7805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

a accomplished in a timely manner with construction, the mitigation may not be provided at all. Mitigation is often compared to construction activities on the basis of comparisons of dollar expenditures. Mitigation is not always directly proportional to dollars spent. Some mitigation features are very expensive but very small benefits compared to others which- are inexpensive for a very large amount of mitigation. Perhaps it would be equally valuable to have biological comparison and habitat comparison when mitigation is entered into project features. . William Molini inquired as to the Bureau of Reclamation's role under the new program emphasis with artificial fertilization in Lake Mead. Mr. Hollenbeck indicated that responsibilities of water quality fall on the Bureau. If the fishery could be enhanced, the Bureau would be supportive of it, providing quality of water going to downstream users could be answered for the . metropolitan water districts and others. The Bureau should have a better understanding of what wildlife agencies are trying to do with the fishery. As he understands, there are not any long term plans available. The agencies advocating fertilization must plainly indicate who is going to fund fertilization activities when the experimental process is ended. Will Congress be expected to fund? If Congress agrees, these activities are not out of line with reclamation mission. Mr. Barrett addressed the concern of finished projects with unfinished mitigation by reporting to his knowledge there have never been completed projects where the mitigation has not occurred. Mitigation has always gone on and Congress has always been willing to fund because they have passed the Fish & Wildlife Coordination Act and know there is a part obligation on the part of the federal government. A second point is if the reclamation goal is to have the mitigation package in place before the impact occurs, then their internal budget processes will drive the mix of dollars between construction and mitigation to complete both. Up to this point, the Bureau of Reclamation's cooperation with various state wildlife agencies has been to put in place much of the easy mitigation. what will come in the future will be those very tough mitigation issues and projects. Up to now, the Bureau of Reclamation has avoided condemning land, but it is convincing that soon--the Bureau has the legal authority--it will have to be done. When that day comes, it's going to be absolutely essential that the Bureau and the states and everybody else must be very cooperative and firm in their support with'state legislatures, governors and others to' back up the Bureau on these conflicts. The council members thanked USBR for their cooperation and history of hard work and good working relationships with wildlife agencies. A part of these good relationships means the separation of friends and business, everyone must understand that the wildlife interests must complete their business. This is not meant to be in an unfriendly or adversary relationship. The states must make sure, however, that mitigation is completed in a timely manner and to meet all of the commitments which exist with wildlife and . environmental constituents. No matter what has happened from old decisions that were made on a single purpose basis, today's society is demanding, especially in the water short a 14