BOARD01934 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Platte River Cooperative Agreement Update: The negotiations to develop the three state endangered species program have become more dirficult and contentious. It seems that each party to . the potential agreement has new or persistent issues, which appear diametrically opposed, For example, many of the underlying conclusions and assumptions ofthe USFWS have been hotly debated for over 10 years, In fact one ofthe driving forces of the proposed program was to agree to disagree on many issues and focus on collecting m~re and better science, and then address the debated issued with more data, . Nevertheless, many Nebraskan's including Congressman Osborne have been pushing to have the National Academy of Science (NAS) look at the s<;ience even though we know that in many cases there is no conclusive information, After nearly 6 months of trying to resolve this issue it appear that the Department ofInterior will fund a NAS review. Our concern has been that the program is a negotiated response to endangered species issues and in some cases it is not based on science but is based on a number of non-scientific factors. We have insisted that a NAS review be focused on the science and not the program and that we look at whether the Platte is essential to the continued existence ofthe species, While we have been partially successful the Service has countered that the NAS should also look at the role the Platte could/should play in the conservation and recovery ofthe species. Arguably almost any place in North America could play a role in the conservation and recovery of the species and therefore the context 01 the NAS review should be on what essential functions the Platte plays in maintaining the species. A very serious concern with any NAS review is that one has very little control over where the scientist may focus as they implement their review. In the past they have even ventured into policy issues and many people view their conclusions as the "supreme court" of science. The above description is a microcosm ofmauy of the debates that we are having and these issues will . not be reiterated here. However, one other issue mat the CWCB should be aware of is the disagreement between Colorado and Nebraska, and to some degree the Service, over South Platte flows. Nebraska continues to insist that new water development in Colorado consider impacts on existing water projects in Nebraska (i.e., Lake MacConaughy and others), While they make these demands they also propose that their future water development can be done without regard to anyone else. These difficult issues and others have given Colorado reason to pause and begin to consider other possible options including a Colorado only prograjn. We have not yet given this serious consideration, but when one considers the negative impacts of the North Platte system in comparison to the South Platte, and Nebraska's demands, it is 'a topic that we will begin to give more serious thought. South Platte Integrated Assessment: CWCB staff attended a two-day workshop hosted/attended by USGS, Colorado State University, NOAA, CIRES, Western Water Assessment and others to discuss the concept of an Integrated Assessment of the SO}lth Platte. The long-term goal of this Integrated Assessment process is to "integrate ecosystem and climate knowledge and sustainability science into policy, management, and decision-making processes of the South Platte Basin. The assessment seeks to provide the scientific knowledge base to help, policy makers, managers and stakeholders make informed decisions about how to keep'the greater South Platte basin a beautiful and enjoyable place to live." Assessment proponents believe three objectives are required to achieve the goal: . . Develop a conceptual model of the system 15