8197 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 13387 adversely-modify such habitat or may be affected by such designation. Destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat is defined as a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat for both survival and recovery of a listed species. Some activities may disturb or remove the primary cogstituent elements within designated critical habitat for the Colorado River . endangered fishes. These activities may include. among others, actions that would reduce the volume and timing of water, destroy or block off spawning and nursery habitat, prevent recruitiaent, adversely impact food sounces,.contaminate the river, or increase predation by competition with nonnative fish. In contrast, other activities may have no effect on the critical habitat's primary constituent elements. Activities such as recreation (boating, hiking, hunting. etc). some tyP? ofi"g, and properly managed livestock grazing may not adversely modify cortical habitat Anee?s designated as critical habitat for the Colorado River endangered fishes support a number of existing and proposed commercial and noncommercial activities. Some-of the commercial and governmental activities that may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat include construction and operatiem of hydroelectric facilities, inigifioa, flood control, bank stabilization. oil and gas drilling, mining, grazing, stocking or` - introdnd oWn of nonnative fishes, munfcipal water supplies, and resort facilities. Commercial activities not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat include nonconsumptive activities such as river float trips, guided sport fishing, and excursion boat toms. Noncommercial activities are largely associated with private recreation.and are not considered likely to adversely affect critical habitat Such activities include boating, fishing, and various activities associated with nature apprec€atiom However, it must-be emphasized that section 7 of the Act only applies to Federal actions (projects, permits, loans, etc.) and that each Federal action must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Some activities could be considered a benefit to Colorado River endangered fishes habitat. such as the Colorado River and San Juan River Recovery Implementation Programs and. therefore, would not be expected to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat-Examples of activities that could benefit critical habitat in some cases include protective measures such as instream flow protection, development of backwater or cove habitat that benefits native species; or eradication of nonnative fish. However, these activities should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Federal actions related to fisheries management in general require close evaluation by the Service. The introduction or stocking of nonnative fish may require evaluation under section 7 for both the jeopardy and adverse modification standards and to determine whether it would constitute taking under section 9. Although the significance of predation on eggs, larvae, and juvenile endangered fish species by nonnative fish has not been quantified throughout the Basin, this impact has been-4ocamertted for1maay species of endangered fishes in the Basin and is considered a key factor in their decline. Nonnative fishes may have other effects on individual fish and critical habitat through competition, changes in habitat, and incidental mortality. - . Endangered fish research and management activities are likely to affect individual fish or improve the quality and usefulness of habitat for the endangered fishes. These types of activities are addressed through the section 10 permit process, which includes a section 7 evaluation to determine the effects of the action. Reasonable and Prudent Measures In cases where destruction or adverse modification is indicated (with or without the likelihood of jeopardy), a portion of the economic impacts may result from complying with terms and conditions in the incidental take statement of a Biological Opinion. An incidental take statement is provided in a biological opinion if the Service anticipates incidental loss of individuals of the species as a result of habitat alteration resulting from a Federal action. The incidental take statement outlines the number of individuals and/or amount of habitat the Service anticipates will be lost due to the Federal action. The Service then identifies reasonable and prudent measures necessary to minimize such take and sets forth terms and conditions that the Federal agency and/or applicant must comply with to implement the reasonable and prudent measures. In some cases, the requirements to minimize incidental take (terms and conditions) may be similar to reasonable and prudent alternatives developed under an adverse modification or jeopardy finding. Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives If the Service concludes in a biological opinion that an action would likely result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, the Service is required to provide reasonable and prudent alternatives, if any, to the proposed action in its biological opinion. By definition. reasonable and prudent alternatives allow the intended purpose of the proposed action to go forward while avoiding the conditions that would adversely modify critical habitat. To increase the potential for identifying such alternatives, the Service recommends that the agencies initiate discussions early in the planning process before plans have advanced to the point where alternatives may not be as feasible. If discussions are initiated early, more opportunities to reduce impacts may be available. If an adverse modification was anticipated, examples of possible reasonable and prudent alternatives provided in a biological opinion include those noted in Table 6. TABLE 6.-EXAMPLES OF POSSIBLE REASONABLE AND PRUDENT ALTER- NATNES Relocate the proposed activity to arx*w ID. cation within or outside of critical habitue to avoid destrucbm or adverse a*ddreation of Modify the project UftsicWoperationalfyl to avoid adverse modification of critical hebf tat _ Provide offsetting measures to either Colo- rado River endangered fishes or the critical habitat area by actions such as: A- aa*M W30M or SOCUring water rights for Color d Rim endangered fishes from other sources to offset a proposed depletion; B. irrplernenting water conservation meas- ures so that no net foss of water occurs; C. enhancing corstitirent element areas so that a net benefit to Colorado River en- dangered frshes occurs, i.e., acquiring bottom lands and removal or large-scale reductions of r"vuative fish within a criti- cal habitat react: or D. undertaking other recovery actions iden- tified in recovery plans, Recovery Impie- mentation Programs, or other approved management plans or activities. Some reasonable and prudent alternatives may only require minor modifications to construction and/or operational plans. As an example, a proposed boat ramp may need to be relocated a short distance to avoid impacting a spawning or nursery area. Projects resulting in more significant impacts may require major changes to the original proposal. A large irrigation diversion project, as an example, may be likely to affect most of the constituent elements-of a critical habitat reach and