WSP08899 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . 2 N C.0 o <:.!:) McElmo Creek In March 1984 FWS prepared and submitted a revised FWCA report to BR. The report addressed the revised project plan and included miti9ation recommendations based on Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP). During September 1984 FWS provided comments on BR's Draft Planning Report and Environmental Assessment with the stated primary concern being that FWCA report mitigation recommendations were not used in the development of these reports. As such, FWS concluded that the mitigation report sections were deficient and recommended that those mitigation features identified in the revised FWCA report be included in these document. Lower Gunnison Basin, Unit One During May 1984 FWS received a letter from Mr. Jack Barnett, Executive Director, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, expressing concern OVer the FWS position on the proposed mitigation for this unit. FWS responded in August 1984 attempting to clarify their position on this issue by providing extensive background information on how the recommendations were developed. FWS also expressed their willingness to formally evaluate and report on other mitigation a1ternatives which have not been addressed to date. Lower Gunnison Basin, Unit Two FWS submitted a Planning Aid Memorandum to the BR which provided: a general description of significant wildlife resources in the study area and their relative importance, existing sources of wildlife resource data, present and future wildlife-related problems and opportunities to avoid or correct them, suggestions of data needs and evaluation methods for the study, and a list of species occurring in the study area. Big Sandy In February 1984 the FWS completed a second draft of the Technical Assistance report for the Big Sandy Unit. Although the Wyoming Game and Fish Department indicated their concurrence with the report if minor refinements could be accommodated, Wyoming's Executive Department recommended by letter dated April 9, 1984, that "the report be indefinitely deferred." Uncertainty over the project direction and the proposed mitigation for fish and wildlife resources were cited as reasons for the deferral recommendation. FWS submitted the report to BR in July 1984 after accommodating, to the extent possible, comments received on the report from all sources. ., 0' ;~