8020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I However, in the past six years federal agencies have recognized this need and have funded limited research to provide decision makers with feed- back on the consequences of previous decisions. The papers by Lewis (5), Rappoport (11), and Prosser (10) in this symposium discuss research funded with this purpose in mind. This paper also accomplishes the same purpose by summarizing six research projects (1,3,4,6,8,9) analyzing the IItrack-~ecordll of 578 fish and wildlife measures to preserve or improve populations and habitats associated with 146 dams, reservoirs, or projects sponsored by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Corps of Engineers, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Forest Service, and Soil Conservation Service. These projects are located in twenty states west of the Mississippi River. Appendix A lists the dams, diversions, or pro- jects reviewed, their location, and the sponsoring agency. Because the methods and measures employed to mitigate impacts on fish and wildlife can be applied to a wide range of ecosystems, the results from this paper can be utilized to improve the mitigation process in all types of developmental activities including coa 1, oi 1 shale" geothermal, and hi ghway projects. FINDINGS The achievement of successful measures for the protection of fish and wildlife resources is a complex, multifaceted process. In its simplest form, the process consists of three steps: . formulation of a fish and wildlife recommendation by state and federal fish and wildlife agencies . bargain for a measure acceptable to the fish and wildlife agencies and consistent with the objectives of the project sponsored by the construction or permit agency . implementation and maintenance of the accepted measures by the agency operating the project. At each of these steps are ecological, engineering, legal', and administrative uncertainities, conflicts and constraints. t:.