ÿ
;:;8=;Dÿ =;D8$;=ÿ >E&?ÿ
F,)/'0B'ÿ
;998E:Eÿ :E=8D;Dÿ >=$?ÿ
F,GÿH,IJ.5ÿ
::;89E%ÿ $D%89=%ÿ >:%?ÿ
F5/+2ÿK'B5+'ÿ $8E:$8&%=ÿ <%<8&=&ÿ >D:?ÿ
*5L+2ÿK'B5+'ÿ ;%%8;:Dÿ $:<8;&%ÿ ><9?ÿ
M,I'0ÿ
E8E<%8;:$ÿ$8:=:8;;%ÿ >$D?ÿ
NO5CJ34ÿ
$&D8%=;ÿ &D%8E&Dÿ >$$?ÿ
M5+'6ÿ
&E8D&E8E&;ÿ<8=:E8&%Dÿ >=$?ÿ
'*5L/
.,PÿQ*K-ÿR*-ÿ$%&&ÿ ÿ
ÿ
)*5L/
.,PÿQ*K-ÿR*-ÿ$%$%ÿ ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
34567ÿS9ÿ 74ÿ ÿ�4��64��ÿ���ÿ7� 66�7��ÿ5�ÿ��4�7ÿ������ÿ��7ÿ���� ��ÿ����ÿ �ÿ
�����5����ÿ��ÿ! !9ÿ
ÿ
*+'+,ÿ
-./,0ÿ
1565/'75ÿ
;$8$;<ÿ
@'30'0ÿÿ
$=8&$:ÿ
AB6'25C'ÿ
EE8=D$ÿ
F,)/'0B'ÿ
EEE8:$:ÿ
F,GÿH,IJ.5ÿ
9:8:%%ÿ
F5/+2ÿK'B5+'ÿ $=8:EDÿ
*5L+2ÿK'B5+'ÿ &E=8==%ÿ
M,I'0ÿ
E%8&=$ÿ
NO5CJ34ÿ
$$8%$Dÿ
M5+'6ÿ
D;&89D$ÿ
*5L/.,PÿQ*K-ÿR*-ÿ$%$%ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ6789 �� ��ÿ��9ÿ����89���ÿ98�98� ����ÿ��8� ���ÿ�9ÿ8� �� ���ÿ
� 9���8�4ÿÿÿ
ÿ
����ÿ��ÿ��ÿ!"ÿ#$%$ÿ&�'��&ÿ'()ÿ(�(�ÿ��ÿ��ÿ*'(')�'(ÿ+,���(-�&ÿ�--.+��)ÿ/0ÿ&1���ÿ��2�&ÿ
'��ÿ�+�(ÿ',��&�ÿ&�'&�(&ÿ34'/5�ÿ67$ÿ��.,ÿ��ÿ��&�ÿ&�'��&ÿ'55�1ÿ.(5�8���)ÿ',��&�ÿ/0ÿ
5�-�(&�)ÿ+',��-�+'(�&ÿ1���(ÿ��ÿ�+�(ÿ&�'&�($ÿ9�(�'('ÿ'&ÿ'ÿ&�'&�(ÿ:.��'ÿ��ÿ!"ÿ&1���ÿ
��2�&ÿ'()ÿ'ÿ+�,ÿ',��&��,ÿ/';ÿ5�8��ÿ��ÿ�,��$ÿ<0�8�(;ÿ)��&ÿ(��ÿ'��ÿ'(ÿ�+�(ÿ&�'&�(=ÿ
/.�ÿ&1���ÿ��2�&ÿ8'0ÿ/�ÿ>�+�ÿ��ÿ��ÿ;'8�ÿ1',)�(ÿ)��8&ÿ��ÿ�'>�ÿ1'&ÿ.(�(��(���('5$ÿÿÿ
ÿÿ
?(ÿ��ÿ+'&�=ÿ��,�ÿ1'&ÿ&�8�ÿ-�(-�,(ÿ'/�.�ÿ��ÿ�8+'-�ÿ��ÿ',��&�ÿ�(ÿ&1���ÿ��2ÿ
+�+.5'���(&$ÿ%-���@A,�1(ÿ��ÿ'5$ÿ3!B2C7ÿ�()�-'��)ÿ5�/�,'5ÿ.(��(;ÿ'()ÿ�,'++�(;ÿ&�'&�(&ÿ
�2�&��)=ÿ�,'++�(;ÿ+,�&&.,�ÿ1'&ÿ,�;.5'��)ÿ/0ÿ�-�(�8�-&=ÿ'()ÿ�'�ÿ-.,,�(�ÿ8'(';�8�(�ÿ
&�,'��;��&ÿ-�.5)ÿ5�')ÿ��ÿ)�-5�(�&ÿ��ÿ�,'++�(;ÿ+,�&&.,�ÿ1'&ÿ�; $ÿ4 �ÿ#$%$ÿ��&ÿ'()ÿ
<�5)5���ÿ%�,��-�ÿ'5&�ÿ-���)ÿ-�88�,-�'5ÿ�,'++�(;ÿ'&ÿ'ÿ+���(��'5ÿ�,�'�ÿ�(ÿ���,ÿ!BBDÿ5�&��(;ÿ
)�-�&��(ÿ3��)�,'5ÿE�;�&��,ÿ!BBD7$ÿÿ
ÿ
F�1���,=ÿ��ÿ(.8/�,ÿ��ÿ&1���ÿ��2ÿ+�5�&ÿ'�'�5'/5�ÿ�&ÿ���ÿ5�1ÿ��,ÿ��ÿ)���5�+8�(�ÿ��ÿ'(0ÿ
&�;(���-'(�ÿ�(��,('���('5ÿ-�88�,-�'5ÿ�.,ÿ8',>��ÿ)�8'()ÿ3&��ÿG��>ÿ��ÿ'5$ÿH"HD7$ÿ?(ÿ�'-�=ÿ
��ÿ'((.'5ÿ#$%$ÿ',��&�ÿ�&ÿ+,�/'/50ÿ5�&&ÿ�'(ÿ!"""ÿ3G��>ÿ��ÿ'5$ÿH"HD7$ÿ?(ÿ'))����(=ÿ
��.; ÿ&1���ÿ��2ÿ�&ÿ'(ÿ�8+�,�'(�ÿ�.,/�',�,ÿ��ÿ&�8�ÿ�,'++�,&ÿ'�ÿ��8�&=ÿ��,�ÿ',�ÿ.&.'550ÿ
IJKLMÿOPLQRLOÿSIMLÿPMITRJUVWLÿJIÿPXMOXLÿVLQUXOLÿJKLYZMLÿSIMLÿ[UWXUVWLÿPLMÿPLWJ\ÿ
&�8�5',50ÿ�'5.�)ÿ/.�ÿ8�,�ÿ'/.()'(�=ÿ�,ÿ/��$ÿ4 �,�ÿ�&ÿ'5&�ÿ(��ÿ'ÿ&�,�(;ÿ8�����ÿ��ÿ',��&�ÿ
&1���ÿ��2�&ÿ��,ÿ)'8';�ÿ�,ÿ8'(';�8�(�ÿ'&ÿ��,�ÿ�&ÿ1��ÿ���,ÿ&+�-��&$ÿ4 �ÿ,�&.5�ÿ�&ÿ��ÿ
&1���ÿ��2ÿ�&ÿ(��ÿ�'��50ÿ+.,&.�)$ÿ��1�,ÿ�'(ÿ!]ÿ��ÿ�,'++�,&ÿ�(ÿ��ÿ#$%$ÿ'()ÿ^.&�ÿ1]ÿ��ÿ
JMUPPLMOÿR_ÿJKLÿ̀LOJLM_ÿabcbÿWROJLdÿefRJÿIMÿO`RTJÿTIghÿUOÿI_LÿITÿJKLRMÿJIPÿTIXMÿPMRSUMYÿ
&+�-��&ÿ�,'++�)ÿ3E�&+�(&���ÿ9'(';�8�(�ÿH"!i7$ÿ
ÿ
%���,'5ÿ&�'��&ÿ'��ÿ)���5�+�)ÿ8���)&ÿ��ÿ'&&�&&ÿ&.&�'�('/5�ÿ',��&�ÿ5���5&$ÿjÿ
G�+.5'���(ÿk�'/�5��0ÿj('50&�&ÿ3Gkj7ÿ.&�)ÿ��ÿ'&&�&&ÿ��ÿ9�(�'('ÿ+�+.5'���(ÿ�()�-'��)ÿ
',��&�ÿ,�&.5��)ÿ�(ÿl�,�ÿ,�&>ÿ��ÿ�2��(-���(ÿ.(��5ÿ',��&�ÿ,'��&ÿ�2-��)�)ÿ!C]=ÿ'()ÿ,�&>ÿ��ÿ
�2��(-���(ÿ,�8'�(�)ÿ/�5�1ÿ!"]ÿ���(ÿ1��ÿ',��&�ÿ,'��&ÿ'�ÿ�,ÿ(�',ÿ1"]ÿ39�(�'('ÿ��&=ÿ
<�5)5���ÿ'()ÿG',>&ÿH"!B7$ÿm�1ÿ9�2�-�ÿ�&�'/5�&�)ÿ'ÿ',��&�ÿ8'(';�8�(�ÿ8'�,�2ÿ��,ÿ
&1���ÿ��2�&ÿ'()ÿ���,ÿ�.,/�',�,&ÿ+�,ÿ4 �8+&�(ÿ��ÿ'5$ÿ3!BB67$ÿ4 �0ÿ�&��8'��)ÿ��ÿ
&.&�'�('/5�ÿ',��&�ÿ5�8��ÿ��,ÿ&1���ÿ��2ÿ��ÿ/�ÿH"]ÿ��ÿ��ÿ+�+.5'���(ÿ3m�1ÿ9�2�-�ÿ
n�+',�8�(�ÿ��ÿo'8�ÿ'()ÿ��&ÿH"!17$ÿ*�5�,')�ÿ�&�'/5�&�)ÿ'ÿ',��&�ÿ)�(&��0ÿ�,�&�5)ÿ
(��ÿ��ÿ�2-��)ÿ!i]ÿ��ÿ���,ÿ�&��8'��)ÿ+�+.5'���(ÿ3j+>�,ÿH"!i7$ÿF',��&�ÿ�(ÿ�'-ÿ��ÿ��&�ÿ
&�'��&ÿ1'&ÿ1�55ÿ/�5�1ÿ���,ÿ�&�'/5�&�)ÿ�,�&�5)&ÿ3m�1ÿ9�2�-�ÿn�+',�8�(�ÿ��ÿo'8�ÿ
'()Hÿ��&ÿH"!1=ÿj�<jÿH"!27$ÿ?(ÿ*�5�,')�=ÿ��ÿ�&��8'��)ÿ',��&�ÿ)�(&��0ÿ3!$Hÿ��H2�&p!""ÿ
>8 7ÿ1'&ÿ^.&�ÿ!p1ÿ��ÿ��ÿ-�(&�,�'����50ÿ�&�'/5�&�)ÿ�,�&�5)ÿ31$6ÿ��2�&p!"">8 qÿ9$ÿ
k���,'=ÿ+�,&�('5ÿ-�88.(�-'���(=ÿH"HH7$ÿ%1���ÿ��2ÿ+�+.5'���(&ÿ-'(ÿ��5�,'��ÿ�; ÿ5���5&ÿ��ÿ
8�,�'5��0ÿ+,�/'/50ÿ).�ÿ��ÿ���,ÿ,�5'����50ÿ+,�5���-ÿ5���ÿ�&��,0ÿ�,'��&qÿ��0ÿ��,&�ÿ,�+,�).-�ÿ'�ÿ
'(ÿ�',50ÿ';�ÿ'()ÿ'��ÿ��ÿ+���(��'5ÿ��ÿ+,�).-�ÿ5',;�ÿ5����,&ÿ39�(�'('ÿ��&=ÿ<�5)5���ÿ'()ÿ
G',>&ÿH"!B7$ÿÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ56ÿ7894ÿ845 ÿ4 ÿ64�46ÿ754ÿ4 ÿ5 64ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ�8����458 6ÿ��ÿ���87 �ÿ�9�64ÿ
�89ÿ� ��� 6ÿ754ÿ8ÿ� 4�4�ÿ9���458 ÿ5ÿ�56495��458 ÿ89ÿ� 654��ÿ� 56ÿ5���� �ÿ4 ÿ��4ÿ
�����ÿ"#$ÿ��%��ÿ&'(#ÿ&)*+ÿ*,-ÿ'"./(+ÿ&(.(ÿ*".ÿ0.("+(.ÿ+'"#ÿ+,$"1ÿ23453ÿ6789:�ÿ
� ÿ�5;�588�ÿ8�ÿ���98��5 ÿ564895�ÿ�9�64ÿ�966�96ÿ5ÿ4 ÿ�896 ���ÿ��4�9ÿ
6 <6ÿ� �5;��ÿ5� ÿ4 ÿ��9ÿ<�9;4ÿ64�4�6ÿ5ÿ9� 4ÿ� ��� 6�ÿ=864ÿ8�ÿ4 ÿ64�46ÿ
��99 4��ÿ���875 ÿ�9�64ÿ�8 65� 9ÿ4 59ÿ�8����458 6ÿ64���ÿ89ÿ5�9�65 �ÿ3ÿ���5458 >ÿ
�� 6ÿ5ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ�8����458 6ÿ��ÿ84ÿ� ÿ� 4�4�ÿ�6ÿ��958�6ÿ64�46ÿ��ÿ8� �ÿ
89ÿ��86�ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ�9�64ÿ6�68 6ÿ?@ ;ÿ4ÿ���ÿ676A:�ÿ
ÿ
B75�4ÿ�8�6ÿ�9ÿ9�9��ÿ96�8 65��ÿ�89ÿ��<� ÿ48ÿ�<� ÿ549646ÿ� �ÿ�6ÿ6��ÿ�9ÿ9�9��ÿ
4 ÿ4�9 4ÿ8�ÿ��<� ÿ9<8���ÿ��8946�ÿC�95 ÿ�ÿ9� 4ÿDE��9ÿ� 958�ÿ?678FE6768:>ÿGBC3ÿ
3@H3Bÿ55���5�ÿB 9�5�6ÿ9�894�ÿ�ÿ484��ÿ�<� 9ÿ8�ÿ675�4ÿ�8�6ÿ;5���ÿ8�ÿ69ÿ54 458 ��ÿ
� �ÿ81ÿ� 54 458 ��ÿ?44�6IJJ777��� 56��6���8�:�ÿ@95��4ÿ�9��489ÿ�8 498�ÿ��45�5456ÿ
�98�����ÿ��68ÿ96��4ÿ5ÿ�ÿ�7ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ<894��5456ÿ�84ÿ54 458 ����ÿ� �ÿ� 54 458 �����ÿ
H87 �9>ÿ�9��489ÿ�8 498�ÿ��45�5456ÿ4�9 45 ÿ�8�846ÿ<��ÿ� �54ÿ68< ÿ�8���ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ
�8����458 6ÿ?C87�ÿB4�;�ÿ6788:�ÿÿ
ÿ
3ÿ6�<>ÿ64��56ÿ�8 ���4�ÿ498� 8�4ÿ4 ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ9� ÿ��ÿ687 ÿ;5��5 ÿ��ÿ�8�846ÿ
� �ÿ� 5��ÿ6495;6ÿ�6ÿ4 ÿ<864ÿ65 5�5�� 4ÿ<894��54�ÿ���4896ÿ?6 ÿ@ ;ÿ4ÿ���ÿ676A:�ÿ=� �ÿ
75���5�ÿ�58�8 5646ÿ��ÿ�8 ÿ� �5��ÿ� ���ÿ<894��54�ÿ96��45 ÿ�98<ÿ�9�64>ÿ��<� ÿ
�8 498�>ÿ� �ÿ��958�6ÿ�89<6ÿ8�ÿ54 458 ��ÿ89ÿ� 54 458 ��ÿ4�;ÿ7 9ÿ�ÿ<589ÿ�89458 ÿ8�ÿ
484��ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ<894��54�ÿ?B75�4ÿ48�ÿK8 69��458 ÿ� �<ÿ822F:�ÿC 6�54ÿ4 59ÿ�9�58�6ÿ
�8 �96>ÿ4 ÿG�B�ÿ456ÿ� �ÿ55���5�ÿB 9�5�ÿ�8 ���� �ÿ5ÿ4 59ÿ� �5658 ÿ48ÿ9<8�ÿ4 ÿ
6� �56ÿ�98<ÿ4 ÿ�� �5��4ÿ�564ÿ4�4ÿ�9�64ÿ��ÿ84ÿ�5<54�ÿ675�4ÿ�8�ÿ�8����458 6ÿ
?4 � 9��ÿL 5649ÿ6778:>ÿ� �ÿ4 ÿB4K�ÿ�8 ���� �ÿ5ÿ4 ÿ6788ÿK3KBÿ4�4ÿ8�9�45�5M�458 ÿ
498� ÿ�9�64ÿ� �ÿ84 9ÿ���4896ÿ�6ÿ84ÿ956 ÿ48ÿ4 ÿ���ÿ8�ÿ�ÿ49�4ÿ?C87�ÿB4�;�ÿ
6788:�ÿB5�ÿ4�4ÿ45< >ÿ���5458 ��ÿ� ��84��ÿ� �ÿ6�5 45�5�ÿ�5� �ÿ�6ÿ� ÿ�8���4�ÿ
4�4ÿ��94 9ÿ6���8946ÿ4�4ÿ�865458 >ÿ� �ÿ54ÿ�8 45� 6ÿ48ÿ� ÿ4 ÿBNOP�ÿ/)(&ÿ4�4ÿ456ÿ���489ÿ
�6ÿ84ÿ956 ÿ48ÿ4 ÿ���ÿ8�ÿ�ÿ49�4�ÿ
ÿ
@84 45��ÿ48�5�6ÿ�89ÿ��94 9ÿ96�9�Iÿ
8�ÿQ8 �ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34
567ÿ89ÿ 47ÿ67 46ÿ4� ÿ4��ÿ�4��7 ÿ74�� ÿ���ÿ���ÿ����ÿ�2��9ÿÿ
ÿÿ
�����ÿ
1�6��4��ÿ
�� �!ÿ %�&'�$�ÿ���$()ÿ*���$+�,-,�$+.//,�,()�!ÿ0(--�)�$ÿ
����#$ÿ ���$()ÿ
2��574�7�ÿ 347�ÿ 74��ÿ�7�47�7�ÿ��ÿ�225ÿ67��7857�ÿ9ÿ:ÿ7��ÿ��ÿ
275��4�;<=ÿ��6�8�7�ÿ54 ÿ4��ÿ4� 7 ���ÿ6�8�9ÿ>76ÿ
4 �� ÿ��ÿ�7?���7�9ÿÿ@7A7�ÿ4�7�4 7ÿ4���46ÿ�4��7 ÿ
��ÿB92ÿ���7ÿ���7�ÿ�7�ÿ���574�7�ÿ�4��7 ÿ47�8�9ÿ
C4�4ÿ 2��574�7�ÿ 347�ÿ D4;ÿ57ÿ4E7�ÿ����� ÿ����4��7 �� ÿ74��ÿ5;ÿ
����4��7 7�ÿ6�A7�7ÿ��6�7�ÿ4��ÿ64�����7�9ÿ347�ÿ
74��ÿ8��F7��7857�ÿ:ÿ7��ÿ275��4�;9ÿ7�ÿ6�8�ÿ��ÿ
4E79ÿ>76ÿ4 �� ÿ�7?���7�9ÿG�7�4 7ÿ�4��7 ÿ�299F
�2��ÿ�4ÿ9��ÿ���79ÿÿ
D��4�4ÿ 2��574�7�ÿ 347�ÿ >�����ÿ��ÿ3�444�� ÿH���Aÿ8ÿ�47�ÿ���8ÿ7��7857�ÿ9ÿ
:ÿI4��4�;ÿ9J9ÿK��4ÿ��ÿ92ÿ4��8469ÿ7�ÿ����� ÿ��ÿ��77ÿ
����� ÿ466��7�9ÿ74��ÿ��66ÿA6�7ÿ��ÿ1Lÿ����ÿ�4��ÿ
�74A��� ÿ�444�� ÿ����Aÿ?��4ÿ��ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ74��ÿ
A6���7ÿ�47�ÿ���A�7�7�ÿ�AA��ÿ��� 9ÿ3�4447�ÿ84;ÿ
4E7ÿ4��ÿ4� 7 ÿBÿ���ÿ���7ÿ47�ÿ74��9ÿ3�4447�ÿ
8� ÿ�74��ÿ�7��ÿ�4��7 ÿ�����ÿ�1ÿ����9ÿ>76ÿ4 �� ÿ
4��ÿ6��7�ÿM4�ÿ�58� ���ÿ�ÿ�7?���7�ÿ�����ÿ92ÿ�4;ÿ
��ÿ�7ÿ74��ÿA6���7ÿ�479ÿ
775�4E4ÿ N��4� 7�7�ÿ16�7�ÿ 7OG=ÿ��A��7�466;ÿ4E7�ÿ���ÿ���7ÿ8� ÿ57ÿ���7�ÿ
��7�ÿ�ÿ�7ÿ775�4E4ÿP487ÿ4��ÿ>4�Eÿ1�88� ���ÿ
77�ÿD7��A�ÿ 2��574�7�ÿ 347�ÿ 47���7ÿ����� ÿ�47�ÿ74��ÿ67��7857�ÿ9ÿ���� �ÿ
D4�A�ÿ9J<9ÿ>76ÿ4 �� ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�7?���7�9ÿ
7���ÿH4E�4ÿ 2��574�7�ÿ 16�7�ÿ Q�A��7�46ÿA44��7ÿ��ÿ�444�� ÿ8� ÿ57ÿ�74��7�ÿ4��ÿ
A4�A4 ÿ���7�ÿ��7�ÿ�887��476;ÿ�ÿ7HÿP487ÿ4��ÿ
2��ÿH744�87�9ÿ
3E64��84ÿ 2��574�7�ÿ 16�7�ÿ 7OGÿ
���ÿH4E�4ÿ2��574�7��ÿ 16�7�ÿ Q�A��7�466;F4E7�ÿA4�A4 ÿ8� ÿ57ÿ���7�ÿ��7�ÿ�ÿ
HP2>ÿ�887��476;9ÿ
��747�7�ÿ
37�4ÿ
2��574�7�ÿ 347�ÿ 1�887�A�46ÿ4E7ÿ6���ÿ���ÿ467<ÿ����� ÿ7��7857�ÿ9ÿ:ÿ
D4�A�ÿB9ÿ74��9ÿ@7A�74���46ÿ�4��7 ÿ���8ÿ
747857�ÿ9ÿ:ÿG� � ÿB99ÿD4;ÿ46�ÿ57ÿ4E7�ÿ���ÿ
���4�A7ÿ4ÿ4�;ÿ�87�ÿ��ÿ4�;ÿ��857��ÿ4��ÿ5;ÿ4�;ÿ
874�ÿ��ÿ4ÿRSTUVWXUÿ64��ÿ�����ÿ4ÿ����� ÿ��ÿ
�444�� ÿ6�A7�79ÿ>76ÿ���8ÿ���4�A7ÿ4E7ÿ84;ÿ��ÿ57ÿ
�74��7�9ÿ2��ÿ4�;ÿ���8ÿ��ÿ4E7�ÿ�7�7ÿ4�7ÿ��ÿ54 ÿ6�8�ÿ
4��ÿ476ÿ4 �� ÿ�ÿ��ÿ�7?���7�9ÿ
Y;�8�� ÿ 7�� 487ÿÿ 16�7�ÿ Q�A��7�46ÿ4E7ÿ466��7�ÿ���7�ÿA7�4��ÿA��A�8 4�A79ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ 6789 89ÿ ÿ�9 �7� 4ÿÿÿ
ÿ
�����ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ����������ÿ��ÿ�ÿ!�����"ÿ��ÿ�#��������ÿ$�������ÿ�#$ÿ���������%ÿ&�������ÿ
���'ÿ��ÿ�"!����ÿ��(��ÿ)*+,-./.0ÿ2+-3.-45ÿ�����6��ÿ)7,0/8.-+990ÿ3:90,+/-.-45ÿ��#�#�ÿ
���!�!����ÿ);<=45ÿ��#�#�ÿ$����6���ÿ!����ÿ);&=45ÿ�#$ÿ��#�#�ÿ�$�#�!����>2ÿ);?=>24ÿ
'�!�ÿ���#ÿ���#$ÿ��ÿ�#����ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�'���('���ÿ�'�ÿ@����ÿ<��#�%ÿA�ÿ��ÿ����!�$ÿ�'��ÿ
�����ÿ�����ÿ�'���ÿ�'���ÿ��66�#�����ÿ��ÿ���������ÿ�#$ÿ$�������ÿ���'ÿ�"6������ÿ��#�$�ÿ
�#$ÿ'�!�ÿ#��ÿ$�!����$ÿ�ÿ�������B�$ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ�������>��������ÿ�(�#��%ÿÿ
ÿ
;&=ÿ�������ÿ�ÿ��#�#�ÿ�������ÿ)C�#���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿ2DEF4%ÿG��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�#$ÿH��ÿ�����ÿ
��6��$ÿ�'���('���ÿ�'�ÿ������#ÿI%�%ÿ'�!�ÿ���#ÿ������$ÿ��ÿ�'��ÿ����#���"ÿ$��$"ÿ
$������ÿ)C���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKK5ÿL��#ÿ�#$ÿM�#$B�"ÿJKKJ�5ÿ@���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKK15ÿC���'�ÿJK2E4%ÿ
G��6ÿ�ÿ��6��ÿ��ÿJDÿ�����ÿ�����5ÿC���'�ÿ)JK2E4ÿ���#$ÿNÿ)2K%N1O4ÿ�'��ÿ�����$ÿ������!�ÿ
���ÿ$����6���ÿ�#����$���ÿ�'��'ÿ��ÿ��6���ÿ��ÿ������ÿ�#ÿ��'��ÿ���$���ÿ)C���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKK5ÿ
L��#ÿ�#$ÿM�#$B�"ÿJKKJ�4%ÿL��#ÿ�#$ÿM�#$B�"ÿ)JKKJ�4ÿ$���6�#��$ÿ���ÿ�#���#���ÿ�#ÿ
�'��'ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�����6��$ÿ��ÿ$����6���%ÿÿ
ÿ
;<=ÿ'��ÿ���#ÿ�����#����ÿ���ÿ'�('ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ6������"ÿ��ÿ��'��ÿ��#�$ÿ�������5ÿ�������"ÿ
�#ÿP�!�#���ÿ)@���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿ2DDF5ÿC����"ÿ��ÿ�%ÿ2DDD5ÿ&��6ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKK5ÿC��'ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKE5ÿ
?6���(ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKD4%ÿQ���!��5ÿ�'�ÿ������ÿ��ÿ���!�ÿ�#ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ���!�!�ÿ�#$ÿ��������#ÿ
���#$�ÿ��ÿ�#H#��#%ÿ? ÿ���$���ÿ�#!����(���#(ÿ���ÿ���!��#��ÿ�#ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ��������#�ÿ'�!�ÿ
�������$ÿ������!�ÿ;<=ÿ�����ÿ)C���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKK5ÿQ������#ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKN5ÿ@���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKK15ÿ
C���'�ÿJK2E4%ÿC���ÿ����#�ÿ���$���ÿ�#ÿ�'�ÿ&�H����ÿ�#$ÿC�#��#�ÿ���#$ÿ�#ÿ���6�#("ÿ
'�('ÿ���!��#��ÿ��ÿ;<=ÿ������ÿ)F2%1NOÿ�#$ÿRE%2EO5ÿ��������!�"SÿC���'�ÿJK2E5ÿ
C�#��#�ÿG��'5ÿT�$���ÿUÿ<��H�ÿ�#�����'�$ÿ$���4%ÿV'��ÿ'�('ÿ���!��#��ÿ�#$������ÿ�ÿ'�('ÿ
����ÿ��ÿ��������ÿ��ÿ�'�ÿ$������ÿ���ÿ$���ÿ#��ÿ���!�ÿ�ÿ#�(���!�ÿ�6����%ÿ?$$����#�ÿ
�������'ÿ��ÿ#��$�$ÿ��ÿ������ÿ�'�ÿ�������ÿ��ÿ;<=ÿ�#ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�#$ÿ�'���ÿ��������#�%ÿ
ÿ
;?=>2ÿ��ÿ�ÿ!���ÿ�#������#ÿ�'��ÿ��#ÿ�����ÿ�!��ÿ������ÿ�#$ÿ!��������ÿ�#ÿ$�6�����ÿ��#�#��%ÿ
A�ÿ'��ÿ���#ÿ���#$ÿ��ÿ�#����ÿ��$ÿ��#�$�5ÿ���'ÿ��ÿ��"����ÿ�#$ÿ��$ÿ�����ÿ)W:92+-ÿX:92+-4%ÿ
YZ[\]\^ÿ̀a\ÿ]b^cdeÿ������ÿ�#ÿ��#�$ÿ��������#�ÿ��ÿ�#H#��#ÿ)@���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKK15ÿV�"�#$ÿ��ÿ
�%ÿJK2E4%ÿ��#ÿf��g��#ÿH��ÿ�����ÿ)W:92+-ÿh08,i3.-ÿh:3.804ÿ'�!�ÿ���#ÿ�������$ÿ��ÿ'�!�ÿ
�#����$���ÿ���ÿ;?=>jÿklmnc\ÿopqÿreso^^\ttÿjuvvwxÿy\d\ÿ\ÿ̀otxÿkz{{|wÿ^\}Z^`\qÿ̀aoÿ̀ottÿ
�������$ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�����$ÿ#�(���!�ÿ���ÿ������%ÿA#ÿJKJK5ÿ���ÿ��ÿ��('�ÿ�!�>�������$ÿ�����ÿ
�����ÿ�#ÿC�#��#�ÿ�����$ÿ������!�ÿ���ÿ;?=>2ÿ������%ÿA�ÿ��ÿ�����#�"ÿ�#H#��#ÿ��ÿ;?=>2ÿ'��ÿ
�#ÿ������ÿ�#ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ��������#�%ÿG���'��ÿ�������'ÿ��ÿ#�������"ÿ��ÿ������ÿ�#$�����#$ÿ
�'�ÿ$������ÿ�#$ÿ'��ÿ��ÿ������ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����%ÿ
ÿ
�����ÿ�����ÿ'�!�ÿ���#ÿ���#$ÿ��ÿ����"ÿ*~ÿ2+-3.-ÿ�#����$���ÿ���ÿ$�ÿ#��ÿ��'����ÿ��#���ÿ
�"6���6�ÿ��ÿ�'�ÿ$������ÿ)<"���ÿ�#$ÿT���6�ÿJKKN5ÿ@���ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKK15ÿ@�(�ÿ�#$ÿ���"ÿ
JKK5ÿC�@��ÿ��ÿ�%ÿJKKR5ÿC���'�ÿJK2E4%ÿA�ÿ��ÿ(�#���"ÿ�'��('�ÿ�'��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ��ÿ�ÿ
�����!���ÿ���ÿ�'�ÿ$������5ÿ���ÿ��ÿ'��ÿ#��ÿ���#ÿ$���6�#��$ÿ��ÿ#�(���!�"ÿ������ÿ�'�ÿ�����ÿ
�'�6��!��ÿ��ÿ�'�ÿ��������#%ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ6789 �ÿ��ÿ�ÿ�����ÿ����������ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ�������ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�������ÿ�!�ÿ��ÿ"�#�#$ÿ
������!�%�ÿ��&ÿ!�&����'ÿ(!���ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2)*+$ÿ,���ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2)*-.#ÿ/���0�!$ÿ�%�ÿ������ÿ
����!����ÿ%��ÿ��ÿ����&ÿ�������ÿ��ÿ�������ÿ"1���ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ*223.#ÿ4�ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�%��ÿ����&�ÿ
����!���ÿ�%�ÿ&������ÿ5��ÿ�!�ÿ!�����0��ÿ����������5��ÿ��&ÿ%����%ÿ��&�0�&����ÿ�!�ÿ�5��ÿ��ÿ
!���0�!ÿ"1��!ÿ��&ÿ6����ÿ*2+2$ÿ7�!���ÿ��&ÿ(����!&ÿ*283.#ÿ9��%�ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ"2)*:.$ÿ
�!�����&ÿ�%��ÿ!�&ÿ�����ÿ";78< ÿ=78< .ÿ����&ÿ5�ÿ��ÿ��&�����!ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ��!��&ÿ��ÿ����!����ÿ
&��ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ�������ÿ�5����ÿ��ÿ&�0����ÿ����5�&���#ÿ>���!����ÿ%��ÿ���ÿ5���ÿ�0������&ÿ��ÿ
�����ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ���ÿ���&ÿ",���%���ÿ2)*8.#ÿ4�ÿ���ÿ�������ÿ����&ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ
?������ÿ"��ÿ��ÿ-8@ÿ��ÿ��&�0�&����.#ÿA�����!ÿ�������ÿ��!ÿ����!����ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ5�ÿ
���&ÿ��ÿ������!ÿ�%�ÿ!�������ÿ�!�0������ÿ��ÿ�%��ÿ&������#ÿÿ
ÿ
B0�!ÿ�%�ÿ����ÿ���ÿ&���&��$ÿ��!������ÿ�����ÿ%��ÿ5���ÿ�ÿ�����������ÿ��!�����ÿ�����!ÿ��!ÿ
!�&ÿ�����ÿ��&ÿ������ÿ��ÿ��!��ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ?������ÿ��&ÿ,������#ÿ4�ÿ�����ÿ��!��&�ÿ��ÿ�!���ÿ
���%ÿ����5���%�&ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ�����������$ÿ�����ÿ����&ÿ5�����ÿ�ÿ�����������ÿ���!��ÿ��ÿ
��!�����ÿ��ÿ������C�&ÿ�!���#ÿ4���������ÿ&������ÿ�!�0������ÿ��ÿ���&ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ
5����0�&ÿ��ÿ5�ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ!���ÿ&��ÿ��ÿ!�!��ÿ&�0��������ÿ��&ÿ&�������ÿ&��ÿ"D9 �ÿE9F�8�9�.ÿ
�����������ÿ"6!G�ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2)):.#ÿ,�����!���ÿ��!ÿ&������ÿ�!�0������ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ
��ÿ��ÿ�����!��ÿ��!�ÿ��ÿ����������ÿ�����!0�����ÿ��&ÿ!����!�&������ÿ����!��ÿ�%!���%���ÿ�%��!ÿ
!����#ÿÿ
ÿ
I!�&�����ÿ��ÿ�������ÿ�%�ÿ����ÿ������ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ��!�����$ÿ���%ÿ�� ����ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ
�!���!ÿ�!�&���!ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿJ#K#ÿ��&ÿL���&�ÿ"L�0���ÿ*222$ÿ>%������ÿ��&ÿ
1���ÿ2))3$ÿ6����ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2)*+$ÿ,���%���ÿ2)*8$ÿ(����!ÿ2)*2.#ÿB�%�!ÿ�!�&���!�ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ
�����&�ÿ��!��ÿ!����!�ÿ���%ÿ��ÿ���&��ÿ������ÿ"MN7�89ÿOPQ9 6R .$ÿ6��!����ÿ5�&��!�ÿ
"S9T�U 9ÿ69T7 .$ÿ��&ÿ5�5����ÿ"VQTÿ7E7 'ÿL�!5�ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ*221$ÿ6�&�!���ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2)):$ÿ
6��5��&ÿ��&ÿW�!�����ÿ2))3.#ÿL���!��ÿ��ÿ������ÿ��ÿ��%����ÿ�%�ÿ&���!�5�����ÿ��&ÿ
�5��&����ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����#ÿ/���0�!$ÿ������!�ÿ�%���&ÿ��!�����ÿ����%ÿ�%�ÿ������%��&ÿ��ÿ
������������ÿ���!�0�&ÿ��!0�0��ÿ��&ÿ&����!���ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ�������0��ÿ����!������ÿ
������#ÿL �%�!ÿ��&ÿK�!�0��!ÿ"*222.ÿ��������&ÿ��ÿ!�&���ÿ�����ÿ���5�!�ÿ��ÿ���!����ÿ
���ÿ���ÿ��!0�0��ÿ5��ÿ&������ÿ!�&������ÿ��ÿ�%�ÿ�����ÿ�����������$ÿ�%�ÿ��!�ÿ������������ÿ
��ÿ!�&�����ÿ�����ÿ���5�!�ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ������ÿ���ÿ���ÿ�����������#ÿ4�ÿ����!���$ÿ�����ÿ
�����ÿ��!�ÿ�����������ÿ!����!�&���&ÿ��ÿ(�&���&�ÿX�������ÿI�!�$ÿK���%ÿ?�����ÿ��&ÿ�%�ÿ
��!!���&���ÿ�!������&�ÿ&������ÿ�%��ÿ�!��ÿ%�0���ÿ�ÿ!�����0��ÿ&����ÿ�����ÿ����������ÿ
��&ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ����!��ÿ����!��ÿ"K�%!��&�!ÿ2))3.#ÿÿ
ÿ
A�&ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ����ÿ����ÿ�ÿ�%!���ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ�����������ÿ&��ÿ��ÿ&�!���ÿ����!��!����ÿ��&ÿ
����������0�ÿ�����������ÿ"A����ÿ��&ÿY%���ÿ*22+$ÿL��!�ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2))+.#ÿ(���&ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ
����!��������ÿ!��������%���ÿ5������ÿ��%�!ÿ����&�$ÿ�%�ÿ!�&ÿ���ÿ��ÿ5�ÿ�ÿ��5��������ÿ5�!!��!ÿ
��ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ!����ÿ���������ÿ��&ÿ��ÿ5�ÿ��!�ÿ&��!�������ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ�%��ÿ�� ����ÿ
&��ÿ��ÿ�ÿ��!�ÿ&�!���ÿ���%�ÿ�0�!���ÿ"L��!�ÿ��ÿ��#ÿ2))+.#ÿ6��%���%ÿ!�&ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ
�����������ÿ����ÿ�����ÿ�����$ÿ�%�ÿ�!������ÿ��ÿ������ÿ��ÿ5������ÿ�����ÿ�����ÿ5ÿ
�����&���ÿ!�&ÿ�����#ÿJ�!�0�����ÿ����&ÿ!��������%���ÿ��ÿ�%���������ÿ5��ÿ��ÿ��ÿ����!ÿ�%��ÿ�����ÿ
�����ÿ�!�ÿ�������&ÿ5ÿ����!��!����ÿ�����������ÿ�!��ÿ5��%ÿ!�&ÿ�����ÿ��&ÿ������#ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456789 ÿ7 6ÿ69575ÿ7�5ÿ7��7�ÿ�55 ÿ� 487�98�ÿ�7�84ÿ9��7�89�ÿ�9�8ÿ��5�ÿ
� �5�54�ÿ85ÿ47 �5��965ÿ� ���789 ÿ ��6ÿ 8ÿ�5ÿ5�789�5��ÿ7��5�856ÿ��ÿ457 7��5ÿ
4785 ÿ�ÿ� 487�98��ÿ� ÿ7�5��746ÿ7�79 8ÿ5�545ÿ65��95ÿ9ÿ85ÿ� ���789 �ÿ� 89�56ÿ
� 9849�ÿ��ÿ969�96�7�ÿ8785 ÿ ��6ÿ6585�8ÿ�965�4576�ÿ� ��7�ÿ� 5ÿ ÿ
� ! "#�#!$ÿ&$'(!)ÿ&!ÿ*#ÿ++,'#-.ÿ/$ÿ$0')ÿ$'�#1ÿ'$ÿ')ÿ$0#ÿ23456)ÿ*#,'#�ÿ878ÿ�456789 ÿ
7 6ÿ69575ÿ745ÿ 8ÿ845785 9�ÿ� ���789 ÿ�97�9�98�ÿ9ÿ�7 �ÿ� ���789 �ÿ� �5�54�ÿ
��4854ÿ45574�ÿ�ÿ69575ÿ��ÿ7ÿ738ÿ7 6ÿ798�:ÿ745ÿ�7447 856�ÿ
ÿ
3 85 897�ÿ8�9�ÿ�4ÿ��4854ÿ45574�;ÿ
:�ÿ<�7��785ÿ69575ÿ�45�7�5 �5ÿ9ÿ789�5ÿ� ���789 ÿ�ÿ�9�8ÿ���ÿÿ
=�ÿ<�7��785ÿ85ÿ5��5�8ÿ�ÿ6957 5ÿ��ÿ7ÿ�74�ÿ7 6ÿ765 �94�ÿ ÿ�9�8ÿ��ÿ
�4�9�7��ÿ
2�ÿ<�7��785ÿ85ÿ9���5 �5ÿ�ÿ���58989�5ÿ5����9 ÿ��ÿ854ÿ�7 96ÿ ÿ�9�8ÿ��ÿ
69�547�ÿ7 6ÿ� ���789 ÿ878� �ÿ
ÿ
ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
23ÿ 56789 7 ÿ��ÿ9�����6�ÿ�9� �7���ÿ�9 �76����3ÿÿ
ÿ
�����ÿ���!ÿ"#ÿ$"%"& 'ÿ(%' #ÿ!�"�ÿ)"�!ÿ�%ÿ"))ÿ*+ÿ!�"�!ÿ�,"�ÿ-./012344ÿ67-ÿ42-/8-49ÿ
,�!��#�:")ÿ#"%& ;ÿ<))ÿ�, ! ÿ!�"�!ÿ�:=�ÿ��#ÿ> �ÿ? ��:�ÿ:)"!!���'ÿ�, ÿ!����ÿ���ÿ"!ÿ"ÿ
�@A>ÿ�%ÿ�, �#ÿ!�"�ÿ��)')��ÿ":���%ÿ=)"%ÿ�#ÿ!�$�)"#ÿ'�:($ %�ÿ&(�'�%&ÿ!�"���' ÿ!= :�!ÿ
"%'ÿ,"B��"�ÿ:�%!#C"���%ÿ=#��#���!;ÿD, ÿ!����ÿ���ÿ�!ÿ"ÿ!�"�ÿ%'"%& #'ÿ!= :�!ÿ�%ÿ
> B#"!E"ÿ"%'ÿ!�"�ÿ�,#"�% 'ÿ�%ÿ��(�,ÿF"E��"ÿGD"B)ÿHI;ÿ�����ÿ���!ÿ"#ÿ)&"))Jÿ
,"#C!�'ÿ�%ÿ��Cÿ��ÿ�, ÿ*+ÿ!�"�!ÿGD"B)ÿHIKÿB(�ÿ�, #ÿ�!ÿ%�ÿ�%'�:"���%ÿ)&")ÿ,"#C!�ÿ�!ÿ
' �#�$ %�")ÿ��ÿ!����ÿ���ÿ=�=()"���%!ÿG! ÿ� :���%ÿLI;ÿD, #ÿ�!ÿ")!�ÿ%�ÿC�' %:ÿ�,"�ÿ
(%�%�%���%")ÿ�"Eÿ�!ÿ"%ÿ�!!( Kÿ="#��:()"#)Jÿ#)"��Cÿ��ÿ=#'"��#ÿ:�%�#�)ÿ":��C���!;ÿM�ÿ�!ÿ�, ÿ
NOPQ94ÿR8-Sÿ6784ÿT3/60Uÿ734ÿ.06ÿU84-.ÿ60ÿ67-ÿV-R-Vÿ0Tÿ3ÿ67U-36Wÿ
ÿ
X��%��")ÿ��=�:!ÿ��#ÿ�(#�, #ÿ#!"#:,Yÿ
*;ÿ>�% ÿ
11ÿ
�ÿ
34ÿ 6789ÿ 7 �ÿ�ÿ� � �9ÿ��7��ÿ��9�7��ÿ�7�ÿ�� 7� 9�ÿ9���79 �94ÿÿ
ÿ
��������ÿ
ÿ
�������ÿ!ÿ"�#$#�%&ÿ'�ÿ$'(&)*�+ÿ#�,&)*'+-ÿ�)ÿ&))&�*��#ÿ%'�ÿ(���*������ÿ*.&ÿ.&�#*.ÿ'%ÿ��*�,&ÿ
��$ÿ�&)*'�&$ÿ���))#��$)ÿ��$ÿ�)ÿ�&+&))��!ÿ'�ÿ�ÿ#��$)+�/&ÿ)+�#&ÿ*'ÿ(���*���ÿ�ÿ.&�#*.!ÿ
���))#��$ÿ&+')!)*&(0ÿ1.&ÿ&,'#2*�'���!ÿ.�)*'�!ÿ'%ÿ*.&ÿ).'�*���))ÿ��$ÿ(�3&$ÿ���))ÿ/�����&ÿ
�&)2#*&$ÿ��ÿ���))#��$4$&/&�$&�*ÿ)/&+�&)ÿ�$�/*&$ÿ*'ÿ�ÿ(')��+ÿ'%ÿ#��.*#!ÿ*'ÿ.&�,�#!ÿ
����&$ÿ��&�)ÿ56����ÿ��$ÿ7*&2*&�ÿ899:;ÿ<�'/%ÿ��$ÿ7�()'�ÿ899=>0ÿ1.&ÿ�(/�+*)ÿ'%ÿ
�������ÿ'�ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3&)ÿ+��ÿ,��!ÿ"�$&#!;ÿ$&/&�$���ÿ'�ÿ*.&ÿ$'(����*ÿ,&�&*�*�'�ÿ*!/&);ÿ
+#�(�*�+ÿ+'�$�*�'�);ÿ*.&ÿ)*�*&ÿ'�ÿ.&�#*.ÿ'%ÿ����&ÿ,&�&*�*�'�;ÿ��$ÿ*.&ÿ*!/&ÿ'%ÿ�������ÿ
�&��(&ÿ2*�#��&$0ÿ?2����ÿ$�!&�ÿ*�(&)ÿ��$ÿ��ÿ$�!&�ÿ��&�);ÿ',&��������ÿ(�!ÿ�&$2+&ÿ/�&!ÿ
$&�)�*�&)ÿ��$ÿ&ÿ$&*��(&�*�#ÿ*'ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3&)0ÿ@'�,&�)&#!;ÿ'*.ÿ$�'2�.*ÿ��$ÿ��*&�)�,&ÿ
��$A'�ÿ/&�)�)*&�*ÿ�������ÿ(�!ÿ+�&�*&ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3ÿ.� �*�*ÿ��ÿ��&�)ÿ"�*.ÿ*�##&�ÿ5�0&0ÿ(�3&$ÿ
���))ÿ/�����&>ÿ'�ÿ&3'*�+ÿ���))ÿ)/&+�&)0ÿB�����&ÿ$'�)ÿ��$ÿ*.&��ÿ��*&�)�,&ÿ�������ÿ.� �*)ÿ
(�!ÿ.�,&ÿ�#)'ÿ%�+�#�*�*&$ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3ÿ$�)*��2*�'�ÿ��*'ÿ*.&ÿ&�)*&��ÿ/��*)ÿ'%ÿ*.&��ÿ.�)*'��+�#ÿ
$�)*��2*�'�;ÿ"�*.ÿ*.&��ÿ�&$2+*�'�ÿ.�,���ÿ�#*&�&$ÿ*.&ÿ#��$)+�/&ÿ(')��+ÿ*.�*ÿ/�&,�'2)#!ÿ
&3�)*&$0ÿ1.&ÿCD@7ÿ.�)ÿ/�'$2+&$ÿ�ÿ/�(/.#&*ÿ*'ÿ/�',�$&ÿ��ÿ��*�'$2+*�'�ÿ*'ÿ*.&ÿ.� �*�*ÿ
�&E2��&(&�*)ÿ'%ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3&)ÿ��$ÿ*'ÿ�))�)*ÿ#��$'"�&�)ÿ��$ÿ#��$ÿ(����&�)ÿ��ÿ$&,&#'/���ÿ
(����&(&�*ÿ)*��*&��&)ÿ*.�*ÿ"�##ÿ&�&%�*ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3&)ÿ�)ÿ/��*ÿ'%ÿ��ÿ',&��##ÿ���))#��$ÿ
(����&(&�*ÿ/#��ÿ5CD@7ÿFGG2>0ÿ1.&��ÿ/��(��!ÿ�&+'((&�$�*�'�ÿ�&#�*�,&ÿ*'ÿ�������ÿ�)ÿ*'ÿ
+�&�*&ÿ�ÿ(')��+ÿ'%ÿ�������ÿ��*&�)�*�&)ÿ',&�ÿ#���&ÿ��&�)ÿ5(���(2(ÿ8F2ÿ�+�&>;ÿ/��(���#!ÿ
*.�'2�.ÿ�'*�*�'��#ÿ�������0ÿH�ÿ)2(;ÿ�������ÿ�)ÿ�&+&))��!ÿ*'ÿ(���*���ÿ.&�#*.!ÿ���))#��$);ÿ
��$ÿ(')*ÿ&3�)*���ÿ���))#��$ÿ�)ÿ����&$ÿ!ÿ#�,&)*'+-0ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
B'*&�*��#ÿ*'/�+)ÿ%'�ÿ%2�*.&�ÿ�&)&��+.�ÿ
80ÿH�%#2&�+&)ÿ'%ÿ$�'2�.*ÿ��$ÿ',&�4�������ÿ'�ÿ�,��#� �#�*!ÿ'%ÿ%''$ÿ�&)'2�+&)ÿ��ÿ
����&#��$4$'(���*&$ÿ#��$)+�/&)0ÿ
F0ÿI�ÿ�))&))(&�*ÿ'%ÿ�������ÿ/�**&��)ÿ+'(/��&$ÿ*'ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3ÿ/�&)&�+&ÿ�&��ÿ*.&ÿ&$�&ÿ
'%ÿ*.&ÿ+2��&�*ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3ÿ$�)*��2*�'�0ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
@#�(�*&ÿ��$ÿJ&�*.&��ÿÿ
ÿ
�#' �#ÿ+#�(�*&ÿ+.���&ÿ"�##ÿ�%%&+*ÿ���))#��$);ÿ��$ÿ*.2)ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3ÿ.� �*�*ÿ*.�'2�.ÿ�ÿ,���&*!ÿ
'%ÿ(&+.���)()0ÿH�+�&�)���ÿ*&(/&��*2�&)ÿ(�!ÿ�&)2#*ÿ��ÿ�ÿ�'�*."��$ÿ).�%*ÿ'%ÿ*.&ÿ+#�(�*�+ÿ
+'�$�*�'�)ÿ(')*ÿ)2�*� #&ÿ*'ÿ*.&ÿ)/&+�&);ÿ/'))�#!ÿ�&)2#*���ÿ��ÿ*.&ÿ)'2*.&��(')*ÿ/��*)ÿ'%ÿ
*.&ÿ+2��&�*ÿ����&ÿ&+'(���ÿ2�)2�*� #&ÿ$2&ÿ*'ÿ$��&�ÿ+'�$�*�'�)0ÿ72+.ÿ����&ÿ).�%*)ÿ��&ÿ
�#�&�$!ÿ'++2�����ÿ��ÿ(��!ÿ)/&+�&)ÿ5D''*ÿ&*ÿ�#0ÿFGGK>0ÿL'�*2��*&#!;ÿ&3*&�)�,&ÿ.� �*�*)ÿ
*.�*ÿ��&ÿ/�' � #!ÿ)2�*� #&ÿ%'�ÿ*.&ÿ)/&+�&)ÿ�#�&�$!ÿ&3�)*ÿ*'ÿ*.&ÿ�'�*.ÿ'%ÿ*.&ÿ+2��&�*ÿ)"�%*ÿ
%'3ÿ����&;ÿ/��*�+2#��#!ÿ��ÿ*.&ÿ?�-'*�);ÿM'�*���;ÿ��$ÿ@���$�0ÿN� �*�*ÿ%���(&�*�*�'�;ÿ
.'"&,&�;ÿ+'2#$ÿ�(/&$&ÿ'�ÿ/�&,&�*ÿ)"�%*ÿ%'3&)ÿ%�'(ÿ���$2�##!ÿ).�%*���ÿ��*'ÿ*.&)&ÿ('�&ÿ
�'�*.&��ÿ.� �*�*)ÿ�)ÿ*&(/&��*2�&)ÿ��+�&�)&0ÿH�ÿ�$$�*�'�;ÿ+#�(�*&ÿ+.���&ÿ(�!ÿ��+�&�)&ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
345ÿ6735839ÿ7ÿ��93ÿ7�5�ÿ37ÿ58�7�835ÿ85�ÿ6 347�58��ÿ8�ÿ85�ÿ98� �9�5ÿ�65�95�ÿ
�7��ÿ 5�3ÿ3459ÿ4 �933�ÿ��8�5�ÿ53ÿ�ÿ���1��ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ�335ÿ�9�95ÿ�58�95�ÿ4 �5ÿ667�5�ÿ!9�95ÿ�3978ÿ" 8��ÿ�49�4ÿ 5ÿ5#�95�ÿ37ÿ
$ 98398ÿ59�9�993�ÿ7ÿÿ5�5 ÿ�8�98�ÿ$ 3�4ÿ�7��5ÿ� 5�ÿ%335ÿ!9�95ÿ& 83��ÿ' 8�ÿ
�335�ÿ 5ÿ98ÿ345ÿ67�5��ÿ7ÿ5�9�98�ÿ3459ÿ�9�95ÿ�3978ÿ6 8��ÿ98ÿ6 3ÿ��5ÿ37ÿ345ÿ6735839ÿ
�9�993�ÿ7ÿ85�ÿ5�5 ÿ�8�98�ÿ�7��5��ÿ(45ÿ��93ÿ7�ÿ9�ÿ9�35�ÿ�ÿÿ%&)*ÿ��ÿ8985ÿ7ÿ
345ÿ+�ÿ,-.-/,ÿ12-324ÿ-3/ÿ,5/62/,7ÿ8.49/:ÿ;.<249ÿ;.4.9/;/4-ÿ.4=ÿ8/6>?/8@ÿ/AA>8-,ÿ
59�9�5ÿ7ÿ�5398ÿ5�5 ÿ� 83��ÿ)78�5�3978ÿ67B5�3�ÿ34 3ÿ��5��ÿ�9�95ÿ�5�985�ÿ
8�ÿ345ÿ9$6 �3�ÿ7ÿ�9$ 35ÿ�4 8�5ÿ 5ÿ59�9�5ÿ7ÿ�8�98�ÿ347��4ÿ345ÿ$59�ÿ345ÿ
C5 �39�ÿ�893939�5�ÿÿ+�D�5 ÿ5�5 �ÿ�8�5�ÿ67B5�3ÿ9$65$5835�ÿ98ÿ�����ÿ(45ÿ
E/6>?/8249ÿF;/826.7,ÿG2H=H2A/ÿF6-ÿ34 3ÿ85 �ÿ6 ��5�ÿ98ÿ����D�Iÿ�7��ÿ4 �5ÿ67�9�5�ÿ
��93978 ÿ�8�98�ÿ37ÿ�335�ÿ37ÿ��6673ÿ345ÿ$ 8 �5$583ÿ8�ÿ5�7�5�ÿ7ÿ%&)*��ÿ
98���98�ÿ��93ÿ7��ÿ87345ÿ67$9�98�ÿ�8�98�ÿ76673�893�ÿ9�ÿ345ÿ*734ÿ$59�8ÿ
& �� 8��ÿ)78�5�3978ÿ�3�ÿ(49�ÿ6767�5�ÿ5�9� 3978ÿ�7��ÿ5�3�9�4ÿÿ� 83ÿ
67� $ÿ7ÿ $5��ÿ 8�45��ÿ8�ÿ(9�5�ÿ37ÿ�7�83 9�ÿ�78�5�5ÿ8�ÿ5�375ÿ
� �� 8��ÿ98ÿ*734ÿ$59� �ÿ
ÿ
"735839ÿ3769��ÿ7ÿ�345ÿ5�5 �4Jÿÿÿ
+�ÿ'7�5ÿ�493�ÿ98ÿ��93ÿ7�ÿ�9�39��3978ÿ8�K7ÿ4 �933ÿ��5ÿ5 39�5ÿ37ÿ�9$ 35ÿ�4 8�5ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
"79�7898�Jÿÿ
ÿ
(45ÿ�9�5�65 �ÿ��5ÿ7ÿ�3��48985D �5�ÿ� ���5�ÿ7ÿ�783798�ÿ�7�5�ÿ8�ÿ�7�735�ÿ
���5�ÿ345ÿ�5�985ÿ7ÿ��93ÿ7�ÿ676� 3978�ÿ98ÿ345ÿ+L���ÿ8�ÿ5 �ÿ+M���ÿ�%�733DC7�8ÿ
53ÿ �ÿ+MLN��ÿO7��$5835�ÿ� �5�ÿ7ÿ��93ÿ7�ÿ679�7898�ÿ98ÿ$7�58ÿ39$5�ÿ4 �5ÿ�558ÿ�5�ÿ
5ÿ��55ÿ"55�ÿ53ÿ �ÿ���1��ÿ)� 583��ÿ3455ÿ9�ÿ�78�58ÿ�7�3ÿ47�ÿ345ÿ��5ÿ7ÿ3�7ÿ
839�7 �� 83�ÿ667�5�ÿ7ÿ�7837ÿ7ÿ6 995ÿ�7���ÿ)47764 �98785ÿ�P7Q7�ÿ8�ÿ
�964 �98785ÿ�R 6�3DO��ÿ$ �ÿ9$6 �3ÿ��93ÿ7�5��ÿP7Q7ÿ� �ÿ667�5�ÿ98ÿ���Mÿ�9ÿ
S5�5 ÿ�8�5�39�9�5�ÿS�8�9�9�5�ÿ8�ÿP7�5839�9�5ÿ�3ÿ�S�SP �ÿ�%5�3978ÿI�ÿP7Q7ÿ��5ÿ4 �ÿ
�558ÿ667�5�ÿ7ÿ6 995ÿ�7�ÿ�7837ÿ��ÿ345ÿ�335ÿ�9��3�5ÿ�56 3$583�ÿ98ÿ)77 �7�ÿ
R 8���ÿ'7838 �ÿ*5� �� �ÿ*5�ÿ'5�9�7�ÿ*734ÿO �73�ÿT� 47$ �ÿ%7�34ÿO �73�ÿ
(5���ÿ8�ÿ!�7$98�ÿ7ÿ3459ÿB�9��9�3978��ÿR 6�3DOÿ��5ÿ� �ÿ667�5�ÿ98ÿ��+�ÿ7ÿ
6 995ÿ�7�ÿ�7837ÿ98ÿ)77 �7�ÿR 8���ÿ'7838 �ÿ*5� ���ÿ*5�ÿ'5�9�7�ÿ*734ÿ
O �73�ÿT� 47$ �ÿ%7�34ÿO �73�ÿ(5���ÿ8�ÿ!�7$98��ÿÿU�5ÿ5�39�3978�ÿ66�ÿ98ÿ
�57� 649�ÿ 5 �ÿ�455ÿ5�5 �ÿ345 3585�ÿ7ÿ58� 8�55�ÿ�65�95�ÿ7���ÿ�9�5�ÿ� ��D
A>>-/=ÿA/88/-:ÿ982VVH@ÿW/.8:ÿX8/WH/7,ÿ;/.=>1ÿYZ;5249ÿ;>Z,/[ÿ\" ÿ���� ��ÿR 6�3DOÿ��5ÿ
9�ÿ�7ÿ6749�935�ÿ78ÿ�7$5ÿ39� ÿ8��ÿ98ÿ'7838 �ÿ8�ÿ�93498ÿ�5398ÿ�7�8395�ÿ98ÿ*5�ÿ
'5�9�7ÿ8�ÿ(5���ÿÿ
ÿ
(45ÿ9��ÿ7ÿ�5�78� �ÿ679�7898�ÿ37ÿ878D3 �53ÿ�65�95��ÿ���4ÿ�ÿ��93ÿ7��ÿ7$ÿ5�67��5ÿ
37ÿP7Q7ÿ8�ÿR 6�3DOÿ$ �ÿ�5ÿ49�45ÿ34 8ÿ7$ÿ345ÿ�7$$78�ÿ��5�ÿ7�5839�9�5ÿQ98�ÿ
647�649�5�ÿ839�7 �� 83ÿ��5ÿ5��3�ÿ98ÿÿ$75ÿ6778�5�ÿ6597�ÿ7ÿ$7393�ÿ7ÿ6 995ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456ÿ783ÿ7964ÿ76ÿ7ÿ9485 ÿ 6�6�8�ÿ�8ÿ� �ÿ�43�ÿ��66� 6�ÿ� �9ÿ� ÿ�8��48� 8�79ÿ
�4����48ÿ�5 8��ÿ�����ÿ 4��3 6ÿ78���475�978�ÿ 6����3 ÿ�6 6ÿ���ÿ5��3 9�8 6ÿ�4ÿ
����57�ÿ�7�ÿ4�ÿ848�75 �ÿ6 ��6ÿ�4�ÿ� ÿ97836�7 !ÿ9�96ÿ4�ÿ�4� 9�78�ÿ��ÿ�6 6ÿ�6ÿ
�8�7��3ÿ783ÿ�8�84�8�ÿ"486#� 8�9�!ÿ�48�7��87�3ÿ �ÿ�7�ÿ� ÿ7�7�97�9ÿ�4ÿ848
�75 �ÿ6 ��6ÿ�4ÿ7ÿ �43ÿ4�ÿ� �6ÿ�4ÿ78���475�978�6ÿ� 6�6ÿ4�6ÿ�4ÿ$�8�ÿ 46 �3 �ÿ
% ÿ&'"%!ÿ� 4�5 ÿ� ÿ��'��!ÿ #� 6�3ÿ� ÿ���ÿ�4ÿ��99�ÿ�486�9�ÿ���ÿ� ÿ(&'�&ÿ48ÿ
� ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ� 6ÿ)ÿ 6����3 6ÿ�8ÿ�48�499�85ÿ 7��ÿ3456ÿ783ÿ� ÿ�873 #�7��ÿ4�ÿ� ÿ97� 9ÿ
6�����486ÿ�8ÿ �8��85ÿ�7�ÿ4�ÿ848�75 �ÿ��939��ÿ6 ��6�ÿ&��99!ÿ�3 79ÿ�6ÿ 6�����486ÿ
34ÿ84�ÿ3� ��9�ÿ733 66ÿ�� 7��6ÿ48ÿ6����ÿ�4*6!ÿ76ÿ� �ÿ7 ÿ84�ÿ7ÿ�3 799�ÿ9�6�3ÿ
� 7�8 3ÿ4ÿ83785 3ÿ6 ��6�ÿÿÿÿ
ÿ
&43���ÿ��78�3 ÿ�8ÿ� ÿ�4�ÿ4�ÿ+ 11ÿ�7��ÿ3 ���6ÿ7�ÿ� 8ÿ�63ÿ��ÿ9��6�4��ÿ4 7�46ÿ
6�8� ÿ,-12ÿ�4ÿ�48�49ÿ�4�4�6ÿ783ÿ4� ÿ��93ÿ 37�46�ÿ"� 8�9�!ÿ� ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ643���ÿ
��78�3 ÿ 43���6ÿ�6ÿ ����3ÿ�4ÿ(&.�ÿ783ÿ� ����3ÿ7 9��7�4ÿ�6ÿ�8ÿ&4��ÿ.7�4�7!ÿ
+48�787!ÿ/ �ÿ+ *��4!ÿ% *76!ÿ783ÿ��4��85�ÿ08ÿ)1,-!ÿ� ÿ���ÿ�66� 3ÿ7ÿ ��63ÿ�8� ��ÿ
3 ��6�48ÿ48ÿ� ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ+ 11ÿ3 ���6ÿ�7�ÿ�8�9�3 3ÿ� 37�3ÿ #�� � 8�6ÿ�4ÿ86� ÿ
�48��8� 3ÿ67�ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ� ÿ3 ���6ÿ���ÿ� ÿ�8�8�ÿ4�ÿ733 66�85ÿ��9��ÿ 79�ÿ�6�6ÿ783ÿ
��8���$�85ÿ848�75 �ÿ�4�79���6ÿ4�ÿ34� 6���ÿ �6�ÿ����ÿ)1,-��ÿ08ÿ)1))!ÿ� ÿ���ÿ7964ÿ
9763ÿ7ÿ�6�ÿ76666� 8�ÿ783ÿ7664��7�3ÿ �4�� 837��486ÿ 573�85ÿ� ÿ����6ÿ4�ÿ
643���ÿ��78�3 ÿ3 ���6ÿ48ÿ�3 799�ÿ9�6�3ÿ6 ��6ÿ����ÿ)1))���ÿ( 37�3ÿ9785�75 ÿ48ÿ
97� 96ÿ 4 ����6ÿ� ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ643���ÿ��78�3 ÿ�8ÿ7 76ÿ4� 97 �85ÿ� �7�8ÿ� 7�8 3ÿ783ÿ
83785 3ÿ6 ��6!ÿ���ÿ3 ���6ÿ7 ÿ6��99ÿ ����3ÿ�8ÿ7 76ÿ4�8��799�ÿ4��� �3ÿ��ÿ
6����ÿ�4*6�ÿ(&.�ÿ��20&ÿ��939��ÿ& ���6ÿ 4�3ÿ78ÿ788�79ÿ7� 75 ÿ4�ÿ,-ÿ848�75 �ÿ
6����ÿ�4*6ÿ��993ÿ� �� 8ÿ'3,,ÿ783ÿ'3,4ÿ���ÿ+ 116ÿ#�� 3ÿ���ÿ643���ÿ��78�3 ÿ
�5 �7�ÿ783ÿ2799ÿ)1,2��ÿ6763ÿ48ÿ�4 ÿ �8�ÿ37�7ÿ3 6����85ÿ�4�79ÿ�8��3 8�79ÿ�7�!ÿ��6ÿ
8��� ÿ76ÿ7 7 8�9�ÿ3 �9�8 3ÿ���6788����7 �6��637�54��!ÿ466��9�ÿ3� ÿ�4ÿ
3 � 763ÿ+ 11ÿ�6ÿ��ÿ� ÿ75 8���ÿ08ÿ79�ÿ)1)1!ÿ� ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ+ 11ÿ3 ���6ÿ�7�ÿ3 9�� ÿ
643���ÿ��78�3 ÿ�76ÿ 4 ����3ÿ�4�ÿ65+ �7875 3ÿ��9��ÿ97836ÿ�678 7�ÿ)1)1��ÿÿ
ÿÿ
9 �878�ÿ973ÿ�75� 8�6ÿ�4�ÿ7�6�3ÿ��5ÿ57� !ÿ6�799ÿ57� !ÿ783ÿ� 9783ÿ57� ÿ��36ÿ
�4�93ÿ� ÿ7ÿ� 7�ÿ�4ÿ6����ÿ�4* 6!ÿ� ��ÿ�7�ÿ6�7�85 ÿ78��79ÿ �7�86ÿ9��ÿ48ÿ� ÿ
97836�7 �ÿ� �9ÿ64� ÿ6�7�6ÿ #�� ÿ� ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ848�4*��ÿ7���8���48ÿ�4ÿ�8��85ÿ
7����97ÿ6 ��6ÿ��5�ÿ� 9783ÿ57� ÿ��36�!ÿ� ÿ�7:4���ÿ4�ÿ57� ÿ6 ��6ÿ�7�ÿ6��99ÿ� ÿ
�8�3ÿ�6�85ÿ973ÿ7���8���48�ÿ�7��ÿ345ÿ�8��85ÿ�6ÿ ����3ÿ�4ÿ64� ÿ*�8�ÿ�8ÿ� �ÿ
6�7�ÿ����8ÿ6����ÿ�4*ÿ785 !ÿ���ÿ84ÿ 6�����486ÿ48ÿ973ÿ7���8���48�ÿ2�8� 6ÿ7 ÿ4��8ÿ
8�4�75 3ÿ�4ÿ97�ÿ64�ÿ 7��ÿ3456ÿ48ÿ� ÿ97836�7 !ÿ76ÿ� �ÿ� #� 8�9�ÿ46�ÿ
776��6ÿ�7�ÿ�7�ÿ�7 �ÿ975� ÿ783ÿ4� ÿ$4484���ÿ3�6766�ÿ&��ÿ 7����6ÿ� 7�ÿ
6�7�85�85ÿ4 4��8���6ÿ� ÿ6����ÿ�4*6ÿ�7�ÿ�85 6�ÿ6��9�79ÿ4ÿ9�79ÿ7�4�8�6ÿ4�ÿ
973�ÿ�9�4�5 ÿ7� 9ÿ9�� 7�� ÿ*�6�6ÿ*7��8�85ÿ� ÿ����6ÿ4�ÿ973ÿ4�648�85ÿ�8ÿ7 �46ÿ
783ÿ4� ÿ6�7�85�85ÿ��36!ÿ� ÿ76ÿ� 8ÿ9���9ÿ 67�ÿ 573�85ÿ� ÿ����6ÿ4�ÿ973ÿ
�85 6��48ÿ�8ÿ6�7�85�85ÿ�7��796ÿ;ÿ�8�9�3�85ÿ6����ÿ�4*ÿ��7�8ÿ�ÿ79�ÿ)1,-��ÿ� ÿ
�76��9!ÿ6�7�ÿ783ÿ�3 79ÿ��939��ÿ75 8��6ÿ�7�ÿ��83ÿ��ÿ� 8 ����79ÿ�4ÿ�8���7�ÿ4�� 7�ÿ783ÿ
3��7��48ÿ�7� 7�586ÿ�4ÿ8�4�75 ÿ� ÿ�49�8�7�ÿ�6ÿ4�ÿ848�4*��ÿ7���8���48ÿ�8ÿ 5�486ÿ
���ÿ�84�8ÿ6����ÿ�4*ÿ4 �97��486ÿ�&��9�$ÿ�ÿ79�ÿ)1,-��ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567589ÿ54 8 ÿ�4�ÿ���5�6�ÿ�669���ÿ
��ÿ��9758��87�ÿ6�6 ÿ4�ÿ9 8954�ÿ4� 8976ÿ54ÿ�6��8�6�ÿ�858�95847ÿ97�ÿ�6�4�9ÿ
56 �78��6ÿ�44�87�ÿ5�6ÿ9 895847ÿ4�ÿ975849��975ÿ�4�67588�6ÿ�4�ÿ�98�86ÿ�4�ÿ
475�4ÿÿ
��ÿ�8�65ÿ97�ÿ87�8�65ÿ8� 95ÿ4�ÿ975849��975ÿ�4�67588�6ÿ�6ÿ47ÿ�8�5ÿ�4�ÿ
87�8�8��9 ÿ97�ÿ4 �95847ÿ
�ÿ�8�65ÿ97�ÿ87�8�65ÿ8� 95ÿ4�ÿ69�ÿ87�65847ÿ��4�ÿ 9�67�6�ÿ9�9 6ÿ47ÿ�8�5ÿ
�4�ÿ87�8�8��9 ÿ97�ÿ4 �95847ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
!49��9��ÿ
ÿ
"�8�5ÿ�4�6ÿ9�6ÿ��6��675�ÿ4#6��6�ÿ947�ÿ�49��9��ÿ"6�6�9ÿ5��86ÿ�9�6ÿ87�8956�ÿ
�8�5ÿ�4�6ÿ��6��675�ÿ�6ÿ�49��9�ÿ9 ÿ5�9�6ÿ976ÿ97�ÿ�4�ÿ�4�9�87�ÿ958�8586$ÿ97�ÿ5�6�ÿ
�9�ÿ#�8�ÿ�67ÿ769�#�ÿ%&876 ÿ97�ÿ'96ÿ�((�$ÿ3�� ÿ�((()�ÿ*�66ÿ�49��9�ÿ
9 4895847ÿ97ÿ#6ÿ9ÿ�9+4�ÿ4��6ÿ4�ÿ�6�86,�6956�ÿ�4�5985�ÿ�4�ÿ+��6786ÿ�4�6ÿ
%"4�9�9ÿ65ÿ9�ÿ�((2)$ÿ#�5ÿ�676�9�ÿ�6 �6675ÿ9ÿ�9ÿ6�6759�6ÿ4�ÿ5459ÿ�4�598586ÿ%66ÿ
366-ÿ65ÿ9�ÿ�.�1)ÿ97�ÿ�4ÿ745ÿ9 69�ÿ54ÿ#6ÿ9ÿ8�78�8975ÿ�4#6�ÿ��4�ÿ9ÿ�97�6,�8�6ÿ
6� 6 58�6�ÿÿ
ÿ
34567589ÿ54 8 ÿ�4�ÿ���5�6�ÿ�669���ÿ
��ÿ/7ÿ9�69ÿ��6�6ÿ�6�86ÿ48847ÿ47585�56ÿ9ÿ�9+4�ÿ4��6ÿ4�ÿ�8�5ÿ�4�ÿ�4�5985�$ÿ
9 6 ÿ5�6ÿ8� 95ÿ4�ÿ5�8ÿ�4�5985�ÿ�9 54�ÿ47ÿ4 �95847ÿ�89#885��ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
"65847ÿ"���9���ÿ
ÿ
0ÿ�9�865�ÿ4�ÿ795��9ÿ97�ÿ�97�9�6ÿ�954�ÿ�9�89#�ÿ8� 95ÿ�8�5ÿ�4�6ÿ5��4���4�5ÿ5�68�ÿ
�97�6�ÿ&4�6�6�$ÿ7476ÿ4�ÿ5�6ÿ�954�ÿ856�ÿ9#4�6ÿ�9�6ÿ#667ÿ8� 8956�ÿ87ÿ�4�6�7ÿ58�6ÿ
87ÿ5�6ÿ�6 876ÿ4�ÿ�8�5ÿ�4�6 ÿ95ÿ97�ÿ9��6ÿ 96�ÿ12ÿ45ÿ267ÿ89:;<5ÿ=47>ÿ2695ÿ7476ÿ4�ÿ5�66ÿ
�9 54�ÿ�9�6ÿ�867ÿ54ÿ5�6ÿ6�6ÿ4�ÿ9ÿ5��695�ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
456789 56ÿ7 9 8���ÿ���������ÿ
ÿ
������������ÿ
ÿ
��!ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ!)&()%*+ÿ!ÿ$)%$,%,ÿ)#ÿ-&#',%ÿ(ÿ.&(/%0#&1ÿ#.ÿ(")#$!ÿ)#ÿ2%ÿ)(1%$ÿ2+ÿ
)�%ÿ345�ÿ($,ÿ)!ÿ-(&)$%&!ÿ)#ÿ/($)($ÿ#&ÿ/-&#'%ÿ)�%ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ!)()6!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ
$ÿ)�%ÿ8939ÿ#'%&ÿ)�%ÿ$%7)ÿ:;ÿ+%(&!9ÿ<)ÿ!ÿ($ÿ6-,()%ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ)0#ÿ-&%'#6!ÿ'%&!#$!ÿ&%.=%")$*ÿ
)�%ÿ-&#*&%!!ÿ)�()ÿ�(!ÿ2%%$ÿ/(,%ÿ)#0(&,!ÿ!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ(!ÿ0%==ÿ(!ÿ"�($*%!ÿ$ÿ
)�%ÿ-&#&)%!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ345�9ÿ>#)(2=+?ÿ)�%ÿ&%-&%!%$)()'%!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ345�ÿ"#$!,%&ÿ)�%ÿ
&($*%0,%ÿ!)()6!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ(!ÿ!%"6&%ÿ($,ÿ�('%ÿ,%$).%,ÿ!+!)%/()"ÿ/#$)#&$*ÿ#.ÿ
!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ,!)&26)#$ÿ($,ÿ)�%&ÿ�(2)()!ÿ(!ÿ�*�ÿ-&#&)+ÿ(")#$!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ345�9ÿ@,,)#$(==+?ÿ
345�ÿ&%-&%!%$)()'%!ÿ&%"#*$A%ÿ)�()ÿ*&(!!=($,ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ($,ÿ#)�%&ÿ/(B#&ÿ
=($,!"(-%C!"(=%ÿ�(2)()ÿ$)()'%!ÿ*%$%&(==+ÿ.(==ÿ2&#(,=+ÿ0)�$ÿ)�%ÿ/!!#$ÿ#.ÿ/#!)ÿ
(*%$"%!ÿ($,ÿ&%/($ÿ(ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ-&#&)+ÿ#.ÿ/#!)ÿ-(&)$%&!?ÿ26)ÿ)�()ÿ)�%ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ
!)&()%*+ÿ!�#6=,ÿ-&/(&=+ÿ2%ÿ.#"6!%,ÿ#$ÿ!0.)C.#7ÿ!-%"."ÿ(")#$!?ÿ-(&)"6=(&=+ÿ)�#!%ÿ0)�ÿ
#2B%")'%ÿ($,ÿD6($).(2=%ÿ#6)"#/%!?ÿ)�#6*�ÿ)�%ÿ*-ÿ0==ÿ"#$)$6%ÿ)#ÿ!6--#&)ÿ($,ÿ
%$*(*%ÿ$ÿ2&#(,%&ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ%..#&)!9ÿ4$(==+?ÿ)�%ÿ*-ÿ"#$)$6%!ÿ)#ÿ!%%ÿ'(=6%ÿ$ÿ
*#$*ÿ)�*�ÿ)�%ÿ-&#"%!!ÿ#.ÿ&%'%0$*ÿ)�%ÿ!)()6!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ2(!%,ÿ#$ÿ)�%ÿ.'%ÿ
=!)$*ÿ.(")#&!ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿE3@?ÿ(ÿ-&#"%!!ÿ)�()ÿ2%*($ÿ0)�ÿ)�%ÿF;::ÿ5@539ÿ��!ÿ%7%&"!%ÿ
"&%()%!ÿ(ÿ!)&6")6&%,ÿ-&#"%!!ÿ)#ÿ,%$).+ÿ($,ÿ%'(=6()%ÿ-#)%$)(=ÿ)�&%()!ÿ(!ÿ0%==ÿ(!ÿ%7!)$*ÿ
&%!%(&"�ÿ$%%,!ÿ($,ÿ!ÿ�%=-.6=ÿ)#ÿ)�%ÿ*-ÿ$ÿ2&#(,=+ÿ(!!%!!$*ÿ)�%ÿ&($*%0,%ÿ
"#$!%&'()#$ÿ!)()6!9ÿÿÿ
ÿ
<$ÿ"#$)$6$*ÿ0)�ÿ)�%ÿ-�=#!#-�+ÿ&%.=%")%,ÿ$ÿ-(!)ÿ5@53ÿ,#"6/%$)!?ÿ)�!ÿ!)&()%*+ÿ0(!ÿ
"#$!)&6")%,ÿ2+ÿ)�%ÿ345�ÿ($,ÿ)!ÿ-(&)$%&!ÿ0)�ÿ&%"#*$)#$ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ!*$."($"%ÿ#.ÿ
"##-%&()#$ÿ($,ÿ-(&)"-()#$ÿ2+ÿ(ÿ2&#(,ÿ*-ÿ#.ÿ*#'%&$/%$)ÿ(*%$"%!?ÿ)&2%!?ÿ>GH!ÿ
($,ÿ-&'()%ÿ$,',6(=!9ÿI%ÿ(=!#ÿ("1$#0=%,*%ÿ)�%ÿ/-#&)($"%ÿ#.ÿ"#/-()2=%ÿ&6&(=ÿ
='%=�##,!ÿ($,ÿ(")')%!ÿ!6"�ÿ(!ÿ&($"�$*?ÿ.(&/ $*?ÿ($,ÿ#6),##&ÿ&%"&%()#$ÿ$"=6,$*ÿ
�6$)$*?ÿ)&(--$*?ÿ($,ÿ0=,=.%ÿ0()"�$*?ÿ)#ÿ)�%ÿ%7!)%$"%ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ($,ÿ$ÿ)�%ÿ
%!)(2=!�/%$)ÿ#.ÿ!)(1%�#=,%&!ÿ$ÿ0=,=.%ÿ"#$!%&'()#$9ÿ��6!?ÿ)�%ÿ.#"6!ÿ#.ÿ)�!ÿ.&(/%0#&1ÿ
!ÿ#$ÿ'#=6$)(&+ÿ"#==(2#&()'%ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ2(!%,ÿ#$ÿ!�(&%,ÿ'(=6%!ÿ($,ÿ$"%$)'%!ÿ&()�%&ÿ
)�($ÿ&%*6=()#&+ÿ&%D6&%/%$)!9ÿ
ÿ
��JK�ÿÿ
ÿ
��%ÿ*#(=ÿ#.ÿ)�!ÿ"#$!%&'()#$ÿ!)&()%*+ÿ!ÿ)#ÿ/($)($ÿ#&ÿ&%!)#&%ÿ!0.)ÿ.#7ÿ-#-6=()#$!ÿ
0)�$ÿ%("�ÿ!)()%ÿ)#ÿ%$!6&%ÿ)�%ÿ!-()(=?ÿ*%$%)"?ÿ($,ÿ,%/#*&(-�"ÿ!)&6")6&%ÿ#.ÿ)�%ÿ!0.)ÿ
.#7ÿ-#-6=()#$ÿ$ÿ)�%ÿ8$)%,ÿ3)()%!?ÿ)�%&%2+ÿ%$!6&$*ÿ=#$*C)%&/ÿ-#-6=()#$ÿ'(2=)+ÿ!6"�ÿ
)�()ÿ)�%ÿ!-%"%!ÿ!)()6!ÿ&%/($!ÿ!%"6&%ÿ($,ÿ=!)$*ÿ6$,%&ÿ)�%ÿ8939ÿE$,($*%&%,ÿ3-%"%!ÿ
@")ÿ!ÿ$#)ÿB6!).%,9ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567896 ÿ8��86�96 ÿ���ÿ�7899896 �ÿ
ÿ
��ÿ��9�8�9�ÿ�ÿ��9�8ÿ���ÿ��� 6��89��ÿ�6��ÿ����!ÿ9�7"#�9��ÿ��6ÿ�6$�6 6�8�896ÿ
��ÿ6�7%ÿ��ÿ8%6ÿ8�86ÿ�9"�"9�6ÿ��6�796 ÿ�98%9�ÿ8%6ÿ%98��97�"ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ8%6ÿ�9�8ÿ
����ÿÿ
ÿ
&'&ÿ()*ÿ+,-(ÿ./ÿ01234./*5ÿ16ÿ7ÿ/.89:*ÿ4*34*/*8;7;.<*ÿ6412ÿ*70)ÿ16ÿ;)*ÿ&2ÿ/;7;*ÿ
=.:5:.6*ÿ4*/1>40*ÿ79*80.*/ÿ?/;7;*@AÿB>4*7>ÿ16ÿC785ÿD7879*2*8;ÿ?BCDEÿ
4*9.187:@AÿF'+'ÿ,14*/;ÿ+*4<.0*ÿ?F+,+Eÿ4*9.187:@AÿF'+'ÿG*1:19.07:ÿ+>4<*Hÿ
?F+G+Eÿ4*9.187:@AÿI8.27:ÿ785ÿJ:78;ÿK*7:;)ÿL8/3*0;.18ÿ+*4<.0*ÿ?IJKL+Eÿ
4*9.187:@Aÿ785ÿF'+'ÿ,./)ÿ785ÿM.:5:.6*ÿ+*4<.0*ÿ?F+,M+Eÿ4*9.187:@'ÿL8;*4*/;*5ÿ
0113*47;14/ÿ.80:>5.89ÿ1;)*4ÿ/;7;*ÿ785ÿ6*5*47:ÿ79*80.*/Aÿ>8.<*4/.;.*/Aÿ;4.N7:ÿ
91<*482*8;/Aÿ018/*4<7;.18ÿ14978.O7;.18/Aÿ4*/*740)ÿ.8/;.;>;.18/Aÿ785ÿ;)*ÿ
-7875.78ÿ4*01<*4Hÿ;*72ÿ74*ÿ*801>479*5ÿ;1ÿ374;.0.37;*ÿ=.;)ÿ;)*ÿ;*72'ÿÿ
ÿ
&'&'&'ÿP*/318/.N.:.;.*/ÿ16ÿ;)*ÿ+,-(ÿ74*ÿ;1Qÿ&@ÿ341<.5*ÿ7ÿ614>2ÿ614ÿ01::7N147;.18ÿ
785ÿ;*0)8.07:ÿ.861427;.18ÿ*R0)789*AÿS@ÿ.5*8;.6Hÿ2*7/>47N:*ÿ<74.7N:*/ÿ;1ÿ
7//*//ÿ785ÿ218.;14ÿ;)*ÿ4789*=.5*ÿ/;7;>/ÿ16ÿ/=.6;ÿ61RAÿT@ÿ34121;*ÿ/=.6;ÿ61Rÿ
018/*4<7;.18ÿ;)41>9)ÿ<74.1>/ÿ7<*8>*/ÿ16ÿ;*0)8.07:ÿ/>3314;Aÿ01::7N147;.18Aÿ
785ÿ3>N:.0ÿ1>;4*70)ÿ785ÿ*5>07;.18AÿU@ÿ/>3314;ÿ4*/*740)ÿ*8/>4.89ÿ/1>85ÿ
/0.*80*ÿ./ÿ;)*ÿN7/./ÿ614ÿ/=.6;ÿ61Rÿ018/*4<7;.18Aÿ785ÿ1@ÿ.5*8;.6Hÿ4./Vÿ670;14/ÿ
31;*8;.7::Hÿ.2370;.89ÿ;)*ÿ/;7;>/ÿ16ÿ/=.6;ÿ61R'ÿ
ÿ
&'&'S'ÿ()*ÿ+,-(ÿ=.::ÿ2**;ÿN.*88.7::Hÿ18ÿ7ÿ41;7;.187:ÿN7/./ÿ=.;)ÿ;)*ÿ2**;.89ÿ)1/;ÿ
/*4<.89ÿ7/ÿ;)*ÿ0)7.4ÿ785ÿ;)*ÿ8*R;ÿ)1/;ÿ/*4<.89ÿ7/ÿ01W0)7.4'ÿD**;.89ÿ
2.8>;*/ÿ=.::ÿN*ÿ3>N:./)*5ÿ18ÿ;)*ÿ+,-(ÿ=*N/.;*ÿ785ÿ/*4<*ÿ7/ÿ78ÿ>357;*ÿ
16ÿ+,-(ÿ70;.<.;.*/'ÿÿ
ÿ
&'&'T'ÿI3341R.27;*:Hÿ&2ÿH*74/ÿ61::1=.89ÿ3>N:.07;.18ÿ16ÿ;)./ÿ4*<./.18Aÿ+,-(ÿ
2*2N*4/ÿ785ÿ0113*47;14/ÿ=.::ÿ*<7:>7;*ÿ34194*//ÿ.8ÿ2**;.89ÿ1NX*0;.<*/ÿ
785ÿ/;47;*9.*/ÿ785ÿ4*7//*//ÿ4./V/ÿ;1ÿ/=.6;ÿ61Rÿ018/*4<7;.18'ÿ()./ÿ
*<7:>7;.18ÿ=.::ÿ.80:>5*ÿ018/.5*47;.18ÿ16ÿ=)*;)*4ÿ;)*ÿ+,-(ÿ27Hÿ5./N785ÿ
N*07>/*ÿ.;ÿ)7/ÿ700123:./)*5ÿ.;/ÿ14.9.87:ÿ3>431/*ÿ16ÿ7//>4.89ÿ:189W;*42ÿ
/=.6;ÿ61Rÿ3*4/./;*80*'ÿÿ
ÿ
Y�ÿZ 6 ÿ8%6ÿ����6�9�6ÿ�98�94#89��ÿ��ÿ�9�8ÿ���ÿ9�ÿ8%6ÿ[���ÿ
ÿ
S'&ÿ+;7;*ÿ=.:5:.6*ÿ79*80.*/ÿ=.::ÿ3*4.15.07::Hÿ218.;14ÿ/=.6;ÿ61Rÿ5./;4.N>;.18ÿ=.;).8ÿ*70)ÿ
/;7;*ÿ>/.89ÿ<74.1>/ÿ5*;*0;.18ÿ2*;)15/ÿ/>0)ÿ7/ÿ/3*0.*/ÿ34*/*80*\7N/*80*ÿ14ÿ
313>:7;.18ÿ/>4<*H/Aÿ;4733*4ÿ785ÿ)>8;*4ÿ)74<*/;ÿ:107;.18ÿ57;7Aÿ785ÿ100>44*80*ÿ
4*314;/'ÿÿ
ÿ
S'SÿP789*=.5*ÿ/3*0.*/ÿ5./;4.N>;.18ÿ273/ÿ=.::ÿN*ÿ04*7;*5ÿ3*4ÿ;)*ÿ9*8*47:ÿ
2*;)151:19Hÿ16ÿ+1<757ÿ*;ÿ7:'ÿ?S22]@'ÿ()*/*ÿ6.9>4*/ÿ=.::ÿN*ÿ>/*5ÿ;1ÿ218.;14ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34567897ÿ4 ÿ45 ÿ��4567ÿ95ÿ939� 9�5�ÿ45 ÿ�ÿ9759��ÿ4374ÿ��ÿ�7�9�9�ÿ
��573�49�5ÿ95737 ÿ ��ÿ4ÿ4374ÿ��ÿ95�374956ÿ�3ÿ7�374 956ÿ939� 9�5�ÿ
5����97 ÿ634 �45 ÿ�4�94�ÿ45 ÿ�4�94ÿ��339�3ÿ�4�9�94956ÿ67579�ÿ
9573��4567ÿ�78775ÿ��� �49�5�ÿ
ÿ
���ÿ�495495ÿ89�ÿ���ÿ939� 9�5ÿ95ÿ4ÿ�74 ÿ1��ÿ��ÿ�7ÿ�9�39�4�ÿ34567�ÿÿ
ÿ
�ÿ"#$%&'()ÿ$*'+&'%,ÿ%-&'.$ÿ+/01&,1-++ÿ-%#ÿ2'*$#ÿ,1-++ÿ31-'1'$ÿ-%#ÿ0&/$1ÿ
30&$%&'-44)ÿ+5'&-64$ÿ/-6'&-&+ÿÿ
ÿ
��2ÿ7759���ÿ7�39�7�ÿ45 ÿ7�95747ÿ7�9956ÿ��7594���ÿ 94��7ÿ89�ÿ���ÿ�4�94ÿ
34567897ÿ 956ÿ�45 �4�7ÿ�4�7ÿ67�8�494�ÿ44ÿ4�49�4��7ÿ�5ÿ4ÿ37�747 ÿ
�49ÿ99�7�ÿ:;<=>7?@Aÿ��3ÿ��5975ÿ45 ÿ��B�434��7ÿ4 7 B75�ÿC�9ÿ7���3ÿ
89��ÿ37�3775ÿ4ÿB4D�3ÿ��B��575ÿ��ÿ89�ÿ���ÿ4 ÿ4 7 B75ÿ45 ÿ��3Bÿ�7ÿ
�49ÿ��3ÿ7�4�4956ÿ37 �349�5ÿ4�9�997ÿ45 ÿ9759��956ÿ��5 3495 ÿ45 ÿ
����3 5997ÿ89�95ÿ74��ÿ47ÿ��3ÿ�� 9��7ÿ89�ÿ���ÿ��573�49�5ÿ7���3 �ÿÿ
ÿ
EÿF1020&$ÿ+G'(&ÿ(0*ÿH0%+$1.-&'0%ÿ&/105,/ÿ.-1'05+ÿ(012+ÿ0(ÿH044-601-&'0%ÿ-%#ÿ
05&1$-H/ÿ
ÿ
I�2ÿC�7ÿJ>KCÿ89��ÿB495495ÿ4ÿ87�97ÿ��3ÿ9 7B9549�5ÿ��ÿ�3375ÿ95��3B49�5ÿ�5ÿ
89�ÿ���ÿ7����6��ÿB45467B75�ÿ45 ÿ��573�49�5ÿ95�� 956ÿ�773837�9787 ÿ
D� 354�ÿ� ��9�49�5�ÿ47ÿ45 ÿ�7 734�ÿ4675��ÿ37��3 �ÿ45 ÿ��� �43ÿ439��7ÿ45 ÿ
�97��ÿJ>KCÿB7B�73�9��ÿ95��3B49�5�ÿ4�9�997�ÿ45 ÿ��B75 ÿ89��ÿ4��ÿ�7ÿ
� ��9�9L7 ÿ�5ÿ�9ÿ87�97�ÿÿ
ÿ
I��ÿC�7ÿJ>KCÿ89��ÿ ���3ÿ�7ÿ; ��949�5ÿ��ÿM��ÿ45 ÿ;N 439B ÿ9;M;Aÿ95ÿ9ÿ
7���3 ÿ�ÿB495495ÿ4ÿ�94��7ÿ�4�9�7ÿ��� �49�5�ÿ
ÿ
I��ÿJ47ÿ89��ÿ9576347ÿ89�ÿ���ÿ��573�49�5ÿ577 ÿ95�ÿ���ÿ47ÿ45 ÿB �98 47ÿ
�349397ÿ7��� 7Bÿ��573�49�5ÿ�3�634B �ÿ959949�7�ÿ45 ÿ7���3 ÿ9575 7 ÿ�ÿ
4 37 ÿ�7ÿ577 ÿ��ÿB45�ÿ634 �45 87�75 75ÿ�7�97�ÿÿ
ÿ
I�IÿC�7ÿJ>KCÿ89��ÿ ���3ÿ�439� ÿ��3B ÿ��ÿ� ��9�ÿ4843757 ÿ��ÿ45 ÿ7 �49�5ÿ�5ÿ
89�ÿ���7�ÿOPQRSQOTÿ�4�94ÿ45 ÿB45467B75ÿ577 �ÿ45 ÿ��4��7567ÿ�ÿ
�7�97ÿ��573�49�5�ÿÿÿ
ÿ
I�I�2ÿC�7ÿJ>KCÿ89��ÿ����4��347ÿ89�ÿ�7ÿ;M;ÿ�ÿ7�7���ÿ7 �49�54�ÿ9��4�ÿ
45 ÿ��73ÿ� 374��ÿB47394�ÿ�3775956ÿ�7ÿB� ÿ4��347ÿ45 ÿ�3375ÿ
95��3B49�5ÿ�5ÿ89�ÿ���ÿ��573�49�5ÿ45 ÿB45467B75�ÿ
ÿ
Vÿ"#$%&'()ÿ-%#ÿ$%H051-,$ÿ1$+$-1H/ÿ+&5#'$+ÿ&/-&ÿH0%&1'65&$ÿ&0ÿ+G'(&ÿ(0*ÿ
H0%+$1.-&'0%ÿ-%#ÿ2-%-,$2$%&ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
134ÿ56789ÿ 8��ÿ� ���ÿÿ�ÿ����ÿ6��68 8�ÿ6�ÿ�99� 8�ÿ��8�� � 8�ÿ
�7 �68ÿ�89ÿ�� �6�ÿ�6�8�����ÿ��� �8�ÿ���ÿ�6�ÿ���7ÿ�89ÿ68 ����683ÿ
�6�8���ÿ� ���ÿ8 9ÿ���ÿ� ÿ9 8��9ÿ� ÿ����ÿ6�ÿ�� ÿ��ÿ� � 8�ÿ
9 �� 9ÿ8ÿ�� ��ÿ!ÿ��6�3ÿÿ
ÿ
"#ÿ%&'()*+,ÿ-(&ÿ.'/0.)ÿ0(ÿ)1.'-)2ÿ)0ÿ)1'ÿ2/'3*'2ÿ4-2'&ÿ0(ÿ)1'ÿ+*5'ÿ6*2)*(7ÿ+-3)0.2ÿ
898:;<=>ÿ@;ÿABCDBÿE9ÿF=GE=HE9IÿJK=LE=JMÿJN8NOJÿPQFÿ:EJNE9IÿO9>=FÿNR=ÿASBSÿ
T(&-(7'.'&ÿU/'3*'2ÿV3)ÿWTUVX#ÿ
ÿ
Y34ÿZ� ÿ��ÿ� � 8�ÿ���ÿ ��ÿ�ÿ�ÿ���� �6��ÿ�6�ÿ9 8���8�ÿ�����ÿ�6ÿ���ÿ
�6�ÿ68 ����68ÿ�ÿ� ��ÿ� ÿ��8�� � 8�ÿ�89ÿ� ���ÿ8 93ÿ[�ÿ���ÿ��6ÿ
��� 8�ÿ�ÿ��6�9ÿ9 ���68ÿ6�ÿ���ÿ�6�ÿ68 ����68ÿ���7ÿ8ÿ�� ÿ\353ÿÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456785976ÿ456 ÿ
ÿ
�� �ÿ�����ÿ��ÿ���������ÿ�������ÿ������!�ÿ"�������ÿ�#$�%���$�ÿ
&��'�())***�+�&*,-,+��.�/)�+*�%0�'���)+��������%1�0�/�1�0��ÿ!!����-ÿ2�ÿ
��'ÿ�����ÿ
,,��-2!�3ÿ"�3ÿ�0-ÿ4�ÿ�ÿ�.��-��ÿ���2�ÿÿ����*ÿ.+ÿ�&�ÿ�!.,./23ÿ-������.03ÿ�0-ÿ������ÿ
.+ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5��ÿ0ÿ�&�ÿ�0��-ÿ�������ÿ6�/��ÿ2%��ÿ0ÿ4�ÿ�ÿ�.��-�ÿ�0-ÿ7�ÿ8���203ÿ
�-�.���ÿ9&�ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5(ÿ�!.,./2ÿ�0-ÿ!.0������.0ÿ.+ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5��ÿ0ÿ�ÿ!&�0/0/ÿ
*.�,-�ÿ8�0�-�0ÿ6,�0�ÿ:�����!&ÿ8�0���3ÿ�0�����2ÿ.+ÿ:�/0�3ÿ���;��!&�*�03ÿ
8�0�-��ÿÿÿ
,1���/3ÿ<�ÿ��3ÿ7�ÿ"�ÿ4�!&3ÿ"�ÿ�1 �&3ÿ=�ÿ��ÿ�&�,-.03ÿ:�ÿ7�ÿ8��������ÿ���#�ÿÿ���.,./!�,ÿ
�����2ÿ.+ÿ0+�!�.��ÿ-�����ÿ0ÿ>�,,.*��.0�ÿ?��.0�,ÿ6��;@�ÿ!�0-ÿ!.11�0�2�ÿ
67.�ÿA?<ÿB(�%���ÿ
0-����03ÿ"�ÿ<�3ÿ9�ÿ:�ÿ7���.03ÿ=�ÿ:�ÿ8��23ÿ:�ÿ��ÿ�;��3ÿ4�ÿ�ÿ4!7�.-3ÿ�0-ÿ<�ÿ4�ÿC����ÿ
���2�ÿ�'�!��ÿ.+ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5ÿ�!.,./2ÿ0ÿ�.��&������0ÿ8.,.��-.�ÿ6�/��ÿ�2#%�B$ÿDEÿ
4�ÿ�ÿ�.��-�3ÿ�0-ÿ7�ÿ8���203ÿ�-�.���ÿ9&�ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5(ÿ<!.,./2ÿ�0-ÿ!.0������.0ÿ.+ÿ
�*+�ÿ+.5��ÿ0ÿ�ÿ!&�0/0/ÿ*.�,-�ÿ8�0�-�0ÿ6,�0�ÿ:�����!&ÿ8�0���3ÿ�0�����2ÿ.+ÿ
:�/0�3ÿ:�/0�3ÿ���;��!&�*�03ÿ8�0�-��ÿ
';��3ÿ=�ÿ�ÿ���1�ÿ8.,.��-.ÿ6��;�ÿ�0-ÿ� ,-,+�ÿ+��������ÿ1�0�/�1�0�ÿ��'.��(ÿ���B%
���1ÿ&������ÿ2����ÿ8.,.��-.ÿ6��;�ÿ�0-ÿ� ,-,+�3ÿ�.��ÿ8.,,0�3ÿ8.,.��-.3ÿ�� �ÿÿÿÿ
�F.3ÿ��ÿ4�3ÿ<�ÿ4�ÿC���3ÿ8�ÿG�.1,�23ÿ��ÿH.I,.*�;3ÿ�0-ÿ<�ÿ��ÿ� ,,�1��ÿ���2�ÿ���.,./!ÿ
�����2ÿ+.�ÿ-�����ÿ0ÿ+���%��0/0/ÿ!.2.���ÿJKLEDMÿOLPQLEMRÿ+�.1ÿ�*.ÿ�!.,./!�,,2ÿ
-��0!�ÿ����ÿ.+ÿ���&�ÿ=.��0�,ÿ.+ÿ� ,-,+�ÿ"������ÿ2#(BB#%B11�ÿ
���,3ÿ9�ÿ=�3ÿ8�ÿ6�ÿ4�,!&��3ÿ�0-ÿ?�ÿG�ÿ8����ÿ���1�ÿ�.��&��0ÿC����ÿ6,�0�ÿ��'-ÿ
�!.��/.0�,ÿ������1�0�ÿSÿ'��%������1�0�ÿ��'.��(ÿ!&�'���ÿ��ÿSÿ�*+�ÿ+.5�ÿ�0��-ÿ
������ÿC�.,./!�,ÿ�����23ÿ:���.03ÿT�/0�3ÿ�� �ÿ
����0-3ÿ"�ÿ<�3ÿ�0-ÿH�ÿ:�ÿ�.���1�0�ÿ���$�ÿ"�'����,3ÿ������,3ÿ�0-ÿ��'�.-�!�.0ÿ.+ÿ
*,-%�.�03ÿ2���,0/ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5��ÿ0ÿ�ÿ��0��.-�!�-ÿ'.'�,��.0�ÿ8�0�-�0ÿ=.��0�,ÿ.+ÿ
U..,./2ÿ�1(��1%��#�ÿ
G��//3ÿ9�ÿG�3ÿ�0-ÿ�ÿ�ÿ��������ÿ�##V�ÿ45�-%/����ÿ'�����ÿ.+ÿ�&�ÿ?.��&ÿ1��!�0ÿC����ÿ
6,�0��ÿ6�/��ÿ12%VVÿDEÿ��ÿG�ÿ��1�.03ÿ�0-ÿ��ÿ7�ÿH0.'+3ÿ�-�.���ÿ6����ÿ
!.0������.0(ÿ6������0/ÿ?.��&ÿ1��!�@�ÿ1.��ÿ�0-�0/���-ÿ�!.�2���1�ÿW�,�0-ÿ
6����3ÿ8.��,.3ÿ8�,+.�0�3ÿ�� �ÿ
G��0&�13ÿ��ÿ���B�ÿ"�!.0�0�0/ÿ�&�ÿ���ÿ.+ÿ4%BBÿ-��!��ÿ�&��ÿ-�,���ÿ�.-�1ÿ!2�0-�ÿ
+�.1ÿG74%1�0�/�-ÿ'��,!ÿ,�0-��ÿW0+.�1��.0�,ÿG�,,��0ÿWGÿ���B%��B�ÿÿ
G�.*03ÿT�ÿ:�3ÿ"�ÿ:�ÿ-0�23ÿ��ÿG�,�+�,-�%A&1�003ÿ6�ÿ��ÿC.�-23ÿ9�ÿ�ÿ��,53ÿ��ÿ=�ÿA,��%
6.'�,;�3ÿ�0-ÿ:�ÿ�ÿG.*�0�ÿ���1�ÿ6��&./�0���ÿ�0-ÿ11�0�ÿ���'.0���ÿ.+ÿ
XQLEYDMZOOLÿP[OLQZEMDMÿ����0�ÿ0ÿ*,-%!��/&�ÿ!.��.0��,ÿ������ÿJ\]O^DOL_[Mÿ�''�R�ÿ
=.��0�,ÿ.+ÿ� ,-,+�ÿ"������ÿ1�(1VB%1$1�ÿ
G��,��3ÿ�ÿ:�ÿ���#�ÿG�&��.��,ÿ�0-ÿ'.'�,��.0ÿ�!.,./2ÿ.+ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5��ÿ0ÿ?.��&������0ÿ
4.0��0��ÿ4���ÿ�&���3ÿ8,�1�.0ÿ�0�����23ÿ8,�1�.03ÿ�.��&ÿ8��.,0�3ÿ�� �ÿ
G��,��3ÿ�ÿ:�3ÿH�ÿ7�ÿ��ÿG,23ÿ��ÿ�����3ÿ:�ÿ4�ÿW01�03ÿ�ÿ4.�&��0�!&,�/��3ÿ"�ÿ�!&*�,13ÿ
�0-ÿ"�ÿ=�ÿ=�!&.*�;3ÿ����L�ÿ�.1�ÿ��0/�ÿ�I�ÿ�0-ÿ���.��!�ÿ���ÿ�2ÿ�*+�ÿ+.5��ÿ0ÿ
0.��&������0ÿ4.0��0��ÿ=.��0�,ÿ.+ÿ4�11�,./2�ÿ���(V�B%V#V�ÿÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456789ÿ ÿ 9ÿ ÿ�ÿ�ÿ36�9ÿ�ÿ��88��9ÿ ÿ� ÿ�����9ÿ ÿ��7�87����6��789ÿ�ÿ�����6�9ÿ
���ÿ�ÿÿ������!�9ÿ"#"#$ÿ��%7ÿ��ÿ5�7ÿ7��7&ÿ��'�5�5ÿ%8���7�5�5���ÿ6���5�ÿ
7()������ÿ�%ÿ�ÿ87�5�87�ÿ��8��*�87ÿ����6ÿ+���78*�5���ÿ"2&ÿ,#-.,,/ÿ
+�8'��9ÿ�ÿ09ÿ�ÿÿ8�'84�5789ÿ���ÿ+ÿ����ÿ,//2ÿ���%5ÿ%�(ÿ87��58��4�5���ÿ)8��8��ÿ��ÿ
+�����ÿ%8��ÿ,/-1ÿ5�ÿ,//"ÿ2��7�ÿ"23."3,ÿ45ÿ� ÿ�ÿ3��67�9ÿ���ÿ+ÿÿ7�76��9ÿ
7��5�8�ÿ7�5�8�5���ÿ�%ÿ7�����787�ÿ�)7��7�ÿ+��'8���7ÿ8��*78��5�ÿ287��9ÿ
+��'8���79ÿ8��57�ÿ������ ÿ
+6�8!9ÿ89ÿ�ÿ9ÿ"#,2ÿ+��)�6�5���ÿ�%ÿ!�5ÿ%�(ÿ���ÿ���%5ÿ%�(ÿ6�578�5487ÿ77�578�ÿ7�6�6�%7ÿ
,&,"."3ÿÿ
+6�8!9ÿ�ÿ9ÿ89ÿ:ÿ�ÿ7�88��!9ÿ3ÿ�ÿ+�)�789ÿ2ÿ ÿ766�9ÿ�ÿ;ÿ7�66����9ÿ���ÿ�ÿ<ÿ
:84''�ÿ"##1ÿ+��)75�5�*7ÿ��578��5����ÿ'75�77�ÿ7�����787�ÿ!�5ÿ%�(7�ÿ���ÿ���.
��5�*7ÿ87�ÿ%�(7�ÿ77�578�ÿ0�85�ÿ�78����ÿ0�548�6��5ÿ=1&,11.,=1ÿÿ
+�88�69ÿ�ÿ"#,-ÿ�)�5��6ÿ���ÿ57�)�8�6ÿ�584�5487ÿ�%ÿ�ÿ�����ÿ����4��5�ÿ��ÿ07'8��!�ÿ
����785�5���9ÿ8��*78��5�ÿ�%ÿ07'8��!�9ÿ�����6�9ÿ07'8��!�9ÿ8� ÿ
+�88�69ÿ�9ÿ>ÿ;8��!9ÿÿ;��5���7ÿ"#""�ÿ��ÿ5��7ÿ)�85�5������ÿ5�7ÿ�4887���ÿ�%ÿ��7(��57��7ÿ
%�8ÿ�ÿ�8���6���ÿ�����ÿ����4��5�?ÿ7�6�6�%7ÿ3��6���ÿ"#""&7#,#"3@ÿ
���&,#,##"A�6'1#,#"3ÿ
+�88�69ÿ�9ÿ<ÿ;ÿ�54'789ÿ>ÿÿ;8��!9ÿ ÿ ÿ3����)9ÿ���ÿÿÿ;��5���7ÿ"#""'ÿ+��ÿ���67.
�7)7��7�5ÿ6�����*78ÿ876�5������)�ÿ7()6���ÿ�����ÿ����4��5�ÿ���)���5���ÿ
���7)7��7�5ÿ�%ÿ��58��4�6�ÿ���4)����?ÿ�������)7ÿ<��6���ÿ13&"2/."==ÿ
+�*7669ÿ�ÿ;ÿ,//"ÿ<��6���ÿ�%ÿ5�7ÿ���%5ÿ%�(ÿBCDEFGHÿIGEJKLÿ��ÿ��45�7��578�ÿ+�6�8���ÿ
>�7���9ÿ8��*78��5�ÿ�%ÿ7��������.�������9ÿ�������9ÿ7��������9ÿ8� ÿ
+�)�789ÿ3ÿ�9ÿ���ÿÿ�ÿ���8�*�78ÿ,//"ÿ+���57ÿ���58�6ÿ5�ÿ)8�57�5ÿ7�����787�ÿ���ÿ
��M4��ÿ!�5ÿ%�(7�ÿ�5ÿ5�7ÿ0�*�6ÿ2758�674�ÿ7�78*7�9ÿ+�6�%�8���ÿ28��77�����ÿ�%ÿ
5�7ÿN7857'8�57ÿ27�5ÿ+��%787��7ÿ,1&2".23ÿ
��*�����9ÿ ÿ�9ÿ� ÿ;��!9ÿ� ÿ�7�7%779ÿ�ÿ�5786���.8��!9ÿ7 ÿN��ÿ27659ÿ�ÿÿ4�4�5��7ÿ
"#"1ÿ287�7�5ÿ���ÿ%45487ÿ�4�5�'67ÿ��'�5�5ÿ%�8ÿ5�7ÿ'6��!.5��67�ÿ)8��8�7ÿ���ÿ
7�����57� ÿ3��6�����6ÿ+���78*�5���ÿ"-=&,,#"2,ÿ
�77�9ÿ�ÿ�9ÿ�ÿ�ÿ�)76���9ÿ ÿ ÿO�57�9ÿ���ÿ ÿÿ���5�6�ÿ"###ÿ+����7ÿ���57�)78ÿ��ÿ
57887�58��6ÿ��8��*�87�&ÿ�ÿ87*�7�ÿ�48��6ÿ�%ÿP��ÿ���ÿ7�6�6�%7ÿ�7�����7ÿ1,&22,.21,ÿ
�������9ÿ��9ÿ�;ÿ<66��559ÿ:ÿ�57���4789ÿ ÿ������789ÿ2ÿ���'788�9ÿ�ÿ>8479ÿ���ÿ� ÿ
�4��7ÿÿ"#",ÿÿ<��6�����6ÿ���57��ÿ�%ÿ�����ÿ���ÿ07'8��!�&ÿ;���6ÿ7)�85ÿÿ
�4'��557�ÿ5�ÿ�����ÿ�7)�85�7�5ÿ�%ÿ7�6�6�%79ÿ2�8!�ÿ���ÿ>�48���9ÿ���ÿ07'8��!�ÿ
:��7ÿ���ÿ2�8!�ÿ+���������ÿ
����ÿ�54!769ÿ<9ÿ7��5�8ÿ"#,,ÿ+���78*�5���ÿ���7���7�5ÿ���ÿ����78*�5���ÿ�58�57��ÿ%�8ÿ
���%5ÿ%�(ÿ��ÿ5�7ÿ8��57�ÿ�5�57�ÿQÿ"#,,ÿ8)��57ÿ��45�ÿ��!�5�ÿ�7)�85�7�5ÿ�%ÿ:��79ÿ
;���ÿ���ÿ2�8!�9ÿ2�78879ÿ��45�ÿ��!�5�9ÿ8� ÿ
<2 ÿ"#,/ÿ����4�ÿ+�����7ÿ��578��ÿ7���58�5���ÿ7*�7�ÿ�7������ÿ+��7ÿ04�'78ÿ-##"ÿ
���!75ÿ04�'78ÿ<2 .�R.922."#,#.#31"ÿ
<2 ÿ"#""Sÿ�5�����46��5ÿ28��8�7ÿ���ÿ3��5ÿ��!ÿ��5���5���ÿ�7��487�ÿ5�ÿ28�57�5ÿ
<�����787�ÿ�)7��7�ÿ�55)�&AA���7)���*A7�����787�.�)7��7�A��5�����46��5.
)8��8�7.���.'��5.8��!.��5���5���.�7��487�.)8�57�5.7�����787�ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
2345ÿ676685ÿ9 �ÿ���� �ÿ�� ÿ9 �ÿ�� ���������ÿÿ2������ÿ�����������ÿ��ÿ
�� ������ÿ���� ÿ9�����ÿ��ÿ�� ������ÿ��!�"5ÿ� �#��ÿ$ �%��ÿ234&'(&)33&
67*7&7+16&76*65ÿ
�� ����ÿ�� ����5ÿ*,,-5ÿ2� �� ��� ÿ�� ÿ./������� ÿ0 ����ÿ�� ÿ3�����1ÿ,7&���ÿ
�� � ÿ�ÿ�ÿ3����ÿ�ÿ���ÿ�/�ÿ9"��ÿ� 2ÿ��ÿ2� �� ��� 5ÿ�� ����ÿ�� ����ÿ
1,�63463&6346,5ÿ0��/� ��5ÿ��5ÿ
�� ����ÿ�� ����5ÿ677*5ÿ2� �� ��� ÿ�� ÿ./������� ÿ0 ����ÿ�� ÿ3������ÿ4�� ��ÿ$ ���ÿ
�ÿ�� � �ÿ�ÿ������� ÿ3�����5ÿ�� ����ÿ�� ����ÿ66�*6,1&*4775ÿ0��/� ��5ÿ
��5ÿ
7� �5ÿ85ÿ�55ÿ�� ÿ95ÿ:5ÿ8 ��5ÿ67715ÿ$�����ÿ/����ÿ�ÿ��� ��ÿ��������!��ÿ���ÿ� ��ÿ
�/��ÿ�ÿ������ÿ�ÿ�������/5ÿ4�� ��ÿ��!�"ÿ�ÿ2��� � �ÿ17�171&1635ÿ
7���5ÿ25ÿ955ÿ95ÿ95ÿ8��#5ÿ95ÿ�5ÿ8��!�����5ÿ25ÿ�5ÿ9�/� ����5ÿ�� ÿ45ÿ95ÿ8��/��5ÿ677-5ÿ
9��� �ÿ��!��ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ����� �ÿ ������ÿ�� � ÿ��������ÿ�"��ÿ�2��ÿ
;<=>?@AÿC@>DEFÿ�� ÿ� ����ÿ;GHIJAÿ>HKLHIAFÿ�ÿ� �/�������ÿ� ��� 5ÿM ����ÿ�ÿ
0 ����ÿ�������ÿ-7�+-*&+-35ÿ
7���5ÿ25ÿ955ÿ�5ÿ�5ÿ9�/ ��N5ÿ95ÿ�5ÿM/���5ÿ25ÿ95ÿ0 �����5ÿ�5ÿ�5ÿ���%����5ÿ�� ÿ�5ÿ�5ÿ
� ��5ÿ*,,+5ÿ9��� �ÿ��!��ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ�ÿ����&��� � ÿ� ����ÿ;GHIJAÿ>HKLHIAFÿ
�ÿ:���"����ÿ$�����ÿ3��#5ÿ0��� 5ÿM ����ÿ�ÿ0 ����ÿ�������ÿ44�-+&165ÿ
7��5ÿ'5ÿ.55ÿ�� ÿ�5ÿM5ÿ4����5ÿ*,1,5ÿ3�������ÿ�� ÿ������ÿ�ÿ8�����ÿ� ����5ÿ
.��/����ÿO �����ÿ,*5ÿ4 �������ÿ22�������ÿ9����5ÿ8�����ÿ9����ÿP�!�����5ÿ
9��/�����5ÿ8�����5ÿP945ÿ4-ÿ��5ÿ
'�����5ÿ�5ÿ�55ÿ95ÿM5ÿ3����#5ÿ�� ÿ�5ÿ75ÿ9�/���5ÿ67745ÿ� 2��5ÿ�����5ÿ�� ÿ��� �ÿ�ÿ$�"ÿ
9�2�5ÿ9 �/"������ÿ$�������ÿ-3�+67&+665ÿ
'���5ÿ.5ÿ�55ÿ�� ÿ�5ÿ95ÿ����5ÿ*,,*5ÿ���5ÿ/ ��ÿ��� �5ÿ� !������5ÿ�� ÿ���!��ÿ��� �ÿ
�ÿ�"��ÿ�2ÿ�ÿ$�%���#�5ÿ3����ÿ$�������ÿ64�*4*&*435ÿ
Q�#���5ÿ�5ÿO55ÿ95ÿ75ÿ4� ����5ÿ45ÿ�5ÿO�� ����5ÿR5ÿ�5ÿO �#���5ÿO5ÿ���N��5ÿO5ÿ7����/5ÿM5ÿ.5ÿ
3���5ÿ�� ÿ.5ÿ�5ÿ� �5ÿ677-5ÿ7�%��ÿ������ÿ�/�� �ÿ�� ÿ"����ÿ�ÿ$ ��/ÿ4�����5ÿ
./�ÿ0 ����ÿ9 ����5ÿO��/���5ÿ9������ 5ÿP945ÿ
8� ��5ÿ�5ÿ�55ÿ�� ÿ�5ÿO5ÿ9����5ÿ*,,+5ÿ2�� �ÿ�� ÿ� ����!���ÿ�ÿ7����ÿ3����ÿ
R����%�����ÿ9��� ��&R���� 5ÿ$�"ÿ: �#5ÿ$�"ÿ: �#5ÿP945ÿ
8 �/�5ÿ455ÿ�5ÿ9�/ �N�5ÿ35ÿ8 �N��5ÿ�5ÿ3�%��5ÿ45ÿ'���#5ÿ45ÿ)�/�5ÿ�5ÿ7�� "5ÿ67*45ÿ
. ����� �ÿ������!������ÿ�ÿ������ ÿ"�ÿ������ÿ�ÿ7�������ÿ�/�ÿ�2ÿ;<=>?@Aÿ
C=>?@AFÿ��ÿ�ÿ% � ���ÿ� ����5ÿ2� �� � �ÿ�� ÿ������ÿ*-*�344&3-75ÿ
�����5ÿ45ÿ�� ÿ.5ÿ'���5ÿ67*+5ÿ./�ÿ��ÿ�ÿ� �ÿ���� �ÿ�ÿ"����ÿ��� �ÿ
���� �����5ÿ�/�����ÿRQQÿ�ÿ' ���ÿ'����/ÿ�� ÿ2�� ���ÿ��#ÿ4���������ÿ��ÿ
�/�ÿP��ÿ�ÿ0 ����ÿ���� �ÿ9��� �����ÿ9��/ �ÿ%�ÿP9�4&43'Q9&0 ����ÿ
9��!���ÿ
/�����SS"""5��/�5��5 !S��/�S ����S"���� ��� �S�� ����S����S��&"�&
��#T�����������ÿ
9��5ÿ�5ÿM55ÿ�5ÿM5ÿ9 ���5ÿ85ÿ�5ÿ���#��%���5ÿ67*65ÿ2�� �ÿ�ÿ. ����� �ÿ�ÿ�������ÿP9ÿ
�� �� �ÿ�� �5ÿ� �����ÿ.�����ÿ9� ���ÿ��� ���ÿ4�+1&+,5ÿ
9�� �5ÿ35ÿ955ÿ�� ÿ.5ÿ35ÿ)U�������5ÿ*,335ÿ9��� ���ÿ� �!��ÿ��ÿ������� ÿ������ÿ�ÿ
�� �� ��� ÿ9��ÿM �V �ÿ#�ÿ�2ÿ;<=>?@AÿWHXLDKJAÿW=KJXHF5ÿM ����ÿ�ÿ0 ����ÿ
�������ÿ6-�6+-&63*5ÿ
11ÿ
�ÿ
345667ÿ89ÿ97ÿ39ÿ9ÿ8 �6�7ÿ�9ÿ89ÿ�6�467ÿ9ÿ�9ÿ��6����6�7ÿ9ÿ�9ÿ����6�7ÿ�9ÿ89ÿ8������7ÿ
���ÿ9ÿ�9ÿ��4������9ÿ���29ÿ������6ÿ!64��ÿ����6"������ÿ#ÿ�$�%ÿ%��6�ÿ%����$��&ÿ
�ÿ'��& 6ÿ6'�(���4ÿ��ÿ��4)*���6�ÿ'�����6ÿ��&�ÿ��ÿ����$6�6��ÿ+6���9ÿ� ����ÿ�%ÿ
������%6ÿ���6��6�ÿ,�-,.1*,��9ÿ
364�7ÿ�9ÿ�97ÿ/9ÿ39ÿ5�#��7ÿ�9ÿ9ÿ�� �7ÿ���ÿ�9ÿ09ÿ�6$��9ÿ���19ÿ�6"�&��'��4ÿ6%%64�ÿ�%ÿ
4����6ÿ'��!�!���ÿ��ÿ�ÿ%�66*���&��&ÿ$��%ÿ'�' �����ÿ�!6�ÿ2�ÿ#6���9ÿ� ����ÿ�%ÿ
������%6ÿ���6��6ÿ,,-1�,*1229ÿ
3���6�7ÿ�9ÿ/97ÿ�9ÿ39ÿ4�!6��7ÿ59ÿ59ÿ34�6��7ÿ�9ÿ9ÿ������7ÿ39ÿ��6(&���7ÿ9ÿ39ÿ5 ��%���7ÿ
69ÿ9ÿ5��&���7ÿ59ÿ�9ÿ/4� �(7ÿ�9ÿ9ÿ��)7ÿ���ÿ+9ÿ9ÿ7 ��9ÿ����9ÿ/6����&�4ÿ��!6#ÿ
%��ÿ�6�646�ÿ��%64�� �ÿ���6��6ÿ�&6��ÿ��ÿ�$�%ÿ���ÿ)�ÿ%��6�ÿ%��"ÿ�6ÿ$6�6��ÿ
8��6�ÿ/�6�9ÿ� ����ÿ�%ÿ������%6ÿ���6��6�ÿ22-9:1*ÿ1�19ÿ
3�4�6��7ÿ09ÿ�9ÿ��.19ÿ����� ���7ÿ64���ÿ���6��6ÿ���)7ÿ���ÿ&6�6�4ÿ��!6���#ÿ�%ÿ�$�%ÿ%��ÿ
;<=>?@AÿC@>DEFÿ��ÿ�6ÿ��)���9ÿ+�6���7ÿ/� �ÿ��)��ÿ/�6ÿ8��!6���#7ÿ8���)��&�7ÿ
/� �ÿ��)��7ÿ8/�9ÿ
3�����7ÿ59ÿ97ÿ49ÿ59ÿ8��(7ÿ39ÿ8 ��9ÿ.:199ÿ4����6ÿ���6"'6�ÿ!���9ÿ��&6�ÿ,29*,,2ÿGHÿ
�''6�7ÿ39ÿ9ÿ;0�F7ÿI���ÿJ�%64����ÿ�%ÿ4����!��6�9ÿ0��6!�6�7ÿ�"�6���"9ÿ
3�����ÿ3���7ÿ������%6ÿ���ÿ���)�9ÿ��.:9ÿ3�����ÿ�$�%ÿ%��ÿ4���6�!����ÿ���6	ÿ
3�����ÿ3���7ÿ������%6ÿ���ÿ���)�7ÿK6�6��7ÿ3�����7ÿ8/�9ÿ
3 ���#7ÿ�9ÿ�97ÿ49ÿ�9ÿ�)67ÿ9ÿ39ÿ0!6�"���7ÿ���ÿ+9ÿ9ÿ3 ��6�9ÿ.:::9ÿJ�%64�� �ÿ���6��6ÿ
���ÿ�6ÿ4���6�!����ÿ�%ÿ%�66*���&��&ÿ���&6ÿ4����!��6�9ÿ���"��ÿ4���6�!����ÿ
�-�,.*�1,9ÿ
�6$ÿ36��4�ÿ�6'��"6�ÿ�%ÿ5�"6ÿ���ÿ3���9ÿ��.29ÿ3 �6��6�ÿ��' �����ÿ���6��"6�ÿ
���ÿK��!6�ÿ3���&6"6�ÿ3����9ÿÿ�6$ÿ36��4�ÿ�6'��"6�ÿ�%ÿ5�"6ÿ���ÿ3���7ÿ
�� L 6�L 67ÿ�6$ÿ36��4�7ÿ8/�9ÿÿ
�54/9ÿ���19ÿ/$�%ÿ%��ÿ;<=>?@AÿC@>DEFÿ3���ÿ���ÿ������%6ÿK� ��ÿ3���&6"6�ÿ�6�%�6ÿ
��9229ÿ�� ���ÿ56�� �46�ÿ4���6�!����ÿ/6�!�467ÿ������&��7ÿ�47ÿ8/�9ÿ
�54/9ÿ���.9ÿ�ÿ%��"6$��)ÿ%��ÿ4���6�!����ÿ�4���ÿ��ÿ�6ÿ5�6�ÿ������ÿ5���������ÿ
8��"69ÿ���)��&ÿ�����ÿ%��ÿ������%67ÿ8/��*�54/9ÿ������&��7ÿ�949ÿ�!���� �6ÿ�-ÿ
� '�-MM$�%$9���&6�����9�''ÿ
6����7ÿ+9ÿ�97ÿ���ÿ39ÿ59ÿ����(6#9ÿ����N9ÿ/$�%ÿ%��ÿ;<=>?@AÿC@>DEFÿ��"6*���&6ÿ���'6�����ÿ
'� 6���ÿ��ÿ�� �6��6��ÿ�#�"��&9ÿ4�������ÿ� ����ÿ�%ÿO����&#ÿ1�-���,*���:9ÿ
����7ÿ�997ÿ3�6�7ÿ597ÿ���ÿ5�66�ÿ5909ÿ��.:9ÿ0%%64�ÿ�%ÿ�6��ÿ%��"ÿ�"" �����ÿ��ÿ����ÿ
���ÿ��6�ÿ$�����%6Pÿ�ÿ�6!�6$ÿ���ÿ'��69ÿÿ�" ��ÿ,1-:21*:129ÿÿÿ
�66)7ÿ39ÿ/97ÿ09ÿ��$�ÿ/ )6�7ÿ���ÿ�9ÿ�9ÿ/4�$��"9ÿ���,9ÿ4��'6�ÿ2,-ÿ/$�%ÿ%��9ÿJ�ÿ+9ÿ�9ÿ
K���6�7ÿ59ÿ�9ÿ�''�6&�67ÿ59ÿ�9ÿ8�6 7ÿ/9ÿ�9ÿ3�6#7ÿ09ÿ39ÿ56�67ÿ���ÿ939ÿ6�&��7ÿ
6�����9ÿ����ÿ%�6��6�ÿ"���&6"6�ÿ���ÿ4���6�!����ÿ��ÿ����ÿ�"6��4�9ÿ������%6ÿ
04���&#ÿJ��� 67ÿK6�6��7ÿ3�����7ÿ8/�9ÿ� '�-MM���9��&M.�91:,21M/5�3,,929ÿ
����7ÿ/9ÿ�9ÿ.:::9ÿ/6�64���ÿ�%ÿ����ÿ�6��ÿ#ÿ�6ÿ�$�%ÿ%��ÿ;<=>?@AÿC@>DEFÿ��ÿ�6ÿ
4�������ÿ'�����6�9ÿ4�������ÿ� ����ÿ�%ÿO����&#ÿ99-2,2*21�9ÿ
�# �7ÿ39ÿ97ÿ���ÿ09ÿ/9ÿ������"�9ÿ���29ÿ�ÿ�6!�6$ÿ�%ÿ'�����6�ÿ���ÿ���6��6�ÿ�%ÿ$���ÿ�$�%ÿ
%��9ÿ��&6�ÿ�2.*�22ÿGHÿ39ÿ�9ÿ/�!���7ÿ���ÿ�9ÿ4��#�7ÿ6�����9ÿ+�6ÿ�$�%ÿ%��-ÿ
04���&#ÿ���ÿ4���6�!����ÿ�%ÿ�$�%ÿ%��6�ÿ��ÿ�ÿ4���&��&ÿ$����9ÿ4�������ÿ������ÿ
56�6��4�ÿ46�6�7ÿ8��!6���#ÿ�%ÿ56&���7ÿ56&���7ÿ/��)�4�6$��7ÿ4�����ÿ9ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
345567ÿ897ÿ4 ÿ9ÿ9ÿ�����9ÿ���19ÿ�� 4��� ÿ� ÿ�4 ÿ�4���ÿ���ÿ����6ÿ��ÿ54����ÿ4 �69ÿ
���45ÿ��ÿ!4""45���ÿ2#$2%&'2%�9ÿ
3�6(� 6�)�ÿ!4 4��"� �9ÿ%*�19ÿ+�4(ÿ�6�7ÿ�����4���6ÿ��4((� 7ÿ4 ÿ��4((��ÿ
�4�4����6��6ÿ�ÿ���ÿ, ��� ÿ��4��6ÿ�ÿ%*�19ÿ-66��4��� ÿ��ÿ.�6�ÿ4 ÿ��55���ÿ
-�� ��67ÿ�46����� 7ÿ/07ÿ,�-9ÿÿÿ
3���7ÿ+9ÿ197ÿ9ÿ+9ÿ���7ÿ89ÿ39ÿ24557ÿ�9ÿ29ÿ� � ����7ÿ09ÿ3�6� 34���7ÿ4 ÿ9ÿ-9ÿ�� 69ÿ
%**&9ÿ.����(���6ÿ��ÿ�5��45ÿ44�"��ÿ� ÿ4�5ÿ4 �"456ÿ4 ÿ(54 �69ÿ54����ÿ6%�$12'
#*9ÿÿ
�4���4 �7ÿ79ÿ-97ÿ!9ÿ-9ÿ��)4 47ÿ09ÿ09ÿ�5�)�6��7ÿ4 ÿ/9ÿ29ÿ�� 6� 9ÿ%**19ÿ!4���)ÿ�4�ÿ
!� ��ÿ04�5�ÿ�6��"4��� ÿ��ÿ6(���6ÿ�6�������� $ÿ-ÿ46�ÿ6�� �ÿ��ÿ���ÿ64���ÿ���ÿ�ÿ
4�6���ÿ84 6469ÿ���45ÿ��ÿ��55���ÿ!4 4��"� �ÿ#�$68&'6�29ÿ
�46"457ÿ997ÿ9ÿ-9ÿ� �67ÿ+9ÿ�9ÿ7��)� ����7ÿ�9ÿ/4��47ÿ!9ÿ� ���� ��7ÿ39ÿ�9ÿ854)��7ÿ4 ÿ89ÿ
!9ÿ2� �669ÿ%*��9ÿ24���4�ÿ6�5���� ÿ��ÿ��"45�ÿ64���ÿ����6ÿ:;<=>?@ÿB?=CDEÿ����ÿ
���ÿ(�('��4���ÿ6�46� 9ÿ�4����ÿ54���45�6�ÿ6&$%�'&29ÿ
�46"457ÿ997ÿ9ÿ-9ÿ� �67ÿ19ÿ9ÿ�4��67ÿ!9ÿ79ÿ7� 47ÿ79ÿ!9ÿ� ���� ��7ÿ4 ÿ�9ÿ/4��49ÿ%*�&9ÿ
7� ���ÿ�)��6���ÿ�ÿ4ÿ������ �� ÿ64���ÿ���ÿ(�(�54��� 9ÿ0� 6��)4��� ÿ7� ���6ÿ
�6$�&'�*%9ÿÿ
�46"457ÿ997ÿ89ÿ2� �667ÿ89ÿF5�7ÿ!9ÿ! 04�����7ÿ89ÿ8� ��57ÿ9ÿ-9ÿ� �67ÿ4 ÿ!9ÿ��55�(69ÿ
%*�19ÿ3�5�46�ÿ"���� ÿ�)45�4��� ÿ���ÿ64���ÿ���ÿ������ ���� ÿ4�ÿF4 ÿ3�)��ÿ
34 ��6ÿ�ÿ�����ÿ/4���49ÿ3�6���4��� ÿG �5���ÿ%&$6��'6�89ÿ
� ���� ��7ÿ79ÿ!9ÿ%**29ÿG����ÿ��ÿ�����6ÿ4 ÿ��5�46�ÿ6���ÿ6�5���� ÿ� ÿ6��)�)45ÿ4 ÿ
"�)�"� �ÿ��ÿ��4 65�4�� ÿ64���ÿ����6ÿ�ÿ���ÿF4 54 6ÿ��6�6��"ÿ��ÿ�����ÿ
/4���49ÿ+��6�67ÿ�����ÿ/4���4ÿ��4��ÿ, �)��6���7ÿF������67ÿ�����ÿ/4���47ÿ,�-9ÿ
� ��5�37ÿ9ÿ297ÿ�9ÿ-9ÿ��55��5"ÿ��4 �67ÿG9ÿF9ÿ����7ÿ09ÿ9ÿ1�7ÿ4 ÿ/9ÿ!9ÿ24559ÿ%*��9ÿ
0�""� �4��� ÿ6��4�����6ÿ���ÿ�� ���ÿ5�4 ÿ(��6� ��ÿ�ÿ4�55���ÿ4 ÿ��"4 ÿ
��45��ÿ��6�69ÿÿ��55���ÿ������ÿF�55���ÿ6&$�&�'�6*9ÿ
� �445"7ÿ/9ÿ%**29ÿ0���� �ÿ�6�������� ÿ��ÿ���ÿ64���ÿ���ÿ:;<=>?@ÿB?=CDEÿ�ÿ+��469ÿ+��6�67ÿ
+��46ÿ+��ÿ, �)��6���7ÿ1�����7ÿ+��467ÿ,�-9ÿÿ
� ���'F��4 7ÿ9ÿ!97ÿ�9ÿ2������7ÿ4 ÿ9ÿ3���569ÿ��829ÿ�4���ÿ���9ÿ4��6ÿ6&%'66�ÿHIÿ!9ÿ
5�)4�7ÿ9ÿ-9ÿF4���7ÿ!9ÿG9ÿJ��4�7ÿ4 ÿF9ÿ!455��7ÿ� ����69ÿ��5ÿ�����4���ÿ
"4 4��"� �ÿ4 ÿ� 6��)4��� ÿ�ÿ5����ÿ-"���49ÿJ �4���ÿ+�4((��6ÿ-66��4��� 7ÿ
5����ÿF4�7ÿJ �4���7ÿ04 4 49ÿ
�.0+9ÿ���29ÿ0� 6��)4��� ÿ466�66"� �ÿ4 ÿ� 6��)4��� ÿ6��4����ÿ���ÿ64���ÿ���ÿ�ÿ���ÿ
, ��� ÿ��4��69ÿ39ÿ84� 7ÿ19ÿ.��7ÿ9ÿ2����7ÿF9ÿ7� ��67ÿ4 ÿ09ÿ3��7ÿ� ����69ÿ
!� �4 4ÿ/�(4��"� �ÿ��ÿ.�6�7ÿ��55���ÿ4 ÿ4��67ÿ2�5� 47ÿ!� �4 47ÿ,�-9ÿ
��)4 47ÿ!9ÿ-97ÿ4 ÿ!9ÿ-66� "4���9ÿ%**19ÿ,( 4��ÿ��ÿ64���ÿ���ÿ�6�������� ÿ�ÿ���ÿ, ��� ÿ
��4��69ÿ3�(���ÿ���ÿ���ÿ�4���ÿ.��ÿ0� 6��)4��� ÿ+�4"9ÿ,9�9ÿ7��5���45ÿ���)��7ÿ
5������ÿ�4����ÿ��55���ÿ3�6�4��ÿ0� ���7ÿ4"�6��4 7ÿ5����ÿ/4���47ÿ,�-9ÿ
��)4 47ÿ!9ÿ-97ÿ4 ÿ19ÿ04���7ÿ� ����69ÿ%**&9ÿ+��ÿ64���ÿ���$ÿ��5���ÿ4 ÿ� 6��)4��� ÿ��ÿ
64���ÿ����6ÿ�ÿ4ÿ�4 ���ÿ4��59ÿ04 4 �4 ÿ54�6ÿ3�6�4��ÿ0� ���7ÿ, �)��6���ÿ��ÿ
3���47ÿ3���47ÿ�46�4���44 7ÿ04 4 49ÿ
��)4 47ÿ!9ÿ-97ÿ09ÿ09ÿ3��7ÿ9ÿF9ÿF�����7ÿ4 ÿ9ÿ39ÿ7�55�69ÿ���89ÿ04�6�6ÿ4 ÿ�4��6ÿ��ÿ
"���45���ÿ��ÿ64���ÿ����6ÿ�ÿ4�6���ÿ84 6469ÿ���45ÿ��ÿ��55���ÿ!4 4��"� �ÿ
#%$�&**'�&*#9ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
3456768ÿ9 ÿ 8ÿ ÿ ÿ3�5�����8ÿ�ÿ�ÿ�447�6�78ÿ6�7ÿ9 ÿ�ÿ������ÿ����ÿ�4� ÿ�6�! 8ÿ
�6"�#6#ÿ$�8ÿ�##�ÿ��%8ÿ6�7ÿ�$�ÿ7��� ��6ÿ4&ÿ���&#ÿ&4'�ÿ��ÿ#�4ÿ7��#��(#ÿ6�7�(6� �ÿ
4&ÿ� �#��ÿ)6��6�ÿ��ÿ*+,-*.�ÿ��ÿ9 ÿ ÿ345676ÿ6�7ÿ�ÿ6�"/�8ÿ7�#4��ÿ0� ÿ
���&#ÿ&4'1ÿ(44!/ÿ6�7ÿ(4���56#�4�ÿ4&ÿ���&#ÿ&4'�ÿ��ÿ6ÿ(�6�!��!ÿ�4�7ÿ6�67�6�ÿ
�6���ÿ� �6�(�ÿ �#�8ÿ2��5 ���#/ÿ4&ÿ� !��68ÿ36��6#(� �6�8ÿ6�676ÿÿÿ
3456768ÿ9 ÿ 8ÿ6�7ÿ3ÿ)ÿ3(� �(�ÿ*,,,ÿ*,,,ÿ��$6ÿ��4�#8ÿ�� ����6�/ÿ��4�#ÿ#4ÿ#� ÿ
3��&#ÿ44'ÿ4���56#�4�ÿ0 6�1ÿ���#4��(ÿ6�7ÿ�(�#ÿ7��#��"$#�4�ÿ4&ÿ���&#ÿ&4'�ÿ��ÿ
54�#�ÿ� ��(6ÿ�6! �ÿ2�-**2ÿ67ÿ ÿ8ÿ3(���##8ÿ7�#4�ÿ3��&#ÿ44'ÿ4���56#�4�ÿ
0 6�ÿ*,,,ÿ��$6ÿ� �4�#ÿ5 �ÿ9 '�(4ÿ9 �6�#� �#ÿ4&ÿ86� ÿ6�7ÿ4���8ÿ36�#6ÿ
4 8ÿ5 �ÿ9 '�(48ÿ23 ÿ
3456768ÿ9 ÿ 8ÿ�ÿ�ÿ�447�6�78ÿ6�7ÿ�ÿ9ÿ:!ÿ���,ÿ���#4��(6ÿ�6�! 8ÿ($���#ÿ
7��#��"$#�4�8ÿ6�7ÿ(4���56#�4�ÿ�#6#$�ÿ4&ÿ#� ÿ3��&#ÿ&4'8ÿ;<=>?@ÿB?=CD8ÿ��ÿ54�#�ÿ
� ��(6ÿ6�67�6�ÿ4�7-56#$�6��#ÿ*��1�+.-�.Eÿ
0�4���4�8ÿ ÿ9 8ÿ6�7ÿFÿ9 ÿ8 � ÿ���Eÿ4447ÿ� "�ÿ6�7ÿ��#�6!$�7ÿ��76#�4�1ÿ
4��$��#/ÿ��#�6(#�4��ÿ4&ÿ6ÿ�6#�5ÿ� �4(6���54� ÿF(44!/ÿ221��+-�+.ÿ
0�4���4�8ÿ3ÿ98ÿ9ÿ4ÿ9� �8ÿ0ÿ ÿ94$��##8ÿ0ÿ�ÿG6(4"�4�8ÿ6�7ÿ9 ÿ�ÿ9$��4�-9(8 ÿ
*,,.ÿ�ÿ(44!�(6ÿ&�6� �4��ÿ&4�ÿ�4��#4���!ÿ�$�#6��6" ÿ�6�6! � �#ÿ4&ÿ
��7�&1ÿ6ÿ5 �ÿ9 '�(4ÿ&$�" 6��ÿ'6�� ÿ56#�4�6ÿ3�44!�(6ÿ3 �5�(ÿ:�&4��6#�4�ÿ
6�7ÿ0 (��44!/ÿ� �4�#ÿ1ÿÿÿ
0�/6�78ÿ9 8ÿ ÿ36"4��8ÿ3ÿ0ÿ)� �!� �8ÿ0ÿ9H��8ÿ� ÿ5���8ÿ5ÿ8ÿI4((4%8ÿ�ÿ ÿ:��8ÿ
6�7ÿFÿ4$! �ÿ��*2ÿÿ�(� ���!ÿ&4�ÿ(6��� ÿ7��#�� �ÿ5��$�8ÿ(6��� ÿ67 �45��$�ÿ
6�7ÿ(6���54�ÿ��4#4�6�545��$��ÿ��ÿ�(#�(ÿ&4'�ÿJ;<=>?@ÿ=KLC><@Mÿ6�7ÿ�7ÿ&4'�ÿ
J;<=>?@ÿB<=>?@Mÿ&�4�ÿ�(#�(ÿ6�7ÿ�$"-�(#�(ÿ�!�4��ÿ4&ÿ54��6/8ÿ�46�ÿ� � 6�(�8ÿ
�E1*-*�ÿ
239 ÿ����ÿ3$��6�/ÿ� �4�#1ÿ��*Eÿ56#�4�6ÿ� �4$�(�ÿ:�5�#4�/8ÿ56#$�6ÿ� �4$�(�ÿ
4���56#�4�ÿ3 �5�(8ÿ�6����!#4�8ÿ9 8ÿ6�7ÿ �#�ÿ&4�ÿ3$�5/ÿ3#6#��#�(�ÿ6�7ÿ
9 #�4744!/8ÿ:4�6ÿ3#6#ÿ2��5���#/8ÿ� �8ÿ:4�6ÿ
239 ÿ43 ÿ��**ÿ4���56#�4�ÿ� ��5ÿ��4!�6�1ÿ��$6ÿ�$��6�/ÿ6�7ÿ��4� �#ÿ
�#6#��#�(�ÿ�##��1NN���&�6$�76!45N��#�N239 -43 �$"�(N$�76&��N4���56#�4�N�94N6��$6�$��6�/��**�7&ÿÿ
239 ÿ43 ÿ����ÿ4���56#�4�ÿ� ��5ÿ��4!�6�1ÿ��$6ÿ�$��6�/ÿ6�7ÿ��4� �#ÿ
�#6#��#�(�ÿÿ�##��1NN���&�6$�76!45N��#�N239 -43 �$"�(N$�76&��N4���56#�4�N�94N��$6O��3$��6�/O�������7&ÿ
� �7 8ÿ0ÿ����ÿ�6�7�(6� ÿ&&(#�ÿ4�ÿ(6���54�ÿ(4��$��#/ÿ7/�6��(�ÿ��ÿ6�ÿ6!�4��6���ÿ(4�/�#� ÿ9����#6#�4�8ÿ)6��6�ÿ3#6#ÿ2��5���#/8ÿ96��6##6�8ÿ)6��6�8ÿ
23 ÿ
P�8ÿI8ÿ�ÿ)ÿ8�""�8ÿ6�7ÿ0ÿGÿ�6��ÿ���*ÿ�6�7�6#-"6�7ÿ:���!6#�4�ÿ96#6�#ÿJ� 5:9M1ÿ
QRSTÿVWXYZ[\]Y^ÿT_`XÿYaÿ]VV]b_\]Y^ÿc]X\V]d[\]Y^eÿaVWf[W^gheÿ_^cÿgi_^bWÿaYVÿ\iWÿjkeÿ
*,,El��*EÿF6�#�ÿ�/�#�ÿ�(��(ÿ76#6ÿ*�1�##��1NN74�4�!N*�1*,+N��7-*�-1.2,���*ÿ
m6���8ÿ�ÿ�8ÿ6�7ÿ� ÿ3ÿ366�7ÿ*,2Eÿ3 �44!�(ÿ�$�5/ÿ&4�ÿ� (#7ÿ��(�4"�6ÿ
�6#�4! ��ÿ4&ÿ�45�ÿ��ÿ 6��68ÿ*,E1-2�ÿG4$��6ÿ4&ÿ��7�&ÿ9��6��ÿ��1EE-21ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34456789ÿ ÿ ��ÿ�55�86�ÿ�����8�6�ÿ7��5ÿ�67ÿ4���8��5�ÿ��ÿ�66���ÿ��ÿ�85668��ÿ
�54���ÿ22�ÿ�! "ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
#55�86�ÿ$����8�6ÿ #55�86�ÿ%��5ÿ
&54���ÿ'���8��5�ÿ
���ÿ����86��ÿ�(ÿ %5�5��5�ÿ��ÿ22�ÿ
ÿ
%56)5��ÿ�(ÿ
54�5��5�ÿ!� �ÿ221ÿ
*%�ÿ(+ÿ,ÿ%ÿ
(�����ÿ*-ÿ
%5�5��5�ÿ �ÿ22.ÿ
/0ÿ,ÿ/0ÿ� /&1ÿ
6�2�����ÿ�(ÿ 54�5��5�ÿ �ÿ223ÿ
#�ÿ
3���8����ÿ�4ÿ %5�5��5�ÿ5�ÿ225ÿ
+ÿ
'�5�689�ÿ36ÿ *�)5��5�ÿ2�ÿ222ÿ
*#ÿ
3���7�5�7�5�ÿ*#ÿ 8�6���9ÿ"���ÿ!!!ÿ
*#ÿ,ÿ/0ÿ
&�487ÿ�8�9�ÿ%ÿ (����5�ÿ3�5�ÿ!! ÿ
+ÿ
:8�����;�ÿ*%ÿ 54�5��5�ÿ"�ÿ!! ÿ
/0ÿ
���ÿ����86��ÿ�(ÿ 54�5��5�ÿ.�ÿ!!"ÿ
�4ÿ,ÿ/0ÿ
+�6���ÿ�8�9�ÿ+ ÿ #����ÿ �"�ÿ!!1ÿ
*-ÿ,ÿ*#ÿ
<�5��ÿ�����ÿ#�ÿ 34�8�ÿ��ÿ!!.ÿ
*%ÿ,ÿ%ÿ
&�487ÿ�8�9�ÿ%ÿ 34�8�ÿ3�2�ÿ!!3ÿ
/0ÿ
���ÿ����86��ÿ�(ÿ 34�8�ÿ5�!�ÿ!!5ÿ
*%ÿ
$����85�ÿ/0ÿ #����ÿ"!�34�8�ÿ�ÿ! !ÿ
// ÿ
'�5����ÿ�(ÿ
34�8�ÿ"���ÿ! ÿ
�(ÿ
3���7�5�7�5�ÿ*#ÿ 34�8�ÿ5�2�ÿ! �ÿ
�(ÿ
���ÿ����86��ÿ�(ÿ 34�8�ÿ!� �ÿ! .ÿ
%ÿ
:�=5��6�ÿ#�ÿ 34�8�ÿ5�2�ÿ! 5ÿ
#�ÿ
6���ÿ
#�9ÿ �"�ÿ! ÿ
�64���8��57ÿ
����9�ÿ+ ÿ
(����5�ÿ" �*�)5��5�ÿ�ÿ! "ÿ#55�86�ÿ�86��5�ÿ���48�57ÿ
�9ÿ�55�86�ÿ����ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34456789ÿ ÿ35 ÿ��� �ÿ��ÿ��8��ÿ��9ÿ�8���8��ÿ78��8���8�6ÿ67ÿ�8���5ÿ� �8���ÿ
4��56�8���ÿ��8���5ÿ��ÿ��8��ÿ��9ÿ����4 �8�6ÿ�8��86ÿ��5ÿ�8���8��ÿ78��8���8�6ÿ86ÿ��5ÿ
��ÿ��ÿ���5ÿ67ÿ����ÿ �8��ÿ��5!�85�ÿ 5ÿ����5ÿ����8�857ÿ86ÿ"3#$%&'(ÿ��ÿ
8678�87� �ÿ���5�ÿ����4�)**����67�85!��*�ÿ �8���ÿ��6�87557ÿ��8���5ÿ�8��86ÿÿ
���5ÿ���ÿ���48�86!ÿ+,�� ÿ�55ÿ59���757ÿ���ÿ��8�ÿ���5ÿÿ
ÿ
ÿ
< ���67ÿ�67ÿ���5 3!8����� �ÿ�67ÿ���5
8���8� �ÿ 8!�ÿ /578��ÿ /578��ÿ.� �8��ÿ"��ÿ.� �8��ÿ
$8��8���8�6 .� �8�� .� �8�� �7��67� �88! �57�
�8��ÿ� �5!�85�
01213451
3!8����� �ÿ�67�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ67828 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ17,89
:56� �ÿ/8957! ��ÿ; 885ÿ< ���67
ÿÿÿÿÿ,7661ÿ
:56� �ÿ/8957! ��ÿ; 885ÿ�����67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ,1,ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ%����8��ÿ67ÿ;857��6�ÿ< ���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ,7>8 ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ1>,ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ� 67ÿ; 885
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ����! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿ6278,1ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ? ��! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ@6ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿKLMNIOI ÿÿP
ÿINQRI ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿINMOM ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿIPNMLM ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿONKMS
A1B42ÿD3E4ÿFGHIJ
Tÿ��8���5
8,T 98T
@T
9T
1T
U4VW4W
3!8����� �ÿ�67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ617@,X ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ,,7,@@
:56� �ÿ? ��! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
:56� �ÿ/8957! ��ÿ; 885ÿ< ���67
ÿÿÿ@7828ÿ
�����5 ��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ? ��! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ1@ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ� 67ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿÿÿ7699ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ����! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿ,271X9ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ? ��! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ@
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿKKYNYQLÿÿÿÿQRNLIPÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿOLOÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿPONQKRÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿKKNKQQÿ
A1B42ÿD3E4ÿFGHIJ
Tÿ��8���5
88T @,T
,T
9XT
>T
Z1VB4V4
3!8����� �ÿ�67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ9>79,> ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ@72X
&6�5[/��6�86ÿ\ �86�ÿ\8!ÿ� !5����ÿ�����67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ21ÿ
&6�5[/��6�86ÿ\ �86�ÿ\8!ÿ� !5����ÿ��5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿ@X7@>,ÿ
&6�5[/��6�86ÿ\ �86�ÿ/ �ÿ� ������ÿ�����67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ,7618ÿ
&6�5[/��6�86ÿ\ �86�ÿ/�6�65ÿ� !5����ÿ��5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿX>ÿ
&6�5[/��6�86ÿ\ �86�ÿ�5�8[$5�5�ÿ< ���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ>ÿ
#���56ÿ'����ÿ/��6�86ÿ"��5ÿ/�6�65[%����8��[] ��5�ÿ
< ���67
ÿÿÿÿÿ@71,9ÿ
#����5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ/8957! ��ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿ1878,,ÿ
#����5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ�����67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ786ÿ
'5�56���ÿ\�657[5�ÿ67ÿ< ��ÿ:��5
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ,,2ÿ
'5�56���ÿ\�657[����ÿ:��5
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ1,ÿ
=5��56ÿ< 5 �ÿ;�86�ÿ� 67ÿ; 885
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ >ÿ
=���86!ÿ\ �86I�ÿ$� �ÿ� !5����ÿ�����67ÿ67ÿ��5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ9ÿ
A1B42ÿD3E4ÿFGH J
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿKYYNPIY ÿÿR
ÿINRRS ÿÿÿÿÿS
ÿKNRYP ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿSYNSKY ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿQNILR
Tÿ��8���5
89T @1T
,T
6T
Tÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34456789ÿÿ ���������ÿ
ÿ
=������67ÿ��67ÿ� (5� 3��8��������ÿ��67ÿ� (5�
+8���8���ÿ +8�!ÿ -578�)ÿ -578�)ÿ,���8�'ÿ. %ÿ,���8�'ÿ
"8���8*��86 ,���8�' ,���8�' 7�'��67� 8��8���57�
+�*8���ÿ���5� �85�
/0123453
3��8��������ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ267288 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ2679:
;56����ÿ-8957�����ÿ<��8�85ÿ=������67
ÿÿÿ>71 6ÿ
� ��!5�6ÿ?ÿ;56����ÿ<��86�ÿ@�75���ÿ?ÿ<��6�57ÿ=������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿA7829ÿ
� ��!%5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿ-8957�����ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿB716Bÿ
@5�56��'ÿC��657D+5�*ÿ�67ÿ=����ÿ; (5�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ6:ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿF�67!8�ÿF�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿ2719>ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿF! �������ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿ27:18ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<�
�
8
6
�
ÿ
G
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
ÿ
<�
�
8
�
8
5
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ:9ÿ
HIJ3KÿM203ÿN5OPQ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿRRSTRP ÿÿÿTPSUVW ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿVSXUY ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿXZSX[[ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿXZSPRU
\ÿ��8��*�5
92\ B6\
>\
2:\
8\
/0]ÿ^0_àI
3��8��������ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿB78:9 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ272:2
34��!5�8�6D;!8!��!��6ÿF5)8D"5�5��ÿ=������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ9Bÿ
34��!5�8�6D;!8!��!��6ÿF5)8D"5�5��ÿF!��*DF�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ9A>ÿ
;56����ÿ-8957�����ÿ<��8�85ÿ=������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ:ÿ
;56����ÿ-8957�����ÿ<��8�85ÿF!��*��67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿA2ÿ
=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿ; )�6�!8�6ÿ@�75���ÿ=������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ218ÿ
@5�56��'ÿC��657D+5�*ÿ�67ÿ=����ÿ; (5�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ22ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿb �!8�ÿ�67ÿ<857) 6�ÿ=������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ> 9ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿF�67ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 6ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿF�67!8�ÿF�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿA7:>Aÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<�
�
8
6
�
ÿ
F!
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
ÿ
<�
�
8
�
8
5
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
9
7
B
>
1
ÿ
HIJ3KÿM203ÿN5OPQ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿVZS[[P ÿÿÿPUSXUV ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿWSPXU ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿTS[UR ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿXSXUX
\ÿ��8��*�5
9A\ 1 \
2B\
6\
B\
/I2Jcÿd35IJ3
3��8��������ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ:>78A1
e6�5�D- �6��86ÿC��86�ÿC8�ÿF��5*���!ÿF�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ26>ÿ
� ��!D;56����ÿe6�5�8�ÿF�67ÿ�67ÿ=��(5�ÿG�������ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿAÿ
� ��!5�6ÿG�������ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿ78 Bÿ
� ��!%5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿ-8957�����ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿBB7:6Aÿ
� ��!%5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿF!��*��67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ9A9ÿ
@5�56��'ÿC��657D+5�*ÿ�67ÿ=����ÿ; (5�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ6ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<��86�ÿF�67ÿ<��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ9ÿ
E5��5�6ÿ=�5��ÿ<�
�
8
6
�
ÿ
G
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
ÿ
<�
�
8
�
8
5
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÿ
P
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿXWZS[XW ÿÿTÿWS[TR ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿXS[PT ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿf ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿUÿYS[VW
HIJ3KÿM203ÿN5O Q
\ÿ��8��*�5
6:\
\
2\
8\
>6\ ÿ
ÿ
�3��ÿ���8��������ÿ��67�ÿ86ÿ� ��!ÿ"�#��ÿ��5ÿ�����8$857ÿ��ÿ�%ÿ&���8�'ÿ�8(56ÿ�!5ÿ���#ÿ$ÿ����8��86ÿ%8�!ÿ�!5)ÿ*'ÿ�%8$�ÿ$95�ÿ86ÿ�!��ÿ����5�ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34456789ÿ2ÿ �������ÿÿ
ÿ
*�)8���ÿ���5���85�
./012341
3��8��������ÿ��67�ÿ
956����ÿ,8957�����ÿ:��8�85ÿ;������67
956����ÿ,8957�����ÿ:��8�85ÿ� ��)��67
;�5��ÿ:��86�ÿ9�(�6� 8�6ÿ?�75���ÿ;������67
@5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:��86�ÿ��67ÿ:��8�85
@5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:��86�ÿ��67 8��ÿ��5445
@5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:�
�86�ÿ� ��������ÿ:��8�85
I
B3C10ÿEFG1ÿH/4 J
Tÿ��8��)�5
;������67ÿ��67ÿ��'5� 3��8��������ÿ��67ÿ��'5�
*8����8���ÿ *8� ÿ ,578�(ÿ ,578�(ÿ+���8�&ÿ-�$ÿ+���8�&ÿ
!8���8)��8�6 +���8�& +���8�& 7�&��67� 8��8���57�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ15261 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ75118
ÿÿÿÿÿ65<=2ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ26>ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ75=8<ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿA5=88ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿA>8ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿ6567>ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿKLMKKN ÿÿÿ
LOMOPL ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿLMNQR ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿRMISR ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿLMRRP
8=T 1=T
>T
2=T
>T
U3VC2ÿW1/3C1
3��8��������ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ1A5=22
956����ÿ,8957�����ÿ:��8�85ÿ;������67
ÿÿÿÿÿX5=X1ÿ
956����ÿ,8957�����ÿ:��8�85ÿ� ��)��67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ7Xÿ
Y6�5�8��ÿ@5��5�6ÿZ���ÿ3(5�8��6ÿ[5(45���5ÿ?�75���ÿ
;������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ2<ÿ
Z���5�6ÿ\ÿ956����ÿ:��86�ÿ?�75���ÿ\ÿ:��6�57ÿ;������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ852<=ÿ
Z���$5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:��86�ÿ,8957�����ÿ:��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿÿ1A5>68ÿ
?5�56��&ÿ]��657^*5�)ÿ�67ÿ;����ÿ9�'5�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿX2ÿ
?5�56��&ÿ-���57^*5�)ÿ�67ÿ;����ÿ9�'5�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ2ÿ
@5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:�
�
8
6
�
ÿ
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
ÿ
:�
�
8
�
8
5
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
X
<
7
ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿLRNMI_K ÿÿÿÿÿ
NMQIS ÿÿÿÿÿÿSIMPNR ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ` ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿR
ÿKM_II
B3C10ÿEFG1ÿH/4IJ
Tÿ��8��)�5
<1T AT
XXT
=T
A<T
BGa1b
3��8��������ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ2256<1 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ7X5X1A
34�� 5�8�6^9 8�� ��6ÿ�5(8^!5�5��ÿ;������67
61
34�� 5�8�6^9 8�� ��6ÿ�5(8^!5�5��ÿ� ��)^��5445
>6<
956����ÿ,8957�����ÿ:��8�85ÿ;������67
A=A6
?5�56��&ÿ]��657^*5�)ÿ�67ÿ;����ÿ9�'5�
78
@5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:��86�ÿ��67 8��ÿ��5445
2X2<
@5��5�6ÿ;�5��ÿ:��86�ÿ� ��������ÿ:��8�85
2=A2=
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿORMPSL ÿÿÿ
I_MKI_ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿRMLKO ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿIIMSOR ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿLNMNRK
B3C10ÿEFG1ÿH/4IJ
Tÿ��8��)�5
A8T 72T
XT
7XT
8T ÿ
ÿ
�3��ÿ���8��������ÿ��67�ÿ86ÿ����ÿ!�"���ÿ��5ÿ�����8#857ÿ��ÿ��$ÿ%���8�&ÿ�8'56ÿ�5ÿ���"ÿ�#ÿ�����8��8�6ÿ$8�ÿ�5(ÿ)&ÿ�$8#�ÿ#�95�ÿ86ÿ���ÿ����5�ÿ
12ÿ
�ÿ
34456789ÿÿ ���������ÿÿ
ÿ
7������67ÿ��67ÿ��E5� 3��8�!��!���ÿ��67ÿ��E5�
�8����8���ÿ �8�"ÿ %578!&ÿ %578!&ÿ#!��8�$ÿ'�(ÿ#!��8�$ÿ
8���8�!�8�6 #!��8�$ #!��8�$ 7�$��67� 8��8���57�
���8���ÿ���5���85�
)*+,-./
3��8�!��!���ÿ��67�ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ01203 ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ01141
556����ÿ%8957�����ÿ6��8�85ÿ7������67
ÿÿÿÿÿ41383ÿ
556����ÿ%8957�����ÿ6��8�85ÿ9"�!���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ00 ÿ
7�5��ÿ:��86ÿ;ÿ<6�5�&�!6��86ÿ<6���7!�57ÿ366!��ÿ�67ÿ
:85668��ÿ=�����67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ2>ÿ
7�5��ÿ:��86ÿ;ÿ<6�5�&�!6��86ÿ<6���7!�57ÿ366!��ÿ7������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ2?ÿ
7�5��ÿ:��86ÿ;ÿ<6�5�&�!6��86ÿ<6���7!�57ÿ65�5668��ÿ
7������67ÿ�67ÿ=�����67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ10ÿ
<6�5�8��ÿ@5��5�6ÿA���"ÿ3&5�8��6ÿB5&45���5ÿC!75���ÿ
7������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ021ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ:8�ÿ9��5��!�"ÿ9"�!���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ8?1ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ:8�ÿ9��5��!�"ÿ9�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿ081804ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ7�5��5(��7ÿ=���
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ23>ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ%��ÿ9����!�"ÿ9"�!���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ88?ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ%8957ÿ9���ÿ5�5��ÿ9��!�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ83ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ%�6��65ÿ9��5��!�"ÿ9�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ21834ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ95&8D 5�5��ÿ7������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ82ÿ
<6�5�D%�!6��86ÿ:��86�ÿ95&8D 5�5��ÿ9"�!�D9�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ82ÿ
A���"5�6ÿ;ÿ556����ÿ6��86�ÿC!75���ÿ;ÿ6��6�57ÿ7������67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ?88ÿ
A���"(5��5�6ÿ7�5��ÿ6��86�ÿ%8957�����ÿ6��8�85
ÿÿÿ21?48ÿ
A���"(5��5�6ÿ7�5��ÿ6��86�ÿ9"�!���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ0?2ÿ
C5�56��$ÿ:!�657D�5��ÿ�67ÿ7����ÿ5�E5�
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ88ÿ
C��F$ÿ%�!6��86ÿ'�(5�ÿ%�6��65D=���"8��ÿ9"�!���67
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ83 ÿ
@5��5�6ÿ7�5��ÿ6��86�ÿ9�67ÿ6��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿ01>24ÿ
@5��5�6ÿ7�5��ÿ6��86�ÿ9�67"8��ÿ9�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ0 4ÿ
@5��5�6ÿ7�5��ÿ6��86�ÿ9"��������ÿ6��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿ418 1ÿ
@5��5�6ÿ7�5��ÿ6��86�ÿB��������ÿ6��8�85
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
@$�&86�ÿ:��86�ÿ(��Gÿ9��5��!�"ÿ9"�!���67ÿ�67ÿ9�5445
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ40 ÿ
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿTRUVWX ÿÿÿ
XYUTZY ÿÿÿÿÿÿ
R[UZZW ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿWU\WZ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿWU[Y[
H+IJKÿMNOJÿPQ,RS
]ÿ�!8����5
??] 4?]
21]
2]
]
^J./O_-̀OÿabcbÿH+IJKdÿPQ,RS
ÿÿÿÿ
WUZVeUYYR ÿ
XXVUTV\ ÿÿÿÿW[XURYV ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿWVRUTWe ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿRWYUVY\
]ÿ�!8����5
?2] 20]
0>]
08]
3] ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
12ÿ
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/ce601791d49fada91920d509017a2147.pdf
8fa19f699bff44181809f222061c71e9
PDF Text
Text
CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AND
CONSERVATION STRATEGY FOR SWIFT
FOX IN THE UNITED STATES – 2011 UPDATE
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………...
1
Executive Summary………………………………………………………………
2
List of Acronyms…………………………………………………………………..
4
List of Tables and Figures……………………………………………………….
5
Accomplishments for 1995-2010………………………………………………..
Accomplishments summarized by objectives from Swift Fox
Conservation Assessment and Conservation
Strategy, 1997…………………………………………………….
Accomplishments summarized by Endangered Species Act
listing factors………………………………………………………
6
6
25
Conservation Assessment, 2011………………………………………………..
Conservation status………………………………………………………
Risk assessment………………………………………………………….
A. Present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species’ habitat or range……………………
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes…………………………………………….
C. Disease and predation…………………………………………...
D. Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms……………….
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence…………………………………………………………..
Livestock grazing……………………………………………..
Climate and weather………………………………………….
Poisoning………………………………………………………
Roadways……………………………………………………...
42
42
42
Conservation Strategy, 2011-2020……………………………………………..
Introduction………………………………………………………………...
Goal………………………………………………………………………...
Objectives, strategies, and activities……………………………………
59
59
59
59
Literature Cited……………………………………………………………………
67
Appendix A. Highlights of activities presented in SFCT annual reports…….
77
44
51
53
55
56
56
56
57
58
�ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following individuals provided input or other technical assistance for this
updated planning document: Jerry Apker and Eric Odell, Colorado Division of
Wildlife; Matt Peek, Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks; Brian Giddings,
Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks; Sam Wilson, Nebraska Game
and Parks Commission; James Stuart, New Mexico Department of Game and
Fish; Patrick Isakson, North Dakota Game and Fish Department; Melynda
Hickman, Mark Howery, and Julianne Whitaker Hoagland, Oklahoma Department
of Wildlife Conservation; Eileen Dowd Stukel, South Dakota Department of
Game, Fish and Parks; Heather Whitlaw and John Young, Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department; Martin Grenier, Wyoming Game and Fish Department; Tyler
Abbott, Bureau of Land Management; Greg Schroeder, Badlands National Park;
Pete Gober and Scott Larson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Bob Hodorff,
U.S.D.A., Forest Service; Kirk Gustad, U.S.D.A., APHIS, Wildlife Services;
Marsha Sovada, U.S.G.S., B.R.D., Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center;
Axel Moehrenschlager, Calgary Zoo; Ludwig Carbyn, Canadian Wildlife Service;
Kristy Bly, World Wildlife Fund; Shaun Grassel, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe;
Jonathan Proctor, Defenders of Wildlife; Marilyn McBirney, Pueblo Zoo; Kim
Shotola, Houston Zoo; Donelle Schwalm, Texas Tech University; Trudy Ecoffey,
Rob Goodman, and Michael Thompson, Oglala Sioux Parks and Recreation
Authority; Indrani Sasmal, South Dakota State University; and Duane Short,
Biodiversity Conservation Alliance.
Eric Odell, Brian Giddings and Eileen Dowd Stukel served as Swift Fox
Conservation Team Chairs during the preparation of this document. Bill Van Pelt,
Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ Interstate Prairie Ecosystem
Coordinator, helped draft this document, providing significant expertise in the
preparation of the Conservation Assessment section. Adam Oswald, South
Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, provided the cover sketch.
This document is dedicated to Kevin Honness for his enduring commitment to
swift fox recovery.
Preferred citation:
Dowd Stukel, E., ed. 2011. Conservation assessment and conservation strategy
for swift fox in the United States – 2011 Update. South Dakota
Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre, South Dakota.
1
�EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1992, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) received a petition to list the
swift fox under the authority of the Endangered Species Act in the northern
portion of the species’ range (Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and
Nebraska), if not the entire range. In 1994, the USFWS concluded that listing
was warranted in the entire range. Also in 1994, the 10 affected state wildlife
management agencies and interested cooperators formed the Swift Fox
Conservation Team (SFCT). The SFCT completed the Conservation Assessment
and Conservation Strategy for Swift Fox in the United States (CACS) in 1997 to
guide management and conservation activities. The USFWS’ 12-month finding in
1995 designated the swift fox as a federal candidate species, with listing
warranted but precluded by higher listing priorities. The 1997 CACS has guided
activities of state, federal, tribal, and private entities to provide defensible data on
swift fox abundance and distribution with a more coordinated approach to
rangewide conservation and management. As a result of new information and
improved coordination among partners, the USFWS removed the swift fox from
the candidate species list in 2001.
The commitment of state and federal agencies, tribes, private organizations, and
landowners in the U.S. and Canada to swift fox restoration continued following
removal of the species from the candidate species list. The conservation strategy
portion of the 1997 CACS was organized by 11 major objectives. This 2011
update summarizes accomplishments from 1995-2010 sorted by those 11
objectives, a process that helped the SFCT assess which strategies to consider
in planning future activities. The USFWS evaluates species for listing or delisting
activities according to specific listing factors. This document also includes a
summary of accomplishments from 1995-2010 by the 5 listing factors, with an
emphasis on work that has resulted in scientific, peer-reviewed publications.
This update includes a current conservation assessment of the 5 listing factors to
long-term swift fox sustainability and concludes that none of the listing factors
has risen to the level of a threat. This update also includes a revised
conservation strategy section with associated objectives, strategies, and
activities to provide a guidance framework for continued monitoring, research,
and recovery for the next 10 years. Revisions to the previous conservation
strategy section of the 1997 CACS reflect completion of a significant amount of
work and reconsideration of remaining threats in light of current knowledge.
The overall goal of this updated conservation assessment and conservation
strategy is to maintain or restore swift fox populations within each state to provide
the spatial, genetic, and demographic structure of the United States swift fox
population to ensure long-term species viability, to provide species management
flexibility, and to encourage population connectivity. The SFCT has and will
2
�continue to implement the conservation strategy and track progress in achieving
the overall goal and associated objectives.
The 8 primary objectives for 2011-2020 are:
1. Maintain a Swift Fox Conservation Team, to include 1 representative of
each of the state wildlife agencies within the historical range of the swift
fox.
2. Maintain swift fox distribution in at least 50 percent of the suitable,
available habitat.
3. Periodically evaluate the status of swift fox populations.
4. Identify and conserve existing native shortgrass and mixed-grass
grasslands, focusing on those with habitat characteristics conducive to
swift fox.
5. Facilitate partnerships and cooperative efforts to protect, restore, and
enhance suitable habitats within potential swift fox range.
6. Identify and encourage research studies that contribute to swift fox
conservation and management.
7. Promote public support for swift fox conservation activities through
education and information exchange.
8. Maintain swift fox population viability such that listing under the U.S.
Endangered Species Act is not justified.
3
�LIST OF ACRONYMS
AFWA = Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
APHIS = Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
AZA = Association of Zoos and Aquariums
BLM = Bureau of Land Management
BMP = Best Management Practices
CACS = Conservation Assessment and Conservation Strategy
COSEWIC = Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada
CRP = Conservation Reserve Program
CWCS = Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy
ESA = Endangered Species Act
FIFRA = Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
GAP = Gap Analysis Program
GIS = Geographic information system
HCA = Habitat Conservation Agreement
HCP = Habitat Conservation Plan
KDWP = Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks
MFWP = Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
MSB = Museum of Southwestern Biology
MOU = Memorandum of Understanding
NPWRC = Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center
NRCS = Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRI = National Resources Inventory
PVA = population viability analyses
SDGFP = South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks
SDWAP = South Dakota Wildlife Action Plan
SFCT = Swift Fox Conservation Team
SSP = Special Survival Plan
TAG = Taxon Advisory Group
TESF = Turner Endangered Species Fund
TNC = The Nature Conservancy
TTU = Texas Tech University
USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFS = U.S. Forest Service
USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS = U.S. Geological Survey
VOR = visual obstruction reading
WAFWA = Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
WGFD = Wyoming Game and Fish Department
4
�LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1. List of objectives, strategies, and priorities from the SFCT CACS
(Swift Fox Conservation Team 1997)…………………………………..
9
Table 2. State legal status and harvest seasons for swift fox, 2010………..
38
Figure 1. Ecological regions (modified from Risser et al. 1981) within the
range of the swift fox in the U.S. and Canada
(Sovada et al. 2009)……………………………………………………... 46
Figure 2. Delineation of high, medium and low quality swift fox habitat in
the U.S. and Canada (Sovada et al. 2009)……………………………. 47
Figure 3. Swift fox occupancy by counties based on data collected from
2001 to 2006 (Sovada et al. 2009)……………………………………..
5
48
�ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR 1995-2010
ACCOMPLISHMENTS SUMMARIZED BY OBJECTIVES FROM SWIFT FOX
CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AND CONSERVATION STRATEGY, 1997
Background:
The swift fox (Vulpes velox) is native to the shortgrass and mixed-grass prairies
of the Great Plains in the central United States, although the species has
demonstrated adaptability to other habitat types. Settlement, unlimited harvest for
furs, and indiscriminate use of pesticides intended for control of wolves and
coyotes reduced the species’ range from the late 1800s to the early 1900s. By
the late 1980s, the swift fox recovered in southern portions of its historical range,
although populations farther north did not (Allardyce and Sovada 2003, Sovada
et al. 2009).
In 1992, the USFWS received a petition to list the swift fox under the authority of
the Endangered Species Act in the northern portion of the species’ range
(Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska), if not the entire range. In
1994, the USFWS concluded that listing was warranted in the entire range
(Federal Register 1994). Also in 1994, the 10 affected state wildlife management
agencies and interested cooperators formed the Swift Fox Conservation Team
(SFCT), which in turn prepared a species conservation assessment and
conservation strategy (CACS) document to guide management and conservation
activities (Swift Fox Conservation Team 1997). The USFWS’ 12-month finding in
1995 designated the swift fox as a federal candidate species, with listing
warranted but precluded by higher listing priorities (Federal Register 1995). The
CACS has guided activities of state, federal, tribal, and private entities to provide
defensible data on swift fox abundance and distribution with a more coordinated
approach to rangewide conservation and management. As a result of new
information and improved coordination among partners, the USFWS removed the
swift fox from the candidate species list in 2001 (Federal Register 2001).
Retaining management authority for this species was a major goal of state
wildlife agencies. The commitment of state and federal agencies, tribes, private
organizations, and landowners in the U.S. and Canada to swift fox restoration
continued following removal of the species from the candidate species list. This
document summarizes accomplishments associated with established strategies
and objectives outlined in the Conservation Assessment and Conservation
Strategy for Swift Fox in the United States (CACS). The SFCT has updated the
1997 document to reflect more recent information and reconsidered conservation
needs. This update is designed to describe progress made since the 1997 CACS
established coordinated objectives and strategies among the 10 states and
partners.
6
�Conservation Strategy:
The goal of the 1997 Conservation Strategy was to: “…maintain or restore swift
fox populations within each state to provide the spatial, genetic and demographic
structure of the United States swift fox population, throughout at least 50 percent
of the suitable habitat available, to ensure long-term species viability and to
provide species management flexibility.” (Swift Fox Conservation Team 1997).
The Conservation Strategy portion of the CACS of 1997 included 11 objectives,
with corresponding strategies and activities. State agency representatives on the
SFCT were asked to summarize work in their respective states corresponding
with the 11 objectives, with the assumption that they would be familiar with and
summarize work by other cooperators.
This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of projects and surveys, since such
information is already included in regular reports and newsletters produced by
the SFCT and maintained on the team’s website, which is hosted by the
Colorado Division of Wildlife:
http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/GrasslandSpecies/SwiftFoxConservatio
nTeam.htm
Several federal agencies have provided assistance across the species’ range.
These agencies include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA Forest Service,
USDA APHIS-Wildlife Services, National Park Service, Bureau of Land
Management, and Bureau of Indian Affairs. These agencies have played
important roles in facilitating communication and providing help at local, state,
regional, or national levels. A critical science partner in the SFCT’s activities has
been the USGS’ Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center (NPWRC), which has
provided important technical expertise, research and survey design input, and
assistance in coordinating and summarizing survey results.
The full CACS of 1997 is located at this site:
http://wildlife.state.co.us/NR/rdonlyres/BEE479C5-546F-471B-A052E0B5E79554B6/0/SwiftFoxConserAssesmStrategy.pdf
7
�Accomplishments toward CACS objectives and strategies are described from a
broad SFCT perspective, followed by state-specific highlights of progress in
achieving each objective, when relevant.
Table 1 summarizes the objectives, strategies, and activities contained in the
1997 CACS document. Strategies were prioritized by the following 4 categories
to indicate the urgency with which the strategy should be accomplished:
Top – Have been completed or were initiated by 1996
High – Should be accomplished by 1999
Medium – Should be accomplished by 2002
Low – Should be accomplished by 2005
8
�Table 1. List of objectives, strategies, and priorities from the SFCT CACS (Swift
Fox Conservation Team 1997)
Objective
Strategy
Priority
1. Establish a Swift
Fox Conservation
Team
1.1 The SFCT is to coordinate and assist in directing
management and research activities outlined in the
conservation strategy. The SFCT will annually monitor the
attainment of objectives and evaluate the completion of
specific activities within each state.
1.1.1 Responsibilities of the SFCT are to: 1) determine
priorities and set timetables for conservation strategy
objectives and activities, 2) establish interteam
technical committees that will address specific
management or research needs to accomplish stated
objectives, 3) draft habitat and species management
guidelines when appropriate, 4) provide a forum for
technical information exchange, and 5) promote state
and federal funding support for specific activities.
1.1.2 The SFCT will generate an annual report to
present state and regional progress toward attainment
of conservation strategy objectives. An annual SFCT
meeting is to be scheduled by the appointed chair to
synthesize information and prepare the annual report,
which will be produced each March.
1.1.3 Each state wildlife agency representative on the
SFCT is to form a state swift fox working group.
2.1 Document the present distribution of swift fox within
each state utilizing various detection methods and/or
species harvest data. Systematic presence/absence and
population surveys or compiling site-specific harvest
information should provide each state with adequate
information to delineate statewide species distributions.
2.1.1 State wildlife agencies will collect and compile
existing species distribution data internally and from
cooperators. The SFCT will assign members to a
technical committee to review techniques and
standardize protocols for selected survey methods.
2.1.2 State wildlife agencies will generate initial
statewide species distribution maps based on current
information. Maps will be periodically updated or
modified as species distribution changes or as new
data become available.
3.1 Develop and implement statewide monitoring
programs that provide population trend information and
that detect changes in local distribution.
3.1.1 The SFCT will assign members to a technical
committee for the purpose of reviewing techniques,
scientific literature and findings from current swift fox
research studies to develop recommendations for
standardized population monitoring techniques.
Results of this activity should be available by 1999.
Top
2. Determine current
distribution
3. Monitor
population status
9
Top
High
�4. Determine
minimum viable
population estimates
and maintain genetic
integrity
5. Identify existing
native
shortgrass/midgrass
prairie ecosystem
and other suitable
swift fox habitats
6. Promote habitat
conservation and
management in
occupied and
suitable habitat.
3.1.2 Each state wildlife agency will coordinate and
implement a monitoring program for existing swift fox
populations or newly established populations, in
cooperation and with assistance of federal agencies
and other interested parties.
3.1.3 The state wildlife agencies of Kansas, New
Mexico and Texas which allow a legal harvest and
Wyoming for incidental take of swift fox; will evaluate
the feasibility of implementing a registration/pelt
tagging program in addition to conducting mandatory
carcass collections.
4.1 The SFCT is to identify, and then encourage research
studies, that will address minimum viable population size
estimates, monitor genetic diversity among populations
and resolve species taxonomic issues.
4.1.1 Investigate minimum population viability through
population monitoring, biological research and natal
den studies.
4.1.2 The SFCT will assign members to a technical
committee to resolve any taxonomic issue and
investigate the genetic integrity of the United States
swift fox population by 2005.
4.1.3 Conduct periodic testing and analysis of genetic
variation among state populations.
5.1 Develop swift fox habitat criteria. These criteria are
essential to define suitable habitat and to identify current
habitat availability.
5.1.1 The SFCT will review scientific literature and
incorporate findings from current swift fox research
projects, particularly the Canadian swift fox
reintroduction program, to develop rangewide habitat
criteria.
5.2 Identify and delineate existing suitable swift fox habitat
within each state. This effort will form the basis for
evaluating species restoration activities, and identify
constraints and opportunities within each state.
5.2.1 Each state wildlife agency will coordinate with
state and federal land management agencies and
private landowners to conduct habitat inventories.
5.2.2 Each state wildlife agency will delineate available
swift fox habitat on state cover maps utilizing the
Geographic Information System (GIS) and Gap
Analysis Program (GAP), report habitat acreage sizes,
and describe land ownership patterns in an annual
report.
6.1 Identify and delineate public lands under federal or
state management control in occupied/suitable swift fox
habitat. This is to be addressed initially on public lands.
6.1.1 Each state wildlife agency will coordinate with the
federal and state land management agencies to
evaluate current levels of legal protection of native
grasslands located within federal and state ownership.
6.1.2 State and federal wildlife agencies will initiate
10
Low
High
High
Medium
�7. Expand
distribution of US
population to
potentially occupy
50% of the available
suitable habitat
habitat protection agreements with federal and state
land management agencies, as habitat conservation
needs are identified, by 2002.
6.1.3 Identify habitat corridors and surrounding areas
between habitat blocks, based on the spatial location
of suitable habitat that is available to be managed for
swift fox.
6.2 Identify and delineate private land ownership patterns
under individual or corporate control in occupied and
suitable swift fox habitat.
6.2.1 State and federal wildlife agencies are to initiate
land conservation or protection measures under
current lands programs as limited by priorities and
within funding ability, or are to consider creating a
lands program with new or redirected funding sources.
6.2.2 Implement methods and techniques to gain and
maintain cooperation with private landowners.
7.1 Expand distribution of existing state populations and
restore swift fox to unoccupied suitable habitat. Promote
natural dispersal through species protection measures
while developing methodology and priority areas for
augmentation through wild-captured swift fox introductions.
7.1.1 State working groups will develop criteria and
establish priority areas within their respective state.
7.1.2 State working groups will provide
recommendations to state wildlife agencies, federal
land management agencies and cooperators on
priorities and timetables to implement population
restoration efforts.
7.1.3 The SFCT will assign members to a technical
committee to investigate and review the availability of
wild/captive foxes and evaluate their potential success
for releases. The SFCT will provide technical
information and release protocol to state working
groups and agencies considering releases.
7.2 Monitor and identify new, continued, or diminishing
threats to population expansion.
7.2.1 The SFCT will assign members to a technical
committee to review available scientific literature on
interspecific competition and applicable control
methods.
7.2.2 The SFCT and state working groups will review
and incorporate information from scientific
investigations that address the adaptability of swift fox
to colonize non-native habitats and which evaluate the
species ability to maintain itself in these habitats.
7.2.3 The SFCT and state working groups will identify
and report new, continuing or diminishing threats to
swift fox population expansion.
11
Medium
Low
Medium
�8. Integrate swift fox
conservation strategy
objectives with
management and habitat
objectives of other prairie
ecosystem species
9. Promote scientific
swift fox management
and a public education
program
10. Implement research
on swift fox biology and
ecology
8.1 Provide swift fox distribution and suitable habitat
information to other prairie ecosystem mapping efforts.
8.1.1 The SFCT and state working groups will
coordinate information exchanges with similar prairie
species working groups, cooperating agencies,
universities and conservation organizations.
8.2 The CACS for Swift Fox in the United States
(CACSSF) may be subject to periodic revision to
incorporate related objectives, strategies or activities
which may be outlined in other prairie species
conservation plans.
8.2.1 The SFCT will review the need to update or
revise the CACSSF and incorporate new or
changing information accordingly.
9.1 Provide a scientific basis for swift fox management
and an avenue for technical information exchange.
9.1.1 The SFCT and state working groups will
collect and compile current technical literature and
management information for distribution through
information requests from state and federal
managers and other interested individuals.
9.1.2 The SFCT and state working groups are to
provide recommendations on standard management
guidelines, beneficial range management practices
for swift fox, methods for data collection/database
management, and current information on swift fox
ecology, management, and research to wildlife and
land managers, government entities, land planners,
state and federal policy makers.
9.1.3 The SFCT will consider cooperating on a joint
publication that promotes the scientific basis for
conserving prairie species, including swift fox, for
distribution to wildlife and land managers.
9.2 Promote public support of swift fox conservation
activities
9.2.1 The SFCT will develop informational and
educational materials.
9.2.2 Each state working group will develop the
structure for an information and education program
in their state.
9.2.3 The SFCT and state working groups will jointly
develop an informational package and educational
initiative for private landowners, specifically
addressing swift fox habitat and management
needs.
10.1 Investigate biological and ecological parameters of
swift fox.
10.1.1 The SFCT is to assign members to a
technical committee to review the current state of
knowledge on the species and habitat requirements.
10.1.2 Each state wildlife agency and cooperators
will address species/habitat needs in site-specific
12
High
Low
Medium
Low
Low
�11. Removal of the swift
fox from the ESA
Category I species listing
areas identified as having special concerns for
population maintenance.
10.1.3 Investigate the susceptibility of swift fox to
common diseases and parasites in various parts of
the species range.
11.1 The SFCT will initiate a cooperative effort with the
USFWS to develop criteria for removal of the swift fox
from candidate listing.
11.1.1 The SFCT and USFWS will evaluate current
species and habitat information with developed
criteria for the removal of the swift fox from the
candidate species list.
11.2 States will develop a long-term management plan
for swift fox.
11.2.1 Each state wildlife agency, with assistance of
cooperators, will develop a comprehensive set of
management guidelines which detail species and
habitat conservation measures to assure species
persistence.
13
Low
Low
�OBJECTIVES
1. Establish a Swift Fox Conservation Team (SFCT).
SFCT progress:
The SFCT was formally established in 1994 by way of a letter to the Regional
Director for the USFWS Region 6 from 10 state wildlife agency directors
(Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Texas, Montana, Kansas, North
Dakota, New Mexico, and Oklahoma). The state directors committed their
agencies to development of a Swift Fox Conservation Strategy with specific
objectives for conservation of the species and dedicated resources to achieve
the strategy’s goals. The team was formed under the leadership of the Western
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA). In 2005, the swift fox
conservation effort was incorporated into WAFWA’s Grassland Initiative, which
uses an ecosystem approach to species conservation and allows more direct
coordination between WAFWA and the SFCT.
The SFCT is led by representatives of the 10 state wildlife agencies and includes
additional representation from federal agencies and the Canadian Swift Fox
Recovery Team. Participating cooperators include interested tribes, conservation
and zoological organizations, universities, and state and federal agencies. The
SFCT has met nearly every year since its formation in meetings that are open to
the public. Team meetings provide a forum for information exchange and
discussion and for distribution of annual reports, which document progress by
each partner toward CACS objectives.
Individual state progress:
Since the establishment of the SFCT, each state has provided a
representative to the SFCT and, with few exceptions, representatives have
participated in annual meetings (Appendix A).
Several states formed state swift fox working groups (Kansas, Montana, and
Oklahoma) to address issues specific to individual states; none of the working
groups remains active. Other states incorporated swift fox issues into
furbearer or grassland working groups (North Dakota, Wyoming). The Turner
Endangered Species Fund formed a South Dakota Swift Fox Restoration
Team in South Dakota; this group is not currently active.
2. Determine current swift fox distribution in the United States.
3. Monitor the status of swift fox populations.
SFCT progress:
Documenting distribution of swift foxes has been a major area of emphasis for
the SFCT since the team’s inception, partly in response to the needs of the
14
�USFWS for their assessment of population status in the review process for
potential listing. Objective 2 was accomplished by compiling existing information
to produce a general distribution map. Existing information was analyzed or
updated, while in other cases, surveys were conducted to accurately evaluate
distribution. The initial product of known or easily acquired information was a
general distribution map included in the 1997 CACS. Following that effort, the
team’s goal was to periodically update the estimates of distribution (Objective 3);
a 5-year schedule for updates was agreed upon by team members. State
agencies submitted results of surveys and other documentation of swift fox
occurrences over 5-year periods to NPWRC. In turn, NPWRC compiled those
submissions to produce an updated estimate of rangewide distribution (Sovada
and Scheick 1999, Sovada and Assenmacher 2005, Sovada et al. 2009).
Objective 3 also recommended development of standardized data collection
methods and survey protocols. The SFCT and others have examined this issue
and concluded that any of several methods may produce adequate results for
monitoring swift fox population trends. State agencies and other researchers
have tested a variety of techniques to determine long-term feasibility. What has
emerged is that a commitment to regular monitoring following protocols
established for the chosen method is more important than use of a standard
protocol across the species’ range. Flexibility in application of specific methods
for monitoring swift fox distribution allows states to tailor their monitoring based
on resources available to them and the effort appropriate to their situation. For
example, trapping surveys, which require significant effort, are not appropriate for
North Dakota, a state with no evidence of a resident swift fox population. Also
included in this objective is the SFCT’s recommendation that states with legal
harvest of swift foxes evaluate the feasibility of a pelt tagging program and the
feasibility of mandatory carcass collection.
Individual state progress:
Colorado conducted and published results of research that assessed trapping
grids to calculate occupancy rates in eastern Colorado (Finley et al. 2005).
Trapping grids is the method the state continues to apply for assessing
distribution. The state statutorily defines swift fox as a furbearer species.
Harvest was closed in early 1998; in 2009, responding to a petition from the
public and with consideration of population estimates within the state, the
Wildlife Commission reopened harvest. Presently, the harvest season is from
November 1 through the end of February, with unlimited bag and possession
limits.
Kansas uses results of surveys of townships for tracks to monitor distribution,
along with other detections, such as observations, road kills, and harvest
records. Track surveys are conducted throughout the western part of the state
over a 3-year period every 5 years (i.e., 1997-1999 and 2002-2004). Surveys
are designed to allow application of Marcov Chain Monte Carlo analysis
15
�
methods to estimate distribution (Sargeant et al. 2005). In Kansas, the swift
fox is managed as a furbearer, with pelt tagging required. An average of 55
swift foxes has been tagged annually since tagging began in 1994.
Department personnel opportunistically collect swift fox location information
year-round.
Montana compiles location data from reported observations (e.g.,
observations, road kills) and from results of surveys conducted periodically for
signs (e.g., tracks, dens) of swift foxes. Also, state and Canadian biologists
conducted 2 capture-recapture censuses along the international border. A
swift fox harvest season opened in 2010 for Region 6/Trapping District 6,
which coincides with the general furbearer season from November 1 through
March 1. Harvest is limited through a per-trapper limit of 3 swift fox and a
Trapping District 6 quota of 20 animals in 2010. Harvest is monitored through
24-hour reporting using a Mandatory Reporting Response Entry System, a
pelt-tagging period with registration requirement, mandatory hide and skull
presentation for tooth/biological sample collection, and 48-hour season
closure notice. The state is collaborating on a swift fox camera trapping
survey in eastern Montana with the World Wildlife Fund, Bureau of Land
Management, and St. Cloud State University. The project began in 2010 and
is expected to be completed by the end of 2012.
Nebraska has used several techniques to survey for swift foxes. Currently,
scent station surveys are used, with a goal of surveying suitable townships
every 5 years. Survey results, supplemented with road casualties and
observation data, are used to estimate distribution in the state. Harvest is not
allowed for this state endangered species.
New Mexico has tested several detection techniques (Harrison et al. 2002,
Harrison et al. 2004), but currently uses carnivore scat surveys with genetic
analysis to confirm species identity. Results of these surveys, supplemented
by information from roadkills, observations, and harvest records are used to
estimate distribution in the state. The swift fox is managed as a furbearer.
North Dakota searches for presence of swift foxes in the state with track
surveys conducted in a sample of western counties. No resident population
has been documented in the state, but there were 7 verified occurrences of
swift foxes in the state since 2007 (i.e., road casualties and untargeted
capture during fur harvest). Six of the 7 foxes had been radiocollared for
study in South Dakota (see Sovada et al. 2009) and dispersed into North
Dakota. North Dakota manages swift fox as a furbearer with no open season.
Oklahoma conducted track surveys across the swift fox historical range
between 1999 and 2000. These surveys revealed that swift foxes currently
occupy most of their historical range in Oklahoma except for the eastern edge
(about 15-20% of the range) where habitat alteration (increased tree and
juniper cover) has reduced habitat suitability. Oklahoma continues to conduct
track and sign surveys to estimate changes in distribution and relative
abundance. Half of nearly 200 townships with suitable habitat are surveyed
16
�
for sign on a 3-year schedule, with ⅓ of the range surveyed each year.
Similar to Kansas, surveys are conducted so that results can be analyzed
with Marcov Chain Monte Carlo analysis methods (Sargeant et al. 2005). The
swift fox is managed as a furbearer with no open season.
South Dakota assesses presence of swift foxes in areas of its presumed or
suspected range with several methods of presence/absence surveys,
supplemented with incidental trapping and observation data. Four
reintroductions have expanded distribution in the state, and additional
monitoring continues at some of those sites. The swift fox is managed as a
state threatened species and species of concern.
Texas completed and published results of an assessment of distribution
within portions of the historic range with suitable habitat by using scat surveys
and live trapping (Schwalm 2007). Texas manages the swift fox as a
furbearer species.
Wyoming summarized known current distribution in 1997 and has refined the
information in subsequent years. Wyoming currently surveys with track plates;
transect surveys have been done in areas from which swift foxes were
removed for reintroduction in South Dakota. Wyoming manages swift fox as a
nongame species.
NPWRC developed and described a cost-effective method of estimating
distribution (Sargeant et al. 2005) and maintains distribution records
submitted by state agencies and others; this information has been periodically
summarized and displayed in distribution maps; the most current map and
distribution data were published in a peer-reviewed journal (Sovada et al.
2009).
4. Determine minimum viable population size estimates and genetic
integrity.
SFCT progress:
Following several discussions at SFCT meetings, the team has concluded that it
is not appropriate to use population viability analyses (PVA), because the large
amount of data necessary for precise estimates is not available. Moreover,
Colorado and Kansas continue to support strong and stable swift fox populations.
Several additional states have documented swift fox occupation of the known
historical range. The successful Canadian reintroduction program has resulted in
an expanding distribution of swift foxes in northern Montana, and more recent
reintroductions have shown promising results in supplementing native
populations in suitable habitats. Continued population monitoring across the
species’ range will help detect changes in abundance or distribution that merit
specific conservation or management actions.
Regarding the genetic issue, the SFCT has concluded that these issues will not
be resolved through the use of a technical committee, but through design and
17
�publication of valid genetic examinations. SFCT members have cooperated in a
recent genetics analysis being conducted at Texas Tech University (TTU; current
graduate students Doni Schwalm and Safi Darden). The SFCT also developed a
specimen collection protocol to take advantage of an offer from the University of
New Mexico’s Museum of Southwestern Biology (MSB) to store samples for
future genetics study or other uses.
Individual state progress:
Colorado continues to monitor its population; has submitted genetic samples
to TTU; is exploring the use of lures to collect genetic materials.
Kansas has collected materials opportunistically for TTU and for deposition at
the NMMSB.
Montana’s results from the International Censuses indicate that the northern
Montana/southern Canada population is viable and self-sustaining; has
submitted genetic samples to TTU.
Nebraska has submitted genetic samples to TTU and materials to NMMSB.
New Mexico continues to monitor population; swift and kit foxes (Vulpes
macrotis) hybridize in southeastern New Mexico.
North Dakota has submitted genetic samples to TTU; these samples are
presumably from animals that originated in South Dakota or Montana.
Oklahoma – A study conducted by Oklahoma State University tested several
population monitoring techniques, resulting in a recommendation to use scat
deposition rates and time-to-track encounters to monitor populations in
western Oklahoma.
South Dakota – minimum viable population concept has been applied at the
individual reintroduction area level; previously submitted samples to genetics
study by Dr. Robert Wayne. South Dakota will opportunistically contribute
genetic materials to TTU study.
Texas - TTU research in progress to examine genetic relationships to patch
occupancy in TX and throughout the species’ range in the U.S.
Wyoming – demography project conducted in Shirley Basin; genetic samples
collected in association with swift fox trapping for TESF translocation project
in South Dakota.
5. Identify the existing native shortgrass/midgrass prairie ecosystem and
other suitable swift fox habitats.
SFCT progress:
This objective was written with the assumption, based on strong evidence, that
shortgrass and mixed-grass prairies are the most important habitats for swift
foxes. Research, particularly in Kansas and Oklahoma, has indicated that swift
foxes are adaptable and able to thrive in some agricultural dominated
landscapes. There is speculation that interactions with other canids, such as
coyotes (Canis latrans) and red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), play important roles in
18
�swift fox distribution and den site selection. Members of the SFCT have
completed several reviews of swift fox habitat and den site selection, both within
individual states and across the range. These summaries have been published in
annual SFCT reports and in The Swift Fox – Ecology and Conservation of Swift
Foxes in a Changing World, a book resulting from a swift fox symposium held in
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1998. The state of the art of habitat mapping
continues to improve, and work on this objective will continue, both at state and
rangewide levels.
Individual state progress:
Colorado has reported swift foxes occupying the preferred shortgrass prairie,
but foxes are also using marginal habitat. The Natural Diversity Information
Source includes the swift fox range map and vegetation and landownership
data.
Kansas created GIS habitat maps in 1992 and 2002 as part of the GAP
project.
Montana used aerial surveys to delineate grassland habitat; larger blocks
were integrated into the Natural Resources Information System to produce
grassland and sagebrush habitat GIS layers.
Nebraska created a GIS habitat map using soil type, slope and vegetative
cover criteria; habitat information collected at all swift fox points to ground
truth this map.
New Mexico identified suitable habitat during preparation of CWCS using scat
survey data and GIS data for shortgrass prairie; this is also used for multispecies habitat management.
North Dakota – USGS completed a land-cover classification map in 2005 for
North Dakota as part of the GAP project. The North Dakota Game and Fish
Department completed a grassland habitat model for the state in 2010.
Oklahoma has mapped and analyzed habitat within 3 km of swift fox track
locations; mapped available habitat within historical range using several map
sources; some habitat mapping was done in association with shortgrass high
plains species of greatest conservation need habitat assessment project.
South Dakota – habitat mapping was done in association with reintroduction
projects; various ecosystem planning efforts (TNC, SDWAP) have involved
habitat mapping exercises.
Wyoming developed some predictive habitat modeling for habitats used by
swift foxes.
USGS estimated the area of potential occupancy based on current
apportionment of suitable habitats within the historic range (Sovada et al.
2009). Land-cover data from GAP analyses (U.S. Geological Survey National
Gap Analysis Program, http://gapanalysis.nbii.gov/portal/server.pt) and the
National Land and Water Information Service (Government of Canada 2008;
http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display19
�afficher.do?id=1226330737632&lang=eng) were used with suitable habitat
defined by considering published research and expert opinion.
6. Promote habitat conservation and habitat management in occupied and
suitable swift fox habitat.
SFCT progress:
This objective involves identifying swift fox habitats on public and private lands
and, through a variety of methods and encouraging protection of habitats to
benefit swift foxes. Formation of the SFCT and participation at annual meetings
facilitated coordination among agencies. Achievements toward this goal have
mostly occurred at the state or national grassland level. Attempts to engage the
NRCS in a sustained way have been less successful, although coordination
between individual state agencies and NRCS has occurred. Additionally, in 2005,
the NRCS and the Wildlife Habitat Council jointly released a swift fox habitat
management leaflet to describe species habitat requirements and to assist
landowners and managers in developing strategies to enhance swift fox as a
component of a grassland management plan (NRCS 2006). This resource is also
available at this site:
(ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/WHMI/WEB/pdf/TechnicalLeaflets/SwiftFox.pdf)
Also, the NRCS Grassland Reserve Program has helped landowners to restore
and protect grasslands, including rangeland and pastureland, while maintaining
the areas as grazing lands. This program should benefit swift foxes. Many private
organizations (e.g., The Nature Conservancy, American Prairie Foundation) are
engaged in efforts to protect and rehabilitate shortgrass and mixed grass prairies.
Because swift foxes have close association with these habitats, protection and
restoration efforts could ultimately benefit swift foxes.
Individual state progress:
Colorado has delineated landownership in suitable swift fox habitats through
the agency’s Conservation Plan for Grassland Species in Colorado.
Kansas has identified public lands within the species’ historic range; this is an
ongoing task as part of the agency’s larger mission.
Montana has produced grassland GIS layers; important private lands have
been identified in northcentral Montana; state conservation easements and
federal programs have protected grassland habitat.
Nebraska is aware of which public lands are within swift fox suitable habitat,
but has not yet mapped them; they partner with public land agencies while
conducting surveys and collecting carcasses; they also partner with private
landowners through state and federal land management programs and
through cooperation with TNC; swift fox is protected as a state endangered
species.
20
�
New Mexico has partially addressed mapping this priority habitat through its
CWCS, an effort that will continue; land purchases and conservation
easements have been made within the swift fox range for grassland species
conservation.
North Dakota has identified landownership within grassland habitat for the
state.
Oklahoma has identified landownership within the historic range. In 2003, the
Landowner Incentive Program was created to provide technical and financial
assistance to private landowners for the restoration, enhancement, and
protection of habitats important to a wide range of at-risk species, including
swift fox.
South Dakota – swift fox is protected as a state threatened species; swift fox
was identified as a species of greatest conservation need in the SDWAP;
state has worked cooperatively with the Forest Service in conducting
research and survey projects.
Wyoming identified public lands during habitat mapping efforts; private lands
are protected through efforts of the Landowner Incentive Program
coordinator.
7. Expand distribution of the United States swift fox population to occupy
50 percent of the suitable habitat that is available.
SFCT progress:
The components of this objective are to enable expansion of swift fox populations
where appropriate and feasible and to mitigate potential threats to swift fox
expansion. Implementation is encouraged at the state level, but analysis has also
been conducted rangewide. Grassland protection and restoration,
reintroductions, and management practices that directly affect swift fox ability to
pioneer in unoccupied areas (e.g., protective status from trapping and hunting)
are management actions that enhance expanding distribution of swift foxes.
The SFCT established guidelines for reintroduction of swift foxes into suitable
habitats that are not occupied. A number of entities have conducted swift fox
reintroduction projects that have been successful. Reintroduction results are
included in SFCT annual reports and in scientific journals. Discussions continue
at SFCT meetings on future needs to help expand swift fox populations into
suitable unoccupied habitat.
Individual state progress:
Colorado – no population expansion needed; threats to grassland species are
covered in the state’s grassland plan and in TNC’s Central Shortgrass Prairie
Ecoregional Plan. The state of Colorado has encouraged discussion at SFCT
meetings regarding the need to prioritize reintroduction sites and to
encourage specific goal-setting for reintroduction projects.
21
�
Kansas – suitable habitat is occupied; Kansas has provided swift foxes to
Lower Brule Tribe, South Dakota, for reintroduction and is a potential source
of foxes for future reintroductions.
Montana has identified suitable habitats by land ownership; a number of
grassland protection measures that will benefit swift foxes are ongoing, such
as state conservation easements; swift fox population in northcentral Montana
continues to expand as a result of successful Canadian reintroduction
program; reintroduction projects have been undertaken by Blackfeet and Fort
Peck tribes; evaluation continues regarding additional areas in southeastern
MT for swift fox expansion.
Nebraska protects swift fox as a state endangered species; this protected
status facilitates natural expansion.
New Mexico maintains swift fox and its habitat as priorities in its CWCS by
maintaining existing habitat.
North Dakota has not taken action on this objective.
Oklahoma – Swift foxes occupy more than 75% of their historic range within
Oklahoma. Within their occupied range in Oklahoma, track surveys are
conducted in half of the townships (84 of 168 townships) on a 3-year cycle to
monitor the population. Based upon track surveys at the township level, swift
foxes are present in at least 62 of the 84 townships (74%). Of the townships
where swift fox tracks have not been detected, most have limited suitable
habitat. Based upon these monitoring surveys, most of the suitable swift fox
habitat in Oklahoma is occupied.
South Dakota protects swift fox as a state threatened species; 4 entities have
undertaken reintroduction projects, including TESF, Badlands National Park,
Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and Oglala Sioux Parks and Recreation Authority;
state worked with reintroduction partners to develop a protocol to facilitate
reporting and retrieval of dead or lost foxes to help in data collection.
Wyoming has established priority areas for swift fox in its state grassland
management plan.
USGS is a collaborative partner in a research evaluation of a swift fox
reintroduction at Badlands National Park.
8. Integrate swift fox conservation strategy objectives with management
and habitat objectives of other prairie ecosystem species such as bison
(Bison bison), black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), burrowing owl
(Speotyto cunicularia), mountain plover (Charadrius montanus), prairiechicken (Tympanuchus spp.), and prairie dog (Cynomys spp.).
SFCT progress:
In addition to the integration and coordination component, this objective includes
a strategy to evaluate the need for CACS revision. As described for other
objectives, recent planning efforts by state, tribal, federal, and private entities
have often been ecosystem-based, resulting in better accommodation of multiple
22
�species that depend on a particular habitat, such as shortgrass or mixed-grass
prairie. Conservation and management of native grassland habitats benefits a
variety of species, both high-visibility species, such as the swift fox, and others
that have not been studied extensively. This has been particularly important
recently, as state wildlife agencies have completed state wildlife action plans.
These plans were required to address the needs of all wildlife species. To
accomplish this ambitious task, many state agencies used an ecosystem- or
habitat-based planning approach. Continued attention to grassland-dependent
species and escalating concerns about native grassland loss will certainly benefit
swift fox. All 10 state wildlife agencies within the range of the swift fox identified
this species as a species of greatest conservation need in their state wildlife
action plans. The coordination role of the Western Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies in management and recovery of prairie-dependent species has
facilitated integration for the species listed above.
9. Promote scientific swift fox management and a public education
program.
SFCT progress:
This objective encourages the SFCT and its partners to help fulfill information
needs for management guidelines, range management practices, data collection
methods, and current information to a variety of audiences and to consider
cooperating on a multi-species prairie management publication to promote prairie
species conservation. The SFCT has met nearly every year since its formation to
exchange information and has produced 14 annual reports since 1995. These
are available at:
http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/GrasslandSpecies/SwiftFoxConservatio
nTeam.htm. The SFCT and its partners participated in a swift fox symposium,
held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada in 1998, which led to the publication
of the book The Swift Fox – Ecology and Conservation of Swift Foxes in a
Changing World. NPWRC co-convened, with the Canadian Wildlife Service, the
symposium and co-edited the book, which includes symposium papers and
solicited chapters on key topics.
When reintroduction emerged as an issue, the SFCT prepared reintroduction
guidelines to help partners plan and execute responsible and potentially
successful projects. To reach a broader audience, the SFCT has produced 9
newsletters, which are available with annual reports and other documents at the
SFCT website, hosted by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (see website address
in previous paragraph). The SFCT assisted with the production of a Wildlife
Habitat Council Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Leaflet on swift fox, which
was previously mentioned under Objective 6. No progress has been made on the
idea of producing a joint publication to promote the scientific basis for conserving
prairie species.
23
�The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) has been an important partner in
sharing information about swift fox to the zoo visitor community and in managing
swift fox in AZA-member facilities. The swift fox falls under the AZA’s Canid
Taxon Advisory Group (TAG). The Canid TAG created a Species Survival Plan
(SSP) for the swift fox, with Marilyn McBirney serving as the swift fox SSP
coordinator. Marilyn McBirney, Pueblo Zoo and Kim Shotola, Houston Zoo, have
represented the AZA at many SFCT meetings, interacting with the group on AZA
needs for captive foxes and discussing educational opportunities associated with
swift foxes and grassland ecosystems.
10. Implement research on swift fox biology and ecology.
SFCT progress:
This objective encourages investigation of biological and ecological parameters
of swift fox, including formation of a research committee to develop and evaluate
research ideas and to take advantage of research funding. The objective also
encourages state-level swift fox research and investigation of susceptibility of
swift foxes to diseases and parasites. Research entities successfully sought
funds through a variety of sources and numerous research projects have been
completed during the past 10 years. Results have been published either in SFCT
annual reports or scientific journals. The SFCT successfully competed for
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation funds to begin the compilation of
distribution data and associated habitat characteristics work that contributed to
the Sovada et al. 2009 publication. The NPWRC maintains a swift fox
bibliography at the following site:
http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/swiftlit/index.htm
11. Removal of the swift fox from the ESA candidate species listing.
SFCT progress:
This objective recommends that the SFCT identify criteria for removal of the swift
fox from the candidate list and recommends long-term state management
planning for this species. The USFWS is required to evaluate listings based on 5
listing criteria. The SFCT has facilitated collection of survey and research
information that helped provide sound biological justification for removal of the
species from the federal candidate list in 2001. In addition, the proven, long-term
commitment of the SFCT and its partners provided important justification for
removal from the candidate list. Few states have developed single-species swift
fox management plans. Many wildlife agencies have shifted their focus from
individual species planning to broader ecosystem- or habitat-based planning,
accommodating the needs of grassland-dependent species, including the swift
fox. Overall the collective body of work of the SFCT provides a template for
efforts to conserve and manage this species.
24
�ACCOMPLISHMENTS SUMMARIZED BY ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
LISTING FACTORS
A significant amount of work has been accomplished and published since the
publication of the CACS in 1997. Much of the work originated from the increased
attention to this species by state, federal and tribal entities, and partners, in
addition to long-term monitoring conducted by state and federal agencies as part
of furbearer population monitoring or rare species recovery efforts. The following
summary touches on recent studies and monitoring programs, with an emphasis
on publication in scientific, peer-reviewed journals. This section is organized by
the 5 listing factors considered by the USFWS for listing, delisting, and status
changes under the Endangered Species Act. However, some studies are
relevant to more than 1 listing factor.
An overview of swift fox ecology, distribution, and status as of 2003 presents
helpful background information (Allardyce and Sovada 2003).
Present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of the
species’ habitat or range.
Literature related to swift fox habitat and den-site selection was summarized as
of 2003 (Harrison and Whitaker-Hoagland 2003).
Vegetative characteristics of denning and foraging areas were measured in
southwestern South Dakota (Uresk et al. 2003b). Total vegetation visual
obstruction reading (VOR) was higher at den sites than at random sites, and
foraging areas had vegetation VORs greater than at random sites. The authors
speculated that vegetation height-density was important to swift foxes in the
study area.
Sovada et al. 2009 calculated the historical range for the swift fox in the U.S. and
Canada at approximately 1.5 million km2, which the authors considered a liberal
estimate because of the inclusion of some unsuitable habitat. The authors also
stated that a precise delineation of historical swift fox range may not be possible,
due in part to the dynamic nature of grassland habitat. They also state that other
authors may have overestimated historical swift fox range by as much as 2025%, particularly in areas dominated by tallgrass prairie vegetation.
Sovada et al. 2009 calculated current swift fox distribution using presence or
absence of occurrence records at the county level in the U.S. and based on
blocks of 93 km2 in Canada. Based on data collected from 2001-2006, the
species occupies approximately 44% of historical range in the U.S. and 3% in
Canada. Assuming that short-structured grasslands are the highest-quality
habitat for this species, 39% of the historical range contains high-quality habitat.
25
�Swift fox currently occupy 52% of the highest-quality habitat (565,926 km2). The
authors speculate on possible reasons for the lack of swift fox occurrence in
areas with suitable habitat.
Population monitoring:
In addition to ongoing monitoring activities summarized in annual team reports,
population monitoring results have been published in government publications
and scientific journals.
The swift fox population in Canada and northern Montana was censused in 20002001 and 2005-2006 (Moehrenschlager and Moehrenschlager 2001, 2006). The
2000-2001 census resurveyed 108 Canadian townships from a census
conducted in 1996-1997 and added 80 townships in Montana. Using a catchand-release method, the census documented a 98.6% capture of unmarked
foxes, a 3-fold increase in known distribution, and a sex ratio that favored
females. Use of the population estimate technique from 1996-1997 indicated a
total population size of 877 foxes. The 2000-2001 census revealed that the
previous subpopulations now form a loosely-connected population in Canada
and Montana.
A repeated census in 2005-2006 resulted in a population estimate of 1162.5
foxes, with an equal sex ratio. All captured foxes were wild-born. The population
had greater connectivity than in 2001-2002, with fox captures separated by no
more than 1 township. Population expansion continued in Montana
(Moehrenschlager and Moehrenschlager 2006). Results of the 3 censuses
contributed to the development of an analysis of habitat suitability and population
viability analysis for swift fox in the Canadian-northern Montana population
(Moehrenschlager and Moehrenschlager 2006). A related planning tool is a swift
fox recovery plan for Alberta (Alberta Swift Fox Recovery Team 2007).
Eight habitat variables were examined at occupied and unoccupied natal dens
near the Canadian reintroduction area in the early 1990s (Pruss 1999). Dens
were located primarily on tops of hills with a gradual slope and tended to be
closer to roads and in areas with higher grass than unoccupied dens. Selection
of greater grass height may be explained by increased insect prey. Road
proximity may be influenced by the availability of carrion, avoidance of roads by
coyotes, and potential use of roads as swift fox travel corridors.
Swift foxes were radio-tracked near Medicine Bow, Wyoming in the late 1990s to
assess home range characteristics (Olson and Lindzey 2002a). Home range size
in this transition area between sagebrush steppe and grassland habitats was
similar to that reported in other studies in grassland habitat. Swift fox pairs had
overlapping home ranges, but overlap was minimal for adjacent pairs, possibly
26
�indicating territorial behavior. Males had larger home ranges than females, but
home ranges of both sexes were smaller during pup rearing.
The same authors reported on survival and production (Olson and Lindzey
2002b). Mean annual survival rate was 0.58. Coyotes were the main cause of
death; half of the coyote-caused mortalities occurred outside the foxes’ home
ranges, potentially due to lack of familiarity with the area. Two swift foxes died of
canine distemper, the first documented occurrence of the disease in this species.
However, a number of animals had been exposed to the virus, leading the
researchers to question whether canine distemper was causing serious harm to
this population. Mean young per litter was 4.6, a higher figure than in other parts
of the species’ range, possibly due to higher prey abundance in sage habitat
compared to grassland habitat.
A study at the same area in southeastern Wyoming examined home range size
characteristics of 10 radio-collared swift foxes (Pechacek et al. 2000). Home
range overlap was greater for paired animals than for unpaired animals, and
home ranges overlapped those of neighbors. The small sample size did not allow
the researchers to determine whether this population had a monogamous or
polygynous mating system.
A summary of the status of swift fox in Montana as of the late 1990s described
clustering of recent records in northcentral Montana (Knowles et al. 2003). A
trapping-grid survey was conducted in the area to determine the extent of swift
fox occupancy, which was presumably a result of swift fox expansion from the
Canadian reintroduction project (Zimmerman 1998, Zimmerman et al. 2003).
Zimmerman’s study confirmed 3 litters in Blaine County, Montana.
A trap-grid survey was conducted in eastern Colorado to estimate swift fox
population and predict occupancy (Finley et al. 2005). The best capture time was
found to be September through March, and short-grass prairie habitat was an
important determinant of detection probability and occupancy rate. The authors
discuss drawbacks associated with such population indexing techniques as scent
stations and spotlighting. Finley et al. (2005) suggest that this survey method
could be improved with the use of radioed animals to determine whether trap
sites attract certain individuals.
Researchers at the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in Colorado in the late 1990s
followed movements of 90 radio-collared adult and juvenile swift foxes
(Schauster et al. 2002b). Adjacent groups overlapped in seasonal areas,
particularly at night, with less overlap of daytime denning areas, possibly
indicating territoriality of denning areas. Adult dispersers had higher survival
rates (100%) than juvenile dispersers (37.5%). Some females bred during their
first breeding season. The authors found swift fox density to be negatively
27
�associated with abundance of lagomorphs; in this area, black-tailed jackrabbits
are associated with shrubby areas, which coyotes are more likely to inhabit than
swift foxes. Swift foxes were positively associated with rodent abundance and
negatively associated with coyote abundance. Juvenile males dispersed earlier
than juvenile females, raising the question of whether pairs tolerate young
females longer in case they have a role as a litter helper.
Fifty-nine social units were identified during a study at the Piñon Canyon
Maneuver Site in Colorado during the late 1990s (Kitchen et al. 2005a). Pairs
maintained closer contact during the breeding season than during pup rearing.
Mates were farthest apart during the night, likely indicating separate foraging, a
strategy that is more efficient when hunting smaller prey. Females spent more
time in the core area of the pair’s home range. Males appeared to spend more
time maintaining their territory than did females, although males stayed closer to
females during the breeding season, possibly indicating that they were guarding
their mates. Females tended to stay in their territory following the loss of the
mate, while 50% of males left after mate loss.
An earlier study at this site in the late 1980s estimated home range size, diets,
annual survivorship rates, and mortality causes (Andersen et al. 2003). The
authors concluded that coyote predation was a major source of mortality for swift
fox. Also at the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in Colorado, researchers compared
dens for radioed swift foxes to control sites (Kitchen et al. 2006a). Dens had no
predominant orientation. More dens occurred in core areas, potentially as a
strategy to avoid encounters with predators. The same study also examined
genetic structure of the swift fox in the area (Kitchen et al. 2005b). The
researchers found kin clustering, wherein neighbors were more closely related
than nonneighbors, with female clusters more extensive.
Den characteristics were described from rangeland and cropland sites in
northwestern Kansas (Jackson and Choate 2000). Few differences in den site
characteristics between the habitat types illustrated the capacity of swift fox to
exploit a variety of habitat types. Dens in cropland areas had multiple openings.
They were quickly reopened if closed by farm machinery.
Swift fox patterns in rangeland and cropland sites were also compared in a study
in western Kansas (Sovada et al. 2003). Home range sizes and core use areas
did not differ between the 2 habitat types. The predominant cropland sites used
were fallow/stubble and small grain fields. Grasslands were the primary
rangeland sites used.
Another study comparing swift foxes in rangeland and cropland examined
mortality, body size, and relative abundance (Matlack et al. 2000). The authors
detected no difference by habitat or sex in the number of days of adult survival
28
�following capture for radio instrumentation. Swift foxes in rangeland were killed
more frequently by coyotes and vehicles. Swift foxes in cropland were killed more
often from nontraumatic causes. Overall, coyotes accounted for 33% of
mortalities. Adults in rangeland were 6-7% larger than animals in cropland. No
difference was detected in relative abundance between rangeland and cropland.
Swift fox research in eastern New Mexico indicated that coyotes were the
primary mortality cause and that diet was dominated by invertebrates and
mammals (Harrison 2003). With the exception of a study in Nebraska, home
range sizes were larger than those reported in other areas. This population
exhibited rapid turnover, with animals generally living less than 5 years. Harrison
(2003) cautioned against considering this area a “stronghold” for swift foxes
without further study.
An examination of swift fox distribution in New Mexico indicated the species’
presence in nearly all historically occupied counties (Harrison and Schmitt 2003).
Surveys did not detect swift foxes in areas converted to cropland and sites with
abundant shrubs and taller grasses.
A study on Kiowa National Grassland in New Mexico in the late 1990s examined
swift fox den site characteristics (Kintigh and Andersen 2005). Den sites had
higher values for road density within 1 and 2 km and elevation index and lower
values for distances to prairie dog towns and residential density within 1 and 2
km. Dens were found more frequently on soils with heavier texture than random
sites. The authors offer a number of explanations for the relationship between
swift foxes and prairie dogs.
Swift foxes in Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas were radio-collared to
determine dispersal characteristics (Kamler et al. 2004). More adult males than
females dispersed, and more juvenile males than females dispersed. Juvenile
males showed bimodal dispersal peaks in September-October and JanuaryFebruary, corresponding to their initial independence in the fall and the breeding
season, when adults may force juveniles to disperse. Adult dispersers had higher
settlement rates than juveniles. Adult male dispersal may help reduce inbreeding
with daughters. Males usually dispersed and abandoned pups after a mate’s
death, while females typically remained in the territory to rear pups. Coyotes
were the main cause of mortality. The authors caution that their results in
shortgrass prairie habitats in the southern portion of the species’ range may not
be applicable throughout the range of the swift fox.
A distribution survey in Oklahoma’s panhandle indicated that swift foxes were
most concentrated in the westernmost portion of the area, with a wide but spotty
distribution (Shaughnessy 2003). Highest detection occurred in areas with the
lowest coyote detection rates.
29
�A study in a fragmented landscape in western Texas showed strong swift fox
selection for native prairie habitats, complete avoidance of irrigated agricultural
fields, and nearly complete avoidance of Conservation Reserve Program
grasslands (Kamler et al. 2003a). Mortalities to road kills were higher than losses
to coyotes, although coyotes were heavily exploited in the study area. The
authors discuss the adaptability and population increases of habitat generalist
furbearers, such as coyotes, red foxes, and gray foxes, to human-caused
environmental changes.
An examination of swift fox use of black-tailed prairie dogs in northwestern Texas
indicated less use than expected of prairie dog towns (Nicholson et al. 2006).
During the single period when swift foxes used prairie dog towns in proportion to
their availability, coyotes had been reduced in the area as part of another
research project. Swift foxes in the study area preyed extensively on
grasshoppers, with a shift to prairie dog towns during the winter. Possible
reasons for lack of overlap between prairie dogs and swift foxes in this study
were swift fox avoidance of prairie dog towns to avoid encounters with coyotes
and the fact that swift foxes typically hunt during the night and prairie dogs are
diurnal. Prairie dog expansion in the study area resulted in disappearance of
swift foxes from what was formerly a core use area.
Den use was studied at Rita Blanca National Grassland in northwestern Texas,
particularly related to use of artificial escape dens (McGee et al. 2006a, McGee
et al. 2007). McGee et al. (2007) documented some daytime use of escape dens.
An average of 8 dens was used annually in the study area. McGee et al. (2006a)
reported that recruitment rates did not differ between untreated areas and treated
areas, where escape dens were added.
The critical role of den sites for swift, kit, and arctic foxes was addressed in an
article that described such aspects as den site use, structure, location, and role
in survival and recovery (Tannerfeldt et al. 2003).
Population monitoring techniques:
A major effort since finalization of the CACS in 1997 has been testing of various
techniques to monitor swift fox populations. Although the idea of developing and
using standard methodology throughout the species’ range has been explored,
the consensus of the SFCT has been that individual management entities must
determine the most feasible and biologically defensible technique for their
particular jurisdictions. The following section describes various studies to test
individual and multiple population monitoring techniques.
30
�Transects were searched for swift fox scat in New Mexico as an alternative to
more time-consuming scent station surveys (Harrison et al. 2004). The authors
concluded that the proportion of transects with scats and the total number of
collected scats may be useful indices for determining relative population
abundance. Scat-detection dogs were used to collect San Joaquin kit fox scat
(Smith et al. 2005). The trained dogs were effective for finding scat under
differing surface types, habitats, and population densities. Dogs detected scat in
both core and satellite kit fox populations. This tool may be useful in areas with
low kit fox density.
Scent-station survey results were compared for kit foxes in California and swift
foxes in Kansas (Sargeant et al. 2003). Scent stations were not found to be cost
effective or reliable for determining swift fox distribution. The authors detail a
number of problems with this technique as it is typically operated and interpreted.
Although the swift fox is not addressed, the effectiveness of scent-station surveys
for furbearers in Minnesota further detailed cautions that should be associated
with this method (Sargeant et al. 1998). If a scent station is the experimental unit,
multiple visits by an individual to closely-spaced stations can confound results.
Results from scent stations should not be used to compare abundance among
differing habitat types. Scent station visits may be heavily influenced by human
activity, weather, season, and habitat characteristics.
Tracking plate transects were tested as a swift fox detection method in
southeastern Wyoming (Olson et al. 2003). Detection rates were calculated with
the use of radio-collared animals. The authors propose that this method may be
useful for detecting population declines.
Several studies have compared population monitoring techniques. Spotlight and
scent-station surveys did not accurately reflect population changes in kit foxes in
California (Warrick and Harris 2001). Swift fox pups typically do not emerge from
the natal den until weaned at 5-7 weeks. Four methods to survey swift fox pups
were examined in northwestern Texas – visual counts, night vision scope, denprobe system, and automated video monitoring system (McGee et al. 2005). Den
probes did not work well. The automated video monitoring system was set up 4070 meters from a den or radioed female and detected swift fox each time.
Techniques for determining relative and absolute abundance were compared in
the Kiowa National Grassland, New Mexico (Harrison et al. 2002). Relative
abundance methods included scent stations, track searching, spotlighting, and
calling surveys. Absolute abundance methods were trapping followed by
resighting with cameras and scat collection for DNA analysis. Track searching,
spotlight surveys, and calling surveys were not efficient in this study. Scat
collection was the most efficient, but also the most expensive relative abundance
technique. Scat collection may not be useful in wetter climates, where scat may
31
�mold and DNA become degraded. However, a wetter climate may make track
searching a more feasible technique.
Trapping grids were used to determine swift fox occupancy rates in eastern
Colorado as a follow up to a previous study (Martin et al. 2007). The authors
failed to detect a population change and speculated that monitoring changes in
shortgrass prairie may be a better swift fox monitoring tool, with the
understanding that there will be a time lag in population response to habitat
changes. The pros and cons of an invasive technique such as trapping and
retrapping are discussed, along with a suggestion that scat collection for DNA be
considered, despite the potential issue of gaining landowner access.
Ninety swift foxes were radio-collared at the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in
Colorado to evaluate 6 survey methods (Schauster et al. 2002a). In order from
best to worst predictors of swift fox density were mark-recapture estimates, scat
deposition rate surveys, scent-post surveys, spotlight counts, and trapping
surveys (catch per unit effort). Track searching (activity index) was not correlated
to swift fox density. The authors include a discussion of various considerations in
set up of monitoring techniques.
Smoked-plate scent stations and spotlighting were compared for swift fox
detection in southwestern South Dakota (Uresk et al. 2003a). Spotlight counts
were not analyzed because of insufficient numbers. Track plates counts were
highest in September. The authors recommended 1-mile-long transects with
baited plates every 0.3 mile, totaling 4 stations per transect, conducted for
multiple nights from mid-August through September. To detect swift foxes in a
rare population, spotlighting may be most useful to locate den sites and to
estimate number of young produced.
Tracking plates, infra-red cameras, and spotlight surveys were used in a
carnivore detection study in Oklahoma’s panhandle (Shaughnessy 2003).
Spotlight surveys were not time effective. Triggered cameras helped verify track
identification at tracking plates, but the technique was expensive. Tracking plates
were the most time and cost effective of the evaluated methods.
Wyoming Game, Fish and Parks Department (WGFD) evaluated infrared
cameras, hair snares, and live trapping as potential survey methods for swift fox
between May and November 2009 in southcentral Wyoming (Knox and Grenier
2010). Performance of these methods was compared using several metrics. The
most efficient survey method for determining swift fox presence in southcentral
Wyoming was infrared cameras. Cameras were easily deployed by 1 person and
required minimal person-hours to set up and take down. Infrared cameras also
effectively documented swift fox when other methods failed to do so. For future
surveys the authors recommended that WGFD utilize the infrared camera
32
�method with an array of 5 cameras per quadrat using a petroleum jelly-based
skunk essence as the attractant. By using arrays of 5 cameras, more quadrats
can be surveyed simultaneously, thus reducing costs and duration of the survey.
Care should be taken to ensure that cameras are programmed to maximize data
storage and battery life. Surveys should occur during the fall dispersal period
(September–December) when swift fox detection rates are reported to be high.
Triggered infrared cameras were used during an assessment of an area in
northeastern Montana to determine swift fox occupation (Bly et al. 2010).
Cameras are also being used to survey swift fox presence or absence in eastern
Montana (Alexander 2011).
A technique used to restore digital images was used to estimate swift fox
distribution in western Kansas with results of track searching (Sargeant et al.
2005). The model estimated distribution, rather than plotting observed
occurrences, which is often done for species distribution maps. With secretive,
nocturnal species like the swift fox, occurrence outliers may skew distribution
maps, and animals may also not be detected within core areas. The authors
describe the conditions needed for this technique to be useful.
Related field techniques:
Additional recent publications relate to capture or handling techniques (Kamler et
al. 2002, Kozlowski et al. 2003, Moehrenschlager et al. 2003), an aging
technique (Richholt and Carbyn 2003), and the use of barking sequence analysis
to classify individual captive animals (Darden et al. 2003).
Reintroduction:
In some areas, habitat may appear to be suitable for swift foxes, but the area
may lack a source of animals for natural expansion. The generally successful
results of the Canadian swift fox reintroduction project are well known (Carbyn et
al. 1994, Herrero 2003). Parks Canada recently released an updated recovery
strategy for the swift fox in Canada (Pruss et al. 2008). The population increase
in Canada resulted in a change in status by the Committee on the Status of
Endangered Wildlife in Canada from extirpated to endangered in 1998 (Carbyn
1998).
An experimental comparison was made between swift foxes translocated from
Wyoming to resident Canadian swift foxes to determine the movement patterns
of the translocated animals (Moehrenschlager and Macdonald 2003).
Translocated animals did not exhibit homing toward Wyoming. They instead
moved randomly from release sites for the first 50 days following release. Those
with larger dispersal distances had lower survival, and translocated males had
33
�higher survival rates than females. The authors recommended that future
reintroductions use soft releases, favor females among released animals, and
use juveniles rather than adults, to avoid negatively impacting experienced
breeders in established home ranges.
Captive-reared swift foxes from the Cochrane Ecological Institute in Alberta were
reintroduced on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Montana from 1998-2002
(Ausband and Foresman 2007b). Twenty-three radio-collared animals were
followed to evaluate population status. Predators, mainly coyotes, caused 79% of
mortalities. Raptors caused ⅓ of mortalities. Radio-collared females died at a
higher rate than expected. Offering rewards for new den site location information
was an effective tool.
Wild-born juveniles were captured and radio-collared on the Blackfeet
Reservation to determine survival rates and dispersal tendencies (Ausband and
Foresman 2007a). Most marked animals dispersed in September and October.
Predation, primarily by coyotes and raptors, caused 80% of mortalities. The
authors noted higher juvenile and first-year survival than in other studies,
possibly due to availability of vacant swift fox habitat.
Potential impacts of juvenile dispersal from the Blackfeet Reservation to
Canadian swift fox populations were described (Ausband and Moehrenschlager
2009). No Canadian animals were recovered in Montana, but a female from the
Blackfeet Reservation was recovered in southeastern Alberta. Five radioed
animals from Montana traveled relatively long distances, compared to other
studies. The authors speculate that the relatively longer travel distances may be
explained by a scarcity of prey or mates. Future reintroductions should consider
the presence of small shortgrass prairie patches to aid dispersing animals.
The Cochrane Ecological Institute in Alberta, Canada, has provided captivereared swift foxes for reintroduction (Smeeton et al. 2003). The history of the
effort and protocols for captive breeding were described.
Swift fox reintroduction at Badlands National Park in South Dakota was
evaluated by 2 research studies (Russell 2006, Schroeder 2007). Russell (2006)
found that habitat characteristics that predicted swift fox presence were
detectable at the landscape, rather than home range level. Swift foxes selected
areas with less vegetation, and they were more vulnerable to coyote predation at
locations with less visibility. Swift foxes used areas closer to prairie dog towns
and closer to roads more than predicted randomly.
Schroeder (2007) evaluated the influences of coyote presence and release sites
on translocated swift foxes. Of model variables tested, only mean distance
moved from the release site contributed to the final model. The author
34
�recommended that future releases continue to use translocated wild animals, be
composed of equal sex ratios, and use short-term, soft-release enclosures.
Coyotes were not removed prior to swift fox releases.
Disease or predation:
Disease:
A summary of known parasites and diseases that affect swift foxes indicated that
fleas were the most abundant ectoparasites, that canine distemper has been
rarely documented, but that limited study in this subject area has occurred
(Pybus and Williams 2003). A disease survey in southeastern Colorado
documented swift fox mortality from canine distemper and described
seroprevalence in swift foxes and coyotes for several viruses and diseases
(Gese et al. 2004). Disease analysis was conducted on swift foxes at Pawnee
National Grassland in Colorado, in association with collection of animals for
reintroduction at Badlands National Park in South Dakota (Salkeld et al. 2007).
Fifteen of 61 foxes were seropositive for plague. Pulex simulans was a common
flea on tested animals, although none of the fleas tested positive for plague. The
study did not resolve whether swift foxes were facilitating plague outbreaks in this
area. Swift fox parasites were surveyed in southeastern Colorado (Miller et al.
1998). The authors speculated that effects of parasites on swift fox reproduction
or mortality are compensatory to other causes. The same senior author led a
disease survey in swift and kit foxes from 7 western states (Miller et al. 2000).
Prevalence rates for 12 infectious diseases are summarized.
The role of swift fox in plague transmission was also examined in New Mexico
(Harrison et al. 2003). Flea species were identified on kit, swift, red, and gray
foxes. All but 2 flea species found are known to carry plague, which occurs in all
New Mexico counties. The authors concluded that any fox in the state is a
potential plague carrier. A study in northwestern Texas documented 3 flea
species and 1 tick species on swift fox (Pence et al. 2004). Swift foxes were
captured at Rita Blanca National Grassland in northwestern Texas, in association
with a sylvatic plague outbreak (McGee et al. 2006b). Although some of the swift
foxes were seropositive for plague, none of the fleas tested positive for Yersinia
pestis. The authors concluded that swift fox likely play a minor role in plague
transmission and have the tendency to produce an immune response to Yersinia
pestis without developing plague.
Predation:
Predator impacts were compared for swift foxes in Canada and kit foxes in
Mexico (Moehrenschlager et al. 2007). Swift fox survival rates were lower than kit
fox survival rates due to impacts of golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and coyote
35
�mortality. Canadian swift foxes had home ranges that were 3 times larger than
Mexican kit foxes, potentially putting the Canadian animals in greater contact
with coyotes at home range margins. Kit fox home ranges decreased as
prevalence of prairie dog colonies increased, likely due to the escape cover and
refuge provided by prairie dog burrows. The authors did not detect habitat
partitioning between coyotes and either fox population.
San Joaquin kit foxes with home ranges that overlapped coyotes had an
increased probability of death (Nelson et al. 2007). The 2 species partitioned
prey; kit foxes preyed on rodents and insects, with coyotes focusing on rabbits
and rodents. Although shrub habitats had higher prey availability, coyotes
dominated these sites, causing kit foxes to occupy grassland habitats. Resource
partitioning was also examined in Colorado (Kitchen et al. 1999). Radio-equipped
swift foxes and coyotes at the Piñon Canyon study site in Colorado had
overlapping home ranges and a high degree of dietary overlap, with some
partitioning. Coyotes were more likely to attack swift foxes that were a substantial
distance from den sites. The authors caution that results from a study site with a
stable swift fox population may not be relevant to an area with a declining or
recovering population.
Karki et al. (2007) studied impacts of coyote removal on swift fox at the Piñon
Canyon site in Colorado. Swift fox and coyote home ranges overlapped. Coyote
removal led to increased juvenile swift fox survival. However, swift fox densities
were similar between areas with and without coyote removal, indicating that the
dispersal rate was a compensatory factor among juvenile swift foxes. The
authors speculate that coyote removal may aid swift fox recovery, even
temporarily, but removal likely must be practiced long term and remove a large
proportion of coyotes (Karki et al. 2007).
An estimated 56% of the coyote population was removed from a study site during
the final year of a larger study on Rita Blanca National Grassland in Texas
(Kamler et al. 2003b). Swift fox survival increased; deaths due to coyotes
decreased; and fall swift fox density, relative abundance, and recruitment rate
increased. The authors concluded that coyote reduction may enhance swift foxes
in areas where the population is below the carrying capacity, but constant coyote
reduction is needed. Other pertinent findings from the larger study included swift
fox avoidance of coyote territories (Kamler et al. 2003c). Swift foxes often sited
dens near roads, which coyotes tended to avoid. The extent of dietary overlap
was also examined in the larger study, based on feces collection (Kamler et al.
2007a). Insects and rodents dominated the swift fox diet. Coyotes were more
general in diet selection, but mammals dominated coyote diets year-round.
Overlap was greatest during the winter and least during the summer. Although
resources were partitioned by mammal prey size, the high degree of overlap may
36
�contribute to the high rate of swift fox kills by coyotes and the displacement of
swift foxes by coyotes on this study site and elsewhere.
Swift fox mortality was compared in cropland and rangeland in Kansas (Sovada
et al. 1998). No difference was detected in mortality rates between the study
areas for the adult or juvenile age class. Coyotes were the major mortality factor.
Juveniles were vulnerable to vehicle collisions in the cropland study area, most
likely because of the higher road concentration. No losses to disease or
starvation were detected. The authors caution against automatic coyote
reduction as a tool for enhancing swift fox populations because of the possibility
that red foxes will increase in the area.
Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
The 1997 CACS included a table summarizing the legal status and harvest
seasons, if applicable, for states within the swift fox range. The following table
presents updated information as of 2010. Note: All 10 state wildlife agencies
within the range of the swift fox identified the swift fox as a species of greatest
conservation need in their respective state wildlife action plans.
37
�Table 2. State legal status and harvest seasons for swift fox, 2010
State
Legal Status
Colorado
Furbearer
Harvest
Season
Open
Kansas
Furbearer
Open
Montana
Furbearer
Open
Nebraska
New Mexico
Endangered
Furbearer
Open
North Dakota
Furbearer
Closed
Season Dates/Limits/Additional
Comments
Season recently reopened
(November 1 – end of February);
unlimited bag and possession
limits. Pelt tagging not required.
May be taken with legal hunting or
trapping equipment by landowners
or furharvester license holders.
Open season mid-November –
February 15. Pelt must be tagged
by KDWP representative within 7
days of close of the season. No
limit on take. Less than 100
animals/year harvested in recent
years.
Portion of Trapping District 6 open
from November 1 – March 1. Quota
of 20 animals. Season will close in
48 hours upon reaching trapping
district quota or on the season
closure date, whichever occurs
first. Trappers may take and
possess 3 swift foxes per season.
Pelt tagging is required. Skulls
must be turned in to MFWP
personnel for processing and
examination at the time the pelt is
presented for tagging. Montana
Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Commission also approved an
additional 20 swift foxes be
available for live capture and
translocation.
N/A
Statewide during open season
(November 1 through March 15).
Estimated sustainable harvest limit
for swift fox is 2,231-3,702 animals.
Estimated harvests for 2007-2009
are far below this limit for both swift
and kit fox. Pelt tagging is not
required.
Incidental capture or trapping must
be reported and carcass turned
over immediately to ND Game and
38
�Oklahoma
South Dakota
Furbearer
Threatened
Closed
Texas
Furbearer
Open
Wyoming
Nongame
mammal
protected from
take by
Chapter 52
Closed
Fish Department.
N/A
N/A; incidentally-taken carcass
must be turned over to SDGFP
immediately.
Regulated take during September
1 – March 31 season. May also be
taken if creating a nuisance or with
a valid hunting license during
regular hunting season (September
1 – late May). Pelt tagging is not
required.
Incidental take allowed under
certain circumstances.
39
�Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
Food habits:
A study at the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in Colorado examined swift foxcoyote interactions (Thompson and Gese 2007). Swift foxes were negatively
related to coyote abundance and vegetative structure. The authors concluded
that their results supported the premise that top predators, such as coyotes, are
aligned with resource availability (resource match) and that intermediate
predators, such as swift fox, use resources under the influence of a predation risk
(safety match).
The black-tailed prairie dog was the most frequently found prey item in scat
collected from kit foxes and coyotes at and near prairie dog towns in northcentral
Mexico (List et al. 2003). Other important food items included insects, kangaroo
rats, small mammals, ground squirrels, and lagomorphs. Mammal and insect
remains predominated swift fox scat collected at cropland and rangeland sites in
western Kansas (Sovada et al. 2001). The authors detected no food habit
differences between the 2 habitat types for mammals, arthropods, or carrion.
Sunflower seeds were often eaten in cropland. Diet was assumed to reflect prey
availability in this study.
Swift fox diets in continuous and fragmented prairie habitats in northwestern
Texas were evaluated (Kamler et al. 2007b). Swift fox diet in continuous prairie
sites contained more insect remains, with greater consumption of mammals,
birds, and crops on fragmented prairie sites. Fragmented sites, particularly lands
enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program, offered a greater diversity of food
items. However, these sites may favor coyotes, adding a predation risk to swift
foxes.
Breeding strategies:
Swift foxes are presumed to be socially monogamous. Breeding strategies were
examined at the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in Colorado (Kitchen et al. 2006b).
The researchers identified 93% of social groups as male-female. They also
identified and followed 4 stable trios, which were located in an area of high fox
density. At least 1 trio member was highly related to at least 1 other member of
the trio. The authors documented that 52% of offspring were sired by a male
other than the female’s mate. They also documented mate switching, typically to
a younger partner.
40
�Interbreeding and genetics:
Swift and kit fox interface in eastern New Mexico and western Texas, where 78
specimens were examined for 14 skull measurements (Rohwer and Kilgore
1973). The authors found some specimens to be intermediate in skull
morphology, but suggested that selection continues to oppose intermediates in
favor of separate forms. No recent shifts in the interface are suspected.
Taxonomic distinctions between kit and swift fox have long been debated
(Dragoo et al. 1990) and much of the information was recently summarized
(Dragoo and Wayne 2003). Dragoo and Wayne (2003) supported combining the
2 species into a single species and recommended that conservation focus on
maintaining genetic flow between populations, unless they have been isolated for
a long period of time.
41
�CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT, 2011
Conservation Status:
In 1992 a petition was submitted to the USFWS to list the swift fox under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the states of Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, and Nebraska, if not throughout its entire range. The USFWS published
a 90-day finding in 1994 that concluded that a species listing may be warranted
rangewide (Federal Register 1994). The 10 state wildlife management agencies
affected by this decision and interested cooperators formed the Swift Fox
Conservation Team (SFCT) in 1994 to develop a species conservation
assessment and conservation strategy document that would provide a framework
to direct conservation of the species as an alternative to a federally mandated
recovery effort. In 1995, with the knowledge of this initiative, the USFWS
published a 12-month finding of a warranted, but precluded to higher listing
priorities (Federal Register 1995). The USFWS concluded that the magnitude of
threats to the species was low to moderate although the immediacy of threats
remained imminent. In 2001, the USFWS reviewed the status of swift fox
populations and determined that the magnitude and immediacy of threats to the
species were not such that warranted listing under the Endangered Species Act
(Federal Register 2001).
The ruling stated that the continuity of populations indicated an apparent viability
and vitality that demonstrated that the magnitude and immediacy of threats to the
species was sufficiently reduced to a level that precluded the necessity of listing.
However, vigilance in monitoring populations was recommended to ensure
conservation of swift foxes. Recognizing the need for vigilance, state and federal
agencies have reaffirmed their commitment to accomplishing the goals
established by the SFCT and their support of necessary conservation actions
that ensure healthy populations of the swift fox.
Risk Assessment:
In reviewing species’ status for listing, USFWS is obligated by the ESA to
analyze 5 factors in terms of their effects on (i.e. threats to) species:
A. Present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of the
species’ habitat or range;
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
C. Disease or predation;
D. Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
42
�In this risk assessment current information regarding threats is summarized
followed by an evaluation based on our present understanding of each threat.
This evaluation contributes to tailoring a framework for continued management
and conservation of the swift fox.
43
�A.
Present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of the
species’ habitat or range.
The National Resources Inventory (NRI) provides information on status and
trends of land, soil, water, and related resources on nonfederal lands in the U.S.
These lands may be privately owned land, tribal and trust lands, and lands
managed by state and local governments. The most recent NRI summary allows
comparisons at periodic intervals between 1982 and 2007 (U.S. Department of
Agriculture 2009). Three broad habitat categories with some relevance to swift
foxes in the U.S. are pastureland, rangeland, and CRP. Land cover in
pastureland was 130,896,300 acres in 1982 and 118,615,700 acres in 2007.
Land cover in rangeland was 417,899,500 acres in 1982 and 409,119,400 acres
in 2007. CRP acreage cannot be compared for the same time period, because
the program did not exist in 1982. From 1997 to 2002, CRP acreage declined
from 32,690,500 acres to 31,990,300 acres.
Where native prairies remain, they are often fragmented into smaller and isolated
areas, resulting in reduced available habitat and prey. These remnant prairies do
not function as did the once expansive shortgrass ecosystems that swift fox
occupied prior to the arrival of European settlers. Replacement of bison with
domestic livestock and the suppression of fire have resulted in changes in plant
community composition and landscape patterns (Bragg and Steuter 1996,
Weaver et al. 1996). Agriculture, residential development, and other commercial
developments have been pervasive in the shortgrass and mixed-grass prairies;
yet swift fox populations have shown some ability to adapt, and populations are
relatively widespread.
Sovada et al. 2009 estimated swift fox historical range and current distribution.
For the estimate of historical range, the pre-settlement extent of the shortgrass
and mixed-grass prairies was used as a base map from which unsuitable habitat
types, such as large forests and shrub-dominated and montane areas, were
removed (Figure 1). Numbers on Figure 1 correspond to marginal historic
records described in Sovada et al. 2009 that help to define extent of distribution.
This assessment estimated the historical area with swift fox habitat was
approximately 1,448,057 km2 in the U.S. and Canada. Based on survey
information collected from 2001-2006, the authors estimated that swift fox
occupied 44% of the species’ historical range in the U.S. and 3% in Canada.
Acknowledging short-structured grassland as the highest quality habitat for swift
foxes, 39% of the estimated historical range remains as suitable habitat in the
U.S. and Canada (Figure 2). Of these highest quality habitats, the authors
estimated that 52% of the habitats are presently occupied by swift fox.
Distribution and occurrence have been confirmed in many counties throughout
the species’ historic range since 1995 (Sovada and Scheick 1999, Sovada and
44
�Assenmacher 2005, Sovada et al. 2009), particularly in the states of Colorado,
Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Wyoming (Figure 3). These states contain
the core of swift fox distribution and contribute to expanding distribution in
adjacent states. The species’ distribution is relatively widespread; however,
distributions and associated densities are highly variable among the 9 occupied
states (Swift Fox Conservation Team 1997). It is generally agreed that swift foxes
evolved in the shortgrass and mixed-grass prairie ecosystems; numerous studies
have provided supportive data to that assertion. However, swift foxes are
surviving in some altered habitats, but we do not clearly understand what the
requirements are to maintain viable swift fox populations in altered landscapes.
45
�Figure 1. Ecological regions (modified from Risser et al. 1981) within the range of
the swift fox in the U.S. and Canada (Sovada et al. 2009)
46
�Figure 2. Delineation of high, medium and low quality swift fox habitat in the U.S.
and Canada (Sovada et al. 2009)
47
�Figure 3. Swift fox occupancy by counties based on data collected from 2001 to
2006 (Sovada et al. 2009)
48
�Habitats within the shortgrass and mixed-grass prairie ecosystems are
recognized as providing: 1) the "essentials" of a diverse prey base, 2) level to
slightly undulating topography which affords long viewing distances to allow
detection of predators, and 3) firm and friable soils that are suitable for the
excavation and maintenance of multiple den sites for year-round use. Habitats in
today's altered landscapes can vary significantly, and their suitability for swift
foxes is difficult to assign. Swift fox populations occupy a variety of habitat types,
including the establishment of populations in a mixture of cropland and
rangeland. Researchers in Oklahoma (Kilgore 1969) and Nebraska (Hines 1980)
reported swift fox populations inhabiting habitats of mixed agricultural use in
Oklahoma and Nebraska, respectively. In western Kansas, swift foxes are
commonly found in cropland-dominated landscapes, which include fragments of
shortgrass prairie, but are largely comprised of fallow cropland, wheat, sunflower,
and irrigated crop fields (Fox and Roy 1995, Sovada et al. 1998, Jackson and
Choate 2000). However, not all habitats are used by swift foxes in proportion to
their availability (M. Sovada, unpublished data). Swift foxes have been
documented denning in fallow cropland fields in Texas (Jones et al. 1987) and
Kansas (Jackson and Choate 2000). Researchers in Wyoming found swift foxes
in shortgrass, mixed-grass, sagebrush-grassland, and sagebrush-greasewood
habitat types with topography ranging from flat to badlands-like terrain (Woolley
et al. 1995). In Montana, no den sites were observed in any habitat other than
native rangeland, but 1 capture out of 16 occurred in mixed habitat during the
1996 trapping efforts (Giddings and Zimmerman 1996). Paradoxically, a study in
New Mexico did not document the use of mixed agricultural/rangeland habitats
by swift foxes (Harrison and Schmitt 1997).
The conversion of native grassland prairies has been implicated as 1 of the most
important factors for the contraction of the swift fox distribution (Hillman and
Sharps 1978). We believe that alteration of the landscape likely influences local
and seasonal prey availability. However, in Kansas and perhaps portions of
Oklahoma and Colorado, a mixed agricultural/rangeland landscape does not
appear to necessarily diminish the habitat value of associated grasslands from a
forage availability standpoint. In fact, Kansas biologists believe that agricultural
systems on privately owned lands are crucial to swift fox conservation because
publicly owned lands in Kansas are either too small or inadequate to support
swift fox populations (C. Roy, Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, personal
communication). The SFCT has suggested that " . . . it is not solely the
conversion of prairie to cropland that hinders current swift fox restoration efforts
but also juxtaposition of the remaining prairies, management of rangelands,
cropping patterns of farmlands, and changes in canid communities that occur in
response to the conversion of prairie habitat to cropland" (Swift Fox Conservation
Team 1997).
49
�Just as farm policies of the past have encouraged conversion of native prairies to
cropland (Baydack et al. 1996), farm policies of the future could impart
restoration of habitat suitable for swift foxes. The Conservation Reserve Program
(CRP) established under the 1985 Farm Bill and renewed under the 1996
extension has stimulated conversion of millions of croplands to perennial
grassland cover (Young and Osborn 1990). However, in many areas of the
shortgrass prairie, CRP fields were planted to tallgrass prairie species or nonnative grasses (Sovada et al. 2009). When these fields are not grazed, mowed,
or burned, they develop dense tall stands of grasses that are not suitable for use
by swift foxes (Swift Fox Conservation Team 1997). Current regulations for CRP
lands do not provide adequate habitat guidelines that would benefit swift foxes.
New CRP guidelines could provide incentives for participants in the CRP to plant
native shortgrass species that are better suited for use by swift foxes. However,
with the reauthorization of the Farm Bill in 2008, and escalating commodity
prices, even greater pressure will be put on producers to bring more acres into
production. The reauthorization of the Farm Bill already lowered the cap from
39.2 million acres down to 32 million. While there are other provisions in the 2008
Farm Bill that could offset losses of CRP lands and potentially benefit swift fox
conservation, it will be the juxtaposition and timing of implementing these other
programs that will determine whether they will contribute to swift fox
conservation. Another consideration related to CRP lands is the possibility that
CRP fields previously planted to tallgrass species may be replaced by dryland
agricultural uses, which may benefit swift foxes.
Habitat destruction and modification has occurred at local levels, although it
appears not to have risen to the level of a threat throughout the species’ range.
Monitoring by the SFCT identified swift foxes as more flexible in their habitat
requirements than originally believed. As the new Farm Bill is being
implemented, continued habitat monitoring by the SFCT will be prudent.
Information on changes in habitats and associated swift fox distribution might
provide insight to swift fox response to landscape changes. It is the SFCT’s view
this factor has not risen to the level of a threat.
Potential topics for further research:
1. Monitor swift fox response to landscape level changes in habitats, such as
restoration of native rangeland, shifts from dryland cropping systems to
irrigated cropping, and changes in CRP enrollment.
2. Evaluate the effects of native prairie patch size and juxtaposition of
agricultural lands and prairies on swift foxes.
3. Monitor swift fox populations in habitats dominated by cropland to
determine if these populations are sustained long-term.
4. Examine why swift fox use of cropland is variable.
50
�B.
Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes.
Determining the magnitude and significance of harvest on swift fox populations
as a result of trapping, hunting, predator control, and other activities has been
difficult due to limited data across the species’ range. Although private predator
control activities result in swift fox mortalities, it is unknown if these activities are
a major source of mortality that directly impacts local populations. Predator
control activities conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service - Wildlife Services targeting coyotes are
responsible for a small number of incidentally-taken swift foxes. However, coyote
control activities may in fact benefit some local swift fox populations. Many
wildlife biologists concur that annual mortality resulting from these activities is a
minor portion of total swift fox mortality (Swift Fox Conservation Team 1997).
Studies conducted in different parts of swift fox range have confirmed predation
by coyotes is the most significant mortality factor (Laurion 1988, Carbyn et al.
1994, Sovada et al. 1998, Kitchen et al. 1999). Additional interspecific
competition with red foxes may exacerbate this problem, (e.g. Ralls and White
1995 report influences of red fox); M. Sovada, unpublished data). Several recent
studies examined the impact of coyote control on swift fox populations (Kamler et
al. 2003b, Karki et al. 2007).
There is insufficient information to directly assess the impact of harvest on swift
fox distribution or population densities; therefore, the importance of harvest in
limiting or regulating swift fox populations is uncertain. However, available
evidence suggests that regulated harvest has had no impact in limiting swift fox
populations. For example, swift fox populations in Colorado have remained
widespread despite 55 years of regulated harvest. No noticeable reduction in
distribution has occurred in Kansas since the opening of a trapping season on
swift foxes in 1982. In comparison, swift foxes have been protected from harvest
in South Dakota, Nebraska, and Oklahoma, with no apparent increase in
distribution or population densities during the same period. Few furharvesters
specifically target swift foxes, and most that are taken are incidental to coyote
trapping (Peek 2002).
The SFCT continues to evaluate the genetic integrity of swift fox, monitor
population status, and maintain a captive population managed by a Species
Survival Plan, directed by the AZA. The states of Wyoming, Colorado, and
Kansas continue to support strong and stable swift fox populations, and swift
foxes continue to occupy historical range in other states. Reintroduction efforts
have expanded swift fox distribution, with no detected impacted source
populations. It is estimated that swift foxes occupy 44% of historical range within
the U.S. and 3% of historical range in Canada (Sovada et al. 2009).
Reintroductions continue to fill vacant habitat. The captive breeding program is
51
�being maintained through careful management and incorporation of swift foxes
that cannot be released back into the wild.
While swift foxes continue to be used for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes, populations appear to be stable throughout the range. It is
the SFCT’s view this factor has not risen to the level of a threat.
52
�C.
Disease and predation.
Although parasite and disease agents in wild swift fox populations have not been
extensively studied, there is no indication that parasites or diseases are
significant factors in the population dynamics of wild foxes. It is believed that swift
foxes share a community of parasites and diseases with sympatric canids and
have not developed a specialized suite of agents. Various disease agents have
been documented serologically (e.g., sylvatic plague and canine distemper)
(Pybus and Williams 2003); however, there are few cases of confirmed overt
diseases in wild swift foxes. Two studies have documented canine distemper in
swift fox (Olson and Lindzey 2002a, Gese et al. 2004). In the past 2 decades,
sarcoptic mange has been a significant mortality factor for red foxes and coyotes
in parts of North Dakota and South Dakota. If mange spreads to areas with
established swift fox populations, mange could become a significant source of
mortality in localized areas.
Predation by mammalian and avian predators, such as American badgers and
golden eagles has been documented (Carbyn et al. 1994, Andersen et al. 2003).
Predation by coyotes is the most important natural mortality factor for swift fox
populations in the United States and Canada (Laurion 1988, Covell 1992, Carbyn
et al. 1994, Sovada et al. 1998). The reported annual mortality rates (range from
0.47 to 0.57; Covell 1992, Sovada et al. 1998, Andersen et al. 2003) may seem
high, yet they are similar to rates reported for other North American foxes (Lord
1961, Storm et al. 1976, Cypher and Schrivner 1992, Disney and Spiegel 1992,
Ralls and White 1995). It has been suggested that potentially high reproductive
rates may compensate for high mortality rates (Sovada et al. 1998). In some
situations, control of coyotes may enhance distribution and abundance of swift
fox populations. However, managers should carefully weigh the likelihood of
significantly improved survival and dispersal to the costs of effectively controlling
coyotes. Consider the results of a study by Cypher and Scrivner (1992), in which
they attempted to reduce coyote numbers to increase kit fox survival. Despite
reduction in the coyote populations, they were unsuccessful in reducing coyote
numbers sufficiently to affect kit fox populations. Also consider the reintroduction
of swift foxes to Badlands National Park and the surrounding grasslands; areas
with a relatively dense coyote population. This reintroduction was successful
despite no effort to control coyotes (Schroeder 2007).
The relationship between red foxes and swift foxes is unknown, although
preliminary data analysis of an experimental study examining this relationship
suggests that red foxes are a barrier to swift fox populations expanding into
unoccupied, but suitable areas (M. A. Sovada, unpublished data). Ralls and
White (1995) reported that although coyote predation on kit foxes can be severe,
red foxes may pose an even greater threat to kit fox populations because where
red foxes rapidly moved into areas occupied by kit foxes, the red foxes appeared
53
�to displace the kit foxes. Based on known interspecific relationships between
other canids, the red fox may be a substantial barrier to swift fox range
expansion and may be more detrimental to swift foxes than coyotes (Ralls and
White 1995). Although unraveling canid relationships is challenging, swift foxes
are clearly impacted by interference competition from both red foxes and
coyotes.
Undoubtedly, predation and disease have always been mortality factors
impacting swift foxes. Overall, as with other species, the rangewide population
should not be affected by reasonable rates of mortality. To safeguard against
severe decline in the population, continued monitoring by individual states should
detect widespread, unusual losses so management actions can be applied. At
this time, it is the SFCT’s belief that predation and disease are not threatening
population stability.
Potential topics for further research:
1. Evaluate the influence of competitive exclusion by other canids on swift
fox dispersal and potential growth.
54
�D.
Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Swift foxes are managed under state laws in all 10 states that encompass the
species’ historical range and are currently protected from harvest through laws or
regulations in 5 of these states (Table 2). All 10 state wildlife agencies within the
range of the swift fox have identified this species as a species of greatest
conservation need in respective state wildlife action plans. Trapper education
programs are becoming more available to fur harvesters and, in several states,
certified completion of fur harvester education courses are required for purchase
of a license. These measures should help reduce incidental harvest across the
swift fox range. USDA APHIS-Wildlife Services personnel document annual
incidental take of swift foxes that occurs during control of other predators; such
take is minimal.
The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada officially
designated the Swift Fox as "extirpated" in Canada in 1978 (Committee on the
Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) 1978). A National
Recovery Plan was developed with the mandate to increase swift fox populations
to self-sustaining levels by the year 2000 (Brechtel et al. 1996). As a result of
successful reintroduction efforts, in 1999 the status of the swift fox in Canada
was upgraded to endangered.
Swift foxes continue to be managed throughout their range through a variety of
existing regulatory mechanisms at both state and national levels. It appears
these mechanisms allow for self sustaining swift fox populations throughout the
species’ range. It is the SFCT’s view this factor has not risen to the level of a
threat.
55
�E.
Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
Livestock Grazing:
Grazing is one of the dominant land uses on public and private lands throughout
the range of the swift fox. The evolutionary history of the shortgrass and mixedgrass prairie resulted in grassland-dependent species adapted to a mosaic of
lightly to heavily grazed areas (Bragg and Steuter 1996, Knopf and Samson
1997). Grazing by wildlife or domestic livestock is essential for maintaining the
health of native and restored grasslands and is necessary on a landscape scale
to maintain a healthy grassland ecosystem. The impacts of grazing on swift foxes
can vary widely, depending on climatic conditions, the state or health of range
vegetation, and the type of grazing regime utilized. Drought tends to magnify
grazing impacts, as both processes reduce plant cover (Giesen 2000). When
forage is reduced by drought, what remains tends to be grazed more heavily
unless animal numbers are reduced. As a result, some grazed areas may supply
adequate habitat during periods of normal rainfall. Intensive and/or persistent
grazing may create habitat in areas with tallgrass or exotic grass species. The
Natural Resources Conservation Service has produced a pamphlet to provide an
introduction to the habitat requirements of the swift fox and to assist landowners
and land managers in developing management strategies that will benefit the
swift fox as part of an overall grassland management plan (NRCS 2006).
Management recommendations identified in this pamphlet can be carried out to
maintain existing swift fox range and to create additional habitat. Land managers
are encouraged to collaborate with wildlife professionals to identify and attain
management objectives.
Potential topics for further research:
1. Potential impact of the loss of historic disturbance regimes on swift foxes.
2. Potential impact of the difference in grazing patterns of cattle and bison on
swift foxes.
3. Influences of drought conditions on availability of food resources in
rangeland-dominated landscapes.
Climate and Weather:
Global climate change will affect grasslands, and thus swift fox habitat through a
variety of mechanisms. Increasing temperatures may result in a northward shift
of the climatic conditions most suitable to the species, possibly resulting in the
southernmost parts of the current range becoming unsuitable due to drier
conditions. Such range shifts are already occurring in many species (Root et al.
2003). Fortunately, extensive habitats that are probably suitable for the species
already exist to the north of the current swift fox range, particularly in the
Dakotas, Montana, and Canada. Habitat fragmentation, however, could impede
56
�or prevent swift foxes from gradually shifting into these more northern habitats as
temperatures increase. In addition, climate change may increase the potential for
swift foxes to encounter new pathogens, and new invasive species could affect
their habitats (Inkley et al. 2004).
All state wildlife agencies have approved Wildlife Action Plans, which are
required to maintain eligibility for a federal funding match source called State
Wildlife Grants. Many states are presently revisiting and revising wildlife action
plans, in part because of potential availability of climate change adaptation
funding in the future. The swift fox is listed as a species of greatest conservation
need by all states within the species’ range. Impacts of climate change will likely
be addressed in the revised Wildlife Action Plans being prepared by all or the
majority of states within the species’ range.
Poisoning:
The widespread use of strychnine-laced carcasses for controlling wolves and
coyotes caused decline of swift fox populations in the 1800s and early 1900s
(Scott-Brown et al. 1987). There is great concern about how the use of 2
recently-approved anticoagulants, chlorophacinone (Rozol) and diphacinone
(Kaput), for control of prairie dogs will impact swift foxes. The anticoagulant
chlorophacinone (Rozol) was approved in 2009 via Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 3 registration for poisoning
prairie dogs in Kansas, Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. A label modification in 2010
added Montana to the list of eligible states where Rozol can be used. The use of
Rozol has been approved for prairie dog control by the state agriculture
departments in Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North
Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming for their jurisdictions.
The makers of Kaput are seeking to expand use of that product to include prairie
dogs. It is currently approved for a variety of other rodents in some states within
the range of the swift fox.
The risk of secondary poisoning to non-target species, such as swift fox, from
exposure to Rozol and Kaput is much higher than from the commonly used
rodenticide zinc phosphide. Anticoagulant use results in a more prolonged period
of mortality for prairie dogs and also has a longer persistence in their body
tissues. Consequently, contaminated prey is available to non-target species for a
period of weeks for anticoagulants versus hours for zinc phosphide. The SFCT,
through WAFWA, has requested the EPA to fully consult with the USFWS on this
new use of these 2 pesticides on controlling prairie dogs and the inadequacy of
the label restrictions in preventing take of non-target wildlife species.
57
�Roadways:
Swift foxes are frequently observed along roadways. Several studies have
indicated that swift foxes frequently use roadways as travel lanes and for
foraging activities, and they may build dens nearby (Hines and Case 1991, Pruss
1999). These roadway associations can be major sources of vehicle-related
mortality for juvenile foxes (Sovada et al. 1998). The significance of this mortality
factor to the overall question of maintaining population viability has not been
studied in any detail. Vehicle-caused mortality does not appear to be a significant
adverse problem from a range-wide perspective. In Kansas, where road densities
are fairly high, state biologists believe that factors such as road densities,
distance traveled, and driver speed may increase the rate of swift fox mortalities.
Kansas has for several years utilized vehicle-caused mortalities per unit time as
a means to calculate a population trend index. However, annual road mortalities
in Kansas do not appear to be affecting distribution and status of this species (C.
Roy, personal communication).
Swift foxes continue to be affected throughout their range through a variety of
natural or manmade factors at both local and landscape levels. However, despite
these effects, there is still a self sustaining swift fox population throughout its
range. It is the SFCT’s view this factor has not risen to the level of a threat.
Potential topics for further research:
1. Potential impact of energy development (impacts from infrastructure and
habitat loss) on swift foxes.
2. Potential impact of biofuels; i.e., habitat loss from conversion of native
habitat to monoculture.
58
�CONSERVATION STRATEGY, 2011-2020
Introduction:
The SFCT and its partners have crafted and revised this framework for swift fox
conservation to reflect the paramount importance of cooperation with and
participation by a broad spectrum of government agencies, private individuals,
and nongovernmental organizations. The framework also acknowledges the
importance of compatible rural livelihoods and activities (such as ranching,
farming, and outdoor recreation, including hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching)
to existence of swift foxes and the importance of participation by such
stakeholders in wildlife conservation. Thus, the framework’s focus is on voluntary
collaborative conservation based on shared values and incentives rather than
regulatory requirements.
Goal:
The goal of this conservation strategy is to maintain or restore swift fox
populations within each state to provide the spatial, genetic, and demographic
structure of the United States swift fox population to ensure long-term species
viability, to provide species management flexibility, and to encourage population
connectivity.
Objectives, strategies, and activities:
1.
Maintain a Swift Fox Conservation Team (SFCT), to include 1
representative of each of the state wildlife agencies within the historical
range of the swift fox.
1.1 The SFCT is comprised of a single representative from each of the
10 state wildlife resource agencies (state), BLM (regional), USFS
(regional), U.S. Geological Service (USGS) (regional), Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) (regional), and USFWS
(regional). Interested cooperators are encouraged to participate with
the team (other state and federal agencies, state universities, tribal
governments, conservation organizations, research institutions,
Canadian recovery team). The SFCT is to coordinate and assist in
directing management and research activities outlined in the
conservation strategy. The SFCT will annually monitor the attainment
of objectives and evaluate the completion of specific activities within
each state.
1.1.1
Responsibilities of the SFCT are to: 1) determine priorities
and set timetables for conservation strategy objectives and
59
�activities, 2) establish interteam technical committees that
will address specific management or research needs to
accomplish stated objectives, 3) draft habitat and species
management guidelines when appropriate, 4) provide a
forum for technical information exchange, and 5) promote
state and federal funding support for specific activities.
2.
1.1.2
The SFCT will generate an annual or biennial report to
present state and regional progress toward attainment of
conservation strategy objectives. An annual or biennial
SFCT meeting is to be scheduled by the appointed chair to
synthesize information and prepare the annual or biennial
report.
1.1.3
Ten years following publication of this revision, SFCT
members and cooperators will evaluate progress in meeting
objectives and completing activities. Evaluation of progress
will include discussion of whether the SFCT may disband
because it has accomplished its original purpose to design
and implement a multi-state approach to assure long-term
swift fox persistence.
Maintain swift fox distribution in at least 50 percent of the suitable,
available habitat.
2.1 State wildlife agencies will periodically update statewide species
distribution maps to monitor long-term changes in distribution and
evaluate progress toward conservation strategy objectives. Maps will
be updated or modified every 5 years. Sovada et al. 2009 should be
updated and submitted for publication with new information 5 years
following its publication date.
2.2 Expand distribution of existing state populations and restore swift
foxes to unoccupied suitable habitat. Promote natural dispersal
through species protection measures while developing methodology
and priority areas for augmentation through wild-captured swift fox
translocations.
2.2.1
The SFCT will work with state wildlife agencies, federal land
management agencies and cooperators to prioritize potential
restoration efforts in areas with a limited distribution and
potentially suitable habitat, when needed.
60
�2.3 Each state wildlife agency will maintain adequate regulatory
mechanisms to promote a self-sustaining swift fox population.
2.3.1
3.
The state wildlife agencies of Colorado, Kansas, Montana,
New Mexico, and Texas, which currently allow a legal
harvest, will evaluate the feasibility of implementing a
registration/pelt tagging program in addition to conducting
mandatory carcass collections.
Periodically evaluate the status of swift fox populations.
3.1 Monitor swift fox distribution within each state using various detection
methods and/or species harvest data. Systematic presence/absence
and population surveys or compiling site-specific harvest information
should provide each state with adequate information to delineate and
monitor statewide species distributions.
3.1.1 State wildlife agencies will continue to collect and compile
existing species distribution data internally and from
cooperators. State agencies and cooperators may need to
collect additional information utilizing various sources such as:
1) species population surveys; 2) state and federal agency
occurrence reports; 3) soliciting public participation;
4) scientific field investigations; or 5) trapper and hunter
harvest data.
4.
Identify and conserve existing native shortgrass and mixed-grass
grasslands, focusing on those with habitat characteristics conducive to swift
foxes.
4.1
Continue to identify, describe, and delineate existing suitable swift
fox habitat within each state. This effort will form the basis for
evaluating remaining species restoration activities and identify
constraints and opportunities within each state for possible swift fox
conservation efforts.
4.1.1 Each state wildlife agency will coordinate with state, tribal,
and federal land management agencies and private
landowners to conduct and continue habitat inventories and
to describe land ownership patterns. Landscape analysis of
suitable prairie habitat should utilize the best available
landscape data, using supplemental map tools (soils,
vegetation), Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and
Gap Analysis Program (GAP), in addition to aerial or ground
61
�surveys. This activity may include cooperation from the BLM,
USFS, Natural Heritage Programs, NRCS, state universities,
and other entities with GIS/Gap Analysis mapping
capabilities.
5.
Facilitate partnerships and cooperative efforts to protect, restore, and
enhance suitable habitats within potential swift fox range.
5.1
Identify and delineate lands under federal, state, or tribal
management control in occupied/suitable swift fox habitat. The
ability to maintain or restore state swift fox populations will depend
on conserving open space in the existing grassland landscape. This
activity will potentially be most effective when focused on major
landscape-scale habitat initiatives.
5.1.1 Each state wildlife agency will coordinate with the federal
and state land management agencies to evaluate current
levels of legal protection of native grasslands located within
federal and state ownership. These areas are to be
delineated as an additional cover layer with suitable habitat
and current swift fox distribution. Protected sites are to be
mapped and acreages determined within the 10 states.
Spatial relationships, such as defining habitat corridors or
habitat blocks, will be examined. Prairie habitat is to be
classified as currently protected, in need of protection, or for
special management needs based on maintaining or
enhancing habitat quality for swift foxes.
5.1.2 State and federal wildlife agencies will investigate habitat
conservation agreements with federal and state land
management agencies, as habitat needs are identified.
Establish memorandums of understanding (MOU) and
habitat conservation agreements (HCA) for habitat protection
and management with land management agencies to
conserve or enhance suitable prairie habitats under public
ownership.
5.1.3 Identify habitat corridors and surrounding areas between
habitat blocks, based on the spatial location of suitable
habitat that is available to be managed for swift foxes. This
activity will identify where habitat conservation and
management efforts should occur to protect, enhance, or
improve suitable habitat. Each state is to identify and
62
�delineate these areas through mapping to help conservation
measures, agreements, or habitat enhancement efforts.
5.2
Identify and delineate private land ownership patterns under
individual or corporate control in occupied and suitable swift fox
habitat. The ability to maintain or restore state swift fox populations
will depend on conserving existing prairie habitat.
5.2.1 State and federal wildlife agencies are to initiate land
conservation or protection measures under current lands
programs as limited by priorities and within funding ability, or
are to consider creating a lands program with new or
redirected funding sources. Agencies will investigate the
feasibility of partnerships with the private sector. On
identified critical private lands state agencies should utilize
conservation easements or agreements, leases, donations,
exchanges, or acquisitions. Federal wildlife agencies should
consider habitat conservation plans (HCPs) and federal land
management agencies should consider land exchanges and
acquisitions. State wildlife agencies may use wildlife action
plan implementation activities to assist with swift fox and
native habitat management.
5.3
The SFCT should encourage investigation of opportunities to
provide population connectivity through coordinated habitat mapping
and reintroduction among partner states, tribes, agencies, and
private landowners.
5.4.
Integrate swift fox conservation strategy objectives with
management and habitat objectives of other prairie ecosystem
species such as bison (Bison bison), black-footed ferret (Mustela
nigripes), burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia), mountain plover
(Charadrius montanus), prairie chicken (Tympanuchus spp.), and
prairie dog (Cynomys spp.).
5.4.1 Provide swift fox distribution and suitable habitat information
to other prairie ecosystem conservation efforts through
activities associated with the Western Association of Fish
and Wildlife Agencies, Landscape Conservation
Cooperatives, Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Joint
Ventures, and other relevant conservation activities that
cross state and agency boundaries.
63
�6.
Identify and encourage research studies that contribute to swift fox
conservation and management.
6.1
Provide a scientific basis for swift fox management and an avenue
for technical information exchange.
6.1.1 The SFCT will continue to provide recommendations on
standard management guidelines, beneficial range
management practices for swift foxes, methods for data
collection/database management, and current information on
swift fox ecology, management, and research to wildlife and
land managers; government entities; land planners; and
state and federal policy makers.
6.1.2 The SFCT will consider cooperating on a joint publication
that promotes the scientific basis for conserving prairie
species, including swift fox, for distribution to wildlife and
land managers. If it is determined that this document is
needed and jointly supported, funding will be solicited from
cooperators and partners.
6.1.3 The SFCT is to identify and encourage research studies
addressing interspecific interactions, climate change, energy
development, and other factors that may affect swift fox
conservation.
6.1.3.1 State wildlife agencies and cooperators will address
species/habitat needs in site-specific areas
identified as having special concerns for population
maintenance. An example may be an evaluation of
potential impacts of new energy development in an
area with known swift fox occupation.
6.1.4
Encourage and participate in studies that define minimum
viable population size estimates.
6.1.5
Conduct periodic testing and analysis of genetic variation
among state populations to validate the basis of the
metapopulation concept to ensure species persistence.
Utilize state, federal, or institutional wildlife and veterinary
laboratories that can support appropriate analysis. Publish
results of genetic analysis 15 years following the publication
of this Conservation Assessment and Strategy revision.
64
�7. Promote public support for swift fox conservation activities through education
and information exchange.
7.1
The SFCT will continue to develop informational and educational
materials to encourage support from an informed public. Such
support will enhance funding opportunities and ease implementation
of conservation strategy activities. Among publics to be targeted are
trappers, hunters, wildlife viewers, livestock and farm groups, private
landowners, conservation organizations, public schools, and
city/county governments. Funding will be solicited, as needed, from
participating states and cooperators.
7.1.1 SFCT will continue to make use of SFCT website to post
reports, annual newsletters, and other information of
interest to partners and the general public.
7.1.2 Implement methods and techniques to gain and maintain
cooperation with private landowners that will influence range
management practices, primarily through state extension
agents, federal grazing leases, and NRCS range specialists.
Efforts will be directed primarily at occupied habitat and
secondarily at suitable habitat.
8.
7.2
The SFCT will coordinate with the Association of Zoos and
Aquariums (AZA) to provide scientifically-supportable information or
input on educational displays or other AZA information to help
present the most accurate and current information on swift fox
conservation and management.
7.3
The SFCT will continue to support the AZA in its efforts to maintain a
viable captive population.
Maintain swift fox population viability such that listing under the U.S.
Endangered Species Act is not justified.
8.1
States will continue to participate in cooperative information,
monitoring, and research efforts to support swift fox sustainability and
to facilitate management at a metapopulation level.
8.2
This document may warrant periodic revision to incorporate related
objectives, strategies, or activities that may be outlined in other
prairie species conservation plans.
65
�8.3
Each state wildlife agency, with assistance of cooperators, will
continue to refine management guidelines that include species and
habitat conservation measures to assure species persistence.
These may involve a review of state legal classification and
protection; long-term programs to monitor species distribution,
population size, and habitat maintenance; and may include harvest
strategies above target population levels.
66
�LITERATURE CITED
Alberta Swift Fox Recovery Team. 2007. Alberta Swift Fox Recovery Plan 20062011. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife
Division, Edmonton, Alberta.
Alexander, J. L. 2011. Survey of swift foxes in eastern Montana. Annual Progress
Report. St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota.
Allardyce, D., and M. A. Sovada. 2003. A review of the ecology, distribution, and
status of swift foxes in the United States. Pages 3-18 in M. A. Sovada, and
L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes
in a changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of
Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Andersen, D. E., T. R. Laurion, J. R. Cary, R. S. Sikes, M. A. McLeod, and E. M.
Gese. 2003. Aspects of swift fox ecology in southeastern Colorado. Pages
139-147 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology
and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains
Research Center, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Ausband, D. E., and K. R. Foresman. 2007a. Dispersal, survival, and
reproduction of wild-born, yearling swift foxes in a reintroduced population.
Canadian Journal of Zoology 85:185-189.
_____. 2007b. Swift fox reintroduction on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation,
Montana, USA. Biological Conservation 136:423-430.
Ausband, D. E., and A. Moehrenschlager. 2009. Long-range juvenile dispersal
and its implication for conservation of reintroduced swift fox Vulpes velox
populations in the USA and Canada. Oryx 43:73-77.
Baydack, R. K., J. H. Patterson, C. D. Rubec, A. J. Tyrchniewicz, and T. W.
Weins. 1996. Management challenges for prairie grasslands in the twentyfirst century in prairie conservation. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Bly, K., C. Reed, and S. Janz. 2010. Assessment of swift fox (Vulpes velox)
occurrence in south Phillips and Valley counties, Montana. World Wildlife
Fund, Bozeman, Montana.
Bragg, T. B., and A. A. Steuter. 1996. Mixed-grass prairies of the North American
Great Plains. Pages 53-66 in F. B. Samson, and F. L. Knopf, editors.
Prairie conservation: Preserving North America's most endangered
ecosystem. Island Press, Covelo, California.
Brechtel, S., L. Carbyn, G. Erickson, D. Hjertaas, C. Mamo, and P. McDougall.
1996. National recovery plan for the swift fox. Report No. 15. Recovery of
Nationally Endangered Wildlife Committee. Ottawa, Ontario.
Carbyn, L. N. 1998. Updated COSEWIC status report: Swift Fox, Vulpes velox.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.
Carbyn, L. N., H. J. Armbruster, and C. Mamo. 1994. Swift fox reintroduction
program in Canada from 1983 to 1992. Pages 247-271 in M. L. Bowles,
and C. J. Whelan, editors. Restoration of endangered species. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
67
�Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 1978.
COSEWIC Status Reports and Evaluations. Volume 1. Official
Classification of the Swift Fox as Extirpated in Canada.
Covell, D. F. 1992. Ecology of the swift fox (Vulpes velox) in southeastern
Colorado. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
Cypher, B. L., and J. H. Schrivner. 1992. Coyote control to protect endangered
San Joaquin kit foxes at the Naval Petroleum Reserves, California.
Proceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 15:42-47.
Darden, S. K., T. Dabelsteen, and S. B. Pedersen. 2003. A potential tool for swift
fox (Vulpes velox) conservation: Individuality of long-range barking
sequences. Journal of Mammalogy 84:1417-1427.
Disney, M., and L. K. Spiegel. 1992. Sources and rates of San Joaquin kit fox
mortality in western Kern County, California. Transactions of the Western
Section Wildlife Society 28:73-82.
Dragoo, J. W., J. R. Choate, T. L. Yates, and T. P. O'Farrell. 1990. Evolutionary
and taxonomic relationships among North American arid-land foxes.
Journal of Mammalogy 71:318-332.
Dragoo, J. W., and R. K. Wayne. 2003. Systematics and population genetics of
swift and kit foxes. Pages 207-221 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn,
editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a
changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina,
Regina, Saskatchewan.
Federal Register. 1994. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day
Finding on a Petition to List the Swift Fox as Endangered. Federal
Register 59:28328-28329, Washington, DC.
_____. 1995. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 12-Month
Administrative Finding on Petition to List the Swift Fox. Federal Register
60:31663-31666, Washington, DC.
_____. 2001. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Annual Notice of
Findings on Recycled Petitions. Federal Register 66:1295-1300,
Washington, DC.
Finley, D. J., G. C. White, and J. P. Fitzgerald. 2005. Estimation of swift fox
population size and occupancy rates in eastern Colorado. Journal of
Wildlife Management 69:861-873.
Fox, L. B., and C. C. Roy. 1995. Swift fox (Vulpes velox) management and
research in Kansas: 1995 annual report. Pages 39-51 in S. H. Allen, J.
Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, editors. Report of the swift fox
conservation team 1995. North Dakota Game and Fish Department,
Bismarck, North Dakota.
Gese, E. M., S. M. Karki, M. L. Klavetter, E. R. Schauster, and A. M. Kitchen.
2004. Serologic survey for canine infectious diseases among sympatric
swift foxes (Vulpes velox) and coyotes (Canis latrans) in southeastern
Colorado. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 40:741-748.
68
�Giddings, B., and A. L. Zimmerman. 1996. Distribution and investigations of swift
fox in Montana. Pages 25-29 in B. Luce, and F. G. Lindzey, editors.
Annual report of the swift fox conservation team 1996. Wyoming Game
and Fish Department, Lander, Wyoming.
Giesen, K. M. 2000. Population status and management of lesser prairie-chicken
in Colorado. Prairie Naturalist 32:137-148.
Harrison, R., and C. G. Schmitt. 1997. Swift fox investigations in New Mexico,
1997. Pages 97-106 in B. Giddings, editor. Swift fox conservation team
annual report 1997. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks,
Helena, Montana.
Harrison, R. L. 2003. Swift fox demography, movements, denning, and diet in
New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist 48:261-273.
Harrison, R. L., D. J. Barr, and J. W. Dragoo. 2002. A comparison of population
survey techniques for swift foxes (Vulpes velox) in New Mexico. American
Midland Naturalist 148:320-337.
Harrison, R. L., P.-G. S. Clarke, and C. M. Clarke. 2004. Indexing swift fox
populations in New Mexico using scats. American Midland Naturalist
151:42-49.
Harrison, R. L., M. J. Patrick, and C. G. Schmitt. 2003. Foxes, fleas, and plague
in New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist 48:720-722.
Harrison, R. L., and C. G. Schmitt. 2003. Current swift fox distribution and habitat
selection within areas of historical occurrence in New Mexico. Pages 7177 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and
conservation of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains
Research Center, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Harrison, R. L., and J. Whitaker-Hoagland. 2003. A literature review of swift fox
habitat and den-site selection. Pages 79-89 in M. A. Sovada, and L.
Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a
changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina,
Regina, Saskatchewan.
Herrero, S. 2003. Canada's experimental reintroduction of swift foxes into an
altered ecosystem. Pages 33-38 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors.
The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world.
Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina, Regina,
Saskatchewan.
Hillman, C. N., and J. C. Sharps. 1978. Return of the swift fox to the northern
plains. Proceedings of South Dakota Academy of Science 57:154-162.
Hines, T. D. 1980. An ecological study of Vulpes velox in Nebraska. University of
Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.
Hines, T. D., and R. M. Case. 1991. Diet, home range, movements, and activity
periods of swift fox in Nebraska. Prairie Naturalist 23:131-138.
Inkley, D. B., M. G. Anderson, A. R. Blaustein, V. R. Burkett, B. Felzer, B. Griffith,
J. T. Price, and T. L. Root. 2004. Global climate change and wildlife in
North America. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
69
�Jackson, V. L., and J. R. Choate. 2000. Dens and den sites of the swift fox,
Vulpes velox. Southwestern Naturalist 45:212-220.
Jones, J. K., Jr., C. Jones, R. R. Hollander, and R. W. Manning. 1987. The swift
fox in Texas. Unpublished report. Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.
Kamler, J. F., W. B. Ballard, E. B. Fish, P. R. Lemons, K. Mote, and C. C.
Perchellet. 2003a. Habitat use, home ranges, and survival of swift foxes in
a fragmented landscape: Conservation implications. Journal of
Mammalogy 84:989-995.
Kamler, J. F., W. B. Ballard, E. M. Gese, R. L. Harrison, and S. M. Karki. 2004.
Dispersal characteristics of swift foxes. Canadian Journal of Zoology
82:1837-1842.
Kamler, J. F., W. B. Ballard, R. L. Gilliland, P. R. Lemons II, and K. Mote. 2003b.
Impacts of coyotes on swift foxes in northwestern Texas. Journal of
Wildlife Management 67:317-323.
Kamler, J. F., W. B. Ballard, R. L. Gilliland, and K. Mote. 2002. Improved trapping
methods for swift foxes and sympatric coyotes. Wildlife Society Bulletin
30:1262-1266.
_____. 2003c. Spatial relationships between swift foxes and coyotes in
northwestern Texas. Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:168-172.
Kamler, J. F., W. B. Ballard, and M. C. Wallace. 2007a. Dietary overlap of swift
foxes and coyotes in northwestern Texas. American Midland Naturalist
158:139-146.
Kamler, J. F., W. B. Ballard, M. C. Wallace, and P. S. Gipson. 2007b. Diets of
swift foxes (Vulpes velox) in continuous and fragmented prairie in
northwestern Texas. Southwestern Naturalist 52:504-510.
Karki, S. M., E. M. Gese, and M. L. Klavetter. 2007. Effects of coyote population
reduction on swift fox demographics in southeastern Colorado. Journal of
Wildlife Management 71:2707-2718.
Kilgore, D. L., Jr. 1969. An ecological study of swift fox (Vulpes velox) in the
Oklahoma panhandle. American Midland Naturalist 81:512-534.
Kintigh, K. M., and M. C. Andersen. 2005. A den-centered analysis of swift fox
(Vulpes velox) habitat characteristics in northeastern New Mexico.
American Midland Naturalist 154:229-239.
Kitchen, A. M., E. M. Gese, S. M. Karki, and E. R. Schauster. 2005a. Spatial
ecology of swift fox social groups: From group formation to mate loss.
Journal of Mammalogy 86:547-554.
Kitchen, A. M., E. M. Gese, and S. G. Lupis. 2006a. Multiple scale den site
selection by swift foxes, Vulpes velox, in southeastern Colorado.
Canadian Field-Naturalist 120:31-38.
Kitchen, A. M., E. M. Gese, and E. R. Schauster. 1999. Resource partitioning
between coyotes and swift foxes: Space, time, and diet. Canadian Journal
of Zoology 77:1645-1656.
70
�Kitchen, A. M., E. M. Gese, L. P. Waits, S. M. Karki, and E. R. Schauster. 2005b.
Genetic and spatial structure within a swift fox population. Journal of
Animal Ecology 74:1173-1181.
_____. 2006b. Multiple breeding strategies in the swift fox, Vulpes velox. Animal
Behaviour 71:1029-1038.
Knopf, F. L., and F. B. Samson. 1997. Ecology and Conservation of Great Plains
Vertebrates Springer-Verlag, New York, New York.
Knowles, C. J., P. R. Knowles, B. Giddings, and A. R. Dood. 2003. The historic
and recent status of the swift fox in Montana. Pages 41-47 in M. A.
Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation
of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center,
University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Knox, L., and M. Grenier. 2010. Evaluation of swift fox survey techniques.
Completion Report. Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Lander,
Wyoming.
Kozlowski, A. J., T. J. Bennett, E. M. Gese, and W. M. Arjo. 2003. Live capture of
denning mammals using an improved box-trap enclosure: Kit foxes as a
test case. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31:630-633.
Laurion, T. R. 1988. Underdog. Natural History 97:66-70.
List, R., P. Manzano-Fischer, and D. W. Macdonald. 2003. Coyote and kit fox
diets in prairie dog towns and adjacent grasslands in Mexico. Pages 183188 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and
conservation of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains
Research Center, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Lord, R. D. 1961. A population study of the gray fox. American Midland Naturalist
66:87-109.
Martin, D. J., G. C. White, and F. M. Pusateri. 2007. Occupancy rates by swift
foxes (Vulpes velox) in eastern Colorado. Southwestern Naturalist 52:541551.
Matlack, R. S., P. S. Gipson, and D. W. Kaufman. 2000. Swift fox in rangeland
and cropland in western Kansas: Relative abundance, mortality, and body
size. Southwestern Naturalist 45:221-225.
McGee, B. K., W. B. Ballard, and K. L. Nicholson. 2007. Swift fox, Vulpes velox,
den use patterns in northwestern Texas. Canadian Field-Naturalist 12:7175.
McGee, B. K., W. B. Ballard, K. L. Nicholson, B. L. Cypher, P. R. Lemons II, and
J. F. Kamler. 2006a. Effects of artificial escape dens on swift fox
populations in northwest Texas. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34:821-827.
McGee, B. K., M. J. Butler, D. B. Pence, J. L. Alexander, J. L. Nissen, W. B.
Ballard, and K. L. Nicholson. 2006b. Possible vector dissemination by
swift foxes following a plague epizootic in black-tailed prairie dogs in
northwestern Texas. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 42:415-420.
71
�McGee, B. K., M. J. Butler, M. C. Wallace, W. B. Ballard, and K. L. Nicholson.
2005. A comparison of survey techniques for swift fox pups. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 33:1169-1173.
Miller, D. S., B. G. Campbell, R. G. McLean, E. Campos, and D. F. Covell. 1998.
Parasites of swift fox (Vulpes velox) from southeastern Colorado.
Southwestern Naturalist 43:476-479.
Miller, D. S., D. F. Covell, R. G. McLean, W. J. Adrian, M. Niezgoda, J. M.
Gustafson, O. J. Rongstad, R. D. Schultz, L. J. Kirk, and T. J. Quan. 2000.
Serologic survey for selected infectious disease agents in swift and kit
foxes from the western United States. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 36:798805.
Moehrenschlager, A., R. List, and D. W. Macdonald. 2007. Escaping intraguild
predation: Mexican kit foxes survive while coyotes and golden eagles kill
Canadian swift foxes. Journal of Mammalogy 88:1029-1039.
Moehrenschlager, A., and D. W. Macdonald. 2003. Movement and survival
parameters of translocated and resident swift foxes Vulpes velox. Animal
Conservation 6:199-206.
Moehrenschlager, A., D. W. Macdonald, and C. Moehrenschlager. 2003.
Reducing capture-related injuries and radio-collaring effects on swift
foxes. Pages 107-113 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift
fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world.
Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina, Regina,
Saskatchewan.
Moehrenschlager, A., and C. Moehrenschlager. 2001. Census of swift fox
(Vulpes velox) in Canada and northern Montana: 2000-2001. Alberta
Environment, Edmonton, Alberta.
_____. 2006. Population census of reintroduced swift foxes (Vulpes velox) in
Canada and northern Montana 2005/2006. Centre for Conservation
Research, Calgary Zoo, Calgary, Alberta.
Nelson, J. L., B. L. Cypher, C. D. Bjurlin, and S. Creel. 2007. Effects of habitat
competition between kit foxes and coyotes. Journal of Wildlife
Management 71:1467-1475.
Nicholson, K. L., W. B. Ballard, B. K. McGee, J. Surles, J. F. Kamler, and P. R.
Lemons. 2006. Swift fox use of black-tailed prairie dog towns in northwest
Texas. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:1659-1666.
NRCS. 2006. Swift fox (Vulpes velox) Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management
Leaflet No.33, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC.
Olson, T. L., J. S. Dieni, F. G. Lindzey, and S. H. Anderson. 2003. Swift fox
detection probability using tracking plate transects in southeast Wyoming.
Pages 93-98 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox:
Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian
Plains Research Center, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
72
�Olson, T. L., and F. G. Lindzey. 2002a. Swift fox (Vulpes velox) home-range
dispersion patterns in southeastern Wyoming. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 80:2024-2029.
_____. 2002b. Swift fox survival and production in southeastern Wyoming.
Journal of Mammalogy 83:199-206.
Pechacek, P., F. G. Lindzey, and S. H. Anderson. 2000. Home range size and
spatial organization of swift fox Vulpes velox (Say, 1823) in southeastern
Wyoming. Journal of Mammalian Biology 65:209-215.
Peek, M. 2002. Kansas swift fox pelt tagging analysis, 1994-95 through 2001-01
seasons. Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, Emporia, Kansas.
Pence, D. B., J. F. Kamler, and W. B. Ballard. 2004. Ectoparasites of the swift fox
in northwestern Texas. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 40:543-547.
Pruss, S. D. 1999. Selection of natal dens by the swift fox (Vulpes velox) on the
Canadian prairies. Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:646-652.
Pruss, S. D., P. Fargey, and A. Moehrenschlager. 2008. Recovery strategy for
the swift fox (Vulpes velox) in Canada. Prepared in consultation with the
Canadian Swift Fox Recovery Team. Species at Risk Act Recovery
Strategy Series, Parks Canada Agency.
Pybus, M. J., and E. S. Williams. 2003. A review of parasites and diseases of
wild swift fox. Pages 231-236 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The
swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world.
Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina, Regina,
Saskatchewan.
Ralls, K., and P. J. White. 1995. Predation on San Joaquin kit foxes by larger
canids. Journal of Mammalogy 76:723-729.
Richholt, M., and L. Carbyn. 2003. Using tooth sectioning to age swift fox. Pages
161-165 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology
and conservation of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains
Research Center, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Rohwer, S. A., and D. L. Kilgore, Jr. 1973. Interbreeding in the arid-land foxes,
Vulpes velox and V. macrotis. Systemic Zoology 22:157-165.
Root, T. L., J. T. Price, K. R. Hall, S. H. Schneider, C. Rosenzweig, and J. A.
Pounds. 2003. Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants.
Nature 421:57-60.
Russell, T. A. 2006. Habitat selection by swift foxes in Badlands National Park
and surrounding area in South Dakota. Thesis, South Dakota State
University, Brookings, South Dakota.
Salkeld, D. J., R. J. Eisen, P. Stapp, A. P. Wilder, J. Lowell, D. W. Tripp, D.
Albertson, and M. F. Antolin. 2007. Potential role of swift foxes (Vulpes
velox) and their fleas in plague outbreaks in prairie dogs. Journal of
Wildlife Diseases 43:425-431.
Sargeant, G. A., D. H. Johnson, and W. E. Berg. 1998. Interpreting carnivore
scent-station surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:1235-1245.
73
�Sargeant, G. A., M. A. Sovada, C. C. Slivinski, and D. H. Johnson. 2005. Markov
chain Monte Carlo estimation of species distribution: A case study of the
swift fox in western Kansas. Journal of Wildlife Management 69:483-497.
Sargeant, G. A., P. J. White, M. A. Sovada, and B. L. Cypher. 2003. Scentstation survey techniques for swift and kit foxes. Pages 99-105 in M. A.
Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation
of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center,
University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Schauster, E. R., E. M. Gese, and A. M. Kitchen. 2002a. An evaluation of survey
methods for monitoring swift fox abundance. Wildlife Society Bulletin
30:464-477.
_____. 2002b. Population ecology of swift foxes (Vulpes velox) in southeastern
Colorado. Canadian Journal of Zoology 80:307-319.
Schroeder, G. M. 2007. Effect of coyotes and release site selection on survival
and movement of translocated swift foxes in the Badlands ecosystem of
South Dakota. Thesis, South Dakota State University, Brookings, South
Dakota.
Schwalm, D. 2007. Current distribution of the swift fox (Vulpes velox) in Texas.
Thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.
Scott-Brown, J. M., S. Herrero, and J. Reynolds. 1987. Swift fox. Pages 432-441
in M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, editors. Wild
furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario
Trappers Association, North Bay, Ontario.
Shaughnessy, M. J., Jr. 2003. Swift fox detection methods and distribution in the
Oklahoma panhandle. Pages 61-69 in M. A. Sovada, and L. Carbyn,
editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a
changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina,
Regina, Saskatchewan.
Smeeton, C., K. Weagle, and S. S. Waters. 2003. Captive breeding of the swift
fox at the Cochrane Ecological Institute, Alberta. Pages 199-203 in M. A.
Sovada, and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation
of swift foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center,
University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Smith, D. A., K. Ralls, B. L. Cypher, and J. E. Maldonado. 2005. Assessment of
scat-detection dog surveys to determine kit fox distribution. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 33:897-904.
Sovada, M. A., and M. Assenmacher. 2005. Update of swift fox distribution in the
United States. Report for the Swift Fox Conservation Team. U.S.
Geological Survey, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown,
North Dakota.
Sovada, M. A., C. C. Roy, J. B. Bright, and J. R. Gillis. 1998. Causes and rates of
mortality of swift foxes in western Kansas. Journal of Wildlife Management
62:1300-1306.
74
�Sovada, M. A., C. C. Roy, and D. J. Telesco. 2001. Seasonal food habits of swift
fox (Vulpes velox) in cropland and rangeland landscapes in western
Kansas. American Midland Naturalist 145:101-111.
Sovada, M. A., and B. K. Scheick. 1999. 1999 Annual report, preliminary report
to the Swift Fox Conservation Team: Historic and recent distribution of
swift foxes in North America. Pages 80-118 in C. G. Schmitt, editor. Swift
Fox Conservation Team 1999 Annual Report. New Mexico Department of
Game and Fish, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Sovada, M. A., C. C. Slivinski, R. O. Woodward, and M. L. Phillips. 2003. Home
range, habitat use, litter size, and pup dispersal of swift foxes in two
distinct landscapes of western Kansas. Pages 149-160 in M. A. Sovada,
and L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift
foxes in a changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University
of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Sovada, M. A., R. O. Woodward, and L. D. Igl. 2009. Historical range, current
distribution, and conservation status of the Swift fox, Vulpes velox, in
North America. Canadian Field-Naturalist 123:346-367.
Storm, G. L., R. D. Andrews, R. L. Phillips, R. A. Bishop, D. B. Siniff, and J. R.
Tester. 1976. Morphology, reproduction, dispersal, and mortality of
midwestern red fox populations. Wildlife Monographs 49:1-82.
Swift Fox Conservation Team. 1997. Conservation assessment and conservation
strategy for swift fox in the United States. R. Kahn, L. Fox, P. Horner, B.
Giddings, and C. Roy, editors. Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks, Helena, Montana.
Tannerfeldt, M., A. Moehrenschlager, and A. Angerbjörn. 2003. Den ecology of
swift, kit and arctic foxes: A review. Pages 167-181 in M. A. Sovada, and
L. Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes
in a changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of
Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.
Thompson, C. M., and E. M. Gese. 2007. Food webs and intraguild predation:
Community interactions of a native mesocarnivore. Ecology 88:334-346.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2009. Summary Report: 2007 National
Resources Inventory. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
Washington, DC and Ames, Iowa.
Uresk, D. W., K. E. Severson, and J. Javersak. 2003a. Detecting swift fox:
Smoked-plate scent stations versus spotlighting. Research Paper
RMRS-RP-39, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Research Station.
_____. 2003b. Vegetative characteristics of swift fox denning and foraging sites
in southwestern South Dakota. Research Paper RMRS-RP-38, Rocky
Mountain Research Station.
Warrick, G. D., and C. E. Harris. 2001. Evaluation of spotlight and scent-station
surveys to monitor kit fox abundance. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29:827-832.
75
�Weaver, T., E. M. Payson, and D. L. Gustafson. 1996. Adequacy for
conservation for short-grass prairie. Pages 67-76 in F. B. Samson, and F.
L. Knopf, editors. Prairie conservation: Preserving North America's most
endangered ecosystem. Island Press, Covelo, California.
Woolley, T. P., F. G. Lindzey, and R. Rothwell. 1995. Swift fox surveys in
Wyoming - Annual report. Pages 61-79 in S. H. Allen, J. Whitaker
Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, editors. Report of the swift fox
conservation team - 1995. North Dakota Game and Fish Department,
Bismarck, North Dakota.
Young, E. C., and C. T. Osborn. 1990. Costs and benefits of the Conservation
Reserve Program. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 45:370-373.
Zimmerman, A. L. 1998. Reestablishment of swift fox in north central Montana.
Thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana.
Zimmerman, A. L., L. Irby, and B. Giddings. 2003. Status and ecology of swift
foxes in north-central Montana. Pages 49-59 in M. A. Sovada, and L.
Carbyn, editors. The swift fox: Ecology and conservation of swift foxes in a
changing world. Canadian Plains Research Center, University of Regina,
Regina, Saskatchewan.
76
�APPENDIX A. HIGHLIGHTS OF ACTIVITIES PRESENTED IN SFCT ANNUAL
REPORTS
Meeting locations
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2005
2006
2007
2008
2010
Fort Collins, CO
Denver, CO
Omaha NE
Snowmass, CO
Amarillo, TX
Phoenix, AZ
Albuquerque, NM
Rapid City, SD
Bismarck, ND
Fort Collins, CO
Kansas City, KS
Great Falls, MT
Rapid City, SD
Fort Collins, CO
Laramie, WY
December 1-2, 1994
September 20-21, 1995
December 11, 1996
September 22, 1997
December 8, 1998
November 29, 1999
January 23-24, 2000
October 17-18, 2001
September 23, 2002
September 16, 2003
March 22-23, 2005
April 4, 2006
April 17-19, 2007
April 18-20, 2008
March 30-April 1, 2010
These reports can be accessed at this website:
http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/GrasslandSpecies/SwiftFoxConservatio
nTeam.htm
1995
Editors: S. H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel. The overview section described
the origin of the SFCT and its activities to date.
Special Feature: Each state agency representative was asked to include copies of state
regulations pertaining to swift fox in their jurisdictions.
Swift fox investigations in Texas, 1995; P. Horner, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
This report describes the initiation of a Section 6 ESA project to establish swift fox surveys in
the Texas panhandle to be coordinated by biologist Kevin Mote. The report also includes
results of a swift fox survey at a U.S. Department of Energy site near Amarillo.
Swift fox investigations in New Mexico, 1995; C. G. Schmitt, NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
Schmitt summarizes the present state of knowledge of swift fox in New Mexico. Because of
a lack of data to describe the current distribution, the agency plans to begin tracking plate
transects in areas of known swift fox range and collection of swift and kit fox specimens.
Distribution and ecology of swift fox in Oklahoma; J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of
Wildlife Conservation.
Three methods, tracking stations, spotlighting, and predator calling, were used to detect swift
fox in 3 panhandle counties. Future surveys will emphasize the use of tracking stations.
Swift fox management and research in Kansas: 1995 annual report; L. Fox and C. Roy, KS
Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
77
�Swift foxes are described as occurring through most of the species’ historical range in
Kansas, with a stable population for the past 20 years. The species is monitored with a
variety of methods, and several research projects are in progress. Dryland wheat farming
and moderate to intense grazing pressure appear compatible with swift fox in Kansas. Native
prairie conversion to CRP cover has reduced swift fox habitat, potentially exposing them to
higher coyote predation.
Swift fox investigations in Colorado (1995); R. Kahn, Colorado Division of Wildlife and J.
Fitzgerald, University of Northern Colorado.
The report describes 2 projects in progress. An analysis of swift fox ecology in and adjacent
to Pawnee National Grassland yielded information about mortality, reproduction, and den
site characteristics. The second project is a sampling of random sites in eastern Colorado to
determine presence or absence of swift fox.
Swift fox survey in Wyoming; T. Woolley and F. Lindzey, WY Coop. Fish and Wildlife Res.
Unit and R. Rothwell, WY Game and Fish Dept.
Spotlighting and tracking plates were used to sample 12 counties, leading to the conclusion
that swift foxes still occur throughout their historic range in Wyoming. Other information
sources indicated that they may potentially occur west of the historical range. Animals were
documented in a variety of habitat types and topographies.
Swift fox investigations in Nebraska, 1995; F. Andelt, NE Game and Parks Commission.
The known distribution and a summary of recent efforts in Nebraska are described. One
swift fox sighting and 1 active natal den were documented in 1995.
Presence of swift fox in southwestern South Dakota; K. Kruse and J. Jenks, South Dakota
State University and E. Dowd Stukel, SD Game, Fish and Parks.
Tracking plates and spotlighting were used to detect swift foxes in portions of 2
southwestern counties. One active den site was located. Spotlight surveys did not detect
swift foxes, although other mammal species were detected with this method.
Current status of swift fox in Montana; B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks
and C. Knowles, FaunaWest Wildlife Consultants.
A recent increase in reports may indicate the presence of a resident population. A statewide
habitat assessment identified nearly 8 million acres of prairie grasslands considered suitable
habitat.
Investigation of furbearer occurrence with special reference to swift fox and preliminary
modeling of possible swift fox population dynamics in North Dakota – 1994-1995; S. Allen,
ND Game and Fish Dept.
Swift foxes occur at very low densities, if at all, in North Dakota. Random quarter-sections
were surveyed for furbearer presence, with no swift fox detected. Population modeling
indicates that 40% annual survival rates are needed for a swift fox population to remain
stable.
NBS 1995 annual report for the swift fox conservation team; M. Sovada, USGS Northern
Prairie Science Center.
The author describes plans to collect information on survey methods and results from
throughout the species’ range, an upcoming research project in western Kansas, plans for
maintaining swift fox data on the Center’s website, and an overview of research needs.
1995 Swift fox survey, Fall River Ranger District, Nebraska Natl. Forest – L. Hetlet, U.S.
Forest Service.
Nearly 10,000 acres of previously unsurveyed acres plus 6,250 acres of established tracking
plate survey routes were completed, with few swift fox detections. One active den was
documented.
78
�1996
Editors: B. Luce and F. Lindzey.
Swift fox management and research in Kansas: 1996 annual report; C. Roy, KS Dept. of
Wildlife and Parks.
Information from pelt tags on harvested swift foxes indicated that 90% were taken incidental
to coyote trapping and were harvested from both cropland and rangeland habitats. Research
on den site characteristics indicated high fall mortality for juveniles. Den characteristics did
not differ between rangeland and cropland habitats, but habitat characteristics differed
between the 2 study sites.
Swift fox investigations in Colorado, 1996; R. Kahn and T. Beck, CO Division of Wildlife.
This report contains an update on an eastern plains inventory, where swift foxes were
captured in selected plots, and an update on results of radio-collaring animals. Coyotes were
responsible for 71% of mortality.
Swift fox investigations in Nebraska, 1996; F. Andelt, NE Game and Parks Commission.
A 3-agency agreement was signed to cover live-trapping and blood sample collection for
genetic analysis. Six animals were trapped in 1996.
Investigation of furbearer occurrence with special reference to swift fox and preliminary
modeling of possible swift fox population dynamics in North Dakota – 1996; S. Allen, ND
Game and Fish Dept.
Random quarter-sections were surveyed for evidence of furbearer occurrence as indicated
by tracks. No swift foxes were detected.
Distribution and investigations of swift fox in Montana. B. Giddings, MT Fish, Wildlife and
Parks and A. Zimmerman, Montana State University.
Swift foxes are considered resident in a 4-county area of northcentral Montana. This report
describes results of trapping efforts in a modified grid pattern.
Oklahoma swift fox status report – 1996; J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
This report provides an update on distribution surveys in the panhandle region and in 3
northwestern counties using scent station surveys. Work is being conducted by department
staff and under contract to the Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory. Additional techniques
include spotlighting and infrared triggered cameras.
Swift fox investigations in Texas, 1996; K Mote, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Swift foxes were detected in 2 of 25 High Plains counties using metal track plates, as part of
an effort to determine distribution in historical range. Supplemental techniques included
spotlighting and live-trapping.
Swift fox density estimation and survey technique evaluation in southeastern Wyoming,
1996; J. Scott Dieni, F. Lindzey, and S. H. Anderson, WY Coop. Fish and Wildlife Research
Unit and T. Woolley, R. Rothwell, and B. Luce, WY Game and Fish Dept.
Report describes mark-resighting project to estimate swift fox abundance in an area near
Medicine Bow, Wyoming. Also describes results of comparison of 3 survey techniques; scat
surveys, tracking plates, and spotlighting surveys. Seasonal differences for the techniques,
advantages, and problems are addressed.
Summary of swift fox research activities conducted in western Kansas – Annual report; M.
Sovada, Northern Prairie Science Center and C. Roy, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on status of study to evaluate 5 survey methods to estimate swift fox distribution
and abundance. Study area in western Kansas includes cropland and range areas.
Describes techniques and preliminary results associated with each survey method.
Survey of swift fox on Pine Ridge Oglala Sioux Indian Reservation, Shannon County,
South Dakota; D. Dateo, J. Jenks, and C. DePerno, South Dakota State University and E.
Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks.
79
�Carbon-plate stations and spotlight surveys were placed in potential swift fox habitat. One
swift fox was detected for both techniques. Abundance of domestic dogs, coyotes, and red
foxes may help explain the low detection rate for swift foxes in the surveyed area.
Swift fox investigations in New Mexico, 1996; C. G. Schmitt and K. Mower, NM Dept. of
Game and Fish.
Describes results of track and spotlight surveys in northeastern New Mexico, resulting in
documentation of 5 swift foxes. Also describes salvage of specimens from several counties.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 1996 SFCT meeting in Omaha, NE and
results of Forest Service swift fox surveys for Fall River Ranger District, Nebraska National
Forest; Douglas Ranger District, Thunder Basin National Grassland; and Pine Ridge Ranger
District, Nebraska National Forest.
1997
Editor: B. Giddings. The overview section describes the completion or near completion of several
strategies, including formation of a swift fox conservation team and determination of current swift
fox range in the U.S. Several states have begun establishing monitoring programs to determine
species status and have begun identifying existing suitable habitats.
Special Feature: Julianne Whitaker-Hoagland prepared a special report titled “A review of
literature related to swift fox habitat use” in response to the issue of defining suitable habitat for
this species.
Preliminary findings of swift fox studies in Montana; A. Zimmerman, Montana State
University and B. Giddings, MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Describes results of graduate study to determine swift fox distribution in northcentral
Montana, presumably present as a result of colonization from reintroduced animals in
Canada. Used grid trapping design to determine presence and radio-collared captured
animals (16). Estimated home range averages and survivorship percentages. Food habits
analyses showed heavy dependence on mammals.
Investigation of furbearer occurrence with special reference to swift fox in North Dakota1997; S. Allen, ND Game and Fish Dept.
No swift foxes detected during surveys of random and optimal quarter sections. Compared
additional quarter-sections with non-paved roadways and found no difference in furbearer
tracks by furbearer species between 2 site types.
Survey of swift fox in Bennett County, South Dakota; P. Althoff, J. Jenks and D. Dateo,
South Dakota State University and E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks.
Used spotlight surveys to detect furbearers in a southwestern SD county. No swift foxes
detected on or between survey routes. Seven other mammal species detected.
Swift fox survey evaluation, productivity, and survivorship in southeast Wyoming; T.
Olson, J. Scott Dieni, and F. Lindzey, WY Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit.
Describes results of a graduate study by Olson. Determined seasonal probability of detecting
member of a swift fox pair with tracking plate transects. Also determined average litter size
(5.25 pups) and estimated adult survivorship (43%) from March 1996 to November 1997.
Surveyed 3 areas in northern and central Wyoming for swift fox presence, with negative
results.
Swift fox investigations in Nebraska, 1997; F. Andelt, NE Game and Parks Commission.
Previous work continued to compile sighting reports. Completed contract with U.S. Forest
Service and USDA/APHIS-Wildlife Services to live trap swift foxes in Sioux County and
collect blood for genetic analysis.
Swift fox investigations in Colorado, 1997; J. Fitzgerald, B. Roell, D. Finley and J. Eussen,
University of Northern Colorado and J. Seidel and T. Beck, CO Division of Wildlife.
80
�Describes continuation of work in Weld County, including collection of data on mortality,
survival, reproduction, and habitat characteristics. Includes discussion of trap modification
for capture of swift foxes in dens. Used infrared-triggered cameras to estimate winter density
using mark-resight methods and program NOREMARK. Results based on camera use are
described.
Swift fox management and research in Kansas 1997 annual report; C. Roy, KS Dept. of
Wildlife and Parks and M. Sovada and G. Sargeant, USGS Northern Prairie Science Center.
Developed systematic sample of alternate townships in 24 counties of western Kansas to
determine swift fox distribution. Townships searched for swift fox evidence. Detected
presence in 40.5% of townships surveyed in 16 counties. Report describes impediments to
effectively using this method and favorable survey conditions for this landscape-scale
presence/absence survey method.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma, 1997; J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Tracking stations used in Panhandle region. Additional tracking plate stations added in 3
additional counties. Sampling limited due to lack of funds. Laid groundwork for future
systematic sampling, using search methods similar to those used in Kansas.
Swift fox investigations in New Mexico, 1997; R. Harrison, University of New Mexico and C.
Gregory Schmitt, NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
Describes surveys with scent stations and spotlighting and review of other sources of
information on swift fox occurrence. Swift foxes occur throughout historic range in New
Mexico, but not found in certain cropland areas of 2 counties within the historic range.
Report describes habitat preferences and other determining factors to swift fox distribution in
the state.
Swift fox investigation in Texas, 1997; K. Mote, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Describes monitoring in known inhabited areas of 2 counties (Sherman and Dallam) and
investigation into swift fox occurrence on private property, using spotlight surveys and
trapping.
Summary of swift fox investigations on national grasslands; L. Hetlet and B. Hodorff.
Summarizes results from Pawnee and Buffalo Gap national grasslands, with additional
sighting reports from Comanche and Buffalo Gap national grasslands. No surveys were
conducted on 5 of the national grasslands. Results from Pawnee were comparative to
previous years. Buffalo Gap NG surveys resulted in a reduced number of detected tracks,
although population status on adjacent private lands is unknown.
1998
Editor: C. Roy. The overview describes the USFWS’ intent to remove the swift fox from the list of
species warranted but precluded from listing, the first Intl. Swift Fox Symposium, publication of
the team’s first newsletter, and the status of reintroduction projects. The overview also describes
progress in meeting Conservation Strategy objectives.
Swift fox investigations in Colorado in 1998. J. Seidel, CO Division of Wildlife.
Track surveys were conducted in agricultural counties of eastern Colorado, with swift foxes
found in all 3 counties (Kiowa, Kit Carson, and Yuma). Eric Geese, Utah State University,
continued research at the Pinyon Canyon site, with 37 new foxes radio collared during 1998.
An improved method for determining the distribution of swift foxes in Kansas. C. Roy, KS
Dept. of Wildlife, and M. Sovada and G. Sargeant, USGS.
The authors describe 2 years of fieldwork to test a search technique for detecting swift foxes
over a landscape scale. After identifying suitable habitat, experienced observers searched a
sample of townships for evidence of occupancy. Challenges associated with this technique
are described. Based on 2 years of work, technique is considered a practical method of
detecting swift fox occupancy over a large area.
81
�Swift fox management activities in Montana. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks.
MFWP hosted the first MT Swift Fox Working Group meeting in 1998. The Blackfeet Nation
reintroduced 30 captive-reared swift foxes onto tribal lands. FWP committed to funding a
statewide swift fox distribution survey in 1999.
Swift fox investigations in Nebraska, 1998. F. Andelt, NE Game and Parks Commission.
No specific surveys or research projects were conducted in 1998. The main ongoing activity
was to compile swift fox sighting reports.
Investigation of furbearer occurrence in North Dakota with special reference to swift fox –
1998. S. Allen, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Describes track searching in random and optimal quarter-sections. No swift foxes were
detected, and swift foxes continue to be suspected to occur at low densities if at all in the
state. Describes impact of a major outbreak of sarcoptic mange in eastern and northern
North Dakota.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma, 1998. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Describes a new monitoring survey in 2 panhandle counties of Cimarron and Texas. Swift
foxes were detected in 35 of 57 townships.
Survey of swift fox in Pennington and Bennett counties, South Dakota. C. Zell and J.
Jenks, South Dakota State Univ. and E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish, and Parks.
Used track and spotlight surveys in portions of these 2 southwestern counties. No swift foxes
were detected; potential reasons for these results are discussed. Most abundant canids in
the study areas were coyotes, domestic dogs, and red foxes.
Swift fox investigations in Texas, 1998. K. Mote, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept., J. Kamler and
W. Ballard, Texas Tech Univ., and R. Gilliland, USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services.
Describes continuation of monitoring in the Texas panhandle and initiation of a swift
fox/coyote interaction study. Annual monitoring techniques modified to accommodate
research study; monitoring methods include spotlight surveys and prolonged saturation
trapping with live-traps.
Swift fox detection probability in southeast Wyoming. T. Olson, F. Lindzey, and J. Scott
Dieni, WY Coop. Fish and Wildlife Research Unit.
Reports on 2 years of results for research project to test techniques to detect changes in
population size on study area in Shirley Basin near Medicine Bow, Wyoming. Study
designed to estimate probability of detecting 1 swift fox of a pair with track plate transects
within a pair’s home range as a step toward developing a statewide monitoring program.
Summary of swift fox surveys conducted on Region 2 national grasslands in 1998.
Survey results covering 8 national grasslands are included. The majority of sites did not
have formal surveys, but swift fox habitation is still reported if known.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 1998 SFCT meeting in Amarillo, TX.
1999
Editor: C. Gregory Schmitt. Overview reported on progress on proceedings of swift fox
symposium and a summary of progress toward specific objectives from the Conservation
Strategy document.
Summary of swift fox research near Medicine Bow, Wyoming – Summer 1999. T. Olson and
F. Lindzey, WY Coop. Fish and Wildlife Research Unit.
Reported on third year of fieldwork to estimate probability of detecting swift fox presence
using track plate transects. Repeated techniques used in 1997 and 1998 and monitored
home range and habitat use of radio-collected foxes. Investigating assumption that home
82
�ranges will be filled from year to year if population is not declining as premise for use of
permanent tracking plate transects for long-term swift fox monitoring.
Swift Fox Completion Report. B. Luce, L. Hunt and J. Priday. WY Game and Fish Dept.
Used baited track plates in continuous transects to document swift foxes in areas with
potential habitat but unknown population status. Also plan to begin baseline transects to
monitor long-term population trends in areas with known swift fox presence.
Swift fox investigations in New Mexico, 1999. R. Harrison, Dept. of Biology, Univ. of NM.
Reported on start of research to determine most appropriate population census method for
swift fox in New Mexico, with an emphasis on methods most practical for statewide surveys.
Methods included radio telemetry, scat collection, scent stations, spotlighting, and calling.
Texas annual summary of swift fox. R. Sullivan, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Includes summaries of a current and proposed research project by Texas Tech. Jan Kamler
is studying the relationships of swift foxes and coyotes in northwest Texas, using radio
telemetry, with plans to monitor impacts of coyote removal from 1 of the 2 study sites.
Patrick Lemons plans to examine competition and interaction between swift foxes and
coyotes, particularly related to diet differences between the 2 species and pup-rearing
behavior of swift fox.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma, 1999. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Track search monitoring continued in 2 counties in the Oklahoma panhandle and began in 4
new counties. Townships with swift fox tracks occurred in Cimarron, Texas, and Beaver
counties.
Swift fox conservation team action items for 1999 (Kansas). C. Roy, KS Dept. of Wildlife
and Parks.
Progress is reported for specific Conservation Strategy objectives related to KS, including
track survey monitoring, consideration of pelt tagging modifications, progress on Gap
analysis projects, habitat preference findings, and improvements to CRP planting mixes in
Kansas to benefit shortgrass prairie species.
Survey of furbearers in Fall River County South Dakota with emphasis on swift fox. R.
Peterson, J. Jenks, SDSU, and E. Dowd Stukel, SDGFP.
Suitable areas in 2 areas of South Dakota’s southwesternmost counties were searched for
furbearer presence. Little swift fox sign was detected in quarter sections that also contained
red fox sign.
Investigations of furbearer occurrence in North Dakota with special reference to swift fox,
1999. S. Allen, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Continued use of track searching within quarter sections. Four furbearer species detected,
but no swift foxes detected. Compared furbearer occurrence adjacent to roads with other
quarter sections and detected no difference.
National Grasslands swift fox report, 1999.
Results from Pawnee, Fort Pierre, Ogalala, Thunder Basin, Cimarron, Comanche, and
Buffalo Gap are included. Only Pawnee and the west half of Fall River Ranger District
conducted formal surveys in 1999.
1999 Annual report, preliminary report to the swift fox conservation team: Historic and
recent distribution of swift foxes in North America. M. Sovada and B. Scheick, USGS.
The authors report on an ongoing effort to document historic and current species distribution,
using a variety of sources. This effort will also result in a GIS database that can eventually
link occurrences to habitat types. Records are itemized by county within states, and a variety
of maps are included.
Swift fox reintroduction guidelines. E. Dowd Stukel, A. Moehrenschlager, L. Carbyn, J.
Whitaker Hoagland, D. Allardyce, T. Wagener, and M. Fouraker.
In response to interest among several entities to reintroduce swift fox, a Reintroduction
Subcommittee was formed. The resulting guidelines cover 7 facets of this topic, with a
83
�variety of considerations prior to, during, and following reintroduction. The report also
contains a summary of state legal requirements related to this topic.
Summary of the 1999 swift fox track survey in Nebraska. R. Bischoff, NE Game and Parks
Commission.
Reports on track survey results from southwest Nebraska, following techniques used in
Kansas. Swift fox tracks found on 1 site, which is associated with 3 earlier sightings during
the 1980s.
Montana swift fox management activities. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks.
Reports on completion of initial phase of statewide distribution survey, planning for
cooperative international survey with Canada, release of swift fox on Blackfeet Reservation,
and other state accomplishments related to national Conservation Strategy.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 1999 SFCT meeting in Phoenix, AZ.
2000
Editors: C. Gregory Schmitt and B. Oakleaf. Overview reported on U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
removal of swift fox from list of species warranted but precluded from listing under ESA and on
subsequent letter to state wildlife agencies and others related to future commitment to activities
described in national Conservation Strategy. Responses to these letters are contained in this
annual report.
Special Feature: Robert Harrison, Dept. of Biology, University of New Mexico, submitted a
literature review on swift fox diet and prey density studies.
Montana swift fox management activities. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks.
Reports on completion of Montana’s portion of international population census with Canada.
Also developed statewide species distribution maps including land ownership and habitats.
The Blackfeet Reservation completed its third year of reintroduction. The report also
discussed the state’s progress in meeting national Conservation Strategy objectives.
Swift fox completion report, State of Wyoming, Nongame Mammals. L. VanFleet and T.
Spivey, WY Game and Fish Dept.
Reports on distribution surveys using baited track plates in a continuous transect in areas of
potential swift fox presence. Surveys in 2000 were conducted in the Southeastern Plains
Region and Powder River Basin. Also describes future plans for surveys to monitor longterm population trends.
Swift fox investigations in New Mexico, 2000. R. Harrison, UNM and C. Gregory Schmitt,
NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
Describes results of second year of a 3-year study on population and general ecology;
continued testing and analysis of potential tools for use as population census method for
statewide use.
Swift fox investigation in Oklahoma. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Describes monitoring in 6 counties within the species’ historical range in Oklahoma using
track search surveys. All detections occurred in 3 counties in the panhandle region; 74% of
tracks observed in rangeland land use in 2000.
Annual report: Status of swift fox in Texas. R. Sullivan, TX Parks and Wildlife.
Includes progress reports on 2 research projects in progress; Jan Kamler’s study on
interactions between swift foxes and coyotes and Patrick Lemons’ study on diet overlap,
population viability, and den site ecology. Also summarizes Texas’ progress in helping to
84
�meet national Conservation Strategy objectives and current state laws and regulations
related to swift fox and other furbearers in Texas.
Swift fox status on National Park Service lands, 2000. D. Licht, NPS.
Fourteen of 24 NPS units within the swift fox historical range considered as potential habitat.
Badlands National Park in SD thought to have the best potential to support a self-sustaining
population. Discussed Badlands’ interest in swift fox reintroduction and plans to cooperate
with Turner Endangered Species Fund’s planned reintroduction at Bad River Ranches.
National grasslands swift fox reports.
Results of formal surveys are included. As usual, the majority of national grasslands did not
conduct formal surveys.
2001
Editor: M. Peek. Overview reported on continued commitment to swift fox management, following
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service removal of swift fox from list of candidate species. SFCT received
funding from National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for project to determine relationship between
swift fox distribution data and habitat characteristics. SFCT also expressed support for 2
reintroduction projects in South Dakota.
Special Features: Copy of the third edition of Swift Fox News was included.
Status of swift fox in Colorado, April 2002. F. Pusateri, CO Division of Wildlife.
Reports on current population estimates indicating an increase in swift fox ranges in
shortgrass prairie on the eastern plains during the past 25 years, with an estimated
population of 7,000 – 10,000 swift fox in that area, as well as occupation of other habitats in
eastern Colorado. Describes plans to resurvey eastern plains beginning in 2002 and a
Commission decision to not reopen the swift fox trapping season.
Kansas swift fox pelt tagging analysis, 1994-95 through 2001-02 seasons. M. Peek, KS
Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Describes requirements and data collected during pelt tagging. During the seasons
analyzed, 181 swift foxes taken by 38 furharvesters. Foothold traps for coyotes captured the
majority of swift foxes. Half of the swift foxes were taken in dryland crop areas.
Montana swift fox management activities, 2001-2002. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish,
Wildlife and Parks.
Describes completion of international swift fox census, in association with Canada, and
completion of second year of statewide surveys, which indicate continuing expansion. Also
reports on state activities related to national Conservation Strategy.
Swift fox status on National Park Service lands, 2001. D. Licht, NPS.
Reports on status of plan to reintroduce swift foxes to Badlands National Park, SD. Swift fox
not known to inhabit any other NPS lands.
Nebraska swift fox scent station survey, 2001. R. Bischof, NE Game and Parks
Commission and M. Lavelle, USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services.
Scent station survey conducted in certain counties in the Nebraska panhandle; 7 of 18
transects contained swift fox sign.
Final report of investigations of swift fox survey methods, demography, and ecology in
New Mexico. R. Harrison, Univ. of NM and C. Gregory Schmitt, NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
Reports on conclusion of 3-year study to evaluate population survey methods. Scat
collection was most efficient method for presence/absence surveys. Trapping and resighting
with cameras was best method for absolute abundance surveys. Also reports on findings
related to demography and ecology of swift foxes in northeastern New Mexico.
Swift fox investigation in North Dakota, 2000. J. Gerads, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Reports on track search surveys, in which no swift foxes were detected, although 4 other
furbearer species were documented.
85
�Population distribution of swift fox in northwestern Oklahoma using a track search survey.
J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife Conservation.
Describes track search survey in portions of 6 counties within historical range. All detections
were in OK panhandle region. Habitats associated with track points (herbaceous rangeland
and cropland) did not differ from available habitat.
Characteristics and behavior of swift fox at den sites in Fall River County, South Dakota. T.
Stokeley and J. Jenks, South Dakota State University and E. Dowd Stukel, SD Game, Fish
and Parks Dept.
Search methods included den site surveys and track searching on public and private lands.
Twenty percent of located dens were used by swift foxes; others used by coyotes, badgers
(Taxidea taxus), and red foxes.
Status of swift fox in Texas (2002). R. Sullivan, TX Parks and Wildlife.
Contains highlights of swift fox surveys conducted during recent years in Dallam and
Sherman counties, description of goals and progress related to the agency’s swift fox
conservation and management plan, and updates from 2 research projects (Swift fox and
coyote interactions in the short-grass prairie of northwest Texas: Population viability, den site
ecology, and diet overlap and Den site ecology of swift foxes in northwestern Texas).
U.S. Forest Service, National Grasslands of Region 2: 2001 annual reports.
Summaries provided for 7 national grasslands, 2 of which conducted surveys (Pawnee and
Fall River Ranger District of Buffalo Gap National Grassland).
Swift fox completion report. M. Grenier and L. Van Fleet, WY Game and Fish Dept.
Describes track plate transect surveys within suitable swift fox habitat in 3 study regions in
eastern Wyoming as part of a long-term monitoring program.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2001 SFCT meeting in Rapid City, SD.
2002
Editor: M. Grenier. Overview reported on relevance of SFCT accomplishments to removal from
candidate species list, including development of long-term monitoring programs, development of
rangewide baseline habitat model map, increased information efforts, reintroduction success, and
generally better coordination and management. Remaining challenges include taxonomic
distinction between swift and kit foxes, impacts of funding shortfalls, and competition between
swift and red foxes.
Status of swift fox in Colorado, April 2003. F. Pusateri, CO Division of Wildlife.
Provides updates on mark/recapture monitoring project to begin in 2003, shortgrass prairie
funding provided through the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund, and first meeting of
Colorado’s Grassland Species Conservation Working Group.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas, 2002. M. Peek, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Provides an update on 2 monitoring efforts in Kansas, pelt tagging program and track
survey. Track surveys were conducted as first year of a 3-year project, and challenges with
this method are described. A record number of swift fox pelts were tagged during the 20022003 furbearer season, possibly due to favorable fur prices.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma, 2002. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Describes analysis of track plate surveys, with fairly even distribution of track location buffer
areas between herbaceous rangeland and cropland.
Management activities for swift fox in Montana. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks.
Describes results of third/final year of statewide distribution survey and activities of state
working group related to meeting national Conservation Strategy objectives.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2002. R. Bischof, NE Game and Parks Commission.
86
�Scent station surveys conducted in Nebraska panhandle, with no swift fox detections,
although swift foxes were known to occur nearby. Track searching was also tried, with little
success due to dry, dusty tracking conditions. Future monitoring will include scent station
surveys run for longer durations.
Swift fox investigations in North Dakota, 200. J. Gerads, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Continued track surveys in randomly selected sites, with no swift fox detections.
2002 Annual report: Status of swift fox in Texas. H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
and W. Ballard, Texas Tech Univ.
Four topics covered – status of swift fox-coyote interaction research (Kamler and Lemons);
new research on role of artificial escape dens to increase swift fox populations; funding
investigations for current and future research needs; and development of guidelines for swift
fox conservation and management in Texas panhandle.
Wyoming swift fox completion report. M. Grenier, L. Van Fleet, M. Martin, and M. Purcell,
WY Game and Fish Dept.
Reports on results of transect surveys conducted in 3 study regions. Among hypotheses for
declines in 2 of the regions is the increase in detections of nontarget species, particularly
striped skunk, domestic cat, and raccoon. Results may indicate impacts of changing habitats
in these areas.
Status of swift fox on National Park Service lands. D. Licht. NPS.
Describes absence of swift foxes from these lands and plans by Badlands National Park to
reintroduce swift foxes.
Summary of swift fox information for the national grasslands 2002. B. Hodorff, U.S. Forest
Service.
As in previous years, a small number of national grasslands conducted swift fox surveys,
Pawnee and Fall River Ranger District. Thunder Basin NG has a resident population, and
Fort Pierre NG had 2 reintroduced animals on their lands from the adjoining Bad River
Ranches.
2003
Editors: M. Grenier and H. Whitlaw.
Special Features: This report includes a protocol for swift fox specimen submission for storage,
in the event that materials are needed for genetic or disease analysis. The University of New
Mexico has offered to store these materials. Target regions for sample collection were identified.
This report also contains information about the importance of coordinating with the Association of
Zoos and Aquariums regarding status and use of captive swift foxes. The report contains a
summary of expenditures on swift fox work, as submitted, and 2 letters of support for continued
involvement of Marsha Sovada, USGS, and commending the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Dept. on easement acquisition on Gordon Cattle Company lands in northcentral Montana.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas 2003. M. Peek, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on continued use of 3 techniques; roadside track surveys, pelt tagging, and
employee observations, which have collectively documented swift foxes in 22 Kansas
counties since 1999.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma, 2003. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Reports on project to digitize historic plat maps and digital orthophotos based on vegetation
classification as part of shortgrass High Plains rare species habitat assessment project. Also
describes new study to examine abundance and habitat associations of swift foxes in
Oklahoma panhandle.
Monitoring population status of swift fox in Montana. B. Giddings and R. Rauscher, MT
Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
87
�Reports on information collection of observation reports and surrendered swift fox
specimens from incidental capture during coyote trapping. Other activities included survey of
Montana trappers in northcentral Montana regarding swift fox population trend in their area.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2003. R. Bischof, NE Game and Parks Commission.
Describes scent station surveys, most of which were run for 3 consecutive days, resulting in
swift fox detection in 5 townships in 3 different counties, including 1 location with no previous
record of occurrence.
2003 New Mexico swift fox completion report. T. Enk, NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
Reports on completion of roadway transects for scat along 10-mile transects in eastern New
Mexico. Scat samples were submitted to the University of New Mexico for genetic analysis.
Detection of swift fox in furbearer surveys in Fall River County, South Dakota. Z. Olson
and J. Jenks, South Dakota State University and E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish
and Parks.
Describes use of track searching and scent station transects on public and private lands.
Both methods yielded swift fox evidence. Scent stations yielded more tracks, and drought
conditions likely contributed to the small number of tracks detected during track searching.
2003 Annual report: Status of swift fox in Texas. H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Report includes abstracts from 2 studies (Importance of artificial escape cover for increasing
swift fox populations in northwest Texas; Swift fox occurrence in black-tailed prairie dog
towns in the northwestern panhandle of Texas) and a description of a future project
(Distribution of swift foxes in Texas).
Swift fox in Wyoming completion report 2003. M. Grenier and L. Van Fleet, WY Game and
Fish Dept.
Reports on continuation of baited track plates to monitor long-term population trends in 3
regions. Describes results and potential reasons for differing detection probabilities and
nontarget species detections.
Status of swift fox on National Park Service lands. D. Licht, National Park Service.
Includes project description for reintroduction project on Badlands National Park, SD, which
began during the fall of 2003.
Summary of swift fox information for the national grasslands 2003. B. Hodorff, U.S. Forest
Service.
Formal surveys again conducted at Pawnee NG and Fall River Ranger District. Fort Pierre
NG has seen some use of their lands by reintroduced animals from Bad River Ranches.
Swift fox track survey methods and analysis – Guidelines for implementation. M. Sovada
and G. Sargeant, U.S. Geological Survey.
Describes benefits, drawbacks, and typical results associated with use of time-constrained
track surveys as a method of estimating swift fox distribution.
Swift fox reintroductions on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana: Determining
success. D. Ausband, University of Montana-Missoula.
Includes highlights of 1998-2002 reintroductions of 123 captive-reared swift foxes. Describes
methods used to determine population growth rates and fecundity and public involvement
activities. Assume population is growing.
Turner Endangered Species Fund summary of swift fox activities on the Bad River
Ranches, South Dakota, 2003. K. Kunkel, TESF.
Describes methods and results of swift fox translocation in 2002 and planned alterations in
techniques to enhance success.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2003 SFCT meeting in Fort Collins, CO.
2004
Editors: J. Stuart, NM Dept. of Game and Fish and S. Wilson, NE Game and Parks Commission.
88
�Monitoring swift fox populations in eastern Colorado. F. Pusateri, CO Division of Wildlife.
Reports on 3 activities; cooperation with Badlands National Park in reintroduction project,
population monitoring with cage traps on random grids to produce a population index, and
disease monitoring for plague, tularemia, canine parvovirus, and canine distemper virus.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas, 2004. M. Peek, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on continuation of use of 3 techniques to monitor population, including roadside
track surveys, pelt tagging records, and observation records of agency employees. Swift
foxes documented in 23 of 24 counties based on 2004 track search surveys.
Swift fox monitoring activities in Montana. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks.
Occurrence reports helped document population expansion into areas that had not been
occupied for a century, likely resulting from reintroductions. Four counties added to state
distribution map. Also describes distribution of BLM grant funds to support international
census analysis and USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center habitat modeling
project.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2004. S. Wilson, NE Game and Parks Commission.
No surveys conducted in 2004, but scent station surveys will resume in 2005. Swift fox is
state endangered and listed as species of greatest conservation need in Nebraska Natural
Legacy Project.
Swift fox research in New Mexico: 2004 Update. J. Stuart, NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
Reports on recent results of scat collection along road transects in 12 counties of eastern
NM and recent harvest data. No pelt tagging is required in NM. Swift fox and its habitat are
conservation priorities in NM’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy.
North Dakota swift fox annual report, 2004. J. Ermer, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Swift fox surveys conducted every 3 years; 2004 was not a survey year, and no incidental
observations or catches were reported. Swift fox is a Species of Conservation Priority in
North Dakota’s comprehensive wildlife planning effort.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma, 2004. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Reports on results of track search surveys in shortgrass High Plains region and on new
study by OSU to examine abundance and habitat associations in the Oklahoma panhandle.
South Dakota swift fox report, 2004. E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks.
Swift fox listed as a species of greatest conservation need in state’s comprehensive wildlife
planning effort. Agency has provided needed permits for 2 reintroduction projects and has
submitted a State Wildlife Grants proposal to assist with reintroduction at Bad River
Ranches.
Texas swift fox report 2004. H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Reports on new project to be conducted by Donelle Schwalm to determine species
distribution in Texas and examining influence of habitat fragmentation on distribution, habitat
utilization, and genetic diversity. Refers to completed studies by Brady McGee and Kerry
Nicholson, which are discussed elsewhere in this annual report.
Wyoming swift fox completion report. M. Grenier, L. Van Fleet, R. Stephens, T. Filipi, and
D. Webber, WY Game and Fish Dept.
Describes baited track plate surveys in 2 counties in southcentral Wyoming. Swift foxes were
the most commonly detected species, possibly due to public land ownership, making the
surveys easier to conduct, and contiguous habitat in the area.
Report of APHIS Wildlife Services nontarget take of swift fox and kit fox in 2004. J. Green,
APHIS Wildlife Services.
Reports nontarget take of 18 swift foxes and 34 kit foxes by APHIS Wildlife Services
personnel in 9 western states during 2004.
Swift fox in National Park Service units. D. Licht, National Park Service.
NPS lands generally do not support swift foxes, with the exception of a reintroduction
experiment at Badlands National Park, SD. Includes a summary of that project, based on
89
�Marsha Sovada et al. report; a highlight was successful breeding of 3 pairs in first year of
reintroduction.
Summary of swift fox information for the national grasslands 2003. B. Hodorff, U.S. Forest
Service.
As in previous years, formal surveys were conducted at Pawnee NG and Fall River Ranger
District, and Fort Pierre NG is home to animals reintroduced on adjoining Bad River
Ranches.
Ensuring restoration of swift fox on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and in northeastern
Montana. K. Kunkel, Univ. of MT and R. Magnan and L. Bighorn, Fort Peck Fish and
Wildlife Dept.
Describes project to assess recolonization potential; work includes mammal surveys,
trapping for foxes, and landscape suitability assessment. Only 1 fox was captured and
radiocollared during reporting year.
Swift fox reintroductions on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana: Determining
success. D. Ausband, Univ. of Montana-Missoula.
Preliminary findings presented. Techniques include radio-collaring adults and juveniles to
assess population growth rates, searching for natal dens, and public information efforts on
and around the reservation. Coyotes accounted for 54% of mortality of radio-collared swift
foxes.
Kainai (Blood Tribe) swift fox reintroduction programme. C. Smeeton, Cochrane Ecological
Institute.
Describes preparation and coordination related to reintroduction project that began with
release of 5 radio-collared animals. Also reports sighting of pair of uncollared animals at the
reintroduction site in 2005.
Swift fox reintroduction feasibility study – Lower Brule Sioux Tribe. S. Grassel, Lower
Brule Sioux Tribe.
Describes feasibility study, which includes data collection on population levels of swift fox
prey and predators, determination of amount of suitable habitat, and determination of
disease presence in furbearers.
Influence of habitat fragmentation on swift fox distribution, habitat utilization, and genetic
diversity in Texas. D. Schwalm, W. Ballard, E. Fish, and R. Baker, Texas Tech University
and H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Describes graduate research project to identify potential habitat in TX panhandle, to identify
factors influencing patch occupancy, to identify genetic patterns within the study area, and to
identify factors influencing regional genetic diversity.
Importance of artificial escape cover for increasing swift fox populations in northwest
Texas. B. McGee, W. Ballard, and K. Nicholson, Texas Tech University.
Reports on first year of study to compare impact of artificial escape dens on swift fox
mortality from coyotes. Artificial escape dens helped increase swift fox survival in areas with
high coyote abundance, but had little effect in areas with few coyotes.
Swift fox occurrence in black-tailed prairie dog towns in the northwestern panhandle of
Texas. K. Nicholson, W. Ballard, and B. McGee, Texas Tech University.
Describes results of study to determine importance of black-tailed prairie dog colonies to
swift fox. Found that swift foxes in study area used prairie dog towns proportionately less
than their availability, based on swift fox capture locations and radio telemetry.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2005 SFCT meeting in Kansas City, KS.
2005-2006
Editors: E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks and D. Fecske, ND Game and Fish
Dept.
90
�Status of swift fox activities in Colorado, 2005-2006. E. Odell, CO Division of Wildlife.
In eastern Colorado, occupancy rates of swift foxes were estimated by cage-trapping and
marking captured animals from 51, 3 x 4 mi2 -area grids from 31 August 2004 to 12 February
2005. For each gridded area the percentage of short-grass prairie was determined using GIS
technology. A total of 136 swift foxes were captured (including 12 recaptures) from 40 grids,
and 71% of the captures occurred in grids containing >50% shortgrass prairie. Based on the
results of the survey, the proportion of grids in eastern Colorado occupied by swift foxes was
estimated to be 0.71. There was no evidence that occupancy in the region declined from
surveys conducted during 1995 though 1997.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas, 2005-2006. M. Peek, KS Department of Wildlife and
Parks.
Although track surveys were not conducted in Kansas during 2005-2006, the population was
monitored by pelt tagging and observation records. During this time period, the Kansas
Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP) documented 84 reports of swift foxes, of which 54
were road-killed animals. Additionally, during the 2005-06 season, pelts of 58 harvested swift
foxes were tagged. Observation and harvest records documented the species in 15 counties
in western Kansas. In addition to population monitoring, the KDWP agreed to provide
animals (30-40 swift foxes each year for the next 3 to 5 years) for a reintroduction effort
project being carried out by the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe in South Dakota. During late
September 2005, 23 male and 17 female foxes cage-trapped in Kansas were soft released
on tribal lands in South Dakota.
Monitoring resident swift fox populations during 2005 and 2006 in Montana. B. Giddings,
MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
The agency continues to assess the population status of Montana’s expanding swift fox
population. Several cooperative efforts have recently been accomplished, including an
international census in cooperation with Canada, translocation of swift foxes to the Fort Peck
Indian Reservation, and various monitoring efforts.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2005/2006. S. Wilson, NE Game and Parks Commission.
During a 2-week period in July 2005, scent station surveys were conducted in 34 townships
in Sioux, Box Butte, Scotts Bluff, and Banner counties of northwestern Nebraska. Swift foxes
were detected in 2 townships, 1 each, in Sioux and Box Butte counties.
Swift fox research in New Mexico; 2005-2006. J. Stuart, NM Dept. of Game and Fish.
This agency continued its use of scat collection on road transects, using an established
protocol in the 12 counties known to be inhabited by swift foxes. The species was identified
as a species of greatest conservation need in the state’s Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategy. Other activities included furbearer harvest data analysis and a
cooperative project with the Forest Service to install artificial den structures on Kiowa
National Grassland.
Swift fox investigations in Oklahoma. J. Whitaker Hoagland, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
This submission was a completion report on a study conducted by the Department of
Zoology at Oklahoma State University, focused on gaining a better understanding of swift fox
distribution and habitat relationships in the Oklahoma Panhandle. Study results supported
previous findings regarding the importance of continuous, native shortgrass prairie to swift
foxes in the Oklahoma Panhandle and within the Southern Great Plains.
Survey of swift fox in Fall River County, South Dakota. J. Jenks, South Dakota State
University and E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game Fish and Parks.
Researchers from South Dakota State University conducted a scent-station survey to detect
swift fox presence on Buffalo Gap National Grassland in southwestern South Dakota. From
May through August 2005, 143 scent station readings were recorded, of which 83 (58%)
were swift fox tracks. An increase in swift fox sign during this survey compared to past
surveys could be due to a recent mange epizootic that reduced coyote density in the region.
91
�Current distribution of the swift fox population in Texas. D. Schwalm and W. Ballard, Texas
Tech University and H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
This report described a number of cooperative efforts with Texas Tech University. Surveyors
used scat transect and live trapping surveys in 35 counties of northeastern Texas. They
detected swift foxes in only 2 counties, likely due to continued habitat loss and
fragmentation. Work continues on gaining a better understanding of the species’ relationship
to habitat fragmentation, coyote densities, and patch occupancy, including the use of genetic
analyses of swift fox tissue collected throughout the species’ range.
Swift fox activity report for Wildlife Services during 2005 and 2005. K. Gustad, USDA
APHIS-Wildlife Services.
This update provided information on incidental take of swift foxes by USDA staff and other
swift fox conservation efforts by the agency.
U.S. Forest Service reports.
Pawnee National Grassland, S. Kittrell. Staff continued standard swift fox spotlighting
surveys on this grassland. They have seen a general downward trend since 2000, but an
increase in swift fox sightings in 2006. Fall River Ranger District, Buffalo Gap National
Grassland, L. Hetlet. Staff continued swift fox surveys using bait stations. They saw
increased swift fox visitations from 2004 to 2005 and from 2005 to 2006, but the causes for
these increases are uncertain.
Summary of Bureau of Land Management swift fox activities. G. Sitter, BLM.
BLM in Montana has made several monetary contributions to cooperative efforts, and staff
have participated in various environmental review efforts to accommodate swift foxes.
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation swift fox survey report for 2005-2006. T. Ecoffey and R.
Goodman.
Surveys were conducted in 2005 and 2006 using scent stations and spotlighting to
determine existence of swift foxes on Pine Ridge Reservation and to evaluate reintroduction
feasibility. They concluded that a viable swift fox population does not presently exist on the
Reservation, existing animals are likely related to reintroduction at Badlands National Park,
and reintroduction should be conducted if funding can be secured.
Restoration of swift fox on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and northeastern Montana. K.
Kunkel, Univ. of Montana and L. Bighorn and R. Magnan, Fort Peck Fish and Wildlife Dept.
This summary report describes site evaluation and preparation prior to the translocation and
soft release of 10 swift foxes onto the Fort Peck Indian Reservation in September 2006.
Survival and retention were higher than expected. Evaluation continues of proactive
measures that will aid in long-term swift fox persistence.
2006 Lower Brule Sioux Tribe swift fox reintroduction summary. S. Grassel, Lower Brule
Sioux Tribe.
This summary report describes the first year of a reintroduction project in which 40 swift
foxes captured in Kansas were soft released in September 2006. Animals were penned as
male-female pairs or as a group of 1 male and 2 females in areas with excavated artificial
dens. Staff are currently radiotracking 17 animals. The majority of known causes of death
were due to coyotes.
Badlands National Park swift fox summary data for 2005-2006. G. Schroeder, Badlands
National Park.
Two years of a reintroduction experiment are summarized. Using animals captured in
Colorado, 30 swift foxes were released in 2005 and 26 in 2006. Litters and pups were
documented in both years. Staff are currently tracking 58 radio-collared animals and
anticipate that 18-20 breeding pairs will produce 80-100 pups during 2007. They are
planning a second 3-year project to begin in 2008 to examine swift fox population viability in
western South Dakota.
Swift fox restoration in west central South Dakota: 2006 Annual programmatic report. K.
Honness, Turner Endangered Species Fund.
92
�This summary report describes results from 2006, the fifth year of swift fox releases. Four
wild litters and 21 pups were documented in 2006. Staff used ITIs on some pups and radio
collars on others. Evaluations included comparison of results from hard and soft release
techniques. The highest cause of known mortality was coyotes. Net population growth during
2006 was 12 swift foxes.
Synopsis of “Population census of reintroduced swift foxes in Canada and northern
Montana 2005/2006.” A. Moehrenschlager, Calgary Zoological Society and C.
Moehrenschlager, Wildlife Preservation Canada.
This summary report describes the results of the third comprehensive catch-and-release
census of reintroduced swift foxes in Canada and northern Montana. Nearly 200 animals
were caught and released. For the first time, no swift fox from the original reintroduction was
captured. Townships with swift fox captures increased to 52.1%, mainly due to population
expansion in Montana. They also documented increased connectivity of populations.
Population abundance estimates in 2006 were 647.3 in Canada and 516.2 in Montana.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2006 SFCT meeting in Great Falls, MT.
2007
Editors: B. Krueger and M. Ewald, WY Game and Fish Dept.
Status of swift fox activities in 2007. E. Odell, CO Division of Wildlife.
Reports on publication in peer-reviewed journal of 2005 monitoring results, CDOW hosting of
SFCT website, status of Montana State University research project in eastern Colorado,
cooperation in translocation of animals from Colorado to Bad River Ranches, SD, and
CDOW hosting of SFCT meeting in 2008. Also includes CDOW’s objection and related
explanation to speculative statements in 2005-06 Pawnee National Grassland (PNG) SFCT
report regarding negative impact of swift fox removal from PNG for Bad River Ranches
reintroduction project.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas, 2007. M. Peek, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on continued use of 3 techniques to monitor populations and harvest, including
roadside track surveys, pelt-tagging records, and observation records submitted by agency
personnel. Track surveys not conducted in 2007. Agency approved permit to allow Lower
Brule Sioux Tribe to remove swift foxes for reintroduction, which is anticipated to continue for
2-4 additional years.
Swift fox populations in Montana, 2007. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on continued monitoring, which in 2007 included collection of observation reports
and surrendered specimens for 6 new records. Montana has 2 self-sustaining populations, in
northcentral and northeastern Montana, with additional reports from southeastern Montana.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2006-2007. S. Wilson, NE Game and Parks Commission.
Reports on scent station surveys in Sioux County, with detection in 1 township.
Swift fox surveys and other activities in New Mexico, 2006-2007. J. Stuart, NM Dept. of
Game and Fish.
Presents 2005 scat survey results and harvest data. Scat surveys were negatively impacted
by wet weather, which delayed field work and potentially caused scarcity of scat on
transects. Mandatory reporting requirement began in 2006; yielded less than 60 harvested
swift foxes, far below estimated sustainable harvest for swift foxes in New Mexico. Also
reports on installation of artificial swift fox den and escape structures on Kiowa National
Grassland. Swift fox is a state species of greatest conservation need, and several prairie
habitat types used by swift foxes are priority habitats in the state’s comprehensive wildlife
conservation strategy.
North Dakota swift fox report, 2006-2007. D. Fecske, ND Game and Fish Dept.
93
�Update includes description of vehicle-caused deaths of 3 radio-collared swift foxes from
reintroduction projects in South Dakota and trapping of a single animal in southwestern
North Dakota, with evidence of additional animals in the area. Describes coordination efforts
with USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center to develop monitoring strategy.
Swift fox monitoring update – Oklahoma, 2007. M. Howery, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Continued use of timed track searching in Oklahoma panhandle counties. Detected swift fox
presence in 42 of 45 surveyed townships, with most detections in rangeland.
State swift fox activities in South Dakota. E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and
Parks.
Presented protocol developed between SDGFP and the 3 reintroduction entities in South
Dakota to address what is expected of SDGFP staff regarding swift fox sightings, carcasses,
injured animals, or animals in need of relocation.
Current distribution of the swift fox in Texas. D. Schwalm and W. Ballard, Texas Tech
University and H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Reports on effort to determine current distribution in 35-county study area using live
trapping, where possible, and a modified scat transect technique. Documented swift foxes in
2 counties, indicating that current distribution is reduced from historic distribution. Potential
explanations are included.
2007 Swift fox survey, Fall River Ranger District, Buffalo Gap National Grassland,
Nebraska National Forest. L. Hetlet, U.S. Forest Service.
Again used baited scent stations to detect furbearers; detected swift foxes, striped skunks,
American badgers, and coyotes.
Restoration of swift fox on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and in northeastern MontanaFinal Phase One Summary Report. K. Kunkel, Univ. of Montana and L. Bighorn and R.
Magnan, Fort Peck Fish and Game Dept.
Conducted 4 years of feasibility study and searching for swift foxes. Concluded that resident
population did not exist, but area was suitable for translocation. Ten animals translocated
from northcentral Montana; retention, survival, and reproduction were subsequently
documented.
Status of swift fox in National Park Service units in 2007. D. Licht and G. Schroeder,
National Park Service.
Reports on lack of suitable habitat on most of these properties, with the exception of
Badlands National Park. Update on Badlands’ reintroduction project includes highlights on
reproduction (29 litters near park and 109 pups), status of translocations, and long-distance
dispersals.
Swift fox behavioral ecology in relation to a bubonic plague event in northeastern
Colorado. A. Anderson, M. Antolin, and K. Crooks, Colorado State University.
Reports on research project examining swift fox home range and habitat use, diet, and den
site selection relative to prairie dog colonies seasonally and before and after major plague
epizootics in northeastern Colorado. Using radio telemetry to monitor adult swift foxes.
Effects of four-lane highways on swift fox: Inferences for the San Joaquin kit fox
population. A. Kociolek and A. Clevenger, Montana State University.
Update on research project to monitor swift fox movements near Interstate 70 near Limon,
Colorado. Failure of telemetry equipment resulted in few conclusions; modifications planned
for second year of study. Documented use of culverts by swift foxes to cross this major
highway.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2007 SFCT meeting in Rapid City, SD.
2008
Editor: P. Isakson, ND Game and Fish Dept.
94
�Special Features: Updated map of Association of Zoos and Aquariums institutions holding swift
fox is included.
Status of swift fox activities in Colorado, 2008. E. Odell, Colorado Division of Wildlife.
Reports on continued agency support in hosting the SFCT website; mention of 2 research
projects in Colorado, 1 of which is summarized in this report (Lebsock et al.). Kociolek study
of swift fox movements near a major highway will resume fieldwork in 2009. Agency is in
early stages of coordination with the Oglala Sioux Tribe regarding translocation of swift foxes
from Colorado to South Dakota.
Swift fox behavioral ecology in relation to a bubonic plague event in northeastern
Colorado. A. Lebsock, M. Antolin, and K. Crooks, Colorado State University.
Research project hypothesis is that black-tailed prairie dogs provide important swift fox
habitat and food resources, and that swift foxes will shift to remaining prairie dog colonies
following a plague outbreak. Continuation of monitoring by a previous researcher, S. Darden
(19 individuals monitored prior to plague, 17 individuals monitored following plague).
Presently conducting GIS analyses.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas: 2008. M. Peek, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on continued use of roadside track surveys, pelt tagging records, and agency
observation reports to monitor populations and harvests in Kansas. Also reports on state
participation in swift fox trapping effort coordinated by the Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies to develop best management practices for trapping; foothold traps and lethal bodygripping traps used. Continued to permit the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe to translocate swift
foxes from Kansas to South Dakota.
Montana annual swift fox report. B. Giddings, MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
Describes monitoring of resident population with collection of sighting observations, vehiclekilled specimens, and incidentally-trapped specimens. Suspect 2 self-sustaining populations
in the state have some genetic exchange via dispersing animals. Plan continued work in
eastern and southeastern Montana to further define occupied areas and to assess potential
for in-state translocation.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2008. S. Wilson, NE Game and Parks Commission.
Reports on track plate survey conducted by consulting firm in association with proposed
wind power project in Kimball County; swift fox detections at 2 of 145 track plates. Three
counties known to be inhabited by swift foxes in 2008; Dawes, Kimball, and Sioux. Scent
station surveys will resume in 2009.
Swift fox conservation activities in New Mexico: 2008. J. Stuart, NM Dept. of Game and
Fish.
Reports on continuation of use of scat survey road transects in 12 counties of eastern New
Mexico. Samples from 2008 currently being analyzed to species by genetic analyses.
Species remains a harvestable furbearer; species and its habitat are conservation priorities
in state’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy.
North Dakota swift fox report: 2008. P. Isakson, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Samples from a road-killed specimen found in Bottineau County, along North Dakota’s
northern border, were sent to Texas Tech University for genetic analysis. Discussions
continued with USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center staff to develop survey
strategies.
Swift fox monitoring update – Oklahoma 2008. M. Howery, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Reports on continued use of timed track survey searches as state population monitoring tool.
Searches completed on 11 townships in 2008, or ⅓ of planned surveys. Swift fox tracks
found in 10 of 11 sampled townships. As in previous years, most detections found in
rangeland habitats.
95
�Swift fox activities in South Dakota. E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks and
M. Phillips, Turner Endangered Species Fund.
Summary reproduced from TESF’s completion of State Wildlife Grants-funded project on
Bad River Ranches in South Dakota for 2005-2007 activities. Highlights include translocation
and release of 180 animals plus 45 pups born in soft-release pens, documentation of 90
pups born in 25 wild litters, and documentation of movement and reproduction between
translocated populations in the state. Also describes important contributions of cooperating
private landowners.
Investigating genetic structure in swift fox populations. D. Schwalm and W. Ballard, Texas
Tech University, H. Whitlaw, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept., and L. Waits, University of Idaho.
Reports on results of study to characterize swift fox genetic composition by studying
relationship between gene flow, genetic structure, and landscape at a broad scale. Did not
use samples that may have been influenced by translocation projects. Two methods used to
detect populations; the first described 2 populations, the second described 7 populations.
Analysis of additional samples will continue at the University of Idaho.
2008 Swift fox survey, Fall River Ranger District, Buffalo Gap National Grassland,
Nebraska National Forest. L. Hetlet, U.S. Forest Service.
Reports on continued use of baited survey stations, which yielded evidence of swift foxes,
striped skunks, and coyotes.
2008 Summary of swift fox activities at Badlands National Park and western South Dakota.
G. Schroeder, Badlands National Park and J. Jenks, South Dakota State University.
Reports on results of reintroduction project at Badlands National Park; 114 animals released
from 2003-2006; a minimum of 41 litters with 155 pups detected in 2008. Also describes new
research project to assess effectiveness of scent station surveys as a survey technique in
western South Dakota by comparing resident and restored populations. Report contains
listing of recent swift fox reports or deaths from areas outside the 3 reintroduction sites in the
state.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2008 SFCT meeting in Fort Collins, CO.
2009-2010
Editors: K. Bly, WWF and Brian Giddings, MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Status of swift fox activities in Colorado, 2009-2010. J. Apker, CO Division of Wildlife.
Swift fox season resulted in an estimated take of 153 animals in 2009. Habitat occupancy
surveys should be completed in 2011, following methods of 2 previous surveys. Safi
Darden’s post-doc research continues on swift fox communication and behavior.
Reorganization of Division of Wildlife resulted in swift fox, as a hunted species, moved to
Terrestrial Section.
Swift fox investigations in Kansas, 2009-2010. M. Peek, KS Dept. of Wildlife and Parks.
Reports on results of monitoring through mandatory pelt tagging of harvested swift foxes
during 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 seasons; 98 and 40 animals harvested, respectively.
KDWP participated in AFWA’s BMPs for trapping. Other information sources included
observations by Dept. employees, reports from reliable non-Dept. people, and road kills.
Montana swift fox report 2009-2010. B. Giddings, MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
During 2009 FWP collected numerous swift fox observations in eastern Montana, and
facilitated a translocation of 30 foxes from northcentral Montana to the Fort Peck Indian
Reservation to establish a new population. In 2010 the BLM, FWP, Defenders of Wildlife,
and World Wildlife Fund funded the first year of a graduate student project through St. Cloud
State, MN to survey various counties in southeastern Montana to detect the presence of
swift fox. Also the first swift fox season was allowed in a portion of northcentral Montana with
96
�a harvest quota of 20 animals while also allowing for the translocation of an additional 20
foxes to the Fort Peck Reservation to augment the recently established population.
Nebraska swift fox report, 2009-2010. S. Wilson, NE Game and Parks Commission.
Reports on scent station survey in 2010; other techniques included carcass collection, sign,
photographs, and observations. Plan to continue scent station surveys in 2011 in high
priority areas.
Swift fox conservation activities in New Mexico, 2009-2010. J. Stuart, NM Dept. of Game
and Fish.
Continued use of scat collection for genetic analysis along established road transects.
Samples collected in 2008 were not analyzed until 2009; many samples were not usable,
likely because of the time lag between collection and analysis. Swift fox identified in 7 of 12
surveyed counties. Swift fox is a conservation priority in NM’s CWCS. Swift and kit foxes
likely taken mainly as incidental to coyotes. Consider swift and kit fox harvests to be well
below sustainable levels. Do not require pelt tagging, but will review annually. Next scat
surveys tentatively planned for 2013.
North Dakota swift fox report 2009. S. Tucker, ND Game and Fish Dept.
Monitor this non-breeding species by occurrence reports and track surveys. Since first
recent documentation in 1984, have documented 7 additional swift fox mortalities from 5
counties. In the process of discussing sampling options with NPWRC.
Swift fox monitoring update – Oklahoma 2009-2010. M. Howery, OK Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation.
Reports on continued use of timed track surveys in occupied range, which is nearly identical
to historical range in the state. Located swift fox tracks in 17 of 20 townships surveyed in
2009. Most detections made in areas dominated by rangeland, with 24% (6) of detections in
agricultural areas.
State swift fox activities in South Dakota. E. Dowd Stukel, SD Dept. of Game, Fish and
Parks.
Reports on several ongoing agency activities, including agency personnel protocol to help
assure that reintroduction entities have the opportunity to obtain data from swift fox
observed alive or recovered dead. Presents abstract from SD State Wildlife Grants-funded
project to analyze and summarize data from the TESF swift fox project at Bad River
Ranches, SD. Study objectives were to evaluate resource selection during pup rearing and
to refine existing habitat suitability model for the pup-rearing period.
Swift fox summary. J. Young, TX Parks and Wildlife Dept.
Reports on proposal in preparation to change swift fox trapping regulations for Division
Director’s consideration and agency efforts to secure funding for a swift fox reintroduction
program.
Evaluation of swift fox survey techniques – Completion Report. L. Knox and M. Grenier,
WY Game and Fish Dept.
Report on testing 3 techniques for possible use in future swift fox surveys – infrared
cameras, hair snares, and live trapping. Infrared cameras were the most efficient tool.
Describes some technical difficulties and their proposed solutions. Recommend use of
infrared cameras in an array of 5 cameras per quadrat using petroleum jelly-based skunk
essence as the attractant during fall dispersal period.
2009 Swift fox survey, Fall River Ranger District, Buffalo Gap National Grassland,
Nebraska National Forest. L. Hetlet, USFS Fall River Ranger District.
Describes 2009 survey effort on 8,300 acres using scent stations baited with sand substrate
mixed with vegetable oil and baited with canned jack mackerel. Survey hindered by rainy
conditions and grasshopper infestation, resulting in presumed underreporting of mammals.
Detected 30 swift fox tracks on 195 bait station-nights.
Tokala Society – Kit fox (Swift fox) society on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation – 2009
and 2010 SFCT report. T. Ecoffey and R. Goodman, Oglala Sioux Parks and Recreation
Authority.
97
�Report on preparation and implementation of swift fox releases on reservation during 2009
(54 released) and 2010 (25 released). Animals followed via radio telemetry; as of June
2010, 15 foxes detected with live signals and 13 foxes never detected. Nineteen pups
documented in June 2010. Four of 25 animals released in 2010 found via mortality signals;
12 detected by live signals.
2009 Summary of swift fox activities at Badlands National Park and western South Dakota.
J. Delger, Badlands National Park.
Reports on status of expanding population in southwestern SD, resulting primarily from
successful reintroduction at Badlands National Park. Progress on research project to assess
long-term viability of swift fox in this area is described, with testing of scent stations as the
potential future monitoring tool. Also using mark-recapture via live trapping and continued use
of passive identification tags to build mark-recapture database.
Restoration of swift fox on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and northeastern Montana. K.
Kunkel, Univ. of MT and L. Bighorn and R. Magnan, Fort Peck Tribe Fish and Wildlife Dept.
Report on results of 3 translocation efforts in fall 2006, fall 2009, and fall 2010. Population
remains very small. Continue to monitor pup production and survival and adult survival.
Worked with MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks to exclude the reservation from swift fox harvest.
Have confirmed 10 pups.
Swift fox SSP 2009-2010 annual report. M. McBirney, Pueblo Zoo.
Provides background on captive breeding program and relationship to AZA structure. Nineteen
AZA zoos presently have 64 swift fox specimens, which originated from research animals
used at NPWRC. AZA Canid TAG recommended that captive swift fox population be capped
at 75 animals, with the opportunity to secure additional wild animals via coordination with the
SFCT. Requests that cooperators contact Marilyn regarding whether nonreleasable animals
can be provided to diversify the captive swift fox bloodline.
World Wildlife Fund swift fox projects in Montana. K. Bly, World Wildlife Fund.
Reports on use of camera trapping to detect swift fox in 2 areas of Montana. Neither survey
detected swift fox. Plan a second survey in 2011 in 6 different counties of southeastern
Montana. Constructed swift fox habitat suitability model to help direct a research project
involving WWF, Saint Cloud State University, MFWP, and the BLM.
This report also contained the meeting minutes from the 2010 SFCT meeting in Laramie, WY.
98
�
https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/3f7927af743152649c7336c80e89e870.pdf
0d4469535f3886c052652dca84098a03
PDF Text
Text
CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT
AND CONSERVATION STRATEGY
FOR
SWIFT FOX IN THE UNITED ST ATES
' __
;
_,.).
,.
"'
,,. j
September 1997
J
�CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AND CONSERVATION STRATEGY
FOR
SWIFT FOX IN THE UNITED STATES
Technical Editors:
Rick Kahn, Wildlife Manager
Colorado Division of Wildlife
Lloyd Fox, Big Game & Furbearer Coordinator
Kansas Department of Wildlife & Parks
Peggy Horner, Nongame Specialist
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Brian Giddings, Furbearer Coordinator
Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks
Christiane Roy, Wildlife Research Biologist
Kansas Department of Wildlife & Parks
September 1997
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ............................................................ iv
Executive Summary ............................................................ v
List of Tables ............................................................... viii
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1x
CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT
Introduction .................................................................. l
Taxonomy ................................................................... 1
Description .................................................................. I
Distribution and Status ......................................................... 2
Distribution ............................................................ 2
Population Status ....................................................... 5
Management Status ...................................................... 8
Life History and Habitat Relationships ............................................ I 0
Life History ........................................................... I 0
Habitat Relationships .................................................... 12
Risk Assessment ............................................................. 13
CONSERVATION STRATEGY
Introduction ................................................................. I 9
Go~ ....................................................................... 20
Objectives, Strategies and Activities ·····························
············20
LITERATURE CITED ........................................................ 29
APPENDIX A.
Swift fox conservation team membership, 1996-1997 .............. 3 7
APPENDIXB.
State agency director·s letter to USFWS regional director ........... 40
APPENDIXC.
State maps indicating historic swift fox range, current known
species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county ......... 44
Figure C 1. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution and
potentially suitable habitat by county in Montana .................. 45
rigure C2. Historic swift fux ra.uge, current kI1uw11 ~pecies disLributiun
and potentially suitable habitat by county in North Dakota ........... 46
Figure C3. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution
and potentially suitable habitat by county in South Dakota ........... 4 7
II
�ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was prepared through the technical assistance and support of many individuals
that participated in Swift Fox Conservation Team (SFCT) meetings during 1994 and 1995.
Team members included Dave Allardyce, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Steve Allen, North
Dakota Game and Fish Department; Frank Andelt, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission;
Steve Brechtel, Chair, Canadian Swift Fox Recovery Team, Alberta Fish and Wildlife Service;
Eileen Dowd Stukel, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks; Lloyd Fox and
Christiane Roy. Kansas Department of Wildlife ~n.-1 P~rkg: Brian Giddings, Montana Department
of Fish, Wildlife and Parks; Bob Hodorff, Fall River Ranger District, U.S. Forest Service; Peggy
Horner, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; Mark Howery and Julianne Whitaker Hoagland,
Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation; Rick Kahn, Colorado Divisiou uf Wih.llifr
(Chair 1994 & 1995); Reg Rothwell and Bob Luce, Wyoming Game and Fish Department; Greg
Schmitt, New Mexico Department of Game and Parks; and Marsha Sovada, Natural Resources
Divisiuu, U.S. Geulugical Service.
Cooperators and other participants included Mark Ball, Pawnee National Grassland; Lu Carbyn,
Canadian Wildlife Service; James Fitzgerald, University of Northern Colorado; Eric Gese,
Denver Wildlife Research Center; Bob Reynolds, APHIS Animal Damage Control; and Tim
Woolley, Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit.
Appreciation is also extended to Sally Sovey of Exhillustrations for the cover art, Martha Lonner
and Marcia Leritz of Media Works for producing the maps and to the numerous reviewers that
provided valuable comments and suggestions pertaining to this document. Public comment and
peer review on the original draft of this document was solicited within each of the ten states
during December 1996. Collectively, about 250 draft docunu,uts and 850 executive summaries
were mailed, and approximately 50 written responses were received. Oklahoma provided a
public hearing on the draft document. Written responses were received from the public,
conserva,ion groups, special interest organizations. universities and state and federal agencies.
A compilation of the comments received are available upon request from any of the current
SFCT representatives listed in Appendix A. Revisions based on public comment and peer
review were discussed by the SFCT members and appropriate changes were incorporated into the
document during 1997.
iv
�7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The swift fox (Vulpes velox) is considered a somewhat specialized species that inhabits the
shortgrass and midgrass prairie ecosystem in the Great Plains region of North America. The
original continental range of this small, buff-colored fox, may have extended north-south from
central Alberta to central Texas and east-west between western Iowa and eastern Colorado.
Between the early l 800s and the mid l 900s the swift fox was subject to a dramatic range
reduction that was apparently a result of human related activities associated with the settlement
anrl o;>vtelopmi,nt of the pr~irie region During the 1950s, swift fox were thought to be
reoccupying many areas of their former range. As a result of natural recolonization and
reintroduction efforts the species is now present in nine states and two provinces. An apparently
common and contiguous population occupies portions of Wyoming, Colorado, and Kansas. with
the species considered locally common in portions of Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico.
Swift fox appear to have a restricted distribution in Nebraska, South Dakota and Montana while
the species is thought to be absent from North Dakota. The pruvim;es of Allmla awl
Saskatchewan now maintain a wild population with a restricted distribution as the result of a
reintroduction program (Carbyn et al. 1994 ). Although the known distribution of swift fox may
represent an estimated 30 percent of the species' reported pre-settlement range. the population
status of swift fox in many occupied areas has yet to be fully investigated.
In the United States, the present level of species protection varies among the ten states and
several federal agencies involved with swift fox conservation. The species is classified as
endangered or threatened in the states of Nebraska and South Dakota; is a forbearer in seven
states; and is a nongame wildlife species in Wyoming. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) lists the swift fox as a candidate species with a priority rating of eight (61 FR 7596;
Feb. 28, 1996); the U.S. forest Service (USFS) designates the swift fox as a sensitive species;
and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) also recognizes this designation for swift fox. Most
state Natural Heritage Programs (NHP) describe the species as rare or extirpated.
In 1992 a petition was submitted to the USFWS to list the swift fox under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) in the states of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska, if not
throughout its entire range. The USFWS published a 90-day finding in 1994 which concluded
that a species listing may be warranted range-wide (59 FR 28328; June L 1994). The ten state
wildlife management agencies affected by this decision and interested cooperators formed the
Swift Fox Conservation Team (SFCT) in 1994 to develop a species conservation assessment and
conservation strategy document which would provide a framework to direct conservation of the
species as an alternative to a federally mandated recovery effort. With thi, knowlc,clze ofrhis
initiative, the USFWS published a 12-month finding in 1995 which resulted in a warranted, but
precluded decision, concluding that the magnitude of threats to the species is low to moderate
allhuugh the immediacy of threats remains imminent (60 fR 31663; June I 6, 1995). This
candidate listing reconunendation is reviewed and reassessed annually by the USFWS.
State wildlife agencies and cooperating federal land management agencies within the current
United States range of the swift fox have demonstrated a commitment to ensure the conservation
V
�of the swift fox and its habitat by identifying a specific conservation strategy fur the species.
Accomplishment of conservation strategy objectives will be coordinated through the SFCT and
may be reviewed annually by the USFWS, with specific activities implemented by state wildlife
agencies in cooperation with the federal land management agencies, research institutions, tribal
governments, private organizations and private landowners as dictated by available funding and
resources. This effort reflects the present position of the states involved, which was indicated to
the USFWS in a letter signed by the ten state wildlife agency directors in I 994, that conservation
of the swift fox can be achieved by this coordinated and cooperative management approach
utilizing state and federal funding sources rather than through a species listinz ,mrler the, FSA
(Appendix B). The stated goal, objectives, strategies, and activities described in the conservation
strategy may be modified by the SFCT if the ESA is utilized at a later date.
A review of the numerous studies on swift fox in the United States indicate that they have
collected qualitative ecological data, but have not adequately addressed defining range-wide
habitat requirements. Ilowcvcr, it is generally a<.:<.:epteJ that swift fox are associated with the
shortgrass and midgrass prairie ecosystem. Habitat within this ecosystem support a diverse prey
base, provide relatively level topography which affords long viewing distances to detect
predators, and consist of firm friable soils that are suitable for the excavation and maintenance of
multiple den sites utilized for year-round use.
The primary considerations identified by the SFCT to develop a successful conservation strategy
for swift fox are to:
I)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Maintain and protect existing areas of species abundance while expanding the distribution
of swift fox where ecologically and politically feasible.
Develop methods to monitor population status and species distribution.
Identify, manage and protect suitable swift fox habitat.
Implement cooperative efforts with private landowners and conservation agreements with
feJeral land management agencies to maintain and manage habitat for sw1Jt fox.
Elevate state legal status and/or management priority of the species throughout its range.
Although not necessarily provide a geographically continuous population, it is essential to
maintain a genetically connected continental population.
In order to achieve the stated objectives outlined in the conservation strategy, the SFCT and each
state swift fox working group may facilitate the collection and transfer of information to direct
the:
I)
2)
3)
Development of a survey protocol to monitor trends in the distribution and population
status of swift fox throughout the species range.
Define what constitutes suitable swift fox habitat within various geuphysiugraphi<.:
regions and identify components of swift fox habitat.
Implementation of habitat and population management practices on state and federal
lands which emphasize the conservation of swift fox.
VI
�4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Development of private landowner incentive programs to support swift fox management
and research.
Development of educational programs to promote positive public support for swift fox
conservation efforts.
Reestablishment of local populations in unoccupied suitable habitat, with initial emphasis
in the northern portion of the species range.
Periodic monitoring oi genetic d1vers1ty and species health.
Implementation of unified harvest regulations to facilitate the collection of biological
information in states where swift fox population levels support a legal harvest.
Investigate the need and availability of captive swift fox in existing zoos and reserves to
maintain a source of genetic diversity.
Swift fox conservation criteria used to evaluate the success of this program will include 1) the
ability to maintain local self~sustaining populations which are geographically distributed
throughout each state or large blocks of contiguous prairie and 2) that the United States
population occupies a minimum of 50 percent of the suitable habitat that is available.
Attainment of conservation strategy objectives are intended to be accomplished by 2015 if
adequate funding and resources are available, with appruxirnatdy half of the species 1estoration
completed by 2005. It is estimated that the total cost of implementing the conservation strategy
over a 20 year period could reach $1,500,000 or more. State, federal and private funding sources
will be solicited as needs are identified.
Yll
�LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
I
State legal status, harvest seasons, and management activities for swift fox, 1995 ..... 9
2
State swift fox harvest estimates based on furbearer harvest
questionnaires, 1982-1995 ................................................ II
viii
�LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
Vegetation classification of shortgrass and midgrass prairie grassland types
in the central United States as modified from Lauenroth (1996) .................... 3
2
Current known swift fox distribution in the United States (Allen et al. 1996)
and Canada (Carbyn, pers. comm.) ........................................... 6
3
Current known swift fox distribution in the United States (Allen et al. 1996) and
classification of shortgrass an<l mirlgrass prairi" erasslancl typ,,, in thi, c."ntral United
States as modified from Lauenroth (I 996) .................................... 7
ix
�CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this conservation assessment is to describe the current known status of the swift
fox in the TJniterl StM<es end to identify and assess the risks to the species. It is intended to focus
efforts toward conserving existing populations and minimizing the continuation of these threats
which will allow an expansion of the species' range. Information is provided primarily at the
state level, an approach that provides a habitat and species asscssmeut which considers regional
variation. Canada has recently completed a national recovery plan for the swift fox (Brechtel et
al. 1996). This conservation assessment is intended to address the USFWS species candidate
listing in the United States under the ESA of I ':/'/3, as amended. This assessment should be
considered dynamic with revisions expected periodically as new information becomes available.
TAXONOMY
The three North American members of the genus Vulpes are the red fox (V v11/pes), swift fox and
kit fox (V: macrotis). Scientists have long debated the taxonomic status of the two arid land
foxes (Samuel and Nelson 1982, Scott-Brown et al. 1987). The swift fox and kit fox represent
the smallest canids in North America with morphological similarities that have resulted in
several locally common names, such as northern kit fox, swift kit fox, and prairie kit fox, which
are often applied interchangeably.
Swift fox differ from the kit fox in appearance by a broader skull and shorter ears, shorter tail
length, and slightly larger body size. Swift fox are considered residents of the grassland prairies
while kit fox occupy the more desert environments. Swift fox and kit fox are recognized as two
separate species (Scott-Brown et al. 1987, FaunaWest 1991, Mercure et al. 1993) although
findings by Dragoo et al. (1990) may continue this debate.
DESCRIPTION
The primary physical species-specific characteristics of the swift fox are its small size, large ears,
black muzzle patches, buffy tan pelage coloration and black-tipped tail. Adult swift fox are 3032 cm (12 12.5 inches) in height and about 80 cm (31 inches) in total k:ngth (Scull-Brown el al.
I 987). The average weight is reported to be 2.44 kg (5.4 lbs) for males and 2.3 kg (5.0 lbs) for
females. Pelage color is similar for both sexes, which is a dark buffy gray across the back
exlt:nding into a yellow-tan coloration across the sides and legs. The throat, chest, and belly area
are pale yellow to white. Pelage color may be more rufus during the summer months. Specific
field identification marks are considered to be the black patches on either side of the muzzle and
the black-tipped tail.
Skull characteristics of swift fox are similar to other canids. The dental formula is: 3/3; 1/1; 4/4;
2/3; for a total of 42 teeth. Egoscue (I 979) reports the female has eight evenly spaced mammae.
�--Swift fox are primarily nocturnal and closely associated to underground den sites (Hillman and
Sharps 1978, Eqoscue 1979). The swift fox likely received its descriptive name from its ability
to outrun predators and pursue certain prey species, particularly the black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus
californicus) and white-tailed jackrabbit (L. townsendii). A number of studies (Cutter 1958b,
Egoscue 1962, Kilgore 1969, Zumbaugh et al. 1985) support the importance oflagomorphs in the
diet of swift fox.
DISTRIBUTION AND STATUS
Distribution
The swift fox is native to the grassland prairies in the Great Plains region of North America. The
original range of the species was influenced primarily by the extent of the shortgrass and
midgrass prairie ecosytems. Historic swift fox range is reported to have included 1.6 million km"
(624,000 mi2) of the grassland prairie in central North America (Scott-Bro\\,TI et al. I 987),
extending north-south from central Alberta to central Texas and east-west between western Iowa
and Minnesula tu ~t:ntrnl Colorado (Hall 1981, Hall and Kdsuu 1959, Sa.mud aud Nelson 1982,
Scott-Brown et al. 1987).
Although historic United States range maps include extreme western Minnesota and Iowa (Hall
1981, Scott-Brown et al. 1987, Fauna West 1991, Samuel and Nelson 1982), specimens were not
collected for verification (Swanson et al. 1945, Allen 1870, Bowles 1975 in Fauna West 1991).
Historic swift fox range (pre-1850) in the United States has been based on verified and unverified
museum records and observational accounts recorded by early naturalists and explorers
(FmmaWest 1991 \ with the latter not quantitatively measuring ahundance or indicating if species
distribution was continuous or patchy and disjunct. Recent vegetation classification mapping
that has been modified to delineate the extent of potential grassland types in the central United
States (Lauenroth 1996) may further confound historic rungc estimates und presents u theory thut
could suggest historic swift fox range was 20-25 percent less than what has been reported in the
literature (Fig. I). Consequently, the extent of historic distribution and population estimates are
difficult to accurately assess today, based on the available historical literature and unverified
specimen records.
However, a dramatic range reduction did occur in the United States in the early l 800s and
continued until the mid 1900s as a result of human related activities associated with the
settlement and development of the prairies (Scott-Brown et al. 1987, Fauna West 1991, Samuel
and Nelson 1982). This range reduction was apparently more dramatic in the eastern and
northern portions of swift fox range (Hillman and Sharps 1978). The loss of native prairie
hHbita1, pre,,fator c:nntml ccampaigns, 1mrc,gul3te,c11rapping anrl lmnting, anrl rnrlent control
programs all contributed to a restricted distribution (Samuel and Nelson 1982, Fauna West 1991).
Swift fox were extremely susceptible to strychnine-laced carcasses on the prairie during wolf
(Canis lupus) extermination campaigns in the late I 800s.(Scott-Brovm et al. 1987, Young 1944).
Johnson (1969) reported the commercial trade of thousands of swift fox pelts between 1835 and
2
�BRITISH
COLUMBIA
CANADA
ALBERTA
SASKATCHEWAN
MANITODA
ONTARIO
MISSOURI
NEW MEXICO
0
500km
Figure 1. Vegetation classification of shortgrass and midgrass prairie grassland types in the central
Uuitt::<.l Stat<::~ a~ mu<.lifit::<.l fwm Lauenrulh (1996).
'3
�18"l8_ Rohinson (19~1) considered foxes to he vnlner3hle to coyote (C latrnns) control methorls
used through the mid I 900s. Fauna West (I 991) suggests the loss of native habitat to agriculture,
a changing prey base, and increased interspecific competition from coyotes and red foxes
maintained this restricted distribution.
Recent species accounts (post-1950), however, now suggest that swift fox populations have been
increasing and reoccupying some ponions of their historic range in the United States (Fauna West
1991, Samuel and Nelson 1982). According to Jones et al. ( 1987), by mid-century the swift fox
began a remarkable recovery from remnant populations in much of the western portion of its
original range.
The last historical record of swift fox in Montana was reported by Bailey and Bailey (I 918) and
Hoffman et al. (1969) concluded that the species was extirpated in the state. In 1978, the first of
a series of collected swift fox specimens was recovered in Custer County in southeastern
Montana (Moore and Martin 1980)_ No sightings were made of swift fox between 1915 and
1970 in North Dakota (Bailey 1926, Pfeifer and Hibbard 1970), between 1914 and 1966 in South
Dakota (Visher 1914, Hillman and Sharps 1978), or during the period 1901 to 1953 in Nebraska
(Jones 1964).
Long (1965) stated that swift fox were not reported for many years in Wyoming prior to 1958. In
Colorado, Lechleitner (1969) indicated that swift fox range had contracted by J 900 which led to
local extinctions in many areas of the state. Recent status information indicates the species is
well distributed in eastern Colorado (Fitzgerald et al. 1994). Allen (1874) felt that swift fox were
still somewhat abundant in western Kansas, although Knox (1875), Baker (1889), and Lantz
(1905) suggested that the species was becoming rare. By the 1930s Black (1937) and Cockrum
( 1952) believed the species had been extirpated. During the 1950s the swift fox began to recover
and specimens were collected (Martin and Sternberg 1955, Hibbard and Taylor 1960, Anderson
and Fleharty 1964, Janes and Gier 1966, and Walker 1978). Boggess and Johnson ( 1981)
considered the swift fox population in Kansas to be stable or expanding throughout much of its
historic range.
Dlair (1939) did not list the swift fox as pa1i of Oklahoma's mammalia11 fauna, however afte1
1956 swift fox were observed in several western counties (Glass 1956, Cutter 1959, Kilgore
1969). Only several swift fox specimens were reported in New Mexico between 1850 and 1950
while numerous records from a seven county area collected between I 952 and I 982 confirmed
their presence in the state (Schmitt I 996). Bailey (1905) noted that Texas ranchers commented
that the "swifts" were scarce compared to their numbers in previous years. As late as 1954, the
species was reported as rather scarce in certain localities of Texas. Although Jones et al. (1987)
indicated that swift fox distribution had been reduced in Texas, they estimated 20,000 swift fox
remained in the panhandle area of the state.
Current swift fox distribution in the United States could be considered relatively widespread,
although it remains limited to only a portion of the species original range. Swift fox occupy
portions of Montana, South Dakota, Wyoming, Nebraska. Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New
4
�Mexico, and Texas (Allen et al. 1996) (Fig. 2). However, distributions and associated densities
appear highly variable among the nine occupied states. The present known range is constricted
and somewhat disjunct, with an identified population core present in the states of Wyoming,
Colorado, and Kansas, an undetermined species distribution in the adjacent states of Nebraska,
Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico, and a restricted species distribution in South Dakota and
Montana. Swift fox are apparently absent in North Dakota, despite several recently collected
specimens. Current known swift fox distribution is apparently about 25 percent of the reported
historic range from the literature or approximately 40 percent of the suggested historic range
based on vegetation classification mapping of the shortgrass and midgrass prairie grassland types
in the central United States (Fig. 3).
Population Status
According to Giddings and Knowles ( 1996) a recent increase in the frequency and intensity of
swift fox occurrence reports and collected specimens between 1992-1995 iu Mu11la11a s1.1ggc:sl
that a resident population occupies at least three counties in the northcentral part of the state and
possibly three counties in southeastern Montana. Dispersal from several reintroduction sites in
Canada (Brechtel et al. 1993) and the Wyoming population are considered to be the source ot
Montana animals. A preliminary statewide habitat assessment in 1994 identified nearly 8
million acres of prairie grasslands as suitable swift fox habitat in Montana (Appendix C, Fig.Cl).
Although several individual specimens have been collected in North Dakota over the past fifteen
years, the presence of swift fox has not been detected during recent furbearer track occurrence
surveys in the western part of the state (Allen 1996). Differential reporting rates for red fox and
coyote harvests and several confirmed swift fox observations indicate swift fox may exist at
extremely low densities if at all in the suitable grassland/agricultural habitat available in the
southwestern counties of North Dakota (Appendix C, Fig.C2).
The 1epu1tccl ~1.1nc:11l clist..rib1.1liua ufswifl fox in South Dakota includes the two most extreme
southwestern counties of the state (Dowd Stukel, pers. comm.), although species presence has
been recorded in as many as 13 counties between 1963-1995 (Kruse et al. 1996). Suitable
shortgrass prairie habitat is present in southwestern South Dakota (Appendix C, Fig. CJ).
Swift fox presence was documented during 1995 in 8 of 12 counties through field surveys in
eastern Wyoming. According to Woolley et al. (1996) these occurrences, combined with
Wyoming Game and Fish Department observation records and trapper surveys, suggest swift fox
~re c11rrently rlistrihnterl th.ronghout most of their historical range in Wyoming, although survey
results in three northern counties remain inconclusive. Suitable habitat includes shortgrass,
mixedgrass, sagebrush-grassland, and sagebrush-greasewood habitat types with topography
ranging from fiat to badland-like terrain (Appendix C, rig.C4 ).
Swift fox are known to occur in very limited numbers in the panhandle and southwestern
Nebraska (Andelt 1996). Attempts to determine present distribution and status of the swift fox
population in recent years have had limited success (Appendix C, Fig. C5). Swift fox numbers
5
�BRITISH
COLUMBIA
ALBERTA
MANITOBA
ONTARIO
NORTH DAKOTA
UTAH
ARIZONA
NEW MEXICO
I
500km
Figure 2. Current known swift fox distribution in the United States (Allen et al. 1996) and Canada
(Carbyn, pers. comm.).
6
�BRITISH
COLUMBIA
ALBERTA
SASK.ATf:I-IFWAN
M/\NITOB/1
ONTARIO
OREGON
ARIZONA
0
I
500km
Figure 3. Current known swift fox distribution in the United States (Allen et al. 1996) and
classification of shortgrass and midgrass .prairie grassland types in the central United States as
modified from Lauenroth (1996).
�appear to be very low making it difficult to assess population size or determine trends during the
past several years.
Kahn and Fitzgerald ( I 996) reported the occurrence of swift fox in 13 counties in eastern
Colorado which comprise shortgrass prairie and associated agricultural lands. This species
inventory resulted in fox captures on 64% of the sample plots. For plots in which swift fox
occurred, the mean number of fox captured was 5.7 fox per 20 miz. Current species distribution
is apparently similar to reported historic range (Appendix C, Fig.C6). In addition, recent data
suggests an increase in swift fox numbers on a research study area with in the state.
Swift fox are currently present throughout most of their historic range in Kansas and have
maintained a stable population for the past 20 years (Fox and Roy 1996). Current swift fox
distribution includes at least 21 counties in western Kansas which are comprised of grassland and
cropland habitats (Appendix C, Fig. C7). Several methods are currently used to monitor
population status and trend. Current research projects are examining differential survival rates
between swift fox that occupy rangeland and cropland habitats, mortality causes, home range
size, and den site characteristics.
Recent status information indicates swift fox currently occupy a four to six county area in the
panhandle and the northwestern portion of Oklahoma. Whitaker Hoagland (1996) suggests that
swift fox occur at low densities and recent studies by Lomolmo and Shaughnessy (1995) also
indicate that population levels are low, except for the extreme northwestern corner of the
panhandle. Successful presence/absence surveys have focused on the panhandle which is
comprised of rangeland, mesa, cropland, riparian habitats, and prairie dog towns (Appendix C,
Fig. C8).
According to Schmitt (1996) a literature review, compilation ofrecords, examination of museum
specimens of swift fox, and correspondence with individuals familiar with swift foxes in New
Mexico have provided only little additional information on which to substantiate the current
distribution and status of this species in New Mexico. However, Schmitt (1996) indicated that
the swift fox has been verified from ten counties in New Mexico and may likely occur in three
additional counties, all of which include large ari;:as of the plaius-mcsa grasslaml type (Appendix
C, Fig.C 9).
Swift fox may occupy twenty-tive or more counties in the panhandle and westcentral regions of
Texas (Homer 1996). Species presence is currently being verified through surveys of identified
suitable habitat. Horner ( 1996) indicates the shortgrass prairie habitat of the panhandle will
support the majority of swift fox in Texas (Appendix C, Fig. CIO).
Management Status
Swift fox are managed under state authority. The level of legal protection and species
management varies among the ten states presently involved in swift fox conservation (Table I).
The species is classified as endangered in Nebraska and threatened in South Dakota, a furbearer
8
fl
i
�--- ---------- -------------
····~··~~·-
Table I. State legal status, harvest seasons, and management activities for swift fox, 1995.
Harvest Season
Threatened
Endangered
Closed
Compile occurrence reports and collect specimens
Closed
Compile occurrence reports
None
Ecological research studies
None/Incidental
Take Allowed
Trapper questionnaire - for species distribution
None
Ecological research studies
Closed/Damage
Take Allowed
None/prior to 1995
was 10/1 - 3/31
Ecological research studies, population distribution studies
I Open
-
11-15 to 1-31/Nonc
I Ecological research studies, population trend and
Furbearer
Open
, I 0-15 to 3-15/N one
Compile occurrrnce reports, trapper harvest surveys
Furbcarer
Open
12-1 to 1-31/None
Species presence/absence surveys, compile occurrence
reports, and conduct trapper harvest surveys
·<>
Furbearer
Furbearer
62C IOa
I Season Dates/Limits I Management Activities
distribution information
Closed
Compile occurrrnce reports
~
�in Montana, North Dakota, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas, and as a
nongarne wildlife species in Wyoming. Of the states that list swift fox as a furbearer, legal
harvest seasons have occurred in recent years in Colorado (closed in 1995), Kansas, New Mexico
and Texas, with variable annual harvest estimates (Table 2). The furbearer season has remained
closed for swift fox in Montana, North Dakota and Oklahoma while a limited harvest is allowed
as an incidental take in Wyoming. Prior to 1995, numerous swift fox research studies have been
conducted in eight of the ten states (excluding Montana and North Dakota) presently involved
with swift fox conservation efforts under their present forbearer or nongame management
programs (Scott-Brov.'11 et al. 1987).
The USFWS lists the swift fox as a candidate species for possible addition to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants under the ESA. with an assigned listing priority
of eight (61 FR 7596; Feb. 28, 1996). This low to moderate listing priority is assigned on the
basis of immediacy and magnitude of threats as well as taxonomic status. Both the USFS and the
BLM list the swift fox as a sensitive species which requires these agencies to evaluate impacts in
their land management decisions.
LIFE HISTORY AND HABITAT RELATIONSHIP
Life History
Swift fox are monestrous, apparently monogamous. and will form pair bonds in early winter that
may last several years. Both males and females are capable of breeding during their first season.
Family units of two females and one male have been reported (Covell 1992). They breed from
December to February depending on latitude (Kilgore 1969, Hines 1980, Covell 1992).
Gestation is approximately 51 days. Litter size based on pup counts at natal den sites averages
four to five young, with a range of one to eight (Scott-Brown et al. 1987). At four or five
months, the young foxes are almost fully grown and difficult to distinguish from adults.
Dispersal begins during September and October. The young foxes will occupy separate dens
around August but remain close to their parents until they disperse (Kilgore I 969, Hines 1980,
Covell 1992, Roy and Sovada, unpubl. data). Swift fox are considered good dispersers although
little is known concerning dispe1sal rnuvemenl a~liviti<::s.
Swift foxes use dens year-round to protect themselves against predators and extreme weather
conditions, and to raise theu young. SWirt toxes usually excavate their own dens but will also
modify or enlarge dens of other species such as badger (Taxidea taxus) and ground squirrels
(Spermophilus spp.) (Hillman and Sharps 1978, Fitzgerald et al. 1983, Uresk and Sharps 1986).
Their dens range from a simple one-way tunnel to a complex system of channels and chan1bers as
deep as four feet below the surface with as many six entrances (Cutter 1958a, Kilgore 1969,
Hillman and Sharps 1978, Fitzgerald et al. 198~. Roy unpubl. data). They typically ki.ck snrl pull
soil away from the entrance creating one or two long soil tailings (Hillman and Sharps 1978.
Scott-Brown et al. 1987, Covell 1992). Swift foxes will den in a variety of shortgrass prairie
habitats including modified habitats such as pastures, rolling hills, roadside ditches, fence rows,
fallow fields, and cultivated fields (Cutter 1958a, Scott-Brown et al. 1987, Covell 1992, Fox and
10
�Table 2. Swift fox harvest estimates based un forbearer harvest questionnaires, 1982 - 1995".
oming
Colorado
Kansas
New Mexico
Texas
148
2,635
1,000
562
310
70
1,387
740
b
C
139
L263
426
146
C
84
949
314
74
C
73
1,062
1,161
124
C
167
624
650
70
C
55
265
420
b
(;
II
166
264
0
C
23
166
32
0
C
41
357
93
b
C
38
<JOO
64
12
C
20
<100
73
0
C
11
<JOO
98
8
C
3
Closed
33
6
C
a - table does not reflect trapper effort
b- data unavailable
c- sample too small for estimate
(,20,100
11
�Roy, unpubl. data). In Nebraska, soils from den sites ranged from a clay-loam to sandy-loam and
were preferably soils that contained some loam mixture that evidently provided easy excavation
and maintenance of the structural properties of the den site (Hines 1980, Hines and Case 1991).
Swift fox may change natal den sites several times during the pup rearing period.
As an opportunistic predator, swift fox feed yearlong or seasonally on a variety of small
mammals, insects, 1eptiks, ca11iu11, am.I gruuml nt!sling birds (Cutter 1958b, Kilgore 1969,
Zumbaugh et al. 1985, Uresk and Sharps 1986, Hines and Case 1991). Small mammals are
especially important food items (Scott-Brown et al. 1987), particularly in winter months. Winter
food habit studies in Kansas found that 65% of swift fox stomach contents contained mammal
remains, nearly half of which were cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus spp.) and jackrabbit (Zumbaugh
et al. 1985).
Coyotes are apparently the primary predator of swift fox throughout the species range and have
the potential to become the major cause of swift fox morteliry (S~ott-Rmwn et al. 1987, Sovada
and Roy, unpubl. data). Other known predators include golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos),
badgers, bobcats (Lynx rufus), and domestic dogs (C.familiaris). Present activities by humans
may also directly impact swift fox survival. Mortality can be attributed to vehicle-caused
roadkills along highways and secondary roads and legal or illegal poisoning, trapping, and
predator shooting. Habitat loss from agricultural conversion is considered to have an indirect
effect on swift fox survival.
There is no evidence from studies in the literature that swift fox exhibit signs of territoriality.
Information indicates that the home ranges of several individuals often overlap. Measured home
range sizes of swift fox appear quite variable and have been estimated at 212 to 519 acres (86 to
210 ha) in areas of Colorado (Rongstad et al. 1989) and at 7,980 acres (3,230 ha) in Nebraska
(Hines and Case 1991 ).
Habitat Relationship~
Swift fox habitat descriptions apparently vary with geo-physiographic area although the species
occupies these habitats within the shortgrass and midgrass prairie ecosystem which is primarily
characterized by level to gently rolling topography (Kilgore 1969, Hillman and Sharps 1978.
Egoscue 1979, Samuel and Nelson 1982). Vegetation compostion in native prairie habitat
includes grass species such as blue grama (Bouteloua graczlzs), buffalo grass (Huchloe
dactyloides), western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii) and needle and thread (Stipa comata) and
shrub species such as sagebrush (Artemis/a spp. ), snakeweed ( Gutierrezia spp.) and saltbrush
(Atriplex canescens). These habitats consist of firm friable soils that range from clay-loam to
sandy or gravelly loam and generally provide intermittent and permanent water sources during
most years. In the western portion of its range, swift fox are apparently found in a broader range
of habitat types (Wooley et al. 1996).
As more investigations are underway to better understand swift fox ecology, several studies have
documented the use of non-native habitats within the shortgrass/midgrass prairie ecosystem. In
12
�Kansas, swift fox are considered abundant in cultivated fields, excavating and utilizing dens in
summer fallow, wheat stubble, growing wheat, sunflower, or com fields (Cutter 1958a, Fox and
Roy, unpubl. data, Sovada, unpubl. data). Kilgore (1969), Hines (1980) and Fitzgerald et al.
(1983) also indicated that swift foxes inhabit areas with a mixture of agricultural cropland and
prairie grassland. These modified habitats may consist of crested wheatgrass (Agropyron
cristatum), Russian thistle (Sa/so/a pestifer), common sunflower (Helianthus annuus), lamb ·s
quarters ( Chenopodium album), bindweed (Convolvulus spp. ), grass bur (Cenchrus spp ), western
ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), and prickly pear cactus (Opuntia polyacantha) (Scott-Brown
et al. 1987).
The extent to which swift fox can adapt to various native and non-native habitats within the
grassland prairie ecosystem is not well documented, However, observations in highly modified
or other non-native habitats suggest the need to further investigate the adaptive strategies of swift
fox and survival rates within areas that are considered to be outside of the classic native
grassland prairie.
RISK ASSESSMENT
Historically, swift fox inhabited the shortgrass and midgrass prairies within the Great Plains
region of the central United States. However, it is not known how swift fox utilized the various
prairie habitats. It is unclear if historic species distribution was continuous, occurred regionally
or existed in a relatively patchy distribution within this range. Historical literature suggests that
some authors considered swift fox densities to be locally high (Grinnell I 914, Wright 1913)
while others traversed vast areas of prairie habitat without reporting any observations of swift fox
(Emory 1848).
Conversion of native grassland prairies to agricultural cropland has been implicated as one of the
most important factors that led to a constricting swift fox distribution and more recently for the
species failure to recover (Cuner 1958a, Kilgore 1969, Hillman and Sharps 1978, Hines 1980.
Fitzgerald et al. 1983). Although dramatic prairie habitat loss has occurred, current ecological
investigations may indicate that it is not solely the conversion of prairie to cropland that hinders
current swift fox restoration efforts, but also juxtaposition of the remaining prairies, management
of rangelands, cropping patterns of farmlands and changes in canid communities that occur in
response to the conversion of prairie habitat to cropland. Ownership patterns involve federal
lands that comprise a large percentage of the northern and western portions of swift fox range but
diminish southward and eastward, where nearly all lands are privately-owned.
The key component to species restoration is to provide suitable habitats where swift fox can
obtain prey while avoiding predation. Swift fox historically inhabited relatively level to
moderately rolling native grassland te1Tain (Hillman and Sharps 1978, Hiues 1980, aud Fitzgerald
et al. 1983) which provided a small mammal prey base and afforded long viewing distances to
detect predators. Throughout large portions of the Great Plains the areas ofrelatively level
topography, with deeper and more friable soils and adequate natural moisture, were acquired into
private ownership and have been converted to cropland. Habitat loss and degradation. such as
13
�4
'
conversion to cropland, intensive grazing habitat fragmentation and urban/rural development,
7
are all thought to have contributed significantly to swift fox distribution and population declines
early in the century. However, the direct and indirect impacts of these factors on swift fox
survival and population viability have not been scientifically investigated to any great extent.
Recent ecological studies and anecdotal information are beginning to contribute knowledge
towards addressing species adaptability and survival strategies of swift fox. This current
informaLion suggesLs that swift fox are capable of inhabiting, surviving and reproducing in other
vegetation types, including sagebrush-grassland, sagebrush-greasewood and plains-mesa
grassland and also certain cropland species including winter wheat. sunflower, and irrigated com
and soybeans (Dieni et al. 1997, Sovada and Roy, unpubl. data)
The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), established under the 1985 Farm Bill and renewed
under that Bill's 1990 extension, has revegetated millions of cropland acres into grass cover.
However, in many areas of the shortgrass prairie ecosystem, CRP fields were planted to tallgrass
proiri<> sp<'r.ie>s or non-native grasses. \Vhen these fields are left ungrazed, unmowed, and
unburned, these grasses developed into dense rank stands. Current management guidelines for
CRP enrolled lands do not appear to provide adequate habitat for swift fox, although it is utilized
as cover by coyotes and red fox. 1',ew CRP guidelines may provide im;.,uti ves for program
participants to plant native grass species, particularily in areas that support an existing swift fox
population.
An increasing public (including the agricultural community) awareness of poor range conditions
in recent years, particularly on federal lands, is slowly leading to a growing emphasis to improve
land stewardship. Improvements in rangeland vegetation quality is expected as a result of this
public issue directed at federal land management agencies. In the ten states that encompass swift
fox range the BLM controls over 36,000,000 acres (14,500.000 ha) of which a large portion is
managed as prairie rangeland. Range quality enhancement. directed at water quality and
increasing vegetative productivity, could benefit swift fox. These may include an improved
vegetative compostion that would provide more productive small mammal and lagomorph
populations and greater stability in soil conditions for den sites. However there may be
conditions, particularly along the eastern edge (mixedgrass prairie ecosystem) of swift fox range,
where high rainfall and fertile soils may produce excessive vegetatiou that would not b"
considered optimal swift fox habitat. Coyote and red fox may exclude swift fox under these
circumstances. Perhaps swift fox pioneered eastward to some extent \Vhen mixedgrass prairies
were grazed by native ungulates or in the absence ot predators, although if these areas are
allowed to recover they may become marginal swift fox habitat. In this case, future land
management decisions may involve a choice between reinstating intensive grazing or accepting
the loss of some peripheral habitats.
The importance of human harvest in limiting or regulating swift fox populations is unknown.
There is insufficient information to weigh the impact of harvest on species distribution or
population densities. For example, swift fox populations in Colorado have remained widespread
despite 55 years of harvest. No noticeable reduction in distribution has occurred in Kansas since
the opening of a season on swift fox in 1982. In comparison, swift fox have been protected from
14
�harvest in South Dakota, Nt:braska, and Oklahoma, with no apparent increase in distribution or
population densities during the same period.
Prices for swift fox pelts have varied from $3-$10 during the last ten years. Low pelt prices
provide some interest but little incentive to actively harvest swift fox. In some states, swift fox
are apparently taken incidentally to coyote trapping activities and are not considered a target
species. States that allow a regulated harvest collect data on harvest estimates, harvest densities,
distribution information or biological data through the cooperation of furharvesters. Figures
indicate that the total estimated harvest of swift fox has steadily declined since 1982 (Table 2).
Predation is presently the most common mortality factor for swift fox (Covell 1992, Carbyn et al.
1993, Sovada and Roy, unpubl. data). The literature on swift fox and also kit fux imJi<;ale lhal
coyotes are the primary cause of natural mortality (Ralls and 'White 1995). In discussing this
situation with the San Joaquin kit fox, Berry et al. (1987:21) stated, "Over 50% of all fox deaths,
and neaily 80% of lhe fox deaths for which cause of death could be determmed, were attributed
to coyotes." Covell (1992:26) stated, "Predation and non-traumatic deaths account for 87% and
13 % of all determined deaths, respectively. Coyotes were responsible for 85% of all predation,
whereas raptors accounted for only 15%."
The canid community of the Great Plains and its hierarchy is a dynamic and complex issue A
comprehensive description of this issue is provided by Johnson and Sargeant (1977).
Historically, the core of swift fox range was occupied primarily by wolves and to a lesser extent
coyotes and foxes. Gray wolves were mostly eliminated by the late 1800s and this event appears
to coincide with a buildup of coyotes (Sargeant 1982). Red fox and gray fox ( Urocyon
cinereoargenteus) numbers were low or absent in the core of swift fox range prior to human
settlement. Wolves directly influence coyote numbers am.I il is thought that swift fox prospered,
at least in the northern portion of the species range, by scavenging on prey left by wolves. Wolf
extermination probably allowed coyote populations to expand and become more extensive
predators of swift fox.
The interactions between canid communities and various prairie habitats are complex and have
baffled naturalists and wildlife managers for decades. Leopold (I 933) pondered the lack of a
population response ofred fox to habitat changes after the turn of the century. In several areas,
increases in favorable habitat did not result in corresponding increasecl r"rl fox densities.
Swift fox appear to prosper in certain areas where intensive control measures were applied to
coyotes. Studies conducted by Kilgore (1969) in Oklahoma and Hines (1980) in Nebraska
mention the scarcity of coyotes due to control practices on the areas they selected for swift fox
studies. Covell (1992) also noted the occurrence of helpers at natal swift fox dens in an area
where coyote control had u,.;,.;unt:cl and an absence of helpers at natal dens on an adjacent area
with no coyote control. An exception to the generalization that coyote control may influence arid
land fox survival is provided by Cypher and Scrivner (1992) who were unable to document an
increase in San Joaquin kit fox on areas where coyote control was applied. However, few
15
�coyotes were actually removed and the area that was impacted was considered small. Obviously,
the relationship between arid land foxes and coyotes is not simple and further research is needed.
Competition between canid species may shape canid communities as much or to an even greater
extent than predation. Competition between members of the canid community are expected to be
the most intense between species of similar size. Although once numerous on Isle Royale in
Michigan, coyotes disappeared soon atter colonizing wolves estabhshed terntones on the island
(Mech 1970). The competitive relationship of coyotes excluding red foxes has been well
documented (Sargeant 1982, Voigt and Earle 1983, Major and Sherburne 1987. Sargeant et al.
1987, Harrison et al. 1989, Sargeant et al. 1993, Sovada et al. 1995). Similarly, this relationship
between red foxes and arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) has been demonstrated (Schmidt 1985,
Railtey 199,).
Non-canid predation on swift fox has been documented, however, the frequency of observations
appears to be relatively small compared to canid predation. Predation from badgers, golden
eagles, great-homed owls (Bubo virginianus) and ferruginous hawks (Buteo regalis) have been
documented, but are not considered significant (Rongstad et al. 1989, Brechtel et al. 1993).
Other factors which may affect swift fox include the impact of parasites and diseases. Swift fox
are occasionally found to be heavily infested with external and internal parasites (Kilgore 1969,
Scott-Brown et al. 1987). However, no evidence exists that suggests parasites influence survival.
There is a general absence of information on the incidence of diseases in wild swift fox
populations. Of the 185 swift fox mortalities from 369 monitored animals in various studies,
none have been attributed to disease. Available data on kit fox appears to have similar results,
however, serologic tests on San Joaquin kit fox have indicated a high prevalence of antibodies to
canine parvo virus. although simultaneous monitoring of animals showecl no c.linical inclications
of disease, and diseases were not recognized as a major source of mortality in these foxes (Berry
et al. 1987). Closer monitoring of swift fox in the future will be required to understand if
diseases and parasites are important in shaping the distribution and abundance of swift fox
populations.
Swift fox are legally protected under state law in all ten states that encompass the species range
and are currently protected from harvest through law or regulation in seven of these states (Table
1). The swift fox is classified as endangered or threatened in the states of Nebraska and South
Dakota; is a furbearer in seven states; and is a nongame wildlife species in Wyoming. States that
provide harvest opportunities regulate take by season length and monitor harvests numbers
annually. Several recent changes have occurred in the harvest regulations for swift fox. Swift
fox were reclassified in 1995 from a predator to being listed in the non-game regulation in
Wyoming. Colorado had previously designated changes in trap devices in a portion of the state
occupied by kit fox and in 1995 the state was mandated to dose its trapping season on forbP.arers,
including swift fox. Kansas maintains a regulated harvest season and recently instituted a
mandatory pelt tagging program to provide detailed harvest records and information for statewide
distribution. New Mexico and Texas provide a regulated harvest season and estimate annual
harvest figures.
16
�Trapper education programs arc becoming more availabk tu furharvesters in a increasing number
of mid-western states. Furharvester education courses are currently required in several states. A
general aspect of these programs is to inform trappers on various methods that can be used to
avoid incidental capture of certain species. The educational process has demonstrated that
changes in capture methods can be modified on a voluntary basis without additional regulation.
Swift fox inhabit vast areas of privately-owned and privately-controlled lands where the
landowner regulates access and harvest opportunities. Since these individuals control access to
their lands they dictate allowable management practices Fnr 1>xnmple, while obtaining
permission from private landowners in western Kansas to conduct scientific studies of swift fox,
the research team learned that several landowners practiced selective management to protect
swift fox on their lands (Fox, pers. comm.).
It is generally accepted that the past widespread use of strychnine intended to kill wolves and
coyotes resulted in dramatic declines iu swift fox populations (Scott-Brown et al. 1\187, Young
1944). However, control practices which specifically target coyotes that result in few non-target
mortalities are generally considered beneficial to swift fox (Robinson 1953, and Egoscue 1956).
Federal predator control program changes made in the 1950s to eliminate non-selective
strychnine and replace it with the more selective toxicant Compound 1080 significantly reduced
swift fox mortalities (USDA 1994). Following the 1080 ban imposed in 1972, most swift fox
removed during federal control activities are taken by M44 devices (USDA 1994). The U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) maintains records of the number of swift fox killed during
federal predator control activities, and they comprise a very small percentage of total mortalities.
Most swift fox are taken in New Mexico and it is unclear as to the number of these animals that
are actually kit fox (USDA 1994). Private predator shooting activities result in swift fox
mortalities although it is unknown if this activity is a major source of mortality that directly
impacts local population levels.
Swift fu,,. are u<.:casionally killed due to collisions with vehicles (Sovada and Roy, unpubl. data).
A population trend index based on the numbers oflive and roadkilled swift fox observed each
year has been conducted in Kansas since 1986 (Roy, pers comm.). Swift fox are frequently
observed along roadways, which may increase the rate of animals being killed specifically by
vehicles. Factors such as road density, miles traveled and driver speed may increase the rate of
swift fox mortalities. Measuring vehicle-caused swift fox mortalities per nnit time may, however
provide a population monitoring method.
Although qn;mtit~tivP d~ta is unavailable, anecdotal infom1ation indicates that swift fox social
groups can survive successfully close to tov.ns, roads and occupied farms. Field data on coyote
and red fox in North Dakota indicates that red fox family groups occupy sites close to towns,
roads and occupied farms within general a1ca, precluminately inhabited by coyotes (Allen and
Sargeant, unpubl. data, Sargeant et al. 1987). This suggests urban and rural communities may
provide refuges for red fox in landscapes dominated by coyotes. However, urban sources of red
fox may periodically expand and have a detrimental impact on local swift fox distribution and
abundance.
17
�T rencls in fam1ing practices during the twentieth century have resulted in an increasing emphasis
on large farm implements and related advances in technology (USDA 1994). The result has been
increases in the size of farms and a demographic shift away from rural areas and into urban
centers. Therefore, the opportunity for a swift fox to encounter a human is considered less today
than it was at the turn of the century, when the human population was much denser in the rural
areas, generally with a family homestead on every 160 acres (65 ha).
The larger geographic areas within current swift fox range where the land use pattern has not
been altered significantly for decades (rangeland and farmland) are not likely to change in the
foreseeable future. An increasing emphasis on soil and water conservation practices may result
in a gradual improvement of range quality, or in the case of cropland, there may be periodic
conversions to different crops, or replanting to native grasses as the availability of affordable
water for irrigation diminishes. Large blocks of federal lands that remain in a prairie grassland
state will likely continue to be managed primarily as grazed rangeland, although subject to
periodic, short-term development for oil/gas leasing and coal mining. However, the long-term
effects of these development activities on swift fox survival has yet to be fully investigated.
Private land uses and landov-mer cooperation with government agencies or private organizations
are crucial to successful swift fox conservation activities. Management practices by private
landowners during the previous 40 years have been sufficient to allow swift fox to survive in
many areas and in some cases expand distribution and numbers. However, swift fox have
prospered indirectly and not intentionally from man's agricultural activities. New developments
in federal agricultural programs provide more incentives to private landowners for promoting
wildlife and habitat management. These include the recent 1996 Farm Bill with changes in CRP
and other program enrollment criteria. For example, under the present CRP enrollment criteria,
NRCS will assign points to landm,mers with ESA candidate species, including swift fox, which
may favor native habitat reinstallment.
I8
�CONSERVATION STRATEGY
INTRODUCTION
This conservation strategy describes the goal, objectives, strategies and activities that will be
implemented to restore the l Jnited StB!e,s swift fox population and to conserve swift fox habitat.
This strategy reflects a metapopulation concept to assure species persistence and an ecosystem
management approach for habitat conservation. This is a coordinated planning effort among the
ten states that represent the species rungc in cooperation with other govcrnmcut ageucie:; awl
private entities. State commitments to this conservation strategy were indicated to the USFWS
in a letter signed by the ten state wildlife agency directors in 1994 that stated conservation of the
:;wifl fox can be achieved by a coordinated and cooperative management approach utilizing state
and federal resources rather than through a species listing under the ESA (Appendix B). The
organizational structure of this effort consists of an interstate/interagency swift fox conservation
team (Appendix A) of which members may be assigned to internal technical committees as
specific information needs arise. Each state team member is responsible for the formation and
lead of a state working group to coordinate conservation strategy activities within their respective
states.
This conservation strategy is designed to be implemented through the state wildlife resource
agencies and federal land management agencies in cooperation with other state, federal, and
municipal government agencies, and involve collaborative efforts and partnerships with tribal
governments, private conservation organizations, individuals, and private landowners. Species
restoration and habitat conservation efforts are linked to key federal and private land ownership
patterns. This conservation strategy identifies both short- and long-term objectives and sets
general time frames to complete specific species and habitat activities. If this conservation
strategy is successful, it is expected that 50 percent of the activities will be accomplished by the
year 2005.
The conservation strategy section is organized by goal. objectives (I., 2., 3 .. etc.), strategies (2.1,
5.1, 5.2, etc.) and activities (3.1.1. 3.1.2, 4.1.1. etc.). Strategies have b<>en assigned to general
priority rankings, as follows, to address the completion of basic information needs, to approach
specific species and habitat conservation actions, and to accomplish additional tasks related to
the implementation of a successful conservation strategy.
Top: 1.1, 2.1
High. 3.1, 5.1. 5.2, 8. I
Medium: 6.1, 6.2, 7.2, 9.1
Low: 4.1. 7.1, 8.2, 9.2, IO.I, II.I, 11.2
Activities associated with top priority strategies have either been completed or were initiated by
1996. Activities listed below high, medium or low priority strategies in this section are intended
to be accomplished in three (1999), six (2002) and nine (2005) year timeframes, respectively.
19
�GOAL
The goal of this conservation strategy is to maintain or restore swift fox populations within each
state to provide the spatial, genetic and demographic structure of the United States swift fox
population, throughout at least 50 percent of the suitable habitat available, to ensure long-term
species viability and to provide species management flexibility.
OBJECTIVES, STRATEGIES AND ACTIVITIES
I. Establish a Swift Fox Conservation Team (SFCT).
1.1
The SFCT is to be comprised of a single representative from each of the ten state
wildlife resource agencies (state), BLM (regional), USFS (regional), U.S.
Geological Service (USGS)(regional), Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS) (regional), USFWS (regional) and Canadian recovery team
(national). Interested cooperators are encouraged to participate with the team
(other state and federal agencies, state universities, tribal governments,
conservation organizations, research institutions) or to become members of the
state working groups. The SFCT is to coordinate and assist in directing
management and research activities outlined in the conservation strategy. The
SFCT will arnmally monito, the attainment of objectives and evaluate the
completion of specific activities within each state.
I. I. I
Responsibilities of the SFCT are to: I) determine priorities and set
timetables for conservation strategy objectives and activities. 2) establish
interteam technical committees that will address specific management or
research needs to accomplish stated objectives, 3) draft habitat and species
management guidelines when appropriate, 4) provide a forum for technical
information exchange, and 5) promote state and federal funding support
for specific activities. The SITT will be formed as a functional team by
1996.
1.1.2
The SFCT will generate an annual repo1t to present state and regional
progress toward attainment of conservation strategy objectives. An annual
SFCT rm:eting is to be scheduled by the appointed chair lo synthesize
information and prepare the annual report, which will be produced each
March.
1. 1.3
Each state wildlife agency representative on the SFCT is to form a state
swift fox working group. The group will consist of interested cooperators
from other state and federal agencies i.e. Natural Resources and
Conservation Service (NRCS), tribal governments, universities and
research institutions, private conservation organizations i.e. The Nature
Conservancy, and private landovmers or agricultural organizations that are
?()
�interested in achieving conservation strategy ohjectives. State working
groups should be active by 1996 and function to provide recommendations
in directing state activities.
2.
Determine current swift fox distribution in the United States.
2.1
3.
2.1.1
State wildlife agencies will collect and compile existing species
distribution data internally and from cooperators. State agencies and
cooperators may need to collect additional infom1ation utilizing various
sources such as: I) species population surveys; 2) state and federal agency
occurrence reports; 3) soliciting public participation; 4) scientific field
investigations; or 5) trapper and hunter harvest data. The SFCT will
assign members to a technical cummill;;;t: lu rt:vit:w techniques and
standardize protocols for selected survey methods by 1996,
2.1.2
State wildlife agencies will generate initial statewide species distribution
maps based on current information. Initial draft distribution maps will be
provided a SFCT annual report by 1996. Updated maps based on field
investigations will be completed by 1999. These maps will provide
baseline information from which to monitor long-term changes in
distribution and evaluate progress toward conservation strategy ohjectives.
Maps will be periodically updated or modified as species distribution
changes or as new data becomes available.
Monitor the status of swift fox populations.
3.1
,.
Document the present distribution of swift fox "'~thin each state utilizing various
detection methods and/or species harvest data. Systematic presence/absence and
population surveys or compiling site-specific harvest information should provide
each state with adequate information to delineate statewide species distributions.
Develop and implement statewide monitoring programs that provide population
trend information and that detect changes in local distribution, Determining longterm population trends for existing and reestablished swift fox populations is a
primary strategy to ensure species maintenance and persistence. This effort will
require standardized data collection methods and survey protocols (Sovada 1996).
3 .1.1
The SFCT will assign members to a technical committee for the purpose
of reviewing techniques, scientific literature and findings from current
swift fox research studies to develop recommendations for standardized
population monitoring techniques. Monitoring may include the use of: 1)
annual harvest data; 2) marking programs; 3) bait stations; 4) track plates;
5) scent-posts surveys; and 6) spotlighting. This technical committee will
recommend a monitoring plan that will encourage coordination among
21
�state, federal, and private activities. Results of this activity should be
available by 1999.
4.
3.1.2
Each state wildlife agency will coordinate and implement a monitoring
program for existing swift fox populations or newly established
populations, in cooperation and with assistance offederal agencies (BLM,
USFS, USGS. APHIS) and other intere,teu µa1Lie, such as tribal
governments, state universities, research institutions, and private
landowners. Statewide monitoring programs will be implemented by
1999, dependent on the development of standardized techmques.
3.1.3
The state wildlife agencies of Kansas, New Mexico and Texas which
allow a legal harvest and Wyoming for incidental take of swift fox, will
evaluate the feasibility of implementing a registration/pelt tagging program
in arlclition to conclnctine; mandatory carcass collections.
Dete1mine minimum viable population size estimates and genetic integrity.
4.1
The SFCT is to identify, and then encourage research studies, that will address
minimum viable population size estimates. monitor genetic diversity among
populations and resolve species taxonomic issues.
4.1.1
Investigate minimum population viability through population monitoring,
biological research and natal den studies. Studies are to be identified by
the SFCT and state working groups or cooperators.
4.1.2
The SFCT will assign members to a technical committee to resolve any
taxonomic issue and investigate the genetic integrity of the United States
swift fox population by 2005.
4.1.3
Conduct periodic testing and analysis of genetic variation among state
populations. This effort will validate the basis of the metapopulation
concept to ensure species persistence. Utilize state, federal. or institutional
wildlife and veterinary laboratories that can support appropriate analysis.
5.
Identify the existing native shortgrass/midgrass prairie ecosystem and other suitable swift
fox habitats.
5.1
Develop swift fox habitat criteria. These criteria are essential to define suitable
habitat and to identify current habitat availability. Species-specific habitat
requirements should be considered in addition to recognizing that habitat use may
vary between geo-physiographic areas and that swift fox adaptive strategies
evidently allow the species to occupy non-native habitats, such as road corridors,
22
�certain agricultural croplands, sagebrush-grasslands, high desen basins and plains
mesa.
5 .1.1
5 .2
6.
i
J
The SFCT will review scientific literature and incorporate findings from
current swift fox research projects, particularly the Canadian swift fox
reintroduction program, to develop rangewide habitat criteria. An initial
site habitat assessment evaluation was developed by Mamo (1987) which
has been used as a model in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Montana. Criteria
should include representative descriptions of nrrnpied habitat and prey
availability within species range. Habitat criteria should be developed by
1999.
Identify and delineate existing suitable swift fox habitat within each state. This
effort will form the basis for evaluating species restoration activities, and identify
constraints and opportunities w iLhiu each state.
5.2. l
Each state wildlife agency will coordinate with state and federal land
management agencies and private landowners to conduct habitat
inventories. Landscape analysis of suitable prairie habitat is to be
completed utilizing Gap Analysis and from prepared maps (soils.
vegetation) and by aerial or ground surveys. Field verification will be
required to evaluate habitat data. Survey and inventory activities will be
initiated by 1999.
5.2.2
Each state wildlife agency will delineate available swift fox habitat on
state cover maps utilizing the Geographic Information System (GIS) aud
Gap Analysis, report habitat acreage sizes, and describe land ownership
patterns in an annual report. Cooperation from the BLM, USFS, state
NHPs, (NRCS), state universities, and other entities with OJS/Oap
Analysis mapping capabilities. Suitable habitat mapping will be initiated
by 1999.
Promote habitat conservation and habitat management in occupied and suitable swift fox
habitat.
6.1
Identify and delineate public lands under federal or state management control in
occupied/suitable swift fox he hitm. The ability to maintain or restore state swift
fox populations will depend on conserving the existing prairie habitat. This is to
be addressed initially on public lands. For example, the BLM controls over 36
million acres in the ten cooperator states (DLM 1992), of whid1 a large portion is
shortgrass/midgrass prairie habitat.
6.1.1
Each state wildlife agency will coordinate with the federal and state land
management agencies to evaluate current levels of legal protection of
23
�native grasslands located within federal and state ownership. These areas
are to be delineated as an additional cover layer with suitable habitat and
current swift fox distribution. Examples of potential key areas which are
distributed along the prairie ecosystem are USFS National Grasslands and
Research Natural Areas (Ryan et al. 1994). Protected sites are to be
mapped and acreages determined within the ten states. Spatial
relationships, such as defining habitat corridors or habitat blocks, will be
examined. Prairie habitat is to be classified as currently protected, in need
of protection. or for special management needs based on maintaining or
enhancing habitat quality for swift fox. This process should be completed
by 2002.
6.2
6.1.2
State and federal wildlife agencies will initiate habitat protection
agreements with federal and state land management agencies, as habitat
1,:uuservatiuu uet:ds art: idt:utified, by 2002. Habitat protection activities
should be stratified to levels based on spatial relationships and swift fox
distribution. Establish memorandums of understanding (MOU) and
habitat conservation agreements (HCA) for habitat protection and
management with these land management agencies to conserve or enhance
suitable prairie habitats under public ownership.
6.1.3
Identify habitat corridors and surrounding areas between habitat blocks,
based on the spatial location of suitable habitat that is available to be
managed for swift fox. This activity will identify where habitat
conservation and management efforts should occur to protect, enhance or
improve suitable habitat. This may provide an opportunity for the Gap
Analysis process to be used. Each state is to identify and delineate these
areas through mapping which will direct conservation measures,
agreements, or habitat enhancement efforts.
Identify and delineate private land ownership patterns under individual or
corporate control in occupied and suitable swift fox habitat. The ability to
maintain or restore state swift fox populations will depend on conserving existing
prairie habitat. In some states, private lands comprise 98 percent of the land
ownership.
6.2.1
State and federal wildlife agencies are to initiate land conservMion or
protection measures under current lands progran1s as limited by priorities
and within funding ability, or are to consider creating a lands program with
new or redirected funding sources. Agencies will investigate the
feasibility of partnerships with the private sector. On identified critical
private lands state agencies should utilize conservation easements or
agreements, leases, donations, exchanges, or acquisitions. Federal wildlife
agencies should consider habitat conservation plans (HCPs) and federal
24
�land management agencies should consider laud exchanges and
acquisitions. An evaluation and prioritization process of private lands in
areas identified to implement land conservation efforts will be initiated by
2002.
6.2.2
7.
Implement methods and techniques to gain and maintain cooperation with
private landowners that will influence range management practices,
primarily through state extension agents, federal grazing leases, and NRCS
range specialists. Efforts will be directed primarily at occupied hahitat anrl
secondarily at suitable habitat.
Fxpanrl distrihntion of the United States swift fox population to occupy 50 percent of the
suitable habitat that is available.
7. I
7.2
Expand distribution of existing ,tale pupulaliuns am! restore swift fox to
unoccupied suitable habitat. Promote natural dispersal through species protection
measures while developing methodology and priority areas for augmentation
through wild-captured swift fox mtroductions (Carbyn et al. 1993). This strategy
is a priority in states which do not have a swift fox population present or the
population has a severely limited distribution. The SFCT and state working
groups should investigate the potential of utilizing existing captive breeding
programs for reintroductions.
7. I. I
State working groups will develop criteria and establish priority areas
within their respective state. Working groups will consider state, federal
and private cooperation as well as funding sources and the extent of
suitable habitat available within that state. Groups will evaluate natural
dispersal vs. augmentation or reintroduction.
7.1.2
State working groups will provide recommendations to state wildlife
agencies, federal land management agencies and cooperators on priorities
and timetables to implement population restoration efforts, if needed, by
2005.
7 .1.3
The SFCT will assign members to a technical committee to investigate and
review the availability of wild/captive foxes and evaluate their potential
success for releases. The SFCT will provide technical information and
release protocol to state working groups and agencies considering releases.
Recommendations and information should be available by 2005.
Monitor and identify new, continuing or diminished threats to swift fox
population expansion.
�8.
7.2.1
The SFCT will assign members to a technical committee to review
available scientific literature on interspecific competition and applicable
control methods by 2002. The committee will provide information and
recommendations to state wildlife and federal land management agencies
as guidelines.
7.2.2
The SFCT and state working groups will review and mcorporate
information from scientific investigations that address the adaptability of
swift fox to colonize non-native habitats and which evaluate the species
ability to maintain itself in these habitats.
7 .2.3
The SFCT and state working groups will ide,ntify and report new.
continuing or diminishing threats to swift fox population expansion.
Integrate swift fox conservation stral<:gy ul,jectives with management and habitat
objectives of other prairie ecosystem species such as bison (Bison bison), black-footed
ferret (Mustela nigripes), burrowing owl (Speotyto cunicularia), mountain plover
(Charadrius monranus). prairie chicken (lympanuchus spp.), and prairie dog (Cynumys
spp.).
8.1
Provide swift fox distribution and suitable habitat information to other prairie
ecosystem mapping efforts through state NHPs and GIS or Gap Analysis
activities.
8.1.1
8.:2
fhe Conservation Assessment and CunservaLiu11 Stiategy for Swift fox in the
United States (CACSSF) may be subject to periodic revision to incorporate
related objectives, strategies or activities which may be outlined in other prairie
species conservation plans.
8.2.1
9.
The SFCT and state working groups will coordinate information
exchanges with similar prairie species working groups, cooperating
agencies. universities and conservation organizations beginning in 1999.
The SFCT will review the need to update or revise the CACSSF and
incorporate new or changing information accordingly.
Promote scientific swift fox management Bncl a puhlic education program.
9 .1
Provide a scientific basis for swift fox management and an avenue for technical
infunuatiou exchange.
9 .1.1
The SFCT and state working groups will collect and compile current
technical literature and management information for distribution through
26
�information requests from state and federal managers and other interested
individuals.
9.2.
I 0.
9.1.2
The SFCT and state working groups are to provide recommendations on
standard management guidelines, beneficial range management practices
for swift fox, methods for data collection/database management, and
current information on swift fox ecology, management, and research to
wildlife and land managers, government entities, land planners, state and
federal policy makers hy ?00?
9.1.3
The SFCT will consider cooperating on a joint publication that promotes
the scientific basis for conserving prairie species, iuduuing swift fox, for
distribution to wildlife and land managers. If it is determined that this
document is needed and jointly supported, funding will be solicited from
cooperators m1u parmers.
Promote public support for swift fox conservation activities.
9.2.1
The SFCT will develop informational and educational materials. It is
considered essential that swift fox conservation efforts are supported by an
informed public throughout the species range. Public support will enhance
funding opportunities and ease implementation of conservation strategy
activities. The various publics to be targeted are trappers, hunters. wildlife
viewers, livestock and farm groups. private landowners, conservation
groups, public schools, and city/county governments. Funding will be
solicited from participating states and coopt:ralors.
9.2.2
Each state working group will develop the structure for an information and
edu~alion program in their state. l he Sl'Cl or a state working group will
publish informational education materials. Materials will be available for
distribution from state working groups by 2005.
9.2.3
The SFCT and state working groups will jointly develop an informational
package and educational initiative for private lanrlownPrs, specifically
addressing swift fox habitat and management needs by 2005.
Implement research on swift foy biology and ecology.
I 0.1
Investigate biological and ecological parameters of swift fox. The amount of
research required will depend on an assessmeut uf the scope of previous research
efforts.
10.1. I The SFCT is to assign members to a technical committee to review the
current state of knowledge on the species and habitat requirements. This
27
�technical committee will review ongoing threats to the U.S. s,vift fox
population in an effort to guide research priorities and also to consider
funding opportunities. Research needs and potential studies should be
outlined by 2005.
IO .1.2 Each state wildlife agency and cooperators will address species/habitat
needs in site-specific areas identified as having special concerns for
population maintenance. An example would be a reintroduction area that
does not maintain animals.
10. 1.3 Investigate the susceptibility of swift fox to common diseases and
parasites in vario11s parts of the species ranee. This research may he
conducted in combination with the collection of individuals and blood
samples for genetic tracking or other objectives.
11.
Removal of the swift fox from the ESA candidate species listing.
11.1
The SFCT will initiate a cooperative effort with the USFWS to develop criteria
for removal of the swift fox from candidate listing.
11.1.1 The SFCT and USFWS will evaluate current species and habitat
information with developed criteria for the removal of the swift fox from
the candidate species list beginning in 2005.
11.2
States will develop a long-term management plan for swift fox.
11.2.1 Each state wildlife agency, with assistance of cooperators, will develop a
comprehensive set of management guidelines which detail species and
habitat conservation 111easures to assure species persistence. These nuiy
involve a review of state legal classification and protection; long-term
programs to monitor species distribution, population size and habitat
maintenance; and may include harvest strategies above target population
levels. Draft state management plans should be initiated by 2005.
28
�LITERATURE CITED
Allen, I.A. 1870. Notes on the mammals oflowa. Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., 13: 178-194.
1874. Notes on the mammals of portions of Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming and Utah.
Part l. On the mammals of middle and western Kansas. Bull. Essex Inst. 6:45-52.
Allen, S. H. 1996. Investigation offurbearer occurrence with special reference to swift fox and
preliminary modeling of possible swift fox population dynamics in North Dakota 19941995. Pages 121-131 in S. H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds.
Report of the swift fox conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
Allen, S.H., J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel. 1996. Report of the swift fox
conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
Andelt, F. E. 1996. Swift fox investigations in Nebraska, 1995. Pages 81-90 in S. H. Allen, J.
Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox conservation team
1995. Bismarck, ND.
Anderson, K.W. and E.D. Fleharty. 1964. Additional fox records for Kansas. Trans. Kansas
Acad. Sci. 67: 193-194.
Bailey. E. P. 1993. Introduction of foxes to Alaskan Islands - History. Effects on avifauna, and
eradication. U. S. Fish & Wild!. Serv. Resour. Pub!. 193. 53 pp.
Bailey, V. 1905. Biological survey of Texas. North A.m. Fauna 25. 222pp.
__ and F.M. Bailey. 1918. Wild animals of Glacier National Park. National Park Service.
210 pp.
__ . 1926. A biological survey of North Dakota. North Am. Fauna, 49. 226 pp.
Baker. A.B. 1889. Mammals of western Kansas. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 1 I :56-58.
Berry, W. H., J. H. Scrivner. T. P. O'FarrelL C. E. Harris, T. T. Kato and P. M. McCue. 1987.
Sources and rates of mortality of the San Joaquin kit fox, Naval Petroleum Reserve #1,
Kern County, California, 1980-1086. U.S. Dept. of Energy Topical Report N11mhi,r
EGG 10282-2154, Govt. Printing Off. Dept. File. File Number DE87012332, Nat. Tech.
Info. Ser., Springfield, Va. 34 pp.
Black, J.D. 1937. Mammals of Kansas. Kansas State Bd. Agric., 30th Bien. Rept., 35:116-217.
29
�Blair, W.F. 1939. Fauna! relationships and geographic distribution of mammals in Oklahoma.
Amer. Midi. Nat. 22(1): 85-133.
Boggess, E.K. and N. Johnson. 1981. Swift fox in Kansas. Unpubl. rpt. Kansas Department
Wildlife and Parks. IO pp.
Bowles, J.B. 1975. Distribution and biogeography of mammals of Iowa. Spec. Pub!. Mus., Texas
Tech. Univ., 9:1-184.
Brechtel, S.H., L. N. Carbyn, D. Hjertaas, and C. Mamo. 1993. Canadian swift fox reintroduction
feasibility study: 1989-1992. Report and recommendations of the National Recovery
Team. 116pp.
__ , L. Carbyn, G. Erickson, D. Hjertaas, C. Mamo, and P. McDougall. 1996. National recovery
plan for the swift fox. Report No. 15. Ottawa: Recovery of nationally endangered wildlife
committee. 29 pp.
Bureau of Land Management. 1992. Public Lands Statistics Book. BLM, Washington, D.C.
Carbyn, L., S. Brechtel, D. Hjertaas, and C. Mamo. 1993. An update on the swift fox
reintroduction program in Canada. Provincial Mus. of Alberta. Nat. Hist. Occas. Paper
No. 19. pp. 366-372
__ , H.J. Armbruster, and C. Mamo. 1994. The swift fox reintroduction program in Canada
from 1983 to 199? Tn MI. Rowles and CJ Whelan. Restoration of endangered
species: conceptual issues, planning and implementation. Cambridge University Press.
Cock.rum, E.L. 1952. Mammals of Kansas. Univ. Kansas Pub!. Mus. Nat. llist. 7:1-303.
Conservation Committee, Kansas Academy of Science. 1974. Rare, endangered and
extirpated species in Kansas. III. Mammals. Trans. Kansas. Acad. Sci. 76:267-272.
Covell, D. F. 1992. Ecology of the swift fox (Vulpes velox) in southeastern Colorado. Unpubl.
M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison. 111 pp.
Cutter, W.L. 1958a. Denning of the swift fox in Northern Texas. J. Mammal. 39:70-74.
1958b. Food habits of the swift fox in northern Texas. J. Mammal. 39:527-532.
1959. Notes on some mammals from northern Texas. Southwestern Nat. 4:30-34.
Cypher, B. L., and J. H. Scrivner. 1992. Coyote control to protect endangered San Joaquin kit
foxes at the Naval Petroleum Reserves, California. Proc. 15th Vertebrate Pest Conf. pps
42-47.
30
�Dieni, J.S., F.G. Lindzey, T. Woolley and S.H. Anderson. 1997. Swift fox investigations m
Wyoming: annual report. WY Coop. Fish and Wild!. Res. Unit. Laramie, WY. 27 pp.
Dragoo, J.W., J. R. Choate, T.L. Yates and T. P. O'Farre!l. 1990. Evolutionary and taxonomic
relationships among North American arid-land foxes. J. Mammal. 71(3): 318-332.
Egoscue, H.J. 1956. Preliminary studies of the kit fox in Utah. J. Mamm., 37:351-357.
--· 1962. Ecology and life history of the kit fox in Tooele C".rninty, Utah. Ecology ~ 3:'I81
497 .
. 1979. Vulpes velox Mammalian species. Lawrence, KS. Am. Soc. Mammal., 122: 1-5.
Emory, W. H. 1848. Notes of military reconnaisance from Ft. Leavenworth in Missouri to San
Deigo, California. U.S. 30th Cong., bt sess., House Exec. Doc. 4 No. 41 (Serial 517),
614 pp.
FaunaWest Wildlife Consultants. 1991. An ecological and taxonomic review of the swift fox
( Vulpes velox) with special reference to Montana. Boulder. MT. 49 pp.
Fitzgerald, J.P .. R.R. Loy, and M. Cameron. I 983. Status of the swift fox on the Pawnee National
Grassland, Colorado. Unpubl. manuscript. Univ. ofN. Colo., Greeley. CO. 2lpp.
__ , C.A. Meaney, D.M. Armstrong. 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Univ. Press of
Colorado. Niwot, CO. 467 pp.
Fox. L. B. and C. C. Roy. I 996. Swift fox ( Vulpes velox) management and research in Kansas:
1995 annual report. Pages 39-5 I in S. H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd
Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox conservation team 199:,. H1smarck, ND.
Giddings, B. and CJ. Knowles. 1996. The current status of swift fox in Montana. Pages 101-120
in S.H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox
conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
Ulass, B.P. 1956. Status of the kit fox, Vulpes velox, in the High Plains. Proc. Oklahoma Acad.
Sci., 37:162-163.
Grinnell, G. B. 1914. The Wolf Hunters. Grossett and Dunlap Pub!., New York.
Hall. E.R. 19~ 1 The mamals of North America. John Wiley and Sous, Inc. New York. 2:60 JI 181-90.
and K.R. Kelson. 1959. The mammals of North America. Vol. 2. Ronald Press Co., NY.
547-1083.
Jl
�Harrison, D. J., J. A. Bissonette, and J. A. Sherburne. 1989. Spatial relationships between
coyotes and red foxes in eastern Maine. J. Wild!. Manage. 53:181-185.
Hibbard, C.W. and D.W. Taylor. 1960. Two late Pleistocene faunas from southwestern Kansas.
Contrib. Mus. Paleo., Univ. Michigan 16: 1-223.
Hillman, C.N., and J.C. Sharps. 1978. Return of the swift fox to the northern plains. Proc. South
Dakota Acad. Sci. 57:154-162.
Hines, T.D. 1980. An ecological study of Vulpes velox in Nebraska. M.S. Thesis, Univ.
Nebraska, Lincoln.
and R.M. Case. 1991. Diet, home range, movements, and activity periods of swift fox
in Nebraska. Prairie Nat. 23:131-138.
Hoffman, R.S., P.L. Wright, and F.E. Newby. 1969. The distribution of some mammals in
Montana. J. Mammal. 50:579-604.
Homer, P. 1996. Swift fox investigations in Texas, 1995. Pages 3-25 in S. H. Allen, J. \Vhitaker
Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox conservation team 1995.
Bismarck, ND.
Janes, D.W., and H.T. Gier. 1966. Distribution, numbers, and hunting of foxes in Kansas.
Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 69:23-31.
Johnson. D.R. 1969. Returns of the American Fur Company. 1835-1839. J. Mammal. 50:836839.
Johnson. D. H. and A. B. Sargent, 1977. Impact of red fox predation on the sex ratio of prairie
mallards. U. S. Fish and Wild!. Ser., Wild!. Res. Rep. 6.
Jones, J.K., 1964. Distribution and taxonomy of mammals of Nebraska. Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat.
Hist. Pub!. 16. 356 pp.
__, C. Jones, R.R. Hollander, and R.W. Manning. 1987. The swift fox in Texas. Unpubl.
report. Texas Tech. Univ .. Lubbock. 21 pp.
Kahn, R. and J. Fitzgerald. 1996. Swift fox investigations in Colorado (1995). Pages 53-60 in S.
H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report to the swift fox
conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
Kilgore, D.L., Jr. 1969. An ecological study of swift fox (Vulpes velox) in the Oklahoma
panhandle. Am. Midi. Nat. 81:512-534.
32
�Knox, M.V.B. 1875. Kansas Mammalia. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 4:19-22.
Kruse, K.W., J. A. Jenks, and E. Dowd Stukel. 1996. Presence of swift fox (Vulpes velox) in
southwestern South Dakota. Pages 91-99 in S.H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E.
Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
Lantz, D.E. 1905. A list of Kansas mammals. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 19:171-178.
Lauenroth, B. 1996. Results of vegetation studies on Pavmee grassland. Pg~ ?0-?fi in D.P.
Coffin, ed. Summary report: shortgrass prairie/mountain plover workshop. Fort Collins,
co.
Lechleitner, R.R. 1969. Wild mammals of Colorado. Pruett Pub!. Co. Boulder, CO. 254 pp.
Leopold, A. 1933. Game Management. Sc1iUHt:r,. New York.
Lomolino, M.V. and M. Shaughnessy. 1995. Section 6 annual report. Oklahoma Biological
Survey.
Long, C.A. 1965. The mammals of Wyoming, Univ. of Kansas Pub!., Mus.ofNat. Hist. 14:493758.
Major, J. T., and J. A. Sherburne. 1987. Inter-specific relationships of coyotes, bobcats and red
foxes in western Maine. J. Wild!. Manage. 51:606-616.
Mamo, C. 1987 Swift fox habitat assessment. Unpub. Rept., Univ. of Calgary, I'aculty of Envi1.
Design, Swift Fox Res. Group, Calgary, Alberta.
Martin, E.P., and G.I'. Sternberg. 1955. A ,wifl fox, Vulpes velox (Say), from western Kansas.
Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 58:345-346.
Mech, L. D. 1970. The wolf: the ecology and behavior of an endangered species. Nat. Hist
Press, Garden City, NY, 384 pp.
Mercure, A., K. Ralls, K. P. Koepli and R. K. Wayne. 1993. Genetic subdivisions among small
canids: mitochondrial DNA differentiation of swift, kit, and arctic foxes. Evolution
47(5): 1313-1328.
Moore, R.E., and N .S. Martin. I 980. A recent record of the swift fox ( Vulpes velox) in
Mon1ana J Mammal. 61:161.
Pfeifer, W.K., and E.A. Hibbard. 1970. A recent record of the swift fox (Vulpes velox) in North
Dakota. J. Mammal. 51:835.
33
�Ralls, K. and P. J. While. I 995. Predation on San Joaquin kit foxes by larger canids. J.
Mammal. 76:723-729.
Robinson, W.B. 1953. Population trends of predators and fur animals in 1080 station areas. J.
Mammal. 34:220-227.
Rongstad, 0. J., T.R. Laurion, and D.E. Anderson. 1989. Ecology of the switt fox on the Pinyon
Canyon Maneuver Site, Colorado. Final report to the Directorate of Engineering and
Ho11~ing, Fort Carson, Co. 53pp.
Ryan, M.G., L.A. Joyce, T. Andrews. and K. Jones. 1994. Research Natural Areas in Colorado,
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Parts of Wyoming General Technical Report
RM-251. Ft. Collins, CO: U.S.D.A., Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station. 57 p.
Samuel. D.E. and B. B. Nelson. 1982. Foxes. Pages 475-490 in J.A. Chapman and G. A.
Feldhamer, eds. Wild Mammals of North America: Biology, Management, and
Economics. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. l:3alt1more. l 147 pp.
Sargeant. A. B. 1982. A case history of dynamic resource - the red fox. Pps. 121-137 in G. C.
Sanderson, ed. Midwest furbearer management. Midwest Fish and Wild!. Conf., Wichita,
KS.
__ , S. H. Allen, and J. 0. Hastings. 1987. Spacial relations between sympatric coyotes and
red foxes in North Dakota. J. Wild!. Manage. 39:30-39.
_ , R. J. Greenwood, M.A. Sovada, and T. L. Shaffer. 1993. Distribution and abundance
of predators in the Prairie Pothole Region that affect duck production. U.S. Fish &
Wild!. Serv. Resour. Pub!. 194. 96 pp.
Schmidt, R.H. 1985. Controlling arctic foxes with introduced red foxes. Wild!. Soc. Bull.
13:592-595.
Schmitt, C.G. 1996 Swift fox investigations in New Mexico. Pages 27-31 in S.H. Allen, J.
Whitaker Hoagland and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox conservation team
1995. Bismarck, N.D.
Scott-Brown, J.M., S. Herrero, and J. Reynolds. 1987. Swift fox. Pages 432-441 in M. Novak,
J.A. Baker, M.E. Obbard, and B. Malloch, eds. Wild forbearer management and
conservation i11 North America. Ontario Trappers Assoc., North Buy.
Sharps, J.C. 1984. Northern swift fox investigations 1977-1981; Completion Rep. P-R Proj. SE2, Study No. IV. 26 pp.
34
�Sovada, M.A. 1996. NBS 1995 annual report for the swift fox conservation learn. Pages 133-13 7
in S. H. Allen, J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox
conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
__ , A. B. Sargent, and J. W. Grier. 1995. Differential effects of coyotes and red foxes on
duck nest success. J. Wild!. Manage. 59:1-9.
Swanson, G.A., T. Surbar, and T.S. Roberts. 1945. The Mammals of Minnesota. Minnesota
Dept. Conserv. Div. Game & Fish Tech. Bull. 2:1-108.
Uresk, D.W. and J.C. Sharps. 1986. Denning habitat and diet of the swift fox in western South
Dakota. Grc,at Rasin Nat 46:249-253.
US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 104, June I, 1994. Endangered and
threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day fi11diug 011 a pelilion lO list the swift fox as
endangered. Pgs. 28328-28329. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, DC.
1995. Fed. Reg., Vol. 60, No. 116, June 16, 1995. Endangered and threatened wildlife
and plants; 12-month finding for a petition to list the swift fox as endangered.
Pgs.31663-31666. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, DC.
__ . 1996. Fed. Reg., Vol. 61, No.40, February 28, 1996. Endangered and threatened wildlife
and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are candidates for listing as endangered
or threatened species .. Pgs. 7596-7613. Dept. of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Voigt, D R. and B. D. Earle. 1983. Avoidance of coyotes by red fox families. J. Wild!.
Manage. 47:852-857.
Visher. S.S. 1914. The biology ofHaidiug cuumy, northwestern South Dakota. SU Geo!.
Survey, 6:1-126.
Walker, .LR. I 978. The mammals (exclusive of the bats) of Cheyenne County, Kansas. Trans.
Kansas Acad. Sci. 81 :185-229.
Whitaker Hoagland, J. 1996. Distribution and ecology of swift fox in Oklahoma. Pages 33-38 in
S.H. Allen, J. 'Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukel, eds. Report of the swift fox
conservation team 1995. Bismarck. ND
Woolley, T.P., F. G. Lindzey, and R. Rothwell. 1996. Swift fox surveys in Wyoming-annual
report. Pages 61-79 in S. H. Allen. J. Whitaker Hoagland, and E. Dowd Stukd, eds.
Report of the swift fox conservation team 1995. Bismarck, ND.
�US Department of Agriculture. 1994. Animal damage control program; final environmental
impact statement. USDA, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Washington, DC.
1702 pp.
Wright, R. M. 1913. Dodge City the cowboy capital. Wichita Eagle.
Young, S.P. I 944. Their history, life habits, economic status, anrl rnntrnl. Part 1. Pages 1-386 in
The wolves of North America. The American Wildlife Instiute, Washington, DC.
Zumbaugh, D.M., J.R. Choat,;:, aml L.B. Fl,x.. 1985. Winter food habits of the swift fox on the
central high plains. Prairie Nat. 17:41-47.
36
�APPENDIX A. Swift fox conservation team membership, 1996-1997.
37
�SWIFT FOX CONSERVATION TEAM -- 1996-1997
(Current state agency representative listed first)
State Agencies:
Montana
Brian Giddings
Montano ri:sh, Wildlife and Parke
PO Box 200701
Helena, MT 59620
Phone: 406-444-2612
FAX: 406-444-4952
email: bgiddings@mt.gov
Colorado
John Seidel
Colorado Division of Wildlife
0214 Prince Drive
Carbondale, CO 81623
Phone: 970-963-1976
FAX: 970-963-1976
Tom Beck
Colorado Division of Wildlife
23929 County Road U
Dolores, co 81323
Phone: 970-882-4115
FAX: 970-882-4115
email: tom.beck@state.co.us
Nebraska
Frank Andelt
Nebraska Game and Parks Commi:,:,ion
PO Box 30370
Lincoln, NE 68503
Phone: 402-471-5427
FAX: 402-471-5528
email: fandelt@ngpsun. ngpc. state. ne. us
Rick Kahn
Colorado Division of Wildlife
317 W. Prospect
Fort Collins, CO 80526
Phone: 970-484-2836 ext. 342
FAX: 970-490-6066
email: rick.kahn@state.co.us
New Mexico
Greg Schmitt
New Mexico Dept. of Game and Fish
PO Box 25112
Santa Fe, NM 87504
Phone: 505-827-9926
FAX: 505-827-9956
email: g schmitt@gmfsh.us.nm
Kansas
Christiane Roy
Kansas Dept. of Wildlife alld PdlKS
1 830 Merchant Box 1525
Emporia, KS 66801-1525
Phone: 316-342-0658
FAX: 31 6-342-6248
email: uskanf7y@ibmmail.com
North Dakota
Steve Allen
North Dakota Game and Fish Dept.
100 North Bismarck Expressway
Bismarck, ND 58501-5095
Phone: 701-328 6338 (info - 6300)
FAX: 701-328-6352
email: ccmail.sallen@ranch.state.nd.us
Lloyd Fox
Kansas Dept. of Wildlife and Parks
Box 1525
Emporia, KS 66801-1525
Phone: 316-342-0658
FAX: 316-342-6248
email: uskanftn@ibmmail.com
Oklahoma
Julianne Whitaker Hoagland
Oklahoma Dept. of Wildlife Conservation
1801 N. Lincoln Blvd.
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
phone: 405-522-0189
FAX: 405-521-6535
email: natural@oklaosf.state.Ok.us
(rnult. users, so send to Julianne's attn.)
38
�South Dakota
Eileen Dowd Stukel
SD Dept. of Game, Fish and Parks
523 E. Capitol
Pierre, SD 57501
Phone: 605-773-4229
FAX: 605-773-6245
email: eileend@gfp.state.sd.us
U.S.G.S./Biological Resources Div.
Marsha Sovada
Northern Prairie Science Center
8711 37th Street, SE
Jamestown, ND 58401-7317
Phone: 701-252-5363
FAX: 701-252-4217
e-mail: mars ha _sovada@nbs.gov
Texas:
Kevin More
Texas Parks and Wildlife
PO Box 659
Canyon, Texas 790·15
Phone: 806-655-3752
FAX: 806-655-3782
U.S.D.A. APHIS-ADC
Rick Wadleigh
USDA APHIS-ADC
12345 Alameda Parkway #204
Lakewood, CO 80228
Phone: 303-969-6560 ext. 32
FAX: 303-969-6578
email: wadleigh@ecentral.com
Peggy Horner
Texas Parks and Wildlife
3000 IH35 South, Suite 100
Austin, TX 78704
Phone: 512-912-7047
FAX: 51 2-912-7058
email: peggy .horner@tpwd.state.tx.us
Forest Service
Bob Hodorff
U.S. Forest Service
Fall River Ranger District
209 North River Street
Hot Springs, SD 57747
Phone: 605-7 45-4107
FAX: 605-745-4179
email:
/s = r.hodorff/ou 1 = r02f07d05a@mhsfswa.attmail.com
Wyurning
Bob Luce
Wyoming Game and Fish Dept.
260 Buena Vista
Lander, Wy 82520
Phone: 307-332-2688
FAX: 307-332-6669
email: bluce@missc.state.wy.us
National Park Service
vacant
Bureau of Land Management
vacant
Reg Rothwell
Wyoming Game and Fish Dept.
5400 Bishop Blvd.
Cheyenne, WY 82006
Phone: 307-777-4588
FAX: 307-777-4650
Canada
Steve Brechtel
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division
9945-1 08 Street
Edmonton, AB T5K 2G9
Phone: 403-422-9535
I-AX: 403-422-9785
Federal Agencies
U.S. Fi:,h and Wildlife Service
Dave Allardyce
USFWS, Ecological Service
420 S. Ga, rie,ld, Suite 400
Pierre, SD 57501
Phone: 605-224-8693 ext. 29
FAX: 605-224-9974
e-mail: r6fws_pie@fws.gov
imult. users, so send to Dave's attn.)
Other - Canada
Axel Moehrenschlager
Oxford Univ. CWS
Box 1 Suite 2
Consul, Sask. Canada SON OPO
Phone: 306-299-4870
FAX: 306-299-4870
email: swiftfox.cynaxe@sympatico.ca
39
�1
APPENDIX B. State agency director's letter to l JSFWS regional director.
40
�S'rATF m:: COLOAAOO
AQY Aqmer, Governor
D;:PARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
RCFERTO
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
·•()-~o-~o.'i;
\
>N EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ••
1:::1
Perty .D.. Olson,.Director
l'
~-
6060 Broadway
. ,
Denver, Colorado 80216
_o-1\rop~ _·
Telephone: (303) 297-1192
August i ,
For Wildlife For People
J.!l!l4
Ralph D. Morgenweck, Regional Director
Region 6
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Denver Regional Office
P.O. Hox 25486, DFC
Denver, Colorado 80225
Dear Ralph,
The swift fox is currently under consideration for federal listing
as an endangered species. On June 1, 1994 the Service published a
90 day finding indicating that the petitioner provided "substantial
information that listing the swift fox may be warranted in the
northern portion of its range" and in addition, "the Service found
that additional substantial information existed to indicate that
listing of the swift fox throughout its range may be warranted".
We believe that substantial error has been made. in the 90-day
finding, both in the omission of key information and in a lack of
rigorous analysis of the existing data.
Each individual statewithin the species range has.communicated these concerns to your
Pierre field office ih detail. In addition/ the states of Colorado,
Kansas, Nebraska, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota and North Dakota
met with Olin Bray and the USFS on July 12th to discuss the listing
procedure and review available information on the status ·of the
swift fox.
Two key points were made at this meeting and need to be reemphasized: First, both the range and population of the swift fox
have increased over the past 30 years. Swift fox populations occur
jn R ~tates and 2 provinces in Canada. While-present distribution
may be less than the presumed distribution prior to settlement, the
current distribution is greater than it was in the period 1900 to
1940. So, whatever we have done over the past 30 years to recover
the swift fox must be working. s~cond,.stat~ wildlife agencico ~re
concerned· ·abou\: : ·the: ··wel·fa:re · -of, ---ttie :·'pwift :·.. fc;:,:x, ·, not·. 9nly.' :a:s:_ . iiii.
· f.urbearer, but.. as.· a . J<:ey:. ,:coi:npoz:i._en_t.____td · the. sllorf.~,tf.a.:'.ss · prairie.
ec6syste-n·.
This concerri·'is-,--mo:nifiisted· ih·· both: -rn·anagement.' and
research efforts in most·, if not all, the states within the species
range. For example, in Colorado at least four studies of the
nF=PARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. James S. Lochhead, Executive Director
WILDLIFE COMMISSION, Thomas M. Eve, Chairman,. Liiuis F. Swif1, Vice~Chairman • Arnold Salazar, ~ecretary
Jesse Langston Boyd. Jr.. Member• Eldon W. Cooper. Member• Rebecca L. Frank. Member
Wi!!iam A. H~gberg, Member~ Mark Le Valley, Member·
41
�st;atus ·and ecology of swift fox- have been conducted within the past
15 .. years . . . Similar 'investigative ·eff:orts have been conducted in
.. other states within. the hJs.tori.c. range of swift
fox.
.
Anothei: . .C·e1c,:,L ;_,.[· t~~ s-~i~t .f:o:i<: sitU:~tio~. n~~ c;vered: ,by the .fi1ding
is the fact that. over 75!!; ::6f swift· fox.' habitat is on _private
property. We realize that ii.'and status is not a consideration for
the listing procei::c, however, a practical assessment of this
situation suggests that landowner practices could have significant
effects on swift fox populations.
In fact_ many landowners are
quite protective of swift fox, do not: allow t-.ak<? and .are careful to
protect den sites. If the species were listed, this attitude could
change due to perceived inability of property owners to modify or
develop swift fox habitat.
At a minimum, listing in the face of
equivocal evidence will only serve to amplify existing perceptions
of capricious federal interventionism. A worst case scenario might
find that listing would actually harm populations 'rather than
enhance them.
These concerns have prompted us to begin to develop a Swift Fox
Conservation Strategy which includes state wildlife agencies, USPS,
private landowners, Pniversities, Native American tribes, USDAAPHIS and the Service in a cooperative venture that will pool
resources and seek to develop a regional management plan.
This
plan will include monitoring and census techniques, population and
habitat objectives, restoration activities (including trap and
transplant schedules), and an active research program.
We will
also establish a swift Fox Working Group that will formulate and
develop management strategies and share research information. To
date we have commitments for over $125,000 to initiate this
project. In addition, states he1v,:, offerea to host workshops, set
µp data bases and provide animals for relocation.
Once the
Conservation Strategy is completed our goal would be to develop a
Conservation Agreement with all cooperating entitieo.
We think this endeavor will better serve to protect, preserve, and
enhance swift fox than listing. We suggest the Swift Fox Workjng
Group work closely with the Service to establish specific recovery
performance guidelines which, if met, will obviate the need for
listing.
If we fail to meet those guidelines, then, we would
cooperate with the Service to involve the Endangered Species Act as
a necessary step in swift fox recovery.
In :summary we. are of:C.,·ring
t.h"' Service a unique opportunity to work
t<?i:i'etlier .on·<the· tri~ti~gemerri;- of· tili's'··species .· ;· w~·_;·strongly --pe-lieve· ·
·list{ng · is ,,: premature,_ ·a.t:,;,.thi"s .-,,tii-ine...:,-... ,_-W~: . :}19 ,:tpink .:. we · n.,;ea . tG
intensffy ·res·earch and managemeii:t:···of t"his ··species~ to. assure· th'ef:r
populations continue on the path of recovery. We -believe we have
the elements of ·a powerful success story here with swift fox.
Listing at this time-would,~<'>nn. ;a mess;a.ge of management fai:l.ure to
the general public, a message that would be regrett?,ble because it
42
�· ,;;ould be wrong.
We await your comments and concerns about this
,initiative.. Th~nk ·yo".
.·{!J+;!ma±J:.
~ Pat Graham, Montana
Jo~~
~
..:::.------+~·
xc: Mollie Beattie USFWS
',;
. ·.,... · .
. ,... .
•,•
. ' . ·.
.. .. -
43
•·
..
�APPENDIX C. State maps indicating historic swift fox range, current known species
distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county.
44
.,
�...
V,
1w] Historic [ [ ] Current § Suitable
Figure Cl. Historic swift 'ox range, current known species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in M)ntana.
�Penibfa
Grand
;Ork&
Steels
Tram
...
°'
Cass
Ransone
Richland
Sargent
•
Historic
[II] Current § Suitable
Figure C2. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in l\orth Dakota.
�Marshall
Day
l--r__...1Grant
Codington
Hamlin
IGng,bu,y
_.,.
Mine,
......
Brookings
Lake
McCook
h?:):j Historic
Deuel
I Moody
Minnehaha
[l] Current § Suitable
Figure C3. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by comly in South Dakota.
�Teton
Sublette
""
00
Un::oln
Uinta
•
Historic
[D Currant § Suitable
Figure C4. Historic swift fox range, current known S?ecies distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in Wyoming.
�...
"'
11 Historic
[I] Current § Suitable
Figure C5. Historic swift fox range. current known species distribution and potemially suitable habitat by county in Nebraska.
�M:itfat
Routt
Alo 31anco
Garfleld
Mesa
Detta
Gunnison
V,
0
Monlrose
.~rchule!a
II!] Historic [I] Current
B
Suitable
Figure C6. Historic swift fox range, current known si;ecies distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in C~lorado.
�Smith
I Jewell
Osborne
I Mitchell
I
Repubfic IWashlnglon
~
Lincoln
----ll Clay
Ottawa
I
l
Salfne
tr
I
.,., Lr:· ••»v.,!fcf"Uf'ii'iVTITlT'TP ::,.. ,~L~~A: ,::·
'
Rice
l
McPherson
I
Matlon
Osage
t
L-Yon
Chase
Harvey
I Johnson
I Doug Ies
I!!.....,....,, ,.,...,,1
- -·
I
'-f'"".".
a:,nawnee 1
I
-\Dickinson: 1
Ellsworth l
u,
I Marshall !Nemaha
I
I Miami
J FranMln
~
Coley !Andera,\
Linn
Bourbon
Woc:dsonl
Greenwood•
Allen
Bmler
1
I Wilson lNeosho ICrawford
Elk
Sumner
Cowley
r
I
Labette
Mo1lgom;ry
Chautauqua
•
Historic
[I] Current § Suitable
Figure C7. Historic swift fox range, current known species dislribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in Kansas.
herokee
�Ottawa
1
Craig
Grant
Delawar,
Garlield
Blaine I Kingfisher
Lopn
Canadlan
Caddo
~
.__,
R
Historic
[D Current § Suitable
Figure CS. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in Cklahoma
�San
Juan
Rio
Arriba
McKinley
Sandoval
Bernalillo
Valencia
Cibola
._,,
V,
Socorro
Caton
Sierra
Grant
Luna
•
Histork
[I] Current § Suitable
Dona
Ana
Hdalgo
Figure C9. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in New Mexico.
�v,
-I-
F IHistoric [TI] Current §suitable
Figure C!O. Historic swift fox range, current known species distribution and potentially suitable habitat by county in Texas.
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Swift Fox Conservation Team
Description
An account of the resource
Swift Fox Conservation Team reports and newsletters
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Conservation Assessment and Conservation Strategy for Swift Fox in the United States