1 / 12

Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ and Tribes’ Program Amendment Recommendations June 12 Comments

Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ and Tribes’ Program Amendment Recommendations June 12 Comments NPCC Meeting June 2008 Spokane, Wa. Plan. NPCC Fish And Wildlife Program. Implement. Eva l uate. CBFWA Vision. Link regional goals to SBP/Recovery goals

shilah
Download Presentation

Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ and Tribes’ Program Amendment Recommendations June 12 Comments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ and Tribes’ Program Amendment Recommendations June 12 Comments NPCC Meeting June 2008 Spokane, Wa

  2. Plan NPCC Fish And Wildlife Program Implement Evaluate CBFWA Vision • Link regional goals to SBP/Recovery goals • Define clear adaptive management framework • Define BPA obligations Output Input • F&W Priorities Addressed • Adequate Funding • Regional commitment to mitigation • Framework for RM&E

  3. Essential Adaptive Management Linkages Subbasin Objectives Strategies Limiting Factors Species Trawl and haul Reservoirs=poor reproduction Harvest = 5 kg/hectare Mid-level Bio Obj Subbasin Objectives Regional Objectives Establish measurable biologic objectives that define BPA’s mitigation obligations

  4. Using an Amended Program Status Objectives Gap Status & Trends Limiting Factors Coor RM&E Threats Strategies Action Effectiveness Measures TargetedSolicitation

  5. May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec NPCC Amend Comm Period Draft Program Comm on Draft Draft Final Prog BPA FY 09 IPR Comment 5/15 – 6/19 New Rate Implemented BPA FY 10&11 IPR Comment 5/15 – 8/15 Formal FERC Process Comm on HLI NPCC Report Develop HLI HLI, DM, & ME amended into program DM & ME Rec Wildlife Review Plan Sponsor Rpts ISRP Review

  6. Where Should the Program Go from Here? • 7 Years of assessment and planning • Subbasin Planning • Recovery Planning • Regional Collaboration for BiOps • RME Development (CSMEP, PNAMP, NED, etc.) • Status of the Resource Report • 2000 Program calls for subbasin level management plans (these were not developed consistently, agencies’ and Tribes’ adaptive management framework provides common template) • The Council should use the adaptive management framework to include specific measures in the subbasin management plans and a systemwide implementation plan for RME

  7. Develop Implementation Plans • The recommendations by the Agencies and Tribes and others provide the material necessary to develop multi-year work plans for each subbasin and systemwide • Build off State and Tribal MOAs and locally developed recovery plans to complete work plans consisting of measures for each subbasin in the Program • The Agencies and Tribes are prepared to work with you to support this effort

  8. Additional Information Provided by the Agencies and Tribes • Streamlined the resident fish section of the adaptive management framework to better support development of implementation plans • Initiated an effort to associate the subbasin level anadromous fish objectives with basinwide objectives

  9. Inconsistencies with BPA -Resident Fish Mitigation • Program should be consistent with the fisheries management plans and regulations set by agencies and Tribes • Current subbasin plans are not adequate to define BPA’s mitigation, need resident fish loss assessments • Cannot account for past resident fish value until resident fish assessments are completed • Program policy supports resident fish projects in basins where a direct link to the FCRPS cannot be made

  10. Inconsistencies with BPA -Wildlife Mitigation • Wildlife mitigation should be consistent with the “current and future plans of the fish and wildlife managers” • Individual acquisition agreements on crediting ratios are not acquiescence by the F&W managers to Programmatic crediting ratios • Move towards a more ecosystem based approach to mitigation; however, fish mitigation may not always mitigate wildlife losses • Need common templates for management plans and addressing loss assessment irregularities under the HEP model

  11. Summary • The 2008 Program should build off 7 years of process initiated by the 2000 Program • Focus on implementation and adaptive management • Build accountability and transparency through adequate reporting • Agencies and Tribes are available to assist

  12. Committed to Continue Working Project Review Process Work with NPCC and BPA to Review Implement Amended Program 2007 2008 2009 Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan NPCC Amendment Process NPCC draft amend- ments Develop final ammend- ments Submit recommen- dations (90 days) Findings and responses Public comment; hearings Public review Public Comment Formal process BPA Rate Case Development

More Related