7938 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r and social resources and problems. The main thing that is lacking in the four plans is an identification of how each one fits into overall Basin recovery and perhaps a mechanism is r needed to fill in that part of each separate plan so that the plan fits into each species recovery criteria and each can contribute what they are capable of contributing overall. This contribution may be below what is needed alone for recovery of a species, but will be identified as contributing to the overall Basin recovery. In conclusion, the CRFWC consensus was to recommend 1). to proceed with a recovery plan in the Lower Basin for the Razorback then, 2.) the process of defining scope for recovery of that species overall, and 3.) look into the process and scope the Lower Basin would biologically and feasibly have in contributing to the overall recovery of the other species in relation to the Upper Basin resources, both physical and financial. The components were defined as 1.) the need for r a Razorback recovery program to identify and talk about the relationship of all critical habitats to the Lower Basin, 2.) recognize the need to be proactive for non-listed native species, 3.) recognize the need to coordinate efforts, 4.) recognize the need to work with Upper Basin clients, the addition of stakeholders to the recovery discussions and evaluation of the role of the Lower Basin in the recovery, and 5.) to coordinate the implementation so that what is done in one Basin does not preclude the options of the other Basin within the overall plan. CRFWC agreed to send a letter to FWS suggesting that this is the way CRFWC feels the efforts should proceed based on the overall two days of discussion dealing with ESA, recovery plans, and planning now being drafted in recovery efforts. The FWS regional director, Albuquerque, may then wish to direct the region's effort in the "perspectives document" to include the r comments received from others as well as CRFWC, and send it out to the commentators and ask them their opinion of this method of procedure, and if they would like to take part. CO moved that the Staff be assigned to draft a letter using these ideas for signature by the chairman and to be sent to the director FWS, Department of Interior. The motion was changed r to add that CO draft a letter on the above discussion and consensus of CRFWC and send it to the other CRFWC directors who would make comments and return them to Mr. Olson within a week. NV seconded the revised motion. After a process of discussion and confirmation of letter contents, the motion was passed unanimously. The letter as subsequently sent, is included as Appendix E. r ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT-SPECIES CONSERVATION TEAM PROGRESS Mr. Randy Radant (UT)reviewed the assignments and progress over the past year on the r Cooperative Conservation Agreement for the Virgin River Spinedace between FWS, the Washington County (U'I) Conservancy District and the State Natural Resource Agencies of AZ, NV and UT, and discussed the agreement which was signed by representatives of these agencies. This document shows that it is possible to form cooperative agreements between local, state, regional and federal agencies to-produce a cooperative plan utilizing the resources each party could bring to provide for an overall objective which would benefit all of the parties. The effort r 15 r