Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.]1 <br /> <br />~, <br /> <br />reports out of committee and the current language does not include any recommendations for funding <br />the Phase I Projects. The Senate Interior appropriations bill was marked up on June 29, 2001 and <br />does not include any recommendations for the Phase I Projects. The Senate Energy and Water <br />appropriations bill is scheduled for markup on July 12,2001. The agencies Washington, D.C. <br />representatives are attempting to obtain funding in this bill. Apparently, there is a significant amount <br />of tension between the Administration and the Congress over the adding or earmarking funding for <br />specific programs beyond those identified in the President's budget. <br /> <br />Representatives of the United States, and Arizona, California, and Nevada are continuing to <br />work vigorously on the potential acquisition of privately owned lands in the Cibola and Palo Verde <br />Valleys for MSCP conservation activities. Mr. Harris, Mr. Hayes, and Mr. Jeffrey Kightlinger, of <br />the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, met with representatives of the Palo Verde <br />I rrigation District to discuss the proposed acquisition ofSempra lands within the Palo Verde Valley. <br />Issues of concern, identified by the PVID Board and individual landowners were identified and <br />discussed. Mr. Harris and Mr. Hayes provided an overview of the status of the MSCP and the <br />rationale behind the need for acquisition of private lands for conservation purposes along the lower <br />Colorado River. Messrs. Harris, Hayes, and Kightlinger committed to keeping the PVID Board <br />briefed on the status of the potential acquisition of the Sempra properties. <br /> <br />Representatives of the United States and Arizona are also evaluating the potential acquisition <br />of the Cibola Valley Irrigation and Drainage District (CVIDD) on the Arizona side of the river. In <br />fact, representatives of the MSCP Steering Committee are in the process of requesting that <br />Reclamation take the lead in initiating a process and dialog with CVIDD. Reclamation is <br />considering the utilization of The Conservation Fund (TCF) to coordinate the negotiations and <br />acquisition process. TCF has significant nation-wide experience in property acquisition for <br />conservation purposes, and has been utilized by Reclamation's Lower Colorado Regional Office for <br />acquiring lands along the lower Virgin River in Nevada for willow flycatcher conservation. <br /> <br />Status afCalifornia Fully Protected Species Efforts <br /> <br />Based upon recent discussions with agency legislative liaisons, A.B. 1561 (Kelley) has been <br />clarified to more fully describe the LCR MSCP goals and objectives, planning area, and <br />implementation period. Additionally, the bill has been amended to reflect a requirement that the <br />Resources Agency, on or before April I, 2001, shall "...report on the implementation of the LCR <br />MSCP, established by the States of California, Arizona, and Nevada, and approved by the <br />Department ofFish and Game." <br /> <br />Senate Bill 107 (Sher), introduced on January 22, 2001, addressing natural community <br />conservation planning (NCCP), is intended to refme and clarify the existing NCCP statutes. <br />Specifically, S.B. 107 addresses the concept of adaptive managcmcnt and monitoring, the role of <br />independent scientific peer review, the requirement for a DFG-approved "planning agreement," and <br />specific planning requirements which must be included within an approved NCCP. <br /> <br />6 <br />