Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-:...---'....,....,....-..;-- ^.",:-.. <br /> <br /> Colorado River Study' Virgin River Study2 <br />Listed Species Colorado squawfish, woundfin, <br /> hwnpback chub, Virgin River chub <br /> bonytail, <br /> razorback sucker <br />Proposed Critical Habitat 2200 km of river 160 km of river <br />Direct Impacts operational pattern of federal timing of flows, agricultural <br /> reservoirs, recreational sector adjustments, expedited <br /> activities, agricultural sectors water project construction <br /> re-allocation to municipal <br /> and industrial, new power <br /> facilities <br />Affected Region Arizona, California, three counties in Nevada, <br /> Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Arizona <br /> Nevada, Utah, Wyoming <br />Time Horizon 1995-2020 1995-2040 <br />Regional Impact Model Input -Output, Computable r nput -Output <br /> General Equilibriwn <br />Number of Economic Sectors 20 16 <br />Number of Impact Scenarios 1 2 <br /> <br />TABLE 1 <br />Summary of the Two Case Studies <br /> <br />Notes: <br />I. Source: Brookshire et al. 1993. <br />2. Source: Brookshire et aL 1995. <br /> <br />To recover the endangered fishes in these two river systems, the river systems must be <br />protected and/or altered to more closely represent the natural conditions that are believed to be <br />biologically necessary for species survival. Alteration of biological conditions, through listing <br />and the designation of critical habitat, will in turn restrict or alter human uses of the river <br />systems and thus generate direct and indirect economic impacts. The methodology used in the <br /> <br />5 <br />