Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Daries C. Lile, Director <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />December 5, 1996 <br />Page -3- <br /> <br />If the Service cannot prove the status-quo flows are a necessary component of the <br />recovery program, then perhaps the "cure" of the minimum stream flow adjudications and the <br />recovery program in general is not worse than the "disease" of Section 7 consultations under the <br />Endangered Species Act. We submit the water community does not need the CWCB to act as <br />another layer of bureaucracy promoting the United States' agenda; the water community instead <br />needs the CWCB to take the lead and critically evaluate the viability of the recovery program <br />and the Service's minimum stream flow claims. <br /> <br />We therefore believe the eweB could better serve its citizens by requiring the Service <br />to prove the merits (if any) of its position that the minimum flows will recover the fish, even if <br />Section 7 consultations are the impetus for such an evaluation. The CWCB, on behalf of the <br />Colorado citizenry, could objectively evaluate the Service's claims and force to conclusion the <br />issue of whether maintaining minimum stream flows will accomplish the much,hoped-for result <br />of the fishes' recovery. From a policy standpoint, such an evaluation would make better sense <br />than the CWCB's potentially drastic and fantastically expensive course of adjudicating the <br />95CW296 and 95CW297 applications, especially when those adjudications could be for nought. <br /> <br />Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. <br /> <br />Very truly yours, <br /> <br /> <br />D <br /> <br />By: <br /> <br />LSjrnms <br />xc: Wendy Weiss <br />Maureen Toomey <br />Alan Roman <br />Elizabeth Black <br />Dan Kerst, Esq. <br />Thomas B. Louderback, Esq. <br />