WSPC12541 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ers. In December 1983, water us- ers il}, Colorado and Utah asked the Colorado Water Congress, a state- wide water users organization based in Colorado, to form the Colorado Water Congress Special Project on Threatened and Endan- gered Species. The Colorado Water Congress Special Project's objectives were to resolve potential conflicts with the Endangered Species Act in a man- ner that respected state water law, recognized interstate water com- pacts, and equitably distributed the cost of any solution. Negotia- tions to resolve the potential con- flicts began in 1984 and involved the Fish and Wildlife Service; the Bureau' of Reclamation; the states of Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah; the Colorado Water Congress Spe- cial Project; environmentalists; and, later, the Western Area Power Administration. In May 1985, the Colorado Water Congress Special Project proposed that the endangered fish species be recovered and delisted. The special project also proposed that actions taken to recover the species be used as mitigation to offset the effects of water develop- ment and management activities under the Endangered Species Act. The water users' rationale was that the only way to solve the problem in the long term was to recover and delist the species. Otherwise, there would be an endless series of "con- sultations" and, eventually, 'limi- tations would be placed upon depletions in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The special project proposal was followed by two ad- ditional years of intense, but suc- cessful, negotiation. . Recovery program. In January 1988, the secretary of the Interior, the administrator of the Western 001019 Area Power Administration, and the governors of Colorado, Wyo- ming, and Utah signed a coopera- tive agreement establishing the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program. The ob- jective of this program is to recover four endangered fish species in the Upper Colorado River Basin while water development proceeds in compliance with the Endangered Species Act, state law, interstate compacts, and Supreme Court de- crees allocating water among the states. A governing committee was es- tablished that includes water us- ers, environmentalists, and repre- sentatives of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclama- tion, the Western Area Power Ad- ministration, and the states of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. The governing committee operates by unanimous consensus. Technical committees were es- tablished with the same institu- tional representation. The Colo- rado River Energy Distributors Association and the National Park Service were added as voting mem- bers in September 2000. The Colorado River Energy Distribu- tors Association represents 130 or- ganizations in six states that pur- chase power from federal hydro- electric projects at Bureau of Rec- lamation dams in the Colorado River Basin. Dearth of Information In 1989, very little was known about the biology and habitat re- quirements of the endangered fish in the Colorado River Basin. Less was known about the actual num- bers of fish present. The informa- tion available at that time indi- cated that the numbers of endan- gered fish had declined sharply over the decades; the bonytail was virtually extinct in the Upper Ba- sin, and the razorback sucker was continuing to decline and near extinction. The recovery program initiated wide-ranging research and monitoring programs to fill the huge information gaps regard- ing the needs of these species and to establish the actual numbers present. The intent of the research was to lay the groundwork for management actions to recover the endangered fish. Major recovery program activi- ties have been in the areas of habi- tat restoration and instream flow protection, nonnative fish manage- ment, stocking, propagation and genetics management, research and monitoring, information and edu- cation, and the associated program management. To date, flooded bot- tomlands habitat has been ac- quired for the endangered species. Propagation facilities have been constructed. Major stocking pro- grams are underway. Water needed for endangered fish habitat is be- ing acquired in accordance with state law.6 Instream flows for en- dangered fish are being protected under state law. Reservoir opera- tions are being modified consistent with state law to benefit endan- gered species downstream. Im- provements in irrigation systems are being constructed, with the conserved water being used in ac- cordance with state law to enhance flows for endangered fish. From 1989 through 2000, a total of $81.7 million has been expended on the Upper Basin re- covery program. These funds in- clude $49.7 million in congres-rsional appropriations to the Bu- reau of Reclamation and the Fish and Wildlife Service; power rev- enues of $22.9 million; $7.2 mil- Spring 2001 .49