Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 44 <br /> <br />partners to "establish measurable criteria to evaluate the number of populations necessary to maintain <br />the three species throughout their respective ranges" and "establish measurable criteria to evaluate <br />the number of individuals necessary within each population to maintain the three species throughout <br />their respective ranges"). To afford additional flexibility, numbers of populations deemed necessary <br />to reach conservation objectives within a given 4-digit HUC may be distributed among drainages <br />within the management unit such that the probability of achieving success within that management <br />unit is optimized. Finally, it is recognized that the number of individuals per population will likely be <br />dependent upon the size and characteristics of each stream. If enumeration of effective population <br />size is too arbitrary or difficult for a stream or stream segment, the Three Species Conservation Team <br />can discuss the applicability of other measures of population status such as relative abundance as a <br />substitute for numbers of individuals. <br /> <br />Prioritization <br /> <br />Three species cooperators will prioritize conservation actions on an annual basis for inclusion in <br />annual work plans. Determination of Utah's management prioritization for the three species on a <br />drainage-by-drainage basis will require careful consideration of 1) the extent of knowledge regarding <br />the status and distribution of the species within each management unit, 2) the degree of risks to the <br />biology, life history, and stability of the species within that management unit (takes into <br />consideration population viability, metapopulation dynamics, and genetic diversity, among others), <br />and 3) the opportunity to adequately provide for the needs of the species within that management <br />unit, including whether funding exists, whether landowners and communities are supportive, etc. (see <br />Figure 3-2). This prioritization can be done for individual projects, 8-digit HUCs, or the 4-digit HUC <br />management units, depending on the needs of the cooperators, though it will most likely be used for <br />8-digit HUCs as most projects have been identified on that scale. If done initially at the 4-digit HUC <br />or management unit scale, leaving a final result other than a list of high priority projects (i.e. a list of <br />high priority management units), the prioritization will be performed again at the next level to clearly <br />identify the highest priority projects. <br /> <br />The initial prioritization step will require the cooperators to consider how much is known for the <br />population (or 8-digit HUe) in question (Table 3-1). Upon completion of the knowledge assessment, <br />managers will have a score assigned to the HUC between zero and five. Scores of 0, 1, and 2 will <br />direct the manager to complete baseline surveys or research within the management unit to gain more <br />knowledge of the system. Scores of 3, 4, and 5 will direct the manager to move to the risk assessment <br />portion of the priority analysis. If a management unit overall scores a 0, 1, or 2, but coritains smaller <br />streams that would score a 3, 4, or 5, those particular HUCs can be removed from the overall <br />management unit and moved into the risk assessment portion of the prioritization. The Team <br />acknowledges that implementation of conservation actions is a high priority and will emphasize <br />implementation over baseline surveys and monitoring, where feasible and practicable. <br />