Laserfiche WebLink
Benefits of the Platte Program to Colorado <br />Why the Platte Program is Needed by Colorado <br />The Platte Program is designed to resolve escalating conflicts between water use and endangered <br />species protection that affect federal permitting ofboth existing and planned imgation and municipal <br />water supply projects in the Platte River basin in Colorado. Resolution of these conflicts is of state <br />interest and important to all those who live and work along Colorado's rapidly growing Front Range. <br />The Conflict <br />Water-related projects which need a federal permit, license, funding, ar are carried out by a <br />federal agency require consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) under the <br />Endangered Species Act (ESA). Federal agencies are required by Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA <br />to insure that those actions are not likely to jeopardize listed species or adversely modify <br />their designated critical habitat. <br />Water projects in the Platte River basin routinelyrequire a 404 permit from the Corps <br />of Engineers for their construction, operation and maintenance. Numerous others are <br />dependent on special use permits issued by the Forest Service for water storage or <br />conveyance facilities located on forest lands. The Bureau ofReclamation and Corps <br />of Engineers also own major water collection, distribution and storage facilities that <br />provide water to numerous ditch companies and municipalities or are used for flood <br />control purposes in Colorado. These types of activities are all subject to Section 7 of <br />the ESA. <br />The FWS believes that the Platte River resource is in a state of jeopardy, and that actions <br />resulting in water depletions to the Platte River will continue the deterioration of the <br />endangered species' habitat. The FWS has issued "jeopardy" biological opinions for <br />virtually all water-depletive projects in the Platte River basin since the late 1970s, citing <br />either new or continued water depletions as contributing factors in j eopardizing the existence <br />of the species and adversely affecting designated critical habitat. <br />Jeopardy opinions have been issued for proposed and unconstructed proj ects and for <br />existing projects which were in operation prior to passage of the ESA. <br />Under the jeopardy standard, individual water projects undergoing ESA consultation must <br />avoid or fully offset all project depletions to FWS instream flow recommendations in the <br />same amount, timing, duration and frequency in which they occur. Land acquisition and a <br />sediment augmentation component may also be a required component of mitigation. <br />Fulfillment of these requirements may, for some projects, simplynot be possible. For <br />many others, these requirements have delayed permitting and compromised water <br />yield and cost-effectiveness of the projects.