9367 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

reservoir, it found that in the meanwhile, in 1988, the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service had listed the Concho water snake as threatened. That listing was based on three brief studies, which found an insignificant number of snakes. The Service believed, based on this limited data, the Concho snake could not survive in flat water. However, as early as 1988, snakes had been located in existing reservoirs. To obtain its ~ 404 permit to build the reservoir, the District had to agree to make downstream water releases, employ a biologist, together with supporting personnel, study the occurrence and life cycle of the snake; and contract with an herpetologist to conduct habitat studies pursuant to a five year contract costing at least $500,000 dollars. Within four years after the issuance of the ~ 404 permit, the staff had found at least 4,000 snakes, each of which has been injected with a distinct computer chip. The reservoir was filled in March 1990, and numerous baby snakes have been found, which were born in the new reservoir. While I believe it would be appropriate to retain the requirement that listings of species be based solely on biology, to ensure the scientific integrity of the species Listing Process and the designation of critical habitat, the Act should be amended to require that data be field tested where feasible, require more detailed findings for listings, require scientific peer review of proposed listing and critical habitat designation decisions, and ensure that the definitions and listing of species and subspecies are based on modern scientific procedures. The listing of a species impacts not just economic development, but also can affect state wildlife management programs. The Colorado Division of Wildlife is spending at least $750,000 annually on the endangered species in the Colorado River. Currently, virtually any agency or any private party can petition the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service to list an species or subspecies. In the future, the Listing Process needs to be more restrictive, including requiring those who propose listing to share with the listing agency the cost of collecting the best scientific data to support listings and critical habitat decisions, and developing verified listing justifications. One of the key mechanisms implementing the Act is the Section 7 consultation process. We heard earlier from Patrick Parenteau that no federal agency may allow an action funded, authorized, or carried out by the agency to jeopardize a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, unless allowed by the God committee. In the case of Animas-La Plata Project, a Section 7 jeopardy opinion was issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service just days before the scheduled groundbreaking of the Project in May 1990. The Service perceived a threat to the Colorado Squawfish. in the San Juan River from the depletion of flows in that river. The San Juan River, however, was not considered to be significant for the recovery of Colorado Squawfish in its proposed recovery plan until the meeting of the Recovery Plan Team, consisting of both Upper and Lower Basin biologists, one month before the jeopardy opinion was issued. It took nearly one year to get a copy of the minutes of that meeting, and it is my recollection that several of the team members were not present at the meeting, but a decision was made on the importance of 75