|
<br />FY 99 Draft Work Plan Summary (With,Pgm. Dir. & technical committee comments and Pgm. air. responses)
<br />
<br />07123198
<br />
<br /> sec. 7 FY88
<br />NUMBER STATUS TITlE COMMIT1EE TOTAL ANN. FUND CAP, FUND FUNes FUNDS tN.KJNOIO"'\'HER COMMENTS (pO, TECH. COMM., I'D RESPONSE)
<br /> po: Reeommelld carrying-over FY 9S funding {$21,OOO} and ~nclllctlng the work in FY 99.00. BC: PO'S
<br />90 0 Distr. of /latchery-reared' RSS - Be so so office error. No cany-iver available (study was cut back tQ $10K in FY 98). See contingency list
<br />NEW NEW SUrvival ofearly CSF life stages Be so po: Defer 1 yr. & revise SOW. BC: Hve IsMP group Integrate as appropriate with other ISMP work.
<br />NEW NEW Survival of early RBS life stages Be so po: No sow receivec/o Be: For l'a%orback suckers, we'll probably have to defer this type of work until we
<br /> have more fish to work with.
<br /> BC: Committee supports enlisting outside helP. in refining population estimate portion of ISMP this year, defer more
<br />NEW NEW Assessment of ISMP Be $10,000 $10,000 Sf~~~I;:'1:~~~~:~~~~:~~~~s~~~~~~ long agwe commit to darifying the objectives oflSMP,
<br /> PO: SOW OVeremphasizes San Rafael and underemphasizezs the contribution of tributaries to recovery.
<br /> Also, the flnal report needs to be completed :sooner. BC: Revi:se SOW, delete Siln Rafael assessment portion
<br /> and Include a hydrological component LUf will work with PO's office to revise}. See contingency lilSt for San
<br /> NEW Contribution of tributaries to recovery Be $7,500 $7,500 RafAel asse::;sment portion. PO RESP: nderstand Utah Is does not want to do lust the "wttlte paper.M
<br /> PO: AnticIpate future year maintenance will ~t only about -51<. BC: Committee didn't ~ to fund model
<br />NEW NEW Maintain IMO model Be $10,900 $10,900 ~ ~v~'b!d~~'ri~ ~~:J:G~1:a~c~.for one,yearto .complete this wol'k. ffturther u are needed,
<br />NEW UNSOL InteractJve catostomld larvae key oe $0 $0 :'~~I~\~ ~~~ ~~E~dfoZ ;~u~<;; C;;:'&s~:Jf~. agrees we need tothink about this torthe future and may
<br />VI. Information, Education & Public Involvement IE: All SOW's shoudl reflect that all news releases ertated to the Recovery Program should be posted to the
<br /> $133,700 $25,200 $108,500 $0 SO $0 fws..coloriverllstserver
<br />PIP.1 OR Colorado Instream flow protection PIp te ,. $0 PO: Colorado will provide $12,500 In-klnd fUndIng.
<br />PIP-12 OR Duehe5nePIP IE $0 ,. po: Budgetand SOW comblneclln~o p!e.-1.2----"
<br /> . PO: Howwill the Instream flow Issues be addressed? SOW seelTlS primarily targeted at late FY 98 activities,
<br /> ~u~~::':b"ue:h:~~~ involvement will other public Involvement take place In FY 99? IE: Utah may add presentations on other Recovery
<br />PIP-12113 OR IE $200 $200 pr09ram Issues at additional public meetings during FY 99.
<br /> General Infonnation and Education PO: 1K is for UDWR. IE: I&E Committee will review and develop strategIes to best me<< various video needs
<br />12 OR IE $25,000 $25,000 for the Recovery Program. _ '
<br /> PO: Before funding, RIP would need assurance that"CONIen::;u:s has been reached In BR and FWS regartling
<br /> appropriatness of interpretive materials In this wildlife area. Probably only one sign Is necessary. PO's
<br />NEW UNSOL Interpretive signs at Horsethief SWA Ie ,. ~ will try to fund out of FY 98 end of year funds If ifs appropriate to fund this.
<br />PIP03 OR Yampa Management Plan PIP IE $1,000 $1,000 IE: ~evise SOWto show an additional $SK in FY 2000 for posSible river trip.
<br />PIP4 - OR Grand Valley capital Improvements PIP Ie $30,000 $30,000 po: Need to Include public involvement on Grand Valley Water Management
<br />PIP.. OR Coofd. Resv. Operations PIP IE $4.2tlO $4,200
<br /> PO: Costs seem high. Dates need to reflect FY 99 won: (most shoW FY 98 dates). On this and Coord. Resv.
<br /> .. opel'atfons, the PIP's need to Identify specific actioM (e.g., # of pubUc meetings, etc.t Instead of # of hours.
<br /> Delete parenthetical and quotation marks under Due Dates. IE: Needs to address pu lie's concems, not just
<br /> take comments. Suggested revlewlng the p'reviously-<leveloned list of Issues and responses to determine
<br /> how to PCOCeed, especially wfth Improving "fish-abilityM of the river during high flows from Rued!. Break out
<br />PIP.. OR Ruedl Reservoir PIP 'E $10,000 $10,000 bUclget by task.
<br /> PO: Program agreed to fund SOOt, of costs. Format needs to be corrected. Dates need to be colTeCted.IE:
<br /> SOW wa:s not modffied to reflea PO's recommended budget change; budget Is $28,000, as recommended by
<br /> OR Flaming Gorge operations PIP Ie $28,000 $28,000 staff. not $SO,OOO as Indicated In SOW,.
<br />PlP.. OR Floodplain restoration program PIP IE $16,700 $16,700
<br /> PO: No SOW received. BUd~et shown is a place-holder. ~ additional funds needed (rn~be $1-6K) could
<br /> be ~ken from the Grand Val ey Water Management project udget. IE: Need SOW from C OWto I&E
<br /> Committee by July 23m {bu<l~ I&ft.open) >CDQW should include the public InvolvelTlilnta:spect In their
<br /> repclrt on Pond Reclamation the Management Committee. PO RESP: SOW submitted and Included with
<br />PIP-1G OR Pond Reclamation public Involvement IE $8,500 $8,600 pacltage of Program Management SOW's :sent to Mgmt. Comm.
<br />
<br />Page 5
<br />
|