WSPP303

• File Number: 8240.200.10.H
• Description: Colorado River Threatened-Endangered - UCRBRIP - Program Organization-Mission - Stocking
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 7/25/1995
• Author: CWCB
• Title: Colorado Non-Native Aquatic Species Protection Workshop - Summary - 07-25-95
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

000434

~

evolve mutually acceptable solutions (early).
. Internet communications.
. Costlbenefit analysis on all efforts/players.
. Long-range coordinated plan for the state.
. Involvement at the local level and regional levels to provide resources that meet
common multiple needs.
. Legislative initiatives to remove barriers to cost-effective approaches.
. Non-regulatory incentives.

I

!

Possible actions to achieve desired results:

. Evaluate existing federal, state and local agency actions for cost-effectiveness.
. Develop incentives:
_ Entrepreneurial mitigation/habitat enhancement (private and public sector)
- Tax incentives
- Direct funding of local actions
. Promote early involvement of parties affected in development/action evolution.
. State and federal agencies should devise a way to give latitude to local areas to devise
processes that solve local problems.

~

Additional Comments:

. Make development pay its own way. Actions impacting species should pay for
mitigation and costs should be internalized by the market?
. Remove duplicative regulations; implement one common regulation at the local level.
. Suggest minimum and alternate levels of efforts (i.e. money) needed to begin and
sustain a watershed management approach.
. Hire philosopher-king as eco-czar.

I
~
;

~

S) Data

Workshop participants identified the need for more and better data coordination and
management in order to allow all interested parties to make informed decisions. They
emphasized the need for efficient, comparable, adequate data supported by on-going monitoring
and analysis of the results. To achieve better data coordination, workshop participants
identified the need for a coordinated information management system and common data-base.
This information management system and data base should be organized at a watershed/basin
scale; provide for easy access across the state and by any entity via the Internet; and include
habitat condition, stream flows, water quality, biological population/status, water uses, and I',.,.~..
locations of species. Formulation of the data-base should be an interagency/intergovernmental )'
enterprise, and rest on a foundation of good/reliable/credible science that is accepted by
stakeholders and decision-makers.

8