7802 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ I980s (Minckley et aI., this volume, chap. 17)' A viable population of humpback chubs remained in the Little Colorado River near its confluence with the Colorado, Few early studies on the biology and ecological require- ments of these fishes were made in the lower basin, but their declines were documented by R. R. Miller (1961), Minckley and Deacon (1968), and others. The four endangered fishes were still found in the unaltered upper basin during the early I960s (Fig. 8-1). Limited preimpoundment studies indicated that numbers of some species were low, and funher suggested that these fishes may never have been abundant, Compe- tition for water resources intensified in the upper basin during the 1960s. Various repons summarized supply and demand of water and evaluated alternative uses of the water re- sources (e.g., National Research Council 1968). The U.S. Water Resources Council (1968) completed a comprehensive appraisal of water resources and their geographic distri- butions, made projections of future require- ments, defined problems and needs, and pre- sented 2 program for water development and conservation to the year 2020, The council concluded that ample resources were availa- ble to meet fishing needs in the upper basin if minimum stream flows and adequate conser- vation pools in reservoirs were maintained for game fish, The repon did not include conser- vation of endangered Colorado River fishes because their status was not then recognized or appreciated. In the mid-1970S the Western u.s. Water Plan (known as the Westwide Study), con- ceived under authority of the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968, proposed develop- ment of adequate information as a basis for decisions on water and related resources in the eleven western states (U.S. Bureau of Rec- lamation [USBR] 1975). The plan focused pri- marily on the quantity and quality of water. In 1976 the USFWS funded a symposium Evo/utioll of a Recovery I'rogram 125 through Resources for the Future to summar- ize probable impacts of potential energy devel- opments on water, fish (including endangered species), and wildlife in the upper Colorado River (Spofford et al. 1980). Future demands and allocations of Colo- rado River water were concisely summarized by Weatherford and Jacoby (1975): In broad terms, the problem of managing the Colorado River is the problem of allocating a flow resource in such a way as to satisfy legally preferred current demands without foreclosing the satisfaction of a different set or configuration of demands in the future. When so viewedol'it is clear that there will be no single or final solution to the problems of allocation and management in the Colorado River basin, The time for seri- ously addressing emerging generation of prob- lems, however, is now. Key Federal Environmental Legislation The American public's concern about environ- mental issues has been marked by surges and declines during the past century. This concern was interrupted by two world wars and an eco- nomic depression, but a major revival occurred (McEvoy 1973) when the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934 was amended in 1958 to confer "equal consideration" to wildlife and directed development programs to give "full consideration" to recommenda- tions of wildlife agencies (Williams and Deacon, this volume, chap. 7). It was not until the [960s, however, that an "environmental movement" took shape in the United States, During this period the federal government acknowledged a national responsibility to save endangered species through the En- dangered Species Preservation Act of 1966, amended as the Endangered Species Conser- vation Act of 1969. The National Environ- mental Policy Act (NEPA) also became law that same year, and regulations to implement it were published by the Council on Environ- mental Quality. The NEI'A requires that en-