Laserfiche WebLink
3. Assumptions used in the Service's Analvsis. The Service's Final Draft BO makes certain <br />assumptions for purposes of its modeling and effects analysis that are designed to illustrate <br />probable effects under implementation of the proposed Program. [Final Draft BO, p. 220]. <br />These assumptions are not necessarily what will prove out as the first increment unfolds. An <br />example is the assumption that the North Platte River channel capacity will be increased to <br />3,500 cfs near the town of North Platte. Id. In fact, the Program commits to restoration of <br />the channel to at least 3,000 cfs or to development of other means of providing similar <br />benefits to the species and their associated habitats. Similarly, the Final Draft BO assumes <br />that the Program will increase the frequency and magnitude of short-duration near-bankfull <br />total flows passing Overton in the 5,000 cfs to 8,000 cfs range. In fact, under the Program <br />the capacity to move 5,000 cfs of Program water to Overton will either be accomplished or, if <br />deemed infeasible, the GC will commit to develop alternative means of providing similar <br />benefits to the target avian species and their associated habitats. <br />The concern is that the BO states that the Service's assumptions will "have a direct bearing <br />on the conclusions drawn regarding whether or not the proposed action will likely j eopardize <br />the continued existence of the listed species or adversely modify federally designated critical <br />habitat" [Final Draft BO at p. 2211. So postured, the Program must fulfill the specific BO <br />assumptions or be placed at risk of reopening. This threatens to undercut the level of <br />negotiated regulatory certainty to be provided pursuant to the Milestones under the Program. <br />It is critical that the BO include language reflecting the following: <br />The Service recognizes that the actual results from implementation of the Program <br />elements and activities may differ from the Service's specific assumptions, and that <br />all habitat obj ectives may not be achieved during the first increment. Program <br />responses to those outcomes will be addressed through the procedures and resources <br />available under the Adaptive Management Plan. The Adaptive Management Plan is <br />expected to change and adjust the Program management activities during the first <br />increment as new information is learned. <br />This concept should be incorporated under the ProQram Capacity to Move Water discussion <br />at page 30, the Section B2 Assumptions at pages 220-221, and under the Monitoring, <br />Research and Adaptive Management discussion at page 296 of the BO. The above-quoted <br />language from page 221 of the BO should also be deleted. <br />4. Disagreement on the Science. The BO does not adequately recognize that substantial <br />disagreement exists concerning the Platte River target species and habitat. The BO should <br />clarify that the views expressed are those of the Service and do not reflect the views of other <br />Program participants. <br />As recognized in the EIS, a myriad of issues related to the target species, the effects of water <br />development on their habitat, and the habitat improvements needed to protect them have <br />been the subject of scientific debate over the last two decades. [EIS, Sidebar 3-1, p. 3-20]. <br />-2-