1997-06-13_REPORT - M1981302 ‎(11)‎

• Permit No: M1981302
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Date: 6/13/1997
• From: US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR
• To: TE/UTE LADIES TRESSES COVERY PLAN
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

The following comments from FEMAT (1993) broadly explain why specific numeric
objectives have not been developed for the Ute ladies'-tresses recovery plan:
"The wide range of natural variation of individual stream habitat variables
and the complex, and little understood interplay between these. . .makes it
difficult to establish relevant quantitative management directives from
habitat features. It is also difficult to quantify direct linkages among
processes and functions outside the stream channel to in-channel conditions
and biological variables.
Structural components of stream habitat must not be used as management goals
in and of themselves. No target management or threshold level for these
habitat variables can be uniformly applied to all streams. While this
approach is appealing in its simplicity, it does not allow for natural
variation among streams . . . . Furthermore, attaining the predetermined
values does nothing to insure aquatic ecosystem processes are protected.
These habitat parameters must be viewed collectively as part of the larger
issue of watershed health and maintenance of natural physical and biological
integrity."
It is not possible at this time to define clear limits or thresholds in
habitat conditions that directly control the distribution and population size
of the Ute ladies'-tresses. Further research will allow better definition and
quantification of desirable habitat conditions and how to achieve them. This
recovery plan describes a process through which the rather general strategic
goals just discussed can be further refined, defined, quantified, and
implemented.
Recovery Implementation. Recovery goals and actions are conceived as
occurring at several scales. The broadest scale of recovery planning and
implementation will take place at the key watershed scale. Recovery actions
will focus on determining and implementing management practices that retain
and restore watershed health and function. Within key watersheds, more
specific watershed management actions will be directed at drainages containing
occurrences of the orchid and critical contributing areas. Finally, site-
specific riparian management objectives will be developed and implemented for
specified areas within drainages that require special management attention.
This plan recommends that an interdisciplinary team (ID Team) be assembled for
each watershed. The ID Team will conduct an evaluation of the cumulative
effects of resource management and land use practices on watershed function
and orchid populations and habitat. Following the evaluation, the ID Team
will make management recommendations and determine management objectives
applicable at the watershed, drainage, or site-specific level . The ID Team
will also develop standards and guidelines for achieving management objectives
and by which proposed and ongoing management actions can be evaluated for
their impact on watershed goals and orchid recovery. The management
objectives and standards and guidelines should be developed in concert with
other programs engaged in sensitive species, riparian area, and watershed
resource management. Finally, the ID Team will be responsible for working
with public and private resource managers and Federal and state agencies to
develop, implement, and monitor management agreements, special land
20