PRRIP Adaptive Management Plan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

S-1: A combination of flow management, sediment management, and land management (i.e., Clear/Level/Pulse) wilUwill not generate detectable changes in the channel morphology of the Platte River on Program lands, and/or habitats for whooping crane, least tern, piping plover, pallid sturgeon and other s ecies of concern. S-2: A combination of non-managed flows, sediment management and land management (i.e., Clear/Level/Mechanical Maintenance) will/will not generate detectable changes in the channel morphology of the Platte River, and/or habitats for whooping crane, least tern, piping plover, allid sturgeon and other s ecies of concern. S-3: Program management actions wilUwill not have a detectable effect on target species use of the associated habitats. S-4: Program management actions wilUwill not be of sufficient scale and magnitude to cause detectable system wide changes in channel morphology and/or habitats for the target species. The AM Working Group also developed CEM's for each of the target species (whooping crane, least tern and piping plover, and pallid sturgeon) and for the physical processes and wet meadows in the central Platte River. The following sections include each of the CEM's as well as the hypotheses, as developed at AM Working Group meetings, associated with various linkages in the CEM s as denoted by a numbered arrow. III.C.1. Whooping Crane (WC) CEM The draft CEM for whooping cranes (Figure 5) was developed using the process generally described above in Section III.A. Hypothesis corresponding to linkages in the CEM are found in the table below. Whoo in Crane H otheses WC-1: Whooping cranes that use the central Platte River study area during migration seasons prefer habitat complexes and use will increase proportionately to an increase in habitat complexes. Characteristics of a Program habitat complex are defined in the Land Plan Table 1. WC-2: Whooping cranes prefer palustrine wetlands to river channel, based on known migratory stopover habitats. Whooping crane use of the central Platte River study area during migration seasons will increase proportionately to an increase in palustine wetlands. WC-3: Whooping cranes do forage in wet meadows and agriculture fields proportionate to their availability. WC-4: In the central Platte River study area, whooping cranes prefer conditions created by species target flows and annual pulse flows. III.C.2. Least Tern and Piping Plover (TP) CEM The draft CEM for least terns and piping plovers (Figure 6) was developed using the process generally described above in Section III.A. Hypotheses corresponding to linkages in the CEM are found in the table below. Least Tern and Piping Plover Hypotheses TP-1: In the central Platte River study area, terns and plovers prefer/do not prefer riverine habitats as described in Land Plan Table 1 and use wilUwill not increase proportionately to an increase in habitat complexes. September 1, 2006 Adaptive Management Plan 15