Laserfiche WebLink
likely to be more costly and time-consuming for the project proponent and the federal <br />agencies than participation in the Program as described above. <br />What are the possible risks or downsides to seeking Program coverage? <br />Program Continuity. Conceivably, any of the four signatories to the Program <br />Agreement (the three governors and the U.S. Secretary of the Interior) could withdraw <br />from the Agreement, or the state or federal participants could fail to meet their <br />commitments under the Program. Should that occur, it is possible that the Program will <br />no longer serve to provide ESA coverage for the downstream target species. In such a <br />situation, consultation on the effects of the proj ect actions may need to be re-initiated. <br />However, such a turn of events is considered unlikely, and should this occur the <br />Department of the Interior would seek practical and reasonable alternatives for project <br />proponents who already had agreed in good faith to participate in the Program. <br />SPWRAP Commitments. As already discussed, coverage of many water projects in <br />Colorado by the Program (under the Colorado Plan) is predicated on membership in the <br />South Platte Water Related Activities Program, Inc. (SPWRAP). Costs and obligations <br />associated with membership are established by that organization, and could change over <br />time in response to Program funding and implementation efforts in Colorado.10 <br />Basin-wide Water Activities (North Platte Basin projects). Coverage of non-federal <br />water projects in the North Platte basin of Colorado by the Program is predicated on total <br />irrigated acreage and total water storage in that basin being maintained below certain <br />thresholds set by the North Platte River Decree." Should these thresholds be exceeded, <br />strategies for addressing depletions associated with new water-related activities in the <br />North Platte basin will need to be developed which satisfy obligations made under the <br />Program Agreement. Conceivably, this could require some additional action on the part <br />of the project proponent at that time. <br />New Federal denletions <br />`Federal depletions' are those associated with federal water-related activities wherein the <br />water rights are held by a federal agency and that water is used for a primarily `national <br />benefit' (as opposed to supplying local users). Examples of new federal depletions may <br />include, but are not limited to: <br />¦ New water storage facilities, impoundments, and consumptive water uses at <br />National Wildlife Refuges, Waterfowl Production Areas, and National Fish <br />Hatcheries; <br />'o As of January 2007, the State of Colorado has already dedicated $7 million toward Colorado's share of <br />Program costs, and legislation is pending to provide additional state funding. <br />" The North Platte River Decree was established by Nebraska v. Wyoming, 325 U.S. 589 (1945), modifierl, <br />345 U.S. 981 (1953), and modified by the Final Settlement Stipulation, March 13, 2001. The Colorado <br />Plan also establishes limits to its coverage of municipal, industrial, piscatorial, wildlife and environmental <br />uses in the North Platte basin; see that Plan for details.