Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-J The- CWCB's Instream Flow Program must continue to work with other State and Federal <br />agencies, local communities, cities, local environmental groups and other interested parties to <br />face the many complex and challenging issues regarding its instream flow appropriations, The <br />future will require the CWCB's Instream Flow Program to continue to address important <br />emerging issues such as the water requirements for declining, threatened and/or endangered <br />species, identifying methods for determining instream flow needs for non-fisheries, water quality <br />concerns, recreation or aesthetic needs and the continued correlation of mankind's need for future <br />economic growth and development with a reasonable preservation of the natural environment. <br /> <br />However, with current staff and resource constraints, the stream and lake protection staff can not <br />process every recommendation that is brought to our attention, Therefore, it is critical that we <br />begin to identify instream flow appropriation priorities, <br /> <br />Proposed {nstream Flow Work Plan Priority Criteria <br /> <br />Participants at the workshop heard many requests and the reasons for those requests from an <br />array of organizations, agencies, cities and parties, All are important in their own way but the <br />staff and Board must somehow identify which ones are the most important and use the state's <br />resources to its maximum benefit. Staff is proposing the way to prioritize the instream flow <br />work plan is to: <br /> <br />(I) Identify criteria; <br />(2) Assign numeric (rating) values to the criteria; <br />(3) Identify for each of the proposed segments/lakes the criteria associated with that <br />segment. <br /> <br />The numeric values for each segment then would be totaled, Segments with the highest total <br />numeric values would be given highest priority in the instream flow work plan, It should also be <br />noted that streams with lower priority values may be included in each year's proposed work plan <br />due to their physical location (same Water Division or watershed) to high priority segments to <br />save data collection and processing expenses, <br /> <br />Staff feels that it can process up to 25 streams, stream segments and/or natural lake level <br />recommendations a year with its current resources and workload, Staff intends to develop a <br />work plan which identifies a pool of up to 75 streams, stream segments and/or natural lake levels <br />for data collection in which it intends to bring instream flow or natural lake level <br />recommendations to the Board in the upcoming three years, Staff feels that by identifying 75 <br />streams, stream segments and/or natural lake levels for data collection will allow it the flexibility <br />to adjust its work schedule to account for the possibility of unforeseen or unfavorable data <br />collection conditions which may occur in a specific water division or watershed, <br /> <br />Flood Control and Floodplain Management -Larry Lang, Chief. Water Project Planning and Construction- Mike Serler, Chief. <br />Instream Flows and Water Rights Investigations-Dan Merriman, Chief. Interstate Streams Investigations-Randy Seaholm, Chief. <br />Office of Conservation Planning-William Stanton, Chief. Personnel and Budget -Susan Maul, Chief <br />