My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9417
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9417
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 2:56:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9417
Author
U.S. Department of the Interior.
Title
Final Environmental Assessment
USFW Year
1998.
USFW - Doc Type
Acquisition and Enhancement of Floodplain Habitats along the Upper Colorado, Green, and Gunnison Rivers as part of the Recovery Program for Endangered Colorado River Fishes.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
115
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />endangered fishes), The Recovery Program <br />would prefer not to hold title to these properties, <br />however, and would seek to convert fee into <br />easement and re-sell the land, This would help <br />to ensure that lands are not taken out of <br />production or off tax roles. If there are instances <br />where lands cannot be sold, the government <br />would make payments in lieu of taxes. <br /> <br />Purchase of easement agreements would entail <br />acquisition of only the rights necessary to <br />provide and protect the habitat. The easement <br />would be perpetual, meaning that the acquired <br />rights would be everlasting. Easements would <br />allow private landowners to retain title to and <br />use their properties for their personal use as long <br />as the rights acquired are not violated. Except <br />during inundation periods, use of the floodplain <br />for purposes that do not adversely affect <br />endangered fishes would be allowed throughout <br />the year. Acquisitions would not include water <br />rights so that existing water rights would not be <br />impacted. As part of the agreement, the <br />floodability of the property would be enhanced, <br />where feasible; measures to control or prevent <br />flooding would not be permitted. In cases where <br />floodability enhancements may increase flood <br />risks to adjacent landowners, the Program would <br />take measures to maintain existing levels of flood <br />protection for adjacent non-participating land <br />owners. The purchase of this form of an <br />easement agreement was preferred by the group. <br />However, it was decided by the group that all the <br />acquisition methods, tools, and approaches <br />should be used (except condemnation), subject <br />to the needs and desires of the landowner, to <br />ensure that all the criteria for evaluating <br />alternatives are met. <br /> <br />Under the proposed action, Reclamation would <br />acquire the easements and subsequently transfer <br />them to the Service. Any habitat enhancements <br />that might be needed would be done by <br />Reclamation under the direction of the Recovery <br />Program and the Service. <br /> <br />II-4 <br /> <br />D. Alternatives Eliminated <br /> <br />Alternative # 2 - Induce Flooding <br /> <br />Induced flooding would provide abundant <br />habitat, except where levees exist. But,there is <br />no doubt that intentional flooding of private <br />lands without the consent of the landowners <br />would be politically unacceptable. This <br />alternative would be very controversial. <br />Previous scoping has shown that it would take <br />too long, if it could be done at all, to persuade <br />landowners to agree to be flooded without <br />considerable compensation. For these and other <br />reasons previously discussed, this alternative has <br />been eliminated from further consideration. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.