OCR Text |
Show Under what framework of inquiry represented in this process will population growth, air and water pollution and other impacts be analyzed? How will the multiplication of these impacts be understood? The state's execution of its public trust responsibility is described in the plan. As these factors influence resource management, appropriate changes will be made in plan amendments and subsequent plans. This is a dynamic plan and revisions will be accomplished as needed or required. Impacts on this watershed and region of global climate change should be acknowledged and incorporated into any discussion about the lake's future. The GSL planning process only deals with impact within the state's jurisdiction of the lake. The management alternatives do not discuss who will oversee and implement the various alternatives in the future. Who will be resolving division conflicts regarding management responsibilities? See the " Planning Process and Implementation" section of this plan. The proposed GSL CMP Decision Process should address this concern. Given the broad scope of managing an ever changing lake and the increasing knowledge about this resources, how will additional information be utilized and changes in management be made in the future? See the " Planning Process and Implementation" section of this plan. The lack of adequate detail regarding the logic and background information used to develop these management alternatives makes it very difficult to formulate constructive comments. This information is essential to formulating good public comment. See the " Introduction" and SCCT sections of this document. The planning team believes that all alternatives are legitimate in the context of public trust management. The team also believes identifying the alternatives in relative terms is sufficient. Propose the preferred management alternatives based on the best solution for each issue instead of selecting one particular alternative. The issues are too complex to use a simplified process. This planning process allows for mixing of alternatives to occur. The final plan may include a mix of actions rather than adhering to a straight ( proposed) alternative. The labels " Enlibra," " amenity" and " commodity" are vague descriptors and the management circumstances are not well defined. Circumstances regarding the background for the alternatives are described in the SCCT. 334 |