Working with DFG biologists and staff on projects is not worthless. On CEQA based projects (including THPs and County Ord) getting good biologic opinion in the file helps immensely.
With DFG staff it is important to develop working relationships with field staff and then management. The management part is to assure field work does not get overturned by politics.
Thanks, Alan, that is helpful. I’ve personally had some dealings with DFG regarding THPs some years back and it seemed those assigned to this were worthless, although once in awhile a pesky newcomer would believe the mission statement and cause trouble for the agency. Kimberly has had some good responses from one or two key biologists on ESA and other issues, one of them having just retired. I’ll include the response from PRMD on DFG’s official comments on the grading ordinance when I send it out.
Decisions made by DFG on policy are made by the Fish and Game Commission.
One new policy that may have impact on the Russian and other north coast
rivers is the approved DFG Coho Recovery Strategy (assessment and
reccomendations for Russian and other river) – found at the DFG web site.
I noticed Kimberly and Jonathan on this because they make statement on
grading ord for SoCo.
Biologic assessment and violations are accomlished under DFG responsible
agency permitting, DFG 1600 Stream Alteration Permits, and comments on
projects (i.e. SoCo Grading Ord). You need to know you local DFG
biologists and managers. They will send you copy and do investigations –