Laserfiche WebLink
<br />rehabilitate overabundant fish species such as carp, livestock management programs <br />undertaken to improve water quality and riparian corridors will not be as important, other <br />erosion control programs that assist landowners in maintenance of fish habitat will appear <br />to lose benefits to the landowner, construction of new lakes and ponds will not be <br />motivated by establishment of warm water sportfishing, and in stream and lake fish.habitat <br />improvement programs will not represent the benefits that typically reinforce motivation. <br /> <br />. Implementation of all aspects of these procedures require assurances that outlet <br />configuration, floodplain location/elevation, and other technical criteria must be met. It is <br />unclear when stocking fish under Table 1 criteria whose assurance will be required or <br />accepted, how it will be obtained, and who will fund such a process. <br /> <br />. The procedures mandate identification of vertical location or elevation of a potential fish <br />planting site in the floodplain of designated critical habitat without identifying a procedure <br />or process. <br /> <br />. Elimination of biological pest control agents such as triploid grass carp and mosquitofish <br />will require greater application of pesticides to affect the same level of pest control. The <br />procedures encourage greater ecological risk of pesticide application, increased monetary <br />investment in pest control, and greater requirements for labor in pest control. <br /> <br />. The complexity of the procedures are generally beyond the expertise or interest of private <br />landowners. Additional services (at additional cost) will be required by landowners to <br />obtain understanding and compliance. <br /> <br />. Private landowner actions that trigger proposal review require a time constraint (120-210 <br />days) for review that is untenable under most expectations of those private landowners <br />engaged in normal commerce. The review process formatted by the procedures will serve <br />to eliminate some fishery management alternatives otherwise available to landowners by <br />providing review process completion outside the normal availability of live fish products in <br />that calender year and outside the biologically accepted "window of opportunity" for <br />stocking species of fish in the upper basin of the Colorado River.. <br /> <br />. The procedures as proposed require landowners to detennine whether their proposed <br />activities require federal action and therefore require a section 7 consultation under the <br />authority of the Endangered Species Act. This will not occur given the level of <br />understanding the public has of the Endangered Species Act and its specific requirements. <br />This lack of understanding may cause a failure to comply with the procedures.. <br /> <br />5 <br />