7999

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7999
• Author: Colorado River Wildlife Council.
• Title: Minutes, Colorado River Fish & Wildlife Council.
• USFW Year: 1996.
• USFW - Doc Type: April 23-24, 1996.
• Copyright Material: NO

1

to heavily lobby the new directors of Wyoming and New Mexico
to become active full participants in Council activities.
The motion was seconded by Colorado. There being no further
discussion, motion was carried by unanimous vote.
FUTURE MEETINGS ,
After a discussion of the costs associated with various
meeting dates in Las Vegas, it was the consensus of the
group that the next scheduled meeting be held December 3,
1996, utilizing as much of that day as needed to accommodate
business rather than continue the meeting into a second day.
The group also agreed that a special effort should be made
to notify all directors of the importance of being present-
for the future of wildlife management on the Colorado River
system. The Council agreed to hold the annual Council
Meeting April 23 and 24, 1997, in Las Vegas and instructed
the secretary to continue investigation into places which
would host the meeting in an appropriate atmosphere at cost
savings to the Council. The secretary is to provide Council

and staff a reminder of meeting dates and an indication of '
meeting place as soon as arrangements can be made based upon
the conclusion of his investigation. At the April 1997
annual meeting, the chairmanship is to be transferred to
Colorado.
SUPPORT OF UPPER BASIN RECOVERY PROGRAM FUNDING i
Mr. Eddy Kochman (CO) noted Council discussion
yesterday about the Council supporting funding legislation
for the Upper Basin Recovery Program through the year
2003. The current plan is to have the legislation
introduced this summer and to include at that time as many
letters in support as possible and to continue efforts to
get as many subsequent expressions of support as possible.
Mr. Hamill indicated it would be appropriate should the
Council wish, to provide a letter of support for use as an
attachment on submission of the legislation. The Council
may feel it's appropriate to again do something different if
they wished.
The group discussed the issue at some length. The
lower basin states were concerned how other participants in
the Lower Basin Multi-Species Conservation Plan would feel
should the lower basin states participate in support of
upper basin legislation requesting a substantial amount of
funding. There was a feeling that many members of the Lower
Basin Multi-Species Plan feel a successful legislative
funding of the upper basin would work to their detriment for
funding as it may be viewed as a second effort when funding
had already been approved. Since the earliest congress is
expected to consider this legislation, other than the
22