8197

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8197
• Author: Martinez, P. J.
• Title: Development and Application of Procedures for Stocking Nonnative Fish Speacies in the Upper Colorado River Basin.
• USFW Year: 1997.
• USFW - Doc Type: Grand Junction, CO.
• Copyright Material: NO

13384 . Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 54 / Monday. March 21, 1994 / Rules and Regulations \
TABLE 5.-OWNERSHIP OF SHORELINE IN KILOMETERS (mum) FOR cmr,Al. HABrrAT FOR THE ENDANGERED COLORADO
RIVER FISHES A-Cor0wed
pN,cerShip2 Rawrback
sucker Colorado
sgarawfish Haauapbadc
chub B XWW
Chub
USFS 380 0 0 0
(236) -
USFWS 159
(99) 35
(22) D 40
(25)
bal
T 894 451 444 ' 97
r
• (555) 00) .R16) (60)
State Lards 63
(39) 79
(49) 1
(Q) 40
(S)
Prorate 960 1.112 27 37
(596) (691) (n) (?)
Total
T 5,551
3.696
. 1220
. tAOS
(3.448) (2296) (758) (624)
I The river drsWxes sW m in this table vrere compiled umv total stmehm Wwwters (assurr M 1 kilometer of river centerfsre has 2 kilo-
meters of s'horelinel lcr each critical habitat reach. There is coraiderabiersvedap of critical habitat readies between sped= Thus, halalfries of
designated critics! habitat for al tour Colorado River endangered fish care of be obtained from this table.
2NPS +Iabonal Park Service: BLM- Bureau of Land f riert USFS-US. Forest Service: USFWS--U.S. Fahand W&Fft Service.
Colorado Squawfish
The Service designates six reaches of
the Colorado River System as critical
habitat for the Colorado squawfish.
These rmches tuba LM km. (1.i48 n$')
as measured ala®g the center line of
each reach (TaW4j. This repaesents
about 29 pe=ent of the historical habitat
of" spectre - C Sitical habitat is ' '
designated fa portions of the Colorado,
Gmeu..Yampa. White, and San Juan .
Rivairs in the [3 T Basin. There is no
critical habitatdesigoated fur this
species in the Lower Basin. The
approximate sunim of shoreline miles
of critical habitat by landownership for
the Colorado qpawfish is presented in
Table 5.
Humpback Qmb
The Service designates seven reaches
of the Colorado River system as critical
habitat for the humpback chuh. These
reaches total 610 km (379 mi) as
measured alongthe center line of the
subject reaches (Table 4). This
represents approximately 28 percent of
the historical habitat of the species.
Critical habitat for the humpback chub
is designated forportions of the
Colorado, Green, and Yampa Rivers in
the Upper Basin and the Colorado and
Little Colorado Rivers in the Lower
Basin. The approximate extent of
critical habitat by landownership of
shoreline for the humpback chub is
presented in Table 5.
Bonytail Chub
The Service is designating seven
reaches of the-Colorado River system as
critical habitat for the bonytail chub.
These reaches total 499 km (312 mi) as
measured along the center line of the
subject reaches (Table 4). This
represents approximately 14 percent of
the historical habitat of the spedzes.
Critical babitat for the bonytail chub is
designated for portions of the Colorado.
Crem and Yampa. fivers imthe Upper
Basin and the Colorado River in the
Lower Basin. The approximate extent of
critical forthebonytaaiillchub is
by ?r { __ .
shoreline in Table 5.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species fisted as endangered or
threatened under the Act include
recognition. recov actions.
requirements for Fed eral protection. and
prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through hstimg encourages
and results in conservation actions by
Federal, State,-local and private groups,
and individuals. The Act provides for
possible land and water. acquisitions in
cooperation with States and requires
that recovery actions be carried out for
all listed species. The requirements for
Federal agencies with respect to
protection of designated critical habitat
of a federally listed species and
prohibitions against taking are
discussed below.
The Recovery Implementation
Program forFmdangered Fish Species in
the Upper Colorado River Basin (RIP) is
a cooperative effort to recover the
endangered fish in the Upper Basin
(Green and Colorado Rivers only) while
providing for water development to
proceed in a manner compatible with
applicable State and Federal laws. The
RIP was implemented in January 1988
by a Cooperative Agreement signed by
the Governors of Colorado. Utah. and
Wyoming: the Secretary of the Interior:
and the Administrator of the Western
Area Power Administration. The
process for conducting section 7
consultations-on water projects was
outlined in the RIP and further clarified
by an October 15,1993,final agreement
on section 7 consultadan.
The KIP provides the reasonable and
prudent alternative to avoid the -
likelihood of jeopardy to tthe?von?tiinuYe-d
existen[]R of the endangered fishffi due -
to depletion impacts of new projects.-.:7
and all existing or past impacts related
to historical projects (,with-tbs exception
of the discharge of pollutants by
historical projects?. Program .- - .. .
participants also intend that the RIP will
provide the reasonable and pru=dent
alternative that will avoid the likely
destruction or adverse modification-of
critical habitat currently being ..-
designated for the endangered fishes. A
Recovery Action Plan (RIPRAP) that
identifies specific actions and time
frames needed to recover the
endangered fishes was developed by-the
RIP. The RIPRAP will be used by the
Service in determining-if the RIP is
achieving sufficient progress as a
reasonable and prudent alternative to
jeopardy. The RIP intends to analyze
and amend the RIPRAP as appropriate,
so that it can serve as the reasonable and
prudent alternative to avoid the likely
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The Service considers
that the RIP has made sufficient
progress to serve as a reasonable and
prudent alternative to jeopardy for
projects that deplete less than 3.7 cubic
hectometers (hm3)(3,000 acre-feet). For
projects depleting more than 3.7 hm3
(3.000 acre-feet), the Service identifies
actions in the RIPRAP that must be
completed to avoid jeopardy.
As a result of reasonable and prudent
alternatives to the Animas-LaPlata
Project provided in the Biological

t

1
1

1

t