7805

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7805
• Author: Colorado River Wildlife Council.
• Title: Minutes, Colorado River Fish & Wildlife Council.
• USFW Year: 1988.
• USFW - Doc Type: July 9, 1988.
• Copyright Material: NO

0
six percent from the total money the total project requires. What that means
is the Bureau needs to move money around within the program between perhaps
mitigation and construction, from one area where there have been delays into
. another area which is going forward at a faster than anticipated pace. The
council needs to recognize that movements both ways are true. An example is
in the Bonneville unit where, because of some very low bids on construction
work, money was saved which could be moved into immediate purchase of lands
along the Strawberry River.
. The Bureau's goal on the Bonneville unit CUP is to have the unit completed by
1995, including all mitigation programs. Mr. Barrett assured the council
that the Bureau or Administration was not trying to prioritize construction
over mitigation and enhancement activities, although there are some places
where that has worked out. The goal is to accomplish the mitigation plan so
that when the impacts arrive, the mitigation work is done. Many of the
existing mitigation items that have not been carried forward are not a matter
of problems of prioritization, but a matter of solving other problems such as
getting all responsible people together to decide what is going to be
purchased, when we buy it from a willing seller, condemn, etc.?
Reclamation Report on the Lower Colorado Basin
Regional Director for the Lower Colorado River Basin, Mr. Edward Hallenbeck,
provided a report (Appendix H) on the mitigation activities and issues along
the lower Basin. He generally reiterated the change in Bureau of Reclamation
values during the past several years and provided insight on the fact that
reclamation changes were following value changes of a society which have
occurred at the same time. Much of the mitigation which is currently being
carried out is going on in the Central Arizona Project and does not affect
the Colorado River to any great extent.
Issues on the Colorado River revolve much around the types of flows and
conditions which these flows impose on man's activities. Measurements of
natural flow from the earliest years of record show there's absolutely no
pattern to flow whatever. Currently, the Bureau through their Congressional
and budget cycles are trying to deal with the effects of the record flows in
1983 and 1984. Society is now talking about the Greenhouse Effect. If, in
fact, the Greenhouse Effect is real, the Bureau may find a pattern and a
whole different system of values by people on which they think water is
important and society and the Bureau would need to provide a whole different
concept for management.
After the reports, the group discussed mitigation problems and issues with
Mr. Barrett and Mr. Hallenbeck. Several items in the conversations centered
. around particular issues:
There was an overriding concern that while many complete segments of
projects were performed because that was the most expeditious and most
cost efficient, it put wildlife in the position of having no bargaining
power left when the projects were completed. It made a very tempting
. scenario for Congress to stop at that point in tough budget times and
say, "Well, we really have got the features some of us wanted and we
really can't afford mitigation at this point and, therefore, mitigation
while on the books will not get funded." Therefore, if mitigation is not
a
13