Geoff Moret, U. Idaho Jean Pan, MOJN I&M Ecologist Research Permits

Protocol# ParksTotal # Permits* Total # IAR submitted** Streams & Lakes 11 (1 active)4 SLS64 (2 active)6 Aridland Springs 55 (5 active)9 IU78***8 2 *this includes all permits across all years **this includes all IARs that must be submitted by end of 2012 calendar year ***expected number of permits in 2012

Permitting Issues (1) Scientific/research permits are issued to individuals rather than to the network What happens if the permit holder/signer leaves MOJN I&M (after several years in the case of a long-term permit)? Can permits be issued to MOJN I&M? 3

Permitting Issues (2) Permit holder must be in the field, so field crews must be named as co-investigators It is not possible to name field crew if we apply for permits several months in advance 4

Permitting Issues (3) Exact field site locations need to be provided as part of the permit Some field sites may be visited but rejected for a variety of factors, thus, the exact # of field sites needed may change the exact location of the field site may change (e.g., GPS variation, due to an obstruction) 5

Permitting Issues (4) Permits are issued for a fixed length of time, with variations from park to park Ideally, we would prefer indefinite or long-term permits (10 or 20 years) Equipment associated with permit stipulated to be removed at the expiration of the permit (e.g., permanent markers, monitors) 6

Permitting Issues (5) An Investigator Annual Report is Due for Each Permit in Each Park Each Year Will be 12 per year for aquatic lead Monitoring occurs on a rotation for some protocols, so there may be a number of years where an IAR must be submitted where no monitoring is occurring 7

Permitting Issues (6) Turnaround time for permit issuance varies greatly, from days to several months Permit requirements for application varies greatly across parks 8

Water-Related Permits Time Table Nearly all water-related permits have been approved within 1 month of application Much faster, when needed (Thank you!) No permanent markers, sites in washes, named sites that CR staff have often visited 9

IU Permit Application Time Table Park1 st review of potential field sites 1 Research Permit Application submitted 2 Permit Issued Permit CaveatsNotes DEVA12/20/111/10/122/28/123 permanent markers/plot, <1/2 in diameter, <8 in tall Initial permit issued on 2/8/12 with 0 permanent markers GRBA12/20/113/26/12 Submitted with only initial park review of potential monitoring areas JOTR12/20/111/10/122/28/12Will need to coordinate sites w/ park archaeologist for clearance Went through NEPA compliance LAKE12/20/111/10/123/15/12Permitted for 9 sites: 6 sites, 1 modified site, & 2 training sites 3 Only culturally cleared sites were included on the permit MANZ12/19/111/10/12 Proposed sites have been culturally cleared; waiting for permit to be issued MOJA12/20/111/10/123/2/12Will need to coordinate sites w/ park archaeologist for clearance PARA (NPS)12/20/111/11/123/14/121 site on the NPS side of PARA Only culturally cleared sites were included on the permit PARA (BLM)12/20/111/11/122/24/12 Working with BLM archaeologist to obtain cultural compliance for all proposed sites 10 1 Sites selected from the GRTS draw were submitted to the VWG members to review for general accessibility and concerns. After correspondence with parks, a final list of 35 sites was submitted with the application. 2 Copies of the application and field site information (UTMs and GIS layers) were also ed to permit coordinators since the online system did not allow for certain attachments. 3 Number of discussions occurred and it was decided that only fields sites could be culturally cleared would be included on the research permit.