Laserfiche WebLink
REVISED DRAFT <br />November 15, 2002 <br />table that the Water Action Committee is considering? If we adopt <br />the table, do the target flows become a Program goal, with a footnote <br />indicating that they are based on the FWS' 1994 target flows, which <br />the States do not agree are technically justified, although they have <br />agreed to use them as targets for the Program? 8 -6 -02 Answer: We <br />will need to develop language indicating that the table remains the <br />work of the FWS and that the States do not agree with the target <br />flows. <br />Question 2: Are periods of excess and shortage measured only with <br />respect to species and annual pulse target flows for all water <br />conservation supply projects? If not, how do we address them? This <br />is a peak flow issue. 8 -6 -02 Answer: Hopefully, this issue will be <br />addressed in the new table. <br />2. Da, -thy Flexibility. Documents implementing the Program provide <br />the flexibility for day -to -day management decisions and activities (e.g., decisions <br />related to weed control or grazing on a particular parcel of land). These types of <br />management decisions and activities will typically not require Governance <br />Committee approval unless they implicate a change in Program policy, increase <br />the budget, or impact the ability of the Program to provide the offsetting measures <br />for ESA compliance purposes. <br />3. Habitat and Species Baseline. The Program uses a 1997 starting point to <br />assess its effects. Attachment _ provides a summary of information available <br />prior to the Program about the baseline for the target species and their habitat. <br />Where data are sufficient and methodologies are replicable, this information may <br />be used to assess First Increment activities. The information available at Program <br />inception did not provide a complete summary of the condition of the species or a <br />comprehensive summary of the habitat available for the target species. Where <br />data were not sufficient or replicable or disagreement exists as to then - current <br />hypotheses regarding the species and their habitats, the IMRP includes measures <br />to fill data gaps and assess trends in species and habitat conditions. Historic <br />information, models, and conceptions of the species and their habitat will be <br />rigorously evaluated and modified as data and information become available. <br />GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE QUESTION: What is the status of the <br />9 <br />• <br />