Laserfiche WebLink
flood stage at Kearney. Also after the 3,000 cfs reference it would be useful to explain <br />how this flow prohibits seedling germination (inundation and the timeframe this flow is <br />needed). <br />Page 10 - Section F.1.1 we also mentioned the importance of the good neighbor <br />principle. Also we specifically mentioned that it might be desirable to develop a BMP <br />for loosestrife starting with the U of N Extension and Country Weed Boards. <br />Page 10 - In the first sentence of Section G you may want to clarify. I thought the <br />discussion focused especially on the lack of success regarding on-channel efforts. Also <br />we probably need to replace compliance but I am confused a little regarding the <br />difference between: attaining the long term program goals, compliance, and determining <br />if we have a reasonable and prudent alternative. <br />Page 11 - In the top paragraph the last three lines don't quite capture what I thought I <br />heard. Were the prescriptive island dimensions "dictated" to the managers? The main <br />points I got were that this effort was costly (include costs); high flow events lead to <br />erosion problems requiring armoring (more management and cost) and loss of habitat; <br />and include information on fledging success. <br />Page 11 - In regard to Mr. Kruse's discussion I recall that he suggested that large scale <br />sediment movement, which is associated with flood flows, appears to "redistribute" and <br />dramatically increase available habitat, thereby reducing predation. In addition, the <br />species may flourish during periodic unstable fluvial events and this is a limitation that <br />the program may need to face. <br />Page 12 - I recommend you modify the third and fourth sentence. Insert <br />opportunistically after 1) and add high flow or flood level after natural. <br />Page 12 - I seem to recall some discussion regarding the need to prioritize how the <br />program might manage conflicting flow objectives. I recall the idea that reducing flows <br />during nesting (give months) season during some years may be the best means for <br />providing tern and plover habitat and that an annual "yardstick" for success may not be <br />appropriate. This concept seems to touched on on Page 12 but could be clarified. <br />Page 12 - Last sentence could be clarified. <br />Page 13 - In Section H.1.2. please add "on channel roost" after crane in the second <br />sentence. Also to me this section is a little unclear how this would work more nesting? <br />Page 13 In Section H.1.3. please add that management of ice flows can be risky because <br />ice dams can form which in turn can cause localized flooding that could adversely impact <br />habitat and/or cause third party impacts. <br />2