Our Klamath Basin
Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
Please
respond to FWS restoration proposals!! Take the
a. The concern
I have heard expressed regarding this "task force"
is the amount of overhead that is sucked up
administratively. It is upwards of 40% of ever
dollar goes to administration. If that's true, it
is WAY to high.
b. The money
should be focused on work that will actually get
done on the ground and benefit Fish. Of course
research and coordination are needed, but what
good does it do if we continue to plan and study
and never do anything that gets results.
c. Sounds like
they have limited what can be done in their
criteria.
d. More than
one stakeholder group is interested in a
"re-working" of what the Task Force looks like. In
other words more stakeholders and less agency
involvement.
Bottom line is, what
in their past performance can we (or they) point
to that has resulted in a measurable benefit to
fish? I think it might be hard to find which
isn't good.
One clear message they
need to hear from folks is .. what is the bang for
the buck? what have you done and how has it
helped?.... my sense is that the stakeholders need
to hold this groups feet to the fire a bit more.
|
Home
Page Updated: Thursday May 07, 2009 09:14 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2005, All Rights Reserved