Draft Minutes
Governance Committee Meeting

NOTE: This document is a draft based on one person's notes of the meeting. The official meeting minutes may be different if corrections are made by the committee before approval.

Agenda and Minutes

Don Ament, Governance Committee (GC) Chair, called the meeting to order at 8:15 a.m. Don and the entire GC thanked Dennis Strauch and others for the hosted reception the previous evening. Minor typographical errors were identified on the draft September minutes and the minutes as amended were accepted by consensus. No modifications to the agenda were made.

Open Comment Period

No comments were expressed.

Target Flow Workshop Update

Mark Butler briefly described the workshop held in Ogallala, Nebraska. The workshop was attended by personnel from Nebraska Natural Resource District's (NRD), NRD board members, and others. Dave Carlson and Kenny Dinan, FWS, went through the background and biology behind the target flows and answered questions.

Species Recovery Plan Workshop

Mark Butler presented an update of a workshop held in September to start the process of identifying recovery goals for the pallid sturgeon, whooping crane, least tern and piping plover as they relate to the Platte River. Subgroups for each group of species did not attempt to revise the existing recovery plans but did review the plans as they pertain to the Platte. For pallid sturgeon, the subgroup determined that no objective criteria could be set at this time because of a lack of basic biological information. For whooping cranes, least terns, and piping plovers, it is likely that recovery goals for the central Platte can be developed. Mark presented a timeline for completion of meeting minutes and a report by Jim Lutey: draft minutes to subgroup leaders by October 19, comments from leaders by October 25, draft minutes to general participants and others by November 1, comments back to Jim by November 7, final minutes November 10. For the report the timeline was: draft report to workshop participants and others by November 27, comments back to Jim by December 11, and final report by December 20. The report and minutes will be distributed to the general recovery teams and others for their information and use.

Ralph Morgenweck began the discussion by noting that the process is trying to parse out the contributions of the Platte River to the recovery of the species and that this will not be done by one workshop. The report and minutes will help identify where to go from here and what sort of timeline can be expected. There was discussion clarifying when comments on the minutes and report were due and concern was raised that both documents were on a very tight timeline to give meaningful input. Mary Jane Graham asked for clarification on where non-consensus views get reflected in the process. Ralph asked that important biological information be forwarded to Jim Lutey soon for inclusion in his report. Ralph also explained that the end product identifying recovery objectives might not be a consensus document but that he hoped it would be and that it is likely the information will be peer reviewed. Concern was raised that the report from the workshop would set FWS's position on the issues. Ralph and Mark explained that this is only the first step in the process and that labeling the report as a "contract completion report" as opposed to "final" may show that the report is not necessarily the FWS's final position. The process for taking the information from this first workshop through the definition of recovery objectives has not been identified.

Whooping Crane Model Report

Mark Butler distributed copies of a report prepared by the USGS in Fort Collins, Colorado, which evaluated the whooping crane model and associated assessment procedures and then gave a brief presentation of the information. The report identified some areas for model improvement. Based on the report recommendations, the FWS has amended the USGS contract to: 1) evaluate, and if needed, reformulate the habitat suitability indices (via a workshop), 2) enhance the FORTRAN computer programs to integrate the recommended randomization and hydraulic segmentation, and 3) publish a technical document to include background information, description and documentation of model inputs, workshop results, model test results, procedures for developing weighted useable area - discharge curves, model operation and use, and recommended model validation procedures. There was discussion related to how the Technical Committee (TC) and Cooperative Agreement participants in general can get involved in the process. Paul Tebbel, TC chair, noted that the TC could set up a peer review of the information when needed but may not have the time or expertise to be too involved. Mark Butler suggested waiting until the updated model is available before proceeding with peer review.

Channel Stability Review Group Update

Curt Brown gave a brief history of the meetings and workshops held to-date regarding channel stability and noted that since August, the group has been focusing discussions on historic bed degradation, sediment size, etc., as opposed to the Sed/Veg Model. Curt reported that the group had met October 10 with Peter Murphy and Tim Randle to discuss a report outlining data and information used in determining the status of channel stability. Curt asked that written comments on the report be provided to him by October 31, 2000. Another draft will be circulated and discussed before the November GC meeting in Denver.

Land Component Policy Statement

Ralph Morgenweck stated that he understood the states are working on a draft statement for consideration by the GC. Ralph distributed copies of historical information related to the topic for consideration in drafting the statement (see attachments). The GC discussed the timeline for review of the draft. It was noted that the goal for the states is to have a draft available for review by October 26 and for consideration at the November GC meeting.

Cooperative Agreement End Date

Dayle Williamson explained that he is looking at the process as a three-part mission: 1) Funding, 2) Adjustment of timelines/milestones, and 3) Recommendation of new milestones/tasks for the extended time (e.g., pilot projects). Dayle also distributed a "Draft Issues to Consider for Extending the Cooperative Agreement" and asked for GC guidance on the identified topics (see attachment).

Ralph stated that Margot Zallen's legal reading of the Cooperative Agreement was that the GC could extend the Cooperative Agreement. Ralph also noted that people within the DOI in Washington are comfortable with this position. There was discussion that a more rigorous process should be used to insure that all bases are covered. Jim Cook suggested that the GC vote and then have a short memo signed by the Governors and Secretary. Margot stated that she believed the signatories delegated this authority to the GC in signing the original Cooperative Agreement. Concern was raised that timing might become an issue in routing a letter for signature through the DOI. It was decided that a formal motion would be made to extend the Cooperative Agreement, with reference to the milestones developed by Dayle Williamson's subgroup, at the next GC meeting. Also, each state's Governor and the Secretary will send letters sanctioning the extension.

Dayle Williamson asked that suggestions for milestones by sent to him by October 23, 2000. After suggestions are received, a draft will be circulated for review within the subgroup and a conference call held. The draft milestone document will be presented for consideration at the next GC meeting. Some concern was raised regarding funding and the process if the currently available amount of approximately $2.2 million is surpassed by proposed pilot projects in the milestones. Dayle and other state representatives stated that it would be difficult for them to go beyond the $2.2 million and encouraged all parties to work within that amount.

Subcommittee Reports

Water Management Committee and Water Action Plan Committee Reports

Larry Todd provided the report in the absence of John Lawson, Water Management Committee (WMC) and Water Action Plan Committee Chair. Larry reported that the subcommittees have met recently and no meetings are planned but that John Lawson had supplied milestone information to Dayle for consideration. The committees are also waiting for information regarding the channel stability issue.

Land Committee

Vernon Nelson and Rhodell Jameson, Land Committee (LC) Co-Chairs, provided the report. Vernon stated that no meeting have been held and none are currently planned. Meetings will be convened as the need arises. Vernon reported that Autumn Kawolski, who had been working with the LC in preparing newsletters and distributing other information, had recently left the Kearney Area Community Foundation (KACF). Vernon explained that he and Rhodell want to continue working with Autumn because of her experience in the process. The group discussed various options for retaining Autumn and it was agreed that Larry Schulz and the Executive Director's office would work on finding a solution.

Vernon noted that both he and Rhodell have been contacted several times during their tenure as LC Co-Chairs by people want to enroll their lands in the Program and they suggest starting a list of potential properties for Program consideration. Vernon and others also suggested that prime land in which the Program would be interested should somehow be tied up through a mutual agreement or earnest money. There was agreement that a list of offered lands should be started but to pay out money before a Program is implemented would be difficult. There was also some discussion regarding the possibility of having a statement in the LC newsletter directing people to Vernon and Rhodell if they had land for consideration. There was not agreement regarding whether this should be done. Mark Butler and others discussed the possible benefits in developing the Habitat Protection Plan and the habitat complex idea if all parties could see actual parcels of land that are being offered. It was agreed that a milestone should be in place during the extension regarding how offered lands would be cataloged. It was agreed that Vernon and Rhodell did not need to travel to Denver for the next GC meeting unless further issues arise.

States Meeting

Mike Besson reported that the states discussed how they would review the forest management issue. The states agreed they will not amend Boyle Engineering's contract, but will contact universities for conducting the review. The states also discussed the Sed/Veg Model and agreed that they need time to fully investigate the issue. The states will be contracting consultants to help out. Once they are fully informed, the states will be more able to work on solutions to possible problems. The states also came to agreement that it is the DOI's determination regarding how many individuals they place on the Finance Committee, one or two. Larry Todd stated that the DOI would like two.

Technical Committee

Paul Tebbel, TC Chair, reported that the TC had met October 10 with the Channel Stability Workgroup and also October 11 to discuss protocols. Paul reported that the TC had finished the tern and plover monitoring protocol for informal review. Based on comments by the informal reviewers the protocol will be edited and then made available for independent peer review. The TC agreed that it would be most expedient to peer review individual protocols instead of waiting until they are all available. Paul also reported that the TC had agreed that whooping crane monitoring would focus on the Platte River and not directly include the Rainwater Basins or other areas of Nebraska if Nebraska Game and Parks and the FWS continue with their current monitoring efforts. There was some discussion within the TC regarding how to analyze whooping crane monitoring data. Other topics discussed by the TC included an update regarding the Cottonwood Ranch Property Monitoring and Research project and TC milestones for the proposed extension, including identification of existing milestones still needing completion. Paul recommended and the GC accepted by consensus that Kevin Church and Jeff Lucas be removed from the official TC membership, at their request. Paul also recommended and the GC accepted by consensus that Rick Brown from Colorado and Dan Lechefsky with the Bureau of Reclamation be added to the TC membership list.

Don Ament asked that the GC accept or modify the TC/GC Workshop Minutes from the September 13 meeting. Margot Zallen submitted minor typographical edits and the GC accepted the redline version of the minutes by consensus. The states asked for more time to review the Decisions/Directions document developed after the meeting.

Outreach Committee

Jim Cook, in the absence of Jerry Vandersnick, Outreach Committee Chair, reported that the committee had not met since the last GC meeting.

Finance Committee

Dayle Williamson, Finance Committee (FC) Chair, reported that the FC had met on October 6 by conference call. During the meeting, the FC approved disbursement requests and recommended that the GC also approve the requests. The GC approved the FC recommended disbursements. Dayle explained that the FC could not come to resolution regarding the issue of FC membership during the Program. The GC agreed that the DOI could have either one or two members and Larry Todd indicated that the DOI requests two. The GC also agreed that the two at large FC members should be comprised of one environmental representative and one water user representative. Margot indicated that she had some comments on the charter related to clarifying the point that only the four signatories have the authority to approve expenditure. Margot and others were directed to provided comments on the FC charter to Clayton Derby for inclusion as redline and consideration by the FC. Dayle reported that the FC also discussed issues related to the KACF and the Cottonwood Ranch Monitoring and Research project.

Land Interest Holding Entity Options

Marty Zeller, Conservation Partners, used overheads to discuss his finding regarding possible Land Interest Holding Entity (LIHE) options (see attachment). The presentation and discussion included requirements for a LIHE, possible criteria for selecting a LIHE, and advantages and disadvantages of several different existing and potential new LIHE. During the discussion concern was raised that lands held by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) reverted to a refuge if NFWF closed or some other catastrophic event happened. Margot Zallen clarified that this stipulation can be waived by NFWF and the FWS so other provisions can take control if certain events happen. There was also some discussion regarding the ability of NFWF to use a special project name for the Program if there were concerns regarding the name. It will be important that the community understands the different responsibilities of the LIHE and land management groups. It was noted that most disadvantages under the various examples can be worked through or provisions set up to minimize potential disadvantages. Regarding establishment of a new entity, Marty noted that Jeff Yost, Nebraska Community Foundation, has experience in setting up subsidiaries under the umbrella of a larger organization. This could be an option for the Program.

In conclusion, Marty noted that there are many advantages to using existing entities, but the Program needs to insure the management is consistent with GC needs. No existing entity is perfect, but NFWF is the closest in capacity and mission. All entities contacted indicated they would be interest in further negotiations. Marty suggested that if the GC decides to use an existing entity that one should be selected and then direct negotiations regarding costs and management occur. This would be done as opposed to distributing a general RFP. If the GC decides to create a new entity, there could be additional costs with overhead, management, setup, etc. There will also need to be direct accountability to the GC. Establishing a subsidiary within the Nebraska Community Foundation could accomplish the necessary tasks and the idea of a local group could "play" well in Nebraska.

There was some discussion regarding the costs associated with using an existing entity. Marty explained that the various entities contacted could not provide firm estimates of costs and suggested that this be worked through on a small demonstration scale before long term financial commitments are made. Ralph Morgenweck asked that general information be provided in the report regarding each entity's fund raising capabilities and past performance. It was suggested that selection of an entity should be incorporated as an extension milestone with the decision made when there is more certainty regarding a Program.

Milestone Reports

Colorado - Kent Holsinger reported no change in Colorado's milestones.

Wyoming - Norm DeMott reported no change in Wyoming's milestones.

Nebraska - Dayle Williamson provided a brief presentation regarding new wells developed in Nebraska for irrigation, residential, livestock, municipal, etc. Information regarding location and capacity was provided to Clayton Derby, Executive Director's office. (Don Ament, GC Chair, asked that direct contacts be made to the Executive Director's office for copies of the detailed information). There was some discussion regarding the number of wells, how replacement wells are included, and any incentives the state pays for decommissioning old wells.

Department of the Interior - Mark Butler reported no change in DOI milestones.

Open Comment Period

No comments were expressed.

Future Meetings

November 14 - Channel Stability Meeting, 2-5 p.m., Archer Room, Three Stones Building, Denver Water, Denver

November 15 - Technical Committee Meeting, 8 a.m. - 1:30 p.m., location TBD, Denver

November 16 - Governance Committee Meeting, 8 a.m. - 1:00 p.m., Chessman Room, Three Stones Building, Denver Water, Denver

The Cooperative Agreement Extension Milestone Committee is scheduled for November 14 from 4:30 - 6:30 p.m. in the Kassler Room, Three Stones Building, Denver Water

State's meeting is scheduled for November 15, Department of Agriculture.

December - No GC meeting scheduled

January 16, 17, and 18 - meeting schedules and locations TBD, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Adjourn

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:45 p.m.