Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.w'~ <br />""i'-'~~~ <br />t, ..L~: <br /> <br />1994 BO incidental take statement, to assist in defining the species' response <br />to the event and in refining a take level. We believe the benefits of the <br />test flow to endangered the humpback chub and its mainstem habitat, and to <br />other ecosystem processes should also be given full consideration. <br /> <br />The incidental take statement and the Stevens, et al. report consider <br />relocation of snails to a position within the habitat above the 45,000 cfs <br />level. We do not believe moving of snails is acceptable as a long-term <br />management strategy. The success of such an effort is hard to predict. <br />Negative impacts to the KAS may result from disturbance due to handling and <br />moving and some KAS may be placed into already occupied habitat resulting in <br />increased competition. If snails are only emerging from winter dormancy their <br />ability to re-orient may be impaired. Self sustaining population(s) of KAS <br />would not require frequent human intervention to maintain themselves in the <br />event of habitat disturbance such as a spring flood, and they have survived <br />flood events larger than 45,000 cfs six times since the dam was closed. We <br />favor focusing resources on understanding the ecology of the species and <br />refining management strategies. <br /> <br />7 <br />