My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8092
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
8092
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:32 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 2:59:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
8092
Author
U.S. Department of the Interior.
Title
Proceedings of the Symposium on Restoration Planning for the Rivers of the Mississippi River Ecosystem.
USFW Year
1993.
USFW - Doc Type
Washington, D.C.
Copyright Material
NO
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
511
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 />2 BIOLOGICAL REPORT 19 <br /> <br />States, only &/0 of the land mass supported ripar- <br />ian vegetation, and we have already lost two-thirds <br />of these lands. We can expect remaining riparian <br />habitat to continue to diminish if the loss of stream <br />habitat isn't stopped. <br />The dialogue of this symposium centers on the <br />Mim:Jissippi River drainage, one of the world's great <br />river systems. This system drains about 12% of the <br />area of North America and is the most significant <br />environmental factor influencing the Gulf of Mex- <br />ico.Fisheries managers in the 28 states in the <br />~issippi drainage have identified more than 90 <br />tributaries and 80 species of fIsh of great concern. <br />Fisheries scientists and managers participating in <br />this symposium will discuss nearly a third of these <br />90 tributaries. These researchers are intimately <br />familiar with their river system's habitat, water <br />quality, flora, and fauna and with the relationships <br />between the components of these ecosystems. They <br />are the best hope to guide restoration of lost fIsh <br />and wildlife values. These same researchers will <br />readily admit the limitations available data dictate; <br />however, they will also point out that sufficient <br />information is available to stop the loss today and <br />to begin a process of restoration. Recommending <br />more research in lieu of action is, in our opinion, <br />unconscionable. <br />Governments do not set out to destroy riverine <br />values, and water development projects have pro- <br />vided such benefIts as flood control, navigation, <br />irrigation, and power production. But in the devel- <br />opment process, the ecosystems have been dam- <br />aged, and values have been lost. Rivers suffer from <br />the cumulative effects of thousands of small, and <br />some not so small, abuses. It is essential to adopt <br />an approach that balances habitat conservation <br />with water resources development. <br />Much of the problem with the way we have <br />treated rivers has to do with the way our institu- <br />tions and governments are organized. IT one wished <br />to condemn rivers to a long, slow, and sure death, <br />the present governmental process was seemingly <br />designed to achieve that end. North America is <br />shared by three countries. Much of the border be- <br />tween the United States and Mexico is dermed by <br />a line drawn down the center of the Rio Grande <br />River. To the north, much of the border between the <br />United States and Canada is defIned by a line <br />dividing the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence <br />River. Farther to the north and west along the <br />border between Alaska and British Columbia, most <br />rivers beginning in Canada's interior run through <br /> <br />southeastern Alaska and empty into the Pacific <br />Ocean. <br />If governments were able to exert complete con- <br />trol over fIsh, as they can over their citizens, one <br />could imagine that Mexican fIsh would be confined <br />to the south side of the Rio Grande River and U.S. <br />fIsh to the north side. Salmon migrating out of <br />Canada would be required to carry passports and <br />to clear U.S. customs to reach the ocean pastures <br />to grow. These same salmon would be required to <br />clear Canadian customs when returning to their <br />natal streams to spawn. Unfortunately, fIsh artd <br />environmental problems show little regard for the <br />boundaries that derme our territories. <br />Selecting the middle of adjoining rivers as the <br />boundary between countries and states has made <br />management of these systems difficult. Mid-river <br />state boundaries are especially common in the <br />Mississippi River watershed. Consequently, 28 <br />states, the Federal Government, and numerous <br />Indian tribes share responsibility for management <br />of the resources in the Mississippi River basin. In <br />addition, the Federal Government has divided the <br />responsibility for fIsheries, water, and habitat be- <br />tween 37 agencies within 9 executive-level depart- <br />ments. It would be difficult to design a more com- <br />plicated management system for river resources. <br />But even worse, the Federal Government, as well <br />as many of the states, is organized by constituent <br />group (recreational, commercial, aquaculture) and <br />salinity (freshwater vs. marine). Most of our <br />coastal states have separate management agen- <br />cies for sport and commercial fIsheries. The fish do <br />not realize this of course, and essential decision <br />making with regard to water quality and habitat <br />maintenance has become bogged down as states <br />engage in "turf battles. II Governments also squab- <br />ble over states rights versus federal rights versus <br />tribal rights, while the health of rivers has been <br />lost. <br />The range, difficulty, and complexity of chal- <br />lenges that confront managers of the multiple <br />jurisdictions affecting a river system are stagger- <br />ing. But if we can put differences and squabbling <br />aside and overcome the multiple-jurisdiction <br />problems to build systemwide approaches to navi- <br />gation and electrical power, why can't we develop <br />systemwide approaches that include fIsh and <br />wildlife? The rule-making process created these <br />circumstances, and it is the rule-making process <br />that can lead to change; however, priorities will <br />have to change. . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.